IOWA CITY, Iowa, May 29, 2007
Obama Unveils Universal Health Care Plan
Government, Businesses And Consumers Would Share The Program's Cost
-
Photo
Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., speaks during a Memorial Day reception with veterans in Davenport, Iowa, on May 28, 2007, (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)
Obama said his plan could save the average consumer $2,500 a year and bring health care to all. Campaign aides estimated the cost of the program at $50 billion to $65 billion a year, financed largely by eliminating tax cuts that are scheduled to expire. President Bush wants to make those cuts permanent.
"The time has come for universal, affordable health care in America," Obama said in a speech in Iowa City, at the University of Iowa's medical school.
While Obama's plan is aimed at expanding coverage, he said cutting costs was also essential.
"We have reached a point in this country where the rising costs of health care has put too many families and businesses on a collision course with financial ruin and left too many with no coverage at all," Obama said. "This cost crisis is trapping us in a vicious cycle."
Obama's plan retains the private insurance system but injects additional money to pay for expanding coverage. It would also create a National Health Insurance Exchange to monitor insurance companies in offering the coverage.
Those who can't afford coverage would get a subsidy on a sliding scale depending on their income, and virtually all businesses would have to share in the cost of coverage for their workers. The plan is similar to the one covering members of Congress.
Obama's package would prohibit insurance companies from refusing coverage because of pre-existing conditions.
The plan doesn't have the mandate that rival Democratic candidate John Edwards is proposing to ensure that all Americans get coverage. The 2004 Democratic vice presidential nominee would require everyone to have health insurance, much like state requirements for auto insurance for every driver. Both candidates would require businesses to help cover their workers.
New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, who oversaw a massive but unsuccessful project to overhaul the nation's health care system while she was first lady, has promised universal health care but has yet to provide specifics.
"My plan begins by covering every American. If you already have health insurance, the only thing that will change for you under this plan is that the amount of money you will spend on premiums will be less," Obama said. "If you are one of 45 million Americans who don't have health insurance, you will after this plan becomes law."
Obama also called for a series of steps to overhaul the current health care system. He would spend more money boosting technology in the health industry such as electronic recordkeeping, put in place better management for chronic diseases and create a reinsurance pool for catastrophic illnesses to take the burden of their costs off of other premium payers.
His plan also envisions savings from ending the expensive care for the uninsured when they get sick. That care now is often provided at emergency rooms. The plan also would put a heavy focus on preventing disease through lifestyle changes.
Obama conceded that the overall cost of the program would be high.
"To help pay for this, we will ask all but the smallest businesses who don't make a meaningful contribution to the health coverage of their workers to do so to support this plan," said Obama. "And we also will repeal the temporary Bush tax cut for the wealthiest taxpayers."
Unveiling the proposal marks a crucial step for Obama. Serving in his first term as a senator, Obama often is criticized as not having the experience to be a serious candidate for the party's nomination.
Some also see him as offering more style than substance, and he's clearly hoping that spelling out a detailed plan to offer health care for all will deflect those criticisms. Polls also have shown that voters rank health care as among their top concerns.
© MMVII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Video and Galleries from Politics
-
Video
The Debate Over Healthcare
-
Video
U.S. Global Military Efforts
-
Video
Obama Wishes Happy 4th
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 70 CommentsThis price looks fine to me!!
Given the cost of the war in Iraq it looks like The USA can afford this one easy. I'd bet Americans would much rather have billion spent on health care then the deaths of thousands of people, and the creation of millions of homeless in an unjust and unnecessary war.
EVERYONE knows the insurance copmanies and others will have any chance of a health care bill killed.
10 to 1 there are 1,000 lobbyist paying off Congress to drop any health care ideas being offered long before the hype and photo op dies.
now we gotta pay high school kids the hiked minimum wage of 7 + bucks an hour and pay insurance for them now...
Kind of like her husband...oops, no, he left a surplus. How is booosh going to leave a surplus?
