Sorry, but I don't buy the "But we couldn't have gotten single-payer" defense

[karynnj]

47. Single Payer was not possible as many Democratic Senators were philosophically against it

ACA passed because it got 60 votes in the Senate in the nick of time. Had that right before Christmas vote failed, NOTHING would have passed. This is because in early January, before the Senate returned, Scott Brown was elected.

Nothing that could not get 60 votes in the Senate could pass. It is true that changes were passed under reconciliation, but the rules for what could be done under reconciliation were such that passing the entire bill that way would not have been allowed.

Bernie Sanders himself said that there were no more than 10 Senators willing to vote for single payer. John Kerry when pushed on why said he would vote for it, but it was impossible because there were nowhere near the number of Senators needed. When pushed on whether they could be persuaded, he said there were two many for whom there was no chance they could be persuaded.

Bernie Sanders has says that he thinks we will get to single payer, but not through the federal government. In fact, Vermont will work on the finance mechanism and other remaining issues - not in this session, but in the next with the goal being to have a workable plan passed by 2017 when they can request a waiver to institute it.

VT governor Shumlin said that they expect a lot of energy against it - not because the big powers care what the small VT population does, but "because letting the pony out of the barn, could lead to the stallions (NY, MA) following" - quote from memory from a recent AARP supported interview between their President and Shumlin in South Burlington.

In fact, what they fear is how single payer could spread and it is how it happened in Canada. The key is for VT to get it right and to benefit from both better, friendlier healthcare and reduced costs due to removing the extra administrative costs and defensive medicine.