Hillarycare
WASHINGTON - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Tuesday that a mandate requiring every American to purchase health insurance was the only way to achieve universal health care but she rejected the notion of punitive measures to force individuals into the health care system.
"At this point, we don't have anything punitive that we have proposed," the presidential candidate said in an interview with The Associated Press. "We're providing incentives and tax credits which we think will be very attractive to the vast majority of Americans."
She said she could envision a day when "you have to show proof to your employer that you're insured as a part of the job interview — like when your kid goes to school and has to show proof of vaccination," but said such details would be worked out through negotiations with Congress.
Clinton unveiled her health care plan Monday in Iowa, promising to bring coverage to every American by building on the current employer-based system and using tax credits to make insurance more affordable.
She told the AP she relished a debate over health care with her political opponents, including Republicans "who understood that we had to reform health care before they started running for president."
On Tuesday, Clinton began airing a 30-second ad statewide in Iowa and New Hampshire promoting her new health care plan. The ad reminds viewers of her failed effort to pass universal health care in the early 1990s, trying to portray a thwarted enterprise as one of vision.
"She changed our thinking when she introduced universal health care to America," the ad's announcer says.
The ad also highlights her support as senator for an expanded Children's Health Insurance Program and for more affordable vaccines.
Her health care plan would require every American to buy health insurance, offering tax credits and subsidies to help those who can't afford it. The mandatory aspect of her proposal, however, gets glossed over in the ad.
"Now she has a health care plan that lets you keep your coverage if you like it, provides affordable choices if you don't, and covers every American," the ad says.
The ad also continues her campaign's effort to appropriate the mantle of change away from rivals Barack Obama and John Edwards. The word change or its variations appears four times in the ad, which ends: "So, if you're ready for change, she's ready to lead."
Though her ads are airing in major markets in both states, they are appaearing with greater frequency in Iowa. Polls of voters in New Hampshire show her with a double digit lead over Obama and Edwards, but polls in Iowa show the three of them clustered together.
I was just ranting about that on my own.
I'd rather the government take money from me than tell me what to spend it on.
And that's besides the fact that I have no interest in ever seeing a doctor and don't see the point in carrying insurance when it's something I wouldn't use even if it killed me.
Do you have a DNR order?And that's besides the fact that I have no interest in ever seeing a doctor and don't see the point in carrying insurance when it's something I wouldn't use even if it killed me.
Nope, because I'm too lazy to go and figure it out. Everyone that I might be around if something were to happen knows to not bother sending me to a doctor at least.
Well figure it out and save us some money.
Nobody YET has dared/has the balls to talk about reducing the excess profits of the health care business as a way to save citizens' money.
For you to be a principled patriot, rather than just a scofflaw and a leech, you should have a do ent on your person stating that if you are hit by a car or some such thing, in order not to be a burden on the state, inasmuch as it would have the responsibility to pay for your care since you choose not to assume that responsibility by carrying insurance, you decline life-saving medical care.
There have been plenty of debates in the forum about reforms in pharmaceutical prices, doctor salaries, and malpractice insurance.
1) The state does not have the responsibility to pay for my care to begin with. The state will charge me, my family, or my estate before writing the loss off. Just because I do not have insurance does not mean I do not accept the responsibility of paying for any care I might receive, even if unwanted.
2) Any of those will get them payment because both me and my family believe in paying off our debts. I tried to repay a PLUS loan that was taken out in my mom's name after she died and they refused payment and wrote it off. I have more than enough assets/life insurance to pay for whatever care they might give before my family and friends can tell them to stop.
And lastly, find me a notory and witness willing to illegally stamp my do ent for free and I'll have one. Notories can't legally work for free and I don't particularly feel like going through the time and effort to find a notory and witness, write the do ent in a clear manner, and pay the small fee when the chances of it being necessary are exceedingly slim.
Do you have a bank, or are you allergic to them, too?And lastly, find me a notory and witness willing to illegally stamp my do ent for free and I'll have one. Notories can't legally work for free and I don't particularly feel like going through the time and effort to find a notory and witness, write the do ent in a clear manner, and pay the small fee when the chances of it being necessary are exceedingly slim.
Most banks and credit unions have a notary on the premises, and they pay the notary and let the members use the service free.
I must go to crappy branches then, because mine said they didn't when I asked a few years ago
Dems. They don't give a about you :read: They want more control. More control = more power = staying power in Washington.
^^^^^ Uh, that's ALL politicians, without exception.
Soon enough you'll have to make sure your health insurance card is next to your auto insurance card when you drive. Yippee.
What is really stupid about Hillary's idea is that the government can mandate auto insurance since it is a privilege to drive. One could draw the analogy that mandating health insurance means that Hillary thinks it's a privilege to live!
Or... maybe it's just that dictator quality she has.
