Tweet
Sitting with starlings (photo: Monocle / flickr)
The solution is Improved Medicare for All
After the November election, there will be a major effort in Congress to pass a budget deal that will make cuts in Social Security, raise the Medicare and Social Security eligibility age, and perhaps more–unless we act to stop it with a solution that is close at hand.
There is agreement from the Wall Street Journal’s David Wessel to liberal economists Dean Baker and Paul Krugman that the pressure will be on to reach a Simpson/Bowles type of compromise. Such a bipartisan plan would damage our most cherished programs and excuse the dastardly deed by asserting that the cuts are small and necessary because of the deficit.
Those who relentlessly scream at us and finance ads to persuade us that the deficit threatens our grandchildren are obscuring the truth. The fact is that the transfer of wealth from public funds and the rest of us to the super rich is the real crisis. But those who have gorged themselves on this massive transfer of wealth also seek to undermine the Medicare and Social Security which are our grandchildren’s heritage from generations of struggles for a better life.
The projected cuts are not minor but very harmful. Even a small decrease in the Social Security Cost of Living Adjustment would deliver an ever increasing downward push on benefits while corporations continue to threaten secure pensions by turning them into lump sums that will fade with the stock market.
Raising the Medicare age to 67 would be disastrous. There will be no affordable health insurance for those in their 60’s. The Affordable Care Act allows private insurance companies to charge premiums three times higher based on age. Under popular pressure, there were regulations placed into the health care reform bill to stop insurance companies from charging higher premiums based on pre-existing conditions. But the companies were allowed to charge three times the premium based on age.
Because of this allowed age discrimination, the Kaiser Foundation estimates that an individual of age 60 in 2014 with an annual income of $50,000 will pay a health insurance premium of over $10,000, or over 20% of income. That does not include out-of-pocket costs which can add up to an additional $6,000 annually. That brings the total to 32% of income—a bankrupting figure.
There is a solution that the single payer movement must place on the nation’s table. Even Bill Clinton said that we could save $1 trillion a year if we adopted the health care system of any of the other developed countries in the world. No more stewing over the deficit!
An Expanded and Improved Medicare for All, HR 676, would save Medicare, end the uncontrolled, gargantuan rise in all health care costs, ease the deficit pressure, and actually bring universal health care to the nation.
This single payer legislation, HR 676, introduced by Congressman John Conyers and co-sponsored by 76 representatives, would divert $400 billion annually from profits and waste generated by the private health insurance industry into care for all. Care would be expanded and costs bought under control through bulk purchasing, global budgeting, and the elimination of administrative expenses forced upon our system in the pursuit of profit.
Doctors would be freed from insurance industry interference with care. Patients would be freed to choose their physicians. Dental, eyeglasses, hearing aids, prescription drugs, long term care, doctors, hospitals, home health, mental health—all medically necessary care would be included. Our health care costs would stop driving us over the cliff and level off just asCanada’s did when that country fully implemented their single payer health care.
Co-pays and deductibles would be banned ending today’s growing problem that health insurance policies are so miserly that even the insured forego care because they can’t afford it.
Our country spends about twice per capita what other industrialized nations spend on health care, yet our health care system lags far behind at number 37 in the world.
So why are we even debating cuts to Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid when the solution is at hand that would bring us both better care and cost controls? HR 676, an improved Medicare for All, is sitting in the Congress, awaiting the rising of a movement that will insist upon its passage.
Kay Tillow
25 Comments
That’s why taking out Paul Ryan, the chief congressional exponent of this horrible idea, is of paramount importance — and taking him out is quite do-able.
did you notice during the “debate” that Obama made the case for Medicare for all when he told Rmoney that govt run health is less expensive then private health insurance. Barry went on to say his grandmother would be forced to 6k a year under a private plan! Gee Obama if that is the case (It is) why did you shove the Afforable health act down our throats? Could it be MONEY from LOBBYISTS?
Thank you for this post. It’s necessary to oppose all the individual proposals to cut Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid benefits in any way. However, it’s also very important to keep the goal of Medicare for All in focus, as the only real solution to providing universal access to healthcare.
I would also consider Dick Durbin (D-IL), Assistant Majority Leader/Majority Whip who voted for Bowles-Simpson, still supports its proposals, and hasn’t signed Harry Reid’s letter to keep SS out of deficit talks, as another key Congressional supporter of this horrible idea.
Thank you Kay Tillow. At this point any thinking American who maintains or retains any sane and real political awareness needs to be seeing and knowing what Kay Tillow presents here. Recommended.
Barack Obama has been laying siege to SS/MC since becoming POTUS. POTUS Obama is a Democratic Party POTUS. So to see in comments above some R vs. D BS being rolled out once again leaves one wondering why this nonsense is still even being peddled. Partisan fervor? Partisan blindness? What? Jesus On A Stick!
