Hillary For New Hampshire: "No child, no adult should go without quality, affordable health care."

[onehandle]

"No child, no adult should go without quality, affordable health care." - Hillary Clinton. WATCH -->

https://twitter.com/HillaryforNH/status/616270218738974720

[Iliyah]

1. K & R

[Beagle One]

2. K & R

[Agnosticsherbet]

3. I agree.

[BrotherIvan]

4. Is there a policy in there?

Just defending the ACA which has now been upheld by the Supreme Court? Is there a Democrat running who wouldn't do that bare minimum?

Puppies are cute! K&R!!!!

[SunSeeker]

8. Yes. And anything that benefits the middle class has to be constantly defended.

It survived SCOTUS, but Congress can always fuck with the ACA. We can't let the GOP control the narrative.

[BrotherIvan]

10. I would like to hear about at least a public option

[SunSeeker]

14. Until we get 60 votes in the Senate for it, we won't get a public option.

In the meantime, we have to protect and publicize the gains we have made.

[BrotherIvan]

16. That just is not true as has been argued numerous times

I have been assured many times that the ACA would "lead to single payer." So now we need supermajorities to get anything done? Trade Authority anyone?

[SunSeeker]

20. What is not true, that we don't have the votes for a public option yet?

We don't and we never have.


We should defend Dem accomplishments instead of tearing Dem accomplishments down. That is how we will get more Dems in office to improve the ACA.

[BrotherIvan]

23. Sigh

The public option didn't need 60 votes. And neither did Trade Authority. It needed political will. Obama just proved you wrong.

[SunSeeker]

27. Lieberman made it clear he would not vote for a public option.

And Lieberman's vote was needed to pass the ACA:

As the disputed (Minnesota Senatorial) 2008 election headed for the courts, Senate Democrats were still two votes shy of a filibuster-proof 60-vote “supermajority.” The late Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter changed that in early 2009 by switching parties, becoming a Democrat. That gave the Democrats control of 59 votes, and sharpened the stakes in Minnesota’s protracted recount. Franken’s final victory in July 2009 made it 60. But a month later, the health care bill’s most ardent champion, Massachusetts’ Ted Kennedy, died.

Kennedy’s temporarily appointed replacement, Paul Kirk, could just as easily be considered the “60th vote.” Or, just as plausibly, it was Connecticut independent Joe Lieberman, who held out until the controversial “public option” was jettisoned. Or perhaps more famously, the distinction could go to conservative Nebraska Democrat Ben Nelson, who held out for a Medicaid provision widely derided as the “Cornhusker Kickback.” Whoever takes the credit or the blame, the Senate approved the law in December 2009 on a vote of 60-39, the minimum necessary to avoid a GOP filibuster.

But the drama was far from over. In January 2010, Massachusetts voters elected Republican Scott Brown to fill Kennedy’s seat. Suddenly, there was no more 60th vote. The House, then still controlled by Democrats, hadn’t voted on the bill. Any changes in the House version would send it back to the Senate, where the Democrats were back to 59 votes. And to pass Obama’s signature health care law, the White House still needed to win over centrist and conservative House Democrats with a long list of concerns about abortion funding and the Cornhusker Kickback.

To get around this, the House passed the underlying Senate bill, but only with the understanding that a separate bill would be crafted to address the remaining stumbling blocks. Since those issues were mainly related to taxes, subsidies and other money matters, the Senate was able to pass the second bill under a “budget reconciliation” rule that didn’t require a supermajority. It passed, in March 2010, by a vote of 56-43.

http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/238733121.html




Trade Authority, unlike the ACA, had GOP support.

[PatrickforO]

25. Unfortunately, the majority of the American people WANT single payer and see health care as

a basic human right.

So, if the Senate 'doesn't have the votes so we won't ever...' or 'until we get a 60 vote (super majority) we won't get single payer,' then why are we not each on the phone several times a day with our Senators?

I mean, when the Senate was considering fast tracking the TPP, which is like NAFTA on steroids and will drive another nail in the coffin of the American middle class, I didn't bother with Cory Gardner, but I called Senator Bennet's office in DC regularly, emailed him and signed petitions.

As to defending Dem accomplishments, they seem kind of mixed. ACA is better than what we had, but not as good as single payer. Obama took single payer off the table, and your candidate in 2008 refused to answer a question during a primary debate about whether health care is a basic human right or not. She wouldn't answer.

But we got rid of DOMA and LBGT marriage is OK throughout the USA. That's good.

The Lily Ledbetter Act is good, as far as it goes.

But we still have boots on the ground in the middle east, and are doing drone attacks.

