HURRY! HURRY!

Once again, President Obama is pushing hard for a massive new law to provide an embracing medical care package for Americans. Personally, I'm for a comprehensive national health system that is run by the federal government. As I see it, the federal government should make health and not war. One thing I'd like to see is the construction of rational hospital facilities throughout the country. This should be done on the massive scale that President Eisenhower and his congress used to construct the interstate system.
In my view one of the problems with American medicine is the "for profit" hospital system. If the federal government built, owned and operated/supervised the hospitals of America, they could rent the use thereof to physicians and skilled nurses. The whole pharmaceutical and medical supply system would come under federal supervision with stated maximum earnings above cost for their products. Furthermore, all physicians and patience at these facilities would be offered a limited insurance by the federal government. A law on this issue would instruct all judges to limit any claim to the maximum the federal insurance system allowed. Physicians’ would pay a modest fee for this insurance which would be included within the general fee charged physicians by the federal government to use the facilities to treat their patience.


This would not end "for profit" hospitals, which physicians, insurance companies, patients, pharmaceutical companies and hospital supply companies, etc., could opt for. However, the benefits that accrued to those who used the federal health system hospitals would not obtain for those who opt for the private system. The latter would be mostly Republicans and rich people.


My vision of a proper health system isn't President Obama's vision. I don't think that my system would require “million-jillion” sentences to express its intent. There is a constant danger in any large legislative act passed. Within the massive complex of clauses in these monsters may often be found non-relevant directives that have the effect of injuring the Bill of Rights. Already, in our time, there are many important politicians and thinkers who view the Bill of Rights as "quaint" and not suited to an "inter-connected" world.


Such people, aware that there are still a few defenders of citizen rights as stated in the U.S.A. Constitution's first ten amendments, hide their nefarious hearts' intentions in a sea of words. As Mao Tse-tung observed that the people were the sea, and the communist were the fish, so "moderns" view massive verbiage as the sea, and their revolutionary clauses as the fish. These should be sought out and expunged.


However, the "hurry! hurry!" urgings of President Obama make legislative scrutiny less likely. The Democrats chant: "Just do it!" Does this rush inspire confidence? The fault for slowness rests with those who made it massive. Massive legislature is dangerous to your liberties.


March 20, 2010