Would the nation be better off if Hillary's '94 healthcare plan had been adopted?

Inspired by this thread: Hillary Clinton's health care plan - Great Debates - Straight Dope Message Board

Facts and informed speculation, please; I’m not looking either for praise or bashing of Hillary Clinton as a person, candidate or potential President. But had the then-First Lady’s plan been adopted in 1994, and pretty much stuck to since then (other than reasonably-extrapolated tinkering to improve it), would the United States be a healthier country now? Would healthcare costs have dropped? Would we have, to all intents and purposes, no uninsured people, or not as many?

Discussion of her current plan is optional but unnecessary.

Any plan that succeeds in providing universal (or at least near universal) healthcare coverage would make for a healthier population than we currently have. The Wikipedia article links to a good critical evaluation at the time.

Costs are hard to get a good analysis of. The complexity would have added some cost, the benefits of fewer uninsured would have saved some, along with some benefits of competition if they happened. Certainly there are and were better approaches but on the whole I think it would have been an improvement from what we’ve had since that miffed opportunity.

It seems like semantics to claim the United States doesn’t have a health care crises; it has an insurance crises, as critics of Hillary’s healthcare plan asserted. It is the insurance companies that control healthcare, so it is one in the same.

I do believe all Americans should have access to quality medical care. It should be fundamental to keep a citizenry healthy and productive. Americans work hard and pay taxes to fund wars and subsidize corporations. It could be solid universal health care that hard working Americans fund. I fail to understand why any low to upper middle class American would be against healthcare reform.

Why is it acceptable for profiteering HMOs to manage health care delivery but not the government? There is something inherently wrong with a system that allows insurance companies to manage health care for large profits. This strikes me as a conflict of interest and certainly doesn’t favor patient care.

Hillary’s plan wasn’t enough change, but it was a good start. Now she wants to work with insurance and pharmaceutical companies to enact change. There is too much potential profit for the big pharmaceutical companies and the large healthcare management organizations. I doubt they will be eager to compromise.

I agree that it didn’t go far enough, but was a good start. What I find interesting is now, 13 years later, you have private industry advocating national health care. One of the reasons GM argues that it can’t compete is that it has to provide health care to all its employees, while foreign competitors do not have to shoulder this cost.

Decades of propaganda against socialism, which Americans have been taught to hate with such a passion that a great many of us are willing to cut off our nose to spite our face. We’ll oppose programs that would help us, even save our lives, if it can be labeled “socialist”. Many of us are more concerned with not helping others, than we are with helping ourselves; a sort of malignant version of altruism.

The problem with the original proposal was that it was hammered out by talking to politicos, not debated openly. While that may be the way to get pols to sign on to a bill, it’s not a good way to generate public support.

Yes, I think we would have avoided many of the jobs being sent offshore. One reason why US workers are more expensive is because the employer pays for a large percentage of health care insurance premiums.

Because I can change HMOs, or switch to a PPO, or switch to an HSA (which I will do this year) under the current system. If the government ran it, I would have no ability to change what is delivered.

I have dealt with Tri-Care, Medicare and the whatever they call it in England. They all sucked compared to what I get now even from my HMO (Blue Cross).

This does seem to be the premise used by Americans who do not want a national health care system, the concept of no choice and fear of low quality medical care. The idea that Americans can choose an insurance company is only valid if you have the resources.
Most small businesses offer one healthcare plan if any. Small business can no longer shoulder the burden of high cost healthcare premiums for employees. Millions of working Americans are locked out of the health care system and it is only going to increase.

I have also lived under the socialized system in the UK. The national healthcare does have its short comings, but it doesn’t compare to the problems facing the current US healthcare system. Even with insurance, PPO or HMO, people still don’t have the freedom to choose unless they have plenty of money and can afford the shared cost of going out of network. Americans are at the mercy of the insurance companies, and the insurance companies want to earn a profit.

Healthcare should not be a privilege which is exactly what it is becoming. It should be a service that every citizen can access like public education. A healthy, educated citizenry is far more productive than a sick and ignorant one.

[shrug] So was the United States Constitution.

Medicare Parts A & B have been a revelation compared to Medical Mutual of Ohio. No confusion. No refusal to pay. No bullshit.

Oh, and I had forgotten MMOH’s clever way of mislaying bills. “Gosh, we didn’t GET that. They’ll need to send it again.” Amazing how often that happened.

Part D is a nightmare to navigate once a year (we’re in that phase right now). After that, it’s been easy.

And I would argue that Part D was designed with the intent that it be a catastrophic failure that could then be used as evidence that the USFeds are uniquely incapable in all the world of handling it.

Yeah, but Medicare pays for shit. In addition, if they audit you and find one problem, they apply it to ALL reimbursements going back several years and ask for a refund. This can be for something as simple as not putting the right text on the case notes.

In one office that I consult to, they take Medicare due to having slack times in the schedule, but if a Medicare patient is a pain in the ass they will fire that patient - the reimbursement simply is not worth it.

I do agree that the insurance companies suck as well, but at least they pay better in exchange for the paperwork.

I’m talking as a patient, not an office.

I do know that I have never had to call a doctor’s office and have them resubmit paperwork or clarify or do any of those things with Medicare that I had to do with MMOH.