Well, you get the idea; it's mixed. I support Bernie because he supports me on EVERY SINGLE ISSUE I CARE ABOUT. Not to say anything bad about Clinton, but I feel like Bernie is for me.

[SunSeeker]

30. "why are we not each on the phone several times a day with our Senators?"

My Senators here in California vote exactly how I want them to vote. It's the red state senators who are the problem. And they won't take my calls.

[PatrickforO]

31. Colorado is not a red state, and Michael Bennet is a Democrat.

But he betrayed us by voting to fast track the TPP so the Congress votes on it without any debate or even seeing it.

[SunSeeker]

42. Congress will vote on TPP without debate or even seeing it?

Got a link for that?

[PatrickforO]

59. Reich and Stiglitz have both weighed in on TPP and you can always look at wikileaks for the source

document. I mean, you're kidding, right? You haven't heard/read extensively about the TPP? Here's Reich's link:

http://robertreich.org/post/107257859130

http://www.rooseveltinstitute.org/joseph-stiglitz-and-trans-pacific-partnership-tpp - this Stiglitz article elaborates on and explains the ISDS provisions of TPP, which are truly damaging to local governments, populations, workers and the environment

https://openmedia.org/blog/boing-boing-senator-not-allowed-take-notes-tpp-stop-secrecy - this open media article talks about Sen. Barbara Boxer's experience when she tried to go in and read the TPP

Honestly, this is a rotten legacy for Obama to leave us. Secretary Clinton, when at State, engaged in what she called 'economic statecraft' and was a driving force behind developing the TPP. And then Obama spends all kinds of political capital getting the Senate to vote on a fast track for TPP without them even debating it. I'm an economist, ad with the provisions in this thing we'll lose MORE jobs than the 460K lost with NAFTA.

And don't kid yourself - these people KNOW what the TPP will do to us. Why do you think they are placating us by reauthorizing TAA? Oh, sure, they say, provide training to those workers displaced by the TPP (or NAFTA - it's STILL happening with NAFTA). But wouldn't it be better to develop a trade agreement that is FAIR rather than being 'free.' Because make no mistake here - when this monstrosity takes effect, MILLIONS of Americans will be 'freed' from their jobs because of it. Wealth inequity will grow, wages will be driven down again, more unions will be busted...

[SunSeeker]

61. None of your links say Congress won't get to see and debate the TPP before voting on it.

[PatrickforO]

60. Oh, and since you're gonna want a link on the Clinton 'economic statecraft'

statement I made, here's the text of a speech she delivered to the Economic Club of New York in 2011. In it, she SPECIFICALLY takes credit for helping develop the TPP.

http://www.state.gov/secretary/20092013clinton/rm/2011/10/175552.htm

[SunSeeker]

62. No, I want a link for your assertion re no seeing & no debate before vote on TPP.

I'm not asking about Hillary. You said in post 31 that Michael Bennet "betrayed us by voting to fast track the TPP so the Congress votes on it without any debate or even seeing it."

I want to know where you got the belief that Michael Bennet voted for a provision that makes it so Congress votes on the TPP without any debate or even seeing the TPP.

Everything I've read says Congress will have months to not just see the full text of the TPP but debate it before finally having the vote on whether to approve the TPP.

[PatrickforO]

63. Honestly, SunSeeker

You could have easily looked up ALL these links. Making me do it seems a bit high-handed. The article below actually states that now the fast track has passed, Congress will have to approve TPP on a simple up-down vote without being able to add amendments and with very little debate. As to the not seeing, refer to the Barbara Boxer post. Read more on it - she was one of very few Senators who were even allowed to look.

Seriously.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-reich-trumka-tpp-trade-fast-track-20150303-story.html

In future, when I make an assertion, perhaps you and others can take the trouble to find links yourselves. I have. Digging for the truth is all our responsibility as citizens of a republic. Because the corporate owned media isn't gonna tell us, nor are most of the corporate-owned candidates for office. We must find out for ourselves and then think for ourselves.

And, based upon what I know, I'm against TPP, feel war should be banned, know our corporate tax code needs to be fixed so the 30+ fortune 500 companies not paying any taxes in one or more of the years since 2008, know we need to more massively subsidize tuition for our children and grandchildren, and strengthen Social Security by removing the income cap on the payroll deduction. I'm for Bernie, because he has publicly supported every single one of these goals. In the words of one pundit, there's a silent majority of people who don't even know they agree with Sanders. Once his positions get out there, it will be a tsunami - a real populist revolt, because Americans are hungry for some serious populist reform.

[SunSeeker]

64. No, that LA Times link does not say there will be no seeing the TPP and no debate before the vote.

I'm just asking you to back up your rather bizarre assertion. I can't find anything that backs you up. Maybe that's why you haven't found anything either.

