Edwards: Garnish Wages If Needed to Cover All

Edwards plan sounds really horrible to me .. and im a democrat …

What about care for illegal aliens?
Currently, we have 12 to 20 million in the country illegally, greatly stressing hospitals by failing to pay for treatments they receive. Only an absurd government would force illegal aliens to sign up for mandatory health care coverage–but then turn around and let them get away with actually being here illegally in the first place.

Edwards is absolutely correct about the need for a fundamental change in healthcare and he’s brave enough to propose specific ways to get universal coverage, although I would favor Dennis Kucinich who wants to take healthcare away from the insurance business entirely and have universal single-payer government provided health insurance. But I’m realistic enough to realize that Kucinich is not electable.

The statistics I have access to show that approximately $1.8 trillion dollars is spent on health care in the U.S. or approximately $6000 per person, twice that and more than other industrialized western nations. Despite spending so much, over 15% of our population is without any health insurance and cannot afford to see a doctor for preventive care and health maintenance, and that up to 60% have insurance with inadequate coverage with high premiums and deductibles. If you accept that health care is an essential service and the health of the nation has an affect on production, education, economy, and general welfare, it would be in the best interest to have a national insurance plan that would take the dollars already being spent and insure that more of them go to directly provide health care to individuals.
First order would be to insure that the government would be banned from building or operating any civilian hospital. Medical care for the military would not be affected but there will not be any government run hospitals for the public. It is critical that medical facilities and providers remain competitive and independent.
Costs: Capping malpractice insurance rates at a percentage of income and awards for litigation. By allowing hospitals to compete for patients with the guarantee that every patient seen will have their costs covered, overall cost of coverage will come down, the goal being no higher than $3500 annually per capita or $1.05 trillion, needed per year. This amount is on par with the per capita cost of other industrialized states, and still would put us high on dollars spent.
Coverage: A review of conditions and procedures that are currently covered in any percentage by current commercial insurance will be covered 100% by national insurance. No co-pays, no prescription costs, including dental and vision.
Payments: A review of currently negotiated rates with hospitals and Drs will set the base for payments to them for services rendered; renegotiations can use inflation and cost of living as bases for increases. Profit in the medical community will be primarily determined by those that provide the highest quality care efficiently, thus being able to see more patients and have more income. Upon receiving an accurately completed claim from the provider, payment is issued.
Prescriptions: Price and quality will be the basis for negotiations for medications. While American companies will be a priority, there will be no requirement that they be the sole suppliers.
Funding: At a savings to all of the currently insured; their rates will drop from their current premium to 10% of monthly income up to $100 per month. With the low estimate of 100 million workers in this category, that raises $120B a year, employers will also save by having a reduced premium for insurance at 4 times what their employees pay and this will result in an additional $480B. $600B collected while putting more money back into the economy. Everyone who works will pay the 10% of income per month with the $100 cap. There are approximately 50 million more workers, with little or no insurance. Assuming the lowest income under the poverty line for this group, these workers will still contribute $1000 a year each or an additional $50B, their employers working on the same sliding scale will provide an additional $200B. So from the workers and employers $850B, can be garnered, and the remaining $200B required has already been appropriated under Medicare, Medicaid, VA medical and any number of other programs that provide medical services both federal and local.
The role of government in this process – pay the bill. Review and oversight will be in place to address issues of abuse. Like the tax database, a medical database can be built to monitor national health and provide support and direction for medical research. Procedures or medications not listed as covered will be reviewed by state medical boards and the basis for approval will be benefit to the patient, not cost of the procedure.
This benefit will only be available to legal residents of the United States. Illegal residents will be treated, but also deported once able to travel.
Using the free market so hospitals compete for patients will make for better services and shorter wait times. With over $1 trillion available for the market, it will be a very profitable for hospitals and Dr’s, look for insurance companies to open their own health care facilities and provide private insurance for previously uncovered procedures.
If there is relevant data that would show that such a plan would not work, please share it. I am no specific fan of socialized medicine, having the government run oversight on medical decisions is a bad idea. National insurance will allow for all citizens to have better access to care, a better national database for health trends across the country, and more money available in the economy seem to be only the initial benefits of such a plan.
taking the profit out of health insurance is the only thing that makes sense.

