The Truth-O-Meter Says:
"Things went wrong with the Medicare prescription D plan that George Bush rolled out."
Steve Israel on Wednesday, November 6th, 2013 in an interview on MSNBCDid Medicare Part D have the same rollout problems as the Obamacare online marketplaces?
Share this story:
Democrats are pleading for patience as they try to reassure
the country that the online insurance marketplaces critical to
President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul can be fixed.
Big programs have seen rocky rollouts only to achieve success later, they say. Their top example: the 2005 launch of Medicare Part D, President George W. Bush’s prescription drug benefit plan.
"Things went wrong with the Medicare prescription D plan that George Bush rolled out," Rep. Steve Israel, D-N.Y., told MSNBC on Nov. 6. "When things go wrong, there are two things we can do as a country. We can spend all our time figuring out who to blame, or we can spend all our time figuring out how to fix it."
Eight years after it went live, Medicare Part D is now widely popular among the seniors who use it.
Were there major problems with the rollout of Medicare Part D? And were they comparable to the challenges facing Obamacare? We decided to take a more a detailed look at its implementation.
Strangely similar
Let’s play a quick game: who made this statement?
"This is a huge undertaking and there are going to be glitches. My goal is the same as yours: Get rid of the glitches."
A Democrat in 2013? Wrong! Actually, it was Rep. Joe Barton, a Texas Republican who chaired the House Energy and Commerce Committee, about Medicare Part D in 2006.
The similarities between the two health care programs, both heralded as the signature domestic achievements of the presidents who signed them into law, are at times eerie. Supporters of the laws asked for time and promised a quick fix. Critics did not mince their words. Even the lingo -- words like "glitches" -- has been recycled.
A report documenting the history of Medicare Part D was released earlier this year by a group of health policy experts at the Center on Health Insurance Reform at Georgetown University. It highlighted several areas where Medicare Part D struggled in its implementation that sound extremely familiar.
For one thing, the Bush administration faced a difficult political battle to get the bill passed in 2003. That damaged public opinion of the law, making it a challenge to educate 43 million seniors on its nuances.
Enrollment in the law was set to begin in late 2005. In April of that year, a Kaiser Family Foundation poll found that only 27 percent of respondents understood the law, while only 21 percent favored it. (In a comparable Kaiser poll in April 2013, 35 percent viewed the Affordable Care Act favorably and less than half felt they were well-informed of its details.)
The Medicare site, meant to help seniors pick benefit plans, was supposed to debut Oct. 13, 2005, but it didn’t go live until weeks later in November. Even then, "the tool itself appeared to be in need of fixing," the Washington Post reported at the time.
"Visitors to the site could not access it for most of the first two hours. When it finally did come up around 5 p.m., it operated awfully slowly," the Post reported. (Sensing a pattern?)
Once seniors began to enroll, problems persisted. According to the report, the online tools had "accuracy problems," and local organizations designated with assisting seniors "reported problems getting necessary and accurate information." Call centers provided by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services underestimated "the needed capacity to ensure that reliable answers could be provided" and "service representatives were not knowledgeable or failed to provide accurate information."
The Georgetown experts anticipated similar hiccups with the Affordable Care Act, noting that the country’s experience with Medicare Part D suggested "the experience will be far from perfect" and "problems were not always addressed as quickly or as thoroughly as critics would have liked, but fixes were usually found."
These days, nine in 10 seniors who utilize the program report they are satisfied with it.
"There’s really a striking amount of similarity even though this time it’s a far larger and daunting task. It’s a fair comparison," said Jack Hoadley at the Georgetown University's Health Policy Institute and one of the authors of the study. "Once something works its way through the problems, you forget the problems."
Still different
But there are important differences between Medicare Part D and the Affordable Care Act that make the challenges facing the exchanges different.
Because it was aimed at seniors and e-commerce was still relatively young, Medicare.gov was not intended to be the main hub for people to purchase and review plans, said David Brailer, the first National Coordinator for Health Information Technology under Bush.
"The issue with Medicare Part D is there were choices of 70 to 100 plans," Brailer said. "People were overwhelmed with the choices, with the options available and didn't know how to navigate and pick one. I don’t remember a conversation at all blaming any IT people. This was about how do you really navigate through all these choices."
Meanwhile, most people who logged on to healthcare.gov in the opening weeks couldn’t even get far enough to review what options were available.
Also, prescription drugs are a relatively small and easy-to-understand part of health care. Shopping for an insurance plan is more complicated.
