Hillary's Silly Catch-22 Health Plan Would Make Joseph Heller Proud..

[ddeclue]

Hillary's Catch-22 plan makes no sense to me. Let me see if I've got this right Hillary: You have to have insurance to get a job so that you can get insurance?

Joseph Heller would be so proud.

Forcing mandatory health insurance makes zero sense. The reason so many millions don't have insurance is not because they don't want it. Many people simply cannot afford it when they have a hard enough time with the basics of food, shelter and clothing.

An individual policy through State Farm or another insurer can easily cost $300-$400/month for a healthy single person. Add kids and a family and this can easily become $1000/month. For a great many working people, this is simply out of their price range when they have to pay rent and buy food first.

That is why I think Hillary's plan (and the very similar Republican Romney plan already in place in Massachutsetts) are both preposterous.

What is really needed is either mandatory EMPLOYER funded healthcare for ALL employees regardless of full-time/part-time status, massive government subsidies and price controls, OR single-payer gov't run (Canada style) health care and ABOVE ALL a total ban on pre-existing health conditions and pre-acceptance physicals.

Nothing else is fair.

Nothing else is affordable.

Insurance is supposed to be a gamble for the insurance company - not a sure thing where they get to cherry pick out only healthy customers.

Insurance is supposd to spread the risk amongst all coverees, not put the high risk customers adrift without a lifeboat in shark infested waters.

Hillary's attempt at imitation is both inferior and very slow in coming - John Edwards has had a real plan released for months now that helps real people.

It's time we select a REAL leader, not just another follower with one finger on one hand out in the wind and the other hand out for campaign donations from the health insurance and big pharma lobbies.

Tell Hillary Clinton goodbye and say hello to John Edwards!

Doug D.
Orlando, FL

[SaveElmer]

1. Disengenuous...

You take one peice of the plan and extrapolate consequences without applying provisions of the whole plan....it is a comprehensive plan...not to be implemented piecemeal

She is not proposing keeping the existing system and simply making it mandatory...the plan also includes several enforceable provisions to make the coverage affordable to ALL families, including those under the poverty line...including direct subsidies for those in the most need. Also makes the plan government employees enjoy available to all as well as a new government run plan similar to medicaid....

One is not implemented without the other...

[Missy M]

2. You should read her whole plan......

obviously you haven't.

[Danieljay]

3. go figure, where was it I read shes taken more money from Pharms and the Insurance lobby than any

other Dem? Shes a corporatist sellout like most of the rest and cannot be trusted.

[William769]

4. Meme! Meme! Meme! Meme! Meme! Meme! Meme! Meme!

:eyes:

[SaveElmer]

5. Spoken as someone who clearly hasn't read the plan...nt

[Danieljay]

31. Its not about the plan. Its about following the money and intuitively not trusting the woman. n/t

[Mojorabbit]

6. Doug

we have a small business. We have a thin margin. We cannnot afford to provide insurance to our three employees. Everyone acts like employers are big corporations around here. Even with a tax credit we still will have to shell out the actual cash to pay for this and we don't have that extra cash.

[SaveElmer]

7. Did you read the plan?

btw I have a small business as well and know very well how expensive insurance is...were I given the breaks this plan provides I believe I could afford to provide insurance to my employees...

[RaleighNCDUer]

11. You really think her plan will give your business tax credits

equal to 100% of the cost of the premiums for all your employees?

What about the guy down with street with twice your number of employees?

The health insurance industry needs to be taken out of the equation completely - it is because of them that we have the costs that we do today, and with the government handing out money to then they will simply spiral the costs to increase their profits. 30% of healthcare dollars go to the insurance industry, which does nothing to provide healthcare. If the insurance industry is forced to accept all applicants they will respond by hiking their rates, because they make a huge proportion of their profits on denying claims - if they cannot deny claims, premiums MUST increase.

This 'plan' is an unmitigated disaster.

[SaveElmer]

12. No...and I wouldn't expect it too

I can afford some measure of support for the plan...but costs are too high...with everyone insured, and with the appropriate breaks I will be able to afford it...

Again, Hillary's plan mandates insurance companies NOT raise premiums based on claims and health condition. That is the sacrifice they make for getting everyone insured. With everyone insured economies of scale will lower costs almost immediately. And her plan, like Edwards mandates further cost cutting measures...in addition, there will be a new government run alternative to private insurance, and people will be able to buy into medicare forcing private insurers to compete with these alternatives. If they cannot, they die

You say health insurance companies need to be taken out of the equation...please delineate for me your exact strategy to eliminate the health insurance industry in four years...

[Mojorabbit]

26. I don't know

if I could afford it because it does not specifically say what percentage of the premiums the tax credits would be. If every small business and large business gets a tax credit will this be totally offset by cutting taxes on the wealthiest people? Would it be sustainable?

Our infrastructure is falling apart, the country is almost in default, the housing market is tanking, the dollar is dropping. A large part of the country is living paycheck to paycheck.