Afterall, do you really want George Bush having access to all of your PAPP smears, mammograms, and prostate exams????
...
Afterall, do you really want George Bush having access to all of your PAPP smears, mammograms, and prostate exams????
...
Afterall, do you really want George Bush having access to all of your PAPP smears, mammograms, and prostate exams????
...
Think of that the next time you take a pill for some ache or pain. It was a "big drug company", not the federal government who created it for you.
Why are you blaming Bush for the guest worker program? Congress is writing bills for this...the same Democratic Congress that was supposed to take care of the people (us).....
Neither side represents us, so I don't why you people still argue about this.
Watch out Obama! The health care industry is powerful, has allies in every corner of Washington and will stop at no length to make sure you do not enact your goals of universal health care for all!
I wonder if the law that the Republican congress passed applies to them.
Thank you neo cons for all you do...
2. Make no mistake about it, the government will need control costs just as the health insurance companies do, yet I suspect that the same libs will have no problem with the government trying to keep costs down....can you say rationing (as in Canada)
Afterall, do you really want George Bush having access to all of your PAPP smears, mammograms, and prostate exams????
...
Afterall, do you really want George Bush having access to all of your PAPP smears, mammograms, and prostate exams????
...
Why not just have National Health Insurance like in Canada??? Think of how much good it would do all of our uninsured citizens! And our corporations who struggle to compete with foreign businesses that come from countries WITH National Health Insurance (or even National Health Care, where doctors are employees of the government)!!!!!
Another opportunity for the Democrats to take the lead appears to be slipping away....
We're about to give free healthcare to 20 million poor guest "workers" from the South anyway. This will all be a mute point in a few years. And yes, both sides seem to be for this (Dem v Rep) even though one side is against it (People v Gov). Who reps the people anymore?
Posted by limited94
I'll give you a hint, it's not the corporate plutocrats... Government is not inherently evil. When we figure out that these so-called American corporations, e.g. -Halliburton, are driven by greed and have no loyalty to the U.S., the only chance we will have, as the founding fathers understood, will come in the form of a representative government.
Maybe those Americans WITHOUT health insurance, can leave this country, go to Mexico, come back over the border, and get coverage free. That might work even better.
And charge us the same premiums and co-pays that the Congressmen/Congresswomen are charged?
I'd be willing to take it sight unseen.
Afterall, do you really want George Bush having access to all of your PAPP smears, mammograms, and prostate exams????
...
Posted by lilvinnyb
There is a major difference. FEMA was deliberately undermined by an administration who didn't believe there was a legitimate role for them... If an administration believes in a program and funds it adequately, in lieu of tax cuts for the wealthy, the results are quite different.
Posted by dogsoul
Probably because the rest of the world is doing no such thing.
"Public health measures have been responsible for many of the major improvements in the health of Canadians. Today, Canadians are healthier and live longer than they ever have previously."
www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/19573.html
www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/idcplg?IdcService=SS
While these countries have experienced, and continue to experience, problems with their public health care systems, they are apparently not looking to return the spiraling, greed driven, costs that made health care unaccessible for most of their citizens.
Huh? Yeah... let's just go with that crackpot theory that it was 'deliberately' undermined... okay, now let's think to how well that benefitted the administration... hmmm....
"If an administration believes in a program and funds it adequately, in lieu of tax cuts for the wealthy, the results are quite different."
Okay, let's look at various administrations in various countries who did just that, shall we? They believed in it, funded the heck out of it, taxed people like mad... and what resulted??? Bad health care for all & a totally bankrupt system... with little to no medical advancements to boot...
Look, the world is as it is... and despite what you may think in that 'evil corporation' mindset of yours, the fact is that your ideas have been tried over & over again - much to the harm & dismay of those who were stuck with 'the results'...
HA! The Canadian system is a JOKE! It's broke, bankrupt - and has virtually ceased to produce any new medicine... of course, what does a Canadian do when they REALLY need quality health care? That's right, hop on down to our neck of the woods... Besides, there are an infinite number of demographic variables that effect life expectancy which are different for each country... were you raised in an amusement park or something?
