ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

American Intent

Updated on March 22, 2014

By: Wayne Brown

I listened to the talking heads today debating the potential directions the new Congress might take with the changes from the recent mid-term elections. Speculation ran a gambit of subjects from immigration to Cap And Trade, to the current healthcare legislation. Most seemed to think that the Republicans are bent on reversing the healthcare laws as they are currently enacted. Most also doubt that it can be done in totality with the Democrats still in control in the Senate and the President vowing to veto any such legislation crossing his desk.

When we boil it down, the current healthcare system set to go into effect in 2013 contains a vast volume of unknown content. Legislators who passed the legislation enacting the system admitted to not reading the 1900+ pages bill prior to voting for it. Even the House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, remarked that “we have to pass this bill so we can see what is in it!” I must admit that may be the most monumentally stupid statement coming out of the entire debate. Well, they passed it and the American public still has no idea what is in it so it only makes sense that some legislation should be enacted to repeal the law so we can once again “try to see what’s in it!”

There are isolated items which have come to the forefront of the discussion as this issue was debated. A number of them have exposed that the President misled the public with what the bill would and would not do especially in the areas of free choice and the cost of the medical care under the legislation. There are those speculators who say that both sides of the aisle believe that there are good things in the existing legislation which should be maintained. If that statement is true, then it is not likely there will be an attempt to wholesale repeal the current legislation as enacted.

For all the discussion going on as to the merits and faults of the current healthcare system established under the recently passed legislation, it is my opinion that we are really missing the point. I find it ludicrous that we are even arguing across the aisle about a bill that no one seems to know the content of well enough to discuss it intelligently. I am of the opinion that the first step, one that should have been taken months ago by the way, should be to put the current plan on the table and let’s examine it in the private sector, in the public sector, in the media sector, and God forbid, possibly even the legislative branch where it should have been read in its entirety in the first place.

Until that step is accomplished and a representative depiction is presented to the public of the current plan, no other decisions should be made. From my perspective, we, as the citizens of America, know little or nothing about this plan for good reasons. There are people within our own government who had rather it not be known until the plan is in place and operating. Then, it might just be too late to do anything about it. If this is such a good plan for America, then let’s get it on the table and maybe we can find some people industrious enough and actually willing to read it from cover to cover. Then and only then will we know where we stand.

For all of the friction and argument both pro and con regarding this healthcare plan thrust upon the American people, there are factors to be considered. I hear some factions expressing thanks that all people will have healthcare available. These same people scoff at the idea that individuals will actually be required by law to buy it without choice of the provider. These same people scoff at the indication that the cost of this insurance plan will increase on average at least 13% in the first year even if you currently have insurance. These same people scoff at the idea that the majority of Americans never envisioned a plan that went this far and changed so much yet we as citizens, like the medical industry, know little or northing about it.

Those are valid concerns and there are some among us and in high places in government who feel all of that can easily be remedied once the plan is enacted and in place. They do not see any real basis for concern or resistance. From my perspective, I feel there is one large and glaring error that is the fly in the soup in this whole discussion. That point happens to be that this plan brings “government run healthcare” to America. That single consideration should be enough to send the American public running in all directions away from such a consideration. For all the problems we may have in the medical and healthcare industry, having the government enter into the everyday operation of it is not something people of sound mind would even consider. If that point does not get through to you, take a good look at the price of postage stamps in America. Take a look at veterans health care. Take a look at Medicare. There are any number of examples which indicate that this is not another place that the government needs to be inserting itself into the lives of its citizens regardless of how good the plan may be. Plain and simply, it takes away the citizens power of choice, it stymies research and development, and it turns away the most talented among us who would otherwise choose a career in medicine. In light of all of that, it does nothing for one of the largest factors driving health costs today…tort reform. For all those pages expended in this plan, there was no tort reform. So, now the government can simply use taxpayer money to satisfy all of the cases that come forward in terms of malpractice issues. That over sight on the part of the lawyers in Congress passing this plan will go far to line their pockets with taxpayer money once they return to private practice.

Initially, this legislation as enacted will likely create a framework of compliance for all competing insurance companies in the USA who are medical service providers. It will stipulate who is covered, how they are covered, and what if anything may be restricted in terms of that coverage. It may also go so far as to stipulate what can be charged in terms of the coverage. With a framework in place then the insurance companies have to determine whether they stay in the game or get out based on whether or not they think they can make a profit. At the next level, the system likely changes to mirror what is seen in today’s corporate insurance programs. In this case, the corporation is self-insured and the insurance company merely acts as the administrator of the program. They provide guidance on coverage, etc. which will already be stipulated in the government regulations. At that point, the government or might I more correctly say, the taxpayers become the single payer provider for all healthcare in America and the insurance companies are relegated to collecting fees from the government to administer a single program in a given region or multiple regions. This will be the closest thing to a “choice” that anyone will have. Ultimately ,we the taxpayers foot the bill and the government makes all the decisions. If it sound familiar, it is an old formula which has been employed over and over and continues to fail miserably.

Hopefully the conservative shift in Washington will signal a new direction in America. Hopefully, we can minimize some of the damage which has been thrust upon the American taxpayer since the Democrats took control of Congress in 2007. Hopefully, we can find effective methods to reduce some of the spending that has been going on now to outrageous levels and avoid raising taxes on the public to cover the deficit only to return to the same old tired process of looking for more ways to spend money.

America needs to lose the greed, power-hunger, and devious methods which have been in place for too long now in our federal government. America needs to continue in its demand that spending be reduced and sanity applied. America needs a government which is far smaller than the current one which has grown by a factor 25% in just the past two years.

Certainly the mid-term elections and the changes which came with it have sent a strong message that America wants a different approach, a different direction, a different intent from its government and the officials populating it. But this is just the beginning; not the end. America must stay on message and remain vigilant in letting the leadership of this nation know that they do work for us and they should be following “the will of the people ” in all they do in the future.


© Copyright WBrown2010. All Rights Reserved.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Wayne Brown profile imageAUTHOR

      Wayne Brown 

      7 years ago from Texas

      @American Romance...As I have said the primary problem here is that this whole thing is run by the Government...that trumps anything that appears good about it because they good will never come true for the taxpayer. WB

      @eovery...Amen, absolutely, Amen...Can a brotha get a witness? Thank ya. thank ya very much! WB

    • eovery profile image


      7 years ago from MIddle of the Boondocks of Iowa

      The congress passed it without reading it.

      One does not have to read it to know that it is a socialistic, spread the wealth around policy. One dooes not need to read it to know the intent.

      As they say, hell is paved with good intention, and the liberals use good intentions to do all their work, but we are stuck paying for it.

      Keep on hubbing!

    • American Romance profile image

      American Romance 

      7 years ago from America

      Wayne, first of all texasbeta loves to rant and flaunt his 500 dollar internet purchased education, while never having nothing of substance to share with others!

      I learned today that after next year (thanks to health care) that if anyone sells anything for over 600 dollars you must send that person a 1099 before the end of the year! Excellent hub and voted up!

    • Wayne Brown profile imageAUTHOR

      Wayne Brown 

      7 years ago from Texas

      @sueroy333...Your situation is one example that supporters of this legislation held up touting how much it was going to help. They claimed that insurance was currently unavailable. I am sure it was not easy to get or keep but at the same time you certainly don't need legislation that will raise the current costs by 30%. Our current system needs some tweaking but it did not require major overhaul...this is nothing but a step in placing the public at total dependence on the government which in turns makes the government all the more powerful while taking away our freedoms. By the way, I have a whole series similiar to this one that starts with the word "American". You might want to read those as well. I suggest that you write a hub on your situation and share on passion on this important subject. Thanks much. WB

    • sueroy333 profile image

      Susan Mills 

      7 years ago from Indiana

      You have no idea how much this hub stirs my soul. We have a kid with a ton of health issues, we have worked really hard to get, and keep, private insurance for her and now, thanks to Obamacare, her rates are going up by 30%. They're hoping people like us will hop on board and let the government take care of them. They'll turn blue waiting for that to happen in my family!

      I guess I'm a conspiracy theorist. I don't believe this is about health care, I believe they bill it as such to sell a bunch of crap to bleeding hearts. You don't overhaul a whole system because there are a few cracks in it.

      Let's see, billions of dollars going through the hands of people who can't be trusted to pay their parking fines. Yeah, there won't be any corruption there.

      Banks, cars, financial systems, and health care--what can they take over next?

    • Wayne Brown profile imageAUTHOR

      Wayne Brown 

      7 years ago from Texas

      @daydreamer13...Thank you...glad it worked for ya! WB

      @drbj...I tend to be a common sense sort of guy who still believes 2+2= 4 when it doesn't, I want to know why. These folks never checked the math...their goal was to just accomplish the task regardless of the outcome. What a shame that we have people serving in government with that ethic and moral fiber. Thanks for your great comments! WB

    • drbj profile image

      drbj and sherry 

      7 years ago from south Florida

      The Obama government is spending $3 for every $2 in revenue; that is a fact.

      I could not stop thinking while reading your hub, Wayne, that it feels like the inmates are running the institution. What does the rest of the country and the world think of us when the major supporters of the healthcare bill announce they have not read it, but enact it (the law) "so they can see what's in it." ???

    • daydreamer13 profile image


      7 years ago

      Well put. You said it!

    • Wayne Brown profile imageAUTHOR

      Wayne Brown 

      7 years ago from Texas

      @Micky Dee...Yeah...those CPA's, they're just a bunch of party animals huh? LOL! WB

    • Micky Dee profile image

      Micky Dee 

      7 years ago

      Yep. We elect lawyers who have their own ATM machine in the courts and legislative branch. They obviously cheated through school and didn't read while they were there. Hoe would they lose "good study habits"? It's ridiculous. Quit voting for lawyers. We'd be better with CPAs.

    • profile image


      7 years ago

      Wayne -

      A good post. If Obamacare is so good, why has the administration granted 111 waivers (and counting) for companies to be excluded from it? This is an ugly little secret that is just now coming to light.

      All the Best,


    • Ken R. Abell profile image

      Ken R. Abell 

      7 years ago from ON THE ROAD

      Thanks. This is good stuff. I don't think very many of our elected officials get it at all---I'm convinced that Obama doesn't it & perhaps lives in such a delusional view of history & himself that he's incapable of ever getting it.

      Time will tell if the Republicans have the cajones to follow through on their plan to de-fund aspects of the Health Care debacle.

    • Amy Becherer profile image

      Amy Becherer 

      7 years ago from St. Louis, MO

      The government relys on the complacency of Americans. I snapped, hook, line and sinker over the rhetoric and image that our current leader projected. Despite Obama's, now worn out, media campaign that depicted a man that listens, even the most casual observer knows America has been sold a padded, false, bill of goods. Just like the trailers advertising an upcoming movie, it's rarely as memorizing or exciting as the film. His education and demeanor provided the means to

      give hope for a president, unlike George W. Bush, with an IQ above cretin level. Unfortunately, that intellect also provides the means to more convincingly deceive and hide the "transparency" he based his agenda upon. If the insipid comment regarding the healthcare bill by House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, wasn't so telling, it would be comical. "The will of the people?" Government would have to care first.

      I wonder what the plan is, with unemployment remaining rampant, on collecting all the fines for non-compliance due to inabiity to pay for government mandated health insurance. Maybe prisons will be the next big hiring blitz to insure all the new-age criminals can be tracked, rounded up and jailed. With the twisted minds running this administration, it will be a step up for the struggling. A free roof, healthcare, meals delivered to your door, cable TV, computers, libraries and time and access to an education may produce a better breed of future leaders. Thank you, Wayne, for a beautifully written stir of a wakeup call.

    • Wayne Brown profile imageAUTHOR

      Wayne Brown 

      7 years ago from Texas

      @Tom Whitworth....I couldn't agree with you more Tom. This is not a step that will fix anything relative to healthcare so much as it will diminish our rights as citizens. WB

      @C.A. Johnson...I have seen the bill as passed but have not read it as you have. From my perspective, the premise on which it is based is flawed from the get-to...the government decides. America has a substantial health care system now with cutting edge research and the ability to attract some of the best minds in medicine. I see all that dying with the government entering into every aspect of it. The American people have always had the "opportunity" to purchase healthcare. For most of us, it is a decision about either/or in our lives. We give up something to have that benefit. I find it absurd that those in government actually believe we can "fine" our way to 100% coverage and the taxpayer will not suffer in the process...the taxpayer will suffer big time just as soon as the government loses control of the costs which will be right after it starts. The is legislation was passed in the dead of night on the back of backroom deals and little read by anyone with the power to vote for it. Healthcare improvements in America can be made simply by starting with some legislation eliminating "pre-existing" elimination and address some areas of Tort Reforem. Mind you, Tort has a place in the healthcare scenario but frivilous lawsuits designed only to gain big settlements and line the attorney's pockets is not one of them. That in itself is one aspect of victimizing the consumer in this country yet it was ignored in this legislation. There were insinuations and promises of reduced costs, etc. offered by administration officials all the way up to the President on this legislation which are already proving to be false and they are willing to admit it was false now that the legislation is passed. The best thing our lawmakers can do is to legislate some improvements and cost controls into the current freemarket model and over time continue to tweak it as needed. There will never be a system in this country or any other that can afford to provide free medical care to millions without burdening the taxpayer with the debt...that is the final result. Thats much for your input, Charlotte, much appreciated! WB

    • C.A. Johnson profile image

      Charlotte Anne Johnson 

      7 years ago from South Hutchinson, KS

      Hi, Wayne.

      Point in fact, I have read the health care bill. I will even concede that it has some good points that would benefit the majority. However, some of the things that are little mentioned and often unknown are the fines for those who cannot afford health care. Once the bill is completely in place, those people who fall in the middle (people not on welfare but do not earn enough to purchase insurance through work or other outlets)will be fined at a rate of $400-$600 per month that they are not insured. If people cannot afford health insurance what makes the government think that they can afford the penalties for not having it?

