USAA testified before Congress as a model example of an existing insurance group that served the needs of its members, without unethical practices, and which turned a profit, which they invest in expanding their services.
So there was no need for legislating to ban profit, or to regulate anything else.
Another insurance group, Amica(?) is Christian based.
And automatically invests profits into serving the poor who cannot afford help.
This company is chosen freely by members, because of its charitable policy, and is not mandated. A friend who uses this company gave it good reviews on its service.
Again, another example of free enterprise companies already allowing effective service without exploiting profits and without any need for federal mandates or legislation.
Why is it the President and Congress "do not trust" the free market to support effective services, but then beg the public to "trust them and their judgment on the health care bill." Why should I "trust" the judgment of anyone who "does not trust" that solutions can be sustained by free will and common sense and education WITHOUT relying on forced mandates and taxing AGAINST free will???
USAA can provide and sell their services by free choice, based on good reputation and proof of top ratings good enough to testify before Congress and be recognized; they don't require anyone to be forced to buy their plans on advance faith it works.
===============================================
BTW what I did propose to the Democratic Party resolutions committee is introducing laws holding corporations to similar standards in the Bill of Rights, since they claim rights of individual personhood under these same laws but at the same time exercise greater collective authority, influence or resources similar to government. The idea was to check and balance the individual rights of corporations to prevent them from abusing greater power than individuals, by requiring due process and equal protections of interests without discrimination, while leaving it to the petitioners and the companies to redress their own grievances case by case. Ironically the committee person who reviewed my proposal felt it was not possible to regulate a private corporation using government standards directly, but did approve the idea of effecting separate laws similar to the Constitution and Code of Ethics.
I believed it was the other way; that the government cannot interfere with private policies, but in general, neither citizens nor government officials nor corporations can violate Constitutional and ethical standards while invoking the same protections.
And now this health care bill crosses that same line with questions over whether Congress can redefine the commerce clause by combining it with taxes and public welfare, and if federal government can require health insurance under regulations.
I don't see how anyone in government can make laws mandatory while violating them at the same time. If it was all voluntary, it would work, but this is being required without people consenting to it. If people don't consent how is that law.
Last edited:
