Nine years, then-First Lady Hillary Clinton, a comprehensive health care proposal blocked and burned - probably a decisive factor in the care of Republican U.S. home a year later. Since several attempts to reform national health systems have also run out of steam.
Now, he said the leaders when considering universal health care - the government medical care for all. Thirteen countries are on this path, with the first plan in Oregon. In November, voters in a revolutionary step, the vote would be the use of tax dollars, so that the full health care for each state is established.
It would increase taxes, but supporters say it would also save billions of dollars a year - in particular by reducing administrative costs by about 25 per cent to 5 per cent. Oregon’s measure would also allow health care to hundreds of thousands of people without health insurance now, many of these children.
“People are really ready for a big change in the system,” said Britt McEachern health care for all Oregon, the popular movement promotion group of ballots. “All we discussed a problem with the health insurance or know a friend who has a horror story.”
The proposal comes at a time when the number of people without medical care at the USA approaching nearly 40 million Americans, while spending $ 4700 per person for health care each year (nearly twice as higher than the amount of other countries), and if the quality of health care to the USA in the lead of the World Health Organization as the 37th - In the lower part that many countries much less wealthy .
But an opponent of any USA, supported by insurance companies and other business groups, can be provided for a large and costly campaign against Oregon. Indeed, the adversary the Clinton plan uses the highly effective “Harry and Louise” television ads to kill the proposal.
“The sky’s the limit would skyrocketing costs,” warns Associated Oregon Industries, a lobbying group, about 20000 enterprises. “Taxes to pay the bills are injured each taxpayer infirm Oregon, Oregon and cost jobs.”
Opponents refer to Canada, detail-payer health care system, where some people now have to wait until certain medical practices or travel to the USA for treatment.
Some Canadian provinces suggests the privatization of the system. Others say it is because the level of expenditure on health care by the legislature is given the campaign people - including health insurers, rather than a private system.
Supporters of universal health care could face an upsurge of fighting, but the political landscape has changed significantly the early 1990.
The debate comes at a time when Americans, especially in the current economic situation, are increasingly concerned about the health benefits to lose.
It also happens that States - faced with the requirement of balanced budgets and growth is intended to cover medical expenses significantly faster than inflation - Cut health programs for the poor.
Some 40 countries have reduced Medicaid benefits, increased the amount to be paid to beneficiaries (such as share or copayments), or the conditions have left more people without health insurance.
Health Care advocates estimate that 2 million Americans lost their health insurance during the last year.
A recent study by the State Supported in California concluded that the State running universal health care cost less, as the current system. Studies in Massachusetts also show large savings.
Oregon is known for its incomparable policy on health issues - doctors, including assisted suicide and a national program of health care for many class people who are not eligible for Medicaid but not be denied coverage.
Action 23, or the “Oregon Comprehensive health care financing plan,” as the initiative of ballots is called, in the context of progressive income and taxes on wages with a maximum of 8 percent of personal income tax.
This did not deserve more than 150 percent of the Confederation Poverty Guidelines would not have to pay additional taxes. In essence, the new fund would replace health insurance premiums, copayments, deductibles and out-of-sac spending for health care.
The plan would be administered by an independent, non-profit body, by a Board of Directors of 15 members (five members of the governor and two Congresses of the State-five districts), negotiations on contracts with suppliers medical services.
The system of public health care, all inhabitants (based on residency would probably be determined how it is the State University System), and it would be a full spectrum of physical and mental health services, including the long-term supply and other forms of treatment. There would be no exception for existing conditions.
All eyes are Oregon this fall to see if this is what the USA is a revolutionary leap.
“It’s a very, very ambitious initiative which, it seems to me, enormous expenditure of opposition from insurance companies, because if it would allow operators of private insurance to the activity” Says William Lunch, professor of political science at Oregon State University, Corvallis.