RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

Galindez writes: "Bernie Sanders' proposal of Medicare for All will cover everything. Single payer is what works around the world and can work here. Bernie released his health care plan just hours before Sunday's debate. The Clinton campaign is critical of his past legislation in Congress that would have put the states in charge. Bernie's new plan is administered by the federal government, not by the states."

The Democratic candidates faced off in Charleston, South Carolina, Sunday evening. (photo: Randall Hill/Reuters)
The Democratic candidates faced off in Charleston, South Carolina, Sunday evening. (photo: Randall Hill/Reuters)

Hillarycare Won't Cover Everyone, Berniecare Will

By Scott Galindez, Reader Supported News

18 January 16


hile Hillary Clinton has made statements in the past in support of single-payer health care, she has never proposed it. Even in 1993, when she chaired Bill Clinton’s special commission on “universal" health care, she didn’t propose a plan that would have covered everyone. Like Obamacare, it had a mandate that said everyone has to buy into a private plan. She called it universal, but like Obamacare it would not have led to everyone getting health care.

Politicians have thrown around the term “universal health care” around, but rarely have they proposed it.

Hillary’s current plan is to defend the Affordable Care Act (ACA) against Republican efforts to repeal it. According to her website, she is “committed to building on delivery system reforms in the Affordable Care Act that improve value and quality care for Americans.”

Bernie Sanders also would not repeal Obamacare without first passing a better plan. But if you listen to Hillary, you would think Bernie is ready to throw everyone off their health care. That couldn’t be further from truth.

Single-payer government-run health care is the only way we get to 100% coverage of every American. Insurance companies love the mandate, since it means people have to buy insurance, but the mandate does not lead to lower premiums and deductibles. Don’t get me wrong, I support Obamacare and have benefited from it, but I have an employer that is giving me $300 a month for health care. But as I sit here in my hospital bed, I still dread the portion of my hospital bill that I will have to pay. I am worried that if I can’t pay, I might lose my health care.

According to Bernie’s website:

The Affordable Care Act was a critically important step towards the goal of universal health care. Thanks to the ACA, more than 17 million Americans have gained health insurance. Millions of low-income Americans have coverage through expanded eligibility for Medicaid that now exists in 31 states. Young adults can stay on their parents’ health plans until they’re 26. All Americans can benefit from increased protections against lifetime coverage limits and exclusion from coverage because of pre-existing conditions. Bernie was on the U.S. Senate committee that helped write the ACA.

But as we move forward, we must build upon the success of the ACA to achieve the goal of universal health care. Twenty-nine million Americans today still do not have health insurance and millions more are underinsured and cannot afford the high copayments and deductibles charged by private health insurance companies that put profits before people.

Bernie Sanders’ proposal of Medicare for All will cover everything. Single payer is what works around the world and can work here. Bernie released his health care plan just hours before Sunday’s debate. The Clinton campaign is critical of his past legislation in Congress that would have put the states in charge. Bernie’s new plan is administered by the federal government, not by the states.

Under Obamacare som states have shortchanged their residents by refusing to set up exchanges or expand Medicaid. I am in Iowa, where there are no platinum plans. I am one who has high premiums and co-pays. I know single payer would save me money. I am willing to pay higher taxes for single-payer health care. I will save money.

According to the plan posted on his website, under the Sanders plan the marginal income tax rate would be:

  • 37 percent on income between $250,000 and $500,000.

  • 43 percent on income between $500,000 and $2 million.

  • 48 percent on income between $2 million and $10 million. (In 2013, only 113,000 households, the top 0.08 percent of taxpayers, had income between $2 million and $10 million.)

  • 52 percent on income above $10 million. (In 2013, only 13,000 households, just 0.01 percent of taxpayers, had income exceeding $10 million.)

This plan would be partly paid for by:

  • A 6.2 percent income-based health care premium paid by employers.

  • A 2.2 percent income-based premium paid by households.

  • This year, a family of four taking the standard deduction can have income up to $28,800 and not pay this tax under this plan. A family of four making $50,000 a year taking the standard deduction would only pay $466 this year.

These additional elements would pay for the remainder of the plan:

  • Progressive income tax rates.

  • Taxing capital gains and dividends the same as income from work.

  • Limit tax deductions for rich.

  • The Responsible Estate Tax

  • Savings from health tax expenditures.

So it would be accurate to say taxes will go up, but the cost is offset by the end of premiums and co-pays. All you will have to do is go to the doctor. The bill will be paid for by the government. You won’t have to pay a dime.

All I see in Hillary Clinton’s health care plan is that she will fight to preserve and improve Obamacare. She will also address rising prescription drug costs.

According to Bernie’s website, his plan “will cover the entire continuum of health care, from inpatient to outpatient care; preventive to emergency care; primary care to specialty care, including long-term and palliative care; vision, hearing and oral health care; mental health and substance abuse services; as well as prescription medications, medical equipment, supplies, diagnostics and treatments. Patients will be able to choose a health care provider without worrying about whether that provider is in-network and will be able to get the care they need without having to read any fine print or trying to figure out how they can afford the out-of-pocket costs.”

So unless your employer is providing you with a great health care plan, you will save money on health,care. It is clear to me that we will get more and pay less for health care under Bernie Sanders.

Scott Galindez attended Syracuse University, where he first became politically active. The writings of El Salvador's slain archbishop Oscar Romero and the on-campus South Africa divestment movement converted him from a Reagan supporter to an activist for Peace and Justice. Over the years he has been influenced by the likes of Philip Berrigan, William Thomas, Mitch Snyder, Don White, Lisa Fithian, and Paul Wellstone. Scott met Marc Ash while organizing counterinaugural events after George W. Bush's first stolen election. Scott will be spending a year covering the presidential election from Iowa.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News. your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

+58 # indian weaver 2016-01-18 12:48
Europe already had single payer federal health care when I first visited in Spring 1969! That is 47 years ago, and it was in place even before I visited. It's a no brainer. We could cut 10% defense spending to pay for it and still have money leftover! It's a no brainer for all except fascist terrorist states like the usa, the most backward of all 2nd class nations - now approaching Third World status, not a member of the 1st World nations anymore (never was whenever compared to Europe since the early 50s). The difference in culture is remarkable if you spend time in Europe, so much more safe and friendly than the USA, due to universal health care and gun control. Can't really compare the ambience in Europe with the exceedingly violent, depraved culture in Amerika created by the 1% - the government, banks, war machine and energy industry rulers.
+1 # Polisage 2016-01-20 16:34
I worked on Hillary's Health Care Task Force. At one of our first meetings, we were told "Single payer is not an option." When a national news magazine (was it Newsweek?) said HRC's plan would require a 4 percent payroll tax, I remember that we had a meeting and were told that the real payroll tax would be more like 2 percent. That was higher than the Medicare payroll tax. Given the risk pool that Medicare now covers, she was pushing universal health care for a population with lower net risk at a higher cost. This was after raiding Medicaid funds, block grants, etc. Costing this thing took a lot of imagination (I remember our Sunday meetings). We looked for tax sources.

