Thursday, February 3, 2011

Health Care Bill, DEMS ARE YOU SERIOUS!

Well yesterday the Republicans in the Senate tried to vote on the repeal of the Healthcare law and as expected it was rejected on a strict party line vote.  Everyone saw this coming.  And of course the Republicans are crowing about the Florida judge's ruling the act unconstitutional, and the Democrats are quoting the rulings form the other two federal judges who have said the act is constitutional.  From what I have read it all seems to come down to an interpretation of the commerce clause of the Constitution.  I thought the definition of "extortion" is forcing someone to pay money so something else will not happen, not "commerce."  Isn't that exactly what the Dems are doing?  You either buy health insurance or we will forcibly take it from you or throw you in jail.  So much for freedom.

One of the biggest things I have a problem with in the Healthcare Bill is the mandate that everyone must purchase insurance.   The Dems are requiring a 25 year old person to buy insurance because according to their logic that 25 year old will eventually need health care.  That 25 year old if he takes care of himself may not have to go to the doctor until they are 50 if they stay healthy.  Most people treat themselves at home for common ailments and only need health insurance for major illnesses.  My current health insurance through my employer costs me $5,600/year, but it costs my employer about $11,000/year. If my employer stopped paying for my insurance and I had to purchase it in the open market a bare bones policy would cost me about $8,400/year.  So the Dems will require someone who owns their own business to fork out over $210,000 for something they may not even use during that time.  And if they don't fork it out they will tax the person or threaten them with imprisonment.  So much for promoting a person's general welfare.

It has been compared to car insurance which in I believe to be an inaccurate comparison.  You do not have to buy car insurance unless you own a car and even then you only have to prove you have insurance when you renew your tag or license.  For this reason it is not an accurate comparison.  The liberals have also said that we are forced to give money to Social Security and Medicaid.  Well I would like for these programs to go away also.  They are the same as the health insurance program.

Many liberals have been spouting off that this is all part of the section for the Constitution that says the Government will provide for the general welfare.  Well that is fine, but where does it say that I must be forced to provide for someone else's general welfare.  Also the term "welfare" means, "the state of doing well or prosperity", or "aid in the form of money or necessities for those in need."  Some would say health insurance is a necessity, but someone can go to the hospital and pay cash for the services without insurance.  If someone is not capable to pay then where does it say that government is then responsible for providing for them. To me that is specific welfare not general.  In the same section regarding general welfare, Article I Section 8, it says that "all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the Unites States."  But Harry Reid violated that section when he agreed to give money to Louisiana in the from of Medicaid for disaster relief.  The Cornhusker Kickback was removed but apparently the Louisiana money was not.  So much for uniformity.

What I also find interesting is that the Healthcare bill does not exempt some religious groups who do not believe in using doctors and by using doctors they are violating a tenet of their faith.  By forcing them to purchase health insurance aren't you also violating the first amendment which says, "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."  There is supposedly a religious clause, but how long before that goes to the wayside if revenue does not come in as projected or costs are higher than estimated.

There are so many problems with this bill, and many of them could have been addressed, but the liberal Dems in Congress decided to run rough shod over anyone who opposed them.  For Pelosi to say the only way people would know what was in the bill would be for them to pass it, just shows the level of arrogance the liberals had regarding this bill.  If it was not for my family needs, if I was a business owner with only myself to think of, I would probably make them put me in jail, and then sue the Federal Government for unlawful imprisonment.  Imagine how many news organizations would love to see my story about how I was a hard working tax payer who refused to buy health insurance and was thrown in jail.  The liberals would rather imprison those who differ in opinion from them than listen to their viewpoints.