LyrArc Article Gist
The US House of Representatives voted 245-189 in favor of repealing the health care law. Only 3 Democrats joined the entire Republican caucus in voting for repeal, compared to 34 Democrats who voted in March 2010 against the health care law. This is a largely symbolic move as the Democrat controlled Senate will not consider the repeal, and even if it did the President would veto it. Republicans favor some aspects of the health care law which allow children to be on the parent's insurance till age 26, and a ban on insurers denying coverage due to pre-existing conditions. Opinion polls show 46% of respondents opposed repealing and eliminating the law, and 45% favored repealing it. The health care issue ranks third among the economic issues important to respondents, behind unemployment and reducing the federal budget deficit.

LyrArc Article Gist
The House bill on health care cleared the House Committee on Energy and Commerce with a vote of 31 to 28. Five Democrats joined all 23 Republicans. Compromises were reached with Blue Dog Democrats, centrist Democrats who had concerns about the cost of the health care overhaul. The bill will be taken up again in September after the August recess, when Congress will be faced with the task of recociling the House and Senate versions and reaching common ground on a number of proposals. Some common ground has already been achieved between centris and Blue Dog Democrats and Democratic members who support Obama's proposals. Among the changes on which consensus was reached in the House version: 1. Access Insurers will have to accept all applicants and will not be able to charge higher premiums because of medical history or current illness. All insurers will have to offer a minimum package of benefits, to be defined by the federal government, and nearly all Americans will be required to have insurance. Insurers will have to get prior approval from the government before increasing premiums over a certain amount. About 95% of Americans will be covered this time. The cost will still be approaching $ 1trillion over 10 years. Federal subsidies will be given to those who cannot afford health insurance and Medicaid coverage will be expanded. And the insurance will be made more affordable for the uninsured. Democrats also reached a consensus on creating some sort of government insurance plan or nonprofit cooperative to compete with private insurers. 2. Mobility And under this new plan it will be easier to change jobs as one would retains one's health insurance. This should actually help the job market, and help promote the mobility that is needed, now that jobs are shifting out of sectors like autos to sectors like energy. 3. Cost The Energy and Commerce Committee voted 47 to 11 to set aprocedure for the government to give federal approval of generic versions of expensive biotechnology drugs. By one estimate this saves $9 billion over 10 years. The Democratic proposals from the Energy and Commerce Committee would authorize the Health and Human Services Secretary to negotiate prescription drug prices for Medicare benificiaries. The agreement and consensus among the conservative, liberal and centrist Democrats, and Democrats with ties and connections to the health care industry was reached after intensive negotiations, and adoption of a package of amendments that helped bridge the differences they had. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Estimates show the 50 million Americans enrolled in Medicare today will increase to 80 million by 2030, according to the program's actuaries. Simple demographics as the baby boom generation ages is making controlling the deficit without controlling increase in health care costs as both sides in the fiscal cliff negotiations are attempting to do can only lead to defunding critical areas such as education, R&D and infrastructure, and breaching the safety net for lower income Americans. Health care spending took up 7% of GDP in 1960, increasing to 17.9% of GDP in 2010. Federal spending on healthcare has grown to about 25% in 2012 from 10% in 1960, and is projected to increase to about 33% in ten years by the Congressional Budget Office.

LyrArc Article Gist
Christina Romer, Prof. of Economics at the University of California, Berkeley, was chairwoman of the Council of Economic Advisors under U.S. president Obama. Here she discusses the different aspects of the debate on raising the minimum wage. Romer says the negative effects on unemployment are small. The impact on consumer spending is also limited. The anti-poverty effects are real for raising the minimum wage from the current $7.25 an hour, says Romer, as over half the families earning a minimum wage make less than $40,000 an hour. President Obama called for raising the minimum wage to $9 an hour in 2013. Studies show 13 million U.S. workers earning less than $9 an hour. Raising the incomes of these families by about $3500 an year under the president's proposal gives workers badly needed income to cope with rising cost of gas, food and other basic necessities. The effects on consumer spending are small, estimated at between $10 to $20 billion. Its main virtue is keeping the principle of fairness and maintaining social cohesion at a time of increaing inequality. Romer says there is competition for workers which makes it possible for workers at the lower end to get a fair wage, but does not account for the effect of high unemployment which takes pressure off raising the minimum wage in the market economy. Another benefit for countries of keeping a fair minimum wage is that other actions can be taken to improve competitiveness for business and manufacturing and reducing the deficit and be seen in a positive context of overall improvement. This is part of the case made in Europe for boosting the mnimum wage as austerity measures are taking place....

