RSS

Category Archives: Free Market

The “Would You Rather” Game… DJT vs HRC

Given that Trump or Hillary will win, here’s the “Would you rather” game… …Trump or Hillary version:

20160417793226317[1]

Who would you rather give 5 acres of your own commercial real estate to for development?
– Trump

Who would you rather have negotiate w/ Iran for hostages and nuclear weapons?
– Hillary already failed at that… …so Trump

Who would you rather have deal with Syria, Libya, Iraq, Pakistan, and Afghanistan?
– Hillary already failed at that… …so Trump

Who would you rather have deal with Russia, Putin, the possibly illegal sales of uranium by Hillary, Crimea, Ukraine, and Georgia?
– Hillary already failed at that… …so Trump

Who would you rather have deal with China, the trade gap, and the currency manipulation?
– Hillary already failed at that… …so Trump

Who would you rather have control the borders?
– Hillary will bring in another 1,000,000 from the middle east of which at least 2% (20,000) will be terrorists… …so Trump
– Hillary will keep borders open for 1,000s of Americans to be murdered or otherwise killed by illegal aliens… …so Trump

Who would you rather have nominate to the Supreme Court?
– Hillary supported Sotomayor, Kagan, and nominee Garland… …so Trump and his list of good Conservative Candidates

Who would you rather lead on healthcare?
– Hillary has already failed at that (twice)… …so Trump

Who would you rather be the chief enforcer of America’s laws?
– Hillary has been breaking Americas laws and subverting ethics for 30 years… …so Trump

Who would you rather be the Commander In Chief of the Armed Forces
– They hate Hillary and the continuing social experiments… …so Trump

So… …Trump!

#tcot

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on August 30, 2016 in Election, Free Market, Freedom, Health Care

 

Tags: , ,

Energy Plan – Reply From/To Governor Nixon

The first letter below was sent from Governor Nixon in response to David Epps’s original letter voicing concerns about Missouri’s Energy Plans and the better option of GSHP.  The second letter below is David Epps’s response-to-the-response.


 

December 10, 2015

Mr. David Epps
406 E. Cape Rock
Cape Girardeau, MO 63701-3202

Dear Mr. Epps:

This email is in response to your correspondence to Missouri Governor Jay Nixon. Thank you for contacting our office. Your email has been reviewed and shared with appropriate staff.

The Missouri Department of Economic Development (DED) is the state agency to best address your matter. We have forwarded your correspondence to the DED Director’s Office. A response has been left up to their discretion.

Again, thank you for your correspondence. Please let us know if we may be of assistance in the future.

Sincerely,

Sam Rourke
Constituent Services Liaison
Office of Missouri Governor Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon
201 West Capitol Avenue, Room 216
P.O. Box 720
Jefferson City, MO 65102-0720
T. (573) 751-3222
F. (573) 751-1495
http://www.governor.mo.gov
Follow: @GovJayNixon


David Epp’s response to Governor Nixon’s letter:

Governor,

RE: Your response to my Letter regarding your Comprehensive State Energy Plan.

You said: “A response has been left up to their [sic DED] discretion.”

You sir are failing to live up to your own words “balance the need for low-cost, reliable energy with our duty to be responsible stewards of the environment”!

You Sir, are an irresponsible steward of the environment in that you have left it up to those that committed the egregious error to correct their error at their discretion. It is your job to provide oversight to prevent DED to continue to commit unrestrained manipulation of the facts and blatant bias!windmills

I have sent the letters to all the Missouri Rural Electric Cooperatives and associations, and to a good number of the your Energy steering committee members, including the University of Missouri at Rolla and GSHP associations/Installers and Missouri Chambers of Commerce and commented on every news paper article reporting on your plan that I could find.

Consult with any expert and you will find that geothermal energy and GSHP’s is the least cost energy and has the least effect on the environment (that includes wind mills and solar electric panels) to obtain 70% of the energy consumed in Missouri homes.

Thank You
David Epps, BSEE
Cape Girardeau

It seems that the only methods the governments can fathom for reducing energy usage are solar panels, windmills, and biofuels… …all ripe for crony-capitalist corruption.  Hopefully, the next governor will promote energy consumption methods that actually work.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on December 15, 2015 in Free Market

 

Tags: , ,

Letter To Jay Nixon – Failure Of Energy Plan

From David Epps…

 

Governor,

Your Comprehensive State Energy Plan took a terribly wrong approach!

For home and business owners/renters It is not about sources and demands of electrical energy as the plan is written it is about sources and demands of heat energy

Energy use in the US homes is all about BTUs (heat energy). 70% of the energy consumption in home is derived from sources of and measured in units of BTUs (heat energy) not KWh’s (electrical energy).  Your furnace, hot water heater, and air conditioner are sized based upon the amount of BTUs required.

I demand a rewrite of your Comprehensive State Energy Plan basing your analysis on the sources and demands of BTUs. This will give the true picture of the challenges and solutions facing Missourians high cost of energy.  You directed the Missouri Department of Energy to prepare a plan to “balance the need for low-cost, reliable energy with our duty to be responsible stewards of the environment”.  The current plan does not satisfy your requirements.missouri-governor-mansion

Upon a rethink of the plan, you will find that Missouri has countless BTUs of geothermal energy below our feet, all of which can be harvested by ground source heat pumps (GSHP).

$100’s of millions have been spent over the last 6 years on solar electricity and wind mills and their electrical generation has barely scratched the surface of the demand while the generation of boundless heat energy in the earth has been ignored.  It is movement of heat energy (BTUs) using electricity and natural gas that cost so much and is in so much demand by Missourians. Moving Geothermal energy, which is free and inexhaustible, costs significantly less.

Only a pitiful 0.25 trillion BTUs were generated by all solar electric panels in Missouri thus far. While, if in just 2014, the $187 million invested on solar installations in Missouri were invested in GSHP’s, 1.44 trillion BTUs of heat energy would have been generated and consumed in Missouri homes for heating and cooling and hot water.

Your recommendations in paragraph 3.1 Strengthening Missouri’s Renewable Energy Standard are mostly poor as they require more regulations, but specifically:

  • Geo thermal AKA GSHP is a renewable resource and is not even mentioned
  • You failed to prioritize your recommendations and that is needed for any legislative action to proceed
  • Priority should be given to rental property rehab and upgrades where about 60% of Missourians live as most of these apartments use electric resistive heat, the most expensive heating there is by whatever means the electricity is generated.
  • GSHP in the winter reduce electrical consumption by 75% over a electric resistive heater and thus electrical consumption is reduced.

By your focus on electrical energy and ignoring heat energy, your Department of Energy is a dismal failure (they don’t know energy), and your plan does not guide Missourians to the correct solutions to reduce their utility bills.

Thank You

David Epps

 
1 Comment

Posted by on December 2, 2015 in Climate Change, Free Market

 

Tags: , , , ,

Your US House Member And The Farm Bill Vote

As expected, the Farm Bill was re-married with the Welfare/Food Stamp Bill and was an assault on the taxpayers, freedom, and the free market in general.

Sadly, the conservative position as well un-represented by the Missouri Republican Coalition with all Republicans voting for the bill:

http://www.heritageactionscorecard.com/votes/vote/h31-2014

It’s disappointing, as I look at the current scorecard for Missouri (a bit differently than most), I see that:

  • Billy Long votes against conservative positions 18% of the time
  • Jason Smith 24% of the time
  • Ann Wagner 31% of the time
  • Vicky Hartzler 32% of the time
  • Sam Graves 33% of the time
  • Blaine Luetkemeyer 37% of the time
  • Senator Blunt votes against conservative positions 43% (almost half) of the time

Notice how often the Missouri Democrats vote with the other side of the aisle – lock – stock – barrel:

  • William Lacy Clay votes against liberal positions 16% of the time
  • Emanuel Cleaver 10% of the time
  • Clair McCaskill 6% of the time

Some middle-of-the-roader Clair is… …but the point to note is that when our “conservative” representatives go across the aisle… …this country continues to move to the left… …toward tyranny.

