Republican congresswoman Michele Bachmann has recently announced her presidential candidacy. What will it mean for your health care if Bachmann ultimately wins the 2012 election?
According to her website, one of Bachmann’s top priorities is to repeal Obamacare because she considers its directives to be unconstitutional. As a constitutional conservative, Bachmann says on her website that she is a “champion of tea party values” and that “the solutions to our problems (don’t) come from Washington: more than ever, Washington IS the problem, and the real solutions will come from your businesses, your communities, your schools and the most basic and powerful unit of all, your families.”
This means that first lady Michelle Obama’s efforts to increase health-responsibility within the government are sorely frowned upon by Bachmann. Bachmann calls Mrs. Obama’s push for breastfeeding and other such efforts to eradicate obesity and promote good health a “nanny state” tactic. Currently, Mrs. Obama’s campaigns focus on children’s health, fitness and nutrition as preventative care. Although she’s been at the brunt of Bachmann’s criticism recently, Mrs. Obama isn’t the only first lady to push legislation with health initiatives. Both Hillary Clinton and Nancy Reagan were known for their persistence with health-related campaigns.
Essentially, Bachmann feels that the government has no right to meddle in the personal lives of U.S. citizens, including their health and fitness decisions. It’s safe to assume that under a Bachmann administration, the federal government will have little to no say in school lunches, physical education, health care, fast food marketing to children and other similar topics.
On her website, Bachmann states with her plans for healthcare, “I will empower your families and doctors, not unelected bureaucrats, to make the right decisions about the shape and form of your health insurance, your quality of care and your course of treatment. And I will push for greater competition in the healthcare market … more ingenuity, more options and more competition – not more bureaucracy and control from Washington – will truly produce better outcomes at a lower cost.”
What do you think? Will Bachmann’s small-government ideals produce favorable results for the health and wellness of our country and give power back to the people, as she says. Or will it backfire and produce more of the same bad choices that have already been made?