Bernie's Medicare for All makes a lot of sense. We really need universal coverage. Anyone who has seen what the uninsured are billed vs. the allowable Medicare caps understands this.
+56 # smilodon1 2016-01-18 13:21
Roll back the Reagan tax cuts for the rich and fund Medicare for all entirely from a modest income tax increase. To me that's the simplest way to do it. Cover everything except vanity surgery. If you want to sculpt your body to look like Barbie, Winnie the Pooh, or Darth Maul, it's on your dime.
+17 # Cassandra2012 2016-01-18 16:14
Quoting smilodon1:
Roll back the Reagan tax cuts for the rich and fund Medicare for all entirely from a modest income tax increase. To me that's the simplest way to do it. Cover everything except vanity surgery. If you want to sculpt your body to look like Barbie, Winnie the Pooh, or Darth Maul, it's on your dime.

No penis enlargement either!
+24 # CL38 2016-01-18 16:21
What Hillary ignores (therefore, lies about) is that while they'll be a small tax increase, NO ONE WILL BE PAYING FOR HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUMS! People will actually save $, even while paying a small tax increase.
+2 # indian weaver 2016-01-19 08:03
Model ours after Europe's single payer plan, using our Medicare as the foundation. No need to re-invent any wheels. Just use the same old round wheels, they work for 100s of millions in Europe.
+38 # Mainiac 2016-01-18 14:36
Most countries with health care for all do not cover both dental care and eye care. They choose one or the other. Bernie’s plan covers both. If one had to choose, I would recommend dental care because many people short-change their teeth.

Whenever I visit my daughter and her family in London I see how easy it is to get medical services.

We have been so ignorant to not have insisted on this when HST was president.
-43 # Old Liberal 2016-01-18 14:40
As far as I know most on the left, including Hillary Clinton and me, agree that in the abstract a single payer healthcare system is the way to go. The problem is that the fight to get there from where we now are would entail a humongous fight that a) we'd probably lose, and b) that would distract us (our political system) from other basic issue such as global warming, frighteningly extreme economic inequity, dissolving infrastructure, and so forth. HC is right--that is not a fight that we want to get into now; let's just, for now, be satisfied with incremental improvements.
For whatever relevance it may have, I am, for now, neither a Clinton nor a Sanders supporter, but am waiting to see how the race unfolds.
+48 # Saberoff 2016-01-18 15:15
Hillary Clinton does not want to fight... Fine, her ilk doesn't have to; never have. Fighting for Everything We have, is all the rest of us do.

Weaver makes the point, above: for a fraction of our defense budget (500 Billion annually = 1.7 Billion per day!) we could cover health care for everyone, and send all eligible kids to school too, for free! And outside of empire building, why do we do it? Defense? I don't think so.

So, there you go... Don't want to raise taxes, like the rest of the sane world has? Then just forget the fight and reduce the pentagon budget by a few billion.
# Guest 2016-01-19 01:49
This comment has been deleted by Administrator
+9 # Reductio Ad Absurdum 2016-01-19 13:06
Well, on THIS issue, based on HER words, she has no will to fight for the very thing she has agreed to in the past — that we need universal health care to have true health care reform.

So knock it off with calling us kiddies — the only bullshit is coming from Hillary.
-4 # bmiluski 2016-01-20 11:34
B.S. reduction...... Hillary does want Universal Health care....I say her say it. She is just more pragmatic about how to get there. Bernie's plan depends a lot on the repugs voting for raising taxes. Hillary's does not.
+35 # Reductio Ad Absurdum 2016-01-18 16:11
Medicare D was W.'s gift to Big Pharma, and Obamacare is still a gift to Big Insurance. The ACA was a first viable STEP, not a SOLUTION, not even close, and The Republicans crippled important elements of it by not expanding Medicaid in half the states.

The ACA was a stab at health INSURANCE reform, not health CARE reform. America has to do better at health CARE reform, whether Hillary wants to do better or not, and if Hillary wants to tackle only one challenge at a time, then she's running for the wrong job.
+2 # Karlus58 2016-01-18 18:29
Well, I believe those things are not as important as Healthcare.
+19 # reiverpacific 2016-01-18 19:16
I say ol' Liberal chappie;
So stay on the shelf and wait until you see which way the wind's blown' eh?
It very much depends on what you consider worth fighting for -and I'm sure Bernie Sanders knows he's IN for a fight -he's been around for long time fighting in the Belly of the greedy, seemingly insatiable, all-devouring Beast -and giving it an ulcer at times.
You can hardly say that for his Blue-Dawg-Dem' opponent.
I don't even get to vote but my American wife does and we've donated to Bernie's campaign from our anything but lucrative means, as we can talk for the bitter experience of being bankrupted by my getting seriously sick and almost croakin' WITH self-employed private insurance (which is why I've always referred to myself as self-exploited) ; just another sad example of the statistic that the joke of a healthcare non-system here is one of the principle causes of bankruptcy in the "Land of the Free" -if you can afford it.
I'd rather hold to King Harry V's inspirational exhortation to this few -this happy band of brothers (and in this case sisters -perhaps even more so) before Agincourt;
"That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his passport shall be made
And crowns for convoy put into his purse:
We would not die (Fight) in that man's company
That fears his fellowship to (fight) with us."
Have fun on that shelf Bubba!
# Guest 2016-01-19 01:19
This comment has been deleted by Administrator
-3 # bmiluski 2016-01-20 11:37
BRAVA, NRESQ.....well said. I find Bernie supporters insufferably condescending and unable to listen to anything that might be realistic.
+3 # Scott Galindez 2016-01-20 22:35
Really? The Clinton camp is the one going negative....
+16 # jwl 2016-01-18 19:57
From another old liberal: the only way anything gets changed from the current status quo is if Congress gets changed, and goes along with completely trashing the current financing of elections. I submit that Secretary Clinton cannot envision changing the Congress, hence makes the argument she does. If Senator Sanders were the Democratic party's candidate I have no doubt that the turnout of Democratic voters would be vastly greater than if it were Secretary Clinton. That's the way the Congress gets changed, and the only way what Senator Sanders wants gets done. That's my assessment, anyhow.
# Guest 2016-01-19 01:46
This comment has been deleted by Administrator
-37 # bmiluski 2016-01-18 14:41
YES, Bernie's plan sounds wonderful. But people, let's not forget the repugs. They want to dump ObamaCare. Why the hell would they support Bernie's plan.
We should keep building onto ObamaCare until it's the Universal Health Care plan we want. Bernie's really good at appealing to our emotions and single payer is emotional. However, let's be realistic, how is he going to convince the tea-bag repugs in congress?
+54 # Scott Galindez 2016-01-18 15:22
It will be a fight and if we lose we have Obamacare...

