It is a moral outrage that 88% of Democrats and 69% of all voters support Medicare for All, yet Democratic Party leadership in Congress has refused to fight for it, particularly during a pandemic that has resulted in millions losing their jobs and health insurance. When the 2021 legislative session begins in January, House Progressives…
But we also recognize that Speaker Pelosi alone can’t deliver us a floor vote. The Medicare for All bill in the House needs to pass through six Committees’ jurisdiction, and it currently lacks financing language (i.e. how to pay for it), so it’s not a bill that can be voted on yet. This is why getting the bill out of committee has been one of DSA’s priorities. Over the past few years, working with other national and local groups, we’ve succeeded in pressuring chairs to hold the first hearings on Medicare for All in the Ways and Means, Energy and Commerce, Rules, and Budget committees. These hearings were historic; the first ever on Medicare for All legislation.
Seems like their just clarifying procedural congress shit. I don't know why you're upset with this.
yeah it's the same shit they used on bernie in the debate. 'how are we gonna pay for it?' despite the fact that it would actually save money... just not for the people who are already making bank profiting off of death.
I don't see how it's the same. Neolibs are saying "how are we going to pay for it" to suggest that it cannot be paid for. DSA is saying the bill is still in 6 committees and the committees have not decides how it should be paid for yet, basically saying it is an incomplete bill. Meaning House Democrats are stalling
you have more faith in them than i do. to me they're using language that mirrors the DNC's position on it, and trying to justify their opposition to force the vote, despite them initially promoting it, before all of their reps declined to press pelosi.
I don't have faith in them I just don't know how to read it any other way
The Medicare for All bill in the House needs to pass through six Committees’ jurisdiction, and it currently lacks financing language (i.e. how to pay for it), so it’s not a bill that can be voted on yet. This is why getting the bill out of committee has been one of DSA’s priorities .Over the past few years, working with other national and local groups, we’ve succeeded in pressuring chairs to hold the first hearings on Medicare for All in the Ways and Means, Energy and Commerce, Rules, and Budget committees. These hearings were historic; the first ever on Medicare for All legislation.
to me this says its incomplete and we want it to be completed. The bill had hearings, which is a start, but were not completed. I don't know how else to interpret it. The DNC position is not that House Democrats are dragging their feet and are the only reason its not complete
Is that not a factual statement? House Democrats have not prioritized this bill and there are 6 committees that have not finished their work. Financing language is probably some of the work that is remaining. They could've said "House Democrats refuse to complete M4A bill so it can't be voted on" and it would mean the same thing
yeah, that's what they should have said. that's the point, they're mirroring the DNC language and homogenizing. they even stan for pelosi "not being able to deliver" a vote. this is passive language.
I'm not understanding how any of this is DNC language. The DNC says that M4A impossible, not that the Ways and Means Committee has not yet adding financing language.
But we also recognize that Speaker Pelosi alone can’t deliver us a floor vote.
If this is actually the case then people should be aware of this. If Pelosi alone can deliver a floor vote then people should aware of that. I guess they could've said that as Speaker it is Pelosi's fault that the committees have not prioritized M4A but realistically anyone who is reading this is well aware of that.
That's what I am trying to say, they are not saying "we have no way of paying for it ever" they are saying the House has not yet specified how it will be paid for. These are two very different meanings. There are many ways it can be paid for.
Any bill that is worked on will at some point in time lack financing language. Then that language is added, then there is a vote. That's what the budget and ways and means committees do is my understanding.
once again, you trust them much more than I do. i'm kind of through having the same conversation over and over, but they literally share the exact same language as the DNC.
currently lacks financing language (i.e. how to pay for it)
which isn't even true. it's so vague, and implies that they don't know where they're going to get the funds, when all studies have shown that it saves money.
it’s so vague, and implies that they don’t know where they’re going to get the funds,
To me this does not seem vague at all. It is clear, the details of how the bill will be funded are not added yet. Saying DSA means that such details can never be added because M4A was for fools all along does not make sense
Yep, that's DSA for you. Useless bunch of rich college kids who just think that socialism is when the government does stuff. There is a reason why the retort of "they just want free stuff" sticks with them.
Generally people who don't even read the links they submit and respond to good-faith criticism with "Go fuck yourself shitlib" are not trying to mean anything.
Yeah if you read the bill, it creates a trust fund for funding m4a (really several funds) that must have money put into it, however how much money to put into it via what taxes or budget allocations since paygo is gone is not there. The statement dsa put out is completely correct. Like the answer it saves money via being cheaper and is funded with taxes is obvious but it still needs the actual amount of tax. Like the bill has to have an accompanying bill saying like defund military 100 billion and reallocate, tax the top 10 percent of income earners x amount etc or (unlikely) whatever it costs will be covered by currency creation if needed.
Bills aren't introduced fully formed, they get finished in committees. This bill is still in 6 committees. The House Democrats clearly are not prioritising this bill because Pelosi could totally ask them to finish it quicker.
