Breaking: Hillary Endorses Edwards' Health Care Plan

I'm still waiting for someone to do a careful analysis comparing Edwards' health care plan released 7 months ago compared to the one Hillary released this week.  One specific is that Edwards' expands' medicaid eligibility up to 50K per family, so they don't have to deal with tax credits.  I didn't see this in Hillary's plan.

Just imagine what her healthcare plan would look like if she didn't have 20 years thinking about it AND Edwards' plan to copy? Talk about "leadership"

Of course there are a lot of details completely lacking in both plans to really know.  One area that is emphasized in Edwards' is the "health care markets", which would create more competition between private insurers.

Anyhow, every single thing in Hillary's plan was already in Edwards'.  Don't expect the corporate media to point this out.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id= D8ROS0OG0&show_article=1

"Does Mrs. Clinton's plan seem very familiar to you?" Edwards said in an interview with The Associated Press. "Mrs. Clinton has--seven and a half months after John unveiled his health care plan--unveiled a health care plan that is in every material respect just like John's."

Edwards calls Clinton's plan "John Edwards' health care plan as delivered by Hillary Clinton."

Elizabeth Edwards has been one of Clinton's sharpest critics. She said Clinton, working with President Clinton, had a chance in 1993 to push universal health care through Congress and they should have been the first Democrats to come up with a new plan for health care.

"We would have expected her to be the first one out of the box, not the last one out of the box with a health care plan" Elizabeth Edwards said. "And then for her to come up with one that looks like John's, it's almost as if she hasn't been willing to have the courage independently to be a leader on these things."

I'm still amused that many HillBots were bashing the "mandate" of Edwards' plan and the medicare type buy in that Hillary adopted.  I guess if Hillary proposes it after the fact it's somehow different.

When will Hillary lead on anything?

Tags: Edwards (all tags)

Comments

20 Comments

Romeny's MA plan is similar as well.

I have also read that the plan that Auh-nuld is floating is similar.  

I don't think anyone copied anyone.  I think that there is some consensus among the various experts, thinks tanks, academs, etc., as to the best way to address the health care issue through government (as in an approach that helps AND can pass the Senate).

by dpANDREWS 2007-09-20 04:58AM | 0 recs
I'm still hoping there can be some prodding

however, from a quick read Edwards' plan emphasizes new "health markets" which are designed to spur competition and centralize administration for businesses to reduce costs.

My understanding is Hillary does not create "any new beauracracy" which IMHO will not create enough competition between private insurance companies..

but hopefully someone like Krugman will write something.

by TarHeel 2007-09-20 05:02AM | 0 recs
Don't you mean Endorsed & Copied?

Clearly Hillary is been in the DC box too long, to actually think outside of it.

by cosbo 2007-09-20 05:22AM | 0 recs
Hillary Endorses Edwards' Health Care Plan

As markjay said in another thread.  How can you say Hillary's plan is inferior to Edward's plan, yet say it is an exact copy? Something is not adding up here.

by lonnette33 2007-09-20 05:32AM | 0 recs
YEP!

ROFLMAO!

Although, I reject both plans.

I want choice.

by BlueDiamond 2007-09-20 05:45AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking: Hillary Endorses Edwards' Health Car

"We would have expected her to be the first one out of the box, not the last one out of the box with a health care plan" Elizabeth Edwards said.

I like Elizabeth Edwards a lot, but come on, everyone over the age of 30 knows Hillary was the first one out of the box with a health care plan.

I must be unique in that I actually respect the Clintons for trying to do something about the health care issue, even though the Republicans won that round.

Here's the bottom line: if Edwards can't say anything about the differences between his plan and Hillary's aside from "I was there first," he's going to score no points on the issue.  No one casts their votes based on who was first to make a speech on some issue.  That's just reality.

by Steve M 2007-09-20 05:56AM | 0 recs
why did she need more

time than Obama to release a plan that's not particularly different from what's been out there?

by TarHeel 2007-09-20 06:28AM | 0 recs
Re: why did she need more

I assume she thought the timing of her release, including the rollout in three parts, would be the most effective.

I really don't see any value to having a race to submit the first plan.  I see a certain confidence in the apparent unwillingness to let other campaigns dictate her schedule.

by Steve M 2007-09-20 07:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking: Hillary Endorses Edwards' Health Car

Here's the bottom line: if Edwards can't say anything about the differences between his plan and Hillary's aside from "I was there first," he's going to score no points on the issue.  No one casts their votes based on who was first to make a speech on some issue.  That's just reality.

People do vote on who is leading their cause.

And Edwards doesn't have to keep saying he was the first, he was first.

He can say: Hillary can copy my plan all she wants, it's not just about the plans, its who has has history of beating those people will try to stop the plan.

Hillary on healthcare in the past = LOSER

John Edwards: Made a career of winning big cases against Big Corp.

The question won't be: Who got there first?

