Our current national health care system is failing us and is no longer serving the needs of the populace.Let’s take a quick look at why.
Over 40,000,000 U.S. Residents are uninsured.This number includes illegal immigrants, and they should be included because they can receive FREE health care at any hospital on an emergency basis.
Subsidized health care through corporations / businesses is not taxed as income, thus those in a higher tax bracket benefit more from the subsidized health care than those earning less – it is becoming a significant regressive tax.
Change jobs and you have a good chance of having to change not only your health care insurance carrier, but you primary care giver – your physician.
American businesses providing health care insurance subsidies are at a distinct disadvantage in the world trade area.This encourages companies to shift jobs overseas.
The cost of these insurance subsidies is added to the price you pay for goods and services, domestically.However, it cannot be passed on in foreign trade.
The prime trade countries with the United States have systems where their corporations do not provide health care insurance or subsidies, placing them at an economic advantage in trade.
Small domestic businesses cannot compete with the health insurance subsidies provided by larger companies due to scale.The cost to these small businesses is proportionately higher for the coverage since the pools are not as large.Large corporations self insure and pay for health care insurance administration, while small businesses cannot afford to self insure and pay for the coverage – the health insurance premium per covered person is simply pricier to the small business.
Premiums for health care coverage are based on limited risk pools.Health care insurers are too regionalized and don’t have giant pools which lower costs per insured and thus make the premiums as efficient as possible.Individual plans, not corporate subsidized, must have a significantly higher premium due to the small and less diverse risk pool.
Uninsured and underinsured faced with catastrophic medical bills become credit risks, thus there is an added cost to these people in credit card and mortgage interest rates.Once a family falls into an insufficient medical coverage situation their lives begin to unravel and their costs sky rocket.These people are in a debtor’s prison without bars, because a family member got sick.
The cost of any sourced health coverage is rising at a rate double and even in some situations triple inflation.How much longer can the middle class, the group in the biggest squeeze due to premiums suffer this carnage and not break.
Do we have a case for change?I think so and I think it is an imperative case for immediate change.What would happen to this country if corporations were freed of the burden of providing health care subsidies and no longer had to roll the expense into their cost of sales?No, they would not make more money – competition in most cases prevents this.They would reduce the price of their goods, become more competitive in world trade, and create more good domestic jobs. If they opted to continue to provide health care coverage to employees as a benefit, then the full amount of the subsidy should be taxed to each recipient.At the minimum the regressive tax situation would end and the health care subsidy would act as a progressive tax – higher paid employees would pay the more taxes on the subsidy due to their higher tax bracket.
How do we then pay for health care in this new world of national risk pools and no subsidies?How do we relieve the crushing burden of this crisis on the middle class (the poor actually have more options today than the middle class in health care costs)? Mr. Obama’s “Socialized Medicine” is one way, but a better way may be “single payer” plans (plural). A quote from the Connecticut Coalition for Universal Health Care document explains it well.
Note: In “socialized medicine,” as in Sweden and Great Britain, doctors are salaried civil servants and the government itself (that is, the citizenry) owns and operates most of the hospitals, with some others being run by non-profit organizations. With a “single-payer,” or national health insurance plan, doctors are in private practice and most hospitals are not government owned and operated. Doctors and hospitals, as well as pharmaceutical and medical device companies, must negotiate their fees and charges with the government agency in charge of financing the plan and articulating its organization. In regard to the costs of drugs especially, this centralization is one of the reasons health care costs are lower in single-payer systems, and it also explains why drug companies fight so hard against any single-payer plans.
In both socialized medicine and national health insurance plans, cost-control mechanisms have been effective in restraining inflationary pressures while providing universal, comprehensive care. Another major difference between such systems and the American way is the absence of any health insurance companies, of which America has over fifteen hundred, all with different types of coverage, rules, regulations and bureaucracies, and all of which are primarily concerned with boosting their profits: shareholder and CEO interests are considered more important than patients’ needs.
The described National Health Care program sounds very much like our Medicare program, but without health insurance companies.It looks like we could do a modified Medicare program for all.All our current health insurance companies would NOT have to be disbanded.They could administer the program as they do now under Medicare, have the same rules and regulations, be national not regional, and be very competitive for your dollars.Mergers would occur and efficiencies due to scalability may very well arise.
How does the individual pay for this?Vouchers! (If you prefer tax credits!) Each citizen and permanent non-citizen legal resident, would be entitled to an annual voucher to pay for 75% of the cost of the comprehensive medical insurance coverage – individual or family, similar to that of Medicare.Medicare recipients would get larger percentage vouchers / credits and veterans may receive higher vouchers / credits based on disability.Those earning between zero and $40,000 annually could receive additional vouchers ranging from 25% to 0% of the cost of the coverage, prorated on income.The cost of this voucher program would be about $1.66 trillion per year, about 12 percent of GDP, when you factor in the savings from elimination of duplication of services and administration.Any eligible employed person not covered by a qualified medical plan from an authorized national provider would be taxed on the full cost of coverage not being spent.These funds would be placed in a pool to cover costs of medical care required for these uninsured people.If we switched to a consumption or fair tax the only thing to change would be the method of the charge to people who can have insurance but choose not to have it.Travelers in this country and non-permanent residents would buy temporary medical insurance while here.
The AMA, yes that’s right – the AMA, put out a chart in December 2007 depicting the difference between a $50,000 and a $150,000 wage earner at the same corporation would fare when subsidies become taxable.The chart also depicts the effect of medical insurance tax credits – vouchers provide a more comprehensive coverage.
We can do this and we can do this now.John McCain’s health insurance program contained a few of these suggested changes.Hillary Clinton’s plan offered less of these suggestions.Barack Obama’s plan offers a number of the suggested changes in a slightly different format.
UPDATE June 17, 2009: Mr. Obama’s real goal is to put government in competition with private insurers and to run the private companies out of business – remember, his long term plan meets the progressive socialized left’s idea of national control of the population – the nanny state. His plan will reduce our level of care by sharing that wealth as well – everyone will get the same poor care so we are all equally distributed.
I invite quality feedback.Please feel free to comment.
With the Congress out of control, with 14 Czars not answerable to the Congress reporting to President Obama, with U.S. Government ownership of GM and Chrysler, with first position bond holders tossed aside in favor of a union – forever altering the investment landscape where for hundreds of years bond holders were protected and now are no longer protected – forever dampening the economy and causing future corporate fund raising to be very difficult and expensive, with the Treasury’s refusal to let some banks pay back their TARP money, with the proposals to establish national health care and a valued added tax to pay for it, with the marching order from the President of the United States to get this done by August, it is clear that the Federal Government looks at states as little fiefdoms subservient to the federal government.
Well, it is the other way around. Someone in Washington D.C. and particularly in the Obama Administration should read the Constitution. On more than one occasion President Obama has indicated that the Constitution is too restrictive of the federal (central) government and that the constitution should allow for the central government to make more rules to deliver services to the populace – often services not equally targeted toward all Americans. His appointment of an activist judge for the Supreme Court is his attempt to make law and make constitutional law from the bench of the highest court in the land. This must stop and stop now.
I have written the following similar letters to Governors Sanford of South Carolina, Perry of Texas, and Freudenthal of Wyoming. This is the letter written to Rick Perry.
