Showing posts with label Health Care. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Health Care. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

The Argument of Tyrants.

“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants. It is the creed of slaves.”
Those familiar with this quotation from William Pitt the Younger, who was the British Prime Minister around the time our Founding Fathers were penning the Constitution, might shake their heads sadly when contemplating the uncanny relevance of his words some 227 years after they were delivered in a speech to Parliament.

It would have been apt had he spoken them in the United States Congress in 2010.

After forcing us to witness the parade of unfortunate victims of medical insurance horror stories, used so despicably by Democrats as political props, we are being cajoled into believing that the intrusion of the federal government into our health care system is a “necessity.”

Now, go ahead and read the quote again.

How stupid do they suppose us to be? The current administration, with the help of its adoring media, harangues us daily with the necessity of dealing with the “crisis” of uninsured Americans. Of course, their big-government preferences for dealing with any problem, large or small, triggers a huge and inevitably malformed growth on the body politic – one with a trillion dollar price tag, a price tag the United States can ill afford in this time of the one true crisis: a faltering economy and high unemployment.

Lost in the wailing and hysteria during this latest power-grab by an Administration of elitists so smug as to believe that we, the unwashed masses, cannot possibly merit the freedom to pursue life, liberty, property and happiness without their guidance and direction, is the fact that the American free-market system would make this problem disappear if left to its own devices.

Simply put, markets work much better than manipulation.

If freed of the heavy hand of mandates and regulation, and if they wish to survive, health insurance companies would by necessity be more responsive to the needs of health consumers - in the same manner as an automobile manufacturer, or indeed, an automobile insurance company. They would be forced by consumer demand to be sensitive to the price and quality of the goods and services they provide to their customers.

All the things that free-market companies do to win and keep customers, coupled with common sense reforms including tort reform, competition across state lines and the lifting of the ridiculous anti-competitive mandates, would certainly result in lower premiums and hence, more coverage for more Americans.

But that does not feather in with the goals of this administration and the Democratic majority in Congress; goals which include dramatically expanding the power of the government over every aspect of our lives.

And so it has come to pass that those of us who oppose government-run health care because we find the abridgement of our individual liberties to be a crushing oppression are labeled as heartless.

Soon, we will be labeled as dangerous.

American men and women have died beneath a flag of stars and stripes for over 200 years, not for kings or presidents, but for the ideals represented by that flag – the recognition that the natural state of man on earth is freedom, and that no government has may impinge upon that freedom under any guise, including that of a perceived “necessity.”

Necessity does not give anyone a “right” to anything, a fact often obscured in debates such as this.

The rights given to us, according to the Declaration of Independence, by “nature and nature’s God” include life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. These rights, take notice, are rights to action, not rights to the fulfillment of needs or desires.

Rights cannot impose obligations upon other people, except the obligation to leave us to pursue our own interests unimpeded. Basically, we have the right to be left alone, so that free from obstructions, we can work for what we want, need and desire.

My right to life does not oblige my neighbor to feed and clothe me or my family – it merely gives me the right, no matter how hard the struggle may be, to feed and clothe my family by the sweat of my own brow.

My right to liberty ensures that I may act for my own benefit, keep the fruits of my labor, and that my neighbor – or my government – may not steal them from me. Conversely, I have no right or claim to the actions or property of another.

And finally, I have the right to pursue happiness, but may make no claim on others to provide me with it. If a “right” were to impose a duty upon another, it would be a violation of that person’s basic rights; we would become a society of master and slave.

When something is given for nothing it is charity; let’s not be afraid to call it what it is. Even if such charity is provided by the government, they must confiscate the wealth of others to do so, and so within the framework of our moral code in the United States, charity is not a right – no matter how much those in Congress wish to portray it that way.

Our country of free men and women has been wounded by this incursion into our liberties, and so this is a time for action; we have an obligation to our forebears, ourselves and our posterity. We’ve been asleep for far too long; we need to get up, get educated and vow to educate others. We must pledge to teach our children that entitlement programs such as the one being rammed down our throats are a curse, and in the long run a tool of enslavement.

Like those brave men and women of colonial America, we need to pledge our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor to the cause of liberty – because without freedom, without our rights, what do we really have?

We will rally again my friends, on April the 15th. We will use our strong hearts and our strong voices to tell this government that we will not be cowed, that we will never give up, and that we will put this right again.

And finally, I leave you with the final, breathtaking words of William Pitt, uttered on his deathbed in 1806. I would ask you to never forget them. I know I won't.
“My country! Oh my country! How I love my country.”

Thursday, July 23, 2009

Running for Cover. And Not Finding Any.

As predicted, Congressman McMahon has taken refuge in a tough guy approach to the radical health care proposal being bullied through Congress. It is to be expected, since he doesn't want to be seen as a cheerleader for what will prove to be an extraordinarily painful and destructive initiative.

It won't work, though. Not as long as we vow to stay informed and engaged.

