The Problem With Government Healthcare

The American Healthcare Reform Act, or “Trumpcare,” as it is coming to be known, is a roughly 95-page piece of legislation (this is strictly the current text) which claims to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). In the essence of time, I have not had the opportunity to read the bill in its entirety. However, there is one aspect that I find particularly interesting.

Besides repealing and replacing the Affordable Care Act, “Trumpcare” also promises to defund Planned Parenthood — the infamous infanticidal organization — for a whole whopping year. Then government money slides once again into their back pocket, and they’re free to continue their murder of the unborn.
Many are lauding this as the end of Planned Parenthood or abortion in general, but they fail to realize (or maybe they blind themselves) that it’s only for a year. It is doubtful that more than a meager handful of Planned Parenthood facilities would go under during that time, especially with millionaire celebrities like Emma Watson who are constantly throwing money in the organization’s direction.
The same people who are so excited about the one-year governmental defunding of Planned Parenthood also seem to be under the impression that a Planned Parenthood facility is the only place the women can get an abortion. BREAKING — it’s not. Government-funded hospitals perform abortions on a daily basis. They just do it legally and require a parental consent for minors in states that also require it.

Another crowd, this one leaning towards the left, screams that healthcare is a right and therefore should be provided by the government. Republicans, in a sorry attempt to keep them happy, have created, as we have seen, its own ghastly rendition of federally-controlled healthcare, which only promises to dig this nation a deeper hole (and the left still isn’t happy).

Then there is the group that is rarely heard from. This group is made up of people who can’t afford healthcare, but are now required to get healthcare, at the risk of paying a large fine. So, they look into signing up for Obamacare, only to find out that they are not qualified. Therefore, they are by default required to pay an annual penalty for A. Not being able to pay for healthcare, and B. Not fitting into the government mold. Is this how we are supposed to help the lower class in our country?

Government healthcare has been a complete and utter failure thus far, but that should not necessarily be our primary concern. The underlying issue here is this: does the federal government have the power to control an individual’s healthcare? Anyone with a basic knowledge of the Constitution would say “no.” The Constitution lays out the federal government’s powers very clearly, and nowhere in the Constitution does it say “Congress shall henceforth mandate healthcare for every citizen.”

There’s a saying in politics, and it’s really quite true. “What the government pays for, the government controls.” It might be said that this should be clear to anyone, with which I would agree. However, there are those who would disagree, and for these individuals, I would like to provide a bit of perspective.
If the federal government pays for your healthcare, it controls your healthcare. If the government controls your healthcare, they presumably control your health. If they control your health, they control your life.

Advertisements

Hate Crimes: America’s Thought Crimes

Earlier this week, America was horrified by the story of a young mentally handicapped man being kidnapped, held for 48 hours, and tortured on Facebook Live. During this time, he was forced to drink from a toilet, was burned by cigarettes, and partially scalped. Undoubtedly, this was a horrible act.

The four criminals, two young black women and two young black men, are in custody, and have been charged with hate crimes, among other things. The video obviously shows that this kidnapping and torture was racially and politically charged- at one point, they went so far as to make the young man disavow white people and Donald Trump. Obviously, under the statutes that establish hate crimes, they can at least be charged with that.

However, this got me to thinking. What is a hate crime? Well, under the law, a hate crime is a crime motivated by the hate of the person, for some reason, whether that be race, gender, mental disabilities, or other reasons. But isn’t that punishing someone for thought? Something protected by the Constitution? Yes, it is.

Now, please don’t misunderstand. As a man who has known many mentally handicapped people through his life, I understand better than most the vile, vicious nature of this attack.

However, that doesn’t change the fact that hate crimes, for all intents and purposes, are punishing people for thoughts. The law can only punish people for actions. And, those in favor of Constitutional principles should remember this.

As it stands now, all four kidnappers stand ready to receive 30 years in prison, without the hate crime conviction, which would only be 3 more years. 3.

Right now, the terms for hate crimes is so small, they’re practically nonexistent anyways.

Constitutionally, they shouldn’t exist, and I personally don’t care for them. They don’t even complete the purpose for which they were made (Punishing the thought crime) in my opinion. I can’t really see a reason to keep them.