'Medicare by Choice' | Drudge Retort

Thursday, March 26, 2026

A coalition of former congressional staffers and federal health leaders is putting forward a health care policy proposal ...

Posted by retort at 12:18 PM | 45 COMMENTS | permalink

This proposal allows everyone the option of enrolling in traditional Medicare regardless of age, even allowing employers to select Medicare by Choice as their employees' workplace benefit. thehill.com/policy/healt ... [image or embed]
-- Democratic Activists (@democratswin.bsky.social) Mar 26, 2026 at 10:16 AM

Comments

"Medicare for All," the proposed single-payer national health care system that would replace private health insurance, proved to be a politically testy item during the 2024 election. Former Vice President Kamala Harris left it off her agenda when she became the Democratic nominee for president"

And then she lost.

But don't learn any lessons Dems.

Note this proposal isn't coming from any elected democrats. They're too cowardly.

#1 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2026-03-26 12:56 PM

The insurance is too DAMN HIGH!!

#2 | Posted by horstngraben at 2026-03-26 12:58 PM

Now, let's see the uninsured Trumpy types vote against their own interests, vote in people who would never allow this to happen, and remain uninsured. And stupid.

#3 | Posted by horstngraben at 2026-03-26 12:59 PM

But, if you think about it, said Trumpers are generally tweakers, or diabetic, or smoke two packs of cheap cigarettes a day. Plus, stupid people are more likely to get hurt.

Maybe it's best if they stay off the rolls...

#4 | Posted by horstngraben at 2026-03-26 01:02 PM

We can't have Choices! That takes away my Freedom!
--Republicans

#5 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-03-26 01:03 PM

NO!!! We should spend the money on bombs and Israel!!!

#6 | Posted by Brennnn at 2026-03-26 01:26 PM

"Note this proposal isn't coming from any elected democrats. They're too cowardly."

Don't get confused. People like the idea of Medicare For All.

The reality would be very different: For full-time workers, Medicare falls around the 70th percentile in comparison to other plans. That means 30% would have to take a lesser plan than they currently have.

And what 30% is that? The ones paid the most. Doctors, Lawyers, Engineers, Executives.

THAT's who'd suddenly turn against the idea, and join a coordinated effort among a whole bunch of wealthy interests: Insurance, Pharma, Hospitals, etc.

#7 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-03-26 01:31 PM

We would have had a public option if not for Joe Lieberman.

#8 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2026-03-26 01:38 PM

#7 | Posted by Danforth

A lesser plan is the one that bankrupts you when you get sick.

#9 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2026-03-26 02:27 PM

Sigh. For someone turning 65. Medicare part B 202.90 per month per person. Supplemental insurance 190.49 per month per person. So for a couple around 10,000 per year before co-pays, deductible and max out of pocket. We need to reduce the cost, not just shift them to third and fourth party payers.

#10 | Posted by visitor_ at 2026-03-26 02:31 PM

I saw the headline and presumed it was a GOP concept of a plan to convince older folks to get off the dole.

#11 | Posted by Dbt2 at 2026-03-26 02:33 PM

Might want to check your abacus on that yearly amount, and your information on what Medicare is all about.

And unless you're dopey enough to fall for a Medicare Advantage plan, there's nothing after the deductible.

My wife's been on Medicare since March 2020, and I've been handling her Medicare. She's had plenty of medical care and a lot of pricey stuff done. I'm on Medicare also, as of last year.

The only times she's been charged anything beyond the deductible was twice, from the same chiropractor's office. It was BS, and we left the practice.

Right now, she's on a zero-premium drug plan and her pharmacy costs are minimal.

#12 | Posted by Dbt2 at 2026-03-26 02:38 PM

We need to reduce the cost, not just shift them to third and fourth party payers.

#10 | Posted by visitor_

Cutting out billion dollar payments to insurance CEOs reduces costs.

#13 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2026-03-26 02:45 PM

It will never pass, there is too much money in an entire layer of millionaires rubber stamping care denials that funnel money to Washington's pockets for Americans to something else.

That means 30% would have to take a lesser plan than they currently have.

So what you're saying is Medicare is equivalent or better than 70% of the plans out there.

We need to reduce the cost,

People love to say "we need to lower cost" because it sounds good, but it never happens because private insurance just pays the bill. So what's your plan to lower costs?

