Edwards takes Clinton to task on special interests
Edwards was critical of Clinton's involvement with lobbyists and special interest groups.
NASHUA, N.H. (CNN) - Former Senator John Edwards blamed lobbyist, corporate insiders and special interest groups, Saturday, for preventing change in America and discussed why his stance on these groups—and his ideas for revamping the political system– conflict with presidential hopeful, Senator Hillary Clinton.
“Look, Senator Clinton is right. You can’t pretend the system doesn’t exist, but you also can’t pretend that it works. And this is where she and I part company because I believe that if you defend the system that defeats change, you can’t be the President who will actually bring change, “ the Democrat from North Carolina added, “When it comes to the Washington influence game, we need to end it, not defend it.”
Speaking before hundreds of cheering union members, the Senator, sporting a pair of jeans and a blue blazer, received the official endorsement from the United Brotherhood of Carpenters for President of the United States. In front of the boisterous crowd, Edwards continued after his opponent.
“She says you bring change by working within the system established by the Constitution. I think the system has been corrupted by corporate powers never contemplated by the Constitution. This is not the government of, by and for the people that our founding fathers intended. There is no principled compromise between the ways things have always been and the way things can be.”
“In the America I believe in, we don’t compromise on our principles, we fight for them with every single thing that we got,” Edwards said.
- CNN New Hampshire Producer Sareena Dalla
From CNN Politics
- Pressure builds on Biden to act on guns in wake of Colorado mass shooting March 23, 2021 12:16 pm
- Sidney Powell argues in new court filing that no reasonable people would believe her election fraud claims March 23, 2021 12:15 pm
- Postmaster General set to announce 10-year plan including longer mail delivery times and cuts to post office hours March 23, 2021 12:02 pm
- Progressive group launches $3.2 million advertising buy to push federal voting law March 23, 2021 11:01 am
- US and allies announce sanctions against Chinese officials for 'serious human rights abuses' against Uyghurs March 23, 2021 10:32 am
- Analysis: Trump's army takes aim at 2022 touting his election lies March 23, 2021 05:01 am
To Dan from Texas: "For the people that have NO health insurance now. Do you believe they should have government provided health insurance or not?"
Of course not–there are lots private insurers out there. And if you're asking if I think the rest of us should be forced to pay even more taxes to make "government provided health insurance" possible, of course not.
When did the government of the US become everyone's Big Brother? When did it become acceptable for people to sponge off strangers? And worse, to invoke the power of government to compel productive, tax-paying, people to subsidise those strangers? Government doesn't create money, you know. All it can do is forcibly deprive people of the fruits of their own
efforts.
And, BTW, I'm supposed to accept "Sicko" as an authoritative source for anything?
After living the last eight years in the USA, and the previous 27 in Australia (which has socialized medicine), I'm still amazed at people who suggest (as Henry Miller from NC does) that it doesn't work. Sure, you don't have as great access as under private health cover (even there).... but at least you had a choice.
I managed to injure myself often, crashing bikes, motorcycles, breaking thumbs and requiring stiches (often), and would simply show up with a "Medicare" card and not a single dollar, and was fixed up as good as new. I'd rather a longer wait in line that a co-pay that requires a personal loan.
I'm a huge fan of privatisation in general... but human health is not something I'd suggest putting in the hands of those whose motivation is profit, versus those whose motivation is satifying people who can vote them out based on their performance.
I don't believe capitalism will fix the issues with healthcare. It is part of the problem. When we let for profit insurance companies make the decisions over doctor recommendations, there is something very wrong. I represent the middle class, work for public education, definitely pay my dues to society and healthcare is not something that comes easily for me. Just for a wellness check this year, my out of pocket costs were $500. There is something seriously wrong with our system. I know people that live in countries that have government run healthcare and they do not complain with the level of care that they get. When the middle class has to suffer so much, it's time for change. The lower class already receives medicare, which definitely is a government run program partially paid for by the middle class. It would be nice to be able to buy into something more available for the middle class without huge costs along with it. Buying health insurance through my workplace this year was like shopping for a wireless phone contract. There were four different plans with increasingly better or worse coverage depending on how one looks at it. To get regular coverage would cost me $300 a month (the plan I was on when I had to pay the $500 for a wellness check). Medical expenses should not be such a huge fear.
People that think only the upper class deserves good healthcare appear very selfish indeed. I would like to know that all people in our society are valued, and that no one would be turned away due to lack of insurance.
I do believe our government is run by lobbyists and corporations. They have the money to be very influential. I also think that most of the candidates would favor big business over what's right for the population. That's why Obama is the only candidate that I trust. I do think that Romney's health care program in Massachusetts speaks much about him though.
Lyons Steve, SB, Baltimore, MD,
I am a Canadian, and I can tell you that you are Wrong about Canadian Health Care. And you should watch Sicko because Michael Moore speaks the truth. Maybe you just don't want to hear it but it is the truth.
Hillary was and still is trying to provide Socialized Health Care for the benefit of those who can't afford the egregious costs of medical services and adequate health care. And I can't for the life of me understand why Americans are so adamant upon looking a gift horse in the mouth. If your rich good for you,Socialized Health Care won't change your present system or deprive you of having one. If your not rich you should jump on the band wagon for Socialized Health Care.
Americans should do the research and get the truth about Government Sponsponsored/Socialized Health Care instead of letting those who obviously don't understand the stystem fill you with misconceptions and untruths.
And before the hate mail starts piling in, call me an idiot if you like. I won't bother me as I know I speak the truth. Do you?
edwards needs to get a life .stop bashing other canidates and let us know what he is about, if anything... we don't hear no new ideas from this southern lawyer
Michelle, Dayton Ohio
You tell me why private enterprise can't handle the health care issues of the United States? I would love to hear your answer.
If you follow the simple premise that corporations put their money where the profits are, it becomes quite clear. Don't quote me on this, but I think the number of lobbyists in Washington has increased something like four-fold since Bush took office. A simple example of their power is seen in the Medicare drug prescription legislation. Remember how many millions were given to Insurance organizations?
I know you want to believe that "free enterprise" is at work here, but it's simply not true. The longer you fail to believe what is going on right in front of you, the longer it will take and the more difficult it will be to turn it around. The information is right in front of you. All you have to do is see it.
Again, there is a reason corporate America is spending on lobbyists and it's not to make your life better.
PS – Michelle, you’re right about this gang in Washington right now. How many billions of dollars of tax payer money unaccounted for in Iraq? That’s why they need to go… and yesterday isn’t soon enough. It’s your tax dollar. You decide.
Ok, suppose I go along with the fact that corporations are evil and are corrupting our healthcare system right now. Is there anything we can do as citizens/consumers to fix the problem? We know the government has a track record of stepping in to fix things and making them even worse, so why is universal healthcare our only option? If we go this route, politicians influenced by their financial sponsors or lobbyists can incorporate the same corruption into the healthcare system as people say corporations are doing now, right? Not to mention the HUGE overhead costs involved in anything the government does. People complain healthcare is so expensive. Do you really, REALLY believe it will be more affordable if its a universal system (does the $500 hammer cliche come to mind?). ? I'm not trying to attack anyone's viewpoints, I'm honestly asking for answers from people who are for this system. I work for the gov't now as a contractor, and I can't believe the waste and poor decisions I have personally witnessed.
One thing I will say, with a more negative tone, unfortunately – I don't think I should have to pay for your doctor bills if you break your arm because of your extreme sports hobbies, or because you bought a new car instead of paying for health insurance. Sorry.
"He should go get his hair cut! Hillary is still the best chance we have of beating the republicans."
Edwards might actually do well in the south. In modern political arena, a canditate like clinton, with more unfavorable ratings than favorable ratings have never won the presidency. It will be hard fought election and will be determined by Ohio(especially franklin county). Can you name one southern state that will break for clinton?
Obama/Edwards in 08, or Edwards/Richardson in 08.......We need diversity!!!!Hillary is tough, but I miss Al Gore....
In principle the idea of universal healthcare is a beautiful thing. But it seems that no one on either side of the debate is willing to look at it objectively.
There are definitely some good points, which are lauded plenty by half of the people on this board.
But they are over-lauded. In the US, when was the last time you saw a poor uninsured family put up posters all over town to raise money to help their kid get a cut stitched up? I grew up in a poor family, living off of not nearly enough government food, and for the majority of my adult life I have had no insurance. Even in the US where medicine is WAY too expensive (due mostly to corrupt lawyers and litigious morons), us poor people can get most small things that need to be taken care of dealt with.
