The Press-Dispatch
Issue link: https://www.ifoldsflip.com/i/825219
The Press-Dispatch Wednesday, May 17, 2017 D-1 OPINION Submit Letters to the Editor: Letters must be signed and received by noon on Mondays. Email: editor@pressdispatch.net or bring in a hard copy: 820 E. Poplar Street, Petersburg With the passage of a new health care bill in the House, the corri- dors of Congress are teeming with lobbyists fighting reform in order to protect the money they get off the government gravy train of cur- rent law. When talking about Medicaid, we are talking about big money. Current federal expenditures are $ 389 billion. The Congressional Budget Office projects this to in- crease to $ 650 billion by 2027. Medicaid has been a backdoor for getting the country on a sin- gle-payer government health care system. Just since 1980, the per- centage of Americans on this gov- ernment single-payer system has exploded from 8.7 percent to 18.3 percent in 2013. Obamacare expanded this sys- tem to include families up to 138 percent of the federal poverty line, and bribed states to expand cover- age, with the federal government picking up 100 percent of the bill for the first three years, unlike coverage for pre-expansion en- rollees, in which states share the costs with the federal government. Because Medic- aid is simply govern- ment health care it is marked by waste and inefficiency. The un- disciplined spending just drives up health care costs and drives down health care qual- ity. University of Michigan econ- omist and blogger Mark Perry points out that from 1998 to 2016, the overall consumer price index increased by 47.2 percent. But over the same period, prices for medi- cal services went up 100.5 percent and for hospital services 176.6 per- cent. Why did health care costs in- crease two to three times more than everything else? Because hardly anyone pays their own bills. There is no market discipline. Health care markets are distort- ed from top to bottom by govern- ment, regulations and bureaucrats. Noth- ing is more person- al than health care; sadly, in no market- place are individuals less in control of their own selves. Insurance companies and gov- ernment decides what you can and can't buy and what you pay in this totally regulated and bureau- cratized business. Perry notes that from 1960 to 2016, the percent of all health care expenditures that were paid by third parties - - insurance com- panies or the government - - went from 52.4 percent to 89.5 percent. Perry also notes that prices for the 20 most popular cosmetic med- ical procedures - - various cosmetic surgeries, liposuction, Botox injec- tions, etc. - - went up just 32 percent The election of 2016 exposed the tension within the Unites States between a secular verses a spiri- tual way of life. The nation of France is likewise wrestling with similar issues. In their recent election for President, France chose to continue upon the path of multiculturalism and inclu- sion. France is doomed. [That is another column.] I am really not a curmudgeon, just a realist. I look for the best in people, but the reality is that the pressure exerted upon the mass- es to conform to a secular world- view is palatable: you can see the results. I hope for a better tomorrow for my children and grandchildren, but I do not at this time suggest things are going to get better. Modern man is caught in a par- adigm of conflict that is not going to change anytime soon. Consider the daily headlines; worldwide, we are plagued with conflict and vio- lence and the demand that some- thing spectacular be done! The progressive and secular theology that emerged from the Enlightenment Era continues to fail because it rejects [natural law] that mankind must have a relation- ship with its Creator [God]. Western Civilization is a result of Christian- ity with its rich ethnos deeply rooted in kin- ship with one another; it's crumbling; and its loss of influence is not by happenchance but is the result of unseen forces that Christians refuse to acknowl- edge. Why do things go wrong? The apostle Paul wrote centuries ago, "…we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principali- ties, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wicked- ness in the heavenly places. Since World War Two ended [72 years ago], we have been trapped by varying degrees of internation- al and social conflict that has slow- ly stripped away the relationships or glue that holds a civilization and people together: ethnicity, family, religion, gender, and nationality. We bemoan wars, yet the na- tions of the world continue to arm themselves for the next one. Our institutions of higher learn- ing reinforced by the mainstream media and hollyweird indoctrinate us that all the aspects of human- ness [natural law] are social constructs and are not real. That is why the pro- gressives attack peo- ple with conservative values with career ending labels: sexual identity [homophobe], ethnicity [racists or xenophobic], religion [superstitious nutjob], family [Neanderthal], and nation- ality [terrorist or extremists]. But what about wars? The Twen- tieth century saw two global wars, a cold war which was ideological, and now a "War on Terrorism" that again is ideological and is global in nature. Time and space prevents me from listing the social issues that Social Justice Warriors demand ac- tion upon. Are we living in a Matrix or an Orwellian world? George Orwell wrote that we cannot see what is in front of our nose. We can artic- Continued on page 2 Continued on page 2 Continued on page 2 Minority View by Walter E. Williams The Weekly by Jill Heuring What do Leftists celebrate? Points to Ponder by Rev. Ford Bond Why things go wrong A Ryancare fix for Medicaid Pursuit of the Cure by Star Parker Colleges should be accredited by states Heritage Viewpoint by Edwin J. Feulner Does anyone out there think higher education doesn't cost enough? Or that there are plenty of ideological points of view for stu- dents to choose from? I didn't think so. Which is one reason that the Obama administra- tion's hostility toward for-profit col- leges was so unfortunate. Policies that limit the ability for new insti- tutions to enter the higher-educa- tion market can only exacerbate its high price and lack of intellectual diversity. So why isn't the Trump admin- istration making greater efforts to change this? The Department of Education, after all, recently moved forward with the Obama administration's decision to termi- nate recognition for the Accredit- ing Council for Independent Col- leges and Schools (ACICS). This was startling news to the 245 col- leges that ACICS oversees, most of which are for-profit schools. Heavy regulations on higher ed- ucation is bad policy in general, but no one should be singled out. Reg- ulations should at least be sector- neutral in their application. Regu- lations place an undue burden on for-profit institutions that lim- it their ability to grow and improve. With America more than $1.3 trillion in student loan debt, the federal government shouldn't be picking winners and losers, and driving students toward one type of institution over another. Rather, policy should be geared toward diversifying educa- tion choices and allowing students to pursue a wide range of options that put them on a path to reaching their career and life goals. Critics of the for-profit sector of- ten point to the sector's relatively low graduation rates and contrast them with those who pursue bach- elor's degrees at four-year institu- tions. However, a true apples-to-ap- ples comparison would be to look at students who pursue credentials at for-profit institutions versus those who attend community college. Both types of insti- tutions offer programs that typically run about two years, and both have more anal- ogous student popu- lations — that is, ma- ny students work part time or full time, and are pursuing higher education later in life. The Obama adminis- tration heavily praised the com- munity college sector, even pro- posing making these schools "tu- ition free." However, fewer than 20 percent of community college students graduate within 150 percent of the time their program is supposed to take. By contrast, two-year for- profit institutions have an average completion rate of 63 percent. The Department of Education's decision to remove recognition for ACICS, alas, isn't unusual. It's May Day celebrations were held all across the fruited plain, with leftist radicals and unionists worshipping the ideals of com- munism. Communism is an ide- ology calling for government con- trol over our lives. It was created by Karl Marx, who – along with his collaborator, Friedrich Engels – wrote a pamphlet called "Man- ifesto of the Communist Party." In 1867, Marx wrote the first vol- ume of "Das Kapital." The second and third volumes were published posthumously, edited by Engels. Few people who call themselves Marxists have ever even both- ered to read "Das Kapital." If one did read it, he would see that peo- ple who call themselves Marxists have little in common with Marx. For those who see Marx as their hero, there are a few historical tid- bits they might find interesting. Nathaniel Weyl, himself a former communist, dug them up for his 1979 book, "Karl Marx: Racist." For example, Marx didn't think much of Mexicans. When the Unit- ed States annexed California after the Mexican War, Marx sarcasti- cally asked, "Is it a misfortune that magnificent California was seized from the lazy Mexicans who did not know what to do with it? " En- gels shared Marx's contempt for Mexicans, explaining: "In Ameri- ca we have witnessed the conquest of Mexico and have rejoiced at it. It is to the interest of its own devel- opment that Mexico will be placed under the tutelage of the United States." Marx had a racial vision that might be interesting to his mod- ern-day black supporters. In a let- ter to Engels, in reference to his socialist political competitor Fer- dinand Lassalle, Marx wrote: "It is now completely clear to me that he, as is proved by his cranial for- mation