2009 The Year Prostitution Become Legal and Taxpayer Funded

As I reviewed the proposed Health Care Reform bill, senate version, it became apparent that the true affect of this bill is the legalization of prostitution in the Senate. Votes were bought and paid for.

Harry Reid served the role of Pimp in Chief. Can't you just picture him in a full length white fur, with a tricked out Escalade? Just a few examples of how our Senators proved they were easy, but not cheap:

Mary Landrieu $300 million, weren't you moved when she proudly proclaimed it wasn't $100 million, but $300?
Chris Dodd $100 million for a hospital to be named later
Ben Nelson $100 million in Medicaid expansion costs matched at 100% Federal share
Other notable sales:
Florida's exemption from losing Medicare Advantage $4 billion
Michigan's exemption for Blue Cross Blue Shield of MI from insurance taxes
Connecticut's exemption for Mutual of Omaha from insurance taxes

The only money the government has comes from our pockets (federal taxes--right front pocket, state taxes--left front pocket, county and local--back right and left pockets). I don't know about you, but I don't even remember being kissed.

Because I Say So!

What former child doesn’t remember being frustrated and angry when our parents responded to “why?” with, “Because I said so.

Because I said so seems to be the up and coming response for governments, academics and the media throughout the world. As I read the December 3, 2009, Wall Street Journal I was struck with how many times the articles listing abuses of individual rights or lazy scientific outcomes ended with a quote from a government or academic official plainly stating that none of the preceding incidents, nothing in the interviews with numerous sources, none of the facts listed were true.

Why? Were they countered with facts, examples of in accuracies, evidence from well managed scientific inquiry? No. None of the accounts of opponents of governments or scientific findings were true, because the official government or scientific arbiter said so.

Consider if you will, the article by Farnaz Fasshari, “Iranian Crackdown Goes Global”. Accounts of Iranians living abroad being detained and questions as they enter Iran, or who have had their members arrested or threatened in retaliation for speaking out against the regime on Face book, Twitter, You Tube, etc are detailed in the article. The Iranian official contacted simply responded”…false…we have no reports of…” Take my word, because I say so.

The second example is Daniel Henninger’s editorial entitled, “Climategate: Science is Dying”. In this piece he rightly points out the scientific community, once viewed as the last bastion of fact based, evidence based decision making, should be concerned about the East Anglia Research Units liberal use of bias in interrupting and, shall I say, fudging the finding related to climate. He points out that this scandal has little to with climate, but much to do with how science must move to restore its creditability.

He states, “because ‘science’ said so, all the world was about to undergo a vast reordering of human behavior at almost unimaginable financial cost.”

Even as children we knew that the response, “because I said so” was either an indication of the lack of a logical explanation for why; or, a certainty that the real answer was beyond our capacity to understand and our parent’s patience to explain it.

Just as we outgrew accepting this answer from our parents and teachers, we, as adults must outgrow the willingness to accept this answer from those in positions of authority such as academics, the media and politicians. We must shirk our intellectual laziness and find the answer to why ourselves. Try reading a source document related to an area of interest in your world, like say a few hundred pages of any health care reform legislation, or cap and trade. Not because I say so, but because you want to know why?

When Democrats give advice to Republicans

During a conference I attended this week, a democrat operative give a speech about the political climate in America today. Interestingly enough, he was there to tell us about the success of the democrats during the last election and his party's goals and objectives for the coming years. Instead, he told us about what the republicans must do to succeed in the future.

Excuse me, but is he in the internal meetings of the republican party? Is he one of the republican strategists? Wouldn't he know more about the democrats than the republicans?

He outlined in great detail what republicans must do. For me, this is a little like having the person who wants to buy your house or business telling you how to get the highest price. Do not believe them.

Democrats, get your own house in order. Republicans, if you are dumb enough to take advice from your opposition, you deserve to lose. Independents, closely review each group's stands and policies, and don't let either side define you!

Wasn't it the serpent who told Eve how great the apple was? Do you think he wanted her to succeed with God?

I thought Murder was a Hate Crime?

Why does the life of an elected official have more value than the life of a person on the streets of the District of Columbia or any other city in the United States? Why do the child, other adults or the Judge killed not merit special treatment.

First, all those hurt and killed and their family members from the Tucson shooting are in my heart and prayers.

My question, as the Black stepmother of two heterosexual, white males is why is it that my sons are the least valued lives in our society? Why will the hate crime question be asked if something happens to my daughter, a white female and me, a black female, but not my sons?

