Category Archives: Government

Why Maybe Progressives Aren’t Bat—t Crazy

2 Replies

Lex offers a detailed assessment of why the progressives might not be bat—t crazy. I'm so confused.

Here's just a taste of what Lex had to say:

Just how bad has Joe Lieberman crapped all
over the whole debate on health-care reform? Bad enough that right now,
I think it’s time he not only gets no health care, it’s time he gets
intestinal cancer in a part of the world where morphine is as yet
undiscovered. I mean, really, what kind of sociopath do you have to be
to disregard those 45,000 annual deaths and singlehandedly chop up a
bill to create something that:

  • Mandates that every American buy expensive insurance from private
    companies without the choice of a public option and lets the IRS fine
    you if you don’t
  • Severely taxes middle-class health care plans, rather than wealthy individuals
  • Increases insurance premiums about $1,000 a year
  • Increases health care costs
  • Continues to exempt health-insurance companies from antitrust laws, inhibiting competition
  • Provides a sweet deal for pharmaceutical manufacturers while
    denying the government the ability to negotiate for lower drug prices
    for Medicare, something Democrats actually promised three years ago.
  • Apparently won’t let the government import drugs from cheaper foreign sources. I’m told my own junior senator, Kay Hagan, was arguing tonight that this was a “safety” issue, which must come as a surprise to the dozens of other countries that do this every day.
  • Grants monopolies on new biologic drugs so they will never become generics
  • Offers NO public option
  • Offers NO Medicare expansion, even in return for payment, for 55- to 64-year-olds.
  • Limits insurance-company payouts, contrary to President Obama’s promise in September
  • Raises taxes in January while not beginning benefits until 2014.

Really, I'm sooooo confused which makes me believe that the powers-that-be have us just where they want us. 

Why Progressives are Bat—t Crazy

Leave a reply

Via Ed Cone comes this interesting piece with an even more interesting graphic about the Senate's health care reform proposal. The graphic compares the projected annual costs of health care (defined as premiums and cost sharing) to a family of four making $54,000 a year in 2016 under three different scenarios: If the Senate Bill is passed, the Status Quo (nothing changes from today's system), Status Quo + SCHIP (the cost of insurance under the status quo if you qualify for SCHIP subsidies).  Basically the annual out of pocket expense for the family under the Senate Bill would be $9,000 while under the status quo it would be over $19,500. The difference is due to a $10,000 subsidy the author identifies in the Senate bill.  He also says that progressives, who generally don't have a problem with "big government," should be all over this thing instead of railing against it.  Here's an excerpt from his breakdown of the "Status Quo" figures:

In 2009, the average premium for a family in the individual market was $6,328, according to the insurance lobbying group AHIP.
However, this figure paints an optimistic picture for two reasons.
Firstly, the average family size in the AHIP dataset is 3.03 people;
for a family of four, that number would scale upward to $7,925, by my
calculations. Secondly, the CBO's estimates are based on 2016 figures,
not 2009, so to make an apples-to-apples comparison, we have to account
for inflation. According to Kaiser, the average cost of health coverage
has increased by about 8.7 percent annually
over the past decade, and by 8.8 percent for family coverage. Let's
scale that down slightly, assuming 7.5 annual inflation in premiums
from 2009 through 2016 inclusive. That would bring the cost of the
family's premium up by a nominal 66 percent, to $13,149. And remember:
these are based on estimates of premiums provided by the insurance lobby. I have no particular reason to think that they're biased, but if they are, it's probably on the low side.

I'm glad to see someone finally putting some digestible figures out there.  While the figures might just be estimates the author at least puts the argument in the proper context.  As someone who has an average healthy family of five (two adults, three children) and who has been in the individual insurance market for years I can tell you that the $19,500 estimate is definitely in the ballpark since we've been dancing in the $12,000-$14,000 a year territory for quite a while.

Out of curiosity I decided to see how this health expense compares to a yearly mortgage expense.  I went to an online mortgage calculator and put in $150,000 for a 30 year loan at 7% interest.  The monthly mortgage payment would be $997.50 which my middle-school level math tells me is a little under $12,000 a year. So the projected "status quo" premium of $13,149 in 2016 is over a $1,000 than the annual mortgage expense on a $150,000 note.  That's truly insane. 

Oh, and the more the insurance is the higher the monthly expense the insured has to report on his loan application and that lowers the amount that he'll qualify for.  That means he and the other average folks like him buy less house, which means the developers have to build smaller/cheaper houses, which means the developer's suppliers sell him less stuff, which means they employ fewer people, and so on.  All so average people can pay out the nose for a piece of paper which tells them that they might not be bankrupted by a horrible illness as long as it wasn't some sort of preexisting condition or didn't happen during a full moon.  That's not just insane, that's bat—t crazy.

