Hillary's remedy is political genius

[Herman Munster]

http://www.seacoastonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070923/OPINION/709230337/-1/rss53

Bottom line: Clinton's plan has a chance. Whoever becomes president, the final product that makes it through the lobbyist-pounded crucible of Congress will look fairly much like it — not the government-run "single-payer" system loved by many liberals, not the "market-driven" status quo dominated by health insurers that is preferred by many conservatives.

And it has a chance because Clinton's proposal addresses the key concerns of middle-class voters, especially the swing constituency in the suburbs.

It is these moderate voters whose defections after Hillary Care I devastated her party and her reputation and, worse, squandered momentum for reform.

It would be silly to say urban and rural residents don't face or care about the lack of affordable, portable and pervasive coverage. But more than most suburbanites, city and country folk likely have coverage that meets at least minimal needs. That's because of the large numbers of rich and poor in urban centers and poor in rural hamlets. The rich can afford insurance if their employers don't supply it. The poor have access to government-funded coverage.

But it's suburbia's dense concentration of the middle- and upper-middle class, including small business owners, with their measured skepticism of big-government schemes to spend their money, that soured on Clinton's health folly in 1993-94.

Suburbanites, who often get insurance through their employers, didn't like the way Clinton would have denied them the choice of their own plan and doctor. Now, she says they can see anyone they want.

[durrrty libby]

1. K for later

[papau]

2. I hope - and suspect - that they are correct n/t

n/t

[antigop]

3. How many of those people who get their insurance through employers realize that

their "insurance" will be a high-deductible policy with a health savings account?

What a bunch of suckers if they fall for this.

[antigop]

4. And how many retirees will realize that this will provide cover to switch their plan

to a high-deductible plan?

Ah, yes, that retiree medical plan that they worked their entire careers for is going to be pulled out from underneath them and replaced with a high-deductible policy.

Thank you, sHillary.

[midlife_mo_Jo]

8. My dad retired from a civil service job

and he now has another full time job because he and my mom can't afford the discounted healthcare they get through the state. Sure, he was promised healthcare, but he doesn't get it without forking out a ridiculous sum of money.

You know any government or business that is keeping their promises lately?

[antigop]

9. sHillary's plan will only make it worse....

And I suggest you take a look at the medical plan for retired federal employees. Compare that to other retiree plans.

[ralphmich3]

93. Somebody tell Hill the gov't is bankrupt

after 5 years of warfare, tax cuts and increasing spending on Medicare and Medicaid

The housing crisis is causing a credit crunch which will likely only get worse....

[papau]

26. Yes - social security and medicare "keep their promises" and do so cheaply and effectively n/t

n/t

[papau]

22. # of employers offering high deductible w/ savings account's now over 40% but # of ee's is under 5%

The product is not what people want.

[antigop]

23. No, it's not but it's what being shoved by the insurance cos and it's what we will get. n/t

[Gloria]

5. In the recent past I had such a "high deductible" plan combined with a

Medical Savings account--the "pilot" program from the Dole days.

In about 5 years I put away a paltry sum, because I couldn't always scrape up the "65% of the premium" max contribution per year. But I'm happy to report that my premiums went SKY HIGH! When I wound up having back surgery, after years of carrying a $2,000 deductible so that I could get a "lower" premium (which was up to over $5,000 a year when I got Medicare SS disability).....My bill was nearly $10,000. (That premium was as of 2002..god knows what it would be now)

What a burden!! What a shit way to approach health coverage! Those MSA accounts are for people who have extra cash lying around....wake up, Billary!

[zulchzulu]

6. The Clinton Healthcare Plan should really be called the Healthcare Insurance Appeasement Act

What's really funny (not really) about all this is that so much of the healthcare insurance industry will be outsourced to India anyway. It's "inevitable".

Making it "mandatory" to choose from the "menu" is precisely what the healthcare industry wants. And like in 1994, this policy will fail again anyway. Chalk it up to "experience".

:puke:

[papau]

28. As long as the menu includes large group ins pricing and option for government plan it isa major

improvement

no pre-existing condition rejection or premium increase seems a good idea.

