Reason.tv - Topics

Randy Barnett: Losing Obamacare While Preserving the Constitution

Thu, 12 Jul 2012 09:00:00 EDT

“We won in our effort to preserve the Constitution and, in fact, we moved the ball in a more positive direction,” says Georgetown Law's Randy Barnett, one of the legal architects behind the constitutional challenge to Obamacare.

Chief Justice John Roberts’ majority opinion in the 5-to-4 decision upheld Obamacare’s individual mandate as an exercise of Congress’ tax powers, while simultaneously rejecting the Obama administration’s sweeping assertion of federal power under the Commerce Clause. Barnett argues that the chief justice “substituted a less dangerous tax power for a far more dangerous Commerce Clause power." Had the Supreme Court accepted the government’s theory of the Commerce Clause, Barnett explains, Congress would have had the power "to do anything it wants with respect to the economy."

A professor of legal theory at Georgetown University Law Center and the author of nine books, including Restoring the Lost Constitution: The Presumption of Liberty (2004), Barnett represented the National Federation of Independent Business in its challenge to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Reason Senior Editor Damon Root recently sat down with Barnett to discuss the Obamacare decision, the “echo chamber” of liberal academia, and why the Constitution is fully consistent with libertarian principles.

Approximately 33 minutes.

Shot by Jim Epstein and Joshua Swain, and edited by Epstein.

Scroll down for downloadable versions and subscribe to ReasonTV's YouTube Channel to receive automatic updates when new material goes live.

Adam Summers Talks Obamacare Ruling on Pajamas Media

Mon, 02 Jul 2012 00:00:00 EDT

Reason Foundation analyst Adam Summers discusses Chief Justice John Roberts and the Supreme Court ruling on Obamacare with PJ Media's Bryan Preston.

Air Date: June 29, 2012.

Approximately 9 minutes.

Subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel .

Nick Gillespie Discusses SCOTUS Health Care Ruling with Erin Burnett

Thu, 28 Jun 2012 00:00:00 EDT

Reason.tv editor in chief Nick Gillespie appeared on CNN's OutFront with Erin Burnett to discuss why, in Erin's words, "we are all losers" when it comes to the Supreme Court's health care ruling. Air Date: June 28, 2012.

Approximately 8 minutes.

Scroll down for HD, iPod and audio versions of this video and subscribe to Reason.tv's Youtube channel to receive automatic notification when new material goes live.

Obesity in America: To Win, We Have to Lose Government

Wed, 06 Jun 2012 00:00:00 EDT

Can the government make you lose weight? Officials sure think so.

In May 2012, an HBO documentary and a Washington conference, both named "The Weight of the Nation," made the case for government intervention in your workout, your workplace and your kid's lunchbox. They argue that lack of individual willpower is not to blame for obesity, and that it will take a serious government overhaul to shrink waistlines on a national scale.

"It's an access issue. We live in an obesogenic environment," says Dr. Lisa Santora, chief medical officer of Southern California's Beach Cities Health District. President Obama agrees. He has already bundled $15 billion in with his healthcare reform bill, and we've seen government programs intervening in nutrition time and time again.

So far, the programs haven't worked out too well.

"The reasearch shows that we haven't been very good at trying to, through government, control obesity," says Cal Poly economics professor Michael Marlow. He says that even when the government realizes that their solutions don't work, they will only try more aggressive regulations that will further impend on your freedom to choose whatever you want on the menu.

Produced by Tracy Oppenheimer. Shot by Paul Detrick, Sharif Matar and Oppenheimer.

About 5.40 minutes.

Scroll down for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel to receive automatic updates when new material goes live.

Remy: Health Care Mandates vs Pizza Toppings

Thu, 29 Mar 2012 00:00:00 EDT

Internet sensation Remy explains how pizza can tell us a lot about health care mandates.

Written and performed by Remy and produced by Meredith Bragg.

About 2.30 minutes. Scroll down for downloadable versions. Subscribe to our YouTube channel to get automatic updates when new material goes live.

Follow Reason on Twitter at http://twitter.com/reason

Follow Remy on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GoRemy

For a complete playlist of Reason.tv's health care coverage, go here

For more Remy & Reason.tv vids go here

For even more Remy, go to http://youtube.com/goremy

For more information about state by state minimum coverage mandates, visit www.cahi.org

Obamacare #FAIL: Day 3 at the Supreme Court

Wed, 28 Mar 2012 20:00:00 EDT

"If I was in the Obama administration, I would not be comfortable with how the last three days went."

Reason's Damon Root was in attendance for the third and final day of oral arguments before the Supreme Court on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), which focused primarily on the issue of severability, which brings into question whether the individual mandate be excised from the law, or if the law in its totality must be struck down.

Now that the case is in the hands of the Court and a decision isn't expected until late June, Root thinks the Obama administration has reason to be concerned not only because their Solicitor General's performance rated poorly, but because "their arguments were nowhere near as strong as they thought they were going to be."

Runs about 3 minutes.

Produced by Anthony L. Fisher, shot by Josh Swain and Fisher.

For more of Reason.tv's coverage of the Health Care debate, click here.

Scroll down for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel to receive automatic updates when new material goes live.

"Constitutional Thunderdome": Day Two of Obamacare Oral Arguments

Tue, 27 Mar 2012 16:50:00 EDT

Reason's Damon Root attended the pivotal second day of oral arguments before the Supreme Court on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), which he described as a "Constitutional Thunderdome." The debate over the legality of the mandate to purchase insurance at the heart of ACA was, says Root, a rough-and-tumble colloquy about the "the role of government in our lives" and "what sort of limits the Constitution places on the federal government."

"I'm more confident after today's arguments than I was going in that the individual mandate is in trouble," says Root. Oral arguments end tomorrow and the Supreme Court's decision is expected in early June.

Runs about 3 minutes.

Produced by Anthony L. Fisher, shot by Josh Swain and Fisher.

To read Root's dispatch from Day One of the proceedings, click here.

For more of Reason.tv's coverage of Health Care debate, click here.

Scroll down for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel to receive automatic updates when new material goes live.

Obamacare at the Supreme Court: Day One

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:31:00 EDT

Reason's Damon Root got a coveted seat for the Supreme Court oral arguments on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). Day one of this epic judicial showdown focused primarily on whether or not the individual mandate constitutes a tax. If the justices rule that the penalties associated with the mandate should be considered a tax, the challengers to ACA would have to wait until 2015, when the law goes into effect to challenge it.

The main event of these proceedings, the arguments over whether or not the individual mandate is constitutional, will take place tomorrow.

For more of Root's coverage of the Obamacare-SCOTUS hearings, go to Hit & Run.

Produced by Anthony L. Fisher, shot by Josh Swain and Fisher.

About 1.40 minutes.

Scroll down for downloadable versions, and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel to receive automatic updates when new material goes live.

Obamacare, Mandates and Regulatory Confusion: Reason-Rupe Poll Results with Emily Ekins

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 00:00:00 EDT

A new finding by the Reason-Rupe Public Opinion Survey shows a majority of Americans dissatisfied with the health care law being debated in the Supreme Court while simultaneously confused about the role of government in current health care policy.

"About 40 percent [of Americans] thought it wasn't regulated enough," explains Reason Polling Director Emily Ekins. When it comes to health care reform, "it's hard to move forward if people aren't clear as to what the market currently looks like."

Reason.tv's Nick Gillespie sat down with Ekins to discuss the poll's findings, what Americans think about the current health care system, and the misconceptions surrounding regulation in the health care market.

The Reason-Rupe survey is online here.

This Reason Foundation project is made possible thanks to the generous support of the Arthur N. Rupe Foundation.

Shot by Jim Epstein and Meredith Bragg; edited by Joshua Swain. About 6.38 minutes.

Scroll down for downloadable versions, and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel to receive automatic updates when new material goes live.

