Bernie Sanders' health care fraud

[NCTraveler]

For years, Republicans have gulled their followers with the hope that they could "repeal and replace Obamacare" even with Barack Obama wielding a veto pen. They couldn’t, and pretending otherwise was a cynical political ploy. The same can be said of Bernie Sanders’ “Medicare for all” plan, unveiled Sunday just hours before the Democratic debate.

Sanders thinks a single-payer government-run system is the only way to provide universal care at an affordable cost. That's not so: Many countries manage to cover everyone by other means. But the more immediate defect with his plan is that it has zero chance of being enacted.


Has Sanders forgotten how hard it was for Obama to get his plan passed — even though it resembled previous Republican plans, like the one created by Mitt Romney when he was governor of Massachusetts? And Obama had a Democratic Congress. The next Congress is likely to feature Republican control of one or both chambers.

To suggest President Sanders would be able to force a far more dramatic change through Congress is deluded or dishonest. His proposal serves only a political purpose: to suggest he’s bolder and more faithful to Democratic values than Hillary Clinton.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chapman/ct-bernie-sanders-health-care-fraud-20160118-story.html

[enid602]

1. a few

Germany, France, Belgium just to name afew.

[jmowreader]

105. Really?

German healthcare: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Germany

Health insurance is compulsory for the whole population in Germany. Salaried workers and employees below the relatively high income threshold of almost 50,000 Euros per year are automatically enrolled into one of currently around 130 public non-profit "sickness funds" at common rates for all members, and is paid for with joint employer-employee contributions. Provider payment is negotiated in complex corporatist social bargaining among specified self-governed bodies (e.g. physicians' associations) at the level of federal states (Länder). The sickness funds are mandated to provide a unique and broad benefit package and cannot refuse membership or otherwise discriminate on an actuarial basis. Social welfare beneficiaries are also enrolled in statutory health insurance, and municipalities pay contributions on behalf of them.

Besides the "Statutory Health Insurance" (Gesetzliche Krankenversicherung) covering the vast majority of residents, the better off with a yearly income above almost €50,000 (US$66,337), students and civil servants for complementary coverage can opt for private health insurance (about 11% of the population). Most civil servants benefit from a tax-funded government employee benefit scheme covering a percentage of the costs, and cover the rest of the costs with a private insurance contract. Recently, private insurers provide various types of supplementary coverage as an add upon of the SHI benefit package (e.g. for glasses, coverage abroad and additional dental care or more sophisticated dentures).

French healthcare: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_France

The entire population must pay compulsory health insurance. The insurers are non-profit agencies that annually participate in negotiations with the state regarding the overall funding of health care in France. There are three main funds, the largest of which covers 84% of the population and the other two a further 12%. A premium is deducted from all employees' pay automatically. The 2001 Social Security Funding Act, set the rates for health insurance covering the statutory health care plan at 5.25% on earned income, capital and winnings from gambling and at 3.95% on benefits (pensions and allowances).[7]

After paying the doctor's or dentist's fee, a proportion is reimbursed. This is around 75 to 80%, but can be as much as 85%.[citation needed] The balance is effectively a co-payment paid by the patient but it can also be recovered if the patient pays a regular premium to a voluntary health insurance scheme. Nationally, about half of such copayments are paid from VHI insurance and half out of pocket.

Belgian healthcare: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Belgium

Healthcare in Belgium is best depicted as a 3 legged table-like structure standing over the patient. The table-top is a primarily publicly funded healthcare and social security service, run by the federal government, which organizes and regulates healthcare. The first leg provides healthcare in the form of independent private practitioners and public, university and semi-private hospitals and care institutions, there are a few (commercially run for profit) private hospitals.[1] The second leg is the insurance cover provided to patients and the third leg is formed by the industry which covers production and distribution of healthcare products, and research and development, although an important part of the research effort is done in universities and hospitals.

Oh...also consider that in Belgium health insurance is part of the Social Security system, which isn't available to anyone with no address...so the homeless are left without medical care even if they're employed. Also, in Belgium the only place you can get anything with a "medicinal effect" is at a pharmacy. You know that aisle in the local supermarket with all the OTC drugs like aspirin and antacids? Belgian supermarkets don't have that.

The closest analogue to Sanderscare is the Canadian system, and it doesn't pay for pharmaceuticals.

[enid602]

122. insurance mandated

These are all insurance mandated systems. You have to buy insurance. As with Obamacare. They are universal health care, as is Obamacare. They are not single payer. If single payer is as great as pops would suggest, why haven't these civilized countries adopted it?

[jmowreader]

124. Probably because single payer only works with a very small insured base

We have a reasonably successful single payer system operating in the US right now: the health care system provided to active duty military. It works because:

there are relatively few people in the system, and you have to be very healthy to get into it in the first place. You have to take one physical to get into the Delayed Entry Program in the first place, a second one before you ship to basic training and a third when you get to your basic training post. (One of my brothers-in-law has an eye condition that is completely incompatible with military service: when he closes one eye the other one shuts down. Since you can't fire a rifle if you can't see with an eye closed, you can't be in the Army with this. No one caught it until he got all the way to Fort Leonard Wood to process into basic.)

if you develop a condition that is more expensive or complex than the system is designed to handle, they will cut their losses by kicking you out of the Army.

there is very little private-sector involvement in the system. The military buys supplies from the private sector (imagine the Army running a bandage factory!) but it owns all its facilities and equipment and all its employees are either civilians hired by the government or are actually in the Army.

preventive medicine is very big in the service - for instance, every five years every military member MUST take a physical, every year in your birth month you MUST go to the dentist, you MUST keep up with your immunizations, etc., etc., etc.

The same system wouldn't work for civilians.

[mythology]

152. It amazes me how little some people understand

Health care/insurance works in other countries. Single payer is only one means to the end of universal coverage. But people seem to not get that.

[Live and Learn]

2. Despicable title. You should be ashamed of it. nt

[trueblue2007]

46. TRUTH HURTS DON'T IT? my opinion. WE NEED TO BUILD on the ACA ... not GUT it.

[Live and Learn]

51. Not at all but LIES are despicable. Single Payer is the only solution!!! nt

[mythology]

81. The Netherlands has the highest health care outcomes in Europe and doesn't have single payer

In fact they have something fairly similar to the ACA. Single payer is one option to the goal of universal affordable health care. It's also one I think is exceedingly unlikely to happen in the U.S. for a number of reasons.

[Live and Learn]

85. It is going to happen because the people want it. nt

[Hortensis]

109. People "want" it? Where were you

while some of us were living and learning? OVER three-quarters of the American populace WANTED healthcare reform in 1992-1993. Then the GOP snowed the nation with many millions of dollars in negative advertising, basic message "you've got yours, but you're going to lose it," and at the end of that only a few still supported it. They "wanted" reform a lot, but they swallowed the lies and rejected it.

Now, here's the message: 17 YEARS LATER we finally got another chance. That period was no surprise to political scientists -- that was a typical delay between failed try 1 and second try in major public policy shifts. Time for the public to get ready again to turn "want" into "support." All through that 17 years, people "wanted" healthcare reform.

Bernie was in office that entire period. The 1993 healthcare reform was begun, but not by him. It failed without Bernie keeping it from failing. At NO point over the next looong 17 years as hundreds of thousands of people died who should have been saved and far most lost their homes and retirement savings to medical bills, at no time did Bernie make healthcare reform happen. He was in Congress. He didn't do it.

And when it was time again, once again possible, it happened because OTHERS made it happen. Bernie was not even on the leadership team.

I'd like to think Bernie could come through with what he promises -- without explaining HOW on earth he would do it -- but there's no reason to think he can. EVIL FORCES FROM THE RIGHT HAVE EVERY INTENTION OF KILLING FURTHER HEALTHCARE REFORM AND LARGELY DESTROYING WHAT WE'VE ACCOMPLISHED SO FAR.

The Democrats' intention to protect what we have from being destroyed and continue to advance toward a single-payer option by building on the ACA is what we're going to do. It's a good, progressive plan in itself but above all because we know it is possible. No pie in the sky without details. Real advances we can count on.

[Live and Learn]

115. You give up too easily. It will happen. nt

[Hortensis]

135. I want single payer, Learn. I was very unhappy -

in retrospect - that Obama chose trying to work together with the GOP to enact healthcare reform, instead of ramming a Democratic bill with single-payer option through against GOP resistance.

I've given up on nothing.

But I am disgusted with chronic malcontents who by nature prefer to complain rather than admit how much has been gained already. Obamacare IS a revolution and one with benefits to be treasured and protected. And the natural evolution of this revolution is toward a single payer option -- because our nation needs it.

But, the revolution may still be stopped, all the benefits we've gained can still be taken away.

Those who say "the people" want single payer are foolish beyond mention. Many millions of Americans extremely stupidly but also extremely sincerely DO NOT WANT OBAMACARE, MUCH LESS SINGLE PAYER, and support all efforts to destroy it.

Bernie hasn't said how he'd cram even more dramatic change down America's throat, or if a completely new law would be able to survive Supreme Court challenges and still function. That should make you very wary.

[Live and Learn]

136. Calm down, you are wrong. Nobody is going to take the benefits away.

The majority of Americans like Obamacare and want more not less.

Bernie has said how he would make the changes and it involves our participation. I am certainly up to the challenge and know we CAN DO it!

[Hortensis]

137. Nice note to end on. Sleep well.

[Kall]

126. Wow, you're really something

Bernie Sanders, then a Congressman from Vermont, is responsible for not preventing health care 93/94 from failing and not getting it passed since under Presidents Clinton and Bush. Do you remember anybody else from 93/94, for instance some spouse that the President put in charge of the effort at the time, who spearheaded the effort and came up with an extremely complicated plan (kind of like the ACA, which passed but has similarly failed to gain public support because the promised cost savings of a plan designed with the support of the insurance industry have not materialized for people) that couldn't even get a vote in a Democratic Congress then?

Remember in 2010, how the Democrats in the know lectured the left that the ACA, once passed, would accrue such public goodwill from all the benefits and savings Americans would experience, that the Republicans would never try to repeal it because it would be political suicide for them? There's a reason Republicans have pledged to repeal the ACA 60 times, but always pledge *not* to touch Medicare for its current beneficiaries. They even run (false) ads against Democrats for ostensibly cutting money for Medicare - a single-payer system - because Medicare has popular support and the ACA does not, and public opinion is where political incentives lie. Their position is fundamentally incoherent, and it wouldn't be hard for Democrats to point that out if they weren't defending the ACA against replacing it with a better system. It's cringeworthy to watch Hillary Clinton say she wants to protect the ACA from being "destroyed" (another Clinton scare tactic at the end, since it would only ever be replaced with better coverage) and say she doesn't want single-payer instead of it because she wants to "stand up to the insurance industry" which was enlisted in writing the ACA.

