The "Better Deal" Platform

Democrats like Chuck Schumer say they're serious about putting the interests of working people first.

They say their new Better Deal Agenda puts the interests of working Americans first.

But are they doing enough to help out America's labor unions?

Why doesn't the new Better Deal Agenda say anything about helping the labor movement?

With income inequality in the United States now at the highest levels in the developed world, Democrats think they have a plan to make our work economy for working people again - as it did from the FDR days to the Reagan Revolution.

They're calling it "A Better Deal" and it includes some legitimately good stuff - like, for example, a plan to break up big monopolies that are putting downward pressure on wages and small business alike.

But does the Democrats' new plan go far enough to fix an economy that is still fundamentally the same economy that crashed back in 2008?


stephensolomita's picture
stephensolomita 50 weeks 6 days ago

The Employee Free Choice Act was first introduced by Democrats in 2007, then again in 2009. Without going into the details (easy to find online), the legislation would have given workers the tools they need to fight for themselves. In 2007, the EFCA was blocked by a Republican filibuster. In 2009, the Dems had 60 seats in the Senate. This time the bill was defeated by four rogue Democrats, including the odious Ben Nelson and, surprisingly, Dianne Finestein. As far as I can tell, Obama didn't spend a dimes worth of political capital on its passage.

deepspace's picture
deepspace 50 weeks 6 days ago

Good-paying jobs, healthcare, education, and extracting ourselves from the endless, hopeless, and ridiculously expensive wars in the Middle East over religion and oil, are by far the major concerns of most citizens. Since their taxes pay for everything, why do the dominate policies of our government work against the many to benefit the few?

Quit subsidizing money-grubbing transnational monopolies that off-shore jobs; quit fighting stupid wars of religion and profit; redirect our taxes to pay for our healthcare and college. Why does the Democratic Party struggle with the obvious way forward?

"Better Deal Agenda"?! isn't that rather spiritless? Since new generations of voters understand almost nothing about the original New Deal, shouldn't that be explained first? Moreover, instead of mincing words and appearing too clever by half, why not just come out in direct solidarity with FDR and explain in plain language why exactly the New Deal was wildly popular. Proudly embody the principles of FDR and fully embrace the revolution of our Founders -- standing up for what's right won the day before, and it will do so again and again despite fierce opposition from the forces of fascism.

Oldskoold's picture
Oldskoold 50 weeks 6 days ago

You are correct DS. However, the misinformation and gradual "dumbing down" (attack on education) has taken it's toll and we have lost at least one if not two generations to the noise of such. I'm beginning to wonder if it's not too late. However; you look at the polls and our progressive ideas and its a whopping 60% or more with us depending on the issue.

What a mess! And; bless their hearts because the roof is gonna fall soon.....

Scotty11 50 weeks 6 days ago

Doesn't resonate with me...and I'm about as Progressive as they come. Put another way, if the platform doesn't excite someone like myself, it's not going to be effective. I'm still voting 'Bernie' in 2020.

Zuckerman's picture
Zuckerman 50 weeks 6 days ago

There is no meat on the bare bones of the "better deal." Even the name of this new proposal shows how insipid and weak it is. Do you really think you can counter aprogram with a slogan like "Make America Great again" with a slogen like "a better deal?" Couldn't they hire someone to come up with something better?

On second thought, the name really fits the proposal. It is mostly a rehash of old Hillary Clinton proposals. Better Deal. Better Together. Same thing It is not specific enough to be meaningful. It is designed to be inoffensive and not challenging. If this is the best the Democrats can come up with, they deserve to be ridiculed, not elected to any office.

This is the kind of lowest common denominator innoffensive crap that has made the establishment Democratic Party the low energy loser that it is.

This is the party that stopped being the party of the working man or the friend of labor unions in the early 1970's. They are the party of jamie Dimon: Not of the working poor and middle class.

deepspace's picture
deepspace 50 weeks 6 days ago


In many ways, it is too late. But it is never too late to keep fighting for what's right, even if it seems like only a rearguard action. Maybe after the roof falls on everyone, everyone will remember the history. Great calamities like the Republican Great Depression tend to focus the mind, especially when you can't feed your family.

mdarrenu's picture
mdarrenu 50 weeks 5 days ago


Democratic leadership still doesn't get it and they are woefully inept. They should have had Bernie Sanders or Al Franken and two younger members announce any new initiative.

