Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

Wall Street Weekly | 10/30/2009 12:00 pm

Liz Peek: Grandiosity, Not Common Sense, Drives Health-Care Bill

© Shutterstock

Bears, Bulls, Chickens and Pigs: wOw’s Wall Street Weekly with Liz Peek (Week of 10/26) 

Editor’s Note: Liz Peek is a financial columnist.

The stock market cheered the resurgent economy yesterday, after losing ground for four days in a row. The 3.5% gain in real GDP was welcome but, since nearly half of the improvement came from the Cash for Clunkers program, I wouldn’t break out the bubbly quite yet.

ISI Group notes that economic recoveries historically mirror the extent of the downturn; the worse the falloff, the faster the bounce-back. They say that, given the recession-caused 3.8% collapse in GDP, the quarter should have jumped 10%. No one was looking for that kind of pop, given the debt load and job anxieties still weighing on Americans. Indeed, today’s report that consumer spending sank 0.5% in September (the biggest drop in nine months) underlines the fragility of the recovery. For further proof, just ask the 530,000 newly laid-off Americans that went looking for unemployment insurance last week.

HSBC’s economists had forecast 4% growth for the quarter. They were too bullish because they overestimated the government’s stimulus spending. The shortfall was in outlays from the cities and states, which unexpectedly turned down. This raises an interesting question, no doubt being asked by the 26 million Americans looking for full-time jobs. What ever happened to the stimulus program?

We do not have to risk fundamentally weakening the health care currently found satisfactory by nearly 80% of Americans.

If you’re wondering where our $787 billion went, visit the Recovery.gov website. The quick answer is … nowhere. Out of the entire program, only $173.2 billion has been paid out. Of the $14 billion in federal contracts awarded so far, for example, only a little over $2 billion has been received. There are some terrific projects that have received funding, though. My particular favorite is the $219,000 spent on a study of the sex lives of freshmen women at Syracuse University. You might prefer the "Week Mapping Radioactive Rabbit Feces With Detectors Mounted on a Helicopter Flying 50 Feet Over the Desert Scrub," which cost $300,000. If you’re a golfer, you’re probably thrilled with the $5,500 tax credit being applied to the purchases of golf carts.

Some of these projects make me chuckle, but the failure to create jobs for Americans is no laughing matter. A story in today’s Financial Times points out that "more than 8 out of 10 U.S. stimulus dollars spent on wind energy farms have gone to foreign companies." Cash that has gone to wind farms has funded 4,500 jobs overseas. Oops.

Well, after all, it’s the government, and no one expects perfection, or timeliness, or accountability. Then why in heaven’s name are we about to allow the government to interfere in our health care? It is inconceivable to me that Democrat leaders in the House and Senate and the Obama administration are bulling ahead with health-care legislation that Americans do not want, that we cannot afford and that is likely to detract seriously from the most pressing issue before us: putting people back to work.

Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and President Obama have reinvigorated the so-called "public option" based primarily on a couple of recent polls that say that Americans favor a government-run insurance program. Everyone should look up the actual WSJ/NBC poll that supposedly "green lighted" the public option. Early on, respondents are asked if the country is headed in the right direction. Over half (52%) say no, up from 43% in April. The sixth question asks people whether they approve (43%) or disapprove (48%) of the way Obama is handling health-care reform. In answering question No. 10, 48% of those surveyed say the government is doing too many things, while 46% say it is not doing enough. Responding to question 26, 42% said they think the president’s health plan is a bad idea, versus 38% who think it is a good idea, and in the follow-up 40% think that the legislation will make their health care worse (vs. 21% who think it will get better) and 47% think the cost will go up, while 13% think it will go down. Does this group sound enthusiastic about more government involvement?

268 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

Callie O
2-3% is not "huge," Sara.
By Callie O on 11/03/2009 7:59 pm
Sara Smile
2-3% is also not the profit of the health insurance companies, Callie.
By Sara Smile on 11/03/2009 8:11 pm
S.J. Morgan

Laurel….do you honestly think 2-3% is an outragious profit margin?  That is what those "obscene" companies have left when they pay all the bills.  Yet the Dem plans want to have the sky is the  limit of coverage for free!

 Liz is absolutely right!!!!!  Personal responsibility has to come into play at some point. I would rather keep my money for fun stuff rather than pay deductables and co-pays but that is life.  Insurance is suppose to be for catastrophic unexpected expenses.  Responsible people put aside some money just in case for the out of pocket expenses that insurance does not cover…just like for your car, your home etc.

By S.J. Morgan on 10/30/2009 7:24 pm
Frannie Em
Didn’t Kaiser, or it’s first manifestation start long before Nixon.  My uncle worked for Kaiser and when I was 7 had a severe head injury and I know he worked it to get me help. Maybe I am under a misconception, but I think it was around before NIxon, or did it get certain advantages?  Help me out if you can.
By Frannie Em on 11/01/2009 12:45 am
Frannie Em
Kaiser was started in 1945.
By Frannie Em on 11/01/2009 12:48 am
Laurel Sayler
Nixon Heard about Kaiser while he was president and thought it was a great idea. I don’t remember all the specifics, but Nixon promoted For-Profit Insurance and didn’t care about the ramifications. There is a recording of Nixon talking about Kaiser and how great he was. I think you can hear it in the movie Sicko.
By Laurel Sayler on 11/01/2009 12:05 pm
Frannie Em

The only thing that I remember about the Nixon proposal is that Sen Kennedy fought against it and later wished he hadn’t done that. Kind of a …now I wish we would have passed that.. 

People and systems evolve with time, it is one of the beautiful principles of life.  Right now we are having growing pains in our country.  Whenever there is adversity it moves us forward, right now -  this point in time is important, it is a teaching and growing opportunity.  Where we end up will be interesting. 

By Frannie Em on 11/02/2009 1:19 am
Laurel Sayler
Since when is my life for profit??? When that profit KILLS people who have insurance and are denied coverage then yes it is obsene. My life is not for sale and will never line the pockets of wealthy CEO’s. A lot of responsible people have lost their jobs and can’t afford even the basics of life how on earth are they supposed to pay for medical insurance?
By Laurel Sayler on 10/30/2009 7:43 pm
S.J. Morgan

You refuse to line the pocket of a private company CEO..but expect the rest of the country to pay for 100% of your medical expenses???

My income has dropped 75%..I still find the money for health insurance because I cannot afford NOT to have it!  The out of pocket expenses will be paid as soon as I am able. 


Those in the poverty level with disabilities I have no issue with helping out… those that gamble with their health and live a life of drugs and alcohol not so much.

By S.J. Morgan on 10/30/2009 7:54 pm
STACY SEARS
Laurel, what is your life worth?  You may feel that your life is not for profit and not for sale, but expecting free health care is ridiculous.  Do you get paid for your job?  Food and shelter are much more necessary than healthcare most of the time, yet these are "for profit" industries.  Where is your outrage about this?  If there is no profit, there is no viable business.  The average profit margin in healthcare (among insurance companies) is 2-3%.  Is 2-3% of your salary after taxes, housing, food, utilities, transportation, etc. reasonable for you?  or would you like more?  I bet you would like more, everybody does.
By STACY SEARS on 11/01/2009 1:42 am
Laurel Sayler
Stacy I’m in teaching and that is in no way a for-profit agency. Capitalism is what is wrong with this country. Praise to the almighty dollar and screw the people. Please BEFORE insurance companies came about Doctors were paid by their patients. Costs were low and people could afford to go to the doctor. How do I know this??? My grandfather worked for a doctor starting at 16 yrs and he told me what it was like. I serve my country everyday just like my mom does and my Grandparents did and we deserve healthcare. Healthcare is a right not a privilege. Plenty of businesses are non-profit and they are viable. Considering that most are just struggling to get by 2-3% of their salary doesn’t exist. Please think of another excuse for outrageous medical costs.
By Laurel Sayler on 11/01/2009 12:17 pm
STACY SEARS
Laurel, you obviously teach for the public school system and that is commendable.  However, you are dead wrong about capitalism being what is wrong with this country.  Our country would not have ever come to greatness if we were a socialist society, read your history…not just the textbook you teach from.  The government and the unions instigated the situation with the insurance companies to begin with.  Prior to WWII there were insurance companies, but people purchased their own coverage if they wanted it.  Many people paid their docs directly and healthcare costs did remain reasonable, however docs still made plenty of money. Then came the wage and price freeze….the unions go to the President and say, hey, we got you elected and now we can’t do anything for our members and that could put us out of business, so what are ya gonna do about that… so the Pres says, what if we give tax breaks to companies offering health insurance?  the union members get some benefits and therefore the union stays in business…then you have employee provided health insurance, regulations increase, competition decreases, there are 8 times more people involved in the financial side, people start running to the doc for every little thing because it doesn’t cost them anything (abuse, hello) and that gets us to where we are today.  I’m not saying that the unions didn’t do a bunch of great things for the American worker, but they are now as greedy as the politicians and the corporations. 
By STACY SEARS on 11/02/2009 1:24 am
Laurel Sayler

Stacy I am a HISTORY MAJOR. I love history and I don’t teach out of a textbook, that is reference material in my class. Funny that you bring up the unions because my Grandfather owned a machine shop and the union was always trying to unionize his shop. When he showed the union reps what his employees benefits and pay were the union backed off because my Grandpa paid better wages and provided better benefits than the unions did. The union also wrote about his shop in the union papers as a model of success and allowed him to advertise in the paper.

We have always been a mix of socialism and capitalism, but over the past few decades money has become king and thats why we are where we are today.

By Laurel Sayler on 11/02/2009 12:41 pm
STACY SEARS
Laurel, the history major,  please name societies that were successful long term under socialism.
By STACY SEARS on 11/03/2009 1:24 am
Sara Smile

I’m no history major, but Sweden occurs to me.   Historically, socialist governments have been successful much longer than our 235 year old democracy.

By Sara Smile on 11/03/2009 11:47 am