The Roanoke Times: RoundTable

Comments

# 1

[December 31, 2006 3:57 PM]

Ted McCormack

With respect to your editorial on the reversion of Martinsville to town status, the following statement was made: "It would probably take a special act of the General Assembly to dissolve Martinsville's charter."

Article VII, Section 2 of the Virginia Constitution states: "The General Assembly may also provide by special act for the organization, government, and powers of any county, city, town, or regional government, . . .but no such special act shall be adopted which provides for the extension or contraction of boundaries of any county, city, or town."

The transition of Martinsville to town status would have the affect of contracting the boundaries of Martinsville and extending the boundaries of Henry County.

Charters are considered special act, so to repeal a charter, the name of the locality would have to be included in the bill which would make the repeal legislation a special act contracting/extending the boundaries of the affected localities, which would violate the Virginia Constitution.

In the early 1990s when Clifton Forge was first looking a becoming a town, it was determined that the transition of an independent city to town status could only be accomplished through a general law (i.e., one that applied to all cities) so the reversion statute was first enacted.

There are those who feel that in order for any city to become a town, it must use the general law procedure or any other procedure that might be developed that would not be considered a special act.

# 2

[January 1, 2007 12:55 AM]

Josh

I see in his column Sunday, Tommy Denton wants comprehensive free health care for all.

Somebody tell me why liberals latch onto a system that's been proven many times over to be a failure.

One needs only to look at our neighbor to the north to see the abysmal failure of socialized national health care.

It's simple economics. You take away the profit incentive from doctors, and you get a doctor shortage.

In the province of Ontario alone, 1.4 million people are without the services of a family doctor, according to the New York Times. Wait times between a physician referral and appointment with a specialist has grown to an average of eight weeks in Canada.

Liberals like Tommy love the idea of government takeover of health care. However, more capitalism, not less, is the key to fixing health care.

Dr. David Gratzer, makes the case beautifully in his book "The Cure: How Capitalism Can Save American Health Care." The late Dr. Milton Friedman endorsed Dr. Gratzer's recommendations in his foreword to the book.

Among other things, Dr. Gratzer would shore up Medicare, partially by setting aside part of the payroll tax into registered health accounts, to be invested in the market.

Seeing how the Democrats demonized Bush's sensible idea of partially privatizating Social Security, the prospect of Dr. Gratzer's idea gaining traction in a Democratic Congress appears slim.

Unfortunately, pesky things like logic and facts won't stop Democrats like Mr. Denton and those in Congress from desiring the fulfillment of FDR's failed socialist legacy.

# 3

[January 1, 2007 6:41 PM]

Alton : →http://imnotemeril.blogspot.com

Josh,
It's simple. They do so because it "feels right" and they haven't put any thought into it beyond those warm, fuzzy feelings.

I give Dan credit for greatly improving the RT editorial page. He is not quite as anti-capitalistic as Tommy, but he is still, unfortunately, a liberal loon.

# 4

[January 2, 2007 8:15 AM]

Dan Radmacher

Thanks, Alton. I think.

But, actually, I think there's a good argument to be made that it's the folks opposing a universal single-payer system who have become reflexive in their opposition.

There are some good arguments being made out there that the health care system does not respond to normal market pressures.

Not every human endeavor does best under a free-market model. We're learning, for instance, that electricity generation and distribution did far better as a regulated monopoly than it does as a free, unhindered market.

Health care is another such instance, especially if you start with the assumption - and I think most do - that basic health care shouldn't be denied to anyone based on the inability to pay.

Couple that with the difficulty in determining price and/or quality of any given provider and the urgent nature of many medical situations, and you have a system that simply does not respond to ordinary market forces.

We need a better way to ensure coverage for all and to restrain prices.

I believe, as do many others, that a single-payer model is a good start.

Not because it "feels right," but because it would be the most efficient use of resources.

# 5

[January 2, 2007 2:07 PM]

Alton : →http://imnotemeril.blogspot.com

But Dan, if you carry that thought to it's logical conclusion you have to ask, should electric service be provided those without the ability to pay? Should groceries? Should beer?

Eventually you either have to rely on the free market system or slowly give in to socialism.

# 6

[January 2, 2007 2:31 PM]

Dan Radmacher

Alton,

I think a basic level of health care is something society that can afford it should provide even its poorest members - regardless of their ability to pay. I don't think the same can be said for beer (though it can be said for nutritious groceries - thus, food stamps).

If that makes me a socialist, then I guess I'm a socialist.

Are you going to go on Medicare, Alton?

Does that make you a socialist, too?