MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Obama Endorses Medicare-for-All

While president, Obama was a single-payer critic. Out of office, he thinks it's the wave of the future.

Carlos Barria/REUTERS/NewscomCarlos Barria/REUTERS/NewscomWhile president, Barack Obama was a resolute critic of the idea that America was ready for single-payer healthcare. Free from the confines of his office, he's warmed to the idea.

In a well-publicized speech this afternoon, the former Commander in Chief praised the bright ideas of his party's progressive wing. "Democrats aren't just running on good old ideas like a higher minimum wage, they're running on good new ideas like Medicare-for-all," Obama said in his remarks, while also endorsing proposals like giving workers seats on corporate boards and reversing tax cuts.

Whatever one thinks of Medicare-for-all—also known as "single-payer"—it can hardly be called a "new" idea. If it were, Obama would not have had to spend so much time in office and on the campaign trail dismissing it as unworkable.

Here's then-Sen. Obama at a campaign event in Albuquerque, New Mexico, in 2008:

"If I were setting up a system from scratch, then I'd probably set up a single-payer system. The problem is we're not starting from scratch," said Obama. "We have a system that most people have become accustom to getting their health insurance from their employer…Making that transition in a rapid way would be very difficult."

Then there's the President Obama addressing the American Medical Association in 2009, while the legislation that would eventually become Obamacare was still working its way through Congress:

"I'll be honest. There are countries where a single-payer system may be working. But I believe—and I've even taken some flak from members of my own party for this belief—that it is important for us to build on our traditions here in the United States. So, when you hear the naysayers claim that I'm trying to bring about government-run health care, know this—they are not telling the truth."

There was also that time in August 2009, when Obama was asked at a town hall event in New Hampshire whether he supported single-payer healthcare:

"A single-payer plan would be a plan like Medicare for all, or the kind of plan that they have in Canada, where basically government is the only person—is the only entity that pays for all health care," said Obama, before stating bluntly. "I have not said that I was a single-payer supporter because, frankly, we historically have had a employer-based system in this country with private insurers, and for us to transition to a system like that I believe would be too disruptive."

This change in Obama's attitude shows a couple things that are relevant for our current debate about Medicare-for-all.

The first is that this is not a bright new idea suddenly gaining traction, but rather an age-old Democratic priority that has never come to fruition because actually doing it would be incredibly difficult and potentially disastrous. This is probably why Obama's enthusiasm for it has waxed and waned depending on his proximity to the White House. One can find examples of Obama throwing his support behind single-payer while still just a state senator from Illinois in 2003, before souring on it during a run for U.S. Senate a year later.

The feasibility—or lack thereof—can also be seen at the state level. In Vermont, a Democratic governor walked away from a single-payer plan after it became clear that paying for it would require the state to massively increase its income and business taxes.

The second point is that expansion of the government's role in health care will not satiate the demand for more government interventions later on. If anything, it just ratchets up the level of government intervention progressives will deem necessary, and that conservatives will eventually concede to be acceptable.

Obviously, Obamacare saw both the expansion of an old entitlement program (Medicaid) and the creation of new ones in the form of new health insurance subsidies. Now, the president who gave that legislation its name is arguing—less than two years after leaving office!—that we need to do much more. Conservatives, meanwhile, have made their peace with Obamacare, declining to repeal it when they had a chance, opting instead to preserve some of its key features.

Government's slow and seemingly inevitable creep into the health-care market doesn't eliminate the practical problems Democrats will face in attempting to implement Medicare-for-all. But if past is prologue, they will eventually have the political capital necessary to give it a go anyway.

Photo Credit: Carlos Barria/REUTERS/Newscom

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    What a bastard.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Former Pres. Obama has a 66 percent approval rating rooted in the elements of the electorate that are expanding, opposed by the electoral elements that are literally and figuratively dying off.

    Say hello to your once and future daddy!

  • Red Tony||

    Seriously, am I the only one who thinks this guy is a rapist?

  • Dillinger||

    Kirkland or O?

  • Red Tony||

    Kirkland. I mean, it's like every fifth post is a rape fantasy. It's probably the most disturbing thing about him.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    You goobers act like Trump is your daddy, but you will learn.

  • Red Tony||

    See? This sounds like something a guy with a rape dungeon would say.

  • ||

    Yeah - for someone who presents as a super-smart really well-educated guy, he never actually makes any arguments - it's always "ha-ha - watch while we of the superior variety ram our ___ down your ___!"

    It's a pretty bizarre disconnect.

  • JesseAz||

    He presents as that asshole hick in a random rom com forced to go back to his hick family only to realize that it is he himself who is the raging asshole. But he never got to the 2nd act.

  • ||

    He has yet to get to his second act - he's currently in the montage where it looks like he really has shed the hick identity and worked his way into being a true Bostonian. Inspiring, upbeat music playing as he nods triumphantly at his keyboard.

  • Sevo||

    "Inspiring, upbeat music playing as he nods triumphantly at his keyboard."
    While admiring his visage in the mirror...

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Arty is a high school dropout working a menial job. His boss is a successful conservative. So this is how he gets back at everyone.

