<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: expenditures</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'expenditures'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22expenditures%22&t=%22expenditures%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:38:19 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>On Government Spending and Job Creation</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4921390&amp;cid=t_138866_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FVVOUecP7aPc%2F</link>
            <description>By Mark A. CalabriaThe standard Keynesian policy proposal for a weak economy is to have the government spend more money, and run deficits to do so.  Clearly much of current government spending is being financed by borrowing.  So current conditions are not subject to the New Deal critique that it was mostly paid for by taxes, as during the Great Depression. Current federal expenditures have increased about 41% since the housing market peaked in 2006.  Has all this government spending generated many jobs?  While keeping in mind that correlation is not the same as causality, it is interesting that the trend in government spending and total non-farm employees mirror one another, but not in the way you&amp;#8217;d like.  The more the government has spent, the more people have lost their jobs...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4921390</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2011 20:35:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4921390</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>More Fifth Column than Fourth Estate</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4872065&amp;cid=t_138866_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fb9IhkADCNqc%2F</link>
            <description>By Andrew J. CoulsonCiting new Census figures, the New York Times claims that &amp;#8220;public school districts spent an average of $10,499 per student on elementary and secondary education in the 2009 fiscal year.&amp;#8221; But according to the most recent issue of the Digest of Education Statistics, expenditures haven&amp;#8217;t been that low for over a decade. In the last year reported, 2007-08, total expenditures per pupil in average daily attendance were already $12,922 (in 2008-09 dollars). Adjusting for inflation, that&amp;#8217;s about $13,500 in today&amp;#8217;s dollars. (Looking at spending per student enrolled, rather than per student actually taught, lowers the total figure, but not by that much).
So what gives? How can the Times claim that public school &amp;#8220;spending&amp;#8221; is $3,000 lower ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4872065</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2011 18:59:51 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4872065</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Monday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4723790&amp;cid=t_138866_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fqe59_xBEk1A%2F</link>
            <description>By George Scoville
Regulatory privilege is not consistent with competitive markets&amp;#8211;that&amp;#8217;s why Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac need reform.
Thank goodness the U.S. Supreme Court found that education tax credits are not consistent with the fictitious notion of a &amp;#8220;tax expenditure.&amp;#8221;
President Obama&amp;#8217;s budget plan is not consistent with either his own deficit commission&amp;#8217;s plan or the Constitution.
The modern &amp;#8220;Executive State&amp;#8221; is not consistent with Article II of the Constitution.
Cyberbullying laws are not consistent with the First Amendment and our concept of free speech:



Monday Links is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4723790</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:12:59 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4723790</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Farm Subsidies Benefit Landowners</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4372026&amp;cid=t_138866_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fjgx0zOlu-9w%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenAlmost half of America’s farmland is operated by someone other than the owner. Critics of farm subsidies often point to examples of famous wealthy landowners receiving handouts as a reason to end the federal government’s agriculture gravy train. Notable recipients have included Ted Turner, Larry Flynt, Charles Schwab, and numerous members of Congress.
While policymakers justify their support for farm subsidies in the name of “protecting farmers,” a new academic study describes how landowners are often the real winners. Farm subsidies get “capitalized” into the price of farm land, pushing up land prices. As a result, those farmers who lease land from landowners at the inflated prices end up having a substantial share of their subsidy benefits effectively canceled o...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4372026</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jan 2011 16:08:36 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4372026</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Another Look At Geographic Variation In Poverty And Healthcare</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4331014&amp;cid=t_138866_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fbuzcooper.files.wordpress.com%2F2011%2F01%2Fmedpac-fig-2c.png</link>
            <description>MedPAC has released another report in which they have tried to explain variation in healthcare utilization among metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs), of which there are approximately 400. MSAs more-or-less correspond to Dartmouth’s 306 hospital referral regions (HRRs), and the conclusions reached by the Dartmouth folks and MedPAC tend to correspond. In commenting about MedPAC’s last report, issued in December 2009, I noted that the major variation was caused by high Medicare expenditures in seven southern states, where patients are poorer and sicker and use much more care.   
In their new report, MedPAC went a step beyond measuring expenditures, which they adjusted for prices and other factors in their last report, to measuring the actual units of service, a far better way to ass...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4331014</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 10 Jan 2011 18:00:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4331014</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Is the Administration Cooking the Books on Govt’s Share of Health Spending?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4313986&amp;cid=t_138866_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F3Z8bfN325lM%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonSomething smells fishy here.
Today, the federal agency that runs Medicare and Medicaid released its estimates of national health expenditures in 2009.  Interestingly, the U.S. Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services re-categorized about 6 percent of national health expenditures &amp;#8212; well over $100 billion &amp;#8212; from “government” to “private,” at the very moment that the government share of NHE appeared set to hit 50 percent.
Last year, CMS projected that government health spending would &amp;#8220;account for more than half of all U.S. health care spending by 2012.&amp;#8221;  But it looks like we were set to reach (have reached?) that milestone much sooner.  See the below table, which I made using CMS&amp;#8217;s estimates from 2008 and Exhibit 5 (p. 1...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4313986</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 06 Jan 2011 00:05:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4313986</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Enough Community College PDA</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4036622&amp;cid=t_138866_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FtH6P4GPzYM0%2F</link>
            <description>By Neal McCluskeyYesterday, President Obama hosted the White House Summit on Community Colleges, and in-your-face love was in the air. President Obama and Second Lady Jill Biden, a community college professor, couldn&amp;#8217;t keep their hands off their signficant other, lavishing all sorts of praise on their favorite little schools.
Swooned Dr. Biden about the dreamy things community colleges do for their students:
They are students like the mother who shared her experience with us on the White House website of working towards a degree while raising three children and straddling financial challenges.  Now employed and the holder of a Bachelor’s and a Master’s degree, she wrote, “Community colleges didn’t just change my life, they gave me my life.”
Community colleges do that e...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4036622</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2010 20:57:54 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4036622</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Next Step for SpeechNow</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4036626&amp;cid=t_138866_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F6sUUi634sro%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesThe plaintiffs in the SpeechNow.org case have petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to decide &amp;#8220;whether, under the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment, the federal government may require an unincorporated association that makes only independent expenditures to register and report as a political committee.&amp;#8221;
You can read all about this important case here.
The Next Step for SpeechNow is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4036626</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2010 17:14:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4036626</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The States Respond to ObamaCare</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3398886&amp;cid=t_138866_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fv1kB49EVIb0%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonToday Politico Arena asks:
Do the 13 state attorneys general have a case against ObamaCare?
My response:
Absolutely.  It will be an uphill battle, because modern &amp;#8220;constitutional law&amp;#8221; is so far removed from the Constitution itself, but a win is not impossible.  There are three main arguments.  (1) Under the Constitution, as properly interpreted, Congress has no power to enact such a plan.  (2) The plan conscripts state governments into carrying out and paying for federal mandates.  And (3) the individual mandate amounts to an unlawful capitation or direct tax.
The first argument will almost certainly lose, because under post-1937 readings of the Commerce Clause, Congress can regulate anything that &amp;#8220;affects&amp;#8221; interstate commerce, which at some level ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3398886</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2010 14:44:57 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3398886</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Lawrence Lessig’s Constitutional Amendment</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3382801&amp;cid=t_138866_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F9982If77svc%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesLawrence Lessig has proposed a constitutional amendment in response to the U.S. Supreme Court&amp;#8217;s decision in Citizens United.  It reads:
&amp;#8220;Nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to restrict the power to limit, though not to ban, campaign expenditures of non-citizens of the United States during the last 60 days before an election.&amp;#8221;
﻿﻿In Citizens United, the Court said that the First Amendment concerns speech rather than speakers. Congress has no power to discriminate against speakers; hence, a source of speech &amp;#8211; people organized as a corporation &amp;#8211; could not be prohibited from speaking (or funding speech).
Professor Lessig hopes to introduce a discrimination among speakers into the First Amendment. His proposed discrimination will not ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3382801</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 20:31:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3382801</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>AP: Obama Misleads Voters about ObamaCare’s Effects on Premiums</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3374106&amp;cid=t_138866_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FUA3h7xM7mE4%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonThe Associated Press reports:
Buyers, beware: President Barack Obama says his health care overhaul will lower premiums by double digits, but check the fine print&amp;#8230;
The [Congressional Budget Office] concluded that premiums for people buying their own coverage would go up by an average of 10 percent to 13 percent, compared with the levels they&amp;#8217;d reach without the legislation&amp;#8230;
&amp;#8220;People are likely to not buy the same low-value policies they are buying now,&amp;#8221; said health economist Len Nichols of George Mason University. &amp;#8220;If they did buy the same value plans &amp;#8230; the premium would be lower than it is now. This makes the White House statement true. But is it possibly misleading for some people? Sure.&amp;#8221;
Nichols&amp;#8217; comments are also m...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3374106</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:51:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3374106</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Senate Bill Would Increase Health Spending</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3358963&amp;cid=t_138866_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FcTe5RcfvNgw%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonEzra Klein quotes the Congressional Budget Office&amp;#8217;s latest cost estimate of the Senate health care bill when he writes:
&amp;#8220;CBO expects that the legislation would generate a reduction in the federal budgetary commitment to health care during the decade following 2019,&amp;#8221; which is to say that this bill will cover 30 million people but the cost controls will, within a decade or so, leave us spending less on health care than if we&amp;#8217;d done nothing.  That&amp;#8217;s a pretty good deal. But it&amp;#8217;s not a very well-understood deal.
Indeed, because that&amp;#8217;s not what the CBO said.
First, the CBO said the &amp;#8220;federal budgetary commitment to health care&amp;#8221; would rise by $210 billion between 2010 and 2019 under the Senate bill.  Then, after 2019, it w...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3358963</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 18:53:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3358963</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Discouraging Speech through Disclosure</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3335287&amp;cid=t_138866_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FuJ2ZjA44jdk%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesDavid Price, a Democratic member of the House of Representatives from North Carolina, has introduced a bill, the Stand by Every Ad Act,  to mandate disclosure of support for political speech by business and union officials.
Rep. Price cites three harms from such speech: &amp;#8220;the opportunity for corporations, unions and associations to dominate the playing field, intimidating public officials and drowning out the candidates&amp;#8217; own messages.&amp;#8221;
Notice that these alleged harms are caused by the speech itself and not by the fact that the speech might be anonymous. Notice also that Rep. Price provides no evidence at all that such harms will take place. Where would such evidence be found? Prior to McCain-Feingold, corporations and unions could fund speech. Several state...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3335287</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 14:23:11 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3335287</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Supreme Court Ruling on Hillary Movie Heralds Freer Speech for All of Us</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3193692&amp;cid=t_138866_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F_TO11YwTO6I%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroToday the Supreme Court struck a major blow for free speech by correctly holding that government cannot try to &amp;#8220;level the political playing field&amp;#8221; by banning corporations from making independent campaign expenditures on films, books, or even campaign signs.
As Justice Kennedy said in announcing the opinion, &amp;#8220;if the First Amendment has any force, it prohibits jailing citizens for engaging in political speech.&amp;#8221;
While the Court has long upheld campaign finance regulations as a way to prevent corruption in elections, it has also repeated that equalizing speech is never a valid government interest.
After all, to make campaign spending equal, the government would have to prevent some people or groups from spending less than they wished. That is directly con...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3193692</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jan 2010 15:29:51 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3193692</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Keeping Score</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3096816&amp;cid=t_138866_87_f&amp;fid=34946&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffixinghealth.blogspot.com%2F2009%2F12%2Fkeeping-score.html</link>
            <description>Traditionally, medical care spending was regarded as fulfilling basic need. Numerous programs were devised during the past fifty years to increase the amount and level of services and none exceeds the influence of Medicare. The nation's health spending during 2007 increased 6.1percent to $2.2 trillion, or $7,421 per person, exceeding by far that of any other nation. Although the rate of increase was somewhat slower than previous years, the increase was faster than the overall economy. Health care consumed 16.2 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), an increase from 16 percent in 2006. Federal, state and local governments paid for 46.2 percent of health care spending in 2007, an increase from 45.3 percent in 2004 and 37.6 percent in 1970.According to the McKinsey Global Institute, health ...</description>
            <author>Fixin' Healthcare</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3096816</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2009 02:28:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3096816</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Union-Funded Study Says Private Schools Expensive!</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2751889&amp;cid=t_138866_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F_RWp3JrdUNg%2F</link>
            <description>I know, it&amp;#8217;s a bit of a dog-bites-man headline, but bear with me. A new study by a Rutgers University ed. professor purports to tell us about &amp;#8220;Private Schooling in the U.S.: Expenditures, Supply, and Policy Implications.&amp;#8221; The trouble is, the study presents no data that are representative of private schooling in the U.S.
Author and ed school professor Bruce Baker analyzed per pupil expenditures of private schools that had registered with Guidestar.org. Based on its mission statement, Guidestar is a service brings together charities seeking donations with would-be donors, in an effort to encourage philanthropy. Only a fraction of the nation’s private schools participate, and they are self-selected into that group. It is reasonable to think that the schools that self-se...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2751889</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 16:36:34 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2751889</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>9th Circuit Imitates Marcel Marceau</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2356878&amp;cid=t_138866_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FtgyCtikjnIU%2F</link>
            <description>Last month, I warned that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals would soon be handing the school choice movement a legal setback. Well, it&amp;#8217;s here.
As expected, the 9th Circuit has reinstated a lower court challenge to Arizona&amp;#8217;s scholarship donation tax credit program. The program allows taxpayers to contribute to non-profit Scholarship Tuition Organizations (STOs) that provide financial assistance to families choosing private schools. The taxpayers can then claim a dollar for dollar credit for their donation.
While this ruling leaves the program intact for the time being, it would almost surely require the tax credit program to be amended if it is allowed to stand. Fortunately, as I noted in my earlier post, the 9th Circuit is overturned as often as a caber at the Highland Games....</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2356878</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 06:04:28 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2356878</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>It Takes a State to Raise a Child: Why I Love Taxachusetts</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=470410&amp;cid=t_138866_117_f&amp;fid=34775&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.webmd.com%2Fhealthy-children%2F2007%2F02%2Fit-takes-state-to-raise-child-why-i.html</link>
            <description>Everyone bellyaches about paying outrageous taxes. Here's an alternative viewpoint.A recent study, entitled &quot;Homeland Insecurity,&quot; conclusively demonstrates a link between the state tax rate and important indicators of children's health (including low birth weight, neonatal mortality, juvenile incarceration, teen pregnancy, and death).They found that: Nine of the top 10 higher tax states rank in the top 20 for overall child well-being.Seven of the 10 lowest tax states rank in the bottom 20 states for overall child well being, with four in the bottom 10 states. Children in low-tax states are considerably more likely to suffer from poor prenatal care, early death, child abuse and teen incarceration than are children in higher-tax states that invest in child and family programs.The authors co...</description>
            <author>Healthy Children</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=470410</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2007 05:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">470410</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

