Ain't necessarily so. Clinton has not criticized the voucher-dimension of the Breaux plan (except from the right, saying it doesn't control costs enough). One could argue that the prescription drug benefit is the judas goat in this process which paves the way for voucherization. It is true that the drug companies hate the Clinton position because it would subject them to cost pressures, so if this is the section of capital you're referring to, you're right. On the whole, however, the Clinton position is rotten.
> One of the battle lines is about control of the vast finance
involved. Am I not right that Greenspan has unusually
specifically criticised the idea
that such large sums of money invested on the stock exchange
should be
managed by state functionaries rather than by being dispersed to
private individuals and for- profit capitalist companies?>
Right.
> I would strongly suggest that campaigners in the US will be
inescapably reformist if they put their limited energies into a
minority health care system rather than centrally into a rational
socialised health care system for the great majority of the
working population.>
I agree. The likely compromise plan would be one in which a prescription drug benefit was provided on a means-tested basis.
mbs