<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: federal</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 'federal'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22federal%22&t=%22federal%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 01:52:33 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Authorized Generics Are A Double Whammy: FTC</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5182322&amp;cid=t_103665_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FSXrWAMrwa34%2F</link>
            <description>In an effort to thwart generic competition, brand-name drugmakers are promising not to launch so-called authorized generics if their generic rivals promise not to market copycat versions of the brand-name drugs, according to a new report from the US Federal Trade Commission.
The findings, released in a 270-page report, explore a twist on the controversial practice of pay-to-delay in which brand-name drugmakers settle patent litigation with an agreement that involves a payment and a commitment by a generic drugmaker not to launch a rival med for a specified period of time. The FTC has called these deals anti-competitive and cost consumers $3.5 billion annually.
Now, the agency, which has been urging Congress to pass legislation to restrict these deals (see here), is turning its attention to...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5182322</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2011 12:51:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5182322</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>More on the Ex-Im Bank</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5181768&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F0FaWo2NWsUM%2F</link>
            <description>By Sallie JamesLast week I blogged about Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s (D-CA) proposal to devote $20 billion of the Export-Import Bank’s funds to promoting manufacturing exports, and why that was a bad idea.
But I realize that my recent call to “X Out the Ex-Im Bank” will be facing some very entrenched interests in Washington, and some well-funded lobby groups. The Bank has historically attracted bipartisan support, and a renewal of its charter sailed through the House Committee on Financial Services earlier this year. The Washington establishment loves this program.
My friend and long-time Ex-Im Bank supporter Gary Hufbauer of the Peterson Institute for International Economics published a critique a few weeks ago of my analysis, and calls for a doubling of Ex-Im’s authorization cap (f...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5181768</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2011 22:03:53 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5181768</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Federal Spending Hits $4.1 Trillion</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5181770&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F68GqLjEXQe4%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris EdwardsIf you looked at the new CBO report on the budget, you may have noticed that federal spending this year will be $3.6 trillion.
In fact, federal spending this year will top $4 trillion. But virtually all reporters and budget wonks (including me) routinely use the lower number when discussing total federal spending. I don’t think the higher $4 trillion number even appears anywhere in the CBO report.
The $3.6 trillion figure is “net” outlays. But “gross” outlays, or total spending, is quite a bit higher. The difference is caused by “offsetting collections” and “offsetting receipts.” These are revenue inflows to the government that are netted against spending at the program level, agency level, or government-wide level. Some examples are national park fees, Me...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5181770</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2011 20:25:36 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5181770</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>End the Mortgage Interest Deduction</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5139684&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FY7qfzaXp3V4%2F</link>
            <description>By Caleb O. BrownThe mortgage interest income tax deduction is popular among homeowners (read: likely voters) despite its role in distorting housing and related markets, its contribution to the housing bubble and its enabling of additional household debt. Never mind that there isn&amp;#8217;t much evidence that the deduction boosts home ownership in the United States. Consider also that the tax break largely benefits affluent homeowners living in expensive urban areas.
As Mark Calabria notes in today&amp;#8217;s Cato Daily Podcast, it&amp;#8217;s well past time for the mortgage interest deduction to be replaced by lower marginal tax rates for all earners.

End the Mortgage Interest Deduction 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=5139684</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 18 Aug 2011 20:26:46 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5139684</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Slate.com vs. Tea-Party/Christians/Bachmann</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5139690&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FiYjlqVEfOmg%2F</link>
            <description>By Andrew J. CoulsonSlate worked itself into a lather yesterday over the insidious education policy implications of Michele Bachmann&amp;#8217;s Iowa Straw Poll victory:
As recently as a decade ago, Republicans like George W. Bush, John McCain, and John Boehner embraced bipartisan, standards-and-accountability education reform&amp;#8230;. Now we are seeing the GOP acquiesce to the anti-government, Christian-right view of education epitomized by Bachmann&amp;#8230;. Against a backdrop of Tea Party calls to abolish the Department of Education and drastically cut the federal government&amp;#8217;s role in local public schools&amp;#8230;.&amp;#8221;
To support this narrative, Slate asked Bachmann what the federal government&amp;#8217;s role was in education, to which she replied, &amp;#8220;There is none; Education is a matt...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5139690</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 18 Aug 2011 12:40:41 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5139690</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Washington Post Asks for Budget Plans</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5139695&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FOehssZVSty8%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenThe Washington Post’s editorial board issued a challenge to the president and his Republican opponents: “show us your plans” for deficit reduction. In fact, the Post says it would be “delighted” to receive plans from its readers. However, the Post isn’t interested in “meaningless promises” to cut “waste, fraud, and abuse”—it wants specifics:
Here’s what we’re not looking for: pablum about eliminating unnecessary spending without identifying where. Gauzy rhetoric about making hard choices without making them. Meaningless promises about eliminating waste, fraud and abuse. Broad assertions about where to find the money — “Medicare savings,” “tax reform” — without specifics. Arbitrary spending caps without accompanying details about how those...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5139695</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 16 Aug 2011 21:16:31 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5139695</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Polls Show Voters Don’t Support Corporate Welfare</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5139698&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fe2yDOuRLLa8%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenTwo polls of likely voters released by Rasmussen Reports today indicate that the federal government’s corporate welfare programs should be prime targets for spending cuts.
The first poll found little support for the Small Business Administration&amp;#8217;s lending programs:

A majority (58 percent) of likely voters said that the federal government shouldn’t guarantee loans issued by private lenders to small businesses. 23 percent said the government should back small business loans and 19 percent were unsure.


A majority (59 percent) of likely voters said that reducing government regulations and taxes would be more helpful to small businesses than the government providing loans to small businesses that can’t obtain financing on their own. 22 percent said the government lo...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5139698</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 16 Aug 2011 18:47:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5139698</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Your Tax Dollars at Work</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5139699&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F6BxVK7muBgc%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazPresident Obama says that we are a  &amp;#8221;generous and compassionate&amp;#8221; country and that &amp;#8220;through government, we should do together what we cannot do as well for ourselves.&amp;#8221; And to fulfill that &amp;#8220;progressive vision,&amp;#8221; he&amp;#8217;s going to work on &amp;#8220;making government smarter, and leaner and more effective. &amp;#8221;
Today, under the rubric &amp;#8220;Breakaway Wealth/Reaping Riches from Federal Spending,&amp;#8221; the Washington Post gives us a front-page picture of where a lot of those generous and compassionate federal dollars actually go:
Millions of dollars worth of federal contracts transformed Anita Talwar from a government accounting clerk into a wealthy woman—one who can afford a $2.8 million home in the Washington suburbs with its own elevato...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5139699</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 16 Aug 2011 18:08:13 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5139699</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Easy Money from the Federal Reserve Is Not the Solution for America’s Economic Problems</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5125719&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FN7EN95OQlFI%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellAllen Meltzer, an economist at Carnegie Mellon University, writes today in the Wall Street Journal about the Fed’s worrisome announcement that it will continue the easy-money policy of artificially low interest rates.
Professor Meltzer’s key point (at least to me) is that the economy is weak because of too much government intervention and too much federal spending, and you don’t solve those problems with a loose-money policy – especially since banks already are sitting on $1.6 trillion of excess reserves. (Why lend money when the economy is weak and you may not get repaid?)
Meltzer then outlines some of the reforms that would boost growth, all of which are desirable, albeit a bit tame for my tastes:
[T]he United States does not have the kind of problems that pr...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5125719</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2011 15:14:25 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5125719</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Charity and the Federal Government</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5118612&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FI7N0AIflcIg%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenDavid Boaz’s post on bizarre and utterly preposterous claims that the federal government’s “social safety net” has been shrinking brought to my mind James Madison’s position that “Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.”
“The Father of the Constitution” wasn’t being cold-hearted when he took this position during a 1794 debate in the House of Representatives over federal aid to refugees. Rather, he was merely recognizing that “the government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects.” Charity just wasn’t one of the specified objects. Of course, future politicians decided otherwise.
Today, most young Americans grow up in federally subsidized schools offering federally subsidized meals. They are i...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5118612</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2011 21:01:59 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5118612</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid Announces Temporary End to Federal Aviation Administration Furloughs</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5096688&amp;cid=t_103665_125_f&amp;fid=34819&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FFullosseousflapsDentalBlog%2F%7E3%2F_g5AAwo4vqk%2F</link>
            <description>Work on this air traffic control tower under construction has been
stopped Tuesday, July 26, 2011, at the Oakland International Airport in
Oakland, Calif. Since a partial shutdown of the FAA took effect Friday,
the agency has furloughed nearly 4,000 workers, stopped the processing
of about $2.5 billion in airport construction grants, and issued stop
work orders to construction and other contractors on more than 150
projects, from airport towers to runway safety lights
This could have been done weeks ago and people could have been working.
The Senate will pass the House’s bill to fund the Federal Aviation Administration through September to end the week-and-a-half-long partial shutdown of the agency, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) announced Thursday.
Under a deal Reid made wit...</description>
            <author>FullosseousFlap's Dental Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5096688</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 04 Aug 2011 22:16:20 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5096688</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Education Tax Credits More Popular Than Vouchers &amp; Charters</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5096166&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FUTcau62NImA%2F</link>
            <description>By Adam SchaefferAs Neal wrote about earlier, Education Next has released their new poll, and there are some interesting results.
Surprisingly, the authors buried the lede in their writeup; education tax credits consistently have more support and less opposition than any other choice policy.
This year, donation tax credits pulled in a 29-point margin of support (that’s total favor minus total oppose). In contrast, charter schools had a 25-point margin of support.
The authors added a new, less neutral voucher question that boosted the margin of support to 20 points. They couched the policy in terms of “wider choice” for kids in public schools, and the implication was that it was universal. All three of these additional considerations tend to have a positive impact on support for choic...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5096166</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2011 19:41:42 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5096166</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Turning Point?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5096173&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FF6-7Vn4OSSM%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesGreg Sargent cites a CNN poll question:
As you may know, the agreement would cut about one trillion dollars in government spending over the next ten years with provisions to make additional spending cuts in the future. Regardless of how you feel about the overall agreement, do you approve or disapprove of the cuts in government spending included in the debt ceiling agreement?
Approve 65
Disapprove 30
Sargent continues:
Sixty five percent approve of deal’s spending cuts. But it gets worse. Of the 30 percent who disapprove, 13 percent think the cuts haven’t gotten far enough, and only 15 percent think the cuts go too far. One sixth of Americans agree with the liberal argument about the deal.
About 20 percent of Americans self-identify as liberals. This would suggest that ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5096173</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2011 20:18:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5096173</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Military Spending and the Budget Deal</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5086142&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fvob1l9ZUg34%2F</link>
            <description>By Christopher PrebleThe budget deal announced last night offers two sets of potential cuts in military spending.
The first set of potential cuts, created by the budget caps, target “security” spending. That includes the Pentagon, State, foreign aid, the Department of Homeland Security and Veterans (the discretionary portion of Veterans spending, to be precise). The deal caps &amp;#8220;security&amp;#8221; spending at $684 billion for this fiscal year and $686 for the next. That requires little pain; the 2012 security cap is only $5 billion below what we&amp;#8217;ll spend on those categories in fiscal 2011. The White House claims that the caps will generate $350 billion in savings from base defense spending for ten years. They get there, dubiously, by projecting security spending at the capped le...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5086142</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Aug 2011 18:15:34 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5086142</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>This Week in Government Failure</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5077654&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FGVNLZMp-uPk%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenOver at Downsizing the Federal Government, we focused on the following issues this past week:

If it is true that a failure to increase the debt limit on August 2nd has the potential to bring about economic Armageddon, shouldn’t we be asking ourselves if it’s a good idea to allow the political class in Washington to continue to collectively play God with our lives?
The ratchet effect: agriculture edition.
Chris Edwards testifies to the Senate Finance Committee on federal spending and debt.
These are the times that try budget analysts’ souls—especially budget analysts who’d like to see Washington dramatically cut spending.
House Speaker John Boehner&amp;#8217;s first budget plan wouldn&amp;#8217;t have cut spending. His new plan won&amp;#8217;t cut spending either.
Chris Edwards...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5077654</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2011 18:51:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5077654</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>We’re In This for the Long Haul</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5077656&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FuSU2KRKUUdU%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonToday POLITICO Arena asks:
Is it the Senate&amp;#8217;s turn to take a crack at the debt ceiling?
My response:
Speaker Boehner has both the Constitution and convention on his side — &amp;#8220;money bills&amp;#8221; arise in the House. In fact, the Constitution is his strongest ally in his struggle to win the support of recalcitrant Tea Party members. They revere the document, after all, and no one has put the point better than Charles Krauthammer in this morning&amp;#8217;s Washington Post.
Boehner&amp;#8217;s bill, just to be clear, is a far cry from what this debt-ridden nation needs. As my colleague Chris Edwards put it yesterday, even the revised plan &amp;#8220;doesn&amp;#8217;t cut spending at all.&amp;#8221; It &amp;#8220;cuts&amp;#8221; only from the CBO baseline, which assumes constantly rising spendin...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5077656</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2011 14:40:44 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5077656</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Thoughts on the Boehner Plan</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5069444&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FiwiXkM-Rmxs%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenThese are the times that try budget analysts’ souls—especially budget analysts who’d like to see Washington dramatically cut spending. The debate over lifting the debt ceiling has produced a number of proposals from Capitol Hill—none of them have been worth celebrating. We can now add House Speaker John Boehner’s latest proposal to the pile.
Boehner’s proposal boils down to the following: cap discretionary spending over 10 years to achieve $1.2 trillion in savings; have (another) bipartisan group of policymakers come up with $1.8 trillion in “deficit reductions” over ten years; and get a vote on a balanced budget amendment. In exchange, the president would get to increase the deficit by $900 billion this year and by another $1.6 trillion next year.
Here are so...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5069444</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2011 20:11:29 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5069444</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Senate Finance Hearing on Debt</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5069447&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FtqQe3o3ngFU%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris EdwardsI testified to the Senate Finance Committee today regarding federal spending and debt.
Here are some of the points I made:

Last night, President Obama called for a &amp;#8220;balanced solution&amp;#8221; to our fiscal problems, including tax increases and spending cuts. However, CBO projections do not indicate that we face a &amp;#8220;balanced&amp;#8221; problem. Instead, projections show that the deficit problem is caused all on the spending side of the budget.
The United States has sadly become a big-government country. Until recently, government spending in this country was about 10 percentage points less than the average of OECD countries. That smaller-government advantage has now shrunken to just 4 percentage points.
In recent years, policymakers have given us the largest deficit...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5069447</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2011 18:05:25 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5069447</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Minefield of American Criminal Law</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5069448&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FL4v1dpVS2L8%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchOver the weekend, the Wall Street Journal ran an excellent article about the problem of overcriminalization—the proliferation of criminal laws and how more and more people can find themselves on the wrong side the law without even realizing it. Here&amp;#8217;s an excerpt:
In 2009, Mr. Anderson loaned his son some tools to dig for arrowheads near a favorite campground of theirs. Unfortunately, they were on federal land. Authorities &amp;#8220;notified me to get a lawyer and a damn good one,&amp;#8221; Mr. Anderson recalls.
There is no evidence the Andersons intended to break the law, or even knew the law existed, according to court records and interviews. But the law, the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979, doesn&amp;#8217;t require criminal intent and makes it a felony punishab...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5069448</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2011 17:39:14 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5069448</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Health Care Entitlements Are the Real Debt Bomb</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5069449&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FBjcOn1sbcrE%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonI&amp;#8217;m a few days behind on this, but over at The Corner Yuval Levin has written an important post about how health care entitlements are the real cause of the debt crisis facing the federal government. Using Congressional Budget Office projections, Levin creates this magnificent chart, which I plan to steal over and over again:

If Republicans want to conquer the federal debt, they need to embrace health policy like they embrace tax cuts.
Health Care Entitlements Are the Real Debt Bomb 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=5069449</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2011 16:55:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5069449</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>This Week in Government Failure</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5057712&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FMkqGhuZSPhU%2F</link>
            <description>Over at Downsizing the Federal Government, we focused on the following issues this past week:

It&amp;#8217;s time to repeal New Deal labor laws.
A new Cato video on the &amp;#8220;Cut, Cap, and Balance&amp;#8221; proposal.
$2 trillion in spending cuts in exchange for raising the debt ceiling isn&amp;#8217;t enough.
Congratulations to Sen. Tom Coburn&amp;#8217;s staff for producing a massive study chock-full of specific spending-cut ideas.
The Gang of Six deficit reduction plan is lousy.
Chris Preble on the hysteria over potential cuts in military spending.

