Sanders gas prospect of debate with Trump

( CNN) Bernie Sanders is helping stoked talk of a debate between him and Donald Trump, telling ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel on Thursday night that the network had contacted the Vermont senator about a matchup between himself and the presumptive GOP nominee.

Kimmel opened up the discussion when he asked Sanders if he had insured Wednesday’s indicate, when the host told Trump he had a question from Sanders’ campaign, asking if Trump would be willing to debate the Democratic hopeful.


Sanders rejects notion he is damaging Clinton against Trump

The Resistance Now: marchers across US to demand Trump’s tax returns

Tens of thousands of people expected to take part in marchings Saturday; Democrat attempt to flip a House seat; Sanders launches his own talk show


It may be the biggest national demo since the womens marches in January.

Tens of thousands of people from across the country are expected to take part in a mass procession on Saturday, to demand that Donald Trump release his tax returns and raise awareness about economic justice.

Since tax wonks rarely get their own mass protests, expect some creative signs. One proposed motto circulating on Facebook: Grab them by the net operating loss carry function .

The march was triggered by a single tweet by the law professor Julie Taub, after she watched a video of Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway declaring that Trump was not going to release his tax returns and that voters didnt care.

That annoyed me … people do care, said Taub, whose research focuses on corruption and the links between politics and money.

Buoyed by the huge turnout at the womens march, she posted on Twitter.

Jennifer Taub (@ jentaub)

Let’s plan a nationwide #DivestDonald and #showusyourtaxes protest for Saturday, April 15 https :// Wo9DY9eEGP

January 22, 2017

Her idea ran viral and became Tax March .

Now, more than 130 demoes are schemed on Saturday, including events in New Zealand in Tokyo. The largest will be in Washington DC, where 50, 000 people have expressed interest in attending.

No return policy. Photograph: Nicholas Kamm/ AFP/ Getty Images

Can Dems flip a house seat to blue?

Democrat Jon Ossoff is polling well ahead of a special election in Georgias sixth congressional district on Tuesday. The 30 -year-old has raised $8.3 m much of it in gifts from out of state as he tries to win the seat vacated by Tom Price, who left to become Donald Trumps secretary of health and human services.

Ossoff is no Sanders-esque progressive theres no mention of single-payer healthcare on his website, or of free university education but a victory could be encouraging for liberals ahead of the 2018 midterm elections.

Jon Ossoff. Photo: Erik S Lesser/ EPA

Bernie Sanders: the activists Oprah

Bernie Sanders has launched a new Facebook Live reveal specifically, The Bernie Sanders Show which is already attracting millions of viewers.

Early episodes have find Sanders interview Bill Nye and the documentary film-maker Josh Fox, and the Vermont senator plans to take the depict on the road in the future.

Josh Miller-Lewis, a Sanders staffer, told the Guardian that Sanders get ideas for his interviews from reading advocates commentaries on his Facebook page.

Hes listening. Photograph: Joe Raedle/ Getty Images

Trumps Tower targeted over traveling ban

Twenty-five people were arrested at Trump Tower on Thursday after infiltrating the foyer in a protest against Trumps immigration policies.

The protesters, from Rise and Resist NYC, sat in front of the buildings elevators holding signs saying no wall and no banning in reference to Trumps now twice-thwarted travelling ban.

Occupy Trump Tower. Photo: ErikMcG/ Pacific/ BarcroftImages

What were reading

The Democratic party is undermining its progressive candidates , writes Jamie Peck. The Berniecrat James Thompson came close to winning a traditionally Republican congressional seat in Kansas on Tuesday but did so without support from the Democratic National Committee or the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

There is hope for liberal Democrats, however. The San Francisco Chronicle reports that Sanders influence is growing within the party. Sanders is touring swing nations with DNC chair Tom Perez next week and one expert believes the center of gravity has definitely moved to the left since the election.

Look at that!

This week watched the first protest in space , and it was directed at Donald Trump.

ASAN, which promotes independent, open source space exploration, sent a weather balloon carrying a tweet directed at Trump to 90,000 ft above earth.

ASAN (@ ASANspace)

. @realDonaldTrump:

LOOK AT THAT, YOU SON OF A BITCHhttps :// Vu7q2j8g1t EU1obtes4q

April 12, 2017

The tweet echoes a comment made by the astronaut and sixth man on the moon Edgar Mitchell 😛 TAGEND

From out there on the moon, international politics appear so petty. You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the neck and drag him a one-quarter of a million miles out and say, Appear at that, you son of a bitch.

Read more:

Hillary Clinton Battles Ghosts Of 2008 On Eve Of Iowa Caucuses

COUNCIL BLUFFS, Iowa — What is it with Hillary Clinton and the Hawkeye State?

Eight years after her disappointing third-place finish in Iowa, Clinton again find herself locked in a close race with a popular senator who is winning over the hearts of Democrats on the eve of the state’s caucuses. And like then-Sen. Barack Obama, who ultimately defeated Clinton during the 2008 Democratic primary, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is proving to be a astonishingly tenacious challenger to Clinton’s long-running presidential aspirations.

If Sanders’ surge in Iowa has Clinton and her campaign fretted, they haven’t demonstrated it — at least not publicly. But at least some of her advocates recognise the race has them on edge.

“I hope she does well. I might not have caucused, but since it got really close, I supposed I’d better merely get out there. I am worried, it’s that close, ” said Herb Folsom, a teacher at Drake University in Des Moines, while waiting to see Clinton at a Sunday evening rally.

The former secretary of state has projected an air of confidence in the final stretch to the Iowa caucuses. Her rallies are remarkably well organized and are by design smallest and more intimate in order to bring the candidate down to earth — sometimes turning away hundreds of people at the door due to safety concerns. Her campaign is quick to tout its ground game operation as being unmatched by that of any other presidential candidate, as well as being in place longer than that of Sanders, her chief competitor. And she has the backing of a large segment of the Democratic establishment, including a good chunk of “superdelegates” who are crucial to locking up the party’s nomination subsequently this summer.

JIM WATSON via Getty Images
Hillary, Bill and Chelsea Clinton

More than anything, Clinton has remained obstinately on message while on the stump. Long gone are the panicky days before the 2008 caucuses, in which Clinton, shaken by the late surge of Obama, addressed massive crowds with speeches that seemed to change haphazardly from event to event. Also gone is the drama, which spilled out into the open in 2008 when feuding consultants routinely attacked and undermined one another over strategy. This go-around, Clinton has surrounded herself with former Obama hands known for running a tight ship.

As she barnstorms the state before Iowans head to caucus on Monday, Clinton has framed her candidacy as one of sensible pragmatism rather than that of radical change — sometimes underwhelmingly so.

“I don’t want to over-promise and under-deliver. I’d instead under-promise and over-deliver, ” she told a crowd of approximately 1,000 people in Council Bluffs, who gathered to see Clinton and her daughter, Chelsea, at a local high school. After the event, Chelsea Clinton stuck around to take photos with supporters for nearly a half hour, another way in which the campaign has strived to add a personal touch to its events.

Bringing her speech to a close, Clinton virtually seemed to be pleading with the attendees to pick the familiar over the new and untested.

“Stick with me. Stick with the experience; I have a plan, ” she said, voice rising over a steady crescendo of applause from the audience.

The urgency of the moment was evident in Clinton’s speeches on Sunday, wherein she attempted to convince undecided voters that they ought to choose an experienced and compassionate leader already tested by Republican naysayers. She touted the economic record of her husband’s presidency, highlighted President Barack Obama’s accomplishments and noted that she’s procured endorsements from former Rep. Gabby Giffords and billionaire investor Warren Buffett on the questions of gun control and taxing wealthy interests, respectively. She also noted how she represented the country of New York in the Senate during the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, her early championing of equal pay and women’s rights, and how often she’s been attacked by the industrialist Koch brothers and GOP strategist Karl Rove.

