One response

  1. Dr. Gaffney:

    Your case against an incremental approach to getting to single-payer is a strong one. It’s being done, in part, in the name of getting unity in the Democratic Party in 2018, i.e., one can be for lowering the Medicare age and adding a public option to the ACA along with supporting HR 676. It appears that Bernie Sanders is moving in that direction as well.

    But, as you say, it distracts from the real problem and dilutes the political momentum for single-payer. At the core of single-payer is the dramatic reduction in administrative expense associated with commercial insurance. This point must be made strongly and often.

    I wonder if you’ve posted anything on state single payer bills. Many in PNHP argue that these efforts, too, can distract from the primary, national mission and, as a result, they provide, at best, passive support for state legislation. However, I feel that efforts, like those in CA and NY are built around the idea of eliminating private insurance and are “true” single-payer plans, even given some of the technical issues that may arise. There are 60 million people living in CA and NY and these states have robust enough economies to make it work.

    We in New York, feel that Dick Gottfried has done an outstanding job and that there is a real shot at putting something on the Governor’s desk over the next 18 months. I would be interested in getting your thoughts on this.


    Henry Moss

    Henry Moss, PhD
    Board Member, PNHP-Metro NYC Chapter