Edward Hum – 10/1/09

This page was last updated on October 5, 2009.

Providing health care a moral issue; Edward J. Hum; Beaver County Times; October 1, 2009.

Mr. Hum was a regular contributor (at least 28 letters) from mid-2004 through September 2007. After about 10 months, Mr. Hum came out of “retirement” to bash President Bush’s Air National Guard service with two letters in less than two weeks. It will be no surprise most of Mr. Hum’s letters have been no more than exercises in bashing President Bush and/or other Republicans. Mr. Hum’s letters are also flame-throwing exercises. I don’t know if Mr. Hum actually believes what he writes, or if he simply likes to stir things up to call attention to himself.

Given his body of work, for a while I wondered what Mr. Hum would use for subject matter now that Barack Obama has become President. At least for the last two letters, Mr. Hum has decided to focus on supporting a government-run, taxpayer-funded healthcare monopoly. The previous letter in support of a government-run, taxpayer-funded healthcare monopoly is here.

Mr. Hum is one of a group of local Republican impersonators (The group also includes Messrs. William A. Alexander, Arthur Brown, William G. Horter, and George Reese.) who write claiming to be disgruntled Republicans. You have to give Mr. Hum “credit,” however, for going the extra mile to further his impersonation. As of September 2006, Mr. Hum was actually registered as a Republican despite the fact he’s no more a Republican than is Dennis Kucinich.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“I have distant cousins living in Germany who don’t have to worry about grandchildren with no health insurance or lousy insurance at a high price.”

[RWC] When George W. Bush was President, Mr. Hum usually started his letters with “Fellow Republicans.” Mr. Hum hasn’t used this intro since Mr. Obama’s election.

Who has “lousy insurance at a high price?” Due to policies Mr. Hum likely supports, we pay more for healthcare and healthcare insurance than we should, but if our insurance is lousy, why do most surveys show people with healthcare insurance (the vast majority of us) are happy with it? As noted in my critique of Mr. Hum’s previous letter on this topic, “most Germans are covered through group health insurance sponsored by their employers.”

“Are they laughing at me, feeling sorry for me or just wondering how our non-system got started? And at twice the cost per person of their system.”

[RWC] Mr. Hum’s alleged “distant cousins” may be laughing at or feeling sorry for him, but probably not because of healthcare.

“Countries that are much less religious than ours made the moral decision years ago that everyone was entitled to health care.”

[RWC] Here we go with the emotional plea, one of the last refuges of a person who can’t make his case with facts, logic, and history. Actually, Mr. Hum also led off with an emotional plea with his comment “about grandchildren with no health insurance or lousy insurance at a high price.”

Mr. Hum writes of a “moral decision.” What’s “moral,” altruistic, or compassionate about the government confiscating hard-earned income from a family to pay for someone else’s healthcare (or daycare, housing, etc.)? Should folks truly in need get it? Of course, but from private charities funded by voluntary contributions. That’s moral and true compassion.

Please read my paper entitled “Healthcare.”