CAMPAIGN 2008

They've Got You Covered?

Obama and Clinton ads both claim all Americans would be covered by their health plans. Clinton's would come close.

factcheck.org
Feb 14, 2008 | Updated: 6:23  p.m. ET Feb 14, 2008

« Return to Article

 
Discuss
 
Member Comments
  • Posted By: SnglMom @ 04/10/2008 11:45:29 AM

    Comment: I can name a few reasons why American health care costs are so high...

    1. People with no insurance using ER as primary care offices.
    2. Malpratice insurance
    3. High salaries
    4. Expensive education
    5. Pharmacueticals Companies.

    Pick one...

    Both Clinton and Obama, make good and bad points. Right now I'm leaning towards Obama, just for the simple fact that Hillary can't seem to keep her house in order. Now Bill is working on a trade agreement with Columbia?? That is the most half-@zz backwards thing I have ever heard. It makes me feel like they don't have the American people best interests at heart.

    Oh and for those of you that say if your person doesnt get into office you're going to vote for a McCain... that is just plain petty and immature. I'm wondering with attitudes like that... should you be voting at all?

  • Posted By: Ltsplybll @ 03/05/2008 2:21:14 PM

    Comment: have some questions about Obama......Are the comments below True or False??
    Upon being sworn into Senate Office Obama REFUSED the Bible and instead was sworn in with the Coran.
    Is he a Muslim?
    He claims to have nothing to do with his father.....WHY?? What is his father doing these days?? Is he Muslim?

  • Posted By: Ltsplybll @ 03/05/2008 2:20:46 PM

    Comment: I have some questions about Obama......Are the comments below True or False??
    Upon being sworn into Senate Office Obama REFUSED the Bible and instead was sworn in with the Coran.
    Is he a Muslim?
    He claims to have nothing to do with his father.....WHY?? What is his father doing these days?? Is he Muslim?

  • Posted By: GTX13 @ 03/05/2008 2:54:20 AM

    Comment: THE DEVIL IS NOT SO BLACK AS IS PAINTED ! A LOT OF "PHILOSOPHY" AND CRITICS ABOUT THIS SUBJECT, BUT NO ONE ACCEPTED TO TAKE ACTION...OVER AND OVER AGAIN ... 200 YEARS PLUS !!! BUT HILLARY WILL PROVE THE CONTRARY !!! ...EXACTLY AS F.D. ROOSEVELT DID IT....WITH SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM !! AND WE HAVE IT !!!...FOR ALL AMERICANS !!!

  • Posted By: extremepooist @ 03/05/2008 2:24:26 AM

    Comment: First of all,no incumbent can promise us anything, their ideas must go through Congress and they more or less decide what is going to be. Americans need to wake up and face the fact that having the Government in our daily lives is not the answer to any of our problems. All people need to be responsible! Not depend on the taxpayers and governing bodies out there to float them through life because they are too lazy or stupid to take care of themselves. Has no one heard of survival of the fittest? By taking care of the PPP we are perpetuating a decline in the gene pool.
    I like to know where in the constitution of the USA it says all people are entitled! and believe it or not, we are not all created equal. Think about it. I work in health care,I see the problems,it's a mess and getting worse,but we can't lead the unwilling to take better care of themselves, and the help available to those who are willing isn't at its best. There is no quick fix and if there is one I'd bet my life it will kill you before you get the care you need.

  • Posted By: coalcrackergranny34 @ 03/04/2008 10:31:31 AM

    Comment: Health Care should be available to everyone only if they want it. It should not be FORCED onto people. Health care should not be provided to anyone who is not a US. Citizen.

  • Posted By: terravista @ 03/01/2008 8:22:53 PM

    Comment: Whether you like Bill or like farakhan doesn't matter. Whether your wife/husbamd is proud to be an American doesn't matter.

    what matters is a cnadidate with substance - and Hillary has substance we can trust in and know she wont change her mind.

    clinton '08

    • Posted By: tj@yahoo.com @ 03/04/2008 2:33:22 PM

      Comment: She has changed her mind plenty, where have you been? Her stance on issues have always changed with what will ultimately benefit her in the end. Please wake up and turn your brain on.

  • Posted By: terravista @ 03/01/2008 8:21:08 PM

    Comment: No, she sounds realistic and not full of false inspiration. Hillary has substance.

    The tides are turnig in her favor - checkl your latest polls against McCain - I will vote fopr McCain if she doesn't get Dem nomination.

    Dumbama is a joke. Go Clinton!

    Clinton '08

  • Posted By: robbie23 @ 03/01/2008 7:12:53 PM

    Comment: I don't know what Clinton will do, but I know what Bill did and he done more for the american people than any other one that we have in the white house in a long time. He should not have ever been put out. He did no more than others that has been in the white house has done/

  • Posted By: robbie23 @ 03/01/2008 7:01:10 PM

    Comment: You can't do anything without the house and senate agrees. You sound like Bush, It is my white house and I will run it like I wnat to.

  • Posted By: kokopelli @ 03/01/2008 7:42:17 AM

    Comment: Part of the reason our healthcare costs are sky rocketing is the fact that soooo many uninsured people come to the hospital, not only for emergent care, but for basic care that is offered at clinics. Unfortunately, if they do not have insurance they still have to pay at a clinic, but if they are treated at the hospital, the hospital pretty much has to write off the expense, because you can't get "blood from a turnip" . So the cost of all the individuals treated at the hospital for emergent care, or basic care are passed on to insurance holders--therefore prices go up.
    We all have to have car insurance to drive, I think requiring health insurance is a responsible mandate--but it has to be affordable. And companies who now offer insurance to workers, can't be allowed to stop w/ the excuse that the employees can get Federal assistance.

  • Posted By: tj@yahoo.com @ 02/27/2008 5:33:42 PM

    Comment: Comment: We need to be very careful and become better informed, After researching further into Hillary's healthcare plan I found that it is to be implemented by a federal government mandate to force every American to buy health insurance. She claims it won't violate our freedom because if you already have a private plan that's OK. But a government alternative plan will be made available. The government will regulate health care, define acceptable health insurance and force every American to buy a plan based on the government-established standard. This last point does not intimidate Clinton's Soviet-style affinities. When asked how purchase can be enforced, she told interviewer George Stephanopoulos, "We will have an "enforcement mechanism." ... you know, going after people's wages." Incredibly, Clinton calls her concept of government-mandated universal health coverage "a core Democratic value."
    Indeed, we have a problem in the delivery of health care in our country. I think you would agree that Costs are going up at twice the overall rate of inflation, with increasing burdens on working families. Why have health-care costs gone out the roof when the prices of just about everything else have gone down? Because health care already has become a highly regulated, highly bureaucratized industry.
    If we want cheaper and more creatively delivered health care, we need less, not more, government.
    According to Dr. David Gratzer of the Manhattan Institute, in 1960 about half of health-care expenditures were directly controlled by consumers. Today, it is about 15 percent. Over the same period in which consumers have relinquished control, per-capita health-care spending has quintupled and costs have skyrocketed.
    Our health-care ills are symptomatic of our social ills. And our social ills reflect a society where the link between personal responsibilities and costs and personal rights and benefits has been largely severed.
    Soviet-style mandates like what Clinton wants will simply dig the hole into which we are sinking deeper. The approach is morally repugnant, the antithesis of everything that a free society is about, and, like the former Soviet Union, does not work. More individual freedom, choice and responsibility in both the delivery and purchase of health care is our only hope. --Star Parker

  • Posted By: rooroomax @ 02/27/2008 12:20:00 PM

    Comment: There is a concern that no one is talking about. Let's say we all get the new insurance. Who says the insurance companies will pay for the proceedures. I know many people who have gotten sick and the insurance companies refuse to pay for various nonsense reasons. Just because we have insurance doesn't mean we will get treated at the hospital.

