Supreme Court Likes Big Money

It is clear that the Constitution needs amending to return our Republic to the voters after the Supreme Court enshrined big money with free speech rights given by our Constitution.  The framers of the constitution never anticipated the way our political parties have become the key money part of deciding who gets elected.  When a foreign millionaire can buy an American Corporation and then have it donate unlimited amounts to help the election of anyone that pleases them and then have no disclosure of where the money came from, it shows our system has become corrupt.  When men from Kansas fund long broadcast messages, that contain any number of lies, to slander ideas and politicians in Minnesota,  something is awry.  Hot button agendas are pushed to the public, while hidden ones are kept secret.  Divide and conquer is the mantra of both parties.  Hate mongering is the result.  There is one way to get back to the ‘unite and prosper’ attitudes of the 50’s and 60’s.  Electioneering is a special form of speech.   The 28^th amendment should read: “Notwithstanding the First Amendment, efforts to influence elections to public office in the United States and its’ subdivisions shall be limited to those who are able to vote in said election.  Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. “  This would provide a massive reallocation of power in this country and would get special interests back to advising and out of contributing money.

All These Health Insurance Experts

After 40 years insuring human beings, I am amazed at the sudden appearance of hoards of health insurance experts as it relates to Obamacare.  The word ‘Insurance’ usually puts people to sleep, but all of a sudden everyone seems to like their insurance company?  The Health insurance industry’s lobbying is the most effective in the United States.  No politician can fight an industry that  can put a dozen agents in every congressman’s office with just a few hours notice.  I still don’t know how America’s Health Insurance Plans, (AHIP) was able to participate in the writing of ObamaCare while at the same time donating $83 million to The US. Chamber of Commerce to run ads attacking the plan using the Chambers name rather than their own.  They can use one side of a story to make people angry, and it’s obvious that angry people don’t think with clear minds. Consider:

1.     Announcing that ObamaCare will increase insurance premiums.  What else is new.  Insurance premiums have gone up virtually every year in memory.  Now the insurance companies can blame someone other than themselves for this.

2.     Scaring people that a government bureaucrat will be deciding the type of medical care you receive.   Right now you have a private insurance company bureaucrat deciding what medical care you will receive.  Not only that, but he may get pay increases by keeping claims down.

3.     Health insurance company profits have been huge in the two years since the  passage, and analysts generally are bullish on future profits.

4.     With the exception of large self insured plans, all insurance is regulated by the states.  Each state has different rules and procedures for insurance companies.  That Obama didn’t know this is deplorable.

5.     Social insurance is provided by the government and allows us to manage risks that pertain to all of the population.  The Armed Forces insures the country’s security, covers all risks and is paid for by all of us.  Social Security, The FDA, OSHA, and Medicare are other examples.

6.     Private insurance companies are formed to manage risks of groups of people, over and above what the government covers, and does this by underwriting , (selecting the best risks and not covering the worst).

7.     The Canadian system is in fact at least 10 separate systems.  One for each province.  Some do a great job, others not so good.

8.     The insurance companies are allowed to keep 20% of premiums for “expenses”.  Medicare is able to do it’s administration for 4% of premiums.

9.     ObamaCare has Republican roots that can be traced from Romney to Nixon.  It is nothing like what the Democrat’s had ever proposed before.

10.  Because all 50 states have laws that require hospitals to serve the uninsured in their emergency rooms, we’ve had the most expensive kind of universal health insurance coverage for a decade or so.

11.  The way most hospitals pay for these uninsured ER visits has been by corrupting their billing system by charging different prices for the same procedures, because of deals they make with separate insurers, causing the highest billings to go to the uninsured.

12.  Because the government under ObamaCare will take care of the catastrophic claims, the private insurance companies have no risk to manage.  Without underwriting, the insurance companies are not taking part in the practice of insurance, they are simply transferring money.  Is it any surprise that United Health Care is putting so much effort into their Optum Bank?

