2008 Presidential Election Candidates on the Issues


Anyone interested in looking over this candidate chart, it may help. It does not include 3rd party candidates, which I'll search as the data becomes available. As usual it's difficult to find a candidate that matched one-hundred percent, but I found that Sen Brownback came closest to my concerns with exception of the "Death Penalty," which I favor, and the "Immigration Fence," which I prefer a more productive inclusion economic solution. Also I see that Brownback is not for "Universal Healthcare," but I would like to know exactly how he would reform the system not only towards national basic coverage, but to help with the current price gouging from Insurance companies, including Doctor visits and Hospital care.


Using the chart in the above link, which candidate matches up with your concerns the closest?



Bobby

You may also want to check out 'On the issues.org' run by former askme.com politics expert Jesse Gordon

OnTheIssues.org - Candidates on the Issues

Brownback on Health care

Market-based solution over socialized government-pay system. (Aug 2007)
Voted NO on expanding enrollment period for Medicare Part D. (Feb 2006)
Voted NO on increasing Medicaid rebate for producing generics. (Nov 2005)
Voted YES on negotiating bulk purchases for Medicare prescription drug. (Mar 2005)
Voted YES on $40 billion per year for limited Medicare prescription drug benefit. (Jun 2003)
Voted NO on allowing reimportation of Rx drugs from Canada. (Jul 2002)
Voted NO on allowing patients to sue HMOs & collect punitive damages. (Jun 2001)
Voted YES on funding GOP version of Medicare prescription drug benefit. (Apr 2001)
Voted NO on including prescription drugs under Medicare. (Jun 2000)
Voted YES on limiting self-employment health deduction. (Jul 1999)
Voted NO on increasing tobacco restrictions. (Jun 1998)
Voted YES on Medicare means-testing. (Jun 1997)
Rated 0% by APHA, indicating a anti-public health voting record. (Dec 2003)

Q: The SCHIP bill would raise tobacco tax. How do we pay for health care in this country without raising some additional revenues?


A: Well, that's why I voted against the bill. But it wasn't just that. The piece of it that I think you have to recognize is that you've got a fundamental decision to make here on health care, which is 16% of the economy, going north fast, probably headed to 20% of our total economy. Do you think the solution to providing more and better health care is (1) that we should have more government solutions involved, or (2) should there be more market-based solutions involved? And I think clearly the answer here is you need more market forces in health care. That's what we need to do. Instead, you've got the Democrats doing a step-by-step march toward a socialized government-pay system. And they're very happy to do it that way. But we can get better health care going this way. And we can hold the price of it down and not bust the federal treasury at the same time.

Based on the chart Thompson is the closest to a small -gvt conservative. That is why I am leaning his way .

Thanks Tom for the research. I think Brownback is a bit off base on his reasoning in the above statement. I think there has to be some bridling (controls) when it comes to the current system and he still hasn't put any of the business aspects in check when it comes to overcharging. So basically I agree with him on not going the Universal Healthcare route yet and his willingness to venture more into the free market US, but I disagree with part of his solution. It also appears that he doesn't want to accept medicines that could be ordered in from Canada, perhaps reducing costs. I was going to give you the "green- I agree" for taking part in the post, but the system says I must spread reputation around before rating you again.



Bobby

My opinion is that citizens are going to vote AGAINST the Republicans... based on polls I have read over the last months... "repudiation" if you will. :)

The citizenry feel that the Iraq War is in their rearview mirror, and want a positive candidate, candidates... this is the most interesting election in a very long time... quite an array of different kinds of candidates... I think a "moderate" could easily get elected. NO more ideologues with extremists followers.

I like the look of Obama.

He's against the death penalty, for the banning of guns, against Guantanamo, and for a staged removal from Iraq.

They look good from a foreigners perspective. I bet that makes most of you guys here glad I'm just an aussie who can't vote, just criticize... :)

Brownback, Romney come closest.

I think it is interesting that Paul, a libertarian ob/gyn MD, opposes abortion, stem cell research and universal healthcare. He would be horrendous to national security unfortunantly.

US healthcare is already heading toward socialized medicine - medicare, VA, medicaid;
So it is not so much free market vs national.

Also there is no category for tax / IRS stance ?
Paul would abolish the IRS.
What about the "fair tax"



Grace and Peace

Bobby, Hillary Clinton is running as a Moderate... she is **not** for quick withdrawal from Iraq.

I had a brain storm today; I think Hillary, should she get the Democratic nomination, will run wiith a military white man.

You must be referring to Wesley Clark's endorsement

I’m proud to endorse Hillary Clinton | WesPac | Securing America Community

Fyi Clark was the Clinton era "occuping "General of the former Yugoslavia.The most notable event of his tenure was ordering British troops to attack the Russians and the British officer refused to obey the order saying "I won't start World War III just to get you out of a jam.".Wesly Clark was FIRED as NATO commander due to demonstrated poor judgement and what other general officers have referred to as "integrity issues."