- 3,863
I am sitting here tonight reading the HOUSTON CHRONICLE and the article reads like this...
"Mitt Romney Believes in a free market solution to Health Insurance..."
OK sounds good so far... and then...
"Mitt's plan would require ALL business to either provide benefits or pay a FEE to FUND a GOVERNMENT plan(s) that the employee could choose.."
So in other words Mitt wants to end Individual Health Insurance? I'll leave this to YOU to make YOUR own decision.
I am of the opinion the reason we are having Health Insurance issues is because it is employer sponsored, over regulation and not very portable - I believe less regulation and INDIVIDUAL plans are the solution - again just my opinion.
It should also be noted that Mitt comes from one of five "guaranteed issue" states which is the most backwards approach to health care in the country - in my opinion. A plan that costs $800/mo in Mitt's state costs about $150/mo (or less) in most other states including my home state of Texas.
I am not anti-Mitt, I haven't made up my mind yet for '08 - not really liking my choices overall - I just feel INDIVIDUAL Insurance is the solution not the problem and when I hear a candidate state "all employers must provide coverage" OR "pick a government plan" I translate that to
"Eliminate the broker and Eliminate Individual Insurance..."
I also know talk is cheap and he is not likely to get elected...
Anyone care to chime in?
"Mitt Romney Believes in a free market solution to Health Insurance..."
OK sounds good so far... and then...
"Mitt's plan would require ALL business to either provide benefits or pay a FEE to FUND a GOVERNMENT plan(s) that the employee could choose.."
So in other words Mitt wants to end Individual Health Insurance? I'll leave this to YOU to make YOUR own decision.
I am of the opinion the reason we are having Health Insurance issues is because it is employer sponsored, over regulation and not very portable - I believe less regulation and INDIVIDUAL plans are the solution - again just my opinion.
It should also be noted that Mitt comes from one of five "guaranteed issue" states which is the most backwards approach to health care in the country - in my opinion. A plan that costs $800/mo in Mitt's state costs about $150/mo (or less) in most other states including my home state of Texas.
I am not anti-Mitt, I haven't made up my mind yet for '08 - not really liking my choices overall - I just feel INDIVIDUAL Insurance is the solution not the problem and when I hear a candidate state "all employers must provide coverage" OR "pick a government plan" I translate that to
"Eliminate the broker and Eliminate Individual Insurance..."
I also know talk is cheap and he is not likely to get elected...
Anyone care to chime in?