WashPost Editorial: Mr. Sanders needs to come clean about the funding for his health-care plan

[riversedge]

I agree. Sanders tossed out a few crumbs related to his "plan" just before the debate. That was rude, unprofessional and just as important--incomplete.



The Post's View
Mr. Sanders needs to come clean about the funding for his health-care plan


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mr-sanders-needs-to-come-clean-about-the-funding-for-his-health-care-plan/2016/01/19/efeed13a-bece-11e5-9443-7074c3645405_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-c%3Ahomepage%2Fstory




Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) pauses while speaking at a town hall in Carroll, Iowa, on Jan. 19. (Andrew Harnik/Associated Press)


By Editorial Board January 19 at 7:31 PM

PREVIOUSLY A non-starter in American politics, democratic socialism is gaining traction due to the presidential campaign of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, a nominal independent running as a Democrat. If Mr. Sanders is to close the sale with voters, he must show he has learned from socialism’s mixed history abroad and devised an updated version that will work in the United States. Judging by the sketchy single-payer health-care plan he unveiled just before Sunday’s Democratic debate, Mr. Sanders is not up to the challenge.

He would replace existing federal health programs, as well as employer-paid group plans and the individual insurance market just expanded by Obamacare, with one big program, at a 10-year cost of $41 trillion, or $13.8 trillion more than the government would have spent over the next decade under current law. He says the new system would pay for itself, partly, by eliminating the current tax exclusion for employer-paid insurance, along with company profits and administrative overhead — and by fully exploiting the government’s buying power to lower costs. Some $10.7 trillion in new money would have to be raised, through a 2.2 percent premium from households, a 6.2 percent payroll tax and a grab bag of stiff tax increases on upper-income Americans.

When all is said and done, Mr. Sanders maintains, a typical family of four making $50,000 will save $5,807 per year , and get full medical, dental and vision coverage with no co-payments or deductibles in return: “All you need to do is go to the doctor and show your insurance card.”

Put aside Mr. Sanders’s lack of political realism, or his dubious choice to tap the rich for huge amounts of revenue and spend it all, with nothing left for deficit reduction or the underfunded Social Security program. Mr. Sanders’s fundamental problem is how to prevent the costs of so much coverage expansion from outstripping even the huge overhead savings he claims and the huge new revenue stream he seeks. His plan contains two sentences on cost control; the gist is that government would have the power to “negotiate fair prices.” But what if those prices are not high enough to support the current level of infrastructure and services and some hospitals have to close? Mr. Sanders promises patients “no more fighting with insurance companies” about who and what to cover, and he’s probably right; those fights would move to Congress and the bureaucracy........................




Also see:
Hours before debate, Sanders shares details of health-care plan that would raise income taxes

By John Wagner January 17

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/01/17/hours-before-debate-sanders-shares-details-of-health-plan-that-would-raise-income-taxes/?tid=ptv_rellink

[bkkyosemite]

1. He "tossed" it out because of the relentless demands from Hillary.

Damned if he did. Damned if he didn't. Hillary needs to show the speech monies from Big Banksters. She needs to stop blowing off her non confidential emails. She is so mad that Bernie is catching up. Feeling the Bern.

[riversedge]

7. Sanders should have been honest with voters before anyone has to ask that he

put out his plan.

[bkkyosemite]

11. That's the thing that causing distress......he is honest!

[cascadiance]

2. He's come clean and talked FAR MORE about his health care plan than Hillary's talked about H-1Bs

... which screw so many of us that are unemployed now because it has been expanded the way Hillary EIGHT YEARS AGO said she wanted to expand then to help out campaign contributors like Tata employment firms, etc.

She should come clean the way Bernie has and even so many Republicans have to this point about where she thinks America should go with this and other "guest worker" (better defined as "indentured servant&quot programs that only help the wealthy get cheap labor...

She needs to talk about this a lot sooner than wait until a general election debate if she gets nominated, where if she hasn't said anything about it until she gets asked a question about it then, someone like Trump or Cruz will take a lot of the independent, Republican, and perhaps even many Democratic Party populist votes, and she will screw all of us when she loses on an issue like that.

[riversedge]

8. Start your own thread instead of hijacking this one with your different issue.

[cascadiance]

9. It's just that I've seen so many issues, where Hillary's campaign has been just nitpicking on issues

... and not recognizing that in many cases, what they try to criticize Bernie for there really is no case for, just because he hasn't discussed an issue at length in every public setting he speaks at, which appears to be the expectation being stated. Bernie has been consistently for civil rights and gone out of his way to be involved in that issue for his whole life a LOT longer than Hillary has, well before her "transition" in to being a Democrat before being for a Republican like Goldwater against Civil Rights legislation in the 60's. I mainly make notes on this, not to heavily criticize her on this, as she's done a lot of good for civil rights too, but for their campaign to criticize him, when he's been far more consistent and had a lot longer time supporting it, I think she deserves to have people nitpick her back to show how that kind of case can be made against her as well, and perhaps a lot more substantively in some instances.

That was what I was trying to communicate on this issue, as it is one that just about every presidential candidate in both parties has taken stances on, but she's AVOIDED completely, but yet her campaign nitpicks on other campaign issues that Bernie doesn't deserve that kind of nitpicking when he's actually got good stances on things like ACA, which he is NOT trying to tear down that she and her campaign are accusing him of doing.

I make this case to note that Bernie hasn't been nitpicking her campaign the same way she's doing his, and he's mostly focused on what he feels like providing attention to the biggest issues that big money being used to buy other candidates force out of being discussed, but which are fundamental building blocks to so many other issues that we are failing on now.

[bkkyosemite]

12. Although I agree with a lot of what you say here Bernie

didn't have to come clean. He did nothing wrong.

[cascadiance]

14. You're right too. I was just trying to highlight that if there's someone who needs to "come clean".

... that there's much more of a complaint about Hillary not doing so for H-1B Visas than Bernie not "coming clean" (which as you have said, he's not really left out anything that he needs to "come clean" about).

Bernie is just more about focusing on the issues he feels most important to America that he tries to keep making visible to everyone he talks to, rather than trying to single out things that he thinks Hillary is weak on. If he were doing the latter, he'd be well served to go after issues like H-1B and TPP, etc., which part of me wants him still to do, because I think not dealing with some of these issues at all in the primaries will leave her very vulnerable in the general election if they are brought up later then.

[Skwmom]

18. They want to make it seem like he is hiding something. The National Enquirer has more integrity

than the Washington Post hacks.

[Warren Stupidity]

3. From your second article:

On Sunday, he released figures from an economist suggesting that a family earning $50,000 a year would save nearly $6,000 a year on health-care costs. The cost of the new federal health-care premium would be more than offset by what such families would save on private premiums and deductibles, according to the analysis by Gerald Friedman, an economist at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst.

Friedman estimated that Sanders's Medicare-for-all plan would save $6 trillion over the next 10 years compared with the current system, in large part by eliminating what the Sanders campaign described as "expensive and wasteful private health insurance."

Any questions?

[Human101948]

4. It's crazy to accept the current hodge podge healthcare system dominated by insurance companies and

big pharma which COSTS TWICE AS MUCH as healthcare in any other developed country WITH WORSE OUTCOMES. To accept that lunacy and then claim that as the starting point for single payer is insane.

[Warren Stupidity]

5. Yeah but people with 10 million a year income would be paying higher taxes!

that's the sort of communism we had under Ike.

[firebrand80]

6. I'm not certain he even has a detailed plan

I'm also not sure how much it matters. Most voters pay more attention to sound bites than detailed policy.

[Vinca]

10. I find the sudden rage at the notion of single-payer healthcare amusing.

It's a useless exercise to go through the ways of paying for it (which would amount to virtually everyone saving money on the amount they currently pay for coverage - citation: common sense). I'm really puzzled why people who used to support what Bernie is proposing have a sudden love of big insurance. You can be for a candidate and not support each and every plan they have.

