Health Care Policy Differences between Clark and Dean

[graelent]

I have been researching the policy differences between Dean and Clark’s Health Care Proposes, and here is the result. The differences are very minor. I hope to do this with all of their policies, so let me know what you think.

All information was gotten from the Candidates Official issues websites at http://www.clark04.com/issues/healthcare">www.clark04.com/issues/healthcare and http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_policy_health_healthcareforamerica">http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_policy_health_healthcareforamerica.

No other information was factored in.

For full disclosure, I am a Dean supporter, but I am trying to be as impartial as I can.


Coverage for Young Americans

Clark:

Creates a Federal CHIP Program that insures children up to 22 from households who make up to 5 times the poverty rate. (Roughly $90,000 a year for a family of 4)

Dean:

Creates a Federal CHIP Program that insures children up to 25 from households who make up to 3 times the poverty rate. (Roughly $54,000 a year for a family of 4)

Differences: Clark covers more families. Dean covers up to a higher age.



Universal Insurance

Clark:

Creates a Federal Employees Health Benefits Program look-alike for Americans who do not have access to employee provided Health Care.

Dean:

Creates a Federal Employees Health Benefits Program look-alike accessible to all Americans.

Differences: Dean offers a wider group of people access to the FEHBP Look-alike insurance.



Government Paid Insurance

Clark:

Government will pay for insurance of all Americans who make less than 1.5 times the poverty line. (Roughly $27,000 a year for a family of 4)

Dean:

Government will pay for insurance of all Americans who make less than 1.8 times the poverty line. (Roughly $32,400 for a family of 4)

Differences: .3 times poverty rate.


Health Care Tax Credits

Clark:

Government offers tax credits to families up to 2.75 times poverty rate to offset insurance costs. (Tax credits go to families making Roughly 49,500 a year for a family of 4 or less). I did not find a chart of the amount of the credits in relation to income.

Dean:

Government offers tax credits of the difference between the FEHBP Look alike Premium and 7.5% of the payer’s income. (If a person’s AGI is $50,000 a year, then 7.5% of that is $3750, and the FEHBP look-alike’s premiums are $150 a month or $1800 a year, then that person would get a tax credit of $1950)

Difference: Accounting method.


COBRA

Clark:

Government pays 70% of Cobra premiums for out of work workers.

Dean:

Government pays 70% of Cobra premiums for out of work workers.

Differences: None


Small Business

Clark:

Grant Money for Small Businesses that offer Insurance to Employees

Dean:

Small Businesses can buy into the FEHBP look-alike


Cost

Clark:

69.5 Billion a Year (Average)

Dean

88.3 Billion a Year

Difference: 18.8 Billion a year

[KittyWampus]

1. Thanks, You Get A Big Wet Kiss From Me!

:yourock:

[JohnKleeb]

2. thanks for this research

:yourock:

[BootinUp]

3. I think this is an excellent idea

To further the discussion I would point this out:

Clark stresses prevention programs, this is something he learned is valuable from his military experience
http://clark04.com/issues/improvinghealthcare/

........
Value through prevention: More bang for the health care buck. Costs are increasing rapidly without contributing to better health outcomes. My plan focuses on getting more bang for the health care buck, helping to improve health outcomes for all Americans while restraining the growing cost of premiums. I would create incentives for both the government and private sector to employ preventive care, improve disease management, and utilize evidence-based medicine. I would promote the use of information technology to reduce medical errors, improving outcomes and reducing costs for all families. And I would make certain that coverage truly insures people from high health care costs.
........

[graelent]

6. I left that out for a couple of reasons

1. It had no specific policy attached to it.

2. Dean says something very similar in his Healthy America Initiative

"Prevention. Improving the use of preventive measures focused on critical issues affecting health smoking, obesity, substance abuse, communicable diseases (e.g. HIV, SARS), and violence and orchestrating private-public partnerships to promote healthy behavior and prevent illness."

[BootinUp]

11. Ok, but I seem to recall in a recent speech

in New Hampshire that he would look to create this national database to track medical outcomes and help doctors to determine the best treatment solutions.

[graelent]

20. Speeches

I specifically decided not to include anything from speeches, only policies outlined on their website. Policy speeches are great, but also easily retractable.

[batman]

4. i prefer deans plan

thanks for the research

[dogman]

5. Why?

Why?

[DuctapeFatwa]

7. Has either of them said how much people would pay a month?

Even for some of the voting class, that might be of interest. :)

[graelent]

8. I saw no specific premium or co-pay amounts

on either website. Just words like "affordable" and "comparable."

[BootinUp]

9. You can look at a 3rd party analysis

http://www.clark04.com/issues/healthcare/clarkplan.pdf

Theres some additional info there on Clark's plan. Including Cost analysis.

[DuctapeFatwa]

13. My question isn't answered there, but thanks, it has lots of other numbers

:)

[RevolutionStartsNow]

10. Excellent work, thanks

I'd also be curious to hear what people think the chances are of these plans actually passing through Congress. I think it's clear that this is a big issue for many Americans, but would our lawmakers make it a priority and not water down the plans and make them useless? (Call me a cynic.)

I know Dean would fight hard for this, as it's a big part of his platform.

[BootinUp]

12. I think it depends on whether

the issue is debated before the public and the eventual election is perceived as a mandate on that and other issues. Also, remember how the healthcare industry took this issue away from Clinton. They actually restrained costs significantly until Clinton's universal plan was defeated.

[Myra]

14. Thank you to those who are focusing on policy and not outrageous smears

There are some jaw-dropping smears on this forum right now,
and I appreciate the attempt to swim upstream and discuss policy
differences.

[jmaier]

15. That's a superb

post, graelent. Thank you for taking the time to research this and make a substantive contribution here! :toast:

[mouse7]

16. Both leave people on Social Security Disabilty without drugs.

A stepparent that is under retirement age on Social Security Disability. My research done so far has shown neither fund prescription drug coverage for Medicare recipients under 65 (the disabled on Social Security Disabiliy Insurance).

So much for great health insurace plans. They both save money by doing nothing for the people who are too ill or injured to effectively lobby that REALLY need help.

If you were wondering why I'm only supporting the eventual nominee, now you know.

On edit: Kucinich's plan is the only one I've found that provides coverage, thus far.

[Donna Zen]

17. Drug plans are separate iirc n/t

[mouse7]

18. I've never seen Medicare drug coverage suggested seperate

If you have a link to a candidate plan that provides drug coverage to Medicare recipients below 65, I'd be more than happy to look at it.

This is one issue I would very much like to be wrong about.

[graelent]

21. I see nothing on the websites regarding

a Drug plan for Medicare recipient under the age of 65.

However, neither website mentions excluding those under 65 from the Medicare Drug Plan either...

[maddezmom]

19. thanks for spending time doing this research

great job. :)