David Broder is now writing comedy

Posted on October 17th, 2009 by ecthompson md

David Broder is the elder statesman of the political pundits and has been doing for over four decades. He is in essence not just a Washington reporter, but the Washington reporter. So what he writes really reflects the thoughts and feeling of the mainstream media. Broder has a column in tomorrow’s Washington Post (available now on-line), on a potential match in the Delaware Senate race. Why do we care? Broder tells us why we should care, “As Democrats from Connecticut to Colorado struggle to hold on to their filibuster-proof 60-seat margin…”

I love when pundits talk about the Democratic 60 seat majority as a voting block in the Senate. It just proves that they believe that we, the American people, are all watching the latest with Jon and Kate. (BTW, did you know that Jon is being sued? TLC is suing him for being a moron. Seriously.) Anyone who is following politics even just a little bit would know that Democrats have almost never voted as a block on any major issue. Harry Reid and other Democratic leaders in the Senate are trying to figure out how to get the health care bill through the Senate without a filibuster. They are facing the same problem that they have had since January: all Democrats don’t think or act alike. This is the Big Tent Party. We have Blue Dogs, environmental guys and military folks. We have mainstream capitalists and those folks who believe the state should provide a free education to everyone. What world is Broder living in? The Democratic party has always been this way. It was Democrats that gave President Carter the most trouble.

Finally, I don’t know what polls Broder is looking at but he states that “The early polls on a possible Castle-Biden race give the Republican double-digit leads.” Sweet. Just a couple of points. First, I don’t think that Beau Biden (30 years younger than Mike Castle) has announced that he is running. Beau Biden (son of Vice President Joe Biden) has a great family name and has been attorney general. Also, Biden has been deployed to Iraq with the Delaware National Guard. The latest poll that I can find shows Castle-Biden in a statistically even race (46-45).

Tags: Media, Party Politics // 14 Comments »

  • DogWhisperer

    I’ve always figured that “organizing” Democrats was like herding cats… but Obama did it for a while… and then lost it.

  • ecthompson

    You are 100% correct. The Dems don’t think with one mind like the R’s. So, this notion that there 60 votes and magically all of the Dems will fall in line. It ain’t going to happen.

    My problem is that this isn’t nuclear physicist type of analysis. Why couldn’t David Broder do the same analysis? He is stupid. Nope, I don’t think so. He isn’t stupid. So then what’s the deal?  That’s my question.  How does a thoughtful columnist write a whole column based on a false assumption?

  • askcherlock

    Saying “organized Democrats” these days is almost an oxymoron. They need to get their act together soon or very little will be in the row of “accomplishments.”

  • nemski

    It’s even funnier isf you live in Delaware. Great post.

  • ecthompson

    thanks!!

  • ecthompson

    you are correct. I’m waiting for Harry Reid to show some ability to lead the Senate. 

  • Joe White

    “Anyone who is following politics even just a little bit would know that Democrats have almost never voted as a block on any major issue.”

    Lets hope this is the case with the so-called health care reform bills put forth by the Democrats.

    There is plenty about health care that can be reformed, but these Democratic bills are nothing that we need.

    –An individual mandate? are you kidding me?

    –Government insurance (public option)? No, just say no.

    When is someone in the Democratic ‘big tent’ gonna step out of the tent and into the 21st century?

    We don’t need government telling us we MUST buy insurance.

    And we don’t need government going into the insurance sales business.

    When is someone on the Democratic side gonna lay aside the lies about ’47 million American citizens in crisis without health care’ and tell the truth?

  • ecthompson

    Joe — thanks for your comments.

    One question — without public option how you control costs? Without the ability to negotiate prices, how do you control costs? The bottom line is you can’t. Personally, I think the public option should be eliminated along with all private insurance. We should have universal healthcare in private insurance be something you would actually buy on your own. Private insurance would become more exotic — medical flights back home if you’re skiing in Aspen for example.

    I do agree that it should not be a mandate but, the only way to keep costs down is to include as many people as you can… as many healthy people as you can. To do that you must figure out how to get young people involved in the program. Because it is the young people that pay for the old people. Without that, prices will continue to increase faster than our salaries.

    So, what is your solution? Thanks again for your comments.

