Vermont Health Care

[Property Is Robbery]

Is he proposing real universal health care? I can't tell.

WweBMoLuf3o

[Savage]

I'm sorry, as soon as I hear anyone say 'socialized medicine' I can't keep watching...

[Property Is Robbery]

Did he say that? Hmm I should watch it again

[Savage]

not him, one of the idiot republicans at the start.

[NGNM85]

Here's an interview from NPR with a Harvard professor who's involved in crafting the healthcare proposal for the state of Vermont; http://www.wbur.org/2011/01/19/vermont-health-reform

He's not kidding when he says this will make Vermont the most progressive state in terms of healthcare, they will be the only state with a single-payer system. Unfortunately, this may be the way it needs to be done; state by state. Groups working to legalize cannabis have already adopted a similar strategy, and it seems to be working.

[Property Is Robbery]

not him, one of the idiot republicans at the start.
Well then fast forward past the blatant idiocy

[Victus Mortuum]

The thing I've noticed is that you really have to treat the states of America like the states of Europe. They will usually act in vastly different ways economically. One state has a state-bank, others have massive welfare and social programs, others are moderately libertarian, another wants state-healthcare etc. While they are unified under a common banner, the constitution ensures that they all maintain relative economic policy independence (Though new judicial readings of the constitution may change this. See: the soon to come court cases between state and federal levels regarding the healthcare bill breaking current interstate commerce clause interpretations).

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

There are currently similar proposals in several states: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-payer_health_care#State_proposals

It passed twice in California only to be vetoed by Schwarzenegger.

[Rusty Shackleford]

There are currently similar proposals in several states: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-payer_health_care#State_proposals

It passed twice in California only to be vetoed by Schwarzenegger.
and jerry brown will do the same.

[NGNM85]

The thing I've noticed is that you really have to treat the states of America like the states of Europe. They will usually act in vastly different ways economically. One state has a state-bank, others have massive welfare and social programs, others are moderately libertarian, another wants state-healthcare etc. While they are unified under a common banner, the constitution ensures that they all maintain relative economic policy independence (Though new judicial readings of the constitution may change this. See: the soon to come court cases between state and federal levels regarding the healthcare bill breaking current interstate commerce clause interpretations).

I really don't think those arguments have a snowball's chance in hell. That's essentially the same argument used to defend private businesses' right to deny services to blacks, which was defeated because the federal government has the right to regulate interstate commerce.

[Bardo]

I posted this interview in Politics a couple days ago. I'm looking forward to watching this story develop. Hopefully Vermont can set a positive example of a successful single payer system in America.

[NGNM85]

I posted this interview in Politics a couple days ago. I'm looking forward to watching this story develop. Hopefully Vermont can set a positive example of a successful single payer system in America.

If it works, other states will follow suit.

[DaringMehring]

If it works, other states will follow suit.

Somehow, it often seems that anarchists have bizarre faith in the bourgeois democracy.

How about --- entrenched health insurance industry interests will go to any lengths to prevent it, if it passes, to undermine it and turn it into a failure, and if it nevertheless succeeds, to prevent it from spreading with redoubled effort.

At this point, health insurance interests are so massive, and so well integrated into finance capitalism, there is no way to reform them out of existence. Perhaps some little battle can be won in a small, irrelevant, outside-the-political-mainstream place like Vermont --- but that's about it...

[DaringMehring]

The other Northeastern states, NY, NJ California, Illonois, Michigan, maybe Maryland and Deleware. But I can't see Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, Oklahoma, Texas Arizona, or Kansas ever implementing it. It will have to be done by the federal government.

In my California class struggle experience --

1 - State single payer is phobically opposed by financial & health insurance backers, and hence Republicans fight to the end on it, and many Democrats are only "enthusiastic" under pressure.

2 - Nobody cares what happens in Vermont.

[NGNM85]

The other Northeastern states, NY, NJ California, Illonois, Michigan, maybe Maryland and Deleware. But I can't see Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, Oklahoma, Texas Arizona, or Kansas ever implementing it. It will have to be done by the federal government.

Thankfully, Texas is not the standard-bearer for the rest of the country. I think, like gay rights, like cannabis legalization, it just has to reach the point of critical mass.


Somehow, it often seems that anarchists have bizarre faith in the bourgeois democracy.

Oh, cut the crap.


How about --- entrenched health insurance industry interests will go to any lengths to prevent it, if it passes, to undermine it and turn it into a failure, and if it nevertheless succeeds, to prevent it from spreading with redoubled effort.

When are the odds ever in our favor? When have they ever not been on the side of monolithic power structures? So, the question is, what are we going to do about it?


At this point, health insurance interests are so massive, and so well integrated into finance capitalism, there is no way to reform them out of existence. Perhaps some little battle can be won in a small, irrelevant, outside-the-political-mainstream place like Vermont --- but that's about it...

This is nonsense. You don’t need to overthrow the government to get better healthcare. Of course, from the sound of it, you aren’t remotely interested in trying.

[Dimentio]

Why did they not think of this earlier?

[Bardo]

The other Northeastern states, NY, NJ California, Illonois, Michigan, maybe Maryland and Deleware. But I can't see Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, Oklahoma, Texas Arizona, or Kansas ever implementing it. It will have to be done by the federal government.

I dont see these states embracing single-payer system yet either. If Vermont passes this measure and is successful in coverage and cost, I think it may win over many people in these states. The south isnt inherently stupid, if single-payer coverage in Vermont turns out to be much more cost effective than the current system I dont see how even the most conservative members of the Tea Party crowd would have a leg to stand on if they try to demonize it.

[DaringMehring]

When are the odds ever in our favor? When have they ever not been on the side of monolithic power structures? So, the question is, what are we going to do about it?


*Not* fight via the bourgeois democracy.

That is like telling a guerrilla army, "well, the odds are never on our side, so why don't you march out onto the battlefield and fight their tanks directly"



This is nonsense. You don’t need to overthrow the government to get better healthcare.

So the whole history of attempted health care reform, including the last major push under Obama, convinces you of this. OK. Go ahead and authoritatively state what is "nonsense."

To me, the history reads like: health insurer parasitism has been increasing in strength, has become integrated with finance capitalism, and is essentially unchallengeable without concomitantly challenging the whole system.

*Maybe* there could be real reform in our late capitalist bourgeois democracy without a revolution --- but only by the threat of revolution.



Of course, from the sound of it, you aren’t remotely interested in trying.

Wrong. I have door to doored in bourgeois elections. I have produced flyers on health care reform. I wonder if you have done the same, because after doing it for even a small amount of time, the problems and limits are only too painfully obvious.

A radical alternative is needed. Unfortunately, with your confidence in reforming the system via the money-rigged capitalist democracy, you objectively hinder the development of that radical consciousness.

[NGNM85]

I dont see these states embracing single-payer system yet either. If Vermont passes this measure and is successful in coverage and cost, I think it may win over many people in these states. The south isnt inherently stupid, if single-payer coverage in Vermont turns out to be much more cost effective than the current system I dont see how even the most conservative members of the Tea Party crowd would have a leg to stand on if they try to demonize it.

I remember hearing a quote from one of the leading Republicans back when Hillary Clinton was pushing her plan for health care, it was something to the effect of;'We have to kill this thing because, if it passes, nobody will ever vote republican, again.' I seriously doubt many Americans are so ideological that they would rather pay up to twice as much for medical care.

[Bardo]

Republicans have had the "states rights" appeal for a few years atleast. I wonder what republican voters will make of a democrat initiating a statewide healthcare movement in contrast with the federal government.

[Bardo]

Alot of the republican base is indeed very ideological. They generally are white, christian conservatives who want to vote for other white, conservative christians. But facts are facts and alot of them are worried about healthcare themselves just like anyone else. Even given their voting history, I cant see them voting against a more cost effective and affordable health care service.

[Victus Mortuum]

Maybe they don't realize that Republican policies are bad for them, maybe they're ignorant, maybe they're ideological but ever since LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act the Republicans have had a stranglehold on poor Southern whites who will always vote for people who are harming them economically.

The North-South divide being a basis of Republican-Democrat splits is really outdated. Here is the Red-Blue split by county in the U.S.:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6f/ElectionMapPurpleCounty.jpg

Also, I've noticed that tea party-ers in my area tend to be individuals in the top 20% income group but not in the top 5% group. From managers to small business owners to more conservative professional workers to the occasional more median wage worker who believes in the climbing the ladder mentality ("You can get there one day if you try hard enough."). But, I have a very limited experience with the tea party, so maybe I have skewed experience.

[Raúl Duke]

I dont see these states embracing single-payer system yet either. If Vermont passes this measure and is successful in coverage and cost, I think it may win over many people in these states. The south isnt inherently stupid, if single-payer coverage in Vermont turns out to be much more cost effective than the current system I dont see how even the most conservative members of the Tea Party crowd would have a leg to stand on if they try to demonize it. I agree, if it turns out it works in Vermont it would probably spread rapidly to some states (particularly those around New England, although I envision New Hampshire being one of the last to adopt it perhaps) and slowly to others. The red states might take a while but if there are some states using a successful single-payer model that would literally be a trojan horse in introducing said health-care system across the nation.


The tea partiers are largely made up of poor working class whites, rural poor, and other people who are most harmed by Republican policies and who stand to benefit most from Democratic policies and things like single payer health-care but they consistently vote for the Republicans time and time again.No, that's false. Statistics show they're usually middle-class older men who are modestly well-off in many cases. Some are probably retired (which leads to the ironies of anti-social program proponents taking in medicare and checks). Like Victus said:

Also, I've noticed that tea party-ers in my area tend to be individuals in the top 20% income group but not in the top 5% group. From managers to small business owners to more conservative professional workers to the occasional more median wage worker who believes in the climbing the ladder mentality ("You can get there one day if you try hard enough."). But, I have a very limited experience with the tea party, so maybe I have skewed experience. This is based off my experience in Florida. The idea that the working class, particularly those at the bottom, would contain most of the more...actively supportive...members of the US right-wing is probably not so true. In fact, the idea that it would is just a myth that some snobbish elitist liberals made up. Sure, they might end up voting Republican (or not voting at all) but I doubt they'll care to participate in the Tea Party when there's probably more pressing matters at hand like work, etc.


They have shown a mind boggling ability to vote against their own interests consistently. This is because the right-wing media has used persuasive lying. In reality, the majority if not virtually all Americans are unsure how a single-payer health care works outside those who have had medicaid and medicare (and even than, the system that could be adopted in your state might or might not be better run than those 2) so lies about how it takes forever to get to a doctor, etc are ingrained in their mindset. There's also those who don't want the system for class/elitist reasons ("oh, they can't afford private insurance, fuck'em!") but I doubt this last reason is strong as it's presumed to be.

When other states have it and when anomalies like people from one state go to another to get cheaper prescription medicine (such as the phenomenon of Americans going to Canada for cheap medicine) and all other sorts of things will have an influencing factor.