Briarroot
11/11/2009 5:50:00 PM
Shawn K. wrote:
> I should also mention that I don't mean to single you out, Giftzwerg.
> Your post was just indicative of something that's been on my mind. The
> amount of F.U.D. that I've seen flying around this whole business just
> drives me crazy. So many people are intent on just selling some party
> line (Democrats and Republicans alike) that honest, coherent
> conversation and debate becomes really difficult to accomplish.
>
Great. Now suppose you enlighten us on those points of HR 3962 (the
Pelosi Bill) that you think will succeed in lowering the cost of health
care? See, that's the sticking point. The whole idea is not to extend
health insurance to people who don't have it and most of whom don't want
it. And make no mistake, the vast majority of the middle class doesn't
really give a shit about the poor, they want to lower *their* health
care costs. Is this bill gonna do that? How?
*My* principle beef is with the individual mandate, which unfortunately
exists in every other healthcare 'reform' bill that I've heard being
talked about in this session of Congress. I wouldn't care if Congress
extended Medicaid coverage to include everyone whose annual income is
below the poverty line (which is what they *should* be doing, by the
way, instead of to shove this fiasco down our throats). I don't care
about the high cost of buying health insurance because I'm not one of
their customers and don't plan to ever be. I care about my personal
freedom and about an over-arching government that seems intent on
further empowering itself at my expense. Ya got me?
--
"Can Washington Make You Buy Health Insurance? Yes, yes, says White
House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. Congress has the power to make
everyone buy health insurance. 'I don't believe there's a lot of case
law that would demonstrate the veracity' of comments to the contrary.
Thank you, Mr. Justice Gibbs. We'll see about all that when -- if - the
matter of Congress' power over private commercial judgments of this
nature gets to the U.S. Supreme Court. Meanwhile the knock-down,
drag-out over health insurance 'reform' shouldn't be allowed to fuzz up
another immensely vital question; to wit, how in James Madison's name
have we reached the point that Congress can so much as contemplate
telling you, and you, and you, and all of us that we'll buy health
insurance, like it or not, Buster? Why do we have to? Because the
government says so, isn't that reason enough? For Mr. Justice Gibbs, and
the people who employ him, it is. Just about anything Congress decides
to do in the name of uplift seems to be constitutional: In other words,
in accord with written stipulations as to what the national government
may and may not do. Several problems arise concerning this fine theory:
- It's nonsense. It contravenes the whole constitutional concept of
divided powers: particular functions reserved to particular branches of
government. And other powers divided between states and the national
government. - It threatens liberty. A government that knows no limits to
its power can be counted on to step more and more heavily on citizens'
rights and privileges. All for the 'general good' naturally! -- It
divides the citizens. On the one hand, those who want particular favors
from government; on the other hand, those who deny that government has
the right to dispense such favors. The Obama administration, which
desperately wants health care to pass, brushes off such concerns as
cranky and relevant mainly to wild-eyed Limbaugh and Palin fans, when in
fact concerns about the rightful exercise of government power should
inform every legislative debate. Those it doesn't inform are likely to
end badly. Majority support of this or that initiative doesn't
legitimize the initiative." - William Murchison, senior fellow at the
Texas Public Policy Foundation