[Peace-discuss] Despite Obstruction By Capitol Police, Progressive Groups Deliver 2.2 Million Petitions To Democrats Still Not Backing Medicare For All

[J.B. Nicholson]

David Johnson:
> House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has refused to allow the bill to
> the floor for a vote. Tom Nickels, a lobbyist for the American Hospital
> Association, predicted in April that Pelosi would ensure there is no
> vote on Medicare for All as long as she holds the gavel.

To add on to David's response: this should hardly come as a surprise to 
anyone given how the Democrats treated HR676 back when it was Rep. John 
Conyers' (D-MI) Medicare for All bill[1] (referred to as the "gold 
standard" Medicare for All bill by Dr. Margaret Flowers of Health Over 
Profit for Everyone and Popular Resistance in 
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/01/22/single-payer-gold-standard-hr-676-rest-peace). 
Pelosi's choice is simply part of the continuity of policy for the 
Democratic Party; Pres. Obama made sure his HMO-written, HMO-pleasing 
ObamaCare (née RomneyCare) would get through instead of Medicare for All. 
Jimmy Dore has rightly argued that this decision shows that as far as 
healthcare policy goes it wouldn't have mattered whether Mitt Romney or 
Barack Obama became POTUS.

This is how the Democrats manipulate the electorate and satisfy their HMO 
funders -- the Democrats apparently put up Medicare for All bills that read 
more or less well (3 such bills so far) and possibly get wide 
co-sponsorship within the Democratic Party (as HR676 did). This delays some 
criticism from the public with an unjustified belief that Medicare for All 
is just around the corner. Then none of these bills are ever brought to the 
floor for a vote.

This is also why I think it's not really that valuable to get into the 
details of the differences between Sen. Sanders' and Rep. Jayapal's 
respective Senate and House Medicare for All bills. Neither bill will ever 
get voted on, and there's no way the Democrats will pick Sen. Sanders to 
represent the Democratic Party no matter how many Democrats vote for him in 
that party's primary. The elites of that party cheated him before and 
they'll cheat him again if need be; he seemed to be down with being cheated 
out of a fair shot at that party's primary in 2016.

I think this understanding should help form a right and proper view of the 
entire Democratic Party even those said to be "progressive" Democrats. 
Ultimately that party makes choices consistent with pleasing their HMO 
sponsors instead of the public that wants Medicare for All. I'm not 
interested in entertaining arguments against Medicare for All from the 
'it's not perfect' bullshit point of view because Medicare for All is such 
an improvement over the status quo and addresses a nationally important issue.




[1] Now HR676 is a bill to "reiterate the support of the Congress of the 
United States for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)" as Russell 
Mokhiber aptly put it, pretty much the opposite of anything to do with 
caring about people's health.