Wild Idea

OK. Congress stinks. Every single member needs a reality check and I think I have an idea. Lets start with a few items. I specifically remember the CEO's of Ford, GM, and Chrysler getting grilled by Congress about their private planes. This caused a stir with many of companies selling their planes. Then, Congress blasted AIG for paying bonuses and tacked on a 90% tax to their pay. I still think this is unconstitutional. Many of those workers were not taking a salary. The bonuses were being used to retain employees. Afterwards, many businesses were targets of Congress for taking lavish retreats. This has caused many issues with economy in Las Vegas.

Since this time, Congress obviously did not listen to their own advice. Not only did they want to spend a couple hundred million dollars to replace some aging planes, they tacked on an additional three hundred million dollars for additional planes. Can we have the automobile executives grill Congress on their use of private planes?

Then we had a little party at the Arizona Biltmore for the Social Security administration. The video was great showing all of the drinking and dancing with our retirement money. I forgot, Social Security is broke. It only contains IOU's from Congress stating they will pay the trust fund back. Where did they get seven hundred thousand dollars?

Now, we have the VA paying massive bonuses. Some of the bonuses ranged in the tens of thousands of dollars. Didn't I read a little while ago about how many of our veterans and soldiers are still waiting on their VA checks? Since they are using tax payer money, should they be taxed at 90% too?

Time for my solution. I figure as a tax payer, Congress should treat me as a shareholder with all tax payers having the final say on executive pay and perks.

I propose cutting the Congressional pay for all members of Congress and the President to $1,000 per approval percentage point. With a max salary of $100,000. We can add on bonuses for cutting waste. I would say each member can get a bonus 1% of each item they find items that save the tax payers money with a maximum cap of $2,000 per bonus. Of course, the income tax would be set at 90% since it is tax payer money. I say we allow the AIG executives write up the payment contract.

Then I would dissolve the current Congressional pension fund and move all members into Social Security for their retirement account. I will let all seniors who only have Social Security payments for income draft the legislation.

In order to cut health care costs, each member will be placed on the VA roles for obtaining all health services. We already pay for the doctors and hospitals. If it is good enough for those willing to die for our country, then it is surely good enough for Congress and the President. The veterans will get to put together the plan for adding members of Congress to the waiting list.

In order to fund these transitions, I would sell those fancy private planes. From here on out, each member of Congress only gets $10,000 per year for travel and will have to get all travel approved by the tax payers in advance. The President can keep Airforce One for safety measures. Maybe this will keep them grounded long enough to actually enact legislation that works.

Lastly, we need to address saving money on sleeping quarters for Congress when they are in Washington, DC representing us. Time to implement the new roommate system. Each member of Congress will be forced to bunk with a member of the opposite party in a college dorm style apartment. We can build it right next to the Capital. I would start with John Bohner and Nancy Pelosi and move down the chain of command.

I would bet if we had changes like this, Congress actually might start passing legislation that worked for the tax payers. Wasteful spending would get cut. Our medical care issues would get fixed. Party conflicts would be come to a halt. Do not want to have an angry roommate. They just might wake up with a new hair cut or covered in shaving cream.

Who Is Looking Out For Us?

Congress and the President have been at it again this week trying to mutilate the real tax payers. It all makes me wonder who is really looking out for our interests. The health care plan is going to stifle those of us who have insurance and tax businesses into oblivion. The cap and trade will do little to help the environment and make people like Al Gore very rich through the trading of carbon credits. The deficit is on the verge of sinking the dollar as China and other countries look to replace the dollar as the global currency standard.

I want to start with health care and health insurance. It is a noble cause to make sure everyone in the country has access to an insurance plan. However, the current proposal in the House is a disaster. Below is section 102 of HR 3200 which is supposed to protect our current coverage. It allows us to keep our current coverage as long as we are participating in the plan prior to the first day of the enactment of the legislation. Anytime afterwards, we will be mandated to use a plan under the government system. After the fifth year of the legislation, our current plans will be forced to move into the government system.

SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT COVERAGE.
(a) Grandfathered Health Insurance Coverage Defined- Subject to the succeeding provisions of this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable coverage under this division, the term `grandfathered health insurance coverage' means individual health insurance coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the first day of Y1 if the following conditions are met:
(1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT-
(A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.

(b) Grace Period for Current Employment-based Health Plans-
(1) GRACE PERIOD-
(A) IN GENERAL- The Commissioner shall establish a grace period whereby, for plan years beginning after the end of the 5-year period beginning with Y1, an employment-based health plan in operation as of the day before the first day of Y1 must meet the same requirements as apply to a qualified health benefits plan under section 101, including the essential benefit package requirement under section 121.

(1) IN GENERAL- Individual health insurance coverage that is not grandfathered health insurance coverage under subsection (a) may only be offered on or after the first day of Y1 as an Exchange-participating health benefits plan.

Once we are all forced into the government exchange, we are bound by the rules dictated by several government agencies. Under Section 122, our essential benefits package will be certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Who are these people and what basement houses them? It also establishes preventative services will be offered at a minimum based on input from the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and vaccines defined by the Director of the Center for Disease Control. Section 123 creates the Health Benefits Advisory Committee chaired by the Surgeon General. The committee will have 9 members appointed by the President and 9 members appointed by the Comptroller General of the United States. The Committee will then forward all recommendations to the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Keeping count? We are up to seven layers of government bureaucracy and going. Section 124 essentially gives the Secretary of Health and Human Services complete control on what benefits and treatments will be adopted for coverage. Section 141 creates the Health Choices Administration chaired by the "Commissioner" and reports directly to the Executive Branch. The Commissioner is given broad duties under section 142 to establish standards for plans in the Health Exchange and going down to remedying violations of rules in coordination with state insurance regulators and the Secretary of Labor. We are up to 10 now, 59 if you count each state separately. Section 144 allows the Commissioner to appoint a Qualified Health Benefits Plan Ombudsman to handle complaints and requests. Essentially, the Ombudsman is a middle layer so we cannot directly contact the Commissioner with any grievances. Section 162 amends the Public Health Service Act and brings in an independent third party for reviewing cases where health insurance is rescinded. Section 201 creates the Health Insurance Exchange under the Health Choices Administration to obtain bids and contracts for eligible health insurance plans. In section 206, a Special Inspector General for the Health Insurance Exchange is created to handle the auditing of the Health Insurance Exchange. The Treasury of the United States is named in section 207 to manage the Health Insurance Exchange Trust Fund. Section 221 creates the public health insurance option and managed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services with another office of the ombudsman for the public health insurance option. Where are we now? Fourteen agencies of government. These are only the highlights. Once you get into the sections on types of coverages and payments you will find more involvement such as the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Science who is responsible for reporting on geographical health care data.

