Expanding Workers Health Insurance Coverage Facts
Best Answers
Who needs a private sector when we have a Clinton make our health-care choices? Who needs a private sector when we have a Clinton make our health-care choices?
The new Hillary health-care plan is very different from the old 1993-1994 Hillary plan. It is far slyer, and far cleverer, far more well-packaged. The same arguments that applied to the old Hillary plan do not necessarily apply to the new plan. But the new health plan ends up in the same place as the old health plan with the government running everything.
Here are the primary problems with the new Hillary health plan:
What Entitlement Crisis?
As everyone should know by now, our nation faces a dramatic entitlements crisis that will play out over the next 30 years. Federal spending has been hovering in a fairly stable manner, around 20-percent of GDP (Gross Domestic Product), for over 50 years now, since the early 1950s. But the Federal governments own official projections show that over the next 30 years or so, federal spending will soar to 40-percent of GDP, requiring total federal taxes as a percent of GDP to double. This is due to the exploding costs of the entitlement programs we already have, primarily Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.
Hillary Clinton and other Democrats respond to this overwhelming crisis by proposing that we not reform any of the existing entitlements. Rather, they suggest that we endorse massive new entitlements, including for instance, National Health Insurance. Policy suggestions like this force one to wonder, are the democrats numerically illiterate?
The Individual Mandate
Hillary Clintons plan starts out very simply: she will mandate under federal law that everyone in America must buy health insurance, and by this she supposedly achieves universal coverage. The catch, of course, is that once you start down the road with this mandate, you end up with government-run health care.
If you are going to require people to buy health insurance, then the next question which follows is, exactly what do they have to buy to fulfill this requirement? Suppose they buy the Fraternity Plan that pays only for unlimited beer and pizza during the weekends? Have they satisfied the requirement?
The serious point is if you are going to require people to buy health insurance, then you are going to have to specify exactly what health-plan people will have to buy to satisfy this requirement. So the government has gone from telling you that you need health insurance, to telling you what kind of health-insurance coverage or plan you must have. And with Hillary, we can assume that this will be no basic, minimum plan. But Hillary continues to insist that this is not government-run health care.
And this, of course, is only the beginning. Special interests will swarm to get their favored coverage in the required plan. People will merrily get used to billing everything in the plan to the insurance company. And costs will rise.
People will start complaining that they cant afford paying for this costly coverage, and whining that the government must do something. The government itself will already be paying for a lot of this coverage, and budgets will therefore explode.
So the government will do something to control costs. It will start rationing. It will start telling people what services and treatments they can have, and when. It will start delaying access to new innovations. It will squeeze payments to health care providers so much that the providers will start rationing what they provide. Government guidelines will start dictating to these providers that they ration care, and how to do it. After a while, people start to realize, hey, we have government run health care.
Dont doubt it. This is exactly what happens with every other country that tries to mandate or provide coverage through government. They realize ultimately there must be some way to control costs. There is no market in these plans to control costs. So the government must do it through the only alternative rationing. Indeed (we will see below), Hillarys plan already includes the machinery for this rationing.
It doesnt help that a small band of too clever conservatives have been supporting just such an individual mandate since 1993-94, when broad ions from conservatives defeated their plan. Congratulations to these folks today. Hillary Clinton has adopted their plan, just as they were forewarned.
The Employer Tax
Since workers would now have to buy insurance under the Hillary plan; employers would have to pay for it wherever possible. All large companies would be required to provide health coverage for their workers (a plan, again, specified by the government), or pay a tax to the government. Already paying among the highest corporate tax rates in the industrialized world, this is just what our corporations need another tax. Once the politicians get used to raiding this corporate cookie jar, the tax will soon be higher than the corporate income tax. When that tax burden leads to unemployment, no problem, we will just raise taxes on the rich again, and pay for more welfare. All of this will just improve the economy, the Clintons promise.
The Refundable Tax Credit
Where employers dont pay for health coverage, the government will. Hillary proposes a refundable tax credit for the purchase of health insurance that will leave workers paying no more than a specified percentage of their incomes for the coverage. Hillarys campaign is already calling this A Net Tax Cut for American Taxpayers.
The problem with this is that the bottom 40-percent of income earners do not pay any income taxes, and the middle 20-percent now pay for very little (this is the end result of all those Republican tax cuts for the rich all these years). But the tax credit is refundable, meaning that if you dont have enough tax liability to take advantage of the credit, the government will still send you a check for the entire credit. So the tax credit here is not giving you back your own tax money. It is giving you back other peoples tax money. So this is not, in fact, a tax cut. It is a new spending program, a new entitlement program, in fact.
We already have a huge program called Medicaid to pay for health coverage for people who are too poor to pay for it themselves. The federal government is now spending close to $250 billion on this program, in addition to probably another $150 billion from the states. And these costs are just projected to explode and explode again over the next 30 years. In other words, we already cant afford the Medicaid program as it currently stands. But what Hillary is proposing with these tax credits is a massive expansion of it. And we are back to the democratic chimeras again.
Unfortunately, some conservative Republicans have recently toyed around with the idea of refundable tax credits for the purchase of health insurance as well. They have rightly been trying to change tax code incentives to get workers to own their own health insurance rather than relying on employers. Realizing, however, that the tax changes would do nothing for at least half of all workers who now pay little or no income tax, they have been considering various refundable plans to expand the help to lower income workers. The fallacy here is trying to provide assistance to the poor, and to low income workers, through the tax code. This is what Medicaid is for, and lawmakers should focus on helping those with lower incomes through reforming that program.
But Hillary is not done with the refundable tax credits. She would provide such credits as well to small businesses who buy health insurance for their workers, paying for as much as 50-percent of premiums for firms with fewer than 25 employees. And she would also bail out big companies, who are now being crushed by foolish past promises to pay for health insurance for their retirees, with still more tax credits. In return, corporate big shots from these companies publicly intone that indeed, it is time for national health insurance. A better solution would be to just have the government take over these already socialized companies and finish running them into the ground.
Government-Run Health Care
Hillary wisely calls her plan the American Health Choices Plan. Accordingly, everyone will be free to choose one of the health insurance options in the Federal Employee Health Benefits Plan. But how is this not government-run health care? No company gets on the list of plans in the FEHBP without first complying with a host of federal requirements and controls. Thats alright when the government is providing insurance for its own employees. But should we be treating all workers in the economy as if they are government workers when it comes to health insurance? Is this not precisely what is meant by excessive government control?