11841-left-turn-sticker[1]

 
2 Comments

Posted by on January 30, 2014 in Congress, Conservative, Free Market, Republican

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

The Boeing Bribe

According to Wikipedia, “a tax credit is a sum deducted from the total amount a taxpayer owes to the state. A tax credit may be granted for various types of taxes, such as an income tax, property tax, or VAT. It may be granted in recognition of taxes already paid, as a subsidy, or to encourage investment or other behaviors.”

With the enactment of SB1 in Missouri, when Boeing shows a profit and there are $150,000,000 in taxes due for 2014, then Boeing will pay NO taxes.  I repeat; Boeing will pay no taxes.  However, if McDonald’s shows a profit and there are $150,000,000 in taxes due, then McDonald’s will pay $150,000,000 in taxes.

When a corporation shows a profit, a portion of that profit is collected in taxes and is the property of Missouri’s citizens. Boeing is being handed $150,000,000 of Missourians’ tax dollars.  How is this not corporate welfare?

This is the epitome of picking winners and losers
This is 100% anti-free-market
This is 100% anti-capitalism
This is 100% crony-capitalism.
This is 100% corporate welfare… ..giving property of Missouri taxpayers to a specific corporation.

So, the legislators that approved SB1 voted for picking winners and losers, anti-free-market, anti-capitalism and crony-capitalism legislation.  Is this why you sent them to Jefferson City?

But, what’s worse is that our Governor and General Assembly spent nearly $100,000 proving that they have created an anti-business climate in Missouri.  That’s the real travesty of this Special Session; Missouri is so anti-business, they have to bribe companies to come here.

Stunningly disappointed.

h/t wsj.com

It’s only a 3-page bill, so take the time to read it.  The reasons for the emergency clause seem to be completely at odds with reality.  Add a couple of clauses related to affirmative action and everyone… …but the taxpayer… …is happy.

 
5 Comments

Posted by on December 9, 2013 in Capitalism, Free Market, Republican

 

Tags: , , ,

The Missouri Legislature Must ENACT Right-To-Work

The Missouri Senate has passed, and the Missouri House is considering SB 29 which will give a public employee the right to choose whether or not to allow Labor Unions to withhold fees and whether those fees can be used for Political Purposes.

In response to this effort by the Missouri Legislature, the Communications Workers of America Union sent out the following e-mail blast:

CWA E-Mail - 20130410

Again, that e-mail is sent in opposition to a bill that would give the CWA’s own members the right to choose whether or not union dues are withheld and used for political purposes!  You would think…

.

For some odd reason, First Responders are not granted the right to choose under this bill, but I digress.

Just to emphasize the CWA Union’s claims:

  • It is a direct attack on all of us that work every day and believe in the protections of a union.
  • It will lead to larger class sizes for teachers
  • It will lead to unsafe staffing levels for nurses
  • It would stop first responders like police officers from advocating for public safety needs
  • It would mean front-line state workers who work in our veterans’ homes would lose their voice on the job and in the statehouse
  • It would mean those who investigate child abuse and neglect would lose their voice on the job and in the statehouse

Anyone with a 9th grade education can read SB 29 and comprehend that the CWA claims are absolutely ludicrous.  I mean… considering unions are so great, why would a member choose not to send in their dues and allow them to be used for political purposes?!?  Unions are great, so there’s no reason for them to oppose letting members decide, right?!?

Sadly, the same level of ludicrousness was true of claims about the Prop B Puppy Mill ballot measure, yet Low Information Voters (LIVs) passed it by 51.6%.

The Missouri Legislature Must ENACT Missouri’s Right To Work Legislation!

With SB 29 in mind, the Missouri Legislature is also considering Right To Work legislation.  But, instead of directly enacting the legislation, they are planning to put it on the ballot.  Whatever the reasoning may be, it’s a H.O.R.R.I.B.L.E. idea.

