Special Blog: The Unfortunate Decision on Obamacare

I write this as one who is disappointed in the thinking shown by the majority of the members of the United States Supreme Court today in upholding the individual mandate of Obamacare — the requirement that most Americans buy health insurance or pay a fine – referring to such a requirement as a tax.

I write this as one who, given my current circumstances, may benefit from President Obama’s healthcare plan. I may not. I’m not sure where I’m supposed to get the undetermined amount of money to pay for the mandated insurance – or to pay for the undetermined amount of the fine if I don’t. And how will I pay the fine for not paying the fine that I might not be able to afford to pay?

But I also write as one who believes the issues at hand are far greater than the question of my personal convenience.

At the heart of the larger debate is the question of what kind of government do we want to have:

Do we want Centralized Administrative/ Bureaucratic Rule (which our nation has moved deeper and deeper into – just today)?

or

Do we want, what I believe is more consistent with the Constitution, a Government whose powers are limited; where the people are the source of the law; where James Madison is taken seriously when he said that if the laws are so voluminous that no one can read them they are not properly laws, even though passed by the legislators?

I vote (if you can’t already tell) for the latter.

If you agree with me, then you can see how it becomes even more imperative than ever that Mitt Romney and additional proponents for smaller, less intrusive government be elected. Then perhaps the promise will be kept to repeal this law and replace it with something better for the American people and their future.

Well, that’s my say. If you were kind enough to read this, I’d appreciate very much your thoughts as well.

 

Advertisements

30 Comments

Filed under Health Care, Politics

30 responses to “Special Blog: The Unfortunate Decision on Obamacare

  1. Stephen Price

    Johnny, I respect your stance on this-even as I disagree. One of the things that I hope you make very clear as one who is often speaking on behalf of your faith is that 1) it is possible for persons with a deep Christian faith to come down on the other side, believing that it helps us meet Jesus’ requirements that we care for the poor, etc.; and 2) that regardless of where we land politically, as persons seeking to follow Jesus, the mandate to feed the hungry, cloth the naked, visit the prisoner, care for the marginalized is still not an option, but a commandment.

    • Gotcha. Thanks for being part of the discussion.

    • Stephen, I respectfully disagree. This bill does not help us meet the requirements of Christ, it instead replaces the requirements of Christ by having the government do it for us. The commandment is for us to perform these acts as obedience and response to Christ’s love for us. Having the government doing it in our place does not show the face of Christ to any of those who may be served. And the government is not trying to follow scripture, it is meddling into the lives of all by micromanaging. As Johnny stated, where do the poor get the money to buy health insurance they cannot afford? What has happened is a serious breach of constitutional law, and like many other government programs, will become bloated and ill enforced, there are many in the past which serve as examples. Christ’s church has the mandate to care for the poor and sick, never does Christ relegate it to Caesar. If Christ’s church is failing, then woe on us to look to the government to step in.

      • And let me be clear. When I say “Gotcha”, that means I understand and am willing to grant that some who disagree with me may be well intentioned, though woefully misguided – for such reasons as delineated by Rebecca.

  2. Katie Pisocky

    I am still a little unclear on what this all means for my personal insurance. That is what concerns me about all of this, that we really do not know. I don’t know if this means we are going towards socialized medicine or if we are going to be able to keep our insurance.

    If socialized medicine is where this is heading, I do know – from talking to people who have socialized medicine – that it would have taken me months to get the mammogram that found my Stage 2 Breast Cancer millimeters away from my lymph node. I do know that it would have taken months to get a specialist for my autistic son, and we would not have benefitted from early intervention for his well being. I do know that it would have taken months for my husband to have surgery on the cataracts that were taking away more of his vision on a daily basis.

    Hopefully that is not where this is headed. Hopefully this just means that more people will be able to get affordable health care from private insurance. Hopefully.

  3. Sandy

    Our loss of a sense of self sufficiency is tragic and it is perpetuated by increasing government provision and involvement in our lives. I have been without insurance and medical care several different times in my life and I have had four children who at times had no coverage but at no time did I want government to step in to fill the need. When I read history books I see a fierceness and self determination in individuals that is hard to find in today’s citizen.

  4. Garry

    I agree with Johnny. The issue is a deeper one that is, indeed, very disturbing.

