Why such a visceral reaction to the health care law?

Why do so many Americans have such a visceral reaction against the new health care law?   It seems to me like a bad law, poorly thought through and terrifyingly expensive, especially given our present deficits.  But I’m thinking that even if it were not so expensive and were not such a Rube Goldberg chain of complexities, that many of us would still be angry about the thing.

Is it that a  government-designed health care system makes us feel like wards of the state, dependent on the government for our health and thus our very lives?  Many of us don’t begrudge welfare to the truly needy, but recoil at the thought of being on welfare ourselves.  Does this new system put us, on some level, all on welfare?

Or is it that we don’t trust the government’s ability to run things effectively, and so are panicked at the thought that the government is now going to be in charge of our health?

Or is it that the health care law, perhaps coupled with the financial bailouts,  represents a repudiation of all that free market, new morning in America policy associated with the Reagan Revolution?  Are we perceiving this as a counter-revolution back to the welfare state ideology of LBJ and other Democratic social engineers?

Or what?  I know you can say something like “all of the above,” but I would find it helpful to know not just what you are thinking but what you are feeling, down in your gut.  I’m not looking for policy analysis but psychoanalysis.  (Not that you are psychos. . . You know what I mean!)  I would welcome hearing from tea partiers and also those of you who are all for the bill, whether this makes you feel better about America, or better about reversing the culture of conservatism that has reigned since Reagan, or whatever.

About Gene Veith

Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College, the Director of the Cranach Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary, a columnist for World Magazine and TableTalk, and the author of 18 books on different facets of Christianity & Culture.

  • http://insidepastorkevinshead.blogspot.com/ Kevin Sorensen

    I think, it is in part the notion that the government has taken God’s place as our provider and so many in this land have replaced God with the government. All unknowingly, of course, but nevertheless, they suckle up to the breast of their “mother” and hope beyond hope that she doesn’t dry up. Government was meant to provide guidance and protection (not in the “God” sense, but in the Romans 13 sense). I am convinced that ours, even at the unwitting behest of her constituents, has taken a place, a level, a status, it was never ordained to take.

  • http://insidepastorkevinshead.blogspot.com/ Kevin Sorensen

    I think, it is in part the notion that the government has taken God’s place as our provider and so many in this land have replaced God with the government. All unknowingly, of course, but nevertheless, they suckle up to the breast of their “mother” and hope beyond hope that she doesn’t dry up. Government was meant to provide guidance and protection (not in the “God” sense, but in the Romans 13 sense). I am convinced that ours, even at the unwitting behest of her constituents, has taken a place, a level, a status, it was never ordained to take.

  • http://wipfandstock.com/store/As_Though_It_Were_Actually_True_A_Christian_Apologetics_Primer Matt C.

    For me, my biggest gut reaction is against governmental inability to run things effectively applied to the health of my family and myself. Bureaucracy has always been my biggest complaint about health care. Every extra layer of oversight means decisions made by people further away from the fact and with lest interest in the subjects. The scores of manifestly stupid decisions I’ve seen made were only possible because of this situation, and more governmental intrusion will only make it worse. The U.S. government is not exactly known for its reduction of bureaucracy, and I would never trust the promises of politicians (a vocation known primarily for its ability to lie) against the manifest judgment of history. Someday I will have to watch loved ones die (or worse) because of an ignorant committee a thousand miles away. Because of their insistence on universal scope, I will have no alternative even if I would otherwise have the means of helping. True, we all have to die, and there’s nothing we can do about it, but surely we have a responsibility to love our neighbor in the meantime, and a greater responsibility to love our families. Being unable to help is one thing–being prevented from helping for no good reason is another.

    There are other grounds on which I oppose the bill, but this is the one that makes it visceral.

  • http://wipfandstock.com/store/As_Though_It_Were_Actually_True_A_Christian_Apologetics_Primer Matt C.

    For me, my biggest gut reaction is against governmental inability to run things effectively applied to the health of my family and myself. Bureaucracy has always been my biggest complaint about health care. Every extra layer of oversight means decisions made by people further away from the fact and with lest interest in the subjects. The scores of manifestly stupid decisions I’ve seen made were only possible because of this situation, and more governmental intrusion will only make it worse. The U.S. government is not exactly known for its reduction of bureaucracy, and I would never trust the promises of politicians (a vocation known primarily for its ability to lie) against the manifest judgment of history. Someday I will have to watch loved ones die (or worse) because of an ignorant committee a thousand miles away. Because of their insistence on universal scope, I will have no alternative even if I would otherwise have the means of helping. True, we all have to die, and there’s nothing we can do about it, but surely we have a responsibility to love our neighbor in the meantime, and a greater responsibility to love our families. Being unable to help is one thing–being prevented from helping for no good reason is another.

    There are other grounds on which I oppose the bill, but this is the one that makes it visceral.

  • Winston Smith

    As Matt C. stated it well, dealing with bureaucracy does not add to the quality of life. Everyone with an ounce of common sense should know that involving the federal government in anything will not improve quality, efficiency or cost-effectiveness.

    There is also the underhanded way in which the bill was passed — the overt bribes to recalcitrant Senators, the parliamentary sleight-of-hand (“deem and pass”) , etc. The fact that the leaders were so desperate to get this bill passed by any means necessary — in the face of popular opposition — was disturbing. Were Obama, Reid and Pelosi driven by their altruistic concern for Americans who lacked health insurance, or were they lusting after the biggest federal power grab in a generation?

  • Winston Smith

    As Matt C. stated it well, dealing with bureaucracy does not add to the quality of life. Everyone with an ounce of common sense should know that involving the federal government in anything will not improve quality, efficiency or cost-effectiveness.

    There is also the underhanded way in which the bill was passed — the overt bribes to recalcitrant Senators, the parliamentary sleight-of-hand (“deem and pass”) , etc. The fact that the leaders were so desperate to get this bill passed by any means necessary — in the face of popular opposition — was disturbing. Were Obama, Reid and Pelosi driven by their altruistic concern for Americans who lacked health insurance, or were they lusting after the biggest federal power grab in a generation?

  • Larry

    Dr. Veith,

    My wife and I talk about this a lot, and she’s in health care, fyi. I’ve pondered this myself. I think for most it’s a general distrust in government, not just efficiency. Government in its programs tends to run more rough shod over folks. However, I’d also say most of us are just as unpleased with private insurance, it too is a mass of red tape that acts like a “government”.

    I think many are secretly selfish, that’s not mentioned much by either side. Many “conservatives” (and liberals, and moderates so as to not miss anyone) don’t become involved until “it’s their problem”. I see too many conservatives becoming in the heat of the battle what they hate most about liberals (and I’m a life long conservative just for full disclosure) in principle though the details differ. It’s revealing, for example in all this, that the elderly didn’t mind staying out of the anti big government mix with high taxes for decades until it was their SS and such involved. Then suddenly they are “anti big government/anti high tax”.

    I think part of it is that the US is finally loosing this idol it calls success and beginning to suffer the reality of life.

    Though I find personally the welfare state mind set very destructive and do prefer a healthier individualistic accomplishment to be the better way to go, there’s an unhealthy “I won’t have to have to help my neighbor out ‘hands on’ if he/she are self sufficient” mind set among many conservatives.

    Both sides worship false gods, one the government and the other private sector business. If I were to cast this in a theological context I’d say that is the big thing about this whole debate, health care is just a stand in for the real underlying issue between the two sides. Because when one’s “god” is attacked one barks back. In a way I think something Luther said is apropos to this in that our god is what we ultimately fear, love and trust. And in this debate I hear the god of liberals to be the government, that’s what they fear, love and trust and conservatives god to be the private sector because that’s what they fear, love and trust. When the other side attempts to tear down what the opposing side fears, loves and trusts it is bound to get ugly because it’s the battle of gods via the worshippers of the same.

    Ultimately the obsession with medical issues is an obsession with death, otherwise why worry? And that is rooted rightly or wrongly in one’s true or false faith.

    Larry

  • Larry

    Dr. Veith,

    My wife and I talk about this a lot, and she’s in health care, fyi. I’ve pondered this myself. I think for most it’s a general distrust in government, not just efficiency. Government in its programs tends to run more rough shod over folks. However, I’d also say most of us are just as unpleased with private insurance, it too is a mass of red tape that acts like a “government”.

    I think many are secretly selfish, that’s not mentioned much by either side. Many “conservatives” (and liberals, and moderates so as to not miss anyone) don’t become involved until “it’s their problem”. I see too many conservatives becoming in the heat of the battle what they hate most about liberals (and I’m a life long conservative just for full disclosure) in principle though the details differ. It’s revealing, for example in all this, that the elderly didn’t mind staying out of the anti big government mix with high taxes for decades until it was their SS and such involved. Then suddenly they are “anti big government/anti high tax”.

    I think part of it is that the US is finally loosing this idol it calls success and beginning to suffer the reality of life.

    Though I find personally the welfare state mind set very destructive and do prefer a healthier individualistic accomplishment to be the better way to go, there’s an unhealthy “I won’t have to have to help my neighbor out ‘hands on’ if he/she are self sufficient” mind set among many conservatives.

    Both sides worship false gods, one the government and the other private sector business. If I were to cast this in a theological context I’d say that is the big thing about this whole debate, health care is just a stand in for the real underlying issue between the two sides. Because when one’s “god” is attacked one barks back. In a way I think something Luther said is apropos to this in that our god is what we ultimately fear, love and trust. And in this debate I hear the god of liberals to be the government, that’s what they fear, love and trust and conservatives god to be the private sector because that’s what they fear, love and trust. When the other side attempts to tear down what the opposing side fears, loves and trusts it is bound to get ugly because it’s the battle of gods via the worshippers of the same.

    Ultimately the obsession with medical issues is an obsession with death, otherwise why worry? And that is rooted rightly or wrongly in one’s true or false faith.

    Larry

  • Joe

    I would type out my response but I think Paul Ryan’s final floor speech pretty mush echo’s my thoughts. And, I’ll send you all to my wife’s blog to hear it:

    http://diary-of-a-wanna-be-supermom.blogspot.com/2010/03/hear-hear.html

  • Joe

    I would type out my response but I think Paul Ryan’s final floor speech pretty mush echo’s my thoughts. And, I’ll send you all to my wife’s blog to hear it:

    http://diary-of-a-wanna-be-supermom.blogspot.com/2010/03/hear-hear.html

  • http://womanofthehouse-blog.blogspot.com/ womanofthehouse

    There are so many things to bemoan about this turn of events, but for me one of the biggest is the loss of responsibility to take care of my own family. I’m an adult; I want to be an adult; I want to be treated like an adult. I don’t want the government taking care of me. Families should take care of their members, and when a family needs help, the church should step in. I don’t want the government acting as my nanny. This is also closely tied to a loss of freedom. Politicians don’t seem to think that the average American knows what’s best for himself and his family and that if they don’t step in, we’ll all make terrible messes of our lives. All this, and they don’t even know me! My family has not had health insurance for several years, but so far, thank the Lord, we have managed to pay all our own medical expenses ourselves, including two surgeries. No, it’s not been easy, but we’ve managed. I didn’t want this law, and I don’t want to be forced to buy something we can’t afford. Politicians need to trust us to do what’s best for us and stop trying to bail us out of every difficulty.

  • http://womanofthehouse-blog.blogspot.com/ womanofthehouse

    There are so many things to bemoan about this turn of events, but for me one of the biggest is the loss of responsibility to take care of my own family. I’m an adult; I want to be an adult; I want to be treated like an adult. I don’t want the government taking care of me. Families should take care of their members, and when a family needs help, the church should step in. I don’t want the government acting as my nanny. This is also closely tied to a loss of freedom. Politicians don’t seem to think that the average American knows what’s best for himself and his family and that if they don’t step in, we’ll all make terrible messes of our lives. All this, and they don’t even know me! My family has not had health insurance for several years, but so far, thank the Lord, we have managed to pay all our own medical expenses ourselves, including two surgeries. No, it’s not been easy, but we’ve managed. I didn’t want this law, and I don’t want to be forced to buy something we can’t afford. Politicians need to trust us to do what’s best for us and stop trying to bail us out of every difficulty.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    I’ve ridden Amtrak, dealt with the IRS and USDA, and gone to the Post Office. I don’t want the same clowns running (ruining) my health insurance.

    Add to that the numerous lies of Mr. Obama and his minions in Congress about the subject, the obvious ignorance of basic economics and founding principles of insurance, and the response should be no surprise.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    I’ve ridden Amtrak, dealt with the IRS and USDA, and gone to the Post Office. I don’t want the same clowns running (ruining) my health insurance.

    Add to that the numerous lies of Mr. Obama and his minions in Congress about the subject, the obvious ignorance of basic economics and founding principles of insurance, and the response should be no surprise.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-27802-Televangelism--Pop-Christianity-Examiner Bob Hunter

    So should medicare and social security be cancelled as well, and leave the elderly to survive through their savings if they have any?

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-27802-Televangelism--Pop-Christianity-Examiner Bob Hunter

    So should medicare and social security be cancelled as well, and leave the elderly to survive through their savings if they have any?

  • Jonathan

    Visceral reaction? Well, let’s see, there’s the brazen–in-your-face, arrogant, naive, we-know-better, shut-up-and-color, let-them-eat-cake, full-steam-ahead, dam-the-torpedos, ends-justify-the-means–attitudes of our elected *public servants* who rammed this disaster through in the dark of night in spite the will of the people. There’s that, and then there’s $12 Trillion in debt now; $20 Trillion by 2020. And how is this supposed to be a debt reducer??

  • Jonathan

    Visceral reaction? Well, let’s see, there’s the brazen–in-your-face, arrogant, naive, we-know-better, shut-up-and-color, let-them-eat-cake, full-steam-ahead, dam-the-torpedos, ends-justify-the-means–attitudes of our elected *public servants* who rammed this disaster through in the dark of night in spite the will of the people. There’s that, and then there’s $12 Trillion in debt now; $20 Trillion by 2020. And how is this supposed to be a debt reducer??

  • D S

    To me, the most alarming issue here is “Big Brother” deciding what is best for us, and strong-arming this into law. The shocking election result in Massachusetts was not going to stop this regime. This is very scary stuff, and one is left to wonder just what is coming next.

  • D S

    To me, the most alarming issue here is “Big Brother” deciding what is best for us, and strong-arming this into law. The shocking election result in Massachusetts was not going to stop this regime. This is very scary stuff, and one is left to wonder just what is coming next.

  • cc

    As a young, single 20-something, I feel taken advantage of and voiceless. I’m employed but making only a little more than minimum wage in my field and can’t afford to buy insurance through my employer. I’ve got a significant college loan to pay off instead. Also the insurance I’m forced to buy likely won’t ever be used since I’m young and healthy and can’t afford to go to the doctor with insurance anyway. That’s the position most of my friends are in, too. Now I’m not only subsidizing social security, medicare, etc, through my taxes, but now I’ll be paying for everyone else’s health care by paying my dues to a private insurance company. Living without insurance with a chance of an accident worries me but not being able to pay all my every day bills worries me more. I feel used.

  • cc

    As a young, single 20-something, I feel taken advantage of and voiceless. I’m employed but making only a little more than minimum wage in my field and can’t afford to buy insurance through my employer. I’ve got a significant college loan to pay off instead. Also the insurance I’m forced to buy likely won’t ever be used since I’m young and healthy and can’t afford to go to the doctor with insurance anyway. That’s the position most of my friends are in, too. Now I’m not only subsidizing social security, medicare, etc, through my taxes, but now I’ll be paying for everyone else’s health care by paying my dues to a private insurance company. Living without insurance with a chance of an accident worries me but not being able to pay all my every day bills worries me more. I feel used.

  • Brenda

    I am in general opposed to the health bill for all the reasons above, but the thing that worries me most is the projected costs, actual costs and the face that my children and grandchildren will have to pay for it. When I think of what we are loading on these future generations’ backs… I just seethe with anger.

    As for Social Security, it worked because it was to serve those who outlived the lifespan of most. Fewer people recieved the benefits, with more shouldering the burden. If we were to raise the benefit age to above our current lifespan that wouldn’t be so onerous…How can the future taxpayers manage? We have killed off our tax base via abortion!

    God help us.

  • Brenda

    I am in general opposed to the health bill for all the reasons above, but the thing that worries me most is the projected costs, actual costs and the face that my children and grandchildren will have to pay for it. When I think of what we are loading on these future generations’ backs… I just seethe with anger.

    As for Social Security, it worked because it was to serve those who outlived the lifespan of most. Fewer people recieved the benefits, with more shouldering the burden. If we were to raise the benefit age to above our current lifespan that wouldn’t be so onerous…How can the future taxpayers manage? We have killed off our tax base via abortion!

    God help us.

