Health Care’s Individual Mandate Struck Down Thanks to RLC Endorsed Attorney General

Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli did not have to battle on the issue of health care. He could have taken the easy path and simply focused on other issues. Instead he decided to put principle first and filed suit against the federal government’s individual mandate that forces Americans to purchase a product.

The Virginia legislature and the Tea Party also deserve credit because the Health Care Freedom Act they passed in anticipation of the Obama health law gave Cuccinelli grounds to file the suit.

Today U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson ruled that the individual health insurance mandate “exceeds the constitutional boundaries of Congressional power” and it’s ultimately “about an individual’s right to choose to participate.”

The Republican Liberty Caucus of Virginia selected Attorney General Cuccinelli as its only statewide-endorsed candidate in 2009. He has demonstrated why through his continued efforts to uphold the rule of law and protect individual rights.

In 2008, then-State Senator Cuccinelli addressed members of the RLC at a meeting in Fredricksburg, Virginia. You can hear his remarks here, here, here, and here.

As I embarked on writing an article about my opposition to the idea that newly elected conservative legislators should budge on issues like spending, debt, or health care, I began searching the Internet to see what others had to say. Almost immediately I came across an article — see below — which reflects my perspective.

Election’s Message Was ‘No Compromise’
by Jerry Haas
Athens Banner-Herald (GA) • November 7, 2010

In 1963, California surf rock band The Surfaris released a song that begins with a roll of laughter, followed by the words “wipe out.” That lyric is a fitting description of the Nov. 2 election results, in which Republicans thoroughly drubbed Democrats to take an overwhelming majority in the U.S. House and make significant gains in the U.S. Senate, as well as in numerous other state and local political races.

Some may say Republicans were the big winners Tuesday.

It might also be said the big winners are Americans who believe the socialistic programs initiated and enacted during the past 20 months of President Barack Obama’s administration need to be stopped and eliminated.

And, it might be said that the big winners are the more than 10 percent of our population who are unemployed, or have given up searching for a job, and as a result of Tuesday balloting, now believe that economic growth to create private sector jobs is just around the corner.

Finally, some may say the big winners are those small business owners and entrepreneurs who need to fuel our economic recovery but who have been paralyzed by the Obama administration’s failure to extend the expiring Bush tax cuts that will trigger the largest single tax increase in the history of our country.

Actually, there are no big winners coming out of Tuesday’s elections.

What happened on Nov. 2 didn’t create winners. What it did create was opportunities.

There’s an opportunity to stop the largest tax increase in American history. There’s an opportunity to shrink the federal government, balance the budget and begin reducing the national debt. There’s an opportunity to free up the private sector to create jobs. There’s an opportunity to repeal the governmental takeover of America’s health care system.

There’s an opportunity to once again have a government that is truly of the people, by the people and for the people.

However, these opportunities may not be realized if the Obama administration and Senate liberals don’t understand that the giant iceberg of conservatism now sits in the path of the Titanic-sized push to grow the federal government. Even in the face of the political “shellacking” – the president’s term – administered Tuesday, Democratic leaders still expressed pride in what had been done legislatively in the past 20 months. This doesn’t bode well for any substantive conservative changes in the 112th Congress.

But make no mistake: Republicanism didn’t produce the largest swing in House seats in 70 years; it was conservatism. So, it’s tragic that Senate leaders are sending the message that Senate Republicans must cease saying “no” to the Obama administration initiatives Americans loudly proclaimed Tuesday they did not want.

The newly elected conservative members of the House and Senate aren’t being sent to Washington to compromise. Tuesday’s message was loud and clear: Shrink government and create an environment that enables the private sector to once again become the greatest economic engine in the world, and while you’re at it, repeal the health care overhaul. With Obama still president and the Senate lacking a conservative caucus of at least 60 members, the probability of significant strides toward accomplishing any of these is doubtful.

Regardless of that dismal outlook, conservatives must bring these issues to the floor continuously for a full vote. If measures passed in the House are held up or not passed in the Senate, or after being passed by Congress are vetoed by the president, it will set the stage for those who did not get the message from the collapse of liberalism on Nov. 2 to once again try and defend their record during the 2012 election cycle.

