Obama's Missed Opportunity on Health Care at the Debate

At the debate tonight a woman in the audience asked Obama: "Should health care be treated as a commodity?"

The moral, ethical, and American answer is, "No."

Obama's answer? A laundry list of what his plan will do, but no answering of the question. His plan was laden with health care policies that co-exist the status quo. He missed an opportunity to explain that the health of our nation's citizens cannot be held hostage to a corporate profit motive.

He said that health care was a right, but how can a purchased "commodity" for only those who can afford it be a right?

Obama needs to clarify his answer.

The problem with the state of health care in this country (among other social issues) is that it's pegged to the bottom line of a corporation instead of the common good. If Obama is unable to attack an industry as large as the health care industry as a candidate, will he be willing to take it on in office?

I'd like to think that maybe he is, which is why I hope we hear more about health care from the Obama camp and they make it clear that the health of our nation can't be treated as a commodity.

If we don't hear this from the Obama campaign, a vote for Nader seems all the more likely.

(Bryan Young is the producer of Killer at Large)

Read more reactions to the Obama-McCain Town Hall Debate from HuffPost bloggers

Comments

[Heckler]

This is probably not the place for this comment, but I can't find information about this anywhere...

What was John McCain doing in the background while Sen. Obama answered this question?

Watch Sen. McCain at about 0:35 sec in this clip to see what I'm referring to...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnaOa659osk

Anyone know who / what he was signaling?

[texanna]

You got the only answer Obama has on health care, which is pretty much why I can't be an avid Obama supporter. His health care plan has always been far short of what is needed to correct the problems with our health care system, because it has always included the very entities that are the root of the problem -- PHARMA and the Health Insurance Industry. Everyone seems to think that he's going to throw off the Centrist cloak he's wearing after he wins the election and become the Progressive of their dreams. I don't think so. Make no mistake, I'm voting for him because there is simply no alternative, but I don't think our health care problems are going to be solved with him as President.

[MrTessier]

I have to disagree. This was a question that neither candidate was ever going to really answer.

What if they had said no, it's not a commodity? Considering the amount of businesses that would be shut down and the affect on the economy, they would be lambasted as being anti-business.

What if they had said yes, it is a commodity? Well, then your just don't care about the common man who is getting hurt in the current market. They would be seen as a stooge to big business.

The only correct answer during an election is to say what they did. Parts are good and parts are bad. I'm going to improve the good and get rid of the bad (I simplified both speeches a bit).

[dagdavid]

He said health insurance is a "right". McCain said it is a responsibility (but not whose responsibility)

[Bobrobert]

roflmao

Bottom line... you are preaching about what you know nothing about.

roflmao

Try again and be sure to vote for your choice... I will.

[timm0]

Yes, he should have directly answered the question. That always bugs me.... but doesn't bug me as much as that creepy old crank who thinks health care is a "responsibility."

I'll write in my own name for president before I waste a vote on Nader.

[IndependentJones]

My thoughts exactly. We've heard him articulate his healthcare plan countless times. This was the moment to say "Yes, I think it has become a commodity and we have to fix that."

A clear, simple answer to that question would have been the highlight of the debate. Instead it's just another example of neither candidate answering the question that was asked.

[egal]

Obama has already elucidated his opposition of bottom-line-directed medical care, his means of holding the insurance companies and medical institutions responsible for the troubles they bring to the people and at the same time empowering the people and giving them both the resources and the opportunity to afford healthcare they choose.

It's up on his site, and has been forever, and also was included in the debate, to some extent, right next to your quoted segment. He's already promising what you want, if not precisely as you desire it (you don't offer any detail in your claims that he doesn't offer any of the detail and changes he does, in fact, detail).

[TheHandyman]

There are 2 reasons why Obama is not talking much about healthcare even tho 80% of Americans want a universal healthcare plan. First, he is in the pocket of the healthcare industry. He is by no means the only one. Second, this bail out and the 2 wars plus all the troops and military bases we have will cause such a shrinking of the economy and federal tax revenues that there will be no money to do anything about health, education, infastructure, or any thing that keeps this country running. Congress will give themselves another golden parachute and increase their health benefits because they, like the rich that own them, are better than us.

Ralph Nader has a simple and effective plan to deal with this. But the willfully ignorant are enraptured with the nonsense being put out by two membersw of the most incompetent institution in the country. Who says so? The People themselves. But instead of voting for someone with workable plans to benefit the People, they will get the lesser of two evils.

[egal]

Your facts aren't. Your assessments run counter to those of the Obama team, independent analysts, economists, financial analysts, medical professionals, and the vast majority of everybody else with remotely relevant expertise. Not to mention, if you contend that Obama won't do anything because our money will be tied up in inevitable recovery, how would voting for Nader (even if he won, hich he can't) help in any manner whatsoever, save perhaps to put McCain in office?

If you bothered to read Obama's webpage or the independent sites that check his proposals, you would see a simple, elegant, and inviting healthcare plan that wouldn't require your proposed complete gutting and starting from scratch of a healthcare market that would then leave most Americans in the lurch during the years-long transition period. But blame it on parties and those the president has refsed to cow to, that's just one more person unwilling to read the facts because of prejudice.

[Bryan Young - Huffpost Blogger]

For 1, I live in Utah, so a vote for Nader or Obama doesn't make any difference in the world.

For 2, I'm not sure if you read the headline of this, but my point is that this was a missed opportunity at the debate. He should have simply answered the quesetion.

Also, voting for the best person for the job is never a wasted vote, whether they win or not. If everyone voted for the best person instead of just the Republican or the Democrat, we'd have a much better country.

[JulesD53]

I respectfully disagree with your assessment on several points. I believe that Senator Obama has clearly explained his health plan many times, most recently in Norfolk Va this past weekend, and has made it clear that health care should be a basic right. So far as being in the "pocket" of the industry, he has said that he will hold insurers accountable for their actions and excessive administrative costs, doctors and hospitals accountable for quality, and manufacturers accountable for delivering value through comparative effectiveness studies. I don't think that puts him in the pocjket of industry.

The other choice is the dismantlement of employer based insurance and the bargaining leverage it affords, a regulation-less free for all, and an explosion in the ranks of the uninsured. Is this what you want?

Don't let perfect again be the enemy of the good.

[milo h minderbinder]

He talks a TON about healthcare, it's a major part of his platform.

[biggeranium]

Amen. That was one of the moments that made me nash my teeth.

But you know, contrary to the rightist meme of Obama supporters believing he's the messiah--I'm not surprised by the disappointing answer, and I'm no less in favor of his presidency.

Obama's been more centrist than I from the get go. In the early primaries, I told people Kucinich's values are more in line with mine, but I support Obama because I believe he can inspire and heal the nation at this critical moment. Not just because he's "electable" but because, whether or not we agree on every point, he's what this country needs at this moment in history. I stand by that assessment.

Maggie

[TheHandyman]

I agree, Kucinich is another politician in the great liberal tradition as is Bernie Sanders. But they are funny looking and just not corrupt enough to make it somehow and the People are willfully ignorant to their own fate.