Corporate America Should Rescue the Government

Many populists and those on the left fear or despise corporate America. But some of its methods and values are what is required to rescue the U.S. government.
Our beleaguered Congress and White House desperately need help in governance. It is especially embarrassing for those wanting Big Government — resentful of private enterprise and anyone in the 1% — to ask for guidance from capitalists.  But with the ferocity of this shutdown and the potential consequences of a debt default later this month, it is obvious that governing is too serious to be left to the government. Our nation should see what corporate America — the private sector — can do in these trying times.  
Like the Department of the Treasury that bailed out some of America’s banks during the meltdown of 2008, similarly the private sector should ride to the rescue of the government. While it would be unlawful to actually seize the government, even to save it from devouring itself on prime time, a group of respected CEOs could educate our lawmakers and president about how good governance and management are conducted in the real world — where there is strategic planning, dignified debate, and accountability.  For several years, we have seen teachable moments: the didactic White House and Congressional leaders have lectured us on proper conduct and values. Now is the time for them to be good listeners.

http://spectator.org/archives/2013/10/08/corporate-america-should-rescu 

So, are these the people you want running your health care?

We have arrived at something very important, very profound in the last week in the United States of America.  Yes, let's use the full name because this is a problem that goes to the fundamental nature of the country.

The government is using its police power against the public interest to make what it thinks is a clever anti-Republican point about the government shutdown. 

Leave aside the substance of the Republican argument that Obamacare is hopelessly compromised by the executive fiats already issued on it by the president -- precisely that selective lawlessness that the section of the presidential oath "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed" is meant to prevent.  If that is the larger point, and it is, we also all see the smaller point -- that all the people in favor of Obamacare don't want to participate in it.  Companies don't want it; unions don't want it; and the people who, if they didn't read or write it, at least passed it, don't want it.  So it is not unreasonable for the Republican majority in the House, the government body closest to the public, to seek a delay in the individual mandate, a stance reinforced by the incompetent introduction of the program.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/10/so_are_these_the_people_you_want_running_your_health_care.html#ixzz2h81b252d

We Can Crash Into Debt Limit "Because the Only People Buying Our Bonds Are the Federal Reserve"

My latest piece explains why the business world's expectations on the shutdown crisis -- that the backlash might make Republicans ready to deal on the debt limit -- was folly. Republicans believe that the sequestration fallout, and the shutdown fallout thus far, have been goosed by Barack Obama in an attempt to maximize the damage to their party. That makes them less likely, not more likely, to raise the debt limit in a hurry. The theory that the government could hit the limit then just prioritize spending on debt service, troops and entitlements is widely accepted, more than Democrats like to think.

The whole story seemed a little House-centric, so I ended the day at the Senate, asking the Republicans who are seen as potential deal-makers there whether the people who said we could prioritize debt and crash through the ceiling were right.

"They're right on that, and I think the administration could work on who gets paid and who doesn't in a way that would pull us through," said Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee. "I don't think the markets have been spooked so far, and I personally believe that if they realized there was a legitimate attempt to make the government work, they would be less likely [to be spooked]."

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2013/10/07/republican_senator_we_can_crash_into_debt_limit_because_the_only_people.html

Democrats Plan Maneuver to Allow Obama to Raise Debt Ceiling

Senate Democrats say they'll advance a bill giving President Barack Obama the authority to raise the debt ceiling unless two-thirds of Congress disapproves, according to a Senate Democratic aide.

The issue of increasing the borrowing limit and avoiding an unprecedented default is fast becoming a central focus in Washington — and comes as ordinary Americans say they're deeply dismayed with the week-old government shutdown, and are finding blame with both Republicans and Democrats.

"It looks like there is more than enough blame to go around and both parties are being hurt by the shutdown," CNN Polling Director Keating Holland said.

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/democrats-debt-ceiling-obama/2013/10/07/id/529693#ixzz2h809nSfV

Rep. Dent: House Has Enough Votes for 'Clean CR'

U.S. Rep. Charlie Dent is among 14 House Republicans who have publicly said they would vote for a "clean" continuing resolution — not tied to defunding Obamacare — and he says there are plenty more.

Dent, appearing Monday on CNN's "The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer," said that members have told him privately they would vote for a "clean CR" if it comes up for a vote.

A total of 217 representatives are needed to pass the resolution. Other reports show 20 or more Republicans promising to vote for a clean continuing resolution.

House Speaker John Boehner has refused to allow a vote, saying it would not pass. The Republican-led House is in a battle with the Democratic-controlled Senate and White House over keeping the federal government funded and ending a partial shutdown that began Oct. 1.

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Republicans-clean-CR-Dent/2013/10/07/id/529760#ixzz2h7zpsZye

The Death Spiral Begins

As a retired computer systems manager, I am always fascinated by large, complex software systems that fail -- such as the Federal ObamaCare "insurance exchange" currently being rolled out at HealthCare.gov.

This software monstrosity is now in its second week, and most people trying to use it still can't get into the system, or else they can't create an account on it, or their account information is lost.  I, and you, can follow this unfolding disaster at any time in the comments section on HealthCare.gov's own Facebook page, at https://www.facebook.com/Healthcare.gov.  (You do not need a Facebook account to view this page.)

Here are a few recent comments I saw recently (on Monday evening, October 7):

Alicia Pasz: I waited but still CANNOT login. My security questions to create a new password are NOT MINE. If I cannot get SOMEBODY to clear this problem how am I going to login? I enrolled over the phone BUT I want to see what is going on with my account/app. I NEED HELP, I cannot create another account because I am already in the system. IS ANYBODY READING THIS REQUEST FOR HELP? (Nick's answer: No.)

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/10/the_death_spiral_begins.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_#ixzz2h7zSlGxh

Obamacare Snake Oil

Don’t look now, but as Obamacare’s critics are focusing incessantly on the abortive rollout of the law’s health-care exchanges, the Left is moving the goalposts in the broader debate — and rather spectacularly, too.
Obamacare, recall, was sold with a specific set of political promises: The new regime, advocates insisted, would reduce the deficit, cover the needy, and reduce total health spending — all while lowering the premiums of those who were already insured. Back in 2007, when Obama was running for the Democratic nomination, he introduced what was then an embryonic proposal with the quixotic assurance that, “if you already have health insurance, the only thing that will change for you under this plan is the amount of money you will spend on premiums.” Then he adumbrated what would happen to the “amount of money” that Americans would “spend on premiums.” “That will be less,” Obama told anybody who would listen.
In case you’re wondering, that’s “less” in the classical sense of the word, as opposed to in the sense of “more,” or “well, that depends on who you are.” Likewise, just so we’re painfully clear: When the president said that he was talking about people who “already have health insurance,” he meant that he was talking about people who already had health insurance. This is not a matter of opinion or a subjective piece of literary criticism. It is a fact. In plain language that the speaker intended listeners to take at face value, Obama established a hypothesis — one that can be tested rather easily. He must be held to it.

http://www.nationalreview.com/node/360617/print