While the FEHBP embodies good policy for the federal government dealing with its own employees, excessive rhetoric from the original designers of that system (about how it is a model for all health insurance) has now brought us to the point of believing that all workers in the private economy ought to be treated as government employees when it comes to health care.
Hillary will also provide, as another option, the choice of a completely government run, government financed health insurance plan. Why? And, again, how is this not government run health care? Moreover, how benign will this plan really be when she is done subsidizing it up the kazoo, and driving all the private plans out of business with her blizzard of regulatory requirements?
Bye, Bye Private Insurance
Hillarys plan will also impose guaranteed issue on all private health-insurance plans. This means that insurers cannot reject anyone for their insurance, even on the grounds that the patient is already woefully sick and costly. Moreover, insurers wont be able to charge more costly patients higher premiums.
Effectively, this would necessarily end any real private insurance in America. Under these requirements, companies are no longer insuring health costs, they are simply financing health costs. Health insurers would be like fire insurers who are required to issue new policies at standard rates to those who show up to buy coverage after their homes have already caught fire. Clearly, this is unworkable.
Hillary says the insurers are supposed to be in the business of spreading the risk, not cherry picking the most healthy. But when someone shows up to buy health insurance with cancer and heart disease, we are no longer talking about risks. We are talking about payout. This is not an insurance business.
Rest assured, moreover, that the healthy with health insurance do not want to see the risks of the irredeemably unhealthy spread to them. Those without health insurance who have become uninsurable can, and should, be served through other means, such as state uninsurable risk pools that do not involve trashing the health-insurance system for everyone else. But trashing the private health-insurance market is exactly what Hillary and her allies advocate.
Rationing
Finally, there is the Best Practices Institute, which should be called the Ministry of Truth for health care. These folks will study all sorts of medical care, issue protocols, and standards for what is the best way to treat this or that. And dont expect any insurers anywhere, public or private, to pay for anything other than what these folks say is the best practice. To oppose the Institute, of course, would just be to pay for waste and inefficiency.
So this is the ideal mechanism for imposing the inevitably necessary rationing. New, expensive medical breakthroughs will be overlooked, or delayed. If your doctor has a brilliant insight on how to treat you, no problem. All you have to do is go to the Best Practices Institute in Washington, explain why this treatment is the right one for you, and get the regs changed. In this brave new world, life insurance will be a lot more valuable to people than health insurance.
Insurers, now all under the control of government, will also impose rationing by squeezing reimbursements to health providers, with the limited funds the new system will allow them, until the providers themselves cut back. This is what the government already does with Medicaid, and increasingly with Medicare.
And there is so much more. In Hillarys three speeches and three papers on her website, she outlines dozens of new health care requirements in her new system, which will not be government run. The government is all wise and all knowing, and just needs to make sure the rickety old health-care system gets it all right, as it is dragged into the 21st century.
And when Hillary gets done with those fascist drug companies, you can forget about any new breakthrough drugs coming to market in the future, running up costs.
But remember, the system is not government run, and dont let those nasty Republicans tell you otherwise.
Brian replied: "Thank God for Mrs. Clinton. She is so much smarter than everyone else. She will take good care of me............"
Moody Red replied: "Let this Conservative tell you very briefly, if a man/woman goes to obtain a position with an employer, and has to show proof of health insurance before he/she could be hired, which is part of the proposal. This would absolutely, and with certainty, be a coercive and centralized plan."
Mark J replied: "I, in no way, have the time to read that book you just copied and pasted. But I also, in no way, will trust Hillary Clinton to make my healthcare choices for me either. Why did I work my ass off in college to find a job that gives me and my family benefits such as health care and dental? I already have a hard enough time as it is providing for my family. Am I gonna have to start paying more to provide for people that can't provide for themselves? If my daughter gets sick, is she gonna have to wait days, even weeks to see a doctor because the hospitals and doctor's offices are overwhelmed more than they already are? This is great for the poor, and it won't affect the rich too much. So the only people I see taking the burden for this are middle class citizens like myself. And that is the majority of this country."
kevw25 replied: "Im not voting for hillary. Next time, if you copy that much,just post a link."
Schaufel replied: "One thing you forgot to mention... if this is tried, it will never go away, no matter how awful the consequences... once the government begins to provide services, and drive out private competition, we can never go back... it is political suicide for any politician to suggest so... therefore we will be permanately stuck with Socialist healthcare until the United States collapses under the weight of all this bureaucracy!
Remember what Ronald Reagan used to say, "the closest thing to immortality is a government program".
GOD Save us if Hillary Roddham-Marx... I mean Clinton... becomes president!"
Which candidate do you agree with on Health insurance? A=Mandatory universal coverage in first term. Tax credits for working families to make insurance more affordable ensuring premiums do not exceed a percentage of income. Business would be required to offer insurance to employees or pay into a pool for people without it. Expand Medicare and federal employees' health insurance plan to cover those without adequate workplace insurance. Raise taxes on wealthier families to help pay estimated cost of $110 billion a year. Also, raise taxes on a portion of "very generous" plans covering people making more than $250,000.
B=Mandatory coverage for children, no mandate for all. Aim for universal coverage by requiring employers to share costs of insuring workers and by offering coverage similar to that in plan for federal employees. Says package would cost up to $65 billion a year after unspecified savings from making system more efficient. Raise taxes on wealthier families to pay the cost.
C=$2,500 refundable tax credit for individuals, $5,000 for families, to make health insurance more affordable. No mandate for universal coverage. In gaining the tax credit, workers could not deduct the portion of their workplace health insurance paid by their employers.
D=Incentives for states to expand affordable coverage. As governor, he signed health care law aimed at ensuring universal coverage through a mix of subsidies, sliding scale premiums and penalties for those who do not get insurance.
No Ron Paul answers please, just refrain from posting. Thank you.
A= Clinton
B= Obama
C= McCain
D= Romney
dlp1182000 replied: "C"
Chet M replied: "NONE"
Heidi 4 replied: "Best plan: Anyone making over $75,000 a year should buy and pay for their own health insurance. This should be adjusted by the number of minor children and extended until young adults reach age 24.
A sliding scale for those making less than $75,000 adjusted by number of children.
The truly middle and lower income families and individuals should be covered by eliminating all but the most essential pork barrel earmarks and raising taxes on those making $250,000 per year."
