The Heritage Uncertainty Principle

[BootinUp]

from Prof. Krugman's blog:

Ezra Klein is puzzled (or at least says he is; I suspect he understands it perfectly) by Republican hypocrisy on health care. For many years the GOP has advocated things that are supposed to bring the magic of the marketplace and individual incentives to health care: higher deductibles to give people “skin in the game”, competition among private insurers via exchanges — competition that would include reducing costs by limiting networks — and, of course, for cuts in Medicare. Now the GOP complains bitterly that some Obamacare policies have high deductibles, that it relies on the horror of exchanges, that some networks are limited, and that there are cuts in Medicare.

...
What underlies what Jonathan Chait calls the Heritage uncertainty principle? He describes it thus:

Conservative health-care-policy ideas reside in an uncertain state of quasi-existence. You can describe the policies in the abstract, sometimes even in detail, but any attempt to reproduce them in physical form will cause such proposals to disappear instantly. It’s not so much an issue of “hypocrisy,” as Klein frames it, as a deeper metaphysical question of whether conservative health-care policies actually exist.

The question should be posed to better-trained philosophical minds than my own. I would posit that conservative health-care policies do not exist in any real form. Call it the “Heritage Uncertainty Principle.”

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/13/a-health-care-mystery-explained/?_r=0

[okaawhatever]

1. I love it. Now we need Ezra to rewrite using only monosyllabic words for the Heritage fans. nt

[ProSense]

2. Krugman

And here’s the thing: Republicans don’t want to help the unfortunate. They’ll propound health-care ideas that will, they claim, help those with preexisting conditions and so on — but those aren’t really proposals, they’re diversionary tactics designed to stall real health reform. Chait finds Newt Gingrich more or less explicitly admitting this.

...nails it. Republican proposals are hypothetical and theoretical BS. They have no intention of doing anything positive. They get credit for pushing things that they don't actually support and would never enact.

It's like Romney's veto of the most significant parts of the MA health care law.

It's like the AEI asshole pushing that Republicans should stand up for the safety net when his actual message is the poor should support destroying it.