The Healthcare Debate Goes On

This is my most recent email to Barbara Boxer (D-CA), posted on July 25th, in her "Join the Healtcare Debate" web page. Unfortunately, I personally think it will be trashed because it does not follow her very liberal and wasteful spending views.

I like and am very satisfied with my insurance coverage. I don't want any changes to it nor do I want a public/government run health care program that WILL inevitably create an unsustainable deficit, increase our taxes, CROWD OUT PRIVATE INSURERS FROM THE MARKET, encourage employers to stop providing coverage because it would be cheaper to pay the penalty than to provide private insurance, and quite possibly will lure employees from private insurance to the cheaper government option. A public option will make it even more difficult for many of us who already pay for private insurance to keep that insurance, which as your should know (with your Cadillac health care plan), provides far better benefits and less interference by a bureaucratic paper pusher than a government run public plan would do. A public plan would also inevitably lead to health care rationing in order to keep costs down, lead to someone other than the insured or family members making life and death decisions, and pay for unnecessary procedures such as abortion, which pro-life taxpayers DO NOT support unless a mother's life is at risk. We are a democratic nation but our voices are being ignored and drowned out by politicians making decisions that will only benefit the small minority of people in the uninsured category. You put at risk millions of peoples' current insurance coverage to cover a few (in comparison to the hundreds of millions that do have coverage) that do not have insurance, which by the way includes illegal immigrants and those that can afford their own insurance but choose not to obtain or opt out. Why do you act irrationally when there are other ways to achieve healthcare reform that do not put the majority of insured at risk or do not cost taxpayers or businesses trillions of tax dollars your current plans will incur? You could make changes to tort reform so mal-practice insurance cost for doctors can be lowered; you could change laws to allow small businesses to reach out of state for employees health insurance at a lower and more competitive cost; you could offer a capped refundable tax credit or a debit card system for basic health care to the uninsured; the government could compete and obtain contracts with over 1000 private health insurance companies to get the best price for insuring the true 20 million uninsured people (not including illegal aliens, those that qualify under MediCare, Medicaid, SCHIP or other current program, and those that can afford insurance). You are not rationalizing the effect of your legislation; you cannot see the forest for the trees.

Please vote smartly, not like you did on the stimulus plan. Thoroughly read and review the current plans and discuss all alternatives before making any decisions. And DO discuss all new recommendations and amendments in the Senate and the House--there ARE many better ideas out there that you have obviously rejected by voting down party lines. Stop this irrational and irresponsible behavior of voting down party lines and your grandstanding (I’ve seen you do this on C-Span) and consider our current economic health, the predictable ramifications of a public insurance option on our great private insurance system, and do not levy a burdensome tax to already strained wages and businesses that are struggling to survive and keep our economy going. Stop the incessant direction toward socializing our nation; this is not what our forefathers intended for our nation.

Civil Discourse Needed

I know what you’re all thinking, here she goes again with the political conservative ranting. But after reading the article by Clyde Middleton, I also have the same questions. As he expresses in the article, the answer “I won” just isn’t an appropriate solution to the perceived or actual outcome that may result from legislation being forced on many of us. Our elected officials should be having some civil discourse regarding the ramifications of their legislation, especially as it relates to our deteriorating economy. Below is a brief section I’m quoting from Mr. Middleton’s article, but, if you can, please take the time to read the entire article by Mr. Middleton, entitled "Liberals, libtards, and a proffered solution," at Examiner.com. And, please don’t just think, ‘here we go again, a typical conservative.’ To me, as with Mr. Middleton, it is more of a “look, I’m not dumping on you. I just don’t get it. I don’t understand why you won’t sit at the table and openly discuss these things.”

“For any liberal or libtard reading, explain to me why Obama can run deficits dwarfing W’s, yet W was an out-of-control spender. Explain to me why W’s “surge” in Iraq was bad, yet Obama’s “surge” in Afghanistan is good. Explain to me why you all screamed at W’s “overseas secret prisons for terrorists” yet are silent now that Obama said he will keep them open and functioning. Explain to me why 45 million “uninsured” is actually 6 million, yet you don’t correct him. Explain to me why the icecaps on Mars have receded and grown in sync with those on Earth, yet the “problem” here in man-made. Explain to me how you are going to pay the $1,000 annual fine for not accepting Obama’s health insurance. Explain to me how you will deal with your parent or child in pain as they lay dying because drug therapy has been rationed in precisely the same fashion it is rationed in every single socialized-medical system in use today. Explain to me how you can complain about Medicare and Medicaid today, yet it’s perfectly fine for Obama to expand those poorly functioning programs to every American. Explain to me why it is such a big deal to require someone that wants to vote being required to present a photo ID first. Explain to me why I have to produce a birth certificate to get a driver’s license, but Obama doesn’t have to produce one to be POTUS. Explain to me your feelings about having to buy your food from a grocery instead of the local farmer because the latest bill going through Congress will create such compliance problems that small farmers will not have the money to comply. Explain to me, on that same note, why we don’t respect religion by requiring that every farmer – the Amish included – be required to file all of those farm-compliance documents electronically. Explain to me why it doesn’t bother you that the Waxman-Markey bill will require you to upgrade your home to federally dictated energy standards before you can sell it. Explain to me why it doesn’t bother you that the federal government is going to make it a crime for putting more than 60 watts cumulative in your chandelier. And if any of these specifics are unfamiliar to you, then explain THAT to me.”