In light of Barack Obama’s wish to expand our federal government, seemingly infinitely, I’d like to offer some thoughts about our HEALTH CARE system.

Years ago, Ronald Reagan made this great statement that he lived by in his eight years as president: “Man is not free unless government is limited.” Our federal government does certain things well: We have the greatest military in the world; we have a great system for the making and enforcing of laws. But, as most Conservatives know deep in their hearts, our government is most effective and useful when its functions are limited. With this being the case, do we really want to hand over to them one of the largest industries in America (health care)?

Even apart from the likelihood of potential mismanagement, the health care system is a business. It’s a business that works very well for millions in America. Certainly it’s not perfect, and there are flaws that need to be mended, but those flaws need to be worked out within the free market, not within government. Competition, supply and demand, and a big thing called Health Savings Accounts are the Big Picture answers to moving our health care system from good to great.

A crucial fact needs to be considered—the government doesn’t have any money of its own. They don’t generate capital or provide services like other businesses. In order to carry out their plans, the government taxes you and me. If Washington decides to start ensuring health care for everyone, the money they will need to accomplish this is going to come from the pockets of all Americans. There is no magic money out there for them to use to take care of everyone; they are going to get that money from us. If they find out they’re running short of money, guess where they’ll come to make up that shortage. Uncle Sam doesn’t work like a typical business in our economy.

If my lawn care provider realizes he has a shortage of income every month, he has some options available to remedy the situation. He can raise his rates, at which time I have some options. If he does a great job and I’m satisfied with his service, I may decide he’s worth those new rates and maintain his services. Or, I have the option of looking for a new lawn man who will do as good a job at lower rates. If enough people fire the first lawn man, and he wants to keep eating, he’ll be forced to come up with an alternate business plan, such as figuring out how to work more efficiently with less overhead so he can keep his rates lower. The bottom line is that the producer is accountable to the consumer—this is how it works in a free economy.

The government, however, travels a different road than the lawn man. If they don’t have enough money, one of their favorite options is to simply raise tax rates or implement new taxes to make more money. When they raise taxes, I don’t have the choice of saying, “No thanks, I’ll find another option.” The government’s likely method for paying for a big piece of health care takes most of the competition and consumer choice out of the picture. We are left with an inefficient business running a huge industry by their own rules without the consumer who utilizes that industry having much say in its success or failure. It’s socialism at its best and it is not what America is all about.

A common argument is sometimes raised at this point: “But health care is a right for all Americans so the government should be involved.” I’ll give my answer to this in tomorrow’s blog. Thanks for reading. Have a great day.