It’s important for any plan to be universal and mandatory, it’s the only way to bring down costs for everyone and to get rid of ‘preexisting condition’ clauses. People have to pay their fair share, healthy people with money shouldn’t be allowed to wait until after they get a bad diagnosis or accident to pay in.
I suspect Obama and Clinton know this too, they just aren’t being honest about it.

he needs to go the extra step and make the entire plan a non-profit plan.

Would not this mandatory policy destroy a healthcare “system” that is already suffering an acute shortage of workers?
Because premimums would be mandated, would not the Government also be required to mandate workers for the healthcare industry? And would not the Government mandate when, where, and how many times a person could visit the doctor? And would not the Government be required to place limits on the cost amount of care within a given period? And why would this be any better than the conditions already prevailing if cash was required up front? I’m thinking. I’m thinking.

Why do all the candidates act like buying or not buying health insurance is a personal choice? Do they truly not realize that there are millions of people deemed “uninsurable” by the health care industry who cannot get insurance on their own at any cost? It irritates the heck out of me that they paint this as a “personal responsibility” issue when my responsible decision to treat my hypertension is exactly the reason I can’t get insurance now!! Had I refused treatment and not seen the doctor for several years, I wouldn’t have a pre-existing condition that disqualifies me from every policy I’ve applied for. People with a history of treatment for depression are similarly SOL–regardless of whether they’ve recovered or not. Unless they plan to provide equal access at equal prices for all Americans (which you know the insurance lobby will never stand for) none of these plans has a snowball’s chance of making it.

bill lynch for president!!! ;)

thats an easy one bill, but truth is , sadly ,one word rules all today.
PROFIT!
thanks for your post ,at least there are 2 of us.
;)

julie: Thank you for correcting me on
Obama’s plan!

OMG….another loonie democrat idea to stick it to … everyone. If someone does not want health insurance there is no way the government would have the right to garnish their wages and force them to buy insurance. BTW, if Edwards would cut back on his $400.00 haircuts he could pay for those who can’t or won’t. Get a clue Edwards…this is a free country and you can’t force anyone to buy insurance they don’t want. But then, they will just raise taxes on all of us so we will be so poor we won’t be able to pay our house payments or car notes. Democrats are working extra hard to socialize the USA. Don’t be fooled by these charlatans.

