To the Journal editor:
Were the votes by U.S. Rep. Dan Benishek, R-Crystal Falls, that contributed to the partial shutdown of our entire national government over one law just or unjust?
Our Affordable Care Act had been passed by our House and Senate, signed by our president, and accepted by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Benishek voted several times to fund our government only if our health-care law was defunded or delayed.
As a result of our House's failed votes to change our health-care law and inaction to fund our national government, our government, was partially shutdown on Oct. 1. This was our first shutdown in 17 years and about 800,000 workers were furloughed.
Illustrative partial shutdowns included some veteran services, national parks, food safety inspections, educational and nutritional programs for children, and small business aid.
Benishek believes in in the absolute right of individual economic freedom and includes minimal government regulation of health-care, and this right justifies the partial shutdown of our entire government.
Fundamentally, Benishek assumes, justice for self, whereas Democrats assume justice for all.
Is our basic right justice for self or justice for all?
"Justice for all" is declared in our Pledge of Allegiance that was passed by our congress, signed by our president, and accepted by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Based on justice for all, Benishek's votes were unjust.
Furthermore, we the people in northern Michigan will not re-elect Benishek.