Tales of Journalism

Here's one of those stupid stories that strives vainly for balance, this time when talking about the health care issue and the 2008 race. It acts like Republicans have come out just as boldly for various health care proposals as the Democrats, and then uses some sleight-of-hand to try and make that seem true. In actuality, the only evidence for this on the Republican side in the article is that Giuliani "plans to produce a major proposal in the next month" which will offer the same failed policies George Bush has offered to the delight of approximately no one, and Romney created a program in Massachusetts based on an individual mandate, which he is now running away from as fast as he can. That's it. The Democrats in the race have actually produced detailed proposals, about which you can quibble, but you cannot deny their existence. And what you can certainly not do is claim that both sides are similarly committed to the issue:

Democrats

Joe Biden
Would "expand health insurance for children and relieve families and businesses of the burden of expensive catastrophic cases."

Hillary Rodham Clinton
"America is ready for universal health care."

Chris Dodd
Would "ensure universal affordable quality coverage by creating a Health Care General Fund (HCGF) to serve all Americans. Then, require employers to either cover their employees or contribute to the fund."

John Edwards
Offers a detailed plan for "universal health care through shared responsibility."

Mike Gravel
"a universal health-care voucher program in which the federal government would issue annual health care vouchers to Americans based on their projected needs."

Dennis Kucinich
Supports "a plan for a universal single payer, not for profit healthcare system.

Barack Obama
Gives a plan for "providing affordable, comprehensive and portable health coverage for every American" and "modernizing the U.S. health care system."

Bill Richardson
Would "open up existing sources of affordable, portable coverage to more Americans."


Republicans

Sam Brownback
Advocates "increased consumer choice, consumer control and real competition."

Jim Gilmore
Healthcare isn't listed on "The Issues" portion of his site.

Rudy Giuliani
Healthcare isn't listed on the "On the Issues" portion of his site.

Mike Huckabee
The site doesn't have an "issues" component.

Duncan Hunter
Doesn't list healthcare under "Issues."

John McCain
Doesn't list healthcare under "On the Issues."

Ron Paul
Doesn't list healthcare under "Issues."

Mitt Romney
Recommends "extending health insurance to all Americans, not through a government program or new taxes, but through market reforms."

Tom Tancredo
Says "tort reform and immigration enforcement would save the system billions."

Tommy Thompson
Would place "the uninsured in state-by-state insurable pools, allowing private insurers to bid on their coverage."

Give me a break, New York Times. The only thing happening here is that a national conversation is beginning on health care in this country and the Republicans are ducking the issue. When they do manage to get cornered, they advocate for the exact same "let the private market's invisible hand fix it" approach that has given us 45 million uninsured and insurance companies with a profit motive to let people die. The overriding concern for any conservative talking about health care is to keep the broken system the way it is, and out on the wingnut frontier they'll yell about tort reform (meaningless in terms of cost control) and dirty immigrants using up all our health care (not true) and even equate universal health care with terrorism if that'll scare enough people into accepting the status quo.

This article is an affront to the New York Times' readers. The mere suggestion that "presidential candidates in both parties are promising to overhaul" the health care system is absolute tripe.