Yes, it is.

Post #293,146 by bepatient 9/18/07 10:02:54 PM Reply	Yes, it is. Mass isn't exactly the bastion of free market thinking either. In fact, alot of their politicians make Hill look downright conservative. Still, at least in their plan their is something that discusses affordability and no interview discussions about how you MUST have insurance to get a job. And be it a couple thousand or a couple million...at min you are talking about expanding an existing gov't program by a factor of 10...maybe you are just playing semantics when you say it will require no new bureaucracy because there is an org with that name already in the government...but since they'll have to hire 10 times more workers to run it (assuming reasonable gov't efficiency...a very large assumption)...I would consider that new bureaucracy. Now for the real kicker...how is it anything other than a forced tax on the poor? Do you think the uninsured are really happy about it? And how is it supposed to reform the system if it is simply using the existing infrastructure? Inquiring minds want to know? Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry._{Adrian Belew}
Post #293,150 by Another Scott 9/18/07 10:36:25 PM Reply	Hmmm.. [link\|http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/09/hillarys-websid.html\|Wired]: Dan Balz of The Washington Post and [link\|http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/09/18/in_ways_clinton_healthcare_plan_resembles_romneys_mass_solution/\|others] noted that Clinton's plan is in fact remarkably similar to Romney's own much-lauded health care scheme that he proposed for his own state, and which was subsequently enacted into law. Balz notes: There are differences in some details of the two plans -- the subsidies available for purchasing health care, the size of the tax on big companies that don't offer insurance, the scope of the basic benefits package, the tax credits offered to small businesses to provide insurance. But as Jonathan Gruber, an economist at MIT, told me today, the two plans are "very, very similar." Gruber advised Romney as governor in the development of the Massachusetts plan and now is a member of a board overseeing its implementation. He said Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards consulted him as they were preparing their proposals this year. One portion of Clinton's plan provides doctors and insurance companies with incentives to use "privacy -protected information technology." The point is to make health care more efficient and affordable. This subject has been an ongoing legislative issue in Congress for the past few years. Clinton has even worked with her husband's nemesis Newt Gingrich on this. I really think you're making too much of that sound bite, just as you did about her comment on oil company taxes. It's hard for me to read her [link\|http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/healthcareplan/americanhealthchoicesplan.pdf\|summary of her plan] (16 page .pdf) and reach the conclusions you have based on some sentence fragments. People can and will argue about the specifics of her plan, as well they should, but arguing with a caricature of the plan isn't very enlightening, IMHO. Cheers, Scott.
Post #293,157 by bepatient 9/18/07 11:43:00 PM Reply	How many times does she need to make these "mistakes" in her soundbites before you realize they aren't, in fact, mistakes or misstatements? And its hard to not call it a forced tax it indeed the state 1) requires you enroll and pay and 2) attaches penalties if you don't. But her carefully crafted sales document makes it sound wonderful..like how it "offers new choices". Reality is its not a really a choice. Its a government mandate. There are aspects of the proposal that are fine and, indeed, well thought out. Unification of insurance rules and elimination of "pre-existing condition" outs for companies. But it also contains language like..."Hillary Clinton\ufffds comprehensive agenda to lower costs and improve quality will substantially lower costs for employers, making it easier for all firms to continue coverage or offer new health benefits to their workers. In return, large employers will be expected to provide health insurance to their employees or make some contribution to the cost of coverage. This responsibility will take into account firms\ufffd size and average wages." Problematic because 1) promises HUGE savings based on "use of modern technology" which we've all heard before..the internet was going to change everything in corporate America and 2) just how do you enforce that "expectation"..and if you increase their expense with this "expectation" all you do is cost people their jobs. Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry._{Adrian Belew}
Post #293,245 by jb4 9/19/07 10:05:55 PM Reply	Re: Yes, it is. Mass isn't exactly the bastion of free market thinking either. but is is a bastion of Mitt Romney's thinking (or what passes for it). And to hear him spout it, they ain't nothing more free market that Mitt Romney! jb4 "It's hard for me, you know, living in this beautiful White House, to give you a firsthand assessment." — George W. Bush, when asked if he believed Iraq was in a state of civil war (Newsweek, 26 Feb 07)

Welcome to IWETHEY!