Ilya Somin on Why The Individual Mandate is Unconstitutional and a Threat to Liberty

Fri, 16 Mar 2012 00:00:00 EDT

A Supreme Court ruling upholding the individual mandate "will really be, if not a death blow, then certainly a very severe blow to the whole idea that the federal government's powers are limited and that it's not the case that the federal government can do pretty much whatever it wants," says George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin, author of an amicus brief in U.S Department of Health and Human Services v. Florida, a challenge to the Affordable Care Act that the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear later this month.

Reason.tv sat down with Somin to discuss why his brief focuses on the individual mandate, what the chances of success are, and whether or not a mandate to buy insurance could empower Congress to pass a mandate that all Americans buy a health food like broccoli.

"There's a lot of industries that have a lot of lobbying power and interest group clout that could promote mandates for themselves," says Somin.

About 9:30 minutes. Interview by Zach Weissmueller. Camera by Tracy Oppenheimer, Paul Detrick, and Sharif Matar. Edited by Weissmueller.

Scroll down for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube channel to receive automatic notifications when new material goes live.

Remy: Cough Drops-The Mandate (featuring Sandra Fluke)

Fri, 09 Mar 2012 00:00:00 EST

Remy crashes Sandra Fluke's Congressional testimony to demand a mandate for his cough drop addiction.

"Remy: Cough Drops-The Mandate" is one of a series of collaborations between Remy and Reason.tv. To watch Remy's other videos, go to youtube.com/goremy.

Approximately 1:50 minutes. Lyrics by Remy. Video shot and produced by Meredith Bragg.

More from Reason on Sandra Fluke and the cost of contraception:

Make the Pill Cheaper by Making it Over the Counter

Sandra Fluke's Protection Racket

It's Like Totally Different When a Liberal Blowhard Guy Calls a Conservative Woman a Twat!

Download the mp3 and HD versions at below, and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube channel.

Lyrics:
Yeah and listen up peeps, you better check the deal
We got another mandate we gone straight reveal
And if you don't listen up, we be walking out
Yeah you know cough drops what we talking about

Take a look at this graph, you gonna holler with fear
Cough drops costing me a hundred dollars a year
I'm talking Halls, Ludens, to keep me alive
It's like a dog-fighting ring, I need Vicks to survive

It's preventative medicine, suppressing my cough? Word.
I need a vote from each of you--oh, that's kind of awkward
Cough drops are so tasty--how is it allowed?
Yeah, this guy knows what I'm talking about.

Cherry, honey lemon, or the mentho-lytus
Directly to my house's where I suggest you ship this
They come in all kinds of colors and flavors galore
Even sheep sk--wait, I think this one's yours

I appreciate the testimony, very profound
We need to verify this policy is morally sound
And there's one reasonable way to see if it should be allowed
And it's to probe you internally, can somebody get me a towel?

My apologies for the gentleman across the aisle
He doesn't understand mandates, he hasn't been here a while
I see no reason we shouldn't pass your request
Just let me double check, yep, it passes our test

This is not about "men's health," this is not a prescription
Mandate Men's Health, 12 month subscription
Your party has no respect for individual rights
Now come on up here, I'd like to check your insides

Well I guess it's safe to say this has kind of devolved
Maybe it's not the best idea to have these people involved
So I think I'm gonna bounce, put this one on the shelf
Hit up the drug store--get some cough drops myself.

Transplant Denied

Wed, 29 Feb 2012 09:00:00 EST

Norman Smith seemed to be making progress in his liver cancer recovery at Cedars-Sinai hospital in Los Angeles, Calif. He had some of the best doctors in the world, he was on a transplant list and he had completed a successful clinical trial that had his doctors dubbing him a "miracle man."

Then, his cancer returned and two months before he was would have received a transplant, he was de-listed for smoking marijuana prescribed by his oncologist at Cedars-Sinai. Now, if he doesn't receive a transplant, he will die.

"It's only my life that I'm fighting for," says Smith. "What do I have to hide? I have nothing to hide."

Smith's situation represents one of the first battles being fought over the place of medical marijuana in medicine and it has left him in limbo.

Cedars-Sinai declined interview requests but referred Reason TV to Peggy Stewart, a clinical social worker with UCLA's transplant program, which holds a similar position to Cedars-Sinai on medical marijuana.

"Marijuana is considered substance abuse," says Stewart. "The legality of it is really not an issue."

Stewart and Cedars-Sinai did say that transplant patients who consume marijuana put themselves at potential risk of infection from a mold found in cannabis called aspergillus.

But not everyone sees the mold as a potential threat.

"The truth is that Norman lives in Los Angeles and there are laboratories that he can take his medicine to and make sure that it doesn't have contaminants," says Stephanie Sherer of Americans for Safe Access , which works to break down political and legal barriers to medical cannabis.

Further, a 2009 study from the American Journal on Transplantation that looked at potential liver transplant candidates said that there wasn't a significant difference between marijuana users from marijuana non-users.

Sherer points out that Smith isn't alone, his problems are the reality for many patients caught in-between managing their pain and receiving a transplant.

"In our database at our office, we know of over two dozen patients that are going through this and unfortunately half of them have passed away because they did not receive these transplants," says Smith.

Music by audionautix.com and freeplaymusic.com

About 6:48 minutes. Written and produced by Paul Detrick. Camera by Alex Manning, Zach Weissmuller and Jim Epstein.

Scroll down for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel to receive automatic updates when new material goes live.

Peter Suderman Talks Romney Flip Flops on Freedom Watch

Thu, 02 Feb 2012 00:00:00 EST

Reason Associate Editor Peter Suderman appeared on Freedom Watch to discuss Mitt Romney's book, No Apology, and Romney's record of flip-flops on healthcare. Air date: 2/1/2012.

Approximately 5:29 minutes.

Scroll down for HD, iPod and audio versions of this video and subscribe to Reason.tv's Youtube channel to receive automatic notification when new material goes live.

3 Supreme Court Decisions to Watch

Wed, 25 Jan 2012 11:00:00 EST

The Supreme Court is back in session with major decisions coming on the legality of Obamacare, Arizona's anti-immigration law, and the right of property owners to due process.

How's the court expected rule in these cases and what are the likely implications of its decisions?

Reason Senior Editor Damon Root sat down with Reason.tv's Nick Gillespie to talk about the 3 decisions to watch in the Supreme Court's current session.

Shot by Joshua Swain and Meredith Bragg; edited by Jim Epstein.

Approximately 4.30.

Scrolldown for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube channel to receive automatic updates when new material goes live.

Will the Ohio Healthcare Freedom Amendment End Obamacare?

Wed, 02 Nov 2011 10:27:00 EDT

"If you're going to take away liberty and property, there has to be some sort of due process involved," says Chris Littleton, the head of Ohioans for Healthcare Freedom and a Tea Party leader in the Buckeye state. "In this case, as citizens, we feel that those things are fundamentally inhibited and we want the Supreme Court to hear our case on this."

Littleton's group is pushing an upcoming ballot initiative that would amend the state constitution to prevent citizens' involuntary participation in any health-insurance system. The U.S. Supreme Court is widely expected to issue a ruling on the constituationality of what's known as the "individual mandate" in Obamacare and Littelton thinks passage of the Ohio Healthcare Freedom Amendment will give his state unique legal standing: "This is citizen-initiated, which is very unique. If it passes, Ohio will be the only state that's done something like that." While most challenges to the individual mandate revolve around the limits of Congress' commerce clause powers, Littleton believes the amendment will activate due process and 10th Amendment considerations.

Littleton sat down with Reason.tv's Nick Gillespie to discuss the Healthcare Freedom Amendment and the similarities between the Occupy Movement and the Tea Party. "I sympathize with the Occupy people...They're sensing that the system is broken," explains Littleton. "But it seems their answer to things is the confiscation of wealth...where [the Tea Party] advocates for legitimate and true free market systems rather than what we have right now."

For more on the constitutionality of the individual mandate, watch Reason.tv's "Wheat, Weed, and Obamacare," which U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson cited earlier this year in his ruling striking down the Affordable Care Act.

For more on Chris Littleton and his work with the Ohio Tea Party, watch Reason.tv's "The Tea Party vs. John Boehner."