  • Richard

    Larry’s point is right on: it’s because we make idols of certain things, and we are upset when they are taken away. Tim Keller, a PCA pastor in Manhattan, has written an excellent book, “Counterfeit Idols,” devoting a chapter to the idols we make of power–hence, the bitterness of the language we use when it comes to politcal matters. Keller quotes a lot from Martin Luther, by the way–it’s a terrific read.

  • Richard

    Larry’s point is right on: it’s because we make idols of certain things, and we are upset when they are taken away. Tim Keller, a PCA pastor in Manhattan, has written an excellent book, “Counterfeit Idols,” devoting a chapter to the idols we make of power–hence, the bitterness of the language we use when it comes to politcal matters. Keller quotes a lot from Martin Luther, by the way–it’s a terrific read.

  • Bob

    I believe that a government-designed health care system is a governmental encroachment on my freedom of religion. While I have very specific beliefs concerning health, healing, sickness and death allow me to answer from a more generalized position. Every culture, until the present, has maintained a close connection between health, or the lack thereof, and religion. In many cultures there is little distinction of office or function between shaman and priest. Health and healing is much more than take a pill or set a bone. Traditionally we have believed that there is a spiritual dimension to health and healing. Sickness, illness, accidents and death are a more than physical events. They are events that force individuals to confront issues of mortality and eternity. Government designed health care assumes, fundamentally, that healing is pure science with a dose of accounting. It raises the question, “How soon will prayer be out-lawed in hospitals just like in our schools?”

  • Bob

    I believe that a government-designed health care system is a governmental encroachment on my freedom of religion. While I have very specific beliefs concerning health, healing, sickness and death allow me to answer from a more generalized position. Every culture, until the present, has maintained a close connection between health, or the lack thereof, and religion. In many cultures there is little distinction of office or function between shaman and priest. Health and healing is much more than take a pill or set a bone. Traditionally we have believed that there is a spiritual dimension to health and healing. Sickness, illness, accidents and death are a more than physical events. They are events that force individuals to confront issues of mortality and eternity. Government designed health care assumes, fundamentally, that healing is pure science with a dose of accounting. It raises the question, “How soon will prayer be out-lawed in hospitals just like in our schools?”

  • jrr

    No policy analysis here. I must admit I was very anxious last week. What bothered me most is the increase in taxes and the inevitable inefficiency and waste of money that there will be. So in part it is a lack of control, less finances and less choice in my health care.

    All that being said, what God always brings to my mind is I am not in control, He is. I am worrying about the worries, pleasures and things of this world, and He told me not to. Thus, I have had to let go and rest in the truth that God is my true provider and even if it this health care were truly a good thing, I still shouldn’t put my hope in it. I still think it is a bad thing, but I am not as anxious as I was.

  • jrr

    No policy analysis here. I must admit I was very anxious last week. What bothered me most is the increase in taxes and the inevitable inefficiency and waste of money that there will be. So in part it is a lack of control, less finances and less choice in my health care.

    All that being said, what God always brings to my mind is I am not in control, He is. I am worrying about the worries, pleasures and things of this world, and He told me not to. Thus, I have had to let go and rest in the truth that God is my true provider and even if it this health care were truly a good thing, I still shouldn’t put my hope in it. I still think it is a bad thing, but I am not as anxious as I was.

  • Jonathan

    Bob H @8. Medicare and SSS are going broke. They are unsustainable. We must ween people off of them. Families (including the church families) should take care of their own, cradle to grave.

  • Jonathan

    Bob H @8. Medicare and SSS are going broke. They are unsustainable. We must ween people off of them. Families (including the church families) should take care of their own, cradle to grave.

  • Josie

    I agree with much that’s been said already..big gov. rolling over the little guy, no voice etc. But I think the reason this has created such a huge outporing of anger among the average citizen is that we all are inundated with news 24/7 in the form of blogs, radio talk shows, facebook, and the most obvious, the 24 hour news cycle on TV. Even when I turn my computer on in the morning, my home page is a popular news org. I think that the fact that we hear and see so much “news” makes us feel as though our opinions are somehow more important and that those in office (power) care more about what we have to say.

    It used to be that politics as a conversation piece was just something “old” guys ranted over on the front porch…pardon the generality! But, now, its everywhere!! Some of this is good…its nice to be more aware of what’s going on in the world, but it can be mind-numbing at the same time…and I think that eventually the politicians choose to ignore most of the ranting…and that angers us even more ; ) Hope this made some sense..gotta go get my coffee and morning news!

  • Josie

    I agree with much that’s been said already..big gov. rolling over the little guy, no voice etc. But I think the reason this has created such a huge outporing of anger among the average citizen is that we all are inundated with news 24/7 in the form of blogs, radio talk shows, facebook, and the most obvious, the 24 hour news cycle on TV. Even when I turn my computer on in the morning, my home page is a popular news org. I think that the fact that we hear and see so much “news” makes us feel as though our opinions are somehow more important and that those in office (power) care more about what we have to say.

    It used to be that politics as a conversation piece was just something “old” guys ranted over on the front porch…pardon the generality! But, now, its everywhere!! Some of this is good…its nice to be more aware of what’s going on in the world, but it can be mind-numbing at the same time…and I think that eventually the politicians choose to ignore most of the ranting…and that angers us even more ; ) Hope this made some sense..gotta go get my coffee and morning news!

  • http://www.christlutheran.net Jeff Samelson

    Leaving the policy concerns aside, I’ll just share what gets my emotions all twisted up about both the healthcare plan and process: the arrogant attitude of “We know what’s best for you, so get in line or get out of the way (and shut up – what does what you think matter anyway?). And even if we’re wrong about it being best, we’re not going to waste this crisis we’ve created — it’s just the chance we’ve been waiting for to turn America around and recreate it, because the old is bad and the new (whatever that may turn out to be) is good.”

  • http://www.christlutheran.net Jeff Samelson

    Leaving the policy concerns aside, I’ll just share what gets my emotions all twisted up about both the healthcare plan and process: the arrogant attitude of “We know what’s best for you, so get in line or get out of the way (and shut up – what does what you think matter anyway?). And even if we’re wrong about it being best, we’re not going to waste this crisis we’ve created — it’s just the chance we’ve been waiting for to turn America around and recreate it, because the old is bad and the new (whatever that may turn out to be) is good.”

  • Peter Leavitt

    The visceral reaction stems mainly from the arrogant and wilful forcing of this bill by Obama, Pelosi, Reid, et al, knowing that a majority of Americans strongly opposed the bill. The fact that Republican moderates including Olympia Snowe, adamantly opposed the bill is telling.

    The Democratic liberals have showed their true authoritarian colors and shall pay a wicked price for it come next November.

  • Peter Leavitt

    The visceral reaction stems mainly from the arrogant and wilful forcing of this bill by Obama, Pelosi, Reid, et al, knowing that a majority of Americans strongly opposed the bill. The fact that Republican moderates including Olympia Snowe, adamantly opposed the bill is telling.

    The Democratic liberals have showed their true authoritarian colors and shall pay a wicked price for it come next November.

  • David T.

    I believe what upsets our gut relates best to worldview. This healthcare plan is not merely attempting to solidify in a new way to govern that has been making headway over the last century, but is helping to issue in a new worldview with so many assumptions contrary to the Christian worldview. In this postmodern (power seeking), socialist worldview we find the estates of the Family and the Church relativized and relegated and eventually persecuted; we see the State growing more powerful and taking on responsibilties that it is not equipped to handle nor given it by God, and we will observe an increasing utlitarian view of life where usefulness takes priority of sanctity (much like it did in Nazi Germany where the true compassion that was supposed to come from the individual Christian, family, and Church was squashed for the good of the state). Those who do not come from strictly Christian worldview, like libertarians, may object for other reasons, but I think this is why we Christians are so disturbed deep down.

  • David T.

    I believe what upsets our gut relates best to worldview. This healthcare plan is not merely attempting to solidify in a new way to govern that has been making headway over the last century, but is helping to issue in a new worldview with so many assumptions contrary to the Christian worldview. In this postmodern (power seeking), socialist worldview we find the estates of the Family and the Church relativized and relegated and eventually persecuted; we see the State growing more powerful and taking on responsibilties that it is not equipped to handle nor given it by God, and we will observe an increasing utlitarian view of life where usefulness takes priority of sanctity (much like it did in Nazi Germany where the true compassion that was supposed to come from the individual Christian, family, and Church was squashed for the good of the state). Those who do not come from strictly Christian worldview, like libertarians, may object for other reasons, but I think this is why we Christians are so disturbed deep down.

  • Booklover

    What everyone else has said.

