Throughout my life I have been touched by the stories of people who have exercised their individual liberties to become more than they were and to live life as they choose is best. These stories are being written on all scales in all places by the millions. They are trying to be written in Iran even as I write this post. People there are craving for the right to choose for themselves, and not by their government, how to live their lives. The world will also never forget the image of Boris Yeltsin standing on a tank, staring down a military coup at the beginning of a Russian movement for personal and economic freedom. Atop that tank he stated, “The people of Russia are becoming masters of their own fate.” The coup was defeated and the democratically elected Yeltsin returned to office.

The end of the Soviet Union, together with China’s movement towards free-market capitalism, proved to the world that the planned economy of controlling supply and demand had failed. Free market economies are engendered in Liberty.

In any economics class, you learn the law of supply and demand. All other things unchanged (technology, shipping, efficiency, productivity, etc.), as the supply goes up and demand remains constant, prices go down. As the demand goes up, and supply remains unchanged, prices go up. As prices go up and the opportunity for a return is seen, individuals jump into the market and offer new innovations or comparable services, thus bringing the price back down and giving those individuals part of the wealth they created. Naturally, the best way to bring down prices is to increase the supply or decrease the demand.

Businesses come and businesses go according to their ability to meet the demands of the consumers in the marketplace. If the business can supply a service that enough people find value in and are willing to pay an amount that is sufficient for the business owners and operators to continue to work for, it will succeed. If not, it will fail and some other business will generally take its place.

Because the Government can no longer afford to be in the health care market, it is seeking to adjust these laws to their own circumstances. Rather than accept the natural laws of economics, government wishes to change the rules.

If government can become the primary insurer of health care for Americans, it can limit the demand by helping Americans avoid, what it deems to be, unnecessary services. By limiting the number of people who get CAT scans for example, the supply appears to go up because “demand” goes down and thus prices go down. Additionally, we may even see government built and ran hospitals as it attempts to increase the supply of services. By increasing the supply of hospitals and doctors, it would cause prices to go down, all other things unchanged.

“If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor. If you like your plan you can keep your plan.” That is what the President keeps repeating, over and over again. However, let us think through this. If you can get the same, or similar plan, for less money (because it is subsidized by the US taxpayer), and still keep your doctor, why wouldn't you go that route? The truth of the matter is, the government's plan will eventually put your plan out of business.

Because of the taxes that will be laid on what the government is calling “Cadillac plans,” mandates to have health insurance, and the heavy subsidies that will be involved in the “public option,” there will eventually be no viable alternative to government ran health care and private insurers will not be able to compete. It is a simple law of economics; the ignoring of which would set aside ages of experience. Even the health care exchange, although an excellent idea in concept, will bring more and more people and businesses onto the “Public Option.” Thus the government will eventually have a vast monopoly on services and will be able to dictate the price it will pay for them. This will appear to bring down costs. It will - but it won’t be natural – it will be by force, and the industry, and therefore our citizens, will be hurt.

What the government doesn’t take into consideration is the human condition. Within each individual there exists varying degrees of desire for freedom and liberty. Some would rather be told to do what needs to be done, some would rather tell others, while still others would rather just tell themselves, and others would do nothing at all. Those individuals who capture the moment and make things happen are the ones that bring about the greatest innovations, changes and events in families, communities and nations. Those individuals who catch their vision and support them by following their lead make those events or innovations occur. And together, we all have brought the world ahead.

The government monopoly over health care reimbursements, payments and costs will ultimately lead to a decline in the innovations and quality of care that has distinguished American health care worldwide. How will it do so? By reducing, or altogether limiting in some areas, the individual liberty of the citizens who make up the health care industry. When the laws of supply and demand are controlled by government, they can control the prices and therefore how much they may pay for the services, but it also will take the opportunities that the human condition needs, opportunities for gain, risk and reward, out of the equation. The reduction, or elimination of these opportunities, will lead to fewer innovations, poorer quality of care, and fewer of our best and brightest going into the Health Care Industry as has been witnessed in other countries with a government monopoly on health care. I can attest to this from my own experience.

By reducing the liberty available, we will be reducing mankind. If we were created to act, and not to be acted upon, the more we are forced to be acted upon rather than to act for ourselves reduces the very fundamental purpose of our existence.

Interrupting this natural balance and flow of human forces is destructive to both the individual Human and the supply/demand balance for the good or service rendered. This destructive force is called oppression or tyranny.