Approximately 5 minutes.

Produced, shot and edited by Jim Epstein; additional camera, Joshua Swain.

Scrolldown for downloadable versions, and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel to receive automatic updates when new material goes live.

Want to Live Forever? Sonia Arrison Explains How In Her New Book

Wed, 19 Oct 2011 00:00:00 EDT

"Everyone has an interest in this," explains Sonia Arrison author of a new book 100 Plus: How the Coming Age of Longevity Will Change Everything, From Careers and Relationships to Family and Faith, "because everyone has an interest in living healthier, longer."

Arrison sat down with Reason.tv to talk about the technological innovations and regenerative medicine that will fuel the the next "longevity revolution." She explains what people need to expect and how regulatory reforms are needed to speed the innovations up so that "we will be able to repair ourselves."

Interview by Reason's Paul Feine. Shot by Alex Manning and edited by Sharif Matar.

About 9.30 minutes long.

Scroll down for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube channel for automatic notifications when new material goes live.

David Bernstein on Rehabilitating Lochner and the Freedom to Contract

Tue, 18 Oct 2011 00:00:00 EDT

“Either the Commerce Clause gives Congress a plenary power to regulate anything it pleases or it doesn’t; and let’s have that argument,” says George Mason University law professor David Bernstein.

Bernstein goes after progressive attempts to limit economic freedom and liberty of contract in his new book Rehabilitating Lochner: Defending Individual Rights against Progressive Reform, a history of the 1905 case Lochner v. New York. The decision nullified a state law regulating work hours for bakers and became the impetus for a 40-year period where American courts protected economic liberty.

A Lochner rehabilitation has not been easy, Bernstein admits. Many legal experts that see Lochner as on par with the infamous Dred Scott decision. The government's encroaching power under the Commerce Clause has also held the case for economic liberty back. But Bernstein remains hopeful and believes both liberals and conservatives have something to gain in reexamining Lochner's implications, which range from protecting the right to an abortion to striking down the health care act’s individual mandate.

Approximately 6.36 minutes.

Hosted by Nick Gillespie. Camera by Meredith Bragg and Joshua Swain; edited by Swain.

Scroll down for downloadable versions, and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel to receive immediate updates when new material goes live.

Peter Suderman Discusses Cigarette Labels and Insurance Exchanges on Freedom Watch

Thu, 18 Aug 2011 00:00:00 EDT

Reason Associate Editor Peter Suderman appeared on Freedom Watch to discuss the tobacco industry's law suit against the FDA over new branding mandates and funding for insurance exchanges. Air date: 8/17/2011.

Approximately 8.02 minutes.

Scroll down for HD, iPod and audio versions of this video and subscribe to Reason.tv's Youtube channel to receive automatic notification when new material goes live.

Grace-Marie Turner On Why Obamacare is Wrong for America

Mon, 15 Aug 2011 00:00:00 EDT

At FreedomFest in July, Reason's Nick Gillespie talked with Grace-Marie Turner of the Galen Institute about her new book "Why ObamaCare is Wrong for America: How the New Health Care Law Drives Up Costs, Puts Government in Charge of Your Decisions, and Threatens Your Constitutional Rights."

Shot by Zach Weissmueller and Jim Epstein. Edited by Sharif Matar. About 7 minutes.

Held each July in Las Vegas, FreedomFest is attended by around 2,000 limited-government enthusiasts and libertarians a year. Reason.tv spoke with over two dozen speakers and attendees and will be releasing interviews over the coming weeks.

Scroll down for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel to receive automatic notifications when new material goes live.

Matt Welch Discusses the Healthcare Mandate Burden on States and Tim Giethner with Judge Napolitano

Thu, 07 Jul 2011 00:00:00 EDT

Reason Editor in Chief Matt Welch appeared on Freedom Watch to discuss how some states are having trouble meeting the federal government's new healthcare laws and whether Tim Giethner will leave after a budget agreement in Congress. Air Date: July 6, 2011.

Approximately 7 minutes.

Scroll down for HD, iPod and audio versions of this video and subscribe to Reason.tv's Youtube channel to receive automatic notification when new material goes live.

Veronique de Rugy: The Facts about the Government's Medicare Cost Projections

Fri, 03 Jun 2011 00:00:00 EDT

Editor’s Note: Reason columnist and Mercatus Center economist Veronique de Rugy appears weekly on Bloomberg TV to separate economic fact from economic myth.

Myth: The government’s cost projections are reliable.

Fact: They are not. No matter what governmental body does the scoring, it is almost invariably unreliable.

In 1967 long-run forecasts estimated that Medicare would cost about $12 billion by 1990. In reality, it cost more than $98 billion that year. Today it costs $500 billion.

When it comes to the federal government, massive cost overruns are the rule, not the exception. The $800 billion cost of the war in Iraq dwarfs the $50-60 billion that Mitch Daniels, then director of the Office of Management and Budget, predicted at the outset. In light of these numbers it’s interesting to remember that Larry Lindsey, President George W. Bush’s economic advisor, was fired for projecting that the war could cost between 1 and 2 percent of GDP back in 2002 (roughly between $100 and $200 billion).

Strangely, lawmakers seem to never expect these extra costs even when the excesses take place under their own noses. The Capitol Hill Visitor Center, an ambitious three-floor underground facility, originally scheduled to open at the end of 2005, was delayed until 2008. The price tag exploded from an original estimate of $265 million in 2000 to a final cost of $621 million.

At the heart of the problem is the massive amount of budget gimmicks, the abuse of rosy scenarios, the emergency spending loopholes, and a lack of fiscal discipline by lawmakers who just can’t stop spending the taxpayers’ money.

This chart compares Congressional Budget Office long-term projections of the debt held by the public from 2010 with long-term projections calculated in 2007. In 2007, the CBO projected that the debt held by the public would surpass 60 percent in 2023. Note that this long-term projection incorporated policy changes that were deemed likely at the time. Using the same methodology last year, the CBO projected that the debt will exceed 60 percent of GDP by the end of 2010. In the three years between projections, the debt milestone has accelerated by 13 years. This unforeseen acceleration is worth careful consideration; as the government consumes more credit, less will be available to the private sector.

In other words, even even short-term economic projections are frequently unreliable—especially when the projections are done by the government.

The above chart shows what a more realistic path for Medicare spending may look like. It compares the long-term projections of Medicare costs under the current law (the 2011 Trustees Report) with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ Office of the Actuary’s alternative projections (2011 Trustees Report Alternative). The latter projections were released as a “best estimate” of future Medicare expenditures to address the “likely understatement of current-law projections.”

These projections primarily differ in their assumptions about the plausibility of drastic payment-rate cuts. If such cuts do not materialize, Medicare will cost tens of billions more each year than current law projects.

Furthermore, under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, physician payments are tied to a sustainable growth rate mechanism (SGR), which adjusts repayment rates in order to cap physician-related spending. Since 2001, physicians have been scheduled to receive at least a 5 percent reimbursement cut each year under SGR; and this cut has been overridden by Congress every year except 2002.

In 2012, physician payments are scheduled to decrease by 29.4 percent—an update which is extremely unlikely to occur. So while the Board of Trustees is legally bound to incorporate these cost savings into its projections, the Office of the Actuary has formed a more realistic baseline which incorporates increasing physician repayments into the total cost of Medicare.

Under the current-law baseline, Medicare spending is projected to grow from 3.99 percent of GDP in 2020 to 6.25 percent of GDP in 2080; under the alternative scenario, Medicare spending is projected to grow from 4.31 percent of GDP in 2020 to 10.36 percent of GDP in 2080. In nominal terms, this is a cost underestimation of $2.7 trillion dollars by the year 2080.

Contributing Editor Veronique de Rugy is a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

Matt Welch Talks Obamacare Switch to Electronic Medical Records

Fri, 06 May 2011 03:00:00 EDT

Reason Magazine Editor in Chief, Matt Welch appeared on Varney & Co. to discuss a mandate in President Obama's healthcare bill that would force doctors to switch to electronic medical records. Air date: May 5, 2011.

