Healthcare vs. Freedom of choice
Disclaimer:
The following is my personal opinion and is not intended as medical advice.
While I don't disagree with the premise that something has to be done about healthcare, This opening paragraph from Obama's website on healthcare (that is linked in this thread) seems to indicate a nativity on the subject.
“We now face an opportunity — and an obligation — to turn the page on the failed politics of yesterday's health care debates… My plan begins by covering every American. If you already have health insurance, the only thing that will change for you under this plan is the amount of money you will spend on premiums. That will be less. If you are one of the 45 million Americans who don't have health insurance, you will have it after this plan becomes law. No one will be turned away because of a preexisting condition or illness.”
Anyone who tells you that prices will be lowered and the highest risk candidates will be covered hasn't in my opinion thought this issue through. Consider for instance, the increased healthcare costs that are due to the increased demands on salaries of healthcare workers and technology demanded by patients that are suppose to be offset with increased efficiencies in providing insurance and treatment. Although I have no reason to believe the government will make delivery of healthcare more efficient, let's say it happens.
Now, we have two other issues to address, the aging of the population and covering individuals with pre-existing conditions. Clearly with the aging population there will be more utilization of healthcare services and this translates to higher overall healthcare costs. Let's be real...once a person is in their 60's, 70's, etc. it's unlikely most are going to change much in the way of their diet, exercise, etc. While I agree targeting kids in grade school and even early teens may have some impact (we need to get serious about Health and PE in schools and not cancel that class because it's considered less important than reading, 'righting and 'rithmetic) we won't see the benefit of that for decades. Also, my guess is any strides made in preventing physical ailments will be offset by increases in mental illness treatments (consider the explosion of prescription psychiatric drugsover the past two decades).
Now with pre-existing coverages....how is that insurance in the first place? Say someone has a pre-existing condition that requires $20,000/year in treatments. The health insurance company must accept that person (the risk) and is capped in their charge to say--$2,000/year. In this scenario the insurer must lose $18,000/year on that customer (plus additional expenses from unexpected medical treatments e.g. cold, broken bone, etc.). Who or how will the shortfall be made up? Clearly, it has to come from everyone else...either in the form of higher premiums for the most healthy and least likely to use the system or in the form or higher taxes from everyone. Otherwise, the insurer will not be able to remain in business.
I like Hillary's plan better because it has an end game of Universal coverage (my translation is government sponsored healthcare). We already have our foot in that model but no one wants to admit it or instead attempts to obfuscate the issue by blaming the problem with that model (providing care to prisoners, and anyone who visits an ER) on Illegal Immigrants (who they maintain come to the U.S. not to work, but primarily to commit crimes, engage in terrorist activities and for access to free healthcare).
Again, this is my personal opinion based on my knowledge and I don't represent myself as a healthcare expert. Please do not rely on this information in determining your healthcare options.