Could a Democrat other than Senator Clinton own the health care issue in 2008?

Several of Mrs. Clinton’s rivals for the party’s presidential nomination seem to think they could wrest her title as the Democrats’ standard-bearer on health care reform.

Senator Kerry of Massachusetts, who was the party’s unsuccessful presidential nominee in 2004 and is considering another bid for the White House in 2008, has booked Faneuil Hall in Boston for a speech this afternoon detailing a health care plan that “works for everybody.”

Last week, as Mrs. Clinton rolled out an “American Dream” domestic policy initiative light on new health care proposals, Senator Feingold of Wisconsin, another likely 2008 hopeful, announced legislation offering federal funding for state-implemented universal health care plans.

A vice presidential candidate in 2004 exploring a presidential run for 2008, Senator Edwards of North Carolina, has sharpened his health care rhetoric in recent weeks, accusing unnamed politicians of manipulating voters by offering incremental changes.

A health policy specialist at Harvard, Robert Blendon, said Mrs.Clinton cannot go into the 2008 campaign without a health care program at least as far-reaching as those of her opponents. “She can’t have the plan that is more anemic than every other major Democratic candidate,” Mr. Blendon said.

Mrs. Clinton’s name is still synonymous with President Clinton’s universal health care initiative from the early 1990s, dubbed “Hillarycare” by some of her critics. One of the trickiest challenges she faces in her potential presidential bid is crafting a health care agenda that avoids some of the earlier criticism about a huge government bureaucracy but is still bold enough to avoid claims that she is retreating.

“She has to have a large plan, but will take more heat for it than all of the others,” Mr. Blendon said.

Mrs. Clinton’s latest salvo, the “American Dream” agenda released last week under the auspices of the Democratic Leadership Council, contained new proposals for education, homeownership, and retirement tax credits, but essentially recycled health care initiatives the senator has previously endorsed. She called for digitizing medical records to reduce errors, creating insurance pools for small businesses, and establishing universal health care for children.

Mr. Blendon called her current plan a “holding place” aimed at riding out the 2006 election without stirring up her critics. “There’s no one on the side of medical errors,” he quipped.

Mr. Blendon warned that an overly cautious strategy by Mrs. Clinton could hurt her with Democratic primary voters.”Her danger is if she takes an issue that intellectually and philosophically she has invested so much of her life in and allows others to take a larger stand, some activist voters may say, ‘Her strategy really bothers me,'” he said. “Her risk is whether Democratic activists who may be angry about the war somehow wonder whether this is another example of how principle gets lost.”

A spokesman for Mrs. Clinton declined to comment for this article.

While Mrs. Clinton has gone out of her way to build bridges on the health care issue with conservatives such as Senate Majority Leader Frist and a former House speaker, Newt Gingrich, Mr. Edwards has been issuing warnings about feel-good half-measures.

“I’m not talking about some weasel word or wiggle word, you know, ‘We’re going to give them access to health care. We’re going to try to reduce health care costs,'” Mr. Edwards said in a speech last month in Washington. “I’m talking about every American having health care coverage.”

In her policy speech last week, Mrs. Clinton pledged fealty to the ideal of universal health insurance. “We need a new direction in health care. Coming from me that is no surprise,” she said. “I still believe in universal coverage. … We need action from Washington to stop the spiral of health care costs and offer every family the chance to give their children a healthy start on their dreams.”

One unusual dynamic that all of the Democratic contenders in 2008 will face is the presence in the Republican field of Governor Romney of Massachusetts. His state recently passed legislation designed to lead to universal coverage by requiring individuals to buy medical insurance.

“I think he really has raised the bar for the Democratic candidates,” Mr. Blendon, the Harvard scholar, said.

The legislative proposal from Mr. Feingold, who may be the most liberal of the likely presidential contenders, “basically endorses” Mr. Romney’s effort, a political analyst, Chuck Todd, noted yesterday. Mr. Todd, who edits a political newsletter, the Hotline, said Democratic voters may be willing to trust Mrs. Clinton even without a detailed plan. “It’s what defines her with voters,” he said. “I don’t think anybody thinks she wouldn’t tackle health care again if she got in there.”