Folks may often wonder if some forwarded e-mails they get contain false or misleading allegations about public figures or issues, since forwards can originate anonymously or lack proper attention. But at least e-mails can be read by the receiver who can easily subject them to a “smell test” and do research to confirm validity if needed.
However, the House health care bill passed on Nov. 7 is another story. The 2,000 pages of legalese cannot be properly read by either politicians or the public in the short time allowed, therefore, claims as to the real meaning of the bill’s provisions are impossible to verify before voting. Instead, those voting on the bill may rely mostly on broad-brushed, but fervently proffered claims by under-informed lobbyists or proponents during debate on the House floor, who can allege whatever cure for health care, because after all, who really knows what is in the bill’s complex foot-high stack of paper anyway?
True health care improvements that preserve freedom and prosperity are in the best interests of all Americans. But false or unfounded claims about what health care ills an expensive proposed law will cure are in the best interests of none.
If lawmakers unknowingly pass health care laws that diminish Americans’ freedoms and prosperity while making existing health care even worse, that might be called foolish or negligence. If they do so knowingly, it might be called legislative malpractice. But in either case, who do you call to fix the problem? Snake oil busters?
