John McCain’s Health Care Plan

Filed under: 2008 elections — Michael van der Galien, Editor-in-Chief on April 30, 2008 @ 8:00 pm CEST

‘Senator John McCain detailed his plan to solve the nation’s health care crisis in a speech here Tuesday, calling for the federal government to give some money to states to help them cover people with illnesses who have been denied health insurance,’ the NYT reports  (pay those poor guys and gals a visit; they need more advertisement money, and Lord knows what bloggers like I are going to do when the NYT is forced to fire journalists who actually do original reporting).

Mr. McCain’s health care plan would shift the emphasis from insurance provided by employers to insurance bought by individuals, to foster competition and drive down prices. To do so he is calling for eliminating the tax breaks that currently encourage employers to provide health insurance for their workers, and replacing them with $5,000 tax credits for families to buy their own insurance.

His proposal to move away from employer-based coverage was similar to one that President Bush pushed for last year, to little effect. And his call for expanding coverage through market-based competition is in stark contrast to the Democrats’ proposals to move toward universal health care coverage, with government subsidies to help lower-income people afford their premiums.

Mr. McCain had previously described aspects of his health care plan but on Tuesday offered new details on how to cover people with existing health problems, in a nod to the growing concerns about the difficulties that many sick, older and low-income people have getting insurance. Democrats had said that his market-driven plan, by not compelling insurance companies to cover people with health problems, would ignore the plight of people who have trouble getting coverage…

For people who currently get health insurance through their jobs, Mr. McCain’s plan would give them a tax credit that they could put toward buying a different, and potentially less expensive, health insurance plan tailored to their needs — and allow them to keep that health plan, and their doctors, even if they switch or lose their jobs.

But Democrats and some experts said the proposal might lead some employers to stop offering health insurance, and questioned whether the tax credit would cover the cost of private insurance…

Mr. McCain’s speech here implicitly acknowledged some of the shortcomings of his free-market approach. But rather than force insurers to stop cherry-picking the healthiest — and least expensive — patients, Mr. McCain proposed that the federal government work with states to cover those who cannot find insurance on the open market. With federal financial assistance, his plan would encourage states to create high-risk pools that would contract with insurers to cover consumers who have been rejected on the open market.

I don’t know about you, but I’m looking forward to a race between the Democratic nominee, and the Republican nominee.

Massive policy differences to talk about.

Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

1 Comment »

  1. 1 Diane Gregg

    October 4, 2008 @ 7:20 am CEST

    I have a controlled mental illness where I have to take only one pill a day to keep me completely normal (actually I am steadier than most people I know) and I only have to see a psychiatrist one time a year for my prescription.  Still Blue Cross Blue Shield of NC wants to charge 1700.00 a month for insurance just for me, not my family.  Because I cannot afford this my doctors work with me on cost.  My psychiatrist gives me shortened visits to make them cheaper.  My family doctor does not order tests unless they are absolutely necessary.  My daughter and husband do have insurance and they do not receive this cost-cutting help from doctors.  If doctors know you have good insurance they do not care how much the treatment costs and they pad treatment plans with unnecessary visits and tests.  Patients need to know costs up front, even if they have insurance.  This way patients could be part of the cost-cutting team.  Their copayment could be a percentage of the bill so they have a financial incentive to cut costs.  My sister has Medicaid and she abuses it mercilessly in collusion with her doctors.  She imagines she has every illness known to man and goes to doctors weekly.  They let her come and come and charge it all to you the taxpayers.  If we all get government healthcare this will be magnified by the millions.  Many people ENJOY going to the doctor.  You know those folks who like nothing better than to discuss their health?  They love medical care.  Many times they are just lonely and want human contact.  But we can’t afford to pay for friendships for them.  I would love to have medical insurance in case I get cancer or something.  I wish I could find a policy where I could pick out the coverage I want and reduce my premium by leaving out my pre-existing condition which runs my premium up so high.  But insurance companies don’t do this.  If you have depression you can’t get insured for cancer and diabetes even if your depression is under control.   Depression isn’t related to cancer, diabetes or a broken leg.  It’s stupid to deny me all insurance just because I take a pill a day for depression.  I like McCain’s plan better because Obama’s will lead to massive abuse.   Insurance companies could compete for our business.  Doctors should be made to disclose treatment costs up front so people can decide if a proposed treatment or test is worth the cost to them.  People will get the treatments that are really crucial to their care and let go the ones that are not really necessary.  In light of the economic meltdown it should be obvious that Americans just can’t afford Obama’s plans for healthcare, preschools, community development and a multitude of other things.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or willfully misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid use of vulgar language as well as racial, ethnic, or religious slurs.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim) or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email.


Editorial Staff

Editor-in-Chief: Michael van der Galien
Managing Editor: Jason
Assistant Editor: Claudia



 



Listen to PoliGazette Radio on internet talk radio




 

Proud member of Moderate Blog Network, a FeedBurner Network.

Recent Comments

  • Michael van der Galien, Editor-in-Chief: redfish i didn’t see this comment till now.nice vid - but...
  • Jay_C: Tough it out?  How can that be?  I’m confused, It’s either they need it (and worry about the...
  • Steve: No more First Amendment? — that is why Americans have a Second Amendment. Thugs may try to stiffle my...
  • Jay_C: I am forced to agree with this: " But compared to the cost of a depression, it’s still a steal at...
  • Jay_C: Question about this…The bailout failed the first time it was brought to the House.  Since the...

Partners

 

Your Ad Here