I'm not greatly familiar with the procedures of the US congress, but I don't see why a bill can't be introduced fully formed, and I don't see why they can't move amendments during the floor. And I don't know why the DSA are saying that it's not Pelosi's fault because of committees when the democrats have enough numbers in the house to move a discharge petition to get it out of the committees
(Not that it matters because it should be obvious that the democrats don't support M4A and obvious why that is)
I suppose it depends on the scope of the bill. M4A does have a pretty massive scope so it makes sense that many committees have to have input.
The DSA statement was just describing the state of the bill so I guess they could've mentioned that Pelosi is responsible for this state not being finished. But everyone reading this knows that.
Seems like their just clarifying procedural congress shit. I don't know why you're upset with this.
They are literally spewing neoliberal lies.
yeah it's the same shit they used on bernie in the debate. 'how are we gonna pay for it?' despite the fact that it would actually save money... just not for the people who are already making bank profiting off of death.
I don't see how it's the same. Neolibs are saying "how are we going to pay for it" to suggest that it cannot be paid for. DSA is saying the bill is still in 6 committees and the committees have not decides how it should be paid for yet, basically saying it is an incomplete bill. Meaning House Democrats are stalling
you have more faith in them than i do. to me they're using language that mirrors the DNC's position on it, and trying to justify their opposition to force the vote, despite them initially promoting it, before all of their reps declined to press pelosi.
I don't have faith in them I just don't know how to read it any other way
to me this says its incomplete and we want it to be completed. The bill had hearings, which is a start, but were not completed. I don't know how else to interpret it. The DNC position is not that House Democrats are dragging their feet and are the only reason its not complete
saying it lacks financing language is garbage though. why is this in their press release?
Is that not a factual statement? House Democrats have not prioritized this bill and there are 6 committees that have not finished their work. Financing language is probably some of the work that is remaining. They could've said "House Democrats refuse to complete M4A bill so it can't be voted on" and it would mean the same thing
yeah, that's what they should have said. that's the point, they're mirroring the DNC language and homogenizing. they even stan for pelosi "not being able to deliver" a vote. this is passive language.
I'm not understanding how any of this is DNC language. The DNC says that M4A impossible, not that the Ways and Means Committee has not yet adding financing language.
If this is actually the case then people should be aware of this. If Pelosi alone can deliver a floor vote then people should aware of that. I guess they could've said that as Speaker it is Pelosi's fault that the committees have not prioritized M4A but realistically anyone who is reading this is well aware of that.
the dnc literally says m4a is impossible because "we can't pay for it."
the dsa knows that m4a will save money, they've seen the bill. so when they say, and i'll quote it
they're saying "we have no way to pay for it." which is bogus, and the reason they're getting shit on in this post.
That's what I am trying to say, they are not saying "we have no way of paying for it ever" they are saying the House has not yet specified how it will be paid for. These are two very different meanings. There are many ways it can be paid for.
Any bill that is worked on will at some point in time lack financing language. Then that language is added, then there is a vote. That's what the budget and ways and means committees do is my understanding.
once again, you trust them much more than I do. i'm kind of through having the same conversation over and over, but they literally share the exact same language as the DNC.
which isn't even true. it's so vague, and implies that they don't know where they're going to get the funds, when all studies have shown that it saves money.
To me this does not seem vague at all. It is clear, the details of how the bill will be funded are not added yet. Saying DSA means that such details can never be added because M4A was for fools all along does not make sense
Yep, that's DSA for you. Useless bunch of rich college kids who just think that socialism is when the government does stuff. There is a reason why the retort of "they just want free stuff" sticks with them.
What's the lie? If the bill hasn't passed through those 6 committees and is incomplete then it's incomplete
Removed by mod
There are people on the other side of the screen, dude.
I'm not understanding what you mean
Generally people who don't even read the links they submit and respond to good-faith criticism with "Go fuck yourself shitlib" are not trying to mean anything.
Yeah if you read the bill, it creates a trust fund for funding m4a (really several funds) that must have money put into it, however how much money to put into it via what taxes or budget allocations since paygo is gone is not there. The statement dsa put out is completely correct. Like the answer it saves money via being cheaper and is funded with taxes is obvious but it still needs the actual amount of tax. Like the bill has to have an accompanying bill saying like defund military 100 billion and reallocate, tax the top 10 percent of income earners x amount etc or (unlikely) whatever it costs will be covered by currency creation if needed.
So why wasn't financing language included in the original bill?
I also find it highly dubious that the leader of the democrats in the house is unable to pressure any committee chairs.
Bills aren't introduced fully formed, they get finished in committees. This bill is still in 6 committees. The House Democrats clearly are not prioritising this bill because Pelosi could totally ask them to finish it quicker.
I'm not greatly familiar with the procedures of the US congress, but I don't see why a bill can't be introduced fully formed, and I don't see why they can't move amendments during the floor. And I don't know why the DSA are saying that it's not Pelosi's fault because of committees when the democrats have enough numbers in the house to move a discharge petition to get it out of the committees
(Not that it matters because it should be obvious that the democrats don't support M4A and obvious why that is)
I suppose it depends on the scope of the bill. M4A does have a pretty massive scope so it makes sense that many committees have to have input.
The DSA statement was just describing the state of the bill so I guess they could've mentioned that Pelosi is responsible for this state not being finished. But everyone reading this knows that.