Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

villager

(26,001 posts) Thu Jun 28, 2012, 02:30 PM Jun 2012

In the end, won't single payer still have to come, "bottom up," from the states?

I'm not sure this ruling changes that. Nationally, the Dems remain too spineless and bought to push for single-payer, even in those rare moments when they could.

And the Republicans are permanently deranged.

Single payer was always going to have to come from states first, really (another "benefit" of the corporacracy keeping states bankrupt, I suppose). And while I realize that means that some states will get it years ahead of others, does this decision change that particular roadmap much?

2 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

In the end, won't single payer still have to come, "bottom up," from the states? (Original Post) villager Jun 2012 OP

feds need to get out of the way...again nt msongs Jun 2012 #1

It will be interesting to see which states act first now, and how that plays out in *their* election villager Jun 2012 #2

msongs

(67,460 posts)

1. feds need to get out of the way...again nt

Reply to villager (Original post)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 02:38 PM

Jun 2012

villager

(26,001 posts)

2. It will be interesting to see which states act first now, and how that plays out in *their* election