Personal Responsibility

Friends,
Let’s have a brief discussion about personal responsibility. Now, before you get mad at me, I know that is a taboo subject in today’s world, but let’s think about it – please humor me.

When I was a kid, as I can remember, there was only one kind of credit card that was in common use and that was a gas company credit card. Since I was too young to have one I can only assume that the debt that was incurred had to be paid. I know that is a silly concept today but, as I said, bear with me. If I recall correctly, Sears and Roebuck had a “revolving credit” account. That meant that if you charged a washer on the account in January, and then paid it down to within a few dollars, then charged a drier on the account and then paid it down to within a few dollars, then charged a refrigerator on the account and then half way down the payment schedule you defaulted on the account they could come pick up all three appliances.

Was this unfair? Maybe or maybe not, but the point is that this is the way the account was structured and you understood the consequences of not paying. That is what I call enforced responsibility; consequences for your decisions and/or actions.

Every day I hear advertisements on the radio or TV saying something like “Do you owe the IRS $10,000 or more? Now you can negotiate that down to pennies on the dollar,” or “Do you have over $10,000 in credit card debt? Now you can be forgiven most if not all of it.” When and how did we get to the point where we expect to incur debts and not have to make good on them? Friends, there is a very simple word for this concept, THEFT. When a person makes a commitment, they follow through with it. If they don’t, they are a liar and a thief. Strong words? Maybe so, but that is the way I feel about it.

But wait, I am being completely insensitive and politically incorrect about this situation. After all, our president the OWH advocates making this attitude public policy. In his State of the Union blather he said:
To make college more affordable, this bill (speaking about an education bill) will finally end the unwarranted taxpayer-subsidies that go to banks for student loans. Instead, let’s take that money and give families a $10,000 tax credit for four years of college and increase Pell Grants. And let’s tell another one million students that when they graduate, they will be required to pay only ten percent of their income on student loans, and all of their debt will be forgiven after twenty years – and forgiven after ten years if they choose a career in public service. Because in the United States of America, no one should go broke because they chose to go to college. And it’s time for colleges and universities to get serious about cutting their own costs – because they too have a responsibility to help solve this problem.

There are two very blatant things wrong here. The first goes along with the theme of this Discourse and that is personal responsibility. As a public policy we are going to tell college students that after 10 or 20 years they will have their debt completely forgiven. Well, I'm one of the folks loaning them that money and I have a vote on that public policy. I VOTE NO! These people assume a debt and I vote that they pay their assumed debt.

The second thing that is wrong with that quote is that the OWH is intentionally encouraging the growth of government in the hiring of college students who will be able to work in one bureaucracy or another for 10 years and be free of the student loans THAT I LOANED THEM.

The OWH has said and done a lot of stupid things in the last year, but this one is right up there with the best. He has absolutely no idea how to solve our economic or social problems. As I have stated in these Discourses in the past, when you are out of money, stop spending. As Newt has said, when you can’t afford to buy a house, don’t buy it. If you can’t afford to go to college, work your way through it.

The only way I can see to get this country back on its collective economic feet is to get rid of the myriad of non-constitutional departments and bureaus and give those functions back to the states and the people where they belong. In that way, billions of dollars that we are hemorrhaging into bureaucracies could go to our debtors and put us back into the black ink territory. A result of these cuts would be massive cuts in social programs. You say that we can’t do that because so many people depend on them? How about making people depend on themselves? That is what the “Greatest Generation” did. They weren’t great just because they won the war against Fascism; they also persevered against the economic crisis brought on by failed government policies.

Friends we are headed there again. These bureaucrats and incompetents in Washington are doing what we used to call “featherbedding.” It is past time we put a stop to it.

As always, I welcome your thoughts and discussions.
Dan

The Tenth Amendment

Friends,

There is currently a movement fostered by the Coalition for a Conservative Majority, Colorado Springs to encourage the Colorado Legislature and governor to tell the federal government that we are going to uphold the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution and expect the same from them. I don’t have to tell you what prompted this movement. At this point I think we should review the Tenth Amendment:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

That seems pretty simple to me. That tells me that the powers granted to the federal government are specifically enumerated in the Constitution and no other powers are to be assumed by that government. It also says that if a power is not specifically granted to the federal government, it is reserved for the individual states or passed directly to the people.