The question will be: Who can beat them and win?

John's just gotta do a little reframing.

Hillary's frame is pretty much stuck.

by cosbo 2007-09-20 06:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking: Hillary Endorses Edwards' Health Car

John Edwards: Made a career of winning big cases against Big Corp.

- You mean as a trial lawyer , right.

How does that equate with governance , once again.

How do you compare that with having to overhaul the whole health care system which will involve a lot of interest , from congress ,republicans, democrats etc.

You have to come up with something better other than he argued cases  and briefs , Hillary Clinton did that as well , arguing in the courtroom cannot be compared to governance.

That line is not convincing.  

by lori 2007-09-20 06:50AM | 0 recs
It's really all about the attitude or approach...

John will sit a table EXPECTING to WIN.

Hillary will sit a table expecting to compromise.

John seems to understand the power is with the people and want to wield for them.

Hillary accepts that the lobbyists are much more powerful than the will of the people and approach the problem from a position of weakness.

John's Attitude
You have TAKE THE POWER AWAY from them

Hillary's Attitude
They can keep they're power as long as I get some of what I want.

One has the attitude of true winner

The other one doesn't

by cosbo 2007-09-20 07:13AM | 0 recs
Re: It's really all about the attitude or approach

All of what you said has little to do with enacting Universal Healthcare with the myraid of interest you have to deal with in reality , its just campagn rhetoric .

My point is you cannot equate governance with arguing court cases and briefs . The reason why Hillary Clinton is getting credit for her efforts is because she tried it in the " Government" when it wasn't popular not in the courtroom.

by lori 2007-09-20 07:18AM | 0 recs
??? good question

who knows but it will be good.

any chance they'll have the disclaimer that Rupert Murdoch's son works for Clinton's global initiative fund?

by TarHeel 2007-09-20 11:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking: Hillary Endorses Edwards'

It's not the same plan.

John Edwards acknowledges that his plan could transition to a single-payer system, and he would be perfectly fine with that.

Hillary Clinton's plan could not, and she's fine with that.

That is a big difference.

by OE 2007-09-20 06:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking:

You know, I'm sorry if I offend people but to me this is just more proof that the Edwards are just in for this for themselves.  They care more about winning than Americans having a great health care plan, no matter what points in it are like Edwards.  I mean, Hillary can turn around and say they copied her for submitting a universal healthcare plan at all.  She has about 12 years on John Edwards for pushing this issue in the first place.  It is just incredibly self-absorbed for the Edwards to be harping on this.  Plus, it seems the experts are saying there are differences and although they share some same elements, it's not the same plan.  And what if it was?  Has he put a copyright on these concepts?  It just seems to me that John and especially Elizabeth never take the "high road."  They always go about as low as it can get.  And him losing support is one of the reactions to this.

by reasonwarrior 2007-09-20 10:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking:

Hillary turned the tables on Edwards tonight in the debate when she talked about how great it was that all five of the Democratic candidates were enthusiastic about fighting for universal health care. Then she added, "You know, when I was fighting for it back in 1993, it was kind of lonely..."

by hwc 2007-09-20 11:32PM | 0 recs
I didn't see it that way

if it's youtubed I''ll diary it and let readers judge

the crowd response was pro edwards

by TarHeel 2007-09-21 04:15AM | 0 recs
Hillary endorses Edwards Health Care

Hillary endorsed Edwards Universal Healthcare Plan?

I am not surprised at all!
The media doesn't want you to know that.

by win 2007-09-20 11:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking:

I'm not offended, but I do disagree.  There are government officials and businesses in this country who have profited by and presided over the economic rape of the working class.  From allowing title and payday lenders to the chronic underfunding of mass transit, from restricting affordable housing to trade deals that lead to outsourced manufacturing jobs, from the institutional racism as seen in Jena to the debacle that is our health care system, we the people have been attacked from every quarter, and John Edwards calls it that way.  

Yes, it can sound negative at times, because there are so many negative aspects of our society to address.  We cannot address them until those who profit from the war on the working class are brought down.  In 1998, after successful battles in the courtroom against such interests, John Edwards took on the champion North Carolina's mega-polluting pork farms, Sen. Lauch Faircloth, and defeated him in an uphill fight.  This suggests to me a pattern of successful advocacy for the people who desperately need it, not a pattern of self-absorbtion.  

by CLLGADEM 2007-09-21 01:28AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking:

Thank you for your response.  And I understand your view on it.  For me, on this particular thing, if the plans are exactly alike, you let critics and other people point that out, you don't do it yourself and it didn't seem like critics and reviwers were saying that- they were different enough at least for them.  It comes across as "whining" to me from the Edwards- if the experts don't say it was a blatant copy, then the proper thing to me is not to express that because it makes one look bad.  But of course in politics, rules are different, so I could be wrong about the perception of it.

by reasonwarrior 2007-09-21 06:21PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads