Senators Mike Lee and Ted Cruz have posted a petition to defund ObamaCare that has reached 688,491 signatures at the time of this writing.
A list is posted on the “Don’t Fund ObamaCare” website of Senators who have pledged to defund ObamaCare, as well as those who have not or will not make the pledge. Not surprisingly, Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham are among those establishment Republicans who refuse to take the pledge, despite their vocal opposition to ObamaCare. It seems that these senators say one thing, but do another.
Lindsey Graham, for example, said last month in part,
“Obamacare is, has been, and will remain a financial disaster for our nation.”
John McCain said that ObamaCare is
“terribly wrong for America, and so do the majority of Americans.”
Yet, they both refuse to pledge to defund the massive overhaul of healthcare? Why?
The Affordable Care Act requires Americans to purchase Health Insurance. Academics agree that rationing is inevitable and in fact, seem to wholeheartedly support the idea.
Renowned bioethicist Daniel Callahan, who founded the Hastings Center, for example, said in a frightening piece last year:
It is not, however, easy to come up with a good euphemism for rationing, though ‘setting limits’ and ‘resource allocation’ are the common code words. The argument, in short, is not whether rationing will be necessary — that is taken for granted — but how prudently to talk about it in the public square. [Emphasis added]
Code words? Euphemisms?
Another prominent bioethicist Peter Singer, explains how the terms become “progressively sanitized,”
Priority setting was called ‘rationing’ 20 years ago, and ‘resource allocation’ 10 years ago and will be called ‘sustainability’ 10 years from now, as our language about this problem becomes progressively sanitized.
Another prominent bioethicist, Arthur Caplan said:
If health care is recognized as a right, then the details of how to achieve affordable health insurance reform will follow. If it is not, then efforts to move reform forward will simply die under the weight of nitpicking, fear-mongering, sloganeering, and the invocation of details as obstructions to change. [Emphasis added]
Interestingly, President Obama referred to “health insurance” as a “right” during a weekly address this month, flying in the face of the Constitution.
If health insurance is a “right,” why do Americans have to pay for it? If health insurance is a “right,” wouldn’t more pressing needs, like food, clothing and shelter, also be “rights?” And if so, is it the federal government (via the taxpayer) who should be providing that right?
“Health insurance isn’t a privilege—it is your right. And we’re going to keep it that way.” —President Obama: http://t.co/NTsJspNw2c
— The White House (@whitehouse) August 17, 2013
There is absolutely no doubt that ObamaCare is an incremental step toward the ultimate goal of a single-payer system. It is a system that inevitably leads to rationing.
As reported by Avik Roy of Forbes earlier this month,
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid “was asked whether his goal was to move Obamacare to a single-payer system. His answer? ‘Yes, yes. Absolutely, yes.’”
If Americans want to keep health care decisions between patients and their doctors, they should stand up and demand changes to the system as it stands today. Tort reform is absolutely essential, as is allowing insurance companies to compete across state lines.
ObamaCare is not the answer.
ObamaCare, in the form of the establishment of the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), will result in unelected bureaucrats making sweeping decisions about health care, reminiscent of the recent case of Sarah Murnaghan, a 10-year-old girl with Cystic Fibrosis that was given “weeks to live” by her physicians in June, as reported by John Hayward of Human Events.
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius famously told Rep. Lou Barletta during a House hearing in reference to Sarah’s case,
I would suggest, sir, that, again, this is an incredibly agonizing situation where someone lives and someone dies. [Emphasis added]
Would Sebelius have made that comment if it were Obama’s child? She was citing “national rules” at the time and fortunately was overridden by a judge.
Sarah, despite Sebelius’ objections, was allowed to receive the surgery she needed. As ABC News reported yesterday, “for the first time in two-and-a-half years, Sarah no longer needs supplemental oxygen…” She is finally home.
The American Medical Association opposes the IPAB, which was recently referred as “essentially a health-care rationing body” by none other than former Democrat National Committee Chair Howard Dean in a piece for the Wall Street Journal last month.
In the time it took for the author to write this piece, the petition to defund ObamaCare has now reached 723,008 signatures.
Follow Renee Nal on Twitter @ReneeNal and Facebook.
Check out her news and political commentary on Liberty Unyielding, Gather and TavernKeepers.com for news you won’t find in the mainstream media. Renee is also a guest blogger for the Shire Blog.