President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

50%

50%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

70%↑

30%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
March 19, 2010 03:47 PM UTC

Open Line Friday!

  • 72 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“The point of CBO and its relevance this morning is that we’re being scammed. The numbers are irrelevant. The fact of the matter is: The number doesn’t matter.”

–Rush Limbaugh, yesterday

Tweet
Share

Comments

72 thoughts on “Open Line Friday!”

  1. …because as your hero Reagan said, “Facts are stupid things.”

    Rush, if you can manage to force your sausage-like fingers to type on a computer keyboard, perhaps you can use The Google to read this article on the Christian Science Monitor…

    “The CBO was created in the Budget Reform Act of 1974 to give Congress independent information and expertise in budget disputes with the White House. Strictly nonpartisan and famously impervious to leaks, CBO scores the cost of proposed legislation to the federal government.

    “But the heart of CBO’s value to Congress is the process leading up to those scores: staffers ask probing questions to clarify the purpose of legislation, and they have a robust back-and-forth with lawmakers to bring scores to an acceptable range.

    “They go out of their way to not be part of the Washington scene,” says federal budget expert Stan Collender, a partner at Qorvis Communications in Washington. “Some analysts have been there since the beginning – more than 30 years.”

    “The business of economic projection is highly controversial. CBO and the White House Office of Management and Budget rarely agree on assumptions or projections. But lawmakers on both sides of the aisle still commonly refer to the CBO as “the gold standard,” even when they don’t always agree with its conclusions.”

    http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/P…

    1. I’m getting the same “CBO is partisan” BS from people who just can’t stand the fact that we are getting close to moderate, sensible health care reform in this country.

  3. It’s what they’ve been given.  Anyone wanna bet big $ that whatever eventually does or doesn’t pass is higher than the $94 they were throwing around yesterday?

    Why isn’t the doc fix in that number?

          1. NO ONE can claim that reform is bad because of the cost!  It’s that simple.  So the simpletons, a.k.a., Republicans keep claiming we can’t afford it despite all of the evidence!

            Republicans, how I hate thee (one daughter and hubby excepted!) let me count the ways.

        2. I dunno. None of us does, really.

          The fact that the rest of the developed world manages to have something like universal coverage at half the cost of our present non-system suggests that perhaps we’re not truly facing doom-and-gloom. From what I know, it looks like we’re moving toward a Swiss system, where they pay about 60% of what we pay (as a percentage of GDP).

          So other than your general distrust of government, upon what do you base your fears?

          1. I work with a private group that interacts with City, State, and Federal government.  I’m constantly amazed by the high level of absolute incompetence at every level of government.  I’d be glad to give you some examples offline, if you really want.

            Enlarging the bureaucracy in an area as important as my kids health care does not excite me at all.  

            1. to rely on your personal impressions and the conclusions you draw from them over global statistical evidence. If only this country were more committed to basing our policies on the arbitrary beliefs of ideologically predisposed individuals, rather than on reason applied to evidence, just think of the great things we could do together! Oh, wait, that’s called “The Bush Administration.” Been there, done that.

            2. and I share in your belief that many of them are incompetent, or worse, and couldn’t give a damn about what they are doing.

              However, that being said, who is going to protect the interests of individuals from rampant abuses by the health insurance industry ?  There is no other choice.

              1. Humans, en masse, are pretty much what they are, regardless of where you find them. There may be some average differences between people who work in the public sector v. those who work in the private sector, due to traits that are selected by each (what kind of people each sector attracts), but the similarities are far greater than the differences.

                The question becomes one of social institutional competence, and of economic efficiency. There’s a myth, among some non-economists, that the private sector is always more efficient than the public sector. 2009 Nobel Prize Winning Economist Oliver Williamson made his carerr contributing to the now well-established debunking of that myth. His tome on the subject, “Markets and Hierarchies,” looks at the circumstances under which hierarchical (e.g., governmental or corporate) organization of some economic task is more efficient than market organization.

                In reality, the private and public sectors are symbiotic; they require each other to function. There are inefficiencies and failures in both, generally of different kinds, which the other is best suited to counterbalance. Markets are tripped up by externalities and distributional justice concerns, while the public sector is tripped up by excessive goal displacement.

