Paul Krudman vs. Obama
Received by email:
January 14, 2008 - NYT Paul Krugman on Obama’s STIMULUS PLAN
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/14/opinion/14krugman.html
Anyway, on Sunday Mr. Obama came out with a real stimulus plan. As was the case with his health care plan, which fell short of universal coverage, his stimulus proposal is similar to those of the other Democratic candidates, but tilted to the right.
For example, the Obama plan appears to contain none of the alternative energy initiatives that are in both the Edwards and Clinton proposals, and emphasizes across-the-board tax cuts over both aid to the hardest-hit families and help for state and local governments. I know that Mr. Obama’s supporters hate to hear this, but he really is less progressive than his rivals on matters of domestic policy.
February 6, 2008 - NYT Paul Krugman on Obama’s HEALTHCARE PLAN
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/02/healthcare-numbers/
Healthcare numbers
Jonathan Gruber, one of the country’s leading health care economists — and someone not affiliated with any of the campaigns — has a new paper on covering the uninsured. He makes use of a detailed simulation model that he’s been developing for several years to assess alternative strategies.
But the big conclusion, relevant to current debates, is on the role of mandates. Gruber compares a program of mandate-less subsidies to help people pay for insurance — broadly similar to the Obama plan — with a program that combines subsidies with mandates — broadly similar to the Edwards and Clinton plans.
The table below summarizes the key results. The mandate-less plan covers only about half the uninsured. The plan with mandates gets almost everyone, at an additional cost of $22 billion — about $1,000 per additional person covered.
MANDATE GRID
WITHOUT WITH
MANDATE MANDATE
Reduction in
number of uninsured: 23 Million 45 Million
Total Cost: $102 Billion $124 Billion
Cost per newly ins’d: $4400 $2700
February 1, 2008 - NYT Paul Krugman On Obama’s smear MAILER
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/obama-does-harry-and-louise-again/
Obama does Harry and Louise, again
The Obama campaign sends out an ugly mailer. Sorry, but this is just destructive — like the Obama plan, the Clinton plan offers subsidies to lower-income families. And BO himself has conceded that he might have to penalize people who don’t buy insurance until they need care. So this is just poisoning the well for health care reform. The politics of hope, indeed.
Update: Ezra Klein adds a screenshot of the original Harry and Louise ad — they’ve obviously deliberately copied it. Just to remind everyone, Harry and Louise were the center of the vile smear campaign the insurance lobby waged against health care reform in 1993 — and this time a Democratic candidate is doing the smearing for them.
Ezra also points us to an Urban Institute study that shows that yes, mandates are essential. The key passage:
Voluntary measures would tend to enroll disproportionate numbers of individuals with higher cost health problems, creating high premiums and instability in the insurance pools in which they are enrolled.
I know that Obama supporters want to hear no evil, but this is really, really bad.
ANOTHER EXCERPT:
From http://www.prospect.org
The URBAN INSTITUTE, as august and respected a think tank as DC’s got, decided to run the numbers. Here’s their conclusion:
In this brief we conclude that, absent a single payer system, it is not possible to achieve universal coverage without an individual mandate. The evidence is strong that voluntary measures alone would leave large numbers of people uninsured. Voluntary measures would tend to enroll disproportionate numbers of individuals with higher cost health problems, creating high premiums and instability in the insurance pools in which they are enrolled, unless further significant government subsidization is provided. The government would also have difficulty redirecting current spending on the uninsured to offset some of the cost associated with a new program without universal coverage.
Our contention that an individual mandate is critical to achieving universal coverage rests upon three points.
First, many individuals will not choose to obtain coverage under a purely voluntary system.
Second, adverse selection will occur under a voluntary insurance system.
Third, it is politically difficult to redirect current government spending on care for the uninsured to offset the costs associated with new broad-based reforms unless the full population is insured.
Excellent SUMMARY -> Obama’s Krugman Problem
http://mike-pridmore.mydd.com/story/2008/2/3/43521/21244