"For those who did choose to enroll (in Medicare Part D) online, they checked out their options by typing in drugs they used, and once you did, you got an estimated out-of-pocket cost to make your comparisons. In the exchange world you have a full health care benefit to buy," Hoadley said. "The drug cost is relatively predictable, certainly a lot more predictable than overall health costs. The challenge for this website is a lot greater, probably by a significant amount of magnitude."
And there’s the political climate as well. When Medicare Part D passed, Democrats were not happy with the final bill and were critical of its botched rollout. But even then, they were generally supportive of its intended outcome and worked with constituents who had difficulty signing up or utilizing their new benefits.
When Medicare Part D faced early troubles, many blue states came to its rescue.
The New York Times reported in 2006 that "about 20 states, including California, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania and all of New England, have announced that they will help low-income people by paying drug claims that should have been paid by the federal Medicare program."
By contrast, not a single Republican voted for the Affordable Care Act, and in the years since it passed, the party has made its repeal a top priority. In the states, many Republican governors have bucked the Medicaid expansion and rejected offers to build their own insurance marketplaces, putting greater pressure on the federal government.
Henry Aaron, a health policy expert at the Brookings Institute, said the opposition from Republicans has forced the Obama administration into a "two-front war" Bush did not have to fight.
"On the one hand, one must and should address the administrative problems that no one denies is plaguing the problem," he said. "But you’re also waging a war of public opinion against the hysterics of its critics."
Our ruling
Israel said, "Things went wrong with the Medicare prescription D plan that George Bush rolled out." There definitely were problems, and in some cases, the parallels between the prescription benefit program’s introduction and the Obamacare marketplaces are strikingly similar. While we also found some serious differences in the laws, we can’t find fault with Israel’s fairly general statement.
We rate his statement True.
Subjects: Health Care, Medicare, Retirement, Technology
Sources:
MSNBC, interview with Rep. Steve Israel, Nov. 6, 2013
Rep. Joe Barton, Testimony during House Energy and Commerce Committee, Feb. 15, 2006
USA Today, "Poll: Medicare prescription drug program popular," Oct. 3, 2012
Florida Sun-Sentinel, "Crackdown on prescription drug imports seems fishy," Feb. 19, 2006
Washington Post, "Medicare Drug Plan finder: Still waiting," Nov. 8, 2005
Center on Health Insurance Reform at Georgetown University, "Launching the Medicare Part D Program: Lessons for the New Health Insurance Marketplaces," accessed Nov. 11, 2013
Phone interview with Jack Hoadley, Georgetown University's Health Policy Institute, Nov. 7, 2006
Phone interview with David Brailer, Managing Partner & CEO of Health Evolution Partners, Nov. 8, 2006
Senate Roll Call Vote on Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, Accessed Nov. 11, 2013
House Roll Call Vote on Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, Accessed Nov. 11, 2013
New York Times, "President tells insurers to aid ailing Medicare drug plan," Jan. 16, 2006
Phone interview with Henry Aaron, health policy expert at the Brookings Institute, Nov. 8, 2006
Written by: Steve Contorno
Researched by: Steve Contorno
Edited by: Angie Drobnic Holan
Big programs have seen rocky rollouts only to achieve success later, they say. Their top example: the 2005 launch of Medicare Part D, President George W. Bush’s prescription drug benefit plan.
"Things went wrong with the Medicare prescription D plan that George Bush rolled out," Rep. Steve Israel, D-N.Y., told MSNBC on Nov. 6. "When things go wrong, there are two things we can do as a country. We can spend all our time figuring out who to blame, or we can spend all our time figuring out how to fix it."
Eight years after it went live, Medicare Part D is now widely popular among the seniors who use it.
Were there major problems with the rollout of Medicare Part D? And were they comparable to the challenges facing Obamacare? We decided to take a more a detailed look at its implementation.
Strangely similar
Let’s play a quick game: who made this statement?
"This is a huge undertaking and there are going to be glitches. My goal is the same as yours: Get rid of the glitches."
A Democrat in 2013? Wrong! Actually, it was Rep. Joe Barton, a Texas Republican who chaired the House Energy and Commerce Committee, about Medicare Part D in 2006.
The similarities between the two health care programs, both heralded as the signature domestic achievements of the presidents who signed them into law, are at times eerie. Supporters of the laws asked for time and promised a quick fix. Critics did not mince their words. Even the lingo -- words like "glitches" -- has been recycled.