CP replied: "Romney is the ONLY cadidate that has addressed the health care crisis and come up with a solution that insured every person in Mass. He came to a bi-partisan agreement in a heavily democratic state. The plan did not raise taxes, kept health care private. Charges people on a sliding scale (if you make less, you pay less) and is seeing incredible success right now. There are over 200,000 citizens in Mass. that weren't insured before Romney and that number is growing by the hundreds every day.
Romney is the only candidate that has any experience in Health Care reform.
I don't want the DMV-type employees handing out my medicine and i don't want to raise taxes by trillions to do it."
Obama or Clinton? Read these carefully and give your vote for the best person who can lead us.? ON ABORTION
OBAMA
Opposes any constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v Wade. Disagreed with Supreme Court ruling to uphold the "Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act." Did not cast a vote on Prohibiting Funds for Groups that Perform Abortions amendment in 2007.
CLINTON
Will sign into law the Freedom of Choice Act, which would codify Roe v. Wade into federal law. Would overturn the "global gag rule," which prohibits Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) from talking about abortion in the event of an unplanned pregnancy. Voted against the Prohibit Partial Birth Abortion bill in 2003. Did not cast a vote on Prohibiting Funds for Groups that Perform Abortions amendment in 2007. Disagreed with Supreme Court ruling to uphold the "Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act."
-ON ECONOMIC STIMULUS
OBAMA
Would pump $75 billion into the economy via tax cuts and direct spending targeted to working families, seniors, homeowners and the unemployed. The plan also includes $45 billion in reserves that can be injected into the economy quickly in the future if the economy continues to deteriorate. Would provide an immediate $250 tax cut for workers and their families and an immediate, temporary $250 bonus to seniors in their Social Security checks. Would provide an additional $250 tax cut to workers and an additional $250 to seniors if the economy continues to worsen. Would extend and expand unemployment insurance
CLINTON
Would establish a $30 billion emergency housing fund to assist states and cities mitigate the effects of mounting foreclosures. Would also include a 90-day moratorium on subprime foreclosures and an automatic rate freeze on subprime mortgages of at least five years. Would provide $25 billion in emergency energy assistance for families facing skyrocketing heating bills. Would invest $10 billion in extending and broadening unemployment insurance for those who are struggling to find work. Would accelerate $5 billion in energy efficiency and alternative energy investments to jump-start green-collar job growth.
-EDUCATION
OBAMA
Would reform No Child Left Behind, ensuring access to high-quality early childhood education programs and child care opportunities, recruit well-qualified and reward expert, accomplished teachers. Make science and math education a national priority. Reduce the high school dropout rate and empower parents to raise healthy and successful children by taking a greater role in their child's education at home and at school.
CLINTON
Would end No Child Left Behind. Promote early childhood education, including nurse home visitation programs for new parents, quality child care and Head Start and pre-kindergarten for all 4-year-olds. Improve K-12 system by meeting funding promises of IDEA. Recruit outstanding teachers and principals, especially in urban and rural areas. Cut minority dropout rate in half. Expand early-intervention mentoring programs. Identify at-risk youth early and provide $1 billion in intensive interventions. Create a new $3,500 college tax credit and increase the maximum Pell Grant.
-ON HEALTH CARE
OBAMA
Would create a national health insurance program for individuals who do not have employer-provided health care and who do not qualify for other existing federal programs. Allows individuals to choose between the new public insurance program or from among private insurance plans that meet certain coverage standards. Requires employers who do not provide health coverage for employees to pay into the national health insurance program. Does not mandate individual coverage for all Americans, but requires coverage for all children. Allows individuals below age 25 to be covered through their parents' plans. Cost estimated between $50 billion and $65 billion, to be paid for by eliminating Bush tax cuts for those earning over $250,000.
CLINTON
Mandates individual health insurance coverage for all Americans. Offers federal subsidies for those who cannot afford it. Allows individuals to choose from among several private plans also offered to members of Congress, as well as a new public insurance plan modeled after Medicare. Requires insurance companies to offer coverage to anyone who applies, and bars insurance companies from charging higher premiums to those with pre-existing conditions. Requires large businesses to provide or help pay for employee coverage. Expands Medicaid and federal children's health care programs. Offers tax credits to limit health care premiums to a certain percentage a family's income. Cost estimated at $110 billion annually, to be paid for by eliminating the Bush tax cuts for those earning over $250,000, as well as by reducing waste and inefficiencies in the current system. Also limits the amount employers can exclude from taxes for health care benefits for those making over $250,000
-ON IMMIGRATION
OBAMA
Supported Bush-backed immigration reform legislation, which would have increased funding and improved border security technology, improved enforcement of existing laws, and provided a legal path to citizenship for some illegal immigrants. Voted to authorize construction of a 700-mile fence along the U.S.-Mexican border
CLINTON
Supported Bush-backed immigration reform legislation, which would have increased funding and improved border security technology, improved enforcement of existing laws, and provided a legal path to citizenship for some illegal immigrants. Voted to authorize construction of a 700-mile fence along the U.S.-Mexican border.
-ON IRAQ
OBAMA
Opposed use of military force in Iraq. Voted for war spending bill that would have withdrawn most U.S. troops by March 2008. Supports phased redeployment of U.S. troops. Opposed Bush's plan to send additional troops to Iraq. Had once called for troop withdrawal to begin by the end of 2006
CLINTON
Voted for use of military force in Iraq, but now says she would have voted differently "if we knew then what we know now." Supports de-authorizing the war. Voted for war spending bill that would have withdrawn most U.S. troops by March 2008. Opposed Bush plan to increase the number of American troops in Iraq. Supports a phased redeployment
-ON SOCIAL SECURITY
OBAMA
Strongly opposed to privatizing Social Security. Believes that the first place to look for ways to strengthen Social Security is the payroll tax system. Currently, the Social Security payroll tax applies to only the first $97,500 a worker earns; Obama supports increasing the maximum amount of earnings covered by Social Security. Would work with Congress to choose a payroll tax reform package that will keep Social Security solvent for at least the next half century.
CLINTON
Opposes all efforts to privatize Social Security. Has stated her plan for Social Security is fiscal responsibility first, and then deal with any long-term challenges. Would support the creation of a bipartisan commission.
i hope this helps you a lot. Good day!
1 minute ago - Edit - Delete
Tammy replied: "copy and paste til the cows come home, I'm voting for Obama"
Holly replied: "This is good information to post. Thanks. I'm not sure what the question is exactly. Just which one do we think is better? Well I think Obama is better on every issue that you outlined."
libertees replied: "Why would you vote for either? Where do you think all that money is coming from?
If you think the Government has or makes Money then you have a bigger problem than who to vote for. You don't even understand the basics."
Election 08 replied: "Obama 08
YES WE CAN AND YES HE WILL"
King Zorglub replied: "Man, you did your homework, and the winner is...?"
Mushroom replied: "I'm still for Obama..."
Baby #1 on the way!! replied: "NEITHER!! OH MY GOSH!!!!! SHUT THE HELL UP ALREADY!!!!!!
You are part of the reason why McCain will win. People are tired of hearing the Obama/Clinton crap.
-Britt"
Archer Christifori replied: "Neither are fit to be president...
Ones a communist and the other is a neophyte the country will suffer under both."
Buffy...Buffy Bond replied: "I am writing in Madonna..they both are socialists"
Deborah W replied: "Obama!"
Mike D replied: "Thanks for the information.
My vote is still for Obama!
As someone said above, YES he CAN and YES he WILL!"
obamaguy replied: "Wow!
I'm an Obama supporter, but it's ing to see someone who isn't extremely tilted towards one candidate. Ididn't know all of that. My main concern was that "I would have voted differently", quote from Clinton on Iraq. McCain would have a field day with that weak comment. Thanks for the info!"
Why Sayer replied: "This shows how close they are in ideas.
But I think Hillary will be better at getting the job done."
Beanie replied: "I'm so glad you posted this since so many supporters cannot articulate their candidate's position. Since one of these two has a great chance at being the next president, we should really understand what changes they want to make and plans they have for our country (I'm also a firm believer in considering their ability to make these changes happen). I'm tired of listening to so much shallow, hero-worship, empty rhetoric about candidates...vote for whoever you want but PLEASE know what they stand for!!!"
Sir Lucius replied: "- ON ABORTION
Obama.
- ECONOMIC STIMULUS
Not a big fan of either of these plans. Our GDP is ~$13,194,700,000,000 and you think $75B will stimulate the economy? In the long term I beleive the money is better spent on initiatives to lower our dependence on foreign oil and fixing the country's 50-100 year-old infrastructure. These plans are just a gimmicks to get working-class votes. It's like a radio station saying the 5th caller gets their heating bill paid for free this month.
- EDUCATION
Both sound like they're full of it on this one, at least Obama doesn't alienate all of the GOP (who he will need) by keeping NCLB intack.
- ON HEALTHCARE
Obama, hands down. You have a choice with Obama's plan, especially when you have to choose between feeding your infant son and health insurance.
- ON IRAQ
Obama was clearly doing some independent thinking / what is right when it came time to vote in 2003 on this issue.
- ON SOCIAL SECURITY
Both of these candidates are again pandering to the blue-collar working class. SS is a crappy system and essentially a tax. You are giving the money to the federal government which you are not guaranteed to get back and if you die before you get a check your family doesn't see a dime of it. If you do get a check you're not even getting a 1% return on all that money you paid in and chances are you die before you even get enough checks to equal what you paid in, much less a return on your "investment"! Let's not forget the MILLIONS of free loaders on the system who are not paying FICA but getting SS checks. Furthermore participation is MANDATORY. Why wouldn't you privatize SS and make people responsible for their own retirement? We get higher returns and this pours trillions into the economy (instead of to the government) and probably do a lot more for economic stimulation than any economic stimulus package Clinton and Obama have proposed. Of course, as a Democratic supporting privatization will not get you the nomination.
Overall: Obama, not perfect, but the lesser of evils and he'll do a lot to repair our image and build bridges."
crazy2all replied: "Thank you for the post!!!"
tadviv replied: "Obama's answers make a lot of sense. Guess i will be voting for Obama in Texas..... At least I will have a RESPECTABLE president in the WhiteHouse"
Can you summarize this for me, into about 2 or 3 paragraphphs? Its John McCain's position on health care.? John McCain believes we can and must provide access to health care for every American. He has proposed a comprehensive vision for achieving that.
John McCain's Vision for Health Care Reform
John McCain Believes The Key To Health Care Reform Is To Restore Control To The Patients Themselves. We want a system of health care in which everyone can afford and acquire the treatment and preventative care they need. Health care should be available to all and not limited by where you work or how much you make.
Making Health Insurance Innovative, Portable and Affordable
John McCain Will Reform Health Care Making It Easier For Individuals And Families To Obtain Insurance. An important part of his plan is to use competition to improve the quality of health insurance with greater variety to match people's needs.
John McCain Will Reform The Tax Code To Offer More Choices Beyond Employer-Based Health Insurance Coverage. While still having the option of employer-based coverage, every family will receive a direct refundable tax credit - effectively cash - of $2,500 for individuals and $5,000 for families to offset the cost of insurance. Families will be able to choose the insurance provider that suits those best and the money would be sent directly to the insurance provider.
John McCain Proposes Making Insurance More Portable. Americans need insurance that follows them from job to job. They want insurance that is still there if they retire early and does not change if they take a few years off to raise the kids.
A Specific Plan of Action: Ensuring Care for Higher Risk Patients
John McCain Will Promote Proper Incentives. John McCain will work with Congress, the governors, and industry to make sure this approach is funded adequately and has the right incentives to reduce costs such as disease management, individual case management, and health and wellness programs.
A Specific Plan of Action: Lowering Health Care Costs
CHEAPER DRUGS: Lowering Drug Prices. John McCain will look to bring greater competition to our drug markets through safe re-importation of drugs and faster introduction of generic drugs.
CHRONIC DISEASE: Providing Quality, Cheaper Care For Chronic Disease. Chronic conditions account for three-quarters of the nation's annual health care bill. By emphasizing prevention, early intervention, healthy habits, new treatment models, new public health infrastructure and the use of information technology, we can reduce health care costs. We should dedicate more federal research to caring and curing chronic disease.
COORDINATED CARE: Promoting Coordinated Care. Coordinated care - with providers collaborating to produce the best health care - offers better outcomes at lower cost. We should pay a single bill for high-quality disease care which will make every single provider accountable and responsive to the patients' needs.
GREATER ACCESS AND CONVENIENCE: Expanding Access To Health Care. Families place a high value on quickly getting simple care. Government should promote greater access through walk-in clinics in retail outlets.
SMOKING: Promoting The Availability Of Smoking Cessation Programs. Most smokers would love to quit but find it hard to do so. Working with business and insurance companies to promote availability, we can improve lives and reduce chronic disease through smoking cessation programs.
TORT REFORM: Passing Medical Liability Reform. We must pass medical liability reform that eliminates lawsuits directed at doctors who follow clinical guidelines and adhere to safety protocols. Every patient should have access to legal remedies in cases of bad medical practice but that should not be an invitation to endless, frivolous lawsuits.
TRANSPARENCY: Bringing Transparency To Health Care Costs. We must make public more information on treatment options and doctor records, and require transparency regarding medical outcomes, quality of care, costs and prices. We must also facilitate the development of national standards for measuring and recording treatments and outcomes.
Confronting the Long-Term Challenge
John McCain Will Develop A Strategy For Meeting The Challenge Of A Population Needing Greater Long-Term Care. There have been a variety of state-based experiments such as Cash and Counseling or The Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE) that are pioneering approaches for delivering care to people in a home setting. Seniors are given a monthly stipend which they can use to hire workers and purchase care-related services and goods. They can get help managing their care by designating representatives, such as relatives or friends, to help make decisions. It also offers counseling and bookkeeping services to assist consumers in handling their programmatic responsibilities.
If you don't think that this is where I should put this question. Please tell me where I should.
agree with you, but still a summary would be nice.
doctor replied: "john mc cain will not develop anything it is just another promise like so many for the last 50 years where nothing was done. all hot air
mc cain did as much research as bush and eisenhour ,nixon and reagan did in the past"
mista411 replied: "Follow the link below to find concise summaries of the McCain and Obama Healthcare Plans."
Someone just unveiled a new plan for universal healthcare: what do you think? key points of the plan:
--has an "individual mandate," requiring everyone to have health insurance
--builds on the existing employer-based system of coverage
offers a tax subsidy to small businesses to help them afford the cost of providing coverage to their workers
--individuals and families who are not covered by employers or whose employer-based coverage is inadequate, offer expanded versions of two existing government programs: Medicare, and the health insurance plan currently offered to federal employees. Consumers could choose between either government-run program, but no new federal bureaucracy would be created.
So what do you guys think? please state the reason for your belief.
Thx!
disclosure: the someone is Hillary Clinton.
To pay for the plan, Clinton would eliminate the Bush tax cuts for those making over $250,000
acmeraven replied: "Male bovine excretement. With usual government inefficiency this will cost a bundle of bucks from our pockets and what healthcare there is will be made worse. Life (if we are lucky) goes on."
ethoma12002 replied: "Sounds to me like just one more way to benefit those who don't want to help themselves. People like me who work for a living will just be taxed more."
lambspew replied: "I think that the best proposal right now is the one that would give a dollar for dollar tax refund to individuals who have purchased private health insurance.
As of right now there is not enough coverage offered by many employer plans or medicare leaving people without the medical treatment that they need. However, there is no incentive for these individuals to go out and purchase insurance by themselves (for the most part we are talking about people in a low income bracket here). There needs to be a serious reform of the healthcare system in the USA whereby government intervention is severely restricted and the market is allowed to flourish. This will create a number of innovative health insurance products that, when coupled with a reform like tax breaks, will almost certainly provide more coverage than a government run program.
An employer has no incentive to create a quality healthcare scheme if it ends up eating into profits. Mandatory health insurance is a good idea, but only if it creates a financial incentive in someway (tax rebate would do that). So if an employer went above and beyond when picking the healthcare plan they would get a break at tax time.
In the event that the "Clinton" plan does get pushed through and no new federal institution is created then we are looking at an outdated behemoth of an institution having to deal with many more policyholders. The current government healthcare scheme is already overburdened with the number of policyholders that it has, and adding more will just clog the system worse than it already is.
Cut back on the government intervention, create a mandatory health insurance scheme with some sort of financial break, and leave insurance in the hands of the open market... For America nothing else will work.."
Why do democrats insist that republicans have not offered a plan on health care? Fact - A plan was offered but it didn't get any press or support by Nancy "do it my way or the highway" Pelosi. Here is a summary of what was offered:
By the way, this took me about 30 seconds to find.
The Republican Alternative
Republicans in the House of Representatives unveiled a 3-and-a-half page summary of their own health plan, without details or an estimate of costs, but emphasized that their plan would cost less than the Democratic plan.
Key Provisions of the House GOP Plan
States, small businesses, and others could group together to offer lower-cost, health care plans.
Medicaid users could take the value of their Medicaid benefits and transfer them to a private health care plan.
People, especially those in lower income brackets or over 55, would receive incentives to build up health care savings accounts.
Employers would automatically sign up their workers for health insurance, so that employees would have to opt out of coverage if they didn't want it.
Tax deductions on insurance premiums for people who get their plans individually or from their companies.
Ideas in the House GOP Plan that Are Supported by Both Parties
Dependent children can stay on their parents' policies until they are 25.
Employers would be encouraged to reward employees for improved health.
Community health centers could be expanded.
Americans can maintain their specific health insurance policies when they lose or leave jobs.
In-home care over institutional care would be encouraged with financial help.
Medical malpractice lawsuits would be limited - though there are significant disagreements between the parties by how much.>
US Army Veteran replied: "That is the existing failed health are system made worse, not reform.
All it really provides is "encouragment"."
V for Vendetta replied: "It's because their plan is only a slight variation to the "rape the public all it can be raped" plan that we now have. Nobody sees any difference so they don't see it as a newly introduced plan."
BigD replied: "That isn't reform! That is what we have now!!
Tort reform - give me a break. There is already a tool in place for frivilous lawsuits. It is called a Motion for Summary Judgment."
ndnqt1966 replied: "Because NO plan that the Conservatives come up with will be acceptable by the dims/libs.....They stupidly believe that 0bama's healthcare is the answer...no if, ands or buts about it!!"
the rick replied: "Your first mistake is assuming that democrats care about the FACTS, they dont . they will lie cheat and steal to get their agenda across,the facts mean nothing to them, who cares that this bill will further erode our economy,it is a way for the democrat party to gain government control over the American people and that is all they truly care about.they dont care about the people they only care about "controlling"the people . just ask yourself if this is such a great policy then why are the people pushing it not going to take part in it? they will be excluded from the government plan"
Paul Grass replied: "Democrats saty in denial they follow and never lead, they can deny all they want but it doesn't change the facts, this is a much better plan imo"
Does anyone know the REAL DEAL about Obama's health care 'reform'? *Does the bill require you to have health insurance?*
Yes. There is a lot of Washington double-talk in the bill - for example, it states, "No individual shall be compelled to enroll in a 'qualified' health plan" (sec. 3101).
