Repeal

Having persuaded their credulous minions that Obama care is the second coming of the Communist Manifesto (rather than the brain child of a right-wing think tank it really is) the Republicans are pretty publicly committed to recall. Romney is still mouthing "repeal and replace" but that doesn't appeal to his Tea Party brethren and he dare not try to give his "replace" any substance. Meanwhile, back on planet Earth, a bunch of Republicans are having second thoughts, since a number of provisions of Obama's law are pretty popular.

David Brooks has a version of replace that turns out to look a heck of a lot like Obamacare. David Frum thinks repeal is a fool's errand, and that Republicans should focus on sensible modifications to the law. He has a version which would hardly cause any liberal heartburn. I've just saved the headlines.

1) Universal coverage has been extended. It won't be retracted, and it shouldn't be retracted. Not only will universal coverage lift a wholly unnecessary misery from the lives of millions, improving the health and welfare of the whole population, but it will also be a spur to economic productivity. Ending the fear of loss of coverage will encourage people to launch new businesses and to change jobs.

2) We should want gradually to sever the connection between employment and coverage for the same reasons as Point 1.

3) We should want to merge the coverage system for under-65s and over-65s. ...

4) We should want to give states the decisive role in defining and shaping healthcare service within their boundaries.

5) We should want to control costs, and indeed to drive them down to levels prevailing in other advanced economies. ...

6) It's important that healthcare be financed in ways that share costs broadly. ...

I think that's a pretty conservative program, actually.

That's good, because I think it's pretty liberal. I endorse 1-3 wholeheartedly. I don't think (4) makes sense for a federally financed program, but that's a small matter. (5) was a key point in Obamacare until wing-nut hysteria over "death-panels" drove it out.

I don't see the TPers buying it, though.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Anti-Libertarian: re-post

The most pointed critique of social security and liberalism in general is the libertarian critique. The problem with libertarians, for a liberal, is that we have too much in common. We both believe in individual rights, tolerance of individual differences, and dislike government prescription of religion. The basic difference, it seems to me, is the different answers we give to Cain's (with thanks to the Captain - my original version had the corpse asking the question!) famous question: "Am I my brother's keeper?" That's not really my basic bitch against the libertarians though. My real complaint is the same as my complaint against most religion - its premise is a fraud. For those who can't stand to wait for the punchline, I believe that trying to implement libertarian principles leads to tyranny or social disintegration. Demonstrating that takes some historical (and pre-historical) context. For all but the last 15,000 or so of the 100,000 years the human spec
Read more

Uneasy Lies The Head

Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown ........... Shakespeare Henry IV, Part II. So it is with us and our slightly distant primate cousins , so it seems. A 9-year study of wild baboons in Kenya by Princeton University and the Institute of Primate Research may turn conventional assumptions of alphas males upside down. The study found that alpha males have high testosterone levels, which allows them to dominate other baboons, get access to more food, and attract better mates. This is expected. Surprisingly, though, the alpha males also have high levels of stress hormone glucocorticoid, which scientists measured from their feces samples. In fact, the stress of alpha baboons was on par with low-ranking baboons. The convention wisdom is that access to food and females provides life security and thus less stress for dominant males. Conversely, weak males who are constantly threatened by starvation and physical violence from stronger males are thought to be more stressed. The st
Read more

We Call it Soccer

The US played its best, and maybe only good game of World Cup, but lost thanks to brilliant goalkeeping by the Swedish keeper and the bizarre method soccer uses to settle ties when three US stars could not put the ball on frame from the 12 yard spot.  At the end it came down to a blocked shot that spun in by maybe a couple of centimeters. Well, that's football - too much like life.   Which brings me to a modest proposal.  Replace the thirty minute overtimes with as many 7-player 15 minute periods as needed to settle it.  Scoring should be much easier with fewer players.
Read more