Another Bill For Your Consideration

I’ve decided to focus on legislation again for a few more days (or a week, whatever it takes).

If you’re curious about HR 676 (United States National Health Care Act or the Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act), I have posted it in html format. You can also download it in PDF format as well. Click the link in the sidebar to read it for yourself.

You might want to take a look at Senate Bill 773 as well. It has nothing to do with health care, but it’s kind of scary in its own right. Here’s one section from the bill.


The President–

(1) within 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, shall develop and implement a comprehensive national cybersecurity strategy, which shall include–

(A) a long-term vision of the Nation’s cybersecurity future; and

(B) a plan that encompasses all aspects of national security, including the participation of the private sector, including critical infrastructure operators and managers;

(2) may declare a cybersecurity emergency and order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic to and from any compromised Federal Government or United States critical infrastructure information system or network;

(3) shall designate an agency to be responsible for coordinating the response and restoration of any Federal Government or United States critical infrastructure information system or network affected by a cybersecurity emergency declaration under paragraph (2);

(4) shall, through the appropriate department or agency, review equipment that would be needed after a cybersecurity attack and develop a strategy for the acquisition, storage, and periodic replacement of such equipment;

(5) shall direct the periodic mapping of Federal Government and United States critical infrastructure information systems or networks, and shall develop metrics to measure the effectiveness of the mapping process;

(6) may order the disconnection of any Federal Government or United States critical infrastructure information systems or networks in the interest of national security;

(7) shall, through the Office of Science and Technology Policy, direct an annual review of all Federal cyber technology research and development investments;

(8) may delegate original classification authority to the appropriate Federal official for the purposes of improving the Nation’s cybersecurity posture;

(9) shall, through the appropriate department or agency, promulgate rules for Federal professional responsibilities regarding cybersecurity, and shall provide to the Congress an annual report on Federal agency compliance with those rules;

(10) shall withhold additional compensation, direct corrective action for Federal personnel, or terminate a Federal contract in violation of Federal rules, and shall report any such action to the Congress in an unclassified format within 48 hours after taking any such action; and

(11) shall notify the Congress within 48 hours after providing a cyber-related certification of legality to a United States person.

Please take the time to read both of the new bills I have posted. If you don’t read the bill you can’t argue a position (for or against it). Personally, I think this bill, like HR 3200, gives one person far too much power and authority. With HR 3200, it’s the Secretary of Health and Human Services, with SB 773, it’s the President of the United States.

Liberty may be endangered by the abuse of liberty, but also by the abuse of power.
James Madison

Another Health Care Bill?

Just a short update tonight. I’ve heard a couple rumors that the House might start discussions over another health care bill, HR 676.

The bill originates back to January of 2007 but was re-introduced in January of this year. The bill was originally sponsored by Rep. Conyers (yes, the same Rep. Conyers who said you need two days and two attorneys, even though he is one, to understand HR 3200) and Rep Kucinich.

I figure it won’t hurt to read the bill, just in case. It will take me a few days to get my thoughts together on this one, and the possibility that the Democratic majority in the House may try to “compromise” by introducing tHR 676 as an alternative to HR 3200.

For tonight, I will leave you with another quote.

Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone,
and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.
John Quincy Adams
— Posted with Stuffr! —

Saturday Night Special

I took the boys over to Sweetwater Creek State Park in Lithia Springs today. We had so much fun walking around snapping photos, we didn’t realize we had been there for five hours!

Here are a couple pics I took while we were there.

The Great Blue Heron

More tomorrow…

It’s not what you look at that matters, it’s what you see.
Henry David Thoreau

Nowhere To Send Canadians

Many people are talking about “single-payer health care”. Many people know that “America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009” is President Obama’s way of starting us down the road to a single-payer system.

Do you know what a single-payer health care system is?

Single-payer health insurance operates by arranging the payment of services to doctors, hospitals, and other health care providers from a single source established and managed by government. This source replaces private insurance companies with a single, public entity which would provide health insurance -but not health treatment- typically to all citizen,s or all legal residents.

Single-payer health care funding would operate as a public service and is a way to deliver near-universal or universal health care. The fund can be managed by the government directly or as a publicly owned and regulated agency.[2] Australia’s Medicare, Canada’s Medicare, and healthcare in Taiwan are examples of single-payer universal health care systems.

President Obama is a proponent of a single payer universal health care plan. That’s what he’d like to see. Don’t believe me? Listen to him say it in his own words.

While HR 3200, the health care bill may not mention the single-payer system by that very name, it sure references a lot of the same “options” as a single-payer system and it sure covers all the basis for Medicare doesn’t it. Remember, Australia and Canada both call their plans “Medicare”.

