IBJNews

Senate bill draws kudos, continued doubts

J.K. Wall
December 2, 2009
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

In the blogosphere, health-policy experts have given the Senate health reform bill kudos for trying everything under the sun to reduce health care spending, but there are lingering doubts about whether it will really work.

“I can't think of a thing to try that they didn't try,” Jonathan Gruber, a health economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, told The Atlantic. “They really make the best effort anyone has ever made. Everything is in here. ... I can't think of anything I'd do that they are not doing in the bill. You couldn't have done better than they are doing.”

Even Mark McClellan, who ran the federal Medicare program for Republican President George W. Bush, praised the bill advanced by President Obama and congressional Democrats.

“It would be good if more could be done, but this is the right direction to go,” he told The Atlantic’s Ron Brownstein. You can read his piece here.

But at least one ardent Obama supporter doesn’t believe it will actually happen—and he doesn’t blame Obama. He blames Congress.

Jeff Goldsmith, president of Virginia-based Health Futures Inc. and a professor of public health sciences at the University of Virginia, lists five big areas where the health reform bills count on future Congresses to make tough decisions to hold down federal spending. You can read his blog post here.

And he has no faith that they will come through.

Polls show the American people tend to agree with him. A November Quinnipiac University survey found that only one in five Americans—and only one in three Democrats—believe health care reform will not add to the deficit.

“The reason almost no one believes health reform will be deficit-neutral,” Goldsmith wrote, “is our political system’s lavishly demonstrated inability to say no to anyone.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. First, the Athenaeum is going to have to get past the hurdle with the Lockerbie residents and the agreement that the parcel would be residential. Second, and in my opinion, this prime piece of property should include parking, PLUS, a black box theater(s), some market rate and affordable artist housing and a plan to renovate and reconfigure the second story theater. I would negotiate to add the DeHaan property surface parking lot into the development mix, place a one story surface parking garage on the DeHaan lot on the street level (for the Dehaan tenants use during the daytime) and add a second story to the garage that would become an addition to the current second story theater and then change the direction of the theater by moving the stage across the alley and on top of the DeHaan lot parking. You can add all the stage elements that are currently missing from the Athenaeum stage to make it more attractive for use by Ballet, Opera and traveling productions. Plus, the theater changes would probably help solve some of the soundproofing issues. Alas,it does not seem to be a part of the strategic plan to conduct a study to determine best use of the property. Seems like the current plan is a quick and easy move that ignores the property best use/potential and any strategic property planning for the effect on future generations.

  2. I recall that MSA's pilings are still in the ground and hard to remove. It’s not likely any proposal will include significant underground construction/parking because of this. Start adding 2 floors of retail, 8 floors of parking and 5-10 floors of possible hotel, and/or 10-20 floors of residential, and you are at 30 floors already with possible expansion of all the uses. But then again I could be wrong.

  3. Accoriding to their website there is no deadline to the Do Not Call list. What is this article referring to??

  4. On what planet are they entitled to this largesse from the stockholders? These people make multi-million dollar salaries: Pay for your own personal travel.

  5. It matters because they're already paid enormously fat salaries: Pay for your own personal travel. Being "taxed on it" isn't a valid excuse--so what? They're still being gifted a raft of luxury perks from somebody else's money on top of an enormous, lavish salary.

ADVERTISEMENT