Links

The Washington Monthly has two interesting articles on how to reduce the cost of health care- and at the same time, expand coverage and improve quality. Proof once again that there are humane and just ways to deal with the long-term fiscal gap. Jason Furman, of the Brookings Institution's Hamilton Project, testified to Congress on the real "dynamic" affect of the regressive Bush tax cuts- they'll be a net loss for three-quarters of all taxpayers, who'll be burdened with paying them off in taxes and benefit cuts over the long haul. In other words, tax cuts don't pay for themselves- people do.

read in full

CMS Denies New SCHIP Rule Exemption for New York

A couple weeks ago, the Bush Administration, via the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) promulgated new rules affecting eligibility requirements to which states must adhere in the administration of their SCHIP programs. On Friday, New York became the first state to be denied an exemption. WASHINGTON, Sept. 7 — The Bush administration on Friday rejected a request from New York State to expand its children's health insurance program to cover 70,000 more uninsured youngsters, including some from middle-income families.

read in full

David Brooks On Health Care

David Brooks in the NYT today promotes Stuart Butler's plan for reforming the health insurance system. Skepticism is advised, on political grounds. The principle political obstacle holding back an efficient and fair benefit system is public fragmentation. Some of us get most benefits from the government- some of us get them from the private sector (with help from the government that often goes unrecognized). And most people don't want to lose what they have, even if it might be for a better deal later on.

read in full

College Access Bill To Be Enacted

CongressDaily (subscription required) reports that the President will sign the Higher Education Access Act of 2007- a revenue-neutral bill that will give more help to students to pay for college.

read in full

What Do Americans Think About Inequality? Part III

Why do Americans think inequality is a bad thing? There are, at least, five distinct explanations. A. It's in the majority's self-interest to redistribute. B. The public thinks unequal market outcomes are undeserved. C. It believes in unconditional equality. D. It believes in redistribution according to need. E. It believes unequal market outcomes are inefficient.

read in full

Samuelson Abuses Census Data

In his Washington Post column this week, Bob Samuelson abuses Census Bureau's Income, Poverty, and Health insurance Coverage in the United States 2006 to launch a critique of immigration policy. The gist of his "reasoning" is this: From 1990 to 2006, the number of poor people increased by 2.9 million people. In those same years, the number of poor Hispanic people increased by 3.2 million while the number of poor whites and blacks and fell by 0.6 million and 0.8 million respectively. If we subtract out the increase in poor Hispanic individuals from the increase in the total number of poor individuals, we are actually left with a net decrease in the number of people in poverty from 1990 to 2006. Ergo, satisfactory progress has been made in poverty remediation, and flawed immigration policies are primarily responsible for strained social services, health care, and public education systems. Why is it important to get this story straight? One reason is truthfulness. It's usually held that we've made little, if any, progress against poverty. That's simply untrue. ... We shouldn't think that our massive efforts to mitigate poverty have had no effect. Immigration hides our grudging progress. A second reason is that immigration affects government policy. By default, our present policy is to import poor people. This imposes strains on local schools, public services and health care. Samuelson, however, is simply peddling statistical misdirection and obfuscation.

read in full

What Do Americans Think About Inequality? Part II

As I wrote in Part I, Americans have a schizophrenic attitude toward inequality: mostly, we don't like it, but we also support policies that make it worse. How could that be?

read in full

What do Americans Think About Inequality? Part I

It's a truism that Americans don't really seem to mind that inequality has increased so dramatically over the last three decades. After all, few policies have been enacted to reverse this trend, and American public opinion has generally become more conservative on fiscal policy. But in significant ways, public opinion studies don't support this truism. The public mostly opposes growing inequality, a fact that has held steady for the least three decades, with some variation in scope and intensity.

read in full

Sen. Sanders on OMB Director Nominee

In the Huffington Post, Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-VT) objects to OMB Director nominee Jim Nussle.

read in full

How The British Could Deal With Inequality

An article from The Guardian with some interesting ideas on how to reduce inequality, rather than just arrest its growth. Note the outrage expressed over the disparity between CEO and average worker pay in Britain, which is modest by U.S. standards.

read in full

Pages

Subscribe to The Fine Print: blog posts from Center for Effective Government