Yesterday Barack Obama released his health care plan. I didn't have time to blog about it, let alone read it, so I can't give you my impressions yet. I am glad he released a plan, because a robust debate over who has the best plan to improve our health care system can only be good for the country and for the Democratic Party.
The Des Moines Register's story on the plan is here.
The Financial Times covers the plan here.
Obama supporter “Democratic Luntz” makes the case on Daily Kos for why this is a great plan.
Ezra Klein, one of the blogosphere's leading wonks on health care policy, doesn't seem too impressed. At his blog and at the American Prospect, he notes that the plan would not achieve universal health care coverage and doesn't provide a public health insurance option that would be available to all Americans.
Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) was quoted by the Financial Times as saying,
“The Obama plan relies heavily on the current employer-based system, which leaves workers at risk of losing their healthcare if they lose or change their jobs,” said Ron Wyden, a Democratic senator for Oregon. “It also puts US companies and workers at a disadvantage in the long term when they have to compete in a global economy against overseas companies whose workers get their healthcare paid by their government.”
California nurses' advocate Shum Preston slammed Obama's plan in a diary posted at MyDD:
This is the worst of all worlds. On the one hand, we will continue to see patients abused by insurance industry execs–the very same abuse SiCKO documents. On the other hand, insurance companies continue to run their plans–meaning we will continue to see astronomical medical inflation, bankruptcy, heartache, and repeated denials of care–BUT the federal government will find themselves on the hook for the sickest and most expensive patients.
I know some Obama fans read this blog. What do you think of the plan? Were you disappointed that it is not universal, or do you think Obama's critics are being too harsh?
I believe that the next president is going to have to make health care a priority, and should start with a universal plan. Perhaps it couldn't all get through Congress in one go, and you'd have to do some reforms piecemeal.
But I worry about Obama's decision to propose a plan that's less than universal. Your starting point for negotiations shouldn't be the reasonable compromise you think Congress might pass.
This taps into my biggest concern about Obama, my sense that in his devotion to “consensus,” he would give half the game away before negotiations with Congress even begin. The president needs to aim high.
2 Comments
I'm an Obama supporter for sure
But to be clear, my personal preference on health care would be Kucinich’s idea of a Canadian style single payer system. But the political realist in me thinks it may not be doable. If D’s get a landslide in ’08 and strengthen their position in Congress, maybe then.
Without knowing all the details of Obama’s or Edwards’ plans (supposedly the only two plans out there), I don’t see a huge difference between the two. The way I understand the big ideas in both plans, it seems like the major difference is that Edwards would mandate that people buy coverage. Obama would leave it optional. Going from optional to mandated does not seem like a huge step to take, if it is needed.
I have a bit of a problem with the general obsession with “plans” and need for details that many of us have. I think we definitely need to know what ideas the candidates have on the major issues, have an idea where each candidate would like to take us. But political reality is that the president will need to work with Congress on all legislation. No president will ever get exactly what s/he wants in any piece of legislation. It’s like obsessing about grammar and style in a rough first draft or an outline of an article, knowing that it will be completely rewritten.
rf Thu 31 May 1:06 PM
well, I support single payer too
in an ideal world, but that would never pass Congress.
Actually, the Edwards plan includes a lot more than a mandate to buy insurance coverage. The thing I like best about the plan is that it provides a public insurance option that anyone could choose to buy into, not just for the especially poor and sick. This would force the insurance companies to actually insure people and not just look for excuses to deny coverage, because healthy people like me who can afford to pay for insurance could choose to join the state plan.
In fact, the Edwards plan states that over time, the system could evolve toward a single-payer system if enough people chose to join the state plan.
Obama's proposal doesn't have anything like this.
For more details on the Edwards plan, click here:
http://johnedwards.com/about/issues/health-care/
desmoinesdem Thu 31 May 2:38 PM