By Rosemary Peters
Before you read the following letter I wrote to my Senator over the summer, I would like to make it very clear that though I do not agree with the particular health care bill being proposed by Congress, I strongly believe there should be health care reform.
Medical and insurance costs certainly need to be brought down. However, I believe there is a better way to do that than creating a public option.
I spent numerous days pouring over the health care bill that was released to the public in midsummer.
The letter below lists philosophical and practical reasons for why I do not agree with this bill.
Senator Reid, I was made, born and raised in Nevada. I have lived here all 19 years of my life and am Battle Born through and through. I love this state, and I love this country; however, I do not love the health care plan. I have many reasons for my opposition to the bill.
First, I do not want the government telling me what to eat, what doctor to go to, and how long I am allowed to live. I do not think the government should be able to make the decision on who should live, who should die, and the manner in which they should do each.
The Declaration of Independence guarantees us the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This health care bill radically diminishes all three.
Second, the projection of the cost of this health care plan is astronomical. And that is just the projection. I find it hard to believe the government's projection of costs in this arena when it just miscalculated the nation's deficit by 2 trillion dollars. I think this point was best made by the quote, "If you think health care is expensive now, wait until it is free." Let's not re-invent the wheel. Let's fix the system that is already in place, especially when this option is entirely possible.
While we are talking about the current system, let's take a look at the number of people uninsured under it. It must be pointed out that a large percent of that number is made up by citizens who choose to be uninsured. Another large percent of that number is made up of illegal immigrants. Instead of forcing health care upon everyone, let's find a way to bridge this gap with less drastic measures.
Third, when reading the health care bill, I found several passages that make me fear that it is a socialist document. The government should not have the ability to dictate things such as how many years a person needs to wait in between giving birth to children. This type of mentality is in the same vein as Logan's Run and 1984 and should not be tolerated or enforced by the government.
Fourth, I am pro-life, as is the majority of this country. It is improper to force me to pay for abortions when I find them fundamentally and morally wrong.
Fifth, I find it unfair that in order to pay for the price tag on this plan a 5.4 percent tax increase will be forced upon American citizens. This redistribution of wealth is Marxist thinking at its greatest. Although I believe that the extremely wealthy should pay taxes at a higher rate than those having trouble making ends meet because they have more to give, I believe this increase in taxes will only hurt our nation as a whole especially since it is these people who are largely responsible for job creation.
Sixth, I have read the Constitution and nowhere in the enumerated powers does it say that the federal government has the constitutionality to even create a health care bill. Furthermore, the Constitution actually does state that any power not listed is directly given to the states. I just have to say dual-layered cake is much better than marble cake and I think allowing states to make their own decisions on health care based on their needs is a better solution than a "one size fits all" medical system.
Seventh, I believe the bill is trying to attach a formulaic way of making decisions when coming to making medical decisions. Medicine is largely trial and error, not algebra.
There is no magical book in which a doctor can look up age, height and weight in order to determine why a person continues to get pneumonia.
This brings me to another point: this bill addresses many illnesses and conditions such as pneumonia and heart problems in an archaic way.
The idea of charging someone a re-admittance fee to a hospital after heart surgery is unjustifiable.
Eighth, it has been proven time and again that where you have government intervention you have a displacement of services, bureaucracy, inefficiency, waste and fraud, and the larger the presence of the government, the larger the impotence that follows.
Finally, if this bill is so great, then why have my congressional representatives voted themselves an exemption from this health care plan?
Rosemary Peters is the Design Editor for The beacon
