Health Care - Promoting the General Welfare

From the Center For Medicine in the Public Interest (CMPI). “The Center for Medicine in the Public Interest is a nonprofit, nonpartisan research and educational organization that seeks to advance the discussion and development of patient-centered health care.” (CMPI Website)




Our founders framed our government and intended it to be a limited government, recognizing as George Washington cautioned that government is “force” and “like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." The video above aptly illustrates the dangers of governmental involvement in free society. Unfortunately, many politicians point to the general welfare clause of the Constitution as justification for expanding government into increasingly more areas of our lives, the latest attempt being a national health care system.

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." (read here)

In 1792 while arguing against a bill sponsored by general welfare government expansionists, James Madison provided the historical context of the general welfare clause. A Founding Father himself, his authoritative remarks refute any notion that the general welfare clause was intended as a “catch all” authority for government to do anything it deems as good for the population in general.

"There are consequences, sir, still more extensive, which, as they follow dearly from the doctrine combated [government expansion to promote the general welfare], must either be admitted, or the doctrine must be given up. If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their Own hands; they may a point teachers in every state, county, and parish, and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision for the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress; for every object I have mentioned would admit of the application of money, and might be called, if Congress pleased, provisions for the general welfare.

"The language held in various discussions of this house [House of Representatives] is a proof that the doctrine in question was never entertained by this body [Congress]. Arguments, wherever the subject would permit, have constantly been drawn from the peculiar nature of this government, as limited to certain enumerated powers, instead of extending, like other governments, to all cases not particularly excepted." (read more here)

Citizens, whenever government presents a governmental solution to problem sets in our society, please consider the realities presented in the Health Care Hoops video when deciding whether or not to support it.

Rejecting the Right

“We would not accept the yoke of Christ; so now we must tremble at the yoke of Caesar.” -Bishop Fulton J. Sheen.


A premise of this blog is that our constitutional liberties can only be preserved on the foundation of a moral citizenry. As Patrick Henry put it, “No free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue; and by a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles”. Accordingly, I view philosophies and ideologies contrary to moral discipline, and those who espouse them, as threats to and enemies of the Constitution.

I want to highlight two speeches, one religious and one secular, which tied the degradation of our society to an effort to eliminate discrimination between right and wrong. I highly recommend everyone find time to watch both speeches. You can view, listen, or read the first speech entitled “Morale Discipline” by Elder D. Todd Christofferson in its entirety (15 min) here. You can view the second speech entitled “How Modern Liberals Think” by Evan Sayet in its entirety (48 min) here.

Elder Christofferson defined moral discipline as “self-discipline based on moral standards”. He posits that, “In the end, it is only an internal moral compass in each individual that can effectively deal with the root causes as well as the symptoms of societal decay. Societies will struggle in vain to establish the common good until sin is denounced as sin and moral discipline takes its place in the pantheon of civic virtues”.

Mr. Sayet’s speech describes some of the political and secular circumstances that exist in today’s society that result in just the opposite. He details a modern philosophy that brands any government, society, or even individual who denounces sin as bigoted. This philosophy, he says, attempts to eliminate discrimination between good and bad, right and wrong, or behaviors that lead to success versus behaviors that lead to failure in society.

Quotes from the speeches follow below (emphasis mine). The first quote from the Wall Street journal wasn’t directly quoted in either speech, but was included as a footnote to Elder Christofferson’s speech.


Wall Street Journal on Societal Decadence:

“Sin isn’t something that many people, including most churches, have spent much time talking about or worrying about through the years of the [sexual] revolution. But we will say this for sin: it at least offered a frame of reference for personal behavior. When the frame was dismantled, guilt wasn’t the only thing that fell away; we also lost the guidewire of personal responsibility. . . .

“The United States has a drug problem and a high-school-sex problem and a welfare problem and an AIDS problem and a rape problem. None of this will go away until more people in positions of responsibility are willing to come forward and explain, in frankly moral terms, that some of the things that people do nowadays are wrong” (“The Joy of What?” Wall Street Journal, Dec. 12, 1991, A14).”

Elder Christofferson on Societal Decadence:

“The societies in which many of us live have for more than a generation failed to foster moral discipline. They have taught that truth is relative and that everyone decides for himself or herself what is right. Concepts such as sin and wrong have been condemned as “value judgments.” As the Lord describes it, “Every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god”(D&C 1:16).

“As a consequence, self-discipline has eroded and societies are left to try to maintain order and civility by compulsion. The lack of internal control by individuals breeds external control by governments. One columnist observed that “gentlemanly behavior [for example, once] protected women from coarse behavior. Today, we expect sexual harassment laws to restrain coarse behavior. . . .

