Weiner is declaring a sort of victory, saying that

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Why Single Payer Advocacy Matters Now More Than Ever

By John Nichols for the Nation -

How should serious supporters of health-care reform spend the month of August?

Not by getting trapped in the narrow “debate” between “party of no” Republicans who favor no reform at all, and Blue Dog Democrats, whose “reform” is to make a bad system worse.

And not by campaigning for “buzz words – “public option,” “employer mandates” – or whatever President Obama or Speaker Pelosi happen to favor this week. There will be plenty of advertising and organizing to that end, including a $15 million expenditure by the AFL-CIO.

Americans who want to tip the debate in the most progressive direction should take advantage an opening provided at the last minute during negotiations to get a bill approved by the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

And they should do so by advocating even more aggressively for single-payer health care.

One of the many side deals that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, and Energy and Commerce chair Henry Waxman, D-California, had to cut to get the votes they needed for the compromise reform measure that was approved before the House broke for its August recess will allow a floor vote on real reform.

Waxman sidetracked a move by New York Congressman Anthony Weiner to replace his proposal with a single-payer plan by agreeing – with Pelosi’s approval – to schedule a vote by the full House on the plan to replace the current for-profit system with a Medicare-style plan that covers all Americans and controls costs.

“A lot of members on our committee want a vote on that,” Waxman, a California Democrat who has worked closely with the Speaker to advance a moderate reform agenda, said of single-payer. “I believe their wishes will be accommodated.”

Weiner is declaring a sort of victory, saying that: “Single-payer is a better plan and now it is on center stage. Americans have a clear choice. Their Member of Congress will have a simpler, less expensive and smarter bill to choose. I am thrilled that the Speaker is giving us that choice.”

Of course, getting a September vote on single-payer does not mean that single-payer will get the votes.

With the Obama administration and congressional leaders determined to compromise rather than fight, it is unlikely in the extreme that the current debate will end with the adoption of a single-payer plan. Even if the House approved one, it would still face a fight in the Senate.

But just as Republicans are willing to just say “no” to any reform, progressives should just say “yes” to real reform.

Campaigning for single-payer in August – by demanding that members of the House agree to support such a plan when it comes up for a vote, and by urging senators to schedule and support a similar vote in their chamber – is the best was to assure that whatever reform ultimately comes will err on the side of Americans who need health care rather than insurance companies that would deny them that care.

At the very least, single-payer advocacy should preserve an amendment sponsored by Congressman Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, which would allow states to experiment with single-payer programs even if the federal government refuses to do so. That’s a significant matter, since Canada’s national health care program began with single-payer experiments at the provincial level.

The worst mistake that progressives could make in August would be to put their time and energy into getting members of Congress to agree to back a barely-acceptable compromise that could end up being unacceptable by the time the lobbyists and their political handmaidens finish with it.

Better to get representatives and senators to commit to back single-payer bills.

That does not prevent them from ultimately agreeing to compromise measures.

But it gets them to begin on the side of real reform, and lessens the likelihood that the eventual deals will be as bad as the schemes that the Blue Dogs tried to impose before the break.

Perhaps just as importantly, a strong vote for single-payer will remind the Obama administration that the president was right when he said six years ago that single-payer was the right response to the mess that private insurers and their allies have made of our health-care system.

Groups that back single-payer are gearing up for August activism.

Keep track of the most important advocacy on the health care issue by following the work of Physicians for a Natonal Health Program at www.pnhp.org, the California Nurses Association at www.pdamerica.org.

Activist David Swanson is suggesting that this should be “Single-Payer Summer.”

Swanson’s right.

Only if Americans who favor real reform make this “Single-Payer Summer” will we have anything worth considering in the fall.

http://www.healthcare-now.org/why-single-p...more-than-ever/

[dalegg 143]

There is no way I can conceive of such a thing happening. It would be fun to watch them change their proposal to this, but man can you imagine the noise at the Town Hall meetings and Tea Parties then... not gonna happen...not now.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

There is no way I can conceive of such a thing happening. It would be fun to watch them change their proposal to this, but man can you imagine the noise at the Town Hall meetings and Tea Parties then... not gonna happen...not now.

Ya ever play Three Card Monte?

[dalegg 143]

There is no way I can conceive of such a thing happening. It would be fun to watch them change their proposal to this, but man can you imagine the noise at the Town Hall meetings and Tea Parties then... not gonna happen...not now.

Ya ever play Three Card Monte?

No way man! You could never do this without a middle class tax hike. That's political suicide and they aren't going to do it. There isn't really any point to doing it either. All they have to do is offer folks a cheaper government option and gradually the system will just run private companies out of business and it will essentially be a single payer system by default. It just won't be called a "tax'. It will be called a "deduction", but it will be a deduction people choose to have.

[luckytxn 2,265]

The Socialists can pass any legislation they want at any time even if the GOP voted 100% against it as theh have fool proof majority.

[dalegg 143]

The Socialists can pass any legislation they want at any time even if the GOP voted 100% against it as theh have fool proof majority.

Yeah, but some of them want to be reelected.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

There is no way I can conceive of such a thing happening. It would be fun to watch them change their proposal to this, but man can you imagine the noise at the Town Hall meetings and Tea Parties then... not gonna happen...not now.

