Nancy Pelosi says no to Sanders' health care proposal

[Ebsy]

Adam, are you really incapable of distinguishing between Universal Healthcare and Single Payer Healthcare? Because you repeatedly return to implying that they are the same thing, which they most certainly are not.

[DavidB.]

It's the fundamental question. You can poll on the broader subject with any number of broad or specific statements that are designed to suppress or expand support for the concept, and end up with anywhere from 35 to 65% of the public supporting the concept. The primary opposition against enacting single-payer does not reside within the public at-large. Any time you provide specifics on a broader issue, public support shifts (and often erodes) - but not always for the reasons some people would like to assume.

One example would be to ask if people support "universal background checks" - 80 to 90% agree. Begin articulating each specific piece of what is required to implement it, and support begins to plunge markedly. A counter-example (where people support a concept more as they learn about it) is ACA: ask people if they like "Obamacare" and a narrow plurality or majority might say no. Ask them point-by-point if they support what constitutes "Obamacare", and it's an aggregate respectable majority in favor.

The common denominator is that the public doesn't know much at all and can be persuaded in either direction by whoever has the best narrative. This is the biggest reason why ACA was a flop, in my opinion: we lost the narrative and it cost Democrats far more than it was worth. At the end of the day, single-payer would follow the same trajectory: people would like the broader idea, grow to dislike whatever actually manifested as advertised, but then would actually like the individual provisions when explained.

This is a great post. I agree.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Pelosi already has the votes for Hillary's health care proposal, No we can't!

[Vega]

If only Sanders had the personality of LBJ he could get literally anything passed.

Maybe he does.

I can just see historians talking about the "Bernie Treatment".

[SillyAmerican]

After the spectacle that was PPACA, the public will no doubt revolt against Democrats just like they did before if they start tinkering with massive healthcare proposals again anytime in the next 10 - 15 years. Students have been waiting for relief for years (basically all my friends from college would agree). The infrastructure is crumbling and its time we expand it instead of just maintaining. Labor laws / unions have been steamrolled by morally bankrupt Republicans for decades now. These things should be prioritized ahead of more healthcare reform.

It's not fair to just risk it all for healthcare time and time again while other seriously important issues go neglected. Besides, at this point, I'm not even sure I trust them to actually enact the reform they always talk about in debates and op-eds. Those special interests aren't just going to go away and they have already shown themselves to be either too greedy or too spineless to ignore the threats of the healthcare lobby.

The concern is that the healthcare problem has been pretty clearly identified; the issue is implementing a workable solution, and the ACA is not a workable solution, and in fact fails to address the main problems with our healthcare system.

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2015/01/05/375024427/americas-bitter-pill-makes-case-for-why-health-care-law-wont-work

[politicallefty]

The Affordable Care Act could easily be called PelosiCare. If it werent' for her, it would have never passed. And she knows it that it barely passed when she was actually Speaker and the Dems had the Senate. So yeah, even if she were inclined to start all over again, she knows it isn't going to happen.

I'm glad to see a voice of reason in this topic, much like Pelosi has said. Obamacare cost Democrats the majority and Pelosi the Speakership. The absolute best case scenario is bare minimum majorities in both Houses of Congress (at absolute best). I'd rather not cede massive seats in Congress to the Republicans in a failed attempt to further reform healthcare right now.

I'm a strong supporter of single-payer healthcare, but I just don't think it is possible nationwide for the time being. We should work with what we have and perhaps take up a proposal during Bill Clinton's second term by lowering the Medicare eligibility age to 55 (or even further beyond that, to 50). That would be a significant reform. We could easily incrementalize additions to government-run healthcare by expanding eligibility. I fully believe that only an incrementalist approach will lead to full universal healthcare for all Americans.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Good, he's a loon and even the Democrats agree with that sentiment, it's never going to happen anyways.

[7,052,770]

Sanders is done LOL. You know you lost when liberals don't even want to advance progressivism LOL. Who will be the future of the left?

What? Liberalism/progressivism already won on this issue. Obama brought us universal health care. It's obviously a better use of our time to focus on other issues we haven't won yet, rather than refighting our victories again over hair-splitting.

[Virginiá]

I'm glad to see a voice of reason in this topic, much like Pelosi has said. Obamacare cost Democrats the majority and Pelosi the Speakership. The absolute best case scenario is bare minimum majorities in both Houses of Congress (at absolute best). I'd rather not cede massive seats in Congress to the Republicans in a failed attempt to further reform healthcare right now.

I'm a strong supporter of single-payer healthcare, but I just don't think it is possible nationwide for the time being. We should work with what we have and perhaps take up a proposal during Bill Clinton's second term by lowering the Medicare eligibility age to 55 (or even further beyond that, to 50). That would be a significant reform. We could easily incrementalize additions to government-run healthcare by expanding eligibility. I fully believe that only an incrementalist approach will lead to full universal healthcare for all Americans.

Great post! (admittedly because it makes me feel not alone in my thinking)

Any attempts to pass major healthcare proposals at this time will only cost Democrats seats in Congress/elsewhere. Small tweaks like you mentioned would be a lot better and probably be risk-free. If Democrats are going to risk their majorities for anything, it might as well be Congressional gerrymandering reform, so they can no longer worry about getting redistricted out of a House majority.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Luckily, if people really want single-payer the ACA bill has a get-out for states to implement single-payer (that can only really be done after 2017, making Vermont's early attempt rather premature).

The main target irt a progressive healthcare policy would be to overtime stripdown all the major out of pocket costs, not turnover the entire law. Limited political capital,  guys.

[IceSpear]

Single payer failed in Vermont. Bernie should figure out why it wasn't done in his own backyard before he tries to take it nationwide.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Who cares about what Nancy Pelosi thinks. Voters don't.