Afterall, do you really want George Bush having access to all of your PAPP smears, mammograms, and prostate exams????
...
Posted by dogsoul
FEMA was in fact gutted, staffing was cut drastically and funding was also cut. That's fact. The man chosen to head it was a show horse judge with no emergency management experience. That's not theory. Unfortunately it was the administrations belief "theory," that government has no legitimate role to play in our lives, that turned out to be the real "crackpot." The fact is that it's your ideas that have been tried over and over. It didn't work for Herbet Hoover and it's not "trickeling down" all that much now... Look, the present health care system works for you... that's fine. I could care less about those who never stop proclaiming their so-called "self-made" superiority. I'm concerned for those millions of Americans, mostly children, who no longer have affordable access to health care.
Posted by dogsoul
Sorry dogsoul but that was comparing Candians under the old system to Canadians under the current system. No new variables were introduced... Amusement park? Must be nice to be so inherently superior.
You see... that's precisely it - for YOU, and those like you... it doesn't matter what actually works & what doesn't... what's been tried before & failed... it's all about what makes you feel all warm & cuddly inside. I am the one who truly cares about those children, and I am the one who is trying to protect them from a socialized system that has been proven to be disasterous every time it's been tried. The fact that you would have this country adopt a health care system that, in the end, would harm far more people than it helps doesn't matter to you... because for you, it's whatever slogan or mantra you've been trained to repeat... it's about 'coming off' as caring versus doing what is necessary to care for people.
I almost died at 17. Spent 4 months in a hospital. A good hospital.. Barely made it- I'm fine now.
The total cost for my care was over $300,000 (In 1982 dollars). Due to my father's union insurance, he was presented with a bill for $990.00 for radiology, and $10,000 for doctors care. The remaining balance was paid by his union insurance.
Nice huh? But the point is that someone with a McJob, bad luck, or a pre-existing condition in my situation is going to DIE. And if perchance they survive, a $300,000 medical bill pretty much equals death for most working people.
Anyone tried declaring bankruptcy lately?? It's not too easy to get out from under any more.
There has to be a baseline level of care, which doesn't discriminate, available to all citizens. It's a must... and it's the moral thing to do.
A hybrid nationalized system, where commercial health plans and a national health plan can meet is an excellent choice.
People opposed to this need to rethink their stand based on something outside of party politics.
Posted by dogsoul at 05:24 PM : May 29, 2007
You know every time this subject comes up you fascist trot out this argument. YOU never point to any Country that has tried it and reversed itself...in fact NO NATION that has Universal Health Care is even concidering and in fact is running from our system. It is without a doubt the worst system there is, costing more and providing less care for the people than any on the planet. But hey why should you who have enough money to afford to buy the doctors you need and to buy the care you need care about the rest of us. Sparky, go to CANADA and spew your garbage but take a couple of idiots from the Reich with you to protect you as you exit.
What good do LIES do? Their Health Care System covers FAR more than ours does and cost far less. OUR's is the most expensive on the planet and you fascist just do not care. The folks in Canada will gladly tell you they like their system far better than ours...far better.
Doesn't providing cheaper health care for the insured, and coverage for the uninsured, do exactly what you are claiming the present system does (but actually doesn't)?
The present system doesn't care for those children and uninsured folks. If it did- we wouldn't be having this discussion. We wouldn't have millions without health insurance.
If you blame big business for the state of health costs you are blaming the very mechanism that caused the problem.
I think the question to be asking is how to get 45 million people insured. Not saber rattling horse-*** based in partisan orgy-land.
Admittedly, both parties smell bad. But for God's sake don't kill messengers with semi-solutions, that might make things better, by using right or left rhetoric.
To do so is to be less than a patriot.
Unless of course you want to get the degree and go treat those kids yourself.
"Buy insurance or we will put you in jail."
That does not sound like much of a plan to me.
fartknocker, We have the highest gas prices ever right now with the oilboys.
Bush came out with a new healthcare plan over the weekend that I bet you'll like. He wants to perform medical experiments on patients without their consent, including on children as young as 15. Your tax dollars at work.
lestb,you're already working January til June for the pharmacuetical industry.Here's what I mean:
drug consumer price active ingredient cost
Celebrex $130.27 (100 mg) $.60
Claritin $215.17(100 tabs) $.71
Lipitor(20mg) $272.37 $5.80
Paxil(20mg) $220.27 $7.60
Prevacid(30mg) $44.77 $1.01
Prilosec(100 tabs) $360.97 $.52
Prozac $247.47 $.11
Xanax(100 tabs) $136.79 $.024
Zocor(100 tabs) $350.27 $8.63
Zoloft(50mg) $206.87 $1.75
These stats are from a Budget analyst for the U.S. Dept. of Commerce.
Afterall, do you really want George Bush having access to all of your PAPP smears, mammograms, and prostate exams????
...
According to what I've read, the only plans any presidential candidates have involves requiring, by law, people to buy health care insurance.
And, that was the foundation for Hillary's aborted health care "plan" when she was Slick Willie's co-president. It is the foundation for Edwards' health care plan. Obama hasn't specified how he would force everyone to participate, but we can conclude it would be under penalty of law.
I fail to understand why we need to involve insurance companies at all. Seems to me that is where much of the unnecessary expenses occur.
"I personally know of two illegal aliens going through cancer treatment scott free. That's about 100K per patient at tax payers expense. No body illegal gets turned away and I don't think anyone legal gets turned away either through medicaid."
Medicaid doesn't kick in until you have NO assets left (that would include your house). It is tailor-made for illegals who already have nothing. It is not tailor-made for legals who hope to survive their illness but have nothing to go back to.
How about this:
1. subsidized med school for top students, who would pay back by:
2. working for the first four years in public hospitals, funded by
3. levy sin taxes on cigarettes, liquor, gasoline, legalized marijuana, prostitution, and gambling.
4. Hospital construction maintenance, paid for by value-added taxes, and by repaid grants from big Pharma's profits on subsidized R&D, and market-value rent for companies operating on state, or federal owned land
5. Fully deductible medical expenses from income tax liability.
6. eliminate mandatory HMO membership, and all mandatory requirements to enter into policies with private, for profit insurance companies, inclusive of "no-fault" auto insurance by private companies.
7. create a "buffer fund" from fines for drug crimes, corporate and other business criminal fines, fines levied on states for not meeting federal standards for food safety, pollution, land degradation, deforestation, and water quality standards.
8. decrease military spending, and apply the savings to the buffer fund.
Effects would be felt almost immediately by the public, and requires no increase in personal income tax.
I propose answers, while the neocons and the neolibs argue semantics and avoid any really workable answers, and the truly ignorant blame illegal aliens...
We have many ambitious young men and older men that apparently have no qualifications whatsoever of being statesmen! But we continue to call them statesmen ANYWAY because of our PRIDE! We don't want to admit that we're not producing great men.
In reality, these so called statesmen are nothing more than cleaver politicians. (Totally incompetent in their positions of leadership!)
They don't care about the poor. How long has it been since you've seen homes being built that poor people could afford to purchase? (40 years--50 years?)
Believe it or not, there was a time in the America when ANYONE could afford a home. Nowadays, people want $150,000 for a clapboard shack and $185,000 for a two bedroom, concrete block home! It's disgusting and loathing how our community has regressed to this level of degenerate character.
When these types of conditions exist in a society, it's the mark of a decadent age for that society.
children under 18, and supplementals for medicare,
and put a limit on how many doctors visits are allowed.
It would have to be rigidly run and supervised which means that it just won't work.
Posted by fizzal at 01:28 AM : May 30, 2007
DITTO!
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 70 Comments