Letter to all Senators, my California Representative, and the President

December 9, 2009

Dear Senator xxxxxxx:
    I saw this image on the Internet.

Ridiculous, right?

But what do you think will happen if people who are trying to avoid starvation or exposure are forced to pay to avoid bankruptcy due to illness? They are already almost bankrupt. That smile is going to disappear and people are going wonder about your sense of priorities. They may also remember what Benjamin Franklin once said -

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
or worse, Andrew Ford -
The price of liberty is, always has been, and always will be blood. The person who is not willing to die for his liberty has already lost it...

I urge you to defend our Constitution and our freedom by voting down and threatening to vote down any health bill that requires the purchase of insurance. There are surely many alternatives, including one that President Obama mentioned and quickly dismissed in the opening sentences of one of his speeches encouraging health reform, which maybe should be reconsidered.

Personally, I think it is more important to get something going on employment. I have included my thoughts on the back of this letter, as I have seen no such proposals in the news. I hope that it helps to generate a few ideas.


San Jose, CA 95129
(408) xxx-xxxx

My Suggestions for Health and Employment

If you really feel the need for health reform, maybe you should consider no longer requiring or subsidizing employer purchased or selected health insurance, and instead establish some model insurance plans and a national market place for health care prices and insurance, with every provider publishing their price list. That way anybody can see what the current cost of any proposed health treatment would be, and we would not have the current scenario; where the least able to afford treatment (those without any insurance) are charged 10 to 30 times what the most able to afford treatment are charged. People could then decide for themselves what is fair and what is right to do, and health care costs would be policed by people themselves. In addition, health care would no longer be tied to employment.

Make the first 10000 per year paid to any employee free of any taxes or other requirements on the employer and protect the first 10000 per year of any individual's earned income (which should include interest and dividends at least for retirees) from ANY attachments or taxes. Without the health "tax" and other required employee benefits, businesses would be more willing to hire in difficult times. Protecting the first 10000 of earned income from any attachments ensures that you dont take from an individual what they need to support and better themselves. Add in a plan that allows an individual to defer some income above that into an unemployment fund which they can tap upto their undeferred level when unemployed, but usable by the state for subsistence unemployment benefits for others, and you have a fund that funds itself from fearful people who are still working when times are scary like now. Make people who are claiming subsistence unemployment benefits (not deferred income) or welfare get themselves presentable, out of their homes, and into the unemployment office to collect their benefits, and you make work much more attractive than unemployment.

I also have ideas to raise employment by building up the infrastructure for our future. Our current interstate highway system was built with public funding, not private. A highway upgrade that reduces our dependence on oil would be highly beneficial to our country and worth paying for. I dont see the one I have in mind proposed yet - maybe it is still one of many being evaluated? That was hoping one of them would follow up - but nobody did :-(

Follow up

  • 2011-09-20 Michelle Bachmann says tax breaks should replace employer health plans
  • Index