That doesn't mean that universal Medicare will happen overnight, and Sanders has not said that it will, but it does mean you should state it's what you believe in, make the Republicans oppose the Medicare system, and fight for it going forward. One of the fundamental mistakes of the ACA design process was that the Democrats started the bidding low - single-payer was taken off the table at the outset, the insurance industry was enlisted in writing it (therefore, so was a meaningful public option, even though they maintained the charade) and for a year they required Republican support as public support cratered as the plan got worse and more obscure (support which they were obviously never going to give, despite the six-figure Democratic political professionals protests to the contrary.)

Hillary has confined her opening bid to something that the Republicans will agree with her on as "improving the ACA" in a closed-door Washington negotiation. And people say Sanders supporters believe in rainbows and unicorns.

[enid602]

134. republicans

But the Republicans will greet Pops with sweets abd flowers when he rolls out single payer. He just has that effect on people.

[forest444]

100. Yes and no.

The Dutch are expected to carry private health insurance for minor and emergency expenses - but are covered on single-payer basis by the state for long-term care (where most health care dollars - or euros - are spent).

And even without that caveat, the comparison between their health care system and our clusterfuck scam of a system would be major apples and oranges, since their private health insurers and health costs in general are tightly regulated.

[Agony]

123. The question is: when Bernie rolls up his sleeves to implement this will you be there?

or will you be happy to keep the health insurance industry in charge of our lives?

[forest444]

125. I certainly do support transitioning to a single-payer system.

All the more so because we have a country in which, unfortunately, fraud has become so ingrained in our business culture - which of course includes the health care business.

This makes consolidating the health care finance into a well-regulated public system even more imperative than it was in other countries at the time they implemented their single-payer systems.

The problem, as we all know, is brainwashing. Will enough of our fellow voters listen if Bernie, as President Sanders, gets the chance to introduce single-payer sometime in the near future?

Or will red-baiting carry the day again, like it always has in this country.

[Agony]

127. forest444

My apologies, I intended to post this as a reply to the OP.

You answered so well that i will just leave this here….

as I think you just said… nothing --- will happen unless WE make it happen. Bernie will be a GREAT catalyst!

[forest444]

128. I'm honored.

That's a very nice compliment. Thank you.

Here's hoping it happens!

[cui bono]

120. What does "highest health care outcome" mean? Can you please provide details of their policy?

What are the similarities? What are the differences?

.

[Still In Wisconsin]

54. Where has any Democratic candidate proposed "gutting" the ACA? Links, please.

I'll wait...

[chervilant]

88. Yeah, well,

don't hold your breath...

[yuiyoshida]

96. This

disingenuous:not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does.

synonyms: insincere, dishonest, untruthful, false, deceitful, duplicitous, lying, mendacious; hypocritical

[Karma13612]

114. go ahead, stick with a profit-based, ever increasing premium cost

coverage system.

Have at it.

Me, I am going with Bernie.

Medicare for All.

[OrwellwasRight]

80. +1000

How many of us would get away with calling Hillary a fraud?

[redstateblues]

154. It's a fairly common occurence here on DU

[chervilant]

87. The whole OP is rather disingenuous.

How about a list of the "many" countries that provide healthcare for all citizens by means other than a "single payer government run system"? How about an explanation for using the word "fraud" in the title?

The only words in this OP that are relevant to me are "President Sanders." That, I definitely support.

[freedom fighter jh]

89. +1

[Quixote1818]

121. + 2

[HerbChestnut]

3. What a load of bull

[think]

4. Do you actually believe this shit or just post it to fan the flames? /nt

[KittyWampus]

59. Those of us in the reality-based community see Sanders' proposals for the empty-promises

they actually are.

[think]

69. Reality based my ass. Y'all cant even admit Clinton sold out to the corporations.

Delusional as usual...

[redstateblues]

155. Bernie will mount the bully pulpit, start waving his arms

and Boom- all the opposition from Congress will vanish into thin air. It's so simple-why can't people see that?

[HassleCat]

5. Seems possible

"His proposal serves only a political purpose: to suggest he’s bolder and more faithful to Democratic values than Hillary Clinton."

I guess maybe he is.

[jeff47]

6. The fraud is the claim that Sanders would pass this quickly.

And Sanders is not making this claim.

[scottie55]

119. Ever Wonder If They Told Roosevelt

What he couldn't do.

Right before he did it.

[bvar22]

7. UnRec for bullshit title.

You'll have better luck with this kind of fraudulent misrepresentation at that other site.

[earthside]

8. Where there is no vision the people perish.

Maybe should replace the face with that of Hillary and the Hillarians.

[polly7]

11. +1,000,000! nt.

[KittyWampus]

62. Big difference between vision and delusions. There isn't just one path to Universal Healthcare.

If you'd bothered to read further than the title, you'd have seen that.

But ideologues can't grasp more than one view and resist any efforts to broaden their understanding.

[dreamnightwind]

145. Getting corporattions out of it is as important as the universal part

[polly7]

9. ...............

