Lions, Beavers, Otters, and Golden Retrievers...

I recently took a personality profile. It is meant to help people understand what kind of personality ‘type’ they are so they can better learn about their strengths and weaknesses and how those relate to other people in their lives. It is a common profile that is used by Gary Smalley (The Two Sides of Love) and others.

The four personality types that it include are Lions, Beavers, Otters, and Golden Retrievers. They are categorized by animals to help you better understand the nature of the personality traits. Lions are leaders, dominant, they like to make the rules and tell other people what to do. Beavers are the organizers, they like things neat, and they like to know what the rules are so that they can follow them. Otters care about fun, they don’t have any concern for rules, if they are faced with the choice between a good time or work, they will choose the good time, and they have a ton of friends but they tend not to be very deep relationships. Golden Retrievers are all about relationships, they are compassionate and very sensitive to the feelings and emotions of others, they are loyal, and crave few but deep relationships.

There are obviously good and bad things about each personality type. Lions are leaders and get things done, but they also struggle intensely when things don’t go their way. Beavers are great administrators and organizers, but they don’t always remember to have fun. Otters are fun to be around and always good for a laugh, but they usually aren’t very neat or organized. Golden Retrievers are great friends to have but they don’t adapt well to change.

I took the test because I was very curious to see where I fell in the spectrum. The answer wasn’t as clear as I had hoped. I’m pretty much in the middle; a little more Lion and Beaver than Otter and Golden Retriever, but not by much.

However, I think that it provided enough information to help me as I plan out the next year (can you guess that type?). I want to develop certain aspects and learn to control others. I want to develop my lion side to be a good leader for my family and small group, and a good teacher to the kids at Mission. I really want to focus on the organizational aspects of the Beaver traits to get a handle on managing my home and my projects to get everything accomplished that I’m setting out to do. When it comes to my kids I think our relationships would benefit by integrating more Otter characteristics into our normal routine. For my friends and relationships, I would like to be more of a Golden Retriever and invest more in my good friends.

There is value in taking stock in your strengths and weaknesses. If you don’t know what they are it’s hard to use them or change them for the better. It will help you to shape your goals so that you develop your talents and discipline yourself through your weaknesses. I’m hoping that it helps make my goals for January 2011, my list of accomplishments for December.

The End and the Beginning

The year is winding down and I’m beginning to think over the past year and the year to come.

There were lots of things that I wanted to accomplish this year; several of them fell into the completed column, but several of them fell into the half way done column. I finished the rough draft of my book and did a lot of editing, but have yet to complete the second draft or the final copy. I’ve lost some weight and I’m on track to keep losing, but I still have a long way to go.

As you can see I can be kind of pessimistic about these things. I like to be able to make a full check mark in the box. I like things to be finished. I get a little frustrated when they don’t quite make it, but somehow that doesn’t necessarily translate into the discipline to complete them, because my laziness at times seems greater than my desire to tie up the loose ends.

Which brings me to my resolutions for next year… I haven’t come up with them yet, but I will definitely be contemplating it once the wrapping paper is all cleaned up and the toys are all sorted.

I really want to answer some big questions. What do I really want to accomplish over the next ten years (if I’m blessed with that), and what do I need to do this next year to put me on track to get to that point? How do I not just fix one habit, but rather establish a pattern that will lead me to the successful end and the sense of accomplishment that I enjoy? How do stop being lazy and find motivation when I feel burned out and defeated? How do I cope with stress better and learn to exercise instead of eat for stress release? How do I accomplish dreams that right now seem distant and incompletely defined?

I haven’t quite figured all of that out yet, and I don’t know that I will this year. Eventually I’ll accomplish some of these things though; hopefully the ones that are actually important. The critical part is taking stock of where you’re at and where you want to go, or more importantly where God wants you to go.

As a follower of Christ, he should take preeminence in all of my decision making, and certainly in my goals and aspirations.

I’ve been trying to come up with a daily mantra for quite a while now. Something that I can start the morning with and use to help refocus me as the day becomes grueling. Here it is what I have been using:

“Today I will seek discipline and wisdom. I will be quick to listen and slow to speak. This day is a gift to be used wisely and well. I will seek God’s glory in everything that I say and do.”

I’ve also scripted a prayer to accompany it:

“God, make my plan for this day what YOU would have it to be. Make my life a reflection of your purpose. May you be glorified in all that I say and do. Amen.”

So what does God want me to do next year?

Prop 113 and 203

Prop 113 is the last of the amendments to the Arizona State Constitution. It would guarantee the right to a secret ballot when voting to create or join a union. It is an active measure against a move by large unions to re-establish their hold on American industry that, until the last election, has been waning.

Let me first say that I have a fundamental issue with unions today.

Granted they have accomplished some admirable things in the past. They are responsible for ending child labor in the US. They are also responsible for employers providing reasonably safe work conditions.

However, for the most part they have out lived their usefulness. The only thing that they do now is choke businesses, extort money from hard working individuals, raise prices on everything from groceries to automobiles, and push industry out of the country.

People should be compensated for their performance and their pay should be dependent on the supply and demand for that position. If someone is a good worker, they should get paid more. If someone is a bad worker they should get fired. If someone does a job that very few people have the talent, skill, or experience to do, they should get paid more. If someone does something that a student still in high school could do with fifteen minutes of training, they should be paid less.

But this measure isn’t about whether unions are good or bad, only about whether or not someone has the right to honestly vote on whether or not to join or create a union without being intimidated by union thugs or fellow employees.

The opponents to this measure favor a system a system called card check where your vote is much more public. It opens objecting employees to pressure and intimidation.

“What, don’t you want to look out for your fellow workers?”

“Don’t you care about how they are treating people here?”

“Don’t you know what they did to Tom? Don’t you think he deserves better than that?”

It’s wrong. If people are going to vote on something, whether that is a presidential election or to start a union, they should be able to make their decision privately without intimidation. Protect the secret ballot.

