I guess it’s not just Democrats. The Republicans sure spent a lot of money the past few years too. I sure am glad they said no to the “Stimulus” Plan though. (And here I am reacting when I said just a few posts ago that I was only going to ACT which means philosophizing constructively). But anyway, I guess it feels more unwise to spend so much when so many people are losing their jobs because where does the money come from? The government gets money from us the citizens or from loans. If the citizens don’t have money they can’t pay taxes. And the government can’t keep on borrowing, can it? Doesn’t it have to stop somewhere? Observing this moment–the recession, the House Democrats passing a huge stimulus plan that is just so HUGE and by huge I mean ecclectic and not inuitive, gross even, people losing their jobs–makes me feel like something is eventually going to give. I don’t know when, but we have already paid a price as a country for spending beyond our means, for having a national average savings rate that is in the negative. That price has been an inflation. When we are going to learn the same lesson applies to our government? We can’t go on spending more than we have forever. And I say WE because we are essentially the government. WE are responsible; that’s the beauty of a republican democracy. What is the cost going to be? And when is the due date? I don’t know. We have expensive healthcare, but is it really necessary for the government to solve the problem? Is that really a solution? Why is the government enabling people who make over 65,000 dollars to use government health care? What else would those people be doing with their money? What is the government allowing them to do with the money they’ve “saved” by not buying into their own healthcare? And why is it an all or nothing deal? Why can’t people pay a part of the government healthcare? Are Democrats allowing people to pay for their mortgage that they shouldn’t have bought into in the first place? Are they allowing them to pay for those unlimited family cell phone plans or even for just one cell phone? Are they allowing them to go out to eat all of the time like they are used to doing? Are they allowing them to have nicer cars? I guess maybe they would say yes to all of those things, and then justify it by saying that doing all of those things help drive the economy. But maybe the economy shouldn’t be driven that much, it’s not tenable, and that’s how we came to where we are.
I’m including an article from today’s WSJ by Kimberley A. Strassel about the Democrats’ healthcare efforts: “Democratic Stealth Care”.
With the nation preoccupied by the financial crisis, Democrats have been quietly working to nationalize health care.
Tom Daschle is still waiting to be confirmed as secretary of health and human services, not that he’s in any rush. Democrats are already enacting his and Barack Obama’s agenda of government-run health care — entirely on the QT.
This was the real accomplishment of this week’s House vote for the $819 billion “stimulus,” and is the overriding theme of Congress’s first month. With the nation occupied with the financial crisis, and with that crisis providing cover, Democrats have been passing provision after provision to nationalize health care.
If Democrats learned anything from the HillaryCare defeat, it was the danger of admitting to their wish to federalize the health market. Since returning to power, they’ve pursued a new strategy: to stealthily and incrementally expand government control. “What no one is paying attention to in the [stimulus],” says Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, “is that Democrats are making a big grab at the health-care sector.”
It began one week after the swearing-in, when Nancy Pelosi whipped through a big expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. The Schip bill was Democrats’ first stab at stealth expansion, unveiled in 2007, though vetoed by George W. Bush.
Initially designed for children of working-poor families, this new Super-Schip will be double in size, and even kids whose parents make $65,000 a year will be eligible. The program will also now cover pregnant women and automatically enroll their new arrivals. The Congressional Budget Office estimates 2.4 million individuals will drop their private coverage for the public program.
Still, it’s the “stimulus” that has proven the real gift horse — a behemoth that has allowed Democrats to speed up the takeover of health care under cover of an economic crisis. They initially claimed, for instance, the “stimulus” would provide Medicaid money to states struggling to pay existing bills. What in fact it does is dramatically expand the number of Americans who qualify for Medicaid.
Under “stimulus,” Medicaid is now on offer not to just poor Americans, but Americans who have lost their jobs. And not just Americans who have lost their jobs, but their spouses and their children. And not Americans who recently lost their jobs, but those who lost jobs, say, early last year. And not just Americans who already lost their jobs, but those who will lose their jobs up to 2011. The federal government is graciously footing the whole bill. The legislation also forbids states to apply income tests in most cases.
House Democrat Henry Waxman was so thrilled by this blowout, it was left to Republicans to remind him that the very banking millionaires he dragged to the Hill last year for a grilling would now qualify for government aid. His response? A GOP proposal to limit subsidies to Americans with incomes under $1 million was accepted during markup, but had disappeared by final passage. In this new health-care nirvana, even the rich are welcome. CBO estimates? An additional 1.2 million on the federal Medicaid dime in 2009.
The “stimulus” also hijacks Cobra, a program that lets the unemployed retain access to their former company health benefits — usually for about 18 months. The new stimulus permits any former employee over the age of 55 to keep using Cobra right up until they qualify for Medicare at age 65. And here’s the kicker: Whereas employees were previously responsible for paying their health premiums while on Cobra, now the feds will pay 65%. CBO estimates? Seven million Americans will have the feds mostly pay their insurance bills in 2009.
The bill even takes a whack at the private market. Under the guise of money for “health technology,” the legislation makes the government the national coordinator for electronic health records, able to certify what platforms are acceptable. This is an attempt to squelch a growing private market that is competing to improve transparency and let consumers compare providers and costs. In liberal-world, only government should be publishing (and setting) health-care prices.
Add it up, and Democrats may move 10 million more Americans under the federal health umbrella — in just four weeks! Good luck ever cutting off that money. Meanwhile, the Democratic majority is gearing up for a Medicare fight, where it may broach plans to lower the eligibility age to 55. Whatever costs accrue, they’ll pay for by slashing the private Medicare Advantage option.
Mr. Obama will, of course, offer his health-care reform at some point. But he’s clearly happy to get what he can, when he can. Despite talk of entitlement reform, he’s voiced no disapproval of this vast new health-care grab. And don’t forget he chose Mr. Daschle, who appreciates stealth himself. In his 2008 book outlining his health-care reform, he offers his party two pieces of political advice: Move fast, before there can be a public debate, and write as vague a bill as possible.
Guiding all of this is the left’s hope that by the time America wakes up to what’s happening, it’ll be too late. Democrats might be on to something.
Write to kim@wsj.com
