Originally published November, 1993 in Good News Newspaper

Not since FDR and the New Deal has the Federal government set out on a “Great Imposition” into our economy, culture and personal lives. Even the English philosopher Thomas Hobbes could not have envisioned a “leviathan” the size that our current Democrat­ controlled government is in the process of creating. Perhaps the best description of what our government is doing comes from the Vice-President’s plan to “re­ invent government.” The problem is that “re­ inventing government” means throwing out any resemblance of Judeo-Christian-based principle and replacing it with a Big Brother­ knows-best secular-humanist mentality. This is no more evident than in Hillary Clinton’s prescription for socialistic medicine.

The Clinton health care plan stands to threaten this nation’s well-being on many fronts. One of the greatest dangers is to medical ethics and the right to life. Besides promoting abortion-on-demand, putting medical ethics into the hands of a liberal­ dominated bureaucracy will further shift the value of life from a sanctity of life ethic to a quality of life ethic. This is extremely dangerous because those who do not meet some bureaucratically-designated quality of life standard could justifiably be deprived their right to life in the name of cost-effectiveness. In a recent issue of Time magazine, writer Michael Kramer explained, “The Clintons’ true goal is the most ambitious of all, a change in the culture of dying.” In addition, Hillary Clinton herself has asserted that living wills and advanced directives will be imposed during the last six months of life when medical costs are the most expensive. In other words, when the cost of providing medical care exceeds your allotment or the bureaucracy determines what is your last six months, it will be time to “pull the plug.” With over twenty years of devaluing life through abortion, it is easy to see where this slippery slope is finally leading: into the mire of government-mandated euthanasia for the elderly, mentally and physically disabled and others who are a “burden” on society.

If the liberalization of medical ethics doesn’t threaten the right to life, health care rationing will. By forcing every American into a national health care program, the law of supply and demand dictates that there will be a shortage of quality care. Rationing will become a way of life as millions of Americans begin to take advantage of the “new and improved free” health care system. In reality, there will be a tremendous cost. The quality of care will decline as people are forced on to waiting lists or are relegated to less-than­ adequate treatment. The health of a majority of Americans will most definitely suffer as government has to assign priority treatment for only the seriously ill. And, for those who end up waiting, time will prolong their suffering or worsen their problems. Apparently the President doesn’t realize that you cannot give everyone something without drastically reducing quality and availability. This politics of equalization and leveling will only lead to the elimination of those attributes that have made America’s health care the best in the world. In the end, rationing means that we can expect government to make choices of when and how much (if any) health care we should have. The President should address the real problems with health care instead of letting government exacerbate it. Only a free market can offer real solutions that will provide the most efficient quality and quantity of care we need and desire.

The issue of privacy is also a major area of concern in the Clinton plan. Vital to the operation of the program is the acquisition and control of sensitive information about our personal lives. Submitting health records to the national government is a recipe for disaster. Should genetic testing or family history reveal certain predispositions to disease or illness, this information in the hands of bureaucrats could become powerful leverage for or against future treatment. To make matters worse, the Clinton plan will include mental health coverage. This should be a clear warning that this Administration intends to find out the psyche of the American people. Perhaps George Orwell was only off by ten years in his vision of a society controlled by a government that knows and controls the thoughts and values of its citizens. Having to give up consumer sovereignty is bad enough but turning over private physical and mental health information is like adding insult to injury.

Economically, America cannot afford national health care. Only this summer, the major issue was the budget and deficit reduction. Now the Clinton Administration wants to take over 14% of our gross domestic product. Short of another gigantic tax increase, there is no way the federal government can take on this amount of the private sector without significant costs. Even major reforms in the Medicaid and Medicare system would not make up the difference. The money will therefore have to come primarily from additional taxes levied on from the business community. This new financial imposition will, no doubt, wreak havoc on the economy through the loss of jobs and higher prices. Looking at prior budget trends of current social programs, we should expect national health care costs to soar every year. The evidence is that social programs go hand-in-hand with deficit spending. In the face of outrageous annual deficits and a monstrous national debt, the President and Congress should be heading away from another expensive government program and not towards the edge of financial ruin.

Should the Clinton Administration impose its health care policy, life in America will never be the same again. Given the experience of the policies of the New Deal and LBJ’s “War on Poverty,” a national health care program once implemented, may never go away. Worse yet, socialized medicine will finally force the middle class to become completely dependent on the federal government for entitlements. In essence, the Clintons’ have concocted a brilliant political strategy for the Democratic party to capture the largest voting constituency ever to become dependent on Democratic policies. (The Republicans better wake up fast and start offering “power to the people” proposals.) In addition to guaranteeing a reelection bid in 1996, the Clintons’ probably hope to place their names high in the annals of American history. Whatever the motive, one thing is certain. Who controls health care is going to be a battle for the life or death of American society. Are you ready to meet the challenge?

(Shane Wikfors is Administrative Director for the Tucson Chapter of Arizona Right to Life and a representative of the Tucson Christian Coalition. Married and the father of two, he is also a University of Arizona Economics, Political­ Science, and American History major.)