I’m voting an enthusiastic YES for Prop 113!

Prop 203 is a measure that is very long and very complicated, but this is the description at its simplest. Prop 203 would create a system for the medical use of marijuana in Arizona.

I really haven’t made up my mind on the whole issue of drug regulation and how that plays into individual freedoms, drug trafficking, and the future of our country.

Here are my objections to this particular bill.

If marijuana is going to be used as a medicine, it should manufactured and distributed like any other controlled substance. A licensed manufacturer should produce, qualify, package, and distribute it through licensed pharmacies. If you are really pushing for medical marijuana, that is exactly what you would do.

However, if you are really looking for marijuana, and the idea of marijuana, to become more socially acceptable so that eventually it could be legalized entirely, then you would produce a proposition like Prop 203, which sets up an entirely specialized system for marijuana production and distribution.

I’m not saying marijuana shouldn’t be used for medicinal purposes. I’m saying that that is not the goal of Prop 203.

I’m voting NO on Prop 203.

Props 111 and 112

Prop 111 and 112 are… you guessed it, amendments to the Arizona State Constitution! Shocking, yes, I know, but don’t worry there are some propositions this year that are NOT amendments, and I’ll get to those soon enough.

Prop 111 is an amendment which changes the name of the office of Secretary of State. Currently in our state constitution, if the governor cannot complete their full term, because they took a national position as Secretary of Homeland Security for instance, then the Secretary of State is the next person in line to succeed the governor. Governor Jan Brewer became the governor because she had been the Secretary of State under Janet Napolitano. This amendment would change the name of the position and how it is elected.

The Secretary of State would become the Lieutenant Governor and would be elected on a co-ticket with the Governor. The idea is that it more clearly defines the chain of command for the state and helps people to realize that the Secretary of State is actually the next person in line for the governorship. The argument seems to be that you can have a governor of one party and a SOS of another party and without an election the governorship can “change hands” so to speak.

Here is the problem with the amendment. The position of Secretary of State is an important position. If you’ve been on the website at all, which I hope you have because you’ve followed some of my links, you’ve discovered that the Secretary of State is actually in charge of a lot of things. Granted they aren’t glamorous things, but they are important things. Is a VP- type Lieutenant Governor going to do all of these things? Aren’t those things beneath a person who has the word “governor” in their title? I know I’m kind of being nitpicky here, but I think the net effect of this is going to be that the Secretary of State’s office is going to turn into an ADDITIONAL state office. We don’t need more offices and more staff members. We want smaller government on every level, not just the national level.

I’m also concerned about the entire premise of the measure. This all revolves around politicians not liking the fact that the people of the state can nominate a governor and a SOS from different parties. I’m sorry, I’m not really concerned as much about the parties as I am about whether or not someone is the best person for a certain position. Obviously I vote Republican almost exclusively, but that isn’t because I’m in love with the Republican Party, but rather because I haven’t been able to find any social, fiscal, and national security CONSERVATIVES in the Democrat Party. For that matter this bill would almost completely shut out a qualified candidate with a reasonable shot at an office like the Secretary of State, who may not be from either party.

I don’t see a significant net positive in this and I see some decent potential for negative consequences.

Prop 111 is a NO for me.

Prop 112 is an amendment to the Arizona State Constitution that brings in the deadline for ballot propositions from 4 months to 6 months before the election. The purpose is to give the government time to verify the validity of the signatures on any petitions.

Again, it’s a bipartisan measure that is supported across the board. So naturally I’m a little skeptical, but other than an urgent issue coming up that should be dealt with quickly (which the legislature could/should handle separately) it seems benign.

I hate to say this about anything, but on this one I’m almost completely indifferent. If it really does help them vet the signatures better then it is probably a good thing.

Prop 112 is a ho-hum Yes for me.

Summary:

Prop 106 – the Anti-Obamacare Prop – YES

Prop 107 – ending racial quotas in state hiring – YES

Prop 109 – protecting hunting and fishing in AZ - YES

Prop 110 – modifying the state’s ability on land trust deals – hesitant YES

Prop 111 – changing the Secretary of State to Lieutenant Governor – NO

Prop 112 – shortening the deadline for ballot measures – hesitant YES

Props 109 and 110

Prop 109 and 110

We are just full of amendments to the Arizona State Constitution this election season. Prop 109 and 110 are two more.

Prop 109 is an amendment geared at protecting hunting and fishing in the state of Arizona. The premise of the bill is that wildlife will be managed in a way that protects hunting and fishing in the state for years to come.

I have a couple of opinions on this one.

I have come into more and more contact with the ‘hunting community’ recently and one thing that seems to be fairly universal among them is a deep respect for the animal populations and a desire to keep those populations plentiful and healthy. Certain hunting in the state is severely limited and for good reason, to protect the struggling species. From this perspective my respect and trust for the hunting community has increased.

My second opinion on this has to do with the animal rights community and their actions in the last couple of years in the western United States. California has had vast farmlands turned into an absolute dust bowl, killing what was one of the largest (if not the largest) agricultural area in the world. Destroying the businesses and investments of farmers in the region and pushing unemployment into unimagineable levels. All for the sake of the delta smelt, which is a tiny fish that MAY be in need of protection according to population levels, and MAY be getting killed off by pumps that push water down into the agricultural area. The whole thing is ridiculous and the more I look into this matter the more it bothers me. Oregon is in a similar boat when it comes to their fishing industry, which has been so hampered and hamstrung by fishing regulations that it is almost completely gone in many rivers. Even individual fishing has been so restricted in the state that it is shocking, especially in an area so rich in resources.

The “pro” argument is that environmentalists and animal rights activists are on a nationwide crusade to limit the rights of hunters and anglers, and from what I have read about, I have to agree.

I am voting YES on 109.

Prop 110 is a strange beast. First of all it is very difficult to discern all of the language in the amendment. That fact alone throws up some red flags. It also has to do with State Trust land which has been used for a variety of purposes over the years, some being less than above board, which also concerns me. Finally on the Secretary of State’s website there are literally NO arguments against the measure. Really? That’s even more surprising.

There are a couple of things that I am definitely in favor of. Primarily the preservation of land around our vital military bases in Arizona and the ability for the state to conduct land swaps with private parties in order to facilitate an adequate space around these facilities. That just makes sense to me.

There also appears to be several measures in the amendment to provide for disclosure to the public about the land deals that are going to happen with adequate time and information to make them fair and reasonable.

If anyone, with a history and experience with State Trust land deals would like to comment or send me a message that would be greatly appreciated. As it currently stands my position on this one is not quite clear. I am going to say a tentative Yes on 110, but would appreciate anyone with more information.

So far here is the score card:

A BIG YES on Prop 106, 107 and 109.

A tentative yes on Prop 110.

Prop 107

Prop 107 is another amendment to the Arizona State constitution. It is a measure which forbids the STATE from discriminating against or giving preferential treatment to anyone based on “race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin.” In short this puts an end to any and all affirmative action measures currently in place in the state government and state agencies, including the three state run universities.

What an outrageous idea! The state of Arizona wants to put into law that for any contracts or positions of employment or education they will blindly look at candidates and pick the one who is the most qualified, talented, and hardest working. That’s just insanity!

Okay, obviously not. It makes total sense.

People don’t like to use the words “racial quotas”, because it doesn’t sound very good, but it is exactly what affirmative action and other “diversity” programs promote.

I’ve experienced this recently in one of my former employers. During a site-wide corporate meeting, one of the executives explained that they aren’t hiring enough women engineers, and that the ones they are hiring are leaving so they need to hire even more to account for the high attrition rate. He never mentioned hiring the most qualified engineers, or the most talented, or the ones with special training in specific areas, or the ones with the freshest and newest ideas. Just women. I have heard a general outrage from the company, mostly coming from… the women engineers that work there. They’ve been there for years and have worked hard to prove themselves (like any engineer has to). Now they think that any project they go on to they will be looked at as another “token female employee”. The company has backed up this policy by hiring two new female engineers. The first one was hired without interviewing ANY other candidates (in a job market with 10% unemployment) and the second one was hired WITHOUT an in person interview at all. Do you think those two will be respected by ANY of the other employees? Do you think they are going to be able to succeed on teams that know how and why they were hired? Have you suddenly CREATED a gender bias against female employees?

It’s nothing against the individuals. I hope they manage to succeed. Unfortunately management has not made it easy for them. In fact they have taken what would be a tough job (I know the company and the jobs) and have made it almost impossible. Is it a wonder why they have a high attrition rate?

Prop 107 eliminates this scenario in the state government. It will do nothing to fix the messed up situation in the company that I use to work for, but it will insure that the State of Arizona is hiring the best teachers, the best administrators, and awarding contracts to the best companies. It just makes sense.

Opponents are saying that this is a step backward for race relations and for “diversity” in the state. That somehow we are all latent racists who will automatically revert to our own biased nature and hire only the people that look like us.

I give people a lot more credit than that. I work with men and women from just about every country you can think of and out of the companies I’ve worked with I haven’t come across a single person that cares (outside of racial quota supporting management) what gender or ethnicity you are. I don’t care if you are from Sri Lanka or Indiana, as long as you know what you are doing and work hard at it. I don’t care if you are an Asian woman or an overweight white guy from New Jersey, if you don’t do your job; I’m going to have real problems with you.

If you support racial quotas to undo years of racial bigotry you have to ask yourself, how long is enough? How long do you support a group because they use to be discriminated against? How long do you give preferential treatment to a minority? Is there a limit? Is there an end?

Stop all racial preferences. Give true equality. If someone discriminates, then everyone has the same appropriate legal recourse. Let’s really be color blind. That’s how you win respect for everyone, that’s how you really make a better state moving forward.

A big YES vote on Prop 107.

Prop 106

It’s election time soon and so it behooves every American to actually educate themselves on what they will be voting on. While most of us are pretty informed about the candidates in the first tier positions (governor, senator, representative…), many of us fail to educate ourselves on all of the issues and options before we go to the polls.

The Secretary of State’s office sends out ample information which most people receive well before the election and promptly discard, rather than read. This is unfortunate, but I must admit, I have to throw myself into that category since I rarely read things in print these days. Fortunately the Secretary of State’s website lists all kinds of useful information including deadlines, campaign finance information, and ballot measure arguments, for and against, the propositions.

It’s a very useful tool and should be used to weed through all of the things being thrown out to the voters on election day. Here in Arizona we have 10 ballot propositions to consider ranging from land use issues to healthcare concerns. Unfortunately the advertising and even the wording of these propositions isn’t always clear and can intentionally cause confusion.

I’m taking the time to search through the ballot options here in Arizona and give my take on each of them by looking at both sides of the equation and making a decision based on the principles that I value.

The first one on the list is Prop 106, which is actually an amendment to the Arizona State Constitution.

Prop 106 is an effort to cut the legs off of Obamacare in Arizona. It states that no person or employer should be forced to provide or participate in any healthcare plan. It also says that people or employers should be able to purchase healthcare services directly. It denies the healthcare mandate put forward by the Obama Administration and stands on the 10th Amendment principle that any power not specifically ceded to the federal government falls within the domain of the state and local government. It is one of many laws or amendments being proposed in states all around the country this election season to try and rein in the ever expanding federal government.

The opposition to the law claims that the costs of healthcare will increase in Arizona if we do not buy into the federal mandates because those without insurance will continue to use emergency rooms like doctor’s offices. They also claim that without buying into the federal mandates we are leaving over a million of Arizona’s children without healthcare coverage.

