Skip to main content

The Atlantic Politics Daily: Medicare for All—Maybe

It’s Tuesday, February 25. In today’s newsletter: Some Medicare for All talk for all who want to talk about it.

Plus: Biden at the brink? Bloomberg to the breach? Where candidates stand heading into the last Democratic debate before Super Tuesday.

*

« TODAY IN POLITICS »

(ROBYN BECK / AFP VIA GETTY)

Medicare for All—Maybe

Listen to Democratic front-runner Bernie Sanders talk about Medicare for All, and you’ll hear pretty clear disdain for more incremental measures to reform the American health-care system.

Sanders has blasted a so-called public option, the trendy moderate alternative to Medicare for All, as a “failed idea.” He’s leaned on Medicare for All as one of his clearest policy differentiators.

But how do Sanders organizers talk about Medicare for All? When my colleague Elaine Godfrey sought them out, what they told her ended up sounding less like what the candidate himself espouses on the campaign trail:

They said they are clear-eyed about how difficult achieving such gargantuan reform will be. And they would be pleased, if not completely satisfied, with passing a public option as a compromise.

“The goal is Medicare for All, but we recognize, Senator Sanders recognizes, that that’s going to be a process,” Kristin Pack, a 50-year-old stay-at-home mom and one of the leaders of Our Revolution Central Kentucky, told me. “If we could get a super-solid public option that could not be easily upturned by another party coming into power, that would be wildly successful.”


Elaine’s story tries to get at the heart of why it isn’t Medicare for All—or bust—for  Sanders supporters.

—Saahil Desai

*

« DEBATE REFRESHER »

(Elizabeth Frantz / Reuters)

Not even a week’s passed since we last recapped the state of the Democratic primary before a debate (not even 150 hours, you can count ‘em). Tonight’s affair (the tenth, count ‘em) comes days before key primaries in South Carolina and then 14 Super Tuesday states, plus American Samoa.

Here’s where we left the contenders:

Joe Biden: He needs a win, and he’s still counting on his South Carolina firewall. But ...

Michael Bloomberg: He took a beating last week. Maybe he’ll try to pivot to gun control tonight.

Pete Buttigieg: After Iowa, he very boldly started acting like a front-runner. For a very limited time, he was. Will he and Amy Klobuchar continue their two-way hostilities?

Amy Klobuchar: She’s still here. After struggling with Latinos in Nevada, she now may be facing a similar challenge with black voters in South Carolina.

Bernie Sanders: Will he be a bigger target than he was last week? Or will he emerge from tonight relatively unscathed?

Tom Steyer: Now for billionaire number two! He’s returning to the debate stage in a state where he’s spent a lot of money (and where one of our reporters caught up with in October to understand … what he’s thinking).

Elizabeth Warren: She continues to struggle in the early states, ending up fourth in Nevada. Warren and Sanders are often lumped together, but the two have pretty fundamental differences in vision, Frank Foer argues.

*

« EVENING READ »

(BETTMANN / GETTY / KATIE MARTIN / THE ATLANTIC)

The Opposite of Socialized Medicine

A small, litigious group has spent decades trying to stop the government from telling doctors what to do. What happens if it succeeds?

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons might sound like another boring doctors’ group politely debating telehealth legislation. But AAPS is a small yet vociferous interest group. Like Zelig with a stethoscope, it has popped up in nearly every major health-care debate for decades, including the Affordable Care Act and opioids, and it wields a surprising amount of influence.

Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky was outed as a member in 2010. (A Paul spokesperson told me that while the senator is no longer a member, he is supportive of AAPS’s fight against Obamacare.)

When Representative Tom Price of Georgia was nominated to lead President Donald Trump’s Department of Health and Human Services, several newspapers pointed out that he, too, was a member. (At the time, an HHS spokesperson said that not all doctors in a group believe the same thing.)

Olga Khazan reports.


*

Today’s newsletter was written by Saahil Desai, an editor on the Politics desk, and Christian Paz, a Politics fellow. It was edited by Shan Wang, who oversees newsletters.

You can reply directly to this newsletter with questions or comments, or send a note to politicsdaily@theatlantic.com.

Your support makes our journalism possible. Subscribe here.



from The Atlantic https://ift.tt/2TjmBJu

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

REPORT: Furious Spike Lee Paces Aisle, Turns Back To Stage...

REPORT: Furious Spike Lee Paces Aisle, Turns Back To Stage... (Top headline, 5th story, link ) Related stories: REVIEW: Hostless Show Starts With Rock & Rolls Off Rails... Actor knocks borders, walls during speech in Spanish... Stage designed to look like Trump hair? 'GREEN BOOK' OVERCOMES BACKLASH, NABS BEST PICTURE... Top Critics Fume... LIST: WINNERS... Advertise here from Drudge Report Feed https://ift.tt/2SUpIKy

Tiny Love Stories: ‘Who Was I to Deprive Him of Joy?’

By Unknown Author from NYT Style https://ift.tt/2UV7YAG

The Ugly History of Dual-Loyalty Charges

When Representative Ilhan Omar recently complained about “the political influence in this country that says it is okay to push for allegiance to a foreign country,” many noted accurately that she had deployed a trope—dual loyalty—that had been used against Jews for years. But this accusation has a broader history in the United States, having been used against several religious minorities—including Muslims like Omar. Indeed, many battles over religious freedom have revolved around dual-loyalty claims. [ Read: Ilhan Omar just made it harder to have a nuanced debate about Israel ] In the 19th century, many attacks on Catholics stressed that these immigrants were pawns of a foreign power. In the 1830s, Samuel Morse—then a prominent painter and later the inventor of the telegraph—urged Americans to build “walls” and “gates” to keep out Catholic immigrants, who would always be loyal to Rome. Because these Catholic immigrants were decrepit —“halt, and blind, and naked”—they were easy to co...