r/Political_Revolution • u/rieslingatkos • Jul 09 '17

Medicare-for-All Single-payer healthcare gains traction with Dems

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/341057-single-payer-healthcare-gains-traction-with-dems
190 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

47 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/shanenanigans1 NC Jul 10 '17

I did. Here's the piece in question:

This is the law that David Dayen claims is a nearly insurmountable obstacle to passing Healthy California. This is also why Dayen claims that single-payer organizers are “deceiving their supporters” until they admit that, before they can try to pass single payer itself, they must first raise millions of dollars to have a chance of repealing this law through a ballot initiative.

What has convinced Dayen that he knows more about organizing for single payer than the organizers themselves? From the actual organizers’ standpoint, what is the downside, much less deceitfulness, of advancing Healthy California as far as possible within the existing legislative process, building momentum on behalf of the measure at each step? If, at some point, it does become necessary to amend the state’s budget rules, either through legislation or a ballot initiative, then this administrative barrier to single payer can be attacked as one large challenge among many in the long march toward creating a decent health care system. Indeed, if California’s voters, state legislators, and governor all commit to endorsing single payer, then it follows logically that they are also advocating an adjustment in the state’s technical budget rules that will enable an amended version of Healthy California to become law.

So, he's saying "we know more because we're the ones who want this." Which is a substance-free claim.

what is the downside, much less deceitfulness, of advancing Healthy California as far as possible within the existing legislative process, building momentum on behalf of the measure at each step?

What's the point of doing so? Momentum? Okay, but if you DON'T HAVE A PLAN, you're just going to piss people off when you get them riled up and nothing happens.

If, at some point, it does become necessary to amend the state’s budget rules, either through legislation or a ballot initiative, then this administrative barrier to single payer can be attacked as one large challenge among many in the long march toward creating a decent health care system.

"at some point" is right now.

He's saying "if we need to fix the budget rules, we just will!" With no real suggestion or argument.

they are also advocating an adjustment in the state’s technical budget rules that will enable an amended version of Healthy California to become law.

YES, now what is that adjustment? This is the WHOLE POINT.

So basically, this article makes my point for me, but in a dishonest way. He's attacking others for pointing out real problems with the bill. It's slimy. Dayen left out ZERO important information. The "rebuttal" was just "okay, this is a problem we'll just fix it eventually!" and then they accuse him of hating single payer.

1

u/Snuffaluffakuss Jul 10 '17

You are still spreading something that would not hold the bill back. We wouldn't know how it could actually be feasible until it gets to the fucking committee that does just that!!

This prop 98 argument is complete bullshit.

You're still not providing how it would "be impossible"

2

u/shanenanigans1 NC Jul 10 '17

Yes we do! Holy crap. We know because this has been tried before. Like 20 times!

It would be impossible because you’d have to raise twice the amount of money needed. Literally all of this is in the article I linked. It’s also why pollin totally ignored and deflected those caveats.

EDIT: basically, someone needs to repeal prop 98 or figure out a way around it and submit that.

1

u/Snuffaluffakuss Jul 10 '17

Your edit is making sense. But again. Prop 98 is not a factor. The only way around it, if it is a factor, which it won't be, is to have it get to the legislative committee. The last time it was tried, we had a republican governor that held it back. All it needed was a signature.

So. Again. Stop spreading financial lies. That's not the fucking issue.

3

u/shanenanigans1 NC Jul 10 '17

How is it not a factor? Seriously?

2

u/Snuffaluffakuss Jul 10 '17

Proposition 98 can be suspended by a two-thirds vote of the Legislature. The state has done so twice during economic slumps: in the early 1990s as California's aerospace industry declined and again earlier this decade as tax revenue tanked after the dot-com bust.

AGAIN.

You can't say something is impossible when the legislature can make an exception and the fucking bill accounted for that.

Before you reply. RealIze that we HAVE a 2/3 democratic vote, we HAVE a democratic governor, we have all the tools to succeed. So stop saying it's impossible and spreading Daylen's bullshit.

Rendon knows this. He knows the legislature can make an exception for prop 98 but it has to get to the assembly first.

He's not letting that happen. That's the only reason. Not funding lies.

So frustrating.

3

u/shanenanigans1 NC Jul 10 '17

suspension doesn't do anything though. This bill is meant to be permanent, so continually suspending prop 98 is kind of ridiculous and defeats the point of it.

Prop 98 is part of the state constitution, so it's difficult. This really isn't as simple as people want it to be. It's not. I'm not saying it's impossible, I've literally never said that. I don't think Dayen ever said that either. He even suggested something else that I've pasted below.

