In an op-ed titled "Numbers, not shouting, overwhelm health care debate," Michigan Democrat John Dingell lays out what he thinks is a case for the health care monstrosity working its way through the Congress. The numbers, unfortunately, don't say what he thinks they say.
It is simply fascinating to me that he thinks the top reason for Federalization is that the current system is "highly bureaucratic and unwieldy..." When, in the entire history of the United States of America, did creating a government program make anything less "bureaucratic and unwieldy?" No serious person could possibly consider the bloated, sclerotic, Federal government to be the antidote to unwieldy brueaucracy; it is the epitome of unwieldy bureaucracy.
Only a doddering, insulated, out of touch politician who has spent more than half a century in Congress could possibly be blinkered and foolish enough as to believe otherwise.
Each of his foolish and misleading claims warrants at least a paragraph. I am only going to highlight one:
"Ending co-pays for preventive care" will "put money back in your pocket."
Where to begin? Preventive care, like any other kind of care, costs something, doesn't it? You can't just wave a wand and say "now it shall cost less!" If you mandate that such services can't charge co-pays, then the cost will simply be included in higher premiums, or, in the case of subsidized insurance, higher taxes. That is simple math, and simple economics, neither of which are strong suits of the fools in Congress.
In other words, the numbers don't say what John Dingell thinks they say. The numbers say that John Dingell can't add.