This is a good place to discuss the purpose of the Bill of Rights. The first nine Amendments were drafted specifically to enumerate and ensure those rights that the founders believed the citizens possessed by virtue of being citizens. The Bill of Rights was drafted to set restrictions on government. It could be cogently argued that each individual Amendment of the first ten is more important than the others. However, I would argue that the first nine Amendments equally detail the rights of all citizens of the United States and the Tenth Amendment sets the boundaries for the federal government with respect to those rights.

While I am not a constitutional scholar, I have read it many times and have yet to find where the federal government has the authority to hold such massive control over the states. All of that control has been legislated since 1791. This points out two problems; first is that Congress and successive presidents have taken it upon themselves to exert that control and second that the states and citizens allow them to do it.

I see two ways to view the power of the federal government. The first is that the feds give the states, communities, and individuals money for various purposes under various programs. In exchange for these monies they demand certain “paybacks.” The overwhelming tendency today is to give the federal government what it wants because states, communities, and individuals want the money. The second way to look at it is to question why are we so willing to accede to their wishes, especially considering that it is our money that they are giving us? The US government has a very poor track record when it comes to living up to its self-proclaimed obligations. Congress just changes those obligations at will, not bothering to consult with the people most affected.

One concept to “encourage” the feds to live up to their obligations is to put all monies slated to go to them into a “sequester fund” until such time that they live up to their stated obligations. The problem with this concept is that we would be admitting that they have the authority to enact and carry out the many programs that come out of Washington. I would argue that they do not have that authority as stipulated in the Tenth Amendment.

I would urge all state legislatures to pass binding resolutions to disassociate themselves from the mandates of the federal government except those specifically set down by the Constitution. Why should we in Colorado pay for the housing of someone who cannot or will not work in Detroit? That is a city and/or state issue and not within the mandate of the federal government. It is time for us to take our rights back!

Find out just what the people will submit to and you will have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows, or both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.
Frederick Douglass, August 4, 1857

For more on this subject refer to my Political Discourse of 10 June 2008 entitled Constitutional Authority on this blogsite.

As always, I welcome your thoughts and discussion.

Dan

Climategate

Friends,
Below is an article by my friend Andy Pico who is passionate about the climate change debate.
Enjoy,
Dan

Climategate
The last few weeks in the world of climate change and science has been, if anything, entertaining. The show in the Gazette opened with Professor Horner’s invective against what he erroneously labels “science denial”, Gazette, 19 Nov 09. In his tirade against the non-believers he equates anthropogenic climate change skeptics with science denial and lists a series of psychological pathologies.

On the following Monday, Nov 23rd, the Associated Propaganda’s (AP) local hysteria outlet for one-sided propaganda, formerly known as the Gazette News Division, ran Borenstein’s rant of how climate change has worsened beyond the grimmest warnings issued in 1997.

Between these two blatant pieces of hysterical propaganda was perhaps the most significant breakthrough in climate science in decades. The posting of the Hadley Climate Research Unit (CRU) data by perhaps an inside whistleblower, has revealed what many in the Climate Realistic Skeptics branch of Legitimate Science have long charged. The systematic and intentional manipulation and outright fabrication of climate data has now been fully confirmed and the Skeptics vindicated.

To make clear the importance of this data in the climate change debate, this is the core data upon which the entire Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) Theory is based. This is the data upon which the climate modelers of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change based its work. This manipulated and fabricated data is the foundation upon which the rest of the fraudulent theory of AGW is built upon.

The revelations and analysis is on-going and new revelations are reported daily. Continuing coverage is available here. What is clear so far is that the scientists at CRU were engaged, together with co-conspirators across our naturally climate changing planet, in an intentional and massive fraud driven by a political agenda. The technical details of how the data was manipulated together with the data are included in the revealed files which go far beyond mere emails. These techniques were shared across the planet with like-minded political zealots in scientific positions across academia and government positions. Similar fabrications have been previously exposed through independent analysis of NASA data and other agencies.

