Wednesday, October 3, 2007

A Prescription for Stupidity

President Bush vetoed a bill that would have given children health insurance today. Of course, this got Senate Democrats and some Senate Republicans upset because, well, they wanted to spend money on this. (And considering next year is an election year, there's no way there could be politics involved in this decision, right?)

I can understand why the Democrats want this program, but the Republicans? They've gotten way off the reservation on this one, and it's time for someone to say it. If this is the Republican Party of today, count me out.

Most troubling about this plan is the fact no one seems to have read the Constitution. Nowhere in there does it give the federal government the power to create a federal health insurance program. Not even if you completely twist every Article, every Amendment, and every single word written by Madison, Hamilton, and Jay. You would have to invent it out of whole cloth for it to be there.

So, why are people, especially Democrats and Republicans, so keen on it? More control over the people...and the people's money. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people willing to give up their responsibility to make their lives a little easier. And what greater responsibility is there for adults than to take care of their children?

That's the heart of the entire push for the government to provide health insurance for children, and it's designed to tug at your heart while someone tugs at your wallet. But the numbers and the emotional appeals are hard to overcome. There are millions of children without health insurance right now. Who wouldn't be moved by that?

Well, me, for one.

The big question nobody's asking whenever this is brought up is "Where are the parents?" It's getting way too easy for parents to pawn off their responsibility to their children and to society on government because they're either too lazy or irresponsible to do it themselves. And when you're dealing with something this big, you can't afford to let Big Brother be Big Babysitter because you don't want to see the bill for their "services." And don't be surprised if they eat everything in your refrigerator to boot, or in the case of William Jefferson, put $90,000 in your freezer.

Some Republicans said Bush vetoing the bill was a big mistake, one that they will "correct" by overriding the veto. Bush said he vetoed the bill because it would give insurance to families making up to $89,000 a year, so the funds would go to people who need it the least. I happen to think Bush was right to veto it, but not for the reason he gave. My reason: government has no business in the insurance game.

Think about it this way. Remember your last trip to the DMV? Imagine turning your local health insurance provider into the DMV. Now, do you get it?

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

The even bigger insult with this bill is the way the Democrats proposed to fund the program. They basically said in no uncertain terms "we know our constituents don't have a lick of common sense, so we are going to exploit that".

Lets think about this. They proposed yet more taxes on tobacco products to pay for this monster program. What could possibly be wrong with that? They get a double shot of brownie points here, right? They are giving health care to kids, AND slapping those bad terrible smokers around at the same time.

But what about 5 years from now? How about 10 years down the road? We know that the percentage of smokers in this country continues to drop every year. Current smokers, those that don't quit, do silly things like die, and meanwhile, fewer kids are smoking these days.

So, lets assume that at the current level of smokers, the new tax actually DOES bring in enough revenue to cover the cost of this program. In the immediate term, the new taxes on cigarettes are likely to motivate some smokers to finally kick the habit. They've also pushed buying a pack of smokes furhter out of reach for your average teen (oh wait, no they didn't, thank you minimum gift, errr wage, hike). Within even a few years, we will be seeing diminishing returns on this tax. Meanwhile, the program's budget will be increasing every year. At best, this program might be fully funded for its first 5 years, but certainly no longer than that.

So basically, Dems passed an under funded program who's only real point was to score political points with the anti-smoking PC crowd, and the save the children socialists.