Two days ago, it was reported that the Pay Czar wants to "claw back" executive compensation from companies that received bailout money(see http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090817/bs_nm/us_feinberg ). With this precedent, where Czar Feinberg proclaimed, "anything is possible under the law," the powers to control compensation are now being expanded to include targeted businesses.  As reported in various sources today, the House Energy and Commerce Committee sent letters to insurers asking for the following information:

• The name of each executive who made over $500,000, including options or bonuses
• Profits and other financials 
• Premium payments
• Claims payments
• Sales expenses
• Administrative expenses 
• Event expenses

The letter states that the comittee is seeking to examine "compensation and other business practices in the health insurance industry." But, this begs the question, "Why?".

Whoa!!! As I wrote this, I recalled a news item from 12 years ago, when the government subsidized 1000 hospitals to reduce the supply of doctors due to a "glut" created by a $7Billion subsidy to create doctors!!! See : http://www.nytimes.com/1997/08/25/us/1000-hospitals-will-be-paid-to-reduce-supply-of-doctors.html 

I almost fell out of my chair when I read that article but this lunacy, well, it almost sent me to the doctor:

Chris Jennings, a senior White House health aide, said today that both Democrats and Republicans had agreed to extend the incentive program because it was a way to save billions of dollars.

''Unlike most aspects of the free-enterprise system,'' Mr. Jennings said, ''an oversupply of doctors does not lead to more competition and less cost. When you get more physicians, you get more medical testing and other costs that drive up the price of health care.''

Save "billions" by spending even more? Why not leave it alone and spend nothing? And why shouldn't the presence of more doctors reduce cost and increase competition like it does for all other things? That's like saying more restaurants leads to more dining out and higher credit card bills. With more restaurants, we have the choice of fries or fois gras, take-out or truffles to voluntarily tempt us or not. With this kind of thinking, we'll all be standing in breadlines at an empty commissary. There were fewer doctors 200 years ago and no one had to pay for an MRI or chemo! If you had the means, you would see a barber to apply leeches, a technique that is making a resurgence in the UK for leeches are not unionized.  The increase in doctors allows for division of labor, specialization. This allows the consumer to have access to the latest and greatest technology when he needs it most. (BTW, the CDC just reported that, due to declining mortality, US life expectancy is at an all-time high, just under 78 years, despite their efforts to fudge the numbers with new methodology.) Does this moron advocate taking that choice away? And they have, for now we again have a shortage of doctors (nothing compared to the shortage we will have if the government takes over healthcare) and we will never know the contributions that the doctors who could have been would have made to medicine.   

Also see:

http://www.businessinsurance.com/article/20090819/NEWS/908199987

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iLixRic5jxtFgPfWqhTgy3d7L9EwD9A63KAO1

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,540661,00.html