The New York Times Reviews Obama’s Health Care Plan
By Charles Lemos on July 24, 2008 at 7:30 PM in Barack Obama, Health Care, Hillary Clinton
In the realm of better late than never, to be fair Paul Krugman spend months reviewing the health care plans of all the candidates, the New York Times has now taken the time to scrutinize Obama’s health care proposals.
It is one of the most audacious promises in a campaign that has been thick with them.
In speech after speech, Senator Barack Obama has vowed that he will lower the country’s health care costs enough to “bring down premiums by $2,500 for the typical family.” Moreover, Mr. Obama, the presumptive Democratic nominee, has promised that his health plan will be in place “by the end of my first term as president of the United States.”
Whether Mr. Obama can deliver is a matter of considerable dispute among health analysts and economists. While there is consensus that the American health care system is bloated with waste, eliminating enough to save $2,500 per family would require simultaneous and synergistic solutions to a host of problems that have proved intractable for decades.
Even if the next president and Congress can muster the political will, analysts question whether significant savings would materialize in as little as four years, or even in 10. But as Mr. Obama confronts an electorate that is deeply unsettled by escalating health costs, he is offering a precise “chicken in every pot” guarantee based on numbers that are largely unknowable. Furthermore, it is not completely clear what he is promising.
His words about lowering “premiums” by $2,500 for the average family of four have been fairly consistent. But the health policy advisers who formulated the figure say it actually represents the average family’s share of savings not only in premiums paid by individuals, but also in premiums paid by employers and in tax-supported health programs like Medicare and Medicaid.
“What we’re trying to do,” said one of the advisers, David M. Cutler, in explaining the gap between Mr. Obama’s words and his intent, “is find a way to talk to people in a way they understand.”
The original arithmetic was somewhat basic. In May 2007, three Harvard professors who are unpaid advisers to the Obama campaign — Mr. Cutler, David Blumenthal and Jeffrey Liebman — produced a memorandum offering their “best guess” that a menu of changes would produce savings of at least $200 billion a year (it has since been revised to $214 billion). That would amount to about 8 percent of the $2.5 trillion in health care spending projected for 2009, when the next president takes office.
The memorandum attributed specific savings to several broad initiatives, with the numbers plucked from recent studies. Investments in computerized medical records would save $77 billion a year, the advisers wrote. Reducing administrative costs in the insurance industry would yield up to $46 billion. Improving prevention programs and chronic disease management would be worth $81 billion.
The total savings were then divided by the country’s population, multiplied for a family of four, and rounded down slightly to a number that was easy to grasp: $2,500. The average cost of family coverage bought through an employer was $12,106 in 2007, with workers paying $3,281 of that amount, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation, a health research group.
Mr. Obama aspires to cover the country’s 47 million uninsured by requiring insurers to accept all comers, regardless of their health status, and by providing generous tax credits to low-income workers. The tax credits could be used to buy into a new federal health plan or private plans marketed through a government exchange.
The subsidies are expensive, estimated at well over $100 billion. Other components of the Obama plan also bear up-front costs, like a pledge to spend $50 billion over five years to speed the computerization of health records, $6 billion a year on tax credits to small businesses that provide coverage to workers, and an unspecified amount to buffer businesses from high-cost insurance claims.
The source Mr. Obama has identified to pay for them — the repeal of President Bush’s tax cuts for those making more than $250,000 — would cover only about half. That means additional health care savings would be needed, not only to keep premiums under control but also to help pay for the subsidies.
A consensus has emerged among health economists that at least a third of the country’s spending on health care is unnecessary. Both Mr. Obama, of Illinois, and his Republican rival, Senator John McCain of Arizona, agree that significant sums could be saved through reductions in unneeded procedures and improvements in electronic record-keeping, prevention and chronic disease management.
But the dollar values Mr. Obama has attached to individual components of his plan are beginning to attract scrutiny. In particular, the Congressional Budget Office issued a report in May questioning the amount to be saved from the computerization of health systems.