A report documenting the history of Medicare Part D was released earlier this year by a group of health policy experts at the Center on Health Insurance Reform at Georgetown University. It highlighted several areas where Medicare Part D struggled in its implementation that sound extremely familiar.
For one thing, the Bush administration faced a difficult political battle to get the bill passed in 2003. That damaged public opinion of the law, making it a challenge to educate 43 million seniors on its nuances.
Enrollment in the law was set to begin in late 2005. In April of that year, a Kaiser Family Foundation poll found that only 27 percent of respondents understood the law, while only 21 percent favored it. (In a comparable Kaiser poll in April 2013, 35 percent viewed the Affordable Care Act favorably and less than half felt they were well-informed of its details.)
The Medicare site, meant to help seniors pick benefit plans, was supposed to debut Oct. 13, 2005, but it didn’t go live until weeks later in November. Even then, "the tool itself appeared to be in need of fixing," the Washington Post reported at the time.
"Visitors to the site could not access it for most of the first two hours. When it finally did come up around 5 p.m., it operated awfully slowly," the Post reported. (Sensing a pattern?)
Once seniors began to enroll, problems persisted. According to the report, the online tools had "accuracy problems," and local organizations designated with assisting seniors "reported problems getting necessary and accurate information." Call centers provided by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services underestimated "the needed capacity to ensure that reliable answers could be provided" and "service representatives were not knowledgeable or failed to provide accurate information."
The Georgetown experts anticipated similar hiccups with the Affordable Care Act, noting that the country’s experience with Medicare Part D suggested "the experience will be far from perfect" and "problems were not always addressed as quickly or as thoroughly as critics would have liked, but fixes were usually found."
These days, nine in 10 seniors who utilize the program report they are satisfied with it.
"There’s really a striking amount of similarity even though this time it’s a far larger and daunting task. It’s a fair comparison," said Jack Hoadley at the Georgetown University's Health Policy Institute and one of the authors of the study. "Once something works its way through the problems, you forget the problems."
Still different
But there are important differences between Medicare Part D and the Affordable Care Act that make the challenges facing the exchanges different.
Because it was aimed at seniors and e-commerce was still relatively young, Medicare.gov was not intended to be the main hub for people to purchase and review plans, said David Brailer, the first National Coordinator for Health Information Technology under Bush.
"The issue with Medicare Part D is there were choices of 70 to 100 plans," Brailer said. "People were overwhelmed with the choices, with the options available and didn't know how to navigate and pick one. I don’t remember a conversation at all blaming any IT people. This was about how do you really navigate through all these choices."
Meanwhile, most people who logged on to healthcare.gov in the opening weeks couldn’t even get far enough to review what options were available.
Also, prescription drugs are a relatively small and easy-to-understand part of health care. Shopping for an insurance plan is more complicated.
"For those who did choose to enroll (in Medicare Part D) online, they checked out their options by typing in drugs they used, and once you did, you got an estimated out-of-pocket cost to make your comparisons. In the exchange world you have a full health care benefit to buy," Hoadley said. "The drug cost is relatively predictable, certainly a lot more predictable than overall health costs. The challenge for this website is a lot greater, probably by a significant amount of magnitude."
And there’s the political climate as well. When Medicare Part D passed, Democrats were not happy with the final bill and were critical of its botched rollout. But even then, they were generally supportive of its intended outcome and worked with constituents who had difficulty signing up or utilizing their new benefits.
When Medicare Part D faced early troubles, many blue states came to its rescue.
The New York Times reported in 2006 that "about 20 states, including California, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania and all of New England, have announced that they will help low-income people by paying drug claims that should have been paid by the federal Medicare program."
By contrast, not a single Republican voted for the Affordable Care Act, and in the years since it passed, the party has made its repeal a top priority. In the states, many Republican governors have bucked the Medicaid expansion and rejected offers to build their own insurance marketplaces, putting greater pressure on the federal government.
Henry Aaron, a health policy expert at the Brookings Institute, said the opposition from Republicans has forced the Obama administration into a "two-front war" Bush did not have to fight.
"On the one hand, one must and should address the administrative problems that no one denies is plaguing the problem," he said. "But you’re also waging a war of public opinion against the hysterics of its critics."
Our ruling
Israel said, "Things went wrong with the Medicare prescription D plan that George Bush rolled out." There definitely were problems, and in some cases, the parallels between the prescription benefit program’s introduction and the Obamacare marketplaces are strikingly similar. While we also found some serious differences in the laws, we can’t find fault with Israel’s fairly general statement.
We rate his statement True.
