Why Make Health Reform Deficit Neutral?

When the agitator attacks of 9/11 hit the United States and again al of a sudden we were plunged into war, aboriginal in Afghanistan and again in Iraq, I don’t bethink anyone ambitious that the wars be “deficit neutral.” No one talked about whether we could allow them. They were things we just had to do.

When George W. Bush proposed giving all-inclusive sums to affluent humans in the anatomy of tax cuts, no one argued that it would be “deficit neutral.” Rather, it was argued that acid taxes wouldn’t accompany in beneath tax acquirement at all, it would accompany us added tax acquirement because the abridgement would abound so abundant faster. And besides, it was somehow awfully urgent, something we just had to do.

When the banks tottered and bare to be shored up with aborigine money to the tune of about $1 trillion, there was no way to altercate this would be “deficit neutral.” We ability get the money back, we ability not. Whether we could allow it was not the question, we just had to do it to save the cyberbanking system. Similarly, the “Stimulus Bill” was awfully urgent, and something we just had to do, whether we could allow it or not.

Then we appear to bloom affliction reform, and suddenly, it seems, this is area we draw the line. The admiral says that bloom affliction ameliorate have to be “deficit neutral.” It can’t in fact amount us annihilation in tax funds. And anybody nods sagely and argues over how to do this.


Why is this the one affair that we can alone do if we can prove advanced of time that it will not in fact amount anything? Our accepted arrangement costs us an estimated 44,000 lives and impoverishes millions of Americans every year, and causes untold suffering. Why is this the one huge civic botheration that anybody agrees we can’t allow to solve?

Comments are closed.