Hillary Clinton: Healthcare Reform debacle (1993)

From iGeek
Jump to: navigation, search

When Bill Clinton was president he gave his wife some make-work projects to help with, to consistently disastrous results. The first was "Hillarycare". There's debate whether she was just doing Bill's bidding (and offering him cover), or she was the great negotiator she pretended, but it was a disaster. It also was clear what her motives and mode of operation was: secret negotiations to make government bigger, crony kickbacks, and a shrill reaction at other people's shrill reaction at being dictated to and cut out of the loop. A foretelling pattern?

Hillary took authority over health care reform:

  1. she started secret closed meetings -- that polarized the public and industry against her
  2. She threatened to "demonize" anyone that was resisting these efforts
  3. Despite a democratic controlled congress, she couldn't their own party to bring anything she suggested up to a vote
  4. Even Mitchell's compromise bill effort (unifying all the efforts the democrats had fragmented into) couldn't get a majority, let alone a filibuster proof one

This fiasco cost the American taxpayers about $13 million in cost for studies, promotion, and other efforts, and made healthcare reform a 3rd rail of politics for 15 years. And there was litigation around Hillary's violations of the openness in government laws. And it as such a disaster that it contributed to the Republicans taking over the house in 1994.

Hillary Clinton: Two Face

Because of this issue, "It takes a village", "Healthcare Reform debacle" and other "scandals" where when people found out how Hillary truly thought or did business, the public didn't like her. Hillary learned from that to be more duplicitous (hide her true beliefs from the voters), to quote:

❝ If everybody’s watching, you know, all of the backroom discussions and the deals, you know, then people get a little nervous, to say the least. So you need both a public and a private position. ❞

That two-faced aspect of her persona, lead to more distrust by the informed. Those who payed attention KNEW she was lying to them, or at least concealing her true beliefs. And they also knew she was far more left wing than the skin of a moderate she wore like a cheap pantsuit, because whenever she slipped and let out who she was, it wasn't every more centrist than people thought. more...


  • Snopes doesn't touch the boondoggle.
  • Politifact only touches it with regards to a claims that Hillarycare would have protected religious liberties and thus HobbyLobby case wouldn't have had to go against it. They hemmed and hawed and said the original proposal would have had the same problem, but there were so many bills and conditions required to get it passed, that we really don't know what it would have had in it. It never got enough support to reach critical mass. So fact checking something that never happened is a weird position.
  • Factcheck only checks a claim Hillary made against Bernie Sanders -- he'd proposed a bill counter to hers (his was universal coverage, hers was more like the ACA). They said Hillary lied by implying Sanders wasn't working on healthcare in 1993, the cynical might assume that's just them spinning the most favorable light on the biggest liberal in the room (and Sanders is to the left of Hillary).


📚 References

Issues:   2nd Amendment - Hillarycare - It takes a Village - SecState

Ethics:   Alinsky - Watergate - Whitewater - Troopergate - IRS-gate - Filegate - Associates - Huma & Weinergate - Bill - Chelsea - Pardongate - Vandals - Benghazi - Emailgate - Liar

Greed:   Cattlegate - Travelgate - Chinagate - Lincolngate - Lootergate (2001) - Lootergate (2012) - Giftgate - Clinton Foundation

Gasslighting:   Go-Away - Rape Victim - Bimbo squad - Birthers - Russian Hackers - Nuclear Response Time - Quotes