Tuesday, July 27, 2010

The Age of Obama - Government By Diktat

In view of the Senate passing Obama's 'financial reform' disaster, there was an interesting story in the July 15th Pravda-on-the-Hudson that spoke volumes about the real and detrimental changes the Obama Administration and its Democrat allies in Congress have been able to impose on America.

It's an innocuous enough story...just a short piece way, way back in the paper on page a-16, in a story that purports to be about health care. Note the opening paragraph:

The White House on Wednesday issued new rules requiring health insurance companies to provide free coverage for dozens of screenings, laboratory tests and other types of preventive care.

This means no more co-pays or deductibles for things like lab work, tests, screenings, routine vaccinations, prenatal care, and regular wellness visits for children and infants. It even extends to counseling for smoking obesity and AIDS tests.

But the most important thing is where these 'new rules' originated. There are a whole slew of newly created government bureaucracies in both ObamaCare and the new financial reform bill that have no legislative oversight and are answerable to no one except the White House. And they can arbitrarily decide to stick their hands in the pockets of private businesses as they deem fit with new rules and regulations, exactly as they're doing here.

But wait - isn't making this kind of preventive care free supposed to reduce costs by making it more affordable and accessible?

Aside from the fact that argument ignores the Constitutional principles involved (governmental taking of private property for starters), it's also factually bogus. Never forget that, as the Obama Administration itself finally admitted, ObamaCare is designed to be a tax bill and a transfer of wealth to people the regime feels are more deserving.

What happens when you own a hot dog stand and announce you're giving away free hot dogs every day, all you can eat? Everybody shows up, including people who normally don't bother with hot dogs or choose to spend their money elsewhere. Hey, why not? It's free, isn't it?

You get a lot more 'business' - but it doesn't put a single cent in your pocket. As a matter of fact, it substantially ups your cost of doing business because of the increased use of utilities, materials, wear and tear on your facilities and increased payroll because your employees have to work longer and harder to satisfy the new demand. Some of them actually quit because of the increased workload and stress and just do something else.

This increased ‘business’ will also undoubtedly affect your quality, as you look for ever increasing ways to buy cheaper materials and hire cheaper labor to try and survive and offset what it's costing you to stay in business.

Even worse, your real customers, the people who used to like to come to your stand because you provided quality hot dogs at a very reasonable price with good friendly service start avoiding your business like the plague. Because it now takes literally hours to get a hot dog from a rude and harassed staff, parking is a nightmare because of the crowds and the hot dogs themselves now smell and taste like cheap canned cat food.

Substitute your local HMO, Medical Insurance plan or health care provider for the hot dog stand and health care for the hot dogs and you've just gotten a preview of what's going to happen to your health care. Only with two important differences.

In the example above, if our fictional hot dog stand owner lowers quality and service past a certain point, people vote with their feet and go somewhere else. But under ObamaCare, all the hot dog stands are going to be forced into circumstances that result in the same lousy service and poor quality, so there's nowhere else to go.

And it's not like you can simply avoid patronizing any of the hot dog stands. Under ObamaCare, you'll be fined and penalized stiffly if you try.

Even worse, since the HMO and medical insurers are going to be forced to take a huge hit because the government is mandating this raid on their wallets and we all know there's no free lunch, they'll will try and ride this out by creating revenue and making cuts in other areas, like curtailing opening new facilities, buying new medical equipment, sponsoring research or hiring more employees to deal with the increased demand.

And the insurance companies will be charging more for premiums, especially because a lot of the new 'customers' taking advantage of the freebies won't be paying premiums or anything else for the care they're getting. Obama's HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius estimates that premiums will rise an average of 1.5%. Given the Obama Administration's famous accuracy in predicting what their wild-eyed schemes will cost, tripling that figure is probably a safe bet.

And that's on top of the new taxes on employer provided health care the bill mandates. Which, of course, you are legally required to have.

Eventually, most if not all private insurers will go out of business, which was always Obama's idea in the first place. So we'll all be getting our execrable hot dogs at one antiquated, understaffed government hot dog stand where it takes months to get served no matter how hungry you are, because there isn't anywhere else. And you’ll be fined heavily if you don’t eat there.

All you have to do if you think I'm exaggerating is take a peek across the pond at Britain, the national health care model for Obama and his prospective apparatchnik-in-charge, Dr. Donald Berwick. Costs have spiraled out of control to the point that even routine procedures are now rationed, doctors are in short supply, and wait times to see a physician are astronomical.

Ain't Obama-style socialism grand, tovarich and tovarin?

This government by diktat extends to the Dodd-Frank 'financial reform' bill, aptly named after two Congressmen who arguably did more to bring on the current financial crisis than anyone else in government. It too is essentially a tax and wealth transfer bill, and provides for numerous bureaucracies and special interest groups with little or no oversight who can impose new rules and costs on businesses any time they feel the urge, and mandate who gets hired and who goes on the corporate boards that run these companies.

For instance, the bill creates more than 20 "offices of minority and women inclusion" at the Treasury, Federal Reserve and other government agencies with the sole job of monitoring businesses to make sure they avoid hiring or giving contracts to white males.

And the new and all-powerful new consumer protection agency that will have American business under its thumb that the bill establishes could justifiably be dubbed the ACORN and Democratic Party Full Employment Act. What this provision will do to employment in the financial sector is something else again.

There is one rather large silver lining in this particular cloud. You have the opportunity in a couple of months to vote for people who will repeal these and the other legislative monstrosities Obama and the Democrats have foisted on us.


This article appeared in a slightly different form in American Thinker ( they moderated my tone a bit and you know they'd never run that graphic!).

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!


B.Poster said...

"....and you know they'd never run that graphic." You're quite correct on that one.

This is not an argument for or against the graphic, however, isn't the American Thinker a "Conservative" publication? "Liberal" publications would have no problem no problem running graphics that depict "Bush/Hitler" in the most despicable ways whereas "Conservatives" are generally reluctant to criticize their opponents in such a manner.

Might this explain why "Conservatives" are losing the political war? You see "Liberals" fight the war no holds barred without a code of chivalrous conduct while "Conservatives" insist on being chivalrous.

I might also point out that I've seen enormous chutzpah on the part of "Liberals". Every time "Conservatives" fight the battle aggressively "Liberals" use the media that they control to cry foul when they've used far worse tactics!! At a minimum, "Conservatives" should cal lthem out on this.

Freedom Fighter said...

Actually, with AT it's more a matter of them seeking a higher, more intellectual tone rather than ideology.

louielouie said...

i believe i'm going to have to cast my lot with b.poster on this one.
while i did, as usual, enjoy ff essay, i got a chuckle out of ff comment about his tone.
his tone.
considering the number of times he has called me down on my comments, i just found it amusing, that's all.
i have asked ff i believe on more than one occasion, if maybe an oklahoma gene slipped in there with them joo genes.