Still Talking About Health Care

When viewed from the perspective of future generations, it is much easier to see the significance of historic events than when viewed while such events occur. The historian has the benefit of perspective. We live in historic times.

If one were to write a fictional drama about government intrigue, I find it hard to believe there would be more twists and turns than this current Health Care debate. By every indication, the majority of Americans want President Obama's health care bill stopped. The rebukes by the American people has been stunning.

So many people that have never been politically active are saying, enough is enough. It's not difficult to see why. The United States is in the midst of a severe recession and while the effects on our citizens has been dramatic, the effect on government can only be described as catastrophic. So many state and local governments are literally running out of money. These states are being forced to redefine their roles in the lives of their citizens.

Only a few years ago, any politician brazen enough to attack government unions as being too strong, and their employees overpaid, would have been labeled an extremist. Now, these views are widely accepted, if not universally agreed upon. So why the change of opinion? The answer is simple, common sense.

You don't have to be a doctor of economics to see that a a worker retiring at the age of 60 and being paid 90% of their salary plus benefits for the next 25 years isn't good for the solvency of the entity that pays them. While this may not be much of a problem for the federal government, yet, it's a huge problem for state and local governments where these payments are much higher in terms of percentage of revenues.

At this point, the only thing that has saved these governments from being forced to cut their budgets and reduce the number of employees in any significant fashion has been the stimulus bill. Now that stimulus funds have been spent, these state and local governments have to figure out how to pay their own bills, and the shortfalls many of them are facing are enormous.

What gives these issues historical importance is the fact that this is only the beginning. The causes of these problems are the demographic shifts that are ongoing and are only going to accelerate. The ratio of taxpayers to tax receivers is dropping and the recession has merely accelerated a problem that's been long in the making.

Just like the federal government hasn't acknowledged in any significant way, medicare and social security shortfalls, the states only addressed these problems when faced with an inability to pay their bills. As more baby boomers begin receiving medicare and social security benefits, obviously their percentage of gdp is going to spike and the United States government will find itself in a similar quandary.

Yet here we are discussing another government entitlement. This is a text book definition of the term counter-intuitive. The American people know all this, so why do the Democrats continue to push forward with something as unpopular as health care reform? The answer is simple. It's worked for them in the past.

If they pass health care, they can then argue that Republicans will be trying to take away peoples' benefits. These argument might not save Democrats up for reelection this November, but give people a few years to get used to the idea of health care subsidies and it's an entirely different ballgame. So basically, Democrats are hoping to create another segment of the population that is dependent on them for their well being.

Put in that context, it sounds fairly corrupt, but it's part of our system of government. We're a representative democracy and if a politician can create a constituency, literally more power to them.