ELIZABETH EDWARDS ATTACKS

[sniffa]

Elizabeth Edwards takes aim at Obama

John Edwards' wife Elizabeth blasted Barack Obama’s health care plan today, telling voters at an Iowa campaign stop that it would not cover her.

“I did a radio interview today, and I heard a radio commercial for Sen. Obama that indicated where it said in there that his health care program covered more Americans than either Sen. Clinton or John. That is actually not true,” said Edwards.

“There’s 15 million people or so — I’d be one of those — the hardest to insure …who are left out of his system.
It’s just kind of a complete untruth.”

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/01/02/elizabeth-edwards-takes-aim-at-obama/

[MaineDem]

1. Good for her! n/t

[Beaverhausen]

2. Pointing out differences is not an attack

but you knew that. :hi:

[K8-EEE]

40. Thank you!!

I think it's an important difference that she pointed out.

[karynnj]

43. It is - if not true - which seems to be the case.

If it is not true and she does this the day before the primary that may be one of the sleaziest attacks from the wife of a candidate ever.

[TeamJordan23]

3. Considering your family is worth over $50 million and your husband can afford $400 haircuts

I am sure you are able to afford healthcare. Which is likely going to the cheapest under an Obama administration.

[MaineDem]

6. Of course she can afford healthcare; that's not the point

Pointing out those who won't be eligible for healthcare is legitimate.

[Adelante]

8. That would be $54M

Which an Edwards supporter informed me the other day is "moderate wealth."

The world's gone crazy :crazy:

[TeamJordan23]

18. Thanks, I'll updated. nm

[Jackpine Radical]

13. She's talking about hard-to-insure people, those with

severe health problems who would be excluded from some plans. It's not about her wealth, it's about her health. You're off base.

[sandnsea]

20. But not Obama's plan, he requires care for all n/t

[Jackpine Radical]

27. You may be right. I don't know the details of Obama's plan.

I was just trying to clarify her comment.

[sandnsea]

29. I posted the links elsewhere, read it n/t

[Beaverhausen]

19. The point is, someone with cancer wouldn't be insured

The Edwards always state that, while they could indeed afford care if they lost their health insurance coverage, most americans could not.

[sandnsea]

23. 'Insurers would have to issue every applicant a policy'

"Insurers would have to issue every applicant a policy, and charge fair and stable premiums that will not depend upon health status."
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/

Elizabeth is just wrong.

[Lurking Dem]

28. Don't let a good rant

suffer for the facts!!

Some people would rather have truthiness than reality.

[karynnj]

44. and I doubt it is innocent

This is a woman who was a top bankruptcy lawyer - I assume that means she COULD read the plan and understand it. (PS it also means that JRE knew all there was to know about the potential impact of the bankruptcy bill on people with huge medical costs. As covered in the amendment he voted against.)

[Mojambo]

21. You totally missed the point.

Assuming you were looking for it in the first place...

[Hieronymus]

24. Oooooooo a presidential candidate that is rich. What in hell does that

have to do with his health care plan? Edwards would cover everyone, and for the poorest Americans it would be subsidized 100%.

[napi21]

33. That's not the point! NO INSURER would write her a policy, for

ANY amount of $$ BECAUSE she has cancer! I KNOW that is true! When my husband changed jobs 5 years ago, COBRA was more than we could afford ($1,000/mo) so I checked to see what other options we had. Every CO. I contacted would insure me, and the premium wasn't too bad ($158/mo), but NONE would insure my husband for that 3 months until his new job insurance kicked in because he had had heart bypass surgery 10 years earlier.

I don't know EVERY candidate's HC plan, but I did hear Hillary specifically state "Insurers would NOT be allowed to cherry pick and refuse to insure people because of pre-existing conditions." She's the ONLY candidate I've heard state that!

[Lurking Dem]

36. Every single one of their plans

states that there can be no pre-existing condition clauses. THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED TO EXCLUDE ANYONE on the basis of their health.

That is EVERY SINGLE PLAN.

[karynnj]

45. That is included in ALL three

The difference is whether there is a mandate that requires you buy it. Therefore, Edwards is right ONLY if she knows she would opt not to buy it.

[IsItJustMe]

52. Cancer can, and most often does require millions. Even Liz deserves coverage.

[rodeodance]

4. Good for her---

[matcom]

5. NOW ITS PERSONL!

BEYOND.THE.PALE!

AN OUTRAGE!

:P

[sniffa]

12. *snort*

:rofl:

[NOVA_Dem]

7. I wonder if she'll have to step back again eventually b/c

everytime she takes on the "VP-Attack" role in JE's campaign, JE is perceived to be "soft" in the media. But then again she can launch an attack this late in the game and not worry about Obama rebutting to harshly against a sick woman.

