Now that we have the attention of the main-stream media and have shaken the foundations of the socialist/status-quo agendas of the politically entrenched, many voting citizens are taking note and wondering – what exactly does a “Conservative Leader” look like.  For those of us who are old enough to have witnessed the leadership of President Ronald Reagan, we have the benefit of our witness.  However, many voters only know of President Reagan from news reports or perhaps text books.  More likely, they learned about him from a source with a liberal bias that paints a rather unflattering portrait.  Reagan was president over 20 years ago.  Since then, our youth have experienced the extreme-left (Pres. Obama) and the middle-left (Pres. Clinton), and the middle-right (Pres. George W Bush); all of which to some extent had domestic policies that increased the size of government and helped raise a generation of people that look to the government for their provision

Fortunately for those who are now asking the question, “What does a Conservative Leader look like?” we have a living example.  On February 11^th, recently elected New Jersey Governor Chris Christie called an emergency joint session of the New Jersey legislature to address the states $2.2B deficit – in a state where the constitution requires a balanced budget no less.  If you are wondering what a true “conservative” leads-like, have a listen to his speech.

Keep in mind that the relatively small state of New Jersey has a $2.2B deficit.  They got that deficit by playing “shell games” with the state budget – like forecasting state revenue increases when everyone knew that revenues would decrease.  The same kind of shell games our leaders in the U.S. Senate and House of Representative play when they send legislation off to the Congress Budget Office for scoring with a set of “assumptions” with which the CBO is required to constrain their analysis.  ”Assumptions” everyone knows have a near zero probability of coming to fruition. 

To further develop your understanding of how a “conservative” leads, I’m providing you with an example of how socialists and defenders of the status quoe lead for contrast.  Have a look at the response of democrats in New Jersey legislature as they try to defend spending money the citizens of New Jersey – one of the most heavily taxed states in the union – don’t have:

It’s time that our government officials, at all levels of government, come to terms with the same thing that every head-of-household knows – You need to live within your means.  And living within your means does not mean printing more money, borrowing more money, and spending your children’s money.   If you believe in these principles, if you believe in the power of the individual – not the provision of the government – then you are a Conservative.  Now, vote like one.

In 1961 Ronald Reagan was part of Operation Coffee Cup Campaign – a conservative group that was speaking out against Socialized Medicine as proposed by the Democrats.  His wisdom then speaks to the same issues we face today.

Up until the birth of our nation, the history of the world was a history of tyranny, where the people’s very existence was subject to the will of the people in position of authority; chiefs, kings, lords, and barons. In any given nation, you will find examples of leadership that led well as well as examples of those that did not. The people where constantly at the mercy of “personalities” in positions of power.

Our Founding Fathers knew firsthand the misery of government tyranny and they took great pains, sacrificing both blood and treasure, to establish a “more perfect union” where centralized government would never be in a position to impose on the liberty of the people. Understanding this is essential to understanding the conservative point of view in the current healthcare debate.

The proposals being forwarded by the Democratic controlled House and Senate will forever change the most fundamental relationship between our government and the people. Any law that puts the government in a position whereby it can dictate to the people what medical procedures will be allowed and what will not is a shift away from liberty and towards tyranny. What we are talking about here is a massive shift in power. Giving the government this authority touches virtually every aspect of lives.

Once the government has both authority and responsibility to manage the finances of the healthcare system then the government is in a position to start dictating behaviors to the people all in the name of saving healthcare costs. For example, in the UK if you smoke you are not eligible for certain heart treatments. Understand, this is not just a denial of payment; it is a denial of service… even if the patient wants to pay for it themselves they cannot get it. I am in no way a proponent of smoking. But frankly, I don’t want my government to be in a position to tell me I can’t smoke if I decide that that is what I want to do.

Now, some say that nothing is stopping private health insurance companies from doing the same thing. That is not true. If I decide I want to smoke and my current health insurance provider puts limits on available treatments as a result, I have the option of 1) opting out of the company and finding another or 2) paying for the treatment myself. However, under a centralized system – whether it’s government run or co-op run with government dictates – there is no choice. What the government dictates is it.

There are ways to solve the problems our current healthcare system faces without shifting the fundamental relationship between “We the People” and our government.