Krugman: Health Reform Revelations

[ProSense]

Health Reform Revelations

One of the side benefits of health reform is that it has acted as a character test. If, for example, you thought of Mitt Romney as a person of character, his desperate attempts to disavow what is essentially his own policy proposal have cured you of that affliction. And as Menzie Chinn points out, Robert Samuelson’s hysterical reaction to what is, when all is said and done, a fairly modest — and paid for! — expansion of social insurance tells what what really lies behind his constant harping on the long-run fiscal issue.

Menzie has a nice chart comparing four policies and their impact on the budget: the two big Bush tax cuts, the Iraq war, and the health reform:



It’s curious, then, that Samuelson and others are driven wild only by the last of these. But Dan Gross explained it all a while back: it’s about

a strain of intellectual Toryism bedeviled by the haunting fear that someone, somewhere may be getting social insurance.

All that high-minded talk about fiscal responsibility is just a cover for this deeper-seated concern.

[Cali_Democrat]

1. Excellent piece by Krugman

Exposes GOP hypocrisy with regard to war spending, tax cuts and healthcare.

Rec'd

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

4. One of the bigger GOP shams was the Medicare Prescription Drug Plan (Part D)

that was passed at 3:00 in the morning way back in 2005.

When I hear the Repukes running around claiming that the bill cuts Medicare spending--pretending that they actually like entitlement programs--they are lying through their teeth.

The reform package addresses waste, fraud and attempts to reduce other administrative costs that add to the deficit.

It also addresses the donut hole.

In reality, it was the Republican Prescription Drug Plan that awarded billions in tax payer dollars to the industry, ALL UNPAID FOR.

Perhaps this analysis should be redone to reflect this fact.

[unblock]

2. the talk about "fiscal responsibility" goes far beyond health insurance

remember, they're all about "fiscal responsibility" when they're NOT in power and when democrats are in a position to choose how the governments money gets spent. then, "deficits don't matter" when the republicans are in charge. the sharp distinction coinciding exactly with the 8 years shrub occupied the white house is quite telling.

it's a blanket attack against the democrats doing ANYTHING constructive. it's obstructionism, plain and simple. and as the article shows, they'll even lie if they have to to attack a democratic law. so even something that reduces the deficit is somehow deemed fiscally irresponsible.

partisan hacks.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

3. Just who thought of Romney as a "person of character"? He's the biggest charlatan

and hypocrite around. Krugman needs to rewrite that sentence for real, unless he's being tongue n cheek.

[MissMarple]

5. Now, he did write "If... you thought".

;)

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

6. Well, o.k. Perhaps I've already had too much wine. n/t

[Cha]

7. I think it's just desserts that romney has to run

from his so called health care reform in Mass that the Dem Legislature came up with..and President Obama so brilliantly tied him to on national tv.

[Yavin4]

8. Samuelson Is A Dishonest Jerk

The media passes him off as some sort of unbiased economic expert. When, in reality, he's a Grover Norquist drone. Any money spent on social spending, and he cries about the deficit. Any money spent on war, and he's silent.

Deficit hawks are only deficit hawks when Dems are in charge. These asshats said NOTHING when Bush destroyed the surplus and pushed us back into deficits.

Samuelson is a lying sack of shit.