Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Why We Don't Need a Public Option

It has been a crazy summer. And not just because of the unseasonably cool weather. Politically, this summer has been crazy. You know what I’m talking about, the health care debate. We’ve heard about death panels and that government provided health-care won’t cost a dime, both of which have been debunked. Let’s move past the shouting, and the finger-biting. I’d like to offer my argument as to why a public option is not appropriate to fix the problem of health care.

First, what is the problem with health care? A lot. Rising premiums, uncovered costs that lead to bankruptcy, skyrocketing costs that have little correlation to health outcomes, lack of portability and, most importantly, health care in our country has inherent bars to allow the free market to work properly.

Why doesn’t the free market work in our current system? First, the consumer chooses not to set a fair price, because any price will be paid to keep a loved one alive. Also, consumers fail to ask what the price is because they are not the ones paying it, someone else is. It's something called the tragedy of the commons… I don’t care what it costs because I don’t directly feel the pain. People only care when the premiums go up. Third, the consumer cannot set a fair price because even if they want to find out the price before incurring it, many hospitals refuse or are unable to provide it, leaving responsible consumers in the dark. Fourth, patients, by their very virtue, have trouble second guessing their doctor as to whether they need something. So patients agree to anything they think will help, cringing, hoping that it won’t ding them too hard either in co-pays or higher premiums or actual costs. Blind consumers do not a free market make.

Addressing the free market issue in health care is central to solving the other problems. Health care reform that gives consumers choice and reform that makes the health care costs transparent will drive down costs. The solution offered by Democrats includes a public option, a government administered health insurance program. A public option is unnecessary to address the most important issue: the free market problem. Here’s the surprising truth about health care, the countries that are able to provide insurance for anyone who wants it, drive down costs, and improve health outcomes don’t have a public option. France and Germany, countries whose major parties are unabashedly socialist, don’t have a public option. The country with some of the best health outcomes and some of the lowest prices in the world, Japan, doesn’t have a public option.

In the meantime, American taxpayers are being told, by some in Congress, that a public option is essential to health care reform. What we’re not being told is how a public option can be sustained when our government is already running high deficits. Some entitlement programs have an expiration date. No one thinks that social security will be around in twenty years. What will the expiration date be on affordable health care under the public option plan?
We need health care reform, but we need sustainable reform that provides affordable medical care for, not only us, but our children and grandchildren. Other countries solve the problem without a public option. Even, gasp, socialist ones. If other countries can provide a high quality of health care to all of their citizens solely through the private sector, then I dare our government to do the same. In light of our increasing debt and the volatility of the government’s support of entitlement programs, we may not have an option.

Thursday, January 22, 2009

Senate Democrats Usurping State Power??? Jumping the gun on seating Frankin.

FYI- Senate Democrats are moving to seat Frankin.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h1cWQhju_9-FCzu4-avUlhBH69OQD95RRVTO0

The problem is that Minnesota law prohibits issuing a certificate until any pending legal action is resolved. Basically, the US Senate Democrats are thumbing their nose at how the state of Minnesota runs their elections. What are your thoughts? My thought is that this is the first time I can use my favorite "college-word" to describe an act of the US government.... usurpation.

If the Senate seats Frankin before the State of Minnesota can legally issue a certificate, we might have a Constitutional question on par with McCulloch v. Maryland.

Tuesday, January 20, 2009

What Republicans are thinking today.

As I'm listening to inauguration coverage, these Wyoming Republicans http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/20/wyoming.gop.inauguration/index.html?iref=newssearch are taking the words right out of my brain.

Sunday, January 18, 2009

Thoughts on the Inauguration from the Dissent.

So, we're coming up on the Inauguration of Barack Obama, the first African-American President. In this time where a public news service is sponsoring Obama-fest, tattoo parlors are preparing to permanently imprint the President-Elect's likeness on inauguration goers, I-Tunes has an entire album "about Obama" and seemingly the entire country is captivated by all things Barack, I have to say I kinda feel like the ugly step sister at the ball.

See, I, along with 46% of my fellow Americans, voted for the other guy. I never caught Obamania. While some where coming down from their Rocky Mountain high at the Democratic National Convention, I was thrilled to be in St. Paul for the Republican National Convention. While others were being inspired by the next President, I was being inspired by a woman from a small town who was on a national stage and voicing my political views.

I know what you're thinking... you're American and you should celebrate this historic event. While there's no doubt that I'm proud that Americans can show the world that race does not define who we are or who we vote for.... I still wanted the other guy to be sworn in on Tuesday. It's like going to Prom but having no friends to go with. Sure, you have every right to celebrate, but you just can't muster the excitement that the people around you have.

But that's okay. On Tuesday, while the 53% who voted for our next President will, deservedly, celebrate their moment. I'll look forward to Wednesday, when I, along with many others, will join the respectful dissent. And don't underestimate the value of dissenters. You can't have a democracy without the dissent.

Tuesday, December 30, 2008

Government Spending in a Troubled Economy

Interesting commentary on government spending in the current crisis.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/12/29/miron.stimulus/index.html

Whether you're for smaller or bigger government, tax money shouldn't be thrown around for the sake of saying you did something.

Thursday, December 18, 2008

FavRep: now with comments!

I started this blog because I love political dialogue. Displaying comments is the cyber version of the watercooler, but I was a little intimidated. What if some nutter stumbled on the blog and posted something mean?

Well, my mind was changed today when some of my TwitterFriends were congratulating another on their first troll. At first I thought they were talking about those ugly little dolls with neon hair... but I was off. It's a nutter who makes a mean comment on your blog.

So, intimidation gone, I'm displaying comments. I'd be honored if someone posted their two-cents in response. Best case, forging along with political dialogue... and worst case, badge of honor.

But be forwarned. Comments with swears and other offensive (as defined by me) language get banished from dialogue land.

Obama's new pick: inauguration speaker.

Some people are outraged:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/12/17/obama.warren/index.html.

I for one, as a huge fan of Rick Warren, am pleased with the pick. A pastor who is globally practicing what he preaches is a great pick for an inaugural invocation.

Double bonus: Obama may not be as extreme as some liberals thought he was.