

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The decision by Aetna to withdraw from many ObamaCare exchanges was a predictable outrage that opens to the door not to the demise of ObamaCare, but the dramatic improvement of ObamaCare led by a grand battle by Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.) and progressives to enact the public option and move toward a Medicare-for-all healthcare system.
Let's coin the phrase "BernieCare" to describe the kind of healthcare system that progressives believe, with some reason, would be the kind of program that voters prefer. Sanders has long been a champion of single-payer healthcare -- which I personally support -- but for obvious political reasons in a lobbyist-dominated Washington, single payer is highly unlikely to happen soon.
Sanders, who is more of a highly skilled political and legislative tactician than pundits understand, has responded to the Aetna withdrawal from many healthcare exchanges by publicly announcing he will wage an all-out campaign to enact the public option.
The Sanders response to Aetna is perfectly timed and politically powerful. The public option, which should have been enacted with the original ObamaCare program, would guarantee that every healthcare exchange will have at least one highly affordable choice for consumers to accept.
The result of including a public option on healthcare exchanges would be that one of two things would happen. Either other insurers would remain on the exchanges to compete for the consumer's dollar, which would create a downward pressure on insurance premiums that benefits consumers, or Americans would enroll in the public option en masse, which would accelerate the move toward a true single-payer system.
I was a vehement supporter of the public option during the original ObamaCare debate. It was a tragedy of epic proportion that the public option was not included in the final ObamaCare law, despite the fact that President Obama supported it and Democrats then had large majorities in the House and Senate.
That omission occurred, despite strong public support for the public option, because of the power of insurance lobbyists in Washington, the obstruction of Republicans in Congress and the reluctance of a small number of more conservative Democratic senators to defy the insurance lobby.
Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, Sanders and the Democratic Party are now united in support of the public option. This was one of the more important developments at the time of the Democratic National Convention when the Clinton and Sanders camps unified behind a series of platform positions that included long-held progressive policies and ideas.
The BernieCare option has always been a frontal assault against the greed of certain insurance companies and the lobbying industrial complex that has dominated healthcare policy for far too long. The BernieCare strategy was dramatized during his campaign for president, where he advocated a full single-payer system, and is now advancing again with the decision of Aetna to abandon most of the ObamaCare exchanges.
This strategy has taken various forms in recent years. The idea of a public option on the exchanges has always garnered strong public support. The idea of a Medicare-for-all system builds on the enormous public support for the Medicare program. And I would emphasize again today, as I have throughout the presidential campaign, that I believe the reason that Sanders dominated Republican nominee Donald Trump in match-up polls throughout the presidential campaign is that he embodies the kind of progressive populist reformation that voters prefer over the status quo or the conservative alternative.
Many analysts believe that the Aetna decision to withdraw from most ObamaCare exchanges was a retaliation against the Obama Justice Department taking a strong position on egregious examples of mergers and acquisitions in the insurance industry, including a proposed but rejected merger sought by Aetna. I fully support the Justice Department's policy, deplore the Aetna withdrawals, and expect the Aetna move to backfire.
Among the many reasons that Sanders is supporting Clinton for president, and turning his attention to electing other Democrats to regain control of the Senate and potentially the House of Representatives, is that he is poised to become one of the most powerful and important senators if Democrats regain control.
If Democrats regain control of the Senate, Sanders will have fascinating options as to which Senate committee he will chair.
He can take his revolution to the federal budget as chairman of the Senate Budget Committee. Even more interesting is that Sanders could have the opportunity to take his revolution to even more immediate heights as chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, if the only Democrat above him in seniority, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), chooses to chair the Senate Appropriations Committee instead.
Republicans and conservatives are rejoicing at the decision of Aetna to abandon most ObamaCare exchanges, but does the GOP really want to become the party of higher insurance premiums, working as the handmaiden of insurance industry lobbyists?
The stage is set for Sanders to campaign throughout the nation and in Congress for his BernieCare alternative, joined by Clinton and Democratic leaders, making the Democrats the party of lower insurance premiums, the great change agent battling lobbyists and influence peddlers who want to stick it to American families and consumers.