By putting the Right To Work legislation on the Ballot, the Missouri Legislature is setting up the State for a Wisconsonian Union and Media circus that could and should be avoided like the plague.  A fully staffed, highly funded maelstrom of Organized Labor disinformation will descend upon the state with all the commensurate physical threats and property damage.  It won’t be pretty:

  • Union Members bused in for massive inorganic rallies at the Capitol
  • Commercial after commercial with Republicans killing baby seals and Union Members
  • SEIU Goons attacking local vendors
  • Democrat Secretary of State Kander’s ballot language likely skewed to prevent passage
  • Claims of evil Republicans firing teachers, first responders, cops, and nuns as well as swatting baby seals

With the CWA willing to make the above incredible claims over a bill that gives their members the right to choose, legislators know that they will double-down on such ridiculous allegations in regards to Right To Work.

What is the Republican plan to fight against such bedlam?  At least one Representative thinks constituents should invest their time and treasure to fight for the measure.  What?!?  Missourians already invested their time and treasure to elect a veto-proof Republican majority in the House and Senate WITH the knowledge and expectation that they enact Right To Work legislation.  It is outrageous to expect Missouri Republicans to engage in this fight once again when it is not necessary.

What happens when the ballot measure fails?  In 1978, Right To Work legislation was placed before the people and it failed.  It has been 35 years since, and we are just now to the point where the legislation can be enacted by the legislature, and now is the time.

Another bill with the same exact wording, sans the voter approval, is also under consideration.  This Right To Work bill should be brought to the floor and receive a vote.  If it passes, great!  If not, then voters know which Representatives need to be lobbied to pass the bill in a future session.

Please contact your Legislator today and urge them to bring HB 95 to the floor for a vote.  This bill gives workers the freedom to choose whether or not to join a union.  Do we believe in Freedom in Missouri?  Yes, we do.

Again, considering unions are so great, why would a worker choose not to join?  What do the unions have to worry about?

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on April 11, 2013 in Free Market, Freedom, Unions

 

Tags: , , , , ,

I attempted to attend the Right To Work hearing in Jefferson City today.  The room was overflowing, so instead, I h/t laborunionreport.comvisited with various legislators and friends throughout the building.  As I drove back to St. Louis, lots of questions were swirling in my head.  Here they are. Read them imagining they’re being asked with all possible condescension and loathing by David Spade’s character ‘Richard’ in the movie ‘Tommy Boy’:

If unions are so great and provide such a benefit to the companies and the state at large… …why do they need a law to force employees to join the union?

Shouldn’t the employees ‘want’ to join the union?

Why do unions think that employees will leave them when the Missouri voters free the employee to make their own decision? I thought unions were so great? Shouldn’t employees still ‘want’ to stay with the unions since they are so great?

If unions are so great, why do they need to have prevailing wage laws to be able to compete for state contracts? Shouldn’t union labor costs be lower because they are so great and competitive?

Don’t the union bosses believe in the freedom of the employee to make up their own mind in deciding to join the union based on the benefits that the union can offer them? Shouldn’t the employee be allowed the freedom to choose?

And since unions are so great, the employees will certainly choose to join them, right?!?! So, there’s nothing for the union bosses to worry about and this is much ado about nothing.

I’m sure the bosses at the unions are mostly pro-choice in killing babies.  Shouldn’t they also be pro-choice in joining the union as well?

Or, did we find another prime example of hypocrisy in the Democratic ranks.

 
1 Comment

Posted by on February 6, 2013 in Democrat, Free Market

 

Tags: ,

Akin: Another Snare Drum In Left’s Anti-Free Market Drumbeat

The left-wing media is all a-twitter over comments made by Todd Akin regarding equal pay for women in the workplace. Of course, the left ignores reality and facts in their latest emotion-based legislation, so they can use it as a drumbeat to attack Conservative candidates and falsify their headlines.

When asked if women should make the same salary as men, Todd simply makes the most correct and obvious answer that a free-market transaction between two parties should decide the rate at which a given person is paid, and THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD STAY OUT OF IT!

Here’s one of the articles.

 

Look at this example.  Sally and Julia take the same administrative HR job with Acme, Inc.  All other things being equal, Sally chooses not to have children, averages 42 hours of work per week and misses an average of 2 days per year above her scheduled vacation.  Julia has three children, averages 35 hours per week and misses 13 days per year above her scheduled vacation.

