Edwards focused on health care in N.H.

[Omaha Steve]

Source: Associated Press


By Holly Ramer, Associated Press Writer

CANTERBURY, N.H. --While two of his Democratic rivals argue over how they'd negotiate with hostile countries, presidential hopeful John Edwards is focused on hostile insurance and drug companies.

The former North Carolina senator told hundreds of supporters in a sunny backyard Sunday that he disagrees with other candidates who believe the best way to overhaul the health care system is to negotiate with insurers and pharmaceutical companies. Those groups will not give up their power voluntarily, he said.

"I've been fighting these people my whole life and have beaten them my whole life," said Edwards, a former trial lawyer. "I think the time to talk to them is after you've beaten them."

Edwards has proposed requiring employers to provide insurance or contribute to the coverage of every worker. The government would pay for insurance for lower income people and subsidize what other families pay. He also would cap the amount insurance companies can charge for profit or overhead at 15 percent and would pay for the $90 to $120 billion a year plan by repealing President Bush's tax cuts for people who make more than $200,000 a year.


Read more: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/07/29/edwards_focused_on_health_care_in_nh/

[benny05]

1. Indeed it will require investments on our part

But I'm willing to do it.

[goodhue]

2. fight the power

fight the powers that be

[Hobbs]

3. It fails reason

Edwards mandating everyone purchase insurance from the bad boys, fails reason and logic. It is not a solution rather a gift to Wall Street and the for profit health care industry. The gains that Edwards pretends would be realized, would actually be lost in bureaucratic red tape with his attempt to regulate 20% of our GDP. And those large law firms that have largely funded Edwards would be litigating all of this in court.

We need a one payer system, non-profit system as Kucinch has proposed. We can also insure all children living in poverty immediately by covering them with Medicare.

[benny05]

4. He's mandating insurance for everyone

Those who cannot afford it will have some subsidies and help from our investments (tax). Moreover, he's making the private insurers to compete with federal ones to bring the costs down. If private insurers decide the government one is better, that's a step towards HR 676. If Congress passed HR 676, my guess is that President Edwards would sign it.

[IndyOp]

5. He is not mandating everyone buy insurance from private companies - his Medicare Plus

option is a government operated pay system and everyone can select instead of private insurance companies. When people see that Medicare Plus is less expensive and provides access to a wider range of doctors, specialists, and drugs without the offensive red tape, then the private insurance plans will wilt and die.

The problem with going ALL single-payer in one step is that this is what freaks out U.S. citizens. The insurance companies will spend 10's of billions of dollars to convince people that they will all DIE if they can't have access to private health insurance. So, to make the provision of single-payer palatable to voters and congress critters there will have to be an appearance of choice.

Edwards plan provides Medicare Plus to everyone smart enough to move to it and people who demand to hold onto their high price, low service private company plan will do so until they see that the switch is smart. A very good Medicare Plus program will put most private health insurance companies out of business within a few years.

Keep in mind that Australia and many other nations with a single-payer system have private insurance policies that anyone can purchase if they want to optimize their care -- get super-fast service and/or hotel room decor and/or coverage for cosmetic surgery. We won't entirely outlaw all forms of health insurance even if we do have a very good single-payer system that the vast majority of citizens use.

[JDPriestly]

6. Edwards' plan is realistic.

To do away with private health insurance in one fell swoop would cause a lot of problems. For one thing, a lot of pension funds have invested in these private health insurance companies. Americans need to see how a single payer universal health system a la Medicare will work. Doctors also need to be able to stick their toes in and find out how it works before they commit to it. Step by step is the best way to move toward single payer. Even in many European countries, people can buy supplemental private insurance. I remember that in one country you could get slightly more comfortable accommodations such as a private room in the hospital if you had private insurance. Many people may prefer it. They should be allowed to waste their money as they wish. I seriously doubt that a single payer government run plan would be very different from the Kaiser insurance I have now -- except it would be better because I would have a wider selection of doctors.

The most important thing is to get doctors on board. They need the assurance that their pay will not be reduced. There is no reason to lower doctors' pay. They work for every penny they earn. It's the high level management in health insurance companies whose salaries should be drastically cut.

[rabidchickens]

7. Yes Edward's posistion is pragematic and a trojan horse

Its really a path to virtual single-payer, it just doesnt appear that way, its electable and the best system easily out of the "big 3"

Moore is really uninformed when he just bashes it.

[Hobbs]

8. Universal Health Care "COVERAGE"

It is not Universal Health Care, as a human right and as provided for in all modern societies, except America. This is just making everyone purchase health insurance. The vast majority of those that don't have insurance likely can't afford it. So mandating it does what? It'll ends up like no fault auto insurance where premiums are negotiated with the State and they increase 3 to 4 times what they were before mandating it.

And then what happens if a person doesn't buy the insurance? Do they go to prison or does the government confiscates their home or personal assets? And what massive new bureaucracy will oversee regulating 20% of the GDP? We can't even buy safe dog food.

What does Edwards mean by buying into New Local Markets? Does one get locked into a program similar to an HMO where you can't leave the local market without special approval.

Kucinch has the better plan a single payer. Medicare for everyone and people are free to go to whomever they want. It is payed for by a 1% increase in taxes and removing Bush tax cuts to those making over $ 200,000. Medicare would obviously negotiate rates with the medical care providers and pharmaceuticals.