Obama: Healthcare Will Be Affordable to Every American, No Mandates (what he REALLY said on MTP)

[K Gardner]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22409176/page/5/

SEN. OBAMA: Well, Tim, here's the philosophical debate that's going on. First of all, every objective observer says Edwards, Clinton, myself, we basically have the same plan. We do have a philosophical difference. They both believe the problem is the government is not forcing adults to get healthcare. My belief is that the real problem is people can't afford healthcare, and that if we could make it affordable, they will purchase it. Now, they assert that there're going to be all these people left out who are avoiding buying healthcare. My attitude is, we are going to make sure that we reduce costs for families who don't have health care, but also people who do have healthcare and are desperately needing some price relief. And we are going to reduce costs by about $2500 per family.If it turns out that there are still people left over who are not purchasing healthcare, one way of avoiding them waiting till they get sick is to charge a penalty if they try to sign up later so that they have an incentive to sign up immediately.

MR. RUSSERT: Which is a quasi-mandate.

SEN. OBAMA: But--well, no, it's not a quasi-mandate because what happens then iswe are not going around trying to fine people who can't afford healthcare, and that's what's happening in Massachusetts right now. They've already had to exempt 20 percent of the uninsured, and you're reading stories about people who didn't have healthcare, still can't afford the premiums on the subsidized healthcare, but now are also paying a fine. That I don't think is providing a relief to the American people. We need to make health care affordable. That's what my plan does. And The Washington Post itself said, for the Clinton campaign to try to find an individual who wanted healthcare and could not get it under the Obama administration would be very difficult because that person probably does not exist. If you want healthcare under my plan, you will be able to get it, it will be affordable, and it will be of the high quality.

[Dems Will Win]

1. Mandates means the Dems lose in 08

Political Suicide so big props to Obama for realizing that!

[Benhurst]

2. There is only one way to go: single-payer universal health care.

Anything else is smoke and mirrors.

[Dems Will Win]

5. We all agree but Kucinich is not viable

Only Obama and maybe Edwards could beat Hil.

[IronLionZion]

17. Is there anyone here who opposes single payer?

I don't think I've ever come across even one DUer who is against single-payer. Seriously, but :wtf:

Preaching to the choir. DUers aren't the ones you need to convince.

[Benhurst]

18. No, it's "our" leadership and candidates we need to convince.

[cyclezealot]

3. Massachusetts bull crap

This is the best we can do. The Massachusetts ransom healthcare plan. No quarantees on the quality of private insurance coverages. Might as well vote for Mitt. Healthcare wise there is no difference. Some listen to B.S. others listen to Michael Moore.

[Vinca]

4. Obama is right about how Massachusetts is working out.

If you can't afford premiums, you can't afford premiums. The people dreaming up these plans are well paid and well insured and have no comprehension of choosing between food or an insurance premium.

[sandnsea]

10. That's it exactly

Mandates are fine, once we know the plan is affordable. Somebody yesterday said that nobody could lie on $20,000 a year. That cracks me up because I know people raising kids on that income, on less than that really. A lot of people.

[cyclezealot]

11. Unless O'Bama endorses the Michael Moore plan

It will only fleece the taxpayers all the more to subsidize private insurance companies. You think they are going to cut into their administrative waste; O'bama thinks that - he is crazy. Anyone other than Kucinich come around to the Michale Moore plan, then I will possibly switch my vote away from Kucinich. But, not until.

[Vinca]

14. I agree entirely. I don't like the Obama, Edwards or Clinton plans.

Kucinich is the only candidate who gets the big picture. But, reality's a bitch and we're going to be dealing with a mishmash of plans that still include the insurance companies. I honestly believe if any of the "big 3" adopted the Kucinich plan, they'd be the next president.

[cyclezealot]

15. ANyone who does not totally reject the

Romney healthcare plan is poison to me. I am lockstep in that position. That is my price for supporting anyone other than Kucinich. Healthcare is my big issue.

[Hippo_Tron]

6. True, but I'd really like to hear one of two things out of the candidates

1) Single Payer

2) Use anti-trust legislation to break up the health insurance cartel.

[K Gardner]

8. We'd ALL like to hear that. We're just going to have to take what improvement we can get and

push like hell for HR 676 to pass !

[Hippo_Tron]

9. Honestly I'd rather try #2 first

I'd like to see the health insurance industry function in an actually competitive market instead of a cartel. If that doesn't drive prices down enough so that they are affordable then I'm all for HR 676.

[cyclezealot]

22. Business in America pretty much works on cornering out the competiton

why should health insurance companies be any different. Deregulation was supposed to free the competitive spirit. So what has happened to your cable bill.

[Hippo_Tron]

25. Yup and that's why we have anti-trust laws

We need to use them more.

[Colobo]

7. Gobama!

[Bitwit1234]

12. The Saint has spoken wonder why he didn't do this for his

constitutions in Illinois. He didn't even go to bat, when they were charging the uninsured 235% more for their care.

[K Gardner]

13. Unfortunately, no one has been talking about healthcare until recently..

I think Sicko is responsible for a lot of that, and also Dennis Kucinich.

Better late to the party than never.

[K Gardner]

16. Kicking to drown out the rumor mongering

[rodeodance]

19. promises to make it 'affordable"---ummmm

[Rydz777]

20. "it will be of high quality." This is an empty promise unless

something is done to increase the numbers of doctors, nurses, other providers, and hospital facilities. The much maligned "Hillary-care" of the 1990's at least tried to deal with this - even if in a clumsy way.

More demand and stagnant supply will only mean some form of rationing, i.e. can't get an appointment, spend longer time in waiting rooms. We now ration by cost. A rational system "of high quality" would explicitly deal with supply.

Britain's system (NHS) has tried to deal with supply by importing thousands of doctors and nurses from third-world countries. What does this do to the third world countries? Oh, that's their problem.

[eridani]

21. If it involves private insurance, it can't possibly be affordable

Obama is bullshitting us hoping to keep insurance companies off his back.

[cyclezealot]

23. to keep the insurance companies off his back.

you got that right. Those who stand up to our string pullers are rare.

[eridani]

28. But it never works

Even compromises that let insurance companies stay in the game, though reducing their profits by a slight amount, get exactly the same level of vilification as real single payer.

[Sparkly]

24. How much is the penalty?

Does it make the insurance unaffordable at that point, and more importantly, how does the cost remain affordable for others if healthy people can wait to sign up until they're sick?

[Cameron27]

27. Good questions,

that's the whole point of mandates, keeping it affordable with large numbers of healthy people.

[dogishboy]

26. But Obama's plan does include a mandate

It mandates that parents buy insurance for thier children. Why is it wrong to force people to buy unaffordable insurance for themselves, but OK to force people to buy unaffordable insurance for their children?

And how was the $2500 in savings computed? It sounds like something Obama pulled out of his ass

[Flabbergasted]

29. kick