  5. Abby

    My heart breaks today for the future of our nation. Yes, we are commanded to care for those who are poor, widowed, fatherless/ orphans. Absolutely. WE are commanded- believers and followers of Christ crucified. NOT the government, NOT even non-believers, NOT beuracracies . The body of Christ is called to action. And free will allows that some of us may choose to not be a part of that body. ( by the way, props to ANY individual who gives of him or herself in the interest of others) the point is, we are supposed to be a FREE nation, founded on FREE will, FREEDOM of religion, of occupation, etc. That includes the freedom to choose our own outcomes, and healthcare is very definitely tied to outcomes. Oh, I could go on but I’ll stop now.
    Thanks for your blog, Johnny, I love you so much!
    abby

  6. Thank you so much. Johnny, for posting your thoughts and insights on this most egregious–and potentially disastrous–attack on our liberty and nation. While I am absolutely committed to Matthew 25:36-41’s command to care for the needy, and have taken in homeless people to live with us–one woman lived with us for 3 1/2 years until she was decided to get her own place–and have been a special education teacher for 10 years, I do not believe that this healthcare mandate will help, but rather seriously hurt and probably devastate the poor and needy–as well as the middle class–in this country. We, as a nation, do need to provide healthcare for the truly needy, but this over-reaching mandate will, I am desperately sorry to write, prove to be a rotting albatross.

    Psalm 146:3-5–
    3 Do not put your trust in princes,
    in human beings, who cannot save.
    4 When their spirit departs, they return to the ground;
    on that very day their plans come to nothing.
    5 Blessed are those whose help is the God of Jacob,
    whose hope is in the Lord their God.

    Lor Cunningham, Organizer and Rally Captain of the Greenville March 23rd and June 8th Stand Up for Religious Freedom Rallies praying and publicly opposing the HHS Mandate

  7. Lor – Thank you for your comments, all you’ve done and all you do.

    Do you have a read yet on what bearing today’s ruling has on the HHS Mandate?

  8. William L. Cox

    William L. Cox

    Johnny- I retired with no medical plan offered by 43 years in the
    textile field.. carpet.. with two retirement plans paid for by Pension
    Benefit Retirement Program at reduced benefit levels and Social
    Security. I’m supported by the Federal Government since I have
    never recovered fully from the last crash that happened a few
    years ago. A heart that admittedly was beat up by stacking poor
    habits on top of a congenital heart defect has been sliced and
    diced at a cost of well over a million during my retirement that
    has turned out to be the best time of my life tho a bit of money
    would ease my Type A persona. There are parts of the plan I
    don’t like but on balance I believe it is great that we finally after
    100 years of squabbling have come with a good try ! Look at the
    good plans that work well such as Swizerland’s, polish and alter
    the plan we finally have, and quit trying to duck the problem.

  9. William – Thanks for joining the discussion. I don’t want to pry but was wondering if you could clarify a couple of thing:
    1. When you say you’re supported by the Federal Government are you referring to Social Security?
    2. I’m not sure if you’re pleased with the ObamaCare and the Court’s ruling today or not. Or if you’resimply pleased that the problem is being addressed and hope for some improvement over what’s been produced so far.

    • William L. Cox

      Johnny – Sure and I don’t consider it prying.. 1. My pensions are paid by the
      government. I paid in part for my SS but by several thousand so far it’s been the accumulation of “interest” on those early forced retirement
      contributions.. they are called “payroll taxes”. I didn’t save a nickel
      until I was in my forties aside from a pretty good chunk of the house we
      lived in. My pensions are reduced amounts the Feds pay for the unfunded
      pensions two companies stuck me with over my career. On one of them
      I almost made the cut in the goodies generated by going belly up and
      screwing the stockholders, the suppliers, and the employees but wasn’t
      high enough on the totem pole. 2. The health care bill makes Tolstoy’ s
      ” War and Peace” look short. NObody, and I mean Nobody, knows
      exactly what is in the bill. I detest lawyers who spend their careers trying
      to figure out ways to get around the laws other lawyers have spent
      countless hours trying to make complex to the point of absurdity..
      Washington has legions of both. I am just pleased that we have made a
      start, then we work on education, then we can work on welfare, then we
      can stop fighting wars we have no business fighting… that’s 2024 as of
      right now I believe. After all that we can address the tax and subsidy
      situation which probably will take longer to solve than health care.

  10. Ann

    An attorney friend said to me this morning, “Our Constitution is dead.” Well, it may not be dead, but it surely needs life support. I agree with those above who point out that caring for “the least of these” is an individual responsibility, not one for government to mandate.

