Federal Bureaucrat, M.D.
By: Marion Edwyn Harrison, Esq.
FrontPageMagazine.com | Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Socialism, dangerously anti-capitalist and anti-free enterprise, does not always force a citizen to choose government for basic needs. However, as more and more evidence is gathered, it has become highly probable, perhaps certain, that Barack H. Obama's health plan if enacted as proposed would do just that: end the free choice of medical care. Everybody would have the same so-called insurance and, with it, the same amount of bureaucratic control.
Does anybody knowledgeable who believes in the right of an American citizen to choose his or her medical care endorse this proposed state medicine? For obvious reasons, we find just the opposite.
Should every American be compelled to abandon all medical care or obtain Medicare care only through a plan forced upon him or her and controlled by the feds?
- American Medical Association finds the “new public plan threatens to restrict patient choice by driving out private insurers, which currently provide coverage for near 70 percent of Americans”;
- The CEO of the Mayo Clinic: “Medicare has systematically been underpaying for services...If more patients are enrolled in a Medicare-like program your very best providers will go out of business or stop seeing patients covered by the government plan”;
- The National Federation of Independent Business: “[T]he private market can meet the challenge and can be held accountable to provide solutions that lead to lower cots and greater competition”;
- The CEO of Eli Lilly notes, under the “government plan...100 million people [would be] shuttled in overnight; it would limit coverage and delay access”; and
- The CEO of Louisiana Blue Cross Blue Shield calls it “a Trojan horse.”
American medical care is, by some measurements, the most expensive in the world. But by any measurement it is the most technologically advanced. The advanced cost is consistent with the high American standard of living. Whether as a dictator, manager, regulator, second-guesser or otherwise, no advocate of federal dominance and pre-eminence of medical care has cited a country in which the level of medicine is equal to, much less more sophisticated than, our American medicine.
Notwithstanding historical limits of medical knowledge, it is not surprising that nowhere in the Declaration of Independence, the Federalist Papers, the Constitution, any amendment to the Constitution, or any relevant writing, does it hint that the federal government is to practice medicine. The federal agencies that led to establishment of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare in 1953 (during the Eisenhower administration, under the 83rd Congress) did not envision such activity.
The rush to bad health accelerates.
We have implemented a new commenting system. To use it you must login/register with disqus. Registering is simple and can be done while posting this comment itself. Please contact gzenone [at] horowitzfreedomcenter.org if you have any difficulties.
blog comments powered by