Open up - Jeff Jacoby: "The old delusion of protectionism."

I don't like this poll quite as much – Today's Boston Globe: "Senate poll: Coakley up 15 points." I guess we're going to need a blizzard in Boston.

Chit-chat

George Will: "What's alarming is whether it indicates a belief on the part of the President which is that there is no problem that will not melt before the sunshine of his charm."

Fox News: "Obama to meet union leaders over their opposition to 'Cadillac' tax."

This is gonna be good.

No freakin' WAY! - I've been away most of the day for my son's swim meet (he shaved 10 seconds off his personal best, BTW) and I come home to this from Public Policy Polling: "Toss up in Massachusetts." Key quote: "Buoyed by a huge advantage by independents and relative disinterest from Democratic voters in the state, Republican Scott Brown leads Martha Coakley 48%-47%."

If you read the breakdown, it appears that opposition to health care reform is driving a lot of voters to the polls for Brown and against Coakley who has stated she supports the legislation. Strangely, though, she says nothing about this key issue on TV ads here in the Bay State. Her pollsters must be seeing the same numbers that Ben Nelson and Harry Reid are seeing.

Link - Scott Brown for U.S. Senate.

More - Roundup from Memeorandum, natch.

And this - Boston Herald: "Scott Brown swearing-in would be stalled to pass health-care reform." I don't believe it. As I've noted below, I think a lot of Democrats would breathe a sigh of relief to have Brown elected to stop the Democrats' suicide mission of passing a very unpopular health care bill.

Tinkerbell is freezing in Orlando - I'm sure I've mentioned this before but I'm a huge Disney fanatic. So imagine my surprise when I saw this notice over at AllEars.net: "Due to the cold weather in Florida, Blizzard Beach water park will be closed January 8, 2010." That's right: a water park with a ski resort theme is being closed due to frigid temperatures. Irony!

Related - Fox News: "Farmers struggle to save crops in southern cold spell."

Update (1/9) - Blizzard Beach closed again today...too damned cold.

Scott Brown for the U.S. Senate - Politico raises an excellent question: "Can Dems pass health care if Brown wins?" Short answer: yes, but it would be very difficult. First they could pass it before he's sworn in which, as I understand it, will be soon after the special election on January 19th. This is not going to happen because half the Senate is still on winter holiday. The second option would be for the House to pass the Senate bill without any modification. I find this only slightly more likely since Democrat Representatives are feeling tremendous political heat from all sides, especially from the unions who want the "Cadillac" tax stripped.

On some level, wouldn't the Democrats in Congress breathe a huge sigh of relief if Scott Brown managed to win this special election? They can say they tried but, gosh darn it, the Republicans blocked us! They'd be off the hook with their liberal constituents for failing to get health care reform while assuaging centrist voters who never wanted it in the first place.

It's a win-win! C'mon, Democrats, show your support for Scott Brown!

By far the most important news today - WSJ: "White House: 'Lost' fans won't be marooned." In other words, the State of the Union address will not push off the season premiere of "Lost" on February 2nd.

You gotta believe - William Jacobson over at Legal Insurrection is a tireless advocate for Republican Scott Brown against presumed frontrunner Martha Coakley in the special election to fill Ted Kennedy's Senate seat. I think it's a looong shot since independent voters, who overwhelmingly favor Brown, are unlikely to drag themselves to the polls. Still, there's much more enthusiasm on Brown's side and anything could happen in an election with low turnout (blizzard in Boston, anyone?) Also, I can't help but believe that Brown may be helped by the presence of a "Kennedy" on the ballot (the Libertarian candidate). Maybe some confused voters will vote for him, pulling votes away from the breathing Democrat Coakley. Hey, it could happen.

You can do it, it's electric! - This one wins headline of the day: "Chevy Volt may cost less than expected $40,000 price." Yeah, that's how capitalism works, General Motors, when you're not propped up with tax dollars. Over at the Atlantic, Daniel Indiviglio calculates that you'd have to drive a lot (thousands of miles a month) to make the Volt cost-effective. Sounds like a winner.

You screwed up, America. You trusted him.

I think this post title from AoSHQ says it all: "Remember When Obama Said He Wouldn't Raise Taxes On Those Making Less Than $250K? Let Me Be Perfectly Clear, He Lied"

The topic at hand is Obama's support for a 40% tax on "Cadillac" health care plans, a large majority of which are held by union members, who will most assuredly see the cost passed on to them. And, via Politico, here's "Ex-Obama supporter slams president for flip-flop on Cadillac tax." Golly, if only a group of Representatives who need to face the voters every two years would listen to their constituents. What a world that would be!

Last word - From Victor Davis Hanson on "Obama's broken health-care promise": "I don't think I can recall in recent political history a serial public vow that was so flagrantly and cynically renounced."

Which raises a good question: why is President Prolix suddenly so quiet on the transparency (or lack thereof) in the legislative process? If there's a rational explanation why a closed conference is good for democracy, I'd like to hear it.

Mayo says "no" – Jeff Jacoby: "Medicare and the Mayo Clinic"

Hurry, hurry, hurry, before I go insane

Everything you wanted to know about President Obama's current viewpoint on health care reform can be found in this Politico roundup. He doesn't care if it covers Americans, or is deficit-neutral, or wrecks the economy, or marches the sick over a cliff. He just wants it done before the State of the Union address so he can laud this "historic" and "landmark" legislation that we mere mortals are not allowed to see crafted, lest our eyes scar over!

President Obama met with House Speaker Pelosi, House Majority Leader Hoyer, Senate Majority Leader Reid and Sen. Durbin last night and told them that he wants a final bill that includes a tax on Cadillac insurance plans and an independent Medicare commission.

Unless it will delay the negotiations, then under the bus it goes.

And he forcefully communicated his desire to pass reform in time for his State of the Union address, according to a Democratic insider familiar with the conversation.

Quel surprise.

Obama also responded to Pelosi’s strong, repeated pitches for the public option by making it clear that, while he supports the proposal, he doesn’t think it is doable.

Can't waste a moment.

Reid, who along with Durbin participated by phone, time and again steered the rather substantive policy discussions back to one central question – will it get 60 votes?

Because otherwise, we might have to push off the mad dash to screw up one-sixth of the U.S. economy.