Now, lets talk about start up costs. We have all heard about the one trillion dollar price tag. Think again. Section 222 lays out the funding.

(2) START-UP FUNDING-
(A) IN GENERAL- In order to provide for the establishment of the public health insurance option there is hereby appropriated to the Secretary, out of any funds in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, $2,000,000,000. In order to provide for initial claims reserves before the collection of premiums, there is hereby appropriated to the Secretary, out of any funds in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such sums as necessary to cover 90 days worth of claims reserves based on projected enrollment.
(B) AMORTIZATION OF START-UP FUNDING- The Secretary shall provide for the repayment of the startup funding provided under subparagraph (A) to the Treasury in an amortized manner over the 10-year period beginning with Y1.
(C) LIMITATION ON FUNDING- Nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing any additional appropriations to the Account, other than such amounts as are otherwise provided with respect to other Exchange-participating health benefits plans.

They are only authorizing two billion dollars. Where did the rest of the money go? There is $8,000,000,000 going to Medicare. However, this is hardly a dent in the $56 billion deficit it is facing. If the funds to actually cover medical payments is only two-tenths of a percent the costs, our government has some serious overhead issues. Maybe it is being used to pay the salaries for all of the new agencies and the massive government red tape needed to gouge the tax payers.

Do not think about cutting health insurance as a last resort when your personal budget is tight. Section 401 modifies the tax code so the IRS can impose the following:

(a) Tax Imposed- In the case of any individual who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of--
(1) the taxpayer's modified adjusted gross income for the taxable year, over
(2) the amount of gross income specified in section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.

This is the part that makes me despise our government. I want the freedom to choose how I spend the money I earn. If I feel I am healthy enough to go without insurance, I should have the right to go without. When I was waiting tables, I did not have the money to pay for health insurance. However, it only cost me $100 to get treatment at the urgent care when I did get sick. The urgent care system is great in this country where you are usually treated by a physicians assistant without the cost of going to an ER.

With saying this, I would never go without health insurance. I am just opposed to having it mandated by the government.

HR 3200 does not address the health care issues today. It is a big government health insurance program being paid for by only 50% of the population. The majority of the costs are driven by health care. These are two separate items. The biggest driver in costs is the inability of Congress to address tort reform. A typical doctor has to pay six figure premiums for malpractice insurance. It figures that the Congress would not stand up to the lawyers since the majority of Congress are lawyers themselves. The next biggest costs is the misuse of the emergency room system. Again, I would push for better management of the urgent care system. Why should a person go to the ER for a sinus infection? For $200, a person can get treated at an urgent care. This is about the amount for one month of cable television. How dare we ask people to prioritize their health care over their cable TV.

I can keep on going with this health bill. It makes for an interesting read. The taxes being levied on the the backs of those who worked hard to provide for themselves are outrageous. I do not work to pay my neighbors health care bill. I work so I can give my children the opportunities I did not have as a child. I came from a hard working farming family. I learned the difference between wants and needs. This has been lost in the eyes of many today. Everyone seems to want their flat screen televisions and tricked out cars over food and health care. We have been turned into a society that places more emphasis on image rather than taking care of the essentials. Congress sure did take care of their essentials by excluding themselves from the health care reform bill.

Next up, cap and trade or should I say make a small group of elites very rich at the expense of the rest of the population. Cap and Trade is being sold as an environmental bill to limit greenhouse gases. However, it does little to limit the gases and does more to help Al Gore, Goldman Sachs, and General Electric very rich. It will also make everything from cars to toothpaste go up in price.

The only way to really help with green house gases is to get all countries to limit emissions. Without it, even more manufacturing will move to places like India, Mexico, and China where they are not enforcing limits. We can also change the way we treat our eco system. Has anyone noticed that urban sprawl is destroying all of the trees? Plants absorb carbon dioxide during the daylight hours. This absorption helps clean our air through a natural process. We need to place more limits on clear cutting. We need to change our eating habits. PETA did a study showing where reducing our diet by one piece of chicken across everyone in the United States would be a greater benefit to the environment that cap and trade.

"By switching from a meat-based diet to a vegetarian diet for only 30 days, you will prevent the equivalent of more than 270 pounds of carbon dioxide from being emitted into the Earth's atmosphere. That means more pollution would be prevented than if you left your car at home every weekday and walked 20 miles."
(http://blog.peta.org/archives/2008/04/offset_al_gore.php)

I am not exactly a PETA supporter, but I do enjoy a good salad every now and then. Just think, we give up one piece of chicken or beef a week and eat a salad, we would better our health and protect the environment.

In all, cap and trade is a bad idea. There are much better solutions than the self-serving solutions being promoted by Al Gore and his polluting private jet.

Lastly, think again if you are not worried about all of the new taxes. You will be begging the government for money when China and other countries dump the dollar. The CBO reported last week that the deficit is now 80% of the Gross Domestic Product. We are setting ourselves up for a deflated currency. Congress is spending money that we do not have. We will no longer be able to afford the costs to import products into this country. In essence, we will look like the USSR when loaves of bread were rationed. I would suggest doing like George Soros. He made his money betting against the US dollar. This netted him billions.

I look to our leaders to represent the best interest for all of us. I do believe in health care reform and a cleaner environment. However, there are better solutions that will not penalize the working class. I believe the roll in government is to provide incentives to bring down health care costs, not micro manage the entire process. Again, government should provide incentives and research grants for private industries to be innovative with eco friendly technology, not mandate ideas that benefit a few. These are much cheaper solutions than bilking my paycheck to the point where I cannot afford to provide a higher standard of living for my children than I had growing up. It is not the American dream. No one seems to be looking out for us.

