I attended a webinar yesterday called "Health Reform 2009: Watershed or Waterloo?" It was put on by my broker and after sitting through it, my heart was broken. As a result, I was moved to a state of heightened concern and anxiety for the welfare of my nation. I will share why.

There are a few laws that simply cannot be argued with.

1. You need money to buy things
2. Money has to come from somewhere
3. There isn't an infinite amount of valuable money (See footnote 10)

Knowing how our Congress & President are in a hurry to pass major health care reform because of this new "Crisis," it seems that "reform" is inevitable. For some time now they have been selling the country this line:

1. Millions of poor & uninsured
2. Increasing costs
3. The government will give us the same health care that the President has

They use these three things as a premise to give them authority to step in and reform our system (See footnote 1). The word "reform" itself implies that the system has been in some criminal state and needs to be brought in line with higher norms and standards. I will admit that there are certainly some problems with health care - every American can. But, there are many pricing problems in America (I think the iPhone is too expensive for example. Everything Apple is too expensive for that matter) and we do not want or hope that the government will get involved. It isn't their role - they have no authority, implied or explicit, for price controls.

Here are the facts:

1. Millions of Poor & Uninsured

Of the 46 million uninsured Americans (15%) total (2007 numbers),
• 12 million eligible but not enrolled in Medicaid or SCHIP.
• 8.5 million have household incomes over $50,000.
• 9 million have household incomes over $75,000.
• 9.7 million non-citizens (including 6 million undocumented aliens).
• 8 million college-aged young adults (4.7 million are students).

(See footnote 2)

I believe in freedom and in its boundaries. When another person's freedom infringes on the freedom and rights of others, they have exercised their freedom in an unjust fashion. Such an exercise becomes a crime.

Regarding the boundaries of free exercise, I would like you to consider part of the original draft of the Bill of Rights for Pennsylvania's first Constitution. In that first draft it read:

"An enormous proportion of property vested in a few individuals is dangerous to the rights, and destructive of the common happiness, of mankind; and therefore every free state hath a right by its laws to discourage the possession of such property."

Is that true? Does the holding of an enormous proportion of property vested in a few individuals create a danger and destroy the common happiness of mankind? This isn't a question you should answer with your knee jerk as you may be inclined to do.

As I look in my minds eye at the vast expanse of humanity around the world, and knowing that the majority of wealth is owned by a minority of the earth's population, and knowing that wars are generally waged over wealth (i.e., gold, land, resources) and to get more of it either because the poor don't have it or the rich want more of it, and whereas wars cause so much misery to the people involved, and knowing that the lack of opportunities afforded to so many around the world is a factor in crime, social ills, disease and death, I can see the danger and destruction that the incredibly disproportionate distribution of wealth can create.

Does therefore the endless accumulation of wealth infringe on the rights of others? It may. It may cause people to be pressed into war who have no true interest in it. It may push others into poverty. It may keep people from basic services. It may cause so many of the ills we see and hear around us and in our world.

The endless accumulation of wealth was never meant to be the American Dream as so many think it is. The American Dream was about Freedom, Liberty, Justice, & the protection of Natural Rights. Let us never forget what our country was and should be really about - Liberty & Justice for all. We as a Nation have never been perfect at that but we have gotten better as we have looked to our foundation - the principles the founders aspired to. That foundation has continued to transform the way we have built & changed our society since 1776.

May Liberty and Justice for all continue to form how we look at the true American Dream versus the fraud so that our American home, and therefore our world home, can be one of freedom, justice and protection of natural rights for all mankind. And may each one of us consider again the question "Does the holding of an enormous proportion of property vested in a few individuals create a danger and destroy the common happiness of mankind?" and then live and act accordingly.

Thus penned Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence and unanimously signed by the Continental Congress in 1776. These are the words that have transformed history, nations, kingdoms and our whole world. Prior to this, there was not a governor on the earth who believed, together with his people, that he received his power from the governed. Power to governwas a right – divinely bestowed and often ruthlessly used on the ruling family’s subjects.

Jefferson and the other members of Congress recognized that government was to be the servant of the people and not the other way around. They recognized therefore that the government could only possess those powers that the people were willing and able to bestow upon it.

The powers the people willfully bestowed were the powers to make laws for a just society, enforce those laws for peace and tranquility and defend the people from insurrections within and wars from without. These were powers the people themselves possessed. They possessed the ability to defend themselves, their families and their property and together with others to establish laws with consequences whereby there might be civil and peaceful living, interactions and transactions. These truths were held to be self evident.

The signers recognized that it was not possible for the people to give to the government powers that they themselves did not possess as individuals. A group of individuals cannot possess any more rights to act than an individual within that group could by themselves. Not all of the things government does presently could an individual do by themselves in the absence of government. For example, do I have the right, self evident or otherwise, to force my neighbor to go to church on my day of worship? The answer is as obvious to us today as it was to the pilgrims who landed on Plymouth Rock – the right to worship God or not toworship God was their choice and privilege but it was not something that could in any way be compelled upon another even if the whole society would benefit from good, moral teachings that all religions provide.

Do I have the right take from my neighbor any money? The answer if obvious there as well. I have the right to ask and they have the right to give but no one possesses the right, even in dire situations, to rob their neighbor and not be punished by the law.

We hold these truths to be self evident… and a violation of these truths is a violation of natural law and our natural rights as part of the human family.

Even well intentioned practices by, at best, a well intentioned government infringing upon the rights of its citizens is unjust and immoral and completely contra the principles of these United States. The well wish of universal healthcare provided by the government is benevolent in thought but unlawful and immoral in deed as are the practices of government welfare in almost all shapes and forms when it is done by compulsion. I don’t have the power to take anything from you to help pay for my neighbors healthcare. I don’t – and there is no way around it. There is no philosophy, no dogma, no doctrine that justifies robbing from those who have to give to those that have not – for whatever the reason. I have the right to ask you, but if I demand it and take it regardless of your will, I am breaking the law – not just U.S. Code, but natural and self evident law.

It is so obvious it is almost unbelievable.

Rather than push for more unlawful, well intentioned welfare, we should strive to have government relinquish these self proclaimed powers and have individuals love their neighbor and out of the benevolence of their own hearts, give to those in need, succor the weary, clothe the naked and feed the hungry. The government can only derive its powers from those it governs and “We the People” don’t possess the power to take away by force from anyone – but especially the good, law-abiding citizens of our nation just the same as “I a Person” don’t. Caring for those in need is one of the greatest works we could ever engage in. It doesn’t come from a government office – it comes from family caring for family, frined caring for friend, churches caring for their members and neighbors caring for one another.

It comes down to agency - the proper use of our liberty - and the usurption of this power by the government (although well intentioned) limits our ability to do what only we can do and fails to truly meet the needs of those who so badly need us.