Many people are registering their dissent with the House and Senate healthcare proposals by writing to their representatives. In the digital age, this is quite easy. Websites such as Congress.org offer convenient ways to find the email addresses of federal and state representatives. Grassroots organizations such as TeaPartyPatriots.org have posted ideas and sample letters to adapt as desired. With such resources at hand, even busy medical students can manage to send off a quick message if they so choose.

The "best practices" for writing such letters are debatable, but one recommendation I will firmly stand by is the following: do not forget to tell your representative what you are for, not just what you are against.

In other words, if there is a health reform proposal under consideration that you oppose, then let them know in no uncertain terms that you oppose it. But be sure to tell them also what type of reform you would support. This serves two purposes: 1) it distinguishes your position from that of others who may also happen to oppose the legislation but for weaker reasons, and 2) it gives the representative a concrete alternative to contemplate and potentially adopt.

For example, here is the text of an email that I personally sent to about 75 selected members of Congress. Anyone reading this editorial is welcome to copy, modify, and use it. Just remember to replace my name with yours when you send it.

Dear Congressperson,

The current proposal for health reform (H.R. 3200) represents a gross violation of individual rights. Despite its overtures to "improving access" and "encouraging responsibility," it is in fact an irresponsible and immoral expansion of government. I do not support it and I will not support any politician who votes for it.

Let me be clear: I do not support a "public option." I do not support universal coverage. I do not support government involvement in healthcare in any form whatsoever, including Medicare, Medicaid, or the myriad programs funded through confiscatory taxes.

I do support efforts to repeal government programs, and I do support private, voluntary charity. I also support Congress ending the preferential and distortionary tax treatment of employer health benefits in exchange for lower general tax rates. In short, what we need is a free markets from which new solutions can emerge. Real reform would be to get government out of healthcare, not to introduce more of the same pseudo-central planning that created this crisis in the first place.

Respectfully,
Jared M. Rhoads

Unfortunately, nobody in Washington views his job as a guardian or night watchman over individual rights anymore.¹ To get re-elected, they need to be seen as "doing something." But they might as well be working for your cause—freedom—so be sure to tell them what you want.

____

¹ In a 1949 letter to businessman Dewitt Emery, novelist and philosopher Ayn Rand wrote: "The sole purpose and justification of government is to protect [individual] rights. Government (according to the American principle) is the watchman of these rights—not the owner and giver." Sadly, this idea of government-as-rights-protector has been almost completely lost.

©2005-2010 The Lucidicus Project, all content unless otherwise noted.