Tom Stark, a Republican candidate running for Democrat Alan Mollohan‘s seat, asked if we’d be willing to publish an article he wrote concerning health care. West Virginia Watchdog is willing to publish any letter from a candidate or incumbent, so if you’d like to write in, please email me at steve@westvirginiawatchdog.org. Below is Tom’s post:

In the November 22, 2009, issue of the Parkersburg News & Sentinel Margaret Meeker suggested that access to health care and the cost of paying for un-insured people were reasons we needed health care reform by Christmas.

Access to health care is NOT an issue in this country. One can be diagnosed, have surgery and be recovered with No deposits, no arrangements, no questions (other than “Do you have insurance”). I know. It just happened to my wife. There may be isolated anecdotal experiences, but it is not systemic. Yes, health care insurance is beyond our budget, but NOT unless something unforseen takes place. Our normal average cost of health care is less than the cost of a policy to cover them. Only when a major event takes place does it wreck havoc with finances. THOSE are the only things insurance should be paying for – Catastrophic coverage. It is usually cheaper to pay out-of-pocket for the routine things. Those that cannot afford the routine things are probably covered by Medicaid anyway. That is another issue for another day.

The real problems (the costs) are made far worse by the many states restricting insurance company business. Every state has different laws governing what insurance companies can cover, can’ t cover, can’t charge for, etc. This is the main reason many states have only a handful of companies willing to sell policies within those states. It is also the reason there is such broad disparity in the rates paid for health insurance between different states. The last thing we need is another 2000 pages of (unconstitutional) regulations layered on top by Washington.

What is needed is for citizens to educate themselves about this issue and put pressure on legislators at the state level to reduce industry costs through simplification of rules that encourage more companies to sell insurance in their state. With more companies comes more competition and lower pricing. Not to mention that troubling issue of creating more jobs. Removing needless restrictions on the types of policies would also help here, too. There are cheaper alternatives available if we think creatively rather than thinking only about regulating.

Everything insurance companies do is based on probabilities (they call it actuarial tables). You could call it playing the odds. What you cannot call it is greedy. Relying on an average two percent profit margin is risky, and that’s the industry average. If a state tells companies that they cannot limit their losses but have to limit their premiums, they will not sell policies in that state. If exposure to risk increases, the cost to the company increases. Premiums MUST go up if they are to remain able to pay claims when required to do so and stay in business. It makes politicians feel good (and more importantly powerful) to dictate terms to an industry because on the surface it sounds good to the uninformed constituent (there’s always an election ahead, you know). They are counting on you remaining uninformed. Don’t let that happen!

Most importantly, there is nothing in the United States Constitution that suggests, infers, or otherwise confers any authority for Congress to enact a single law that affects someone’s contractual relationship with their insurance company, their doctor, their hospital or any other medical entity for that matter, nor is there any provision that confers a “right” to health care insurance at taxpayers’ expense. And most ludicrous of all, there is no right of Congress to impose criminal sanctions on a citizen for not buying something! Where will this madness end? You have been sold two pigs in a poke if you believe otherwise. Your vote is being bought with lies designed to make you beholden to the politicians for freebies. Simply by centralizing control. Tyranny dressed up nicely so it doesn’t smell bad at first is still tyranny. It is not freedom as we have known it for 230+ years.

There are about 30-35 specific legislative powers (depending on the way you divide up the sentences) given to Congress under the Consitution and ALL OTHER POWERS are reserved to the states or the individual. There are, however, two phrases that have been twisted and distorted beyond recognition in order to consolidate such power in Washington: 1) The “interstate commerce clause;” and 2) the “general welfare” phrase. The first intends to prevent states from feuding over goods crossing state lines in commerce (hardly what we speak of here), and the second refers to the “general welfare” (could be translated “the peaceful order”) of the STATES, not every individual. Individuals are the states’ responsibility to worry about.

Once these two facts are understood and acknowledged, we could dismantle about eight cabinet-level departments and save hundreds of billions of dollars that are currently spent on things that have no business being done by Washington. Since one of those is the Health and Human Services department, this whole health care mess would no longer be an issue in Washington.

When it comes to government, smaller really is better.

As always, your thoughts and comments are welcome.

Stark2010 – WV Conservatives Wanted » Blog Archive » Revisiting Health Care Solutions

Powered by ScribeFire.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Health Care’s Option Play (blogs.wsj.com)
• Health Care Reform: Lessons From Mass. (abcnews.go.com)