 |
 |
   Memo: The way forward on health care reform in 2010.
 A dark legacy of the Vietnam War is creating a whole new set of problems.
|
   |
|
|
November 1, 2009
WE DON'T NEED A COMMISSION.... Policymakers should be focusing on economic growth, not deficit reduction. Some "centrists" haven't gotten the message.
First, there's no evidence to suggest there is "anxiety in financial markets" about the U.S. budget deficit. The opposite appears to be true. Second, Evan Bayh recently voted to "reform" the estate tax, cutting taxes for the extraordinarily rich, at a cost of $750 billion over the next decade. To pay for it, he recommended ... nothing. The costs would simply all be added to the deficit. I hope he'll forgive my skepticism about his credibility on the subject of fiscal responsibility. What's more, this notion that both parties are to blame -- Dems want to spend too much, Republicans want to cut taxes too much -- may feed into conventional wisdom, but it's both lazy and wrong. Republicans decided to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, didn't even try to pay for it, and added the costs to the deficit. Republicans did the same thing boosting Medicare spending, adding all of the costs for Part D to the deficit, and with No Child Left Behind, adding all of the costs to the deficit. GOP policymakers took the largest surplus ever and created the largest deficit ever. I know everyone is always supposed to believe at all times that "both sides are equally to blame," but reality should have some relevance here. Nevertheless, less than a year into President Obama's first year, 10 members of the Senate Democratic caucus are looking to force the issue. It's not enough that the president's budget proposals already project deficit reductions, and it's not enough that health care reform would also reduce the deficit if it passes. These 10 want a "commission," along the lines of the commission to close military bases, which would apparently be tasked with cutting Medicare and Medicaid. What's more, they may use the upcoming vote on raising the debt ceiling as a way to force a commitment on the issue. Sigh. —Steve Benen 9:05 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (16)Comments
Sigh. Same as it ever was. The kabuki dance continues, with no one willing to 'upset other members' of the Senatorial club by calling out those who would support maintaining the status quo, and actually do something about it. So they'll talk about this (and any other subjects of import, really) to appear "intensely focused" on the "issue" and will walk away with Nothing Accomplished (TM) other than to reinforce the fact that they are the people's representatives only in title, but alas not in action. Posted by: terraformer on November 1, 2009 at 9:11 AM | PERMALINKI find the current health care plan weak and not really what "Health Care Reform" was originally all about. I don't know why Obama has elected to watch rather than lead the battle, it is indeed his battle to fight more than any other. Maybe it is better to just bring the single-payer system to a vote and if it fails - Democrats can use the 2010 elections to clean out the Senate and the House of all the people that voted against it. Nobody ever wanted this to be a giveaway to special interests and the insurance industry. Posted by: Dean on November 1, 2009 at 9:35 AM | PERMALINKI agree. Focus on economic growth, not deficit reduction. That's what Ronald Reagan did. Posted by: Al on November 1, 2009 at 9:41 AM | PERMALINKSenator Bayh, one for whom the moniker DINO aptly describes, in a state where the Democratic Party is DPINO (Democratic Party in name only), stands in an increasingly longer line behind the likes of Senator Liebermann. His advocacy of tax breaks for the rich, and his prevaricating waffling about "healthcare reform" is, to say the least, a disgrace. Please tell me, anyone, why a person who consistently votes on the other side of the aisle on both domestic and foreign policy issues should be supported in any way by the national party? Despite being a resident of California, I am well aware of the politics in the State of Indiana (I lived there for 3o years). It is this part of the political process that chaps my hide: where a man in office asks his constituents to bow to "realities" because of his own underhanded compromises and concessions (not to mention outright corrupted behavior--re: his wife's connection to the healthcare industry). And to think I (once) voted for his father... Posted by: Chris C on November 1, 2009 at 9:42 AM | PERMALINK"Nobody ever wanted this to be a giveaway to special interests and the insurance industry." Are you sure about that, Dean. Bayh's wife is Wellpoint. Disgusting Joe Lieberman's wife was hired a year ago as a health care lobbyist. The giveaway is well underway. Disgusting Joe Lieberman's wife was hired a year ago as a health care lobbyist Actually, she's been lobbying for and/or sitting on boards of insurance, HC and pharma companies for almost 25 years. Posted by: shortstop on November 1, 2009 at 9:46 AM | PERMALINKGOP policymakers took the largest surplus ever and created the largest deficit ever. republicans always keep their eye on the ball - the goal is simple: make sure social security goes broke as soon as possible so they can gut the program. Ergo, trump up things to spend money on way beyond tax receipts so every year the social security trust fund receipts go to cover current expenditures. And because the unnecessary expenditures go to republican cronies, its a double bang for the plutocrats. Posted by: pluege on November 1, 2009 at 9:58 AM | PERMALINKEverybody's for deficit reduction until they find out what it takes to do it. Ask every one of these fraud Democrats which taxes they plan on raising and what spending they plan on cutting. Their answers will be illuminating -- by that I mean they'll be the Washington equivalent of Ralph Kramden's huminah-huminah-huminah. Posted by: JMG on November 1, 2009 at 10:03 AM | PERMALINK"deficit reduction" is the air force in the corporations' war aginst human beings in this country. they round up their thugs and puppets in Congress and load them up with moralistic propaganda that is absolutely ridiculous economics and start dropping the 'deficit' bombs all over the place on yer teevee and in yer Congress. Pretty cool trick: they hollow out the entire economy of the country, hoard all the wealth, and then offer the strict painful necessities of life to the humans and the institutions they just robbed... these monsters deserve to be in prison. Posted by: neill on November 1, 2009 at 10:08 AM | PERMALINKwell josh, i'm not sure what yer story is about, but there aint nothing secret about seizing assets of the "mentally impaired" -- that's the definition of capitalism these days. Posted by: neill on November 1, 2009 at 10:13 AM | PERMALINKSigh? No Steve, This goes to the following quote about Grayson. It is good you document the hypocrisy of Bayh, but stronger words need to be used to call out and highlight the incoherence of self proclaimed centrists. Their policy proposals are a joke and they should be looked at as a joke. Respect for the office but no respect for them. They need to be discredited at every opportunity. Posted by: AJS on November 1, 2009 at 10:30 AM | PERMALINKIf these guys ever introduce their deficit-reducing commission proposal, I hope that someone promptly introduces an amendment to name it the Herbert Hoover Commission. Ur sayin' it wrong. It's not economic growth they should be focusing on, it's full employment. Big difference. Posted by: Bil on November 1, 2009 at 11:14 AM | PERMALINKwe must continue to appease the corporatists or they won't allow even our little, pathetic incremental improvements to get thru the senate Posted by: sue on November 1, 2009 at 11:20 AM | PERMALINKSure there is anxiety in the financial markets about the size of out national debt...why do you think the dollar is at an all-time low? Doesn't make a difference how well your domestic financial markets are doing if you get reamed everytime you try to spend your currency outside your own country.
This isn't some random commission. If you read the article it is clear that this is the Conrad-Gregg commission plan. "The Budget Committee will hold hearings in mid-November on the Conrad-Gregg proposal and other ideas from lawmakers and budget analysts for attacking deficits that are the largest since the end of World War II." Given that Conrad is Chairman and Gregg is Ranking Member you can bet C-G will be the end product out of Committee. Conrad-Gregg presents itself as 'bi-partisan' but really isn't at all. Under C-G the Commission will be composed of 8 Republicans and 8 Democrats. But two of the latter have to be from the Administration. Meaning only six Congressional Dems of whom Conrad and Cooper (author of the largely parallel Cooper-Wolf proposal) are locks. Approval of the proposal requires 12 votes but if we assume that 8 Reps plus Conrad and Cooper are locks then the 'reformers' are starting from 10 votes. Meaning if they get buy-in from the two Admin Reps Reid and Pelosi are locked into a bill that allows only an up or down vote with no input from the committees and no amendments. The whole thing is a sham, just an institutionalization of Baucus's attempts to do much the same thing with the Gang of Six, lock out progressives and insist that a Center-Right-Far Right 'bi-partisan' proposal is all or nothing. Where nothing will be presented as just being in denial. If you read the actual documents put out by Conrad and Gregg pushing C-G you see nothing about raising taxes or cutting defense spending or any other means of addressing budget deficits other than Social Security and Medicare. As I said to a policy list-serv "They are not even putting old wine in new bottles, they are just dusting off the old bottles." Same shit, different day. Nobody should believe that any of this is being offered in good faith. Posted by: Bruce Webb on November 1, 2009 at 2:50 PM | PERMALINKPost a comment
February 2010
January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 |
|
|
    |
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
