Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Jake Tapper/factcheck.org on claims about the Koch Bros funded study on health care costs [View all]lapucelle
(21,067 posts)115. The Conyers version HR 676 is fully funded.
(c) Funding-
(1) IN GENERAL- There are appropriated to the Medicare for All Trust Fund amounts sufficient to carry out this Act from the following sources:
[NOTE: the following part of H.R. 676 describes only one idea for the funding. After sufficient support is established in the U.S. House of Representatives, many funding options will likely be debated. It will be important for some citizens to monitor the progress and give input at that time. In the meantime, any ideas or wishes you have for funding should be sent by letter in the U.S. Mail to your U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators.]
(A) Existing sources of Federal government revenues for health care.
(B) Increasing personal income taxes on the top 5 percent income earners.
(to do: need to communicate what level of income this means)
(C) Instituting a modest and progressive excise tax on payroll and self-employment income.
[Current Medicare tax: 1.45% paid by employers and employees.]
(D) Instituting a modest tax on unearned income.
[This is an additional source of funding added to the H.R. 676 that was proposed in the previous session of Congress. The expected percentage is not yet available. H.R. 676 will not be given an economic evaluation by the Congressional Budget Office until it gets to at least 100 cosponsors<.]
(E) Instituting a small tax on stock and bond transactions.
(2) SYSTEM SAVINGS AS A SOURCE OF FINANCING- Funding otherwise required for the Program is reduced as a result of
(A) vastly reducing paperwork
[Elimination of unnecessary administrative activities within all of our health care bureaucracy]
[for-profit bureaucracy]
[government bureaucracy]
[supporting bureaucracy that results from the other two types of bureauracracy and the overall negative situation that they cause]
[ Go to Costs and Savings for more information.]
(B) requiring a rational bulk procurement of medications under section 205(a).
(C) improved access to preventive health care.
(3) ADDITIONAL ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS TO MEDICARE FOR ALL PROGRAM- Additional sums are authorized to be appropriated annually as needed to maintain maximum quality, efficiency, and access under the Program.
(1) IN GENERAL- There are appropriated to the Medicare for All Trust Fund amounts sufficient to carry out this Act from the following sources:
[NOTE: the following part of H.R. 676 describes only one idea for the funding. After sufficient support is established in the U.S. House of Representatives, many funding options will likely be debated. It will be important for some citizens to monitor the progress and give input at that time. In the meantime, any ideas or wishes you have for funding should be sent by letter in the U.S. Mail to your U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators.]
(A) Existing sources of Federal government revenues for health care.
(B) Increasing personal income taxes on the top 5 percent income earners.
(to do: need to communicate what level of income this means)
(C) Instituting a modest and progressive excise tax on payroll and self-employment income.
[Current Medicare tax: 1.45% paid by employers and employees.]
(D) Instituting a modest tax on unearned income.
[This is an additional source of funding added to the H.R. 676 that was proposed in the previous session of Congress. The expected percentage is not yet available. H.R. 676 will not be given an economic evaluation by the Congressional Budget Office until it gets to at least 100 cosponsors<.]
(E) Instituting a small tax on stock and bond transactions.
(2) SYSTEM SAVINGS AS A SOURCE OF FINANCING- Funding otherwise required for the Program is reduced as a result of
(A) vastly reducing paperwork
[Elimination of unnecessary administrative activities within all of our health care bureaucracy]
[for-profit bureaucracy]
[government bureaucracy]
[supporting bureaucracy that results from the other two types of bureauracracy and the overall negative situation that they cause]
[ Go to Costs and Savings for more information.]
(B) requiring a rational bulk procurement of medications under section 205(a).
(C) improved access to preventive health care.
(3) ADDITIONAL ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS TO MEDICARE FOR ALL PROGRAM- Additional sums are authorized to be appropriated annually as needed to maintain maximum quality, efficiency, and access under the Program.
There's no need to reinvent the wheel that John Conyers invented in 2003. What we need is a senate version of this bill.
http://www.medicareforall.org/pages/Bernie_Sanders
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
134 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Jake Tapper/factcheck.org on claims about the Koch Bros funded study on health care costs [View all]
ehrnst
Aug 2018
OP
Some have lifted small portions of that "study" and isolated sentences to claim, to the effect....
