Timothy Silbaugh – 11/19/09

This page was last updated on November 20, 2009.

What freedoms are they talking about?; Timothy Silbaugh; Beaver County Times; November 19, 2009.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“After listening to many talk show hosts and callers, it has become evident that many people wrap themselves around the Constitution and the flag and have no idea what’s in the Constitution.”

[RWC] Even if you accept what Mr. Silbaugh wrote above, as you’ll see below Mr. Silbaugh is in no position to throw rocks.

“They talk about freedoms described in the Constitution. However, I don’t know what freedoms they mean.”

[RWC] Did Mr. Silbaugh miss the Bill of Rights, and the 10^th Amendment in particular? The 10^th Amendment says, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Translation: The federal government has only the powers explicitly granted by the Constitution and everything else belongs “to the States respectively, or to the people.”

“Freedom for slaves, freedom for women, freedom for people who didn’t own land? Maybe the freedom to exploit children in sweat shops or the freedom to own other people?”

[RWC] What is Mr. Silbaugh writing about? Mr. Silbaugh appears to believe the Constitution doesn’t include the amendments.

Regarding “Freedom for slaves,” the 13^th Amendment abolished slavery. It would have been in the original Constitution, but both anti- and pro-slavery forces were dug in. Without the slavery-related “compromises,” there would not have been a United States as we know it.

Regarding “freedom for women,” I can only guess Mr. Silbaugh is writing about the vote. In my opinion the Constitution never allowed for denying women the vote, but in any case the 19^th Amendment settled the issue.

Regarding “freedom for people who didn’t own land,” I have no idea what Mr. Silbaugh is writing about.

Whether real or imagined, the issues Mr. Silbaugh listed are addressed by the Constitution.

“Perhaps it’s a freedom that I can’t find, apparently the one where our government should execute people without a trial. It must be written someplace because that’s what the same people who say President Barack Obama is taking away their freedoms say we should do. I just can’t find it.”

[RWC] Who wants the government to execute whom “without a trial?”

“I know. The hosts must mean the freedom for certain businesses to deny health care coverage after you buy an insurance policy, and they then spend upwards of $300 million of premiums people have paid to them for health care coverage in order to fight an effort to keep them from denying coverage for the sick and poor.”

[RWC] By law, medical insurance companies must provide the coverage paid for by the insured. It’s breach of contract to deny benefits for covered treatment.

Here we find Mr. Silbaugh’s definition of “freedom.” First, it appears Mr. Silbaugh believes government should force insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions. That’s the same as forcing a company to issue a fire insurance policy on a house that’s burning down. That’s not coverage; it’s a handout and forces up the rates of everyone else. Don’t I have the freedom to buy a policy that doesn’t cover pre-existing conditions?

Second, it appears Mr. Silbaugh believes government should force insurance companies to provide coverage for people who can’t afford to buy the coverage. That’s not coverage; it’s a handout and forces up the rates of everyone else. Do I believe people who need help because of circumstances beyond their control should get it? Of course, but via private charities funded by voluntary contributions.

“Is that the freedom our soldiers die to keep in place?”

[RWC] Please read my paper entitled “Healthcare.”