Quote of the Day
Don't underestimate the value of Doing Nothing,
of just going along,
listening to all the things you can't hear,
and not bothering.
Winnie the Pooh
Primum non nocere
(First, Do No Harm)
"Given an existing problem, it may be better not to do something, or even to do nothing, than to risk causing more harm than good."
We can't afford to do nothing.
Barack Obama
The medical profession has two seemingly contradictory principles: beneficence vs. nonmaleficence. The doctor or other medical professional can confound or even worsen a patient's condition by making mistakes during diagnosis or treatment, including preparation errors (e.g., the wrong blood type or misidentified body part for surgery) or being ignorant of or mistaken about salient patient facts or condition (blood pressure, organ disease, family medical history, diabetes, allergies or sensitivities, current prescriptions, any substance abuse or eating disorder, etc.) Certain conditions require special treatment or handling (e.g., spinal cord injuries at the place of trauma or breech births). However, "do no harm" does NOT mean "give no care", and it can't be used to justify inaction in the event of a dying but treatable patient.
I frequently quote the Serenity Prayer in this blog: in particular, the wise person knows when to accept the things that one cannot change. In matters of economics, we have concepts like opportunity costs and the law of unintended consequences. The last thing the economy needed trying to recover from the recession and a high national debt was massive new costs and regulatory regimes contributing to economic uncertainty and business costs, including personnel.
Even if one assumes for the sake of argument that this was the time and place for reform, there were constraints (especially massive unfunded Medicare liabilities). Obama probably have could gotten a bipartisan agreement on more feasible health care reform through Congress focusing on catastrophic health, shoring up state/region high risk pools, and allowing interstate marketing of basic health insurance in a manner similar to self-insuring corporations or other groups.
Obama's declaration (about doing something in lieu of nothing) is wrong in general. Hasty, impulsive, or desperate decisions create new problems without resolving old ones. For example, federal price-fixing below market prices all but ensures seniors and the poor will encounter issues finding providers. Many businesses will find it a no-brainer (much cheaper) to shed a very high-costing plan in favor of a much less expensive penalty.
We need more even-keeled leadership, a confident one that doesn't make excuses and is self-disciplined. What many people didn't understand about the Romney "Seamus scandal" (the family transporting the family dog in a wind-shielded carrier mounted on top of the family vehicle on a vacation) is why the family mentioned the anecdote. Seamus had some gastric distress issues the first time they tried it, and the Romney sons noticed a brownish liquid streaking down the side window and alerted Mitt. Mitt stopped at a gas station, hosed down the car, tended to the dog and then resumed driving. Calm, cool, collected: he analyzed the problem, outlined a plan, and executed it. He didn't look to make excuses or point fingers at the kids.
But He Does Have a Signed Excuse From Dr. Howard Dean...
If you are going to run negative ads against Obama this fall, this is exactly the kind of ad you should run. I haven't reviewed all the RNC or Romney ads, but avoid the personal stuff (red meat topics like Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright), and use Obama's words--his promises, his apology tour, etc. I can even envision a mock Michael Moore commercial. Remember his anti-Bush movie where he essentially compared Bush's reaction to the 9/11 attacks to a deer caught in headlights? I could easily imagine a project where you show scenes of Obama's numerous vacation and golf outings during the BP oil spill, appearing on various TV shows, unemployment statistics flashing in the background, weak growth, huge deficit.
Promises, promises, promises...Flip flops, flip flops, flip flops. Remember "no more earmarks"? No individual mandate for health care? Gitmo? An early exit from Iraq and Afghanistan? Trying KSM in New York City? Promises to shrink the deficit by half? The vote against raising the debt ceiling as Senator?
A Reflection on Public Service Ethics
One of the points I made in my Tuesday Reflection of the Day is the fact that American politicians really don't have a well-honed set of professional ethics, as in the case of the medical profession and accounting, just to list a couple of examples. I haven't formally reviewed medical ethics, but even in terms of a casual observation, I think there are serious inadequately addressed ethical issues, including, but not restricted to, conflict of interest issues dealing with pharmaceutical and medical device companies, defensive medicine costs, and elective abortions (particularly on fetuses with functioning organs and/or nervous system).
For example, I've worked at one time separately for two management consulting companies associated with traditional accounting companies (the management consulting business was separate, and I was never in contact with any accountant). One of the tedious nuisances once you are hired, on your own time, you have to comb through lists of clients and your records to identify any existing positions you have in a current client (and/or a relative is employed or has another economic interest in that client). You were expected to liquidate any relevant positions expeditiously and to report all relevant transactions. (The potential issue is the risk of insider trading on good or bad news ahead of the market.)
When earlier this month (April 4), President Obama signed into law the STOCK Act--which bans Congressional insider trading--one could only ask why it took until now. (For a good historical timeline on relevant events, see procon.org). Seeing that public approval rating in the early teen's didn't have anything to do with it, don't you think? We have a long way to go--we shouldn't have corrupt political back-scratching, patronage jobs, etc. We need a lot more transparency, we shouldn't have legislators reading through hastily written thousand-page bills, and we shouldn't have the White House meeting with groups directly impacted by relevant policies.
Let's Stop This Political Posturing As Usual!
Cantor's Small Business Tax Cut: PASSED 235-178:
Thumbs DOWN!
Fair warning against progressives' misconstruing disagreements among conservatives: this has more to do with a disagreement of process than general policy goals. I have disagreed with the GOP majority on other occasions: extension of the payroll tax and renewal of certain provisions of the Patriot Act. I don't disagree with the idea of a payroll tax cut in general: the issue I have is with short-term tax cut gimmicks as generally ineffective policy (as per Milton Friedman's permanent income hypothesis) and the fact that entitlement programs already have grossly underfunded liabilities.
In essence, Cantor wanted a one-year 20% tax cut for small businesses--unpaid for. Obama has already threatened to veto it, and there's serious reason to believe the measure will not pass the Democrat-controlled Senate. [The Democrats' concerns of deficit over a few billion are touching, given the fact they've already run up a record $5T of new debt in just over 3 years.] I'm opposed because of basic principles expressed in past pasts: I don't like temporary tax cuts; I think the real solution is a business tax overhaul eliminating various write-offs and resulting in a more globally competitive tax rate. I also don't like playing winners and losers (in this case, small business are getting the brunt of the benefit, but big companies hire people, too).
The Dems, of course, wanted to limit the benefit to capital improvements and have been waiting to throw the stimulus cost per job rhetoric back in the GOP's face. (My response: money is fungible, and all this would do is add to the complexity of the tax law. The Democrats still have this megalomaniac impulse to meddle in business decisionmaking, something beyond their and the bureaucracy's level of competence; given the sorry nature of government operations, the Democrats need to mind the government's own business.)
Undoubtedly a Future Politician....
The otters follow the adorable little girl, even without campaign promises of bigger, better marine invertebrates. They crash into the wall following her--it's almost like Congressional Democrats following Obama...
Musical Interlude: My Favorite Groups
The Rolling Stones, "Heart of Stone"