                The challenge, always, is how to take maximum advantage of the strengths of each sector, while minimizing the impact of the defects of each sector. It’s a policy design problem, rather than ideological one. Or, rather, it should be.

                In America, there are very few people left who believe that all, or even most, economic tasks should be left to the government to perform. There is no significant faction arguing for a command economy. However, there is a very significant faction arguing for the virtual elimination of government services. Our dialogue, our debate, is heavily skewed to the Right. Which is why the bulk of the Left in America is actually the Center, from a global and rational perspective.

                That’s why the Democratic Party is the last sane party standing right now.

              2. many parts of the government work well (i.e. the Marines are the government).

                But even if the government was completely incompetent, for profit insurers would still be worse because it is their shareholders best interest to kill me so they don’t have to pay my medical bills.  

                It is the model: collect premiums: never pay benefits if you can avoid it.

                I’ll take incompetence over a business model incentivised to kill me any day.  And what’s even better is that we have good government run healthcare through tricare so I have hope that the US could do it as well as Canada nationally.

                  1. is to be a f***-up. Joining the army at 22, with no great skill for subordinating myself, my drill sergeants had me “knocking out” 50 at least once every half hour (it becomes self-reinforcing, because sometimes they would drop someone else, and say “and you too, Harvey,” just for good measure!). Push-ups was the only part of the PT test that I couldn’t max when I arrived at Basic Training (The two mile run was what tripped up most people, but I was a distance runner). I had no trouble maxing it by the time I got out of Basic, however!

              1. I have just had a lot of interactions with federal government employeees that left me wondering what the hell they were paid for.

                That being said, yes, we do need government (inefficient or not) to protect us from underhanded greedy healh insurers. Their complete parasitic abuse of the system is notorious.

            4. Yes, LB, and the inverse of that is the Private Industry, at all levels, is full of wise, intelligent and astoundingly competent beings of such superiority that the rest of us mere mortals weep when we consider thus….

              Bullshit. The gov’t is no different than any other large organization. I’ve pounded my head against the wall trying to work on Vets Court, but for every ignoramus I’ve met in the VA, C&C of Denver or Higher Ed, I’ve met an amazing, dedicated person who’s hard work and knowledge has made things happen.

              And for the second part of your statement about who’s managing my health care- I WOULD rather have a tight-assed gov’t worker who sticks to the regs like a freakish religion, rather than a cubicle clone who gets bonuses to deny as many claims in a day as he can.

              2. What I’ve found is a lot of people doing a good job while some suck and some other excel. It’s called the Bell curve.

                The other thing I have found is that when it requires going outside of standard operating procedure, that is where you see the government at its worst. Initiative seems to be frowned on by most agencies and so when they don’t know what to do, they tend to freeze.

                The other big issue I think they face is they aren’t measured by results. I’m not talking merit pay or individual reviews here. Basic question – what are the goals of the Department of Revenue and how well are they meeting them? Since no one knows what they are they are left measuring activity instead of results.

                1. if you compare to a big corporation (and I mean really big, like Verizon or something) do you really see any difference in efficiency? It seems like small organizations (whether governments or small businesses) operate flexibly and efficiently, and large ones don’t.

                  And given the constraints, in my experience government employees are more responsive and helpful than corporate employees. The former are sometimes overly cautious and may make you wait, but the latter are utterly powerless and often specifically paid not to help you with a problem.  

                  1. When I worked at Microsoft we talked about how screwed up MS was, yet it was one of the best run large companies out there. You will find large differences between industries. And large differences within industries.

                    Someone who had worked in several industries put the continuum on government – aerospace – oil – financial – IBM – Microsoft (from least to most productive). But at the same time there are probably groups in the government who work a lot more effectively than some groups at Microsoft (which has become more bureaucratic over time).

            5. Either we entrust healthcare to insurance companies who are, by law, supposed to turn a profit and are accountable only to themselves;

              OR

              entrust it to a cumbersome government bureaucracy that at least is accountable to We the People, even if it’s insulated by several layers of elected government officials and their appointees.

              As I said elsewhere, I for one do not think this will magically solve all the problems. But we’ve had 16 years to really appreciate the results of doing nothing to address the issue, and only the blind can fail to see that health care reform is better.

            6. ….are Medicare and the VA the highest rated delivery systems?

              Why hasn’t any nation with universal HC smacked themselves on the forehead and asked, “Why aren’t we doing it the American way?”

              Why is every charge by my Medicare parents paid within about a month from billing, and the (government monitored) “Medigap” insurance equally efficient.  No denials of service, no cancellation, no arguing.

              Why did my carrier years ago refuse to pay for a PSA test when it was part of my package in black and white. After months of just flat refusing to pay, I had to.  Why?

              I hate insurance companies.  All kinds.

              BTW, I signed up fo SS a month ago and it was painless.  Twenty minutes after I started, online, I was done. Every piece of mail was extremely well written and my first deposit occurred on the day they said it would.  

    3. Just the other day LB was salivating over a rumor that the CBO was going to put the cost at over a trillion.  Had that happened, both Rush and LB would have been all about the CBO. Instead, CBO puts it at under the trillion mark. I’m shocked, shocked I tells ya, at the about face.

      According to many, including Reps. Markey and Salazar, both now on board, it will also be the biggest deficit reduction bill in 25 years.  Of course history going back decades shows that there is pretty much always deficit reduction under Dems and increase under Rs (we’ve all seen the graphs on many occasions right here) but never mind that either.

      I guess LB’s more accurate (?) numbers (a la Rove’s mythical numbers in days of yore), would be so different as to not only erase that deficit reduction but to actually add to the deficit and push the cost up past a trillion. Rush just goes with claiming that numbers, like objective reality, don’t matter.

      Never thought I’d live to see the day that LB would become a confirmed, up is down, create your own reality, Limbaugh ditto head.  Too bad.

      2. The funniest bit is toward the end, where he notices Beck calling himself a conservative libertarian.

        On the board he writes

        CON.SERV.ATIVE

        LI.BERT.ARIAN

        He says, paraphrasing, “See, they’re cons! And they want us to serve, like slaves! Now look at the second part: lie! Who’s lying? Aryans! It’s just like Hitler! They spell it with an I instead of a Y to fool you. And who’s trying to fool you? Bert!” Then he goes into a Sesame Street rant.

        There’s only about 25 seconds total of Beck clips, so you should be able to keep most of your breakfast down.

  6. “Many opponents of hydraulic fracturing in Western Colorado suffer from 90/10 syndrome: 90 percent of their information is usually less than 10 percent accurate,” said David Ludlam of the West Slope Colorado Oil and Gas Association.

    Mr. Ludlam, everyone I know who has met you acknowledges taht you are at the bottom of a very steep learning curve.  Good luck.  

    Be careful of accusing your ‘opponents'(those who want companies to remedy their poison drinking water wells, for example, with out facing years of court) of being uninformed.  

    2. claims that we don’t know what we are talking about by challenging him to a debate on the issue of hydraulic fracturing.

      I will use this space to do the same.

      Mr. Ludlam…any time…any place.

      Your move.

      Duke Cox

        3. I felt it was my civic duty, what with the topic being a bill I had testified on.

          Let’s just say the Droid is a crappy blogging tool, whether its the device or the interface with the blog software and the Android OS

          My wife was ready to kill me.

              1. Honestly, I just thought your comment was great, especially about doing your civic duty in Hawaii. That was sort of cute. I love the stuff you post here and what you add to the conversation–when I’m replying to you, you can rest assured it’s with all respect.  

  8. 1) Have 3 beautiful daughters ages 16 – 25.

    2) Go to a restaurant with male waiters.

    On the flip side, how to have the entire morning to yourself on vacation.

    1) Have 3 daughters ages 16 – 25.

  9. CNN is reporting that Joeseph Cao, who voted Yes on the initial House health care reform bill, is considering voting Yes on the final bill as well, despite John Boehner’s promise that his caucus would vote 100% against the bill.

    Cao comes from a very Democratic district (he replaced William “Cold Cash” Jefferson), and it’s a district that would benefit greatly from the reform bill.