Throw The Bums Out

I am finally at the point where I no longer believe most of our politicians listen to the country. Our country is so divided and lacking true leadership that I almost want to move. The message boards make my blood boil just listening people state the party line and go along with whatever they are told. In case you are wondering, I am getting infuriated with the "slam thousand page bills down our throats until it comes out our rear ends before we can read it" policies of Congress and a president who thinks this is called getting it done. This might be by design since this will cause carbon emissions with a tax to go along with it.

If the Cap and Trade bill eventually passes and gets signed into law, there are provisions in it that state I have to ensure my house meets certain energy efficiencies before I can sell it. The energy efficiencies are based on the California housing codes. I do not live in California for a reason. This is a direct intrusion on the sovereign rights of the States. Second, the EPA and hundred other agencies being granted power by this bill do not answer to the voters. I guess we will have a hundred blends of gasoline to go with it now.

We are a diverse country. I like diversity because it can help us draw upon the best ideas. However, diversity fails when it is mandated by the government. It splits us into political pawns with each side determining which group is going to garner them the most votes. We are being used for our votes so they can retain power.

Real tax payers are close to becoming a minority meaning those who actually have a net Federal tax liability. I paid close to $40,000 in taxes last year. I am not even close to rich, yet our government thinks I should be able to pay more into the system so they can help those who do not contribute. The real tax payers need to give an economics lesson to anyone who says the government needs to provide a public option for free health care. It is not free. People like me will be asked to pay more to pick their tab.

The voters and true tax payers need to wake up in the United States. We were founded on the principles of a true republic, a republic that is supposed to stand for legislation by representation. President Obama's victory only garnered 52% of the vote meaning there is 48% of the population who disagree with the "change." We have become a country obsessed with legislating all facets of our life.

Our freedoms are being eroded away at enormous rates in the name of fixing problems or being sensitive to every issue. Reagan had it right when he said "government is not the solution to our problems, government is the problem." It is time to throw everyone in Congress out. I do not care who it is. If they are an incumbent in the next election, they need to go home and rethink how they have treated our country, its citizens, and the Constitution. We need a new Congress full of freshmen who represent the people and uphold our basic rights. The power needs to be given back to the states and local communities. The Federal government needs to go back being a place to settle intrastate issues, protecting our boarders and national security, keeping up with foreign relations, and maintaining the value of our currency.

The local communities and state governments are better suited to handle issues. They know the problems and issues facing us. If I wanted to contribute as a tax payer to the unemployed in Michigan, I would move there. I picked the community that best fit my lifestyle and beliefs. If the Federal government keeps up with the current pace, we will all be living under one set of regulations with no escape.

My mantra for 2010 is "Throw the bums out!" Who is with me?

It's Been A Wild Month

Today is the first time I have posted in about a month. I have been really busy with work, school, and the family lately. However, I have been keeping up with the fast paced changes in Congress. All I can say is wow, these are truly some whopper changes we are facing.

I want to start with health care since President Obama is pushing to get something passed before the fall. I do not like any of the proposals so far. My biggest gripe is none of them address everyone paying their own way. I do not like the idea of potentially having to pay a higher rate so someone else can have a lower rate. I do not like the idea of Congress and the President have a direct influence in my medical care.

At least with Blue Cross Blue Shield, I can bring a civil suit against them. I am forbidden to sue the Federal government. I know, we can sue a particular agency. However, do you really think Congress or the President is going to allow a lawsuit go through without their influence if it has the potential to affect their health care policies. For instance, if Medicare denies a claim for a life saving procedure. A law suit could potentially open the flood gates for everyone to get the procedure. With Blue Cross Blue Shield, I have not had any claims denied. I had to pay higher costs when my son had to be taken to the emergency room.

Second, what if Blue Cross Blue Shield came up with a plan where I had to pay a higher rate so someone else could pay a lower rate all based on income. This is exactly what Congress is proposing with their public option. Even a smoker would get the same rates as non-smokers.

We have 535 members of Congress. How come 535 lawmakers cannot come up with a proper health care solution that addresses the real issues without causing massive changes to the 85% of Americans who do have coverage? Out of all of the plans, I have not heard one person talk about consequences of their plans.

What about costs? Has anyone been shown any figures on the cost of premiums for individual or family plans? I currently pay around $350 a month for health insurance where my employer covers another $950 a month. In all of the plan, I make too much income to be granted a lower rate. What happens to me if my employer pushes its health insurance to a public option or a co-op? I do not have the money to make up $950. This does not include my dental or eye care plans. If the government enforces a mandate, I will essentially be forced into bankruptcy by the people who are supposed to represent me.

Lastly, when is Congress or President Obama going to state the facts about the costs? There is a big difference between health care and health insurance. Our health insurance is based upon the laws of averages and risks. It is a pool of money paid into an account to pay for the health care of a collective. The insurance companies average out the health care costs of the participants to determine the premiums. Rather than creating a new health insurance plan, Congress needs to focus on bringing down cost of health care. I doubt they will go after tort reform since the trial lawyers contribute a lot of campaign money. However, they can create a governing board to standardize the way charting and billing is done similar to IEEE for computing. We also need to enforce preventative health care. The majority of the costs come from people going directly to the ER rather than focusing on doing things to ward of illness such as diet and exercise.

Friday, the House passed the Cap and Trade bill by a vote of 219 to 212. The bill is 1,200 pages long with a 300 page amendment or payoff for votes that was added at 3 AM Friday morning. This bill will cripple our economy and make the Al Gore's of the world very rich since they are invested in selling carbon rights. All I hear out of Congress is the companies will be the ones paying for Cap and Trade. Are we really that naive? Do they really think a company is not going to pass the costs with an increase in the prices of their products?

We are already looking at the potential for hyper inflation and increased costs for everything because of the borrowing. Now, we are going to be faced with even higher costs to pay for carbon emissions. We will also see our manufacturing move to places like China where there are not limits on emissions.

