Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Bernie did not support getting rid of the ACA BEFORE Medicare for All was passed. [View all]sheshe2
(87,611 posts)99. Forbes.
Six Reasons Why Vermont's Single-Payer Health Plan Was Doomed From The Start
Last week, Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin (D.) announced that he was pulling the plug on his four-year quest to impose single-payer, government-run health care on the residents of his state. In my judgment, said Shumlin at a press conference, the potential economic disruption and risks would be too great to small businesses, working families, and the states economy. The key reasons for Shumlins reversal are important to understand. They explain why the dream of single-payer health care in the U.S. is dead for the foreseeable futurebut also why Obamacare will be difficult to repeal.
snip//
3. The Vermont plan would have required a 160 percent tax increase
The Shumlin administration, in its white-flag briefing last week, dropped a bombshell. In 2017, under pre-existing law, the state of Vermont expects to collect $1.7 billion in tax revenue. Green Mountain Care would have required an additional $2.6 billion in tax revenue: a 151 percent increase in state taxes. Fiscally, thats a train wreck. Even a skeptical report from Avalere health had previously assumed that the plan would only cost $1.9 to $2.2 billion extra in 2017.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2014/12/21/6-reasons-why-vermonts-single-payer-health-plan-was-doomed-from-the-start/#30f90152277d
Last week, Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin (D.) announced that he was pulling the plug on his four-year quest to impose single-payer, government-run health care on the residents of his state. In my judgment, said Shumlin at a press conference, the potential economic disruption and risks would be too great to small businesses, working families, and the states economy. The key reasons for Shumlins reversal are important to understand. They explain why the dream of single-payer health care in the U.S. is dead for the foreseeable futurebut also why Obamacare will be difficult to repeal.
snip//
3. The Vermont plan would have required a 160 percent tax increase
The Shumlin administration, in its white-flag briefing last week, dropped a bombshell. In 2017, under pre-existing law, the state of Vermont expects to collect $1.7 billion in tax revenue. Green Mountain Care would have required an additional $2.6 billion in tax revenue: a 151 percent increase in state taxes. Fiscally, thats a train wreck. Even a skeptical report from Avalere health had previously assumed that the plan would only cost $1.9 to $2.2 billion extra in 2017.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2014/12/21/6-reasons-why-vermonts-single-payer-health-plan-was-doomed-from-the-start/#30f90152277d
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
118 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Bernie did not support getting rid of the ACA BEFORE Medicare for All was passed. [View all]
Ken Burch
Dec 2016
OP
Of course he didn't. After all he voted for the ACA (and if he hadn't it wouldn't have passed...
PoliticAverse
Dec 2016
#2
Thanks for reminding people of this. Bernie will ALWAYS be looking out for those less fortunate... as sure as the day is long!
InAbLuEsTaTe
Dec 2016
#8
Not to mention that he got community health clinics to serve 10 million people as part of the ACA.
jfern
Dec 2016
#101
Yes but harping on getting rid of ACA supported GOP position that it didn't work.
Justice
Dec 2016
#3
you did. GOP is negative on ACA; so was Bernie. Bernie reasons might be different but both negative.
Justice
Dec 2016
#7
"Medicare for all" is the same as "no health care for anyone who can't pay"
portlander23
Dec 2016
#9
Wrong, and this kind of dishonesty is what causes the divisiveness. Hillary did not say
R B Garr
Dec 2016
#16
This is as silly and dishonest as Trump's 30 years and why haven't you done X argument but
TheKentuckian
Dec 2016
#49
No, what's silly and dishonest is saying that Bernie has some superpower influence over policy
R B Garr
Dec 2016
#66
This is just gratuitous Clinton bashing. Speaking of which, why didn't Bernie run
R B Garr
Dec 2016
#93
lol, saying it will never happen is far different from Sanders' dishonestly implying
R B Garr
Dec 2016
#65
she wasn't fighting for single payer any more, and certainly it wasn't part of her platform. how is
JCanete
Dec 2016
#22
He could not even get single payer passed in his tiny state of Vermont. It's not hard to
R B Garr
Dec 2016
#24
nothing is a viable option if we take it off the table, and even luke-warm legislation gets blocked
JCanete
Dec 2016
#26
Ha, wouldn't it be nice if he explained the reality of getting things passed instead of blaming
R B Garr
Dec 2016
#31
what reality? that we can do something if we all come together to do it? Is that a lie? nt
JCanete
Dec 2016
#33
Single payer failed in Vermont. That reality. He was unable to get it passed in
R B Garr
Dec 2016
#36
this is dumb. So he was unable to get it passed. What does that mean to you? If something
JCanete
Dec 2016
#39
Clinton said she was against single payer. She's wong. the ACA needs to be replaced with it.
Gore1FL
Dec 2016
#92
Sorry, but the "arguments" are reality. Bernie didn't get it passed in Vermont and he
R B Garr
Dec 2016
#96
Bernie said the ACA needed to be replaced, but he knew that single payer was not
R B Garr
Dec 2016
#75
A lot of countries have single payer. I don't support "Democrats" who oppose single payer and say
jfern
Dec 2016
#113
LOL, that's funny, too. How completely self-serving and unrealistic. It doesn't
R B Garr
Dec 2016
#114
More hilarity! Bernie should have been honest during his rallies about his failure
R B Garr
Dec 2016
#116
Bernie promoted single payer but couldn't even get it passed in his home state.
R B Garr
Dec 2016
#118
True, obviously. But what he did do is bash Hillary for not supporting single payer, and for
DanTex
Dec 2016
#6
pragmatism is what you go for when compromising with the other side. We shouldn't be compromising
JCanete
Dec 2016
#25
12 dollar minimum wage is basic. Its really the bare minimum, and the point is it isn't livable.
JCanete
Dec 2016
#38
Compared to 7.25 it is drastic. Arguing about 15 vs 12 was one of Bernie's low moments.
DanTex
Dec 2016
#41
If livable has any bearing, then yes there is a difference, and being hyperbolic all republican
JCanete
Dec 2016
#43
well we know how people survive on 7. They get 2 or 3 jobs. A livable wage implies
JCanete
Dec 2016
#48
Again, a livable wage implies being able to house and feed yourself, and maybe a child
JCanete
Dec 2016
#53
$15 was the top standard set that I am aware of when the discussion was taking place.
Gore1FL
Dec 2016
#69
San Francisco and Seattle came up with those numbers. We already went over that.
Gore1FL
Dec 2016
#94
Apparently doing it Bernie's way is the only way you really care about health, or wage stagnation..
JHan
Dec 2016
#64
He didn't have the Clinton baggage to deal with in a year where political dynasties were rejected.
Gore1FL
Dec 2016
#55