okie
 
  1  
Mon 28 May, 2007 09:02 pm
snood wrote:
It's the first time I've tried to listen to him at any length. He impresses me as someone totally impressed with his own importance in the scheme of things, and also pretty clueless.


Have you applied the same yardstick to the other Democrat candidates, snood?

I would have to say the same thing about Hillary. And Obama seems like he is sort of searching for the right place to stand on things. I'm not sure he knows. And the enthusiasm seems to be waning. And surely he should have known 10,000 people did not die in Greensburg? Is he that engaged into what is actually happening out there?
0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  1  
Mon 28 May, 2007 10:01 pm
Okie, you know that only perfect people don't ever mis-speak, especially on topics such as nucular weapons, the youthful Queen of England, the immortal eternal general, jobless chicken plucking factories, searching inconvenienced air traffickers to make sure nobody has any weapons, proponent of restoring wetlands so it is more likely that hurricanes will cause damage
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Tue 29 May, 2007 12:07 am
okie wrote:
snood wrote:
It's the first time I've tried to listen to him at any length. He impresses me as someone totally impressed with his own importance in the scheme of things, and also pretty clueless.


Have you applied the same yardstick to the other Democrat candidates, snood?

I would have to say the same thing about Hillary. And Obama seems like he is sort of searching for the right place to stand on things. I'm not sure he knows. And the enthusiasm seems to be waning. And surely he should have known 10,000 people did not die in Greensburg? Is he that engaged into what is actually happening out there?


Okie, I'm pretty secure in my ability to come to informed opinions about those running for president - both republican and democrat. Funny you should ask this of me - as if it should just be assumed that you have some kind of egalitarian "yardstick" that you apply to those candidates. I guess you probably think you do.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Tue 29 May, 2007 01:17 am
mysteryman wrote:
Until we are down to only 3 or 4 candidates,the polls will be,IMHO,useless but interesting bits of trivia.


Might be. For you.

In other countries, where there are more than just two candidates/parties, such polls work pretty and aren't useless at all.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Tue 29 May, 2007 04:23 am
It looks as if Obama has worked out his plan for universal health care.
    [b]Obama calls for universal health care [/b] By MIKE GLOVER, Associated Press Writer [...] A copy of his remarks and documents describing the program were obtained by The Associated Press. Under Obama's proposal, every American would be required to carry health insurance, and the Illinois senator would create a National Health Insurance Exchange to monitor insurance companies in offering the coverage. In essence, Obama's plan retains the private insurance system but injects additional money into the system to pay for the expanded coverage. Those who can't afford coverage would get a subsidy on a sliding scale depending on their income, and virtually all businesses would have to share in the cost of coverage for their workers. The plan that would be offered would be similar to the one covering members of Congress. His package would prohibit insurance companies from refusing coverage because of pre-existing conditions.
Full Article

One thing I can't see in the article is how much companies would be able to crank up premiums because of pre-existing conditions. I hope things like this will become clear when Obama officially delivers his remarks and posts the full plan on his web page.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Tue 29 May, 2007 04:57 am
Sounds OK to me. Well, Id rather have the private companies taken out, and have a state agency offer the health insurance on a non-profit basis, but thats never going to fly.

What I'd still be concerned about is how it works with the 'sliding' subsidies for lower-income households.

First question: to what extent will these subsidies, in combination with the part that the employer is going to be obliged to cover, cover the cost. If you're going to require everyone to have health insurance (which I think is a good idea), you have the responsibility to make it affordable for the lower/lowest-income groups who dont have any now because they cant afford it.

Second question: how will these subsidies be arranged. You dont want mounts of paperwork, where Americans have themselves first to put up the money they dont have to the health insurance company, then figure out the bureaucracy of how to get part of the money back from the state. How it used to work in Holland for decades, until a rather disastrous reform two years ago by the then-right wing government, was that if you earned less than X, the health insurance company was obliged to insure you against a set low, subsidized price - and the company could then get the rest of the money for that insuree back from the state. That way the insuree just got one monthly bill, subsidy already included, fini.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Tue 29 May, 2007 06:05 am
Cool. Glad he did it, and looks pretty good to me so far. (The framing in the story bothers me a bit though -- the guy just decided to become president a few months ago, couldn't it just have taken him that long to come up with this plan? As opposed to "seeking to add heft to his presidential bid," and "he's clearly hoping that spelling out a detailed plan to offer health care for all will deflect those criticisms." It makes it sound like if it wasn't for that criticism, he wouldn't have come up with the plan.)

Anyway, evidently there will be an official unveiling sometime today, that will probably have more details.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Tue 29 May, 2007 06:47 am
sozobe wrote:
The framing in the story bothers me a bit though -- the guy just decided to become president a few months ago, couldn't it just have taken him that long to come up with this plan?

Well, that all depends on how detailed the plan is...
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Tue 29 May, 2007 07:10 am
New poll. Doesn't look good for the Republicans. Guess all that macho war talk isn't selling these days.

Quote:
Obama Leads Four Republicans in U.S. Race
May 29, 2007
(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Barack Obama is the top 2008 presidential contender in the United States, according to a poll by Zogby International. At least 46 per cent of respondents would support the Illinois senator in head-to-head contests against four prospective Republican nominees.

Obama holds a three-point edge over Arizona senator John McCain, a six-point lead over former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, and a 17-point advantage over both former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney and actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson.

In other contests, both New York senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and former North Carolina senator John Edwards lead Romney and Thompson, but trail Giuliani and McCain. New Mexico governor Bill Richardson is virtually tied with Thompson, leads Romney by three points, and trails Giuliani and McCain.

On May 27, Obama pledged to provide proper assistance for active duty soldiers, declaring, "We're falling far short in addressing the mental health care needs of these heroes, and that's inexcusable. I believe strongly that there is a sacred trust between this country and those who serve it. That trust begins the moment a service member signs on and lasts the duration of his or her life."

In American elections, candidates require 270 votes in the Electoral College to win the White House. In November 2004, Republican George W. Bush earned a second term after securing 286 electoral votes from 31 states. Democratic nominee John Kerry received 252 electoral votes from 19 states and the District of Columbia.

Bush is ineligible for a third term in office. The next presidential election is scheduled for November 2008.

Polling Data

Possible match-ups - 2008 U.S. presidential election

Rudy Giuliani (R) 42% - 48% Barack Obama (D)
John McCain (R) 43% - 46% Barack Obama (D)
Mitt Romney (R) 35% - 52% Barack Obama (D)
Fred Thompson (R) 35% - 52% Barack Obama (D)

Rudy Giuliani (R) 48% - 43% Hillary Rodham Clinton (D)
John McCain (R) 47% - 43% Hillary Rodham Clinton (D)
Mitt Romney (R) 40% - 48% Hillary Rodham Clinton (D)
Fred Thompson (R) 41% - 48% Hillary Rodham Clinton (D)

Rudy Giuliani (R) 47% - 43% John Edwards (D)
John McCain (R) 46% - 41% John Edwards (D)
Mitt Romney (R) 36% - 50% John Edwards (D)
Fred Thompson (R) 40% - 48% John Edwards (D)

Rudy Giuliani (R) 50% - 35% Bill Richardson (D)
John McCain (R) 52% - 31% Bill Richardson (D)
Mitt Romney (R) 37% - 40% Bill Richardson (D)
Fred Thompson (R) 40% - 39% Bill Richardson (D)

Source: Zogby International
Methodology: Telephone interviews with 378 likely Republican voters, conducted from May 17 to May 20, 2007. Margin of error is 5.0 per cent.

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/15905
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Tue 29 May, 2007 07:18 am
xingu wrote:
New poll. Doesn't look good for the Republicans. Guess all that macho war talk isn't selling these days.

Does look okay for them if they're running against Clinton, Edwards, or Richardson. Given the numbers you cite, Murphy's law commands that the Democrats end up sending in a Clinton/Richardson ticket.
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Tue 29 May, 2007 07:25 am
I think there's too much negativism towards Hillery. I just don't see her winning this unless Obama really screws up. Obama has a sincerity about him that Hillery lacks. She's more machine than human.
0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  1  
Tue 29 May, 2007 11:19 am
This was just released to the Obama group administrators as highlights from the speech he will give this afternoon in Iowa:

Quote:
Here are some highlights from Barack's health care speech today. We'll have more info on the website soon.


Barack Obama believes it's time to make quality affordable health care a reality for every American. For too many years, we've seen health care plans offered up with great fanfare and promise, only to be crushed under the weight of Washington politics and industry lobbying. This cannot be one of those years.



The health care crisis has reached a critical point. It's not just that forty-five million Americans are uninsured. It's that those who do have health insurance are struggling to pay for it because health care premiums have risen nearly 90% in the past six years, four times faster than wages.



Businesses aren't faring much better. Over half of all small businesses can no longer afford to insure their workers, while others have responded to rising costs by laying off workers or shutting their doors. Some of our biggest corporations are watching foreign competitors based in countries with universal health care run circles around them.



