BlueRidgeForum

” . . . [H]ealth care is the fastest way to a permanent left-of-center political culture. That’s its attraction for an ambitious president: It redefines the relationship between the citizen and the state in a way that hands all the advantages to statists — to those who believe government has a legitimate right to regulate human affairs in every particular.” – Mark Steyn

Obamacare: A Bigger Threat To Our Liberty Than Even To Our Wallets

Mark Steyn explains here - -

“Freedom is messy. In free societies, people will fall through the cracks — drink too much, eat too much, buy unaffordable homes, fail to make prudent provision for health care, and much else. But the price of being relieved of all those tiresome choices by a benign paternal government is far too high.Government health care would be wrong even if it ‘controlled costs.’ It’s a liberty issue. I’d rather be free to choose, even if I make the wrong choices.”

New Hampshireman Steyn gives us some context here - -

“President Obama has no choice but to move fast, in part because the image he presented during the campaign — a post-partisan, post-racial, post-anything-unpleasant-and-controversial, pragmatic centrist — was a total crock. He has a vast transformative domestic agenda and — because most of its elements are not terribly popular — he has to accomplish it at speed, or he won’t get it done at all.

Health-care ‘reform’? As we’ve seen this past week in the House of Representatives, put not your trust in ‘Blue Dog Democrats.’ And, as we’ll no doubt see in the weeks ahead in the Senate, put not your trust in ‘moderate Republicans’ whose urge to ‘reach across the aisle’ is so reflexive it ought to be covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act.

“The president needs to get something passed. Anything. The details don’t matter. Once it’s in place, health-care ‘reform’ can be re-reformed endlessly. Indeed, you’ll be surprised how little else we talk about. So, for example, public funding for abortions can be discarded now, and written in — as it surely will be by some judge — down the road. What matters is to ram it through, get it done, pass it now — in whatever form.

If this seems a perverse obsession for a nation with a weak economy, rising unemployment, and a war on two fronts, it has a very sound strategic logic behind it. As I wrote in National Review a week or two back, health care is the fastest way to a permanent left-of-center political culture. That’s its attraction for an ambitious president: It redefines the relationship between the citizen and the state in a way that hands all the advantages to statists — to those who believe government has a legitimate right to regulate human affairs in every particular.

That’s not why it’s tanking in the polls, of course. It’s floundering because Obama sold it initially on the basis of ‘controlling costs,’ and then the Congressional Budget Office let the cat out of the bag and pointed out that, au contraire, it would cost $1.6 trillion, and therefore either add to an unsustainable deficit, or require massive tax increases, or (more likely) both.

All of which is true. But to object to the governmentalization of health care on that basis implicitly concedes the argument that, if we could figure out a way to bring the price down, it would be fine and dandy.” (Underscoring Forum’s.)

and Steyn here expands on how- -

” . . . government health care ‘redefines the relationship between the citizen and the state in a way that hands all the advantages to statists — to those who believe government has a legitimate right to regulate human affairs in every particular.’

But don’t worry, you’d be surprised how you get used to it. From Britain’s Daily Express:

The Children’s Secretary set out £400 million plans to put 20,000 problem families under 24-hour CCTV super-vision in their own homes.

They will be monitored to ensure that children attend school, go to bed on time and eat proper meals.

The national government is installing 24-hour cameras in your home to ensure that you eat properly and go to bed on time. And social decay in Britain (which is at least partly due to the nanny state’s assumption of all adult responsibilities) is so advanced that almost everyone now thinks this perfectly normal.

By the way, dig the name of that cabinet position — the ‘Children’s Secretary.’ Nice chap. Shared a plane ride with him once. Very pleasant fellow. But what an Orwellian title.”

Obamacare: the Most Dangerous Scheme

But the good sense of many Americans across the land already leads them to a revulsion against the latest Obama scheme which they rightly sense is the most perilous. 

From Michelle Malkin - -

“Grass-roots revolt in Austin, TX: ‘Just say no!’ to Obamacare; Pennsylvanians boo Sebelius & Specter, “How can you manage health care when you can’t manage Cash For Clunkers?

By Michelle Malkin  •  August 2, 2009 07:50 PM

Democrat Rep. Lloyd Doggett went home to Austin, Texas, and heard from his constituents about the planned government health care takeover.”

 From Power Line - -  

“Taking the deliberation out of the world’s greatest deliberative body 

August 2, 2009 Posted by Paul at 7:25 PM

Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius and Sen. Arlen Specter held a town hall meeting on health care today in Philadelphia. The audience appears to have been mostly hostile.

In the one exchange I’ve seen, Specter tried to explain how he goes about learning what’s in a 1,000 page piece of legislation. Specter said that, because of time constraints, his practice is to divide responsibility for reading the bill among his staffers. This explanation brought boos from the crowd.”

Read the entire Power Line post here.

Tell your Representatives and Senators to Pursue Freedom-Oriented Alternatives

Arming ourselves with facts and informed opinion on the governmentalization of health care, and explaining freedom-oriented alternatives are essential.  We list a few key documents.

Here is a key 2006 paper, “The Health Care Choice Act: Eliminating Barriers to Personal Freedom and Market Competition,” from the Heritage Foundation:

“The Health Care Choice Act would expand personal choice and create robust market competition across state lines within the individual health insurance market. It would make health insurance more affordable for millions of Americans and help individuals and families purchase plans that best comport with their wants, needs, and values.”

Here is a major July 2009 freedom-oriented alternative “EMPOWERING PATIENTS FIRST ACT” to Obamacare from the Republican Study Committee (RSC)  building on the work of earlier Republican consumer-choice reformers. This handy document is also a side-by-side comparison with the available House version of Obamacare. And here is more supporting RSC material on “Putting Patients First.”

Next Steps:  Getting our arms around the basics of patient-centered reform, and getting our voices to places where errant senators and representatives cannot easily ignore them.

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed