Democrats Draft Health Elements of Party Platform
The Democratic platform is "heavy on Obama's message of change, a theme that helped him win his party's nomination," AP/Cleveland Plain Dealer reports. The drafting platform committee of the Democratic National Committee on Sunday also agreed to changes in its health care language, which include some recommendations by former Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), according to the AP/Plain Dealer reports. During the campaign, Clinton and presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) advocated similar health care proposals, although Clinton supported a requirement that all U.S. residents obtain health insurance.
The committee agreed to include language in the platform that describes health care as "a shared responsibility between employers, workers, insurers, providers and government." In addition, the platform states, "All Americans should have coverage they can afford," adding, "While there are differing approaches within the party about how best to achieve the commitment of universal coverage, we stand united to achieve this fundamental objective through the legislative process."
Michael Yaki, chair of the committee and an Obama aide, said, "There's no real consensus yet on which is the best health care reform to do other than we are committed to universality and we're committed to getting there," adding, "We believe that as you make health care more affordable, people will be able to buy health care -- that's the basic principle. How we get there is a matter of the legislative process" (Sheeran, AP/Cleveland Plain Dealer, 8/3). Chris Jennings, a member of the committee and a former health care adviser to President Clinton, said, "It was important" that the language on "shared responsibility" was "stated quite clearly in the platform." He called the changes to the platform on health care "an honorable accommodation that illustrates a commitment to unity."
The full platform committee will vote on the platform in Pittsburgh on Saturday (Silva, "The Swamp," Chicago Tribune, 8/3).
Editorials
Two newspapers recently published editorials about health care issues in the presidential election. Summaries appear below.
-
Akron Beacon Journal: Obama has proposed to expand health insurance to more residents, as well as reduce health care costs, by the end of his first term as president, a plan that "invites full-blown skepticism," a Beacon Journal editorial states. According to the editorial, Obama has proposed to reduce health care costs "primarily from promoting the use of electronic medical records, ... controlling administrative costs ... and emphasizing preventive care and the management of chronic diseases." His "focus certainly is not misplaced," but the "time frame for such a remarkable turnaround is overly optimistic" because of the "clash of political interests that have impeded an overhaul for more than a decade," the editorial states. "More important still, there is little solid evidence the proposed changes will yield the size of estimated savings," the editorial states, adding, "Slippery numbers only hurt the plan's credibility" (Akron Beacon Journal, 8/4).
- Philadelphia Inquirer: Obama and presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) both have "loaded up their crash carts with plenty of life-saving tools" and are "ready to apply the paddles to the heart of America's ailing health care system," but they likely will "discover that neither has developed a miracle cure," an Inquirer editorial states. The editorial states, "McCain's health plan, for instance, calls for dabbling a bit in experimental medicine, while Obama's hopes could exceed his healing powers." According to the editorial, both candidates "offer detailed strategies to deal" with the "array of complex challenges" faced by the U.S. health care system, with some agreement on "modernizing the health care system with greater use of technology, driving down drug prices through competition, targeting better prevention and management of chronic diseases, promoting quality care and coordinating patient care more closely," which "bodes well for incremental reform." The editorial states, "In terms of getting coverage to the uninsured, Obama appears to have the better plan," but the proposal "could flop because it lacks a mandate that the uninsured actually purchase those newly affordable health plans." The "remedy for Obama is easy: embrace a universal mandate for all Americans to buy health insurance, then find the means to help them purchase that coverage." For McCain, the problem is that "his proposal to expand access to insurance seems bound to unnecessarily tick off the millions of people who have workplace insurance" and lacks "a solid answer for covering those Americans whose existing illnesses prevent them from finding insurance at almost any price," the editorial states. The editorial adds, "McCain isn't wrong to explore moving away from workplace-based health insurance," but, "for his plan to work, McCain would have to embrace" a "more comprehensive approach." The editorial concludes, "Both presidential candidates have to decide whether they're really willing to follow through on the treatments they're prescribing" (Philadelphia Inquirer, 8/3).
