While Some Democrats Walk Tightrope On Scrapping Private Insurance, Majority Of Americans Are Against

Even if a single payer, government run health insurance system was viable, particularly monetarily (it’s not even close), how wise is it to put the federal government in charge for 330 million Americans? I’m betting people can come up with ideas in seconds. For Democrats, just imagine that this was in the Executive Branch so that Trump was in charge. Scared you right, because of your TDS, eh?

Nixing private insurance divides ‘Medicare for All’ candidates

Some Democratic presidential candidates who say they support “Medicare for All” are walking a tightrope on whether to fully embrace a key portion of the proposal that calls for eliminating private insurance.

Only a few White House hopefuls raised their hands when asked at last week’s debates if they were willing to abolish private insurers, even though others who were on the stage have publicly backed legislation from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) which would do just that.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), Sen. Kamala Harris (Calif.) and Sanders all raised their hands, as did New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio. But Harris later said she misunderstood the question, and clarified that she does not support eliminating private insurance.

“I am supportive of Medicare for All, and under Medicare for All policy, private insurance would certainly exist for supplemental coverage,” she said Friday morning on CBS News.

If Medicare for All was meant to provide health insurance for all, then why the need for any “supplemental coverage”? Wouldn’t it take care of everything? Or would it be so that citizens could get medical procedures that Government is denying, such as a knee replacement when Government says “you’re too old, here’s a cane”?

Anyhow, the above article shows many of these Dems running for president wiffle waffling back and forth, walking that tightrope

Robert Blendon, a health policy professor at Harvard University, said most candidates will be deliberately vague about Medicare for All, even the ones who are co-sponsors of the Sanders bill.

“I think many candidates signed onto the principle,” Blendon said. “They want a Medicare dominated system but didn’t fully understand that today’s Medicare … has a private alternative which is very popular. I just don’t think they are aware of that.”

Actually, they’ll be deliberately vague because they know this type of massive expansion of government will scare off the majority of swing voters, as well as a bunch of support for people who are just Democrats, not progressive nutjobs.

A similar Kaiser poll from January found that support for Medicare for All dropped from 56 percent to 37 percent when respondents were told it would eliminate private health insurance.

And then a poll from Monday

(Breitbart) A CNN poll released Monday found that 57 percent of Americans said that the government should not enact a program, such as Medicare for All, that would completely eliminate private health insurance, compared to 37 percent of those who said that they should scrap private health insurance, and six percent of those polled who had no opinion.

CNN’s latest poll showcases a three-point gain for those who oppose eliminating private health insurance, which covers over half of Americans.

Further, only 31 percent of Democrats said that a national program should completely replace health insurance, while 48 percent, or nearly a majority of Democrats, said that a national health insurance program should not completely replace insurance.

If you can only get 31% of Democrats to support it, no wonder the 376 Democrats running for their party’s presidential nod are “deliberately vague.”

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

11 Responses to “While Some Democrats Walk Tightrope On Scrapping Private Insurance, Majority Of Americans Are Against”

  1. Professor Hale says:

    It seems that politicians never tire of screwing things up. Health care costs in America are exorbitant BECAUSE of government interference in the market. Medicare/medicaid doesn’t pay enough to cover the services they demand. Private insurance picks up the tab for medicare/medicaid through cost shifting. Without private insurance, there is no Medicare because there won’t be any hospitals or emergency rooms. If someone doesn’t pay the bills, all those places close.

    I’ll give the same advice i gave back when the ACA was being debated. Hey government: Why don’t you fix the health programs you already have, then we’ll talk about giving you more responsibility? (the VA, Indian Health services, The highly restricted health care system for military retirees, and medicare/medicaid). For medicare/Medicaid, pay the full cost of actual services, then see what happens to the rest of the market.

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      The problem with the argument that US gov’t interference is causing expensive US healthcare is that every other advanced nation on Earth, all with varying degrees of gov’t “interference”, have LESS expensive health care than do we in the US. Much LESS. And every citizen is covered in other countries.

      • formwiz says:

        Fold in the usurious taxes on income (40%+), sales (20%+), and gas ($2.50+), couple with DMV-level service, add in Auschwitz-style concern for the very young, very old, frail, and terminal, and mix with life-threatening delays in procedures and it’s a lousy deal.

      • Professor Hale says:

        Push your deliberate misinformation elsewhere. I’m not interested. Your history here demonstrates you are incapable of listening. BTW, Obama already told us about how everyone’s insurance would cost $2,500 less. Then our premiums doubled or tripled. We don’t have to wonder what happens when government interferes in the health market. WE WATCHED IT HAPPEN. The problem with Socialism isn’t that it just hasn’t been done right. It’s that it has.

  2. Professor Hale says:

    Another lesson from the ACA, the Democrats don’t really care that most Americans don’t want what they are selling. They know what’s good for us.

  3. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    It’s simple, Medicare for All Who Want It. That is, a public option to buy health insurance, based on a sliding scale depending on income. The only demands on private insurance is to make certain they cover a minimum menu of services.

    Of course private insurers don’t want to insure sick people, old people, Vets with chronic issues from their service, 9/11 1st responders, or poor people. They want to insure healthy people who pay premiums and file few claims.

    Why do US citizens pay double (on average) than other “modern” nations? Where does that extra $1 TRILLION we pay for health care go?

    • formwiz says:

      It’s simple, Medicare for All Who Want It. That is, a public option to buy health insurance, based on a sliding scale depending on income.

      Simple as in simpleton.

      Anybody who thinks it will be optional should ask themselves whether it’s optional to bail out of Social Security.

      Of course private insurers don’t want to insure sick people, old people, Vets with chronic issues from their service, 9/11 1st responders, or poor people. They want to insure healthy people who pay premiums and file few claims.

      Insurance companies insure old people all the time, and anyone who can pay the premiums.

      Ask a vet how good the VA is. That’s what Medical Assistance (Medicare? you should live so long) For All will be.

      Why do US citizens pay double (on average) than other “modern” nations? Where does that extra $1 TRILLION we pay for health care go?

      Not into politicians’ pockets.

      Factor in the usurious taxes the Euros pay and we get it cheaper with better care, better service, and better training.

      Or does the idea of a diversity hire doctor from Sierra Leone appeal to you?

      Remember our diversity hire Preezy?

    • Kye says:

      “Why do US citizens pay double (on average) than other “modern” nations? Where does that extra $1 TRILLION we pay for health care go?”

      I guess in a round about way it goes to 75 years of us paying for their military defense, the UN and for every tsunami, volcano, earthquake, hurricane and every other natural disaster including feeding the victims of communism and despotism all over the world. Maybe if we kept that cash here we wouldn’t be facing the fiscal problems we have. And maybe if those countries had to pay for their own protection and their own crises for the last 7 decades they couldn’t pay for their own healthcare at all?

      Trump 2020 Keep America’s cash at home!

    • david7134 says:

      Jeff,
      How many times do you have to be schooled in a topic. We have already put to bed the reason for the expense of American medical care and that is that the government either directly or indirectly controls the pricing.

  4. Professor Hale says:

    Next he’ll be telling me if I like my doctor, I can keep my doctor. It’s like he totally slept through the Obama administration.

Bad Behavior has blocked 5869 access attempts in the last 7 days.