Home Health EXPOSED: Debbie Wasserman Schultz Serves Donors Over People On Single Payer

EXPOSED: Debbie Wasserman Schultz Serves Donors Over People On Single Payer

12662
13
SHARE

Disgraced former-DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz just admitted that she likes the idea of single-payer healthcare, in theory—just not in practice, because she’d have to give up the hundreds of thousands of dollars she receives from the corporate healthcare machine.

Progressives of South Florida were there on Sunday when Schultz attended an Indivisible chapter meeting in Ft. Lauderdale. “MiamiGator” captured this video in which someone asked, “where do you stand on single-payer healthcare?”

As the Hillary Clinton clone we’ve grown to loathe, Schultz spouted off the usual talking points in response. First came the spiel that we need to fix the broken Affordable Care Act in order to cover more people, instead of simply guaranteeing coverage to everyone with universal healthcare.

“I support the concept of Medicare-for-All, but what I support now, because we’ve already adopted systemic healthcare reform, is working within the Affordable Care Act to improve it so that we can make sure that we expand healthcare,” said Schultz, before she was interrupted with boos. “We need to expand Medicaid so it covers virtually everybody, and so I support Medicare-for-All, if we were starting it from the beginning, but we’re not starting from the beginning.”

This is a strange statement for Schultz to make, as she did not co-sponsor an attempt to pass Medicare-for-All in 2009, before there was an Affordable Care Act to fix. It seems like that would’ve been a perfect time to “start from the beginning,” especially with Democratic control of the White House, Senate, and the House of Representatives.

Schultz swiftly moved on to the next token neoliberal argument—single-payer healthcare is just too pie-in-the-sky to achieve, even though every other major industrialized country in the world has managed to figure it out.

“I’m going to support the most significant healthcare reform that we can actually pass,” said Schultz. Unfortunately, she has a point here, but only because she’s part of the problem—our elected officials have been bought and paid-for by the private health sector.

BEAT THE PRESS. DONATE TO TATM FOR JUSTICE JOURNALISM

Schultz has enjoyed a total of $1.1 million in campaign contributions from healthcare industries since 2006, so supporting Medicare-for-All would upset those donors and put a huge dent in her future re-election bids.

IndustryDonation Totals: 2006-2016
Health Professionals$620,189
Pharmaceuticals/Health Products$147,082
Hospitals/Nursing Homes$136,340
Health Services/HMOs$119,368
Pharmaceutical manufacturing$81,882


Debbie is not the only bad apple in the bunch of Democrats we’ve elected to Congress, where the lines between liberal and conservative are becoming blurrier every day. For some reason, Democrats have been unjustly crowned as champions of healthcare. The truth is, 89 House Democrats 
are still not supporting a new version of HR 676, which would pave the way for a Medicare-For-All system. In the 2016 election cycle, only $5 million separated Democrats from Republicans in donations from the health sector, which is less than 10% of their total spending of $68.5 million.

Despite the fact that the majority of Americans would prefer a universal healthcare system, our Congressmen and women are choosing to represent Big Pharma and profit-hungry insurance companies, and they’re guided only by their wallets. The average citizen can’t shell out thousands or millions of dollars to earn a voice in politics, or in this case, to gain a fundamental right to proper healthcare.

People like Debbie Wasserman Schultz don’t care that you’re spending your hard-earned money on outrageous prescription costs, co-pays and hospital bills while also attempting to keep food on the table. You’re not paying her the big bucks, so she won’t fight for you or your rights.

“If, politically, Medicare-for-All actually became viable, if we elected enough people to Congress that could make it happen, then I most definitely would be supportive of it,” said Schultz. You heard her, everyone—let’s replace the fake liberals and regain control of the House and Senate in 2018.

Update 5/2/2017: You can read the follow-up to this article here.

Edited by Lydia McMullen-Laird 

13 COMMENTS

    • Hi, K.G.! Thank you for your vigilance, I’ve corrected the article. We appreciate it!

  1. she said “if we were starting from the beginning”….that’s an absolute deflection. A separate bill is easier to replace at the same time, but you absolutely COULD add amendments to the ACA to essentially MAKE it Medicare for ALL AND single-payer (sngle public option) without repealing ACA, so that’s typical deflection on her part.

  2. The lead paragraph is a lie. I attended this meeting and that is not what DWS said. Is this page paid for by Republicans to create divisions in the Democratic Party? We will ONLY see universal healthcare coverage and eventually a government Medicare for all program by defeating Republicans and electing Democrats, not by wishful thinking slogans.

    • Hi Phillip, while I understand where you’re coming from, the first paragraph is not quoting Schultz–the direct quote is further down in the article, along with the justification behind my statement. Your assertion is false. We do, however, exist to call out corruption in both parties, including the actions of Debbie Wasserman Schultz and 88 other current congressional democrats who refuse to support HR 676. Thank you.

      • There are currently 54 Republicans dominating the U.S. Senate and 247 Republicans dominating the U.S. House. Plus the undeniable fact that Trump occupies the Whitehouse underlines the silliness of demanding blind allegiance to HR 676. Elect more Democrats starting in 2018 THEN start counting votes for universal and single payer Medicare for all. Until then, I suspect you are just a pawn of the Republicans trying to tear apart the opposition.

        • …Okay…so, you’re saying that because the Republicans have control of the House and Senate right now, we shouldn’t ask democrats to do the right thing and hold them accountable? They will be able to vote nay on the Republican healthcare bill either way. Also, did you miss the link at the bottom of the article calling for Congress to be replaced with real liberals?

          A quick search shows you’re friends with the President of the Indivisible chapter I call out in my follow-up article (and based on your prior comment, also a member), here to call me conservative fake news…just as I said before, very Trumpian behavior from you both, gentlemen. So, if you don’t mind, can you pass along the message that I’m still waiting on a response from him? Thanks!

  3. Taylor Raines is obviously why out over her depth, in attribution of legislation, doing the math and understanding what led up to President Obama being able to get Congress to pass the Affordable Care Act as a compromise to achieve universal health insurance coverage. “The Truth Machine” seems built to churn out fake-news.

    • I am only publishing this as to not silence dissent, and I’m sure I will only be feeding the troll by responding, but I believe passionately in universal healthcare. Democrats can still support HR 676 and oppose tomorrow’s legislation… the two should go hand-in-hand… oppose the Republican legislation, embrace liberal legislation. The numbers game is problematic no matter how you slice it, and I’m not in disagreement with you–we need to elect a brand new, liberal, progressive congress, and it looks like we might need to take the majority to make significant strides in healthcare.

      That doesn’t change the fact that over half of Americans want universal healthcare, so the public needs to pressure ALL Congressmen and women to support HR 676. If Congress is currently hell-bent on replacing the ACA, why NOT support guaranteed coverage as the replacement? It’s counter-productive to harp on “fixing” our broken healthcare system gradually (I would not be covered without the ACA, but it is far from perfect). Democrats can and should fight for universal healthcare unapologetically, but they often can’t, because they’re indebted to their wealthy donors in the health sector.

      Just like anything else, we need to fight for this to happen, and we need to fight for it NOW. You’re essentially implying that democrats should roll over and play dead on publicly, firmly supporting universal healthcare until we elect more democrats, in hopes of some kind of theoretical compromise? No thank you. That strategy is absurd, and the opposite of progressivism–we will fight until it is a reality. And you can refer to my prior comment for my thoughts on how I’m supposedly “fake news.”

Comments are closed.