Lately I have heard a lot about Sarah Palin, the former Alaskan Governor, and VP candidate. Most people would assume, me being conservative,that I support her for president in 2012. Let me set the record straight. With all respect to Palin, I do not support her for President. Not now, nor have I ever.
One reason I do not is that she just is not experienced enough. Before becoming Governor for the past three years, her leadership experience was as extensive as being a mayor of a town comparable to the size of my own school district. She was also on the PTO for many years. I am not bashing the PTO, but it simply cannot be a prerequisite for Commander in Chief of the greatest country the world has ever seen.
Furthermore, Palin lets her social and religious views cloud her judgment in many cases. I am a strong spiritual man, but I realize certain instances cannot include my beliefs. Mandatory prayer in schools and refusal of abortions after being raped are a couple examples. Gay marriage is on that list as well. All of which, Palin would disagree with me.
I have a lot for respect for Sarah Palin, but I cannot, and will not support her should she run in 2012. Were she to run for Congress, I could back that instead.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Thursday, August 13, 2009
My 5 Point Plan
After voicing my opposition to Obamacare last night, I would like to propose a brief plan of my own.
First, I would also like to make another point known in Obama's plan. Under Obamacare, a small business that employs say twenty employees or more, and does not offer them health insurance, would be forced to pay up to an 8% tax. Put that on top of the other tax increases Obama is pushing, and many states could have a top rate of 60%. These businesses could include the mechanic down the street, or the burger shop on the corner. They simply cannot afford this.
Now back to my point. I resent people that criticize but don't put forth ideas of their own, so here is my plan of sorts.
First, pooling small business health care. Nowadays, large corporations receive huge discounts on health insurance for their employees because of the volume of people to be insured. If we could pool together 100 small businesses consisting of up to maybe 50 employees each, then the mechanic down the street could afford to insure his employees.
Second, open state boundaries to health insurance consumers. Right now, states regulate who can and cannot offer insurance within their borders. This decreases competition and creates near monopolies in some states. Just as we in Michigan can purchase car insurance from California, we should be able to do the same for health insurance.
Third, electronic medical records. Storing our records online with our insurance companies would ensure tests are not repeated unnecessarily, raising costs for everyone. It would also decrease the use of paper and help the environment.
Fourth, tort reform. Doctors repeatedly test for every possible condition, not because they believe a patient may have that disease, but because they are afraid of getting sued by a disgruntled patient. This would reduce hospital costs, and reduce costs doctors pay for their own insurance, thus reducing how much we pay them.
Fifth, tax credits for all families to purchase health insurance. This credit would increase as well if the family receives annual physicals for their entire life. This is preventative because it is much cheaper to treat cancer if we find it in the first 6 months, rather then when the person is collapsing and sure to die.
So there ya go, let me know what you think.
First, I would also like to make another point known in Obama's plan. Under Obamacare, a small business that employs say twenty employees or more, and does not offer them health insurance, would be forced to pay up to an 8% tax. Put that on top of the other tax increases Obama is pushing, and many states could have a top rate of 60%. These businesses could include the mechanic down the street, or the burger shop on the corner. They simply cannot afford this.
Now back to my point. I resent people that criticize but don't put forth ideas of their own, so here is my plan of sorts.
First, pooling small business health care. Nowadays, large corporations receive huge discounts on health insurance for their employees because of the volume of people to be insured. If we could pool together 100 small businesses consisting of up to maybe 50 employees each, then the mechanic down the street could afford to insure his employees.
Second, open state boundaries to health insurance consumers. Right now, states regulate who can and cannot offer insurance within their borders. This decreases competition and creates near monopolies in some states. Just as we in Michigan can purchase car insurance from California, we should be able to do the same for health insurance.
Third, electronic medical records. Storing our records online with our insurance companies would ensure tests are not repeated unnecessarily, raising costs for everyone. It would also decrease the use of paper and help the environment.
Fourth, tort reform. Doctors repeatedly test for every possible condition, not because they believe a patient may have that disease, but because they are afraid of getting sued by a disgruntled patient. This would reduce hospital costs, and reduce costs doctors pay for their own insurance, thus reducing how much we pay them.
Fifth, tax credits for all families to purchase health insurance. This credit would increase as well if the family receives annual physicals for their entire life. This is preventative because it is much cheaper to treat cancer if we find it in the first 6 months, rather then when the person is collapsing and sure to die.
So there ya go, let me know what you think.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Universal Healthcare
I have steered clear of this issue for quite a long time. I don't like this issue because of the divisions it brings, and anger not towards just policies, but towards individuals as well. I was intent on continuing to focus on other issues in the public, until, when reading parts of the bill, I stumbled upon a certain passage. In Section 102 of HR 3200, the federal government laid the groundwork for the utter destruction of private insurance.
After year five of the HR 3200's implementation,someone who leaves a company to become self-employed, a very common practice, he or she would not be able to purchase his OWN PRIVATE PLAN!! He/she MUST enroll with the federal government. Are you kidding me?
In addition, after year one of HR 3200, all employer plans must be identical to the public option. This leads to every employer asking... why? Why should I continue to provide private insurance for my employees when they can get the same insurance with the government, on the taxpayers dime. Again, we will see private insurance gone within my lifetime.
Obama consistently speaks of the public option competing with the private plans. He is not being truthful. He knows full well no company can compete with one that is subsidized by the government. When the private companies are left out to dry, they will close their doors, lay off all their workers, and suffer under universal health care.