Seriously.

[dsc]

33. Yes it did and it got them

this is a matter of public record.

[AgingAmerican]

65. Defeatism

nt

[SunSeeker]

70. Defeat is exactly what we will get if we nominate Bernie.

We need Bernie in the Senate. He is not a national candidate. That is why the GOP's wet dream is for Bernie to win the nomination.

[AgingAmerican]

71. Defeatism is giving up without trying

nt

[SunSeeker]

72. Nader tried. Kucinich tried. McGovern tried.

I learn from past mistakes.

[AgingAmerican]

73. None of them are Bernie Sanders

Nowhere close. Queue next worn out meme.

[SunSeeker]

74. True. Bernie is in an even worse position than they were.

He has little name recognition, he's 73, he has little money and he calls himself a socialist. What could go wrong?

There's a reason the GOP is praying Bernie gets the nomination.

[AgingAmerican]

75. Nonsense

You are just biased against him.

[SunSeeker]

76. Reality is biased against him.

Me personally, I like the guy--as a Vermont Senator. We need him in the Senate, not as a human trampoline for the GOP presidency.

[George II]

69. But when Bernie gets the nomination and is elected President..........

.....he'll GET those 60 votes!

[Doctor_J]

13. THE REPUBLICANS ARE NOT GOING TO CHANGE HERITAGE CARE!!!

What the fuck is wrong with you people? Boner and McTurtle work for the same insurance companies that Obama and Clinton work for. The insurance lobby would cut them off cold if they take Gingrichcare away.

The only person who might "fuck with the ACA" is an actual liberal who thinks people deserve care instead of insurance bills.

[SunSeeker]

18. The ACA saved my brother's life.

I'm glad they didn't wait for the perfect plan while thousands died without healthcare.

If and when we get 60 votes to improve the ACA instead of dismantle it, we need to keep defending it.

[Doctor_J]

26. I won't wait for a thank you note

I pay an extra $8000/year for the same shitty insurance I had before Heritage Care. I know you don't care at all about the fact that we pay 2-3 times as much as everyone else in the world, and still have to fight with these bloodsuckers to get them to honor their contract. You got yours, so that means everything is wonderful. This is Republican Thinking 101. You should consider voting GOP (if you don't already - since the ACA was proposed by Newt Gingrinch in 1994, I assume you voted for him then).

Second, no one is ever going to take this away, unfortunately. We're stuck with it, forever. The "repeal" votes were nothing but theater, and anyone who actually believed this court would cut Big Insurance off from their trillion dollar a year windfall is very, very gullible. Try looking outside of the Big Media bubble once in awhile. The truth is scary, but very exciting.

[SunSeeker]

28. It is NOT "the same shitty insurance." You can't be kicked off.

There is no life time cap. Your kids can stay on it until 26. There are limits to how much in copays you must pay each year. You get free annual physicals and preventive care, including colonoscopies.

[dsc]

34. I find it beyond hard to believe your premiums went up by 8000 a year

that is more than my insurance costs, even if I were to pay the entire cost on the exchange (my employer claims to spend about 5500 on my insurance) and I am a near 50 year old man. You are literally stating that the extra amount you are paying is more by about a fourth than my entire policy.

[George II]

39. Haven't you heard of the 50+ attempts to repeal the ACA? If it finally IS repealed....

....we need a President who will veto that repeal.

It's more than "just defending the ACA"!

[SunSeeker]

5. K & R

[CanadaexPat]

6. "and therefore I am proposing...." what?

[BrotherIvan]

15. I have no idea

This is an advertisement. Her campaign purposely dipped the sound at the end where she finishes her statement to defend the ACA, trying to cover for the fact that there's no there there. That was a purposeful choice not to have her on camera saying that. I hope this isn't how her whole campaign is going to go.

[George II]

40. I heard it clearly - "and I will do everything I can to make that possible".

[BrotherIvan]

44. What EXACTLY?

Is there a policy proposal or just "trust me". I can't believe such empty rhetoric gets cheers.

[George II]

50. Here we go around in another "Sanders circle".

You want her to detail policy in a 30-second spot? Can Bernie do that?

Let's see if he says more in his next 30-second spot.

[BrotherIvan]

56. He doesn't put out ads like this

That is the point. She NEVER details policy. Not in her kickoff, not in the very few appearances she has made. She is supposed to be doing it this summer. Well it's hot as hell where I live so that's summer. Even when she does talk about something in depth, she doesn't really talk about it. She doesn't take a position or a stance that doesn't poll above 80. It's getting frightening now.