  • Posted By: rooroomax @ 02/27/2008 12:18:42 PM

    Comment: There is a concern that no one is talking about. Let's say we all get the new insurance. Who says the insurance company will pay for the proceedure. I know folks how have gotten sick and the insurance companies refuse to pay for various nonsense reasons. Just because we have insurance doesn't mean we will get treated at the hospital.

  • Posted By: rhino8505 @ 02/27/2008 11:54:45 AM

    Comment: It's amazing how no one has yet to mention that Clinton's CHIP program she "created" covers children only if their Mother makes less than $12 per hour, yet if a single Mother makes $12.50 per hour, they do not qualify...interesting how .50 per hour all of a sudden enables a single Mother to afford healthcare coverage.

  • Posted By: aintwegotfun @ 02/27/2008 9:42:19 AM

    Comment: The way I understand it the poor would be subsidized, but at least they will be covered and their bills will be paid. The rest would pay premiums at a small percentage of their income. With lower incomes their will be also some subsidization. Their bills will also be paid. Their also will be choices of policys. Those that would think that they do not need it, a seriously flawed concept, would be made to get it & so when they end up in a hospital their bills will be paid. Paid bills = lower cost. We all know when we have to go to a hospital we are being over charged to make up for those people that must need to go there, but do not have insurance. Did you hear the latest news that the cost of medicine is going up? There also needs to be some control over that as we are subsidizing the Pharmaceutical house for their business in other countries. As far as doctors are concerned, they won't see you if you are not wealthy or have insurance. So people have to go to emergency rooms as they must treat you. Not a good thing as there is not continuity of care for chronic conditions. Clinics for the poor are subsidized with our taxes. So in effect every one is paying for those whom do not have insurance. How about dentists? This is a health concern also. I cannot imagine the expense to a dentist for puling one tooth and saving another on a youth by filling and providing a spacer and then charging $4,000.00. Something needs to be addressed about this. They don't have the same problem as doctors.

  • Posted By: tj@yahoo.com @ 02/26/2008 7:17:49 PM

    Comment: Comment: ingridhn
    Please do not counteract out of ignorance. If you really look at the issues behind Hillary's healthcare and how it would have to be "forced" upon the American public, you cannot tell me that is either ethically or morally acceptable. Not with standing unconstitutional. Before you comment to my discussion to the issue of Socialized Healthcare, please research the facts yourself and tell me how else Hillary or anyone else with these same kind of ideals is going to make sure that everyone has healthcare in our country. We currently are short handed on nurses and medical specialists in this country. Many American's already have to wait weeks or months to see the Doctor's they prefer. I currently know a couple of Specialists who are so upset with the current regulations that are posed on them right now by the Government that they are wishing they would have chosen a different profession. Which is also contributing to the shortage in good, quality healthcare. This shortage will continue to have unintended consequences if we are forced to have government mandated healthcare. Anyone else who wants the truth behind such an ideal please refer to my earlier discussion. It is now starting to be outside of more and more individuals self-interest to become medically trained once they find out about the mess of regulations that continue to be heaped upon their heads. Also, How do you suppose that by "forcing" people to carry health insurance, this is going to help anyone, included those who are covered? There are still going to be those who are going to go see a Doctor if they have even just a cut or scratch on their fingers, all in all making your and my wait longer and longer in the Doctor's office. A friend of mine was just diagnosed with Colon Cancer and he told me that he had to wait 2 months just to see a specialist to begin necessary treatment.
    Force should never be used politically, socially, or psychologically. Please realize the dangers of your socialistic paradigm.

  • Posted By: GGemma20 @ 02/25/2008 10:23:23 PM

    Comment: I am a lung and breast cancer survivor and I also have Myasthenia Gravis, simply put this is grave weakness of the muscles, and it has cost us almost everything and our formal lifestyle. I say formal because prior to this bad area of our life my husband and I had a good life! We had only one child, but love her above all things near and dear to us. We supported her and her husband and Army Ranger and their six children. Our two families combined have never received a thin dime or supprt from the government even when I swallowed my pride and asked the government, not I screamed for help from them and received nothing. In forty years my husand has never missed more than a week of work due to illness or other wise. We have always worked together on one paycheck and to this day have never been afforded anything from our society. Yet, I hear of all these illegals coming into our country and they can receive help when asked I ask what for, as I never ask why. But what do they deserve that my hard working husband has not proved himself even after serving in the Army Security Agency and is an honorable man in in his time of need he is not entited to any support or help form the government that we both have believed in and fought hard for? There is something seriously wrong here, isn't there? I am about as disabled as a person can get, I am welded to this wheelchair and have had to be subjected to treatmnents one could only compare to as blood letting and my body is scared for life! My hospital cost was lacking $300 under a million after a 4 month say with MG, to save my life. My point here is if we can do it on one paycheck that is about $500 a week before taxes then how come other people can't do it ? And I would openly admit that had I not had a priveledge to such fine doctors that can not be compared to any other doctors in the world, I would not be here today. My point in this entire comment is perhaps we all must look at ourselves and see where we can cut corners and help out our family and neighbors when we can. I feel that socialized medicine would harm our community of care, as most good doctors can't practice good medicine today because of the tremendous malpractice insurance they must pay to be a physician. I for one would not want the magnitude of responsibility that they are saddled with, like telling some family that they may be losing their mother or wife, would you?

  • Posted By: who ami @ 02/25/2008 7:32:02 PM

    Comment: Hillary expanded health care to the National Guard. Who is she kidding? She will ruin health care for all. Remember what she tried to shove through when her husband was president. You will lose everything you own if you are poor and she is priesident.

  • Posted By: aka-doc @ 02/25/2008 7:30:21 PM

    Comment: If the government wants to free up billions of dollars they need to make health insurace companies non-profit giving the money back to the public who pays it in and doctors who preform the servive and not keeping it for their own greed and give. this in itself would lower costs of healthcare make it acccountable and give doctors back their jobs and money.

  • Posted By: havalah @ 02/25/2008 7:28:59 PM

    Comment: Finally, some people have some sense to see the big picture of what Clinton's plan is proposing! It really seems to be all about control and the way society is going, the last thing we need is the government trying to control one more aspect of our lives. I mean the FBI is now aggregating a database of all persons personal information like handprints, eye scans, body movements, etc. Another plan that may be passed on May 12, would require all citizens to have a national ID card that they wouldn't be able to buy or sell without. Does anyone see what is happening to our "free" country. So few people even pay attention to these small changes and then they or their children will wake up one day and wonder how we went from free to bound and controlled. It's nice to know that other people are wise enough to see where our country is headed if people don't start paying attention to these type of issues.

  • Posted By: TMT1 @ 02/25/2008 7:23:18 PM

    Comment: You know, unless we also get new congressmen elected, it won't matter what either candidate's views are on health care, or anything else. They can't do it alone, the House and Senate need to pass a bill first. This "change movement" needs to go further and replace all incumbants in Washington!

