Public and Private Yuletide Health

I’ve taken a break from blogging over the last several months, in large part because of a deluge of things that have happened in my life.   What has arisen me from my hibernation from my keyboard, besides a general need to write, is a bit of news regarding a subject near and dear to me: health care.   I’ve received wind, as I’m sure you have, about a full-bore effort to derail Medicare-For-All in this country, being waged by some of the biggest players in the industry such as Blue Cross Blue Shield, as well as a bipartisan rogue’s gallery of hacks such as high-level advisors with both the Obama and Clinton campaigns.    The overall popularity of Medicare-For-All has reached 70% in recent polling, so why the fight over it when so many support it - Democrats, Republicans, and otherwise?

That 70% figure, which was culled from a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll, is exactly what has the industry spooked.   It is viewed widely within various corridors of the industry, especially the payors, as a direct and existential threat to their existence.    Some of the typical arguments given by those that oppose Medicare For All include:

—> According to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, healthcare spending accounts for 17.9% of our Gross Domestic Product.   Switching now to a nationally-administrated Single Payor plan from our current mishmash of private providers might prove to be too much of a jolt for our economy to handle (nobody can predict this, but you can bet it will be brought up);

—> Single Payor Healthcare is considered a socialist solution, and socialism has been a favorite bogeyman of the business classes in this country for well over a century.   It lost some of it’s negative connotation in recent years, thanks in large parts to the Bernie Sanders 2016 presidential campaign.   It is also increasingly popular among younger generations, which provides further consternation among the boomers who still dominate our business and government communities. (In other words, red-baiting);

—> Single Payor Healthcare would require a necessary expansion of the government bureaucracy, something that Republicans and conservative Democrats are reflexively opposed to (They’ll just have to get over it);

—> What of those that work for the private payers, like Blue Cross?   If we go to a single payor system, where do those work? (There may be a point here - this will need to be worked out.)

The Atlantic attributed several reasons for Obama dropping the Public Option during the negotiations for Obamacare’s passage.   He campaigned for it during his 2008 run and touted Single Payor during many of his stump speeches, so why did he drop it?   While I can’t completely fault him for it - there were still many DINOs who needed to be appeased such as Joe Lieberman and Blanche Lincoln - he still showed a gross lack of leadership.  I think he knew that if a Public Option was offered, people would flock to it in such a way that private payor subscriber numbers would plummet to the point where many of the names you know and hate - Blue Cross, Blue Shield, United Healthcare, etc. - would have to either fold or radically reinvent their business models. 

If you’re so inclined, here’s the link for their brand-spanking-new organization.   In looking through this site, I can see just how slickly worded and phrased the contents were - almost like they were written by people affiliated with political campaigns.   Wait a minute - they most likely were, because apparently, advisers and operatives from the Clinton and Obama campaigns are joining forces in this exercise of propagandistic bullshit.  

And look for various talking heads and meat puppets to scream this organization’s mantra to the airwaves and bandwidth.   Expect several cameo appearances from Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, and Screamin’ Howie Dean (among many others) to discuss ad nauseum about the inadequacies of Medicare For All, and to pump the concept of how great, wonderful, and innovative our healthcare system truly is.  

Also, here is Jimmy Dore’s takedown of same organization and those that run it.   Consider yourself warned regarding the language he uses, but he lays it out (and lays them out flat) here.  

All of this boils down to one question I have for the politicians and their operatives involved in this: just who do you represent?   Seventy Percent of the population wants it, they already pay taxes for Medicare - so who could you possibly be representing except for your EMM-EFFING Big Pocketed Rich Donors?    And you want MY SUPPORT?  You think I should listen to YOU, knowing your history of dishonesty and double dealings?  

Here’s my response to those listed on the “about” page of this organization:

F$%K YOU!