Mr. Obama took his estimate of $77 billion a year from a 2005 study by the RAND Corporation (which cautioned that reductions of that magnitude would not emerge for 15 years). The Congressional analysts found, however, that for various methodological reasons the RAND study was “not an appropriate guide” to potential savings.
This month, Mr. Obama’s health advisers tried to recast the debate so that the questioning of any one number would not undermine the plan’s broader credibility. They enlisted eight health policy experts to sign a letter that, without endorsing the math behind any single initiative, proclaimed it was “not only possible, but likely” that Mr. Obama could save $200 billion annually. They did not say by when.
Mr. Cutler, who helped collect the signatures, said he and his colleagues had decided “that our attempt to lay out one plausible scenario for the savings had created more problems than it had solved.” He added: “Putting the debate where this message puts it — do you believe we can save 8 percent of health spending through a major series of public and private reforms — asks the question in a way that is much more productive than the issue of ‘Do you believe a single estimate among many, many studies?’ ”
Mr. Obama’s economic policy director, Jason Furman, said the campaign’s estimates were conservative and asserted that much of the savings would come quickly. “We think we could get to $2,500 in savings by the end of the first term, or be very close to it,” Mr. Furman said.
The campaign won additional backing this week from Kenneth E. Thorpe of Emory University, an authority on health care costs who helped formulate Bill Clinton’s failed plan in 1993. In an assessment that he initiated in coordination with the campaign, Mr. Thorpe wrote that if all of Mr. Obama’s proposals were enacted they would reduce health spending by between $203 billion and $273 billion by 2012. He calculated that half of the savings would accrue to the federal government.
The Obama advisers said that while not all of the savings would translate into lower premiums, consumers would gain in other ways. The savings to employers would be passed along as higher wages, they predicted, and the savings to government would eventually mean either lower taxes or added benefits.
But whether employers and governments respond that way cannot be guaranteed, particularly in a difficult economy. And a number of health policy experts have questioned whether the $2,500 projection is either fiscally or politically realistic. Reducing health care costs, they emphasized, means taking money from someone’s pocket and rationing care that Americans have come to expect, a recipe for stiff resistance.
“There is no easy money because, as the saying goes, one person’s fraud and abuse is another person’s income,” said Joseph R. Antos of the American Enterprise Institute. “I wouldn’t think that four years or eight years or probably 10 years will be enough to see numbers of that sort.”
The Commonwealth Fund, a health research group in New York, published a study in December projecting that a robust overhaul consisting of 15 broad initiatives would generate savings of only 6 percent after 10 years. “Doing it by the end of a first term is ambitious and would require tough policies,” said Karen Davis, the group’s president.
Jonathan B. Oberlander, who teaches health policy at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, called it wishful thinking. “Do they have the potential to generate significant savings in the long run?” Dr. Oberlander asked. “Yes. Do I believe they will produce substantial savings in the short run that can be used to finance Obama’s plan? No.”
Here are some of Paul Krugman’s columns on health care proposals:
Mandates and Mudslinging November 30, 2007.
Clinton, Obama, Insurance February 4, 2008.
More Obama ugliness on health care February 4, 2008.
His health care plan is USELESS.
For starters, he said in debate, AND on his web site when I looked last, that he isn’t going to “interfere with states” as if the states are going to do the magic changey thing. Whomever put that plan together has woefully inadequate knowledge of how States operate. In MANY states, the state legislators are in the back pocket of health care insurers. Barack Obama clearly also does not know that some states forbid by law that their residents cross state lines to get health insurance cheaper. This means they not only cannot purchase “congressional health care plan” but they cannot shop beyond the state. This means that health care insurers in these states will happily gobble up any “Supplementary incentives” and STILL continue to raise rates– and the state ‘leaders’ won’t do a thing about it. Leaving things to the states is tantamount to leaving things just as they are.
And telling someone proudly that you will reduce the yearly cost of health insurance by $2500 shows a REAL lack of understanding of exactly how much a single pay health insurance policy costs. I am convinced that Obama hasn’t got Clue One about what a single pay health care policy costs, because he is so accustomed to getting government freebee insurance of the best kind.In my state, you would pay 2k Per Month for a family HMO policy that will surely let you die if you sign on and get sick. And that’s a fact. I can assure you that a family that can’t afford $24,000 a year cannot afford $21,500 a year. A single pay for a single person for that same policy is roughly $900 per month.
Giving “incentives” to states is tantamount to giving the health insurers another freebee, while they still raise the rates double digits to make up for the people Barack Obama says don’t have to get insurance. Somebody has to pay for them. That means the rest of us. That means higher rates. Much higher rates. I won’t even get into the fact that he has said NOTHING specific about how he intends to reduce cost that will stop Health care insurers from raising rates yearly over the already obnoxious rates.
This is not universal health care at all. It is a No Health Care Plan. The 50 million people who are not insured now won’t be able to be insured under Barky’s plan either. They won’t be able to afford it even with his pissant $2500 promise. In fact, John McCain will give me a $5k write off. Hell, I’m better of with his plan.
Worthless. Simply Worthless. He should be laughed off the platform when he talks about his No Plan.
Here is the link you wanted uppity.
http://tinyurl.com/6z8ujy
Thanks Time!
Whoa they sound upset. Hahahahaha.
For Immediate Release
July 24, 2008 Contact: Press Office
703-650-5550
I remember LinFar who talked from her heart about health care…and then did a back flip into a vat of Kool-Aid when HRC suspended her campaign. I have wondered how in the world she could support someone who is so clearly not in tune with UHC in this country. Very sad. I actualy feel sorry for LinFar and friends.
OT…but wonderful - is this comment by McCain on Obama’s big Berlin speech. Very powerful. Very compelling. And very devastating. THIS IS THE CAMPAIGN THEME HE SHOULD TAKE:
——————–
McCain Campaign on Barack Obama Speech
ARLINGTON, VA — Today, McCain 2008 spokesman Tucker Bounds issued the following statement on Barack Obama’s speech in Germany today:
“While Barack Obama took a premature victory lap today in the heart of Berlin, proclaiming himself a ‘citizen of the world,’ John McCain continued to make his case to the American citizens who will decide this election. Barack Obama offered eloquent praise for this country, but the contrast is clear. John McCain has dedicated his life to serving, improving and protecting America. Barack Obama spent an afternoon talking about it.”
———————
The fact that McCain has “dedicated his life” is a powerful statement and mutes the age issue…IMHO.
I remember LinFar who talked from her heart about health care…and then did a back flip into a vat of Kool-Aid when HRC suspended her campaign. I have wondered how in the world she could support someone who is so clearly not in tune with UHC in this country. Very sad. I actualy feel sorry for LinFar and friends.
OT…but wonderful - is this comment by McCain on Obama’s big Berlin speech. Very powerful. Very compelling. And very devastating. THIS IS THE CAMPAIGN THEME HE SHOULD TAKE:
——————–
McCain Campaign on Barack Obama Speech
ARLINGTON, VA — Today, McCain 2008 spokesman Tucker Bounds issued the following statement on Barack Obama’s speech in Germany today:
“While Barack Obama took a premature victory lap today in the heart of Berlin, proclaiming himself a ‘citizen of the world,’ John McCain continued to make his case to the American citizens who will decide this election. Barack Obama offered eloquent praise for this country, but the contrast is clear. John McCain has dedicated his life to serving, improving and protecting America. Barack Obama spent an afternoon talking about it.”
———————
The fact that McCain has “dedicated his life” is a powerful statement and mutes the age issue…IMHO.
McCain will also lift McCarren Ferguson Act allowing insurance to be regulated by the Feds,
and has said he will make sure we have state to state competition,
he is gonna make them compete, WooT!
Uhhbamas plan having that mandate for children only, will raise premiums for children, since we arent spreading the risks in the larger pool of insureds and they have us where they want us
and by not putting all of us in the risk pool, and not mandating for all, we will still have exorbitant ER costs for non emergency care for people who dont buy coverage.
