Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't think so. When Obamacare passed they had the support of every democrat and the reps were locked out using the nuclear option. Democrats had the opportunity under Obama to put national healthcare in place and missed the ball. At that time every member of Congress on the Dems side was lock step with anything Obama wanted to do with Reed and Pelosi leading the charge.
No filibuster was allowed. The nuclear option was used to pass Obamacare. They could have done the same thing for national healthcare instead of Obamacare but didn't.
That's because many in the Democratic Party are owned by large healthcare companies. They didn't believe in so they passed a mandate FORCING Americans to buy overpriced private coverage from these companies.
Obamacare did help cover people who didnt have coverage before and for that its laudable. However, it hit a lot of other people in the pockets due to mandates and increasing coverage pricing on the other end.
Many people seem to either side with the corporations or business interests, while others side with the government, not realising that they are so entangled with one another. In the end, its the common working man who gets screwed.
Oh great. We know how the government runs things. There is no bottom line to meet and get very little for what they pay for.
Well, reality is that every civilized country on this planet provides healthcare for it's citizens except for us. We still like to make believe doctors make housecalls and if you get sick, your insurance company covers you. It's all a bunch of crap. The biggest reason people file for bankruptcy is because they can't afford medical bills even though they have insurance. How insane is that?
Obviously health insurance is there to benefit the insurance companies, not the general public. Even many if not most insurance plans through employers are greatly lacking in paying for medical expenses until the insured forks out an outrageous deductible and even then they'll only cover a percentage of the actual bill. Even with insurance, many if not most Americans end up with a huge debt they can't pay.
People don't choose to become sick and healthcare shouldn't be a luxury.
We've proven that Medicare works. Throw the insurance companies a bone with supplemental plans for people who want/can afford it, and offer Medicare for all.
We've proven that Medicare works. Throw the insurance companies a bone with supplemental plans for people who want/can afford it, and offer Medicare for all.
Also, Trump (love him or hate him) is a supporter of nationalized healthcare and is on record in favor of it. He wouldn't oppose a well thought out bill proposed by dems.
“We must have universal healthcare,” wrote Trump. “I’m a conservative on most issues but a liberal on this one. We should not hear so many stories of families ruined by healthcare expenses.”
The goal of health care reform, wrote Trump, should be a system that looks a lot like Canada. “Doctors might be paid less than they are now, as is the case in Canada, but they would be able to treat more patients because of the reduction in their paperwork,” he writes.
Employers should contribute to National Healthcare fund as well as individuals. Government should reimburse individuals at the least 75% of their care. If having Cancer or some other type of long term care 100% Is covered. Individuals in the military active duty, veterans at VA facilities, mental health services at a non-profit/State facility, those on disability, homeless, or over over the cats of 65 receive 100% reimbursement guaranteed. Individuals can still buy premium insurance if they want and utilize health savings accounts. Something similar to France's system.
Also, Trump (love him or hate him) is a supporter of nationalized healthcare and is on record in favor of it. He wouldn't oppose a well thought out bill proposed by dems.
It would be interesting to see what he could do with a Democrat-controlled House and Senate....
If you look at the numbers, he doesn't need a Democrat controlled House and Senate to pass this. He needs the vast majority of the Dems and a handful of Reps in both houses.
That would alienate most of the Democratic Party at the time. When the ACA passed, there were still a few who sided with the GOP. Plus on the Senate side, there had to be concessions to satisfy 1 moderate GOP senator for the 60th vote. National healthcare wouldn't be able to pass and the GOP would be able to fillibuster.
Sure single payer is the goal but there's a political reality too. Have to play the game, one small step at a time.
If there were 60 progressive senators, that would be a different story but, that's not reality lol.
Republicans and Democrats should be pushing for universal healthcare.
Business should jump on board, it'd save them a lot of money.
Individuals should jump on board, it'd save them a lot of money.
We already pay for universal healthcare... and then we pay for it again all over out of pocket.
We have a fragmented, highly inefficient system that is no where near the best in the world.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
