Well, the Democrats had their monthly debate the other night and one thing is perfectly clear. They have to winnow down the field. CNN extended the time allowed for each answer but it’s still obvious that it isn’t enough for a serious debate. Everyone has had their shot at sloganizing, which is pretty much all you can do in 75 seconds. Now it’s time to trim the field and give the remaining candidates a couple of minutes to make their points.
So who to cut? I thought it was pretty obvious. Of the dozen candidates, only seven seemed to have acquired the stature to continue. All the candidates had something to say that was significant, but if the game keeps extending no one will take it seriously.
In this writer’s opinion Warren, Biden, Sanders, Klobachar, Buttigieg, Harris and Booker are the keepers. Seven is a good number for this kind of debate. From here it will winnow itself down as the primaries begin.
What’s wrong with the other five? Not much. All have something to recommend them, but mostly they don’t have a serious shot at getting there. Andrew Yang is probably the best of this bunch. He’s smart and expresses that intelligence well, but his thousand dollar a month a person won’t solve any real problems and it just stinks of political gimmickry as did his odious give-away after the last debate.
Beto O’Rourke made a pretty good comeback especially on the post debate show where he killed. The question is, is it too little too late? I loved his stance on automatic weapons, which was purposely misinterpreted by the GOP. All these liars who want to discredit the plan can only do it by being Trump sized liars. 77% of the American people want to ban machine guns. That is that! That doesn’t entail breaking into a person’s home to grab them. It does entail passing a law outlawing them and setting up a system by which owners can turn them in and get paid for doing so. This is basically a law-abiding country and if we pass a law most people will abide by it.
As a number of the commentators mentioned, many on the panel went after Elizabeth Warren, supposedly because she wouldn’t say how she would make her plan for healthcare affordable. I think they all knew why she wouldn’t say it. None of them would either if they were pushing her point of view. Bernie said it but it won’t hurt Bernie with his supporters.. Warren is looking to a broader coalition.
I don’t want to get into a big examination of how to fix healthcare here. The only important thing to know is that the Democrats are going to expand it to cover all Americans, while Trump and the GOP want to eliminate it mainly because all those who need it, are costing the billionaires who run it a shitload of money. Once a voter understands that it’s a no-brainer because they will also understand that everyone will be covered and even with a tax increase they will make out better.
I’ll do a thing on healthcare later in the blog.
Corey Booker had a very good debate. He concentrated on two things. The first thing was, everyone should concentrate on beating Trump above all else. The second was, they should not be so disagreeable with each other. So, I’ll be disagreeable here and point out to Corey that the reason for these debates is to lay on the table how each of the candidates feels about what they want to do as opposed to what all the others want to do, and why they think their ideas are better than anyone else’s. That’s what debates are for and if it gets a little contentious it’s only because people tend to feel very strongly about what they want and how to do it. That’s good, as long as they don’t become Trumpian and start lying about everything that’s said that they don’t like.
Kamala Harris had a pretty good debate. She’s smart as hell and knows how to parse an argument. She also represents a segment of the electorate that has historically been under represented. She’s forceful, intelligent and she has an edge, but despite all that good stuff she just doesn’t excite me. Maybe it’s my fault because she should.
Amy Klobachar is beginning to. She’s forceful and smart as hell. She comes from a background of winning in a state that really doesn’t support her ideas but elected her over and over anyhow. I thought of her as a VP candidate when this thing started but maybe she’s a lot more than that.
Mayor Pete came out of the reasoning, intellectual closet last night and showed some fire and the ability to use that intelligence to formulate a serious attack. Pete has been my favorite candidate practically from the first time I heard him speak but I found myself disagreeing with some of his positions last night, specifically his clinging to middle of the road positions just to appear more electable. I still think he will make the best president. The question is, will he get the nomination?
Bernie answered the question about his health, at least for last night, but he is still 78 years old with a bad heart. That’s not an ideal platform on which to run for president. However, he’s a fiery guy and he’ll leave his stamp on this race.
Biden didn’t answer the big question of the night, the one about his son, and he still has confusion when answering complicated questions but he did bring the fire to end the debate. That’s to his benefit, but he is slipping and I really don’t think he’s the answer in the long run.
Elizabeth Warren has moved to the lead lately but she didn’t do herself any favors with her refusal to give a clear answer to the repeatedly asked question about whether or not her healthcare plan will entail raising taxes on the public. She should have said, YES, but in the end you will gain by lowering your healthcare costs by more than you’ll pay in taxes. It’s a simple answer to a simple question yet she is holding onto that old political saw about never admitting to raising taxes. It could become a disaster for her. Her stance is based on benefits to the people, but way she beats around the bush sure sounds like political bullshit. Her appeal is that she is a straight shooter and she has to keep that out front at all costs.
The biggest move of the night was probably Buttigieg showing that fire. He has already established that he can raise a ton of money. Now he has to make a good showing in the rest of the debates and in Iowa. I wouldn’t be surprised if it all came down to him against Warren.
****
Okay, let’s take one last look, at the way to progress on healthcare. It’s already abundantly clear that all the Democratic candidates want some form of universal care and that many of the Republicans, including the President, don’t. That should win the Democrats the election all by itself, unless they somehow completely screw it up.
There seem to be two areas of contention. One is about whether or not to keep what appear to be the already successful private plans provided, primarily by employers and unions, and the other involves the problem of paying for it all? They very definitely overlap.
First there’s the problem of the insured that want to stay insured by private plans. It’s a problem because it reflects back onto the cost to run the system. If we allow people to keep their private plans, the extraordinary costs of those plans, as opposed to the much lower costs of Medicare will hurt the systems ability to remain fluid. The private plans actually cost money and ultimately it’s the money of those who are insured by them. Sure the employer or the union pay for them now, but if they didn’t have to, that money or at least a good part of it could be paid to the insured in the form of increased wages or other benefits. Unions would make sure of that. Either way it costs the employer money. They pay the insurance or they pay that money to the employee in the form of higher wages and benefits. As soon as the employees realize this, they will begin asking their bosses or their unions to see about making this change. For many it will happen even sooner, like when the insurance company tells them they will not cover some procedure that would unquestionably be covered by Medicare.
It might take longer than four years because the public is grossly uninformed but it will happen.
The biggest mover, as it always is, will be the money. Those who whine about the Medicare For All plan being unaffordable are just plain lying. There is a ton of money in the healthcare system right now. The problem is, the largest part of it is being spent in the wrong places. Our system is more than twice as expensive as any other system in the world and we don’t get any better care than any other civilized nation.
That’s because we spend a huge percentage of our healthcare dollar on profits for the pharmaceutical and insurance industries. Those profits, 20-40% for insurance and up to 1000% or more for drugs, represent a huge pool of money that could be spent to provide coverage if insurance were eliminated and drugs were regulated, or at least controlled by Medicare. And that’s one of the big reasons why the Medicare For Alladvocates want to get rid of private insurance. The money that is now being squandered on profits to the insurance companies can be better spent on direct care. Also when those private subscribers come over to Medicare it gives Medicare a bigger base and therefore a more powerful club with which to beat the drug industry into submission.
Right now the drug industry only does about half of the research into new drugs in this country. The other half is done in hospitals and various government research facilities all around the country. If one looks into it one discovers that drug companies only do research into cures for diseases that are widespread, because those are the only diseases that provide a large consumer base for the purchase of such drugs. The drug industry does almost zero research on cures for little known diseases. There’s no profit in it. But the drug industry still gets to write off its research costs.
The world pharmaceutical market generates $1.05 trillion annually of which the US and Canada bill about half or $515 billion. But the US and Canada make up only about 7% of the world’s population.
The drug industry currently spends over $2.6 billion on research and development and another $5.2 billion on advertising. Then there are lobbying and associated costs that allow the industry free rein to expand their profits to astronomical heights. Those profits could easily run equal to the research and advertising totals so we’re looking at over $15 billion in costs that would be removed from the process even before the profits were reduced in an area where the industry was properly regulated.
The question must be asked; why are drugs so much more expensive in the US than in any other country in the world? The answer is because all other countries, recognizing that drugs are a public resource, regulate them by law. This country doesn’t, mainly because of the bribes and lobbying benefits that flow to our members of congress.
Just the top 8 insurance companies recorded health insurance profits of over $7 billion in just the third quarter of last year. That comes to almost $30 billion per year, besides what the rest of the industry earns.
So without even cutting into profit markups that can run over 1000% we’ve found around $45 billion to help pay for the extra folks that will be added to the health care rolls. It would, therefore, be reasonable to assume; with the elimination of private insurance and private drug research, and the limitation of advertising and lobbying costs, plus the addition of profit limitations, we would expect to find over $100 billion a year available to help with the extra costs incurred by the planned expansion of Medicare. And that’s just the start. There’s a lot more hidden money that we haven’t even started to pull out of the crevices.
Medicare For All is definitely affordable. It’s just a question of digging out all the money that is being wasted.