I’ve read the most amazing post by Louis on this very site. I think it should be used by professors in universities in order to teach fuzzy thinking. Seriously!
The guy starts with a declaration that US spends too much on health care. He does not explain why this is happenning and what could be the ways to cut the medical costs today without destroying the private system. For example, he thinks he can cut the price of the government run medical insurance by capping the medical lawuit bills and
denying the benefits to the illegal alliens. Now, why not try all these measures today, BEFORE we start experimenting with the government run medical insurance? Louis is silent on this obvious point, which reveals his fuzzy thinking.
Next, he spends awful amount of time describing who will be forced to pay what – without even an attempt to explain in any detail how the people would be able to control their health care – and I mean individually, not as a collection of 300 million folks, each with his own interests. How would htey be able to guard their interests, and be sure that the same folks that run the DMV don’t screw them? Moreover, on what actual principles will the government be running the medical care?
Here are a few nice attempts from him:
“It is critical that medical facilities and providers remain competitive and independent.”
Here it is utterly unclear how can medical facilities become independent if the government is the sole and completely arbitrary decider on the prices and quality of the services rendered. Ever dealt with the monopoly, which has unlimited power? Multiply it by 100 when you are dealing with the government.
“By allowing hospitals to compete for patients with the guarantee that every patient seen will have their costs covered, overall cost of coverage will come down, the goal being no higher than $3500 annually per capita or $1.05 trillion, needed per year.”
Here again, it is the government deciding which treatments are to be chosen, and which is the “effective” way of dealing with particular illnesses. Anyone who feels differently
than the government buecracy should use prayer as the most effective way of changing the situation.
“Payments: A review of currently negotiated rates with hospitals and Drs will set the base for payments to them for services rendered; renegotiations can use inflation and cost of living as bases for increases.”
Who is to negotiate with whom? Moreover, the socialistic ideas that prices can be simply calculated by the government should examine the example of Soviet Union, and how effectively the prices were decided there. For some reason, stupid humanity did not find a reliable way to find the actual price for a product by theorical calculations, and the only known way is a free trade between actual interested parties, and it’s definitely not the government telling the doctors how much their services are worth.
“Profit in the medical community will be primarily determined by those that provide the highest quality care efficiently, thus being able to see more patients and have more income. Upon receiving an accurately completed claim from the provider, payment is issued.”
Okay, so “efficient medical care” is now judged by the number of people who went through your facility, not whether they actually got better. Hm. Funny. I would like Louis to explain how this exactly works. I am curious. Really.
Also – who decides whether the claim is accurately completed – and based on what exact standards? I mean, all around the world government folks know how to play the system. And it is very easy when the power is unlimited and no general principles are given.
“Prescriptions: Price and quality will be the basis for negotiations for medications.”
This is clear as night. Price and quality tend to go together. Which is preferrable to the government – lower priced, lower quality, or higher priced, higher quality? Louis, you are sharing words, not ideas here. Grow up, boy.
“The role of government in this process – pay the bill.”
And to decide how much everything costs. Which, if you think about it, is a tremedous power.
“Using the free market so hospitals compete for patients will make for better services and shorter wait times.”
Sure. Government price controls make wonders with wait times and better services. Just go and take a look at the housing with price limits. They all look dandy, and they are plenty of them for everyone.
The ending of the Louis’ post is brilliant. “If there is relevant data that would show that such a plan would not work, please share it.”
In other words, Louis wants to take a trillion dollars out of people’s pockets, by force, he promises it will work (somehow) – and he puts all the burden of proof on the skeptics. Listen here, Louis, before I even think about attempting to prove to you that your fantastic plan won’t work, how about you describe in painstaking details how your plan will be actually working? Here is topic one – explain based on what general principles the government will judge if they achieved the following: “Prescriptions: Price and quality will be the basis for negotiations for medications.”
Also, explain how the government will be determining the “profit” for the medical companies. Say, one company dealt with 5 people with a particular type of cancer – and all of them were cured. Another company in the exact same time treated 10 people, and only 8 were cured, while 2 died. Now, as you said previously, “Profit in the medical community will be primarily determined by those that provide the highest quality care efficiently, thus being able to see more patients and have more income.” Tell us, who should be payed what and why? Go ahead, make my day.

I keep hearing everyone say universal health care. Its not a lack of health care that is the problem. its health care insurance, and there is a world of difference. With or without insurance no ER room will turn you away, and others don’t foot that bill, as some think, you will be billed for the visit.
But what people need to think on is this…Health care insurance isn’t a right, it isn’t a privilege, its a service you choose or don’t choose to have.
APB now, APB forever

It’s amazing to me. If I ask all you Universal Health care folks to name me one thing the Government does better then the private sector you would be very hard pressed to come up with an answer. Is the Government more efficient? NO. Is it more effective? NO. More responsible? More Thrify? More Moral? NO. NO. NO. Yet somehow you think handing over your health care to them is going to be better.
The Government is a major reason the current system is a mess right now and you believe that some way, some how this time they will do better? They screw it up and some how handing it over to them is the answer? With centuries of failure you somehow think that this time they will get it right? My god what is wrong with you people. You do know your betting your life and the life of your loved ones on this don’t you? Remember this, when the lines are long, the quality is worse and the cost is more your better remember that you were told this would happen and you chose it.

Isn’t AMERICA great???? Edwards just proved that you can get rich here by being so incredibly stupid.

So….
A woman has the right to choose to terminate a baby, but not the right to choose her own health care situation, because that will be by gub’mint mandate?
What–is she too stupid to make the health care choice?

Why don’t we just vote for someone that will turn the US into Cuba and all our problems wiil be solved ?

You cannot squeeze blood from a turnip. So the question remains, how much are taxes going to be raised under his plan, and for who, to pay for the healthcare?

