US Politics Mega-thread - Page 8722

On September 13 2017 21:38 Sr18 wrote:
How comparable is the situation in the US now to the situation in the time of MLK? The examples I read above in the quoted letter of MLK, about "colored people" not being allowed in certain places etc, are things of history, right?

On September 13 2017 22:25 KwarK wrote:

Quick question. Have you started using terms like "cultural Marxism" unironically? If so, what does that term mean to you? Am I a cultural Marxist?

Battle lines have been drawn as Bernie Sanders launches his latest attempt to establish a healthcare system that covers all 323 million Americans.

Standing in opposition to Sanders’ plan are what he calls the “most powerful and greedy forces in American society”: the pharmaceutical industry, insurance companies, Wall Street and the Republican party.

“The opposition to this will be extraordinary,” Sanders said in an interview in his Capitol Hill office, prior to the launch of his universal healthcare bill, known as “Medicare for All”.

“They will spend an enormous amount of money fighting us. They will lie about what is in the program. They will frighten the American people,” he said.

Sanders has no illusions about the bill’s fate in a Republican-controlled Congress, where it has little chance of passing. But he says the time has arrived to have a debate he believes is fundamental: is healthcare a right or a privilege in America?

Sanders will formally unveil the bill at a press conference on Wednesday, with the backing of nearly a third of the Democratic caucus in the Senate – a record level of support for a bill he introduced just four years ago with only one signature, his own.

The Sanders plan would radically reform the American healthcare system, transitioning it over the course of four years to a federally administered insurance program. The new system would be underwritten by an increase in taxes.

Sanders “single-payer” bill would provide comprehensive coverage for everything from the cost of hospital services, prescription drugs, mental health, maternity and newborn care and dental health.

The proposal would gradually expand Medicare – the federal health insurance program for people who are 65 or older and some younger Americans with disabilities and other illnesses – until it covers everyone.

During the first year of the program, the eligibility age for the Medicare program would drop to 55, and all Americans under 18 would be added to the program. The eligibility age would gradually decrease until the fourth year, when everyone would receive a “universal Medicare card”.

Sanders said of the plan: “You’re going to the same private doctor that you went to. You’re going to go to the same hospital that you went to. The only difference is instead of having a Blue Cross Blue Shield [insurance] card – and having to argue with your insurance company – you’re going to have a Medicare For All card. That’s it.”

Since Sanders launched his presidential campaign in May 2015, public support for universal healthcare has climbed. Where 46% of the public supported such a system in 2008 and 2009, a recent Kaiser poll found 53% now support the idea.

But that same survey found that when respondents were told that a universal healthcare plan might give the government “too much control,” or that it might increases taxes, opposition spiked from 43% to 62% and 60% respectively – perhaps a sign of the major political and policy fights that lie ahead.

And yet the bill is gaining steam among the Democratic party. Among the 15 senators co-sponsoring the bill are Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gillibrand, Cory Booker and Al Franken – all of whom are rumored to be considering a run for president in 2020.

In the House of Representatives, a majority of Democrats have signed on to a similar measure introduced by John Conyers of Michigan, a bill he has brought forward in every Congress since 2003 without nearly as much support.

Still, Democratic leaders have declined to endorse the single-payer measure. House minority leader Nancy Pelosi has said her focus is protecting President Obama’s Affordable Care Act (ACA) from Republican attempts to tear it down. And Chuck Schumer, the Senate minority leader, has said Sanders’ plan is one of several pieces of legislations under consideration in his caucus.

Republicans, bruised after a failed campaign to repeal the Affordable Care Act, are eager to use Sanders’ progressive plan to attack Democrats. Of the 10 Senate Democrats up for re-election in states Trump won, only one, Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, has signed on to the bill so far.

Senator John Barrasso, a Republican from Wyoming and an orthopedic surgeon, said on Tuesday the Sanders bill “is becoming the litmus test for the liberal left” and decried the program as too costly. He pointed to Sanders’ home state, where legislators tried and failed to establish a single-payer system after experts estimated that running the program would require doubling taxes for residents of Vermont.

