Did Party of "No" Save Obama From Violating Pledges to American People

In his State of the Union speech last week President Obama sounded like leftist media and political types who have labelled Republicans as the "party of 'No.'" First forgetting the blockage Democrats put on President Bush (remember the Gang of 14 agreement so Bush judicial nominees could get through the Senate? Just one example.), then forgetting that Republicans have stood in the way of nothing since Democrats have had enough votes in the Senate and House of Representatives to pass any legislation they want. So because one or two Republicans would not cross the aisle and join the Democrats in bad legislation, legislation so bad it could not get passed with super majorities in both Houses, the Republicans are the party of "No."

It seems to me that the Democrats are the party of "maybe but only if you bribe me or my constituents or special interest group campaign financers." By sticking together as a party the Republicans have actually been helping President Obama from not violating more campaign pledges than he already has.

Throughout the campaign Obama pledged bi-partisan efforts if he were elected. His first year in office his only attempt at bi-partisanship was practically moving in with GOP Senator Olivia Snowe to get her to support the Senate's version of health care reform--in the Democrats eyes all you need is one vote and they can scream, "we had bi-partisan support!" Again in the State of the Union Obama said bi-partisanship was needed for Washington to work properly. We all know the definition of bi-partisan here means, "they need to put aside their principals and pledges they made to their voters and support our legislation without any changes."

Republicans rightfully rejected this definition of bi-partisanship, and Senator Snowe took back Obama's guest key. As a result the Democrats, if they were going to pass health care would have to do so alone. The bill is theirs for all the credit and all the blame. Because no health care bill has been passed, nor Cap and Trade, Obama still technically has not violated his pledge to voters to be bi-partisan. If Snowe had fallen to Obama's pressures then he, and the Democrats would have falsely screamed "bi-partisan support!" and looked like fools to the American people.

On Friday President Obama made the very unusual, and I believe unique, move of appearing before the Republican Caucus House Retreat in Maryland. He gave a televised address and had a question and answer period. Having just lit the GOP up in his State of the Union it was a political gamble for Obama to make this appearance and he gets plenty of credit for doing so.

At the GOP retreat, Obama admitted that the Republicans opposition to the Senate health care bill, and the subsequent inability of the House to pass the Senate version (thus far) has allowed Obama to keep another of his pledges to the American people (thus far).

Said Obama to the gathering:

We said from the start that it was going to be important for us to be consistent in saying to people if you can have your--if you want to keep the health insurance you got, you can keep it, that you're not going to have anybody getting in between you and your doctor in your decision making. And I think that some of the provisions that got snuck in might have violated that pledge.

So had the Senate and House Democrats passed the health care bill that Obama and his Administration were strongly pushing, and denigrating all who opposed it, then they would have passed a bill that was a consistent pledge of the President: no bill would violate the insurance you currently have, no bill would take away your doctor, no bill would get between you and your doctor, and no increase in taxes or fees for your insurance.

So if you hear anyone saying that Obama is doing a decent job of keeping his campaign promises and pledges to the American people you can tell them, "he can thank the Republicans for that because he and the Democrats in Congress wanted to violate those pledges."

But don't expect any credit to be given to the Republicans for making this President stick to any pledges made on the campaign trail, or since taking the oath of office.

Creating Unemployment: Squeezing America's Economic Engine

I don't think our company, Stratis Financial, is much different than many companies in America. A few guys were dissatisfied with their existing employer, had no stake in the company or its future, a few issues came to a head soon everyone was looking to go somewhere else. Meeting to talk about our woes, one person says, "I'm looking into just renting a small space and going it alone." Pretty soon we were engaged in what would be needed to start a company where we all had a stake. A few months later we opened with leases for space and furniture. We financed computers, and took out equity loans on our homes to capitalize. We made personal guarantees on our financial agreements and also with our vendors. We were personally risking our personal savings, equity and credit because we believed in our vision and each other.

Finally ready and opening our doors in two locations we had four people on payroll that had to be paid on the 15th and 31st of every month. We went four months before any of us took any commissions for ourselves, continually returning our earnings from our sales back into the company. Our wives supported our vision and made sacrifices at home. We struggled but we slowly continued to grow.

We had a boom period that we used to pay debt down and off, update and upgrade equipment and technology, invest in our company. This was followed by a slow leak and then a complete bust. But we knew the drill, we tightened our belts, re-arranged some schedules and worked hard to ensure minimal impact on our staff and their families. We again used equity lines to capitalize the company and ensure operating funds. We struggled, but we kept our doors open and our staff kept their jobs. With the slow business we would have been justified in restructuring, laying people off, closing an office, consolidating. But we love the people we work with, the have pictures or our children mixed with pictures of their own. We are a family, we look out for each other. We struggle, we try to minimize their struggle.

Now we are growing again, because we struggled and stayed open we are attracting people who want to work with us instead of their current companies--if they are still open. But we are not rushing into growth. We are slow and steady and making sure everyone fits. Our over riding motto in bringing people into our company is "would you have them over to Sunday dinner?" It's not just about how many sales you can do, how fast you can do the work, it is about how well you do your sales and how well you do your work. Does the client come first and right on top of that quality? We are open because we adhere to our core values and principals. Better someone not get a loan they cannot afford than we get a closed deal and a commission. We are still open because it works.

We are using the growth of this year to reinvest in our company, retain earnings so we can be prepared for the challenges that continue to hit our business and industry and be prepared for 2010 and beyond. We are a small business, we need to be ready for what is coming next that could slow down our sales volume through regulations, policies and politics. We need to ensure that our business model allows our people to still have jobs and we are still able to help our clients attain and retain homeownership.

We are a small business but not unlike millions of other small businesses throughout the United States. The statistics vary but companies that employ less than 100 people account for approximately 35-40% of the jobs in this country. In the current economy the number of small businesses and self-employed individuals starting companies is actually growing. Out of work and tired of using their creative talents and skills for someone else the inner-entrepreneur and American spirit of adventure leads them to give it a go. They are risking their personal finances and credit to provide jobs for others so they can achieve their visions. They are bringing sack lunches to work and hurting other small businesses--restaurants--by cutting back on their nights outs so they can ensure they can make payroll in five days. Most of them are family run and employees are like family. Benefits like insurance and retirement are provided and shared contributions are made. Labor laws are followed and concessions made because of the personal nature between ownership and labor. Sometimes it is a struggle, but everyone works together to ensure doors stay open, customers are taken care of and everyone can pay their bills. In times of crisis personal loans are made.

They are the backbone and the economic engine for America and its economy.

Under the Pelosi health care plan recently passed by a bare minimum of votes most of these small American businesses are now categorized at "big business" with the definition being total payroll. If a business has a payroll of $500,000 or more it is considered "big business" and under the legislation fully responsible for health care insurance for their employees. It doesn't take much for a company to reach $500,000 in payroll, look at the family owned restaurant with an executive chef, a couple of dishwashers and busboys, some wait staff, personell upfront, perhaps employing fifteen to twenty people; simple math puts the average salary at just over $2000 per month. Consider the small manufacturer specializing in auto upholstery with fifteen employees and specialists in pattern making, sales people, shop manager, how hard is it to get to $500,000 in total payroll? Add 10-15% to the costs of the employer and what has to happen? maybe now we have 14 employees, or 13.

Under the constant push to pay for programs President Obama and Democrats seem to have set the income limit for "America's wealthiest" at $250,000 per year, frequently the verbage is $250,000 for a married couple. Consider the small business owners who have their ups and downs, on the up years they pay down and pay off debt incurred in the down years to keep their business open, continue payrolls, sacrificing to ensure those dependent on them are safe. In the up years profits are plowed into the debt and savings to repay and reload. While our family has not experienced this sort of income, it would be nice to be able to and know that our sacrifice and hard work to get to this income level is not instantly penalized so that we can support wasteful spending in Washington. Support another TARP or stimulus package. Many people see that income level and think of CEOs and attorneys and doctors and other "rich people." In reality a couple that has an upper level government employee and a tenured teacher with several years and creditials reach that mark as well. But it is the small business person who pays the taxes at the expense of their business.