Do not get me wrong, I am all for cleaner air. However, I do not buy into the global warming effects. The Earth goes through continuous climate cycles. Even Peta stated that we could remove the equivalent of a half million cars off the road if every American gave up chicken for one meal a week. I do think there is a link between the pollutants in the air and the allergies we all experience.

Again, how come 535 members of Congress cannot come up with a reasonable solution towards moving us to a cleaner energy source? The administration is all about solar and wind power. However, solar and wind will not sufficiently produce enough energy to power the country. Solar panels require an exorbitant amount of water to maintain. Has anyone thought about the effects of this on our drinking supply? Both require a direct element to function. It is not always sunny and windy outside. Why is the administration down playing hydrogen fuel cells? Is it because their supporters will make their money in solar and wind? President Obama cut the funding for hydrogen fuel cells when he came into office even though the technology is further along than solar and wind power.

What happened to nuclear power? It emits steam. Yes, the spent fuel rods are not exactly play toys. However, the technology exists to recycle and safely store them. One nuclear power plant can power the homes of 650,000 Americans. Our politicians are pushing us back to the dark ages as long as Congress and the administration stifles innovative ideas so they can push for solutions that will only affect the wealth of their contributors.

So much for having a short post. I will need two or three more to really get into the specifics of health care, health insurance, and clean energy such as insurance company profits and plug-in cars. Hope you enjoy the light reading.

Politics And Michael Jackson

My drive home turned into a "where were you when" moment last Thursday. I was listening to Mark Levin when he broke into a story coming over the AP wire about the passing of Michael Jackson. It had only been a few hours earlier when I saw were Farrah Fawcet had passed. I could only think of how June 25th was truly a tragic day. We lost two great icons. Then I started thinking how Michael Jackson affected the world.

I remember when I got my first Jackson 5 album. I remember buying the Thriller album from Columbia House Music Club. While I was not a maniac Michael Jackson fan, I enjoyed his music. Michael Jackson was one of the great talents. He transcended all of the political boundaries and created his own world. He was a kid who never knew how to grow up. He looked at the world through the eyes of a child.

Michael Jackson met with countless politicians from all countries including the famous trip to the White House with President Reagan. He was honored by President George H. W. Bush as the artist of the decade in 1989.

If only the politicians could have seen the world the way Michael Jackson saw it. Would we have the suffering that exist today? Would they continue to be fueled by their egos and power rather than helping a child make it to adulthood? As adults, we understand why there is suffering. Children just wonder why there is pain.

Michael Jackson felt that pain because he never quite grew up. Maybe we all need to take a step back and reflect on our own childhood days. The children of the world will grow up one day to become the next generation of leaders. I think we can change their attitudes by creating a sense of self worth rather than allowing them to see all of the war and devastation. A child who is shown the generosity of others will hopefully grow up to return the generosity to the next generation.

By changing our culture, we can make the world a better place for our children. Michael Jackson influenced many. He helped countless children and was even listed in the Guinness Book of World Records for supporting more charities than any other pop star. Children are the future of our world. Giving them hope for a better life is our only chance for true change.

The Sunday Circuit June 7th,2009

I like reading the political blogs. I highly suggest the weak of heart refrain from this. The CNN Political Ticker has a very rabid group. The one thing I notice is most bloggers seem to post out of anger towards a party rather than talking about the issues at hand. This is really starting to concern me. With the advancement of the technology and the web, the outside fringe elements of society have managed to bring their polarization of society into the main stream. This got me wondering. Has society become so disenfranchised with small issues that we will never be the nation that stood as one during World War II? Have the political parties gone too far with allowing the fringe elements to control their philosophies?

I do not see the United States standing united again. During World War II, our citizens lined up to serve this great nation. If they could not fight in the war, they worked in the factories making equipment. Everyone worked together to make our nation superior through hard labor and advanced innovations. We stood up as one nation united under the Stars and Stripes and said we would go down as one if needed.

Now, fast forward to today. In an attempt to micro manage all of the smaller issues, society has forgotten about the big picture. We have forgotten that our country is in a crisis. Rather than working together and rebuilding what is broken, we have decided to focus on taking political sides. We have let our political parties decide the best options rather than working together to come up with solutions that not only fix the big picture but also serve the best economical interest of society. We have forgotten how to work.

Society would prefer take sides on not being paid enough rather than taking competitive wage.
We label anyone who opposes our opinion as a hater or un-American rather than understanding the issues. We choose to demean the corporations and businesses who provide us jobs rather than support their goal of making a profit.

Society has become a bunch of hypocrites. We are hypocrites when we buy a foreign product over a US product because of cost. We are hypocrites when we refuse to acknowledge that the other party might have a better idea that benefits all Americans and our country. We hypocrites when we complain about the job losses even though we do not support the US businesses.

It is time to take a look at the big picture again and strive towards achieving the goals that will get us there. We need to realize that all of the smaller issues will not get solved. We need to learn from history and take notes on the industrial revolution play book. The backbone of our country was once the American worker until they got polarized by the fringe elements of society. Unless we can regain our attitude as a best in class producer of manufacturing jobs, we will remain a society broken into segments focused on small issues.

Empathy On The Courts

Empathy is the latest term being thrown around lately by the political parties. It is a term that essentially means being able to understand what another person is experiencing in their life. The Democrats think we need more judges who are empathetic. Republicans believe a judge should not display empathy. However, the question still remains. Should a judge show empathy when making a decision?

I think the answer is no. An judge who makes rulings based on empathy is showing bias towards one party over another. For instance, say we have a landlord who is owed several months back rent from a minority tenant and the landlord decides to evict the tenant. If the judge rules in favor of the tenant because they can relate to the harsh times the tenant has been through, the judge is clearly showing class bias by saying the landlord does not have the right to evict a tenant solely based on the background of the tenant even if it means the landlord possibly losing their property to foreclosure.

A judge has a responsibility to keep a clear understanding of the legal issues at hand and the rule of law. Showing empathy to a person, group, or cause can emotionally change the decisions made by a judge even if it means disregarding the rights of the other party.

Lady Justice is blind for a reason. Our courts are supposed to represent all that is fair regardless of race, gender, sex, and background. We need courts to base each and every case strictly by the law and Constitution even if it means ruling against an issue they are empathetic towards.

