Click here to add text
Click here to add text

At least that’s Jake Tapper’s tweet. Nicholas Kristoff is tweeting of that anniversary too. I guess comparisons are running trough their head – but they are not willing to go there. Someone did (h/t cj) and the resulting headline is

ObamaCare versus the old ClintonCare: a major step backwards

From the first paragraph you know exactly why

On September 22, 1993, President Clinton, in an impassioned address to a joint session of Congress, unveiled his Health Security Act to the American people.   He laid out six principles: security, simplicity, savings, choice, quality and responsibility, and explained in unambiguous language how each of these principles were embodied in the Health Security Act.

Wow! Six principles! Beats the two I’ve been hearing from Obama: competition and choice

Competition is not even about the patients, but about the profit making blood suckers.

And what did Clinton say about quality?

Of quality, Clinton said, “If we reformed everything else in health care but failed to preserve and enhance the high quality of our medical care, we would have taken a step backward, not forward.  Quality is something that cannot be left to chance. When you board an airplane, you feel better knowing that the plane meets standards designed to protect your safety. We must ask no less of our health care system…”

Wow! Clinton was thinking of the travelers – i.e patients. That’s why “quality” was there,but “competition” was missing.

Continues Howard Smith

Nothing, though,  speaks to the differences between the visions of these two men  more than the two bills, themselves. It starts in the preambles of both. The preamble of Clinton’s Health Security Act promises to protect the health security of every American and provide them the highest quality care while at the same time controls the growth of health care spending. The preamble of ObamaCare, in the guise of HR 3200, says only “to provide affordable quality care for all Americans and reduce the growth in health care spending and for other purposes.”
One can see how the drafters came from two opposite directions. Here’s a clue as to who Obama’s drafters are

The other interesting fact I learned here is that when proposed, Clinton’s reform had 80% public approval. It took insurance companies 11 months of Harry and Luise ads and media battering on Clinton to whittle down this support.

You know, adds like this one

Click here to add text
Click here to add text

To push his reform (assuming he actually has one) Obama took lessons from Tom Daschle and his “Anything but Clinton” strategy (not that the man had a chip on his shoulder, mind you) but he

didn’t much like Hillary Clinton’s tactics for fixing health care 15 years ago – so much so that he wrote a book critiquing them.

And amongst his brilliant solutions?

Daschle wants an overhaul plan moving on Capitol Hill by spring. Clinton waited almost a full year. Daschle wants lawmakers to take the lead in drafting it. Clinton kept the job inside the White House.

Yup, Tom. Propose nothing. Ask support for…Congress’s dealings?

On edit, The Confluence reminds us that we can also credit to Daschle what today is referred to as “The Snowe trigger” – holding the public option as punishment if the Insurance companies are really, really bad

After Daschle has been embarrassingly shot down for nonpayment of taxes

his anti-Clinton expertise is still being sought as he has, as NYT puts it

Daschle Has Ear of White House and Industry

.So, how will they implement the other revolutionary Daschle proposal – the grassroots push with spokesman in chief  Sanjay Gupta?(no kidding)

I mean, the B0bots have been fooled once and are gullible enough. But having them support a non-existent proposal which is meant to service the industry – aren’t the wingnuts already doing that? I mean, coming out to defend the insurance companies? Maybe that’s what Obama meant by post-partisanship! Let’s all come together and support the big CEOs!