Which candidate has an actual plan for health care?

[blondeatlast]

I have a chronic health problem so this is an important issue for me. This could sway my vote.

[Kat45]

1. I'd like to know the answer to that question, too.

[arissa]

2. Kucinich is the only candidate who is proposing

Universal Healthcare, as in single-payer, EVERYONE IS COVERED - PERIOD. No gimmicks, no compromises.

Dean's plan is the next best, but it's a compromise plan and he's only promising to cover "all children under the age of 18" and he wants to do it through private insurers.

[arissa]

3. Here's his position statement

The Kucinich plan is enhanced 'Medicare for All' -- a universal, single-payer system of national health insurance, carefully phased in over 10 years. It addresses everyone's needs, including the 40 million Americans without coverage and those paying exorbitant rates for health insurance. This approach to healthcare emphasizes patient choice, and puts doctors and patients in control of the system, not insurance companies. Coverage will be more complete than private insurance plans, encourage prevention and include prescription drugs.

Health care is currently dominated by insurance firms and HMOS, institutions that are more bureaucratic and costly than Medicare. People are waiting longer for appointments. Fewer people are getting a doctor of their choice. Physicians are given monetary incentives to deny care. Pre-existing illnesses are being used to deny coverage.

Over time, the Kucinich plan will remove private insurance companies from the system -- along with their waste, paperwork, profits, excessive executive salaries, advertising, sales commissions, etc -- and redirect resources to actual treatment. Insurance companies do not heal or treat anyone, physicians and health practitioners do ...and thousands of physicians support a single-payer system because it reduces bureaucracy and shelters the doctor-patient relationship from HMO and insurance company encroachment.

Non-profit national health insurance will decrease total healthcare spending while providing more treatment and services -- through reductions in bureaucracy and cost-cutting measures such as bulk purchasing of prescriptions drugs. Funding will come primarily from existing government healthcare spending (more than $1 trillion) and a phased-in tax on employers of 7.7% (almost $1 trillion). The employers' tax is less than the 8.5% of payroll now paid on average by companies that provide private insurance. For budgetary details, click here.

This type of system -- privately-delivered health care, publicly financed -- has worked well in other countries, none of whom spend as much per capita on healthcare as the United States. 'We're already paying for national healthcare; we're just not getting it, says Kucinich. The cost-effectiveness of a single-payer system has been affirmed in many studies, including those conducted by the Congressional Budget Office and the General Accounting Office. The GAO has written:
"If the US were to shift to a system of universal coverage and a single payer, as in Canada, the savings in administrative costs (10% to private insurers) would be more than enough to offset the expense of universal coverage."

Over the years, groups and individuals as diverse as Consumers Union, labor unions, the CEO of General Motors, the editorial boards of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution and St. Louis Post Dispatch, and Physicians for a National Health Program have endorsed a single-payer approach. It is sound economics -- what actuaries call 'Spreading the Risk' -- to extend Medicare to younger and healthier sectors of our population, thereby putting everyone in one insurance pool. It permanently saves and improves Medicare, while eliminating duplicative private and government bureaucracies.

While enhanced Medicare for All makes economic sense, it has not made political sense to some, due to the power of the private insurance lobby. The streamlined Kucinich plan is very different than the 1993 Clinton HMO-based plan, a complex proposal that left big insurance firms in a central role. After Clinton's 'Managed Competition' plan failed without coming up for a vote, talk-radio host Jim Hightower asked President Clinton why he hadn't put forward a "simple, straightforward" single-payer plan "instead of all this bureaucracy." Clinton replied, "I thought it would be easier to pass" a bill that left the insurance industry in place. "I guess I was wrong about that."

http://www.kucinich.us/issues/issue_universalhealth.htm

[blondeatlast]

9. A sensible plan, but 10 years just seems too long for me.

nm

[Eloriel]

8. THAT's not true about Dean

JESUS H. CHRIST. I know you're new -- welcome -- but I am SOOOOO tired of people spouting off the wrong damn stuff about Dean.

Here's a link to his healthcare policy:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_statement_health

Please read all of it, but here are the details:

My plan consists of four major components.


First, and most important, in order to extend health coverage to every uninsured child and young adult up to age 25, we'll redefine and expand two essential federal and state programs -- Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program. Right now, they only offer coverage to children from lower-income families. Under my plan, we cover all kids and young adults up to age 25 -- middle income as well as lower income. This aspect of my plan will give 11.5 million more kids and young adults access to the healthcare they need.


Second, we'll give a leg up to working families struggling to afford health insurance. Adults earning up to 185% of the poverty level -- $16,613 -- will be eligible for coverage through the already existing Children Health Insurance Program. By doing this, an additional 11.8 million people will have access to the care they need.