But if you file a tax return and fail to attach proof of your qualifying health plan, the IRS, in coordination with the expanded federal office on electronic medical records and a new state bureaucracy called a Gateway, will find you, notify you of your default and fine you (sec. 59).
How big a fine? That's left up to the secretary of health and human services, but it will be big enough to ". . . accomplish the goal of enhancing participation."
Of course, people on Medicare, Medicaid and other government programs are exempt. But the outrage is that members of Congress are exempting themselves (sec. 3116).
*What is a "qualified" health plan?*
The bill doesn't detail what this term means, but the language suggests you will be limited to a managed-care-style plan. Patients will have their care coordinated in a "medical home" - this decade's term for your primary care provider - and will not be allowed to see a specialist or get a test whenever they want to. Their care will be "coordinated." Doctors will be paid with "incentives" or hit with penalties to encourage cost-effective care.
One such method is capitation, which means doctors get paid a flat fee per month per patient. With capitation, the fewer tests and referrals you're allowed, the more your doctor makes (sec. 2707).
*How much will a "qualified" plan cost?*
There are no prices in the bill, but it does make clear that there will be sliding-scale subsidies for individuals buying plans and temporary subsidies for small businesses covering workers.
The bill says a family of four with a household income of $110,250 will not have to lay out more than 10% of its modified adjusted gross income (sec. 3111). Ten percent is a lot, but you might have to pay even more. Senators are looking for ways to trim costs, including allowing only families in lower-income groups to get subsidies.
*Will this plan affect you if you get your health insurance from a large company?*
Yes. The bill leaves blank precisely what employers' obligations will be (sec. 163), but you will need to prove that you are enrolled in a "qualified" plan.
Negotiations in the coming days will determine whether your employer must contribute to the cost of that plan and what the tax treatment will be.
*What about the "public plan" everyone is discussing?*
The bill mentions that there will be a public plan, but offers no details (sec. 3101 and 3116). The importance of the public plan has been exaggerated. Its opponents warn that the public option will drive out private insurance, but that will happen anyway. The bill gives the health and human services secretary power to limit profit margins, which makes it iffy how long insurance companies will be able to survive (sec. 2704).
That's another reason President Obama's promise yesterday that he's "not going to mess" with your plan is unconvincing. No one likes insurance companies, but the indications are that faceless bureaucrats in Washington will be even stingier when it comes to doling out your medical care.
El Tecolote replied: "The real deal is, the President does not have a clue as to how he's going to PAY for this brain child of his."
Bigass replied: "It is the first step toward Socialistic HealthCare. Massachusetts "forces" people to have health insurance. It falls very short of the promises they made. It is 3X as expensive as they said and I think we ought to start throwing the illegals the hell out and see what impact that has on healthcare before screwing with the system in place."
Two Men Ought not Lay Togethar replied: "Im not reading that. You talk like you have insider information or something. I've read the whole bill, im fine with having fines for not having health care. When people DONT have it I pay their bills screw that."
thetruthsoid replied: "The REAL DEAL is find ways to spend more and more money why? Create National Panic and start The North American Union"
e z80227 replied: "nobody, not even BO knows the details other than it will fail and it will wreck the economy. this is why it's taken 60byears of trying to force it on us and we still don't want or have it......
mine please too:"
G J replied: "If we are to trust Obama on health-care, why don't we get to see his health records??"
bash replied: "This OPINION columist is the same one who lied about Obama's health care proposals throughout the primaries, who lied about Clinton's health care goals, and who has a LONG track record of lying about democrat bills and initiatives. Search for her in google. She is a right wing hack."
brown9500.v9 replied: "That is a lot of typing for nothing.
Obama just said yesterday that the plan is in the bare bones stage and will be put together in Congress over the next few months.
You rubes are so easy to lead by the nose ring.
It amazing that you haven't ended up on Limbaugh's dinner plate yet."
Think 1st replied: "No, because it is not finished yet.
Certainly Betsy Mccaughey.does not know.
But facts have never been her strong point, as history shows us.
Will phony conservatives embrace her lies once again?"
ogreat1 replied: "If there's an affordable option for medical coverage and people don't choose to take advantage of it then fine them. ....Right now the taxpayers are paying for the un and under insured..... do you consider this FAIR?"
old_quilt replied: "He is to messing with our health care if we have it ! We will pay tax on it based on how good it is, and if you are a union member you get a free ride ! Thank you to the contributions to his war chest ! So the average family has to make up for them and there outstanding benefit package as well ! He is going to put many small businesses out of business because of the cost of health care or the tax for not having it !
We all no the intent is to put the insurance companies out of business so that we all have to look to the government or the unions(who have Obama in there pocket !)"
zaza replied: "Just wait until you see how much "free" health insurance will cost. What is amazing to me is that people actually NEED the government to force them to get health insurance. VERY few people who have no insurance can not afford it. Most families without insurance have household incomes over 50K per year. If you do not have some form of health insurance when you make that amount of money you are not doing something right or you have your priorities in the wrong place."
bendover replied: "The president will not give us any details of this plan or how he plans to pay for it. He only says it's something that must be done. that to me is clue in itself that he is hiding something."
Fakename replied: "We are going to get screwed with this deal, and they are going to get richer and have more dependent people to vote for them."
shjOlds_442 replied: "BO is just trying to do "something" with a general idea. No surprise that not once has the liberal media even tried to explain the problems the European countries have with it. I have never seen so many things in my life time cover up on such a grand scale just because the guy is black.
As far as cost is concern, I doubt that he, or anyone on his staff have even a clue. BO is proof that going to Harvard proves nothing."
Obama is "retooling message" to "win over" people. If it was a good idea, why does he have to win us over? "His approval ratings slipping, President Barack Obama is retooling his message on health care overhaul, aiming to win over Americans who already have insurance.
Polling shows that Americans especially those who already have coverage are skeptical of the Democratic proposals to expand coverage to the nearly 50 millions who lack it. So Obama will use a potentially boisterous town hall-style meeting in New Hampshire to highlight how his proposals would affect workers whose employers provide their health insurance."