I beg everyone out there to take a stand, and make your voice heard. Call Mike Rogers or Mark Schauer, tell them you cannot support the ousting of every American economic principle we have. Where private competition is good for all, and government should not, and cannot, steep across certain boundaries. These boundaries are beginning to blur, and the time is now to take it back.
After year five of the HR 3200's implementation,someone who leaves a company to become self-employed, a very common practice, he or she would not be able to purchase his OWN PRIVATE PLAN!! He/she MUST enroll with the federal government. Are you kidding me?
In addition, after year one of HR 3200, all employer plans must be identical to the public option. This leads to every employer asking... why? Why should I continue to provide private insurance for my employees when they can get the same insurance with the government, on the taxpayers dime. Again, we will see private insurance gone within my lifetime.
Obama consistently speaks of the public option competing with the private plans. He is not being truthful. He knows full well no company can compete with one that is subsidized by the government. When the private companies are left out to dry, they will close their doors, lay off all their workers, and suffer under universal health care.
I beg everyone out there to take a stand, and make your voice heard. Call Mike Rogers or Mark Schauer, tell them you cannot support the ousting of every American economic principle we have. Where private competition is good for all, and government should not, and cannot, steep across certain boundaries. These boundaries are beginning to blur, and the time is now to take it back.
Monday, August 3, 2009
Rep. Conyers
Representative John Conyers (D-MI) is an embarrassment to our state. He was recently heard stating the unimportance of reading the thousand-page health care overhaul bill currently before Congress, and even his own committee. He didn't feel like Congressmen shouldn't read the bill, because, "what's the point" if you don't have two days to read the bill, and a team of lawyers to understand it. First of all, nearly all of his fellow members of Congress are lawyers, so let's be real. I am sure Conyers could get together for a reading party with his lawyer friends. Second of all, Conyers is taking a month long vacation as we speak, and he cannot find two days to read possibly the most radical bill ever introduced in American society. It's embarrassing and juvenile. The repercussions of this mentality of laziness and entitlement will be devastating not only to many families, but to our very Republic. Congress is not only supposed to be a watchdog of the other 2 branches, but of their fellow members. If we do not watch what they put in their bills, and they do not as well, we are looking at corruption far worse then Dodd allowing the AIG bonuses to fo through with taxpayer money.
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Race in America
Racial issues are often too sensitive to address, not for me however. And if you disagree with anything here, please tell me, and I'll address it. I feel however, that this push for political correctness is actually a roadblock to true and honest diversity, as well as a danger to our safety and security.
The arrest of prominent African American, Professor Gates, who teaches at Harvard and is a personal friend of President Obama, is a perfect example. When neighbors saw a man jimmying a lock on Professor Gates home, they alertly called the Cambridge police. When the police arrived, Professor Gates, instead of being grateful that the police responded to a possible robbery, he lashed out, saying "what? you harassing me cuz I'm a Black man in America?!." If it was me, I would be grateful that my neighbor had the courtesy of calling the cops, and that the cops took it seriously. Mr. Gates then proceeded to show the officers his ID, which honestly should have been enough, but the officers were still skeptical. After that, Gates became irate and loud. Then prompting the officers, including a Black officer on the scene, to arrest him for disorderly conduct, charges that were later dropped. To assert that the officer was racist is ridiculous. This officer actually led a class against racial profiling, and has the entire police force behind him. This only fuels more racial tension.
Even worse, this is a very dangerous policy. Imagine if tomorrow, a Black man is seen jimmying a lock, and the cops are called. When they arrived, the man said he lived there, a common story, and the cops, fearing a lawsuit like Cambridge may face, decide to leave. Later you return home to find your house empty, and the cops arrive suspected you of robbery since they just saw the Black man who "lived" there.
It is dangerous.
Now racial profiling is a horrible crime that is all too relevant, but, using it in every case involving a questionable decision by an officer in a tough situation. It divides at a time when we all must unite.
The arrest of prominent African American, Professor Gates, who teaches at Harvard and is a personal friend of President Obama, is a perfect example. When neighbors saw a man jimmying a lock on Professor Gates home, they alertly called the Cambridge police. When the police arrived, Professor Gates, instead of being grateful that the police responded to a possible robbery, he lashed out, saying "what? you harassing me cuz I'm a Black man in America?!." If it was me, I would be grateful that my neighbor had the courtesy of calling the cops, and that the cops took it seriously. Mr. Gates then proceeded to show the officers his ID, which honestly should have been enough, but the officers were still skeptical. After that, Gates became irate and loud. Then prompting the officers, including a Black officer on the scene, to arrest him for disorderly conduct, charges that were later dropped. To assert that the officer was racist is ridiculous. This officer actually led a class against racial profiling, and has the entire police force behind him. This only fuels more racial tension.
Even worse, this is a very dangerous policy. Imagine if tomorrow, a Black man is seen jimmying a lock, and the cops are called. When they arrived, the man said he lived there, a common story, and the cops, fearing a lawsuit like Cambridge may face, decide to leave. Later you return home to find your house empty, and the cops arrive suspected you of robbery since they just saw the Black man who "lived" there.
It is dangerous.
Now racial profiling is a horrible crime that is all too relevant, but, using it in every case involving a questionable decision by an officer in a tough situation. It divides at a time when we all must unite.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
