[alancarp]

Was it broken before? Most people weren't insured because they didn't want to be. For the rest, help to purchase some sort of catastrophic coverage is sufficient. Beyond that, tort reform (liability limits) had always been on the table - and rejected by Democrats. Thtat would clearly reduce costs.

The only other big soundbite issue involves coverage for the pre-existing conditions, and that had already been in law for those with 'continuous' coverage. I don't believe that people should expect to ignore coverage before something bad happens, then immediately sign up and expect all bills to be paid for them.

Regardless: even if there is NO plan, that's certainly better than the status quo that's being imposed on us.

[livius]

Actually,there was a problem. I’m self employed and I couldn’t buy health insurance for over 30 years because I had had a melanoma removed - when I was 29. It required no follow up treatment, nothing, and I asked if I could get a policy excluding even that particular thing. The insurance companies told me it would be too costly for them to diagnose it in order to exclude it.

So, yes, there was definitely a problem. But the Clinton/Obama plan was NOT the solution.