By the way, the author of this article is a young journalist who has ASL and
is the father of a young child.
Miriam
Elizabeth Warren's Plan Is a Massive Win for the Medicare for All Movement
By Ady Barkan, The Intercept
04 November 19
The movement for single-payer health care has taken some big strides forward
in recent years. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., put the issue at the center of
the Democratic Party's debate with his run for president in 2016. In
partnership with the nurses union and other champions, he then got 19
senators to co-sponsor his bill in 2017. After Democrats took back the House
of Representatives, we demanded and got hearings in multiple powerful
committees on the fantastic bill spearheaded by Rep. Pramila Jayapal,
D-Wash. (The successor to that of the progressive hero and former Michigan
Rep. John Conyers, who died this week.)
These were our victories, earned by a movement that has been fighting for
many decades.
The plan that Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren just released is another
enormous win for us. It will help persuade our friends and families and
neighbors to support Medicare for All, and in the not-too-distant future, to
convince Congress too. Here's why.
To begin, her plan covers everybody, with zero out-of-pocket expenses.
"Medicare for All" is a great brand. So is "Free Healthcare for Everybody."
And that's the central promise of the Sanders and Jayapal bills, and the
Warren proposal as well. You get the doctors and caregivers and treatments
you need, for free. That's it. It is a deeply appealing vision (as evidenced
by the enthusiasm that Bernie generates among the working class) that we can
use to drive enormous turnout from voters who often stay home out of
cynicism about what either party will do for them.
Eliminating the cost of health care will mean many thousands of dollars back
every year for families throughout the country. It'll come to $11 trillion
in savings over 10 years. For my sisters and brothers in red, let me put it
this way: It would represent the largest redistribution of wealth since the
Great Society, or maybe the New Deal, or maybe even the Emancipation
Proclamation. (Can some economists or historians help me out here?)
But won't the government take it all back in taxes? This, my comrades, is
where Senator Warren performs what is perhaps the greatest feat of public
policy jujitsu that I have ever seen.
Her plan doesn't raise taxes on working families. Lately, debate moderators
have been salivating at the idea of getting Warren to admit that her plan
will be paid for by creating a new employer-side tax. (Bernie has already
said as much - because he's a no-bullshit, courageous guy, and everyone has
been assuming that it would be necessary.) And her debate-stage admission
would then be the subject of a billion dollars in Republican advertisements.
This was the trap that was being set for Warren, according smart observers
like Paul Krugman and Zach Carter, and it could have disastrous political
consequences. (They even had me worried. Honestly.)
But then Warren did what she does best: her fucking homework. She consulted
the experts, she double-checked the numbers, and she dropped a codex of
wisdom right in the middle of the teacher's desk. And the political
reverberations may be felt for decades.
Just imagine what will happen when the debate moderators ask her next time
how she'll pay for her plan. She can answer honestly and with authority that
Medicare for All will mean zero health care costs and no increases in taxes
for all but the wealthiest Americans.
So how does she pay for it? Here is where the brilliance of this plan's
political economy really shines brightest. Warren pays for her plan by
targeting the bad actors who are making our health care system so expensive
and wasteful and our economy so rigged and unequal.
On the revenue side, she eliminates the ability of corporations to hide
their profits overseas and the ability of megawealthy families like the
Kochs and the Waltons and the Sacklers to avoid taxes through accounting
gimmicks and the capital gains loophole. She bumps up her wealth tax. She
funds the IRS properly, so the agency can actually collect that revenue
(Republican lobbyists and lawmakers have starved it for decades because they
are, um, corrupt). And then the plan fills in the revenue with an
employer-side tax that is equal to current employer health care expenses.
(Warren makes some smart decisions in order to reward, rather than penalize,
high-road employers who are currently providing great health care coverage
and especially those with unionized workforces. It's a clever way to
encourage corporations to let their workers unionize, and if you're
interested in that level of detail, you should go read the plan).
Then, Warren shows how a single-payer system, and only a single-payer
system, will dramatically reduce costs. This is what all credible analyses
make clear: With only Medicare paying the bills, we get huge savings.
Administrative costs plummet. Wasteful billing and cost-shifting disappears.
Outrageous drug prices get negotiated down to something reasonable.
This is why Medicare for All works so much better than the public-option
plans that other candidates are offering. We can't get those savings if
"Medicare for all who want it" is competing with a bunch of private
insurers. Doctors and hospitals wouldn't save any money or time, like they
would under single payer. And we wouldn't be able to rein in absurd expenses
from the pharmaceutical and medical device industries, or monopoly hospital
corporations. (She also cuts immoral and wasteful spending on wars. Yes,
please.)
Historically, single-payer advocates have focused on the human benefits of
more and better health care coverage. And rightfully so. That is what
matters the most. But we've simultaneously shied away from discussing the
cost, because the numbers are just so big. And that is why this plan is such
a landmark. It turns our perceived weakness into a powerful strength. From
now on, when we're asked how to pay for the program, we can point to the
very same corporate interests who are trying to defeat us.
Do the numbers add up, or is this a hocus-pocus political trick? You won't
be surprised that various fancy, respected policy wonks helped run the
calculations and fill in the details.
We shouldn't be surprised. After all, Warren spent most of her career as one
of the nation's experts on middle-class family costs, and wrote one of the
major game-changing studies exposing the severity of medical bankruptcies.
Her co-authors? David Himmelstein and Steffie Woolhandler, co-founders of
Physicians for a National Health Program.
PNHP is holding its annual meeting this weekend in Philadelphia. Dave and
Steffie founded the organization in 1987 (when I had just graduated from
diapers). It was the height of the Reagan Revolution, but they had inherited
from their forebears a vision for a more just and equitable society - in
which health care is finally treated as a human right.
It is a multigenerational vision. A multigenerational struggle. And a
multigenerational movement. And, together, we can celebrate this moment
because we are that much closer to our promised land.
e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
Email This Page