More taxes for small business means less reinvestment in their business. Higher fees and costs means less money available for raises or bonuses. Higher costs imposed on small businesses means someone is probably losing a job. Small business owners have it all on the line, personal guarantees on leases, their monthly income directly tied to company profitability, payroll that at times comes out of their own pockets. Like a mom who feeds her child first and herself second, America's small business owners pay their dedicated and loyal employees first and themselves second. At some point however if it is between their child's education account or a receptionist, we are going to have to answer the phone ourselves.

Sadly I do not find it ironic but rather normal that in front of the cameras Congressional leadership and the White House are talking about jobs, jobs, jobs and trying to spin and rationalize the abomination of waste that is becoming evident from the stimulus package. Telling America they are working to create and save jobs while unemployment rises and they push more and more debt onto the balance sheet. Inside away from the microphones they are voting for more taxes on the very people that create and save jobs. Inside conference rooms they plan how to increase taxes on those who write payroll checks and decide to lay off or hire depending on their business revenue and cash flow.

History has proven time and again and in economies across the world that lower taxes on business leads to higher employment. Ronald Reagan's tax cuts from Jimmy Carter's oppressive marginal tax rates led to a massive economic recovery and slashing of unemployment. George W. Bush's tax cuts led to record tax revenue for the Treasury and over 95% of Americans being employed. Give American business, especially small business, more cash flow and they will reinvest it in their companies and more people will be employed. Take away cash flow, take more of the revenue and people will lose jobs.

With one year left until the 2010 midterm elections watch how the incumbents and party in the majority spin the discussion on jobs. They will rail against the "rich" and how we need more for the "common worker" and defend taxing employers to help workers. In the end increasing taxes on small employers that sign the paychecks for 40% of Americans means fewer paychecks.

Somewhere today a few guys will get together to talk about opening their own company. They will commit to leases and pulling together funds to put together some operating capital. They will hire some workers. They will make a huge leap and take a risk to start a small business. Let's hope they succeed....despite the intentions of their elected leaders.


For a look at small businesses cropping up in Long Beach, particularly Bixby Knolls check out the article Leslie had in this week's Uptown Gazette "Women Dominate Uptown Business Scene"

Just Some Questions

Below are questions I have asked myself throughout the past week. Instead of writing what my answers to them would be I am interested in any answers you may have, or additional questions you have asked yourself.

For the week starting Monday August 3, 2009 here are some things I asked myself:

Do astronauts still drink Tang?

Should healthier employees pay lower premiums than unhealthy employees in the same company health plan?

Have you ever been actively involved in a protest?

Have you ever worn shorts to work?

This question from crowd at Majority Leader Hoyer’s Town Hall, “I’m a registered Democrat, why are you trying to rush health care reform through in two to three weeks when it took President Obama six months to pick a dog for his kids?”

Do you give someone “props” or “kudos”?

Do you think Cash For Clunkers is a good use of tax revenue?

Given that the Democrats have significant enough majorities in both houses of Congress to pass whatever they want, is it disingenuous or ludicrous to blame Republicans for the health care legislation being in trouble?

You favorite weekend footwear, laces, Velcro or slip-on?

Did the person third in line to the Presidency really equate Americans exercising First Amendment rights Nazis?

Has any couple become members of the 186 mile high club?

How come the talking heads on CNN and editorialists for the New York Times did not call those who filled the streets of San Francisco, New York and Los Angeles, “crack pots” and “operatives” but feel it is okay to give those labels to people attending small meetings throughout the country asking questions of their Representatives?

Cremation or burial?

Is respect for the exercise of First Amendment rights applied equally?

Best summer movie this year is? Best summer movie ever?

What is your measure of “success?”

If the health care legislation currently in Congress is so great why aren’t its proponents spending time, energy and media time focusing on whatever may be positive in it instead of denigrating those of us opposed?

What is the last concert you went to?

Whenever someone says ‘It’s not that cold, you’ll get used to it, do you?

Do you remember your first roller coaster ride?

Cookies or Pie?

.

Villains And Victims

It seems the blame, the victimization, the broad personal attacks, the characterizations, and negative attacks that so fully consumed Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and many of her Democratic allies in Congress and across the country during the Bush Administration are fully ingrained in their character and basic political philosophy. Now that they have full control of Congress and the White House they cannot stop with the finger pointing and name calling. Only instead of their vitriol being directed at a President they hated and spent eight years trying to undermine it is now being directed at the American people. Every issue that arises in our country has someone to blame, someone they can castigate and someone they can attack with character assassinations. In the process the culture of our country takes another step from personal responsibility and accountability. While many Republicans are certainly guilty of the blame game and character attacks, typically they are directed at political rivals and opponents rather than huge swaths of the American public.

