[Peace-discuss] Elizabeth Warren’s Medicare-For-All “Plan” is Pretend

[David Green]

Elizabeth Warren’s Medicare-For-All “Plan” is Pretendby Benjamin Studebaker

After a great deal of prodding from both centrist and lefty critics,
Elizabeth Warren finally put out her Medicare-For-All plan.
<https://www.npr.org/2019/11/01/775335150/read-elizabeth-warrens-plan-to-pay-for-medicare-for-all>
The
problem is that the plan is both unrealistic on its own terms and openly
pretend. Let me show you how.

Before I dig into the actual proposal, I want to highlight this line from
page 2:

We must fix this system. And over the *long-term*, the best way to achieve
that goal is to move from the system we have now to a system of Medicare
for All.

See that phrase “long-term”? That’s code to rich people for “this is all
pretend”. Most presidential candidates will tell you that they’re going to
do stuff “in the first one-hundred days” or even on their “very first day”.
When wannabe presidents tell you they’re going to do something right away,
it usually doesn’t happen, but at least you have some reason to think they
might try. Warren put “long-term” in this plan to send an unequivocal
message to the rich and the powerful that she isn’t serious about this and
doesn’t care.

She uses the phrase over and over. On the very next page, in case you
missed it the first time, she repeats it:

I’m filling in the details and releasing a plan that describes how I would
implement the *long-term* policy prescriptions of the Medicare for All Act
and how to pay for it.

But wait! Maybe you missed it on page 2 *and *on page 3. In case you missed
it twice, she uses the phrase again on page 4:

Every candidate who opposes my *long-term* goal of Medicare for All should
explain why the “choice” of private insurance plans is more important than
being able to choose the doctor that’s best for you without worrying about
whether they are in-network or not.

And then she uses it twice more on page 5:

And every candidate who opposes my *long-term* goal of Medicare for All
should put forward their own plan to make sure every single person in
America can get high-quality health care and won’t go broke – and fully
explain how they intend to pay for it. Or, if they are unwilling to do
that, concede that their half-measures will leave millions behind. And make
no mistake – any candidate who opposes my *long-term* goal of Medicare for
All and refuses to answer these questions directly should concede that they
have no real strategy for helping the American people address the crushing
costs of health care in this country.

And in case you forget, it’s there again one more time on page 19:

And the American people know that in the *long-term*, a simple system that
covers everybody, provides the care they need when they need it, puts $11
trillion back in their pockets and uses all of the public’s leverage to
keep costs as low as possible is the best option for their family budgets
and for the health of their loved ones.

Harry Reid, who encouraged Warren to run for senate and helped jump start
her career, is on the record doubting her commitment to the proposal:

<https://twitter.com/wideofthepost>
wideofthepost at wideofthepost
<https://twitter.com/wideofthepost>
<https://twitter.com/wideofthepost/status/1183168042920005632>

Harry Reid tells David Axelrod that he doesn’t think Elizabeth Warren will
follow through on ‘Medicare for All.’

“Give her some time, I think that she’s not in love with that, I think that
she, you’ll wait and see how that all turns out... oh I know she’s
pragmatic, just wait”
[image: Embedded video]
<https://twitter.com/wideofthepost/status/1183168042920005632>
3,781 <https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1183168042920005632>
5:50 PM - Oct 12, 2019
<https://twitter.com/wideofthepost/status/1183168042920005632>
Twitter Ads info and privacy <https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256>

1,604 people are talking about this
If Elizabeth Warren really wanted people to believe she was committed to
Medicare-For-All, she’d at least do us the courtesy of pretending she’d try
to do it right away. “Long-term” shows she’s not even serious enough to lie
properly.
<https://twitter.com/wideofthepost/status/1183168042920005632>

This isn’t the first time Warren has used code words to conceal her
intentions. Back in March, Warren said
<https://edition.cnn.com/politics/live-news/elizabeth-warren-town-hall-mississippi/h_b172fb6504a7e76a8a725b1d20b6ec36>
:

When we talk about Medicare for All, there are a lot of different
pathways…Some folks are talking about “Let’s start lowering the age. Maybe
bring it down to 60, 55, 50″…Some people say “Do it the other way. Let’s
bring it up, from, uh, everybody under 30 gets covered by Medicare.” Others
say “Let employers be able to buy into the Medicare plans.” Others say
“Let’s let employees buy into the Medicare plans.” For me, what’s key is we
get everybody at the table on this…I’ve also co-sponsored other bills
including expanding Medicaid as another approach that we use.

This “pathways” or “many paths” language was a way of appearing to support
Medicare-For-All without committing to the actual proposal put forward by
Bernie Sanders. As Warren goes onto illustrate, “many paths” meant
everything from “buying into” Medicare, which is Pete Buttigieg’s public
option, to gradually lowering the Medicare eligibility age. But you know
the one thing she didn’t list? Bernie’s bill.

Elizabeth Warren likes to pretend Bernie’s bill doesn’t exist. In
September, she used another code word, calling Medicare-For-All a
“framework”:
<https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/463577-elizabeth-warrens-vagueness-on-medicare-for-all-isnt-fooling-anyone>

Right now, what we’ve got in Medicare for All is a framework. It doesn’t
have the details and you’re right to be asking. But the most important part
of your asking is to raise awareness so we get this right as we go through
it.

By calling Medicare-For-All a “framework”, Warren insinuates that it has no
specific content and could mean whatever you want it to mean.

At the time Warren was acting as if Medicare-For-All were a mere slogan,
Bernie Sanders quite literally had a website up which enables you to
calculate your savings under his bill. This website has been up since 2016.
It’s still up. You can still go there. Please do:

https://valadian.github.io/SandersHealthcareCalculator/

At every stage, Warren has been careful to signal that for her,
Medicare-For-All means whatever you want it to mean. Now, by telling us
it’s a “long-term” goal, she’s signalling it means nothing at all. And
because she’s doing it right in front of our faces in a *policy* plan, most
people can’t see it.

The thing to realise about Warren is that the policy plans are not real
plans—they’re campaign devices. A Warren “plan” is no different from an
issues section of a candidate’s website. Candidates use issues sections to
play games all the time. Andrew Yang loves to use his issues section to
feign support for Medicare-For-All. Initially, in April, Yang’s website
said:
<https://benjaminstudebaker.com/2019/08/14/andrew-yang-is-playing-hide-and-seek-with-the-left-press/>

Either through expanding Medicare to all, or through creating a new
healthcare system, we must move in the direction of a public option.

In suggesting that Medicare-For-All was merely a move “in the direction” of
nothing more than a public option, Yang said loudly what most of the
Democratic candidates have been saying quietly. It was too obvious. By
August, he swapped it out for a framework-version of Medicare-For-All, with
no details
<https://benjaminstudebaker.com/2019/08/14/andrew-yang-is-playing-hide-and-seek-with-the-left-press/>
:

Through a Medicare for All system, we can ensure that all Americans receive
the healthcare they deserve. Not only will this raise the quality of life
for all Americans, but, by increasing access to preventive care, it will
also bring overall healthcare costs down.

Before too long, I’m sure Yang will be telling us his “long-term strategy”
for Medicare-For-All, and I’m sure his supporters will be expecting us to
take it very, *very* seriously.

There are stages here:

   1. Say you support Medicare-For-All, but suggest it could mean anything,
   including a public option. There are “many paths” and we need to go “in the
   direction”.
   2. Say you support Medicare-For-All, but suggest that it is a
   “framework” or a slogan that needs to be defined.
   3. Issue a plan for Medicare-For-All, but insinuate repeatedly that the
   plan is “long-term” and not a priority.

Andrew Yang does it on his issues page. Elizabeth Warren does it behind the
thin veneer of a policy “plan”. It’s pretend.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20191113/6a8fbdfa/attachment-0001.htm>