McDonald backs single-payer health insurance

Say what? (0.00 / 0)

"If Germant plays it cool, and doesn't endorse single-payer health care ... "

Then Tyler Germant would be a hack.  I'm tired of candidates who won't take a principled stand.

I applaud McDonald's announcement.  There are a lot of folks in Missoula who are waiting to see who the real progressive is in the Demo primary (and the best one to challenge Rehberg in the general).

---

by: pete talbot @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 02:58:29 AM UTC

There are reasons not to favor single-payer... (0.00 / 0)

...that have nothing to do with "hackdom."

Single-payer may not even be the best way to go in the present economy/political climate.  

---

by: Jay Stevens @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 13:59:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm not saying Tyler is a hack ... (0.00 / 0)

But McDonald took a strong, principled stand on an extremely important issue.  The ball is now in Tyler's court.  I'm waiting for his response.

And Jay, I see you're following the Max Baucus thought process: single payer, bad; Republican/health care industry equivocating, good.    

---

by: pete talbot @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 19:18:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

??? (0.00 / 0)

Where did I say single-payer was bad?

I'm saying it ain't going to happen. Remember, most of the other single-payer efforts occurred in the context of WWII, when economies were restructuring themselves. To propose a massive restructuring of the health-care industry without a clear mandate -- yes, polls show support for single-payer, but not by huge margins, and in the absence of any organized media campaign by the insurance industry against the idea -- and with only a handful of Congressional reps. favoring it?

Good luck.

Maybe directing my energy for a robust public option (which is still possible) instead of single-payer health care is selfish. Having that option a year ago might have made the difference between staying in Montana and leaving.

So, yeah, I find all of you "progressives" out there getting all condescending because I advocate for a health care reform package that could actually help me and my family to be somewhat of an old act.

I like the perspective that single-payer advocates bring. I like the idea of single-payer health care. I love hearing reasoned arguments for it, and truly value practical activists fighting for it. (If nothing else, it bolsters our position for getting a good public option.) Certainly single-payer advocates have had the right to full and equal access to this blog to espouse their ideas.

But when you all start questioning my motives? Please. Fuck off.

---

by: Jay Stevens @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 21:31:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Here's the deal (4.00 / 1)

Single payer advocates are getting painted as non-realistic, naive and out-of-the-loop.  They're supposed to roll over when Baucus or Ezra Klein or some other beltway wonk discredits single payer.

"It ain't gonna happen," they say, "So just shut up."

Folks are making the single payer crowd out to be the scapegoats for blocking reform instead of the real villains: right-wingers, the health care industry and the industry's benefactors.

You see, I don't think single payer has a chance of passing congress, either.  That doesn't mean I'm going to stop advocating for it.  If we don't keep the pressure on, it will never pass.

Trust me, Jay, I could use some health reform in my own life, too.  An honest public option bill would do wonders.

And I'll applaud any candidate or office holder who has the balls (or ovaries) to stand up for single payer.  I'll heap scorn on those who waffle on the issue.

Perhaps my "you're following the Max Baucus thought process" line was a low blow.  Sorry.  But your "Fuck off" was a little harsh, too.    

---

by: pete talbot @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 22:29:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

yes, it was low... (0.00 / 0)

But frankly I'm a little tired as being painted as some tool of Baucus. Mark T apparently thinks I engineered Baucus' approach to health care (I didn't), and that I applaud the way the Senator has handled it, politically (I don't).

I don't recall ever saying that single-payer health advocates were naive -- the activists out there working for it have done wonders of injecting their opinions into the discussion despite the opposition from folks like Baucus. And their work -- not mine -- has actually made a robust public option more likely.

Personally -- and I thought this was obvious -- I'm writing about this session, this health care reform package, and the politics of health care reform.

One way to get single-payer on the table is to elect candidates who support single-payer health care. And now that McDonald came out supporting it, we have the opportunity to turn this election into a mandate on health care reform.

---

by: Jay Stevens @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 23:26:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No question (4.00 / 1)

single payer is the way to go...if indeed you are serious about reforming health care by making it universal, comprehensive and cost effective...which by the way, when you think about it, is a very conservative idea...

One area I think any candidate should explore when promoting single payer is the impact on state budgets, and impacts for business...single payer would of course eliminate the need for "workman comp" insurance...a potentially large savings for business and state governments.

It has been estimated that a single payer plan would save over $400 billion in administrative costs...I am assuming that is over a 10 year period...thus, right there, you have half the money needed to fund single payer over a 10 year period...if you include savings from no longer needing a workman comp program, where are we?  What would be the tax needed to cover a single payer plan?  