The biggest obstacles to reform are the drug and insurance companies who profit most from the status quo. Recently, the single fastest growing component of health care spending has been administrative costs and profits for insurance companies, who have spent more than $1 billion on lobbying and campaign contributions over the last ten years to block the kind of reform we need.



As President, Barack Obama will turn the page on yesterday's health care debates and bring together businesses, the medical community, and members of both parties around a comprehensive solution to this crisis. And he'll let the drug and insurance industries know that while they'll get a seat at the table, they don't get to buy every chair.



Barack Obama will sign a universal health care plan into law by the end of his first term in office. His plan will not just guarantee coverage for every American, it will bring down the cost of health care and reduce every family's premiums by as much as $2500.



When Barack Obama is President, everyone will be able buy into a new health insurance plan that's similar to the one that every federal employee - from a postal worker to a Congressman - currently has for themselves. And if you cannot afford this insurance, you will receive a subsidy to pay for it. If you have children, they will be covered. If you change jobs, your insurance will go with you. If you need to see a doctor, you will not have to wait in long lines for one. If you want more choices, you will also have the option of purchasing a number of affordable private plans that have similar benefits and standards for quality and efficiency.



We'll also take five, long-overdue steps to bring down costs and bring our health care system into the 21st century. First, the federal government will pick up the tab for some of the most expensive illnesses and conditions, which means your premiums will go down. Second, we'll focus our health care system on preventing costly, debilitating conditions in the first place by requiring coverage of evidence-based, preventative care services, and making sure they are paid for.



Third, we'll reduce the cost of our health care by improving the quality of our health care. We'll ask hospitals and providers to collect, track, and publicly report measures of health care quality so that patients can make informed choices about the care that's best for them.



Fourth, we'll reduce waste and inefficiency by moving from a 20th century health care industry based on pen and paper to a 21st century industry that's paperless, reducing deadly medical errors, shortening the length of hospital stays, ensuring that nurses can spend less time on paperwork and more time with patients, and saving billions and billions of dollars in the process.



Finally, we'll break the stranglehold that a few big drug and insurance companies have on the health care market. Under Barack Obama's plan, we'll make generic drugs more available to consumers and we'll tell the drug companies that their days of forcing affordable prescription drugs out of the market are over. And we'll investigate and prosecute the monopolization of the insurance industry.
0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  1  
Tue 29 May, 2007 11:25 am
They've started giving us these weekly updates too. I'll post them here occassionally:

Quote:
May 28 - June 3, 2007


Barack Obama Schedule: Barack Obama spent the weekend traveling with his family in northern New Hampshire in an RV. A segment about his New Hampshire trip will appear on The Today Show on Tuesday morning. Throughout the weekend, he met with veterans, hosted town hall meetings, and even fit in time for an ice cream social. He will return to Iowa Monday night for a meeting with veterans before delivering his health care speech on Tuesday morning at the University of Iowa Medical Campus - a speech in which he'll lay out his plan to make quality affordable health care a reality for every American.

Later this week, he will do a west coast swing with stops in Reno and Las Vegas, Nevada and Oakland, California. He will wrap up the week in Manchester, NH where he will participate in the CNN/WMUR debate on Sunday evening.

Michelle Obama Schedule: Michelle Obama campaigned with her husband on Sunday and Monday in the north country of New Hampshire and has no public events until Saturday when she'll return to New Hampshire on her own to address the New Hampshire Democratic Convention. She'll also kick off Women for Obama in New Hampshire, accompanied by her daughters.

Veterans: Barack Obama believes there's a sacred trust between this country and those who serve it. That's why he has a comprehensive plan to meet the lifetime mental health needs of America's veterans. With cases of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) sharply on the rise, Senator Obama is proposing key improvements <http> to mental health care at each stage of military service: recruitment, deployment, and reentry into civilian life.


Iraq: Last week, Barack Obama voted against President Bush's supplemental war spending bill to demand a change of course in the Iraq war - which he opposed from the start and believes should never have been authorized and never been waged. He believes we must negotiate a better plan that funds our troops, signals to the Iraqis that it is time for them to act and that begins to bring our brave servicemen and women home safely and responsibly.

Barack Obama has a plan to end the war by commencing a phased redeployment of U.S. troops out of Iraq with the goal of redeploying all combat brigades from Iraq by March 31, 2008. Letting the Iraqis know that U.S. forces will not be there forever is our last, best hope to pressure the Sunnis and Shi'a to come to the table and find peace.

Immigration: In the U.S. Senate, Barack Obama is working to fix the immigration bill that's before Congress by fighting to make sure it values families and protects Americans and legal immigrants from errors in government databases that could cost them their jobs. He's also working to restructure the temporary worker program in the bill so that it does not drive down wages and working conditions.

