The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
And if it doesn't pass "as is" expect it not to pass at all, followed by noimprovements, corrections, repeals, or finesse anytime soon thereafter.
So, what would you rather have 15 years from now? The current system, or the Senate Bill?
Oh, by the way, on the no improvements hereafter point... Politico has Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi work to save health care reform
Struggling to salvage health reform, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have begun considering a list of changes to the Senate bill in hopes of making it acceptable to liberal House members, according to sources familiar with the situation. The changes could be included in separate legislation that, if passed, would pave the way for House approval of the Senate bill -- a move that would preserve President Barack Obama's vision of a sweeping health reform plan. But the move comes with political risk, because it would open Democrats up to charges that they pressed ahead with roughly the same health care bill that voters appeared to reject in the Massachusetts Senate race Tuesday. Republican Scott Brown won on a pledge to try to block Obama-style health reform.
The changes could be included in separate legislation that, if passed, would pave the way for House approval of the Senate bill -- a move that would preserve President Barack Obama's vision of a sweeping health reform plan.
But the move comes with political risk, because it would open Democrats up to charges that they pressed ahead with roughly the same health care bill that voters appeared to reject in the Massachusetts Senate race Tuesday. Republican Scott Brown won on a pledge to try to block Obama-style health reform.
The worrying point is that some parts of the bill only kick in after several years. It might be easier to take away an entitlement that has only been promised, but not actually given.
Sunset clauses mean that the accountants can pretend that some measure will be a temporary rather than recurring expense. (To be fair to Enron, this is not actually Enron accounting - it's WorldCom accounting.)
Gradual kick-ins mean that costs will only come into effect some way through the accountants' ten-year forecasts. Which, of course, permits a politician to say "it will cost only N million per year over the next ten years," when the true story is that "it will cost 0 million per year for the next three years, N million per year for the four years following that, and 2N million per year after that until the heat death of the universe."
Krugman had a nice deconstruction of these mechanics when he critiqued the Bush tax cuts back in 2001, but damned if I can find it.
- Jake If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.
by DoDo - May 23 41 comments
by Nomad - May 10 14 comments
by JakeS - May 15 7 comments
by Metatone - May 14 85 comments
by ARGeezer - May 16 15 comments
by gmoke - May 17 2 comments
by DoDo - May 12 11 comments
by Migeru - May 6 100 comments
by ARGeezer - May 241 comment
by DoDo - May 2341 comments
by gmoke - May 172 comments
by ARGeezer - May 1615 comments
by JakeS - May 157 comments
by Metatone - May 1485 comments
by DoDo - May 1211 comments
by Nomad - May 1014 comments
by Migeru - May 78 comments
by marco - May 782 comments
by Migeru - May 6100 comments
by Ted Welch - May 35 comments
by afew - May 341 comments
by ceebs - May 26 comments
by gmoke - Apr 301 comment
by Frank Schnittger - Apr 3067 comments
by joelado - Apr 2954 comments
by Metatone - Apr 2854 comments
by ATinNM - Apr 275 comments
by ceebs - Apr 265 comments