Sanders Stands on Principle: No Reform w/out Public Option

Sanders Stands on Principle: No Reform w/out Public Option

Sanders Stands on Principle: No Reform w/out Public Option

If Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wants to get the 60 votes he will need to break a Republican filibuster and pass a health care reform bill, he’s going to have to include a robust public insurance option.

Without that basic protection for consumers and taxpayers, Reid will lose the vote of Vermont Independent Bernie Sanders, who caucuses with the Democrats but has made no secret of his frustration with attempts to dumb down reform.

“I strongly suspect that there are number of senators, including myself, who would not support final passage without a strong public option,” says Sanders, who supports development of a single-payer “Medicare for All” system but has indicated he would accept a milder reform if it controls against insurance-industry profiteering.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

If Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wants to get the 60 votes he will need to break a Republican filibuster and pass a health care reform bill, he’s going to have to include a robust public insurance option.

Without that basic protection for consumers and taxpayers, Reid will lose the vote of Vermont Independent Bernie Sanders, who caucuses with the Democrats but has made no secret of his frustration with attempts to dumb down reform.

“I strongly suspect that there are number of senators, including myself, who would not support final passage without a strong public option,” says Sanders, who supports development of a single-payer “Medicare for All” system but has indicated he would accept a milder reform if it controls against insurance-industry profiteering.

“The American people want a public option that would compete against the private insurance companies, whose only goal in life is to make as much money as possible,” says Sanders. “If we do nothing, the dollars we spend on health care will nearly double in the next eight years.”

Sanders has not gotten as much attention as conservative Democrats who have grumbled about Congress doing “too much.”

But the Vermonter’s objection highlights that danger of doing too little.

Sanders is positioning himself as a leader in the fight for real reform.

“It is my intention to do everything I can to see that a strong bill is passed which provides universal coverage in a cost-effective way,” he says, while admitting that: “This is going to be a very difficult, complicated and contentious process which I hope and believe will, in the final analysis, succeed.”

What’s the key to success? Getting President Obama and his administration engaged in the fight for a strong public option.

“We need them in there with guns blazing,” says Sanders. “This country faces a major health care crisis. With 46 million Americans uninsured, 45,000 dying each year because they don’t get to a doctor when they should, almost 1 million going bankrupt because of medically-related bills and health costs scheduled to double within eight years, it is imperative that we pass strong health care legislation that will address these issues.”

Sanders is tight about the need for Obama to get more actively and aggressively involved.

But there is also a need for progressive senators, who back the public option, to join Sanders in signaling that they will object to a dumbed-down “reform” bill.

That’s not a threat.

It’s a way to help the majority leader keep his promise to deliver health care for all while controlling costs.

When progressives make their demands clear, Reid will have far more leverage to push for real reform.

Support independent journalism that does not fall in line

Even before February 28, the reasons for Donald Trump’s imploding approval rating were abundantly clear: untrammeled corruption and personal enrichment to the tune of billions of dollars during an affordability crisis, a foreign policy guided only by his own derelict sense of morality, and the deployment of a murderous campaign of occupation, detention, and deportation on American streets. 

Now an undeclared, unauthorized, unpopular, and unconstitutional war of aggression against Iran has spread like wildfire through the region and into Europe. A new “forever war”—with an ever-increasing likelihood of American troops on the ground—may very well be upon us.  

As we’ve seen over and over, this administration uses lies, misdirection, and attempts to flood the zone to justify its abuses of power at home and abroad. Just as Trump, Marco Rubio, and Pete Hegseth offer erratic and contradictory rationales for the attacks on Iran, the administration is also spreading the lie that the upcoming midterm elections are under threat from noncitizens on voter rolls. When these lies go unchecked, they become the basis for further authoritarian encroachment and war. 

In these dark times, independent journalism is uniquely able to uncover the falsehoods that threaten our republic—and civilians around the world—and shine a bright light on the truth. 

The Nation’s experienced team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers understands the scale of what we’re up against and the urgency with which we have to act. That’s why we’re publishing critical reporting and analysis of the war on Iran, ICE violence at home, new forms of voter suppression emerging in the courts, and much more. 

But this journalism is possible only with your support.

This March, The Nation needs to raise $50,000 to ensure that we have the resources for reporting and analysis that sets the record straight and empowers people of conscience to organize. Will you donate today?

Ad Policy
x