"Pump and Dump Drama Queen"

Mark Schmitt asks an excellent question that, alas, eluded the Vega.

Let's consider why it might generally be considered a conflict of interest for Frist to own so much HCA stock. The main concern would be that Frist might be in a position to use his public power to improve the financial condition of such hospitals; for example, he could push for some kind of increased coverage for the uninsured or even universal health care. He might have a public motive for doing so, but he might also have a private motive, since it would hugely benefit a hospital chain like HCA. That's the reason for putting all his stock in a blind trust, so that he won't know, and we know that he won't know, whether he would benefit privately.

But when the uninsured ratio goes up, and Frist actually knows that this will affect his own portfolio, paradoxically his reaction isn't what the normal conflict-of-interest analysis would assume. Rather than use his official power to reduce the number of uninsured, he takes a private action, and just dumps the stock. And not just any stock, this is his patrimony he's selling out. It's the stock of his own family's company. But he washes his hands of it. Leaves it to some bigger sucker.

As Schmitt notes, this is emblematic of "conservatism" in this country these days. Ignore an obvious solution that will actually help the very people they consider their constituents -- in this case business, large, medium, and small -- and instead pursue one that will be a very short term fix but put off a much bigger problem that will pose a disaster down the road. The point is to maintain power, rake in a quick buck, whatever.

This has helped answer a question I've been mulling for months now. The cost of having so many uninsured Americans, and the cost American businesses are paying to insure their employees now, are looming on the horizon like...well...like a pair of category 5 hurricanes. So why, I asks myself, why are our corporate chieftains not banging their shoes in Senate hearing rooms demanding that we figure out some sort of Universal health care coverage, and take the onus off their shareholders?

I've been so naive. Of course they're not going to do that. It might have political consequences, as in pissing off DeLay. And it will have precious little reward for them since it won't affect this quarter's earnings.

Then they go ahead and help Republicans convince the rubes that the Medicare prescription bill is the answer to all their problems, and that universal health care is the road to Canada and socialism, where medicine is parceled out to people less deserving than they.