  11. Mark Tank

    The bigger issue today was not about medical care or health coverage. It was about power … and the unchecked power of the Supreme Court handed phenomenal power over to the Executive Branch today. The opportunity for the triumph of Law failed, because the Supreme Court proved once again that it is impervious to accountability, and as susceptible to intimidation and political correctness as any politician. On the federal level, the ideal of a government “of the people, by the people, and for the people” is beginning to perish from the earth.

  12. Paul

    I have attached a link to the Supreme Court decision announced today on
    the Affordable Care Act. I don’t like the immediate result of preserving the
    individual mandate, but when you read the body of the decision written by
    Chief Justice Roberts, you will see that it details at great length the
    Constitution’s limitations of the Federal government and its being given
    only those powers that are enumerated in the Constitution. I hope that
    will help us in the long run. Here’s a short quote from the decision that was
    encouraging to me.

    “Members of this Court are vested with the authority to interpret the law;
    we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy
    judgments. Those decisions are entrusted to our Nation’s elected leaders,
    who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them. It is
    not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political
    choices.”

    I’ve only read the first 15 or 20 pages so far, but here’s the link to the
    published decision: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-393c3a2.pdf

  13. Jimmy Orders

    The events of today are a continuation of a pattern that is becoming all too familar. The will of the people is being thwarted by lawyers and judges. Recent examples include but are not limited to Homosexual Marriage (voted down each time it has been placed on a state ballot) and now Obamacare. The voters will have another chance to voice their opinions in November. The issues are very clear. It will be the most important election of our life time.

    If you work for a living the burden of carrying so many non producers is close to insufferable. If you are on the receiving end please pay attention to the truism – if something can’t happen it won’t happen! We are close, very close, to not being able to pay for the promises our politicians have made. There is an end game and we need look no further than Greece and Italy to glimpse the future.

    It is a short lived victory for liberal progressives either way. If Romney wins in November Obamacare will be repealed. If Obama wins we go broke before his 2nd term is complete. You may not agree or like the choices but it is where we are as a country today!

  14. Mark Tank

    The Coming Coercion of ObamaCare is documented here. Just saw this link from the Manhattan Declaration. http://www.alliancedefensefund.org/Content/pdf/ObamaCare_and_its_Mandates_Fact_Sheet.pdf

  15. DoNotGiveInToEvil

    Johnny, I agree with you that ObamaCare being upheld under the power of taxation (on *non-action* no less, indicative that the Supreme Court views this power as unlimited) is lamentable. Still, I can’t say I’m surprised that when they are given absolute power to interpret the words of the Constitution over 236 years they keep discovering in it new powers for the Government of which they are a part.

    But I don’t follow your reasoning when you say:

    “If you agree with me, then you can see how it becomes even more imperative than ever that Mitt Romney and additional proponents for smaller, less intrusive government be elected.”

    What makes you think that Mitt Romney is a proponent for smaller, less intrusive government? If our choices are really confined to the tiny political spectrum between Obama and Romney (who differ in their Statism in matters of fine detail and rhetorical flourish) only the illusion of choice in “representative government” remains.

    Besides, if by voting third party or abstaining from voting altogether gives the election to Obama, he may end up being the “smaller, less intrusive” option between the two anyway. Yes, Obama, despite his pre-election peace rhetoric, kept up our involvement in unjust foreign wars. But by his statements on foreign policy, Romney has indicated even more willingness to engage in wars of aggression. Remember, ObamaCare isn’t the only big government program to consider–War is an even more costly and destructive arm of the State. Something all pro-life Christians ought to carefully consider.

    Furthermore, I don’t think elections will ever solve the problems we have of increasing State interference in our lives. Elections themselves are inefficient government programs. Freedom-loving politicians can rarely overcome the politicians who cater to covetousness of the people by offering State-handouts to every imaginable interest group. Only the voluntary sector can allocate scarce resources efficiently and morally. Democracy (our American flavor of Statism) isn’t the solution, it’s the problem. For our democratic voting knows no bounds, the State thinks it may place any item up for the people to duke it out at the ballot box, thus in principle leaving any decision about any area of life open to collectivization ObamaCare-style.

    Instead, we must learn why freedom in human interaction within the confines of the moral law of God really is the way we were designed to live. Just as outright slavery was abolished in the 19th century (and peacefully in most places) we can abolish slavery to political tyrants with a massive shift in the culture (including non-Christians, who have the law written on their heart) so that people recognize theft, murder, manstealing, etc. as wrong—even when the State does it. Christians should lead this charge, or history will judge us.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s