The CBS and ABC evening newscasts led Monday night -- even before O.J. Simpson -- by trumpeting Hillary Clinton's universal health care plan, a proposal fill-in CBS anchor Harry Smith insisted addresses a vital need: “It's a huge problem. An estimated 47 million are not covered.” Of course, CBS didn't bother explaining how a significant number of those can afford insurance or are illegal aliens. ABC's medical doctor, Tim Johnson, who back in 1993 called Bill and Hillary Clinton “almost heroes in my mind for finally facing up to the terrible problems we have with our current health care system,” praised Senator Clinton's new plan: “Every industrialized country in this world that is successful with health care -- often more successful than we are -- has a partnership between government and the private sector.”
Smith led the CBS Evening News: “She tried to do it as First Lady. Now, as a presidential candidate, she is trying again. Hillary Clinton today outlined a new plan for making sure every American has health insurance. It's a huge problem. An estimated 47 million are not covered.” Reporter Jim Axelrod asserted “Clinton doesn't remind reminding people of her past painful experience in health care reform” because “in the latest CBS News poll, 66 percent of registered voters say her health care experience will help her.” Charles Gibson led ABC's World News: “We start with Senator Clinton, now trying to get to the White House by promising to do something she couldn't do when she was in the White House -- come up with a plan to provide health care for all Americans that would be accepted by Congress.”
Brian Williams limited coverage to this short item on the NBC Nightly News:
It was the issue that tripped her up as First Lady for a time, but now she is running for President and today Senator Hillary Clinton called for health care coverage for all Americans. This time, the centerpiece of her universal health care plan is that all Americans would be required to have insurance either through their employers or self-purchased with help from the government.
Unlike Williams, the ABC and CBS stories at least offered a brief mention of Clinton's plan to pay for her system by raising taxes on those earning more than $250,000.
In the guise of journalism, the CBS Evening News has been campaigning for universal health care funded by the federal government. An August 8 NewsBusters item, “Universal Health Care Backer's 'Moment of Truth' Championed by CBS Evening News,” recounted:
Tremendously exaggerating the number of Americans who lack access to health insurance, CBS on Wednesday night trumpeted the cause of an AFL-CIO member who denounced the United States for not providing health insurance coverage for his wife and endorsed the John Edwards plan for universal health care. Anchor Katie Couric previewed the upcoming story: “Presidential candidates hear a dramatic plea for help from one of the millions of Americans with no health insurance and no way to pay for it.” Setting up the tribute to the retiree, Couric asserted that “45 million Americans have no coverage. That includes more than 13 million between the ages of 19 and 29. Many of them don't get coverage from their jobs, and cannot afford to buy it on their own.” Of course, many can afford it and in that age range feel comfortable without insurance. In fact, 17 million of the uninsured earn more than $50,000. Removing those, plus people who are not U.S. citizens, leaves fewer than ten million chronically uninsured.
Reporter Michelle Miller began her CBS Evening News piece by championing how “every once in a while, a moment of truth breaks through a political campaign event. That happened last night when a 60-year-old retired steel worker from Union Township, Indiana, asked a question.” Viewers then saw a clip of Steve Skvara from the AFL-CIO debate shown Tuesday night on MSNBC: “Every day of my life, I sit at the kitchen table across from the woman who devoted 36 years of her life to my family, and I can't afford to pay for her health care. What's wrong with America? And what will you do to change it?” Miller explained that “Skvara says he got the answer he was looking for from his favorite candidate, John Edwards,” who proclaimed: “And we ought to have universal health care in this country!” Skvara agreed: “We need a national health care plan.” Miller wondered: “Now the question is whether a moment in a debate will be the moment that motivates reform.”
