As promised, I am continuing to rip up the Senator Bernie Sanders “Medicare For All” plan. I will explore a little kink in the assumption of the single payer popularity myth that was certainly exposed in last November’s general election in Colorado where single payer “health care” managed to make it to the ballot.
Surveys on Overall Attitudes Toward Single Payer Health Care
According to a Daily News article by Jason Silverstein published Sept. 20 (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/americans-dems-support-single-payer-health-care-poll-article-1.3509035), a Politico/Morning Consult Survey found that 49 percent of general voters liked the idea of a single payer health care system while 35 percent oppose it. The survey also found that 17 percent held no opinion on the subject.
The poll also found that that two thirds of Democrats (roughly 67 percent in actual number) support a single payer system, and 18 percent oppose it. According to the Daily News article, apparently more Democrats have been having a single payer epiphany since a similar poll by the publication in April that reported 54 percent of Democrats favoring such a “health care” system.
Additionally, the poll reported that a majority of Republicans “hold a strong but not overwhelming opposition to a single payer plan.” The statistics on the Republican side are 52 percent in opposition and 33 percent supporting it.
Such statistics could be alarming until one looks at the results of REAL efforts to establish single payer systems within the United States. Clearly that is where the rubber really meets the road.
Isn’t it interesting that the people of a primarily blue (Democrat) state like Colorado soundly defeated the single payer “health care” scheme that some tried to foist upon them in November 2016? Amendment 69, called ColoradoCare, the ballot measure that would have established a statewide universal system of “health care,” went down in defeat. According to reporting by John Ingold (http://www.denverpost.com/2016/11/08/coloradocare-amendment-69-election-results/), ColoradoCare would have eliminated most of the private insurance in the state, substituting it with a state-run “cooperative” that would have “covered” all Coloradans.
The single payer coverage would have been primarily funded with a 10 percent payroll tax with employees at businesses putting in one third of the tax and their employers paying the rest. Additionally, self-employed people would have been paying the entire 10 percent. The Denver Post article estimated that the annual cost for this giant government behemoth, once it was fully implemented, would have been $36 billion and would have “dwarfed the state government’s budget.”
As it turns out, the final tally in the election to establish single payer “health care” in Colorado was 78.9 percent being opposed to it, according to the Denver Post.
The publication also reported that even in Denver, which has a strong left-leaning population, the single payer scheme was losing in a ratio of 2:1.
Although only a small fraction of Colorado’s populace (which would have been only slightly more than 21 percent) approved of the drastic measure, the small fraction of those who dream of a socialist Utopia in their state, and no doubt spreading to the entire country, were gearing up for another run at brainwashing their fellow Coloradans. One of Amendment 69’s most prominent supporters told Ingold that they would “definitely be better next time.”
You see, these socialists are not phased by the unwillingness of a populace to embrace something that they are clearly not crazy about. That is so typically socialist because their elitist ideologies totally reject the idea that people could actually have solid reasons for disagreeing with them, such as on the principle of PERSONAL LIBERTY, for one. It happens in California too. If the socialists cannot ram something down the throats of their fellow citizens, they will keep going at it. I don’t know what socialist propaganda the promoters of Amendment 69 will resort to next time, but I am sure they will not be shy about consulting Sanders. Isn’t it funny that in so many articles about single payer “health care,” the photo that goes with it is good ol’ Sanders? I guess he has become the poster boy for socialized medicine in the United States.
My next blog post about the obstacles of reality to single payer “health care” systems being made universal in any state, or the country as a whole for that matter, will cover recent (and continuing efforts) to establish universal single payer “health care” in California.