John Edwards' Bastardized 'Universal Health Care' Proposal

John Edwards' health care proposal is basically the same as the one Sen. Clinton has adopted... require everyone to carry health insurance and offer federal subsidies to help reduce the cost of coverage. At the time of Clinton's proposal, I asked the obvious question... how do you could actually enforce such a mandate?

Edwards has given his answer and it's a doozy-

Under the Edwards plan, when Americans file their income taxes, they would be required to submit a letter from an insurance provider confirming coverage for themselves and their dependents.

If someone did not submit proof of coverage, the Internal Revenue Service would notify a newly established regional or state-based health-care agency [which] would enroll the individual into the lowest cost health-care plan available in that area....The newly covered individual would not only have access to health benefits but would also be responsible for making monthly payments with the help of a tax credit.

....If a person did not meet his or her monthly financial obligation for a set period of time (perhaps a year, perhaps longer) the Edwards plan would empower the federal government to garnish an individual's wages for purposes of collecting "back premiums with interest and collection costs."

As an LOL Cat would say, "NO WANT!!!". Having to prove private insurance ownership when filing tax returns? Then having the IRS treat objectors (or those who made the decision to opt out) like deadbeats and garnishing their wages? This plan couldn't be any worse if it tried.

Fair warning- This is what you're getting when you vote for John Edwards or Hillary Clinton.

Look, we all know the political system is too corrupt (and the insurance business too bloated and powerful) to create a U.K.-style national health care system overnight, but then just have the courage to admit that. Us dirty liberals won't bite, we swears. These publicly-subsidized private insurance 'compromises' are anything but, and everyone knows it. In fact, I would argue that they are actually worse than the status quo, if done in the way Edwards proposes (if there's a better way of going about it, I am all ears).

We know what 'universal health care' is. This isn't it. As Tim F. at Balloon Juice argues, if you're going to propose a plan that will piss people off (and the Edwards plan will piss everyone off), then just have the guts to go for a single-payer, national system. "We might as well make it a fight worth winning," he says, and I concur.

[UPDATE: Matthew Yglesias also has a good post on this mandate debate.]