Edwards calls for universal health care

[JohnLocke]

Edwards calls for universal health care
Friday, February 2, 2007--UPI
----
WASHINGTON--Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards called for universal health coverage Friday before the U.S. Democratic National Committee.
At the committee's winter meeting the former senator from North Carolina joined the list of candidates who have called for healthcare coverage for the nation's nearly 47 million uninsured individuals.
"We need a truly universal solution, and we need it now," Edwards said.
While he did not reveal a specific plan for coverage, he described the large number of uninsured as "victims of a healthcare system gone wrong where policies are driven by profits, not patient care."
Policies should be determined by the needs of working-class citizens, not other stakeholders, he said. "We have to stop letting the health insurance companies and the big pharmaceutical concerns decide our nation's healthcare policy.
"We have to give the silent victims, who have to stand in line at free clinics and use the expired medicines of friends and neighbors...the dignity of universal healthcare."
In an apparent response to the tax-break-based plan President Bush unveiled in his State of the Union Address, Edwards ruled out any plan that offers healthcare access to only some of the uninsured.
"We have to stop using words like 'access to healthcare,'" he said, "when we know with certainty those words mean something less than universal care.
"Who are you willing to leave behind without the care he needs? Which family? Which child?"
----
Read the rest here.

[AnOhioan]

1. If he means "gov't funded single payer universal healthcare".....

he should say so...if not, then all it is is more empty words.

[JNelson6563]

2. Yes, by all means

Edwards should do the phrase-ology work for the GOP. Brilliant.

I need to start wearing waders when I wander out of LBN here at DU. the rivers of political cluelessness tend to run all the deeper around primary time.

Julie

[AnOhioan]

4. So keep the insurance behemoths in place is your view

Brilliant, just brilliant

[JNelson6563]

6. Not at all

We're talking about the framing of it. Sure it should be single payer federally funded but have we not learned a damn thing in the past decade? It's not so much what you say but how you say it. What you propose it be labelled as may as well read "Nanny state health care". No, the framing is important and should be done more cleverly than what you propose.

Julie

[AnOhioan]

8. You and I will have to agree to disagree

I think the Democratic Party has played the "framing" game for far too long. A tell-it-like-it-is, straight-talking candidate will gain more votes than someone who carefully chooses words designed to elicit a desired response. The populace sees through those kind of actions. That is why the general populace distrusts both major parties.

[JNelson6563]

10. Ok, I'm with you on that

We'll definitely have to agree to disagree because I think the Dem party has arrived way late to the framing game. That's how come we got way-laid in the 90's.

We need to seize control of the dialogue and the key to that is choice of words IMO.

Peace.

Julie

[Bluestater2008]

15. Look at HR 676 by John Conyers

He's already got it in the hopper. go to thomas.loc.gov and enter the bill number.

[Bjorn Against]

3. I want to hear the words "single payer"

I don't want to see the Massachusetts joke of a Universal Health Care system unleashed at a national level because I think it would be a disaster. I want single-payer universal health care, not a system where we are universally forced to stuff the pockets of the insurance industry.

[bemildred]

5. I don't want "coverage".

I want a tax-funded public health care system, that treats patients like human beings, not cost-avoidance centers.

[kath]

11. Yeah, this universal "coverage" stuff is bullshit - we need SINGLE PAYER

universal health CARE, just like every other first-world nation has.

[sandnsea]

13. There's the clinic in every county program

Tell me your county and I'll see where yours is. Maybe you already have free public health care and don't know it.

[bemildred]

17. I am aware of such things.

That is not a substitute for a tax-funded public health care system. I know what "free public health care" looks like in this country these days, I know very well.

[sandnsea]

19. If not clinics, then it's coverage

One or the other. If we're not talking about a network of public health facilities, then everybody needs coverage to get healthcare. It's when they start talking about 'access' that we're in trouble, just like he said. He was good on health care in 2004, I don't expect he's gotten worse on the issue.