[antigop]

30. And rescission? n/t

[papau]

38. recission needs a legal reason - there is none when pre-existing is not a

condition of the contract.

[antigop]

31. Option for a government plan -- it does NOT say you get it at the same cost

It says you have ACCESS to the same plans as federal employees.

It doesn't say you will pay the SAME PRICE.

[papau]

40. True - but group pricing means lower than current - and that "medicare like" option will have

a price that will start out keeping prices down and may end up with single payer by the backdoor of an "option" :-)

[antigop]

33. And the ability to deny care? n/t

[papau]

41. Doctors are still able to deny care - but why would they when they know they will be paid?

n/t

[antigop]

42. No, the insurance companies can still deny care. I gotta go. n/t

[papau]

46. coverage design of the policies will most likely be regulated - but you're right that this

is not spelled out.

[bpeale]

62. Exactly!!!

[Kelly Rupert]

7. Do I like everything about her plan? No. But it's better than what we've got now,

simply because of mandatory universal coverage. Do the insurance companies make more money than they would otherwise? Yes. But, at the same time, the number of non-paying ER visits decreases, as people are able to go to GPs for stomachaches instead (and, shock of shocks, preventative care), lowering healthcare costs for everyone. Similarly, the number of post-catastrophe bankruptcies decreases.

People end up getting more care, and the cost to the system is decreased. Pay for it with a rollback in tax cuts for the rich, and it's wins all around.

[antigop]

11. Nope. YOu got it wrong.

If the "mandatory universal coverage" is simply a high-deductible policy, people won't get preventive care because they would have to pay out of their own pocket up to the amount of the deductible.

And nowhere has there been an actual statement of what the premiums, co-pays, coinsurance, or the deductibles will be.

Please don't tell me it "wins all around".

<edit to add> sHIllary has already given the insurance companies a seat at the table. Do you honestly think this won't be a win for the insurance companies. Oh, please!

[papau]

29. the Mitt option of high deductibe is not what is on offer in Hillary's plan - but

Hillary's details are being left to Congress -

but at least it does not start by kissing ins co butt.

[antigop]

32. Papau, you know darn good and well, this is what we are going to get. n/t

[papau]

43. If it is we kill the whole thing - savings has been a hard sell - I doubt it will get easier n/t

[Maribelle]

48. You seem to be giving out incorrect information here, regarding preventive care

Many high-deductible family plans do in fact supply clauses allowing preventive care NOT subject to the high deductible.

[antigop]

49. Briefly checking in....High-deductible plans a worry...

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/03/05/high_deductibles_a_healthcare_worry/

>>
But, research shows high deductibles deter people from getting needed treatment, including preventive care, and can plunge those without savings into debt.
>>

[Maribelle]

51. What can I sell you about Massachusetts and its witchcraft, which is more reliable than your post?

Both large companies and smaller companies are designing their high-deductible plans around preventive care. Perhaps the spokesperson you quoted from BCBS of Massachusetts needs to get into a conference call with the rest of the world, because they are truly giving the Blues a bad name with that scare pomp.

Who is a good candidate for high-deductible insurance?

JUST ABOUT EVERYONE CAN BENEFIT — IF IT IS COUPLED WITH A HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNT


A common misconception is that high-deductible health plans are geared exclusively toward healthy individuals. Actually, some high-deductible and HSA plans have benefit designs with incentives geared to those with chronic conditions such as waiving the co-pays for preventive medications used to keep these conditions under control. Other plans financially reward consumers who follow the recommended preventive care.



http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/business/stories.nsf/healthcare/story/039D2696CF4540D8862573540055D4D4?OpenDocument

WiseEssentialsTM plan -- offering full coverage for essential preventive services and waiving the deductible for six office visits per year -- is available at monthly rates comparable to those paid by consumers for cable, Internet and cell phone packages.

http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20070828006215&newsLang=en

I can give you at least one thousand more links supporting the preventative care inclusion in high-deductible insurance, so if you need more please let me know. Or perhaps by this point you should quit cherry picking the one in ten thousand, and start reading the majority which totally and shamefully debunk the scare pomp you post in your silly widdle attempt to simply bash Hillary.