When the credit crisis started, Washington immediately put anyone working on Wall Street or in the financial industries in the category of selfish and greedy people looking to make money any way possible. If you listen to commercial radio you have heard the ad from the law firm looking for clients for their loan modification services in which President Obama is blaming "unscrupulous mortgage lenders" who caused all the problems in the housing industry. During a press conference on the Democrats health care proposals Obama accused doctors of taking tonsils out of little children and performing other procedures just so they can make more money. Last week Pelosi told reporters that independent insurance agents "are the villains in this," "this" of course being the problems with our health care system.

From obesity, to gang violence, to the environment, to household economics, to illiteracy, to health, every problem has a victim and every victim is given someone to blame--usually someone faceless. The problem is that no one in America is faceless. Every industry or segment of the country that is the target of some politician or political party's blame consist of good, hard working Americans. But this is lost on those who feel it is easier to promote their political agendas by characterizing some of their constituents as helpless victims who have no choice or ability to make decisions and providing a big, bad target to blame.

Mortgage brokers and independent insurance agents operate in very similar ways, they just offer different products. By having a variety of larger companies that actually fund mortgages or write the insurance policies with whom they have business arrangements, they find the product that matches the abilities, personal histories and needs of their clients. Because they have a variety of competing wholesale lenders or insurers vying for their clients, they also have the ability to shop the rates for the clients to find the best combination of price, service, and product. Our company uses insurance agents to help keep the health insurance costs down for all our employees while still being able to offer a variety of plans from which to choose. Another agent shops our Errors and Omissions insurance annually to make sure we have a product that covers our company at an affordable premium. Life, health, business, auto, home, we have many different insurance products we all use in our daily lives. Local insurance agents sponsor our Little League teams, take out ads in the high school basketball programs, donate to local charities and are at the PTA meetings. Hardly the villains Pelosi wants you to think they are.

The same can be said for mortgage brokers. Or real estate agents. Or local restaurants. Pick a small business in your community and you can find members of that industry or company throughout your community. Are their bad mortgage brokers that screw(ed) people? Yes. Are there bad real estate agents that push(ed) homes on people? Yes. Are there bad insurance agents that over-insure clients? Yes. Are there financial advisers that steer clients to higher commission products? Yes. Every industry, every sector of the economy, every community has those who see as their primary purpose to squeeze as much money out of the market place and their clients as possible. And in every industry these people constitute a very, very small minority of those who work in the industry.

Think of the many different people and companies that provide services for you and your family. Your family doctor, your insurance agent, your financial advisor, your attorney, do you think there primary concern is to help you with your decisions and problems or to take as much of your money as they can? Obama, Pelosi and many of their fellow Democrats think it is the latter. They do not realize that every industry they characterize as "unscrupulous," every nameless person they call "villain," every group they accuse of operating from "greed" consists of Americans that are working hard to provide for their families and improve their communities.

With the health care legislation that was rushing through Congress now stalled until September at the earliest we can expect an August filled with commercials, speeches and appearances on the Sunday morning talk shows vilifying health care providers as charging too much, insurance companies as making too much and employers as providing too little. Your doctor, your neighbor and your boss are all to blame for your health care difficulties. By victimizing you and other Americans and blaming big groups they are setting up an argument based on class warfare, "Us" versus "Them" and everyone is "Us."

At no point in any of these arguments or commercials will any of "Us" be shown taking responsibility for ourselves. My health issues are not because I eat too much, drink too much, smoke too much, exercise too little, have genetic defects, engage in risky behavior, or do not bother with routine check ups. My financial issues are not because I wanted too much, did not stay in school and get a degree, spend and consume too much, borrow too much, save too little, or cannot keep a job because I'm always right and the boss is always stupid. None of my problems are of my own causing because I did not read papers I signed, did not get references, found a "great deal" or did not do any research at all on the individual or company I was going to work for or with. None of the problems I am having are my own causing. I know this because that is what our national leadership is telling me. I am pissed because some unscrupulous, greedy, villainous, professional or company has purposefully screwed me over. If it were my fault I would take some accountability, but since it is not I will blame them.