  • Anonymous

    Dr Thompson,

    There is not one solution, but many solutions to lower health care costs, increase healthy lives and behaviors.

    There are lots of things that can and should be done, without allowing the government to take over the health care industry.

    – Individuals should be allowed to band together in large groups (without being an employment based group) to buy group insurance and negotiate favorable rates like large corporations and unions do. Cost to government = zero.

    – The exemption for ‘self insured’ plans should end. If an employer wants to ‘play insurance company’ he should be regulated like one.

    – The insurance industry should standardize all forms to reduce paperwork costs (by some estimates as high as 20% of the cost of care http://www.pnhp.org/news/2005/november/1_in_5_health_care_d.php ) Cost to government = zero.

    – All people should be allowed to open MSA/HSAs to fund their health care costs.

    – End the legalized practice of cost-shifting. Those with private insurance should not have to pay for those who refuse to pay, or refuse to pay full price.

    – End illegal immigration which is overwhelming the health care systems of many cities with nonpayers.

    – Kick the junk food and soda pop vendors out of the public schools and concentrate on providing nutritious meals.

    – Give class credit for kids who go out for sports. Cost to government = zero.

    – Insurance companies should offer discounts to adults actively engaged, (not simply enrolled) in an exercise/physical fitness program. Cost to government = zero.

    – Encourage telecommuting. People who don’t have to spend excess time sitting behind the wheel, and who can eat at home for lunch instead of McD’s can benefit. Cost to government = zero.

    – Strengthen state insurance dept regulations regarding what must be covered in a health policy. Insurance regulation should stay at the state level. Get the feds out.

    Conservatives recognize that government has a proper role in the health debate. The more local (state and county) involvement and the less federal (unconstitutional) involvement , the better IMHBDAO.

    Have a good day. :)

  • ecthompson

    Guest –

    It really isn’t that hard to put some sort of name to your treatise.

    Exactly how are individuals going to band together? Would this be Internet-based? How you gonna be able to tell legitimate bands of folks versus illegitimate bands of folks? I guess some sort of agency would need to certify them as legitimate, correct? Not your best idea, let’s move on.

    Agreed that the self-assured exemption should end.

    The proposal to standardize all health insurance forms is already in malt many of the bills that are being considered right now.

    Expanding health savings accounts is a terrible idea. Of course, this is my opinion. I think he was save money, save money. Open a savings account, open a money market account, dig a hole and place the money in it in your backyard. With savings rates of Americans at all-time lows, it is hard for me to wrap my mind around how Americans would all of a sudden find enough money to save that would significantly impact their health insurance.

    Explain just how a hospital would do this? Let’s say the government passes a law, tomorrow, to end cost shifting. Exactly how would the hospital function? Some hospitals have a significant number of patients who wore self-pay are you basically closing these hospitals down? Are you asking hospitals to turn these patients away? Even those with significant emergencies heart attacks, pregnancy, trauma?

    What class credit are you going to give for physical education? Is this credit towards college? Seriously? I think that every elementary school, middle school and high school should have physical education. It should be a significant part of every child’s day but not for credit.

    So you think that insurance company mandates are okay. How much of a discount should we mandate? How does an insurance company monitor how often and how hard someone works out? Someone who goes to the gym for an hour a day and never gets on an exercise bicycle or a treadmill versus someone who goes three times a week and works out hard for 45 minutes how do you delineate that?

    I think many of your ideas are pretty good. Unfortunately, it’s unclear exactly how they would make a significant impact on the healthcare dollars that we are spending. For example, many schools do not have junk food or sodas yet Americans are getting fatter throughout the 1980s. So, how is this going to truly affect obesity? It will probably have little if any effect but it is a nice idea. I would encourage you to read a few of my posts (here, here and here) on healthcare reform.

    Thanks for your comments.

  • Joe White

    Dr Thompson,

    My bad. I fat fingered the post and submitted before adding my name. My apologies.

    There are no illegit groups. That’s the point. If me and my motorcycle club or me and the 15 families on my block, or me and 1000 totally unacquainted people want to pool our bucks and buy group insurance, we should be able to.

    Would it be internet based? That would be up to each insurer as to how they want to enroll new business, but I would imagine that would be one of many options they would offer to bring new business in the door. Cost to government=zero.

