Physicals and Regulations

Well there's a headline that is lucky if it attracts any of my non-regular readers.  B!O!R!I!N!G!

But here goes.  Today I had my annual physical.  All is well, which is good because my better half is undergoing chemo.  But, my Dr. let me know this cheery statistic.  80% of 80 year old males have prostate cancer!  Since I plan on living at least another 22 years, that means I have an 80% chance of getting prostate cancer.  Well I hope they figure out some better ways of dealing with it.  Right now, everyone I know who has had it, had the organ cut out and rebuilt their muscle controls.  That is not how I want to spend my days, so maybe I will go with the radioactive seeds and develop a glow you know where.

So where does regulation come in. It doesn't directly.

The NYT had two excellent columns today detailing how the Republican's are screwing up the progress the country could be making on key issues with their intransigence.  Neither column was written by RedState's favorite foil Paul Krugman which shows that even middle of the road columnists like Joe Nocera and David Brooks see the issue in the manner I do.

Mr. Nocera wrote about what the unconfirmed temporary appointed (and now resigned) Head of Medicare Dr. Berwick was able to accomplish in his 18 months trying to get people healthier with shorter stays in hospitals and reduce the cost of health care.  Of course, he was only able to just get started because Medicare is like a gigantic aircraft carrier on a medium sized lake.  Why did he have to quit?  Because the Republicans blocked a vote on his nomination.  Mr. Nocera explained why Dr Berwick is the most qualified person to accomplish this important task, but because he once praised a single payer plan.  Well Medicare is a single payer plan for U.S. Citizens 65 and over and it does need its costs fixed.  Beyond me why the Republicans wouldn't vote for someone committed to reducing its costs.

Mr. Brooks wrote how President Obama has included business people in his regulatory process.  62% of the people the administration meets with regarding regulation are business people.  Only 16% are activists.  Furthermore, President Obama has not increased regulatory costs as much as President's Reagan, Bush I and Bush II.  And I bet if you took out Dodd-Frank, the Gulf Oil Spill, and the Affordable Health Care Act, regulatory increase has been close to zero.  Now I don't know about you, but I think the Banks' that gave us our current economic mess should be regulated better.  Certainly, Halliburton, TransOcean and BP (and the others) need sufficient oversight to make sure another Macondo oil well spill does not happen again.  And as someone with a family member with a preexisting condition, I am glad that we will be able to buy health insurance when COBRA runs out.

yet, the Republicans are campaigning to undo all this supposed regulation.  I hope the Democrats defend themselves aggressively.  Mr. Brooks ran through a thought process that disputes these regulations are causing the employment problem and points out that two of the areas with the greatest increase in regulation (health care and energy) are actually the source of job creation.

As I pointed out recently, the Republicans continue to run on this point because they have no other solution to the employment problem and they think they can convince the voters that regulations create and maintain unemployment.  Republicans really want to pursue the same policies that Bush II used and put us in this mess.  I hope a sufficient number of voters see this my way in 11 months.