I remind you of what Adam Smith wrote in his 1775 Lectures on Jurisprudence:

“Little else is requisite to carry a state to the highest degree of opulence from the lowest barbarism, but peace, easy taxes and a tolerable administration of justice; all the rest being brought by the natural course of things. All governments which thwart this natural course, which force things into another channel or which endeavor to arrest the progress of society at a particular point, are unnatural, and to support themselves are obliged to be oppressive and tyrannical.”

There is an option besides the status quo and the President's plan. Essentially, that option is the one that will break up insurance monopolies, cut back the government’s involvement as an insurer, elevate the government to a role of supervision and regulation where they can setup the right structure for free market forces to work, find a way that the uninsured can pay rates comparable to that of the insured, and create a model for affordable, private insurance not obtained through an employer.

That is the best chance for America.

As our founders stated in the Declaration of Independence, “all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.” However, let’s not volunteer for more eventual suffering, oppression and tyranny at the hands of government – no matter how subtle it may appear at first. Let the government govern, protect and regulate and let the People remain the masters of their own fate.

We hear stories from the President of the daily letters from people who cry to him to reform health care. I have no doubts regarding those people's sincerity nor do I dispute the need for reform. I hope there is reform – true reform. I personally believe that there is a place for Government in health care. That place however happens to be in governing and not in running an industry.

One of the problems with the government running health care is the inevitable rationing of care that will take place. This is more than a notion or a scare tactic. It is something that is happening even now with Medicare and Medicaid. One such example recently came too close to home for me.

Within the past week I received some sad news regarding a friend of mine. She was blind and lived in the inner city. I used to wash her windows (why she wanted clean windows was beyond me) and we were a part of the same congregation together. She had her struggles but was one of the kindest, and most soft spoken people I have ever known. She really was a sweet heart. Tragically, a few weeks ago she fell and severely injured herself. I do not know all of the details of her fall. However, I know that her injury was very bad. Nevertheless, because she was on Medicaid the hospital wouldn't take her because it didn't cover the hospital stay for that kind of injury. Because she didn't receive the care she needed, she passed away a little more than a week ago. Her passing is the sad and real fruit of rationing care. She will be missed as she was loved by all those who knew her.

The rationing of care is not something that can be trusted in the hands of politicians, appointed committees, or Capital Hill lobbyists. Surely we can see that this power is best left in the hands of the people and regulated, not administered, by our Government. Government is to govern - not to own and operate businesses.

To learn more about the rationing of care by one who knows, please see the included video.

Crises are times for action. Things happen in times of crisis that never could or would have happened otherwise: Presidents invoke Executive privilege; congress cooperates to move legislation through and the people unite around their leaders in a moment of rare support rather than dissent. Such was the case during our Revolution, the Great Depression and immediately following 9/11. The people realized the true gravity of the situation and looked to leaders to help navigate the Country through those perilous times.

Because of the hope for leadership during those events, the people are generally supportive of the policies proposed at the time. In short, it is a time when, politically speaking, things get done and bills get signed into law. It is also an opportunity for ill meaning or self serving politicians to put bills through that appear to address the crisis but are intended to boost their political careers and win votes. We also sadly learn that Executive powers invoked in times of crisis are never forfeited – even when the crisis has subsided. Temporary government programs are the closest thing to immortality.

Rahm Emanuel, White House chief of staff, recently said, “Never let a serious crisis go to waste. It’s an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.” Also, recently secretary of state Hillary Clinton stated, “Never waste a good crisis.”

We can see that the White House has, as have other administrations before them, no intention of letting the current crisis pass them by without taking full advantage of the opportunity to push things through that the American People in every other circumstance would not have allowed.

Crises are either real, exaggerated or created. One does not have to think long before they realize this is a true statement. To name just one, think of the War on Terror during the Bush Administration. Certainly there was and is a real threat and crisis from Al Qaida terrorists attacking US interests at home and abroad. However, the crisis that was Al Qaida quickly enveloped Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. It also morphed into terrorists at home leading to a loss of individual liberties through warrantless wiretaps and other surveillance activities on American citizens. The crisis involving Al Qaida is real. The crisis involving Iraq was created at worst, exaggerated at best. And at one time, a majority of Americans fell for it.

Such is the case with health care reform. We are not in a crisis and should not be tricked to think we are in one. The only crisis involving health care is the $68 trillion un-funded Medicare liability on the government’s books. This is a crisis of government – not health care.