I do not have an answer for the health care crisis but none of the plans I have read about seem to take into consideration how people that fall into the crack will pay for housing, food, clothing, transportation, day care, and the many other responsibilities we have in our daily lives with the added cost of mandated health insurance.
I would choose to have health insurance if I could afford to have it for my entire family. At my place of employment if I choose to take the health insurance for my family, my cost would be close to $300 per month. Which is affordable for some but when I take into account that I bring home around $1000 per month and my rent is around $400 per month, my utility bills(electric, water, gas, phone) run around $400 per month, not to mention car insurance, gas for said car, food, and the now added cost of co-pays if I took the offered health insurance I cannot afford the health insurance but yet I make to much to get help from the state.
Is there an answer to this crises? I do not know but I do know that mandated health coverage as Edwards would enact is not the answer.

I can’t believe American people would stand for more government control of our lives. WE need to take responsibility for our lives and keep government out….
Consumer driven health care is the way to go. Benefit programs etc…. Then we would bwe driving the cost for health care not big companies.
I love AmeriPlan USA. It is the way to go!

This the thinking of Communism and the whole Democratic Party has now turned to Communism. Hillary is the leader of the pack.

So Mr. Edwards, you want to garnish my wages if I don’t buy healthcare? What right do you have to tell me what and what not to spend my money on? Last I checked, we don’t vote for king or dictator in the USA. Can anyone say communistic, anti personal liberty, anti personal responsiblity liberal? Gov’t healthcare is a guaranteed way to run our economy into the ground. Not to mention how it massively goes against the principles our country was founded on.

Edwards is such an idiot, he needs to be a shampoo model, not a lawyer or politician. There is NO RIGHT to health care, nor is it a function of the Federal (or State) Gummint to provide or coerce participation in socialist medicine. Gummint run health care will reduce us all to British style health care… phooey.

Edwards and all these democrats are communists pure and simple. Hillary says we have to take your money away from you for the common good. Edwards would mandate Everyone has to buy health insurance. I would never vote for any of them. What right do they have to tell anyone to buy health insurance? With their logic everything should be free. What ever happened to freedom in America? These democrats never discuss FREEDOM!!! The founding principle of this republic. It is all about government Mandates and growing the size of the federal bureaucracy. What a JOKE. The American people better wake up and think twice or three times before electing any of these communists as president.

Where does it say that the government has to take care of you and provide for all your needs? That’s communism, pure and simple!

The only way nationalized or mandatory health care can cut health care cost is by rationing health care and establishing business like “economic benefit analysis” in deciding who get what treatment. This is already done, to one degree or another in every country with socialized medicine.
The elderly are sent home to die. Many cancer patients die waiting for treatment. hundred of thousands of Canadians come to the US every year for treatment they can not get in Canada. My mother-in-law would already be dead if we lived in Canada because there is no economic return to keeping her alive. She is 85, blind, diabetic and in the not so early stages of dementia, and had her right leg amputated. She requires 24 hour care. In Canada they would have let the infection in her leg kill her.
But none of the Democrat candidates want to talk about this.
Any do any of you really believe Hillary is going to wait in line behind her maid to see a doctor?
Lawyers are responsible for a huge amount of the cost of care. If a doctor wants to take home $100K a year he has to bill at least $400K due to high taxes and high liability insurance costs. That cost is passed on to us.

I do NOT want your socialist view of the world to run mine. I’ve lived under several types of socialism & all achieve the same goal: control of every facet of society. And that is what you are after, Mr. Edwards, at least have the intestinal fortitude to admit it.

I would love for grocery stores to not make a profit either…someone else get rich because I have to eat…how ridiculous! I mean, I have to eat, right? That’s just so unfair. Bad profits, bad!
And I guess I should do my current job for free also, God forbid I make a profit working!

Looks like the freepers have hit this thread pretty hard with their mindless diatribe and talking points.
Only thing I can say is they had complete control of the US government for the past 7 years and look what a mess they made.
Republicans and Corporatists are destroying our country at an alarming rate.
Their theories have all failed in practice and have led us into stupid wars and, since the beginning of “Reaganomics”, have run our national debt from under 1 trillion to nearly 10 trillion dollars today!
Who is going to pay that debt? Certainly not the billionaires…
Instead of taking orders from your minders like Rush and O’Reilly why not spend some time educating yourselves and engaging in some true critical thinking?
The Corporatists care nothing about our America.