The people have spoken. The mandate is clear. The opportunity to begin moving a conservative agenda forward has been generated. It is up to those who now represent us to do what we want them to do – without compromise.

Jerry Haas, a local Banner-Herald columnist, is involved in Christian ministry. Send him email here.

Amidst the biggest mid-term shift in party political power since 1938, voters in several states approved propositions related to the Obamacare health law passed earlier this year.

Arizona and Oklahoma voters voted 55 percent and 65 percent, respectively, not to enact the individual mandate contained in the health care law. Seventy-one percent of Missouri voters endorsed an anti-mandate statewide constitutional amendment in August.

State legislatures in Georgia, Idaho, Louisiana and Virginia have all passed laws that would similarly stifle Obamacare by granting citizens freedom of choice in health care.

According to columnist Deroy Murdock, the Republican Party’s conquest of 19 previously Democrat state-representative chambers, 10 full legislatures, and 11 governorships gives state-level Republicans brand-new opportunities to hammer ObamaCare.

Additionally, Republican control of the most state-legislative seats since 1928 could spawn fresh anti-ObamaCare lawsuits beyond the 21 that states have filed. According to national exit polls, 48 percent of voters surveyed want Congress to repeal ObamaCare.

The Republican Liberty Caucus (RLC) Board of Directors are excited and optimistic about the election results. The most exciting results for Republican Liberty Caucus members is electing two of our own members to Congress:

Dr. Rand Paul is Senator-elect from Kentucky. Justin Amash (pictured, right) is Representative-elect from Michigan’s Third Congressional District. Congratulations, Rand and Justin! RLC supporters have no doubt that these two champions of liberty will work vigorously to promote our vision of a free country in Congress.

The RLC is also pleased that Mick Mulvaney of South Carolina, John Koster of Washington state, Chip Cravaack of Minnesota, and Steve Chabot of Ohio will join Dr. Ron Paul and our other pro-liberty Republican legislators in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Joining Rand Paul in the Senate are RLC-endorsed Senate candidates Mike Lee of Utah and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania.

Two RLC-endorsed candidates for Governor, Paul LePage of Maine and Nikki Haley of South Carolina, were elected. LePage and Haley come from very different backgrounds and from different parts of the country, but are united in their strong belief in the individual and faith in the free market system.

Other key RLC victories and races we are still watching are below.

Arkansas: State Rep. Mark Martin, a RLC endorsed candidate, won his bid for Secretary of State. He is the first statewide Republican elected official since former Gov. Mike Huckabee left office.

California: Despite losing on the RLC-endorsed Proposition 19 to legalize marijuana in California, the RLC’s positions on Prop. 27 (no to eliminate the state redistricting commission) and Prop. 21 (a vehicle license surcharge to fund state parks) were adopted. Additionally, the RLC’s positions on Prop. 20 and 26 were adopted. These propositions related to Congressional redistricting and the process to impose state/local fees. See the proposition results here and view the RLC’s positions on each of the proposals here.

Arizona: 55 percent of state voters supported an amendment to the state constitution disallowing the Obamacare individual mandate to take effect in Arizona. Voters also approved medical marijuana.

Colorado: Despite Ken Buck’s Senate loss, RLC-endorsed candidate Donald Beezley defeated an incumbent and is now an elected State Representative from Broomfield.

Idaho: RLC-endorsed candidate for Bonner County Commissioner in District 2, Mike Nielson, won election on a platform of transparency and balanced budgets. Nielsen said he was eager to start getting more detailed budget information on the county website and wants to get a head start on the 2012 spending plan, according to The Bonner County Daily Bee.

Indiana: Republican Liberty Caucus member Steve Davisson was elected State Representative in Southern Indiana’s 73rd district. Congratulations, Hoosiers!

Kentucky: In addition to Rand Paul’s victory, RLC-backed candidate Thomas Massie was elected Judge Executive in Lewis County.