[antigop]

71. Oh, I guess you missed my statement...

"And nowhere has there been an actual statement of what the premiums, co-pays, coinsurance, or the deductibles will be."

[Maribelle]

75. You said: high deductibles deter people from getting needed treatment

That's what I responded to. You did not qualify it with a directly-related "an actual statement". You made an unqualified blanket statement.

I am giving you information regarding high-deductible plans offering coverage for preventative care - - - - regardless of premiums, co-pays, coinsurance, or other deductibles.

[antigop]

77. And there is no law that says a company has to provide it n/t

[antigop]

73. And I guess you miss the point that high-deductibles/HSAs is the GOP plan for healthcare!

The GOP Party Platform:
http://www.gop.com/media/2004platform.pdf

>>
Health Savings Accounts (HSAs)
Health Savings Accounts allow people to own and control their health care. They
are an important step toward creating a system of consumer-driven health care that puts
patients and doctors at the center of decision-making – not government bureaucrats.
When consumers make decisions about health care, individuals control their health care
dollars and health care decisions. Health Savings Accounts allow people to save, earn
interest, and spend tax free on their health care needs. HSAs are combined with a lowpremium,
high-deductible health insurance plan to offer flexible, affordable insurance
options for small businesses and individuals. Health Savings Accounts are now available
to all Americans thanks to the efforts of President Bush and the Republican Congress.
The next step, which our Party endorses, is to extend tax deductibility to the insurance
premiums associated with HSAs. We also support efforts to expand the use of Health
Savings Accounts to help control health care costs and give individuals more power in
making important medical decisions.
>>

[Maribelle]

78. I do not care what the GOP offers.

They are forked tongue hypocrites, regardless.

[antigop]

81. And what role do high-deductibles policies play in sHillary's plan?

Since she's given a seat at the table to the insurance companies already...

[antigop]

74. And you miss the point that high-deductibles lead to adverse selection. n/t

[Maribelle]

79. I will ignore the rest of your game playing in this thread.

[antigop]

80. Oh, right. n/t

[antigop]

76. And you miss the point that high-deductibles are NOT a good idea.. n.t

[antigop]

72. deleted --- posted in wrong spot n/t

[cobalt1999]

10. I've always said..

Give me an okay solution that actually gets implemented over a great solution that stays a dream.

[antigop]

12. OK for whom? For whom?

Do you know what YOUR choices will be? Do you know what YOUR costs will be? Do you know what YOUR co-payments will be? Do you know what YOUR deductibles will be?

Mandatory insurance for working folks isn't a solution if the deductibles are a significant percentage of a person's income.

[cobalt1999]

13. Is it better than nothing?

Even a high deductable is better than forcing people to go into debt to pay the entire bill. You may dream up the perfect plan, but if it stays a dream it doesn't benefit anyone. Start with an implementable solution and improve it from there.

[antigop]

14. Nope, not if the high deductibles force people to go into debt.

And not if the insurance companies are still in the loop.

[cobalt1999]

16. You're kidding right?

On one hand, a person may have to go into debt for a $5000 deductable OR go into debt for a $50,000 medical bill (like today). You don't see a difference?

Is it perfect...NO. Is it better than nothing...YES.

More importantly, it is implementable over the "perfect" solution.

[Imagevision]

17. When the person can't afford the $5000 deductable what good is it???

[cobalt1999]

19. It's $45,000 better.

It's not perfect, people may still have to go into debt, however, give me a imperfect fix that gets implemented over a perfect solution that doesn't get implemented.

[antigop]

21. If you think a corporatist plan is a good deal, I feel very sorry for you. n/t

[antigop]

25. How many industrialized nations let their citizens go into ANY debt for medical bills? Good grief!

n/t

[antigop]

18. You're kidding, right? So we settle for "better than nothing"? Good grief!

How many industrialized nations make their citizens go into debt at all over medical bills?

We have the chance to do it right. We should DO IT RIGHT.

[cobalt1999]

24. You are assuming the perfect solution can be implemented

I disagree. Shoot for the moon if you want, but if you fail we are left with nothing. I still say give me an imperfect solution that we know will be implemented. Improve it from there.

