• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Vox: Bernie Sanders outlines his single payer bill

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
Jun 18, 2009
62,408
10
1,115

ApharmdX

Banned
Aug 20, 2014
3,812
0
0
I really like the 4 year roll-out. I'm reserving judgment on the whole thing until details are public in its entirety, but I must say I love how Bernie is taking the reigns of the Democratic Party. The future of the party, if progressive policy positions become its default, feels brighter to me, and I'm excited, even though this bill is political gesturing at this point in time.
 

Chindogg

Member
Oct 5, 2010
6,336
0
0
Respect for him trying and gathering at least 15 other senators to step forward.

Too bad Pelosi and Schumer can't step forward with them.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
Jun 18, 2009
62,408
10
1,115
Yeah I somehow missed the actual reveal is happening right as I posted this. Whelp we'll probably get a new thread!
 

pigeon

Banned
Feb 14, 2011
19,361
1
0
From PoliGAF:

I actually...really like Bernie's bill. I think the changes he made to get Dem support are whip-smart politically. The four-year timeline provides bite-sized pieces that should make negotiation easier. Don't want to overhaul America in four years? Draw it out to the ten-year window instead! Easy changes.

The key aspect of the bill is not changing what it does in the first year. Once the bill is benefiting people it will have a natural constituency that will help move the process forward. The rest of the timeline is pretty malleable.

Personally, I would want to add in a buy-in for Medicare in the first year as well in the event that the timeline gets extended. It's also not really clear why private insurance needs to be outlawed.

Kicking off the pay-fors to a separate bill is actually...pretty smart. There is no particular reason our goals need to be tied one-to-one to our ability to fundraise.

Overall, pretty good!
 

gutter_trash

Banned
Feb 4, 2005
43,878
1
0
Respect for him trying and gathering at least 15 other senators to step forward.

Too bad Pelosi and Schumer can't step forward with them.


There are still 3 years of Trump damage left. Pelosi and Schumer are doing their best to stop or slow the Trump damage.

defending ACA, Dreamers, Planned Parenthood, Medicare, Medicaid in the Present Tense
 

kirblar

Member
Oct 9, 2010
63,315
1
860
This did not need to be a part of this bill.
 

Chindogg

Member
Oct 5, 2010
6,336
0
0
There are still 3 years of Trump damage left. Pelosi and Schumer are doing their best to stop or slow the Trump damage.

defending ACA, Dreamers, Planned Parenthood, Medicare, Medicaid in the Present Tense

Fighting to not lose has continuously been a shit strategy for Democrats and it's frustrating how they continue to follow the playbook in hopes that one day voters will realize they were right.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Jul 31, 2007
39,660
0
0
LOL at outlawing private insurance. Classic Bernie. Start with a decent idea and then take it to an extreme to make it completely untenable.
 

badcrumble

Member
May 12, 2006
26,792
5
0
Putting kids all in the first-stage rollout is a smart idea for the same reasons that Medicare in its original form targeting seniors is a smart idea.

As for outlawing private insurance, that seems to me to be an incorrect/blunt-instrument solution to the very real problem we face today of doctors refusing medicare/medicaid patients because they won't make enough money. That's a problem that does need solving, and some solution is better than none, but I'm not convinced that this is the right one. I'm also not convinced, though, that "outlawing private health insurance" is an accurate descriptor of what's in the bill - it sure sounds like it could be a glib mischaracterization.
 

kirblar

Member
Oct 9, 2010
63,315
1
860
Fighting to not lose has continuously been a shit strategy for Democrats and it's frustrating how they continue to follow the playbook in hopes that one day voters will realize they were right.
Did you think we were "fighting not to lose in '09"? Because that's very much not what happened.
 

KissVibes

Banned
Jun 10, 2012
0
0
0
Democrats need some Icy Hot to get rid of The Bern. He is fucking up THE MOST BASIC AND GOOD ideas.

This did not need to be a part of this bill.

To many people this reads as "Hey millions of Americans, you'd all lose your fucking jobs!"
 

Aaronrules380

Member
Feb 19, 2013
15,791
0
0
For a random bill everyone knows is going to never become law, it's not that big of a deal. That can be worked out later. It's probably a big deal with PR though. He should have at least made a half ass plan to pay for it.

I'd say even in this case it's still a bad thing because not including a detail like that is basically admitting you don't have a good idea on how to go about doing it. And while anyone with the slightest bit of political savvy knows this was never going to become law, a lot of Americans are idiots
 

benicillin

Banned
Mar 31, 2012
5,306
0
0
I don't think getting rid of private insurance would be part of an actual bill that was designed to pass the senate and the house.
 

pigeon

Banned
Feb 14, 2011
19,361
1
0
For a random bill everyone knows is going to never become law, it's not that big of a deal. That can be worked out later. It's probably a big deal with PR though. He should have at least made a half ass plan to pay for it.

