You have to own that. They are “the boss” according to aoc. lolThis was a well thought out response.
You have to own that. They are “the boss” according to aoc. lolThis was a well thought out response.
Which specific dem candidates have come out and when for healthcare for undocumented immigrants? Please give citations to source.So when all Dem candidates raise their hands for free healthcare for illegals you’re ok that? There are AMERICANS who don’t have healthcare. Really?
https://www.nationalreview.com/news...ly-funded-health-care-for-illegal-immigrants/Which specific dem candidates have come out and when for healthcare for undocumented immigrants? Please give citations to source.
Just a little more about the whole health care for immigrants thing. As I’ve spoken on here before, this really isn’t any different than what we have today. EMTALA already guarantees everyone healthcare, the Federal government and private insurance subscribers are already picking up the tab, but poor people just don’t have a shiny card with a policy number and the words “health insurance” on it.Debate lady said:A lot of you have been talking about government health care plans you proposed in one form or another. This is a show of hands question and hold them up so people can see. Raise your hand if your government plan would provide coverage for undocumented immigrants,” moderator Savannah Guthrie asked the ten candidates, all of whom raised their hands.
Thank you. Most people don't understand EMTALA, why it exists, or its impact.https://www.nationalreview.com/news...ly-funded-health-care-for-illegal-immigrants/
It happened during the debate.
Technically what bamamc1 said is misleading as the question was in context of “government health plans” the candidates support, under which all of them support a health care for all provision, which would mean there wouldn’t be anyone without insurance.
Just a little more about the whole health care for immigrants thing. As I’ve spoken on here before, this really isn’t any different than what we have today. EMTALA already guarantees everyone healthcare, the Federal government and private insurance subscribers are already picking up the tab, but poor people just don’t have a shiny card with a policy number and the words “health insurance” on it.
It’s complex. However whenever I have someone who gets high and mighty against Health care for all, I ask them if they support repealing EMTALA. Four times out of five, they don’t know what it is. After a brief explanation, usually with requisite iPad views showing that such a thing exists, they either need more time to think, or they dig their heels in deeper, and I give up. No one brings one of the few real counterpoints and that is long term maintenance for diseases like cancer/AIDS, because under EMTALA they just treat the acute issues, not curing or chemotherapy. Which is where a ton of insurance $ go now because there isn’t nearly as much money to be made in prevention.Thank you. Most people don't understand EMTALA, why it exists, or its impact.
It's amazing that it was seen as just a simple "anti-dumping" act at the time. I've told people that we already have universal healthcare for undocumented, wherever there is an ER and, like you, get a blank stare. The last time we had to use an ER was Xmas before last. My wife had a colonoscopy, and while rehydrating, started passing kidney stones, so she drank even more water. Long story short, her sodium level dropped so low, she became delirious and then dropped into a coma. Despite flu season being in full swing, and news media spreading announcements from hospitals begging the populace not to come to the ER with the flu, half the people in the ER were wearing ER-issued masks. A very large percentage were Hispanic and, I'd bet, a lot of them were probably undocumented. They are all entitled to care...In case anyone is interested. This has a detailed breakdown of the EMTALA
The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA): what it is and what it means for physicians
The platform isn't drafted and adopted until the convention.Well.....fast forward to the presidential election year and they still have only their 2016 platform listed:
https://democrats.org/
https://democrats.org/where-we-stand/party-platform/
Same with the RNC apparently.The platform isn't drafted and adopted until the convention.
It's fiction anyway, but the DNC really needs to get ahead of thisSame with the RNC apparently.
Why do they take so long?
Isn't this something they want in place earlier to give potential voters more time to consider their choices?
Explain?Why do people care what's in the RNC or DNC platform?
Only because it is supposed to represent what one party or the other holds as it's goals and objectives.Why do people care what's in the RNC or DNC platform?
I remember GWB - 2 elections in a row he ran on a promise of Social Security reform. For 6 of his 8 years in office he had control of the Senate and House BOTH and never had a bill put on the floor to reform SS. He promised it, got elected because most people saw the need, then ignored that promise.Only because it is supposed to represent what one party or the other holds as it's goals and objectives.
I can understand why some don't care but it's been traditional to have this in place.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_platform
The platform is heavily influenced by the nominee. Once someone gets the required votes for nomination, back room wrangling about the platform can begin.Same with the RNC apparently.
Why do they take so long?
Isn't this something they want in place earlier to give potential voters more time to consider their choices?
Interesting - I didn't know that. I'll have to go back and look at both party's from 2016 and see if I can perceive any tie-in'sThe platform is heavily influenced by the nominee. Once someone gets the required votes for nomination, back room wrangling about the platform can begin.
It seems like a meaningless document that's entirely forgotten after the nominee takes office. You're voting for a candidate who has their own platform. Look to that. The party platform is empty symbology IMO.Explain?
The RNC platform became much friendlier to Russia due to the maneuverings of the Trump campaign, for instance.Interesting - I didn't know that. I'll have to go back and look at both party's from 2016 and see if I can perceive any tie-in's
The party platform is really the candidate's platform, as has been discussed already. As the primaries play out the parties work out what is resonating with their base, the "platform" takes shape. The platform does not represent what the candidate wants to do - it represents what the candidate needs to say to get elected. Bill Clinton perfected the art.It seems like a meaningless document that's entirely forgotten after the nominee takes office. You're voting for a candidate who has their own platform. Look to that. The party platform is empty symbology IMO.
The RNC platform became much friendlier to Russia due to the maneuverings of the Trump campaign, for instance.