[antigop]

27. Oh, brother. How sad. How truly sad. n/t

[cobalt1999]

35. Reality isn't always a happy perfect playground. n/t.

[antigop]

36. What nonsense. n/t

[Tellurian]

45. What is truly sad is your gloom and doom statements aren't getting you anywhere..

Health Care professionals have already reviewed Hillary's Plan and given it High Marks for coming up with affordable health care for all.

Read the Title and the article at the link: "Candidate's remedy is political genius" written by Lawrence C. Levy heads the National Center for Suburban Studies at Hofstra University.

[papau]

34. DK is the only single payer only option voice out there - hard to see kow we politically "do it

right" - meaning single payer - if DK can't break out into double digits soon.

[antigop]

37. Easy. We insist on doing it right. And vote in candidates who will support it. n/t

[papau]

44. :-) - I like the plan - but now we need a list of those in Congress that support single

payer - we have about 80 in the House so far - I have no count for the Senate.

I'll take Hillary or Edward's plan until we can get a working majority to change over to single payer.

[Greyhound]

56. Is it still possible, under the proposed law, for insurance companies to overrule the physician

and deny care to the patient?

Are there any caps on the premiums they are allowed to charge?

Are the insurance companies still allowed to arbitrarily designate treatments as "experimental" and deny them?

Are they still allowed to simply refuse to pay claims and force the patient to either pay, or have their credit ruined, or go into bankruptcy? Oh wait, I forgot bankruptcy is not really an issue anymore is it?

[Greyhound]

15. More corporate welfare that will hurt everybody except, of course, the corporations

that created this piece of shit.

Oh and let's not forget the people that can't afford any of the "options" they get to have fines and other penalties (I'm sure at some point jail is involved where they will get some health care) heaped on them.

This is genius in the same way that the last seven years have been a great success for *'s base.

This would make me sick if I could afford to get sick.

[antigop]

20. Unbelievable,greyhoound, isn't it? That people are falling for this? n/t

[Greyhound]

50. Sadly, it is quite believable and probably the best argument for The People getting

the government they deserve. Unfortunately we all have to live with the consequences of their fear and apathy.
:kick:

[Maribelle]

53. Their fear and apathy? Their?

You are fear mongering personified using that JAIL ammunition you just fired.

Are you attempting to pat yourself on the back with your diseased hand?

[Greyhound]

54. So you are saying that the law she will propose mandating that people

buy insurance (she is the greatest recipient of their largess, including republiks) will not provide any penalties for those that do not/can not? Are you saying that the national trend to criminalize poverty does not exist?

Or do you simply like to engage in ad hominem attacks because you think living under a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism">fascist state is a good idea?

[Maribelle]

57. There will be no law she will propose mandating that people buy insurance.

Regardless of how hard you try to mix and spin your "Jail" fear tactic in with your other garbage.

Please don't take the attack personally. It's your fear mongering in order to bash Hillary that is being attacked.

[Greyhound]

58. From her own sight:

Individuals: will be required to get and keep insurance in a system where insurance is affordable and accessible. http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/healthcareplan/summary.aspx">Here's the link

Is this somehow unclear to you? Can I offer any help in word definitions?

[Maribelle]

59. Your link is merely the summary, not the actual plan.

Individuals will be responsible for getting insurance for themselves, the government will not be doing it for you. Individuals will be responsible for keeping the insurance by paying the premiums when due. Individuals will be responsible for bringing proof of insurance with them to the next employer if they choose to keep what they have instead of signing up for the new employer's plan. Individuals will be required to do all of this themselves.

Nowhere in Hillary's plan will you find that getting insurance is mandated.

If you clear YOUR thinking power, this iS not a very difficult concept to comprehend.

Twisting words into they way YOU want them defined is not a valid debate.

[Greyhound]

60. It is a direct quote from her own website, but I'm the one twisting words?

You are grasping at straws, at best, and more likely making a pathetic attempt to deceive others that are reading this sub-thread.

Again, is there some comprehension problem that we can help you with?

[Maribelle]

61. No you are grasping. Individuals will be required to do the things I noted in my last post.

Individuals need to do their part. They will not be mandated to buy insurance, no matter how hard, no matter for how long you utter your falshoods. It's not in the plan. It won't happen.


Added on edit:

Require: needful , necessitating, demanding, calling for, needing, lacking, without


Mandate: order, command, directive, decree, dictate, instruction, fiat, obligation

[Greyhound]

64. Do you have any evidence to back up your asinine claims? Since you don't seem to understand

the meaning of the word required as it applies to law, and your entire position seems to consist of wishful thinking in your part, unless you have such, I see no reason to continue to humor your childishness.

[Maribelle]

69. You're the one with the asinine claims.

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/healthcareplan/americanhealthchoicesplan.pdf


No where in Hillary's plan does it say that idividuals will be required to apply for insurance or mandated, or punished if they do not.


However, to get it, it does say it will be the individual's responsiblity and not the government's responsibility.

[Greyhound]

83. I posted the exact quote from her website, in its entirety, and provided a link to it,

yet you persist in denying that it says what it says.

Once more for those that don't want to click back to the previous reply;
"Individuals: will be required to get and keep insurance in a system where insurance is affordable and accessible."

and from the .pdf you linked to;

Specifically, responsibilities include:
...• Individuals: To get and keep insurance in a system where insurance is affordable and accessible.

My emphasis

Who are you trying to convince? (BTW I furled the page JIC your are connected with the campaign)

[Maribelle]

84. You are attempting to twist "will be required to get and keep insurance".

You talk about going around in circles.

If people choose to get insurance, they will be required to get and keep insurance - - themselves, the government is not going to give it to you on a platter.

[Greyhound]

85. I posted the exact quote from her website, in its entirety, and provided a link to it,

yet you persist in denying that it says what it says.

Once more for those that don't want to click back to the previous reply;
"Individuals: will be required to get and keep insurance in a system where insurance is affordable and accessible."

and from the .pdf you linked to;

Specifically, responsibilities include:
...• Individuals: To get and keep insurance in a system where insurance is affordable and accessible.

My emphasis

Who are you trying to convince? (BTW I furled the page JIC your are connected with the campaign)

:eyes::crazy::eyes:

[Maribelle]

86. You said mandated above. Nothing you have quoted since means mandated.

Are you still twisting and spinning around, hoping that somehow in all those swirls you are making you will turn "Individuals will be required to get and keep insurance" -into something like - individuals will be mandated to get insurance under the penalty of punishment and even jail?

I gave you a link to the actual plan when you were using the summary. You could not find "MANDATED" even in the actual plan.

I have no reason in the world to say it's not mandated if it were. Hillary surely would not want anyone to muck it up.

But you have a reason to muck it up, now don't you? Tell the truth.

[Greyhound]

90. So you're still at it, OK here you go...

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mandate">10. to authorize or decree (a particular action), as by the enactment of law.

You are really invested in this corporate shill's facade of helping the people, aren't you?

next.

Oooo, can we argue over the meaning of the word facade now? :silly:

:eyes:

[Desertrose]

63. Hillary's plan will NOT help me.

I am self employed.I make enough to pay rent, utilities, groceries and my few bills. I have no car payment (goddess willing) and don't buy much of anything beyond my art/business supplies.

If I could afford healthcare, I would have it. Just because Hillary says I have to have it, doesn't mean I can afford it- regardless of what it costs.

I make too much for state/gov't coverage and not enough to buy my own. As for savings to cover a deductible....are you kidding? Please tell me how Hillary's plan will help me & people like me.


And you feel it is fine for corporations to make a profit off "healthcare" when individuals have to go into DEBT to pay for doctors/surgery/treatments?

The only plan that will help everyone- especially those who need it is HR626. we pay for our healthcare already in the trillions we pay in taxes...why should we have to pay more. Why should corporations get fatter and fatter at theexpense of the individuals lives and health?

DR

[Maribelle]

65. Hillary does not say you will have to have it.

If you want it, however, your will be required to get it yourself, the government will not get it for you.

It will be your choice.

[Desertrose]

66. Like its my "choice" now , then?

As I said, Hillary's plan will not help me.

[Maribelle]

70. Hopefully you will have choices that will be more affordable then.

For instance, if you do not qualify for medicaid now, you could then. Additionally, there will be other options for your to consider.