There are several issues with this. Number one, Obamacare is already increasing insurance premiums across the country. This is inherent in the bill because of the minimum coverage conditions. Several companies have either dropped healthcare coverage or are requiring their employees to cough up a much larger portion of the premiums. Insurance companies are also dropping individual plans, which many people carried on their children. Fewer options, higher cost.

The new federal mandate will increase the cost of health insurance and decrease the number of people who are covered by an employer sponsored program. We are already seeing this move across the country.

The federal government already increased SCHIP (State Children’s Health Insurance Plan) coverage drastically in the last few years, covering people who should no longer be considered children, who have income levels several times higher than the national poverty rate.

Opponents also argue that the only thing this amendment will do is guarantee a legal battle between Arizona and the federal government.

Absolutely, I couldn’t agree more. We will join with dozens of other states who already have or will pass similar measures to fight this encroachment on the rights of states and individuals. Just because something will cause a fight doesn’t mean that it should be avoided. In this case the whole purpose is to win the battle, not concede defeat. Fight and fight hard, fight loud, an overwhelming victory on Prop 106 would send a clear message to the new group of lawmakers in Congress and to the President that the people of Arizona don’t want Obamacare.

Prop 106 is like planting a flag in Arizona and saying, “no, we will not put up with a detached and corrupt federal government coming up with an indecipherable healthcare mandate that takes liberty and freedom away from the people and makes their healthcare decisions for them.”

Prop 106 is a big YES!

Governor Christie

The model has been given.

All, others, please follow suit.

This is how you lead.

At first glance, Governor Chris Christie is the most unlikely political candidate. He’s over weight, has a hint of a New Jersey accent, doesn’t mince words, in fact some would even say that he has been rude at times, and finally he advocates and even governs… based on principles - and conservative ones at that!

Surely this man could never have been elected governor, especially not governor of a bluer-than-blue state with some of (if not the) highest property taxes in the country.

Watch and learn.

You’ve got to love this guy. He’s a leader. He takes his fight TO THE PEOPLE and wins. Nothing is off the table, he just has to figure out a way to explain it to the people in plain, simple, common sense language and he hits it out of the park every time.

Teachers unions – toe to toe. Bloated state employee benefits and retirement packages – bring it on. Out of control property taxes – locked and loaded.

The latest one to fall – Planned Parenthood. He cut the funding. The state legislature countered with a bill to keep the funding and the governor whipped out the VETO pen and sent it back to them. They threatened to override, but it lost… so sorry. Now at least some of the clinics in New Jersey are closing their doors.

That’s right. How many times have we had conservatives back away from fighting abortion, or fall far short of cutting funding for Planned Parenthood.

Governor Christie – you are the man. I hope he runs for President. I hope he runs in 2012. We need a problem solver. We need a leader. We need someone to take on the untouchable issues and apply conservative principles in plain, common sense language.

We need Governor Christie.

Chaos

What is going on out there?

Feels like chaos doesn’t it?

Democrats are abandoning their captain, scrambling for the life boats and salvaging whatever they can out of the churning waters as the ship of the Democratic majority sinks like the Titanic smashing into the iceberg of fiscal irresponsibility.

The career Republicans are all jockeying for their own little position at the helm of the Flying Dutchman, surging from beneath the waters of their own political demise only one election ago; at the same time trying to fight the Tea Party that is quickly taking over the ship.

While this struggle for political advancement plays out, the average American is more concerned about their next paycheck than who gets to hold what title. They are more preoccupied with trying to pay their mortgage and provide for their families than they are with which suit wearing aristocrat gets to sit in the big fluffy chair.

The country is a mess. We’ve lost sight of the very liberty that was purchased at such a great cost.

On that note, the chaos is encouraging.

People are starting to pay attention.

It’s time to pull back the curtain completely. Expose the whole system for what it has become - a giant mess that cannot be fully comprehended by the average citizen. If people don’t understand it, they can’t change it. They’ll get bogged down in the minutia and they’ll give up.

The federal government has become the hydra that many of the founding fathers feared. Patrick Henry would be plastered on the evening news right now; standing on the steps of the capital building with a musket in one hand and a sword in the other screaming for a revolt.

I know, I sound like a paranoid, aluminum hat wearing, tea party, sign carrying, crazy person.

Thanks.

There is something wrong when we elect leaders touting flowery rhetoric about hope, change, and demonizing legitimate businesses and industries.

We need meaningful changes, not fancy slogans.

We need to ignore campaigns that make an emotional appeal in order to ignore the facts behind an issue.

We need to read the bills.

We need to hold people accountable.

We need to end the days of the career politicians.

We need to push for term limits in every office.

We need people who are there to fix problems, not guarantee their political futures.

Get engaged.

I’m going to spend some time going through the propositions that are going to be on my ballot this November. I’ll explain how I researched them and why I am going to vote for or against them. Whether you agree with what I am saying or not, I hope it inspires you to look at the ballot that you will vote on. Make an informed decision. Talk to your neighbors, friends, and coworkers about their choices and educate them if you need to.

Don’t follow the rhetoric, look at the facts. Decide where you would really like to see your country, your state, your county, your city, your school board – and make it happen.

I'm back!

About a year ago I stopped blogging. A year. Wow.

I really didn’t mean for it to be that long, it just ended up that way. I have been working on a book in my copious free time, and last night I finished the rough draft (and there was much rejoicing). I still have a lot of work to do, including probably two more drafts of the book, but it is a major milestone for me and I am excited about it.

Also in the last year I began gardening. The gardens that were for a long time just holes (and sometimes frog ponds) in my backyard have yielded all kinds of fresh fruits and veggies. I thought it would be fun, but I had no idea what a great experience it would be and how much I would really enjoy it.

Along with the gardening I began composting because I wanted to improve the composition of the soil in my gardens. Well the first round of compost is in the ground and it looks great!

The beds are prepared and the first seeds of the fall/winter garden are in – very exciting. This fall I will be growing a plethora of different things, including green beans, broccoli, celery, carrots, snap peas, spinach, loose leaf and head lettuce, romaine, cabbage, garlic, and onions.

Good times.

Despite a very busy year, I haven’t been ignoring what has been going on in the world or the country. There are lots of dangerous and concerning things both on the national and international stage. I’m considering how I would like the blog to look and what changes I will make from how I use to do it. We are two months away from a very important midterm election and the composition of our government is due for a shuffle. Republican hopefuls are also beginning to spend time in Iowa and New Hampshire (if they haven’t been already). We will see a handful emerge from the ever increasing pack in the next few months. The presidential election season has become a very long and tedious adventure and this one will certainly be no different.

So… I’m back!

Thanks for reading. Expect more soon.

Do they really want competition?

Just watch the video and it is very clear. Wolf Blitzer understands it, David Axelrod, senior advisor to the President does not. They aren't talking about competition because they really WANT competition. They are talking about it because it sounds good and it masks the move toward single payer. Hats off to Wolf for really pushing the point.

ACORN working for...

Prostitution, sex trafficing of underage girls, tax fraud... it's all good.

That's the ACORN way.

Did I mention they get tax payer funding?

What the videos, wretch into the closest trash can, then call your Congressman and ask them to pull all funding for ACORN. Election fraud was bad enough to prompt the phone call, but this is just ridiculous. How long will our tax money fund this institution?

This was just funny...

The Lies and Story Behind the President's Speech

The following are excerpts from the President's speech to Congress on 9.9.09 with my comments following.

Put simply, our health care problem is our deficit problem.

- Actually, it is a part of the deficit problem, but how is spending more money and resources going to fix the problem?

First, if you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already
have health insurance through your job, Medicare, Medicaid, or the VA, nothing
in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the
doctor you have. Let me repeat this: nothing in our plan requires you to change
what you have.

- Unless he is talking about a new, unseen bill, this is not true. Your healthcare plan would be required to change. At the most, your plan COULD be the same as it is now for up to five years. Of course even mentioning this ignores the fact that my healthcare plan is MY business, not the business of the government. The tone of being some benevolent dictator is revolting. My healthcare is MY business and the Constitution does not give the government the right to interfere with it.

What this plan will do is to make the insurance you have work better for
you. Under this plan, it will be against the law for insurance companies to deny
you coverage because of a pre-existing condition. As soon as I sign this bill,
it will be against the law for insurance companies to drop your coverage when
you get sick or water it down when you need it most. They will no longer be able
to place some arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage you can receive in a given
year or a lifetime. We will place a limit on how much you can be charged for
out-of-pocket expenses, because in the United States of America, no one should
go broke because they get sick. And insurance companies will be required to
cover, with no extra charge, routine checkups and preventive care, like
mammograms and colonoscopies

- See this is the problem. Sometimes politicians don’t seem to live in the real world. This is all fluff that sounds really good, but what it really means is $$$$$$$$$. Insurance companies have to show a profit. If you cover more things, you limit deductibles… you have to increase premiums. Costs don’t magically disappear. They are real. They are legitimate. And they are going to SKYROCKET! Or, your health insurance company will go out of business. Guess that could affect the coverage you currently haven’t couldn’t it?

This exchange will take effect in four years, which will give us time to do
it right

- If these are such a good idea, why not start them now? Why wait four years? Oh wait, when they fall flat or become an obvious Trojan horse for a government run plan it will be too late. President Obama’s last election will already be over.

Now, even if we provide these affordable options, there may be those —
particularly the young and healthy — who still want to take the risk and go
without coverage. There may still be companies that refuse to do right by their
workers. The problem is, such irresponsible behavior costs all the rest of us
money. If there are affordable options and people still don't sign up for health
insurance, it means we pay for those people's expensive emergency room visits.
If some businesses don't provide workers health care, it forces the rest of us
to pick up the tab when their workers get sick, and gives those businesses an
unfair advantage over their competitors. And unless everybody does their part,
many of the insurance reforms we seek — especially requiring insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions — just can't be achieved.That's why under my plan, individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance — just as most states require you to carry auto insurance. Likewise, businesses will be
required to either offer their workers health care, or chip in to help cover the
cost of their workers. There will be a hardship waiver for those individuals who
still cannot afford coverage, and 95 percent of all small businesses, because of
their size and narrow profit margin, would be exempt from these requirements.
But we cannot have large businesses and individuals who can afford coverage game the system by avoiding responsibility to themselves or their employees.
Improving our health care system only works if everybody does their part.

- Okay, just to make sure I read that right, because you are alive, you will be required to have health insurance. Now, I understand about car insurance, after all you are placing other people at risk, but you don’t have to drive it you don’t want to, and hence, you don’t need to buy car insurance. But if you are a living, breathing American you will be FORCED to buy health insurance? Why not just FORCE people to pay their emergency room bills? Garnish their wages until their bill is paid. And I’ve said it before, but I’ll say it again, mandating coverage does not MAGICALLY give businesses the money to pay for it. Even larger businesses that don’t insure their workers will look at the cost and say one of two things, either they have to lay off some workers to be able to afford it, or simply close up shop and move the business off shore. Oh yah, this should help unemployment.

The best example is the claim, made not just by radio and cable talk show hosts,
but prominent politicians, that we plan to set up panels of bureaucrats with the
power to kill off senior citizens. Such a charge would be laughable if it
weren't so cynical and irresponsible. It is a lie, plain and simple.

- Actually it’s not a lie. Of course, no government actually calls them death panels, but what the bill proposes, or use to propose before a Senate committee withdrew it, is a panel to determine guidelines for appropriate care, much like those that exist in the UK. Only they aren’t only for older people, they are for all people. Like this baby that was born premature at 21 week and 5 days. The NHS rule book for premature babies is that only babies born after 22 weeks or later will be provided for. So this baby survived for two hours while his mother begged and pleaded with doctors to help him, but he passed away without any medical attention. Now, would you call the panel that makes that decision a “death panel?” I think the name is understandable.

There are also those who claim that our reform effort will insure illegal
immigrants. This, too, is false — the reforms I'm proposing would not apply to
those who are here illegally.

- As the congressman pointed out, this is a lie. There is no stipulation in the bill that beneficiaries of any of these changes must be US citizens, therefore the door is open to all.

And one more misunderstanding I want to clear up — under our plan, no
federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will
remain in place.

- I really wish this one were true, but HR3200 makes it very clear that minimum coverage will be determined by the department of Health and Human Services and whoever is the commissioner or czar or whatever you want to title them, that is put in charge of the application of the system. Half a dozen amendments were proposed and voted down (on party lines) that would have kept the Hyde Amendment in place, prohibiting abortions. If the bill would have kept abortions from being funded then why not just approve the amendment? Well, the President and half of Congress needs to make sure they live up to the promises that they have made to Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and the rest of the pro-abortion lobby.

So let me set the record straight. My guiding principle is, and always has
been, that consumers do better when there is choice and competition.
Unfortunately, in 34 states, 75 percent of the insurance market is controlled by
five or fewer companies. In Alabama, almost 90 percent is controlled by just one
company. Without competition, the price of insurance goes up and the quality
goes down. And it makes it easier for insurance companies to treat their
customers badly — by cherry-picking the healthiest individuals and trying to
drop the sickest; by overcharging small businesses who have no leverage; and by
jacking up rates.

- This was probably the biggest lie of the night. Did you catch it? The president affirms that his guiding principle with the ‘public option’ is about competition. Now he is right that consumers do better with competition, but his plan doesn’t provide that. It provides a government option. That’s not competition, that’s a government take over. If the President wanted consumers to benefit from competition he would make the healthcare market a national one by breaking down the state and local barriers and letting all insurance companies compete in any market. End local mandates and local monopolies. THAT is competition! Not a government option.

Despite all this, the insurance companies and their allies don't like this
idea. They argue that these private companies can't fairly compete with the
government. And they'd be right if taxpayers were subsidizing this public
insurance option. But they won't be. I have insisted that like any private
insurance company, the public insurance option would have to be self-sufficient
and rely on the premiums it collects.

- REALLY!? Now even without public subsidies, would the government insurance provider have to pay the same taxes that the private companies do? No. Would they have to maintain the same capital requirements that the private companies do? No (look at Fannie and Freddie as an example). So would the government plan be undercutting the private insurance companies? Yes.

And I will make sure that no government bureaucrat or insurance company
bureaucrat gets between you and the care that you need.

- If the government is supplying insurance, then by definition, there will be a bureaucrat or panel that will decide what will be covered and what won’t. A patient may say that they absolutely have to have a sex change in order to live a healthy, normal life, but will the public option cover that? Or that they have to have an abortion because they can’t afford a baby. Will that be covered? Who is going to make that call?

Here's what you need to know. First, I will not sign a plan that adds one
dime to our deficits — either now or in the future. Period. And to prove
that I'm serious, there will be a provision in this plan that requires us to
come forward with more spending cuts if the savings we promised don't
materialize. Part of the reason I faced a trillion dollar deficit when I walked
in the door of the White House is because too many initiatives over the last
decade were not paid for — from the Iraq War to tax breaks for the wealthy. I will not make that same mistake with health care.

- Quite frankly he is already predicting TRILLION dollar deficits EVERY year, so there is very little integrity to back up this statement, but in any case, how can you extend insurance to another 30 MILLION people without costing any more money? Again, I think we need to remember this is the real world, not fantasy land.

Second, we've estimated that most of this plan can be paid for by finding
savings within the existing health care system — a system that is currently full
of waste and abuse. Right now, too much of the hard-earned savings and tax
dollars we spend on health care doesn't make us healthier.

- Can you really say that you are serious about this if you are not asking for tort reform? The extra tests that most doctors do are to cover their bottom lines if and when they get sued. If you aren’t talking tort reform, then you really aren’t serious about bringing down these costs.

Now, because Medicare is such a big part of the health care system, making
the program more efficient can help usher in changes in the way we deliver
health care that can reduce costs for everybody.

- Didn’t the President just expound on the fact that government run insurance will be so much cheaper and more efficient than private insurance companies? Now he is saying that the system that the government already runs and controls needs to be improved to be more efficient? What he doesn’t mention is that the cost cutting measures in Medicare include reductions in fees paid to physicians, which will cause more physicians to refuse to treat Medicare patients, or up their costs to their non-Medicare patients.

Finally, many in this chamber — particularly on the Republican side of the
aisle — have long insisted that reforming our medical malpractice laws can help
bring down the cost of health care. I don't believe malpractice reform is a
silver bullet, but I have talked to enough doctors to know that defensive
medicine may be contributing to unnecessary costs. So I am proposing that we
move forward on a range of ideas about how to put patient safety first and let
doctors focus on practicing medicine. I know that the Bush Administration
considered authorizing demonstration projects in individual states to test these
issues. It's a good idea, and I am directing my Secretary of Health and Human
Services to move forward on this initiative today.

- Lip service to tort reform. Read it this way, “I know you want me to say the words tort reform, but I just can’t bring myself to do that, so I’m going to tell you that my Health and Human Services Secretary will look into this problem. I’m brushing tort reform off, but hey at least I kind of mentioned it.”

And if we are able to slow the growth of health care costs by just one-tenth
of one percent each year, it will actually reduce the deficit by $4 trillion
over the long term.

- CBO numbers do not back this up. Not even close. They predict a deficit in the hundreds of billions of dollars related to HR3200.

