Single Payer Amendment

Comments

1. woburndem says

   June 3, 2009 at 9:52 am

   I would love to read the amendment if you can post a link that would be great.

   <

   p>Regarding the current comments on an Obama plan for health care I think it is a disgrase that he is now willing to talk about taxing the benefits. that is going right back after the 95% he talked about were paying to much tax. So he gives us 4 dollar a week tax cut in our pay pail then raises the federal tax deduction by factoring in the $150 a week we pay for health care now as a way to pay for more health care hey with help like that foreclosures should rise by 10-15% alone on that economic policy.

   <

   p>How about employers with more then 15 employees must offer and pay 51% of comprehensive health for all employees and their families. Want to bet the business will be screaming for single payer with in the year.

   <

   p>As Usual just my Opinion

   • kirth says

     June 3, 2009 at 7:55 pm

     on the short-sightedness of business leaders that they aren’t screaming for single-payer now. Local governments should be endorsing the concept, too.  

2. annem says

   June 3, 2009 at 11:19 am

   Putting forth a reasoned position calling for the ideal reform solution, improved Medicare-for-All aka Single payer, creates the political space for a compromise that will provide reform progress in the right direction, healthcare as public good not as commodity.

   <

   p>A strong Medicare-like public option alongside new regs on the insurance industry is reform headed in the right direction; an individual mandate to purchase a private insurance policy (the Mass. Plan) is not.

   <

   p>The ideal solution needs to be championed on its merits, b/c it represents the right thing and the smart thing to do (SP is “conservative spending with liberal benefits”), and it needs to be championed for political reasons, so that the inevitable compromise actually does some significant good and gets the reform process headed in a meaningful direction.

   <

   p>Many good educational and political resources on this issue, incl’g an events calendar, are avail. on the Mass-Care website at http://masscare.org

3. demredsox says

   June 3, 2009 at 2:27 pm

   First off. As citizens (or even as delegates), it is not our job to simply see what is, right now, palatable, and work towards that. Certainly, that is part of it. BUt these things happen when a group of determined people advocate for it over a large period of time.

   <

   p>Moreover, our focus need not be national. Consider Canada, where single-payer originated in the provinces, where its success led to its wider adoption. Here in Massachusetts, we have an opportunity to play a large role.

4. annem says

   June 3, 2009 at 3:06 pm

   to see this playing out on the national health reform scene check out Ezra Klein’s 6/3/09 blog at WaPo

   <

   p>

   Why Health Reform Is Likely to Have a Public Plan  http://voices.washingtonpost.c…

   Huffington Post’s Ryan Grim has been doing great work covering Sen. Ben Nelson’s (D-Neb.) endless flips and flops on the public health insurance plan. A few weeks ago, you might remember that Nelson was talking about forming a “coalition of like-minded centrists opposed to the creation of a public plan, as a counterweight to Democrats pushing for it.” Back then, the public plan was a “deal breaker.”

   Now? He’s open to a public plan. Neat how that works. But Nelson isn’t alone. Support for the public plan seems to have elevated in a few corners. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), previously cool to the idea, is now said to be fighting “tooth and nail” for its inclusion. Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.), once a monosyllabic opponent (“no”), is now proclaiming himself open to the idea.

   Meanwhile, the public plan’s supporter — Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), and others — have organized and begun insisting, rather than merely mentioning, the idea. Liberal senators came together and signed a letter in support of the policy. The White House, which seemed relatively unsinterested in the issue a few months ago, has begun pushing hard for it.

   And that, in my reporting, is what seems to be underneath the change. A few months ago, most observers thought the public plan was a bargaining chip. It had a lot of public supporters but few real friends. In recent weeks, that’s begun to change. The White House seems genuinely intent on including a public plan — or at least some form of public competition — in the final bill. And that’s changed the incentives for senators down the line. The public plan was safe to oppose so long as the powerful players weren’t really interested in its survival. Indeed, when the policy was going to be bargained away anyway, the incentives were to try to convince the health industry that you’d been their key ally in that victory. But now that the White House has put some muscle behind the policy, opposition has potential consequences. And that’s making the policy’s opponents rethink their stridency.

   A few months ago, I would have bet against the presence of a public plan in the final bill. Now I’d put my money in favor of it.

   By Ezra Klein  |  June 3, 2009 |  Comments (5)

   <

   p>Your Massachusetts voter voice needs to be heard, so please call DC and leave messages for Senators Kennedy (202) 224-4543 and Kerry (202) 224-2742.

   <

   p>It’s easy and takes only 2 minutes; just give your name and address and urge them to hold firm for a strong Medicare-like public insurance option in national healthcare reform–or say that “Medicare-for-All Single payer is ideal and that’s what we need them to fight for.

   <

   p>Whatever you believe, now’s the time to say it. Kennedy (202) 224-4543 and Kerry (202) 224-2742.