The PROBLEM is when BIG things come along. Often poor people will have no alternative but to try to raise money somehow.
But these problems are solved in Universal Health Care right? WRONG.
In Universal Health Care systems not only do poor people have trouble getting brain tumors taken care of, but the middle-class (who would sell their house to save the life of their spouse or child), and even the rich who could pay for it out of pocket, are put on a waiting list because the government can only perform a certain number of operations in any given period of time.
I'm sure I don't have to waste my time to list all the possible different scenarios where waiting for 4 months for treatment is not advisable. For you Canadians, with respect (I have several Canadian friends), how many times have you read a story about a Canadian running off to the US for treatment because he or she couldn't wait for eventual treatment in Canada?
Let's say your wife has between 3 and 6 months to live. Her cancer is operable, but the system in Canada puts her on a waiting list. Waiting 4 months for tooth-bleaching is fine, but in this case it could very well mean the death of your spouse.
Look, any reasonable person, after some thought, will agree that some hybrid system is going to be the socially responsible way to go... but over-promotion mixed with the convenient cover-up of facts will do NOTHING to improve the situation. It just destroys the legitimacy of one's position.
For Americans, there are a few things we need to do: First we need to deal with the corrupt-lawyer-litigious-moron problem. As an extreme example, requiring ALL patients to sign forms BEFORE treatment prohibiting them from any legal actions against doctors or hospitals(this could be balanced by mandating that any doctor's or hospital's record be instantly and easily available, complaints, accusations and all). This one act would go a long way towards reducing medical costs in the US.
We could also talk salary-caps, profit-caps for procedures and medicines, government subsidization of equipment manufacturing and so on.
But even having done all we can do in those areas... brain operations, cancer treatment, re-attachment of limbs, etc. will continue to be prohibitively expensive for some time. In the current US system poor people can't get these procedures done without raising money, but in a Universal system NO ONE can get them done in a timely manner. There is always a line.
While I believe a hybrid system would be the most effective as far as providing the most care goes, the aforementioned especially expensive and difficult procedures will ALWAYS be a problem.
Sadly, what I seem to see is people on either side just trying to defend THEIR system... no one seems to truly be interested in finding the best way to make sure the greatest good is done.
I am currently working in Japan, actually, and they have a universal-type system here, too (it isn't free though, they pay about 30%). But Japanese have to travel to the US to get an organ transplant or other major procedures done.
No country in the world has this problem licked. This is partially because a perfect medical care system is impossible (at least currently), but perhaps mostly due to the fact that most people, especially the most vocal ones, only seek to defend 'their' systems and attack others systems.
Not useful at all. But we seem to be used to superficial, useless 'dialog' on these CNN boards.
There is still over a year to go, so alot can still happen.
And alot of information is still left to come out when this campaign starts 'heating up'.
But I know this – anybody who believes that Hillary Clinton is a "candidate of change" is severely misguided, and hasn't paid attention to anything the Clintons did while in the White House or that Hillary Clinton has done as so called Senator of New York. Look it up and read the facts. She is more of what we have now, and more 'business as usual.' And this woman will say or do ANYTHING that she helps will get her elected. She is a professional LIAR.
The Clintons are guilty of so many crimes, it is a wonder that they never went to prison. And they have ties to the Bush family and this current administration. They gave (sold) US Missile technology to China, they started NAFTA and cost millions of jobs, they rented the White House for political contributions, they allegedly sold presidential pardons.
The past 20 years are Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush. And you think you will change anything by electing Clinton again?
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different result.
Both Hillary and Edwards stand for big government. You will see higher taxes with both of them, and more and more entitlement programs for people who don't particularly want to work. Hill and Edw. will both expand welfare, (courtesy of your taxes and my taxes) instead of telling able-bodied people to go seek a job.
Thank you, Isaac in Louisville. I think you have articulated what I meant to say much better than I actually said 🙂 I strongly agree with your points. And I'd like to second the motion that we stop attacking each other, only seeing one point of view, and put our heads together to figure out the optimal (although surely not perfect) solution. We're smarter than those goons in Washington.