It's now blindingly obvious that Obama will sign anything with the words "health care" on it. It's called "leadership" in case you didn't know. Suck on that, FDR!

Extra - Candidate Obama pledges that health care debate will be on C-Span and "streaming on the web."

Now turn off those cameras! - Nancy Pelosi on health care legislation: "There has never been a more open process for any legislation." Oh, man.

Extra - Real Clear Politics: "Obama's C-SPAN problem."

Nothing but net game-winner at the buzzer

I heard about this on NPR today:

Well, that was fun - Internet breakdown again, but I think I fixed the DSL permanently this time. If not, it's time for Plan B.

Massachusetts special election - Later this month, there's an election to fill Ted Kennedy's vacant Senate seat. It would seem beyond the limits of hope that a Republican could claim the seat of the "Lion of the Senate" in the bluest state in the country. But, as Bill Jacobson notes, special elections are all about enthusiasm and, so far, state senator Scott Brown is generating buzz while Democrat Martha Coakley is laying low and refusing to debate Brown one-on-one. Here in Western Massachusetts (and I assume elsewhere in the Bay State), Brown is running this clever commercial in which he morphs from a tax-cutting JFK, closing with the slogan "Less taxes = more jobs." Sounds like a plan, Jack!

More - Roundup at Memeorandum.

The Grim Reaper as taxman

Jeff Jacoby lays out the argument against the estate tax in "Let's keep the death tax dead":

To class warriors, of course, abolition of the estate tax is a disgrace. The American Prospect's Tim Fernholz wonders why foes of the estate tax are so keen on "lining the pockets of the already-wealthy," and bristles at the thought of not taxing "folks who inherit huge fortunes" when their parents die. "It makes little sense," declaims USA Today in a recent editorial, "to shower tax breaks on a tiny sliver of the nation's wealthiest citizens."

Here's my argument against the death tax: the money that everybody earns is taxed once as income tax. If we put it into the bank to save, the interest earned is taxed. If we invest that money, it's taxed with a capital gains tax. And if we spend it, there's a sales tax. (If we stuff it under the mattress, the value is eaten away by inflation, too.) From the moment the money is earned, it is taxed in a hundred different ways: can't we leave it alone in death?

Besides, the "rich" aren't going to pay that tax, unless they've hired particularly inept financial planners:

But the nation's wealthiest citizens aren't the ones the estate tax hurts. The Rockefeller, Buffett, and Kennedy fortunes are secure, shielded from the IRS by flocks of tax lawyers and accountants. As Henry J. Aaron of the Brookings Institution and Boston College economist Alicia Munnell have sardonically observed, estate taxes "are penalties on those who neglect to plan ahead or who retain unskilled estate planners." Populist rhetoric notwithstanding, they add, American estate taxes "have failed to achieve their intended purposes. They raise little revenue. They impose large excess burdens. They are unfair."

Then there's the immorality of punishing hard work, thriftiness, and savings:

The estate tax is pernicious because it punishes precisely the kind of behavior society should want to reward - work, prudence, savings - and it rewards behavior that should be discouraged - profligacy, overconsumption, and leisure. The easiest way to avoid all death taxes, after all, is to spend your money before you go. Work hard, reinvest your earnings, and leave your life's savings to your loved ones, on the other hand, and the IRS becomes one of your heirs. As economist Arthur Laffer memorably put it in an essay last year, "Spend It in Vegas, or Die Paying Taxes." That is hardly the message we should want our tax laws to convey.

For every spoiled debutante like Paris Hilton waiting to collect on her inheritance, there are a hundred doctors or businessmen who worked or risked all they had to earn their fortunes. Bill Gates, for example, dropped out of Harvard to start a little company called Microsoft. His company then provided livelihoods to thousands of employees and he retired to run a foundation that hands out $1.5 billion a year to causes ranging from HIV research to education reform. But when Bill Gates dies, the federal government will take just a little bit more. Spreading the wealth around, you know.

U.S. closes embassy in popular crossword puzzle answer - Both the United States and Great Britain have closed embassies in Sanaa, Yemen, "in the face of Al Qaeda threats." On Fox News Sunday, Bill Kristol called that a "sign of weakness." We can presume that the White House's response to this threat will be swift and decisive.

Extra - More from Gateway Pundit.

Cornhusker kickback craziness continues - Politico is reporting that Senator Ben Nelson has been contacting the state attorney generals, asking them to hold off on legal action against Nebraska's special Medicaid exemption in the current health care legislation. The pitch? The possibly unconstitutional deal is a "placeholder" and that Medicaid exemption will be extended to the other states.

The Nebraska exemption is/was estimated to cost $100 million over 10 years so, if the Medicaid deal is extended to all 50 states...well, you do the math. Tom Maguire echoes my thoughts on this special deal that's special for everyone: there is no fiscal reality to this health care legislation. It's all smoke and mirrors to fool the CBO and pass something, anything.

That inconvenient Constitution again - From Opinion Journal, the subtitle says it all: "Why the health-care bills are unconstitutional - If the government can mandate the purchase of insurance, it can do anything." Oh, you're gonna eat that spinach, mister.

Never odd or even - Hey, today is 01/02/2010! Boston Globe: "What's so special about today? It's a palindrome."

This is just the beginning

Bloomberg: "Mayo clinic in Arizona to stop treating some Medicare patients"

The Mayo Clinic, praised by President Obama as a national model for efficient health care, will stop accepting Medicare patients as of tomorrow at one of its primary-care clinics in Arizona, saying the U.S. government pays too little.

Keep in mind that this action was taken before the 21% drop in Medicare reimbursement rates that are required in the current health care reform legislation to make it deficit neutral.

Extra - Villainous Company notes the government's penchant for cost control and asks: "What could possibly go wrong?" In my opinion, if doctors feel they're not getting paid enough to cover expenses, they could always pull out a tonsil or two.

Happy New Year, everyone - I'm going to have some herring (Swedish tradition) and open a red wine. Have a safe night, all.

Another year-end list - Politico has the top 10 weirdest moments of 2009.

Miami espionage - Yesssss! "Burn Notice" marathon on USA today.

The ghost of health care reform future

Via Heritage, here's what Americans can expect with the new health care legislation. Sounds expensive for everybody.

