Perriello Fluvanna Town Hall Meeting Speech

Last night, August 17th, Congressman Perriello held a Town Hall Meeting at the Fluvanna Middle School in Fork Union. I along with hundreds of citizens from the area attended. After waiting over an hour in line to speak, I had my turn at the podium.

The full text of my prepared speech is below. While I believe everything I had to say was important, I felt the need to cut out some of it in order to save time and be effective in what I was trying to ultimately convey. The sections I cut are included below but the words in red are what I chose to say while standing at the microphone.

The person who spoke directly ahead of me was the first in a long line to mention that this bill was unconstitutional and the 1oth amendment confirmed it. He was surprised that this had not come up yet. Perriello responded to his comments stating that this had come up in other Town Halls and that while there was definitely an issue concerning its constitutionality, that was something that could be fought out in the courts and ultimately taken to the Supreme Court.

I did a little research on your background and found you are a Yale graduate of Law, and you have been involved in community organizing because of your concerns over social injustices. It is to that experience I would like to make my appeal.

First I appreciate your concerns for social injustice. I agree we need to get more involved in our communities as a whole. As Christians, we are called to "Love our neighbor as ourselves"...I believe it is our Christian duty to help those in need.

The problem we've seen over the years is the transition from individuals voluntarily working in an organized fashion to help their fellow citizens to federal government agencies providing these services, mandating all law-abiding, income-producing citizens to pay for these services. While we thought we were doing a good thing by collectively pooling tax dollars to fund such noble causes as social services, we have created a monster. We have not only created generations dependent on the state, but we also have burdened the American people through taxation without representation (with all of these bureaucratic agencies, created by the federal legislative branch, unaccountable to the American people) and less-than-stellar, barely-surviving services (such as Social Security and Medicare). This is a huge disservice to our communities.

We are all created by God, therefore upon Him all mankind are equally dependent, and to Him they are equally responsible. God is our source, sir...not the federal government. Our charitable work must begin in our own homes and in our own communities, not dictated to us from top levels of government.

Getting back to "health care reform"...I admit we have issues in our current health care industry that need addressing, but the solutions are not found in the charitable contributions of Congress.

Upon taking office you swore an oath to uphold the United States Constitution. Therefore, if you are presented with a piece of legislation that falls outside of the jurisdiction of the powers identified in the Constitution, then you are compelled by your oath to vote "no" regardless of how we feel about it on the simple grounds that it is unconstitutional.

While we may have personal convictions to serve our communities who are lacking in need, it is not the role of the federal government to assure affordable, quality health care coverage for every person living within our borders. This power is nowhere to be found within the United States Constitution, specifically it is not listed in Article 1 Section 8 where your Congressional Powers are laid out. And the 10th Amendment confirms this when it addresses the powers that are not delegated to the United States (meaning the Federal Government) by the Constitution, as being reserved to the states.

[I paraphrased these two paragraphs above and interjected some other thoughts since the person ahead of me had just addressed this. I specifically questioned why the Congressman felt it was okay to vote for something unconstitutional, leaving it up to the courts to fight it out especially since he swore the oath to uphold the Constitution in the first place.]

For your convenience here is a copy of the Constitution along with a copy of Federalist Paper #41 written by James Madison where he discusses these particular powers and explains that the often-misrepresented "common Defence and general Welfare" clause is a general phrase that is clearly defined by the detailed phrases following it in the Constitution. Congress is limited to those powers listed in that document. I encourage you to read both of these documents and pass them along to your colleagues in DC...I promise these are much shorter than this health care bill.

Now since you are holding these Town Hall meetings for the sole purpose of hearing the concerns/questions of your constituents on this particular bill, I would like to share just a few of mine:

I am a 40-year-old wife, mother of four (ages 14, 5,4 & 2) and a tax-paying small business owner. I'm a college graduate and in the past have worked for temporary employment agencies as well as small, mid-size and large corporations. During that time I have been insured, uninsured and uninsurable (due to becoming pregnant). Presently I have a Health Savings Account along with a low premium, high deductible Health insurance policy to cover my family.

While I choose to have this current plan vs. no insurance at all, I am disgusted with the idea that this bill will rob me of my choice. Section 401.59B on Page 167 indicates that I as an individual will be required to have "acceptable" health care coverage or else the federal government is going to fine me. If I choose to pay all of my medical expenses out of pocket without the assistance of anyone else (whether it be the government or some insurance company), I am going to be penalized by my own government?

Also, Section 313 on Pages 149-150 indicates that I as an employer must provide all of my employees regardless of whether they are full or part-time workers with the public option or else I'll be fined a certain percentage. And if I am successful in my business and hire more employees, creating new jobs, pushing me up to the next bracket, then I'll be fined at a higher rate.

So, not only am I being punished for paying my own bills, I am also being punished for not paying someone else's?

[Congressman Perriello had already indicated several times he had an issue with the mandates on individuals and small businesses. I wanted to make sure he knew I had an issue with it as well.]

Concerning my family, my husband and I are adamantly opposed to injecting our children with unnatural vaccinations. However, if we were to participate in this public option, then the vaccinations that the government deems necessary will be REQUIRED according to Section 1711 on Page 764. If we choose not to participate, we still have to pay to force others to get these shots regardless of their personal convictions.

My husband and I are even more adamantly opposed to killing innocent babies whether they are still in their mothers' womb or not. Yet according to Section 1713 on page 768 there is a "nurse home visitation service" which will cater to those who seek "improving maternal or child health and pregnancy outcomes or increasing birth intervals between pregnancies". Increasing birth intervals between pregnancies? Sounds like birth control to me...it also sounds like an open door to abortion.

[I omitted the above paragraph because Perriello already indicated he would not vote in favor of taxpayer-funded abortions. And I omitted the next paragraph because I wanted to drive home my main point without going all over the place.]

While these items I have just mentioned are just a few that really bother me personally about this bill (a few others include the rationing of health care, end-of-life planning, national health ID card, government committees and task forces, Federal government mandated school-based health clinics integrated into the school environment, surcharges for high income individuals, and government involvement in marriage & family therapy) the absolute number one biggest problem I have with all of this combined with the bailouts & federal acquisitions of private industry is that this whole scheme wreaks of socialism. In this particular case the US Congress is proposing to tax a portion of its people in order to exercise mandatory health care coverage, establish more government bureacracy, and ration health care as it deems necessary amongst the entire population...including non-US citizens! You and your colleagues are seriously considering nationalized health care, forcing the American people to succomb to the government for its health needs.

I understand we need health care reform, but the idea of the federal government taking over the health care industry in America is absolutely obscene. [Many people cheered at this statement.]

My question to you, Congressman is, "Knowing that this legislation without a shadow of a doubt is in violation of the US Constitution, who and/or what gives you the power to take away our God-given rights to life and liberty by casting anything but a "no" vote concerning this bill?"

One local FoxNews affiliate captured a portion of my question on her news report (the underlined text above). Unfortunately she failed to recognize my whole point that this bill is unconstitutional. Also, it would have been nice to include the statement before my question since it was so widely received. But I'm just glad it received some attention.