The August 1 NewsBusters posting, “CBS Hails 'Landmark' and 'Historic' Efforts to Expand Federal Control of Health,” began:
Wednesday's CBS Evening News trumpeted two liberal efforts to expand government power, leading by heralding “landmark legislation” to have the FDA regulate cigarettes followed by a story slanted in favor of, as reporter Thalia Assuras described it, an “historic expansion of health care coverage for children” of the “working poor.” Assuras, however, ignored such inconvenient facts as how a family of four with an income as high as $82,600 could get on the taxpayers' dole....Couric introduced a look at “getting medical coverage for the millions of American children who don't have it.” Assuras touted how a proposed expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) “boosts funding by $50 billion over five years, almost doubling the number of uninsured kids covered from the current six million children to about 11 million.” Sinking to the all too common media technique of exploiting a victim to push a liberal policy, Assuras cited “children like seven-year-old Pilar Edwards whose ear ache was so severe her mother brought her to this mobile medical clinic where she could get help even though Pilar is uninsured.” Assuras did pass along how critics contend “the legislation is a slippery slope toward a universal health care plan,” but against two negative soundbites, viewers heard from four advocates as Assuras concluded with a Senator's charge that “it would be a travesty if the President vetoed this legislation,” followed by these final words from Assuras: “With kids caught in the middle.” More like taxpayers.
A 2003 MRC CyberAlert item, “Dr. Tim Johnson Was a Cheerleader for HillaryCare in 1990s,” collected some of his quotes from 1993-94:
“I say the Clintons are almost heroes in my mind for finally facing up to the terrible problems we have with our current health care system and bringing it to the attention of the public....Most people, I think, will be better off.” -- ABC Medical Editor Dr. Tim Johnson, September 24, 1993 20/20.“Everyone is applauding, I think, in the health care community, the emphasis on universal access, because they know that unless they're going to let some people just die in the streets, it makes sense to get medical care early, when it's going to be more effective and less costly....the insurance companies are the focal point for the dynamics of denial that are part of our present for-profit system.” -- ABC medical editor Dr. Tim Johnson, January 26, 1994 World News Tonight.
“So at least from the physicians represented here, you get a 100 percent vote, including mine, for universal coverage.” -- ABC reporter Dr. Tim Johnson to Hillary Clinton on Good Morning America, July 19, 1994.
Transcripts of the September 17 coverage on CBS and ABC, as provided by the MRC's Brad Wilmouth, who corrected the closed-captioning against the video:
CBS Evening News:
FILL-IN ANCHOR HARRY SMITH LED: She tried to do it as first lady. Now, as a presidential candidate, she is trying again. Hillary Clinton today outlined a new plan for making sure every American has health insurance. It's a huge problem. An estimated 47 million are not covered. In fact, in a CBS News poll out tonight, respondents told us it is the biggest problem facing the country after the war in Iraq and the economy. Tonight, Jim Axelrod on how President Hillary Clinton would solve it.
After summarizing the plan, Jim Axelrod segued to critics of it:
...Senator Clinton doesn't remind reminding people of her past painful experience in health care reform. That's because, for all the scars that it may have caused, she's benefitting now -- that is, if you believe the polls. In the latest CBS News poll, 66 percent of registered voters say her health care experience will help her. It's even higher with Democratic primary voters...
ABC's World News:
CHARLES GIBSON: We start with Senator Clinton, now trying to get to the White House by promising to do something she couldn't do when she was in the White House -- come up with a plan to provide health care for all Americans that would be accepted by Congress. She says it can be done for $110 billion a year, and she'll pay for it by eliminating some of President Bush's tax cuts. ABC's David Wright joins me tonight from Washington. David?
Following Wright's look at the plan, a story which ended with Mitt Romney calling it “socialist,” Charles Gibson turned to Dr. Tim Johnson:
And our medical editor, Dr. Tim Johnson, joins me now. Tim, David reported on an interesting irony there. They've essentially adapted the plan in Massachusetts initiated by then-Republican Governor Mitt Romney. And yet, Romney says, no, this is socialized medicine. Is that fair?TIM JOHNSON: I don't think it is fair. They're obviously using that word to scare people, but, in fact, the government programs that Hillary will offer, including Medicare and the federal employees program, have a lot of private choice. Medicare patients can choose any doctor or hospital they want, the federal employees choose from a long list of private plans that the government has vetted for cost and quality. I don't think any Republican would run on a platform saying they want to take Medicare away from seniors or the federal employees plan away from employees, including Congress, just because the government plays an important role.
GIBSON: But, Tim, at the same time, she -- and David played the cut -- she says this is not government-run. And, as you pointed out, to be perfectly frank, it would expand a couple of, major, in major ways, expand a couple of federal programs.
JOHNSON: Well, I think it's fair to say it's not government-run, but certainly the government is involved. And, in fact, every industrialized country in this world that is successful with health care -- often more successful than we are -- has a partnership between government and the private sector. And that's what I think we have to have in this case. As I said, the government has a role in providing guidelines, maybe regulations, but leaving free choice. That's the key, I think, to the partnership.
GIBSON: In just in about ten seconds, is she inevitably tainted by the fact that she tried to work on this issue in 1993 and failed?
JOHNSON: I don't think inevitably. She's obviously being much more open about the process now than she was back then. I think that will pay off.
—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center





Tremendously exaggerating the number of Americans who lack access to health insurance, CBS on Wednesday night trumpeted the cause of an AFL-CIO member who denounced the United States for not providing health insurance coverage for his wife and endorsed the John Edwards plan for universal health care. Anchor Katie Couric previewed the upcoming story: “Presidential candidates hear a dramatic plea for help from one of the millions of Americans with no health insurance and no way to pay for it.” Setting up the tribute to the retiree, Couric asserted that “45 million Americans have no coverage. That includes more than 13 million between the ages of 19 and 29. Many of them don't get coverage from their jobs, and cannot afford to buy it on their own.” Of course, many can afford it and in that age range feel comfortable without insurance. In fact, 17 million of the uninsured earn more than $50,000. Removing those, plus people who are not U.S. citizens, leaves fewer than ten million chronically uninsured.
CHARLES GIBSON: We start with Senator Clinton, now trying to get to the White House by promising to do something she couldn't do when she was in the White House -- come up with a plan to provide health care for all Americans that would be accepted by Congress. She says it can be done for $110 billion a year, and she'll pay for it by eliminating some of President Bush's tax cuts. ABC's David Wright joins me tonight from Washington. David?
JOHNSON: Well, I think it's fair to say it's not government-run, but certainly the government is involved. And, in fact, every industrialized country in this world that is successful with health care -- often more successful than we are -- has a partnership between government and the private sector. And that's what I think we have to have in this case. As I said, the government has a role in providing guidelines, maybe regulations, but leaving free choice. That's the key, I think, to the partnership.









Editor at Large

Comments Policy
Raise taxes - check Limit
September 17, 2007 - 21:58 ET by Free ThinkerRaise taxes - check
Limit freedom - check
Increase cost of health care - check
Expand government buraucracy - check
Un-named countries where this idea actaully works - check
Willing media to present story with no scrutiny - check
I can't wait for this to be exposed in a general election debate.
Current American Health Care system is stuffed.
September 18, 2007 - 05:06 ET by ruckroverYour system of health care in the USA is stuffed, of course it needs changing.
Here in Australia we have universal health coverage.
If you want private personalised treatment in hospital you join a private health fund. Private Health funds here are way way cheaper than in the USA. We pay around US$270 per month for a family of 6.
They will pay private inpatient bills and operations and around half of allied health stuff like physio, optometry, podiatry, dentistry etc etc.
If you need an urgent operation or urgent treatment in hospital you get it totally free at a public hospital under Medicare - which all Australian citizens and permanent residents have as a right.
If you go to your family physician or to any specialist doctor for outpatient treatment it is covered to around 80% of the fee by Medicare. Many doctors will just take the 80% because if they do it that way the govt makes sure they get the money quickly. Some doctors will charge higher, but they are in a competitive market that caps that to some extent. If they bill you, you take your receipt and get your 80% refund from Medicare. This service has recently extended to psychologists for counselling sessions as long as you have a family physician referral.
For Medicare we pay a 1.5% income tax levy. More of our taxes do go to pay the system...but as a percentage of GDP Australian spending on health care is a long way below the USA. And we don't have millions of people uninsured. There is a great sense of communal security in this system, everyone knows they will get free health care in a dire emergency.
The rest of the developed world has varying forms of this - Europe and Canada etc. Cuba and many developing nations have similar though less technologically advanced systems.
The USA stands pretty much alone because your system sucks huge amounts of money out to shareholders of the private insurers who essentially grow rich on the suffering of others, because the incentive is to undertreat in order to have more money left over for the shareholders.
If you want to have such a cruel and miserable system for ideological right wing free market reasons - then you're welcome to it - just don't try and export it!
Figures from Australian govt statistics for 2002 (since then American health care costs have soared faster):
In Australia in 2002, total health expenditure as a proportion of GDP (9.3%) was the ninth highest in the OECD. It was higher than the average for all OECD countries (8.5%) and slightly below the average for the ten OECD countries with similar socio-economic structures, health systems and standards of living. The United States, with 14.6% of GDP spent on health was the highest spending country.
In 2006 according to the Washington Post USA health care was 16% of GDP and is expected to hit 20% of GDP in 2015.
Hilary Clinton is right - you better do some kind of complete overhaul of your system before it sucks your economy into a bedpan.
I'm not saying our system is
September 18, 2007 - 08:29 ET by Free ThinkerI'm not saying our system is right, but there are better ways to fix it than involve a huge government buraucracy that requires everyone to participate. We have the best healthcare in the world and the model, as bad as, it is is still better than those you mentioned in Europe and Canada and Cuba. You mentioned that a trip to the hospital is totally free for you, well, guess what it is not free. You pay for that through inferior medical care and higher taxes. I would like to see more Americans move to health savings accounts. Let consumers have choices and make decisions based on competition.
Ruckrover: You failed to
September 18, 2007 - 11:02 ET by stratmanRuckrover:
You failed to give the source for your cut and paste post, and, you compared Australian facts/figures from 2002 with USA 2006 numbers which is deceptive. You also forgot to post the paragraph that follows your 2002 facts for Australian health care expenditures:
It would seem that those that can do purchase private health insurance in droves in Australia, begging the question of overall quality and/or expediency of "free" health care delivery in Australia. Additionally, the hidden cost of health care, one you did not discuss, is found in the out-of-pocket expenditure, and is greater than that for Americans.
You have been indoctrinated into your system and I into mine. You accept higher taxation and I do not. Let's keep it that way, mate.
BTW, open up your border/immigration policy like America and see what happens to your "free" health care. We're not comparing apples to apples my friend. Ditto goes for WHO health care statistics that Michael Moore, Europeans and Communists like to quote.
Killing them with kindness isn't working. Time to get scrappy with the Donkeys.
I am so weary of this woman.
September 18, 2007 - 06:35 ET by motherbeltI am so weary of this woman. The entire media are her serfs. If they had their way, we would just skip the election and crown her President for Life. If she is elected, I will have to just turn my TV off for the duration. They can't help slobbering all over her now...what will they be like if she is elected?
Charles Gibson: She says it can be done for $110 billion a year, and she'll pay for it by eliminating some of President Bush's tax cuts...
I don't suppose it occurred to Gibson to question that price tag, or to wonder what will happen when, inevitably, costs increase. Heaven forbid they should do their job and hold politicians (at least this one) accountable! They're just so happy to be in Hillaryland!!
For the Children
September 17, 2007 - 22:08 ET by WoodyMHillary Clinton, the mass media, and AARP agree on socialized medicine. What's to worry?
Does Chuckie Gibson
September 17, 2007 - 22:11 ET by Trix RabbitDoes Chuckie Gibson honestly want me to take at face value the pedestrian prattling from a "doctor" like Timmy Johnson who is nothing more than a:
A) Shill for socialism
B) Hustler for Hitlery Rotten Clintoon
C) 1974 med school graduate (208 out of 210) of the Universidad de Guadalajara.
Liberal: a power worshipper without power. George Orwell
Trix,
September 17, 2007 - 22:25 ET by BlondeC) 1974 med school graduate (208 out of 210) of the Universidad de Guadalajara.
That's evil. I knew there was a reason I liked you!
Woo hoo....blow them out of the water.
Sheesh....laughing!
Great post.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Thanks, Blonde. And yes,
September 17, 2007 - 22:34 ET by Trix RabbitThanks, Blonde. And yes, sometimes I do have my odd moments...
Liberal: a power worshipper without power. George Orwell
To be fair about
September 18, 2007 - 11:37 ET by stratmanFunny line about Guadalajara. I know a couple of people that went there for medical school. I've always wondered how these schools get cadavers for anatomy class. A friend who was in school in Grenada (during the US military action against Cuban infiltration) said that you bought your own from a "vendor" on the island. The guy's shack/house would have bones bleaching in the sun on the roof.
To be fair about Johnson:
One thing's for sure, with his life history, Johnson knows how to manipulate individuals and groups. While maybe not malevolent, one just doesn't get to the heights of career as Johnson has without utilizing psychology to smooth the way.
I like the guy and most of what he has said on TV that I have seen. I do not agree with him on this report. Knowing some of his life history puts his words into perspective, but I still don't agree with his socialist bent.
Killing them with kindness isn't working. Time to get scrappy with the Donkeys.
CBS
September 17, 2007 - 22:20 ET by Del DolemonteCBS = Clinton Broadcasting System.
Let's face reality-Hilly could be caught red-handed on video in some cheap dive dressed up in a Nazi leather dominatrix outfit with Janet Reno on the bed underneath her and her whip, and the "objective" media wouldn't report it. My guess is that some of those famous 900 FBI files included media members. They're scared shitless.
I once asked a Clinton supporter this: "what if you witnessed Bill Clinton breaking into your home and raping your kid sister?"
He replied: "It would depend on the forensic evidence".
Del, I think you're
September 18, 2007 - 06:41 ET by motherbeltDel, I think you're kidding. (Well, maybe not).
I know Bill isn't the subject this time, but back in the Lewinsky days, I caught a lady calling in on C-Span raving about how everyone should just leave Bill Clinton alone, it's nobody's business, it's his personal life, he's wonderful President! etc. Brian Lamb, the host, asked her is there anything, anything at all that this president could do that would make you say "Enough!" And she got mad and said "NO!!!"
That Klinton Kool-Aid was some powerful stuff.
On running to The Nanny at every damned turn
September 17, 2007 - 22:28 ET by UnsaneThe perfect example of killing a fly with a Minuteman missile. Instead of nationalizing an industry and strangling the goose that lays countless golden eggs, why not find different approaches?
Surely, some of those news-readers, who get paid millions to READ (not to go class-warfare on everyone, but rather to demonstrate how America as a whole has changed for the worse), could set aside a few bucks and set up a charitable organization that helps those who truly have no easy access to a doctor? Yes, I know that you can get stabilized at any ER in America at no charge, but bear with me here...why must every damned problem be solved by The Big Nanny in Washington, instead of by the men and women in the mirror?
Our health care system is not perfect, but with a few tweaks (a charitable organization such as the one alluded to above, labor unions teaming up with industry to set up health care organizations instead of handing over their union dues to political parties, people NOT using health insurance EXCEPT for catastrophes and otherwise using MSAs, for a few examples) we could make it even more the envy of the world.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
"Smith led the CBS Evening
September 17, 2007 - 22:37 ET by HumanEvents"Smith led the CBS Evening News: 'She tried to do it as First Lady. Now, as a presidential candidate, she is trying again.' " She's not the only one trying. You extremely liberal biased msm "reporters" are trying hard to dupe the country into embracing Clinton Care.
What in the world was someone like the Dragon Lady doing in charge of a "health care" plan for anyway? She was First Lady only. Not an elected position to anything ever. And never any experience or job in the health care field. Imagine if George Bush had appointed Laura to such a thing. Then suddenly the libs and dims and msm would have a problem with the total lack of qualifications. But now Hillary is shamelessly and ludicrously using her 1993-1994 "task force" role as supposedly qualifying her now with experience! Uhhh a bogus position hardly counts as legitimate experience. It'd be like if I had been given a job on tv in 1993 hosting my own cooking show even though I never knew how to cook anything as simple as hamburger helper or stove top stuffing. And then on the basis of that "experience" claim here in 2007 that I am qualified to have my own cooking show again.
How wonderful. We'll all have health insurance. No matter if we have to wait months, years, or even forever to actually get health care. At least we'll be "covered"! We'll all get to wave the Great Stainmaker's "Health Security Card" around in the air and know that it can never be taken away! Wow!
Isn't it always interesting, too, how Bill Clinton and Hillary Rodham (please don't play her game by calling her Hillary Clinton. she only went to that name in 1992 so it would look like they had a real marriage instead of the farce it has always been) always want to force everybody to buy health insurance? What about those who don't want insurance? Why make Rush Limbaugh, Oprah Winfrey, Howard Stern, and other wealthy people get a Clinton Care health plan when they can easily pay for all their own medical expenses out of pocket? Why make young healthy individuals who don't wish to pay for insurance do it? How come Bill and Hill never say, "For those who want health care insurance and can't afford it, we want to devise a plan to help such individuals."
Because they are socialists and want the government (with them in chief power) to run all of our lives.
Funny also (no, actually it's disgusting) how these evening "news" networks don't care about still more Clinton and Rodham fundraising scandals. If it was a Republican with a health plan they would undoubtedly be asking questions like, "In view of the recent illegal fundraising, does that hurt the chances of the new health care proposal being accepted as trustworthy in the minds of the American people?"
The media (especially 60 Minutes in October 1992) got the Great Stainmaker elected in 1992. They will do all they can to do the same for the Dragon Lady in 2008.
Reporter Jim Axelrod
September 17, 2007 - 23:24 ET by Conservative_in_mass.Reporter Jim Axelrod asserted “Clinton doesn't remind reminding people of her past painful experience in health care reform” because “in the latest CBS News poll, 66 percent of registered voters say her health care experience will help her.”
The first part; "remind reminding people", to quote the Gieco caveman; "uuhhh, what?" If you do find a "reminding" person out there, please remind them of this proposal.
As for the 66% who say that Hillary's health care experience will help, I'm absolutely 100% certain this poll of "registered voters" was not skewered by questioning more "registered democrats" than republicans. Right.
Health care experience? I though she was a lawyer? Oh I forgot, she followed a nurse around for a day a few weeks back. Ok, that qualifies her, she is the smartest woman in the world after all.
Finally, let's not leave out the class warfare component; were only going to stick it to those with a gross income of 250k and up. If this were to ever become law, how long would it take for that number to drop to say 75k a year?
This liar has a whole sideline full of media cheerleaders pulling for her.
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese. ~ Unknown
Suggestion on Hillary Care
September 18, 2007 - 02:27 ET by well99Since ABC and CBS are so much behind it.They can pick up the tab.Add Moore and his celeb buddies to the list of donors.Dont forget Hilliary and the Dems they can fork out some money too.This way no new taxes.
Her system would have the
September 18, 2007 - 23:51 ET by cupera1Her system would have the speed of the local DMV office, the efficiency of the department of Agriculture, the cost containment of the US Congress, the compassion of the IRS. I can hardly wait
cupera...post of the week
September 18, 2007 - 23:59 ET by BlondeHer system would have the speed of the local DMV office, the efficiency of the department of Agriculture, the cost containment of the US Congress, the compassion of the IRS.
That is about the most succinct summary of HRC's entire plan I think I've ever read.
You ought to e-mail it off to Fred, and all of the rest of our candidates.
Perfect.
My vote for post of the week.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
}}---> I second that Blonde
September 19, 2007 - 00:15 ET by Cool Arrowcupera tied that bundle perfectly
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
Yep, Cool
September 19, 2007 - 00:19 ET by BlondeSome things are just perfect.
cupera's post.
Night...I'm out.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive