a guest column by Dave Baumeister
Greetings, Blogophiles!
Last week, I promised I would cover the second round of debates this week, and in so doing, I have to refer back to that first column.
As you may recall, I made the point that as things stood at that time, former Vice-President Joe Biden had the best chance of beating Trump “bigly.” I do think that other Democratic contenders could beat him, too, but if they did, they would not do it be as wide a margin. I was not advocating a candidate, I was factually stating who had the best shot, based on current information.
But, after watching the second round of debates, I can be a little more specific about that. First of all, on both nights of debates, I saw people who represented the future of the Democratic party, and after what I saw, I believe the Democrats’ future is quite strong, indeed.
I wouldn’t say anyone had bad ideas, but going by the past, I can see that some of their ideas are not very likely to happen.
That does seem to be the case with political candidates, doesn’t it? They promise all sorts of great-sounding ideas, but then, when they are elected, the realities of governing set in, and those ideas tend not to go very far.
Let’s take health care reform, for example. Some type of universal health care has been a linchpin of the Democratic platform for well over 30 years.
In the debates, we heard several talking about Medicare For All, and Biden was touting Obamacare Plus. Having a form of nationalized health care – like every other civilized nation in the world – is a pretty good idea, and it will eventually come into being, but how likely is it to happen after the next election?
I’m not trying to make a point with this; I’m just asking. My readers need to think about this and answer it for themselves. Just, please, do it truthfully.
Remember “Hillarycare”? That goes back to 1993, and of course nothing ever happened there.
With the Affordable Care Act, a.k.a. Obamacare, the United States got its first government-sponsored plan, but at what price? It was watered down, so it was never as good as a national health insurance plan needed to be, and it ended up costing Democrats control of both houses of Congress for the next eight years.
Was that worth it? Again, you need to answer that for yourselves.
What we did get with the Affordable Care Act were millions of people who had been uninsured or uninsurable getting health insurance. We saw pre-existing conditions covered. We saw women getting coverage for birth control.
And even when Donald Trump started trying to destroy Obamacare, Republicans began to think, “Hey, maybe there are some good things to this, after all.” Which is most likely why they could never muster the votes to kill it.
So, no matter who is selected to run for the Democrats, it is much more likely that we will see an Obamacare Plus before we ever see a Medicare For All.
But the idea for the future is still a good one. I, for one, would like to see a Democratic president who embraces new ideas, and once he or she is elected, he or she can push those things. But they don’t need to be the center point of a candidacy.
Sen. Cory Booker made a really good point during the debate that they were playing right into Donald Trump’s hands by viciously attacking each other. Yes, in most elections, even primaries, candidates need to point out how they are better that everyone else running.
But this time, the candidates, as well as the voters, need to remember that the ONLY thing important is that President Trump in NOT re-elected.
Oh, and the other thing I got from the debates is that Bill De Blasio seems to represent every stereotypical quality about what the rest of the county dislikes in people from New York City.
Comments on Comments: OK, I thought this might make an interesting piece to my column, but with last week’s column section, there were only about a dozen comments on topic, and the rest dealt with unrelated matters. However, reading them did make me think of a good editorial page where letter writers send in all sorts of different ideas about a multitude of topics.
So everyone, keep thinking, keep writing and keep coming up with good ideas!
“Stop infighting and beat Trump” = “Everybody shut up and unite behind my candidate.”
I don’t know how you conduct a primary without pointing out differences and debating ideas — which the supporters of the person currently ahead in the polls conveniently denounce as “infighting.” Yes, let’s nominate a vague, declining, pillowy-soft candidate without a serious primary because he’s “the only one who can beat Trump.” How do we know? We just do!
Chris, notice that I’m not asking people to unite behind “my” candidate. I don’t know who the nominee will be. It may well not be any of the Dems whom I prefer (and I haven’t analyzed them all enough yet to prioritize them, but let’s say my candidates are Warren, Buttigieg, Sanders, Biden… and that’s only if we can’t draft Dennis Kucinich). I’m saying that infighting right now unnecessarily weakens candidates who will all be better Presidents than the current occupant of the White House. Whatever our allegiances now, whatever the outcome of the Democratic convention, if we want any possibility of progress toward decent policy outcomes like smart improvements of the Affordable Care Act, not to mention the restoration of decency and competence to the Executive Branch, we all have a deep civic and moral obligation to show up and vote a Democratic replacement to Donald Trump.