I don't know why but I have a big problem with this guy. I can just see his spin doctors hoping his wife keels over so they can get the sympathy vote, and MAYBE get a chance at the white house....
Hey, Henry Miller, Cary, NC : September 8, 2007 7:35 pm
You didn't answer my question at all.
For people who can NOT AFFORD to buy heatlh care. Should we
1) deny them access to care they can't pay for, even if that leads to their death
2) Require charities to pay for the health care of all Americans who don't have any health insurance if they need life saving treatment (for example, cancer treatment, chemotherapy, surgery, radiation)
3) continue what we do now, force hospitals that take the losses to raise costs so we can pay with higher insurance costs (My employer and I cover my family for $900/month – what do you pay Henry?).
4. Provide an adequate insurance plan/or direct heath cost coverage to everyone from the government paid by taxes from YOU and ME as a base and let people buy "Premium" insurance (People like YOU and ME) on their own. The tax cost will be far less then what it costs currently to pay for the uninsured (YOU and I are paying much higher insurance costs than we would if hospitals didn't have to charge so much).
Answer the question, Henry. Saying there are lost of private insurers out there is stupid if people can't afford to buy a policy. 47 MILLION people don't have insurance. Henry, what about them. What do you tell them to do????
someone here pointed out the Bush-Clinton,Bush-Clinton stranglehold in Washington , and when you think about it, it's kind of embarrassing- it's as if we don't have anyone else qualified than these two families !
Coming from North Carolina, I have seen first hand how Edward's handles "change" and there is no way I will vote for him. I do not like any of the candidates, either side, however if one thing is for sure, its that I would never vote for Edwards
Michelle- capitalism and free enterprise are certainly wonderful, and free-market competition is important for many reasons. However, in my opinion, there are two things that all Americans - as citizens of the greatest country in the world - should have access to in service of our nation's ultimate promise of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness: HEALTHCARE and EDUCATION. These items are too important to leave to the market. Without providing healthcare to all citizens, we cannot claim to support any culture of life.
Edwards has no any hope, that's why he attacks frontrunner Hillary Clinton. Edwards, we don't care what you believe, we believe what we see. Most of people decided their mind, so you just waste time and make youself foolish. Sorry for Edwards and Obama.
It's ironic, to say the least, that Edwards was criticizing politicians who are influenced by special interest groups while he was "speaking before hundreds of cheering union members."
This is all about Oprah's ego, plain and simple, end of story.
Obama is not ready for prime time and may never be. He is developing a terrible case of foot-in-mouth disease.
In addition, there may be some other "things" Obama may be worring about come February, and it ain't going to be the primaries.
Wearing jean in front of the union workers, but with a $400 haircut from donated funds, does not make John Edwards on equal footing with his union supporters.
Labour unions are also special interest groups too.
John Edwards is a hypocrite and speaks with both tongues.
Isaac, Louisville, KY
I would respectfully like to voice a difference of opinion on a few issues you speak to concerning our Canadian Health Care System.
I am not trying to defend our Canadian Health Care System. I am merely trying to provide a true picture versus the negative spin being put upon this system by those not stating actual facts. And quite frankly I believe unfactual statements about other Government Funded Health Care Systems is providing a disservice to the American People. It is providing a untrue and negative image of Government Health Care Systems that could provide them with Health Care that has to now been unaffordable thus unavailable to middle class Americans.
In my Province, Brain operations, cancer treatments, and re-attachment of limbs are medical services both provided and covered on our Provincial Medicare System. Our Province is the smallest in Canada but these services are still provided and if not available in our home Province they are available and covered in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Ontario which are only at most a three hour drive or an hour flight. Now if you want the BEST Surgeon in the World you are free to wait months for an appointment and pay for it!
You stated: "In the current US system poor people can't get these procedures done without raising money, but in a Universal system NO ONE can get them done in a timely manner. There is always a line."
I COUNTER: This statement is NOT TRUE in PEI Canada. If one of our citizens has to go out of Province for a life and death treatment communities raise money for the family yes. But not to pay for the services attached to the treatment in another PRovince but to assist the family with lodging and travel costs. And whether the family need the assistance or not the community will still have a fund raiser to provide it.
