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.â€
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.”
A typical barbecue releases as much greenhouse gas into the atmosphere as a 90-mile car journey, scientists have found.
Carol M. Browner Question: If Republicans still controlled at least one house of Congress when you took office, what would you be prepared to do on Day One, under existing executive authority, to set the country on a path to address the existential threat posed by climate change?
California’s Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a $215 billion budget on Thursday, which includes taxpayer-funded health care for illegal aliens.
Hollywood has produced quite a few fictionalized depictions of dramatic climate change. Scores of people die after Manhattan freezes in 2004’s “
The New York Times published an op-ed Saturday that calls for border protection agents to face “serious social costs†and public shaming over their work at facilities housing migrant children.
