(280) RESPONSE & OBSERVATION

I have been asked how I have calculated the percentage of the people who are uninsured in the United States. Accepting the government's figures. There are 300,000,000 people in the United States and that 50,000,000 of them are uninsured, 50,000,000 divided by 300,000,000 equals 17%. I have rounded the 17% up to 20%. Understand, this figure represents people who are uninsured, not people who are not receiving medical care. The medical system in the United States takes care (in some form or fashion) 98% of the people. It is a liberal sleight of hand to point to the number of people who are uninsured. In the liberal mind, going to a clinic or a charity hospital has a stigma attached to it and no one should be stigmatized. Instead, a massive bureaucracy should be created that doles out medical care. According to government estimates, within X years, 95% of the people will have health coverage under the proposed plans. However, in order to achieve this result, people who have insurance plans in place, including Medicare, have to take a reduction in benefits, and they have to pay higher prices for their coverage. This morning, I paid a $150 co-payment on a medication that had been prescribed to me by my doctor. The co-payment used to be $10, but after I started using the government-provided Plan D of Medicare, my co-payments have drastically increased. Again, I point out that I am not allowed to deduct any of this from my taxes. Yet, the government proposes that we increase taxes on the rich (whoever that is) to pay for care of the poor. Obviously, Robin Hood still lives in the hearts and minds of the folks who occupy important positions in Washington. I do not know a single doctor who does not provide some pro bono service. I am a lawyer, and I provide a lot of pro bono services every year--and I am glad to do it. I think it is my contribution to the welfare of society.

I also note that not a single politician has suggested that all medial costs, including the cost of insurance and preventative maintenance be tax deductible. The government would rather impose additional taxes and pay a bureaucracy to dole out medical care. Allowing a tax deduction is just too simple.

* * *

Maine is having an election on whether same-sex couples should be married. The real question is: should anyone be allowed to marry? If you have children, whether you are married or not, you are required by law to support them, and people go to jail every year who refuse to support their children. It is a complicated bureaucratic nightmare to get someone in jail, but it happens every day. The moral is don't have children you cannot afford.

Drifting back to the marriage conundrum, a person can have (let's say a man) several girlfriends, he can have children with those girlfriends, he can have torrid sex with the girlfriends, and all of this is permissible under the law. But let him enter into a contract with a woman that the state becomes a party to, that person becomes known as a Wife. If he takes on another Wife without ridding himself of the first Wife, he has committed a high crime--and our crazy, conservative Courts cannot wait to put the sap in prison.

Respectfully submitted,
Donald M. Heavrin,
Life in the fast lane