Quantcast
Home / Opinion / Letters to the Editor / ‘Obamacare’ means more big government

‘Obamacare’ means more big government

President Obama has achieved the impossible. On Sept. 9, Obama went before the American people and achieved something even I thought was impossible. Obamacare 2.0 has more big government than Version 1.0.

The voters of southern Arizona should be cautious. Let’s analyze a few aspects of the repackaged Obamacare.

1. The president will require individuals to purchase health insurance. I ask the president how he intends to help individuals and small businesses by fining those who can’t afford health insurance.

2. We will make a not-for-profit public option in the insurance exchange. This is the very same big government scheme that we saw in the initial bill. You could put lipstick on a pig…but it’s still a pig.

3. The new plan will force insurance companies to keep prices low.
Price controls are a relic of Richard Nixon’s administration. Anyone with a basic knowledge of economics knows that price controls create shortages, rationing and in the end, increased costs.

4. “You know what will happen if we do nothing – more will die. On this point, the president should be ashamed of himself. Scaring Americans by insinuating that we will die if we don’t support his big government scheme is nothing more than fear mongering. What we need are common-sense solutions to reducing health care costs and expand coverage.

Here is the plan I have proposed at my town halls across southern Arizona.

1. Tort reform to lower the cost of care.

2. Allow citizens to buy insurance across state lines.

3. Give individuals the same tax deduction as businesses for purchasing insurance.

4. Allow groups to pool together to purchase insurance.

5. Expand the use of tax-free, health savings accounts We can do better than Obamacare 2.0. The president’s plan to increase government control over our lives reduces freedom and expands the deficit. It’s the wrong path to take. I support sensible solutions that will achieve lower costs without reducing liberty or American economic stability.

- Jesse Kelly is a Republican who is a candidate for Arizona’s 8th Congressional District seat.

One comment

  1. I just spent 3,000 dollars and lost one week’s pay and still have no answers to why I am ill. I work for a small business and all they can offer is a Health Savings Plan. I need better coverage. I need better care. I need another option. I work very hard to support my family. I gladly pay my taxes. I believe that something has to change before I lose my job and my home. Something needs to be done. In my humble opinion, the medical professionals and the insurance companies are continuously trying to “one up” each other to make more money and the patients are the ones that are ultimately paying for it. The rules change faster than patients can keep up with them. Doctors are tired of providing uncompensated care and insurance companies are tired of paying for unnecessary tests. Patients are tired of fighting with both parties to get their health care needs met. Legal action is about the only protection that patients have left. If that is gone what protection will we have? I don’t think any of your other ideas will do much to change the way insurance companies and medical professionals conduct business.
    I am leaning towards the public option because if I had the choice of a managed care corporation or the government “controlling” my life, I would have to choose the government. At least government officials have to worry about getting re-elected. CEO’s of corporations do not.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 

Scroll To Top