June 4, 2009
Rick Perry, Governor, State of Texas
Office of the Governor
P.O. Box 12428
Austin, Texas 78711-2428
Re: States Rights
Dear Governor;
I sent this note yesterday to Governor Dave Freudenthal of Wyoming.
Owing to the recent actions and planned actions (it all can’t be interstate commerce) by the Federal Government which are not within the 17 enumerated powers provided the U.S. Government in the Constitution, and the Obama supporting Congress, have you considered a law suit in Federal Court re-asserting the rights and powers of the states found in the Constitution? The goal is to stop this runaway madness and socialization of the private sector.
I suggest Wyoming because you have the greatest Republican majority of any state legislature. I also suggest a state file the suit since there should be no question about legal standing in the courts. This will probably work its way up to the Supreme Court.
Clearly as a state, Wyoming has the right to require the federal government to limit itself to the 17 powers and the few amendments describing the limits of power of the U.S. Government.
I represent no faction or organization. I write as an individual. I am not an attorney. I am an individual who sees the best of this nation disappearing more and more each day. President Obama and his Treasury among other Departments and the Congress are out of control and need to be reigned in. Will you do it? Can you do it?
Governor Perry, perhaps you might contact Governor Freudenthal and encourage him to file that suit. Perhaps you may wish the former Republic and the State Texas to join him. Unless the states take action now, states rights will be gone forever and we will not recognize this nation by the next Presidential election. I will also be writing to Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina. I am not writing Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona, as I do not believe she has the fervor for righting this Constitutional wrong.
With the sincerest pleading, I am
Ken Moyes
I suggest that anyone who reads this post and feels that the federal government is out of control and is assuming the rights provided the states under the constitution (see Today’s Federal Government is Unconstitutional) should write to their Governor or to the Governors listed in this post Just go to a search engine and enter the state followed by “governor” and it will bring up a link to that state’s governor.
Unless we do something now, we will not recognize this country by the next Presidential election. Stand up and be counted!
Do we really want judges making law from the bench based on their own beliefs of how things should be? Do we really want to obfuscate the legislative process by having unelected jurists – a party of one – make our laws? President Obama has stated, as recently as yesterday, that he wants jurists who render decisions based solely on the law and to look at the existing law and U.S. Constitution for their decisions.
If he really believes this than why did he nominate Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court? Once again we have to watch both hands when he speaks. He appears to be shaking your hand with his right hand and quietly picking your pocket with his left hand. I say this because Sonia Sotomayer is clearly a jurist who openly brags about making policy from the bench. She has laughingly talked about legislating from the bench.
We do not need to look at her prior decisions, when she has openly, and I might add arrogantly, admitted legislating or making policy from the appellate bench. A recent YouTube clip says it all! Yet she is nominated for the highest court in the land, and is young enough, that if affirmed, will serve for the next thirty years. Is this what was intended by checks and balances? If you don’t believe me and you have not seen the clip click here, remember she is the one speaking to law students. She is explaining where they might best pursue a law career. She is suggesting appellate court experience, since that is where policy is made.
If we continue to allow jurists to make decision on how they wish the law to be and not how it stands as written, an enterprising defense attorney will, sooner or later, use the “I disagree with the law as written and I feel it should be different, just as Justice so and so does on a regular basis” defense.
Had enough yet? If you believe in the rule of law and not law of the judge, you may want to get on the phone with your Senators and tell them to keep looking for a balanced jurist.
Recently the Democratic leadership in the House of Representatives sought to move a global warming bill – a 900 page bill – that has not been read or digested by any legislator, out of committee and to the full House for a vote. Congressman Henry Waxman, Democrat, the committee chairman, acknowledged publicly that he did not fully understand what was in the bill. He simply wanted to move the bill out of committee and to the House for a vote. At 900 pages, this an enormous bill covering intricate “cap and trade” and other environmental regulations.
“Cap and trade” potentially represents a radical change in the cost to the people of this country of our industrial infrastructure and power generation. This bill has the potential to devastate our economy beyond the economy’s current volatility and yet no one person really knows what is in it. What makes this plan even more flagrant is the cavalier attitude and approach by the Democratic leadership on passage of this bill.
When the Republicans were insisting that the bill be read aloud – their right under our Congressional procedures – Mr. Waxman hired a speed reader for the clerk’s staff and threatened to have the entire bill read by the speed reader. Remember, speed readers are those folks who no one can understand and are found in comedy routines. Are our legislators this arrogant and whimsical about how they represent us in Congress? Instead of taking bill content knowledge seriously, the Democrats just want to pass an ideologically radical, economically risky 900 page bill without any one legislator knowing what is in it.
Don’t we as citizens deserve more? When we elect someone to Congress, we expect them to represent us on matters of legislation. We don’t expect our legislators to abdicate learning about bills before them so they can make a prudent and intelligent vote. If they are not going to bother learning what is in a bill, then we can either use a dice roll or hire chimps to vote. Hiring a speed reader is not a funny or laughable matter. It is an arrogant abuse of power and a mockery of our constitutional republic. Just how many bills will these legislators vote on without reading? This flagrant approach to bills started with the unread stimulus package. We deserve better.
Uh! Hello! You folks in Washington D.C., remember us, the forgotten fiscal conservatives. The Democrats among you have decided to buy votes from the “have nots” by offering them everything under the sun, at the expense of the “haves” and our children and children’s’ children. The Republicans among you feel that remaking the Republican Party to Democrat “lite” will place you back in power – what are you smoking?
I am seeking a party and candidates who will not spend me into oblivion. The people of California after being threatened with the release of violent criminals from their prisons, in an effort to scare the voters into voting to raise taxes so California can continue spending, rejected that plan and voted for spending cuts. Perhaps they sent a message to all legislators of today – stop spending to buy votes. Aren’t there any candidates who find spending money we don’t have, abhorrent? If you are out there let me know.
Maybe, we can start our own party – let’s call it the Republican Party, since the old republicans are now democrat lite. We can be for a federal government that follows the constitution and only exercises the nineteen enumerated powers found in the constitution. We can be for a government that only spends what we can afford. If you are one of those candidates who finds out of control spending abhorrent, then we can use you in this new novel party – the party of the fiscal conservative.
Another party plank might be: let poorly run businesses fail. Can’t cut it in business, than Darwin says you should be allowed to fail. How about we have a plank that says government managed business or healthcare is a mistake? Perhaps we could adopt a plank that says if a baby can regularly live outside the womb, such as a seven month old premature baby, aborting this child is murder – no more cruel horrific late term abortions, unless the mother’s life is in imminent danger. Basic common sense dictates that when seven month old babies regularly live outside the mother’s womb, we must assume that they are persons under the Constitution – any other thought process is self serving, myopic, selfishness and down right hypocritical. Mr. Obama, a late term abortion advocate, wants to minimize abortion. If abortion is not a terrible thing, then why does he want to minimize it? I digress, but I don’t believe he qualifies to be in our new Republican Party, since he is a mainlining socialist democrat.
I am sure we can find more planks, but we want this party to have a big tent. Let’s start small by saving this country from financial ruin and from killing seven month old persons – or are we starting big?
