Home | About | Donate

With Power to Knee-Cap Bold Demand, Incoming Democratic Tax Committee Chair Says Medicare for All 'Not Realistic'


That’s you talking, but no system works by magic, including the Canadian system. And it wasn’t invented overnight by legislative fiat either. It featured a major physician’s strike in Saskatchewan when that province became the first in Canada to adopt a single-payer type system. Turns out provider-side payment caps weren’t popular. Is your bill ready to deal with that? What kind of caps will you implement? After all, doctors came out against—and threatened to not support—the ACA when provider-side price disclosure provisions were being considered in Congress. It may be a topic worth looking at, especially since the cost of implementation goes up the weaker the caps, right?

I think it’s magical fairyland to pretend voters aren’t going to ask questions about this stuff. While Trump is in office, is the time to do what was done for Medicaid, look at options and craft a bill that can pass. Again, I’ll refer you to the Wilbur Cohen interview. He was the primary author of Medicare and knew a thing or two about this stuff.


So, you can’t or refuse to answer the most basic questions you’d be, or your candidate, would be asked by the people they’d be asking to support him/her.
Got it, Green Party member. Good luck with that campaign you’ll be losing. Almost everywhere, btw.
Ever heard of the term, " carveouts " in legislation?


The key is “total.” Total costs may go down from a federal budgetary perspective, but individual taxes may go up. What kind of payroll tax increase—and one will be necessary, particularly if you want a system that will last—do you want? That will depend on coverage options, provider caps, and drug price controls. And your the first person I know that says Wilbur Cohen, who implemented Social Security and was a key author Medicare, misses the point. Is it possible you have that backwards since he, after all, helped create and implement two successful social insurance systems.


Actually you have it backwards. Federal budget expenditures will go up, but individual expenditures, even net of tax increases, can go down. Total costs, which include government expenditures, business expenditures and individual expenditures will be lower than than the sum of those categories today. It’s about how we share the savings, not how we share some imagined “burden” which won’t exist.

I would say taxes (need not be payroll taxes) go up by an amount that is less than the amount of savings individuals enjoy from single payer, universal, no copay, no deductible coverage. How would you share the savings?


It’s obvious you are in magical fairyland now. I won’t bother responding anymore. If you want to get to those savings, you got to have hearings and craft a bill. That doesn’t happen by magic.


Maybe you should read:

Koch-Funded Hit Piece Backfires: Shows Medicare for All Would Save ‘Whopping $2 Trillion’ Over Ten Years While Covering Everybody


Yes, any major change will be met with resistance. Are there doctors in Canada? Seems to have worked out. Have you now moved the goalposts to say that everyone should have a plan on what to do after a bill passes into law? Will another committee hearing fix that? No, no it won’t.

Because what I’m talking about is passing legislation that isn’t perfect, because perfect legislation doesn’t exist and you know that and choose to ignore it, like you ignore the minimum wage.

Also, doctors don’t vote in Congress, politicians vote. It’s kind of a wild pitch you made on this one. Doctors won’t like it so we can’t do it? Is that really the argument?

The vociferousness of your replies makes me think you believe I’m proposing that a bill be passed on Day One. No. But it’s not like this is a new issue that no one has ever thought about, either. Many of the “problems” would be things that no longer exist. We don’t need a payroll tax, even. We can raise corporate taxes, personal taxes, capital gains taxes (by a lot) and fund the program out of the general fund.

Also, even if pricing stayed like it is right now, there would still be savings from greater efficiency. The price caps really come into play when the gov’t takes over the provider role as well.


I did. Nothing in it negates the points I’m making. It takes hearings and actuarial analysis to craft a bill. And crafting a bill means negotiation and, yes, politics.


Crafting the right bill takes real leadership. Something that is largely lacking in DC.


Sounds like you’ve got ideas. See the word “can” in there. May want to get your colleagues in Congress on board so they can meet with their voters in the districts and explain the bill, which they’ll surely have questions about. What’s the best way to do that, especially for some of your swing district colleagues (or those in conservative districts like mine)? Think you may want a CBO analysis to give them confidence? How would you get there?


Independent green eco socialists know that healthy humans create a strong nation. Do you stand for a healthy strong nation? Ds say no. Greens say yes. A green new deal is for everybody with a brain, heart and soul.


No one wants the greater of two evils.

Think green. Live green. Vote green. Bring the house down, Register independent green eco socialist and leave the choice blank if the D is a war party colonial austerity freak and there is no green.

Write in none of the above to make an exclamation and instantiate a new idea. Fun is a valid goal. Accentuate the positive. Do not vote for corporate funded Ds.


Didn’t mean to sound snippy, I hear what you’re saying and I’m sure it is hard being away from family.
Good luck .


No problem Marie, I live in the deep south, not sure where Ed lives.


Yes it is Mass hole! tax the RICH!!!


Time to go for the jugular. Primary everyone of these corporate stooges. Start the campaign right now and don’t let this guy breath. Make it very clear. You cross the base and you go down.


I’m just gonna leave this here.


It’s only realistic if you live in any other industrialized nation except the U.S. U.S. is the can’t do nation. The rest of the world solved the healthcare problem years ago.


I don’t disagree with “pushing” for stuff, but there are zero major pieces of legislation that just magically happened because they were just so awesome. This entire site would have called FDR a massive sellout for what passed as Social Security, for example. Medicare took 30 years to come to fruition and that’s not because advocates were sellouts or losers, but because they had to develop a workable program and one they could get the votes for and sustain itself. HR 676 calls for a “modest” excise payroll and self employment income tax. Aren’t you curious about what those might look like?

Hearings are a great start. Let’s look at a bill, let’s get actuary testimony, let’s examine transition periods. It sure sounds like that’s what is planned, per the article you link to. A vote will come when those issues get sorted. Right now is the time to start sorting.


Ummmm, what’s wrong with a rage fest? I’ll take anything that gets the complacent off their couches and away from their screens.