This from the Staten Island Advance (SILive) today:
Said McMahon: "... I am concerned that the proposed health care bill will be paid for at the expense of our small business owners ... essentially penalizing (them)." [snip]

But Staten Island Rep. Michael McMahon predicted there will be a new way of providing health care in this country, and paying for it, by year's end, if not by Congress' August recess..."
Sound familiar? It should. Last week we wrote:
Do not be surprised if you see the Congressman expressing "deep concerns" about the health care bill, insinuating that he may not vote for it until he knows how it will be paid for. Ultimately, though, after some minor tweaks and fixes, he will toe the Obama/Pelosi line.
Now under normal circumstances this tactic would work quite well; it makes it seem as if he is putting the well-being and interests of his constituency before party loyalty - but that's all smoke and mirrors. The truth is that we are fools if we let him shape the message this way.

The underlying theme here is that despite the "tweaks and fixes," our Congressman is in favor of socialized medicine. McMahon - along with all the other politicians who will vote for this bill but are not personally bound by it - is ultimately going to vote to dump the greatest health care system in the history of the world.

Detractors (and there are many) will say that I'm being picky, that even when the Congressman does work for the benefit of his constituents I am looking for and finding fault. This is not true. The reality is that no matter what portions of socialized medicine McMahon objects to, he will still, in the end, support socialized medicine.

As I have said before, will say here, and will say again on August 2nd in Conference House Park: "Time and time again our Congressman votes us into the twilight world of soft tyranny..."

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

In Obamaland, Getting Sick Could Be The Death Of You

The Thug-in-Chief had a sitdown this week with the bigwigs from the healthcare industry, both the insurers and providers. Can you picture Obama walking around the room with a Louisville Slugger in his hands, a la Al Capone? I can.

Needless to say, the meeting went well for the Pres, but not so good for me and you.

What came out of this little get-together was a pledge by the healthcare industry to save $2 trillion over the next ten years. Savings are good. Eliminating wasteful spending is good, too. Of course, what remains unspoken could kill you - and that is the methods that will be employed to save this $2 trillion. Here's a quick rundown on the most likely scenarios:

1. CUTS IN PHYSICIAN'S COMPENSATION. As the universe of those that require health care expands with the aging of the baby-boom generation, the incentives for students to enter the field will diminish as the potential compensation diminishes. Without the expectation of a big payday at the end of those long, hard years of study and self-deprivation, more and more of our best and brightest will finds other areas of interest. Fewer, and less qualified, doctors will be treating more and more patients - just the thought of it is enough to makes you sick.

2. LIMITED AVAILABILITY OF THE BEST DRUGS. It comes as no surptrise to learn that the newest drugs are often the best drugs, and the best drugs are the most expensive drugs. Well, if we are going to cut costs, perhaps the older, less effective drug might save us a few bucks. More people in Canada die of cancer than in the United States, and coincidentally, 44% of all new drugs to hit the market are priced out of Canada's healthcare system. The linkage is inescapable and real.

3. PREVENTIVE CARE WILL DECREASE - NOT INCREASE. It will be one of the first things to go under the rationing system that will have to be imposed to make the cuts a reality. Routine colonoscopies? Look in the rear view mirror and you might get a glimpse.

Dick Morris writes:
Obama's pretension that nobody will find changes in their current health insurance plans except for a magical reduction in their cost by $2,500 a year is a fool's proposition. Private health insurers will be no more private than TARP-funded banks or government-subsidized car companies are in Obama's America. They will be controlled by government health care planners who will approve treatments, limit drug use, hold down medical incomes and bring their cost-cutting programs to bear. Inevitably, their axe will fall on the oldest and the sickest among us, those least "deserving" of our newly limited and, under Obama's program, diminishing, health-care resources.


The other radical changes Obama is bringing about in our nation can always be reversed. New taxes can be repealed or lowered. That which was nationalized can be privatized. Government that has grown can be cut. But once the health care system is extended to cover everyone, with no commensurate increase in the resources available, the change will be forever. The vicious cycle of cuts in medical resources and cuts in the number of doctors and nurses will doom health care in this country. This wanton destruction will not be reversible by any bill or program. A crucial part of our quality of life — the best health care in the world — will be gone forever.

Sunday, March 15, 2009

How our Congressman spends YOUR $$$ (Pt 1)

Let's start at the beginning.

The 2009 Congress was barely two weeks old when the profligate spending started. Under the title of "CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2009" Congressman McMahon and his fellow House Dems, led by the Nancy Pelosi, voted to re-authorize the Children's Health Insurance Program, a bill that was designed to provide health insurance to poor kids whose families could not afford to procure it themselves.

One problem, though, with this bill. It EXPANDS the program to include "children" up to the age of 30, and "poor" families that earn up to $78,000. That's right, YOUR MONEY will help pay for health insurance for a 30-year-old "child" whose parents earn 78 grand a year. Beautiful.

You know what it really is, don't you? It's a down payment on socialized medicine.