      The 1099-K has been a lightly glossed over issue. The far reaching problems regarding the 1099-K affect even the smallest of entrepreneurs including Hubbers like us. Although we may only garner $2 per year for our writing efforts, by definition regarding the 1099-K, we are freelancers with a business. That means every purchase that we make in regards to our writing whether it is a new computer, disks on which to save our work, or choose to write at the local diner; we are responsible for gathering the private information of the businesses and individuals ( other freelancers, servers, etc.) that we ended paying $600 or more per year. This is information that we in general are not privy to and may have difficulty gathering. The flip side of this is that should we fail to gather this information and submit the assorted 1099-K forms to the IRS we are subject to fines and possible charges of tax evasion. Further, considering how the bill is structured, any entity that we did not fill a form out on that also failed to submit their form properly can be charged with as a conspirator.

      Then after these headaches we also have issues where age limits apply to the health care rule and where life saving procedures have to go before a board of inquiry before than can be performed. This is not a death panel but more like a justification panel. Will the procedure improve the quality of life, extend life, or will the procedure leave the patient in a similar existence afterwards. The bill will allow the government to decide on long term care of coma patients as well as affect the donation of organs. Organ donation can also be forced in certain circumstances despite a victim's or family's wishes.

      I think the Republicans have a good idea regarding the de-funding of particular aspects of the health care bill in order to fine tune it until those parts can be removed.

      Charlotte Ann

    • Tom Whitworth profile image

      Tom Whitworth 

      7 years ago from Moundsville, WV


      Your hub hits the nail on the head as this Federal Government Health Care Plan is just a power grab by Federal bureaucrats and Fat Cat politicians of the Socialist bent and that has never worked anyplace on the face of the entire Earth!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • Wayne Brown profile imageAUTHOR

      Wayne Brown 

      7 years ago from Texas doubt, there is plenty of evidence if you just look around! WB

    • Wayne Brown profile imageAUTHOR

      Wayne Brown 

      7 years ago from Texas

      @Texasbeta...I will gladly post your comments and let the discussion go from there. I will apologize to you that I was not posting hubs while Bush was in office...I did not happen to be on HubPages at the time. In terms of growth of the federal government, I could give a damn less as to how it grew. The majority opinion of most Americans is that spending is out of control in this country and that we need to change that direction. I find it interesting that you find Tort Reform such an insignificant aspect of the medical care costs when it seems to be an area that continually comes up in the discussion of rising medical costs. Maybe its a semantics issue. In terms of government expansions, I could care less what is driving the expansion, etc. I might remind you that the Democrats took over the purse strings in Congress in late 2007, so I would not be to quick to say that the Bush government was too large by its own choosing. I don't have an axe to grind here for the Bush Administration. My point here is the government is wholly unqualified to manage healthcare in this country...hell, they have trouble running a post office. So you right ahead and believe whatever it is that makes you feel good but government run healthcare makes me shake in my boots. WB

    • profile image


      7 years ago

      First of all, you are incorrect in almost all accounts posted in this hub. First of all, the only reason you don't know what is in the health care bill is that you are too lazy to read it. It is out there, easily accessed in its full script, and in a vast number of summarized versions. Dude, you don't even have to get off of your couch to look it up.

      Second of all, you state that tort reform is "one of the major costs driving up healthcare costs." That is either a lie on your part, or you just don't take any time to actually look anything up before you spout the Republican bumper stickers of our time. Tort reform accounts for $11 billion of total healthcare costs. We spend $2.3 trillion a year. Now tell me squire...what percentage is that? It is less than 1/10 of 1%. These are figures that span the entire aisle of partisans.

      Third, you state the government has expanded 25% since Obama. Says who? I'll mail you $100 bucks if you can find a viable statistic to support that claim. The labor statistics are only summarized to 2008 in most cases. You can find the exact number of federal employees every month since 1939, but it takes quite a bit of work to find it...which I did, but you have to earn it sir. By the way...the exact number from 2 months ago was less than any month of the Bush presidency since August 2007. So technically, when you look at the actual number...Obama's administration has a smaller government than Bush did from Aug 2007 until the end of his 2nd term. That is a fact. Now, you might be addressing is the cost of govt vs the gdp, in which case you have an argument. However, you didn't state that. The fact is, Obama has and always has had a smaller government than Bush did. Were you writing hubs when George was in office? Nope.

    • eovery profile image


      7 years ago from MIddle of the Boondocks of Iowa

      I still think a lot of the congressmen do not get it.

      Keep on hubbing!


    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at:

    Show Details
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the or domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)