Abetted by a media that loves to trot out the sob stories and victims, the political philosophy of the new Democrats is working. In California the government has become the Nanny State trying to abdicate every citizen from any responsibility or accountability providing someone to blame and enabling them to create more laws that restrict more freedoms and liberties. Washington under full Democratic control is working towards this direction as well with an objective of total government control over industry, financial services and health care. The more blame that can be placed on an industry the more right the government has to regulate the industry, the more the industry is regulated the less choice we have, the fewer freedoms we enjoy and the less personal responsibility and accountability we must have.

Freedom to succeed also means the freedom to fail. Success is not a right but must be attained through hard work and good decisions. Unfortunately the philosophy of the political majority in our Congress and White House is that the successful need to compensate the unsuccessful, that good decisions can only be made by government and that if you do not work hard and/or make good decisions you need not worry because you will be taken care of, courtesy of the government.

I am proud to be a mortgage broker and the hundreds and hundreds of families I have helped become homeowners in the past few decades. I am proud to know many insurance agents who do great work helping families and small businesses with their insurance needs and being their in those unfortunate times they need those policies. I am proud to know many doctors throughout our community who care about their patients and their health, working to help them create good habits and lifestyles for a healthier future. I am proud to know many real estate professionals who care more about families purchasing the home that fits their personal needs and financial abilities rather than how much commission they can make. I am proud to know many financial advisers who look at the long term goals and current financial abilities of their clients instead of how they can make more money.

Too bad Pelosi and Obama are not as proud of these Americans as I am.

.

Just Some Questions

Below are questions I have asked myself throughout the past week. Instead of writing what my answers to them would be I am interested in any answers you may have, or additional questions you have asked yourself.

For the week starting Monday July 20, 2009:

Why is the Obama Administration not releasing June financials?

It couldn’t be they are waiting until after Congress goes on recess to release figures that show the budget and operations aren’t doing so great, could it?

Have you Binged? (that is Bing –ed note binge- ed! As in Microsoft Bing search platform)

What percentage of health care costs are do to litigation or defensive procedures done in fear of litigation?

Are you acting stupidly if you state someone else acted stupidly without knowing the facts surrounding the actions?

How much is spell check, texting and Tweeting with the character limitations of Twitter hurting the language skills of our younger generations?

Fair food: corn dog or turkey leg?

In his press conference President Obama said doctors make medical decisions based on fee schedules, would pull out tonsils for a sore throat because it pays more, does your doctor make decisions about your health depending on how much s/he will get paid?

Are you in favor of a part-time legislature in California?

Have you watched gas prices as closely this summer as last?

What percentage of healthcare costs are because of procedures done defensively to avoid possible malpractice suits?

What is the worst movie you have seen, in the theater, in 2009?

So the California Democrats would rather cut education spending than drill off the shore of California and bring in $100 million plus?

Can you name the time and place of the last negative event from off shore oil production in California? Let’s make that the last five so we don’t have a one-time apparition, shall we?

Doesn't it make sense to clean up the waste and fraud in our existing Federal healthcare programs, i.e. Medicare and Medicaid, and solve inefficiencies there before increasing spending more than 15 times for similar programs?

Why is the United States building two nuclear power plants in India but not in the United States? Are we too good for nuclear power or is it too good for us?

What is your favorite Disney movie?

Is the happiest group in America right now Obama’s classmates at Harvard Law who will make fortunes guiding clients through loopholes and finding shelters to avoid the taxes Obama wants to impose on them?

Have you ever not shaken someone’s hand when offered theirs?

What is your favorite summer memory from when you were in elementary school? Junior High? High School?

Does your family have a summer vacation tradition?

Can you name a better sound than two young siblings playing by themselves and giggling uproariously?

Have you seen our $18 million dollars?

Cookies or Pie?

.