  • perlchpr||

    Nope.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Yup

  • Just Say'n||

    Cheering on a socialist program because the messenger is popular.

    Libertarian af

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Libertarian? This is a site for fans of big-government womb management; authoritarian and bigoted immigration policies (the 'papers, please?' crowd); tariffs and protectionism; state micromanagement of medical clinics (that serve women); enforced hand-over-heart, toe-on-line standing at attention for the national anthem; and other right-wing authoritarian preferences popular among disaffected faux libertarians.

  • Red Tony||

    Hey, claiming that he's the one true libertarian and that everyone else is a filthy idiot is part of Hihn's schtick. Quit stepping on his toes, you cyberbully!

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    I a libertarian mostly in comparison with the right-wing malcontents who prance about in libertarian drag that fools only each other.

  • Sevo||

    Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland|9.7.18 @ 6:13PM|#
    "I a libertarian mostly in comparison with..."

    Oh, OBL, Fauxcahantas, Bernie, Obo,...

  • XM||

    You're so libertarian that you endorse medicare for all. Uh huh.

    You're ok with government regulating every aspect of our lives EXCEPT for the womb and immigration. Then you accuse libertarians of hypocrisy if they ain't down with open borders.

    You can move away from the right wing goobers and live in socialist states. What's stopping you?

    Snickers

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Plus, I'M the one true libertarian. This is known.

  • perlchpr||

    I can accept that claim, actually.

  • The Knuckle||

    There can be only one, or was that highlanders?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    We know now how many anarchists run Reason and hang out in comments.

    There are Libertarians here. You can tell by the content of the things they say.

  • Rockabilly||

    Big fucking deal.

    Obama is a fucking douche bag of the most highest fucking order

    A bigger fucking charlatan than Rev. Arthur L(loser) Kirkland.

    Fuck Off WarBama - Lord of the Drones and keeper of the fucking secret kill list -

  • JesseAz||

    Umm... no. But he's basically in a dead statistical tie with good ole W.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    So he's right because he's popular?

    Every post you make is the populist or expert fallacy.

  • Cyronic||

    An ex-president's approval rating is completely irrelevant to this discussion, unless your implication is "He's the most popular, therefore he's right!" In which case, congratulations, you're a populist now, you goober.

  • Live Free Or Diet||

    Sure!
    'Cuz Obama's first solution for health coverage worked out so well.

  • Ron||

    they created a system designed to be so bad that people will demand single payer.

    Actually the only thing keeping us from single payer is unions. If corporations went to single payer it would be cheaper for the corporations and the unions would have less influence over them and people would have fewer reasons to join a union

  • damikesc||

    they created a system designed to be so bad that people will demand single payer.

    And critics specifically pointed it out at the time. It was a system DESIGNED to fail to allow a total government takeover.

    Because nothing the government does badly does anything but justify MORE government.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    +1

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    This is his final solution.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    You know who else made not-so-veiled references to Hitler?

  • Red Tony||

    Roger Waters?

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    Winston Churchill?

  • Live Free Or Diet||

    Klara Pölzl?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Eva Braun?

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    David Hilter?

  • Flinch||

    Hogg.

  • JFree||

    But if past is prologue since Republicans do not have a clue as to an alternative, Dems will eventually have the political capital necessary to give it a go anyway.

    FIFY

  • Mickey Rat||

    Nothing like expanding on a program that is going broke, does not fully pay for services, while completely changing its finding to payee demographic in such a fundamental fashion it cannot really be called the same program.

    Giving away other people's resources and services is a great idea,...if you are not one of the other people.

  • ||

    Everybody can live off the rich! Why can't anyone see the genius of that plan?

  • Tony||

    And the superior libertarian solution for universal healthcare is... oh you have none. It's not universal, and it's "Let anyone who is both sick and poor die." Right?

    Smug cynical asshats.

  • Tony||

    And allow me: "Charity unicorns blah blah magic!"

  • Mickey Rat||

    You only get to "universal" by pointing guns at people who don't want to use your shoddy one size fits all program.

    You economic fascist.

  • Tony||

    Just like universal property rights. Which actually does involve physical violence, not just the metaphorical kind. How many times must we go over this? It's an invalid argument unless you're an anarchist. If we can do one thing universally, we can do another.

  • Mickey Rat||

    So if someone lets you shake their hand, that means you can fuck them?

    Because one thing is tolerable does not mean everything is.

  • Tony||

    Very true, but you can't say one thing is intolerable for reason X and then tolerate something that can only exist via X.

  • Sevo||

    Tony|9.7.18 @ 5:42PM|#
    "Very true, but you can't say one thing is intolerable for reason X and then tolerate something that can only exist via X."

    No one made such a comment, but an ignorant shitbag like you is not going smart enough to notice the differences, and no one here is going to waste time trying to explain it.
    Why don't you grow up, you pathitec excuse for humanity?

  • Tony||

    I don't want to, and with a very low risk of knocking some chick up, I don't have to.

    You want government goons to point their guns at me and tell me to stay off what you claim is your property (actually what government entitles to you), whether I agree with that situation or not. Fascist derp!

