VA Senator Mark Warner had a couple of articles published over the weekend, one on economic/monetary policy, and one on health care.? Unfortunately I was not surprised by his view on either issue.? What he proposes in his articles is, of course, more government.?
Lets take a look at the economic article first.
The Federal Reserve has largely managed its primary mission, monetary policy, with skill and success. For nearly 25 years since Paul Volcker tamed inflation, the United States has benefited from low and stable interest rates.
Well, first of all, I wouldn’t call it a success, but I guess depends on what kind of ruler you’re using to measure with.? And Paul Volcker has?”tamed inflation”?? What planet are you living on Sen. Warner?? The dollar has lost about 96% of its value over the last hundred years, and is continuing to lose value at least at that rate.? How is that tamed?? Stable interest rates?? Have you called the mortgage companies lately to try and refinance?? The rates can change 1/2 a point in 1/2 an hour (I may exaggerate, but only a little).
The events of the past two years have underscored the need for regulation of the financial markets that anticipates and mitigates systemic risk. The events of the past 20 years have demonstrated that the Federal Reserve is the wrong choice as a systemic risk regulator.
Hmm, have they really?? Has regulation of the market helped anyone at all?? I do agree with him on that last sentence though.
First, the Fed has proved itself incapable of managing and preventing systemic risk. Second, sound monetary policy is too important to place at risk with conflicting or diverting responsibilities. Third, the Fed is not structured to provide the transparency and accountability the public deserves. Fourth, this action could concentrate too much economic power in a single institution.
.
What we need is an all-inclusive Systemic Risk Council with an independent chair appointed by the president and confirmed by Congress, and a membership including the Treasury secretary, the chairman of the Federal Reserve and other prudential regulators. A council with an independent staff, the ability to gather any financial information it needs to spot systemic risk, and prophylactic and emergency powers to deal with such risks would be much more likely to stop the next crisis.
I completely agree with the first paragraph, but the second?? Here is where we see the usual politicians unthinking, knee-jerk reaction come out.? OMG, something bad happened.? What, it’s already being regulated by government?? Well, then we must need more government to get it right.? Has that ever worked before?
Ok, lets move on to the health care article.
If my family had better access to good information, informed counseling, and other key resources a decade ago, we might have held important family discussions with my mother and worked with her doctors and pastor to craft a care plan that truly reflected my mother’s wishes.
NOW MY FAMILY certainly is not alone in having difficulty discussing these sensitive end-of-life issues. But it’s clear that an honest discussion about care options, treatment settings, and end-stage care planning would give many patients and their families the opportunity to make more informed decisions that could dramatically improve the quality of life of patients and their family caregivers.
That’s why I have introduced the Senior Navigation and Planning Act of 2009 (S.1263). At its heart, this bill helps Medicare beneficiaries, their families, and caregivers to plan for their transition into senior life in non-crisis moments. Essentially, we are trying to help seniors, their families, and caregivers navigate through a complex health care system.
So, my first question would be, is someone out there limiting people’s access to this information in the first place?? I would think not.? So what problem, exactly, are we trying to solve here.? Unfortunately I think you only need to look at the money.? This bill appears to be trying to address when we let people die instead of spending an inordinate amount of money to keep someone alive an additional 6 months.? I’m not trying to sound callous, but there has to be a point where we say “enough”.? This bill smells like a way for insurance companies to advise people on saying enough a little sooner, and saving them all those medical costs.? The problem is that we’re dealing with Medicare, so they can’t say “no” to anything without being sued.? I think what we need instead of this silly bill, which really isn’t helping families or caregivers, the information is out there, is to deregulate the insurance industry and get rid of Medicare.? This would allow insurance companies to offer the plans that are beneficial to them and? the consumer, and would get government out of yet another private industry.? What we have now is uncontrolled spending, who’s not going to go for that million dollar treatment with a 1 in 10000 shot of working if it’s “free” to them?
Tags: economy, health care, insurance, medicare