Follow Downsizing the Federal Government on Twitter (@DownsizeTheFeds) and connect with us on Facebook.
This Week in Government Failure 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=5057712</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2011 19:34:39 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5057712</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Debt Debate a Reminder of What Government Is</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5057713&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fh5njg4-TRIw%2F</link>
            <description>If it is true that a failure to increase the debt limit on August 2nd has the potential to bring about economic Armageddon, shouldn’t we be asking ourselves if it’s a good idea to allow the political class in Washington to continue collectively play God with our lives? After all, these people are fallible human beings.
In a similar vein, Sheldon Richman reminds us of what government really is in a new column on the issue of federal debt. I like Richman’s statement because one need not be a hardcore libertarian to appreciate the message:
Government is not some higher super-competent entity like the man pretending to be the Wizard of Oz wanted the people to think he was. It’s a coercive organization of limited, flawed, and essentially ignorant men and women who, having been anointed ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5057713</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2011 19:03:16 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5057713</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Senate Committee Approves Pay-To-Delay Bill</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5051240&amp;cid=t_103665_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2Ff0rmi8u5dV8%2F</link>
            <description>The US Senate Judiciary Committee has approved a bipartisan bill that would limit pay-to-delay settlements that are designed to keep lower-cost generic drugs off the market for extended periods. The move comes after the US Supreme Court declined to review one hotly contested deal (see this) amid repeated cries from the US Federal Trade Commission that settlements are anticompetitive and costly to consumers.
Under the bill, which is called the Preserve Access to Affordable Generic Drugs Act, brand-name drugmakers would be deterred from settling patent disputes by paying generic rivals in exchange for promises that a copycat version of its drug will be kept off the market. The deals would be considered illegal and the FTC would be given the authority to stop the agreements (read the legislat...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5051240</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jul 2011 20:04:25 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5051240</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>This Week in Government Failure</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5036219&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F-sTuIxycJF0%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenOver at Downsizing the Federal Government, we focused on the following issues this past week:

People here in Washington are now considering military spending cuts that they thought strategically unwise and politically impossible just a few years ago. And conservatives are joining in.
Federally funded spaceflight is the quintessential neoconservative project: a giant, wasteful crusade designed to fill Americans&amp;#8217; supposedly empty lives with meaning.
The Obama administration wants to send bureaucrats from federal agencies that are notorious for wasting other people’s money to help local bureaucrats do a more “efficient” job of spending other people’s money.
President Obama’s Fiscal Commission handed Republicans ready-made spending cuts on a silver platter — R...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5036219</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2011 20:06:46 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5036219</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Strong Cities, Strong Communities: Bad Idea</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5028155&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FHyem7SCcShk%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenWhen government officials come up with what they claim to be a wonderful new idea, I often think of an old Saturday Night Live skit from 1990 poking fun at commercials for blue jeans. The skit’s scene is a group of middle-aged buddies getting ready to play basketball in their new “Bad Idea Jeans.” Each guy optimistically announces a plan to do something that is actually a “bad idea.” For example, a character says “I don’t know the guy but I’ve got two kidneys and he needs one, so I figured…” and “BAD IDEA” flashes across the screen. (The skit can be watched here.)
The White House’s new “Strong Cities, Strong Communities” initiative had that BAD IDEA screen shot flashing repeatedly in my mind as I read the press release:
Today, the Obama Administr...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5028155</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jul 2011 21:00:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5028155</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>NCLB Is a Failure. It’s Nothing Personal.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5008144&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FoQ9BxcwOTyk%2F</link>
            <description>By Andrew J. CoulsonEducation writer RiShawn Biddle has offered a spirited response to my blog post yesterday about the failure of the No Child Left Behind act. In it, he asserts that NCLB has advanced school choice, and links to an earlier essay that ostensibly presented his case. Summarizing it, Biddle writes that:
The impact of No Child on advancing choice… starts with the law’s Adequate Yearly Progress requirements. Thanks to the data culled, the low quality of education in traditional district schools was exposed for all to see, providing parents and school choice activists with the information they needed  to push for the advancement of choice.
No thanks. The poor performance of U.S. schooling has been evident to a great many people for a very long time. The bestseller Why Johnn...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5008144</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jul 2011 12:51:49 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5008144</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>This Week in Government Failure</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4992655&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FxEO8B7rjBn8%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenOver at Downsizing the Federal Government, we focused on the following issues this past week:

As Congress scours the budget looking for spending cuts, federal employment and training programs would be good targets.
If Republican and Democratic lawmakers were really discussing major spending cuts, then the media would be full of stories mentioning particular changes to entitlement laws to reduce benefits and stories about abolishing programs widely regarded as wasteful, such as community development grants.
Indexing the tax code to the chained Consumer Price Index = stealth tax increase.
Putting $2 trillion in spending cuts in perspective.
Not only is individual financial literacy not an appropriate concern of the federal government, but the federal government itself is a mo...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4992655</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2011 16:48:51 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4992655</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>$2 Trillion in Cuts in Perspective</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4984422&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FgrDzfzJqs_M%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenCongressional Republicans have said that spending cuts must be at least as large as an increase in the debt ceiling. Negotiations over lifting the debt ceiling are ongoing, but the “magic number,” so-to-speak, would be around $2 trillion in spending cuts.
Cutting $2 trillion in federal spending sounds like a lot, but it’s actually relatively small because the cuts would likely occur over ten years. According to the Congressional Budget Office’s most recent budget baseline, the federal government will spend almost $46 trillion over the next ten years.
The following chart shows what $2 trillion in spending cuts over the next ten years looks like when measured against the CBO’s baseline. Even with the cuts, federal spending would still increase by $1.8 trillion:

Rathe...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4984422</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jun 2011 19:23:20 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4984422</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Chained CPI: A Stealth Tax Increase</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4975826&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F5lkzgVd7Tog%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris EdwardsAs we close in on congressional votes to increase the federal debt limit, negotiators are coming up with all kinds of ideas to hike taxes. (Suspiciously, they haven&amp;#8217;t revealed very many spending cut ideas so far).
One idea being discussed is to raise revenue by reducing the indexing of parameters in the income tax code. Currently, tax brackets and other features of the tax code are indexed to the Consumer Price Index (CPI). It is widely recognized that the CPI overestimates inflation for various reasons, as discussed here.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics has developed a more accurate (and lower) measure of inflation, called chained CPI. If the tax code was indexed to chained CPI instead of CPI, the government would receive an automatic tax increase relative to cu...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4975826</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jun 2011 18:35:34 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4975826</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Beware the Depends Bomber?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4975832&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F95kWXhww15U%2F</link>
            <description>By Gene HealyMy Washington Examiner column this week is on TSA, the federal agency that&amp;#8217;s its own reductio ad absurdum.
In the latest TSA atrocity, the agency forced a wheelchair-bound, 95-year-old leukemia patient to remove her adult diaper, for fear she might be wired to explode. “It’s something I couldn’t imagine happening on American soil,” her distraught daughter told the press: “Here is my mother, 95 years old, 105 pounds, barely able to stand, and then this.”
My God, what is she on about? Proper procedure was followed!
As I point out in the column:
in a classic case of &amp;#8220;mission creep,&amp;#8221; TSA is taking its show on the road and the rails.
Remember when, pushing his bullet-train boondoggle in the 2011 State of the Union, President Obama cracked that it would...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4975832</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jun 2011 13:29:46 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4975832</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Unhappy (belated) Birthday National Minimum Wage</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4975838&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FvJgnjNUGgPE%2F</link>
            <description>By Mark A. CalabriaI wasn&amp;#8217;t in the mood Friday to celebrate the 73rd birthday of the federal minimum wage, created under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.  Looking at youth unemployment numbers can be a little depressing.   Those figures should, however, sober up anyone who is still drunk under the spell of thinking the minimum wage has no impact on unemployment.

The chart above shows the increase in unemployment overall (right axis) and the unemployment rate for workers age 16 to 19 (left axis).  The difference between these two numbers usually runs about 10 percent, even in good times.  Notice that when the minimum wage was raised in July 2009, overall unemployment had started to level off, while youth unemployment sky-rocketed.  We also witnessed a big spike in youth un...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4975838</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 16:12:13 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4975838</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>CBO’s Long-Term Budget Outlook</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4960039&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FMwSOG5P2eGc%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenThe Congressional Budget Office released the latest edition of its annual forecast of where the federal government’s budget is headed. The numbers are new but the message is the same: the budget is on an unsustainable path. According to the CBO’s more politically-realistic “alternative scenario,” federal debt as a share of GDP will hit 109 percent in 2021 and would approach 190 percent in 2035.
For those mistaken souls who believe that merely eliminating “waste, fraud, and abuse” in government programs can solve the problem, the CBO has news for you:
In the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO’s) long-term projections of spending, growth in noninterest spending as a share of gross domestic product (GDP) is attributable entirely to increases in spending on severa...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4960039</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 20:39:09 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4960039</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Ricardo Paging Alan Blinder</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4952793&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FDGqSypCChvo%2F</link>
            <description>By Mark A. CalabriaI almost hesitate to suggest that anyone actually read Alan Blinder&amp;#8217;s defense of Keynesian economics in today&amp;#8217;s Wall Street Journal, except that the piece lays out clearly in my mind why Blinder is so wrong.  The only part you really need to read is:
In sum, you may view any particular public-spending program as wasteful, inefficient, leading to &amp;#8220;big government&amp;#8221; or objectionable on some other grounds. But if it&amp;#8217;s not financed with higher taxes, and if it doesn&amp;#8217;t drive up interest rates, it&amp;#8217;s hard to see how it can destroy jobs.
So in Blinder&amp;#8217;s world, deficits are explicitly not future taxes, despite what I believe is a fairly strong consensus among economists that some form of Ricardian equivalence holds (see John Seater&amp;#...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4952793</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2011 16:40:22 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4952793</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>In Global Warming Case, Supreme Court Reaches Correct Result But Leaves Room for Mischievous Litigation</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4952803&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FbC4DuEg6ftg%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroIn the important global warming case decided today, American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut, the Supreme Court unanimously reached the correct result but one that still leaves room for plenty of mischievous litigation.  While it’s clearly true that, as the Court said, the Clean Air Act and the EPA exist to deal with the claims the plaintiffs made here—that the defendants’ carbon dioxide emissions are pollutants that cause global warming—the Court left open the possibility of claims on state common-law grounds such as nuisance.  And it unfortunately said nothing about whether any such disputes, whether challenging EPA action or suing under state law, are properly “cases and controversies” ripe for judicial resolution.
The judiciary was not meant to be the sol...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4952803</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:58:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4952803</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Boost the Money Supply, Raise Interest Rates</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4952807&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FwsPZxFTvNJQ%2F</link>
            <description>By Steve H. HankeThe rate of broad money growth (M3) in the United States is weak (see the accompanying chart).  The ultra-low federal funds rate (0.25%) has acted to keep a lid on broad money growth and, in turn, economic activity.  Yes, “low” interest rates imposed by the Fed are contributing to a credit crunch and anemic money growth.  But, wait.  This is counter-intuitive.  And if that’s not enough, it’s not what the textbooks tell us, either.

While the Fed has pumped huge quantities of so-called high powered money into the economy, the U.S. is paradoxically facing a credit crunch.  Banks have utilized their liquidity to pile up cash and accumulate government bonds and securities.  In contrast, bank loans have actually decreased since May 2008.  And since credit is a s...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4952807</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 00:45:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4952807</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Report of a Woman Asked to Stop Breastfeeding in Memphis Area Social Security Office</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4934014&amp;cid=t_103665_86_f&amp;fid=34445&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwomenshealthnews.wordpress.com%2F2011%2F06%2F16%2Freport-of-a-woman-asked-to-stop-breastfeeding-in-memphis-area-social-security-office%2F</link>
            <description>Via Lindsey at The Memphis Blog, I learned of a report of a woman told by security at a Memphis, TN area Social Security office that she could not breastfeed her eight-month-old baby while waiting in line at the office. When she told the officer that she had the right to breastfeed where she was, the officer and then a manager tried to shuttle her off to a conference room, and was allegedly told that the office as a federal facility has its own rules. 
Problem is, there is apparently a law specifically authorizing women to breastfeed on federal property where they are otherwise allowed to be &amp;#8211; and it&amp;#8217;s been law for more than a decade (see section 647). 
Tennessee law is also quite clear, stating that &amp;#8220;A mother has a right to breastfeed her child who is twelve (12) months ...</description>
            <author>Women's Health News</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4934014</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2011 12:34:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4934014</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The NYT‘s Weak Defense of Homeland Security Grants</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4921381&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fo88B5L4tJGw%2F</link>
            <description>By Benjamin H. FriedmanLast week, the House passed a homeland security appropriations bill slashing funding for grants to states and localities. The New York Times has now noticed and unleashed an indignant editorial:
House Republicans talk tough on terrorism. So we can find no explanation — other than irresponsibility — for their vote to slash financing for eight antiterrorist programs. Unless the Senate repairs the damage, New York City and other high-risk localities will find it far harder to protect mass transit, ports and other potential targets.
The programs received $2.5 billion last year in separate allocations. The House has cut that back to a single block grant of $752 million, an extraordinary two-thirds reduction. The results for high-risk areas would be so damaging — wit...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4921381</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2011 21:01:43 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4921381</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>This Week in Government Failure</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4921386&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FcLLTPo1HjH8%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenOver at Downsizing the Federal Government, we focused on the following issues this week:

If we are ever to get our budgetary house in order by limiting the size and scope of government, central planning bureaucracies like the Economic Development Administration have to (finally) go.
Firefighting is a purely local concern and should be funded by those who benefit from a local fire department’s services &amp;#8212; not federal taxpayers.
House Republicans say that they will not support a debt increase unless the Democrats agree to equal-sized spending cuts. The crucial question is: Will the proposed budget savings be real cuts or smoke-and-mirrors &amp;#8220;cuts&amp;#8221;?
The U.S. Postal Service&amp;#8217;s problems: the response thus far from Congress couldn&amp;#8217;t be more typical: a c...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4921386</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2011 17:31:20 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4921386</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>FTC May Use Rules To Thwart Pay-To-Delay Deals</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4921757&amp;cid=t_103665_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FC0tblUFA4DY%2F</link>
            <description>In what some say would be a highly unusual move, the US Federal Trade Commission is considering using its rule-making power to stop pay-to-delay deals between brand-name drugmakers and their generic rivals, after failing to convince Congress or the courts to act, Bloomberg News reports.
A rule to block the deals would involve antitrust issues, rather than consumer protection, and could be made on the agency’s own initiative under its basic statutory authority rather than at the direction of Congress, Bert Foer, president of the American Antitrust Institute, tells the news service.
&amp;#8220;Any potential attempt by the FTC to move forward unilaterally with such a rulemaking would be unprecedented,” Sean Heather, executive director of the global regulatory cooperation project at the US Cha...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4921757</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2011 15:10:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4921757</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Truth Is, All of Higher Ed Is Broken</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4921396&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FKyovaxBLj6s%2F</link>
            <description>By Neal McCluskeyOver at the New America Foundation&amp;#8217;s &amp;#8220;Higher Ed Watch&amp;#8221; blog, Stephen Burd purports to know &amp;#8220;the truth behind Senate Republican&amp;#8217;s boycott of the Harkin hearing.&amp;#8221; And what is that truth? Republicans are trying to &amp;#8220;discredit an investigation that has revealed just how much damage their efforts to deregulate the industry over the past decade have caused both students and taxpayers.&amp;#8221;
Really?
Okay, it is possible that Republicans are trying to save themselves some sort of blame or embarrasment &amp;#8212; I can&amp;#8217;t read their minds &amp;#8212; but if so they&amp;#8217;ve done a terrible job. Every time Harkin holds one of his hearings the bulk of the media coverage treats it like it has revealed shocking abuse by the entire for-profit se...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4921396</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2011 13:54:55 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4921396</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>What Do Peter Diamond and Paul Pate Have in Common?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4911460&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F7aevM6o7g8Q%2F</link>
            <description>By Mark A. CalabriaYou might have heard of Peter Diamond, he recently won the Nobel Prize in Economics and earlier this week withdrew his nomination to the Federal Reserve Board. But maybe you have not heard of Paul Pate.
Mr. Pate, former Republican mayor of Cedar Rapids, Iowa was nominated by President Bush in 2003 to fill a seat on the board of the National Institute of Building Sciences. I remember it well, as I handled that nomination as staff for the Senate Banking Committee.
So what exactly do Mr. Diamond and Mr. Pate have in common? They were both nominated for positions they could not legally hold. I&amp;#8217;ve written elsewhere about Mr. Diamond&amp;#8217;s situation. Mr. Pate was barred from serving on the NIBS board due to an ownership interest he had in an asphalt company.
Bush&amp;#8217...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4911460</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jun 2011 18:07:13 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4911460</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Extinguish Federal Grants to Firefighters</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4911464&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FYbQmO1Im2Eg%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenLast week, the House passed a $40.6 billion Homeland Security appropriations bill for fiscal 2012. The Constitutional Authority Statement for the bill cited Congress’s authority to appropriate money and the General Welfare Clause. Citing the General Welfare Clause might be appropriate for activities associated with the common defense of the nation. However, it is not an appropriate justification for something like the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Assistance to Firefighters Grant program, which distributes federal taxpayer money to local fire departments.
Firefighting is a purely local concern and should be funded by those who benefit from a local fire department’s services. Why in the world am I paying federal taxes in Pennsylvania to a bureaucracy in Washingto...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4911464</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jun 2011 12:40:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4911464</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Government Control of Language and Other Protocols</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4902405&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FI8niYC-xAnE%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperIt might be tempting to laugh at France&amp;#8217;s ban on words like &amp;#8220;Facebook&amp;#8221; and Twitter&amp;#8221; in the media. France’s Conseil Supérieur de l&amp;#8217;Audiovisuel recently ruled that specific references to these sites (in stories not about them) would violate a 1992 law banning &amp;#8220;secret&amp;#8221; advertising. The council was created in 1989 to ensure fairness in French audiovisual communications, such as in allocation of television time to political candidates, and to protect children from some types of programming.
Sure, laugh at the French. But not for too long. The United States has similarly busy-bodied regulators, who, for example, have primly regulated such advertising themselves. American regulators carefully oversee non-secret advertising, too. Our govern...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4902405</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2011 16:35:53 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4902405</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Diamond Down</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4902408&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FvibE5rjCuMw%2F</link>
            <description>By Mark A. CalabriaToday Nobel Prize-winning economist Peter Diamond announced he is withdrawing his nomination to the board of governors of the Federal Reserve System. 
Professor Diamond, in the pages of New York Times, blames the opposition to his nomination on both partisan politics and what he sees as a misunderstanding of the relationship between unemployment and monetary policy.  Mr. Diamond, however, is the one with a fundamental misunderstanding.  We all know unemployment is an important issue and needs to be addressed.  The question is whether it can be addressed with loose monetary policy.  Mr. Diamond apparently believes it can.  There are many who believe it cannot.  If all our labor market problems could be solved with loose money, then we&amp;#8217;d already be at full...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4902408</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2011 15:08:29 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4902408</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>This Week in Government Failure</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4893394&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FXw54OiQpX0Y%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenA fierce storm from Mother Nature killed my Internet connection last Friday (I didn&amp;#8217;t see any black helicopters, so I&amp;#8217;m assuming it was her). Therefore, the following are issues we focused on over the last two weeks at Downsizing the Federal Government:

Federal employees enjoy benefits that aren’t available to most private sector workers.
A bottom-up approach to transportation policy would save taxpayers money and increase mobility.
Trims to discretionary agriculture programs leads one congressman to channel his inner Harold Camping.
Education policy: the Obama administration wants a race to the cradle.
Only six other Republicans voted for Sen. Rand Paul&amp;#8217;s plan to balance the budget in five years through spending cuts.
Two key House Republicans want to ha...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4893394</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 2011 16:09:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4893394</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Thank You, America!</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4893406&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FDaVQ4v1Q7Pc%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazThe Washington metropolitan area is the only major U.S. housing market where prices increased on an annual basis in the first quarter, according to a 20-city S&amp;P/Case Shiller home-price index released Tuesday. The region was helped by relatively stable employment, fewer foreclosures and an abundant supply of house hunters.
Other surveys indicate sales in the area are approaching boom-time levels.
&amp;#8211;Wall Street Journal
Thank You, America! 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=4893406</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2011 18:34:34 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4893406</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>From This Morning’s Health Care News</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4893409&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FHSX6Xx0svkY%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonIndiana learns just how much flexibility states have when administering federal health care programs.
A Medicare pilot program bearing a striking resemblance to ObamaCare&amp;#8216;s &amp;#8220;accountable care organization&amp;#8221; program turns out to be a flop.
Newsflash: Medicare&amp;#8217;s Soviet-style price controls get the prices wrong.
From This Morning&amp;#8217;s Health Care News 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=4893409</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2011 15:59:41 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4893409</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>‘Gainful Employment’ Regs Softened, Still a Diversionary Sideshow</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4893415&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FyrejsaU4zQo%2F</link>
            <description>By Neal McCluskeyThe hotly anticipated &amp;#8212; and dreaded &amp;#8212; &amp;#8220;gainful employment&amp;#8221; regulations aimed at for-profit colleges were released this morning, and based on media reports the big news is that they are a little more lenient than originally expected. Most importantly, schools that fail to meet debt-to-income and debt-repayment requirements will not be cut off from federal student aid &amp;#8212; the financial crack on which almost every college and university depends &amp;#8212; until 2015.
That&amp;#8217;s the big news, at least as reported. But it isn&amp;#8217;t the important story.
The real story remains that the Obama administration, and at least the education leadership in the Senate, continues to divert the public&amp;#8217;s eye towards for-profit schools when the entire hig...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4893415</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2011 13:53:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4893415</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Physicians on the move for hospital employment</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4883714&amp;cid=t_103665_113_f&amp;fid=38236&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.healthcareitnews.com%2Fblog%2Fphysicians-move-hospital-employment</link>
            <description>Physician employment by health systems is surging.&amp;nbsp; According to a 2009 poll by the Medical Group Management Association (MGMA) 65% of physicians who changed jobs in 2009 moved into a hospital employment model. Additionally, almost half of new fellows across all specialties agreed to become hospital employees. This shift in employment is also shifting the medical real estate market.

  
      
          No sticky    
    

read more (Source: Healthcare IT News Blog)</description>
            <author>Healthcare IT News Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4883714</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2011 12:18:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4883714</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>FTC Challenges Pay-To-Delay In Court Filing</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4862924&amp;cid=t_103665_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FPY8LOK5kv_0%2F</link>
            <description>Once again, the US Federal Trade Commission is trying to thwart pay-to-delays deals and its latest effort is a brief in which the agency has asked an appeals court to reverse a lower court ruling that sanctioned a settlement between Schering-Plough and two generic drugmakers - Upsher Smith and ESI, which was a division of Pfizer&amp;#8217;s Wyeth - over the K-Dur blood pressure med.
The background: In 1995, the two generic drugmakers sought FDA approval to sell versions of K-Dur, but Schering-Plough, now owned by Merck, filed suit for patent infringement. Just before the trial, Schering-Plough agreed to pay Upsher $60 million not to sell a generic until 2001, and the FTC filed suit (read here). Separately, Schering-Plough agreed to pay ESI up to $15 million to agree not to sell a generic until...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4862924</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 25 May 2011 12:02:39 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4862924</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>One-third of College Degrees Wasted?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4841436&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FsSGo76ioxcw%2F</link>
            <description>By Neal McCluskeyThe most recent, comprehensive Pew higher education survey has gotten a lot of coverage for its findings on how important the public thinks college is, its financial payoff for grads, etc. For some reason, though, by far the most interesting statistic in the report has gotten roughly zero play, either from Pew itself or media coverage of the report: &amp;#8220;Among all college graduates, 33% say they are in a job that does not require a college degree.&amp;#8221;
Wait. One-third of all college graduates are in jobs that don&amp;#8217;t call for a college education? So one-third of all college degrees are quite possibly total economic wastes? (To be fair, no doubt some of those grads are looking for jobs requiring a degree, mitigating this somewhat. On the flip side, many job...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4841436</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 18 May 2011 17:32:46 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4841436</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>President Obama’s ‘War on Fun’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4841442&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FFZ_BziKOzgc%2F</link>
            <description>By Gene HealyMy DC Examiner column this week focuses on Barack Obama&amp;#8217;s transformation into our National Noodge, nudging, shoving, poking and prodding Americans into healthier lifestyles via the powers of the federal government. 
A year ago, the New York Times got all excited about the &amp;#8220;new age of regulation&amp;#8221; the administration was busy ushering in. The president had elevated “a new breed of regulators&amp;#8221;: folks like regulatory czar Cass Sunstein, who wants to “nudge” Americans toward healthier consumption choices, and CDC head Thomas Frieden, who, as NYC health commissioner, proclaimed ”when anyone dies at an early age from a preventable cause in New York City, it&amp;#8217;s my fault.”
Today&amp;#8217;s column tracks how this killjoy crusade is playing out: 
Quitti...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4841442</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2011 17:56:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4841442</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>This Week in Government Failure</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4820807&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F1-my4i5ni3Y%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenOver at Downsizing the Federal Government, we focused on the following issues this week:

HUD community development programs illustrate what happens when the federal government severs the relationship between local officials and local taxpayers.
Republicans should package their spending reforms as worth undertaking even if the government had a surplus.
The sclerosis at the U.S. Postal Service is a reflection of the sclerosis in Congress.
Promises to hold down future discretionary spending levels and partial program trims are not real spending cuts.
The president&amp;#8217;s high-speed rail plan is probably dead. Unfortunately, fiscal federalism isn&amp;#8217;t faring much better.