2010: Physician Medicare payments decrease 21% effective March 1, 2010
2011: “Annual Fee” tax on health insurance, allocated according to share of total premiums. Begins at $2 billion in 2011, then increases to $4 billion in 2012, $7 billion in 2013, $9 billion in the years 2014, 2015, and 2016, and eventually $10 billion for 2017 and every year thereafter. Two insurers in Nebraska and one in Michigan are exempt from this tax.
2012: Medicare payment penalties for hospitals with the highest readmission rates for selected conditions.
2013: Medicare tax increased from 2.9% to 3.8% for incomes over $250,000 (joint filers) or $200,000 (all others). (This is stated as an increase of 0.9 percentage points, to only the employee’s share of the FICA tax.)
2014: Individual mandate begins: Tax penalties for not having insurance begin at $95 or 0.5% of income, whichever is higher, rising to $495 or 1% of income in 2015 and $750 or 2% of income thereafter (indexed for inflation after 2016). These penalties are per adult, half that amount per child, to a maximum of three times the per-adult amount per family. The penalty is capped at the national average premium for the “bronze” plan.
2015: Establishment of Independent Medicare Advisory Board (IMAB) to recommend cuts in Medicare benefits; these cuts will go into effect automatically unless Congress passes, and the President signs, an override bill.
2016: Individual mandate penalty rises to $750 per adult ($375 per child), maximum $2,250 per family, or 2% of family income, whichever is higher (capped at the national average premium for the “bronze” plan). After 2016, the penalty will be increased each year to adjust for inflation.
2017: Itemized deduction for out-of-pocket medical expenses is limited to expenses over 10% of AGI for those over age 65.

Keep in mind that nobody but nobody believes that Congress will reduce reimbursement rates to Medicare doctors by 21%. The political pressure to counteract these cuts will be intense meaning that Washington will depend on even more deficit spending. And suddenly I'm a big fan of "the trigger option." Why not wait until next year to see if Washington holds firm to their own legislation? If Congress can't find the fortitude to cut Medicare payments by one-fifth, let's call the whole thing off.

Let freedom read - Atlas Network: "Top 10 pro-liberty books of the decade."

Bad ads - Slate: "Readers sound off on the year's worst commercials." The anti-depression drug commercials are always...depressing.

I need a Congressional scholar

After all the speeches, the new Rasmussen poll out today shows a new high for Americans opposing the health care bill moving through Congress. A full 58% oppose the bill with 46% of them strongly opposing; only 39% approve with 19% strongly in favor. The state governors are waking up to the massive new unfunded liabilities in Medicaid expansion. And the green eyeshades at the CBO have discovered that Congress is double-counting Medicare "savings" from cuts that will never occur. And those are just the aspects of the legislation in plain sight: a big chunk of the cost is hidden in adjusted insurance rates and taxes on medical supply companies.

So I need somebody answer this question because I can't quite figure it out from online sources: what is the procedure to merge the two (House and Senate) bills? Do they go to committee and then face a whole new vote in both houses? If so, is there another chance to filibuster in the Senate or has that ship sailed? Does the CBO need to score the merged bill? Finally, is there any possibility that some legal authority (the Rules committee or the Justice department) could declare that parts of the bill are unconstitutional?

Extra - Critical Condition: "It's not inevitable." Good to know!

Update - Two kind commenters (commentators?) have good explanations in the, um, comments. Also, there's this story from Fox News: "Republican attorney generals threaten lawsuit over health care." I thought the correct term was "attorneys general." Eh.

The country gets serious on airline security - The country called Holland.

Money well spent because it's somebody else's

President Obama: "We can't continue to spend as if deficits don't have consequences, as if waste doesn't matter, as if the hard-earned tax dollars of the American people can be treated like monopoly money."

This just in: "Treasury plans to inject another $3.5 billion into GMAC." Maybe another round of Cash for Clunkers, why not? Send the bill to the kids.

Related - Opinion Journal: "The deficit commission trap"

Cornhusker kickback kicks back - It looks like the voters of Nebraska are not appreciative of Ben Nelson's Medicare deal in the health care reform bill: "Health care bill may be bad news for Nelson in 2012." Only 17% approve of his vote while 53% strongly disapprove; 55% now have an unfavorable view of Nelson. Welcome to Chris Dodd territory, Senator.

Radio, radio

In my travels (so far) this week, I don't think I've heard a single radio station identified by their call letters. Instead, there were "The River," "The Peak," "The Point," "Fresh," and "Wink."

I remember when radio stations were brand names to themselves: WNEW (Where Rock Lives!) WPLJ, WCBS, WNBC. Even Z-100 bothered to tell you the radio frequency. Whatever...they all play the same adult contemporary music now anyway.

Quote of the day - Here's Christopher Hitchens on Slate: "The demand to satisfy that sad illusion [of air travel security] can be met with relative ease if you pay enough people to stand around and stare significantly at the citizens' toothpaste."

But seriously now

I think Ann Althouse makes a good point here about how we're looking at the Christmas Pants bomber:

But no one - other than the bomber - was seriously hurt, so we can discount it or play with it and be flippant or political in ways that we would avoid if there were specific and numerous victims.

I don't have my copy of "The Looming Tower" at hand (I'm traveling for the holidays) but I'm suddenly reminded of an aspect of the 1993 truck bombing at the World Trade Center: at the time, some government and security officials failed to appreciate the building threat of Islamic terrorists because they became fixated on the fact that one of the truck bombers went back to the Ryder truck company to get his deposit. What a dope! Now I'm getting an unsettling deja vu that we'll be seeing "hot pants" gags on Leno. Homeland Security secretary Janet Napolitano doesn't help the situation when she claims "the system worked," sending the blogosphere into a feeding frenzy.

By all accounts, the passengers of Flight 253 were a failed detonator away from the Great Hereafter. If that guy had detonated his device from the lavatory, there would have been nobody diving over seats to stop him. That's how close it was.

Yet today and tomorrow we'll be patting down little old ladies from the Midwest and dumping out baby formula and confiscating my nail clippers (that happened.) Meanwhile, the terrorists will be studying this attempt, probing for weaknesses, and planning their next assault. But we'll be serious then, after it's too late.

