Pelosi DESPERATE To Stop Medicare For All

Progressive activist and Medicare for All advocate Ady Barkan had the opportunity to ask Nancy Pelosi questions about plans for the near future of Medicare. Pelosi obfuscated what was at issue in terms of how different versions of expanded Medicare could be paid for, and seemed to confirm that she will not be working to lower the entry age. Medicare for more isn't on the table, and Medicare for All isn't anywhere near the discussion as long as Pelosi's running things. The Majority Report crew discuss.

We stream our live show every day at 12 PM ET.

We need your help to keep providing free videos! Support the Majority Report's video content by going to

Watch the Majority Report live MF at 12 p.m. EST at youtube.com/samseder or listen via daily podcast at

Download our FREE app

SUPPORT the show by becoming a member

We Have Merch!!!

LIKE us on Facebook

FOLLOW us on Twitter

SUBSCRIBE to us on YouTube

Sam Seder: So let's play the Pelosi clip. So Ady Barkan, the Medicare for All activist, interviewed Nancy Pelosi. It was done for "Now This," so the interview is a little bit choppy. There are two things that are on the table right now in terms of Medicare for All, or Medicare, I should say. One has been dropping the age of eligibility to 60 or 55. Biden was in favor of dropping it to 60. Maybe you could do a buy-in at 55. The idea is to get as many people on board in that program as possible.

Emma Vigeland: And Bernie's backing this in the Senate. But not enough Democrats as of now.

Sam Seder: And reports were a couple of weeks ago that there was just not the support for that and instead they were focusing on expanding benefits for Medicare, current Medicare recipient. So dental, vision, etc, etc. Here is an exchange, which I think, A: Both confirms that reporting, that that's what they're planning to do, and B: Shows the absolute B.S. behind that decision.

Ady Barkan: Separately from strengthening Medicare, President Biden campaigned on a promise to lower the Medicare eligibility age to 60, which would cover another 23 million people. This expansion could be paid for easily in different ways. One of the options would be to empower Medicare to negotiate drug prices, just as the Department of Veterans Affairs does, which pays half as much for drugs as Medicare. I know that you pride yourself on representing your caucus, especially when there is broad consensus like this. So will you also bring forward the bill to lower the Medicare eligibility age?

Nancy Pelosi: Well the money that you discussed about giving the Secretary the ability to negotiate is the money that we were spending on hearing, vision, and dental. Now should there be more money, then we can take it to the next step. But the president is looking at the budget to see how that is. We have 400 billion dollars for home care for our seniors, for people with disabilities. A very top priority for us that we want to protect. If we're using the money for renegotiating prices for expanded benefits, let's get as much money out of that as possible. The way we're writing the laws, pharmaceutical companies cannot increase the price of prescription drugs higher than inflation. If they do, they have to give a rebate to the federal government of that amount of money.

Emma Vigeland: Well she gave away the game there, right? So, if the key phrase is: "If we're using the money for," — the money — she is focusing on a finite amount of money that they've already decided that they're going to stick with and not expand when it comes to addressing Medicare. And instead of lowering the eligibility age they're going to attempt to — and this is not even a guarantee that they do this — encompass dental, vision, and hearing, which is really important for seniors, of course, but they could do both. She's creating a false choice to bark in there, and it's a false choice that allows Democrats to weasel away in this conversation.

Sam Seder: Right, and it's all under this sort of rubric of "pay for" and "pay go" and this and that and it's not just to pay for, right, it's that Medicare itself has to pay for the enhanced benefits, Medicare savings, I should say has to pay for the the enhanced benefits. As opposed to any new money. And I think that's, at the end of the day, expanding it to more people is obviously better for those of us who want Medicare for All. Because the more people you get in the boat, the easier it is going to be to improve the seating on the boat, as it were. And this is just an example of the relentless agenda that Nancy Pelosi has to deny any growth in the popularity or the utility of Medicare, whether it's Medicare for All or Medicare for more, she desperately doesn't want that.