Yesterday, I heard the host honest thing in the world. You know how coming from 5 year olds, things are often to the point and honest, not knowing the implications of what they say...
Heard a 5 year old say "I don't like her, she always scolding people" referring to senator Clinton!
Define "Health Care Business" please.
Could be a scary thing to give OUR government the mandate to regulate the profits of a Health Care Business. Just look how far they've extended their control of EVERYTHING based on one little Interstate Commerce Clause of the Cons ution!
I say she should turn it over the Wal-Mart. They are coming up
with some pretty good ideas for the employees.
The New York Times
September 19, 2007
Health Plan Overhauled at Wal-Mart
By MICHAEL BARBARO
Wal-Mart, long criticized for its health care coverage, unveiled a broad plan yesterday that is intended to cut employee costs, expand coverage and offer workers thousands of cheap prescription drugs.
Starting Jan. 1, Wal-Mart’s insurance will look a lot like that offered by many other American companies, but with some twists that even longtime critics described as innovative. Independent experts praised several features of the plan and said it could represent a turning point for the retailer, the nation’s largest private employer.
“On face value, this looks like a very significant change and improvement,” said Ron Pollack, president of Families USA, a health care advocacy group in Washington that has been critical of Wal-Mart.
Wal-Mart said it would give each employee or family that signs up for coverage a grant of $100 to $500 to defray health expenses while charging premiums as low as $5 a month. It will eliminate expensive hospital deductibles and make 2,400 generic drugs available to employees for $4 a prescription — about 1,000 more than it sells to customers at that price.
The plans with the lowest premiums would still charge annual deductibles as high as $2,000 — typical for American corporate health plans, but perhaps steep for Wal-Mart employees, many of whom work part time and earn less than $20,000 a year. And the company’s plans have other limitations, including waiting periods as long as a year for new employees.
Wal-Mart Watch, a group long critical of the company, said yesterday that “these plans are still unaffordable due to low wages or inaccessible due to waiting periods.”
It is unclear how many of the 125,000 Wal-Mart workers without health coverage would sign up. But industry analysts said the program represented an upgrade for the 636,000 employees who already receive health insurance through Wal-Mart. They said it could force the company’s discount-retailing compe ors to offer more generous plans for their own workers.
Helen Darling, president of the National Business Group on Health and a former benefits consultant, called it “a very good plan,” saying that “parts of it, like the $4 generics, are game-changing for the industry.”
Mr. Pollack and others noted, though, that they had yet to see the fine print of the new program.
Wal-Mart has long been held up to ridicule for its health care programs.
Two years ago, the Maryland legislature took the unusual step of requiring Wal-Mart — and only Wal-Mart — to increase spending on health insurance. The law was later overturned.
Even before yesterday’s announcement, Wal-Mart had taken some steps to answer critics. It allowed part-time employees to enroll their children in the company’s insurance program, reduced the waiting period before a new part-time employee was eligible for benefits to one year from two, and created plans with premiums as low as $11 a month.
But critics contended that the company had not done enough, pointing to the still high deductibles and lengthy waiting periods.
The new program, for which workers can sign up starting this month, offers 50 ways to customize coverage, with varying trade-offs like higher premiums and lower deductibles.
In one plan, for example, an employee would pay premiums up to $79 a month, receive a health care credit of $100 and pay a deductible of $500. In another, the employee would pay premiums of $8 a month, receive a $100 health care credit, but pay a deductible of $2,000. Though many generic drugs will be available for $4, brand-name drugs will cost $30 to $50.
In an interview, Wal-Mart’s executive vice president for benefits, Linda M. Dillman, said the company hoped to persuade those workers without health coverage to sign up for it. About half of Wal-Mart workers have coverage from the company, while 40 percent more get their coverage elsewhere — through a spouse, a parent, a second job or a state program like Medicaid. About 10 percent have no health coverage.
“We are removing any barriers of entry” to the company’s health care plan, Ms. Dillman said. “When you are talking about $8 a month and a $100 health care credit, why would you not sign up?”
She said the program emphasized preventive care, paid for by the company before a deductible kicked in. Health care credits, for example, would make it possible for employees to see doctors and buy prescription drugs without paying anything out of pocket.
“If they need to seek care, they will do it, not forgo it,” Ms. Dillman said.
Milt Freudenheim contributed reporting.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company
On the Wal Mart plan; I'm seeing deductibles and credits, but I'm wondering what the limits on the major medical coverage are. Most people concentrate on where benefits begin; to save REAL money, you limit where they END.
Meanwhile the little people are stuck with the great programs created by the benevolent.
The idea of government requiring health insurance is that the government ends up paying for it anyway. Didn't our great and glorious leader tell us that people can just go to the ER? Who ends up paying for that?
And the question is?
The idea of government requiring health insurance is that the government ends up paying for it anyway.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