[bemildred]

20. You don't believe in hospitals and doctors offices?

Are we going to eliminate them? Or are they only for people with "coverage"? I want health care to be an entitlement, based on need, managed by a government-regulated not-for-profit public utility of some sort. I want to get rid of the HMOs and the "health insurance" parasites. Mr. Edwards will have my support to the extent he favors such an approach, and otherwise not.

[sandnsea]

21. Government controlled clinics?

Like I said, you probably already have one. Is that what you support?

Or do you support some program of coverage that allows you to go to the hospital and doctor of your choice?

[bemildred]

27. I have not mentioned clinics, that is what you want to talk about.

I don't see why, but clearly you want to go on about clinics.

[sandnsea]

28. not "coverage", but a "public health care system"

That's what you said in your first post. If you don't want "coverage" that will allow you to go to the doctor or hospital of your choice, then a "public health care system" would have to entail public clinics. You have to go somewhere to get health care. If public/private hospitals and doctors are paid for services rendered, then people need some sort of coverage to pay for that care. Single payer is health coverage. Medicare for all is coverage. Subsidized health policies is coverage. Government run public health would mean free clinics or a VA type system to most people.

[bemildred]

29. "Coverage" implies insurance.

That is a commercial insurance "product" that you pay for as an individual. That is not what I want. I do not want any insurance companies anywhere near health care. I want it to be a universal not-for- profit, or regulated profit, institution, like most public utilities were back before they started to screw them up. Think Medicare or the Social Security system and you have the right idea, that would be even better. If that is where Mr. Edwards is going, then he is fine with me. If it is some form of requiring everyone to buy insurance coupled with promises to help the indigent out, then, as you point out, that is what we have now, and the result is that you have to become indigent to get help with you medical emergencies. Meanwhile, the insurance parasites would be able to continue to siphon off the money and trash health care delivery.

If it is not a single-payer national or state health care system, it is not what I want. Is that clear enough?

[sandnsea]

30. Medicare is insurance coverage

There are even monthly premiums. Medicaid is coverage. Some states have expanded their programs to include subsidized insurance programs. When you say you don't want coverage, a lot of people will think you don't want any of this and support a government paid clinic and hospital program. Although if you want a regulated medical industry like power where your choice is designated, then that is government clinics and hospitals. I actually have something sort of like that in Oregon from when they implemented the Oregon Health Plan. They monitor how many clinics and hospitals can be in practice based on Medicaid reimbursement. In small towns, there's only one. It's not a government clinic, but there's also no choice. You have to go to a city for choice, and hope they're taking patients. But I don't think you get that option with any of the Medicaid related programs. Anyway, most people don't even want single payer because they think it will turn into a government medical program like the VA. They want everyone to have coverage to choose their own doctor who has to be responsive to patients, not bureaucracies.

[bemildred]

31. But Medicare is not an insurance company.

It is the government, an entitlement. I think I have made myself clear enough, and if you still prefer not to get my meaning, that is fine with me. I am not talking about government clinics and hospitals, I am talking about the government using its taxing authority to raise money to pay for public health care. The government pays for the defense business, and regulates it, but there are lots of private defense firms. There is no reason whatsoever that same power cannot be used to provide the citizenry with health care when they need it, cheap or free to the recipient.

[sandnsea]

32. That's coverage

As long as a person can pay for medical care with their own money, or buy insurance if they want to - then anything the government provides in addition is going to mean everybody has coverage. If you don't think people should be able to pay for their own medical care at all, that everybody is forced into one program, then that's government health care. If you don't use words accurately, it becomes easier to manipulate the public against any change at all.

[Telly Savalas]

7. We've had a similar commitment from Sen. Obama

and I believe Sen. Clinton has promised the same thing.

Before we can judge any of the candidates on this, though, we need to see their specific plans, and that's still a few months away.

But even though these proclamations lack substance, they're still a positive step in as much is they turn the national dialogue away from the GOP's jingoistic bullshit and towards matters that actually impact the lives of Americans.

