Last year, candidate Obama made a big deal about creating a nationalized health care program which would "...give health insurance to 47 million Americans who are now without coverage." Of course, what he failed to mention was that the figure he cited includes American citizens as well as illegal immigrants. And the fact that it will cost well over $1 trillion dollars (which we do not have) to provide health insurance for everyone.
That could be part of the reason why Chairman Obama is now saying, "If we don't get it done this year, we're not going to get it done." The more we find out about the Democrats' plan to seize control of our health care industry, the less likely we'll be to go along with it. Dems know how toxic such a blatantly anti-American plan will be during an election year. So, like a bunch of stereotypical oily-haired car salesmen, they're pulling out every trick in the book to pressure Americans to sign on the dotted line and walk out with the health care equivalent of a used Yugo.
This past weekend, the President ginned up the rhetoric to candy-coat this most recent attempt to further his Soviet-style makeover for America:
In his weekly radio address on Saturday, President Barack Obama declared that “it’s time to deliver” on health care reform. In a letter to Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), President Obama wrote, “I strongly believe that Americans should have the choice of a public health insurance option operating alongside private plans. This will give them a better range of choices, make the health care market more competitive, and keep insurance companies honest.”Great. There's that word again: choice. Only it's NOT choice, it's government control of private industry. What he's proposing would have the government (who makes the rules) competing against the private sector (who must abide by those rules) to provide health care to everyone in America. Ed Morrissey put it plainly: "government insurance will kill private insurance."
Government doesn’t exist to turn a profit, nor does it face competition. That’s why, in part, government operates so inefficiently. We put up with that in certain areas, like the military, because we don’t want private groups arming themselves with tanks, bombers, and armies and navies. In most other areas, we prefer the private sector, as competition usually gets us the best products and services at the best prices.Even if you ignore the staggering costs for such a ridiculous undertaking (which Obama has already admitted he plans to fund by taxing health care benefits), and the inevitable rationing of health care, there's still the unconstitutional nature of the government's seizure of 17% of our gross domestic product – the federal government has NO right to hijack our medical industry. The 10th Amendment (remember the Constitution?) is pretty clear on this:
Government exists to service its interests, at least in its present form. Mostly, it serves to further itself. Any government bureaucracy that sees danger in competition will work to eliminate it. The dynamic in health-care plans would not be government making private insurers “more honest”, but in squeezing them out of the marketplace to create a monopoly. Since government doesn’t have to show a profit to exist, it will simply low-ball the other insurers on price until they all drop out of the health-care field.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.Last time I check, there is no right to health insurance written anywhere by our Founders. Which leaves health care – and health insurance – in the hands of the states and the American people. Sure, we've got plenty of problems with the imperfect system we have now. But to chuck it out the window in favor of a system built upon such historical failures as the Soviet Union, we'd need to have our heads examined.
And with government-run health care, the cost for such an extensive exam is just too great.
|