A Pipe Dream...

Many of us heard President Obama's speech last night, addressing his health care reforms. It was about time. Most Americans, after all, have loudly protested the government-supported health care movement from the start. Unfortunately, President Obama changed nothing about his plan. His speech did not move Congress any closer to reforms that would put patients first.

Instead, President Obama did what he was famous for: orated in his favor. Rather then address the valid concerns of the people (regarding a health plan that does not uphold America as a republic), the President openly accused his critics of "scare tactics," and told the American people that if we don't get behind his plan - which he calls doing "nothing" - "more will die as a result." What a brazen attempt to lay guilt on people for having a (valid) differing opinion.

So what is Obama's heath care "reform", where, supposedly, nothing will change (begging the question: so of what use is the word "reform"?)? Just this: a public, government-controlled health insurance plan; a new federal definition of acceptable health insurance; an individual mandate that everyone purchase that insurance OR face a tax; and an employer mandate increasing the burden on the engine of jobs. Hmm. That does not sound like "nothing" to me.

President Obama ended by saying that his "door is always open" to discuss alternatives to his plan. So far, however, we have seen little consideration given to the types of reforms we have openly supported - such as buying health insurance across state lines, tax credits for Americans of all incomes, etc. These are real reforms that would work for real people. Unfortunately, as we've seen before, President Obama seems to care more about furthering his agenda. So the people lose.

I honestly wish that the president's quasi-socialist plan would work. And it would, if socialism was a successful theory of social organization. But as history has proven, time and again, socialism CANNOT work. Why? Because it relies on the inherent goodness of man; something that Christians (in particular) know to be false. We are a fallen world, full of fallen people. We will never band together as equals (on this side of eternity), because there will always be the few who do not work as hard to earn the privileges that socialism provides. Am I saying that we shouldn't look after the well being of our fellow man? Of course not. After all, Jesus commanded us to love our neighbors as we love ourselves.

What I am saying is that we cannot place our hope or trust in a political theory that has been tried, tested, and has failed. That's confusing the two kingdoms: the City of Man vs. the City of God. At it's most basic, we cannot operate as if man was inherently GOOD, when we know the opposite to be true.

What we need politically is what capitalism offers: INCENTIVE. Our democracy has always stood strong under the weight of that political ideal, so let's not drop it now, when we most need it.