Today in Las Vegas, Nevada the Service Employees International Union and the Center for American Progress Action Fund held a Presidential Forum on healthcare. All the Democratic contenders were there (John Edwards, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bill Richardson, etc...).
The candidates were asked questions from viewers on the internet and union members that were in attendance. According to tbe original AP article I first quoted AP News article,
Sen. Barack Obama was challenged by an audience member who said she had gone to the senator's Web site looking for health care reform information and found only plans about HIV and lead poisoning. He said he would have a detailed plan in a couple months, after he has a chance to discuss it further with experts and front-line workers.
This just reconfirmed a belief that I have developed over the last few weeks. Sen. Obama is a great leader, has a wonderful story, but presently doesn't have the policy credentials to lead our country in its present state. The campaign is still early and maybe he will develop his policies over time, but for now, I will stick with the candidate that is leading on the issues--John Edwards.
Evidently the AP changed their story to where it now reads
"Video of the candidate forum was fed live over the Internet. The moderator, Time magazine's Karen Tumulty, took questions from Internet viewers as well as prescreened questions from union members in the audience.
Obama said he would have a detailed plan in a couple months, after he has a chance to discuss it further with experts and front-line workers."
John Edwards is the only candidate with a comprehensive plan for universal healthcare. He truly understands the problem and that it is unjust and immoral for us to sit idly by why 47 million Americans don't have health insurance.
Here's John Edwards' healthcare plan:
John Edwards has a bold plan to transform America's health care system and provide universal health care for every man, woman and child in America.
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 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.
If you like what you see, follow this link to sign an online petition of support for Sen. Edwards' Universal Healthcare Plan.
Paul Krugman had this to say about Sen. Edwards' healthcare plan in a recent column in the New York Times
What a difference two years makes! At this point in 2005, the only question seemed to be how much of America's social insurance system — the triumvirate of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid — the Bush administration would manage to dismantle. Now almost all prominent Democrats and quite a few Republicans pay at least lip service to calls for a major expansion of social insurance, in the form of universal health care.
But fine words, by themselves, mean nothing. Remember "compassionate conservatism?" I won't trust presidential candidates on health care unless they provide enough specifics to show both that they understand the issues, and that they're willing to face up to hard choices when necessary.
And former Senator John Edwards has just set a fine example.
At first glance, the Edwards health care plan looks similar to several other proposals out there, including one recently unveiled by Arnold Schwarzenegger in California. But a closer look reveals extra features in the Edwards plan that take it a lot closer to what the country really needs.
Like Mr. Schwarzenegger, Mr. Edwards sets out to cover the uninsured with a combination of regulation and financial aid. Right now, many people are uninsured because, as the Edwards press release puts it, insurance companies "game the system to cover only healthy people." So the Edwards plan, like Schwarzenegger's, imposes "community rating" on insurers, basically requiring them to sell insurance to everyone at the same price.
Many other people are uninsured because they simply can't afford the cost. So the Edwards plan, again like other proposals, offers financial aid to help lower-income families buy insurance. To pay for this aid, he proposes rolling back tax cuts for households with incomes over $200,000 a year.
Finally, some people try to save money by going without coverage, so if they get sick they end up in emergency rooms at public expense. Like other plans, the Edwards plan would "require all American residents to get insurance," and would require that all employers either provide insurance to their workers or pay a percentage of their payrolls into a government fund used to buy insurance.
But Mr. Edwards goes two steps further.
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.
And Mr. Edwards is O.K. with that. "Over time," the press release says, "the system may evolve toward a single-payer approach if individuals and businesses prefer the public plan."
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?
To be fair, these are still early days. But America's crumbling health care system is our most important domestic issue, and I think we have a right to know what those who would be president propose to do about it.
At the end of the day, true leaders lead on the defining issues of their time. I think we can all agree that besides the War in Iraq, Healthcare is the number one issue facing most Americans.
Hillary tried to get universal healthcare and failed setting back the movement. As a result, we've had to wait 15 years for a mainstream Democratic candidate that's willing to push for universal heallthcare.
As Paul Krugman states, Obama is full of inspiring rhetoric. So I'll ask again, Obama where's the beef? Maybe he'll put some meat on his policy bones with time, but until then, I'm not convinced.