Back to Basics

If you think it was bad in August with the possibility of facing fines for not buying health insurance, it has gotten worse. Now we find out if you don’t buy health insurance you could be fined an additional $25,000 and face a year in jail. Jail time for not purchasing something because the government tells you it’s required! This is outrageous. You will notice Congress and government employees are immune from this system.

Here is John Shadegg explaining this new twist to the bill.

Did I miss something in the new health care reform proposals?  When did the democrats’ proposals provide free office visits, free medications and free medical procedures to everyone?

I recently had a conversation with a friend that has a pre-existing medical condition and is very concerned about being able to obtain affordable health insurance.  He is currently insured and is paying what I would consider a very reasonable price for his monthly premiums (less than $200/month).  He must also take medications that run about $2000 per year.  Understandably he is concerned about health care issues.  He indicated a friend of his is on some government insurance plan (he didn’t specify which one) and that this friend is able to obtain all of his medical and dental treatments and medications at no cost to him.

It seems that some people in favor of the democrats government run proposals are assuming that this health care is somehow not going to cost them anything, other than maybe a monthly insurance premium.  They assume the cost of office visits, medical treatments, medications and dental services are going to be provided free of charge.

I read H.R. 3200 and have heard the reviews on the Baucus bill.  Nowhere would I interpret these bills as providing free medical and dental treatments for all, with the only obligation being a monthly insurance premium.  People with certain income levels could qualify for government assistance in paying for the monthly premiums and co-pays, but it certainly did not come with a free price tag.  In fact, I read some reviews on the Baucus bill indicating the co-pays and other costs the consumers would have to pay would actually make health care less affordable to middle-class Americans.

Until the health care reform became an issue, I assumed that once someone retired and was on Medicare that those medical premiums would also be free.  I found out otherwise when talking to my parents.  When on Medicare after you retire you pay a monthly insurance premium, which is taken out of your Social Security check to cover your Medicare health insurance.  Further, you continue have out-of-pocket expenses, like cost-sharing, for medical treatments received.  If you are on the government medication system you also continue paying a portion of the medication.  My grandmother was paying out of her own pocket $1200 a year for her medication and she was on Medicare and had a secondary medical insurance policy.

So you have to wonder if those in favor of the government health care actually understand the consequences of the program.  The government program would not be a free system – you will be paying for premiums, co-pays, and cost-sharing.  You will further be paying to supplement those who cannot afford insurance and the cost of medical treatment.  If you think your premiums and cost today are high, they will only go higher with government controlled plans.  As a bonus to the higher costs you will have no choice but purchase these plans because now it becomes a law that you must have insurance.  If you don’t, you will be penalized by the IRS, and may also face imprisonment.

So, before jumping on the government control bandwagon, look at the other proposals being offered.  Every plan wants those with pre-existing conditions to be covered at costs within reasonable limits of a regular policy.  Every plan wants to provide insurance coverage to all that don’t have it.  No plan offers free insurance, free medical, free dental or free medicine to all.  Do you want the government controlling your medical treatment and care, along with mandatory requirements, higher premiums and higher taxes?  Or do you want patient choice?

I urge everyone to really understand the bills being proposed – read them!  The concerns out there are very real.  This is your future – your life!  Nothing the government provides is free, and the health care reform is no exception.

Corruption in government – it starts with the election process.  Special interest groups, labor unions, big pharma, all making campaign contributions supporting the candidate that is going to give them the back room deals they are after.  Why do you think this country is in this much trouble!  They have all basically bought and paid for the candidate of choice, the one who is looking out for their special interests instead of the interests of the American people.  The corruption needs to stop now, and reform needs to start with the funding of political campaigns.

The democrats seem to want to make everything equal – take from the rich and give to the poor.  So let’s start with campaign funding.  Let’s implement this equal for all system for the politicians, right from the start of the campaign process.  It’s time for a radical campaign funding change.

Instead of companies and individuals supporting one candidate over another, campaign contributions would be made to a government fund for each elected position.  There would be one fund for the president, one for each state senator race, one for each representative of the house race.  All campaign monies would go into this fund and NO OTHER funding for campaigns would be permitted.  The money from these funds would then be divided equally to all candidates running for that position, whether it be two or more.  Everyone would have an equal opportunity in campaigning for the desired position.

How the campaign spends this money would be up to them, but they would have to limit spending to only the money received from the fund.  It would be restricted, of course, to legal activities only.  At the end of the campaign a full disclosure of the money would be required within a specific timeframe and an audit would be completed on the final campaign funds.  Any money remaining from the election would be returned to the fund for the next elections.  There could be no “outstanding balance due” at the end of the campaign.

A radical move, but the problems we see in the government today are because every special interest group and every company has their own agenda and they have all made deals with the politicians to get what they want.  They donate and expect to receive benefits in return – and they don’t just mean a thank you letter.  The government is no longer run by the people, for the people.  It is being run by special interests and big business.  This has got to stop!  Start the reform where the corruption begins – the campaign funding.  Equal opportunity for everyone.