If you don’t believe that this country is headed for financial ruin, then ask the Chinese why they don’t want anymore Treasury Bills. If you don’t believe that this country continues to head for moral decay, than you don’t know that 100 million people voted for the American Idol, while only twenty million more voted in the Presidential election. How many of the 100 million Idol voters know who the Speaker of the House is?
Under what specific power granted to the federal government in the Constiution is the government permitted to establish a government health care organization? They want to tax soda as part of the fund raising to pay for the health care – the sixteenth amendment provided the right to levy an income tax. There is no federal authority to tax soda to pay for health care – while soda is interstate commerce, health care is not and there is no authority to tax for a commodity.
Under what power is it permitted to invest in corporations or make loans to corporations?
If you don’t know, then contact your Congressman or Senators and insist on an answer.
Just what are the powers granted to the federal government under our Constitution? It’s simple; the powers are laid out clearly in the Constitution in Article 1, Section 8. There is no secret here or any ambiguity in this matter. The Constitution tells the federal government what it can do and anything not covered is reserved for the States, thus the power of the federal government is severely limited and the States are superior to the federal government. Yet our federal government functions like it has unlimited power – if Congress says it is okay, it must be okay. Well this current federal / state relationship is clearly wrong and unconstitutional. Congress and the executive branch are out of control.
The federal government, particularly Congress, in words directly taken from the Constitution, is empowered to:
borrow Money on the credits of the United States (this one has been worked to death);
regulate Commerce with foreign nations and among the several states, and with the Indian Tribes (regulate in this case means to make function smoothly and foster trade – not to control everything and anything that is remotely managed through interstate commerce);
establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States (the federal government has been remiss on Naturalization and violating its own laws on Bankruptcy);
coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures (the federal government certainly has been working the coining – printing – money to its fullest, but its current economic policies have actually worked to unregulate the Value of our Money);
provide for Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
establish Post Offices and post Roads;
promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations (this specific power to punish piracy was not readily utilized by the Obama administration recently, until the Captain of a Navy vessel forced his hand);
declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water (military tribunals);
raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years.;
provide and maintain a Navy;
make Rules for the Government and Regulation of land and naval forces;
provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrection and repel Invasions;
provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress (your National Guard);
exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise the Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-yards and other needful Buildings;
and make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof (limited to the defined powers of the federal government).
Under the 15th amendment, the United States has the power by legislation to enforce the voting rights of citizens.
In the 16th amendment, the Federal Government was given another power: The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration. (This amendment has allowed the Federal Government to use the tax code to manipulate the States and to drive social issues, but it was never intended to allow this action.)
The federal government has absolutely no other authority than what is spelled out above. Watching your Congress work would let you believe that it can do whatever it wants.
Can you find the power to institute Cap and Trade – a tax on carbon emissions?
Can you find in this list of powers the power to loan money to AIG and other TARP recipients?
Can you find the power to regulate executive compensation?
Can you find in this list the power to mandate educational requirements to the States?
Can you find in these powers the right of the federal government to tell me what I should eat or, to make rules for national healthcare or to control healthcare – there is no interstate commerce when I visit my doctor?
Try your own test of these powers to see if other federal government regulations pass the test.
Just what are the powers of the States? What limitation on these powers does the Constitution offer? The limitations are those rights afforded the people of the United States in the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights also provides for the powers of the States in the tenth amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution(article 1, section 8 ),nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. The 14th amendment provides additional restraints on the States “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Why have we let the federal government become what is was not supposed to be – all powerful? Why have the States rolled over when confronted with federal legislation violating the assigned powers of the federal government? Perhaps it is time to fight back and place the federal government back into an inferior position to the States. Push, plead, and cajole your State representatives to fight back and regain their rights as States.
I have had enough with the Congress, both Democrat and Republican – the lies and half truths by Dodd, Rangel, Pelosi, and Frank, feigned indignation from Republican leadership, and on and on. Take a good look and you will see that the snake oil salesmen and women of the world have determined that Congress is the best gig in town. Yes there are a few patriots in Congress, but the majority only care about staying in Congress and retiring rich.
I have had enough from the Bush and Obama administrations – each administration with its own gross degree of hypocrisy. Does anyone really think we can spend our way out of debt? Does anyone really think that the push for cap and trade is not a tax? Does anyone really think that either administration really cared or cares about the future of the American people – we know they cared or care about the future of their ideology, but what about the future of the American people? Main stream America is an afterthought to these parties. I don’t mean sending stimulus checks – I do mean the overall health of this nation. All we seem to believe in is short term appeasement of the voter in exchange for votes. We use earmarks to gain campaign funds – how wrong is that? Main stream America has been ignored by both parties, in favor of both right and left wing zealots and the progressives from both parties – oh and let’s not forget those very uber rich who are now buying our Congress and perhaps the presidency – you know – the George Soros types through tentacled organizations, with their own agenda. Who do we blame? Us, that’s who – not the U.S., but the people who are simply not engaged with their government. Our government is no longer of the people and by the people. It is now of the fringe and by the fringe – the 12% on each side. Too many Americans are just interested in what is in it for them. Too many Americans know who was thrown off American Idol, but not who the Speaker of the House is – yet they vote.
Unless and until we begin to care enough about our own future and how much the government should play in that future, we will continue down the path of letting the fringe of America – from each party – be in charge. The Federal Government is out of control and has been out of control for nearly a dozen years. In fact, we could say the Federal Government has been out of control since the seventeenth amendment – that was when the states abdicated their constitutional role of watchdog of the federal government. Look it up.
Had enough? If so, then do something about it. Start by finding good people running for state office or in state office and get behind them. Likely they have not been corrupted and if you find really good patriots to support, likely they will not be corrupted. Push for the states to take back the watchdog role of the federal government. Push for the states to control the federal government. Sit on your hands and you will get what you deserve – a non-functioning nanny state, run by the fringe in power. Soon they will tell you how to eat, drink, rear your children, and how to live, or are they already doing that? They can’t help themselves because they believe they are much smarter than you.
Many people in perceived fairness say that President Obama is in office a little more than two months, so we should give him a chance. To these people I ask, how long do you give a new nanny who demonstrates poor child rearing skills, with your children? For the ladies, how long do you allow a new beautician who is clearly doing her own thing and not doing what is best for you to continue before you yell stop? We are seeing so called fixes to our economic problems that are not economic problem fixes. We are seeing major changes to our civic culture under the guise of fixing our economic problem. We are seeing a serious threat to our constitution, by a man who openly does not like our constitution the way it was written.
President Obama is a “big government” - government is intended to take care of people – kind of guy. Just listen to his own words. He is asking to spend hundreds of billions on energy, health care, and education – sounds noble, but he has no plan on how to spend this money. No businessman in the world could borrow money without a business plan, yet he wants multiple billions without a plan – he wants you to buy into his wishes sight unseen – something like buying land (swampland) in Florida. This massive spending on noble targets may sound great, but you need to lift the hood to see just what happens when the big government engine is turned on. In the world of gross domestic product, government produces nothing – it is a drain. It does not foster job growth. It does not provide the necessesary economic energy to sustain growth and to keep on delivering. Government simply takes from the producers and the only thing it gives back is a portion of what it has taken – the rest is government overhead. Over time, the producers stop producing because there is no upside for them to produce.