  • Sevo||

    Tony|9.7.18 @ 5:57PM|#
    "You want government goons to point their guns at me and tell me to stay off what you claim is your property (actually what government entitles to you), whether I agree with that situation or not. Fascist derp!"

    I'd rather you die of a particularly painful disease, and your inability to see the difference between defending rights and manufacturing them makes your rep here perfectly uderstandable.
    You are a fucking ignoramus and proud of it.
    Grow up.

  • Red Tony||

    ...wow, Past Me.

    ...I mean wow.

    ...super wow.

    ...was Past Me always this idiotic?

    By Past Me's logic, wherein a person is "allowed" to keep their property only because the government wills it, a person likewise is only "allowed" to keep their life because a thug with a baseball bat wills it. There is no right to life, only an allowance of life by a stronger being.

  • ||

    was Past Me always this idiotic?

    He's gotten better, actually.

  • Tony||

    If any rando on the internet can say what rights are, then I declare a right to healthcare.

    How do you not see the circularity of your bullshit?

  • Nardz||

    "If any rando on the internet can say what rights are, then I declare a right to healthcare"

    So, slavery?
    Got it

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    I have the constitution to back up my claims. Tony, you have nothing.

  • ||

    I don't want to, and with a very low risk of knocking some chick up, I don't have to.

    This is maybe the most honest thing you've ever posted here.

    Now run along - the grownups are talking.

  • ||

    What a fool. I dont expect a government goon to point a gun at you. I am happy to do that myself. I just don't want them pointing a gun at me when I use that gun because you have respect for others.

  • handsoffmypineapples||

    Maintaining property rights requires only that you don't take my stuff.

    Universal healthcare would req

  • handsoffmypineapples||

    Maintaining property rights requires only that you don't take my stuff

    Implementing universal healthcare would *LITERALLY* require that you take my stuff

    That's a pretty fundamental difference.

  • Tony||

    And what if I do take your stuff? No taxpayer funded services required?

  • Tony||

    And I'll take that as a "yes" on the dying in a gutter thing.

  • ||

    It's a good thing there are no downsides to a government run healthcare program, and we only need to think of the downsides of any alternatives.

  • Sevo||

    So S=C, ya think shitbag here is perfectly fine with people dying on the waiting lists?

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    Yes. He's also fine if a court says your life is too costly to keep going, even if you intend to use your own money to travel elsewhere to try.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    "Own money"......

    Oh Chippah, don't you understand? That's not yours, it's a national resource.

  • leninsmummy||

    You could always work and save money to pay for your healthcare like any other service.. I mean people seem cool with taking out 60 thousand in loans for an English degree but when it comes to paying for health it's like wtf those 5$ contraceptives aren't covered?!?

  • DesigNate||

    Medical care is not a fucking right. Fascist.

  • Tony||

    It is in the entire rest of the civilized world. And it is for the old and poor in this country. And it can be for everyone else if we want it to be. Poopyhead.

  • Sevo||

    Tony|9.7.18 @ 5:40PM|#
    "It is in the entire rest of the civilized world"

    No, shitbag, it is not a "right" there, either. It is a coerced government service. And poorly done as are all government services.

  • Tony||

    Rights exist when governments make them exist.

  • Sevo||

    Tony|9.7.18 @ 5:55PM|#
    "Rights exist when governments make them exist."

    That's FUNNY!
    I guess slavery is just fine when the government says so?
    Pathetic.

  • Red Tony||

    The especially stupid thing is that Past Me basically just admitted that gay marriage isn't a right since the government never "made" a right to gay marriage exist.

  • Tony||

    In fact the Supreme Court did that very thing a couple years ago.

  • ||

    Rights exist when governments make them exist.

    Which is why the Nazis were right to try to exterminate the Jews.

  • Tony||

    It's no wonder you can't grasp the nature of rights with talk like this. Obviously not everything anyone ever does is morally laudable. You have to have decent people making the rules, or at least people sufficiently motivated to be decent.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    This from the guy who thinks that slavery is a right.

  • Tony||

    I don't want to blow your mind hole or anything, but there was a point in history when certain people had a right to own slaves. Does that mean it was good? No, no it doesn't. Sheeshus Christ.

    Why after all these years can we not get past this dumbass little semantic point? Is it because you guys are constantly dancing around the gravestone of your argument that is: "Yeah, God made rights--and I know what God said when he did."

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    At least you're honest about your desire for slavery and fascism. That's a start.

  • Sevo||

    Tony|9.7.18 @ 7:33PM|#
    "It's no wonder you can't grasp the nature of rights with talk like this.
    [...]
    You have to have decent people making the rules, or at least people sufficiently motivated to be decent."

    Gee, so it's just been the wrong people all this time!
    Shitbag, claiming your audience doesn't 'grasp the nature of rights' when we perfectly understand your claims to be bullshit might work with other lefty ignoramuses or maybe even your mom.
    Not here.

  • Deconstructed Potato||

    Tony | 9.7.18 @ 5:55PM | #

    Rights exist when governments make them exist.

    I always said you had a sense of humor. A sick, morose humor, but humor nonetheless.

  • lap83||

    "Rights exist when governments make them exist."

    The progressive religion perfectly summarized. You want something? Just ask your divine creator, the government, and it will be so.

