opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
David Harsanyi
David Harsanyi
5 Feb 2016
Obama's Mosque Speech Was a Dangerous Fantasy

For eight years now, the president has reprimanded the American people for their attitudes about Islam. And … Read More.

29 Jan 2016
What If Trump Wins?

There are many potential outcomes to a Donald Trump GOP nomination. And every one of them is a disaster for conservatives. … Read More.

22 Jan 2016
It's an Era of Angry Populism and No One Is Immune

As many conservatives grapple with the growing prospect of a Donald Trump presidential nomination, I've … Read More.

Commerce Is the Culture War


It's always curious to watch the champions of "choice" decide what choices to champion and what choices to dismiss for the common good.

If you believe that the Obama administration's decision to force Catholic institutions to pay for and offer (directly or indirectly) products the church finds morally objectionable is an assault on religious freedom and free speech, you probably also realize the importance of consumer choice. After all, when government dictates what people buy and sell, it dictates much more.

First, let's ponder the precedent: Obama argues that government not only is empowered to force every adult to purchase a product in a marketplace (in this case, health insurance) but also can demand that providers sell certain products in this market (in this case, contraception). Washington, then, has the ability to direct both seller and buyer if it deems such actions beneficial for society.

And, needless to say, when Democrats deem something beneficial for society, they have a strong tendency to start treating this something as if it were a "right." As it stands, you have the "right" to a free condom, and should you forget or neglect or utilize this right, you have the right to an abortion that is partially funded by fungible taxpayer dollars. (If, however, a couple keep a child, they have no right to use their tax dollars to shop for a school outside their own neighborhood or, apparently, find a health care plan that comports with their values.)

As many of you know, there are "negative rights," as in my right to be protected from harm if I try to buy, say, birth control. And there are also "positive rights," as in my right to have birth control provided for me. In the eyes of many liberals, condoms, health care, salubrious foods, housing, etc., should, if there is any decency in this nation, be positive rights.

Thus, anyone failing to provide these things is really just "denying" people access.

So, the argument goes, by failing to offer birth control, the Catholic Church is actually preventing access to reproductive health care.

A neat trick.

If we need an example of how limiting consumer choice can ignite social, economic and quality issues, we can turn to the similar one-size-fits-all debacle of "rights" called public education. Yes, there are Philistines like me who believe that exposing schools to market forces would spur innovation and better outcomes. Surely, there is little doubt that if we extricated schools from state monopolies and transformed parents into consumers, the many arguments about God, history, politics and Darwinism — or whateverism is grating against your sensibilities — would be fought in the comment sections of websites rather than in classrooms.

Don't get me wrong; the left believes that parents should be free to teach their kids whatever they'd like, just not in the schools they happen to pay for.

Health care is similarly destined, no doubt. The intent of Democrats is to create a system with uniform coverage. So what we will be left with is a bunch of highly regulated, interchangeable insurance companies offering virtually identical plans with no incentive for innovation and absolutely no reason to tailor products or plans to appeal to the many diverse groups in this country — religious or otherwise.

They have one consumer to please and one set of morals to worry about. The state. If you don't like your plan, switch to another one just like it. If you can't afford to leave your employer's plan, then join one of those fabricated exchanges run by government.

If you've got some religious beef, beg for an accommodation.

If you don't like the answer, well, hey, where you gonna go?

It's like a theocracy ... without the God part.

David Harsanyi is a columnist at The Blaze. Follow him on Twitter @davidharsanyi. To find out more about David Harsanyi and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at



1 Comments | Post Comment
So you want to keep our health care system as is, leave it to the free market? Under the free market system our health care options are dictated by our ability to pay, the company our employer has a contract with, and the health care plan itself, what they will and won't cover and pay for, not to mention the difference between what the provider charges compared to what your insurance allows. Hosp bill 10K. Ins will maybe pay 8k. You pay the rest or hospital eats it.
After paying one third of every paycheck for coverage, you now have to meet your deductible. Choose a high deductible you pay a lower monthly premium. Your insurance company doesn't pony up a dime till you pay your deductible. And it rolls back to zero every year. New insurance year in October and you just paid 4k toward your deductible in September. Bend Over. Come October the deductible again starts at 5k. All out of pocket. It didn't cost your insurance a penny. Next year, same thing. This continues till you reach your maximum out of pocket, say 15K.
Also, the free market plan decides how much your co-pay and deductable will cost you and it has the discretion to apply limitations and exclusions (None of which benefit the consumer). Lose your job, lose your insurance. You could purchase COBRA. So who can afford COBRA when they're employed, let alone unemployed? Didn't get sick throughout your 20 years of insurance but get sick after your insurance ends? It's like you never had coverage.
Compare Obamacare: "A system with uniform coverage" (Rich and poor alike will have healthcare coverage)"Highly regulated, interchangeable insurance companies.." (about time the vultures were regulated).." offering virtually identical plans with no incentive for innovation.." (the incentive being money) (Obamacare is an innovative plan that offers healthcare to all) .."and absolutely no reason to tailor products or plans to appeal to the many diverse groups in this country religious or otherwise." (The poor and rich will have equal access to medical care).
Obamacare, is decidedly superior to no medical insurance or limited coverage. Today if your or my no job, no medical insurance neighbor/friend racks up a $50k+ hospital bill the hospital will have to write it off. Guess who pays for it in today's free market??????????
Comment: #1
Posted by: demecra zydeem
Mon Feb 20, 2012 3:40 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right: comments policy
David Harsanyi
Feb. `16
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
31 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 1 2 3 4 5
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Walter Williams
Walter E. WilliamsUpdated 10 Feb 2016
David Limbaugh
David LimbaughUpdated 9 Feb 2016
Froma Harrop
Froma HarropUpdated 9 Feb 2016

7 Nov 2012 Democrats Are the Silent Majority -- For Now

6 Aug 2009 New Rules for Radicals

5 Nov 2009 Don't Stress on Stress