FAIR USE NOTICE

FAIR USE NOTICE

A BEAR MARKET ECONOMICS BLOG

DEDICATED TO OCCUPY AND THE ECONOMIC REVOLUTION

OCCUPY THE MARKETPLACE

FOLLOW ME ON FACEBOOK

This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

FAIR USE NOTICE FAIR USE NOTICE: This page may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This website distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for scientific, research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107.

Read more at: http://www.etupdates.com/fair-use-notice/#.UpzWQRL3l5M | ET. Updates
FAIR USE NOTICE FAIR USE NOTICE: This page may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This website distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for scientific, research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107.

Read more at: http://www.etupdates.com/fair-use-notice/#.UpzWQRL3l5M | ET. Updates

All Blogs licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0

Thursday, December 31, 2009

Single-Payer’s Last Stand?

Single-Payer’s Last Stand?

by Greg Kaufmann

The Progressive Caucus (CPC) is the largest caucus in Congress with 82 members--it dwarfs the often-hyped Blue Dog Democrats with its 52 yapping pups.

[Lynn Woolsey and Raúl Grijalva, Co-Chairs of the House Progressive Caucus, sandwich President Obama.  The question, however, is whether or not the 82 member caucus can exert any influence as the health bill goes to conference.  One point of particular interest is waiver language that would permit states to implement alternatives to insurance market exchanges, including single-payer systems. (Newscom collage h/t TPM)]Lynn Woolsey and Raúl Grijalva, Co-Chairs of the House Progressive Caucus, sandwich President Obama. The question, however, is whether or not the 82 member caucus can exert any influence as the health bill goes to conference. One point of particular interest is waiver language that would permit states to implement alternatives to insurance market exchanges, including single-payer systems. (Newscom collage h/t TPM)
Yet the CPC has struggled to get the respect and attention it has strived for--prior to this Congress, it seemed like the mainstream media wouldn't even refer to it by name, instead using vague descriptions like "the liberal wing of the party."

That's because getting the talented but diverse Caucus to unite and show its legislative muscle has often been described--even by its own members--as herding cats.

This might be the moment for the Caucus to change all that in dramatic fashion.

The House healthcare bill passed by just five votes--220 to 215. Surely the CPC's 81 House votes (the 82nd member is a Senator, CPC founder Bernie Sanders) should be viewed as just as powerful as the votes of Ben Nelson or Joe Lieberman in the Senate.

But will a strong majority of the CPC unite around a single provision and insist that it be included in the final bill exchange for their support?

One item worth rallying around--and it hasn't received a lot of attention--is waiver language that would permit states to implement alternatives to insurance market exchanges, including single-payer systems.

The Senate bill allows states to apply for such waivers in 2017, but that's arguably too late. States would be required to establish (and invest in) the insurance market exchanges in 2014, making it difficult to develop and provide resources for any alternative model. The House bill doesn't have any waiver language at all, though CPC members--including CPC co-chairs Raúl Grijalva and Lynn Woolsey, and Congressman Dennis Kucinich--fought successfully for similar language in the House Committee on Education and Labor version.

Canada's healthcare system evolved from a program first established in Saskatchewan. Will states in the US have a similar opportunity to serve as incubators and prove that single-payer can provide comprehensive coverage and reduce costs? The CPC has the power to insist on it--if it chooses to do so.

No comments:

Post a Comment