0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Tue 29 May, 2007 11:38 am
Hey Butrflynet, you're much more active on his website than I am, would you mind giving me a heads-up if he will be stopping by Columbus? He's bound to do it sometime and I'd hate to miss it (unless it costs a lot to get in).
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Tue 29 May, 2007 11:44 am
Once there are more details out, I'd love for someone more familiar with Edwards' and Hillary's plans to do a comparison... If nobody is though, or is but would prefer not to do the compare&contrast, I'll try to do it myself. (Does Hillary even have a detailed plan out yet for health care? I know Edwards does, but I'm not sure about her.)
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Tue 29 May, 2007 11:51 am
Thomas wrote:
It looks as if Obama has worked out his plan for universal health care.
    [b]Obama calls for universal health care [/b] By MIKE GLOVER, Associated Press Writer [...] A copy of his remarks and documents describing the program were obtained by The Associated Press.

OK, help me out here.

The article also says this:

Quote:
Obama's plan doesn't have the mandate that his rival John Edwards is proposing to ensure that all Americans get coverage. The 2004 Democratic vice presidential nominee would require everyone to have health insurance, much like state requirements for auto insurance for every driver. Both candidates would require businesses to help cover their workers.


At TNR The Plank, Bradford Plumer commented, in two steps:

Quote:
Obama's going to unveil a health-care plan soon. Judging by the AP story, his plan will rely largely on individual mandates (with subsidies for low-income workers), presumably something similar to what Arnold Schwarzenegger proposed in California, although obviously we'll have to wait to hear the gritty details.

Update: Hmm... this AP update suggests that Obama won't have a "mandate... to ensure that all Americans get coverage." That's pretty weak.

(The "this update" link refers to the article I quoted here.)

OK, so I'm out of my depth here.

  • What are these individual mandates?
  • How does their absence make Obama's proposal "pretty weak"?
  • Do I read this correctly as meaning that Obama's proposal is actually weaker than Schwarzenegger's California proposal?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Tue 29 May, 2007 11:54 am
sozobe wrote:
(Does Hillary even have a detailed plan out yet for health care? I know Edwards does, but I'm not sure about her.)

The article Thomas linked in also says:

Quote:
New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, who oversaw a massive but unsuccessful project to overhaul the nation's health care system while she was first lady, has promised universal health care but has yet to provide specifics.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Tue 29 May, 2007 11:56 am
Thanks, nimh, I missed that. That's cool that Obama beat her to it -- I hope his plan holds up.

I'm out of my depth here too, hope to find out more over the course of the day, as the details emerge and as there is more analysis.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Tue 29 May, 2007 12:25 pm
nimh wrote:
  • What are these individual mandates?

"Individual mandate" means that each individual has a legal obligation to acquire health insurance.

nimh wrote:
  • How does their absence make Obama's proposal "pretty weak"?

I'd leave that for Bradford Plumer to answer. But the standard argument for individual mandates is that without them, bad risks would drive out good.

To see the problem, imagine a universal healthcare system in which citizens are free to participate or not. The state insures everyone at the same rate, and this rate is set to cover the average policy holder's medical bills. Under this regime, some prospective policy holders -- the most healthy ones -- would figure out that they are better off uninsured at the current rate. They leave the system. Now, the average risk of the remaining policy holders is worse. The state has to rise premiums to make the premiums cover the cost of the new average risk. Some policy holders -- the most healthy ones -- figure out that they are better off uninsured at the new rate... and so on until the system has no more policy holders.

There are only two ways to escape this viscious cycle: 1) Allow insurance companies to fit their premium to the individual policy holder. This defeats the original point of providing affordable insurance to the previously uninsurable. 2) Make it mandatory for people to get health insurance.

nimh wrote:
  • Do I read this correctly as meaning that Obama's proposal is actually weaker than Schwarzenegger's California proposal?

If it does not include an individual mandate, it probably is, since Schwarzenegger's plan does include an individual mandate. But I wouldn't make that judgement quite yet. Mr Plumer seems to speculate wildly based on scarce information in the AP articles.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Tue 29 May, 2007 01:12 pm
The New York Times has more on Obama's healthcare plan.
    [url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/29/us/politics/28text-obama.html]Full speech[/url] [url=http://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/politics/factsheet_healthcare.pdf]Fact sheet[/url] (PDF) [url=http://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/politics/finalcostsmemo.pdf]Analysis by outside experts [/url](PDF)
Enjoy the read!
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 203
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.19 seconds on 08/09/2025 at 07:32:16