The Hillary Clinton health plan

September 17, 2007

Predictably, Ezra Klein is drooling over the plan, while Cato’s Michael Tanner hates it.



Related posts:

  1. The Massachusetts’ health plan
  2. Obama’s health plan
  3. A health insurer positive on Hillary Clinton?
  4. Hillary Clinton: The most and least trusted politician on health care
  5. Health care reform on a state level
  6. The Wyden health care plan
  7. Hillary Clinton on Yahoo! Answers


KevinMD.com on Facebook


  Follow on Twitter   Subscribe



{ 11 comments }

1 Anonymous September 17, 2007 at 3:19 pm

Kevin, given that I believe you said you are a fan of what Romney did in Mass., and Hillary’s plan is pretty similar, can we presume that you support Hillary’s plan as well?

If not, what are the differences?

2 Kevin September 17, 2007 at 3:21 pm

I do support the concept of an individual mandate.

I will have to spend the next few days digesting the details before I render a judgment on the plan.

Thanks,
Kevin

3 Anonymous September 17, 2007 at 5:35 pm

The plan may be affordable. It calls for $9.2 Billion a month.
We spend $10 Billion a month on Iraq and with no short term or long term profit. It’s very obvious where the we can get the money for health care.

4 C.A. Chien September 17, 2007 at 5:42 pm

Dr. Kevin: Hello. I’ve read your blog for three months and am amazed how much info you consume. My friends call me a super-geek, but you appear at least 4x ahead of moi.

With Mrs. Clinton’s announcement today, I decided to speed up launch of my online site –

http://www.healthcaremoney.info

with this comment on her (new) plan –

” .. Today, there is little in Mrs. Clinton’s new “universal health care” proposal that would ensure quality universal health care. If enacted, it would most likely just create more unresponsive bureaucracy to make health care more complex, costly, and problematic. Her husband once promised the “end of big government:” her plan appears to be trying to bring some of “big government” back ..”

In toto at –

http://healthcaremoney-newsblog.blogspot.com/2007/09/analysis-opinion.html

Best regards. Keep up the great work.

5 Happyman September 17, 2007 at 6:28 pm

It stands to reason that a major expansion of entitlement programs (even extending the option of such to those w/ private insurance), without a corresponding increase in taxes, will lead to medicaid-like reimbursements.

This will only create a hugely bureaucratic system where people wind up in ERs anyway due to lack of good outpatient care (e.g. medicaid).

Hillary has her head in the clouds & seemingly is immune to the high tax burden shouldered by metro NY middle-class & upper-middle-class folks to support medicaid here.

I don’t see how she can force insurers to take all comers, & not have rates commensurate with risk exposure – this idea flies in the face of the concept of insurance.

She’s pretty good, however, at appealing to the masses who only see the issue from one side (patients who want coverage for everything no matter the cost, but don’t want to pay for it, at least not directly).

In this way she has shown that she can run w/the big boys & become as lying & corrupt as anyone.

6 Anonymous September 17, 2007 at 7:34 pm

“a plan that stresses… cost control and consumer choice”
Those don’t usually work as a package.

“businesses, in turn, would be required to offer insurance to employees, or contribute to a government-run pool”
Expect more full-time employees to be replaced with part-time contractors.

“Clinton would offer expanded versions of two existing government programs: Medicare, and the health insurance plan currently offered to federal employees… aides stress that no new federal bureaucracy would be created”
No new bureaucracy, just bigger existing ones. Super.

“cost-saving measures to help pay for universal coverage… computerized medical record-keeping and a reduction in federal overpayments to hospitals and health maintenance organizations. She would also promote wellness and disease prevention as a way to reduce costs”
Why do I feel like that’s not going to save anything for a long time, if ever?

“she would require insurance companies to provide coverage to all consumers regardless of pre-existing conditions”
I guess that cost will be coming out of insurance company profits, right?

If only the socialists would relocate to socialist countries. But I guess there wouldn’t be any Democratic candidates if that happened.

7 Anonymous September 17, 2007 at 8:29 pm

You critics need to wake up and smell the roses. This is happening, in one way or another. When a Repub Congress and Repub President pass the largest entitlement program, the prescription drug benefit, in 40 years without even a pause, then the debate has already been altered.

As long as the critics’ total contribution to the debate consists of criticisms, and not alternative legislation, then they are simply pups yapping at passing cars.

You physicians have in part brought this on yourselves, as well. You’ve bitched so long and loud about the deal you’re getting that people assume you want change. Well, change you’re getting. Hope you like it.

8 C.A. Chien September 17, 2007 at 9:02 pm

” .. When a Repub Congress and Repub President pass the largest entitlement program, the prescription drug benefit, in 40 years without even a pause ..”

Is there a benefit-cost analysis, of quality-of-life improvement v. cost? Having statistics would bring about more meaningful analysis.

On the other hand — trying to force insurers to insure high-cost individuals borders on the bizarre.

It would be like the U.S. trial lawyers group allowing Mexican lawyers to practice in the U.S. without taking the bar. That happens right after the cow jumps over the moon. The insurers — whom I do NOT hold a brief for — will fight that to the death.

9 Anonymous September 20, 2007 at 12:31 am

“trying to force insurers to insure high-cost individuals borders on the bizarre.”

Well yes, because here in America it has become totally normal, expected and proper, to deny health ins. to the only one’s who really need it. That would be a shame if we actually required they be treated (the same as everyone else) without discrimination.

10 Anonymous September 21, 2007 at 3:07 pm

I think Hillary may be onto something.

If she becomes President, she is going to need an excellent health care plan. A bullet proof plan, you might say.

11 Mike September 22, 2007 at 11:46 am

What is the big deal about the individual mandate? I alreapy pay into Medicrae whether I like it or not, so this seems like more of that. And since I’m paying for health insurance anyway, what do I car if I pay it to gov’t or UNH.

I still think she’s full of crap. But that part doesn’t bother me. Just the rest.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post: Tattooing your eyeball

Next post: Friends, relatives and medical advice

Site Meter