Until the American Voters realize that the special interests are interested in maintaining their power through divide and conquer tactics I see little chance for positive change.  The biggest problem with health insurance today is the insurance companies.  As long as they are at the table in the discussion of Americas Health we will be spending 15-20% more than we need too.  The real problem should be finding jobs for those who are currently employed in this frequently highly paid and unnecessary industry.

Many of us would agree that the current US political system is rife with corruption.  Unfortunately we seem to spend our time blaming someone else for this situation.  When it is impossible to win a debate with logic, the only way left is with insults and name calling.  What we need to realize is that we are all at fault for our current state because we have delegated our personal power to our special interest groups.  Interest groups, like all organisms have a first priority for survival.  This survival instinct leads to the propagation of lies, that when told often enough get to be believed.  As long as these lies are propagated, we have no opportunity to use reason to solve problems for the nation as a whole because the “experts” in the field are telling us crap that will keep them comfortable and in power.  Consider:

1.     Who is going to take your gun away?  We are told it is the President!  I want to know who will come to your door and ask to have your gun?  The only people willing to take this job will be suicidal psychopaths.

2.     Because emergency rooms are forced to treat anyone that walks in, we already have universal health insurance coverage.  It is the most expensive form of health coverage that guarantees that this well paid part of our economy will continue to grow.

3.     The business of “business” is not to make money.  The business of “business” is to provide goods and services to the population. 

4.     When taxes go up on the rich, they tend to look for additional tax deductions.  Because all job creation expenses, that I am aware of, are tax deductible it isn’t logical that raising taxes on the rich stymies job growth.

5.     Jews, Christians, and Muslims all worship the same God, they just do it differently.  So many “believers” have obviously never read the scriptures, but rely on their “teachers” that are more concerned with this world than the next.  The Quran forbids suicide, killing of innocents, and other believers.  It also affirms Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, which neither Muslims or Christians seem to follow in great numbers.

6.     The media is kept profitable by making us believe that one side would be buying Cadillac cars for our welfare recipients and the other believes that “I’ve got mine, screw you”.

7.     Getting angry about an issue isn’t a good thing.  Good decisions are seldom made in anger.

Our founding fathers created our Constitution based on a geographic democracy.  Until relatively recently our elected representatives were beholden to those who voted them in.  They are now beholden to those who fund them.  We have a system that allows a foreigner to give any size gift to any American without the recipient having to report the gift, if it stays overseas, and only report the earnings on the gift (no earnings, no report).  It is also now possible for a foreigner to buy or form a US corporation that can then donate to any campaign it wants.  I’ve heard surprise, not that it was possible to buy a representative, but that it could be done cheaply.  This state of affairs has turned many issues that should be local into national issues that are nothing but divisive.  For example, gun control in Idaho makes no sense but in the large inner cities it is a different matter.

It used to be that lobbyists were available to advise on issues and Parties were a means for the parliamentary process to  be efficient.  They are now concerned with election funding.  Because of the power this builds, the people involved are much more concerned about keeping that power than exercising it for the benefit of the country.  

I believe we need an “American Spring” that guts the electoral power of the interest groups, including the political parties by passing a constitutional amendment limiting the support or opposition to election campaigns to those able to vote in the election.  This can only be accomplished from a grass roots level as there will be a large fight against this by all those who stand to lose power.  Many good people are staying out of politics because of the funding available to opponents if they take a stand that doesn’t sit well with one group or another.  Some bad people are getting into politics because of the funding available to them when they assert certain positions.  This is not the way the country is supposed to work.  I hope that we can change it.

 

How Stupid are we?

The upcoming election will be a good test of just how stupid the American People are.  Have we really drunk the Kool Aid from the “Big Money” lobbies, or do we know how to think for ourselves?  In an effort to keep the status quo, we have been fed a large number of emotional issues that have very little effect on our personal lives, but fuel the anger that hides reason.

