Ancient Virtues

Remove and Replace
The tax, which applies to devices like artificial joints, pacemakers, wheelchairs and gloves, is expected to raise about $29 billion over 10 years. It is one of several sources of new revenue in the health care law that will pay for the expansion of health coverage to 30 million uninsured people, many of them poor. The industry claims the tax will hurt demand for its products, but, in fact, sales of these devices, which are not purchased directly by consumers, are unlikely to be affected by price, especially by a small tax increase. As more people receive health coverage that pays for devices, the industry will more than make up the cost of the tax.
...
Ms. Warren and other Democrats say they would support an actual repeal of the tax if another tax could be found to replace it. That could save the tax, because Republicans aren’t interested in raising another tax, and the Obama administration already has its eye on potential replacement taxes for other, more important purposes, like investments in education and infrastructure.  (New York Times editorial, 4/1/2013)

Interesting editorial wherein the Times laments....well, a couple of things. 

First, the bi-partisan Senate opposition to the Obamacare medical devices tax. As the Times tries to tell us, this harmless tax was going to pay for health insurance for the poor. How dare anyone oppose it!

Second, the fact that the medical device industry had the nerve to lobby Senators including the likes of Elizabeth Warren and Al Frankel who - good on them - did what Senators are supposed to do and represented the interests of their states. In the New York Times worldview, it is perfectly all right for the Sierra Club to lobby, but never a corporate interest.

Well thankfully as the Times points out, Team Obama has "replacement taxes" lined up. Liberals always do, don't they? Although we ponder how these replacement taxes are going to fill the gap of the medical device tax in paying for health insurance for the poor when the Times says they are going to pay for education and infrastructure*.... Perhaps the Times did a sloppy cut-and-paste on their various editorials with the theme of: Why We Need More Taxes.

* Editor's Note: Henceforth RedStateVT will always refer to "infrastructure" by the more correct description "crumbling infrastructure."


Tight Lies
Unable to meet tight deadlines in the new health care law, the Obama administration is delaying parts of a program intended to provide affordable health insurance to small businesses and their employees — a major selling point for the health care legislation.

The law calls for a new insurance marketplace specifically for small businesses, starting next year. But in most states, employers will not be able to get what Congress intended: the option to provide workers with a choice of health plans. They will instead be limited to a single plan. (NYT, 4/1/2013)

First, we repeat again our suspicion that Obamacare is such an unwieldy beast that it may self-implode. 

Second, does anyone else get the sneaking fear that "limited to a single plan" sounds a bit like "single payer?"


Unaided
But it stipulates that any educational institution that receives aid meant to encourage or promote normalization of ties with Israel will face punishment: a 10-year prison term for an individual perpetrator and a fine of 20,000 Jordanian dinar (about $28,200) for any institution involved in organizing exchange programs or activities that include Israelis. (NYT, 4/1/2013)

This edict from Hamas. And the world wonders why there is no peace in the Middle East. Imagine if the Israelis "stipulated" something like this!


Dark Future
The bill makes little attempt to grapple with the complicated issue of how to identify and treat the violent mentally ill. That thorny topic has been relegated to a committee to study and report on, at some future date. (WSJ, 4/2/2013)

Connecticut punts on the real issue raised by the Newtown massacre.