True or false?: in 2010 Sanders said adoption of single payer couldn't begin on the federal level

[geek tragedy]

Simple enough--did he say "no we can't" for national single payer in 2010?

I will post the answer in a reply to this thread.

1 vote, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	That's inconsistent with what he's saying now, so of course not.
	0 (0%)
	Yep, he said it. Go figure.
	1 (100%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[geek tragedy]

1. answer and link

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/sanders-single-payer-never-had-a-chance

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) reminded the progressive media gathered on Capitol Hill today that single-payer health care reform was dead before it started in the Senate.

"It would have had 8 or 10 votes and that's it," he said, addressing a topic central in the minds of many who the bloggers and left wing talk show hosts gathered for the 4th annual Senate Democratic Progressive Media Summit in Washington reach everyday.

Sanders is among the few in the Senate not afraid to say he supports government-run, universal health care. But his calls for such a program have gone unanswered, much to the chagrin of progressives who still feel it is the best way to solve the nation's health care crisis.

Sanders said it was still possible for single-payer to come to the U.S. eventually -- but he said the road will not begin in Washington. If a state like California or Vermont ever instituted a single-payer system on its own, Sanders said, it would eventually lead to national adoption of universal coverage.

Sanders has put forward an amendment to the current health care bill in the Senate that would allow states to use federal funds to create their own single-payer plans, he said.

Single-payer aside, Sanders chalks up the difficulty Democrats have had passing health care to a mistaken belief about party unity when reform efforts kicked off.

"The major error Democrats undertook was to assume we had 60 votes or even 59," he said. "We never had that."

Sanders said he thinks Democrats have 50 votes in the Senate to pass a bill "certainly to include a public option." It was a bit of good news for progressives, who have turned their attention to using reconciliation in the Senate to bolster a reform bill with the addition of a public option.

[Xyzse]

42. Quite misleading, particularly as that article mentions that you post says that:

"Sanders is among the few in the Senate not afraid to say he supports government-run, universal health care. But his calls for such a program have gone unanswered, much to the chagrin of progressives who still feel it is the best way to solve the nation's health care crisis."

By saying that "the road will not begin in Washington" means at the Presidential level, there was no support for it. Which is true as Obama himself took it off the table.

I don't quite understand what the big deal is on this one.

[geek tragedy]

45. No, in Washington means at the federal level.

hence the discussion of it needing to start at the state level

[Xyzse]

46. It could mean either of the two.

During the time, Obama did take the Universal Healthcare option off the table even before actual negotiation started.
That shows a lack of support from the President, as the leadership was not on board with the idea, then of course one could say it would not work in the "Federal" level at that point.

Which is why I didn't really see this as a big deal as that was the only reasonable method at the time.

Don't get me wrong, I am still quite happy that the ACA has passed, even though I consider the implementation flawed and the law needs work.

It is also one thing to basically say, we will try our hardest to get the best possible outcome, rather than saying flat out that something can not be done.

[yourpaljoey]

2. who cares?

He knew it could not begin at the Federal level with Obama dead set against it!

[beam me up scottie]

31. No one except the right wing of the party who don't support single payer.

Just exploiting the issue while people die for lack of health care.

[think]

3. Did we have a presidential candidate running on single payer then?

[geek tragedy]

4. No, but we had a huge Democratic majority in the house and a supermajority of 60 in the Senate.

When do you anticipate that happening again?

[think]

9. Sooner with Bernie than with Hillary. Hillary is just too corrupt. People are tired of corruption.

Except Hillary supporters. They'll deny that she'll be corrupted by all the dirty corporate cash doled out to her.

History has shown that politicians that take the money are much more willing to do what the corporations want rather than what the people want.

[geek tragedy]

10. zzzzzzzz. Blah blah corrupt oligarch blah blah nt

[think]

11. So typical of you to just ignore corruption. pathetic even.

[geek tragedy]

14. no, I ignore substance-free insults and sloganeering. nt

[think]

17. Goldmans Sachs, Citigroup, Jp Morgan, USB just to name a few of the sleasiest banks

Hillary took millions from. Keep your head in the sand though. Like I say you Hillary fans will ignore the obvious.

[geek tragedy]

18. so you respond with more substance-free insults and sloganeering nt

[think]

20. No. I respond with banks that routinely violate US laws that your candidate

takes money from.

[geek tragedy]

21. so your position is that anyone who gets paid by a bank is corrupt? nt

[think]

24. She's a politician running for president. She will appoint people to regulate and police these banks

She's not just ANYONE.