I know plenty of them DINKS, double income no kids, INKS, NIKEs no income kids educated living with parents..
Uhhbama stammered and hemmed and hawed when confronted by Hillary at the debate on this,
you have a mandate for children, how will YOU enforce the mandate for those who violate it?
uhm uhh, see you will have to consider this too, HRC said paraphrase.
We can get it from them when they go to the hospital, said Uhhbama!!
WHAT? said Hillary? You would demand cash when a parent appears with a sick child in the ER?
no cogent answer
yeah, McCains credit and interstate competition over Uhhbamas premium hiking partial half assed cave in to big insurance and rx co plan…
HILLARY IS POTUS
WooT!
Uppity. There is no chance he ever intended to actually pass a health care bill. His plan is a result of trying to take any advantage Hillary had. His mandate is for children only so maybe he is counting on adults to opt out.
But, this country needs universal health care. I have posted this article from the BBC before with the hope people would understand what is really happening to people who have no health care and simply cannot afford it. Hillary has a health care plan that would work. She has spent years refinning it and trying to get her colleagues to listen. I can’t imagine anything worse than having a sick child and having no resourses to pay for care, but adults are suffering too.
He started a charity - Remote Area Medical (RAM) - more than 20 years ago to bring relief to those cut off from healthcare.
Originally it was to help poor tribes in the former British colony of Guyana, South America.
That is where he lived after leaving Preston, Lancashire, more than half a century ago - he still is a British citizen.
But now Stan spends most of his time bringing relief to the richest country in the world.
Production line
Some 60% of RAM’s work is now carried out in the United States.
Here in this country if you’re poor - you don’t have much of a shot
Stan Brock
Founder, RAM
On a wet, spring weekend he lands his vintage World War II aircraft - once used to drop American troops on D-Day - in Lafayette, Tennessee.
He bought the plane to parachute medics into the jungle.
Today he is unloading dentists’ chairs from the plane into a pickup truck.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7420744.stm
I’m so filled with hope.
Very audacious of you!!!
Barack Obama will try to put in place the plan that his health care lobbyist buddies write for him.
It looks like Boren. I wonder if his shitty healthcare plan had anything to do with Goolsbee’s secret visit to Canada to discuss NAFTA.
Barack Obama would not get anything accomplished as POTUS. Thank goodness he won’t be POTUS. He’s far too lazy. He has never accomplished much of anything important so why would anyone believe he would in a tougher job? That is just stupity. No, no, no. He will be way too busy parading around the world giving speeches and sucking up his adoration. It won’t last too long because most people would catch on or get bored with the hollow words at some point, but no, nothing imoprtant would really get done.
I will be voting McCain, but my opinion is and has been that if we lost President Hillary Rodham Clinton for ‘08, healthcare in the US will not be changed. Hillary was our healthcare President. There is no other prepared or knowledgable enough so for any of you whiners in the next 4 years who whine about healthcare, I am going to ask who you voted for in the Primary and if it was Obama or McCain, I will say well, you just didn’t want any changes to healthcare then! Deal with it. You threw away the decent choice!
In German speech, Obama said he is going to tear down walls between immigrants and natives. I thought he was for the wall between Mexico and US????
Anyone know?
Its true…both ways barack
Obama tells Berlin he will tear down the wall between immigrants and natives, but he VOTED FOR BORDER WALL.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/176290,CST-EDT-REF18.article
Great catch.
But maybe he voted for the wall when he was in his Banking committee or Indonesian speaking mode.
Under Hillary’s plan:
1. Anyone with a healthcare plan they like, keeps it. If you don’t like what you have, or yours is too expensive, you can choose from among several PRIVATE insurance plans (NOT GOVERNMENT) now offered to members of congress.
