What impact will universal healthcare issues have on next presidential election?

  1. We discuss the pro's and con's on here of universal vs private health insurances but how important is this issue to us really? If you normally do not vote is this issue one that you would get out and vote for or against? If you normally do vote would you cross party lines in order to vote on way or another? Is the candidates stand on healthcare even an issue you would think about in voting for a particular candidate? Will healthcare be an issue in the next presidential election or is it a dead horse? Which is more important the War in Iraq or universal healthcare?
  2. 238 Comments

  3. by   Simplepleasures
    If the congress can get our troops out of Iraq and get us out of that quagmire, healthcare will be HUGE in the next elections.I fervently hope the Iraq question can be settled before then and our president does not get us involved in Iran. The Democratic candidates seem to have all been presenting their stance on Universal healthcare and looks to be something that will bring MANY voters out to the polls in 2008.
  4. by   burn out
    But is healthcare an important enough issue that it would sway your vote in the next election?
  5. by   Simplepleasures
    Quote from burn out
    But is healthcare an important enough issue that it would sway your vote in the next election?
    YES, but I may be viewed as biased.
  6. by   Spidey's mom
    Quote from burn out
    But is healthcare an important enough issue that it would sway your vote in the next election?
    No, not for me. Terrorism is first. Then education. Tax Relief. Etc.

    Everyone has access to healthcare - even if it is the ER. I don't like the system now - but I don't believe that universal healthcare is the answer.

  7. by   pickledpepperRN
    Health returns as hot issue in '08 race

    Candidates shift focus to preventive care

  8. by   Ginger35
    I also don't believe that universal health care is the answer. Most people do have access to health care if they need it. Of course our system is not perfect by any means......

    Aside from that - if a universal health care system went into effect - If we think we are "over whelmed" - just wait until everyone thinks they can go to the ER (or where ever) - anytime for any complaint - and expect the "top notch" treatment.....

    OR - From a management perspective - If hospitals et al feel that the reimbursement stinks now - with a given payor mix of private and public funds - just think if most of everyone was covered under this Universal health plan that may reimburse less for services rendered than what they have now on public assistance......Plus, they could very well possibly lose a vast majority of the privately funded payor mix. I think this would be devastating financially.

    My prediction is that this universal health care system is good "PR" - but I still don't think it will fly. Expansions in coverage with Medicare / Medicaid - that would be feasible - but I don't see a universal health care system anytime soon due to the financial issues. Too many stakeholders involved. I could be wrong - but I just can't see it........
  9. by   HM2VikingRN

    I think the current health system will go bust trying to support 31% administrative costs. A far better and more efficient system must be designed and implemented. The costs of the uninsured are being passed on to the insured through higher premium costs. Single payer offers equal care with better outcomes.
  10. by   HM2VikingRN
    It's a ''let a thousand flowers bloom'' approach. Under the Baldwin-Price bill, any state could propose a solution to improve coverage within its borders. The proposals could involve radical changes to federal, as well as state, health programs. One state might seek to spend federal money more effectively. Another might let private-sector families join the federal employee health program. Yet another might create federal-state tax credits or vouchers to help people buy insurance.
    Each plan would have to include clear, measurable goals for improving coverage over a five-year period. And each would have to specify the bottom line costs for the federal government.
    A special bipartisan commission—staffed by the Health and Human Services secretary, mayors, governors and members picked by congressional leaders—would review the state proposals and select a ''slate'' spanning the ideological range.
    This slate would go to Congress for an up-or-down vote with no amendments—all or nothing—with rules to prevent stonewalling and political micromanagement. If chosen, a state plan would last for five years. It would get a share of however much money Congress voted for the program, based on state progress in reaching its goals.
  11. by   ZASHAGALKA
    universal healthcare will not play a large role in the general election, although it might shape the Democratic primary.

    Here's why: the general electorate is center right and most left sided candidates embrace that center right once they win the nomination.

    An example of this is Hillary and the war in Iraq. She is being pressured, like her democratic primary-mates, to renounce and apologize for her vote to go into Iraq. She is resisting, and for good reason. She wants to be seen as a strong foreign policy candidate in the general election. There is a calculation on just how left she has to go to win the primary without going so far left, that she can't re-center for the general election.

    The ultimate Democratic nominee will not want to tout universal care because they won't want to leave themselves open to the accurate charge that to do so involves a huge tax increase. Walter Mondale proved to the Democrats that you don't advocate huge tax increases in a general election.

    Plus, 1993's attempt at healthcare reform proved to the Democrats that it is an easy sell to the American public to fear the changes being advocated. The same means and methods used to defeat President Bush's Social Security reform are available to work against healthcare reform and for the same reason: people fear change.

    That's not to say that the Democrat nominee might or might not embrace universal healthcare; it is to say that they will advocate healthcare reform in general terms and not nearly get so specific in the general election.

    Don't expect the general election to be a referendum on universal healthcare. The Democratic nominee will not want to be 'harry and louise'd'.

    Last edit by ZASHAGALKA on Feb 25, '07
  12. by   Simplepleasures
    Universal Healthcare will not just go away, I believe the general election may just be that referendum, IF we as a people speak loudy enough, continue to let our lawmakers know that a change is IMPERATIVE and we wont stand for anything less.Again, we need to be thinking hard about who we choose to represent us, lets get out of that apathetic mode and have the largest voter turnout in history in 2008.
  13. by   HM2VikingRN
  14. by   Draken
    Universal health care sucks, no argument.

    If you dont believe me join the army and try to go to the dentist.

    I went 4 times in 3 years for a broken tooth that never got fixed because it always needed my units approval and i never got.

    tricare is not the same as being a service member.