right off the Edwards website

[LSK]

(2) Invest in Preventive Care and Health. Study after study shows that primary and preventive care
greatly reduces future health care costs, as well as increasing patients’ health, but our health care
system is focused on treating diseases, not preventing them. Insurance companies have little incentive
to bear these costs. As a result, many people do not receive preventive care such as tests and
immunizations. Other Americans suffer from preventable, chronic conditions that can lead to
complications and disability. Edwards will help Health Care Markets lead the effort to realign
incentives in the health care system that reward healthier outcomes and lower costs.

• Promote Preventive Care: Health Care Markets will offer primary and preventive services at
little or no cost. Incentives like lower premiums will reward individuals who schedule free
physicals and enroll in healthy living programs. Edwards will also support community efforts to
improve health, such as safe streets, walking and biking trails, safe and well-equipped parks, and
physical education programs for children.


http://www.johnedwards.com/about/issues/health-care-overview.pdf

Can we stop this mandatory doctor nonsense now?

Can people please take the time and RESEARCH THE FACTS????

[Beaverhausen]

1. thank you

this whole thing is totally ridiculous.

[natrat]

133. i want to know who is behind it-hrc campaign,some corporate group paying people to post

drug makers,insurance groups

[Gold Metal Flake]

2. K&R

One more R needed.

[cosmik debris]

3. scare tactics are more fun! n/t

[lapislzi]

4. If the facts do not conform to the theory, they must be disposed of.

Everybody knows that.

:sarcasm:

[RufusTFirefly]

5. Thank goodness. We can now return to discussion of his haircut.

;-)

The persistent threads/questions about mandatory doctor visits were the DU equivalent of push-polling.

[LSK]

7. yes, John Edwards will call for mandatory haircuts next

:D




JUST KIDDING FOR THOSE TOO SERIOUS HERE!

[RufusTFirefly]

10. Mandatory EXPENSIVE haircuts!

And everyone will be required to travel to New Orleans to get 'em.
This man must be stopped!!!

[Beerboy]

129. I hope the government-doctor says I'm gay

so I can get the better haircut!

[renie408]

11. MANDATORY HAIRCUTS??? I am going to write Edwards right now to let him know my thoughts on this!! nt

[libnnc]

25. Oh noes!!111! Gub'ment subsidized salon visits!!1111!!

Seriesly??!11??!!!

:wow:

[Lex]

66. Do I get to choose my hairstyle?

I was thinking of something like this:



:P

[SaveAmerica]

113. Mandatory Expensive Haircuts with FRENCH STYLING PRODUCTS

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!! And the worst part is that I will be a woman with a mandatory haircut. Oh the humanity.

[jpgray]

6. DUers are headless chickens when it comes to media smears.

Doesn't matter who it is, what it's about, or even whether it's founded on anything substantial.

[Mojorabbit]

12. The other post

stated that he has said mandatory in at least two speeches. Is this true or not?

[jpgray]

13. Wouldn't it be in the AP article? Without those quotes, I don't see why everyone's hopping on board

[LSK]

14. .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1729074&mesg_id=1729074

[Mojorabbit]

30. Thanks for the link

but in that thread there are some who say he said mandatory at the armstrong debate and others that say it is a msm misrepresentation. I wish one of his supporters would come up with a definitive reply.
When I first read an outline of his health care plan, I liked it better than Hillarys but less than Kuchinichs. I am looking for some facts one way or another.

[LSK]

31. another link...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20464387/

[Mojorabbit]

36. I watched the video

and it does not address it either. I'll look on you tube later tonight to see if the full debate is there.
Thank you for the link. It is appreciated.

[Cameron27]

38. I posted the link (see #35)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1730928&mesg_id=1731520


This is in the third of 3 videos of his perfomance.

[Mojorabbit]

46. He says here

If you are in this universal system you have to go for checkups, you have to be monitored. So there it is..
I am waiting to see if he says anything about penalties.
Nothing about penalties. Thank you so much for the link. This puts an end to the question of wheather he said it or not.

[Cameron27]

58. Thanks, it's horrible to know you've heard something,

and then have everyone doubt it, although I was beginning to wonder if I'd heard it myself, lol.

[iverglas]

82. "Nothing about penalties"

Which just might be because there wouldn't be any, in the classical sense of fines, prison terms ... or discontinuance of insurance by the insurer, in a non-universal scheme ...