2. There would be no more waiting for services than there is now. (Canada has a governmental one-payer system that is universal, but people wait ages for services. So does England. That’s not what Hillary’s plan is at all.) What Froma Harrop is recommending IS a government program (Medicare/Medicaid), but that’s not what Hillary’s plan recommends.
3. Health care for you and everyone else would be much cheaper and much better than it is now, simply because of volume. When everyone is required to have it, costs go down because exhorbitant emergency room visits by the currently uninsured will be dramatically reduced. Coverage must be a “mandated” or costs will never go down.
4. For those who are poor, healthcare would be subsidized so that they can afford it.
5. Universal healthcare would be a boon to the economy because businesses that wish to offer healthcare to employees would have these costs greatly reduced.
6. Your healthcare plan can never be taken away from you for ANY reason, whether or not you are employed, or have pre-existing conditions, etc.
Obama’s healthcare plan is seriously flawed. Basically, it’s literally nothing more than we have right now. Small wonder it would pass congress!!! But, McCain’s plan is just as useless. So, McCain & Obama have that big, important issue in common!
Obama’s plan to just cover children is a joke. What if parent’s get sick???
Your vision & judgment has been seriously impaired by all that kool-aid…
Wishing you good health– you’ll need it!
I see the healthcare policy issue as a shining example of the fraudulent claims of Obama.
Two points why I still reject the idea of an Obama candidacy:
1) Policy points, as mentioned in the before: a) Kids, and subsequently their parents, health we be subject to a merit system, in that you must go out and get signed up. Universal mandates would ensure every child is in the system. b.) His plan will be manipulated by insurance companies, which will be manipulated by hedge fund bets.
2) Quality/Moral Failure: He employed good v evil politics (change v status quo) politics through out his campaign to distinguish himself as transformation, but used Republican ideological talking points in emailers to denigrate Hillary Clinton’s mandated universal healthcare plan as “socialize medicine” -which were specifically geared toward “independent” white affluent males in VI, MD, and WI- it was dropped in Ohio when Clinton called him out.
I’ve always been told you can’t have your cake and eat it too. You’re either above it all and transformational or you use gutter and alley tactics like “socialized medicine”.
When I combine policy points and Obama’s willingness to operate below the standard he holds everyone else to, I have a fundamental problem with the candidate, and pretty negative assessment when guessing his intended goals. He ran up his lead on anyone but Hillary and antiwar position, and sadly, healthcare was not a key issue for the majority of his voters. He will not suffer any fallout from his supporters for failing us on his economic policy.
There is also a methodology about him that reminds me of Ronald Reagan in how easily he denies responsibility or professes total unfamiliarity with the nefarious conveniences of his arrangements.
Thank you Hope. You are right on every point. I have never believed he actually intended to initiate a universal health care plan to begin with. This was the problem Elizabeth Edwards had with his cantidacy. I wonder now, if she knows she should have spoken out for Hillary?
I wonder about the parents also. Since the children come from the parents, the parents being healthy is the first step toward healthy children. Unhealthy parents=unhealthy children. It’s not rocket science!
It’s amazing how so many people don’t get that basic idea. Farmers get it. The want the parents of their stock to be as healthy as possible before reproducing. After all, we are animals too!
The NYT is completely infuriating — this is the paper of Hillary’s home state? She said months ago his plan leaves 16 million out and is more expensive and less doable than hers. Krugman said the same thing.
NOW that she’s been kicked to the curb by the DNC the NYT wants to talk about his crappy health care plan that makes no sense?
Charles, thank you for posting this.
Wake up, Super Delegates.
Everyone here should have figured it out by now: Obama does not have a plan for anything. He simply does not care about anyone but himself. He wants to be a hero in the history books alongside Abraham Lincoln, JFK, and MLK. He wants to be the first black president. He wants people hundreds of years from now to worship him - but why? Simply because he could “unite” people and give great speeches. Everything is about him making people feel good with his oratory skills (which aren’t even that great. he only reads plagiarized speeches from a teleprompter). Everything about this man is fake and the worst thing about it is that Obama probably knows and doesn’t care. He simply wants to be in charge and become the most famous man in history. Those are his only goals. He could care less what happens to you or me or African Americans suffering in New Orleans or the south side of Chicago. Obama is selfish and arrogant. And it comes through in his health care policies. He thinks people can do whatever they want with their health care because he doesn’t give a damn if people are left out to die. All of this is about one person and that is him being the first black president and going down in the history books with his face on our money and an airport, library, and schools named after him. He only cares about himself.
