Indiana Voucher Bill is Federalism in Action
Conor Friedersdorf is excited about the new voucher bill signed into law in Indiana by governor Mitch Daniels. Dana Goldstein is more skeptical, pointing to a number of aspects of the legislation that are counterproductive, such as requiring students to receive permission to attend a class taught by a teacher rated as ‘ineffective’ two years in a row. And finally, Cato’s Adam Schaeffer thinks the law is little more than a mountain of regulations waiting to crush private schools participating in the voucher program.
They’re all probably a bit correct. Personally, I’m a fan of federalism, even though I know it will lead to ideas I don’t support. Vouchers, for instance, seem like a pretty Utopian reform, and contra Schaeffer, I think you’re pretty much bound to have strings attached to government money. Private schools that don’t want government
Why Healthcare Reform Requires Market Reforms
The American healthcare system is a mess. Buried under regional insurance monopolies, supply-side cartels, and a vast web of ad hoc government intrusions is something remotely resembling an actual market. But only remotely. A true healthcare market would not be so opaque that healthcare consumers could not identify prices. Nor would it require consumers to acquire health insurance via their employer.
Under presidential hopeful Mitt Romney, Massachussettes attempted to solve some of the many problems our healthcare system has created by creating, essentially, Obamacare (though predating the recent healthcare law by several years). The problem is, Romneycare created subsidies for purchasing health insurance without applying market reforms to increase access and competition of healthcare provision. And so we get this:
A new poll of 838 Massachusetts doctors finds patients are still waiting weeks — in some cases
