Candidates Split Along Party Lines on Healthcare
Presidential candidates have talked Iowans’ ears off about health care, but people who have listened closely say the contenders have done little to distinguish themselves from their rivals.
Unless you drill down into their plans, each leading Democrat sounds a lot like the other leading Democrats, and each leading Republican sounds a lot like the other leading Republicans.
The issue promises to be a flashpoint in next fall’s general election, in which the two nominees will have dramatically different views on the subject.
Caucusgoers can choose the candidates they believe are most likely to win the argument in November and shepherd changes through Congress.
“I think people are looking for someone who can get this done. Who has the ability, the experience and the finesse to do it?” said Kathy Stangl of Des Moines.
Stangl has attended more than 65 campaign events, hitting almost all the candidates from both parties and asking them questions about how they would reform health care. Stangl has a fatal lung disease and is spending her remaining time helping keep the issues of preventive care, medical research and health insurance in the forefront of the presidential race.
She said she generally gets more details from the Democrats, whose health care plans call for bigger government roles than what the Republicans want.
The top Democratic contenders generally want to increase the governments’ involvement in health care and help provide insurance coverage for the 47 million Americans now going without. The Republicans generally want to encourage citizens to be healthier and to help make the health care market more efficient and easier to navigate.
John Hale, policy director for the Iowa CareGivers Association, said he’s thrilled to hear the discussion, which he described as the most intense national focus on health care in decades.
“It’s clear that this is one of the top - if not the top - domestic issues that the Democratic candidates have talked about,” he said.
Hale, a political independent and health policy aficionado, said the leading Democrats differ in details, but the gist of their universal health care plans is the same. When asked how he would advise Democratic caucusgoers to choose, he said the difference could come down to which candidate could build national support for a major shift. “It comes down to who is going to lead most aggressively on this, and who has the best chance of actually producing results.”
State Sen. Jack Hatch, a Des Moines Democrat, said his party’s health reformers used to talk more about implementing a “single-payer” system, in which the government would directly insure everyone. But the only presidential candidate still backing that idea is Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich, whose campaign is gaining little traction. “The candidates are moving away from that, which shows they’re being realistic,” he said.
Hatch, who is leading a health reform effort in the Legislature, describes himself as one of the most liberal legislators at the Statehouse. But he said that even many lefties like him have decided to back off single-payer proposals and to look for more pragmatic approaches.
Top Democratic presidential candidates all are talking about ways to improve and expand the country’s current mixed system of public and private insurance plans, Hatch said. Their more moderate stances demonstrate their belief that major health care changes can pass if they’re not too extreme.
State Rep. Linda Upmeyer, a Garner Republican who serves on the state health reform commission, said her party’s presidential candidates talk more about ways to help Americans get better, affordable health care through private markets instead of through government mandates. Most of the Republicans’ proposals include tax credits or deductions to help individuals afford insurance.
A national health care consultant said there are differences among the plans if you dig into them.
Jon Cohen, a managing director for Pricewaterhouse-Coopers, said Democratic candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama propose offering tax credits to small businesses to help them pay for the health insurance they would be required to buy for employees.
The third leading Democrat, John Edwards, does not propose such tax credits, Cohen said. He said credits could help build support among small employers, who have provided some of the most significant opposition to proposed state mandates.
He also noted that Edwards and Clinton propose requiring that everyone have health insurance, while providing subsidies to those who could not afford it.
Obama would require only that children have insurance, while offering incentives for adults to get it.
Edwards and Clinton say mandates are the only way to ensure everyone is covered. Obama says his approach is more realistic.
Overall, Cohen said, the country has seen an amazing increase in discussion on the topic.
“I’ll tell you, in 2004, nobody was talking universal health care,” he said.
Copyright ©2007 The Des Moines Register.
State Sen. Jack Hatch, a Des Moines Democrat, said his party’s health reformers used to talk more about implementing a “single-payer” system, in which the government would directly insure everyone. But the only presidential candidate still backing that idea is Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich, whose campaign is gaining little traction. “The candidates are moving away from that, which shows they’re being realistic,” he said.
Fuck you, Jack. Reality is CREATED by belief, faith, and ACTION! How DARE you denigrate your constituency and the rest of the country’s desire for a single-payer system and a more sane and equal rule book for have’s and have not’s?