George II
Aug 2018
#1
How does this relate to what Sanders and AOC said about the Koch funded study? (nt)
ehrnst
Aug 2018
#17
No one is disagreeing with any of that, and we are all perfectly aware of it. Your insistence on
Squinch
Aug 2018
#27
What does this have to do with Sanders' and AOC's claims about the conclusions of the study?
ehrnst
Aug 2018
#39
I can be difficult to muster up words beyond that of a bumper-sticker. Nice try, though.
LanternWaste
Aug 2018
#87
You got nothing, otherwise you would have stated something beyond a four-letter word. . . . nt
Bernardo de La Paz
Aug 2018
#101
Nice try. If we want it, we need to work it out. Which is obviously possible to do. But
Squinch
Aug 2018
#7
What exactly? Where did Factcheck.org get it wrong about what Sanders and AOC claimed?
ehrnst
Aug 2018
#19
No, the analysis is that the "Koch Study Was Good Just Left Stuff Out", but...
George II
Aug 2018
#44
Can you direct me to his plan to pay for it, and the progress he's made over the years? TIA.
George II
Aug 2018
#55
You are still just throwing out phrases with no context, and no citations, My Friend.
ehrnst
Aug 2018
#34
Can you give an example of any unaccounted externality in the Mercatus study?
lapucelle
Aug 2018
#111
I heard that a couple of weeks ago from a Democratic Congressional candidate, that "death cost".
George II
Aug 2018
#41
And, you bast*rds, how dare you suggest that the rest of us don't believe healthcare is a right?
Squinch
Aug 2018
#23
It seems to me that this thread is a perfect illustration of the stupidity of the
Squinch
Aug 2018
#31
Was it purists or "realists" that removed the public option and Medicare buy in from the ACA?
Humanist_Activist
Aug 2018
#92
If it was not removed, we would not have gotten the votes to pass ACA in the Senate.
SunSeeker
Aug 2018
#97
Yep - Ted Kennedy thought that we might have something now that is closer to what Canada has
ehrnst
Aug 2018
#124
Was it the purists or the realists that got the first healthcare plan that has ever been passed
Squinch
Aug 2018
#100
It still doesn't cover the general public because of the loopholes that allowed Republicans...
Humanist_Activist
Aug 2018
#103
Where am I blaming Democrats? They did the best they could, we, on the ground...
Humanist_Activist
Aug 2018
#105
That ought to be self evident, but this thread seems to show that to some it isn't.
Squinch
Aug 2018
#128
Horseshoes and hand grenades. Even if it's $2 Trillion more over 10 years, everyone has insurance.
TheBlackAdder
Aug 2018
#46
And if we find it is 2 trillion more, then we can easily do what we need to do to fund it, namely
Squinch
Aug 2018
#49
If we find, it's there at $200B/yr. If it were an increase, we're talking 6.7%. It could be even.
TheBlackAdder
Aug 2018
#52
How does this address what CNN and factcheck.org say about what the study actually concluded vs
ehrnst
Aug 2018
#73
The larger objective should be to get a senate version of HR 676 written and passed.
lapucelle
Aug 2018
#114
This fact checked needs some fact checking. Based on a completely bogus statement.
Nanjeanne
Aug 2018
#50
LOL! Such careful splitting of hairs and obvious word-games means you've already lost the argument.
NurseJackie
Aug 2018
#58
I was referring to the false distinction separating "the American People" from Taxpayers
ehrnst
Aug 2018
#71
As a matter of funding this program - the American people will do so through the Govt.
ehrnst
Aug 2018
#81
But that isn't what Sanders was saying, the American People also pay copays, premiums....
Humanist_Activist
Aug 2018
#77
I know what Tapper said but his conclusion on the accuracy of Sanders and AOC is simply
Nanjeanne
Aug 2018
#76
So you think that the author of the study should not be trusted concerning his conclusions
ehrnst
Aug 2018
#85
Ok I'll try again and then I give up. I think the author of the Koch funded analysis that was based
Nanjeanne
Aug 2018
#88
He starts off with a claim that is not true, neither Sanders nor AOC are talking about saving...
Humanist_Activist
Aug 2018
#78
He says the Koch brothers, who have control over their hiring and firing, didn't influence...
Hassin Bin Sober
Aug 2018
#79
So what is his conclusion, is it going to cost the same, significantly more, or less? N/t
Humanist_Activist
Aug 2018
#91
Where is his evidence for this, even assuming disbursement payments match levels of insurance...
Humanist_Activist
Aug 2018
#95
Throughout this thread the facts - not alternative facts - have been posted. But you know, it's
Nanjeanne
Aug 2018
#106