Health Insurance: Why mandates are important to successful change

[Evergreen Emerald]

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/2/17171/13211

However, without mandating coverage, a "free rider" problem is created. Under Obama's plan, healthy people can choose not to buy health insurance until they experience a medical problem. At that point, they can simply buy into a plan with no added cost concerning their sickness.
In essence, they can free ride on the system while they're healthy, and they can just join up when they get sick. They won't be added to the pool until they're high risk, themselves. This increases costs for all.

snip

Obama's attacks on universal coverage strike a nerve with me because of the work I've done and the places I've heard his argument coming from.

Snip

The essence of Enzi's argument is very much the same as Obama's argument against mandates. They're misleading, dispassionate, and in opposition to the ideals of the Democratic Party. Health care is a right, not a privilege. The only way to secure that right is to make it truly universal.

[Captain Hilts]

1. CORRECT. Non-mandatory encourages people to be free riders. nt

[GodlessBiker]

5. How is not using something you are not paying for a free ride?

[Uben]

11. It isn't

You can opt out and pay for your care up front or provide your own private coverage.

No free rides. If you get ill, you either have coverage or pay up front'

What do you not understand?

[Uben]

2. It is really very simple

Either you buy into coverage or opt to pay up front if you get ill. Your choice, you suffer the consequences. Mandated coverage is the only answer.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

3. Mandated single payer to non-profit providers is the only way to go

I don't trust for-profit insurance companies to really provide universal coverage. If we mandate that everyone buy insurance they will simply jack up the rates as high as they can and keep on ditching people who need expensive care by calling the treatment "experimental". Never underestimate the power of greed. It must be controlled, and the only way to do it is through non-profit insurance.

[Cameron27]

4. K&R

[mrreowwr_kittty]

6. Corporate health insurance is in opposition to the ideals of the Democratic Party

Neither plan does away with it, but Clinton's forces you into it.

[Evergreen Emerald]

7. It is coupled, tho with an over haul of the system

so that the health insurance companies do not have the power they do now. We are ready for the change. We were not ready for the change in the 90's. We allowed the media and the Congress to kill the health plan overhaul.

this time we have to choose to fight along with the Nominee.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

8. Yes, I'm choosing the nominee who was smart enough not to include a mandate

The ONLY possible way to sell mandates to the American people is to demonize the working poor. Meaning you make them out to be the deadbeats who are causing everyone else to pay too much, as opposed to greedy insurance companies. I've already seen DUer do this, as recently as this morning.

[Evergreen Emerald]

9. you better read the whole article again--without mandates neither will work

The "smarter" plan requires mandates.

[OzarkDem]

20. No, you're wrong

Clinton's plan will allow a choice between a government plan like Medicare and private insurance.

[BootinUp]

10. If Obama wins the nom, we can forget Universal Healthcare. nt

[mrreowwr_kittty]

14. Mandatory health insurance = universal health care in Clintonworld nt

[BootinUp]

15. Its clearly how you get there from here. nt

[mrreowwr_kittty]

17. Really? Has mandatory auto insurance led to universal single payer car insurance?

In a word, no.

Mandatory health insurance is a BOON to the health insurance industry. It will NOT lead to universal health care. It will make those corporations even more powerful and entrenched.

I'm not saying I like Obama's plan. I don't. They both suck, because they both involve insurance. The gambling industry does not belong in healthcare. Period.

[BootinUp]

18. I notice you avoid mentioning or are unware of the government plan

that will be available in addition to private insurers. Private insurance will NOT be the beneficiary when they have to compete against a government plan that is attractive to middle class people.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

19. Both Clinton's and Obama's plans have that feature.

But the insurance lobby will never allow for full competition with the government. What will happen is a compromise where the "insurable" must use private companies while the government plan becomes a catch-all for the "un-insurable". Actually that's allright because people with pre-existing conditions would finally get some coverage but it won't be a competitive situation for everyone. Any plan has to get through Congress, and the insurance companies simply will not allow themselves to be undercut by the government.

