'Medicare for All' Bill Reaches a Record-Breaking 104 Co-Sponsors in Congress

[workinclasszero]

'Medicare for All' Bill Reaches a Record-Breaking 104 Co-Sponsors in Congress
Majority of House Democrats now support single-payer health plan
Wednesday, April 26, 2017 - 5:45pm

WASHINGTON - Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP), a group of 21,000 physicians, medical students and health professionals, announced today that H.R. 676, the Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act has reached a record number of co-sponsors in the House of Representatives, now totalling 104.

H.R. 676 was introduced in January by Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), and has rapidly gained support from members across the country, adding 28 new co-sponsors in April alone. The bill would yield about $500 billion annually in administrative savings and provide immediate coverage to the 26 million Americans who are currently uninsured, achieving President Trump’s campaign promises of more coverage, better benefits and lower costs.

“Americans are fed up with an inhumane, profit-driven health system that leaves millions without care,” said Dr. Carol Paris, president of PNHP. “Quality health care is not a luxury, nor is it a commodity that can be bought and sold in a marketplace. It is a social good that can be best delivered through a single-payer national health program."

https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2017/04/26/medicare-all-bill-reaches-record-breaking-104-co-sponsors-congress

[ProfessorPlum]

1. Yeah! Fuck Yeah!

[Kirkwood]

2. Not nearly enough.

80% of Hillary voters want Medicare for All.

Even 40%+ of Trump supporters want it.

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2017/april/it%E2%80%99s-not-just-democrats-and-liberals-who-support-medicare-for-all

[spanone]

3. K&R...👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼

[Frustratedlady]

4. The system's already set up, just add pregnancy coverage and we're good to go.

It is time the insurance industry learns the world doesn't revolve around them. Next, the pharmaceuticals.

[2naSalit]

5. +1

[ehrnst]

13. Not really. The system is set up for a segment of the population.

And Medicare isn't single payer - you need other payers for dental, rx, vision and hearing.

It sounds so much easier than it is. Sort of like converting the entire power grid to wind, geothermal and solar.

Sounds easy until you know about how the actual infrastructure is set up, then you realize that it's not going to happen quickly.

It took Canada until all the independent provinces to implement their own single payer (from the 40's to 1964) then there was a very liberal administration that converted it to national. That is what "the system's already set up" actually means.

They were still adjusting and fine tuning it in 1999.


This non-partisan, self funded health care think tank explains it better:

http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2013/05/14/why-medicare-for-all-is-not-the-answer/

I would LOVE to have the coverage I had when I lived in England. I would also prefer that the roads in the city that I live in now were laid out in a neat, planned grid, like in Chicago, but I know that both aren't going to happen.

Especially in a country where a huge chunk of people have a visceral hatred and distrust of anything that could be called "Big Government."

[Frustratedlady]

18. I should have added "tongue in cheek" --

I was more or less joshing.

[ehrnst]

25. Thanx - didn't catch that.

[Orsino]

19. It is easy, or at least simple, to begin adding more people onto Medicare.

That it doesn't cover everything is hardly the point. It covers many things, and of course could eventually be tweaked to cover more.

We lack only the will to break the stereotype of Medicare's being only for the elderly, and to fund it more reasonably.

[ehrnst]

24. Begin, yes.

There was a plan to do exactly that. Gradually.

https://www.advisory.com/daily-briefing/2016/07/12/clinton-health-care-plan

[Orsino]

41. Sigh.

If only.

I'm progressive enough to want big change quickly in most things, but a total revamp of American healthcare/insurance was always going to have to be incremental, if only for the sake of the jobs at stake.

We coulda been on our way by now, maybe.

[Dustlawyer]

6. +1!!!

We need to write/call our legislators and make sure they get with the program. They need to understand it will be political suicide to vote against it!!!

[ehrnst]

26. I think that it's symbolic at this point

Because even keeping the ACA is iffy right now.

And there is going to be NO support for it from Obstericians, Gynecologists and anyone with a vague familiarity with public health if the Hyde Amendment is not overturned, and a guarantee of coverage for ALL reproductive health procedures determined to be basic by the medical community.

[mountain grammy]

7. And I want to see all their faces on all the "news" shows...

they need to get on Fox and all the little network "chats" and blow this up.. It's got to make it inside the idiot bubble.

[tiredtoo]

8. My Representative (Dan Kildee) has not signed on

He sent me an email detailing his concern.
Has something to do with Indian healthcare. And/or messing with the sovereignty of the Indian nation. Not sure if I am buying his explantation.

[tiredtoo]

10. A clip from Congressman Kildee's email

"However, I have some concerns with how this bill is written and the unintended consequences for Native Americans. This bill would require the Indian Health Service (IHS), a federal health care provider and health advocate for Native Americans, to be integrated into the Medicare for All Program after five years.

I strongly support tribal sovereignty – the right of Indian tribes to govern themselves. I believe that by mandating an end to the IHS program, this bill does not recognize the sovereignty of Indian tribes to govern themselves and to choose a health care program that meets their unique needs. It is important the rights of tribes be considered as part of any legislation that directly impacts the American population."
end quote.

Personally methinks this is along the lines of states rights. Native Americans should be assimilated into the United States as full citizens, eliminate the sovereign nation thing. (This may be opening another can of worms I haven't seen but ?)
I replied to the congressman questioning if we, as a nation, recognized this sovereignty at Standing Rock. No reply from the congressman yet.

[ehrnst]

14. It's going to have to be contingent on repealing the Hyde Amendment.

We couldn't do that when we had the house, Senate and the White House.

[tiredtoo]

32. is that part of the bill? eom

[ehrnst]

39. Dealbreaker if it's not. (nt)

[SunSeeker]

9. K & R

[George II]

11. I think there might be something in the bill that may be flawed. None of our five Representatives...

...in a very blue state have co-sponsored it. One would think at least one of them would have done so.

[murielm99]

21. This House Resolution has been around since 2003.

Not all the Democratic reps in my state are on board either.

We have Obamacare, which can be expanded and improved, much like they did in Canada. This looks to me like a liberal version of repeal and replace. I am wary of it.

When Conyers started presenting this resolution, I think he was making a gesture. He said he would present it every year until we had health care for all. Remember, he also introduced a resolution to reinstate the draft. He knew that would never go forward to committee, to become a bill. Conyers wanted everyone to think about who would be doing the fighting and dying in Iraq. It wasn't going to be rich people's kids!

Does anyone think for one minute that Conyers did not fully support the ACA, or that he wants to see Obama's legacy destroyed?

[tiredtoo]

33. IMHO

the affordable care act (Obamacare) was a step towards single payer. Not an attempt at repeal and replace but an improvement.

[murielm99]

34. Yes, it is a step toward single payer,

like the steps Canada took over many years. The ACA is a first step. We need to protect it and improve it, not replace it!

[tiredtoo]

31. ask them why

send an email or call and ask them why they haven't signed on yet. I did so and my congress critter sent me an email explaining his reason. Not that i liked it but it was a reply.

[JCanete]

38. I think that's very slight evidence for that assumption. Are you saying they chose not to

and maybe even spoke a sentence disparaging it? It's probably worth hearing what they have to say. It was certainly worth hearing what Feinstein had to say regarding medicare for all. That kind of reasoning may float your boat, or it may infuriate you.

[George II]

42. I'm saying they didn't co-sponsor it.

[Wounded Bear]

12. My guy is on board...

Smith, WA-9

[hurple]

15. Lock her up!

emails
bengahzi

um

um

Look! squirrel!

[PatsFan87]

16. Nice to see my congresswoman Chellie Pingree supporting it!

[smirkymonkey]

17. K&R

[DippyDem]

20. K&R

[Xolodno]

22. If Trump wants a big "win"

...and got some sane repubs to go along. This would be it.

[LuckyLib]

23. This what we have to keep front and center:

“Quality health care is not a luxury, nor is it a commodity that can be bought and sold in a marketplace. It is a social good that can be best delivered through a single-payer national health program."

[Warpy]

27. For profit insurance would still have a role under Medicare for All

in providing coverage of the 20% Medicare doesn't cover. Between that and providing the infrastructure for processing Medicare claims (something they do now), they'd be in good shape.

I hope this gains traction over the next two years so it can be a done deal if we manage to take Congress in 2018. Two years of presidential bungling should allow that if the party wonks don't throw the opportunity away again.

[bekkilyn]

35. Yes, big reason why it's important to keep this issue in the forefront

rather than waiting for "the right time" that never actually happens.

Even if we can't get it passed until the right people are in power to make it happen, it will be in even bigger demand by then, and most of the kinks will have already been worked out due to more and more people getting on board and working it out. Then all it would really need would be the votes to make it happen the very moment the opportunity presents itself.

Although I personally wouldn't mind "repealing and replacing" the insurance companies. Still, it's a start!

And yes, I support the ACA and would still defend it from Republican maliciousness it in the meantime, but it's not the end goal and shouldn't be treated as such. Indeed, it's better than the nothing we had before, it's still pretty flawed due to having to cater so much to for-profit greed.

[red dog 1]

28. K&R...Thanks for posting

Too bad Trump, Eddie Munster & McTurtle will never allow it to happen.

[workinclasszero]

30. But Dumpf promised his voters....universal healthcare...for all!

[ehrnst]

40. Universal Healthcare is the blanket term for "everyone having affordable health care"

Single Payer is to Universal Healthcare as hatchback is to car.

[workinclasszero]

43. We wont get either one from PEEOTUS or his damn party either

You can take that to the bank.

[Honeycombe8]

29. A very good sign. nt

[BlancheSplanchnik]

36. WOW! Yeah! This is the kind of record breaking I LIKE!

YES! 'Bout fuggin time!

[Rhiannon12866]

37. K&R and kudos to John Conyers!

He's been a remarkable leader in Congress - and he's a member of DU!