One item I would like to convey to you and your audience is the following: I think the Democrats need to drop their strong gun-control (anti-gun) stance since it is only lost them voters over the last few decades without really changing policy. Especially in light of the Trump/Conservative/Putin/Koch party - since the public might need firearms to overtake the government. But seriously:

1) Gun control laws are mainly a historical by-product of racist laws

2) All the bluster has not really made much of a change in terms of outcomes. Guns deaths have gone down . The only real issue is suicides and these mass shootings - which are a phenomena that is hard to stop through legislation.

3) Crime/suicide would go down more if society was more equal through pro-worker policies - which they can't do because they lose too many voters from their gun control stance. Probably fewer shootings.

4) The NRA nuts don't shoot up anyone - they are just nuts - so again, the dem/libs establishment wastes too much time on them.

Having Bernie (and even Al and some other libs) to come out and be pro-gun could actually be believable.

Ou812's picture
Ou812 50 weeks 5 days ago

I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would think a monopoly is a good thing. Yet most who write here want a monopolistic health care system. Single Payer is a monopoly folks. Competition is the key in health care, phone service, electricity and everything. The more completion, the better the quality, price and service.

stecoop01's picture
stecoop01 50 weeks 5 days ago

IMHO, here is a list of things this country needs to do (but probably never will):

1. Limit the size of corporations, based either on the number of employees, or the number of smaller businesses encompassed by the parent company (or both).

2. Limit the profits of corporations; for example, a corporations gross profits must not exceed it's net profits by more than, say, 10%. If it does, the excess must be turned over to the government (security nets) or charities.

3. Reduce the income tax on hourly wages and salaries; raise the income tax on dividend and interest income. (And there's a lot more that needs to be done with taxes, too much to mention here).

4. Take the responsibility of income tax collection out of the hands of employers, and put it in the hands of the tax payer; and make it a monthly system instead of annual. You pay your rent/mortgage/car loan/utilities monthly, why not your taxes?

5. Close all the tax loopholes for out-of-country investments and bank accounts.

6. Change the salaries of all of our Representatives and Senators to be the AVERAGE of those who could have voted for them. If they want a raise, than they need to do something to raise the incomes of their constituents.

7. Pass an amendment guaranteeing the right to vote to every American citizen, 18 or more years of age, not currently in prison.

8. Eliminate campaigning altogether; candidates for a public office would submit a resume and 'platform' to a NON-PARTISAN Candidate Validation Committee; they would verify the candidates qualifications and, optionally, mental fitness, for the office. Then, one month before the election, they would publish the results of their investigations for all the candidates. Voters would then make their voting decisions from that publication.

9. Switch to machine marked PAPER ballots with a voter verification system; the voter would be given a TWO-part ballot. Each part would have the same unique machine-readable number on it; the voter inserts the ballot in to the voting machine, makes his/her selections and presses a button; the machine marks both parts of the ballot identically. The voter then keeps one part, folds the other part and puts it in the ballot box. The ballots would than be machine read and a list of ballot numbers would be published. This would allow each voter to verify that their ballot was counted and read correctly. If a voter sees an error, they have the OPTION to remain silent, or to speak up and, possibly, reveal who they voted for (there may be away for a voter to anonymously complain about a ballot counting error).

10. And so much more that I have thought of over the last few years, but just can't remember right now.'s picture
randolphgarriso... 50 weeks 5 days ago

I am afraid the Democratic party is not the way to go anymore. It is corrupt as the Republican Party. We need Bernie and Tulsi to take the Green Party and remold it to the peoples party or a full blown armed revolution will be required.

ikeberltersen's picture
ikeberltersen 50 weeks 5 days ago

The "Better Deal' is a branding exercise, not a declaration of principles. It has all the vapidness of the names we give our military ventures (Operation 'Enduring Freedom'). It's another attempt to rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic and declare, in Clinton's words, that "we are already great." I'm sure they made a swell Power Point Presentation with lots of spiffy graphics to show everyone how great it will be. Color me underwhelmed.

Outback 50 weeks 5 days ago

First off, cudos to you, Thom, for FINALLY calling into question the tepid counterpoise to the far right agenda today's watered down, milque toast Democratic Party has become. Schumer and the rest are a far cry from the fire in the belly of FDR. Ironically, Olympia Snow's (R-ME) stand against the draconian health care bills being offered up by her own party make the feeble bleatings of the Democrats look pathetic. We truly need a third party capable of taking a Sanders-like stand.

But to OU812's comment, I'd have to ask why you would think that "competition" is the answer? Competition for what? For a market that offers good health care to the highest bidder? Why do health care conglomerates that guage their performance on profit (not patient outcomes) "trump" a system like Medicare that, for decades, has demonstrated its ability to deliver great service to the most infirm segment of the population at near zero overhead? You are obviously hooked on Fox weed. Engage your brain. Stop offering up this Reaganesque bilge.

changeX's picture
changeX 50 weeks 5 days ago

And why aren't Canadian pharmaceuticals being imported again #8? Where is all this competition?

Just think of how competitive labor willl be once there is a guaranteed minimum income along with Medicare for all. Why the competition in the labor market is going to be wonderful for everyone. If company A offers worse benefits than company B and there are four other job offers to choose from for each person, we are going to be a strong vibrant economic power house of a country again.

Presently, the only competition is to see who can sing and dance the best, how fast things can be outsourced, and which billionaire will become the first trillionaire. We can all see that Reaganomics and the Contract with America has lead us to Oligarchy Road.

Ou812's picture
Ou812 50 weeks 5 days ago


Medicare is not a single payer program there are many supplemental programs that "supplement" the government Medicare. Don't you realize that if one entity controls health care, that entity makes the rules decides who gets what, and when they get it. Medicare could not exist without the supplemental programs. And please stop with the attacks on me. If you can't defend your ideas without attacking me, your ideas are weak.

darts89119's picture
darts89119 50 weeks 5 days ago

Absolutely wrong. Single payer does NOT monopolize anything. There will still be doctors and hospitals. People who want more xould opt for a private supplement if they want more. But at least our healthcare would not be hostage to an horrible employer plan. Others could choose to start a small business because you wouldnt need to work for the man to get healthcare that sucks. Its the same plan millions use in military VA medicare right now but just expanded to all citizens. Also no grotesque CEO pay. And the government administrators will be accountable to the people.

2950-10K's picture
2950-10K 50 weeks 5 days ago

Good point about the missing labor union support. Bernie's Workplace Democracy Act would be a great place for the Dems to start. Raise the cap and Medicare for all need to be trumpeted as well.

The Dems can't win without union support which is why the Fascists since Reagan's reign of terror on labor have done everything possible to destroy them.

Does any worker deserve complete control by an avaristic out of control rich person with no option other than quitting ones job? Unions exist because humans tend to be inhumane.

deepspace's picture
deepspace 50 weeks 5 days ago

Re: #14

For the life of all, those who trifle over words and miss the point. What you call something is less important than what it does. Under private insurance monopolies, tens of millions won't have insurance, and tens of thousands will die as a consequence of this profit-taking. Under a publicly owned, oriented, accountable, and much cheaper, single-payer system -- a public insurance program only, not a private healthcare service -- those same millions would live and prosper a helluva lot longer! Libertarian free-market dogma doesn't work for common folks and never has, especially for their healthcare. We pay the most and suffer the most of any modern country from curable diseases and preventable deaths. Not all words are equal.

martyh53147's picture
martyh53147 50 weeks 5 days ago

Thom, my hat is off to you and your radio show. I hesitate to comment because I don't pretend to be knowledgeable enough to be relevent.

