We have the resources to fix the health system

Nice letter. I think most everyone agrees that:

1. Our health care system has cost and access problems.

2. We have the means to improve it in both these areas.

We're just a bit stuck on the details.

Gee it seems that if this bill passes as is, the "kiddies" on this site can be taken care of by mom and dad until they are 27!  Doesn't take much to see that the dems want you vote in 2012.  They just think we are too dumb to notice that is the reason.  What slime.

Public option to compete with private sector.  Duh - why not just open state lines and allow competion to come in that way?

Sets up health ins. "exchanges" where consumers can easily compare coverage and rates.   NOTE:  It does not guarantee that you can indeed buy better rates, just that you can compare rates.

Reguires nearly everyone to obtain health ins. starting in 2013 - of course that is the year after the election.

Provides federal financial help for lower and middle income consumers so they can obtain coverage - that means our tax dollars will be paying for your insurance.

Expands Medicade coverage to more people - our tax dollars again.

Imposes penalties on people and businesses who fail to comply with the new law - job losses.

Can you just imagine the bureaucratic network that will have to be in place to enact these laws.  Why this admin. can fix that 10% unemployment figure just hiring people to fill these jobs -  Of course, they will be federal employees getting the same benefits that Congress gets (not you), and you and I will be paying for them.  

Now folks, that's change you can believe in!

“The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”  That was the first thought that passed through my mid late last night, Nov 7, 2009, as the U.S. House of Representatives passed “Health Care Reform” legislation (H.R. 3962) on a 220 - 215 vote.  I also remembered the following quote from Thomas Jefferson:

“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”  

While most reasonable people can agree the cost of health care insurance is too high and its access is too limited to those that need it most, this legislation has many flaws.  James Madison, the “Father” of our Constitution once said:  

“It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their own choice if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood.”  

I think he was talking about 1990 pages of H.R. 3962.  For example, this “law” creates 111 new Federal bureaucracies, imposes fines, civil penalties and possible prison time for those who may  violate certain provisions of the “law.”  This law removes your (and/or your employers) “freedom of choice.”  You must have “acceptable” health insurance (purchased by yourself or your employer), like it or not, regardless of cost and the current state of your health.  If not, you will pay the government more taxes:

Section 307 ( c ) ( 1 )

(A) TAXES ON INDIVIDUALS NOT OBTAINING ACCEPTABLE COVERAGE.—The amounts received in the Treasury under section 59B of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to requirement of health insurance coverage for individuals).

(B) EMPLOYMENT TAXES ON EMPLOYERS  NOT PROVIDING ACCEPTABLE COVERAGE.—The amounts received in the Treasury under sections 3111(c) and 3221(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to employers electing to not provide health benefits).

I don’t pretend to fully understand this bill, nor the many Federal laws it amends (see Madison‘s quote above).  However, I do fundamentally understand the Constitution of this great Nation.  Our supreme law, the Constitution, was designed to limit the power of the Federal government so the people could be free from unreasonable infringements on their LIBERTY.  This concept is laid out in the Preamble and fortified by the Bill of Rights.

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” -AND-

5th Amendment - “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb;

nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”  -AND-

9th Amendment - “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”  -AND-

10th Amendment - “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” (emphasis added)

What does this word “liberty” mean as described in the Constitution and Declaration of Independence, and is it worth fighting for?  

Liberty, n. pl. lib·er·ties

1.

a. The condition of being free from restriction or control.

b. The right and power to act, believe, or express oneself in a manner of one's own choosing.

c. The condition of being physically and legally free from confinement, servitude, or forced labor. See Synonyms at freedom.

2. Freedom from unjust or undue governmental control.

3. A right or immunity to engage in certain actions without control or interference: the liberties protected by the Bill of Rights. (etc.)

You tell me, does H.R. 3962 secure YOUR blessings of liberty or infringe on your rights as provided by the Constitution?  I urge you to contact your Senators and let them know we won’t give up our freedom of choice and be subject to yet more government intrusion into our lives!  In closing, I leave you to ponder this proposed new law with two additional quotes from our Founding Fathers:

“Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.” -- Benjamin Franklin

“I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”

James Madison

Slim Shady Obama and his jack boot enthusiast's Pelosi and Reid have no intention of helping AmeriKKKa. By the time thier health plan kicks in (2013/14,) Nancy will be sipping chardonay on her vinyard, Harry will be playing 5 card stud in a retirement home, and Obama will be hiding out in his dacha in a Cicero enclave of Chicago.

It's clear: fascism and the junta mentality has succeeded in Washinton, DC.

One more time...if my taxes or premiums go up one dime due to this crap, I want to be able to write off MY premiums on my income tax...both State and Federal.

The letter could be termed good, as was done by a previous poster, only if one accepts an unimpassioned missive as an adequate address of the severe philosophical differences between the at least two camps on this issue.

Conservatives must be cautious not to submit to concurring to the premise that a gov't run health care industry takeover is a viable option. If that ground is given the battle becomes moot.

Surely the gov't can "compete" with private enterprises of ANY industry as they would not be subject to the natural market forces of a capitalistic system. A gov't run organization is a monopoly, or soon becomes one after start up, since they do not have to generate a profit, and the source of their "investment" is not a voluntary action by the "invenstors". If the gov't run entity falls short of it's obligations, it merely prints money, giving rise to inflation and a weakened dollar, or raises the subscription fee for the investors. A gov't run entity is free of the normal market forces that control costs and create additional interest in true investment. Entities operating in a free or semi-free capitalistic environment don't stand a snowball's chance in the land beyond the river Styx of competeing with such an organization.

We, as of last night, have a strong chance of federal gov't total interference into an industry that represents 1/7 of the GDP. Conservatives and, actually, true Jeffersonian liberals, should be experiencing an out-of-body level of revulsion at this intrusion, and should continue or commence contacting those ELECTED officials about their concerns regarding this matter. If your elected officials do not hear from you they may conclude that you concur with this debacle.

I guess the previous poster actually termed the letter "nice". "Good" was my connotation.

KD, No harm. I think it was both nice and good.

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.” -- Benjamin Franklin

One of my favorite quotes. Much more appropriate to situations in which the government actually restricts the rights of all citizens to protect us from enemy threats, such as happened after 9/11. In this case an inconvenience and minor expense will help our citizenry gain liberty. Removing the fear of not being insured will rekindle the spirit of entrepreneurship in this county. I thought you conservatives favored folks pulling themselves up by the bootstraps.

My reply I know of three young couples who felt compelled to get married just to acquire health insurance. We still have shotgun weddings, but now it's UPMC holding the gun.