Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Clinton and health care
Posted by: McQ on Monday, March 26, 2007

These words should chill you to the bone if you're a lover of freedom and liberty:
"We're going to have universal health care when I'm president — there's no doubt about that. We're going to get it done."
That's Senator Hillary Clinton. And, of course, she's not the only one of the group on the Democratic side who are running for the presidential nomination saying that.

Clinton further elaborated:
"I believe the American people are going to make this an issue," said Clinton. "I believe we're in a better position today to do that than we were in '93 and '94. ... It's one of the reasons I'm running for president."
Unfortunately she may be right about being in "a better position" now than in '94. According to a Pew Research Center study of trends in political values and core attitudes, a trend for more support of government programs has grown by double digits. From '94 to now those who believe that government should care for those who can't care for themselves has grown from 57% to 69% a 12 point increase. Those who believe that government should help the needy even if it means more debt has grown from 41% to 54%, a 13 point increase. Those increases, if solid, may indicate a critical mass which was missing when the Clinton administration attempted this previously.

Also note the words Clinton used. She didn't say "universal health insurance." She said "universal health care". One of the things that should be demanded immediately is some precision about what she and the others are talking about in reality.
The reason she hasn't "set out a plan and said here's exactly what I will do," Clinton said, is that she wants to hear from voters what kind of plan they would favor.

"I want the ideas that people have," said Clinton. She said any health care plan must deal with the reality that there's a unique climate in the country.

"We are bigger and more diverse and people like their choice," said Clinton.
This goes back to my discussion about redefining rights. As an example of the point:
Kathy Byars: Why do members of Congress get the Mercedes of insurance plans and pension plans while many of their constituents are just trying to pay for the basic necessities?

Clinton: I believe that one of the ways we can get health care for everyone is to open up the federal plan that's available to members of Congress … to everybody. That would be one way that we could say to you that you have the same right as anybody in Congress.
Notice as well the way Clinton uses the word "choice". That word is also being redefined.

What Clinton plans on doing is using the force of government to deliver benefits to those who want them by coercively obligating those who can pay for those wants. That is the "choice" she is offering. It is populism gone crazy and exactly the problem James Madison foretold in his discussion about the evils of democracy in Federalist 10.

Clinton is also banging the "lack of insurance" drum.
"The number of uninsured has grown," said Clinton. "It's hard to ignore the fact that nearly 47 million people don't have health insurance, but also because so many people with insurance have found it's difficult to get health care because the insurance companies deny you what you need."

Bruce Kesler
at The Democracy Project has done a little reasarch into the claim and finds that the according to the Census bureau that number is overstated by 2 million and that 20% of the remaining number are illegal immigrants. As Kesler points out, a truer number is 25 million. And, of course, there are various reasons for that group not having such insurance, some of it by choice.

Kesler also points out that "according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) about a quarter to half of the uninsured are without coverage for the entire year. The rest are between coverages."

In reality that 25 million constitutes 10% of the total if we ignore the number includes those between coverages. Bottomlining it, Kesler says:
In other words, for 10% the Democrats would upend the other 90%, who by various surveys express 80% satisfaction with their health care, if anxiety about its personal costs.
And that's just talking insurance. Don't forget Clinton's words: "universal health care". Just a reminder.

Spending. Here's an interesting tidbit:
In 1960, health insurance paid covered 36 percent of private health spending, while individuals covered the remaining 64 percent out of their own pocket. By 2004, health insurance accounted for 77 percent of private health spending, while out-of-pocket spending accounted for 23 percent of spending.
Note the reversal. We hear about "skyrocketing" health care costs and spending yet it is insurance providers doing the bulk of the spending while patients have actually been spending less and less "out-of-pocket".

And of course, one of the favorite targets of the universal health care crowd are the greedy insurance companies:
Insurers are not profiteering, as Democrats rant. Their profit margins are about average for American industries, 7.1%, well-below the 11.8% of Publishing & Printing, even below the 7.5% of Computers & Office Equipment or 8% for Entertainment.
How does Clinton plan to pay for this?
"We're going to change the way we finance the system by taking away money from people who are doing well now," she said. Asked who that way, she mentioned insurance companies.
Got that? Remind you of anything else?
The top Democrat said her goal is to get "oil companies that have experienced these amazing profits either to reinvest them in our energy future to reduce our dependence on oil or to contribute to a strategic energy fund that will provide incentives for companies and consumers who want to be part of an energy solution."
She repeated the idea earlier this year. Or, remember this?
"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good"
A clearer statement of intent for a presidency couldn't be made. And for lovers of liberty and freedom, a more chilling one.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
"The nine friendliest words in the English language are, ’I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’" .. or was that not how the quote went?

The difference in the speaker’s party only goes so far — not long ago, no serious Presidential candidate could advocate for that kind of scheme; it would have been a still-born plan and a campaign killer to boot. It is depressing that the United States is moving so far from its founding ideals of personal freedom. Those who want more statism can easily move to Canada or Europe, but those of us who want independence and liberty have no where else to go.
 
Written By: Michael Poole
URL: http://
"A clearer statement of intent for a presidency couldn’t be made. And for lovers of liberty and freedom, a more chilling one."
Ask Clinton fans if they are lovers of liberty and freedom and they will proudly say "Yes, I am." They believe that we can have universal health care and liberty and freedom too. They are ignorant, brainwashed sheeple. Interested in Liberal Narrative Theory?
”These two points remind me of many liberal people I know ...: they get their ideas from liberal opinion leaders, and they hardly realize it [my emphasis], and they believe they’re open-minded, even though they won’t brook disagreement with their adopted views.”
 
