Sunday, September 24, 2017

Washington Post: Washington is Confused Because Rand Paul Stands on Principle

I am not making this up.

 Amber Phillips reports for the Washington Post:
Of all the contradictory and confusing positions Republicans have taken this year as they try to repeal Obamacare, the one Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has staked out is the most head-scratching to Washington....his answer comes down to principle: Get rid of all of Obamacare, or bust.
Yup, this confuses Washington, Rand Paul really wants

to get rid of Obamacare, on the principle that healthcare would be much improved if left to free markets. WaPo again:
Some of the other senators leaning against the bill have concerns about the rushed process, or how the bill could leave millions uninsured, or how their governors feel about it. This bill goes too far in undoing government's role in health care, they argue....

Paul, almost uniquely, sees this differently....

It's a principled stand that ignores the political realities, argue some of his colleagues.
The report of Phillips is correct here. Washington has always been crony but it is so bad now that when a Senator stands on principle it confuses the entire city.



  1. Rand needs to be careful here. Knowing his temperament and lineage, Trump and the Repubs may be using him and his "stand on principle" as a scapegoat to further their interest in maintaining the status quo. The current Repub bill, although it retains 90% of Oloser crony care, does eliminate the most pernicious aspect (as described in your previous post), the individual mandate. Rand may believe he won some kind of moral victory, and he may win praise from some libertarians, but the rest of the crony establishment will be laughing at him and everyone else as they continue to increase their control and collect their loot. It's just a really bad state of affairs.

    1. Nope. Disagree completely. If his dad had compromised like you recommend, nobody would have heard from a squeaky voiced congressman from a pudunk district in Texas. Instead Ron is am international hero. It's a teaching moment.

    2. I said Rand should be careful, not necessarily vote for the current bill. He's got a platform and Dad's Dr. No routine may not be the best choice. There are real considerations for real people here. Have you been in the crosshairs of the mandate penalty while having to forego unaffordable insurance in order to eat or pay for housing? Your teaching moment ain't paying my taxes. Trump touched on this during the campaign when he mentioned the hardships people are facing. Talk about stealing the moral high ground from the phony progressive/left types. Rand should run with that when addressing Trump and the country.

      Personally, I think Olosercare should go on its merry way for those who want it and those cronies who are getting rich from it. They are printing it all anyway. Taxing those who don't buy a product or service is THE core issue. Ron Paul always spoke about allowing the socialists to have their socialism, just allow those who disagree to opt out. A bill that eliminates the mandate allows folks to opt out without an onerous tax while others can choose to have their healthcare socialism. Rand could propose a bill that does just that instead of being set up by the establishment as an "obstructionist" who saved 100% of Olosercare with his all or nothing stand.

    3. Have you ever heard of the Yell for more from the roof tops and take a deal that was at least what you hoped for.

      Didnt think so

    4. If the goal is to get rid of Obamacare piecemeal then don't create a new system pretending it's a replacement. Just repeal obamacare piece by piece and work all the way back to 1910 when government started this mess.

  2. Can I get a shout out for principle?
    Go ahead take a half a loaf. That'll scare the shit out of them. Then another half? Then another? Pretty soon your beggin' for crumbs. And they will LAUGH as they kick your sorry asses into the gutter. Time and Time again this has happened, and you're still tryin' to sell this sorry shit to me?? FU. That ain't woikin'.
    I stand with Rand (corny but there ya go...)

    1. Yeah, eliminating 10% of an already existing bad law, including the odious mandate tax that afflicts mostly lower income folks, is worse than keeping 100% of an existitng bad law. Nice logic ya got there. I guess this is what passes for "principle" these days.

  3. You're right, Hollow Daze. That idiot George Mason stood on principle and wouldn't sign the Constitution, and look what it did - they had to pass that damned Bill of Rights. Damned principled fool!

  4. Principle aside, I think Rand fully understands that this is a one-shot deal. Once Obamacare is nominally repealed, and the Republicans have that skin on their wall, the appetite for further healthcare reform will be nonexistent. Makes sense to play hardball and try to get the best deal possible.

    He really needs to go all professor and try to explain why a free market would result in better provision of healthcare. Maybe even propose some policies to those ends (e.g. getting rid of professional licensing, drug regulation, EMTLA, insurance restrictions, etc.)

    1. Agreed, Rand has to play hardball, educate and propose alternatives, not just go all Dr. No, and then try to get the best deal possible.

    2. The people need a lesson on how things got this way. Something to break the idea that medical care is too important for the free market and should be expensive. Just about everyone keeps looking for ways to pay high prices instead fixing the cause of the high prices.

  5. Going all Dr. No is one bargaining strategy. Its a great one too when playing with unprincipled cronys. What, do you all suggest as an alternative method?

    If you are really wanting to repeal as much of something as you can then you should start with 100% repeal as your stated goal. You dont go into a debate caving to all of your opponents claims. And from our understanding of economics there really is no resposible alternative. People are hurting and dying under this political socialized medicine experiment. That is irresponsible!

    I also think its great and kind of interesting that Rand is getting so much press coverage and using it well. Might reveal something of his importance that the cronys need to convince him or try and shame him into acceptance.

    I think a great way to move the converstation forward would be to debate the the details of the planned rollback of taxes and legal code so any social medicine dependents and the medical market producers can transition back out in a reasonable manner.

    But based on the statistics I think the vast vast majority of people will just be happy to have another tax eliminated. The uncertain part is how fast more medical market alternatives can rebound to refill the gap...with actual services. Not everything is immediately salvagable after govt wages war. Lots of businesses will need to be built back up.

    But there are many direct patient care medical and surgical practices opening up even now so I think the future would be very bright with all out repeal.