However, the crisis that is being portrayed from Capital hill is not that one. It is a crisis that the health care system is broken – not one that says the government’s insurance agency, or Medicare, is broken. It is the painting of a picture that small businesses will be hurt by the insurance companies – not that every American will be hurt by the additional $1 trillion in annual taxes they will have to pay for this new system. They are painting the picture that millions aren’t getting the care they need under our current system – not that 10 years from now, if the status quo is unchanged, anyone on Medicare won’t receive the care they need. Finally, the President is also framing health care reform as the key to our economic recovery. Excuse me? Health care was not the cause of, nor is it the solution out from, our current economic woes.

They are trying to scare the public into a support role by creating a health care crisis. They have done this with other crises a hundred times before. Other notable ones would be the war on drugs, the war on terror, the war on poverty, the war on energy, and the war on global warming.

It is good for us to take a quick look and refresh our minds about one of the basic pillars of the Government's argument that a crisis in health care exists: the 47 Million uninsured Americans.
Julie Seymour of the Business & Media Institute published an excellent article on the census data the 47 million number comes from.

For centuries governments were, and many still are today, essentially private businesses for the “Royal” families. The United States of America was the first country in modern times to be founded on the principle that the People, and not a person or group of persons, was the Sovereign. Government was to be the servant of the people and not the master. It was to secure their rights and claim none for itself. However, those times and those ideals are largely in the past.

Sadly, one must ask after all of the government involvement in energy, agriculture, price fixing, retirement programs, grants, nation building, foreign wars & entanglements, mandates and entitlement programs, is the Federal Government now a business or a government? It cannot be both, but sadly it is trying to be. For a free people, it is unnatural and wrong for the government to be a business just as it is for a business to be a government. The government’s place in business is generally in regulation or in supplying a good or service that is owned, by Natural Right, by the public. Such services would include national defense, public water, and law enforcement.

Sadly, the government has done much, much more in the health care industry than regulate or supply the basic services the public has empowered the government to provide. In the health care industry, it has become an insurer by representing low income and elderly Americans as the payer of their medical goods and services, determining which services should and shouldn’t be covered, and a dictator of prices to the private sector by informing them how much they will receive for their life maintaining and saving goods and services. While it has thus been playing the role of Business, it has neglected its role as Government by failing to break monopolies in the insurance industry and setup the proper and just guidelines requisite for a free market health care system.

Additionally, the government assumes the role of master, rather than servant, when it plays in business. How? First, It dictates to Americans what they have to do to remain on health care. In a previous life, we lived in the inner city where many people were on government aid. One such family was very close to us. The mother was single and could barely walk due to her weight as well as a degenerative disease in her feet. She was in need of surgery to correct the problem and was on Medicaid. Thankfully, she had surgery on one foot and was in the 6 month recovery time before she could receive the surgery on her other foot when she received a letter from the Government stating that her son made too much money for her to remain on Medicaid. She either had to go off of Medicaid or her son would have to quit his job or move out. He chose to leave home and we took him in. He left not because that was his intention had he been left alone, he left because of the role of master the government had assumed. Also, this is not an isolated incident but is one that is repeated every day across this great land. Granted, if they supply health care for all, this becomes a moot point. However, the principle remains unchanged in the authority delegated to Government.

It becomes master by dictating what services a person needs and what services they don't need – even if their doctor recommends them. It becomes Master by forcing citizens to pay for the government's coverage. It becomes master by dictating what it will pay to American businesses in reimbursement. It becomes Master by being able to become involved in the health of every American. Whether it chooses to exert this role or not will largely depend on the people at the head of government and this agency. Nevertheless, these are not the roles upon which good government is based.

Furthermore, the government’s unnatural role in health care has certainly been part of the problem that has brought us to our current situation. Its low reimbursement levels to doctors and hospitals have actually pushed prices up for private insurers and even higher for the uninsured individual – forcing them to cover the costs the government refuses to pay. It has also caused small clinics and doctors to suffer (1). The government has also failed miserably in its role as government by failing to break the Insurance Industry’s monopoly on health care by not repealing the Federal anti-trust exemption and creating the proper framework for a free-market system in health care (2). These failures have contributed to an unprecedented increase in health care costs which has made it impossible for lower wage Americans to purchase affordable health insurance. Because of this, the government has actually contributed to the elimination of the market for low-income insurance plans.

Who is to blame for this? In part, the government. Last year, Congress received a 9% satisfaction rating – its lowest in history. Also, 1/3rd of Americans thought that Congressmen were corrupt (3). Amazingly, Americans are still looking to the government to fix the problem with health care. They should think again – unless their fix is government getting out.