A regular Baby Doc Duvalier, if you ask me.
You are so right. I have seen very few people as self-absorbed as that flapping jib. He won’t answer questions because he has never thought about the issues; he doesn’t think about them because he doesn’t care about them. The debates should have been a wake-up call to his supporters. But when there’s trouble a-brewing, they just bring out a boiler-plate, platitude-filled speech to pacify the restless herd.
He is in it for the money-people, honey, the international blood-suckers who are driven by greed and power and who call themselves citizens of the world. They have no country, no compatriots. It is all about them….
He’s much to do about nothing…
That’s how I see him, too. He’s not even really a stateman, nevermind interested in being president for people.
It’s about being the first black president. And that’s all it’s about.
Just a reminder: There is currently a “cocktail party” at riverdaughter’s
http://riverdaughter.wordpress.com/2008/07/24/cocktails-at-the-scratching-post-down-by-the-riverside/
I truly think he’ll be the worst of both worlds: he’ll raise our taxes, and funnel the extra money to insurance companies and corporations.
He told Rueters that Democrats are too regulation-happy:
Of course! The American taxpayer is the goose that laid the golden egg to these people.
But they weren’t expecting a puma.
TIME FOR THE SHOW
no quarter radio!! NOW!
the only way I’d ‘get behind O’Bama’ would be if he were standing at the edge of a cliff……..that’d be tempting.
http://www.thecityedition.com/Pages/Archive/Summer08/BrazileRoveConnect.html
This plan is no plan. I’ve worked for a hospital system since the early 90’s. Those who are poor who own nothing(you can’t have savings, a house, an expensive car,etc)are eligible and do receive Medicaid. They are limited to a smaller pool of doctors that will accept them as pateints but they have adequate care. Also most states have programs for children under eighteen even if the parents own a home or earn over a certain amount. But where the problem lies is in the uninsured and the underinsured who have jobs or who are students who cannot afford individual policies. There are so many variables, including healthcare costs, a lack of prevention services, higher premiums passed on to the employee from the employer, the lack of major medical coverage in case of catastrophe(prior to the 90’s the patient was assured that 100% of bill would be covered if he had this insurance now they are lucky if 50-80% is covered)and people are living longer. The only solution to this mess which is bankrupting people and ruining their credit for life is universal healthcare coverage–Clinton has worked on this for so long and her plan is COMPREHENSIVE and will yield results. BO’s plan will once again benefit the healthcare corporations and the huge medical industry such as the one his wife works for as a corporate lawyer. It is more of the same, why did these “journalists” with their keen analytical minds start writing about this back in January, February and March?
Has it escaped your notice that the Federal Govt is bankrupted?
The answer to Medical Care is tax credits for people to pay it for themselves or get their own private insurance.
Only because the same sort of idiots that brought us the deciderer are now trying to foist the change-changer on us to complete the bankruptcy proceedings.
Jake Tapper should win a Pulitzer. He’s uncovered the hypocrisy of Axelrod and crowd to a tee.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/07/just-hours-late.html
So Obama did not go to see the wounded vets, gave a speech, and is now trying to raise money off the speech.
Many Obot heads have exploded over this blog entry. Looks like Jake riled up the beehive, and the Queen Bee is none to happy either.
I wouldn’t nominate Jake Tapper for Clark County bailiff after this piece:
Bubba: Obama Is Just Like Jesse Jackson
January 26, 2008 8:18 PM
Said Bill Clinton today in Columbia, SC: “Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in ‘84 and ‘88. Jackson ran a good campaign. And Obama ran a good campaign here.”
