Last week The Hill reported on more insurance industry voices crying out that financial losses from covering Obamacare enrollees are becoming—hold onto your hats—“unsustainable.”
Not being Liberals we aren’t sure, but we suspect that word is about the strongest pejorative it’s possible to use nowadays without being forced to issue a groveling apology to some aggrieved interest group. The report follows on the heels of a Blue Cross Blue Shield Association report that Obamacare clients are lots more expensive to cover than other insurance customers. Well, boo hoo hoo.
Some of us said this directly to Republicans in the insurance business before Obamacare became established fact, so we aren’t exactly brimming with sympathy in repeating it today: Obamacare is designed to strangle the private health insurance industry and those who play along looking for sweetheart deals are assisting in their own eradication, facilitating the planned government takeover.
Some nodded ruefully before returning to the deal-cutting. Others weren’t that principled.
Anyway, now it’s reality but four paragraphs into last week’s story we still came upon this: “While analysts expect the market to stabilize once premiums rise and more young, healthy people sign up…”
Wait a minute.
Is there no editor at The Hill who would think to send a reporter back to either find some analysts who don’t seem obviously insane, or get the first batch to explain why they think higher premiums go hand-in-hand with more healthy, young people signing up to pay them? That’s as logical as thinking your business will improve once it’s controlled by a government that dictates what it sells and how much it charges.
Executives in one industry after another are figuring out that you don’t make deals with someone who resents your very existence. Good work. Too late.
That massive silence you noticed two weeks ago was the absence of complaint about eligible voters being denied their rights in Wisconsin’s spring election. Historically a low-turnout event, it’s been vulnerable to manipulation by well-organized interest groups—think teacher unions—but a Wisconsin spring election with high voter turnout seldom spells good news for the Left.
Last Friday, State Representative Chris Taylor’s taxpayer-financed E-Update warned of—to borrow her headline:
Rep. Taylor is—to use a polite term—carefree in combining claims that run afoul of one another to produce an alternative reality. To quote from her missive:
“After last week’s election, two things were clear – The GOP’s extreme Voter ID law played out exactly as it was designed to and the lack of a public information campaign about the law drove people from the polls. Students were especially hard hit, with several campuses experiencing hours-long lines.”
Rep. Taylor (D-Madison) says that during legislative deliberations on the Voter ID bill, “’giddy’ GOP lawmakers acknowledged [it] would most negatively affect the ability of students and minorities to vote.”
Well, pardon our nitpicking, but we’re wondering how to reconcile something that “drove people from the polls” with “hours-long lines” of student voters—precisely the people allegedly targeted for turnout suppression.
Associated Press numbers say more than 100,000 people voted in Dane County for presidential candidates, 65 percent of them for Democrats. Other than the inflated (sort of the opposite of “suppressed”) turnout, that sounds about as routine as it gets.
And so does a Madison Liberal telling people whatever they just saw with their own eyes was really something else.
Friday is Earth Day and even making allowances for a person being 17, it was a bit sad last week hearing a scholarship winner thank her benefactors by saying she would put an education in environmental sciences to good use “because things are going downhill.”
Wherever she winds up at college, we hope she learns—and isn’t too disillusioned to find—that in her brief lifetime so far the environment isn’t going downhill; just the opposite.
EPA statistics reveal deep reductions of every major pollutant since passage of the Clean Air Act in 1970: lead, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, all hugely reduced and beating EPA air quality standards; mercury down at least 40 percent by means not even specifically aimed at reducing it; all this even though activities generating emissions have massively increased. U.S. water quality is also greatly improved.
Those are two revelations, here’s another: When things are going downhill the explanation is often subsidy-grubbing “environmentalists” badgering people to do destructive things.
Some examples would be cutting millions of U.S. trees to burn in European power plants; clearing land to grow inefficient biofuels like palm oil and sugar-cane ethanol, destroying rainforest habitat; and paving over many square miles of pristine Southwest desert with giant mirrors that ignite countless birds in mid-air, to intermittently produce solar energy in amounts obtainable 24-7 from natural gas in a structure hardly bigger than a large house.
And don’t even mention windmills producing a fifth of their ballyhooed capacity, slaughtering birds and bats, disfiguring the landscape, and requiring fossil-fueled generation not being used but running anyway so it’s available instantly to backstop the undependable turbines.
Traditional pollution problems are increasingly well-addressed in this country. But thanks to the environmental alarm industry, environmental virtue comes at a high price. For the environment.