Sure government can create jobs, government jobs, and this does two things that should make you run from government intrusion in your life. First, any government job created takes away from the producers the ability to produce, grow, and create jobs with a multiplier effect. It must continue to take from the producer to support the government created job. Second, the government created job, as it takes away from private sector job growth, keeps you permanently chained to the government to keep your job. Some may say – “what is wrong with a good job from the government?” – the answer is that the government job is not sustainable and that over time, the ecomony and quality of life shrink. As the economy shrinks, the government must take more and more from the remaining producers to sustain those made up government jobs – remember, government jobs produce nothing and add nothing to the economy. As more and more is taken, the producers produce less due to loss of economic motivation – this becomes a cycle of doom. Countless countries have tried this and met the same result – failure.
Throughout history in Latin America, South America, Europe, and Asia (most of the globe), power hungry despots and some well meaning socialists have adopted the control afforded by socialism and the “government can do it all” approach, and failed miserably. Our current President is an academic with a law degree. He has never produced, never managed anything, and appears to have never studied history on the failure rate of big government socialism. That is, unless he is not concerned with 100% failure rate or the success of the venture (we cannot call it an experiment since the experiment failed in a plethora of tests around the globe), and he is only seeking the control and power that comes to a few, not the masses, from the big government socialist venture.
The following is Barack Obama, when he was a state senator, in his own words describing why our constitution is flawed and in need of change. If this does not send chills up your spine, then you have not been paying attention. He feels that the constitution does not provide government with sufficient powers. In this video Mr. Obama telegraphs just where he wants to take this country with the big government socialist approach. The video was found on a blog Bob’s Bites. (Thank you Bob’s Bites).
This bullet train approach to CHANGE toward a big government socialist nation with an understanding that the constitution does not permit the kind of change being attempted, must be stopped. Unfortunately, President Obama will be in office for four years and the current very left, very socialist Democratic Party controlled Congress will be intact for two years, making the stopping of this train very difficult, but not impossible.
We need to pressure the members of the U.S. Senate’s Democratic Party who hold the more moderate and conservative economic voting records in the Democratic Party Senate caucus and three Republican RINO’s (republicans in name only) to act as a buffer and to take steps to retard the hi-speed approach to socialist economic change. We must pressure these Senators to slow the massive government spending for big government. This government spending is not sustainable and simply cannot be repaid. You see, right now, the government is a sub-prime borrower seeking an unsustainable mortgage – have you heard this before? This is what got us into this mess and now we are attempting to spend our way to prosperity and borrow our way out of debt - show me one budget text book that portends a happy outcome when you spend more than you can produce for a sustained time. One book does explain this unique economic plan – it is the bible – the new testament to be exact. It is commonly known as the “Miracle of the Loaves and the Fishes”. Unfortunately for us, while Barack Obama may think he can walk on water - he cannot and he cannot perform the “Miracle of the Loaves and the Fishes” or make wine from water!
Do what you can to stop this bullet train, before it is too late! Tell them (cut and paste the statement if you wish):
“Stop the over the top spending and borrowing now – don’t destroy our country! Socialism does not work!”
The Democratic Senators in the Senate, with the most conservative economic voting records and the three Republicans (RINOs), who should be pressured are:
Beware the need for speed!Your government has kicked in the afterburners to push through some very questionable changes and threats to our Constitution without the traditional process of deliberation.Tell me this.If the Obama Administration believed that the money and powers it was seeking would easily pass public muster and scrutiny, would they have a need to move freight car loads of legislation at breakneck speeds designed to limit public awareness, discourse, and comment?Would they rapidly seek power to seize public non-banking corporations because they deemed them a risk to the economy?Would they rapidly seek power to limit executive pay at all companies, not just TARP recipients?Would they rapidly encourage creation of a new world currency in place of the dollar?Would a Democratic controlled Congress move to limit debate and quash filibuster, as they are doing, if these were not highly questionable actions and powers being sought?The answer is categorically no, but there are moving that quickly!
Whatever happened to the Constitutional prohibition in the Bill of Rights of illegal and unreasonable search and seizure or due process?Today, we have the bankruptcy code to provide due process in any seizure of an insolvent company.Now the Obama Administration wants to be the arbiter of what company survives or is extinguished. Under questioning from Congresswoman Blackburn, Secretary Timothy Geitner either did not know the difference between constitutional authority to seize property and a simple law passed by Congress, or he knew and just feigned ignorance.
The Obama Administration wants to cap executive pay.Whatever happened to the shareholders – you know – the owners of the business?Why does our government need to get involved in a strictly capitalism issue?If you want to cap executive compensation and you feel that boards of directors are not adequately protecting shareholders, give shareholders the ability to vote on executive pay of their executives, annually.When any and all executives of a company are seeking to receive compensation of base pay and bonus or incentives in excess of a multiplier of the median total corporate compensation, give the shareholders the ability to vote on the matter.If the median compensation is $50,000, then a multiplier of 50 is applied, or any other multiplier that works, the shareholders would need to approve any total compensation package, excluding any five or more year restricted stock, of $2,500.000.Why does the government need to be involved?Why is the administration competent in this area – Mr. Obama has never run anything in his life, other that the nation for 60+ days?Why does he or the Congress feel that they know better?They don’t know better and know it.Their real goal is to control the economy and capitalism, as found in a socialism economic model.The best way to control capitalism is to control what capitalists make, thus controlling the capitalists.
The Administration is seeking oodles of money for Energy, Health, and Education.Yet the Administration has not put forth one page of detail on how that money will be spent.This alone should scare you sufficiently so that you want to run and keep running.Don’t run, fight back.We are not a country of fools, yet we are being treated as fools.We are experiencing not a march toward socialism, but a sprint toward socialism, and more importantly an attempt by a few to control our economic and political systems.
If you have never picked up a pen to write or a phone to call your representative in Congress, do it now!Let them know that you voted for a fix to the economy, not a power grab using the economy as the weapon.Take a good look at events and the fixes being applied.You will see that the fixes do not apply to the problems.This Administration is eviscerating targets to divert public attention to what they are really doing.They not only knew about the AIG bonuses, they approved them and wrote them into law – Geithner knew and approved them in the fall of 2008 as NY Federal reserve Bank Chairman.Yet, they feigned surprise and disgust at what amounted to less than one tenth of one percent of the total AIG bailout.
The Obama Administration is using the down economy to rapidly drive through significant radical changes to our country in the name of fixing our economy.They have not attended to the economy in any of their fixes. They do not want the economy fixed, because when it is fixed they can no longer use a down economy to mask what they have really been doing.
If you hear someone say we must give him a chance, then tell them that if you go to a doctor for a broken leg and he whips out leaches to “bleed” you, will you wait to give him a chance?No!You will run like the wind on one good leg.The same is happening today in Washington.The Obama Administration should be given a chance only if and when they are applying a fix that even remotely seems right.Take a good look at the current fixes in the previously passed bills and the bills now to be passed and you will see leaches being used and not good sound proven economic fixes.The solutions chosen by Mr. Obama are akin to leaches because they have never, yes never, worked anytime or anywhere else in the history of the world.In fact, the solutions he has chosen have been seen as abject failures throughout world history.More is at play than fixing the economy.This is not Denmark, but something is certainly rotten here.
