As President Obama continues to push for Obamacare under the guise that it’s a “necessary” reform, and the spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) talks about getting it passed “by any legislative means necessary,” one question remains unanswered: If Obamacare’s so great, why do Democrats have to lie about it?
Time and again when congressional town hall meetings have erupted in protests against universal health care, Obama has offered up press releases assuring the public that Obamacare is not about universal health care. He’s even gone as far as to say he doesn’t support universal health care, otherwise known as “a single payer system.” But this just isn’t true. In 2003, when Obama spoke to the “AFL-CIO Civil, Human, and Women’s Rights Conference,” he said: “I happen to be a proponent of a single payer, universal healthcare plan…[where] everybody is in, nobody is out.”
Moreover, he derided America for being “the wealthiest country in the history of the world [and] spending 14% of its Gross National Product [on healthcare]” without providing “basic health insurance to everybody.”
And Obama’s admission of his desire for a single payer system in 2003 is not an isolated one. In May 2007, as Democrat contenders were starting to try to distance themselves from others in the primary crowd, The New Yorker reported that Obama admitted that if he could start “from scratch,” and have it his way, “‘then a single-payer system’ — a government-managed system like Canada’s, which disconnects health insurance from employment — ‘would probably make sense.’” New Hampshire’s Concord Monitor reported similar statements from Obama in August 2007.
We’ve seen Obama use this tactic again and again with his mantra about how those of us who are happy with our private insurance will be able to keep it under Obamacare. Yet even a glancing look at the current health care proposal reveals that Obama’s pledge is only true so long as your insurer doesn’t make “any change to the terms, conditions, or benefits (like co-pays or deductibles) of your policy.” In the event that even a co-pay changes, your policy “is no longer qualified and you will be forced to move to a ‘qualified plan,’” i.e., the universal, government-run, “one size fits all” plan.
Yet in spite of all these misrepresentations on Obama’s part, when the public rejects a “government takeover” of the 1/6 of our economy that health care represents, the president takes the position that conservative talk radio or fringe groups on the right are distorting his plan in order to defeat it — all the while it’s Obama who’s purposely distorting the truth behind this “needed reform.”
Of course, Obama isn’t the only Democrat hiding the truth about Obamacare. Democrats as a whole have done their best to assure the public that “there is no ‘government takeover’ in any part of any plan supported by the President or Congress,” just as they spent months denying the existence of “death panels” in the health care overhaul.
And there are no “death panels” per se: just rationing of health care based on age, cost and life expectancy. The Democrats have spent a big chunk of the summer setting up strawmen like the phony “death panels” issue, in order to defeat them and distract people from the huge and all-too-real reasons to fear health care nationalization.
But guess what? When opposition at congressional town hall meetings continued to mount, reports surfaced on August 14 that the “Senate Finance Committee decided to remove the so-called ‘death panel’ provision from its version of Obama-Care legislation.”
This whole deal is a sham, folks. Although it’s touted as “necessary,” the only people for whom it is necessary are the liberal politicians positioned to profit from the additional power it will give them. Yet they face a dilemma because “we the people” have taken the time to read through the bill, and have seen with our own eyes that the goal behind Obamacare is a universal, “single payer system.”
Therefore, while Majority Leader Reid may find the wherewithal to use “any legislative means necessary” to pass this mess, I wonder if he’ll also find conscience enough to be honest about the details contained in the bill before doing so?
No chance. Like the other Dems, he wants to pass it, not read it.
Sign up to the Human Events newsletter