Perhaps the most egregious scientific manipulations now exposed by Climategate are the intentional perversion of the peer-review and publication processes. These faux-scientists collaborated to block publication of opposing views in scientific journals. Those editors of scientific journals who adhered to ethical processes were removed from their positions and replaced with political zealots. The faux-scientists then made the specious claim that there were no opposing viewpoints published in those peer-reviewed journals. Those journals which maintained scientific impartiality and adhered to ethical conduct were black-balled and presented as being less than mainstream and merely the fringe of lower order scientists who could not be published in the mainline journals.

This formula has been widely used and some of our own local AGW Hysterics have stated as much, often citing a blatantly phony “study” that claims 97% of scientists and published papers are in support of AGW, after of course ignoring any journals or scientists who disagree. One of our local scientists went so far as to claim in an on-line exchange that he could find only 29 papers that disagreed with AGW Theory, when challenged on that point cited the above where only those journals who have been taken over by editorial zealots were counted and all of the previous work on climate history covering previous climate cycles, which used to be the “Scientific Consensus” on climate history prior to the IPCC commissioned fabrication by Dr. Mann of the fraudulent “Hockey Stick”. Dr. Mann’s data manipulations have been previously debunked and have now been fully exposed; programs, data and all.

The thousands of scientific papers that touch on climate change and climate history across many fields of study have been ignored by the faux-scientist cabal of political operatives engaged in unethical and illegal misconduct. In their emails between co-conspirators, the faux-scientists at the core of AGW Theory operating from their tax-payer funded agencies across the cooling planet admitted between them that the climate had stopped warming and that they had to “hide” this fact from the public and coordinated that scientific sophistry of deception.

This certainly vindicates all of us who have pointed out the inconvenient fact of global cooling over the past decade and been attacked for doing so. And yet, with their fraud fully exposed and their perfidy open for all with the intellectual and moral integrity to see, the propaganda continues and the real denial of science by the AGW Hysterics continues. The President plans to commit the US, without any legislation passed to do so, to carbon reduction targets. The House has passed a Cap and Trade bill and the Senate now has before it a true monstrosity of epic proportions designed to impose government control of energy with enormous costs to individuals and horrendous economic impacts. It is not science denial or an exaggeration, as Professor Horner put it, to identify the costs and point out where government seizure of businesses, which is socialism, and oppressive government control of businesses, which is economic fascism, combined with corrupt cronyism will result in enormous costs to society and the destruction of freedom, pushed for by those who are “proud to call themselves Liberal”. The liberal/progressive adherents to AGW Hysteria like to push the notion that the costs of doing nothing are too high, when in fact the costs of doing nothing are, nothing, and the costs of their programs are enormous.

It is not a denial of science to reference a vast body of scientific work and solid evidence that supports theories of natural climate change and climate cycles. It is far more accurate to state that the outright data fabrication and cynical perversion of peer review is the true denial of science. Those faux-scientists, illiterate in economics, ignorant of history, aided and abetted by the incompetent and corrupt agenda-journalists of the Propaganda Press, are the true deniers and cynical manipulators of science in pursuit of a false political agenda. Indeed, when questioned on Climategate, Carol Browner, the Mendacious One’s Climate Grupenfuhrer, stated that the corrupted data did not matter. It has never been about the data, which was fabricated from the start; it has always been about the political agenda that hijacked the science. Now, the EPA proposes to regulate, without any legislation, greenhouse gasses as a threat to human health.

Perhaps now we can have an honest, open and ethical review of the science in a process that respects the real principles of open discussion and pursuit of real science, while this still remains a free country.

Andres Pico

Health Care Bribery

Friends,

I have written on several occasions about things Congress does that are not, in my opinion, justifiable under the Constitution. The health care package that the OWH is desperate to sign is just the latest. The Socialists in Congress are pushing this piece of FOD harder than I have ever seen in my lifetime. The House version wasn’t even allowed to see the light of day until massive pressure from you, the citizens of this country, raised a howl. It seems that their urgency comes from the fear and reality, that if the citizens of this country are given enough time to look it over we will go on an impeachment spree. (Hmmm, now that’s not a bad idea; but I digress.)

I think that at this point in the discussion it is appropriate to take a look at how the Socialists are getting the job done. In the movie The Godfather, Don Corleone made an offer that couldn’t be refused. Well, it looks like Don Harry took a page out of the godfather’s playbook. He made an offer to Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana that she couldn’t refuse. In this case it was a bribe of $300 million to support cloture.

Now, folks, I don’t know about you, but where I come from bribery is a crime. In this case, it is a crime of the highest order. Don Harry has promised $300 million of our money for Senator Landrieu to take back to Louisiana. This will enable her to tell her constituents that she is working for them, and in a way she will be right. She is cutting backroom deals to steal a large sum of money from the rest of us. Please do not misunderstand me. I am not saying that I want some of that money for our state. That is not the issue. The issue is that she was bought, just like practitioners of the world’s oldest profession.

But Senator Landrieu was not the only one to get in on this deal. Senator Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas was another key vote that Don Harry courted. The deal that Senator Lincoln got has not been disclosed but it was surely a good one.

I’m going to make a few demands here. There are several attorneys and several law makers who receive my postings. I want one or more of them to tell me how this kind of crime can go by without drawing the scrutiny of the FBI. Bribery is a crime in every jurisdiction in which I have lived. I want the FBI to explain to me why they are not opening a case file on this situation. I want my senators, Mark Udall and Michael Bennet to tell me why they are not screaming from the top of the Capitol Dome for an investigation. (Of course, I already know the answer to the last one.) Senator Bennet has even said that he will vote for the bill even if it costs him his job. Well, Senator Bennet, I intend to make sure that is exactly what it costs you!

The most important question I want answered is one I have posed numerous times before. Where is the constitutional justification for the health care program that Congress and the OWH want to shove down our throats? Where is the constitutional justification for forcing the citizens of the United States to buy ANYTHING; whether it is health care or stocking caps? The federal government has NO authority to make us buy anything.

This country has become one of hand-outs; welfare recipients, unions, and special interests to name a few. We all need to go back to the lesson that John Smith learned in Jamestown, Virginia. When the colony was first established, all goods produced went into a common store and everyone would draw equally from that store. The lazy drew the same as the industrious. They almost starved. When you take the work incentive away, there is no reason to work to support those who would not work anyway. That is the way the United States is becoming, facilitated by the federal government. Captain Smith set down the rule that if you did not work, you did not eat. It is time we re-institute that rule.

It is high time we elect representatives and senators to Congress who have the good of the nation in their sights and not just their own power base. It is time we put in representatives and senators who will get up on their desks and do an Indian war chant when these abused take place. This slippery slope we have been riding for the last two years will be hard and painful to reverse but we have no choice. We have to stop it and we have to take our country back from the power brokers in Washington DC.

As always, I welcome your comments and discussion.

Dan

Veterans' Day 2009

Friends,

As we approach another Veterans’ Day I would like to take the opportunity to expound on a few thoughts related to our service men and women past and present.

The Founders understood the necessity of having an army and a navy. Provision for these protectors of our freedoms was set down in the Constitution. Since the early days of the Republic we have, at times, revered and vilified those protectors.

My service was lack-luster at best but I am proud to have served with true heroes who fought selflessly to protect all of us from those intent on denying us our freedoms as set down in the Constitution. That document is unique to the United States. No other country can boast of its like. For that reason it is incumbent upon all of us to work diligently in its defense; but those who work the hardest are the brave men and women who lay their lives on the line every day. To them it is just a matter of doing what is right; it’s no big deal.

We have all received the emails about the Marine escorting the remains of a fallen comrade, or the stories about a soldier charging down the murderous barrage of gunfire to save his down buddy, or fighting house to house to free a town from the thugs trying to impose their warped ideology on the populous. As Admiral Nimitz said of the Marines on Iwo Jima, “Uncommon valor was a common virtue.” Countless stories of valor have come from Iraq and Afghanistan over the past eight years. These humble warriors simply have a job to do and they do it – better than anyone else in the world.

I would challenge all of you to stop and say “Thank you” whenever you see one on the street, in the grocery store or at a gas station. Chances are they will be embarrassed or surprised when you say it, but they will appreciate the thought.

Last week, a friend sent a You Tube link to a recording of The Ten Tenors singing “Here’s to the Heroes.” If you haven’t watched it, I highly recommend it. Even if you have, it is well worth watching a couple of dozen times.

To all of you young men and women who now constitute the new “Great Generation” I say Thank You.

As always, your comments and discussion are welcome.

