Hillary on Medical Savings Accounts

vharlow · 01-22-2007, 09:09 AM

Dennis Hastert, former Speaker of the House recounted this discussion with Hillary.....

"I mentioned...to the first lady about medical savings accounts and just right away she said, 'We can't do that.' And I said, 'Well, why?' And she said, 'Well there's two reasons.' And I said, 'Well, what are they?' [And she said,] 'The first reason is with the medical savings account, people have to act on their own and make their own decisions about health care. And they have to make sure that they get the inoculations and the preventative care that they need, and we just think that people will skip too much because in a medical savings account if you don't spend it, you get to keep it or you can...accumulate it in a health care account. We just think people will be too focused on saving money and they won't get the care for their children and themselves that they need. We think the government, by saying 'You have to make this schedule. You have to have your kids in for inoculations here, you have to do a prescreening here, you have to do this'--the government will make better decisions than the people will make, and people will be healthier because of it.'

"I said, 'Well, part of that's an education process. People have to understand that [if] they behave a certain way, they're going to save money, [with the] preventive medicine issue--you get the prescreenings, if you can inoculate your kids you save money on it. I mean, they're not sick. You save money.' She said, 'No. We just can't trust the American people to make those type of choices...Government has to make those choices for people.'

"I said, 'Okay, we just disagree there. But what's the second reaosn?' And she said, 'Well, the second reason is, with a medical savings acount, savings are [like] an IRA. They go in as actually money saved and all that money will go into IRAs which goes to the private sector.' And she said, 'We can't afford to have that money go to the private sector. The money has to go to the federal government because the federal government will spend that money better than the private sector will spend it.' And so [I thought] holy mackeral. I can't argue these issues. These are philosophical issues."

Rep. Hastert, whose legislative plan included tax-deferred Medical Savings Accounts with contributions by employers. He concluded after a discussion with First Lady Hillary Clinton that there was little common ground on which to negotiate with the Clinton Administration on health care legislation. "Health Has No Fury," David Brock, The American Spectator, November 1996.

tristanrobin · 01-22-2007, 09:23 AM

I will never understand why the Democratic party is pushing Hillary (and has been grooming her since she was first elected Senator). There is NO WAY she can win. Nobody is ever going to discover something about her which changes his mind about her. Either you like her - or you hate her - and everybody KNOWS her. There is not even any point in campaigning.

Bad, bad, bad choice.

Rod · 01-22-2007, 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vharlow

Dennis Hastert, former Speaker of the House recounted this discussion with Hillary.....

"I mentioned...to the first lady about medical savings accounts and just right away she said, 'We can't do that.' And I said, 'Well, why?' And she said, 'Well there's two reasons.' And I said, 'Well, what are they?' [And she said,] 'The first reason is with the medical savings account, people have to act on their own and make their own decisions about health care. And they have to make sure that they get the inoculations and the preventative care that they need, and we just think that people will skip too much because in a medical savings account if you don't spend it, you get to keep it or you can...accumulate it in a health care account. We just think people will be too focused on saving money and they won't get the care for their children and themselves that they need. We think the government, by saying 'You have to make this schedule. You have to have your kids in for inoculations here, you have to do a prescreening here, you have to do this'--the government will make better decisions than the people will make, and people will be healthier because of it.'

"I said, 'Well, part of that's an education process. People have to understand that [if] they behave a certain way, they're going to save money, [with the] preventive medicine issue--you get the prescreenings, if you can inoculate your kids you save money on it. I mean, they're not sick. You save money.' She said, 'No. We just can't trust the American people to make those type of choices...Government has to make those choices for people.'

"I said, 'Okay, we just disagree there. But what's the second reaosn?' And she said, 'Well, the second reason is, with a medical savings acount, savings are [like] an IRA. They go in as actually money saved and all that money will go into IRAs which goes to the private sector.' And she said, 'We can't afford to have that money go to the private sector. The money has to go to the federal government because the federal government will spend that money better than the private sector will spend it.' And so [I thought] holy mackeral. I can't argue these issues. These are philosophical issues."

Rep. Hastert, whose legislative plan included tax-deferred Medical Savings Accounts with contributions by employers. He concluded after a discussion with First Lady Hillary Clinton that there was little common ground on which to negotiate with the Clinton Administration on health care legislation. "Health Has No Fury," David Brock, The American Spectator, November 1996.

Wow vharlow, we the people should all hear her tell how ignorant we are. She really is lost on these issues. Why are people still voting her into a leadership role? It really iritates me to hear people in positions of wealth and influence to be so ignorant as to say such things. It came from her mouth so that must be what is in her heart. For the most part I have not seen the government spend the peoples money wisely when they are giving pork to special interests groups and into large corporates to subdue the masses into thinking what a good deal they have.

vharlow · 01-22-2007, 10:51 AM

This arrogant woman thinks she, the elitist, is better at making choices for the American people than they are, and she wants all your money so she can make those choices and YOU CAN'T!

Someone should ask here questions about these things she said at the first opportunity.

chrisg967 · 01-23-2007, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vharlow

Rep. Hastert, whose legislative plan included tax-deferred Medical Savings Accounts with contributions by employers. He concluded after a discussion with First Lady Hillary Clinton that there was little common ground on which to negotiate with the Clinton Administration on health care legislation. "Health Has No Fury," David Brock, The American Spectator, November 1996.

Vharlow, I noticed you gave the source for this information as David Brock, in The American Spectator. I looked it up. He does not seem to give sources for his information, or else I'm totally missing them. And he says it was Hastert's recollection of the conversation. He doesn't give Clinton's recollection of the same conversation. Why not? If he's an investigative reporter (like it says at the end of the article), he should have gotten both sides.

If asked about this conversation now, will she even remember it???

I think Mr. Brock blew it when he neglected to corroborate the story with Clinton.

vharlow · 01-23-2007, 08:08 PM

Ask her....go ahead. I signed on and asked a question, but of course, she wasn't answering questions she didn't want asked. She never did. She won't do an interview show unless she gets to give them the questions she wants to answer. Ask Rosie O'Donnell why she didn't ask Hillary about her stance on gay marriage. Hillary told them what questions to ask.

sgtdmski · 01-23-2007, 11:44 PM

Mr Brock wrote this article and in doing so interviewed Dennis Hastert. Mr Hastert gave his side of the story, and yes we await to hear Hillary's but then of course she is always unavailable for comment.

These are the same excuses that we hear when it comes to reforming Social Security. Face it people, the Democrats think they know how to spend your money better than you. And time and again we let them because of the promised goods or services we will receive. Health care coverage for all, yet at what cost???? Long wait times for treatment, limits to treatment available, you name it.

Cradle to grave protection with social security, yes folks that's right, give the government you money and you will earn you 1.8% interest so that you can receive that monthly check for $1258. If only that went into even a savings account at 3% interest you would more than double your monthly income. Maybe Hillary is right, the people are just too dumb.

dmk

chrisg967 · 01-24-2007, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vharlow

Ask her....go ahead. I signed on and asked a question, but of course, she wasn't answering questions she didn't want asked. She never did. She won't do an interview show unless she gets to give them the questions she wants to answer. Ask Rosie O'Donnell why she didn't ask Hillary about her stance on gay marriage. Hillary told them what questions to ask.

Signed on where?

chrisg967 · 01-24-2007, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sgtdmski

Mr Brock wrote this article and in doing so interviewed Dennis Hastert. Mr Hastert gave his side of the story, and yes we await to hear Hillary's but then of course she is always unavailable for comment.

These are the same excuses that we hear when it comes to reforming Social Security. Face it people, the Democrats think they know how to spend your money better than you. And time and again we let them because of the promised goods or services we will receive. Health care coverage for all, yet at what cost???? Long wait times for treatment, limits to treatment available, you name it.

Cradle to grave protection with social security, yes folks that's right, give the government you money and you will earn you 1.8% interest so that you can receive that monthly check for $1258. If only that went into even a savings account at 3% interest you would more than double your monthly income. Maybe Hillary is right, the people are just too dumb.

dmk

Well, the article was written in 1996, so my guess is that recollections are going to be more fuzzy now, 20 years later. And it is difficult to tell in his article exactly when the conversation took place. It might have been in 1993. So were the questions we're asking now ever posed back in 96 after the article came out? Is there any evidence that Clinton actually said these words besides what Brock says Hastert said?

I dislike wasting energy getting upset over nothing. So far, this seems like nothing, as there seems to be no other evidence...

Ferret it out and I will consider it.

Thanks,
Chris

vharlow · 01-24-2007, 01:15 PM

I signed on to her webcast at hillaryclinton.com where she is supposed to be answering questions. You should know, though, if she didn't write the questions herself, or if she doesn't already have an answer ready for a question, she won't answer it. The Clintons never did take questions that weren't screened and approved ahead of time.