LyrArc Article Gist
Allan Blinder gives a spirited account of what he sees in the Paul Ryan Republican deficit reduction plan. He says that with the voucher plan retirees would fall further and further behind the increasing cost of health insurance. With no explicit cost containment proposals it assumes that some kind of miracle will occur for costs to be kept in check- especially as Republicans want to repeal the cost containment proposals in the President's healthcare plan. He asks whether someone is saying, that we have to destroy Medicare so it can be saved. Ryan woulld also turn Medicaid into a block grant, then underfund it and let the states figure it out when they are in a budget squeeze. Blinder points to the estimates of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, that show about two-thirds of Ryan's budget cuts would come from programs that serve low and moderate income Americans. And to make matters worse the steep spending cuts go to finance tax cuts that largely benefit the wealthy. He calls this Robin Hood operating in reverse, and coming on top of 30 plus years of rising inequality. David Stockman makes a similiar point on the editorial pages of the New York Times, April 24, 2011; also adding the point that the middle class will have to pay higher taxes for the deficit to be addressed, something President Obama's plan fails to do. Blinder says that the Bowles-Simpson and Rivlin -Domenici proposals attack the deficit reduction problem in a better way, that asks something from all classes and interests. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A health care practitioner says the real problem is the high cost of medical care in the U.S. when compared to other countries. She points out that the Obama bill in 2008 did not take effective steps to bring down the cost of health care before enacting legislation to cover the uninsured, leading to higher premiums for the middle class. The link between healthcare and profits is seen as the main problem. 

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman compares the Republican Ryan Plan and the plan proposed by President Obama for deficit reduction. He also compares the Ryan plan on Medicare and Obama's proposed plan for Medicare.

LyrArc Article Gist
Brooks looks at the Obama and Ryan deficit reduction plans and sees something to like in both plans. He agrees with Ryan that modern medical technologies are becoming too costly to afford- especially with aging populations here and in Europe- and the need for consumers of medical care to shoulder some of the burden to control these costs. He agrees also with Ryan on the need for seniors and the middle class to share some of the burden of rebalancing benefit systems. He agrees with Obama in the need for a balanced approach combining tax increases with spending cuts, and the contribution government can make through targeted investments. He is pessimistic about the chances of bringing the two approaches together taking their best points because of the political climate which is increasingly partisan.