    Then the government saw that the right to have free chocolate ice cream grow on trees was good. And there was morning and there was night the first day

  • perlchpr||

    "Rights exist when governments make them exist."

    The progressive religion perfectly summarized. You want something? Just ask your divine creator, the government, and it will be so.

    Enh. As much as I hate to admit it, Tony sort of has a point.

    So, just ignore the fact that he's using the wrong word. He's saying "right" but generally means "privilege", and "privilege" in a very broad sense that encompasses both things which are purely artificially provided by the government, and the benefits of things which we consider actual rights.

    And what he's saying is that people only have the privileges that the government chooses to enforce. People in the Soviet Union did not have a meaningful right to property, because not only would the government not back one, it actively worked against the concept.

    But the Soviet did have a "right" to bread, and the government would notionally back that up. But, of course, then we get to the other half of the problem. Just because the government says you have a right to something doesn't mean that something is going to exist.

    I mean, for some things, our government is large enough to warp reality to make it true. We could declare a "right to internet", and spend the money to provide infrastructure to make it happen. Healthcare is probably more expensive to provide in bulk than raw 'net access. I doubt even the US government has the weight to pull that off.

  • damikesc||

    Rights exist regardless.

    They are USABLE when the government doesn't suppress them.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Tomy would have the the government strip of your right to protect yourself.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Then the right to your life.

    Tony, thinks the state should have right to YOU.

  • Social Justice is neither||

    talk about unicorns and magical thinking.

  • DesigNate||

    I'm at least honest enough to admit I can be a poopyhead.

    Just own the fact that you think the government should control all of us economically (I know you don't think they should in any other regard because somehow it's only icky when they try to control us socially.)

  • Rockabilly||

    fuck off Tony

    Move to Cuba for your fucking commie ass medicine.

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    We in America fought a war about 150 years ago to put to rest the idea that one person has a right to the labor of another.

    Your side lost.

  • Tony||

    So cops and judges and jailers don't work?

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    Who has a right to a cop? Maybe you think you're at a different website?

  • DesigNate||

    Assholes like Tony can't wrap their heads around the fact that you have a right to a trial, impartial judge, and jury of your peers to protect you from governmenal malfeasance.

    Because they think the government is always right, as long as their team is in charge.

  • Sevo||

    Tony|9.7.18 @ 5:17PM|#
    "And the superior libertarian solution for universal healthcare is..."

    Notice that shitbag assumes a result that only he and other shitbags prefer and then asks how others plan to accomplish that.
    Pathetic.

  • Tony||

    Then I went on to explain that you don't have a solution or want one.

    But it would be nice if you would be honest and spell out your preferred course of action: "If you can't afford health insurance or care in the private market, you can die and take your diseased children with you."

  • Sevo||

    Tony|9.7.18 @ 5:52PM|#
    "Then I went on to explain that you don't have a solution or want one."

    No, a random assertion is not an 'explanation' of anything. But accepting that means you'd have to have other than a room temperature IQ.

  • CE||

    We don't need single payer for groceries or houses or utility bills or automobiles. Why is health care different?

    Just stop gumming up the free market. If charity doesn't help the truly needy, downsize the military budget and put more into food stamps and Medicaid.

    Rich older non-working people shouldn't live off young working people just because they're old.

  • Echospinner||

    I am not for single payer because the government never does anything cheaper and better. Why should it?

    Groceries are already paid for through taxes for those who cannot afford them. Why, because we just can't stand the thought of people starving when there is more food than we can eat.

    There are some differences. What if the grocery store just let everyone in and allowed them to select a weeks worth of groceries. There are no prices on the shelves. They charge different amounts based on your income. If you had no money you paid nothing. If you had good income you paid $3000 and so on. That is similar to what we have in medicine now.

    Furthermore you can make choices at the grocery. I can buy the fancy French water or the cheaper water or none at all. Or I can shop for a cheaper store. That does not happen in medicine. The consumer does not really have the ability to select that way. To a limited extent maybe but when the doc says you need an MRI to see if you have cancer you get one. You don't really shop around. How would you?

    Most people trust medicine to some extent because although it is not at all allergic to profit it has established credibility and an ethic even if imperfect. Plus what choice do you have when the appendix needs to come out? Food we are all experts.

    We can keep what we have now, make adjustments to control cost as far as possible and keep the government out of it as much as we can. That may be the best approach.

  • Echospinner||

    You also mentioned something that I think relates to Medicare as we have it. It relates to Social Security as well.

    I am getting to the age where retirement is not that far away.

    Lemme tell you. I paid far more into that than I will ever get back. If you want to buy me out at 7% compounded in cash right now go ahead. I will transfer the SS checks and Medicare payments to you. I could be on the beach tomorrow.

    Sucks right?

    I did not start this and would have gladly taken it as investment account.

    "Rich older non working..." jeez you entitled progressive softies have no clue how good you have it.

  • Brian||

    Tony:

    And the superior libertarian solution for universal healthcare is... oh you have none. It's not universal, and it's "Let anyone who is both sick and poor die." Right?

    Sure, just as soon as you confess to:
    "I endorse the policies most associated with pussy, not because I care about people, but I like being taken care of, and I love guilt-tripping people into taking care of me (i.e., pussy)."