Dan

Health Care Fraud

Friends,

A lot of us subscribe to on-line news letters, blogs and such. I am no different. One news release site I subscribe to is from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). It always makes me feel a little better when I hear about bad guys being indicted, getting caught, and sentenced. Over the past year of so that I have been receiving these news releases it has struck me that at least four or five times a week there is an item about someone being charged or sentenced for health care fraud. The latest example is about a “Wheelchair Company, Its Owner and Physician Sentenced for Health Care Fraud.” Just today there were three news releases about such cases. Two more are: “Michigan Clinic Owner Pleads Guilty in Massive Medicare Fraud Scheme;” and “Florida Man Sentenced for Money Laundering Related to Health Care Fraud.” The good news is that some of the bad guys are being discovered and caught, but how many are getting away with their nefarious activities?

My first thought is that these cretins are stealing from us, the taxpayers of the country. While this is certainly true, this crime needs to be viewed from another aspect. What makes this type of crime so common is the ease with which the criminals are able to manipulate the public health care systems of Medicare and Medicaid. It is my contention that this is possible because these bloated and completely broken programs are being run by career bureaucrats who are not staying on top of their responsibilities.

These bureaucrats are able to get away with incompetence because the system allows them to. I have no doubt these programs were established with the best intentions, but where are the checks and balances to keep this type of fraud from taking place? Has there ever been a top-to-bottom review to try to discover if industry best practices are being employed?

The bottom line of this discussion is that every program established by the federal government is riddled with efficient management that comes from bureaucratic bloat. Medicare and Medicaid are only two broken and mismanaged programs in a long line. The during the Johnson administration the feds decided that all the money in the Social Security system was just what they needed to increase social programs under the war on poverty, part of the Great Society.

The US Post Office has continued to operate much as it has for the last 200 years. It is common for commercial businesses to look for new and innovative ways to improve their business processes. This is a concept that seems to have been lost on the US Post Office. Not only are they unable to operate efficiently, they seem to have little interest in looking for ways to improve their operations. Consequently, they have been eclipsed by UPS and FEDEX.

Now, the federal government is intent on taking the best health care system in the world and put it into the same category as Medicare and Medicaid. That is the category of failed programs. Never mind the fact that there is no place in the Constitution that gives the feds the authorization to even address medical care. Speaker Pelosi, Senator Reid, and the OWH are determined to establish a health care system under their direct control. What I find especially sad is that with the feds abysmal record at running programs we are likely to see our health system reduced to the status of a third world country.

With an increase in bureaucracy, there is a corresponding increase in propensity for corruption. Looking at the proposed health care legislation as it currently is proposed in the House of Representatives, the House Republican Conference has compiled a list of new federal bureaucracies that would be established by that 2000 page tome. They add up to 111 new organizations. They are listed below with the section and page number from the bill.