About this statement:
Published: Wednesday, November 13th, 2013 at 10:00 a.m.Subjects: Health Care, Medicare, Retirement, Technology
Sources:
MSNBC, interview with Rep. Steve Israel, Nov. 6, 2013
Rep. Joe Barton, Testimony during House Energy and Commerce Committee, Feb. 15, 2006
USA Today, "Poll: Medicare prescription drug program popular," Oct. 3, 2012
Florida Sun-Sentinel, "Crackdown on prescription drug imports seems fishy," Feb. 19, 2006
Washington Post, "Medicare Drug Plan finder: Still waiting," Nov. 8, 2005
Center on Health Insurance Reform at Georgetown University, "Launching the Medicare Part D Program: Lessons for the New Health Insurance Marketplaces," accessed Nov. 11, 2013
Phone interview with Jack Hoadley, Georgetown University's Health Policy Institute, Nov. 7, 2006
Phone interview with David Brailer, Managing Partner & CEO of Health Evolution Partners, Nov. 8, 2006
Senate Roll Call Vote on Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, Accessed Nov. 11, 2013
House Roll Call Vote on Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, Accessed Nov. 11, 2013
New York Times, "President tells insurers to aid ailing Medicare drug plan," Jan. 16, 2006
Phone interview with Henry Aaron, health policy expert at the Brookings Institute, Nov. 8, 2006
Written by: Steve Contorno
Researched by: Steve Contorno
Edited by: Angie Drobnic Holan
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/nov/13/steve-israel/medicare-part-d-and-obamacare-health-care-gov/
We won’t go back.
Republicans are opening new fronts in the war on healthcare, and rewriting their battle plans for the 2014 elections with a focus on opposition to the president’s reforms.
But we won’t go back to letting insurance companies deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. We won’t let them kick young adults in their early twenties off their parents’ plan. We won’t let them take away free birth control as preventative medicine with no co-pay.
Democratic unity on health care reform is cracking as some vulnerable Democrats are joining Republicans in an attempt to pass a bill that would require insurance companies to continue offering policies that were recently cancelled because they don't meet the tougher requirements of the Affordable Care Act.
Meanwhile, even the president is responding to pressure from Republicans and Democrats alike by attempting to defuse the situation with new rules that will allow insurance companies to continue offering some policies disallowed under the Affordable Care Act.
We cannot afford to go backwards. Neither the House, nor the Senate (or even the White House) should be allowed to chip away at the hard-won advances of the health care reform fight.
Tell Democrats and Republicans in Congress: We won’t go back. In fact, we’re ready to go further and expand Medicare to all Americans. Click here to sign the petition automatically.
The real problem isn’t the modest but still life-changing reforms of the Affordable Care Act (despite its botched rollout). Millions of people have already been helped -- people with pre-existing conditions, young adults who get to stay on their parents' plan and beneficiaries of the Medicaid expansion.
When it comes down to it, this most recent fight is about the power of predatory insurance corporations. Insurers sold to a small percentage of Americans junk plans that were so bad they fall below the threshold of what’s acceptable under the Affordable Care Act. The fact that greedy insurers are confusing customers for profits is exactly why we need a real solution like Medicare for All.
But with Republicans on the attack, and some Democrats and even the White House on the retreat, what can progressives do? It’s time to stop playing defense and build power for the only reform that would get us out of this mess: Medicare for All.
Tell Congress: Not only will we not let you take down health care reform, we want you on the record with an up-or-down vote on Medicare for All. Click here to automatically sign the petition automatically.
The Affordable Care Act, also called ObamaCare, has brought some positive reforms, but we all know it only represents the very first few steps down the path to fixing our broken health care system. In fact, it was really a health insurance reform bill, not a health care reform bill.
Now, as right-wing extremists work methodically to dismantle the law's modest improvements in how health insurance is bought and sold, we need not only to stop them in their tracks, but also to counter their demands with a real progressive vision that has the power to deliver the change this country needs.
We have to form a strong progressive flank in this fight so if a deal gets cut we don’t end up with a compromise on the compromise that moves us further to the right.
Every other industrialized country in the world provides quality, universal health care at a fraction of the cost of the U.S. system. Private insurance companies are a big part of our problem. And while President Obama's health care law will expand coverage to millions of Americans, it guarantees customers and profits for insurance companies that put profits before people.
The point of the newly launched exchanges is to funnel insurance customers into these companies’ plans. The latest controversy concerning Americans supposedly losing their current private coverage is largely a mess created by insurers shutting down short term, high cost plans so customers can be shifted onto lower cost, long term coverage offered by the clumsily launched federal (or in some instances, state) exchange.
From the beginning, these companies opposed a "public option" -- a government-run health insurance program that would compete with private insurers -- because they wanted to maximize profits and minimize care. But we don’t need health care exchanges to cover Americans. We could solve today’s problems by expanding a program that is already up and running -- and working.
Medicare already covers 40 million Americans over the age of 65, providing quality care at prices that are much lower than the private market. We may not have the votes to win this fight, but the current mess provides a strategic opportunity to get Congress on the record when it comes to universal health care and build momentum not just to preserve the status quo but to win the real change we need.
Tell Congress: We won’t go back. Now more than ever, it’s clear that what we need more, not less, reform and that means Medicare for All. Click here to sign the petition automatically.
Time and time again we see the right go on offense. After the murderer of Trayvon Martin mounted a “Stand Your Ground” defense in Florida, Republicans didn’t agree to modest reforms to the law to protect citizens from vigilante violence. Instead, they pushed for changes to the “Stand Your Ground” law to expand the rights of gun owners and make it harder to hold murderers accountable. They didn’t win their bid to expand the law, but they successfully defended the current law and didn’t lose any ground to reformers. By staking out a position far to the right they made maintaining the status quo look like a compromise.
The current debate in Washington DC lacks any kind of forceful push for the policy that will actually solve our nation’s health care crisis. It’s clear that Democrats, some of whom are now joining Republicans to turn against key portions of the law, may not even hold the line, let alone fight for even better coverage for Americans. So that push needs to come from us.
By staking out a progressive flank and generating a groundswell of public support for expanding Medicare so that it covers everybody, we can create space for a better outcome in potential negotiations and can help prevent the debate on health care reform from shifting even further to the right.
Tell Congress: Get your hands off the Affordable Care Act, and get-on-record with an up-or-down vote on Medicare for All. Click here to sign the petition automatically.
Let's remember, when health care reform went through Congress, a single-payer system like Medicare for All wasn't even on the table.
The implementation of the modest -- but still life-changing -- reforms of the Affordable Care Act and the battle over a deficit deal that cuts Medicare benefits (instead of closing corporate tax loopholes or reining in Pentagon spending) are sure to be among the top issues in the 2014 election.
America's health care system is in crisis. If Democrats fight for half-measures and Republicans continue on their rampage trying to destroy what few reforms we’ve been able to achieve, 2014 could conceivably give the Republicans the wins they need to take the Senate and repeal the entire Affordable Care Act.
We know Medicare already works. Let’s fight to expand Medicare to all Americans, and find out who in Congress is with us.
Tell Congress: Support Medicare for All. Click the link below to automatically sign the petition:
http://act.credoaction.com/sign/medicare_for_all?sp_ref=19446663.4.1239.e.5291.2&referring_akid=9466.179403.RCNim3&source=mailto_sp
Thank you for fighting for the change we need.
Becky Bond, Political Director
CREDO Action from Working Assets
|
Republicans are opening new fronts in the war on healthcare, and rewriting their battle plans for the 2014 elections with a focus on opposition to the president’s reforms.
But we won’t go back to letting insurance companies deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. We won’t let them kick young adults in their early twenties off their parents’ plan. We won’t let them take away free birth control as preventative medicine with no co-pay.
Democratic unity on health care reform is cracking as some vulnerable Democrats are joining Republicans in an attempt to pass a bill that would require insurance companies to continue offering policies that were recently cancelled because they don't meet the tougher requirements of the Affordable Care Act.
Meanwhile, even the president is responding to pressure from Republicans and Democrats alike by attempting to defuse the situation with new rules that will allow insurance companies to continue offering some policies disallowed under the Affordable Care Act.
We cannot afford to go backwards. Neither the House, nor the Senate (or even the White House) should be allowed to chip away at the hard-won advances of the health care reform fight.
Tell Democrats and Republicans in Congress: We won’t go back. In fact, we’re ready to go further and expand Medicare to all Americans. Click here to sign the petition automatically.
The real problem isn’t the modest but still life-changing reforms of the Affordable Care Act (despite its botched rollout). Millions of people have already been helped -- people with pre-existing conditions, young adults who get to stay on their parents' plan and beneficiaries of the Medicaid expansion.
When it comes down to it, this most recent fight is about the power of predatory insurance corporations. Insurers sold to a small percentage of Americans junk plans that were so bad they fall below the threshold of what’s acceptable under the Affordable Care Act. The fact that greedy insurers are confusing customers for profits is exactly why we need a real solution like Medicare for All.
But with Republicans on the attack, and some Democrats and even the White House on the retreat, what can progressives do? It’s time to stop playing defense and build power for the only reform that would get us out of this mess: Medicare for All.
Tell Congress: Not only will we not let you take down health care reform, we want you on the record with an up-or-down vote on Medicare for All. Click here to automatically sign the petition automatically.
The Affordable Care Act, also called ObamaCare, has brought some positive reforms, but we all know it only represents the very first few steps down the path to fixing our broken health care system. In fact, it was really a health insurance reform bill, not a health care reform bill.
Now, as right-wing extremists work methodically to dismantle the law's modest improvements in how health insurance is bought and sold, we need not only to stop them in their tracks, but also to counter their demands with a real progressive vision that has the power to deliver the change this country needs.
We have to form a strong progressive flank in this fight so if a deal gets cut we don’t end up with a compromise on the compromise that moves us further to the right.
Every other industrialized country in the world provides quality, universal health care at a fraction of the cost of the U.S. system. Private insurance companies are a big part of our problem. And while President Obama's health care law will expand coverage to millions of Americans, it guarantees customers and profits for insurance companies that put profits before people.
The point of the newly launched exchanges is to funnel insurance customers into these companies’ plans. The latest controversy concerning Americans supposedly losing their current private coverage is largely a mess created by insurers shutting down short term, high cost plans so customers can be shifted onto lower cost, long term coverage offered by the clumsily launched federal (or in some instances, state) exchange.
From the beginning, these companies opposed a "public option" -- a government-run health insurance program that would compete with private insurers -- because they wanted to maximize profits and minimize care. But we don’t need health care exchanges to cover Americans. We could solve today’s problems by expanding a program that is already up and running -- and working.
Medicare already covers 40 million Americans over the age of 65, providing quality care at prices that are much lower than the private market. We may not have the votes to win this fight, but the current mess provides a strategic opportunity to get Congress on the record when it comes to universal health care and build momentum not just to preserve the status quo but to win the real change we need.
Tell Congress: We won’t go back. Now more than ever, it’s clear that what we need more, not less, reform and that means Medicare for All. Click here to sign the petition automatically.
Time and time again we see the right go on offense. After the murderer of Trayvon Martin mounted a “Stand Your Ground” defense in Florida, Republicans didn’t agree to modest reforms to the law to protect citizens from vigilante violence. Instead, they pushed for changes to the “Stand Your Ground” law to expand the rights of gun owners and make it harder to hold murderers accountable. They didn’t win their bid to expand the law, but they successfully defended the current law and didn’t lose any ground to reformers. By staking out a position far to the right they made maintaining the status quo look like a compromise.
The current debate in Washington DC lacks any kind of forceful push for the policy that will actually solve our nation’s health care crisis. It’s clear that Democrats, some of whom are now joining Republicans to turn against key portions of the law, may not even hold the line, let alone fight for even better coverage for Americans. So that push needs to come from us.
By staking out a progressive flank and generating a groundswell of public support for expanding Medicare so that it covers everybody, we can create space for a better outcome in potential negotiations and can help prevent the debate on health care reform from shifting even further to the right.
Tell Congress: Get your hands off the Affordable Care Act, and get-on-record with an up-or-down vote on Medicare for All. Click here to sign the petition automatically.
Let's remember, when health care reform went through Congress, a single-payer system like Medicare for All wasn't even on the table.
The implementation of the modest -- but still life-changing -- reforms of the Affordable Care Act and the battle over a deficit deal that cuts Medicare benefits (instead of closing corporate tax loopholes or reining in Pentagon spending) are sure to be among the top issues in the 2014 election.
America's health care system is in crisis. If Democrats fight for half-measures and Republicans continue on their rampage trying to destroy what few reforms we’ve been able to achieve, 2014 could conceivably give the Republicans the wins they need to take the Senate and repeal the entire Affordable Care Act.
We know Medicare already works. Let’s fight to expand Medicare to all Americans, and find out who in Congress is with us.
Tell Congress: Support Medicare for All. Click the link below to automatically sign the petition:
http://act.credoaction.com/sign/medicare_for_all?sp_ref=19446663.4.1239.e.5291.2&referring_akid=9466.179403.RCNim3&source=mailto_sp
Thank you for fighting for the change we need.
Becky Bond, Political Director
CREDO Action from Working Assets
Automatically add your name:
|
No comments:
Post a Comment