We know .......damn right we know

[merrill]

I say if voters would receive actual paybacks for their tax dollars democrat politicians would not need as much money for campaigns.

For example putting Single Payer Health Insurance on the nation wide ballots so that WE are making the decision.

Let’s not be stupid WE know that elected officials accepting campaign money from the health care/insurance industry is a huge conflict of interest.


Which is why placing the issue on a nation wide ballot is the only way to keep dark money out of this issue.


USING TAX $$$$$ MORE EFFECTIVELY: = National Priorities Project

 

[MarathonMike]

WUT???

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

I say if voters would receive actual paybacks for their tax dollars democrat politicians would not need as much money for campaigns.

For example putting Single Payer Health Insurance on the nation wide ballots so that WE are making the decision.

Let’s not be stupid WE know that elected officials accepting campaign money from the health care/insurance industry is a huge conflict of interest.


Which is why placing the issue on a nation wide ballot is the only way to keep dark money out of this issue.


USING TAX $$$$$ MORE EFFECTIVELY: = National Priorities Project

The liberal majority of the East and West Coast would decide the issue in your scenario. This sort of mob rule shit is the reason the US is a Constitutional Republic and not a Democracy.

 

[OKTexas]

I say if voters would receive actual paybacks for their tax dollars democrat politicians would not need as much money for campaigns.

For example putting Single Payer Health Insurance on the nation wide ballots so that WE are making the decision.

Let’s not be stupid WE know that elected officials accepting campaign money from the health care/insurance industry is a huge conflict of interest.


Which is why placing the issue on a nation wide ballot is the only way to keep dark money out of this issue.


USING TAX $$$$$ MORE EFFECTIVELY: = National Priorities Project

You might want to read Article 1. Section 1 of the Constitution again. Then see Article 5. There is no constitutional process for a national referendum, so an amendment would be required. Good luck.

.

 

[JGalt]

I say if voters would receive actual paybacks for their tax dollars democrat politicians would not need as much money for campaigns.

For example putting Single Payer Health Insurance on the nation wide ballots so that WE are making the decision.

Let’s not be stupid WE know that elected officials accepting campaign money from the health care/insurance industry is a huge conflict of interest.


Which is why placing the issue on a nation wide ballot is the only way to keep dark money out of this issue.


USING TAX $$$$$ MORE EFFECTIVELY: = National Priorities Project

What are you complaining about? The biggest recipients of healthcare and insurance money seem to overwhelming be Democrats. Imagine how much worse it would be with socialized medicine?

AI Overview

For the 2023-2024 election cycle, the largest US congressional recipients of campaign money from the
health care and insurance industries (combined health sector) include several incumbent Senators and Representatives.


Top Recipients in the Current Election Cycle (2023-2024)

The data from OpenSecrets for the full health sector shows the top congressional recipients (excluding presidential candidates) as:

Candidate

	Chamber	Amount
Sherrod Brown (D-OH)	Senate	$4,137,178
Jon Tester (D-MT)	Senate	$3,676,939
Colin Allred (D-TX)	House	$3,242,265
Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE)	House	$331,402 (Pharmaceuticals/Health Products only)
Brett Guthrie (R-KY)	House	$534,102 (Pharmaceuticals/Health Products only)

Note: The amounts for Brown and Tester represent the total from the entire health sector, while the detailed House member amounts were primarily available for the "Pharmaceuticals/Health Products" slice of the industry, which is a major component of the overall health sector.


Top Recipients from the Pharmaceuticals/Health Products Sub-Sector

Focusing specifically on the pharmaceuticals and health products industry group for the 2023-2024 cycle, the top congressional recipients are:


Senate

1. Bob Casey (D-PA): $624,574
2. Jon Tester (D-MT): $576,423
3. Sherrod Brown (D-OH): $478,109
4. Jacky Rosen (D-NV): $341,471
5. Bill Cassidy (R-LA): $329,842

House

1. Brett Guthrie (R-KY): $534,102
2. Scott Peters (D-CA): $351,378
3. Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE): $331,402
4. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ): $326,292
5. Colin Allred (D-TX): $320,535

Top Recipients from the Insurance Sub-Sector

The top congressional recipients for the 2023-2024 cycle specifically from the insurance industry (excluding presidential candidates) are led by:

• Sherrod Brown (D-OH): $626,325
• Jon Tester (D-MT): $504,473

Note: Contributions are from PACs and individuals giving $200 or more, according to Federal Election Commission data covering the period up to late 2024.

 

[1srelluc]

You might want to read Article 1. Section 1 of the Constitution again. Then see Article 5. There is no constitutional process for a national referendum, so an amendment would be required. Good luck.

.

No shit, the OP must think that the nation is like CA.....Referendum all the things.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

WUT???

"Representative" Government Gives Us a Banana-Peel Republic

 

[g5000]

I say if voters would receive actual paybacks for their tax dollars democrat politicians would not need as much money for campaigns.

For example putting Single Payer Health Insurance on the nation wide ballots so that WE are making the decision.

Let’s not be stupid WE know that elected officials accepting campaign money from the health care/insurance industry is a huge conflict of interest.


Which is why placing the issue on a nation wide ballot is the only way to keep dark money out of this issue.


USING TAX $$$$$ MORE EFFECTIVELY: = National Priorities Project

For UHC to be on a nationwide ballot, it has to be proposed as a constitutional amendment and passed by 2/3 of the states.

But before that, it has to be passed by a 2/3 vote in the House and the Senate, or by a national convention called by 2/3 of the states.

So good luck with that.

 

[g5000]

The liberal majority of the East and West Coast would decide the issue in your scenario. This sort of mob rule shit is the reason the US is a Constitutional Republic and not a Democracy.

It's both.

I wish I knew where this recent idiocy that we are not a Democracy came from.

 

[g5000]

A funny thing about Article V constitutional conventions.

I hear the Right calling for one more than I hear the Left. But they aren't thinking it through.

Once a convention is formed, ANY change to the Constitution can be up for grabs.

So buh-bye Second Amendment. Buh-bye electoral college.

Article V? Be careful what you wish for.

.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

It's both.

I wish I knew where this recent idiocy that we are not a Democracy came from.

Recent ? Have you ever read anything written by the Founding Fathers ? They loathed Democracies.

The Constitution lays out exactly what form of Government the US is and has always been. A Constitutional Republic. Nowhere in the document is the word Democracy.

The education system in this country is fucked.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I say if voters would receive actual paybacks for their tax dollars democrat politicians would not need as much money for campaigns.

For example putting Single Payer Health Insurance on the nation wide ballots so that WE are making the decision.

Let’s not be stupid WE know that elected officials accepting campaign money from the health care/insurance industry is a huge conflict of interest.


Which is why placing the issue on a nation wide ballot is the only way to keep dark money out of this issue.


USING TAX $$$$$ MORE EFFECTIVELY: = National Priorities Project

You want to get rid of money in politics, go for Proportional Representation.

Germany's whole federal election costs just a little more than the most expensive Senate seat in the US.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

You want to get rid of money in politics, go for Proportional Representation.

Germany's whole federal election costs just a little more than the most expensive Senate seat in the US.

Rep Is a Ripoff

Every kind of "representation" is an insulting anti-democratic fraud. Nobody really believes in that scam, or else we would elect a few posters to represent all the other posters here. As it is, USMB has what the Constitution-bangers would call "mob rule."

 

[merrill]

The liberal majority of the East and West Coast would decide the issue in your scenario. This sort of mob rule shit is the reason the US is a Constitutional Republic and not a Democracy.

If all voters vote that are registered then your comment makes no sense. All those east and west voters could live elsewhere which means single payer would still win. Why some voters love paying inflated rates for health care is beyond me. Not only that liberals would not be the only ones signing on to practical and fiscally responsible health insurance........