Why can't we just treat murder as murder? Keep the distinctions of 1st degree, 2nd degree and manslaughter--measures of intent.

As I listen to the aftermath of the Tucson shootings, I hear those who say that shooting a member of Congress should merit a special level of punishment. It would be added to the list that includes sexual orientation, gender, race, ethnicity and several other categories of special circumstances due to characteristics of the victim's life or profession, and the level of bias one can conjure after the fact.

Stop! Murder is murder. If the laws we have do not deter those who have hatred and murder in their hearts, what hope do you have for more laws? Each and every life should be valued. If anything, those of us who choose public speaking or service are making a choice. We value our beliefs enough to risk our safety.

Our families will not grieve more or less than any other victim's. The loss will not be greater or less to one's circle of influence and friends.

I cry out for equal protection, not special treatment after the fact. Let's not use a horrible event to create new separations between citizens.

As Benjamin Franklin once said, "we must all hang together or we shall most assuredly all hang separately." As a society it is as true today as in 1776. Don't let us be divided and defeated by the forces of anarchy--America hangs in the balance.

Competitive Option, a Health Care Reform?

More years ago than I would like to remember, I was the Deputy Director of Medical Assistance and Health Services (Medicaid) in New Jersey. At the time the State owned a managed care plan--Garden State Health Plan. New Jersey built the Garden State Health Plan, because no commercial/private plans were willing to enroll Medicaid members at that time.

As private plans moved into the Medicaid market, New Jersey chose to move all of the AFDC/TANF members(at the time this was the Aid to Families with Dependent Children populations, now known as Temporary Assistance to Needy Families)into managed care. At that time, the State faced a bit of a dilemma. The Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA), now Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS, yes I know it is missing an M) questioned how private plans could compete with a state-owned plan. Further, they questioned the incentive to assign members who failed to choose a plan fairly amongst plans when the State had an ownership stake in one of the competitors.

Even in 1997, it was common knowledge that you can't make the rules, regulate an industry, and not at least have the appearance of bias. What industry would we trust to police itself...other than the legislative branch of government. Ok, it not that we trust them to do it, but they make the rules, so we can't stop them.

By definition, a public option, that is owned and operated by those who make the rules for all of the competitors can not even give appearance of fair competition. Let alone actually compete fairly. No health plan or insurance company can levy taxes or print money when it fails to meet its capital requirements.

Competitive Option--not so much. Oh, and New Jersey sold the members of the Garden State Health Plan to a private plan for $15 million. The reason for the sale noted in the New York Times and attributed to Governor Whitman was "privately run health maintenance organizations could operate it more efficiently."

Hold that thought!

Barbie and me!

So my morning Wall Street Journal read started with an article about Barbie. Yes, run off elections in Afghanistan, secret developments on the health care reform front, and this health care expert is reading an article about Barbie.

Did you know that she has had 130 difference careers since 1959? That's slightly less than the number of companies I have worked for. In the 1960s, she was an astronaut. In the 1980s she wore power suits, just like me. She even wore Jackie Kennedy's bob cut.

Even when I knew that bound feet and waist too small to accommodate ribs was not reality, I knew that any and every career that I could qualify for was a possibility. Hey, if she could do it while trying not to tip over from the upper body weight and the tiny feet, it would be easy for me.

Mostly, as girls, we knew that Barbie was plastic and an fantasy. Apparently, we had one up on designer Ralph Lauren. In our world, Barbie was just a doll. Some where along the way designers like Mr. Lauren forgot that. Firing a model for weighing 120 lbs and photo-shopping her until her head is bigger than her waist is just...crazy. I remember 120 lbs...let's see, I was 12 years old. See to me having a doll is pretty harmless, but taking real live people and photo-shopping them or requiring them to starve themselves to meet a vision is dangerous.

For my generation, Barbie was plastic...for girls now the models on magazines look like they are flesh and blood. Our daughter is in fashion school, so we watch a lot of model/designer "reality" (yeah, right) TV. When the competing models were telling one girl that she could never win. "They won't go with a plus size girl" (she wore an size 8), I was ready to blow. When the speaker of the house is so plastic surgeried-out that she can't express dismay? Houston, we have a problem.

So please give me back the days of Barbie, with the 130 careers and the you can be anything spirit. When we knew she was just a really pretty doll. Kim Kardashian run that picture with the cellulite.