Follow Downsizing the Federal Government on Twitter (@DownsizeTheFeds) and connect with us on Facebook.
...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4820807</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2011 20:10:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4820807</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The 2011 Social Security Trustees Report — Harbinger of Bad News</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4820811&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FHTcYGvzkSP4%2F</link>
            <description>By Jagadeesh GokhaleThe just-released 2011 annual report of the Social Security Trustees shows a significant worsening of the program&amp;#8217;s finances.
Last year we were told that we would see payroll tax surpluses over benefit expenditures for a few more years — until 2015. That won&amp;#8217;t happen according to the 2011 report; the program will now add to federal deficits in every future year — and increasingly so, which will ramp-up financial pressure to downsize other federal programs, increase taxes, or create yet more debt.
Note that both Republicans and Democrats negotiating over how to reduce federal deficits and the national debt have resolved to leave Social Security untouched for now.  That leaves the program&amp;#8217;s finances to fester and worsen — increasing the costs of f...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4820811</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2011 18:58:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4820811</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Is Housing Holding Back Inflation?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4820812&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FjmWaKEP5nYU%2F</link>
            <description>By Mark A. CalabriaToday the Bureau of Labor Statistics released the consumer price index (CPI) numbers for April, which generally gives us the best picture of inflation.  The headline number is that between April 2010 and April 2011, consumer prices increased 3.2 percent, as measured by the CPI.  Obviously this is well above 2 percent, the number Ben Bernanke defines as &amp;#8220;price stability.&amp;#8221;  Setting aside the reasonableness of that definition, there is definitely some mild inflation in the economy.
Also of interest in the April numbers is that if you subtract housing, which makes up over 40% of the weight of the CPI, then prices increased 4.2 percent — twice Bernanke&amp;#8217;s measure of stability.  What has always been problematic of the housing component is that its large...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4820812</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2011 18:50:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4820812</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Boehner’s Price for Increasing the Federal Debt Limit</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4820822&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FJVTIs8aBKcc%2F</link>
            <description>By William A. NiskanenHouse Speaker John Boehner, in his speech to the Economic Club of New York on Monday night, was very clear about the conditions for which he would support an increase in the federal debt limit:
… Without significant spending cuts and reforms to reduce our debt, there will be no debt limit increase.  And the cuts should be greater than the accompanying increase in debt authority the president is given.
We should be talking about cuts of trillions, not just billions.
They should be actual cuts and program reforms, not broad deficit or debt targets that punt the tough questions to the future.
And with the exception of tax hikes &amp;#8212; which will destroy jobs &amp;#8212; everything is on the table.
Congress is institutionally incapable of formulating and approving a large...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4820822</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 12 May 2011 20:35:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4820822</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>High-Speed Rail and Federalism</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4813242&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FN1KhQQSxd_Q%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenFlorida Governor Rick Scott deserves a big round of applause for dealing a major setback to the Obama administration’s costly plan for a national system of high-speed rail. As Randal O’Toole explains, the administration needed Florida to keep the $2.4 billion it was awarded to build a high-speed Orlando-to-Tampa line in order to build “momentum” for its plan. Instead, Scott put the interests of his taxpayers first and told the administration “no thanks.”
That’s the good news.
The bad news is that the administration is going to dole the money back out to 22 passenger-rail projects in other states. Florida taxpayers were spared their state’s share of maintaining the line, but they’re still going to be forced to help foot the bill for passenger-rail projects in...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4813242</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 11 May 2011 20:21:43 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4813242</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>“Let Them [Safety Certified Mexican] Truckers Roll, 10-4”</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4813249&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FsSqIDHP1DpQ%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel GriswoldOK, I took some editorial license on the line from the 1970s song by C.W. McCall about truckers bantering on their CB radios, but the spirit of the song applies to our ongoing dispute with Mexico over access to U.S. highways.
On Friday, the comment period will end in the Federal Register on a pilot program proposed by the Obama administration that would allow qualified Mexican trucks and their Mexican drivers to make long-haul deliveries within the United States. With the exception of a brief interlude from 2007 to 2009, the U.S. has banned Mexican trucks from serving destinations within the United States.
I explain why this is bad for our economy and our reputation as a nation in an op-ed this morning in the Washington Times and in my own comments filed with the Federal ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4813249</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 11 May 2011 15:36:03 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4813249</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>VA Mental Health Care is So Bad, It’s Unconstitutional</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4813360&amp;cid=t_103665_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2011%2F05%2F11%2Fva-mental-health-care-is-so-bad-its-unconstitutional%2F</link>
            <description>So says a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, after reviewing the evidence about the ability of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to offer an appropriately level of mental health care and treatment to returning soldiers.
In this way, the costs of the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been grossly underestimated, because they don&amp;#8217;t take into account the increased needs and costs of the vets&amp;#8217; ongoing and increasing mental health care. The longer we&amp;#8217;re at war, the worse it&amp;#8217;s going to get.
According to the article on TIME.com about the recent ruling, not only do some vets have to wait weeks to get in to see a mental health professional at many VA medical centers, but there&amp;#8217;s often no significant triaging ...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4813360</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 11 May 2011 15:30:28 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4813360</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Yes, Says Virginia, There Are Limits on Federal Power</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4813260&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FTRqxGl4BsSo%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroToday, the Fourth Circuit became the first appellate court in the nation to enter the Obamacare fray.  It heard two very similar cases back-to-back, Liberty University’s, in which the government won in the district court, and the Commonwealth of Virginia’s, in which Judge Henry Hudson struck down the individual mandate back in December.  Going into the hearing, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli’s legal team had done a wonderful job setting out the reasons why Hudson was correct and why Congress went too far in asserting the unprecedented power to compel people to enter into contracts with private insurance companies.  I was proud to sign Cato’s brief supporting that position and continue to maintain that the federal government cannot require people to buy g...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4813260</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2011 17:57:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4813260</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>This Week in Government Failure</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4794841&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fa-mo2hugaVM%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris EdwardsTad DeHaven has gone fishing with his dad, so I&amp;#8217;ve got weekly wrap-up duties.
We focused on the following issues at Downsizing the Federal Government this week:

Randal O&amp;#8217;Toole talks high-speed trains.
Tad says that he&amp;#8217;s &amp;#8220;hot and bothered&amp;#8221; by politics on Capitol Hill.
Tad compares budgeting in 1995 and 2011.
Dan Griswold describes the idiocy of federal sugar policies.
I discuss fiscal policy and royal weddings. Obama is talking corporate tax cuts and Republicans are talking spending cuts. I&amp;#8217;ve got a great idea for a bipartisan deal!

To close out, Tad would usually say something tech-savvy such as &amp;#8221;follow Downsizing the Federal Government on Twitter (@DownsizeTheFeds) and connect with us on Facebook.&amp;#8221;
This Week in Gov...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4794841</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2011 21:03:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4794841</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Some Thoughts on Federal Rental Housing Assistance</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4789220&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fl6rZ5DLuA-4%2F</link>
            <description>By Mark A. CalabriaLast week I participated on a panel on federal rental housing policy, organized by Harvard&amp;#8217;s Joint Center for Housing Studies in conjunction with the release of their new report on conditions in the rental market.  In their defense, the report does attempt to avoid offering policy prescriptions.  But the report does come pretty close to suggesting that we spend more on federal rental housing assistance.  In the post-housing bubble  environment, many, myself included, have dared suggest that there&amp;#8217;s nothing wrong with someone being a renter, and that maybe we pushed too many into homeownership.
But saying we overdid homeowneship is not the same as saying we ignored rental.  In fact the federal government has spent massive amounts on rental housing, yet ac...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4789220</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2011 18:01:28 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4789220</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Hazy-Eyed Hunter Prepares to Fire on For-Profits</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4789222&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F_8xJ2WgGK-k%2F</link>
            <description>By Neal McCluskeyYesterday, the U.S. Department of Education sent proposed &amp;#8212; and  highly controversial &amp;#8212; &amp;#8220;gainful employment&amp;#8221; regulations to the Office of Management and Budget for review, the first step in the process of officially publishing them. The regulations &amp;#8212; assuming they haven&amp;#8217;t changed drastically from previous proposed versions &amp;#8212; would limit the ability of students in vocational postsecondary programs to access federal financial aid if those programs produce debt burdens the regs deem too high, or salaries they deem too low. The exact details on what constitutes &amp;#8221;too high&amp;#8221; and &amp;#8220;too low&amp;#8221; should be revealed soon.
The big problem with this is that it is aimed at easily abused for-profit schools while leavi...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4789222</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2011 16:03:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4789222</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Seven Reasons to Oppose Higher Taxes</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4789224&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F_T6uSP5kDhU%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellAs I have explained elsewhere, tax increases are a bad idea &amp;#8211; unless you favor bigger government.
And I&amp;#8217;ve already added my two cents to the tax debate between Senator Coburn and Grover Norquist regarding the desirability of higher taxes.
So it won&amp;#8217;t surprise anyone to know that I fully agree with this new video from the Center for Freedom and Prosperity, which offers seven reasons why higher taxes are a bad idea.

The video is narrated by Piyali Bhattacharya of Young Americans for Liberty, and here are her seven reasons.

Tax increases are not needed
Tax increases encourage more spending
Tax increases harm economic performance
Tax increases foment social discord
Tax increases almost never raise as much revenue as projected
Tax increases encourage mor...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4789224</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2011 13:58:53 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4789224</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>FTC Complains Pay-To-Delay Deals ‘Skyrocketed’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4789641&amp;cid=t_103665_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F919qtSMsjE4%2F</link>
            <description>Despite setbacks in courts and Congress, the Federal Trade Commission continues to hammer away at pay-to-delay deals involving patent settlements between brand-name and generic drugmakers. The agency views these deals as anti-competitive, arguing they rob consumers of lower-cost meds that might otherwise arrive much sooner in pharmacies.
And so the FTC chair Jon Leibowitz has released yet another report that he hopes will generate some momentum in Congress toward restricting these agreements. The report found there 31 deals in fiscal year 2010, a 63 percent increase from fiscal year 2009. The deals reached in the last year involved 22 different brand-name meds with combined annual US sales of about $9.3 billion.
Of the 31 settlements, 26 involved generics that were “first filers,” whic...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4789641</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2011 12:39:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4789641</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Can We Rely on Inflation Expectations?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4780292&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F-bKAEJ36A_Q%2F</link>
            <description>By Mark A. CalabriaThe Wall Street Journal has pointed out that in his recent press conference Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke used the words &amp;#8220;inflation expectations&amp;#8221; (or some variation) 21 times. His argument is that we need not worry about inflation because we will see it coming, and then the Fed will do something about it. Such an argument relies heavily on the ability of inflation expectations to predict inflation. Which of course raises the question, just how predictive are inflation expectations?
The graph below compares inflation, as measured by CPI, and inflation expectations, as measured by the University of Michigan consumer survey, the longest times series we have on inflation expectations.

Clearly the two move together. For instance, the correlation between c...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4780292</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 17:17:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4780292</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Is National Debt As Bad As Paul Ryan Says It Is? Lessons From The Past</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4767993&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fis-national-debt-as-bad-as-paul-ryan-says-it-is-lessons-from-the-past%2F2011.04.30</link>
            <description>The last two weeks have made clear that the debate over our national debt will play a major role in the next election cycle.
On one side, many Republicans, lead by Representative Ryan, insist that the rate of growth of our national debt – especially the massive projected growth of Medicare and Medicaid – promises to destroy our society within a generation or two; and that the only way to avert that catastrophe is to make substantial structural changes to our entitlement programs. The subtext of their message is: Federal debt is bad, and debt of this magnitude will be fatal.
On the other side, most Democrats, led by President Obama, stress that our entitlement programs are promises that simply can’t be changed in any substantial way, insist that such entitlements are “investments in...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4767993</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 30 Apr 2011 14:00:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4767993</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Wednesday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4758740&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FAL-eC2nmqmc%2F</link>
            <description>By George Scoville
New research suggests that there has been more monetary and macroeconomic instability since the Federal Reserve&amp;#8217;s inception than in the decades preceding it.
New thinking about the usefulness of government programs will help us from restore fiscal balance and economic well-being in America.
New geopolitical circumstances should make us wonder: why are we still a part of NATO?
New Deal-era jurisprudence may soon be overturned as challenges to the Affordable Care Act reach the U.S. Supreme Court.
New means of funding public roads will increase efficiency by confronting drivers with the costs of using them, and reducing congestion:


Reminder: If you&amp;#8217;re in the DC area, please join us this Friday at 4:00 p.m. Eastern for a special sneak preview of Free or Equal a...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4758740</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:01:48 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4758740</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Updated Cato Budget Plan</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4753669&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FEWH5eRgfepA%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenOver at Downsizing the Federal Government, Chris Edwards has released an updated version of his &amp;#8220;Plan to Cut Spending and Balance the Federal Budget.&amp;#8221; The plan proposes spending cuts of more than $1 trillion annually by 2021, which would balance the budget without resorting to damaging tax increases. Federal spending would be reduced to 18 percent of gross domestic product by 2021 under the plan, which compares to President Obama&amp;#8217;s projected spending that year of 24.2 percent of GDP.


Some key points:

No sacred cows are spared.   Defense, domestic, and so-called entitlement programs are all cut.


The plan recognizes that   the scope of federal activities must be curtailed. It would begin the reversal   of decades of federal expansion into hundreds of area...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4753669</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2011 18:10:32 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4753669</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Public Choice and Spending Cuts</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4734046&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FHARaQeQERsI%2F</link>
            <description>By Caleb O. BrownThe Institute for Humane Studies Learn Liberty project continues to offer clear-headed analysis in video form. The latest effort features Ben Powell of Suffolk University explaining the concept of concentrated benefits and diffuse costs in the context of ongoing budget fights.

Cato recently produced two short videos on complementary aspects of the budget fights. For a more detailed treatment of many aspects of public choice, get your free (cheap!) copy of Cato&amp;#8217;s excellent book, Government Failure: A Primer in Public Choice.
Public Choice and Spending Cuts 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=4734046</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 21 Apr 2011 14:07:15 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4734046</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>No Profile in Courage Here, Either</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4734048&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FEm4sS4pU8fY%2F</link>
            <description>By Neal McCluskeyYesterday, speaking at Facebook headquarters, President Obama assessed the guts of Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) and other congressional Republicans and concluded that their deficit reduction plan isn&amp;#8217;t &amp;#8220;particularly courageous.&amp;#8221; That might be accurate &amp;#8211; their plan lacks specificity and could target a lot more for elimination &amp;#8212; but it&amp;#8217;s pretty rich for the President to throw out such a conclusion. After all, his whole strategy appears to be the bankruptingly lame-but-safe crying of doom for cute kids and other supposedly defenseless people no matter what the size of the proposed cut to a social program or how ineffective the program has been. That, and the constant lamentation that &amp;#8220;the rich&amp;#8221; &amp;#8211; a small and th...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4734048</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 21 Apr 2011 13:29:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4734048</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Response to Joe Weisenthal’s Critique of My Politico Opinion Piece</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4734055&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fmk_JJ-d9Xfs%2F</link>
            <description>By Jagadeesh GokhaleYesterday I had an op-ed in Politico suggesting that U.S. lawmakers should consider not raising the federal debt limit (at least for now). I argued that freezing the ceiling would assure investors that the United States is serious about reducing its debt, and that it would serve as a commitment device for lawmakers and President Obama to forge and follow a serious debt-reduction strategy.
A financial website writer named Joe Weisenthal strongly disagreed with my column. He seems to misunderstand several of the points that I was making, and so I offer the following response to his comments:
From Weisenthal’s post:
Another day, another economist advocating that the US default on its debt.
The latest is Jagadeesh Gokhale of the Cato Institute, who has a big piece advo...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4734055</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 20 Apr 2011 17:31:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4734055</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Air Traffic Control: Too Important for Government</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4734059&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FvpasOb5Le_8%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris EdwardsThe government&amp;#8217;s air traffic controllers have been sleeping on the job, watching movies rather than guiding planes, and misdirecting the First Lady&amp;#8217;s plane over Washington. There have been soaring numbers of airplane near misses caused by ATC errors over the last year.
Yesterday, the president said that federal government technology systems are &amp;#8220;horrible&amp;#8221; &amp;#8220;across-the-board,&amp;#8221; which isn&amp;#8217;t good news for citizens hoping that the Federal Aviation Administration&amp;#8217;s computers will land them safely.
The government&amp;#8217;s air traffic controllers are very highly compensated, but they are unionized and they work for a mismanaged bureaucracy. The federal ATC system has had serious labor and management problems since the 1960s. And the...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4734059</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 20 Apr 2011 13:54:01 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4734059</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Budget Cuts Look Familiar</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4734064&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F1TK6Wboi4Xo%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenWhat do these federal agencies and programs have in common?
Agricultural Research Service, Animal &amp; Plant Health Inspection Service, Rural Development programs, Women, Infants &amp; Children, Foreign Agricultural Service, National Institute of Standards &amp; Technology, National Oceanic &amp; Atmospheric Administration, Economic Development Administration, National Telecommunications &amp; Information Administration, Small Business Administration, State Department foreign aid, Fund for African Development, International Development assistance, Economic Support Fund, Peacekeeping Operations, Trade Development Agency, Army Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, Bureau of Reclamation, National Forest System, Appalach...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4734064</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 19 Apr 2011 12:59:09 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4734064</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>If There Were An Annual ‘Regulation Day’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4723786&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FNFg2b0upjHA%2F</link>
            <description>By Walter OlsonAs Iain Murray points out at National Review&amp;#8216;s &amp;#8220;Corner,&amp;#8221; there&amp;#8217;s no date on the calendar each year that reminds us, the way income tax filing day does, of the huge share of our economic labors that the government commands in the name of regulation. In part this is because the costs of regulation are even better disguised than those of taxation: while paycheck withholding may lull us into complacency about our income tax burden, it is downright transparent compared with the costs of regulation, which the ordinary citizen may never recognize when passed along in the form of higher utility bills or sluggish performance by some sector of the economy. Iain notes the good work done by his colleagues at the Competitive Enterprise Institute: 
Regulations cost...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4723786</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2011 18:19:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4723786</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Happy Tax Day! Rest Assured. Your Money Is Well Spent Defending Rich Allies</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4719885&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FjFmU0d2pZjw%2F</link>
            <description>By Christopher PrebleA little over a year ago, I posted two different graphs (with the help of my colleague Charles Zakaib) that showed the growth of U.S. national security spending vs. that of other NATO allies over the last ten years. The data, based on the International Institute for Strategic Studies’ annual Military Balance, showed that U.S. taxpayers spend far more on our military, both as a share of total economic output, and on a per capita basis, than do any of our allies.
New data, for 2009, was made available in IISS’s Military Balance 2011, and the revised graphs are shown below. (Again, thanks to Charles for his help). As I suspected, the gap remains as wide as ever. In a few cases, it has grown wider.