The Latest Eminent Domain Fight: Flight 93 Memorial

It probably sounded like a noble cause when Congress instructed the National Parks Service to build a memorial at the crash site for Flight 93. This rural Pennsylvania area will forever be remembered for its role in the September 11th attacks. However, the surrounding land has now become a beacon for the eminent domain debate.

Eminent domain was created as a way for our government to build roads and infrastructure. Since then, the government has abused this power to assist private businesses build shopping malls, high end houses, and anything else they feel will bring in higher taxes.


The government is looking to acquire an additional 500 acres of land including the crash site to build the $55 plus million memorial around the crash site. While the government attributes the use of eminent domain to failed negotiations, the property owners are stating there were not any negotiations.

The Constitution guarantees us the right own property. The government should not have the right to take over anyone's property without their full consent. This is a blatant abuse of our individuals rights. In this case, the original law stated that the land could only be purchased from willing property owners. The law was later amended to allow eminent domain by adding a line in the 2007 Consolidated Appropriations Act.

I think we all would like to see a memorial. However, eminent domain should not be allowed for condemning private property just so the government can build the memorial. More than likely, the case will go the an empathetic judge who sympathizes with the family members and allows the park service to take over the property. This does a grave injustice to our freedoms as property owners.

We need to revolt against eminent domain before the government decides to take all of our property. What will be next? Maybe it will be the government needing our property to payoff the national debt. Who is going to stand up for our rights to keep our land?

The Tuesday Roundtable (May 26, 2009)

Well, another week has gone by and it is time for my Tuesday Roundtable. A lot has happened over the past week, especially today.

The big news in the United States is the appointment of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court by President Obama. It did not take long for some questionable comments to start appearing. She has a taped speech where she stated that the courts are a place for making policy. This is a very damaging comment since the Federal appellate courts are solely responsible for interpreting law based on the Constitution and no more. If a law is vague in nature, it is not the court who should clarify it. It should be sent back to the legislature for an amendment. This quote alone would push Judge Sotomayor into role of an activist judge.

To make matters worse, she also stated that a persons background based on race and gender plays a key role in making decisions. Race and gender have no place in the judicial process. We are all granted equal rights. The singling out of a specific class by the courts undermines these rights. I use this basis for my opinion on gay marriage. Nobody in our country should be excluded rights afforded to others. Marriage, in itself, is not a right afforded by the Constitution. However, I see the governments role in allowing a legal relationship or civil union as something that can be allowed.

We cannot look at Judge Sotomayor on a few public quotes alone. Her body of work will tell us how she will uphold the Constitution. She does not have a strong record when her cases have made it the the Supreme Court with most of the decisions being overturned.

I see the Sonia Sotomayor appointment making it through the Senate Judicial committee fairly quickly. However, the Senate needs to slow things down when it comes to the floor and have a fair debate. I do not like the idea of President Obama and Harry Reid pushing to get her nomination passed quickly. We see where the stimulus bill has gotten us.

Congress needs to thoroughly evaluate her credentials and legal responses for the public to see. The Republicans will hurt themselves if they treat the proceedings the same way the Democrats handled the Robert Bork hearings. However, an open discussion on Judge Sotomayor's background is needed. This is a lifetime appointment. We do not need a judge who thinks they can legislate from the bench outside of the elected politicians, especially from the US Supreme Court. These judges cannot be held accountable for their decisions by the voters.

In other news, the GM bondholders appear to be headed the same direction as the Chrysler bondholders, bankruptcy. This is a good thing. I completely disagree with the anger shown by many on the message boards saying the bondholders are a bunch of rich people who need to take their losses and move out of the way so the government can do as they please. The managers of these bond funds are representing the investors who poured their hard earned retirement money into these companies. What the bloggers fail to realize is that almost all of us own bonds in GM and Chrysler through our 401K and pension plans. It is not just the rich who are losing out. I applaud the bond fund managers for saying we should not have to settle for pennies on the dollar.

Lastly, Iran and North Korea are at it again. Both are defying all sanctions and calls for diplomacy to forge ahead with their nuclear capabilities. These are very dangerous countries with tyrannical leaders. We can only wait so long before we have to pass up on diplomacy for more extreme solutions. Allowing either of these countries to poses nuclear weapons will lead to the loss of innocent lives. I will go into this further in a blog by itself later this week.

I hope everyone had a great Memorial Day and remembered the fallen heroes in our military. They truly deserve the recognition.

Obama Versus Cheney

Wow. Who would have thought Dick Cheney's political career would still be going? As much as we despise him, you have to like his passion for standing by his convictions. This man is really angry about the way President Obama is handling the national security and rightfully so. Cheney was the architect behind our post September 11th policies. Within a matter of weeks, if not days, Obama destroyed 80% of them.

Today, we had dueling speeches from both Vice President Cheney and President Obama stating their cases for and against the post September 11th policies. Both speeches gave compelling arguments for their stances. Obama pointed out that the 20th hijacker was prosecuted in the criminal courts. Cheney mentioned September 11th twenty plus times.

In my opinion, both missed the point. We have an international publicity issue coupled with a national security issue that is rooted with the worst terrorist attack on American soil in history. There are terrorists housed at Guantanamo that other nations refuse to take. The Guantanamo terrorists are not American citizens that have rights under the United States Constitution. Besides, these are people who want to destroy our Constitution and way of life.

How do we address the issue? Bringing the terrorists to the United States for trial in our criminal court systems will afford them rights that they have not earned. Who wants a Super Max prison in their neighborhood much less one that houses some of the most evil people on the planet? Leaving the terrorists at Guantanamo, on the other hand, leaves us with an international black eye which Obama is trying to fix.

Last week the President stated he is willing to continue with the military tribunals in a modified fashion. I am still trying to figure out the modified part considering the terrorists where allowed access to lawyers, the ACLU, and the American Red Cross under President Bush. Yes, the tribunals are slow, but this is because of the sensitivity of the classified documents. Besides, the right to a speedy trial is only afforded under the Constitution and these terrorists are not privy to the same rights I was born under and uphold as a citizen. Before you bash me, I know the Supreme Court said they have a right to habeas corpus. We also cannot send them to the international courts without the possibility of exposing our intelligence gathering secrets to other countries.

