When I read Ezra Klein, I always find myself wondering how someone could become so full of BS in only two and a half decades. He is wrong more consistently than any other health care commentator that I know of—no mean accomplishment.

An illustrative example is his latest column at TAP, in which he punctuates hopelessly trite observations about the 1994 collapse of HillaryCare with assertions about the future of health care reform that border on the delusional.

Among the most hilarious passages is that in which he advises his readers that “the time is right” for ”progressive” reform (i.e. the implementation of government-run health care): 

Fifteen years later, much has changed. All of the Democratic presidential frontrunners have promised to make health care reform the top domestic priority of their first term. And they will do so with the support of a community of advocates, analysts, organizers, and even Congressmen who are far savvier, and far more battle-hardened, than those of 1994.

To arrive at such a conclusion, after last year’s SCHIP debacle and the collapse of a similar initiative in Oregon, one has to be utterly impervious to objective data. If these battle-hardened, savvy advocates couldn’t get it done “for the children,” how are they going to manage “reform” on the scale he suggests?

In the honest vernacular of my native South, “Ain’t never gonna happen.”

Comments 3

  1. spike wrote:

    The reason SCHIP failed is because of a President who doesn’t care about his constituents. If a Democrat were President right now, the SCHIP expansion would easily have passed. Ezra Klein is assuming that we’ll have a Democratic President in 2009, and that the Democrats will probably pick up some seats in Congress. Besides that, the scope of health care is such that state solutions are very difficult to pull off (because states can’t run deficits and any health systems expenditures are going to be higher in a recession when governmnet revenues are also lower) so a federal solution is needed. So bringing up failure in Oregon isn’t very relevant.

    Posted 25 Jan 2008 at 9:45 am
  2. Catron wrote:

    “The scope of health care is such that state solutions are very difficult to pull off … Oregon isn’t very relevant.”

    Oh, but it is. Oregon is dominated by faux-progressives. If that electorate won’t buy the “universal? health care scam, nobody will.

    “Expenditures are going to be higher in a recession when government revenues are also lower.?

    We’re not in a recession, Spike. A recession occurs when there are two consecutive quarters of negative growth. We haven’t even had one. Here’s more on that Lefty canard.

    Posted 25 Jan 2008 at 10:17 am
  3. spike wrote:

    I didn’t say we were in a recession. I said that IF we were to be in one, a state system that can’t operate at a loss would implode.

    Posted 25 Jan 2008 at 1:11 pm

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *