Miscellany: 6/08/11

Quote of the Day

Great is the road I climb, but the garland offered by an easier effort is not worth the gathering.

Sextus Propertius

The Health Care Kerfuffle: A Brief Discussion

I've probably published dozens of commentaries about the health care issue and have a few basic talking points (which, of course, no politician is supporting): the government should reinsure for catastrophic illnesses, probably through a small national sales tax (which I believe would be the fairest way to spread the risks/costs); we need to vest patients/consumers in the health care transaction; we need to deregulate, both at the federal and state level, special-interest benefit mandates. We also need to strip morally hazardous policies, e.g., allowing people to defer health insurance enrollment until they are seriously ill or middle-class head of households to freeload, e.g., guaranteed free hospital care if no existing health care policies.

Nevertheless, I do want to discuss a recent McKinsey finding at least 30% would likely end employer health care benefits by the time ObamaCare is introduced in 2014. I think we are in an unsustainable health care bubble, and I know that the progressives' belief that they can micromanage the health care sector is sheer hubris. What I think we'll see is the equivalent of what started happening in the 1980's as companies realized that pension  programs were unsustainable: they cannot allow their personnel medical benefits grow out of control. I think at some point they are likely to offer a subsidy capped at some level and/or employee match. 

Now as to the McKinsey prediction: I think there is some game playing going on. A major employer probably doesn't want to strip health care insurance first, allowing competitors to use the benefit as a way to hire away the best and brightest. However, once a major employer makes a commitment (which I suspect will be accompanied with compensatory pay increases), I think a large number of other companies will follow suit. It's difficult to know what's going to happen, especially until disparate court challenges to ObamaCare work their way to the Supreme Court are resolved, but I think it's absolutely clear companies at some point in time will want to cap those benefits. Will it start before or on 2014? Maybe not. But at some point they'll have no choice.

Romney, Polls--and the 2012 Election

In John McCain's stunning, unlikely 2008 GOP nomination comeback, I was one of the McCain supporters whom stuck by him as his campaign organization and front runner status collapsed especially because of the radioactive immigration reform bill, which infuriated media conservatives, already upset at McCain over his opposition to the early Bush tax cuts (especially his use of class warfare rhetoric) and campaign reform. McCain who had presciently argued that the Bush Administration's Iraq strategy was undermanned, carried the water for Bush's belated change of strategy that Bush absurdly suggested was motivated by a desire not to affect the 2006 election. (In fact, Bush's delay almost certainly resulted in the unnecessary loss of several House and Senate seats that would be needed to support a johnny-come-lately change in strategy; has Bush ever acknowledged how many casualties might have been spared if he had changed strategy earlier than later?) A temporary uptick in casualties was inevitable and only served to embolden the anti-war activists in the new Congressional Democratic majority to cut and run from Iraq. It is true that McCain needed a lot of help on Capitol Hill to give the ultimately successful strategy a chance to work; the President by that time was deeply unpopular and kept a low profile. McCain's high-profile support was politically courageous because his political career was on the line and public sentiment had swung against the Iraq commitment; none of his main GOP competitors had to cast a single vote for or against Iraq (including Romney, whose view on the issue was, in my judgment, nuanced). Later, media conservatives like Ann Coulter, seeking to undermine McCain's candidacy, would damn him with faint praise, trying to downplay McCain's military/foreign policy advantage over his adversaries.

