General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDo you want your state to try single-payer, like Colorado???? I DO. Absolutely.
Last edited Wed Nov 25, 2015, 09:33 PM - Edit history (1)
PLEASE NOTE: THIS IS NOT A PRIMARIES DISCUSSION. IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT CANDIDATES, PLEASE GO TO GDP INSTEAD.
So in my state I'm pushing for a state single-payer plan, like they're going for in Colorado. AND I'm doing everything I can to support the ACA for now, because ANY state can use ACA funds to institute single-payer instead.
If we lose the ACA because a new Rethug administration comes in with a Congress similar to what we have now, then that's the end not only of the exchanges, the Medicaid expansion, the subsidies, and the Essential Benefits, but also of any Federal funds helping states work out single-payer.
What do we get by constantly highlighting the flaws of the ACA? We increase the public perception that we should listen to the Rethugs and toss the whole law out.
Don't delude yourself that if that happens, we'll get single-payer instead. We won't. Not a chance in hell if the Rethugs take control.
And it will be hell.
P.S. And if you don't believe single-payer could happen state by state, then you haven't been paying attention. Ten years ago a single state approved gay marriage. Now it's the law everywhere in the country. I believe the process of change could be much quicker if a handful of states had successful single-payer programs. Please let this happen. Don't help the Rethugs tear down this chance.
think
(11,641 posts)FloridaBlues
(4,007 posts)Let alone single payer. If you have a republican Governor forget about it!
pnwmom
(108,973 posts)But if they prove it can work, it will be harder and harder for the Rethugs to keep fighting it.
This is already happening with the Medicaid expansion, with some red states finally getting on board now. Better late than never.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)The ONLY chance we have for Single Payer is to elect Bernie, and a bunch of Liberal Democrats on the down ticket.
I really, REALLY hope that your single state Universal HealthCare Plan is successful,
but you will run into the same problems that happened in Vermont., the Risk Pool was too small for a viable insurance system. It couldn't pay for itself.
If I'm not mistaken, I remember the amendment to the ACA added by Bernie Sanders allowing states to opt for their own system. (NO other Democrat added an amendment to do so) Also, IIRC, a poison pill amendment was added by (?) dictating that a State Run Single Payer System must show a profit the FIRST year. That, and a small Risk Pool is what killed the Vermont Single Payer System.
BTW: If you are cheering for State Run Single Payer,
then you are cheering FOR Bernie Sanders.
HE is the one responsible for the inclusion of this into the ACA...
and had a bitch of a time fighting the "Centrist" Democrats to get it.
If it was Hillary, you wouldn't have this opportunity.
LuvNewcastle
(16,843 posts)pnwmom
(108,973 posts)Bernie and Hillary both supported the ACA. Bernie also supports single-payer, but he doesn't complain about the ACA on the campaign trail. He acknowledges that this was a Democratic accomplishment, that he was part of, and has improved health care for millions.
His supporters should stop denigrating Obama's achievement. Doing so won't make more people vote for the Democrat instead of the Rethug in the general. It will encourage more ignorant people to think the ACA is worthless and to listen to the Rethugs who want to toss it out. And the Rethugs, if they win, won't be replacing it with single-payer. They'll replace it with the nothing we already had.
Andy823
(11,495 posts)I and my wife have been healthy over the years, but this year we would have ended up paying over $40,000.00 for medical bills if not for the ACA. My daughter had a pre-existing condition that would have hurt her chance of getting insurance, she now has it. I don't really listen to those who say the ACA is worthless, even if they are democrats. Sure some of the plans have high deductibles , but I know from experience this year that the deductible was nothing compared to what we would have had to pay out of pocket for the medical care we received this year.
SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)at least there shouldn't be.
Vermont didn't do it because the tax increases would have been too high.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)Believe me when I tell you that the people who wrote the ACA KNEW this well in advance.
I don't believe ANY state (perhaps Calif or NY) has a sufficient Rick Pool to enroll enough members to "break even" the first year.
Only a National Public Option would have a risk pool large enough to make it worthwhile,
and expanding MediCare would have a Risk Pool of 330 MILLION members...
now THAT is where the savings would occur.
Bernie was able to keep Universal Health care ALIVE with his amendment.
Thank YOU, Bernie!!!
Did Hillary help you?
.
.
.
.
Didn't think so.
SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)Which has nothing whatsoever to do with profit for single payer.
-none
(1,884 posts)This state by state is a doomed, money wasting path to failure.
Why should we give our money to big insurance companies, so they can screw us over when we need health care the most? Eliminate them. They are parasitic middle men bent on profits for themselves over your life.
We still need health care, not health insurance.
joshcryer
(62,269 posts)Andy823
(11,495 posts)A lot of things can, and do, get accomplished at state levels. Washington state increased their minimum wage, because they put it on the ballot. Washington sate also has legal marijuana, because they put it on the ballot. The only way to start doing things that can't be done as long as republicans control even one branch of congress, is to get them started at state levels. When the people get to vote on things, they can get a lot done. I hope Washington state also tries a single payer system, and if the people have a chance to vote, I think it would pass.
Ron Green
(9,822 posts)Andy823
(11,495 posts)SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)Federal employees and military members make up about 1.7% of the population, and that's a fairly significant percentage that won't be paying into the system.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Is "Mad As Hell Doctors" still together? Weren't they from WA?
Ron Green
(9,822 posts)live here in Oregon.
Last edited Thu Nov 26, 2015, 01:19 AM - Edit history (1)
Are they still active in terms of advocacy?
Ron Green
(9,822 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)What parade?
Ron Green
(9,822 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)and more specifically that payment mechanisms don't work in American politics as a way to do that (Google "Medicare doctor fix" .
That said, data are always better than models, so, I'm all for as many states as can figure out a way to do it to try it.
ismnotwasm
(41,975 posts)If one state successfully models single payer, it's only a matter of time before another state does. In my state of Washington, the ACA has been very successful, and nursing unions and organizations are very involved. They recognize where it can improve, but the bottom line is that in Washington state there are 1.6 million people who have insurance through the ACA. Nursing organizations are pushing for more Nurse practioners to take up the slack primary care docs are leaving. They see the ACA as an opportunity for the nursing profession which means better health care delivery, and improved stress on preventative medicine
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)Wouldn't it run into the problem of reverse cherry-picking?
Suppose a large number of healthy young adults living elsewhere select the cheapest possible Bronze plans under ACA or maybe even choose to pay the penalty for being uninsured. Then one of them gets a cancer diagnosis and another is in a bad accident, being discharged from the emergency room in stable condition but needing multiple surgeries. Depending on their employment situation and other factors, they might be able to move to Colorado to get the expensive medical care they now require. (If you're a welder in Florida paying for much of your medical care, taking a pay cut to be a sales clerk in Colorado might leave you with higher net income.)
The result is that the risk pool is distorted. The way it's supposed to work is that all those healthy people pay premiums and that money is used to provide care for the few who need it. If the healthy people are all outside Colorado, then they're not contributing to the fund that has to pay for the new arrival's chemotherapy.
Granted, not everyone facing big medical bills would be able to move. Nevertheless, if a significant number could and would move, the result would be to make single-payer look unfeasible.
I know that Canada moved to nationwide single-payer by starting in one province. I don't know whether this problem arose there or how it might have been addressed.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)I think we'll see a public option long before true single payer.
madamesilverspurs
(15,800 posts)State Senator Irene Aguilar M.D. is the driver on this. Still a practicing physician, she got into politics with the intent to open the clinic doors for everyone.
http://coloradocareyes.co/