Isn't this a repeat of the mid-nineties? Didn't the healthcare sector pay the republicans to help quell the banshee that was Hillary Rodham Clinton? Weren't they afraid of her influence in turning the industry on its head? (Weren't they successful in doing this?)
Apparently this is a reversal of things, and times. Mrs. Clinton has on her plate a different plan than she was considering in the nineties, less ambitious, and less effective. Though she claims to have plans to be a "healthcare president" (which would mean being strictly adherent to your philosophies), by taking the money from the industry, she is allowing herself admission into a gigantic conflict on interest. What it seems to be amounting to is the industry buying Clinton's compliance into their preferred style of medicine - private and costly. Clinton, and for that matter, anybody who is interested in healthcare for Americans should not fear the industry or worry about having their permission. The United States government has the ability to regulate the industry, or to the extreme, shut it down. No private insurance. Thus, there is no real reason for Hillary to fraternize with the enemy.
Not to say this is extremely important, but some of her fellow Presidential hopefuls address financial concerns through donations and non-questionable sources. Frankly, I expected more from her, as in not providing a place for her to be attacked by her opponents and the population she is trying to enchant. This may, in the long run, damn her campaign.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/29/us/politics/29health.html?_r=1&ref=health&oref=slogin
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Boy, I sure agree, Chris -- the only Democratic who has had the guts to say this is Dennis Kucinich (last time it was Howard Dean)...
Post a Comment