The government injecting itself into the health care system or getting between doctors, insurers, and patients has been driving up the cost of care for decades. The knee-jerk response to complaints about the cost of health care is to meddle some more, resulting in more expensive health care.

Democrats in Vermont have been pretending to know better for years, but more recent veto-proof majorities have a way of inspiring. They are health Care’s worst enemy, but that’s not how they see it. Instead of tearing down barriers and opening markets, their solution is predictable progressive pablum.

Allow more people on Medicaid.

New legislation would expand Medicaid services to more people without telling taxpayers how much this will cost them.

One idea, which would require coverage for obesity drugs (where it is bravely inferred that the body positivity movement is detrimental to public health), has an estimated cost of 100 million. Government watchers will know this is likely a gross underestimate but not nearly as blatant a disregard for other people’s money as expanding eligibility to age 26 or anyone in a 4-person household with income up to 7,925.00 a month. That’s 87,540 a year.

Median household income in America (2022) is $67,521.00. The average salary in Vermont is just over 59K a year. Are we admitting that the state has so bolloxed up health care with its meddling that the average Vermonter should be on Medicaid, or are we saying we want everyone on Medicaid because cradle-to-grave government-run care was always the plan?

That was the goal of Obamacare, which is still around, but it never managed to do anything to make care more affordable (if it had, we wouldn’t be having this discussion).

New Hampshire’s problems began when legislators led by Democrats made it impossible for insurance companies to compete. We went from more than a dozen insurers to fewer than five. We may have fewer today.

The hospital cartel has used the legislature to ensure its good health by promoting rules and laws that make it harder for private non-affiliated medical practice to thrive, which would create competition and drive prices down.

Legislators, pockets filled with donations from the medical Industrial complex, aid and abet the monopolies instead of going out of their way to get government out from between patients and providers, including health insurers and nothing Vermont (or New Hampshire, as far as I can tell) wants to change the trajectory.

The only thing legislators can do to help healthcare costs go down is to open up markets that allow for competition. Permit any insurer to do business with anyone (patient, practice, whomever) and watch them compete like Geico, Progressive, and State Farm on plans and pricing. Let private practice negotiate with insurers and patients for the cost of care and coverage and watch access improve..

Drugs? The US does pay too much, more than most other nations, but the internet (as with telehealth’s potential) is waiting to solve that problem if licensed healthcare professionals and pharmacists are freed up to help consumers find the drugs they need at the lowest cost instead of at the inflated cost insurers won’t cover.

That’s a very loose 30,000-foot analysis, but in almost every case, the problems were created by legislators, and stakeholders leverage influence to create monopolies, and these solutions are nowhere on their radar.

So, Vermont Legislators are looking busy but not for ways to bring down costs. They are hoping to provide the appearance of doing something even when everyone should know it will only make matters worse so they can keep looking busy, and so on.

The post After Years of Making Medical Care Cost More VT Legislators Pretend More Meddling Will Lower Costs appeared first on Granite Grok.

I was thinking some more about HB 1308, Arlene’s bill for parental access to library records, and thought about an old Ian Underwood article that should be in the Grok archives and found in a search.

He discussed the difference between a beneficiary and a customer, using an example of giving money to a (grand) kid to purchase a bike.  He explained how the future owner of the bike is the beneficiary, but the donor of the money to pay for the bike is the customer. Without rewriting his article, the take-home talking points were about who gets to decide certain things, like the bells and whistles and price tag.

When I read that, three situations came to mind.  One of them is when a landlord hires a handyman or contractor to make repairs or improvements to the rental unit.  The tenant is the beneficiary, and the landlord is the customer.  As a tenant, I remember complaining to the management office about a contractor making a mess and not cleaning up after himself and another one doing low-quality work. If I complained to that contractor myself, I would be told to go pound sand because I wasn’t the one paying him. If I was a property owner, my recourse could be refusing to pay my balance until the problem is rectified.

Another example is when you order something online and free shipping is included, for whatever reason. You, the customer(of the goods being purchased), are NOT the customer of FedEx, UPS, USPS, or whatever 3rd party carrier is used. You are its beneficiary. I’m sure I’m not the only one who has spent countless moments (or whatever other embarrassing units of time) furious about lies and broken promises when the merchandise fails to arrive when it’s supposed to.  Again, you, the consumer, can’t sanction that delivery company for doing a bad job, but Amazon, Chewy, or whoever the sender is can!

The 3rd example is you, the patient, and Blue Cross (or other 3rd party insurance). A cash patient is a customer and s/he can see any provider in any zip code that’s accepting new patients. As an insured patient, it’s the insurance company that is the customer, and you are the beneficiary. You don’t get to choose treatments, drugs, procedures, schedules, etc., that are outside its clinical policy bulletin.  If you do, guess what? You either get a big bill from the provider or are refused by that provider up front (in an approval-required situation).

So this brings me to a 4th example, which is the library. It could be a school library or your local Anytown USA public library. Your kid (or someone else’s) is the beneficiary, and you are the customer. Your kid might want to check out a Nancy Friday book, but you disapprove, just like the kid with the cash gift might want the bike with the $1000 price tag, but you only gifted $200.

As it stands now, my guess is that parents can refuse to sign off on a library card for their kids, but that could be complicated and inconvenient for a variety of reasons that we all can think of. But with HB1308, parents would have an extra tool in their toolbox to keep a watchful eye on their kids’ library records. Of course, there are still other issues to be dealt with, such as what materials are available to kids, but remember that YOU, parent, taxpayer, or both, are the customer, and the customer is always right.

If you, unlike Nashua and Hollis, happen to have decent reps, you might consider telling them to vote against the committee recommendation and support HB1308 next time the House meets, which appears to be tomorrow! (Thursday, 2/22).  Remember that you are their boss, and this is an election year. Contrary to what Nashua’s former BoE member Ray Guarino wants you to think, they work for you.

The post YOU, Property Taxpayer, are the (Library’s) CUSTOMER appeared first on Granite Grok.

Despite prompting from House Rs, the leadership refused to reconsider HB1212, which Republicans won and had ITL’d. That was the first of a waterfall of mistakes that cost big losses in the House for conservatives, solely due to inadequate House leadership.

That bill was later reconsidered by the Dems and passed. How many more times do we have to lose before we get competent republican leadership?

Don’t even get me going on the whipping. When you send out a whipping sheet and then don’t even take a minute to have a conversation with those telling you they don’t know how they’re voting or that they’re voting against you on your PRIORITY bills… You’re not a whip. You’re self-demoted to a flag waiver, especially when leadership admits to two freshman reps single-handedly flipping the EFA votes at lunch last week.

It’s pretty bad when freshmen are more effective than “leadership.”

I couldn’t say it better than Rep True –

The post Op-Ed: House Leadership? appeared first on Granite Grok.

The Machine Media is so busy engaging in a post-Trump 350+ Million dollar decision circle jerk they seem to have missed who got screwed. Donald Trump is going to appeal and win. It won’t even be close. The city used a political vendetta to attack a developer and was deliberately a public takedown.

But they had no cause other than their Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS). I can almost hear the progs screeching; what do you mean by no cause? I mean, no cause! No one else could find a reason to charge Trump with any wrongdoing because he didn’t do anything wrong.

The feds declined to file charges as did the previous AG. And the reality is, this should have been heard by the Commercial Division, however, they had already declined to file.

Why do you suppose the real experts in complicated commercial cases, part of the Supreme Court of New York State would decide not to pursue?

To borrow from cheatin’ star-crossed Crossfire Hurricane lover Peter Strozk, there was no there there, but someone with a political agenda (and chronic transmissible TDS) encouraged it. And while that ruling went against Trump, it will cost NYC exponentially more than The Donald, even if he doesn’t win on appeal (which he will).

More from the Tweet (shared below)

I know many reading this think they are experts in everything. You’re not. Those of us who actually attended law school and have been doing commercial real estate for over 40 years, you’ve been lied to. You do not have the facts. You do not know what you are talking about. We employ two of the largest law firms in the country and they’ve been in meetings 16 hours a day in order to determine just how bad this all really is. Every one of these companies, representing trillions of dollars in real estate, is carefully evaluating whether to stay or exit.

Chetrit Group
Vorea Group
Turnbridge Equities
Extell Development
Bldg Management Company
Vornado
Realty Trust
L+m Development Partners
United Construction And Development Group
Beb Capital,
Totem Howard Hughes Corporation
Starrett Corporation
Rfr Realty Jay Group
Property Markets Group
Rabsky Group
Two Trees Management
Heartfelt Townhouse Builders
Lonicera Partners
Taconic Partners Beitel Group

Whether Trump wins on appeal or at SCOTUS, the precedent has been set. A wall has been broken and there are no take backs. Any company can now be targeted and have their assets seized at the whim of an over zealous AG or politicians. I don’t expect you to know or understand standard CRE practices, but every company below could be found guilty of the exact same actions the Trump Organization was accused of and found guilty, because it is NOT a crime.

The feds declined to file charges, as did the previous AG. And the reality is, this should have been heard by the Commercial Division, however, they had already declined to file.

Why do you suppose the real experts in complicated commercial cases, part of the Supreme Court of New York State would decide not to pursue?

I know many reading this think they are experts in everything. You’re not. Those of us who actually attended law school and have been doing commercial real estate for over 40 years, you’ve been lied to. You do not have the facts. You do not know what you are talking about. We…

— Tony Seruga (@TonySeruga) February 21, 2024

No one is safe from malicious political prosecution. The obvious problem aside from the trucker strike this inspired is that billions in investments don’t leave without someone feeling it. New York (Little Letitia) and New York City (Engoron) just F***** itself, and I’m not even sure they (the TDS political cranks) know it yet or care.  I’m sure they can move away, too, if the need arises.

But who wants to bet that when they figure it out, and it’s all going south, they blame Trump?

The post Night Cap: NYC Has F***** Itself With 350 Million Dollar Trump Ruling appeared first on Granite Grok.

IN EARLY 2021, our New Hampshire House Education Committee held a hearing on a transgender sports measure. I had serious concerns about biological (XY chromosome) boys playing contact sports against biological (XX chromosome) girls but naturally wanted to hear everyone’s thoughts.

Of the 33 folks who testified (mostly moms), 32 passionately advocated for their trans kids. And their testimony “moved the needle” for some of us.

Moms (and dads) want their trans kids to have full opportunities to experience all that they can as they grow up — including sports. The hearing raised much awareness.

But there are other moms and dads out there similarly advocating for other kids as well. They also have strong feelings about what’s best for their children that can conflict with feelings of other parents. The schism reminds us to be wary about messing with momma bears.

Some would counsel that this subject is a minefield to avoid. Why step into it and opine at all and then get blown up? But as a parent, grandparent, sports columnist, and elected official, I’m going to enter this dangerous and complicated minefield, and hopefully emerge without getting blown up. We’ll see.

Parents experiencing more traditional circumstances need to understand how parents of trans kids see their worlds — as we learned at that 2021 hearing. And conversely, parents of trans kids need to do likewise. Folks on various sides of this issue surely honor parental love.

This year, after much deliberation, I accepted an invitation to co-sponsor HB 1205, which “prohibits biological males from participating in female athletics.” Given the number of people seeking to speak at the Education Committee hearing, testimony was limited to two minutes. I used my time to speak of safety and 50/50 balls.

A 50/50 ball (or a 50/50 puck) involves two players heading toward each other at full speed. I specifically recalled a high school soccer game where my daughter and another girl banged into each other while going for a 50/50 ball. The violent collision was followed by a scream and soon an ambulance was on the field to take a broken-legged girl to a hospital. (Not my daughter.) The imagery always stayed with me.

The two soccer players each weighed 115 to 120 pounds. But what if a 100-pound (XX) biological female has a violent 50/50 run-in with a 160-pound (XY) biological male? Ouch.

There are many more pieces to this beyond 50/50 balls. For example, the NCAA requires trans athletes to take drugs. A male-to-female transgender student who is not doing hormone treatments may not compete on a women’s team.

This mandated drug use requirement is unsettling and complicated. Then there’s the debate over minors undergoing gender reassignment surgery. We recently had a big kerfuffle at the State House over HB 619, which would ban the practice.

Regarding yet another (bathroom) bill, many folks testified about fears relating to biological males in female bathrooms and locker rooms. A proposed criteria for bathroom use essentially came down to what gender a person claimed to identify as. And while most trans kids are wonderful people, there are examples of miscreants exploiting the “identification” situation with nefarious intent. Related concerns deserve attention.

Inconveniently, some folks’ “identifications” also change over time — not just in adolescents but, in some cases, folks who are 50 or 60 years old.

Caitlyn Jenner is perhaps the world’s most famous trans athlete. As Bruce Jenner in 1976, Caitlyn won the Olympic Decathlon. Jenner is a strong and articulate opponent of XY trans athletes competing against XX athletes at any level.

There is a simple (though not easy) answer to this complicated transgender sports participation question. XX’s compete against XX’s. XY’s compete against XY’s. Admittedly, this would preclude some trans athletes from competing on their desired teams. Sport, like life, is not always fair. And while sport can yield ecstatic victory thrills, sport is also about dashed dreams and disappointment. Such is life. At some point, I accepted that I was never going to play for the Celtics.

Any other policy would guarantee ambiguous grey areas, endless conflict, drug mandates, bathroom/locker room danger and drama, and untold avoidable injuries as players pursue those 50/50 balls.

Can we ever get through this minefield to a promised land with clear definition and safety? We need to try. It wasn’t Yogi Berra but Geoffrey Chaucer who first said over six centuries ago, “Nothing ventured, nothing gained.”

The post 50/50 Balls and Transgender Sports appeared first on Granite Grok.