Healthcare “reform,” as envisioned by Obama and the Democratic congress, where we would eventually destroy what little competition, and all of the choice, that remains in the healthcare sector, is quickly going the way of the dinosaurs. I predicted this would happen for Obama’s big goals in one of my comments on a previous post, where I also defined the term “nerf.” It sounds like they are going to have to settle for token changes to the system to avoid the extra embarrassment of passing absolutely nothing. This is in spite of the party in charge having super-majorities in both houses of Congress, and is quite extraordinary when you think about it. Technically, they could pass whatever they wanted without listening the people or the other party one bit. It’s very heartening to see a resurgence of involvement when it comes to drastic changes to our economy and our lives. Granted, many people don’t understand exactly what they are arguing against, largely because Congress hasn’t come up with a concrete bill, but opponents are fairly curtain whatever the end result is won’t be to their benefit, and they are right about that. People know what they don’t want and politicians, dodging questions by claiming there is no final bill, do not pass muster. For my suggestions on how to reform healthcare see this post. I have at least one more to add to it, but I think I will give it its own post.
The current healthcare debate is a good example of why we need a balance of power in the government. When one party gains too much power, the worst ideas of the party come out. This is called group-think, and it’s very dangerous. One reason I think we did so well the last 4 years under Clinton is because Congress was run by the opposing party and because Clinton wanted to be known as an accomplished president, he gave up his collectivist tendencies and governed in a pro-growth fashion. I hope the current administration follows a similar path.