But please don't misunderstand what I am saying. I truly believe this nation needs socialized medicine. Getting there, however, seems to be a major problem that will not be resolved overnight.

[antigop]

82. Yeah, "hopefully you will have choices". Sorry, "hopefully", doesn't cut it n/t

[avrdream]

89. Choosing the public option of the menu WOULD help you.

The plan says this will be Medicare like and that no person will be overly burdened by this insurance.

If people would FOCUS on that option, we could get single payer, universal health care provided by the government.

Brilliant in its' simplicity.

[antigop]

92. You don't know whether the public option would help or not

There is NO definition of what "overly burdened" is.

There is no mention of what premiums, deductibles, or co-pays would be.

And it says "Medicare-like" -- whatever the hell that is.

[Greyhound]

68. Yet another example of why this "plan" sucks. n/t

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Greyhound]

55. I've changed my mind.

[antigop]

39. I gotta go, folks. I'm not paid to post on DU all day. If you think a corporatist plan is what you

want, I feel sorry for you.

[Tellurian]

47. Your attempt at disinformation is falling flat. tinfoil hat rec'd

[Alamom]

67. k

[depakid]

87. That's just rationalizing the irrational

The 3 top Dems plans are boondoggles. Period.

Pandering to some ephemeral class of people or to lobbiests for abusive industries is not and will not bring about the needed reforms or address the fundamental problems with America's dysfunctional and fragmented health care system.

Indeed, it could even make matters that worse.

[Carrieyazel]

88. What does Hillary Clinton have to do with political genius?

You meant to say Bill Clinton right?

[PATRICK]

91. Rationale partly correct

if the plan was just not crafted for the sake of good comparisons to her rivals. The other problem is that a genius compromise before compromise is actually called for is beginning the deal with a surrender. it goes downhill from THAT point. Sure if DK gets in his plan will be clobbered, while the slow bleeding to oblivion that will afflict the others depends on their Congressional clout, sincerity and mandate.

There is no real genius in trying to make everyone happy, forget about ACTUAL crying needs for health and the most sane proposal(DK's). It is political expediency and comfort for lobbyists, or political expediency and hope for the electorate to get something at all. Crafty assurances for the insurance companies are clever all right. After all we elected the lobbyists, put the banks over our lives and infested the sea with sharks. The only smart thing is to promise we'll behave and give them an arm and a leg before a single ballot is dropped.

Weakness in all the wrong places and guess who praises this the most with the most hypocritical smiles? the companies that will try to defeat her, dump her and force her to deal things their way until they get their next dictator.

The key concerns of the haves are compromised by a national swindle that effects everyone. They have to be educated not placated with promises to first take care of the snake oil salesmen and pirates leeching off of them and who deny health care to the have-nots. Immigrants, the uninsured. This compromise keeps us all divided and all victims.

[bvar22]

94. The USA is the wealthiest country in the WORLD,

and, somehow, Single Payer NOT For Profit Universal HealthCare is beyond out reach?

There are people on a DEMOCRATIC website insisting that we MUST settle for a half assed MANDATORY "For Profit" Medical Insurance SCAM that shovels $Millions$ of dollars of taxpayer money into the pockets of some of the wealthiest CEOs in the WORLD. :shrug:

Settling for HillaryCare2 "because its better than nothing" is an insult to intelligent citizens that Live & Work in richest country in the World!

Hillary's Plan is NOT "genius".
Its really simple:

Step 1)The CEOs of Insurance Corps and HMOs give Hillary $BIG MONEY$ and friendly Corporate Media coverage.

Step 2)Hillary gives these same CEOs $MILLIONS$ in payback legislation.

Working Americans don't even enter the equation.
We are the Rubes (suckers) at the carnival trying to win at a rigged game.

Fuck a bunch of Mandatory FOR PROFIT Health Insurance Scams, and the HUCKSTER CONS that peddle them !

These plans prey upon Americans who Work for a Living!
Quality Universal Non Profit HealthCare is a HUMAN RIGHT in every other civilized country in the WORLD, not a "For Profit" commodity!

Don't settle for this crap "because its better than nothing".