Does the left really believe that the Federal Government should tell the business to pay Sally and Julia at the same rate?  Why does it matter when Sally is Stan?  How is that any different?

But that’s just it.  The Left doesn’t believe in the Free-Market, just like the Left doesn’t believe in Freedom.

Vote Conservative!

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on September 29, 2012 in Economy, Free Market, Liberals

 

Tags: , ,

One Thing Jo Ann Emerson and Barack Obama Have In Common…

…both are running away from their records in Washington, DC.

h/t wikipedia.orgSadly, that’s not the only thing.

Like Obama’s attack on Bain Capital, Emerson’s campaign is disingenuously attacking her opponent over a comment regarding the failed Federal war on drugs.  So, you have to ask the following question:

“Does Bob Parker advocate that laws should be changed such that residents of MO-8 can go out and buy marijuana for recreational use?”

No one in Emerson’s Campaign could honestly answer ‘yes’.  The Staff knows it’s not true.  Jim Limbaugh (Emerson’s Treasurer) knows it’s not true.  Jo Ann Emerson knows it’s not true.  As an answer to my question, I would get the same mumbo-jumbo-lawyer-approved argument that they hope will keep the voters’ focus off of the real issue in this election – her record.

The votes that Jo Ann casts are the most important things she does as a member of the House; it’s her record.  So, why does Jo Ann Emerson want to keep the focus off her record?

Simple:  Far too many of her votes are on the same side as Barack Obama*

  • On TARP (the bailout of the big banks) Jo Ann Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
  • On bailing out the corrupt AIG Insurance giant, Jo Ann Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
  • On allowing the VPs and Presidents and CEOs to still get bonuses at the bailed-out banks, Jo Ann Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
  • On exposing taxpayer dollars to failing union pensions, Jo Ann Emerson co-sponsored it (to the delight of Barack Obama).
  • On Cash for Clunkers, Jo Ann Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
  • On the NDAA, that allows the government to imprison American Citizens indefinitely without trial, Jo Ann Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
  • On funding the business-crushing EPA, Jo Ann Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
  • On funding the Department of Education that centrally controls our children’s future with big-government edicts, Jo Ann Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
  • On funding for the Planned Parenthood abortion factory, Jo Ann Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
  • On funding Dodd-Frank and its business-crushing regulations, Jo Ann Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
  • On violating the 72-hour Republican promise for voting on bills, Jo Ann Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
  • After the Tea Party and millions of Americans screamed ‘NO!’ to more spending… …on raising the debt ceiling and enslaving your children to $2.4 Trillion more debt and deficit spending, Jo Ann Emerson voted with Barack Obama.

Jo Ann Emerson repeatedly votes with Barack Obama, and considering that she made these votes in the face of a renewed Conservative and Tea Party microscope, she will continue to vote with Barack Obama if she is sent back.

The Heritage Foundation* has calculated a more than disappointing 44% Conservative rating for her Congressional Votes (Todd Akin = 82%).  And, the Madison Project put her top-3 most liberal Republican voting record into their Hall Of Shame.*

True Conservative?

In a recent flyer attacking her opponent, the claim is that she is the “TRUE Conservative”.  Really?  Ask yourself these questions:

  • Would a TRUE Conservative vote to fund the EPA?
  • Would a TRUE Conservative be the Vice Chair of Center Aisle Caucus?
  • Would a TRUE Conservative be a member of the liberal Main Street Partnership?
  • Would a TRUE Conservative be the Chair of the Tuesday Group, a meeting of House liberal Republicans?
  • Would a TRUE Conservative be a Founding Member of the Bipartisan Congressional Retreat?
  • Would a TRUE Conservative vote to fund the abortion factory that is Planned Parenthood?
  • Would a TRUE Conservative donate to the vile chair of the Democratic National Committee, Debbie Wasserman Shultz?
  • Would a TRUE Conservative vote for a $2.4 Trillion increase in taxes (debt ceiling)?

Clearly the answer is ‘No’ for each of these questions, yet your conservative Congresswoman Jo Ann Emerson voted or is responsible for each of the items above.