  • MarkLastname||

    I have some sad news for you Tony: there are a finite number of doctors, nurses, drugs, etc. there's a finite amount of healthcare. That means not everyone gets all the healthcare they want, humans bring mortal and all.

    And putting the government in charge of producing it will do nothing to increase the supply of it. See, that's believing in magic. If the government seized control over all the farms then declared all food free, no fewer people would starve because there's no more food than there was before. In fact more people will starve because now there's no incentive for anyone else to produce food to sell. Same with healthcare.

    Socialized medicine is rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic after setting the life rafts on fire.

  • leninsmummy||

    It's too bad that Tony won't read or understand your sincere attempt at explaining the real world.

  • Benitacanova||

    Slick Barry was always for something before he was against something before he was for it again. Mr. I vote present strikes again.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    If Republicans want to avoid universal health care, they should develop a better or equal plan without delay.

    I expect them to continue to focus on the God-guns-gays issues that animate the current conservative electoral base, but perhaps conservatives will surprise us and become effective before Democrats impose adult supervision.

  • Just Say'n||

    They had three plans that would have been infinitely better than Medicare for all. Woketarians vociferously opposed all of them.

    The virtue signal is more powerful than economic reality

  • Sevo||

    Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland|9.7.18 @ 5:32PM|#
    "If Republicans want to avoid universal health care, they should develop a better or equal plan without delay."

    Annoying asshole joins shitbag in claiming his desired result means everyone come up with a plan to accomplish that.
    Listen to your betters, you ignorant bigot.

  • Rockabilly||

    Fuck you alleged 'Rev.'

    Move to North Korea for your fucking commie ass health care.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    I may ask to have the honor of delivering your Obamacare card.

    Just to get to watch you take it and like it.

  • ||

    Just to get to watch you take it and like it.

    Hmm.

  • Deconstructed Potato||

    Red Tony was right.

  • Nardz||

    Of course... In a sense.
    Ask yourselves: how would an impotent person, perhaps even a eunuch, of devastatingly mediocre intelligence present himself in fantasy?
    Exactly as the Rev does

  • MarkLastname||

    Mediocre? That's generous.

  • Sevo||

    "I may ask to have the honor of delivering your Obamacare card.
    Just to get to watch you take it and like it."

    Why do lefty assholes always propose some ridiculous hypothetical and then claim to have 'won'?
    Is it just plain stupidity?
    Asshole bigot, you should listen to your betters.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Develop a better plan or learn to accept universal health coverage (similar to universal access to elementary school education, or sidewalks, or a municipal water system).

    Time is short for those who wish to avoid universal health care, mostly because they have had their chance and blown it.

  • DesigNate||

    Just because you think you have a right to a doctors services, that doesn't mean we have to provide you with a solution to achieve that. Fascist.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Persuade your fellow Americans to implement a better plan, or prepare for the new and improved universal Obamacare.

    I predict Republicans will not propose a plan, let alone a better plan or one that can be enacted, and that Republicans will lose enough elections, in relatively short order, to enable Democrats to enact a single-payer system. Mostly, I expect Republicans to huff and puff and whimper and whine until they are in the minority, at which point they will shift to bitter muttering at the sidelines.

  • MarkLastname||

    If the majority of voters believe something, it must be true. If the majority of voters demand a course of action, then it is by definition right and proper.

    The epistemology and moral philosophy of Revtard Arthur (and Tony)

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I pay cash for medical and dont pay into social security or medicare.

    No obamacare for me.

  • Dillinger||

    how 'bout you let O fade into the past

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    We can't. There are literally hundreds of thousands of journalists... Ronin, if you will, wandering without a master.

  • Just Say'n||

    Dave Waddle is devastated ever since his messiah left the White House

  • Just Say'n||

    Meant "Weigel", but "Waddle" works better

  • Red Tony||

    The really sad thing is that "Dave Waddle" is better than anything WCR could ever come up with.

  • Just Say'n||

    I owe it all to spell check

  • Nardz||

    ++++

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    how 'bout you let O fade into the past

    Next stop: United States Supreme Court.

    It will be known by history as the Obama Court.

  • Sevo||

    "Next stop: United States Supreme Court.
    It will be known by history as the Obama Court."

    Asshole, I'm guessing you are so unlettered as to be ignorant of that scumbag FDR's efforts at court-packing at a time his 'free shit' promises made him extremely popular.
    FYI, he failed, asshole.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    He already was on the supreme court for eight years. Or was it some other executive that acted like a super-legislature unchecked by any other branch?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Another Lefty fever dream when election 2018 goes badly for democrats and trump get reelected in 2020.

    Lefties think democrats will ever be in power again soon.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Just not enough half-educated bigots to keep the Republican-conservative electoral coalition afloat.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    You lefties do keep the GOP alive.

    I will focus on the Libertarian action though.

  • Rockabilly||

    Fuck you Obamamammamaamaamamamamamma

    take your medicare and stick it up your fucking commie ass hat ass.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    That's soon-to-be-Justice Obama to you, tough guy.

    He is your better, and will be making decisions for you soon enough. And you will obey.