Extra - Jeffrey Goldberg: "The TSA's security burlesque"

Healthcare now and forever - Mark Steyn points out that the magnitude and complexity of taking over one-sixth of the U.S. economy will entangle the federal goverment for, well, forever: "Cross the river, burn the bridge."

The world's greatest deliberative body - Opinion Journal on the Senate postmortem: "A law so sweeping and complex that nobody can understand it but that will affect the lives of all Americans was thus rushed to passage without any real debate, and less reflection."

Also, there's that sticky issue of Constitutionality: "Connecticut might sue if Nebraska gets Medicaid money." Oh, Tenth and Fourteenth Amendments, are you against it too? Tsk tsk.

Security theater - In light of the recent terrorist attempt, it's worth checking out this November 2008 Atlantic article on "The things he carried." Bottom line: all that shoe-removal and laptop-separation and air-spray are about as useful as a bogus scribble on your boarding pass.

Extra - Mark Steyn has more.

More (12/28) - Megan has the quote of the day: "The TSA's obsession with fighting the last war is so strong that I expect any day to see them building wooden forts at our nation's airports in order to keep the redcoats at bay."

The reason for the season

The staff here at Viking Pundit wishes everybody a happy and healthy Christmas season.

So that's that - Fox News: "Senate passes health insurance overhaul."

Let's recap: In a time of record deficits and exploding debt, Congress is going to pass the mother of all entitlement programs to pile upon the trillions of unfunded liabilities already in place from Social Security and Medicare. The funding for the bill is risible: Medicare cuts that will never happen are counted twice, doctor reimbursement rate cuts that nobody believes will occur, new taxes on "Cadillac" plans that will surely disappear, and an added burden on businesses as the country struggles to climb out of double-digit unemployment.

It is not universal coverage, it does nothing to bend the cost curve, and it imposes a possibly unconstitutional mandate on Americans to purchase something or be fined, which is laughably defined as "not a tax" by our President. It puts new burden on the insurance companies, forcing them to set prices against their very nature, driving up expenses that will surely be passed on to businesses and policy holders. There is no tort reform, no insurance portability, the tapped states will have to pick up the cost for expanded Medicaid.

Finally, Americans oppose this legislation by wide margins, but the Democrats know better. Congratulations on your big "win" guys.

Extra - Karl Rove "The real price of the Senate health bill." It's $2.4 trillion.

More - Right Wing Nuthouse: "The worst piece of legislation in my lifetime."

And this - Doctor Zero: "What democracy is not."

Beyond the law - Since we know that Obama will sign anything with the words "health care" on it, we may have to depend on the courts to restore sanity. Here's Richard Epstein with "Why the Reid bill is unconstitutional."

So that's a thumbs down - Good News Film Reviews on "Avatar": "This is the worst movie I have ever seen." Spoilers galore.

EBITDA: Estimates before I tricked the dumb accountants

The mad rush to pass health care reform before anybody has read the legislation is all about getting the foot in the door or the camel's nose under the tent, whichever you choose. From Paul Krugman to the Boston Globe, there's this admission that it's a stinker of a bill but we can fix it later.

Except that, if history is any guide, the political pressure on new programs is always towards expansion and never cost containment. Which is why the Senate had to resort to all kinds of trickery to make a laughably "deficit neutral" reform package. Here's Charles Krauthammer explaining the chicanery:

Number one, the only reason it ends up with a surplus is because it strips out - well, it assumes that there will be cuts in reimbursements for doctors of 21 percent next year with no increase over a decade. They're 100 percent certain that is not going to happen, but it's in the bill because [there will be] will be a separate provision that will strip it out. So once you calculate that in, you're already in the red.

Secondly, and this is the most important, it supposedly costs $850 billion over ten years. But 98 percent of the costs of the bill are in the last six years. So it's a trick. If you actually look at real charges, you start in 2014 when the benefits kick in and you go out ten years, then the cost is not slightly under $1 trillion. It is $1.8 trillion or $2.5 trillion, which means it will blow an enormous hole in the deficit.

In other words, once the four years of tax hikes to fool the CBO have passed and the program needs to stand on its own, the "deficit neutral" health care reform will be anything but. So far, Americans have been more difficult to dupe:

By 73-18 percent, voters don't believe President Obama will be able to keep his promise to overhaul health care without increasing the federal deficit and by 56 - 37 percent they don't want the overhaul if it will increase the deficit.

This debt explosion will be piled on top of this.

Extra - Now they tell us. The CBO says it's going to be really hard to make those Medicare cuts: "It is unclear whether such a reduction in the growth rate can be achieved."

Take it away, girls!

I'm really burnt out on the health care reform debate. So let's enjoy the theme song from "Laverne and Shirley"

Health care monstrosity - Pundit & Pundette has a good roundup on Ben Nelson, the CBO, and more.

And this - Big Government "SOLD: Senator Nelson's bribe": "We'll be blunt. The health care reform legislation under consideration in the Senate is the most corrupt piece of legislation in our nation's history." Read about how Nelson secured a Medicaid exemption for Nebraska that is unavailable in 49 other states.

More - Yuval Levin on the Corner: "There is no conceivable policy argument for the way the new bill treats Nebraska, it's simply a case of a senator's vote being purchased with taxpayer dollars."

All is calm - No snow yet at 11pm. The snowblower is gassed up.

Maybe Franken should have let him finish - On the cusp of a series of Senate votes, Joe Lieberman has packed up and gone home to Connecticut. This makes Timothy Noah's article in Slate all the more interesting: "Can Democrats count on Lieberman?"

Obama gives Copenhagen agreement a B+ - Fox News: "Obama: U.S. reaches meaningful breakthrough on climate change." Illusory metrics, gaping loopholes, and nothing is legally binding. Otherwise: "meaningful" yes.

"This means something"

Close your eyes and vote

It's hard to believe that the Senate is cramming through legislation that will affect one-sixth of the whole U.S. economy and nobody knows what's in the bill:

With the clock ticking down on health care reform, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has until Saturday to strike a 60-vote compromise if Democrats hope to meet a Christmas Eve deadline - but the obstacles kept piling up Thursday.

Reid still had no legislative text and no cost analysis to release.

