- Current health insurance plan
- Level of wealth
- Priority for assuring good healthcare for all.
Here is a link to the Analysis of the Candidates’ healthcare Proposals web site. It presents a systematic detailed comparative analysis of each candidate's healthcare proposal based on the wants and needs of the 18 voter groups. The analysis resulted in the following conclusions:
- The candidates most concerned with improving the quality and controlling the costs (i.e., increasing the value) of healthcare are: Clinton, Edwards, Kucinich, Obama, Richardson and McCain.
- Voters who want good care for all are willing to do what it takes—including paying increased taxes, etc.—to support a publically-funded UHS. Candidates who want a Federal Employees Health Benefits Program UHS (FEHBP-UHS) and want to keep private insurance as an option are: Biden, Clinton, Dodd, Edwards, Obama and Richardson. Only Kucinich proposes a government-run Single Payer UHS (SP-UHS). Choosing between these two options is discussed on the web site.
- If an FEHBP-UHS is desired, then Clinton and Edwards are the best choices because they also more focused on increasing care value, with Obama and Richardson coming in second.
- If an SP-UHS is desired, then Kucinich is the only choice. Note that his plan (HR 676) is also the most detailed (has the greatest specificity), which means it may be the most credible.
- Minimizing taxes and reducing personal health-related expenses
- Increasing healthcare value (cost-effectiveness), in which case McCain is probably the best choice since he proposes the most strategies of all Republicans for improving quality and controlling costs (as well as being the only Republican addressing the health need of veterans through the VA).
All these and other related issues are examined on the web site, including issues concerning healthcare quality improvement, cost control, financing new publicly funded universal healthcare systems, subsidies, mandates, tax changes, and more.
I welcome your comments.