That time when Bernie met Hillary and got no where on health care

[pinebox]

Well, here we go again!
Massive article, small snippet below. Quite telling.

When Bernie met Hillary--Long before challenging Clinton, Sanders reached out to her on health care. He got nowhere.
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-119082



In February, Sanders requested a meeting with Hillary, “to bring in two Harvard Medical School physicians who have written on the Canadian system,” according to the records of the administration’s task force. Those physicians were Stephanie Woolhandler and David Himmelstein, leading advocates for single-payer health care.

They got their meeting at the White House that month, and the two doctors laid out the case for single-payer to the first lady. “She said, ‘You make a convincing case, but is there any force on the face of the earth that could counter the hundreds of millions of the dollars the insurance industry would spend fighting that?’” recalled Himmelstein. “And I said, “How about the president of the United States actually leading the American people?’ and she said, ‘Tell me something real.’ ”

Sanders was undeterred by this dismissal of single-payer’s political viability. In March, he was at it again, inviting the first lady up to Vermont as the state considered overhauling its own health care policies. In June, Clinton did go up to Vermont – to address a Democratic Governors Association meeting hosted by the state’s then-Gov. Howard Dean in the quaint village of Woodstock – and she brought Sanders and Sen. Pat Leahy with her.

The administration’s background briefing on Sanders, tucked in with its plans for the trip, notes, “As a relatively junior member without the support of major party backing, Sanders is not much of a factor legislatively. He is a cosponsor of Congressman McDermott’s single-payer bill and given his reputation for independence and his somewhat combative style may be one of the more difficult Members to get on board the Administration’s proposal.”

On the eve of the trip, Sanders scored a meeting with the president in Washington. The task force’s record of the meeting speaks to the complexity of his relationship to the Clintons. “Accounts were that it was cordial, focusing more on process than substance. He urged the President to get out into the country more to sell his plan himself rather than letting the press define it. Given the sensitivities within the delegation, the Senators may be somewhat jealous of this meeting. In addition, there have been reports that the Congressman will be participating in an event on Saturday critical of both the welfare and health care reform efforts of the Administration.”

[upaloopa]

1. Just curious what happened to single payer

in Vermont?

[Dawgs]

2. Are you saying you're against single payer, or are you being ignorant about something else?

If neither, please explain.

[-none]

3. Single Payer needs to be implemented nation wide to be viable.

[pinebox]

8. Was Bernie Gov of VT?

Nope.

[Historic NY]

17. That like saying the First Lady was elected.

[thesquanderer]

23. They couldn't get the numbers to work.

It's explained pretty well at

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/12/single-payer-vermont-113711

It really needs support at the federal level in order for it to work (as it does in other countries). And of course Sanders has been trying to approach it from that end, as he was then as well...

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/must-read/a-single-payer-system-makes-economic-sense

but having a president who was really behind it could make a bigger difference! (Whatever did happen to that "public option" anyway...)

[HassleCat]

4. They are both correct, but both wrong on strategy

Clinton is correct in saying single payer is difficult-to-impossible. Sanders is correct in saying the issue requires presidential leadership. Even so, it should be a goal of instituting single payer, or an equivalent system, for every Democrat. Obamacare was OK as a first step, but we have a long way to go. We need to build on it, improving it incrementally, until it covers everyone at a reasonable cost. All Democrats should commit to do this. Clinton is correct n saying single payer is not an option now, but she dismisses it as if it can never happen, and that's the wrong approach. Sanders wants to push for single payer now, and that's the wrong approach, too. It should be a long term goal of all Democrats, and they should be expected to say so if they expect our votes, and they should be expected to work toward it if they want us to reelect them. Sanders passes this test, obviously, and Clinton just needs to adjust her position a little.

[Doctor_J]

9. making everyone buy private insurance is not an incremental step toward single payer

If single payer healthcare is the goal, the Obama fan club needs to admit that his plan is a disaster, and needs to be undone, not expanded. If OTOH you think that paying, as part of our healthcare costs, billions of dollars in profits, Obamacare is fine. It can't be "improved" into single payer, since it's the opposite of single payer.

