[lbo-talk] state by state single payer

[Marv Gandall]

I suppose a parallel might be when unions fail to secure an industry-wide 
master agreement and fall back on their better contracts in unionized firms 
to gradually win over workers in the unorganized ones. That's not happening 
much anymore as beleaguered unions surrender past gains rather than build on 
them. If state-by-state becomes the only way to expand the public health 
care system in the US, sounds like there'd have to be something better than 
the Massachusetts plan to inspire support elsewhere. Where is it most likely 
an attractive plan would emerge - New York? California? Illinois? Any reason 
the outcome would be different than in Massachusetts?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "shag carpet bomb" <shag at cleandraws.com>
To: <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 6:29 PM
Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] state by state single payer


> At 02:43 PM 10/21/2009, Doug Henwood wrote:
>
>>On Oct 21, 2009, at 2:12 PM, Carrol Cox wrote:
>>
>>>I have sneered a lot at Progressives, but I never really thought they
>>>would sink to such self-parody as even to discuss such a proposal as
>>>this. Sad.
>>
>>What in god's name are you talking about? Why would a state single- payer 
>>scheme be such a tragedy? It could actually happen, you know. Is
>>that the problem with it?
>>
>>Doug
>
> I'm interested in the answer too. My mom's a nurse and part of a coalition 
> of health practitioners who have gotten fed up with the current national 
> debate, totally sick of Obama -- tres disappointed! So, they are going to 
> try to get a single payer plan for Vermont, hoping as others have said 
> that the example will be set and other states will move along.
>
> Some businesses in the state are apparently on board as well, seeing it as 
> a social indicator that can be used to lure more businesses to the state.
> shag
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk