Replies

WSJ - The ISIS Threat in the U.S. (and other stuff)

The "Affordable Care Act reordered the legal framework to let a president impose price restrictions unilaterally," writes Scott Gottlieb . ObamaCare's Independent Payment Advisory Board "was designed to take decisions about how to reduce Medicare's spending out of any public debate. The board's appointed academicians have no statutory obligation to engage in the public notice and comment that is customary in regulation." Also, board decisions are "exempt from judicial review and appeal, and they take effect without Congress." And the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation "is similarly able to create new payment rules" to "target medical technology and procedures."

Speaking of ObamaCare, a Journal editorial on last week's sell-off in health insurance stocks explains that UnitedHealth Group's downgrade to its earnings forecast was "almost entirely driven by losses on the Affordable Care Act exchanges. UnitedHealth is the largest U.S. insurer by enrollment, and the company is warning it may withdraw from ObamaCare in 2017."

When you have eggheads like Gruber involved, this was inevitable. When you mix marginally bright with markedly arrogant, you get the pseudo intellectuals that populate government, and those that government brings in as consultants.

Gruber's comments about the ACA then: "So what's different this time? Why are we closer than we've ever been before? Because there are no cost controls in these proposals. Because this bill's about coverage. Which is good! Why should we hold 48 million uninsured people hostage to the fact that we don't yet know how to control costs in a politically acceptable way? Let's get the people covered and then let's do cost control."