Who is POTUS? Barack Obama. Who worked to put up ACA,scuttle any Medicare For All pathways forward as a Democrat POTUS? Barack Obama. Who had plenty of Ds in Congress during 2009-2010 to lead or compel or make walk the plank if they did not follow his Democrat POTUS lead? Barack Obama did. ACA is called ObamaCare for a reason. Barack Obama was doing backroom deals as POTUS to let AHIP get what AHIP wanted. What Big PhARMA wanted. What allied American health care for private regime(s) control/healthcare done for $$ profit wanted. A Democrat POTUS. Barack Obama. Not Paul Ryan. What a pile of R vs. D junk.
ACA is going to fail at American healthcare cost control. ACA will fail to actually help a large segment of Americans who fail to overcome its access and assistance denial/disqualify incline(s). By design. Who then will be facing/face IRS rollercoaster rides trying to satisfy the arcane ACA requirement(s) for penalties for not paying the AHIP pirates off. POTUS Barack Obama set this up as POTUS. Barack Obama could have been a profile in political courage and told AHIP it’s gig was up and Obama was going to power up Medicare For All because as POTUS he wanted to find a way ahead to reduce USG budgets,outlays and results shortfall.
POTUS Obama could have done the hard politics. Did not. Deserves to be voted out of the WH for being a political coward. A political fraud.
Attacking Social Security is attacking Americans who paid into this USG mandatory taxed labor contribution for decades. In view of the current American Depression for many Americans who are 55,59,61 and 64 any attack on SS at this point is a direct threat to how these Americans at these age points can exist,will exist or must exist between now and the day they die.
Thank you Kay Tillow for lining up/going down the line and telling what needs to be told.
This is not about simpleton R vs. D BS politics at this point. Anyone stll peddling the R vs. D BS about which American poltical “party” is going to protect SS is catapulting and selling stupid and stupidity. Barack Obama is no friend of SS. The R vs. D BS at this point is nonsense,is partisan driven stupidity. Sheesh.
This SS attack is about the politics of 10 Percent Wealthy Americans vs 90 Percent Americans. Top vs. Bottom. Haves vs Have nots. As seen with POTUS Obama’s choice and decision to sabotage Medicare For All and go with what AHIP wanted and wants. As seen with POTUS Obama now telling Americans that America is a poor land that cannot,will not pay out the SS they paid into for entire working lives when able to work. In this American Depression undermining SS is a direct threat to millions of Americans who need SS to slow the falldown(s) so many now face going into retirement scenarios where they cannot find decent paying jobs,face age related hiring freezeouts and will be needing more healthcare that they cannot afford to be paying out thousands of $$ a year to the AHIP American Healthcare For Profit Piracy League.
This is not about some more R vs. D BS. This is about who wants to take the $$,who wants to pay for American Militarism/Corporatism while denying decades of SS taxed income rakings now being paid out to a large group of Americans who paid in for decades believing that to reach age 62 or age 65 was the goal and getting on Medicare was going to help make the last stretch from age 65 to death a better last run.
Back when Clinton left office, the U.S. government had a surplus and was projected to eliminate the national debt by 2010. Now through Republican malfeasance, they have accomplished the goal of ensuring that Democrats govern as if Republicans.
Now we are left with another neoliberal centrist Democrat who will be a willing tool of the Republican dream since 1935 and put Social Security on the path of irrelevancy. We have the Ryan budget ending Medicare as we know it. Bill Clinton and Ryan were videotaped talking about the need to reform entitlements in the wake of the NY-26 special election.
Sometime soon, the administration will “tweak” the benefits in exchange for something like the “Buffet rule” which will tax the top earns an extra 3.6% on taxable income above $250,000 and the media will declare it a great success even though Grandma will be eating cat food.
The question is how are we going to protest this action?
shootthatarrow, another spot-on comment.
Recommended, Kay Tillow, and thank you for posting this.
put Chris Van Holland and Steny Hoyer on that list.
The debate between President Obama and Governor leave no doubt that there is no space between the result sought by both men when it comes to SS/MEDICARE—both will eviscerate BOTH PROGRAMS possibly on different timetables. OBAMA AND ROMNEY freely admitted that OBAMACARE was the national model of ROMNEYCARE–which is insurance industry profiteering on steroids. Jill STEIN offers an alternative with her lifelong support for MEDICARE FOR ALL and her impassioned denunciation of the bi-partisan sellout to the pharmaceutical industry in MEDICARE-PART D. We will all have to mount a serious fightback against the duopoly corporate survivor.
Change the dialogue.
The corrupt Washington politicians ran up the debt to benefit the rich.
And they are going to pay it off because WE WON’T PAY.
Let the elite know, if you get what you want, the end of Social Security and Medicare you will be sorry.
How any economists are telling us, if we took the damn profit out of healthcare we could easily go from 18% to 12% of GDP and cover everyone.
Careful, shootthatarrow. Many before you have been banned here for lesser comments. And cloonan, any talk of third party candidates is against the site rules here, as is any talk of withholding your vote from the Democrats or anything that goes against the two party duopoly. This site has to make money and they can’t do that with a bunch of anti-Obama crazies shouting their mouths off.
Enter Margaret or Southern Dragon to call me names in 3 … 2 … 1 …
Forgot to add: eat the rich.
Don’t understand what you are talking about. FDL is by far more anti-Obama than pro-Obama – at least in the posts and comments. Please explain.
Kay, Thanks for posting this. I’m voting for Jill Stein.
times four. Shootthatarrow@5 Great comment.
Taking out Obama would really reestablish the social security Third Rail. The reason there was a Third Rail aspect to attacking social security is because, within our political duopoly, the Democrats were resolute defenders of SS and every time the GOP went after SS the Democrats clobbered them because the American People wholeheartedly support SS. Since the Obama Democrats are no longer staunch defenders of SS, and indeed have their own plans to attack it, there is little downside risk to the GOP’s efforts as there is no party to inflict the political punishment any longer. Want to make SS sacrosanct again? Drive Obama and the other Blue Dogs out of the Democratic Party. How? Abandon Obama and the Democrats and vote for Jill Stein and the Green Party.
I agree, the only short-term way I can think of to possibly avert this disaster is for a strong third party showing in this election. After that, I guess if people think the Dems are redeemable, try to drive out the Blue Dogs and reclaim the party; if not, then get to work to build a bigger, better Green Party.
Agreed!
Only slightly o/t: someone recently posted a link to a breakdown of the US national debt, showing what percentage is owed to whom. I can’t find it, but it was a wonderful tool for showing how only relatively small percentages are owed to other countries, most of it to ourselves (treasury, bonds, &c &c.) – anyone remember it and have it? I won’t lose it again :-)
There is no deficit. There are only treasury sucking wars and treasury sucking building and supporting of other leech nations. There is no deficit. The deficit debate is a lie. It is a red herring. There is no deficit. The deficit is exactly the same amount as what the mongers say the wars have cost. BF lie. Putting a fork in America with the big “deficit” lie and the big lies to war. No one at the Pres. debate said we’d have more money for America if we stopped throwing money into the Mid-East and Paki and Afghan and Iraq–still–after all these years. No peace dividend for eleven years. Never in the history of America have we gone without a peace divident for that long. Our chain is being yanked. Big deficit lies all around. Big deficit lies to totally turn everyones’ pockets inside out. Big deficit lies for United States Security to put cameras and mics up all of our noses. The time for calling BS on the deficit lies is at hand. Where has all of our money gone? Billions in bribes to other nations. Billions in the military war machine. And for what? So we can all have cameras up our own domestic backs here at home while Afghan troops shoot our troops? Something is very, very wrong. Get the hell out of all miltarized zones. Bring my tax money home. There will then be no deficit. BTW, Romney and OBama are both asses for not mentioning this all the time from mountain tops. Big freaking deficit lie. There is no deficit. There is only massive misappropriation.
If you want to see a presidential debate in which candidates offering a very different point of view participate, check out the extended debate offered by Amy Goodman and Democracy Now!, in which Jill Stein (Green Party) and I (Justice Party, Progressive Party of Oregon, Independent Party in New Mexico and Connecticut, Natural Law Party of Michigan, and independent candidate in several other states)participated: http://www.democracynow.org/2012/10/4/expanding_the_debate_exclusive_third_party . There you will see the case made for Medicare-for-all healthcare and preservation of Social Security and Medicare. Speak up loudly from the voting booth as you stand against the militarism and corporatism sell-outs of both the Democratic and Republican Parties.
Hey, Rocky Anderson is here!
Fantastic overview of the impending threat to our beloved historical programs! The Obama/Biden rhetoric about “no substantial changes” to these programs is infuriating. We ALREADY know they intend to make substantial changes to the programs; they’ve been working on it as part of their efforts to create a more Republican-friendly Democratic agenda. Obama supporters MUST hold him accountable by asking the tough questions now, and withholding the vote in November unless he confirms in writing that neither program will be touched. Period. Regardless of your stance on single-payer healthcare (disclaimer: as a primary care physician, I’m a staunch supporter), these programs have proven for decades that they work. At the very least, Medicare should be expanded and strengthened, and neither program should be sacrificed as a bargaining chip when so many of our other liberties (healthcare included) have already been tossed into the fires of concession.