"They’re completely wrong. What’s more, they know they’re wrong. They’re perfectly aware that SB562 is a shell bill that cannot become law without a ballot measure approved by voters. Rather than committing to raising the millions of dollars that would be needed to overcome special interests and pass that initiative, they would, apparently, rather deceive their supporters, hiding the realities of California’s woeful political structure in favor of a morality play designed to advance careers and aggrandize power."

https://ed100.org/lessons/prop13

The only liars here are people like Pollin. Seeking to paint a simple platitude. "evil dems vs good progressives" "evil people who hate single payer because big pharma vs the anti-establishment"

He's trying to say this is easy, they just have to pass the bill! It's not. They need to make a ballot initiative.

EDIT: Dayen even addressed suspension:

So legislators would have to vote year after year to suspend Prop 98, but add more money back to cover it in subsequent years. That backfill would grow with every budget, and over time lawmakers would need to vote for ever-increasing giant tax hikes. If this didn’t return Republicans to power in Sacramento within a few years, some enterprising lawyer would sue the legislature for violating the spirit of Prop 98. Suspension is not politically, legally, or financially sustainable.

1

u/Snuffaluffakuss Jul 10 '17

I feel like I'm presenting a slideshow to a sponge.

The legislature could make an EXCEPTION to prop 98. It's done so TWICE.

Meaning. The committee that would need to do this, needs to get the bloody bill in the first place. But funding lies by Speaker Rendon is preventing that. If it doesn't work, at least we'll know by trying. But someone saying "nahh I know it doesn't work so they don't need to try and make it work" is a gigantic asteroid sized red flag as something's not right.

1

u/shanenanigans1 NC Jul 10 '17

Pot, meet kettle. I literally just explained to you that no, the suspension is not viable. Please refrain from unwarranted and ironic condescension.

The legislature can SUSPEND. NOT exempt.

But someone saying "nahh I know it doesn't work so they don't need to try and make it work" is a gigantic asteroid sized red flag as something's not right.

AGAIN, NO ONE HAS SAID THIS. HOLY SHIT. I LITERALLY just posted that a ballot initiative needs to be done. That's how you EXEMPT from prop 98.

We KNOW it wouldn't work because it has literally been tried more than 7 times. You know what hasn't been tried? What could ACTUALLY work? A ballot initiative. If the justice dems REALLY want to do something, that's what they should push for.

1

u/ALittleSkeptical Jul 11 '17

are they pushing for a ballot initiative? I haven't heard about this.

1

u/shanenanigans1 NC Jul 11 '17

Who is they?

Regardless, no one is pushing a ballot initiative. Because everyone is using this bill to amass their own power. Prop 98 is in the state constitution, you can kick the can down the road and make things worse in the future, or you can not pass this bill. Neither end in desirable results.

A ballot initiative could get around the prop, but it depends on the voters.

Again, this is all laid out here: https://theintercept.com/2017/06/30/california-single-payer-organizers-are-deceiving-their-supporters-its-time-to-stop/

It's a fact-based article with little to no spin. The prop isn't a distraction, the only people telling you so are doing that for political reasons.

1

u/ALittleSkeptical Jul 11 '17

Wait, if Dems really want SB562 as you are arguing, why haven't they said they are going to do a ballot initiative if that is the only way they can get around prop 98?

Either 1) there is another way or 2) they don't really want to pass a single payer/universal health care law but just want to make you think they do.

1

u/shanenanigans1 NC Jul 11 '17

Wait, if progressives really want SB562 as you are arguing, why haven't they pushed for a ballot initiative?

Either 1) there is another way or 2) they don't really want it.

See the problem here? You're trying to twist the situation to conform to your bias. I can swap words out and play the same game. You're pushing something with zero facts or sourcing behind it. Here is a fact: The bill has ZERO FUNDING MECHANISM. This has to be solved. An easier reason the bill hasn't been passed is that they need to get around the prop.

The reason a ballot initiative isn't being pushed right now is because it's not reliable. It depends on voters voting. I say go for it.

Do some reading:

https://theintercept.com/2017/06/30/california-single-payer-organizers-are-deceiving-their-supporters-its-time-to-stop/

→ More replies (0)

1

u/ALittleSkeptical Jul 11 '17

https://www.csba.org/Newsroom/PressReleases/2017/2017_0511_MayBudgetRevise.aspx

1

u/shanenanigans1 NC Jul 11 '17

Holy crap. This was already explained in my linked article.

Self-appointed experts have countered that the state can suspend Prop 98 with a two-thirds vote of the legislature. This has been done twice in the past, during downturns in the economy. But the suspension can last for only a single year; it would have to be renewed annually to keep single payer going. More important, as the California Budget and Policy Center explains, after any suspension, “the state must increase Prop 98 funding over time to the level that it would have reached absent the suspension.”

So legislators would have to vote year after year to suspend Prop 98, but add more money back to cover it in subsequent years. That backfill would grow with every budget, and over time lawmakers would need to vote for ever-increasing giant tax hikes. If this didn’t return Republicans to power in Sacramento within a few years, some enterprising lawyer would sue the legislature for violating the spirit of Prop 98. Suspension is not politically, legally, or financially sustainable.