As much as people love to complain about our current health care system here in the United States, there are a few facts most of those people forget to mention. Did you know,

  • Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.
    • Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the U.K. and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.
  • Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.
    • Breast cancer mortality is 9 percent higher, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher and colon cancer mortality among men is about 10 percent higher than in the United States.
  • Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.
    • Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit are taking statins, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease. By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons and 17 percent of Italians receive them.
  • Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.
    • Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate and colon cancer:
      • Nine of 10 middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to less than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).
      • Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a pap smear, compared to less than 90 percent of Canadians.
      • More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a PSA test, compared to less than 1 in 6 Canadians (16 percent).
      • Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with less than 1 in 20 Canadians (5 percent).
  • Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the U.K.
    • Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long – sometimes more than a year – to see a specialist, to have elective surgery like hip replacements or to get radiation treatment for cancer.[6] All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada.[7] In England, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.

Why are President Obama and Congress trying to re-design our entire system from the ground up when we could easily be providing insurance for just those who need it right now?

If HR3200 is allowed to pass, it will allow the single-payer health care system to gain a foothold in America and none of those facts listed above will be relevant within a year. Once it is adopted, things will just get worse.

Remember the other day when I mentioned our own personal medical nightmare when our son’s appendix ruptured? While I thank God every day that he survived, I honestly believe if we lived in Canada, he would be dead right now. We were lucky when we walked in the door of the emergency room that day. We were seen within minutes of arriving (even though it seemed like hours at the time). I cannot imagine what I would have done if the following had happened to us.

You tell the nurse that your son must be seen by a doctor immediately – it’s an emergency! – as his condition is worsening by the minute. The nurse tells you, stone-faced, to go and sit in the waiting room to wait for a triage nurse. Having no choice, you do what you are told and join twenty or so others in line in front of you. You are given nothing to help make your son more comfortable – no damp facecloth, no bedpan for the vomit, nothing.

When a triage nurse finally strolls in a half hour later your son is too weak to respond to her and you begin to panic. Finally, a doctor appears and says it’s just a “bug” and that you should not be playing “armchair doctor” by “diagnosing” appendicitis. He orders some time-consuming tests anyway, because you have shown him that you are very, very angry. Six hours later the test results come back positive for appendicitis.

Make sure you read Cathy LeBoeuf-Schouten’s “My Canadian Healthcare Horror Story“. If that wasn’t bad enough, watch this.

Why on Earth would our politicians be considering any plan that could lead to single-payer health care? You would have to be a moron to ignore the statistical fact that it would ruin health care in our country and people would die because of it.

Do we really want morons like this running our country? Do we really want to allow them to pass such a measure here in the United States? Contact your member of Congress today and tell them not to support this bill or any other bill that opens the door for the single-payer system in America.

A Few Words From A Juris Doctor

With people showing up at townhall meetings asking questions about “America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009“, the health care bill, you would think that our representatives in Congress would have read the bill by now.

I’m sure many of them have assigned their staff to read parts of the bill, but how many of them have actually read it themselves? I sure would like to know.

While I was sitting here tonight trying to decide what I was going to write about, I was reviewing some of my previous posts and I got to thinking about the fact that this bill is nothing short of unconstitutional. It also violates the Tenth Amendment. In my analysis of the health care bill, on Day Three, I pointed out the clear violation of States rights as guaranteed by the 10th Amendment.

Section 208 removes a States right to offer their own State-based health insurance.


(1) a State (or group of States, subject to the approval of the Commissioner) applies to the Commissioner for approval of a State-based Health Insurance Exchange to operate in the State (or group of States); and

(2) the Commissioner approves such State-based Health Insurance Exchange,

then, subject to subsections (c) and (d), the State-based Health Insurance Exchange shall operate, instead of the Health Insurance Exchange, with respect to such State (or group of States). The Commissioner shall approve a State-based Health Insurance Exchange if it meets the requirements for approval under subsection (b).

The “Commissioner” must approve any State-based “Exchange”, therefore denying States rights granted under the U.S Constitution.

The 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states,

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

The U.S. Constitution does not give the United States (the feds) the authority to regulate health care within the borders of the States, and it also doesn’t prohibit the States from doing so, therefore, the United States (the feds) can not legally decide what the States can and cannot do in regard to health care. There is no right side or left side of this argument, it’s written in the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

I then wondered whose job it is to make sure the bills which are introduced in the House do not violate current legal statutes, our civil liberties, or constitutional law. A quick search (and common sense) told me this must be handled by the Judiciary Committee of the House Of Representatives.

Sure enough, the following list shows the jurisdiction of the House Committee on the Judiciary.

1. The judiciary and judicial proceedings, civil and criminal.
2. Administrative practice and procedure.
3. Apportionment of Representatives.
4. Bankruptcy, mutiny, espionage, and counterfeiting.
5. Civil liberties.
6. Constitutional amendments.
7. Criminal law enforcement.
8. Federal courts and judges, and local courts in the Territories and possessions.
9. Immigration policy and non-border enforcement.
10. Interstate compacts generally.
11. Claims against the United States.
12. Members of Congress, attendance of members, Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner; and their acceptance of incompatible offices.
13. National penitentiaries.
14. Patents, the Patent and Trademark Office, copyrights, and trademarks.
15. Presidential succession.
16. Protection of trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies.
17. Revision and codification of the Statutes of the United States.
18. State and territorial boundary lines.
19. Subversive activities affecting the internal security of the United States.