We shouldn't duck the fight because its too hard like hillary said last night...
As Fredrick Douglass said no progress comes without struggle
+18 # sayenitnow 2016-01-18 15:51
It is better to "fight" smarter.
We learned this in the sixties... !!!
+13 # jwl 2016-01-18 20:04
No. What we learned in the sixties was that political fights are never completely won. What we accomplished in the sixties has been chipped away at since the eighties, and we're now pretty much back where the country was in the Glided Age. That's our lesson: we can't ever let up, if we want to achieve progressive goals.
+1 # bmiluski 2016-01-20 11:40
Boy JWL, you can say that again. Look at what's happened to the rights women had regarding the control over their own bodies.
+16 # Reductio Ad Absurdum 2016-01-18 16:22
In last night's debate, Bernie missed a great comeback after Hilary, apropos of zilch, listed the major things the ACA accomplished. His rejoinder should have been "You're welcome!"
+15 # Karlus58 2016-01-18 18:32
I agree, for we were never given the opportunity to fight for single-payor. Our lovely Democrats never put up that fight. Hillary was one of them. You must know the rest. And recall Leiberman...he' s been a lobby for healthcare insurance cartels forever.
# Guest 2016-01-19 01:23
This comment has been deleted by Administrator
+3 # joeybagofdonuts 2016-01-19 12:14
ONLY WITH A REPUBLICAN HOUSE, SENATE, AND PRESIDENT COULD WE LOSE OBAMACARE. The ACA didn't get done without a fight, but the fight isn't over. It is the same as voting rights. When the 15th amendment was passed blacks were given the right to vote, but could they actually vote? No. That is why there was a fight for the Voting Rights Act. Is there still free access to vote? No. That is why we need to keep fighting until all citizens who want to vote, can vote freely. Does this willingness to continue the fight for more and better rights diminish the legacy of Lincoln, MLK, or LBJ? No. Neither will the fight for single payer universal diminish the legacy of Obama. The ACA was a great start, but it is not good enough. There are still too many Americans who are uninsured or under-insured paying large co-pays and/or deductibles. Single-payer universal was a dream of Obama that he let go to get anything passed.
+1 # Scott Galindez 2016-01-20 22:38
Why not have the fight and defend Obamacare until We move to single payer...
+30 # CL38 2016-01-18 16:17
republicans will be against ANYTHING Democratic. Work with Bernie to see that these same obstructionists are VOTED OUT and replaced with non-racist, non-misogynist politicians.
+28 # jimallyn 2016-01-18 16:35
Quoting bmiluski:
how is he going to convince the tea-bag repugs in congress?

He isn't. WE are. You, me, and everyone else in Bernie's revolution will demand it, and vote out everyone who doesn't comply.
+10 # jcdav 2016-01-18 19:55
You better believe IF the citizens would UNASS behind Bernie and STAY standing till the reform is complete (say kill C~itizens united, Stop TPP, etal) there just might in a decade --yeah that is a lot of standing, but the effort would benefit US and our kids--an honest congress acting in the interests of the people NOT the MIC & Banks.
+8 # dbrize 2016-01-18 20:28
Quoting jimallyn:
Quoting bmiluski:
how is he going to convince the tea-bag repugs in congress?

He isn't. WE are. You, me, and everyone else in Bernie's revolution will demand it, and vote out everyone who doesn't comply.

Cut back on the caffeine.

A casual look at a red/blue map informs you the GOP isn't gonna lose the House and is unlikely to lose the Senate.

Sanders gives Dems their best chance to keep the WH because though 74, he is a fresh face on the national scene with new ideas, not wedded to the old elitist networks. He plays well to independents and swing voters without the old guard negatives surrounding Hillary.

That said, there will be no landslide winner.

If elected, Sanders will have to negotiate his "single payer" proposals and convince at least a few GOPers to come on board. This can be done. If he plays it smart.

Though many don't realize it, single payer is not some monolithic one size fits all. It's one thing in Canada and England, another in France, Denmark and Sweden and yet another in Singapore and Hong Kong. All have universal healthcare. All tailor it to their own needs, culture and financial abilities.

Sanders sells a bipartisan study committee for four or five "best of the best" to come up with an "American Plan for America". This provides some cover for GOP members. There are elements in the GOP open to SP. If the GOP loses the WH again, they will be ready to negotiate. It can happen.
+12 # lfeuille 2016-01-18 21:01
Change Congress, not our goals. What Bernie is proposing is really the minimum required to keep the middle class from sinking into poverty and allow those now in poverty to get out. All this talk about Hillary's "practically" is worthless. She simply will not do what is needed.
+29 # Working Class 2016-01-18 14:52
Single Payer is the only answer that makes sense. As a nation and as individuals we would save money, but more importantly save lives. There is no excuse for people having to worry about whether or not they can afford to go to the doctor. Too many people wait seeking medical attention due to financial concerns. This is not how a "civilized", "modern" nation should be operating. The only concern of any legitimacy is the fact there are many people who work in the medical insurance industry that would be displaced. I would propose that a Medicare For All System be put in place that lowered the age of eligibility for coverage in five year increments every year for five years. This would lower the eligibility age for Medicare to the age 40 in five years, then in the sixth year all citizens would be eligible from cradle to grave. This would allow those impacted to be retrained and placed in productive work - unlike the work they do now, which is nothing more than facilitating the ability of the private insurance industry to prosper off the needs of those needing medical attention that should be a right in a civilized society.
+11 # Cassandra2012 2016-01-18 16:16
Ah but the medical INDUSTRY would lose money.... and profit is all they (the MBAs running it) care for.
+5 # jwl 2016-01-18 20:08
Excellent thought, Working Class! A virtually painless way to phase in the Medicare for All era. It'll be fought viciously by the industry, but they'll be hard put to fight it rationally.
+6 # lfeuille 2016-01-18 21:08
No, it should be done all at once. If we give them time to pick away at it we will never get there, but once we have it is will be very difficult
for any politician to take it away.

