Sen. Hillary Clinton's plan would go further than a similar approach by Sen. Barack Obama toward achieving universal health care, according to Jack Krugman of the Seattle P-I. The difference is mainly due to the required participation in the Clinton plan.
Krugman's sources find that a plan without mandates, broadly resembling the Obama plan, would cover 23 million of those currently uninsured, at a taxpayer cost of $102 billion per year. An otherwise identical plan with mandates would cover 45 million of the uninsured -- essentially everyone -- at a taxpayer cost of $124 billion. Overall, the Obama-type plan would cost $4,400 per newly insured person, the Clinton-type plan only $2,700.
An even cruder analysis that fell out of my calculator shows that $125 billion divided by 150 million (assume that half of all Americans pay a tax or other surcharge to cover the 45 million newly protected) would cost each of the taxed persons about $833 per year above their current tax and insurance burden. About $2.25 per day or about 20 minutes work at minimum wage. Seems cheap to me. Why do the right-wing crazies so vehemently resist? A more cynical person than I might wonder whether they own insurance stocks.
- Lindsey Graham Deprecates Impeachment Inquiry Transcripts
- Build, don't destroy the US Postal Service
- History Museum in Johnstone Scotland on our Platform
- More Deviltry in Turkey; This Time It's Murder
- Big Energy Has another Option
- Trump now says his Florida resort won't be used for G7 in 2020
- More Illegal Foreign Emoluments for Tr*mp
- A Scotland History Connection
- Fable Dies Tragically in Spelling Accident
- Tr*mp and the Bahamas
- Putting United Health Care (UHC) "Security" to the Test
- Is America Dead?
- Keep the candidates coming; challenge their stamina
- National Internet Access Program Needs Net Neutrality
- How long, Lord?