To mandate health insurance or not to mandate; that is the question. And with the Democratic debate this Thursday at the University of Texas at Austin, many Texans will get to see how both Obama and Clinton stack up to each other on the issue.
It all boils down to whether Texas voters prefer a mandatory health insurance, similar to Texas' mandatory auto insurance laws, or a mandatory coverage for children only. Obviously Obama will encourage adults to seek coverage, but coming from a middle class income, I can understand how a required coverage would be a turn-off. Especially since Texas has a high number of uninsured residents.
At the moment, I'm considered lucky to have an employer offered health plan that is, quite frankly, the cheapest I've ever seen, but many other Americans who are above the poverty line but not wealthy, are not as fortunate. Especially with the difficulty in obtaining affordable coverage with a pre-existing health condition. So to make the majority of middle class America - who don't qualify for Medicaid - have some kind of coverage is basically forcing them to either break the law and stay uncovered or increase their cost of living by up to 34%.
Our other option? McCain would be so kind as to advance Bush's tax cuts and let us keep more of our hard-earned money to pay for the already costly insurance. Hmmm... makes it a little awkward for middle class Republicans it seems.
Texans would be well to do if they supported to the health plan least likely to fail. Children should have to be covered, but let grown adults decide if they can afford coverage or not. But I guess we'll see how Texans really feel about it after the debate is over and the primary votes are tallied. See ya in March!
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/politics/national/stories/022008dnbusHealthMandate.3bac732.html
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
The Results: It's All in the Details
Well, for my first post on my blog, I thought it would fun to share with all ya'll an interesting article from the New York Times I found in regards to some "fun facts" that were come across while calculating the numbers from Super Tuesday and the caucuses.
It first points out the almost perfect division on the Democratic side of the votes. If you tally up the 21 reporting states from tuesday, Clinton barely, if at all, pulled ahead of Obama with a calculated %50.19 - %49.80 split, respectively. It will be interesting to see how such a close race will turn out for the Democratic spot and to see how fast it gets resolved and a clear winner is determined. Do I smell a recount?
Then it goes on to point out how, curiously, Obama seems to be winning practically all the caucuses (not to mention some Latino votes who are normally faithful to Clinton). Whether or not this is related to his uncanny ability to deliver powerful and inspiring feelings is still up for debate.
Also addressed is the record-breaking voter turn-out for primaries; now up to %27 of eligible voters as opposed to %25.9 set back in 1972! Did it really take us all this LONG to realize that our own complaceny at the voting balot is mostly to blame for the mess we're currently in? Apparently so, but like they say, we're "a day late and a dollar short." Maybe two decades ago was when we should've really been showing up. But oh well, we'll only do it once, right?
For the full story go here:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)