Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!
View past Libertarian pings here
Posted on 06/14/2010 12:30:25 PM PDT by rabscuttle385
The administration's terrible healthcare reform bill is now law, but the debate over how-- and whether-- the federal government should be involved in providing healthcare services is not over. It is not too late for America to correct its course and stop the march toward a government run, "single payer" healthcare system.
Polls show that a large majority of Americans don't want Obamacare. Congress should seize the opportunity to repeal the very worst aspect of this new legislation, namely the mandate that forces every American either to purchase health insurance or face an IRS penalty. This mandate represents nothing more than an unconstitutional, historically unprecedented gift to the insurance industry. I introduced the "End the Mandate Act” (HR 4995) expressly to prevent the administration from ever putting this provision into effect.
Instead of mandating the same failed entitlement healthcare schemes that are bankrupting Europe, Congress should fundamentally re-examine the case for free-market healthcare. Our current model, based on employer-provided health insurance, did not arise based on market preferences. On the contrary, it makes no sense to couple health insurance with employment. But federal wage and price controls instituted during World War II left employers with no alternative to attract workers in a tight labor market other than offering extra benefits such as health insurance and pensions. Over time these nonwage benefits became the norm, especially since employers could deduct the cost of health insurance premiums from their income taxes while individuals could not. The perverse consequence is that employees lose both their paychecks and their health insurance when they lose their job.
As reliance on third-party health insurance grew, patients became detached from the true costs of their doctor visits. In the 1970s the Nixon administration, along with the late Senator Edward Kennedy, championed the cause of health maintenance organizations (HMOs). Congress accepted the faulty premise that HMOs would reduce costs through centralized management of patients, when in fact the opposite was true: more bureaucracy would only lead to higher costs, less accountability, and worse patient care.
In recent years Congress has only intensified the problem with more laws and more regulations, especially with the disastrous Medicare prescription drug benefit. The drug benefit was another example of naked patronage to a politically-connected industry, and it exponentially worsened the federal government’s balance sheet. Obamacare will be the last nail in the coffin of our bankrupt entitlement system.
More laws are not the answer. Instead, we need to allow a market system to operate that reflects consumer choices while rationally pricing services. In a market system patients likely would pay cash for basic services, while maintaining relatively high-deductible catastrophic insurance for serious illnesses and accidents. The cost of most routine medical care would drop if the patient paid the bill on the spot, especially if doctors no longer needed to employ large staffs solely to deal with insurance and billing.
Let me repeat: we need a system in America where patients pay cash for basic services, and carry insurance only for serious illnesses and accidents. “Health maintenance” is the responsibility of each of us individually. We cannot continue to collectivize the costs of healthcare and expect things to get better.
Authoritarianism is bad for your health. Congress should end the Obamacare mandate and allow market-based medicine to flourish.
RINOs always screw you in the end!
There’s a little gem the Dems always forget:
No matter how much Kennedy railed against the health care system before he died, no matter how much he said he had an answer, he was largely responsible for the system we have now in the first place.
Ron Paul now says its the role of the Federal Government to fix the health care system.
Which article in the US Constitution cites this authority?
Like Barry Goldwater , Paul has jumped the shark in is twilight years.
Huh?
"More laws are not the answer. Instead, we need to allow a market system to operate that reflects consumer choices while rationally pricing services.
Ron Paul has a bill to overturn Obamacare on the Floor, and beyond that, he's suggesting that Congress get out of the way and let the market work.
What about those ideas challenge the Constitution?
Fight the bastards. Join the Obamacare Class Action Lawsuit
"The purpose of this lawsuit is to reverse Supreme Court precedent related to the Commerce clause and thereby overturn Obamacare. The Supreme Court has historically erred in its interpretation of the Constitutional role of the Federal Government. Recent Supreme Court rulings hint that they may be willing to take another look at Commerce clause precedent. Obamacare is so over reaching and so onerous, that it must either be repealed in Congress or struck down in the courts. We must fight this on both fronts. This is our historic opportunity to reverse America’s trend toward Socialism by overturning this unconstitutional precedent.
If you are a US citizen and agree with the goal of this lawsuit, please join us. If you have concerns about joining, please review the FAQs for more information. Every person we add strengthens the voice of "We the People".
OVER 10,000 AMERICANS JOIN LAWSUIT AGAINST OBAMACARE
When the federal government has ventured into an unconstitutional area (or just an unwise area) it takes federal action to reverse the first mistake.
It takes federal action to abolish the Dept of Education.
It takes federal action to abolish the alphabet agencies.
It takes federal action to cut taxes or change the tax structure.
re: “Authoritarianism is Bad for Your Health”
In study after study of rats and other animals in the lab, as well as observation of humans in various context the results are clearly the same.
Lab rat group A is given a diet of a seemingly healthy food with no choice.
Lab rat group B is given a diet of a seemingly unhealthy food with no choice.
Lab rat group C is given a choice of both healthy and unhealthy food. Some of the rats in group C eat more of the unhealthy food than others. There is big variance.
Consistently the rats in group C have better health and live longer than the rats in groups A and B. The same is true with choice of toy and exercise activity. Rats with a choice of exercise activity are healthier than rats with no choice.
In this posted article, he hits a home run.
Article 1 Section 8.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.