  • Posted By: TMT1 @ 02/25/2008 7:22:51 PM

    Comment: You know, unless we also get new congressmen elected, it won't matter what either candidate's views are on health care, or anything else. They can't do it alone, the House and Senate need to pass a bill first. This "change movement" needs to go further and replace all incumbants in Washington!

    • Posted By: tj@yahoo.com @ 02/26/2008 7:20:56 PM

      Comment: I agree. More people need to be informed starting from the ground up.

  • Posted By: tj@yahoo.com @ 02/25/2008 5:38:33 PM

    Comment: Her plan is to use a federal government mandate to force every American to buy health insurance. She claims it won't violate our freedom because if you already have a private plan that's OK. But a government alternative plan will be made available. The government will regulate health care, define acceptable health insurance and force every American to buy a plan based on the government-established standard. This last point does not intimidate Clinton's Soviet-style affinities. When asked how purchase can be enforced, she told interviewer George Stephanopoulos, "We will have an enforcement mechanism. ... you know, going after people's wages." Incredibly, Clinton calls her concept of government-mandated universal health coverage "a core Democratic value." Indeed, we have a problem in the delivery of health care in our country. Costs are going up at twice the overall rate of inflation, with increasing burdens on working families. Why have health-care costs gone out the roof when the prices of just about everything else have gone down? Because health care already has become a highly regulated, highly bureaucratized industry.
    If we want cheaper and more creatively delivered health care, we need less, not more, government.
    According to Dr. David Gratzer of the Manhattan Institute, in 1960 about half of health-care expenditures were directly controlled by consumers. Today, it is about 15 percent. Over the same period in which consumers have relinquished control, per-capita health-care spending has quintupled and costs have skyrocketed.
    Our health-care ills are symptomatic of our social ills. And our social ills reflect a society where the link between personal responsibilities and costs and personal rights and benefits has been largely severed.
    Soviet-style mandates like what Clinton wants will simply dig the hole into which we are sinking deeper. The approach is morally repugnant, the antithesis of everything that a free society is about, and, like the former Soviet Union, does not work. More individual freedom, choice and responsibility in both the delivery and purchase of health care is our only hope.--Star Parker

    • Posted By: ingridhn @ 02/26/2008 2:17:11 AM

      Comment: Tj@yahoo.com
      I am deeply concerned about where did you get your information from. Is it due to lack of education or something else. How many democratic countries in the world, particularly industrialized countries in the world who have government back health-care, are following Soviet style democracies?

      Lest not forget, USA have the most private insurances but yet have the highest healthcare cost all over the world Health insurers run health care business like a corporation who pays fat $$$ to the corporate officers.

      Say for example, Australia, I have lived there myself for the whole 10 years, my private insurance for one year is equivalent to one month premium in the US. The reason why healthcare cost so much in the US, Health insurers run the industry like a Monopoly.

      I suggest to ALL who are in favor in privatized healthcare, to travel the world, see it for yourself and compare before you rant your incomprehensible opinion to the public.

      The last thing I would read is an opinion of a misinformed american who could not do the math, economics and above all Logic.

      I support the democrats "universal healthcare for all" americans.

      • Posted By: finnland 2007 @ 03/04/2008 1:58:18 PM

        Comment: I think you need to travel a bit more!!

  • Posted By: aintwegotfun @ 02/25/2008 4:12:11 PM

    Comment: Tell it like it really is. We are heading for at least a recession. This is a world wide worry. Why? Because we are the biggest spenders in the world. Remember NAFTA? With recessions, more pe[ple will lose jobs. More people will lose health insurance. Those whom have it will pay more for it to cover those that go to emergency rooms for visits that would ordinarily go to a doctor's office. Emergency rooms are overburdened to the point that real emergency's could result in a person's death. You know that O'Bama says change comes from the bottom up. What he is saying is we have to change our ways.That means you & I folks.The American dream is a dream that has to be worked for, not just handed out as an entitlement. Boy, wait until the baby boomers retire enmasse. Setting aside all your prejudices against people because they are not perfect little robots & in fact are real people like you and I. Stopping all the ridiculous false rumors like gossipers over the fence in the back yard, stopping all the hate mongering, lets get real! The person whom goes into the Oval Office in 2009 will most likely be facing a 400 billion deficit. This is reality. All politicians, when running for office will tell you what they think you want to hear so you will vote for them. Now which one has the experience to deal with this very large deficit that can cause so much harm to us and the world? This is what has to be addressed before anything else can be accomplished. Fact, to have experience in balancing this budget you have to be a Governor of a state & or President. Go, Hillary and swiftly & don't forget to bring Bill!

  • Posted By: DUMPLIN @ 02/25/2008 1:53:33 PM

    Comment: REQUIRING PEOPLE TO PAY FOR HEALTH INSURANCE? GARNISHING WAGES? ANOTHER STEP TOWARDS SOCIALISM.

    • Posted By: tj@yahoo.com @ 02/25/2008 5:41:35 PM

      Comment: You nailed it right on the head. The sad thing is that too many uninformed public, U.S. citizens don't even recognize it. They all wonder why we are so heavily taxed and they don't even realize that it is because they haven't informed themselves enough about the issues.

  • Posted By: twinoftwins @ 02/25/2008 8:56:14 AM

    Comment: Obama does have substance, and we beleive he can get the job done. But one thing for sure we know Hillary and Bill have a record of covering up for themselves and putting it on others that are lesser in their opinion. I wish we could have had a strong woman with strong morals so I could have voted that way, but we do not so I will go with Obama or not vote at all if he does not win.

  • Posted By: Be Smart @ 02/24/2008 9:38:16 PM

    Comment: Obama has created a group of followers that don't leasen to reasons anymore. Undecided voters are Hillary's only hope. I listened to Obama, and I can't see what his supporters idolize him for. I just see an unexperience senator who believes on hope, change and hype. If you take away the fact tha Hillary is a woman and Obama is black, I know that Hillary would had been already the democratic candidate. She is just smarter, sharper, and her policies and plans are much more defined and realistic. I hope all voters in OH,TX,RI,VT, PA and the rest of the states yet to vote can see that taking a risk on just hope and change is to big a risk to take. And don't worry about Obama, as good a speaker as he is, he'll solidify his political fututre soon enough. I just see no substanse nor experience here.

  • Posted By: patrickrover @ 02/24/2008 10:07:05 AM

    Comment: Obama seems to be losing his coolness with the recent mailers in Ohio. I checked the facts and there is no truth to what he says below regarding Clinton and NAFTA. His comments on the health insurance are at the very least "misleading:" Both his and Clintons' plan are close but the Clinton plan has the better chance of covering all citizens. Hers' is truly a resonable and affordable plan for Universal coverage, while Obama's is what I would call a "Uni-Vision Plan". In plain language a "vision to provide Universal coverage, but falls short of the definition. Plus, it appears that Americans who choose not to pay for coverage will be paid for by the rest of us who want coverage for us and our families to the amount of about $800 per person per year with the Obama UniVision plan. His mailers besides being (1) A lie regarding NAFTA and (2) misinformation on the health plan is sad that he stooped to such a low means of trying to get votes. I echo and repeat Ms Clinton's words, "Shame on you Barack Obama". You appear to be a divider rather than the uniter that we really need as a President. Yoiu say you stand by this abomination of a poorly thought out written libel, well again this is not the type of person we need as a President. I hope that people now realize that you are a lot of fluff at this time in your life and bring Hillary Cllinton, a person of strength, patriotism, and experience into the most important position in the world today.

    Obama Campaign Distributes Two Dishonest Mailers In Ohio

    The Obama campaign is distributing two dishonest mailers in Ohio. The first mailer falsely claims that Hillary said NAFTA was a "boon" to the economy. Hillary never said that. The Obama campaign is basing the quote on a 2006 Newsday article that characterized her views this way without any substantiation. In fact, Newsday recently said that the Obama campaign's use of their article was "misleading." The Politico called the Obama campaign's use of the quote "bogus."

    The second mailer from the Obama campaign mimics Harry and Louise ads that the health care industry used to scare people into opposing universal health care. The ad claims "Hillary's health care plan forces everyone to buy insurance, even if you can't afford it."

    Here are the facts:

    Sen. Obama fails to mention Hillary's plan cuts costs just as aggressively as Sen. Obama, if not more so.

    Hillary's plan contains more generous subsidies than the Obama plan. Noted health expert Ken Thorpe of Emory University concluded that under the Hillary plan, everyone will be able to afford coverage.

    The Obama plan leaves 15 million people out, which drives up costs because everyone else ends up subsidizing their emergency care.

    Paul Krugman called the mailer "ugly" and "destructive."

    • Posted By: Be Smart @ 02/24/2008 9:50:55 PM

      Comment: I'm glad Hillary already saw it. Obama has been playing the cat on the Shrek movie, and getting away with it for much too long. I'm surprise Bill did not cut up with this any sooner. Calling Obama on his unexperience and lack of substance does not make anyone a racist. Hillary's intelligence, experience, and well definned strategies would had taken her to the democratic nomination already if she wasn't a woman. How can someone run on hope,hype and change for the US presidency??? Something is just not right here. I'm praying fo Hillary. I hope she does not give up

  • Posted By: ckbm4 @ 02/23/2008 1:56:41 AM

    Comment: I would not want someone mandating me to purchase health insurance. Requirement like that will give the insurance companies free reign to hike up prices and gouge us even more than they do already. I think Obama is on the right track, but just not up to speed. Instead of spending millions on subsidies, let's put some price controls on insurance companies, doctors. My last office visit was $267, and all he did was listen to me breath and ask a few questions. What other profession gets to swindle people out of their money without question? Even the insurance companies make their coverage convoluted and confusing. It's terrible to deal with their double talk - always trying to wiggle out of paying for something. Let's concentrate on forcing insurance companies to make their coverage straightforward and affordable, and at the same time put some pricing restrictions on doctors, clinics, and hospitals. Hypocratic oath should extend to hurting others in all ways... Doc, please stop stabbing my pocket book!!

  • Posted By: ckbm4 @ 02/23/2008 1:52:16 AM

    Comment: I would not want someone mandating me to purchase health insurance. Requirement like that will give the insurance companies free reign to hike up prices and gouge us even more than they do already. I think Obama is on the right track, but just not up to speed. Instead of spending millions on subsidies, let's put some price controls on insurance companies, doctors. My last office visit was $267, and all he did was listen to me breath and ask a few questions. What other profession gets to swindle people out of their money without question? Even the insurance companies make their coverage convoluted and confusing. It's terrible to deal with their double talk - always trying to wiggle out of paying for something. Let's concentrate on forcing insurance companies to make their coverage straightforward and affordable, and at the same time put some pricing restrictions on doctors, clinics, and hospitals. Hypocratic oath should extend to hurting others in all ways... Doc, please stop stabbing my pocket book!!

  • Posted By: rn.or.20yrs @ 02/23/2008 12:34:21 AM

    Comment: i am an r.n. in a 12 room operating room.i cannot tell you how much waste i see.every trocar and gadget that is disposable is chosen over perfectly good reusable options.these choices are made by surgeons who have no vested interests in saving the system $.companies selling surgical technology are also making huge profits and are like lobbyists catering to doctors.the insurance companies are culprits,but they are not the only ones-there is an active preditory pyramid in the "system".

  • Posted By: docdeg @ 02/22/2008 3:05:56 PM

    Comment: Healthcare for everyone is a noble idea. Our government in control of it is not a good answer. The problem with expensive medicine is the fault of insurance companies alone. They decide which medicine I can prescribe and tell you what you can take, purely based on the profit margin to them. The companies and their executives make millions. The insurers also give millions away to charity in the form of grants. Why should insurance companies make all this money. If they want to give grants, give it in the form of free insurance. I basically give away healthcare when someone can't afford to pay their bill at my office so why should they not do the same. And while we are on the subject, since they are able to set the amount that I can bill, why can people who need insurance not tell them how much they should charge? The only people getting rich of medical care are the insurance companies and executives. If you want to solve the health insurance problem, make them all be non-profit and require them to insure one and all for a set price. Do away with prior authorization and let doctors choose what medicine, tests and treatments are best for their patients.

    • Posted By: Wannabkenobi @ 02/25/2008 5:41:41 PM

      Comment: Docdeg:

      Would you be interested in running for President? Your plan is the best and most reasonable of any I've heard so far! It places responsibility exactly where it belongs. Docdeg for Prez in 2012!!

    • Posted By: macaroni @ 02/25/2008 10:01:07 AM

      Comment: I am a physician with a chronic illness. I have 200k in loans from medical school to pay off and have healthcare bills as well. As someone who experiences the medical world as both a patient and a physician, I have to say I agree with "docdeg". The insurance companies and pharmaceutical industry are to blame. We should go after them for the money necessary to pay for the uninsured.

      • Posted By: IntegrativeOB/GYN @ 02/25/2008 8:33:12 PM

        Comment: I am also a physician. I see several issues with healthcare in this country. One is the cost of defensive medicine. No one has any solution to the tort system in this country which effects every business, corporation, municipality, and individual. If we were not all paying billions of dollars for liability insurance there would plenty of money for healthcare and other social programs. Second is the lack of emphasis on preventative medicine. We spend the majority of our healthcare dollars on chronic diseases and end of life care. If we put more money upfront on proper nutrtion, exercise, and lifestyle changes it would go far on the overall health of this country.

  • Posted By: dewcooper @ 02/22/2008 7:36:07 AM

    Comment: For those who keep saying that we need a socialised medical system like in Canada and England:

    In England, traffic cameras are now trained on drivers to arrest them for eating in their cars. And in both Britain and Canada, the old Hitler Youth slogan, "Nutrition is not a private matter!" has taken on a new life. One expert this week argued that obesity must now be treated like Global Warming, requiring stern government intervention.

    Health experts in Britain and Canada insist that the government has every right to meddle in the private life of its citizens since the state is picking up the tab for their healthcare (never mind that it's not the "state" but the taxpayers themselves). As Tony Harrison, a British health-care expert, explained to the Toronto Sun, "Rationing is a reality when funding is limited." So fat people and others can't get surgeries if bureaucrats or doctors don't think they're worthy of surgery. Now, of course, there's a certain logic here since the taxpayers are picking up the tab and someone has to make the hard choices about priorities. But it never occurs to these people that maybe the fact that the government is slowly being put in charge of many of the most important and personal issues in peoples' lives is in fact an argument against socialized medicine. It doesn't occur to them that refusing to unload seriously ill patients from ambulances, sometimes for hours at a time, just so emergency rooms can meet government quotas, is a sign that something is seriously wrong with the way statists handle medicine.

