Dick Morris makes the case for a "consensus" reform plan that would alleviate the partisan tension and "do something" about health care. Is this really a good plan, especially with rabid Marxists in the majority?
Clearly, Dick Morris is not a consistent Constitutional conservative. His ideas of "consensus" and "triangulation" may be good political science (in the Machiavellian sense) but they are bad political philosophy. His ideas are too much Rawls and not enough Locke. Morris' ideas may produce popular electoral victories, but more must be done to change the culture and philosophy underlying our political landscape.
Private property and the sanctity of contracts are inalienable. The government does not have the right to take away our liberty or property, nor interfere with or vitiate private contracts. A government that claims such rights is illegitimate and "it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it."
Morris' ideas to deny insurance companies the right to protect themselves (and all their customers, vendors, and creditors) with lifetime caps on payouts... or to deny insurance companies the right to charge higher rates commensurate with higher risk are clearly violations of the rights of innocent insurance companies. Such is the perverse and pernicious nature of regulation: innocent companies are branded guilty until proven innocent, in clear violation of due process. Actually it's worse than that. An innocent company must continually jump through the arbitrary hoops of a tyrannical government.And there is no point at which innocent companies are ever released from this unjust perpetual persecution.Haven't innocent insurance companies been victimized enough by government thuggery?
For those who still respect the Commandment THOU SHALT NOT STEAL, it is morally imperative to block any further restrictions on the rights of innocent insurance companies. Let insurance companies actually do what they were meant to do -- manage risk and price risk properly.