[BootinUp]

25. bullshit! lol

Hillarys plan reigns in the private insurance industry with new regulations and most definitely does not exclude people from choosing the government plan. You must be thinking of Obamas plan.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

26. Either plan has to get through Congress first.

There will be compromises and you can bet the farm that will be one of them.

Get that through your head, please.

[BootinUp]

27. I think we should give up now like Obama. nt

[mrreowwr_kittty]

28. I think we should go with the plan that doesn't LOSE THE GENERAL ELECTION FOR US.

What kind of "garnish" would you like with your defeat Jim?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080203/ap_on_el_pr/campaign_rdp

[Evergreen Emerald]

29. get a grip. Both have said that.

So much for wanting "Change"--I guess in less it means changing things.

Think outside the box people.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

30. The irony of a Clinton supporter suggesting to think outside the box is staggering. nt

[Evergreen Emerald]

31. you don't even know me. What a closed minded statement

not progressive in the least. I guess that is what comes from believing hyperbole. But when it comes right down to the nitty-gritty of change...you are all spinning in hysterics.

[sandnsea]

12. A card in the mail is universal health care

A mandate to pay who knows how much to private insurance is a gift to the insurance industry.

[Evergreen Emerald]

13. Did ya read the article? What the hell you people.

Just continue to repeat the talking point, without really looking at the facts.

[OzarkDem]

23. Apparently electing Obama is more important than having health insurance

I'm really surprised at the lack of good sense people are showing in discussing such an important issue.

[OzarkDem]

21. Clinton's plan offers a choice between govt and private plans

Do your homework.

[bornskeptic]

22. She didn't say it would be paid to private insurance.

The American Health Choices Plan gives Americans the choice to preserve their existing coverage, while offering new choices to those with insurance, to the 47 million people in the United States without insurance, and the tens of millions more at risk of losing coverage.



The Same Choice of Health Plan Options that Members of Congress Receive: Americans can keep their existing coverage or access the same menu of quality private insurance options that their Members of Congress receive through a new Health Choices Menu, established without any new bureaucracy as part of the Federal Employee Health Benefit Program (FEHBP). In addition to the broad array of private options that Americans can choose from, they will be offered the choice of a public plan option similar to Medicare.


A Guarantee of Quality Coverage: The new array of choices offered in the Menu will provide benefits at least as good as the typical plan offered to Members of Congress, which includes mental health parity and usually dental coverage.

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

Why would she mandate coverage with a private insurer when there is a public plan available to everyone? Presumably if anyones wages were garnished, they would go into paying for coverage under the public plan. If the person preferred to choose a private plan, that would be his or her option.

edited to eliminnate misplaced symbol.

[halobeam]

16. what I don't understand when I read mandate debate threads

is how mandating kids? @25 yrs of age to have insurance by the parents, is not considered mandating. In the last debate Obama did say that if not complied with, then back premiums could be charged.

That's a chunk. That will still then be a less mandate than Clinton, but I wonder who's showed that their plan would be more affordable to more people. I think that needs to be understood. Also, taking into consideration that mandating is transitional into universal health care, that some have offered as a position, then, what part of Obama's mandate for kids helps this? I would think it has to help some of it, but by how much? Does it equal out?

Again, Who's plan SHOWS more afford-ability to more people?

These aren't rhetorical questions. I really am searching for this information.

[busymom]

24. This is absolutely correct.

Too man people could opt out...and then opt in when they need care. One of the ways that these programs maintains sustainability is that people pay in while they are healthy and then use services when they are in need of care. Without this, the system couldn't function.

All of us who are young think that illness can never happen to us. I have health insurance, but I never invested in life insurance/disability insurance because I felt like I was still young. My husband and I were busy putting money into paying off college loan debt and getting by. 2 years ago, at 35, I was diagnosed with cancer....now even though I'm in the clear, I'll never qualify for any real life insurance. This is also an issue for me in terms of health coverage right now. Because my insurance is through my husband's employer, I'd be screwed right now if I 1. got a divorce (though that isn't in the plan right now) or 2. my husband had to switch jobs.