In this week's American Issues Project column, I comment on how Barack Obama promised the American people that he would transform America, which at the time sounded uplifting and positive, but what the American people are seeing now is a transformation that is terrifying them. Obama's policies take those decisions people have made for themselves to the government. Here's a portion:
With dramatic increases in the size and scope of government, Americans fear there will be an unprecedented intrusion into their lives.The laws of physics tell us that no two objects can occupy the same space at the same time. This principle also applies to the question of government versus freedom. Freedom cannot thrive when government continues to grow and takes over industries and services that were previously in the hands of the free market. As government control, regulations and taxes increase, freedom of choice retreat at a similar rates. As government control, regulations and taxes decrease, freedom grows and fills the void that government once held.
Nothing embodies this struggle better, perhaps, than the president's proposed health care overhaul. Very few people would argue that our health care system should remain as it currently is. Virtually everyone acknowledges that it needs reform; however, the kind of reform the president and the nanny-staters want to achieve is centered on government playing a much larger role in the delivery of health care. Many nanny-staters want a public option, which is just another way of defining government-run health care. Several liberal members of Congress have insisted that the health care bill that will land on the president's desk will have a public option. If the president signs a health care reform bill with a public option, the American people will see their freedoms and choices slip out of their control.
The Baucus health care proposal that was just passed out of the Senate Finance Committee will artificially drive up the cost of private health insurance premiums for two reasons. First, health insurance premiums are more expensive than the penalty for not purchasing insurance. At the same time, the cost must be the same whether a person is healthy or sick, leaving no incentive for young, healthy individuals to purchase insurance until after they have become sick. This will leave primarily sick people who are paying into and drawing from the system, driving up costs. Second, insurance companies will be hit with a 40 percent excise tax for the more expensive health care premiums, a cost that will be passed onto consumers. What makes matters significantly worse is that the new tax policies associated with employer provided health insurance will drive down wages. The Joint Committee on Taxation admitted this fact in two separate letters issued on October 13th.
The consequence of these policies is that millions of Americans who want to live their lives independent of government largesse will be forced into a government run plan. But more than that, this kind of government control gives bureaucrats a say in the amount of health care that will be provided and to whom it will be provided. Naturally, the American people, particularly our nation's senior citizens, are very concerned that their access to much needed procedures will be based upon the metric of whether it is financially beneficial to the collective.
Please read the rest and let me know if you agree or not. You can leave a comment here or at my column.
The polls reflect the fears the American people have about President Obama's transformation. Fox News' most recent poll says that the American people's opposition to his health care reform plans remains strong. On top of that, only 43% of the American people would vote to reelect him if the election were to be held now. Probably even more aggravating is that Hillary Clinton is more popular than he is right now. Obama dismisses these polls, chalking them up to fear of change. He had better take the American people's push back seriously or he will find himself with a much stronger Republican opposition in Congress by the time 2010 comes to a close.
While you're at AIP, be sure to check out the other columnists. Lorie Byrd has a great column that examines the president's misplaced priorities. Ed Morrissey exposes the Democrats' cap and trade shell game.
About The Author:Kim Priestap is a freelance writer, blogger extraordinaire, wife, and mom to three wild and wacky kids. In addition to blogging at Wizbang, she also writes at her personal political blog KimPriestap: No-nonsense conservative opinion.
You can follow Kim on Twitter at @KimPriestap.
Permalink | E-mail This | Linking Blogs | Sphere: Related Content | Digg this! | FARK It!
Filed under:
Barack Obama
Comments (15)
If Barry signs a bill with ... (Below threshold)1. Posted by GarandFan | October 16, 2009 9:44 PM | Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
If Barry signs a bill with a public option, he'd better reserve a Ryder moving van in 2012 and avoid the 2nd wave rush. The first part will take place in 2010. Old people can be counted on to vote.
1. Posted by GarandFan | October 16, 2009 9:44 PM |
Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
Posted on October 16, 2009 21:44
2. Posted by jim m | October 16, 2009 9:49 PM | Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Yeah but we're getting it anyway aren't we.
With Obama's popularity being below Clinton's what do you think of the possibility of his joining Franklin Pierce as the only incumbent president to fail to get the nomination of his party for a second term?
2. Posted by jim m | October 16, 2009 9:49 PM |
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Posted on October 16, 2009 21:49
3. Posted by Nancy's Nazi | October 16, 2009 10:04 PM | Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Good writeup Kim. An additional concern is that the government will know of your party affiliation when health care decisions are made for you. As much as it sickens me to think so I'm believing that may play a part in the amount and quality of care you receive.
3. Posted by Nancy's Nazi | October 16, 2009 10:04 PM |
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Posted on October 16, 2009 22:04
4. Posted by kathie | October 16, 2009 10:14 PM | Score: 4 (6 votes cast)
Maybe some of Obama's words sounded sweet and nice to some people, but they couldn't have listened to all of his words. Nor did they look very closely at his associations over the last 20 years, Rev. Wright and George Soros to mention a few. Red flags were all over the place, but because he was black, people excused what Obama said and overlooked who he associated with, thinking that as white voters, who were they to judge a black man.
Obama was running as a man for the highest office in our Country. He was more then black, he was a man who should not have been forgiven of his words and associations, because they made a very compelling negative picture.
Three examples that caught my attention when listening to his words. When Joe the plumber approached him, he told Joe, that the guy at the top did not share his wealth sufficiently with the guys at the bottom. Another time he told us that in 5 days he was going to fundamentally change America. He also told us that George Bush didn't have a clue how to deal with Iran, that he could get them to give up their nuclear ambitions, by reaching out his hand to them. He and MSM lead Americans to believe that George Bush was nothing more then a war monger who wanted to just bomb everyone. Really? No President is that stupid, and neither was Bush. If you take the fore mentioned 3 utterances to their logical conclusions, no one should be surprised where Obama is going.
He will try to fundamentally change America if we let him. We are going to have to be smarter and better then he and his gang are. We the people are all that stand between his vision and the America that we know and love.
4. Posted by kathie | October 16, 2009 10:14 PM |
Score: 4 (6 votes cast)
Posted on October 16, 2009 22:14
5. Posted by jim m | October 16, 2009 10:32 PM | Score: 4 (6 votes cast)
He already has changed American irrevocably. He has destroyed the value of the dollar. It will likely be dropped as the currency for oil trade before the end of the year.
He has spent us into a debt so deep that we may actually need to either monetize it or default.
He will run a dishonest census next year that will count illegals giving undue influence to dem strongholds, the inner cities.
If he succeeds with health care he will permanently place a large segment of the economy under direct government control and he will serve up its workers to be slaves to the labor unions
5. Posted by jim m | October 16, 2009 10:32 PM |
Score: 4 (6 votes cast)
Posted on October 16, 2009 22:32
6. Posted by recovering liberal democrat | October 16, 2009 10:47 PM | Score: 4 (6 votes cast)
Before I awoke from my liberal stupor, I would have been cheering what is happening. Now, it seems hard to believe I was that stupid to think this would have been good for this country. Never again.
6. Posted by recovering liberal democrat | October 16, 2009 10:47 PM |
Score: 4 (6 votes cast)
Posted on October 16, 2009 22:47
7. Posted by 914 | October 16, 2009 11:16 PM | Score: 0 (4 votes cast)
No, We dont want His grand transformation to thirld world dictator status.
7. Posted by 914 | October 16, 2009 11:16 PM |
Score: 0 (4 votes cast)
Posted on October 16, 2009 23:16
8. Posted by poptoy | October 17, 2009 5:59 AM | Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
Stick a fork in the Big eared O. He's done. Thank GOD.
8. Posted by poptoy | October 17, 2009 5:59 AM |
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
Posted on October 17, 2009 05:59
9. Posted by iwogisdead | October 17, 2009 7:39 AM | Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
It's pretty easy to sell the concept that we should provide health care to poor American citizens who can't afford it. But, of course, instead of doing that, the Democrats are trying to destroy the current system.
The Democrats really do want single payer, and the American people do not. So, the Democrats have to disguise their intentions. Eventually, the people will get it figured out, and, hopefully, it won't be too late when they do.
9. Posted by iwogisdead | October 17, 2009 7:39 AM |
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
Posted on October 17, 2009 07:39
10. Posted by UNRR | October 17, 2009 9:30 AM | Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
This post has been linked for the HOT5 Daily 10/17/2009, at The Unreligious Right
10. Posted by UNRR | October 17, 2009 9:30 AM |
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
Posted on October 17, 2009 09:30
11. Posted by grasp | October 17, 2009 10:02 AM | Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
Obama, Pelosi, Ried and Clinton are very deceptive, I believe we have been had by this bunch.
11. Posted by grasp | October 17, 2009 10:02 AM |
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
Posted on October 17, 2009 10:02
12. Posted by Josie | October 17, 2009 4:55 PM | Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
I love how Glen Beck has such a wonderful way of explaining these complicated points to me. I'm a mother of 4 and I dont have time to listen to politicians. Mr Beck said that American is number 1 and now we are threatened, lets stay number 1 as a christian nation.
12. Posted by Josie | October 17, 2009 4:55 PM |
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 17, 2009 16:55
13. Posted by Chucky Sly | October 18, 2009 1:39 AM | Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
Wow. You conservadoinks really speak in panicky overstatements. You fear your own government and lash out at the first president to give a damn about the majority of the people since who-knows-how-long. You listen to the Becks and Limburgers and think they're "opening your eyes" to some big conspiracy. Bad news...those guys are idiots. And sadly, this article was equally idiotic. "Freedom cannot thrive when government continues to grow and takes over industries and services that were previously in the hands of the free market." Where do you think you live? North Korea? Your life hasn't and won't change in any significant way other than you get more choices. What in the heck is wrong with you? You're like the people in Arizona who opposed making a Dr. Martin Luther King federal holiday. Are you really arguing against another paid day off? Sorry to inform you but your little fishbowl here is NOT in fact the view of the majority of us here in America. I can assume you all enjoy getting reamed by the insurance industry with no vaseline then? Hey, to each his own I guess.
13. Posted by Chucky Sly | October 18, 2009 1:39 AM |
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
Posted on October 18, 2009 01:39
14. Posted by AC | October 19, 2009 5:18 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
If cost cutting is what is desired, then what we really need is a US version of Britain's National Health Service. We would need a bit more than $900 billion per year to fully fund a US version of the British National Health Service (universal health care) - $900 billion per year in total, not $900 billion in addition to our current spending.
In 2007, the combined Federal, State, and local government expenditure on health care was $1035.7 billion. So, we can fully nationalize health care with the US National Health Service, and cut government health care spending by about $100 billion per year at the same time. No additional tax source is needed.
Additionally, adopting a US version of Britain's National Health Service will free up more than $1.2 trillion per year in private funds no longer needed to pay for private health care expenditures.
The bottom line is that we are already paying for universal health care, we just aren't receiving it.
/Data from: the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Office of the Actuary, National Health Statistics Group; U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis; the U.S. Bureau of the Census; and the UK NHS
14. Posted by AC | October 19, 2009 5:18 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 19, 2009 17:18
15. Posted by TheRebal84 | October 20, 2009 3:49 PM | Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
About time the America people take back America...laws, taxes, health, bills being shove on us....these bills should be put on a Ballet and voted on by the real America People, we should vote on everything, our reps are surely not looking out for us!!!
15. Posted by TheRebal84 | October 20, 2009 3:49 PM |
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 20, 2009 15:49