Everyone in this room knows what will happen if we do nothing. Our deficit
will grow. More families will go bankrupt. More businesses will close. More
Americans will lose their coverage when they are sick and need it most. And more
will die as a result. We know these things to be true.

- Read it like this, “I don’t like scare tactics unless they help me.”

One of the unique and wonderful things about America has always been our
self-reliance, our rugged individualism, our fierce defense of freedom and our
healthy skepticism of government. And figuring out the appropriate size and role
of government has always been a source of rigorous and sometimes angry debate.

- This is in the middle of a section where he uses the memory of the late Ted Kennedy to drive home the emotional aspect. I completely agree with the statement, but it runs counter to the government based plan that the President just laid out.

I understand that the politically safe move would be to kick the can further
down the road — to defer reform one more year, or one more election, or one more term.

- That must be why the plan takes four years to kick in.

Basically the President gave a good speech that laid out the same things that he has been saying all summer. Looking at the legislation, many of his points are misleading, disingenuous or out right lies. The speech was more of the same and was really just about reasserting himself into the center of the debate.

Inappropriate

Am I a fan of the President's policies? Obviously not.

Do I believe that he has lied repeatedly during some of his speeches on healthcare? Yes. At the very least his comments have been very misleading half truthes.

In this case about illegal immigrants, there is nothing in the bill that requires verification of citizenship to receive benefits. In the past and present, this has been an open door to illegal aliens. So, the President is being very deceiving.

That being said, do I think it is appropriate to yell out "You LIE!" or "Liar!" during a presidential address to Congress? No.

Of course, I don't think the President's comments were appropriate either, but I will comment more on that later.

Here's the video

The Expectation is KILLING ME... okay, maybe not

So, what are we going to hear tonight? That is, if we are watching. The President’s prime time press conferences have gotten a decreasing number of viewers each time. I think tonight is a little different considering the tremendous hot button that the healthcare debate has become, plus this is a speech to Congress so it carries a lot more weight than just your average press conference.

Will he say that healthcare reform must include a public option? Will he give an unreasonable deadline, considering the real bill hasn’t even been made public yet, or possibly even been written? Will he announce that his own team, rather than Congressional leadership, is crafting the bill? Not a question of if, but how often, will he mention the late Senator Kennedy?

This could be a huge opportunity to win public favor and convince the American people that he is taking the reigns on this issue and he’s going to do it right. If he announces that they are going to slow down and really weigh their options because healthcare reform is too big and too important to get it wrong, he will get broad support and unanimous approval. His ratings would spike. The far left would be critical, but he would win over independents, a group that he is losing in droves right now.

There are lots of things that could be done with this speech, but will any of it make a difference. An address to Congress carries a lot of weight, but also a lot of expectation. This is a rare occasion. If treated lightly it will hurt his credibility. People are tired of platitudes and generalities. The average Joe has heard more about healthcare in the last 40 days than they ever want to hear about again. They want the specifics. They want the nuts and bolts. No more messing around and vague generalities. Unfortunately, the President has notoriously lacked details in any of his speeches up to this point, and those that he has provided have been demonstrably contrary to the current legislation.

So what will we see and how many will watch?

The speech is scheduled for 8pm eastern time if you are interested.

Our Current and Escalating Economic Mess

As we are all distracted by the mess that is healthcare reform we need to keep one eye on our economy. Unless you are the Vice President, or a lobbyist for a labor union, you probably realize that the $787 BILLION stimulus package so far has been a bust. Millions more jobs have been lost, unemployment in most areas is hitting levels not seen in a quarter of a century or more, and the US government is borrowing almost half of every dollar they spend. Deficits are planned for more than 10 years out of approximately $1 TRILLION per year. That’s planned spending that doesn’t even include the full impact of healthcare reform (if that survives in any form). This cannot go on forever. Unlike what some in congress may say, we cannot borrow our way to prosperity. The United States is not immune to reality.

The Fed continues to print money to buy up debt from the Treasury and our lenders are getting tired of it. China has said that they will start to diversify their foreign reserves. Of course when they say that, they mean that they are going to start dumping the $2 TRILLION dollars that they hold in US currency. Certainly this is one of the reasons gold has come back up to $1000 an ounce as China and other countries move away from the dollar towards investments that will provide protection against American inflation. For us that means an uptick in inflation considering $2 TRILLION will start floating back into the system.

Economists have started to say that we are pulling out of the recession, which is true, we are pulling out of the latest trough. But was that the bottom? Cash for clunkers spurred an artificial boom of 700K cars sold, but what will an artificial boom do to demand in the next two quarters?

The method deployed for the stimulus has never worked and is not going to work for us long term. The government can’t borrow and spend the country into sustained prosperity.

What’s worse is that the backlash against these monstrous deficits will not result in a cut back in spending, but rather an increase in taxes. This will only force more jobs and more companies off shore or out of business. Throw in a health insurance mandate and you’ll crush the small businesses that make up half of the economy. Mandating insurance coverage doesn’t magically give companies the ability to afford it.

The dollar just hit a new low for the year. Gold is soaring. High unemployment.

Have we paved the way for a solid, sustained recovery, or are we going through a sugar spike that is going to leave us worse than how it found us.

Cut spending. Cut taxes. Pull some money out of the system. Stop lending money to ourselves. Restore investor confidence in the US dollar.

Friday Rant

Just a quick rant list for Friday:

- Van Jones the “Green Jobs” Czar. This is just one more example of the kind of people that the President chooses to associate himself with. This week Van Jones made news by referring to republicans using a cheap, school yard expletive. But more research into Van Jones reveals several odd things. Number one he is a self described communist. Ok, that’s a little different. He also signed on to a 9/11 “truther” petition that demands investigations into the US government and makes claims that the Bush administration at the very least KNEW about the 9/11 attacks and did nothing to stop them. Oh yah, definitely cabinet level material here.

