Wall Street Weekly | 10/30/2009 12:00 pm
Liz Peek: Grandiosity, Not Common Sense, Drives Health-Care Bill

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
Thanks for the offer, Stacy — but I am not interested in discussing the healthcare bill with someone who doesn’t understand the concept of out of context interpretation and will also accept an interpretation without knowing the credentials of the interpreter.
Stacy — given the fact that you are the one who was applauding another posters’ interpretation of the Bill, without knowing the credentials of that poster or the poster’s source. I am glad that you recognize that is in fact very sad.
Personally, as I indicated — I am not content to let just anyone interpret something for me. I want to know the credentials of the individual and their motivations. There’s nothing wrong with allowing a highly credentialed professional interpret something for you — we do that when we deal with doctors, lawyers, accountants, plumbers, electricians, etc…………none of us can be experts at everything. The truly smart among us are smart enough to know what they do know and what they do not know.
Ah…….Stacy, having a "printed copy of the Bill" doesn not makes you an expert on interpretting the Bill. Since you have a "printed copy of the Bill" as does anyone who cares to waste over a thousand pages of paper to print it — if you actually read the Bill — you will see that it is linked to hundreds of other federal laws and regulations. So, you need to also read (not just print out) and understand those other laws and regulations. The Bill cannot be read and interpreted in a vaccuum.
My original post to you was because you were thanking a poster for the interpretation that they posted — which included no sources, no indication of the credentials of the poster. I’m new and it struck me as odd that someone would do that — but, as I read through certain posts — I have no become aware that some people do not care what their source is, as long as it seems to validate their pre-conceived ideas.
Good points, Glenda! I have pretty well decided, having listened to cry-baby land for so long, that it’s a lost cause trying to debate health care, foreign relations, or anything else with the present generation of liberals. I agree with a writer from Forbes, who cited the success of four charter schools in New York, serving about 1500 students in Harlem, using private scholarship funds. He made the point that students are no longer taught American history, or civics, so they don’t develop pride in their American heritage as most of us did. They’re taught "diversity," and the current culture, with no stress on personal responsibility or the need for personal achievement. Join a team, everyone gets a trophy, whether or not they excel. It doesn’t provide the basis for real life success.
Making non-government education available to kids, especially those from deprived areas, may be the way to reclaim America, not only for ourselves, but especially for future generations. If conservatives and Republicans support an exodus from public schools as a strategic goal, they will strike at the heart of liberalism, at the same time liberating minorities trapped in failed government schools.
"If we could teach these kids about America, its promise of hope will produce everything conservatives are looking for, but can’t find in politics. It will also pay political dividends as children and their parents see which party and persuasion cares about them enough to bring real change to their lives."
Whatta ya think?
It will take a lot of commitment, and a whole new mindset, but it might just work. One of the students, Jaime Martinez, an 8th grader who was rescued along with his sister, Ashley, from a failing public school where he says he was bullied, has seen grades up at his parochial school, he sings in a choir and takes dancing lessons.
Wouldn’t it be terrific if ALL kids could get into decent schools, with teachers and administration committed to excellence? We’d soon have a bright new world, wouldn’t we?
Oops! Sorry…I gave the wrong article credit. This is the correct one, and complete article:
http://townhall.com/columnists/CalThomas/2009/10/27/a_long-range_strategy
Callie — Now that vouchers no longer exist - there will be many parents not able to transfer their kids out of failing schools and into A schools. They will be trapped in F schools with no hope for their future. I have personally talked with several mothers who are extremely upset because they are no longer given the opportunity to watch their children excel. In my lifetime I have watched many of our public schools being dumbed down.
Kids are our future - it’s time to give these parents the opportunity to help their children learn about their opportunities in learning and growing intellectually in a school more defined for their capabilities.
By the way, I have always loved articles by Cal Thomas.
let’s talk about cry babies Callie- "I haven’t even looked at spring clothes; God forbid someone catches me out in something new. Keeping up with fashion seems somehow decadent in this new era, like getting Botox injections or catered dinners. Like so many others, I’m shopping in my closet. I’ve bought exactly two things this year—makeup and panty hose. If I buy a present for someone, I have the package sent to their home. I don’t want to be spotted climbing into a taxi, laden with Bergdorf Goodman shopping bags." poooooor Liz.
www.portfolio.com/executives/2009/04/21/Confessions-of-a-Bailout-CEO-Wif…
Hubby Jeffrey Peek’s company, CIT Group, accepted a $2.33 billion bailout under the federal government’s Troubled Assets Relief Pro gram, or TARP, last fall.
The poor little rich girl, a financial columnist for FoxNews.com, wrote, "I’ve taken a vow of financial absti nence." www.nypost.com/p/news/regional/poor_bailout_wife_can_flaunt_my_IZgHQuSR5XprrD8egew5uJ
Bonnie
If there is anything left to leave my children - they will have to pay for our debt now with it.
Beth
My sister in law is a nurse and tells me all the time about how crazy the regulations have gotten just to help a patient get well. There are so many restrictions and regulations since it is government money, that some of her patients are getting worse because they don’t meet certain criteria. They have to petition medicaid constantly and the bureaucracy moves slowly.
"Liz, you live in a bubble. Well off New Yorker. "
By Diana T on 10/30/2009 12:33 pm
Precisely Diana.She is clueless about the reality of the lives of most Americans.That’s more obvious with every article she writes.
As for health care, the republicans in government don’t want to do anything to change the health care system because they’re being well paid by the health care industry to keep it profitable for the CEOs. What they want to do is make it impossible for people to whom more harm than good has been done by the health care industry to get restitution for that harm. They say that if doctors couldn’t get sued for cutting off the wrong leg that they wouldn’t have to charge so much to stay rich and still pay their malpractice insurance.
Bottom line, either way you look at it, it’s all about making a profit not about healing the sick. That’s the republican way.
Health care shouldn’t be an industry, it should be a service.
It shouldn’t be a commodity, it should be a service.
It shouldn’t be a privilege, it should be a right.
Where do we draw the line, Sherrie, in a free country on what is a commodity and what is a ‘service’ to be granted for free?
Food? Shouldn’t we all be guaranteed three meals a day? Utilities? Shouldn’t we all be guaranteed the ‘right’ to warmth (or coolness) for health? And shelter? Why should anyone be encumbered with a mortgage? Shouldn’t safe, clean, modern shelter also be a right? What about legal representation? Shouldn’t every American have their own lawyer to consult with? And account? Why should I ‘risk’ not getting the best tax deal by doing my taxes myself? Shouldn’t the government provide tax services, free of charge, for me and everyone else?
The answer is, for those TRULLY IN NEED we have always provided medical care, nutrition support (food stamps, WIC), public housing, public defenders, tax aide services…yet for the majority, the free enterprise system allowed a plethera of services based upon the economic level of the buyer. Be it a car, a house, or a health insurance policy.
I could go on and on…but you have to get the point.
Rather than turn the entire health care system (that works for most) into a another draconian government pit of lost funds; why not open up the insurance options nationally (no more dictated by individual states) and then offer some sort of Medicare (plus the successful supplemental private options) to those 12 million who trully NEED insurance?
Rather than try the easier, more efficient small fixes, this Administration, House and Senate wants TOTAL GOVERNMENT CONTROL of 1/6 of the economy…and given their total lack of credibility in all things financial (Cash for Clunkers; the 8k First Time Home Buyer Rebate) the only sane option is walking away from anything they propose.