It looks like President Obama and the signature achievement of his Presidency, i.e. the Affordable Care Act which is commonly known as “Obamacare”, is experiencing some tough sledding. There’s a good article in the National Journal that sums up what is really happening now. In a nutshell, the wealth redistribution effects of ObamaCare are now being realized. And it is very uncertain that political support for it can be maintained now that more and more ordinary citizens are feeling the effects of these re-distributions.

These effects may get even worse in 2014 when the employer mandates fully kick in and a lot of people lose their employer health coverage (which is already starting, as some companies are dropping coverage of part-timers). The wealth redistribution from ObamaCare is generally from rich to poor, young to old, health to sick – and this has been allowable, up to a point, in US politics (Social Security and Medicare both do this).

HOWEVER – at some point, the political backlash from the rich (and the somewhat better off), the young and the healthy can get very strong. The primary example being cited is the failure of the 1988 Catastrophic Care Medicare expansion  »  continue reading …

I have said several times here on my blog soapbox (and on my web site) that I think that a voucher system is the best way to get the health care cost crisis from ruining our economic future.  I wouldn’t say that vouchers are a “perfect” way, nor would I claim that a voucher system would have no side effects (most all good medicines have some).  But I do think that it’s the best of the list of messy options available for health care reform (this list includes notorious characters such as: do nothing at all as things continue to worsen; socialize all medical practice; socialize the payment system i.e. “single payer”; continue over-regulating medicine and insurance with overly complex, contorted, no-longer-understandable laws and myriad agencies – i.e., Romneycare, Hilarycare and now Obamacare; or get government completely out of medicine i.e. survival of the richest).  A voucher system can be tweeked in many ways as to promote economic fairness and maximize access to good health care. (I won’t say GUARANTEE ACCESS TO THE BEST HEALTHCARE, as most politicians do; I have higher standards of veracity than most of them, which still isn’t saying much these days).
 
So, I was rather pleased to see that Senator Ron Wyden, the thinking man’s Democrat when it comes to health care issues, has teamed up with GOP social program slasher Rep. Paul Ryan to promote a new plan for the overhaul of Medicare, one that relies heavily on vouchers to get costs under control.  I’ve only read the summary of the plan, I’m not familiar with all the details, nor the devils that no doubt lie within.  However, on the surface, it seems promising.  First off, it won’t affect people 55 and over (which includes me, to be quite honest!).  We will still get the old-fashioned, high-cost Medicare that everyone has come to hate and yet crave at the same time.  But younger people would face a choice between old-fashioned Medicare and a cost-indexed “insurance support system” that is basically a voucher to purchase a comprehensive health insurance plan. 
 
Actually, that’s not such a new thing; the Medicare Advantage program has been around since the GW Bush days as an option to all Medicare recipients.  Medicare Advantage isn’t exactly  »  continue reading …

There’s a great debate going on in American politics today, but it’s all very cryptic. Neither the liberal Democrats nor the conservative Republicans (including the T-Partiers) want to say what they really mean, so the argument goes on in code. This argument is all about where and how we should live. But no one will just come out and say that.

The Dems hint that they favor the new-urbanist vision of the “green, efficient and sustainable city”. These are the kind of places that progressive and educated people seem to favor (at least in theory – where they actually live can be another matter). Not surprisingly, people who support the urban vision usually vote Democratic. For better or worse, however, the Dem liberals can’t just come out and say that city living is better (in theory, at least).

Why not? Because most Americans live in the suburbs. Most of the votes come from the ‘burbs. The Dems don’t want to  »  continue reading …