Maine: In addition to the victory of Paul LePage for Governor, RLC candidates for State Rep. and State Senate also found success. State House Challengers Michael McClellan, Ryan Harmon, Richard Malaby, Beth O’Connor, and Eleanor Espling (pictured, above left) — each endorsed by the Republican Liberty Caucus of Maine — won election. Additionally, former State Senator Lois Snowe-Mello won her old seat back and State Rep. Doug Thomas was elected to the State Senate. The RLC had a great day in Maine yesterday!

Maryland: Cindy Jones, a RLC member and delegate at our 2009 Convention in Florida, was elected to the St. Marys County Commission. Among all of the county commissioner races, Mrs. Jones had the largest margin of victory and the highest vote total. Four of the five Commission seats are now held by Republicans.

Michigan: RLC-endorsed candidate for State Senate Arlen Meekhof was elected to the post. Meekhof wants to repeal the Michigan Business Tax surcharge and bring jobs to the state.

Minnesota: Despite losing the Governors race narrowly, the RLC had its coalition of candidates elected to the State Senate and the State House. Kathy Lohmer (pictured, right), Andrea Kieffer, Doug Wardlow, Kurt Bills, and Sondra Erickson were elected to the House and Dave Brown and Dave Thompson were elected to the Senate. Former Minnesota RLC Secretary Norann Dillon narrowly lost in her race against an incumbent in a Democrat district. Congratulations to these new legislators and to the Minnesota RLC!

Missouri: In The Show Me State, RLC-endorsed candidate Paul Curtman was elected State Representative. He will represent parts of Jefferson, Franklin and St. Louis counties. Additionally, RLC-endorsed candidate Brian Nieves was elected to the State Senate. Two RLC-endorsed incumbent State Representatives, Tim Jones and Shane Schoeller, will be taking over leadership positions in the Missouri House of Representatives. The Missouri RLC is hosting its 2010 Convention on Saturday, November 13 in Springfield.

Montana: In Montana the RLC has an incumbent coalition in the State House and the entire slate of RLC-backed candidates was reelected. Additionally, former State Senator and longtime liberty advocate Jerry O’Neill was elected to the House of Representatives.

New Hampshire: Former Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire Chair Jim Forsythe was elected to the State Senate and State Rep. candidates Cameron DeJong and Andrew Manuse were elected to the State House. RLC Board member Paul Mirski was elected to the State House in Grafton as was former RLC Chair Dan McGuire in Merrimack. Longtime liberty activists Keith Murphy and Seth Cohn won election to the State House from Hillsborough and Merrimack, too. A full list of RLC victories from New Hampshire can be found here.

North Carolina: Republican Liberty Caucus-endorsed candidate Glen Bradley won election to the State House of Representatives. Congratulations to Glen and the North Carolina RLC!

Oklahoma: 65 percent of voters supported a ballot proposition to rebuke Obamacare by not allowing the individual mandate contained in the health care law to be enacted in the Sooner State.

South Carolina: RLC-backed candidate Curtis Loftis, who ousted the incumbent State Treasurer earlier this year in the primary, is now the State Treasurer-elect of The Palmetto State.

Uah: Two new RLC-endorsed candidates won election in Utah — Daniel Thatcher was elected to the State Senate and Ken Ivory won election to the State House. Ivory joins several other RLC incumbents in the House.

Texas: The Texas RLC helped elect two new State Representatives, Jason Isaac and David Simpson. Additionally, former Texas RLC Chairman Melissa Goodwin was elected Justice on the Third Court of Appeals. RLC Advisory Board member Jerry Patterson was re-elected State Land Commissioner. A full list of Texas results are available at our blog.

Wisconsin: In Wisconsin, a coalition of RLC-backed candidates for State House have won election for the first time. The slate includes: Andre Jacque from Green Bay, Jim Steineke from Appleton, Chris Kapenga from Delafield, Evan Wynn of Whitewater, Scott Krug of Black River Falls, Jeremy Thiesfeldt of Fond du Lac, and Roger Rivard of Rice Lake. Mr. Krug beat incumbent Marlin Schneider, who served in the legislature continuously since 1970. Congratulations to the Wisconsin RLC and Badger State voters!

Wyoming: Endorsed State Representative candidate Gerald Gay won election to the legislature for the first time.

These election results show not only the strength of the Tea Party, but also the disgust of average Americans with unresponsive, anti-liberty bureaucrats. The results also illustrate that liberty principles are popular and will make a comeback!

The battle has just begun, so thanks to all of our activists and candidates from across the country. Thanks especially to the state and national officers of the RLC who allow our organization to function.

The Republican Liberty Caucus is a grassroots coalition of liberty-loving Americans.

Won’t you join us in this critical battle to win hearts and minds for liberty and Constitutional restoration?

Liberty Republicans have a communication challenge. That is, the concepts of limited government, freedom and liberalism are difficult for most people to understand. It is easier to understand the claim that you are helping someone by handing them money than the claim that by limiting government you unleash entrepreneurial energy. Add to that the socialists’ habit of co opting phraseology that characterizes the advocates of freedom, for instance, socialists’  purloining of the word “liberal”.

Nowhere is the challenge facing liberty Republicans greater than with respect to money and banking. The systemic lying about the role of the Federal Reserve Bank in the media and the misleading way in which the topic is taught in basic college courses in economics contribute to the problem. But the reality is that the subject is too abstract for Americans brought up to believe in “experts” and in the word of the federal government. Thus, a malaise of contradictions, confusion and just plain dumbing down makes it difficult for liberty Republicans to discuss economic and monetary issues.

The bailout was a major blow to freedom. Supported as it was by the media, university academics and most Republicrat socialists, it would take someone committed to freedom to say that they opposed. it.

Moreover, because the pro-banker socialist establishment from George W. Bush to Barack Obama favored the bailout, while the general public opposed it, it is a handy campaign issue. A candidate who can say they opposed the bailout and that there will be no more trillion dollar welfare plans for wealthy bankers can win.

Thus, we of the liberty Republican philosophy have a handy litmus test. We can oppose any candidate who favored the bailout, and favor candidates who opposed it.  This simplifies communication and offers a galvanizing campaign issue.  Moreover, the public is likely to be susceptible to our message. The likes of Karl Rove and Newt Gingrich have revealed their socialist core.

And we can stop them.

President Obama is giving his first State of the Union address on Wednesday at 9pm EST. We’re going to be covering it live with special guest bloggers and commenters as well as open participation for our readers. Watch this space for the live chat starting when the president takes the podium.

<a href=”http://www.coveritlive.com/mobile.php?option=com_mobile&#038;task=viewaltcast&#038;altcast_code=5086297a6b” mce_href=”http://www.coveritlive.com/mobile.php?option=com_mobile&amp;task=viewaltcast&amp;altcast_code=5086297a6b” >State of the Unon Live Blog</a>
This will be a live event sponsored by Blogcritics Magazine, The Republican Liberty Caucus and National Broadside. You can access the chat utility on any of those sites.

House Democrat leaders are pushing for a Saturday vote on their sweeping health-care bill.

There are certain Democrats who MUST be called every day from now until the vote, which may be as early as Saturday now. Here’s the Target 92 list on the House side to all vulnerable and Blue Dog Democrats.  Blue Dogs are in blue. Here’s the .xls and .pdf versions.  Of note, the first 40 on the list are the Blue Dogs that signed the “deficit-neutral” letter mentioned above.  Everything you need to email their staff, write letters, make phone calls and send faxes, both to their district and Capitol Hill offices.

Keep calling out to the House and to the Senate in general. Of course, you can also reach them via the Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121. And of course, here is the CapWiz alert so you can contact your own members directly.

Top Ten Tax Increases Included in ObamaCare House Bill H.R. 3962

1. Small Business SURTAX (Sec.551, p. 336) – $460.5 Billion
2. Employment Mandate TAX* (Secs 511-512, p.308) – $135 Billion
3. Individual Mandate TAX* (Sec. 501, p.296) – $33 Billion
4. Medical Device TAX* (Sec.552, p. 339) – $20 Billion
5. $2,500 Annual Cap on FSAs* (Sec. 532, p. 325) – $13.3 Billion
6 Prohibition on Pre-Tax Purchases of Over-the-Counter Drugs through HSAs, FSAs, and HRAs* (Sec. 531, p.324) – $5 Billion
7. Tax on Health Insurance Policies to fund Comparative Effectiveness Research Trust Fund (Sec. 1802, p.1162) – $2 Billion
8. 20% Penalty on certain HSA Distributions* (Sec. 533, p.326) – $1.3 Billion
9. Other Tax Hikes and Increase Compliance on U.S. Job Creators – $56.4 Billion
………> IRS reporting on payments to certain businesses (Sec. 553, p.344) – $17.1 Billion
………> Delay implementation of worldwide interest allocation rules (Sec. 554, p. 345) – $26.1 Billion
………> Override U.S. treaties on certain payments by “insourcing” business (Sec. 561. p. 346) – $7.50 Billion
………> Codify economic substance doctrine and impose penalties (Sec.562, p.349) – $5.7 Billion
10. Other Revenue-Raising Provisions – $3 Billion

TOTAL TAX INCREASE . . . . . . . . . . $729.5 Billion

*[Violates President Obama's pledge to avoid tax increases on Americas earning less than $250,000]

Not surprisingly, Obama, the Democrats in Congress, and the complacent Republicans in Congress recently voted to extend and appropriate additional funds to Cash for Clunkers. The program is just another endless example of a temporary, short-term government solution to a problem that could be solved by the free market.

The late economist Milton Friedman, whose wife Rose sadly passed away earlier this week, used to say that “nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program.” Generally this is true, but — despite the fact that Congress authorized an additional $2 billion in emergency funding for the bill two weeks ago — there are reports that the Cash for Clunkers program may already be out of cash yet again.

No problem, since the government has an unlimited source of revenue: namely, We the People. Another Friedman quote may be better fitting for this particular case: “If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in five years there would be a shortage of sand.”

Okay, so the Cash for Clunkers program is immensely popular — so why the criticism?

The program, administered by the the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (you trust them, don’t you?), was created to help boost the auto industry while helping the environment.

Sounds good, right? Consumers who own a car with low fuel efficiency can receive $3,500 to $4,500 from the federal government if they buy a new car with higher fuel efficiency.

Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron explains several problems with the program, namely: 1) the program pays people to junk cars that still have economic value; 2) the program will cause an increase in driving; 3) Official government policy favors one industry (automobiles, in this case) at the expense of other industries. Miron concludes that Congress “should end the program, not expand it”.

Of course, the government solution does not come without inefficiencies. This article points out that many car dealerships are considering pulling out of the program because they are not receiving payments from the government. Many of the dealerships understandably need that money to pay their bills and meet their payroll. Surprise, surprise — the government is not responding to local car dealerships who are participating in its own program.

Finally, there is today’s headline in The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel: “Charities worry that car donations will go clunk” — which is very concerning.  Talk about a good way to stifle the market — let’s just put charities out of business altogether and have the government save us all.

The article highlights how very worthwhile endeavors such as Kidney Cars Program and the Rawhide Boys Ranch are now competing with the government. These private charities — along with scores of others — both use donated vehicles to raise funds for their programs.

This underscores Professor Miron’s point about the negative impact of the government coming to the rescue of one industry and impacting it to the detriment of other industries.

A program like Cash for Clunkers is simply not an appropriate role for a constitutionally limited government to administer in a free society.

Cash for Clunkers is a temporary solution that will soon go broke.

We’ll just have to wait and see how long it takes for the politicians to — once again — rescue the overzealous program with the hard-earned dollars of cash-strapped American taxpayers.

by Terri McCormick

Regardless of political party or ideological persuasion, there are limited resources and outcomes possible with H.R. 3200 – “America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009″ — the bill currently pending in Congress. There is no doubt that the stakes are high for individuals and businesses. It is critical that citizens engage in the discussion and that ‘We the People’ read the bill and act accordingly.

“Politics as usual” bedtime stories, when combined with chicken cordon bleu in the home of large political contributors, does not for good health care policy make. What it makes is a rather redundant kettle of “Status Quo Soup” stirred with the spoon of insider politics.

As former Congressman Dick Armey (R-TX) recently commented, “President Obama made the mistake of not setting a more specific direction for the democrat dominated legislature in both houses to pursue health care reform.”

Who will pay for the Healthcare Reform Act?

The middle class – either those small business owners who gross $250,000 a year or wealthier Americans whose household incomes are over $1,000,000, according to Mr. Obama in a press conference on July 23, 2009. The gaping taxpayer hole for the “Reform Act” appears to be 1/3 of the total cost of $1.5 trillion dollars.

Who is the Health Care Act written for?

A July 21, 2009 headline in The Washington Post read “Industry Cash Flowed to Drafters of Reform”. As liberal protesters marched outside, Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) sat down inside a San Francisco mansion for a dinner of chicken cordon bleu and a discussion of landmark health care legislation under consideration by his Senate Finance Committee.

The July 21 story goes on to say: “Baucus’s fundraising prowess underscores the enduring political strength of the health care lobby, which led all other sectors in donations to federal candidates during the last election cycle and has shifted its giving to Democrats as the party has tightened its control of Congress.” In fact, “The [health care] sector gave nearly $170 million to federal lawmakers in 2007 and 2008, with 54 percent going to Democrats, according to data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks money in politics. The shift in parties was even more pronounced during the first three months of this year, when Democrats collected 60 percent of the $5.4 million donated by health care companies and their employees, the data show.”

Pay for Play politics does not yield solutions for Americans, but instead yields ‘deals’ for politicians.

What does the Health Care Reform Act do?

On page 16 of the 1,017 page document it clearly states, “In 5 years all private insurance plans must look like public plans.”

It is a government takeover of the private health care insurance industry. The private sector industry responsible for negotiating price on behalf of the patient will then be eliminated and a government-run “system” will replace it.

Does the Health Care Reform Act lower skyrocketing costs?

It would appear that government rationing is the answer being pursued, with the following examples:

1. Consider Elder Care. Instead of a goal to “age with dignity and independence” — which seems to be a shared common goal — under the bill in Congress, we will each be assigned to consultants who will review our case every five years to determine how grave a risk we will be to the federal health insurance system. When we become too high of a risk, the government will pull the plug. Or we will pay for the costs out of our own pocket (as if we haven’t paid enough in to the system already, right?).

2. Limits will be set to control costs for End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) of kidney disease, which many diabetics must face. The operative phrase is palliative care. It means treating the symptoms but not the underlying root cause of the disease. Give ‘em pain pills and let ‘em go die.

3. Congress has the ability to opt out of H.R. 3200 and they will still maintain their AIG-guaranteed pension and health care benefits.

4. TARP was distributed along party lines … so shouldn’t Americans be wary of health care being dispensed along party lines as well?

The notion of politicians and bureaucrats making health care decisions for the American people should have all of us concerned. But many Americans have been lulled to sleep, fat, dumb and happy that “the system is taking care of us.”

No need to read the 1,017 page document. Just trust the lobbyists and long-term politicians holding fundraisers throughout the negotiation process of the bill to get it right for all Americans.

For Hospitals, Clinics and Doctors

Is there an increased medicare reimbursement rate and guaranteed payment by the feds to hospitals and doctors who practice in federally approved clinics and hospitals? If not, the question then becomes ‘What happens when government bureaucrats hold all the insurance options?’

According to former Marine Veteran Carmen Russo, “The bottom line is that government will decide who lives and who dies. That’s what happens.”

Wouldn’t it be better if the Health Care Reform Act actually controlled health care costs?

Some suggestions:

Recommendations made on a Committee I chaired in the Wisconsin Legislature in 2002:

1. Create pools for prescription drugs, cooperative insurance pools, association pools nationwide and other insurance pools so that the free market has the opportunity to work. (Savings in Wisconsin’s first year alone was $40 million.)

2. Hold government bureaucracies and government-funded hospitals accountable by enforcing lean management controls on monies distributed on behalf of taxpayers. (Ever wondered why vertical impact machines were so expensive? You should – they are hammers!)

3. Get government out of the business of private business and into the role of ensuring a safety net for those Americans who need catastrophic care and government-secured insurance.

4. Never forget for a moment that the largest increases in health care costs are our individual choices that come with individual responsibility such as; our weight, exercise, smoking habits, and lifestyle choices.