You think people have time to go shopping for the cheapest xray when they have a broken leg?

In most instances the costs are negotiated with the health insurance company anyways. Millionaires negotiating to set prices with other millionaires.

#14 | Posted by Nixon at 2026-03-26 02:47 PM

#12 My numbers are accurate. Lucky you that you and your wife are not on any expensive drugs.

#15 | Posted by visitor_ at 2026-03-26 02:58 PM

"THAT's who'd suddenly turn against the idea, and join a coordinated effort among a whole bunch of wealthy interests: Insurance, Pharma, Hospitals, etc."

That would be me. I might be the only person here who has been subject to a government-operated healthcare system.

I don't remember it being that bad before COVID, but from spring of 2020 until I retired in August of 2023, the US military healthcare service was almost useless. Appointments for non-flyers were non-existent. You would just go to the ER at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center. Even for me as a flyer, appointments had to be made weeks in advance.

Then I retired, getting a private plan through Cigna Global. On the Tuesday after I retired, I called the general provider I had chosen. They asked if I could come in Thursday. I started laughing because it seemed so crazy.

I'm not against a government plan for those who want it, any more than I am against people who want to fly Spirit Air because it is cheap. But don't expect First Class service unless you're willing to pay first class prices. And that seems to be a big rub. That the quality and timeliness of the person buying the first-class ticket should be the same as that of the person buying the Spirit Air ticket.

#16 | Posted by madbomber at 2026-03-26 03:43 PM

BTW, Europe is chock full of different healthcare policies. It's not like the US has to start from scratch.

#17 | Posted by madbomber at 2026-03-26 03:45 PM

Medicare users ratings of their health care?

"Medicare beneficiaries generally report high satisfaction with their care, with 80-90% rating it positively.

Most (92%) over age 65 rate Medicare positively, while 79% of those under 65 with disabilities do. Ratings are based on 1-5 star systems for providers, hospitals, and plans, focusing on quality and patient experience."

www.google.com

#18 | Posted by Corky at 2026-03-26 03:53 PM

Flag:

BTW, Europe is chock full of different healthcare policies. It's not like the US has to start from scratch.

#17 | Posted by madbomber

Actually, due to the republican party selling out the country to oligarchs who are gutting it for cash, the US is going to start from scratch in every respect.

But if we rebuild from our collapse, it would be obvious to copy things that worked elsewhere.

#19 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2026-03-26 08:29 PM

""Medicare beneficiaries generally report high satisfaction with their care, with 80-90% rating it positively."

Oh, I'll agree with that. Back before O'Care, it was the only group of people who didn't have to worry about access to health insurance.

But Medicare is still in the 70th-80th percentile compared to plans offered to health industry workers and higher-paid workers. Those folks wouldn't necessarily want to take a step down.

And that doesn't even address the equation, where the folks getting the 80-100th percentile plans are assumed to be paying the same premiums as they are now.

Not that I wouldn't like to see M4A. All I'm saying is there's a built-in resistance of at least 10 powerful groups, and most M4A advocates can't name five.

#20 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-03-27 12:34 AM

If you earn less than $109,000 a year after 65, and have a Part F supplement (covers the other 20% Medicare doesn't cover), 100% of care is covered under Medicare once you've met the $283/year Medicare deductible for outpatient and $1,676 for hospital stays. That's it.

#21 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2026-03-27 03:16 AM

We need to reduce the cost, not just shift them to third and fourth party payers.
#10 | Posted by visitor_

Cutting out the expense associated with dealing with the private insurance industry would save US health care providers around half a trillion per year.

#22 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2026-03-27 10:24 AM

#22 No argument there.

#23 | Posted by visitor_ at 2026-03-27 12:39 PM

Flag:

#22 No argument there.

#23 | Posted by visitor_

So why does your party want those leeches to keep sucking a half trillion per year from us?

#24 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2026-03-27 01:05 PM

"All I'm saying is there's a built-in resistance of at least 10 powerful groups, and most M4A advocates can't name five."

Make it three.

They think it ends with insurance companies and the republican party.

They literally think it's that simple.

It's not.

#25 | Posted by eberly at 2026-03-27 01:12 PM

If you believe that the mess our healthcare system is in is the fault of the Republicans, you have a very simplistic view of the issues involved. There are many competing interests, the entire political class is just one.