I think the democratic party is still not up to taking on the challenge. Hillary, although better than Trump, was still part of the establishment. Way too embedded. Bernie was a better answer, and the Democratic party crippled him. Personally I think he could have beaten Trump if the Democratic party wouldn't have acted for Hillary. Makes me wonder exactly what the Democratic party is trying to achieve. Their brand of the same-old-same-old. I think it's time for a third party. The Democrats have had a great opportunity to take some control, and due to their own ineptitude and issues of their own, they are wasting a golden opportunity. The populace can see the idiocy of the current regime, but where is the voice of rebellion? I don't hear it? The rebublicans have made total idiots of themselves, where are the progressives pointing out the con job and offering an alternative? I'm not hearing it. We need to be louder and clearer than Trumps idiot tweets. It should be easy, given that his spoutings are factual garbage.

The progressives need a figurehead, loud and in front, pointing out the stupidity of the Trump Regime. I'm all for Bernie, but lets face it, although a gifted leader, he's a little old for taking on the task for the next election.

2950-10K's picture
2950-10K 50 weeks 5 days ago

Supplemental Medicare Programs? You mean like big pharma's, Medicare Part D donut hole Bachmann? You really crack me up!

Healthcare, education, and energy, are all sectors that need to be not for profit and under the control of "We the People". Unchecked extreme concentration of wealth has made this necessary.

changeX's picture
changeX 50 weeks 5 days ago

The "Better Deal" Platform

Did Scaramucci give this to the Dems as a gift and they took it? Is it a waffle house sales campaign? This is like three week old icing on the "Stronger Together" cake.

This implies the GOP has some kind of "deal" offered to the Dear Reader. If there was some kind of deal I would like to know what it is. Most would immediately reject the usage of the word "deal" and replace it with "shaft" resembling a middle finger. So now we can all imagine what a "better deal" might consist of.

Regarding healthcare and a lot of other things people do not want a DEAL, they want better quality and better performance, usually coming with a cost. Right now we are paying more than any other country - for less healthcare. Health care insurers would be forced to provide a better health insurance product with the added competition of Medicare for all who wants it.

A new deal would be more appropriate for those who put their wealth offshore to avoid paying taxes! Pay your taxes or don't let the door hit you on your way out.

wmleidy's picture
wmleidy 50 weeks 5 days ago

the spigot that created income inequality when it was turned on by ronald reagan is the same spigot that must be turned off to reverse the process. it is the tax code, which now reflects nearly forty years of effort by the republicans to cut taxes for the rich.

Outback 50 weeks 5 days ago

OU812: I am certainly not intending to attack you personally. Rather, your way of thinking, and that of the legions of befuddled like minded "conservatives" that continue to stumble down the trenches created for you by those with everything to gain. To address your specific comment about the "Advantage" programs; the supplemental riders on Social Security created (recently) to entice Medicare recipients to "get a little bit more" out of Medicare. This vampire program is bleeding Medicare dry. Insurance companies were permitted to sink their fangs into Medicare and are being subsidized by Medicare in the process. Another example of this is the Bush era Part D drug plan. If you were paying attention, a Medicare recipient was given the option of signing up or paying a heavy penalty down stream for not having done so. Kind of like, "gee, it would be a shame if you didn't take on the premium now, and then a brick came through that nice plate glass window of your butcher shop". So these "supplemental programs" you tout as examples of free market superiority are just graft, wrapped in twisted logic.

DHBranski's picture
DHBranski 50 weeks 5 days ago

The "Better Deal" is like "Trumpcare." It is intended to replace the New Deal with a solidly neoliberal/Clinton plan. Yes, Democrats are fine with "the working class." The day you lose your job, however, Democrats spit in your face, and strip you of your most basic human rights.

Bit of relevant history: What came to be called "AFDC" was actually first included in FDR's Social Security Act, later separated to focus on the needs of families in poverty. The Clinton Dems wiped that out, and had enough time to begin similarly "reform" Social Security, targeting the disabled. By 2000, the disabled became the fastest-growing group of homeless people. So, the solution was to utilize police to grow more brutal to the homeless. Since the 1990s, the overall life expectancy of the US poor has already fallen below that of every developed nation.