I just think this is not the cheapest most effective way to handle the issue. It is too complicated. The repubicans will pull out their chart again that shows this. Menus of govt programs to choose from, keep your own but with tax credits of unknown amounts, etc. If the tax credit is even fifty percent, we cannot afford it without raising our prices.

[Warpy]

8. Most people work for small businesses

around the country, from mom and pop stores to small manufacturing operations to dental offices...you get the picture. Most of these places live as paycheck to paycheck as their employees do. Forcing them to spend money they don't have to insure the employees they can barely afford to pay is just another way of driving them out of business.

The same goes for putting the onus on the individual. People who are just scraping by are not going to be able to shell out extra money for mandatory health insurance, especially if there's a chronic illness in there somewhere that prevents their getting coverage at any reasonable cost.

Single payer is the only system that will cut costs, increase the pool of healthy subscribers to cut per capita premiums, and take burdens off health care providers, businesses and individuals alike.

Hillary gave us a rotten plan 14 years ago and she's giving us a rotten plan now. She desperately needs a reality check, but is unlikely to get one while she is in the rarefied air of the Senate, surrounded by lobbyists.

[Zodiak]

9. And being rewarded with high poll numbers n/t

[Lydia Leftcoast]

13. Because people aren't actually reading the plan

They're hearing "universal insurance" and INTERPRETING IT AS "universal health care."

[Zodiak]

24. Well, the plan is brand new

But her poll support is not.

But you are right...I think she would not receive such support if her voting record and alliances were well-known.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

25. I think that several factors are at work for non-political junkies

1. They've heard of Hillary

2. She gets more news coverage than any other candidate

3. The MSM have already decided that it's going to be a Clinton/Obama ticket, with Edwards as a "spare" in case one of them does something scandalous.

4. Commercial television (which is about all the news most people get) doesn't cover anything in depth.

[Zodiak]

27. That is true, as well.

The gatekeepers most certainly need their gates crashed.

[SaveElmer]

10. Did you read the plan?

Obviously not...mandating individuals acquire insurance is not the proposal...it is one part of a comprehensive plan. She is not taking the current system and simply mandating coverage. Like Edwards plan, it is done in conjunction with measures to reduce costs, and provoide aid, in the foorm of tax credits and direct subsidies to make insurance affordable. It includes an enforceable provision which caps premiums as a % of income, prohibits discrimination based on class or economic circumstance, or current health condition...

[Lydia Leftcoast]

14. Tax credits (yawn)

I already get tax credits.

My insurance is affordable on paper, it's only because I have a $5000 deductible AND 20% co-pay after that. Unfortunately the monthly premiums are just high enough to keep me from being able to afford any out-of-pocket medical costs. Since I'm pretty healthy, the company gets several thousand dollars in free money from me every year.

All three major companies offering medical insurance to individuals in the Twin Cities offer the same crappy policies to self-employed people over 50. So much for competition.

That's a reality that Hillary (and any other candidate who still believes in fairies--I mean, insurance companies) has never had to deal with and cannot possibly understand.

Meanwhile, the CEO of my company writes editorials in the Strib about the importance of preventive care--which I can't afford under her miserable insurance policies.

Would Hillary's plan ban deductibles? Would it cap co-pays at 20%?

If it doesn't, I'm not interested.

[SaveElmer]

15. Hillary's plan caps premiums as a % of income...

Also provides government run alternatives...

[Lydia Leftcoast]

16. My PREMIUMS are already affordable

It's the deductibles and copays that are the killers.

[SaveElmer]

19. I believe the cap does include copays and deductibles...

But I will find out for you...

[Hell Hath No Fury]

22. A pecentage of income THEY...

determine that you should be able to pay.

Say I bring home $1200 a month and they determine I should be able to afford $100 or $75 or even just %50 a month for my premium.

So I get a "tax credit" to help me "pay" for that.

Well, guess what? There are some months I might not have $100 bucks for my health insurance, heck there are some months I might not have even $50 for insurance! Maybe there are some months I end by searching for quarters in the couch so I can afford a .99 tostada from Taco Bell to get me through the day. :shrug:

You see, that is me. Right now. That is my life.

And guess what? I already have employer provided health insurance, and there are some times I still cannot get the health care I need because of the high co-pay costs.

Nothing in Hillary's plan tells me about how someone like myself who does not qualify for Medicaide or already has unaffordable insurance or the other types of working poor manage with her "universal" health care plan.

Her "mandatory" plan is one big windfall for the insurance companies, plain and simple, no matter how you so valiantly try to dress up that pig. :shrug:

[AlGore-08.com]

17. Is there somewhere besides her website where the details are posted?

Here's the link to the most detailed description of her plan on her website:

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/healthcareplan/summary.aspx

The plan posted is a list of nice sounding goals. It does not include any specifics about how those goals would be achieved. For example, it says things like:

"Individuals: will be required to get and keep insurance in a system where insurance is affordable and accessible."

But it doesn't define "affordable" anywhere in the document. My brother-in-law is a public school teacher. His employer does not provide health insurance. They have children, and the lowest quote they've found for insurance is $800 a month. So he and his family have none. Is $800 a month "affordable"? The insurance companies think so. How does the Clinton campaign define "affordable"?

The plan says things like:

"Reducing Costs: By removing hidden taxes, stressing prevention and a focus on efficiency and modernization, the plan will improve quality and lower costs."

What is the exact amount of "waste" that exists in the current system? If one really could get rid of that waste, what would happen if the insurance costs were not reduced enough to make them "affordable"? What would happen to the insurance companies if they refused to lower their rates?

"Provide Tax Relief to Ensure Affordability: Working families will receive a refundable tax credit to help them afford high-quality health coverage."

But it does not define "working families". How much does a family have to make to qualify for the tax credit? What if they pay less in taxes than the tax credit? What if they can't afford to buy insurance until they get their tax refund?

And it says things like:

"Limit Premium Payments to a Percentage of Income: The refundable tax credit will be designed to prevent premiums from exceeding a percentage of family income, while maintaining consumer price consciousness in choosing health plans."

But it doesn't say what that percentage will be. On one of the other threads, a Massachusetts-ite posted that their mandatory health insurance cost them 17% of their income. What will the percentage be under Clinton's plan? 3%? 8%? 17%? 25%?

And it says things like:

"Employers: will help financing the system; large employers will be expected to provide health insurance or contribute to the cost of coverage: small businesses will receive a tax credit to continue or begin to offer coverage."

Again and again and again - - what qualifies as a large business, and what qualifies as a small business? How much is my "large" employer expected to contribute toward the cost of my insurance? 90%? 75%? 25%? 3%?

There will have to be cut off points in this plan - - the amount of income you make to qualify for the tax credits, the size of your company, etc. Are those cut off points realistic? What will happen to the folks who don't make that cut off?

Yesterday Hillary Clinton was quoted as saying she can imagine a time in the future where you have to prove that you're insured to get hired. What happens to folks who can't afford health insurance even under this plan? And there will be people who can't afford it. What happens if your financial situation changes suddenly for a reason outside your control - - you get a divorce, your spouse passes away, you're fired from your job? What's the safety net for those folks, and how long does it take to kick in?

Until the details are made public, there is no way to determine if this plan is remotely workable.

[SaveElmer]

21. There is a 16 page PDF that you can download...on the same page...

Has more details there...

[Tellurian]

28. Heres the pdf..

IF anyone bothers to read it. Much easier to believe DRUDGE's regurgitated pap. Did I say pap? I really meant to say, Crap!!


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

[Warpy]

23. Actually, it is.

Trying to offset the cost to marginal workers with tax cuts is a non starter, since marginal workers don't pay enough in taxes in the first place to afford health insurance if every dime goes to insurance.

There is no mechanism to prevent companies from rescinding coverage after illness because of flaws in paperwork. This is an abuse that is happening right now.

There is no mechanism for preventing companies from using every means available to delay or deny care, something they are doing right now.

As long as profit is retained as the primary motive in health care, no plan will succeed. All Hillarycare II does is give people the illusion of safety without delivering any of the real thing.

It's a bad plan.

[JDPriestly]

18. We need single-payer health care.

Cut the funding for the weapons and death and increase the funding for health and life.

[Maribelle]

20. Forcing mandatory health insurance? That's a lie.

But I do appreaciate the folks that come here to simply repeat lies they've swallowed. It gives us a glimps of what hate mongering will be like after the primaries.

This is the THIRD time within the hour on different threads. Boy you guys are out in full force this beautiful day.


http://mediamatters.org/items/200709180016?f=i_latest


"At this point, we don't have anything punitive that we have proposed," the presidential candidate said in an interview with The Associated Press. "We're providing incentives and tax credits which we think will be very attractive to the vast majority of Americans."

She said she could envision a day when "you have to show proof to your employer that you're insured as a part of the job interview -- like when your kid goes to school and has to show proof of vaccination," but said such details would be worked out through negotiations with Congress.

[western mass]

29. Corporate welfare for the health insurance industry.

An obscenely cost-ineffective health care system run by parasites.

Hillary's plan: pump more public $$ into it (yes, tax credits are just a backdoor method of making other taxpayers pay).

Amazing.

[Armstead]

30. More Slide-rule mumbo jumbo

I live in Massachusetts. Guess what. The insurance companies have announced that another round of premuim increases is coming. By a strange coincidence, the fact that the state now has mandated that everyone has health insuranbce hasn't curbed the voracious appetite of insurers at all.

The only fricving way that health coverage can be made universally available and affordable is to take the profit motive out of coverage. Stop farting around with all of these formulas and make health insurance non-profit, not-for-profit or at the very least impose stringent price controls and limitations on profitability of private insurers.