It will be ironic -- and wonderful for liberals -- if BernieCare saves ObamaCare and the big winners are American consumers.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
The decision by Aetna to withdraw from many ObamaCare exchanges was a predictable outrage that opens to the door not to the demise of ObamaCare, but the dramatic improvement of ObamaCare led by a grand battle by Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.) and progressives to enact the public option and move toward a Medicare-for-all healthcare system.
Let's coin the phrase "BernieCare" to describe the kind of healthcare system that progressives believe, with some reason, would be the kind of program that voters prefer. Sanders has long been a champion of single-payer healthcare -- which I personally support -- but for obvious political reasons in a lobbyist-dominated Washington, single payer is highly unlikely to happen soon.
Sanders, who is more of a highly skilled political and legislative tactician than pundits understand, has responded to the Aetna withdrawal from many healthcare exchanges by publicly announcing he will wage an all-out campaign to enact the public option.
The Sanders response to Aetna is perfectly timed and politically powerful. The public option, which should have been enacted with the original ObamaCare program, would guarantee that every healthcare exchange will have at least one highly affordable choice for consumers to accept.
The result of including a public option on healthcare exchanges would be that one of two things would happen. Either other insurers would remain on the exchanges to compete for the consumer's dollar, which would create a downward pressure on insurance premiums that benefits consumers, or Americans would enroll in the public option en masse, which would accelerate the move toward a true single-payer system.
I was a vehement supporter of the public option during the original ObamaCare debate. It was a tragedy of epic proportion that the public option was not included in the final ObamaCare law, despite the fact that President Obama supported it and Democrats then had large majorities in the House and Senate.
That omission occurred, despite strong public support for the public option, because of the power of insurance lobbyists in Washington, the obstruction of Republicans in Congress and the reluctance of a small number of more conservative Democratic senators to defy the insurance lobby.
Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, Sanders and the Democratic Party are now united in support of the public option. This was one of the more important developments at the time of the Democratic National Convention when the Clinton and Sanders camps unified behind a series of platform positions that included long-held progressive policies and ideas.
The BernieCare option has always been a frontal assault against the greed of certain insurance companies and the lobbying industrial complex that has dominated healthcare policy for far too long. The BernieCare strategy was dramatized during his campaign for president, where he advocated a full single-payer system, and is now advancing again with the decision of Aetna to abandon most of the ObamaCare exchanges.
This strategy has taken various forms in recent years. The idea of a public option on the exchanges has always garnered strong public support. The idea of a Medicare-for-all system builds on the enormous public support for the Medicare program. And I would emphasize again today, as I have throughout the presidential campaign, that I believe the reason that Sanders dominated Republican nominee Donald Trump in match-up polls throughout the presidential campaign is that he embodies the kind of progressive populist reformation that voters prefer over the status quo or the conservative alternative.
Many analysts believe that the Aetna decision to withdraw from most ObamaCare exchanges was a retaliation against the Obama Justice Department taking a strong position on egregious examples of mergers and acquisitions in the insurance industry, including a proposed but rejected merger sought by Aetna. I fully support the Justice Department's policy, deplore the Aetna withdrawals, and expect the Aetna move to backfire.
Among the many reasons that Sanders is supporting Clinton for president, and turning his attention to electing other Democrats to regain control of the Senate and potentially the House of Representatives, is that he is poised to become one of the most powerful and important senators if Democrats regain control.
If Democrats regain control of the Senate, Sanders will have fascinating options as to which Senate committee he will chair.
He can take his revolution to the federal budget as chairman of the Senate Budget Committee. Even more interesting is that Sanders could have the opportunity to take his revolution to even more immediate heights as chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, if the only Democrat above him in seniority, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), chooses to chair the Senate Appropriations Committee instead.
Republicans and conservatives are rejoicing at the decision of Aetna to abandon most ObamaCare exchanges, but does the GOP really want to become the party of higher insurance premiums, working as the handmaiden of insurance industry lobbyists?
The stage is set for Sanders to campaign throughout the nation and in Congress for his BernieCare alternative, joined by Clinton and Democratic leaders, making the Democrats the party of lower insurance premiums, the great change agent battling lobbyists and influence peddlers who want to stick it to American families and consumers.
It will be ironic -- and wonderful for liberals -- if BernieCare saves ObamaCare and the big winners are American consumers.
The decision by Aetna to withdraw from many ObamaCare exchanges was a predictable outrage that opens to the door not to the demise of ObamaCare, but the dramatic improvement of ObamaCare led by a grand battle by Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.) and progressives to enact the public option and move toward a Medicare-for-all healthcare system.
Let's coin the phrase "BernieCare" to describe the kind of healthcare system that progressives believe, with some reason, would be the kind of program that voters prefer. Sanders has long been a champion of single-payer healthcare -- which I personally support -- but for obvious political reasons in a lobbyist-dominated Washington, single payer is highly unlikely to happen soon.
Sanders, who is more of a highly skilled political and legislative tactician than pundits understand, has responded to the Aetna withdrawal from many healthcare exchanges by publicly announcing he will wage an all-out campaign to enact the public option.
The Sanders response to Aetna is perfectly timed and politically powerful. The public option, which should have been enacted with the original ObamaCare program, would guarantee that every healthcare exchange will have at least one highly affordable choice for consumers to accept.
The result of including a public option on healthcare exchanges would be that one of two things would happen. Either other insurers would remain on the exchanges to compete for the consumer's dollar, which would create a downward pressure on insurance premiums that benefits consumers, or Americans would enroll in the public option en masse, which would accelerate the move toward a true single-payer system.
I was a vehement supporter of the public option during the original ObamaCare debate. It was a tragedy of epic proportion that the public option was not included in the final ObamaCare law, despite the fact that President Obama supported it and Democrats then had large majorities in the House and Senate.
That omission occurred, despite strong public support for the public option, because of the power of insurance lobbyists in Washington, the obstruction of Republicans in Congress and the reluctance of a small number of more conservative Democratic senators to defy the insurance lobby.
Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, Sanders and the Democratic Party are now united in support of the public option. This was one of the more important developments at the time of the Democratic National Convention when the Clinton and Sanders camps unified behind a series of platform positions that included long-held progressive policies and ideas.
The BernieCare option has always been a frontal assault against the greed of certain insurance companies and the lobbying industrial complex that has dominated healthcare policy for far too long. The BernieCare strategy was dramatized during his campaign for president, where he advocated a full single-payer system, and is now advancing again with the decision of Aetna to abandon most of the ObamaCare exchanges.
This strategy has taken various forms in recent years. The idea of a public option on the exchanges has always garnered strong public support. The idea of a Medicare-for-all system builds on the enormous public support for the Medicare program. And I would emphasize again today, as I have throughout the presidential campaign, that I believe the reason that Sanders dominated Republican nominee Donald Trump in match-up polls throughout the presidential campaign is that he embodies the kind of progressive populist reformation that voters prefer over the status quo or the conservative alternative.
Many analysts believe that the Aetna decision to withdraw from most ObamaCare exchanges was a retaliation against the Obama Justice Department taking a strong position on egregious examples of mergers and acquisitions in the insurance industry, including a proposed but rejected merger sought by Aetna. I fully support the Justice Department's policy, deplore the Aetna withdrawals, and expect the Aetna move to backfire.
Among the many reasons that Sanders is supporting Clinton for president, and turning his attention to electing other Democrats to regain control of the Senate and potentially the House of Representatives, is that he is poised to become one of the most powerful and important senators if Democrats regain control.
If Democrats regain control of the Senate, Sanders will have fascinating options as to which Senate committee he will chair.
He can take his revolution to the federal budget as chairman of the Senate Budget Committee. Even more interesting is that Sanders could have the opportunity to take his revolution to even more immediate heights as chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, if the only Democrat above him in seniority, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), chooses to chair the Senate Appropriations Committee instead.
Republicans and conservatives are rejoicing at the decision of Aetna to abandon most ObamaCare exchanges, but does the GOP really want to become the party of higher insurance premiums, working as the handmaiden of insurance industry lobbyists?
The stage is set for Sanders to campaign throughout the nation and in Congress for his BernieCare alternative, joined by Clinton and Democratic leaders, making the Democrats the party of lower insurance premiums, the great change agent battling lobbyists and influence peddlers who want to stick it to American families and consumers.
It will be ironic -- and wonderful for liberals -- if BernieCare saves ObamaCare and the big winners are American consumers.