Obamacare: No Waterloo, rather a tactical retreat
WASHINGTON — Yesterday, Barack Obama was God. Today, he’s fallen from grace, the magic gone, his health care reform dead. If you believed the first idiocy—and half the mainstream media did—you’ll believe the second. Don’t believe either.
Conventional wisdom always makes straight-line projections. They are always wrong. Yes, Obama’s aura has diminished, in part because of overweening overexposure. But by year’s end he will emerge with something he can call health care reform. The Democrats in Congress will pass it because they must. Otherwise, they’ll have slain their own savior in his first year in office.
But that bill will look nothing like the massive reform Obama originally intended. The beginning of the retreat was signaled by Obama’s curious reference—made five times—to “health-insurance reform” in his July 22 news conference.
Reforming the health care system is dead. Cause of death? Blunt trauma administered not by Republicans, not even by Blue Dog Democrats, but by the green eyeshades at the Congressional Budget Office.
Three blows:
(1) On June 16, the CBO determined that the Senate Finance Committee bill would cost $1.6 trillion over 10 years, delivering a sticker shock that was near fatal.
(2) Five weeks later, the CBO gave its verdict on the Independent Medicare Advisory Council, Dr. Obama’s latest miracle cure, conjured up at the last minute to save Obamacare from fiscal ruin and consisting of a committee of medical experts highly empowered to make Medicare cuts.
The CBO said the IMAC would do nothing, trimming costs by perhaps 0.2 percent. A 0.2 percent cut is not a solution; it’s a punch line.
(3) The final blow came last Sunday when the CBO euthanized the Obama “out years” myth. The administration’s argument had been: Sure, Obamacare will initially increase costs and deficits. But it pays for itself in the long run because it bends the curve downward in coming decades.
The CBO put in writing the obvious: In its second decade, Obamacare significantly bends the curve upward—increasing deficits even more than in the first decade.
This is obvious because Obama’s own first-decade numbers were built on arithmetic trickery. New taxes to support the health care plan begin in 2011, but the benefits part of the program doesn’t fully kick in until 2015. That excess revenue is, of course, one time only. It makes the first decade numbers look artificially low, but once you pass 2015, the yearly deficits become larger and eternal.
Three CBO strikes and you’re out cold. Though it must be admitted that the White House itself added to the farcical nature of its frantic and futile cost-cutting when budget director Peter Orszag held a three-hour brainstorming session with Senate Finance Committee aides trying to find ways to save.
“At one point,” reports The Wall Street Journal, “they flipped through the tax code, looking for ideas.”
Looking for ideas? Months into the president’s health care drive and just days before his deadline for Congress to pass real legislation? You gonna give this gang the power to remake one-sixth of the U.S. economy?
Not likely. Whatever structural reforms dribble out of Congress before the August recess will likely not survive the year. In the end, Obama will have to settle for something very modest. And indeed it will be health-insurance reform.
To win back the vast constituency that has insurance, is happy with it, and is mightily resisting the fatal lures of Obamacare, the president will in the end simply impose heavy regulations on the insurance companies that will make what you already have secure, portable and imperishable: no policy cancellations, no pre-existing condition requirements, perhaps even a cap on out-of-pocket expenses.
Nirvana. But wouldn’t this bankrupt the insurance companies? Of course it would. There will be only one way to make this work: Impose an individual mandate. Force the 18 million Americans between 18 and 34 who (often quite rationally) forgo health insurance to buy it. This will create a huge new pool of customers who rarely get sick but will be paying premiums every month. And those premiums will subsidize nirvana health insurance for older folks.
Net result? Another huge transfer of wealth from the young to the old, the now-routine specialty of the baby boomers; an end to the dream of imposing European-style health care on the United States; and a president who before Christmas will wave his pen, proclaim victory and watch as the newest conventional wisdom reaffirms his divinity.
Charles Krauthammer is a columnist for the Washington Post. His e-mail address is letters@charleskrauthammer.com.
Aug 7, 2009 at 9:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
manufactured?
.
http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uplo...
.
YEP!
Aug 4, 2009 at 12:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
Yes all the bad stuff is because of Bush…how long is this song going to last?
Aug 3, 2009 at 9:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
916Wi
.
uh, no. Didn't and not trying to.
.
Then why is it "we the people" instead of "me the person"?
.
What is sad is the "enough is enough" comes after Obama had to bail out people because of what happened during GW's reign of terror. Now, when people have a chance to make things better the cost is the issue. Too bad this debate wasn't taking place after Clinton left office with a surplus.
.
BTW, I am not partisan, I voted for clinton x2, GW x2 and Obama x1. I have beliefs from both parties just happen to agree with Obama a lot lately.
Aug 2, 2009 at 9:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
Whythink.....You're trying to equate health care reform to racism and sexism???? That's an interesting comparison that makes absolutely no sense. You're treading in Darwin1 territory here!!!:) The problem with your "We the people--not me the person" argument is that it is always used when "me the person" is asked to foot the bill for "we the people"......this time to the tune of $1.6 trillion. Enough is enough.......
Aug 2, 2009 at 9:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
booch11, do you work for every penny you earn? Maybe you feel as if everything in your life should be handed to you. That is just plain wrong!!! We don't ALL need to drive, owning a home is NOT a right, and if YOUR dumb enough to CHOOSE to live in a flood plain, well you get wwhat you deserve!!!!! My earned money should be MINE and not handed out like candy to those who feel like they deserve it.
Aug 2, 2009 at 8:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
The President needs to throw out the convoluted mess that is being touted as reform.
Public opinions won’t cure sick people.
Real reform should provide care and medications to every individual, rich, poor, young, old, no restrictions if you ask for free public care and medications you should receive them at public owned and operated hospitals and clinics, no insurance, no co pays, free period.
It is not a level playing field with government competing against private insurance and for profit care providers for patients, nor should it be.
Government needs to become the basic necessities no frills provider of health care.
Nobody can collect the money to pay for health care as cheaply as the government can through a national sales tax, as opposed to forcing individuals and businesses to purchase questionable insurance to pay for expensive services in a system that has failed so many, and nobody can deliver high quality care and medications as cost effectively as the VA has for years.
Private health care's roll in public/private reform should be to attract every client they can who would find their services so compelling that patients would pay good money to voluntarily purchase their services which in a new system would be free of all government regulation except for safety.
All government mandated programs could be distributed through government hospitals at a fraction of the costs spent now by taxpayers to private systems, and the new system would produce true savings of hundreds of billions of dollars annually from the $2.5trillion spent last year, and no one would be left without care.
Businesses which select public care for their employees should have no further involvement to either pay anything for care or be involved in any way with health care.
Entrepreneurs and businesses could go back to doing what they do best, creating goods, services, jobs, profits, and tax revenues, when liberated from health care costs and hassles.
For seniors care and medications at public facilities would be free, no more doughnut holes and no insurance or co pays required.
This solves the Medicare, Medicaid and all other government funded cost control problems that no one will talk about, while giving seniors an infinitely better deal than they have today and much better than the convoluted reform being touted.
Going back and forth between free public, and user purchased private care, may suit some people, and it would provide unlimited choices, ultimate freedom, and always free public care would be available when it is needed or desired to everyone who asks for it with no restrictions.
Aug 2, 2009 at 8:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
Whythink, the strawman used by those for national healthcare is people that loose everything because of an illness/disease/injury/surgery.
Not one of the current proposals will fix this! If a person is off work up for any of the above they are not working; no work no pay. Even if there are reduced or no medical bills to pay there are still mortgages/loans/food/necessities so the big “scare” of not loosing everything is not gone.
If the true concern is over loosing everything when out of work than address that, but don’t lie about fixing it with health care reform.
Aug 1, 2009 at 10:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
booch,
Driving a car versus someone debating if I can afford the surgery I need or not. I see a big difference in car/home insurance and going broke because of knee surgery or brain surgery.
.
RAF,
Yes, using the unknown based on a bill many say they haven't read but can site to scare people about the future they cannot predict is happening. I believe that is wrong.
.
Using facts and personal stories about people who have LOST, not will lose, but already LOST, their home because of the cost of surgery w/out insurance is being informative.
.
Health insurance is a scary issue.
However, at this time, the group using actual facts that have already happened to make a claim for change is doing the right thing. The change they want may not work but at least they are trying to make things better.
.
Those against reform are using some strange arguments
. 80% of people have insurance so little change is needed.
. Everyone can get care, so forget the costs, care is available.
. We aren't being allowed to read the bill so the Dems. are hiding things, bad things.
. Article ... of the bill says this and that will cost all of you quality of care, $$$, more $$$ and old people, you will all be forced to die, alone with no care at all.
. The biggest lie of all, "gov't take over of health insurance."
.
Again, I am not sure what the best outcome was but the 80% argument is quite scary.
. I wonder, were 80% of the people happy with seperate but equal?
. Were 80% happy with women making less and/or not being able to vote?
.
I am lucky, I am in the 80% but work with many who aren't. Parents who can't medicate their child for ADHD because they just changed jobs and can't afford it until their insurance takes over. My friend who went $20k in debt because he needed knee surgery from a pick-up basketball game. Those are mild, I see the medical bills my insurance pays for stiches, tubes being put in my child's ear, an x-ray, etc...
.
Something must change because currently, for some health insurance and health care is scary.
.
We the people, not me the person.
Jul 31, 2009 at 8:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
Tort reform is the answer....Remember Liebeck v. McDonalds? $2.86 MILLION for spilled coffe --- REALLY!!!! Come on, there are hundreds of others the same way. ALL companies including Insurance Co's HAVE to "prepare" for this which causes massive increased rates. How many doctors get hit with lawsuits? Billions are spent on malpractice insurance alone - the actual cost of the health care would be tremendously lower. Its time to stop the craziness & then everyone could afford health care - that actually wanted it. Also, how about treating the illegal aliens for Life Threatening conditions - enough to stabilize then transport them by putting them on a bus / plane back to their country of orgin & letting them deal with it.
Jul 31, 2009 at 3:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
i think ALL insurance is a right.
If I live in a flood plain, the government should pay.
***
if i drive a car -- the government should pay (we all need to drive don't we?)
****
owning a home is a RIGHT isn't it? Therefore, the government should pay my homeowners insurance.
****
the wealthy can afford to pay damages from a fire or a flood. and those fatcats can afford expensive auto repairs. -- therefore --- THEREFORE -- tax them at 10% instead of the 5.4 proposed for health care.
***
THEN, we can all have our cake and eat it too.
Jul 31, 2009 at 10:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
ARRRGH! Me thinks the scurvy rats are everywhere.http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2009/07/31/medicare-ad-exaggeration523.html RAmen
Jul 31, 2009 at 9:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
"if you get care without insurance say good bye to your house, car, life savings, retirement, etc..."
-
And you just complained of others using scare tactics...
Jul 31, 2009 at 9:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
I just wish the health insurance companies would find their soul and stop screwing us to make record billions.
.
I like the idea of a government option but the numbers are scary. I strongly believe that we can't sit back and watch the health insurance industry continue to make record profits while the costs of health care goes up. Something must change.
.
I also believe that the far right extremists like Rush and Hannity and most of fox news, have ruined any chance of a positive discussion on this topic with their scare tactics (gov't take over, no care for the elderly, etc...). In addition, there "nothing is wrong because everyone gets care" claim. That is true, but if you get care without insurance say good bye to your house, car, life savings, retirement, etc...
.
I do recognize that some liberals have tried to scare us as well. The reasons are no longer just the millions of uninsured. That I don't like.
.
Does anyone care about the millions of uninsured Americans?
.
BTW, I believe along with a Strong Public Option, Strong Tort Reform is necessary. The lawyers should be the second target behind the insurance company. Obama has disappointed me on this issue.
.
Too much politics on both sides and not enough HONEST solutions.
.
Jul 31, 2009 at 8:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
The only place the proposed reform would have worked is fantasyland. The system would have bred corruption the likes of which has never been seen--and that's not even accounted for with the ever increasing price tag. We started at $1 trillion....now were up to $1.6 trillion......End this thing before it has a chance to break us all......
Jul 31, 2009 at 8:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
here is a site that all should look at and then ask the senators etc if they have read the bill!!http://www.liberty.edu/media/9980/attachments/healthcare_overview_obama_072909.pdf
Jul 31, 2009 at 12:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
I think you nailed it. How will Obama force 30 million or so illegal aliens to buy health insurance? If hospitals don't get paid for the care given to illegal aliens the cost is just shifted to legal citizens via higher charges to insurance companies causing higher premiums, in essence providing free insurance to illegal aliens.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.