DHBranski's picture
DHBranski 50 weeks 5 days ago

Related, a lot of people don't know that the elderly poor and the disabled rely on dual benefits, Medicare/Medicaid. Medicaid covers the Medicare copay, prescriptions, etc. It also helps with rent subsidies for assisted living apartments for the elderly and the disabled. Democrats appear to be fine with ending Medicaid.

stopgap's picture
stopgap 50 weeks 5 days ago

It should be called "The Throw Hillary Under The Bus Plan." If they spent more time on taking money out of politics, accountability and transparency, then most of this other stuff would take care of itself.

But no matter how bad we might think Democrats are? When it comes to mastering the finer points of deceit and all out corruption, they are mere babes in the woods compared to their Republican counterparts. Let Emperor Trump be exhibit A.

But I guess the Republicans are being transparent. They don't seem to care how obvious or outlandish or insane, corrupt or cruel their lies might seem to rational people, as long as their rabid base is willing to stand behind them and they have the reins of power. In fact, as long they have the reins of power, they don't even care if their base believes them or not! Where else are they gonna go and how could they ever admit to being such saps? Plus, its not in their DNA anyway.

changeX's picture
changeX 50 weeks 5 days ago

The "Better Deal" Platform?
Some of the other runner up Platform titles may have been:

New and Improved
Try It! You’ll Like It!
Best value
Free trial (oh my)
Results overnight
Offer ends soon
First time offered
Act now
Not sold in stores
Buy one, get one free
No questions asked
Once in a lifetime
Final days to save
Everything included
Cancel anytime
Ancient Chinese Secret
Where’s The Beef?

Ronin's picture
Ronin 50 weeks 5 days ago

Every thing that comes from politicians is little more than "marketing collateral" to sell themselves. As I life long Democrat I am only partially sympathetic to the Democrat who touts a "new" agenda that is supposed to enrich the lives of the many.. which is we, the disrespected majority clinging to a flase beleif that we all matter.. Unless and until America "repeals and replaces" our "civil religion" that is imbedded with self-emolument programs for our elected officials which are dedicated to serving only their needs, then we are helpless to assert that the needs of the many supercede the needs of the few that actually run America... and thus ruin what we call a "democracy." Perhaps Trump's election is indeed an omen signalling this is indeed how the world ends, not with a bang but a whimper... from the Whitehouse laments to the whines of an ineffective elected Democratic official... all elected officials are dedicated to staying in office, American society has to change from a collection of "tribal loyalties" to a unified people... which will not happen as long as we continue to assert that the "self" is the key to prosperity. All organizations are run for the benefit of those that run them.. from the US Government to the local PTA. America sucks as culture. I am native born and a US Army veteran... I wish I had emigrated to a more civilized nation when I was still young enough to take the journey... to be part of a society that says we all matter.

Far East LA 50 weeks 5 days ago

I sure Hope Chuck and Nancy didn't spend much Time on this - it certainly doesn't look like they did.

No wonder the Dems have lost Bigly (oh, how it pains me to use that, but ...) 63 seats in the Census year of 2010 gaining only 8 back in Obama's Big Win year of 2012, then losing 16 (net 13) in 2014, and gaining only 6 back in 2016 with the Hillary/Bernie surge. PITIFUL!

Much of this 'bad Fortune' pivoted on the National Dems forgetting there was an Election in Nov 2010 until late September of that year ... and, then only after Daily Kos, Alan Grayson and a few others started shouting from the nation's belfries.

At a time in our Society that sees the Younger generations (and the still Hippie Boomers) flocking to Progressive ideas and away from the "repugliecons", how is it possible for the Dems to be so out of step??

The one good thing to come out of the Communists boosting Trump is DWS is gone from DNC. Now, may be for good.

2018 or 2020 may see an En Marche! blow both the Dems, and the equally out of touch Rs out of DC and the States? One can only Hope for Change ....

jibaro01's picture
jibaro01 50 weeks 5 days ago

I don't know, maybe I'm being fooloish but, as I remember it, labor movements did not develop and grow because politicians favored it. They grew because people cared about their future and the unions gave them hope. Today, people don't see labor unions in the same light. Those labor unions don't defend the rights of the people they are supposed to defend and are le by high payed professionals that get their money from the salaries of those they represent.

Joinning a labor union is like joinning a political party. You join then because there is no alternative and there's no guarantee that you are going to get anything from them.

By the way, Thom, MSN closed their site to comments. It's been like that for close to two weeks. A site like that doesn't close that area of their site because they want to improve it, as they claim. They do so because they don't like the comments they are getting and because those comments are being accepted and repeated by other people. If people start agreing with each othe, that is dangerous to the powers that be. Yet, I don't hear anything about this. I would think that for someone who is working to improve life in the USA, that is fighting for the right's of the people, it would be important for the people to be able to communicate their ideas and to reach agreements that might influence political life and bring positive change.

So, I'm mentioning this again here. Of course, I realize that what I see in the Inernet might be caused by a computer virus designed to block my comments but the same is happenning with my wife's tablet when she enters to her account. So, i'm not the only person afected by this.

jibaro01's picture
jibaro01 50 weeks 5 days ago

(This is a reply to Far East LA comment. Aparently it will not show as such.)

This is happening because there is very little diference between Democrats and Republicans. The politicians in both parties require the money from big industry to run their campaigns, so, both sides are owned by the same people.

You want to see some positive change? The only way to achieve that is to end Citizens United and to make changes to the Constitution to make it clear that where politics are concerned private companies are not people and can't intervene. Something is needed to separate private enterprises from politics like it was done with the religious movements.

Ou812's picture
Ou812 50 weeks 5 days ago

If Medicare for all is so great, why do Bernie Sanders, Al Gore, and others promoting it NOT have it?

2950-10K: Good point. Medicare Part D is what happens when there is monopolistic health care insurance. What's wrong with having a choice?

changeX's picture
changeX 50 weeks 5 days ago

Ou812 finally comes out and says Medicare for All is great, even though she couldn't answer my question in #13.

ErinRose's picture
ErinRose 50 weeks 5 days ago

A better question is: Can we trust the Demorats to serve two masters, or is this more talk the talk? Just look at all the lobbyists and GoldmanSachs people whom they keep filling their ranks with. Do we really believe the leopard can change his spots? Hosw many more times must the true liberal Democrats be sucker punched before they wake up and refuse to play this game any more? The Democratic Party is DOA it's so corrupt. We need a Third Party with candidates who will sign contracts to not accept corporate donations, not become lobbyists, or do any of the things Democrats have been doing to sell out this country. The time is now to take off the velvet gloves and get down to business.

Robert_sa's picture
Robert_sa 50 weeks 5 days ago

A good argument could be made that Democrats during the FDR Administrations of the 1930s and 40s passed legislation that created the American middle class.

Strong labor union protections, a federal minimum wage, social security, banking regulations and other consumer protections and government jobs programs like the CCC and the WPA (the latter proving that the government can and DOES create jobs), set up an economic recovery and growth that was unprecedented in our history and remains the greatest example of the soundness and success of Keynesian economic theory.

(But why hold on to something that works, right?) Generally, those principles were accepted and applied by our government until the Reagan era, when a former actor and McCarthyite convinced learned men and the American people that Keynesian economics was a failure (the process which had been working for almost 50 years), and that government welfare should be directed to those at the top of the economic ladder than to those at the bottom.

Since the Reagan era, Republicans have fought successful to funnel American wealth and income away from the middle-class and toward the very wealthy. The sad and frankly, infuriating thing about that is that for the past 20-odd years, Democrats have joined them!

"A Better Deal" smacks of Obama era deference to Wall Street and the billionaire class. "30 million Americans still remain without health insurance, but Medicare for all (single-payer) is too hard, Pie-In-The-Sky; so we'll try to cut that number down to about 20 million uninsured. How's that?"

The truth is, the reason it's "too hard" for our Democrats to stand up for Democratic ideals is that they fear the wrath of their corporate masters and wealthy donors. "Nope! Trickle-down works, it just needs tweaking. Trust us."

