Liberal Health Care Catfight

January 7th, 2008 by Peter Suderman

Obama and Clinton have been in a much-publicized spat over their respective health care plans. And while it’s true that Clinton’s would force absolutely everyone to purchase insurance and Obama’s would not, the thing to remember is that both are bad. The Wall Street Journal breaks it down for us:

“Universal” health care is of course a major Democratic issue, and Mr. Obama laid out a proposal in May, Mrs. Clinton in September. Both plans create a public insurance option managed by the government. Both plans impose more stringent regulations on insurance companies, and both institute new taxes on business.

 

Want more? Sign up our free weekly newsletter:

   
We do not sell or share your email and you can unsubscribe at any time.

One Response to “Liberal Health Care Catfight”

  1. Mister Guy Says:

    From what I know, there is not much “new” that is being created by either of their plans. They would just allow regular Americans to have access to the very same set of private insurance options that Congress and the rest of the federal govt. have access to right now. There’s already an administration system setup for the FEHBP. The range of plans in the FEHBP by individual state are quite vast, cheap, and private. It’s a start, but Hillary goes further than Obama towards universal health care, which this country DESPIRATELY needs in order to get a handle on the staggering rise in the cost of providing health care in this country. I used to be a federal employee, and the only payroll deduction that increased well-over 150% for me was the amount that I was paying for my health care premiums. This kind of increase is unsustainable!!

Leave a Reply