Which Health Plan Currently Being Sold by a Presidential Candidate has the Best Chance

[renie408]

of being put into action?

Listen, PLEASE believe that what I want for the people in this country (including me and mine) is universal cradle to grave single payer health coverage. But I live in AMERICA and unfortunately, that isn't going to happen within the next couple of years. Because even if I vote for and help elect a President who has that as his plan, the insurance companies will fight it tooth and nail. I actually think that some day we might could get to that ideal health coverage. But not in ONE leap. It seems to me it has to happen in steps. So, I hear people saying that Hillary Clinton's plan is not the BEST plan because it includes insurance companies and 'mandates' coverage. That doesn't sound ideal to me, either. But is A plan and if it has a chance of actually coming to pass, that is better than some perfect ideal that doesn't.

If you compare the plans, which ones have a chance IN REALITY? Ideals are great. Standing on principles is important. But while we stand on our principles and hold out for the plan that gets rid of insurance companies, which isn't going to happen any time soon, people are DYING. Presidents are not dictators. They have to sell their plans to the Congress AND the American people AND (whether anybody likes it or not) to corporate America.

I like the sound of Obama's plan, also, BTW. I am not jumping on Hillary's bandwagon. It just seems to me that some of what I am hearing are knee jerk reactions to seeing the words "mandate" and "insurance companies" and even "Hillary". I thought Democrats and Progressives had open minds. Why can't this even be considered?

[sasquatch]

1. Probably John Edwards

If he forces a gun to the Fascist bastards heads like he says he will then he'll get it passed.

[AZBlue]

12. Doesn't it cost too much?

Wasn't there an analysis that the tax on the rich wouldn't cover it? I like his plan, but is it feasible?

[aquart]

2. I don't care. Half measures won't make things better.

They will make the insurance companies richer and small businesses even less competitive than before.

[renie408]

4. YEAH!! I don't CARE how many people die while I hold out for perfection!! n/t

[aquart]

17. Will it save lives or cost more?

You believe this patched together profit center for the insurance companies will save more lives than it kills. My perception is that by delaying real healthcare for perhaps decades, it will kill more.

But thanks for the snide accusation.

[C_U_L8R]

3. certainly not Mitt's

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1828965

whatta beanhead.

( a cross between a bonehead and a peabrain)

[BootinUp]

15. Was this thread supposed to be humorous? I'm crackin up. n/t

[LWolf]

5. HR 676.

It's actually the only HEALTH plan on the table.

The rest are health INSURANCE plans, and don't guarantee equal access to equal quality care, and don't guarantee that the insurance will be truly affordable for all.

[renie408]

11. I just wrote my congressman about it. N?T

[LWolf]

14. Thank you! n/t

[renie408]

16. Nope, thank YOU. I also donated $10.89 to the advertising campaign. n/t

[askeptic]

6. I don't think the starting point should be the compromise

I think the starting point should be the health plan you'd really like to see, and then you go from there. If this is the starting point, then we'll see much less than this in the end. So - until a candidate is chosen, I'll stick with the candidate who has the health care plan I'd like to see, who wants to stop the war in Iraq for real, and who wants to stop another war, too - the drug war. We might just end up giving tax money to the insurance companies in the end - but I think we democrats tend to expect too little and then we get it.

[renie408]

13. Fair enough. N/T

[illinoisprogressive]

7. Obama has done health care reform here successfully.

we had a republican controlled state senate then. I know he can push his through and I know his new plan will work out as he's done this before.

[AZBlue]

9. But it doesn't cover adults or elderly.

Why only cover children?

[MiaCulpa]

8. I'm not certain how 'mandatory' anything will go over, but

Hillary's plan seems reasonable. It would force insurance companies to compete with Medicare/Medicaid. Again, as for the 'mandatory' part, I dunno,, but I also don't know how anyone could expect their govt agencies to help in a health crisis if they didn't take advantage of a plan when they were supposed to or should have.

Edwards plan I just can't back. He is actually for govt mandated testing, wellness checkups. I don't want the US govt telling me when or if I need some form of test. I'd like to decide that for myself, along with my dr's recommendations.

I haven't given up on the idea of universal health, but I'd also be shocked if it came to pass in the coming year.

[InvisibleTouch]

10. I'll admit to having a knee-jerk reaction to the word "mandate."

I don't want to be forced to buy into anything. Give me a choice, sure. But force me? I'll hope to see it go down in flames. And I like Hillary, otherwise.

[Sparkly]

18. Why not start by putting forward the plan one thinks is really best...

... and working to get as far with it as possible?

I can understand reps in Congress having to compromise, vote for what will pass, be realistic, etc. But why wouldn't a candidate for president outline what they truly think is best, argue for it, persuade people to it (and I don't think it's difficult to persuade people that profit motive is a monkey wrench in health care), and THEN compromise with Congress as necessary?

[BootinUp]

19. you socialist.

:)

I just don't think America is ready to buy into Government run, but regulating the bad boys in the insurance industry is a much easier sell. Doesn't her plan limit profits? I assume the other candidates have proposed something similar, I haven't read them all though.

[Solon]

20. Getting it passed into law is only half the battle...

The question is whether it will work on a practical level, and actually cover everyone adequately. The problem is that, for most of these plans, they are called transitional, but with a lot of crap thrown in that just doesn't make sense to me. I mean, they talk about choice, but what choice do you have between bad, worse, and the absolute worst?

That is my biggest single problem, just because something can pass into law doesn't mean that its the best practical solution to a problem, look to the war on drugs as an example. Why does the United States have to be different, and "break new ground" with our faces? I fear these plans will backfire, badly, and set back health care reform for another generation. Baby steps I'm not worried, falling flat on your face while taking those steps is what I'm worried about.