It is unclear to this taxpayer why there is such a disparity between the handling of banks that were viewed as causing the Financial Collapse of 2008 and the healthcare reform proposals aimed at insurance companies.
The one similarity that does jump out is that our government is attempting to super-regulate both industries, and, in the case of House Bill 3200 (healthcare reform), possibly even eliminate the insurance industry altogether.
Case in point, as reported in the New York Times this morning, President Obama has called for an overhaul in the banking arena: "Mr. Obama said the banks had nearly wrecked the economy by taking 'huge, reckless risks in pursuit of quick profits and massive bonuses.' The administration wants to ban bank holding companies from owning, investing in or sponsoring hedge funds or private equity funds and from engaging in proprietary trading, or trading on their own accounts, as opposed to the money of their customers."
That in itself may not be a bad thing. Afterall, the entirety of Main Street USA suffered the consequences.
The NYT also reported, "Mr. Obama also is seeking to limit consolidation in the financial sector, by placing curbs on the market share of liabilities at the largest firms. Since 1994, the share of insured deposits that can be held by any one bank has been capped at 10 percent. The administration wants to expand that cap to include all liabilities, to limit the concentration of too much risk in any single bank."
That one does seem logical.
However, the ideas being formulated and, indeed, legislation that has already been written (fortunately, not passed) actually amount to more and more government regulation occurring in every large industry.
Should there be more scrutiny placed in the discovery, and prosecution, of criminal activities by, perhaps, a handful of over-zealous, greedy people? That would certainly send a message throughout the financial sector.
As this topic relates to the banking industry, there are either too many existing loopholes in current law allowing financial institutions to be reckless with OPM (other people's money) or certain individuals at those businesses simply broke the law executing their plans for profit.
Either way, there does not appear to this taxpayer enough reason to completely overhaul and, eventually, over-regulate the entire banking extablishment.
As to healthcare reform, which is needed, one reason why insurance costs what it does is due to X-Tort (extreme tort) compensation awarded in litigation.
However, not one person in the White House, Senate or House of Representatives has proclaimed that Tort Reform (which would affect the income of attorneys) is needed in an attempt to scale back the cost of insurance. (At least, if there are any elected officials talking about this aspect they must be whispering.)
Yet, Tort Reform is definitely a large component of what is needed, not government-run healthcare.
There are still too many ideas floating around Capitol Hill these days that amount to government over-regulation of our lives and the eventual erosion of America's Bill of Rights.
If our elected officials really believe in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, they should pay much more attention to the words of our Founding Fathers.
To wit:
The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government - lest it come to dominate our lives and interests. Patrick Henry
Most bad government has grown out of too much government. Thomas Jefferson
Over For Now.
Main Street One
No comments:
Post a Comment