Author Topic: Lobbyist Handprints on Obamacare  (Read 1491 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Lobbyist Handprints on Obamacare
« Reply #15 on: December 10, 2012, 01:49:13 PM »

Online Rondo2287

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12333
  • Tommy Points: 563
  • Historical Draft Best Overall/Best Defensive team
I don't know why it would be surprising to anyone that Lobbyists would have a hand in Obamacare.  By expanding the pool of insured citizens he has essentially started a money grab in the industry.  Where there is a moneygrab there are going to be interested parties who have lobbyists

This I don't have an issue with. When people screamed about socialized medicine in relation to the ACA, what I saw instead was the President instead indefinitely extending the life of the private health insurance industry by tying it via legislation to the american people.

Yeah, while lobbyists in general make me cringe, they are part of the system, like it or not.  Although not sure I the private health insurance industry needed much help here.  I would have been a little happier if Obama and company had decided to work harder to keep the healthcare workers and small hospitals in business when they made the bill.  But maybe the small hospital lobby is not as powerful as the HMO lobby.

Exactly, any time there is serious change the lobbyist will get involved to make sure that their parties are not left out in the cold due to the change.  Thats why I was saying if Romney and Ryan were to make any substantial tax changes they should do without putting their plan out there too far in advance because the lobyists would be out in full force making sure their employers were taken care of and nothing would actually change.

Re: Lobbyist Handprints on Obamacare
« Reply #16 on: December 10, 2012, 01:57:30 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9816
  • Tommy Points: 553
Exactly, any time there is serious change the lobbyist will get involved to make sure that their parties are not left out in the cold due to the change.  Thats why I was saying if Romney and Ryan were to make any substantial tax changes they should do without putting their plan out there too far in advance because the lobyists would be out in full force making sure their employers were taken care of and nothing would actually change.
Lobbyists lobby. They don't actually pass policy.
Managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Lobbyist Handprints on Obamacare
« Reply #17 on: December 10, 2012, 01:59:18 PM »

Online Rondo2287

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12333
  • Tommy Points: 563
  • Historical Draft Best Overall/Best Defensive team
Exactly, any time there is serious change the lobbyist will get involved to make sure that their parties are not left out in the cold due to the change.  Thats why I was saying if Romney and Ryan were to make any substantial tax changes they should do without putting their plan out there too far in advance because the lobyists would be out in full force making sure their employers were taken care of and nothing would actually change.
Lobbyists lobby. They don't actually pass policy.

Correct, which is why I said they lobby and didnt say they pass policy. 

Re: Lobbyist Handprints on Obamacare
« Reply #18 on: December 10, 2012, 02:00:41 PM »

Offline Brendan

  • Ray Allen
  • **
  • Posts: 2988
  • Tommy Points: 72
    • Self Assay
I won't further the media bias line - I didn't want to get into it. My point is that the story is the story irrespective of the reporting. Other posters pulled in a media bias, creating the distraction.

On ACA - the lobbyist cycle is what's disgusting, not the fact that lobbyist are involved. This kind of cycle (this is NOT a PARTISAN issue) is a bad one:
work for gov -> take high paid lobby job -> back to gov
especially when the lobbying is extracting funding from the gov't that is then used to pay for the campaigns of the incumbents that play ball (rinse and repeat.)

It was well articulated in the article.

ACA is especially prone to this kind of corruption:
1. Involves basically 15% of the US economy and growing
2. Tons of rules or worse yet requirements for a bureaucrat in the exec arm to make a rule
3. Tons of special interest carve outs
4. Very little time to review a huge bill before it passes ("You have to pass it to find out whats in it.")

Instapundit.com has proposed a ex-gov't employee tax of 50% on marginal income above salary earned after gov't job. So you make 100k and leave to make 1m? You have to pay: .5 * (1m - 100k) = 450k off the top, then normal taxes on 550k (1m - 450k already taxed.) I think that's a good rule, since the salary you are getting is for the access the tax payer paid for you to get.

The best way to eliminate this kind of corruption is to limit the role of gov't in line with US' founding principles.

Re: Lobbyist Handprints on Obamacare
« Reply #19 on: December 10, 2012, 02:04:03 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9816
  • Tommy Points: 553
Exactly, any time there is serious change the lobbyist will get involved to make sure that their parties are not left out in the cold due to the change.  Thats why I was saying if Romney and Ryan were to make any substantial tax changes they should do without putting their plan out there too far in advance because the lobyists would be out in full force making sure their employers were taken care of and nothing would actually change.
Lobbyists lobby. They don't actually pass policy.

Correct, which is why I said they lobby and didnt say they pass policy.
Right, but you're making it sound as if they can lobby any bill away. This isn't true. If Romney and Ryan wanted to make changes, they would just make it, end of story. Somehow lobbyism didn't stop the Affordable Care Act, a pretty serious change in its own right.

Also, re: the moneygrab comment. I don't think you understand how risk management works.
Managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Lobbyist Handprints on Obamacare
« Reply #20 on: December 10, 2012, 02:06:21 PM »

Offline Chris

  • Global Moderator
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17982
  • Tommy Points: 636

On ACA - the lobbyist cycle is what's disgusting, not the fact that lobbyist are involved. This kind of cycle (this is NOT a PARTISAN issue) is a bad one:
work for gov -> take high paid lobby job -> back to gov
especially when the lobbying is extracting funding from the gov't that is then used to pay for the campaigns of the incumbents that play ball (rinse and repeat.)



I agree that this cycle is bad (although I think it is unavoidable, unless you are either going to ban lobbying in general, or REALLY step into a sticky situation as far as limiting the ability of people to change industries).  My problem is that I think it is a bit disingenuous to link this to Obamacare.

Yeah, it happened with Obamacare, but it also happens with just about every other lobby in Washington.  Its the way the entire industry works. 

Also, I would like to add that I don't think this is necessarily "corruption".  There is no evidence that I have seen that any corrupt deals were made.  Just that experts on the subject matter were hired.

Re: Lobbyist Handprints on Obamacare
« Reply #21 on: December 10, 2012, 02:09:22 PM »

Online Rondo2287

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12333
  • Tommy Points: 563
  • Historical Draft Best Overall/Best Defensive team
Exactly, any time there is serious change the lobbyist will get involved to make sure that their parties are not left out in the cold due to the change.  Thats why I was saying if Romney and Ryan were to make any substantial tax changes they should do without putting their plan out there too far in advance because the lobyists would be out in full force making sure their employers were taken care of and nothing would actually change.
Lobbyists lobby. They don't actually pass policy.

Correct, which is why I said they lobby and didnt say they pass policy.
Right, but you're making it sound as if they can lobby any bill away. This isn't true. If Romney and Ryan wanted to make changes, they would just make it, end of story. Somehow lobbyism didn't stop the Affordable Care Act, a pretty serious change in its own right.

Also, re: the moneygrab comment. I don't think you understand how risk management works.

I understand risk management have taken several classes on the topic and my brother is an actuary but oh well.  And I think you have misunderstood my point.  Lobbyists cannot propose and pass a bill but lobbyists can present a significant roadblock to people trying to pass bills. 

Course with the way that the ACA was passed I don't think it is a good way to guage the effects of lobbyists since it was passed without of much of it being read or understood by those voting on it. 

Re: Lobbyist Handprints on Obamacare
« Reply #22 on: December 10, 2012, 02:31:51 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27202
  • Tommy Points: 2044
Obamacare was for the most part modeled after Romneycare in Massachusetts. And anyone in Massachusetts that has had family medical insurance(if they purchase it through their employer or on their own) can tell you, Romneycare did nothing to stop the insurance premiums from rising every year.

Seems like something an insurance lobbyist would think up to put in place. Give everyone the story about how universal healthcare will curtail medical costs and medical insurance costs. Put it in place and then see that its not going to happen.

A one payor system is the only sure way to curtail medical costs and medical insurance costs. Having the government dictating to the medical industry is the only way to do it otherwise, just like the oil industry, the costs are just going to continue to skyrocket.

Re: Lobbyist Handprints on Obamacare
« Reply #23 on: December 10, 2012, 02:45:54 PM »

Offline Chris

  • Global Moderator
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17982
  • Tommy Points: 636
Obamacare was for the most part modeled after Romneycare in Massachusetts. And anyone in Massachusetts that has had family medical insurance(if they purchase it through their employer or on their own) can tell you, Romneycare did nothing to stop the insurance premiums from rising every year.

Seems like something an insurance lobbyist would think up to put in place. Give everyone the story about how universal healthcare will curtail medical costs and medical insurance costs. Put it in place and then see that its not going to happen.

A one payor system is the only sure way to curtail medical costs and medical insurance costs. Having the government dictating to the medical industry is the only way to do it otherwise, just like the oil industry, the costs are just going to continue to skyrocket.

And yet one of the major reasons the costs are skyrocketing for private insurance is because the Government isn't paying their full share, for the people they are "covering" (with medicare, medicaid, etc.).  So, I am not sure a one payor system cures it either, unless they are going to find the money to pay a lot higher rates than they are currently paying. 

Re: Lobbyist Handprints on Obamacare
« Reply #24 on: December 10, 2012, 04:33:58 PM »

Offline Brendan

  • Ray Allen
  • **
  • Posts: 2988
  • Tommy Points: 72
    • Self Assay
Obamacare was for the most part modeled after Romneycare in Massachusetts. And anyone in Massachusetts that has had family medical insurance(if they purchase it through their employer or on their own) can tell you, Romneycare did nothing to stop the insurance premiums from rising every year.

Seems like something an insurance lobbyist would think up to put in place. Give everyone the story about how universal healthcare will curtail medical costs and medical insurance costs. Put it in place and then see that its not going to happen.

A one payor system is the only sure way to curtail medical costs and medical insurance costs. Having the government dictating to the medical industry is the only way to do it otherwise, just like the oil industry, the costs are just going to continue to skyrocket.

And yet one of the major reasons the costs are skyrocketing for private insurance is because the Government isn't paying their full share, for the people they are "covering" (with medicare, medicaid, etc.).  So, I am not sure a one payor system cures it either, unless they are going to find the money to pay a lot higher rates than they are currently paying.
Yep.

A single payor system doesn't curtail costs in a way that provides for good outcomes. There is a reason monopolies are dangerous. There is also a reason monosopy is just as  dangerous. When enforced or run by the gov't they are even worse.

The way to improve healthcare across both dimensions that matter (cost and quality) is more, not less free market.

 

Hello! Guest

Welcome to the CelticsBlog Forums.

Welcome to CelticsBlog