Reporters are usually not responsible for the headlines over their articles, but the headline over Robert Pear’s and David Herszenhorn’s October 7th New York Times article is simply misleading: “Health Care Bill Gets Green Light in Cost Analysis.” Pear and Herszebhorn do report that the Congressional Budget Office “cost analysis” is on the Senate Finance Committee bill, but then they down play the ramifications of the fact, writing:

Republicans, who are overwhelmingly opposed to the legislation, minimized the significance of the cost analysis. They suggested that the “real” bill would be written secretly by Democratic leaders as they combine the

… Continue Reading

The New York Times’ Robert Pear and Gardiner Harris have a front page story in the August 18th New York Times on Sen. Kent Conrad’s (D-ND) proposal to increase health insurance competition through nonprofit health care cooperatives. Pear and Harris write:

Prof. Ann Hoyt, an economist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, who has done extensive research on cooperatives in many industries, said they could serve a useful purpose in health care — just as credit unions compete effectively with banks, prompting them to offer higher interest rates on deposits and lower rates on loans.
…
In a study published in March and financed

… Continue Reading

Covering President Barack Obama’s public health insurance plan pitch to the American Medical association, New York Times reporters Robert Pear and Jackie Calmes write in the June 16th paper under the header Cost Concerns as Obama Pushes Health Issue:

Mr. Obama spoke just days after the A.M.A. had signaled opposition to his proposal for a public health insurance plan to compete with private insurers as part of a menu of choices, much like the one for members of Congress.

This is either factually wrong or highly misleading. Members of Congress, and all federal employees for that matter, do receive a menu … Continue Reading