'Party of No' Blocks Debate on Bernie Sanders' Real Reform
Gandalf Grey
Published on Thursday, December 17, 2009 by The Nation
'Party of No' Blocks Debate on Bernie Sanders' Real Reform
by John Nichols
The Senate almost debated health care reform this seek. No, not the tepid
tinkering proposed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, in the
compromised for demanded by Senator Joe Lieberman, I-Insurance Industry.
We're talking real reform.
Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders has always understood that the real reform
involves a lot more than enriching insurance companies with massive new
infusions of federal money.
The real reform takes the insurance companies out of the equation and
replaces them with a single-payer Medicare-for-All system that provides care
to all Americans and cuts costs by eliminating corporate profiteering.
The Medicare-for-All reform has always been the right fix. Barack Obama, as
a U.S. Senate candidate in 2003, said as much.
"I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care
program," he told a crowd of union activists. "I see no reason why the
United States of America, the wealthiest country in the history of the
world, spending 14 percent of its Gross National Product on health care
cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody. And that's what
(reformers are) talking about when (they say) everybody in, nobody out. A
single payer health care plan, a universal health care plan. And that's what
I'd like to see."
Obama was right six years ago. Unfortunately, he has opted for compromise
and the result is the unfocused, lobbyist-driven, spin-defined debate over
so-called "reform."
Sanders has kept to the real reform path and, on Wednesday, he was supposed
to get a vote on a proposal to amend the Senate health-care reform bill to
replace all the compromises with a single-payer plan that would provide
health care and dental coverage for every American, save money, and improve
health care results.
"In my view, the single-payer approach is the only way we will ever have a
cost-effective, comprehensive health care system in this country," explained
the independent senator from Vermont. "One of the reasons our current health
care system is so expensive, so wasteful, so bureaucratic, so inefficient is
that it is heavily dominated by private health insurance companies whose
only goal in life is to make as much money as they can."
Like many of the amendments proposed by Democratic and Republican senators
during the current wrangling over health-care reform, the Sanders amendment
was not going to pass. But the prospect of the debate on it offered a rare
opportunity for the Senate to engage in real debate about what needs to be
done to provide care for all and eliminating unnecessary costs.
The Sanders amendment offered senators a chance to get serious about the
fiscal responsibility they are so very inclined to discuss but so very
disinclined to embrace.
As Sanders and his aides explained in their argument for the amendment: "The
1,300 profit-making private insurance companies administer thousands of
separate plans and waste about $400 billion a year on administrative costs,
profiteering, high CEO compensation packages, and advertising. Health care
providers spend another $210 billion on administrative costs, mostly to deal
with insurance paperwork. As a result, the United States spends $7,129 per
person on health care, almost double the amount spent by nearly any other
industrialized country. Nevertheless, 46 million Americans lack health
insurance, 100 million Americans cannot access dental care, and 60 million
Americans do not have access to primary care."
Compare that $7,129 per person figure for the U.S. with per capita health
spending figures for countries with genuine national health care plans, such
as Canada's $3,895 and Austria's $3,763 on health care costs. Both of these
countries provide fuller care for people who live longer and healthier lives
than do Americans.
Those are the facts, and those facts terrify "Party of No" Republicans and
the many Democrats who imagine that they represent the insurance industry
rather than constituents who need more care at less cost.
How terrifying?
Rather than allow the Sanders amendment to be debated as every other
proposal to improve a fundamentally flawed Senate proposal, Republican
senators engaged in extreme obstructionist tactics to block consideration of
the amendment. Rejecting Senate tradition and standard practice during the
current debate, several conservatives demanded that the clerk of the Senate
read every word of the 767-page amendment Sanders proposed.
Recognizing that the move would stall action not just on health care reform
but on a host of economic issues that are critical to unemployed Americans,
Sanders had no choice but to pull the amendment off the floor. But he was
not happy about what happened.
"The fact that 17 percent of our people are unemployed or underemployed, one
out of four of our children are living on food stamps, we've got two wars,
we've got global warming, we have a $12 trillion national debt, and the best
the Republicans can do is try to bring the United States government to a
half by forcing a reading of a 700 page amendment. That is an outrage,"
Sanders said. "People can have honest disagreements, but in this moment of
crisis it is wrong to bring the United States government to a halt."
Opponents of real reform made the sad and frustrating spectacle that is the
current debate all the more sad and frustrating.
But Sanders still has history on his side.
"At the end of the day -- not this year, not next year, but sometime in the
future -- this country will come to understand that if we are going to
provide comprehensive quality care to all of our people, the only way we
will do that is through a Medicare-for-all, single-payer system," the
senator says.
That is the truth, uttered by an honest reformer, in the midst of a debate
on which Americans will one day look back in anger. Real reform is not
coming this year or next. But it will, it must, come. And when it does, it
should be remembered that Bernie Sanders tried to get the Senate to do the
right thing.
Copyright � 2009 The Nation
John Nichols is Washington correspondent for The Nation and associate editor
of The Capital Times in Madison, Wisconsin. A co-founder of the media reform
organization Free Press, Nichols is is co-author with Robert W. McChesney of
Tragedy & Farce: How the American Media Sell Wars, Spin Elections, and
Destroy Democracy - from The New Press. Nichols' latest book is The Genius
of Impeachment: The Founders' Cure for Royalism.
--
NOTICE: This post contains copyrighted material the use of which has not
always been authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material
available to advance understanding of
political, human rights, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues. I
believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107
"Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike,
that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans--born in
this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud
of our ancient heritage--and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing
of those human rights to which this nation has always been committed, and to
which we are committed today at home and around the world.
"
-John F. Kennedy, 1961
Sid9
"Gandalf Grey" <vali...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7MudnS9-j6f54LfW...@giganews.com...
Who wins? Who loses?
1. Patients lose
2. Our government loses
3. Doctors lose
4. Insurance companies win.
John Q Public
HAHAHAHAHAH
Bernie Sanders has publicly admitted he "IS" a communist and you
fuckers wanna canonize
him, stupid little marxist shills, if your lovely marxist bill goes
through then:
Who loses "EVERYONE"
Who Wins "MARXIST FASCISTS"
Remember the great words of Milton Freedman (NOT an exact quote but
close enough)
Show us these places where eliminating greed and corruption have made
society better, there
aren't any. Only time in history where crushing oppression and poverty
have been at their
lowest levels is when a "CAPITALISTIC FREE MARKET" has been in place!
liberal
> On 2009-12-17 13:54:44 -0500, "Sid9" <s...@belsouth.net> said:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Gandalf Grey" <valino...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Pity Freedman was totally wrong. Pick up a book on the economic
history of the United States and learn about real history. Not fascist
fantasies.
Bert Hyman
<vali...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 'Party of No' Blocks Debate on Bernie Sanders' Real Reform
Great news!
--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN be...@iphouse.com
Gandalf Grey
"John Q Public" <my2c...@me.com> wrote in message
news:2009121714050931729-my2cents@mecom...
And all your posts publicly admit that you're a liar and a moron.
Gandalf Grey
"Bert's Hymen" <be...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9CE4879C71E...@216.250.188.140...
> In news:7MudnS9-j6f54LfW...@giganews.com "Gandalf Grey"
> <vali...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 'Party of No' Blocks Debate on Bernie Sanders' Real Reform
>
> Great news!
For fascists.
licentissimus
Total bullshit. Sanders withdrew his bill.
Phlip
Sure, and Karl Rove & Colin Powell "resigned".
licentissimus
> "Bert's Hymen" <b...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
>
> news:Xns9CE4879C71E...@216.250.188.140...
>
> > Innews:7MudnS9-j6f54LfW...@giganews.com"Gandalf Grey"
>
> >> 'Party of No' Blocks Debate on Bernie Sanders' Real Reform
>
> > Great news!
>
> For fascists.
I 've never figured out why Communists refer to middle-of-the-road
Americans as fascists.