D.K. is “gaining no traction” because you have him chained outside the state borders so you can pump B.S.-as-usual into Iowans brains, therefore stifling change, growth, and what leader is truly best for “We The People”!!!
{quote}: “I’ll tell you, in 2004, nobody was talking universal health care,” he said.
And they still aren’t!! Except for Dennis Kucinich. The others are talking about Universal COVERAGE - which means keeping the profit-hungry insurance companies in the picture.
Let’s start using precise language everyone, so that the REAL differences can come out. Universal Health Care does not mean Universal Coverage! DK is the only politician who is wants to get the insurance profits out of your health care!!! How many of you - you who can afford coverage - like the fact that your premiums go to some (usually male) CEO who already makes a bloated salary of hundreds of millions of dollars every year?!
If you don’t have a problem that, then go ahead and vote for barf-bag-Hillary or just-a-fake-Edwards or no-substance-Obama.
If this transfer of your limited money to the already wealthy bothers you even a little bit, the VOTE KUCINICH!!!!
We are not going to get universal single-payer health care by electing a presidential candidate who promises to give it to us.
Why not? Simple. We are not going to be able to elect a presidential candidate who promises to destroy one of the largest and most profitable sectors of the largest (in dollar terms) profit-making business in the United States.
Not happening.
So, how do we do this?
First, we do need a president who would be willing to do it if the political conditions made it possible.
He or she would need to have the support of a strongly Democratic Congress, both houses.
And, there would need to be a strong grassroots-based movement demanding universal health care and proposing single-payer as the economically rational way to do it.
The insurance companies, through the mass media, would fight us tooth and nail. If they go down, they will go down clawing and slashing and slamming hard.
But fortunately, there is some corporate weight on the other side. Other big business would be glad to be relieved of the costs of providing health insurance to employees. So, it is not impossible to imagine the corporate media taking a middle road in the presence of a mass political movement calling for single-payer.
In the end, some compromise might be needed, some kind of roadmap to single payer, or some role left for private insurers to provide extras or luxuries. A deal might have to be cut, and skillful politician like Mr. Obama might be needed in the White House to bring this together.
Or maybe Ms. Clinton. Even Mr. Edwards.
But that’s how it has to go, if it’s to go at all.
Forget about the campaign promises and the Obama plan vs. the Edwards plan. All that stuff doesn’t mean a thing. Nothing will happen until at least 2010. What will happen then is pretty hard to predict, but if we want single-payer, the place to start is not with a candidate’s statement but organizing on the ground, independently of any political party or candidate.
Years ago I went into the HR. There I informed them how much insurance I wanted on my house, my car and my pick up truck plus make sure my canoe was included . Mr Gray also sort of a democrat but from Iowa, looked at me and asked, ” What in hell are you talking about ?” I explained that since he has my health insurance in this big pool and is so good then take care of all my insurance business and let me keep some money. It would be like a pay raise. He almost called security, then laughted at me and said ” Good joke. ” With a cheap smile he looked at the door and expected me to just waltz out, but before I did I asked if I O W A meant ” Idiots Out Wandering Around”.. I left.. About a year later he talked to me in a different tone. He understood my point about the insurance business.. I feel so much better now. Nothing has changed except for coverage and rates. We need to unite and make this change.
after watching the blogs here the last few days,i decided to check things out,for myself.the interview with bhutto was stunning.i read a lot of bloggers that said they had registered republican,so they could vote in the primary for ron paul.i used good ole youtube to watch two amazing videos of r.paul.one, was his 2002 warning to congress,about iraq.it was MARVELOUS.you should give it a view.next i watched his recent response to the assassination of bhutto.i am now convinced.i will vote for ron paul,and all i have to do is register.i am an independent,but i am switching to republican,so that i can be truly independent.go ron !
Ron Paul will NOT be able to win the Republican nomination. His strong libertarian ideas will NOT be accepted by the Conservative Republicans. Therefore, he does not have a chance of actually being chosen as the Republican candidate. I agree with you that he has many wonderful ideas but at this time in our history, he is totally unelectable on a national level. Maybe his time will come in 2012.
Humans are herbivores. That is indisputably true.
Why didn’t anyone tell you? Because the game being played by the corporations that keeps you doing everything to get sick also puts mega bucks in the pockets of medical schools, insurance companies, pharmaceutical industries, agribusinesses, etc.
We don’t need a corporate health care plan, the Repub version or the “I can’t make it happen becasue its too difficult” democrat version.
We do need everyone to get the most basic facts of human anatomy and physiology understood: Humans are Herbivores!
“When we kill animals to eat them, they end up killing us because their flesh, which contains cholesterol and saturated fat, was never intended for human beings, who are natural herbivores.”
William C. Roberts, M.D., editor, American Journal of Cardiology
visit the Herbivore Awareness Project at http://www.allinharmony.com
From “The Comparative Anatomy of Eating”, by Milton R. Mills, MD
Facial Muscles
CARNIVORE: Reduced to allow wide mouth gape
HERBIVORE: Well-developed
OMNIVORE: Reduced
HUMAN: Well-developed
Jaw Type
CARNIVORE: Angle not expanded
HERBIVORE: Expanded angle
OMNIVORE: Angle not expanded
HUMAN: Expanded angle
Jaw Joint Location
CARNIVORE: On same plane as molar teeth
HERBIVORE: Above the plane of the molars
OMNIVORE: On same plane as molar teeth
HUMAN: Above the plane of the molars
Jaw Motion
CARNIVORE: Shearing; minimal side-to-side motion
HERBIVORE: No shear; good side-to-side, front-to-back
OMNIVORE: Shearing; minimal side-to-side
HUMAN: No shear; good side-to-side, front-to-back
Major Jaw Muscles
CARNIVORE: Temporalis
HERBIVORE: Masseter and pterygoids
OMNIVORE: Temporalis
HUMAN: Masseter and pterygoids
Mouth Opening vs. Head Size
CARNIVORE: Large
HERBIVORE: Small
OMNIVORE: Large
HUMAN: Small
Teeth: Incisors
CARNIVORE: Short and pointed
HERBIVORE: Broad, flattened and spade shaped
OMNIVORE: Short and pointed
HUMAN: Broad, flattened and spade shaped
Teeth: Canines
CARNIVORE: Long, sharp and curved
HERBIVORE: Dull and short or long (for defense), or none
OMNIVORE: Long, sharp and curved
HUMAN: Short and blunted
Teeth: Molars
CARNIVORE: Sharp, jagged and blade shaped
HERBIVORE: Flattened with cusps vs complex surface
OMNIVORE: Sharp blades and/or flattened
HUMAN: Flattened with nodular cusps
Chewing
CARNIVORE: None; swallows food whole
HERBIVORE: Extensive chewing necessary
OMNIVORE: Swallows food whole and/or simple crushing
HUMAN: Extensive chewing necessary
Saliva
CARNIVORE: No digestive enzymes
HERBIVORE: Carbohydrate digesting enzymes
OMNIVORE: No digestive enzymes
HUMAN: Carbohydrate digesting enzymes
Stomach Type
CARNIVORE: Simple
HERBIVORE: Simple or multiple chambers
OMNIVORE: Simple
HUMAN: Simple
Stomach Acidity
CARNIVORE: Less than or equal to pH 1 with food in stomach
HERBIVORE: pH 4 to 5 with food in stomach
OMNIVORE: Less than or equal to pH 1 with food in stomach
HUMAN: pH 4 to 5 with food in stomach
Stomach Capacity
CARNIVORE: 60% to 70% of total volume of digestive tract
HERBIVORE: Less than 30% of total volume of digestive tract
OMNIVORE: 60% to 70% of total volume of digestive tract
HUMAN: 21% to 27% of total volume of digestive tract
Length of Small Intestine
CARNIVORE: 3 to 6 times body length
HERBIVORE: 10 to more than 12 times body length
OMNIVORE: 4 to 6 times body length
HUMAN: 10 to 11 times body length
Colon
CARNIVORE: Simple, short and smooth
HERBIVORE: Long, complex; may be sacculated
OMNIVORE: Simple, short and smooth
HUMAN: Long, sacculated
Liver
CARNIVORE: Can detoxify vitamin A
HERBIVORE: Cannot detoxify vitamin A
OMNIVORE: Can detoxify vitamin A
HUMAN: Cannot detoxify vitamin A
Kidney
CARNIVORE: Extremely concentrated urine
HERBIVORE: Moderately concentrated urine
OMNIVORE: Extremely concentrated urine
HUMAN: Moderately concentrated urine
Nails
CARNIVORE: Sharp claws
HERBIVORE: Flattened nails or blunt hooves
OMNIVORE: Sharp claws
HUMAN: Flattened nails
We need Medicare for every American cradle to grave (home care for seniors included) with prevention as the cornerstone.
