Sunday, November 21, 2010

Congressional Health Benefits Are Not Hypocritical

Somehow, the Left got it in their minds that anti-single-payer & anti-Obamacare Congressmen accepting the health benefit that comes with their new jobs is hypocritical by virtue of it being government-run healthcare.  This misses the point by a mile.

The distinction is between government as an employer and government as a general overseer and manager of everything under the sun.  It is not improper for government-as-employer to offer health benefits.  (At least not any more improper than it is for any other employer.)

What these Congressmen oppose is the creation of (1) a government monopoly/socialization of health care, and/or (2) heavy-handed federal control and regulation such that health care may as well be fully socialized (e.g. Obamacare).

These Congressmen are opposed to a systemic government health care regime, not merely the compensation of government employees.

Frankly, this distinction is so obvious that those criticizing Republicans on this matter must be feigning ignorance.


Larry said...

What makes you think they're "feigning" ignorance?

JoeCollins said...

I suppose I should consider the old advice to never attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence, but those screaming the loudest about this seem to be the more intelligent ones. If they are truly ignorant then I weep for the future.

Anonymous said...

I think some of the people were most upset by the "my insurance doesn't go into effect for 28 days? What am I supposed to do in the meantime??? Is there something I can purchase in the interim?" questions. Because, you know, that whole "gap coverage" idea was so terrible and all...

I think that sufficiently steers away from "government as employer". I agree with you that accepting insurance from your employer is thoroughly acceptable, even if - shocker - that employer is the government.