Pelosi_care #2

More on Pelosi-Care

At a recent post passage news conference, someone asked Pelosi if it was true that jail time could be imposed for those not signed up for the gummint health plan. And she DID NOT deny it.

Think long and hard on this. She is saying that she feels it acceptable to put people in jail for not buying into her health plan. IN JAIL!!!! For the love of all that is holy, they did that in Russia; we don't do that in the US of A!! Going to jail for not buying insurance, simply because this woman decides it should be so.

Think about this. From the Ace of Spades
Read the whole article if you have a chance.

"The left says: You are crazy to claim your so-called freedoms are being taken away, and you are a lunatic to scream about an overly powerful state which will use violent coercion (no one goes to jail without the threat of violence if he doesn't, after all) to enforce its notions of the "economic good

And with the next breath the left says: By the way, you shall either buy health care insurance or we will throw you in prison for two or three years.

I'm paranoid? Really? I am not fretting here about some remote and unlikely possibility. We are not speaking here of "slippery slopes" or in terms of "what comes next?"

We are instead objecting to a black-letter law spelled out for all to see in the very first piece of legislation you're proposing."

Right out of the box. The state here -- Pelosi, Reid, Obama -- are claiming that they can imprison people for behavior that has never before even been hinted as being a crime, on the theory that such behavior constitutes unpatriotic economic behavior which is detrimental to the state's balance sheets.

Think about what a broad, all-encompassing term "economics" is. 80% of our waking hours are spent in economic activity of one sort or another. The state here is asserting the right to imprison people for behavior they consider not actually morally reprehensible or harmful as other crimes are, but instead merely detrimental to the Great Push Forward, the state's master plan of economic health and well-being."

Going to jail because you didn't buy an insurance plan approved by the government. Can you even conceive of that? Can you imagine any of the Founding Fathers tolerating such a law, let alone passing it? Can imagine any of those who fought for our independence obeying such a law? In your wildest fantasies, could you conceive of any of our so-called representatives daring to propose such a frightening law? But there it is, compliments of Pelosi and all the spineless zombies in the House who just blindly signed off on this piece of totalitarianism masquerading as a health-care bill. Now all those who voted for this bill either agree with this bull***t, or else didn't know that it was in there. Either way, they should be thrown out. If they didn't know, then they are incompetent; if they did know and voted for it anyway, then they are supporting a bill which is a direct violation of the Constitution and should be impeached. They are willing to put you or your family in jail if you don't agree with their bill and buy their insurance.

Health Care Part 2

Now that we have lost the auto industry, much of the banking and finance market, and are in imminent danger of losing the energy market, all to government control, the next area to fall appears to be the health care industry. We are being told, over and over again, of the health care crisis that is befalling us, and how something must be done now, right now!!!!!! But wait...the stimulus bill had to be passed right now, the energy bill (cap and trade) had to be passed right now, the mortgage bailout had to be right now, etc, etc. What exactly is the big rush here? If you accept that there even is a crisis (more later) in health care, how exactly are things going to be so much worse if we take the time to read the friggin' bill and argue it? This bill has the power to change completely and possibly irreversibly how all of us get medical care in the future. Isn't that a good reason to rush into this a whole lot slower that we seem to be doing? We argue the survival of some stupid minnow in some small stream somewhere in Montana much more than we seem to spend discussing this huge bill!

But let's back up a little bit here if we may. What exactly is this "crisis" that we are supposed to be fixing? We are told that there are 47 million without health care, but virtually every study shows that this number includes illegals, as well as those who have sufficient income to purchase insurance but freely choose not to. So the number who are involuntarily uncovered is much, much less than this, well below 50% of this number. And studies show that this proposed bill will leave over 20 million uncovered. So we have gained exactly nothing.
We are also told that health insurance is too expensive, and that the insurance companies are ripping us off. Well, yes it is expensive, but at least part of that expense is driven by government regulations. I don't want a policy that covers "alternative medicine" , massage therapy, chiropractic and a scad of things that cost a lot and are of no use to me at all. But because of gov't regulations, these have to be included, driving up my costs. And likewise I can't shop for a better or less expensive policy anywhere else except in my home state, because of gov't rules. And though I sure don't like spending money, when I needed the policy for a heart attack and stenting, or when I severely damaged my knee and needed surgery to rebuild it, it was sure nice to see almost all the costs covered by the policy. And when I look at the way government plans work in Canada and England, I'm pretty sure that had we the government system in place here at those times, I would not have received the same care at the same speed, and indeed might not have had the treatment at all because of my "advanced age". Heck, why should we care if an old, over-the-hill guy of 60 + years has a knee that works or not anyway. The plan can save $$$ if we deny his treatment. And the old man, me, has NO recourse. Sorry, I'd rather have a private company who has at least some interest in my well-being than a bureaucrat in an office somewhere who has absolutely no interest in me or my health.
Additionally, much of that cost is driven by things that could be changed or controlled without tossing the whole system. Want to lower medical costs? Find ways to eliminate frivolous lawsuits. Protect drug manufacturers from ridiculous class action suits that make lawyers millions, and alleged victims almost nothing. Minimize government involvement in health care. Force everyone, everyone, to pay something toward their care. If it is going to cost you nothing to use the system, you will overuse and abuse that system. Even a nominal charge every time you visit the ER or clinic will make you a bit more selective in when you do use it.
As to the argument that there are "many" who are denied health care because of lack of finances, please look up the EMTALA laws (Emergency Medical Treatment And Labor Act). It mandates that all who present to the hospital campus must be seen, with no regard to ability to pay.

But even more basic than all this.....what do we mean when we say that everyone has a right to health care? Why do we have this right? Where did it come from? And if we have such a right, do we not also have the same right to food, shelter, an automobile to get us to the store or Dr's office, gas to run the car, a telephone, TV etc etc. Where do we stop? If the basis of this right is necessity (We must have this right or else we might die!), then what is more basic to life than food? And if I have a basic right to food, then how dare the grocery store and the farmer charge me for their products? I have a RIGHT to it!!!

More to follow