And, there are young people who need it now. Who won't be able to pay the increasing cost of private insurance for another 5, 10, 20 years. It is discrimination against the young.
+39 # Anonymot 2016-01-18 15:14
Among my many criticisms of Obama is his "compromises" which could also be spelled
con-promises. We couldn't avoid voting for him, given the Republican competitor. But his compromises included health care which many "Democrats" excused by saying that it was better than nothing. Hillary, as we know, blew it in the '90s and she's happy with it now as Obamacare, because she wants Obama's endorsement and cares little about the public good.

I've lived part-time in several European countries since the Sixties and let me assure you, American medicine is great, except for their pill-pushing, unecessary testing, and cosmetic surgery, but so is that of the UK, France, Italy, and Portugal to my personal experience. When I come back here I'm always carrying 3 months of my blood pressure medications, because in Europe they cost about 40% of what they do here.

Bernie has the right idea. Could he get it past a Republican House or Senate? Perhaps we had better start paying attention to the congressional races, too.
+22 # CL38 2016-01-18 16:14
Bernie has always said that after he's elected it's important for people to STAY INVOLVED. Electing Democrats to Congress (no blue dogs, thanks) is critical to implementing a successful Revolution!
+4 # lfeuille 2016-01-18 21:11
Democrats or other progressives. It doesn't matter as long as they will support his agenda. Of course no Republicans will.
# Guest 2016-01-19 01:42
This comment has been deleted by Administrator
+6 # Anonymot 2016-01-19 08:12
Try compromising your breathing. Of course a democracy requires some compromises, but what we have, what Obama gave us, is not knowing when, how much, or over what to compromise.

You need to consider the difference between compromise and surrender.
0 # EternalTruth 2016-01-19 09:30
Why do you use all capital letters? It's very annoying. Please stop if you want people to read your posts.
-1 # bmiluski 2016-01-20 11:43
I believe eternal that he is frustrated with the pie in sky comments that keep giving him red thumbs.
I don't blame him.
+15 # djnova50 2016-01-18 15:32
If you want to learn more about a single payer health care system, take a look at the FAQs on the Physicians for a National Health Plan site:
+3 # Henry 2016-01-18 15:56
-27 # sayenitnow 2016-01-18 15:48
# Mr. Galindez , I think Hillary would love to run on the promise of Universal Health Care for all: But the reality is there would need to be a strong Democratic majority in both Houses to see it happen. Lets be real! Bernie is a Great motivator but not as pragmatic a leader or as well versed, and not as able to articulate plans to tackle all of the major issues. He too often sounds like a "one trick pony" on a rant. Bottom line is it is better to win the White House with someone who has some "coat tails" that can also deliver a few house and senate seats so we can keep improving on gains made. In Addition to that and maybe most importantly we must secure the Presidency to insure that the Supreme Court becomes a Progressive Liberal Court. Bernie is not the best candidate for a National Election Win Period!
# Guest 2016-01-19 01:39
This comment has been deleted by Administrator
-3 # bmiluski 2016-01-20 11:45
Thanks sayenitnow and thoughts exactly.
+2 # Scott Galindez 2016-01-20 22:43
And just who do the Repugs have to beat Bernie...He polls better than Hillary because he does better with independents than Hillary
+23 # Scott Galindez 2016-01-18 15:55
just talked to my kidney doctor and he wouldn't mind single payer for greedy reasons. If he guarentee payments he would be better off since so many people cant afford to pay so they don't pay.
+17 # Radscal 2016-01-18 17:13
Scott, would you care to share with your readers what has led to your hospitalization , and discussions with a kidney doctor?

Either way, I know I speak for many RSN readers when I wish you a speedy and long-lasting recovery.
+1 # Scott Galindez 2016-01-20 22:45
I have type 2 diabetes and m medication damaged my kidneys. Im on insulin now and doing better.
+13 # Karlus58 2016-01-18 18:36
Scott, I would gladly return back to my medical practice if single-payor, Medicare for All was finally realized! Private insurance was the problem. Medicare paid well and rates were just fine.
+29 # Scott Galindez 2016-01-18 15:56
Oh and he says its frustrating how many treatments are rejected by private insurance companies...He said it happens less from medicare.
+15 # Karlus58 2016-01-18 18:38
Absolutely true! Private insurance cartels pay what they want to, when they want to, and if they want to.
+19 # CL38 2016-01-18 16:10
"A 2.2 percent income-based premium paid by households" but NO MORE INSURANCE PREMIUM COSTS.

Hillary won't cover people (except for the 1%) in ANY area, Bernie will cover the 99%.
-1 # bmiluski 2016-01-20 11:46
NOT if you have a gerrymandered repug congress.
+19 # Kindinosaur 2016-01-18 16:38
From the standpoint of this medical provider, at the point of care, anything other than a single payer system is ineffecient. One of the pharmacists I frequently speak with said he was covering about 65 Medicare supplement plans. All of them covering different services and different medications, They change coverage or copay arbitrarily. The computer programs that are supposed to keep track of what is covered and at what cost is not reliable. All of that leads to inefficiency and increased cost. The Affordable Care Act is a start, not a finished product. We already fought for the ACA. Why not continue the fight for something that works?
+13 # jimbo 2016-01-18 17:27
a couple of trillion dollars sit in off-shore accounts shielding over $600 billion in taxes stolen from We the People. The problem moving from the vast profits by insurance companies that are shoveled into these accounts to a universal health care system involves 'bridging', have a source of finance that allows the move. President Obama use what ever method possible to bring those stolen taxes home, and use them as the bridge. Giving huge profits to these insurance companies when millions don't have health care coverage is ignorant and insane, and needs to end. I call what we have the republican money machine, part of the insane profits the insurance companies get are shoveled right back to the republicans, which reinforce the existing system. Put an end to it, now. don't wait.
+2 # andyseles 2016-01-18 18:07
Please read

Old liberal and Sayentenow reflect the neoliberal,comp romising, pragmatic cynicism that supports the status quo which works for the 1% and no one else.
"Evolution," is a carrot held out to the spineless who give away the family farm.
Playing basketball, I'm betting Obama broadcasts every move.
+12 # Citizen Mike 2016-01-18 18:51
Hilary will compromise to support the interests of her corporate sponsors but Bernie will not compromise the interests of the general public to protect anyone's profits. I think it is immoral to profit from healthcare insurance. The insurance companies have proven themselves to be public enemies, let's call them what they are, bloodsuckers!
+6 # Robbee 2016-01-18 19:05
wild thing! - # bmiluski 2016-01-18 14:41 "YES, Bernie's plan sounds wonderful.

- only because it is!

"But people, let's not forget the repugs. want to dump ObamaCare. Why the hell would they support Bernie's plan.

- they don't! - check them out!

"We should keep building onto ObamaCare until it's the Universal Health Care plan we want.

- keep building onto ObamaCare until it's the Universal Health Care plan we want? - that's your plan, not hill's - hill has NO plan to build on obamneycare!

"Bernie's really good at appealing to our emotions and single payer is emotional.

- what the hell does that mean? it's what we want? what's wrong with that? is it time now to stop trying for what we want? aside from hill, of course, is that YOUR IDEA TOO?

"However, let's be realistic, how is he going to convince the tea-bag repugs in congress?"

- i have reason to doubt that this disgusting congress is ready to do anything about anything like healthcare - they are stuck in a repeal obamneycare death spiral!

- i have less reason to doubt that the repub electorate is ready to do anything about anything - many may love single-payer!

kindly confess that bernie voted for and supported obamneycare, as the lesser progressive solution to 40 million uninsured americans, and now wants to cover the remaining 30 million, okay?

how is hill having NO PLAN other than to hang onto obamneycare, better than bernie's plan to hang onto it only until america can do better?
+5 # lfeuille 2016-01-18 21:16
You can't turn Obamacare into universal coverage. It is based on private insurance company PROFIT. The only way to get to universal coverage is to mandate it and to cut out the profit and admin cost of private insurance.
+7 # Robbee 2016-01-18 19:23
if there was a moment when hill lost the dem nomination to bernie, it was last week, when hill, bill and sacrificial lamb chelsea attacked bernie on single-payer, lying that bernie wanted to repeal obamneycare!

hill is trying to prove she is less progressive than bernie and doing a good job of it - it is yet to be seen whether her false-flag attacks on single-payer will actually do her any good with voters, as dems tend to vote progressive - go bernie!

Clinton Attacks Produce Windfall of Campaign Cash for Sanders
Karen Tumulty, The Washington Post 14 January 16

Sanders’s … campaign … accused the Clinton campaign of making “vicious and coordinated attacks” on Sanders’s health-care plan, which calls for a government-run system.

… daughter, Chelsea Clinton, got into the act, bashing Sanders during her first campaign appearance on behalf of her mother this election season.

“Senator Sanders wants to dismantle Obamacare, dismantle the [Children’s Health Insurance Program], dismantle Medicare and dismantle private insurance,” Chelsea Clinton said at a stop in New Hampshire. “I worry if we give Republicans Democratic permission to do that, we’ll go back to an era — before we had the Affordable Care Act — that would strip millions and millions and millions of people off their health insurance.”

.… Single-payer health care has long been a cherished hope of liberals, who see it as the only way to assure that all Americans receive medical coverage.
-8 # Rain17 2016-01-18 23:27
I know this question won't be liked. But assuming that somehow Bernie wins the nomination and then the general election--I just don't see America rushing to elect a self-proclaimed "Socialist" President--how does anyone expect it to get through a Congress that is likely to remain under GOP control?
0 # Scott Galindez 2016-01-20 22:47
If Bernie wins he will have the Senate too....
+3 # Robbee 2016-01-18 19:26
says - # Billy Bob 2016-01-14 11:19 "... Clinton's ... attacking him FROM THE RIGHT."

- to me this is the most important point! - in essence hill defends obamacare against single-payer!

she's supporting a private, profit-based middle-man, healthcare system that affords medical care for an additional dozen millions of working americans against a healthcare system that affords medical care for all americans - she draws a bright line - she shows how she is markedly less progressive than bernie - she shows a distinct policy difference from bernie! (note that obama beat hill in 2008 while championing single-payer! deja vu!)

in the overall shift of america to a more progressive society, hill defines herself as the healthcare moderate leaning to conservative - (yet not so far right that she wants to repeal obamacare with no alternative in sight! - she’s no zomblican!)

overall i find it helpful to bernie, not harmful to bernie, that hill has staked out a clear difference from bernie! - they will debate the issue and bernie will win! - go bernie!

- i posted the above before sunday's debate when bernie killed hill on healthcare!
+7 # jcdav 2016-01-18 20:08
HRC is IMHO a lie representing a lie...she has a demonstrated life long all but sociopathic habit of lies, misrepresentati ons, reversals and other obfuscations ....if one looks at her backers one can clearly see who she will end up representing... If you want representation UNASS NOW Bernie is up for he job ARE YOU UP FOR WORKING TO GET HIM ELECTED?
# Guest 2016-01-19 01:37
This comment has been deleted by Administrator
0 # Scott Galindez 2016-01-20 22:48
Bernie will defend the AXA too...
-9 # Shades of gray matter 2016-01-18 20:18
S.Galindez: "So unless your employer is providing you with a great health care plan, you will save money on health,care. It is clear to me that 'we' will get more and pay less for health care under Bernie Sanders." AND THERE IS THE 900LB GORILLA in Bernie's living room, the Med4All poison pill. Tens of millions are content NOW with employer provided insurance, plus the Obamacare safety net. The little babies can stop reading now, click thumbs down, & go about your infantile Revolution. I THINK Bernie has misread his support, most of which is NOT over insurance, but Wall Street criminality, abuse, political corruption.
+5 # lfeuille 2016-01-18 21:19
I think you are wrong. Every year people see their costs go up and their coverage go down. They can see the writing on the wall. I think the vast majority are dissatisfied. Only the rich think they are getting a good deal.

