Part 3 of 3
By David A. Black, Sr.
Part of the problem with the Proposed Health Care Reform Act is that we cannot expect to hear the truth of the issues in “honest debate”. For instance, the “Death Panel” was adamantly denied, until it was removed from the proposal.
The proposal will allegedly cover the health care of illegal immigrants. Supporters repudiate this, claiming the language forbids coverage of illegal immigrants.
However, there is nothing in the proposal to allow verification of any recipient’s legal status. When Conservatives offer legislation to amend the discrepancy, Liberals reject the amendments.
Liberals forget there are laws prohibiting illegal immigration; yet they are here. Because illegal immigrants ignore our federal immigration laws, it is logical to assume they will ignore any legislated restrictions to “nationalized” health care.
In his speech to the Joint Houses of Congress, President Obama claimed to promote “choice and competition” by officially announcing a “Public Option”.
The president declared, “I have no interest in putting insurance companies out of business. They provide a legitimate service, and employ a lot of our friends and neighbors. I just want to hold them accountable.”
Ironically, that is similar to President Obama’s comments about not wanting control of General Motors, Chrysler, and companies affected by the “Financial Bail-Out”. In the aftermath, we find that the opposite is true. The president, and his administration, have asserted unprecedented control of “Private Industry”. Why should we expect Health Care to be treated any differently?
The president went on to say, “… it would only be an option for those who don’t have insurance… In fact, based on Congressional Budget Office estimates, we believe that less than 5% of Americans would sign up.”
Remember, I wrote to begin with, “we cannot expect to hear the truth”; you decide.
The president first cites to the falsely inflated number of 15% of Americans being uninsured at some point, and then exaggerates the number by doubling the time period, erringly assuming that doing so automatically doubles the number of people affected.
How so? He claimed that one in three Americans goes without coverage at some point; that is more than 30%. Then something closer to the truth slips out when he cited the CBO saying, “…only 5% will sign up”.
Mr. President, is it 15%, 30%, or 5%? You referred to, or quoted all three percentages in the same speech. With all due respect Sir, annoying little facts, known as the truth, will come back to bite you when they are misrepresented.
President Obama promised the following points in his “sales pitch” for the “Public Option;
1. No tax subsidies for the “Public Option”.
2. No additional deficit spending.
3. Not a dollar of the Medicare trust fund will be used to pay for the “Public Option”.
4. Greater security for the middle-class, not higher taxes.
Ignoring the fact that President Obama contradicted every point in his speech, and assuming the president intends to abide by these four points. Logically, to accommodate the “Public Option”, the president is proposing another Government Subsidized Entity, similar to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (Who, along with GM and Chrysler, the newest GSE’s, are going bankrupt)
Think about it! Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, GM, Chrysler, and the financial industry staggering under the weight of the government…These are prime examples of what to expect for our health care system under a “Public Option”.
The only way for a “Public Option” to abide by the four points in his “sales pitch”, and maintain “choice and competition”, is to mandate that the ‘Public Provider” abide by the same laws enforced on “Private Providers”. This means, among other things, the “Public Provider” would be required to establish “security holdings”, (typically 70 – 80% of their policy values) to ensure the financial ability to cover claims.
In order to stay in existence, insurers must guarantee the principles, which are the premiums paid by the people. To do this, insurance companies invest the premiums they collect to cover claims that may exist on their policies and for their own business returns as well, including operating costs.
This means, the government, through the “Public Provider” would necessarily purchase stocks, bonds, real estate, and commodities to amass profits. (Not a far stretch after the Auto and Financial Bail-Outs)
Politicians engaged in such activities create obvious potential dangers. In short, your tax dollars would be risked, or “invested”, in the stock market to cover the costs of the “Public Option”.
Keep in mind, during his speech, President Obama informed us that nationalizing health care through a “Public Option” is only a part of his plan; he reminded his “Progressive Friends” that, “The ‘Public Option’ is only a means to that end – and we should remain open to other ideas that accomplish our ultimate goals.”
What are the “ultimate goals” of the presidents “Progressive Friends”?
Government “investing” tax dollars in “Private Industry” is a one-way ticket to corruption. It will not be long before politicians assume massive control of the market through legislation, to “protect” the investments of the “tax payers”.
Considering the government prints money at will, this creates an environment in which private insurance companies cannot compete. In relatively short time, financial pressures will force “Private Providers” to file for bankruptcy.
There is no better “investment” than to acquire failing competitors. Therefore, through “free market capitalist investing, “private assets” would end up in the government’s possession.
DANGER! The president is proposing a “hostile takeover” of our nation. He is simply using Health Care Reform as a vehicle to reach a more sinister destination. The “Public Option” creates a potential “enemy from within”, using Capitalism, to accomplish Socialism.
Nationalized Health Care is, by its nature, another form of Socialism being introduced to a “free” society; another attempt to gain control of all major methods of production in an effort to confiscate wealth and dictate the lives of individuals through mandates and distribution of means.
Redistribution, or the practice of taking from one societal group to provide for another group, is Socialism.
The government dictating compliance by mandating involvement of private individuals in government run programs is Communism.
America was created, by design, as a Capitalist Society; a social system based on individual rights through the separation of the economy and the Government; with a limited government, relegated to the duties of protecting the rights of the People. America is founded on the rights, of individuals, to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness. Americans enjoy the right to possess private property, and maintain the right to individually contract to, and profit from our own labor.
The right to Life and Liberty guarantees us to freedom from oppression, freedom from burdensome government, and the right to freedom of actions in our individual Pursuit of Happiness, so long as no person or group infringes or violates the rights of another.
Previously, in “The Health Care Reform Act of 2009 – Crisis or Coercion”, I disputed the “facts” the president termed “undisputable”.
In “National Health Care and the Constitution”, I called the president out, defying him to present an argument, giving him or Congress the Constitutional Power or Authority to legislate “National Health Care Reform”.
Now, I am declaring the potential dangers of a sinister agenda.
I reject giving the President, or Congress, the Power to implement legislation that could, so easily, be used as a means to anything as sinister as what I have described.
The Founders intended to create a nation of “free men”, fundamentally rooted in societal and economic capitalism, to preserve the natural rights of each individual. Any attempt to vilify capitalism, or provide support of socialism is, in a word, un-American.
I maintain, that if America allows the nationalization of our health care system, we are only a step away from saying goodbye to our Representative Republic, and hello to a Socialist State; in essence, saying goodbye to Liberty, and welcoming Tyranny.
So long as a single Patriot fights for Liberty, Freedom lives. Never stop fighting.