Monday, February 18, 2008

Obama's "Substance:" Health Care

Hillary’s current desperate attack on Barack Obama is to criticize the fact he is an inspirational speaker who can articulate his visions in a way we haven’t seen in decades. She implies in these attacks that since he has such ability he therefore must have no substance behind his words. To use such logic is to discount leaders such as Franklin Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, John and Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr.

She is counting on the fact that voters are too lazy to actually look to see that Obama has carefully detailed plans on all the issues he speaks about. Though I will have to admit due to sign up pages and donation pages his web site is sometimes hard to navigate.

Therefore I’ll provide a link below to get directly to the issue pages as well as discuss particular issues in depth right here on this blog.

Since Hillary’s favorite falsehood lately is on the huge differences between their Health Care plans, using words that Ted Kennedy calls “fear mongering on health care”, I will start there.

Both Hillary’s and Obama’s health care plans are very similar. Both use the Congressional Health Care plan as a model. Neither are single payer systems both use reducing costs in various ways as a central proposal. There are two differences in the plans that I see.

One is Hillary uses Romney’s republican assumption that people don’t have health care because they are irresponsible. Therefore her plan mandates coverage. How she would enforce this she avoids to answer but most likely would involve some form of garnishment or holding back tax refunds. The 15 million people she claims would not be covered under Obama’s plan would be adults who choose not to be covered. No one would be unable to obtain coverage under her or Obama’s plan.

Secondly she requires insurance premiums to be based on income. So that those that make say $30,000 a year would pay less then someone that makes $100,000 a year for the same exact coverage. So in a way this is another tax on some to pay for others. Yet she proposes doing this through private insurance companies. Trust me I have no love for many of the methods and tactics of the health insurance companies, but I also recognize that they are indeed businesses who’s reason for existence is to make a profit. Their rates must be based on costs not based on how much someone can pay. No business could survive that way.

The biggest problem with this is, to get any health care plan implemented it has to be passed by congress. I can already hear the cries of socialism if this income based premium structure of Hillary’s is proposed.

The health care reforms this country needs will not be easy to implement. Hillary’s will be impossible to get in place. Obama’s are realistic, workable and solves many of the problems we face in health care. As one radio commentator said, who’s identity I don’t recall, “there is so much hate for Hillary among republicans she will have trouble getting a postmaster general nomination confirmed let alone a health plan.”


Read the full health care plan of Barack Obama: http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/

For information on other issues:
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/

Labels: , , ,

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thankyou for your posts

7:01 PM  
Anonymous Celestina said...

Thank you for this short and sweet synopsis of the differences between Clinton's and Obama's plans. It is precisely what I have found, though I often get tired of saying it over and over to those who won't take the time to simply read the plans for themselves.
Honestly, I'm not sure either candidate has come up with a workable plan which will get through Congress, but I'll take Obama's over Clinton's.

5:21 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home