The Grassroots Respond to Representative MacMaster | Jen Kuznicki
I received a comment on my blog from Representative Greg MacMaster, in response to an email I received that I published on this site.  I reached out to my grassroots partners and we have responded to his comments here.

Jen (and Anne, who sent the private email to Jen), There were many emails and calls that are not mentioned in this article that Jen posted. Taking part of a conversation and branding me as a supporter of Obamacare is wrong and frankly unfair. 1. I am totally against Obamacare – period

It is true that there have been many emails and phone calls that have not been mentioned so far by us and by you, Representative.  Many of those emails lay the foundation of our opposition to expanding Medicaid and creating an exchange.  With all due respect sir, you have been saying you are against Obamacare for quite some time, and we would like to believe it, however, in our outreach to you in understanding your position, we have summarized the opposite.  We have come so far in three years.   Every Republican voted against Obamacare in 2010.  The underhanded, sleazy way it came to be law, even with 70% of the American people standing in opposition to it’s implementation, led to a massive grassroots effort to found many a Republican career with fierce support for any Republican that vowed to defund and repeal.
2. I am fighting for ways to minimize the impact to our citizens – looking at what laws we could draft before its mandated to take over on January 1st, 2014.
We understand you are trying to work within the system and accept the laws under which we must live.  However, accepting medicaid expansion is folly, and any honest observer of the program would not only reject its expansion, but call for an audit, and reform it completely.  It is difficult to understand your reasoning ie. the ‘takeover’ in 2014, as if that is the soul reason you are seeking to go along with it.  There have been many links to research, sent to you already by serious grassroots people, to give you the ammunition to fight this pervasive law.  You have either ignored them, or rejected them outright, and that causes us to be very concerned.
3. These state laws will help ONLY if we become a Partnership. That being said, if we choose to do nothing, which seems to be the rhetoric from many Tea Party, Libratarians, Constitutionalists and some very conservative Republicans…. We will have no defense to protect us. Simply put: you are demanding we protect you, then criticizing how I am doing it.
4. A State Health Program by many, is the best choice and those states that are going down that road – happen to have chose the State Health Care Exchange…. The very one many of you vowed to stand against, which we did because we didn’t have a solid education on how it would impact Michigan.
Again Sir, with all due respect, we have given you the research necessary to fight against the implementation of Obamacare at the State level.  We have said, time and time again, that once the takeover happens, it makes no difference who runs the exchange, because DHHS is in control.  It is the duty of government to protect our RIGHTS.  Where exactly are you coming down on this issue?  For, if it is my right to reject any law that is unconstitutional, how are you protecting my right? Let us go back to the Supreme Court ruling, where the individual mandate was clarified. In its ruling, the court held that the law could not be upheld under the Commerce Clause, which was the government’s primary argument in its support. “The Federal Government does not have the power to order people to buy health insurance,�? Roberts wrote for the majority.  It seems you have given up on that basic fact.  To be sure, the effects of government taking over medicine (be it state government or federal) are the exact same – taxes, skyrocketing premiums, massive deficits, long waits, taxpayer funded abortions, rationed care…… And yet you would expand a government program that already rations, to trap citizens who are trying to get out of their current circumstances and become more self-sufficient.  Also, we would appreciate the respectful gesture of listening to �?Tea Party, Libratarians, Constitutionalists and some very conservative Republicans�?, since it is us who are the only ones engaged enough in this discussion to be able to spar, and it is us who have not just given you the plan of action, but the solutions you are seemingly rejecting.  We are very keen on liberty, and so was the Republican party at one time, we can be again.  Bashing us may ingratiate you to moderates and liberals, but fortunately or unfortunately, it endears us to each other, and makes us stronger.

5. After many days of digging for information, I have filtered out the philosophical ideals and took law, The Constitution and Supreme Court ruling and continued my effort to build a wall of protection.
Sir, although this comment is of soaring rhetoric, we find it a bit lacking in credibility, fighting to implement that which is repugnant, would not lead one to believe you are doing anything of the sort.  Expanding Medicaid will trap citizens who are struggling to get out of near-poverty, and will bankrupt our State in years to come.  It is curious how trusting the Michigan Republicans have become of the Federal Government.  A limited government party with the full power of both houses and the governorship, put there by the grassroots in 2010, should at the very least ask the question, “How in the world will a leviathan that is the US Federal Government be able to pay ANY of its bills, nevermind what it promises States?�?  Michigan Republicans should be asking, “How do we break apart this law and fight it,�? but instead it seems they are saying, “Where do we sign?�?
6. Cato Institute, NCSL, The Heritage Foundation, and our own additional research have brought hundreds of pages forward and frankly, adding the stance:of “Don’t do anything and force the Feds to take it over�? should not be an option. For we have no defense, no laws (because they’ll only apply if we have a partnership or state healthcare exchange). So you are demanding I defend your rights but not allowing me to provide you the best option to do it.
In an attempt to become familiar with your research, and again, we have sent you copious amounts of research as well, and you have rejected out of hand the solutions to this predicament, we looked into CATO and Heritage.  Both strenuously argue against implementation and expansion, and give various examples of what you could do.  Your fight has become against grassroots solutions, primarily because you have resisted and rejected our information.  One has to decide why a State Representative would do such a thing, and who stands to benefit from implementation and expansion.  It isn’t as if we are alone.  Fourteen States, led by Republicans, have said no to medicaid expansion, and implementing exchanges, precisely because they know the Federal Government cannot afford this behemoth plan to take over health insurance.
7. I agree that Medicaid is broken and its a mess. But by expanding it allows greater flexibility in allowing personal choice of Medicaid, private insurance or the mandated HCE…and don’t forget the fines the Feds will have forced upon us too.
Excuse us, Sir, but we know what Medicaid is, how it is terrible, how it is being rejected by more doctors, how the service is rationed and the results are abominable.  It is unconscionable to describe expanding such a system as, “greater flexibility in allowing personal choice.�?    So expanding it is absurd.  You do not fix problems like we have with Medicaid by expanding them. Have you ever seen the government fix a problem by throwing more money at it?  NO.

8. I took all of your questions and charged forward to find answers – only to return and be criticized for advising what may very well be the best choice in defending you.

January 1st, 2014. We will have a federally controlled healthcare system. It’s law and unfortunately, it’s also Constitutional and no state laws to minimize the impact to Michigan citizens. This is what you’ll get by doing nothing.

Again, with all due respect Representative MacMaster, the 1st step is to do nothing, not expand Medicaid and entrap people.  We are still very steadfast in our 2010 view of the world, and we reject this law.  Not four months ago, the entire Republican bandwagon was on a kick to repeal, and we would have to fight them to replace it with another government program.  It is difficult to see how very beaten the Republican firebrands have become.  There are suggestions, upon going through your campaign finance records, that your biggest donor has become Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan.  BC/BS are lobbying like mad and are the chief crony capitalists fighting  for implementation so that they can be the lone provider.  It is too bad.

You can’t fight a court battle on rhetoric or philosophical ideals….. It’s law that prevails and that’s what I must use to protect us.

Greg MacMaster
State Representative
Yes sir, you are correct, but when you reject alternate views it is clear that ‘thinking outside the box’ may have been lost on you.  We certainly hope this is not the case.  The grassroots are connected, organized, and put aside their differences in this battle.  We respect your office, and wish to continue to keep an open dialogue.
Michigan’s Coalition of Grassroots Volunteers

One Response to The Grassroots Respond to Representative MacMaster

  1. says:

    This article is EPIC. Love the respectful point by point dismantling of a politician's arguments.

Leave a Reply