I think many people may underestimate her, her commitments, and her ally, Bernie Sanders. They will be fighting for this until they get it, period.

That's why I can't support her nomination at this point.

hers. The rest can stay, but she needs to switch to a strong Public Option stance IMHO, and let things take their course.

Tell me what you like about his health care plans, how they differ from EW's and are better.

will be a big issue in General Election.

What is she going to do when she gets hit with "Warren is for mandated Medicare for everyone, even those who don't want it?" It's too late for her to say she changed her mind and is really not for MFA. She's got to ride that horse, even if the majority of Americans -- rightly or wrongly, and I tend to believe wrongly -- are either opposed or quite concerned about what that would mean to them. I believe it is is loser in general election, not matter how simple she tries to make it for the stupid.

Why would she, why should she do that?

Single payer works, and the US system does not.

Unless you are talking about a phased approach, where the 50-60 group could enter a MFA system, with a planned fairly rapid lowering of the age in 10 year increments,

than incremental changes that do not show an understanding of the huge flaws in the US system.

President Trump’s executive order: ‘Protecting Medicare from Socialist Destruction’
Trump Expected to Call for Expansion of Private Medicare Advantage Program
https://pnhp.org/news/president-trumps-executive-order-protecting-medicare-from-socialist-destruction/

Protect the right of the healthcare industry to profit by denying medical care to Americans.

I think in debates like these everyone is using their on homegrown ideas of what the problem is and what the solutions are.

And they are using the same words but in their minds nothing about it is the same.

For example, some say M4A is a single payer system run by government where you pay nothing for care.

Others think it is the current Medicare covering everyone who is not covered by it.

To some the problem is that there is profit motive in healthcare and anything connected with it.

To others the problem is the millions of uninsured.

"socialism commies" don't take over Murika.

private health care, approval for it goes underwater. People don't want to give up their current health care. It is one of those things that is popular with the Democratic base, but not outside of it. Your argument is correct, but you have to deal with political reality.

I am a Federal retiree, and even the Federal system is much worse than the Canadian system. People fear what they do not know, but seniors in the US already have access to Medicare, and they like Medicare at higher levels than the rest of the US population likes their own private plans.

If Warren gets the nomination, What is going to happen when the Republicans pound it in that people are going to have to give up their employer based health care? I could be wrong, but I believe it is going to hurt her big time.

The ACA builds on the current system. It could not really succeed because the insurance companies are still in control.

Medicare for All emphasizes that Medicare, a program which seniors prefer, will be extended to all. Polling also showed that the ACA is/was more popular than "Obamacare".

We seniors love it! I have only been on it for two years now.Though it has met my few needs for now, just was informed that the cost of living increase will drop this year for SS by 1.6 percent and Medicare said rates will increase for my drug plan. I was on tier one and paid nothing. Now they will cost. I don't know how much. Double whammy for those of us on fixed incomes.

Frankly I disagree with my Senator and my candidate of choice. Senator Warren. I would like to see ACA built on first. It was always meant to be single payer.

I do not want to see the building imploded and the foundation destroyed and a new system put in place that could take decades to build and take away a persons choice.

But Medicare already exists, and it is essentially single payer for seniors. Lowering the buy in age would allow more Americans to buy into Medicare. And that way, we would see more people deserting the private market for the lower priced public option.

For this to work best, the weaknesses that Bush Jr. built into Medicare would have to be fixed.

I believe a phase-in program would attract more moderate votes for Warren than she would lose on the left. If she's nominated, maybe she can tippy-toe in that direction without losing credibility. Not that full-blown MFA really has a chance to pass without lots of compromise (and even then…).

Medicare already enjoys widespread, bi-partisan support among voters. Phasing it in by gradually lowering the buy-in age would bring in younger, healthier people.

But there also must be the ability to negotiate drug prices to levels that the rest of the world pays.

I wouldn’t mind if she did. At the same time, I think single payer is a good starting position in the negotiations.

We have a winner!

I wasn't sure about the argument that Obama should have asked for more in order to get the public option, but I think it's time to use a different strategy and that one is valid. As good as the ACA has been, there are major problems in states that refused to expand Medicaid.
We really need action at the federal level and EW has taken a position that makes room for more solutions than are currently available.

I think she will water down MFA in the general. She’s smart, and is willing to do what needs to be done politically to get into office so she can bring about structural change.

Right now she’s making sure Bernie can’t run to her left. Once Warren wins the nomination she’ll release a detailed health care plan that will not only bring us true single payer, it will be doable and practical.

NT

Not following this.

And how, exactly, does she water it down? Maybe they could take out Turner's "Slave Ship" cuz it's just FULL of water but lots of people want to see it...

this is just AWFUL!

I’m thinking, She has a Masters of Fine Arts? Why is that a problem and how would she water it down?

compromises will most likely be needed, and she wont be writing the bill.

but she will stick to principals, and wont give away the store.

and think she needs to change her stance. She should say that while she ultimately supports Medicare for all, she is in favor of first passing a Medicare buy-in option that would be a stepping stone to single payer in the future.

Warren earlier this year:

"How do we get universal coverage? Medicare for all. Lots of paths for how to do that. But we know where we are aiming. And that is, every American has health care at a price they can afford. And that the overall costs in the system are held as low as possible.

So right now, there are multiple bills on the floor in the United States Senate. I’ve signed onto Medicare for All. I’ve signed on to another one that gives an option for buying in to Medicaid. There are different ways we can get there. But the key has to be always keep the center of the bullseye in mind. And that is affordable health care for every American."

.... along with Bernie and one other to say they would do away with private insurance. I've been waiting for some reconciliation of those two positions.

If she modifies her approach, it is going to be tough for the GOP to make a commercial about that hand going up.

on the outcome. I don't see Senator Warren as the "my way of the highway" type that Senator Sanders seems to be. I expect her to work hard for what she wants, but if she gets 70% of that, realize that is a big win and focus on smooth implementation of that 70%.

So no, my support will never waiver, I agree, she will find a way

I recognize that policies will get dinged by the collaboration process that gets them passed. She has my support because overall I like the way she fights for the middle-class. She's more conservative than I am, but so are most candidates, except (possibly) Sanders. Nonetheless, I think she's our best bet for beating Trump -- energetic, upbeat, savvy, quick witted. A specific policy change doesn't alter that equation.

me what watering it down means using your description of M4A.

Thank you!

If she begins compromising on Medicare for all it signals her willingness to compromise on range of other issues. The answer is yes, I would feel differently toward her.

I understand that there are a lot of people who don't want to give up their employer based healthcare program (the plan I had with my last employer was fantastic) and I'm sure that Warren understands that her proposal would be changed as it goes through the process of getting past both houses of Congress.

But like Social Security one has to start somewhere.

I will vote for whoever is the Democratic Candidate, as the Crooked Republicans that are in charge of our government must go the way of the dinosaur!

that when elected, she'll have to work with bicameral legislature to pound out a compromise. And there will be so much corporate lobbying by big pharma and the for-profit healthcare providers that it will be everything we can do to even get a public option, even if we have a giant majority. Because it is doubtful the people will all have the kind of courage Warren does, depending on their districts.

So, let's keep the MFA message out there because it is gradually changing minds. And hearts.

but when she says if you 'want to take private coverage away from millions of Americans, I'm not your candidate,' she is being a bit disingenuous because she knows very well as a US Senator what the negotiation process would look like, and that even if Warren is elected (or Bernie for that matter), we aren't likely to get MFA but rather a plan that offers some public option and private insurance if people still want it.

See, this whole debate is all media 'gotcha' bullshit. Bottom line, ALL our candidates want to tackle the healthcare system and improve it. THAT should be the talking point.

her poll numbers will look quite different.

She has outlined her plan which boils down to basically a fairer taxation system. Trump's tax thingy only helped the tip top of the one percent. That has to be changed. It is unfair and inimical to the well being of the middle class. We get hit with regressive taxes under republicans, whether at the federal or state levels (my state of CT is mercifully dark blue!).

So please don't misinterpret what she is saying. You may not care for her and some of the other Dem candidates. But NO ONE is saying "free this and free that."

My personal preference would be for a gradual Medicare opt-in, enlisting the aid of employers (who will be very glad, I think, to get out from under the enormous expense of providing employees with private/group insurance.

Within a decade, we could basically have MFA, but without as much screeching and hollering. We know that most people who have Medicare now prefer it to their previous status, so the more people who get into the Medicare system, the more will like it.

So if she waters it down, I'd be glad of it, as I think it will be less painful to get an opt-in established, especially now that we already have ACA.

and the willingness to listen to people and not be rigid and "puritan" is something I think we need. Of course, "watering down" needs to be defined, but no one person, or group, has all the answers. Hell, in reality, most of us don't really understand the questions, there's far more going on than meets the eye. If these last few years have have not us nothing else, it should be that.

So, no. Not in the least

Undecided to Warren.

Yeah, we'll get the usual ton of shit and outright LIES from repukes so let's prepare for it.

There's work to do!

Warren earlier this year:

"How do we get universal coverage? Medicare for all. Lots of paths for how to do that. But we know where we are aiming. And that is, every American has health care at a price they can afford. And that the overall costs in the system are held as low as possible.

So right now, there are multiple bills on the floor in the United States Senate. I’ve signed onto Medicare for All. I’ve signed on to another one that gives an option for buying in to Medicaid. There are different ways we can get there. But the key has to be always keep the center of the bullseye in mind. And that is affordable health care for every American."

A president does not create legislation, although she can propose and support legislation.

vision. So if she “waters down” in her vision for this country while campaigning, i would definitely think differently.

I would prefer health insurance companies to go back to being non-profit organizations again. Let’s try that first. That would be much easier to implement. If that doesn’t work, THEN try Medicare for All.

Her current position makes her unelectable, so I would very much appreciate a pivot at some point.

got? I expected better.

EW is, like me, an idealistic pragmatist.

That is why I will strongly support her throughout the primaries, no matter how much supporters of other candidates try to muddy the waters.

Strange that people who have no trouble with Biden touting his work with racist scumbags are suddenly aghast that Warren might not torpedo her entire agenda for the sake of ideological purity.

We need medicare done in a single presidential term or it won't get done
I first supported harris until I read she wanted a 10-year transition
while warren was for 4

For the latter, yes. I’m more interested in starting points than ending points. Compromise will happen. So I’m the end MFA probably isn’t going to happen but if you start there and negotiate from there, you’re more likely to end up with more of what you want.