The Agenda

Is Obamacare Workable?

I wrote my latest column on how wishful thinking is shaping the health reform debate, which I compare to the wishful thinking of pro-war conservatives like myself who backed the invasion of Iraq without giving due consideration to the challenges involved in stabilizing a fractious, war-ravaged, multi-ethnic society. The comparison is counter-intuitive, but I think it’s pretty apt. For example, many liberal hawks who turned against the war insisted that while the idea of invading Iraq was sound, the implementation was a disaster. Many on the anti-war left note that these problems of implementation were predictable long before the invasion actually took place. It turns out that there are some implementation landmines in the health reform proposals as well.   

For example, can the federal government actually implement the sliding-scale subsidies that are at the heart of both the House health bill and the Senate bill currently under consideration? Eugene Steuerle, a centrist based at the non-partisan Urban Institute, is far from an anti-government zealot. Yet he raises a number of difficult questions in his latest column.

Under Congress’s current plan, families and households would receive subsidies pegged to their income, marital status, number of children, and cost of insurance. To determine your subsidy in 2016 on the basis of your 2016 income, however, is pretty hard since you haven’t yet earned it. The idea is to rely on your tax returns—not some onerous welfare-type application. But your 2015 returns often aren’t filed until April 2016. So Congress has decided that your 2014 income tax return is the go-to source for info on your income- and family-status eligibility in 2016.

Furthermore, Steuerle goes on to explain, roughly one-third of workers experience some kind of employment disruption, whether it’s the loss of a job or a decision to take paternity leave, etc. The legislative proposals envision an appeals process designed to adjust subsidies in response to these income shocks. But of course this will require elaborate and expensive measures to minimize fraud and abuse. Steuerle cites the EITC as a cautionary example.

In the tax system, the earned income tax credit is usually paid out after the end of the year based on last year’s income. Attempts to pay it during the year have floundered largely because few know before December 31 what their total annual income will be. Yet, significant errors creep in, despite an elaborate system of reporting wages on W-2 forms and interest and dividends on 1099 forms. For instance, the net income of many self-employed—consider household workers paid in cash—is underreported by 30 percent or more.

To minimize these distorting effects, Steuerle calls for a flatter monthly credit that can be taxed away for richer recipients and supplemented by safety net programs like Medicaid for poorer recipients.

I also highly recommend an earlier Steuerle column on the unequal treatment of small vs. large employers and families in the insurance exchange vs. those receiving coverage from their employers. I should add that none of Steuerle’s columns make the case against moving towards universal health coverage. My sense is that he’d favor more expensive measures that are fully-funded and transparent. He objects not to the goals of the Democratic reform proposals so much as the disregard for thorny questions of equity and implementation.

Reihan Salam — Reihan Salam is executive editor of National Review and a National Review Institute policy fellow.

Most Popular

National Security & Defense

So Long to the Iran Deal

Almost immediately after the news broke that President Trump intends to replace Secretary of State Rex Tillerson with CIA director Mike Pompeo, media figures speculated that the decision was about Russia. The argument went like this: Tillerson was fired because he had recently criticized the Russian government ... Read More
Economy & Business

The Swamp: Navarro Nucor Edition

The Wall Street Journal has a story today about the ties between President Trump's trade adviser, Peter Navarro, and the biggest steel company in the U.S. -- Nucor Corp. It is particularly interesting in light of the stiff steel tariffs successfully pushed by Navarro, which he championed ever since he joined the ... Read More


EMPIRICAL   As I can fathom neither endlessness nor the miracle work of deities, I hypothesize, assume, and guess.   The fact that I love you and you love me is all I can prove and proves me. — This poem appears in the April 2 print issue of National Review. Read More

Nancy MacLean Won’t Quit

One of the biggest intellectual jousting matches last year was between Duke history professor Nancy MacLean, who wrote a slimy, dishonest book about Nobel Prize–winning economist James Buchanan and the whole limited-government movement, and the many scholars who blasted holes in it. If it had been a boxing ... Read More

How Germany Vets Its Refugees

At the height of the influx of refugees into Germany in 2015–17, there was little doubt that mixed among the worthy cases were economic migrants taking advantage of the chaos to seek their fortunes in Europe. Perhaps out of instinctive pro-immigrant sentiment, Germany’s Left obscured the difference. Its ... Read More
National Security & Defense

Leave McMaster Be

About every two months, there are rumors that Gen. H. R. McMaster might be let go as Trump’s national-security adviser (along with many other stellar appointees). The world, however, is a much more logical and predictable place than it was 14 months ago. We’ve restored ties to the Gulf monarchies; Israel ... Read More