"Above All, Do No Harm"

Most Americans are familiar with the concept of the Hippocratic Oath, the Oath which our doctors take to commit themselves to the well being and health of those they treat, "Above all, do no harm." This is not the oath taken by members of the United States Congress nor the President of the United States. Their oaths are to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. To preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, sometimes you must do harm. This must be the guiding force for President Obama and some Democrats in Congress as they are pushing for passage of a Health Care Bill that will dramatically alter the United States health care systems, economy and culture. And it must be done by August because members of Congress go on vacation for the month.

So far the 111th Congress has passed, and President Obama has signed, some pretty significant legislation that was bulky, expensive beyond historical proportions, and unread. As we saw with the "Stimulus" bill passed early in this session of Congress, billions of dollars were spent on projects that almost no members of Congress knew about--except those shoving in their pet projects. The resulting bill did not resemble in spirit or in actuality the intentions given to the American people: to provide Federal funding for infrastructure projects that are "shovel ready" that will provide jobs for Americans. Since passed little of the money has been spent, projects across the country that were "shovel ready" are now on holding pending several additional layers of red-tape, and unemployment is approaching 10%. Last month the House passed the Cap and Trade Bill which is very harmful to American businesses and is very expensive, and went unread by almost every member of the House before they pushed it through with a bare majority vote--needing eight Republicans to cross the aisle for passage.

In 1993 then First Lady Hillary Clinton presented a health care reform package to Congress that was over 1000 pages and very complicated. Members of Congress read the bill, found many flaws and eventually decided it was not something their constituents wanted. In 2009 Democrats presented a health care reform package to Congress that is over 1000 pages and very complicated. Members of Congress are barely reading the bill and are expected by Congressional leadership and the President to pass it in the next week. One can hope that the 111th Congress will follow the lead of the 103rd Congress and actually read and deliberate the bill before them. Given the rushing to vote on major bills thus far my hope is scant.

Health care in America is very complicated with many layers, there is private insurance, Medicare, Medicaid, Medical, COBRA, medical groups, HMOs, PPOs, and all you want is to have your child vaccinated or treated for bronchitis. Most Americans are in good health, have minimal interaction with the medical profession, have good insurance obtained through their place of employment and seeing rising premiums despite their good health because of government regulations that say premiums cannot be higher for one employee than another. So at work you pay higher premiums for the poor health choices of co-workers who may have issues due to their over-eating, smoking, drinking, etc. As well you pay additional taxes to pay into Medicare and Medicaid/Cal to pay for the health care of those who do not have insurance, they are covered at very little or no cost whenever they visit the doctor or a hospital. Most Americans are not thrilled by their higher taxes and premiums due to the poor decisions of their co-workers and the uninsured they are covering, but they pay and move on.

From an employer standpoint health care is very complicated as well. Regulations state that how one is covered all are covered. Many companies have one or more people dedicated just to managing the health insurance and other benefits provided to their employees. In America if you own a company you are also responsible for your employees health care, why is another topic, but personal responsibility for one's health care has been taken from you the individual and given to your employer. Thus your employer selects which insurance company will provide your insurance and which plans will be available to you. As mentioned because it is a group plan your premiums are predicated on the overall health of the group, lowest common denominator dictating premiums for the most healthy. The employer must keep track of the premiums, ensure the insurance company is helping employees, keep track of when new employees are eligible and keep track of the COBRA rules for employees whose employment is terminated either voluntarily or involuntarily. Most employers take on this burden as a cost of doing business and understand to be competitive in the marketplace for quality employees must have a good insurance plan. Some employers pay all the premium for a worker and his/her family, others cover just the employee's portion, but whatever is covered for one must be covered for all.

Under the bill currently being rushed to vote in Congress for health care reform are provisions that many employers will welcome from a profit standpoint, while probably dislike from a personal standpoint. In the bill companies will be able to drop their company insurance plans and save money on their health care costs. Depending on the total payroll of the company, any company not providing insurance for their employees will have to pay from two to eight percent of the payroll to the government who will provide their insurance. So no more COBRA, no more keeping track of premiums, no more having personnel specifically on the payroll just to deal with insurance. Further for many companies paying even an 8% additional payroll tax is cheaper than the premiums they are paying now for their employees. Further, in the plan is a provision to tax the health care premiums that are paid by the employer and the employee--no more pre-tax benefit for health insurance. By getting rid of the insurance plan the employer saves money in premiums, labor resources and costs to track insurance and payroll taxes. Simple math and a look at the bottom line dictates getting rid of the company plan. Suddenly you are federally insured and subject to the guidelines, policies and procedures for your healthcare as dictated by the federal government.