  • Just Say'n||

    Come on, that's just fantasy

  • Nardz||

    True. The score of that comment was so high, it broke the progressive scale.
    Truly impressive

  • Nardz||

    Supposed to be reply to Bubba

  • Bubba Jones||

    This is a masterpiece.

  • Sevo||

    "That's soon-to-be-Justice Obama to you, tough guy.
    He is your better, and will be making decisions for you soon enough. And you will obey."

    Part of your court-packing fantasy, asshole?

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    I expect enlargement of the Supreme Court (similar to that of the Arizona Supreme Court a few years ago, for the ignorant among us) in a few years.

    I heard no objections among the riff-raff when Republicans expanded the court in Arizona a few years ago. I doubt Democrats will have much interest in conservative whining in a few years.

    Win the elections or experience the consequences.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Well considering he's visited all 57 states, which I can never hope to in my lifetime, he must be my better.

  • Deconstructed Potato||

    And you will obey.

    Is there a safe word? Please god let there be a safe word.

    Ever since Red Tony pointed out the relentless rapeyness, I imagine the Rev as Zed from Pulp Fiction.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Surely the Gimp. This is what you get when you remove the ball gag.

  • Nardz||

    ^WINNER

    NotAnotherSkippy by ko in the 8th!

  • Rock Lobster||

    And Zed gets appropriately killed in the end by one of those he victimized.

    Behold, Rev, the fate of humanity's "betters."

  • MarkLastname||

    And this guy calls other people fadcists. Giving Hihn a run for his money in the batshit crazy department.

  • Bubba Jones||

    Britches is gullible

    "What we've done with Obamacare is have a step in the right direction, but we're far from having something that's going to work forever," Reid said. When then asked by panelist Steve Sebelius whether he meant ultimately the country would have to have a health care system that abandoned insurance as the means of accessing it, Reid said: "Yes, yes. Absolutely, yes."

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    This is the core problem with liberals. They. Just. Won't. Stop.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Yeah, it won't stop, all of this damned progress. Women voting and owning property . . . and they don't even need a note from the man! Darkies in the same classrooms as white girls . . . but no prayers, because of these damned liberals. Gays being treated like human beings. Evolution and gravity in science classes. Abortions for the riff-raff (who can't afford the airfare to Europe). Literacy tests out, but this damned hippity-hoppity-rappity music playing in public. Can't have poll taxes, but you have to have handicapped access. Police have to justify their actions, but commies and socialists can speak with impunity.

    Why, I tell you, these liberals are just no damned good and there is no end to their evil ways.

  • DesigNate||

    You are one racist, misogynistic fuck.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    Won't this so-called man ever shut up?

  • sarcasmic||

    Isn't that a bit harsh? Just because he wears a pantsuit and is more feminine than his wife.... Never mind.

  • Deconstructed Potato||

    I predict at least three more decades of The Obamanation walking this earth and holding spellbound the media disciples who spread his word. Upon his ascension from the corporeal plane, his stature as the Great Prophet will be ensured for eternity.

  • Let freedom ring||

    Reason is still irrelevant. What taxes are you gonna raise? Income taxes on the rich (ie middle class). But fellow reasonoids, there is no such thing. Income is not taxed in this country. The income tax is a misnomer, it is an excise tax on profit derived from a federal privilege. How do we know? The US Constitution, the tax laws themselves (Title 26) and the success of administrative procedures that conform to those laws and court decisions.
    Thousands and thousands of ordinary Americans have received full refunds of their withheld taxes including payroll taxes, state and federal for fifteen years now because they understand the law and are willing to stand up for it. Instead of publicizing this, Reason staff and Cato and Lew Rockwell etc continue to believe the propaganda that the income tax is a tax on all income and the IRS is evil .
    The IRS is not evil folks, it more like the Volgons in "A hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy". If you give them the right paperwork, they will process it. If not, they will make you listen to their poetry while they slam you against the wall. www.losthorizons.com

  • sarcasmic||

    It's Vogons. Not Volgons. You ain't no frood and you don't know where your towel is.

  • CE||

    You know who else had a bright idea?

  • sarcasmic||

    My Wonko the Sane moment was when the international symbol for a good idea was made illegal.

  • perlchpr||

    Is this a reference to the "OK" sign thing?

  • sarcasmic||

    In cartoons when someone has a great idea an incandescent light bulb appears over their head...

  • AlmightyJB||

    Where do I send my application to be on the death panel?

  • Mark22||

    European death panels generally consist of a mix of politicians, doctors, insurance company representatives, and church officials.

  • Headache||

    What Bullshit! Obama lied, can't you just say it.

    And then this -
    Conservatives, meanwhile, have made their peace with Obamacare, declining to repeal it when they had a chance, opting instead to preserve some of its key features.

    All the republicans that voted against repeal were not conservatives. They were RINOs.

  • lap83||

    OK Obama, why don't you give up whatever premium healthcare you have and try Medicare for awhile to show us all how great it is? No? That's what I thought

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    The "for all" part refers to the little people.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Is nobody going to mention how desperate Democrats are to have Obama on the campaign trail?