[karynnj]

46. Here - timing is everything

Either Obama has to correct Edwards' "misconception" the day of the caucus OR this goes uncorrected and hurts Obama.

[sandnsea]

9. 15% of the nation does not have auto insurance

Mandates do not work. This claim is based on believing a mandate will bring 100% coverage when it has been proven note to. NH, which does not have auto insurance mandates, has higher coverage rates than some states that do. This 15 million nonsense has been the LIE all along.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/05/us/politics/05truth.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin

[Onlooker]

10. What a stupid comment by her!

We don't need national health care to help the very wealthy. If Elizabeth Edwards isn't covered that won't bother me one bit. She can afford her own health care. It's the poor that need the care.

[sandnsea]

17. He will regulate care for everybody anyway

His program requires all insurance companies to cover everybody and do away with higher rates for sicker people. I think she's bought into the hype from Hillary's campaign, as so many people have done.

[Jackpine Radical]

22. She's not excluded because of her wealth, but because of her health.

A poor person with her health problems couldn't get insurance either. You're REALLY missing the point here.

[no name no slogan]

37. Actually, if she were on public assistance, she'd get Medicaid (even with pre-existing conditions)

The poor in this country get covered, as do the wealthy. It's low-income working people and the middle class who get squeezed.

[Jackpine Radical]

38. Technically true, but Medicaid can be very poor.

In WI, for example, it's hard finding a dentist anywhere who will take it, and many services are not covered. Psych care generally consists of meds & med checks with little availability of psychotherapy. I got so tired of being hassled that I dropped my provider number years ago.

[karynnj]

47. That's true NOW, but not under any Democratic plan

[Laurab]

51. She's not excluded period. That is the point.

Elizabeth is not telling the truth, and should correct her statement, but I have a pretty good idea that she won't. She's playing dirty politics, which is the REAL point.

[pnwmom]

57. You're showing your own lack of insight here, not hers.

What she is saying is that Obama's insurance will fail to include the sickest people, in other words, people like her.

[MzNov]

11. Or did she just "take aim" at something O'Bama said ??

Attacks? Elizabeth Edwards?

Disagrees maybe.

[sniffa]

15. i'm just keeping in the spirit

[Pirate Smile]

39. You got the all caps correct. Good Job.

:thumbsup:

[Sulawesi]

14. It's fine. I would have left out the last sentence...

[Hieronymus]

16. Elizabeth is right, as usual.

[sandnsea]

25. No, she's wrong

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/

Insurers would have to issue every applicant a policy, and charge fair and stable premiums that will not depend upon health status. The Exchange will require that all the plans offered are at least as generous as the new public plan and have the same standards for quality and efficiency.

[JDPriestly]

26. This is what I have been wondering about.

A couple of years ago, I had to buy insurance on my own. Since I am over 60, I have a couple of minor pre-existing conditions and, knowing I would be leaving my job, I had gone to the doctor and specialists for check-ups before leaving, so I had been to the doctor (but not seriously ill, no cancer, no heart disease, no diabetes, etc.) a number of times over the year. The check-ups were the routine things that you are supposed to regularly have.

Lo and behold, the insurance companies wanted to force me to buy the special insurance of last resort because of my "pre-existing conditions" and because I had gone to the doctor more than a certain number of times in the previous year. I managed to get health insurance a different way, but it was not easy. Had I been required to buy the special insurance, I would have had to go without insurance because I would not have been able to afford the monthly premium. I would have been basically excluded from health insurance. And that is in California where we at least require insurance companies to provide insurance, albeit expensive insurance, for everyone.

So, you don't have to have cancer, or heart disease, or diabetes or some other horrible condition to be uninsurable. The medication for my pre-existing condition costs maybe $10 per month. It is very common. Then there is arthritis -- which affects just about everybody over 60, allergies -- also ubiquitous and another condition that is genetic but not very serious. And for that, I would be uninsurable in many states. Elizabeth is so right on this. I do not believe that Obama's plan would require insurance companies to insure the now uninsurable for affordable rates. That is the key to this problem.

The other key is to prevent insurance companies from having high deductibles and refusing to cover certain care.

[sandnsea]

30. Then you want Obama's plan

Because he's going to require every insurance plan is available to every citizen and is not based on pre-existings.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/

Insurers would have to issue every applicant a policy, and charge fair and stable premiums that will not depend upon health status. The Exchange will require that all the plans offered are at least as generous as the new public plan and have the same standards for quality and efficiency.

[frazzled]

31. Bull-SHIT: Elizabeth lies

The very FIRST point on Obama's health plan states plainly

Obama's Plan to Cover Uninsured Americans: Obama will make available a new national health plan to all Americans, including the self-employed and small businesses, to buy affordable health coverage that is similar to the plan available to members of Congress. The Obama plan will have the following features:

Guaranteed eligibility. No American will be turned away from any insurance plan because of illness or pre-existing conditions.