It is quite obvious we have two completely different views on the role of government, as well as health care, in the United States.  We have those on the far left that believe everything belongs to them and everyone should work for the government so they can all receive their handouts.  We have those on the right that believe the government should be limited in power and that those who work should be able to keep what they earn.  Those that earn have paid taxes so those that want to receive have been able to do so.  But the balance is slipping and those who earn can no longer afford to pay for those who don’t.  Thus the battle.  Unfortunately, the left is pulling the race card at every opportunity, even when it doesn’t exist.  You’d think we were back in the 1960’s!  I’ve read comments that include all the racial innuendos, foul language and demands that the right get out of the country.  If the right left where would you get your handouts?

So I put forth a totally radical option to be considered.  Create a uniform income tax for everyone (yes, I know the left is screaming already that this isn’t fair – get over it).  Say this tax, as an example, is 25% no matter what your income.  This money is put into the actual government operations given in the powers of the constitution.  Those that have paid into the Social Security system and Medicare will also continue receiving benefits from those programs as it was long ago promised to them.  They’ve paid their dues, they deserve their benefits.  As for the other “social” programs, each individual may opt in or out of the program by a simple check of a box on their tax returns and W-4 filing status.  If you choose to opt in to the social programs, then you will pay an additional 25% of your income to taxes to help pay for these programs.  Monies collected from the additional tax must be put into a fund and held specifically to cover the costs of these programs.  If you choose to opt out of the social programs then you will not pay any additional tax to cover these programs but you will also not be eligible to participate in any of these programs.  No money in, no money out.

These social programs would have to be self-funded.  Only monies collected from the additional taxes can be used, no other federal monies could be diverted to cover these programs.  If the programs ran out of funds then they would be out of funds until the next tax season.  People could also voluntarily donate to these social programs if they choose, whether they wanted to participate or not.

Those on the left get all the social programs they want.  They can determine how many and what types of social programs they want and their elected officials can determine the budgets and monies available based on the taxes collected for these programs.  Those on the right get what they want – limited government into their daily lives.  If you want the social programs then put your money where your mouth is!  Start paying into the programs you want to collect from.  Your free ride is over!

U.S. Senator Roger Wicker

Lost in the ongoing debate over health care reform was a recent decision by Senate Democrats to delay yet again the introduction of their so-called cap-and-trade legislation. The decision, announced earlier this month by Sen. Barbara Boxer, the chairwoman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, is a sign that this misguided legislation has not gained the momentum Democrat leaders had hoped.

In reaction to the announcement, the Wall Street Journal said: “The latest delay is probably a submission to reality, which is a rare thing in the current political environment — and a major victory for the U.S. economy, at least for now.” I agree completely. Considering the blow cap-and-trade legislation would have on family budgets, the nation’s economic recovery, and our long-term competitiveness, the news of the bill’s delay was a welcome development.

The Carbon Tax

The House of Representatives narrowly approved cap-and-trade legislation in June. The legislation would ostensibly curb global warming by reducing the amount of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere. In order to achieve this, companies that emit carbon dioxide — such as power plants, petroleum refiners, and manufacturers — would be forced to purchase allowances from the federal government for each ton of carbon dioxide emissions they produce.

The cost of these allowances would in effect be a massive tax levied on energy producers, manufacturers and other companies across our economy. This massive new tax would not simply be absorbed by the companies. It would be passed along to consumers by way of higher energy prices. This is not just my prediction. As a candidate for president, then-Sen. Obama admitted: “Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”

Since energy is used to make and provide other goods and services, Americans would see higher prices across the board.  In writing recently about cap-and-trade, Patrick Fleenor, the chief economist at the Tax Foundation, said that “other effects will be less obvious. Food prices will rise because energy is used extensively in the production and transportation of agriculture products.” In fact, during testimony before Congress, the director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said it was unlikely any consumer product’s price would remain the same under a cap-and-trade program.

Mississippi Impact

A recent study released by the Heritage Foundation provides a window into how a cap-and-trade system would negatively impact Mississippians. The group found that by 2035, Mississippi’s gross state product would be reduced by $3.4 billion if the House-passed cap-and-trade bill became law. Energy prices for everyone in the state would rise. By 2035, the study stated electricity prices would increase by more than $1,000 per household, and Mississippians would pay $1.27 more for a gallon of gasoline.

Cap-and-trade would also severely impact agriculture, our state’s largest employer. Under a cap-and-trade system, the American Farm Bureau Federation reported input costs for agriculture would rise by $5 billion. A recent report by the University of Missouri-Columbia found that under cap-and-trade, a typical corn, soybean, and wheat farm in that state could see increased costs of $11,649 in 2015 and $30,152 in 2050. Results anywhere close to this in Mississippi would be disastrous for the nearly 30 percent of workers in our state employed directly or indirectly by agriculture.

Wrong Direction

Our economy still has a long way to go before fully recovering.  Unemployment has jumped to a 26-year high of 9.7 percent. The last thing our economy needs is for Congress to implement a massive new energy tax that will trickle down and negatively affect every facet of our economy. That is exactly what a cap-and-trade program would do.  Such a scheme is wrong for our country, and I will continue working to ensure its defeat.