Tag: legislation

A Real Christmas Gift

Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

President Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and other congressional leaders among the Democrats hailed the passage of the Senate health “reform” bill as a Christmas gift to the American people. That’s about the equivalent of trying to convince the chief income earner(s) in a home that the real gift of Christmas for them is the increased balance on the credit card (or the reduced balance of their checking and/or saving’s accounts) rather than the presents they got.

In response to the news that the bill had finally passed my wife had a great idea for a real gift that the Senate could give us for Christmas some year (besides repealing that bill). If they have the authority to mandate that we buy insurance that opens up a world of possibilities. First and foremost her suggestion is that they should mandate that everyone in America should get an answering machine. Just imagine and end to:

Ring . . .

Ring . . .

Ring . . .

Ring . . .

Ring . . .

Ring . . .

Ring . . .

Ring . . .

The person you are calling is not available. *click*

I’m quite confident that universal telephone answering machines would have a positive impact on interstate commerce.

Tags Christmas, funny, Harry Reid, health care, Laura, legislation, money, Nancy Pelosi, Obama, unconstitutional

National

Reid Has a Moment of Sanity

Post author By David
Post date December 24, 2009
No Comments on Reid Has a Moment of Sanity

I was very surprised when reading about the results of the Senate vote on health care.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., initially cast a “no” vote.

The explanation we are given is that he was exhausted – which makes sense considering the amount of all-night negotiations and arm-twisting that he has been doing recently.

It reminds me of a friend of mine who grew up in Boston. By the time I knew her she had been out of Boston long enough to lose the accent. one time I called her early enough in the morning that she was still waking up and her natural Boston accent was prominently on display in her voice. When the defenses are down the truth shines through.

I guess it just goes to show that when his defenses are down even Harry Reid knows that this is a horrible piece of legislation.

Tags Harry Reid, health care, legislation

National

It’s Not Too Late to Change Your Mind

Post author By David
Post date December 22, 2009
8 Comments on It’s Not Too Late to Change Your Mind

Conservatives, for right reasons and wrong reasons, are united in opposition to the current health care reform legislation. Unfortunately many liberals are falling into the trap of “stand by our guys” that already landed us in NCLB, Medicare Part D, and Iraq during the last administration (for which I apologize to all my liberal friends even though I opposed all of those). Of course liberals have little reason to listen to a conservative like me so rather than make my own argument today I’ll share the conclusion from Fire Dog Lake:

The Senate bill isn’t a “starter home,” it’s a sink hole. It needs to die so something else can take its place. It doesn’t matter whether people are on the right or the left — once they understand the con job that’s about to be foist upon them, they agree. That’s why Harry Reid and President Obama are trying to jam it through as fast as they can, before people get wise. So email the list to your friends and family, tweet it and spread the word.

I was going to add my own perspective when I first started reading that, but it is too well done to be condensed. Go read all 10 Reasons to Kill the Senate Bill.

Many people, liberal and conservative, seem ready to give up because the Senate already cleared their first 60-vote hurdle. That’s exactly what Reid and his company of non-representative public officials would love to see. Please don’t give up yet or settle for this poor excuse for reform. We may not agree on all the right directions, but almost everyone who’s paying attention knows that this legislation is not anything close to what we need. Let’s not allow the Senate to pass this just so they and the president can say they passed something – that is simply not a good enough reason.

Tags connections, Harry Reid, health care, KVNU FTP, legislation

National

Harry Reid the Insomniac

“Senator” Reid must suffer from insomnia to schedule a vote at 1:00 AM on a Monday to torture his fellow members of the Senate as they vote on a bill to torture their constituents throughout America. That is how Harry Reid fits the definition of “insomniac” as a noun.

The definition of “insomniac” as an adjective also fits because his actions will cause a lot of sleepless nights among people who previously believed they had some freedoms left in this country. Even more dangerously, every lawyer and CEO in the health care industry will undoubtedly suffer from insomnia as they try to figure out how to profit from the 2700 page bill that has not even been released online yet as far as I can find (I can only see the “original” 2074 page version of the bill).