If this crap was such a great idea, why doesn't congress have Obamacare and why do they have to "convince" us?
Is Nazi Pelosi correct when she says, "Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American." How are we "un-American" by not blindly following Barry?
I'm confused!
Not My Fault! replied: "Totally agree! This Obama-care garbage is a pile of doggy poo poo! It's socialized medicine that hasn't worked in other countries and they are shoving it down our throats without reading it.
Pelosi is an idiot and an embarrassment!"
Common Sense replied: "It's all "smoke & mirrors', designed to have you confused."
Moose replied: "He must combat the lies, smears and distortions of the right wing extremists.
"Death panels" will kill Trig - give me a break. Who would believe that?"
Felonius Monkey replied: "Because there's a lot of disinformation out there. For example, there was an elderly person at one of the town hall meetings who yelled out, "Keep your government hands off my Medicare!"
Also there's this perception that Congress is about to vote on the final version of a reform bill. The truth is that there are multiple bills in Congress, some farther along than others. So there's still plenty of time to work out the problems.
Finally, the rumor of 'death panels' or 'euthanizing the elderly' have created a lot of fear. These are malicious rumors which have absolutely no truth."
jack schitt replied: "Because some people drank the Kool-Aid that was chain emailed to them."
LEIF G replied: "The problem with Obama is that most of his supporters are low or no-income (or just plain stupid - or both), and they benefit the most from his stupid ideas. The problem with that is that a small number of people end up taking the the hit for these people. There's no point in bettering yourself and your life if Obama is going to tax you until everyone's the same. (Except him, I didn't see him sharing any of his record breaking campaign contributions with Mccain)
Winston Churchill had it right many years ago.
"We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle."
I feel like Obama's putting me into that same bucket."
Kevin M replied: "I agree and would you like to bet those people at the town hall will be hand picked by Obamas team.Smoke and Mirrors the only thing he is good at."
eric s replied: "that's how a good snake-oil salesman cons people.
so far the obama administration has labeled anyone who disagrees with him... right wing extremists, nazis, un-American, etc.
i won't be surprised if we see full scale revolt, especially if somehow (God forbid) obama gets re-elected or, in the manner of a good leftist dictator, tries to change the Constitution to stay in office even longer.
obama is running a Thugocracy... the black panthers with billy clubs intimidating elderly voters during the election... union thugs beating up blacks at healthcare debates... democrats, like pelosi, encouraging that sort of thing. it won't be long before obama is setting up gulags... he'll probably refer to them as "re-education facilities." he's already attempting to form a civilian "army" to "spread his message."
obama is exactly what orwell warned us about and what hitler tried to be."
Zinger replied: "What is really amusing is that if the health care bill passes look at the final version where all of a sudden pork barrel projects are added to the equation much like the stimulus plan. The Native American Indians had it right all along in that 'White man (i.e., government) speaks with forked tongue.' Funny how some things never change."
Derek replied: "They're holding town meetings because 75% of Americans in general, including 68% of liberals, oppose this healthcare bill. They're in a hurry because they know 2/3 of democrats in congress are getting voted out. They are holding town meetings so democrat congressmen can get a consensus on the matter. They're worried about re-election, and the majority know their demographic are opposed to this."
Do you know what Hillary's stances on the issues really are? Lower taxes for middle class families by: extending the middle class tax cuts including child tax credit and marriage penalty relief, offering new tax cuts for healthcare, college and retirement, and expanding the EITC and the child care tax credit.
Harness the power of innovation to create high wage jobs of the 21st Century. Investments in alternative energy can create new jobs for the 21st century; expanded access to broadband will bring opportunities to underserved and disadvantaged communities;
Healthcare insurance - If you have a plan you like, you keep it. If you want to change plans or aren't currently covered, you can choose from dozens of the same plans available to members of Congress, or you can opt into a public plan option like Medicare. And working families will get tax credits to help pay their premiums. Hillary would give tax credits to small businesses that provide health care to their workers... Insurance companies won't be able to deny you coverage or
end our military engagement in Iraq's civil war and immediately start bringing our troops home. .. convene the Joint Chiefs of Staff, her Secretary of Defense, and her National Security Council. She would direct them to draw up a clear, viable plan to bring our troops home starting with the first 60 days of her Administration. She would also direct the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs to prepare a comprehensive plan to provide the highest quality health care and benefits to every service member -- including every member of the National Guard and Reserves -- and their families....
On immigration - Hillary strongly believes we need to do more to know who is in our country by securing our borders and ensuring that employers comply with the law against hiring and exploiting undocumented workers. She supports deploying new technology that can help stop the flow of undocumented immigrants into the country and an employer verification system that is universal...
Hillary's stance on the issues are posted on her campaigns web site.
Source(s):
Hillary's positions have been posted on her website for months, and these are her positions taken directly from her website. All you have to do is follow the link.
If we stop illegal immigration, and stop paying the medical bills for illegals, then maybe we can help pay medical bills for the needy in the U.S.. The largest group of people who need assistance tend to be young people just starting out, and retirees. A government service program could help young people.
International Corporations, and the people who make huge amounts of money from them should be paying for the huge cost of our overseas military that is nothing but a subsidy for these giant corporations. That should pay for a middle class tax cut, and then some. A tax on all goods the cross state and national borders should cover that. Why should U.S. workers subsidize the exportation of their jobs?
Regulations that create competitive markets will increase the number of jobs and the wages, and there will be fewer people who need help paying for healthcare.
Lonnie P replied: "Ri-i-i-i-i-ight!!!!
Hitlery doesn't even know what her stance is so how can YOU?
There's only one way to tell when Hitlery is lying -- HER MOUTH IS OPEN AND SOUND IS COMING OUT!!
Edit:
So they're posted on her website; this means nothing.
Postings can, and are, edited and revised as needed to pander to those who need pandering to at the moment."
wizzards_23 replied: "Hillary is kind of like a Gemini. Two personalities. I don't believe anything she says. No, I couldn't vote for her, and yes, I know her responses to the issues. (flip flopped or not)."
Freethinker replied: "Horsecrap. The Wicked Witch herself doesn't know what her positions are from minute to minute, so how can you possibly think you do?"
justanotherjoe replied: "Actually that sounds really good!!!!................. Too bad she's a proven liar.
Ron Paul 2008."
texasjewboy12 replied: "I don't think even SHE knows what her position REALLY is, because as she's shown us numerous times, it's always subject to change!"
