All Hands on Deck!

I'm amused at the recent push by the liberal politicians to introduce the "public option" into the new health care proposal. Their reasoning is to introduce competition into the market place, which should in their mind lowers health care insurance coverage prices.So by a show of hands.....Who fell for that idea?

First we need to look at how healthcare insurance currently works. State's oversee what a provider has to include in a policy. The levels of required coverage differ from state to state. For example, a consumer could walk into an insurance provider in Utah and receive a policy for as little as $1574.00 per year. If that same person was to purchase coverage in say, the state of Maine, the policy would cost $3688.00 per year. Now take the identical consumer and send them to get coverage in the state of New York and he'd have an out of pocket expense of $4734.00 per year. Better than three times the cost of the Utah plan. Why? The minimum coverage demands are more inclusive in the other two states, closer to Cadillac plans, if you were.

A more conservative approach has suggested we open up interstate competition so those in New York could have the option to purchase affordable insurance from a Utah licensed provider. Allowing for the free market to determine the marketable price of an insurance policy, there by lowering the prices through competition. The insurance regulators of those individual states are opposed to such folly as they claim it'll open the door for less than desirable coverage for their citizens. My guess is the insurance lobby is pulling their strings, or the state officials don't want to relinquish their "control" they grown so accustom to.

Enter the liberal idea... They want to establish a public option to compete. Now if the federal government was to offer insurance nationwide, wouldn't that be unfair competition as other companies aren't allowed to cross state line without complying with state regulation? Doesn't this also strip the state of "control" of their individual insurance markets? Wouldn't we accomplish the same thing by just allowing interstate insurance sales, without forcing the states to give up their regulation? Pssstt, it's a power grab by the federal government!

The federal government is power hungry. They've gained control of your school system by holding the purse strings, thereby dictating standards. They've even entered your car, now your required to wear seatbelts because if your state didn't enact legislation to that effect, the feds would cut of road funding. Now they are after your health care. Our founding fathers insisted that the states have the freedom to govern themselves. This power granted in the Constitution is slowly being eroded away by Washington under the guise of "What's best for us". A little side bar here: "What's good for the masses" is right out of the Communist Manifesto. The United States of America was founded on the principle of "individual" rights. If you concentrate on what is good for the individual, the masses will be just fine.

I hope the voters recognize this for exactly what it is! Complain loudly my people, our freedom is once again under attack by Washington. If they control your health care plan, they will be that much closer to controlling you. This is an assault on free market principles and your right to choose.

God Bless!
Capt. Bill