Hillary Clinton's Mandatory Health Insurance Plan Is An Attack on the Middle Class, Group Says

The Foundation for Taxpayer & Consumer Rights FTCR announced that it is 100 percent opposed to Senator Hillary Clinton's mandatory health insurance purchase plan. Senator Clinton has received over
Hillary Clinton's Mandatory Health Insurance Plan Is An Attack on the Middle Class, Group Says
 $1 million in campaign contributions from insurers for her presidential campaign and it certainly seems that this proposed policy is their "return payment" on their investment especially when the plan is offered as a solution for health care reform by a woman who used to be a proponent of socialized medicine in America.

The plan's mandatory requirement -- that every American purchase private insurance -- assures that the health insurance companies will stay in business, but it does not define how the average American middle class family will be able to afford the coverage. Clinton's plan does not in any way shape or form suggest a cap for premiums or regulate them. When it is considered that insurance coverage for a family of four costs approximately $12,000 per year, Jamie Court, President of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, defined the measure as an "attack on the middle class family." Health care reform is a necessity; however, it cannot be achieved when only viewing part of the picture as proposed by Clinton's plan. It is clear that a hard look needs aimed at the health care insurance industry. If they can make Clinton do an about face in her policy--just imagine how much power health insurer campaign contributions wield.

Insurance Companies Reap the Benefits

The FTCR notes that a recent report from the Kaiser Family Foundation indicates that the average cost of insurance coverage for a family of four is $12,000 per year. That total does not include payment of any required deductibles that could be an out-of-pocket expense up to $5,000. Plus, more insurance companies are keeping more premium dollars for profit causing them to rise even more at a rate of 250% faster than inflation rates. It was further cited in Kaiser's report that while health insurance premiums have increased 78% since 2001, wages have only increased by 19% and inflation by 17%.

Related information
  • Clinton's plan would ensure that insurance companies have even more control over health care.
  • Clinton's support of this plan is a complete reversal of her previous viewpoint on health care.
  • Campaign contributions from health insurance companies buy a lot of power.
 
Comments 1 - 10 of 17 Next >>
Comments
Type in Your Comments Below

This information is not in her website, does that mean that the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights is embellishing the issue or is this information being left off her website. On her website she is offering quality and affordable healthcare for all Americans. Giving them their choice of healthcare providers, and offering tax cuts to businesses who offer healthcare for their employees, it does not mention that we MUST make that decision of which healthcare provider to choose from.

Posted on 04/16/2008 at 7:04:50 PM

The Foundation for Taxpayer and Comsumer Rights has been pushing for real healthcare for all for many years and sometimes is the only source telling the truth about plans that look like universal healthcare, but are just scams to force Americans to sign up for overpriced insurance that often dumps people on the street as soon as they get sick. We don't need Hillary to put us into bondage to insurance companies. And get this, if you can't pay for the insurance and she determines that you can, she'll have the government seize your wages to pay for it.

Posted on 02/18/2008 at 11:02:43 PM

"The Foundation for Taxpayer & Consumer Rights FTCR announced that it is 100 percent opposed to Senator Hillary Clinton's mandatory health insurance purchase plan," being the first sentence sure sets the tone of the article. I agree with you about citizen content, the problem is, you picked a bad article to start with the analogies.

Posted on 09/18/2007 at 4:09:00 PM

Hey Chadd - Read how the article is written, not just what the title says.

Posted on 09/18/2007 at 3:09:00 PM

Hey Jack - the article wasn't about the Health Plan, it was about a group's response to the Health Plan. If you opt to criticize, do so correctly.

Posted on 09/18/2007 at 3:09:00 PM

Great report, Shari. Hilary's healthplan is definitely information voters need to consider when they head to the polls in the upcoming primaries.

Posted on 09/18/2007 at 1:09:00 PM

Yeah I don't know. I don't trust Hillary. She is in the bilderberg group, and is for a New World Order. If you think this is scary watch this video of her vision of the future. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6h3G-lMZxjo

Posted on 09/18/2007 at 11:09:00 AM

This ridiculously one-sided article doesn't even scratch the surface of Hillary's plan. This should be in the "Opinion" section. It does not so much as mention the expansion of existing gov't programs for individuals or familes who are not employed. It also fails to mention the $110 billion a year the gov't would contribute to help defray costs. This is the problem with user-generated content: ignorant users.

Posted on 09/18/2007 at 11:09:00 AM

This is really interesting and disturbing at the same time. Thanks for the info; I'm going to look into it further.

Posted on 09/18/2007 at 10:09:00 AM

You know something is crazy town when in our own weird way Alyce and I agree on something. Somehow though, John Darling doesn't see the need for the universal condemnation that should come with the government telling you how to spend your non-tax dollars.

Posted on 09/18/2007 at 9:09:00 AM

Comments 1 - 10 of 17 Next >>