THE GOALIE SLEEPS:

A Long, Long Muddle (NY Times, 3/28/04)

The White House has been driving Congress — and the nation — in wildly contradictory ways that suggest a deeply muddled, or perhaps nonexistent, set of domestic goals.

Last year, for instance, the Republican House leaders desperately pummeled their more fiscally conservative members to get the Medicare drug program passed at the behest of the White House. Meanwhile, when the chief Medicare actuary tallied up the program's real cost, the administration did everything to keep him quiet but bury the man alive.

While Mr. Bush was pressing for this huge increased commitment in entitlements — along with big new spending on the military and homeland security — he was also drastically cutting taxes, depriving the government of the revenue it would need to pay for programs like a Medicare prescription drug plan. Last week, at the president's behest, the loyal House leaders waded into the fray once more, defeating attempts to block new tax cuts in next year's budget.

There are many people who believe in small government and low taxes. They often make the argument that tax cuts are needed to "starve the beast" and force the government to cut spending, particularly for mammoth entitlement programs. Others, including this page, believe the social safety net is vital, that the government has a responsibility to do things such as help the elderly pay their drug bills, and to collect enough revenue to make that possible.

But virtually no one believes it is a good idea to dramatically expand expensive Medicare entitlements while drastically cutting taxes.

Any estimates on how long it takes before the Times figures out that Health Savings Accounts, which effectively reprivatize health care and submit it to market forces, were the point of the bill?

Posted by Orrin Judd at March 28, 2004 8:02 AM