HHS Secretary Sebelius on ObamaCare: "We have a lot of reeducation to do."
No, I'm not making this up: In an interview with ABC News yesterday, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said that "there still is a great deal of confusion about what is in [the reform law] and what isn't." The remedy for the poor, bewildered public? "We have a lot of reeducation to do."
As Glenn Reynolds quipped, "Maybe there are camps for that?"
Still, if it's reeducation that's needed, maybe we ought to start with Sebelius, who seems to be somewhat confused herself. She's still arguing that the PPACA extends the solvency of Medicare:
Sebelius argues the reforms "strengthen" Medicare, extending its solvency by 12 years through 2029. "My view is actually supported by independent actuaries, by economists and by the Congressional Budget Office," Sebelius said.
Except that, as I noted earlier this month, this claim is very much not supported by the CBO, which released a letter last December concluding that "to describe the full amount of HI trust fund savings as both improving the government's ability to pay future Medicare benefits and financing new spending outside of Medicare would essentially double-count a large share of those savings."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I realize this is a slow news time, but c'mon -- we all know that's not what she meant.
That is exactly what she meant. And further there is a law against using government resources for propaganda.
We ain't give a shit 'bout no law.
Perhaps she intends to implement this great leap forward over a five year plan?
I realize you're slow, but she meant exactly what she said.
Alt-text fail.
Suggestions?
"Michelle never lets me nibble her lip hair."
Clicks like button.
"I'm definitely not in Kansas anymore."
Brothers always chasin' the white tail.
Is that racist?
Oh boy, even her hair is white!
HAHAHAHA
You win, you witty bastard.
"Does the threadbare carpet match the ratty drapes?"
Thanks for the visual.
It's not my fault her bloodless vulva looks like the business end of a ghost-stripper.
Someone should tell her to at least spray paint it.
"They graffito-tag my 'gina, Barry!"
It's like kissing my mother. Except she wants me.
So that's what's up with all those FEMA camps.
Re-education. Hmm... sounds familiar...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reeducation_camp
No, she's a big Rise Against fan.
Does Matt Drudge take you out for regular walks Suderman? I hate to see pets abused.
Still jerking off to your 2200 page health care porn I see! Get back to us you find out how the story ends.
At least I don't want people to die because they don't get free health care.
That's a strawman, right ?
TOTALLY!
Yes, you do. If you didn't want people to die because they don't get free health care, then you'd want a bill that devotes the entirety of the countries resources to health care.
Of course, back in the real world, we realize that in order to have some things, you have to sacrifice other things. It's called scarcity. Something you haven't figured out.
I'm loath to respond since you're talking to a spoofer, but you're only correct if you ignore every other advanced country on earth that manages to provide universal health care for cheaper than we do. Healthcare isn't a finite resource, it's a service that can be supplemented with tax money.
So to recap, you think it's okay that access to healthcare is wealth-dependent and you're willing to ignore any and all facts necessary to maintain that position.
Spoofer, I know you're just trying to make me look like a fool, but no one's stupid enough to believe that crap.
It's ok. I know you are the real Tony.
Only a fool would say that any commodity is not a finite resource.
Yeah, they did so by lowering doctor's salaries.
Brain drain, here we come.
Luckily for those other countries, they've had the mixed-market US system to copycat, else medical innovation would have stagnated years ago.
Here's how it works, Tony:
Socialism stagnates
Mixed economies grow but costs skyrocket as producers exploit the corrupted incentives.
Free-markets provide low-cost and innovation, all in accord with consumer demand.
And you can fly if you think happy thoughts and find some pixie dust.
Consumer demand in healthcare is not related to rational choice but need that comes from random fortune, and that's the problem with free market fairy tales applied to healthcare.
Consumer demand most certainly is related to rational choice (although I might be willing to give you emergency care).
What do you think the second-opinion is all about? (Please don't say the words "adverse selection" either because I can destroy that as well.)
The problem with the US system is just like I said. It's a mixed system. You have subsidized health care during old age, so consumers don't have the incentive they should to live healthy lives, and you have tax breaks for employer-based insurance which encourage people to buy insurance plans that change as often as their jobs, giving rise the "pre-existing" condition problem.