[NCTraveler]

15. Great quotes.

That positive inspiration is why I am supporting Clinton. She never gives up. Great fighter.

[polly7]

16. But she 'does' nothing to improve health care for ALL. Just like the quote said.

"Don't bother doing anything, it's going to turn out fine anyway".

[Beacool]

10. Yes, but Sanders will bring to the WH some special magic that will make Congress more amenable

to his proposals, not like that slacker Obama. Let's all pretend that this Congress isn't far more conservative than the one in place when Obama took office.

"To suggest President Sanders would be able to force a far more dramatic change through Congress is deluded or dishonest. His proposal serves only a political purpose: to suggest he’s bolder and more faithful to Democratic values than Hillary Clinton."

That about summarizes it.

[cui bono]

24. Yeah, better to go with a candidate who's not even going to try to implement the best health care

program. Better to go with someone who will just say "cut it out" and then leave them be.

We should never, EVER, vote for the candidate who will actually fight for us all, all the time. Who had consistently done so for 50 years. That would be terrible!

And we should believe what we read in a paper that endorses Republicans over Dems even though what we quote from it is simply an opinion that is easily shown to be false by looking at the candidate in question's decades long record.



.

[trueblue2007]

49. Hillary did not say just leave the health care we have now is the best we could have

she says she WOULD BUILD ON IT AND MAKE OUR HEALTHCARE BETTER. I am sick and tired of hearing lies slapped against Ms. Clinton. LOOK AT WHAT SHE TRIED TO PASS IN 1992 !!!!

Bernie was no where to be found. Ms. Clinton as fought HARD to get the US medical insurance and you know it.

Hillary in 2016. If Bernie is our nominee well then Bernie in 2016.

I WILL SUPPORT OUR DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE!!

[cui bono]

52. She's been campaigning against single-payer all week!!!

And LYING about it and Bernie while doing so. So how is she going to try for single-payer?

She made almost $3 million is speaking fees to the health industry recently, which explains why she's out there campaigning with their interests in mind rather than the people's. That is not the sort of person I want leading this country. Ever.

.

[Plucketeer]

118. Exactly!

Shit - NOTHING ever gets done unless you TRY! I'm for TRYING - not band-aid fixes. We went to the MOON with a whole different mindset than maybe we just hang some bigger engines on a B-52 and see how much closer to the Moon we can fly! GAH! The DETERMINED IGNORANCE is mind-boggling.

Listen - her personal plumbing is NOT reason enough to cling to the hopes of seating her in the Oval Office. We need a leader with VISION - and not one that's looking in the rear view mirror.

[trueblue2007]

129. You're foolish she is NOT campaigning against better. SHE SAID BUILD ON THE ACA.

MEANING MAKE IT BETTER.

Those were her words last night. Not mine. MS CLINTON SAID

“We finally have a path to universal health care,” Clinton said in explaining her opposition to Sanders’s single-payer plan. “We have accomplished so much already. I do not to want see the Republicans repeal it, and I don’t to want see us start over again with a contentious debate. I want us to defend and build on the Affordable Care Act and improve it.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/01/18/bernie-sanderss-idealism-and-hillary-clintons-pragmatism-clash-in-debate/

TAKE THE DIRT OUT OF YOUR EARS. She did not say get rid of healthcare.

I am soooooooooooooooooo tired of you people lying about her. SHE HAD FOUGHT FOR HEALTHCARE FOR US and you know it.

[cui bono]

131. I guess you just haven't been reading the news this past week.

The MSM called out Chelsea for lying, Hillary for being dishonest and duplicitous.

She has been lying for days. In her own words. Have you not been on DU the four days before the debate?

Just peruse GD.P from the last week and you'll see all the OPs that have proof of her lying, over and over again, about what single-payer is and lying about what it would do to health care. She did it for FOUR days straight.

Then come back and try to defend her.

Oh, and where did I say she said she wanted to get rid of health care? You need to pay attention to what people actually say and not respond with an emotional rant that doesn't address the post you are replying to.

.

[Fast Walker 52]

29. his campaign shows exactly that he IS bolder and more faithful to Democratic values than Hillary

Is that a problem?

[hifiguy]

70. For many it is a

YUUUUUGE problem.

[JRLeft]

12. Unless we are going to make health insurance nonprofits, and capped then we need a single payer

system.

[silenttigersong]

13. Speaking of Fraud

Single payer or Medicare for all will also cut down on medicaid and medicare fraud.

[Fast Walker 52]

32. serious question-- how would it cut down fraud?

Not saying it wouldn't, it's just not an obvious outcome to me.

[silenttigersong]

40. Well

I think if you analyze ,the fraudulent paper chase of the derivative scam you will see that catching a problem early is a key to stopping it.So it is just moral relativity,a gov employee must account to a different entity.Of course it is not fail safe.

[Recursion]

71. Ummm... no, it would vastly, vastly expand Medicare fraud

If Medicare is expanded to the entire population, Medicare Fraud becomes much more common.

[OrwellwasRight]

83. Actually, there would be no fraud because everyone would be covered by the same plan.

The reason it exists is desperation.

[Fla Dem]

110. That doesn't prevent fraudulent claims being submitted.

Whatever system is in place there will always be criminal minded people who will try to scam the system. Unethical providers will still be able to submit fraudulent claims to the government for payment.