That seems like a rather large obstacle (no CBO score either). Which begs the question: what's the big rush? Why must this legislation get passed in December instead of January or February, especially when most of the provisions of the proposed bill don't go into affect until 2014? As Jennifer Rubin notes, every day that ticks by reveals a new low in popular support:

Time, of course, is the kryptonite of health-care reform, the one phenomenon that disrupts the hype and pressure on lawmakers to vote on something, anything, and do it right now. It forces lawmakers to reflect and to worry (Sixty percent of the voters in my state oppose this?), and it reveals that the only thing ReidCare has going for it is an illusion of urgency.

I strongly suspect that the rank-and-file Democrats don't want to pass this awful legislation on a party-line vote. There's now strong incentive for at least a couple of Democrats to say: "hey, let's slow down, and do this right."

Extra - Everybody hates it.

And now this - Politico: "MoveOn opposes Senate bill." Uh-oh.

Stop, look, listen - Long post over on RCP blog: "The health care bill is political suicide."

Extra - Now the unions are going wobbly: "Unions decline to endorse Senate bill."

More - What's Jim Webb up to? He's been very quiet.

And this - Bill Kristol urges Ben Nelson to announce he won't vote for cloture so that everybody in Washington can 1.) avoid a big snowstorm and 2.) read the bill. Reading the actual legislation? What a concept.

Twelve days of Christmas

I heard this on the radio this morning and laughed my butt off:

Monopoly money

Former Senator Phil Gramm used to have what he called the "Dickie Flatt" test: he would ask himself if a certain government expenditure was worth taking a dollar from his friend's wallet. I don't think anybody in the Obama White House has any clue or compunction about where the money comes from: "U.S. ready to join $100 billion climate aid fund."

Sure, why not? Throw it on the pile.

Extra - Deep impact.

And a commenter will lead them

In a display of populist pique, the Boston Globe decided that – gosh darn it – we should take those bonuses away from the bankers: "Go ahead, tax these bonuses."

So a tax on bonuses at US banks would simply give back to taxpayers some of the money they have donated to the banks. That crack of the whip might also caution the banks against another speculative spree, encouraging the pursuit of long-term stability in place of short-term bonanzas. A bonus tax is not a cure-all for the banks’ vices, but it will do no harm and may do some good.

It took exactly one comment for somebody to school the Globe on that thing we call "the Law"

Well, Globe, there is just one problem with your suggestion. It's called the Constitution of the United States which prohibits bills of attainder.

Nice try.

Two out of two doctors agree – They're the original odd couple: Drs. Howard Dean and Tom Coburn both write that the health care reform bill should be scrapped.

Related - MSNBC's First Read: "Public sours on health reform"

Whatever, Ezra Klein (a continuing series) - Without a trace of introspection or irony, the WashPost blogger defends the following about health care reform: "An insurer will have to offer insurance at the same price to a diabetic and a triathlete." What a great deal...for the diabetic. The young and the healthy - it's time to pony up.

Fisking is alive and well - Matt Hoy takes apart Thomas Frank.

Five health care reform whoppers

Straight from Cato:

1. Health care reform will reduce your insurance premiums

2. Middle-class taxes won't be raised

3. You can keep your current insurance

4. It will only cost $484 billion

5. It will reduce the budget deficit

Quotes from 2006 - Guess who said this: "Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership."

Al Gore takes Copenhagen - Just makin' stuff up now in a free-form green exploration in front of a festival crowd.

Extra - At COP15, "misinformation" and frozen toes.

I've heard that song before

Here's Mark Steyn on Obama's speechwriters:

They seem to be the last guys on the planet in love with the sound of his voice and their one interminable tinny tune with its catchpenny hooks. The usual trick is to position their man as the uniquely insightful leader, pitching his tent between two extremes no sane person has ever believed: "There are those who say there is no evil in the world. There are others who argue that pink fluffy bunnies are the spawn of Satan and conspiring to overthrow civilization. Let me be clear: I believe people of goodwill on all sides can find common ground between the absurdly implausible caricatures I attribute to them on a daily basis. We must begin by finding the courage to acknowledge the hard truth that I am living testimony to the power of nuance to triumph over hard truth and come to the end of the sentence on a note of sonorous, polysyllabic if somewhat hollow uplift. Pause for applause."

It didn't come but once at Oslo last week, where Obama got bad press for blowing off the King of Norway's luncheon. In Obama's honor. Can you believe this line made it into the speech?

"I do not bring with me today a definitive solution to the problems of war."

Well, there's a surprise. When you consider all the White House eyeballs that approve a presidential speech, it's truly remarkable that there's no one to scribble on the first draft: "Scrub this, Fred. It makes POTUS sound like a self-aggrandizing buffoon."

This begs the question: does Obama read his own speeches or did he add that line in himself? (H/T Maggie's Farm)

Whatever, Ezra Klein - Somebody's knee-deep in the big muddy of moral vanity today. The WashPost blatherer all-but-called Senator Joe Lieberman a murderer for standing in the way of health care reform, specifically the expansion of Medicare. Klein's earned some criticism but it looks like he's really not apologetic because, gosh darn it, people are dying.

Well, like all moral imperatives, there's no cost Klein is unwilling to (let others) bear to pay for universal health care. But why stop there? The lack of health insurance is a piker when it comes to the #1 killer of Americans: automobile accidents. Surely, we must lower the speed limit to 30 miles per hour. No, 15. And what's with all the people "murdered" by heart disease? Can we really stand by as - in the words of Klein - hundreds of thousands of Americans die from cheeseburgers and shakes?

And so on.

There is no cost control - Opinion Journal: "The cost control bill of goods"

By the way, last night on "60 Minutes" President Obama insisted that he's holding to his guideline that any health care legislation be "deficit neutral." I really wish Steve Kroft had pressed him on this issue since nobody outside the administration believes it. Obama has summoned Senate Democrats to the White House tomorrow for yet another pep talk about "history" - which is what some Senators are going to be if they vote for this monstrosity.

It's all about feeding the ego

Boston Globe: "Don't buy green"

Two articles this week suggest that buying "green" products like fluorescent bulbs and recycled plastic toys can be counterproductive. In Slate, Ideas contributing writer Rebecca Tuhus-Dubrow discusses social-science research that has explored the effects of such small actions on our psyches. Studies have found that the warm glow of self-satisfaction they produce leads us to relax our ethical standards in other areas of our lives.