“She definitely fell so many names today. Way more than I have heard in the past with her, ” said Mary Grudle, a teacher at Lincoln High School in Council Bluffs.

The point of all that name-dropping was to create a sharp contrast with Sanders, who, Clinton said, has a “different view , not a different goal” in his campaign for the White House.

The senator, she added, “wants to have contentious debate” on success Democrat already notched during the course of its Obama presidency, like health care. Clinton was contended that rather than starting over on health care with a proposal like single payer, Democrats ought to “protect[ Obamacare ], preserve it, and make it better.”

The 74 -year-old senator and his populist message, however, have clearly resonated in Iowa. According to a highly respected Iowa poll released by the Des Moines Register on Saturday, Sanders trails Clinton by only three points, 45 percent to 42 percent, among likely caucus-goers. More troubling for Clinton, the poll showed her trailing badly among voters under 45, a data point made accutely evident by the crowds who turn up at Clinton’s campaign rallies. In contrast, Sanders seems to be highly popular with college student, thousands of whom turned up at his rallies in the final weeks before the caucuses.

JIM WATSON via Getty Images
Hillary Clinton at a rally in Des Moines

Clinton supporters who spoke with The Huffington Post at a pair of rallies on Saturday and Sunday seemed resigned to the fact that young people liked Sanders more than their preferred candidate. They agreed that the senator had good ideas, and said that they admired his passion. But they argued that young people backing Sanders were making a naive selection, one that would demonstrate disastrous if he won the nomination.

“I think he appeals on the issues, ” said Alan Lewis, nearby residents of Council Bluffs. “I think in a perfect world, you have a Congress who runs along with all his ideas, it would make sense. But merely from a practical standpoint, I don’t think that he would be able to do the things that he says that he wants to do.”

Dianne Mears, a retiree who lives in Cedar Rapids, took issue with Sanders’ education plan. She said young people liked the prospect of a free education, but that they were unaware of the costs associated with such a proposal.

“What they’re not looking at is that he’s going to taxation the middle class, and they think that he’s going to give free education, but you can’t, ” she said. “I have kids that go to the university, and they’re into him, but he wants to give it free. It’s not going to happen. It’s not going to happen.”

Cornelia Schmidt, another attendee at Clinton’s rally in Cedar Rapids, are recognizing that Sanders pulled at her heartstrings. But, she argued, the senator is “a little bit too liberal for the other part of America that’s old enough to vote.”

In an interview on Sunday, Sanders claimed his alliance was made up of more than simply young people. He also argued that voter turnout would be the biggest determining factor in whether he comes out on top on Monday.

“I think we have a real shot to win this, if there is a large voter turnout. And it’s not just young person. It is working-class people, it is middle-class people who are sick and tired of status-quo politics, ” he said.

At Clinton’s final pre-caucus rally on Sunday night in Des Moines, exhilaration was high as presidential candidates rallied with her husband, daughter and former Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin. Clinton again asked attendees to caucus for her — ultimately dedicating her the victory in a state that has shunned her in the past.

One supporter in the crowd, however, didn’t quite feel the same urgency.

“I’m not fretted. I suppose either Hillary or Bernie would be wonderful presidents, ” said Charles Richards, nearby residents of Des Moines. “However the caucus comes out, the candidates are going to go on to many other primaries and other caucuses, and it’s a long ways from here to November. It’s a long road. I want Hillary to win. She’s my nominee. I’m for Hillary.”

Samantha Jo-Roth contributed reporting .

Read more:

Watch Bernie Sanders Try His Ben& Jerry’s Flavor

A thick layer of solid chocolate atop a creamy hunk of mint ice cream is the stuff that dreams are made of. It’s also the deliciousness that sits inside a pint of Ben& Jerry’s “Bernie’s Yearning” flavor, a very limited edition ice cream crafted by Ben& Jerry’s co-founder Ben Cohen.

While Cohen has made merely 40 pints of the specialty frozen concoction, the ladies at ABC’s “The View” were able to get their hands on one, and offered the Democratic presidential hopeful his first taste of it on Wednesday.

Bernie Sanders could have won. That’s the Corbyn lesson for America | Steven W Thrasher

Bernie, like Corbyn, offered hope that another world was possible. Hes exactly the kind of nominee the Democrat must rally behind in the future

Had he been the Democratic party nominee, Bernie Sanders could have won the presidency. Ive been waiting more than half a year to say this aloud, and todays as good a day as any to get it off my chest.

Im not saying this just because Jeremy Corbyns amazing candidacy, inspiring perhaps more than 70 % of 18-24 year-old British people to vote, skewered Theresa Mays junk austerity politics and imperiled her prime ministership.

Im saying this because its a good moment to reflect upon how, if the so-called left( especially the Labour party in the UK and the Democratic party in the US) rallied around candidates who supported actual leftist politics a commitment to strong labor protections, a confidence in creating a robust safety net, an aversion to working for Wall street, a dislike for fighting to get centrist referendums, and an unwavering commitment not to back down to intimidation from the right their candidates could win.

Yes, I know that May, who tweeted that if she were to lose only six seats I will lose such elections and Jeremy Corbyn will be sitting down to negotiate Brexit, is slithering her style back into another government, even as her party has lost 12 seats. But “shes been” been severely weakened.

The number of voters who desire conservatism is dying off faster than Theresa Mays credibility. Voters who want centrism are kicking the pail more quickly than Hillary Clinton can make excuses for why she lost. Young people and non-white voters are the future of electoral politics.

A candidate who can appeal to the majority of young people who largely reject capitalism, who reject racism, who dont want to be in debt for life just for get an education, and who dont want their societys resources hoarded by a greedy few is the kind of candidate who will be on the upswing in the coming years and who can win.

In the UK, that candidate was Jeremy Corbyn. In the US, it was Bernie Sanders.

It doesnt look like Corbyn is heading to 10 Downing Street right now. And, of course, Bernie didnt win the Democratic nomination. But I have to wonder: could Corbyn have become prime minister if his own party had actually fully supported him over the past few weeks rather than railing against him? And could Bernie have won the nomination( and then gone on to spare us the lunacy of Trump) if the DNC hadnt stacked the deck in Clintons favor?

Regardless, Bernie always polled better head-to-head against Trump than Clinton did. Like Corbyn, Bernie clearly had the youth exuberance, winning more young elections than Trump and Clinton combined. Like Corbyn( and Trump ), Bernies rallies had an electric energy Clintons rarely, if ever, did.

Unlike Clinton, Bernie actually won primaries across the upper midwest, in places like Wisconsin. And unlike Clinton, he probably would have actually campaigned in Wisconsin, and may have been able to hold on to Pennsylvania and Florida and gone on to win the White House.

Of course, Bernie could have lost, too. He never got right with black with voters. When Killer Mike, the rapper, was getting dragged on Twitter for defending Bill Maher earlier the coming week, I remembered how he supposed Killer Mike was the smartest option to outsource about 90% of his African American outreach to, along with Nina Turner.( Then again, at least Bernie didnt use enslaved captives to operate his mansion or if he did, he didnt blithely explain it as a longstanding tradition, which maintained down expenses in a book which utilized the possibly African proverb It takes a village for its title .)

But Bernie, like Corbyn, roused a sense of hope that another world was possible, especially among young people. When dour Clinton railed that universal healthcare will never, ever come to pass, he pushed Medicare for all and young voters embraced it. While Clinton espoused Henry Kissinger and Wall street, Bernie repudiated that such pragmatism and cynical centrism was moral or even electorally helpful. He was right.

There was a similar beauty in the Corbyns campaign: he didnt give in to fear, and he courageously embraced the left. I was so happy to see that, even after the two recent assaults in Britain and Mays attempt to scare people into voting for her, voters contracted instead of expanded her power. The fearmongering failed. Hope was embraced instead.