- Rep Charlie Rangel. Under investigation by the ethics committee for failing to correctly report his income from rental properties around the world, Congressman Rangel, the Chairmen of the House Ways and Means Committee (you know the one that is responsible for tax law), gave campaign contributions to members of the ethics committee that were investigating him. Hmmm…. sounds kind of fishy to me.

- Sen Harry Reid. Recently the Senator Majority Leader endeared himself further to his constituents by telling the largest newspaper in Las Vegas that he hopes they go out of business. The paper responded with this scathing editorial that left me laughing and cheering. Combine that with the fact that Reid trails either of his republican challengers significantly, I would say the Senator Majority Leader will be looking at unemployment come 2010.

- Vice President Biden. Well, just saying Vice President Biden kind of explains everything, but this week he said that the economic stimulus package had exceeded their expectations. REALLY!? I hope someone on his staff showed him the new unemployment figures. Of course unemployment figures stop counting people who have given up looking for jobs. The official number is 9.7, but some say that real unemployment may be as high as 16%.

- The Presidential address to the school children of the nation. My first thought was, “wow, has the President already run out of groups that want to hear him speak?” Then when I read the “accompanying materials” that encouraged teachers to prepare for the speech by reading books about presidents, or a book about Barack Obama, and included all kinds of activities for kids to discuss how they are going to help the President. I don’t know the whole thing just seems creepy. My kids say that their school hasn’t even mentioned it. Personally I think the whole thing is going to back fire and the kids that do see it will mock, rather than admire, the effort.

Health Care Reform Goes Hand in Hand with Tort Reform

As politicians head back to Washington and start reviewing and debating the latest version of what will be the Kennedy Healthcare Act or some version thereof, I thought it would be good to look at something this bill is guaranteed to miss, tort reform.

It’s one of those political, Washington sounding phrases that basically means we need to get a hold of the trial lawyers who troll around outside doctor’s offices waiting for them to make a mistake. Don’t get me wrong; just like anything that has been abused, there are legitimate cases against irresponsible doctors. The system should be set up to deal reasonably with those and discourage and weed out the vampires that bleed the system.

These frivolous lawsuits cost you money and drive up the over all cost of healthcare. Malpractice insurance isn’t cheap! It varies by region and the type of practice you have, but it can easily run into the six figure range for an annual premium, especially for more high risk type specialties like OBs and nuerosurgeons. But the costs aren’t all direct. Every time a doctor meets with a patient they not only have to focus on treating a condition, or finding the cause of a problem, they have to think about what tests they need to run just to cover their backside in case of a lawsuit. The costs for people in rural areas are even more significant because many times a doctor can’t make enough money with a rural practice to cover his costs, so many communities don’t have a doctor, forcing them to commute to the doctor’s office. Sound familiar?

Now lets look at the scenario that occurred in Texas.

According to an Op-ed by the Texas Governor, Rick Perry, they were faced with a serious issue six years ago. Doctors were leaving the state in droves. 13 out of 17 liability insurers (providing malpractice insurance) left the state. Costs to doctors were going through the roof, which elevates the costs to the patients. 24 counties had no primary care doctors at all. 2/3 of the counties had no practicing obstetricians and 6/10 had no pediatricians.

Sounds like a mess doesn’t it?

So they reformed it, capping non-economic damages and put and end to law suits dragging on for years that do nothing but rack up lawyer’s fees.

And the market responded.

Ten insurance companies came into the state and malpractice insurance costs plummeted by an average of 27%. Over 14,000 doctors have come back to, or started up their practices in Texas in the first five years since the reforms. More OBs, pediatricians, and general practitioners are moving into areas that have never had these services in their communities.

In all fairness, there is one group that is very unhappy with the changes; the trial lawyers.

So why doesn’t the President’s healthcare reform plan include tort reform?

Take a look at this list of donations of trial lawyers to politicians, then take a look at the fact that lawyers/law firms gave over $178 million dollars to Democrats during the last election cycle ($54 million to Republicans). $eem$ like a pretty $trait forward an$wer to me.

Tell your reps you don’t want ANY healthcare reform without TORT reform. Let’s fix the system.

A healing elixir

It’s been quite the week. After a very busy weekend I went to bed early Monday night with a sore throat. Other than a trip to the doctor’s office, an occasional visit to the rest room, and two occasions where I became so hungry the pain woke me up, I stayed in bed until Wednesday morning. Nothing like a week’s worth of sleep and some antibiotics to clear things up.

The funny thing is I tried herbal teas with honey, Advil, Tylenol, and even a special prescription mouthwash that is suppose to be great for sore throats, but none of it made my throat feel any better. Non-contagious I came into work yesterday with my throat still killing me and poured myself the first coffee I had had in three days. It worked beautifully. My throat felt better for hours. I honestly thought it was going to make it worse, but it was like a magic salve of goodness running down my throat. I’ve had strep before and coffee has never helped, but I’ve never tried French press coffee with strep. I think there must be something about the oils in it… I don’t know, but it was beautiful. Later in the afternoon it started bothering me again and I poured myself another cup and it got better with every sip. I highly recommend.

Of course, I highly recommend the press anyway, especially if you are a heavy coffee drinker and want to cut back. Huh? Oh yes, I use to drink pots, if not gallons of coffee a day. Now, just two to three cups a day and I am gooooood. If you don’t like coffee because of its bitterness, but you really like the smell of coffee, you have to try the press. It’s all the beauties of coffee and none of the draw backs. I’ve been on the press for a couple of years now and have even converted my wife. In fact… we don’t even OWN a drip coffee maker right now. The two that we had both busted and we have no desire to replace them. I am in the market for a bigger press, just in case we have guests who want an amazing cup of coffee.

I still have some drip coffee on occasion and in a pinch it gets you through, but why someone would be willing to subject themselves to that on a regular basis, knowing the rich, bold, flavorful goodness of the French press, is beyond me.

Speaking of which… I think it’s time for some right now.