The media chooses to comment on the right's symbolic healthcare vote, but meanwhile there's some leftward movement on healthcare with possibly real consequence.
Basically, according to Congressman Welch (D-VT) state and federal lawmakers are proposing single payer--and thus, to opt out of Obamacare. Senior Democrats in Washington support Vermont's intention.
The story:
Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) told The Huffington Post that his state's local and national lawmakers were "looking to get a waiver" so as to formally opt out of the federal system. Conversations have begun as to how an alternate health care policy might look like should the waiver be granted, Welch said.
"Vermont is very supportive of moving towards single-payer, you have the entire congressional delegation you have the governor who ran on the platform of single-payer and the legislature is very sympathetic to single-payer," he said.
Welch notes that under current law, Vermont cannot obtain a waiver before 2017.Senator Wyden (D-OR) and Senator Brown (R-Mass) have a proposal that would expedite the process by making 2014 an earliest date for withdrawal. Single payer could exist in America--in Vermont--that soon.
Tomorrow, Governor Drumlin will receive a report from "one of the architects" of Taiwan's single payer system.
James Clyburn commented on the history of state power in opting out of federal legislation:
"And I don't know why nobody focuses on it, but if you go back and look at Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, you would find some very interesting language that allows states to opt out of the coverage of that act. I happened to run the agency in South Carolina that because of the law we passed in 1972, South Carolina was allowed to opt out of that section of the Civil Rights Act so law as the state law was substantially equal to the federal law. And I think that is the whole concept of states' rights.
"If you are going to come up with a state law that will give coverage to the citizens that is equivalent to the federal coverage, what's wrong with opting out?"
I continue to maintain that the surefire way you make single payer national, in a political environment that allows rural and depopulated states to dominate or bully the majority of the American population, is to use incentive against the free market crowd.
A Wyoming or an Alabama may never choose to pass single payer in a vacuum--but what happens when Vermont, then Massachusetts, then Connecticutt and all of New England have single payer?
And let's suggest then it spreads to Minnesota, Oregon, Washington and California. And then, Colorado and Illinois.
At some point, other states start to catch up out of necessity. A worker is motivated significantly by better health care for herself and her family. Workers move to places with good quality of life--be that clean air, nice neighborhoods... or better pay or health care. The move out of places that offer substantially poorer quality of life.
No, not a forgone conclusion, but rather one requiring work from progressives. However, once you remember how many people die because of insurance companies, and how many will live longer with single payer, it's worth its weight in gold.