From: jason@ab20.larc.nasa.gov (Jason Austin)
Subject: Re: Bush/Quayle's Health Plan -- vouchers?
Reply-To: Jason C. Austin <j.c.austin@larc.nasa.gov>
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA
	<1992Sep9.134621.19407@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca>
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 16:40:44 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.134621.19407@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:
-> In article <9SEP199207293665@gergo.tamu.edu> dave@gergo.tamu.edu (Dave Martin) writes:
-> >Could someone please give me details on B/Q's supposed plan for national
-> >health care? I saw a rather long clip of Quayle yesterday (it may have been
-> >from his Labor Day speech) where he made all sorts of wild assertions about
-> >Clinton's health care plans (claiming that it would be "rationing" health
-> >care -- and commenting that the last time we had rationing was when the
-> >other Democratic President (Carter) rationed Energy and everyone had to wait
-> >in huge lines and that we would have to do that if Clinton had his way).
-> >Then ol' Danny Boy says that he and Bushy have this plan, where they would
-> >have tax incentives and vouchers (!) for health care.
-> >
-> >So what the hell does he mean by that? Tax deductions (for itemized returns
-> >only, of course) if you buy your own health care and a piece of paper that
-> >says you can get health care?
-> >
-> >Someone mind explaining their plan, or better yet, emailing me a copy of
-> >their plan? Or is that too much to ask... 
-> >
-> 
-> Their plan is a limited tax credit/voucher for the working poor, which will 
-> hardly buy any insurance or provide the type of coverage that is most
-> useful for improving general health and controlling costs, and the 
-> continuation of an unlimited tax deduction for the well-off.
-> 
-> And they don't say how they are going to pay for it, since it is
-> an addition to the current system, not a reform.
-> 
-> Real reform would ultimately not cost anything since the elimination
-> of the waste in the system would pay for the increased coverage for
-> the poor.  Even if the US were only able to achieve an efficiency
-> comparable to Canada's, the second most expensive system in the world
-> next to the US, it would amount to $200 billion dollars in savings 
-> in private/public dollars.  Americans should be talking about the
-> health care dividend...not the peace dividend...which is peanuts
-> in comparison.
-> 
-> Real health care reform would also make a huge dent in the federal
-> budget deficit, improve business competitiveness, labor force mobility
-> and efficiency, and remove one of the barriers which keep people
-> from moving off welfare into the workforce.
-> 
-> Gerald

	I don't believe either of the Health plans are the answer to
making Health care more available.  Any doctor will tell you, the
biggest expense for them is liability insurance due to the
sue-the-doctor frenzy and the big settlements juries have been
awarding.  There was mention of this at the Republican convention, but
unfortunately it has not received the attention it deserves.  
--
Jason C. Austin
j.c.austin@larc.nasa.gov

Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections