On Friday night in the airing of MSNBC’s“All In With Chris Hayes”, Senator Sanders announced that in light of the disastrous failure of the Republican to repeal (not replace) the A.C.A., it’s time to allow for the next step in a health care program for this country which he believes to be Medicare for all, a single payer program. To do this, he states:
“We have got to have the guts to take on the insurance companies and the drug companies and move forward toward a ‘Medicare for all,’ single-payer program,” Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said on MSNBC’s “All In with Chris Hayes” on Friday night. “And I’ll be introducing legislation shortly to do that.” Sanders added on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday that he would “absolutely” seek President Donald Trump’s cooperation on expanding Medicare and lowering prescription drug prices.*
Prior to the fiasco on Friday where the Republicans pulled their vote on their version of “Repeal And Massive Tax Refund”, Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), a close Sanders, ally and the current deputy chair of the Democratic National Committee mentioned this new approach by Sanders at an in defense of the A.C.A. rally the day before, Thursday.
“Don’t just be satisfied with defeating Trumpcare ― set your sights on creating real Medicare for all!” he told a cheering crowd of hundreds of activists. Ellison is a co-sponsor of a “Medicare for all” bill in the House.*
SNIP
Representatives of several major progressive organizations ― the Working Families Party, the Progressive Campaign Change Committee, Credo, Social Security Works and the National Nurses United ― all echoed this push in conversations with The Huffington Post on Friday and Saturday.
“The problem is the insurance companies, Big Pharma ― they’re gonna come back and use the chaos to their advantage,” predicted Social Security Works executive director Alex Lawson. “If Democrats go with a half-a-loaf policy, Republicans are going to blame them for the failures of Big Pharma. They have to immediately pivot to expanding Medicare.”
Chuck Idelson, the current Communications Director of the 150,000-person labor union “National Nurses United” has been a long time advocate for Single Payer, and stated:
“It does take time for social change.”
“We didn’t end slavery overnight,” Idelson said. “It took from Seneca Falls in 1848 ’til 1920 until women won the right to vote. But they only won it by building a movement.”*
That very same theme of building a movement has been the cornerstone of Senator Sanders calls for change, as he has repeatedly stated strongly and maintains that this change will come about with millions of Americans begin fighting for it in earnest, and will not come from a single, or small group of politicians: Change will happen when millions speak with one voice, and act upon such.
Senator Jeff Merkley, (D-Ore.) the only Democratic Senate colleague that supported and endorsed Sanders bid for Presidency brought about in discussion the possibility of lowering the Medicare eligibility age, and empowering Medicare to negotiate drug prices.
There are plenty of ideas already on the table that would make health care more affordable for working families, from a public option, to prescription drug negotiations, to offering older Americans the chance to buy into Medicare,” Merkley said on Friday. “I’m happy to work with anyone, from either side of the aisle, to explore these or any other ideas that would improve health care for working Americans.”*
Even the lowering of the Medicare eligibility age from 65, an idea that has also been introduced in discussion would bring about changes in premiums:
Lowering the Medicare eligibility age from its current level of 65 is a “very interesting” idea, because of the positive financial effect it would have on the Obamacare insurance exchanges, said Austin Frakt, a health economist for the Department of Veterans Affairs.
By allowing the oldest exchange participants to enroll in Medicare, lowering the Medicare age would relieve the health insurance marketplaces of some of their costliest customers, said Frakt, who also has academic posts at Boston University and Harvard.
“It would reduce the premiums in those markets,” he predicted. (Frakt noted, however, that absent measures to offset the cost of the additional beneficiaries, the change would increase Medicare’s financial burden.)
Social Security Works’ Lawson praised the idea as an incremental step toward Medicare for all.
“Start by lowering the age to 62 and get it down to zero,” he said.*
And in conclusion:
In the meantime, a potential benefit of this ambitious approach is what’s known as shifting the “Overton Window,” a political science term for the narrow range of acceptable political views at a given moment in time.
By adopting a position that is considered extreme by contemporary standards, politicians and activists can make more attainable policy goals start to seem reasonable by comparison.
That phenomenon already seems to be working in progressives’ favor.*
It’s time to go bold, and go long, and not time to hide, and wait for something else to grab the health care debate spotlight.
Strike while the iron is hot….
*All quotes from article courtesy of By Daniel Marans:
www.huffingtonpost.com/...;
Be safe out there.