Tell your elected representative “Not on my watch!”
Professional Congressmen – Why? Today there are 251 members of the House of Representatives serving for more than ten years or five terms. This is nearly 58% of the House of Representatives. Remember the House is the people’s house and the representatives serving in this house were intended by our founding fathers to be of the people and from the people. When representatives serve in the House for more than two terms they become insolated from the people. They begin to work the system for their own benefit and not for the benefit of their constituents. Mostly this is caused by the treatment they receive from lobbyists and the personal wealth they begin to obtain. The more time in the House, the more power they can build and the more they can build an organization that will keep them being reelected, by making contribution connections – contributions most often originating out of their district. This means that they are now representing contributors of other districts and not the people of their district. The old adage that “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely” is simply how our Congress works.
The numbers about tenure become more frightening as you look at the more senior members of the House. Today there are 42 Democrats and 20 Republicans serving for more than twenty years. Nineteen representatives, fifteen Democrats and four Republicans, are now serving for more than thirty years or an unconscionable fifteen terms. Two Democratic representatives are serving for more than forty years. The number and dollar amount of earmarks is almost in a direct ratio with the time in Congress and the power achieved. As a Congressman delivers more earmarks, they build a contribution base and name recognition to aid them in reelection. Remember that many of these earmarks are payback to political contributors and are not in the best interest of the district, the state, or the country.
Still not convinced that this professional Congress needs to change?Consider that these people represent old thinking, with little recent real world experience or real world business or management skills, and a heavy dose of cronyism. Most committee chairs are based on longevity and have the power and connections to kill bills or fast track bills on their own.
The Senate, the upper house with longer six years terms, suffers it own brand of professional legislator. Ten Democrats and zero Republicans are now serving for more than twenty-four years or four terms in the senate. Of this group, three members are serving for five terms or thirty years and three are serving for more than thirty-six years or six terms.
Only fifty-four members of the House are freshman representatives (32 Democrats and 22 Republicans). This group represents little more than 12% of the House. In reality, there are enough members of the House of Representatives serving longer than most members of the Senate that determining which body is the upper house or the lower house is difficult. Statistics indicate that voters (that’s us) return their Congressman and Senator to Congress at an alarming repeat rate of over 90%. Does this absurd unrealistic return rate represent a love affair of the voter with his or her representation or does it reflect a broken system where power makes it nearly impossible for an incumbent to lose and allows little opportunity for new blood?
When did serving in Congress become an occupation? When did it stop being a noble calling of fellow citizens who put real careers on hold to serve their country for a limited time?
If we are to have a country of the people, by the people, and for the people, then we must make changes. Congress will not change on its own. We need term limits applied to both the House and the Senate. We need to limit both Congressional Representatives and Senators to no more than two consecutive terms – but how? We need a constitutional convention called by the states with two goals. First is to limit congressional terms and the second is to make changes to re-instate state’s rights over a massive out of control incompetent federal government. Return this country to the vision of the founding fathers.
Contact your representative to your state’s legislature (not your U.S. representative) and push for your state to call for a constitutional convention to achieve these two goals.
Listed below are the twenty year plus Congressmen and women who have been in power far too long and need to move on to a real job, if they are able. They are grouped by state with party affiliation and district following the name. Those with 30 and 40 years in Congress are so indicated. Click on the name and see a summary of the rereprsentative’s background and congressional status, including committee assignments.
A loud public outcry is being heard about the AIG bonuses, with the Obama Administration chiming in and stirring up the crowds and acting as chief cheerleader. It seems anything the Obama Administration does can be traced back to polling in an effort to feed the populist movement. When you hear the Obama Administration take on a part of society, whether it is big oil, Wall Street, enemy combatants – pardon me, I should say those fine, but misguided fellows picked up on the battlefield trying to kill our soldiers, it is either to appease the left or to cover up its own complicity in causing the problem.
Let’s look at the AIG bailout. There were three principal players involved in developing the bailout program, during the Bush Administration, subsequently called TARP. The principal players were Secretary Henry Paulson, Federal Reserve Board Chairman Bernanke, and New York Federal Reserve Bank Chairman Timothy Geithner, now Treasury Secretary Geithner. President Obama felt that Mr. Geithner’s capabilities made him the guy to run the nation’s Treasury Department, during what is arguably the most complicated fiscal crisis this nation has ever experienced. Did Mr. Obama make a good pick? As Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Geithner’s responsibilities included (taken from the overview section of its web site)
“…broad policy responsibilities and the effects of its operations on the nation’s economy.
The New York Fed has supervisory jurisdiction over the Second Federal Reserve District, which encompasses New York State, the 12 northern counties of New Jersey, Fairfield County in Connecticut, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Though it serves a geographically small area compared with those of other Federal Reserve Banks, the New York Fed is the largest Reserve Bank in terms of assets and volume of activity…”
What is important about the geographical jurisdiction of the New York Federal Reserve Bank? Take note of the headquarters location of Citi Group, AIG, Bear Sterns, Merrill Lynch, J.P. Morgan Chase, and Lehman Brothers – all in the financial district of New York commonly called Wall Street. Essentially the New York Federal Reserve Bank is located a little less than 1,000 feet from Wall Street and the New York Stock Exchange. So how do we explain that the then Chairman of the New York Federal Reserve Bank on whose watch the collapse began, who was one of three influential people in designing the TARP bailout, and who is now Treasury Secretary administering the bailout for the Obama Administration is surprised along with President Obama about these dastardly executive bonuses to AIG?
The following is an excerpt from the Wall Street Journal of September 16, 2008:
“…The final decision to help AIG came Tuesday as the federal government concluded it would be “catastrophic” to allow the insurer to fail, according to a person familiar with the matter. Over the weekend, federal officials had tried to get the private sector to pony up some funds. But when that effort failed, Fed Chairman Bernanke, New York Fed President Timothy Geithner and Treasury Secretary Paulson concluded that federal assistance was needed to avert an AIG bankruptcy, which they feared could have disastrous repercussions.
Staff from the Federal Reserve and Treasury worked on the plan through Monday night (September 15th). President George W. Bush was briefed on the rescue Tuesday afternoon during a meeting of the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets…”
One would think that when arranging a multi-billion dollar loan to a failing business that some due diligence would be done to insure that the loan money all goes where it is supposed to go. A simple question to the leadership of AIG, whether there were any monetary obligations to management would have sufficed. If the answer was no, the government was mislead and this was not a good faith transaction, then now the TARP money could be recalled and AIG forced into a pre-packaged bankruptcy. This would effectively preclude the contracted bonuses from being realized. If the answer were yes, then the bonus contracts could have been reviewed at that time and if they could not be negated, a pre-packaged bankruptcy should have been fast tracked. Not optimun competency here!
So why again is the Obama Administration so over the top on these bonuses when their chief financial guy, Secretary Geithner, was a principal architect of the bailout? Yes, Paulson and Bernanke are also to blame, if you are in the blame game, as it appears President Obama is in. As is becoming the game plan for the Obama Administration when it is caught with ineptidude, e.g., Geithner’s mishandling , they find a scape goat and make it loud. In this case, it is those dastardly executives and their bonuses.
