Obama mandates may come later (inconvenient truth retrieved from the wayback machine)

[jackson_dem]

-snip-

Edwards's approach is preferable to Obama's because it is less susceptible to being undermined by the cost-shifting created when the uninsured end up being treated at emergency rooms. Mr. Obama argues that the problem of the uninsured is mostly a matter of affordability, in which case solving the price problem would do the trick. If not, he says, a mandate could come later, when costs have been driven down enough to make it fair. Still, the Obama plan could leave a third of those currently uninsured lacking coverage.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/08/AR2007060802264_pf.html

This is what he was saying when his plan was originally presented. Only after he got attacked by Edwards and Clinton (yes Edwards didn't only criticize Clinton! In fact it was Edwards who first made Obama's health plan a campaign issue) over this did he play the hand he was dealt and completely erase any references to him "possibly" going to mandates for adults in the future from his campaign rhetoric and press releases.

The New Republic ran a piece on Obama's health plan in June that quoted his aides saying the same thing about possibly going down the mandate for all road in the future.

He did say he would not go to a mandate for adults until prices had been reduced but his rhetoric since he was attacked by his opponents gives voters the false impression that he opposes mandates on principle and hence misleads them into believing he would never implement them if elected.

[dkf]

1. In the long run only single payer will work.

We need to use all the money currently being spent on our horrendous health administration costs into real health care. This is the only solution.

The rest of this fight is BS.

[PurityOfEssence]

19. And conservatives will be the ones who give it to us

Seriously. It won't be out of the kindness of their alleged hearts, but cold-blooded calculation of the disadvantage our corporations have in a global marketplace when competing against foreign corporations who don't have to bear the burden of health care costs.

It'll happen simply because it makes sense, and much as it'll rankle their ideologue sensibility that every human endeavor should be performed via the profit motive, it'll be the only way.

[dkf]

22. At least the GMs and Fords of the world realize it.

Problem is if the solution to health care and retirement costs becomes bankruptcy. Or if they move all the jobs to Canada first.

[murielm99]

2. You posted this too late at night.

It needs to be seen by the day crowd, too, even if they go into extreme denial.

[jackson_dem]

5. Then let's kick it during the day tomorrow

:D

[DUyellow]

3. so he says if his way doesnt work, then he will make it work for that 3% So he does cover everybod

[jackson_dem]

4. Why isn't he straight about his position?

After all he is the man who vows to "tell you what you need to hear, not what you want to hear" (itself a veiled swipe at Hillary). Why don't you just tell us what you believe, Barack?

[DUyellow]

32. he has said, he will not leave people out... he has said that his plan is not concrete...

he has said things will have to change when it goes into congress. YOU JUST CHOOSE NOT TO LISTEN.

he has said, at last resort, he would do a mandate for the last 3%... The fact that you know this speaks for itself.

saying that 15 Mil will be left out is BS... you know that.

He says he will leave nobody out, and if he has to change parts of his plan to make that happen he will.

we believe in a different way of doing it, i trust his judgment.

[jackson_dem]

33. I've watched all the debates. He hasn't mentioned this in a single one

Nor does he mention it in his stump speech.

15 million is a conservative estimate and based on real evidence. That is not the same as saying he would deny health care but the fact is not everyone will be covered under his plan and one consequence of that is higher prices for everyone who has insurance.

[DUyellow]

34. when in a debate or stump speech did he say "a mandate could come later"

When did Clinton say that she would go after people's wages in a stump speech or a debate? but she will, do you need a link for that?

he has said this in a speech that he will cover everybody and that he will if needed he will adjust his if some still do not for one reason or another. I have heard that in stump speeches.

[lligrd]

6. But We Will Have Time To Change His Mind About

Single Payer. And I for one intend to try very hard to do so.

[kerrygoddess]

7. Repeating what I said in my thread about Obama + fining parents

Now that everyone is paying attention and we've seen that some Obama supporters didn't know that he would fine parents who don't have healthcare for their kids, maybe some will get the importance of the mandate.

The bottom line if the public wants universal healthcare and most feel the way to achieve it is with mandates. Paul Krugman noted that you have to start there at the top to get what we need.

In '04 Kerry's healthcare plan was adjusted to reflect the Dem Party platform during the convention and some of Edwards ideas were joined into the plan.

What astounds me with everyone defending Obama's lack of the mandate is that no one seems to be looking to the future and thinking about the fact that if he is indeed the nominee, his healthcare plan will get tweaked during the convention -- as will all of his plans. Likewise so will Clinton's if she should become the nominee.

My point here is this. I think a lot of good people are arguing over this with out understanding that his position and plan could change and probably will because there will be enormous pressure on him from Edwards and Clinton to add a mandate. That pressure will also come from the many members of the party and other Dem leaders who think a mandate is neccessary. And when and if that happens - I predict some here who now decry the mandate will be saying -- yes we need a mandate.

