If HR676 is any model for what House Democrats mean by “Medicare for All”, supporters of M4A should probably be careful of what they wish for. It isn’t Medicare for all. It isn’t much like the Canadian plan or the British plan or any of the Continental European plans that are praised so regularly by proponents of healthcare reform. It’s not like the Canadian system because that system is implemented by the provinces. It’s not like the British plan because practitioners wouldn’t be employed by the government. It’s not like any of the other plans because it renders private insurance covering anything the plan would deem medically necessary illegal.
Sounds like a this will be “sure votes for us” bill that no one seems to be talking up. Imagine the furball when they follow thru on the plan to end the Indian Health Service and VA.
FWIW, in the British system, there is private insurance (e.g. BUPA) while specialists (what they call consultants) have private practices and see NHS patients only referral from the GP and only if the local Council has funding available.
Bill can be found at Congress here.
Reminds me of the Jessie Jackson Jr proposed amendments to guarantee income, housing,etc which never advanced from committee.
“End the Indian Health Service”? Damn near advocating genocide on diabetics, not unprecedented though.
But not that any Natives know this, they always vote D. If they vote.