  • Posted By: supplant @ 02/22/2008 3:37:05 AM

    Comment: Conservatives preach against govement involment untill it come down to Wall-Street, Banks and Bussiness then they want the government to bail out, subsidize, create tax breaks, etc...uhh yea that's involment. They are against redistribution of wealth while claiming to be righteous Christians...uhhh read Acts 4:35 Hippocites it's precisley what the apostels did. Whenthegovernmentstoptakingmyhavhjghbbbbbmmmmmmmeeeelllleearnmomoneymonemand laying claim to

    • Posted By: dewcooper @ 02/22/2008 7:40:52 AM

      Comment: Didn't realize that the Apostles were part of the governemnt. Prior to Wilson and FDR, it was the Church and private sector sho provided aide to those in need. Read your history.

      And it is the Dems\fascists who want to 'marry' government and big business, via the model set by Woodrow Wilson and his disciple FDR (both idols of Obama and Hillary). As Wislson wrote: "Woodrow Wilson proclaimed that the goal of Progressivism was to have the individual "marry his interests to the State." "Government" he wrote in book, "The State," "does now whatever experience permits or the times demand."

      "No doubt," he wrote elsewhere, taking dead aim at the Declaration of Independence, "a lot of nonsense has been talked about the inalienable rights of the individual, and a great deal that was mere vague sentiment and pleasing speculation has been put forward as fundamental principle."

  • Posted By: supplant @ 02/22/2008 3:17:02 AM

    Comment: First of all know one like long comments. secondly I don't want another governmental agency garnishing my wages, finally The republicans so despise Hillary that she would be the most ineffective president to ever hold office to the degree that only what she could do with the sole help of democrats would be accomplished.

  • Posted By: ParkerEducation @ 02/21/2008 8:00:53 PM

    Comment: Universal helth coverage is a benafit of a rich country. We are able to do this as a whole alot cheaper than individually. We should do it.

    • Posted By: dewcooper @ 02/22/2008 7:42:27 AM

      Comment: When has government control ever made anything cheaper or better? Education? Welfare? Social Security? Veterans and public hospitals? All were better and more profitable as private entities.

  • Posted By: tj@yahoo.com @ 02/21/2008 1:02:41 PM

    Comment: This is the new Hillarycare. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is proposing, yes very similar to communist Russia or China. She now wants to slip it past us by dressing it up in drag. Her plan is to use a federal government mandate to force every American to buy health insurance. She claims it won't violate our freedom because if you already have a private plan that's OK. But a government alternative plan will be made available. The government will regulate health care, define acceptable health insurance and force every American to buy a plan based on the government-established standard. This last point does not intimidate Clinton's Soviet-style affinities. When asked how purchase can be enforced, she told interviewer George Stephanopoulos, "We will have an enforcement mechanism. ... you know, going after people's wages." Incredibly, Clinton calls her concept of government-mandated universal health coverage "a core Democratic value." Indeed, we have a problem in the delivery of health care in our country. Costs are going up at twice the overall rate of inflation, with increasing burdens on working families. Why have health-care costs gone out the roof when the prices of just about everything else have gone down? Because health care already has become a highly regulated, highly bureaucratized industry.
    If we want cheaper and more creatively delivered health care, we need less, not more, government.
    According to Dr. David Gratzer of the Manhattan Institute, in 1960 about half of health-care expenditures were directly controlled by consumers. Today, it is about 15 percent. Over the same period in which consumers have relinquished control, per-capita health-care spending has quintupled and costs have skyrocketed.
    Our health-care ills are symptomatic of our social ills. And our social ills reflect a society where the link between personal responsibilities and costs and personal rights and benefits has been largely severed.
    Soviet-style mandates like what Clinton wants will simply dig the hole into which we are sinking deeper. The approach is morally repugnant, the antithesis of everything that a free society is about, and, like the former Soviet Union, does not work. More individual freedom, choice and responsibility in both the delivery and purchase of health care is our only hope.--Star Parker

  • Posted By: tj@yahoo.com @ 02/21/2008 1:00:47 PM

    Comment: Suppose I tell you that the government will design a product and make you buy it. If you say no thanks, that's too bad. The government will decide what you need and what you will buy.
    If you say you can't afford it, we'll send in government investigators to check, and if they conclude indeed you can't afford it, we'll tax your neighbors and make them subsidize you so you can pay for it.
    We'll set up a government bureaucracy to monitor and make sure you're cooperating. If they discover you haven't made the purchase, they'll go to your employer and have your wages garnisheed.
    Let's assume further that total spending for this government-designed and -mandated product accounts for about a fifth of the nation's total economy.
    The former Soviet Union? Communist China? Definately.

    • Posted By: dewcooper @ 02/22/2008 7:44:20 AM

      Comment: Try the US under Wilson and FDR. We are now seeing, I believe Hillary called it, the New, New Deal...

  • Posted By: katwages @ 02/21/2008 11:49:33 AM

    Comment: Making sure each and every person has health care is wonderful. When you say you will garnish there wages to pay for if they do not accept is wrong. Do you even have a clue. With the high gas prices, cost of food,living,etc.Many Americans are already having to choose between food & toothpaste,soap,washing detergent, electricity,etc. Many of what used to be middle class are making these choices now also. Cut cost of everything. Give us some real releif.

  • Posted By: Jewlztones @ 02/20/2008 4:50:10 PM

    Comment: Canada and many European countries. They live longer, are less stressed out and generally more happy. Think for yourself, and question authority. "The Man" is not always right. Look at the mess Bush is going to leave us with...something we'll be cleaning up for years to come. The problem is Americans are afraid of their government when the government should be afraid of Americans. Read the Constitution...our fore fathers are rolling in their coffins.

    • Posted By: dewcooper @ 02/22/2008 7:45:54 AM

      Comment: Health experts in Britain and Canada insist that the government has every right to meddle in the private life of its citizens since the state is picking up the tab for their healthcare (never mind that it's not the "state" but the taxpayers themselves). As Tony Harrison, a British health-care expert, explained to the Toronto Sun, "Rationing is a reality when funding is limited." So fat people and others can't get surgeries if bureaucrats or doctors don't think they're worthy of surgery. Now, of course, there's a certain logic here since the taxpayers are picking up the tab and someone has to make the hard choices about priorities. But it never occurs to these people that maybe the fact that the government is slowly being put in charge of many of the most important and personal issues in peoples' lives is in fact an argument against socialized medicine. It doesn't occur to them that refusing to unload seriously ill patients from ambulances, sometimes for hours at a time, just so emergency rooms can meet government quotas, is a sign that something is seriously wrong with the way statists handle medicine.

  • Posted By: Jewlztones @ 02/20/2008 4:44:43 PM

    Comment: They both have it wrong...the whole concept to Universal Healthcare is that NO ONE has to pay ANYTHING...there's no forcing people to get health insurance, no mandates, no ifs ands or buts. Universal Healthcare means when you're sick or hurt, you get the care, treatment and meds you need when you need it. It means walking into a doctors office or hospital no questions asked...regardless of sex, age, race, and if you have insurance or not. Hillary and Obama may say they have a plan for Universal Healthcare, but in reality, they don't have a plan for it...in fact, as long as Americans continue to be greedy and we allow our government to feed off the rich and the lobbyists, nothing is going to change...our hard earned dollars will go to the hundreds of thousands of dollars in profits sitting in the rich executives pockets. By the way...Exon Mobile's profits for 2007 were $75,000 per MINUTE. Makes me sick. And as long as American's keep on believeing the crap the media is feeding us, that Universal Healthcare is socialist and will lead to communism, well take a look at corporate America...it defines socialism and uniformity...so does the Police and Fire department in your home town...Universal Healthcare works for Canad

    • Posted By: dewcooper @ 02/22/2008 7:50:42 AM

      Comment: You obviously have no dea how the federal budget works. The fed 'pays' for NOTHING! They tax WE THE PEOPLE in order to fund their programs, which would include Universal\Socialised Healthcare. The citizens of Canada and England PAY for their coverage, to the tune of 30-40 percent of their paycheck. Nothing is free, including free healthcare.

