- Nov 27, 2017
If we have 50 Dems? Absolutely. If Mitch is still in control, nothing is happening on anything. But, yes, I do think we have the votes for a public option. it's really popular. It makes good political sense. It's actually something that can be implemented without destroying a third of the economy. There's no downside for any Democrat to vote for it.
Ya, but it's not single payer so it's basically Republican.Don't forget the perennial "We have to start as far left as possible so that we can negotiate our way down. Don't start with a compromise!!!!!" that ignores the way politics actually works. If the votes aren't there, they aren't there. If Kyrsten Sinema won't vote for single-payer, that's it. You can't bully her because you have no leverage over her; she's only accountable to the people in her state, many of whom would actually like her being the ~~~responsible~~~ Democrat and telling the big bad socialists no.
It's ironic that people so opposed to capitalism seem to think that a capitalistic negotiating tactic is the way to go for getting policy passed, though.
If I could be queen for a day and remake the country in my own image - first, it would look a lot better, but second, I'd institute single-payer. However, I acknowledge the votes aren't there, the concept is not popular, and that we'll have to "settle" with a robust public option, lowering the Medicare buy-in age, cost controls, etc. I put the word settle in quotation marks because such a system would be massively to the left of what we have, would achieve universal coverage, and would help hundreds of millions.
I agree. If I could waive a magic wand? Sure, we can do single payer. Because while I'm waiving my wand (Phrasing) I would be making it so we have the infrastructure in place to actually make this shit work. The far left position is not always the best one to take. I just wish I knew where this magic electorate that is so liberal actually is. (Outside Twitter.)