#26 | Posted by visitor_ at 2026-03-27 01:43 PM

Republicans have been saying they are werking on a Health Care Plan for decades now, and still haven't put one on the table, which they said they would do last year.

#27 | Posted by Corky at 2026-03-27 01:49 PM

#26 | Posted by visitor_

If you want to look at obstacles to fixing our health system, the republican party is numbers 1, 2, and 3.

#28 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2026-03-27 02:12 PM

Why don't Democrat strongholds like Cali, Illinois and New York have significantly better and less expensive healthcare?

#29 | Posted by visitor_ at 2026-03-27 02:57 PM

#26 | Posted by visitor_

Literally no one thinks that. As I stated above, a single Independent is responsible for us not already having a public option.

While the GOP is not solely responsible, I hope you would at least acknowledge the Party's intransigence on the issue.
They currently hold majorities in both houses of Congress as well as the the White House yet they've offered no alternative to the current system other than raising costs on 22 million Americans by stripping ACA subsidies. It's been more than a decade since Donald Trump promised to deliver a comprehensive plan to replace ACA. It was in January of 2016 when Trump said his plan would provide "insurance for everybody" and "much lower deductibles" was "very much formulated down to the final strokes" and would be announced right after his Secretary of HHS received confirmation. That plan was never introduced and Republicans have spent the past decade doing next to do nothing on the issue.
Trump lied and the GOP has sat on their hands.

#30 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2026-03-27 03:10 PM

proving you can't actually count to 3.

There are no points, no extra credit, no benefit, no bonus, nothing for pretending a problem is simple when it's not.

Why people pretend there is something in it for them to do that is why they're asking the same questions their whole miserable life.

It makes you helpless, powerless, and weak.

Let me put it another way......the democratic party is fine with you believing the only obstacle to fixing our healthcare system (which isn't a solution....just a term you can't define) is the republican party and insurance companies.

that can be argued easily. The health insurance lobby bought just enough democrats when it was obvious they'd need democratic party votes to water down and ---- on Obamacare.

Leading democrats at the time Obamacare was being passed were very transparent about it and very critical about it.

I'm not looking to blame democrats for anything, BTW. I'm just saying the obstacles are vast and complex.

#31 | Posted by eberly at 2026-03-27 03:22 PM

that can be argued easily. The health insurance lobby bought just enough democrats when it was obvious they'd need democratic party votes to water down and ---- on Obamacare.

Leading democrats at the time Obamacare was being passed were very transparent about it and very critical about it.

I'm not looking to blame democrats for anything, BTW. I'm just saying the obstacles are vast and complex.

#31 | Posted by eberly

Yeah they only had to buy a couple democrats because they knew the entire republican party would vote against it.

50 repubs and 2 dems vote against it = "Look at how corrupt the democrats are!" -idiots

#32 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2026-03-27 03:24 PM

-Literally no one thinks that.

I think you're probably right....but some folks here are so desperate to participate in an argument they'll pretend they think that.

#33 | Posted by eberly at 2026-03-27 03:28 PM

See Johnny? Right there you have someone who is working to appear this ------- dumb.

Or perhaps it's entirely possible it's not work at all. It's not pretending.

It's genuine ignorance.

#34 | Posted by eberly at 2026-03-27 03:30 PM

The GOP is guilty of everything they're accused of.

It's just a bigger list of obstacles.

Speakstupid doesn't even realize he's arguing with Danforth more than me.

Danforth conceded it's 10+ "powerful groups"

Speakstupid thinks it's 1.

Where Obamacare fell short is proof of existence of those groups. The GOP votes against ACA were irrelevant because they didn't have the numbers anyway.

#35 | Posted by eberly at 2026-03-27 03:35 PM

"I'm just saying the obstacles are vast and complex."

And we haven't even TOUCHED ON the resistance campaign.

The spending will make political campaigns look like lemonade stands by comparison.

#36 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-03-27 03:38 PM

-Trump lied and the GOP has sat on their hands.

Are you suggesting a president made a promise they knew was politically unrealistic but promised it anyway?

Now, that's not a way to NOT call Trump a liar. He lied. Period. No point is minimizing it by suggesting he was naive or his heart was in the right place but should have known congress wouldn't go for it, etc.....LOL

but it's not my first time seeing something like that

#37 | Posted by eberly at 2026-03-27 03:40 PM

After the passage of Medicare, Republicans worked with Democrats to fix and improve it.