And then there are the polls showing 81% of Dems and 58% of the population at large favor single-payer.
-6 # Rain17 2016-01-18 23:26
Of course the question when phrased "do you support single-payer" will poll well. But when phrased "are you willing to pay higher taxes for single-payer", I bet support drops significantly.

Single-payer will remain a political nonstarter until American opinions toward government, specifically social welfare programs, significantly change. You have too many Americans whose belief is:

"I don't want my tax dollars paying for those peoples' healthcare (i.e. minorities on welfare, illegal immigrants, and other unpopular groups) at my expense. It's not my fault they won't get a job. I shouldn't have to pay for other peoples' healthcare".

And until those opinions change I suspect that single-payer is a political nonstarter.
+5 # lfeuille 2016-01-19 00:58
The question: Are you willing to pay $500 more in taxes in order to save $5,000 in premiums, copays and deductables? will poll VERY well. This is a more honest formulation of the question.
-3 # Rain17 2016-01-19 19:26
Well I wish you were right, but I don't think you are. But even if you were you would still encounter people who would say:

1. I don't want to lose the right to pick my own doctor (even though today insurance companies largely make that same decision).

2. I don't want the government to take over healthcare and make medical decisions.

3. I don't want the government coming between me and my doctor.

4. I don't want to have to report to some scary-looking Soviet-style building replete with hostile bureaucrats whose only goal in life is to come between me and my doctor.

5. I'll have to wait three years to get that knee replacement!

6. I'll have to wait six months to get an appointment, while "those people" rush to the front of the line.

Again, as I've said in most of these threads, until American attitudes toward government, especially social programs, significantly change, single-payer is likely a political nonstarter. You have too many Americans who "don't want to pay for other peoples' stuff.
+2 # Scott Galindez 2016-01-20 22:53
The answer is to ask them if they want the profit driven insurance industry to make those decisions.
+8 # Radscal 2016-01-18 21:52
The last poll I saw reported 80% of likely Democratic voters want Universal Single Payer.

But that is only one plank in Sanders' platform, all of which are favored by substantial majorities, including "independents" and even many Republicans.
+5 # dquandle 2016-01-18 20:55
Whattaya mean. Hillarycare will guarantee coverage for everyone the only exceptions being if you are a man, a woman, or a child...
+5 # lfeuille 2016-01-18 21:24

I really hope you get better soon. Before you lose too much money to the current health care non-system. It's too bad we don't already have single-payer. That would be one less thing to worry about while your trying to recover.
+5 # Robbee 2016-01-18 21:42
more like a 98 pound gorilla? - let's examine - employers have been in a decades-long struggle to shift health insurance expense to their employees - none but congress has no-copay, no-deductible, single-payer coverage - those with employer coverage pray that their kids can get such ever-shrinking coverage

says - # Shades of gray matter 2016-01-18 20:18 "... THERE IS THE 900LB GORILLA in Bernie's living room ... Tens of millions are content NOW with employer provided insurance, plus the Obamacare safety net. The little babies can stop reading now, click thumbs down, & go about your infantile Revolution. I THINK Bernie has misread his support, most of which is NOT over insurance, but Wall Street criminality, abuse, political corruption."

- now i'm not saying all employers will refund to all employees all the premiums they save on fringe benefit health insurance - and pay it to employees as wages - BUT, TO THE EXTENT THEY DO, NET AFTER TAXES IT WILL STILL MORE THAN COVER THE EMPLOYEE SHARE OF NO DEDUCTIBLE, NO CO-PAY CARE THAT SINGLE-PAYER WILL AFFORD TO ALL, EVEN THEIR KIDS! EVEN AFTER THEY LEAVE HOME! AND THEIR KIDS KIDS!


bernie can whup your gorilla with one hand tied behind his back! just watch him! - go bernie!
-2 # Shades of gray matter 2016-01-18 22:05
The only polls that even BEGIN to count are those on election day. I think it would be only honest to restrict our discussion to the likely behavior of those who ACTUALLY VOTE, including in midterm elections. Dems had massive House super majority, filibuster proof Senate, landslide Prez with Mandate, and they couldn't even inject a 3 state 6 year experimental public option. Tens of millions of people with pretty decent employer provided insurance are typically ACTUAL VOTERS. V-O-T-E-R-S. They ain't gonna like BernTax. Besides, many of those now not covered are choosing to not apply, even for virtually free, or extremely reasonably priced, subsidized Obamacare. Employers are NOT going to pay the new BernieTax, +$15/hr., AND rebate private insurance payments to employees. I, too, prefer Single Payer, but I urge you to be open minded as you think this through. The focus now should be, as Uncle Bernie says, on inappropriate influence in the political process and marketplace. There are 3 main issues in this campaign: (1)restore humane democracy, (2) restore humane democracy, (3) restore humane democracy. Absent that, all else is for naught, sound and fury signifying NOTHING.
# Guest 2016-01-19 01:30
This comment has been deleted by Administrator
+2 # Robbee 2016-01-18 22:11
than hill picking the wrong fight, in the wrong place, the dem primaries, well, life does not get any better! - go barnie!
-5 # Rain17 2016-01-18 23:22
I know this isn't going to be a popular comment here, but I wonder how anyone expects this plan to get through Congress if Bernie somehow were to win the nomination and ultimately the general election. As the GOP will likely control Congress after the 2016 elections this plan is likely dead on arrival--and will go nowhere.

I'll say it again as I've said each time an article on healthcare reform has appeared on this site. If we are ever to get single-payer American attitudes toward government, especially social programs, are going to have to significantly change. Right now you simply have too many Americans whose belief is:

"I don't want my tax dollars going to pay for 'those peoples' healthcare' (i.e., minorities on welfare, illegal immigrants, and other unpopular groups) at my expense. I shouldn't have to pay for other peoples' healthcare."

And that's even before you consider other people who are afraid that they'll "lose the right to pick their own doctor" or "have to wait three years to get that knee replacement". Yet there are others who fear "long waiting lines" and "bureaucrats making medical decisions".

That the ACA even passed is a miracle. But my larger point is that, until the number of Americans who believe what I wrote above decreases significantly, single-payer will remain politically a nonstarter in this country.
# Guest 2016-01-19 01:32
This comment has been deleted by Administrator
-1 # Rain17 2016-01-19 19:54
NRESQ, I think you are right about most of the younger kids. Here is the larger point. Many of them can afford the luxury of pursuing that "revolution", which will likely mean electoral disaster for the Democrats should Sanders be the nominee.

To some of them living out this "revolution" amounts to nothing more than acting out a fantasy of radicalism. Mark my words, once some of them actually have to get a real job and earn a living, watch some of them become conservative.

Look at David Horowitz, who was once a New Left radical in the late 1960s and 70s and became a conservative by the mid-1980s. I suspect that some of the most ardent McGovern supporters from 1972 gladly pulled the lever for Ronald Reagan in 1980. By the mid 1980s they nostalgically looked back on the "radicalism of their youth".

Odds are the at the ones who are willing "to bet the house" are likely the ones with good health insurance and jobs. Much like I said about most who supported Nader in 2000, they're not going to be suffering the consequences that they want to inflict on everyone else. So they can afford the luxury of "betting the house and everything else" because, if they bust, they're not going to be suffering the consequences.

I like Bernie and agree with some of his ideas. However, I'm just also realistic enough to know that, at least right now, a majority of Americans does not support his agenda--or at least not to the extent that others on this board thinks.
+1 # Scott Galindez 2016-01-20 23:01
I don't think you have been to a Bernie rally....Bernie 's support is diverse in age...and while the media continues spread the lie about his lack of support among people of color, he is up to 32 % of the vote among people of color...up from 3% in August....Much of Bernie's support stopped voting and he has given them a reason to come back to the polls.
+3 # Shades of gray matter 2016-01-19 00:50
I love Bernie Sanders. I love his supporters. I love their decency. But his supporters should perhaps pay more careful attention to what he says, and how he conducts himself. He is very, very smart. Extremely respectful. He keeps using very conditional words about when we can expect single payer. He KNOWS it is no time soon. He keeps saying that the PREREQUISITE for program changes is a political revolution, a SUSTAINED MOVEMENT, like the multi-decade Civil Rights Movement. I fear that far too many people want Bernie to win, if by only one vote, so that He can work miracles while they go back to political inaction. Folks, CHILDREN risked their lives for De-segregation. Parents risked their lives and the lives of their precious children for De-segregation. Many died in the struggle.
Like some before him, Bernie is our teacher, not our miracle working savior. Listen. Observe. The anti-war movement mobilized MILLIONS to take ACTION, over and over. Dedicated activists were arrested today after shutting down the SF Bay Bridge. WE will have to mobilize MILLIONS of activists in risky endeavors over and over and over, for decades. Get prepared.
# Guest 2016-01-19 01:35
This comment has been deleted by Administrator
-3 # Rain17 2016-01-19 20:02
My issue with Sanders is that I just don't think he can win the general election. And unlike other people here I'm not willing to risk everything on the hope--and/or fantasy--that America will elect a "self-proclaime d Socialist" president. I honestly think most people on this board simply don't want to accept that, to large segments of the electorate, Sanders is simply a nonstarter.

I just don't think that Sanders can survive the inevitable torrent of red-baiting and negative ads that are almost certain to air against him. Too many Americans equate Socialism with Communism. But there are some people here who live in denial, cover their ears, and say "lalalala--I can't hear you" when anyone dares to make that point.

But the other point you make is correct. What do people expect Sanders to do should he, against all odds, become President? Do they magically expect him to enact his agenda with a Republican-cont rolled House and Senate? Do they really think that, somehow, he's going to wave a magic wand--and everything will fall into place?

And then, much like how people turned against Obama, as soon as it becomes clear that Sanders can't do everything in two yeras, these same people will come back here and scream "he is a sellout". Some of them will then sit out, stay at home, and/or vote third party in the midterm elections, giving more power to the GOP.
+1 # Scott Galindez 2016-01-21 17:54
Poll after poll show Bernie does better against all the republicans than Hillary. Too many independents just plain don't like her. independents in New Hampshire were polled and Bernie had the highest approval rating, even against the Republicans.

Bernie is the most electable candidate.
0 # bluebluesdancer 2016-01-19 00:55
I am all 'for' a single payer Universal Healthcare system, but I am NOT for a system that is like the one in UK.
If we model ours on that system we will have a disaster!
Let us look instead at all the other medical single payer systems in use in Europe.
I know about England. I grew up there and have seen several friends and family go through horrific mistakes and even death because the system is not good.
0 # lfeuille 2016-01-19 01:03
Bernie's plan is not like the UK. But their National Health have been decimated by decades of Tories and Laborites who act like Tories. Their system can be save if they elect the right people. The are pretty much in same place were are in their politics.
+2 # indian weaver 2016-01-19 08:07
A friend was recently vacationing in France. She broke her arm in an accident. She went to a hospital, had the arm taken care of, and spent a night in the hospital for observation and initial recovery. Didn't cost her a cent! Just one of millions of examples of the European single payer health care system, helps in that way too. I was surprised in a way. I don't know all the details of the European system but I know it worked for her perfectly. She was amazed. Such is the comparison between our criminally profitable system for health care companies and not much for We The People left over except pain and heartbreak, not to mention early deaths and related tragedies (mostly dying of problems you can't afford to get treated, early onset diseases that become fatal over time, and injuries etc.).
+2 # Robbee 2016-01-19 12:13
what is true history of single-payer in america? is it? as says - # Rain17 2016-01-18 23:22 "... That the ACA even passed is a miracle. But my larger point is that, until the number of Americans who believe what I wrote above decreases significantly, single-payer will remain politically a nonstarter in this country."

are tens of millions of health-insured employees content to go along with obamneycare, which the GOP vows to repeal with, as yet, 5 years later, no proposed alternative? CONTINUALLY AT RISK OF LOSING COVERAGE IF THEY LOSE A JOB - WITH, PERHAPS, NO COVERAGE FOR PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS - WITH CO-PAYS AND LARGE DEDUCTIBLES? - are these tens of millions of hostages to jobs content? when, at less expense, they would not be hostages and would be entitled to care, as a right?

we got obamneycare when 54 senators and obama expressly demanded single-payer - when 6 blue dog senators, needed to defeat filibuster, insisted on private healthcare, to try to save their jobs - that's our miracle? look at what obama demanded until 6 blue dogs got in the way! he was single-payer!

the real question is how long will tens of millions of health-insured employees remain content with private healthcare - when will they decide to act in their own self-interest?

bernie will make the case! hill will not! my point is that it is better to make the case than to shut up about healthcare and propose no way to improve on obamneycare - go bernie!
-1 # Rain17 2016-01-19 20:08
Robbee, if you were to ask most people "if they were happy with their health insurance", most of them would probably say yes. Most people who do have employer provided health insurance are happy with it. They take it for granted.

At that stage the issue of the "uninsured" doesn't matter to them because they have coverage. To them the uninsured mostly consist of "those people"--i.e., "minorities on welfare, illegal/undocum ented immigrants, those who don't want to work, and other unpopular groups". They don't think that they are at risk of losing their coverage because "they are responsible" unlike "those people".

Only if/until some of them run into a situation where their insurance won't cover a condition or if/until some of them end up with a large hospital bill for an emergency that wasn't their fault will reconsider their positions. At that point the issue is no longer abstract, but real to them. When they actually suffer at the hands of the US healthcare system the damage becomes concrete, not abstract anymore.

But the vast majority of those with employer provided health insurance are happy with it because they haven't been faced with large hospital bills.
+2 # Robbee 2016-01-19 12:44
political revolution that bernie demands cannot be won by his election alone - his election would only mark an early indicator of its popularity

says Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog 04 January 16 "Bernie Sander’s presidential campaign is part of this mobilization ... no single president or any other politician can accomplish what’s needed because a system caught in the spiral of wealth and power cannot be reformed from within. It can be changed only by a mass movement of citizens pushing from the outside.

“So regardless of who wins the presidency in November and which party dominates the next Congress, it is up to the rest of us to continue to organize and mobilize. Real reform will require many years of hard work from millions of us.”

then says - This Is Not Democracy. This Is Oligarchy. Bernie Sanders, Reader Supported News 05 January 16 “Here’s the truth: The economic and political systems of this country are stacked against ordinary Americans. The rich get richer and use their wealth to buy elections, and I believe that we cannot change this corrupt system by taking its money. If we’re serious about creating jobs, health care for all, climate change, and the needs of our children and the elderly, we must be serious about campaign finance reform …”
+1 # Robbee 2016-01-19 12:48
political revolution, pt. 2

“We must pass a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United … We need legislation that requires wealthy individuals and corporations who make large campaign contributions to disclose where their money is going. And more importantly, I believe we need to move towards the public funding of elections.”

does anyone here know just what "political revolution" bernie calls for? or what's revolutionary about it?

no, it's not whack-a-mole, fending-off every abuse of us 99%, whatever pops up and gores us next

as bernie puts it - “Long term, we need to go further and establish public funding of elections … American democracy is not about corporations and billionaires being able to buy candidates and elections. It is not about Wall Street and big oil or the Koch brothers and Sheldon Adelson spending billions of dollars to elect candidates who will make the rich richer and everyone else poorer ... This is not democracy. This is oligarchy. The defining principle of American democracy is ... every citizen having an equal say ... And that’s the kind of American political system we have to fight for!”

- it's overthrowing the plutoccracy that rules us! - restoring democracy! - and he's told us how we will do it!

we say we love him but, except for robert reich and i, who here on rsn supports bernie's "political revolution"? - it’s not too late! listen to bernie!
+2 # Robbee 2016-01-19 13:03
the question is - how content would tens of millions of employees be, about their expensive, private, for-profit, co-pay, deductible, healthcare - if private, for-profit, 20%-skimming, healthcare middlemen did not spend millions in customer premiums, every year, telling customers how content they should be?
0 # Robbee 2016-01-19 16:00
lotta stuff coming up -

Nate: "Bernie Sanders is the only candidate in either party with a net-positive favorability rating"

From an article on FiveThirtyEight .Com by Nate Silver:

“We’ve got an unpopular set of presidential candidates this year– Bernie Sanders is the only candidate in either party with a net-positive favorability rating — but Trump is the most unpopular of all. His favorability rating is 33 percent, as compared with an unfavorable rating of 58 percent, for a net rating of -25 percentage points. By comparison Hillary Clinton, whose favorability ratings are notoriously poor, has a 42 percent favorable rating against a 50 percent unfavorable rating, for a net of -8 points. Those are bad numbers, but nowhere near as bad as Trump’s.

"Contra Rupert Murdoch’s assertion about Trump having crossover appeal, Trump is extraordinarily unpopular with independent voters and Democrats. Gallup polling conducted over the past six weeks found Trump with a -27-percentage- point net favorability rating among independent voters, and a -70-point net rating among Democrats; both marks are easily the worst in the GOP field. (Trump also has less-than-spect acular favorable ratings among his fellow Republicans.)

"You could plausibly argue that Ted Cruz would be a worse nominee than Trump ... It’s a perplexing that Republican elites have resigned to nominating either Trump or Cruz ..."
0 # Robbee 2016-01-19 18:39
FDR endorses bernie: This is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Nor need we shrink from honestly facing conditions in our country today.

I am certain that my fellow Americans expect that on my induction into the Presidency I will address them with a candor and a decision which the present situation of our people impel. This is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Nor need we shrink from honestly facing conditions in our country today. This great Nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself—nameless , unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days.
+1 # diamondmarge7 2016-01-20 07:18
BERNIE's "political revolution" will happen when millions get involved long before the actual voting begins. HRC was almost hysterical during the Sunday debate as she shrilly proclaimed how much she 'LOVED" Obama and the ACA; she was desperately trying to ensure the mostly AA audience to vote for her because of "her GREAT LOVE FOR ALL THINGS OBAMA." Yes,singlepayer will mean a fight. Well, folks, would u rather fight for lower costs and better coverage in this fight, or wend your children off to fight and die in foreign wars? Hillary was LYING Sunday night. She was spreading LIES and MISINFORMATION in her desperation. And when did people of good will NOT have to fight-for civil rights, for marriage rights, for unions, for fair working conditions? The bosses, the corporations, the oligarchy, in other words, will never give up w/o our fighting like hell. So, whaddayouwanna fight for? As Frederick Douglass famously said, "Power concedes nothing." IMO our democracy is worth fighting for. If you agree, then work like your very life depends on electing BERNIE and Congress critters who will support his agenda.

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.