As you can see, the $2,101 that every American man, woman, and child ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4719885</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 15 Apr 2011 15:37:31 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4719885</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Consumer Groups Ask FTC To Split CVS Caremark</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4715014&amp;cid=t_103665_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FpYq3k6eZCQ4%2F</link>
            <description>Four years after the merger between the CVS drugstore chain and the Caremark pharmacy benefits manager, which has spurred numerous investigations and lawsuits over anticompetitive concerns, a handful of consumer groups have written the US Federal Trade Commission to ask the agency to break up the company. 
Why? The groups charge CVS Caremark limits choice through various programs, the merger has given CVS unfair advantage over other retailers, patients are steered toward CVS and confidential patient information is improperly shared. Such concerns have already prompted investigations by the FTC and attorneys general of 24 states. CVS Caremark has previously said it is cooperating with the probes.
“There is strong evidence that the CVS Caremark merger has harmed consumers,” says the lett...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4715014</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 15 Apr 2011 12:18:08 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4715014</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obama/Boehner’s Phony Spending Cuts</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4714716&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FYt3CADRA5Ds%2F</link>
            <description>By Caleb O. Brown
President Obama and Congress have agreed to cut $38 billion in federal spending, right? If you go by so-called &amp;#8220;budget authority,&amp;#8221; that may be true. But real spending cuts come when you actually cut real spending, not &amp;#8220;budget authority.&amp;#8221; Outlays in fiscal year 2011 will likely be considerably higher than last year&amp;#8217;s outlays. That means the spending cuts advertised by President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner are laughably fraudulent. Learn more at downsizinggovernment.org.
Video produced by Caleb O. Brown and Austin Bragg.
Obama/Boehner&amp;#8217;s Phony Spending Cuts 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=4714716</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 14 Apr 2011 22:08:58 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4714716</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Happy Tax Freedom Day!</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4704621&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FWDzxhAgxFEM%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellIf you are an average American, today is a great day. According to the Tax Foundation, you have finally worked long enough and earned enough money to satisfy the annual tax demands of federal, state, and local governments.
This means you now get to keep any additional income you earn.
That&amp;#8217;s the good news. The bad news is that Tax Freedom Day only measures the direct and immediate impact of taxation. It doesn&amp;#8217;t measure the overall burden of government. This chart from the Tax Foundation shows that the fiscal burden of government has jumped enormously since the end of the Clinton years.

Happy Tax Freedom Day! 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=4704621</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2011 16:03:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4704621</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>It’s Bigger Than the Budget</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4704626&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FCDMCl8OnIqI%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonToday POLITICO Arena asks:
Do the cuts (and increases) contained in the six-month spending bill House Republicans posted overnight make sense, and do they go far enough in attacking the deficit and national debt?
My response:
Today’s Arena question captures perfectly what’s missing from our current budget debate. In listing a few of the compromises contained in the six-month spending bill House Republicans posted overnight, and asking whether those cuts (and increases) go far enough in attacking the deficit and national debt, it invites us to imagine that America is one big family, arguing over how “we” should spend “our” money.
We’re not. As I wrote in last Thursday’s Wall Street Journal, we&amp;#8217;re a constitutional republic, populated by discrete individual...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4704626</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2011 14:33:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4704626</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>“The Largest Annual Spending Cut in Our History”?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4696607&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FGaYv4vnKj9A%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazIn this week&amp;#8217;s Britannica column, I look at the claims being made for the budget cuts in the weekend deal:
“The largest annual spending cut in our history,” President Obama said. Speaker of the House John Boehner called it the “largest real dollar spending cut in American history.” Saturday’s front-page, upper-right headline in the Washington Post proclaimed:
BIGGEST CUTS
IN U.S. HISTORY
The story went on to say that Obama “said the cuts would be painful but necessary.”
NPR’s Andrea Seabrook reported, “The Republicans got big, big cuts.”
And are they?
Please. It’s a cut of $38 billion in a budget of $3,819 billion. That’s 1 percent. That’s a rounding error in federal budgeting&amp;#8230;.
That same budget table shows that federal spending fell f...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4696607</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 11 Apr 2011 13:20:24 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4696607</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Kiss-Your-Sister Budget Deal Is Finalized, but Claudia Schiffer Still Ain’t Your Sibling</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4696611&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FIEBJ9rrQycA%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellThere were reports about 10 days ago that the crowd in Washington reached a budget deal, for the remainder of the 2011 fiscal year, with $33 billion of cuts. That number was disappointingly low. I wrote at the time that if this was a kiss-your-sister deal, we didn&amp;#8217;t have any siblings that looked like Claudia Schiffer.
I knew it was unrealistic to expect the full $61 billion, but I explained that $45 billion was a realistic target.
We now have a new agreement, which supposedly is final, and the amount of budget cuts has climbed to $38 billion. So our sister is getting prettier, but she still isn&amp;#8217;t close to being a supermodel. Here are the highlights (or lowlights) from the New York Times story.
Congressional leaders and President Obama headed off a shutdown ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4696611</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 09 Apr 2011 22:40:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4696611</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Why Should Social Insurance Reform Not Affect Those Over Age 54?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4684266&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FWOltDcKDhrY%2F</link>
            <description>By Jagadeesh GokhaleHouse Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan's budget plan is ostensibly for FY 2012, but it contains reforms with far-reaching implications for the nation's fiscal condition.
Most of the action in his plan is on the spending side and mainly on health care entitlements: Medicare and Medicaid.  Many pundits on the left are claiming it is a political document rather than a serious budget proposal, especially because it lacks details on many of its proposed policy changes. 
One thing that stands out, as pointed out by David Leonhardt in the NYT, is that Ryan's plan exempts people older than age 55 from bearing any share of the adjustment costs.  They should, instead, be called upon to share some of the burden, Leonhardt argues — a point that I agree with.  If seniors a...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4684266</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2011 21:16:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4684266</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Why Are Self-Proclaimed Deficit Hawks Unenthusiastic about the Ryan Budget?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4684269&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FqvHpL0CFepQ%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellWashington is filled with groups that piously express their devotion to balanced budgets and fiscal responsibility, so it is rather revealing that some of these groups have less-than-friendly responses to Congressman Ryan's budget plan.
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, for instance, portrays itself as a bunch of deficit hawks. So you would think they would be doing cartwheels to celebrate a lawmaker who makes a real proposal that would control red ink. Yet Maya MacGuineas, president of the CRFB, basically rejects Ryan's plan because it fails to increase the tax burden.
...while the proposal deserves praise for being bold, the national discussion has moved beyond just finding a plan with sufficient savings to finding one that can generate enough support t...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4684269</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2011 17:59:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4684269</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Rep. Ryan’s Budget Avoids Cuts to Military Spending</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4684273&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FtiywFcd5qAI%2F</link>
            <description>By Christopher PrebleFor all the boldness of Rep. Paul Ryan’s proposal to reduce projected federal expenditures by $6 trillion, an initiative that I support, the Pentagon’s budget emerges essentially unscathed in Ryan’s plan. This is a mistake on both fiscal and strategic grounds. Significant cuts in military spending must be on the table as the nation struggles to close its fiscal gap without saddling individuals and businesses with burdensome taxes and future generations with debt. Such cuts will also force a reappraisal of our military’s roles and missions that is long overdue.
The Pentagon’s base budget has nearly doubled during the past decade. Throw in the costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, plus nuclear weapons spending in the Department of Energy, and a smattering ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4684273</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2011 15:39:01 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4684273</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Wednesday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4684274&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FCEIDqKmv1ug%2F</link>
            <description>By George Scoville
It's time for a little less hubris.
It's time for a government shutdown.
It's time to stop shooting ourselves in the foot.
It's time for an adult conversation on the federal budget, and Chairman Ryan's plan is a good start.
It's time to rethink our strategy in Afghanistan:



Wednesday 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=4684274</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2011 14:46:04 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4684274</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Federal Spending: Ryan vs. Obama</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4684277&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fjerptwu4EFo%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris EdwardsHouse Budget Committee Chairman, Paul Ryan, introduced his budget resolution for fiscal 2012 and beyond today entitled “The Path to Prosperity.” The plan would cut some spending programs, reduce top income tax rates, and reform Medicare and Medicaid. The following two charts compare spending levels under Chairman Ryan’s plan and President Obama’s recent budget (as scored by the Congressional Budget Office).
Figure 1 shows that spending rises more slowly over the next decade under Ryan’s plan than Obama’s plan. But spending rises substantially under both plans—between 2012 and 2021, spending rises 34 percent under Ryan and 55 percent under Obama.

Figure 2 compares Ryan’s and Obama’s proposed spending levels at the end of the 10-year budget window in 2021. ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4684277</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2011 14:54:21 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4684277</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Tuesday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4684278&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FM-AHhGfm6-Y%2F</link>
            <description>By George Scoville
Republicans have a big opportunity to undo Obamacare and reform Medicaid and Medicare all at once.
It's a good thing, too, because we're facing a big debt crisis and if we don't change course, federal spending will crest 42% of GDP by 2050.
There's also a big elephant in the room in an excessively complicated tax code.
One has to wonder if the Republicans intend to put the big sacred cow of defense spending on the table.
Unrelated to the budget, education choice proponents scored a big victory in the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday in ACSTO v. Winn, a decision that upheld education tax credits:



Tuesday 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=4684278</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2011 14:13:52 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4684278</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Congressman Ryan’s Budget Is a Big Step in the Right Direction</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4676756&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fs0h5QDv2r10%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellThe chairman of the House Budget Committee, Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, will unveil his FY2012 budget tomorrow. Not all the details are public yet, but what we do know is very encouraging.
Ryan's plan is a broad reform package, including limits on so-called discretionary spending, limits on excessive pay for federal bureaucrats, and steep reductions in corporate welfare.
But the two most exciting parts are entitlement reform and tax reform. Ryan's proposals would simultaneously address the long-run threat of bloated government and put in place tax policies that will boost growth and improve competitiveness.

The long-run fiscal threat to America is entitlement spending. Ryan's plan will address this crisis by block-granting Medicaid to the states (repeating the succe...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4676756</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 04 Apr 2011 16:18:57 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4676756</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Orphans, Forget Spring. Bundle Up. There’s a Chill in the Air</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4676779&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FDisruptiveWomenInHealthCare%2F%7E3%2FQjV-tryLFQ4%2F</link>
            <description>By Glenna Crooks. Having been engaged in rare disease research and orphan drug development for many decades and as one who continues behind-the-scenes to encourage the work, events of the last few weeks about Makena’s launch sent chills through me. 
The firestorm that followed created some heat but none sufficient to help relieve the shivers. Others might declare the outcome a “win” but the more I read, the worse it seems. I’m not privy to what really happened, only what the press reports. It does not look good&amp;#8230; for virtually anyone of the players involved, especially the critics. 
Those critics raised tough questions and to date only the company has faced them. It’s about time the critics themselves –and perhaps others as well – face some.   
For those who’ve mi...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4676779</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 04 Apr 2011 09:31:25 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4676779</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Energy Error Continued</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4670091&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FTpfGnYThmvk%2F</link>
            <description>By Richard L. GordonWhen Barack Obama emerged as a serious contender for the presidency, he offered a core menu of curing everything by increased federal intervention in health care, education, and energy. Whenever new problems arose that lessened the urgency of earlier concerns, Obama has crafted assertions that his original prescriptions will also resolve the new difficulties. In energy, this has involved extending his program to new, even more dubious projects. He also has a habit of incessantly repeating the same tired arguments in the vain hope that his skill at persuasion will win the day.
His March 30, 2011 energy speech and accompanying Blueprint are typical. About the only differences between these and his June 15, 2010 speech on energy were more bad ideas. He added to the panic...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4670091</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:24:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4670091</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>KV Pharma Lowers Price Of Preemie Drug</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4664471&amp;cid=t_103665_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FBooQH9h2fi8%2F</link>
            <description>Under enormous political pressure and undercut by an unexpected FDA decision earlier this week, KV Pharmaceuticals has lowered the price of its Makena injectable drug for premature births by nearly 55 percent, to $690 per injection. Previously, KV hoped to charge $1,500. Despite the decrease, this is still considerably more than the $10 to $20 that compounding pharmacies typically charge.
Nonetheless, KV maintains the price drop, supplemental rebates and the standard 23.1 percent Medicaid rebate &amp;#8220;will result in a substantially reduced cost per injection for state Medicaid agencies compared to list price. This will help ensure that every woman who is prescribed Makena – regardless of her ability to pay – has the comfort of knowing a medication that has been rigorously reviewed by ...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4664471</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Apr 2011 15:18:27 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4664471</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Let’s Not Lose Sight of a Real Education Market</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4664147&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FvIdkR6So0ek%2F</link>
            <description>By Neal McCluskeyOver the last few days Jay Greene, the Fordham Institute's Kathleen Porter-Magee, and several other edu-thinkers have been arguing about whether national curriculum standards would destroy a competitive market in education, and a market that already provides the uniform standards Fordham wants Washington to impose. But let's be very clear: We haven't had a real market -- a free market -- in education for a long time.
Sadly, I'm afraid Jay started this whole mess, though he certainly knows what a free market in education would look like and I don't think he intended to confuse the issue.  Indeed, he doesn't use the term &quot;free market,&quot; but mainly writes about the &quot;competitive market between communities.&quot; His argument is that Americans over time picked standardize...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4664147</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2011 19:04:41 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4664147</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Wednesday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4658365&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FDOoaNeXsr-o%2F</link>
            <description>By George Scoville
Please join us on Thursday, April 7 at 2:00 p.m. ET for &quot;The Economic Impact of Government Spending,&quot; featuring Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN), Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX), former Sen. Phil Gramm, former IMF director of fiscal affairs department Vito Tanzi, and Ohio University economist and AEI adjunct scholar Richard Vedder. We encourage you to attend in person, but if you cannot, you can tune in online at our new live events hub.
The last time we saw a green energy economy was in the 13th century.
This isn't quite what we meant by &quot;defense spending.&quot; For a refresher, see this itemized list of proposed cuts that could save taxpayers $150 billion annually.
&quot;Prosperity reigns where taxes are low and right to work prevails.&quot;
In case you missed it last Friday, che...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4658365</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:32:15 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4658365</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>FDA Won’t Pursue Compounders Making KV Drug</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4658621&amp;cid=t_103665_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F_coAu5MMn48%2F</link>
            <description>In response to threats KV Pharmaceuticals has made to compounding pharmacies that want to continue making low-cost versions of its high-priced Makena preemie drug, the FDA has just issued a statement saying the agency will not take any &amp;#8220;enforcement actions&amp;#8221; against compounders.
The &amp;#8220;FDA understands that the manufacturer of Makena, KV Pharmaceuticals, has sent letters to pharmacists indicating that FDA will no longer exercise enforcement discretion with regard to compounded versions of Makena. This is not correct,&amp;#8221; the FDA statement says.
&amp;#8220;In order to support access to this important drug, at this time and under this unique situation, FDA does not intend to take enforcement action against pharmacies that compound hydroxyprogesterone caproate based on a valid pr...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4658621</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2011 14:43:43 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4658621</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>KV Pharma, A Preemie Drug &amp; The March Of Dimes</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4658625&amp;cid=t_103665_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FywfQAM3CoRc%2F</link>
            <description>Earlier this month, controversy erupted after KV Pharmaceuticals began charging $1,500 for an injection of its Makena drug for preventing premature births. Why? Makena is actually a form of progesterone that has been available for decades from compounding pharmacies at roughly $10 to $20 a week (read this and this). Now, though, KV Pharma has a lock on the market, because Makena is the only drug approved by the FDA for this purpose. Two US senators, however, asked the US Federal Trade Commission to investigate and various patient groups are pressuring KV to lower its price. We spoke with Alan Fleischman, medical director at the March of Dimes, which has received some $1 million in donations from KV over the past decade, but issued a harsh condemnation (see this). This chat occurred just be...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4658625</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2011 12:22:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4658625</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Budget Battle Update: It’s About Preparing for the Inevitable Fight, not Forcing a Shutdown</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4653305&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fckf64u9fopA%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellAccording to news reports, Democrats and Republicans are unlikely to reach any sort of budget agreement before April 8, when a short-term spending bill for the current fiscal year expires.
Barring some new development, this could mean a shutdown of the non-essential parts of the government.
This makes both sides very nervous. Democrats don't want the spending spigot turned off and are worried that voters might conclude that there's no reason to ever re-open departments such as Housing and Urban Development. Republicans, meanwhile, mostly worry that they might look unreasonable and get blamed if certain parts of the government are mothballed and voters can't get passports or visit national parks.
Given this state of play, what's the best strategy for fiscal conservative...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4653305</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 29 Mar 2011 21:25:44 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4653305</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Thinking Through Merger Review</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4653306&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FSM08H5Zny0A%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperRandy May of the Free State Foundation has a characteristically good post about the AT&amp;T/T-Mobile merger entitled: &quot;The AT&amp;T and T-Mobile Merger: Thinking Things Through.&quot; Among other smart ideas, Randy highlights the competitive game-playing that goes on in the merger review arena:
When considering competitive and market impacts for purposes of merger reviews, observe the extent to which various competitors, often many competitors, mount vigorous campaigns designed to convince the antitrust authorities and the regulators that if the merger is approved there will be an absence of competition. Note the incongruity.
There's level-headed thinking aplenty in this post from a long-time Federal Communications Commission and telecom-industry watcher. Check it out.
Thinking Th...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4653306</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 29 Mar 2011 20:38:57 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4653306</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>What Are Republicans Thinking?!?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4642577&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FDUAjXcfKZ1Y%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellI posted recently at International Liberty about the stunning political incompetence of Republican Senators, who reportedly are willing to give Obama an increase in the debt limit in exchange for a vote (yes, just a vote) on a balanced budget amendment.
As I explained, there is no way they can get the necessary two-thirds support to approve an amendment, so why trade a meaningless and symbolic vote on a BBA for meaningful and real approval of more borrowing authority for Obama? My analogy yesterday was that this was like trading an all-star baseball player for a utility infielder in the minor leagues.
I did acknowledge that forcing a vote on a BBA was a worthwhile endeavor, but said that the GOP has that power anyhow, so why trade away something valuable to get somethi...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4642577</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 27 Mar 2011 19:29:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4642577</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>ONC opens comments on federal HIT strategic plan</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4636523&amp;cid=t_103665_113_f&amp;fid=34625&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthit.hhs.gov%2Fportal%2Fserver.pt%2Fdocument%2F954074%2Ffederal_hit_strategic_plan_public_comment_period</link>
            <description>The Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology today opened a four-week comment period on proposed revisions to the Federal Health IT Strategic Plan (pdf). Last updated in 2008, the plan spells out ONC&amp;#8217;s strategy for meeting national health IT goals for the five-year period beginning in 2011. The HITECH Act requires this revision.
According to a blog post by national coordinator Dr. David Blumenthal:
Some components of the Plan may already be familiar, including the Medicare and Medicaid Electronic Health Record Incentive Programs and the grant programs created by the HITECH Act, which are creating an infrastructure to support meaningful use. However, the Plan also charts new ground for the federal health IT agenda:

In Goal I, the health information exchang...</description>
            <author>Neil Versel's Healthcare IT Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4636523</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2011 20:29:28 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4636523</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>End Federal Welfare – Don’t Mend It</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4631461&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FxO-WpFvB8qo%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenRep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), the chairman of the conservative House Republican Study Committee, recently introduced “The Welfare Reform Act of 2011.” The legislation’s two key components are the imposition of work requirements on food stamps recipients and the capping of total spending for 77 welfare programs at 2007 levels (adjusted for inflation going forward) when unemployment drops below 6.5 percent.
From the RSC press release:
Congressional Republicans and President Bill Clinton enacted reforms in 1996 that required beneficiaries of a new welfare program (TANF) to either work or prepare for a job. President Clinton triumphantly declared these reforms would “end welfare as we know it,” and in fact millions of families have since moved off the TANF rolls and begun to ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4631461</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2011 03:04:49 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4631461</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Government Shouldn’t Try to Manage the Communications Marketplace</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4631465&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fue904-gifrM%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperMatt Yglesias takes my recent post gathering three links a little too seriously. Beyond their subject matter---the proposed merger of AT&amp;T and T-Mobile---the theme running through the links was that they were all to the TechLiberationFront blog, not that &quot;the federal government should not try to manage the development of the communications marketplace.&quot; My humor is a little odd. Not everyone gets to come along....
But it's true that the federal government should not try to manage the development of the communications marketplace. So I'll defend that, and first principles, which Yglesias claims to have reached their limits when it comes to communications.
First, I'll refine my thesis: the government should not manage the communications marketplace.
What is a &quot;marketplace&quot;?...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4631465</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 24 Mar 2011 15:46:43 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4631465</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Voices on the AT&amp;T – T-Mobile Merger</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4622229&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FSfmPjGV3c8s%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperNews that AT&amp;T plans a purchase of T-Mobile has brought out a lot of commentary.
On the TechLiberationFront blog, Larry Downes critiqued the emotional reaction of some advocates for government-managed communications.
On the TechLiberationFront blog, Jerry Brito noted how the deal highlights the artificial spectrum scarcity created by the Federal Communications Commission.
And on the TechLiberationFront blog, Adam Thierer catalogued a series of thoughts on various aspects of the merger.
Picking up a theme? That's right: the federal government should not try to manage the development of the communications marketplace.
Voices on the AT&amp;#038;T &amp;#8211; T-Mobile Merger 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=4622229</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2011 14:19:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4622229</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>End the Fed: More than Just a Bumper Sticker Slogan?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4615083&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FwQVFtpMI84E%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellTo put it mildly, the Federal Reserve has a dismal track record. It bears significant responsibility for almost every major economic upheaval of the past 100 years, including the Great Depression, the 1970s stagflation, and the recent financial crisis. Perhaps the most damning statistic is that the dollar has lost 95 percent of its value since the central bank was created.
Notwithstanding its poor performance, the Federal Reserve seems to get more power over time. But rather than rewarding the central bank for debasing the currency and causing instability, perhaps it's time to contemplate alternatives. This new video from the Center for Freedom and Prosperity dives into that issue, exposing the Fed's poor track record, explaining how central banking evolved, and mentio...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4615083</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2011 13:07:28 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4615083</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Bailout Coming for the Postal Service?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4605809&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FCMScOf5gXHM%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenThe U.S. Postal Service is in financial trouble. Undermined by advances in electronic communication, weighed down by excessive labor costs and operationally straitjacketed by Congress, the government’s mail monopoly is running on fumes and faces large unfunded liabilities. Socialism apparently has its limits.
While the Europeans continue to shift away from government-run postal monopolies toward market liberalization, policymakers in the United States still have their heads stuck in the twentieth century. That means looking for an easy way out, which in Washington usually means a bailout.
Self-interested parties – including the postal unions, mailers, and postal management – have coalesced around the notion that the U.S. Treasury owes the USPS somewhere around $50-$75 b...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4605809</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 19:48:34 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4605809</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Federal Spending Cap: Corker vs. 3%</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4592359&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FZxnzQBPDcpY%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenThe American Action Forum will host a conference on Capitol Hill this afternoon to discuss budget reform (details here). Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) will discuss his “Commitment to American Prosperity Act,” which would cap federal spending at a declining percentage of GDP over ten years. Spending as a percentage of GDP would eventually be reduced to 20.6 percent, which is equal to the average from 1970 to 2008.
Corker’s plan properly places the focus of deficit reduction on the source of the problem: too much spending. A concern with Corker’s plan is that it is somewhat complicated, which could make it difficult to explain to the public. Chris Edwards, who will be speaking at today’s event, recently showed that the government can get its finances under control by imposin...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4592359</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 15 Mar 2011 18:23:33 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4592359</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Norquist Is Right, Coburn Is Wrong: Tax Increases Undermine Good Fiscal Policy</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4575045&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FhYxQkYpDKeg%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellThere's a significant debate now taking place in Washington — largely behind closed doors, but sometimes covered by the media — on whether fiscal conservatives should maintain a rigid no-tax-increase position. One side of the debate features Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform, which is the organization that maintains the no-tax-increase pledge. The other side features Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, who is part of a small group of GOP senators who might be willing to increase the tax burden as part of a deal that supposedly reduces deficits.
I'm a huge fan of Senator Coburn, who was in favor of cutting wasteful spending before it became fashionable. His office, for instance, releases a &quot;Pork Report&quot; every couple of days. You shouldn't read it if you have hi...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4575045</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2011 15:28:29 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4575045</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Big Herba’s Research Deficit: Why It Isn’t About The Money</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4560269&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fbig-herbas-research-deficit-why-it-isnt-about-the-money%2F2011.03.08</link>
            <description>This is a guest post from Erik Davis of Skeptic North.
**********
Bankers, Buyouts &amp; Billionaires: Why Big Herba&amp;#8217;s Research Deficit Isn&amp;#8217;t About The Money
It’s a scene from the blogosphere that’s become all too familiar. A skeptic challenges a natural health product for the lack of an evidentiary base. A proponent of that product responds that the skeptic has made a logical error &amp;#8212; an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, and in such a scenario it’s not unreasonable to rely on patient reporting and traditional uses as a guide. The skeptic chimes back with a dissertation on the limits of anecdotal evidence and arguments from antiquity &amp;#8212; especially when the corresponding pharma products have a data trail supporting their safety and efficacy. The pr...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4560269</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2011 22:00:09 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4560269</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Pharmalot… Pharmalittle… Good Morning</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4560597&amp;cid=t_103665_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FC7Wu-i1zM6o%2F</link>
            <description>Hello, everyone, and top of the morning to you. Another shiny day is unfolding here on the Pharmalot corporate campus, where we are hustling the short people off to their various school houses for some learning. And this marathon calls for a much needed cup of stimulation - our flavor today is Cinnamon Cream Swirl. Please join us as we also peruse the news for interesting developments. As always, we encourage you to contact us if you hear of something noteworthy. Meanwhile, have a great day&amp;#8230;
FDA Warns About Abbott HIV Med In Premature Babies (Reuters)
Teva Says Docs Contacted For Generic Copaxone Study (Bloomberg News)
FDA Accepts Application For Astra &amp;#038; Bristol Diabetes Drug (Associated Press)
Japan Finds No Direct Link To Vaccines And Deaths (Reuters)
FTC Takes Aim At Patent T...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4560597</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2011 12:53:17 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4560597</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Supreme Court Rejects Challenge To Pay-To-Delay</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4560598&amp;cid=t_103665_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FDDJwXnTTp4M%2F</link>
            <description>The Supreme Court rejected a challenge to a pay-to-delay deal in which Bayer paid Barr Pharmaceuticals, which is now owned by Teva Pharmaceuticals, to drop a patent lawsuit over the Cipro antibiotic (see this). The move is a blow to the Federal Trade Commission, which calls the deals anticompetitive and had been hoping the Supreme Court would review a case in the face of legislative inactivity. The issue has divided lower courts around the country for years.
A wholesaler and three retailers, including CVS and Rite-Aid, asked the Supreme Court to review the settlement, arguing the deals choke off competition by stifling the arrival of lower-cost generics on their shelves. In the case they cited, Barr challenged the Cipro patent in October 1991 and struck a deal with Bayer in January 1997 tw...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4560598</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2011 22:44:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4560598</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Some Perspective on $61 Billion in Spending Cuts</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4560247&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FwjlQSaASUQ4%2F</link>
            <description>By Caleb O. BrownTad recently put $61 billion in spending cuts in perspective. I've added a few bells and whistles to his data. Enjoy.

