No mandate makes universal claim tough

Barack Obama responded to an attack on his health care plan from Hillary Clinton by saying, "I do provide universal health care. The only difference between Senator Clinton's health care plan and mine is that she thinks the problem for people without health care is that nobody has mandated -- forced -- them to get health care."

The distinction between the two plan's is that Clinton's has a mandate requiring people to get health insurance; Obama's does not. Is it fair to say a plan is universal without a mandate?

There's little doubt that Obama's plan would significantly expand health care coverage. In its structure, it's not that different from Clinton's: Both leave in place employer-based private insurance; they increase access to Medicaid and SCHIP programsl they subsidize premiums for some employers; and they create pools for individuals to buy their own cheaper insurance.

But universal? Obama's plan "would get close to universal coverage," said Sara Collins, a health care expert with The Commonwealth Fund. "It's clear his goal is universal coverage," she said, noting that Obama's plan includes a mandate for children.

Featured Fact-check

Instagram posts

stated on October 10, 2024 in a post

“Univision accidentally shows that Kamala Harris is reading from a teleprompter live on air.”

"But I think to get all people covered, he would have to mandate that adults get it, too."

We think Obama is pushing the envelope calling a plan without a mandate "universal." For that reason, we rate his claim Barely True.