Phlip
> I 've never figured out why Communists refer to middle-of-the-road
> Americans as fascists.
You are not "middle of the road". Such people want a little regulation over the
huge corporations that find screwing them over so easy these days.
Collaboration between business and gov't to screw people fits Mussolini's
original definition of "Fascism".
That's why, comrade.
Gandalf Grey
"licentissimus" <licent...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:32080145-cd07-4aec...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 17, 12:38 pm, "Gandalf Grey" <valino...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Bert's Hymen" <b...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
>
> news:Xns9CE4879C71E...@216.250.188.140...
>
> > Innews:7MudnS9-j6f54LfW...@giganews.com"Gandalf Grey"
> > <valino...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> 'Party of No' Blocks Debate on Bernie Sanders' Real Reform
>
> > Great news!
>
> For fascists.
^ I 've never figured out why Communists refer to middle-of-the-road
Americans as fascists.
I've never figured out why rabid fascists refer to middle of the road
Americans as Communists.
Gandalf Grey
^ Total bullshit. Sanders withdrew his bill.
Because the senate fascists blocked all movement by forcing a reading. So
stop lying, Adolf.
Bert Hyman
wrote:
Except that in reality the "collaboration" is a sham. Some corrupt
businessmen think they can obtain an advantage over their competitors by
getting in bed with a corrupt government, but they usually find
themselves at the end of a rope eventually.
There's very little "cooperation" when one side controls the
legislature, police, military and the courts.
> That's why, comrade.
There's little practical difference between fascism, socialism or
communism. They're simply somewhat different flavors of totalitarianism.
Right now, the US is sliding toward fascism.
Phlip
> > Collaboration between business and gov't to screw people fits
> > Mussolini's original definition of "Fascism".
>
> Except that in reality the "collaboration" is a sham. Some corrupt
> businessmen think they can obtain an advantage over their competitors by
> getting in bed with a corrupt government, but they usually find
> themselves at the end of a rope eventually.
Explains the recent erosion of GOP market share, huh?
Businesses get tired of paying what's essentially "protection money"
into a giant racketeering scam...
> There's little practical difference between fascism, socialism or
> communism. They're simply somewhat different flavors of totalitarianism.
>
> Right now, the US is sliding toward fascism.
It was. Then we reclaimed control of elections. These days you can
steal a squeaker, but not a landslide...
Gandalf Grey
"Bert Hyman" <be...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9CE4ADCC2B8...@216.250.188.140...
As practised and promoted by the GOP.
*us*
The electronics will decide your 'vote' for you.
Bert Hyman
news:161b14e2-d3e3-47ec...@m25g2000yqc.googlegroups.com
Phlip <phli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 17, 3:05�pm, Bert Hyman <b...@iphouse.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Right now, the US is sliding toward fascism.
>
> It was.
Still is.
> Then we reclaimed control of elections. These days you can
> steal a squeaker, but not a landslide...
The unrelenting move toward state control of the economy is
accelerating, if anything.
Gandalf Grey
"Bert Hyman" <be...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9CE56D14535...@216.250.188.141...
> In
> news:161b14e2-d3e3-47ec...@m25g2000yqc.googlegroups.com
> Phlip <phli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Dec 17, 3:05 pm, Bert Hyman <b...@iphouse.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Right now, the US is sliding toward fascism.
>>
>> It was.
>
> Still is.
Only to the extent that the GOP fascist party gains power.
Phlip
No no no don't you see? Requiring an HMO who says they will treat your diseases
to actually treat your diseases is Fascism! And it's also excessive regulation
to stifle competition, which is Socialism!
It's the slippery slope to all of us wearing identical grey shirts with cargo
pockets!
Not Sure
> licentissimus wrote:
> > I 've never figured out why Communists refer to middle-of-the-road
> > Americans as fascists.
>
> You are not "middle of the road". Such people want a little regulation over the
> huge corporations that find screwing them over so easy these days.
