Skip to main content

View Diary: What's Done Is Done (332 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  With the public option, yes (10+ / 0-)

    but with single payer, less so.  There were a few who brought it up, but for the most part I recall people on the left mostly being reactive.

    Even the public option was something that was already in the original drafts of the legislation as opposed to something out of the box that liberals pushed to get inserted into the conversation.

    In the intervening years I've come to believe that the health care fight would've gone better for everyone if liberals had pre-empted the whole thing by launching a campaign/movement to push Medicare Part E (E for everyone).

    I admit to not being prescient on that myself.  I remember it being the middle of July 2009 when I first heard someone say we should have Medicare for All, and I thought, "what an excellent idea", but by then the debate's parameters were already set.  

    “Th’ noise ye hear is not th’ first gun iv a revolution. It’s on’y th’ people iv the United States batin’ a carpet.” - Mr. Dooley

    by puakev on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 01:58:45 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Unfortunately (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      puakev, AoT, elwior

      The time reference to look at was the nomination of the President as the standard bearer for the Democratic party.  The nomination came down to either him or HRC.  

      Obama was for health exchanges, a public option, and no insurance mandate.

      HRC was for an insurance mandate, and a public option.  

      Obama won, and we got the health exchange, the insurance mandate, and no public option.

      Single payer was never even on the table.  If Dems had honestly wanted that, they could have lined up behind Kucinich.  But he's funny looking or something, I guess.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site