MyDD :: VIDEO: Elizabeth Edwards on Countdown with Keith Olberman

VIDEO: Elizabeth Edwards on Countdown with Keith Olberman

by NCDemAmy, Wed Apr 09, 2008 at 09:52:08 PM EST

In recent weeks, Elizabeth Edwards has been speaking out against McCain's so called health care plan.

Tonight, she appeared on Countdown with Keith Olberman where she told Keith that while she is not endorsing Hillary, she does prefer her health care plan. This should come as no surprise as Hillary's plan more closely resembles John Edwards' UHC plan, than does Obama's.

The key difference between Obama's and Clinton's healthcare plans is that Obama's lacks a mandate. Without a mandate, far fewer Americans will have coverage. As Elizabeth stated on Olberman, a lack of a mandate drives up costs.

While Elizabeth does prefer Clinton's health care plan, she also pointed out that both of the remaining Democratic Presidential candidates' plans are far superior to McCain's.

Tags: Elizabeth Edwards, universal health care plan, hillary clinton, barack obama, mccain (all tags)

Permalink :: 69 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: VIDEO: Elizabeth Edwards on Countdown with Kei (2.00 / 15)

another key difference between hillary's plan and obama's plan is that hillary's plan includes mental health parity- treatment of mental disorders on a par with physical disorders.

by campskunk on Wed Apr 09, 2008 at 09:54:46 PM EST

Re: VIDEO: Elizabeth Edwards on Countdown with Kei (2.00 / 16)

Every plan needs to include a full mental health parity.

Edwards' plan did and in fact, his plan would treat mental health issues the same as physical health issues.

by NCDemAmy on Wed Apr 09, 2008 at 10:05:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes (2.00 / 7)

and many aren't paying attention to it. Obama's play just calls for improved mental health coverage.

Thanks for the video.

Check out the New Progressive Blog EENRBLOG

by dk2 on Wed Apr 09, 2008 at 10:17:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Pre-existing conditions, drugs, self-employed (2.00 / 4)

Any way you slice the numbers, for anyone who has someone in their family who has a pre-existing condition, takes prescription drugs or if the insured is self-employed or unemployed (not a member of a group)

Hillary's plan is clearly both comprehensive and affordable, but the usual problems we see now will still apply with Obama's plan, which can end up having huge costs in some situations.

For example, as Edwards brings up here, very few people (she uses the example that she and Se. McCain could possibly afford the insurance, but not many other people could) could afford to get insurance under McCain's and Obama's plan.

The reason being that it would cost too much, even if they were not allowed to turn anyone away (if they had the money- which could be thousands of dollars a month) Also, the way Obama saves money is to give people the 'choice' of buying plans that leave more and more expenses out. Thats going to mean that people still wont be able to afford things they need, because they will cost extra. Even the healthy among the middle class and especially, the working poor quite probably won't be able to afford anything comprehensive coverage. They may be technically 'insured' but it will be coverage with a lot of gaps.

The result of this will be the continued mess, the same problems that we have now, and medical costs will continue to rise as Obama is doing nothing to contain them. Hillary, at least, limits the amount that individuals or families will be asked to pay in any given year for complete coverage to 5-10% of income, which is FAR less than what people could have to pay under Obama and especially McCain. If someone with cancer under the Obama or McCain plans goes shopping for insurance, under McCain, they will pay comparably to what they pay now which is to say it could be a HUGE amount of money, or go without coverage which means they will rapidly be stripped of everything they own by bills.

Under Obama, its not clear but there doesn't seem to be any mechanism to limit costs - Instead, you will pay what the plan does not. Many younger people dont seem to understand this, perhaps the truth is too disturbing. They think they will be young and healthy forever, but look at how we blew our chance in 1994, and now its basically 13 years later and still no solution. That WILL happen again if we blow it now and its why so much money os flowing to Obama and his anemic plan.

Under Hillary its clear that peole will not be stripped of everything they own by illnesses as they are now, and the way she does this is by covering everybody.

Also, the problems with insurance rescission will continue under Obama/McCain which means that when someone gets seriously ill, the insurance company has a huge financial incentive to drop them and if possible, find a way to get them to repay the money they have spent out on their behalf.

They hire people to comb people's past medical records looking for a misstatement and then they sue for money paid out and drop the person. Sometimes, they just make something up (if they think you are too poor to afford to hire a lawyer)

The only way around this is to make coverage universal. I'm afraid both Obama and McCain are rearranging deck chairs on a Titanic of a medical nightmare and Hillary at least is trying to craft a system that works for people.

