Full post here.
Waiting on the Senate…(for the rest of the week)
As for me, I don’t see how extending coverage to 30 million new people will not come without profound and potentially harmful social and political consequences (as regards personal liberty). The political system is, in my opinion, neither the best nor most efficient way of addressing the jerry-rigged health-care delivery system we have…and its rapidly rising costs. Atul Gawande, however, makes a decent, evolving, pragmatic case for some government involvement:
I do think political compromise is a necessary way to reduce the current ideological pressures on our elected officials and political system, so we can solve the problems we have, like rapidly expanding medical costs. However, I also think much of the momentum behind this bill is simply leftist (we have a moral obligation to the poor, and that obligation is best met by growing the government) and a chaotic, not sufficiently organized left in power (and splintering and coalescing) under Obama. Such is politics. I think Milton Friedman points out some problems in spending other people’s money on other people:
And I don’t think anyone arguing the ‘health-care is a right’ argument has convinced me of the necessity of this bill as it’s looking now, or that our moral obigation should take this path (rather than unite the left’s interests around common cause).
It just seems like partial failure of the imagination on all of our parts.
Just a few thoughts from center-right libertarian type.
In response to Obama’s presidency and the current political landscape, is Will Wilkinson moving toward a more liberal youth?: Will Wilkinson And Jonah Goldberg On Bloggingheads: Updating Libertarianism?