"American health consumers will decide which works best," Mr. Edwards said Wednesday afternoon while traveling through South Carolina on his campaign bus. "It could continue to be divided. But it could go in one direction or the other, and one of the directions is obviously government or single-payer. And I’m not opposed to that."
New York Times
Republicans have argued against Universal Health Care because the market would work things out, right? But we know free market Health Care has been a disaster for everyone but the CEO's who run insurance companies, their bonuses coming at the cost of lives.
John Edwards stumps for votes on primary eve in Dover, NH. January 7, 2008 with Nataline Sarkysian's Family.
Everyone is painfully aware of the story of Nataline Sarkysian and how her standard of care was decided by the bottom line not what her doctors and family wanted to do for her. There can be no free market choice if those who pay for health care cannot be certain that any life threatening illness will be treated as their doctor decides. How does this constitute a solution? How can we as a society stand by and let profit margins decide if someone's life will be worth extending or saving?
Many have argued that the only solution is a single payer system. But just because it's the best solution doesn't mean it's going to be possible in our hostile economy and the strong opposition from the right. The best solutions have to be reasonable, acheivable and the right thing for as many people as possible.
Republican candidates and policy strategists have raised the specter of "socialized medicine" and depicted the Democratic plans as a back-door route to a so-called single-payer government system.
Mr. Edwards brushed off that critique. "There is nothing back-door about it," he said. "It’s right through the front door. We’re going to let America decide what health care system works for them."
I love it! It's right through the front door. Isn't that who should decide, the American people? Wouldn't this be the best way to move us to a single payer rather than letting insurance companies decide the rules and decide who gets the benefit of treatment from their provider? Then there is the issue of what is covered and how much, it's like a minefield of hidden costs.
"I mean, when you get the statements by the providers and the insurance companies about what’s covered and what’s not covered, even for two people who are well versed in the law and experienced with the health care system, it seems completely arbitrary in many cases," said Mr. Edwards, a lawyer. "It doesn’t make any sense."
Edwards has also addressed the biggest issue facing Universal Single Payer Health Care. There are many people who have health care and they worry about things changing to the point it would affect their quality of care. This has been used time and time again by Republicans to argue against Universal Health Care, Hillary's plan was shot down by thes consumer fears and the hard push by the insurance industry.
Mr. Edwards said he strongly considered a single-payer plan before announcing his initiative last February.
"I thought that there was a legitimate and strong argument for it," he said. "But I also believed that there are an awful lot of Americans who like the health care they have and are nervous about entirely government-controlled health care."
Directly from Edwards' Issue page on Health Care
Under the Edwards Plan:
· Families without insurance will get coverage at an affordable price.
· Families with insurance will pay less and get more security and choices.
· Businesses and other employers will find it cheaper and easier to insure their workers.
The Edwards Plan achieves universal coverage by:
· Requiring businesses and other employers to either cover their employees or help finance their health insurance.
· Making insurance affordable by creating new tax credits, expanding Medicaid and SCHIP, reforming insurance laws, and taking innovative steps to contain health care costs.
· Creating regional "Health Care Markets" to let every American share the bargaining power to purchase an affordable, high-quality health plan, increase choices among insurance plans, and cut costs for businesses offering insurance.
· Once these steps have been taken, requiring all American residents to get insurance.
Securing universal healthcare for every American will require the active involvement of millions of Americans.
http://www.johnedwards.com/...
And, as many have noted, Edwards has been leading on this issue, just as he has on many others. His plan came out in February 2007, almost a full year ago and it was met with a great deal of praise. But not many people were paying attention at the time (damn you media), they were more worried about the narrative of the two person race. One of the most important commenters about Edwards' plan for me is Paul Krugman.
People who don't get insurance from their employers wouldn't have to deal individually with insurance companies: they'd purchase insurance through "Health Markets": government-run bodies negotiating with insurance companies on the public's behalf. People would, in effect, be buying insurance from the government, with only the business of paying medical bills - not the function of granting insurance in the first place - outsourced to private insurers.
Why is this such a good idea? As the Edwards press release points out, marketing and underwriting - the process of screening out high-risk clients - are responsible for two-thirds of insurance companies' overhead. With insurers selling to government-run Health Markets, not directly to individuals, most of these expenses should go away, making insurance considerably cheaper.
Better still, "Health Markets," the press release says, "will offer a choice between private insurers and a public insurance plan modeled after Medicare." This would offer a crucial degree of competition. The public insurance plan would almost certainly be cheaper than anything the private sector offers right now - after all, Medicare has very low overhead. Private insurers would either have to match the public plan's low premiums, or lose the competition.
snip
So this is a smart, serious proposal. It addresses both the problem of the uninsured and the waste and inefficiency of our fragmented insurance system. And every candidate should be pressed to come up with something comparable.
Yes, that includes Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. So far, all we have from Mr. Obama is inspiring rhetoric about universal care - that's great, but how do we get there? And how do we know whether Mrs. Clinton, who says that she's "not ready to be specific," and that she wants to "build the consensus first," will really be willing to take on this issue again?
Paul Krugman Edwards Gets It Right
Edwards is dedicated to not only making Health Care affordable, fair and universal, he also wouldn't mind if it morphed into a single payer system, which has worked in many other industrialized nations. And according to Commonwealth Fund study it matters to more and more people regardless of party affliation.
More than 80 percent of Americans think employers should be required to provide health insurance to their workers or pay into a fund to help cover them.
snip
"The public seems to be more in line with the Democratic position," said Sara Collins, assistant vice president at the Commonwealth Fund.
More than 60 percent of people surveyed by Commonwealth said candidates' health care positions would be very important in their presidential voting decision.
snip
A slight majority of Republicans support requiring individuals to have health insurance, while 80 percent of Democrats favor an individual mandate, as long as the government provides help to individuals who can't afford it.
So, not only did Edwards come out with his plan first, he's considered the outcome of his plan and it is in line with what most Americans want. I sincerely believe that this subject can unite Americans for the very reasonable goal of Universal Health Care at affordable prices while still letting the "market" decide the final outcome. This is not a Republican or Democratic issue, it truly is a moral issue and an imporatant part of the Democratic Party winning in the General Election.
I am going to end on this short part of a speech that Edwards gave on Health Care and I think that he is the right voice for this issue.