Good summary in today's New York Times of the accomplishments to date of the Affordable Care Act. Even though the complete law doesn't go into effect until January 1, 2014, many elements have already taken effect.
What has ACA (aka Obamacare) accomplished to date:
1. Nearly 7 million children have stayed on their parents' insurance, more than 3 million previously uninsured;
2. 71 million Americans already received free preventive care (no co-pay or deductibles);
3. 34 million additional Americans on Medicare received free preventive care;
4. 17 million children with pre-existing conditions now insured;
5. 107,000 adults with pre-existing conditions now in federal plan;
6. Community health centers serving 3 million additional Americans;
7. 19 million Americans with reduced premiums or cost sharing;
8. In 2012 insurers paid $ 1.1 billion in rebates because they didn't spend enough revenue on claims or quality improvements;
9. Lower rate increases by insurers;
10. $ 6.1 billion saved on prescription drugs;
11. Sharp declines in annual growth in health care spending;
12. Medicare Advantage premiums down 10% and enrollment up by 28%.
That's just the beginning. Readmissions are down and followup care improved. More improvements are in the offing.
Sunday, March 24, 2013
Saturday, March 23, 2013
Small Wars In US History
Current media attention is focused on the war the United States started with Iraq a decade ago.
I'm reading an interesting book I picked up a couple of weeks ago at the Marine Corps Exchange at Cherry Point Marine Corps Air Station: Just and Unjust Wars by Michel Walzer. The book's subtitle is "A Moral Argument With Historical Illustrations."
Just war theory focuses on two aspects of warfare: 1) was there a just cause (as in, was it justified or moral to initiate military action or respond with military action) and: 2) was the war conducted in a just manner.
I would say there is another aspect of war that does not strictly fall under just war theory, but it relates: was the war wise?
In the United States we have a fourth recurring question: was the war constitutional? Specifically, critics of particular wars often claim that the war is not legitimate, because Congress did not declare war as specified in the Constitution.
On this latter point, I recommend reading a really interesting military manual: Small Wars Manual United States Marine Corps 1940. The manual is available here. It is a clearly written guide to planning and conducting small wars in all of their variety.
Just read the introduction and it will be clear that what I have written elsewhere is true. Up to the time of World War II, most of our military interventions were conducted by the Department of the Navy. That included some very substantial military undertakings, including our Quasi-War with France during John Adams' administration. In no case was there ever a declaration of war when the conflict involved only the Navy Department.
Only when the War Department was involved in the conflict did the United States ever declare war. That has happened only five times in our history.
The fine line between conflicts involving only the Navy Department and categorized as "small wars" and the more substantial conflicts involving the War Department disappeared with passage in 1947 of the Armed Forces Unification Act.
That act created a constitutional muddle that we have never resolved.
We would be better off to return to a time when the Navy/Marine Corps team did small wars. They knew how to do it. A number of our military interventions would have been more competently planned and conducted if they had followed the 1940 Small Wars Manual of the Marine Corps.
It would save a lot of money, too.
I'm reading an interesting book I picked up a couple of weeks ago at the Marine Corps Exchange at Cherry Point Marine Corps Air Station: Just and Unjust Wars by Michel Walzer. The book's subtitle is "A Moral Argument With Historical Illustrations."
Just war theory focuses on two aspects of warfare: 1) was there a just cause (as in, was it justified or moral to initiate military action or respond with military action) and: 2) was the war conducted in a just manner.
I would say there is another aspect of war that does not strictly fall under just war theory, but it relates: was the war wise?
In the United States we have a fourth recurring question: was the war constitutional? Specifically, critics of particular wars often claim that the war is not legitimate, because Congress did not declare war as specified in the Constitution.
On this latter point, I recommend reading a really interesting military manual: Small Wars Manual United States Marine Corps 1940. The manual is available here. It is a clearly written guide to planning and conducting small wars in all of their variety.
Just read the introduction and it will be clear that what I have written elsewhere is true. Up to the time of World War II, most of our military interventions were conducted by the Department of the Navy. That included some very substantial military undertakings, including our Quasi-War with France during John Adams' administration. In no case was there ever a declaration of war when the conflict involved only the Navy Department.
Only when the War Department was involved in the conflict did the United States ever declare war. That has happened only five times in our history.
The fine line between conflicts involving only the Navy Department and categorized as "small wars" and the more substantial conflicts involving the War Department disappeared with passage in 1947 of the Armed Forces Unification Act.
That act created a constitutional muddle that we have never resolved.
We would be better off to return to a time when the Navy/Marine Corps team did small wars. They knew how to do it. A number of our military interventions would have been more competently planned and conducted if they had followed the 1940 Small Wars Manual of the Marine Corps.
It would save a lot of money, too.
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Pope Francis' Family
New information in today's on line edition of The Telegraph (UK).
Information provided by Mrs. Berdoglio, Francis' sole surviving sibling, who lives in Buenos Aires, is that their parents immigrated from Italy to Argentina to escape the fascist regime of Benito Mussolini. Mrs. Bergoglio, a divorced mother of two adult sons, emphasized that stories suggesting her brother's complicity in actions by the Argentine military junta are wide of the mark. Such complicity, she emphasizes, would have been a betrayal of their father's lessons to the family.
The father, Mario Bergoglio, had been a railroad worker in Northern Italy in the Piedmont region before emigrating to Argentina in the 1920's.
Information provided by Mrs. Berdoglio, Francis' sole surviving sibling, who lives in Buenos Aires, is that their parents immigrated from Italy to Argentina to escape the fascist regime of Benito Mussolini. Mrs. Bergoglio, a divorced mother of two adult sons, emphasized that stories suggesting her brother's complicity in actions by the Argentine military junta are wide of the mark. Such complicity, she emphasizes, would have been a betrayal of their father's lessons to the family.
The father, Mario Bergoglio, had been a railroad worker in Northern Italy in the Piedmont region before emigrating to Argentina in the 1920's.
Tuesday, March 19, 2013
Pamlico County Commissioners March 18, 2013
Last night's County Commissioner meeting dealt mostly with the County Planning Board's draft ordinance covering possible wind farms. They scheduled a public hearing April 1 by a vote of 4-1 (Chris Mele against) with two absentees (Pat Prescott and Carl Ollison).
The draft ordinance has not yet been posted on line.
The draft ordinance has not yet been posted on line.
How Cyprus Affects Europe
Here's a pretty straight report on what's wrong with Europe's approach to Cyprus.
Bottom line: the European Central Bank and IMF are practically inviting a run on European banks.
It may take awhile to develop, but it will be hard to turn around. Then what will happen to the Europe project?
Bottom line: the European Central Bank and IMF are practically inviting a run on European banks.
It may take awhile to develop, but it will be hard to turn around. Then what will happen to the Europe project?
Monday, March 18, 2013
1968: Perfidy In DC
Lyndon Johnson had the goods on Richard Nixon. But he couldn't use it.
The Democratic Party convention in Chicago was a disaster. Johnson even considered appearing at the last minute and putting his name forward for nomination.
Bad idea.
Peace talks were going on in Paris, and North Vietnam had made a promising offer.
Richard Nixon feared that prospects for peace would scuttle his campaign. He sent Anna Chennault as his intermediary with the South Vietnamese ambassador, pleading with them to put off negotiations and wait for a better deal after the election.
The FBI bugged Chennault and the National Security Agency monitored the Ambassador's communications with Saigon.
Johnson knew what was going on. In private he called it treason. But he couldn't make it public without revealing the monitoring. It's generally considered bad form to bug embassies and read ambassadorial communications - and to reveal it in public.
Of course, it's even worse form not to monitor and to get caught flat footed.
So Johnson kept his mouth shut in public.
Nixon won by less than 1%. Had Nixon's perfidy become public, he may well have lost by a landslide.
Here is the story. All captured on Lyndon Johnson's White House tapes.
It wouldn't be the last time a presidential candidate meddled in international negotiations to the detriment of national interests. It may well have been the last time such actions were so clearly documented.
The Democratic Party convention in Chicago was a disaster. Johnson even considered appearing at the last minute and putting his name forward for nomination.
Bad idea.
Peace talks were going on in Paris, and North Vietnam had made a promising offer.
Richard Nixon feared that prospects for peace would scuttle his campaign. He sent Anna Chennault as his intermediary with the South Vietnamese ambassador, pleading with them to put off negotiations and wait for a better deal after the election.
The FBI bugged Chennault and the National Security Agency monitored the Ambassador's communications with Saigon.
Johnson knew what was going on. In private he called it treason. But he couldn't make it public without revealing the monitoring. It's generally considered bad form to bug embassies and read ambassadorial communications - and to reveal it in public.
