Quote of the Day:
As long as individuals remain free to exit government-subsidized health care or to pay for more treatment than the government will cover, I not only don’t find it offensive for the government to set a limit on the procedures it will reimburse, I darn well hope it does. But perhaps the conservative critics mean to argue that the ultimate endpoint of the Democrats’ reform plans will be a government takeover of the entire health system—a scary proposition–and are using rationing as a rallying cry to gin up opposition.
I don’t know what point many conservative critics are trying to make either. I feel her pain.
But when you have republican members of congress, and I mean actual members of congress as opposed to the usual half-witted fringe, saying Obama is going to usher in a Stalinist and/or Nazi style Gestapo security force, send conservatives off to re-education camps and then implement euthanasia programs, it would not seem appropriate to give the conservative critics the benefit of the doubt these days.
Presumably these critics speak English and should be able to reduce their criticisms to clear and cogent arguments where one would not be in the position of guessing what argument the conservative critic may mean to make.
From what I understand from the Economist (a center right publication), the healthcare plan most likely to pass (if at all), is the approach endorsed by the Economist and one modeled on the Swiss system. This would hardly be a take over of the entire system but would rather use carrots and sticks via the tax code to increase participation in the existing system.
If use of the tax code in this manner is objectionable, critic should so say so. I am sure many would concur with objections of this sort. Maybe enough of the population would also concur.
But as it stands, if the rhetoric of convenience with death panels administered by nameless faceless bureaucrats in black helicopters is the best its champions can muster, conservatism as a serious concern, is seriously screwed.