Thursday, August 13, 2009

Jo Ann Emerson on ObamaCare

One might think that the healthcare debate is a dividing line for politicians.

Every plan for healthcare "reform" now being put forth by Democrats would cripple our economy and cause death to many people through rationing or abortion.

Either that, or the failure of Republicans to pass one of the "reform" measures will cripple our economy through the continued increase in healthcare costs, and cause death and suffering to millions without insurance or access to quality healthcare.

I believe the first option is true.

But one thing all parties should agree on, neutrality is not an option. Got to take a stand!

But Jo Ann Emerson, representative for Missouri's 8th District, seems to disagree with me.

I took advantage of an online contact-your-congressman website and sent an email to Rep. Emerson asking a simple question: Will you vote for a healthcare plan that we will be forced to accept but Congress won't. She didn't answer that simple question. Instead, I received this:

Thank you for contacting me about the debate over health care reform taking place in Congress and across the country. This is such an important issue for our nation, I am very glad to have the benefit of your opinions on the subject.

I didn't really write to give my opinion, just wanted an answer to the direct question: Will you vote for a healthcare plan that we will be forced to accept but Congress won't. But I suppose every letter to constituents starts off with this kind of boilerplate.

The number of Americans without health insurance is a continuing concern to me and to other members of the U.S. Congress. I take this problem very seriously, as it disproportionately affects Americans in rural congressional districts. In response to the increase in the uninsured population, policymakers at the state and federal levels of government have been searching for effective, affordable and responsible ways to expand access to health insurance coverage.

More boilerplate, I guess. But on an issue this important, I guess I would have skipped the boilerplate and gotten right to the important issues facing us.

As I am sure you have heard, debate over the past few weeks has centered on a particular legislative proposal from the House Democratic leadership. However, moderate Democrats and Republicans were shut out of the debate. Fortunately for those of us who think this legislation costs too much and does little to protect the quality coverage of Americans who like their plan and their doctor today, negotiations have opened back up.

Does she really believe the Democrats' proposal "does [too] little?" Should government do more in the field of healthcare?

Today the poor and working class have medical care hundreds of times better than the healthcare only the richest had 100 years ago. This is due to capitalism. When Washington D.C. started "reforming" health care to "protect" certain groups, we began to have a "healthcare crisis."

As congressional discussions on health care move forward in the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate, I will continue to stand on the principles that are valued in Southern Missouri.

What are those principles? What should those principles be? I believe one of the most important things a Congressman can be is an educator. Is anyone learning anything important from this letter?

At the end of this debate, it is my hope to vote on a bill that provides a pathway to health care for those Americans who do not have it today without corrupting the doctor-patient relationship for those who do.

A Congressional bill will do this? Every time Washington D.C. tries to "provide" something, it takes from those who have, claims to give to the have-nots (actually nobody in America has-not; though some have less than those who have more; this is not a problem), and destroys the system that produces goods and services for everyone.

Americans deserve a bill that protects people from extravagant costs without sacrificing care. Americans deserve a bill that extends coverage to those in rural areas without exploding the deficit.

How can a government law possibly do this?

I truly appreciate your interest in this issue, and I hope you will continue to follow this debate closely as Congress addresses the health care issue.

Kind regards,

Jo Ann Emerson

Didn't answer my question, and didn't say anything important. I guess she's against the Democrats' bills. But if the same kind of bill were sent to Congress from the Bush White House, I think she'd vote for it.

No comments: