Click on the video to activate live chat.
The stance Chuck Schumer took on Medicare for All during his appearance on MSNBC’s Meet the Press is the reason many do not have faith in the Establishment Democrats. Chuck Todd did a great job in exposing his double talk on healthcare.
Chuck Schumer did more spinning when Chuck Todd tried to pin him down on his real Single-payer Medicare for All position. All he did was double talk.
“Here’s what Adam Green, founder of Progressive Change Campaign Committee writes,” Chuck Todd said. “He says, ‘Democrats need to put a bright north star in the sky for 2020 voters, showing what Democrats would do with more power and making clear that we’re moving toward Medicare for all, as a big part of a 2020 electoral strategy. It seems pretty clear that the presidential nominee, whoever it is, will support Medicare for all.’ Do you think it’s time for Democrats to push this?”
“Look, Democrats are for universal access to health care, from one end of the party to the other. We want more people covered, everyone covered,” Senator Schumer said. “We want better health care at a lower cost. People have different views as to how to get there. Many are for Medicare for all. Some are for Medicare buy-in. Some are Medicare over 55. Some are Medicaid buy-in. Some are a
We must remember that most Americans including a majority of Republicans support Single-payer Medicare for All. Notice he used the diverse opinions suggested by politicians, the sole purpose of keepin insurance companies alive. It is a fraud. Having any answer with insurance companies in the mix is nothing but added expenses and cost to healthcare.
Todd, on this round, did a good job that caused Senator Schumer to expose himself.
“I know you’re very, I know you’re very careful about putting your view here, now that you’re the leader of your, of the Senate conference there,” Todd said. “Are you going to support Medicare for all, Senator Schumer?”
Schumer’s double talk would become clearer.
“Look, as I said, there are lots of different routes,” Schumer said. “I’m going to support a plan that can pass and that can provide the best, cheapest health care for all Americans.”
Viewers are encouraged to subscribe and join the conversation for more insightful commentary and to support progressive messages. Together, we can populate the internet with progressive messages that represent the true aspirations of most Americans.
Egberto, Sen. Schumer is leader of Democrats in the Senate; he is not leader of the Democratic Party nor leader of Democrats in the House. His response endorsed healthcare-for-all but did not endorse a specific way to get there. If we understand and accept politics for what it is, then, we should understand and accept that in 2019 we will have 47 Democrats in the Senate Democratic Caucus; and each of them should be given a chance to make their own case for what is the best way to achieve the Democrats’ goal of healthcare-for-all. If Sen. Schumer had endorsed Medicare-for-all as the goal, he would have limited the caucus’ and the Party’s ability to reach agreement between Senate and House Democrats on the best approach to achieving the ultimate goal of healthcare-for-all. Just because Chuck Todd attempted to tie him down to a specific approach in order to limit his options later, as Senate Democrats’ leader (if he wants to lead effectively), he is obliged to let each of his caucus members have a say before the entire caucus agrees on what the public position will be on the matter. Each of the other Senate Democrats are free to express their views on which approach is best, both in public and in private; but, as their leader, he does not have that luxury because such specific endorsement would stifle, limit, and frustrate debate among Democrats within the Senate Caucus on the issue. I believe it is possible to express your personal views about what you believe is the best approach to achieving healthcare for all without denigrating Senator Schumer in the process. Not all Democrats agree with you that Medicare-for-all is the answer to our goal; and not giving those who do not agree a chance to express their opinions and sell their ideas shows great disrespect for those members of the Party. Remember, we will need every vote from Democrats and Independents to win in 2020. You should be aware that such public denigration serves to weaken Sen. Schumer’s leadership and his ability to negotiate a compromise with Senate Republicans, which he will need if Democrats are to be successful in obtaining Senate approval of whichever approach Democrats (as a Party) choose in this matter, which you should expect will emanate from the House–not the Senate where Democrats are the minority Party. Democrats will not see the ball moved at all if they do not get at least 13 Senate Republicans to join them in whatever course of action they choose. We should not make that job more difficult for Chuck Schumer and his Democratic Caucus by arguing family business in public. If Republicans think we are divided, they will be less willing to compromise on the matter. Since you and I are not in the Senate or the House, we should be followers of what our representatives choose to do to achieve our goal of healthcare-for-all; and good followers offer private advice to their leaders so that they choose wisely but are careful not to criticize them in public, which weakens their ability to lead.
First of all thank you for your very measured response. Rest assured I understand all that you said. Moreover, the positions you expressed was the position I took even as a Bernie Delegate.
I was one of the pragmatists that urge the more Progressive Wing to acquiesce to keep order for the exact purpose you mentioned. During my very pragmatic stance, in the minority of our caucus I was told I was naive to believe that those in the “Establishment” would ever really listen to the wants and needs of the American people. After all, they’ve seen both Clinton and Obama speak the language of the people as they adopted more corporate friendly policies while leaving crumbs for the masses. I’ve written enough about these in a manner that tore neither one of them down but one that pointed out how blind one can get when the Plutocracy uses their psychological narratives.
Unfortunately, I think we will need a realignment. Many think Democrats get played by starting a negotiation from what they think can pass, as Schumer said, as opposed to what must pass for the American People.
As a Progressive Activist my role has to be the people first. They are in pain and the game the moderates have been playing have got them played either ignorantly or willingly. Many times it is clear the latter is the reality.
I do respect what you say completely but I must respectfully disagree in today’s climate. I urged most to hold their fire on President Obama on not forcing at least a Public Action by using the power of the presidency and his eloquence to really force a movement. I was wrong! We should have seen that the little use for OFA after he was elected until 2011 was in fact to temper a popular movement.
I have a wife with Lupus. I have seen too much. We must not go through another round where we are gamed. A Single-payer Medicare for All option is the only option. Now let’s work on how best to implement it. Profit for paying a bill is an expense that could go to provide more healthcare, I’ve learned and written too much on this to allow double talk to allow the existence of an industry whose product is pilfer.
Let’s agree to disagree. Rest assured when I need to come home I will. But while we are in flux we will be watching every Democrat. Irrespective sir, know that we have your back.
Regards,
Egberto