Krugman is NOT a Clinton Shill. He's mostly a single issue voter with a valid opinion

[KittyWampus]

on Hillary's Health Insurance proposal. There are other Health Economists whose opinion differ with Krugman.

Note I said Health INSURANCE proposal, because she is not advocating Universal Health CARE Access.

Neither candidate is.

Both Obama and the Clintons have plans with strengths and weaknesses.

It's terrific that on this one issue this forum has actually begun to talk about something of substance. In fact, it's one of the ONLY issues this forum has gone beyond neener-neener silliness.

I applaud all DU'ers who've presented their candidates plans and critiqued their opponents.

Personally, I am for a Single Payer Health Care.

The second disappointing option left after Single Payer is REGULATING THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY as the first practical step.

Since Hillary and Obama are afraid to kill off the blood-sucking parasite that is the Health Insurance Industry, then that industry should be regulated to within an inch of it's life. Shrunken to a weakened state so we can eventually drown it in the bathtub.

IMO, Obama's plan does that most effectively and has highest possibility of passing with the Democratic majority he'll help get into office.

[ursi]

1. hang on to him, desperately, then!

[KittyWampus]

2. you obviously didn't read my post. Go back and read it.

[papau]

12. Obama's Health adviser Dr Cutler says Krugman correct but not that many

fewer will be uninsured with out mandates and if it is a large number Obama will add mandates in a later bill.

As to regulating -

Obama's "regulating" of nuke emissions from power plants was "reporting".

[Occam Bandage]

3. He is a single-issue voter, yes. OTOH, his single issue is

Hillary Clinton's campaign.

I do agree with you about Obama's health care plan, of course, but Krugman's preference, I think, runs deeper than just this.

[OzarkDem]

4. Agree, his focus is policy, not candidates

Obama, however, doesn't even support his own health care reform plan. The same arguments he's using against Clinton's can be used to kill his plan, too.

[K Gardner]

5. Excellent post, cryingshame. Thanks !

[rodeodance]

6. Obama said in his speeches he will have a seat at the table for the Insurance folks--

I trust Sen. Clinton to hard ball negotiate much better.

Since Hillary and Obama are afraid to kill off the blood-sucking parasite that is the Health Insurance Industry,

[KittyWampus]

10. Hillary will lose the Dem party seats in Congress and in states across country.

that's #1 so forget a larger Democratic majority.

#2. Hillary has said she'll work with "fair minded Republicans" so she's EXACTLY like Obama in that regard
#3. Mandates at this time, are politically DOA.

So we are left with the more do-able case of shrinking the Health Insurance Industry to a size we can drown in the bathtub later.

[chascarrillo]

7. Absolutely.

Look, Krugman is in the enviable position to gain a paycheck by simply stating his opinion of things, so why should I chastise him for doing his job? That does so intelligently and he's a major credit to have on our side. He's chosen a different candidate than me, sure, but it's silly to think that he did so without putting a lot of thought and consideration into it.

[KittyWampus]

11. And I'm thrilled to see a substantive argument happening here in GDP!

[NC_Nurse]

8. I really like Paul Krugman and I understand his problems with

Obama's health care plan. However, clearly Clinton has gotten the most $ from pharma and
insurance companies. Just because her plan sounds good NOW doesn't mean it won't look very different
when she rolls out the final product once congress and her donors get their hands on it.

My hope is that Obama's plan will improve with congressional amendment and still be the best for the people, not the corporations.
I trust him a lot more than her.

[rodeodance]

13. Clinton got the American Nurses's Assoc endorsement. I will stick with that as

one factor to stick with the Clinton plan

[suston96]

9. Obama would punish those delaying signing -up but won't say how.....

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/opinion/04krugman.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

An Obama-type plan would also face the problem of healthy people who decide to take their chances or don’t sign up until they develop medical problems, thereby raising premiums for everyone else. Mr. Obama, contradicting his earlier assertions that affordability is the only bar to coverage, is now talking about penalizing those who delay signing up — but it’s not clear how this would work.

So the Obama plan would leave more people uninsured than the Clinton plan. How big is the difference?

To answer this question you need to make a detailed analysis of health care decisions.