Politics has changed, Corbyn said last night. Politics isnt going back into the box where it was before. Whats happened is, people have said theyve had quite enough of austerity politics, theyve had quite enough of cuts in public expenditure, under-funding our health service, under-funding our schools, our education service, and not giving our young person the chance they deserve in our society. These are the same sentiments that brought Bernie, a lifelong Democratic socialist, within striking distance of the Democratic presidential nomination.

Since the Brexit referendum, weve had a sense of dread that the world is floating unavoidably and unstoppably to the far right. Macrons victory set the brakes on that a bit, as did Corbyns strong describe last night. But so, too, did the strength of Bernies campaign last year. He showed that young people and working-class people dont want Democratic politicians to be in the pocket of, or actually be former executives of, Goldman Sachs.

The Democrats would do well to look at Corbyns success last night, and Bernies success last year, and to look for someone with such hopeful and broadly popular principles to rally behind in the future. Because they could win bigly.

Read more:

‘Take some basic economics’: Bernie explains his ‘ridiculous’ vision of banking

You have to constantly double-check the verification emblem on @BernieSanders’ account to ensure that tweets like this aren’t being made by a charade account. But rest assured, this one is genuinely Bernie.

A presidential nominee in a major party says banking shouldn’t be about making money. This dangerous, anti-capitalist comment should remove him from the nomination process and presidential race. Instead, it further fires up his sycophantic supporters.

Fortunately, many understand the economy well enough to know that such a proposal is certifiably insane.

Here’s an idea 😛 TAGEND

Great idea! Then the Berniecould show us all how business is conducted without making any of that evil money.

Read more:

The Women’s Convention is worse off without Bernie Sanders | Jamie Peck

By inviting Bernie Sanders, the Womens Convention was strengthening its project and appeal. Its a shame he is no longer going to attend the event

Since Bernie Sanders was first announced as an opening-night speaker at the upcoming Women’s Convention in Detroit, a small but vocal group of people started carrying their outrage. Fueled by misinforming headlines like” Bernie Sanders Headlining An Event Called The Women’s Convention Is Peak 2017“, citizens and professional pundits maintained it was bad to let Sanders, a man, speak at a convention devoted to the political advancement of women’s rights.

There was even a petition, which was successful at get Sanders moved to a panel. It may or may not shock you to learn that despite my intense is committed to feminism, I do not share their rage. In fact, I’m a little vexed the organisers caved.( After all this, Sanders announced on Thursday that he would be skipping the event wholly in order to visit Puerto Rico .)

Sanders was meant to be one of 60+ speakers, all of whom but two are women.( As far as I know, there are zero transgender or gender non-binary speakers booked, but no one seems to care about that .) Sanders was never the “headliner;” Congresswoman Maxine Waters, whose phrase” reclaiming my hour” was adopted as the convention’s tagline, was and remains so.

I agree that women’s movements is necessary spearheaded by women and gender non-conforming folk, but humen have a role to play, too, and two out of 60 seems like a safe ratio.

While not everyone criticizing the organisers’ decision is motivated by 2016 rancour, the petition contains a good sum of it. Among other things, it accuses Sanders of” contribut[ ing] to a decades-long campaign of deception about the record of Hillary Clinton ,” hardly an objective or verifiable claim, and” assault[ ing] the Democratic party ,” as if that’s synonymous with being anti-woman.

Sanders’ efforts to help elect Democrat( including Clinton) aside, feigning the Democratic party is inherently aligned with women’s interests and thus above criticism is a dangerous false equivalency that’s been used to silence left-critics for decades.

The petition also accuses Sanders and the convention’s organizers of” stoking factional divisions among natural allies … especially women and minorities ,” which seems to refer to disagreements between self-described feminists on the question of Clinton v Sanders, which is often a proxy for the more relevant battle of neoliberalism versus social democracy.

But while there’s less disagreement among progressives than some people want you to think — a 2017 Economist/ YouGov poll procured 80% of people who voted for Clinton for chairperson favor expanding Medicare to cover all Americans — these are important debates to be having.