      • Posted By: finnland 2007 @ 03/04/2008 2:10:09 PM

        Comment: No is does not. Most Canadians come to the U.S. for treatment and surgery.
        And as for free. What planet do you come from. Nothing is ever free. Someone always pays

    • Posted By: dewcooper @ 02/22/2008 7:48:04 AM

      Comment: "the whole concept to Universal Healthcare is that NO ONE has to pay ANYTHING" You obviously have no idea how the Federal Budget works. The Fed 'PAYS' for nothing! They tax WE THE PEOPLE

  • Posted By: Jewlztones @ 02/20/2008 4:44:22 PM

    Comment: They both have it wrong...the whole concept to Universal Healthcare is that NO ONE has to pay ANYTHING...there's no forcing people to get health insurance, no mandates, no ifs ands or buts. Universal Healthcare means when you're sick or hurt, you get the care, treatment and meds you need when you need it. It means walking into a doctors office or hospital no questions asked...regardless of sex, age, race, and if you have insurance or not. Hillary and Obama may say they have a plan for Universal Healthcare, but in reality, they don't have a plan for it...in fact, as long as Americans continue to be greedy and we allow our government to feed off the rich and the lobbyists, nothing is going to change...our hard earned dollars will go to the hundreds of thousands of dollars in profits sitting in the rich executives pockets. By the way...Exon Mobile's profits for 2007 were $75,000 per MINUTE. Makes me sick. And as long as American's keep on believeing the crap the media is feeding us, that Universal Healthcare is socialist and will lead to communism, well take a look at corporate America...it defines socialism and uniformity...so does the Police and Fire department in your home town...Universal Healthcare works for Canada, and tons of European Countries...they have longer lifespans...and are happier and less stressed out in general....it's time for a Revolution. American's are afraid of our Government, and our Government needs to be afraid of The People. Read the constitution...listen to what others are saying...look at these issues from more than one perspective..."The Man" is not always right...look at the mess Bush is going to leave us in, that we will be cleaning up for the rest of our lives.

  • Posted By: Cascadia @ 02/20/2008 2:16:08 PM

    Comment: My husband is an orthopedic surgeon and there is typically a six month wait to get in to see him for hip or joint pain. There is nothing under universal "coverage" that would change either the payment mechanism nor the services covered It is just a scare tactic used by the far right. We aren't that naive and things will change soon. Less then 20% of all patients account for 70% of all care those with chornic conditions like diabetes, heart disease and other lifestyle related illnesses. Until you get a system that pays up front for preventive care it won't matter how we pay for it. SImply covering everyone wont help when you also don't look at the cost of care. New drugs, new procedures that don't extend lives, even frankly the income of doctors like my husband.

  • Posted By: jxjennings @ 02/20/2008 12:49:16 PM

    Comment: Wake up people. Stop using fear and false accusations to continue to control the masses. We have long waits in our country for medical procedures. The difference in your wait under universal coverage is that your doctor will get to decide what medical treatment you receive, not your insurance company. Yur doctor has how best to treat you his/her motivation. The insurace companies have, how can we save more money as ther motivation. Why can Americans not see that we do not have to accept this type of health care. For those of you who refuse to see the truth, I hope that you don't find yourself sitting in front of your xrays with your doctor discussing a treatment that your insurance company won't cover or they deem"experimental." You might not like everything about Hillary, but you better believe that she is the only candidate that completely understands this issue and knows how to make all the neccessary changes happen. Stop accepting all the spoon fed lies and take responsibility for learning the truth. The reason Hillary is so feared in the White House is because all the drug companies and insurance companies understand that she is going to take away their control over this country and the control of the health of our nation. They ahve deep pockets and they are spending money they took form us to ensure that Hillary does not get in a position to end their reign.
    Wake up! And finally, the government is the only entity in a position to stop drug and insurance companies. This is not an attempt by the government to control our helath care, it's an attempt to give the control back to the people. My name is Janice Jennings and I approve this message.

    • Posted By: dewcooper @ 02/22/2008 7:53:12 AM

      Comment: Health experts in Britain and Canada insist that the government has every right to meddle in the private life of its citizens since the state is picking up the tab for their healthcare (never mind that it's not the "state" but the taxpayers themselves). As Tony Harrison, a British health-care expert, explained to the Toronto Sun, "Rationing is a reality when funding is limited." So fat people and others can't get surgeries if bureaucrats or doctors don't think they're worthy of surgery. Now, of course, there's a certain logic here since the taxpayers are picking up the tab and someone has to make the hard choices about priorities. But it never occurs to these people that maybe the fact that the government is slowly being put in charge of many of the most important and personal issues in peoples' lives is in fact an argument against socialized medicine. It doesn't occur to them that refusing to unload seriously ill patients from ambulances, sometimes for hours at a time, just so emergency rooms can meet government quotas, is a sign that something is seriously wrong with the way statists handle medicine.

      No, when the government controls healthcare, it will NOT be the doctors who decide your care and treatment...

  • Posted By: Themanager @ 02/20/2008 12:27:46 PM

    Comment: Just talk with someone from Canada, England or Germany. They have long waits for medical procedures.Even to see a doctor you wait. Don't mess with my insurance. Go after the insurance and drug lobbiests in Washington. Stop the phoney law suits. Once again it's let the goverment take care of me, and thats what Clinton and Obama are pandering to.

  • Posted By: Themanager @ 02/20/2008 12:06:38 PM

    Comment: The

  • Posted By: dewcooper @ 02/20/2008 8:48:12 AM

    Comment: So, the fed is going to provide health insurance for all persons in America, both legally and not. How long until the fed decides what they will and won't cover based upon lifestyle - obese, smoke, drink, drug use, etc.? if you fail to adhere to the 'food pyramid' and Surgeon General guidelines, will it affect your coverage? What about the illegals, will they be covered when they go 'home' for the holidays?

  • Posted By: illidan @ 02/19/2008 9:30:51 PM

    Comment: private health care should be provided for those you can afford it and it will give a full coverage, and for the rest who cant afford, they will be covered by a universal health care should recieve a coverage to a certain degree.

  • Posted By: dewcooper @ 02/19/2008 3:25:36 PM

    Comment: Okay, there are 300 million people in the US. About 10 million don't have health insurance (all by law have medical coverage), some \many by choice. So, we are going to tax and alter the way of life for OVER 90% of the country for this very small minority!

    I just don't get some people...

  • Posted By: sjbrock80 @ 02/19/2008 3:03:47 PM

    Comment: National healthcare will not be all roses like either candidate makes it sound!!

    Ask a Canadian how they like national healthcare, go ahead, ask them...