Blake replied: "Stances are great. But it's solid plans, like Barack has on HIS website, that matter, as well as the judgment to act intelligibly. Just look at the differences in health care on both their sites. Hillary's is filled with great words. Barack's outlines exact plans."
Beau replied: "Very easy answer, without reading your long question: She goes by the way of the polls! Observe that she is always the last to vote on the senate floor on controversial issues, look at how her husband changed after he got into office: DOMA, Don't ask, Don't Tell were all Poll Based - and promised before he took office not to happen!
She is a very Poll oriented person and not a straight thinker on her own, except maybe in the case of health care!"
G T replied: "Hillbillery Klinton will change her views as the polls dictate. She will never tell the truth of her real political leanings, why do you think that her college thesis has been locked away from public perusal?"
Kelsette replied: "Here's a little joke to explain just what I think about those plans being proposed by Hitlary:
A man died and went to Heaven. As he stood in front
of the Pearly Gates, He saw a huge wall of clocks
behind him. He asked, "What are all those clocks?"
Peter answered, "Those are Lie-Clocks. Everyone on
earth has a Lie-Clock. Every time you lie the hands
on your clock move."
"Oh", said the man. "Whose clock is that?" "That's
Mother Teresa's", replied St. Peter. "The hands have
never moved, indicating that she never told a lie."
"Incredible", said the man. "And whose clock is that
one?" Peter responded, "That's Abraham Lincoln's
clock.? The hands have moved twice, telling us that
Abraham told only two lies in his entire life."
"Where's Hillary Clinton's clock?" asked the man.
"Hillary's clock is in Jesus' office. He's using it
as a ceiling fan"."
Think Richly replied: "Lower taxes..? Really? A Democrat for lower taxes? Hmm..
How is Hillary going to pay for the healthcare insurance of the growing poor?
Lemme guess? By taxing the rich? Or is it the upper middle class?
So, she is going to steal from the rich and give to the poor, no matter if the rich earned it legally, and no matter if the poor are poor because they want to remain that way by living off welfare?
Here is a little phenomenon.. whatever that is subsidized, it grows. When you subsidize the poor, the poor will increase in numbers, and the increases in expenses for the healthcare will not be covered by the increase in taxes on the rich or the upper middle class. And the middle class is shrinking because of the slowing economy and the housing crisis. Plus, with the baby boomers beginning to tap into the social security funds and medicare funds next year, the expenses for medical coverage will only grow, not shrink.
Now, where is Hillary going to get the money from? By increasing taxes again? Here is a little phenomenon. Taxes destroy wealth. The wealth of the upper middle class / rich will shrink as the taxes increase, and the upper middle class will slip into lower middle class (and rich will become upper middle class), and the revenues from taxes will decrease. This is a slippery slope that will spiral into oblivion."
thor_torkenson replied: "Shill all you want. You're going to lose."
RON PAUL for President 2008 replied: "Hitlery wants to take away guns from private citizens. RON PAUL has sworn to uphold the Constitution and preserve our Second amendment right. Obama is just as connected to the foreign special interest groups that want to destroy our FREEDOMS that we Americans have been granted through our Constitution.
Hitlery is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (so is Michelle Obama Chicago CFR) the Bilderberg Group and her husband was a Rhodes Scholar and an active member of Bohemian Grove (just like Poppa & Bush Jr.)
If you are familiar with the global elitist plans of these groups it clearly shows that the interest of American sovereignty and the best interest of the average American has NEVER been their goal.
Also take a look at where the flow of campaign money for Hitlery, Obama and Guliani is coming from...
Now take a look at RON PAUL no global elitist organization membership and again just follow the money trail that will speak volumes more than my or ANY other "opinion" you can get here..."
witz1960 replied: "YES I know.
How? I look at her voting record. and if there is no vote on a subject, then it is the first thing out of her mouth before polling data tells her to change.
Her stances can basically be explained by saying that the government can do it better. So taxes must go up or be created to pay for the government to do it poorer and more expensively.
Look at her actions NOT her words. She is , to put it kindly, a Socialist.
Americans are so incredibly smart, innovative and generous. Get Government out of the way and that will unleash the power of hundreds of millions of individuals.
If you are looking for "words".. how about these? "The government that governs least, governs best?" - Thomas Jefferson"

More Resources
EXPANDING HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE
EXPANDING HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE. TO THE UNINSURED: RATIONALE, ... majority of large firms already provide health insurance coverage to their workers (98 ...
Expanding health insurance: The AMA proposal for reform
workers whose employers do not offer coverage. The current tax. exclusion of. employment-based ... The AMA believes that expanding health insurance coverage through ...
Expanding Insurance Coverage for Workers in Small Businesses
options to expand health insurance to workers in small businesses, the Missouri ... Expanding Insurance Coverage for Workers in Small Businesses 3 ...
Health Insurance Tax Credits: Potential for Expanding Coverage
... possible mechanisms for expanding health insurance coverage in the United ... expanding coverage to workers in firms that do not offer insurance coverage ...
Expanding worker's comp insurance eyed: Times Argus Online
Times Argus Online - Vermont news, Vermont election results, Barre News, Montpelier News, Central Vermont News, ... and physical health insurance coverage. ...
Options to Expand Health Insurance Coverage for Workers in Small ...
... lack of health insurance coverage among workers in small employers ... Expanding Health Insurance Coverage to More North Carolinians. Durham, NC. April 2006. ...
Expanding Insurance Coverage For Workers in Small Businesses: Lessons ...
The most common form of health insurance coverage in the United States is obtained ... offering coverage, on expanding eligibility for currently excluded workers in ...
Expanding Private Health Coverage to Uninsured Hispanic Americans
... Hispanic Americans do not have access to even basic health insurance coverage. ... contribute to employers dropping health insurance coverage for their workers; ...
Unemployed Workers Need Help With Health Insurance, 10/25/01
... place to ensure that workers do not lose their health insurance as well as their ... An Option for Expanding Health Insurance Coverage, Kaiser Family Foundation, ...
Expanding Public Insurance Coverage at Health Care for Health Care Workers
Expanding Public Insurance Coverage. Employer Purchasing Pools. Premium Subsidies ... Vermont's public health insurance plan. Expanding Public Insurance Coverage ...
Tags
Expanding Workers Health Insurance Coverage © 2009
Credit Cards
|
Emo Names
|
Pickup Lines
Report Abuse to: abuse(at)5nxs.com