Approximately 5:30 minutes.

Scroll down for HD, iPod and audio versions of this video and subscribe to Reason.tv's Youtube channel to receive automatic notification when new material goes live.

Veronique de Rugy Tells the Truth About Health Care Reform and the Economy on Bloomberg

Fri, 15 Apr 2011 00:00:00 EDT

Editor’s Note: Reason columnist and Mercatus Center economist Veronique de Rugy appears weekly on Bloomberg TV to separate economic fact from economic myth.

Myth 1: Health care reform will reduce the deficit.

Fact 1: Health care reform will increase the deficit.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act includes many provisions that have nothing to do with health care: the CLASS act, a student loan overhaul, and many new taxes. These provisions don't change the health care system. They just raise money to pay for the new law. Strip them away and the law’s actual health care provisions don't lower the deficit—they increase it!

The chart below uses data from Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to clarify the fiscal consequences of health care reform.

As you can see, from 2012 to 2021, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the health care act will reduce deficits by $210 billion (note that this estimate differs from the widely cited $143 billion figure used during the lead-up to the passage of the act). During this same time period, however, the actual health care reform provisions of the law will increase deficits by $464 billion.

Of course, one should not evaluate the health care legislation on its fiscal impacts alone. In theory we should get some fiscal benefits. But the key question is how they net out. Still, no matter what you think about the benefits of the health care legislation, it is incorrect to claim that health care reform will save money. It won’t.

Myth 2: The U.S. health care system is a free-market system.

Fact 2: Roughly half of all U.S. health care is currently paid for by the government.

Even in the absence of the health care reform law, government programs including Medicare and Medicaid already fund almost half of American health care. Roughly a third of the remaining expenditures are funded by private insurers—mainly through subsidized and highly regulated employee plans. Not exactly a free market.

As this chart shows, state and federal entities make up over half of the health insurance market. Of course, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will only increase the share of government involvement in the health care market.

Myth 3: Medicare spending increases life expectancy for seniors. Reductions in Medicare spending will therefore reduce their life expectancy.

Fact 3: Increases in life expectancy for seniors are due to increased access to health care, not to Medicare.

While Medicare spending has certainly decreased seniors’ out of pocket health care expenses (by 1970, Medicare reduced out of pocket expenses by an estimated 40 percent relative to pre-Medicare levels), the program’s effect on mortality is much less clear.

This chart compares mortality rates by age during the periods immediately before and after Medicare’s implementation. As you can see, there is little difference in the observed mortality of men and women during these time periods. This observation is supported by the economic literature.

Economists who examine the effects of Medicare on mortality have found little evidence of a causal relationship, especially in recent years. For example, MIT’s Amy Finkelstein and Wellesley’s Robin McKnight used several empirical approaches and found no evidence that Medicare played a role in the substantial declines in elderly mortality that followed its implementation. Instead, they write, their evidence suggests that,

the explanation lies in the fact that, prior to Medicare, lack of legal access—rather than lack of insurance—was the main barrier to receiving hospital care when individuals had life threatening, treatable conditions.

Other economists, writing at the Chicago Federal Reserve, have found that Medicare did reduce mortality rates immediately following its implementation. But they also found that the effects of Medicare on mortality have been diminishing ever since. These researchers found that by the mid-1980s, there is no evidence of Medicare having any effect on mortality. As legal access to the health insurance market for the elderly has expanded over time, whatever effect Medicare once may have had on mortality has since disappeared.

Contributing Editor Veronique de Rugy is a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

Matt Welch Talks Obamacare PR on Freedom Watch

Mon, 21 Mar 2011 12:00:00 EDT

Reason Magazine Editor in Chief Matt Welch appeared on Freedom Watch With Judge Napolitano to discuss new PR tactics by the Obama administration to rally support for Obamacare.

Air Date: March 18, 2011.

Approximately 8 minutes

Scroll down for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube channel to receive automatic notification when new material goes live.

Nick Gillespie Discusses Obamacare and Corporate Welfare with Judge Napolitano

Thu, 13 Jan 2011 00:00:00 EST

Reason.tv editor-in-chief Nick Gillespie appeared on Jude Napolitano's Freedom Watch to discuss the continual corporate exemptions to the health care reform's mandates and whether Obama's relationship with Wall Street means he's pro-market or pro-big business. Air Date: January 7, 2010.

Approximately 9 minutes.

Scroll down for HD, iPod and audio versions of this video and subscribe to Reason.tv's Youtube channel to receive automatic notification when new material goes live.

Great Moments in Unintended Consequences

Wed, 08 Dec 2010 13:00:00 EST

Reason.tv presents Great Moments in Unintended Consequences!

All actions have unanticipated side effects, but government acting through regulation or legislation is particularly adept at creating disastrous unintended consequences.

Great Moments in Unintended Consequences takes a look at three instances of epic government facepalm: Osborne Reef, Corn Ethanol Subsidies, and a particular clause in ObamaCare that is already doing more harm than good.

Approximately 3 minutes.

Produced by Austin Bragg.

Scroll down for HD, iPod and audio versions of this video and subscribe to Reason.tv's Youtube channel to receive automatic notification when new material goes live.

Peter Suderman Debates Federal Regulations in Healthcare on CNBC

Mon, 01 Nov 2010 00:00:00 EDT

Associate Editor of Reason Magazine Peter Suderman appeared on CNBC to debate Judy Feder of The Center for American Progess on the new federal regulations in the healthcare industry. Suderman argues governemnt intervention will only increase health care costs and burdern taxpayers. Air date: 11/01/10.

Run time approximately 7.05 minutes.

Scroll down for HD, iPod and audio versions of this video and subscribe to Reason.tv's Youtube channel to receive automatic notification when new material goes live.

The Road to CanadaCare? Sally Pipes on The Truth About ObamaCare

Thu, 09 Sep 2010 09:50:00 EDT

Now that they've passed ObamaCare, can we see what's in it?

Sally Pipes, president and CEO of the Pacific Research Institute and author of The Truth About ObamaCare sits down with Ted Balaker to discuss what's really on the way courtesy of the recent health care overhaul: higher costs, decreased access to care, and the looming spectre of a single-payer system in America.

Pipes, who hails from Canada, worries that ObamaCare has set the U.S. on a path toward a Canadian-style system. She weighs in on if and how ObamaCare could be repealed and what should replace it.

Approximately six minutes.

Interview by Ted Balaker. Shot by Alex Manning and Paul Detrick. Edited by Austin Bragg.

Scroll down for HD, iPod, and audio versions of this and all our videos, and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube channel to receive automatic notification when new material goes live.

Judge Rules ObamaCare Unconstitutional, Cites Reason.tv

Wed, 25 Aug 2010 10:00:00 EDT

*Update: U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson ruled that because the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act's individual mandate to purchase health insurance is unconstitutional, the entire law "must be declared void." Judge Vinson cites this Reason.tv video on page 47 of his decision.

More from Peter Suderman here: http://reason.com/blog/2011/01/31/judge-individual-mandate-uncon

Wheat, Weed, and ObamaCare: How the Commerce Clause Made Congress All-Powerful

The Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power to "regulate commerce . . . among the several States," and for more than 100 years federal lawmakers invoked it for a very narrow purpose—to prevent states from imposing trade barriers on each other. But today members of Congress act as if it gives them the authority to do just about anything—including forcing you to eat your vegetables.

During her Supreme Court confirmation hearings, Elena Kagan seemed to accept that the Commerce Clause could, in theory, give Congress the power to dictate what Americans eat. And what about ObamaCare's "individual mandate," which forces Americans to purchase health insurance? ObamaCare opponents are lining up to challenge its constitutionality, but supporters say it's justified—you guessed it—under the Commerce Clause.