  11. What I mostly do on vacation is read. A bunch of books and some non-work websites. (With a wife & 3 daughters that is vastly preferable to shopping and getting a tan by the pool.)

    I just finished The Gamble. It’s a superb summation of what Odierno, Petraeus, Keane, etc. did to turn the war around. And a sobering assessment of where we are now and how much remains to be done.

    Highly recommended. (Barron & Dan, if you read please post what you think of its point of view and conclusions.)

  12. FromWilliam Rivers Pitt over at Truthout (http://www.truthout.org/):

    “Last week, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) made it clear to any and all that he was going to vote “No” on the health care reform package currently being considered by the House. His argument was simple, and on many levels, entirely correct: the current bill is half a loaf, does not contain any kind of public option and is a big, fat giveaway to the insurance and pharmaceutical industries.

    Alarm bells started ringing all over the White House, and Representative Kucinich found himself invited for an Air Force One trip with the president. The plane landed, and Representative Kucinich emerged with an announcement that he would, in fact, be voting “Yes” on the bill. Moreover, he immediately swung into action and began whipping votes to make sure the bill gets passed, a move his colleagues described as “unprecedented.”

    Reading the article, it doesn’t sound like an arm twisting, or a backroom deal for Ohio or Dennis, but rather that Obama made the case that a defeat of this bill would ruin Obama’s presidency and seriously hurt the Democratic Party.  

    1. Whatever, good for him and good for Obama.  When the president puts his arm around you and says “I need you, your party needs you but, most important of all, your country needs you” it’s not easy to say no.  This way, at least you have something to tell your grandchildren.

      1. and the few remaining hairs on Dennis’s head were whipping about:-)

        I’m not very impressed with the bill. It’s a start, that may or may not affect how insurance companies operate, and health care delivered in this country. It may have more effect on how lobbyists influence legislation…..one can hope.

        I’m more of a prevention kind of guy. Both universally (mandate that the use of atrazine be stopped as a fertilizer, for instance. It’s as bad as DDT), and specifically through education about diet, exercise, etc.

        3. which is to create an entitlement.  I’m old enough to remember how the right wingers fought Medicare like lions on crack.  The thing is once you give people something, you can’t take it back.  Then, you have to make it better until it meets their needs.  Social Security had a lot of flaws when it started, but no politician would dare dismantle it now.

  13. Folks, this is in Forbes magazine…not some left wing rag!

    The Misinformed Tea Party Movement

    Bruce Bartlett, 03.19.10, 12:01 AM EDT

    For an antitax group, they don’t know much about taxes.

    “On March 16 the Tea Party crowd showed up for yet another demonstration on Capitol Hill in Washington. Curious about the factual knowledge these people have regarding the issues they are protesting, my friend David Frum enlisted some interns to interview as many Tea Partyers as possible on a couple of basic questions. They got 57 responses–a pretty good-sized sample from a crowd that numbered between 300 and 500 people.”

    (Survey reports are here as .pdf: http://www.frumforum.com/wp-co…

    “The first question that was asked concerned the size of government. Tea Partyers were asked how much the federal government gets in taxes as a percentage of the gross domestic product. According to Congressional Budget Office data, acceptable answers would be 6.4%, which is the percentage for federal income taxes; 12.7%, which would be for both income taxes and Social Security payroll taxes; or 14.8%, which would represent all federal taxes as a share of GDP in 2009.”

    “Tuesday’s Tea Party crowd, however, thought that federal taxes were almost three times as high as they actually are. The average response was 42% of GDP and the median 40%. The highest figure recorded in all of American history was half those figures: 20.9% at the peak of World War II in 1944.”

    http://www.forbes.com/2010/03/…

    And this is the political movement that thinks they can run the Federal Gov’t with more fiscal responsibility and discipline. What seems to be true is they can’t find their ass with two hands and a funnel.

    1. How about if on Monday Obama announces drastic tax cuts, across the board, of 75%, to bring the tax rates in teabagger minds down to the tax rates in reality. Do you think they’ll celebrate? (They won’t notice since they’re all on Social Security and EIC anyway, but they’ll think it’s great for the ecomony.)

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

70 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!