Medicaid-Receiving Companies Object to the Senate Bill

The Senate is proposing an overhaul of Obamacare and an improvement to the health coverage providing industry, and one of those improvements is a rollback of the Obamacare expansion of Medicaid and an eventual capping of Federal funds transfers to the States’ Medicaid programs.  There are objections to this.

The primary objections are from insurers and hospitals, et al., who get a significant fraction of their income from the guarantees of Medicaid payments; they don’t want to have to compete in the open market.  They prefer the supposed safety of that guaranteed income, paltry though it is, especially compared to the income available from a free market, and they don’t care what that “safety” costs those who must pay for it.

The States themselves, for instance, in addition to financing their own Medicaid programs, are required to contribute to other States’ Medicaid programs through those Federal tax transfers, and by extension they’re forced to contribute to other States’ spending decisions generally.

Let Medicaid be the State-run program it was intended to be. Keeping the monies that would otherwise be transferred to other States would both leave more money for funding a State’s own program and force each State to become more fiscally responsible, instead of exercising a claim on other States’ money.  That fiscal responsibility also will contribute to the rising prosperity of freer market.

And let the health care providers and coverage providers compete for income from that much larger market.

Vandalism

Terrorist vandalism.

Islamic State militants bombed the historic Nouri Grand Mosque in Mosul late Wednesday, Iraq’s military said, destroying the site where Islamic State’s leader first announced the creation of a self-declared caliphate straddling Iraq and Syria.

They did it purely out of petty, venal spite.  Blowing up the place served no useful purpose, not even in the twisted minds of these Daesh barbarians.

More Hateful Violence-Inciting Rhetoric from the Left

They just can’t let go, even after they’ve been shown, graphically, what their incitement to violence achieves.

“My advice would just be to Republicans who do cozy up to him—it’s like hugging a suicide bomber,” [MSNBC Political analyst Elise Jordan] said. “He blows you up in the process with him.”

Her problem with reality continued, as she insisted that Trump “wasted the country’s collective time speculating over the tapes’ existence.”  Never mind that the only ones wasting time in the speculation was the NLMSM: it was their editorial decision to obsess over an obvious trolling move.  No one made them.  And no one outside the “press” room cared.

Obstructionism

…for the sake of obstructionism.  And now the Progressive-Democrats in the Senate are getting blatant about it.  They don’t want to help reform the health care coverage disaster of the last eight years, so to block Republican and Conservative efforts at reform, these Progressive-Democrats have decided to block everything in the Senate.  Here’s Senator Chris Murphy (D, CT) o the overall attitude:

What more could we do—hold Republican Senators by the arms to stop them from getting to the chamber?  I think we’ll use every tool at our disposal.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D, NY) even arranged to force cancelation of all committee meetings last Monday, regardless of the subject or purpose of those meetings.  No business was allowed to be conducted—all to block health care coverage reform.

Meanwhile, these Progressive-Democrats are ignoring the millions of Americans who are about to lose all coverage as coverage provider after coverage provider leave the Obamacare markets and withdraw from the ObamaMarts in the States.  Iowa, for instance, is about to lose all providers of individual plans—every single one of them—and no Iowa citizen will have access to market coverage.

This blanket obstructionism while the health coverage industry burns stinks, it’s damaging to Americans who need or want health care insurance, and it’s destructive of our democracy.

More on Foolish

Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago President Charles Evans said Tuesday that the U.S. central bank can wait until the end of the year before making the decision to raise rates again, while adding it could start reducing the size of its balance sheet before that.

Indeed.  We could wait a decade, too.  Both delays are about equally foolish.

Increasing interest rates on debt, whether market rates of Federal Reserve benchmark rates, are inherently inflationary.  Thus: the Fed needs to set its rates to levels consistent with target inflation, and then sit down, and be quiet.

Mr Evans also said in the interview that even if the Fed does hold off on rate rises until very late in the year, that needn’t stop the institution from pressing forward with its plans to allow its balance sheet to start shrinking at some point this year.

Indeed.  The Fed needs to take this separate step, regardless, and get rid of the massive amount of Treasury debt it bought as part of its failed stimulus policy.  The Fed isn’t a stimulus institution: its role is strictly the maintenance of stable market pricing and full employment (the latter which shouldn’t be a mandate as full employment will fall out of long-term price stability).