What is Kamala Harris' plan on health care?

[Curky]

For those considering switching candidates to Kamala Harris, it would be helpful to know if she backs Medicare for All, a public option, or other.
Let's answer that question.

[True Dough]

1. According to TIME magazine:

Kamala Harris

Before the debate: Harris is a co-sponsor of Sanders’ Medicare-for-all plan, and said during a CNN town hall earlier this year that she would like to eliminate private insurance. However, she has also co-sponsored other more moderate proposals, including ones that would create a public option for people to buy into Medicaid and that would lower Medicare’s eligibility threshold to 50 years old.

After the debate: On Thursday night, the second debate seemed like a big moment for Harris on health care. She was the only candidate other than Sanders to raise her hand when the moderators asked whether she would eliminate private insurance. Though this is what the Medicare-for-all bill she supports says it would do, other backers of that bill—Senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Cory Booker—did not raise their hands.

However, by Friday morning, Harris walked back her hand raise and said she had misinterpreted the question. She told CBS This Morning that she had understood the question to mean “Would you be willing to give up your private insurance?” and so answered it personally, meaning she would be willing to join Medicare-for-all herself.

“I am supportive of Medicare-for-all. And under Medicare-for-all policy, private insurance certainly exist for supplemental coverage,” Harris told CBS This Morning. This middle ground is similar to the positions that Booker and Gillibrand have staked out.


https://time.com/5616864/2020-democratic-candidates-health-care/

[fleur-de-lisa]

9. Thank you for posting this.

[comradebillyboy]

2. It would be good if her position on the issue wasn't so confused.

[Hoyt]

3. Seems clear to me, if one looks. She's for Medicare-for-All. I think Biden is behind Public Option.

I think the PO -- with subsidies for all uninsured, uninsured, and those who cannot afford health coverage -- is going to be more popular in 2020.

So, Biden has the edge there.


FWIW: I'm still a disappointed in the revelations on his working against desegregation -- and equal educational opportunities -- with segregationists (which is what he did, even if he wants to call it being against "forced busing&quot , but believe he has edge in healthcare debate. Medicare-for-All may be the best plan, but too many people are against it because they don't understand.

[Demsrule86]

15. That is untrue...no one liked or likes busig

And being against busing does not mean you support segregation...so just stop.

[Hoyt]

18. You are missing the point, busing was not required if the local schools were desegregated

and quality was equal. Opposition to busing, let white local governments off the hook.

This is what Jesse Jackson said yesterday:

". . . . . .Jackson was less forgiving of former Vice President Joe Biden, who joined Jackson at a convention event on Friday. Speaking about Biden’s record on busing — which has become a flashpoint after Sen. Kamala Harris of California confronted him at the debate — Jackson said that Harris “established Biden on the states’ rights side of history,” which “cannot stand the test of time.” He framed Biden’s opposition to federally mandated busing as part of a larger debate over the federal government’s trying to create racial equality.

"“He’s for voluntary busing, I’m for court-ordered busing — well, everyone’s for voluntary busing,” Jackson said. “[T]he federal government had to order the abolition of slavery, the federal government had to order the right to vote, they had to order the desegregation of schools and jobs and contracts. So ‘voluntary’ assumes that those who are oppressive have some will to move based on moral values, and that does not happen.”

"Jackson added that Biden had done “a lot of good things.”" . . . . . .

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/30/jesse-jackson-2020-democratic-party-1391027

[Demsrule86]

19. It is total bullshit and was 50 years ago...yeah there was segregation and still is...and none

of it is Biden's fault and those who say he supported it are lying.

[Hoyt]

25. It's not BS. If Biden wanted to work with racists to stop busing, part of the deal

should have been that schools had to desegregate and ensure quality schools within 6 months. But he didn’t.

I agree with Jackson.

As to 50 years ago, the most important thing Democrats have done is fight for equality, whether most white wingers wanted it or not.

[Demsrule86]

27. Biden had to work with racists to get anything done...they controlled the committees...but thanks

for playing...Ted Kennedy did too...they all did. And to say if you were against busing,you are racist is beyond the pale.

[Hoyt]

29. How many Democrats worked with racists to thwart equality?

Well, Other than Dixiecrats?

[Demsrule86]

31. He did not such thing...so that is when did you stop beating your wife question...he was against

busing...so was Sanders. Busing was a shitty program that never worked and was done away with...it has nothing to do with racial equality which Biden fought for his entire life...

[mcar]

4. Here

https://kamalaharris.org/issue/health-care/

[fleur-de-lisa]

10. Thanks!

[Mr.Bill]

5. She wants to bus you across town to a better hospital.

[stopbush]

6. This is flame bait. You're online. A two-second web search would have brought you

to Kamala’s website, where your question would have been answered in full.

[USALiberal]

7. Go to google.com, it lets you search for stuff! Nt

[Honeycombe8]

8. I am not in favor of messing with Medicare as it exists now....

in any way, unless it makes Medicare healthier or more financially sound. Medicare as it is now works well. It's not perfect, but it's reasonable cost (ins. cos. - ESP. THE ACA- charge seniors astronomical premiums, even if they're healthy), and provides broad coverage, focused on the needs of seniors. For example, SENIORS DON'T HAVE TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT PAYING FOR MATERNITY COVERAGE with Medicare! Ins. cos. zero in on care and devices that seniors are most likely to need, rather than all care & devices that may be more often used by another age group.

Maybe that's an answer. Medicare-like programs for different age groups. Young adult, middle-aged, seniors.

[Turin_C3PO]

12. I think

Medicare could work for all people if it’s tweaked a little. I have Medicare now due to being on SSDI. I’m only 35 with a chronic disease (cystic fibrosis) and it works great.

I think the answer is to have Medicare as a buy-in option and up the reimbursement rates of Medicare to providers. Also, with everyone being covered, we’re going to need more providers so hopefully we can train more doctors. Also, allow nurse practitioners and physician assistants to take care of some tasks that doctors are doing now.

[Honeycombe8]

13. Only if Medicare for seniors is SEPARATE.

Because seniors are given the shaft by the other age groups. High claimant insureds will crowd the field, and ins. cos. will INCREASE THE PREMIUMS FOR THE SENIORS to make up for that, since for some reason the younger ones never get the shaft.

I experienced this with the ACA, which totally shafted me for 5 years, until thank goodness I could escape and get into Medicare. Paying for maternity care at age 60? Seriously? A $6,000 deductible and you call that insurance? Seriously? An HMO plan that few doctors will take, yet costs $800-$1,000 a month? Really? And no one cared. Not one person in the Democratic Party cared, when it was mentioned by anyone, even me. Younger people don't care about seniors, IMO. So it needs to be kept separate.

The SSI is a different program. I'm not sure how Medicare fits with that. So I'll leave my opinion about that out of the mix. But as far as tens of millions of high-claimant people entering Medicare, that would destroy Medicare for seniors, IMO.

I am in favor of preserving Social Security and Medicare for seniors.

[Turin_C3PO]

17. Well, the public option

doesn’t have to be called Medicare, it can be a separate program.

But as to your worries, Medicare is already paying for high claim patients like me on SSDI. Everyone on SSDI gets Medicare and most/many have a ton of medical issues. So I’m not sure the premiums would go up if we added the general younger population. In fact, I think Elizabeth Warren said it would be cheaper for everyone. I’ll have to check that though.

[Honeycombe8]

20. SSDI

I will say that I have read more than a couple of times that that is the part of Medicare that presents the financial solvency issues with the program. Not regular Medicare for seniors. When SS and Medicare was set up, it was not designed for SSDI or SSI or whatever that is called, since those claimants/beneficiaries would not have paid into the programs for decades. I'm not saying they shouldn't have those benefits; I'm just saying that it's not true that it's not a problem for those programs.

As for the entire population mixed with seniors for Medicare, I've seen it firsthand. Promises about it not affecting seniors adversely aren't true. We just experienced it. Seniors get slammed. The worst part was that no one cared. It's not like people were working on those problems. As long as this other group or that other group were liking it, that's all that mattered. So a big NO vote from me for any plan that messes with Medicare for seniors. (As it is, taxes will have to go up or something, because of the SSI or SSDI effect, to make Medicare more financially solvent. )

[Turin_C3PO]

21. Yeah, Medicare AND Social Security

has to be fixed soon. Social Security is due to cut benefits by like 20% by the early 2030’s if nothing is done. But that’s a different discussion.

Well, in any case, we need some type of plan that stops people from going bankrupt from medical bills. It can be a separate program and Medicare for seniors can be left alone.

[Honeycombe8]

23. Biden passed a bill that prevented people from incl. medical bills in bankruptcy.

That's why people are destroyed by high medical bills. They can't get out from under them, no matter what. Ironically, if you run up $100,000 in credit loans as an irresponsible person on a spending spree, you CAN extinguish that debt with bankruptcy. Makes no sense.

[Turin_C3PO]

24. Agree,

I definitely don’t agree with Biden’s bankruptcy bill. It’s terrible.

[riverine]

32. Ridiculous.

Biden passed a bill that prevented people from incl. medical bills in bankruptcy.

Medical bankruptcies are the #1 cause of them.

[Honeycombe8]

33. Biden passed a bill that prevented people from discharging medical bills in bankruptcy.

I remember when he did it.

He had to put it forward about four times before it passed. He was dead set on getting that passed.

Medical bills could be included in the total of debt for someone, but the med bills themselves, as I recall, could not be discharged (done away with), like some other types of debts. Something like that.

It also had some other hard things anti-consumer in that bill. It was harsh to debtors.

[riverine]

36. Uhhh, No, he didn't. No such bill exists or has ever existed

in this country.

[Honeycombe8]

38. Do your research. This was an issue when he ran in 2007.

Warren & Biden have debated the Biden bill before. Biden was unable to get it passed until George W. Bush got into office.

The bill, which was signed in to law by George W. Bush two months after Biden and Warren tangled, made it harder for Americans to discharge the debts they accrue from things like credit cards and medical bills.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/03/12/biden-vs-warren-2020-democratic-primaries-bankruptcy-bill-225728

Student debt broke $1.5 trillion in the first quarter of 2018 according to the Federal Reserve, outstripping auto loan ($1.1 trillion) and credit card debt ($977 billion) significantly, with 1.1 million people owing over $100,000 for their educational expenses. Twenty percent of student borrowers default on their loan payments. (snip) Similarly, almost one in five Americans’ credit reports feature delinquent medical debt. Bankruptcy from growing insurance and prescription costs is also affecting Americans at a precipitous rate. Studies vary widely, but generally between 26 to even 62 percent of bankruptcies cited medical debt as a contributing or even primary factor. A harrowing figure from the October 2018 American Journal of Medicine showed that 42 percent of new cancer patients exhaust their life savings within two years of treatment, with an average loss of $92,098. (snip)

Usually, Biden opposed even modest protections for borrowers. For instance, he voted against one amendment that would protect mothers who failed to receive their child support or alimony. He voted against setting a limit of 30 percent on loan interest. He also voted against special protections for bankruptcy among former military, victims of identity theft and those with unmanageable medical debt.

https://truthout.org/articles/millennials-are-the-most-indebted-generation-they-can-thank-joe-biden/

All told, the upshot of the bill was to make it significantly more difficult for individuals to walk away from debts with a Chapter 7 bankruptcy filing.

This was particularly significant for credit card companies because credit card debt is what’s known as “unsecured” debt. A home mortgage is backed by a house that the bank can foreclose on and seize. An auto loan is backed by a car. But a credit card is just a credit card. And if you use your credit card to buy food or medical procedures or other services, there’s nothing at all to sell off in a liquidation process. So credit card companies in particular wanted to cut down on Chapter 7 filings, and they got what they wanted.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/5/6/18518381/baccpa-bankruptcy-bill-2005-biden-warren

Bill Clinton vetoed it. But the bill was re-introduced a couple of more times, maybe more. Then Biden inserted it into a foreign relations bill (he was head of the Foreign Relations Committee). Amendments were added, making it more acceptable to some other Democrats. It was passed. "What did happen was a substantial decline in the number of people able to file for bankruptcy in response to a medical emergency." https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/5/6/18518381/baccpa-bankruptcy-bill-2005-biden-warren

[Demsrule86]

11. She raised her hand about taking private insurance away in a MFA Plan but is now walking this back

so who the hell knows for sure.

[Honeycombe8]

14. She's not lying about that question, tho. I thought that's what the question was, too.

And I guarantee you that a few of the other candidates did, too, when they raised their hands. The question was worded badly.

Who here would abolish their private health insurance in favorite of a government-run plan?

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/full-transcript-2019-democratic-debate-night-two-sortable-topic-n1023601

[Demsrule86]

16. It seemed clear to me and as far as I know she is the only one who has walked it back...but then

I no longer like her and will only support her in a general so it really doesn't matter.

[Honeycombe8]

22. I don't support Harris & don't plan to. But the others don't have to walk it back...

because they don't matter. Their numbers are too low.

But I heard the question the same way she did.

Many people watching at home have health insurance through their employer. Who here would abolish their private health insurance in favorite of a government-run plan?

That could certainly mean "Who here would abolish his own private health insurance in favor of a government-run plan?

[Demsrule86]

28. True that...Warren I know does support ending private insurance I wish she wouldn't.

[Hoyt]

30. It was definitely a poorly worded question.

[AlexSFCA]

26. she said she supports Medicare for All and eliminating private health insurance

I think Biden has the best plan. If you remember, ACA was supposed to have public option but it was blocked in the senate. So Biden rightly so proposes to improve ACA by adding that option which is essentially medicare on the exchanges and then see how popular it is before making drastic changes. This makes the most sense to me. Also a lot of people seem to forget that we are merely talking about insurance, hospitals and doctors are all private unlike many other countries. You would still get exact same care with same doctors and hospitals. I personally support universal healthcare through medicare from birth but it is not something that can be done quickly as undoubtedly SC would immediately block any such bill from taking effect (it’s almost certainly unconstitutional). We are such a big country that scaling up medicare is going to take some time but by doing it gradually, we can avoid unnecessary SC confrontations.

[SidDithers]

34. Many answers in this thread, and you've yet to comment on them...

Welcome to DU.

Sid

[Curky]

35. I'm just as confused as you are

That's why you and I can't tell what her plan is.
She has changed her position (January) and allegedly misheard a question (the other day).

[MrsCoffee]

37. She co-sponsored Bernie's bill. I think we can say she is on the same page.