I do believe that the general intent of the bill is to unconstitutionally take control of the medical services of our economy. This particular provision, however, could simply be an attempt to state that the services to be provided can be paid for via direct billing from the customer accounts. If I were setting up a hospital, I might include very similar wording in the administrative directives. My point is that being a private entity, you would have no concern about the implementation of these directives at my private hospital.
I provide my observations simply to point out that there is a somewhat logical explanation for these provisions. Conservatives attempting to undermine the bill; e.g., us, may find the response to our complaints to be that this is merely a statement that the agencies will be able to direct bill, therefore, what’s the big fuss. At that point, our response should be that another valid interpretation of this provision is that clients will have to accede to direct billing from their bank accounts in order to get services. A true liberal will counter that our interpretation is a “stretch”. At this juncture, you, the conservative, should point out that nobody would have to worry about such language being a “stretch” if the enterprise were left in the private sector, where it belongs!
Thus, I am not trying to give cover to this bill. Instead, I am suggesting that this particular provision may simply be the result of haste on their part and the dangers entailed from these provisions are inherent only because they apply, inappropriately to a government enterprise.
The wording of this provision and others demonstrates that the writers have no general regard for individual liberty. It also demonstrates a false level of detail attempting to mislead the public into believing it is well thought out.
I think that Free Republic should devote a thread to the best arguments to bring up in town halls and short discussions. So far, the videos have produced one fellow who commented that Congress wants to push healthcare reform through in 6 weeks when Obama took 6 months to choose a dog for his kids. Another good rejoinder was the guy who asked the congressman why he wasn’t going to be covered by this “great” healthcare plan. [The congressman made NO response.] One-liners such as these provide sound bites which can have a big impact and are easy to grasp by the general public.
They are throwing the Constitution in the toilet and flushing it.