In March, as the Supreme Court considered the constitutionality
of President Obama’s partisan health care law, the American people
saw an event that could mark the end of bureaucrat-controlled
health care. At the same time, just across the street in the halls
of Congress, they witnessed a powerful reaffirmation of the
American Idea as the House of Representatives passed the Path to
Prosperity—a budget for the federal government.
The interconnectedness of these two events cannot be
understated. Taken together, they have refocused a long-overdue
debate about the proper role and scope of the federal government.
This debate will undoubtedly continue in the months ahead and build
to a crescendo in November, when the American people will have the
opportunity to make a defining choice about what kind of nation we
will be in the 21st century.
Perhaps no single issue crystallizes the choice before the
American people and the contrast between the two parties more than
health care. The differences between the President’s
bureaucrat-centered model and the model advanced in the Path to
Prosperity, which champions choice, competition, and individual
control, could not be clearer.
The bureaucrat-controlled approach to health care may have begun
with the best of intentions, but it quickly ran into the same
problem that it always does: bureaucrats are terrible at setting
prices in a market economy. As the federal government’s control
over health care grew, bureaucratic mistakes started to cause
serious problems. Government subsidies drove up costs; and health
care became unaffordable for those who didn’t qualify for them. As
a result, rising costs now threaten to leave our children buried
under a mountain of debt.
As it usually does, this approach called for more and more power
to be ceded to Washington in order to solve this problem—and for
the first time ever, the unlimited power to force Americans to buy
something. The result was “Obamacare.”
The President’s health care overhaul is emblematic of the wrong
way to address the problems in health care and Medicare. The law
raids Medicare by nearly $700 billion to fund a new, unsustainable,
open-ended health care entitlement. It creates a government panel
of bureaucrats with the power to impose price controls on providers
in ways that would result in rationed care and restricted access to
treatments. It vastly expands an already unwieldy administrative
state by creating 159 new boards, commissions, and government
programs. It is built around the flawed assumption that
bureaucrats, if given power over the marketplace, can curb rising
health care costs by expertly determining prices and dictating
treatment options to doctors and patients.
Ultimately, this approach transforms the relationship between
citizen and state, leaving individuals increasingly passive and
dependent on their government. Further, it substantially diminishes
the quality of and the access to care, as future policymakers cut
costs to meet budgetary bottom lines rather than patients’ medical
needs. There is no way for “experts” in Washington to know more
about the health care needs of individual Americans than those
individuals and their doctors know, nor should bureaucrats
second-guess how each individual would prioritize services against
costs.
The “fatal conceit” of the health care law stands in stark
contrast to America’s historic commitment to individual liberty and
personal responsibility. And the Supreme Court’s deliberations
showed indications that the bureaucrat-centered approach is just
not possible in America.
Our Constitution restricts the federal government to certain
limited powers, and reserves all other powers to the states and the
people. Our Founders trusted the American people, not an
all-powerful federal government, to act in their own best
interests. They trusted these actions would result in the greatest
good for all. Their trust paid off: America became the greatest
force for good the world has ever known.
The new health care law, which asserts unlimited power for the
federal government to decide how Americans should get their health
care, simply is not compatible with the Constitution.
In their deliberations, the Justices of the Supreme Court also
raised a very salient point: If this is the end of
bureaucrat-controlled health care, what comes next?
House Republicans showed them with the passage of Path to
Prosperity, which offers a new approach—one that maintains a
critical role for government but ultimately puts the American
people in charge, as they should be.
For the second year in a row, Republicans in the House outlined
a better way forward in health care. Our budget repeals the
President’s health care overhaul and keeps the protections that
made Medicare a guaranteed promise for seniors throughout the
years.
To the bureaucrats who have mismanaged the program into
bankruptcy we say: Enough. Your approach doesn’t work. Government
has never come up with a magic formula for lowering costs and
improving quality. It’s time to put 50 million seniors, not 15
bureaucrats, in charge of their own health care decisions. Forcing
insurance companies to compete is the only way to guarantee
quality, affordable health care for seniors that will last for
generations.
Implementing these reforms in Medicare can have the effect of
lowering health care costs for everyone; and that’s the
answer to the question, “What comes next?”
Our budget shows there are leaders in Washington committed to
building on this bipartisan consensus for patient-centered reform.
It shows how we can increase affordability for everyone, while
preventing government debt from threatening the health security of
seniors and the economic security of all Americans.
Putting our trust in the American people—and this goes beyond
health care—is what our budget is all about.
We get government bureaucrats out of the business of picking
winners and losers in health care and other critical sectors of the
economy. Instead, we trust the American people to make their own
decisions about what kind of cars to drive or what light bulbs to
use.
We give power over safety-net programs to the states, and tell
governments that are closest to the people: We trust you can do a
better job than the federal government designing these programs so
that they actually meet the unique needs of each community.
We lower tax rates by closing special interest loopholes, making
clear Washington doesn’t need to micromanage people’s decisions
through the tax code. We let hardworking taxpayers keep more of
their hard-earned dollars, and trust them to decide how to spend
it.
It is so rare in American politics to arrive at a moment in
which the debate revolves around the fundamental nature of American
democracy and the social contract. But that is where we are.
The President’s approach gives more power to unelected
bureaucrats, takes more from hardworking taxpayers, and commits our
great nation to a future of debt, doubt, and decline. This approach
is proving unworkable—in our Congress, in our courts, and in our
communities.
The contrast between the President’s approach and ours could not
be clearer. We put our trust in citizens, not government. Our
budget returns power to individuals, to families, and to
communities.
The Path to Prosperity represents a vote of confidence in the
American experiment. Putting our trust in the American people will
hopefully renew their trust in us. Americans should control their
destinies—and we trust them make the right choice about the future
of our country.
America is on the wrong track, and the President’s approach is
bringing us toward a debt crisis and a welfare state in decline. As
leaders, it is our obligation to offer the nation a better way
forward, and we have. We are offering the nation the opportunity to
realize a brighter and more prosperous future, in a way that’s
consistent with our founding values. And we do so with confidence
that, as they have countless times since our nation’s founding, the
American people will make the right choice and preserve the
American Idea for generations to come.