To suggest that they’re in any way Sanders’ doing, and that women and minorities cannot manage having them, is reasonably infantilizing. They still don’t understand that for Sanders’ feminist supporters, it’s never been about him specifically, but the ideas for which he advocates.

Perhaps the most valid debate against Sanders’ inclusion in the event is his handling of the Heath Mello debacle, for which I myself have criticized him. While the Omaha mayoral candidate promised he posed no present or future danger to reproductive rights, Sanders muddied the waters with a statement that could fairly be interpreted as saying Democrats should compromise on choice if it helps them win elections.

But prominent Democrat- including Nancy Pelosi, Tim Kaine, and Hillary Clinton- have built innumerable unambiguous statements of this nature. That doesn’t make it OK, but it does call critics’ honesty into question.

If we are to judge people on policy , not gaffes, Sanders’ Medicare-for-All plan would do more for reproductive rights in America than anything since Roe v Wade with comprehensive coverage of abortion care.

And true reproductive liberty includes the freedom to have and adequately care for children, a option that would be empowered by the kind of broad, redistributive programs for which Sanders is an effective messenger.

Beyond abortion rights, he’s demonstrated a lifelong dedication to many issues that affect women and gender non-binary people disproportionately to humen, including healthcare, education, housing, and workers’ rights.

By inviting the most famous face of class politics to be one of many speakers at their seminar, the Women’s Convention was strengthening its project by looking at all of the ways girls are oppressed- including economically.

If you really care about females, it might be smart to stop bickering over who gets the best slot and get to work on some of these crucial issues.

Read more:

Bernie Sanders’ Health Plan Is Too Good To Be True, Analyst Says

When Bernie Sanders released his universal health care plan last week, promising that most people would be given more generous insurance coverage while paying less for medical care, most policy experts said it sounded too good to be true.

Now, a veteran health economist has rendered a more serious assessment of Sanders’ proposal and concluded that the critics were right.

According to analysis from Emory University professor Kenneth Thorpe, a former Clinton administration advisor who has also done paid work for health industry clients, Sanders has wildly underestimated the cost of providing such comprehensive benefits to all Americans. Either his plan would blow a giant hole in the deficit, Thorpe predicts, or the new payroll and incomes taxes to finance project proposals would be more than twice as high as the Sanders campaign has projected.

Either way, Thorpe says, the Sanders plan would create both winners and losers, as any health reform proposal would. The winners would include workers for whom the new taxes would still be less than what they pay now, in premiums and out-of-pocket expenses blended. The losers would include some Medicaid recipients with chores, because their employers would pass along the expense of new payroll taxes as lower wages.

Thorpe’s analysis is preliminary, and the exact mix of people better or worse off financially would depend on a bunch of factors , not least among them the still-fuzzy details of how the Sanders plan would pay physicians, hospitals and drugmakers.

But under Thorpe’s hypothesis, which he says take into account the difficulty of imposing the Sanders plan on existing U.S. health care infrastructure, 71 percentage of running households that now have private insurance would end up paying more for their health care if Sanders had his route.

The Sanders campaign, which says that its plan would benefit 95 percent of Americans, is sharply disputing the analysis. Warren Gunnels, a senior policy advisor on the campaign, told The Huffington Post that Thorpe’s estimate was a “complete hatchet job” and said it was “disappointing, but not surprising, ” devoted Thorpe’s past work for industry.

So how did Thorpe get those figures? And why are they so different from the estimates that economist Gerald Friedman, from the University of Massachusetts Amherst, produced for the Sanders campaign?

It’s all about the assumptions that each analyst made.

Sanders, an independent senator from Vermont seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, has proposed to create a single-payer system — that is, he would wipe out current insurance the agreements and put in their place a single federal insurance program that would encompass everybody. The scheme would have automatic enrollment so that it would truly cover just about everybody, even those who haven’t signed up for coverage under the Affordable Care Act.