1. Retiree Reserve Trust Fund (Section 111(d), p. 61)
2. Grant program for wellness programs to small employers (Section 112, p. 62)
3. Grant program for State health access programs (Section 114, p. 72)
4. Program of administrative simplification (Section 115, p. 76)
5. Health Benefits Advisory Committee (Section 223, p. 111)
6. Health Choices Administration (Section 241, p. 131)
7. Qualified Health Benefits Plan Ombudsman (Section 244, p. 138)
8. Health Insurance Exchange (Section 201, p. 155)
9. Program for technical assistance to employees of small businesses buying Exchange coverage (Section 305(h), p. 191)
10. Mechanism for insurance risk pooling to be established by Health Choices Commissioner (Section 306(b), p. 194)
11. Health Insurance Exchange Trust Fund (Section 307, p. 195)
12. State-based Health Insurance Exchanges (Section 308, p. 197)
13. Grant program for health insurance cooperatives (Section 310, p. 206)
14. "Public Health Insurance Option" (Section 321, p. 211)
15. Ombudsman for "Public Health Insurance Option" (Section 321(d), p. 213)
16. Account for receipts and disbursements for "Public Health Insurance Option" (Section 322(b), p. 215)
17. Telehealth Advisory Committee (Section 1191 (b), p. 589)
18. Demonstration program providing reimbursement for "culturally and linguistically appropriate services" (Section 1222, p. 617)
19. Demonstration program for shared decision making using patient decision aids (Section 1236, p. 648)
20. Accountable Care Organization pilot program under Medicare (Section 1301, p. 653)
21. Independent patient-centered medical home pilot program under Medicare (Section 1302, p. 672)
22. Community-based medical home pilot program under Medicare (Section 1302(d), p. 681)
23. Independence at home demonstration program (Section 1312, p. 718)
24. Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research (Section 1401(a), p. 734)
25. Comparative Effectiveness Research Commission (Section 1401(a), p. 738)
26. Patient ombudsman for comparative effectiveness research (Section 1401(a), p. 753)
27. Quality assurance and performance improvement program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 1412(b)(1), p. 784)
28. Quality assurance and performance improvement program for nursing facilities (Section 1412 (b)(2), p. 786)
29. Special focus facility program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 1413(a)(3), p. 796)
30. Special focus facility program for nursing facilities (Section 1413(b)(3), p. 804)
31. National independent monitor pilot program for skilled nursing facilities and nursing facilities (Section 1422, p. 859)
32. Demonstration program for approved teaching health centers with respect to Medicare GME (Section 1502(d), p. 933)
33. Pilot program to develop anti-fraud compliance systems for Medicare providers (Section 1635, p. 978)
34. Special Inspector General for the Health Insurance Exchange (Section 1647, p. 1000)
35. Medical home pilot program under Medicaid (Section 1722, p. 1058)
36. Accountable Care Organization pilot program under Medicaid (Section 1730A, p. 1073)
37. Nursing facility supplemental payment program (Section 1745, p. 1106)
38. Demonstration program for Medicaid coverage to stabilize emergency medical conditions in institutions for mental diseases (Section 1787, p. 1149)
39. Comparative Effectiveness Research Trust Fund (Section 1802, p. 1162)
40. "Identifiable office or program" within CMS to "provide for improved
coordination between Medicare and Medicaid in the case of dual eligibles" (Section 1905, p. 1191)
41. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (Section 1907, p. 1198)
42. Public Health Investment Fund (Section 2002, p. 1214)
43. Scholarships for service in health professional needs areas (Section 2211, p. 1224)
44. Program for training medical residents in community-based settings (Section 2214, p. 1236)
45. Grant program for training in dentistry programs (Section 2215, p. 1240)
46. Public Health Workforce Corps (Section 2231, p. 1253)
47. Public health workforce scholarship program (Section 2231, p. 1254)
48. Public health workforce loan forgiveness program (Section 2231, p. 1258)
49. Grant program for innovations in interdisciplinary care (Section 2252, p. 1272)
50. Advisory Committee on Health Workforce Evaluation and Assessment (Section 2261, p. 1275)
51. Prevention and Wellness Trust (Section 2301, p. 1286)
52. Clinical Prevention Stakeholders Board (Section 2301, p. 1295)
53. Community Prevention Stakeholders Board (Section 2301, p. 1301)
54. Grant program for community prevention and wellness research (Section 2301, p. 1305)
55. Grant program for research and demonstration projects related to wellness incentives (Section 2301, p. 1305)
56. Grant program for community prevention and wellness services (Section 2301, p. 1308)
57. Grant program for public health infrastructure (Section 2301, p. 1313)
58. Center for Quality Improvement (Section 2401, p. 1322)
