Home | About | Donate

'Make Your Stand': Medicare for All Supporters Ready to Hold Dems to Account


'Make Your Stand': Medicare for All Supporters Ready to Hold Dems to Account

Jessica Corbett, staff writer

As popular support for single-payer continues to grow and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) prepares to introduce Medicare for All legislation, the Establishment wing of the Democratic Party is reportedly "alarmed" by the shifting dynamics and fearful "of primary election challenges" if they don't support Sanders's proposal.


Bernie’s how to instead of the usual politician’s ‘we should’! Bernie wants to make it happen. Bravo Bernie.

It’s great to see an actual how to upsetting the party hacks’ typical complacency. They sense that they can’t just mouth the standard lines (their we shoulds but never do) but will actually have to vote for it!

Thanks for your sticktoitiveness Bernie. If we get it …it will be because of your activism instead of just talk!

Yay Bernie!


After the last two votes on the Republican bills, it seems that the “political reality” is that Americans want healthcare as a guaranteed right. Not as a market-based policy that only some can afford. If so many other countries can afford it, the excuse that we can’t is absurd. Especially when both parties just passed a 696 billion defense bill:


Dear Mr. Krugman,
Just lie here and never mind the bull dozer heading in your direction.


Goddamn right the sellout establishment DINO’s better be worried - and all who sail with them! Their complicity, cowardice, and collusion with for-profit health care-for-some will, and is already, seeding a grass-roots movement tidal wave of demands for them to - you know - actually be an opposition to the trump agenda, NOT accomplices!

Schumer, Pelosi, Cuomo, Maloney, Menendez, D W-S, that Krugman scum-bag, and all the other “better deal” nay-sayer liar prevaricators and corporate whores who make all the excuses for doing nothing to really create change are in for a big surprise! MoFo’s!

Whether its not supporting expanded/improved universal single-payer medicare because they serve the insurance, corporate hospital, and big-pharma parasites that add so much to the cost of health care, or them coddling and supporting the for-profit criminal war-machine, or kissing Netanyahu’s/Israel’s and AIPAC’s asses and betraying our republic, or being the RepubliCon-lite party of deceit and betrayal after betrayal, the Dem so-called leadership had better actually lead (they are not morally capable of) or get the hell out of the way, cause the 99% and Bernie Sanders are commin through baby!


I think single payer healthcare deserves consideration but so far it seems to be presented as a scam with supposedly Wall Street taxes paying for most of it. I would rather see it presented honestly which means asking the American public whether they want to pay for it. Is there any country where stock market trading pays for healthcare? I don’t know. I have always assumed the citizens of these countries pay through increased taxes. What we need is an honest discussion of the cost and and honest discussion of who is going to pay. The Democratic Party already has enough litmus tests. It really doesn’t need another one. These litmus tests just stifle debate. It would be a shame if populism totally stifled the party into conformity but it could happen as this movement for single pay suggests. Are the BernieBros going to be launched against any Democrat who doesn’t support single payer. Are Democrats who resist going to be subject to all kinds of profanity. I hope Democrats are better than that.




You might be interested in a point I bring up here:

At some point, people are going to have to talk real policy. People are also going to have too face up to the fact thst we are not getting single payer from Tom Price, a guy that wants to gut Medicaid, Trump, or McConnell. A lot of talk is just that, talk so far.

It’ll be interesting to see what Bernie actually brings forward.


It’s time to make a stand and let candidates running next year that Medicare for all has to a big part of their agenda or platform as such. If not, no vote! Scream loud and clear that it’s high time foe good healthcare for all. Also while we’re at it cut the ridiculously insane military budget; over a trillion $'s total is…no words to even describe it.


Well, the man of peace that some “progressives” were telling me about wants to lob nukes around. We are gonna need some solid coverage if that happens.


The Ds are at war with themselves.

And for the sake of having the opportunity to work around this calcified 2-Party farce, I hope they lose.


Politicians show their respect for activists and social movements by fearing them. If those in the Democratic Party are fearful because they are corrupt and fear those to their left challenging them, good. The Democrats that will be challenged on this have been sheltered for far too long. If they fear and don’t like this, that is a good sign. They can whine to their donors and send out their Joy Ann Reids, David Brocks and Neera Tandens to attack the peasants (and people like Lrx to post on sites like this).

As far as single payer, it will be a long term fight and many in both parties will fight against this because they’re paid to. This will also have to be well designed, if it is isn’t, then the opponents of single payer will pounce on it. Having said all of this, this will be an epic, epic fight, as this not only poses an existential threat to the inefficient parasites on the healthcare system, it also poses a threat to the worldview that the right has been building for decades now. If this is put in place, it will work, and there’d be no turning back.