Many working families have incomes that put them beyond the help offered by government programs. But this doesn't mean they have viable options for healthcare. We'll establish an affordable health insurance plan people can buy into, providing coverage nearly identical to what members of Congress and federal employees receive.


To cushion the costs, we'll also offer a significant tax credit to those with high premium costs. By offering this help, another 5.5 million adults will have access to care.


Third, we need to recognize that one key to a healthy America is making healthcare affordable to small businesses.We shouldn't turn our back on the employer-based system we have now, but neither should we simply throw money at it. We need to modernize the system so employers will have an option beyond passing rising costs on to workers or bailing out of the system entirely. Fortunately, we have a model of efficient, affordable and user-friendly healthcare coverage: the federal employee health system.


With the plan I've put forth to the American people, we'll organize a system nearly identical to the one federal workers and members of Congress enjoy. And we'll enable all employers with less than 50 workers to join it at rates lower than are currently available to these companies -- provided they insure their work force. I'll also offer employers a deal: The federal government will pick up 70% of COBRA premiums for employees transitioning out of their jobs, but we'll expect employers to pay the cost of extending coverage for an additional two months. These two months are often the difference between workers finding the health coverage they need, or joining the ranks of the uninsured.


Finally, to ensure that the maximum number of American men, women and children have access to healthcare, we must address corporate responsibility. There are many corporations that could provide healthcare to their employees but choose not to. The final element of this plan is a clear, strong message to corporate America that providing health coverage is fundamental to being a good corporate citizen. I look at business tax deductions as part of a compact between American taxpayers and corporate America. We give businesses certain benefits, and expect them to live up to certain responsibilities.

I believe this plan is sensible and that it can pass Congress -- but most importantly, I believe that it is the right thing to do.

-----

That passing Congress is a really key part. You can promise anything you want -- free healthcare incuding all the cosmetic surgery you want and designer eyeglasses too, but if you can't get it passed through Congress, it ain't gonna cover anyone.

Eloriel

[blondeatlast]

11. Thanks for the info.

"Many working families have incomes that put them beyond the help offered by government programs. But this doesn't mean they have viable options for healthcare. We'll establish an affordable health insurance plan people can buy into, providing coverage nearly identical to what members of Congress and federal employees receive."

Sounds good, at least in the short run.

[arissa]

13. No need to get snippy

I've heard Dean speak on the issue of healthcare several times. Each time, the ONLY thing he promises is to try and get "every child under 18" insured. I've repeatedly heard him speak on it, and I've repeatedly heard that as the benchmark, and I've repeatedly heard him state that he would model his healthcare system after Vermont's, which he claims insures 99% of "children under 18."

Now I haven't read all the statements on his website, but one thing is certain: on the several occasions I've heard him speak, that is all he promised.

So either he can't keep his position straight between his speeches, he's changed his mind in the past month and is now touting a different plan since I last heard him speak, or he's got a good staffer who is good at making what I heard him speak about sound a lot better in written form.

Or I suppose it is possible that I'm simply schizophrenic and never actually heard Dean say all that, 3 or 4 times. :)

But whatever the reason for the discrepancy between what I've heard him say repeatedly and what you pulled from his website, there's no need to jump down my throat.

[tjdee]

4. Edwards is unveiling his plan on Monday in NH.

I'd prefer Kucinich's plan to all of them, but that plan would never pass in a House with a GOP majority.

My health is kicking my ass lately, but I'd like relief that could actually HAPPEN in next year's Congress--instead of a health plan that strokes my (very sick, oy) ego and goes nowhere in Congress.

[leftyandproud]

5. Kucinich

no compromises...Repeal the tax cut and give universal healthcre to everyone. No "moderation" involved. USA will finally catch up to the rest of the world with a single payer system.

[sandnsea]

6. Kerry's Plan is Good

It involves being able to buy into the actual Federal Program, not medicaid or medicare. Generous credits for small business and those on unemployment. Some controls on prescription drugs. Money for hospitals, etc., to upgrade technology to help bring costs down. Some other things too. I don't think this country will go for single payer in the near future, I think this is a super alternative.

http://www.johnkerry.com/site/PageServer?pagename=spc_2003_0516

[blondeatlast]

12. So far Kerry is winning this round--it seems the most practical.

I like his insistence at holding down prescription costs. I'd like to see a timeline for pmplementation, though.

I still could vote for any of them in relation to health care--good thing it is a while till the primaries.

I find Gephardt's the least to my liking, though.

[Clete]

7. As a senior citizen, I too am very interested.

Various plans have been proferred by various Democratic candidates and legislators as well as other progressive non-partisan groups. I find this website to be the most informative on this matter.

http://www.pnhp.org/

[whoYaCallinAlib]

10. Gephardt has a good plan.

I think every democrat will have a good plan by the primaries. Healthcare is a major issue in this election.