Even though raising the Medicare retirement age is both deeply unpopular with voters and a terrible policy that saves the federal government only a modest amount of money, it is still treated by the Washington media as an idea to be seriously considered. During what little TV news I’ve watched in the past week, I have seen multiple elected Democrats asked about it. If we are going to be discussing changing Medicare eligibility age to reduce the deficit what we should be talking about is lowering it.
|By: Jon Walker Wednesday August 3, 2011 4:45 pm|
Regular voters actually like real progressive health care reforms when that is what is offered. Expanding public health insurance programs is popular. During the health care debate large majorities always supported allowing people to buy into Medicare, the public option, and expanding Medicaid. It is the corporatism people hate.
|By: Jon Walker Wednesday April 6, 2011 6:45 am|
There are two very simple, straight forward things you can do with Medicare if you want to make a big reduction in the deficit: you can either destroy Medicare, or vastly expand it.
|By: Jon Walker Tuesday December 14, 2010 2:50 pm|
Now that federal judge Henry Hudson has just struck down the individual mandate in the new health care law, the case will likely end up before the Supreme Court. While I suspect, in the end, the constitutionality of the individual mandate provision will be upheld, this individual mandate is not critical. There are many alternative ways to deal with the potential issue of individuals who might try to save money by delaying the purchase of insurance until they get sick that would meet the requirements set forth in Judge Hudson’s ruling.
|By: Jon Walker Tuesday December 7, 2010 12:15 pm|
When health care reform was passed, we were told by Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) it was only a “starter home” that would be improved later. We were also offered vague promises from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) that we would get a vote on a public option in the months following the passage of the new law. Obviously this hasn’t happened.
But there is no reason why Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid couldn’t bring up the public option for an up or down vote next week.
|By: Jon Walker Friday June 11, 2010 9:00 am|
Bill Clinton came to praise the health insurance industry, not criticize it, as the keynote speaker at its Las Vegas convention.
|By: Jon Walker Monday March 22, 2010 12:35 pm|
I have said before that I think this bill is deeply flawed and, most importantly, does not provide an clear pathway to eventually getting real reform. But now that this bill is the new reality, now is not the time to stop fighting. I do not plan to stop fighting until we have achieved real health care reform. Like it or not, we are effectively forced to work from this new starting point. All the groups that were saying this bill must pass because it is a “positive first step” now need to quickly begin preparing for the next step.
|By: Jon Walker Monday March 22, 2010 6:01 am|
The White House and Democratic leaders have made many promises about health care reform throughout this long and winding process—from guaranteeing affordable, quality care for everyone to pledging tougher regulation of the medical industrial complex that created this broken system in the first place. If the majority party wants to honestly deliver on these promises—not to mention if they want to remain in the majority—then a concerted and immediate effort is required to prove that this week’s legislation is truly the first step toward reform, and not the last.
|By: Jon Walker Thursday March 18, 2010 11:45 am|
One of the Democratic leadership’s talking points for the reconciliation bill is that it increases affordability tax credits for people on the exchange. What they aren’t saying is that the increase in subsidies in the Senate bill is only temporary.
|By: David Dayen Friday March 12, 2010 7:35 am|
I mentioned a couple weeks ago that the public option would continue as an enduring electoral issue. Grayson’s bill, which is slightly but really not all that different, would keep it going on a legislative track as well.