There’s a danger in drawing straight lines
The WSJ sees something like the end of the republic if Obamacare passes:
Democrats are on the cusp of a profound and historic mistake, comparable in our view to the Smoot-Hawley tariff and FDR’s National Industrial Recovery Act. Everyone is preoccupied now with the politics, but ultimately at stake on Sunday is the kind of country America will be.
The consequences of this bill will not only be destructive for the health-care system and the country’s fiscal condition, though those will be bad enough. Inextricably bound up in a plan as far-reaching and ambitious as ObamaCare are also larger questions about the role of government, the dynamism of American enterprise and the nature of a free society…
Once the health-care markets are put through Mr. Obama’s de facto nationalization, costs will further explode. The Congressional Budget Office estimates ObamaCare will cost taxpayers $200 billion per year when fully implemented and grow annually at 8%, even under low-ball assumptions. Soon the public will reach its taxing limit, and then something will have to give on the care side…
Democrats deny this reality, but government rationing will become inevitable given that overall federal spending is already at 25% of GDP and heading north, and Medicare’s unfunded liabilities are roughly two and a half times larger than the entire U.S. economy in 2008. The ObamaCare bill already contains one of the largest tax increases outside the Great Depression or the world wars, including a major new tax on investment income — and no one seriously believes it will be enough.
We share a number of the Journal’s concerns, but if the last year has taught us anything, it has taught us the danger of drawing straight lines. The President was once very popular; now more American voters strongly disapprove of Obama than in total approve of him, however tepidly. If healthcare passes, it does not go away — it becomes a topic that will continue to dominate the national dialogue until November and beyond, in our view to the detriment of Democrats.
There’s a deep anger about this legislative process and about congress itself among many Americans, the kind that doesn’t fade easily. Unlike the clear majority of Americans favoring past healthcare reforms, there is no natural or national majority for this bill — the proof of that is that Democrats have been able to pass a bill for a year, and even the day before a vote is scheduled, they are still bickering among themselves and don’t have a clear path to a majority vote.
As for Republicans and Independents. the vast majority of whom oppose this measure, their opposition to the Obama agenda gives them a great deal in common as they stand together athwart history yelling “Stop!”
Moreover, there is a great deal of fury over the arrogance and rank corruption of America’s legislators. Matthew Continetti: “When you bake a cake, everything depends on the selection of ingredients and the manner of preparation. So, too, with the law. Health care reform’s inputs — the partisanship, the special deals, the procedural tricks, the budgetary gimmicks — will directly affect its outputs, i.e., its consequences. They are part and parcel of a $1 trillion-plus health bill that will raise taxes, cut Medicare, become ridiculously expensive sooner rather than later, and poison politics for a long time to come…The process is the substance.” Many of the opponents of this legislation don’t think simply that it’s a bad bill — they think it is an illegitimate bill.
There’s a need for real healthcare reform that is simple, incremental, and relies on decentralized solutions, and market solutions whenever possible. There is a need to control runaway entitlement spending. There’s an urgent need to get the skyrocketing deficit under control. Top-down, centrally imposed grand schemes for new entitlements are the wrong fantasy at the wrong time, and we think a clear majority of Americans know this. We may be wrong, but we expect the anti-Washington mood to grow, and we expect November to reveal that, while we may be a deeply divided country, we are no longer such a closely divided country.
March 21st, 2010 at 7:06 am
Obama has sold the ‘collective’ soul of the Democratic party. Expect a strong swing to state’s rights and the emergence of the Tea Party to replace the Democratic party; and in turn take on the ‘RINO’ Republican party.
March 20th, 2010 at 4:16 pm
“This is the largest tax bill in history,” the Republican leader fumed. The reform “is unjust, unworkable, stupidly drafted and wastefully financed.” And that wasn’t all. This “cruel hoax,” he said, this “folly” of “bungling and waste,” compared poorly to the “much less expensive” and “practical measures” favored by the Republicans. “We must repeal,” the GOP leader argued. “The Republican Party is pledged to do this.”
That was Republican presidential nominee Alf Landon in a September 1936 campaign speech. He based his bid for the White House on repealing Social Security. Campaign conclusion: Landon 8, Roosevelt 523 electoral votes.
March 20th, 2010 at 5:14 pm
Steve, there was great public support for Social Security when it passed, and great public support for the general idea of having the federal government take a non-passive role in the economy. Neither of these two conditions is true at this time. Attempting to re-live FDR and the Great Depression in the year 2010 is probably not a successful political strategy.
You sound very much like many Republicans in November 2008, who refused to believe the polls saying that Obama would win big. The polls run the other way now.
March 20th, 2010 at 5:51 pm
I suppose I should also point out that prior to the New Deal, the federal government’s share of the economy was so low that it was fiscally possible to increase government involvement in the economy without damaging economic growth too much. That, also is no longer true. Obamacare will mean reduced health care access for everyone but the very wealthy, at least until after the entire health care system collapses and is replaced by the 100% private system that will grow up in parallel with it. But it might take decades to return to health care as good as what we have now.
This link partially explains the effect I’m talking about: http://maxedoutmama.blogspot.com/2010/03/kill-poor-initiative.html
March 20th, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Excuse me, Steve, but what’s the point of repeating the WH authored talking point? Social Security, without a major increase in eligibility age or $ benefits, has been revealed as the Ponzi scheme that even my 25 year old soon recognizes it to be. And of course the $2.5 trillion in excess FICA tax revenues in the so-called “lockbox” collected since it was reformed in the 2980s are widely known to have been stolen for use in the USG operating budget. The IOUs representing these contributions are actually special issue Treasury bonds and, most importantly, they are non-negotiable. Thus the USG cannot “cash them in” to fund Social Security benefits. In fact, Treasury will have to use it’s borrowing authority to obtain the funds to finance Social Security, along with the $1.5 trillion annual operating budget deficit. Steve, isn’t it nice to know that your retirement benefits depend on the largess of the Chinese and Japanese? The PAYGO system has now, 10 years earlier than expected, already turned negative, i.e. FICA taxes alone cannot fund all monthly benefit checks. The situation will only get worse from here on out. If the voters had listened to Alf the U.S. might have avoided one way road to fiscal bankruptcy from entitlement spending disguised by “good intentions.” The voters also lost their way in November 2008 so that was not the only election mistake. Let’s hope it’s not repeated the next time.
March 21st, 2010 at 9:22 am
If this monstrosity passes, get used to waiting in lines America!
Being a Canadian means accepting long lines at the hospital or clinic ( to let the air out of the hospitals’ tires) for everything.
In Montreal ( and it is one of the better places in this country for health care thanks to Quebecois nationalism) where I live, everynight I dread the thought of one of my children getting sick or getting hurt obliging us to go to a hospital. Once there ,I do not know when we will leave – could take 30 minutes or 4 hours – especially on a saturday afternoon when it is 3rd world day at every children’s hospital. But they are the only one having lots of babies – with signs in 12 diffrerent languages – coming to a hospital near you!!! G_d bless the USA
March 22nd, 2010 at 6:29 am
Actual feelings instead of spin:
Canadians favour their health care to U.S. system: poll (within the last 9 months)
OTTAWA — Canadians think their American neighbours would be wise to look north as they grapple with a massive health-care overhaul. Why of course Canadians would prefer their own Health Care, with all its flaws over the non existent US medicare system, that is pretty much a no brainer. No one in Canada lost their home over a sprained ankle. The Canadian Press Harris-Decima survey suggests 82 per cent of Canadians believe our system is better than U.S. health care.
March 22nd, 2010 at 9:16 am
Steve, who is Harris-Decima? I’ve never heard of them. It wouldn’t be the first time that the Canadian Press hired a couple of kids with Grade 10 math to do a poll for them…
March 22nd, 2010 at 12:55 pm
Mr. Canucklehead seems a bit ignorant of Canucks. I should have thought he would at least have heard of the well-respected Harris Poll before; they joined with the established Decima organization of Canada, which was a full-service Canadian research firm with US $26 million annual revenue and 125 employees. After the merger, Harris/Decima has been recognized as one of Canada’s most established names in public opinion and market research, with a 25-year track record as one of Canada’s largest full service research firms.
March 22nd, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Well, Steve, I see you failed once again to respond when I demolished your arguments.
I assume it is because you cannot.
March 22nd, 2010 at 8:05 pm
Neil, you indeed did state some correct facts about positive initial public support for social security, but that had little to do with my first point, which was how clueless Landon and the Republicans were then about the public’s desire for such a program, and how their negative rhetoric at that time seems totally like today’s. If the Republicans really cared now about the public more than the profits of insurance companies, they wouldn’t today be repeating Landon’s proposals for “repeal” of improvements in support for the public’s needs.
As David Frum, a conservative himself, just wrote –
“No illusions please: This bill will not be repealed. Even if Republicans scored a 1994 style landslide in November, how many votes could we muster to re-open the “doughnut hole” and charge seniors more for prescription drugs? How many votes to re-allow insurers to rescind policies when they discover a pre-existing condition? How many votes to banish 25 year olds from their parents’ insurance coverage? And even if the votes were there – would President Obama sign such a repeal?
Conservatives and Republicans today suffered their most crushing legislative defeat since the 1960s.
It’s hard to exaggerate the magnitude of the disaster. Conservatives may cheer themselves that they’ll compensate for today’s expected vote with a big win in the November 2010 elections. But:
(1) It’s a good bet that conservatives are over-optimistic about November – by then the economy will have improved and the immediate goodies in the healthcare bill will be reaching key voting blocs.
(2) So what? Legislative majorities come and go. This healthcare bill is forever. A win in November is very poor compensation for this debacle now.
So far, I think a lot of conservatives will agree with me. Now comes the hard lesson:
A huge part of the blame for today’s disaster attaches to conservatives and Republicans ourselves.”
March 23rd, 2010 at 1:28 pm
Restating your position, along with an appeal to (David Frum’s dubious) authority, is not a rebuttal. Sorry, I still must assume you don’t refute my points because you can’t.