The plan she proposed in the early 90s wasn't a bad plan, and probably better than her current one, but it got torpedoed by special interests and neither she nor anyone else will offer it again for that very reason.   So, we're left with some type of employer-provided health care plan, because that is, apparently, what people prefer.   But I agree, she needs to give more specifics as opposed to general statements about things that alarm people.

[QUOTE=eadler;264106]I didn't bring up federalism in the first place, it was your reaction to the idea of Universal  Health Care. If anyone is confused it is you.

Federalism is a red herring. It doesn't apply to social security or medicare or the VA health system
These programs seem to work well.

It is possible to craft a national health care plan using the concept of federalism, but it is not necessary. We have such a thing as Medicaid, which has a lot of problems because different states have different resources, and as they develop budgetary problems people get dropped from the rolls. This is in will certainly happen to some of the poor during the next recession, especially if Bush's new budget is taken seriously.
Canada has a mandatory health care system, but does have federalism of a sort since  each province has its own plan.

The way you frame the problem is even wrong. You speak of helping people who are sick.
Getting health care is not only important when you are sick. Proper preventive health care is important while you are well to prevent you from getting sick. It has been shown that people who are without insurance and who don't get preventive health care end up being sicker and dying sooner.

It seems you prefer to continue to focus on  federalism and the constitution instead of dealing with the real problems of the failing US health care system.[/QUOTE]

Canada is a poor example.

They are opening private clinics (as the US system) because their National system cant accomodate.

It doesnt work eadler.  We have been through this.

TENAC says--

"It doesnt work eadler. We have been through this."

Don't forget to remind people that by your own admission you are in rhe Insurance/Healthcare-for-profit biz.

WGal

[QUOTE=JosephBaileyOne;264838]It was torpedoed because she was a non-elected First Lady that had every intention of ramming it down anybody's throat that got in her way as I would remind the reader's here that for Clinton's first two years, he had a Democratic House and Senate to run with and they were the ones that shot it down.[/QUOTE]

Only after a costly and sophisticated campaign against it, remember Harry and Louise ads?

So, we got the status quo, which included rationing, extended wait times, and a significant segment of society without coverage at all, leading to increased costs for emergency care.   And all that just got worse since she first tried to formulate a plan 15 or so years ago.   Doesn't matter.   It won't be back in any of our lifetimes and we'll struggle to find an alternative that allows the insurance companies and the HMOs and the PPOs, and now the drug companies, to retain their profits and their outrageous salaries and perks for the administrators, while at the same time, provide basic care (no chemotherapy for those who can't pay) for the uninsured.

[QUOTE=Whisperingal;264849]TENAC says--

"It doesnt work eadler. We have been through this."

Don't forget to remind people that by your own admission you are in rhe Insurance/Healthcare-for-profit biz.

WGal[/QUOTE]

Wgal sorry to pipe up on this one but it appears that is how Hillary looks at it too.  The only way she could provide health care for everyone is to put pressure on the insurance and drug companies and make them change the way they do business.  That is where she failed the first time around and that is where she will fail this time. 

That's the answer but she can't give that answer.  Bringing more people into the plan isn't going to lower costs it's going to raise costs and then somehow someway it will cost the country more so that the companies running these plans still make money.  And then by her own vagueness she somehow said people would be forced to pay for it.