LyrArc Article Gist
Alan Blinder, Princeton University professor and former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve, says the biggest reason for the growing deficit in the years out to 2040 is because of increases in health care spending. Its not that there is runaway spending in other areas. He cites CBO projections that show other costs stable relative to GDP from 2015 to 2035 and declining. This is why healthcare spending is at the heart of the problem. And why tackling the deficit has a lot to do with reducing healthcare cost increases.

LyrArc Article Gist
Washington Post editorial on the Obama Georgetown speech of April 13, 2009. It questions whether President Obama has the candour and courage to tackle the tough issues of deficit reduction and entitlement reform. New healthcare spending for coverage itself will add to entitlement, and it says some of the savings mentioned by the President are phony or already needed for new spending for the economic recovery and health care. At the same time the paper gives Obama good marks for his clarity and grasp of the crisis and steps for recovery, and the policy agenda in the areas of health care, energy and education. The questions about courage and candor also raise all the questions about facing upto the facts about insolvent banks that Krugman, Rosenfeld, the Economist and others have raised. Is Obama dodging the hard choices, is he dithering? On the toughest issues like foreclosures, insolvent banks, global regulation pushed by the Europeans, will he end up making inadequate or faulty choices, and when he comes around to making the tough choices, will he have lost so much valuable time as to prolong the crisis and stretch it out to many years....

LyrArc Article Gist
A WSJ/NBC poll of Sept 20, 2012 showing Obama with a eight percentage point lead in Iowa, and a five point lead in Colorado and Wisconsin.

LyrArc Article Gist
A study by AARP of 514 brand name and generic drugs between 2005 and 2009, shows that generic drug prices went down an average of 31% during this period, and brand name drug prices went up by 41%. One of the authors of the report says that it is important to look at individual drug prices and not studies showing total spending on drugs, because this is a significant cost for people paying out-of-pocket, It drives up insurance premiums, and pushes retirees into coverage gaps in Medicare Part D drug program. Analysts indicate pharmaceutical companies are increasing prices on drugs before patent expiration to get as much profit before the patents expire.

