Just Write it into Law

There’s a lot of misinformation out there about the health care reform proposals, and many of them have people scared for their lives. Elderly people are worried that they won’t be taken care of if their needs compete for the attention of somebody younger. Parents of the disabled fear for their child’s care. Middle-class taxpayers fear Obama will go back on his word and not raise their taxes (though he’s arguably done so already). And while much of the misinformation seems to be perpetrated by right-wing extremist groups, there is something very powerful and very important about the nature of the fears it is invoking.

One of the most naive beliefs an American can hold is the belief that the evils that have been perpetrated in places like Germany, Cambodia, or Russia simply won’t happen in the United States. “That would never happen here!” we often think. And yet, year after year, administration after administration, and decade after decade we see our civil liberties slowly eroding under the guise of good intentions, public welfare, and social justice. The Constitution has been avoided or evaded time and time again for the sake of “national security” or some other cockamamie idea that comes across the mind of our politicians and presidents. If you think it couldn’t happen here, don’t forget that we interned Japanese Americans during World War II, and citizens in New Orleans were threatened at gun point to give up their weapons inside their own homes. Sure, they aren’t worthy of Holocaust comparisons, and such atrocities simply aren’t in the blood of Americans. But nobody in charge today—no matter how well they steward their tenure, no matter how ethical, moral, and equitable to all they truly would be—can guarantee that the power they give themselves today will not be abused by those in power in the future.

Generally speaking Americans think only until the end of the year, or perhaps a few years out, which is disheartening, really, because the issues that profoundly affect our lives today will most certainly profoundly affect our lives (and the lives of our children and grandchildren) tomorrow. What scares most people is not what Barack Obama wants to do. It is not what Nancy Pelosi or other Democrats propose for government involvement. It’s the very notion of government involvement in the first place becoming too intrusive. I really don’t worry about what Barack Obama will enact while president, I worry about what comes once he is gone. I worry about the power given to the federal government that may be used for good up front (though I believe that is debatable) will be used for evil later.

I believe that this is truly at the heart of the fears of the American people dissenting over the current swath of health care proposals. It isn’t about today, it is about tomorrow. It isn’t about retirees, it’s about ten years from now. There are dangerous proposals being made, for sure, but that isn’t the bulk of the concern.

So here’s my proposal: write into law prohibitions of all the things the American people fear will happen. Write into law that no state or other government entity will ever interfere or have the right to interfere with a doctor’s and patient’s decision for medical care. Write into law that no senior citizen will ever be denied care due to age. Write into law that private market insurance cannot ever be outlawed. If you write them into law, it will help squelch the fears of the concerned, and will bind the hands of government agents who, in the future, may use such a license to do harm to the same people it was meant for good.

View Comments to “Just Write it into Law”

Anothernonymous 20 August 2009 at 2:02 pm #

This makes sense. The problem, of course (as I'm sure you recognize) is that laws can be changed. That's the nature of democratic government. You have to trust somebody, and frankly, I'm more willing to trust the government to manage my health care decisions than I am to trust an insurance company that exists to make money for its stockholders. If writing these things into law would help persuade others to agree with me, I'm all for it.
xfree9 20 August 2009 at 10:16 pm #

We're not a democracy, which means changing laws should take considerable effort, since majority opinions change like the wind. I would be more in favor of a Constitutional restriction, similar to one of the amendments in the Bill of Rights. “Government shall make no law…” sort of language. It takes a lot of effort to change an amendment, and of course to add one.

If the Congress can get an amendment in the Constitution guaranteeing the right to health services, I'd shut up. But they won't do it, (1) because they frankly don't care about the Constitution, and (2) they know they cannot.

Also, I'm not for the decisions being entrusted to anybody but the person himself (or herself). That means insurance companies aren't to “control” what I need, nor should government. At least with insurance companies you can appeal to unethical behavior with the government. If the government wrongs you, you're out of options (realistically speaking). That's why I don't advocate giving power to the government, but to individuals to act peacefully with each other. If government is necessary to be an impartial and fair referee, so be it.
Anothernonymous 20 August 2009 at 11:25 pm #

Let's put it this way. If it came down to a choice between a system in which an upper middle-class guy with good insurance could get any health care his doctor recommended, no questions asked, and a desperately poor teenager with leukemia and without insurance (her father is in jail and her mother is unemployed) couldn't qualify for a transplant that would save her life – and one in which a government official could say “No, you can't have your laser eye surgery because we're going to spend the money to save this girl's life” – which one would you choose? No in-betweens: just up or down?
xfree9 20 August 2009 at 11:41 pm #

Using the reasoning of the government, I'd say, “Let's print some money and get both.”

Personally, if I were paying, I'd say, “I'll get you your eye surgery once the girl is saved.”

There is no system with all correct answers. In a free market utopia where everyone does act peacefully there would still be dilemmas like this. I just don't believe in putting the power of life and death in the hands of a few politicians, even ones who currently are benevolent (so they say).
Anothernonymous 21 August 2009 at 10:25 am #

I understand your desire to have it both ways. My point was that in real life things don't work like that. There are at this moment needy, desperately ill people in this country who are dying due to lack of medical care while wealthy people have laser eye surgery. To me this situation is simply intolerable, and there are no concerns about possible government malfeasance that I couldn't easily sweep under the carpet in order to fix it.

I guess that's an essential difference between me and you. I'm a lot more scared of economic injustice and its moral implications than I am of the government.
xfree9 21 August 2009 at 1:05 pm #

I'm a lot more scared of economic injustice and its moral implications than I am of the government.

But what I think I'm saying is that there is much economic injustice caused by and perpetuated by government itself.
Anothernonymous 21 August 2009 at 1:32 pm #

Not at present. That, I think is my point. We have a real crisis that only the government can fix in anything like the amount of time required to save lives.
Anothernonymous 21 August 2009 at 2:25 pm #

I understand your desire to have it both ways. My point was that in real life things don't work like that. There are at this moment needy, desperately ill people in this country who are dying due to lack of medical care while wealthy people have laser eye surgery. To me this situation is simply intolerable, and there are no concerns about possible government malfeasance that I couldn't easily sweep under the carpet in order to fix it.

I guess that's an essential difference between me and you. I'm a lot more scared of economic injustice and its moral implications than I am of the government.
xfree9 21 August 2009 at 5:05 pm #

I'm a lot more scared of economic injustice and its moral implications than I am of the government.

But what I think I'm saying is that there is much economic injustice caused by and perpetuated by government itself.
Anothernonymous 21 August 2009 at 5:32 pm #

Not at present. That, I think, is my point. We have a real crisis that only the government can fix in anything like the amount of time required to save lives.