Dean: Individual Mandate Will Be Removed From Health Care Reform By 2014

[depakid]

Former DNC Chairman Howard Dean has never been a fan of the individual mandate for insurance coverage, both on policy and political grounds. And once Senate negotiators removed any hope of a public option for insurance coverage from the final health care reform package, he became much more outspoken in his criticism.

The logic, simply put, was that there were other avenues for providing health care coverage to large swaths of the population without forcing them to sign up with private insurers. Dean would know -- he expanded health care coverage for kids without an individual mandate while serving as governor of Vermont.

On Friday, the former DNC chair took his skepticism with the individual mandate to a different, more provocative level. Appearing on MSNBC, Dean predicted that the policy will be removed from the legislation by the time much of the reform is implemented in 2014.

His comments come just days after a Virginia judge ruled that the provision is unconstitutional -- something that Dean took into his calculations. But the case he made was also based on the belief that a mandate will never achieve broad popular support, something that appears relatively true at this early juncture.

Dean: The truth is the mandate's not essential to the plan anyway. It never was esential to the plan. They did it in massachusetts and had a mandate, but we have universal health care for kids in my state without a mandate.

Savanah Guthrie: How can you say that? the way it's explained to us by the White House if you do anything about preexisting conditions, you got to get everybody into the game. Without the mandate, you can't require insurance companies to stop prohibiting --
Dean: We did in my state. We did it 20 years ago in my state.

Chuck Todd: How did you do it?

Dean: We just said all comers will have to get insurance and you can't charge -- this is why our bill is so much better than what they passed -- you can't charge more than 20 percent above the basic rate; in the Senate it's 300 percent, based on age. The fact of the matter is that I thought the president was right in the campaign. Academically you want a mandate. The American people aren't going to put up with a mandate.

I made this prediction before and I'm going to make it again: by the time this thing goes into effect in 2014, I think the mandate will be gone either through the courts or because it's unpopular. You don't need it. There will be two or three percent of the people who cheat. That is not enough to bring the system to a halt and people don't like to be told what to do.

More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/06/dean-individual-mandate-w_n_673218.html

[ProSense]

1. Here's a piece

criticizing Dean's statement

[depakid]

4. Didn't you already post that in another thread? LOL

I doubt the courts will do it- but I can surely see the political advantage.

[ProSense]

7. "I doubt the courts will do it"

So you started a thread with a definitive and inaccurate statement by Dean?

[depakid]

8. People have differing legal opinions on the matter- doesn't make them inaccurate

until the court(s) actually rule.

Your problem with it is that it doesn't fit with the party line- nothing more and nothing less.

[ProSense]

9. "Individual Mandate Will Be Removed From Health Care Reform By 2014"

How does he know this? Who does he think will remove it? Missouri's decision isn't even binding.

[depakid]

10. He's making a prediction!

Just as Krugman and others with elementary math skills and an understanding of macroeconomics made predictions about the failure of the stimulus to get the best bang for the buck, bridge the output gap and deal with anti-stimulatory state budget cuts.

Dean's looking at the politics- and what courts might potentially do with this fiasco (which I'm quite sure he's pleased to have had nothing to do with).

I think he may well be right about the former- the mandate's unpopular and will get even more so as the failure to contain costs and prevent medical bankruptcies becomes ever more apparent.

[ProSense]

11. Based on what?

Pie in the sky wishes?

[depakid]

12. LOL- based on political acumen. You know- the thing that rescued the Democratic party

from minority status and handed them the opportunity to be the dominant political force for a generation.

You know, that thing that the Obama administration and the Senate Democrats squandered though crap legislation and endless pandering to the corporate right?

[ProSense]

15. "based on political acumen"

What does that have to do with policy?

The fact is that claiming the mandate will be removed based on a gut feeling doesn't cut it.

[depakid]

17. Claiming that the Democratic party could be resurrected from its sorry state in the 2000's

was more than a gut feeling-

Too bad the Democrats haven't followed through with it- rather than choosing to pandering to the corporate right, and enabling and legitimizing Republicans and their failed ideology... again.

Unfortunately, that was a once in a lifetime opportunity that is unlikely to be repeated on this scale.

[ProSense]

18. I'm referring to the claim about the mandate.

What is it based on? You said political acumen.

[depakid]

19. You just don't know when to quit

I think this irks you because you know that your guru broke campaign promises on this and with his sell out of the public option (despite well over 70% support).

Now the Dems are left with unpopular mandates to defend, even as premiums rise and benefits are cut. That's going to be damaging to them politically- as well it should.

[ProSense]

20. Health care law signed,

and its popularity is increasing.

No complaints from me.

[depakid]

23. errr... mandates aren't popular- never were and never will be

which is the issue in the OP.

As to "complaints," Obama could advocate burka's and you'd be talking about reductions skin cancer rates...;)

[kelly1mm]

24. Dead on right! +1 nt

[ProSense]

25. It's the most unpopular part of the bill, but

mostly among Republicans, and not with a significant majority.

Poll: Increasing Number Of Americans Oppose Repealing Health Care Law

[eridani]

27. Because nothing has happened, other things are on the front burner

Let a mandate for useless crap that you can't afford to use come into effect, and that will quickly change.

[xchrom]

2. The courts might 'fix' it - I don't have a lot of faith

Capital Hill will want visit it again that soon.


And I don't have a lot of faith in government
And private enterprise getting divorced
So soon after getting married.

[ibegurpard]

3. I have a feeling that the mandate will be the last thing to go

Supreme Court is full of corporate shills.

[ZombieHorde]

6. That has been the pattern, lets hope your feeling won't come to pass. nt

[ZombieHorde]

5. I would love to see the mandate gone by 2014. nt

[RBInMaine]

13. All a moot point. The "mandate" is subsidized, and there are exemptions already for the poor. Chill.

[depakid]

14. Not a moot point at all- but an unpopular and ineffective policy with a 70% actuarial value

that will do next to nothing to protect people from medical bankruptcies.

Dean and Vermont managed to deal with the problem without a mandate- so he's already done the put up or shut up, whereas the administration and the Senate didn't even try.

[ProSense]

16. "Dean and Vermont managed to deal with the problem without a mandate"

Maybe you should read this again.

[Milo_Bloom]

22. Do you even read your own links?

NOTHING in the link provided disproves what was stated.

[Milo_Bloom]

21. Little question the mandate, as enacted, is unconstitutional.

[Dragonfli]

26. I certainly hope so, Was not looking forward to having to pay the poor tax for not

having enough money to feed the corps for a policy I could not afford to ever use.

It looks like I may be able to still afford food in 2014 after all!
fingers crossed

[JVS]

28. I hope he's right, but I don't see the mandate going unless the republicans just scrap it all

[Honeycombe8]

29. So...he did not provide coverage for all in his state? Just children?

So he did not do what Massachusetts did, which was to get coverage for almost every person, adults included, in the state.

I don't see why that gives Dean some sort of moral high ground. The country already provides health care to almost all children, even w/o health care reform, correct? If you're poor, kids get Medicaid and other programs for underprivileged kids. If you have a job, you buy family coverage through your employer's group plan. It's only the working poor who have a problem. That's a big problem, for sure. But all the others are covered w/o health care reform.

It's the adults who are the issue, I think.