Clinton VS. Obama (Healthcare Reform)
“In 2005, the United States spent 16% (up from 14% in 2000) of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on health care, a greater share than any other developed country for which data are collected by the Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development.” This was a quote taken from the annual report issued by the CDC with regards to the state of healthcare within the United States. The cost of healthcare has risen around the world and even more so in the United States due to the sheer number of providers, costly system and huge malpractice insurance amounts that most doctors have to pay. These are not all the factors by any chance but they are some of the more significant ones. I am writing this article from three perspectives:
1. My dad has been a GP for all 25 years of my existence and has experienced some of these healthcare issues from the practitioner’s side.
2. I have worked for a major Healthcare provider in the USA and do have some first hand knowledge of the systems and costs involved.
3. I have paid for health insurance from my first day of college in America till the last day of work in my previous employer.
I decided to examine this healthcare issue because it is one of the more significant issues coming up to the election and in part due to a question posed on Facebook:
I think many people around the world often listen to the promises of politicians but do not actually examine the facts behind what they say. I have done this and examined both the Healthcare plan as offered by Hillary Clinton and the plan offered by Barack Obama. Here are some of my conclusions in no particular order because they all warrant attention (All information regarding the plans were extracted from the candidates websites):
1. The first thing you will notice is that Senator Obama’s plan is 15 pages including references while Senator Clinton’s plan is a mere 3 pages. I realize this does not mean a lot but if I was a gambling man, I would say Senator Clinton relies on more than just the facts to sway the minds of the voters.
2. The plans are essential the same in a broad sense with both candidates mentioning that they want all Americans to be covered by health insurance and they use the number of 47 million Americans being uninsured. Both candidates also reference the Federal Employee Health Benefit Program as a basis for the national healthcare plan that they will create. Another similarity is that both candidates state that no American will be excluded on the basis of pre-existing conditions.
3. With the similarities out of the way, we can go to the most significant difference that being the explanation of the plans. Senator Clinton’s plan is vague at best with two to three lines of detail over each sub-topic. She mentions modernizing the health system however unlike Senator Obama she does not go into detail as to how it gets done. Senator Obama mentions the key phrase “Health IT Investment”, as a former employee of a healthcare company, I can say this is essential in any potential health plan as the costs are quite outrageous. I cannot go into speciic amounts but my organization was paying a minimum of $10,000 a month for our I.T system which if reduced, we could pass on the savings to our customers. Working for a healthcare company, I was paying $100 a month as a premium for healthcare coverage. I also remember when I was in College, I looked around for private healthcare for just myself and the cheapest quote I could get was $140 for myself as a student. These costs are even more absurd when you consider the co-payments you will have to pay when you visit the Dentist or Doctor. Senator Obama mentions an integration of healthcare systems around the country in order to minimize costs associated with paper methodology. My father has never practiced in America but I can see from personal experience here in Ireland and in the USA that many doctors have modernized but still heavily rely on paper. This needs to stop and this is one of the more important differences I noticed in my analysis of the two plans.
4. I will acknowledge that Senator Clinton uses two words that Senator Obama does not in his plan which is “Fiscally Responsible.” Modernizing the healthcare system is all good and fine but where is the money going to come from? There is only so much that the Government can afford to spend and take of the drug companies, insurance providers before the cost falls to the consumer. Any potential healthcare plan must (with a capital M) be cost effective so that an already tight financial situation in the USA is not worsened because some candidate is forced to keep his promises.
5. Senator Obama mentions the use of generics; this was a major issue in the USA a few years ago because the mayor of Springfield, MA allowed his citizens to buy drugs from Canada even though the federal government declared it illegal. Generics save a lot of money and the fact that the Federal government has outlawed them thanks to the lobbying from the big drug companies is crazy. The needs of the people must be taken over the needs of big business, as long as the generics are tested fine, I see no reason why citizens of the USA cannot order medication from countries like Canada where it is far cheaper.
6. There are many other differences between these two policies but the last and probably the most important thing I would like to discuss with reference to these two candidates is that Senator Obama mentions the need for American’s to change their lifestyle. He used a good statistic referencing that 133 million Americans suffer from chronic illnesses like Diabetes, Asthma, and Obesity. As someone who lived in America for 6 years, I know all about the lifestyle. Many people drive everywhere unlike Europe where people walk a lot more, the meals are actually larger in the USA because I have compared a Large Quizno’s sub to a Large here in Ireland and the Irish Quizno’s is decidedly lacking. Senator Obama makes a good point in that Americans need to change their lifestyle in order to improve the health of the whole country and eventually productivity since people who are sick are a strain on the healthcare system and cost the whole country at the end of the day.
Changes like these are by no means instantaneous and especially the last point but my whole point in this article is that I urge voters to research beyond what the candidate says and look at the hard facts. Senator Obama’s plan is more comprehensive and covers the essential measures that effect America today and for the years to come. Healthcare needs to be an evolving concept that intertwines the average citizen, the government, the drug companies and the insurance companies in an equilibrium that benefits all and it is my view that Senator Obama is the person who can create such a plan.
January 27 2008 11:39 pm | American Politics
January 28th, 2008 at 9:11 pm
I really don’t want either one of their plans. I feel positive that if government runs health care they’ll simply make a mess of it. I don’t want more government control in America, but less. Socialized medicine doesn’t work, and that fact has been proven every time it’s been tried. I have friends in Canada who detest it. I personally know two people who have had to come to America for an operation because they had waiting lines in Canada that required they wait for six months or more to get in. One of my friend’s father died because he wouldn’t make the trip to America although his son offered to pay for everything. The man had a heart problem and needed bypass surgery, but died waiting for it.
Crian, you asked in this post where the money is going to come from. The answer is simple: higher taxes. As soon as a Democrat gets into office taxes will be raised on everything. They have a bill now that they aren’t going to try to put past Bush because they know he won’t approve it. He’s already vetoed a proposal for a gas tax increase twice. They want to impose a 40 cent gas tax on us over a period of 5 years. We already pay 18.4 cents per gallon, so that means in five years, if this plan passes, we will be paying 58.4 cents per gallon. The plan is to add 8 cents per year for five years. For verification of this, all you have to do is google “Transportation Panel Urges Gas Tax Increase.”
January 28th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
Gayle, I have read your blog and seen the intergrity of your writing so their is no need for verification on my part. I have also heard from friends of mine in Canada about the state of health system and the lack of performance thereof. At the same time the current health system is far from perfect and the USA is not the same as Canada so maybe the government could do better? The price of gasoline in Ireland is close to $5 a gallon, which also helps people take public transport, reduce their carbon footprint etc… so wouldn’t a rise in gas tax not only help the environment but the health of the american people as a whole?
January 29th, 2008 at 12:17 am
I know that what you say about the environment is the real reason they are attempting to impose this gas tax, even though they claim it’s to be used to improve our infrastructure. There are other ways to improve our infrastructure. Toll roads, just to name one. $5.00 per gallon would not be acceptable to most people here, especially people like me who live way out in the country without access to public transportation. I don’t even have any neighbors to carpool with!
But here’s the thing, regardless of whether it would help the environment or not, which it probably would, but what about poor people that the Democrats say they care so much about? How can they justify that sort of tax increase and claim at the same time they care about the poor? That sounds 180 degrees out to me. What about disabled people who can’t get onto a bus? I drive a little elderly lady friend around who uses a walker and has braces on both legs. She has a horrible problem balancing. She can’t go up stairs at all. There are thousands of people just like her, and just as many in wheel chairs. And while I’m at it, what about me? I don’t charge her for the gas. She doesn’t have the money to afford it, but at $5.00 per gallon I’d have to rethink my charity. The thought of driving a little pill box that gets many miles per gallon of gas is not an option for me either. I’m tall for a woman and have trouble getting in and out of tiny cars. I think anyone 5′10″ tall or more must have the same problem.
Well, Crian, it’s been interesting. Thanks for saying I’m reasonable and have integrity. I am and I do, but it’s nice to hear comming from a Democrat. As I said on my post, I’m very busy and have probably taken more time with you than I have time for, and that’s because you seem to be another reasonable Democrat. As I told you on my post, I have two who visit my blog fairly regularly. At any rate, you’re welcome on Dragon Lady’s Blog any time. My posts will be slowing down for awhile though. I usually post at least once a day, sometimes more, but I don’t have time for that right now.
Have a wonderful evening. Ireland is a beautiful country. I hope you’ll post some pictures sometime.
January 29th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Thanks for the comments and the time spent Gayle, I really appreciate it in many parts because I don’t often get to discuss policies like this in Ireland with the lack of American’s about these days. I think perhaps we can table this discussion until you have a bit more time. Take Care and Goodluck. I do have a load of pictures of Ireland and I would like to post them eventually.
January 29th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
I really enjoy reading your blog and like the way you go in depth on the health care issue.
Everyone would like to have affordable health insurance, but I don’t think government health care is the way to go. It seems our government can do more harm than good when they get involved.
There is no way a government run plan would not raise taxes. Just think of all the bureaucracy that it would create and where the money would have to come from.
Is there any country you know of that is better off with socialized medicine? This is only a question and not meant as argumentative.
What is the medical situation in Ireland?
Do you have socialized medicine and if so, how is it paid for and working out?
January 29th, 2008 at 10:30 pm
Hi Sandy, I really enjoyed reading your blog and its down to earth nature. Regarding socialized medicine, I had heard somewhere that the Danes are pretty good at that so I did a quick google search and found a pretty nice pdf explaining the whole process. Denmark has had social healthcare since the 70’s and here is a quote I found:
“The 1998 Euro Barometer survey prepared by the European Commission in collaboration with the London School of Economics and Political Science, showed that 90 per cent of Danes were satisfied with their health care services, more (by a large margin) than residents in any other EU member state. Many caution howver, that such comparative satisfaction surveys should be taken with a pinch of salt.”
Like the quote says itself, and what we all know about statistics, they only tell so much but perhaps there is truth there? The medical situation in Ireland is similar to the USA with most people having private health insurance unless you work for the government or are retired. The recent furor over here has been that the average Irish citizen wants more in terms of healthcare since it is quite expensive here. I would pay 60 euro roughly per month for healthcare here that does not cover many things and that would be the standard package. I think healthcare in every first world country is going to be come a greater issue as the population ages, the right plan needs to be found for each individual countries circumstances, maybe what the Danes do will not work for the USA? I think the government can get it right with the mix of private/public and government funding and if it means that they have to up the FICA rate from 7.5% in the usa to 8.5% so that more people have health coverage, I would not personally object.