It didn't receive support from the House or the Senate, and was addressed by Hillary in her book Living History. She acknowledges the plan had problems and that her political inexperience didn't help either. I think we, and she, have moved past these two problems. The current Universal Health Care proposal only holds onto the most rudimentary facets of her original plan, and is being supported by both Democrats and some Republicans. It makes me more confident about my support for Sen. Clinton's candidacy to know she is a politician that learned from her own first faulty steps and can actually acknowledge them, learn from them and move on.
2007-03-05 03:49:50
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
1 - It died a well-deserved death.
2 - It was Bill's payoff to Hillary for her standing by him during the Gennifer Flowers blow-up. He knew letting her run wild with healthcare was going waaaayyyyyy out on a limb but that's the quid-pro-quo they have: he screws up big-time and then helps her with one of her major socialist projects. They are definitely quite a pair.
As far as nationalized health care goes, if the socialists ever do get it through Congress the American people who now have healthcare paid for by someone else are going to be amazed and enraged when they find out exactly what that means for them: RATIONING - just like it does in every other country where healthcare is nationalized. And, since we Americans use healthcare much, much more than any other people on Earth, it's gonna be especially painful.
The rationing will be especially strict as Baby Boomers are going to begin overwhelming Medicare starting in about 2012. Along with Medicaid and Social Security, the federal government's ability to keep sending out the checks for entitlement programs at the planned-for rate is going to be severely constrained unless it raises taxes substantially (thereby slowing the economy and reducing taxable income, making it harder to raise those taxes).
No, I'm afraid that the time is past in this country (if, in fact, it ever existed) for grand socialist constructs like nationalized health care. Simply stated, we can't afford it (read: we don't want to pay for it).
2007-03-05 11:59:00
·
answer #2
·
answered by Fast Eddie B 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
Ya can't bleed the turnips anymore ! I pay way too much tax for way too little income.
If they want to Tax me more I will be using the "(Haha) Healthcare system that put me into the dirt.
Democrats just do not know how to work a budget without raising taxes. Its called ignorance, and a lack of responsibility.
With Republicans I know where I stand and it is not in the bread line like the communists.
2007-03-05 11:47:53
·
answer #3
·
answered by richard_lee_boyd 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
I am a democrat, but am not crazy about the Universal Health Care idea. The costs would be tremendous. While it is sad that all Americans do not have health care, there is no way that we can pay for healthcare for all people with out raising taxes significantly.
2007-03-05 11:43:39
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
An obstructionist GOP congress impeded its progress. 71% of Americans however want it.
2007-03-05 11:40:58
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
1⤋
Maybe she is saving that for a greater impact on her presidency?
2007-03-05 11:47:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by sapphire_630 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
it is in the Crapper like Canada's Healthcare Plan.
2007-03-05 11:41:43
·
answer #7
·
answered by AFIN 3
·
3⤊
3⤋
DOn't you remember??? Republicans killed it, and 2 million people have died because of it.
2007-03-05 11:41:30
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
2⤋
Like her husband, it was close, but no cigar! Maybe he can find some interns to work on it when he is first lady?
2007-03-05 11:40:25
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
6⤋
Do you not think there are bigger issues at stake right now than this?
2007-03-05 11:40:15
·
answer #10
·
answered by Bush Invented the Google 6
·
3⤊
4⤋