SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The sad thing about the rightwing Supreme Court challenge to President Obama's health care policy is that it was totally avoidable. It would have been impossible if Obama had offered a robust public option, like "Medicare for All Who Want It."
The sad thing about the rightwing Supreme Court challenge to President Obama's health care policy is that it was totally avoidable. It would have been impossible if Obama had offered a robust public option, like "Medicare for All Who Want It."
Rather than forcing people to buy private insurance largely from the companies who've been ripping us off every step of the way, Obama could have and should have given people a choice.
If you want to keep your private health insurance provider, fine.
But if you want the government, in essence, to be your insurer, then join the Medicare program. This option the Supreme Court couldn't invalidate unless it threw out the entire Medicare system, which has stood for 47 years.
My bet is that everyone but the most drunken devotee of Ayn Rand would have leapt at the Medicare for All option.
Why?
Because most people on Medicare are very happy about the coverage and grateful for the program. Just ask someone who's on it.
It's not perfect, but it's a whole lot better than the private insurance market offers you.
And the administrative costs aren't bloated because huge amounts of money aren't wasted on CEO salaries and glossy ad budgets.
Unfortunately, Obama failed to present the option of Medicare for All Who Want It.
Instead, he bought in--and told everyone else under 65 who is not disabled to buy in--to the private insurance model.
And that's the core of his problem today at the Supreme Court.
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
The sad thing about the rightwing Supreme Court challenge to President Obama's health care policy is that it was totally avoidable. It would have been impossible if Obama had offered a robust public option, like "Medicare for All Who Want It."
Rather than forcing people to buy private insurance largely from the companies who've been ripping us off every step of the way, Obama could have and should have given people a choice.
If you want to keep your private health insurance provider, fine.
But if you want the government, in essence, to be your insurer, then join the Medicare program. This option the Supreme Court couldn't invalidate unless it threw out the entire Medicare system, which has stood for 47 years.
My bet is that everyone but the most drunken devotee of Ayn Rand would have leapt at the Medicare for All option.
Why?
Because most people on Medicare are very happy about the coverage and grateful for the program. Just ask someone who's on it.
It's not perfect, but it's a whole lot better than the private insurance market offers you.
And the administrative costs aren't bloated because huge amounts of money aren't wasted on CEO salaries and glossy ad budgets.
Unfortunately, Obama failed to present the option of Medicare for All Who Want It.
Instead, he bought in--and told everyone else under 65 who is not disabled to buy in--to the private insurance model.
And that's the core of his problem today at the Supreme Court.
The sad thing about the rightwing Supreme Court challenge to President Obama's health care policy is that it was totally avoidable. It would have been impossible if Obama had offered a robust public option, like "Medicare for All Who Want It."
Rather than forcing people to buy private insurance largely from the companies who've been ripping us off every step of the way, Obama could have and should have given people a choice.
If you want to keep your private health insurance provider, fine.
But if you want the government, in essence, to be your insurer, then join the Medicare program. This option the Supreme Court couldn't invalidate unless it threw out the entire Medicare system, which has stood for 47 years.
My bet is that everyone but the most drunken devotee of Ayn Rand would have leapt at the Medicare for All option.
Why?
Because most people on Medicare are very happy about the coverage and grateful for the program. Just ask someone who's on it.
It's not perfect, but it's a whole lot better than the private insurance market offers you.
And the administrative costs aren't bloated because huge amounts of money aren't wasted on CEO salaries and glossy ad budgets.
Unfortunately, Obama failed to present the option of Medicare for All Who Want It.
Instead, he bought in--and told everyone else under 65 who is not disabled to buy in--to the private insurance model.
And that's the core of his problem today at the Supreme Court.