I’ve been an independent for years….. and this is how their attempting to convince me that their worthy of my vote. Frankly, this guy is floating the next LEAD balloon trying to get some traction on a campaign which is “on the tracks.”
This is proposed power grab dressed as in the context of “FOR THE COMMON GOOD” is the next thrust towards socialism.
If he’s so hip on this idea, he should be fist to contribute; you know… lead by example… but as we all know that won’t happen in his or our children’s lifetime.
After the decimation of our beautiful proud country overrun with “ILLEAGAL” immigrants and terrorists all allowed in with open arms, by the people to are WE’VE empowered to control boarders, and the “free for all” handouts by the liberals. I’ll have to crawl into my expensive cardboard box sporting one ripped flap underneath the local interstate overpass and cry in my “stone soup”, since I won’t be able to work due to the negative impact that work will have on my life.
The whole lots of these guys are just plan *@#^%ed up in the brain.
They need to move to the Congo, Cuba…. living among peasants for a couple of years…
Alas, life with a golden spoon…

Thomas Jefferson said: My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.
And, too many of you propose that more government is a good thing. When a bureaucracy is created, as it will be with national health insurance, it’s goal is the consumption of more and more taxpayer dollars to insure its continuance.

Sorry Bill but your numbers just don’t add up. The healthcare industry is much more complicated due to “mandated” regulations from the federal and state governments. It’s these regulations and excessively high malpractice insurance premiums that drive up the cost of health care. Take the government completely out of healthcare and allow the market to work (supply and demand) and eventually healthcare prices will come down on their own. Just the amount saved in elimination of government required paperwork alone would lower the cost of healthcare dramatically.
You mentioned the debt being so high. That’s not due to reaganomics, it’s due to overspending by the former democratic Congress and by the Bush administration and the most recent republican congress. Unfortuantely the new democrats are even making it worse. Reaganomics has increased the government revenues by five fold but the stupid congress has spent every penny of it and more. The debt was even balanced before Bush took over for a very short time. Spending is the problem not income.
The Billionaires you speak of (top 1% of all income) pay 60% of all taxes. The top 10% pay 90% of all taxes and the top 50% pay 100% of all taxes that means that 50% of all Americans are getting a FREE ride. That is unfair. Why blame people for being producers, they also create the jobs for everyone else. No poor person ever created a job.
Thanks to Reaganomics the United States has sustained the longest and biggest growth of GDP in history. We have averaged nearly 4.0% growth for the past 24 years, with record low inflation, the lowest interest rates in history and 3.5% unemployment, that’s amazing.
From 1976-1980 when Jimmy Carter was in office and the democrats controlled congress we had 12% unemployment, 17% inflation, and 18% interest rates. The highest tax rates in history. An economy of a third world nation. Do we want this again?
If spending hadn’t increased so much (I blame Bush and the recent republicans for this too) America would have an enormous surplus right now. Tax cuts are the reason for this long sustained growth. The democrats if elected will destroy our economy and bring it crashing around us because of record tax increases and new federal programs.

Just what I would expect from Edwards. It fits right in with his control-freak agenda: Get the test or shot they tell you to get or your mandatory premiums go up. It can mean the difference between not paying the mortgage or doing what they tell you to do.

hey Erik, I can’t wait till we are a “successful” country and people will risk their lives on leaky inner tubes and in 110 degree deserts to get here…if you look at Europe today you can see in elections in most countries that the big welfare society days are over…in France, Britain, Germany, Italy, even Scandinavia, they have been making cutbacks on the endless largesse of yore. Even the socialists are “light” versions. The Europeans know they must be more competitive in a globalized world, and the trend is away from the nanny state.

This is nonsense, of course. We cannot even enforce the requirement that all persons driving on the road have insurance. So forget this insane plan. (i.e. “let them eat cake”…..if they cannot afford health insurance, just require everyone to purchase it anyway….duh!)
Maybe in the next election they will decide everyone needs to drive a BMW and simply mandate or require everyone to buy one. If they cannot afford one, a BMW will be put on back order for you, and paid for by stealing your income tax return and garnishing your wages until it is paid for. Problem solved! Why was this ever a problem anyway?