President Obama has said that if you are in a private insurance plan and have a family doctor you will not see any changes or additional cost because of the bill in Congress. This is simply not true. There is no way this plan with costs in the trillions, which will alter the relationships, compensations, premiums and requirements for employers, doctors, hospitals, pharmacies, drug companies and patients will not impact the status quo. Further at a cost of several trillion dollars who is going to pay for this? The "rich"? Guess who becomes "rich" once the government needs to pay a bill that has now grown to over $12 trillion before this health care bill?

If you own a company you must contact your Congressional representatives and tell him/her you will support their re-election if they rush to vote on this bill before it can be dissected and debated. If you are insured by your company you must contract your Congressional representatives and tell him/her you will not support their re-election if they rush to vote on this bill. No one wins by Congress taking the most complicated issue before our country, its health and health care delivery, and "solves" the issue in less than two or three weeks.

Obama repeatedly said on the campaign trail that he wanted bi-partisan support for major issues, that he would change politics in Washington and reach across the aisle for input and ideas in crafting solutions to such major issues as health care. Well we have seen that for him bi-partisanship is Republicans agreeing with him, bi-partisanship is presenting one solution across the aisle and criticizing and debate, bi-partisanship is shutting the opposition out of meetings where legislation is being crafted. This issue is too big to shove through Congress. It impacts every single American, except those in Congress with their own health care system. It impacts every person reading this post. Contact your Congressional representatives and tell them to slow down. Read the provisions, speak to your constituents and do what they want.

When dealing with health care one should remember, "Above all, do no harm."


UPDATE 7-22-09 1:00 pm: Thanks to sister Sharon for providing this link which contains a list of "tweets" from blogger at Economic Policy Journal who has read the 1000 page bill and posts his findings. A sample: "PG 203 Line 14-15 HC - "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax"" and "PG 50 Section 152 in HC bill - HC will be provided 2 ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise" and "Pg 425 Lines 17-19 Govt will instruct & consult regarding living wills, durable powers of atty. Mandatory!" Read the entire list put together so far at EconomicPolicyJournal, real policy lifted right out of the bill Obama is pushing to have passed by August 1st.

.

Who Controls Your Health?

President Obama has said that he wants a comprehensive health care bill through Congress by October. "Comprehensive health care bill" covers a lot ground and when most people hear it they think of universal health care in the form of a Federal health insurance program to cover those currently without insurance. To many this is one of the single biggest issues in our country--the millions of Americans without health insurance--and it is there goal to ensure every American is insured. But "comprehensive health care" can, and will, go far beyond insurance, count on any such bill to include regualtions on the food and restaurant industries, health care providers, labs and any sector of the country that in somehow impacts personal health. It will offer another opportunity for Obama's growth of the Executive Branch and Federal Government into our daily lives--this time under the guise of health.

The focus by the media, and those in government who craft the bill, will be on the health insurance component. Count on Obama's media machine, and his allies in the Mainstream Media, to touts the benefits of a universal insurance plan and that every American will have health care. Count on them to ignore the details, as they did for the stimulus package and his budget. Having seen first hand and upclose the financial intricacies of health care delivery in our state I am very certain the current system is seriously flawed. But with this knowledge I am even more skeptical of any program that comes out of Washington to "fix" our health care system, and any program that provides universal health care run by Washington. No amount of positive spin from the policy makers or the media will allay this skepticism.

Obama is saying that any national health insurance will be paid for by the "wealthiest Americans," his favorite source of cash. The group of Americans that already pay in the neighborhood of 80% of taxes will be asked to shoulder a bill that is now priced at $1.2 trillion. To further pay for the package will be employers, large and small, either through health care providing mandates or penalties--I'm sorry, contributions--to a health care pool. On top of this is a proposal to stip away the tax deduction for health care insurance premiums, so those employers who are now paying all or part of their employees medical insurance premiums will no longer be able to deduct those premiums from their income tax, or if they are allowed to do so the recipients--the workers--will have to pay taxes on the benefits. On the one hand Obama is throwing trillions of dollars in "stimulus" funding into the economy to create jobs, on the other he is proposing increasing taxes on everyone who works, and/or their employer, which will result in job losses due to higher operating costs.

