Why Write In Lee Cobb?

Below is a flyer of blunt/brief takes on a few broad and fundamental issues:

Obviously,  this list is incomplete and not every topic can be covered but we will generally go over social security retirement, deeper on the possibility of free healthcare, and necessary policy matters in making Healthcare more feasible to fund. (Other topics may be edited into the site as they come up) 

Healthcare & Retirement: Security Should Be Universal

Healthcare:

The goal is to build toward Medicare for All: a healthcare system in which every American can receive necessary medical care without being excluded because they cannot afford private insurance. Not to mention the hardships of paying a deductible and the remaining percentage after the deductible is paid.

But universal coverage alone isn't enough. If the government simply promises to pay whatever healthcare providers charge, the system could become unnecessarily expensive and difficult to sustain. 

A better approach would combine elements of two existing models. 

The United Kingdom's approach demonstrates the concept of healthcare as a public service, with government playing a central role in ensuring that healthcare is available to everyone. 

The Japanese approach demonstrates another important principle: healthcare prices should not simply be whatever an individual provider or institution decides to charge. Japan uses nationally established reimbursement and pricing structures that create a common framework for what medical services cost. 

The philosophy behind a hybrid system would therefore be: 

Universal access, combined with nationally established prices. 

Instead of creating a free-for-all in which every hospital, physician, pharmaceutical company, and insurer negotiates its own disconnected prices, the United States could establish a national healthcare pricing book—a transparent schedule establishing standardized prices and reimbursement rates for covered services. 

That would allow the government to pursue universal coverage while still putting boundaries around what the system costs. 

The objective isn't merely to make healthcare free at the point of service (although it should be free at tge point of service). It is to also create a system in which Americans can receive necessary care, providers can be fairly compensated, and the country has a mechanism for controlling costs. 

Social Security Retirement:

Retirement security should operate on a similarly simple principle: 

When a person reaches retirement age, retirement should be something they are guaranteed—not something they have to prove they earned enough credits to deserve. 

The current Social Security retirement system requires a worker to accumulate 40 credits, generally requiring roughly ten years of covered work, before becoming eligible for retirement benefits. The campaign's philosophy is that retirement security should be universal rather than dependent upon whether someone happened to accumulate enough qualifying work credits over the course of their life. 

The proposal would therefore eliminate the 40-credit eligibility requirement for Social Security retirement. 

Reaching the retirement age itself would establish eligibility. 

The next question is whether the benefit is actually enough to provide meaningful security. 

A retirement system can technically provide a benefit while still leaving someone with an amount that is extraordinarily difficult to live on. The campaign therefore supports establishing a $500-per-month minimum Social Security retirement benefit.  

The $500 would be a floor, not a bonus added to existing benefits. Someone whose calculated benefit is already above $500 would continue receiving their calculated amount; someone whose calculated benefit would otherwise fall below $500 would receive $500 instead. 

Furthermore, the campaign supports lowering the Social Security retirement age to 60, at minimum, so that people can begin receiving their full retirement benefits earlier in life. 55 is idealistic given that many places have historically given senior discounts for goods and services at age 55 and 55 appears to be a decent Social norm for a senior age and senior age should be retirement age but the campaign holds that 60 is an adequate compromise and more economically feasible as well as politically feasible given possible opposition.   

The campaign believes that earning more money should not disqualify someone from receiving Social Security retirement benefits or make their benefits decrease any. The existing principle of using a person's earnings history to determine their benefit can remain to the benefit of the retiree (assuming it calculates higher than the $500 floor amount), but the benefit itself should not disappear or even lower any at all simply because someone continues working or earns above a particular income threshold.  Likewise, Social Security taxes should not stop applying simply because a person's income exceeds a certain level. Those who earn more would continue contributing to Social Security rather than reaching an income level at which their obligation to contribute ends. By removing the social security income tax cap, we substantially lower the shortfall on funding social security yet a shortfall still remains. The real debate is what money should be reallocated from where to make up the difference.