How did a clause intended as a restriction on states wind up giving Congress a green light to regulate noncommercial, local, and purely private behavior? How will ObamaCare stand up against the legal challenges brought by the states? Legal titans John Eastman (Chapman University Law Professor) and Erwin Chemerinsky (Founding Dean, University of California, Irvine School of Law) slug it out to to determine whether or not Congress has been abusing the commerce clause.

Produced by Austin Bragg. Approximately 10 minutes.

Scroll down for HD, iPod, and audio versions of all our videos and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube channel to receive automatic notification when new material goes live.

Bracing for ObamaCare: Shirley Svorny on the Economics of Healthcare Regulation

Mon, 16 Aug 2010 03:30:00 EDT

ObamaCare expands coverage to millions of Americans, but, warns Professor Shirley Svorny, without stronger measures to expand the supply of healthcare providers and contain costs, we can expect a physician shortage and soaring premiums.

The California State University, Northridge economist suggests options for lowering costs and dismantling state-level regulations that restrain competition and innovation.

Approximately five minutes.

Interview by Paul Detrick. Shot by Alex Manning and Detrick. Edited by Austin Bragg.

Scroll down for HD, iPod, and audio versions of this and all our videos, and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube channel to receive automatic notification when new material goes live.

Union Jobs vs. Children's Lives: Which side are you on?

Wed, 11 Aug 2010 06:00:00 EDT

Congress has passed a $26 billion aid package that is intended to save the jobs of thousands of teachers, nurses, and other public-sector employees. To critics who call the measure a "special interest" bill, President Barack Obama says , "I suppose if America's children and the safety of our communities are your special interest, then it is a special interest bill."

In politics everyone claims to be on the side of the children, but who really is? Pat DeLorenzo is a parent whose daughter suffers from epilepsy. Like roughly 10,000 other epileptic schoolchildren in California, eight-year-old Gianna suffers from the type of prolonged seizures that, without immediate attention, can result in brain damage or death. After witnessing the response of teachers and school nurses to one of his daughter's life-threatening seizures, Pat DeLorenzo now believes that teachers and nurses care more about protecting union jobs than saving epileptic children.

DeLorenzo feared the worst when he receive a call from his daughter's school, informing him that she had suffered a seizure. Gianna survived that day, but DeLorenzo was outraged that school administrators had not given his daughter Diastat, a drug that stops seizures before they do permanent harm and is FDA-approved for use by laypeople. Today many schoolchildren must wait until an ambulance brings them to a hospital before they receive Diastat. That's much too long, says DeLorenzo who supports, SB 1051, a California bill that would allow trained non-medical volunteers to administer Diastat at schools.

Epilepsy advocates like the Epilepsy Foundation and physicians groups like the California Medical Association have lined up to support the bill. Unions representing teachers, nurses, and other public employees have lined up in opposition, claiming the bill would put children in danger. Their solution: hire more school nurses.

"The unions are not on the side of the kids," says DeLorenzo who believes unions are more interested in expanding their ranks than protecting epileptic children.

"It's exactly the opposite," says Gayle McClean, southern section president of the California School Nurses Organization and a member of the California Teachers Association. "We care deeply for children and we want them to receive the most appropriate care and that means they need a licensed medical person caring for them."

Sacramento lawmakers sided with unions and have refused to bring the bill up for a vote. The bill will officially expire on August 31.

"Union Jobs vs. Children's Lives" is written and produced by Ted Balaker. Field Producers: Paul Detrick and Zach Weissmueller; Additional Camera: Austin Bragg, Production Associate: Sam Corcos.

Approximately 7.30 minutes.

Scroll down for HD, iPod, and audio versions of this and all our videos and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel to receive automatic notification when new material goes live.

Do Vaccines Cause Autism?

Thu, 06 May 2010 06:30:00 EDT

It's not surprising that so many parents are so worried about autism. After all, the disorder strikes about one out of every 115 kids, its prevalence seems to be growing, and its cause or causes remain mysterious.

A 1998 article published in the British medical journal The Lancet generated enormous impact by proposing a link between autism and childhood vaccines. Since then, celebrity activists like Jenny McCarthy have argued that common shots like the measles, mumps, and rubellla vaccine (MMR) trigger autism. Countless media stories have covered the alleged link.

Some parents take to the streets to protest the federal government's vaccine policy and thousands more take the issue to court. Many others, like Kelly Green, who runs AutismHwy and is the mother of an autistic child, feel overwhelmed by the information flooding in from both sides of the debate. Jim Moody, of the think tank Safe Minds, blames the federal government for not being honest about the threat and failing to provide reliable information on the matter. But researchers like UC Santa Barbara's Lynn Koegel say the evidence is overwhelming that vaccines do not cause autism.

Recently, the debate took another turn when The Lancet retracted the 1998 article that did so much to spark the controversy. Will the retraction finally allay parents' worries or will some continue to resist vaccinations?

"Do Vaccines Cause Autism?" is written and produced by Ted Balaker, who also hosts. Producer: Hawk Jensen; Associate Producer: Paul Detrick; Camera: Dan Hayes, Hawk Jensen, and Alex Manning. Approximately 5.50 minutes.

Scroll down for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube channel to receive automatic notification when new material goes live.

Katherine Mangu-Ward Discusses the Backlash to Healthcare Reform on Russia Today

Tue, 30 Mar 2010 14:00:00 EDT

On March 25, 2010, Reason Senior Editor Katherine Mangu-Ward joined a panel to discuss the backlash against the passage of the health care bill on Russia Today's "The Alyona Show."

Approximately 15:27 minutes.

Scroll down for downloadable iPod and audio versions.

Subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel and receive automatic notifications when new material goes live.

3 Reasons Healthcare Legislation Won't Reduce the Deficit

Wed, 24 Mar 2010 08:30:00 EDT

One of the main selling points of health care reform was that it would cut the federal deficit by a supposed $143 billion over the next decade and a trillion-plus dollars in the one after that.

But not only will the legislation not cut one thin dime from the deficit, it will also certainly cost far more than the $940 billion in new spending already on the table for at least three reasons.

These include:

1. Legislative Trickery. Congressional Democrats have pledged support for "the doc fix," a permanent upward adjustment to the rates at which Medicare providers are reimbursed. As Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said, "We have made a commitment to do this. This is very important." The cost of the "doc fix"? Some $247 billion over the next 10 years, wiping out any deficit reduction from health care reform.

2. Higher Premiums. In 2006, Massachusetts passed health care reform very similar to what President Obama just signed. The result? The Bay State now has the highest premiums in the country and cost about 33 percent more than expected.

3. Bad Accounting. The government is terrible at predicting how much programs will cost, especially when it comes to medical care. Initial 1960s' projections of Medicare's costs in 1990 had the program costing about $12 billion; the actual result was almost 10 times that amount. As a Joint Economic Committee report notes, "Major health care proposals have almost always cost more...than the highest cost estimates published while the legislation was pending."

Approximately 2.19 minutes. Written and produced by Meredith Bragg, Dan Hayes, and Nick Gillespie, who also hosts.

Read more about health care reform and its costs here.

Subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube channel and receive automatic notification when new videos go live.

Anthony Randazzo on RT's The Alyona Show Discusses States' Rights

Tue, 23 Mar 2010 12:00:00 EDT

On March 18, 2010, The Reason Foundation's Director of Economic Research Anthony Randazzo joins a panel to discuss healthcare reform and the latest conflict between the Federal government and States rights, on Russia Today's "The Alyona Show".

Approx. 10 minutes.

Subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel and receive automatic notifications when new material goes live.

Nick Gillespie Discusses Pet vs. Human Hospitals on Stossel

Mon, 22 Mar 2010 07:00:00 EDT

On February 8, 2010, Reason.tv's Nick Gillespie talked with John Stossel on Fox News about state regulations, healthcare reform, and pet hospitals.

Approximately 5 minutes.

Watch the Reason.tv video, Treat Me Like a Dog, on which this segment was based.

Subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel and receive automatic notifications when new material goes live.

And come back to Reason.tv March 15 through March 19 for the debut of Reason Saves Cleveland With Drew Carey: How to fix the "Mistake on The Lake" and other once-great American cities, an original six-part documentary series.

Virginia Postrel: How to Reform Health Care Without Killing Innovation

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:54:00 EST

Former Reason magazine Editor in Chief Virginia Postrel has seen the strengths and the shortcomings of the American health care system both as a kidney donor and a breast cancer survivor.

She argues that individuals should be free to sell their organs, and that encouraging organ markets may be the best way to save the lives of the more than 100,000 Americans currently awaiting transplants. A 2009 article Postrel wrote for the Atlantic Monthly highlights her experience with the ultra-expensive wonder drug, Herceptin, and the perils of centrally controlling health care costs.

Reason.tv's Ted Balaker sat down with Postrel to discuss organ markets, wonder drugs, and how to reform health care without squashing innovation.

Interview by Ted Balaker. Shot by Hawk Jensen and Paul Detrick. Edited by Paul Detrick. Music: "Something New" by Very Large Array (Magnatune Records).

Approximately nine-and-a-half minutes. Scroll down for embed code and downloadable versions.

To see Reason.tv's health care play-list, go here.

Postrel, the editor in chief of the blog Deep Glamour, talks to Reason.tv about politics, style, and voter expectations here.

Subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel and receive automatic notifications when new material goes live.

Treat Me Like a Dog

Thu, 25 Feb 2010 00:00:00 EST

When it comes to health care, who gets treated better—man or man's best friend? Of course, it's hard to make an apples-to-apples comparison when you're comparing four-legged patients to people, and there are many ways in which human care tops pet care. But pet owners told Reason.tv there are some ways where it would be a step up to be treated like a dog.

Pet owners like the convenience of animal care; they also like the client-focused atmosphere. "I think one of the things that human health care can learn from veterinary medicine is the client service side of things, the relationship side of things," says Dr. Peter Weinstein, executive director of the Southern California Veterinary Medical Association. Various reasons explain why people often find animal care so pleasant, says Weinstein. One reason—animal care workers love what they do. Another reason—competition.

Weinstein notes that vets work hard to differentiate themselves from their competitors because "there are a large number of vet hospitals, many located very closely to one another." And vets know even more competitors could emerge because less red tape makes it easier to open an animal hospital. Weinstein recalls opening his clinic, which offered everything from X-rays to operations: "I believe it was 12 weeks from the time I signed the lease to the time I saw my first client. Try doing that with human health care."

It would take at least 20 times as long to open a comparable human hospital in California. It can take even longer in the 34 states with "certificate of need" (CON) laws, where state agencies—not consumers—decide how many hospitals there should be. These laws even allow existing hospitals to hold up plans for new hospitals. "The existing hospitals go in front of these government agencies and say, 'we don't need any competitors; we're taking fine care of the people,'" explains Reason magazine's Ronald Bailey. Recently, certificate of need—often called CON law—provoked a showdown in Tennessee where frustrated residents resorted to protests and petition drives to pressure the state to green-light a new hospital.

Weinstein is happy veterinarians don't have to deal with anti-competitive CON laws, "In veterinary medicine we could have two practices right next to each other and then it's the consumer deciding to whom they want to go." Consumer choice and competition—maybe we could use more of that in human health care.

"Treat Me Like a Dog" is written and produced by Ted Balaker, who also hosts. The director of photography is Alex Manning, the field producer is Paul Detrick and the animations were done by Hawk Jensen.

Approximately six minutes. Scroll down for embed code and downloadable versions.

To see Reason.tv's health care play-list, go here.

To sign up for Reason.tv's YouTube page, go here.

Don't Get Hurt

Tue, 16 Feb 2010 08:00:00 EST

What if you were injured and developed severe pain that wouldn't go away? Would your government let you take the kind of pain medication you need? If federal officials follow the recommendation of a Food and Drug Administration panel, many of the most effective prescription painkillers—including Vicodin, Percocet, and countless generics—would be banned.

Scott Gardner says that kind of a move would be "intensely cruel."

"I took Vicodin for three years," says Gardner. "I needed it. It got me through a very tough period of my life." The tough period began after a cycling accident shattered the left side of his body. After eight surgeries and countless hours of physical therapy, Gardner's once active life is now filled with limitations. He suffers from chronic pain that prevents him from sleeping more than a few hours at a time, and yet his pain today is nothing compared to the agonizing days and months following his accident.

"When there's nothing but pain, there's no reason to live," says Gardner. "There were times where the only way I could stay sane and civil was because I could take painkillers."

The fear of addiction and abuse already makes many suspicious of pain medication. Media reports about celebrities like Rush Limbaugh or Matthew Perry suggest that it's common for people to become addicted to medications they once took for legitimate medical conditions. And countless public service announcements remind us of the dangers of prescription drug abuse.

Now the old fear of prescription drug abuse takes a new twist. The FDA panel is targeting drugs like Vicodin and Percocet because they contain acetaminophen, a popular painkiller also found in many over-the-counter drugs. Panel members warn that some Americans ingest too much acetaminophen, and overdoses can lead to liver damage, even death.

But maybe the FDA panel isn't putting this threat into context. After all, mundane threats like falling down stairs claim more lives than acetaminophen overdoses. And it turns out the more common fear—that patients will become addicted to prescription drugs—is also overblown. In fact, the barrage of warnings we hear about prescription drugs obscures an important point—people saddled with severe chronic pain need these painkillers.

Says Gardner, "I think people who haven't dealt with pain don't really know what it's like."

"Don't Get Hurt" is written and produced by Ted Balaker, who also hosts. The director of photography is Alex Manning, the field producer is Paul Detrick and the animation in the piece is from Hawk Jensen.

Approximately five minutes. Scroll down for downloadable versions.

To watch this video on Reason.tv's YouTube channel, go here. If you subscribe to the channel, you can also get automatic notifications when new videos go live.

For Reason.com's coverage of "opiophobia," or overblown fears by the government about prescription painkillers, go here.

Real World DC (Health Care Remix)

Fri, 08 Jan 2010 00:00:00 EST

Coming this winter to C-SPAN:

The true story... of 535 politicians...picked to live in two houses...work together and their lives taped...to find out what happens...when Congress stops being polite...and starts secret, detailed negotiations on a sweeping, transformative health care reform bill...This is the real Real World DC.

Featuring Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Charles Rangel, Robert Byrd, Barney Frank, Max Baucus...and billions of taxpayer dollars.

Written and produced by Meredith Bragg.

Don't Break What's Working in Health Care

Tue, 22 Dec 2009 10:00:00 EST

When it comes to health insurance reform, California State University, Northridge economist Glen Whitman emphasizes, "We have to make sure we don't just fix the parts that are broken. We also have to make sure we don't actually break the parts that are working very well. And it turns out that one of the areas that America is really great at is innovation."

Reason.tv's Ted Balaker sat down with Whitman to discuss his new Cato Institute policy analysis, coauthored with Raymond Raad, "Bending the Productivity Curve: Why America Leads the World in Medical Innovation."

Whether it's Nobel laureates in medical fields or the most important recent medical innovations, Whitman and Raad find that the U.S. has contributed more than any other nation, and in some cases, more than all nations combined. Whitman cites some key factors that account for America's innovative ways, and warns that if America adopts a more centrally planned health system we may not only innovate less but we might not know what innovations we're missing.

Interview shot by Alex Manning and Hawk Jensen; it was edited by Manning. Approximately 10 minutes.

Subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube channel here.

Related video: "Would ObamaCare Kill Medical Innovation?"

ObamaCare and Mission Creep

Mon, 21 Dec 2009 09:02:00 EST

From the war in Iraq to the space station, government programs almost always end up costing much more than they were supposed to. They also usually end up doing more than they were supposed to. Would ObamaCare be any different?

Some say ObamaCare would lead to death panels, even euthanasia classes. Now supporters of President Obama's health care overhaul are fighting back against such charges. And the president himself warns: "If you misrepresent what's in this plan, we will call you out."

But you don't have to side with those who warn of euthanasia classes to recognize that government programs often end up doing all kinds of things that weren't in politicians' original plans. Call it mission creep. Politicians pass a program, and then the scope of the program grows and changes.

It's happened with everything from state-level health insurance plans to the Troubled Asset Relief Program. TARP's original mission was spelled out in its name—the government would purchase troubled assets from financial institutions. However, just over a year later TARP's mission has exploded, and billions in TARP funds have gone to bail out General Motors, Chrysler, and struggling homeowners. TARP money may even fund another stimulus.

"The Best Laid Plans of ObamaCare" is written and produced by Ted Balaker, and hosted by Nick Gillespie. Director of Photography: Alex Manning; Associate Producer: Paul Detrick

Approximately 2.30 minutes.

What this video at Reason.tv's YouTube Channel.

Watch the companion video, "Would ObamaCare Cover Sticker-Shock Treatment?."

Matt Welch on C-SPAN's Washington Journal, December 12, 2009

Thu, 17 Dec 2009 12:00:00 EST

On Saturday, December 12, 2009, Reason magazine Editor in Chief Matt Welch appeared on C-SPAN's Washington Journal to discuss his controversial article, "Why I Prefer French Health Care," from the January 2009 issue.

Approximately 30 minutes. Scroll down for embed code and downloadable versions.

A True Tale of Canadian Health Care

Tue, 08 Dec 2009 05:00:00 EST

Many advocates of health-care reform are admirers of Canada's state-run, no-opt-out, single-payer system. Indeed, in 2003, President Barack Obama voiced enthusiasm for such a health-care program.

Proponents of Canadian-style health care should meet Cheryl Baxter, a Canadian citizen who waited years for hip-replacement surgery, only to be told that her operation would not happen any time soon. Instead of waiting, Baxter did what an increasing number of Canadians are doing: She flew to a clinic in the United States, paid out of pocket, and had a life-altering surgery in a matter of weeks rather than years.

Baxter's experience doesn't just throw damning light on Canadian health care. The sort of clinic she went to in Oklahoma suggests a different way of delivering health care in the United States, too: A simple fee-for-service model in which providers openly advertise their prices, service, and reputation. Rather than a frustrating, complicated mess of intermediaries such as employers and insurance companies, U.S. health-care reformers should think about bringing medicine into line with the same dynamics that help deliver great service at great prices throughout most other parts of the economy.

While Canadian health care is certainly cheaper than its U.S. counterpart (health care spending in Canada is about 10 percent of GDP versus 16 percent in the United States), it is not necessarily better or more equitable. As a recent National Bureau of Economic Research comparison concluded, "Americans are more likely to report that they are fully satisfied with the health services they have received and to rank the quality of care as excellent." Not only do Americans have far greater access to basic diagnostic tools ranging from mammograms to CT scans, the researchers found "the health-income gradient is actually more prominent in Canada than in the U.S." That is, wealthy Canadians receive far better care compared to low-income Canadians than rich Americans versus poor Americans.

"A True Tale of Canadian Health Care" was produced by Dan Hayes and Peter Suderman. Interviews were filmed by Alex Manning and the segment is hosted and scripted by Nick Gillespie. Approximately 5.11 minutes.

Reason.tv would like to thank the Independence Institute for arranging and underwriting travel to Canada for Suderman and Manning.

For other Reason.tv videos on health care, go here.

How to Fix Health Care

Wed, 02 Dec 2009 07:00:00 EST

Make no mistake about it. Health care reform is coming. But what's the best way to fix our health care system, which is an inefficient, complicated mess of private actors, third-party payers, public subsidies, and innumerable state and federal regulations? Should we place our faith in the government or in the free market?

ObamaCare supporters argue that the answer lies in more government—more subsidies, more regulations, a law mandating individuals buy health-insurance coverage and, of course, more taxes to pay for it all.

The alternative is to base reforms on what works in the other five-sixths of the U.S. economy, where choice and competition increase quality and drive down prices over time.

Can a market-based health care system work? We can begin to answer this question by looking at Lasik, a medical procedure that's not covered by health insurance. And has gotten better—and cheaper—over time.

"How to Fix Health Care" proposes three simple reforms that will put us on a path to a health-care system that's better, more affordable, and more accessible. And get this—these market-based reforms can be implemented without creating new government programs or raising taxes.

Approximately 8.30 minutes. Produced by Paul Feine and Meredith Bragg. Hosted by Nick Gillespie.

For downloadable versions of this video, scroll down. To watch this video at Reason.tv's YouTube channel, go here.

Would ObamaCare Kill Medical Innovation?

Mon, 23 Nov 2009 06:00:00 EST

As health care reform inches closer to reality, a massively important question becomes even more pressing: Will ObamaCare kill the sorts of medical innovation that makes the United States the leader in bringing new treatments, technology, and procedures to market?

"America is the only industrialized nation that doesn't have a national health plan," says Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.), former Gov. Howard Dean (D-Vt.), and countless others who want the United States government to guarantee health coverage to all.

Protesters at a recent rally in downtown Los Angeles demanded universal coverage. They told Reason.tv that America is a cruel land where profits come before people.

"It's disgusting!" said one woman. "There should be no profits in health care!" What about those who argue that profits drive medical innovation? "I think that's kind of sick," declared another protester, who wants the U.S. to be more like Canada, where government policy keeps drug prices, and drug company profits, lower than in America.

Many regard the profit motive as cruel, but might it actually produce compassionate results? After all, America has generated vastly more medical innovations than other nations. Included in the long list is the innovation that saved the life of Dave Christensen, construction supervisor, husband, and father. After being diagnosed with cancer, Christensen was lucky enough to be given a then-experimental drug that probably wouldn't have been developed or brought to market in any other country in the world.

If America follows the lead of the rest of the world and clamps down on profits in health care, who will make tomorrow's wonder drugs?

"Drug companies that take big risks may make big profits," says Reason.tv's Nick Gillespie, who hosts the video. "But I say, Good for them. If they're saving lives, I hope they make a killing."

"Would ObamaCare Kill Medical Innovation?" runs about seven minutes. Producer-Writer: Ted Balaker; Producer: Hawk Jensen; Director of Photography: Alex Manning; Associate Producer: Paul Detrick.

Special thanks to the Independence Institute for arranging and underwriting travel to Canada.

Scroll down for embed code and downloadable versions.

To subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube channel, go here.

Natural Food Fight: Whole Foods and Health Care

Thu, 15 Oct 2009 12:12:00 EDT

In August, Whole Foods CEO John Mackey argued in the pages of the Wall Street Journal that the solution to America's health care crisis was to be found in "less government control and more individual empowerment." His own company's unique health care plan, Mackey wrote, covers 90 percent of employees, costs less than health insurance plans, aned provides a "very high degree of worker satisfaction." But for the sin of not supporting a government take over of health care, labor unions and left-wing activists called for a boycott of Whole Foods, claiming that Mackey's solutions were unworkable and his employees were unhappy.

Reason.tv talked to protesters, Mackey, and employees about "the Whole Foods alternative to ObamaCare."

Produced by Michael C. Moynihan and Dan Hayes. Edited by Dan Hayes. Approximately 5 minutes. (Full disclosure: Mackey has contributed to Reason Foundation, the nonprofit that publishes this website.)

John Mackey's Conscious Capitalism: Full Interview Version

Wed, 14 Oct 2009 11:00:00 EDT

Note: This is the full version of an hour-long conversation with Mackey. For an abridged, five-minute version, go here.

When he started his first organic food store in Austin, Texas in 1978, Whole Foods Market CEO and co-founder John Mackey had no idea that he would eventually usher in not just a revolution in how we shop but what we buy. If you dig being able to buy dozens of types of once-exotic apples, or cheese, or wine, or soaps, or countless other items, you can thank Mackey in part for helping to create cathedrals of commerce that have vastly enriched our day-to-day lives and vastly expanded our palates. (Full disclosure: Mackey has contributed to Reason Foundation, the nonprofit that publishes this website.)