Written By: notherbob2
URL: http://
Based on what you write, you can very easily conclude Hillary is evil.

Not that it matters, she won’t win it.

Nutroot scum aside, it looks as if the people want a (percieved) moderate this election. (At least at this point)

That means Giuliani or Obama, or someone who can pull that off. Hillary could never in a million years come off as modreate, and no amount of fawning press assistance could help. Though the socialist sheep would surely try!

Plus, the country is probably tired of Bush/Clinton stuff. We’re not England, enough of these royal families seems the sentiment.

Hillary is destined for the same bitterness that John Kerry has. I’m already preparing my big belly laugh :)
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://

Bruce Kesler at The Democracy Project has done a little reasarch into the claim and finds that the according to the Census bureau that number is overstated by 2 million and that 20% of the remaining number are illegal immigrants. As Kesler points out, a truer number is 25 million. And, of course, there are various reasons for that group not having such insurance, some of it by choice.
A quarter of all the uninsured are in just two states with less than a quarter of the nation’s population. Half are in just six states with less than half of the nation’s population.

Rather than revising the entire nation’s healthcare system a good start might be in the states in which the problem is most severe.

I’d also like to ask a question. How can any system of universal insurance be made fiscally sound without cost controls, without limitations on legal status of those eligible, and with open borders?
 
Written By: Dave Schuler
URL: http://www.theglitteringeye.com
WOAH THERE Dave, enough of those fancy pants words like "Fiscally sound" youl scare the children, and as you know, its all for the children!
 
Written By: josh b
URL: http://www.the-schragnasher.com
Dave, your comment is spot on, as usual. If memory serves me correctly, you’ve been a supporter of national health insurance initiatives. Is that correct? If so, given your valid concerns above, how does that square up? (If I’m wrong, just hit me).
 
Written By: kreiz
URL: http://
The ‘Mommy State’ may get a real ‘muther’ in ‘08, and she promises to nurse this ailing nation back to health. Prepare to bend over and grab your ankles. It has been said “Democracy will only last until the people realize they can vote themselves Bread and Circuses,” Clinton has latched onto the idea political power can be achieved by bribing the voters with their own money. It’s a great scam and the Boobwazee is lapping it up.

William F. Buckley said, after the fall of the Berlin wall “The only Communists left are residing in American Universities.” Now it seems they have slipped the bonds of ivy-covered walls and once again are infesting the political system. Clinton’s statement "We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good" would make Karl Marx proud.
“We’ve got to get the costs under control. Why would we put more money into a dysfunctional system?"
This reeks of price control and a complete takeover of the health system by Washington. Already physicians are refusing to take on new Medicare and Medicaid patients because government payments fail to cover the costs of their treatment. Insurance companies use Government reimbursement rates to set their own. The trend of lowering compensation for medical services will eventually result in poorer health care for all of us. You get what you pay for, and Washington can only afford a second rate health system.

 
Written By: James E. Fish
URL: http://
Speaking of anger and hatred, I simply ask, "Why do you rich, Christo-Fascist 1% hate the poor so much? Is it that they are too brown, too gay, too womyn? Too numerous, too aware of your privileges, too angry to passively accept the crumbs from swept from the plate of the ’haves’ and therefore too scary to be left to live, but instead must slowly have the life squeezed out of them whilst providing the cheap labour to fuel your never-ending, never-enough rapacious wet dreams?"

Why do you hate them so, that you would deny them health care, and then you wonder why the Progressive Movement is growing by leaps and bounds? Fearing it’s inevitable smashing of your oppressive hetero-normal white picket-fence, Lauara Ashley-clad, SUV-driving, Parochial School Uniform-clad, Gaia-raping Fourth Reich. A gibbet, a noose, and a shor rope await you....

And as a side note, Who the F^c( CARES what you think about anger on the Internet!? It is our incandescant rage at the perfidies of this Regime that provide the heat that drives the engine of our success, as it is the foolish, pig-like Greed that fuels your hungry ravaging of our once pristine Planet.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
Joe, Great Noam Chomsky impression
 
Written By: James E. Fish
URL: http://faroutfishfiles.blogspot.com/
Thank, thank ya very much...I used "-clad" twice, it just didn’t work but I wanted to get the floral clad yuppie trophy wives in AND their PDA using, telegenic Biff/Buffy offspring in too. It wasn’t my best work....but an artist likes appreciation, when he can get it...

You know once you get into the rhythm of it it actually flows quite easily.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
“Democracy will only last until the people realize they can vote themselves Bread and Circuses,”
So what your saying is that its already too late? I tend to agree.
 
Written By: DS
URL: http://
So what your saying is that its already too late? I tend to agree.
Despair, Cynicism, and Anger are bed-fellows, and not good companions.

 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
So what your saying is that its already too late?
And that’s the truth.
Despair, Cynicism, and Anger are bed-fellows, and not good companions.
Unlike Al Frankin and Adrianna Huffington
 
Written By: James E. Fish
URL: http://faroutfishfiles.blogspot.com/
Why do you hate them so, that you would deny them health care, and then you wonder why the Progressive Movement is growing by leaps and bounds? Fearing it’s inevitable smashing of your oppressive hetero-normal white picket-fence, Lauara Ashley-clad, SUV-driving, Parochial School Uniform-clad, Gaia-raping Fourth Reich. A gibbet, a noose, and a shor rope await you....
Dang Joe, you are getting scary . . .

Do you score more with hippy chicks?
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
Dang Joe, you are getting scary . . .

Do you score more with hippy chicks?
If you do, send some extras my way
 
Written By: James E. Fish
URL: http://faroutfishfiles.blogspot.com/
My partner would have my @rse if I scored with hippies of either sex....
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider