Life & Liberty
A Commoner's Proposal
Health-Care Reform, Part 2: A Plan for Individual Freedom and Responsibility
July 24, 2009
Yesterday, Part 1 of my Health-care Reform discussion focused on tearing down the Obamacare plan - one that seeks to place government in control of health-care options through creation of massive bureaucracy, taxation, and ultimately - deficits. Following the President’s primetime address, many pundits and legislators came back with similar analysis and alternate policy suggestions. I thank you all for you comments on my writing.
Today, I’d like to offer some thoughts on reforming health-care. Certainly, several of my thoughts are echoed by those in government; and likewise, I agree on some ideas proposed by leaders in the area. For instance, Bobby Jindal, Governor of Louisiana, provided his solution for health-care reform in a recent op-ed in the Wall Street Journal. These included the necessary tort reform, pooling for small businesses, streamlining of medical record keeping, and portability options for existing plans. Governor Jindal, and others, have also spoken on Health Savings Accounts.
Ideally, I’d like to see ideas such as those below, which I term, "A Plan for Individual Freedom and Responsibility" become part of the discussion for reform. So please, if you agree with some points, or have insight to others, I urge you to forward suggestions to your House and Senate representatives, personal contacts, or media outlets. Perhaps ‘common sense’ from common men and women can impact the direction of this reform mandate.
1. Greatly expand the role of Health Savings Accounts (HSAs), making them the core of every American’s plan for their management of future health-care costs.
Health Savings Accounts, I’d imagine, are foreign to most Americans today. An advertisement for one recently popped on my screen as I closed my online bank access a few weeks ago. Essentially, these are ‘tax free’ accounts that offer the individual a way to save, and pay, for any and all health-care costs using pre-tax dollars and tax-free interest. Different from medical flexible spending accounts offered by some employers benefit plans, contributions to the HSA roll over year-to-year. In other words, no tricky ‘use it or lose it’ rules that discourage people from saving more to cover unexpected out-of-pocket expenses.
Sounds great, right? Unfortunately, the rules for HSAs render them useless for anyone with a decent medical plan offered by their employer. To contribute to an HSA, you must be in a HSA-qualified health plan. The minimum deductible for these plans is $1150 (individual) or $2300 (family). Also, annual expenses out of pocket cannot exceed $5800 (self) and $11600 (family). So, you really can’t be in an HSA unless your plan has a relatively high deductible, and then you are limited in how much you can use from your account within a given year. My conclusion is that unless you are in a high-deductible plan, these are useless. What a shame.
My first proposal is to broadly expand the utility of HSAs to cover every American. Eliminate the deductible requirement. Eliminate (or loosen) the maximum withdrawal amount per year. Allow employers to offer benefits that match employee contributions to HSAs, similar to 401K accounts. Finally, make family accounts flexible in the sense that upon one person’s death, or upon a child turning 18, dollars can be shifted to another individual's account tax-free.
The greatest utility of an HSA would be realized if every American was able to tap it for any necessary medical expenses and insurance premiums. Essentially, it would act as ‘self insurance’ for medical disasters, a spending account for saving for qualified day-to-day out-of-pocket medical expenses or premiums, and a fund for you and your families future wellness. Generational portability gives the individual greatest flexibility in deciding how they want to navigate their own expensive end-of-life care decisions. And the key element – tax-free funding, fits with the principals under which our nation was founded: that life is an unalienable right – and therefore investing in your life or health should not be subject to taxation.
2. Create incentives to good health for the insured person, similar to a ‘good driving’ discount offered for automobile insurance.
Preventative measures to staying healthy include exercise, eating healthy, and avoiding ‘risky’ behaviors such as over-consumption of alcohol, smoking, drugs, etc. We all have seen the general questionnaires provided by doctors which attempt to capture honest feedback on such behaviors. I propose there is a way to create incentive for people ‘back it up’ by voluntary participating in periodic health evaluations. Voluntary participation would involve periodic health check-ups, where analysis of body mass index, blood-work, EKGs and other general fitness characteristics would be measured to determine eligibility for certain ‘refunds’ to the cost of your health insurance plan. These discounts would be given by insurance companies in the form of contributions to your Health Savings Account. An overall healthier patient population could also result in lower overall premiums over time.
Realize, of course, that safegaurds should be in place to prevent you from being penalized or coverage dropped based on results.
3. Make every dollar of health-care expenses tax deductible, with the ‘refund’ directly channeled to an HSA.
As touched on above, upon the founding of our nation, we were stated to have been endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights. Those were “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness”. Any health-care plan that looks to tax ‘benefits’ from an employer for providing health-care to its employees is in clear violation of these rights. People don’t go to doctors because they like to spoil themselves – they go because they are ill. Taxing benefits, or dollars spent for purchasing a health-care plan, or for paying a deductible, or for out of pocket expenses (co-pays, prescriptions), should be eliminated.
My proposal is to revise the tax code to make every dollar spent on necessary medical care services tax deductible. Currently, the tax code specifies that medical expenses are only deductible for the portion that exceeds 7.5% of a taxpayer’s adjusted gross income (AGI). That means for someone making $100,000 per year, the first $7500 of medical expenses are not deductible (in other words, those expenses are paid with after-tax dollars). All after-tax dollars spent to secure one’s health or that of their family should be deducted from a person’s AGI, resulting in a tax credit (refund). Perhaps the amount refunded on a yearly basis would be limited in some way - like a maximum yearly claim amount, with the ability to roll costs exceeding that amount over into future tax years. Furthermore, the refund shouldn’t be lumped in with any other tax refund check or tax liability – it should be directed to one’s HSA. In that way, people are building their account for the future. Finally, it stands to reason that any costs paid with tax-free HSA dollars (or tax-free 401K or IRA dollars) are not part of the calculation for a refund.
4. Change 401K and IRA rules to allow flexibility in withdrawals to cover medical emergencies, without penalties.
401K withdrawals prior to age 59-½ typically impose a 10% penalty and a 20% withholding tax. The 10% penalty may be waived if the distribution is used for your medical expenses, so long as the expenses exceed 7.5% of your adjusted gross income. Once again, 401K rules should be revised to allow emergency distributions both penalty and tax free if your expenses exceed those available from your HSA. In other words, some degree of transportability should be allowed from your 401K to meet medical emergencies.
5. Phase out Medicare by 2060
Medicare is an insolvent government program destined to consume more tax revenue and create more unfunded liabilities the longer it remains. While the administration concerns itself with eliminating carbon emissions to ‘save the planet’ from doom, it should really be concerned with eliminating Medicare to save our country and future generations from economic doom. I propose essentially eliminating Medicare by 2060, or 50 years from when legislation is enacted.
I’ll propose the idea for doing this in a moment. However, let me say I haven’t ‘run’ any numbers on this – that would be something for the experts to do – and modifications may be necessary. For instance, people who are still working and expect to receive Medicare may be subject to a slightly higher Medicare tax on their paychecks until they retire. Those ‘on the bubble’ may have a lower tax in order to enable kick-starting of their HSAs. The general idea is thus illustrated below.