Maybe they would be DISINCENTIVES, e.g. in the form of higher premiums or suchlike.

Like . He. Says . on the website:

http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/health-care/health-care-fact-sheet/

Promote Preventive Care: Health Care Markets will offer primary and preventive services at little or no cost. Incentives like lower premiums will reward individuals who schedule free physicals and enroll in healthy living programs.

A disincentive is a "penalty". It is a way of achieving compliance, by deterring non-compliance. A higher premium would be a disincentive to non-compliance.

So I STILL don't know why his website talks about INCENTIVES to comply -- and that's a different bit from the one I have quoted elsewhere -- if he's talking about COMPULSORY compliance. And so it STILL sounds to me like he's proposing INCENTIVES for compliance / DISINCENTIVES for non-compliance.

I don't like his plan. I wouldn't want it for myself. I have something infinitely better, and I will fight anyone who tries to make what I have into what Edwards is proposing (an effort that is very much underway in Canada). But if I had nothing, I might find his proposal a lot better than what I have, and more likely to get adopted than something else. I don't know. But I'm sure I'd rather see it discussed for what it actually is, and not have the discussion get sidetracked by something that seems entirely chimerical.

[Mojorabbit]

85. More info is needed

ie suppose one falls off the healthy living program prescribed for one. Does your insurance premium automatically go up. Who makes the decisions? Humans are so complicated. I hate the thought of any kind of coercion when it comes to health care. There are so many variables.

[Mojorabbit]

51. I did find the link

and he did say it would be mandatory. Bummer.

[renie408]

28. I clearly heard him say "haircuts". I was there and I heard it. I don't have a link for it right now

[renie408]

8. Incentives?? That manipulative BASTARD!! n/t

[Debi]

9. WHAT?

"Edwards will also support community efforts to improve health, such as safe streets, walking and biking trails, safe and well-equipped parks, and physical education programs for children."

Now I'm going to have to walk and bike on trails and take my kids to the park? Damn you John Edwards!!

[jackstraw45]

15. Who is this Edwards guy? ABC/NBC/CBS told me that CLinton was running against Obama..

:sarcasm:

[LSK]

18. hes a Canadian who wants you to cut your hair

:hide:

[RufusTFirefly]

19. I thought the election was already over. n/t

[renie408]

23. Election...?? n/t

[Lex]

16. people here repeating freeper talking points/distortions suck

(thanks for the link LSK)

[bobbolink]

48. You gotta admit.......... it's a very successful ploy in turning off meaningful discussion.

:hi:

[Fovea]

17. Another Centrist Meme blown to hell.

and about time.

[Richard Steele]

20. K&R

[RufusTFirefly]

21. Seriously, I love that Edwards wants more walking and biking trails

These will improve the health of Americans, their communities, and the planet in so many ways.
Also, depending on where the trails are, they can be a boon to local businesses by encouraging more foot traffic.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

80. What's he gonna do about the hot weather in TX where we can't go walking cuz it's too hot?? n/t

[Cameron27]

22. LSK, he said that his plan called for mandatory checkups

during the Armstrong cancer forum. I'm trying to find a video or transcript of it, but so far, nothing.

[RufusTFirefly]

24. Did he also say he invented the Internet? n/t

[Cameron27]

27. Look, that's what he said

it was a short comment, and I'm still trying to find the transcript. There's a thread here on DU, where the forum was discussed while in progress, and this mandate for medical check-ups was discussed.

[StarryNite]

29. That's the way I took it too.

But the really scary thing is how many people believed he was calling for mandatory checkups and thought that was a great idea.

[bbgrunt]

33. That was the scary part! But I still have questions about

what kind of "incentives" he proposes.....seems like the devil is always in the details.

[robinlynne]

39. and why is that a bad thing? That's called preventive medicine. As it is now, you

have to jump through hoops to get a checkup from an insurance company.

[Cameron27]

43. Because it's a mandated check up .

I don't want any politician getting in the middle of my health care, and I don't want to be bound by John Edwards' mandates about when I should see my doctor.

edited to say that I was responding to the point of this thread that seems to question whether he said it or not.

