Q--


"broadly resembling the Obama plan" won't cut it. We have no idea what the final plan will look like. He will not be leaving 20 million more than Hillary out. That's pointless speculation. And if Mr. Krugman thinks he will because of cost, that's your answer right there. The plan will cost more than Mr. Krugman assumes. Obama knows this, and will adjust the cost as necessary.

1) What is the date of your NYT article?   Direct source is needed.

2) Hillary's "mandate" plan is a guaranteed crash-and-burn.   Why? She has recently admitted it will involve garnisheeing the wages of those who do not want to participate. That will never fly politically, as I've noted.

Reason:

Mainly the US cult of the individual--as opposed to in Canada.   Why do you suppose gun rights groups are so powerful?   And Ron Paul's fund-raising strength was not just based on opposition to the Iraq war--the Libertarian party feeds on this feeling against the government.   Pressure against red-light cameras is another manifestation. There's even considerable sentiment to scrap the income tax.

This fits right in. The Republicans-- and the Democrats recently elected on pro-hunting, anti-abortion. etc., tickets--will never accept government coercion of individuals to participate in Hillary's program.

I think it's likely she knows this--but has made the cynical calculation that it doesn't matter--all she wants is a nice simple slogan--"universal healthcare" to run on.

It is however possible that just the "garnisheeing" element she has admitted will sink her plans and keep her out of another stay in the White House--as I say, government coercion--and that's how it will be portrayed--is electoral poison.