    Why would we need a government agency to ‘certify’ groups, i.e giving us permission to buy insurance? We don’t. That’s the point . Why is it that the only ‘legit’ groups currently must be ‘employment based’? Government need have no role in it other than to get out of the way.

    ——————–

    How would a hospital end cost shifting? It would stop.

    If I’m sitting at a restaurant and the guy at the next table runs out without paying, the waitress should not bring me his bill to pay. It’s a simple concept.

    No, I’m not asking doctors or hospitals to turn anyone away. I know several families who went into the hospital to give birth and walked out with a baby and a payment plan because they had no insurance. And they paid the bill over time. What’s wrong with asking people to pay their bill?

    —————————–

    No, I’m not suggesting that insurance companies should be mandated to offer a discount. But they should be allowed to. Let them figure out which programs qualify for the discount, not the government.

    Thanks for your reply.

  • ecthompson

    Joe –

    Thanks your comments. I truly appreciate them.

    Hospitals are all are already billing those patients who are self-pay. The question comes then what happens when they begin to miss payments? Do you take them all to court? If they make $20,000 a year and they have a $50,000 hospital bill, how realistic is it that they will get it paid off in a reasonable amount of time?

    Although I like most of your ideas they really don’t address the overall problem. Had we get the 46 million Americans covered? This is where the increase in cost comes. None of your ideas that I could see addressed the question of portability. In 2007, Americans spent $2.2 trillion on health care. How do we decrease costs and increase efficiency? On average, Americans pay approximately $7200 per person. I didn’t see how any of your proposals were going to decrease this cost in the next year or two or three. If I’m not mistaken, somewhere around 50 million CT scans were done last year. How are your proposals going to decrease the number of CT scans and yet still deliver excellent patient care.

    I’m looking for things they going to help portability, efficiency and help physicians deliver cost-effective healthcare. Finally, whatever proposal you come up with, we need to cover everybody.

  • Joe White

    Dr Thompson,

    Thanks for your reply.

    First, we don’t have 46 million Americans uninsured. Census Bureau figures show that 10 million of those are not American citizens.

    Going further into the ’46 million in crisis’ myth, we find that 7 million of those make more than $75k per year.

    An ADDITIONAL 7 million of those make more than $50k per year (i.e. between 50-75k). I have purchased insurance for over 20 years on less. Sometimes far less.

    An ADDITIONAL 13 million make less than $25k per year so they probably ALREADY qualify for Medicaid.

    And finally , 18 million are between the ages of 18-34, a group notorious for having large numbers of people who CHOOSE not to pay for insure simply because they are young and healthy and do not think they need to.

    Obviously there is overlap between these groups, but you get the point.

    There are not 46 million Americans in crisis.

    I wish the Democrats would come up with an honest number so we could have a real discussion, but I’m not holding my breath.

    —————————–

    Perhaps you missed my comments about reducing the 20% that is spent on paperwork, but I think there are significant savings to be had here, all without need of government takeover, mandates, or taxes. I think a target under 5% is reasonable.

    In addition, ending cost-shifting would significantly reduce insurance costs for the majority of Americans who buy private insurance.

    And enlarging the total number of insureds by allowing individuals to form their own groups and purchase insurance would tend to lower premiums for everyone.

    —————————–

    The bankruptcies that are being attributed to medical bills show on average to have less than $20k in medical bills. I think reforms in bankruptcy law would tend to encourage more people to pay their bills more often and abandon them less. Bankruptcy is far too easy to declare as it is.

    —————————-

    Portability is a far less significant problem if you can join a group at any time that does not need to be employment based.

    Have a good evening, Dr. I appreciate your reasonable replies.

  • Joe White

    Since there are obviously not ’46 million Americans in crisis’ as elected Democratic leaders claim, I would be interested to know just how many people you really think are ‘in crisis’.

    If they already qualify for Medicaid, or already make enough to purchase their own insurance, or are not American citizens, or simply do not wish to purchase insurance because they are young and healthy, I think we should be able to agree these people don’t fit in the ‘crisis’ or ‘needy’ category.

    So how many truly do?

    Are Democratic leaders willing to produce an honest number so that a reasonable debate can take place based on the situation as it really is?

« »