Old Man in the Middle

Could it be that the Bush family will again put a Clinton in the Whitehouse? David Limbaugh has a perspective on the possibility. History can repeat itself. I believe Bill made it to Washington the same way, i.e., playing too the middle. Hey, I almost voted for his second term. I also think that Bill fought off Hillary’s liberal positions/influence for the whole eight years he was in office.

Could Israel, Palestine, Lebanon and Iraq form a self-defense coalition against radicals who’s objective is to destabilize the Middle East. I know I am reaching but GW should some how make it happen. I think it is already on his mind.

Maybe the Bush administration should save some of its political capital for something other than medical malpractice tort reform. News Batch provides some perspectives on tort reform. Many issues are addressed. The surprises were that the cost of insurance for doctors as a percentage of revenues is lower than I expected and may not be the cause of doctors leaving practices and insurance premiums are not skyrocketing with some indicators that they are coming down. In addition, News Batch also indicates that although California already enacted some of the provisions of the Bush administrations proposal e.g., cap on non-economic damages back in 1979, it was more likely that insurance reform in CA in 1988 has made the difference. This seems to be confirmed in part in a report by the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights.

A disturbing bit of information from New Batch is that 4 in 100 hospital patients are in some way harmed. Two 2 of the 4 appear to be unpreventable. However, the most disturbing numbers are that 1 of the 4 is preventable but not negligent and 1 of the 4 is preventable and negligent. We should not be accepting this poor performance. The cost of medical malpractice insurances would surly drop dramatically if performance improved. The Bush administration would serve us better if it found a way to motivate doctors to improve performance. That would also mean less for the trial lawyers. Win win! (Thanks to Paul and Tom for challenging me on this topic.)

One of many definitions of a trust is something committed or entrusted to one to be used or cared for in the interest of another. Then I would think one could say that the Social Security Trust Fund is money entrusted to the Federal Government to be used and cared for in the interest of future retirees. Guess what, they used it and forgot to care for it. In addition they (the politicians) work hard to keep the secret. But the word is slowly getting out. A Newsweek article (February 14, 2004 issue) “Social Security A Daring Leap” does point out that “The trust fund is irrelevant. It is an accounting entry, not real money.” It is buried in the article but it is there.

I fail to understand why our politicians continue to refer to the trust fund at all. Those who cling to the idea that the Trust Fund will run out of money in 2042 or even 2052 are truly acting like ostriches and are perpetuating a myth. The Today Show (one of my least favorites right up there with 60 Minutes) had a special on social security on February 17, 2005. They continue the myth. The important date to talk about is about 2018 after which SS payout will exceed taxes collected.

I found a good explanation of how our politicians have spent monies that we are led to believe are safely in trust. Visit the Government Trust Fund and Deficit/surplus Report by Michael Hodges. Thanks Michael.

I am a moderate from Massachusetts. That means that the majority of Massachusetts voters think I am from the extreme right.