59. Assistant Secretary for Health Information (Section 2402, p. 1330)
60. Grant program to support the operation of school-based health clinics (Section 2511, p. 1352)
61. Grant program for nurse-managed health centers (Section 2512, p. 1361)
62. Grants for labor-management programs for nursing training (Section 2521, p. 1372)
63. Grant program for interdisciplinary mental and behavioral health training (Section 2522, p. 1382)
64. "No Child Left Unimmunized Against Influenza" demonstration grant program (Section 2524, p. 1391)
65. Healthy Teen Initiative grant program regarding teen pregnancy (Section 2526, p. 1398)
66. Grant program for interdisciplinary training, education, and services for individuals with autism (Section 2527(a), p. 1402)
67. University centers for excellence in developmental disabilities education (Section 2527(b), p. 1410)
68. Grant program to implement medication therapy management services (Section 2528, p. 1412)
69. Grant program to promote positive health behaviors in underserved communities (Section 2530, p. 1422)
70. Grant program for State alternative medical liability laws (Section 2531, p. 1431)
71. Grant program to develop infant mortality programs (Section 2532, p. 1433)
72. Grant program to prepare secondary school students for careers in health professions (Section 2533, p. 1437)
73. Grant program for community-based collaborative care (Section 2534, p. 1440)
74. Grant program for community-based overweight and obesity prevention (Section 2535, p. 1457)
75. Grant program for reducing the student-to-school nurse ratio in primary and secondary schools (Section 2536, p. 1462)
76. Demonstration project of grants to medical-legal partnerships (Section 2537, p. 1464)
77. Center for Emergency Care under the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (Section 2552, p. 1478)
78. Council for Emergency Care (Section 2552, p 1479)
79. Grant program to support demonstration programs that design and implement regionalized emergency care systems (Section 2553, p. 1480)
80. Grant program to assist veterans who wish to become emergency medical technicians upon discharge (Section 2554, p. 1487)
81. Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee (Section 2562, p. 1494)
82. National Medical Device Registry (Section 2571, p. 1501)
83. CLASS Independence Fund (Section 2581, p. 1597)
84. CLASS Independence Fund Board of Trustees (Section 2581, p. 1598)
85. CLASS Independence Advisory Council (Section 2581, p. 1602)
86. Health and Human Services Coordinating Committee on Women's Health (Section 2588, p. 1610)
87. National Women's Health Information Center (Section 2588, p. 1611)
88. Centers for Disease Control Office of Women's Health (Section 2588, p. 1614)
89. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Office of Women's Health and Gender-Based Research (Section 2588, p. 1617)
90. Health Resources and Services Administration Office of Women's Health (Section 2588, p. 1618)
91. Food and Drug Administration Office of Women's Health (Section 2588, p. 1621)
92. Personal Care Attendant Workforce Advisory Panel (Section 2589(a)(2), p. 1624)
93. Grant program for national health workforce online training (Section 2591, p. 1629)
94. Grant program to disseminate best practices on implementing health workforce investment programs (Section 2591, p. 1632)
95. Demonstration program for chronic shortages of health professionals (Section 3101, p. 1717)
96. Demonstration program for substance abuse counselor educational curricula (Section 3101, p. 1719)49. Grant program for innovations in interdisciplinary care (Section 2252, p. 1272)
97. Program of Indian community education on mental illness (Section 3101, p. 1722)
98. Intergovernmental Task Force on Indian environmental and nuclear hazards (Section 3101, p. 1754)
99. Office of Indian Men's Health (Section 3101, p. 1765)
100. Indian Health facilities appropriation advisory board (Section 3101, p. 1774)
101. Indian Health facilities needs assessment workgroup (Section 3101, p. 1775)
102. Indian Health Service tribal facilities joint venture demonstration projects (Section 3101, p. 1809)
103. Urban youth treatment center demonstration project (Section 3101, p. 1873)
104. Grants to Urban Indian Organizations for diabetes prevention (Section 3101, p. 1874)
105. Grants to Urban Indian Organizations for health IT adoption (Section 3101, p. 1877)
106. Mental health technician training program (Section 3101, p. 1898)
107. Indian youth telemental health demonstration project (Section 3101, p. 1909)
108. Program for treatment of child sexual abuse victims and perpetrators (Section 3101, p. 1925)
109. Program for treatment of domestic violence and sexual abuse (Section 3101, p. 1927)
110. Native American Health and Wellness Foundation (Section 3103, p. 1966)
111. Committee for the Establishment of the Native American Health and
Wellness Foundation (Section 3103, p. 1968)

With 111 new bureaucracies, boards, etc. there is a golden opportunity for crooks to make millions off you and me, the average taxpayer while we take a number and wait in line for someone to set a bone or try to find out why we have a 104 degree temperature.

I ask you all to contact your congressman and senators to tell them that your health care is not the government’s business and to keep their hands out of our wallets.

As always, I welcome your comments and discussion.

Dan

Government Power Excesses

Friends,

It seems like every week there is at least one more conservative group that starts up to advocate for one or another of our constitutional rights. I applaud all of their efforts, but it seems like I am reaching overload. Like most of you, I am a go-to-work kind of guy; and like most of you I don’t have time to read all of the blogs and information that comes in every day. But scanning over the plethora of information I find a common thread in the complaints and concerns with our current governments; yes, I said governments, plural.

The common thread is that no matter what level of government the blogger is discussing, or the issue, the issues all seem to eventually boil down to an excess hunger on the part of our legislators, executive department personnel, and judges to exercise power that is not afforded them by our city, state or national charter or constitution. Since I don’t have time to write a volume on the excesses of government I will limit this discussion to a few of my hot buttons.

I recently received an email discussing Social Security as the system relates to our congressional representatives and senators. They do not seem to be bound by the same constraints that we mere mortals are when it comes to collecting Social Security. The crux of the email was that everybody should be covered by the same system. I agree. However I have a different idea. Why not just do away with Social Security! My proposal is to grandfather all individuals who are currently drawing benefits and those within 10 years of Social Security eligibility. For all others, move their accumulated money into whatever investment vehicle the individual chooses. Mandatory payroll deductions would still be made but instead of the Feds getting it to squander, the money would go into investments that each citizen deems right for him. There could be stipulations on the types of investments that could be made but the bottom line would be to keep the money out of the hands of the politicians. This would apply to ALL citizens. This is my concession to the federal government telling us what to do but it falls short of allowing them to do it for or to us.

Another area that is kind of sticking in my craw is in the area of our right to keep and bear arms. The OWH has appointed a fair number of “czars” whose decisions carry the weight of law. Take, for example, the Regulatory Czar, Cass Sunstein. He has called for the end to all hunting and even goes so far as to advocate animal rights to the extent that a human can sue another human on behalf of a “wronged” animal. If I shoot a bear charging me in my own yard do I go to jail or face a law suit on behalf of the bear that is trying to make me his dinner?

What about a ruling from the head of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, David Michaels. If Mr. Michaels says that having a pocket knife in the work place is dangerous and I carry mine to work, am I subject to being fined or charged with a crime? To carry this a little farther, Oklahoma passed a law forbidding companies from discharging employees who carry their personal protection guns to work and keep them locked in their cars. This law has been upheld in federal court. However, the way federal regulations are structured, Mr. Michaels could declare that guns locked in personal cars pose an unacceptable risk in the work place. This declaration by an unelected official would carry the weight of law and negate the Oklahoma law. Someone needs to explain the constitutionality of that to me.

The recent abrogation of our first amendment rights comes in the form of the so-called hate-crimes bill. Now the feds can charge us under this act for not only the act of a crime, but for the reason for the crime. That gets into the category of retribution, not justice. Also, it does not apply equally to all citizens. “As WND reported, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder admitted a homosexual activist who is attacked following a Christian minister's sermon about homosexuality would be protected by the proposed federal law, but a minister attacked by a homosexual wouldn't be.” It seems that Congress and the OWH are trying to foist class warfare on us. One class of citizen is more equal than other classes. This comes very close to double jeopardy. As I have written in previous posts, there is an element of hate in every crime. Further adding a characterization of the crime just to add retribution is far outside the realm of justice.

As I have stated numerous times, I am not a constitutional scholar, but I do refer to that revered document often. As many times as I have read it, I have yet to discover where it says that the federal government has the authority to do or say ANYTHING about our health care. As far as I am concerned, this entire debate is a complete waste of the taxpayers’ time and money. The bottom line of this waste is that it is going to cost every taxpaying US person a great deal of money. Of course, those who do not pay taxes will get off with a free ride.

Now to the bottom line; all of these regulations, social welfare programs and non-constitutional departments are not only breaking our bank but our backs. As well as not being a constitutional scholar, I am not an economist, just a working stiff. However, I think I have a way to pay off the national debt AND get our country back on the track set down by the Founders. It is a fairly simple solution. Eliminate all government departments that are not enumerated in the constitution; stop federal spending on all items that are not specifically laid out in the constitution (that includes all social welfare programs); eliminate the “death tax;” lower corporate taxes to 10%; and lower the income tax rate to 15% for all wage earners who earn over $35,000. Presidents Kennedy and Reagan proved that when you lower taxes, revenue to the federal government increases. Putting the tax burden on those who pay wages simply does not make sense.

This Discourse seems to have spread all over the spectrum but as I stated up front, there is a common thread throughout, and that is the excessive power assumed by the federal government. It is my crusade to assist in reversing that trend. I would hope you would join me in this effort.

Your comments and discussion are welcome.

Dan