I know the right is terrified of Hillary because they feel healthcare will end up cutting into millitary spending but the alternative is literally letting the healthcare industry KILL thousands of people a year, far more than Iraq and Sept 11 combined, by witholding care.

This WILL effect almost every American, if you get sick, it will hit you in the wallet when you can least afford it.

Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Without a REAL committment to it, we WON'T win in November.

by architek on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 08:46:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

HRC Plan (none / 0)

Is unrealistic. There is no way that Hillary's plan will get through Congress with a mandate. I am young and I do not want my government forcing me to take health care. If it is affordable and available, fine. But to force health care on individuals is not going to happen here. What makes everyone think that Hillary is going to be successful this time around with universal/mandated health care?

by regina1983 on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 09:14:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Plan (2.00 / 5)

The only way for health care to be affordable for all is to have a mandate. With everyone in the system, costs go down for everyone.

by moevaughn on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 09:30:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Plan (none / 0)

Not necessarily. Mandates can be expensive and to force those that are scraping by in general to pay for health care may it be by garnishing paychecks is ridiculous.

by regina1983 on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 09:39:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Plan (2.00 / 5)

People who cannot afford to pay the premiums, would be subsized or get free coverage if they qualify.

Just as checks are garnished for unpaid child support, it may be necessary to do so in extreme cases where individuals refuse to get coverage.

If everyone is covered, the system will be more efficient and everyone will have to pay less for coverage.

As it stands now, those who do have coverage, are paying outrageous premiums while we still have 47 million left out. This is insane.

by NCDemAmy on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 09:54:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

What is the limit on medical bills per year as % (2.00 / 3)

of income under Obama's plan?

For example, if I 'choose' the $300/month plan that has a monthly cap on benefits of $3000, and I get i a car accident that leaves me paralyzed, will I have to pay the difference between the real costs and that $3000 a month that s covered? The difference could be hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Suicides because of medical costs are rising rapidly. Will Obama's plan address the causes of that, or will he offer some other equity-protection arrangement for families like Hillary does with her 5-10% of yearly income cap on medical expenses under her plan?

or could people still end up owing hundreds of thousands of dollars if they fail to predict when they might get ill and buy the more expensive plan in advance? (but then also get kicked off and have the insurance company go after what had already been paid if it turns out that they withheld information to get into the plan, perhaps to save money on premiums of get accepted, even though they had some illness.)

Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Without a REAL committment to it, we WON'T win in November.

by architek on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 10:18:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Would there just be one COMPREHENSIVE plan ... (2.00 / 2)

under Obama-lite, or would low-income people be able to 'SAVE MONEY'on premiums at the entry point, by giving up benefits later? In other words, by having less of their bills paid?

I guess what I am asking is would there be a number of different plans for different income levels, that woukd differentiate BY LEAVING MORE AND MORE OUT OF THE PAYMENTS THE LESS ONE PAID UPFRONT?

also, once a family member got sick, could you switch plans from the cheap plan, to the plan that paid more?

In other words, if I made minimum wage, and I got the cheapest Obama package, which might cost me $300/month, could I then switch to a more expensive plan if I got cancer, so that they wouldn't take the money I had been saving for my retirement with the uncovered expenses?

Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Without a REAL committment to it, we WON'T win in November.

by architek on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 10:25:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Would there just be one COMPREHENSIVE plan ... (2.00 / 2)

Excellent questions. I don't have all of the answers regarding details such as that of Obama's plan.

But, I don't think that his plan would provide for people to switch plans regardless of pre-existing conditions, considering his plan is not universal, (doesn't cover all adults).

by NCDemAmy on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 10:45:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Would there just be one COMPREHENSIVE plan ... (2.00 / 2)

if minimum wage is $8.25, then a 40 hour week would mean that this $300/month package would be a quarter of my income...

by jentwisl on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 11:39:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

People would not pay more than 5-10% of income (none / 0)

she has made that clear.

And it would be for comprehensive coverage, not cosh-shifted coverage with lots of holes like Obama is pushing.

Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Without a REAL committment to it, we WON'T win in November.

by architek on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 01:51:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: HRC Plan (2.00 / 5)

Being young...I can tell you that I went uninsured for many years in my 20's. I also had little sick time off. I would have appreciated UHC because insurance was unaffordable until I had an employer who was willing to help out.

You are losing sight of folks like Lance Armstrong. He was young when he was diagnosed with cancer. Knock on wood, he's still in remission. But even he wants affordable health care for the young and thus, everyone being in the system makes sense to keep the cost down.

by benny06 on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 09:45:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: HRC Plan (2.00 / 6)

We have a majority in Congress and may have a super majority after the next election.

