U.S. 2018 mid-term elections thread

[Trev]

I do agree that economic safety nets need to be in place, however I think there is room for change and improvement with Medicare. Specifically the reimbursement of doctors, and wait periods doctors have to go through to get their money. One of the main and valid criticisms of Medicare for all, is that it will cause many doctors to not accept Medicare at all and lead to a system of many doctors only accepting out of pocket payments, because of how poorly the government runs the system currently.

https://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20180130/NEWS/180139995

As with all systems, I fully believe it can be reformed. But the impression I'm getting is that the Repubs just want to gut it entirely because of "fraud," which I just straight up cannot support because 1.) welfare fraud really isn't as big of an issue as many make it out to be, and 2.) the bad actions of some people abusing the system shouldn't, to me, outweigh the boundless good that the system does for people who are really struggling in poverty.

 

[EnglishALT]

As with all systems, I fully believe it can be reformed. But the impression I'm getting is that the Repubs just want to gut it entirely because of "fraud," which I just straight up cannot support because 1.) welfare fraud really isn't as big of an issue as many make it out to be, and 2.) the bad actions of some people abusing the system shouldn't, to me, outweigh the boundless good that the system does for people who are really struggling in poverty.

I can understand taking in some checks that could deal with fraud, possibly reigning in what foodstamps can and cannot be used for, implementing some sort of work requirements, etc etc. Welfare reform, and working to get people off of welfare instead of prolonged use, used to be a bipartisan issue. Bill Clinton's campaign in 1992 had a central promise of welfare reform. It's a shame the Democrats seem to have abandoned even trying to find ways to continue to change welfare so that it is only a temporary safety net.

 

[Trev]

I can understand taking in some checks that could deal with fraud, possibly reigning in what foodstamps can and cannot be used for, implementing some sort of work requirements, etc etc. Welfare reform, and working to get people off of welfare instead of prolonged use, used to be a bipartisan issue. Bill Clinton's campaign in 1992 had a central promise of welfare reform. It's a shame the Democrats seem to have abandoned even trying to find ways to continue to change welfare so that it is only a temporary safety net.

Well, a lot of those checks already exist, so... yeah. Yes, the Dems aren't exactly pushing reform, but I mean... they kind of got put on the defensive. They pretty much have to argue from the perspective of "please do not nuke welfare, our citizens need it" given that Repubs are taking drastic measures to cut welfare spending all-around instead of coming up with ideas to fix it. Getting people off welfare is a bipartisan issue - I have yet to meet any non-politician Republicans or Democrats who disagree on that facet - but it seems the methodology is the main issue, not the result (as it usually is with most economic issues).

We should probably table this discussion as it is migrating towards a healthcare/welfare perspective.