Cape Gazette
http://capegazette.villagesoup.com/p/1070448

Still more fodder on Flood column

By Armand Carreau | Oct 27, 2013

You know what they say about democracy? Democracy is two wolves and a rabbit discussing what they will have for dinner. The United States is not a democracy, but a Constitutional Representative Republic. And you are right, polls, like statistics, can be found to support either side’s position.

In a Republic, we should be governed by principles and values stated in the Constitution. If we were governing within the parameters of the U.S. Constitution by applying its principles and values, it would be clear that the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional, despite what Chief Judge Roberts decided.

The Republicans were trying to defund the ACA before people began enrolling. Once people are enrolled, it is difficult to repeal, as entitlement beneficiaries will rebel against the loss of their benefits. The House has the Constitutional power to appropriate funds for the budget. The Republican-controlled House funded the entire budget (including many laws and projects they disliked), except for the ACA. The Democrats then shut the Government down.

The main body of your article deals with the ham-handed attempts by the Republicans to negotiate a deal on spending and the ACA. Your version is derisive and hyperbolic, but it does serve a purpose. If you think the Republican efforts at negotiating are outrageous, they are child’s play compared to the Democrats’ shameless schemes to pass the Affordable Care Act. So the absurdities continue on both sides.

I take issue with a few lines from your article, which I quote below:

“In 2010, after the midterm election, Sen. Mitch McConnell said the Republicans’ goal was to make sure Obama was a one-term president…Their goals began and ended with stopping Obama. Stopping the ACA was the best way to do that.”

Thank you for your honesty in recognizing that Sen. McConnell made that “one-term president” remark in 2010. Most on your side suggest that the remark was made when Obama first took office, implying that Republicans dislike Obama because they are racists. The remark was made after almost two years of Obama in office, after ACA was passed and the electorate handed Obama a “resounding thumping” in the 2010 election. The opposition to Obama was a reflection of policies, “ends justify the means” tactics (how ACA was passed), and the character of the man. There are many reasons for stopping the ACA, some of which are listed below.

“He [Sen. McConnell] didn’t even bother paying lip service to the idea of getting America back to work.”

The economic blow-up was the immediate reason for Obama beating McCain and winning the office in 2008. But rather than working on the economy, Obama got the stimulus passed, and left the economy on auto-pilot, hoping it would take care of itself. He then spent his first year in office getting the ACA passed. The Republicans passed several job bills, which the Democrats let die in the Senate.

“But they’re not asking for a delay to tweak or improve the ACA. What they’re really saying is, ‘Give us one more year to destroy you and the ACA or we will blow up the economy’.”

There is a real possibility that ACA will destroy itself in the coming year, and millions of Americans’ health programs along with it. It is possible to improve insignificant parts of the ACA, but that would keep us busy for decades; it is, after all, over 2,700 pages of law, with over 20,000 pages of regulations. There is no practical way to “fix” this legislation.

The major flaws of this “law” demand repeal. They have to do with the fact that it is about power, redistribution, and control as part of President Obama’s “Fundamental Transformation.” Once the government owns our healthcare, they will own us: they can refuse medical treatment, reward supporters and punish enemies, ration drugs and surgery, tell us what to eat, how to exercise, where to live and travel.

This is another entitlement that will hasten the country’s day of reckoning; 20,000 pages of regulations that paralyze the economy with uncertainty and expensive compliance; mandates enforced by the IRS and punishable by penalties; loss of doctors who will either retire, or do a strictly cash business; loss of insurance companies that will not be able to compete with government-run state exchanges, all of which will lead to a single-payer program.

I would agree with the propagandist remark since throughout your article, you deceptively promote the idea that we are a democracy. And there is a lot of opinion masquerading as fact, some of which I have attempted to counter. You conclude with a statement about democracy and majorities. In the words of Ronald Reagan, “There you go again…”

Armand Carreau
Bridgeville

Comments (1)
Posted by: Thomas Adams | Oct 27, 2013 17:20

Mr Carreau writes that “[o]nce the government owns our healthcare, they will own us: they can refuse medical treatment, reward supporters and punish enemies, ration drugs and surgery, tell us what to eat, how to exercise, where to live and travel.”

 

Governments in the following countries “own” healthcare:  Israel, Canada, the UK, Ireland, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, Australia, and New Zealand .  In his next letter, perhaps Mr Carreau can show how those governments have used universal healthcare as a means to repress their citizens by restricting where they can live and travel and by punishing their political enemies.  Or if he prefers a government closer to Delaware, then certainly Massachusetts will do.

 

I might add that private insurance companies in this country have always imposed limitations on medical treatments and procedures.  Rationing of healthcare is nothing new.



If you wish to comment, please login.