Of course, we need both.

Regarding John Washburn’s post, it’s near worthless otherwise. It does what so many others do by using “hot button” terms to trigger emotional responses that lead to no further critical thinking. “Hillary Care” is about as vague a concept to most Americans as there is. Many just don’t like HRC. I don’t like her proposal, but for some specific reasons.

It definitely not because of universal coverage (and universal access).

It’s interesting that there are so many assumptions loaded into his post. Who is to say that there wouldn’t be copayment, who is to say that universal access leads to flat salaries for primary care physicians, and who is to say that competition shouldn’t still play a role?

I fear that such perspectives lead people to reject the notion of universal coverage all together.