Who can tell me the significant differences between the Clinton and Edwards health plans?

[rinsd]

Here's a pdf with a summary of Edwards plan - http://johnedwards.com/about/issues/health-care-overview.pdf

Here's the summary of Hillary's http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/healthcareplan/summary.aspx

Both have stated that they will roll back Bush's tax cuts for the rich to help finance their plans.

They also both seem to rely on elimination of wasteful spending as a means of finance.

Shit it doesn't even have to be "significant" differences. Just tell me what differences you see.

[Cameron27]

1. John & Elizabeth can't,

so this should be interesting.

[Mythsaje]

2. Both of them suck...

Of course, that's not a difference now, is it?

[rinsd]

3. LOL.

No, I don't think that would qualify as a difference.

[Mass]

4. According to his wife, the plans are remarkably similar.

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/shared-blogs/ajc/politicalinsider/entries/2007/09/19/elizabeth_edwards_hillary_clin.html

“I guess you could slip a piece of paper between what Ms. Clinton and what John proposed in February, but that’s about it. It’s remarkably similar,” Ms. Edwards began.

“We’re of course glad to have her company, and to the extent that this is an endorsement of his proposal, we’re happy to have that.
...

I know she says Hillary will not do it, but if we are simply talking about the two plans, either Elizabeth Edwards does not know what she is talking about or the two plans are extremely similar.

[ProudDad]

5. hillary couldn't get hers passed... (n/t)

[dogman]

11. Proof?

Link?

[IA_Seth]

12. And we know Edwards can...

After all of his hard work getting the IWR passed, we owe it to him!

[ProudDad]

16. And that's a DAMN good thing!!!

The problem is that if given the opportunity she will set the cause of Universal Health Care in this country back 14 years -- AGAIN!!!

-----------------

I believe that there's a slight chance to reason with Obama and Edwards and convince them that single-payer is the way to go. I think they're making noises to justify the insurance mafia money they're getting too but that they aren't 100% wed to another corporate giveaway to the insurance industry -- especially Edwards...

Hillary and health insurance is like bush and Iraq... It's become a personal thing with both of them and drives their decision making processes (such as they are)...

Not to mention that hillary is the NUMERO UNO recipient, Dem or republican, of health insurance mafia and big pharma money -- even if they haven't "bought her" per se, they recognize a kindred korporate spirit when they see one.

[ProudDad]

6. The major difference is that

hillary has an insurance mandate -- EVERYONE HAS TO BUY INSURANCE (NOT health CARE, insurance) from her buddies in the health insurance mafia...

Edwards' doesn't have that mandate...


Other than that they are equally as fucked up -- they're both give-aways to the insurance industry, can't be passed and are NOT the solution to the Health Care Problem...


The real solution is HR676 and if ObamClintWards hadn't been bought and paid for by the health insurance mafia and big pharma, they'd be promoting Universal Single-Payer too...

[Mass]

7. Apparently wrong, according to the plan itself

The Edwards Plan Will:
 Require businesses and other employers to either cover their employees or help finance their
health insurance.
 Make insurance affordable by creating new tax credits, expanding Medicaid and SCHIP,
reforming insurance laws, and taking innovative steps to contain health care costs.
 Create regional Health Care Markets purchasing pools to give every American the bargaining
power to purchase an affordable, high-quality health plan, increase choices among insurance
plans, and cut costs for businesses offering insurance.
 Once these steps have been taken, require all American residents to get insurance.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rinsd]

8. Actually Edwards does have that mandate.

Finally: Individual Responsibility. Once insurance is affordable, everyone will be expected to take
responsibility for themselves and their families by obtaining health coverage. Some Americans will
obtain coverage from public programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP and others will get
coverage through their jobs. Other families can buy insurance through the regional Health Care
Markets. Special exemptions will be available in cases of extreme financial hardship or religious
beliefs.

He uses the caveat "once insurance is affordable", similar to Hillary's caveat

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

Both are inferior to single payer.

[ProudDad]

18. Well, I'll tell you what I can fucking "afford"

about $20 per month.

Let me know when your friends in the health insurance mafia and big pharma provide a plan at that level, ok?


:eyes:

[SaveElmer]

22. Both good plans..a couple differences

One difference is in the way premiums costs are derived. Hillary caps premiums as a percentage of income...with enforceable guarantees that they cannot rise above that. Edwards uses a sliding scale formula that it is my understanding does not make that guarantee...

On mental health coverage...

Hillary goes a bit further...guaranteeing mental health parity in her plan...Obama and Edward's do not make a specific promise to that effect...

[mohc]

9. Overall they are very similar

Both include expansion of Medicaid and SCHIP, limiting premiums based on income, guaranteed issue, as well as employer mandates (either cover employees or pay into a government plan).

Any significant differences would lie withing the core parts of their plans: for Edwards the "Health Care Markets" and for Clinton the "Health Choices Menu". (They even have the same abbreviation!!). Health Care Markets seems to be a new program, Health Choices Menu implemented within FEHBP, Clinton seems to see this as an advantage as it requires no new bureaucracy. While both plans include a public option similar to Medicare, the choices of private insurance are limited to those included in the package the members of Congress gets in Clinton's plan. It appears under the Health Care Markets system you would only qualify if your employer did not provide private insurance, this may be the case in Clinton's plan as well but the way I am reading it you could opt into the government plan even if your employer provided private insurance. Finally, the Health Care Markets are administered at a regional level instead of by the FEHBP.

So basically the big difference is the use of the FEHBP in Clinton's plan, which probably dictates the other differences.

[GOPBasher]

10. I don't know, but they both suck shit. We need single-payer health national

health insurance. THAT is the only fix to the problem. Both of these plans will keep health care costs sky-rocketing, and how the fuck do we cover everyone with current health care costs? We're already spending 15% of our GDP on medical care; if their plans go through we'll pay what? 20%? 25%?

Elimination the insurance companies would actually save money, and we'd be able to cover everyone for less than we're spending now. But the asshole can't do that now, can they?

[bpeale]

13. check out the following link for edwards plan...its comprehensive

http://www.kaisernetwork.org/health_cast/health2008hc.cfm?hc=2375

[ProudDad]

19. AND WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!!!! (n/t)

[bpeale]

20. you sir are an idiot

[ProudDad]

21. And you are seriously deluded

if you think any plan that leaves the health insurance mafia and big pharma in charge as ObamClintWards' plans do equates to "Universal Health Care"...

or could ever get there.

or could be passed...

There's only ONE Universal Health Care plan in play at present -- HR676...

[Andrew_Lindsey]

14. Kick!! n/t

[jsamuel]

15. response

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3548462