[Karma13612]

133. and when caught, they will be fined and go to jail. Medicare doesn't mess around. eom

[Recursion]

138. That doesn't even make sense

If everyone is covered by the same plan, that means there's vastly more claims for fraudulent providers to hide within.

The reason it exists is desperation.

No. The reason it exists is because doctors and hospital owners like yachts.

[OrwellwasRight]

139. Interesting.

I never hear about insurance fraud in France or Canada or the UK. But sure, yeah, there will be lots of reasons to lie to get coverage once you get coverage by virtue of being a human being. You're right.

[Recursion]

140. Do you understand what Medicare fraud is? (Hint: google "Medicare fraud canada" for examples)

Last edited Mon Jan 18, 2016, 11:19 PM - Edit history (1)

It definitely happens in Canada.

Medicare fraud is not about people falsely signing up for Medicare. I don't know of that ever happening.

Medicare fraud is doctors or hospitals either submitting claims for procedures they didn't perform, or performing needless procedures to get higher reimbursements. It's definitely a weakness of single payer vs. something like an all payer model.

[OrwellwasRight]

142. No it's not.

When you aren't paid fee-for-service, there is no profit motive for performing unnecessary services. Um, duh.

[Recursion]

143. And Medicare pays fee for service

If you want to talk about adopting a non-fee-for-service capitation model, like O'Malley has proposed, that's a completely different issue, and has nothing to do with whether the financing is single payer or multi-payer.

[OrwellwasRight]

147. And getting private profit out of the system has everything to do with

single payer v. multipayer.

[Recursion]

149. No, not at all. Single payer still has for profit providers

It's almost astounding how many people here haven't even thought about it enough to realize that.

Under single payer, doctors' practices, hospitals, and device manufactures (the actual cost centers) remain for-profit.

[OrwellwasRight]

150. Under your model I guess.

Not mine. Haven't we already been over this?

[Recursion]

153. Well, no, we haven't. Single payer is just about financing.

If you're talking about provider reform that's a very different question.

And your candidate isn't talking about it. (Mine is.)

[OrwellwasRight]

157. It's not a very different question. It is all related to universal healthcare,

which is what this conversation is about and which we have gone round and round on. Not sure why you think it is still fun. I guess you have to have the last word.

[99th_Monkey]

14. "No, We Can't", aim low then negotiate for crumbs, give up before you try,

These are not winning arguments, in an election or in Congress.

Because of Obama's relative lack of DC chops, he aimed low, and got the ACA crumbs leaving
29,000,000 Americans still without healthcare, probably the very people who most need it.

Bernie's been in DC for decades, know how to get stuff done, where the bodies are buried, how
to work well with many Republicans.

It's all too easy to just say, "no we can't, so why even try?" That's not in Bernie's dna

[Fast Walker 52]

31. exactly

[in_cog_ni_to]

17. Chicago Trib = RW RAG that endorsed billionaire Teabagger Governor Bruce Rauner over DEMOCRATIC

Last edited Mon Jan 18, 2016, 04:28 PM - Edit history (1)

Governor Quinn.

The Trib endorses Teabaggers/Repubs all the time.

Just so people know.

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[cui bono]

20. Thank you. I did not know that.

Makes a lot of sense now, for a couple of reasons.

.

[in_cog_ni_to]

36. Crystal clear. Yes.

Rauner is in the process of trying to pull a Brownback/Walker on Illinois. Thank the Goddesses we have a DEMOCRATIC legislature to stop him. He's a horrid POS.

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[MisterP]

48. *Rahm* endorsed Rauner

[in_cog_ni_to]

91. Rahm is Rauner's golfing buddy too. Says EVERYTHING we need to know, as far as I'm concerned.

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[ljm2002]

18. And the "more immediate defect" in this article...

...is their claim that Senator Sanders' "proposal serves only a political purpose: to suggest he’s bolder and more faithful to Democratic values than Hillary Clinton".

Whereas the truth is, he has submitted several bills over the years trying to implement single payer health care. Sure, you can say "but they were ineffective". But what you can't say (at least if you're being honest) is that he is grandstanding only for political purposes when he proposes it on the campaign trail.

[cui bono]

19. You seem to be trying really hard today. But really, fraud???

I don't see anything in what you posted that is even close to fraud. Please explain how anything Sanders is saying is amounts to fraud.

.

[Jefferson23]

21. lol n/t

[Motown_Johnny]

22. Then isn't Hillary guilty of the same fraud since she failed back in the 90's?

We were told that we would get health care reform back then. I guess that was fraud.


The idea that we shouldn't even try is disturbing. Even if this attempt fails, we should make that attempt. It will have a better chance the next time it is tried, and if that fails we try again.

Defeatism is never a winning strategy.

[Gothmog]

23. The Sanders plan has zero chance of being adopted

[cascadiance]

33. If you feel that Democrats have zero chance of changing things for the better...

... and perhaps what is in place is OK with you, then why don't you join the Republican party? That seems to be what you are advocating if what you feel is the case that there is only one party that can change things.

[Ed Suspicious]

57. Yup.

[redstateblues]

156. The majority here on DU aren't interested in reality

Obviously no one has been paying attention to what has been happening in the mid-terms-where were all these fired up people when it counted? The idea that one crusty curmudgeon is going to start shouting and waving his arms and things will magically change is just not realistic. None of his proposals have a snowball's chance in hell. Bernie has no allies in either the house or the Senate- he has spent his career dissing them. I used to like Bernie, but honestly the more I see of him and his MO the less I like him.