You Stated:
"While I believe a hybrid system would be the most effective as far as providing the most care goes, the aforementioned especially expensive and difficult procedures will ALWAYS be a problem."
I Counter: This statement is also untrue in PEI. As I stated above these as you call them difficult procedures are not a problem here and are provided under our Medicare System.
You Stated:
"In Universal Health Care systems not only do poor people have trouble getting brain tumors taken care of, but the middle-class (who would sell their house to save the life of their spouse or child), and even the rich who could pay for it out of pocket, are put on a waiting list because the government can only perform a certain number of operations in any given period of time."
I Counter: This is also not true in PEI. Brain surgeries are performed in Moncton, N. B. and Halifax N.S. a one to three hour drive from here as needed. And Life threatening surgies in these areas DO NOT WAIT MONTHS. In fact a young man who fell off a Tractor onto a concrete loading deck last November suffered brain injuries as a result. He was immediately taken to Moncton, N.B. by air and brain surgery was performed immediately.
You Stated:
"I'm sure I don't have to waste my time to list all the possible different scenarios where waiting for 4 months for treatment is not advisable. For you Canadians, with respect (I have several Canadian friends), how many times have you read a story about a Canadian running off to the US for treatment because he or she couldn't wait for eventual treatment in Canada?"
I Counter: What Province do your Canadian Friends reside in? As I know of a few Canadians who have went to the US for various medical treatments and procedures. However, not due to long waiting periods for the treatment in Canada but rather due to the treatments and/or procedures not being available in Canada.
You Stated: "Let's say your wife has between 3 and 6 months to live. Her cancer is operable, but the system in Canada puts her on a waiting list. Waiting 4 months for tooth-bleaching is fine, but in this case it could very well mean the death of your spouse."
I Counter: Again, I have not heard of such extreme waiting periods here. If the wife lived in PEI and that surgery was not available here, or she would have to wait an indefinite period for such life threatening surgery, they would give her the option of going to another Maritime Province or another Canadian Province who could perform the said surgery in more timely fashion. And the surgery would still be covered in the Province providing the service.
You Stated: "I am currently working in Japan, actually, and they have a universal-type system here, too (it isn't free though, they pay about 30%). But Japanese have to travel to the US to get an organ transplant or other major procedures done."
I Counter: This is normal for many National Funded Health Care Systems. Not all Procedures are provided in all Provinces,States, and localities. The good news is with National Funded Health Care Systems regardless of where you have to go as long as it in the country you reside in it is covered by your National Funded Health Care System. Isn't that better than leaving present American tax payers without any possible means to receive the treatment, surgery, procedure they need BECAUSE they can't afford to pay for it?
No matter which way I look at the present American Health Care System it says to me that "Justice and Equality For All" does not exist where Health Care is concerned. If you can't pay, you dont' receive. This is not acceptable for anyone, anywhere.
And I can tell you in PEI if we were not on our present Medicare system and a citizen had a life and death situation at hand, one of our Professionals be they a doctor or surgeron would perform the service free. They would not be turned away due to not being able to pay for the service.
But it's your perogative to believe what you wish to believe. All I can tell you is the truth as I know it concerning our Medicare System. I've never had a problem receiving any treatments, surgeries, or procedures in a timely fashion. I can see my Doctor four times a week if I need to and I do not pay for my visits. If I need Xrays, Cat Scans, MRI's, Blood work, Cancer Treatments, etc. etc. I will receive all without the worry of having to pay thousands of dollars later. I wouldn't trade my Medicare System for any other private or fee paying system available.
Former Senator Edwards needs to be careful what he wishes for in the future.
I agree with strong Labor Unions, the right to organize and collective bargaining. However, anyone who doesn't believe a Labor Union is a special interest group or that Labor Union lobbyists are somehow different than other lobbyists is an idiot.
As with everything else in America you have to take the good with the bad. You have to find some way to work with those you disagree with, following the same rules, and overcome their arguments and lobbying efforts to do the greatest possible good.
By former Senator Edwards' standards and principles he would have to decline his recent Labor Union endorsements and money. Much like he declined his dividend checks from the mortgage companies that are foreclosing on Katrina victims.
Oh, sorry, I guess he kept that money. Apparently it didn't violate his principles.