[Reagan Man]

I'm embellishing nothing. Your faith in BIG GOVERNMENT isn't held by the vast majority of conservatives or by most Republicans for that matter. This is a political victory for the GOP and will help get PresBush and Republicans re-elected in 2004. But it does nothing to reduce the size of government and is fiscally irresponsible.

Here's what the Heritage Foundation has to say about this $400 billion unfunded government program.

The Medicare prescription drug proposal is bad health policy, exacerbating the flaws in a system that has almost no market-based incentives to improve service and control costs. But the House and Senate bills also will undermine sound tax and economic policy in several ways. Specifically:

The size of government will expand

A new entitlement will take America even faster down the road that has caused so much economic damage in Europe's welfare states. Indeed, the unfunded Medicare expansion is essentially a huge future tax increase since the population of Medicare recipients will nearly double once the baby-boom generation retires. Ironically, just when some European countries are waking up to the problem and restraining unfunded entitlements, America will be creating an enormous new entitlement.

President Bush's recently enacted tax cut and tax reform package will likely be the first casualty

Because of arcane budget rules, the bulk of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire at the end of 2008 and the end of 2010. Extending these tax cuts or making them permanent will be enormously difficult in an environment of skyrocketing spending for government-provided health care. Indeed, the creation of a prescription drug entitlement may be akin to repealing the Bush tax cuts.

By adding to the deficit, the huge new unfunded liability will likely be the death knell of further tax relief and fundamental tax reform

A prescription drug benefit means bigger deficits--a problem that will intensify as the baby boomers start to retire in the next decade. Once these demographic and fiscal variables become part of the budget forecast, lawmakers seeking to cut taxes and create a simple and fair tax code, such as the flat tax, in all probability will face insurmountable political obstacles.

A new entitlement means bigger government, and bigger government means higher taxes, especially when politicians are expanding the welfare state and neglecting much-needed Medicare reform. Simply stated, the prescription drug benefit will make America more like stagnant European nations such as France.

[FirstPrinciple]

Maybe they have access to some 8 ball which tells them how everything will just work out perfectly in the future. The cost of health-care will not rise, the price of drugs will not increase and this program will not cost 2 trillion like every other thinking economist has projected. Who knows maybe they are right?

[FirstPrinciple]

Now that I think of it, maybe Bush back-loaded the tax-cuts for a reason. He didn't want to have to be constrained by smaller govt revenue in the short run, so he could have his spending priorities. If the tax-cuts were front-loaded, then deficits would rise in the short-run, which would force the Fed to raise interest rate. Bad strategy for re-election. Maybe he wanted to have his cake and eat it too.

[Southack]

"it does nothing to reduce the size of government and is fiscally irresponsible."

That's why I said that you were "embellishing". If you had said, this law does "less than desired amounts" to reduce government, that would be one thing, but saying that it does "nothing" is easily disprovable.

The Medicare Reform law has half a dozen Privatization options, any one of which, if taken to its full potential, could greatly reduce the size of government. Likewise, ushering in *preventative* medicine in place of the ancient Medicare insistence upon surgery and other reactive care is likewise a financial improvement with great potential.

At the very least, the Medical Savings Accounts in this new law give yet one more tax cut to Americans, a fine way of reducing government by starving the beast.

Thus, your argument is diminished by your repeated insistence upon using hyperbole that can so easily be disproved. Does "nothing" to reduce government, you claim?! Oh please.

Moreover, the cost may be a legitimate target, but the figures being tossed around are not the values authorized in this law. The Medicare Reform law only authorizes $39.5 Billion, flat rate, per year for each of ten years.

That's roughly $10 per month per American.