The same people who failed while on watch, then failed on creating a fix, are the same people entrusted to steer us out of these dangerous waters. Doesn’t this just give you a warm feeling all over? Our country has been and is being led by politicians and bureaucrats who more often than not, have no capability to succeed outside the confines of the political bureaucracy. Yet, President Obama wants to expand this country’s government and have the government take care of our needs.
Today, we still do not have a detailed plan for the stabilization of the banking system, promised back in January by Mr. Geithner. Of the top eighteen positions in Treasury only one has been filled – Treasury Secretary Geithner. The other seventeen top positions are vacant with scant nominees to be considered. Maybe Mr. Geithner should try Career Builder to find candidates? The actions of this Treasury Secretary have not and do not exude confidence and excellence. Yet Mr. Obama is worrying about bonuses that amount to a fraction of one percent of the AIG bailout. Perhaps his Administration should focus on filling the positions in the Treasury and stabilizing the banking system?
UPDATE: March 18, 2009
Our Congress and White House are embarassed and over the AIG bonuses and are ramping up the mob mentality of populism. They are trampling the Constitution in their attempt to look like smart people. They apparently have never heard about bills of attainder. Bills of attainder are integral to our economic system. It is sacred, yet in an effort to look like good guys and not the dim bulbs they are showing us they are, they are talking about retrieving the AIG bonuses with legislation. What is worse is that our Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner knew about the AIG bonuses before the TARP money was handed out, and he knew that $68 Billion of AIG’s taxpayer funded TARP money would be funneled through AIG to foreign banking companies - he apparently was okay with both.
When the Constitution was ratified and adopted it was important to always accurately know what the population of the States was in order to establish the correct representation in the House of Representatives and the correct number of electors from each state in the Electoral College. The cornerstone of our nation’s republican government – not to be confused with the Republican Party – is a census free of White House manipulation. The Constitution requires this head count to occur every ten years. Since this census is the cornerstone of our form of government, the census absolutely must be free of politics. Up till now the free of politics requirement has not been perfect, but has been close enough to make the census work.
Never in the history of this great land has the foundation of our government been at such risk. We now hear that the community action group well known to be attached to the hip of our President, ACORN, will be asked to partner with the Census Bureau, along with other organizations, to recruit staff for the decennial census. Fox News reports on Acorn. Remember, ACORN was not only a major supporter of Mr. Obama, but that he had been an attorney providing guidance on their community organization methods – he actually advised them on how to challenge banks under the Community Reinvestment Act – that law suit opened the doors to sub-prime lending.
Again, remember that it was barely six months ago that ACORN was under investigation in a host of states for voter fraud – mostly for registering voters multiple times and ineligible voters, in violation of election law. ACORN had buried the Secretaries of State in those states with thousands of bogus voter registrations, severely limiting the effectiveness of these offices to properly police the presidential election. Tell me that this is not a political move by the White House to steer the 2010 census.
There is a process to sign on to the Census Bureau as a census taker, actually a number of positions exist with the most prominent being the enumerator position. These are temporary positions and they pay very nicely. There is a website - Census Jobs - that clearly describes how to go about signing up for the census test. Yes there is a test. Do we really need ACORN, when we are experiencing an 8% plus unemployment rate and a pool of retired citizens who have seen their retirement nest eggs sliced in half, and now need to work? All the Census Bureau needs to do is to heavily publicize the process and it will have access to an enormous legitimate labor pool. So why are ACORN and other community organization groups involved or needed? Is ACORN being asked to provide its brand of voter recruitment? Is ACORN needed to ensure the recruitment of census takers, with a history of playing fast and lose with rules, who will have no problem filling out thousands of bogus forms to skew the census, as they did with voter registration?
If you have ever pressured your Congressman or Congresswoman or your Senators! Now is the time! With the current state of the economy and our unemployment, we do not need to find organizations to recruit. All the Census Bureau needs to do is get the word out and they will find census takers to get the job done. The White House has already been challenged for attempting to take over the census and now they are trying to skew the census through a back door. Just tell them to keep community organizers and community organizing groups away from the census.
Here is a webpage that tells you all about the census hiring.
We do not need ACORN or White House involvement. We need a clean non-political census, since – and I cannot say this often enough - it is the cornerstone of our democratic republic. Without a clean census, we are just another third world country.
The real no spin definition of most earmarks is a Member of Congress targeting a group with your money taken right from the ever flowing government monetary fountain to either get votes or campaign funds for reelection. This keeps the “select” few in Congress. Search high and low and you will not find much integrity in Congress or with those who use the system to keep getting reelected.
Who runs our government? At any given time, the decision makers in Congress represent the 15% of the population who place party above country. Most people who are registered Democrats or Republicans follow their party and generally agree with their party, but do not place party above country. Most elected representatives are of the 15% of the population who are Democrats or the 15% who are Republicans – these are the folks who place party above country. Under the Bush administration there was a push to expand the Republican Party by expanding government and spending more – sounds like the Democrats doesn’t it? The theory was, if we give the people “stuff” they will vote for us, since this has worked for the Democrats for some time.
The problem was that the Democrats had elevated giving stuff to those who don’t have stuff to an art form and thus the Republican plan badly backfired. In the case of the Republican representatives, they placed party above country. The problem with the Democratic Party, now that the backlash against the Republicans has given the Democrats essentially a majority in both Houses of Congress and possession of the Whitehouse, is that they are seizing the opportunity to take their art form of expanding government and giving stuff to those who don’t have stuff to a new level. They are using this opportunity to forever move this country, in a series of well planned steps, to the far left progressive governance of socialism and control by their party. Again this is party over country.
In a previous posting “Fix Congress, But How?” I suggested changes to our Constitution as a means of regaining control of the country from the parties. It should always be what is best for the country, not what is best for the party. That posting did not cover one other method of regaining control of our country and the re-establishment of bi-partisan governing or more importantly multi-partisan governing. This type of governing is brings back checks and balances.
By allowing a third or even more parties to grow and prosper to major status, we will force compromise, build in check and balances, and blunt extremism from the two major parties of today. This means changing state laws that have been put in place to make it very hard for other than a Republican or Democrat to run for federal office. Today’s Democratic Party is not the party to which my father, a union bricklayer, belonged. The Democratic Party of John F. Kennedy was more like the Republican Party today. Both Parties have moved very left. Within each party are those who represent the centrist, left and right camps of party members. The Blue Dog Democrats are fiscally conservative members of the Democratic Party, and are mostly from the south. They may be Democrats, but they do not control the party – the Far left does. This group would bolt to a viable third party if it could achieve major status. Do you think they were comfortable recently when Speaker Pelosi demanded a yes vote for the 1,000+ page American Recovery Act (stimulus bill of $787 Billion) with no time to read or digest it? This was a case for these people to place party over country, because if they did not comply, the party would not support them going forward during the reelection primary campaign.
You can initiate change yourself. Find a party of your liking and change or simply go independent. However in most states independents lose out during the primary season by being shut out of the vote. The two major parties are simply too powerful, with the Democrats being in an über power position. This situation is incredibly dangerous for this nation. The far left 15% of the population are now in control of our country. Is this how you want this country managed? Spinning off those other major parties is change you can trust. Change you need to push for by contacting your state representatives to insure that getting on the ballot is equally easy for all parties.