My assumption for elimination by 2060 is the following – most people 50 years old today will be dead by 2060. Anyone 50 years old or older will still be eligible for Medicare moving into the future. Those younger than 50 years old will not participate in the program. The 50+ year olds will continue to pay into the system for as long as they work. Those between the age of, say – 35 and 49 – will continue to pay up until age 50. At that point in time, those ‘bubble’ folks would necessarily redirect the normal Medicare contribution exclusively to their HSA. They would also be permitted ‘catch up’ contributions to their HSA (tax free dollars) or transfer of IRA or 401K dollars to shore up their HSA account.
What of the under 35 year olds? As ‘unfair’ as it may seem, I think the Ponzi-scheme the government created with Medicare needs to run its course, with these people footing a portion of the bill during the early part of their working lives until the liabilities have been met. Perhaps they continue to pay into the fund at a reduced percentage rate, as the 50+ year olds phase out of the program. Nevertheless, beyond age 35, future mandatory contributions from payroll are directed to their HSA account. Even yet-born or yet-to be working individuals need contribute until age 35, or until which time the program is phased out around 2060.
For disclosure, I am 38 years old. I’d fall into the ‘bubble’ group: the one that will have paid to the most to Medicare, receive the least, and will have the least amount of time to build their HSAs. In other words, this plan has no advantage for me.
6. Extend pharmaceutical companies’ terms of market exclusivity (in years) for new drugs in return for price control of the medicines they provide.
Health-care reform and overall control of expenses must preserve the ability of so-called ‘innovator’ companies to recoup the massive amounts of investment required to bring new, life-preserving medicines to market. With drug development costing billions of dollars and around 10 years of development time for each new drug, these companies need a competitive environment where they can recover such costs. As a result of current patent laws, and ‘try and stop me’ challenges by maverick generic companies crashing the market, innovator companies often need to set prices as high as possible to enable recovery of development costs and earning of a profit over the short window of exclusivity the drug has in the market. This draws negative reaction within the U.S., and calls for shortening the window of exclusivity to allow generics, or importation from other countries. Both reactions threaten the innovator company’s viability even further, resulting in destruction of jobs and opportunity for medical advances.
My proposal is to extend the years of exclusivity for new drugs, in return for some price controls on the cost of the therapy. Patients will gain by lower cost of the medication on a yearly basis, and innovator companies will gain by longer years of exclusivity to recover their investment.
7. Provide incentives for the creation of more new doctors and hospitals to ease patient burden.
Even some of the current legislation on health-care reform realizes the need for more doctors to serve our aging and growing population. America needs to invest in the next generation of physicians and nurses. Training of new doctors and nurses needs to focus on goals that reduce the doctor (or nurse) to patient ratio. It would stand to reason that better, more efficient decisions can be made if a doctor has more time to study an individual’s case. Given the tremendous personal investment required to become a doctor, it is critical that compensation remains an incentive to entering the field. The expense of schooling need also be addressed. Perhaps reduced student loan rates and extended terms, or a volunteering of services option for repayment of medical school debt should be examined.
Rather than build ‘bridges to nowhere’, infrastructure investment should invest, in part, in building both commerce-generating and community-beneficial institutions. Hospitals are a prime example of a worthwhile investment, so long as that hospital can generate a return on capital. Facilities whose emergency rooms are inundated with the un-insured or poor represent a big challenge in staying afloat. These are situations in which state and local government funding, combined with reducing the number of uninsured patients, need be promoted as first line objectives to solve the problem.
8. Enforce immigration policies. End automatic benefits to ‘anchor babies’ and do not provide free health-care to illegal immigrants.
Enforcement of immigration policies to eliminate repeated access to our health-care system by illegal immigrants must stop. We simply do not have the resources. No one in our society benefits, in the long-term, from unfettered immigration of uneducated, low-income workers. In fact, I’d argue, that of the doubling of cost of healthcare in our country over the last ten years, a good portion of it (aside from inflation) is due to this swelling patient population. Remove them from the system, and recovery cost savings would likely enable an equal number of uninsured citizens more affordable health-care options. I’m sorry I need to say it, but poverty inevitably leads to more illness and emergency care. Our nation needs to focus on our own poor.
So, while I certainly do not want to see illegal immigrants dying in the streets, I do think that the first visit of one to any hospital should include a ticket on an ICE bus back to their country of origin. Take away the incentive of a free-lunch and citizenship for so called ‘anchor babies’, and illegal immigrants will instead get in line to join our country like so many others do.
The Empty Head (of State)
Health-Care Reform, Part 1: Decoding the Obama Address
July 23, 2009
President Obama’s primetime healthcare address last night offered nothing more than we’ve come to expect: overplaying the crisis he was dealt to further his tyrannical policies, overstating his accomplishments, dodging simple answers to questions, and utilizing confusing ‘code speak’ that left most Americans, I imagine, unable to comprehend if what they were hearing was good or bad. Hint: It was bad.
Right off the bat, President Obama opened by painting a rainbow of rhetoric regarding the economic turnaround amidst the chaos he inherited. He blamed our misery on a failure to invest in clean energy and amazingly, on a broken healthcare system. He then warned, like he did in February, that without immediate action to fix these issues –including healthcare, that we are doomed. And, true to form, a key element in his plan is a massive new government program, for which new taxes must be drawn from the wealthy and compulsory participation is a must least you suffer the consequences.
First, healthcare costs did not contribute to the recent economic melt-down. For Obama to insinuate that the problem of increasing healthcare costs in good economic times were burdensome to the point they contributed to the collapse, and are now hindering the recovery, was nonsense. It's a lame attempt to take our continued economic crisis to sell his latest snake oil. However, it is fair to say that our future economic stability – or at least that of the government in terms of its budget – is dependent on healthcare costs it committed to with the establishment of Medicare. And the reason why? It seems, over forty years ago, government over-committed and under-delivered on its ability to support the elderly through Medicare. That 2.9% payroll tax every American job pays into the system is not nearly enough, and so our General Fund tax revenues are increasingly being gobbled up to meet the program’s obligations. So, the federal government is desperate. They have about 10 years to solve the problem. And their solution is to shanghai the entire healthcare industry, slash the standard of care, and ‘thin the herd’ of baby-boomers expected to hit the ranks before it’s too late.
Except they don’t present it that way. Instead they play to the inequalities of a free society by suggesting that 50 million (and growing) of us lack healthcare. Never mind that 10 million of ‘us’ are illegal immigrants driving up premiums because they use the emergency rooms at hospitals like it were the free clinic. So now they want us to trust them again – trust that by adding tens of millions more people and reducing the waste in a system they currently administer, it will prove "deficit neutral". The Obama administration is not about “spend, spend, spend,” claims the President. Right, it’s about “Tax and spend, tax and spend, tax and spend,” Mr. President. Nice try.
Obama spent a bit of time defending banks, and their recent profiteering as a result of receiving TARP. He touted the free-market economy. So, apparently it is A-OK for banks to earn a profit on behalf of their shareholders, but not insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, and doctors. For instance, the $80 billion coughed up by Pharmaceutical companies he touted is nothing special - just part of the working capital used for the risk-filled venture of creating new medical advances! Despite popular belief, money doesn't grow on trees - therefore, the so-called ‘savings’ and ‘competition’ he seeks through government regulation of health care will undeniably result in less R&D for new medicines, fewer American jobs in these industries, and fewer doctors in business as they get fed-up with lower wages and higher case loads they are forced to support.
