Trump to 60 Minutes: single payer health care

The Examiner ^ | September 28, 2015 | Gary Gross

[TBP]

ccording to the transcript of Donald Trump's interview with Scott Pelley on 60 Minutes, Mr. Trump favors a single payer health care plan in certain situations. During the interview, Pelley asked Mr. Trump what his plan was to replace Obamacare would look like. Mr. Trump responded, saying "I am going to take care of everybody. I don’t care if it costs me votes or not. Everybody’s going to be taken care of much better than they’re taken care of now." When Pelley pressed Mr. Trump further about who would pay for this coverage, Mr. Trump said "the government’s gonna pay for it."

[D-fendr]

>>>And, pray tell, does it say he plans to cover “everyone” with “Universal health care”?

In the same interview: “the government’s gonna pay for it.”

You need to read my initial response to you to see what I’m going to say when you respond to this one.

[nopardons]

Yes, they have; the Cruz supporters.

I worked on both of Reagan's winning presidential campaigns.

I'm hardly a GOPEer, but I am a Conservative.

I'm also a realist, who is sick of holding my nose to vote for someone. I am also sick of the garbage, name calling, lies, insults, abject stupidity, and flame wars.

[House Atreides]

Misinterpreted...at best.
***************************************************************
“The government’s going to pay” is pretty hard to misinterpret. This is troubling coming from Trump...hopefully, he’ll get his mind right on this.

[nopardons]

I've "been around" too, but you've NEVER seen anyone like me, in your entire life.

And I repeat....you don't "know me" at all, not in any way, shape, manner, nor form.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

In the same interview: “the government’s gonna pay for it.”

Pay for "what"? Everyone to be on a single payer system? Keep trying.

[D-fendr]

Thanks for your reply:

>>He meant I believe “expand it to everyone who needs coverage”. Not “expand to everyone”.

Except he said: “Everybody’s got to be covered.”

And he said: “This is an un-Republican thing for me to say..”

And.. given his past statements, I think your interpretation is more a stretch.

[Osage Orange]

Wow....!!

FR cracks me up sometimes....

I've NO candidate yet.....it's too early.

[nopardons]

It's an OLD thread, an OLD statement, and who knows what he will do as president? You don't.

It's actually NOT his first priority anyway....the ILLEGAL HORDE and ISIS are; also the economy.

And you know what? Cruz hasn't said what he'll do.

[dynoman]

Most who like Trump also like Cruz. I know I do. But some Cruz supporters here on FR actually say they will not vote for Trump if he wins the nomination. That is scorched earth thinking - scorched earth is a loser's tactic, it's a resentful vengeful act that happens during a retreat. Hillary getting elected -> because you won't vote for Trump -> because Cruz didn't win the nomination is a retreat. No other rational or coherent way to look at it.

[nopardons]

Yeah, yeah.....pull the other one, why don’tcha? LOL

[Osage Orange]

Whatever....

But, I've seen enough...of you.

And I know people just like you.

[HarborSentry]

You’re right: “in certain situations” is the key here.

It really means nothing without seeing an actual outline of a plan. We already have single-payer care in a lot of situations.

Even Rush Limbaugh once suggested giving everybody catastrophic coverage. That could be interpreted as single payer, but only in a sense.

We need to see more, but immigration is still the major issue. We dare not lose on that one, and few Republican candidates are willing to take as strong as stand.

Frankly, as much as I despise single payer, I’d take that over a candidate who’s wobbly on immigration.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

I think your interpretation is more a stretch.

When your "interpretation" involves ignoring the words "private plans" to then state that Trump is talking about a public universal healthcare system, then, no, the fair reading isn't a stretch.

[Theophilus]

We settled what was in that bag 3 months ago! How dare you peek!

[D-fendr]

Pay for “what”?

The uninsured person.

Read the interview. It’s what I’m referring to.

