Soon after a maverick inland hurricane destroyed our home and one-third of our storage units, we rented a building down town that had formerly been used as a health clinic. We put our office in the front and the several examination rooms and closets we turned into storage units to make up for some of those lost in the storm. While working on this conversion, I went next door to the local hardware store and made a certain purchase, I don’t recall the exact expenditure but it was around $40 and I remember the disgust I felt at having just spent $40 for something I absolutely did not want and did not need.
Now, just what does this have to do with providing quality health care to the 50 million odd people in America (allegedly) who have no access (allegedly) to such a vital necessity? Well, nothing, really. And that’s the first point I want to make. While my story above has absolutely nothing to do with providing health care to those in need, it has just as much to do with providing that quality health care to needy people as does the current legislation being pushed in Washington.
They are wanting us to make the same kind of purchase (a purchase that will run into the TRILLIONS of dollars) that I made that day at the hardware store. They want us to buy something we do not want and do not need. But there’s a reason, just like there was a reason I bought that electric drill. In fact, millions of people just like me bought drills that year and yet not a single one of us wanted a drill. What we wanted was a hole.
Now we were operating on a tight budget at that time, as you might imagine. We’d lost our home and pretty much everything in it, except a few clothes and personal items we managed to salvage. So I had to sell my wife on the idea of making the purchase. “Oh, it has a 3/4 horsepower motor. It has this safety feature and that little doodad which will make the job easier, and, yes it costs more here in town but I’ll save $20 in gas over a trip to Oklahoma City, not to mention the time, so it will actually save money…” But for all my praise and hyping the thing, I did not want it, nor did I need it. All I wanted was a hole in a door.
And so Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama do not want quality health care for all those 50 million odd Americans who they allege don’t have access to it. Yes, I know, they talk like they do, they sell it like they do and they spin it like they do, just like I did a sales job on my wife for the drill. The agenda, in my case, was a hole. What’s their agenda in Washington? I’ll show you, based on a bill authored by Rep. John Conyers from Michigan. First introduced in 2003, it has been reintroduced every session since and boasts 86 co-sponsors. The bill is currently in subcommittees of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, as well as in the House Ways and Means Committee and Natural Resources Committee. It is due up for debate and a vote NEXT MONTH! It is very telling in regards to where they intend to take this thing, if not in one giant leap (HR676), then in incremental steps, the first of which would be HR3200, the 1000+ page monstrosity currently causing the outrage in Town Hall meetings all across the country.
1. To create a new precedence and a new procedure for establishing basic human rights, as defined by the radical left. Unalienable rights are set by the constitution. They are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Some liberals wish to expand that list. This from Ajamu K. Sankofa, Esq, from the organization, Healthcare-NOW. Healthcare-NOW is one of the many organizations listed as proponents of the legislation (HR 676) that John Conyers introduced to Congress last year. See Conyer’s website.
“Remember, health care is a birthright and government has a moral and legal duty to protect all of its residents. HR 676 is the only health care reform legislation that has been introduced in this country that rests on the solemn principal that health care is a fundamental human right.”
From Scott Thusrby of Healthcare-NOW:
“Inalienable rights – The fact that the rest of the industrial world and most of the other countries in the world have universal health care coupled with the basic tenants of all the major religions of the world promotes universal healthcare as being an inalienable right of men and women.”
Health care is NOT a fundamental human right according to the law or according to the US Constitution. Government does NOT have a legal or moral duty to provide health care to everyone. Proponents don’t even believe their own rhetoric about government’s legal and moral duty to protect everyone, or they’d fight to outlaw abortion. Also, the mantra calling for the ubiquitous separation of church and state is disregarded here, tying a supposed government duty to a tenet of “all the major religions of the world”. (I guess Christianity is not a major religion, but that’s a different story.) So their agenda is to establish health care as a fundamental human right and the authority to determine what constitutes fundamental human rights, without regard to the Constitution.
2. To broaden popular support among illegal aliens and further integrate them into the population in order to bolster their attempts to turn immigration reform into amnesty, thus enlarging their power base. Many on the left have always sought this, a major step toward an open door policy – “come to the US any way you can and we’ll take care of you.” Again, from Mr. Sankofa:
“The incontrovertible fact is that the implementation of the Conyers Bill would immediately and substantially begin to decrease health care costs for virtually all US residents and the federal government, while at the same time giving all residents, regardless of their employment status, age, income or citizenship status, immediate and comprehensive access to world class health care.”
From Conyers’ site:
SEC. 101. Eligibility and registration:
“(a) In general.—All individuals residing in the United States (including any territory of the United States) are covered under the USNHI Program entitling them to a universal, best quality standard of care.”
Anybody want to increase their estimate of the projected cost of this thing?
3. To make reparations for slavery and further widen the racial divide. I hate to throw this in the mix, but I was shocked when I saw the following quotes and don’t know any other way to interpret them. No matter your interpretation, the thought behind the words needs to be exposed. Here again, Mr. Sankofa:
“The historic backlash of racism/white supremacy has fully whipped all residents of this country, but it has especially whipped its primary target the hardest. Accordingly, the extreme health deficit that is now experienced by the African descendant community within the United States was created during chattel slavery and systemically sustained to the present-day by de jure and de facto racial discrimination.”
We still have slavery in America, folks, because we haven’t instituted a universal healthcare system. Further:
“Many of its ugly features are revealed by the current orchestrated deterioration of the health care system in the United States and its foreseeable deleterious and disproportionate impact upon African descendants residing in the United States in all areas of health outcomes.”
“Hence, a drug pandemic and a concomitant violence pandemic were created in the Black and brown communities by the federal government…
…Its payoff was the profound disempowerment politically and economically of two generations of African Americans…”
And then there’s this from Scott Thursby:
“Slavery and involuntary servitude were instantly abolished throughout the United States of America at the exact instant the majority of Judges of the Supreme Court of the United States of America voted in favor of this Amendment.”
“Becoming ill is an involuntary act of men and women. Millions of Americans without universal health care at this moment are pledged to work, often for the remainder of their lives paying off their medical bills. In essence they are under involuntary servitude to the medical establishment.”
So we are presently in violation of this amendment (13), according to this gentleman. Further:
“If this was 1860 you would be voting for candidates that are either for the continuation of slavery or for abolishing it.”
So now if you get sick or injured, and go to the doctor and pay for their services, you are a slave, and that healthcare provider is in violation of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution. I’m not making this stuff up, folks.
4. To eliminate free market health care…PERIOD. This is an anti-capitalism move. They want to take fully one-sixth of the US economy and permanently remove it from the private sector. From Conyers’ text of HR 676:
“1) In general.—No institution may be a participating provider unless it is a public or not- for-profit institution.
(2) Conversion of investor-owned providers.—Investor-owned providers of care opting to participate shall be required to convert to not-for-profit status.
(3) Compensation for conversion.—The owners of such investor-owned providers shall be compensated for the actual appraised value of converted facilities used in the delivery of care.”
Actual appraised value will be substantially less than actual funds invested, in many cases.
“(a) In general.—It is unlawful for a private health insurer to sell health insurance coverage that duplicates the benefits provided under this Act.”
And from Mr. Sankofa:
“We must deconstruct white supremacy in all of its subtlety, expose the disinformation of the insurance industry and their political hacks; we must educate all communities that health reform that permits the private health insurance industries to remain in the health care business is sham reform and a deliberate deception…”
From Ethel Long-Scott, Executive Director of the Women’s Economic Agenda Project:
“In this context, no issue is more important than the battle for our people’s health as an integral part of the fight for poverty elimination. We have to take health care out of the market economy…”
This is a broad and bold sweep toward communism. Nothing more, nothing less.
5. To further suppress, oppress and punish the wealthy of this country and redistribute their assets across the board in pursuit of equality through entitlements.
From Conyers’ website:
“Sources of funding will include:
• Maintain current federal and state funding for existing health care programs
• Closing corporate tax loopholes
• Repealing the Bush tax cuts for the highest income earners
• Establish employer/employee payroll tax of 4.75% (includes present 1.45% Medicare tax)
• Establish a 5% health tax on the top 5% of income earners; a 10% tax on top 1% of wage earners
• One quarter of one percent stock transaction tax”
In talking with Oklahoma State Senator Ron Justice, I asked how much tax revenue would be lost on the state and federal level from shutting down the private healthcare industry. He said the amount would be astronomical. After all, we are talking about the revenue generated from one-sixth of the US economy. None of the sources above appear to me to be sufficient to even cover the cost of lost tax revenue as a result of passage of this kind of sweeping legislation, much less the costs of the actual health care. This is especially relevant given the plan to gradually shift from private to public over fifteen years, at which time the costs of any socialized health care plan will have exploded.
Then there’s this from Marilyn Clement of HealthcareNOW:
“Only the very rich would pay more. Very importantly, this would be a tremendous victory because it would add a human rights entitlement to our law…”
Of course this is false. Directly from Conyers’ bill, listing sources of revenue to pay for the costs of the program:
“Instituting a modest and progressive excise tax on payroll and self-employment income.”
So I guess having a job or owning your own business makes you “very rich”.
6. To gain reelection in 2012. They are counting on healthcare legislation to secure for themselves long-term power. This from the Washington post on July 13th:
“In sessions with Democrats, Obama and his advisers remind lawmakers that the defeat of President Bill Clinton’s health-care overhaul spelled electoral disaster for the party in 1994, costing Democrats control of both the House and Senate.”
“‘Behind closed doors, he essentially says: If this sinks, we will have trouble in 2010,” said Jim Kessler, vice president for policy at the moderate Third Way think tank. “If this goes down, they will lose a whole lot of momentum on everything else. Clinton’s whole agenda went down after the reform’s defeat.’”
Obama believes his entire agenda depends upon the passage of this healthcare debacle. It is the socialization of roughly 17% of the nation’s economy, and will guarantee rigid government control over the individual anytime those in power decide to use it.
So there you have it. Health care reform is merely the drill, the tool nobody really wants or needs. Listed above are six of the several holes that comprise the REAL agenda, the real reason for the big push to spend all those untold billions for health care reform. HR-3300 is only a first step. HR-676 is the real vision, the real goal, the real bag of manure they intend to shove down your throat.
If you wish to do a little research on your own, here are some links:
You can also find a brief history of the bill on Wikipedia.