Some of this was implied in his statement that if a red pill costs half as much as the blue pill, we need to buy the red pill. No matter that the company that spent billions to develop the blue pill is the one we’re relying on to develop the next best thing (the green pill) and the company that markets the red pill adds nothing by way of technological advances to medicine, produces the pill in India, and likely makes a greater profit margin than the blue because they’ve incurred a fraction of the R&D and clinical trial costs to put their drug on the market. Result: Sorry, no green pill, you’re dead.
The President claimed that two-thirds of the cost of his healthcare plan arise from money taxpayers are already putting into the system. He claims, essentially, that the money is being wasted – and that he can cover 50 million additional people (effectively doubling the number of people already covered by Medicare) by improving information technology, squeezing the profit out of insurance companies, doctors, and pharmaceutical companies, and limiting coverage to only those procedures that ‘improve your health’. All this for around $1.5 trillion over 10 years – which averages to about $3000 per person per year. Anyone think this is possible? I don’t. As a point of reference, Medicare will spend about $11,000 per year, per individual in 2010. What will we get for $3000? A lollipop and a rub on the head, Sport.
Lets talk a bit about Obama’s favorite phrase of only paying for outcomes which ‘improve your health’, because this is apparently a key for achieving savings and reducing waste. Essentially, it is pure code-speak for reducing the standard of care and quality of life - i.e. rationing. See, many therapies or procedures you receive do not necessarily ‘improve your health’, but do improve your quality of life. One of these might be something like a hip or knee replacement for the elderly. Yes you are in pain, yes you lack mobility, but is that affecting your vital signs or life expectancy? No. Then under the Obama plan, you’ll have to live with it – especially if you are older or near to death – because, after all, we’re running a ‘deficit neutral’ operation now. You're hip is not a priority.
Another example is chemotherapy in mid to late-stage cancers. Ask any Oncologist, and they’ll tell you no one has cured cancer yet. You may catch it before it metastasizes and cut it out, or treat it to a point that you go into remission, but no one is ever ‘cured’ of malignant cancer. When the cancer comes back, chemotherapy and other oncology drugs are used to ‘delay progression’ or extend your life by months or years. Other treatments you receive, such as red blood cell enhancers (erythropoetins), may improve your quality of life as these anti-cancer drugs often destroy the good with the bad in your body. Some may then argue that neither of these treatments necessarily ‘improve your health’ - they don't cure you. They only delay the inevitable – or make you more comfortable to lead somewhat of a respectable life while you are dying. And so, in these instances, the bureaucrat-run advisory committees Obama speaks of may decide that either the life-extending drug or the other therapies that allow you to squeeze the last bit of enjoyment out of life as you face death are too expensive and are not covered because they do not ‘improve your health’.
So, in essence, Obama doesn’t really have to double the number of people currently served by Medicare, by squeezing in 50 million more people at $3,000 per person onto the rolls. He just has to ration care to the terminal and elderly so that they are miserable and die sooner – thus thinning the herd of the people already within the government healthcare system. Shout out to the baby boomers – aren’t you glad the system you paid into your entire life is now going to give your gardener Jose and his 5 kids healthcare, while you get an early trip to the morgue?
Another phrase Obama tossed around was the ‘Public Option’. He likened the new system to an ‘exchange’ like the Federal employees participate in. For most employees of big corporations, this seems comparable to your ability to choose from an HMO, PPO, or high deductible plan. However, when asked explicitly by the ‘fake Steve Koff’ whether he (Obama) or Congress would participate in the plan, and whether the public would enjoy the same standard of care as Congress, Obama showed his true hand. He has excellent coverage, he said - ‘a doctor travels with me’-type of care. The public option is like a part of the Federal exchange system, and he is part of the Federal exchange system too. Thus meaning, the “Presidential Option” part gives him a traveling doctor, the “Congressional Option” part gives them best doctors and treatment on-demand, the “Federal Employee” part gives them something similar to our private PPO plans, and the “Public Option” part is something like, well, a public restroom. So, no, unless you are former Senator Larry Craig, Congress won’t be using the public restroom – I mean, the public option.
Another statement on the Public Option related to ‘keeping insurance companies honest’. The President implies that the federally-run program will be – essentially - a more efficient, non-profit entity. If the President is so sure of this, I challenge him to demand that option be funded solely with ‘premiums’ collected from its participants – no subsidies allowed. Allow people to freely choose to opt in to the public ‘non-profit’ or private ‘for-profit’ plans. In other words, let’s see how the Government does running a non-profit healthcare business for $3,000 per person, per year. Then let’s see what the state of service and finances are for the public plan after, say, 5 years. See what doctors will sign up to serve people in the plan based on fees they’ll pay. See how fast the costs increase for the plan to remain solvent. See what a failure it is.
Obama repeatedly insulted the medical community. Any doctor still supporting this plan or President needs to make an appointment to get their head checked. For the President to broadly paint doctors as choosing a treatment such as a tonsillectomy for a sore throat solely because he’ll get paid more is a complete insult to the many fine doctors in America. It paints them as both corrupt and incompetent. It's slanderous. Are there corrupt or incompetent ones out there? Yes, a few. But most doctors truly care about their patients and giving them full access to treatment options. And while in one breath he accuses doctors of waste by ordering too many treatments or tests that don’t ‘improve health’, he accuses insurance companies of denying coverage. Which one is it? Surely, when he speaks of MedPAC’s role in recommending appropriate treatments, their role is more likely to be that of the penny-pinching insurance companies. What do they know of the individual patient? If ‘statistics say’ 75% of the people who have such a condition respond to treatment A, then that is what you are getting. Never mind if you'd respond to the more expensive treatment B.
Once again, for the President to show such callous disregard for the majority of honest, caring physicians, and his utter nonsensical comprehension of diagnostics to establish the cause of illness for the individual patient is downright amateur. It’s our President, throwing the great majority of doctors straight under the bus for sake of political expedience. No sooner did he insult physicians for using multiple, sometimes ineffective techniques as part of a diagnosis than he offer a soft but conflicting promise that the public option will still be able to send that sore throat person off to multiple specialists to get the ‘right’ answer. For $3,000 per year? I don't buy it. With fewer, overcrowded doctors offices all we'll get is "Take two aspirin and call me next month - NEXT!". No wonder Obama needed to finish the press conference with an unrelated ‘race-relations’ question. It's the only question he had the qualification to opine upon.
In conclusion, what we have is an ill-conceived, poorly constructed attempt to solve the Medicare crisis by trying to sell a plan to further growing government control over your life. If the government truly wants to inspire healthy, responsible living, fix the Medicare crisis, and enable people to control their own destiny from the healthcare perspective, then the solution is to provide the necessary tax incentives and freedoms for people to make their own choices, using their own money. Reform is necessary, but it involves less government, not more. Medicare needs reform - it needs to be phased out as a system that doesn't work. If you oppose government commandeering the future of healthcare, I urge you to call and write your Congressional representatives to make your voice heard. Tomorrow, I will follow with Part 2: My ideas on healthcare reform.
Next Story is Continued Below
A Letter to My Congressman
June 25, 2009
Too often, our duties as a spouse, parent, provider, or homeowner preclude us from understanding or engaging in debate over the policy decisions within local, state or national government. Indeed, such policies have tremendous impact on our lives - both now, and for the foreseeable future. Presently, the situations within all levels of government seem most precarious. With unemployment nearing 10% nationally, swelling deficits across the board, and a 'blood in the water' mentality amongst big government proponents, it would seem that everyone should - if they cherish the United States as the land of opportunity and freedom - take the time to 'weigh in'. Yet, as I've learned through talking with my family, friends, and neighbors, many do not 'have the time'.
Not 'having the time' to vote, or become knowledgeable enough to know who to vote for - that one upsets me. Not 'taking the time' to send your representatives a quick email, or forwarding a link to a friend or family member is disheartening as well. Apathy will lead to our gradual enslavement, because the have-nots in our society will never quit asking for 'more please', and those organizations which thrive on consolidating power and money (unions, special interests, etc.) see the taxpayers and their dollars as an easy mark in light of this apathy. My message to my circle of influence: Non-participation will ultimately cost us more in loss of life, liberty, and property than we stand to gain through our yearly salary increases we toil to earn. If you are a member of a free society, you should 'make time' to participate in protecting those freedoms and dollars. You begin by having a voice.
Yet I, having dipped my toe into the pool over the last year or so, realize just how time consuming becoming even remotely knowledgeable and actionable can be. Part of my 'silence' over the last few weeks on Heeby Jeebie has been due to a need to re-dedicate myself to my other obligations. Indeed, I understand how challenging it is to find balance in life - I understand the priority of needing to put food on your table, put in quality time at work to maintain employment or at home to maintain relationships, and the need to enjoy life too. However, I have learned that DVRs are a great tool for slotting both my entertainment TV time and my political news TV time around 'life'. And, I've come to identify both individuals and organizations who seek to promote my set of beliefs and have joined their e-mailing lists. Finally, I've still maintained my voice - to my state assemblyman and my congressional representatives, and to my Facebook network. I for one do not want to be silent at this stage of our history; and I no longer subscribe to the idea that when I close my front door at night that my world shrinks to that which lies within my walls.
Which brings me to my letter. I prepared the following 'catch all' letter to my congressman, Elton Gallegly (R), last Thursday after a typical night watching the political news. It followed my second-ever donation in as many months to the causes I support, the first being to NumbersUSA to fight Amnesty for illegal immigrants, and the second to the RNC to help air ads countering Obama's healthcare reform objectives. The truth be told, folks, I know I am a small cog. My limited financial resources aside, I feel the only power I have is to voice my position to my representatives and to encourage others to do the same. For the readership here at Heeby Jeebie, if the letter provides any easier means or motivation for you to either share or use my writing to provide your voice to your representative or to inspire others to voice a similar opinion, then my sharing it with you today has had purpose.
Dear Mr Gallegly,
As I've had the opportunity to correspond in the past, I once again take the opportunity to let you know of the policies that give us grave concern here in your district, amongst my family and friends.
I am speaking of the tri-fecta of the Democrat Agenda which are Health Care, Cap & Trade, and Amnesty. Each, and in combination, threatens to destroy the personal gains of hard working, conservative Americans. My family absolutely opposes national healthcare that would create a public option that either taxes private plans, creates unfair competition that will drive people to a public plan, diminishes the quality of care, places bureaucrats in control of deciding treatment options, etc. In short, we oppose the Kennedy plan or any Democrat option that transfers additional dollars from my paycheck to another or attempts to bring my hard-earned privilege of healthcare to a base level under government control.
Second, we hope that you will vigorously reject Cap and Trade legislation and, rather, promote a balanced plan for energy independence as the Republican coalition has put forth. The Global Warming debate has been politicized and its proponents stand to earn windfall wealth from its foisting upon American citizens. While I personally strive to conserve and develop alternate energy strategies, taxing Americans to adopt a 'horse and buggy' rollback of our society is not the answer. It is an economy killer. Promotion of balanced transition sources such as developing American oil and natural gas reserves, modernizing our nuclear power plants and enabling Yucca Mountain, and creating incentives for corporate and personal adoption of conservation (to drive economies of scale) are the directions our nation should steer. Creating a false-tax with Cap and Trade to feed the government beast is wrong: foreign offsets would negate any real CO2 reductions, and the idea of real CO2 impact on climate is still debatable. Furthermore, it seems a great proportion of such revenue will not be directed towards pushing efficiency in alternate energy, but will be redistributed to 'poor' families not able foot the higher bills (classic Socialism-based wealth redistribution).
Finally, efforts to pass Amnesty for illegal immigrants must be squashed. For one, creating an entitlement needy population will place undo burden on our nation at a time when we are 'maxed out'. Second, bringing into the fold a high proportion of unskilled, uneducated workers robs jobs and depresses wages for American citizens at a time they need it most. Finally, such a move threatens to reduce both the moral and cultural aspects of American society which should promote both assimilation, common language, and rule of law. Amnesty in this case is politically driven to attempt to garner de facto single-party rule through returned political allegiance and it must be stopped to protect our sovereignty and democracy.
As our representative, I urge you to rise up to resist this agenda. I ask that you both vocally resist and take the opportunity to engage your constituency in this fight.
Warmest Regards,
Michael Kennedy
The Unknowns
May 8, 2009
Do you believe in Cinderella stories? I do. From the American Revolution to the Miracle on Ice in the 1980 Winter Olympics, and from the Battle of Gettysburg to the 1986 New York Mets World Series comeback, Americans have been doing the improbable for 233 years. Last evening, in a small nook of America, I experienced another miniscule Cinderella story of no great consequence to many: Our rag-tag team of C-League softball wannabes, 'The Unknowns', winless in every game to date and mercy-ruled frequently, played out of our skin to score an impressive victory over our opponents in the late game of a double-header, 12-3.
Our co-ed team is composed of an improbable lot of true beginners sprinkled with a few experienced players such as myself. While I’ve lacked commitment to weekly practices, others have been highly dedicated, week in and week out, to improve their play. We’ve endured an uncanny number of injuries from hit or thrown balls to our players, yet people, courageously, keep coming back. We encourage each other, whether we strike out, or miss a ball in the field, or get a hit, or make a catch. And so finally, after weeks of suffering beat downs from our opponents and bruises to our bodies, our positive attitude and work paid off. Like so many great American victories of the past, this rag-tag team put it all together: playing great defense, focusing a bit more on offense, and getting a few lucky breaks to score an inspired victory.
It was during the inaugural Victory Beer amongst my teammates last evening that the link between my team’s experience and our current predicament in our great nation became self-evident. Several weeks ago, Tea Parties rallies swept the country ‘in revolt’ of the direction of our Nation. Reckless spending by out of touch legislators, and big government intrusion to every facet of life appears to violate our Constitution by our representation failing in their responsibility to be ‘of the people, by the people, for the people’. Like my softball team, we modern-day patriots too are a rag-tag bunch – derided by main stream media and dismissed by the ruling party. We are loosely organized as ‘grass roots’, relying upon volunteerism to spread the word and to begin unifying people into a cohesive force. And like my team we’ve faced – since the November elections - a steady beat-down of our own from every possible direction of government through its policy shifts.
Yet despite being told daily by our elected President that Americans have mandated a new direction – one clearly steered towards Socialism or worse – we resist; despite being pummeled in Congress and in the main stream media – we restate our values and continue to organize. We are, in essence, ‘The Unknowns’ – a young team beaten badly to date, but now awakened and looking to score our first victory.
On May 19, in California, and on June 2, in New Jersey, ‘The Unknowns’ have the opportunity to put to the test our abilities to change the course of reckless government. In California, voters will take to the polls to vote on Propositions 1A through 1F, a series of measures sponsored by Chief RINO Arnold Schwarzenegger and the out-of-touch Democrat-ruled State Assembly. The aims of these propositions are to saddle Californians with an additional $16 billion in taxes over 2 years, and to pilfer revenue from other state sources to fund reckless government and its mistress, big state unions. These taxes go beyond those immediately imposed last month as a result of a disastrous state budget battle to close a $42 billion shortfall. Those taxes alone extend for two years, and will cost a family such as mine an extra $2000 / year. The backers of the propositions are trying to convince voters to accept an additional 2 years in taxes, under the guise of eventual budget reform. However, the distorted and twisted way in which the measures were written all but guarantees one thing – the unions, who enjoy plush wage, medical, and retirement entitlements, will prosper from mandatory pay-backs and the people will again be faced with budget shortfalls in the years to come. The Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association is a valuable resource to get the skinny on this budget trickery.
The underhanded manner in which these Propositions were written should be evident to anyone with a pulse in California. In fact, the Tea Party rallies in California carried just as much a message of “ENOUGH!” to Sacramento as it did to Washington D.C. With talk radio hosts Jon and Ken leading additional ‘NO ON 1-A” rallies, and grass-roots groups like Save California Now networking locally, May 19th is California’s Gettysburg. Except in this battle, The Unions are the one's threatening to sack our state. A convincing victory by the upstarts will shake big government’s foundations and rattle big unions. Like a 7.0 earthquake, it will make national news. Like a 7.0 earthquake, there will be aftershocks if the Props fall. The California system is an unsafe building with a poor foundation, and it must be torn down lest it collapse on all of us.
Of course, in the California battle, we’ve seen the mettle and resolve of our enemies. Yet we must continue to keep our eye on the ball. First, they’ve tried to sell the tax increases as ‘budget reform’, claiming that future budget increases will be tied to the average of prior year’s revenues “adjusted for inflation and population growth”. Analysis reveals this is a sham. Next, they’ve threatened our children with cries from teacher’s unions that education will suffer – this despite being the highest paid teachers in the nation, and California spending the most of any state ($59 billion/year) on education. Prop. 1-B would give back to the teacher’s union budget cuts sustained in closing the $42 billion 2009-2010 gap - so there's really no sense of sacrifice on behalf of their unions. Yet every year, Californians are played to give more and more funds for education, and get less and less in quality because of a union system that lays off its youngest and brightest rather than fire incompetent tenured teachers.
Now, they’ve trotted out ads featuring fire fighters and police officers, threatening our public safety. Cities are unable to fund massive retirement benefits promised to these fine folks. While I respect most teachers, and Police, and Fire as the cornerstones of our public servants, their unions need to step up and accept reduction in the cushy benefits and salary increases during times of fiscal calamity. But they don’t – the union leaders expect more in times of less, all to benefit their quest for power and influence.
New Jersey, another ‘blue’ state, is being killed by high taxes and inefficient government. Steve Lonegan, former mayor of Bogota, NJ, is attempting to win the Republican nomination for Governor against current front-runner Chris Christie. The race compares similarly to that in 2003 in California. Lonegan might be compared to fiscal hawk Tom McClintock. Christie, like Arnold Schwarzenegger, is one ‘the polls’ would suggest for giving incumbent Jon Corzine a run. Of course, we know how California turned out with the Governator.
Coming on strong since his campaign officially got going a few months ago, the upstart Lonegan represents core conservative values. Steve supports a competitive flat income tax as a means to stop the bleeding of high income wage earners from the state. He also is intent on scrutinizing government bureaucracy to reduce state spending, and overhauling the so called “Abbott decision” in NJ, which practices revenue redistribution from ‘wealthy’ school districts to ‘poor’ districts. Steve is an impassioned speaker – a breath of fresh air that the GOP should recruit to rebuild the party. He is on-point in talking of smaller government, individual rights, protecting the nation from Socialism, and urging Americans to preserve their Constitutional rights for future generations. I urge readers to learn more about him at www.lonegan.com. As a movement, we need to support Steve Lonegan.
Should his push to win the Republican nomination prove successful, Steve will face off against Corzine, the reviled current Governor, in November 2009. With revenue shortfalls expected to result in ‘crisis mode’ actions by Corzine in the coming months, a fiscal hawk such as Lonegan could be in a great position to turn the state ‘red’ one year earlier than the 2010 Congressional Elections. Once again, if ‘The Unknowns’ can rally here, this is a game-changer, a momentum builder.
So do you believe in Cinderella Stories? While you are thinking about it, I leave you today with the Gettysburg Address:
“Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation, so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.
But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate... we can not consecrate... we can not hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government: of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”
- Abraham Lincoln
Power and Responsibility
April 30, 2009
Since I started this venture in earnest two months ago, Facebook has been a highly valuable tool, not only for communicating with friends, but also because it breeds cross-pollination of ideas. It was serendipity at play over the last day, as two separate streams of commentary on FB collided with current events to steer my writing this evening.
First, FB friend Michael Sabler emailed me yesterday. Michael thought the slogan “With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility”, a quote from the first Spiderman movie, could act as an effective rallying cry for an ad campaign to support GOP candidates in 2010. I’ll leave it to Michael to tell the rest of the story on his timeline, but I’ll come back to this quote in a moment.
Next, FB friend Ralph McGee and I started an exchange today after Ralph posted an answer to a Facebook quiz “Where will you live in 20 years?” The answer Ralph received was ‘homeless’. I quipped back to Ralph, “Is ‘country-less’ an option?”. Ralph’s response lamented that the direction this country is going [under Obama] leaves him and others in his family thinking at times if there is anything left in the country ‘worth dying for’. Ralph and his Dad both served this country – defended it. A telling statement – that people who voluntarily answered the call of duty now feel the current direction of our nation leaves them country-less. I’ll come back to this in a moment as well.
Now this evening was the highly managed press conference to ‘celebrate’ 100 days of the Obama presidency. I didn’t hear the self aggrandizing teleprompter intro. There were portions of the Q&A that I could stomach, whereas others left me headed for the trash can. One of the questions bound to get every Conservative blogger’s goat, however, was that by the NY Times correspondent Jeff Zeleny:
“During these first 100 days, what has surprised you the most about this office? Enchanted you the most from serving in this office? Humbled you the most? And troubled you the most?”
First, comes Obama’s answer to “Surprised”:
“And so, you know, the typical president, I think, has two or three big problems. We've got seven or eight big problems. And so we've had to move very quickly and I'm very proud of my team for the fact that we've been able to keep our commitments to the American people, to bring about change, while at the same time managing a whole host of issues that had come up that weren't necessarily envisioned a year-and-a-half ago.”
Hold that thought, because here comes the answer for “Troubled”:
“Troubled? I'd say less troubled, but, you know, sobered by the fact that change in Washington comes slow. That there is still a certain quotient of political posturing and bickering that takes place even when we're in the middle of really big crises. I would like to think that everybody would say, you know what, let's take a time-out on some of the political games, focus our attention for at least this year, and then we can start running for something next year. And that hasn't happened as much as I would have liked.”
And finally, we have the answer for “Humbled”:
“Humbled by the -- humbled by the fact that the presidency is extraordinarily powerful, but we are just part of a much broader tapestry of American life, and there are a lot of different power centers. And so I can't just press a button and suddenly have the bankers do exactly what I want or, you know, turn on a switch and suddenly, you know, Congress falls in line. And so, you know, what you do is to -- is to make your best arguments, listen hard to what other people have to say, and coax folks in the right direction.”
So what do we have here? A President who loves to call to people’s attention that he is overwhelmed with serious issues facing the nation – yet is hell-bent to elevate prioritization of his Socialist agenda to a quasi ‘national emergency’ level to satiate his own self-importance, appease the far-left constituency, and lay the groundwork for one-party rule. One who extols himself and his team for ‘moving quickly’, then chastizes the legistlative process, and the opposition, for slowing him down. Apparently, the process of checks and balances established by the Constitution is ‘troubling’ to Mr. Obama. This theme continues with his answer to ‘humbled’ – he is humbled that he is powerful, but not all-powerful. Apparently, he wasn’t granted Dictator-status in his first 100 days - the ability to push a button to get his way - but needs to ‘coax’ people in the ‘right’ direction. Poor guy.
This gets me back to “With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility”. Responsibility begins with prioritization. Prioritization to national security and the economy. Given all the nation faces abroad and domestically, I would feel much better about a President who came out to the Nation and said “I am willing to slow down on Cap and Trade, Immigration Reform, and National Health Care because my people need to fully focus on core issues of this economy.” Rather than trying to be a ‘beacon’ of morality and befriend rogue despots, I’d like to hear a President respond “We live in dangerous times, and I will not dictate any absolutes when it comes to what our nation will or will not do to keep it’s people safe.” Instead, we prioritize closing Guantanamo, banning waterboarding, and destroying morale in the CIA by dragging the prior administration through the mud. We prioritize kowtowing to Mexico, the Hispanic Coalition and big unions; prioritize imposing massive taxes on energy consumption as a means of beating us into submission on clean energy; and prioritize massively increasing government liabilities by seeking to get into the Health Care business.
Great Responsibility entails embracing the system which our Founding Fathers devised for balance of power. I first learned the system of Checks and Balances in Civics class in 7th grade; the process would come as no surprise to me, if I were President. For Obama to be ‘troubled’ with the workings of a representative democracy – to view opposition as bickering and posturing – is troubling in itself. A responsible leader would tell his Congress “I require debate amongst the parties; I expect bi-partisan support. I expect time is taken to craft a bill most agreeable to everyone. Our nation has one chance at getting these things right.” Instead, we see spending bills and other major policy flying through both chambers with hardly a thought (or read), and a majority party attitude that the 47% of the nation who didn’t vote for Obama’s ‘Change’ should just shut the hell up – and those that did have given him proxy to do it all without checking in. We get a President who would like the expedience of pushing a button to make us all bend to his will. Thank goodness the tattered and weakend Constitution still stands in his way.
Obama finished his answer with this:
““This metaphor has been used before, but the ship of state is an ocean liner. It's not a speedboat. And so the way we are constantly thinking about this issue, of how to bring about the changes that the American people need, is to -- is to say, if we can move this big battleship a few degrees in a different direction, you may not see all the consequences of that change a week from now or three months from now, but 10 years from now or 20 years from now, our kids will be able to look back and say, "That was when we started getting serious about clean energy. That's when health care started to become more efficient and affordable. That's when we became serious about raising our standards in education.””
To Ralph, I present that Mr. Obama likewise envisions America 20 years from now being much different from today. A few degrees ‘in a different direction’ will raise taxes on energy to a point where some may be forced to ride our bikes, or take the bus, or perhaps freeze to death in dead of winter. A few degrees will put the US Government in control of making life or death decisions on our Health Care - with the purpose of making it ‘efficient and affordable’. Following the Good-Fast-Cheap rule, it is sure not to be very good.
Reflections and Directions
April 23, 2009
It has been one week since the April 15 tax parties. I've spent the week reflecting on the Tea Party event and trying to better balance obligations to family, work, myself, and this venture. And so here I find myself, a few hours before work, trying to collect these thoughts into something tangible for posting on my 'blog' that is a concise and can do justice to one week's worth of news flow. I'll give it a shot.
As I wrote to Bobby Eberle, of GOPUSA last Wednesday evening, the Tea Party I attended in Valencia, CA was attended by a 1000+ people by my estimate. The organizers later put that number at 1500 - 2000. Where we were positioned up and down Valencia Blvd. gave us amazing rush-hour drive-by support. We connected with thousands of people in their vehicles as they stopped at our busy intersection.
There were three observations from the Tea Party. First, it was purely grass-roots. I spent time talking with some of the organizers. They were ten ordinary people who, despite differing political views, agreed that the taxation and deficit spending we are experiencing was excessive and required action. They all pitched in over 4 weeks to get the Tea Party publicized and permitted; none were professional organizers or GOP party operatives. None had ever done something like this before.
Second, there was age diversity of the people - all of whom appeared to attend because they love America. A host of empty nesters, young adults, high school kids, working parents, and entire families (complete with small children) were present. The drivers for attendees I talked with was both concern over the future of this country, and the imposing of high taxes in the current economic crisis. People genuinely believed the taxation decisons in California are punishing our economy, and the spend decisions locally and nationally today are threatening America's survival. Government is simply spending beyond its means, and as a result, they've imperiled America's survival for future generations. It was inspiring to see young and old rallying - not protesting - for America, for the principles in which America was founded.
Third, I realized for every car that honked in support, there was someone who was perhaps uncertain as to the outcome of the rally, or perhaps bashful, or busy supporting their families, so they didn't attend. But for the next event, these people have the potential to add to our numbers. If this grass-roots movement grows, it is because more and more people will be inspired to fight to preserve the traditions of America. Already, over the past week, we've seen the President try to quell the uprising by (hypocritically) 'talking tough' on spending. He talks of 'setting a tone' by finding $100 million in cuts amongst a $3.6 trillion budget - an incredibly paltry amount. Nevertheless, we at least got Obama's attention. Now, we must continue to grow the movement through future events and coordination between groups. 50,000, 200,000 and 1,000,000 people gatherings are tough to ignore.
Finally, I attended the event with my in-laws, who did an awesome job turning my 'Flick the Tick' graphics into head-turning signage. As we walked through the crowds, I realized some understood the symbolic nature of the tick immediately, while others asked exactly what 'Flick the Tick' meant. In short, for my readers who might still be asking the same: 'Big Government, Big Unions, and Illegal Immigrants' was my standing response. While some may take offense, the fact is all three are the root of the problem here in California, and our Representatives are doing a lousy job of protecting it's citizenry. But more on that in future articles.
The Timeline Game
April 15, 2009
When I transitioned into a new position within my company last year, I began interacting with larger groups who utilized more structured project planning than I was accustomed. I was introduced to something known as the 'Integrated Project Plan', a multi-organization, multi-milestone wonder (or head-ache) created within Microsoft Project. At the beginning of a new project, the team gets together and tries to arrive at how all the particular hand-offs between groups will be worked out, in what order, in order to achieve the overall project objective. For project managers (PMs), this is heaven. There are parallel activities that are projected to begin and end at different times, and they choreograph it all. For someone new stepping into the room trying to follow it all, it's both intimidating and confusing.
I can attest to that, of course, first hand. In one of my first projects in my new group, I found myself in the cross-fire between several veterans of the timeline game. Never-mind that I was still trying to figure out what exactly my new role entailed, in terms of specific activities and resources required, but now I was being asked whether I could complete the activities in X weeks, or how much material would I need from such-and-such group to complete the activities, and would it be possible to trim off a week if contingency Y occured. Flustered, I finally became terse with the PM and said, defeatedly, "I cannot, nor will I, answer your questions in this meeting. I need time to steady the timeline and my commitments". After the meeting, a fellow team member approached me and said I was completely justified in my approach. That made me feel a bit better, but I still felt I had been overwhelmed by the complexity of the situation and reserved myself towards better understanding the threads of activity amongst the groups.
I became convinced last evening, after watching the (Fox) news, that the powers that be in the Obama administration entered office in January with a specific project plan. Unfortunately, I do not believe the plan is meant to please everyone in our nation. I believe the plan, from day one, was to script events with flawless choreography over the first year of his Presidency so as to make it virtually impossible for Obama to be unseated in 2012, and the Democrats for the foreseeable time afterwards. Many bloggers have been warning what the objectives will be for the Obama administration. Perhaps someone has even layed out the timeline and how the choreography will occur. Though none of this should come as a shock, my heads been spinning with trying to make sense of all the threads of action in the first 100 days. The American People, myself included, are expected to be the newbies in the room. I believe the events are meant to keep us off-balance, so that we might tacitly support or be downright oblivious to the commitments we make with this administration.
A segment on Greta Van Susteren's program did it for me last night, as well as some good observations made on Hannity. With President Obama's economic speech yesterday saying we're "seeing a glimmer" of recovery, and following it with a promise to continue wreckless Big Government, the choreography clicked for me. Here we go:
If we look back to January (or even November), we see the first act setting a scene of panic. First, create panic within the nation by talking down the economy, then use the high from the inauguration and motivating talk from the new president to hastily pass a stimulus bill by President's Day. This will provide a bit of a boost to the economy in...say...two months. Some people get pissed, so go on a media tour to show the President is a likeable guy. The Stock Market crashes: people are more somber, creates a panic in the banks. So, uncork the engineered stimulus booby-trap (AIG bonus scandal), deny GM more bailout money, and act again as a savior in time of crisis by promoting defacto nationalization. In the meantime, give a rhetoric-filled speech to sell the new budget and downplay the pork in the Omnibus by blaming it on the prior adminsitration. Take some more heat, but amongst all the noise, quietly pass the GIVE act to begin indoctrinating / enslaving America's youth, and move towards exerting more control over the 2010 census.
Act Two is still playing out. With all eyes on Barack and Michelle in Europe, the Congress quietly passed the 2010 budget, going to committee just before the President's return, the Congressional break, and the Tea Parties. With America focused on sound-bites from Europe, no real discussion will manifest on the result of moving closer to a global currency by the closed-door commitments at the G-20. Initiate several 'under the radar' objectives: Start discussing Amnesty for the Illegal Immigrants, and start portraying the 'right' as extremist just before the Tea Parties get going. That brings us to this week, with Congress on Easter recess, Obama began talking of recovery. The perceived mood swing may be backed by a uptick in economic activity provided in part by the stimulus, and for Americans who believe 'it's working', this will give the administration credibility enough so that the American people 'trust' Obama enough to see the big budget through to signing. Nice choreography.
I am not sure how the third act will get going, but you can be sure the underlying objective is to pass legistlation paving the way for Amnesty. The 'Card-Check' objective, making it easier for Unions to organize and consolidate power, will also be important. Be sure, something is in the works by the Project Manager to provide a smoke screen while these get through to law. Some type of 'mood setting' will be broadcast by the administration to get Americans to drink the Kool-Aid. The result: imagine 13 billion entitlement-hungry illegal aliens on the path to getting the right to vote and promised better paychecks if they become union members. If this happens, it is as good as 'Check-Mate' for a two party system in this country. Project Complete, Game Over. Scary, scary stuff.
Amidst rolling waves and fading light, three shooters steadied their aim...
April 13, 2009
It was a beautiful Easter Sunday yesterday as my family attended services at the local Lutheran church where my son attends pre-school. To be honest, as regular church goers, my wife and I are not highly successful – it remains a growth area for us. Yet with knowledge that the church hosted Sunday school for the kids, we took the opportunity yesterday to attend.
Service was amazingly peaceful, the pastor entertaining yet sincere, and the congregation accomodating towards our being novices in procedure. No reference to politics, and scant reference to current events made for a brief yet welcomed respite for all that was going on beyond our walls and community. I had a moment in the service where I became aware of this, as a young infant was being baptized, and as I saw how eagerly the congregation leaned into the aisles and stood on tip-toe to witness a purely good event. “Christianity at its finest”, I thought, “Americans need more of this”. Only later, during prayer, when a woman asked God to bless the Captain of the Maersk-Alabama, did the outside world enter the sanctuary. Our service ended, our kids did their Easter egg hunt, and we returned home to enjoy the rest of our morning.
Only later in the day, after returning from our family gathering, did I learn that the Captain of the Maersk-Alabama was successfully rescued by U.S. Navy Seal snipers in a precision strike. As I read the newswires on the net and learned of the emerging details, a confluence of American pride, faith, and relief grew within me. America in times such as these can still stand tall, clearly on the side of righteousness. Honorable, highly-skilled men and women in the armed services stand ready to defend our nation’s people against thugs, pirates, and terrorists. Even a brief amount of respect was felt for President Obama, for authorizing the use of force to end the Somalian situation. I love this country like many conservatives do – for what it stands for. Yesterday we, together, made that stand.
It was this morning, as I awoke and began thinking about writing of yesterday's events, that I wondered what role that woman’s prayer for the Captain – or countless other prayers for him throughout our nation throughout the week – played in his miraculous rescue. Alas, my research led me to the conclusion that this one woman’s prayer Easter morning may have been ex post facto, by minutes according to the reported time the events transpired. It was then, as I read my email about a swell of anti-gun legislation being proposed in California, and the glow of a nation united became clouded with politics once again, that a new link of providence emerged. I offer it to you now:
It was at a moment like that which occurred yesterday, with our nation’s finest soldiers ending a crisis – an act of terrorism – using three perfect and well-timed strikes against the enemy, that Americans should think how important it is to protect our 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms. Our motives for doing so need not be nefarious, they need not be defined. The right is simply a part of our heritage. It is critical we believe in the wisdom of our Founding Fathers as this right being something we might just need, to face those in this world who mean us harm, from wherever they may come, at whatever time.
I say this because I suspect that the wheels of motion for yesterday’s events were initiated a long time ago, well before the events on the Maersk-Alabama transpired, well before our Nation’s Finest became adults and decided to join the Armed Forces. I suspect, that in different places, at different times, three fathers presented their sons with birthday gifts. “This is your first rifle, son, and I am going to teach you to use it”, each father began. “Now listen carefully, because this is my first rule of handling a firearm – a most important rule: Never, ever point a gun at someone unless you intend to kill them. Understood?”
“Yes, sir.”, each boy responded.
And so their training began.
The Tax Revolt Begins by Voting Your Dollars Locally
April 9, 2009
A dollar here, a dollar there. For most Americans, the reality of small incremental changes to their daily expenses does not warrant changing their habits. But the fact is, even in a good year, most of us only get a 2 – 5% raise on our gross salaries. Factor in the existing taxes and entitlement programs (Social Security, Medicare), and those changes amount to only 1 – 2.5% increase in real dollars into our checking accounts. For a family grossing $100,000 per year, that may only amount to $1000 to $2500 per year, or about $20 to $50 per paycheck. Suddenly, inflation and taxflation have a real impact on us – we work hard every year to try and improve out lives, yet the raises we get are taxed and inflated away. Rather than get ahead, we struggle to keep up - and your hard work in securing a promotion and raise in salary gets you no better than where you were last year. In today’s economy, many who are still employed are facing salary freezes, or even cuts in our wages, compounding the matter even more.
So the idea of incremental increases in taxes and services suddenly becomes important. Sales taxes, taxes on energy consumption (such as those proposed by President Obama) and increases in state income taxes all squeeze that $20 - $50 per week you fought to earn. In California, sales taxes across the state were recently increased 1%; prior to the state decision, some local municipalities’ voters foolishly approved to raise sales tax an additional 0.5%, bringing the total to 1.5%. If you live or shop in an area that has raised its sales taxes by 1.5%, you’ll of course experience an increase of $1.50 per every $100. in taxable goods you purchase. Such an increase on durable items, like a refrigerator, or HD-TV, will add $10 to $20 to the cost. For these infrequent and substantial purchases, people are sometimes willing to change their habits – such as purchasing the item in another county that may have lower rates. But what we must also realize is the impact of increased ‘consumption tax’ on our daily expenses – gasoline, restaurant bills, personal and home care items, and clothing. A dollar here, a dollar there – it begins to add up, and it once again saps away the progress you made by working hard.
My recent weekend spending illustrates the point. I started on Friday afternoon going out to lunch with my work friends. The $15 tab for me roughly included $0.22 in additional taxes. Later in the evening, my wife and I went out for an evening of dinner and drinks – the night costing us around $100 – or an extra $1.50 in taxes. On Saturday, my son and I went to Costco for our bi-weekly shopping trip. Our $5 pizza and drink lunch cost an extra $0.03 in taxes, $60 tank of gas an extra $0.90, and our $300 Costco run included diapers, beer, toothbrushes and dish soap – the increased sales tax on those items adding $1.63 over what they cost last week before the tax increase. On the way out to visit family on Sunday, my wife’s stop at Jo-Ann’s ($24), cost an extra $0.36; our stop at Jamba Juice on the way home added an extra $0.16. I’d done nothing exceptional on the weekend from the one prior, yet now it cost me about $3.05 more. The 1.5% increase in sales tax sapped about 6% of my $50 per week raise. Over the course of a year, simple everyday purchases will run my family somewhere on the order of $200 more in sales taxes, as I see it.
The Tax Revolts and Tea Parties across the nation are meant to demonstrate that concerned Americans are weary of big government spending leading the ‘need’ to raise more revenue through taxation. No corporation in America would survive very long by allowing expenses to outpace revenue. Yet the incompetence of big government is masked by their ability to apparently turn the screw a little tighter on the populace year after year. Municipalities who passed additional sales tax measures to increase revenue did it on the rationale that consumers would not change their spending habits on a local level – thus enabling them to reap tens of millions of dollars of additional revenue each year. These may be the same municipalities who are seeking to offer tax breaks to businesses to establish worthy commercial enterprises in their area – such as in Oxnard, CA. So as a result, Oxnard attracts the business from the surrounding area with low tax rates in enterprise zones, which in turn drives consumers from beyond the city’s borders into Oxnard to pay an extra 0.5% in tax. Like magic, Oxnard has expanded its tax base beyond its borders – and its ability to pay for its relatively high population of illegal immigrants. There is a term for such tactics against the consumers in Ventura County – it’s called a ‘Fly Trap’. Not surprisingly, that Costco and JoAnn’s we drove 15 miles to this weekend were both in Oxnard. I didn't learn of the extra city tax until I looked at my receipt Sunday night.
As I was recently reminded, a grass-roots revolt against big government needs to start at the local level. Many of us who are fed up with free-spending politicians anxiously await the next elections. Though we typically only vote once per year for changing our representation, we have immense power to vote with our dollars every single day. Those who are serious about fighting the taxflation impact on our earnings need to start voting with their dollars first on the local levels. The tactics of a city like Oxnard need to be called out.
The first action is to vote your dollars in adjacent cities with the lower tax rates as much as possible. If you have elected officials who favor low taxes or didn’t raise their local rates – then you should write those officials and the local chamber of commerce and tell them to promote the heck out of it. Drive business into the lower tax district. In those areas that raised local rates, avoid businesses there. Email leadership in cities like Oxnard and let them know you will shop at another business in another city and spend your money there instead. The swiftest and most effective Tax Revolt we can have is to vote our dollars wisely and consistently – and let them know we are doing it! Failure to do so amounts to nothing more than making a $200 contribution each year to those local politicians who support raising your taxes.
In my next article, I’ll discuss how we must vote our dollars at the state level…so become a fan of heebyjeebie.com and check back soon. Thanks for Visiting!
Links:
Oxnard seeks to draw businesses (and taxpayers) in through Enterprise Zone: http://blog.canditax.com/2009/04/08/oxnard-looks-to-the-enterprise-zone/
New California Sales and Use Tax Rates, by County & District: http://www.boe.ca.gov/news/pdf/l212b.pdf
Heeby Jeebie Launches 'Flick the Tick'
April 3, 2009
In conjunction with Zazzle, heebyjeebie.com has launched its 'Flick The Tick' national campaign in opposition to the big government ticks responsible for massive bailouts, exploding entitlements, and a blantant socialist agenda. Perfect gear for the upcoming Tea Party rallies, I can customize the text to your liking - or you can go with my chosen rallying cries on the shirt. I'll be uploading different state editions of the logo to compliment the national logo, but let me know if your state is needed sooner and I can prioritize...
Our entire line of Zazzle custom print products can be viewed in the flash player below. Link to our store now to customize to different shirt styles for men, women and children using Zazzle's slick online system!