Maybe we can gather all of the families who lost a loved one on September 11th and lock them in a room with one terrorist at a time. We can give them the evidence for each prisoner and let them decide the fate. I suspect the terrorists would be sent to a grave before the decision is ever made.

Ultimately, President Obama is going to have to decide which is more important: our national security or our popularity in the world. We know where Dick Cheney and Bush stand on the issue.

The Tuesday Roundtable (May 19, 2009)

Well, today was an exciting day in the changing landscape of the United States government. Our economy is still in the tank and the politicians feel the need to pass credit card legislation that will have a dramatic effect on the responsible credit card holders. There is also news that when GM goes into bankruptcy, the good assets will sold to a government owned entity for around $6 billion with the $15 billion in government loans being forgiven. The remaining bad assets will be sold off through the bankruptcy proceedings. Lastly, Congress is pushing legislation calling for 35 mpg on all new cars.

You have got to love those plastic credit cards. They have played a large role for the US having a negative savings rate. However, they can also be very valuable when used responsibly. I love taking advantage of the free points. I love not having an annual fee. I love paying off the balance at the end of each month without paying interest. I love having a low interest rate when I do need to carry a balance.

The new credit card legislation is aimed at curbing fees and interest rate hikes for all consumers. This essentially creates a ceiling for all credit cards. Those who are above or at the ceiling today are the card holders who have bad credit or racked up some late payments. What does this mean for me? For starters, the banks are going to have to lower rates for the card holders above the ceiling. Because of this, the banks will start to lose their profit margin. Thus, they are going to have to increase the rates, reduce free points, and add annual fees on the prime customer base to make up the lost profit. I guess I should send a letter to Congress thanking them for making me subsidize the irresponsible credit card holders.

It looks like our government will be making it official soon and turn General Motors into Government Motors with the UAW as the main stockholder. Where in the constitution does it say the government has the right to spend tax dollars to buy businesses? Congress is getting into an area where they will not only regulate the business, but also own the business. This severely handicaps the other automakers in drafting future legislation since Congress will be looking out for their own entity above the others. GM will essentially own the playbook of the other car makers and be able to stifle the competition. Best of all, this is being done with our hard earned tax dollars. I think we should ask for our $15 billion back.

If this comes to fruition, am I going to be penalized as a consumer for buying a Honda or Ford? Does this mean GM cars are going to be priced lower than the competition with tax subsidies? I cannot wait until someone files a law suit questioning the legality of this. Oh wait, I forgot that the Supreme Court will be stacked in favor of the administration.

The best for last. The combustion engine was a wonderful invention. It has gradually evolved over the years into our main source of transportation. Now, Congress expects us to be able to push it to limits that are out of this world if you like big trucks or SUV's. There is a reason big vehicles do not get high gas mileage. It is do to weight. This legislation will force automakers to produce much lighter and smaller vehicles.

Lighter and more compact cars are not feasible unless you like to park a lot. I have two young children. I need a large vehicle as the only way for me to travel and carry everything I need with them. First, you have the suit cases and cooler. Then you have the toys, blankets, and games. A small car cannot hold all of the items we need for a week long trip.

However, my biggest worry is the safety of my kids. A larger vehicle is going to withstand an accident many more times than a compact car. In order to make cars lighter, the automakers will be forced to use more composite materials and less metal.

The whole miles per gallon debate would come to a halt if Congress would put more resources into hydrogen and fuel cell technology. Yet, this administration feels the need to cut hydrogen funding. Battery powered cars need electricity which is produced mainly by coal powered plants. Does anyone realize that a hydrogen car emission is water? How much cleaner do you want it? Where is the logic when GM and Honda already have hydrogen powered test vehicles?

Don't get me wrong, I am all for credit card legislation, GM's survival, and cleaner air. It just does not need to come at the expense of the tax payers and consumers.

Well, this is my first Tuesday round table. I hope you enjoyed it. I look forward to the comments.

Help me get the word out about my blog so we can continue to have a meaningful and logical debate on the issues. Maybe one day, we will be passing the future legislation.

The Clinton Gingrich Years

I have been watching and listening to a lot of the heated, verbal assaults lately between the Republicans and Democrats lately. One person keeps showing up, our good friend Newt Gingrich. Unfortunately, Newt got caught up in his own Lewinsky scandal and was forced out of Congress after bashing Clinton severely for his misdeeds.

This got me to thinking about government spending. I did some research on the Clinton surpluses during the time when the Republican soundly ruled Congress and the Democrats owned the White House.

From 1997 to 2001, our government had a budget surplus of $236.2 billion including the Social Security numbers. This averages out to around $59 billion a year. The surpluses can be largely accredited to the income tax and the Social Security tax increases when Clinton first got into office along with tax increase from George H. W. "Read My Lips" Bush.

What really sticks out in my mind is how Clinton and Gingrich each had their own agendas and settled in the middle for the good of the country. Clinton wanted health care. Gingrich wanted smaller government. In the end, we got a balanced budget, welfare reform, and over 17 million new jobs which is far more than the 9.5 million new jobs created under Reagan.

Then I really started thinking. What would have happened if the Lewinsky and Gingrich scandals had not occurred? Would the Republicans have kept control of Congress? Would Al Gore have won the election?

While I am not an Al Gore fan because of his radical environmental views, I think our country could have continued the trend of surpluses and prosperity. I also believe Gingrich would have continued as the Speaker of the House. I will save the environment opinions for later.

I do not think having Al Gore in the White House would have prevented September 11. However, I believe he would have taken a softer approach on the terror war and stuck with going after Bin Laden much like Clinton and using sub based missiles to attack terrorist training sites. This approach is much cheaper and less costly that the $80 billion a year we are spending on Iraq and Afghanistan.

Sure, he would have pushed the environmental changes that would jeopardize business profitability. Yet, Al Gore would have had stay in check with the Republican Congress to draft middle of the road legislation that benefits both sides of the political spectrum. I think we would have had Social Security and Medicare reform. There would have been legislation for better fuel efficient cars, the one environmental clause I think Al could have passed. Lastly, I think we would have continued operating with a budget surplus reducing our deficit.

Best of all, Barney Frank would have never been chairman of the House Finance Committee touting that Fannie and Freddie are in good shape. This alone would have helped us avoid the current housing collapse and recession.

I guess I should have called this piece the "What if? The Gore Gingrich Years". What your thought?

My Congressional Paycheck

Not too long ago Barney Frank suggested that rules limiting pay for financial companies should be applied to all financial companies regardless of whether or not they received government funds. If this passes, Congress will greatly expand their control over corporate America. I also seriously question the Constitutionality of this.

How far is Congress going to take controlling salaries at private companies? First they will cut the executive pay, then they move to limit the pay of all employees of financial firms. Next, all of the talented employees leave to other sectors where they can obtain a salary worthy of their talents. Congress will then have to dictate the salaries for all companies so everyone is on equal standing. Talent will no longer be a factor because Congress will have enforce limits on promotions and changing jobs to prevent a lack of employees in each sector. Think of this in terms of raising the starting pay to get more people to work in a certain field like medicine.

Does all of this sound familiar? It sounds a lot like Communism to me where the government dictates which industries are viable and the ones that are not.

I am disregarding the comment below. I based it on a coversation with a co-worker and someone pointed out that it is inaccurate. My appologies.
China and the good, old Soviet Union comes to mind where the government dictates the career and field of study for every person. They mandate where you will work. It sounds to me like our country is moving towards Communism.

This scares the heck out of me. I work for a financial institution who did not take any of the bailout money. I fear Congress is going to tell me I am overpaid and have to take a pay cut. If I am forced to cut my salary, is Congress also going to bail me out when I can no longer pay my mortgage and other bills? Are they going to tell me that I cannot receive a bonus each year even when my company posts exceptional results year over year?

Congress is on a power trip that is going too far. The Constitution no longer has merit. They are rewriting our rights almost every week. Before you know it, we will all get our paychecks signed by Barney Frank.

Torture?

This whole torture debate has gone too far. Yes we used water boarding as a means to interrogate terrorists, all three of them. Yes we kept documents on how many times we used this method on them, a couple hundred times. Yes we kept a medical doctor and psychologist in the room while we did this. Yes we limited the amount of mental stress that we could place on these terrorist. We provided air conditioned shelter, food, and amenities for the terrorists.

I wonder if these same terrorists provided a medical doctor for Daniel Pearl. Did they give him medical help when they cut off his head? Did they treat Mr. Pearl in a humane way when they cut off his head? Do you think the mastermind of September 11th thought about the well being of the people inside the World Trade Center? No they wanted to murder as many innocent Americans as possible to make a statement.

By all means call what the CIA did to the terrorists torture. Yet, our country took all the precautions to prevent lasting physical harm to some very twisted murderers. Would it be called torture if we had dropped a missile on these same terrorists blowing them to pieces?

War is ugly. There are some things our country does to save innocent human life that we just do not need to know. I like knowing that I can go to work without the fear of someone setting off a bomb. Can this be said for the people in Spain riding the train in Madrid or a bus in London?

Our country is special because we have protected it. Without these protections, we will begin to face the same issues as countries in the Middle East, Europe, and Asia. I am proud of my country for doing what was needed to prevent further attacks on American soil. I remember September 12th and the way we all stood together as one. We rose up from the ashes and took the battle to the terrorists.

To make this a political game because your party decided it did not like being out of power is a travesty. We need to protect the liberties and life we have in this country at all costs even if it means dunking a murderer under water for a few seconds.

Pro Responsibility

The news today is all about the Notre Dame graduation and President Obama. Why must a special day for graduates be turned into a political debate of Pro Choice, Pro Life, Pro Abortion, Pro Children, or whatever other Pro options are out there? This is a time to honor the accomplishments of students over the past few years of their lives. This is not a time to debate the morality of abortion.

I consider myself Pro Anti Being Pro. This is not a civil debate. Have you ever seen the Pro Choice and Pro Life crowds show up for a protest and talk about their differences? All I have ever seen are two groups separated from each by police as they yell at each other. Since when did this ever accomplish anything?

Ultimately, the issue boils down to when is a child considered a viable human being who has rights. I see one side of the argument as you want the right to do whatever you want with your body, but you do not want an unborn child to have the right to live. The other side of the coin are people who made a mistake and would rather terminate an unborn life rather than bringing a child into the world without the structure for a proper family foundation.

The abortion argument has many sides to it. Yet, we fail to debate the root of the issue and choose to express our right to argue over it. I think the most amazing thing is Jane Roe is now Pro Life. The person who gave the Pro Choice group their legal founding does not even believe in their philosophy anymore.

I have not taken a stance on the issue. If I had to chose today, I think I would chose Pro Responsibility. I take full responsibility for all of my actions. I should have to live with my mistakes and learn to live with them. Others might disagree, but there is not much of an argument for being Pro Irresponsible.

Healthcare and Me

I like my health care. I can go to my doctor when I want and have the ability to go to a specialist without an initial opinion from my primary care giver. What I like most about my health care is the fact I get to choose how much I want to pay. This year I elected a $500 deductible EPO. Last year, it was an HMO and was about $30 a paycheck cheaper. I went with the EPO because it covers a higher percentage of my costs since I am starting allergy shots.

This is a lot different than Medicare. I do not get a choice in payment options with Medicare. The government dictates the tax and applies it to my earnings. Since it is a tax, I pay a higher premium that someone who is making less than me. This is the equivalent of going to the grocery store and having to pay $5 for gum where someone else pays 50 cents because I make more money. If a convenience store did this, they would be charged with discrimination or price gouging. Why should the government be allowed to do this?

If we are subjected to a government plan, will my wife be forced to pay for Medicare premiums too even though we currently only use the family plan from my job? This would essentially double my health care costs. What happens if I want to opt out of Medicare? Will the government give me this option? I doubt it because Medicare uses my current payments to cover the expenses of recipients today which sounds a whole lot like a ponzi scheme. We can discuss this idea later.