LyrArc Article Gist
This is an exceptionally humorous operating room story of Dr. Trump and Dr. McConnell by Kristof of the NYT. Sometimes humor tells the story- and Kristof does this using a story of a surgeon president Trump in the operating Room trying to address the concerns of the patient Janet, as he keeps telling her she needs a new heart with great benefits, great benefits, before she implodes or goes down failing. Flat out take the old heart out even if a replacement hasn't been found, believe me great benefits the surgeon tells her, just that the patient just isn't getting convinced as its happening to her. The analogy is with replacing a health care plan, not just the Obama plan, any plan without something to take its place. For a few days before this article by Kristof, the Republican effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act without having a replacement was presented as a good idea. Janet is like the three Republican women- Collins of Maine, Capito of West Virginia, and Murkowski of Alaska who wanted to keep the heart they had till a replacement was found, against the surgeon Trump's advice. In a way it is about politicians in the last decade who never had any discussions as they rushed through with their own agendas, as the Republican and Democratic health care plans were rushed through Congress with relatively little participation and debate to hear all viewpoints. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
With the rushed approach adopted by the Trump administration not enough consideration was given to winning support in the House from 25 conservatives in the Freedom Caucus. Without their support the bill cannot be passed in the House of Representatives. The fight also includes one over what are essential health benefits including whether  maternity care would be included. As a result some moderate Republicans are also expressing opposition on the grounds that less people will be covered and fewer benefits will be provided under the Republican House plan called AHCA. President Trump has not involved himself in the details, and the bill comes very early in the first 100 days, leading to the perception that health care has become a partisan conflict without really grappling with the problems of high cost of health care and creating a solution that all can support. Democrats are seen as having made the same error early in Obama administration's first term. President Trump sees this as a much needed win with a drop in his approval ratings, making this even less of an effort to come out with a good plan.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The startling truth about health "reforms," - they won't control spending, and without that the whole system of health care will rapidly become unaffordable and unsustainable. Obama's Council of Economic Advisors points out in new report that since 1975 annual health spending per person, adjusted for inflation has grown 2.1 percentage points faster than overall economic growth per person. At this rate health spending which was 5% of the GDP in 1960, and is 18% of GDP today, would grow to 40% of GDP in 2040. Medicare and Medicaid would increase from 6% of GDP now to 15% in 2040, or equal to three fourths of federal spending. Employer paid insurance premiums for families which grew 85% in inflation adjusted terms from 1996 to $11,941 in 2006, would increase to $25,200 by 2025 and $45,000 in 2040. This would force employers to reduce take home pay. Samuelson says the uncontrolled health spending is singlehandedly determining national priorities, reducing discretionary income, raising taxes, widening budget deficits and squeezing other government programs, while it is producing large amount of waste in medical spending. See the link to Prof. Tyler Cowen of George Mason University in NYT, 6/14/ 2009, who cites the habit of doctors to write many expensive tests as one of the prime culprits in the wasteful spending. And in the process it delivers higher cost for lower overall quality of health for the American people. This at a time when many European countries provide live examples of doing it in a better way- lower cost, better health. The serious problem with the Obama health reforms says Samuelson is that it talks about restraining spending but may end up increasing spending. Its talk about controlling spending he says is good intentions, but based more on hopeful thinking, public realtions and risks becoming cosmetic reform. Because to really control spending will require coming to grips with its fundamental cause- hospitals and doctors are paid mostly on a fee-for-service basis and reimbursed by insurance, private or governmental. Such a system encourages doctors and hospitals to provide more services, expensive tests, favors heavy use of expensive medical technologies to increase profits, and for patients to expect them. Samuelson puts his finger on the root of the problem - there is no incentive and every disincentive for all the players in this game , doctors, hospitals and patients to seek reform of this system. For doctors and hospitals the hope would be that this cosmetic "reform" would leave the system basically unchanged, and patients to continue with a lifestyle and expectations that do not not acknowledge the fact that a lot of healthcare does not come from spending but from preventative care, education, good eating and exercize habits, and healthy lifestyles. And the uninsured are no exception, they would simply start consuming the expensive care for lower quality of overall health like everyone else. With this kind of situation confronting us, the views of Samuelson, and Professor Tyler Cowen of George Mason University, as welll as a growing chorus of informed public opinion on this subject, is that insuring the uninsured is a good idea, but doing it within the bounds of the present system, can only increase the costs. And too much is at risk, to rely on what Samuelson calls a scattershot of measures to control costs made up by Congress such as "evidence -based guidelines," "electronic record-keeping," "bundled payments to hospitals, to give the illusion of progress that won't make a serious difference. A sweeping restructuring of health care is needed, that would overhaul "fee-for-service" payment and reduce the fragmentation of care. It will also need what has not even be touched on adequately in the debate. This is the massive need for education in the schools about nutrition, eating, exercize, healthy lifestyles. It would also require opinion leaders in each field from sports and other fields to lead by example and with constant public presence, the media, and companies to form a partnership with private institutions to change existing eating habits and lifestyles that encourage obesity, smoking, fast food eating habits, large portions in restaurants....

LyrArc Article Gist
Lipton, Austin and LaFraniere of the NYT tell the story of how the serious differences between the prime contractor for the federal healthcare website, CGI Federal, and the Obama administration officials handling the website, evolved into conflicts that could not be resolved. This led to the flawed website being rolled out on schedule ignoring serious problems with the website. The detailed report comes after interviews with Obama administration officials and specialists who worked on the project and looking into government and contractor documents. A month ago in October 2013 the healthcare website for the Obama healthcare law was up only 42% of the time with 10 hour failures happening frequently. Basic steps for the functioning of website backup systems in case there is a failure, testing to ensure negligible or no outages, were not secured. The government officials responsible for the rollout did not have the capabilities to handle such a project. Henry Chao, who worked in the Medicare agency for 19 years was left to oversee day to day questions for the website HealthCare.gov, but lacked a formal background in software engineering and no authority to make the decisions needed. The $630 million project was setup inside the Medicare Agency, instead of a separate agency specially setup for this project and staffed with the appropriate skills as originally proposed. Five different lower level government officials made decisions without the authority needed and no one person with the necessary skills was given overall responsibility and decisionmaking. A series of missteps were allowed to take place- settting many added requirements that made it difficult for contractors to focus on basic steps and get them right, use of the MarkLogic database system instead of systems from IBM or Oracle against the advice of contractors, multiple contractors without a way to control the overall project, shifting requirements from the government and bureaucratic delays for resolving basic issues such as use of social security numbers, all worked to create delays. With the delays came a deterioration of relations between Obama administration officials and the contractors. The government officials response was to stick to the deadline of Oct. 1 rollout, with Michelle Snyder, chief operating officer of Medicare agency telling people she would fire the contractor if possible. In the end no one took responsibility for a safe reliable rollout, even though the system failed a test of 500 users in late September and was down half the time in mid-October. President Obama or his advisors were either not kept fully informed, or did not grasp the significance of the collapse in relations between contractors and the government and a project out of control. His aloof distanced approach was not an asset in such matters- saying about the rollout and use of the website: "this is real simple" like using the Kayak website for travel bookings- and he saw no need to take action leading to the major failure for the administration that followed....