[DoughtyOne]

I have never seen such a perpetually stupid bunch of Freepers in my life. In less tha a month I’ll have been here for eighteen years, and I have NEVER seen it anywhere close to this bad.

Once more, let’s lead the children around this process again. Then next week we’ll have to do it again, because the disinformation folks will make it necessary.

These are the main four types of care.

Obamacare
Medicare
Medicaid
Indigent care

OBAMACARE

Trump is going to do away with Obamacare. He will work with Congress and the states to lower state boundaries so insurance companies can compete in all 50 states, or as many as they want. Today states limit insurance companies to operate in one or a few states. This stifles competition and the types of policies available.

Under this plan states that have five or ten companies competing today will instead have 50 or 100 competing. This will drive down policy costs and increase the diversification of policies.

This is a clear move (altogether now) AWAY FROM SINGLE PAYER!

Under Obamacare exchanges are closing, insurance companies are dropping out, and employers are stopping offering coverage. That all moves us closer to single payer. Trump’s plan does the exact opposite.

That covers Obamacare. That’s it in a nutshell, what we now have and what Trump proposes.

MEDICARE

Medicare DOES NOT CHANGE.

MEDICAID

Medicaid DOES NOT CHANGE.

INDIGENT CARE

Now we come to the part folks are trying to label “single-payer” so incredibly stupid ilinformed people can be misled.

LISTEN UP FOR THE THOUSANDTH TIME.

Indigents get their care paid for by the government and have for at least 40 years. Did anyone miss that? Those who cannot pay for their care have been covered by the government since at least the 1970s.

These people show up at the E.R. and every hospital that gets Medicare funds, is required by law to provide service to them. If the hospital refuses service, the federal government will nullify their ability to get Medicare funds for their elderly patients. Hardly any hospitals have done this. I have only heard of one or at most a few who have.

Once these people receive care in the E. R., they are evaluated. They can get on a Medicaid program if the have no money or assets. If they have money or assets, they have to pay. Another words they are means tested.

This still takes place under Obamacare. It will still take place under Trump.

This IS NOT what we think of as general working class access to healthcare, so this IS NOT a move to single payer. The indigent care has always been single payer, paid for by the government. Trump has stated he wants to get stakeholders together to see if there is a way to reduce the costs of indigent care provision. That is also the opposite of what the Left did setting up Obamacare. They actually avoided including some stakeholders in the process of developing Obamacare.

Working class access was not headed to single payer until Obamacare, and then it moved in that direction because the Left wanted that.

Trump is not pushing for single payer. If someone tells you he is, that person is either one of the dumbest people in our nation, or a flat out liar.

[mmichaels1970]

But for the most it's going to be a private plan and people are going to be able to go out and negotiate great plans with lots of different competition with lots of competitors with great companies and they can have their doctors, they can have plans, they can have everything."

Wait a minute...How is that "single payer"? I see a sort of safety net in this article but if "most" are going into private plans with lots of competitors, how is that single payer? We always argued for increased competition across state lines. All he seems to be missing is Tort reform.

I always understood single payer as a single government provided plan for all citizens. I really don't see anything about that here.

[dynoman]

“Giving the Fed’s total control is NOT a fix...”

As if they don’t already have it...

[Cringing Negativism Network]

Likewise right back to you.

I don’t think I am misinterpreting Trump. Then again, I support him for the office of President.

You seem to think I am misinterpreting Trump. You do not support him for the office of President, because you are supporting someone else.

So this could be a question of who is correctly interpreting what Trump is saying.

Or perhaps this is just an issue, with which you can support someone else, without actually getting them involved in the question at all.

One of those two.

I know what I think, is happening here.

[American Constitutionalist]

Well in that case all the dirt that the TRUMP supporters try to dig up on Ted Cruz or the constant BS recycling of the propaganda about his vote on the trade deal, the Iran deal is well over 3 months old so it is “ old news “ I.E. Boring

What is good for the goose is good for the gander.