Ya ever play Three Card Monte?

No way man! You could never do this without a middle class tax hike. That's political suicide and they aren't going to do it. There isn't really any point to doing it either. All they have to do is offer folks a cheaper government option and gradually the system will just run private companies out of business and it will essentially be a single payer system by default. It just won't be called a "tax'. It will be called a "deduction", but it will be a deduction people choose to have.

If you read between the lines, all they have to do is get a bill to conference. The bill comes out under reconciliation rules. A simple majority in both houses, up or down, and after a lot of arm twisting and deal making, the bill goes to the President for signing. That's the game plan.

[luckytxn 2,265]

The Socialists can pass any legislation they want at any time even if the GOP voted 100% against it as theh have fool proof majority.

Yeah, but some of them want to be reelected.

And because the Socialists can well fund any race they will be reelected. Mid terms are usually where the congress gets an opposition. That is why Obama the Socialist said that the deal had to be done by a certain date. There is a reason he said that. Think about that and the reasons he could be meaning. This is politics after all and not anything about them caring about us citizens.

There is no way I can conceive of such a thing happening. It would be fun to watch them change their proposal to this, but man can you imagine the noise at the Town Hall meetings and Tea Parties then... not gonna happen...not now.

Ya ever play Three Card Monte?

No way man! You could never do this without a middle class tax hike. That's political suicide and they aren't going to do it. There isn't really any point to doing it either. All they have to do is offer folks a cheaper government option and gradually the system will just run private companies out of business and it will essentially be a single payer system by default. It just won't be called a "tax'. It will be called a "deduction", but it will be a deduction people choose to have.

If you read between the lines, all they have to do is get a bill to conference. The bill comes out under reconciliation rules. A simple majority in both houses, up or down, and after a lot of arm twisting and deal making, the bill goes to the President for signing. That's the game plan.

Exactly and your blue dog Socialists will get their plum assignments and a nice earmark for going along. Politics as usual.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Politics makes strange bedfellows. Weiner is a weasel, but I have to agree with him on this issue.

Personally, I think the employer model sucks, and the only way to get costs back under control is to nationalize healthcare. Everybody is scared of rationing, but there is no reason to give a sedentary person a hip replacement, unless they want to pay for it themselves. Old people are going to have to do with less. Tough choices got to be made, and the doctors are greedy bastards just like everyone else, so they won't do it. Nobody trusts the insurance companies, so Congress is already making the choice for everybody. So, let Congress pay for it, and watch costs get under control, when healthcare begins overwhelming every pet project. Highways, or healthcare. Let the government make the hard choices for a change.

Pay as you go, Madame Speaker?

And don't forget to add dental to the program as well. Greedy bastards. If all the doctors would be satisfied with free government housing and a fried chicken dinner every Sunday, we wouldn't be in this mess.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Single Payer? No way we're going to do things efficiently in American health care. It's against the tradition of waste.

[luckytxn 2,265]

Just bring it on then and when the true costs come out and the taxes become something that the middle class considers crushing then we can say, "we told you so, but you were drunk on the Koolaid."

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Single Payer? No way we're going to do things efficiently in American health care. It's against the tradition of waste.

You gots to admit government doesn't have a good track record, but given that they created this problem, it is going to take govenment to solve it. And by government, I mean we the people caused this problem.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Single Payer? No way we're going to do things efficiently in American health care. It's against the tradition of waste.

You gots to admit government doesn't have a good track record, but given that they created this problem, it is going to take govenment to solve it. And by government, I mean we the people caused this problem.

Again, in the health care arena, the government has a far better track record than the private insurance industry.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Single Payer? No way we're going to do things efficiently in American health care. It's against the tradition of waste.

You gots to admit government doesn't have a good track record, but given that they created this problem, it is going to take govenment to solve it. And by government, I mean we the people caused this problem.

Again, in the health care arena, the government has a far better track record than the private insurance industry.

Even with the insurance companies, the system is already heavily regulated. It's time to remove all the pretext, and all the profiteers, and move right away to a single payer system. That is the only way to guarrantee 100% registration: If you are not registered, you don't get treated anywhere.

Plus, I know several employers, that if they didn't have to worry about providing healthcare to their employees any more, they would be hiring tomorrow. It's a job program as well. And for those on the right, it would castrate the unions. Everybody wins!

[luckytxn 2,265]

Single Payer? No way we're going to do things efficiently in American health care. It's against the tradition of waste.

You gots to admit government doesn't have a good track record, but given that they created this problem, it is going to take govenment to solve it. And by government, I mean we the people caused this problem.

Again, in the health care arena, the government has a far better track record than the private insurance industry.

Even with the insurance companies, the system is already heavily regulated. It's time to remove all the pretext, and all the profiteers, and move right away to a single payer system. That is the only way to guarrantee 100% registration: If you are not registered, you don't get treated anywhere.

Plus, I know several employers, that if they didn't have to worry about providing healthcare to their employees any more, they would be hiring tomorrow. It's a job program as well. And for those on the right, it would castrate the unions. Everybody wins!

Except the Government has never ever had an efficient program. It will be a huge lumbering bureaucratic nightmare. Do we need to go into all the links from yesterday that showed that medicare was actually worse than private companies on overhead?