85% of Democrats support medicare for all. But the corpstream media shills are throwing misleading poll question results at democratic candidates for president. The goal of this article is to provide some better answers than the candidates have been giving
Kamala Harris looked like a deer in the headlights when she was asked about private health insurance, and the fact that people would no longer have the ability to keep the plan they had.
Kamala Harris Backpedals on Medicare for All Within 24 Hours
(Image by YouTube, Channel: The Humanist Report) Details DMCA
Today, on CNN, John King points out that a recent poll shows while 75%+ support healthcare for all, only 56% support a health care plan that does not allow people to keep the plan they like. Actually, I'm using the real poll numbers. King paints a misleading picture that looks worse.
Harris was flummoxed by the question. She should not have been. She should have been been better prepared. Perhaps she wasn't because she's not really a strong supporter for such a plan. A day later, she backed off for Medicare for all and suggested that she's open to models that include private insurance. Either way, I have some ideas on how she and all Democratic primary presidential candidates can answer it better. But I'd like your thoughts and suggestions too.
Keeping a plan you like
Support for medicare for all drops from over 70% to about 56% when the idea that all people must have it is broached, compared to other options which make medicare for all available to people over 50 or people who don't have insurance.
First, the idea that people can keep the private plan they like is an illusion, or worse, a lie
Every year, health insurers change the rules and change the policies they are providing to employers. So no-one gets to keep the exact same policy. Currently, whether through Obamacare or employer-provided health care, the consumer has no say in the policy changes.
Second, even with the current medicare, there are many different medicare Advantage and Supplent options available to medicare subscribers. They range from free to to costing a few hundred dollars a month, all, usually less than current non-medicare plans. I assume that the same range of options will also be available when medicare is applied to all.
Waiting longer for appointments
John King pointed out that support drops to under 30% when the possibility of longer waits for medical tests or treatments is raised. This is a fraudulent claim. The reality is, under many existing plans, patients are restricted to only seeing certain doctors, which can cause long waits. That could change with medicare for all, making access to appointments even faster, with more flexible options. Any poll that suggests that possibility is a bogus poll attempting to sell an agenda.
Fear mongering pollsters ask the question of whether respondents will support medicare for all if their taxes go up. Not surprisingly, it results in a very low poll number-- 26% support, 70% opposed. This deceptive question is a lie of omission. The questions should be how people feel about paying less overall, though their taxes may go up, with the elimination of health insurance fees.
If presidential candidates just use the answers I provide above, I think they'll be in a better position than Kamala Harris was in. But I have a feeling that you, the readers, can come up with more, better responses.