Do we really believe that getting rid of thousands of government workers will lower unemployment?  Do we think that the President can do anything meaningful to jump start the economy?   Do we really think that we can substantially reduce the deficit by cutting discretionary spending and not raising taxes?  Do we think that politicians that pledge not to cut taxes don’t force others to raise taxes? 

We really don’t understand how insurance works when we talk about Social Security as a savings account rather than an insurance reserve.  We’ve had private accounts since 1974 (called IRA’s).  If we really believe that universal health care is a human right (50 states have passed laws providing for universal emergency room coverage) then why do we let insurance companies take 15% or more of every health care dollar?  I’d very much like to learn how we can have “for profit health care” and not raise prices, increase treatments while ignoring cures, or hope for more sick people!

Does anyone actually believe that the government could even try to take anyone’s guns away?  Why do some think that making abortion illegal will stop them from happening?  Of course all the efforts put into making teaching a less than honorable profession will make it easier to pull the wool over the eyes of a lot of future voters. 

If politicians spent more time on what they have done and were planning on doing, rather than lying about their opponents, we could see more clearly.  We have to remember that when the politicians have raised millions of dollars, those millions are all going to the media to buy TV, print & radio coverage.  Getting the big money out of politics will not be done by either the politicians or the media. 

We could get the big money out of politics by passing a constitutional amendment:"Notwithstanding the First Amendment, efforts to influence elections to public office in the United States and its; subdivisions shall be limited to those who are able to vote in said election.  Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."

I'm Outraged

I have tried to ignore the divide and conquer tactics of our politicians but find myself more and more outraged. I am outraged that my freedom of religion is under attack by people trying to pass laws that state when life begins. I am outraged by Christians being upset when I wish them Happy Holidays, am I to know they’re not Jewish, Muslim, Hindu or Buddhist? Did I try to insult them with this? My religious freedom is challenged when I have to sit through others prayers in a public space. I am outraged that religious zealots can’t tell the difference between secular and sacred and try to deny committed couples the same rights to pursue secular happiness that heterosexual couples can freely enjoy. I am outraged that a nation founded on religious freedom should be called a Christian nation. Much of America’s foreign policy for the last decades has been trying to stop nations from adopting Sharia law because of it’s obvious problems for freedom and democracy. Why are we trying to adopt “Christian” law? I am outraged by politicians whose main motivation is holding power. I am outraged that I may not be able to vote if I shave off my beard. I am outraged that ugly personal attacks have taken the place of reasoned debate. I am outraged when American citizens patriotism is questioned because they hold beliefs that are not common. I am outraged that lobbyists are writing laws and seemingly running the country. America became great because of its diversity and acceptance of new ideas and people. It’s time to stop thinking that we know the TRUTH and begin to listen to others and use logic again.

Gutting Campaign Finance

The cost of getting elected has grown so large that our representatives are stuck with spending a considerable amount of time raising campaign funds. In order to do this, they are forced to go to where the money is; Political Action Committees, and Lobbyists. When we, as citizens, desire Congress to take a particular action, we use our special interest group to represent us. The special interest group will find out which members of Congress have the power to accomplish the ends, and then start letter writing campaigns and make campaign contributions to the appropriate committee members. This process results in the most flush special interest groups getting their way.

This reliance on special interest groups (lobbys) is the reason that we will never see the change that
either parties is looking to implement. Obamacare is a great example of this. While America’s Health Insurance Plans Association sent over $83 million to the Chamber of Commerce to fight Obamacare, they were busy helping write the bill that actually became law. They’ve whipped up a frenzy of hatred in people that don’t know much about the funding of health care, while at the same time have reaped huge profits since the law was passed. The well funded fight by the banks to gut the new financial regulations, (which they again helped to write), shows what well funded representation can provide. In both these cases, the group of people who are funding the PAC’s stand to lose their livelihood or at the very least lose substantial amounts of money. The people who benefit from the proposals will stand to gain a much smaller benefit, that they very often don’t fully understand, even though their numbers are much greater than the PAC contributors. Those in the tax industry understand this when they say that tax simplification always makes taxes more complicated. Once a tax benefit has been granted a special interest is created. That special interest will fight tooth and nail to keep any benefit they have even when the reasons for the benefit are long gone. Witness the subsidies the federal government gives to the oil companies, corporate farmers, and airwave users.

Of real concern is the type of person this system is attractive to. Many we see in the political arena are clearly motivated more by the desire to lead then the desire too better the lives of those that are being led. Many of our best leaders never saw themselves in a leadership position until it was thrust upon them. These people will never be involved in our political process as long as the chief requirement of a candidate is to be able to raise sufficient funds to run a campaign.

Lobby’s can provide valuable service to the country in the form of expert testimony about their industries. When they are providing funds to candidates, their purpose has been corrupted while their incomes have sky rocketed. Our political parties also have seen this corrupting influence. They serve a useful purpose in Congress by being able to define and support bills before Congress. When the party holds the purse strings to campaigns, the local candidates are forced into supporting the national line of thinking even if contrary to what’s best locally.

Our Founding Fathers provided us with a Constitution that has each House member representing an equal number of neighboring citizens, and a Senate with equal representation from each State. The beauty of this system hinges on local representation bringing local issues to the National table that can only be acted on if the same issues occur across the Nation. This system, while nominally intact, has been corrupted beyond what I believe our Founding Fathers could ever have imagined. We are now asked frequently to provide campaign funds to elections that are far away from our location in an attempt to sway an election in a district that we know little or nothing about. With the state of transportation and media in the late 1700’s what it was, I don’t believe our Founding Fathers even considered the possibility of people campaigning for candidates that they couldn’t vote for. In many cases, I
believe, people wouldn’t even know who was running in a distant district until the winning candidate was seated in Congress. In the rural economy that we had back then, people’s needs were always more like their neighbors than people in other states. If people that lived a distance from each other shared the same concerns, you could be sure that those concerns were worth addressing at a national level. That is no longer the case.

One of the most important rights in the United States is that of Free Speech. As a country we have recognized the importance of limiting this right in special situations. You cannot yell “FIRE” in a crowded theater just like you can’t lie in order to make money, (fraud). I realize it is probably impossible to stop all politicians from lying. It is possible to lessen the impact of these lies by restricting campaign funding. Electioneering is a special form of speech, that must be limited to the people who are most affected by the election in question. With this in mind I would suggest the following as an Amendment to our Constitution:

Notwithstanding the First Amendment, efforts to influence elections to public office in the United States and its’ subdivisions shall be limited to those who are eligible to vote in said election.

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

The enacting legislation would provide for legitimate reporting of news, full disclosure in a timely basis of contributions, and the rights of states to pass laws limiting contributions. Penalties for violators should include the loss of the right to vote.

The difficulty of getting this passed is obvious due to the power inherent in the lobby’s and the political parties. It should be possible, however, as these are two of the groups that are most reviled in the country. It might require a Grover Norquist 'no new taxes' type of action, where we all shame our congressmen into pledging support for the Amendment.

GET BIG MONEY OUT OF POLITICS!!

Proposed Amendment XXVIII of the US Constitution

Notwithstanding the First Amendment, efforts to influence elections to public office in the
United States and its’ subdivisions shall be limited to those who are able to vote in said election.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

The only way this could happen is through a large grass roots campaign. The threats to the
existing way of doing business is too big for our lawmakers to accept this without a large groundswell.

Enforcement legislation would allow news reporting of the facts of elections by “legitimate news organizations” (defined, for example, as less than 50% of their reporting being political and less than 10% of their revenue coming from electoral campaigns). Complete public disclosure of donors would be required. States would be given the right to set limits on the size of contributions. Penalties for violation would include loss of voting rights, fines, and jail time.