San Antonio Conservative

@andresbocanegra on twitter

Healthcare: What Would Reagan Say?

Again, I feel compelled to post some audio of Ronald Reagan speaking out against socialized medicine. Now you can call me an extremest or naive, and say that the Democrats and President Obama are not advocating socialized medicine akin to Canadian or British systems. But listen to this clip that was put together and aird on the Glenn Beck Radio Program. Please know that this is only being used to give some perspective, not because its from Glenn Beck. I have been accused in the past of idolizing Glenn Beck, like Democrats idolize Obama. While I listen to his program, he and I are not always in agreement so take this audio for what its truly worth.

I want to point out some key quotes from this audio piece (which has been awesomely remixed with some music). Reagan talks about the proposals (much like today’s) under the Truman Administration that would advocate for a “public option” health insurance, but would make it much more compulsory then than perhaps current legislation suggests. So we will begin after the jump:

  1. Back in 1927 an American socialist, Norman Thomas, 6 times candidate for President the Socialist Party ticket. He said that, ”The American people will never vote for socialism.” But he said, “Under the name of liberalism the American people would adopt every fragment of the socialist program.” There are many ways in which our government has invaded our precincts of private citizens, the method of earning a living, but at the moment, I would like to talk about another. Mainly because this threat is with us and at the moment is more immanent. One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people is very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project. Most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can’t afford it.
    1. This is still true to this day. Those of who speak out against the type of healthcare reform, quantifying it as a stepping stone toward socialized medicine (see quote 2) are called inhumane, and ostracised for being against the health of those who are low income. When in fact its not true. We are for providing more access to care but doing it in a way that is responsible and not rationing of healthcare.
    2. What I would advocate for, and many of my friends and colleagues advocate for is market solutions. This isn’t about additional regulations. Medicare and Medicaid coverage is consistantly rationed and there are frequent cost over-runs and budget cuts. Clearly the government is not the best health insurance provider. Conservatives want to see the ability for insurance companies to compete across state lines (currently they can’t…thats why there is a Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas and a Blue Cross Blue Shield of California and etc.), this would help likely bring overall cost of coverage down because there would be incentive to have lower prices across the board. We want to see responsible tort reform, to help lower the costs of malpractice insurance. Responsible tort reform would benefit not only doctors, but in the end patients. If doctors pay lower malpractice premiums…they would be able to continue to practice medicine. Congress is well in it authority to do this because it is some of their current regulatory structure that prevents this and they have the authority to regulate interstate commerce.  Why get the government out of the way and help let the free market and capitalism solve the problem? If healthcare was such a right as some on the left claim it is…then why would they be willing to put the government in control of it? We don’t give the government control over our right to free speech or right to free expression of religion.
  2. “We have an example of this. Under the Truman Administration, it was proposed that we have a compulsory health insurance program for all people in the United States. Of course the American people unhesitantly rejected this. With the American people on record as not wanting socialized medicine, Congressman Foran said, “If we can only break through and get our foot inside the door. Then we can expand the program after that.” Well let’s see the socialist themselves say about it, “They say, once the Foran bill is passed, this nation will be provided with a mechanism of socialized medicine. Capable of indefinite expansion in every direction until it includes the entire population.”
    1. We now know the Foran Bill (as it was introduced) and the Kerr-Mills Bill or Medicare which was attached to Social Security. Now we are seeing an expansion into covering the remaining populace, just as the socialists of Truman’s day foretold. But we have a reason to be skeptical of this new expanision of healthcare programs.
    2. Medicare and Medicaid as I have said experiences cost over-runs, budget cuts, trouble with repayments to providers, etc. What happens if the government experiences another budget crisis…will the public option be forced to be rationed or have cost cuts? Will some surgeries or other procedures of some of those under the public option have to be cancelled because of those budget cuts? This is the worry we have. And what future expansion will we see after this. Several members of Congress have said that they believe in a single payer type system … but they just don’t have the votes to do it now. That means that they would seek to do it in the future if it ever became possible.
  3. James Madison in 1788 said “since the general civilization of mankind I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpation.”
    1. We should take these words to heart and fight against the encroachment of the federal government into our daily lives. Like I said, if healthcare is believed to be such a “right,” why would you wnat to give the federal government control of that “right.”

August 30, 2009 - Posted by | Healthcare, Obama Presidency | , , , , , , , ,

2 Comments »

  1. This Reagan audio clip from 1961 is being trotted out again just like it is every time we debate changes to our health care system. What I don’t get, however, is why anybody thinks it is relevant?
    If anything, what it should demonstrate is the fact that Reagan was clearly wrong back then, just as conservatives are wrong today for opposing universal health insurance.
    Reagan was talking about all the awful things that would supposedly occur if the country adopted Medicare and Medicaid. Clearly it did not happen the way he said it would. We did not turn into a “socialized” nation and lose all of our freedoms.
    Let’s look for a minute at the results that Medicare has produced:

