Non Essential Government Services

If Congress doesn’t agree on last year’s spending and doesn’t pass a continuing resolution, the government will be forced to “shut down”.   I have to ask myself, “Is that such a bad thing?”

What is a shutdown?  Nobody really knows but we’re told that Social Security checks will still be sent and that the armed forces will still protect us (and about 90% of everyone else on the planet.)  The only thing that we’re told is that the “non essential government services will be closed and those people will be put on administrative leave.”

Since that’s all the information at hand, I’m going to make some observations and suggestions that may be all wet in light of the complete picture, but I think it’s a start when we think of what this might mean.

The first question that comes to mind is, “Will we get back the $105 Billion that Democrats inappropriately snuck into ObamaCare when they passed it?  It was an authorization bill but they made it into an appropriations bill with nobody but the sneaks who did it knowing about it.  I’m not sure in which of the 2,400 pages of the bill the appropriation is, but it’s there and we want the money back!  Pronto!

Am I surprised they did that?  No, not really.  A former pastor of mine said, “We should never be surprised when sinners act like sinners.”  Without trying to equivocate, I just want to paraphrase and say that we should never be surprised when free-spending liberals act like we have all the money in the world and act according to their true nature.

After recovering from the angst of Dems acting like Dems, I have to ask, “If we shut down non essential services, how will that affect our lives?”  If they’re not essential, I have to think that the answer is, “Not much.”

Next I ask, “If we shout down the non essential services, how much will that save?”  Again, I have to think the answer is, “Not much,” since the meaning of “essential” is left to the operating units themselves.  Some how every bureaucrat will deem himself or herself “essential”.

Let’s shut down the government until Democrats start acting like responsible adults and not like the spoiled rich kids that they are.  I don’t think we’ll see any real difference.  The roads will still have potholes and bridges will be crumbling because Congress raided the Highway Trust Fund in years past.

There are dozens of ways that Congress can get us back on the road to fiscal health, not the least of which is to let private people pay for Harry Reid’s Cowboy Poetry Festival.

Let’s take everyone’s ideas and do them all. Assuming, of course that they’re Constitutional.

On, Wisconsin!

If only public sector workers would put in as much effort in their jobs as they have shown in the Wisconsin demonstrations these past few days and weeks.

I congratulate the Wisconsin legislators for splitting the financial bills so they could get some work done.  Granted, it’s the part that the Democrats (or maybe the unions who control the Democrats) didn’t want to pass.  They have stripped the public employees of many – but not all – of their collective bargaining rights.

So now the Dems are saying that democracy was “stolen” from the people.  Forget that the Dems fled the state to avoid the battle.  Forget that the Dem leader made sure that he was too far away to make it back to Madison in time to vote on anything.  Forget that the Dems themselves were trying to hijack the legislative process by making sure that financial bills could not be voted on.  Oh, and forget that it’s OK for Dems to railroad legislation themselves (can you say, “ObamaCare”?)  Nevertheless, it’s the Republicans who were trying to hijack democracy.

I think the Dems are just angry that they were out maneuvered.  They thought they could bring things to a stand-still.  They simply thought wrong.  Now that they they failed, to save face, it’s somebody else’s fault.  Typical.  They don’t want to take responsibility for their actions.  They were AWOL (but still taking their salaries).  They were the ones refusing to negotiate and debate.  Apparently it’s OK with the Democrats if the state goes belly-up.

But let’s not lose sight of the bigger question.  Should public sector workers at any level (federal, state or local) have collective bargaining rights?  It is this writer’s opinion that they definitely should not.  Bargaining means that responsible labor representatives negotiate with responsible management.  The problem is that the so-called responsible management are politicians who are taking campaign donations from the labor unions with whom they are “negotiating”.

This is conflict of interest at the highest level.  Politicians are not negotiating with money for which they are accountable.  They are using your money simply to buy the unions’ votes.  This is how we get bus drivers making over $150,000 in a year.  This is how we get union members having over 90% of their health care costs covered by your tax dollars.  This is how people get upwards of $100,000 a year in pensions (with full health care).  Try finding that for the average worker in the public sector!  In the private sector, management has to deal with shareholders and boards of directors to keep spending in check.  States simply raise taxes to pay for their promises that make the promise makers rich and re-elected.