How do we pay for it? Simple. Cut the MIC, change our foreign policy to stop all wars of aggression and by cutting the for-profit insurance companies (unnecessary middle-men, paper shuffling for health care providers etc.) out of the equation and allowing the coverage to follow everyone regardless of what job they have, we could easily cover everyone.
The current crop of candidates are so beholden to the inefficient, rotten for-profit system that they cannot see the forest for the trees.
We need standardized care in community hospitals that are well run by NURSES!!! and DOCTORS!!!, not by a bunch of MBA’s who have had the whole notion of PROFIT, PROFIT, PROFIT drummed into their stupid heads for 10 years or so.
Just find the best functioning healthcare system in the world that covers everyone and is not for profit and DUH!!!…..duplicate it here! OH…..MY…..GOD…..!
(I am a Registered Nurse BTW, with 30 years of experience).
ginger,not looking for electable,looking for miracle and i am expecting it.i disagree,i think ron paul is electable.i do not think dennis kucinich is electable.the babble in the repub inner-lair suggests there are quite a few repubs looking at ron paul,secretly.i know many democrats as well,who are saying the same.ron paul is a legitimate and viable candidate,with excellent credentials.why else would there be chatter on the net about certain neocons wanting to harm abovementioned-candidate? i have seen the chatter.ron paul is electable.
national healthcare is the only sane way to go.who wants any more dealings with greedy corporate insurance companies ?
In most of the foreign countries I’ve visited, if you have a medical problem other than an emergency, your first stop is the pharmacist who can dispense many perscription drugs to help you. If he or she thinks that it is necessary, they will send you to a medical Dr. Our pharmacists should be used to their full potential and we must limit the medically motivated torts. Using this model, health care costs can be brought down and single payer may be affordable. We the people that need it, must make a concentrated effort to push for it. We can screw the insurance companies just as they’re screwing us.
I don’t see why we can’t have two different types of health insurance: single-payer medicare for all and paid health insurance for those with enough money to pay for it.
Isn’t this how it’s done in Britain, or am I wrong?
Mandates……. Bah Humbug!!
There is only one viable system and that is single payer. Insurance companies ARE the problem NOT the solution. Health care would not cost what it does were it not for insurance. For profit insurance and for profit service in our greed centric market environment will only raise health care costs. IT is time we drew a distinction between “free enterprise” and “capitalism”. Free enterprise being small business founded to provide goods and services competetively, and capitalism being huge monopolistic conglomerates dedicated to providing as little service as possible for as high a price as possible.
Health insurance is a “cost plus” business. It operates exactly like highway contractors did a few years back when they took contracts on the basis of cost plus a percentage of cost as profit. The incentive is to increase costs… thus profits. So long as costs go up for every healt care business…… all benefit in turning over larger sums of money from which to rake the profits to make the bottom line look good.
Until the private insurances companies are cut out of the equation there will be no workable solution to this most important of American concerns.
Howard
State Sen. Jack Hatch, a Des Moines Democrat, said his party’s health reformers used to talk more about implementing a “single-payer” system, in which the government would directly insure everyone. But the only presidential candidate still backing that idea is Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich, whose campaign is gaining little traction. “The candidates are moving away from that, which shows they’re being realistic,” he said.
Dear Mr. Hatch,
Please take the corporate cock out of your ass and mouth long enough to get as much air as possible in any/all of your openings. You’re suffering from oxygen deprivation and corporate-ass-rape-stockholm-syndrome.
Ron Paul is to the Constitution what Joe Stalin was to free elections. Nice words, no substance.
Ron Paul is a gilded age Hoover-RayGunite “the government can’t help anybody….. BUT THE RICH” Asshole
Kucinich is plenty electable! Just vote for him! He’s the one and only. We should be so lucky!
H.Clinton is not real change, Obama is not real change, Edwards is not real change. Want a real change? Vote Anti war candidates for REAL change, Vote: If not Kucinich then Ron Paul, If not Ron Paul then Kucinich. Stop the madness! Peace Now!
Throw off the bloodsucking capitalist leeches. Everybody drop your health insurance and stop going to doctors. Start reading up and learn how to prevent diseases and heal injuries. Hold town hall meetings once a month on preventive approaches. Encourage the whole town to show up. Marvel at those huge brain capacities inside everyone’s skulls. Whooah!
And, there would need to be a strong grassroots-based movement demanding universal health care and proposing single-payer as the economically rational way to do it.
See, even Nader2000 agrees that the people should take matters into their own hands, and pay themselves the wisdom of the ages for maximum lifespan and natural death without capitalist interference.
Start excluding capitalism from your life TODAY!
Top Democratic presidential candidates all are talking about ways to improve and expand the country’s current mixed system of public and private insurance plans, Hatch said. Their more moderate stances demonstrate their belief that major health care changes can pass if they’re not too extreme.
In other words a band-aid type fix, the health insurance system can’t be fixed. For profit corporate health insurance is not health care. Give me health care; I can’t afford to buy insurance that is going to do nothing but drastically climb in cost. We need a government controlled health care system in this country. I don’t have any problem with there being a corporate controlled health care insurance industry that works for the corporate elite/very well off individuals.
I can envision two distinct health care industries developing around the needs of both systems. Set the government system up similar to social security apply a mandatory tax to all wage earning Americans. All income up to a ceiling is taxable and goes towards paying for health care for all Americans. Those who can afford it and don’t trust the national system can still buy private health insurance and go to doctors who cater for their needs. One of the things I would like to see from this is, more general practitioners, that don’t cost you anything to go see. I think everybody should have a basic physical according to his or her age once or more a year. In this way we could become proactive instead of reactive to major health problems. That in its self should be a major savings in the total health care cost of this country.
I look at it this way the healthier the American people as a whole are the better off everybody including the wealthy and wage earners are. That’s why I believe everybody who has a job should be paying into it even if it helps the poor or non-workers who aren’t paying into it.
Top Democratic presidential candidates all are talking about ways to improve and expand the country’s current mixed system of public and private insurance plans, Hatch said. Their more moderate stances demonstrate their belief that major health care changes can pass if they’re not too extreme.
In other words a band-aid type fix, the health insurance system can’t be fixed. For profit corporate health insurance is not health care. Give me health care; I can’t afford to buy insurance that is going to do nothing but drastically climb in cost. We need a government controlled health care system in this country. I don’t have any problem with there being a corporate controlled health care insurance industry that works for the corporate elite/very well off individuals.
I can envision two distinct health care industries developing around the needs of both systems. Set the government system up similar to social security apply a mandatory tax to all wage earning Americans. All income up to a ceiling is taxable and goes towards paying for health care for all Americans. Those who can afford it and don’t trust the national system can still buy private health insurance and go to doctors who cater for their needs. One of the things I would like to see from this is, more general practitioners, that don’t cost you anything to go see. I think everybody should have a basic physical according to his or her age once or more a year. In this way we could become proactive instead of reactive to major health problems. That in its self should be a major savings in the total health care cost of this country.
I look at it this way the healthier the American people as a whole are the better off everybody including the wealthy and wage earners are. That’s why I believe everybody who has a job should be paying into it even if it helps the poor or non-workers who aren’t paying into it.
This message is for anybody who is interested in a potential error in the software that drives this page. The browser I use is FireFox.
It would appear the program that runs this board has a problem in the edit routine. When I attempted to edit my first submittal I got error messages in the bar below the input window. The edited submittal appeared to be on the board. To check I went to Common Dreams main page and came back here from their link. My edited post wasn’t there. So I decided to re-submit my edited post from scratch. Now it appears I have a double post.
I double-checked this by closing my browser and getting back online from scratch.