There's more than a little regulation already, liar. Better luck next
time :)
John Q Public
He's on record asshole, c'mon, prove otherwise lyin fuckwit that he
isn't a commie
John Q Public
Sorry, his removal or withdrawal of the ammendment was against the
parliamentary
rules of the senate, but, why should little things like rules and the
constitution ever
get in your little marxists way hmmmm!
Fascist little communist schill
Gandalf Grey
"Phlip" <phli...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:z1PWm.1566$lV1...@newsfe02.iad...
And those little caps. When are Americans going to wake up and realize that
the corporations are the true masters?
Gandalf Grey
"Not Sure" <fred1...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:01a59728-0d27-49dd...@y32g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 17, 2:13 pm, Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> licentissimus wrote:
> > I 've never figured out why Communists refer to middle-of-the-road
> > Americans as fascists.
>
> You are not "middle of the road". Such people want a little regulation
> over the
> huge corporations that find screwing them over so easy these days.
^ There's more than a little regulation already, liar.
Bullshit. Nothing that a corporation can't drive a truck through.
Gandalf Grey
> On 2009-12-17 14:38:47 -0500, "Gandalf Grey" <vali...@gmail.com> said:
>
>>
>> "Bert's Hymen" <be...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9CE4879C71E...@216.250.188.140...
>>> In news:7MudnS9-j6f54LfW...@giganews.com "Gandalf Grey"
>>> <vali...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 'Party of No' Blocks Debate on Bernie Sanders' Real Reform
>>>
>>> Great news!
>>
>> For fascists.
>
> He's on record asshole,
then you should be able to provide the quote where Bernie admits he's a
communist, you pathetic lying fuckwadd.
Gandalf Grey
So you're still lying, eh fuckwadd? The parliamentarian allowed him to do
so and the parliamentarian is the final authority on what the rules are and
aren't. If the GOP fascists don't like it, they can take a short break from
fucking the American people and fuck themselves.
Phlip
I like the "theft is illegal" regulation. What a terrible burden!
Gandalf Grey
Yes. I feel so sorry for these money grubbing bastards.
John Q Public
Cite your undoubted hundreds of examples where once a amendment was
accepted and started
to be read (Requires completion at this point) that it was withdrawn previous.
Yep cite cite cite little marxist!
5295 Dead, 428 since 1/20/09
wrote:
If he's on record then you won't have any trouble providing the cite.
I'm guessing that you've made the same claim under a different alias,
got slapped down when all you could produce was him describing himself
as a socialist, and because you are both stupid and a liar, you just
change your id and repeat the claim.
Gandalf Grey
Cite your evidence that the parliamentarian isn't the last word on what is
and isn't allowable or shut the fuck up and go out and cite your evidence
that Bernie Sanders ever said he was a Communist, you pathetic pile of crap.
Lamont Cranston
> On 2009-12-17 13:54:44 -0500, "Sid9" <si...@belsouth.net> said:
>
>>
>> "Gandalf Grey" <vali...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:7MudnS9-j6f54LfW...@giganews.com...
>>
>> 1. Patients lose
>> 2. Our government loses
>> 3. Doctors lose
>> 4. Insurance companies win.
>>
>>
>
> HAHAHAHAHAH
> Bernie Sanders has publicly admitted he "IS" a communist
Simply a lie.
Lamont Cranston
<CRICKETS!>
Gandalf Grey
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont....@Shadow.com> wrote in message
news:hggseu$4ct$1...@news.datemas.de...
Yeah. The silence is deafening.
Gandalf Grey
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont....@Shadow.com> wrote in message
If John Q couldn't lie, he couldn't post at all.
>
licentissimus
> licentissimus wrote:
> > I 've never figured out why Communists refer to middle-of-the-road
> > Americans as fascists.
>
> You are not "middle of the road". Such people want a little regulation over the
> huge corporations that find screwing them over so easy these days.
>
> original definition of "Fascism".
>
> That's why, comrade.
Sorry but your definition is incorrect. Try socialism = doctrine of
centralized
state control of wealth and property. In ten short months Obama is in
control
of the Banking and Investing industries, the Automobile industry and
the
Federal government with a rubber-stamp legislature. Together, Obama
and
the legislature are working day and night to control Medicine and the
insurance
industries and the energy industries.
Fascism = socialism an economic system with a capitalist veneer.
licentissimus
> "licentissimus" <licentissi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
Well tough shit, Mao, Sanders withdrawal broke the Senate's rules. How
can
the "Senate fascists" stop any bill in the Senate when there are 60
Democrats
in control of the US Senate?
licentissimus
> Innews:b2yWm.59734$ky1....@newsfe14.iadPhlip <phlip2...@gmail.com>
I agree, but I would say the US is sliding toward totalitarianism.
Whether we argue that it is fascism, socialism or communism
matters not. Loss of freedom and opportunity are at the end of
Obama's road.
Phlip
> Sorry but your definition is incorrect. Try socialism = doctrine of
> centralized
> state control of wealth and property.
That's communism.
You know - like having a Halliburton plant in the White House, to start 2 wars
on false premises, just to give no-bid contracts to your cronies...
...and to ship shrink-wrapped pallets of $100 bills - a hundred million each -
to Baghdad, then somehow manage to "lose" them.
That's centralized control of wealth and property, backed by propaganda &
repressing personal liberties. Communism.
licentissimus
Communism is a derivative of Socialism. Mussolini was a
Socialist in his youth and later created fascism in
Italy. Hence, fascism is also a derivative of
Socialism. They are all three totalitarianism where a
select group of elites enjoy great wealth and power and
the common man barely ekes out an existence under
edicts from a centralized government entity.
Gandalf Grey
On Dec 17, 3:13 pm, Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> licentissimus wrote:
> > I 've never figured out why Communists refer to middle-of-the-road
> > Americans as fascists.
>
> You are not "middle of the road". Such people want a little regulation
> over the
> huge corporations that find screwing them over so easy these days.
>
> Collaboration between business and gov't to screw people fits Mussolini's
> original definition of "Fascism".
>
> That's why, comrade.
^ Sorry but your definition is incorrect.
His definition is perfectly correct and fits the GOP perfectly.
Gandalf Grey
On Dec 18, 4:28 pm, Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> licentissimus wrote:
> > Sorry but your definition is incorrect. Try socialism = doctrine of
> > centralized
> > state control of wealth and property.
>
> That's communism.
>
> You know - like having a Halliburton plant in the White House, to start 2
> wars
> on false premises, just to give no-bid contracts to your cronies...
>
> ...and to ship shrink-wrapped pallets of $100 bills - a hundred million
> each -
> to Baghdad, then somehow manage to "lose" them.
>
> That's centralized control of wealth and property, backed by propaganda &
> repressing personal liberties. Communism.
^ Communism is a derivative of Socialism.
No. Communism is communism and socialism is socialism and fascism is
fascism, and the GOP is fascist.
Gandalf Grey
^ Well tough shit,
Nice to see you admitting your allegiance to the GOP fascist party.
5295 Dead, 428 since 1/20/09
That describes communism and fascism well enough, but socialism, when
coupled with a strong constitutional democracy, produces a higher level
of freedom than what most Americans enjoy.
John Q Public
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
He admits it and says it frequently, guess you two fools are truly in
the ozone.
That ones a no brainer
Just a little taste if ya care to google dimwits
Bernie Sanders does more than just call himself a Democratic
Socialist.� He is also one of three members of the United States
Congress that is a card carrying� member the Democratic Socialists of
America (DSA).� He is also the author of the AudioBook, "Socialist and
Communist Perspectives on the 2004 Presidential Election." (link)
Gandalf Grey
Cite any one time that Bernie ever said he's a communist, you lying sack of
shit.
<CRICKETS>
Lamont Cranston
Thanks for confirming that you are a habitual liar. Sanders has never
said that he is a communist.
Lamont Cranston
Two days later: <STILL CRICKETS>