forgottenliberty.com

Is Government Run Health Care a Moral Duty and the New American Dream?

Over the weekend, Bill Clinton and Al Gore gave speeches at the annual Jackson Day dinner in Tennessee. They both referenced the passing of Ted Kennedy and the current health care debate. Their remarks show the fundamental difference between the conservative and liberal view of government. While the liberal focuses on bigger government and more social programs to solve things like poverty and health care, a true conservative will seek to limit government involvement and believes in individuals and the free market to solve almost all problems. Clinton and Gore’s remarks bear witness to this.

First, lets look at a line about health care from Clinton’s speech as reported by Politico,

“I’m not a very good politician any more; I just say what I think,” Clinton said. “But I have been waiting for this for 40 years … to recreate the American dream.”

Apparently, Clinton believes the recreation of the American dream is government reform of health care (a government takeover of health care).  This is vastly different from the traditional definition of the American dream.  The American dream was about the freedom to be anything one wanted to be, to be able to rise as high as one can and succeed or fail based on one’s own abilities and hard work.  People crossed the Atlantic Ocean because of the individual liberty and freedom from government control found in America.  They did  not come here because they thought the government would take care of them.  People in the Old World used to say that the streets in America were paved with gold.  This saying did not come about because of some government funded work project to pave streets and stimulate the economy.  It came about because liberty and the free market were unleashed in the early days of our country.  Limited government, individual liberty, personal responsibility, and the free market set the foundation for success and the American dream.  Why should we, as Clinton says,  recreate it to involve government nannyism and control?

Clinton’s remarks are very revealing of the liberal mindset, but Al Gore said something that is even more insightful.

From the same Politico article,

Playing off the focus of the Kennedy funeral on the Gospel of Matthew’s parable of Jesus taking care of “the least of us,” Gore thundered that the country has “a moral duty to pass health care reform. This year.”

What is so insightful in this remark is the fact that Gore tries to combine religion and moral authority with government.  Gore’s statement is consistent with the Statist view of all authority (including moral authority) resting in the government.  This, of course, is opposite of the “all power resides in the people” view that our country was founded on.  On the surface, saying that the government has a moral responsibility to provide health care may sound good to some people.  However, this is dangerous, because it takes power away from the people and gives it to the government.  It would require the government confiscating more money from the people and taking many medical decisions away from them.  How is that moral?  I don’t want the government taking money from me and giving it to someone else they decide needs it for health care costs.  I want to decide for myself who I give my money to.  I also want to decide for myself which doctor I go to.  The government should not have the authority to decide for me which doctor I can see or what medical procedure I can have.

Gore’s interpretation of the words of Jesus is also wrong.  Jesus said, “Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.”  Gore takes this to mean the government has the moral duty to provide health care.  He is taking the words of Jesus out of context.  The parable he is referring to(Matthew 25: 31-46) is about an eternal reward  for those that take care of the hungry, thirsty, or sick… not a government program.  The conservative believes we all, individually, have a moral responsibility to care for those who are in need.  This is consistent with the Judeo-Christian values our country was founded on.  This is an individual responsibility and, if one believes the words of Jesus, we as individuals will be held accountable for our actions.  To imply that the government is the one who is supposed to take care of those in need is inconsistent with Biblical values and our Constitution.  Charity is not the job of the government, but of the people.  The people will always be able to administer charity more effectively than the government and will be more effective in spotting fraud of abuse.

Politicians like Clinton and Gore (and Obama, Pelosi, etc.) are trying to alter the foundational beliefs of our country.  They are trying to take more power and freedom from the people and give it to the government.  We need to fight this and educate the population about the benefits of individual liberty and the free market.  Many Americans have forgotten liberty.  They need to be reminded of it so they do not fall prey to politicians who promise them things like free health care and use terms like “moral authority” when refering to the implemetation of a new government program.

Related posts:

1. How Will Obama’s Health Care Plan Lower Costs?
2. Health Care Reform Passed the House, It’s Up to the Senate Now
3. Sorry, No Health Care for You part 1
4. Big, Liberal, Socialist Government Has Failed

Click here to subscribe to Forgotten Liberty