We cannot regulate personal choices. But we can regulate government stupidity caused by incremental policy based on campaign contributions. The problem is both political parties have lost the public’s trust.

It is time to get behind candidates who we trust to change the way things are. We cannot hope and pray for change without action.

It is time to act!

__________________________________________________________________________

Terri McCormick is a former Wisconsin State Representative. While in the legislature, she Chaired the Health Care Cost Partnerships Committee.  She is currently working to establish an active Republican Liberty Caucus affiliate in Wisconsin.

© 2009 Terri McCormick
Reposted with permission.

The following article was published in The Atlanta Journal Constitution on Monday, July 20. It’s author is former Republican Congressman from Georgia Bob Barr. Mr. Barr is currently a member of the Libertarian Party.

Health care ‘Never Never Land’
by Bob Barr

In “Sicko,” iconoclastic filmmaker Michael Moore extols the virtue of health care in such liberal “paradises” as the United Kingdom and Cuba. Leaving his audience to wonder where he would choose to go for treatment if he were facing a life-threatening illness — the People’s Hospital in Havana or the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. — Moore exhibits the same Alice-in-Wonderland delusion that has settled over the Obama administration.

A majority of members of Congress, too, seem to believe that if only enough bureaucracy and taxpayer dollars are thrown at the health care “crisis,” then everyone in the country will have their every medical need met, when they want it, and at much reduced cost. Such a mind set turns Peter Pan’s Never Never Land into a reality show.

For starters, advocates of the House legislation might want to talk to governors of those states, like Massachusetts, that have already implemented “universal” coverage plans. Increasing program costs, coupled with decreased state revenues as a result of the economic downturn, are causing serious fiscal problems and are forcing those states to consider cutbacks in coverage.

However, witnessing the irrational, “gotta-do-this-now” push in our nation’s capitol to pass comprehensive health care “reform” within the next few weeks, it is obvious the proponents of Obama-care are not interested in anyone throwing the cold water of fiscal reality on their parade.

The House version of the legislation, unveiled by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) last week, includes substantial mandates on American businesses (including a severe, 8 percent payroll tax on any business that fails to offer health insurance coverage to its employees). Still, the Pollyannaish Pelosi claimed (with a straight face) it would “lower costs to businesses.” This is government logic at its finest — you lower the cost of doing business by raising taxes on those businesses.

Pelosi’s obvious inability to grasp even the most basic of economic concepts was further displayed when she claimed that the “costs to consumers,” too, would be lowered. Apparently, this would be accomplished by placing a new surtax on those American consumers whose income exceeded the levels deemed worthy by the legislators.

Analysts of the 1,000-plus page legislation calculate its 10-year cost to exceed $1 trillion. Other experts fear such a figure greatly underestimates its true cost. Even the Congressional Budget Office calculates that the government subsidy for health care coverage will amount to some $6,000 per person within the next decade, which figures to more than $1.8 trillion.

Pelosi’s bill would also create a government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers. Such a scenario, of course, is never a fair “competition,” because the government “owner” can always print money, spend borrowed money indefinitely, operate without regard for cost-benefit analysis, and threaten legal sanctions for those who fail to comply. None of these remedies are available to businesses (except, of course, for the “new” General Motors).

The smoke-and-mirrors approach is evident also in the fact that high-income taxpayers, who would already be taxed in order to pay for the “universal” coverage for their less-well-off compatriots, would face escalating taxes if the government fails in the years ahead to achieve targeted “savings” in Medicaid and Medicare. In other words, the government will set “savings targets,” but if it fails to meet them, it is taxpayers who will pay the penalty, not those members of Congress or federal bureaucrats who decide how much to spend on the entitlement programs.

Other industries, including pharmaceuticals, will face increased taxes as well, in order to pay for this “reform.” The more successful drug makers will pay a higher percentage tax than their smaller, less successful colleagues. Once again, success in the business arena is punished in the government arena.

Truly, this bill is a monstrosity.

###

Bob Barr, an Atlanta attorney, is a former member of Congress and Libertarian presidential candidate.