I think it is quite possible that Hillary's UHC would make it through Congress.

As far as the government, forcing you, consider that many of us don't want to be forced to pay to pick up the slack on an inefficient system because so many don't have coverage.

I don't mind paying taxes into working, functional programs for those who cannot afford insurance but I do mind paying outrageous insurance premiums, (a total waste of money), because 47 million Americans lack coverage.

by NCDemAmy on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 09:51:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

If not, consider this. Its been 13 years since (2.00 / 4)

Obama's healthcare guy Jim Cooper killed the Clinton universal healthcare plan.

If we end up with McCain or Obama, will we have to endure stuff like this for another 13 years while the various stakeholders cash in and make trillions of dollars - and people DIE because they can't afford some $0.11 cent drug that costs $300/month because their plan doesn't cover phramacy benefits to keep it 'affordable'?

So that it can be offered cheaply enough that 'nobody is turned away'?

http://www.latimes.com/features/health/l a-fi-healthinsure-sg,1,3627886.storygall ery

Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Without a REAL committment to it, we WON'T win in November.

by architek on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 10:30:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: HRC Plan (none / 0)

I think that if we had a majority that could pass Single Payer after the elections it is possible that we would see it happen regardless of which one is President.

It is unrelated, sort of, but I know there are fights in many states to pass it at the state level (we are working on it here in PA...in fact I am working with a candidate for the State Senate who makes that her central issue.)

I read the body count out of the paper; now it's written all over my face.

by JDF on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 02:44:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama might veto it. He's made it clear he is (none / 0)

against the only kinds of universal coverage that would make it affordable for everybody.

(mandates or single payer)
That is the experience of many other countries. The rules of economics are not somehow different in the US.

In fact, the expense makes these lessons even harsher.

We should assume that the Presidential candidate, whoever it is, may not be successful for years and work to bring something about sooner.

Obama isn't even going to try to attack this until the last year of his term, 2012 (four years from now)

Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Without a REAL committment to it, we WON'T win in November.

by architek on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 01:56:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: HRC Plan (2.00 / 3)

I'm sorry but your youth is showing here

Health Care is a necessity & whether it be via a mandate or some other mechanism EVERYONE needs to be insured.
We have a Dem. majority in Congress which is possibly the BEST time to get the health care mandate passed.

by jrsygrl on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 11:17:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: HRC Plan (none / 0)

That's true, and the reason that the Clinton campaign doesn't use the term "mandate" in their proposal. Mandate in it's current form hearkens to those "unfunded mandates" evident in NCLB, and the term is radioactive right now. I've actually been surprised that she has used the term mandate on the stump, but the lack of concern with this sort of detail was part of the problem in '92 that brought the house of cards crashing down on her first attempt at reform.

by bookish on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 02:00:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: HRC Plan (none / 0)

That's like saying there's no "Hope" for changing Washington, it is what it is.

C'mon. You have to try.

Hillary (the winner) will go to congress with a majority of democrats. Of course she can get this through - IF PEOPLE MAKE THIS A PRIORITY.

At least with Hillary's plan - the negotiations start with much more on our side of the table.

by nikkid on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 05:22:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes (none / 0)

That is incorrect. Please see my comment below.

by bookish on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 01:54:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VIDEO: Elizabeth Edwards on Countdown with Kei (none / 0)

You are wrong. Please get your facts correct instead of misleading people.

From Obama's healthcare proposal:

Improve Mental Health Care. Mental illness affects approximately one in five American families. The National Alliance on Mental Illness estimates that untreated mental illnesses cost the U.S. more than $100 billion per year. As president, Obama will support mental health parity so that coverage for serious mental illnesses are provided on the same terms and conditions as other illnesses and diseases.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/health care/

by bookish on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 01:44:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VIDEO: Elizabeth Edwards on Countdown with Kei (2.00 / 2)

What does "serious mental illnesses" mean? That doesn't sound like a full mental health parity to me. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

by NCDemAmy on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 02:03:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VIDEO: Elizabeth Edwards on Countdown with Kei (none / 0)

I think you're parsing, so I'll return the favor.

Nowhere in Clinton's plan does it mention "full" mental health parity. What is the coverage gap in her plan? Please provide sources, as I've done so for you.

by bookish on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 02:32:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VIDEO: Elizabeth Edwards on Countdown with Kei (none / 0)

No, there is a difference between having a mental health parity and not having one. Covering some serious mental illnesses (iow, only a portion) is not the same.