Yes, the Dems say that there will be repercussions.  They warn of recall elections and “other things” as they “take back democracy” (whatever that means).  I suppose it could mean that they’ll come out of hiding and return to Madison to do what the people elected them to do in the first place, and that’s represent them and shirk their responsibilities.

However, Dems, beware of unintended consequences.  They say a word to the wise is sufficient so I’m probably wasting valuable keystrokes to write this.  Nevertheless, I feel it must be said:  For the ones not suckling off the teat of the nanny state all this may look like progress toward solvency.  I’d not be surprised if any senator put up for a recall vote didn’t get even more votes in favor of keeping the job due to his or her guts and resolve to keep Wisconsin from going bankrupt.

The simple fact is that the federal government and many of the individual states are broke.  You cannot get blood from a turnip.  Very few people can afford 125% tax rates but that’s where we’re heading if we don’t get a handle on spending, and now.

It’s funny, though, that these people seem to forget that if they don’t like what’s happening, they can quit their jobs and go into the public sector.  I don’t recall any of them saying that someone held a gun to their heads and forced them to work for the state.  Maybe they can start their own businesses.  I doubt that will happen because they’re too used to being molly-coddled by the Nanny State.

Face it, folks.  The free ride is about to end.  The unions know it and they’re running scared.  The producers in the state (and that’s just about everyone not on the state payroll) see this as the most humane way out of the jam.

I’m sick and tired of Health Care Reform

Health Care Reform is the one of the Obama agenda items that seems to be on the list of why so many Democrats were fired in the last election.  Republicans now want to take advantage of that now.  The question that people ask is, “Why do we need reform?”  The simple answer is, “Health care is too expensive.”  This then begs the question, “So, what’s wrong with ObamaCare?”  To which one reply is, “It rations health care with no guarantee of improvement.”  Simple questions with simple responses.

But the true answer is really more complex.  It’s too expensive partly because government has made it too expensive.  Let me explain with one of many examples.

Way back when, the people thought health care costs were getting out of  control.  The solution presented by the socialists was to create HMOs.  Everyone goes in the pool at the same (or relatively the same based on parameters) cost and HMOs decide what you need to stay alive and you get that treatment.  Costs were kept down but the (unintended?) consequence was that now health care became rationed.  A triage nurse or administrator decided if you could see a doctor and what kind of doctor (probably a nurse or physician’s assistant) you’d see.  The HMO determined what treatment options they’d make available and there could be a waiting list.  To lower costs, the government created a method of rationing run by the private sector.  It was reminiscent of ration coupons during World War II.

ObamaCare is HMO times infinity.  Like any government program, it would cost orders of magnitude more than the politicians say it will and, like social security, welfare, and other programs, will bankrupt the government as entitlements grow out of control.

Now, I won’t tackle the constitutionality of government-controlled health care with its mandates on what you must buy.  About 25 states are willing to do that better than I could.  I only want to address one issue, the cost of health care.

There are a whole host of reasons why health care is so expensive so I’ll just touch on a few of them.  Rather than forcing the citizenry to be shackled to the Federal yolk, these areas are places that government can address if it’s serious about reigning in health care costs.

The cost of medical school and specialized education is significant.  Four years of college, four of medical school, residency (where you’re paid enough just to keep you almost from starving), and further education for specialization can leave a doctor a half million dollars or more in debt before he or she can start a practice.  It, along with its interest, must be paid back one way or another and that is through the doctor’s salary.  It’s not uncommon for a doctor to have to pay tens of thousands per year to pay off education debt.  If we want reform, let’s at least make the interest tax deductible and lower what the doctor needs to be paid.

Forget the rent in New York City.  The cost of malpractice insurance is too darn high.  Why?  Because we are a litigious society.  If a patient dies because of the operation, that can be malpractice.  If the patient dies in spite of the operation, that is not.  It is proper to sue if the doctor has done something wrong.  It is not proper if you simply don’t like the outcome of a properly-performed procedure.  You, your parent or guardian, made an informed decision.  If it doesn’t come out as you hoped, that’s unfortunate and, sadly, too many judges don’t have the guts to throw out frivolous lawsuits.  We need to take a tighter look at who is suing for what.  There should also be caps on things like “pain and suffering” when your nose job doesn’t make you look like a superstar.  In short, we need massive tort reform.  Let’s hope that Congress has fewer trial lawyers this go-around and can do something here.

