Tag: american spectator

Monday Links

  • Podcast: When Germany enacted their own “Cash for Clunkers” scheme, some of the old vehicles were illegally exported and sold out of the country before being destroyed. Could it happen here? Would that be so bad?

Europe Votes … For Something

The results are in after the Europeans voted in elections for the European Parliament.  But while they were voting for the European Parliament, they largely voted on national issues.  Ruling parties in Britain and Hungary were blasted.  The Spanish ruling party took a hit. Anti-immigration candidates in Britain, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Austria did well.  Ruling conservative governments in France, Italy, and Germany (in coalition) also prospered – after stealing the interventionist economic policies of their opponents.

Particularly noteworthy is the continuing fall in voter turnout.  Barely 43 percent showed up at the polls last week.  The Eurocratic elite is worried, as they should be.  As decision-making increasingly flows to Brussels, and to unelected institutions in Brussels, people perceive government to be less accountable.

Czech President Vaclav Klaus observed earlier this year:  “There is no European demos – and no European nation.” Alas, the divide between governed and governors is only going to increase if the Irish people ultimately approve the Lisbon Treaty, which further consolidates power in Brussels.  It is a worrisome trend for anyone concerned about liberty, as I discuss in a new article on American Spectator online.

New Doherty Book Review

There is a new review of Brian Doherty’s book, Gun Control on Trial: Inside the Supreme Court Battle over the Second Amendment, over at The American Spectator.

The review captures the uphill battle that the Heller litigants faced in the District of Columbia:

When an employee on the Taxicab Commission once suggested that taxicab drivers be able to arm themselves for self- defense, a spokesman for then mayor Anthony Williams said, “The proposal is nutty, and obviously, it would not be entertained seriously by any thinking person.” After D.C. readjusted its laws in the wake of Heller so that guns were no longer prohibited but regulated to the point of making ownership exceedingly difficult, Mayor Adrian Fenty justified it thusly: “I don’t think [the people of D.C.] intended that anybody who had a vague notion of a threat should have access to a gun.” Apparently the mayor doesn’t know or doesn’t care that once a threat is real, it’s probably too late to go through all of the city’s regulatory hoops.

Cato held a book forum for the event, which is available here.  Also check out Reason TV’s videos of Brian discussing this historic legal battle, both before and after the decision came down.

New at Cato

Here are a few highlights from Cato Today, a daily email from the Cato Institute. You can subscribe here.

  • Malou Innocent argues that the United States should not increase its troop presence in Pakistan in a new Cato Policy Analysis.
  • Watch Tucker Carlson discuss whether a president should blame problems on past administrations on Fox News.
  • Chris Edwards is finishing his live debate with French economist Thomas Piketty over whether the rich should pay higher tax rates. Readers decide who wins, so don’t miss the chance to cast your vote.

New at Cato

Here are a few highlights from Cato Today, a comprehensive daily email from the Cato Institute. You can subscribe, here.

  • Doug Bandow weighs the usefulness of NATO in the American Spectator.
  • David Isenberg discusses the use of private military and security contractors in war for United Press International.
Topics:

Deadly Canadian Health Care

Opponents of nationalize health care rightly warn about the negative impact of politicizing medical care, but it’s never easy to prove that someone who otherwise would have lived died as a result.  Yet Canadians are asking whether that may be the case with actress Natasha Richardson.  Reports the News & Observer (hat tip to Matthew Vadum at the American Spectator blog):

Questions are arising over whether a medical helicopter might have been able to save actress Natasha Richardson.

The province of Quebec lacks a medical helicopter system, common in the United States and other parts of Canada, to airlift stricken patients to major trauma centers. Montreal’s top head trauma doctor said Friday that may have played a role in Richardson’s death.

Richardson, 45, died Wednesday at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York after falling Monday on a ski slope at the Mont Tremblant resort in Quebec.

“It’s impossible for me to comment specifically about her case, but what I could say is … driving to Mont Tremblant from the city [Montreal] is a 2 1/2-hour trip, and the closest trauma center is in the city. Our system isn’t set up for traumas and doesn’t match what’s available in other Canadian cities, let alone in the States,” said Tarek Razek, director of trauma services for the McGill University Health Centre, which represents six of Montreal’s hospitals.

While Richardson’s initial refusal of medical treatment cost her two hours, she also had to be driven to two hospitals. She didn’t arrive at a specialized hospital in Montreal until about four hours after the second 911 call from her hotel room at the resort, according to a timeline published by Canada’s The Globe and Mail newspaper.

Because of the pervasiveness of both third party payment and government regulation, the American medical system spends more than it should.  But it remains far more oriented towards meeting patient needs than does government-dominated health care.  As policymakers debate various “reform” measures, they should keep Natasha Richardson’s tragic fate in mind.