Edwards had one in his UHC plan as does Hillary:

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/he althcareplan/summary.aspx

by NCDemAmy on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 05:58:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VIDEO: Elizabeth Edwards on Countdown with Kei (none / 0)

Obama's plan says he supports mental health parity. Then follows up to say so that serious mental illness is covered. I'm not sure what you want. Are you under an assumption that he doesn't want the other covered? Or is he saying that we need parity so that people with debilitating mental disease get the help they need? It's either parity or it's not.

by bookish on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 10:14:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VIDEO: Elizabeth Edwards on Countdown with Kei (2.00 / 11)

She is such an awesome lady. Thanks for the video!

And so, may evil beware and may good dress warmly and eat lots of fresh vegetables.

by thatpurplestuff on Wed Apr 09, 2008 at 10:00:18 PM EST

Re: VIDEO: Elizabeth Edwards on Countdown with Kei (2.00 / 13)

it seems like she is making who she prefers known , short of an endorsement

Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.

by lori on Wed Apr 09, 2008 at 10:02:03 PM EST

Re: VIDEO: Elizabeth Edwards on Countdown with Kei (2.00 / 11)

Elizabeth's repeated statements about Hillary's plan makes her preference clear. It's a compelling "endorsement" coming from her because 1) she has had issues with Hillary in the past and 2) She has a terminal illness. I'd venture to say that hillary impressed Elizabeth in the "interview" with the Edwards.

TexasDarlin blog

by TexasDarlin on Wed Apr 09, 2008 at 10:07:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: clear preference (2.00 / 4)

Yes. Her statement towards the end makes her preference very clear:

A health plan without a mandate is half a plan.

Guess we can figure out who has the half plan and who has a whole, complete plan!

by moevaughn on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 09:17:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VIDEO: Elizabeth Edwards on Countdown with Kei (2.00 / 5)

Elizabeth is making it crystal clear that she prefers Hillary's health care plan. No doubt about that.

But, there may be other issues where she prefers Obama's plan.

Elizabeth is focusing on healthcare though.

I'm not sure she will reveal who she votes for in our NC primary, May 6th! It would interesting to know, even though Elizabeth has said, she doesn't feel her endorsement would carry as much weight as the MSM is making it out to be.

by NCDemAmy on Wed Apr 09, 2008 at 10:09:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VIDEO: Elizabeth Edwards on Countdown with Kei (2.00 / 3)

I agree... it seems clear that she is going out of her way NOT to endorse anyone... In fact, KO asked her pointedly if she was endorsing and she did not.

I think she is supporting the Democrat... something to consider.

Like the nominee, don't like the nominee... Our nominee is still better than John McCain...

by JenKinFLA on Wed Apr 09, 2008 at 10:46:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Anyone who has ever been seriously ill can see the (2.00 / 4)

HUGE differences between the plans. But other people wont catch the devil in the details. IF the goal of insurance is to give people peace of mind if they get seriously ill they should vote for Hillary. Honestly, the difference can be hundreds of thousands of dollars in the case of someone who has cancer. Given that one in six of us will get cancer in their lifetime. (The list of diseases that make you uninsurable is pretty long) and that people with serious diseases often lose their jobs - the reason to vote Hillary is a huge one.

Honestly, can you Obama supporters give me one REAL reason to vote Obama? I have not heard ONE.

Here is a excellent keynote speech by Elizabeth Edwards in which she describes a number of situations in which Hillary's healthcare will work but both McCains and Obama's dont change anything which is to say they throw people to the wolves just as happens now.

Watch it. There's a transcript too.

http://www.kaisernetwork.org/health_cast /hcast_index.cfm?display=detail&hc=2 532

Some of the other speeches at that Health Jornalism conference are interesting too.. particularly for the stories of how people's lives are torn apart by illness. medical bills are huge. They can run into millions of dollars. Thats whether you are rich or poor, you still will owe.

This is NOT some little trivial issue like some of you try to imply it is.

Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Without a REAL committment to it, we WON'T win in November.

by architek on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 08:59:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Anyone who has ever been seriously ill can see (none / 0)

You must be, or think you are, very important to use all of that bold...

I read the body count out of the paper; now it's written all over my face.

by JDF on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 02:46:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Look as a HRC supporter I know that the odds are (2.00 / 1)

she will not get the nomination - no matter how angry that makes me (and I think we are all going to pay the collective price for that). I would think, at this point,even if the Edwards' have a preference they may be leaving it alone so as not to further create a divide in the party.

by jrsygrl on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 11:18:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

endorsements (none / 0)

That may well be the reason for the Edwardses not endorsing. Good point.

Edwards, along with other party elders, such as Gore and Carter, are remaining neutral, perhaps so not to further the divide in the party.

by NCDemAmy on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 02:05:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: endorsements (2.00 / 1)

I thought Carter endorsed Obama? I'll admit I heard this as a headline before changing the channel so I could be mistaken - but I was upset when I heard it.

by jrsygrl on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 02:57:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: endorsements (2.00 / 1)

Carter's family admires Obama, but no endorsement.

by benny06 on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 05:52:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: short of an endorsement (2.00 / 1)

Lori,

riddle me this:

Elizabeth Edwards' focus in this campaign has always been on health care.

She clearly prefers Hillary's UHC plan (as do I, by the way)

Still, she is NOT ENDORSING HRC.

Doesn't that mean she must have some major reservations concerning other aspects of Hillary?

I mean, were you listening? She said she'd even applaud McCain if he came up with a reasonable UHC plan.

Would you call that "short of an endorsement", too?

"The way to win a Presidential race against the Republicans is to develop the class warfare issue..." Lee Atwater, Bush `88 campaign manager.

by aufklaerer on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 06:10:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: short of an endorsement (2.00 / 3)

Not necessarily. I don't think we can assume she has serious reservations concerning other aspects of Hillary. Same goes for how she may feel about Obama.

Perhaps, she and John Edwards decided not to endorse for other reasons. Maybe they felt they should not attempt to influence the primary since they had been opponents of both candidates.

Point being, we don't know their reasons for not endorsing.

by NCDemAmy on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 08:09:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

It's nice to see... (2.00 / 8)

Keith Olbermann not bashing Hillary Clinton for a change.

by soyousay on Wed Apr 09, 2008 at 10:05:45 PM EST

Re: It's nice to see... (2.00 / 2)

KO has always pointed out that BOTH democrats are better then McCain.

Obama said, as Bill beamed. "Thank you, President Clinton."

by TruthMatters on Wed Apr 09, 2008 at 10:14:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's nice to see... (2.00 / 2)

True. How could he not? lol.

He stayed fairly neutral tonight though as far as Hillary vs. Barack.

by NCDemAmy on Wed Apr 09, 2008 at 10:15:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

As a KO fan I have had to stop watching (2.00 / 2)

his show. Hillary Clinton has not been treated fairly at all by the MSM.

by jrsygrl on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 11:21:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Thank you, Elizabeth, for speaking out (2.00 / 9)

Universally mandated health care is definitely the way to go, and this is illustrated by the experience of Canada and the majority of First World countries. Otherwise, those who pay will wind up paying for the freak needs of the many who do not pay. We already do, so at least let us be efficient about it and not wait for someone to be in their advanced and most expensive stages.

Elizabeth does her homework; McCain does a gross, inhuman triage. Thank you for speaking out for all of us, Elizabeth. You're looking great, and we hope you feel as great as you look!

by CyberCitizen on Wed Apr 09, 2008 at 10:12:51 PM EST

Re: Thank you, Elizabeth, for speaking out (2.00 / 3)

McCain's own plan won't even cover himself, I mean its just a bad plan,

how any democrat could ever think of voting for him.

Obama said, as Bill beamed. "Thank you, President Clinton."

by TruthMatters on Wed Apr 09, 2008 at 10:15:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama's plan has many of the same drawbacks (2.00 / 5)

McCains does. Notice how the Obama fans here are devoting SO much effort to spinning this so that people dont realize this. DON'T LISTEN TO THEM.

If you ACTUALLY WATCH EDWARDS VIDEO at this link, or read the transcript, you will see what she is talking about.

The people here are trivializing the problems with Obama's plan, but they basically are huge.

The one that is particularly scary is that people will not get care they need when they are forced by the expenses of the comprehensive plans to choose the cheaper affordable plans. Its a GAMBLE and they will end up paying what the cheap 'affordable' plan does not or going without.

That will NOT give people peace of mind and sick people will still OFTEN have huge, UNCOVERED bills. They still will not be able to afford healthcare. But the statistics will say they are supposedly 'covered' . Thats what is happening - those are the people who end up with the huge bills, bills insurers wont pay. Did they think that they somehow dissapeared? THEY DON'T.