After the passage of the PPACA (Patient Protection - which all insured benefit from - and Affordable Care Act), republicans did NOTHING but try to take it away from untold millions of people.

Now, thanks to the BBB, millions who buy private health insurance on the exchange can't afford the premiums.

But they have no problems spending hundreds of millions on a war of choice. Money that COULD have been used to keep subsidies.

Republicans don't give a flying &^#! about average Americans. That's the truth.

#38 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2026-03-27 03:46 PM

"Where Obamacare fell short is proof of existence of those groups. "

I would amend that to Where Obamacare fell short OF M4A is proof of existence of those groups. I think that's what you're saying, and the meaning isn't ambiguous.

M4A was taken off the table immediately, which I hated, but it was an admission they didn't want to waste time fighting an unwinnable fight.

#39 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-03-27 03:50 PM

The GOP votes against ACA were irrelevant because they didn't have the numbers anyway.

#35 | Posted by eberly

"Facts that ruin my argument are irrelevant!"

#40 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2026-03-27 03:51 PM

"Are you suggesting a president made a promise they knew was politically unrealistic but promised it anyway?"

No, I think he's suggesting it's a fraud to pretend something is near completion when neither the first public forum nor the first hearing has been had.

It's also an insult to the people who work months and months for the outcome.

Not that MAGA cares.

#41 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-03-27 04:01 PM

"The GOP votes against ACA were irrelevant because they didn't have the numbers anyway."

The rotting corpse of John McCain on line #1 for you. He wants to remind you of a moment:
www.youtube.com

#42 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-03-27 04:04 PM

-Trump lied and the GOP has sat on their hands.
Are you suggesting a president made a promise they knew was politically unrealistic but promised it anyway?
Now, that's not a way to NOT call Trump a liar. He lied. Period. No point is minimizing it by suggesting he was naive or his heart was in the right place but should have known congress wouldn't go for it, etc.....LOL
but it's not my first time seeing something like that
#37 | Posted by eberly

That's not what I'm suggesting. This wasn't an unfulfilled campaign promise or some nebulous policy statement delivered at the state of the union that can be spun to mean something else or blamed on the opposition party for something not occurring.
It was a clear statement that a fully detailed plan existed and would soon be delivered for Congressional debate. Had his statement been true then I think it may have been politically feasible. Republicans in Congress would have loved to replace Obama's biggest legislative victory with something from their party and I think quite a few Democrats would have been receptive to negotiations had a plan be presented that would actually provide coverage for everyone while lowering deductibles.
Trump lied and the GOP Congress did nothing. Meanwhile the healthcare industry put a lot of long term decisions on hold while we waited to see what the new President was bringing to the table.
Trump is still repeating the lie to this day. The White House even went as far as releasing "The Great Healthcare Plan" earlier this year. Have you read it? It is laughable. It's no plan at all. That plan that we were told was completely formulated and ready to introduce 10 years ago is nothing more than a single page of catchphrases and platitudes so Trump can tell his cult devotees that he delivered something. He will try to blame Democrats for it's failure and some on this site will buy his line despite it not being anywhere close to being draft legislation or even a framework for a comprehensive plan. Meanwhile problems 2 & 3, the GOP lead House and Senate, will continue to take no leadership on the issue and just keep deferring to Trump like they've done for a decade.

#43 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2026-03-28 01:38 AM

I've got to agree with Johnny.

If problems #1, #2, and #3 corrected course, M4A might have a fighting chance.

His original point stands.

#44 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-03-28 01:44 AM

Medicare For Most.

Rich people can buy fancy plans.

This is called the "Bismarck System" and it was invented by arch-conservative Otto von Bismarck, who started a war with France to unify Germany.

That is the best option for us.

Let's see some real competition among these for-profit health care plans, like I see Citi and Chase chasing my credit card spending, which is nearly all of my spending.

#45 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-03-28 01:51 AM

Drudge Retort Headlines

Italy Suspends Defense Pact with Israel (36 comments)

JD Vance Says Epstein and Trump Hated Each Other (21 comments)

Vought: White House Doesn't have 'ballpark' total for Iran War Funding (20 comments)