This was in response to a question from ABC News’ David Wright about it taking “two Clintons to beat” Obama. Jackson had not been mentioned.
Boy, I can’t understand why anyone would think the Clintons are running a race-baiting campaign to paint Obama as “the black candidate.”
WRITTEN BY JAKE TAPPER.
If you agree the Clintons were racists, then maybe you respect this man’s creds. I think he’s a sellout hack peddling the worst yellow journalism around.
Hope wont put food on my table or put gas in my car……solutions to these problems, REAL SOLUTIONS , not a bunch of bullshit, will!
Anyone, and I am referring to those that have their heads up Obama’s ass sniffing the hopium, need to wake up! This man is Dangerous!
Today, one of the commentators started calling Obama’s plane “O” force one……this thought could make one nauseous.
That goes with the o-movement–he’s crowning.
Ok my husband, that’s just nasty.
I’m glad everyone is so thoughtful and have done their research. But, let me put this a simple as I can after 25 years of managed care experience, this is bull shit! The only way that we can solve this problem is everyone die by the age of 52 or stop eating fat fat, drinking and smoking. Technology has put us in this position. We live longer, we eat more and we don’t take medical advise.
Hold on, I can’t find my ligher! Dam and I just drop a mini cheese burger. We protest when companies fire smokers, we cry foul when a company will not hire a fat person that will cost them thousands of additonal dollars in health care cost.
Don’t get me wrong, I think BO is just like his inials Stink! But, Americans can do what we do best is solve our problems.
That isn’t the cause. We spend twice as much on health care than any other country. Those countries have citizens with the same sorts of vices. So that little deductive argument falls apart. There are two problems: we want our care no matter what the cost (and because we’re a captive audience to the health-care industry, they charge us as much as they can squeeze out of us.) The second problem is that we have gone from an essentially non-profit system to one that is profit-driven. So long as the health-care industry has dollar signs where their compassion should be, we will never get costs under control.
You do understand that not all illnesses are a result of an imaginary arbitrary punishment, right? How do you explain children with cancer or infants born with diabetes? Your compassion and depth of knowledge of the human experience is heartwarming.
God bless Karl Rove’s black heart for being unable to recognize the sheer, vast, natural beauty of ANWR. He just sees oil fields.
I still can’t get over Obama charging a fee to his speaking engagements and than calling the people his donors. The audacity of change and hope. The change is that things will cost you more or you will pay for what used to be free and hope that you don’t wake up and realized you’ve been scammed.
BO’s healthcare plan is Gov. Duval Patrick’s healthcare plan in MA.
Thought that was Mitt Romney’s healthcare plan. How is it working out over there?
Months ago I made a blog post of NY Times post by Paul Krugman who had Obama’s health care plan analyzed up against HIllarys.
As I posted here, his plan did not come out on top. Needless to say the press ignored all this and it was an independent research and study that was done on their respective plans.
The press ignored the negative campaigning Obama did, for sure, when he consistently lied to the public about Hillary’s plan. He got by with that over and over.
It was hard to watch as Hillary was accused of negative campaigning when Obama was pulling that crap.
The cognitive dissonance must be deafening for the Obamots–”Psst! Your candidate SUCKS!”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aP3q8dHA4Hk
I’m not much of a communist, but I do know that the crucial problem in the US’s health care system, is that it is privately owned and largely for-profit. Any workable solution will have to address that, and ultimately it probably means making health care workers government employees, and nationalizing the infrastructure. Ultimately, that is. Not tomorrow. In any case, tinkering with details such as the means of storing medical records is NOT going to cut it.
Also, I’d like to point out once again that one of the members of the precious Democratic Rules and Bylaws Committee, James Roosevelt, is president and CEO of the for-profit Tufts Health Care Plan. I believe that he’s promoted his company as a partner in the Massachusetts health care plan. However, I haven’t followed this, so you’d have to ask Deval Patrick or other residents of Massachusetts how it’s working out for their state government to shovel money at a for-profit health insurance group.