My advocacy of McCain also reflected a certain reality: it would be a change election, and George Bush's slumping ratings put potential GOP candidates in a box: the President was very popular with the base, which meant the GOP candidates had to kiss his ring, but they had to know that any close link would allow the Democrats to portray them as a Bush third term, which would be lethal in the general election. I thought John McCain was the obvious strongest candidate; I thought the best opportunity to win the White House was to have a candidate whom could appeal to the political center and would be able to separate himself from Bush. In fact, McCain's battle with Bush for the 2000 GOP nomination and differences on key votes like the early Bush tax cuts clearly established the separation. McCain had worked across the aisle (e.g., Feingold and Lieberman) and was part of the Gang of 14 which defused a crisis in the US Senate. Obama had been preaching a misleading post-partisan politics with a voter population tired of partisan bickering; in fact, Obama was a key reason why the 2007 immigration reform failed by stripping away Democratic concessions to Republicans, while McCain was taking heavy hits from anti-reform conservatives for making political concessions. In a certain sense, McCain's populism and reformist credentials would allow the GOP to keep Obama or Clinton from posturing as a pseudo-centrist. In fact, originally I was favorably disposed towards the selection of Sarah Palin, whom I thought cemented McCain's populist/bipartisan/reformer centrism; at the time, Palin had sky-high approval ratings in Alaska and had shown an ability to work with Democrats. I didn't think McCain would pick her because of the pending Troopergate investigation, when a report was due in the middle of the general election campaign. I didn't believe for a second that McCain would risk a possibly adverse finding blowing up his campaign. I also never thought that Sarah Palin would resort to a red meat, polarizing campaign; I think Sarah Palin herself was probably surprised at her appeal to the GOP base.

The reason for providing the above discussion is to explain the context for the 2008 GOP nomination campaign. Keep in mind the recession started in December 2007, and the economic tsunami  wasn't on anybody's radar. Romney's campaign bothered me for a few reasons: first, Romney made it clear he was willing to freely spend from his considerable resources (while McCain's campaign was so cash-strapped, he was flying coach and carrying his own bags through airports). Second, Romney decided that he needed to veer right of center as a social conservative and made other policy changes (e.g., on immigration) which, in my view, seemed politically convenient and an attempt to pander to the media conservatives. My perspective at that point in time was that Democrats would run a class warfare campaign against his trying to buy the Presidency, as Mr. Flip-Flop, inexperienced on military/foreign policy, etc., and Romney would be buried in the general election. (I think Romney made for a more compelling story after the economic tsunami, but I'm not sure in a change election with traditional Democratic safety net policies at play that the outcome would have been any different.)

I went on a few popular conservative websites as a rare McCain supporter; the media conservatives were unnerved by McCain's resurrected campaign and went on a stop-McCain kick. Even though I did not work for the McCain campaign, I really did not like the anti-McCain groupthink on the blogs, launched a vigorous defense of the senator and returned some fire of my own on Mitt Romney, discussing some of the points above--plus, with respect to Romney's unchallenged private business accomplishments, suggested the likely populist response: Mitt Romney as a venture capitalist took on some troubled companies and had to shed costs--which, of course, would inevitably include layoffs.

Some time later there was a GOP candidate debate where McCain repeated a talking point he had previously raised over Romney at Bain Capital laying off allegedly thousands of workers. Romney was visibly angry as McCain raised this. But I should point out some of the Democrats had already started making the same point, which of course is consistent with their class warfare/pro-union talking points.

Thus, I was not surprised when I recently saw one of those Fox News Channel liberal contributors (some female whom worked for a past John Kerry campaign) already make the same point. Romney so far has run a remarkably adroit campaign, positioning himself as the candidate whom knows business and what it takes to create jobs.

What do I expect to be Romney's biggest challenges as a clear front runner? (RCP shows that this week's released Quinnipiac and Fox News polls with a 10-point lead for Romney; Romney is now routinely scoring 20% or higher in GOP polls across the board including 5 to 10 points or more leads in all the early GOP races (Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina). In addition, he leads in one prominent head-to-head against Obama (Washington Post) and within striking distance in others (Fox News, Quinnipiac, Democracy Corps, etc.))

I expect the GOP competition to basically acknowledge Romney's private sector and Olympics accomplishments. I believe that the biggest issue Romney will face is his Massachusetts record, particularly RomneyCare; I suspect that he will be attacked for the controversial mandate provision and other perceived issues (e.g., cost and accessibility issues). There may be also a broader attempt to paint him as the GOP version of  Obama (e.g., his position on climate change), not to mention some of the issues raised in the 2008 campaign, such as his suspect social conservatism and other position reversals.

How should Romney respond? Compare and contrast his executive style to Obama's, and explain pragmatic, business-like dealings with the opposition. Deal with the mandate issue by stressing moral hazard; explain how the final legislation differed from the Democrats' preferred version, what he vetoed; provide a lessons learned--what he would do differently today; examine ObamaCare from his business/jobs perspective. For the social conservatives, emphasize strong family values.

The "job killing" charge, say in a general election campaign: I would point out that in a failing, unprofitable business, no job, including the manager's, is safe. The difference: Obama believes that a high tax and regulation environment stimulates business/job growth, and the strategy hasn't worked; Romney has real-world experience in turning around a failing business, a failing Olympics... Obama may be a nice guy, but he can't fix what's wrong in Washington: he's part of the problem.

Fukushima Nuclear Incident Update. This segment is a thrice-weekly, more readable summary of some key blogs covering the the recovery of Fukushima Daiichi shutdown but damaged nuclear reactors 1-3 and relevant spent fuel pools, whose critical cooling systems failed as the result of power failure following a record earthquake/tsunami.

The Hiroshima Syndrome blog notes:

• June 8 post: One of the things I love about this blog is how the blogger applies reducio ad absurdum arguments. For instance, there are the frequent references in the press about a China Syndrome-style fuel melting. So the blogger notices the emperor is wearing no clothes; I loosely paraphrase: "Hello? If the fuel isn't in the RPV, what do you think is heating the temperature to over 100 degrees centigrade? Why do you think the temperature is going up when we reduce coolant flow into the RPV?" Then there's the discussion of hot spots: more radiation-intense local areas. An obvious point is that this may be an artifact of something predictable: for instance, suppose we have a low concentration of radiation by-products in, say, rainwater. If we have a focus point (e.g., a drainage area), it is likely you would find higher concentrations area there, and there are some common sense public policies: restrict access, but not unduly: the danger dramatically diminishes at short distances from the source. The blogger continues to be exasperated by the discrepancies and fingerpointing among disparate sources; we've already noted a necessary reform of the Japanese nuclear watchdog being independent from a government agency promoting Japanese commerce. He also mocks local governments for scapegoating the nuclear power outages, noting power failures (including backups) which were beyond the reach of the tsunami (unlike the diesel backup generators at the Daiichi site). He also does his quick summary of Hiroshima Syndrome, noting resistance to releasing filtered water, delays to dealing with sewage, rapidly approaching capacity, and discussions of hot spots presupposing an inapplicable nuclear bomb fallout perspective.

Killebrew Moment: Lakeview, MN Miracle Field Renamed

Harmon Kilebrew Field Opening Day
Sunday, June 26th 2011  3:00 P.M
Harmon Killebrew Field at King Park
18350 Dodd Blvd Lakeville MN 55044

On a side note, in yesterday's post, I discussed some of the late Harmon Killebrew's charities. I saw an update that his charity golf tournament (starting on his birthday June 29) is sold out, but tickets for the Target Field birthday celebration are still available.

Harmon Killebrew's foundation has contributed over $250K towards "Miracle Field" projects around the country. The Miracle League finds a way for disabled children to participate in the magic of the baseball experience. The featured video on the Miracle League home site plays a catchy Eddie Kilgallon tune (first video below); you can find a history of the Miracle League and related special rules here, along with links for donations and ways to participate in the program.

Political Humor

"When the economy is bad, it means budget cuts and teacher layoffs. That means the next generation won’t even know as much about American history as Sarah Palin." - Jay Leno

"Despite the scandal, Weiner will not resign, saying he hasn’t done anything illegal and this is not the most embarrassing photo of him that has ever surfaced. That would be his senior portrait from high school." - Jimmy Kimmel

[Well, there's also that picture with former President Bill Clinton. Of course, when Weiner started off his news conference by saying, "I did not have sexual relations with any of those women..."]

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Groups

Chicago/Peter Cetera (featured backing vocals on chorus/trailing verses).

My miniseries on former Chicago bass guitarist/tenor Peter Cetera

Paul Anka, "Hold Me Til The Morning Comes". A personal top 10 favorite...