Blog @ MoreWhat.com

As the Democrat parade assembled this week for a five minute news conference on healthcare with giddy exuberance Speaker Pelosi dodged real questions on the issue. Sharing her giddiness as well as offering no substance to the discussion were the committee chairs from the House. Rangel, Waxman, Miller and Slaughter are Pelosi’s expendable accomplices.

At the time it appeared reasonable to visit the websites of the fearful foursome to review their respective positions on the matter. Because this blogger has less familiarity with George Miller of CA the review started with him.

After a few clicks to view various items related to the subject the last stop illuminated the puppet mentality of the four. Miller had what first appeared as a generous list of resources for review sporting titles that indicate a group of summarized and detailed references on healthcare legislation.

The most appealing referred to a list of those who support the legislation. Given every major and not so major poll for months has indicated most Americans oppose the legislation one could hardly resist taking a look.

Not a surprise that the link merely redirects one to Speaker Pelosi’s website. The list of supporters is dominated by labor unions and other special interests and agendas yet to be determined here.

One example of the support from a source unknown to this blogger stood out. Pay particular attention to the quote in the excerpt below that includes the word ‘ensure’. Then read the excerpt from the CBO director.

Barbara Kennelly, National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare
“The Affordable Health Care for America Act includes substantial benefits, improvements, and protections that are very important to our members…

“Contrary to the rhetoric heard from opponents, this bill does not cut Medicare; rather it includes provisions to ensure that we are receiving high quality care and the best value for our Medicare dollars.” [10/29/09]

from the CBO Director on November 18, 2009
Based on the extrapolation described above, CBO expects that Medicare spending under the bill would increase at an average annual rate of roughly 6 percent during the next two decades—well below the roughly 8 percent annual growth rate of the past two decades (excluding the effect of establishing the Medicare prescription drug benefit). Adjusting for inflation, Medicare spending per beneficiary under the bill would increase at an average annual rate of roughly 2 percent during the next two decades—much less than the roughly 4 percent annual growth rate of the past two decades. Whether such a reduction in the growth rate could be achieved through greater efficiencies in the delivery of health care or would reduce access to care or diminish the quality of care is unclear.

To emphasize the folly of either side of the debate suggesting absolute conclusions the more reasoned approach is found in the CBO Director’s letter to Harry Reid and repeated below:

Whether such a reduction in the growth rate could be achieved through greater efficiencies in the delivery of health care or would reduce access to care or diminish the quality of care is unclear.

The single feature of healthcare reform that was to garner support from one and all focused on the spiraling costs and reducing them. To bend the cost curve downward was a familiar expression over many months. There is no convincing evidence to support that notion in proposed legislation.

That collection of revenue for either the House or Senate version of healthcare reform would start in 2010 yet no claimed improvements would begin before 2014 should send up red flags for any observer. It’s the classic sucker punch from politicians. Pass legislation that increases revenue (taxes) immediately and promise outlays (expenditures) related to the revenue (taxes) at some point years in the future. This avoids the nasty repercussions of accountability by wearing down the public’s attention span as well as cementing bad policy and legislation for years to come.

It’s really simple math. Social security, Medicare and Medicaid are unsustainable programs. The only way to balance the books is increase revenue (taxes) or cut outlays (expenditures) or both.

Some of those supporting as well as some of those opposing currently proposed healthcare reform legislation do so for personal gain. They have chosen a position based on their own situation and not yours. The rest of us would like things to improve but have little confidence the current proposals will help. The speed of the process suggests those in the majority in Congress, etc., want passage before the scam completely falls apart. That’s another one of those red flags you should have noticed. Ignore them at your own peril (and unfortunately the peril of your fellow citizens)

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

This entry was posted on Thursday, January 7th, 2010 at 2:29 pm and is filed under Public Affairs, Money Matters, Health, wordpress, Politics, Democrats, liberal, Waxman, disclosure, ethics, obama, Medicare, Legislation. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.