The Stark Difference Between Republicans and Democrats on Health Care Couldn’t Be Clearer

The Stark Difference Between Republicans and Democrats on Health Care Couldn’t Be Clearer

The Stark Difference Between Republicans and Democrats on Health Care Couldn’t Be Clearer

More and more Americans understand that health care should be a basic right, not a commodity that you purchase if you can afford it.

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

EDITOR’S NOTE: Each week we cross-post an excerpt from Katrina vanden Heuvel’s column at the WashingtonPost.com. Read the full text of Katrina’s column here.

“When they go low, we go high,” Michelle Obama told the Democratic National Convention in her electrifying address last year. That phrase summarizes the stark contrast between Republicans and Democrats on the fundamental question of affordable health care. Republicans want you to have all the health care you choose to afford, even if you can’t afford much. Democrats understand that affordable health care should be a fundamental right.

Having failed to pass four different bills to repeal and replace Obamacare, Republicans are back at it again. Backers of the new bill—labeled Graham-Cassidy after Senators Bill Cassidy (R-LA) and Lindsey O. Graham (R-SC)—claim to have 48 or 49 votes for this effort. Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has asked the Congressional Budget Office to make the bill’s assessment a priority. The 141-page bill was only made public on September 13, but Republicans are pushing for a vote by the end of the month.

The millions of Americans who were appalled by previous Republican efforts to gut affordable health care should be alarmed once more. Graham-Cassidy employs classic conservative packaging to dress up what it is peddling. It turns health care over to the states, allowing Republicans to posture about getting “closer to the people.” Its cuts are phased in, delaying the effects until 2020 and the most destructive effects until 2027 and thereafter.

Read the full text of Katrina’s column here.

Thank you for reading The Nation

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read, just one of the many incisive, deeply-reported articles we publish daily. Now more than ever, we need fearless journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media.

Throughout this critical election year and a time of media austerity and renewed campus activism and rising labor organizing, independent journalism that gets to the heart of the matter is more critical than ever before. Donate right now and help us hold the powerful accountable, shine a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug, and build a more just and equitable future.

For nearly 160 years, The Nation has stood for truth, justice, and moral clarity. As a reader-supported publication, we are not beholden to the whims of advertisers or a corporate owner. But it does take financial resources to report on stories that may take weeks or months to properly investigate, thoroughly edit and fact-check articles, and get our stories into the hands of readers.

Donate today and stand with us for a better future. Thank you for being a supporter of independent journalism.

Ad Policy
x