“Policemen and laws can never replace customs, traditions and moral values as a means for regulating human behavior. At best, the police and criminal justice system are the last desperate line of defense for a civilized society. Our increased reliance on laws to regulate behavior is a measure of how uncivilized we’ve become.”

“In most of the world, we have been experiencing an extended and devastating economic recession. It was brought on by multiple causes, but one of the major causes was widespread dishonest and unethical conduct, particularly in the U.S. housing and financial markets. Reactions have focused on enacting more and stronger regulation. Perhaps that may dissuade some from unprincipled conduct, but others will simply get more creative in their circumvention.3 There could never be enough rules so finely crafted as to anticipate and cover every situation, and even if there were, enforcement would be impossibly expensive and burdensome. This approach leads to diminished freedom for everyone. In the memorable phrase of Bishop Fulton J. Sheen, “We would not accept the yoke of Christ; so now we must tremble at the yoke of Caesar.”

“In the end, it is only an internal moral compass in each individual that can effectively deal with the root causes as well as the symptoms of societal decay. Societies will struggle in vain to establish the common good until sin is denounced as sin and moral discipline takes its place in the pantheon of civic virtues”

Elder Christofferson on Intelligent Use of Agency:

“…[I] have heard a few parents state that they don’t want to impose the gospel on their children but want them to make up their own minds about what they will believe and follow. They think that in this way they are allowing children to exercise their agency. What they forget is that the intelligent use of agency requires knowledge of the truth, of things as they really are (see D&C 93:24). Without that, young people can hardly be expected to understand and evaluate the alternatives that come before them. Parents should consider how the adversary approaches their children. He and his followers are not promoting objectivity but are vigorous, multimedia advocates of sin and selfishness.

“Seeking to be neutral about the gospel is, in reality, to reject the existence of God and His authority. We must, rather, acknowledge Him and His omniscience if we want our children to see life’s choices clearly and be able to think for themselves. They should not have to learn by sad experience that “wickedness never was happiness”.

Evan Sayet on Modern Liberalism:

“[Modern Liberalism] is diametrically opposed to that which is good, right or successful”.

“[Modern Liberalism] sides with evil over good, wrong over right, and the behaviors that lead to failure rather than the ones that lead to success”.

“The modern liberal looks back on [the history of] human civilization and knows only one thing for sure, that none of the ideas that mankind has come up with, none of the religions, none of the philosophies, none of the ideologies, none of the forms of government – none have succeeded in creating a world that is devoid of war, poverty, crime, and injustice. So they are convinced that since all of these ideas of mankind have proved to be wrong, the real cause of war, poverty, crime, and injustice must be found, can only be found, in the attempt to be right.

“If no one ever thought they were right, what would we disagree about? If we didn’t disagree, surely we wouldn’t fight. If we didn’t fight, of course we wouldn’t go to war. Without war there would be no poverty, without poverty there would be no crime, without crime there would be no injustice. It’s a utopian vision, and all that’s required to usher in this Utopia, is the rejection of all fact, reason, evidence, logic, truth, morality, and decency.”

“The best way to eliminate rational though [or] the attempt to be right, is to work always to prove that right isn’t right, and to prove that wrong isn’t wrong.”

“[Modern Liberalism’s] one criterion for truth, beauty, honesty, etc, etc, is does it tear down what is good and elevate what is evil. Does it tear down what is right and elevate what is wrong. Does it tear down the behaviors that lead to success and elevate the ones that lead to failure so there is nothing left to believe in.”

Sayet on a Cult of Indiscriminateness:

“The way the elite do this is by teaching our children, starting with the very young, that rational and moral thought is an act of bigotry. That no matter how sincerely you may seek to gather the facts, no matter how earnestly you may look at the evidence, no matter how disciplined you may try to be in your reasoning, your conclusion is going to be so tainted by your personal bigotries, by your upbringing, by your religion, by the color of your skin, by the nation of your [7th] great grandfather’s birth, that no matter what your conclusion is, its useless, it is nothing other than a reflection of your bigotries; and therefore the only way to eliminate bigotry, is to eliminate rational thought.”

“[The rising generation is] raised to believe that indiscriminateness is a moral imperative, because it’s opposite is the evil of having discriminated… In order to eliminate indiscriminateness the modern liberal has opted to become utterly indiscriminate. The problem is, of course, that the ability to discriminate, to thoughtfully choose the better of the available options, is the essence of rational thought [or as Elder Christofferson put it, ‘the intelligent use of agency’].”