LyrArc Article Gist
David Brooks says the Paul Ryan Budget proposal is a bold step forward that is badly needed in this debate on health care, even though it has some grave weaknesses which need to be corrected. It is a bold step forward because he says Democrats say they want no middle class tax increases, or are not willing to say what kinds of tax increases they support, and yet they believe the Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security programs are worth preserving. This is'nt based on reality. He cites the weaknesses, beginning with the one discussed in David Leonhardt's column in the New York Times on April 7, 2011. Too many Americans pay too little into Medicare taxes and expect to collect several hundred thousand dollars more in Medicare benefits. The example given in Leonhardt's column is from a study that shows 56 year olds with average earnings pay about $140,000 in dedicated Medicare taxes over a lifetime, and then go on to collect $430,000 in benefits. Middle class and affluent boomers can't get off paying their share like everybody else. Its just the right way for their children and the nation's children. Ryan's plan excludes older people reaching retirement in ten years. The other major weakness is that the cuts are too deep. Things like the Pell grants which Ryan proposes to cut back to 2008 levels need to be preserved, and more money has to go into science, education and research and early childhood education for the U.S. to be competitive with China and India. The Ryan proposal places cuts that would be required so that tax revenues need to be at 18% of GDP. The number where a larger consensus exists is for tax revenues at 20% of GDP (also supported by business and the Wall Street Journal's editorial columns). This would preserve programs that are most productive for the economic future of the U.S. Ryan's proposal lets the hope for reducing costs of medical care rest entirely on future retirees deciding how much medical care (tests, procedures etc) they consume through larger cost sharing. Yet a structure and framework is needed to manage these costs effectively, and some combination of incentives to retirees to control costs and an effective structural framework is needed. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
UnitedHealthcare says it will keep parts of the healthcare law relating to preventive healthcare services without co-payments, allowing parents to keep children on insurance till age of 26, even if the Supreme Court rules against the healthcare law. Most insurers see these parts of the law that are popular quite favorably.

LyrArc Article Gist
Romney picks seven term Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan as his running mate for the 2012 U.S. presidential election. It is a daring pick because Ryan has clear ideas about reducing the U.S. deficit which are in sharp contrast to the approach taken by Obama and Biden, offering American voters a clear choice. This is similiar to the contrasting choices between Reagan-Bush and Carter-Mondale during a period of high unemployment and inflation in the 1980 presidential election. The contrast was also made clear by the release of the Shultz memo to President Reagan and the comparisons with the Reagan election by Romney economic advisor Glenn Hubbard, both recently published in WSJ.

LyrArc Article Gist
Clarence Cammers, 64, one of Paul Ryan's constituents back home in Wisconsin, has a question for Ryan at one of his townhall meetings. Clarence is worried about what would happen to his son Tim, 32, if Medicare cuts went through and his son had to use vouchers for getting health insurance. Ryan's district includes Racine withe high unemployment, and Janesville which was devastated by the closing of the General Motors plant in 2010. Most of the people there are conservative, believe in fiscal responsibility and a balanced budget, but they are also older, working class people. Some of them like Clarence are dependent on their Social Security check to get by from month to month and are not sure they can cope with the kinds of cuts Ryan is proposing. In this story Clarence and Tim discuss the meeting and come to the conclusion that Tim will lose either way- with taxes going up or Tim not getting the retirement that he should be getting. Clarence a life long saver decides he will cut back on his expenses and save $588 from his $1912 monthly social security check for Tim. Tim has severe attention deficit disorder and works for $10 an hour in food prep at a resort....

LyrArc Article Gist
Chief Justice Roberts let the Obama healthcare law stand arguing that the individual mandate for everyone to carry health insurance acted as a tax, and was on these grounds constitutional. Justice Roberts found middle ground by first rejecting the Obama's administration's argument that asking every American to buy health insurance was legal under the commerce clause, and following this with the a non partisan approach that found the mandate legal under the tax clause. Roberts was guided by the writings of an eminent legal authority, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes. Roberts referred to this in his opinion saying: "It is well established that if a statute has two possible meanings, one of which violates the constitution, courts should adopt the meaning that does not do so." Legal scholars speculate whether Roberts changed his vote later on or whether the Justice had used the questions in the hearings on the law to explore the idea that the law could be constitutional on different grounds. During the arguments in the hearings Roberts said: "The idea that the mandate is something separate from whether you want to call ita penalty or tax just doesn't seem to make much sense."...