Sanders calls his proposal a “Medicare-for-all” plan, but the insurance he proposes to give all Americans would nearly remove out-of-pocket spending, constructing the benefit package more generous that what most people with either private insurance or Medicare have now.

Covering more people and most of them with more generous benefits plainly requires a lot of money. But single-payer systems abroad manage to provide generous, universal coverage for much less than the U.S. spends — because those foreign systems fritter away less money on administrative waste and profit, and since they are give governments the power to set medical prices and salaries at much lower levels than the U.S. currently pays.

Taking those prospective savings into account, Friedman determined in his analysis, a single-payer system could dramatically reduce health care spending. That, in turn, would make it possible to finance the Sanders plan with payroll taxes of 6.2 percentage plus an “income-related premium”( basically, an income taxation) of 2.2 percent. That’d still be a lot of money, to be sure, but Friedman concluded that it would be less than what most people pay now in blended premiums and out-of-pocket expenditures. The one group consistently paying a lot more “wouldve been” wealthy, since the Sanders plan would jack up their taxes to provide additional financing.

When the Sanders campaign released its plan and the accompanying analysis, Friedman was candid about the limits of his projection, particularly when it came to grappling with political and policy-related complications. “The pleasure of being an academic is I can just spell things out and leave the details to others, ” Friedman told reporters at the time. “The details very quickly get very messy.”

Thorpe attempted to adjust for that messiness — and found that, in order to pay for itself, Sanders would have to set the payroll taxation at 14.3 percent and the income-related premium at 5.7 percentage. Both taxation hikes would be more than double what the Sanders campaign has said it would impose.

A big reason for the inequality, Thorpe said, would be that upgrade in benefits, since it would entail the government was paying for expenditures that individuals with private insurance and Medicare currently pay out of their own pockets. The benefits upgrade would also boost spending indirectly, since people with lower out-of-pocket spending tend to ingests more medical services. According to Thorpe, the Sanders analysis didn’t fully take into account these costs.

Thorpe also assumed that the new government insurance plan Sanders foresees would pay for medical services at approximately 105 percent of cost — in other words, at 5 percent above what providers like hospitals need simply to cover their expenses. That’s less than private insurance now pays, but more than Medicare and a lot more than Medicaid. Again, Thorpe said, Friedman’s analysis doesn’t adjust appropriately for that likely expense.

In theory, an insurance program like the one Sanders has sketched out could hold down costs by putting a lot more pressure on physicians, hospitals and drugmakers to deliver lower prices — and, perhaps, by limiting access to services and drugs.

In practice, Thorpe says, doing so in the U.S. would require dramatic changes that neither the health care industry nor the public would tolerate, at least in one fell swoop. And that, Thorpe told HuffPost, makes the Sanders plan “completely implausible” without major changes.

Thorpe has been rendering estimates like these since the 1990 s, when he worked with then-first lady Hillary Clinton on crafting the reform bill that the administration tried and failed to get through Congress.

But Thorpe told HuffPost that he conducted his analysis on his own initiative. And his assumptions about the difficulties of imposing a single-payer system in the U.S. — particularly the challenges of wringing huge efficiencies out of providers — are broadly consistent with what most health policy experts believe. “Under a single-payer scheme, the government would define prices get paid to doctor, hospitals and narcotic companies, ” said Larry Levitt, senior vice president of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. “Whether or not that would create huge savings in overall health care spending is more a matter of faith than economic analysis.”

Of course, Thorpe’s analysis is as subject to scrutiny and second-guessing as anybody’s. Friedman told HuffPost that, based on a cursory inspection of research reports, he guesses Thorpe built several too pessimistic assumptions — underestimating the savings from reduced by billing transactions and insurance overhead, for example, and slightly overestimating the generosity of benefits that Sanders has in mind. Friedman also thinks Thorpe didn’t sufficiently account for savings from the cheaper drug prices a single-payer plan could achieve.

Still, Friedman noted, “Kenneth Thorpe is a serious intellectual and his contribution to this dialogue is most welcome.”

Read more:

Bernie or bust? The lessons of 1968

( CNN) On a warm August night in 1968, the two of us joined thousands of other young people in front of Chicago’s Hilton Hotel, braving tear gas and billy clubs to demand an end to the Vietnam War. While delegates to the Democratic Convention remained sheltered inside, with police and National Guard troops protecting the entrances, we screamed “Bring the Troops Home” and “The Whole World is Watching.”

We didn’t realise it at the time, but our most consequential chant was “Dump the Hump, ” derisively aimed at Vice President Hubert Humphrey, who had until then refused to distance himself from the war policies of President Lyndon Johnson. We wanted to change how the government worked — and it turned out that we did, although far from the style that we wanted.

The Resistance Now: having a chat with Bernie Sanders

The Guardians new column features excerpts from The Bernie Sanders Show Republicans fail twice in a single week on healthcare and more

A chat with

Bernie Sanders! The Guardians new column features excerpts from The Bernie Sanders Show( with Sanders permission, of course ). This week: Sanders discusses North Korea and atomic weapon with former secretary of defense William J Perry. Take a seem .

Bernie Sanders, looks a lot like hes in a hurry. Photo: J. Scott Applewhite/ AP

The GOPs double implosion on healthcare

Republicans managed to fail twice in a single week on healthcare, marking another tentative win for activists opposing to keep Obamacare alive.

But Senate Republicans are reportedly planning to vote on a new bill next week although they dont know what theyre voting on yet, NBC News reported.

Meanwhile, activists are keeping up the pressure. On Wednesday, Washington DC police apprehended more than 155 people at Senate office builds as activists protested the GOPs aimed reforms.

A woman is led away by police in Washington DC on Wednesday. Photograph: Pacific Press/ REX/ Shutterstock

The Republicans Better Care Reconciliation Act collapsed on Monday, when Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell couldnt pull together the votes to pass it. Then on Tuesday, a last trench endeavour by McConnell to repeal the Affordable Care Act without replacing it a move which would have stripped an additional 32 m people of healthcare also failed to garner enough votes.

Campaign for affordable housing

Donald Trumps budget, considered in March, would cut $7.4 bn from the Department of Housing and Urban Developments budget almost 15% of the departments total. It would include cuts to rental assistance, which enables more than two-million families to afford housing, PBS reported.

In response, housing activists are launching a National Housing Week of Action on Saturday, as they call for increased federal investment in affordable housing. The National Low Income Housing Coalition( NLIHC ), which is behind the action, says there will be more than 40 events held across the country to raise awareness of the plight of low income families in America. They plan to call senators and hold voter registration drives all week.

The NLIHC say there are only 35 affordable homes for every 100 extremely low income renter households in the US. That figure varies from nation to state though in Nevada there are just 15 affordable homes for every 100 people in need. California has just 21, while Arizona and Oregon are both on 26.

Las Vegas faces a massive shortage in affordable housing. Photo: Eleanor Scriven/ Robert Hardi/ REX

What were reading

Hillary Clinton is less popular than Donald Trump, writes Daniel Jos Camacho over here at the Guardian. There is no doubt that sexism plays a part in her stand, Camacho says, but Clintons Third Way centrist politics have also contributed to her downfall. Clinton did not offer a true alternative to the status quo, Camacho writes. Democrat should look elsewhere for a blueprint forward and leave her politics far behind.

In a sign that that wont happen any time soon, early reports suggest that Democrats are working on an agenda that leaves out many progressive agenda items, according to Mic. The platform does not, at this time, appear to emphasize increasingly popular progressive policies like single-payer health care, writes Andrew Joyce. But then again, whos to say trying the same thing over and over again wont work?

Down in flames

This is what Donald Trump was doing while the healthcare bill was in its death throes. He sure does like trucks.

The president of the United States pretends to drive a fire truck. Photo: UPI/ Barcroft Images

Read more: