I’ve been waiting for Megan McArdle to cook off over the news that the administration just casually made it impossible to assess the effects of Obamacare on insurance rates; and hoo, boy, but she’s unhappy.
I’m speechless. Shocked. Stunned. Horrified. Befuddled. Aghast, appalled, thunderstruck, perplexed, baffled, bewildered and dumbfounded. It’s not that I am opposed to the changes: Everyone understands that the census reports probably overstate the true number of the uninsured, because the number they report is supposed to be “people who lacked insurance for the entire previous year,” but people tend to answer with their insurance status right now.
But why, dear God, oh, why, would you change it in the one year in the entire history of the republic that it is most important for policy makers, researchers and voters to be able to compare the number of uninsured to those in prior years? The answers would seem to range from “total incompetence on the part of every level of this administration” to something worse.
Megan – who has a theoretical point, by the way; getting accurate answers can be tricky in the polling business, even when people aren’t trying to lie – perhaps has a certain reluctance to go immediately to ‘something worse.’ Or perhaps maybe I’m not as inclined to be charitable and simply assume that Barack Obama and his merry wrecking crew are incompetent buffoons who couldn’t clean a fast food bathroom after closing time. Either way, the proper response to this is to say to Megan McArdle, Pay close attention to the people who will try to dismiss you, browbeat you, or shout you down over this. Those are the people who are not trustworthy about this current administration.
I know. It’s more pleasant to say I told you so. But eventually you have to stop, and go do the next thing.
Moe Lane
[UPDATE] Forgot: via AoSHQ, who was apparently waiting, too. And HE waxed most wroth as well.
PS: I don’t care if the Activist Left does it. They have lots of other bad habits that eventually boomerang back on them.
With this Administration it’s always the “something worse” explanation that is the correct one. The most likely reason for the change is that under the old set of questions the number of uninsured would have risen and the Administration just can’t have that little factoid get out while it’s trying to sell O’bamacare as a brilliant success.
Jane Galt voted for this guy. I assume the cognitive dissonance involved in realizing he’s deliberately lying is too great so far.
If we don’t say “I told you so”, can we at least stop paying attention to McArdle? This sentence alone qualifies her as a fool: “The answers would seem to range from “total incompetence on the part of every level of this administration” to something worse.”
I like Megan McArdle’s articles/analysis. She is balanced and uses facts/data. Why would you not want to pay attention to her? serious question wanting an answer.
Please note: I spent over 20 years in the health care insurance industry and her pieces are always on point.
Megan managed to get herself off of my list.
http://moelane.com/2009/09/01/megan-mcardle-is-off-of-my-elections-have-consequences-list/
Like I said last night I’m kind of surprised they caught this one in advance, that hasn’t been their operational pattern, normally they get blindsided by the obvious.