It's all corrupted. You have no idea what costs would be in a free-market system. But you don't see food costs going through the roof.
KPres,
That's because there will never be a 100% free market system, so as long as we're talking about fantasy worlds I might as well argue that things would be all peachy if we lived in the socialist Utopia of the Star Trek universe. But what's the point?
Healthcare is not like food. Food is cheap and people can budget for it. Healthcare is not like that. People don't rationally choose to get treated for cancer among many other options available. They really only have the one option if they want to live. When life and death are at stake, the magic of rational choice in a free market becomes kind of moot.
Besides, food is subsidized too. Ever heard of food stamps?
Coupla points.
Medicare is the closest thing to Obamacare. Do you dispute the recent study that found Medicare outcomes were only as good, or possibly worse than no health insurance?
I'd prefer significantly more freedom in the health care business (including no-license doctors) but I can't believe that even people like you like what PPACA ended up becoming. It's bad for EVERYBODY!
Doctor time IS a limited resource. What do you propose is the best way to manage access to that resource? I say price is the best access manager around.
If we deregulated the medical industry, then prices would fall as we've seen with places like Minute Clinics, etc.
When it comes to those hugely expensive treatments, if everybody can afford them, then nobody can afford them. It's an imperfect world, but for those expensive exotic treatments let price be the guide, & charity will have to be the supplement for the needy, or if we decide that we need to be generous as a people we should insure catastrophic levels of medical costs, not day-to-day stuff.
I find it curious all the lefties dream of Britain or France's healthcare systems but are strangely silent on emulating their much, much cheaper tort-law systems.
Perhaps we should eviscerate the trial lawyers down to European size? I don't see the lefties and their trial-lawyer buddies advocating we adopt ALL European social efficiencies! What a bunch of hypocrites that way. Free healthcare, but the lawyers still their get free lunch too. Public healthcare for "free" but with out-of-court settlement private industry sized malpractice payouts. Who's gonna cover the difference for doctors who make $100,000 a year but have to still pay $40k-plus for malpractice insurance? All of a sudden a quarter-mil in med school debt and twelve years of the grind just to practice doesn't seem worth it quite-so-much. There is a huge economic disconnect there that we have not addressed. But fuck it, WE WANT IT ALL in the USA!
"Consumer demand in healthcare is not related to rational choice but need that comes from random fortune."
If only we had some way of investing funds toward the possibility of future expenses. But, no, rational people would never do that.
I don't want people to die but rest assured what health care they get will be more expensive and probably more restricted than it is now.
Enjoy it you smug self righteous nitwit!
Yeah, you want them to die standing in line because they can't pay for health care themselves.
It's the Year Zero.
"Reeducation"
Is that whatcha call tone deaf ?
At least I don't want people to die because they don't get free health care.
Dumber
and
dumber
and
dumber...
You're dumb. That wasn't me. The one about Suderman being led around on a leash by Matt Drudge was, though.
Stop spoofing me.
Yur both dum
Shit! Can't tell the difference. WHICH ONE DO I SHOOT!!!???
No, you stop spoofing ME!!
Stop spoofing real people. Tony is an idiot, but he is not a troll (any more than anyone else on here). He does actually engage in the discussion a bit.
No he doesn't. When he's lost the debate, he changes the subject like a passive-aggressive asshole.
Fuck you and what do you think of the new Oval Office?
There goes another 2% of the Democrat's support on the next generic ballot question. They keep it up and they can get down to 10% by election day.
What I meant, is that most of the country is just too darn stupid to understand how wonderful total government control of individual health and wellness is. I mean, you can't expect these idiots know anything! Believe me, I'm from Kansas!
How much of this can you take?
Can we talk about this now?
Sorry for the threadjack. Looks like you guys lost your favorite Scandanavian contrarian.
See? That's not me. Dumbass spoofer can't even be bothered to read the morning links before trying to make fun of me.
"Dumbass spoofer can't even be bothered to read the morning links before trying to make fun of me."