    Since the advent of Medicare, “the health of the elderly population has improved, as measured by both longevity and functional status,” said one study published in the journal Health Affairs. In fact, according to the study, “life expectancy at age 65 increased from 14.3 years in 1960 to 17.8 years in 1998 and the chronically disabled elderly population declined from 24.9 percent in 1982 to 21.3 percent in 1994.” Leaders of the Commonwealth Fund wrote in May that, “compared to people with private insurance, Medicare enrollees have greater access to care [and] fewer problems with medical bills.” The report added that this finding is significant when considering that those Americans on Medicare represent a demographic that is more likely to be in poor health and to have lower incomes. Prior to Medicare, “about one-half of America’s seniors did not have hospital insurance,” more than 25 percent “were estimated to go without medical care due to cost concerns,” and one in three were living in poverty. Today, nearly all seniors have access to affordable health care and only about 14 percent of seniors are below the poverty line.

    There is no question that Medicare has been an overwhelming success. If the program has problems today it is because of the out-of-control spiraling healthcare costs and the fiscal mismanagement of Republicans – specifically the Bush administration – over the past eight years. Rather than ignoring this problem the way the Republicans did, the Obama administation is trying to deal with it for the sake of future generations. There is no immediate upside for Obama or for Democrats who are liable to lose seats in the House due to all the fearmongering and stonewalling from Republicans.

    But you certainly should not be able to ressurect stale, old fearmongering that is more than 48 years old, which has been so soundly discredited and disproven, and try and use it again today. That is outrageous.

    Why (not) get the government out of the way and help let the free market and capitalism solve the problem?

    First off, the “free market and capitalism” are never going to “solve the problem” because that is not what they do. Capitalism is an economic system that is designed to maximize profits for private industry. It is not designed to provide social services and health care to the people who are most in need. There is no profit in doing that. In terms of health care, capitalism works to provide services to those who are best able to pay for it. When you look at how our health care system works to serve those with money, it looks great. The best in the world! But when you look at how it works to care for the population as a whole, it is flat-out lousy, which is why we rank something like 37th in the world with the highest costs and among the lowest life expectancy. It’s because the system doesn’t work for such a large segment of the population that is unable to pay for it.
    That is why the government has to step in to provide health insurance coverage for those who fall through the cracks. It is what they do in every other civilized country in the world and it is what we need to do here. It doesn’t mean that the government will take over the healt care system, or even take over health insurance. It will just provide an alternative (public option) for those who currently cannot afford a private health insurance plan.
    But would that mean that some people already covered by private insurance might switch to a government plan? Maybe, but so what? Isn’t that what the free market is all about? If the government plan is going to be better than what the private insurers are offering then they better get on the ball and offer something better. It’s called competition.

    If healthcare was such a right as some on the left claim it is…then why would they be willing to put the government in control of it? We don’t give the government control over our right to free speech or right to free expression of religion.

    First, it is the government that protects our rights to free speech and freedom of religion. We would not have these rights if it were not for the government.
    Second, we already entrust the government with our most important and vital functions such as national security and emergency services. The U.S. military is a government-run, “Socialized” system. We also have government run police stations, fire departments, judicial system and prisons. If the government is so bad at running things, as conservatives today maintain, then why aren’t they out there right now demanding that we privatize the U.S. military? I thought we had the best and strongest military in the world?
    Suffice to say that conservative attacks on the government today are overblown (and I would argue unpatriotic) and hyped to serve a partisan agenda that is detrimental to our nation as a whole and meant only to serve the interests of some very powerful, private interests.

    Comment by Mike Thomas | August 31, 2009 | Reply

    • Mike,
      There are so many holes in your argument I don’t have the time to address them all right now so I will just focus on one glaring one that I believe is at the root of your opposition.

      You state, “First, it is the government that protects our rights to free speech and freedom of religion. We would not have these rights if it were not for the government.” This statement is false in that it ignores what the founders of this country declared to be at the core of our constitution. Our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are GOD GIVEN rights that we are born with. To say that we would not have these rights if it weren’t for the government is incorrect. We would still have them until something else took them away. We, THE PEOPLE, fought to protect those rights, and we, THE PEOPLE, formed this government to protect those rights from threats foreign, AND DOMESTIC. Obamacare threatens to take away many of those rights under the “guise,” of helping the poor. I myself consider the excessive spending, overstated urgency, and outright lie after lie after lie that comes out of the mouth of this president and this congress in the name of fairness, decency, duty, morality, etc., to be a direct threat to my liberty and freedom to choose. This administration including many of the republicans, have fallen into the category of a DOMESTIC THREAT. I know I’m not alone in this and I believe there are more of us than there are of you. The government is not protecting us from this threat because THEY don’t see it as one. The government would not have ANY power if we the PEOPLE, had not given it to them! In my eyes they are abusing that power, and it is up to us THE PEOPLE, to take it away from them as I assure you, we, THE PEOPLE, most certainly will. May God help you, and may God help us, THE PEOPLE, and may God help this great nation to survive, prosper, and continue to be an example to the rest of the world and a beacon of hope for all who cherish freedom and liberty.

      Comment by Robert Darling | September 16, 2009 | Reply


Leave a comment