[antigop]

9. Kucinich's plan is not "a few months away" -- you can read it right now

It's called Medicare for All -- HR 676.

It's right here: http://kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/676.pdf

I don't know of any other candidate who has released a written plan.

[Luckyduck]

12. Yes Edwards should be speaking of this everywhere he goes

He could do a lot to raise awareness and help get this passed BEFORE the presidential election.

[Texas_Kat]

14. Just now?????

Clark has been advocating single-payer heathcare since January 2005.

http://securingamerica.com/node/560

[JohnLocke]

16. Edwards has been calling for universal health care for years.

He's just repeating it again now.

[Mass]

18. Single payer or just another slogan with nothing behind?

I had a thread a few weeks ago about what candidates were calling " universal healthcare". Kucinich and Clark's supporters answered. The silence from the Edwards's supporters was deafening.

[sandnsea]

22. In 2004...

he supported expanding Medicare downards, a buy-in program. And a program expanding Medicaid upwards to uninsured young singles. I don't recall what else, but expanding federal programs seemed to be his basic approach to improving coverage.

[Eurobabe]

23. On MTP JRE was talking about "employers" making contributions

that needs to be flushed out further...I wasn't quite sure what he meant?

We need to take US employers out of the insurance plan selection process. In Germany, your employer contributes 50% to your insurance premiums (this is required by law) BUT they DO NOT dictate to the employee WHAT plan or INSURANCE company you pick, AND no one can be refused coverage for pre-existing conditions. In Germany, government-regulated insurance rates are tied to max gross income per month. If you work more than 19 hrs. a week, insurance coverage is mandatory. You cannot be canceled out of your insurance for any reason, BUT with private insurance (Privatkrankenkasse) if you make too many claims, they can raise your rates so that it becomes financially painful enough to push you back into a government-regulated insurance plan (gesetzliche krankenkasse). Private insurance is also government-regulated, but less strictly than the bulk program.

USA employer-based HR-negotiated healthcare is a major part of this problem. Get HR out of the picture, why do you think everyone has such crappy healthcare plans? Because Employer X wants the cheapest plan (for them) possible and you the employee end up with a shitty HMO that has limited coverage because it costs your employer big bucks and cuts into their profits. So they (employer) get together with cronies or whoever will sell them the cheapest coverage at your expense. Large and medium sized companies can fare well, but the smaller businesses get royally screwed because the "pool" is smaller, ie one guy in my hubby's last employer had cancer and it raised everybody's rates the year after he had alot of treatments. This is just unacceptable. The risk pool in Germany is spread far and wide so these types of things don't happen, can't happen.

My healthcare costs me $40 a year, and I am covered for everything. We got to choose our plan, and can buy more expensive 'private' insurance if we need it, perks with this plan include a private room for hospital stays, plus coverage for what we would call 'elective' surgeries.

Bottom line, the US insurance systems needs a massive overhaul, and soon.

[Vinca]

24. Edwards said he'll release his health care plan tomorrow, so I'm

going to wait and see what it is. My fear is that the majority of candidates addressing this issue are headed more to a Romney-like solution, making health insurance mandatory which is supposed to somehow result in universal coverage. The insurance companies are the problem and they've got to be taken out of the mix. Even in Massachusetts, the rosy quote for basic health coverage just about doubled after the bill was passed. It has to be a government-based program for everyone to have health care. I'm worried this is electioneering on everyone's part and in the end we'll still be at the beginning.

[Nutmegger]

25. Yes I'm also concerned that "Romney-health care" will get branded as universal

when it's really not. We need universal, single payer health care.

I'll be awaiting the details.

[ChiciB1]

26. Well, Given All the Other "I Can't Abide Edwards" Threads Here

of late... GOOD LUCK with any positive talk about him! I KNOW I'm missing something, I just know I am!
Just haven't figured it out yet! I would have to say that Kucinich and Feingold share most of what I believe in, but then I SERIOUSLY SERIOUSLY doubt either one will EVER get elected.

This piling on of Edwards is even worse than that of Hillary!