Clinton II shifts stance on health care

[draft_mario_cuomo]

==Focus is now on efficiency, not universal coverage
BY JEREMY OLSON
Pioneer Press
Article Last Updated: 06/01/2007 11:37:19 PM CDT

==Fourteen years ago, Hillary Rodham Clinton came to Minnesota with eight months of experience as first lady and a fiery message about fixing health care and covering the nation's uninsured.

"We must have universal coverage as soon as possible," she said.

Clinton, now a U.S. senator and a 2008 presidential candidate, returned Friday. Once again she uttered the "U" word. But this time she wasn't talking about the idea of government universal health care that was defeated by a coalition of small businesses, insurance companies and others a decade ago.

She instead talked about a computerized "universal medical record system," which, if implemented in all U.S. hospitals, could save $80 billion per year by reducing paperwork, redundant care and medical errors. Clinton said her priority this time is to eliminate waste overall in the U.S. system, saving as much as $120 billion per year that could then be used to help the uninsured buy medical coverage. ==

Read the rest at http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_6041322

[MaryBear]

1. Her focus is on better care for all.

The writer is putting a narrow slant on what is in reality her very broad view of what is needed in health care reform. Hillary Clinton is probably one of the best informed in the nation about this subject, and to minimize her viewpoint is disingenuous.

[doggyboy]

9. The reporter lies

While UHC is not a part of Hillary's plan (or Edwards or Obama's) Hillary does speak about UHC and there are references to it on her websites

[Bitwit1234]

2. Again they bash Hillary

You are correct. DailyKos printed a report, after the presidential candidates had the Health Care Meeting in one of the SW states. They all said that Hillary Clinton had a very viable health care plan far above the others. Now they are particular fans of Hillary but they did give her credit where credit is due. It is a shame that everyone has to make it a point to slam her isn't it.

[Mythsaje]

3. Efficiency doesn't mean shit

to someone who goes 100,000 dollars in debt because of something outside of their control.

This isn't an answer. And just because small business and the insurance companies (who can go fuck a garbage disposal for all I care) blocked it ten years ago doesn't mean that it wouldn't fly today with a new approach. The corporations can't afford to keep paying the bill for their employees, and the ONLY ones who are still winning this game are the insurance companies. And, frankly, I think almost everyone knows it now.

This does not fill me with confidence with regards to how Sen. Clinton would approach this issue this time around. Sounds to me like the insurance companies are putting a little more into her campaign coffers than I'm comfortable with.

Then again, I'm a cynical bastard when it comes to that sort of thing. And I fucking loathe insurance companies as a general rule. Goddam vultures. Since auto insurance became mandatory their profits have skyrocketed, yet the amount of money they've paid out in claims has gone down--percentage-wise. They're providing a service, sure, but they're stealing us blind in the process. They're now doing CREDIT CHECKS for auto insurance, and jacking up the rates for anyone who doesn't pass muster. As IF that has any goddam thing to do with driving.

I'd LOVE to see them get kicked in the teeth and I wish I could say I was surprised to see that it's not going to be Hillary who does it.

Just when I was beginning to be willing to give her the benefit of the doubt.

[gobblechops]

4. Are there

any candidates that are pushing for socialized medicine like every other major industrialized nation?we could do a Lota good here if we focus on cures instead of profits,profiting from health care while denying it to the needy is immoral.

[area51]

20. Dennis Kucinich.

To my knowledge, DK is the only candidate for single-payer, universal healthcare that's something like the civilized countries have.

[SquireJons]

5. Hillary, et al, are missing the boat.

Don't they have any salesmen in the Democratic Party? Or, maybe they are mistaking America.2007 with America.1936.

If we are ever going to get Universal Health Care, it has to be sold as a way to create jobs and save US businesses money. It's the only way to get Congress to support it, since it no longer matters if roughly 70% of Americans support an idea.

And in fact, there is a lot of truth to the argument. GM can't compete with foreign car manufacturers in part because they have huge financial obligations to cover health costs for all of their employees, past and present*. German, and Japanese car companies don't have to worry about that. So American automakers are restructuring, shutting down plants, selling off parts of the companies, laying off employees, losing market share and partners.

But if health care were provided by the government, then it would free up enormous cash reserves for US companies to use for investment and growth. That would create employment and additional tax revenues without a tax increase (on business of course). Plus, American consumers would have additional income to buy (chinese) goods with.


...ta da! Presto magic... we get health care.


* That's their argument, not mine. Use their words to win!

[rodeodance]

6. umm. this is very upsetting to me!

[Rock_Garden]

7. I agree with MaryBear.

Of all the candidates, Hillary probably has the best idea what will or will not fly, in regards health care. Cutting waste makes a great first step, and it doesn't necessarily preclude a universal health care system later.

[MaryBear]

11. Exactly, Rock_Garden.

This is one speech. Nothing wrong with cutting waste. Job satisfaction generally goes up when people feel like their work is worthwhile.

[a kennedy]

8. NOT health insurance for all........but HEALTH CARE for all.

nuff said. Just now sure how to get it. :cry: :cry: :cry:

[sutz12]

10. A worthy first step...but....doesn't fix the real problem.

Any improvements in efficiency will go to the CEO classes and the stockholders, not to the people who really need the help in the form of improved care.

[calteacherguy]

12. It is way past time to have a universal, single record-keeping system.

My only concern is the implementation of this system. If it's the government implementing it, I'm not confident it will be implemented in the most efficient way, given the past record of governement bureaucracy. I just hope it's implemented well.

Perhaps Bill Gates and/or Steve Jobs or other people of that level could be placed on the advisory board.

Perhaps the solution to Health Care is one step at a time, rather than attempting to turn the whole system on it's head with one bill.

[illinoisprogressive]

13. how she loves to lift ideas from people. that has long been an Obama idea

[calteacherguy]

15. Centralizing health care records is not a new idea.

There are a lot of ideas surrounding health care, but not new ones.

[AZBlue]

18. Not at all - I first heard about it 9 or 10 years ago

when I worked in the healthcare industry. And, not being a healthcare provider myself, it may have been around even longer than that - I wouldn't have been one of the first to hear of it.

[jmp]

16. ...

Can't be too long. 5 years ago, no one had even heard of the man.

[doggyboy]

19. Obama doesn't have any health care ideas of his own

Like Hillary, and all the other candidates, their health care plans originated with policy wonks in think tanks.

None of the candidates are superhuman, no matter how highly you think of them. They are not all experts on every issue who write their own proposals.

[Colobo]

14. Interesting.

[AZBlue]

17. This actually IS an important change that must be made.

It will save billions and ensure better and more accurate care.

That being said, it has to be combined with access to healthcare for everyone. EVERYONE.