Clinton Discusses Universal Health Care Enforcement Options

By: Brian Montopoli
Topics: Hillary Clinton

One of the big questions surrounding Hillary Clinton's universal health care plan has been the question of enforcement. That is: How will she mandate that all Americans pay for their health care?

On ABC's "This Week" on Sunday, Clinton provided some clues to how she might do so. "We will have an enforcement mechanism, whether it's [garnishing people's wages] or it's some other mechanism through the tax system or automatic enrollments," she said.

Clinton further noted that "there are a number of mechanisms" that could be used, including "going after people's wages, automatic enrollment."

As the Associated Press notes, "Clinton said such measures would apply only to workers who can afford health coverage but refuse to buy it, which puts undue pressure on hospitals and emergency rooms."

Clinton's Democratic rival, Barack Obama, offers a plan that mandates health care coverage only for children and leaves some Americans uninsured. (Obama puts that figure at 3 million, while Clinton suggests it's closer to 15 million.)

Clinton has long resisted articulating an enforcement mechanism for mandating universal health care, which has prompted criticism from the Obama campaign. "Without an enforcement mechanism, there is no mandate," Obama has said.

Responding to Clinton's comments on Sunday, Obama spokesman Bill Burton said Clinton "again refused to directly answer the question" of enforcement.

Brian Montopoli
Brian Montopoli is the senior political reporter at CBSNews.com.
Follow on Twitter »

9 Comments +

Add a Comment


by thagan3-2009 February 7, 2008 2:47 PM EST: Nobody is considering consoldating of the health-care industry in recent years. Health insurance has gone up 78% since Bush took office. The only power consumers have over cost is choice. Mandates will lead to consumer abuse.; Reply to this comment


by DrColes February 5, 2008 1:51 PM EST: The government caused the entire problem with health care in America by over socializing (with mandates) medicine to the extent it is not completive. The government allows a monopolistic pharmaceutical environment, and the FDA a federal agency failing American citizens and needs be eliminated or completely re-organized; it%u2019s corrupt, and is causing a major impact on the cost of healthcare in America, and we want to exacerbate the problem? http://www.InteliOrg.com/; Reply to this comment


by crunchymnchy February 4, 2008 8:10 PM EST: EVERYONE%u2019s got a crush on Obama%u2026 presenting the brand new Obama Pizza Rap featuring Obama Girl:

http://digitalfuntown.squarespace.com/dft-blog/2008/2/4/obama-pizza-rap-featuring-obama-girl.html; Reply to this comment


by etherplain February 4, 2008 6:45 PM EST: Listen, I thought long and hard about who to vote for. Originally I was for Edwards. So don''t accuse me of misinforming anyone as if I''m some kind of Hillary trog.
I have two points on this in regards to Obama: 1) Don''t harp on mandates when you have your own to enforce.
2) I truly believe that universal coverage should be mandated to all, to keep premiums fare for all and to prevent the gaming of the system that Obama mentioned his plan doesn''t specifically account for (this comes up in the last televised debate).

and btw Clinton''s plan has the same caveat about existing health plans. You aren''t required to switch. ....95% of the plans are identical.

P.S. I wouldn''t go to any candidate''s website for substantive information about their policies. It''s all spin, I don''t care who they are.; Reply to this comment


by realpatriot1 February 4, 2008 6:30 PM EST: etherplain,

Obma''s plan also allows people to continue with their current coverage if they want, He requires insurers to offer the same basic coverage as members of Congress receive but people aren''t required to change their coverage to get that.

He makes it mandatory for children under 18 to be covered but offers those who can''t afford it government subsidies to defray the costs. Young adults up to age 25 are not required to have insurance but will be allowed to remain on their parents plans.

If you seriously want to learn more about his plan and aren''t just concerned about disseminating misinformation about it you can learn more at Obama for America.; Reply to this comment


by forthepeopl1 February 4, 2008 4:43 PM EST: Crime of the Century: Time for Congress to Act

david a belanger,for-america@hotmail.com

Who''''s minding the store in Washington?

While President George W. Bush was standing before the members of Congress on January 28 laying out his plans, such as they are, for the final year of his second term in the White House, he was also seriously and perhaps fatally undermining the authority of Congress with a new signing statement, attached to the latest National Defense Authorization Act, in which he declared that he would simply violate or fail to comply with four provisions.

Let me say that again. The president states in writing that he is not going to obey and will not be bound by four parts of a law duly passed by the Congress.

Just so you know that we''''re not talking about the naming of a bridge or a new ship, the four provisions of the act which the president is going to ignore are:

* the establishment of a commission to investigate contractor fraud in Afghanistan and Iraq

* the protection for whistleblowers who report contractor fraud from harassment or official retribution

* a requirement that U.S. intelligence agencies respond to Congressional requests for documents

* a ban on funding for any permanent military bases in Iraq, and on any actions that would seek to give the U.S. control over Iraq''''s oil resources or oil
money.

Still think we are in Iraq to get the ''''terist?''''; Reply to this comment


by etherplain February 4, 2008 4:28 PM EST: Ok, about Obama''s health plan. What is bothering me is that Obama and his camp seem to be painting Clinton''s health plan as some kind of big-brother boogyman project. Ok, but there''s two things about that. 1) Clinton''s plan allows those with healthcare to maintain their current arrangement 2) Obama''s plan Mandates all children. Ok so Mr. Obama, what''s your plan for enforcing your mandate??? Gonna garnish the future wages of the kids? NO! Your going to go after their parents (and we''re talking about kids up to age 25 I believe). I believe if Universal Healthcare is really going to work, then everyone needs to be covered. If only "healthy" people don''t get healthcare then the premiums will be higher for all. And if that Healthy person does get sick, we''ll all still end up paying for it in the end. Obama said it himself that if someone "games the system" there would be repercussions...ok, so if I don''t get insurance and get sick, then your going to garnish my wages and make me pay "back dues"? What''s the difference here??!; Reply to this comment


by dinslc February 4, 2008 3:46 PM EST: Obama''s plan doesn''t "leave" anyone without insurance.

Anyone who wants insurance under Obama''s plan would have it. If anyone CHOSE not to have insurance, it''d be because of their own decision, not because they got "left" behind by anyone.; Reply to this comment


by conservatdan February 4, 2008 2:55 PM EST: Let us look at McCain%u2019s conservative credentials:

-IMMIGRATION: he wrote the bill granting amnesty to illegal immigrants
-TAXES: he voted against the Bush tax cuts multiple times (he has since flip-flopped and has campaigned as a lifelong tax-cutter)
-PROFESSIONAL ETHICS: ringleader of the infamous Keating 5 ethical scandal which cost US tax payers $160 billion (Google it)
-PERSONAL ETHICS: McCain cheated on his first wife after she had a severe accident that left her partially disabled. He then divorced her and married his multi-millionaire mistress, whose daddy bought McCain a spot in the Congress; Reply to this comment