[bkkyosemite]

13. Yep almost 80% of this nation want single payer.

[ljm2002]

20. Actually it is 80%+ of Democrats...

...who want single payer. Overall it's about 53% of the population IIRC, and a minority (about 38%, again, IIRC) of Republicans.

[Gothmog]

15. great editorial

Thank you for posting

[Nanjeanne]

16. Can someone point me to Hillary's plan

I've read her website and seen the summary. I've googled. But I can't find her detailed plan and how she is paying for it. I'd like to compare the two. Anyone?

[Skwmom]

17. What a bullshit editorial.

Last edited Thu Jan 21, 2016, 02:29 PM - Edit history (2)

He would replace existing federal health programs, as well as employer-paid group plans and the individual insurance market just expanded by Obamacare, with one big program, at a 10-year cost of $41 trillion, or $13.8 trillion more than the government would have spent over the next decade under current law.

(Of course lets FORGET the fact that regular Americans will save money with this system and OVERALL costs will be less with premium savings etc. And with premiums going up and up I would say the Obama estimate is low. The insurance companies will always want to feed more and more at the public trough. The LACK OF ETHICS demonstrated by this Editorial Board is disgusting ).

His plan contains two sentences on cost control; the gist is that government would have the power to “negotiate fair prices.” But what if those prices are not high enough to support the current level of infrastructure and services and some hospitals have to close? (To the insurance companies have NEGOTIATED contracts for years with hospitals and have been able to make a PROFIT from these contracts without FORCING hospitals to close. So I am to believe that taking the profit out of the equation will lead to negotiated prices that will drive hospitals to close? Do you know how stupid this sounds? This is on par with the "next thing you know we'll be having humans marrying pigs" argument against gay marriage.)

Put aside Mr. Sanders’s lack of political realism, or his dubious choice to tap the rich for huge amounts of revenue and spend it all, with nothing left for deficit reduction (IF we CUT out corporate welfare and quit having the 1% and corporations feed at the public trough we would have money for debt reduction. The rich have made millions off of buying our politicians, raiding the public treasury and refusing to pay their fair share - for example the deferred taxes for hedge funds. But since they aren't required to pay until after 2017 will I be surprised that somehow the government determines they don't need that money for debt reduction - hell NO. The corporate hacks ALWAYS preach debt reduction EXCEPT when it comes to government giveaways to the corporations and 1% and HUGE tax giveaways to the rich. Since a HUGE amount of the debt is attributable to giveaways to the 1% and corporations and graft (I think the actual amount would be staggering), I damn well think they should belly up to pay it down.)

Health-care costs have been moderating in recent years, a fact the Sanders plan relies on to balance its books. However, a major reason for that cost containment has been the rise of high-deductible plans of precisely the kind Mr. Sanders wants to eliminate; cost-sharing encourages people to avoid unnecessary tests and other wasteful expenses. (High Deductible plans are CASH COWS for the insurance industry and discourage preventative testing which keeps healthcare costs down. Plus, with a new system checks and balances and controls can be put in place to have a more cost efficient system. This also beg the questions, if health care costs are moderating why do insurance premiums keep rising and rising? Of course, we don't want to clue the American people into the fact that the insurance companies have their own built in system of taxpayer bailouts.)

Health insurers watch profits soar as they dump small business customers. This is what this editorial is intended to protect.

And let’s be clear, these insurers aren’t suffering. UnitedHealth Group, the largest health insurer, reported last week that it made $10.3 billion in profits in 2014 on revenues of $130.5 billion. Both profits and revenues grew seven percent from 2013.

http://www.publicintegrity.org/2015/01/26/16658/health-insurers-watch-profits-soar-they-dump-small-business-customers

I suggest you look up the definition of integrity to familiarize yourself with what it is supposed to mean because obviously you have none.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mr-sanders-needs-to-come-clean-about-the-funding-for-his-health-care-plan/2016/01/19/efeed13a-bece-11e5-9443-7074c3645405_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-c%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

[Armstead]

19. Let people suffer needlessly and die prematurely It's more cost effective.

[Dawson Leery]

21. Bernie needs to be held accountable.