I can see a two-tier approach to providing health care for Americans. That is to say, we’d have state-sponsored health care for all who intended to use it, along with private plans for those who didn’t trust the state-sponsored system or could pay the exorbitant premiums. It would be similar to the way higher education is distributed…community colleges for those without the funds to attend private colleges. If we could get the all-powerful for profit insurance corporations to go along with it, we’d have a viable plan. Fat chance!
This article just shows how the mainstream media and their like numbers do all they can to keep Dennis J Kucinich out of the debate to insure they stack the deck insuring their prostitutes win. Vote for Kucinich, the candidate the overwhelming majority of the American people agree with on issues such as health care, education, ending a foreign policy of endless war, and others right across the board. Kucinch can win if the people will just vote for their own views in the primaries, caucuses, and the election.
Vote for HRC if you want to see the GOP keep the presidency and take back the congress and then completely consolidate fascism in this country. HRC will make sure the Democrats cease to be a party of any consequence if she’s the presidential candidate.
If HRC wins it I’m not voting. I will not vote for anybody except Dennis Kucinich. I might still vote for Edwards, maybe, I haven’t completely made up my mind yet about him but I am leaning away from him. Kucinich and maybe Edwards are the only one’s running worth a consideration to be my leader. The rest of them definitely aren’t worth my time.
There’s only one Democratic candidate who can possibly lose to the motley crew of Republican candidates out there, given how badly the Bush administration has run things, and that’s Hillary Clinton, which is why she has so much MSM support. The Republicans want very badly for her to be the Democratic candidate.
Given the above, I think anyone who votes for her in the Democratic primary (or endorses her for the same), is either naive or complicit. So, whoever you vote for in the primaries, please don’t make it Hillary. She’s the only chance the Republicans have.
If you’re feeling really positive, though, Kucinich is by far the best choice, and anyone’s electable if enough people vote for them.
Just think about the message the people would be sending the democrats in congress if the people woke up and went completely outside the influence of the corporate media and selected Kucinich. A vote for anybody other than Kucinich is nothing more than an approval rating of the current status quo.
END THE CORRUPTION!
Too many piggies at the trough.
Everybody should get the basic care and preventative medicine that should cost very little. It should cover accidents and most treatable ailments.
People who participate in extreme sports or need extensive care for incurable disease should have supplemental coverage.
Children especially should receive care so that they are able to compete at school on a level playing field. There are so many disabilities that affect a child’s learning we are pretty good at addressing that now and it should be a priority in the future.
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
In our own best interest, vote Kucinich. If it works for all other countries, except ours, why not? Don’t look a gift horse in the mouth. He’s fighting for us, let’s help him out.
The economics of why health insurance is no longer a viable model:
Insurance is a system whereby many at risk pay small amounts into large catastrophe funds in expectation that only a few of them will ever need it, i.e., most of them will never have to file a claim. In this way, the losses of those few who suffer the catastrophes insured against are covered while still leaving enough in the fund to pay a profit to the insurer who maintains the fund, which would be fair if only a few ever needed to file claims.
In the “old” days, almost no one needed to file a health insurance claim. Very few people were on permanent prescriptions, compared to today with so many on multiple lifetime-long prescriptions. You visited a doctor only when you had a serious complaint, which was not that often. People didn’t get bypass surgery; they died instead. Elective surgery was not common; living with a condition was.
Today, everyone with health insurance sees the doctor multiple times each year. Every insured files claims. If everyone has to file claims, then insurance cannot work, because insurance only works when relatively few of the insured ever file claims. When everyone files claims, premiums have to be sky high in order to pay a profit to the insurer, thus driving the cost way beyond what is needed to be spent for care.
Therefore, only a single-payer system that pays medical expenses only — and not insurance company profits — can be viable going forward in our society. This is the only way to reduce health care costs in America. Keeping the insurance companies in the equation will only protect the status quo, and that is precisely what we do not need or want.
For this reason, Kucinich gets my vote in the primary. And for me it will be Kucinich or Paul in the general. If neither of them wins their primary, I will write in Kucinich’s name in the general election.
Medicare for everyone will cost a mere fraction of the money poured into turning Mideast countries into rubble, displacing millions and killing hundreds of thousands of their people. And for what? Corporate greed. The same thing that keeps us from enjoying universal health coverage.
So, no one was talking Universal Healthcare in 2004? Well, I’m voting for that nobody..Dennis Kucinich!