Edwards: Garnish Wages If Needed to Cover All

Edwards: Garnish Wages If Needed to Cover All

ABC News' Teddy Davis Reports: Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards is hoping to stand-out from rivals on health care by portraying the plan of rival Barack Obama as leaving 15 million uninsured and portraying Hillary Clinton as lacking the candor needed to get to universal coverage.

"Barack Obama's plan leaves out 15 million people," said Edwards. "The truth is that some people will choose not to buy insurance even though it's affordable, knowing that the rest of us will pay for their emergency room visits."Listen to this moron. Some people will CHOOSE NOT TO BUY INSURANCE. Paying for their emergency room visits is just the same as paying for their insurance. And who is he to say that people shouldn't be able to REFUSE insurance if they don't want it?

"But it is just as bad to say that everyone will have insurance without a plan to get there," he continued. "Hillary Clinton says her plan will cover everyone through a 'mandate' but does not provide even the most rudimentary idea much less a detailed plan of how this 'mandate' would work."

Like Clinton (and unlike Obama), Edwards' health-care plan would require every American to have health insurance. Require insurance. We're not talking about "giving" everyone insurance (which will ultimately be the same thing) we're now just coming out and saying "Every American is going to have insurance at gunpoint." Does it make me a bad man to want to drag Edwards into the street and kick him?

But unlike Clinton, Edwards is now detailing how he would enforce his mandate.
Under the Edwards plan, when Americans file their income taxes, they would be required to submit a letter from an insurance provider confirming coverage for themselves and their dependents. Once again, the IRS gets involved. Remember, they were only supposed to tax the upper 1-5%. Guess not anymore!

If someone did not submit proof of coverage, the Internal Revenue Service would notify a newly established regional or state-based health-care agency (which Edwards has dubbed a Health Care Market). Market. Market! A place where people buy and sell things. A market isn't a damned government agency you dip**** with delusions of adequacy!

Those regional agencies would then evaluate whether the uninsured individual was eligible for Medicare (which covers those over 65), Medicaid (which covers the indigent), or S-CHIP (the State Children's Health Insurance Program which targets the working poor).

If the individual was not eligible for either of those existing public programs, the regional-health care agency would enroll the individual into the lowest cost health-care plan available in that area. The lowest-cost option could be a new Medicare-like public option or a private insurance plan. Well thank God private insurance companies aren't going to be put out of business.

The newly covered individual would not only have access to health benefits but would also be responsible for making monthly payments with the help of a tax credit.Let me get this straight. They're going to put a gun to his head and take his money, force him to pay for insurance upon threat of going to jail, and then they're going to give him a tax break. In what kind of crazy, screwed up moonbat world does that even begin to approach making sense?

The exact size of the financial obligation would vary according to a person's income (lower-income Americans would receive larger tax credits). Yet more punish the industrious economics. The nerve of those fellows...working!...and expecting to keep the fruit of their labor. I seriously question their compassion.

If a person did not meet his or her monthly financial obligation for a set period of time (perhaps a year, perhaps longer) the Edwards plan would empower the federal government to garnish an individual's wages for purposes of collecting "back premiums with interest and collection costs."More gunplay by the feds. If a person doesn't want health care and refuses to play ball, the federal government is simply going to rip their money away, reaching into their future paychecks to take payments for health care they didn't receive. And just how IN THE HELL is that going to affect their ability to pay for healthcare and other necessities in the present?

The process, according to the Edwards campaign, would resemble the process used to collect money from Americans who are delinquent on federal student loans or child support payments.
The Edwards campaign has not put a dollar figure on the amount that would be garnished from wages because the cost of the lowest-priced plan in that region could vary and is not yet known.

While raising the specter of wage garnishment could expose Edwards to the criticism that he favors a bigger, more intrusive government, he is hoping that Democrats will reward him for offering a plan that is bolder than Obama's and more candid than Clinton's.Reward him for proposing theft. For those who didn't catch it the first time, he thinks they'll reward him for THEFT! Man walks into my place of work, mouthing off about what he wants to steal, I'm going to call the POLICE!

"To get fundamental change in our health care system, we need a fundamental change in our politics," said Edwards. "That starts with being clear and direct about what we are going to do and how we are going to do it."Sure is a fundamental change you arrogant ****, and it's not a change for the better.

I read this and for some reason I think of Neil McCauly and Waingro in a hotel room. It's like a Rorshach ink-blot test.