Dr. Jeffrey S. Flier is the dean of Harvard Medical Schoo. As
such, he resides in the tallest Ivory Tower, within the most
impenetrable Ivory Keep, surrounded by the deepest Ivory Moat. So
when he
writes, in the Wall Street Journal's editorial page,
that what you see is not what you get with the left's currently
proposed health care reform, he knows what he's talking about.
Flier notes the lessons of the Massachusetts health care reform,
which he notes has insurance-expanding measures similar to those
in the bill under consideration. MassCare, he warns, expanded
insurance (although not quite to everyone) but increased spending
to the point that in the near future Massachusetts will have to
find ways to cut spending drastically.
This example, he warns, should be taken to heart, because we can
expect a similar outcome for Obamacare:
Selling an uncertain and potentially unwelcome outcome such as
this to the public would be a challenging task. It is easier to
assert, confidently but disingenuously, that decreased costs
and enhanced quality would result from the current legislation.
So the majority of our representatives may congratulate
themselves on reducing the number of uninsured, while quietly
understanding this can only be the first step of a multiyear
process to more drastically change the organization and funding
of health care in America. I have met many people for whom this
strategy is conscious and explicit.
We should not be making public policy in such a crucial area by
keeping the electorate ignorant of the actual road ahead.
Thanks for the honesty, Dr. Flier. It's good to know that, while
too discreet to let it slip in public, liberal proponents know
that Obamacare is only half the goal: first get everyone insured,
and then worry about paying for it.
There are plenty of ways to control costs or manage the budget
overruns once everyone's on the rolls. But you have to imagine
that the option Flier's interlocutors have in mind is single
payer.
Some penumbral emanations or something like that. Not only does
it require it, unlike any other "right" discovered since the
founding it will require you to buy something.
Grzmlyk| 11.18.09 @ 5:02PM
I will channel the mind of the Obama administration in toto:
"I got yer penumbral emanations right here. Hey, mook: The
constitution enshrines what we say it enshrines. Now are you
gonna pay up or are you gonna sleep with the fishes?"
Tim| 11.18.09 @ 12:42PM
Where does the Constitution enshrine lying?
L. Ross| 11.18.09 @ 1:20PM
Where does the Constitution enshrine health care?
Tim| 11.18.09 @ 3:15PM
Some penumbral emanations or something like that. Not only does it require it, unlike any other "right" discovered since the founding it will require you to buy something.
Grzmlyk| 11.18.09 @ 5:02PM
I will channel the mind of the Obama administration in toto:
"I got yer penumbral emanations right here. Hey, mook: The constitution enshrines what we say it enshrines. Now are you gonna pay up or are you gonna sleep with the fishes?"