@CommonDreams (Common Dreams) posted a new topic, subject "'The Time for Incrementalism Is Over': Jayapal Launches Medicare for All PAC". It read:

   ## 'The Time for Incrementalism Is Over': Jayapal Launches Medicare for All PAC
    
    Jake Johnson, staff writer
    
    With support for single-payer spreading rapidly among current members of Congress, congressional candidates, and the American public, Rep.
    
      * Back to full article

So @Garrett_Connelly (Garrett Connelly) replied

    Did I miss the link where I can donate my 2¢ worth?

After which, @GuildF312S (Robert Lee Hefter) added

    I hope that Rep. Jayapal is talking about H.R. 676, and not the bait-and-switch S.B. 1804.

Then @Greenwich (Barbara Briemer) said

    Current officials have to be cleared out as they will fight Medicare4All and sabotage it,  
    every step of the way.

Then @Greenwich (Barbara Briemer) said

    How do we know?

@GuildF312S (Robert Lee Hefter) replied

    Greenwich:
    
    > How do we know?
    
    The article is opaque on the subject, hence my previous post.

After which, @GoebbelsSez (Jon) added

    GuildF312S sez:
    
    > “I hope that Rep. Jayapal is talking about H.R. 676, and not the bait-and-switch S.B. 1804.”
    
    This PAC appears unattached to any particular legislation, from what I can see (and based on the generic wording of its website).  
    For what it's worth, Jayapal is co-sponsor of the house bill. I'm not convinced either version will advance in my remaining lifetime, but if/when it does, the devil will be in the reconciliation details.

So @GuildF312S (Robert Lee Hefter) replied

    GoebbelsSez:
    
    > For what it's worth, Jayapal is co-sponsor of the house bill.
    
    Thanks, that gives me cause for some all-too-rare optimism.

Then @Greenwich (Barbara Briemer) said

    Guild – right – not a good sign.
    
    Plus, it's kind of upside down – reality is public pushing this Medicare4All  
    on our representatives rather than the party itself standing for Medicare4All.
    
    Basic enemies of national health care would be designing it – executing it.
    
    Funding it.

Then @Alan (allen) said

    Not giving a dime!
    
    The website http://passmedicareforall.org defines nothing. The pages Our Mission, Who We are, Why Now – leave candidate qualifications so completely wide-opened that even Senators supporting Sander's S1804 Trojan Horse could qualify for funding form the PAC.
    
    Give your contribution to Health Care Over Profit: http://healthoverprofit.org/

To which @Alan (allen) replied

    Medicare for All
    
    ### Medicare for All
    
    Every American should have access to high quality health care regardless of their income. The Medicare For All PAC will support candidates, initiatives, research and proposals around the country that share the common conviction that health care is a...
    
    You didn't miss anything, the author didn't include the link.

After which, @Alan (allen) added

    It has been designed. It is called Medicare. If we can fund the MIC at 60% of our budget, funding is not the issue. Never has been. Plus, HR676 SAVES money over the current system and provides the most efficient and economic plan out there.

So @AlexG (Alex Grimsson) replied

    flagrantly illegal corporate monopolies, meta-monopolies, and price-fixing schemes within the US health care system must also be broken up by state & federal prosecutors, if overall healthcare costs are to become affordable – no matter which centrally-designed public system replaces the current predatory chaos.
    
    Monopolies arie a factor that has so-far been ignored in reformist debates.  
    Just Google-search “medical monopolies in the US” to see the voluminous data which show the huge a cost factor that such wrongly tolerated monopolies constitute in the present HC system. <><><>  
    .

After which, @Elenarose added

    I'm old. I'm excited. Not a significant peep in the House has been made for this ever before. Of course, the shadow shows up where the light is cast. That's your comment. Fueling progressive change with soggy blankets full of cynicism, know-it-all-ism, and sourness

After which, @Greenwich (Barbara Briemer) added

    “…even Senators supporting Sanders' S1804 Trojan Horse could qualify for  
    funding from the PAC.”
    
    It's important that those who know the difference between the plans – and presume  
    it is single payer that we want – need to keep reminding us about which ones are  
    legitimate and which aren't.

Then @Greenwich (Barbara Briemer) said

    Alan –
    
    That's extremely naïve.  
    And did you miss it the other day that Pelosi is insisting that it will be “pay as you go” …  
    in other words, nothing – not any national health care could be funded unless it is paid  
    for first. But – right – they will print money for keeping wars going and MIC lavishly funded.  
    How about making a hashtag – presumably of HR676 (if that's what everyone agrees on)  
    and just adding “single payer” so that we all know which program is preferred and which we  
    should all be supporting?
    
    Coming back to my use of “design” – we should be using European models as they were  
    originally funded, with the original and any amendments which improved those plans.  
    And/or Canadian – all the plans should be mined for the “design.”  
    And any US plan should include full eye care – an American can go blind now if they need  
    special lenses if they have special problems/lenses that can cost $22,000 and they have to  
    raise the money themselves. And they won't necessarily pay for the exact prescription of  
    lenses your eye doctor may recommend, if it's another $3,000 or so. (Two separate problems  
    in the above.) Plus eyeglasses are essential in the plan. And, of course, dental insurance.
    
    And, I say naïve because our entire system of insurance - which let's hope will be gone – and  
    all of the cuts that have already happened to Medicare and to Social Security should by now  
    have made clear to you that they would try to do this on the cheap – and there would also be  
    constant delays to forestall any program, hoping they could overturn it.
    
    While they continue to stuff money in their own pockets, they continue to cut Social Security and  
    Medicare – you should understand that – and actually ALL social programs. Extending the  
    Medicare program to all ages wouldn't stop that greed or the attacks. That's something you have  
    to understand. I mean – go back and look at Thatcher and what she did to the UK health care  
    system. The right wing will fight these programs to the end and underfund them every chance they  
    get. And deprive citizens of health care.

Then @Greenwich (Barbara Briemer) said

    Elena –
    
    I doubt you could find any American who isn't for Medicare4-All – and it certainly isn't me!!
    
    Bill Clinton was supposed to provide National Health Care – it was a very prominent issue at  
    the time, lead by a guy who became a Senator – can't think of his name right now.
    
    Oops! Hillary just happened to drop the ball on that one – and Democrats couldn't find their  
    tongues to fight the “Harry & Louise” ads which ran regularly on TV. Neither did our press  
    fight for national health care.
    
    So consider it cynical, know-it-all, sourness – or whatever you wish but wake up to reality.
    
    And I trust that some others here will explain to you the dangers of trust anyone in office now –  
    and that we are dealing pretty much with two right wing parties. The Koch Bros. are not going  
    to sit idly by, either.

To which @DHFabian replied

    Stuck in a rerun. Medicare for All is is not universal health care. It's some lower-cost coverage, presumably coming at the expense of Medicaid. Currently, low-income seniors and the disabled rely on dual benefits, Medicare/Medicaid, with Medicaid covering prescription costs, and much more. Congress knows that anything resembling universal health care would make no sense in a country that's over 20 years into its war on the poor. It's not possible to maintain health without adequate food and shelter. In fact, the overall life expectancy of the US poor already fell below that of every developed nation.

@DHFabian replied

    What good would Medicare be for those who can't afford the premiums or prescription costs (Medicare for All is not free health care)? How cost-effective would universal health care be, when it comes to the poor who lack adequate food and shelter?

So @Greenwich (Barbara Briemer) replied

    Fabian –
    
    Have to rely on others to reply to your post and to enlighten me in regard to your comments …
    
    > Stuck in a rerun. Medicare for All is is not universal health care. It's some lower-cost coverage, presumably coming at the expense of Medicaid. Currently, low-income seniors and the disabled rely on dual benefits, Medicare/Medicaid, with Medicaid covering prescription costs, and much more. **Congress knows that anything resembling universal health care would make no sense in a country that's over 20 years into its war on the poor. It's not possible to maintain health without adequate food and shelter. In fact, the overall life expectancy of the US poor already fell below that of every developed nation.**
    
    and to your post to me –
    
    > What good would Medicare be for those who can't afford the premiums or prescription costs (Medicare for All is not free health care)? How cost-effective would universal health care be, when it comes to the poor who lack adequate food and shelter?
    
    Meanwhile, I'll ask –
    
    Why is Medicare4All not “universal health care” or national health care for all?  
    Granted the CURRENT design …  
    Does not include medicines/drugs for patients, nor full eye care costs, nor for eyeglasses.  
    And ONLY provides 80% of costs with most seniors using AARP for insurance for balance.  
    A valid national health care program would include those items and other very important coverage.
    
    Essentially, Americans now pay exorbitant prices to insurance companies for health care  
    they rarely get and the costs to seniors continue to rise.  
    Americans pay out what the Swiss pay for their luxury system of national health care.  
    Like other social programs, presumably as Medicare is expanded, there would be enough  
    excess to pay for the poor. And, of course, as preventive health care took hold, and as  
    we could begin to clean up pollution of air and water, everything (including costs) would decline.  
    But I well note your comments about the levels of poverty here in the US now – and of  
    course the homeless which you point to in making clear no one can be healthy or recover  
    their health without a roof over their head and sufficient food.
    
    The demand for social responsibility has to grow to such levels that we are talking about  
    ousting those in government – **a full purge of the right wing** – who have served the rich.
    
    As I often point out we are discussing a 1,000 different problems across health care, pollution,  
    chemicals, Global Warming, drinking water, schools, violence, guns – reinstatement of Welfare  
    programs knocked out by Clinton, and of course returning to long term Unemployment Benefits,  
    on and on – basically restoring all of the New Deal regulations and programs knocked out in the  
    last decades …
    
    **but the basic problem is the rise of the right wing/fascists who have taken over government.**
    
    Remove the right wing and we break the dam holding the MIC and national security state together,  
    including our fascist CIA.
    
    But I'll be anxious to see the replies, if any – and yours, naturally –
    
    Thank you –

( there was a missing post )

( there was a missing post )


{'source': 'discourse', 'url': 'https://commons.commondreams.org/t/the-time-for-incrementalism-is-over-jayapal-launches-medicare-for-all-pac/55492', 'title': "'The Time for Incrementalism Is Over': Jayapal Launches Medicare for All PAC", 'views': 1612, 'has_accepted_answer': False, 'word_count': 2257, 'like_count': 12, 'reply_count': 14, 'participant_count': 10, 'posts': 22, 'tags': '', 'author': '@CommonDreams (Common Dreams)', 'participants': '@CommonDreams (Common Dreams), @Garrett_Connelly (Garrett Connelly), @GuildF312S (Robert Lee Hefter), @Greenwich (Barbara Briemer), @GoebbelsSez (Jon), @Alan (allen), @AlexG (Alex Grimsson), @Elenarose, @DHFabian', 'image_url': [None], 'created_at': '2018-09-12T17:09:00.398Z', 'last_posted_at': '2018-09-13T17:30:55.869Z'}