In The Washington Post’s Outlook section, meanwhile, Mike Tidwell, executive director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, makes the more familiar case that small-scale individual acts are no substitute for large-scale public policy.

The NY Times stripped bare the feel-good eco-movement a couple years ago with "Eco-socialites make cleaning green a priority"

These days Ms. Barnett, a former assistant district attorney in Manhattan whom Women's Wear Daily once profiled under the headline "Sloan Ranger," is today a consumer reporter for KNTV, the NBC television affiliate in San Jose, Calif. She recycles and has tossed away her children's plastic sippy cups. Concerned with carbon emissions, she is about to replace the Barnetts' two family cars with hybrids. "I turn the water off when I’m brushing my teeth," she said. "I'm always learning, I'm always trying to improve."

Still, she has no plans to reduce the family’s significant carbon footprint by, say, selling the Manhattan second home. "I'm not a perfect person," she said. "I'm not the greenest woman in America." And there was scant indication that other guests, most of whom, presumably, knew their way up the steps of a private jet, were contemplating major lifestyle cutbacks. Glancing about the room, Ms. Barnett said, "We aren't all going to move to one-bedroom apartments."

Heavens, no! How about some CFL bulbs?

She plans to practice conservation, to a point. Energy-saving light bulbs are fine - for the utility closet, perhaps. In other rooms, "they don’t give a very pretty light," she said.

Classic stuff.

Extra – Don't forget about this oldie: "Gore defends mansion's power consumption."

A different strategy - Economics professor Greg Mankiw notes in the NY Times: "Tax cuts might accomplish what spending hasn't." Do you know who was a big fan of this concept before she joined the Obama White House? Chairwoman of the Council of Economic Advisors Christina Romer. Maybe she could share her research with her boss.

Ungovernable - Instapundit called it.

Does not reduce costs, does not contain costs. Guess what? – WSJ "Senate health bill will raise costs": "The report, compiled by the chief actuary at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, estimated that total health costs in the U.S. would be $234 billion higher than if the bill weren't passed. President Barack Obama has said Democrats' health plan would reduce the growth of health-care costs." Yeah, that's what they said.

Engorge the beast

The United States is fast approaching a debt burden equal to GDP which has not been seen since the days of the Great Depression and World War II.

Not that the press corps cares anymore, but the omnibus also continues the earmark explosion that Speaker Nancy Pelosi vowed to end when she was trying to oust Republicans in 2006. The Heritage Foundation counts 5,224 earmarks, bringing the total for the year to about 10,000, or about 23 for every Congressional district. There is money for bike paths, skate board parks, museums, water-taxis to resort towns, and other absolute necessities.

Not exactly Hoover Dam and the USS New Jersey.

Senator Kent Conrad, the ranking Democrat on the Budget Committee, is a walking example of the split Democratic spending personality. He frets that U.S. debt will soon be 114% of GDP, a level he says is "absolutely unsustainable" and a "threat to the economic security of America." Yet he keeps voting for every spending bill and will vote for the multitrillion health bill too.
….
After so much double talk, we've concluded this is all part of a conscious political strategy. Spend so much and run up the deficit to unprecedented levels, then turn around and claim that there's a fiscal crisis that can only be solved with higher taxes. They spend, you pay.

Emphasis on "you" because, no matter how much the Democrats swear the tax burden will only fall on the "rich," there's simply not enough in Bill Gates' bank account to cover all this spending. Washington is playing with the monopoly money of China's easy credit but, just like my post-Christmas credit card bill, we gotta pay in the end.

Kinda releated - Megan Mcardle: "A new breed of deadbeats"

We are the CITs so pity us

"Meatballs" was on Comedy Central this afternoon. Ah, memories.



Did anybody in this movie, besides Bill Murray, go on to any kind of movie career? Maybe that Chris Makepeace kid.

No controlling legal authority - I'll borrow one of Al Gore's favorite phrases to introduce this Heritage Foundation legal review: "Why the personal mandate to buy health insurance is unprecedented and unconstitutional."

Treeless in Seattle - Somebody cut down a rare conifer at a Seattle arboretum yesterday, possibly because he/she was looking for cheap Christmas tree. Police are stumped.

Al Gore sticks his fingers in his ears, yells "Lalala!" - Watts Up With That notes that Al Gore can't tell time. What I think is more telling is that Prince Albert doesn't deign to "read all the emails" which is code for reading any of them. This is part of a pattern for Gore who refuses to debate anybody on global warming, dismisses all skeptics, and has renegade journalists removed and blackballed.

No respect - Gallup: Members of Congress are seen as less ethical than used car salesmen. Engineers (ahem) are rated as highly ethical.

Good ole W – While Obama keeps blaming Bush, a lot of Americans have decided: "Ah, he wasn't so bad."

It's magic!

The Senate Democrats have hammered out a health care compromise without a government-run public option but with an expansion of government-run Medicare:

Senior Senate Democrats reached tentative agreement Tuesday night to abandon the government-run insurance plan in their health-overhaul bill and to expand Medicare coverage to some people ages 55 to 64, clearing the most significant hurdle so far in getting a bill that can pass Congress.

Wait...what? Wasn't the new health care program going to be funded by a half-trillion dollar cut in Medicare?

Shut up, they explained, everybody's going to be totally stoked about the new plan. Well, everybody except the doctors and hospitals:

The American Medical Association said it opposes expanding Medicare because doctors face steep pay cuts under the program and many Medicare patients are struggling to find a doctor. Hospitals also said expanding Medicare and Medicaid is a bad idea.

So doctors, hospitals, insurance companies, state governments, and the American people all think this health care reform is a dog. But Congress is going to cram it down our throats and Obama is going to sign any piece of paper with the words "health care" on it. But it's all gonna work out: you have to believe!



Wow, check out those shorts.

Extra - Q&O: "Medicare buy-in: Worst. Idea. Ever."

Forcing you to buy something - The Heritage Foundation has a forum today titled: "Is the personal mandate to buy health insurance unconstitutional?" I can't believe it is. Washington certainly has the power to tax and spend money (which it does all-too well) but I'm baffled by the argument that the Commerce Clause gives Congress the power to compel purchase of anything. Senator Orrin Hatch and Prof. Volokh will attend.

Clever, but it had to come down - Maggie's Farm has a picture of one man's Christmas decorations, which the police told him he had to take down because it was distracting passersby. Funny stuff, though.

All you need to know about the Copenhagen nonsense

President Obama had originally planned to combine his trip to Copenhagen and Oslo to minimize the considerable carbon footprint of Air Force One. However, he decided to push back his presence until later in the conference, and so:

The move means the president will make two separate flights to Scandinavia this month, one to pick up his Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo and another to the Copenhagen conference. Originally, he had planned to combine the trips.

Clearly, Gaia can take another hit for "the One."

Extra – Daily Mail: "Copenhagen climate change summit to produce as much CO2 as an African country" Greater good, everybody.

Whatever, Ezra Klein

I'm thinking of starting a new series here on my blog called "Whatever, Ezra Klein." The WashPost journalist commentator tireless cheerleader has never seen a health care reform development that isn't just totally awesome:

Sources who have been briefed on the negotiations say that Medicare buy-in is attracting the most interest. Expanding Medicaid is running into more problems, though there's some appeal because, unlike increasing subsidies, expanding Medicaid actually saves you money. There's also ongoing discussion about tightening regulations on insurers, but I don't know the precise menu of options being considered.

Medicare expansion? Would that be the same Medicare that will be cut by a half-trillion dollars to pay for health care reform? Which includes Medicare expansion. This is truly a Mobius strip of fiscal logic.

Then there's the expansion of Medicaid that "saves you money." How exactly does this magic happen? Medicaid is funded in part by the federal government and in part by the states and, in fact, governors have been lining up against expansion of Medicaid because it puts an unfunded burden on the states (according to this Washington Post article – have you seen it Ezra?)

Progress, always progress, declares Ezra. Paradise awaits.

America says "no thank you" to Obamacare - Jay Cost has a great analysis over at Real Clear Politics about the health care bill winding through Congress: "Why does the public oppose Obamacare?" In a nutshell, he details how we don't really understand the 2000+ page legislation but we're all pretty tuned into the idea that it's going to cost a pile of money, much more than can ever be raised by chimerical Medicare cuts and tax hikes. Check it out.

Extra - Megan explains risk aversion as opposed to loss aversion.

Can't get it out of my head - The Boston Globe has an article titled: "Let us now praise jingles." Cos-tan-za!

Fear of a Daily Planet

An old trivia buddy sent this one along, from the WashPost:

A Nov. 26 article in the District edition of Local Living incorrectly said a Public Enemy song declared 9/11 a joke. The song refers to 911, the emergency phone number.

That would be "911 (is a joke)" from 1990, suckah!

Congressional innumeracy – Weekly Standard "Obamacare's ugly math." At least there's this glimmer of sanity in tonight's news: "Senate's progress over health care bill grinds to a halt"

Fact: working women comprise 86% of cosmetic surgery patients. Get ready for 'Botax'

Congress stands for Medicare cuts it will never enact

AP: "Senate votes to keep Medicare cuts in health bill" Of course they had to because otherwise there would be no funding for this "anything goes" health care bill. Just like Kirstie Alley during the holidays: she swears she'll go on a diet after the New Year.

The record in Congress on actual Medicare cuts is less than stellar:

It's that time of year again: Washington is talking about cuts to Medicare. President Obama's health-care reforms depend on them - up to $400 billion worth over 10 years. As a psychiatrist, I'll break the bad news gently: Medicare cuts are like Santa Claus and his flying reindeers - often talked about, never actually seen.

The federal government has long fought to control Medicare spending. Today's Medicare program costs taxpayers twice what it did 10 years ago. But whenever lawmakers from either party agree to savings, Congress reverses course, fearing cuts will anger voters on Election Day.

Congress reversed planned cuts in 1999. And 2005. And 2004. And 2006. In fact, since 1997, when members of both parties agreed to automatic cuts if spending rose faster than population and economic growth, the program has been cut just once, in 2002.

At one point, Congress voted to postpone a 10% cut in Medicare doctors' fees fromDecember 2007 until mid-summer 2008. Just weeks later, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi attacked the rescheduled savings as "exactly the wrong medicine."

So come July 2008, despite massive deficit projections, Congress voted to abandon the planned savings altogether. President George Bush vetoed that decision - only to have Congress, both parties, override him.

These Medicare cuts will never materialize and the health care reform bill will explode the deficit. Simple as that.

Extra - Ace: You can't "keep your insurance" if it's Medicare Advantage.

The Massachusetts model, yet again - Boston Globe "Six hospitals to sue state over payment shortfalls": "The suit charges that Massachusetts violated a law requiring adequate reimbursement to hospitals for patients insured by the government. The hospitals contend the state set repayment rates so low they do not cover the cost of such medical care." Fear not, all these issues will be ironed out in the federal plan. Paul Krugman told me so.

An adage about absolute power comes to mind - Noted Constitutional scholar Nancy Pelosi has decided that Congress can do whatever the heck it wants when it comes to health care reform. On the treadmill, tubby, or it's jail for you!

A respectful distance - I'm a big fan of former presidents and vice-presidents keeping their yaps shut once a new administration takes office. Except for the quadrennial political conventions, I would prefer if they just played some golf and worked on their memoirs. So I'm with James Fallows with "In praise of George W. Bush." And, yeah, I'm also looking at you Jimmy Carter.

The industry of green - Via Don Surber: "Climategate prof raked in $22.6 million in grants" Powerful incentive to find the "right" conclusions, I'd say. (H/T Maggie's Farm).

Extra - Opinion Journal: "Climategate - follow the money"

Debt forever with government-run healthcare

Gallup: "Americans still leaning against healthcare legislation"

Americans currently tilt against Congress' passing healthcare legislation, with 49% saying they would advise their member to vote against a bill (or they lean that way) and 44% saying they would advocate a vote in favor of the bill (or lean toward advising a yes vote).

Despite the considerable efforts of Congress and the president to pass health insurance reform, the public remains reluctant to endorse that goal. Over the past month, Gallup has found more Americans opposed to than in favor of healthcare legislation, though at least one in five say they have not made up their minds. Proportionately more independents (27%) and Democrats (24%) than Republicans (14%) are undecided, which at least improves the odds that legislation could wind up getting majority public backing. But the recent trend has been in the opposite direction, with opposition growing.

John Gordon Steele explains why Americans have soured on healthcare reform:

The public is aware of the situation and in poll after poll puts deficit reduction as its No. 1 priority. So what will the greatest deliberative body in the world - as the U.S. Senate loves to call itself - spend the month of December deliberating about? The greatest expansion of the federal government’s responsibilities since Lyndon Johnson left the White House 40 years ago.

And add to the deficit it will since there's zero chance of Congress cutting Medicare by a half-trillion dollars and cost containment efforts in the original bills are already being thrown overboard:

In merging bills drafted in committee, meanwhile, Reid significantly watered down two of the most important cost-containment provisions: a tax on high-cost health insurance policies that was opposed by labor unions and an independent commission that had been designed to automatically and methodically restrain Medicare spending. Senior White House officials have called those provisions critical, but House leaders are adamantly opposed to both.

By a wide majority, Americans know that the current bills moving through Congress will explode the deficit. Why does Congress pretend otherwise?

Officers gunned down in Washington State - Four officers ambushed and murdered in cold blood. What can you say about a senseless tragedy like this? Police are combing the area for a suspect and they have not ruled out a possible accomplice.

Update - Person of interest: Maurice Clemmons

More - Unbelievable: a lifetime of crime and second chances including a commutation by then-Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee. The key should have been thrown away a long time ago.

The write stuff - Opinion Journal: "Five best books: historical fiction"

The first book that came to mind (before seeing the list) was Tom Wolfe's "The Right Stuff" about the Mercury astronauts although Wolfe's style is considered "new journalism" instead of historical fiction. Maybe a more apt choice would be Neal Stephenson's Baroque Cycle. I learned so much about the Glorious Revolution, monetary policy, and the Royal Society (among many other topics) after reading this series. Bring on the Trial of the Pyx!

Something to be thankful for - CNN: "Godfather of spam going to prison"

Who's closest to the actual retail price without going over? - If you believe Obama, then health care reform will be deficit-neutral. But Michael Cannon at Cato estimates that once you strip away all the budget gimmicks, Obamacare will cost $6 trillion. Somebody is closer to the truth.

When we get around to it, maybe

I just found this gem of unintentional humor from the White House blog responding to Krauthammer’s article, insisting that tort reform is on the table when it comes to health care reform:

President Obama issued a Presidential Memorandum directing the Secretary of HHS to move forward with an initiative to give states and health systems the opportunity to apply for medical liability demonstration projects.

Are there enough qualifiers in there? Are any of these demonstration projects in the pipeline or does the HHS need to approve the applications so we can review and formulate a task force to process the information, forthwith? Short answer: there is no tort reform.

Worst legislation ever - Charles Krauthammer (Harvard Medical School 1975) declares the health care legislation working through Congress “irredeemable” and urges “Kill the bills and do health reform right.”

Nancy Pelosi, laugh riot

Who’s writing her material nowadays?

Despite the $787 billion stimulus package passed in February, unemployment climbed to 10.2 percent in October. While critics cite the jobless rate as a sign that the stimulus has failed, Pelosi argues that the federal government is just not trying hard enough.

"We have to shed any weakness that anybody may have about not wanting to be confrontational on this subject for fear that we'd be labeled not sensitive to the deficit," Pelosi said, in a recording posted by Think Progress.

"The American people have an anger about the growth of the deficit because they're not getting anything for it. ... If somebody has the idea that the percentage of GDP of what our national debt is will go up a bit, but they will now -- and their neighbors and their children -- will have jobs, I think they could absorb that, and then we ride it out and bring money in," she said.

On the one hand, the House Democrats are proposing new legislation (that is, deficit spending) to create jobs while pushing through a massive health care bill that will undoubtably destroy jobs by putting expensive new mandates on business. Is Nancy Pelosi insane or is this a bit she’s doing?

Happy Thanksgiving, everyone

Stream of consciousness on a slow news day

There doesn't seem to be much going on today as everybody winds down for Thanksgiving. The top story on Fox News right now is "Are Vampires real?" I hear there's a vampire movie out, so there may be a tie-in.

My weekend started out great because my normal commute was...a normal commute. I took an alternate route home and missed almost all the holiday traffic. Sweet.

I know that when unemployment is topping 10%, it may not be the ideal time for a lavish state dinner at the White House. But, gosh darn it, I love it when our country plays the host, especially to a (future?) ally like India. They're going to be bigger than China one day; might as well play nice. The President makes less money than most baseball players, so why not let him entertain some friends?

On the other hand, I just heard that Obama will be flying to Copenhagen for some climate conference. Does this guy ever stay in the country for more than a couple days?

Detroit will be playing their annual football game against Green Bay tomorrow. Followed by Oakland-Dallas. Snooze. There's an outside chance the NY Giants-Denver matchup will be decent.

Did I mention that Jimmie Johnson won his fourth (in-a-row) NASCAR championship? Snooze redux.

I'm about three weeks away from finishing my coursework for my master's degree. When I graduated from college in 1991, I never thought I'd be heading back to school. But just like "60 is the new 45" I suppose that a masters is the new bachelors.

I haven't written about the race for Ted Kennedy's old seat in the Senate. Whoever wins the Democratic primary will win the seat and, at this point, it looks like Bay State AG Martha Coakley. She'll be a "yes" vote on the health care bill to bankrupt the nation.

Well, if I don't write anything further tonight, let me close with "Happy Thanksgiving."

Kentucky. Fox News. You know what I'm getting' at.

Two months ago, Andrew Sullivan knew there was a lynching in Kentucky and engaged in a little casual stereotyping, possibly while listening to "YMCA"

But the most worrying possibility - that this is Southern populist terrorism, whipped up by the GOP and its Fox and talk radio cohorts - remains real. We'll see.

Situation "seen": we now know that Bill Sparkman committed suicide and staged the scene so his family could collect on life insurance. William Jacobson, of a long memory, has a list of bloggers in "Calling for Sparkman apologies."

Update - Sullivan responds: "Hey, man, I said 'we'll see'!" The Other McCain retorts.