“Where does it say in the Constitution that we are guaranteed health care or welfare?”
Same place that it says women are entitled to an abortion (I mean “choice”)…NOWHERE!!!!

I can see it now. You can’t afford the insurance. The government garnishes your wages, with fees, penalties and interest. That goes on your credit report.
Then, when you apply for a job, your prospective employer does a background check and says, uh, oh, I am not hiring this person. They are a risk! (While credit reports are not the best indicator of a potential employee’s performance or trustworthiness,this is practice is growing).
So now, you can’t get job because you could not pay for your insurance premiums, govt penalties and interest. You go on welfare, and get free insurance. What a deal!!

This is nothing but COMMUNISM!!!!

All these phonies talk about is “health care”. What they really mean is an insurance policy. If they were legitimate, they would be talking about a govt program which would assist American students to become doctors and nurses without costing a student a total fortune. Also(not)close to Edwards heart is the concept of lawsuit reform. A doctor/nurse dedicate their life helping people and they are confronted with huge malpractice insurance costs and lawsuits from the Edwards type lawyers.

Atlas Shrugged.

Socialism marches on! How come Hugo Chavez didn’t come up with this brilliant plan? Soak the rich! Redistribute the wealth! Give the money to those who really deserve it, the poor! Right (or should I say left) on!

Sue, your friend with Hep C can walk into any hospital and they cannot turn him away. We don’t have insurance and my doctor charges $35.00 for an office visit. He does not take any government payments (medicare, medicaid) because if he did, government then dictates how much he has to charge everyone. He would then have to charge around $80.00 for an office visit. So, when government takes over prices WILL go up.

“Government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have.”
Barry Goldwater

We also need to end the IRS…..

Think of being sick or even worse in an accident then subjected to a hospital run like the DMV……..sounds great to me. What part of the liberal mind thinks that more government is more efficient and better for this country?
I love the comment that “taking the profit out of health care is the only thing that makes sense”
What are you talking about, what new drugs, techniques, surgeries, efficient procedures, technologies, advances in care will be brought about if we “take the profit out”
I hope to drop $250K on a med. school education and then be told by the government how much money they will allow me to make.
Move to CANADA if you can’t understand basic economics and belive we are all entitled to “free” health care.
Socialized medicine does not work.

Edwards says that health insurance must be mandatory because “some people will choose not to buy insurance even though it’s affordable [by whose definition?], knowing that the rest of us will pay for their emergency room visits.”
In the first place, where does he get ‘us’? Congress has a more comprehensive plan than any available to the masses as it is, also paid for by someone else, namely the taxpayers. Lawmakers only count themselves part of ‘us’ at election time; don’t be fooled.
In the second place, those who CHOOSE not to have health insurance typically can pay for their own doctor visits, and they are able to do that because hundreds of dollars every month aren’t disappearing down some largely superfluous health plan. They aren’t freeloaders, Mr. Edwards; they are free citizens, exercising their right to spend their money as *they* see fit.
Here’s the way health insurance now works, thanks to decades of government meddling: you pay a monthly premium equal to what it would cost to visit the doctor two to four times a month. In exchange for that, you are *allowed* to visit the doctor two to four times a year for ‘free’. For a person who is generally healthy and who takes even basic care of themselves, that makes no sense at all. Catastrophic costs are another matter, but that is not
Does Edwards really believe that people must choose between regular doctor visits and ER visits — that most people’s private lives are so precariously balanced that only active and ongoing monitoring by some authority figure separates them from disaster? That isn’t the experience of the vast majority of Americans, and Edwards and those of his ilk would do well to remember that.

Barack Obama Must Be Doing Something Right

I have a rule of thumb that has served me well in assessing public figures: Anyone Paul Krugman dislikes cant be all bad. Thus, Krugmans recent attacks on Barack Obama suggest that the Illinois Senator has hidden virtues. Yesterday&#8…

Mr. Edwards,
I have some suggestions for scumbag attorney’s like you.
1. Read the Constitution
2. Do what it says
3. If you want to help uninsured
people by providing them with
health insurance then you can
personally choose a dozen or more
families of your choice, practice
the Christian principle of giving
and out of your vast wealth
easily be able to pay the premiums
out of your pocket for all those
families and still be able to pay
the mortgage (if you have one) on
that shopping mall that you live in.
If you got all of your wealthy
socialist friends to do that
I’m sure we could put a big dent
in this health insurance problem.
Oh, by the way. I’m sure it’s tax
deductible.
Problem solved. Next!
Thanks,
The Mad Spartan

MadSpartan,i say/said the same to all the libs we have representing US that if they are so upset about all the illegals,uninsured etc,then set up a philanthropic org /sponsor a few hundred illegals etc.THEMSELVES,hell,they can easily afford to….that WE,the PEOPLE have had enough.
my gawd,to witness with your own eyes the direction (socialism) this nation’s running toward….

I am a licensed health insurance agent in the state of NC, John Edwards’ state.
However, I gave up selling insurance… it seems that insurance companies will use nearly any excuse to decline coverage. I wasted hours with people signing them up, only to find out they had some pre-existing condition that caused them to get turned down! That is because if you have a major problem, or are overweight like most Americans, you run up more of an annual bill than your annual premium. I actually had people call me that had just gotten pregnant – and wanted MATERNITY coverage!!!! (“Hello, State Farm? I just totalled my car, so I’d like to buy some collision coverage…”)
And NC has some pretty oddball rules. For example, if ANYONE in your family is pregnant, you cannot get health insurance… period. Seriously. If Mommy is pregnant, then the 3 yr old, 6 yr old, and hubby CAN’T GET INSURANCE! Or if you’re applying for coverage and you discover your teenage daughter is knocked up — DECLINED!
I am a 50 yr old diabetic. I can’t get coverage for ANY price. I’ll bet 75% of those “uninsured” who are not illegal have the same problem — insurability.
Edwards is an idiot.
Get the government OUT OF YOUR LIFE!

I hope people understand what Edwards is. He is a Marxist-Socialist. His proposal is another “back-door” approach to confiscate your income as part of a broader platform to engineer the takeover of 1/7th of the nations’ economy.
If government schools did their job and taught pure economics, people like the Marxist Mr. Edwards would be laughed out of serious politics for the clown that he really is.
Marxist-Socialist like Mr. Edwards have at least one thing in common with their predecessors: They don’t want to simply leave you alone.
Garnish your wages is code for stealing what rightfully belongs to those work for what they have while the government simply seeks to take what you have. It takes more effort for the individual to work for what he has than it takes for idiots like Edwards to go after what you have.
People in North Carolina are the happiest when he is out of the state making a complete fool of himself.
He is just another self-centered socialist masking himself as one who cares about people.
He is indeed another socialist who is a clear threat personal freedom.
C.A.

Winston Churchill said, “If you are young and not a liberal, you don’t have a heart. If you are older and not a conservative, you don’t have a brain.” I rest my case, Cecil.
C.A.

This also goes for Hilary Clinton. She is also constitutionally challenged. Now the queen wants to garnish wages and force people to buy health insurance. Are these dems idiots or what? By what authority are they going to mandate this? I think it is time for another Boston tea party revolution to win back our freedom.

A higher volume of people paying premiums into a Medicare-type program will bring healthcare costs down. For those of you who believe the private sector can do a better job than the gov’t, don’t you understand that the CEO’s and higher level executives of insurance and healthcare companies, HMO’s, fly around in corporate jets and make multi-million dollar bonuses paid for by the exorbinantly priced treatment of sick people? In my opinion, that’s immoral. A Medicare-type program broadened to apply to all Americans would have a lower expense to profit ratio. Medicare already spends way less on administration costs than a private company, and the cost of healthcare would go down because the hospitals would be treating more people with insurance coverage and less uninsured people. The illegal alien problem is a separate issue.

Hey Molly!
We don’t ask the taxpayers to pay for everyone else’s auto insurance premiums.

Correction! It was the Ford Explorer that had a bad design, and it took civil lawsuits to get it changed.