Universal Healthcare Should Not Extend to Certain Criminals

Universal Healthcare Should Not Be So Universal

            Why should I pay for the healthcare of a child molester?  It seems that our national healthcare debate is driven by a common assumption that all Americans are entitled to healthcare simply by virtue of their citizenship (and in some cases, despite their decided non-citizenship).  But what about those who don’t deserve it?  Rapists, murderers, men who beat their wives, we could go on and on.  How am I morally obligated to help them?  Why should society subsidize those who ruin it?  Put more bluntly, why should victims of abuse be taxed to pay for the well-being of their abusers?

            We are fortunate to live in a country that recognizes that we all have certain natural rights: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  But sometimes people forfeit those rights by their actions.  When we incarcerate a violent criminal, we take away their liberty and their ability to pursue happiness, and we are justified in doing so.  Likewise, even if one accepts the basic premise that everyone is born with a natural right to healthcare, there has to come a point where one has caused such harm to others that he has forfeited whatever claim he may have had to my help, and the help of those he has harmed.  

            And what about people who choose to pursue happiness by abusing drugs?  There was a story out of Britain a few weeks ago about a 17-year-old boy who was doing $300 worth of cocaine per week, and not surprisingly suffered a heart attack.  He has since been fitted with a pacemaker.  Now, pretend for a moment he was an American.  Should I have to pay for that?  In so doing, wouldn’t I just be subsidizing his drug habit?

            Understand that I’m fairly libertarian, but liberty has consequences.  If you want to abuse your body, that’s your business.  But don’t ask me to pay for it.  And if you want to abuse children, or women, or anyone else, don’t come looking to me to pay for your medical care. 

by Jordan B. Rickards, Esq.

Republican candidate for North Brunswick Township Council

See this article as it appeared in the Home News Letters to the Editor section on September 1

Labor Day Tea Party a Success

North Brunswick’s inaugural Labor Day Tea Party was a resounding success, with an estimated 200 people in attendance.  Click below to view videos of the speeches given by North Brunswick Republican Organization candidates Mary Chyb and Jordan B. Rickards.

VIDEO: JORDAN B. RICKARDS TEA PARTY SPEECH

VIDEO: MARY CHYB TEA PARTY SPEECH

NORTH BRUNSWICK DEMS RAISE TAXES TO RECORD LEVELS, AGAIN!!!

“North Brunswick Democrats Only Have One Answer For Everything: Tax and Spend”

At a time when we need our money the most, the Democrats on the North Brunswick Township Council are taking more of it than ever.

In 2001 the municipal tax rate was 67 cents for every $100 of property value assessed.  But since 2002, under the so-called “leadership” of Democrat Mayor Francis “Mac” Womack (who at the time was Council President), that number has steadily and consistently risen.  Indeed, it seems that when the Democrats are not busy seizing land to hand over to developers, they do little other than raise taxes.  This year, the Mayor and Council members (all Democrats) report that they are raising taxes yet again, this time to 78.5 cents per $100, meaning that the owner of a $250,000 house — whose property taxes are already the highest in the nation, at a rate of close to $7,000 annually in municipal, county, and State property taxes — now owes an additional $287.  Over the course of a 30 year mortgage, that homeowner was already on pace to pay an astronomical $210,000 in property taxes, just for the right to keep his own home.  The property tax burden is three times greater here than it is in Pennsylvania, and almost nine times greater than in Delaware.  But apparently, the North Brunswick Democrats feel we’re not paying enough. 

In announcing the most recent tax increase, Democrat Councilman Carlo Socio, who is running for re-election this year, complained that “Any time that you have a reduction in your spending it should be a good thing and it should translate into a more positive outcome.  That unfortunately is not being realized right now due to Trenton.” There are two things wrong with that statement. 

First, contrary to Councilman Socio’s claim, the town has not effectively reduced spending, but rather has increased it exponentially.  In 2001, Councilman Socio’s first year, the town budget was $30 million.  Just eight years later, Councilman Socio and the rest of the Democrats have increased the budget to $44.8 million.  While this is a slight decrease from last year, it is overall a massive fifty percent increase over Socio’s eight year term.  How many North Brunswick residents can say their incomes have increased fifty percent over the last eight years, to meet the Democrats’ out-of-control spending?  How many local businesses can say that their profits are up fifty percent?

Secondly, Councilman Socio’s complaint that the problem is “due to Trenton” is both irresponsible, and self-defeating. Trenton — which, by the way is entirely controlled by Democrats, just like North Brunswick — did not force Socio and the rest of the Council Democrats to recklessly add $15 million to our budget over the last eight years. Socio and his cohorts in the Council cast the votes, they are to blame for the mess they’ve created, and they should have the courage to take responsibility. Unless, of course, they would like us to believe that the North Brunswick Township Council is nothing more than a puppet for Jon Corzine and the greater Democratic machine; a claim that does not seem all that implausible given their like-minded, reckless, tax-and-spend-and-tax-again policies that are bankrupting the State and its citizens.

When he was running for re-election in 2003, Councilman Socio bragged “On taxes, we’ve held the line.” Right, the line that points straight up as our taxes have gone higher and higher.  He also said “When [Mayor Womack] and I ran for the Township Council in 2000, we promised the people of North Brunswick that we understood their call to take both the municipal government as well as the Democratic Party in a new direction.”  And this is the “new direction”?  Funny, I’ve been living in North Brunswick for thirty years, and I don’t remember the people of this town ever calling for oppressive taxes, a prohibitively high cost of living, and a wasteful, enormously inefficient local government.

The problem is that there are no Republicans on the Township Council to challenge any of these Democrats, thereby allowing their spending (and, as logically follows, our taxes) to go completely unchecked.  Perhaps this year, instead of simply voting a party line on Election Day, North Brunswick residents should heed the following warning: “We’ve seen how one-party government works in North Brunswick.  We need balance to make sure history does not repeat itself.” Those words were spoken by Carlo Socio when he was running in his first election to the Council back in 2000, using the campaign slogan “got balance?”  Socio went on to observe that a one-party government “is shortsighted and makes bad decisions.” His running mate at the time, current Mayor Womack, agreed, saying “I think a two-party relationship is critical.”

 
And then they got elected and proved themselves right.

Jordan B. Rickards, Esq.

Republican candidate for Township Council

See this article as it appeared in the Home News Letters to the Editor section on August 7

Latest events

ELECTION DAY NOVEMBER 3rd

ELECTION DAY IS NOVEMBER 3RD.  DON'T FORGET TO VOTE!!!

October 24: Fall Gala featuring STEVE LONEGAN.

Join us for our fall gala fundraiser, honoring NBRO Man of the Year Gene

Labor Day Tea Party a Success

North Brunswick's inaugural Labor Day

Election Day

When: November 3rd Your vote counts! Are you registered? Click here to register now!

Future Events

Please check back often or contact us about future events such as party meetings.