Tearing up a page from a Republican play-book

There is a lot of noise among commentators and bloggers about Hillary's new health care plan.

I have not studied her plan nor the Mass. plan that Governor Mitt Romney helped get in place there in any detail, but from what I understand they are very similar -- mandated insurance from private insurance plans (no, repeat NO requirement to leave your existing plan if you like it) with taxpayer funding for insurance pools for those who are not offered insurance at work, through a spouse, through medicare, etc.

So did a Republican presidential candidate pass a socialized medicine plan while governor, or are the pundits and Republican candidates for president grossly hyperbolizing now that Hillary has adopted much of a Republican presidential candidates past (and passed) healthcare plan?

And, frankly, even if it was 'socialized medicine' what in hell makes that so bad? 46 MILLION people do not have health insurance in this country. In and of itself, is that morally acceptable??

And, if anyone thinks that those people getting sick does not cost you and me plenty through other transfer payments is a fool. The reason my private insurance (and everyone else's) is so high is in part because we are paying for the uninsured losses of hospitals, doctors, etc. So the transfer payments are made based on who can afford to pay for private health insurance.

Why is a tax -- which everyone can see, debate, and hold officials accountable for -- so 'anti-conservative', but making invisible transfer payments from all of us who are responsible enough (and lucky enough) to have and pay for health insurance OK?

There really are times when the all-holy "market" fails to meet the real social needs of citizens. Health care is clearly one of those places -- and conservatives seem loathe to admit to this glaring failure. If markets were adequately addressing the healthcare crisis, we'd be seeing progress for God's sake. The problem has been identified and talked at for decades...and getting worse, not better! I can think of no other basic human need in America in which the market consistently ignores 15% of potential customers. The uninsured are a growth industry! Oh, but they are woefully unprofitable.

Every other first world nation has made the choice to see basic health care as of higher importance than profit potential. We are sadly alone on the globe in making the other choice on this one. It is morally abhorrent, and I take no pleasure in saying so.

We pay more in terms of real GDP for our health care in this nation than those other first world nations. And for lesser aggregate outcomes: higher infant mortality, lesser longevity, etc. We are paying more for our care than Canadians or Brits or the French -- it just shows up differently in our paystubs and bank balances.

I'm not thrilled with the idea of Hillary for Prez -- but at least the Dems have the courage to talk about one of the most critical problems we will face internally within the US in my generation. Scaring people with untruths about a serious policy proposal is not leadership from her Republican rivals.

Peace.