But let’s not think one clever one-liner in the Oval Office makes Larry Rhoden a great statesman. On principle and policy, he’s still incoherent.
The same day that Governor Rhoden went to Washington to celebrate new federal prescription drug price controls, the Governor issued his latest weekly ramble to decry government involvement in the economy:
When government gets too involved in the economy, it tends to make things a lot more expensive. Businesses waste time, effort, and money trying to comply with regulations. Fortunately, South Dakota doesn’t have that problem in the way other states do. We base our regulations in common sense, we cut red tape, and we have the 2nd fewest overall regulations in the nation.
But continued challenges at the national level do impact South Dakotans, and we are doing what we can to address them.…
Healthcare costs also continue to rise year after year. This past year, for the first time in South Dakota history, it cost state taxpayers more to cover Medicaid costs than to pay for K-12 education. Frankly, it should not be that way, but it’s a direct result of the federal government kicking more and more of the cost of Medicaid down to the states. And we’re working with the Trump Administration to address that, as well [Gov. Larry Rhoden, weekly column, 2026.09.18].
Governor Rhoden claims that government getting “too involved” in the economy “tends to make things a lot more expensive.” “Too” and “tends” are weasel words, making his principle vague enough to allow Larry to turn on a dime and advocate any government involvement that suits his agenda.
But Rhoden fouls even that vague declaration when he turns to health care. The cost-driving “problem” he identifies, “the federal government kicking more and more of the cost of Medicaid down to the states”, is not an example of government getting “too” involved or even “more” involved; to the diametrical contrary, Rhoden is complaining that the federal government has reduced its involvement in the health care economy.
Rhoden says he’s working with the feds to address that cost-driver, but the immediate result of that work, touted in a separate press release from Rhoden the same day as the above-quoted column, is more federal involvement in the health care economy: specifically, communist price controls on prescription drugs. The White House extorted the price cuts from Big Pharma on the promise of exemptions from tariffs, another radical involvement of government in the economy.
Less federal involvement in the economy would look like (a) no price controls (on drugs or beef) and (b) no tariffs (on drugs or beef or anything else), which would boost the economy and make lots of things cheaper. One would think Governor Rhoden himself would draw that conclusion from his own warning about too much government involvement. But the White House he praises is involving the government in the economy in policy after ad-hoc policy, and Rhoden apparently wants that involvement.
The most pesky involvement of government that raises cost (or reduces profit) in health care is requiring everyone get coverage.
Health care is the best issue to argue a side: is the government there to protect business profits or to protect citizens’ health? Whose interests ought government represent: business or citizenry?
Ironically, the only of those two that can actually vote to choose the government, consistently chooses a government that puts their interests in second.
Health care is cheap — if we just let those pesky sick people die untreated.
We base our regulations on common cents. We let people die for pocket change. God can sort them out.
We are not a socialist organization, Mr. O. The health care industry is but an industry, and the free market will drive to the best outcomes for the smartest and the fittest. All others pay cash.
grudzie We are spending mucho “cash” as you say and our USA government, the recipient of all that “cash”, is obligated to help pay for everyone’s health care.
That’s in the constitution as Article 1 Section 8 Clause 1.
This issue is personal for me as the 4 year old who was my flower girl at my wedding moved to Canada as an adult. She died of breast cancer in 2012, at the age of 44 having returned to the USA by which time it was too late.
In 2014 my own daughter, then 30, was diagnosed with aggressive, bilateral breast cancer. But fortunately she was in the USA. Between the discovery of the first lump, the first appointment, a mammogram, an ultrasound & a biopsy to diagnosis was about 2 weeks . Treatment began immediately, bilateral mastectomy, chemo and radiation. She got the works, and fast. There was no delay in getting anything done. She is still cancer free.
The medical centers along our northern border are full of Canadian medical refugees.
A friend was recently treated at the Mayo Clinic and said he thought half the other patients there were from Canada.
We already have two single-payer systems here, the VA and the IHS, and the people who are in them want to get out.
You cannot look at this and think socialized medicine works.
In 2022 the Mayo Clinic served 1.3 million patients. Only 6,700 of them were international. Even if all them came from Canada, that’s still a tiny percentage.
https://newsnetwork.mayoclinic.org/n7-mcnn/7bcc9724adf7b803/uploads/2023/04/2022-Mayo-Clinic-Fact-Sheet-.pdf
I know kinda what you go through. Algebra. My condolences and best wishes.
My daughter is diagnosed with the breast cancer gene. For prevention she’s just had a hysterectomy and is having a double mastectomy. Age 42 Many cancer deaths on her Mothers side.
My dear grudznick, “ We are not a socialist organization, Mr. O”.
You are half correct: we socialize industry costs and allow free markets to take the profits.
We all know unfettered capitalism is bad, very, very bad.
By the way, where are those “right to life” fellows who should be demanding health care for all the sacred lives in the US?
Yes, socialized agriculture, socialized dairies, socialized cheese, socialized livestock production, a socialized timber industry, socialized air service, socialized freight rail, a socialized nursing home industry, socialized water systems and now a socialized internet are all fine with Republicans in South Dakota but then they insist single-payer medical insurance is socialized medicine.
when the solution to rising health care costs is medical-assistance-in-dying, that is not an improvement in service.
When your doctor works for you, your death is a loss of revenue, when your doctor works for the government, your death is a cost savings.
Influenza preys on the elderly and the poor and South Dakota is 51st in elder protections.
So, it comes as little surprise that the red moocher state is 49th in opportunity and fifth worst state for nurses but third best state for doctors. Any RN with at least half a brain will leave for Minnesota, Colorado or the Southwest the instant they graduate so the work force in South Dakota will just get older, stupider and more Republican.
Algebra, your simplistic comparison is wrong on-face: the loss of a person on government health care is the loss of a taxpayer. That loss of revenue stream is the same as the profit motive you point out for private doctors.
Better yet, we should all be saying that the preventable loss of a life is ALWAYS wrong – a loss on face.