WP:Simple Question Defines Complex Health Debate

[godai]

Good article which explains well the differences and issues with the Obama and Clinton proposals....excerpts follow...

---------------------------------------------------------------
The defining difference between the Democratic presidential candidates on the top domestic issue in their recent debate and throughout the campaign has been their contrasting views on a seemingly simple question: Should the government require all Americans to have health insurance?

Of the 47 million people in the United States who lack coverage, they argue, some are uninsured by choice and would remain so unless required to join. Many of those most likely to stay uninsured are young, healthy people who probably would not need to go to the doctor -- and whose premiums would help cover the cost of care for those who do.

If only the sick and those most likely to need care buy in, insurers would need to charge higher premiums. That, in turn, would make policies harder to afford and increase pressure on the government to further subsidize the plans, driving up the overall cost.

Critics of the individual mandate say forcing people to obtain insurance is unfair and ineffective. Some Americans will not sign up no matter what, they say. In California, for instance, 25 percent of drivers lack auto insurance even though the state requires it, according to the Insurance Research Council, an industry group. That is higher than the share of Californians without health insurance, about 20 percent.

The government would have to enforce a mandate, perhaps through garnishing wages, opponents say.

In Massachusetts, scofflaws who do not buy health insurance this year face a penalty of as much as $912, imposed on their 2008 state tax return.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/23/AR2008022302026.html