    My relatives who are exuberant about the passage of this law are anti-Christian. Coincidence?

    I am basically watching my husband, a small business owner, die of stress. His taxes are so high, yet this law will only make them higher. After having many back surgeries which he paid for, he is now having heart problems largely due to stress from the IRS coming after him again and again. Most times the IRS finds out they have made a mistake, yet they hound him for years until finally finding their own mistake. Put them in charge of health care and we have an inexcusable situation.

  • Booklover

    What everyone else has said.

    My relatives who are exuberant about the passage of this law are anti-Christian. Coincidence?

    I am basically watching my husband, a small business owner, die of stress. His taxes are so high, yet this law will only make them higher. After having many back surgeries which he paid for, he is now having heart problems largely due to stress from the IRS coming after him again and again. Most times the IRS finds out they have made a mistake, yet they hound him for years until finally finding their own mistake. Put them in charge of health care and we have an inexcusable situation.

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.com/ John

    Simply put, the government failed at social security and medicare/caid, and we are afraid that the government will mess up health care and we will all die earlier than we would have and in poorer health and with less wealth. Also, we are very angry that our elected officials shoved this on us (while exempting themselves), in spite of the fairly clear majority being against the bill.

    And then there are those of us who hoped some day to see an intelligent, democratic and socialist solution to healthcare implemented in this country. This bill just about guarantees that such a structure can never take hold.

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.com/ John

    Simply put, the government failed at social security and medicare/caid, and we are afraid that the government will mess up health care and we will all die earlier than we would have and in poorer health and with less wealth. Also, we are very angry that our elected officials shoved this on us (while exempting themselves), in spite of the fairly clear majority being against the bill.

    And then there are those of us who hoped some day to see an intelligent, democratic and socialist solution to healthcare implemented in this country. This bill just about guarantees that such a structure can never take hold.

  • http://www.newreformationpress.com Patrick Kyle

    Saw an interesting story on the news last night. Apparently the health bill allows a loophole to the insurance companies so that they don’t have to insure children with a pre-existing condition until 2014. The administration is scrambling to ‘interpret’ the law in such a way to preclude the insurance companies from acting on this loophole.

    Also saw Waxman and his cronies are dragging any company that publicly states what the new bill is costing them (as existing law and the SEC require) before Congress to answer “questions,” whatever that means. Nothing like some good ole’ gangster style intimidation.

  • http://www.newreformationpress.com Patrick Kyle

    Saw an interesting story on the news last night. Apparently the health bill allows a loophole to the insurance companies so that they don’t have to insure children with a pre-existing condition until 2014. The administration is scrambling to ‘interpret’ the law in such a way to preclude the insurance companies from acting on this loophole.

    Also saw Waxman and his cronies are dragging any company that publicly states what the new bill is costing them (as existing law and the SEC require) before Congress to answer “questions,” whatever that means. Nothing like some good ole’ gangster style intimidation.

  • George

    Before causing a stir in the recent health care debates, Sister Carol Keehan, D.C. of the Catholic Health Association sat down with U.S. Catholic to explain the importance of health care reform. Read the full interview with her to find out why those who work in health care think the reform we got last week is a good first step.

    http://uscatholic.org/culture/social-justice/2010/03/its-time-take-our-medicine

  • George

    Before causing a stir in the recent health care debates, Sister Carol Keehan, D.C. of the Catholic Health Association sat down with U.S. Catholic to explain the importance of health care reform. Read the full interview with her to find out why those who work in health care think the reform we got last week is a good first step.

    http://uscatholic.org/culture/social-justice/2010/03/its-time-take-our-medicine

  • http://planetaugsburg.wordpress.com Andy Adams

    The manner in which it was passed is a big $%#^@ deal (to quote the Vice-President). This is a bill no one read, about which none of its supporters could tell the truth, for which countless people were bribed, strong-armed, or just plain beaten into submission.

    Moreover, it represents an exponential leap in government power and influence into the most private and sensitive spheres over our lives, our health care. Think of one government program that stayed within the scope of its original mandate? There are none. Now, try to think of a decision you make that does not in some way impact your health in some way shape or form. Government has just taken a beachhead in the effort every aspect of your life.

    A threat to liberty? You bet. Look at it this way. Liberty was just forcibly removed from the ghetto to concentration camp.
    The final coup de grace is that federal dollars will now fund abortions in the United States. Forget the Stupak Executive Order, it will not survive one minute of scrutiny from a federal judge.

    If this bill stands, we will fall. This bill must not stand.

  • http://planetaugsburg.wordpress.com Andy Adams

    The manner in which it was passed is a big $%#^@ deal (to quote the Vice-President). This is a bill no one read, about which none of its supporters could tell the truth, for which countless people were bribed, strong-armed, or just plain beaten into submission.

    Moreover, it represents an exponential leap in government power and influence into the most private and sensitive spheres over our lives, our health care. Think of one government program that stayed within the scope of its original mandate? There are none. Now, try to think of a decision you make that does not in some way impact your health in some way shape or form. Government has just taken a beachhead in the effort every aspect of your life.

    A threat to liberty? You bet. Look at it this way. Liberty was just forcibly removed from the ghetto to concentration camp.
    The final coup de grace is that federal dollars will now fund abortions in the United States. Forget the Stupak Executive Order, it will not survive one minute of scrutiny from a federal judge.

    If this bill stands, we will fall. This bill must not stand.

  • Kandyce

    To be honest, I am bothered at many levels by this. I don’t trust our government to administer money well or efficiently, I believe that the health insurance problem is actually a symptom, and when you “fix” a symptom, the true disease remains untouched and still lethal (to use a health care analogy), I am very offended by the people who play dirty and accuse others who oppose the bill of being stupid and uncaring, and I am offended by the notion that it is okay to make the “rich” pay for it. We have entered a collective mindset that large corporations are evil and that people with more money than I must have attained their money through immoral or “lucky” ways and to that end, we can decide how they should spend their money. That is, in a word, thievery. I believe that we do have a responsibility to the less fortunate, but when we provide for one person on the back of another, that is not compassion. It is slavery. I am much less offended by the concept of outrageously higher taxes for all than I am by higher taxes for just a few.
    In the end though, I know in my head and my heart that even in the worst of circumstances, if our government were to collapse and I were to be enslaved in a totalitarian regime, I would still be free in Christ. That is what puts politics in perspective for me.

  • Kandyce

    To be honest, I am bothered at many levels by this. I don’t trust our government to administer money well or efficiently, I believe that the health insurance problem is actually a symptom, and when you “fix” a symptom, the true disease remains untouched and still lethal (to use a health care analogy), I am very offended by the people who play dirty and accuse others who oppose the bill of being stupid and uncaring, and I am offended by the notion that it is okay to make the “rich” pay for it. We have entered a collective mindset that large corporations are evil and that people with more money than I must have attained their money through immoral or “lucky” ways and to that end, we can decide how they should spend their money. That is, in a word, thievery. I believe that we do have a responsibility to the less fortunate, but when we provide for one person on the back of another, that is not compassion. It is slavery. I am much less offended by the concept of outrageously higher taxes for all than I am by higher taxes for just a few.
    In the end though, I know in my head and my heart that even in the worst of circumstances, if our government were to collapse and I were to be enslaved in a totalitarian regime, I would still be free in Christ. That is what puts politics in perspective for me.

  • George

    http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/health-cares-new-nullifiers

    E. J. Dionne Jr.

    Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli seems determined to use an attack on health-care reform to bring us back to the 1830s. Cuccinelli, to cheers from the Tea Party crowd, went to court this week to overturn the new law, which he says conflicts with a Virginia statute “protecting its citizens from a government-imposed mandate to buy health insurance.”

    “Normally, such conflicts are decided in favor of the federal government,” he said, “but because we believe the federal law is unconstitutional, Virginia’s law should prevail.”

    The Republican attorney general’s move reveals how far into the past America’s New Nullifiers want to push the nation. They don’t just want to abandon a more than seven-decade-long understanding of the Constitution’s interstate commerce clause that has allowed the federal government to regulate a modern, national economy. They also want to resurrect states’ rights doctrines discredited by President Andrew Jackson during the nullification crisis of the 1830s and buried by the Civil War.

  • George

    http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/health-cares-new-nullifiers

    E. J. Dionne Jr.

    Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli seems determined to use an attack on health-care reform to bring us back to the 1830s. Cuccinelli, to cheers from the Tea Party crowd, went to court this week to overturn the new law, which he says conflicts with a Virginia statute “protecting its citizens from a government-imposed mandate to buy health insurance.”

    “Normally, such conflicts are decided in favor of the federal government,” he said, “but because we believe the federal law is unconstitutional, Virginia’s law should prevail.”

    The Republican attorney general’s move reveals how far into the past America’s New Nullifiers want to push the nation. They don’t just want to abandon a more than seven-decade-long understanding of the Constitution’s interstate commerce clause that has allowed the federal government to regulate a modern, national economy. They also want to resurrect states’ rights doctrines discredited by President Andrew Jackson during the nullification crisis of the 1830s and buried by the Civil War.

  • fws

    I haven´t read the actual bill. I suspect that if I did read the bill I would not understand most of it or it´s implications or how it would work out in practice.

    So I guess I really have no basis for substantive opínion other than what I have been told 3rd hand eh?

    The rest of you offering opinions… what more do you know ? are you also opposed to social security and medicare? why do you suppose republicans support medicare and social security but not government subsidized health care? I would like to know how conservatives resolve this apparent inconsistency in their mind.

    could it be …um… poilitical expediency? republicans realizing they would not get voted in if they ran on an anti social security platform? and .. hmm why isnt that in their platform?

    Viscerally: I have chronic yet manageable illness that requires expensive drugs. I have been kept alive for 15 years now by those drugs I could not in any way afford if the government did not provide them to me. I hope it is understandable when I say that I am not all that opposed to what the government is providing me for free.

  • fws

    I haven´t read the actual bill. I suspect that if I did read the bill I would not understand most of it or it´s implications or how it would work out in practice.

    So I guess I really have no basis for substantive opínion other than what I have been told 3rd hand eh?

    The rest of you offering opinions… what more do you know ? are you also opposed to social security and medicare? why do you suppose republicans support medicare and social security but not government subsidized health care? I would like to know how conservatives resolve this apparent inconsistency in their mind.

    could it be …um… poilitical expediency? republicans realizing they would not get voted in if they ran on an anti social security platform? and .. hmm why isnt that in their platform?

    Viscerally: I have chronic yet manageable illness that requires expensive drugs. I have been kept alive for 15 years now by those drugs I could not in any way afford if the government did not provide them to me. I hope it is understandable when I say that I am not all that opposed to what the government is providing me for free.

  • colliebear56

    I thank God frequently for the benefits of modern medicine and the enhanced quality of life it has given all of us. Basically, I don’t like pain.

    I fear that centralized control over the system will negatively affect that quality of life.

    Ditto to everyone’s comments, pretty much, except for George @25.

  • colliebear56

    I thank God frequently for the benefits of modern medicine and the enhanced quality of life it has given all of us. Basically, I don’t like pain.

    I fear that centralized control over the system will negatively affect that quality of life.

    Ditto to everyone’s comments, pretty much, except for George @25.

  • Kandyce

    Am I opposed to Social Security? I have been for years. My sister receives SS because she was born profoundly disabled, and while I am thankful that it pays for her living and medical expenses, that she gets it just doesn’t seem right under the premise which SS is supposed to work. I have worked in group homes where my wage was indirectly paid to me through Social Security programs, and I saw the waste of money between the person that SS was supposed to support and the actual support they received. While some other people who worked those jobs wanted an increase in federal funding (mostly for a warranted increase in their pay), I always wondered if private organizations wouldn’t be more efficient. My nieces also receive SS because their mother has a mental illness, and that money is absolutely not needed by them because they are supported by their father and stepmother. I’m positive there are cases where children in that situation need the money, but not in this case, and they are not allowed to turn the money down! Our social systems represent waste, promote uncaring, and in some cases prevent the “beneficiaries” from improving their lives. In short, I find our government’s social services to be some of the most unkind programs I’ve ever worked with. We need to help people. And the current SS program isn’t very helpful.
    I don’t know really anything about Medicare, so I can’t say. I will admit that I have uncharitibly assumed that it is as terribly overmanaged and underserving as I find SS programs to be. I could very well be wrong.

  • Kandyce

    Am I opposed to Social Security? I have been for years. My sister receives SS because she was born profoundly disabled, and while I am thankful that it pays for her living and medical expenses, that she gets it just doesn’t seem right under the premise which SS is supposed to work. I have worked in group homes where my wage was indirectly paid to me through Social Security programs, and I saw the waste of money between the person that SS was supposed to support and the actual support they received. While some other people who worked those jobs wanted an increase in federal funding (mostly for a warranted increase in their pay), I always wondered if private organizations wouldn’t be more efficient. My nieces also receive SS because their mother has a mental illness, and that money is absolutely not needed by them because they are supported by their father and stepmother. I’m positive there are cases where children in that situation need the money, but not in this case, and they are not allowed to turn the money down! Our social systems represent waste, promote uncaring, and in some cases prevent the “beneficiaries” from improving their lives. In short, I find our government’s social services to be some of the most unkind programs I’ve ever worked with. We need to help people. And the current SS program isn’t very helpful.
    I don’t know really anything about Medicare, so I can’t say. I will admit that I have uncharitibly assumed that it is as terribly overmanaged and underserving as I find SS programs to be. I could very well be wrong.

  • Joe

    Frank said: “I haven´t read the actual bill. I suspect that if I did read the bill I would not understand most of it or it´s implications or how it would work out in practice.”

    - Congratulations, you are just as informed as 90% of those folks who just voted on this bill.

    But to your main point, when you are talking about social welfare programs everyone engages in line drawing. Everyone sets their limit as to how much gov’t interference is okay. This is not an inconsistency that removes your ability to make an argument against further, additional or different interference. If that were so, decision making would be nothing but plain logic without human judgment. It was Emerson who said, “foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.” Because this is a gov’t program the line drawing must be done on a societal scale. The problem with this bill is that the American people did not want it – yet Congress and the President moved the line anyway.

    As for me, I would like to see SS, Medicare and Medicaid fundamentally reformed and turned into programs that are really about a safety net. Higher asset qualification caps and lower benefits for all. I think it would be immoral to change the field for those on it now, so it would have to be prospective reform.

  • Joe

    Frank said: “I haven´t read the actual bill. I suspect that if I did read the bill I would not understand most of it or it´s implications or how it would work out in practice.”

    - Congratulations, you are just as informed as 90% of those folks who just voted on this bill.

    But to your main point, when you are talking about social welfare programs everyone engages in line drawing. Everyone sets their limit as to how much gov’t interference is okay. This is not an inconsistency that removes your ability to make an argument against further, additional or different interference. If that were so, decision making would be nothing but plain logic without human judgment. It was Emerson who said, “foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.” Because this is a gov’t program the line drawing must be done on a societal scale. The problem with this bill is that the American people did not want it – yet Congress and the President moved the line anyway.

    As for me, I would like to see SS, Medicare and Medicaid fundamentally reformed and turned into programs that are really about a safety net. Higher asset qualification caps and lower benefits for all. I think it would be immoral to change the field for those on it now, so it would have to be prospective reform.

  • John C

    For a non American it is difficult to understand the anger and bitterness that the religious and libertarian Right feel towards this bill. The democrats won both houses of congress and had a clear mandate to introduce health reform. A civilized society cannot deny its citizens health care because they can’t afford insurance. A child should not be denied health care because of a pre-existing condition.
    Citizens should not be denied access to the great civilizing institutions of modern society — Justice, Health and Education.
    These institutions have to be supported and nurtured. Otherwise one might as well say as Thatcher did, “There is no such thing as society — only individuals going about their business”
    I will also add that governments may be inefficient but sometimes they are more efficient than private enterprise.

  • John C

    For a non American it is difficult to understand the anger and bitterness that the religious and libertarian Right feel towards this bill. The democrats won both houses of congress and had a clear mandate to introduce health reform. A civilized society cannot deny its citizens health care because they can’t afford insurance. A child should not be denied health care because of a pre-existing condition.
    Citizens should not be denied access to the great civilizing institutions of modern society — Justice, Health and Education.
    These institutions have to be supported and nurtured. Otherwise one might as well say as Thatcher did, “There is no such thing as society — only individuals going about their business”
    I will also add that governments may be inefficient but sometimes they are more efficient than private enterprise.

  • Peter Leavitt

    John C, while Americans may be quaint, they value hard work and regard personal responsibility more favorably than the sort of government welfare that has so far proven to be fiscally unsustainable. The unfunded liabilities for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are estimated to be about $70 trillion. ObamaCare is yet another entitlement that will substantially add to our debt burden and potentially place America among the other European nanny states with unsustainable debt burdens along with high unemployment.

    Also, some Republican conservatives, including especially Paul Ryan, have found alternative arrangements that fulfill the purposes of the entitlements while being fiscally sustainable.

  • Peter Leavitt

    John C, while Americans may be quaint, they value hard work and regard personal responsibility more favorably than the sort of government welfare that has so far proven to be fiscally unsustainable. The unfunded liabilities for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are estimated to be about $70 trillion. ObamaCare is yet another entitlement that will substantially add to our debt burden and potentially place America among the other European nanny states with unsustainable debt burdens along with high unemployment.

    Also, some Republican conservatives, including especially Paul Ryan, have found alternative arrangements that fulfill the purposes of the entitlements while being fiscally sustainable.

  • Carl Vehse

    Why do so many Americans have such a visceral reaction against the new health care law?…. I would find it helpful to know not just what you are thinking but what you are feeling, down in your gut.

    Or as Barbara Walters might ask, “If you were a tree opposed to 0bamacare, what kind of tree would you be?”

  • Carl Vehse

    Why do so many Americans have such a visceral reaction against the new health care law?…. I would find it helpful to know not just what you are thinking but what you are feeling, down in your gut.

    Or as Barbara Walters might ask, “If you were a tree opposed to 0bamacare, what kind of tree would you be?”

  • Dan Kempin

    Carl, #32,

    Oooh! I know: An endangered species!

    (Oh, come on! That was pretty good. I was trying to be visceral, after all.)

  • Dan Kempin

    Carl, #32,

    Oooh! I know: An endangered species!

    (Oh, come on! That was pretty good. I was trying to be visceral, after all.)

  • Manxman

    I deeply resent the fact that the people responsible for this atrocity crafted it in secret and flat out lied to us repeatedly about its costs and about the sleazy deals it has in it to empower and enrich favored groups.

    I resent it because it is only one part of Obama’s racially-biased larger plan to restructure America socially and economically.

    I resent it because I know, once all the facts are known in its 2500+ pages of government expansion and overspending, that there will be numerous radical, corrupt changes that will catch people totally by surprise and negatively impact the lives of the working middle class.

    I deeply resent the fact that it uses government power to take what belongs to responsible people and redistribute what is rightfully theirs to millions of people who are immoral and do not practice due diligence in their own lives.

    I deeply resent the fact that Obama and his crowd believe that middle class Americans like me are too stupid to recognize their motives and what their pack of radical elites is doing to us and our country.

  • Manxman

    I deeply resent the fact that the people responsible for this atrocity crafted it in secret and flat out lied to us repeatedly about its costs and about the sleazy deals it has in it to empower and enrich favored groups.

    I resent it because it is only one part of Obama’s racially-biased larger plan to restructure America socially and economically.

    I resent it because I know, once all the facts are known in its 2500+ pages of government expansion and overspending, that there will be numerous radical, corrupt changes that will catch people totally by surprise and negatively impact the lives of the working middle class.

    I deeply resent the fact that it uses government power to take what belongs to responsible people and redistribute what is rightfully theirs to millions of people who are immoral and do not practice due diligence in their own lives.

    I deeply resent the fact that Obama and his crowd believe that middle class Americans like me are too stupid to recognize their motives and what their pack of radical elites is doing to us and our country.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    “Obama’s racially-biased larger plan to restructure America socially and economically”. Hello, not-so-subtle code words! I don’t assume that everyone out there hates the health care bill for Manxman’s (@34) more-or-less stated reason, but I also have to wonder how much of the animosity towards the bill (or, really, anything done by Obama) is due to a larger fear.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    “Obama’s racially-biased larger plan to restructure America socially and economically”. Hello, not-so-subtle code words! I don’t assume that everyone out there hates the health care bill for Manxman’s (@34) more-or-less stated reason, but I also have to wonder how much of the animosity towards the bill (or, really, anything done by Obama) is due to a larger fear.

  • Carl Vehse

    One can get pretty visceral just listening to the exchange between
    Bill O’Reilly and Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) from the video on Hot Air’s “Who’s on first, Congressional-style,” when Reilly asks Weiner which government organization is going to force taxpayers to pay if they access the system without proper coverage under ObamaCare. Who is that? Yes. Yes who? Who. Who’s on first?

  • Carl Vehse

    One can get pretty visceral just listening to the exchange between
    Bill O’Reilly and Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) from the video on Hot Air’s “Who’s on first, Congressional-style,” when Reilly asks Weiner which government organization is going to force taxpayers to pay if they access the system without proper coverage under ObamaCare. Who is that? Yes. Yes who? Who. Who’s on first?

  • Peter Leavitt

    Todd, aside from picking up on one of Manxman’s many excellent points, what exactly is your visceral or otherwise view on ObamaCare. You tend to be superficially clever at finding the weak points of other’s views, while being rather vague about your own views. Put your own view on the subject on the line for a change.

  • Peter Leavitt

    Todd, aside from picking up on one of Manxman’s many excellent points, what exactly is your visceral or otherwise view on ObamaCare. You tend to be superficially clever at finding the weak points of other’s views, while being rather vague about your own views. Put your own view on the subject on the line for a change.

  • DonS

    Excellent thread. Many fine comments that well express why we should strongly dislike the strong-arm tactics and hasty measures which were used to force a complex, completely new health care system on our society, without anywhere close to the kind of scrutiny that should have been applied, all for the purpose of stroking the ego of a president who had decided this measure was necessary to “save” his presidency. The country be damned.

    What to dislike? Keith, @ 1, well stated that we are increasingly substituting government’s provision for God’s provision. “In Government We Trust”. Why is that? Why do we have a bias toward believing that government is good and everything else is bad, even though the evidence strongly weighs against that notion? What I hate about this the most is:

    1) Loss of Freedom — when government enters a space, and regulates that space, individuals lose freedom. Everything government does is coercive in nature (get it? — REGULATE). If something doesn’t go well in the private sector, you can choose another provider, or another course of action. But when government is involved, you must do it their way, or pay a fine, or go to jail. FREEDOM !!!! Like Esau, we are so quick to exchange the good things we as Americans are so blessed to enjoy for a bit of pottage.

    2) Extreme Financial Disaster — We, as Americans, are currently on the hook for some $120 trillion in government debt and unfunded liabilities through our existing entitlement programs. This does not include debt and liabilities owed by our state and local governments, or pension obligations other than social security. This number is rising by some $10 trillion per year, almost the amount of our $14 trillion annual GDP. Can you say “unsustainable”? And yet, we have now saddled ourselves with yet another entitlement of unknown, but no doubt ridiculous proportions. Proponents don’t even care that they have no clue how to pay for it. Welcome to the world we have left for you, kids!

    3) Government -mandated benefits — health insurance would be relatively cheap if it only covered catastrophic illnesses and injuries. Now that the government runs the show, we are not going to have the option to purchase that kind of coverage. A bureaucracy is going to be established to direct the benefits that must be included in every health plan, to probably include such things as gender re-assignment surgery! First dollar coverage for preventive care. Etc. Costs. Go. Up!!!!! By unlinking the consumer even more from the direct costs of health care, and requiring more and more coverage, shortages will be created, the cost of care and insurance will increase, government debt will increase, and we will all be paying much higher premiums. But, it’s government, so it must be good!

    4) Loss of Religious Freedom — since the government will now be involved in every aspect of health care, faith-based institutions and individuals will be forced out of the sector. Separation of church and state, don’t you know! The ACLU will see to it.

  • DonS

    Excellent thread. Many fine comments that well express why we should strongly dislike the strong-arm tactics and hasty measures which were used to force a complex, completely new health care system on our society, without anywhere close to the kind of scrutiny that should have been applied, all for the purpose of stroking the ego of a president who had decided this measure was necessary to “save” his presidency. The country be damned.

    What to dislike? Keith, @ 1, well stated that we are increasingly substituting government’s provision for God’s provision. “In Government We Trust”. Why is that? Why do we have a bias toward believing that government is good and everything else is bad, even though the evidence strongly weighs against that notion? What I hate about this the most is:

    1) Loss of Freedom — when government enters a space, and regulates that space, individuals lose freedom. Everything government does is coercive in nature (get it? — REGULATE). If something doesn’t go well in the private sector, you can choose another provider, or another course of action. But when government is involved, you must do it their way, or pay a fine, or go to jail. FREEDOM !!!! Like Esau, we are so quick to exchange the good things we as Americans are so blessed to enjoy for a bit of pottage.

    2) Extreme Financial Disaster — We, as Americans, are currently on the hook for some $120 trillion in government debt and unfunded liabilities through our existing entitlement programs. This does not include debt and liabilities owed by our state and local governments, or pension obligations other than social security. This number is rising by some $10 trillion per year, almost the amount of our $14 trillion annual GDP. Can you say “unsustainable”? And yet, we have now saddled ourselves with yet another entitlement of unknown, but no doubt ridiculous proportions. Proponents don’t even care that they have no clue how to pay for it. Welcome to the world we have left for you, kids!

    3) Government -mandated benefits — health insurance would be relatively cheap if it only covered catastrophic illnesses and injuries. Now that the government runs the show, we are not going to have the option to purchase that kind of coverage. A bureaucracy is going to be established to direct the benefits that must be included in every health plan, to probably include such things as gender re-assignment surgery! First dollar coverage for preventive care. Etc. Costs. Go. Up!!!!! By unlinking the consumer even more from the direct costs of health care, and requiring more and more coverage, shortages will be created, the cost of care and insurance will increase, government debt will increase, and we will all be paying much higher premiums. But, it’s government, so it must be good!

    4) Loss of Religious Freedom — since the government will now be involved in every aspect of health care, faith-based institutions and individuals will be forced out of the sector. Separation of church and state, don’t you know! The ACLU will see to it.

  • Manxman

    I would hate this bill if it were being pushed by legislators, either Republican or Democrat, in a time of relative economic/financial normalcy or stability. But for something this massive, costly, risky, potentially destructive, etc. to be arrogantly jammed down our throats at a time when the economy is in the dumper and the financial and economic systems are reeling from other legislative idiocies, make me really question the sanity and the motives of the people responsible for it.

    It is a serious mistake to be looking at this bill stand-alone. It has to be analyzed in the context of all the uncertainty and change going on as it was being passed. It was insane to be doing something this huge and this radical at this time with the government dominated by one political party.

  • Manxman

    I would hate this bill if it were being pushed by legislators, either Republican or Democrat, in a time of relative economic/financial normalcy or stability. But for something this massive, costly, risky, potentially destructive, etc. to be arrogantly jammed down our throats at a time when the economy is in the dumper and the financial and economic systems are reeling from other legislative idiocies, make me really question the sanity and the motives of the people responsible for it.

    It is a serious mistake to be looking at this bill stand-alone. It has to be analyzed in the context of all the uncertainty and change going on as it was being passed. It was insane to be doing something this huge and this radical at this time with the government dominated by one political party.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Peter (@37), you are rather inconsistent about your playing at Comment Police. When the topic is pedophile priests, you want to discuss Boy Scouts and the media. But when I make an on-topic reply to a fellow commenter, it’s not good enough for you. As if I haven’t discussed my views on health care elsewhere.

    What’s more, not only am I neither a “tea partier” nor “those of you who are all for the bill” that Veith called out, I don’t have a particularly strong reaction towards this bill. That said, since you asked, I am concerned about the effect it will have on our nation’s budget/debt, though I remain unsure how that will play out. I think it’s a giant, piecemeal thing, which may have unforeseen consequences (which, by their nature, are not known to me or anyone else right now). And I do think it has many good parts to it, though many of those are not now in effect. It’s not a strong opinion, so I didn’t think it would add much to the discussion, which is, you’ll note, about “visceral reactions”.

    I remain under the impression that most of the anger was not about the health care bill itself, as such. I think Larry’s comment (@4) was, as is typical, one of the more trenchant ones here.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Peter (@37), you are rather inconsistent about your playing at Comment Police. When the topic is pedophile priests, you want to discuss Boy Scouts and the media. But when I make an on-topic reply to a fellow commenter, it’s not good enough for you. As if I haven’t discussed my views on health care elsewhere.

    What’s more, not only am I neither a “tea partier” nor “those of you who are all for the bill” that Veith called out, I don’t have a particularly strong reaction towards this bill. That said, since you asked, I am concerned about the effect it will have on our nation’s budget/debt, though I remain unsure how that will play out. I think it’s a giant, piecemeal thing, which may have unforeseen consequences (which, by their nature, are not known to me or anyone else right now). And I do think it has many good parts to it, though many of those are not now in effect. It’s not a strong opinion, so I didn’t think it would add much to the discussion, which is, you’ll note, about “visceral reactions”.

    I remain under the impression that most of the anger was not about the health care bill itself, as such. I think Larry’s comment (@4) was, as is typical, one of the more trenchant ones here.

  • http://RoseFremer@yahoo.com Rose

    Today HHS named the members of the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research.
    http://www.hhs.gov/recovery/programs/os/cerbios.html
    Soon the government will list ‘preferred’ treatments that will be covered; next they will rate your doctor.
    Remember QALY? It’s already law in the first stimulus package. Quality Adjusted Life Years will be the metric to determine what/if treatment you are allowed.

  • http://RoseFremer@yahoo.com Rose

    Today HHS named the members of the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research.
    http://www.hhs.gov/recovery/programs/os/cerbios.html
    Soon the government will list ‘preferred’ treatments that will be covered; next they will rate your doctor.
    Remember QALY? It’s already law in the first stimulus package. Quality Adjusted Life Years will be the metric to determine what/if treatment you are allowed.

  • http://carolmsblog.blogspot.com/ C-Christian Soldier

    bho-nancy P.-babs B- and et.al. are acting as if they are of the old “royalty” mind-set—the motto of the US (American) Revolution was “No King But KING JESUS”—it is time we start re-reading original documents on the founding and stop the insanity of ‘royals’ being able to wrest property from the citizens at will…
    Life-Liberty-Property…
    C-CS

  • http://carolmsblog.blogspot.com/ C-Christian Soldier

    bho-nancy P.-babs B- and et.al. are acting as if they are of the old “royalty” mind-set—the motto of the US (American) Revolution was “No King But KING JESUS”—it is time we start re-reading original documents on the founding and stop the insanity of ‘royals’ being able to wrest property from the citizens at will…
    Life-Liberty-Property…
    C-CS

  • Economist Doug

    Why do robbers steal from banks?
    Because that’s where the money is.
    Why does the federal government draw the tyrannical?
    Because that’s where the power is.

    We are drawn to those arenas that allow us to live out our sinful nature to the fullest. The robber to the bank, the liar to the courtroom, the greedy to Wall Street, the politician to DC.

    This bill (along with others) has elements of corruption, theft, nepotism, and disregard for human life. That is a reflection not on the politics of the issue or the configuration of the parties but on the individuals who crafted the bill and manipulated it through.

    I think the constellation of figures in both parties are well-representative of that. We’ll not get a better sort of politician until the federal government is no longer the locus of power and the power-hungry flock elsewhere.

  • Economist Doug

    Why do robbers steal from banks?
    Because that’s where the money is.
    Why does the federal government draw the tyrannical?
    Because that’s where the power is.

    We are drawn to those arenas that allow us to live out our sinful nature to the fullest. The robber to the bank, the liar to the courtroom, the greedy to Wall Street, the politician to DC.

    This bill (along with others) has elements of corruption, theft, nepotism, and disregard for human life. That is a reflection not on the politics of the issue or the configuration of the parties but on the individuals who crafted the bill and manipulated it through.

    I think the constellation of figures in both parties are well-representative of that. We’ll not get a better sort of politician until the federal government is no longer the locus of power and the power-hungry flock elsewhere.

  • ptl

    to fws above….conservatives probably rationalize all their positions on these policies in accordance with a basic premise of what it means (at least to me) to be a conservative….we are not against change, but like it to be slow rather than some sort of radical restructuring of a system. this is probably because with slow change you can work out most of the unforeseenand/or unintended consequences in real time while they are happening and the whole thing goes relatively smoothly. with a radical restructuring of a complicated system that grew up over many generations, it is hard to predict what may happen, and often times it can be serious and damaging. so in health care, am pretty sure no one is against most of the major premises in the bill, but just with the radical, sweeping manner in which it is going to happen, as well as a few other problems. as per social security and medicare, am certain that most conservatives would agree that it is important to honor commitments that these plans have made and are on the books and many people have based their future economic plans on, but the systems could be overhauled and waste removed, and even other systems found to replace them, if they are shown to be better. but of course, all of this would happen in a nice, slow and deliberate manner, with respect for the past and concern for the future and the importance of getting it right and minimizing harm.

    as per the expensive drugs that keep folks healthy, am not an expert of those, but critics of the health plan point out that it is usually privately ran pharmaceutical companies that do the research and development that discover these life saving therapies, and there is concern that they won’t have the ability or incentive to do that as well in the future. am not sure because have not read the bill (guess not many have even in congress), but in a representative democracy am counting on my congress people to do that and report to me their concerns, so am taking them at their word (perhaps not a prudent thing to do? but hey, what else can you do in such a complex society?). so if that is correct, then we may not see as many new advances in those kind of treatments in the future? hope not, but if it was me dependent upon the availability of a certain drug, then would read the bill and make sure they will still be available and still for the great low price of free, and if there is still the opportunity for r&d to find even better drugs for the future. hope and pray that will be true in your case and am sure you know much more about that situation.

    sorry if i don’t express my self as well as others on the blog, but hope this sheds some light on the health bill as seen from one kind of conservative perspective, but not all am sure.