WATCH THIS VIDEO.. (scroll down to Keynote)

http://www.kaisernetwork.org/health_cast /hcast_index.cfm?display=detail&hc=2 532

Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Without a REAL committment to it, we WON'T win in November.

by architek on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 09:07:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's plan has many of the same drawbacks (2.00 / 0)

Yes, but in fairness, Obama's healthcare plan is far better than McCain's, who essentially does not have a plan.

by NCDemAmy on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 09:58:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VIDEO: Elizabeth Edwards on Countdown with Kei (none / 0)

I just noticed when I watched this on my Tivo. when Elizabeth is talking about the differences and she is saying why hillary's is better she uses 1 word alot. Mandates...Mandates....Mandates how will that play when Hillary is trying to sell that to rural vote? They don't like democrats because they think we are big government, they will hear MANDATES...MANDATES....MANDATES.

it will never pass in congress, we just don't have enough votes to get that passed be the american people. we have to do it in steps, and that is why I support Obama's plan, it has a great chance to get passed by Congress, and from there we have a first step to work from to get closer to truly Universal Health Care.

Obama said, as Bill beamed. "Thank you, President Clinton."

by TruthMatters on Wed Apr 09, 2008 at 10:19:50 PM EST

Re: VIDEO: Elizabeth Edwards on Countdown with Kei (2.00 / 7)

Well without a "mandate" there will be no Social Security, no Medicare, no Unemployment Insurance; heck there will not even be motor vehicle registrations/insurances. This is easy to explain to rural America. I guess that is why Hillary probably is doing better in rural America ...

by ScottinNJ on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 12:39:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Millions of dollars difference... (2.00 / 6)

Hows this, with a 'mandate'...

Your health expenses CAN'T cost you more than 5-10% a year. Without a mandate, the bills you get can EASILY end up costing 10,000% of your yearly income.

How could some rural family pay, say, a $1,000,000 hospital bill?

Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Without a REAL committment to it, we WON'T win in November.

by architek on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 09:11:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VIDEO: Elizabeth Edwards on Countdown with Kei (2.00 / 7)

It may not be detrimental to Hillary as you fear when a lot of people hear the word mandate they think of an obligation upon the government to do something like Social Security.

by alvic63 on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 02:16:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Mandates aren't that important (2.00 / 1)

Interestingly, Jacob Hacker--the Princeton political scientist who essentially designed the health care plan adopted by Clinton/Edwards and, to a lesser extent, Obama--doesn't think Mandates are all that important.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/comm entary/la-oe-hacker26feb26,0,3044897.sto ry

I do not believe that the individual mandate is essential to healthcare reform, as its supporters suggest. That's because Obama and Clinton have rightly rejected reform based on the individual purchase of insurance, choosing instead to allow most people to obtain subsidized coverage through their employers. By emphasizing the individual mandate, Clinton is shifting attention from this fundamental and popular feature of her (and Obama's) approach and actually may be hurting the cause she cares so deeply about.

Also, from another article:

According to an Urban Institute study released in 2003, uncompensated care for the uninsured constitutes less than 3% of all health expenditures. Even if the individual mandate works exactly as planned, that's the effective upper boundary on the mandate's impact.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/con tent/07_42/b4054081.htm

I just don't think the mandate is that important, and I think think it is a political loser in a general election.

by DPW on Wed Apr 09, 2008 at 10:26:09 PM EST

Mandates are very important (2.00 / 6)

I disagree. Without mandates, far fewer individuals will have coverage, which will drive up costs for everyone.

Moreover, those who don't have coverage, are less likely to seek preventative care or any care for that matter.

by NCDemAmy on Wed Apr 09, 2008 at 10:59:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Without a mandate, when you get sick (2.00 / 4)

they (the insurance companies) hire special investigators to try to kick you off of your insurance and 'recover' (by suing you) the money they have paid out on your behalf.. So people end up in NIGHTMARE SITUATIONS where they are lying in some hospital and suddenly, they have no insurance and have to get a lawyer with money they dont have to prevent the insurance company from taking their home, childrens college money, car, work tools, EVERYTHING.. and under the bankruptcy bill, if they get better, they will be paying for the rest of their lives. many people committ suicide. Listen to the other speeches at the conference to hear THOSE stories..

