I have sent the following e-mail to the Faulk campaign:
Mr. John Faulk;
Re: comments left on my blog in response to my essay H.R. 676, The Battle is Joined;
H R 676 will have American Taxpayers picking up the health care cost for all 'RESIDENT" read that as illegal aliens. In Sheila Jackson Lee's supporting documents she states the 'VISITORS" to the USA will be given a National Health Care Card. Will we taxpayers have to pay for their trip to the sates also?
Help me defeat Sheila Jackson Lee
What you say is true enough, and it misses the point entirely. Would it make any difference if Sheila Jackson Lee dropped her demand for coverage for illegal aliens? NO! The issue is not who should be “covered” under HR676, but whether anyone should be forced into a government-run healthcare system at all.
As I made clear, the battle over HR676 or any other “universal healthcare” scheme is a moral fight involving the rights of the individual and the government’s proper role, which is to protect those rights. “American Taxpayers picking up the health care cost for all…illegal aliens” is a minor issue considering the enormous stakes involved in the Lee plan. By reducing the argument to one of who should or should not be “covered,” you are evading the essential issues involved, and thereby conceding defeat to the Sheila Jackson Lees of the nation.
I respectfully ask that you re-read and study my post, especially the links at the end of the essay. They provide a practical and moral roadmap to a true free market alternative to the dictatorial designs of Lee and her ilk. The fight over HR676 is a crucial one for America, which cannot be fought over minor technicalities. There is too much at stake here. If the Left is successful on HR676, it will not stop there. Food, clothing, shelter, higher education…the list is endless, and at the end of that road lies totalitarian socialism. The Dems have come down squarely on the side of the state against the individual. The GOP must offer a clear alternative, which means a principled, moral defense of individual rights.
Unfortunately, it doesn’t appear to be up to the task. Instead, I see one compromise after another after another. As a lifelong 59 year-old Republican, this is dismaying and demoralizing. Until the GOP steps up and re-establishes a principled commitment to free-market capitalism, limited government, and individual rights, it will continue to be hard for me to identify as a Republican.
To paraphrase Ronald Reagan…I did not leave the Republican Party; the Republican Party left me.
Mr. Faulk's focus on the immigrant issue is an example of fighting with muskets a battle that should be fought with nuclear missiles. It is all too common to the current Republican Party. Mr. Faulk focuses on a technicality. The bill’s (HR 676) sponsors will likely compromise by acceding to his objection to including illegal aliens (and perhaps a few other points), the bill gets passed in a “show of bi-partisanship,” and the Left scores a major victory.
HR 676 cannot be challenged except at its root…by challenging openly and consistently the very sacred cow of Medicare itself. It was inevitable that this day would come. There is quite simply no way one can rationally support government-run medicine for people over 65, but not under 65. If Medicare is good for some, it is good for all. If the "Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act" is bad, then Medicare is bad for all and should be abolished. It’s either-or.