Now that the Health Care Bill has become law, both law maker and layman have the opportunity to read the over 1000 pages of legalese, to determine exactly what just transpired. As the New York Post stated this week, this is not a Health Care Law but rather tax legislation and a law which is intended to redistribute wealth. What it essentially does is place in the hands of the Federal Government over 16 % of our economy. When you consider this new law in that respect, one can see why there is so much consternation among the citizenry. The Federal Government, and mainly President Obama, has usurped a large portion of our liberty in this one sweeping measure, with the prospect of this merely being a foot in the door of our liberty and freedom.

States Attorneys General have already filed suit, in Federal Court, stating that this law is unconstitutional, using the Tenth Amendment and the Commerce Clause as their argument. I agree with the Attorneys General. If the Supreme Court finds precedent in past Commerce Clause holdings, most of which are relevant to the FDR and LBJ administrations, then this court can and will find any attempt to grab giant portions of our economy, for the benefit of the Federal Government, constitutional. Given the overly general phrasing of Article I, Section 8, which gives Congress the power to “lay and collect taxes…..and provide for the general welfare…,” along with the “necessary and proper” clause, it is hard to imagine the Obama Administration using this as an argument to support its sweeping grab at our economy, and yet, that is exactly how this will be argued. Finally, if the high court cannot read into the 10th Amendment that this new law exerts unconstitutional powers over ” the powers….. reserved to the states respectively, or to the people,” then we the people are in for a very trying time as long as Obama and the Liberals control the Executive and Legislative Branches of government. Interestingly, I suspect that the powers exerted by this new law shall have no effect on the freedom and liberty of the members of Congress or the Executive, who seem to find ways to escape the wrath of their own powers.

It goes without saying that there is no “right to health care.” Not only was health care never considered by the writers of our Constitution, health care has always been a privilege to be earned, along with all of the other privileges of a Capitalistic society. Despite what Obama would urge us believe, there is already federal law which protects those without health insurance, even to the point of providing health care to non citizens, ie., undocumented aliens or illegals. Despite such law costing our health care system more than it should bare, it is obfuscation to claim that 30 million humans in the U.S. are without access to health care. As a matter of fact, most of that burden is borne by both the states and by the medical community. The burden is not on the federal government, and neither the states nor the medical community has asked for federal legislation to be considered in this area, especially legislation as sweeping as our new Health Care Law. This new legislation was not meant as a measure of kindness or welfare to the so called 30 million. It was written with another purpose in mind.

In reading the Commerce Clause, as to how the lack of health insurance has impaired or blocked interstate commerce is beyond me. To begin with, of those stated 30 million without health insurance, a large percentage do not want health insurance. As a young healthy individual, being forced to buy health insurance is analogous to forcing me to buy flood insurance here in the desert. I do not interpret the Commerce clause in that manner. In addition, forcing small businesses to purchase health insurance for their employees will do more to impair commerce than augment it, as many small businesses will either shut their doors, or simply pay the “fine,” which is just another term for tax, while, at the same time, compensating for said tax by raising prices or laying off employees. The Commerce Clause was written to encourage business growth and thus commerce between the states, not to force business to close for reasons of federally increased overhead. The Commerce Clause, while interpreted by various Supreme Courts, in ways which only demonstrate the fact that the high court does bend with the political waves, which flow during stressful periods in our nation, has generally held that certain business practices “impairing interstate commerce,” or ” detrimental to the health and welfare of the common worker,” based on certain “commissions” of business, are unconstitutional. Now the court is being asked, by the Liberal Congress, to find that the same clause is worded so as to hold that “omissions,” on the part of business, are interfering with interstate commerce. Only a devoted socialist could believe that the lack of health insurance impedes interstate commerce, but that is exactly the argument of our government as to this suit.

Viewing this law as simply another “tax,” the “people” are being forced to pay for something that many of them will never see and what is worse, pay for a service which, in many cases, will be withheld from them, given the fine wording in the law which defines when “health care” will be deemed necessary or not efficient in its use. It is quite evident that the so called “Tea Party Movement” is supported by the same type of individuals that opposed the British tax laws some two centuries ago.

As far a a piece of legislation meant to “spread the wealth,” it should have been apparent, and obviously was not, to most citizens, that Obama has been and continues to be an avowed Socialist. As a short term member of the Senate, his voting record was the most liberal of any member of the Senate. While I have never understood the mentality of Socialism or its big sister Communism, I appreciate the fact that there are those, both here and abroad, who believe in Marxism or Lenin or in Mao. These people want a level playing field for everyone, despite talent and hard work being the means by which success is attained in a Capitalistic society. Obama’s idea of a society is that of the novel “1984″ but without, as yet, the police state mentality. However, each step taken by those of this economic bent is incremental, and what are small fines for non compliance today, can and will become stiffer fines and imprisonment tomorrow. A foot in the door is all these Socialists and Communists need before they begin politicizing the courts, taking powers from the states and the people, and imposing their own view of society on society. Social engineering is exactly what their goal is, and once that train is allowed to leave the station, it requires a civil revolution to stop it in its tracks.

Europe is a perfect example of a Socialistic train that has gone too far to be stopped. If America wants to become another Europe, it shall have its chance in future elections. But it is well to remember one fact. The level playing field always has its own “high ground,” for those who are more equal than others. The fact that Congress has not availed itself of the new law is an example of this truism. The level playing field is always going to be a target of some super power who wants to go beyond the simple wealth distribution / everyone is equal society, to one in which the society becomes a source of slavery. One can look at the old Soviet system, or the current Red Chinese or North Korean system, to realize that there is but one final end to the desires of a Socialistic government. Only in freedom and liberty is there the strength to fight off the oppressors who lay in wait for signs of weakness, before attacking their prey. America is now showing those very signs of weakness, in allowing its so called representatives to usurp the power of the people. While I disagree with some of the tactics of the far right, in voicing their disagreement with the current administration, if we continue to allow that door to be opened even wider, by the voices of the far Left, we shall have lost any opportunity of taking America back to the moderate nation of liberty and prosperity for which it was intended.

JLK