Tired and frustrated about Washington, D.C.? Do you believe that Congress is out of touch with the people? Do you believe that Congress does not represent us and instead represents special interests with their legions of lobbyists and big campaign donations. It also seems clear that those in Congress have a sole purpose of continuing to serve and this purpose is to do everything and anything they can to remain in Congress. Have you noticed that those who retire usually retire very wealthy?
Where else can we be told time and time again how the Congress will clean up its act, yet we suffer powerful committee chairpersons and rules designed to keep and grow the status quo. The affliction of power brought about by seniority affects both parties. Our two party system appears to be the problem and not the solution – ideology takes second place to capturing power and remaining in office. Their real constituent is reelection! We routinely return the incumbent to Congress at greater than a 90% rate. Something is radically wrong when the very people who complain about the Congress, us, routinely return their representatives to Congress more than 90% of the time. Perhaps this 90% return rate is not totally our fault, but can be traced to the design of the election system, campaign funding, and the support of special interests. Does it seem right that your Congressman or Congresswoman is more influenced by money from outside his or her district? Why should some agricultural company in Hawaii be allowed to monetarily influence a Congressman from an industrial district in Pennsylvania? It happens that money flows in to Congressional campaigns from all over the United States and yes, Europe and China, among other places. Why is it okay for everyone in the world to buy the loyalty of your representation in Washington?
If and when you call your representative in Congress, you will most likely get voice mail that asks you to leave a message about your issue. They keep raising the funding for the staffing of their offices, yet there is no one to answer the phone? These people feel so insulated that they have openly and brazenly discussed, and in committee voted to add a voting representative in Congress to the District of Columbia and the State of Utah. This is highly unconstitutional behavior – the Constitution is crystal clear on how representation is handled and representation is not established by the Congress at their whim. This vote in committee and soon to be a floor vote represents the ultimate example of people serving in Congress suffering the aphrodesiac of unchecked power.
What can we do about our Congress? Can we amend the Constitution? Congress controls the Constitutional amendment process or do they? Our Constitution provides for an alternate amendment process, one initiated by the states. A state can call for a constitutional convention and if two thirds of the states agree, i.e. 34 states, it convenes. The states send representatives to the convention and any amendment coming out of the convention needs ratification by three fourths of the states, i.e. 38 states, to become an amendment of the United States Constitution. Now you can petition your state legislators, your representatives in your capitol, for a constitutional convention to change Congress and to restore lost rights back to the states.
We can seek a change in how Senators are elected. When the Constitution was adopted, it provided for election of Senators by the states legislatures and not direct election of the senators by the people. While this method was subject to politics and political maneuvering, it gave the States a say in the size of the federal government, the judiciary, and foreign affairs through the Senate. It was the seventeenth amendment that made this change. We need to repeal the seventeenth and replace it with an amendment that provides for election of senators by their respective legislatures, with a restriction on recall requiring a two thirds vote in all houses of legislature of the state – Nebraska has only one house of legislature, while the others have two. This would take the pandering and special interests out of the Senate, since Senators would not need multiple millions to run for reelection. This amendment would add an additional check and balance – the state itself through its Senators.
We can seek an amendment that would limit campaign contributions in cash, property, or services to an individual residing or a corporation headquartered in the district of the congressional candidate – no political party contributions, thus only constituents are important to the member of Congress.
We can seek an amendment that requires all spending bills and any spending appropriation to be of like kind in a bill, be in the body of the bill with no spending amendments, and have gone through committee and been approved by the majority of the committee. This will eliminate earmarks.
We can seek a change in ballots across this nation for candidates for a federal office. No longer can states make special rules that make it hard for third party candidates to get on state ballots for president and vice-president, or congressional representatives. This would stimulate the candidacy of members of parties other than Democrat or Republican parties.
We can seek term limits on members of the House of Representatives to three terms. This will eliminate the individual absolute power some members of Congress have achieved.
These few amendments will re-establish this republic and fix the now forever and perpetually corrupt Congress. Members of Congress are addicted to a drug of Congressional power and will never give it up on their own. We need to make this change through the states – push your state representatives to make these changes. Tell them these amendments will provide the states with more rights and make it easier and less costly for the state representatives to run for federal office.
President Obama, I have a question. Very often during your campaign for President, you were adamant about eliminating earmarks. You stated that you would go line by line in every bill looking for earmarks and have the earmarks eliminated before you sign the bill into law. The current $410 Billion Omnibus Bill before the Senate and passed by the House, with your encouragement and support, contains nearly 9,000 earmarks. Some of these earmarks are absolutely insane, especially in a time of fiscal crisis. One item in the Senate version of the bill was an earmark submitted by you when you were a Senator from Illinois. This earmark has now had your name removed, but it is yours just the same, because while you name was removed, the earmark remains in the bill – you did not eliminate your own earmark.
Perhaps, after the Stimulus Bill, The American Recovery Act, it is too soon to challenge you on this earmark thing, because we have been told by you and you’re your spokesman, Mr. Gibbs, that the Stimulus bill did not contain any earmarks. However, we know this was true only in the technical sense, but if pork looks like an earmark, spends like an earmark, is not debated like an earmark, and is slipped in like an earmark, then it is an earmark. The current Omnibus Bill earmarks explanation from your Mr. Gibbs is even more strange. It is that these were last years earmarks and thus don’t count toward your pledge. Please understand that I and many others find this to be a moronic, disingenuous explanation from the Obama Administration.
For two years you campaigned against earmarks and yet you will not come out against last years, as yet to become law, earmarks? Mr. Obama, will you veto this bill if it ever gets through the Senate? This pork laden earmark filled (9,000) bill was written by the Democratic leadership in the House. Even that ultra small band of fiscally conservative former Democrat colleagues of yours in the Senate are choking on this bill and are joining the Republicans in fighting this bill. If they have come out against it, why haven’t you?
Mr. Obama, I have noticed a pattern in your positions. You have verbal positions that are presented to the people and you tell us what we want to hear and you have actionable positions on the same issue that are just the opposite of what you told us. You did promise transparency, so is this lack of transparency in your actions on purpose? Can we expect this I will tell you one thing and regularly do the opposite to continue throughout your term of office? Yes I said one question, but I got carried away.
Recently, President Obama in an effort to achieve his health care reform agenda made the statement that health / medical costs force a person into bankruptcy every thirty seconds. View YouTube and his words here. This sounds like health care is steamrolling citizens into bankruptcy. Is this true? First, we need to discount corporate bankruptcy since these bankruptcies would not be caused by health care expenses, so we then focus on consumer bankruptcy. If his statement and numbers are accurate, then in one year 1,051,200 consumers will file bankruptcy, due to health care costs. This statement is highly implausible and smacks of the slight of hand we experienced with the “we don’t have time to read the stimulus bill antics” from the Obama Administration.
In 2008, 1,074,225 consumers filed for bankruptcy. This equates to a little less than 1.04 consumer bankruptcies every thirty seconds. These can’t all be health care related. Bankruptcies are caused by extreme debt and debt is caused by spending, capital acquisitions, and specifically spending that includes health care costs. If you were to believe Mr. Obama, and his one bankruptcy every thirty seconds propaganda, you would believe that just about every bankruptcy is caused by heath care. If you don’t believe me, look at the numbers. He statement means that no bankruptcies were caused by mortgage past dues, credit card balances, and catastrophic loss? If you want to do your own math, go to the American Bankruptcy Institute for the numbers. Remember there are 31,536,000 seconds in a year.