All the states require auto insurance. You must have homeowner insurance. Think about it. We should ALL have healthcare insurance.

I posted this in response to the thread here on whether Kerry called for a mandate in '04. He didn't in '04 but did in '06 and he said in his speech in '06 that we must " secure the basic right of health coverage for every American." He has said many times that it should be a "right not an option" and Hillary Clinton says the same thing.

I think a lot of people here who support Obama would probably agree on that but won't say they think he should change his plan. Why not? Why not speak up and say Obama needs to add the mandate for all. We all deserve to health care in this country.

We simply can not afford to just agree blanketly with who ever our nominee is. No candidate is perfect. No candidate has all the right ideas. We have a convention not only to choose our nominee but to put forth a platform on all the issues. This issue is so important to so many Americans. We must get it right this time. We must.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4738055&mesg_id=4739332

[ProSense]

8. Obama's would never include garnishing wages, even his mandate for kids looks nothing like Hillary's

SEN. CLINTON: -- because this is a significant difference. You know, Senator Obama has said it's a philosophical difference. I think it's a substantive difference. He has a mandate for parents to be sure to insure their children. I agree with that. I just know that if we don't go and require everyone to have health insurance, the health insurance industry will still game the system, every one of us with insurance will pay the hidden tax of approximately $900 a year -- (applause) -- to make up for the lack of insurance.

And you know, in one of our earlier debates John Edwards made a great point. It would be as though Social Security were voluntary; Medicare, one of the great accomplishments of President Johnson, was voluntary. (Applause.) I do not believe that is going to work.

So it's not just a philosophical difference. You look at what will work and what will not work. If you do not have a plan that starts out attempting to achieve universal health care, you will be nibbled to death, and we will be back here, with more and more people uninsured and rising costs. (Applause.)

MS. BROWN: All right. We appreciate that you want to make a point.

Senator Obama, we have limited time --

SEN. OBAMA: Yeah.

MS. BROWN: -- so I would like Jorge to move on to another subject, or we're going to be out of time.

SEN. OBAMA: But I -- well, I -- I understand, but I think that Senator Clinton made a -- (laughter) -- you know, she's making a point, and I -- and I think I should have the opportunity to respond very briefly, and I'll -- I'll try to make it as quickly as possible.

MS. BROWN: Very briefly, absolutely.

SEN. OBAMA: Number one, understand that when Senator Clinton says a mandate, it's not a mandate on government to provide health insurance; it's a mandate on individuals to purchase it. And Senator Clinton is right; we have to find out what works.

Now, Massachusetts has a mandate right now. They have exempted 20 percent of the uninsured because they've concluded that that 20 percent can't afford it. In some cases, there are people who are paying fines and still can't afford it, so now they're worse off than they were. They don't have health insurance and they're paying a fine. (Applause.) And in order for you to force people to get health insurance, you've got to have a very harsh, stiff penalty. And Senator Clinton has said that we will go after their wages.

Now, this is a substantive difference. But understand that both of us seek to get universal health care. I have a substantive difference with Senator Clinton on how to get there, okay.

SEN. CLINTON: Well --

MS. BROWN: All right. All right, Senator Clinton --

SEN. CLINTON: Wait a minute. No, this is too important. (Laughter.) This is the number one issue that people talk to me about. You know, when a mother grabs my arm and says "I can't get the operation my son needs because I don't have health insurance," it is personal for me. And I just fundamentally disagree.

You know, Senator Obama's plan has a mandate on parents and a fine if parents --

SEN. OBAMA: That's right.

SEN. CLINTON: -- do not insure their children.

SEN. OBAMA: That's right.

SEN. CLINTON: Because he recognizes that unless we have some kind of restriction, we will not get there. He's also said that if people show up at the hospital sick without health insurance, well, maybe at that point, you can fine them.

We would not have a social compact with Social Security and Medicare if everyone did not have to participate. I want a universal health care plan. (Cheers, applause.)

SEN. OBAMA: That mother, who is desperate to get health care for her child, will be able to get that health care under my plan, point number one.

Point number two, the reason a mandate for children can be effective is, we've got a ability to make affordable health care available to that child right now. There are no excuses. If a parent is not providing health care for that child, it's because the parent's not being responsible under my plan, and those children don't have a choice.

But I think that adults are going to be able to see that they can afford it under my plan; they will get it under my plan. And it is true that if it turns out that some are gaming the system, then we can impose potentially some penalties on them for gaming the system. But the notion that somehow I am interested in leaving out 15 million people, without health insurance, is simply not true.

SEN. CLINTON: Well --

MS. BROWN: (Off mike) -- (applause).