Socialism: The Core of the Health Care Debate II

“…no true American can be a socialist or a communist or support programs leading in that direction.” -- Ezra Taft Benson, American Heritage of Freedom

In my recent blog, "Socialism: The Core of the Health Care Debate", I discussed how the unconstitutional principle of re-distribution of wealth is the selling point of a nationalized health care system, naively accepted by some well meaning individuals and embraced by the greedy. I also mentioned that many politicians champion health care reform to increase their political power by making the citizenry increasingly more reliant on government solutions and increasingly less reliant on themselves. I read an article today by Roger Hedgcock with a title I may well have used for my blog, "Health Reform is Spelled F-O-R-C-E". The article reminded me of additional reasons to eschew national health care.

If America socializes our health care, public costs will drive health care decisions, not individual choices or desires.

The government will eventually determine when “end of life” medical care is cost prohibitive, or wasteful and pointless. (See video where President Obama implies that individuals are incapable of making good “end of life” decisions; that government must save them from evil medical practitioners who will milk them dry by loading their elderly parents up with needless tests.)

Health care costs will cause Federal regulation to expand into a broader range of activities since nearly everything affects health in some way or another. For example, it is conceivable that the Federal Governement will try to regulate the likes of McDonalds out of business for nutritional reasons. It is conceivable that they will force doctors to perform abortions and euthanasia on demand.

Roger Hedgecock writes:

“When you cut through the different bills working their way through Congress, cut through all the speeches, all the charges and counter charges raging in the debate on health insurance "Reform"---at the bottom line is governmental force. A shift of power and money and choice from the citizen, taxpayer, and patient to Government.…

…The same mentality that led President Clinton to blurt out that taxes were good because "we know better how to spend your money than you do" is evident today in the arrogant attitude that only this behemoth increase in government power can save us from our inability to provide health care to ourselves and our loved ones.”

Beware of this Pandora's Box, America!

An Educated and Moral Citizenry Needed to Preserve Liberty

I first saw this picture on the Drudge Report. It shows what the Washington Mall looked like after the crowds attending President Obama’s inauguration departed. (What happened to the Woodsy the Owl campaign to “help keep America looking good” anyway?) Dumbfounded, I was saddened to see this evidence that increasingly more of our citizens do not live by the Golden Rule, expecting others to serve them and clean up their messes. Am I making too much out of this? Does this not really indicate anything about the basic values held by those capital litterbugs? I'll let you be the judge.

I use this introduction to tee up some of my favorite quotes from wise men who expounded on the links between public morality, education, and the preservation of liberty:

“No people will tamely surrender their Liberties, nor can any be easily subdued, when knowledge is diffused and Virtue is preserved. On the Contrary, when People are universally ignorant, and debauched in their Manners, they will sink under their own weight without the Aid of foreign Invaders.” – Samuel Adams in a letter to James Warren, November 4, 1775

Bad men cannot make good citizens. It is when a people forget God that tyrants forge their chains. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, is incompatible with freedom. No free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue; and by a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles. – Patrick Henry

“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

“It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?

“Promote then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.” – George Washington in his farewell address.

“Too many Americans have lost sight of the truth that God is our source of freedom—the Lawgiver—and that personal righteousness is the most important essential to preserving our freedom. So, I say with all the energy of my soul that unless we as citizens of this nation forsake our sins, political and otherwise, and return to the fundamental principles of Christianity and of constitutional government, we will lose our political liberties, our free institutions, and will stand in jeopardy before God.” – Ezra Taft Benson, October 1979

"We are involved in an intense battle. It is a battle between right and wrong, between truth and error, between the design of the Almighty on the one hand and that of Lucifer on the other. For that reason, we desperately need moral men and women who stand on principle, to be involved in the political process. Otherwise, we abdicate power to those whose designs are almost entirely selfish." – Gordon B. Hinckley in "Stand a little Taller", pg. 15, July 2001

The Immutable Law of the Harvest Dooms Social Programs

Brian Mecham of Latter-Day Conservatives.Com brought a wonderful speech to my attention. In 1966, Elder Howard W. Hunter brilliantly exposed many fallacies of socialist theory through the light of the Law of the Harvest. Liberty was under assault in 1966 and still is today. I highly recommend that all defenders of liberty read "Law of the Harvest: As a Man Sows, So Shall He Reap". The speech is full of truths to inject into our modern day debates on the proper role of government.

I’ve chosen just a few choice quotes to leave on this blog. The full speech is available HERE.

“… there appears to me to be a trend to shift responsibility for life and its processes from the individual to the state. In this shift there is a basic violation of the Law of the Harvest, or the law of justice. The attitude of “something for nothing” is encouraged. The government is often looked to as the source of wealth. There is the feeling that the government should step in and take care of one’s needs, one’s emergencies, and one’s future.

“…as my friend…became a slave to his own ignorance and bad habits by refusing to accept the responsibility for his own education and moral growth, so, also, can an entire people be imperceptibly transferred from individuals, families, and communities to the Federal Government.”

“If you deprive a man of his right to fail in the righteous use of his property, you also deprive him of his right to succeed. If you remove from a man his right to “go to hell,” you likewise remove his free agency to go to heaven. Satan’s entire philosphy is based on a “something for nothing” philosophy: salvation without effort – a free gift…”

“In a very real sense, the true Law of the Harvest was restored – the law of justice, the law of mercy, the law of love. It was restored in a free country under the influence of a God-inspired Constitution which created a climate of freedom, opportunity and prosperity. The basic virtues of thrift, self-reliance, independence, enterprise, diligence, integrity, morality, faith in God and in His Son, Jesus Christ, were the principles upon which this, the greatest nation in the world, has been built. We must not sell this priceless, divine heritage which was largely paid for by the blood of patriots and prophets for a mess of pottage, for a counterfeit, a false doctrine parading under the cloak of love and compassion, of humanitarianism, even of Christianity.”

“What can you do here and now? First, resolve to live the Law of the Harvest and realize that this will involve a price, and with some that price will be very, very heavy. Then go to work, resisting temptation, overcoming bad habits, and developing the good habits of an upright character, …

“Like the light set on a hill, like the leaven of a loaf, you will influence for good our entire country and help preserve this great Republic and its inspired Constitution and its great climate of freedom.”

TIM HAWKINS: The Government Can

Thanks to my friend Paul Trujillo for bringing this video to my attention. Tim Hawkins, comedian, political satirist, highlights wonderfully what our constitutional form of government ISN’T supposed to be, but what our present day government IS becoming.



Think about it patriots. If it is so, it's because we allow it to be.

SOCIALISM: The Core of the Health Care Debate

Being stationed overseas sometimes makes it challenging to keep abreast of the latest political and social debates and developments back home. I spent some time this Labor Day weekend catching up on the health care debate in congress. It appears that the proponents of nationalized health care are on the ropes, so patriots need to maintain the momentum and defeat their cause. There are many well meaning citizens in our country that support nationalized health care because no one has yet laid bare the real issues and exposed the fallacies in the health care debate. Nationalized health care is not charitable, is calculated to increase dependency on government, and significantly erodes the freedom established by our Founding Fathers, furthering our nation’s decline towards the absolute despotism of a socialist government.

The prophet Ether wrote, “…when ye shall see these things come among you …awake to a sense of your awful situation, for it cometh to pass that whoso buildeth it up seeketh to overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations, and countries; and it bringeth to pass the destruction of all people, for it is built up by the devil, who is the father of all lies;" (Ether 8:24-25).

The big fallacy, I mean lie, perpetrated in the health care debate is that since it is good to take care of the poor and needy, a public health care system must be good. This is the same argument used in the War in Heaven – Satan’s position was that he could bring to pass a great good if no one had free agency and he forced them to keep the commandments. Satan spoke of lofty goals, but power and control were his real goals.

Nationalized health care is about force and control – granting more power to the government to forcibly take the fruit of one person’s labor, and control it’s disposition. This is not charity. Jesus commands men to follow his example and be charitable, but allows them the freedom to choose.

Watch the following clip and think about the main points that Milton Friedman attempts to teach Phil Donahue’s audience:



Clip Summary:

There is a difference between greed and self interest.

Socialism has failed to deliver on its promise to eliminate poverty to every nation who embraced it.

More people rise out of poverty when societies are free and citizens rely on their own industry instead of government doles.

There are no “angels” in our government we should trust any more control or power to than our constitution grants them.

The prophet Ether warned that, “… whatsoever nation shall uphold such secret combinations, to get power and gain, until they shall spread over the nation, behold, they shall be destroyed;” (Ether 8:22).

Some of our citizens support the idea of nationalized health care because they haven’t adequately considered the Christian implications of forced charity. Others do so because they want power and gain – power over someone else’s money for their gain. Many ignore the commonsense realities of the law of the harvest and desire to get something for nothing, or more for less. Many that are currently on the government dole desire to stay on it, and not earn their own way. Many politicians want to increase their political power by making the citizenry increasingly more reliant on government solutions and increasingly less reliant on themselves. Most disturbing to me are the many that desire to divorce their aging parents with their health care problems and force society to pay for them. This in turn creates many who realize that they have not provided for their own future healthcare needs, cannot rely on their own offspring to tend to them in their waning years, and therefore desire that government forcibly take money from others in society to pay for what they and their thankless children cannot or will not.

Patriots should ensure that the debate on nationalized health care is centered on our national decline towards the despotism of socialism. The core of the issue has always been about greed, lusting for control over the fruit of another's labor; in a word, socialism. Wherever this greed exists, we should expose it and not allow someone to camouflage it with altruistic platitudes.