Secondly, government should push legislation for individual health care choices rather than employer based health care. This option would allow individuals to purchase health insurance with a tax credit to cover the difference that an employer would have paid. There is some really good research on how this system would benefit and best of all, it really is a fair price where I pay the same as everyone else.

We all agree on one thing, we need to reduce the costs of health care and increase the amount of people with coverage. I believe the governments only role in this is to offer meaningful regulations for the industry. I should not be forced into health insurance or Medicare with no ability to opt out if I cannot afford the premiums or should I say tax.

Integrity and Respect

When I was growing up, I enjoyed going out to my grandparents' farm every weekend. My grandfather used to ride me around on the tractor. I got to help collect the eggs from the chickens, watch the pigs and cows, and help my grandmother pick vegetables in the garden. Of course, her garden was about the size of a typical field.

What I remember the most was riding into town with my grandfather to go to the feed and seed store. Everyone we passed would wave and my grandfather would wave back. In this small farming community, all of the people would ask how you were and talk about the latest happenings. My grandfather would buy me a Moon Pie to keep my busy while he was getting some seed or a new socket wrench.

At the time, all of this seemed like a typical Saturday routine. In reflection though, I realize how all of the people had compassion towards one another. Everyone was truly concerned with any issues that might have come up. They all had integrity and it showed in the way they interacted with one another. People displayed a mutual respect that has been lost in society today.

In the age of instant communications and high ratings, the news media has scrapped all journalistic integrity in favor of sensationalism. They will news stories based on hearsay that will appeal to the audiences even if it means foregoing the truth. The days of getting the facts straight has gone the way of being the first to accuse. The political parties are eager to take advantage of this in order to ridicule their opponents.

I miss the small town life I once knew. Even today, small towns are facing the same issues as big cities where television and the Internet has eroded the moral integrity that once existed. The respect we once cherished has been replaced with an attitude of arrogance and appeal.

My grandfather worked hard to provide for our family. He made sure we had the basic necessities in life. He taught me how having integrity and respect you will also have trust. I do not trust our media and politicians any more. Until our country can regain the moral soul it has lost, we will not be able to have the great society that once was our beacon of hope.

Fuzzy Math

I saw where the government expects the United States deficit will be $1.84 trillion dollars (
$1,840,000,000,000.00) this year. My first thought was this is only 1/3 of the total budget. Then I decided to do some fuzzy math. There are 525,600 seconds in a year. The deficit alone equates to the government spending $3,500,761.04 per second every day for an entire year and this does not include interest.

Just imagine if the government took this money and did something for the housing market. They could buy:

1. Buy 9,200,000 houses at $200,000 each
2. Pay down $36,800 on the home loans for 50,000,000 home owners
3. Give a $6,133 check to 300,000,000 citizens of the United States

I would go with option 1. Rather than bailing out the banks and car companies, the US government could purchase 9 million homes in towns and cities across the country. They can then use the homes to help lower income and homeless residents with the following conditions:

1. Pay the greater of $200 a month in rent or 10% of their government benefits
2. Maintain the house to neighborhood standards
3. Remain drug free
4. Obey all local ordinances
5. Find a permanent full time job in two years which would trigger a small $100 increase in rent

This would bring over to $2 billion in revenue on a yearly basis for the government. It would also give people the incentive to find a job reducing their need for government assistance and medicare.

The end result would move many of the troubled assets off the books of the banks with a fair market price. This would also free up capital for lending. Neighborhoods would become safer with a reduction in abandoned homes. The economy would return to prosperity.

Getting It Right!

I ask myself everyday what it will take for the people of the United States to get it right. If you read the political blogs like I do, you might think we have already fallen off the cliff and are just waiting to crash into the abyss. Everyone seems entrenched on their party lines with no room to give on any issue. The Democrats are emboldened to the extreme left. The Republicans are lost in the woods trying to find a voice. Somewhere in the middle are those like me looking to find what is right.

Our country was founded on absolute principles meaning that government can only do so much. The Constitution lists all of the things Congress cannot do in order to ensure each and every citizen maintains explicit rights. I feel as if the line has been crossed by government and our individual sovereign rights have been violated. We no longer have a government that represents the people. It is now beholden to the power of the national parties. The Democratic and Republican parties have invaded the local elections whenever they deem necessary to maintain this power.

When was the last time a state election was confined to the people of just the state? Take Virginia for example. Both parties have set their eyes on winning the Governor's office by throwing all of their money and public relation machines behind their candidates. They are sending people into the state from all over the country to get out the message of the party.

Many time candidates are hand picked by the national parties to run for office in a state. These candidates do not look to the voters for accountability. They look to the organizations who funneled them resources for direction. They are puppets of a system that is destroying the very foundation that our country was built upon. Our so-called leaders represent the interest of groups looking to gain from the power they hold.

It is time for the voters to get it right. Our country is in severe trouble. We need to find local leaders who understand the issues in our communities and put them in office. Our representatives should be held accountable to those they are supposed to represent. The voter has to take control of our individual freedoms as granted by the Constitution. We need to bring back accountability to the voters before our country actually falls off the cliff.

Holding Our Government Accountable

I sit back reflecting upon the founding of our government and the mockery the Democratic and Republican parties have brought upon it today. The most outrageous abuse of power recently is the pushing forward of the "speech or debate clause" by Nancy Pelosi. She is sheltering Congress from investigations by the Department of Justice based on separation of powers. All of this comes at a time when several members of Congress have been cited for ethical and legal misconduct.

This is a travesty that prevents us from holding the people who represent us accountable via the legal system. We, the people, need to reign in the politician who look at their elected office as a source of power. If we cannot trust the government to properly investigate corruption, we have a duty as voters to elect them out of office.

What happened to the politicians who listened to the people they represent? The majority say what they need to get elected and then follow the party lines. I want a representative who lives in my community and works to help improve my community. House members should look out for their districts. Senators should look out for the good of their states.

Corruption and greed by both parties has our members of Congress salivating over power and money. The people of the United States of America need to realize that the ultimate power lies with us every time we vote. We need to send a message to all of the politicians who think they are above the law or know what is best for the people they represent.