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 General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

ErikJ

(6,335 posts)
Wed Mar 28, 2012, 04:40 AM Mar 2012

State by state Medicare for all will make Obamacare ACA decision irrelevant?

I believe 11 states are working on single-payer /medicare for all right now. It will spread quickly from state to state like it did in Canada 40 years ago.
OC actually slows this process down by 2 years? I think. So maybe its better if this overly complex mess gets thumbs down.

A national Medicare for all bill would have been 6 pages long vs OC 2000 pages.

10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
State by state Medicare for all will make Obamacare ACA decision irrelevant? (Original Post) ErikJ Mar 2012 OP
How would this work? CAPHAVOC Mar 2012 #1
"It will spread quickly from state to state like it did in Canada 40 years ago" peace frog Mar 2012 #2
I'm not so sure about that, how long would those states that are Republican dominated remain that... Humanist_Activist Mar 2012 #3
This is why they want to overturn ACA. Selatius Mar 2012 #5
States want to attract businesses. If the businesses come, the people come. Honeycombe8 Mar 2012 #10
I think they will eventually nxylas Mar 2012 #4
NOT to Oklahoma. YellowRubberDuckie Mar 2012 #8
OR to Florida peace frog Mar 2012 #9
Yep, I'm sure counting on Oklahoma, Utah, Idaho, Mississippi and Ohio to get on board with that. HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #6
nope. sorry won't work cali Mar 2012 #7

peace frog

(5,609 posts)
2. "It will spread quickly from state to state like it did in Canada 40 years ago"
Wed Mar 28, 2012, 05:31 AM
Mar 2012

This may be true in an alternate universe but not in the USA which we inhabit. Do not delude yourself, Republican-dominated states will not adopt state-run single payer healthcare, period.

 

Humanist_Activist

(7,670 posts)
3. I'm not so sure about that, how long would those states that are Republican dominated remain that...
Wed Mar 28, 2012, 05:46 AM
Mar 2012

way when there neighbors enjoy single payer, low cost, medical insurance and care? I live in Missouri, not the most liberal of states, but less than 10 miles from me is Illinois, and if they passed single payer, the entire St. Louis Area will be well aware of the benefits, and we represent almost half the electorate in the state. A lot of residents from both states crisscross the border everyday, and frankly, if Illinois passed such a bill(which is possible), I'm packing my bags and moving those 10 miles. If I have to travel a little farther to work to avoid having to pay the atrocious plans they offer(don't pay for shit, and expensive premiums), then I will.

If the Republicans in my current state are obstinate in their opposition to single payer, how long can they dominate the state legislature? Not long, I gather, so they would be forced to either allow single payer, or get voted out of office. The biggest obstacle is still the southern part of the state, being full of ignorant jackasses, but hopefully the metro areas can counterbalance their influence.

Selatius

(20,441 posts)
5. This is why they want to overturn ACA.
Wed Mar 28, 2012, 05:53 AM
Mar 2012

ACA got the ball rolling. Once the government required the individual states to comply or come up with a system of their own, a crack opened for a state like Vermont or so on to entertain a single-payer system. States that want to come up with a system of their own but are still within the parameters set down by ACA as far as increasing coverage can apply for a waiver. Whether or not the White House grants the waiver depends upon who controls it. If you have a right-winger in the White House, probably not.

Honeycombe8

(37,648 posts)
10. States want to attract businesses. If the businesses come, the people come.
Wed Mar 28, 2012, 08:31 AM
Mar 2012

No state has trouble keeping its citizens or attracting people, esp if there is a thriving business community (jobs and larger tax base).

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
7. nope. sorry won't work
Wed Mar 28, 2012, 06:07 AM
Mar 2012

I heard Anya Rader Wallach, Chair of the Green Mountain Care Board which is tasked with designing and overseeing Vermont's coming health care plan and she said that without the ACA, it's doubtful if it can be achieved. You can't, on a state level, simply expand Medicaid.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»State by state Medicare f...