[Skwmom]

25. What a bunch of b.s. n/t

[Katashi_itto]

26. Whoa, Hill People are desperate.

[leftofcool]

27. His healthcare "plan" is a fraud and Bernie is a fraud!

[cascadiance]

34. Being defensive of having to defend the REAL fraud in our present and past systems?...

This FRAUD by insurance companies that Bernie is trying to eliminate!

You seem to be a bit confused as to where the real fraud is and who is trying to promote it.

[Fast Walker 52]

28. "to suggest he’s bolder and more faithful to Democratic values than Hillary Clinton." So what???

He sure seems to be!

[bowens43]

30. blah blah blah blah........you hill people crack me up

[Ed Suspicious]

58. The Hills have eyes, but no heart.

[LonePirate]

35. Sanders has a terrific plan but we need to be realistic about its chances.

Anybody who thinks electing Sanders will compel Congress to pass this plan in the first two years is deluded, especially with Repubs in charge of at least one chamber.

We should push this plan but we need to be aware it may take several years, if not a decade or two, before we can implement it.

[Ed Suspicious]

60. All Sanders supporters know this. This is no mystery. We simply want to fight for it. Not

fighting for it ensures that it will NEVER FUCKING HAPPEN!

[LonePirate]

66. I'm not sure all Sanders supporters know this. I think some expect instantaneous change next January

Electing Sanders is a show of support for a set of ideas. Electing Sanders is not going to change our country in the short term.

[bread_and_roses]

76. OH, please. On this site? We are not new

to the political process. And, I suspect even the young'uns supporting Sanders are not so deluded as to think that a President is some sort of absolute ruler.

[LonePirate]

98. I never specified Sanders supporters on this site only.

I think most, but not all, of Sanders supporters on DU are cognizant of the difficulties when it comes to enacting his agenda. Outside of DU, I think most, but not all, of Sanders supporters believe massive change is coming in 2017 upon his inauguration. Feel free to disagree but that's what I have observed and assessed.

[bread_and_roses]

73. This, exactly (n/t)

[Recursion]

74. It's too vague for me to call it "terrific"

For one thing, it doesn't actually say what level of benefits will be given.

[bigdarryl]

146. And don't forget the Supreme Court

[Vattel]

37. No one, including Sanders, thinks that he can convince

a Republican Congress to pass his plan. No one. What Sanders seeks is a political revolution that will transform Congress into a legislative body that will create a single payer system.

[MineralMan]

38. I wouldn't use the word "fraud," frankly.

It's an unrealistic goal, of course, but a goal that is commonly held by many. There is nothing Bernie Sanders can do to push single-payer through any Congress that will be elected in 2016. Nothing. It won't happen.

That doesn't mean it's not a great long-term goal, but it's not something that will happen until we have strong Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress. For me, that means that holding onto and improving ACA should be the goal for the next President's first term. To suggest that any other course is possible is to hold out a plastic carrot in hopes of getting people to follow it.

It's not a "fraud," though to push for single-payer. It's just an unrealistic goal than can't be achieved any time soon. I prefer Presidents who set realistic goals, given the Congress they will have. I wan't continued progressive movement, not promises that can't possibly be kept. That's why Clinton will be the nominee and our next President. She's promising stuff that can be accomplished, pretty much. Sanders isn't. People understand that.

[MoonRiver]

41. To me fraud means

promoting something which one knows is impossible, in order to obtain personal benefits. In Bernie's case that would br votes.

[MineralMan]

42. Well, I still don't like the usage. Bernie Sanders truly believes

that single-payer healthcare should be implemented and is promoting that. I think he is overreaching. If people agree with him, they'll vote for him. If they believe it's an unreachable goal at this time, they will vote for Clinton.

Voters, at least in the majority, are pretty realistic about political campaign rhetoric. They know what can be done and what cannot. Some vote idealistically, but not enough to get a candidate elected who proposes an impossible plan.

So, I wouldn't use the word "fraud" in relation to Sanders' single-payer goal. Unrealistic and unreachable are my words for that.

[MoonRiver]

44. Ok, I see your point.

[sulphurdunn]

79. We are in deep shit as a nation.

All HRC promises is maybe to tweek the status quo and suggests that is somehow bold and innovative. What is certain is that if elected, she will not buck the republican congress or Wall Street or any other corporate power, and that nothing will change for the better, but there will be change. That change will manifest itself in the continued erosion of our standard of living and quality of life. We are way beyond where it is prudent to play the art of the possible with a rigged political system, and it is time to take the first step in shaking up the status quo. Sanders is the man for that. People understand that.

[azmom]

39. Fuck this shit.

[Ed Suspicious]

63. Amen. This is seriously fucking stupid and I cannot believe what I'm reading here today. You

people call yourselves Democrats?

[NCTraveler]

108. I think that is a Limp Bizkit song. Nt

[rurallib]

43. single payer has been a democratic party goal for as long as I have lived

now it seems that half the party is saying we should abandon the single payer goal in favor of the current expensive, cumbersome system that is in many ways a giveaway to heath insurance companies.

It is truly a shame that what used to be the party of ideals and vision now caters to corporations and says "well, we just can't do it anymore."

How many voters will continue to look to democrats to lead when democrats say "I can't do that" rather than "I will work my ass off to do the right thing."

[Still In Wisconsin]

45. "Stop asking for nice things, peons! Shut up and vote Hillary!" - the empty pantsuit

[cantbeserious]

47. Ever More FUD

eom

[thereismore]

50. LOL at your defeatist attitude.

With friends like this!

[Blue_In_AK]

53. I thought Hillary was a bit disingenuous last night

when she said they weren't even able to get a public option when negotiating the ACA, therefore single payer is out of the question. The way I remember it, the public option wasn't even seriously considered, much less pushed for. The insurance companies had an overwhelming amount of influence on what finally passed as the ACA.

I would think a way forward at this point would be to reconsider a public option, which I'm sure would be popular, and then move from there to Medicare for all.

[questionseverything]

93. she was not honest about the public option

we had a good public option bill from the house

we did not have the 60 votes for closure in the senate but the aca never did either, it was passed thru reconciliation which only has a simple majority threshold

[lastone]

55. What a bunch of bs.

Single payer will be a reality under Sanders and any / all attempts to stifle will be meet with reasoned debate, factual numbers and proof of the system working in many other countries. When you have to go against a position you've supported in the past as hrc is doing you know they smell the same defeat coming add they did in '08.

[Javaman]

56. let me ask you one question: are you against single payer? nt

[chervilant]

97. I sincerely doubt

you will receive an answer to your inquiry.

[Javaman]

144. I know. I like to put it out there

so they can see their own hypocrisy.

[retrowire]

61. Don't you remember? The ACA is the stepping stone towards universal healthcare.

It's not universal health care. Bernie's is the next step. The ACA set us up for that victory. This is just more "Bernie wants to take our healthcare" bullshit.

And in regards to the idea that Medicare for all can't be done? Defeatist politics, and I have no time for that. There is an American dream to be had. And it can and will be won.

[MyNameGoesHere]

64. Well Obama already killed grandma

so let's see who gets the ax with single payer. Wonder who the repigs can march out when that is debated in congress? Grandpa? Naw, probably "OMG think of the children!"

When I want to believe in single payer again I will go back to taking hallucinogens again, it helps.

[jmowreader]

107. Naah...it'll be your mom this time.

Did you ever get the feeling this cover illustrates how the Republicans operate?

[kathysart_decoration]

65. Where's the real fraud/question

The real question is why the ADA had to be "invented" when we already had Medicare in place. Necessary changes could have been made and it would have been a much easier move to just expand an already existing program. Again, the real question to be asked is why it did not happen and single payer ended up being belittled by a president who initially said he supported it. Who, exactly, was being served by the ACA? The insults thrown at Bernie Sanders are absurd and he would be the right person to make this work - which should have happened in the first place. Someone please tell me where the "fraud" is. Why is anyone questioning a move over to an expanded Medicare program? It is the ACA that is the fraud. We now have these 2 programs, one of which is cumbersome and unnecessary, the other a proven program which has been working for many years. Nope, the wheel had to be reinvented.

[Indepatriot]

67. Clinton supporters, like their candidate, know no bottom when it comes to lying about Sanders.

Same as their tactics in 08'..... it worked so well for them then, should work just as well this time.

[restorefreedom]

68. bernie truly believes there is a pathway to SP

it won't happen in an instant, and it sure as hell won't be easy, but it is worth trying for, esp when progressives start winning state races.

if anyone believes bernie is perpetrating an intentional lie (aka fraud), well they haven't been plugged in for the past 40 or so years.

and if anyone believes he would take such a position for 40 years just to placate the people who might vote for him for president some day, well i don't even know what that means.

[mikehiggins]

72. Most obnoxious title so far

Fraud? Jeeze, the counterpunch's almost write themselves.

Just for one, HRC shot at in Bosnia.

And the writer says that the health plan proposal only serves to "suggest he's bolder and more faithful to Democratic values tha Hillary CLinton."

Well, uhh, yeah. Yeah he is.

HRC is business as usual. How's that working out?

[Bluenorthwest]

75. Hillary opposed my rights for 17 years.

I don't find it acceptable. So I'm voting for the candidate who has never opposed the rights of any group.

[DirkGently]

77. Goals aren't "fraud."

And a single-payer / universal health system has been a goal of Hillary's as well.

What's troubling about Clinton's argument here is the weird insinuation that continuing to pursue a true universal system is somehow going to destroy the useful but limited gains of the ACA.

There is no reason at all we can't improve on what we have under the ACA while steering toward the far superior solution of a single-payer system.

It sounds like Clinton's saying she has no intention of even trying to move toward single-payer, and wants to simply tweak the ACA because it would be easier.

That doesn't just seem like it's less true to the party's traditional goals -- it actually is, which is the problem with her position.

It's also a problem her people sent Chelsea out to peddle the idea that pursuing single-payer, just she and others have done, would somehow strip "millions and millions and millions" (Chelsea laid it on pretty thick) of their existing care, which of course is not true at all, as everyone sort of noticed immediately.

As Clinton has argued herself, Democrats attacking other Democrats on universal health care is unacceptable.

[ladjf]

78. Genuine B.S. nt

[Warren DeMontague]

81. desperation

it's what's for dinner.

[demwing]

84. Wow, feeling the Bern today?

every dishonest, bullshit post like this drive a wedge further into the division in the Democratic party.

Please continue...

[Herman4747]

86. If the country currently has ROMNEYCARE...

...then we can do better.

[OxQQme]

90. To the naysayers

Those who say it can't be done--do you wish it won't be done?
Really?

Bernie has said in all of his speeches that it's not about him.
It's us.

Without our support, which btw includes each state supporting and voting into office more congress critters and representatives
who share progressive values, then you're probably right about an uphill battle if it's Bernie all alone.
This is a 50 state battle, not just a presidential one.

[Bluenorthwest]

92. Will there be Death Panels?

This is familiar material you are running today. Does this fraud kill grandma?

[think]

99. Nailed it/nt

[Scalded Nun]

94. I would not expect, and I do not believe Bernie would try to gut ACA

This would be a conversion/transformation process.

By all means, let's keep the bar way down low for her. 0% chance means do not try? And whose 0% declaration is that? I sure am glad you were not around when the colonies decided to break from England.

All that say he is gutting it are just willing to support the lies of their anointed one. I would expect that when Hillary loses the nomination they will either stay away from the polls or even vote for anyone but Bernie.

I could be wrong about that...We'll have to wait and see.

[Fuddnik]

95. Comedy gold

The biggest fraud in America is Hillary Clinton.

[m-lekktor]

101. Of course the author of this piece, Steve Chapman, is a rightwing libertarian from Reason Magazine!

He also writes for the Chicago Tribune, known to be conservative/Republican leaning editorial wise. That's all one needs to know about this garbage you have linked to! You should research your sources before you link to them, not all of us are low info!

[draa]

106. Yep, and the OP just ate it up.

What's clear is Clinton's supporters have no intention of an honest debate. And with their candidate of choice why would they. They've been using right wing talking points for a few days now and their desperation makes me smile.

[NRaleighLiberal]

113. Bingo.

[Phlem]

102. This Op is totally turd way.

[FloridaBlues]

103. I would like to see the meat and potatoes how does he implement this

Some thing he has avoided in saying or posting.
Will it be up to the states or totally federal.
I wish he would have gotten into details but he hasn't.
I'm not talking about his pie in the sky funding that is written out.

[mudstump]

104. Hillary's new slogan....

No we can't because....it's too darn hard...boo, hoo.

[Vinca]

111. BS. Bernie has been fighting for this particular issue for as long as I can remember.

He might not be able to get it through Congress, but at least he has the gumption to try. The ACA would have been the solution IF there had been a public option. It would have morphed into Medicare For All. Sadly, big insurance had its hand out and won the day. Many people are seeing their premiums and deductibles climb despite the ACA and something has to be done before we're right back where we were before the ACA. When you cite other countries, you're forgetting one crucial thing: mindset. Those countries believe everyone in their nation deserves to have access to medical care. In this country the primary concern is the profits of insurance companies, big pharma and other assorted shake down artists.

[NRaleighLiberal]

112. H is for HopeLESS I guess

[fbc]

116. What a strange post... We should adopt a republican platform because republicans control congress?

[SoapBox]

117. Fraud?

I'm look'n at some other candidates...



Take a look around...there is all kinds of "fraud".

[Odin2005]

130. This is dispicable REACTIONARY slander again Bernie.

[hopemountain]

132. so, the op wants us to eat the cup of

bitter crap because its the best one can expect and after all, it is what it is?

the american people are smarter than you think.

[Armstead]

141. Can't do anything -- Edition 16.5

[Warren DeMontague]

148. rightwing libertarians are okay, now?

Oh, the irony.

[Metric System]

151. Sanders is being disingenuous in his quest for the Presidency. He is promising things he will not be

able to deliver just to get votes in the primary.

[Matariki]

158. I haven't forgotten the give-away to insurance companies

or how anyone pushing for single payer was NOT even given a seat at the table.

[Gothmog]

159. Bernie Sanders's fiction-filled campaign

This is a great editorial https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/bernie-sanderss-fiction-filled-campaign/2016/01/27/cd1b2866-c478-11e5-9693-933a4d31bcc8_story.html

Mr. Sanders’s story continues with fantastical claims about how he would make the European social model work in the United States. He admits that he would have to raise taxes on the middle class in order to pay for his universal, Medicare-for-all health-care plan, and he promises massive savings on health-care costs that would translate into generous benefits for ordinary people, putting them well ahead, on net. But he does not adequately explain where those massive savings would come from. Getting rid of corporate advertising and overhead would only yield so much. Savings would also have to come from slashing payments to doctors and hospitals and denying benefits that people want.

He would be a braver truth-teller if he explained how he would go about rationing health care like European countries do. His program would be more grounded in reality if he addressed the fact of chronic slow growth in Europe and explained how he would update the 20th-century model of social democracy to accomplish its goals more efficiently. Instead, he promises large benefits and few drawbacks.

Meanwhile, when asked how Mr. Sanders would tackle future deficits, as he would already be raising taxes for health-care expansion and the rest of his program, his advisers claimed that more government spending “will result in higher growth, which will improve our fiscal situation.” This resembles Republican arguments that tax cuts will juice the economy and pay for themselves — and is equally fanciful.

The Washington Post is agreeing with Prof. Krugman's analysis