This could be just a simple misstatement but this misdirection is becomming a pattern from Mr. Obama. We are being told by Mr. Obama that we need to expedite health care reform as part of the nation’s fiscal recovery. Health care caused bankruptcy is not a prime impetus to the current fiscal troubles this nation is experiencing. Anytime you hear that we need to rush a bill to passage from Mr. Obama, stop and cringe. The Obama Administration motto, “never let a good crisis go to waste to achieve your agenda” is the reason for the fuzzy numbers put forth by Mr. Obama.
A surprising number of people today are seeking a socialist government because they have a hope that a nanny state will improve their lives. Many of these people, group one, are of modest income, brought about by modest education, and some early life mistakes. Let’s not confuse these folks with those who want socialism because it gives them control of how we should all live, group two. Group two is the alpha group with generally higher education and income levels. This posting is targeted to those who are of modest means in group one. There are three types of people: those who don’t know and know they don’t know; those who know and know they know; and those who don’t know and think they know – these are the dangerous ones and a bulk of these people fall into group two. You will find a lot of these folks in Hollywood and in the Capitol Building.
Group one was provided an education in our schools run by controlling far left educators – group two. The educators in their wisdom most likely dismissed the in depth teaching of U.S. and world history. Group one simply does not realize exactly what they are seeking. They have been sold a Utopian view by the far left of the Democratic Party, members of group two, with nary an explanation that all previous attempts at beneficial socialism worldwide have been abject failures. China’s people are benefiting from improved prosperity and some limited advances in personal freedom, but these advances and improved prosperity are only brought about by shifts toward capitalism. I cannot think of one nation that has adopted socialism and has seen economic prosperity and experienced widespread individual freedoms for its people through socialism. The populace of these nations have no incentive to become wealthy and are generally regulated to death. The socialist movement deflates any opportunity for a rags to riches rise.
Rather than use one of an unending list of failed socialist foreign nations as an example, I thought I would highlight one of our fifty states that entered into the socialism track years ago. It is a state that has passed law after law impinging qualified personal freedom to the limit of our U.S. Constitution and has tried to be the most prolific nanny state that it can be. It is a state where no one is held personally accountable. I point out that personal freedom is qualified because their definition of freedom is unique to the rest of the country. Smoking pot is good, but the rules on personal business expansion and prosperity are onerous. It is a state that is suffering through and sharing the current U.S. and world severe recession, but is also suffering a self imposed economic collapse as a direct result of its attempt to be a nanny state. It is a state that during a recession, where millions are suffering due to unemployment and rising costs, has decided it is good to increase taxes. It has chosen to increase a regressive tax, the sales tax, to help solve the budget problem. This is almost incredulous since they are raising taxes disproportionately on the people who have been weaned to depend on the nanny state. How brilliant is that?
If you have not guessed as yet, it is the State is California. This very liberal experiment in creating a nanny state, which included onerous rules on businesses and outrageously high taxes, is tanking faster than a falling meteoroid. This State is suffering years of debt taken on to achieve the very liberal social programs that are the underpinning of the “nanny state”. I hope the millions who are seeking the Nanny States of America take a moment to see what will become of the United States of America, if we continue on this path to a national socialistic nanny state. One look at California and the multi-tentacled sink hole it has become should be enough to demonstrate to those of modest means, that in the long run the nanny state will only bring them abject misery.
This post is not targeted to group two socialism control freaks who truly believe that they know better how we should live and what our culture should look like – these are just misdirected fools and there is nothing you can tell or show them that will change their minds, since it is all about control to them. They have no problem with constantly repeating history but with an expectation of a different result. Fortunately for the conservatives and moderates who populate this nation, they cannot accomplish this trek to socialism on their own. They need the votes of those with modest means. They try to obtain these votes by promising stuff, lots of stuff. They get these votes by pounding into these folks just how badly they have it and how dastardly corrupt business types are.
All we need to do is to point out California in detail to these modest means folks over and over again, and maybe we can wakeup some of these folks to the reality that their invitation from group two that says “we would like to have you for dinner” really means that they are the dinner.
Our new Attorney General, Eric Holder, has recently come out against semi-automatic weapons. He says that our laws permitting semi-automatic weapons are fostering the shipment of these weapons to Mexico for the drug cartels, exacerbating the drug violence at the border. Thus we must control the sale of these weapons in the United States and restrict ownership to address this crisis. Boy does this ever sound reasonable. I personally have no use for semi-automatic weapons, but I think that we do need to agree that the second amendment gives my solid citizen neighbor a right to own these weapons.
The truth, not told by our Attorney General, is that the Mexican drug cartels use not only these semi-automatic weapons, but fully automatic P90’s, hand grenades, and RPG’s as well. The truth of the matter, not heard from Mr. Holder, is that the semi-automatic weapons are being purchased in the United States in such bulk as to be a currently illegal sale or they are bartered for drugs, also not legal. The truth of the matter is that the Mexican authorities have not installed the proper detection equipment at the border to catch these weapons coming in to Mexico. The truth of the matter is that Mr. Holder is using the Obama Administration playbook to “not let a good crisis go to waste”. As was done with the stimulus bill and with the omnibus spending bill, we are told that an action is needed to solve a crisis, when in reality the bulk of these actions are designed to install their brand of socialism and government control of how we live. For a very good and informative read on the Mexican gun and drug violence, read Stratfor’s piece: Mexico: Dynamics of the Gun Trade.
Mr. Holder has told us just enough to justify the Administration’s longstanding desire to eliminate gun ownership to fight crime. Do you really think drug dealers apply for a gun permit before acquiring a gun? Just how much illicit gun violence is there from permit carrying gun owners? Mr. Holder would do better to spend his time marshalling his forces to track down and stop the wholesale market for illicit guns going to the drug cartels. He need not spend his time trying disingenuously to snuff out the second amendment, simply because he and the rest of the Administration do not like it.
There are many people in this country who really want socialism, just read various blog comments on the internet. Those who want socialism should study up on the effects of socialism. It is a disease that slowly deprives a populace of freedom, and prosperity, with the non-workable utopian hope that the government can right all ills by bringing economic balance from those who have more to those who have less. There are also many who open mindedly want to cut the Obama Administration slack because they feel that the Administration is working to solve our problems. These people should stop and take a very close look at what the Administration is doing, under the guise of fixing a financial crisis. If they did look under the hood, so to speak, they would find a host of actions that have nothing to do with fixing a financial crisis, and everything to do with installing heavy government control over the citizens.
We must start to really listen to the Administration when its members speak, and we must really start to look at the people who are chosen to be in this Administration. We cannot assume that because they say they are fixing our problems, that they are. We must prevent them from acting like that distant cousin who shows up to stay, acts like he is mowing our lawn and fixing our shingles to help us out, but is really quietly cleaning us out of our silverware and other valuables. When Erik Holder and other members of this Administration speak, listen very carefully to the actual words used, and you will hear the real agenda. You will hear the very slick use of the English language to make you believe one thing, while they are doing something else.
