Several years ago I had breakfast with Mitt Romney and he was talking about the state healthcare plan put in while he was governor. An analysis showed that a high percentage of young people don't sign up for health insurance through their employer, and he believed the Mass. Health Plan would work if they required young people to enroll, and young people would subsidize the cost for older people. He proclaimed the enrollment mandate was key.
Forward several years and Mitt losing the Presidential election, Obama claimed ACA was patterned after Mitt's plan. However, by then Mitt's plan had been in for several years and we already knew that Mass had about the highest healthcare cost per capita in the nation, so the enrollment mandate wasn't working.
Under ACA, a young adult to age 26 can remain under their parents plan, so those young people won't help keep the cost of ACA lower. Those not fortunate enough to have coverage under their parents plan have a choice between paying about $100 per month for very basic coverage, or $90 per year as a tax penalty. Simple economics and human behavior will explain the outcome: few will take coverage. Early indications are proving this expectation will become reality, and the cost for ObamaCare will quickly become the more expensive option for many people.
Insurance companies are smart, and they understand the dynamics of risk much better that the Federal Government. Over a decade ago, the Feds came up with what they thought was a good idea to contain Medicare expenses: pay insurers 95% of the expected cost in a geographic area and cuts costs by 5%. It might have sounded reasonable to a Washington paper pusher, but those of us who understand risk either laughed or took advantage. In fact, insurance companies instantly marketed new plans under this law, but their ads didn't feature old people in wheelchairs with free transportation to the doctor or hospital, they featured younger, healthier seniors and offered such things as free gym memberships. These plans didn't attract average or above average risk, they marketed to younger, healthier seniors and they made billions while the cost of care outside these plans skyrocketed!
With ACA offering guaranteed coverage, they will attract the bad risk like a supermodel visiting a boys summer camp. Insurance companies who did not join ACA as a provider will market to healthier people in need of coverage, and I predict this cycle will be a repeat of the original Medicare Risk plan experience. Katherine Sebelius is an amateur, and she is competing against people who actually understand risk and know how to do marketing. You might notice the largest insurers didn't join the ACA provider list, because they once again smell opportunity.
Tuesday, November 5, 2013
Thursday, October 17, 2013
A Lesson in Civics
I remember watching on television a very liberal college professor who was advocating more power for the minority party. She saw the role of the minority as a group that has veto power over policies, and I recall thinking what a nut she was to make this outrageous suggestion. For our nation is a Democracy where the majority rules. It's not like a Parliamentary system where the majority forms a new government, but a representative system where power is divided based upon the aggregate of localized elections. The Senate is a house that is more respectful of minority views compared to the House which is a winner takes all structure. Real power rests with the Executive Branch, which is responsible for carrying out the laws passed by Congress. Last, but not least, is the Judiciary, which has the last say when it comes to the rules by which the other two branches of government operate.
The Democrats control about 50% of the elected federal government. The Republicans control about 17% of the elected government, leaving the remaining 33% to the appointed Judiciary. Was it right for the Republicans to make such divisive demands, resulting in a government deadlock which closed down Washington and everything they control? Regardless how noble the cause, they never had a snowballs chance in hell that they would win this fight. In the end, they caved and lost the battle.
Was it fair for our mainstream press to blame the Republicans for the government shutdown? Probably not, but you have to look at the distribution of power to see why they might have received the blame. That's not to say the mainstream press is fair or impartial--they aren't. That's not to say the President or Harry Reid conducted themselves appropriately. Not only did the President say he would not negotiate, but he criticized the Republicans for doing exactly what Senator Obama did during Bush's Presidency. In fact, Senator Obama suggested the Republicans have a patriotic duty to take the position they assumed, and that the mere fact this fight occurred was a "failure of leadership" by the President. Was Senator Obama wrong then? Is President Obama a hypocrite? Did the mainstream press talk about the position of then Senator Obama and either agree with the Republican strategy, or underscore the hypocracy? Neither occurred, and I would be foolish to expect our mainstream press to hold their darling to a high standard. The press is not fair. They are not balanced. They are not neutral. They are not analytical, or serving the good of the country. Get over it, they a business seeking ratings or newspaper sales. Journalism has lost its way for sure.
Regardless what Senator Obama said or did, following his strategy was foolish. The Republicans entered this fight with no clear plan; with no exit strategy; with little coordination of messaging by party members; they entered this divided, and it showed.
