On Sun, 16 Jan 2000, Nathan Newman wrote:
> [Bradley] is promoting universal coverage of health reform (however
> moderate his proposal) which Gore refuses even to do at this point.
You're much better on policy details than I am Nathan, so can I ask you to go further on this point? My impression was that there is nothing universal about Bradley's coverage except the name. If I understand correctly, he's for abolishing Medicaid -- the only actually existing universal coverage we have -- and replacing it with tax credits that would theoretically make it easier for poor people to buy coverage. That seems like the dead opposite of universal coverage. FWIW, The Progressive had a long article in the December issue that argued that Bradley's health plan was actually to the right of Gore's (although the authors hated them both).
__________________________________________________________________________ Michael Pollak................New York City..............mpollak at panix.com