Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris on Tuesday proposed a major new initiative: expanding Medicare to cover the cost of long-term care at home.
Such a plan could mean the option of staying at home, rather than in a nursing facility, for the millions of seniors and people with disabilities who need help with the daily tasks of life.
It could also mean physical and financial relief ― and new opportunities for school or work outside the home ― for the millions of working-age Americans who today provide so much of that care on their own without much in the way of outside assistance.
If the proposed legislation is enacted, such a program would represent a substantial boost in federal support for caregiving and, by any measure, one of the largest one-time increases in American history.
"If you have a pre-existing condition...heart disease; diabetes; breast cancer...they're coming for you. If you love someone who has a pre-existing condition...they're coming for you. If you're under the age of 26 on your parents' coverage...they're coming for you."
Wednesday night's Vice-Presidential debate between Kamala Harris and Mike Pence wasn't as bad as last week's dumpster fire of a Presidential "debate" between Donald Trump and Joe Biden. The questions were mostly better, and neither Pence nor Harris screamed at each other. On the other hand, the moderator did a terrible job of cutting Pence off when he ran over his time limit or interrupted Harris, and just as importantly, Pence flat-out refused to answer most of the questions at all, often instantly changing the subject to whatever he happened to feel like talking about with zero pushback from moderator Susan Page.
Harris’s rollout Monday was met with swift criticism from both the Biden camp, which called it “A Bernie Sanders-lite Medicare for All,” and the Sanders camp, which insists Harris “can’t call [her] plan Medicare for All.”
In saying this, the Sanders campaign is effectively trying to lay a copyright claim to Medicare-for-all, as if it, and only it, can define what it means. The reality is far less clear — and depending on your perspective, it could be Harris’s proposal that is more justified in claiming the Medicare-for-all branding.
I'm not going to overquote my own piece, but this has led to some backlash against me, so for the record:
(IMPORTANT: As my friend Shawn Pierce keeps pointing out, the phrase "Medicare for All" has two very different meanings...one is the brand "Medicare for All", which simply refers to any healthcare plan which ensures 100% universal, comprehensive healthcare coverage for everyone; the other is the specific bills introduced by Sen. Bernie Sanders and/or Rep. Pramila Jayapal, which would indeed completely eliminate private major medical insurance for 100% of the population as well as completely eliminating all out-of-pocket costs in favor of 100% federal public funding).
For months now, California Senator and Presidential candidate Kamala Harris has repeatedly struggled with how to address her support of Bernie Sanders' 100% mandatory, $0 out-of-pocket-cost, 100% comprehensive "pure" single payer "Medicare for All" healthcare bill.
