December 15, 2010

Health care reform act blogging

This guy, Jim Hufford, is very much worth reading.

Fair, sensible, and well informed.


gnarlytrombone said...

the unique character of health insurance markets could be the key

This is what I was trying to noodle about yesterday. It still seems to me to be ornery logic: "It's commerce but it's not really 'commerce.'"

illusory tenant said...

Indeed, that's what SCOTUS will have to do in order to uphold the provision: demarcate between the realm of health care and all other forms of commercial activity. Otherwise there'll be a revolution.

gnarlytrombone said...

Rick Perlstein makes a pertinent observation at the end of this essay on the demonization of gubmint and deification of bidness.

The party of government itself, the Democratic Party, of its own, activist volition, passes a comprehensive health-care bill instructing the middle class that the federal government shall no longer just provide monthly checks to you for the rest of your life beginning when you are 65. It will require that you write the monthly checks to certain corporations that have now become generous protectors of middle-class interests, by official government mandate

I think that's the source of a lot of the liberal denial. First conservatives block the best avenue to sane health care policy. Then they come up with this semi-privatized RomneyCare kludge. Liberals hate it because it certifies that business has indeed been deified, but swallow hard and move on.

To have the plan derailed because of that sop to bidness is an irony too painful to bear...

Medical Rate said...

Maybe a moot point since the funding for the bill will be hard to get with the change in Congress.

And with all of the exceptions that are being handed out, why even go forward with the bill?