[StarryNite]

45. Why don't people get it?

If they said we had to go to church they would be screaming mad. As well they should be. When they want to take away our choice of whether to have an abortion or not, once again they start screaming that it's our body and we should have the choice. And once again, they are correct. Yet in this case they don't think we should have a choice? :shrug:

[robinlynne]

47. Maybe the reason for this is the opposite, to make sure we GET the care.

Maybe it is mandating the health industry. I dont think he suggests people would go to jail for not getting a checkup does he? Who in hell doesn't want a checkup anyway? I feel like it is so hard to get health care, even now when I pay 350 a month to a health provider. if a once a year checkup were mandatory I would be glad, i would feel the amndatory is aimed at the health provider, not at me. checkups are something I want.
Anyway, I'm sure it is not about big brother sticking chips into you. Pretty sure it's to make sure you get what you need. Why not write to his website and ask him?

[StarryNite]

52. "Get what you need"?

Deemed by who? If that doesn't sound like Big Brother, I don't know what does? What if "they" deem that abortions should be outlawed? The first thing most liberal women would say is it's my body, my choice. And it should be our choice. Just as it should be our choice if we want to go to the doctor. Under national health care you should be allowed to have checkups, if you want them. But you shouldn't be forced to have them in order to stay on the plan.

[robinlynne]

60. If you are really worried about big brother I would use that energy VS the fisa

court disgrace the democrats just allowed. That is 18 months of guaranteed legal spying on all of us. That scares me. not Edwards health plan. I think letters and complaints to Pelosi and Reed are in order. What is happening NOW is scary. and REAL. and INVASIVE. not Edwards' health plan.
And I find current health plans really scary. Did you see Sicko?

[StarryNite]

70. Oh, I agree with you on the fisa court.

I am not one bit happy with the Democrats allowing Americans to be spied on. That's crap! But I also don't think we should be told what to do with our own bodies either. Yes, I did see "Sicko". I'm anxious for it to come out on DVD too. I certainly do think we should have nationalized health care. I think it's terrible that we don't. And I think under the plan we should be able to have health checkups. That makes good sense. I just think we should have our choice of if or when we feel we need to go to have them. That's probably the only difference between the way you and I think about it.

[robinlynne]

83. agreed. I'm sure it is something which could be discussed and changed, rather than

the basis of a candidate who is in favor of taking away our rights...

[Cameron27]

50. I don't know.

If it came out of any RWer we'd be having a fit. Mandating health checkups for everyone whether healthy or sick, young or old, is terrible, and I don't care who's promoting it.

[StarryNite]

44. It should be a choice.

That's all we are saying. It's our body. Our taxes would be covering the plan. We should have the choice of when we feel it's necessary to go to the doctor.

[Truth2Tell]

105. So what about people who make bad choices

and the result is added costs for everyone? That could include smoking, poor diet, lack of exercise, refusal to see doctors, or you name it? These would be real questions in any all-encompassing community health care solution. How would you suggest we address those questions, assuming you support universal care, and fairness and freedom too? I ask your suggestions because I don't know the answer.

[Cameron27]

110. How does the Canadian government address these things, I wonder

or any of the other governments with socialized medicine? We have a DUer who's an MD from a country with universal healthcare, and he said there were no mandates like this in his country. (of course I can't remember the country lol)

[Crunchy Frog]

128. I've seen posts from Canada, Australia, and Japan.

None of them have mandated doctor visits, and they all seemed to think it was a bad idea.



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1725368&mesg_id=1727458

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1725368&mesg_id=1726815

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3494008&mesg_id=3495010

[Cameron27]

132. Thank you.

I'm going to bookmark that info because it looks like the spin is in on this issue.

[iverglas]

134. by public education, in doctor-patient contact ...

The only conceivable "mandatory" health care thing in Canada would be quarantine -- as in the SARS incident in Toronto, when people who had been exposed were instructed not to leave their homes. Of course there is also mandatory reporting of certain communicable diseases, and admission to schools is conditional on vaccination.

Under our horrific right-wing provincial government in Ontario a few years ago, I believe that the annual physical for average healthy adults was removed from the schedule, i.e. no longer covered by the universal provincial plan, along with a few other things like yearly eye exams, which became semi-yearly and I think have now been removed altogether, except for under-20s and over-65s and people with eye conditions. I'm a patient at a community health clinic by choice, where doctors are on salary rather than paid fee-for-service by the plan, and the clinic still does annual generals.