[George II]

68. How much "detail" can one put in a 30-second spot?

[840high]

17. Impatient you - she wants to know

what Bernie proposes first.

[CanadaexPat]

22. We know Bernie - single payer. She'll never get there.

[840high]

58. Yes. I was just having fun. You

are correct.

[George II]

35. She didn't say that in the clip...

She said "and I will do everything I can to make that possible". You didn't hear that? Or did you ignore it because you didn't want to hear that from HER?

[CanadaexPat]

46. I have heard that from her plenty. It's a platitude.

She is considered an expert in health care, but doesn't have one concrete proposal to make? What does she think will make it possible and what does she think is the best way to enact what she thinks will make it possible? Why is what she thinks is the best way better than what other candidates think is the best way? This is an election campaign, not a feel-good exercise.

[George II]

48. The ACA is already law.

[CanadaexPat]

57. There's still something like 12% uninsured (~37M people)

[George II]

67. The fact that they are uninsured isn't the fault of the ACA.

[99Forever]

7. I agree.

Are there any Democratic hopefuls that disagree with that position?

[Doctor_J]

9. My INSURANCE is expensive and sucks, and Hillary thinks the system is great

When is the last time she said anything that wasn't a meaningless platitude? Was it 1993?

[Cha]

11. mahalo onehandle!

[boston bean]

12. She is the real thing! Love her as do MILLIONS of others!

[840high]

19. I used to love her.

[boston bean]

21. ok.

[Joe the Revelator]

37. How does this milktoast statement lead you to believe she is the real thing?

Its literally the same thing we've been fighting for the last 8 years. What is she bringing to the table?

[boston bean]

41. A democratic agenda. I like that, you don't?

[Joe the Revelator]

43. Its all platitudes....and how does your comment answer my question???

How does Hillary parroting a talking point that ANY of our candidates would agree with bringing anything new to the table and how does that make her the 'real deal'?

I submit that it just makes her another talking point politician with no real plan.

[catnhatnh]

24. ...

<iframe width="854" height="510" src="

" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[ismnotwasm]

29. K&R

[ibegurpard]

32. I agree

We now have access to "affordable" insurance so let's work on the healthcare part.

[Joe the Revelator]

36. Isn't that what we've done the last 8 years? Where's the beef?

[NorthCarolina]

38. Sounds like a plan that still includes

for-profit insurance companies in the mix, so no thanks...I prefer the Medicare for All plan.

[Bonobo]

45. What if they have ZERO money? Do they still deserve health care?

I mean... as a citizen.

If so, throwing them to the wolves of private health care companies really is no solution.

[ismnotwasm]

53. What are you talking about?

In Washington state alone we have 1.6 million newly insured. Many of them for the very first time. WSNA, my Union is doing everything it can to stay involved in the legislative process as well as monitor trends in Healthcare. We are working for a even better educated, more involved nursing workforce, the ACA is changing the face of healthcare with a emphasis on preventative medicine--something nurses have been advocates for for years. Apart from the ACA, there is cost bundling, and the government no longer paying for certain hospital acquired conditions. Everybody is stepping it up, and the competition for health-care dollars is fierce.

If you are talking about single payer, that would be great, it's not what we have. What we have is a wide open door of opportunity to improve the healthcare of millions of people.

[shenmue]

47. Oh yeah!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

49. Healthcare for all - single payer system

[Bonobo]

51. Yes, it NEEDS to be tied to one's rights as a citizen/resident.

NOT just another product to buy.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

55. In UK

I was brought up there and the NHS was free at the point of use - they took a proportion out of my salary. I had the same wait times as our #1 hospital Johns Hopkins. Doctors are in health in the Uk because they want to be doctors not business people.

[Thinkingabout]

52. ACA may not be everything to everybody but for myself I have had health insurance throught out

my life first through my father's plan and then later through my own plan. Now I have a condition which could quickly sent my lifetime limit over the $1 million so with ACA addressing this issue I do appreciate it. Also the pre-existing conditions is also covered, it is a good thing.

Hillary has been a long time advocate of children's issues, worked for the CDF and believes children should have health care and education, she will continue to be an advocate for children's issues.

[LWolf]

66. My insurance is still too expensive to use.

The cost of the premiums don't leave anything for the copays and deductibles.

It was that way before the ACA, it's that way with the ACA. If it's helping some people, I'm glad.

The ACA, though, is not the answer. It's a bandaid.

[ismnotwasm]

54. I was just reading her website

Great stuff there.

[Cleita]

77. Bravo Hillary. Now what specifically are you going to do to make sure that happens?

[MoonRiver]

78. And I know she will work her fingers to the bone to bring that about!

Go Hillary!