House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.) on Friday endorsed efforts to lower the Medicare eligibility age and expand the program, as Democrats try to navigate internal tensions around a progressive push for “Medicare for All.”
During a conference in Denver about the future of the Democratic Party, Jeffries outlined the healthcare legislative priorities Democrats plan to tackle once he takes over as House Speaker in January.
Jeffries said the party must first undo Republican cuts to Medicaid funding and restore the Affordable Care Act’s temporary enhanced premium tax credits that Democrats provided during the COVID-19 pandemic.
While he stopped short of endorsing Medicare for All, Jeffries said Democrats need to go further than merely restoring what Republicans took.
Sure pal and magically a few democrats miss the vote due to an AIPAC celebration.
This is Hakeem Jeffries telling us who he represents.
This is actually a pretty big deal, but not for the reasons it seems.
These are concessions - modern concessions - to the opposition (progressives). While there is no meaningful challenge to him currently, it means he views that as a real possibility. Making early concessions like this can undercut a would-be challenger before it begins.
IOW, our voices are being heard, and he is responding, at least a little bit.
FUCK JEFFRIES!
Dropping to 50 is dumb, and more likely to fail than the full thing and stop any notion of further adoption of M4A.
Which is why the private insurance backed conservative Democrats in the caucus are pushing for it.
If it’s not outright self-sabotage, then it’s typical timidity of the spineless subset of Dems, unwilling to aim high when given a sweeping mandate.
Dropping to 50 is dumb
I’m not so sure of that. I’m a full advocate for M4A and I agree lowering the Medicare eligibility age to 50 won’t do that. However, it may do something else.
There are a significant number of 50-64 year old Americans that are still in the workfore because of the cost of healthcare at these ages is so high and they aren’t eligible for Medicare yet. While many in this group are lower income, a sizable chunk are also middle and upper income. This last group are in well compensated jobs that they may not actually need, but they stick around for employer subsidized healthcare (because ACA subsidies have a much smaller income ceiling/cliff).
If this group of Americans could suddenly quit and still have affordable healthcare, that would open up lots of high paying jobs for the younger generation to advance into. So while this “Medicare for 50+” won’t solve the M4A need, it might seriously increase the income of Americans under 50 years old that need it the most.
I started to write the pros and cons of going down that path, but honestly, I think we can skirt getting in the weeds since we both agree M4A is the way to go and ask why are we compromising at all?
I mean seriously. M4A is already very popular and will only become more so if these new Democrats take this mandate and sell it from their newfound podiums. This is not the time to compromise; this is the strongest Democrats have been in decades and will likely be stronger in 2028. We as advocates especially must continue to purify the party and continue holding accountable our own representatives while continuing to persuade those uninformed on M4A.
People are tired of unfairness, and these incremental steps excluding vast swaths of the working class will only piss people off who are excluded. Plus widening the pool to healthier age groups will actually bring down average cost.
we both agree M4A is the way to go and ask why are we compromising at all?
The question is, will M4A pass? If it won’t then an incremental improvement is better than nothing. We could have had Carbon Cap-and-Trade decades ago, but we went for the full thing, got nothing and already have climate change.
Also again, while we’re discussing this as addressing healthcare, this move may be a move not to directly affect healthcare costs, but rather affordability for all Americans. If “M450+” becomes law, how many of the highest paying jobs will suddenly open up allowing every rung underneath to move up and increase their pay which directly addresses affordability of everything and not just healthcare?
“Enjoy your breadcrumbs peasants”
- Jeffries /probably
Lower it down to conception.
“See guys I’m a progressive! I umm want to lower Medicare age to 50, so we can take care of you young folks.”
The Speaker picks committee spots/leadership and decides what comes to a vote.
Both are too important to trust Jeffries with
Pathetic
“Medicare for All now!” yelled one.
“Why should we trust you?” one shouted, while another called Jeffries a “traitor.”
But unlike his Senate counterpart, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Jeffries faces no serious competition in his bid to be elected House Speaker.
“Remember y’all, I grew up in Brooklyn,” he said with a smile.
What a piece of shit.
Why is Ayanna Pressley not considered “serious” competition?
Never forget: This fuckwit Sinema/Adams/Fetterman-like grifter had a private meeting with Kushner, too.
Is the Brooklyn line some kind of threat? Or I guess he’s just saying he’s tough and isn’t bothered.
I think it’s more a “I’m a man of the people / I’m not an elite ” thing. But he’s full of shit.
He should have added “I grew up in Brooklyn in the 70s and 80s, before it was all gentrified and shit”…
Hes trying to act like a tough guy.
Brooklyn ain’t shit, Boogie Down forever.
Fuck Hakim Jefferies, corporate captured piece of shit.
Better; he’s admitting he’s intimidated
If they don’t fund it by raising taxes on the siper-wealthy, it’s moot.
Can we move to phase 2, make his life a living hell