    Imagine this... You're sick and need to go to the doctor for an antibiotic. Do you think it will take 1 or 2 days to get it with national healthcare? No, it will most likely take 2 or 3 weeks to see a doctor because doctors offices will be overcrowded. Ever heard of the DMV, Social Security office?? Those are nothing compared to what doctor's offices will be like.

    Overcrowded doctor's offices - underpaid, un-trained technicians and nurses - that's what national healthcare will provide. Sounds great!!!

    Sometimes what may seem like a cure-all, great idea does not provide good for everyone. Do you honestly think Clinton or Obama are going to give up their personal doctors and use a government supplied one?

    Go ask a Canadian about how great national healthcare is...

    • Posted By: dewcooper @ 02/20/2008 8:50:28 AM

      Comment: Let us not forget the kid who died from apendisitis while wating for his 'scheduled' surgery in Canada. The Gov't response - he could have opted to pay for the surgery himself. So what good is socialised medicine if you still have to go 'private' to save your life?

  • Posted By: dewcooper @ 02/19/2008 2:32:26 PM

    Comment: Let's see, it is the government's responsibility to provide healthcare and medical coverage, college education, mortgage protection, insurance protection during national disasters, retirement funds, highway funding and national defense. And I thought we defeated communism...

  • Posted By: Reece @ 02/18/2008 6:05:34 PM

    Comment: Just once I'd like to see a presidential candidate say, "I want to make sure that we do things my way." Instead we seem to get double talk that says they want to curtail our rights more than they already are. No one spends my money better than Me. The healthcare system is burdened by oversight in Washington. Each time a new law is passed to protect us we get further from our rights. Someday, the people will want real leaders again who don't feel threatened by people who are capable of making their own decisions.

  • Posted By: IdeaChaser @ 02/18/2008 8:58:05 AM

    Comment: I disagree with the potential Ruler's idea of having the gov't make decisions for me. If she wants to do what the people want, have her and the rest of the politicians pay out of their pocket for SS and health care, instead of the tax payers paying for it. Also, allow up to $15,000 tax credit for insurance premiums and 100% of all medical expenses reimbursed each year and carried over excess if no more taxes left to deduct from. That way, the person instead of drawing from their savings, selling homes, and forfeiting college funds to pay the $50,000 and more for cancer treatment will not be burdened by the excessive tax structure. Having the gov't take on more decisions for us is not a good thing; they are elected to be governed by the people, not dictate to us!!

  • Posted By: IdeaChaser @ 02/18/2008 8:56:16 AM

    Comment: I disagree with the potential Ruler's idea of having the gov't make decisions for me. If she wants to do what the people want, have her and the rest of the politicians pay out of their pocket for SS and health care, instead of the tax payers paying for it. Also, allow up to $15,000 tax credit for insurance premiums and 100% of all medical expenses reimbursed each year and carried over excess if no more taxes left to deduct from. That way, the person instead of drawing from their savings, selling homes, and forfeiting college funds to pay the $50,000 and more for cancer treatment will not be burdened by the excessive tax structure. Having the gov't take on more decisions for us is not a good thing; they are elected to be governed by the people, not dictate to us!!

  • Posted By: k_jarrett @ 02/18/2008 8:51:46 AM

    Comment: By mandating insurance you are removing the individual's right to choose????? Maybe, but I don't have a choice when my hospital has to treat people that choose not to have insurance. The hospital then passes the cost to those of us that were responsible and bought insurance, and we didn't weren't given the right to choose if we wanted to pay extra for the irresponsible acts of others. I am not a Hillary fan, but at least her "mandate" is being honest.

  • Posted By: k_jarrett @ 02/18/2008 8:35:15 AM

    Comment: IN THE U.S., 15% OF DRIVERS ARE UNINSURED EVEN THOUGH AUTO INSURANCE IS MANDATED. SO HOW IS HILLARY'S PLAN GOING TO GAIN 99% COVERAGE WHEN HEALTH INSURANCE IS EVEN MORE EXPENSIVE THAN AUTO INSURANCE? A MANDATE IS DEFINITELY THE WAY TO GO, BUT LET'S NOT FOOL OURSELVES, NOT EVERYONE WILL GO SIGN UP. THERE ARE PLENTY OF PEOPLE NOW THAT QUALIFY FOR MEDICAID AND SCHIPS, BUT THEY ARE TOO LAZY TO GO SIGN UP. ALSO, MANY POLS TEND TO MIX IDEAS. JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE, DOESN'T MEAN YOU WILL NOT GET TREATED IN AN EMERGENCY. HOSPITALS ARE REQUIRED TO TREAT YOU AND EAT THE COST.

    • Posted By: kay54 @ 02/24/2008 12:27:51 AM

      Comment: There are also a lot of people that have to decide between feeding there kids or putting a roof over there head or paying liability insurance. In Houston the school buses do not pick up the children from the homes anymore and some times the buses are to far. You must drive your kids to school. I am a single grandmother, I am not on eligible for foodstamps even though my imcome is below the poverty line. So i feed my grandchild and some months have liability insurance and some months don't. Don't call me lazy, you know nothing of my life and not walked in my shoes.

  • Posted By: glassguy @ 02/18/2008 8:28:10 AM

    Comment: By mandating insurance you are removing individuals right to choose! It looks great at the begining--everybody has coverage but who is going to pay for it? How much are our taxes going to go up to pay for the insurance of those who aren't working, or those who don't want to work? What happens, once it is in place, when the government comes back and tells you when you have to go to the doctor, and they decide they aren't covering your lung cancer because you smoke? Yeah, I pay a lot for my health coverage, but ultimately I have the final decision. Socialized health care is a BAD IDEA! The government can't run anything, look at Social Security and Medicare and that is a small portion of the population--no they want a program that includes EVERYONE! Yikes.

  • Posted By: glassguy @ 02/18/2008 8:27:13 AM

    Comment: By mandating insurance you are removing individuals right to choose! It looks great at the begining--everybody has coverage but who is going to pay for it? How much are our taxes going to go up to pay for the insurance of those who aren't working, or those who don't want to work? What happens, once it is in place, when the government comes back and tells you when you have to go to the doctor, and they decide they aren't covering your lung cancer because you smoke? Yeah, I pay a lot for my health coverage, but ultimately I have the final decision. Socialized health care is a BAD IDEA! The government can't run anything, look at Social Security and Medicare and that is a small portion of the population--no they want a program that includes EVERYONE! Yikes.

  • Posted By: cookiemonster @ 02/18/2008 7:59:48 AM

    Comment: Comment: I guess I am not teh working poor, but, I have always had health insurance, even when I was unemployed. If the federal government would mandate personal responsibility, instead of personal entitlement, we would all be better off. though i am not totally opposed to some form of universal insurance, what I want a guarantee on is that in twenty or thirty years, when the new "insurtncae program is running out of money and doesn't really work, the government will have the "hutz-pah" to correct itself, unlike the continuing saga of Social Security/Medicare.

  • Posted By: bethany617 @ 02/18/2008 7:36:57 AM

    Comment: What we have to think about what kind of person we will elect as president. Barack Obama is an honest and sincere person. He is passionate about really changing an Amercian government that doesn't listen to the American people and really doesn't work for the American people. This is what is so exciting about him. He won't change things enough to keep us satisfied, he will be the kind of president who will aim higher and lead us toward greatness again. Let's not miss this opportunity to elect a president who will work with members of all political parties to actually get results. That's the change we can believe in.

    • Posted By: Pucky13 @ 02/22/2008 11:17:14 AM

      Comment: I could not agree wiht bethany more. We have to realize Barack is one of us and he knows what it is like to suffer not being able to furnish your family with healthcare and things in life that should not be even an issue in AMERICA. Lets face it the system as it is right now is in deep trouble, We need fresh blood and a man that understands our needs and will fight to get them fulfilled

  • Posted By: One of Many @ 02/18/2008 7:31:46 AM

    Comment: I do not wish Insurance to be madated. I am one of the working poor. My employers provide insurance for me, but I must pay for my children. It is very expensive but they are covered. Choices I make to afford this are, no cell phone, I drive a 12 year old car so I only have to pay liablilty on my car insurance, I don't eat out, go to the movies or anything else. I have a family and I AM RESPONSIBLE for them. If Obama can lower my insurance rates that would be great. Mandated insurance on Hillary's plan is unacceptable.

    • Posted By: sjbrock80 @ 02/19/2008 3:10:57 PM

      Comment: Great post! I agree with you completely - it should be a personal choice.

      • Posted By: twinoftwins @ 02/21/2008 8:24:05 AM

        Comment: Great Statement. In my state if you want insurance you can apply to the state and get it according to your wages. Not the best insurance but at least there is help for those who need it. The thing is to many people want every thing free and that is killing us as a nation. Like you stated, be responsible and give up some things. I did that all my life while raising my 3 children.

  • Posted By: ayoss58 @ 02/18/2008 7:30:25 AM

    Comment: Hillary is anti-choice and doesnot respect the right of every american to "choose what is good himself/herself.who wants the federal government to run his/her life?.Hillary has embraced the radical leftist view wholeherted!!.
    Barack is pro-choice and understands the fundamentals of heqalthcare economicsand respect free-choice!!!.The larger issue is the majority of Americans like their present healthcare system because it still the best in the world although expensive to some few low-income groups.
    Competition rather than monoplies by insurance & drug companies will reduce healthcare costs more than govt mandates!!.

  • Posted By: ayoss58 @ 02/18/2008 7:14:01 AM

    Comment: What are these self-appointed experts saying?.That if the government can force me to buy an insurance policy which I cannot afford,all the 47 million uninsured will get insured.How convoluted such a reasoning!!!.
    What is an unaffordable is unaffordable hence unsustainable.No amount of coercion from the federal government is going to gurantee compliance.Instead,more people will opt out.That's why Hillary is a disaster with her socialist plans.Today is mandatory universal healthcare,tomorrow will be universal kindergarden,housing,foodstumps......the list of mandates never ending!!!.

  • Posted By: ayoss58 @ 02/18/2008 7:03:03 AM

    Comment: Universal mandate vs individual choice.Politically, a mandate implies coercion which is unacceptable to Americans at large.Mass & Cal have tried mandates and they don't achieve the results intended.Infact to argue that affordability & accessability is inferior to government mandates is not supported by the facts hence,just political manipulations from leftists think-tanks.
    What Hillary and supporters can't answer is how are you going to enforce the mandate and what constitute a reasonable individual contribution?.What is reasonable to Hillary's income doesnot mean in reality anything reasonable because its not the free-market but some arbitrary intervention by government.What is politically a dogma doesnot translate into sound economic policy.The economic truth is that mandates result into distortions & higher costs than voluntary market-orientated healthcare plans.Hence,for all the hype,Hillary's plan is inferior!!!.

  • Posted By: Shamseeker @ 02/18/2008 12:53:21 AM

    Comment: Comment by marketing truth is pretty short-sighted and stupid. When third world countries with universal health care plans can figure out how to cover everyone at little cost and have lower per capita health problems and mortality rates, it just shows how obtuse and pretentious the old right wing has on the American psyche. Even with the current system in place, individuals and families often have to pick and choose partial procedures, prescriptions, doctors or facilities because the insurance industry has a stranglehold on what to cover. Although I purchased insurance thru my employer, since it's too expensive on the outside(no unversal options), I experienced an uphill battle trying to get a large insurance co. to cover necessary chemo-therapy for my spouse, after several specialist indicated she required it for her medical condition; it could've cost her her life. You have a paper-pusher, often times not even a regular medical doctor, for the insurance company determining your treatment, and giving automatic denials for bottom line-profits.
    As far as this Andres idiot article on compelling someone to buy something they can't afford, what do you think auto insurance is? That's mandated in all states if you drive a motorized vehicle on any road. And I think that's a tad lower on the totem pole as far as priorities go in comparison with your personal health. You claim no right to "government bureaucracy", yet I guess Americans' then wouldn't have rights to such institutions as post offices, public libraries, and national parks, to name a few.
    As it stands, insurance will continue to be a complete racket, and the whole system needs to be overhauled. I only hope you don't have to go thru the same thing when you suffer an emergency or medical condition in which you have to wait for an insurance bean-counter to decide your fate!

    • Posted By: dewcooper @ 02/19/2008 3:31:57 PM

      Comment: Sorry about your wife's situation, but why is it the Federal Govrnment's, (and in the end mine), responsibility to provide you and your family with insurance? Many 'third world countries' are also going to privitized medicine because the service is too slow\poor and they want more options for their money.

  • Posted By: ROCKWOOD1 @ 02/17/2008 10:51:47 PM

    Comment: Universal health care would be a plus no doubt. The problem that needs attention is why do health insurance comanies call the shots. The power of health care should be with the doctors and the families.We all know that health insurance companies don't care about the well being of the people only the well being of thier bank accounts.Please will someone stand up for the people. fhskns@aol.com

  • Posted By: letto2103 @ 02/17/2008 10:12:52 PM

    Comment: I honestly do not care who does it but it is a MUST. Where I come from (Chile), everybody has health insurance, it is very simple... your employer uses your own money to get it for you, at least 7% of your paycheck, is the same porcentage for everybody and depending on how much you pay it's how much you have to pay to your doctors, we do not pay excesive money for medicines, all we need is the prescription (if needed) and drugstores "fight" to give you the best price, it is not a matter of whether you have insurance to get your medicine at a reasonable price. If you work, your employer MUST pay for your health insurance and your retirement plan.
    Yes, they take it out of your paycheck but, it is for you, isn't it?
    Who would have thought... a so called third world country!!!
    paulletty2001@msn.com

  • Posted By: marketingtruth @ 02/17/2008 7:34:57 PM

    Comment: Hillary Clinton uses the vehicle of 'Universal Health care' , which sounds good, but when you read further into what she is REALLY attempting to do, you will see the fascist attitude that is evolving from this vehicle called 'Universal Health Care' that she is continually touting about as if it is the 'savior of this country'. Hillary could end up being worse than Bush ever was, because of the clever way in which the Clinton machine can charm the brains right out of people's heads, so much so, that people won't even READ and do their own RESEARCH to see what is really being revealed from Hillary's lips. Times columnist Andres writes. He adds that, "despite her reassuring rhetoric" that her health care proposal is not a "government takeover" and contains no "new bureaucracy," Clinton proposes to "use the heavy hand of government" to require all residents to obtain health insurance. Her "near-religious zeal to force universal coverage strikes some as odd," Andres writes, adding, "Why compel someone to buy something he or she can't afford?" According to Andres, the "financial penalties for those who fail to purchase insurance ... stirs significant opposition," and Clinton "open