This Black Barbie will proudly exhibit my Rocky the Flying Squirrel triceps, my less than flat tummy and my dimples...not in my face cheeks.

But thanks Barbie for letting me know as a kid that the only reality that mattered was I didn't have limits! Hey, what did Ken do for a living?

I miss shame!

I really miss the concept of shame...not the stone the fallen woman type. The type of shame that I miss is the let's feel accountable for our own choices type. I miss the concept of privacy.

Lately, I have been spending a lot of time in airports, over hearing cellphone conversations. A couple of things are becoming very clear to me. First, no one is accountable for their problems. Either the evil company or coworker or some other being caused their problem.

No, the individual complaining didn't contribute to the situation.

Secondly, people seem to be entitled to promotions, bonuses, jobs, unemployment, free health care, free food, pay without work, etc...not on the basis of hard work, but just because they showed up and spent the time.

Thirdly, corporations, the media and politicians are collections of people--individuals, and should be judged accordingly. All (fill in the blank) are not the same. Like people there are good corporations, media and politicians, just like there are bad ones.

Now back to the cell phone. Here are some basic rules to keep in mind:
* If your conversation involves sex, body parts, body functions or things that come out of body parts--don't discuss it in public.

* At least two people in any waiting area know your company, and probably one of the people you just maligned.

* Yes, you are great and all knowing. Everyone else is misguided and too stupid to take your advice...Isn't it enough for you to know that? Must I know it, too? I don't even know your name.

* If you are not ethnic, and do not actually come from an ethnic background, don't add it for affect in your cellphone conversations. (If I hear one more white man talking like a tv ghetto woman, or one more young girl trying to sound like a gangster...I will be a headline)

* Mostly, I know you are as bored in the airport as I am. Don't let boredom rob you of your privacy and dignity. Think about how you would perceive a stranger having your conversation in public. Then picture that person sitting across from you at a job interview...would you hire them?

Health Care Reform/Independence

The Wall Street Journal published an article entitled, "Spine Surgery Found No Better Than Placebo". Let's not get caught up in whether or not the spinal surgery works, let's look at the politics of this article. Health care reform, as currently proposed, allows the government to use "expert advise, based on the 'best' research to determine which procedures will be paid for by health insurance...not just government insurance, but health insurance. These decisions, in theory will be based on, independent studies. Who funded these studies? The federal government. Doesn't that make these studies about as independent as my right hip is from left hip?

One can not be considered independent if you have dog in the fight. The studies were conducted in the US, Britain and Australia. Does it matter that two of the three countries have government health care? Does it matter that the sample of participants was limited in the US because many surgeons who believe the procedure refused to participate? Does this affect the sample, and thus the outcome? Maybe.

What is clear, is that the outcome of these government funded studies may allow the governments to stop covering a service that people and physicians have evidence is helpful to patients.

The issue here is the definition of independence. Shame on the researchers and the reporters who use the word independent in this situation. We must change our thinking to match the times!

Faith of My Father

My father is buried at Logan National Cemetery under a federal headstone with a cross on it. Around him and near him are those with Stars of David on their stones. They are buried on federally owned ground. The federally owned ground that they died protecting.

The Mojave Desert Cross, a memorial to World War I veterans, has been declared unconstitutional by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court of the United States will hear an appeal of this ruling. This simple cross, that has stood for 75 years as a symbol of healing for veterans was attacked by a person in Oregon who felt that if they should ever drive through the Mojave desert, the sight of this cross would offend them.

There is a wonderful video at http://www.donttearmedown.com. This cross is currently hidden from those it heals by an ugly plywood box. I don't want to see Arlington Cemetery or any other military cemeteries shrouded in plywood. This must stop now!

If this case is won by the ACLU, how much time do think it will take before they want to cover the crosses, stars of David and other religious symbols on these Federal sites.

Please share this. Stop the madness! Donate what you can to the wonderful lawyers who are willing to fight for those who fought and died for us. If you are offended by my father’s or other soldier’s faith, then don’t look, but let them keep in death, the symbols that meant so much to them in life!

Do Big Tents Work?

I just had a birthday. Thank you. As part of this birthday, friends from all walks of life and times of my life contacted me to say HBD. One friend, who is really family and someone that I can truly say I love indicated that he felt that abortion was one of the topics where our President wants a big tent.

I am trying to figure out what a big tent means. Not just for abortion, but for any life and death, health or hurt issue.

It is vital to have big tents for talking. We need safe places to speak with one another. To talk and really listen to one another, or no new ideas or changes can ever occur. However, at some point we must agree to disagree. At that point how do we stay under the same tent? Supporting the same people?

Do we vote against our core beliefs in order to stay under the tent? Do we give our resources and support to those who work against what we feel is right?

At what point must we stand up and say, "This is what I believe. There is no way that I can acquiesce to your wishes?"

Can we stand together, under the same tent if the result is that I condone, support the death of the innocent with my presence and gentleness?

When is it time to step out of the tent, brave the weather, fight the fight? How surprised will we be when we see all those willing to leave the tent with us?

Government Health Care means Government Choice

2009 has been an eventful year for me. One of those events was the opportunity for this adjunct professor of health administration to travel to Canada to learn a little about the Canadian health care system. Like many Americans, I have been guilty of considering Canada as the attic where our strangely bilingual cousins who have some weird relationship with the British Royal Family live.

There is so much to learn from Canada's health care system as we think of reform. Oh and the Canadian health care system has a name--Medicare. You know, the same name as our government-operated health care program that is eating the Federal budget like a PAC Man on methamphetamine? Here are some observations:

You Say Single Payer-I Say Socialized--proponents of the Canadian system like to point out that in socialized systems doctors are employees of government. In Canada, doctors do not work for the government, instead the government is the only payer. You say potaaato, I say potahto. The docs still have their own offices, overhead, etc. Government run health care is socialized health care.

Payment/Insurance does not Equal Access to Care Interestingly enough, Canada proved that payment for care does not equal access. My favorite quote on this is from Canadian Supreme Court Chief Justice Beverly McLachin, "Access to a waiting list is not access to health care." Access is such an issue that Canada has a 10 year plan to improve wait times. There are websites operated by each Territory/Province publishing the wait times for covered procedures. Just a couple of examples--Manitoba-15 weeks for a Stress Test; British Columbia--8 weeks for cataracts surgery and 12 weeks for knee replacement.

Taxes? Many like to cite Canada's 29% average federal tax rate as proof that government funded health care won't be expensive. I say, not so fast. Since the Territories/Provinces operate these programs, lets add in the average ~15% tax that are collected at this level. For those who are math challenged that's 44% income tax. Did I mention a tax up to 1.95% on employers, too.

Premiums Yes. In addition to the tax load and the 30% average out of pocket expenditures for health care, many of the Territories/Provinces charge a monthly premium for this care. Folks under US Medicare you need supplemental insurance for very high co-pays and deductible (unless you join a private managed care plan), many items aren't covered and in some areas, not a single physician will accept assignment(in other words you pay and wait for the government to reimburse you). Does this sound familiar?

Private insurance is another cost for Canadians Until 2005, when the Canadian Supreme Court ruled that Canadians have the right to buy private insurance, Canada, Cuba and North Korea were the only countries in which private health insurance was illegal and one was not allowed to pay privately for any service covered by Medicare.

Payer's Choice Don't forget that the payer decides what is covered. Consider that Canada is a country without any restriction on abortions and it pays for those services through Medicare. There are waiting list for so many services, but the money is there to make sure that even someone in the last trimester of pregnancy can get an abortion without a wait. If we, in the United States, turn our health care over to government, we will turnover our right to decide what services we want covered.

Instead of building a system that 3 of the Supreme Court Justices in Canada see as possibly unconstitutional, why not just fix our system. How you ask? http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006813

Address the 10% fraud and abuse in the health care system.

Address the 5-9% costs of excessive liability in our system (by this I mean frivolous lawsuits, punitive damages, the defensive practice of medicine. No, I do not mean taking away a persons right to sue for real damages related to medical malpractice or abuse)

Use the real numbers to discuss the issue of the uninsured. If we have 50 million uninsured, consider that we have between 12 and 20 million illegal immigrants here who do not have access to insurance. Government health care will not, should not address this prior to addressing the issue of illegal immigration. What about those with access to affordable insurance who do not enroll--students, young adults,etc.

Let's not throw out a system that works for 84% of Americans without first addressing the problems that we can easily fix.

Moral Double Standards!

Humor me. As a 50+ former beauty queen type this whole thing with Carrie Prejean is making me crazy. Not because of the beauty queen stuff, but because a conservative, especially a Christian, is held to a much different standard than other people. For example, liberal feminists(?)who fought to protect a man who callously and wantonly used women as disposal sex tools--Bill Clinton, wouldn't stand up for the women who were his victims.

Now a very honest liberal I know once explained it this way--"We don't claim to have any moral standards, so we can't be held accountable for not living up to them. You claim standards, so you are accountable."

Interestingly, enough we can tell that they have no moral standards--let's see their longest serving Senator is a former Exalted Cyclops of the KKK; all of the state houses flying the "stars and bars" Rebel flag had those raised by Democrat governors; plagiarist as the VP; tax cheaters everywhere, but most notably heading the agency that collects taxes and prosecutes the rest of us if we make the same "honest mistakes". Need I say more.

Ms. Prejean is being persecuted for posing in lingerie ads, not smut, not porn. But the arbiters of right, who have no moral standards feel qualified to apply our moral standards for us. Let's just forget that her true crime was standing up for the Biblical definition of marriage. Oh, for those of you who think we who think that marriage is a man and a woman, but if you must then have a domestic partnership. WE are not intolerant. We love the sinner not the sin. Please try to remember that the radical Islamist that you think we should just talk with, that you defend as poor victims of our imperialism, they stone, behead, etc. homosexuals. That's to me is intolerance and wrong. Expressing an opinion should not be.

For those of you who feel the need to apply our standards for us--Please try to remember that Christians are forgiven, not perfect. And that one stubble does not negate the validity of the walk.

Anyone recall that her stance on gay marriage was the same as President Obama? Oh and by the way, Ms. Prejean should thank liberal critics. Do you know the name of the winner of the Miss USA pageant?

My I See Identification Please!

Conservatives are talking a lot about how to win in the 2010. I humbly suggest that until voter fraud is fixed no one has a hope of a fair and honest election. Voters should have to show an ID!

Think of all the activities that require identification--have you taken a plane or train lately, applied for public assistance or Medicaid, applied for social security or Medicare, agreed to volunteer for any activity that includes other peoples children, cashed a check, checked into a hotel room, used a credit card, purchased a firearm? If you said yes, then you have been asked for ID.

So tell me, how is it discriminatory to ask for identification when people vote? The very poor have IDs to get cash assistance and Medicaid...the very wealthy to fly. Everyone in between to do everything in between.

It does discriminate against groups and candidates who bus ineligible people to the polls. Or against those who are voting for the illegal aliens given drivers licenses and registered to vote in lieu of being turned into INS for $5,000 per person in an unnamed southern county. I wonder what that sheriff and judge did with the money? I wonder who those illegals voted for in the last election?

Don't Let the Left Define Conservatism

I keep hearing that we must move to the middle to win in the future. I don't believe it! This philosophy is coming from the people who let the New York Times and the popular press choose our candidate during the last election.

Consider the case of Arlen Specter. For years those of us in Pennsylvania let the press and our national politicians tell us that this "liberal light" candidate was what we needed to win in PA. What did it buy us? An unreliable vote. Such weak loyalty to those who elected him, that he was willing to openly take his ball and go home as soon as he thought he couldn't win. Forget the letter after the politician's name and look at what they believe.

Real Conservatism is a belief that life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness begins at conception not at birth; that the Constitution should guide the decisions of politicians, the courts and the actions of all Americans; that strong borders make a strong country; that freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion; and that this is a country founded on Judeo-Christian values.

It seems so simple. So Jeb Bush and those who are meeting this week to define the future of the republican party, remember that you have nothing without conservatives, and this is what we believe!

CBS Polls Where are you?

Imagine my surprise as a Black woman who so disapproves of President Obama's actions as president to find out that 96% of Black Americans approve and 4% don't know or care? We'll talk about the 4% in a minute.

So who is CBS talking to? Were you called? None of my very pro-life, pro-low taxes, pro-2nd amendment, oh, let's just say it pro-Constitution and Bill of Rights friends were called.

So this amazing, profound, Black mandate came from 973 people who actually still answer their residential, land line or who will answer an unknown number on their randomly called cellphone. Not 973 Black people, 973 total people. They admit that Blacks were over samples compared to census measures of actual percentage of the population--212 of 973 or about 22% of the sampled.

Not too surprisingly this poll was a partnership between CBS and the New York Times. Not too vested in the outcome!

So let me ask you hardworking, taxpaying Americans(Black)--when was the last time you had time to talk to a pollster on the telephone? Answer a random cellphone call? Or if you are conservative, continued to talk with anyone who initially identified his or herself as being connected to the NY Times or CBS? Sort of explains the don't knows, too!

I rest my case!