Alan, thank you for addressing the button-link issue. (Note: it wasn't the first time this had happened.) I think it's ironic, Adam Schiff was sitting at the Burbank Mall when someone made the genocidal eugenics comment to him. Burbank? Luther Burbank? One of history's great plant breeders, he also advocated for human eugenics. The name was coincidental, however. The mall (and city) were named for a different person.
Just gave today's post a quick first read. Federal vs state-based single payer? I'm an agnostic and support both approaches. I'm glad Ro Khanna is stepping up with a commonsense basket of waivers. A few concerns, none of which are showstoppers compared with the good that could result...
> I live in Texas, population about 30 million. Covering "at least 95%" under Khanna's bill would invite corrupt-to-the-core Texas politicians to exclude perhaps 1,500,000 Texas residents. (Note: by stonewalling Medicaid expansion, these far-right racist mofos currently exclude some 5,000,000 Texas men, women and children despite generous federal incentives. If there's a way to screw up or circumvent a pro-social federal program, Texas will do it from sheer meanness and spite.)
> Across America's mass-incarceration gulag, many prisons and jails offer egregiously poor healthcare for inmates. Will any provision in Khanna's bill, force that to change in states that opt for waivers?
Add'l thoughts:
> Kudos to One Payer States as a longtime grassroots leader banging the drum for state-based universal care.
> How to sell this concept to conservative politicians, pundits and voters? Advocates might frame it up as a "states' rights" issue.
Thanks for spotlighting this alt approach to giving single-payer universal healthcare a toehold at least somewhere in the US.
p.s. I clicked a Comment button on today's (10.18.23) email, and it posted my comment to some weeks-old post. I'm now redoing my comment here, on the correct page. Could you please fix this problem of buttons misdirecting comments? Thank you!
Thanks Ira. I'm not sure why the comment was mis directed but for my next post I will redo all the buttons and hopefully that will help. I understand and sympathize with you about Texas. It has the largest uninsured population of all the states and frankly I think the majority of legislators are fine with that, There is a school of thought that one of my previous congressional reps (Adam Schiff) shared with me. Medical Eugenics. Rep. Schiff was sitting at the Burbank mall years ago talking to constituents and someone came by and made it clear that if you're not smart enough or rich enough to afford insurance then you should die and be out of the gene pool. He told me that he heard that privately from others over and over. So it's out there and it is hateful. Sadly fixing it and healthcare for all of us, would make the system wildly less expensive (sigh). Thanks for advocating!!!
A clarification: Medicaid expansion would cover about 1,000,000 people. It would leave the other 4,000,000-or-so with no healthcare coverage. This is why universal care is needed. In the case of Texas, that will likely require the feds to force the issue with Medicare for All legislation -- which Biden has vowed to veto if it ever got through Congress.
This may be a naïve question, but here it is. You are advocating one payer, state-based healthcare, so that states do not have to depend on the federal government to enact healthcare for all.
However, you are asking readers to support a bill in Congress that grants all of the waivers needed to make such plans work. This looks to me like an instance of asking supporters to bang their heads against a closed door. With a slim Republican majority in the House of Representatives, no such bill will pass.
Is there a way that states can apply for the needed waivers without the enactment of a bill in Congress?
Thanks Gary, There is a way. each state can apply for all the individual waivers. This only simplifies the process. Of course, all of this is uphill as we are struggling to keep democracy on its feet.
Alan, thank you for addressing the button-link issue. (Note: it wasn't the first time this had happened.) I think it's ironic, Adam Schiff was sitting at the Burbank Mall when someone made the genocidal eugenics comment to him. Burbank? Luther Burbank? One of history's great plant breeders, he also advocated for human eugenics. The name was coincidental, however. The mall (and city) were named for a different person.
Just gave today's post a quick first read. Federal vs state-based single payer? I'm an agnostic and support both approaches. I'm glad Ro Khanna is stepping up with a commonsense basket of waivers. A few concerns, none of which are showstoppers compared with the good that could result...
> I live in Texas, population about 30 million. Covering "at least 95%" under Khanna's bill would invite corrupt-to-the-core Texas politicians to exclude perhaps 1,500,000 Texas residents. (Note: by stonewalling Medicaid expansion, these far-right racist mofos currently exclude some 5,000,000 Texas men, women and children despite generous federal incentives. If there's a way to screw up or circumvent a pro-social federal program, Texas will do it from sheer meanness and spite.)
> Across America's mass-incarceration gulag, many prisons and jails offer egregiously poor healthcare for inmates. Will any provision in Khanna's bill, force that to change in states that opt for waivers?
Add'l thoughts:
> Kudos to One Payer States as a longtime grassroots leader banging the drum for state-based universal care.
> How to sell this concept to conservative politicians, pundits and voters? Advocates might frame it up as a "states' rights" issue.
Thanks for spotlighting this alt approach to giving single-payer universal healthcare a toehold at least somewhere in the US.
p.s. I clicked a Comment button on today's (10.18.23) email, and it posted my comment to some weeks-old post. I'm now redoing my comment here, on the correct page. Could you please fix this problem of buttons misdirecting comments? Thank you!
Thanks Ira. I'm not sure why the comment was mis directed but for my next post I will redo all the buttons and hopefully that will help. I understand and sympathize with you about Texas. It has the largest uninsured population of all the states and frankly I think the majority of legislators are fine with that, There is a school of thought that one of my previous congressional reps (Adam Schiff) shared with me. Medical Eugenics. Rep. Schiff was sitting at the Burbank mall years ago talking to constituents and someone came by and made it clear that if you're not smart enough or rich enough to afford insurance then you should die and be out of the gene pool. He told me that he heard that privately from others over and over. So it's out there and it is hateful. Sadly fixing it and healthcare for all of us, would make the system wildly less expensive (sigh). Thanks for advocating!!!
A clarification: Medicaid expansion would cover about 1,000,000 people. It would leave the other 4,000,000-or-so with no healthcare coverage. This is why universal care is needed. In the case of Texas, that will likely require the feds to force the issue with Medicare for All legislation -- which Biden has vowed to veto if it ever got through Congress.
Alan,
This may be a naïve question, but here it is. You are advocating one payer, state-based healthcare, so that states do not have to depend on the federal government to enact healthcare for all.
However, you are asking readers to support a bill in Congress that grants all of the waivers needed to make such plans work. This looks to me like an instance of asking supporters to bang their heads against a closed door. With a slim Republican majority in the House of Representatives, no such bill will pass.
Is there a way that states can apply for the needed waivers without the enactment of a bill in Congress?
Thanks Gary, There is a way. each state can apply for all the individual waivers. This only simplifies the process. Of course, all of this is uphill as we are struggling to keep democracy on its feet.