    Most of Obama legacy items have been rolled back, been partly rolled back, or are in the process of being rolled back.

    Who was the 44th president again?

  • Jerry B.||

    So if your family makes more than, say, $70,000 a year, Obama now supports raising your taxes.

    Is he actually campaigning for the Republicans?

  • Sebastian Cremmington||

    Medicare for All would be the biggest windfall for the well off in the history of America!! First chance Republicans got they would repeal all of the taxes Democrats implemented to pay for it. Health care in 2018 isn't that important and everyone should understand lifestyle choices are much more important than health care. So American children have 100% health insurance coverage and yet they are not as healthy as European children because of lifestyle issues...which is actually an argument against both sides of this issue because America's "problem" is not related to health insurance!! Michelle Obama was right and Barack was wrong!!!

  • perlchpr||

    If we'd stop arresting parents for letting their kids play outside, we'd probably have less of a childhood obesity problem.

  • leninsmummy||

    We should ban them for going outside for safety reasons, then the next step is for a government employee to inspect the area to be sure it's safe and issue a permit for outside time. Then we can have an agency fund study to determine what is the optimal play vs study time and which games have the most social justice value. For the children.

  • Mark22||

    If Medicare/Medicaid instituted the same cost controls as the UK or France, Medicare/Medicaid for all would be perfectly feasible and could be paid for out of the existing Medicare/Medicaid budget ($1.6T, or about $5000/American/year, more than most European systems spend per capita).

    The problem with the US healthcare system isn't the lack of single payer, it's the lack of effective cost controls. In fact, ACA is clearly designed to make any kind of cost controls impossible: it's a gigantic handout to special interests.

  • Echospinner||

    First good comment I have read here.

    It is not really about how we pay for it. What we should be talking about is how much we are paying.

    One way or the other almost everyone is getting some level of health care and the costs are shifted around. It doesn't really cost $70 for a Tylenol in the ER but the hospital has to make up for other losses in some way. So it is all coming out of the pockets of income earners one way or the other.

    In the list of options Medicare for all has a place on the table along with other choices.

  • Sevo||

    Echospinner|9.7.18 @ 11:47PM|#
    "First good comment I have read here.
    It is not really about how we pay for it. What we should be talking about is how much we are paying."

    I'm going to guess you have no knowledge of the price and wage fixes which continued post WWII. Unless you do, you are in over your head; Truman is the reason we pay what we do for medical care.
    And that fucking imbecile Obo would be more than happy to promote the same rather than propose an actual 'fix'; he's not real bright

  • Sebastian Cremmington||

    Truman is the only reason we have a private health insurance market. Without the group market private health insurance doesn't work. Sorry, the Heritage plan was clearly rejected by Republicans when they had the opportunity to repeal the regulations that perpetuate the group market.

  • Echospinner||

    Over my head. You have no idea.

    I don't care how it gets paid. I am not talking about some big pharm CEO. I mean literally the real shit, piss, blood, pus, bile.

    The people who actually do what we are taking about do not care for the most part. Who is the president or politics. Like that matters. How many years did you spend actually doing what we are talking about? You think it just happens?

    You think the paramedic, nurse or resident doctor putting in the chest tube is thinking about any of that? We can't even get enough of those people. We import many of them.

    Bottom line is you get what you pay for. Without funds the system collapses. If you are some kind of expert in the money part help would be appreciated.

    Truman, Obama, whatever. Means nothing.

  • DesigNate||

    Its not that we can't get them. The AMA literally restricts the supply.

  • Echospinner||

    The AMA has about 10% membership, if that. They control nothing.

    Supply if you mean US trained medical students, almost all of them will become doctors, has zero to do with the AMA.

    We have more residency slots than people to fill them. That means that near everyone trained here who can pass the NBME can qualify to get a place in the match for residency. That is just a start. In short becoming a qualified doctor with board certification and state license, let alone hospital privileges is much more complicated than most people know. As it should be the government has less to do with it than internal vetting.

    Someone from elsewhere. That is a net gain for our medical system.

    The bottom line is not about qualified personnel. It relates more to the economic issue of an inelastic demand curve and a supply side which is equally rigid. Not a box of cornflakes.

    Cost control. There are limits to what we can spend unless you are the navy.

  • MarkLastname||

    The AMA lobbies to restrict accreditation of medical schools, not to mention restrictions on who else can provide medical services, like nurse practitioners.

  • Echospinner||

    No the AMA has a lobby but has little power. They hardly even produce useful medical science these days. That is decades late. Hardly anyone cares about that organization. The AOL or MySpace of medicine.

    The AMA has nothing at all to do with medical schools. They sell life insurance to docs these days.

    Nurse practitioners and PAs are regulated by state medical boards just like MDs and DOs.

    CRNP or CRNA are great fields to go into. Demand is high and do a terrific job. Better for someone who wants to go into medicine than all the expense and years to get an MD. Pay is very good and less hassle.

  • Sebastian Cremmington||

    Plus the group market was crafted by the UAW and New Deal Democrats! So essentially Obama is criticizing himself and Hubert Humphrey!?!

