American Health Choices Plan

[Bread and Circus]

Sounds a little Karl Rovian, no?

I'm not going to pass judgement on the plan itself, I just think the title of Sen. Clinton's plan reminds me of "No child left behind", "Clear Skies Act", and "Patriot Act".

I might be a little paranoid but have we truly walked into another era of politics where the pigs and the people can hardly be told apart?

:scared:

Am I the only one who feels the title is propagandistic and deserves the same ridicule as the propagandistic mind control crap that has been force fed to us for the past 7 1/2 yrs?

[rinsd]

1. I know some DUers think Karl Rove invented politics.

But naming things in a manner to positively associate them has been around for a very long time.

This is especially true of campaigns where sloganeering is rampant.

Your point would make more sense if you proved the plan did not live up to its moniker much like the Bush examples you put up.

[Bread and Circus]

2. Sloganeering has been much more of a factor lately and Rove..

and some other key political folks are responsible for it. I forget the guy's name but the man who came up with alot of the "black is white, up is down" catch phrases has been on talk shows to mention how this propaganda works.

It's a little creepy and I hope it's not a sign of things to come.

[papau]

7. true - but it gets out ahead of the lies about "no choice forced on you government plan"

n/t

[Bread and Circus]

13. So, you don't find it concerning when Bush and Clinton use the same

propaganda style of language?

[papau]

15. nope - no problem - indeed if Dems do not use language that moves votes we need a new party

n/t

[WeCanWorkItOut]

3. Another odd one: "Medical Homes" were once "Gatekeepers"?

I believe both terms refer to the patient needing the GP's
permission to see a specialist. Medical Homes is a concept
that we might want to think twice about.  But a cute homey
title like "Homes" may lead nice people to just
smile, and not assess.

[BootinUp]

4. As I remember

it was the Bushies who stole the Clinton's interesting way of naming programs, but with the evil twist of making it cause the opposite. Back in the nineties the programs actually seemed to work as advertised.

[Bread and Circus]

5. This is a less-creepy sounding way to present a health proposal

"The United States National Health Insurance Act, H.R. 676" via http://www.house.gov/conyers/news_health_care.htm

Not only that, it's a better plan.

[BootinUp]

6. Well true, true,

but if its a question of what has a chance in Hades of being passed, I think Hillary's probably wins by a rout.

[Bread and Circus]

9. Key question then... is Hillary's plan a good one?

I mean, do we want it to pass? If it's just a bandaid, wouldn't it prevent or delay a true solution?

I, as a physician, have read the highlights of the plan which relies on some sort of a voucher system to buy health insurance. That's not going to the root of the problem. Also, she mentions on her site that the new system will be by and large paid for by increased health efficiency, which really gives me pause because the biggest inefficiencies and waste come from administration costs due to insurance, yet she's going to increase private insurance usage - so it seems she is waging her plan on a "hope for the best" fantasy that somehow all the hospitals, doctors, nurses, insurance companies, drug companies, and anyone else who makes a profit from the system to A.) work 15% harder (to care for all the people who will hopefully have coverage and B.) due it for less money as a result of her "efficiency" campaign. That's not going to happen without a good fight.

Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see anywhere where her goal is to drastically reduced the for profit insurance system that has gotten us into this problem.

I guess I will have to wait and see...as I know she's not dumb and the Clinton's tend to have good advisers.

[BootinUp]

12. It pits the efficiency of government payer vs the private insurer

by allowing people to buy into a medicare like system. Regulates the insurers in several regards as well. I haven't seen details about vouchers, nor have I looked. But there are provisions of course for people with lower income. By and large its paid for by tax increases from what I heard. But then I haven't had time to look for more details. My initial impression was that there was some good ideas in there and it was good place to start.

[Bread and Circus]

14. I will gladly wear egg on my face if the public plan is available for all...

I guess time will tell.

I just want a true solution, not one that just placates the notion that "everyone is covered" yet still makes for a broken system.

[AZBlue]

8. You're judging a plan on it's TITLE????

Huh????

[Bread and Circus]

10. No, I'm saying the title sounds propagandistic (Orwellian) using the same

trick language we criticize the Bush administration for.

Someone pointed out the Clinton's brought this to modern politics. I find it sad. I've read that "Free Speech Zones" started under Clinton, and that is hugely undemocratic.

[Bread and Circus]

11. .