I prefer Hillary's health insurance plan over Obama's but why hasn't either offered any legislation

[Stop Cornyn]

to enact their plans?

From my perspective, Obama's plan is a bit better than what Romney and Schwarzenegger offered in Massachusetts and California.

Hillary's plan is quite a bit better than Obama's.

Edwards' plan is much better than Hillary's.

And Kucinich's plan is by far the best plan of all.

But no matter whose plan you prefer, why haven't Obama or Hillary taken any steps to offer actual legislation to implement their plans?

Dennis Kucinich deserves much credit for pushing actual legislation (H.R. 676) to make his superior health care plan into law.

If Obama or Hillary believed this issue was so important (as they claim on the campaign trail) and they thought their plans were so great, why haven't they offered any legislation?

[Romulox]

1. These health plans are POLICY/POSITION statements

None of them have the chance of seeing the light of day as implemented policy. Which is why arguing about how many angels are on the heads of pins of Obama's or Hillary's plan is pure political schlock.

[Stop Cornyn]

3. Dennis Kucinich's plan isn't a policy/position statement; it's H.R. 676. He supports legislation to

implement the health care plan he promotes during his campaign.

Why doesn't Hillary or Obama have legislation to implement the the health insurance plans they promote?

[frazzled]

2. Because it wouldn't have a snowball's chance in hell in this Congress, this Admin.

Even if a Democratic-sponsored health care plan were to make it through the House, it would be blocked by the Republicans in the Senate and/or vetoed by this administration.

To introduce such a bill would merely be grandstanding at this point. If you like grandstanding, knock yourself out.

[Czolgosz]

5. So we're only offering legislation that Bush pre-approves? What a quitter attitude!

[frazzled]

8. No, it's the politically astute attitude

To be effective, you always have to measure priorities against possibilities and timing. Granstanding on your soapbox and tilting at windmills is actually less effective than waiting for the moment when success can be obtained. Republicans who would otherwise support health insurance measures will not allow their "boy" to be upstaged, and will oppose anything he tells them to. We've seen that time and again. But under an (effective) Democratic administration, their constituent pressure will be enough to make them come to the table on this critical issue. To back them into a corner of opposing a health-care measure right now will only make it harder for them to change course later.

But as I said, if empty grandstanding is your thing, go ahead, knock yourself out.

[Stop Cornyn]

10. It's "politically astute" to propose only that legislation you know in advance it will pass? What

happened to debate? What happened to leadership? What happened to rallying the people to pressure their representatives to support popular legislation which majorities of Americans want?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

4. Because Kucinich has nothing to lose and will never implement his plan.

Obama and Hillary, if elected, just might do so, and to unveil the gritty details of the plan before having even the slightest opportunity to actually get it passed is to destroy the bill, and lose campaign points, for absolutely no good reason. If you unveil the details now, people won't focus on the goal of the bill, they'll just nitpick every little detail of it to find reasons why both the bill and the candidate are bad. And, once again, with a President that won't even sign a bill that gives health care to children, there is ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE of getting the bill signed into law right now.

It would be idiocy, pure and simple, to introduce a bill.

[Stop Cornyn]

6. If Obama's or Hillary's plans are reasonable, they should offer legislation on all or at least part

of their proposals.

If they are not reasonable plans, why have Hillary and Obama offered them?

If they are reasonable plans, why aren't they promoting them in the legislature?

At least Kucinich's plan is available for Congress to support it or not. Hell, there are currently 86 co-sponsors of that legislation!

How do we make corporatist Democrats toe the line if we don't make them choose sides on key legislation and how do we penalize Repubs who vote against the people they supposedly represent if we don't give them legislation to vote for or against?

[ThomCat]

7. That's total B.S. and I'll tell you why.

Republicans in the 70s and 80s kept proposing legislation that was called ridiculous and outrageous, but they pushed it anyway. And after the 4th or 5th year of constantly pushing the same far-right ideas the media started taking it seriously solely because it had been out there year after year. They started talking about the democrats opposing it, instead of talking about the legislation itself. Truly far right policies became mainstream because the right pushed them and kept pushing them.

If we won't dare propose anything until the last moment then we'll never push anything into the mainstream that way. And if we won't dare to keep pushing anything over and over and over again just because we believe in it, then obviously we don't really believe in anything.

I think Kucinich has the right idea. Healthcare bills should be proposed over and over and over again until they gain traction.

[Tejanocrat]

9. Agreed!

[Renew Deal]

11. Because they don't have the power to get them enacted?

That's the simple reason.

[Czolgosz]

12. kick