and his hair, descends from the Negroes who had joined Mo- ses' exodus from Egypt, assuming that his mother or grandmother on the paternal side had not interbred with a nigger. Now this union of Ju- daism and Germanism with a ba- sic Negro substance must produce a peculiar product. The obtrusive- ness of the fellow is also nigger- like." Engels shared Marx's racial philosophy. In 1887, Paul Lafar- gue, who was Marx's son-in-law, was a candidate for a council seat in a Paris district that contained a zoo. Engels claimed that Lafar- gue had "one-eighth or one-twelfth nigger blood." In a letter to Lafar- gue's wife, Engels wrote, "Being in his quality as a nigger, a degree nearer to the rest of the animal kingdom than the rest of us, he is undoubtedly the most appropriate representative of that district." Marx was also an anti-Semite, as seen in his essay titled "On the Jewish Question," which was pub- lished in 1844. Marx asked: "What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money. ... Money is the jeal- ous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist. Money de- grades all the gods of man – and turns them into commodities. ... The bill of exchange is the real god of the Jew. His god is only an illu- sory bill of exchange. ... The chi- merical nationality of the Jew is the nationality of the merchant, of the man of money in general." Despite the fact that in the 20th century alone communism was re- sponsible for more than 100 mil- lion murders (http://tinyurl.com/ zafgs5p), much of the support for communism and socialism is among intellectuals. The reason they do not condemn the barba- rism of communism is understand- able. Dr. Richard Pipes explains: "Intellectuals, by the very nature of their professions, grant enor- mous attention to words and ideas. And they are attracted by social- ist ideas. They find that the ideas of communism are praiseworthy and attractive; that, to them, is more important than the practice of communism. Now, Nazi ideals, on the other hand, were pure bar- barism; nothing could be said in favor of them." That means leftists around the world will continue to celebrate the ideas of communism. Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason Uni- versity. I got it from my momma PUZZLED ABOUT WHAT TO READ? ..and you will have your solution. subscribe to 812-354-8500 I think it's time to talk about the birds and the bees. When a mommy and daddy love each other very much...they have a baby. And through genetics, they pass down different traits to their baby. All this to say, "I got it from my momma," and I'm very thankful, on this Mother's Day, that I got it from my momma. Let's start with my physical appearance. With few excep- tions, I got my entire look from my momma, and it's clear to any- one that sees us together. Sever- al years ago, I was looking at old pictures of my aunts and uncles at my grandma's house, and I got confused because I found what I thought was a picture of me at my first Communion. Turns out it was actually a picture of my momma. So, Momma, on this Mother's Day, thank you for my beautiful face and my hot bod. I also inherited several per- sonality traits from my mom- ma. Some good and some bad, of course, but they all make me "me," and I wouldn't trade them, or my momma, for anything. We both love to help people and do a good job of it, we both have a hard time saying no, and we both put family first. Not to mention we're both incredible moms, if I may be so bold. But not all personality traits are hereditary. Some are learned, a direct result of the environment one was raised in. Not only did my momma contribute to my genetic makeup, but she also shaped me into the woman I am today by rais- ing me in a loving and safe envi- ronment. She raised me to be car- ing, to put others first and to love the Lord. So, Momma, on this Mother's Day, thank you for my glowing personality. Finally, my mom shared her val- ues with me. As I said above, the Lord is a priority. Family is a prior- ity. She lives her life that way, and I do my best to follow her example in my own family. Growing up, we got in more trouble saying a mean thing about our sisters than say- ing a curse word. Our whole fam- ily attended all the big events in each other's lives (and not just be- cause we were in a lot of the same activities). We always end every phone conversation with "I love you," even if it was just a quick call. Our family is so close because of this glue my mom put in from the beginning, and I can only hope my family will grow to be just as close. So, Momma, on this Mother's Day, thank you for teaching me what's important. It's not all roses. We have our struggles. But no matter what happens, I know my momma loves me, and I hope she knows I love her, too. If she doesn't, I obviously haven't taken her lessons to heart, because love pours out of every action she does. As I reflect on motherhood this Mother's Day, I'm thankful for the example my momma has given me so I have a prayer at being a good momma to Flannery.