[HassleCat]

10. OK, then

I guess we should elect Tea Party extremists, since they all favor repealing Obamacare. Once it's gone, people will see the light and demand singe payer, and all those Tea Party people we elected will say, "Yeah! Single payer! That's the ticket!"

OK, that was a bit of reductio ad absurdum, but what do you think we should do?

[mhatrw]

26. 48% of people already favor single payer healthcare

Another 25% or so would favor it of its benefits were clearly explained to them.

[HassleCat]

28. I think so, too

But it's one of those issues like gay marriage. The public will have to lead, and I will have to be very. very clear to politicians they are "safe" in supporting single payer. The evolution could be rather quick, as it was with same sex marriage, or it could take a while, as it's doing with legalizing hemp.

[PowerToThePeople]

30. One of my primary tests for right wing ideas

is, does this idea favor private profits over the public good.

If the answer is yes, it is right wing.

[mhatrw]

25. Why is the obviously superior approach ever the wrong approach?

Because we live in an oligarchy? If not, why is it wrong to fight for what we all know is right?

[Progressive dog]

5. The Clinton health plan didn't pass more

than twenty years ago. Old, old, old news.

[thesquanderer]

24. Ironically, she chose to appease the big interests rather than attempting single payer...

...and yet she still couldn't get it passed.

But yeah, it was a different time.

[Doctor_J]

6. interesting. She is a devout corporatist who thinks that the hyper rich should get a cut of

everything, including our healthcare.

[CharlotteVale]

13. Exactly. Just like Obama.

[frylock]

7. ‘Tell me something real.’

A preview of our fearless, fighting leader.

[Ikonoklast]

14. Dismissive of her intellectual inferiors.

Another Imperial presidency needs to be stopped.

[Maedhros]

20. Why should I vote for a candidate who doesn't believe that the President

can lead the people?

That right there is starkly pathetic.

[hootinholler]

11. WOW

They got their meeting at the White House that month, and the two doctors laid out the case for single-payer to the first lady. “She said, ‘You make a convincing case, but is there any force on the face of the earth that could counter the hundreds of millions of the dollars the insurance industry would spend fighting that?’” recalled Himmelstein. “And I said, “How about the president of the United States actually leading the American people?’ and she said, ‘Tell me something real.’ ”

There are at least two reasons to take such a position:

1: You and the fucking president fear big pharma even back then and give up without trying

2: You agree that money can be made by skimming money out of things that everyone has to pay for and use your position to at least enable it.

The former is weak and not very Presidential although sensible woodchucks would ascribe it to pragmatism.

The latter, well, if your ethics allow you to overlook the extortion aspects of that deal, then I really don't want you as my president because what will you ethics allow in the future? Deregulating Wall St.? Defending heteronly-marriage? Devastating the poor?

Those are the fucking ethics you are supporting HillCats.

[Catherina]

31. ‘Tell me something real.’ ? ! ! ! Wow n/t

[bluestateguy]

12. Right!

If the president just makes some speeches around the country and makes some phone calls to member of Congress, that will easily overcome a several hundred million $ ad campaign by the insurance companies.

Why didn't the Clintons think of that?

[Pharaoh]

22. so she just rolls over and plays dead

great strategy!

[mhatrw]

27. The President explains WHY single payer is better for the nation.

Then the President gets 75% of the voting populace to favor single payer because it is clearly better for the nation.

Then the President says if your Congresspeople will not get with the program, we have a bunch lined up for you in the next election who will.

[Scuba]

29. /\_/\_This right here_/\_/\

[SoapBox]

15. Damned Librul Media at it again!

It will all be dismissed with a red attack, racist attack, sexist attack...or whatever we care to fill in the blank with.

Good OP pinebox.

[zappaman]

16. ok. n/t

[ibegurpard]

18. maybe she has evolved since then?

[Babel_17]

19. Great piece of history, thanks (nt)

[Ed Suspicious]

21. There are some very big differences between these two candidates.