This one's for you, Harry
Posted by aogThursday, 06 August 2009 at 10:02 TrackBack Ping URL

One for Eagar’s “corporate managers are idiots” file

One of the main architects of the friendly approach, Karen M. Ignagni, the industry’s chief lobbyist, personally pledged to President Obama that insurers would not stand in the way of a sweeping overhaul this time.

For a while, it seemed to be working — until recently, when the insurance industry re-emerged as Washington’s favorite target. “Villains,” Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker, called health insurers. And Mr. Obama derided the industry for pocketing “windfall profits.”

What person with a functioning brain and some minimal level of awareness could have expected this to end any other way?

Comments — Formatting by Textile
AVeryRoughRoadAhead Thursday, 06 August 2009 at 11:41

If the American public had “a functioning brain and some minimal level of awareness,” then we’d not be in this mess to begin with.

The current health insurance model is broken, or at least extremely non-optimal. The correct solutions are pretty simple, but they involve “embracing the suck”, as you say, and therefore we’re likely to end up with gov’t run universal health care by the time the entire Boomer cohort has retired - they’re just too expensive and unprepared as a group.

Annoying Old Guy Thursday, 06 August 2009 at 15:09

This one place I agree strongly with Orrin Judd in that while it wouldn’t be perfect, we would be far better off with a health savings account / catastrophic insurance system without any corporate tax breaks, and low income subsidies as needed. That’s not such a radical change but it would result in significantly better health care. Such a solution, however, would take power away from our ruling class which is why it won’t be permitted.

Harry Eagar Saturday, 08 August 2009 at 14:06

I’m not quite sure what your point is. That lefty Democrats don’t trust corporations?

As I wrote at Restating the Obvious, the markets did not believe the insurance companies’ pledge (neither did I), since they reacted to the prospect of sucking trillions out by — rising. Odd, that.

My mother, a Catholic, is worried because she was told (not by Pelosi) that the reform bill will require all Catholic hospitals to perform abortions.

If you want to run a scorecard about which side has been more dishonest and disgusting, I don’t think the Democrats are going to come out looking worse on this one.

Annoying Old Guy Saturday, 08 August 2009 at 17:11

My point is that lefty Democrats don’t like people who are not them making decisions and having power.

The markets rose because they thought the Pelosi-Obama-Reid plan was going down in flames. Note that markets rose the day after Reid announced no vote before the recess. How you connect that to belief in the insurance companies’ pledge I fail to grasp.

It’s not clear that what your Mother was told is incorrect. A reasonable person may well argue that no one, in fact, knows if that is true. It may well be true, given previous legislation from the same party. What Pelosi has to do with the accuracy of the claim I don’t grasp. Whether it’s true or false, Pelosi wouldn’t be announcing the fact in public.

I would be fine with such a scorecard, as I think the P-O-R axis has been blantantly more disgusting and dishonest. I don’t see what that has to do with anything in this post or the comments, but score away. Be sure to put in the punch back twice as hard with union violence.

Annoying Old Guy Tuesday, 11 August 2009 at 09:43

Cite: Even Megan McArdle isn’t so impressed

Post a comment