Can You Feel the Heat?

It's getting down to the wire (have I said that before?) and I'm just trying to figure out what the HECK is happening on Capital Hill.

Here are a couple REALLY great things to think about:

1.  Great article at The Heritage Foundation today.  It makes some great points about the congressional process being used to pass this bill:

• The Senate bill is so unpopular with the House they are now resorting to the "Slaughter Rule which would deem the Senate bill passed at the same time the House would approve a new reconciliation bill."  So, they will pass it without an ACTUAL vote.  Most claim this as unconstitutional.  
• Pelosi is promising reconciliation, but "there is one increasingly glaring problem with Pelosi's pass-the-bill-without-voting plan: it is proving impossible to draft that reconciliation bill."  It's been promised every day since last Wednesday and it's still yet to be seen.  Numbers could still be pending from the CBO, but the text hasn't even been released.
• And while all of that muddy-unconstitutional mess is afoot, most people are wising up and realizing "the reconciliation bill is never going to become law.  The Senate will never pass it.  They have no reason to.  The Senate likes the existing Senate bill.  That's why it's called 'the Senate bill'...they are the ones who passed it...As soon as the House passes it, President Obama will sign it and then leave for Asia.  That's it. Obamacare will be, 'the law of the land' (Gibbs)."

Can anyone say, stressful!  It's unconstitutional. It's unethical. It's tricky, snaky and "dark".  That's the only way I can describe it.  It's desperate and dark and the public knows it.

2.  Public Opinion is Downright Nasty:

On Monday, I sat on a teleconference with Congressman Dave Reichert. He took questions from local residents for one hour and every single solitary caller shared outright frustration over Congress' total rejection of public opinion.  Reichert encouraged people to keep the phones busy. 

3.  Rush Limbaugh is saying the same thing:

He's listed the Congressional House phone numbers on his site.  I've listed them here for you:

1.877.762.8762, or 

202.224.3121, or

202.225.3121

And if you get a busy signal keep trying!

When you get through you need to request to speak with a specific representative. If you don't know WHO to ask for, check out this website: CODE RED, which lists the still undecided members of the House.  I would suggest one of those...

I'm trying to call Rep Brian Baird, from the southwest Washington area.  He's the only WA rep still undecided. But Reichert mentioned you don't have to stay within state lines.  Put the pressure on them all.  

Keep up the fight, people.  

And, if you're interested, Obama was out "defending" his plan in an exclusive FOX interview today. I'll have more on that tomorrow, but you can read the transcript here.  There was a lot of dodging going on...

Source:

There's No Bill But the Senate Bill

3000%!!...Insanity

"Your employer...would see premiums fall by as much as 3,000 percent, which means they could give you a raise."

 - President Obama

This is bad math...VERY bad math.  

Consider the equation as our president suggests:

Let's say your employer is paying $10,000 per year for your health care benefit.

If it goes down 100%, that would make it $0.00

If it goes down an additional 2900%, that means your employer would RECEIVE $290,000!

***

Here's the math in case you're interested: after losing the first 100%, which is the ENTIRE $10k premium, the remaining 2900% multiplied by the premium amount (10k) is 290,000

Again, 2900% x 10,000 = 290,000

Can anybody believe this!?  Do you know the audience actually clapped?!

If the Dems don't get this push for health care do you think Obama will resort to saying your premiums will go down by a "million ca-zillion percent"? 

Or maybe he'll start using his hands to illustrate the benefits of Obamacare, saying premiums will go down (stretching his arms as far as they can go) THIS much .  

I'm home with little kids all day, so that falls more in line with my every day lingo.

Mr. President, I don't believe anything you say this much {...........................................} 

(And I have long arms)

Source: Rush Limbaugh 03.16.10

Government Lingo Excludes "Efficiency"

Anybody who disagrees our government is inefficient and has difficulties conforming to a budget, here is a prime example:

"Census Bureau over budget as heavy counting gets under way."  

 - Fox News

Do you remember seeing the Census commercials during the Super Bowl? Or what about the advanced letter reminding us the Census was on its way? The Census website touts both of these actions as "cost-savings in the long run," but that's hardly believable now. The Census is now over budget before the real meat of the program even begins.  

Fox reports: "Auditors also found the Census Bureau provided training to some 15,000 workers who either worked not at all or less than a single day -- at a total cost of $5.5 million."

Are you kidding? They can't even manage the training or the staffing plan.

Just think of this in reference to health care.  

Mark my words, it will be mismanaged from the get-go.  

Starting with the revenues. The taxes to support health care begin immediately. How much do you trust the money will be left alone for its intended purpose? Social Security is in a hole, Medicare is in a hole, just wait for it...Obamacare will follow suit.  

Anybody who thinks the President is correct on his Obamacare price tag should raise the projected expense a few 100 billion dollars. Thinking a government program can be managed efficiently is an oxymoron.

The only thing better than modeling a government program after a private sector one is to just back off and let the private company continue to manage it.  

Consider if the Census were opened up for bidding and contracted out to a private company...

Cheaper?  YES.  More efficient?  Undoubtedly.  

Source:
FOX: Census Bureau Over Budget
2010.Census.gov FAQ

Encourage Motivation NOT Entitlement

"Losing her health care ended up causing her her life."

 - Marcelas Owens (11-yrs old)

Once again, rather than talk facts and empirical data, Democrats instead play on people's emotions and portray the opponents of government-run health care as horrible, despicable people.    

This is the basic story: Marcelas Owens (now 11 yrs old) was the son of a single mother who lost her job and her insurance and later died of a fatal form of high blood pressure.

Read carefully: Yes, this is tragic and sad.  Children growing up without a mother and father is a very sad thing.  

But these are the parts of the story that are causing me to twitch:

 - Owens mother, Tifanny, was a single mother. Where was the father? When a woman makes a choice bringing about not-so-easy natural consequences (i.e., conceiving three children out of wedlock without a supportive father) does it mean the American taxpayer should fill this void? Should we be responsible? What about Medicaid? She was unemployed with three children and they say she didn't qualify...it doesn't smell right.  If she can't get Medicaid then who can?

 - The woman was TREATED at two local hospitals.  On her final visit she was hospitalized for 8 days!  I'm still trying to figure out how insurance would have helped this woman.  She had a fatal form of high blood pressure, which is very difficult to treat and most patients die within a few years. Her death could not have been avoided even WITH insurance.

 - The politicians along with Owens himself kept saying, "70 uninsured people die each day."  A caller on the Rush Limbaugh program said, "what about the other people that die each day WITH insurance?"  Who can we blame for that? Are the evil insurance companies responsible for the deaths of the uninsured AND the insured?  

 - And if 70 people dying a day is your data point, then why the long waiting period for health care reform to begin?  They are promising a short-term fix that doesn't begin for FOUR years!  Implementation is scheduled for 2013-2014, so how does passing Health Care reform next week help this little boy in the near term?  

 - Most importantly, I feel terrible about how this cute little boy (did you see his chipmunk cheeks?!) is being exploited for the democrats' progressive agenda. Sen. Murray should be ashamed...they have brainwashed Owens into thinking his country is out to get him, and Pres. Obama could have literally saved his mother. But while our Congress goes out for cocktail drinks and fancy galas, do you think they'll check up on Marcelas Owens?  NO!    

This boy needs stability.  This boy needs to settle in with his Grandma and learn to accept life's challenges.  He's only 11.  Life is going to be hard.  It's hard for everyone, but why should we feed a hatred for his country? He's going to grow up his entire life with a sense of entitlement and wait around for his government to make it right.  THIS IS A PROBLEM!!  

Enabling a child to grow up feeling cheated is reprehensible.  Why doesn't someone actually HELP this boy?  He has his whole life ahead of him, and he needs:

• A counselor. For the last two years he's been angry about his mother's death.  He should probably have some grief counseling instead.
• A mentor.  A "Big Brother"?  He needs an example and a motivator.
• Involvement.  What about school programs and sports?  
• Encouragement and love. He needs to learn to work hard and earn his way through life.

We are all born into circumstances beyond our control.  But EVERYONE has the power and capacity to improve their station.  So rather than trapse this boy all over Congress telling him mean men/women are out to get him, they should be encouraging him to work heard and create a better life than the one he grew up in.

That's American. That's Hope. That's change I can get on board with.      

Sources:
Seattle Times Story
King5 News
Rush's Commentary...good!

Imploding?

"Most voters believe the current plan will harm the economy, cost more than projected, raise the cost of care, and lead to higher middle-class taxes.  That's a tough sell when the economy is hurting and people want reform to lower the cost of care.  It's also a tough sell for a president who won an election by promising tax cuts for 95% of all Americans."

 - Scott Rasmussen and Doug Schoen (WSJ)

It's coming down to the wire.  We keep talking about the "end game" but the supposed deadline (as imposed by Robert Gibbs...pah) is only a week away.  People are scurrying like mad. Consider these recent events:

People are literally going nuts --- hello, Massa?!

Pelosi is telling us she must pass the bill in order for us to find out what's in it---umm...what?

And we have Obama's Chief of Staff targeting members of Congress in the locker room wearing, well, nothing actually...he's naked (ewwwww...sorry for the visual picture).

What is going on people!?  You can't make this stuff up.

Even SNL and David Letterman are working their sketches around this chaos.

Can anyone say "FINALLY!"

It's like the end of National Lampoon's "Christmas Vacation" when Clark (Chevy Chase) gets his supposed bonus, which is actually enrollment in the "Jelly of the Month" club, and he's already promised his family a swimming pool...whoops.  His subsequent tirade (which my parents always had to edit when I was a kid) and childlike tantrum with a chain saw is classic.

I think Obama, Pelosi, and Reid are getting their "bonus" this week...and don't be fooled...it was a gift from us - the American people.  We KNOW what will happen if this bill passes and we don't want it.  Enjoy the jelly instead.

SOURCES:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704784904575111993559174212.html?mod=WSJ_hp_mostpop_read
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_031010/content/01125106.guest.html

Clarification From a Real Professor

President Obama on insurance companies: 

"they freely ration health care...on who can pay and who can't."

GMU Professor Don Boudreaux corrects: 

"Not exactly; coverage is rationed according to who PAYS and who doesn't.  Many folks - especially young adults - have the ability to pay but choose not to do so."

The meat of the argument is in the choice.  It's not about CAN/CAN'T, it's about CHOICE. I'm thankful we have a real professor here to correct our President.   

I referred to this last week regarding our own personal cash outlays for our health coverage (click here for post), but let me be a little more clear...

We are able to pay out the nose for our health care BECAUSE we make sacrifices in other areas of our budget.  

• Would I like to live in a nicer house? YES!  Someday my children will have a yard.  
• Do I wish we were saving more for my children's college education? Yes!
• Would I like to travel more? Yes!
• Would I like to have knee-high riding boots like Mary Carillo? Yes!!  (see this post) 
• Would I like to not stress every time I do my budget? Yes. I despise the stress.

Of course, there are poverty-stricken individuals in our nation truly unable to afford health care, and you know what??  They still get it!  It's called Medicaid.  It's an income threshold qualifying benefit.  If you're truly poor, you get health coverage.

Professor Boudreaux continues with Obama's determination to fix this rationing of a product to those who pay and those who don't.  Boudreaux's example is AWESOME.  He says:

"Not only insurers, but all producers who greedily refuse to supply persons who don't pay should be set aright...

"For example, the typical worker rations his labor services according to who pays and who doesn't.  That must stop.  Oh, and supermarkets!  Every single one rations groceries according to who pays.  Likewise with restaurants, clothing stores, home-builders....Indeed, my own county government has been corrupted by this greedy attitude: if I don't pay my taxes, the sheriff takes my house...Preposterous!"

You all know plenty of people who are cash-strapped, but do well enough to have cell phones and plasma TVs, the latter of which I am still denying my husband.  It's about choices and to each his own.

A friend of mine recently saw a man panhandling for money on the streets of Seattle.  She felt sorry for him until his iPhone rang and he had the gall to answer it. I wonder if he'd be upset if AT&T started "rationing" his cell coverage should he not pay his bill. "Preposterous!"

Source:

John Stossel commentary
GMU Professor Don Beaudroux

You Can't Argue With Liberals

"I am committed to continuing to fight for the revenue necessary to get folks back to work..."

WA State Rep, Geoff Simpson

[Reese translation: revenue = TAXES!]

"When you argue with [liberals], you are not arguing facts or statistics, you are arguing against a religion...Leftists' idealogy is not based in reality.  It is based in a belief....There is no rational thought or intellectual honesty or rigor involved.  It is simply something for the masses to opiate themselves on and feel good about."

 - Captain Capitalism (Why You Can't Argue with a Liberal)

I just don't get it.

Liberals are killing me...and my budget. 

I made a phone call last week to our Washington State Legislative office and in return received a nice letter from my representative, Geoff Simpson, where he outlined his position on taxes. His above quote is an oxymoron, and my eyes-rolled while reading the letter. 

Oh brother.

Please tell me....how does taxing the citizens of this state MORE help them get back to work?

I feel like a broken record. The folks in charge just don't get it.

Businesses will not hire until economic uncertainty dies down...they are waiting to see what their tax bill will become. Health care is killing it...so is Cap and Trade...and so is the "Jobs Bill", which is continuing to just throw money at the problem.  

But Captain Capitalism has it right...you can't argue with a liberal.  They are so rooted in their ideals it's religious-like and they continue to argue against empirical facts and evidence.  

**heavy sigh**

But, anyway, the battle for passage of ObamaCare is going to be in the House.  So,  

HERE IS WHAT YOU SHOULD DO....

Go to this website...find your Representative in the House and 

write them, 

email them, 

call them.  

My representative, Dave Reichert, also had a health care survey on his website. I'm really interested in the results, but he doesn't share.  Whoever your representative is, it's time to lay on the pressure.  Reichert will most likely vote against the health care bill, but it doesn't hurt to make your opinion known.

IT TAKES 5 MINUTES.  

And while uncertainty swarms the nation, my home state also faces some troubled times ahead.  Our State Congress is looking to impose MAJOR new taxes:

• Imposing a progressive income tax (yikes!...we currently don't have a STATE income tax)
• Increasing the sales tax 
• Imposing special taxes for: candy, bottled water, gum, soda, and cigarettes.  If you know me personally, you know my budget will be in a tight spot if this passes (minus the cigarettes...ick...but I can't live without a certain diet beverage and certain "nannies", aka candy).  

And so, my fellow Washingtonians, write your state congressional members as well.  

Here goes another week.  My stock of a certain diet beverage is dwindling fast as I deal with this chaos.


**Note: for people living in close proximity to me, the representative-finding website listed my representative incorrectly as Adam Smith...it's really Dave Reichert.  I am right along the border, so check your representatives map, just to be sure!

Sources:
Dave Reichert Website
Captain Capitalism 05.01.09
http://fns.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/03/07/house-dems-still-undecided-on-health-care/