In August, Mackey became one of the most controversial businessmen in America when he penned an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal outlining his company's free-market-oriented health care system and offering eight concrete reforms that would reduce costs and improve access. Noting that health care is not "a right" as that term is properly understood, Mackey forcefully argued that increasing government intervention into health care is precisely the wrong thing to do: "The last thing our country needs is a massive new health-care entitlement that will create hundreds of billions of dollars of new unfunded deficits and move us much closer to a government takeover of our health-care system. Instead, we should be trying to achieve reforms by moving in the opposite direction—toward less government control and more individual empowerment."

The response from the left to Mackey's op-ed was swift: Advocates of single-payer health care, union activists, and others called for protests at and boycotts of Whole Foods, despite the fact that the company provides affordable and well-regarded coverage to its employees.

As a cutting-edge entrepreneur who is comfortable quoting astrological signs and Ludwig von Mises, who practices veganism and sells some of the best meat in America, and who chases profits and is an outspoken advocate of charitable giving, Mackey confounds conventional political categories. As an advocate of what he calls "conscious capitalism," Mackey is that rarest of businessman: an articulate and passionate defender of free enterprise and free individuals.

In late September, Mackey sat down with Reason's Matt Welch and Nick Gillespie to talk about health care reform, corporate social responsibility (on which Mackey has written for Reason), why government interventions rarely achieve their goals, and how Mackey came to his unstinting belief in free markets.

Approximately five minutes. Shot by Dan Hayes and Meredith Bragg. Edited by Meredith Bragg.

This is the full version of an hour-long conversation with Mackey. For an abridged, five-minute version, go here or click below.

John Mackey's Conscious Capitalism: Abridged Version

Wed, 14 Oct 2009 11:00:00 EDT

Approximately five minutes. Shot by Dan Hayes and Meredith Bragg. Edited by Meredith Bragg.

This is an abridged version of an hour-long conversation with Mackey. For the full interview and downloadable versions, go here or click below.

Nick Gillespie on Fox News' Freedom Watch with Judge Napolitano

Fri, 18 Sep 2009 11:00:00 EDT

On Wednesday, September 9, Reason.tv's Nick Gillespie appeared on Fox News' Freedom Watch with Judge Andrew Napolitano (read his Reason archive here and watch his great talk from Reason in DC here).

Among the topics: Why Congress treats the Constitution like a pair of stretch pants, the real reasons health care reform is unpopular, and the power of dissent in a free society.

Approximately 12 minutes. Edited by Dan Hayes. Scroll down for downloadable versions and embed code.

Reason.tv on Health Care: Get Some!

Thu, 10 Sep 2009 06:00:00 EDT

As President Barack Obama "aims to take control of health care debate" via his big speech last night, ponder these offerings on the subject from Reason.tv. As the public option goes under the knife and polls keep plummeting, these are nothing less than essential viewing.

How to Fix America's Health Insurance Crisis: Get Some!

What if Government Ran Health Care?

Would ObamaCare Cover Sticker-Shock Treatment?

Obama to Citizens on Health Care: Send in All Fishy Emails!

Reason mag on health care.

No American Should Have to Choose Between Health Insurance and Getting Drunk

Thu, 10 Sep 2009 00:00:00 EDT

President Obama's prime-time health insurance speech underscored an important point: No American should have to choose between health insurance and paying rent, between health insurance and getting groceries--or getting drunk, getting designer jeans, or protein powder.

We hear so much about hardworking Americans who need health insurance, but what about the rest of us? Millions of uninsured Americans could afford health insurance, but it would mean giving up some really cool stuff. Support President Obama's plan to cover all Americans, because no American should have to choose between health insurance and protein powder.

Approximately 1.10 minutes. "Tough Choices" is written and produced by Ted Balaker. Director of Photography is Alex Manning.

For more information on the uninsured, go here.

What if Government Ran Healthcare? (Sprint Ad Remix)

Fri, 26 Jun 2009 06:00:00 EDT

As the debate over health care reform gets underway, Reason.tv asks, What if government ran health care?

Approximately one minute. Produced by Meredith Bragg, Austin Bragg, and Nick Gillespie.

128 Days Later: It Can Always Get Worse

Wed, 27 May 2009 11:00:00 EDT

For all the talk about President Barack Obama's historic first 100 days in office, too little attention has been paid to what could happen next...

Now, from the horror masters behind The Auto Bailout, The Stimulus Package, and White House Poetry Night comes a story of true terror...

128 Days Later: It Can Always Get Worse.

Written and produced by Meredith Bragg, with Nick Gillespie. From a concept suggested by Katie Hooks and Jeff Winkler.

To embed this video on your site and subscribe to Reason.tv&'s YouTube channel, go here.

Grover Norquist: Leave Us Alone Already!

Fri, 02 May 2008 00:00:00 EDT

Americans for Tax Reform honcho Grover Norquist recently sat down with reason.tv's Nick Gillespie for a 45-minute conversation about Norquist's new book Leave Us Alone: Getting the Government's Hands of Our Guns, Our Money, Our Lives.

From the book's description at Amazon:

The modern Republican party is a coalition of groups and tendencies created during the political life of Ronald Reagan, based on principle rather than region and history. The new political movement that now controls much of the Republican party is one of Americans who simply wish to be left alone by the government. They are not asking the government for others' money, time, or attention. Rather, they want to be free to own a gun, homeschool their children, pray, invest their money, and control their own destiny.
They are the Leave Us Alone coalition, at the heart of the center-right, and Grover Norquist argues that it will grow in power and size during the next generation. Directly opposed to this coalition is the descriptively titled Takings Coalition, which is at the heart of the tax-and-spend left, and they will battle for control of America's future over the next fifty years. It is increasingly important to better understand these coalitions than it is the Republican or Democratic parties themselves.
In a compelling and powerful narrative, Norquist describes the two competing coalitions in American politics, how they are organized, what makes them stronger or weaker. What each can achieve and what they cannot do. And how you may fit into the contest as well as gain a deeper understanding of American politics—where it's been, where it is and particularly where it will go—through a series of eye-opening economic, demographic, and political trends that will shape these coalitions in the years to come.

In this wide-ranging, in-depth discussion, Norquist talks about splits among libertarians and conservatives, the many failures of the Bush administration and the GOP Congress, his trouble with Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, the urgent need for reform in Social Security, health care, and education, and much, much more.

Organ Transplants

Tue, 18 Mar 2008 03:00:00 EDT

When we go to the doctor’s office for a checkup, most of us get annoyed if we have to thumb through old waiting-room magazines for a half-hour. Yet many people wait much longer for something much more important.

Sally Satel, a researcher at The American Enterprise Institute, waited for new life in the form of a kidney transplant, until an unexpected someone stepped forward. Since giving Sally her right kidney, Virginia Postrel, former editor of Reason, has thought a lot about how to increase the supply of kidneys for people like Christina Deleon. Like 75,000 other Americans, Christina has no living donor and has no choice but to endure dialysis and wait—she’s been on the list since 2003.

Postrel and UCLA’s Dr. Gabriel Danovitch take on some common misconceptions about kidney donation, but they disagree sharply on the most controversial proposal—paying people to donate kidneys.

Each year more than 3,000 Americans—a figure comparable to the death tolls from the 9/11 attacks—die waiting for kidneys. Is it time to legalize the sale of kidneys?

Drew Carey investigates what could be done to end the wait for people like Christina, and give them the freedom they deserve.

Is Single-Payer Health Care a Lemon?

gillespie@reason.com (Nick Gillespie) — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 11:40:00 EST

Interesting take on single-payer health care from Stuart Browning:

The Lemon demonstrates how single-payer health care systems have a lot in common with the failed economic systems of Soviet-era eastern Europe.
Written, Directed, Produced, Edited and Narrated By:
Stuart Browning (about)
About the Video:
The Lemon is part of the Free Market Cure Video Series created by filmmaker Stuart Browning to inform Americans about the dangers of collectivized medicine and the benefits of free markets in health care.
The filmmaker has received no funding from the health insurance industry or the health care industry.

More info here.