Its a nightmare and most Americans have NO IDEA of how bad it has become.

http://www.kaisernetwork.org/health_cast /hcast_index.cfm?display=detail&hc=2 532

http://www.latimes.com/features/health/l a-fi-healthinsure-sg,1,3627886.storygall ery

Previous insurance rescission coverage

(this web page includes links to these stories.. titles below, links at the above URL)

Healthcare insurance probe grows
By Lisa Girion
L.A. city attorney asks Blue Cross to substantiate claims that it has revised its rescission practices.
March 5, 2008

Health Net ordered to pay $9 million after canceling cancer patient's policy
By Lisa Girion
The punitive damage award is the first of its kind and has prompted the giant medical insurer to scrap practices that have recently come under fire.
February 23, 2008

INSURANCE
L.A. sues insurer over cancellations
By Lisa Girion
The city attorney says Health Net defrauded policyholders by dropping patients who needed costly care.
February 21, 2008

Doctors balk at request for data
By Lisa Girion
Physicians object to a letter from Blue Cross seeking information that could lead to policy cancellations.
February 12, 2008

Family rejects Blue Cross' claim
By Lisa Girion
After years of paying for a badly disabled boy's nursing care, the insurer said he no longer needed it. His parents hired a lawyer.
December 30, 2007

Health insurer tied bonuses to dropping sick policyholders
By Lisa Girion
One of the state's largest health insurers set goals and paid bonuses based in part on how many individual policyholders were dropped and how much money was saved.
November 9, 2007

Rules against health plan cancellations are delayed
Lisa Girion
A state agency drafting the regulations says the variety of policies is slowing the process.
August 29, 2007

Blue Cross undergoes exam
Lisa Girion
The health plan comes under fire during a state regulatory hearing. The company says members are well served.
August 8, 2007

INSURANCE
Complaints spark state hearing on Blue Cross
Lisa Girion
Regulators want to see whether the healthcare firm is adhering to an accord with California.
July 11, 2007

HEALTHCARE
Insurer cited in policy rescissions
Lisa Girion
BC Life mishandled more than half the cases reviewed by the state. Critics say regulators have not done enough.
July 3, 2007

The State
Blue Cross makes policy about-face
Lisa Girion
Blue Cross of California agreed Thursday to stop canceling individual health coverage unless it can show policyholder deception -- a major shift by the state's largest health insurer that could lead to sweeping industrywide changes.
May 11, 2007

INSURANCE
Halted health coverage suit may be far-reaching
Lisa Girion
An appeals court will weigh Blue Shield's retroactive cancellation of a car-crash patient.
May 7, 2007

HEALTHCARE
Doctors, hospitals join Blue Cross suit
The largest organizations representing California physicians and hospitals joined a lawsuit against Blue Cross of California on Thursday, accusing the state's largest health plan of illegally and routinely refusing to pay them millions of dollars for medical care provided to enrollees whose policies were later canceled.
April 20, 2007

Insurer allowed to drop Realtors' health coverage
Lisa Girion
A judge ruled Monday that Blue Shield of California could cancel group health insurance for the California Assn. of Realtors, apparently dooming it to the growing list of organization-sponsored health plans that have died in recent years, leaving people uninsured.

Blue Cross cancellations called illegal
Lisa Girion
The health insurer 'routinely' dropped the policies of pregnant or ill clients, an agency finds. The company disputes the charge.
March 23, 2007

Blue Shield sued over revoked insurance
Lisa Girion
At issue is the insurer's leaving patients without coverage after they have been hospitalized.
February 16, 2007

Health plan review may be intensified
Lisa Girion
The state's top HMO regulator calls for outside oversight of insurers' attempts to drop policyholders.
January 30, 2007

Kaiser to push for standards on health plans
Lisa Girion
The move comes amid a growing controversy over the insurance industry's cancellation of individual policies for medical coverage.
January 3, 2007

Doctors seek to sue Blue Cross
Lisa Girion
The California Medical Assn. wants to join patients in a dispute over canceled policies.
December 27, 2006

HMOs to face stricter rule
Lisa Girion
A state agency plans a move that would make it harder for insurers to drop sick policyholders.
November 14, 2006

Kaiser Told to Reinstate Coverage
Lisa Girion
Regulators' action in a kidney patient's case comes as scrutiny over cancellations grows.
October 19, 2006

Blue Cross Moves to Quell Furor
Lisa Girion
The health insurer, accused of dumping sick policyholders, says it will alter procedures.
September 20, 2006

Blue Cross Sued Over Claims Refusals
Lisa Girion
The healthcare insurer allegedly refused to pay hospitals after authorizing treatments.
May 9, 2006

California and the West
Canceled Policies Prompt Lawsuits
Lisa Girion
Customers of Blue Cross and Blue Shield say they were dumped after incurring medical costs.
April 28, 2006

Garamendi to Probe Blue Cross' Practices
Lisa Girion
California regulators said Wednesday that they would investigate accusations by 10 patients that Blue Cross has a system to retroactively cancel health coverage for members after they need expensive medical care.
March 30, 2006

Former Members Sue Blue Cross
Lisa Girion
Ten plaintiffs say the health insurer illegally dropped them after they became seriously ill.
March 28, 2006

Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Without a REAL committment to it, we WON'T win in November.

by architek on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 09:18:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

If McCain or Obama win, many people (2.00 / 4)

are considering at least a temporary emigration to a country with universal healthcare. Many have far brighter job pictures than the US if you have skills that are in demand or an advanced degree. The other costs of living are often lower too.