I understand the urgency of meeting an artificial deadline on Christmas day for a bill that won’t take effect for another 4 years but I wonder why this could not have waited another 6 or 8 hours until a decent time for a vote. I’m always distrustful of a fast moving legislative body but more than any other rushed vote this move is reminiscent of some other midnight political proceedings that were driven by a desire for power.

Tags Harry Reid, health care, issues, legislation

National

Howard Dean is Right

Few people would predict that I would agree with Howard Dean as often as I do, fewer still should be at all surprised that I agree with him when he says of the Health Care Bill:

This is essentially the collapse of health care reform in the United States Senate. Honestly, the best thing to do right now is kill the Senate bill.

Then again, I also agree with President Obama when he said:

the federal government “will go bankrupt” if Congress does not pass a health care bill

Of course we begin to disagree from there because I’m confident that we will go bankrupt at least as fast with his health care bill (any version of it) as we will if we do nothing. We need reform, but we don’t need this reform. Once again I agree with Howard Dean’s take on the cost issue:

He said he also doesn’t see cost-control measures but, rather “a whole bunch of bureaucracies and a lot of promises.”

While we disagree with what health care reform this nation needs I was dismayed by the truth pointed out by Chris Cillizza as he explained why he feels confident that despite all the wrangling, Congress will pass a health reform bill:

The broad strategy adopted by the White House toward health care is based on a single fundamental belief: coming out of this extended fight with nothing to show for it amounts to a political disaster not just for the President but for congressional Democrats as well.

“It’s a huge problem if nothing gets passed,” said one senior Democratic strategist. “Huge.”

Howard Dean is right about the dangers of that strategy:

We’ve gotten to this stage … in Washington where passing any bill is a victory, and that’s the problem. Decisions are being about the long-term future of this country for short-term political reasons, and that’s never a good sign.

I even agree with Howard Dean that there are some good elements in the current Health Care Reform bill. At least, I agree with him if Section 9002 is still in the bill. (As an aside, when did they return to the term “health care reform” from the more accurate “health insurance reform” that they had begun using earlier this year?)

I still contend that the only proper way forward on health care reform (and the only possible way forward when debate over this bill finally ends – regardless of the outcome) is to stop trying for some sweeping omnibus overhaul bill and pass individual pieces of legislation to take baby steps forward. If this bill passes the very first baby step forward will have to be the repeal of the individual mandate.

Tags health care, Howard Dean, legislation, reactions

General

2074 Pages of Loopholes

With Thanksgiving weekend behind us all politically interested people can look forward to the Senate opening work on the healthcare bill. According to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid:

. . . senators {will} work on weekends if necessary to hammer out compromises on thorny issues like a government-run insurance plan, abortion coverage and holding down costs.

“The next few weeks will tell us a lot about whether senators are more committed to solving problems or creating them,” Reid said.

I make no pretense that I have abandoned my day job and any semblance of a life to read through the entire 2074 pages of H.R. 3590 but I have read through the entire 13 page index of the bill and looked up a number of sections that either looked interesting or concerning to me. Of course my first question is how will this affect my health insurance situation (that may give some insight into the 12 sections I reviewed). The real question in this debate is whether there will be anyone who takes the time in the coming weeks (according to the story linked above we may expect up to 3 weeks of debate) to read the entire bill and break down what it actually means for consumers and the nation – going beyond the party-line soundbites that we will no doubt be subjected to constantly through the media for as long as the debate lasts.

After reading through my chosen sections I found seven that were interesting enough for me to write about them. (For anyone who is curious, there are approximately 350 sections to the bill – 50 times what I am doing today.) I will review them in the order they appear in the bill.

Tags Bob Bennett, Harry Reid, health care, issues, legislation, Orrin Hatch, reactions, senate

culture

Political Cultures

photo credit: www.charlietphoto.com

There are two political cultures that we need to change in order to have a healthy “government of the people, by the people, and for the people” in this country. The first is the culture among the voters as defined by how thy perceive those who hold political office. The second is the culture among lawmakers as defined by how they perceive the purpose and role of government.

Our Pit of Dysfunction

I got thinking about these culture issues during a brief discussion with my brother in which he mentioned an ex-politician that now works for the same company as he does whom he described like so:

He’s the kind of guy who leaves you with a sense that not all politicians are scum sucking bottom dwellers. He’s a really great guy.

That is a great example of the voter culture that leaves voters not wanting to participate in politics because the whole process feels dirty. That perception makes you feel that anything more than voting might contaminate you by association and has the added effect of making your vote feel useless anyway.

Among politicians the dysfunctional culture is one that views government as a powerful multi-tool which is adaptable to help deal with whatever problem the nation is facing at the time. The perception that government can be so adaptable is dangerous because it causes an excessive reliance on government (a hammer) so that we use it for tasks it was not meant to address (like cutting aboard and wondering why the edge is all jagged) while overlooking other available tools (any number of saws) that are better suited to many of the challenges we face.

The reality is that neither of those cultural perceptions is correct. Many politicians (possibly even the vast majority although my own experience is too limited to prove that conclusively) on both sides of basically every issue are good people who really do want what they think is best for their constituents and the nation as a whole. That fact may explain why, when confronted with their individual elected leader at whatever level, voters find it easy to send the incumbent back even while holding a very low opinion of the elected body they are sending them to participate in. Because government is not a multi-purpose tool to address a wide variety of problems, even well-meaning people (politicians, lobbyists, voters) trying to use it as such will create at least as many problems as they solve and they will be dissatisfied with the results of all their hard work.

Continue reading “Political Cultures”

Tags change congress, civic participation, discourse, Elevated, legislation, power

National

Half-Truths from the White House

Post author By David
Post date October 20, 2009
26 Comments on Half-Truths from the White House

I am not naive enough to expect more than a half truth from a political leader anymore but I am still naive enough to do what little I can to expose the half of what they say that is false. The White House blog sets out to expose the Republican Leaders’ Plan to “Delay, Define, and Derail” health care legislation. Their closing statement is the classic half truth:

. . . while we remain committed to working with those in both parties who have good-faith proposals about how to strengthen the final reform bill, we will not stand idly by in the face of false accusations aimed to score political points or maintain the status quo at all costs.

They toss around the “false accusations” claim within eye-shot of publishing some false accusations of their own. For example, in that very statement they imply that Republicans have offered no good-faith proposals. That’s not the first time they make that claim in their post. Earlier they said:

Republican leaders will resort to the time-honored tactic of attempting to stall reform to death – raising arbitrary and disingenuous hurdles under the guise of wanting further debate, when in reality they have no intention of offering constructive proposals.

Every time they make the claim that Republican’s have offered no constructive proposals voters need to recognize that only two types of administrations could make that claim right now. Either the administration is lying through their teeth (the more likely of the two) or else they are genuinely unaware of the good faith proposals that Republicans have offered such as HR 3400, which Democrats in control of Congress are not even willing to debate. Either kind of administration (dishonest or ignorant) is extremely dangerous to our nation. If they are dishonest they must be stopped. If they are ignorant they must become informed. I’m willing to work on both routes until I can prove which kind of administration we have.

Another half truth offered by the White House in that post is to reassert the claim (by using the CBO) that their bill will lower the deficit.

Republican leaders intend to repeat their claims that reform “will raise insurance premiums on individuals and families, while failing to lower the overall amount of money that the U.S. spends on health care… even though the nonpartisan CBO predicted the [Senate Finance Committee] bill would reduce the deficit and lower the cost curve, even as it extends coverage to millions of uninsured Americans.”

It has already been shown by history that the CBO estimate is based on the shakiest footing imaginable because it depends on Congress doing what it has never done before – cutting medicare spending. Until democratic leaders can show how they will actually fulfill the mythical fiscal promises in the bill that make that CBO estimate possible there’s no reasons to believe them over the Republicans. No matter who is proposing a bill there is no reason to pass it so long as there are significant unanswered questions about how it will actually work.

The Democrats are proposing bills that will not take effect for years and which depend on premises that are not dependable and then they wonder why people are hopping off their “Hope and Change” train.

Tags health care, legislation, Obama, parties

National State

Two Good Ideas in One Bad Bill

Post author By David
Post date October 19, 2009
No Comments on Two Good Ideas in One Bad Bill

It’s back – the bill that just won’t die. Let’s first explain why this is such a bad bill that I never pass up an opportunity to oppose it. First, it’s unconstitutional and both sides are compromising the integrity of their ideals in order to produce this bad bill. Second, this is an example of governing by exception which is a long-term recipe for disaster. Having only states be represented in Congress is good, except that we want to treat D.C. more like a state. The current census apportionment process is good, except that Utah felt bad about not getting an extra seat on a technical sliver. Long-term the only people who come out ahead when governing by exception are the exploiters who prefer to live in loopholes rather than being ensnared by the system that they are taking advantage of. These are the same people who rarely if ever actually contribute anything to the society in return for playing the leeches role.

There are two very good ideas in this bill which should be pursued without compromise. The first is giving D.C. a voting representative in the House. Any citizen who is subject to the same federal tax laws as the citizens of the states should have a voting representative in Congress – as far as I know that is only D.C. but that rule would apply to any citizen who did not live in a state whether we started taxing American Samoa or Puerto Rico the same as we do for the 50 states. The privilege of representation in the House should be based on the responsibility to pay taxes because taxation is the primary responsibility of the House. Representation in the Senate should be a privilege limited to full statehood.

The second good idea in the bill is the expansion of the House. This should be much more than two seats. In fact what we need is a bill (probably an amendment) that defines the size of the House as a function of population by setting the maximum number of citizens that a Representative in the House may represent. While I would argue that the size of the house should be multiples of its current size even setting such a ration to such an unmanageable number as 500,000 citizens per representative would be an improvement over this static “435 seats in the House” that we have currently. (That would add somewhere near 100 new representatives – as opposed to the paltry 2 being proposed in this bill.)

While I am not a fan of legislative manipulation tactics (such as the NRA killing the bill previously by attaching an amendment that would curtail the gun laws in D.C.) I have to say that it is better to prevent a law from passing using such tactics than it is to enact a law using such tactics (such as slipping the bill into a “must pass” defense appropriations bill as they are talking about trying now).

The fact that the people pushing this bill have not even proposed an amendment to give D.C. the voting representative they deserve demonstrates that they are more interested int he power grab than they are in actually helping the people of D.C. If they were serious about the issue they would at least be making that kind of proposal even if they also pursued this unconstitutional path.

Tags Deseret News, fourth seat, issues, legislation, unconstitutional, voting

General

An Ideal Legislator

I seem to have caught the interest of some people when I offered to describe the job of a being a legislator. I said that it would take multiple posts (and it will), but I thought I should start out by explaining the scope of what I would be describing.

My view is that being a legislator involves being a person and thus the job of a legislator demands some qualifications within the life of the person filling the role. I believe there is a lot of room for variation, but there are some things that really are necessary in the life of someone who would be a good legislator. (If I still have any atheists among my readers let me just offer that having any religious belief or affiliation is not among the qualifications.)

Being a legislator also involves being a candidate in the vast majority of cases (there are obviously exceptions where someone is appointed to fill a vacancy in a legislative body) thus there are ways that an ideal legislator would approach the campaign process differently than a less-than-ideal legislator. Watching campaigns today is a good way to observe how far our current political environment is from the ideal. (I know that when I talk about this there will be people who argue that what I say is impractical – in fact I would not be surprised if some of what I say gets labeled “political suicide.”)

Finally, being a legislator obviously involves participating in the process of crafting legislation. This is the most important aspect of what makes an ideal legislator and in some ways the least well understood. I would argue that a legislator who truly does their job in this area should not have to actively campaign for re-election other than to defend themselves against any unfair attacks from challengers. (I do make some exception in this for those who have not served a full term because of being appointed, and possibly also for first term representatives because they have served less than two years before voters are asked to vote again on filling their seat.)

Tags change congress, ideal, legislation, legislature, thoughts