I received your form letter regarding your recent vote on health care. I would like you to address the following:
1) You state that you believe health care is a moral obligation. What makes you think the government has, or should have, the power of enforcing affirmative moral obligations upon society? You are not voting for an obligation, you are trying to legislate a right into creation where none existed. Tom Harkin has clearly expressed the idea that this is just a step towards an inalienable right which will be expanded upon and granted by the government. I believe Christianity is a moral obligation. Should we establish Christianity as a state religion? Or should we continue to leave freedom of religion as it was intended, a right granted by our Creator, not our government. I'll agree not to enforce my moral obligations on you if you'll agree not to enforce them on me.
2) You state that the Stupak amendment will only provide federal funding for abortions in limited cases, including rape and incest. I believe that abortion should only be an option in the case of a clear medical necessity and that it is the taking of a life without any justifiable cause. Will I be able to segregate my tax dollars from this funding or do I have to go to jail to preserve my religious beliefs?
3) You conclusorily state that health care in the United States lags behind other countries. I submit that the studies I think matter show it clearly is the best. You cite as evidence increases in diseases. Does insurance prevent disease? Will insurance curb the rate of HIV infections in the city? Will diabetes rates drop because of insurance? The opposite is actually true as economics and behavioral science tells us that people increase risky behaviors as a result of insurance mitigating that risk.
4) You fail to address the employment consequences of the bill. Higher taxes on the middle class. Taxes on health benefits. Likely loss of jobs or benefits. Higher payroll taxes on small business, etc.
5) You also missed the biggest and most obvious flaw of your argument. There are no uninsured persons in Louisiana. We have a charity hospital system that serves all, paid for by tax dollars. And still those health concerns you cite continue to rise. Every state that has attempted universal coverage has failed to do so without drastic negative consequences.
I submit, sir, that your vote has more to do with the political expediency of getting reelected than it does with any sense of moral obligation as your supposed moral obligation defies all logic. I will put whatever money and time I can to have you defeated in the Republican primary or to find an independent candidate to protect the people from a government gone off the rails and to restore ideas of constitutionality to the actions of our legislature. The hope I had for you upon your election is long gone. You have been a great disappointment to me.
Mark R. Ladd, Esq
1) You state that you believe health care is a moral obligation. What makes you think the government has, or should have, the power of enforcing affirmative moral obligations upon society? You are not voting for an obligation, you are trying to legislate a right into creation where none existed. Tom Harkin has clearly expressed the idea that this is just a step towards an inalienable right which will be expanded upon and granted by the government. I believe Christianity is a moral obligation. Should we establish Christianity as a state religion? Or should we continue to leave freedom of religion as it was intended, a right granted by our Creator, not our government. I'll agree not to enforce my moral obligations on you if you'll agree not to enforce them on me.
2) You state that the Stupak amendment will only provide federal funding for abortions in limited cases, including rape and incest. I believe that abortion should only be an option in the case of a clear medical necessity and that it is the taking of a life without any justifiable cause. Will I be able to segregate my tax dollars from this funding or do I have to go to jail to preserve my religious beliefs?
3) You conclusorily state that health care in the United States lags behind other countries. I submit that the studies I think matter show it clearly is the best. You cite as evidence increases in diseases. Does insurance prevent disease? Will insurance curb the rate of HIV infections in the city? Will diabetes rates drop because of insurance? The opposite is actually true as economics and behavioral science tells us that people increase risky behaviors as a result of insurance mitigating that risk.
4) You fail to address the employment consequences of the bill. Higher taxes on the middle class. Taxes on health benefits. Likely loss of jobs or benefits. Higher payroll taxes on small business, etc.
5) You also missed the biggest and most obvious flaw of your argument. There are no uninsured persons in Louisiana. We have a charity hospital system that serves all, paid for by tax dollars. And still those health concerns you cite continue to rise. Every state that has attempted universal coverage has failed to do so without drastic negative consequences.
I submit, sir, that your vote has more to do with the political expediency of getting reelected than it does with any sense of moral obligation as your supposed moral obligation defies all logic. I will put whatever money and time I can to have you defeated in the Republican primary or to find an independent candidate to protect the people from a government gone off the rails and to restore ideas of constitutionality to the actions of our legislature. The hope I had for you upon your election is long gone. You have been a great disappointment to me.
Mark R. Ladd, Esq
No comments:
Post a Comment