“These litmus tests just stifle debate.”

Yet here you are, debating them. Kinda undermines your point to do that.


Ah, President Truman in 1945, called for a 5 step program for universal and quality healthcare. Even income to recoup wages lost to health or accidents.
Then came Medicare, Medicaid, the CHIPS Program and so on, and so on.
72 years later, we’re between a rock and a hard place for Democrats, politically. If your a Republican, not so much. Which are you and, if not Single Payer/Medicare-for-All, what then? Please elaborate. Define a Bernie Bro while you’re at it.
Go Bernie Gals, Ladies, Women Everywhere in America. Overthrow da’ Bro, Show us this ain’'t no party, this ain’t no disco, this ain’t no fooling around.


Screw your Berniebro BS (were you paid to talk about “Obama’s Boys” in 2007 and 2008?), and the Brock affiliated organization you work for. What a horrible, sexist term to use. Even Brock himself apologized for using it. The financial transactions tax was proposed to pay for universal access to college education, not single payer, and he never said that that alone would fund single payer. You are lying, which isn’t a shock. Yes, single payer would lead to some tax increases, but it would be more than offset by reductions in out of pocket expenditures for most of the population. It would cost less (we pay the highest percentage of our income towards healthcare than any other country on Earth according to World Bank data, we pay more per capita and pay the most for drugs), single payer systems have less waste/overhead and don’t have the massive social costs of this system. We know this from every other country on Earth and from basic common sense. The argument people like you make is essentially, “How can we afford to pay less for healthcare?”

“Are the [working people] (fixed that for you) going to be launched against any Democrat who doesn’t support single payer?”

Hopefully. Not doing so results in thousands of people dying, thousands of people going into bankruptcy. I think that is kind of worse than challenging a group of corrupt politicians in that dying party.

“Are Democrats who resist going to be subject to all kinds of profanity? I hope Democrats are better than that.”

So, the Democrats can go on supporting a system that results in thousands dying, and you are worried about people saying swearwords or being called sellouts (which most of them are)? Are you kidding me? Besides, the Democrats are also not better than the Republican Party in voters’ eyes, a party that backs deeply unpopular ideas and a party in which only about a quarter of the population now identifies with. I am at a loss as to what you think you accomplish by posting what you post on this site. Not only is most of it outrageous and counter-productive (you offend people more than you convert them to your side), but you take positions on issues that would be considered far outside the mainstream in most any other developed country. Long past time that was the case here.


contact your legislators in d.c. and TELL THEM NOW THAT YOU SUPPORT MEDICARE FOR ALL! JUST DO IT.


Nobody expects that. Most people realize this is a long term fight, Sanders included.

“It’ll be interesting to see what Bernie actually brings forward.”

I agree, and I fully expect most people in the DNC and affiliated with the DNC to lie about and manipulate whatever he does. Those in charge of the DNC will work to undermine him and will then find some silly, easily fixable problems with his policies as a justification for doing so. Gosh, we really want to do this, but paragraph so and so says this, so instead of working to fix the problem we gotta blow the whole thing up. Then the hordes will be sent out to lecture the left and working people about being so immature and unrealistic. Hope I am wrong, but I’ve seen the movie before.


Yes, and use the KISS ( Keep It Simple Stupid ) Method. Especially, with some of these Corporate Congress Critters; they’re slow learners, after all. Just tell them you’re supporting Sen. Sanders’ upcoming Medicare-for-All bill.


This is debatable and depends on the nature of one’s employer provided coverage currently in comparison to whatever new system is developed and the extent of the benefits it offers. For example, in 1993, CBO estimated that while single payer would save the country money overtime, the money consumers themselves would save would be offset by the increased taxes they would pay by a modest amount. The analysis was based on Medicare reimbursement rates. The CBO found similar results in subsequent examinations as well.

In California, the discussion around financing the recent healthcare bill revolved around a 15% payroll tax increase. Split between employer and employee, that would mean a 7.5% payroll tax increase for individuals. In my case, that would be substantially more than my current premium a month and approximately $4000 additional a year. Even with my prescriptions and assuming two doctor’s visits a year, I’d still be paying more than I am currently.

Now, the above does not make me opposed to single payer. I am for it, especially knowing my premiums will likely continue to rise overtime and the future is always uncertain. But, we advocates like to use big numbers about what single payer will save the “system,” but a lot of people are going to use little ones to determine how a policy affects them individually. I suspect this is why HR 676 has a placeholder in it as far as payroll taxes are concerned (see §211).


Who are the establishment Democrats against Single Payer?