Speak No Good: The Tragedy of FDA Gag Rules
Sharing information about new drugs and new uses for old drugs is an essential part of physicians' quest to cure disease and save lives. Unfortunately, the federal government often stands in the way.
Sharing information about new drugs and new uses for old drugs is an essential part of physicians' quest to cure disease and save lives. Unfortunately, the federal government often stands in the way.
The treaty would actually harm American industries and workers, significantly increase the cost of living and contribute little to reducing global warming – if, in fact, it is occurring.
From the inception of Social Security in 1935, politicians have encouraged people to think of the system as similar to private pensions. Private pension plans that invest a person's contributions in secure, interest-bearing instruments do not go broke.
Work-fare programs in some states already have been successful in getting recipients back to work while decreasing total welfare costs.
A 1994 poll found that more people in their twenties believed in Unidentified Flying Objects than believed they would collect Social Security retirement benefits.
After years of bipartisan legislative proposals to create tax-free Medical Savings Accounts (MSAs), months of partisan congressional wrangling over whether to include MSAs in health insurance reform proposals and weeks of discussion on various MSA demonstration projects, Congress passed a law that includes a limited version of Medical Savings Accounts. The legislation has some good and some bad points, but the future fight over who can have an MSA likely will get ugly.
If Congress doesn't act soon, the Medicare trust fund will be unable to pay the medical bills of our senior citizens by the year 2000, and possibly sooner.
Medical Savings Accounts (MSAs) give people a new way to pay for health care.
After more than 30 years of the War on Poverty, the federal government has proven one thing: it does a bad job of dispensing welfare. Hardly anybody is happy with the result. However, there is a better alternative: taxpayer choice.
Recently released data from the Department of Commerce reveal that federal, state and local taxes consumed a record 31.3 percent of gross domestic product last year – the highest level in U.S. history. Even at the height of World War II in 1945 total taxes only consumed 25 percent of GDP.
Both proponents and opponents of a federally mandated increase in the minimum wage are framing the issue in the wrong terms.
Medical Savings Accounts (MSAs) have become the most controversial element of the health insurance reform proposal before Congress. They should be the least controversial.
Congress should take five more steps toward meaningful regulatory reform. The first involves revisiting and improving the reforms Congress has made. The last four represent a sharp break with the past and radically alter the federal government's future regulatory efforts.
With the exception of the Card-Krueger findings, virtually every major study that has ever been done has found significant job losses from an increase in the minimum wage. But even if one accepts the Card-Krueger findings, evidence of other unfavorable effects makes an overwhelming case that the minimum wage should not be raised and that, in fact, abolishing it would do more for those it is intended to help.
Superfund cleanups have been incredibly expensive and inefficient, and the law has been ineffective in protecting both human health and the environment. With reauthorization overdue, now is a good time for reform.
A consensus is emerging on the right way to reform our health care system. The consensus stems from the recognition that the tax system has shaped and molded our health care system and is responsible for many of its problems. Health reform, therefore, requires tax reform.
Superfund was scheduled to be reauthorized in 1995, and its authority to level taxes on private companies expired at year's end. If Congress fails to reauthorize the program and the taxes, Superfund will be phased out as its existing revenues are depleted.
The problem of health insurance portability can be resolved without costing the federal government additional money or distorting the health insurance market for other customers.
While solving the problem of the 1 percent of the population that lacks health insurance because they have been denied coverage due to a preexisting condition, this bill would create even greater problems for the 99 percent. Let's see why.
There is a better way of taxing. Under a flat tax, all income is taxed, and it is taxed at the same rate. Furthermore, income is taxed only once, at its source, when it is realized.
A flat or single-rate income tax would replace the current system of five rates and hundreds of deductions, credits, exclusions, etc. This change is grounded in widely accepted principles of taxation.
Should Medicaid – the federal-state health insurance program for the poor – remain a federal entitlement or should the funds be turned over to state and local governments?
The recent shutdown of parts of the federal government lasted 21 days and ended on January 5. It idled thousands of federal employees and closed numerous government agencies.
Clear and convincing evidence from the United States and elsewhere shows that privatizing criminal correctional facilities results in better public service at a lower cost than government operation.
The spending explosion in long-term care is in large part a direct result of perverse federal income tax incentives that subsidize insurance for current medical expenses but penalize insurance for long-term care expenses. However, both the U.S. House and Senate have passed legislation to correct this tax inequity.