Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Comments

  2. …sufficiently ambiguous as to be virtually meaningless.  Do you have something specific that you wish to direct us to?

      • …I still have some objections to Edwards’s proposal, but it does seem to be well thought out and gets very close to half the optimal.

        <

        p>I am still not enthused with his proposal (in the Drum article) that it be enforced via the IRS.

              • Neither here nor on your own previous thread have you named an organization or outlined any superior way of enforcement

                <

                p>Providing for IRS “enforcement,” which, as been noted by others here is virtually non-existent through lack of audits, is virtually a non-starter, largely because it is likely that most people do not want to give the IRS more power.  The ICE proposal is just silly (as, I presume, it was intended to be.)  Providing for IRS enforcement is virtually assured to deep-six Edwards’s plan.

                <

                p>I can see two additional options.  One, a bureau in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to monitor compliance.  Two, a bureau in the Social Security Administration, which is probably where it belongs.

                <

                p>But, as I have written many times here before, unless the mandate is income-based, instead of level-premium, it isn’t going to go anywhere, anyway.

                • Using a lack of audits as evidence that the IRS would be unable to enforce the mandate is a very weak argument. First of all, the primary responsibility of the IRS in the health care enforcement would be checking for the presence of a letter attesting to enrollment in some health care plan (the letter could include a unique ID proving its validity). The absence of a valid letter would immediately trigger the enforcement. When choosing whom to audit, there is rarely such a clear signal, so enforcement of a violation is not certain.

                  <

                  p>Second, we have a conservative administration now that laid off 157 estate tax lawyers in charge of auditing the returns of wealthy Americans subject to the estate tax — an administration that is in general uninterested in performing the basic functions of government, because they don’t believe government should be performing that role. With that sort of administration in place, it doesn’t matter which agency’s in charge of enforcement — the IRS, HHS, SSA, whatever — it will not be done with satisfaction. Comparing the Bush administration’s level of IRS auditing to how an Edward’s administration might enforce a health care mandate is a dog that won’t hunt.

                  <

                  p>Now as for your suggestion of having HHS or SSA handle the enforcement . . . boy that would suck. Not only do I have to interact with the IRS and Mass DOR on an annual basis, but now I would have to remember to separately communicate with yet another government agency on a yearly basis. Not only that, but my tax dollars would have to fund a communication infrastructure and a new paper-pushing bureaucracy to interact with every single American once a year — an infrastructure that the IRS already has in place! Sure, let’s see how cost-inefficient we can make this.

                • …apparently you have never had to interface with the SSA.  I have had to.  Do you know where your federal copies of the employer’s versions of the W-2s are sent?  To the SSA.  All that would be necessary is that the employers supply certificates of compliance along with their versions of the W-2s.

                  <

                  p>I’m not entirely certain where the 1099s go to, but there are so many of them as to be virtually unaditable.

                  <

                  p>I will repeat.  A mandate that requires an individual to send a certificate of complaince to the IRS will deep-six this proposal.  No ifs ands or buts.

  3. I pulled into the Shell station on Pleasant Street in Belmont for gas, and the attendant (yes, they pump the gas for you) noticed my Edwards bumper sticker.

    <

    p>He asked, how come more people don’t have an Edwards sticker?  He said Edwards was the smartest candidate.  He’s also dead-on right on the issues.  (Well, I think Richardson is better on No Child Left Behind.  He could be Edwards VP.)

    <

    p>Come on, BMG friends.  Edwards is the class of the Democrats!

  4. I was glad to read the portion:

    <

    p>

    Finally: Individual Responsibility. Once insurance is affordable, everyone will be expected to take
    responsibility for themselves and their families by obtaining health coverage.

    <

    p>I was under the impression (until now) that the Edwards and Clinton plans were just slight tweaks on RomneyCare. It’s good to see that Edwards gets the main problem with it (as can be seen here in Massachusetts), and flips the order on its head: improved systematic infrastructure for creating affordable access to care first, and a personal mandate once that is ready. This is essientially the same spirit as the Obama plan, except Barack doesn’t think we should talk about forcing a mandate until after a system is ready for that to be possible and only if neccesary at that point.

    <

    p>http://www.barackobama.com/iss… has links to the PDF of the full plan.

    <

    p>I don’t pretend to be an expert in the area, but I think from skimming both pdf’s, Edwards and Obama both have the core steps to get to universal health care by building on the existing system instead of starting from scratch: creating a way to buy into federal coverage and force private insurers to compete with the public system. Edwards does also include the worst aspect of RomneyCare: a personal mandate enforced through the tax-collection system, but at least that comes last not first.

    <

    p>It won’t be as cost-efficient as starting from scratch with a single-payer system, but more efficient than the status quo, and avoid any dangers of a transition period, (plus will be easier to get through the Insurance lobby and the Congress, whatever the party make-up).

    <

    p>Does anyone have a link for a detailed version of Hillary’s plan?  

Archives