SEN. CLINTON: We disagree on that.

link

[jackson_dem]

10. So how will he enforce his proposal to mandate parents as well as a possible future mandate for all?

[ProSense]

12. It will not be by garnishing people's wages. n/t

[jackson_dem]

13. How will he do it? Has he told anyone?

[kerrygoddess]

15. No he hasn't and neither has Clinton actually

but don't tell nosense that. ;)

[ProSense]

17. "but don't tell nosense that." Oh, so you're now going moronic, huh? Hillary said she would, deal

with it: Going after people's wages (video)

[jackson_dem]

20. How will Obama do it PS?

By just "hoping" it happens? There are only a few ways to do it and wage garnishment is probably the most effective enforcement mechanism. Whether or not it is politically feasible is a completely different issue.

[ProSense]

21. Not garnishing wages. How will Hillary? Voters need to choose one of them? How will Hillary? n/t

[jackson_dem]

24. How do you know?

Can you give us a link ;) to a statement by him on this?

Edwards stated he would do it by garnishing wages. Hillary hasn't been clear about how she would do it and I criticized her for this at the time. Of course, honesty and specificity about his agenda didn't get Edwards far did it? :shrug:

[ProSense]

25. "Hillary hasn't been clear about how she would do it and I criticized her for this at the time."

Vote Obama!

[jackson_dem]

29. But neither has Obama

Edwards was and I supported him.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

26. "You are so full of shit." Necessary? The words "going after people's wages" are hers. She is

running a shitty campaign. Deal with it, and stop being a jerk!


Edited profanity!

[kerrygoddess]

27. No they are Obama's words

Which Stephanopolous repeated frequently. Thanks for sharing though. Again I can only reiterate it was a great interview with HRC. I'm glad you posted the link.

[ProSense]

28. No they are her words:

STEPHANOPOULOS: You didn't get the chance to answer that question in the debate.

What is the answer to those two questions? Will you have fines for people who don't buy health care, don't apply -- don't go by the mandate? Will you garnish their wages?

CLINTON: George, let's put this in context, because this is a big difference between us. I think universal health care is a core Democratic value and a moral principle, and I'm absolutely going to doeverything I can to achieve that.

You know, if you look at my plan, it's a misstatement to say that people won't be able to afford it, because I have a very detailed approach about giving people health care tax credits,limiting --
I'm the only person who does -- limiting the percentage of what you would have to pay for a premium to a low percent of yourincome.

This plan has been examined by independent experts, and they agree with me, just as they agreed with Senator Edwards, as well, that if you do not start with a plan that attempts to achieve universal health care, you will not get there.

The insurance companies will continue to cherry-pick. The emergency rooms will be crowded. And once again, we will slide into the morass we're in now, where more and more people are uninsured and we don't get the quality outcomes that we should.

With respect to how do you get people to do it, I find this somewhat bewildering. Senator Obama has a mandate. He has a mandate on children. He has talked a lot about requiring people, if they show up to get some kind of health care, like in the emergency room, and they don't have health insurance, hitting them right then to make sure that they get some kind of health insurance.

Well, I don't think you should wait until someone's in distress or sick. I think you should look to sign people up when they come into contact with the health-care system or government agencies.

About 20 percent of the people who don't have health insurance in America today could well afford it, even at the cost that it is, which is exorbitant. So what we've got to do is have shared responsibility. Everybody has to pay something, but, obviously, on a sliding scale.

That's why my health care tax credit...

STEPHANOPOULOS: But let me interrupt you there.

CLINTON: ... and the premium cap will work.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me interrupt you there, because the other night at the debate, you said that you and Senator Edwards bit the bullet on this question...

CLINTON: That's right.

STEPHANOPOULOS: ... of mandates, and Senator Edwards was quite clear in his plan. He said if people still didn't buy the insurance, their wages would be garnished.

And I still haven't heard, if people can afford it and they don't buy the insurance, will their wages be garnished under your plan? Will they have to pay fines?

CLINTON: Well, they don't have to pay fines, George. We want them to have insurance. We want it to be affordable.

And what I have said is that there are a number of ways of doing that. Now, there's not just one way of getting to that.

I think you can automatically enroll people, and you will then say you've got to be part of this. It's what Senator Obama does for children. Clearly, he has a mandate, and he has a means of enforcing it or at least it appears he does.

And what I have learned over the last many years is that I'm sure the Congress has some ideas about this. But if you don't start with universal health care, if you don't say everybody's going to be in the system, we'll never get there.

And if you look at some of the misleading mailings that Senator Obama is sending out around the country, honest to goodness, it looks like it was written by the health-insurance companies.

It's so reminiscent of old "Harry and Louise" talking about how, oh, the sky will fall if we try to have universal health care.

He's playing right in to all of the arguments against this core value of the Democratic Party.

I will stand on the stage with John McCain and engage in that debate. Why would we want a nominee who leaves people out? And Senator McCain will say, well, I've got a plan and, yes, it leaves people out. So we're even.

