Category: Politics

The bleeding hearts will give you statistics like, “22,000 adults died in 2006 because they did not have health insurance” as a reason to support the Obama Health Care Plan.  While that is sad, Obama’s plan DOES NOTHING to solve this particular problem.

Let’s break it down.

America has about 3.5M homeless.  1.4M of those are children.  That means 2.1M adult homeless people.  How many of these people have medical insurance?  None.

For the adult homeless, let’s assume a fixed distribution between 19 and 75, and lets assume they have a typical life expectancy (although they probably live less).  That means that at least 38,596 of them will die this year.  Will many of them die because they didn’t have health insurance?  Of course!  But unless Obama’s magic health care plan can also solve homelessness, these statistics aren’t going to change one bit.  So the whole claim that this is a problem with our insurance program is bunk.

Make your own conclusions about Obama’s health care plan.  But when you hear these ludicrous arguments about “number of uninsured Americans”, “number of Americans to die without insurance”, “high cost of insurance” – remember these statistics are very complicated and never accurately summarized in a pithy headline.

I received the following letter from Senator Boxer today.  Inline are my thoughts.

Dear Friend:
I need your help.
Making sure America’s families have access to affordable, quality health care is a complex challenge, but one we simply cannot afford to ignore any longer.

Who is ignoring it?  I’m not; you’re not.

The status quo is unsustainable:

I agree.

46 million Americans have no health insurance.

Yes, we also have about 30 million unemployed Americans.  If you will focus on growing employment, many of the 46 million will be able to afford health insurance.  You point out that health care costs too much; how will your plan reduce the cost of healthcare?

America also has about 60 million smokers.  About 9 million of the 46 million uninsured people you mention are smokers – should they be allowed to continue smoking while we are paying for their healthcare?  Is it fair that they don’t pay for their own insurance when they’re buying cigarettes which kill them?

The U.S. spends more than twice as much on health care per person than most other industrialized nations, yet we rank 29th out of 30 industrialized nations on infant mortality.

This doesn’t appear to be true (see stats).  While it is sad that the mortality rate is not lower, it is not clear that this is an indictment of the American medical system.  Moreover, how is your plan going to fix it?  I don’t see any evidence that it will.

America has the best medical care in the world – bar none.  Americans don’t fly out of country to have surgery – to the contrary, foreigners fly here to have surgery.  The best medical care costs money, and the counter examples you provide are not representative of the entire system.  Yes, we should work to reduce the infant mortality rate, but we should do many things – including cure cancer too.

Employer-sponsored health insurance premiums have more than doubled in the last nine years.
And, a recent study found that, if we do nothing, families in many states, including California, will have to spend 40% or more of their pre-tax income on health insurance through their employer.

Yes – why are they paid pre-tax?  Why do health insurers get paid with pre-tax dollars while the rest of us are paid with after-tax dollars?  Stop subsidizing the medical industry with pre-tax dollars and costs will come down.

The time for action is now.

I agree – you mentioned that already.  But your plan doesn’t even address the problems you’ve listed, so I don’t think it is a good one.

What about the rising cost of malpractice insurance?  Why don’t you fix that?  Oh – right – your husband is a lawyer.  You wouldn’t want to take away his revenue stream.

As I work with my Senate colleagues to craft healthcare reform legislation, I ask you to help me by sharing your stories and experiences – both good and bad – with our healthcare system. 
Please go to http://boxer.senate.gov/features/healthcare/submit.cfm  to share your stories with me. 
I look forward to hearing from you.

Thank you for the letter.

Sincerely,
Barbara Boxer
United States Senator

Here’s the simple how-to guide for voting on Tuesday.

Prop 1A – NO
This confused proposition claims to limit state spending, but the first thing it does is create a “rainy day slush fund” to the tune of ~$16B.  There are only 28M Californians, folks.  That means taxes of $571 from every man, woman and child in the state.  But since only 18M of those people want to work, and another 11.5% are unemployed, each worker will get hit with ~$968!  Yes, we should limit state spending.  As far as I can tell, this is an increase in spending.

Prop 1B – NO
California has not been able to pass a budget largely because legislators have their hands tied.  Propositions like 1B mandate spending in certain areas without consideration for future events.  When crunch time hits, legislators need maneuverability.  We cannot predict the future, and guaranteed spending always hurts.  Experts agree this will be roughly a $10B tax increase starting in 2011.  Further, in order for this law to work, you need to vote yes on 1A.

Prop 1C – NO
The proposition calls itself a “lottery modernization act”, but really it is a loan from the lottery to the state for $5B to cover more spending.   This would also make lottery profits no longer guaranteed for education.  We don’t need more loans for the state to pay back later.

Prop 1D – NO
Redirects funding from 1998’s Proposition 10 so that funding can be used for purposes other than what was designed in 1998.  This is a great example of why propositions are a bad idea.  In 1998, Prop 10 passed.  But now, the state is in a jam and wants the money to use for something else.  Let’s repeal Prop 10 altogether, not amend it to create more crazy spending plans.

Prop 1E – NO
Like Prop 1D, this proposition is redirecting funds to new purposes.  Prop 1E proposes to change the funding plan for 2004’s Proposition 63, which guaranteed funding for certain mental health services.  Now, the state is in a jam and wants to spend it on something else.  Like with Prop 1D, let’s just eliminate Prop 63 rather than create more complications in our budget.

Prop 1F – NO
This law would prevent salary increases for legislators when there is a deficit.  I don’t disagree, but we don’t need such a stupid law.  It has trivial effect on our overall state economy, and we should be more strict about balancing the budget rather than creating penalties for deficits.

Conclusion
The cheat sheet for this year’s election is simple.  NO.  NO. NO. NO. NO. NO.  Get the pattern?

Several of the propositions are about changing earlier propositions (the lottery, prop 10, and prop 64) so that we can balance the budget by using those guaranteed funds for new purposes.  I agree we need to unlock funds so that we can balance our budget.   But creating new, cockamamie laws isn’t the answer.  Let’s repeal the guaranteed spending initiatives altogether.

Doesn’t look like my 64% number was right, but I still think its going to be a landslide.

Putting my prediction out long before the rest of the media will (they want the drama!).

Obama’s going to win big in November – he’ll amass at least 64% of the popular vote.

If you were Barack Obama, and you decided you wanted Clinton to be your VP, who would you pick?

I thought it was rare for candidates to win without the popular vote.  However, we are seeing it twice within 8 years:  Obama is going to win the nomination without holding the majority of votes.  Fortunately, this is the nomination, and not the election.  But there is so much Obama fanfare here in Silicon Valley that I don’t hear anyone complaining.  Regardless of who you voted for – doesn’t this bother you?  Maybe you think Michigan voters don’t deserve to vote?