LyrArc Article Gist
Chile, Mexico and the U.S. rank high in the diabetes rate for top soda consuming countries. In the U.S. the diabetes rate is at 7.7% of the population, in Chile 9.6% and Mexico 9%. Soda consumption per capita was at 165 litres in the U.S., 146 litres in Mexico and 134 litres in Chile, and 145 litres in Argentina where the diabetes rate is at 3.9%, for 2012. A new public service ad in Mexico City subway stations says it all, showing an ad with a soda bottle and the words- "Would you take 12 teaspoonfuls of sugar? Soda is sweet, diabetes isn't." The new Pacto de Mexico agreed to by all major political parties includes the soaring diabetes rate in Mexico as a problem to be tackled, including lunches at public schools and the consumption of coke and sodas by children. A particular acute problem in Mexico is the lack of clean drinking water in many areas and the dependence on coke and sodas for liquids. But bottled water could be used in its place if available at lower prices. One proposal is for a soda tax which could generate $2 billion and be used for setting up clean drinking water fountains in schools and other places. Elected officals in Mexico are firm about the need for action, as Mexico recently became the first country over 100 million inhabitants with the highest obesity rates at 7 adults out of 10 over the age of 20 obese or overweight, and the consequently high diabetes rate. Diabetes is the No. 2 killer in Mexico, and a serious health danger. Coca Cola gets its second highest revenues from Mexico after Europe, and the situation has evolved after years of heavy coke advertising to the point where Coca Cola is taken at every meal by some Mexican families, and is a sign of prestige. The company's response is to fight the public service ads with ads showing people burning off 149 calories by walking. The country now faces a long and uphill fight. Russia is one of the countries which is also conducting a similiar fight against soda drinks. The Bloomberg Philanthropy is financing efforts against soda drinks in Mexico, as part of its campaign against smoking and sodas as health hazards, and this maybe Bloomberg's bigger contribution to society than his service to New York City. Developing middle income countries such as Mexico, Chile, India, China, Brazil, are the hardest hit by soaring diabetes. And the costs to their health systems in 10-20 years from uncontrolled obesity and diabetes will be enormous. The U.S. is a developed country with similiar high rates of obesity and diabetes, with soaring medical costs, and serious problems that strangely have not received the public awareness and efforts that one should expect. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican Majority leader in the U.S. Senate has come up with a new health care bill that is aimed at winning over reluctant Republican Senators. Two taxes on high income people on 3.8% investment income and a payroll tax of 0.9% on incomes over $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for couples are retained in this version of the bill, which adds $231 billion over a decade. Some of this is used to offset rising premiums in the new bill, and provide additional funds. The deep cuts to Medicaid are retained and Senator Collins of Maine says she is opposed to the new bill because this will hurt people in rural areas of Maine, and does nothing to change this. Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky is also opposed to the bill. Opposition comes from moderate Senators opposed to deep cuts to Medicaid in Republican health care alternatives to president Obama's Affordable Care Act, and from conservative Senators opposed for other reasons.  Senator Graham of South Carolina and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana introduced their own version just minutes before Mitch McConnell brought up his revised bill. All Democratic Senators are opposed to the Republican bill and call the deep cuts to Medicaid disastrous for lower income people.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
President Obama's speech announcing the details of his executive order on immigration on Nov. 20, 2014, starts by saying he is not bypassing Congress or the Republicans. He says Republicans had the opportunity to pass legislation in the House that passed the Senate, or come up with their own bill. And still have an opportunity to come up with a bill he could sign into law that address the shortcomings of the current immigration system. In selling the bill to Americans he points out that this is not an amnesty, that the current system which allows immigrants here to stay illegally without paying taxes or any accountability is an amnesty. He points to deportation of millions as not an option, an out of the character of America. That deportation of criminals will continue and is up 80% in his administration, without mentioning that deportation under his administration for ordinary undocumented immigrants without any criminal record had reached a high of 400,000 a year under his administration, higher than under the Republican Bush administration. In fact it had reached such levels that Hispanic groups stated they would sit out the midterm 2014 elections and not vote for Democrats or Republicans, after providing a significant part of the winning margin for Obama in the 2012 presidential election. President Obama says he has the legal authority to prevent deportation, and that this is essentially what this executive order does- providing a temporary right to stay and work in this country to undocumented immigrants here living in the shadows who are here for more than 5 years, not a permanent status or citizenship. He cites other presidential decisions of the last 50 years, Republican and Democratic, that have integrated large groups of undocumented immigrants, including an executive order by President Reagan. And he refers to the Bush presidencies 41 and 43, where both father and son, considered Hispanic Americans "a part of American life," as good hard-working people deserving a chance to be Americans. The speech ends with an appeal to the compassion of Americans urging them to look at their own individual stories going back one, two or several generations, or Ellis Island where the early waves of European immigrants entered the country in the 19th century, and to immigrants from the period after the early British settlements in the 18th century. This is typical Obama, as much as the calculated decision to pursue a aggressive deportation policy was for the first 6 years of his administration, including the decision for "Dreamers" or young people before the 2012 election. "Scripture tells us, we shall not oppress a stranger, for we know the heart of a stranger. we were strangers once, too. And whether our forbears were strangers who crossed the Atlantic, or the Pacific, or the Rio Grande, we are here because this country welcomed them in." Over 2 million deportations in one of the most aggressive deportation policies of any administration, followed by an effort to stop deportations before the next presidential election, when the NYT had called his deportation policy "infuriating." ...