Until now, the President owned the economy. The record the Republicans were going to run against was the most poorly managed economy since the Great Depression. Unfortunately, the Republican fight will invite the Democrats to say, "the Republican shutdown harmed the economy..." We all know from an intellectual standpoint that this short event is not responsible for the multi-trillion dollar deficit spending; the high unemployment; the very slow growing economy; the huge increase in welfare recipients; higher taxes, and on and on. The memories of our electorate are very short. Voters didn't recall 9/11 when the Democrats complained about Bush's poor economy. Voters forgot about how proud they were of George Herbert Walker Bush as our Commander in Chief overseeing the Gulf War. They are unlikely to remember Benghazi and all of the other foreign policy failures under Obama.
It is too bad the press failed to identify the great importance of the Republican's objective to put fiscal responsibility back on the negotiating table. No doubt this is the single most important threat to our nation's security, but the Republicans CANNOT rely on the press to put this issue on the front burner. The press is not going to do anything that will hurt their chosen party, regardless how critical the issues are that confront our nation. For example, they are not going to write about how damaging the Obama/Iran policy might be to our nation and Israel, at least until Israel attacks Iran or Iran uses a nuclear weapon against Israel.
There are so many examples of how President a Obama lied to the people about ObamaCare in order to get it passed. Despite what he said, ObamaCare will impact your ability to keep your current health plan and/or doctor; ObamaCare will NOT reduce healthcare costs, and it will NOT reduce the nation's death. The White House refuses to tell us how many people have enrolled for ObamaCare, saying that so many people want this they crashed the system because so many people tried to enroll on the first day. The press knows these are lies, or at least incredible exaggerations, but they aren't about to hold the President to a standard that expects or demands honesty.
What this all means is the Republicans MUST get their house in order. They need to establish common, achievable objectives between now and the next Congressional elections. They can learn a lot from the Democrats, who are very good at messaging. The Democrats have developed a sophisticated plan and organization that coordinates the messages they wish to convey; speaking as a single party with short, concise talking points. It matters not if it is the President, a Senator or Congresswoman, they are all saying the same thing at the same time. Regardless how outrageous, inaccurate or deceptive the message might be, it is coordinated. When our very uninformed voting public hears the same message over and over, they begin to believe it. The Democrats are very good about using social media, political operatives (labor unions, woman's' groups, abortion advocates and even the press) to get their messages out.
With nearly three decades of professional services under my belt dealing with labor unions, I have developed primary principles by which I serve my clients: 1) pick your battles. Every issue is not of equal importance, and fighting over every issue not only makes you look unprofessional, but it makes it impossible to achieve your objectives. 2) working with labor unions is like being in a bad marriage where divorce is not an option. You must give in order to take. Decide what is important, and determine what you can give up for it that is least damaging to your client. Big issues usually require bid trades. 3) you both have a job to do, so treating the other side with disrespect will invite the same towards you. You are unlikely to have a lot in common, or share the same objectives. However, don't make it personal, it's business. You can treat the other side with respect without appearing weak. If you want them to work with you, use charm. Keep things light, when possible. Let them know when something is important by changing the tone--forceful, but not rude or disrespectful.
The American public is as divided as Congress. These issues are important, and as much as people often do not want to talk politics, you can't fix our problems without dialogue. Political correctness is the liberal approach to shut down a dialogue about some very important issue confronting this nation. You can't fix problems you can't discuss. Political correctness is a strategy to protect bigotry and preserve racism.
The Democrats control about 50% of the elected federal government. The Republicans control about 17% of the elected government, leaving the remaining 33% to the appointed Judiciary. Was it right for the Republicans to make such divisive demands, resulting in a government deadlock which closed down Washington and everything they control? Regardless how noble the cause, they never had a snowballs chance in hell that they would win this fight. In the end, they caved and lost the battle.
Was it fair for our mainstream press to blame the Republicans for the government shutdown? Probably not, but you have to look at the distribution of power to see why they might have received the blame. That's not to say the mainstream press is fair or impartial--they aren't. That's not to say the President or Harry Reid conducted themselves appropriately. Not only did the President say he would not negotiate, but he criticized the Republicans for doing exactly what Senator Obama did during Bush's Presidency. In fact, Senator Obama suggested the Republicans have a patriotic duty to take the position they assumed, and that the mere fact this fight occurred was a "failure of leadership" by the President. Was Senator Obama wrong then? Is President Obama a hypocrite? Did the mainstream press talk about the position of then Senator Obama and either agree with the Republican strategy, or underscore the hypocracy? Neither occurred, and I would be foolish to expect our mainstream press to hold their darling to a high standard. The press is not fair. They are not balanced. They are not neutral. They are not analytical, or serving the good of the country. Get over it, they a business seeking ratings or newspaper sales. Journalism has lost its way for sure.
Regardless what Senator Obama said or did, following his strategy was foolish. The Republicans entered this fight with no clear plan; with no exit strategy; with little coordination of messaging by party members; they entered this divided, and it showed.
Until now, the President owned the economy. The record the Republicans were going to run against was the most poorly managed economy since the Great Depression. Unfortunately, the Republican fight will invite the Democrats to say, "the Republican shutdown harmed the economy..." We all know from an intellectual standpoint that this short event is not responsible for the multi-trillion dollar deficit spending; the high unemployment; the very slow growing economy; the huge increase in welfare recipients; higher taxes, and on and on. The memories of our electorate are very short. Voters didn't recall 9/11 when the Democrats complained about Bush's poor economy. Voters forgot about how proud they were of George Herbert Walker Bush as our Commander in Chief overseeing the Gulf War. They are unlikely to remember Benghazi and all of the other foreign policy failures under Obama.
It is too bad the press failed to identify the great importance of the Republican's objective to put fiscal responsibility back on the negotiating table. No doubt this is the single most important threat to our nation's security, but the Republicans CANNOT rely on the press to put this issue on the front burner. The press is not going to do anything that will hurt their chosen party, regardless how critical the issues are that confront our nation. For example, they are not going to write about how damaging the Obama/Iran policy might be to our nation and Israel, at least until Israel attacks Iran or Iran uses a nuclear weapon against Israel.
There are so many examples of how President a Obama lied to the people about ObamaCare in order to get it passed. Despite what he said, ObamaCare will impact your ability to keep your current health plan and/or doctor; ObamaCare will NOT reduce healthcare costs, and it will NOT reduce the nation's death. The White House refuses to tell us how many people have enrolled for ObamaCare, saying that so many people want this they crashed the system because so many people tried to enroll on the first day. The press knows these are lies, or at least incredible exaggerations, but they aren't about to hold the President to a standard that expects or demands honesty.
What this all means is the Republicans MUST get their house in order. They need to establish common, achievable objectives between now and the next Congressional elections. They can learn a lot from the Democrats, who are very good at messaging. The Democrats have developed a sophisticated plan and organization that coordinates the messages they wish to convey; speaking as a single party with short, concise talking points. It matters not if it is the President, a Senator or Congresswoman, they are all saying the same thing at the same time. Regardless how outrageous, inaccurate or deceptive the message might be, it is coordinated. When our very uninformed voting public hears the same message over and over, they begin to believe it. The Democrats are very good about using social media, political operatives (labor unions, woman's' groups, abortion advocates and even the press) to get their messages out.
With nearly three decades of professional services under my belt dealing with labor unions, I have developed primary principles by which I serve my clients: 1) pick your battles. Every issue is not of equal importance, and fighting over every issue not only makes you look unprofessional, but it makes it impossible to achieve your objectives. 2) working with labor unions is like being in a bad marriage where divorce is not an option. You must give in order to take. Decide what is important, and determine what you can give up for it that is least damaging to your client. Big issues usually require bid trades. 3) you both have a job to do, so treating the other side with disrespect will invite the same towards you. You are unlikely to have a lot in common, or share the same objectives. However, don't make it personal, it's business. You can treat the other side with respect without appearing weak. If you want them to work with you, use charm. Keep things light, when possible. Let them know when something is important by changing the tone--forceful, but not rude or disrespectful.
The American public is as divided as Congress. These issues are important, and as much as people often do not want to talk politics, you can't fix our problems without dialogue. Political correctness is the liberal approach to shut down a dialogue about some very important issue confronting this nation. You can't fix problems you can't discuss. Political correctness is a strategy to protect bigotry and preserve racism.
Monday, October 14, 2013
More Bananas, Please!
We were told the Sequester would be so bad, with cuts so deep, nobody in Congress would allow themselves to reach an impasse and implement the Sequester. We heard the same frightening stories about the shutdown--if it happens we will surely see our country fall back into a deep recession, or even trigger a depression.
For those of us who do not rely on a government paycheck or handout, both events were hardly detectable, except when you tune into your favorite news channel. If the press was full of knowledgeable souls, perhaps we would have not heard things would be so bad. Instead, the press is composed of mostly liberal masters of dogma, only capable of parroting their favorite politician or political operative.there is only one certainty: the press is incapable of providing an honest, neutral view based on fact, or at least knowledgeable sources. Perhaps it is not possible to find people capable of offering a more educated viewpoint, but I suspect the press just finds it beneficial to report more controversial views because the truth is simply not so sensational.
But that is the point. The Sequester and Shutdowns simply did not produce the destructive result promised by our many newspapers and television shows. For journalism is no longer the pursuit of a story as much as it is pursuit of interested followers. The truth about the Sequester and Shutdown are far less interesting than the ticking clock countdown until our country falls off the face of the earth. In order to support the sensationalist story, the White House blocked off open air memorials, parks and sidewalks. Yes, sidewalks. While Mount Vernon is not a federally-funded attraction, the sidewalk from the street to the home of our first President is on federal land and the administration made sure to erect barricades to make Mount Vernon appear closed. No doubt it took more effort and more dollars to erect the many barricades to parks, monuments and buildings than if they did nothing.
We all know the closures and barricades were there to make a point, but it came off a lot more like the poor sport who picked up his ball, the game ball, and went home because he didn't get to play his chosen position and if he didn't get his way, the game ball is going home with him and nobody gets to play. I know it sounds childish, but that is exactly how I view our President during this debate.
As for Congress, I find it easy to side with the Republicans because I know we need to reduce Federal spending, and the Sequester and Shutdown are proof positive we can survive with a much smaller government. However, I cannot say the Republicans entered this fight prepared, with a plan of action. It seems they gave up on a delay of ObamaCare early on and changed the objective to budget cuts. Their objective might be just, but they have not demonstrated they are ready or capable of taking the reins of this country's government; instead giving the Democrats plenty of arguments to point out their lack of planning and failure to stay on message. The fact is, they all look like a bunch of monkeys in need of bananas because they are not fooling anyone into believing we have a leader ready to take over the White House when the eight year plague ends.
For those of us who do not rely on a government paycheck or handout, both events were hardly detectable, except when you tune into your favorite news channel. If the press was full of knowledgeable souls, perhaps we would have not heard things would be so bad. Instead, the press is composed of mostly liberal masters of dogma, only capable of parroting their favorite politician or political operative.there is only one certainty: the press is incapable of providing an honest, neutral view based on fact, or at least knowledgeable sources. Perhaps it is not possible to find people capable of offering a more educated viewpoint, but I suspect the press just finds it beneficial to report more controversial views because the truth is simply not so sensational.
But that is the point. The Sequester and Shutdowns simply did not produce the destructive result promised by our many newspapers and television shows. For journalism is no longer the pursuit of a story as much as it is pursuit of interested followers. The truth about the Sequester and Shutdown are far less interesting than the ticking clock countdown until our country falls off the face of the earth. In order to support the sensationalist story, the White House blocked off open air memorials, parks and sidewalks. Yes, sidewalks. While Mount Vernon is not a federally-funded attraction, the sidewalk from the street to the home of our first President is on federal land and the administration made sure to erect barricades to make Mount Vernon appear closed. No doubt it took more effort and more dollars to erect the many barricades to parks, monuments and buildings than if they did nothing.
We all know the closures and barricades were there to make a point, but it came off a lot more like the poor sport who picked up his ball, the game ball, and went home because he didn't get to play his chosen position and if he didn't get his way, the game ball is going home with him and nobody gets to play. I know it sounds childish, but that is exactly how I view our President during this debate.
As for Congress, I find it easy to side with the Republicans because I know we need to reduce Federal spending, and the Sequester and Shutdown are proof positive we can survive with a much smaller government. However, I cannot say the Republicans entered this fight prepared, with a plan of action. It seems they gave up on a delay of ObamaCare early on and changed the objective to budget cuts. Their objective might be just, but they have not demonstrated they are ready or capable of taking the reins of this country's government; instead giving the Democrats plenty of arguments to point out their lack of planning and failure to stay on message. The fact is, they all look like a bunch of monkeys in need of bananas because they are not fooling anyone into believing we have a leader ready to take over the White House when the eight year plague ends.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)