By Louis Avallone
–
It would be easy to write about the Supreme Court’s historic, unprecedented decision to extend federal power last month by sanctioning “Obamacare,” or socialized medicine, for 300 million Americans, or the Court’s determination that funding this law represents a “tax” on American citizens, and not a “penalty.” We could talk about the semantics in choosing one of those words over another, and how the Court held this law constitutional only because Congress could have identified its enforcement as a “tax” (and not a “penalty”).
We could also discuss how Justice Roberts supposedly betrayed conservatives, and the Constitution, all in one fail swoop. We could discuss how others feel, instead, that Justice Roberts’ vote was actually helpful to conservatives, and constitutional liberties, because “Obamacare” can now be repealed by 51 (instead of 60) votes in the U.S. Senate, having now been declared strictly a “tax.”
We could also debate here whether the Court’s decision actually strengthens individual liberties because the only “penalty” from failing to purchase “Obamacare” insurance is a tax, instead of house arrest or property forfeiture or jail time.
And you might also express relief that the Court did not uphold the law under the Commerce Clause, because that would have given Congress almost unlimited police power to mandate and regulate all sorts of behavior, for whatever Congress might deem a public benefit (and that could be unending, of course).
And maybe we would discuss the argument that the Court’s decision actually improves states’ rights, by declaring it unconstitutional, and a violation of the Tenth Amendment, for the federal government to withdraw Medicaid funding, or any other federal funding, for states that opt out of “Obamacare”.
Yes, we could talk about all of these propositions regarding the Supreme Court’s decision on “Obamacare” and participate in the handwringing and worry of its consequences, but with the sound of firecrackers still ringing in our ears from celebrating our nation’s independence on July 4th, I think it’s far more important, and productive, if history is to be our guide, to simply recognize that this law will not endure.
You see, the “Obamacare” law simply won’t succeed over time; but not because it is not well intentioned. Nor simply because Republicans in the Senate may get the 51 votes needed to repeal the law. It won’t succeed simply because good intentions are not enough and it violates one of the most important truths of life.
Let me explain. Yes, there are undeniable truths of life. Some are pretty basic, here are a few: Every problem you have is your responsibility, regardless of who caused it. Nobody has it all figured out. People embellish everything. Those who complain the most, accomplish the least. Putting something off makes it more difficult.
This all leads me to share with you one of the most important truths of life: There is “no free lunch” or in this case, “no free healthcare.” Nobel-prize winning economist Milton Friedman is famous for his “no free lunch” saying, and it refers to the reality that if any goods or services seem “free,” this is only because you are paying for it some other way. Or, more likely, while it may be “free” for some, there necessarily must be others that are paying the way. For example, over the next 10 years, under “Obamacare,” the American people will pay almost $1 trillion in new taxes for their “free healthcare.”
A “free lunch” (or “free healthcare”) or expanding the federal government is all well- intentioned, no doubt, but it isn’t what it seems. Just like our nation will spend $953 billion on welfare programs this year, yet we still have record levels of poverty. Deficit spending during the Obama administration has been nearly $5.17 trillion, in part to “save” jobs, but the long-term unemployment rate is at its highest level since 1948.
Then there’s the Social Security program that began in 1935. Legislators back then did not plan for it to be insolvent in 2037 or to start paying out more in benefits than it collects in taxes by 2016, but those are the facts, despite the intentions at the beginning. Nor did the Medicare program, started in 1965, include a plan for it to be insolvent by 2017. But it will be.
The same lessons will apply to “Obamacare.” The law simply won’t succeed, but not because it is not well intentioned, or because access to healthcare isn’t part and parcel of the principle that every life is sacred. It won’t succeed because there’s no exceptions to the undeniable truth that there is “no free lunch,” and the majority of Americans see that now, more than ever in recent times. In the words of Ronald Reagan, “It is not my intention to do away with government. It is rather to make it work — work with us, not over us; stand by our side, not ride on our back.” Well-intentioned legislation then, simply, is not, nor has it ever been, nor will it ever be, enough. And that’s why “Obamacare,” as a tax or penalty, simply won’t endure, regardless of what the Supreme Court calls it.