Skip to comments.The Healthcare Bill Would Be Obama’s ‘Enabling Act’
Posted on 03/14/2010 3:36:45 AM PDT by Scanian
Why are Barack Obama and other Democrat leaders so intent on passing a government takeover of healthcare now Now NOW?
They must know that costs will rise and the quality of care will fall, right? They must know that Obamacare would destroy the economy, right? Of course they do. But, they also know that the federal government would tighten its grip on the nation. They know that Obamas czars and other appointees would be authorized to bypass Congress in enacting sweeping regulations on nearly every aspect of a persons life. And, they know that these new powers of the federal government would be concentrated in the hands of the Democratic Party and the President.
Heres what else they know. History affords many examples of regimes whose motto was Never let a crisis go to waste. In 1933, having campaigned for hope and change, the National Socialist Workers Party forced through the German parliament a Law to Remedy the Distress of the People and the Nation, also known as the Enabling Act.
This new law enabled the German chancellor and his appointees to bypass parliament in imposing sweeping regulations on the people:
(Excerpt) Read more at biggovernment.com ...
Whose right is health care? Do you think it's yours?
Congressman Anthony Weiner has said that health care is not a commodity. If it isn't a commodity then do doctors and nurses have rights? Assigning health care the status of a right makes health care workers slaves to that right who must serve it. On what ground could a health care worker refuse to provide their products and services since that would violate the patient's "basic human right to health care."
That is a direct loss of individual rights for health care providers. The collective right of the people to receive health care would supersede the provider's individual right to set fees and hours or to change their occupational status or even decide how to apply their skills and knowledge if taken to its logical extreme. A collective right, by practical definition, is a state right because it is a right that is created and given by the government to those it chooses to give it to. It is not a natural right possessed by each person protected by the Constitution from the government. It is also a collective/state right by virtue of the fact that it would supersede individual rights when the two come into conflict. How else would the government view a right that it created and administers vs. one it has no control over?
Of course it isn't stated in any bill that a patient's right to care supersedes a provider's right to set fees and hours etc, but it doesn't need to. Rights, as always, are adjudicated in the courts. The Health Care Reform bills simply establish the foundation for the courts to rule in favor of the collective right.
Weiners view is collectivist, fascist and totalitarian. Collectivist because it has to be described as being a right of the many instead of the one and superior due to that fact. Fascist because ultimately the sole authority for its creation and oversight is from one entity the Federal government. Totalitarian because the Federal government is the enforcer of this collective right as well. State and local jurisdictions will have little say about it.
Congressman Weiner's view is the underlying philosophy of all of the Health Care Reform legislation in the House and Senate. Consider this section in the Senate version of the bill; the setting up of community watch dogs that will monitor citizens for various health parameters. Read pages 382 - 393.
So, even citizens themselves will be subject to Federal regulations on their behavior in order to fulfill the "human right" of universal health care. It isn't the individual's liberty that is being protected by that it is the government's control over its own health care system that is being guarded. How much clearer can it be that these bills abrogate the concept of individual rights? Someone will be checking your lifestyle, according to gov regulations, to be certain you serve the best interests of the "basic human right to health care" ie. "the Public Option."
HCR is not just about rationing care and wealth redistribution. It's about the end of individual rights as the corrosive effects of the new collectivist "basic human right to health care" spreads throughout the legal and political systems like a virus.
I think that the main purpose of Health Care Reform (HCR) is as a direct assault on individual liberties.
Health Care is a Liberty Issue
Conservative Underground - 18 August 2009 - Tim Dunkin
Second Bill of Rights aka FDR's economic bill of rights
(An early attempt to embed collective rights into American politics and society.)
Sweeping regulations are coming. Let's hope House Democrats don't fall in with Nancy Pelosi, The Countess Democratula, and the other fascists to complete the devilish deal.
OMG the SKY IS FALLING!!
Is that supposed to be humorous?
Rahm? That you?...
My mother in law’s hearing aid cost the MEDICARE program $3,000. It got chewed up by a dog, and was ‘easily’ replaced for another $3,000. I wondeded how on the REAL Market they can sell a LAPTOP, with memory cards, wireless connections, hard drive, mother board..for $699 NEW, which has a lot MORE technology, and that small piece of plastic with a little microphone and speaker costs $3,000. When the gov’t BUYS, it causes the whole market system tends to break down. We get LESS for our money, and it costs EVERYONE more. Doctors would like to HEAL and do procedure, but their days are spent filling our reports, doing meaningless, endless trivial requirements.
Trying to find actual news is becoming a challange.
So your gripe is the constant bogus Saul Alinsky tactics of the left, to make everything an emergency and a “crisis” which only the left and government can solve by more laws, and more spending?
The “crisis of the day” crap which dates back to the days of Bill Clinton?
The propaganda which our so-called media willingly parrots?
It dates back to far before Bill Clinton my FRiend, and its not unique to either side. That's what I'm getting at.
Real news is all over the place here at FR. Dig in.
For instance check out all the excellent info on the CA scam artist who last week faked his Prius speeding out of control. FoxNews is just getting around to exposing the fraud right now on tv.
However (as you intone) who knows if SeeBS, ABC, CNN, NBC, etc. will ever get around to telling the truth on the matter.
The crisis of the day crap which dates back to the days of Bill Clinton?
The propaganda which our so-called media willingly parrots?
........ good questions.
..... Naked Rahm wants you.
Dont worry we will be able to read and see whats in the health bill before the President signs it, Obama himself promised it to be so. He wouldn’t lie.
So what does “it’s not unique to either side” mean exactly?
When George W Bush explained that fundamentalist terrorists were trying to destroy America, and the media covered that, was that what you’re referring to?
I’m trying to remember when exactly, the media parroted any Republican for any big-government, more-rules agenda.
Can you please be more specific?
Great post. You said it all.
When a reference to 1933 is posted - this article is required reading.
DHS was implemented on Nov 25, 2002, during a time when the Republican party had control of not only congress, but also the presidency. Many news organizations (CNN, CBS among others) rarely said anything contrary to the creation of this new huge expansion of the Federal Government. This also was the same time that the constitution shredding PATRIOT act was passed.
Both sides use Crisis to get what they want done, the people are scared and look for leadership, so when someone says "lets do X" usually people go along with them if they think it will help. The tools of Politics don't change depending on what side of an aisle you sit on.
Yea! Just another tool fool.
This is somewhat the thing that Bambi is already doing by having regulatory agencies make and enforce broad policies controlling the lives of citizens. However, the "health care" act would take this up to a whole different level and would indeed have effects very similar to the Enabling Act, particularly if it is passed with one of the highly unconstitutional procedures that are being discussed.
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.