    Obviously Medicare for All is the most logical health care system and we could easily make it work but it wouldn't be superior to our current system because through dumb luck we got the private sector involved in health insurance. You never take the private market out of a system that is performing satisfactorily. The reason the private sector got involved in health insurance in America is because the group market is extremely business friendly. Liberals are really stupid to advocate this when expanding Medicaid is the biggest no-brainer in history slightly edging out marijuana legalization.

  • Qsl||

    I actually wonder about that.

    Supposing you had UBI, you could subsidize a large portion of healthcare while allowing markets to work. And you wouldn't need to make the compromises of a one size fits all plan and simplify many aspects of healthcare.

    You could have PHS address healthcare for those who fall through the cracks, but as Mark22 points out, cost controls (and transparency) are a major issue. There is no greater cost control than competition.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Free market healthcare or bust.

    Pay cash for minor medical visists and costs immediatly go way down.

  • Echospinner||

    Try and get an appointment as self pay. Most docs work for big groups now who will not take cash. The person at the front desk is not a cashier at the grocery. They do not even know how to do that. You need an approved plan to get past the waiting room. Sad, but that is how it is.

  • Mark22||

    While president, Obama was a single-payer critic. Out of office, he thinks it's the wave of the future.

    In case you still haven't figured it out: Obama says whatever people want to hear and whatever is in his interest.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Obama plays the long game.

    That's why guys like him have been directing America's path of progress for decades while guys like you object inconsequentially.

  • Sebastian Cremmington||

    Uh no. The individual mandate was added to the ACA purely to help Obama get reelected. So Gruber explained to Obama the CBO exaggerated the effect of the individual mandate so Obama reversed his position to improve his reelection chances.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Obama plays the long game.

    That's why guys like him have been directing America's path of progress for decades while guys like you object inconsequentially.

  • Mark22||

    Obama plays the long game.

    That's what (neo-)Marxists do.

    That's why guys like him have been directing America's path of progress for decades while guys like you object inconsequentially.

    Quite true: Obama and people like you are turning America into a progressive society, i.e., a society that is increasingly dominated by economic stagnation, racism, international wars, and authoritarianism.

    And it's hardly a new phenomenon that people like Obama and you destroy societies, either out of selfishness or out of spite. It has happened again and again throughout history and it's going to continue to happen. Sooner or later you always succeed, that's the way of things. But even when you do, other countries pick up the torch, because free societies always do better than progressive societies.

  • MarkLastname||

    More likely, he always wanted socialized medicine, but only now has it become acceptable to say so. He's doing things the Fabian way.

  • Freddie||

    In the years and decades of debate leading up to Obamacare, conservatives, supposedly the advocates of free markets, made the fundamental mistake of defending a status quo that was not theirs to defend. Pre-Obamacare, we did NOT have a free market – we had essentially a single-payer system delegated to employers through the tax code.
    Having the employer as the single payer carried all the sins of the government as single payer – limited choices, hidden costs and centralized bureaucratic control of medical decisions in exchange for the illusion of "free" health care – plus another big one: if you are sick and lose your job, you lose your coverage and now you have a pre-existing condition.
    Your employer's healthcare spending, typically around $10-15 thousand per year per employee, is a part of your pay that you never see. Without the tax bias (employee health care benefits are tax free), your employer would probably skip the hassle of running a health plan and simply pay out higher cash wages* – leaving you free to shop around for the health plan that best meets your individual needs and that would stay with you if you left your job.

    *your "total compensation" (in corporate geek-speak) is set by market forces; if your boss thought he could get away with cutting your pay he would have done so already

  • Sebastian Cremmington||

    Great comment! That said I will add that I supported McCain's 2008 plan over the Democrat's plan but I have since come to embrace the group market even though it is obviously unAmerican. The reality is the group market is the only way to have the free market somewhat involved in the health care market and I believe the free market is generally a positive force.

  • Mark22||

    The reality is the group market is the only way to have the free market somewhat involved in the health care market and I believe the free market is generally a positive force.

    The reality is that a totally free market in health care works fine. We don't need pools or group markets of any kind.

  • Sebastian Cremmington||

    But Republicans seek to perpetuate the group market.

  • Echospinner||

    ". Pre-Obamacare, we did NOT have a free market – we had essentially a single-payer system delegated to employers through the tax code."

    We still had Medicare and Medicaid. Medicare controls the shots in reimbursement and has since it started. Plus 65 is by far where the most expense is. The insurance companies follow Medicare not the other way around.

    You are right. It was not a free market.

  • B Wilds||

    Like many people, I was under the impression that Medicare was free and that after the age of 65 at least the burden of healthcare payments would be lifted from my shoulders. The dirty little secret is that for most people only part A is free and it will only suffice or be enough if you are poor or willing to become poor if you become ill and run up massive healthcare cost.

    For people with savings they wish to protect the cost of healthcare will remain an issue. The complex Medicare system is something most of us know little about and try not to think about until we must. Below are a few things it is important to know, and they may shock you.

    http://brucewilds.blogspot.com.....t-get.html

  • tlapp||

    The government's own Trustee report show Medicare 65% short of money needed to pay promised benefits. That is not insurance it is insurance fraud. But then again socialism is the equal sharing of the misery so why not have it for all?

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online