2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: The Clinton Administration OPPOSED SCHIP. People here are trying to re-spin the history of SCHIP. [View all]Baobab
(4,667 posts)and he wanted a minimal program which if signed into law then would likely be able to continue in minimal form for awhile despite the GATS already having been signed and largely prohibiting it, the elimination of it would likely have to wait until an "injured arty" petitioned the WTO after health insurance became world trade. The US has been trying to make it world trade continuously all this time but as far as I know countries want to be able to sell one policy for the whole country, not 50 policies for 50 states.
See this document >>> http://www.citizen.org/documents/usa.pdf
under financial services, do you see "NAIC Model Rule"?
Thats what they want. One policy thats the same for the whole country. Once that happens all public programs are likely to be toast and instead we'll get things like foreign health providers that will ship patients elsewhere for care if they have less expensive insurance. Also, the skilled trades will be globalized and massively subcontracted, nursing, teaching, IT, construction. Anything which uses public/tax money. etc. Which will depress wages a lot and make any future New Deal type stimulus impossible.
See
This aspect of the services liberalisation agenda is only now beginning to be recognized by the economics community, believe it or not they didn't know about it. The US economics community by and large were kept in the dark. Which makes me think that the trade agenda being pushed on us in these secret deals is going to be a real nightmare of unintended consequences.
That's pretty depressing.
Here is another global explanation:
The Wrong Model: GATS, Trade Liberalisation and Childrens Right to Health
http://www.iatp.org/files/Wrong_Model_GATS_Trade_Liberalisation_and_Chil.htm