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

eridani

(51,907 posts)
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 07:36 AM Dec 2015

n Medicare-for-All, Clinton Reminds Us That She's Part of the Problem

Demonizing government and taxation is a Republican thing to do. Anyone who would prefer a $900/month "premium" to a $300/month "tax" shouldn't be running around outside without adult supervision.

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2015/12/22/medicare-all-clinton-reminds-us-shes-part-problem

In ignoring the fact that a single payer plan would, as Sanders quickly pointed out, do “away with the cost of private insurance,” meaning that “the middle class will be paying substantially less for health care,” not only was Clinton wrong on the claim that the Sanders plan would cost the middle class more, but she knew it. As Sanders said of her, “I know you know a lot about health care.” Hillary Clinton, let’s remember, was the point person for Bill Clinton’s unsuccessful 1993 health insurance reform, to the point where it was sometimes called “Hillarycare.” People have applied a lot of negative labels to Hillary Clinton over the years, but “stupid” is not one you hear very often. This was not an actor like Ronald Reagan, delivering lines he may or may not have understood. This was not George W. Bush, struggling over words and concepts. It was a telling, cynical moment.

In ignoring the fact that a single payer plan would, as Sanders quickly pointed out, do “away with the cost of private insurance,” meaning that “the middle class will be paying substantially less for health care,” not only was Clinton wrong on the claim that the Sanders plan would cost the middle class more, but she knew it. As Sanders said of her, “I know you know a lot about health care.” Hillary Clinton, let’s remember, was the point person for Bill Clinton’s unsuccessful 1993 health insurance reform, to the point where it was sometimes called “Hillarycare.” . In ignoring the fact that a single payer plan would, as Sanders quickly pointed out, do “away with the cost of private insurance,” meaning that “the middle class will be paying substantially less for health care,” not only was Clinton wrong on the claim that the Sanders plan would cost the middle class more, but she knew it. As Sanders said of her, “I know you know a lot about health care.” Hillary Clinton, let’s remember, was the point person for Bill Clinton’s unsuccessful 1993 health insurance reform, to the point where it was sometimes called “Hillarycare.” People have applied a lot of negative labels to Hillary Clinton over the years, but “stupid” is not one you hear very often. This was not an actor like Ronald Reagan, delivering lines he may or may not have understood. This was not George W. Bush, struggling over words and concepts. It was a telling, cynical moment.

In a 2004 interview, Senator Elizabeth Warren (then a professor) told Bill Moyers that when explaining a banking industry-backed bankruptcy bill to First Lady Clinton in the late 1990s she found that “I never had a smarter student.” Warren went on to tell how Clinton flipped from opponent to proponent of the bill, however, once she saw herself as representing Wall Street in the Senate.

The health care story is similar. Back then, the for-profit health insurance industry went all out to obfuscate the facts of the Clinton bill, most memorably with a series of TV ads featuring a pair of actors named Harry and Louise. Yet by the time Senator Clinton was running for reelection in 2006, yesterday’s enemies had become today’s campaign contributors. The New York Times reported her the second highest recipient of health care industry campaign contributions, trailing only Republican Senator Rick Santorum. Washington health care lawyer and lobbyist Frederick H. Graefe told the paper that “People in many industries, including health care, are contributing to Senator Clinton today because they fully expect she will be the Democratic presidential nominee in 2008.” Therefore he felt that “If the usual rules apply,” early donors would “get a seat at the table when health care and other issues are discussed.”

63 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
n Medicare-for-All, Clinton Reminds Us That She's Part of the Problem (Original Post) eridani Dec 2015 OP
Facts are stubborn things, indeed! Proserpina Dec 2015 #1
Medicare is not free, there is a premium associated with Part B and Part D. Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #2
if every single person alive in the US was placed into Medicare for all Karma13612 Dec 2015 #5
Misleading, these are facts, in countries where there is national health care Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #7
Yes taxes are higher but overall costs for health care are much lower. jhart3333 Dec 2015 #14
Of course, but would you give up your Medicare to sign up for the ACA instead? EndElectoral Dec 2015 #16
no way! dana_b Dec 2015 #44
again, in case you didn't fully read my comment, Karma13612 Dec 2015 #20
Yes, but they pay no insurance premiums or copays AgingAmerican Dec 2015 #40
They do in France plus high taxes, they also pay co-pays. Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #41
The high taxes result in a much higher standard of living. Single payer proposals here, like those eridani Dec 2015 #57
France isn't every country with single payer AgingAmerican Dec 2015 #63
What is misleading is the facts has not been delivered, the might not fact. Part B is coverage for Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #19
Try thinking outside the box. eom Karma13612 Dec 2015 #21
I am, I am looking at reality, it will not be free, does not matter what you have been told. Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #23
You are pulling numbers and rates out of thin air. it is misleading and disingenuous. eom Karma13612 Dec 2015 #36
Okay, pull the numbers out which Sanders has furnished. Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #37
The whole point is, unless you get the CBO to do an analysis, you aren't going to have Karma13612 Dec 2015 #38
Well, to startvwith therecwill have to be lots of Republicans defeatedcand removed from Congress. Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #39
Washington Health Security Trust estimates $150-$250/month per adult eridani Dec 2015 #54
Love to see single payer, keep in mind - private insurance companies actually administer Medicare. Hoyt Dec 2015 #26
they administer it because the system in thrall to them Armstead Dec 2015 #42
Sometimes you have to deal with reality of politics, even if disgusting. That's what Clinton is doin Hoyt Dec 2015 #43
Yes we would--they make no actuarial decisions and no decisions about what is covered eridani Dec 2015 #58
If a patient has insurance, the tests and treatments ordered will exceed anything in other Hoyt Dec 2015 #59
Nope. All price schedules will be negotiated and controlled--just like they are elsewhere n/t eridani Dec 2015 #60
That would be a big change from what we have now. A desirable change, but Hoyt Dec 2015 #61
Strange. Repubs have driven discourse so far to the right by insisting constantly and loudly what-- eridani Dec 2015 #62
My health insurance at work was charging me $1,200 per month for my healthy 20 year old Dustlawyer Dec 2015 #8
Taxes will still be about $300 a month, what is the difference. $50. If it isn't paid one way it Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #22
It will be a LOT cheaper! Just RX will save tremendous Dustlawyer Dec 2015 #24
Really no reason for me to continue this, this plan will not happen in the next 10 years, maybe more Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #25
Of course. Confronted with facts that destroy Warren Stupidity Dec 2015 #30
Personal attacks on me when is not going to change the fact there are too Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #31
The attacks are on your bullshit arguments against healthcare for all. Warren Stupidity Dec 2015 #33
bye i dont need this, i am right about the Republicans Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #34
The Repubs got to where they are today by demanding every ridiculous policy they wanted--- eridani Dec 2015 #48
They had the votes. Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #49
Because they campaign on their values, not their policies eridani Dec 2015 #50
Because republicans votes and gets republicans elected. Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #51
There are more independents than Dems or Republicans eridani Dec 2015 #52
The point is to remove a lot of the useless costs Warren Stupidity Dec 2015 #29
I'll take "cheaper and universal" for $300/month, Alex n/t eridani Dec 2015 #55
The proposal replaces medicare medicaid and other programs with a comprehensive universal Warren Stupidity Dec 2015 #18
Wrong. Taxes are in place of insurance eridani Dec 2015 #46
Yet some still insist she's a progressive. Weird, eh? Scuba Dec 2015 #3
electing Hillary as president will not help the country on any front Doctor_J Dec 2015 #4
ouch. Good comeback!!!! eom Karma13612 Dec 2015 #6
Presenting Republican ideas as a Democrat-the Clinton specialty. jalan48 Dec 2015 #9
That perfectly sums her up. CharlotteVale Dec 2015 #32
K.R 99Forever Dec 2015 #10
K & R SoapBox Dec 2015 #11
Clintons should know they have been 'working towards' Gov healthcare for all Americans the longest. Sunlei Dec 2015 #12
Corporations love Hillary, and they should. She said so herself. ViseGrip Dec 2015 #13
Wonder how many retired people would give up their Medicare. EndElectoral Dec 2015 #15
or people on disabilty dana_b Dec 2015 #45
Glad it was so wonderfully easy for you to get on disability in the first place eridani Dec 2015 #56
I would. Cheaper for me, plus all deductibles would be eliminated eridani Dec 2015 #47
it is also quite ironic that the duers who swore that heritage care was a step toward single payer Doctor_J Dec 2015 #17
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Dec 2015 #27
Nominating Hillary will further us down the road to ruin. Broward Dec 2015 #28
Imagine the response here if it was a Republican making the identical attack instead Karmadillo Dec 2015 #35
It's a sad observation, but Hillary Clinton is bought. Ron Green Dec 2015 #53

