A response to Mr. Joe Moris, and his opinion story “Passing of health care is brilliant,” published 6 July.
I’ll start with “egalitarian,” as in his statement “The current liberal thinking is to squeeze out the middle class in order to create an egalitarian society. They can’t say it that way but that is what their objective is.”
Response: Definition: New Oxford American Dictionary: 1. Egalitarian: of, relating to, or believing in the principle that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities.
From our Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
I support the “liberals” objective in this case. Indeed, why doesn’t Mr. Moris support this principle found in our Declaration of Independence? Possible answer: From George Orwell’s “Animal Farm.” “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others” Sadly, however, I do recognize that right now in our society some animals are indeed more equal than others. Money talks. Wealth equals opportunity. Both need to be eliminated from the political arena. They don’t belong there in a democracy. Nor does a multi-millionaire belong in the White House.
Liberal in what, Mr. Moris? Do you really believe that all liberals are lock-step in everything? Every issue is responded to by liberals in exactly the same way? If so I must tell you that you are wrong, People who are liberal (apparently anyone to the left of you politically — and that would be well over half of us) do have differences of opinion on a range of topics. I find myself aligned with conservative thinking on some issues, with liberal thinking on others. So exactly which “liberals” that are trying to “squeeze out the middle class?” The Democrats who wants to help the poor and middle class with tax relief and affordable health care or the Republicans who want to extend tax relief to the upper one percent of Americans and who want to kill the Affordable Care Act? And replace it with — what?
Third: About that Affordable Care Act. Thirty-two of thirty-three developed nations had universal health care before we finally passed the ACA and made it thirty-three. Of those earlier thirty-two nations eight had mandated coverage, sixteen had single payer systems and the remaining nine had two-tier coverage. Germany, Greece, Belgium, South Korea, Switzerland. Luxembourg and possibly Austria (depending on which web site you visit) are all forms of republics or monarchies. They aren’t communist countries because they have mandated coverage, nor are they being broken by the high cost of care. The percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) spent on health care in those countries is very low compared to that of the United States. Further, in 2010 about 49 million Americans didn’t have medical care coverage, with about 70 percent of them unable to afford it – being below the federal poverty level.
And then there’s this: The Massachusetts health care insurance reform law, informally referred to as Romneycare, enacted in 2006, mandates that nearly every resident of Massachusetts obtain a state-government-regulated minimum level of healthcare insurance coverage and provides free health care insurance for residents earning less than 150 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL). Government mandated health insurance is okay at the state level but not at the federal level. Right? Why? By what reasoning is medical care for Americans in Massachusetts significantly different than those in the other forty-nine states?
On one thing we agree. As stated in Mr. Moris’ story: “Healthcare through the acts and dicta of the Court has given the States the ability to restructure the way they mandate private insurance in their States.” I wonder how many states will indeed provide health care for residents below the poverty level, and how many will find ways to make medical care more affordable for the middle class?
Finally, Mr. Moris: Asparagus is delicious, and at least one expert thinks it good for preventing cancer.
Filed Under: Community Commentary