Discussion: In Massive Party Shift, Democrats Line Up Behind Sanders' Medicare-For-All Bill


Let’s see where this goes


We won’t have to look very far.


At least this is a good step in the right direction and will shine a light on the biggest no brainer ever.

One large risk pool that covers everyone? Lower costs? Run by Medicare, one of the most efficient healthcare systems in the world? Cut out the middleman insurance companies that make massive profits and try to screw their customers at every turn?

Hmm…Seems to check all the boxes.

Let’s see if they can sell it better than they have in the past. I’ll flip my shit if I see one more person completely drop the ball when a reporter asks “well it couldn’t pass at the state level in Vermont, why would it work for the U.S.?”


Medicare-for-all is a good rallying cry, for sure, but it’s probably not the best way forward.
Medicare for all at age 45? That’s a better system, using the private sector for those pre-45 (employer/individual) where the costs of providing health care are generally on the lower end of the spectrum.
As for funding? The pre-Medicare coverage is paid for now (employer/individual), so there’s some funds to start with. And you’re eliminating a massive amount of overhead.
Short answer: This is not too tall a mountain to climb.


I think Sanders has provided Democrats a good marketing theme and an aspirational target that can appeal to a number of voters. Single Payer/m4a is a bad idea from a policy implementation/cost standpoint, but it has good branding.

I sensed Sanders recognized the price tag problem in his remarks and seemed to open the door to medicare buy in or public option as an interim measure. If what we end up doing is campaigning on m4a and pass medi buy in when we win bad Congress, I’m all for it. If he insists on sabotaging and scapegoating those who would push for Medi buy in or public option, then I think this effort will damage the party. I’m an optimist and I’ll choose the former.


This will probably prove to be a mistake. The serious issues about how to make the transition from employer-sponsored to government-administered healthcare, and questions (reasonable and not) about cost give the Republicans and insurers a host of opportunities to scare voters and obstruct change. Far better to have a public option, like Sen. Murphy’s bill to permit individuals and employers to buy in to Medicare or Medicaid. “Give people a choice!” or “Let the people decide” are slogans that are hard to oppose.


Also hard to espouse when you’re the folks who fought for and protected an individual mandate.


Making vague, non-specific, unachievable health care promises worked great for the GOP. Bigly, bigly great. I’m downright thrilled we’re jumping aboard M/V Democratic Failboat.

1 Like

This is good…and make no mistake: it wouldn’t be happening if the ACA hadn’t been enacted and the GOP hadn’t gleefully hanged themselves with it. Trump and the GOP have essentially painted themselves into a corner and their continued BS of trying to abuse their power to undermine the ACA through deliberate mismanagement and using legislative fear and uncertainty to force insurers to spike their premiums is a bigly part what’s causing this paradigm shift and making the conversation even possible in the first place.



Thank God. It’s time to bury the DLC; Third Way DINO Lite Republicans- AKA the Hillary Wing- and get back to being Liberal Progressives.


If you’re taking a victory lap on this as an anti-Clinton Bernie-bro prick, then you don’t understand it.


Get over it.

Get informed.

Even Bernie admits it: “We’ve been very cautious and careful and the Affordable Care Act has served many Americans well. In no way are we scrapping it. We’re building on it. This is the next step to build on the ACA.”


So we put even more people into a pool of people that are needing to be paid for by an ever-reducing number of workers? The insurance companies don’t have to cover the most costly consumers of health care services, and they get to make a profit off those people that are more likely to be young, fit, and healthy. And these younger people are placed into even smaller pools thus raising the cost of their insurance, all while still paying into the Medicare system? How would this reduce overhead? It would just pass it on to the private sector companies that are 1) making a profit off of it; and 2) worse at it than the medicare system right now.

I don’t get it.


Yes. This is a no-brainer, at this point. Americans will be receptive to this as never before. I hope.

1 Like

When were the Democrats progressive? Dates please. Seriously, I’m confused.


I’m ready to Move On.


Clearly not. Maybe you should see someone about it. Your ACA plan will cover the meds.


“Though the bill does not say how the government would pay for the implementation of universal health care, Sanders released a list of populist suggestions, including raising the estate and capital gains taxes, creating a new tax on the wealthiest 0.1 percent of earners, and taxing Wall Street banks and other large financial institutions.”

Gosh, and just when Trump was beginning his already tough sell to slash taxes for the über-rich.

Sure hope this doesn’t make him look like even more of a shill for the billionaire class.

At the expense of your healthcare.