  • ptl

    to fws above….conservatives probably rationalize all their positions on these policies in accordance with a basic premise of what it means (at least to me) to be a conservative….we are not against change, but like it to be slow rather than some sort of radical restructuring of a system. this is probably because with slow change you can work out most of the unforeseenand/or unintended consequences in real time while they are happening and the whole thing goes relatively smoothly. with a radical restructuring of a complicated system that grew up over many generations, it is hard to predict what may happen, and often times it can be serious and damaging. so in health care, am pretty sure no one is against most of the major premises in the bill, but just with the radical, sweeping manner in which it is going to happen, as well as a few other problems. as per social security and medicare, am certain that most conservatives would agree that it is important to honor commitments that these plans have made and are on the books and many people have based their future economic plans on, but the systems could be overhauled and waste removed, and even other systems found to replace them, if they are shown to be better. but of course, all of this would happen in a nice, slow and deliberate manner, with respect for the past and concern for the future and the importance of getting it right and minimizing harm.

    as per the expensive drugs that keep folks healthy, am not an expert of those, but critics of the health plan point out that it is usually privately ran pharmaceutical companies that do the research and development that discover these life saving therapies, and there is concern that they won’t have the ability or incentive to do that as well in the future. am not sure because have not read the bill (guess not many have even in congress), but in a representative democracy am counting on my congress people to do that and report to me their concerns, so am taking them at their word (perhaps not a prudent thing to do? but hey, what else can you do in such a complex society?). so if that is correct, then we may not see as many new advances in those kind of treatments in the future? hope not, but if it was me dependent upon the availability of a certain drug, then would read the bill and make sure they will still be available and still for the great low price of free, and if there is still the opportunity for r&d to find even better drugs for the future. hope and pray that will be true in your case and am sure you know much more about that situation.

    sorry if i don’t express my self as well as others on the blog, but hope this sheds some light on the health bill as seen from one kind of conservative perspective, but not all am sure.

  • ptl

    test as my other comment did not post :(

  • ptl

    test as my other comment did not post :(

  • Bruce Gee

    After a week of viscerally struggling with the implications of the bill, I’ve found myself joyfully saying: “Come quickly, Lord Jesus!”
    So, the upside is incredibly good.

  • Bruce Gee

    After a week of viscerally struggling with the implications of the bill, I’ve found myself joyfully saying: “Come quickly, Lord Jesus!”
    So, the upside is incredibly good.

  • John C

    I think that you state the standard definition of a conservative ptl.
    Most people who post on this blog think they are conservative. I think that on economic issues they are more libertarian than conservative and reactionary on social issues. This phenomenon requires definition and it should be applied to the current Republican party.

  • John C

    I think that you state the standard definition of a conservative ptl.
    Most people who post on this blog think they are conservative. I think that on economic issues they are more libertarian than conservative and reactionary on social issues. This phenomenon requires definition and it should be applied to the current Republican party.

  • Carl Vehse

    Why such a visceral reaction to the health care law?

    Take your pick of the reasons from the Heritage Foundation’s “Top 10 Disasters of Obamacare.”

  • Carl Vehse

    Why such a visceral reaction to the health care law?

    Take your pick of the reasons from the Heritage Foundation’s “Top 10 Disasters of Obamacare.”

  • ptl

    for a simple primer on the thoughts and philosophy of a true conservative, would recommend G.K. Chesterson “Orthodoxy”

    http://www.amazon.com/Orthodoxy-Moody-Classics-G-Chesterton/dp/080245657X/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1270012032&sr=8-8

    Cheers!

  • ptl

    for a simple primer on the thoughts and philosophy of a true conservative, would recommend G.K. Chesterson “Orthodoxy”

    http://www.amazon.com/Orthodoxy-Moody-Classics-G-Chesterton/dp/080245657X/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1270012032&sr=8-8

    Cheers!

  • http://www.newreformationpress.com Patrick Kyle

    John C,

    That’s all well and good…. but who pays the tab? Where does the money come from to provide all these goods and services? Should doctors who spend 8 – 12 years of their life and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to acquire their particular skill, be forced to give it away for free, or mandated to charge rates that will never allow them to recoup their time and money?

    Should we really believe a government that has proven that it cannot reign in catastrophic deficit spending, will now ‘save us money’ by controlling the health care industry?

    Maybe those of us in the middle class with shrinking wages should foot more of the bill? (insert caustic sarcasm here)

  • http://www.newreformationpress.com Patrick Kyle

    John C,

    That’s all well and good…. but who pays the tab? Where does the money come from to provide all these goods and services? Should doctors who spend 8 – 12 years of their life and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to acquire their particular skill, be forced to give it away for free, or mandated to charge rates that will never allow them to recoup their time and money?

    Should we really believe a government that has proven that it cannot reign in catastrophic deficit spending, will now ‘save us money’ by controlling the health care industry?

    Maybe those of us in the middle class with shrinking wages should foot more of the bill? (insert caustic sarcasm here)

  • John C

    I thought Clinton left office with a budget surplus Patrick. Taxes may indeed rise but taxes are the price you pay for civilization.
    The decline in the real wages of the middle class has been going on for decades and it is an entirely separate issue.
    I am not sure what form doctor’s renumeration will take but you don’t hear of too many impoverished doctors in other developed countries — the AMA is a very influential union.
    Perhaps it was the decline in trade unionism and the rise of neoliberalism under Thatcher/Reagan that led to the decline in real wages.

  • John C

    I thought Clinton left office with a budget surplus Patrick. Taxes may indeed rise but taxes are the price you pay for civilization.
    The decline in the real wages of the middle class has been going on for decades and it is an entirely separate issue.
    I am not sure what form doctor’s renumeration will take but you don’t hear of too many impoverished doctors in other developed countries — the AMA is a very influential union.
    Perhaps it was the decline in trade unionism and the rise of neoliberalism under Thatcher/Reagan that led to the decline in real wages.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    Bob Hunter; whether we like it or not, Socialist Insecurity and Mediscare have dug their own graves already. They have over $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities, and we cannot depend upon the Chinese to buy that much debt to fund it. The question is not whether it will end, but rather when, and how gracefully these boondoggles will be ended. More or less, will pensioners take into account the interests of their grandchildren when they vote?

    Which is another reason why I oppose Obama-care. Both Mediscare and Socialist Insecurity are currently running 8x higher than initial estimated costs–with another projected doubling in the next few decades. Why would we expect that another government program would not similarly go over budget? Isn’t there a point where we need to listen to the actuaries and realize that we are in way, way way over our heads, and take appropriate action?

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    Bob Hunter; whether we like it or not, Socialist Insecurity and Mediscare have dug their own graves already. They have over $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities, and we cannot depend upon the Chinese to buy that much debt to fund it. The question is not whether it will end, but rather when, and how gracefully these boondoggles will be ended. More or less, will pensioners take into account the interests of their grandchildren when they vote?

    Which is another reason why I oppose Obama-care. Both Mediscare and Socialist Insecurity are currently running 8x higher than initial estimated costs–with another projected doubling in the next few decades. Why would we expect that another government program would not similarly go over budget? Isn’t there a point where we need to listen to the actuaries and realize that we are in way, way way over our heads, and take appropriate action?

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.com/ John

    @PTL, #46

    Sometimes, “radical” change is necessary. Years of “conservative” economics did not get rid of slavery – it took a war.

    However, the hasty nature and unthinking basis for this bill is very disturbing. It tells me that congress does not care about solving the problems with health care. I am very greived by this bill, because it almost guarantees that a smart, efficient, and social option can never be implemented.

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.com/ John

    @PTL, #46

    Sometimes, “radical” change is necessary. Years of “conservative” economics did not get rid of slavery – it took a war.

    However, the hasty nature and unthinking basis for this bill is very disturbing. It tells me that congress does not care about solving the problems with health care. I am very greived by this bill, because it almost guarantees that a smart, efficient, and social option can never be implemented.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X