MARKET ECONOMICS VERSUS GOVERNMENT CONTROLS

This short attempt at humor infuriated those who think Tiger Woods’ “Mea Culpa” press conference last week closed the issue and future references to an action he or his wife actually or allegedly took that night in November should be off limits. Meet the Press Host, David Gregory; asked him “Do you expect people to take you seriously after making such a remark?” Adding “it was a comment thought by many to be in bad taste.” Other bloggers and certainly all those who are opposed to the Governor’s being a candidate for President in the 2012 election apparently agreed with him. The governor said that he thought the ” American people still enjoy a sense of humor” I thought the reference to a nine iron smashing the window of big and out of control government remark was pretty much on the mark. I also find it strange that these same critics had no comment regarding a Fox TV channel show that featured a cartoon character with “Downs Syndrome” commenting that “her mother was the former Governor of Alaska”. Personally I think both comments were perhaps insensitive but they did convey a humorous element and didn’t seem to be so outrageous as to cause such an uproar given the history of political verbiage.

Unfortunately, what was lost in the Meet The Press interview on Sunday February 21st was the solid logic of Gov. Pawlenty’s description of why the exploding budget deficits and unbridled increases in actual or proposed government spending are not sustainable. He said “its simple math.” Here he was on target yet there was no follow up by Gregory except to ask “Do you think the Stimulus program worked?” Pawlenty replied “based upon the goals of the Administration, I’d say no.” Gregory asked, “What about the 12,000 jobs created in your state?” Pawlenty said “Those were government jobs and you do not grow the economy by increasing the number of jobs paid for by collecting more taxes.” Actually there may be some multiplier benefit but whatever that amount would be will unlikely create any real or even nominal growth in the economy.

It is sad to see that when a person expresses a different perspective on what the role of government should be in America and how it may vary from how government programs currently operate, that the debate slides into questioning that simply seeks to confirm the status quo or to grant more entitlements to constituents and to give more authority to government to administer greater control over the economy. Pawlenty was the only one at the Governor’s Conference I heard say, “we are trying to solve a problem that exists because of a series of negotiations that took place between managements and labor over the period of the last forty or fifty years without a basis for sustaining them even in a growing economy.” Unrealistic entitlements are the problem and until the American people are ready to accept the reality that we must bring them in line with the economic ability to pay for them by constructive tax laws, contractual amendment, or God forbid, State bankruptcy, we face the potential for monetary and economic disaster of immeasurable proportion.

During the Governors Conference this week, the subject of health care was also discussed with far ranging views and opinions. One thing that demonstrated the differences in attitude was the Democrat Governors saying over and over: “these are our problems: 1. Insurance rates are rising by amounts that preclude individuals from being able to afford their premiums, 2. Insurance companies’ earnings have been exploding on the upside in part because of ill founded increases in rates. 3. Insurance companies are excluding those with pre-existing conditions. 4. Those that lose their job are also losing their health insurance. 5. We have to provide affordable premiums for those 20 plus million who have no coverage at all.
The only solution is to adopt a single payer system like Medicare or raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for it.

If you accept these as the minimum conditions for obtaining a health care bill, there will be no bill this year. Pawlenty uttered the following truism: “Healthcare reform is a great issue for this country. The system we now have is broken and we have to fix it. There is a way to do it but we must have consumers and markets in charge.” Now what does “markets and consumers in charge” mean? Consumers must have enough “skin” in the game to make it worth while to refuse superfluous medical procedures if they are going to have to pay for them while that medical service is not providing cure or improvement results for his illness. Today 20% or more of the cost of medical procedures allegedly initiated on behalf of the consumer are actually for the benefit of the provider, not the patient. We must incentivize the consumer to determine whether there is enough (or any), benefit to him to make him want to have that specific procedure. And that will be determined if it results in better health. To achieve this goal, and yet continue to protect the consumer from malpractice and still prevent the medical provider from having to order unnecessary procedures really only designed to protect them from lecherous law suits, we must have tort reform.

I was impressed by the strategies and proposals made be governor Pawlenty. He may become a valid conservative candidate for the Presidency in 2012.

One Man’s Opinion- Bud Brewer