Some Perspective on $61 Billion in Spending Cuts 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=4560247</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2011 17:13:53 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4560247</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Hey, National Curriculum Standardizers: Stop Lying to Us!</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4560248&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FaTp_rdBUiLQ%2F</link>
            <description>By Neal McCluskeyToday, a group of seventy-five national-standards crusaders released a manifesto calling for &quot;shared curriculum guidelines&quot; to accompany the Common Core State Standards. But don't worry, the petitioners assure us, &quot;use of the kinds of curriculum guidelines that we advocate in the core academic subjects would be purely voluntary.&quot;
Oh please, please -- stop lying to us!
Here's the only absolutely clear thing that we've learned so far from the national standards push: Leading national standardizers do not want adoption of their plans to be truly voluntary.
Sure, they talk about creating mere &quot;guidelines,&quot; and states being free to choose what they'll use, but they know reality full well: Whatever Washington connects to federal money becomes de facto mandatory, and they mos...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4560248</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2011 17:08:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4560248</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Healthcare Reform Continues As Judge Relents</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4560277&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fhealthcare-reform-continues-as-judge-relents%2F2011.03.07</link>
            <description>A federal judge who&amp;#8217;d ruled healthcare reform was unconstitutional and that his decision as a federal judge was the equivalent of an injunction has relented. Healthcare reform can continue in the states, pending appellate and Supreme Court review.
&amp;#8220;The sooner this issue is finally decided by the Supreme Court, the better off the entire nation will be,&amp;#8221; wrote federal judge Roger E. Vinson, who&amp;#8217;d decided that the healthcare reform act&amp;#8217;s mandate that people buy insurance or face penalties overextended Congress&amp;#8217; powers under the commerce clause of the constitution.
One reason for granting a stay, despite his previous clear intent that healthcare reform cease, includes his statement (on page 18) that:
&amp;#8220;Can (or should) I enjoin and halt implementation of...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4560277</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2011 17:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4560277</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Republicans Are Right to Cut the IRS Budget</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4560252&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FIbBKouCMHwQ%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellOne of my many frustrations of working in Washington is dealing with perpetual-motion-machine assertions. The classic example is Keynesian economics, which is based on the notion that you magically create additional economic activity by having the government spend money instead of allowing the private sector to decide how it gets spent (in an especially bizarre display of this thinking, Nancy Pelosi actually said that subsidizing unemployment was the best way to create jobs).
Another example of this backwards analysis can be found in the debate over the IRS budget. The President is resisting a GOP proposal to modestly trim the IRS's gargantuan $12.5 billion budget and his argument is that we should actually boost funding for the tax collection bureaucracy since that wi...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4560252</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2011 13:54:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4560252</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Regulation, The FDA, And Shortages Of Hospital Drugs</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4549736&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FAcDaptYtsMA%2F</link>
            <description>By Walter OlsonIn recent weeks the press has been reporting widespread alarms about shortages of many frequently used hospital drugs [L.A. Times/Chicago Tribune, Scranton Times-Tribune, KMGH (Colorado hospitals swapping drugs in short supply), The Columbian] The drugs running short include various antibiotics, anesthetics, chemotherapy drugs and others, including many generic compounds long since approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA). &quot;The most troubling aspect is that it is critical drugs for which there are limited alternatives. Many are involved in cancer care and surgery,&quot; one hospital pharmacist told the Chicago Tribune's reporter.
While a variety of factors have played a role in the shortages, including lawsuits and economic retrenchment by some drugmakers, there...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4549736</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011 18:28:06 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4549736</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Bernanke’s Soft-Core Keynesianism Is Even Worse than the Nonsensical Analysis of Hard-Core Keynesians</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4540555&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FXQm6dn1vw6Y%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellEarlier this week, the Washington Post predictably gave some publicity to the Keynesian analysis of Mark Zandi, even though his track record is worse than a sports analyst who every year predicts a Super Bowl for the Detroit Lions. The story also cited similar predictions by the politically connected folks at Goldman Sachs.
Zandi, an architect of the 2009 stimulus package who has advised both political parties, predicts that the GOP package would reduce economic growth by 0.5 percentage points this year, and by 0.2 percentage points in 2012, resulting in 700,000 fewer jobs by the end of next year. His report comes on the heels of a similar analysis last week by the investment bank Goldman Sachs, which predicted that the Republican spending cuts would cause even greater...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4540555</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2011 18:56:44 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4540555</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>GOP Wins First Skirmish in Budget Fight, but Shutdown Battle Still Looms</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4540559&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FJqdfGOdXcp8%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellA large number of Democrats voted with Republicans in the House yesterday to pass a two-week spending bill that includes $4 billion in cuts compared to what Obama requested. This is a modest victory for the GOP since they can truthfully claim that they are on target to impose the equivalent of $100 billion of cuts over a full fiscal year.
And it appears the Senate will go along with the House proposal, as reported in today's Washington Post:
The deal, which eliminates dozens of earmarks and a handful of little-known programs that President Obama has identified as unnecessary, sailed through the House on a 335 to 91 vote. Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), who initially resisted including any cuts in a short-term funding extension, predicted that it will pas...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4540559</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2011 16:37:42 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4540559</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Cato’s First Brief in a Patent Case — On Constitutional Grounds</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4532195&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FZFDFqdsy4_A%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroRecognizing an opportunity to make quick and easy money, private attorneys have been suing companies under the False Marking Statute, 35 U.S.C. § 292.  This law allows any person to sue to enforce a federal criminal statute that prohibits anyone from labeling an unpatented product with a patent number or to advertise a product with a patent number that is not actually patented. 
The penalty for violating this law is $500 per offense, which has been interpreted to mean each and every product falsely marked.  For instance, if a business is charged with falsely marking 100,000 products, it could be liable for $50 million.  Private attorneys suing under this statute seek massive amounts in damages and then try to settle with the defendant for a fraction of that cost (still ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4532195</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2011 16:21:20 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4532195</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Non-Defense of DOMA</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4517156&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F4s9Nn8lvb68%2F</link>
            <description>By Jason KuznickiThe Obama Administration's decision to stop defending DOMA in the courts has provoked some widespread commentary. Jim Burroway hints that Obama's strategy here is both deep and cynical. Obama's locked in a losing fight with Republicans over the budget, because Americans really do want to cut federal spending. This remains true even if, notoriously, nearly the only specific program they want to cut is our negligible foreign aid.
The mood is anti-spending, and it's just possible that a government shutdown scares Obama even more than it scares the Republicans. The remedy? Change the subject. Make Republicans in Congress defend their stance on gay marriage, which is so not the discussion they'd like to be having.
It could be one of the first instances in which gay marriage cou...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4517156</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2011 17:43:20 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4517156</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Spending Restraint Works: Examples from Around the World</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4507262&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FA4YRqrIWVIY%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellAmerica faces a fiscal crisis. The burden of federal spending has doubled during the Bush-Obama years, a $2 trillion increase in just 10 years. But that's just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. Because of demographic changes and poorly designed entitlement programs, the federal budget is going to consume larger and larger shares of America's economic output in coming decades.
For all intents and purposes, the United States appears doomed to become a bankrupt welfare state like Greece.
But we can save ourselves. A previous video showed how both Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton achieved positive fiscal changes by limiting the growth of federal spending, with particular emphasis on reductions in the burden of domestic spending. This new video from the Center for Freedom an...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4507262</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 22 Feb 2011 14:16:41 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4507262</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Nutrition Labels For Alcoholic Beverages?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4507285&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fnutrition-labels-for-alcoholic-beverages%2F2011.02.21</link>
            <description>Virtually all bottled beverages you can buy have handy-dandy nutrition labels from which you can access information about calories, carbs, and so forth. All beverages except the ones containing alcohol, that is. Why is that?
Maybe it’s because alcoholic beverages contain little to no protein, sodium, cholesterol, Vitamin A, Vitamin C, calcium and iron (remember that alcohol is metabolized as a fat, not a carbohydrate) &amp;#8212; so why bother? Then again, alcohol does contain calories &amp;#8212; a lot of them. Would people drink less if they knew how many calories they were consuming? Would they drink less if they knew how many “servings” of alcohol were contained in the bottle they just purchased?
Maybe it’s because of the cost of performing nutritional analyses on each vintage of wine,...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4507285</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2011 22:00:49 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4507285</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Senate Bill Would Restrict Authorized Generics</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4495432&amp;cid=t_103665_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FhzVMM9bdJ8U%2F</link>
            <description>A handful of Senate Democrats have revived a bill that would restrict brand-name drugmakers from being able to market an authorized generic during the 180-day exclusivity period that follows the first successful challenge to a patent by a generic rival. Known as the Fair Prescription Drug Competition Act, the bill was first introduced by US Senator Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, in 2007.
Authorized generics, as you know, may be sold by brand-name drugmakers after a patent expires, although marketed differently. However, a 2009 report by the US Federal Trade Commission found that consumers are harmed by deals between brand-name and generic drugmakers in which a generic entry is delayed. The FTC noted that the arrival of an authorized generic during that 180-day exclusivity perio...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4495432</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 18 Feb 2011 17:10:06 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4495432</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obama’s Budget Means the Burden of Government Spending Will be $2 Trillion Higher in Ten Years</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4482738&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FMv71wpKQzWM%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellFiscal policy wonks (like me, I'm forced to admit) sometimes miss the forest because we focus too much on individual trees.
So while I think my posts on the spending and revenue sides of Obama's new budget contained lots of useful information, I didn't pay any attention to the elephant in the room (I'm really going overboard with metaphors, huh?).
The most important number in Obama's budget is that he is proposing $5.7 trillion of spending in 2021, about $2 trillion more than is being spent this year, according to table S-1 of the budget.
Here's everything you need to know about Obama's budget, in one chart.

It's important to make three additional observations. First, Obama's budget is based on all sorts of optimistic assumptions and rosy scenarios, as explained by Br...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4482738</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 16 Feb 2011 15:40:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4482738</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Deconstructing the Revenue Side of Obama’s Budget</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4482745&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FG2b5b7cI130%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellI looked yesterday at the spending side of Obama's budget and found some good news and bad news. The good news was the absence of any big new initiative to expand the burden of government. That's a welcome relief since the past couple of years have featured budget busting proposals such as the so-called stimulus scheme and a government-run healthcare plan.
The bad news is that the budget does nothing to undo any of the damage of the past two years. Nor does it undo any of the damage of the previous eight years. And because the President's budget refuses to address entitlement spending, it certainly doesn't do anything to avert the damage of rapidly expanding budgets over the next several decades.
Now let's look at the tax side of the fiscal equation. In large part, the...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4482745</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 15 Feb 2011 15:52:28 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4482745</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obama Shellacking and the Federal Budget</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4477693&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F2_YoSWRJyGU%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris EdwardsA lot has happened since President Obama introduced his last budget in February 2010. His party took an historic &quot;shellacking&quot; at the polls for its big government policies, his Fiscal Commission recommended serious spending cuts, and European governments have illustrated the severe problems of deficit spending.  
Given all this, did the president adopt a more frugal and prudent approach in his new budget yesterday? Not at all--the spending levels in his new budget are virtually the same as the unsustainably high spending levels in his February 2010 budget.
The chart shows Obama's proposed spending for FY2012 from last year's budget, and his proposed spending for the same year from his new budget.  His new budget proposes slightly more discretionary and ent...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4477693</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 15 Feb 2011 14:07:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4477693</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>New Era of Big Government</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4477695&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FK3uc-XQxohY%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenThe George W. Bush administration ushered in a new era of big government. The Obama administration has built on Bush's profligacy, and the president's new fiscal 2012 budget proposal would further cement the trend.
Spending as a percentage of GDP has increased dramatically since the surplus years of the late 1990s. As the chart shows, the president’s budget once again seeks a permanently high level of federal spending as a share of the economy:

While the numbers drop from their stimulus- and recession-induced highs, it is not because the president has suddenly decided that he desires a less active government. Rather, optimistic economic assumptions largely account for the slight retrenchment.
Tax increases and optimistic economic assumptions explain the projected rise in r...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4477695</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 15 Feb 2011 14:04:15 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4477695</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Federal Budget: Obama Chickens Out</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4477697&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FP-8z4iHe-mk%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris EdwardsDespite the record $1.6 trillion deficit this year, and the consensus that exploding spending and debt is pushing the nation toward catastrophe, the Obama administration has completely chickened out on spending reforms in its new budget.
The president took a “shellacking” in the November elections as a result of his big-government policies. Does his new budget reflect any movement to the fiscal center? Not at all — spending levels in his new budget are virtually the same as in last year’s budget.
Read my post at NRO for full details.
Federal Budget: Obama Chickens Out 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=4477697</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2011 20:16:02 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4477697</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Deconstructing the Spending Side of Obama’s Proposed FY2012 Budget</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4477698&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FOKdeJvN1w8A%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellPresident Obama's proposed budget for fiscal year 2012 has been released and there is lots of rhetoric in Washington about &quot;budget cuts.&quot;
At first glance, this seems warranted. According to the just-released fiscal blueprint, the federal government is spending about $3.8 trillion this year and the President is proposing to spending a bit more than $3.7 trillion next year. In other words, the White House is going beyond a budget freeze and is actually proposing to spend $90 billion less next year than is being spent this year.
That certainly seems consistent with my proposal to solve America's fiscal problems by restraining the growth of spending.
But you won't find a smile on my face. This new budget may be better than Obama's first two fiscal blueprints, but that's da...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4477698</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2011 19:47:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4477698</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Nonintervention: the New Isolationism?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4477700&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Foc9EGs2cxi8%2F</link>
            <description>By Doug BandowToday, the Obama administration released its FY 2012 budget, and with it the Pentagon’s spending request.  Regrettably, the Pentagon’s plan shows that the federal government’s 4th consecutive $1 trillion-plus annual deficit has not quelled an appetite for a continued quasi-imperial foreign policy that subsidizes a multitude of rich allies around the globe.
Unfortunately, if you argue against such a massive budget, you are immediately labeled an “isolationist.”  Take the example of Senator Rand Paul’s (R-KY) crusade to cut the federal budget by $500 billion.  Among many other substantive cuts, Senator Paul called for ending U.S. foreign aid around the globe. And when pressed, he included aid to Israel.
Aid to Israel represents less than one percent of his prop...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4477700</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2011 17:47:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4477700</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Bone Is Nice. Actually, No.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4477704&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FYGTW9YOSXeY%2F</link>
            <description>By Neal McCluskeyAfter House Republicans' weak first attempt at offering cuts to gargantuan federal spending -- a proposal that included nary a flick at education-related outlays -- and the Obama administration's hinting that it would leave education totally untouched, there is a tiny bit of good news: Both the GOP and the administration are apparently willing to trim funding putatively intended to help educate people. But these are just tiny bones they're throwing to people who know that the federal government likely does zero net good when it comes to actually educating people, and that there is no acceptable excuse not to make big cuts to federal &quot;education&quot; programs.
House Republicans, for their part, scheduled lots of education programs for shaves in their second attempt at mak...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4477704</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2011 15:33:36 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4477704</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>To Fix the Budget, Bring Back Reagan…or Even Clinton</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4477705&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FwJFsb7B85WQ%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellPresident Obama unveiled his fiscal year 2012 budget today, and there's good news and bad news. The good news is that there's no major initiative such as the so-called stimulus scheme or the government-run healthcare proposal. The bad news, though, is that government is far too big and Obama's budget does nothing to address this problem.
But perhaps the folks on Capitol Hill will be more responsible and actually try to save America from becoming a big-government, European-style welfare state. The solution may not be easy, but it is simple. Lawmakers merely need to restrain the growth of government spending so that it grows slower than the private economy.
Actual spending cuts would be the best option, of course, but limiting the growth of spending is all that's needed ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4477705</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2011 15:17:13 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4477705</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obama the Born-again Budget Cutter?!?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4472946&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FqBapCXmGzEg%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellChalk up another victory -- at least on the rhetorical level -- for the Tea Party.
President Obama will release his fiscal year 2012 budget tomorrow and he's apparently become a born-again fiscal conservative. Here are some excerpts from a Washington Post story:
President Obama will respond to a Republican push for a drastic reduction in government spending by proposing sharp cuts of his own in a fiscal 2012 budget blueprint that aims to trim record federal deficits by $1.1 trillion over the next decade. ...two-thirds of the savings would come from spending cuts that are draconian by Democratic standards... When it lands Monday on Capitol Hill, Obama's plan will launch a bidding war with Republicans over how deeply and swiftly to cut, as the two parties seek a path to ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4472946</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 13 Feb 2011 17:48:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4472946</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Secretly Happy Colleges Should Mean Overtly Angry Taxpayers</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4459942&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FuDOUN8PWALw%2F</link>
            <description>By Neal McCluskeyYesterday, House Republicans introduced their preliminary list of spending cuts, cuts that were, they declared, &quot;to go deep.&quot; Unfortunately, coming in at just $74 billion, they were about as deep as onion skin. After all, the total federal budget is well over $3 trillion, and the national debt now exceeds $14 trillion. 
The relatively lilliputian size of the proposed cuts should give any taxpayer major queasiness over Republicans' desire to truly rein in government. But if that doesn't scare you, this report from Inside Higher Ed absolutely should:
Shhh. Don't tell, and they'll never admit it publicly. But college officials are (very quietly) feeling okay -- at least for now -- about how Congressional Republicans would treat the programs that matter mo...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4459942</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 10 Feb 2011 18:33:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4459942</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Slashing Popular Programs Contest</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4459944&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FQmFdlTYgTFM%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris EdwardsHouse Republicans proposed some (tiny) spending cuts this week and the Obama administration will likely propose some (tiny) cuts next week in the federal budget.
So get ready for a barrage of slasher stories! National Journal started us off yesterday with the headline “WH Slashes Heat for the Poor.”
Coming down the pike are dozens of stories about how policymakers are planning deep, vicious, and inhumane cuts that will undermine the foundations of the republic. A 5 percent cut to a program that has risen 50 percent in recent years will not be a simple “trim,” but a brutal, gouging “slash.”
Every single one of the upcoming cuts will be to “popular” programs. So policymakers will propose a $1 million cut to mohair subsidies, and the headline will be “Congre...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4459944</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 10 Feb 2011 17:03:50 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4459944</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The 1993 Clinton Tax Increase Did Not Lead to the Budget Surpluses of the Late 1990s</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4459945&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FYyUJdXxCkbg%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellProponents of higher taxes are fond of claiming that Bill Clinton's 1993 tax increase was a big success because of budget surpluses that began in 1998.
That's certainly a plausible hypothesis, and I'm already on record arguing that Clinton's economic record was much better than Bush's performance.
But this specific assertion it is not supported by the data. In February of 1995, 18 months after the tax increase was signed into law, President Clinton's Office of Management and Budget issued projections of deficits for the next five years if existing policy was maintained (a &quot;baseline&quot; forecast). As the chart illustrates, OMB estimated that future deficits would be about $200 billion and would slightly increase over the five-year period.
In other words, even the Clinton A...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4459945</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 10 Feb 2011 13:49:13 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4459945</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>TSA Unionizing</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4445779&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FJgx2a6IvCqc%2F</link>
            <description>By David RittgersWorst news I’ve heard lately, via The New York Times:
Seeking to end a debate that has brewed for nearly a decade, the director of the Transportation Security Administration announced on Friday that a union would be allowed to bargain over working conditions on behalf of the nation’s 45,000 airport security officers, although certain issues like pay will not be subject to negotiation.
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) has proposed an amendment to the FAA reauthorization bill that would prohibit TSA workers from collective bargaining. Wicker’s proposal doesn’t go far enough. At the least, the decision to halt privatization of airport security should be reversed. Ideally, the TSA would be scrapped or reduced to merely inspecting the performance of airport security provided...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4445779</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 07 Feb 2011 19:41:39 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4445779</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Nidal Hasan Exactly the Man Many Knew Him to Be</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4433135&amp;cid=t_103665_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2011%2F02%2F03%2Fnidal-hasan-exactly-the-man-many-knew-him-to-be%2F</link>
            <description>Army Maj. Nidal Hasan was exactly the kind of man many people knew him to be. And that&amp;#8217;s why they continually promoted him and sent him some place else. Because nobody, apparently, was willing to intervene despite many warning signs about his behavior.
Those are the findings from the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs. They found that the massacre allegedly carried out by Nidal Hasan could have have been prevented.
Had just one person acted on the information many different people had, the tragedy that occurred at Fort Hood on November 5, 2009 may have been prevented.

&amp;#8220;The officers who kept Hasan in the military and moved him steadily along knew full well of his problematic behavior,&amp;#8221; the report found. &amp;#8220;As the officer who assigned Has...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4433135</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 04 Feb 2011 02:00:13 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4433135</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Sen. Rand Paul Proposes Serious Cuts</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4419112&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F8PbpRgs3Pk8%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenFreshman Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) has raised the bar in Washington by releasing a bill that would make substantial, specific, and immediate cuts in federal spending. While policymakers on both sides of the aisle have largely paid lip service to stopping Washington’s record run of fiscal profligacy, Paul’s proposal makes good on his campaign promise to seriously tackle the federal government’s bloated budget.
Paul’s bill would target $500 billion in cuts for fiscal 2011 alone. While audacious by Washington standards, cutting federal spending by that amount would still leave us with a projected $1 trillion deficit this year. Nonetheless, the federal government’s scope would be dramatically curtailed, which would pay dividends in coming years as the economy is unshackled ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4419112</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2011 18:49:44 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4419112</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Nondefense Discretionary Spending Freezes</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4405760&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FSNsR1IcCYoM%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenWhen it comes to reining in federal spending, House Republicans and the president have one idea in common: freezing nondefense discretionary spending. That category accounts for about 18 percent of total spending, so let’s see how such a freeze would affect the overall budget.
Today the Congressional Budget Office released updated budget figures and baseline projections of federal spending through fiscal 2021. Projecting the budgetary future is obviously an inexact science, and the CBO’s baseline reflects unrealistic assumptions. However, it does allow us to get an idea of the impact of a nondefense discretionary freeze on total federal spending.
Three proposals have been put forward:

In his State of the Union address, President Obama proposed freezing nondefense discret...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4405760</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jan 2011 15:00:31 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4405760</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Senators Reintroduce Pay-To-Delay Legislation</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4399818&amp;cid=t_103665_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FVytK4mo5a_A%2F</link>
            <description>A pair of US Senators have reintroduced legislation that would limit the so-called pay-to-delay deals that remain one of the hottest controversies enveloping the pharmaceutical industry. The move comes after the House and Senate last month failed to agree on an appropriations bill, which included pay-to-delay restrictions.
You may recall that pay-to-delay settlements involve agreements in which brand-name and generic drugmakers settle patent disputes by exchanging a payment for a commitment to refrain from marketing a generic off the market for a set period of time. However, the Federal Trade Commission calls these deals anti-competitive and force consumers and government healthcare programs to pay high prices. A Congressional Budget Office report estimated the federal government could sav...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4399818</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jan 2011 18:11:24 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4399818</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>VIDEO: Nine Cato Experts Break Down the 2011 State of the Union Address</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4399497&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FMFUBsOyy9go%2F</link>
            <description>By Caleb O. BrownIn this video reaction to President Obama&amp;#8217;s State of the Union address last night, Cato experts Gene Healy, Benjamin H. Friedman, Jagadeesh Gokhale, Neal McCluskey, Sallie James, John Samples, Justin Logan, Daniel J. Mitchell, Michael F. Cannon, and David Rittgers analyze the president&amp;#8217;s address, and make note some of the outright fabrications in it:

If you missed our live blog coverage of the State of the Union address, you can scroll back through the conversation this morning.
VIDEO: Nine Cato Experts Break Down the 2011 State of the Union Address 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=4399497</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jan 2011 15:47:32 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4399497</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>GOP Conservatives Propose Spending Cuts</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4394422&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FJHtVMOW7kH0%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenLast week the conservative House Republican Study Committee released its Spending Reduction Act of 2011, which would cut federal spending by $2.5 trillion over the next ten years. Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) will introduce it in the Senate.
The vast majority of the savings, $2.3 trillion, would come from freezing non-defense discretionary spending at fiscal 2006 levels over the next ten years. The rest would come from cutting the federal civilian workforce, privatizing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, repealing the state Medicaid FMAP increase, repealing remaining stimulus funds, and immediately reducing non-security discretionary spending to fiscal 2008 levels.
Of the $2.3 trillion over 10 years that would be saved by freezing nondefense discretionary spending at fiscal 2006 levels, o...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4394422</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 24 Jan 2011 19:45:54 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4394422</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Robert Kagan for the Defense</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4382749&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FvbTJ4BCKkfc%2F</link>
            <description>By Christopher PrebleThe calls for cutting the federal budget continue to build in Congress as the new GOP members try to make good on their promise to rein in the deficit.  And, right on time, the latest issue of the Weekly Standard features an article by Robert Kagan critiquing the chorus of calls for cuts to military spending. 
I think Kagan’s critique is reasonably fair, certainly more so than others of the recent past.  But his basic premise, that national security spending is unrelated to the national debt, simply is not true.  At the The Skeptics, I address this:
It is of course true that entitlements and mandatory spending pose the greatest threat to the nation’s fiscal health, but $700+ billion [in defense spending] isn’t chump change. The question of what we should spe...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4382749</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2011 17:48:42 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4382749</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Spending Restraint and Red Ink</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4382755&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FSamESHnA_8M%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellI&amp;#8217;m not a big fan of central banks, and I definitely don&amp;#8217;t like multilateral bureaucracies, so I almost feel guilty about publicizing two recent studies published by the European Central Bank. But when such an institution puts out research that unambiguously makes the case for smaller government, it&amp;#8217;s time to sit up and take notice. And since these studies largely echo the findings of recent research by the International Monetary Fund, we may have reached a point where even the establishment finally understands that government is too big.
The first study looks at real-world examples of debt reduction in 15 European nations and investigates the fiscal policies that worked and didn&amp;#8217;t work. Entitled &amp;#8220;Major Public Debt Reductions: Lessons From...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4382755</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2011 14:37:43 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4382755</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Drugmakers Try To Keep Patent Deals Under Wrap</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4377787&amp;cid=t_103665_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FcjCmn3mBJKE%2F</link>
            <description>Two years ago, the US Federal Trade Commission filed a highly publicized lawsuit against Cephalon over pay-to-delay deals worth an estimated $200 million with some generic drugmakers - Ranbaxy Labs, Mylan Labs and Teva Pharmaceuticals - to keep a copycat version of its Provigil sleep-disorder pill off the market until 2012 (read this). Now, though, more than three dozen other drugmakers have raced to court to try to keep details of their own deals from being disclosed as a result of this battle.
In a motion filed in federal court in Philadelphia this week, no fewer than 37 drugmakers - including Abbott Laboratories, Merck, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Sanofi-Aventis, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Johnson &amp;#038; Johnson, Actavis, Waston Pharmaceuticals, Dr. Reddy&amp;#8217;s, ...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4377787</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jan 2011 20:48:02 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4377787</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Europe Steps Up Probe Of Patent Settlements</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4361306&amp;cid=t_103665_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FUuhSDJneggs%2F</link>
            <description>One month after yet again raiding offices of various drugmakers (back story), the European Commission is now taking a more polite approach and telling several companies - including Bayer and Roche - to submit details of their settlements over patent disputes. 
The EC asked a &amp;#8220;selected number of originator and generic companies&amp;#8221; to submit a copy of all patent settlement agreements relevant to the 27-member EU region and which were concluded between Jan. 1, 2010 and Dec. 31, 2010, according to an EC statement.
Like the US Federal Trade Commission, the EC has been probing these pay-to-delay deals in the belief that they stifle competition and, therefore, delay entry to the marketplace of lower-cost medicines (read about the FTC efforts here). This followed a report from the Europe...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4361306</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jan 2011 14:20:42 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4361306</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Homeopathy: Why Is The Canadian Government Regulating A Scam?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4360985&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fhomeopathy-why-is-the-canadian-government-regulating-a-scam%2F2011.01.17</link>
            <description>Regular readers of the Better Health blog are familiar with the shoddy science behind homeopathy (an outdated system of &amp;#8220;medical&amp;#8221; treatment that relies on water dilution and shaking to &amp;#8216;&amp;#8221;strengthen&amp;#8221; the effects of drugs). But because homeopathic placebos have been marketed so successfully (even receiving paid endorsements from hockey teams), the Ontario government has decided to regulate homeopathic practices.
In this terrific news exposé, reporters ask if it&amp;#8217;s appropriate for the government to regulate health scams. In doing so, are they not lending credibility to modern-day snake oil? Check out these videos and let me know what you think. Is there a roll for government in regulating homeopathy?
Part 1:  

 (more&amp;#8230;) (Source: Better Health)</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4360985</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jan 2011 13:00:14 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4360985</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Rep. Brady’s CUTS Act</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4343114&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F0ud79KYaN3E%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenRep. Kevin Brady (R-TX) has introduced the Cut Unsustainable and Top-heavy Spending Act, which would cut spending by $44 billion annually.  Brady’s effort moves in the right direction but it is a very modest fiscal reform effort.
The legislation, which Brady calls a “down payment on getting America&amp;#8217;s financial books in order,” chooses targets that have already been proposed by the Obama administration or the president’s Fiscal Commission. Therefore, the proposal should have bipartisan appeal. For example, Brady’s bill would cut Pentagon spending and eliminate subsidies to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
Many of the targets represent “house cleaning cuts” that would reduce spending on bureaucratic activities such as printing and federal travel. Th...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4343114</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 13 Jan 2011 14:59:32 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4343114</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Healthcare Repeal: How Would It Affect Coverage And Cost?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4337939&amp;cid=t_103665_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fhealthcare-repeal-how-would-it-affect-coverage-and-cost%2F2011.01.11</link>
            <description>[Soon] the new GOP-controlled House of Representatives will be voting on and is expected to pass a bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA) &amp;#8211; lock, stock, and barrel. There is virtually no chance the repeal bill will get through the Senate, though, which maintains a narrow Democratic majority, and President Obama would veto it if it did.
But let’s say that the seemingly impossible happened, and the ACA was repealed. What would the impact be on healthcare coverage, costs, and the federal deficit?
In a letter to Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released its preliminary estimates of the impact of repeal on the deficit, uninsured, and costs of care, and found that it would make the deficit worse, result in more uninsured persons, and higher premiu...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4337939</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2011 22:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4337939</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>States Ask Supreme Court To Review Pay-To-Delay</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4331236&amp;cid=t_103665_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FED0DYDEIm1U%2F</link>
            <description>The controversy over so-called pay-to-delay settlements between brand-name and generic drugmakers has prompted attorneys general from 32 states to file an amicus, or friend-of-the-court brief urging the US Supreme Court to review the deals, which the states say thwart competition and block needed access to lower-cost medications.
The move comes less than a month after three pharmacy chains and a wholesaler petitioned the court to rule on the issue, which has divided other federal courts (see this) and spurred the Federal Trade Commission into a Quixotic quest to urge Congress to pass a law to restrict these deals (back story).
The case that precipitated these filings involved a deal in which Bayer paid Barr Pharmaceuticals, which is now owned by Teva Pharmaceuticals, to drop its patent cha...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4331236</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2011 13:26:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4331236</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