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
2. Medicare is not free, there is a premium associated with Part B and Part D.
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 08:43 AM
Dec 2015

This premium is for each individual. There are co-pays and as a person on Medicare I still have to pay for a Medigap insurance to assist in paying for health care, I never see these points given when talking about Medicare for all. So it will be $300 in taxes plus another $200-300 in medical insurance. This will be per individual.

Karma13612

(4,552 posts)
5. if every single person alive in the US was placed into Medicare for all
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 10:18 AM
Dec 2015

then the costs would be distributed and you might not even have the Part a and Part b and Part D nonsense anymore.

Since the whole country would be under one plan that would be administered by Medicare, then they would probably want to streamline it to cut admin costs.

Your assumptions at this point in the game are shaky and misleading.

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
7. Misleading, these are facts, in countries where there is national health care
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 10:32 AM
Dec 2015

Taxes are higher, that is a fact. I know something about Medicare, it is not free, there are co-pays, it is not free.

jhart3333

(332 posts)
14. Yes taxes are higher but overall costs for health care are much lower.
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 10:44 AM
Dec 2015

Please stop trying to justify the insurance/healthcare industry in the US. It places a horrific burden on people in this country and denies us our basic right to health care.

dana_b

(11,546 posts)
44. no way!
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 08:50 PM
Dec 2015

I am on disability and have Medicare. My costs have gone down substantially. Even with the whole part B, D stuff.

Karma13612

(4,552 posts)
20. again, in case you didn't fully read my comment,
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 11:02 AM
Dec 2015

there would probably be a re-formed version of Medicare when it becomes single payer, Medicare for All.

So, to just simply say that people will have to pay for X or Y or Z is just that, MISLEADING

 

AgingAmerican

(12,958 posts)
40. Yes, but they pay no insurance premiums or copays
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 06:24 PM
Dec 2015

So its a lot cheaper and everyone has good coverage.

eridani

(51,907 posts)
57. The high taxes result in a much higher standard of living. Single payer proposals here, like those
Thu Dec 24, 2015, 02:53 AM
Dec 2015

--Canada, Taiwan and S Korea, have no deductibles. Copays in other universal systems are administered in highly variable ways. and usually have lower income exceptions. Bottom line = taxes are cheaper than premiums.

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
19. What is misleading is the facts has not been delivered, the might not fact. Part B is coverage for
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 11:01 AM
Dec 2015

doctors visits, etc, Part D is for drug coverage, I don't see either of these two going away, it will be hospital coverage and a few other things covered by Medicare Part A, what good would it be to have hospital coverage without doctors and prescriptions?

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
23. I am, I am looking at reality, it will not be free, does not matter what you have been told.
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 11:07 AM
Dec 2015

$300 a month increase in taxes, will be the same as a premium, not free.

Karma13612

(4,552 posts)
38. The whole point is, unless you get the CBO to do an analysis, you aren't going to have
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 05:13 PM
Dec 2015

exact numbers.

Where the heck are you getting $300 from, pray tell?

Sanders has not furnished numbers because they would be inaccurate until an analysis was done. But, yours are no more accurate, and for the same reason.

But, you can be darn sure that it will be less than the outrageous premiums that some of us are paying now.

It will depend on income, etc.

I understand you want answers in order to prove that single payer would somehow be worse than premiums in a poorly-regulated private for profit market based insurance system that we have now.

Sorry, but I can't wait for you to be proven wrong.




Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
39. Well, to startvwith therecwill have to be lots of Republicans defeatedcand removed from Congress.
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 05:47 PM
Dec 2015

The GOP wants to stop Medicare so to expand Medicare to all with this bunch in Congress does not have the votes. Second buying into a proposal without having a plan to how much it will cost is not much of a plan.

eridani

(51,907 posts)
54. Washington Health Security Trust estimates $150-$250/month per adult
Thu Dec 24, 2015, 02:46 AM
Dec 2015

That is a small fraction of the $900/month I paid before getting on Medicare. Anyone who prefers a higher premium to a lower tax should not be let outside without adult supervision.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
26. Love to see single payer, keep in mind - private insurance companies actually administer Medicare.
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 01:08 PM
Dec 2015

You wouldn't be rid of them. And it wouldn't be cheap. Agree, long-term it should save money, especially if the health care system is changed and us beneficiaries are reasonable in how we utilize services.

 

Armstead

(47,803 posts)
42. they administer it because the system in thrall to them
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 08:39 PM
Dec 2015

No system is going to be perfect. But if they were changed to contractors performing a service that would at least be an improvement over the gouging that's currently going on.

We need publicly oriented social insurance for everyone based on income. That shouldn't be denigrated as a goal.It should be the goal. Hillarys bullshit posturing against it precludes that possibility.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
43. Sometimes you have to deal with reality of politics, even if disgusting. That's what Clinton is doin
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 08:44 PM
Dec 2015

Sanders talks about what should be (and he's often right), not how he can possibly get it done. He might as well be waving his arms about doing away with cancer and other diseases.

eridani

(51,907 posts)
58. Yes we would--they make no actuarial decisions and no decisions about what is covered
Thu Dec 24, 2015, 02:58 AM
Dec 2015

I have no objection to farming out paperwork, which would be likely done with single payer as well. uBt that's ALL they do. Right now, we have much less health care utilization than any other industrial country.f Half per capita what we pay now would definitely be cheaper.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
59. If a patient has insurance, the tests and treatments ordered will exceed anything in other
Thu Dec 24, 2015, 03:07 AM
Dec 2015

countries because doctors and hospitals profit off those tests, even when not medically necessary.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
61. That would be a big change from what we have now. A desirable change, but
Thu Dec 24, 2015, 03:22 AM
Dec 2015

Last edited Thu Dec 24, 2015, 08:57 AM - Edit history (1)

just saying it, doesn't make it so. Doctors and hospitals aren't going to give up that profit easily. Point is, Medicare for all only makes sense with big changes to how care is delivered and beneficiary expectations. Don't see it happening with GOPers in control of Congress.

eridani

(51,907 posts)
62. Strange. Repubs have driven discourse so far to the right by insisting constantly and loudly what--
Thu Dec 24, 2015, 03:33 AM
Dec 2015

--their values are. But Dems should not ever do the same by advocating policies and values that have broad support. Why?

Dustlawyer

(10,495 posts)
8. My health insurance at work was charging me $1,200 per month for my healthy 20 year old
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 10:32 AM
Dec 2015

daughter in collage. She got on Obama Care for $350 per month. Any supplemental policy will be much less than either of these!

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
22. Taxes will still be about $300 a month, what is the difference. $50. If it isn't paid one way it
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 11:05 AM
Dec 2015

will be paid another, it will not be free.

Dustlawyer

(10,495 posts)
24. It will be a LOT cheaper! Just RX will save tremendous
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 11:49 AM
Dec 2015

amounts and keep people from having to ration their medications or going without. No one should ever have to file bankruptcy or go without treatment due to lack of funds. HRC has nothing that will prevent this appreciably.

I know nothing will ever get you to concede anything when it comes to negative FACTS about HRC, so go ahead and send your response and I will let readers judge for themselves.

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
25. Really no reason for me to continue this, this plan will not happen in the next 10 years, maybe more
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 01:01 PM
Dec 2015

for the fact Congress is occupied by republicans. Without getting 66% of eligible voters voting it will not change, this is reality.

 

Warren Stupidity

(48,181 posts)
30. Of course. Confronted with facts that destroy
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 01:56 PM
Dec 2015

your bullshit arguments you tack over to "ain't gonna happen". Well of course it can't ever happen if we don't start voting for real change.

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
31. Personal attacks on me when is not going to change the fact there are too
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 02:16 PM
Dec 2015

Many Republicans in Congress to pass Medicare for since they hate Medicare.