I knew the Judiciary Committee handled the “legal” stuff, but I never knew they controlled the state boundary lines, or patents and copyrights. It’s amazing what you learn when you read.

I honestly believe there is nothing you can’t do, if you just take the time to learn how, and learning how to do something can be as simple as picking up a book and reading.

As you see above, the Judiciary Committee is responsible for reviewing any bills that involve House administrative practice and procedure, our civil liberties, constitutional amendments, and revision and codification of the Statutes of the United States. The members of this committee must be very smart.

Due to the legal nature of the committee’s work it has been customary for members of the committee to have a legal background. In a time of great change and scientific progress an expanding list of issues, including intellectual property, cloning, and the internet, require committee members to possess a wide breadth of knowledge in order to effectively address concerns from these and other new areas.

Because the health care bill will in fact impede some of our civil liberties (remember the creation of that massive database that will contain all of your financial records, venereal disease tests, vaccination records and school records) and trample the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the Judiciary Committee will most likely read and review this bill. Right?

The members of the Judiciary Committee should have a legal background and be fairly knowledgeable with all aspects of the law, right?

The Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee is Rep. John Conyers, Jr. from Michigan’s 14th Congressional district. Rep. Conyers is an educated man. In fact, he is quite skilled in law.

After graduating from Northwestern High School in Detroit, Conyers served in the Michigan National Guard 1948–50; US Army 1950–54; and the US Army Reserves 1954–57. Conyers served for a year in Korea as an officer in the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers and was awarded combat and merit citations.

Conyers grew up in Detroit, and received both his B.A. and his J.D. from Wayne State University. He served as an assistant to Congressman John Dingell prior to his election to Congress.

Some of you less educated folks (myself included) might be wondering what a J.D. is. The term “J.D.” stands for “Juris Doctor” which means,

a first professional graduate degree and professional doctorate in law.

Originating from the 19th century Harvard movement for the scientific study of law, it is the only law degree that has a goal of being the primary professional preparation for lawyers. It is the only professional doctorate in law and is a three year program in most jurisdictions.

As I said before, Rep. Conyers is the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee. He’s got the legal background needed to serve on the committee.

He’s sure to catch the trampling of the 10th Amendment when he reads the bill.

I bet the creation of such a massive database, a clear violation of our civil liberties, will raise a red flag for him when he reads the bill.

He’s sure to block most of the provisions of this bill before they reach the House floor. Right?

Don’t count on it. It sounds like he has no intention of reading the bill at all.

What purpose is there in having a Judiciary committee (or any other committee) if they have no intention of reading the bill in its entirety?

Why would we support any politician that had no intention of reading the very legislation they will be responsible for vetting and making sure does not violate the Constitution or any of our rights? It’s too late and serves no purpose to read the legislation after the vote.

Hindsight is 20/20 but it won’t stop you from falling off the cliff, unless you walk backwards. Do we really want a government that does things backwards? Why would we, as a people, allow this to happen?

No Vacancies & Patient Stacking

Last night I referenced the man in the United Kingdom who was lucky enough to have his appendix removed twice. Tonight, I’m going to show you another shining example of universal health care.

When health care costs get too high, how will the government compensate for those costs? In other words, they have to fund it (raise taxes) or cut it (ration care). You think that doesn’t happen? Sure it doesn’t.

Thousands of women are having to give birth outside maternity wards because of a lack of midwives and hospital beds.

Health chiefs admit a lack of maternity beds is partly to blame for the crisis, with hundreds of women in labour being turned away from hospitals because they are full.

Latest figures show that over the past two years there were at least:

* 63 births in ambulances and 608 in transit to hospitals;
* 117 births in A&E departments, four in minor injury units and two in medical assessment areas;
* 115 births on other hospital wards and 36 in other unspecified areas including corridors;
* 399 in parts of maternity units other than labour beds, including postnatal and antenatal wards and reception areas.

Additionally, overstretched maternity units shut their doors to any more women in labour on 553 occasions last year.

Can you imagine giving birth in a public restroom or in your family van simply because the hospital turned you away because there weren’t enough beds? I wonder why they didn’t have enough beds?

‘While some will be unavoidable emergencies, it is extremely distressing for them and their families to be denied a labour bed because their maternity unit is full.

‘It shows the incredible waste that has taken place that mothers are getting this sort of sub-standard treatment despite Gordon Brown’s tripling of spending on the NHS.

‘Labour have let down mothers by cutting the number of maternity beds and by shutting down maternity units.’

Did you catch that? They tripled spending on health care with their National Health Service, but shut down maternity units and got rid of beds. That’s government forced health care at it’s finest people.

You think that’s bad? Have you heard of ‘patient stacking’? Check out this video from Glenn Beck back when he appeared on CNN.

Again, I have to ask. Is this the kind of health care we really want to see here in this country?

Let’s make sure that doesn’t happen.