Guest column by Tobin Hitt
On March 26, and for a few days thereafter, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments against the individual health insurance mandate from 26 states who have risen up against President’s Obama’s landmark legislation, which he signed back in March of 2010.
Twenty six states, and most of the good old U.S.A., sees this law as a federal takeover of the historic and established health and welfare jurisdiction of the 50 states.
And in a federalist republic states sort of like to hold onto their turf, and to manage stuff at their own speed, and on their own cost curve.
This law, wishfully if not prayerfully known as “The Affordable Care Act” (ACA), had some unintended negative consequences. First, it sealed Washington’s political party gridlock. Second, it has sapped all that our present President has tried to do. And third, it will continue raising the ire of an enervated U.S. populace that never liked the mandate and is now must wait and see if it will be upheld, or courageously thrown out.
Besides, if this novel law is fiscally administered anything like the Defense Department, or the Federal Reserve, or our present federal entitlement programs, or foreign aid, it will be just another federal boondoggle crippling any faint hopes of Washington budgetary restraint.
How did it come about?
Read full post here.
By Blogger Chuck Redfern
Let’s wag our fingers while we howl our hollow laughs: Mitt Romney is the focus group’s love child, the marketer’s political pin-up, the self-proclaimed experienced “leader” who displays mere salesmanship. He transforms like a shape-shifter on abortion and global warming and mouths opinion-poll platitudes: Obama is an appeaser, a socialist, a failed CEO. Romney, the contemporary synthetic candidate, trashes substantial and crucial argument like so many wads of waste paper. Who knows? He may ply his way into the White House like Jack Kennedy, who won the 1960 election because of a better make-up artist (lucky for us, he made a decent president).
Pin a polka-dot tie on him and put him in a used car lot.
Easy targets like Romney blind us to our murky secret: We, the supposedly innocent electorate, made him. The American character has sunk to such nihilistic depths that we prefer the marketer over the leader. We repeatedly vote in the dealers and peddlers and negative campaigners. We claim we want the truth but reward professional presidential candidates like Mitt Romney. We’ve laid the lot on which they hawk their jalopies, then complain they’ve sold us lemons.
Not to drill the point home or anything, but we get the people we vote for. We’re the problem. Romney is a symptom, not the disease.
We’d cultivate Joshua 1:6 if we wanted true leadership. God counsels Joshua: “Be strong and courageous” and repeats the call in verses 7, 9, and 18. Think of Aung San Suu Kyi, the Burmese opposition leader who walked alone in the face of soldiers aiming guns with shoot-to-kill orders in 1989. A major countermanded the order at the last moment and she lived – only to spend many subsequent years under house arrest. Think of Nelson Mandela and his 27-year prison stint or Mother Theresa in Calcutta’s slums. Or think of the heritage in Romney’s own party: Theodore Roosevelt bucked the special interests, busted huge trusts, and befriended the infant labor movement while cultivating a business-friendly environment; Thomas Dewey, who would eventually become one of the New York’s greatest governors, boldly walked through the city streets when he was a prosecutor, knowing mobsters had ordered a hit on him. Dewey lost the 1948 presidential election when he uncharacteristically withheld his views and tried to coast into the White House, but his influence played a crucial role in the formation of the moderate Eisenhower Republican.