by Graydyl

Created on: March 25, 2009   Last Updated: May 28, 2010

Deficit. Deficit. Deficit. The massive federal deficit compounded with the growing number of unemployed Americans despite soaring healthcare expenditures resonated with candidates in the 1992 presidential election.

American voters ranked healthcare just behind the economy and the federal budget deficit in importance in surveys by Harvard School of Public Health and Kaiser.[1]

Since national debate revolved around the government's massive deficit spending, presidential candidates William Clinton, George Bush, and Ross Perot proposed ways to reduce healthcare costs in their platforms.

All three political platforms acknowledged that Americans have a universal right to quality and affordable healthcare. The Democratic platform in 1992 described the rising costs of healthcare as "terrorizing", demonizing the escalating health care costs as a public enemy of America, an entity lurking in the corner of every home waiting to launch a national attack on the American people as the federal deficit grew larger.[2]

Governor Clinton, the Democratic candidate, took advantage of the urgency of the deficit to propose a complete reform of the control of healthcare costs. Clinton agreed with Bush that cutting Medicare costs was crucial, but he did not believe that this was enough to prevent health care costs from increasing: in order to effectively control health care financing, health care regulation needed to undergo drastic changes in both public and private sectors.[3]

Clinton's reform strategy implemented "managed competition", which would divide hospitals and physicians into competing "accountable health partnerships".[4]

These partnerships created a contract with insurance-purchasing cooperatives to provide standardized medical benefit packages for fixed per capital benefits.[5]

Managed competition's public regional alliance system's purpose was to maintain quality of healthcare services while reducing costs as a result of competition among health plans.

Clinton initially endorsed the "play or pay" plan, which would require employees to privately provide health insurance to their employees or be forced to pay a public tax..[6]

However, the Republican platform viciously attacked "play or pay" for its creation of additional costs for employers and less job availability. [7] Clinton responded by altering his platform to focus on managed competition and leaving out the "play or pay" component.

However, the author of the letter to the New York Times editor wrote from the perspective

• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next Page >>