Even Canada..

You can always come back when/if the US becomes civilized again.

Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Without a REAL committment to it, we WON'T win in November.

by architek on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 09:26:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Mandates aren't that important (2.00 / 2)

I also agree. I cannot begin to tell you all the voluntary enrollment programs that have failed because of low enrollment and high beginning costs because of low enrollment.

by Iamjustmakingapoint on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 12:09:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Social security shouldn't be a mandate (2.00 / 3)

Oh wait, that's what BushCo says! Never mind.

/snark

by Southern Mouth on Wed Apr 09, 2008 at 11:40:51 PM EST

If it walks like an endorsement, talks like an (2.00 / 3)

endorsement, and sounds like an endorsement - it's an endorsement. What a fantastic lady she is!

Obama supporter working to defeat McCain.

by Rumarhazzit on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 12:30:23 AM EST

But does it walk and talk like one? (2.00 / 3)

I'm able to make that conversation to try to urge the candidates to these positions because I don't have a dog in the race. I only care about the issues.

Repeatedly, it is McCain she turns her fire on, not Obama, because, as she recognizes and states, McCain's healthcare "plan" is a big step in the wrong direction, while both Clinton's and Obama's plans are big steps in the right direction - with Clinton's plan of course being her favorite of the two. It is not just healthcare, but tax policies, where she is making the effort here to point out how inept McCain's proposals are.

If she is actually a primary-candidate-endorsing duck, I think she's doing a pretty respectable job of not walking and talking like one. Instead, she's walking and talking like a general-election-pro-Democratic duck.

Agreed, she's fantastic. :-)

Keep it short. DemocraticShortList.com

by Rob in Vermont on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 02:58:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Its pretty clear WHY she is doing that.. (1.66 / 3)

Its not because she likes Obama, its because she would rather see him win than McCain. Even if his platform is inferior, he is ahead, he has the big healthcare bucks behind him, he has the slick PR firms and the insider connections.

Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Without a REAL committment to it, we WON'T win in November.

by architek on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 09:30:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Its pretty clear WHY she is doing that.. (none / 0)

Ah yes, Senator Obama, the first-term Senator from Illinois, is the consummate DC and corporate insider, and Hillary Clinton, with eight years in the White House and nearly eight as Senator, and as one of the heads of her party, is a scrappy outsider fighting for the middle class.

Yep.

by amiches on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 10:59:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VIDEO: Elizabeth Edwards on Countdown with Kei (2.00 / 1)

I have always felt HRC had the better plan of the two remaining. But as I am not a one issue voter..well.
I hope her health is well at this time.. She was by far my favorite spouse in the Primary...

Both she and John will be effective in the Fall.

"If you want to end war and stuff, you gotta sing loud"...Arlo Guthrie

by nogo war on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 07:02:15 AM EST

Re: Elizabeth Edwards (2.00 / 4)

My favorite quote came towards the end of her appearance when Elizabeth said a health plan without a mandate is only half a plan.

There you go: Obama has half a plan.

Who has a whole and complete plan?

by moevaughn on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 09:11:27 AM EST

Hillary's plan is the only viable one.. (2.00 / 4)

Not only is Obama's designed to fail, it wont even be trotted out till 2012.

(BTW, did they remove that from their website? I was just trying to find the URL and the old one gave me a 404)

But, Obama has made it clear that no changes on healthcare at all till 2012, which is four years from NOW. (while he is in the final months of his re-election campaign, if he is elected.)

Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Without a REAL committment to it, we WON'T win in November.

by architek on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 09:34:03 AM EST

Wonder how much the healthcare industry (2.00 / 4)

had to pony up to get that alone. That delay is worth trillions of dollars to them ALONE.

Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Without a REAL committment to it, we WON'T win in November.

by architek on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 09:34:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

re (2.00 / 3)

If Obama supported a mandate so would they. Sheep off a cliff

by rossinatl on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 12:42:11 PM EST

Re: VIDEO: Elizabeth Edwards on Countdown with Kei (none / 0)

I like Elizabeth Edwards a lot more now that her husband is no longer running. Good video.

by Korha on Thu Apr 10, 2008 at 02:21:21 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.