 

Warren Stupidity

(48,181 posts)
33. The attacks are on your bullshit arguments against healthcare for all.
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 02:43 PM
Dec 2015

If you take that personally that is your problem.

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
34. bye i dont need this, i am right about the Republicans
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 03:13 PM
Dec 2015

NEVER passing Medicare for all. Have to vote them out first

eridani

(51,907 posts)
48. The Repubs got to where they are today by demanding every ridiculous policy they wanted---
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 11:50 PM
Dec 2015

--at full volume. And Democrat should not even think about demanding reasonable things that are widely supported?

Bernie! Because fuck this shit!!

eridani

(51,907 posts)
50. Because they campaign on their values, not their policies
Thu Dec 24, 2015, 12:57 AM
Dec 2015

About time Dems started doing that--and Sanders is.

eridani

(51,907 posts)
52. There are more independents than Dems or Republicans
Thu Dec 24, 2015, 01:20 AM
Dec 2015

Many hate political parties, but will respond to strongly asserted values. 25% of Vermont Republicans vote for Sanders

 

Warren Stupidity

(48,181 posts)
29. The point is to remove a lot of the useless costs
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 01:54 PM
Dec 2015

and unjustified profit-taking from the system while guaranteeing that everyone is covered from birth to death.

Nobody has claimed that such a system would be free.

 

Warren Stupidity

(48,181 posts)
18. The proposal replaces medicare medicaid and other programs with a comprehensive universal
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 11:00 AM
Dec 2015

program that covers all standard healthcare services including long term care, prescriptions, mental health, dental health, rehabilitation etc. No copays. No premiums. No exclusions. No cost shifting back to consumers by service providers. The system is entirely funded through taxes including an employer payroll tax and individual income taxes. Both employees and employers currently in the private system would see a net decrease in their total healthcare costs.

The legislation: http://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/american-health-security-act-of-2013?inline=file

eridani

(51,907 posts)
46. Wrong. Taxes are in place of insurance
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 11:43 PM
Dec 2015

The Washington Health Security Trust can be funded 100% by an assessment of $100-$200 per month per adult over 18 and a payroll tax of 1-1.2% on payroll under $500K per year plus 10-12% on payroll over that. Federal funding for Medicare and Medicaid would be folded in also. For people already on Medicare during the transition, B + D would cost $50-$75/month.

 

Doctor_J

(36,392 posts)
4. electing Hillary as president will not help the country on any front
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 09:41 AM
Dec 2015

She is trump without the wall around the country.

SoapBox

(18,791 posts)
11. K & R
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 10:39 AM
Dec 2015

She is perfectly clear...she sides with big money and big power.

She won't rock the boat for the Health Insurance industry...

Sunlei

(22,651 posts)
12. Clintons should know they have been 'working towards' Gov healthcare for all Americans the longest.
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 10:42 AM
Dec 2015

Unlike Republicans who don't give a shit about anyone if there isn't a profit included.

eridani

(51,907 posts)
56. Glad it was so wonderfully easy for you to get on disability in the first place
Thu Dec 24, 2015, 02:50 AM
Dec 2015

With single payer, you get whatever health care you need with no deductibles.

eridani

(51,907 posts)
47. I would. Cheaper for me, plus all deductibles would be eliminated
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 11:47 PM
Dec 2015

Though of course I am grateful to Medicare for improving my situation compared to the shitty overpriced catastrophic crap I had to rely on from age 62 to 65.

 

Doctor_J

(36,392 posts)
17. it is also quite ironic that the duers who swore that heritage care was a step toward single payer
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 10:51 AM
Dec 2015

are the very same ones who now say we can't have uhc. When did the party become cheerleaders for corporate robbers and killers?

Broward

(1,976 posts)
28. Nominating Hillary will further us down the road to ruin.
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 01:20 PM
Dec 2015

She identifies as a Dem, but she sounds like a Repub. She would likely govern as one as president if given the chance.

Karmadillo

(9,253 posts)
35. Imagine the response here if it was a Republican making the identical attack instead
Wed Dec 23, 2015, 03:19 PM
Dec 2015

of our very own Senator Abuela from the great state of Wall Street. Feel the CHill!

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»n Medicare-for-All, Clint...