It's called a CONFLICT of INTEREST.

It's legal under current laws but it sure as hell shouldn't be.

Good grief. I remember when Democrats use to be upset when the Republicans would pull this shit. And the GOP didn't even come close to the levels of cash Hillary has been receiving.

[geek tragedy]

29. President Obama took in millions of campaign contributions from Wall Street employees in 2008.

And then he pissed them off so much while in office that they all donated to Mitt Romney to try to get him out of office.

[think]

30. Hillary's taking DIRECT INCOME. Somehow you all don't seem to understand that is more liquid

than campaign donations.

As for Obama, Holder did more than enough to help the banks avoid any serious prosecution for their crimes.

Holder is back working for the same law firm that defended Citigroup while he was prosecuting their crimes.

I like Obama but don't think Eric Holder wasn't the gift Wall Street was looking for and got....

[redstateblues]

27. still no poof of quid pro quo-still waiting

corruption meme is just another smear. Envy is an ugly emotion

[DanTex]

5. Which makes it all the more peculiar that he didn't lift a finger to prevent

the VT single payer program from collapsing.

[senz]

23. You don't know that. Quit making stuff up.

[Hoyt]

28. If he did, he failed.

[senz]

32. Hey Hoyt: Senators don't run states.

You can learn more about it here: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/12/single-payer-vermont-113711

[Hoyt]

35. US Senators are senior political figures in most states and have a lot of pull.

He could have asked the Democratic governor to at least give the appearance of studying single payer, rather than dropping it like a hot potato because it costs way too much to convince the voters. Maybe one day, you'll learn something beyond high school civics.

[senz]

36. Oh a nice ad hominem from a Hill fan with a Woody Guthrie avatar.

[Hoyt]

37. Not as bad is your post above invoking your vast knowledge of civics.

[senz]

39. Sweetie, I don't have osteoporosis. Sorry! But your sexism/ageism is duly noted.

What you consider my pretense at a "vast knowledge of civics" is in fact a vast enthusiasm for what our founders intended for us when they created this democratic republic. It's more along the lines of idealism rooted in the notion that all human beings are intrinsically worthy.

You know: old-fashioned liberalism?

No, I guess you wouldn't know.

[senz]

41. Woo hoo! You modified your original reply!

Lucky me, I learned how to view the original, and here it is:

No as bad is yourosteoporosis invoking your vast knowledge of civics.

[Hoyt]

43. That's what my auto correct did. But we've become accustomed to how Sanders' supporters play.

[senz]

44. Bullshit.

Now quit dragging a hero of mine through the muck with every comment you write. If he were alive today, he would at the thought of your candidate.

It really is time for a new avatar.

[LexVegas]

6. Promise anything to get elected. nt

[senz]

40. lol, isn't that what ol' Hill is doing?

Sure it is. And you know it.

[SHRED]

7. Are you for healthcare as a right or not?

That's the real question.

[geek tragedy]

8. I agree with 2010 Bernie Sanders. nt

[SHRED]

12. Do you favor a Medicare-for-all or not?

[geek tragedy]

13. I favor allowing 55-64 year olds the right to buy into Medicare

and I favor Vermont or some other state implementing a single payer plan to prove it can work, and to work out the bugs, so we can try it on a national level.

[SHRED]

15. I support that...

...with a phased in dropping of the age requirement.

[geek tragedy]

16. sure, roll it out over time. Drop the age of eligbility by 2 years per year, and pretty soon you

are on the track towards single payer

You see how we agree on this? This is because what separates us in many cases is not where we want to go, but rather what the best way to get there is.

[Capt. Obvious]

19. You're quite the Sanders supporter

[beam me up scottie]

26. Yes indeed.

Some would say he's on a Roll

[senz]

22. It COULDN'T start at the Federal level in 2010. He knew that.

The best we could hope for back then was state by state.

2017-20 could be an entirely different story if Bernie is elected.

[virtualobserver]

34. exactly.....times have changed....The affordable care act took us halfway

The key is convincing the people, and he will have the bully pulpit to do just that.

Once you convince the people, the Congress will follow.

[Bill USA]

25. ohhhhh, Bernie's minions are going to spit all over your shoes for this!!!!!

[senz]

33. Bernie doesn't have minions. He's not that full of himself.

[Motown_Johnny]

38. Not until he is President, then we can.

He was not saying that it could never be done, only that it could not be done given the conditions at that time.