But I digress. Basic info about coverage: http://www.health.gov.on.ca/english/public/pub/ohip/services.html

The thing about a universal health insurance plan is that it is universal. It doesn't matter whether you are rich, poor, old, young, sick, healthy, negligent or exemplary, you get the health care that you need to the same standard as everyone else. The only time when lifestyle, including following medical advice, would be an issue would be indetermining the efficacy of treatment, e.g. giving a liver transplant to an active alcoholic (which would of course also involve criteria for rationing, since organs are scarce), or doing surgery on someone whose physical condition (e.g. obesity) counterindicates it.

In what Edwards seems to be saying, he appears to be importing an element of "responsibility" into the discourse, as in: if you have rights you also have responsibilities. That isn't the nature of rights. And in Canada, we believe that health care on an equitable basis is a right. We also just consider, pragmatically, that efforts to keep costs down by imposing obligations or costs on individuals (a $5 fee for ER visits, to keep out the worried well or lazy, is another thing often tossed about) just raise the costs to the system and are likely to harm those most in need of help.

[StarryNite]

111. While it is true that those

who make poor choices when it comes to their health may add to the cost for everyone, I would think there would be others who take very good care of themselves and are blessed with good genes. There will be others who may take very good care of themselves but still get terrible diseases or have major accidents. The costs would be averages of the population. Just like it is with health insurance. Health insurance fees are based on averages. It's just that they are way out of whack. And yes I do support universal care, fairness and freedom but let's face it, life isn't fair. Think how wonderful it would be if instead of spending billions of dollars on killing people in illegal wars, we spent even a fraction of that amount on health care.

[Truth2Tell]

137. Thanks for your thoughtful answer

I think you're right. :)

[LSK]

26. thats great, but you need a source

Hope you find it.

[Cameron27]

35. Here's the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9SgIwzumB4&mode=related&search=

It comes right after "we mandate preventative care" at 1:28

[StarryNite]

40. "You have to go for

regular, periodic checkups"

Gee, that sounded to me like he said, you have to go for regular, periodic checkups. And what if we don't agree with the doctor's "orders"? Does the doctor have a hot line to the government to rat us out? Big Brother, Big Doctor, Big Politician and this whole idea is a big load of crap.

[LSK]

57. thanks, its actually nice to have the 1st hand source

I don't know what to think of that, maybe hes overreaching?

:shrug:

[Cameron27]

63. You're welcome,

I'm glad I found it, I can't believe that MSNBC didn't keep a transcript.

[Inspired]

91. I was at the Armstrong forum and I don't recall this. n/t

[Cameron27]

92. He said it,

you can refresh your memory here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9SgIwzumB4&mode=related...

It comes right after "we mandate preventative care" ...

[WTF cubed]

116. And I heard he ate babies!

*sigh*

[saracat]

32. Thank You.It is obvious what camp these smear tactic come from.

The same people that deliberately sabotaged 2004.Misrepresentation of others is their forte.

[IndyOp]

34. What a NOVEL approach! Looking up information instead of guessing, surmising,

interpreting... Thx!

:hi:

[robinlynne]

37. sounds like a good idea to me. why do you have a problem with preventive health care?

[StarryNite]

42. Why don't you have a problem

with losing your power of choice over your own body? Do you need Big Brother to tell you what to do? Are you okay with Big Brother deciding to outlaw abortions?

[robinlynne]

49. looks like you are reaching for something to be mad about.

[StarryNite]

54. Nope

Edward's said it. Would you be upset if he had said abortions should be illegal? I would. It's my body, my choice. The same thing holds true in this instance, my body, my choice. Do you think people who smoke or eat French fries should be kept off the national health care plan? Or people who don't exercise the correct amount of minutes each week?

[robinlynne]

64. As I said to another poster, scary is the FISA court elimination of 2 weeks ago.

Scary is what the supreme court, teh whitehouse, the DOJ and congress are doing. That is scary. the fact that our own dems are supporting the war and the elimination of the FISA courts is terrifying. Edwards doesn't scare me at all. I'm sure a conversation about it with his people would straighten it up in an instant if you were so inclined. I dont believe for a second that his wish is to extend "big brother' like powers.

[StarryNite]

72. Actually,

that was me you said it to and I replied to that comment.

[robinlynne]

84. Hi! just read your reply. It was a good one!

[StarryNite]

87. Thanks.

:hi: We share a lot of common ground.

[robinlynne]

86. That is what current hmos are doing, exactly.

[mondo joe]

56. I don't think enough can be known about it at this time to draw such a comparison.

If he's talking about multiple plans, and some are incentized (a la, discount for those who take part in wellness activities) I have no problem with it, and don't think it's comparable to Big Brother.

[hiphopnation]

71. reactionary much?

[hiphopnation]

41. walking and biking trails????????

so what, now he's going to force me to walk and bike? I think I heard him say that in a speech, Drudge linked to it.

"My fellow Americans," it went, "the key to our health is for me to enlist a team of brownshirts to infiltrate every American community and make sure they're taking daily walks or bike rides. Those that don't comply, to the gas chamber with them. Thank you."

fuckin nazi

[Lex]

65. LOL! You better get your bike out of the garage

and your hiking boots on or else there's gonna be trouble.

[gollygee]

53. I assumed it was mandatory on the part of the provider - like the provider would have to allow it

not that you would have to go. But it would be mandatory that access to preventative health care be provided.

[StarryNite]

55. Now that would make good sense.

Too bad it's not what he said.

[LSK]

59. but its what his plan says

[StarryNite]

61. Then he should get with the plan

and not say things that are contrary to it. We shouldn't have to play guessing games with what a candidate says and what he/she means.

[LSK]

62. maybe hes floating an idea to see the reaction?

:shrug:

[Lex]

68. "Mandatory" like the insurance company couldn't waive it.

Of course.

It's the only way it makes any freakin' sense. Did people here think he was going to round people up in their homes and force them at gun point to get a yearly physical. Jesus Christ.

[Mojorabbit]

77. That is not what he says

He also says mandatory monitoring.

[smalll]

67. You are right, mandatory check-ups are NOT in Edwards' plan, but...

his recent verbal statement DID point towards mandatory health care. So no, I don't really believe that Edwards wants to "force" us to go to the doctor, but that's pretty much what he said. It's called a GAFFE. And when a candidate makes a gaffe, he has to take his lumps. That's all that's going on here on DU. He's getting his lumps. :shrug:

[Lex]

69. Mandatory from the heath insurance provider's point of view.

In other words, they have to cover it every year for you.

Duh.

[Cameron27]

73. He should have been more specific then,

because he seemed pretty intent about those mandates when he was talking to Armstrong. I hope he issues a full explanation, because right now, I have to take him at his word.

[StarryNite]

76. You are correct.

He is the candidate. He is the one that said that. It isn't up to his "people" to fix his blunders or try to dig him out of a hole. He either meant what he said or he misspoke but either way it came out of his mouth. Are we suppose to pick and choose we want to believe we think he meant? :shrug:

[StarryNite]

74. Hopefully it was just a gaffe

and that he will learn from it as his campaign progresses. If he doesn't, what we Democrats are saying about him is nothing compared to what the neocons will do to him.

[GreenArrow]

75. "a GAFFE"

Isn't that what they call it when a politician accidentally tells the truth?

[Mojorabbit]

78. Does he know

about these threads? It seems weird to me that he did not speak to a medical person first about this.
Perhaps it was an off the cuff remark. Hoepfully he will have a fully detailed plan up for all to read soon.

[Blackhatjack]

79. STOP! Ask Yourself "How Silly Do I Look Trying To Smear Edwards This Way?"

No one believes Edwards would make doctor visits mandatory.

If you are making that argument, then you are the Emperor With No Clothes --people see right through you!

[Mojorabbit]

81. Did you watcfh

the video where he does say that?

[BlackVelvet04]

88. How silly do you look accusing people of trying to smear Edwards?

Pretty damn silly. He's the one that said what he said and he needs to clarify his comments. I emailed the Edwards campaign for a clarification.

[StarryNite]

89. Please share with us

what they say.

[BlackVelvet04]

94. If I get a reply I will post it in a new thread. n/t

[StarryNite]

95. Thank you.

[rndmprsn]

90. K+R

[Gold Metal Flake]

93. Waaaaaaaah! Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

Waaaaahaaaaahhaaaaaahhaaaaaa etc.

Anyways, a gleeful PM kick.

[usregimechange]

96. I knew it, and those doing so were democrats...

[Yael]

97. 'nother K&R

[usregimechange]

98. k/r

[CarolNYC]

99. So, if I'm following the responses of the Edwards' supporters correctly...

I'm not supposed to believe what Edwards says in appearances because he doesn't really mean what he says. And if I were to quote or ask for clarification on something he said, even if he actually did say the words and there's even a video to prove that he did, it's just an attempt to smear Edwards...

And, of course, he wouldn't suggest something as stupid and nonsensical as mandatory checkups....unless he did suggest them, in which case, they are really a great idea and why all of this faux outrage about it when everyone knows it's the best idea to come down the pike in recent memory....

My head's spinning...No wonder I don't like politics.

[StarryNite]

102. Well said!

I guess when it comes right down to it, a lot of people on here have a real problem with choice when it comes to our own bodies. I wonder if they object to taking a woman's right to choose away when it comes to abortions?

[CarolNYC]

106. How far does it go?

If Edwards didn't really mean what he said, maybe he needs to come out and clarify what he meant or what he was trying to say there....What's kind of freaky is all of these people trying to sell this mandatory thing as some wonderful, or at least unobjectionable, idea because Edwards said it...Just how much choice are they willing to give up to the government? Where does it stop, once it gets started?

[B Calm]

100. Limbaugh was talking about this today. He said he doesn't go to

the doctor even when he is sick, blah blah blah.. All I could think about was his doctor shopping for drugs. What a fucking hypocrite..

[BlooInBloo]

101. OH NO!!!! Preventtive care!!! RUUNNNN!!!!!

[StarryNite]

103. So are you saying that people

should not have choice when it comes to their own bodies?

[BlooInBloo]

104. Yes. I think every American should be lined up and marched straight to the syphillis rooms.

[StarryNite]

107. Why?

Do you want some company?

[BlooInBloo]

108. LOL!

[StarryNite]

109. Silly

:D

[Bluebear]

112. They should certainly have the opportunity to opt out of the health care plan, yes,

Fair enough?

[StarryNite]

114. Why should they have to opt out?

I'm not sure where you stand on this and why you would be against choice. Is it that you feel that not having a physical checkup leads to illness or higher medical bills that would have to be shared by all? If so, then what about people who smoke or are overweight, should they also have to opt out? What about people who don't exercise several times a week? Or people who have what is considered a risky lifestyle, like multiple sex partners or dangerous hobbies, should they also not be included? Just where should the line be drawn? What about people who get their mandatory physical but choose not to follow their doctor's orders when it comes to taking a medication? Should they be reported to the government and dropped off the plan?

[Bluebear]

118. I'm progressive, so be assured my thoughts are with the patient's wellbeing

What about people who smoke - free patches, lozenges, drugs, if they would like to try to quit that horrible addiction

or are overweight, should they also have to opt out? - no

What about people who don't exercise several times a week? - leave me out of this :)


Or people who have what is considered a risky lifestyle, like multiple sex partners or dangerous hobbies, should they also not be included? - no


Just where should the line be drawn? - i really don't know. I would certainly prefer preventive care to be highlighted rather than the word "mandatory". I am very anxious to hear Edwards expound on what he meant.

What about people who get their mandatory physical but choose not to follow their doctor's orders when it comes to taking a medication? Should they be reported to the government and dropped off the plan? - no

[Bluebear]

120. Hello? :)

[StarryNite]

121. I'm here, hang on.

I was foraging for a healthy snack in the kitchen. :D Grapefruit juice, All Bran and some vitamins to be exact, just in case Big Brother is reading this. But really, that is what I had.

[StarryNite]

122. Anyway,

you said, "What about people who smoke - free patches, lozenges, drugs, if they would like to try to quit that horrible addiction

or are overweight, should they also have to opt out? - no"

But what if those people don't want to quit smoking or lose weight? Should they then be tossed off the plan?

What about gay men? There is a higher incidence of AIDS among the gay community. From what I understand, it's a very expensive disease to treat. So therefore gay men who contract AIDS would be raising the rates for the rest of the people. So should they have to choose between forcing themselves to live a lie and have sex with women or perhaps become celibate for the rest of their lives so they could stay on "the plan"?

The beauty of national health care is that we are all covered. Nobody should be turned away from getting medical attention because they didn't follow somebody else's idea of what is healthy.

[Bluebear]

123. I wouldn't toss anyone out of the plan.

In short, I am for national health care with preventive medicine covered with no catches. That's the bluebear plan :)

[StarryNite]

125. I like the bluebear plan!

:toast:

[Cameron27]

115. No, not fair at all.

Why should anyone have to give up on universal health care just because he wants to make the decision when they should visit their own doctors? I'll vote for Kucinich's plan.

[StarryNite]

117. You are absolutely right.

I just do not understand why people on this forum, who are advocates of a woman's right to choose, would be against choice when it comes to this. :shrug:

Kucinich's plan gets my nod.

[Cameron27]

119. I don't understand it either, but maybe it's a stand by your man

thing. I didn't expect to see this submission to authority mindset on DU though.

[StarryNite]

124. Perhaps it is a loyalty to Edwards.

Actually, I would rather it be that than to think we are surrounded by posers who just pretend to be for choice when it comes to our bodies.

[Bluebear]

126. No way.

And my support for any candidate ends when there is any hint of anti-choice.

[StarryNite]

127. You bet!

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[LeftCoast]

130. Can I just say that this issue is why I do not support Single Payer

Don't get me wrong. I support UNIVERSAL coverage. I do not want single payer though. The argument going on right now about Edwards' policy is a perfect illustration. Both sides on this discussion have excellent and valid points. I don't want the government dictating to me what my relationship with my doctor is going to be. On the other hand, as an RN I am fully aware of the massive costs of NOT getting regular medical exams. How do we balance individual freedom with cost to society (or the group-good, if you will)?

I've mentioned before that Switzerland has universal health care, but is single-payer in nature. The government mandates that everyone have coverage and if you don't have enough money for that coverage they will give you money to get it. This allows people to find coverage that is right for them. It also allows for innovative methods of cost savings. One carrier gives a significant refund to people at the end of 5(?) years if you are as healthy at the end of that time as you were at the start. This encourages people to get regular checkups and to lead a healthy lifestyle but doesn't force them.

My 2 cents. :)

[LSK]

131. you can have single payer without the Govt dictating to you

The 2 things are not connected. It depends on how you setup the system.

[iverglas]

136. the reason you don't support single payer

seems to be that you don't understand it.

Edwards' plan is for universal coverage, NOT single payer, and yet it would be entirely possible to "mandate" anything at all within that scheme by allowing insurers to apply incentives and disincentives like premium reductions and increases for people who don't comply with the insurer's requirements.

The plan would require people to have insurance, and then apparently leave that aspect of their policies to insurers' discretion, or could presumably even include a requirement that insurers employ such strategies.

A single payer plan could do that too. But it certainly doesn't have to.

The thing is that any plan that does that ceases to be "universal" in anything but name. A true universal plan provides access to health care based on need, not on financial resources, lifestyle or compliance with policy.

You say:

I don't want the government dictating to me what my relationship with my doctor is going to be.

and the plain fact is that in the Canadian system, which is the most universal scheme now in existence where services are provided in the private sector, the insurance plan has absolutely nothing to do with what your relationship with your doctor is.

You choose your doctor (assuming you don't live in an area where there is a shortage of primary care physicians as there is in some places now, due to mismanagement of supply by recent right-wing governments), your doctor chooses the services you received base on what is medically necessary, and neither of you has any contact with the insurer until the doctor bills it and is paid, using one of the handy computer programs available for the purpose. The plan doesn't tell your doctor what services to provide, and doesn't tell your doctor what services not to provide, among the services covered by the plan.

No one in my province (which does not have the nominal sliding-scale premiums a few provinces have) has any contact with the insurer from one decade to the next, unless s/he needs a new ID card.

How do we balance individual freedom with cost to society (or the group-good, if you will)?

It usually just comes out in the wash. Efforts to regulate individual behaviour through health insurance plans, whether by imposing charges to deter inappropriate use of services or by imposing obligations to reduce the need for services, are essentially ineffective, more costly and counterproductive in the big scheme of things. Doctor-patient contact works best for both.

So the public consensus that health care is a right, combined with the expert understanding that economic carrots/sticks increase costs and have unwanted adverse effects, make the whole idea a dead horse whenever it arises.


edited to fix typo

[Blackhatjack]

135. Exhibit A - How To Kill A Serious Healthcare Reform Proposal? Make Silly Allegations....

... take the focus off the changes that the healthcare insurers and providers vehemently oppose in the proposed plan, and elevate a ridiculous claim to outrageous proportions.

This is exactly how Repubs and their healthcare/insurer contributors will attack any serious effort to reform our healthcare delivery system.

If you really believe that Edwards' healthcare reform plan is promoting 'forced' healthcare visits on the public, by all means go to his site and read his plan AND POST THE PROVISIONS OF HIS PLAN THAT PROVE YOU ARE RIGHT.

We will be waiting to see those proposals that so offend you and prove that you were right.