The only way for the Democratic Party and the American middle-class to survive and thrive is to return to Keynesian values. Protecting individuals against corporate economic pillaging and understanding that when to bottom is self-sufficient, and the middle thrives, Demand skyrockets and the entire nation fares better overall.

If only there was a modern politician who championed the values of Democrats of the 1930s and 40s... Wait a minute.. That is exactly what Bernie Sanders has been doing for 40 years. And as it turns out, he is now, by a wide margin, the most popular politican and Senator in the USA.

So he was here, he was ready to lead, what happened? What happened is that establishment, corporate owned Democrats sought to crush him and indeed, today, 9 months after the general election, their money and machinery is on an all-out blitz to crush, not only Sanders, but his followers, those who hold to actual Democratic values (now called leftists, progressives, bros, etc).

"A Better Deal?" We need to say, "Thanks, but no thanks," and ramp up the fight to restore true Democratic values and Democracy to our governement and our people.

Legend 50 weeks 5 days ago

In post 32 why do you say that Bernie and Al Gore do not have medicare? If you are 65 or older any insurance company is going to tell you to sign up or drop you. They will cover supplemental for you. There is also a penalty for not signing up.

I have my questions about Medicare and how great it is. I pay $121 per month for a plan that covers 80% of a procedure. But the procedure costs 5 times more than it would in another country. So I would be paying 100%. Supplemental plans cost $200 to $300 per month. Will increase as I age. Anyone from another industrialized country would consider this to be very expensive and they have better quality healthcare.

Ou812's picture
Ou812 50 weeks 5 days ago

I'm over 65 and do not have medicare because I'm covered under a health care plan. There is not penalty, I checked. All Retired Federal elected officials are covered by the Federal employees health plan a non government health care plan. Federal elected much purchase there health insurance under the Federal employees health plan.

changeX's picture
changeX 50 weeks 5 days ago

Legend you mean in post #31. In post #32 I was pointing out that the bleep bleppeity bleep bleep actually wrote ...Medicare for all is so great. Reading closer it is being asked If Medicare for all is so great then... goes on to criticize.

Some people try to derail progress and sabotage. Medicare for All could have been implemented in the 1960's. After almost six decades of healthcare moaning and complaining nonsense they still have no idea what they are doing.

ellenperry's picture
ellenperry 48 weeks 5 days ago

I actually think the "Better Deal" is a terrible slogan. Not only does it imply we are all just working stiffs with no real power it also ignores the millions of us who are independent business people or working in the "gig" economy. I am no longer donating to DNCC. I am only supporting smart candidates who promote Green Energy, Healthcare for all, Pro-Choice, and Social Justice. I think we really need a Green New Deal. Thanks Thom.

Democrats Should Steal Trump's Thunder on Trade

It's time to run bigger, better and harder on trade policies.

Latest Headlines

Who rejected United States-North Korea peace talks?

There were conflicting reports on Sunday regarding a recent proposal for United States-North Korea peace talks which was allegedly made before North Korea"s recent nuclear test

U.K. Pound Falls As Markets Get Brexit Jitters

Bloomberg said on Monday the pound had sustained its biggest fall against the dollar in 11 months

Clinton: I'll defend Israel but push for 'two-state solution

Hillary Clinton believes both Republican candidates Donald Trump and Ted Cruz "missed the mark" with their approach to the Israel-Palestinian Arab conflict
From Unequal Protection, 2nd Edition:
"If you wonder why and when giant corporations got the power to reign supreme over us, here’s the story."
Jim Hightower, national radio commentator and author of Swim Against the Current
From Screwed:
"Thom Hartmann’s book explains in simple language and with concrete research the details of the Neo-con’s war against the American middle class. It proves what many have intuited and serves to remind us that without a healthy, employed, and vital middle class, America is no more than the richest Third World country on the planet."
Peter Coyote, Actor and author of Sleeping Where I Fall
From Unequal Protection, 2nd Edition:
"Beneath the success and rise of American enterprise is an untold history that is antithetical to every value Americans hold dear. This is a seminal work, a godsend really, a clear message to every citizen about the need to reform our country, laws, and companies."
Paul Hawken, coauthor of Natural Capitalism and author of The Ecology of Commerce