Lastly, in every other industrial country with single payer, private insurance companies still exist, and do business covering procedures not covered by the single payer system...however, in several of these countries all private insurance companies must be...by law..not for profit.

---

by: big sage @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 12:59:05 PM UTC

Scared after the primary (1.00 / 1)

I support single payer, but I hate to see Dennis McDonald sign his post primary death wish by endorsing what the GOP will call "socialized medicine."

I was worried when the republicans attacked McDonald for being a San Fransisco attorney, and coming to Montana to buy a ranch and run for congress. I know he wants to support single payer to gain the votes of progressive democrats, and I can understand that. But he's created another vulnerability for the right wingers to attack after the primary, and that scares me.

I like both McDonald and Gernant, I like single payer, but what I really want is someone who can take Rehberg without being a walking target for attacks.

---

by: V. Dimone @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 16:57:09 PM UTC

Concern trolling? (0.00 / 0)

This is like the definition of slime. I like both Tyler and Dennis but this "I like what he's doing but zOMG he'll come under attack" stuff is nuts.

---

by: Matt Singer @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 20:36:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

In all honesty, Matt (0.00 / 0)

but zOMG he'll come under attack" stuff is nuts.

That's what lead a lot of people away from Morrison to Tester.  I know Tester was the better candidate, and I believe that you did as well.  But Morrison had baggage, personal baggage, that could have swayed the election.

If fairness, this is different.  This ain't personal, it's policy.  There will be people who are gun shy of wingnut attack.  It's to be expected (and describes at least a third of the Senate.)  As you well know, the task at hand is to educate about the policy and the politics, such that the personal gets buried.  Dennis (Rehburg) and his minions are going to play dirty, regardless.  Instilling confidence in position is a win-win, and deriding fear ... isn't.

---

by: Rob Kailey @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 22:18:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

There's still a difference (0.00 / 0)

and the "aw shucks, I like what yer saying but I'm just afeared of my own opinions because everybody disagrees with me" stuff is a sign of either an utter pansy, a political illiterate, or a concern troll. Usually the last of those three options.

---

by: Matt Singer @ Wed Jul 01, 2009 at 18:33:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

We need to discuss the choice of David Kendall to (0.00 / 0)

explain the various health care plans in congress in the Health Care Forums sponsored by Forward Montana and other orgs on Monday night.  Here's an article on why in the heck the Third Way has any place in left politics. And why in the world we give these people a prominent seat at this table. If seated at all, they should be seen but not heard.
http://www.alternet.org/health...

Chris Hedges also writes about the repudiation of "fair and balanced" which is the latest incarnation of Walter Lippman's "objectivity and balanced" that brought us PR and spin. This discussion here is being repeated everywhere.  We are at a crossroads.  Which side are you on?  Sorry, but in the dead center is just that...dead.
http://www.alternet.org/story/...

---

by: Feral Cat @ Wed Jul 01, 2009 at 12:59:18 PM UTC

In the context of health care reform... (0.00 / 0)

...I have no idea where your "center" lies. I mean, those espousing socialized medicine would argue single-payer advocates are the "center." Now it seems people who want a public/private plan are the "center," but the notion of a robust public health insurance option would have been considered "far left" two years ago.

IMHO, we should be less hung up on placing ourselves in some sort of ideological hierarchy and be more concerned about hammering out workable and realistic policy...

---

by: Jay Stevens @ Wed Jul 01, 2009 at 17:01:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Read the Chris Hedges piece. It's about passion. (0.00 / 0)

and the optimism of the will.  My reference to the " dead center" had "dead" as the operative word.      

---

by: Feral Cat @ Wed Jul 01, 2009 at 18:48:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

David Kendall is a local with a lot of insight to what is happening in Washington (0.00 / 0)

He's also a great human being. I don't agree with a lot of Third Way's reports. I also love working with people with whom I disagree and I certainly don't have a problem working with people whose employers hold opinions I don't support.

We're witnessing the conservative movement embrace the "constantly smaller tent." It strikes me as sad, unhealthy, and counter-productive. I don't want to go down that path.

By all means, criticize what David said. He's got a thick skin, a good sense of humor, and an ability to correct himself. I'm sure he'd be happy to discuss reform with anyone. But, please, don't make a cartoon character out of him.

---

by: Matt Singer @ Wed Jul 01, 2009 at 18:36:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]