Subscriber Login

Forgot Your Username?
Forgot Your Password?
Declaration of Independence inherently socialistic PDF Print E-mail

Letter to the Editor:

Last week, after reading an opinion in this forum, I?became confused as to what was really in the Declaration of Independence. Imagine my surprise when I?decided to review that venerable document again, only to discover that it was inherently socialistic.

The preamble clearly states that “all men are created equal,” and therefore, all are deserving of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” I could not find any specific reference to universal health care, which in retrospect is a good thing.

Medical treatment in the late 18th century largely consisted of emetics, cathartics and phlebotomy (puke, poop and bleed).

Well-meaning physicians certainly facilitated George Washington’s demise, and when Alexander Hamilton imported an innovative physician from the West Indies to treat his yellow fever, he probably would have discovered that his physician was not on his plan.

Medical care and cost have come a long way since 1776. The question now is, who is going to pay for it?

Philosophically, some would argue that those who can afford health care can have it, and those who cannot will at least do their part to keep Social Security solvent for years to come by dying before they are eligible for benefits — an entitlement mirage.

Survival of the (financially) fittest might seem reasonable in a brutally Darwinian sense. After all, Sarah Palin’s “death panels” will need some criteria for allocating a limited resource. The issue, of course, is far more complicated than that.

Fortunately, the Declaration of Independence provides valuable insight into this dilemma. Far from suggesting that government should be drowned in a bathtub, it states that governments derive their “just powers from the consent of the governed.” Here is where it gets sticky, because in the opinion expressed last week, “the minority of Americans . . . think in this manner” (in favor of universal health care.

I would dispute that opinion on the grounds that HR 3590, or ObamaCare, was passed Dec. 24, 2009, with a vote of 219 to 212 in the House, and by a super-majority of 60 to 39 with one abstention in the Senate. It passed despite the Republican filibuster and was signed into law March 23, 2010, by President Obama.

In a representative demo­cracy (like our government), this reflects the will of the people without having to directly poll every single citizen. Indeed, it is the majority of Americans who think in this manner.

Furthermore, in its main body, the Declaration of Independence accuses King George III (not W) of a whole host of transgressions. At the top of the list “of repeated injuries and usurpations” is the following: “He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.”

Come to think of it, that sounds a lot like a desire for universal health care. I guess we are all Socialists.

Terrance Moe

Three Lakes

Tuesday, December 03, 2013 11:02 AM


+6 #1 2013-12-09 16:40
Nicely worded letter Terrance and I agree! I especially love it when those on the Far Right Scream about Obamacare or Single payer and it being Socialistic then in the next breate yell..."Keep your hands off my Medicare!".

Add comment

Comments exceeding 1,000 characters will not be accepted. Please refrain from using texting language and spell out all words. All comments are reviewed and must be approved before they are posted.

Security code