When it comes to taxing working Americans to pay for the health care insurance of others, I ask: Do we not already pay a tax to provide health care to those without insurance? Look at your paycheck, do you see deductions for MediCal? For MediCare? What is the purpose of these deductions? To fund health care for uninsured Californians and Americans.

Further our hospital and health care system is also self-funding health care for illegal aliens who are treated the same as those who are benignly clasified as "self-pay." The law, and morality, mandates that hospitals treat anyone who walks, or is transported, in the door, whether they have the ability to pay or not. To stay in business hospitals raise their charges to try to cover the amount of free care they are providing from those who are paying through their insurance coverage. This increases the costs to the insurance companies, who in turn charge higher premiums. In the end, through a very flawed system that is costing the health care system the most, everyone who needs treatment gets it. Realizing this is very broad stroked and there are Americans with serious medical situations without coverage that are struggling, overall the vast majority of those within our borders have their most basic health care needs met--whether insured or not.

So that brings us to what will change? If there is a national insurance program what will change in our health care delivery? Besides even more government beauracracy than there is today. Besides even more resources having to be spent by hospitals and doctors to hire employees just to bill the government and follow up when they do not pay--as happens today. Besides have someone at a government desk with no medical training making a decision as to whether a medical procedure is necessary or not. Besides increasing the taxes on every American with a job--not just the "wealthiest among us." Besides that what will change? A base level of health care insurance for all Americans currently without insurance? That we already have but is being funded by the hospitals?

A major reason our health care system is screwed up today is government intervention. In California the state is so involved in health care that it mandates how many nurses have to be on shift for every patient that is in the facility--whether it be two in the morning or two in the afternoon--thanks to union influences on health care legislation. Government is involved in micromaging what equipment can be used in hospitals, where it can be placed and how health care programs can be run. Regulations mandated by elected politicians with only the advice of the lobbiests with the most money, not the most experience. Patient health is not nearly a primary consideration. Need proof: Martin Luther King Hospital.

Ask yourself how will the overwhelming majority of Americans be better off by more control of our health care system taken out of the local hospital, out of your doctor's office and out of your own control and put into the hands of politicians who are already making decisions based on campaign contributions and not what is best for the rest of us. Ask how a new level of spending in excess of $1 trillion, on top of the $2+ trillion already dedicated in five months, will be paid for if not by you and your taxes. Ask how our economy can absorb yet more debt, force yet more taxes on employers, and expect to add jobs? Ask how a system that currently has a fraud rate of about 10% will not maintain that same rate of fraud when the spending increases to $1 trillion (that would equate to $100 billion in fraud)?

My solution to the health care crisis is somewhat simplistic. First, any hospital that is licensed in the state is eligible to receive MediCal/MediCaid/MediCare funding. Second, all payments are the same to all hospitals for the same procedures and treatments, no more contracting with specific hospitals. If all hospitals have to take all patients when they come in, then all hospitals should be reimbursed the same for the same treatments. This includes private insurance--no more separate contracts for every group and hospital. Third, no more system where the more patients a facility or state has under MediCal/MediCaid the more funding they get from MediCare; fund based on need not on what is already being billed. Fourth, use Oregon as a model with promoting treatment and payment of preventative medicine first, encourage well-checks and screenings on a regular basis. Fifth, for those uninsured with employment when they file their taxes they are billed for a health care account; for those without a job their other public benefits are adjusted for the medical coverage provided.

There will always be a small minority of our populace that will not work, that will not pay for insurance, that will not take care of themselves. Our most fundamental question must be: to what extent must we burden the responsible to care for the unresponsible? I know this opens a big can of worms, especially among the most liberal among us, but that is the most basic question. How much must you pay to care for the drug addict, the habitual alcoholic, the woman who sees no problem in multiple children with multiple fathers, what is your personal responsibility through your hard work and success to support those among us that are least responsible? Obama and his allies think it is all your responsibility and the health care bill going through Congress will show that philosophy.

.