Defending Jo Ann Emerson = Defending Barack Obama:

Would a TRUE Conservative stand tall in front their constituents and defend their record or hide behind semantic attacks on their opponent?  (Are we going to need a milk carton?)

You’ve seen the gotcha video of her opponent at a forum in Poplar Bluff, MO.  Have you seen grainy cell-phone video of Jo Ann Emerson being asked tough questions by 2 of her constituents at the same time in a back-and-forth forum?

No.

Why?

Because to stand in front of such a forum and defend her record on the items above, she’d have to defend many items on Barack Obama’s march-to-socialism agenda:

  • To defend her record, she’d be defending Barack Obama and her vote to fund his EPA that regulates carbon dioxide, spilled milk and ditches on our farms.
  • To defend her record, she’d be defending Barack Obama’s attacks on the unborn and her vote to fund Planned Parenthood’s baby killing machine.
  • To defend her record, she’d be defending Barack Obama and her vote to take $Billions$ from taxpayers and hand them over to insurance giant AIG.
  • To defend her record, she’d be defending Barack Obama and her Cash for Clunkers vote to support the GM / Chrysler bailout that, likely illegally, handed the companies over to the UAW.
  • To defend her record, she’d be defending Barack Obama’s big-spending-agenda and her vote to increase the national debt by $2.4 Trillion (a tax increase) that is the largest increase in the history of the nation (that’s $7,000+ of debt she voted to give to every child born in 2012).

Union Support:

If the Tea Party urged you to cross the aisle and vote for a Democrat primary candidate, obvious that candidate is the best option to vote for items on the Tea Party agenda.  Of course.

That is exactly what happened in 2010 when the IBEW Union sent a letter to their members urging them to, disingenuously,  cross the aisle vote for Jo Ann Emerson in that primary.

The letter stated, “Over the past few years, myself and other labor representatives in the area, have sought out labor friendly Republican Candidates who will support our agenda and protect the legislative safeguards such as prevailing wage, immigration laws etc. that allow us to keep a level playing field with the non-union contractors.” [Emphasis Added]

Prevailing Wage legislation is what removes the level playing field; it doesn’t create it.  In theory, unions are fine, but when they need special legislation to allow them to compete, they are not conducive to the Free Market that made this country great.  If they are so great, they should be able to compete in the Free Market w/o special legislative safeguards.

I haven’t seen a 2012 version of that letter, but I suspect, with her union pension bill co-sponsorship, the sentiment is the same as it was in 2010.

Don’t Complain:

I certainly urge everyone who reads this discussion to study the issues and vote their conscious.  This is not a diatribe against Jo Ann Emesron’s character or personality.  It is simply a look at her record on some of the most important votes of the last 4 years.

However…

  • If you do vote for Jo Ann Emerson, don’t complain about the EPA, because she will vote to fund it.
  • If you do vote for Jo Ann Emerson, don’t complain about Planned Parenthood, because she will vote to fund it.
  • If you do vote for Jo Ann Emerson, don’t complain about the National Debt, because she will vote to increase it.
  • If you do vote for Jo Ann Emerson, don’t complain about Dodd-Frank, because she will vote to fund it.
  • If you do vote for Jo Ann Emerson, don’t complain about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, because she will vote to keep it.

Summary:

You’ve heard the tired cliché that the definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result.  Well, in southeast Missouri, surely we are not insane.

  • If you want more of the same in Washington, more spending, more big government, more business-strangling regulation, send Jo Ann Emerson back to Washington.
  • If you want far too many of your representative’s votes to support Barack Obama’s freedom crushing agenda, send Jo Ann Emerson Back to Washington.

For real change, if you want a Constitutional Conservative for a representative, you have to change who’s there.  If you want small and limited government, you have to change who’s there.

If you want to change Washington, you have to change who’s there.

If you want to change Washington, you have to change who’s there.

If you want to change Washington, you have to change who’s there.

The only way to change Washington… …is to change who’s there.

I like Jo Ann Emerson.  She has always been very nice to me, and Jo Ann Emerson is a fine woman.  She loves her country and cares about Missouri’s 8th District.

