A few days later, Bill Clinton vigorously defended his wife's responses, saying that Russert's question was "breathtakingly misleading" and that "Newsweek"'s article was off the mark, saying, "She was incidental to the letter, it was done five years ago, it was a letter to speed up presidential releases, not to slow them down." Factcheck.org subsequently concluded that Russert's claim was incorrect, that Bill Clinton had released White House records earlier and in greater numbers than his two immediate predecessors, and that there was not much Hillary Clinton could do to speed up the release of records involving her. However, on March 6, 2008, Federal archivists at the Clinton Presidential Library blocked the release of hundreds of pages of White House papers on pardons that the former president approved, including clemency for fugitive commodities trader Marc Rich, based on guidance provided by Bill Clinton. An August 12, 2007, article described concerns that a Clinton candidacy could lead to a backlash due to fears that she might prove "polarizing." The article states, "A strategist with close ties to leaders in Congress said Democratic Senate candidates in competitive races would be strongly urged to distance themselves from Clinton." According to an online poll, "half of likely voters nationwide said they would never vote for New York Sen. Hillary Clinton." An October 10, 2007, article in "The Hill" made the opposite argument stating that Clinton was "not polarizing and highly electable. You didn't misread that headline. It is contrary to all current conventional wisdom. It is also true – supported not only by recent national polling data but by most polls all year long. Susan Estrich, on p.66 of her 2005 book, "The Case for Hillary Clinton" argues, "Hillary Clinton is not polarizing; her competence is accepted." On September 17, 2007, Clinton revealed her new American Health Choices Plan, an "individual mandate" universal health care plan that would require health care coverage for all individuals. Clinton explained individuals can keep their current employer-based coverage, or choose an expanded version of Medicare or federal employee health plans. The projected cost of the plan is $110 billion annually and will require all employers to cover their employees' health insurance or contribute to the costs of their employees' health insurance coverage; tax credits will be provided to companies with fewer than 25 employees to help cover costs. She proposed to pay for the plan by cutting government medical costs and by not extending the Bush tax cuts to those making over $250,000 a year.