In my last post I presented the facts regarding the enactment of Obamacare. Now for the analysis.
The facts indicate that the President knew that he had to lie to get Obamacare passed. If his moral philosophy is consequentialism, which I think it is, then lying is justified by this philosophy . The ends (affordable healthcare for everyone) justify the means (lying to the American public). Consequentialists are not concerned with the actions, they are concerned with the results or the consequences. If lying is required to provide affordable healthcare to all people, then so be it.
The facts also indicate that the Democrats in Congress did not read the bill before their voting. They relied on the President’s word that “if you like your plan…” If they had actually read the bill, many would not have voted for it. Those Democrats that would not have voted had they known what was in the bill follow the moral philosophy of deontology. They believed that is their duty or obligation to provide affordable healthcare to everyone, and they would not have enter into a lie to et the law passed. These members were simply following their duty to all Americans to provide affordable health care.
Those few Democrats that did know what was in the bill and voted for it would be followers of consequentialism. Lying to the public would be acceptable to these Democrats since it contributed to the enactment of the bill.
The few Republicans that read the bill and knew that the President was wrong were vocal in their opposition; however, they were drowned out by others that accepted the deceitful marketing points. These few members were defeated by the lies that were simply too powerful to overcome. Why wouldn’t you support the moral objective of affordable healthcare for everyone if there were no changes to your policy or doctor and the premium cost would go down.
More to come.