That is not the kind of contrast we should be drawing going into this general election.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But, yet, Senator Clinton, we actually have that mailing and let me show our viewers quickly what you were talking about, because you referred to it.

It says that Hillary's plan will -- excuse me, let me read this again -- "forces everyone to buy insurance, even if you can't afford it. You pay a penalty if you don't."

And I want to bear down on this question one more time, because they're claiming this issue of the penalty. And a lot of independent health care experts, many who worked with you in 1994, say that without these enforcement mechanisms, you simply can't get to universal coverage, you can't claim to have universal coverage, so there's no difference between your plan and Senator Obama's.

And, I mean, you talked about automatic enrollment. Will you garnish wages of people who don't comply, don't buy the insurance?

CLINTON: George, we will have an enforcement mechanism. Whether it's that or it's some other mechanism through the tax system or automatic enrollments.

But you're missing, I believe, the key point. If you don't start with universal health care, and I have very aggressive cost controls and quality improvements, and my health care tax credits plus the premium cap that I am the only person to put in to a health care plan to say, your income will be adjusted so that a small percentage will be always the limit of what you have to pay for premiums.

If you don't do what I am saying we do, we will never even attempt to get to universal health care. And the reason why I think there are a number of mechanisms, going after people's wages, automatic enrollment, when you are at the place of employment, you will be automatically enrolled, whatever the mechanism is is not as important as, number one, the fundamental commitment to universal health care, the appreciation that, with health care tax credits and with a premium cap, it will be affordable for everyone.

And the misleading information that Senator Obama's campaign is putting out, that I will force people to do it even if they can't afford it, is absolutely untrue.

CLINTON: There will be mechanisms to enable everyone to afford it. We have costed this out, and we will be able to achieve it.

So isn't it better that we start with a system that gets everybody in than starting with a plan that leaves 15 million people out to start, which will only get bigger and bigger as time goes on?

link

It took her long enough to answer the question.

[Johnny__Motown]

9. Then shouldn't Clinton supporters like his plan more? Now that we know a mandate may come later?

Honesty I think most of us already knew this.


It seems that Obama is using the reverse of Republican tactics that have plagued us during the Shrub administration.

He wants to get things passed, make them law. Then revisit them and strengthen them. W has done this with everything from the Patriot act to tax cuts.


Perhaps if you comprehended what he is trying to do you might support him.

[jackson_dem]

11. I know what he is doing

1) Getting the easy part done first sounds better in theory but negotiations occur with every bill. Why not try for a mandate the first time and if you don't have the votes revert to the current Obama idea and come back with a mandate later? The reason Obama doesn't have a mandate for parents is because he knows the rethugs would use it in the general (whereas a mandate for children is on surer political footing). That is where he is politically wise.

2) He is also being disingenuous and that is what this thread is about. Once again the reality of Obama clashes with his rhetoric and the Obama myth. He says he will "tell you what you need to hear, not what you want to hear" on the stump in a thinly veiled swipe at Hillary. He does not live up to his own standard.

[Johnny__Motown]

30. I disagree, he is honest about his plan. The fact that it may change later is a separate issue

Every program is revisited in government. We are still looking at changes in social security and FDR started that.

The fact that he is realistic about getting a plan passed without a mandate is more honest than saying you will try for a mandate then barter it away later.

Also, the AVAILABILITY of health care will be universal. This is something that the Clinton people always skip over. He is simply taking a different approach to the people who will resist buying it.


One last point, Hillary has given no specifics what so ever as to the enforcement mechanism that will uphold her mandate. Not how it will function, not how large it will need to be, not how it will be regulated, not how much it will cost, not how it will be funded and not how effective we can expect it to be.

Until we have specifics on her non-existent enforcement entity nobody should support her mandate.

[JimGinPA]

14. You Linked An Uncredited Op-Ed From Last June?

:eyes:

[jackson_dem]

16. June. This was his position before Edwards criticized him on this issue in a debate...

Guess which month that debate was held?

There was also a New Republic article. The link isn't working for it right now but it got significant attention at the time. Are you claiming the Washington Post and New Republic fabricated these things? That is funny. I don't remember any complaints from the Obama campaign about fabrications from those two at the time...

[kerrygoddess]

18. Here's the original link - from from Editorial Board at the WaPo

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/08/AR2007060802264.html

WTF? Not at all uncredited. It was clear it was an editorial not an Opinion.

[flor de jasmim]

31. Something vital that may have gotten lost in the shuffle

Obama is working towards mobilizing people to work towards bettering their own future. He also talks about sitting down and discussing the issues--isn't it reasonable to suppose, then, that he would be willing to listen to the voice of the people on this issue?? If he changes course now he'll be called a flip-flopper by HRC and the Repubs.