Tuesday, September 18, 2007

Opinion

Editorial, Op-Eds Address Clinton's Health Insurance Proposal

      Summaries of an editorial and several opinion pieces that address a proposal to expand health insurance to all U.S. residents announced on Monday by presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) appear below.

Editorial

• Washington Post: The "essential elements" of the proposal "bear a strong resemblance to earlier proposals" by other Democratic presidential candidates, according to a Post editorial. However, the editorial states, the "most interesting" difference is that the Clinton proposal would "limit the tax deductibility of employer-sponsored health plans for the wealthiest Americans," which is "a sensible step toward fixing one of the most expensive and counterproductive parts of the tax code." Clinton "deserves credit for being the only Democratic candidate to take even this step toward a more rational system," according to the editorial (Washington Post, 9/18).

Opinion Pieces

• Marie Cocco, Indianapolis Star: Clinton is the "hands-down leader in knowledge of the country's crazy-quilt health insurance and delivery system -- not to mention the unrivaled expert on the crass political calculations that go into destroying every effort to change it," syndicated columnist Cocco writes in a Star opinion piece. Cocco writes, "The rhetoric against any serious effort to repair the health insurance system that has broken the bank -- and the hearts -- of millions of Americans inevitably gets more divorced from reality the closer reform comes," adding, "The only sure bet on Clinton's return to the health insurance debate is that she'll drive opponents of change batty" (Cocco, Indianapolis Star, 9/18).
  
  
• Bill Hammond, New York Daily News: "Clinton has delivered a smart, realistic plan for achieving universal coverage that establishes the Democrats as the party of ideas on the nation's most pressing domestic issue": health care reform, Daily News columnist Hammond writes. The proposal "isn't just good politics, it's smart politics," Hammond writes, adding, "Most Americans would continue buying coverage from private insurance companies -- a far cry from the 'single-payer' model that dominates in Europe and from the caricature that" Republican presidential candidates "are trying to create" (Hammond, New York Daily News, 9/18).
  
  
• Paul Howard, New York Post: The proposal is "an attempt to prove that, as a presidential candidate, she's learned from her earlier mistakes and can craft a consensus plan that will generate broad popular support," Howard, a senior fellow at the Center for Medical Progress at the Manhattan Institute and managing editor of MedicalProgressToday.com, writes in a Post opinion piece. Howard writes that Clinton "is a smart, pragmatic political operator, and her latest health care plan reflects that savvy," but he adds that "when push comes to shove, her agenda hasn't changed" from 1993 (Howard, New York Post, 9/18).
  
  
• David Brooks, New York Times: Clinton's plan marks a "huge step forward from 1993" and is "evolutionary, not revolutionary," Times columnist Brooks writes. It is "much simpler than the one she came up with 14 years ago" and is "better than the GOP candidates'" plans. The proposal would establish a "magic circle of companies, providers, government entities, all interlocked in a system to provide health security," but "there will still be forces outside the magic circle that will be adapting and innovating in ways that might upset the plan." Brooks notes that "there are still complexities in the health care system that no loya jirga, no matter how smart, can fully anticipate and control" (Brooks, New York Times, 9/18).
  
  
• E.J. Dionne, Washington Post: Clinton "comes late to the health care sweepstakes" with her proposal, but "there is a message in that," Post columnist Dionne writes. Dionne writes, "Her approach, she says, has been 'very deliberate,'" which is "why she offered ideas on curbing health costs and improving the quality of care before she got around to her plan to cover everyone." According to Dionne, the proposal "has incentives for small businesses, special help to companies with high legacy costs for retired employees and a lot of assistance for the middle class" to address the question that individuals and interest groups "will always ask, 'What's in it for me?'" (Dionne, Washington Post, 9/18).