Of course, it's even worse form not to monitor and to get caught flat footed.
So Johnson kept his mouth shut in public.
Nixon won by less than 1%. Had Nixon's perfidy become public, he may well have lost by a landslide.
Here is the story. All captured on Lyndon Johnson's White House tapes.
It wouldn't be the last time a presidential candidate meddled in international negotiations to the detriment of national interests. It may well have been the last time such actions were so clearly documented.
Bank Heist In Cyprus Threatens Eurozone
Over the weekend, IMF, ECB and Cyprus banking officials agreed to a plan to swipe depositor's funds to pay for a bailout. Small depositors rush to get their funds out of banks. The mattress looks safer. Will this trigger a run on banks in other European countries?
More evidence that the Eurozone is a flawed monetary union.
What can they be thinking.
Germany remains confident in austerity.
One view of the decision:
More evidence that the Eurozone is a flawed monetary union.
What can they be thinking.
Germany remains confident in austerity.
One view of the decision:
Sunday, March 17, 2013
World Wide Shortages: Wisdom, Compassion, Humanity
"Do you not know, my son, with how little wisdom the world is governed?"
Axel Oxenstierna, Chancellor of Sweden to his son (1648).
I reflect on this quote from time to time and conclude that nothing has changed since 1648. That was about two decades before my first European ancestor arrived in Virginia.
I would like to believe that the American Experience has added to the world's stock of wisdom, but the more I study our own history, the less my confidence in that hope.
Still, I think it is at least a mixed bag. Some wisdom, some foolishness, some downright selfishness and inhumanity.
Today's Washington Post has a very illuminating article on the SNAP program (formerly known as Food Stamps) in Woonsocket, Rhode Island. The article is worth reading for a number of reasons. First, it illuminates the amount of work that poor families have to go through to take advantage of SNAP. more importantly, it makes it clear that SNAP is much more than a program assisting individuals and families. It keeps whole communities alive.
Without safety net programs like SNAP, even more small businesses would have closed and small towns across the land would have become ghost towns. As the article explains:
"At precisely one second after midnight, on March 1, Woonsocket would experience its monthly financial windfall — nearly $2 million from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as food stamps. Federal money would be electronically transferred to the broke residents of a nearly bankrupt town, where it would flow first into grocery stores and then on to food companies, employees and banks, beginning the monthly cycle that has helped Woonsocket survive."
More importantly, programs like SNAP, Unemployment compensation, Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security help us avoid persistent regions of deep poverty and hunger that once existed across Appalachia and other rural areas of the country.
But if you read the article, be sure to also read and reflect on the many mean-spirited comments made by Washington Post readers.
And ask yourselves the question: "What kind of country do we want to be when we grow up?"
Axel Oxenstierna, Chancellor of Sweden to his son (1648).
I reflect on this quote from time to time and conclude that nothing has changed since 1648. That was about two decades before my first European ancestor arrived in Virginia.
I would like to believe that the American Experience has added to the world's stock of wisdom, but the more I study our own history, the less my confidence in that hope.
Still, I think it is at least a mixed bag. Some wisdom, some foolishness, some downright selfishness and inhumanity.
Today's Washington Post has a very illuminating article on the SNAP program (formerly known as Food Stamps) in Woonsocket, Rhode Island. The article is worth reading for a number of reasons. First, it illuminates the amount of work that poor families have to go through to take advantage of SNAP. more importantly, it makes it clear that SNAP is much more than a program assisting individuals and families. It keeps whole communities alive.
Without safety net programs like SNAP, even more small businesses would have closed and small towns across the land would have become ghost towns. As the article explains:
"At precisely one second after midnight, on March 1, Woonsocket would experience its monthly financial windfall — nearly $2 million from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as food stamps. Federal money would be electronically transferred to the broke residents of a nearly bankrupt town, where it would flow first into grocery stores and then on to food companies, employees and banks, beginning the monthly cycle that has helped Woonsocket survive."
More importantly, programs like SNAP, Unemployment compensation, Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security help us avoid persistent regions of deep poverty and hunger that once existed across Appalachia and other rural areas of the country.
But if you read the article, be sure to also read and reflect on the many mean-spirited comments made by Washington Post readers.
And ask yourselves the question: "What kind of country do we want to be when we grow up?"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
