I've watched nearly all the debates and countless hours of Meet The Press, The Situation Room, Hardball and Washington Week. And there are still several nagging issues my two Democratic candidates fail to answer to my satisfaction: health care and increased taxes on small businesses. As an independent magazine publisher and owner that both employs and targets mostly 20-somethings, my perspective on the health care debate is specifically informed by the proximity to these Gen-Y citizens. Our company subsidizes employee healthcare and has done so for a decade or more now. But the recent debate between Obama and Clinton -- specifically the Obama stance that mandatory coverage is not needed -- really fails to meet reality head on. Obama claims that anybody who could afford health insurance would surely purchase it. This has not been my experience and I'm unsure if he really believes this or is stuck in a misstatement of his own creation.
Over the years, I can count dozens of 20-something friends, employers and acquaintances that routinely skip out on insurance. Seen as a remote need and a mundane life expense, these healthy young individuals would rather fund something else in their lifestyle and who'd blame them? Who really thinks they're going to end up in a hospital at 25? Even the employees I insure -- especially the guys -- seem to rarely even visit the hospital for check-ups or preventative care. And many -- easily a relevant portion of the millions of uninsured -- feel that the risk of getting caught without insurance in an emergency room is worth the several hundred dollar per month in savings. You don't have to look any further than to the millions of un- and under-insured motorists on the roads. It's obviously partly an issue of costs, but one can't deny the simple issue of personal risk management. The only problem is that this ends up costing everybody else when the proverbial chickens come home to roost and something goes wrong. You and I pick up the tab in the form of taxes and medical costs.
My only guess as to why Hillary Clinton hasn't done a better job of poking a hole in Obama's borderline erroneous claim that virtually all of the uninsured are so due to financial hardship, is that it would come across as just one more mean-spirited tag her haters could use against her: "Hillary doesn't care about the poor huddled uninsured." But some have recently argued that Obama's plan to allow anybody to "opt out" of insurance (seemingly without any real penalty, though he floated the totally unrealistic concept of back-premiums during a recent debate) will make his plan massively more expensive in the long run. And more disturbingly, it's been said that his plan will stall or have to be re-done to a mandated system (vis a vis Clinton) in order to get passed and make fiscal sense. To me, universal health care, like auto, can only mean mandatory coverage.
But I'm not letting Clinton off either. She, along with Obama, still don't get that who they describe as wealthy people in this country -- myself, it seems -- are largely entrepreneurs, small business owners and sole proprietors. The age-old Democratic war drums that play to the hearts of the middle class unfortunately castigate the most vital sector of the American economy. By not even addressing the effects of a tax increase on those making over $250K annually -- which, as a business owner of an S-Corporation, isn't a huge amount of pre-tax income when you consider that this is your salary, and profit margin -- Democrats dismiss me and the millions of others who'd like to be proud party loyalists. Against my financial interests, though I continue to vote along party lines if only to sleep better at night. Democrats are fortunate this year to have such an electrifying field, but in any other year, they'd probably be poised to lose (again) since the migration of business owners from the party (assuming they had them in the first place) has been unfortunate. It's easy if you're Warren Buffet, to say that you don't need a tax break. Try staying afloat in the predatory and unsupportive business environment of California. It isn't easy and I can thank my democratic leadership for largely allowing these negative conditions to grow.
I'm undecided as to my vote today, even though I remain proud and supportive of both Democratic candidates. I just hope they'll find a more authentic and realistic voice on these two subjects sometime before the general election. They'll need to do this for the party, for me, and for the country.
Follow Raymond Leon Roker on Twitter: www.twitter.com/raymondroker
What they both do is continue to make the Insurance companies the main focus for our health.
We cannot allow For-Profit corporations decide what is best for us. These people only care about the bottom line and paying stock dividends to their investors.
We must join the rest of the civilized world and do what is best for the American people not stockholders.
Tweaking the system around the edges is only going to help shy rocket costs and help the Insurance and Drug companies add to their bottom line.
What we need is Not For-Profit Healthcare or Medicare for all citizens not just Seniors.
I suspect that one reason why debates will not speak in these terms is that the very concept of "health maintenance" has now been fouled up beyond all recognition by the HMO businesses. I am not suggesting that this is the reason why your 20-something friends are so negligent of their health care; but I WOULD suggest that a national culture that has suppressed the "true semantics of health maintenance" at least contributes to the problem. Needless to say, a reformed health care system that mandated regular physical check-ups would face a lot of attack on grounds of being too paternalistic; but a more integrated system would at least have the leverage to experiment with incentive programs.
All this is a long-winded way of saying that, without a clear "vision statement of a healthy society," arguments over who pays how much for what are not going to signify very much in the long run; but, since those arguments (rather than the welfare of the electorate) are the bread-and-butter of politics, I know better than to expect politicians to get beyond them.
What no candidate has emphasized with sufficient clarity is the critical need for prevention. Wellness programs should be established in all schools, and companies. This is the real key to fixing our healthcare system.
Lowering the cost of healthcare by breaking the lobbyists grip on government and changing the way that new drugs are marketed to physicians by tall blonde women will help, but somebody must pay. There is no other option.
Hillary had the opportunity to implement universal healthcare with a Democratic President, Senate and House in office and accomplished ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. NADA.
Some interpret this dismal failure to mean that hillary has the experience necessary to deliver the goods.
I see it quite the opposite. A unique record of failure and disappointment cloaked in secrecy under the lock and key in the clinton library does not inspire confidence.
It's kind of like standing in a cab line at O'Hare and one cab is shiny and new and another cab is rusted, dented, worn out, beat to shit and the doors are hanging off of it.
I think I'll take my chances with the new cab.
How many insurance advertisements run in your magazine targeting the seemingly "untapped" youth market? You don't need to take away the basic human rights of the poor and the young in order to get them insured. All you need is a clever advertising campaign. And believe me, as a member of the American youth, it pains me to say it.