Tom Pittman's WebLog

2010 May 6 -- Debating ObamaCare

I have never personally met anybody in favor of ObamaCare. Until a couple months ago, I did not have any reason to believe such a person even exists. Even our President-Trainee and his lap-dogs in Congress who voted and signed it into law carefully exempted themselves from its obligations.

Shortly after ObamaCare became the law of the land, my friend in Texas put me in email contact with one of his former high-school classmates, who apparently supports the fiasco. Let's call him "Steve" in deference to his limitations. I say "apparently" because it is not clear that he really understands what this law has foisted off on the country. Steve's wife, whose own views on the topic were never clearly disclosed, is much smarter. She recognized immediately that he could not possibly win any open debate on the subject, and like any good wife protecting her husband from the rigors and risk of public combat, put the kebosh on his participation.

So I still do not know of anybody who really and honestly thinks ObamaCare is a good idea.

But I also don't know very many people who really understand what a BAD idea it is.

The "Tea Party" faction made a lot of noise when it was passed, but they are merely a diffuse aggregate of greedy individuals seeking lower taxes in a country whose tax rate is already one of the lowest in the world. Media pundits mostly agreed that Tea Partiers will not and cannot convert their general grumpiness into political action next November.

The people most immediately harmed by the new law -- low-income people like myself whose tax rates will substantially increase four years from now when the conscience penalty kicks in -- do not have the financial resources to fight the law and win in court.

After the new law has destroyed the quality of medical care in this country and made a mess of the economy, it will be largely too late to fix it -- even if anybody has the vision to understand who the culprit really is, and the political fortitude to effect the necessary changes.

The problem is socialism. Some of the people who voted ObamaCare into law (and many of the public who elected them) are open and admitted socialists.

The National Socialist ("Nazi") Party of Germany differed from the politics of the (now former) Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in few and insignificant ways. Both systems imagined that the wisdom and benevolence of a central government exceeded that of individuals motivated to look out for their own interests. Both systems imagined that the people in their party leadership were superior to other human beings, but only the Nazis set out actively to exterminate what they supposed were the inferior races; the Soviets were either too smart or too cowardly to attempt it. Both systems have received the just reward of their policies, which is extinction.

The National Socialist (otherwise and inaccurately  known as "Democratic") Party in the USA mostly shares the agenda of those two former and failed progenitors. Their public policies include the genocidal destruction of "inferior" races through targeted abortion (blacks and hispanics have always been targeted for a higher kill rate, a policy quietly but still supported by party leadership), and now (with ObamaCare) the withholding of medical care from the weak and infirm as Obama is already trying to do through the scourge of MediCare.

Most important, socialists wrongly believe that the inequalities of wealth between the haves and the have-nots can be corrected by taxation and redistribution. ObamaCare explicitly purports to do that. What really happens -- and history confirms -- is much more subtle.

What happens is that the whole economy sinks to a new low: many of the lower middle class join the poor in their poverty. A few of the rich -- mostly those in the power structure, now including government officials (see Obama income) -- stay rich, but most of them sink to formerly upper middle class levels or leave the country. Because they are no longer there creating and spending wealth, there is less money for the middle and lower classes to earn and spend. Jesus said "The poor you will have with you always." That's why the socialist vision is impossible. It's called the Law of Unintended Consequences.

But the economic consequences, evil as it is, is not what bothers me. It won't change my economic position much; other foolish laws have already done that. What offends me most about ObamaCare is the coercion. The Nazis in Germany and the Soviets in Russia forced their economic vision on everybody. Now ObamaCare does the same with health care. Obama promised last year,

No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan, period.
It's in the law. But if they let you take advantage of the so-called "grandfather clause" then everybody will opt out of the system. They explicitly don't want that. So the law has a penalty tax. 2.5% may not seem like much, but it applies to otherwise untaxable income. Half the people in the USA (including me) did not earn enough money to pay income tax last year, but all of them (us) would be liable for the conscience penalty tax.

It gets worse. One of the things I noticed in my church's "prayer chain" is that almost all of the prayer requests are about health issues. People don't pray for what they believe they can do themselves. They don't ask for prayer that they might become more holy or virtuous, or that they might love their spouse more. Those are good things for God to do, but people don't ask for prayer to achieve that. But they do ask for prayers when they get sick. Why? Because God alone is in complete control of our health.

ObamaCare seeks to change that. Obama -- like all the socialist dictators before him -- wants the government to take over God's prerogatives. They want you to bow the knee (metaphorically only, of course) to Caesar.

Jesus said, "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and unto God that which is God's." ObamaCare arrogates to Caesar that which is God's. The context when Jesus answered that question was the payment of taxes. Jesus said to pay the taxes because the money had Caesar's image on it. Our money still has Caesar's (now Washington's) image on it, so conscientious Christians everywhere pay their taxes -- even when they are unjust, as the case of the ObamaCare conscience penalty tax.

But it's EVIL.

It's a tax imposed on people for obeying God rather than man.

It's an excise tax on choosing not to buy a product, a tax on commerce that the law explicitly forbids being interstate and therefore under the Constitutional authority of Congress to impose it.

It's a retrogressive income tax that falls most heavily on the poorest of the nation, and on the people who choose not to benefit from the services the tax allegedly pays for.

It's EVIL in every way.

Can anyone honestly defend ObamaCare? Tell me: I really want to know

"Steve" later explicitly communicated (to a third party) his unwillingness to debate the issues. Like other people who know they are wrong, he tried to blame his withdrawal on me.

Other links:

Essay People's Choice Health Care: an alternative to ObamaCare that is not Evil
Essay "Health Insurance Is the Problem, Not the Solution"
Blog post, hospital administrator admits "I'm responsible"
My letter to President Obama
A Physician's perspective
A better solution, without raising taxes

Complete Blog Index
Itty Bitty Computers home page