<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Romneycare: Soon to be an Orphan?</title>
	<link>http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/04/13/romneycare-soon-to-be-an-orphan/</link>
	<description>Cleaning the Augean Stables of the Health Care Debate</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 13:04:09 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Catron</title>
		<link>http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/04/13/romneycare-soon-to-be-an-orphan/#comment-252</link>
		<dc:creator>Catron</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Apr 2007 16:23:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/04/13/romneycare-soon-to-be-an-orphan/#comment-252</guid>
		<description>You’re probably right on Romney. Like Diogenes the Cynic, I’m always looking for an honest man. When it comes to politicians, I’ll probably be looking for a long time. 

As to Laszewski, I think he (like so many) focuses too much on the plight of the uninsured. That problem is a &lt;a href="http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/04/05/universal-health-care-coverage-focusing-on-symptoms-rather-than-the-disease/" rel="nofollow"&gt;symptom&lt;/a&gt; rather than the disease. 

I agree that health care reform is probably best accomplished at the federal level, but mainly because Washington is the &lt;a href="http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/reform/" rel="nofollow"&gt;source&lt;/a&gt; of most of health care’s ills. I think the best course would be deregulation rather than a heavy-handed “universal coverage” mandate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You’re probably right on Romney. Like Diogenes the Cynic, I’m always looking for an honest man. When it comes to politicians, I’ll probably be looking for a long time. </p>
<p>As to Laszewski, I think he (like so many) focuses too much on the plight of the uninsured. That problem is a <a href="http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/04/05/universal-health-care-coverage-focusing-on-symptoms-rather-than-the-disease/" rel="nofollow">symptom</a> rather than the disease. </p>
<p>I agree that health care reform is probably best accomplished at the federal level, but mainly because Washington is the <a href="http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/reform/" rel="nofollow">source</a> of most of health care’s ills. I think the best course would be deregulation rather than a heavy-handed “universal coverage” mandate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Harlow</title>
		<link>http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/04/13/romneycare-soon-to-be-an-orphan/#comment-238</link>
		<dc:creator>David Harlow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Apr 2007 02:44:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/04/13/romneycare-soon-to-be-an-orphan/#comment-238</guid>
		<description>Two separate issues: One, Romney and Two, "RomneyCare." Re: #1, Romney, not unlike other politicians, has long tailored his message depending on his audience of the moment (social liberal at home, conservative on the road).  No biggie. Re: #2, the plan, for all its faults, might actually do some good for a lot of people.  Is it perfect?  No.  Is it better than the real-world alternative (not the Platonic ideal alternative)?  Hell yeah.  Does it cost money?  Of course it does.

Bottom line: I agree with Bob Laszewski's &lt;a href="http://healthpolicyandmarket.blogspot.com/2007/04/another-victory-declared-in.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;conclusion&lt;/a&gt; that this experiment points up the truism that this really needs to be dealt with at the federal level.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Two separate issues: One, Romney and Two, &#8220;RomneyCare.&#8221; Re: #1, Romney, not unlike other politicians, has long tailored his message depending on his audience of the moment (social liberal at home, conservative on the road).  No biggie. Re: #2, the plan, for all its faults, might actually do some good for a lot of people.  Is it perfect?  No.  Is it better than the real-world alternative (not the Platonic ideal alternative)?  Hell yeah.  Does it cost money?  Of course it does.</p>
<p>Bottom line: I agree with Bob Laszewski&#8217;s <a href="http://healthpolicyandmarket.blogspot.com/2007/04/another-victory-declared-in.html" rel="nofollow">conclusion</a> that this experiment points up the truism that this really needs to be dealt with at the federal level.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