Adam Smith wrote in his 1775 Lectures on Jurisprudence:

“Little else is requisite to carry a state to the highest degree of opulence from the lowest barbarism, but peace, easy taxes and a tolerable administration of justice; all the rest being brought by the natural course of things. All governments which thwart this natural course, which force things into another channel or which endeavor to arrest the progress of society at a particular point, are unnatural, and to support themselves are obliged to be oppressive and tyrannical.”

The government’s increased involvement as a business in health care has, as we are now seeing in the problems we are facing, disrupted the natural course and balance with the market place and will disrupt, directly or indirectly, all three pillars necessary for a successful society. And, according to one of the world's greatest economic philosophers, this will lead to more oppressive and possibly tyrannical government as it is forced to find methods for payment to cover its ever increasing budget shortfalls caused by its very involvement in the business side of health care (4).

Unless we wish for the natural balance of market forces to continue to be thwarted by the Government’s involvement in the business of health care - which would bring on additional hardships for American citizens through increased taxes, poorer service, and more government intervention in their lives - we need to seek to limit, or end, the Government’s involvement almost entirely in the business side of health care – not expand it.

Although the government’s role in health care has served the needs of many Americans, its role has created an imbalance in the market place that cannot be corrected except by creating a free-market system. Further nationalization will not correct the problem. As it has been shown over and over again, it will further it (5). The time has necessarily come when it becomes critically important to limit, or end, the government’s business involvement in health care or we risk an unprecedented financial disaster and a limitation on our individual Rights. It is time to elevate the government back to its role as regulator before it takes on further roles as Master.

I pledged allegiance to the Republic – not a business – and I want my Republic back.

_______________________________________

We live in a land of peace, plenty and opportunity. Surely Americans can find a way to better use those resources to take care of those in need. How we do this is the debate we need to have. Sadly, the debate that is taking place is making us think that is what we are doing when, in reality, we are not. The debate in Washington is not about a better way for health care. It is about government setting up a public option or a single-payer option.

If the debate can become how to use the plenty and opportunity of our great Country to better care for the health of one another, then I would argue that the direction we need to go is one of breaking up insurance monopolies, cutting back the government’s involvement as an insurer, elevating the government to a role of supervision and regulation where they can setup the right structure for free market forces to work, finding a way that the uninsured can pay rates comparable to that of the insured, and creating a model for affordable, private insurance not obtained through an employer.

Because the question before us is a public or single payer government option, my posts will focus on convincing any reader that any increased government intervention on the business side of health care, rather than on regulation, is folly. I have shared what the economic cost of increased government involvement in health care will be, one of the likely outcomes of government run health care and laid out an argument that health care is not a Right that governments have the Natural power to secure and that when they attempt to, they trample on the true Rights governments were intended to secure.

Over the next several weeks I will lay out additional arguments that address Health Care Reform. Each argument can be taken in isolation but, in the end, these arguments form the case that should be considered collectively.

However, in the end, if Americans can succeed in defeating the proposals for more government involvement in the insurance side of Health Care, we still will have the real work to perform. This work is reforming the American Health Care system to see that the free market can at last prevail and that you and I as part of that free market and as brothers and sisters of the human family can be our brother’s keeper.

Not too long ago, Anji and I, along with our children, stood in Independence Hall at 5th and Chestnut. That that was one of the most hallowed houses I have ever been in for that was the place where, “our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.”

For both Anji and I, they are more than just our Founding fathers, two of them are our grandfathers. I am descended from Benjamin Harrison of the Virginia delegation and Anji is descended from Samuel Adams of the Massachusetts delegation.

There, in those small halls, I felt a sense of great humility for those great founders who sat in those chairs – founders such as our grandfathers and George Washington, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson who ascribed their names and pledged their sacred honor to that inspired document that begins:

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

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. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. “

It was also in that room, that again our great founders ascribed their names to that inspired document that begins, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

For these freedoms countless numbers have lived, served and died. Next to life itself, the ability to choose how to live that life is the greatest of all of God’s gifts. I love our country and proclaim, along with the Prophet leader Moroni of old, that the spirit of God is the Spirit of Freedom. It is therefore a part of our religion to preserve and promote that freedom.

In the words of Abraham Lincoln, “It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

And for you and I, let this day refresh our recollections of these rights, and stir within us, an undiminished devotion to them.