“While Bernie Sanders’ slogan may be very popular, it’s really the nuts and bolts and the details that matters the most,” Barrasso said. “And that’s what’s it going to cost the American people in terms of money, in terms of time and in terms of their freedom of choice when it comes to healthcare.”

Some advocates of a “single-payer” system have expressed concern that Democrats could fall into the same trap Republicans did with their campaign to “repeal and replace” Obamacare. Sanders’ Medicare For All bill, like the Republicans’ repeal and replace effort, is a popular idea but leaves open crucial policy decisions and ideological disagreements.

Senator Claire McCaskill, a moderate Democrat up for re-election in Missouri, said a single-payer bill was “premature” but welcomed the debate. She said she would prefer to allow people between 55 to 65 to buy into the Medicare program.

Meanwhile, Democrats too have raised concerns that changing gears too quickly – shifting from defending Obamacare to overhauling it with a disruptive new plan – could put the healthcare law in jeopardy as Republicans continue to push for a repeal.

Advertisement

“The risk is getting distracted by a longer-term healthcare policy discussion when these guys are still rabid to gut the ACA,” said Senator Chris Murphy, a Democrat from Connecticut, who has not signed on to the bill.

But for advocates of the plan, such as Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat from Connecticut and one of the bill’s 15 sponsors, universal healthcare is “an idea whose time has come”.

“There should be no question about what our goal is: provide access to everyone,” Blumenthal told reporters on Tuesday. “There is nothing about the politics of the moment of the ACA that precludes supporting Medicare for All as the ultimate goal.”

Sanders said he was open to other approaches that push the country toward universal healthcare but said he believed that Medicare for All, modeled after the Canadian healthcare system, was the most logical path.

On September 13 2017 22:37 Plansix wrote:
Like High Crimes and Misdemeanors, cultural Marxism has a real definition that doesn’t really line up with the alt-right meme version. It is sort of a conspiracy theory based on bad readings of Marxism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_School#Cultural_Marxism

On September 13 2017 13:22 TheFish7 wrote:


For once I agree with Paul Ryan. But what are the 7 countries? Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen(?) Pakistan(?) Syria(?)

On September 13 2017 23:19 chocorush wrote:


That wiki entry is a disaster, but it does get across the conspiracy theory point that the editor thinks that conspiracy theory Cultural Marxism is a conspiracy theory.

On September 14 2017 00:07 xDaunt wrote:

The great thing about Hillary's book is that everybody is going to get a really good, unvarnished look at what a selfish and entitled bitch she is. She's giving everybody closure.

On September 14 2017 00:05 xDaunt wrote:
I don't see much value in viewing the development of cultural marxism as a conspiracy theory hatched by the Frankfurt School for most of the same reasons as why I don't see Karl Marx as someone who spawned the communist takeover of Russia. Marxism, in the purest sense, is an analytical tool, notwithstanding the fact that Marxism (as a term) has been conflated with actual political and social movements. For me, cultural marxism is a useful label that embodies many of the left wing cultural movements of the past 50 years that embrace and apply Marxist-style oppression theory.

On September 14 2017 00:11 zlefin wrote:

still less so than her opponent last election

I wonder how many people are actually gonna read it in full; and how many are just going to look at cherry-picked quotes from it.
I assume most people will read into the book what they want to read into it; rather than approaching it with an open mind to see what new information can be gleaned. i.e. they're just seeking validation for what they already believe, and will find it because that's what they want to find.
as to myself; I don't really care, she's in the past and when I read nonfiction (very rarely) it's very high quality useful stuff, and this doesn't get to that standard.

In the end, Clinton does get at what she promised in her author's note. She lays out a how-to section for those areas in which she thinks Democrats could up their game: better technology, unifying the centrist and farther-left wings, being more on guard against Russian interference.

It's anyone's guess as to how to do those things. Even without Clinton's suggestions, those questions would have loomed over the party as 2018 approaches.

Even less clear is whether anyone wants to hear Clinton say it. Then again, that may not be the point.