Hot take, let's mint the coin to pay for it.

Remember, money is a fake idea, taxes don't finance government!
 

ApharmdX

Banned
Aug 20, 2014
3,812
0
0
Why outlaw private insurance? If you provide government coverage for all, let people who need supplemental coverage pay for that from private insurers out of pocket.

I don't understand the thinking. I mean, fuck private health care in the US, the vultures, but if you want to buy your own supplemental coverage why not leave that as an option?
 

excelsiorlef

Member
Sep 20, 2014
32,454
9
525
Burnaby, BC
Fighting to not lose has continuously been a shit strategy for Democrats and it's frustrating how they continue to follow the playbook in hopes that one day voters will realize they were right.

Different people can do different jobs. This is a show bill. Pelosi and Schumer not signing on now doesn't mean they'll oppose later.
 
Apr 14, 2008
10,656
1
0
New Orleans
I don't get why they'd outlaw private insurance. Systems like the UK's all allow the purchase of supplemental private insurance.

Aside from that, I think the bill is great.

Also, they need to scream from the rooftops that while taxes will obviously go up, people won't be paying absurd private insurance premiums any more.

A single-payer system will be expensive. Our current system is more expensive.
 

Zoe

Member
Jan 3, 2007
45,101
2
1,075
39
Austin
I don't think getting rid of private insurance would be part of an actual bill that was designed to pass the senate and the house.

The House bill sounds even stricter. Wonder why nobody's been talking about that one.


About financing:
During the presidential campaign, Sanders released a seven-point plan for raising $6 trillion for his bill. Yet in this new rollout, he will releasing different options to raise money for the bill separately — independent of the bill he's gotten 13 Senate Democrats to co-sponsor. That will make it easier for Senate Democrats to co-sponsor the legislation and win over Sanders's supporters, but also not co-sign their names to legislation calling for billions in new personal income taxes (as Sanders's primary campaign plan did).

”What I can say is we are going to be listing a number of revenue-raising proposals," Sanders said of the bill's financing.
 

Aaronrules380

Member
Feb 19, 2013
15,791
0
0
Different people can do different jobs. This is a show bill. Pelosi and Schumer not signing on now doesn't mean they'll oppose later.

yeah, I don't get why people don't understand this. They're in a completely different position from the average congressman in that they don't just speak for themselves. They can't make decisions on stuff like this based purely on their own feelings
 

Volimar

Member
Jun 11, 2011
34,722
3
685
steamcommunity.com
I think a four year rollout might be too fast but given the pendulum of American politics I can see the need to do it that fast. And hopefully the ACA has made people at least a little more involved in their insurance decisions that they'll be able to get on board faster.
 

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
Jun 8, 2004
28,904
1
1,645
Why outlaw private insurance? If you provide government coverage for all, let people who need supplemental coverage pay for that from private insurers out of pocket.

I don't understand the thinking. I mean, fuck private health care in the US, the vultures, but if you want to buy your own supplemental coverage why not leave that as an option?


It's *super* dumb. Medigap insurance and supplemental insurance on top of Medicare are *super* popular.

This is like the Canadian system where private insurance isn't allowed at all that all my Canadian friends bitch about non-stop.

Edit: Canadians can get private insurance. I was mis-informed by my Canadian friends who complain constantly about something relating to not getting private insurance.
 

pigeon

Banned
Feb 14, 2011
19,361
1
0
The House bill sounds even stricter. Wonder why nobody's been talking about that one.

I've been talking about it! For some reason people are only interested in Bernie's bill. It's a hard road being a black congressman.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
Jun 18, 2009
62,408
10
1,115
I think a four year rollout might be too fast but given the pendulum of American politics I can see the need to do it that fast. And hopefully the ACA has made people at least a little more involved in their insurance decisions that they'll be able to get on board faster.

Honestly I will expect it to take at least 5-8, but the important part is to get tens of millions of people onto it fast so that then they're going to react poorly if the GOP tries to take it away again
 

Chindogg

Member
Oct 5, 2010
6,336
0
0
Did you think we were "fighting not to lose in '09"? Because that's very much not what happened.

Getting Bob Dole's healthcare plan that was sabotaged and used as ammunition by the GOP to take over Congress is very much playing to not lose and they still fucking lost.
 

teiresias

Member
Jun 11, 2004
17,259
4
0
It's *super* dumb. Medigap insurance and supplemental insurance on top of Medicare are *super* popular.

This is like the Canadian system where private insurance isn't allowed at all that all my Canadian friends bitch about non-stop.

Yeah, outlawing it is completely ridiculous. By the time the system is setup there will be so many donut-holes anyway that people will absolutely NEED to have supplemental insurance in some cases? At that point they're stuck paying out of pocket as if they have no insurance again.