Why would she just out and out lie about this?

[sandnsea]

32. The biggest Obama mistake

Was saying all the plans were the same. They aren't and the details of the differences matter. I really don't know why he did this, unless he wants to make the mandates the issue, which aren't going to go over in NH.

[frazzled]

34. They are the same on the point of not allowing anyone to be turned away

for pre-existing conditions.

The only difference between any of these plans is whether they are mandated or not. That has nothing to do with coverage. All the plans COVER everybody. Whether that coverage is mandated or not, the compliance rate will probably be about the same.

[sandnsea]

35. There are other differences

Tax credits vs monthly subsidies is one. I don't think the others have the Health Exchange watchdog organization either. Obama also puts more money in at the front end to help people get in faster.

[sjdnb]

41. Where'd you get this ... at his site it reads

"Reducing Costs of Catastrophic Illnesses for Employers and Their Employees: Catastrophic health expenditures account for a high percentage of medical expenses for private insurers. The Obama plan would reimburse employer health plans FOR A PORTION OF the catastrophic costs they incur above a threshold if they guarantee such savings are used to reduce the cost of workers' premiums."

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/

This is to cut employer's a break, not the underinsured or uninsured. And, it doesn't mean the employers will be required to provide it.

They'll be reimbursed for a portion of the costs if they, go over some undefined "threshold" and guarantee the reimbursement will go to reducing the employee's premium ... yeah, that's gonna work.

[karynnj]

48. That's not the relevant feature

It is like the highly praised feature in Kerry's 2004 plan, that had a giant pool to cover costs above $50,000 - his def of catastrophic. Taking away this large risk is very important to small businesses. If you had 10 employees consider what happens to the per employee the next year if one employee has open heart surgery. Many small businesses that had offered insurance were forced after such circumstances to no longer provide insurance for anyone - as it was too expensive. (Kerry chairs the Small Business Committee.)

This does not impact how the plan looks to the employee - who doesn't care that some high costs are paid by a national pool.

[frazzled]

50. Right on that web page, bubbie ... at the very top ...

Under the heading, Barack Obama's Plan ... a few paragraphs from the intro

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/

Or are you just pretending to be obtuse. I already said it was the FIRST point in his plan.

[sjdnb]

42. ELIZABETH EDWARDS makes a point

about concerns she has with Obama's Health Care Plan and that is an ATTACK?!?!

If you (or, Obama supporters) think this is an attack, maybe you're not ready to face what will get thrown at you in the GE.

[karynnj]

49. If it is a lie the night before the caucus?

[Laurab]

53. Well, I think we'd expect LIES from REPUKES more in the GE

and lies by repukes don't worry me much. Elizabeth Edwards, a sympathetic figure because of her cancer, is being used as an attack dog right before the caucus and LYING about her husband's opponent. She's done it a few times during the campaign. I would expect better from her and her husband, really I would. "Concerns she has with Obama's Health Care Plan"....yeah right.

I like John Edwards - he was in my top choices, but something like this could, and probably just did, change my mind.

[sjdnb]

58. Obama's plan would NOT cover her

"Reducing Costs of Catastrophic Illnesses for Employers and Their Employees: Catastrophic health expenditures account for a high percentage of medical expenses for private insurers. The Obama plan would reimburse employer health plans FOR A PORTION OF the catastrophic costs they incur above a threshold if they guarantee such savings are used to reduce the cost of workers' premiums."

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare /

This is to cut employer's a break, not the underinsured or uninsured. And, it doesn't mean the employers will be required to provide it.

They'll be reimbursed for a portion of the costs if they, go over some undefined "threshold" and guarantee the reimbursement will go to reducing the employee's premium ... yeah, that's gonna work.

[FrenchieCat]

59. That's employER, not employEE

Obama's plan would reimburse a portion of the EMPLOYER'S cost......as long as it is used to offset the EMPLOYEE's premium.

The EMPLOYEE gets the coverage, regardless. :eyes:

[sjdnb]

61. Read the entire thing... only if the employer

decides to participate ... aka thinks it's in his/her best interest ... which, under Obama's currently defined plan, the corporation would probably would NOT be!

Are you people really so smitten so as to not be able to interpret a plan accurately?

[Laurab]

60. You're repeating yourself I think.

And your post was already answered by someone else, I believe, so I'd suggest you read through the whole thread.

[Laurab]

54. Damn, Sniffa I didn't mean to kill your thread

it was doing so well...but "It’s just kind of a complete untruth.” and I couldn't take it!

[sniffa]

55. i'll never forgive you for this

x(

[Laurab]

56. Oh, you will, too - sometimes I'm just such a party-pooper

but, there are so many more you can start - endless material to work with, I KNOW you'll think of another one that's even better! :evilgrin: