by Jerry Agar

If the health care bill had to be passed by the House, it should have been done on Halloween.  It's that scary.

The bill promises to devastate the nation financially, threatens our civil rights and sets up what Sarah Palin called "death panels."  And all of this with a piece of legislation Americans do not want.

So now maybe you are thinking, this Agar guy is out of his mind.  Please stay with me.

FINANCIAL

Senator Lieberman said, "If the public option plan is in there...I will not allow this bill to come to a final vote. I believe the debt can break America."

Current estimates put the cost over the first ten years in the hundreds of billions of dollars.  Some even dare to say it will be a trillion.  Before we discuss whether those numbers are reasonable and affordable, let's look at whether they are likely to be accurate.

The Heritage Foundation reports on findings of the Senate Joint Economic Committee:

In 1965, as Congress considered legislation to establish a national Medicare program, the House Ways and Means Committee estimated that the hospital insurance portion of the program, Part A, would cost about $9 billion annually by 1990. Actual Part A spending in 1990 was $67 billion.

In 1967, the House Ways and Means Committee predicted that the new Medicare program, launched the previous year, would cost about $12 billion in 1990.  Actual Medicare spending in 1990 was $110 billion—off by nearly a factor of 10.

What if that trillion dollar figure is off by a factor of 10?  If you think it can't possibly happen, what evidence do you have of government efficiency in both predicting and controlling cost?

CIVIL RIGHTS

President Obama has said that those who do not have insurance - those who "free ride" on the system - will pay a penalty.  The ultimate penalty for resisting government edicts is jail.  If you think I am wrong, stop paying your taxes and keep refusing no matter what they threaten.  Call me from jail.

Some people defend the idea of mandatory health insurance with the example of mandatory auto insurance.  It is a false argument.

No one is required to own a car and the constitution doesn't give us the right to one.  The constitution does give us the right to exist.  We carry auto insurance against the possibility of damaging some else's person or property when we choose to drive.  The same argument cannot be made in relation to the fact that we may cause other people to spend tax dollars on our health.  We cannot be expected to pay for health insurance or cease to exist.  If we must pay a fee to the government in order to be a living human being in America, and to maintain our liberty, that is a vicious assault on our civil rights.

DEATH PANELS

Regarding the "death panels," consider this from the Wall Street Journal.  "However, as subsidized costs soar, government will have no choice but to ration medical care, starting with the aged and grievously ill. Is pre-natal life more valuable than the elderly?"  The WSJ editorial is sub-headlined with this:  "Every medical insurance decision will be subject to rationing by politics."

Economist Thomas Sowell observes that the government can reduce the amount Americans spend on health care in only two ways. Provide health care more efficiently than the private sector does, or administer the distribution of health care, controlling both the supply and the pricing--engaging, that is, in rationing.  As Peter Robinson wrote in Forbes, "The first is impossible.  The second?  Unthinkable."

So when a group of bureaucrats engaged in rationing sits down to consider whether we can afford to fund the rising cost of an ailing elderly person, how is that not - well meaning as they may be - a death panel?

PUBLIC OPINION

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 45% now favor the health care plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats.  Most (52%) remain opposed.  Only 25% Strongly Support the plan while 42% are Strongly Opposed.

Health care reform as it is being discussed today is dressed up as affordable and caring.  But it is wearing a mask.  And unlike the cute kids under all of those Halloween costumes last month, rip the mask off of health care reform and it is not very attractive at all.