Politicians worry about votes above all else

Published 9:56 am Friday, October 2, 2009

Charlie Wilson and his liberal pals in Congress need to give us a reform bill that will really reform the cost of health care cost.

This can be done without any cost to taxpayers and address cost, portability, and competition. This can be done by allowing individuals to purchase their own insurance pre-tax as they currently do through their employers, this would tie health insurance to the individual and not to the employer thus addressing portability.

Encourage the use of individual health savings accounts to pay for routine health care cost.

Email newsletter signup

Get rid of restraints that prevent individuals from purchasing health insurance across state lines which would strongly encourage competition.

I have heard many legislators state the taxpayer funded government option was needed to encourage competition in many states because in many states consumers where limited to one insurance provider.

Why not open the market to the more than 1200 insurance providers in business nationwide? Allow people to purchase the type of insurance they want, not what the government says they are required to have, get rid of all government mandates on what every person must have.

Additionally, those that are pushing yet another taxpayer funded entitlement program state, that they can pay for half of this with savings from stopping fraud in Medicare. I have to ask, why have you not done this already?

Prove to us that you can do this first before you saddle the taxpayers with a larger bill for another program that’s only purpose is to buy votes with taxpayers money further entrenching less than honorable incumbents.

I have written Rep. Wilson on these possible options and he continues to parrot the tired party line response that will give us yet another inefficient entitlement program.

I have also asked Rep. Wilson where in Article I Section 8 of the United States Constitution the power to create this program, as well as many like it, is found and still he lacks the courage to address this simple question. I will head off the standard response and state that it is not found with the “General Welfare” Clause. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson left us commentaries that told us in regards to this clause, it is to be view in light of the specific and limited powers enumerated within Article I.

James Madison wrote, “Whenever, therefore, money has been raised by the General Authority, and is to be applied to a particular measure, a

question arises whether the particular measure be within the enumerated authorities vested in Congress.” Madison further explained, “If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions.”

Thomas Jefferson conveyed, “Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but were to those specifically enumerated; and that, as it was never meant they should raise money for purposes which the enumeration did not place under their action; consequently, that the specification of powers is a limitation of the purposes for which they may raise money.”

It is going to be my practice in the future to vote against every incumbent, regardless of party, so we may return to a time when we had statesmen as representatives instead of the current crop of politicians that only look for more taxpayer funded vote buying schemes to secure their future re-election.

Timothy Nicely, South Point