Because of the threat of malpractice, doctors are forced to perform CYA tests and procedures.  Everyone wants an MRI for a hangnail.  People go in to the doctor and demand that they prescribe that new medicine they saw on TV.

There are other reasons, too.  Costs to create new drugs, hospital expenses and medical equipment are all factors as well.  The net, however, is not to grab control of the industry.

Don’t get me wrong.  There are some good provisions buried somewhere deep in the ObamaCare bill.  Those should be culled out, debated and, if truly beneficial to the American people and not just to lawyers or other special interests, passed as separate bills once the overall bill is repealed.

There are reasonable things that we can do to get health costs under control.  Rationing and socialism are not among them, however.  Let’s get rid of this fiasco and debate features we can understand.

A Portend of Things to Come?

USA Today reported in an article that “hospital care [is] fatal for some patients.”  Apparently about 15,000 Medicare patients die each month partly from shoddy hospital care.  On a regular basis we hear of abuses in VA Hospitals or, as in this case, with Medicare recipients.

Medicare, Medicaid and VA Hospitals are all run by the government.  So will ObamaCare.  Government-controlled health care will have all the problems, regardless of what it is called.  Is that the kind of care you want?

Any time you read “VA Hospital” or “Medicare” or “Medicare”, you can substitute “ObamaCare” with little chance of misrepresentation.

There is a commercial on television where a man is bitten by an animal and goes into the emergency room.  The receptionist tells him that someone will be with him in 28 days.  Michael Moore to the contrary, this is typical of poorly run, over-extended socialized health plans.  Scarce resources will be rationed and unless you are well connected, they won’t be rationed to you.

I applaud the lame duck Congress in not funding ObamaCare in the last session.  I hope the new Congress will take a very close look at the bill and be very careful in what they do fund.  True, there are some good provisions.  Those should be funded and promoted.  It’s good politics and it’s good public policy.  However, the rest should be allowed to die.

It may require that the rest of the government be cut back to a shoestring budget to prevent diverting other money to ObamaCare, but would cutting back everything else really be a bad thing?

A Time for …?

Today’s USA Today had a headline that read, “Now what?  Obama, Republicans face choices of compromise or conflict.”  That may be true for Obama but sadly, each time that Republicans have gotten any kind of power in recent times, they took another choice: Cave.

Mainline Republicans want so much to be loved by Democrats and the main stream media that they have been willing to sacrifice values and their political careers to get on their good side.

When will the learn that some people live to hate them?

This new crop of Republicans in congress seem to have heard the message that this election was not an embracing of Republicans but a repudiation of the Obama plan.  The Republicans seem to have heard this but I doubt the President has.

For once the people have had a chance to speak where Obama and Congress were forced to listen, and for many of them, the message was, “Good bye!”

President Obama in his address yesterday essentially said that he lost track of the voters but that we were not smart enough to understand his policies so he should have explained better.  Which pieces of his policies did the voters not understand?

Was it Cap and Trade, which promised to raise energy prices and put coal miners out of work?  This in a time when unemployment is still very high and most families don’t have a lot of extra money to spend on higher energy bills?

Was it treating the Christmas underwear bomber as a criminal which allowed him to “lawyer up” in place of treating him as the terrorist he is?

Was it the give away programs to the labor unions (Harry Reid owes them big time for his re-election)?

Was it the rising debt that will bankrupt our children and grandchildren as it races to $14 Trillion?

Was it the growing government?  During this time of unemployment, the federal payroll continued to grow.

Was it ObamaCare, the unprecedented takeover of the health system?  I don’t think it was just an unfortunate coincidence that the last big Republican take over of the House happened after HillaryCare was soundly rejected by society.

Every one of the problems that these “fixes” were designed to address have  fixes.  Many of the fixes don’t require rampant socialism.

It is doubtful that the new Congress can repeal ObamaCare outright.  Obama still has the veto pen.  They can, however, deny funding for the federal programs and enact legislation that address the real problems without sacrificing liberty and our futures.  If necessary, we can address some of the more rational fixes.

I sincerely hope the new Congress will follow the mandate given to them in this election.  Let’s break with tradition.  It will take some compromise and a lot of conflict.  Let’s not cave this time.  Maybe the Democrats and media won’t like them but “We the People” will.