The ACLU is an Equal Opportunity Ticker Offer

Leave a reply

It always cracks me up to hear pigeon hole the ACLU as some sort of liberal activist group.  I guess they are if "liberal" means defending all peoples' civil liberties no matter which end of the political spectrum they fall on.  Sure, conservatives are ticked about the whole Forsyth County Commissioners' prayer issue, but I suspect they'd support the ACLU in their defense of a Florida student who wants to wear a t-shirt that says "Islam is of the devil." 

For the record I sometimes disagree strongly with the ACLU, but I do think they're very consistent.

One of Those Health Reform Arguments

Leave a reply

One of the arguments I hear about health reform proposals is that it will inevitably lead to socialized medicine and eventually the only people who will get "good" doctors will be those who can afford to pay cash for access to them.  Well I hate to tell you but we've had a "have vs. have not" health system in place here in the US of A for quite a while and I'm pretty sure it's only going to get worse with or without reform.  Check out this piece from a Greensboro blogger (h/t to Ed Cone for the lead):

I recently received a form letter saying that Dr. James Kindl, my physician for the past two decades, is joining MDVIP, "a national network of physicians who focus on personalized preventative healthcare." His letter goes on to say "In order to provide enhanced proactive care, I will be reducing the size of my practice to no more than 600 patients who may join on a first-come, first-served basis."

What his letter doesn't say, and what doesn't become apparent until one goes to his new website and actually tries to sign up for his new practice, is that this members-only service has an annual fee of $1,500, and that this fee only pays for membership; all the usual charges will still apply, billed to your insurance company.

Right now if you don't have health insurance your "safety net" is the emergency room and they must treat you if you show up.  Unfortunately if you have any assets at all the provider will take them in return for services rendered and you'll end up without much to enjoy with your (hopefully) good health.  Of course there are the free clinics but those offer inconsistent care at best.  That's what I mean when I say that we are a nation of haves and have nots with regards to health care. I'm flummoxed by the arguments against reform that say we need to resist "socialized medicine" so we can keep seeing our doctors without interminable waits for service and we can continue to have access to cutting edge medical equipment.

As for the anti-reformers' warning that my taxes will go up with any kind of public option, well I have a hard time believing that the tax burden can be any worse that what my health insurer does to me each year.  Right now my health care burden is about 15% of my gross income and it is only that low because my family has been extraordinarily healthy the last couple of years (knock on wood) and since our premiums tend to rise at a higher annual rate than inflation or my wages then I'm fairly certain that my health care burden will be approaching 20% of my income within a couple of years.

I'm not necessarily arguing for the reforms currently being proposed by Congress, but I'm pleading for the powers that be to do something because we're drowning out here in the real world.  And don't get me started about the impact on small business because we could be here all day.

Forsyth Residents Part of Study Linking Population Density and Walking

Leave a reply

The American Journal of Preventive Medicine just published the results of a study that looked at the effect of land use density on peoples' walking behavior and included Forsyth County residents as part of the study.  It's really a "no duh" result, but having data to inform municipal planning decisions is always helpful.  From the study:

After adjustment for individual-level characteristics and neighborhood connectivity, it was found that higher density, greater land area devoted to retail uses, and self-reported proximity of destinations and ease of walking to places were each related to walking. In models including all land-use measures, population density was positively associated with walking to places and with walking for exercise for more than 90 minutes/week, both relative to no walking. Availability of retail was associated with walking to places relative to not walking, and having a more proportional mix of land uses was associated with walking for exercise for more than 90 minutes/week, while self-reported ease of access to places was related to higher levels of exercise walking, both relative to not walking.

Public Service With a Grimace

2 Replies

I've written before about volunteering my time as a member of the Lewisville Zoning Board of a Adjustment for a few years, and now as a member of the Lewisville Planning Board.  Usually I really enjoy it and I definitely find it interesting.  Last night's work session, however, was interesting yet far from enjoyable.

Our work sessions and public meetings (we usually have one work session and one public meeting each month) usually last about two hours and unless you really get into town planning they're about as exciting as watching paint dry.  Occasionally we have some contentious issues pop up and you can imagine that if we recommend against granting someone's request they aren't too happy about it.  Last night we had a gentleman come in to attend our work session even though his case wasn't on our agenda because he hadn't filed the appropriate paperwork with the town.  Still we made a motion to add him to the administrative part of our agenda, which falls at the end of the meeting, and he waited for it to come up.

Cut to 2 1/2 hours later and the gentleman's case came up.  The town planner reported that he hadn't recieved the paperwork necessary to formally schedule the case for us and as a result he and his staff hadn't prepared a staff report or recommendation, so we agreed to continue the case to our next meeting.  The planner had also provided us with copies of the letter from the gentleman that had initiated the case and an attached list of new uses he would like to have applied to his downtown building.  In addition the town planner provided a copy of the letter his office had sent to the gentleman detailing what he needed to do to get his case on the agenda.  When the gentleman heard that his case wasn't going to be heard he wasn't pleased and he asked if he could speak. When told that it wasn't a public meeting so he'd need to get permission from the Board to speak and it became apparent that we weren't inclined to listen to him until we had all the case work in front of us, he proceeded to speak anyway.  I can't quote him directly, but I can say that he basically accused us of having preconceived notions about his case and he said that the whole process was rigged.  He ended by sarcastically thanking us for wasting two hours of his time.

I was fine until he accused us of wasting his time.  As I said, we normally meet twice a month, but for much of this year we were under a series of tight deadlines due to a moratorium the town had put on downtown development so for about six months we were meeting weekly.  We on the board are all busy people with jobs, families, family activities, church activities, etc. and yet we willingly give the town some of our precious time in exchange for the occasional "thank you" or "job well done."  It's truly the definition of public service and for someone to accuse us of wasting his time just pushed me over the edge.  The devil on my shoulder wanted to shoot him a one-fingered salute and tell him he could take his valuable time and shove it where the sun don't shine, but instead I bit my lip and let him go ahead and stomp out of the room like a five year old.  I'm confident that if his case does come before us we'll treat it with the same objectivity we always do, but he won't be getting service with a smile. 

Virginia Foxx Tweets Question: “Will govt-run healthcare require monthly abortion premium?”

Leave a reply

Virginia Foxx just posted this on Twitter:

Will govt-run healthcare require monthly abortion premium? @GOPLeader has details: http://bit.ly/zvl8F

What's interesting to me is that when you click through to the link she references and read it there are links that would seem to be intended to prove John Boehner's assertion that a government run health plan would require all subscribers to pay "abortion premiums," but the link that should go to the reference material detailing the supposed required premium instead goes to another webpage with a quote from Boehner.  I have a sneaking suspicion that this is going to be an assertion that is very similar to the forced euthenasia crap that was being thrown around over the summer. From where I'm sitting the GOP strategy is:

  • Pick one hot-button item out of an immense and complex bill
  • Intentionally misread the language, or at least take it out of context, to make a fiction-based assertion about the bill
  • Blast it to your frothing constituency
  • Hope that the accumulated weight of the multiple assertions can eventually bring down the bill

Stay tuned to see if that's the case.  What bugs me about this approach is that it distracts people from the "meat" of the health care debate.  I have no problem with people disagreeing with each other on the fundamental issues like whether or not it is the proper role of the government to provide an alternative to private health insurance, whether or not there should be programs like Medicare and Medicaid, etc. I do, however, have a very big problem with people using deceptive tactics like these to try and defeat a bill rather than arguing about it on its merits.

BTW, convenient timing of this release, what with the Tea Party event on the Hill today wouldn't you say?

Everything Old is New Again

Leave a reply

I read this Gartner blog post about the government making its data more easily accessible with a little smile on my face because it caused me to have a little "Back to the Future Moment" moment.  More specifically I enjoyed this part:

A conversation with a federal client on Monday about this last aspect was illuminating. He observed that certain data may allow businesses to create services that they charge for and profit from. If successful, these services, irrespective of whether they are useful to the public, would put a significant demand on the government infrastructure. The question then would be how to strike a fair balance between providing data transparency and access to the public, and ensuring that taxpayer money is not being used to subsidize businesses.

I hate to tell them, but there's been a nice little sector of the publishing industry that's made a killing off of repackaging public data since well before the internet even existed.  They did it by compiling relevant data for readers that was easier to digest than the "off the shelf" data provided by the government and/or the information was delivered in a more timely manner.  To me this worry is a lot of noise about nothing; the government has to provide the public access to its data as part of its mandate and worrying about businesses being subsidized by this activity is, to me, nonsensical.  Companies won't be in business long if they simply regurgitate data, but they can build a nice business if they add a little value for consumers (insight, context, timeliness, etc.) and I think everyone benefits from that in the long run.

Claudville, VA Gets First ‘White Space Network’

Leave a reply

Tiny Claudville, VA (pop. 916) is just across the NC-VA state line about 15 miles northeast of Mt. Airy and it has the distinction of being the first place in the country to get a "white space network."  From the BusinessWire story:

For the first time in the U.S., unused TV broadcast channels freed up by the transition to digital TV are being used to wirelessly deliver high-speed Internet connectivity to business, education and community users. These unused frequencies are commonly referred to as TV white spaces. Under an experimental license granted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Spectrum Bridge designed and deployed a wireless TV white spaces network to distribute broadband Internet connectivity in Claudville, Virginia. To ensure that Claudville residents can make the most of this new high-speed connectivity, Dell, Microsoft and the TDF Foundation contributed state-of-the-art computer systems and software applications to the local school, as well as the town’s new computer center. As a result, Claudville residents have already begun to reap the benefits of joining the online community…

TV white spaces are vacant channels in the television band and are ideal for sending broadband signals across long distances and for penetrating walls, trees and other objects. These TV white spaces hold enormous potential for expanding broadband access, particularly in rural and other underserved areas…

To discover what white spaces channels are available in your area, the Web site ShowMyWhiteSpace.com offers a free search tool that lists all open white spaces channels at any address in the U.S. This site also contains white spaces news and information, as well as links to FCC documents and other valuable white spaces resources.