But, if a 16-year tenure is good enough for great TRUE Conservative Missouri State Representatives and Senators like Jason Crowell, Brian Nieves, Jane Cunningham and Jim Lembke, it’s good enough for our U.S. Congressional Representatives.

As the Chairman of the Cape County Tea Party, there was one vote that was most critical to me in the 112th Congress.  Jo Ann voted to raise the debt ceiling guaranteeing that the Federal Government would deficit-spend another $2.4 Trillion.  This is nothing more than a tax increase that you, me, our children, our grandchildren will have to pay for in countless measures of reduced standard of living.

This is the primary reason (along with others noted above) that I will vote this time for a chance to bring more a conservative voting record to our district; I will be voting for Bob Parker.

(This writing reflects my personal views and may or may not reflect the members of the Cape County Tea Party)

*Sources include:

 
1 Comment

Posted by on July 22, 2012 in Congress, Conservative, Election, Free Market

 

Tags: , , , ,

Blunt Supports…

…everything the Healthcare Mandate was going to pay for, but not the Healthcare Mandate?!?

Michelle Malkin called out Senator Blunt:

(h/t TPM) GOP Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri, vice chair of the Senate GOP Conference, told a St. Louis radio station two weeks ago that he supports keeping at least three ObamaCare regulatory pillars:

  • Federally imposed coverage of “children” up to age 26 on their parents’ health insurance policies (the infamous, unfunded “slacker mandate”)
  • Federally mandated coverage regardless of pre-existing conditions (“guaranteed issue,” which turns the very concept of insurance on its head and leads to an adverse-selection death spiral)
  • Closure of the coverage gap in the massive Bush-backed Medicare drug entitlement (the “donut hole fix” that will obliterate the program’s cost-controls)

So, how are we going to pay for this Senator Blunt?  Sunshine and fairy farts?

Read more on Talking Points Memo.

If enacting the 3 main pillars of ObamaCare is the Republican’s main solution should the Supreme Court strike down the mandate, why are they even joining the fight?

Clearly, nothing has been learned from the 2006 / 2008 shellacking and the 2010 salvaging of the Republican Party compliments of the Tea Party Movement.  It’s still a party of milquetoast moderate solutions that will continue to bankrupt our country, create bigger government (albeit at a slower pace than Liberals), and destroy the fabric of what made America great… …the expectation that you go out and work for what you need and want.

NOBODY is talking about the real solution… …getting the Employer out of the Health Care business.  Yes, cross-state-line purchases, HSAs, and removal of 1st-dollar payments will help.  But, a huge portion of the problem is that the Employer is so involved in the Health Care business.

Under the current system, really only one person has to be satisfied with the Health Care Plan being offered to the company’s employees: the VP of Human Resources.  If he or she is happy (after getting laid, tickets to the finest suites of every professional sports venue, golf outings, boat outings, and gala dinners — trust me, I’ve seen it), then the Employer chooses their plan.  Maybe it’s the best of the three plans that the VP of HR had time to take a look at, but is it the best for 100% of the employees?  Of course not.

The government got the Employer into the Health Care business with wage and price controls during World War II and on occasion beyond.  They’ve got to get them out of the picture, so Health Care Companies work to keep their actual customer (the employee) happy — not Senior Management.

Then a market-based health-care exchange would make sense.  Ever heard of Kayak?  Priceline?  Oribtz?  Hotels.com?  Apparently, the free market can build a system where you can compare rates for travel cheaply and efficiently.  There’s no reason a free-market Health Insurance Exchange couldn’t do the same.

Then, the Employer can offer funding of a Health Care Plan… …and stay out of the CHOICE of a Health Care Plan.  The Employee is then responsible for choosing the best plan from a menu of options.  He or she can decide if they want to have the Appendectomy insured, or know that it costs $1500.00 (or whatever) and be prepared to pay for it.

If they choose not to have insurance, the Employer keeps the money… …and probably looks to hire someone more responsible.  But, the Employee now has the best option to find the most suitable Health Care solution for his or her personal situation.

That, my liberal Republican friend, Mr. Blunt, is a good starting point for Health Care reform.

 

Tags: , , ,