Chris, you know I’m all for pointing out differences and debating ideas. I’m all for pointing out failings in Biden’s past policies, asking whether we can count on him to do better (and whether his record as Barack Obama’s VP shows he did better), and asking whether any of the other candidates can do better. But I oppose specious attempts to shorthand-brand Biden as a racist when he isn’t. Democratic debates should focus on figuring who offers the best plans, not on portraying any of the candidates as unfit for the Presidency. If I were running, I’d say exactly that: “Everyone on this stage would make a good President. I will vote for any person on this stage who wins the nomination to be President. But I will show you that the policies I support will be the best for this country, and that I am best equipped to beat Trump and fight for and enact those policies.”
My recommendation to any Democratic candidate is to point out that Medicare for all is perfectly affordable, compared to our current system. I’ve done this before, but once more unto the breach, good friends:
CURRENTLY:
Most people pay a minimum of $500.00 per person for health insurance these days. Remember that.
Everyone pays 3% payroll deduction for Medicare Plan A (half from the employer, half from the employee). Remember that.
Everyone has $2,000-$15,000 deductible. And that’s just the insurance. You’re still going to have copays, etc., and the deductible.
MEDICARE FOR ALL:
If every one of the 325.7 million people in America paid the TOTAL $400.00 a month that Medicare Plan B, D, and supplemental cost, that would be $1.5 trillion dollars going into the program each and every year. Add to that the 3% payroll deduction for Medicare Plan A mentioned above, and you have another half a trillion dollars, for a total of $2 Trillion every year.
And there is no $2,000-$15,000 deductible. Try $300 deductible per year. And the cost for every prescription drug goes way down, because the costs are managed.
And those who are fortunate enough to have Cadillac health insurance can keep it – they do it that way in Britain. Or extra for dental/eyecare (they do it that way in Britain and I believe in Canada). But standard health care is covered – no more how am I going to pay for this crap.
Which Democrat candidate said this, yesterday? “Poor kids” are just as bright as “white kids”.
Lindsey Bonehead Graham promised yesterday that if a GOP majority was elected to the House, maintained in the Senate and Insane Imbecile remains in the WH, they’ll repeal Obamacare and replace it with something SCarolinians will really love!
(Gee, that sounds familiar.)
My Congresswoman, Rep. Angie Craig, D-MN2, agreed with Lawrence O’Donnell that Graham’s words were a campaign gift. She said in our district the GOP enabled, Economic Eunuch created farm crisis has only recently surpassed health care as the number one concern.
My guess is in the red states, as in Congressional District 2 of Minnesota, health care is the number one or two issue. I doubt Lindsey Bonehead’s threat to take away Obamacare is what they want to hear.
My opinion is that the best path is to add a public option which would be Medicare for any who want it. Private pay insurance, employer coverage, etc would continue to be available for any who want it. My guess is that employers would drop insurance benefits like chunks of hot magma.
I’d love to see robust dental and visual added to Medicare. Both have profound effects on one’s physical health.
“So, no matter who is selected to run for the Democrats, it is much more likely that we will see an Obamacare Plus before we ever see a Medicare For All.”
This is reality. We may get to Medicare for All at some point, but not for a while. Our system of government is not set up for big changes. Big changes happened after major disasters–the civil war and
the Great Depression. We made higher than average progress under Teddy Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson, but even Johnson could only get Medicare and Medicaid instead of what he really wanted which was national health care. So, other than after a major economic or social meltdown, we make slow and steady progress, followed by periods of retrenchment. If we get rid of Trump and win big in the Senate, maybe we can get Obamacare Plus, but Medicare For All is just too much change all at once. History augers against it. Now if the economy tanks and Republicans lose enough seats to provide moer than 60 votes to the Democrats, then its a possibility.
Don’s right. National Health in England began after Nazis had bombed every hospital in London. It was the cheapest way to get healthcare to the people. It worked and exists to this day.
A timid, cautious approach to serious issues is just what Trump is a hankerin’ for in a Dem candidate.