Tony. Lighten up, my friend. We're not making fun of you. We're making fun with you.
[no homo]
"But in a new book to be published next month, Lomborg will call for tens of billions of dollars a year to be invested in tackling climate change. "Investing $100bn annually would mean that we could essentially resolve the climate change problem by the end of this century," the book concludes."
$100 billion a year? Worldwide?
Uh, OK, I'm game. Somehow, though, I think the envirofascists might be wanting a little more.
"He added: "This is not about 'we have all got to live with less, wear hair-shirts and cut our carbon emissions'. It's about technologies, about realising there's a vast array of solutions."
Uh, that's almost exactly what the left attacked the Freakanomics guys for saying.
My problem has never been with dealing with Global Warming, per se, my problem has always been that there's no way in Hell I'd trust it the Socialist left, since all they're going to do (and have done) is use it as a fear-mongering tool to hijack power for the government.
INOW, fuck you Tony and all you other Communist fucks!
So am I a socialist, communist, or fascist?
Yes let's leave complex global problems up to you guys!
All of those things have their roots in the same kind of collectivism.
The bottom line is that they think the individual is ultimately a tool of the state. They just differ in what the best way to employ that tool is.
Tony, you might not be, there are many pragmatics on the left. And I can have a conversation with them. But there's also a ton of idealogical communists, and quite frankly, they're the ones who provide a great many of the left's ideas, which gullible pragmatists pick up so they can think they're being "reasonable."
Funny I tend to only hang around leftists and I've never once in my life met a communist.
You're just throwing words around as pejoratives. I don't worship the state. I don't think individuals are cogs in the state's grand machine. I believe in individual freedom, a hell of a lot more of it than you do. I just recognize that the state can be a powerful tool of the people used to achieve that end.
For example, who is more free than someone in prison? They don't have to worry about when their next meal is going to be, they know exactly in want bed they are going to be sleeping in every night. All of life's necessities available for free: clothes, entertainment, sports, gay sex.
I'm not a communist. I just want everyone to be free to not have to make a choice for themselves. Once the whole world is an open-air prison we will all be free.
Seriously WHICH ONE DO I SHOOT!!!????
I can't tell the difference between parody and self-righteous bullshit anymore. I need a vacation.
[no homo]
Seriously, whoever is playing Fake Tony deserves an Oscar. The prison post is acting gold.
Actually I want people to be more free to have more choices. If 1% of the country can each sacrifice half a yacht so that everyone has healthcare, a massive increase in freedom and choice has just been bought extremely cheaply.
"I just recognize that the state can be a powerful tool of the powerful people used to achieve that end."
FIFY
So am I a socialist, communist, or fascist?
I'll take 'useful idiot' for $400, Alex.
The socialists and communists want the government to control and manage the resources and industries of their respective countries for the good of the "worker", the "proletariat".
The environmentalists want their government to control and manage the resources and industries of their respective countries for the good of "Mother Nature".
"We have a lot of reeducation to do."
If they try, I'm sure they can compile all the pertitnent instruction in a little red book.
Clearly the problem with America is that we are too stupid and racist to appreciate what amazing things Obama has accomplished, such as this wonderful Free Health Care For All program that was recently passed.
Maybe we just don't deserve to keep someone of his quality any longer. Maybe a European nation would be better equipped to fully utilize all the genius ideas Obama has to offer.
Europe, come take him!
That wasn't me. The one about Suderman being led around on a leash by Matt Drudge was, though.
Well, it was certainly something to be proud of.
You right-wing assholes lost the fight on social security and weren't able to stop Medicare and Medicaid. Folks still pay taxes and collect unemployment benefits. Most Americans get a public education. Leviathan continues to grow. What makes you think you can stop universal health care? For cynical fucks like Suderman, babbling on about it is a source of income, but what about the rest of you zombies?
So, when Max goes down on his mother, you ever wonder if he tries to fit his little pinhead back up in her?
You could drive a semi into that skin tunnel.
Looks like we've got next season covered now. Thanks Max's illegitimate father!
I don't think I can stop anything. That's why I can't stand all this left-right "alliance" stuff. I'll just sit on the sidelines and be right, and when it all comes crashing down, which it will eventually, my slate will be clean and I'll be able say "I told you so."
I'm with you Kpres. Sometimes being right is all you've got. That and pornography. Beautiful, greed-induced, unjudgemental pornography.
You right-wing assholes lost the fight on social security and weren't able to stop Medicare and Medicaid. Folks still pay taxes and collect unemployment benefits. Most Americans get a public education. Leviathan continues to grow. What makes you think you can stop universal health care? For cynical fucks like Suderman, babbling on about it is a source of income, but what about the rest of you zombies?
We zombies know that all of your "programs" as currently configured will be joining us in histories dustbin shortly. Enjoy them while you can!
ARFARFARFARFARFARFARFARFARFARFARF!!!!!!!!!!
Did Max just refer to the welfare state as Leviathan? The Sea Monster? One of the seven princes of hell?
Does that mean you know how counterproductive it is?
Spoofer, I know you're just trying to make me look like a fool
"I didn't tell President Lincoln you're an idiot. I thought he knew."
Consumer demand in healthcare is not related to rational choice but need that comes from random fortune, and that's the problem with free market fairy tales applied to healthcare.
Oh, what the hell...
Did it ever occur to you [hint: it's a rhetorical question] that from the standpoint of any producer, there is no meaningful distinction between the two?
That not what Marxist Twaddle For Pre-Schoolers said. So you must be wrong.
At least it's better than Re-ned-ucation.
Though maybe Reeducation would improve if you got a nice glass of warm milk and a little nap.
Your stupid fucking libertarian scheme makes communism look rational, and communism was actually tried.
Stupid fucking right-wing ratfucks! Derp de derp de derp!
I'm calling dibbs on a top bunk right now!
So, after the re-education fails, what will be The Final Solution for healthcare?
Forcing the tyrannical boot of lower healthcare costs and a more just and equitable society DOWN ON YOUR THROAT.
I love your dry sense of humor. Lower costs and more equitable society? Delightful!
Assuming you define "just and equitable" as stealing money from some people to pay for other people's healthcare.
While were at it, why don't we just set the price of every good and service one the market today at a mandatory one cent? Why, poverty would be eliminated! We'd live in a Garden of Eden, where everything you want in life is available to you, at only one measly penny!
And while we're at it, we'll wire one billion dollars into everyone's bank account. That way, we'll all be able to live life of Bill Gates without having to actually do any meaningful work!
Can't forget about employment, though. By making it mandatory that you can only work 2 hours a work, we'll spread the work around to everyone in America! To cover for the hours of work lost, every second worked on the job will be payed at a mandatory $1,000,000. Eco-friendly jobs we'll be payed $1,000,000,000 per second, and jobs at abortion clinics will be payed $1,000,000,000,000 per second.
To prevent our perfect Progressive Utopia from be shattered by the thought criminals, aka anyone who doesn't agree with me 100% of the time, all dissenters will be executed or sent to a forced labor camp in Alaska, where they will be educated about the glories of progressivism and Keynesian economics, while providing meaningful work for the Greater Good.
Gee, this whole "economics" thing sure is easy!
I just popped a boner.
Yawn. What a long post just to erect a boring strawman.
Read and repeat as long as you need until it sinks in: just because you are an extremist utopian fanatic doesn't mean everyone else is.
Actually, I was making fun of your belief that the government can perform two miracles; (1) remove scarcity from the healthcare sector and (2) keep prices low by decree or regulation.
So, Tony, please learn the difference between mocking someone and making a strawman.
I don't see what's so hard to figure out. You take more money from rich people and rich entities and you use that money to buy more doctors and nurses. The richest assholes in the country caused our current economic shitstorm and profited from our useless wars so how about they suck it up and pay for some healthcare for the people who actually contribute to this society?
Re-education?
It's a little late for new lies and spin.
Is Katha-leen going to try and argue a dog has five legs because a tail has been redefined as a leg?
C'mon darlin, go sell crazy someplace else.