Thursday, August 27, 2009

Healthcare Insurance is...Insurance.

Many citizens have forgotten the fact that we are not entitled to everything we want or even need to survive. We’ve come to expect that we deserve a job or a meal like it was our birthright. Hopefully, enough people will be brave enough to compassionately remind the citizenry that our birthright is that to be free. Once we trade the smallest pieces of our freedom for a morsel of security, our newly bound dependence charges us with the implication that we deserve neither freedom nor security.

The current national conversation around the Healthcare reform debate is one near and dear to all of us. It is a complex issue when one focuses on the specifics of the legislation or on the emotion that entangles us when we think about our personal Healthcare struggles. However, if the situation is broken down to its most basic elements, one can begin to grasp the significance of some core principles and get less caught up in the useless back-and-forth that the current conversation seems to always include.


  1. Importance of Authority – Our federal government was designed with limited powers. Our founders enumerated 18 powers given to Congress in Article 1 Section 8. Because they were historians, the founders knew that when unlimited power in the hands of a centralized government always resulted in tyranny. Their goal was to design a functional union of states, which held authority in all matters not defined for the federal government within the US Constitution. Until We the People again assert the founders intentions related to certain Constitutional clauses (i.e. General Welfare, Commerce, Necessary and Proper), we will be at the mercy of those who have inappropriately redefined these clauses to change our society. They have done so because they knew they could not change the law; We the People would not have let them. To the point of Healthcare, authority was never given to the federal government to provide Healthcare to its citizens. Doing so without going through the constitutional amendment process is usurpation of authority and creates null in-void legislation. Until We the People direct our state legislatures to pass nullification bills, we will face the real potential of our federal representatives usurping more power from us and becoming more tyrannical by the day. This continued cycle can only ultimately lead toward some form of Oligarchy or worse.
  2. Healthcare as a Right – Our founders did not craft the Constitution or the Bill of Rights to enumerate every right the people had. Conversely, it did enumerate the powers of the federal government. If it didn’t provide an exhaustive list, then one might ask how we can determine what is a right and what is not. The answer to that question is found when we understand (as the founders did) that rights came from our Creator (i.e. Unalienable Rights). Once we explore their writings and speeches as well as the historical figures that they studied, we begin to develop an understanding and appreciation of what they believed at their core. One such example is that the government could not force an individual to provide for another individuals needs. Providing for another’s needs is an example of Unalienable Duties, however this is outside the realm of government intervention. An individual does not have the right to Healthcare at another individuals expense, period. An individual does have the right to not have a third party interfere with someone providing healthcare to the individual. One might ask how such statements can be made or that we already provide for the welfare of the downtrodden. They would probably be the first to call someone a monster who says that the government has no place doing such things. However, I would wager that those “monsters” on average provide more assistance to the downtrodden and hurting.
  3. Insurance – The basic premise for having insurance is to transfer risk. We’ve come to expect that having insurance means any of our healthcare needs will automatically paid for by our insurance provider. Thinking that through the entire healthcare cycle, that can’t even pass the common sense sniff test. Jack Whelan recently said that Health Insurance "is not pre-payment of service, it is the transfer of risk of the financial impact of a potential event from yourself to a company." I can’t make the point any better than what is stated in the following article that was passed to me by a friend: Article HERE.
We who disagree with the current Healthcare legislation are not opposed to reforming Healthcare in this country; we are opposed to how it’s being forced upon us…and to who’s doing the forcing.

2 comments:

  1. Nice post! Keep up the strong work on behalf of our endangered Nation.

    --Steve Berryman.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Great post Josh, however one point that I think we should be making clear is that Health Care and Health Coverage are two separate things. The opposing sides in this argument keep using Health Care as a catchall for both. I believe that the US has the best Health Care in the world, and if the concepts of care and coverage are kept separate, I don't think anyone can reasonably argue against that point. It is Health Coverage that is being argued and I think that the distinction needs to be made at every opportunity.

    When it comes to Health Coverage, the argument comes down to responsibility. Who is responsible for the individual's coverage?

    As you mentioned, Insurance is a transference of risk. The Insurance industry is providing a service which provides coverage for the expenses of care. Where in the constitution is the guarantee of services?

    ReplyDelete