Monday, September 28, 2009

Sprinting to the Start; Crawling to the Finish

A opinion writer for The Wall Street Journal, no name for the writer is given, has brought to my attention that Democrats are now attempting to bring HR 3200 to vote within the next six weeks. A noteworthy excerpt:

The six-week limit also happens to fall—conveniently—before the gubernatorial elections in Virginia and New Jersey, both of which the GOP has an even-to-better shot of winning. Democratic losses will terrify the Blue Dogs, who are already wavering in their support for an extreme health makeover.

The title of the webpage is "Health Care Deadline Is Arbitrary", and rightly so. As was noted before, this specific piece of legislation, if passed, would not go into effect until sometime in the year 2013. That means that politicians are sprinting to pass something which they will then crawl to put into effect. Along with the above information in the quote, it is conclusive now that our representatives are trying to force this legislation onto the American people before opposition becomes too great.

Now would be a good time to send a reminder to your representatives about your views on this piece of legislation. You can find your appropriate contact forms here. Here is my letter for a reference, which I give permission for anyone to take and alter (but not to copy verbatim):

Dear [representative],

I am writing to remind you that I am opposed to the medical care reform legislation HR 3200, and that I have asked you to cast a vote against it. If you should cast a vote in favor of it, I will not consider voting for you as a candidate for political office again, as this issue is cardinal.

This legislation is not either impractical *or* immoral, but *both* impractical *and* immoral. Any degree of government intervention in the medical industry, whether it be a full nationalization or something as simple as insurance mandates, has been a recorded failure in the multiple countries that tried it, including the United States (referencing Massachusetts in particular). The results of such interventions have been longer waits for appointments, skyrocketing costs, a declining number of doctors, decreasing quality, lack of innovation, and, immorally, the prohibition of a doctor and patient to voluntarily contract on payment and treatment options since the government holds the threat of physical force against them.

The legislation, as it currently stands, gives arbitrary power to bureaucrats, imposes higher taxes on individuals, imposes rationing, and places multiple agencies it establishes above the jurisdiction of the courts:

Big government is the cause of our current medical care ills, and has always been. Only a free market, and I mean an *absolutely* free market that contains no governmental controls, can fix this.



Stella Zawistowski said...

I think calling the timeline "arbitrary" is being too kind to its proponents. The timeline is clearly NOT arbitrary: It has been carefully chosen to hornswoggle us. Democrats want a decision made NOW! NOW! NOW! -- before there's been time to have adequate discussion and dissent, and before there's time for political repercussions in the gubernatorial elections to give members of Congress pause. But they want the EFFECTS of that decision to be deferred until after the next presidential election! That way, they hope, they can convince us to re-elect Obama before the disastrous effects of his healthcare policy are seen.

This is not arbitrary timing; it's con-artist timing. Thanks for pointing it out.

Benpercent said...

And thank you for bring up the point that it isn't an arbitrary timeline.