Public Option HealthCare

130

2009-12-16T20:32:06Z

2009-12-16T20:32:06Z

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmBLD9w-mzk

The author provides an historical perspective of the excellent  community-based systems for helping the needy that existed before the federal programs were put in place. There  are many examples of existing programs worthy of duplication and well-thought out proposals for transitioning back  to a bottom-up approach. Margin Olasky

113

2009-09-02T19:21:00Z

Renewing American Compassion

2010-02-04T16:30:57Z

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0895264145?ie=UTF8&tag=wwwrestoringt-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0895264145

“If you don’t know where you are going, you will probably end up somewhere else.” <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurence_J._Peter" target="_blank">Laurence J. Peter</a> US educator & writer (1919 – 1988) Where are we going? What is the destiny of America? Who is responsible to save our nation? It seems apparent that at this time in our history we are struggling to know where we should be going. Given the constant cries for a “bailout” for every form of financial crisis it seems that Americans have resigned themselves to government solutions to our problems. Many are now admitting that our financial crises have been contributed to (if not caused outright) by the government’s unnatural involvement in this economy. Despite this we do not seem to have the courage, or foresight, to address our problems in any other way but through greater government debt, guarantees, etc. Certainly, the endless piling on of debt onto the backs of the American people cannot continue indefinitely. Is this the direction we really want to go in, or is there any alternative? To answer this question, I am reminded of Benjamin Franklin. Mr. Franklin has been called “the quintessential American” of his time. He was self-educated and after studying printing in his brother’s newspaper shop he went off on his own to Philadelphia, where he started his own printing company. As reported at The Franklin Institute website: His most famous publications were a newspaper called The Pennsylvania Gazette and his annual Poor Richard’s Almanack. He had many new ideas for publishing and he is known for printing cartoons, illustrated news stories, and letters to the editor. He believed in the power of the press, using his printing press as a way to bring the news to all people. He used cartoons and pictures so that everyone could understand the news, even people who had not learned to read. Mr. Franklin was instrumental in bringing street lighting to Philadelphia. Ben also helped to set up the first postal system in Philadelphia. In order to make Philadelphia a safer city, he started the Union Fire Company in 1736. A few years later, in 1752, he set up America’s first fire insurance company. He even organized a Night Watch and Militia to help keep peace and safety in Philadelphia. While in Paris, Ben proposed the idea of Daylight Savings Time. In 1731, Ben founded America’s first circulating library so that people could borrow books to read even though they might not have been able to afford to buy books to read. He discovered the conductivity of heat by color and established the first volunteer fire-fighting union (in the world!) and fire insurance company in Philadelphia. In an incredible history of his life, The Real Benjamin Franklin, the essence of Mr. Franklin is revealed. I found it very interesting how creative he and his associates were. For example, he (and his “master-mind” team) had the idea of laying bricks on one city block of Philadelphia. At that time, no city blocks were paved in the entire city. Despite naysayers, they went at it and successfully paved one of the city blocks. As a result, the citizens of Philadelphia became inspired and paved the entire downtown area. Mr. Franklin also devised the first lottery system in order to raise funds for the building of a church in Philadelphia. He was instrumental in the implementation of a new money system for the colonies, including the printing of a new form of money, so the colonies would not be dependent on British notes. Addressing other needs of his time he invented the lightning rod, through which he discovered electricity. He also invented the Franklin stove, which was a more efficient way to produce heat from wood (for which he refused a patent, as he stated it should be for the good of the people). His other inventions include: bifocals, the glass harmonica, the library chair, swim fins, the long reach device, the catheter, and Daylight Savings Time. <div>   <div class="MsoNormal" style="0.5in;">So what can “Good old Ben” teach us today? To whom did Mr. Franklin look for the solutions of the problems of his day? He obviously took direct, personal responsibility for his environment and was not afraid to engage in the process of : “ask and ye shall receive.” </div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="0.5in;"> Given what he created and cognized, he clearly had opened himself up to receive alternative answers to the dilemmas he and his countrymen faced. </div> </div> It’s amazing how we take so many of today’s institutions for granted, such as the library, volunteer fire departments, insurance, etc. We often fail to understand that it was committed individuals, such as Benjamin Franklin, who looked problems in their face and asked “how can I help to solve this problem?” instead of: “government, solve this for us, please!” As we see more and more of the failure of governments surface in the future, let us remember the greatness, the faithfulness and the true righteousness of men like Benjamin Franklin. Let us imbue into our soul their spirit of self-empowerment, and self-reliance. Let us have the courage to take back our sovereignty and our divine right of self government. I have no doubt that we can save our nation, and end up where we want to go, if only we can remember who we really are.

2009-07-24T21:41:29Z

Where do we go from here?

2009-08-07T23:45:37Z

It is interesting to consider the effect of the federal government’s involvement in the area of food choice and diet. I have previously stated that the founder’s were adamant that the federal government should not be involved in legislating food choices for our nation. No enumerated powers were given to the federal government in this regard. The 9th and 10th amendments clearly restrain any involvement in these issues. Despite these “chains of the constitution” we, the people, have sat back while the federal government goes merrily on dictating laws and choices for the American people.  9th amendment: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. 10th amendment: 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. Thomas Jefferson once stated: “If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls who live under tyranny.” I had the privilege a few years ago to be a mentor at a local grade school in my home town. This program laudably has the intention of providing support and encouragement to children of single parents. In addition to helping a young 1st grader contemplate reading and how to kick a ball, I would often sit and have lunch with the students. I was appalled at the quality of the food that was being served to the students. I felt that the food was the most packaged, least healthy food any human being could eat. For example, the fried chicken “patties” were formed into hearts and other shapes, and covered with sugar sprinkles in order to encourage the students to actually them. Canned mushy carrots, along with other “vegetables” of the least nutritional content possible were served. Topped with “desert bars” that must have been manufactured by the millions and preserved with who knows what chemicals. What does this have to do with the federal government, you might ask? Do you remember the food pyramid which was given to “enlighten” the American people as to the “healthy” diet we should all have? I found the original FDA food pyramid in an article by Disabled World – 2007-10-20. As you may recall the FDA said: “You should center your diet around the foods at the base of the food pyramid, and eat less of the foods at the top.” Here is that pyramid:  <img class="alignleft" src="http://www.disabled-world.com/artman/uploads/pyramid.jpg" alt="" width="382" height="292" /> Old food pyramid picture As you can see, we were told to center our diet around bread, cereal rice, pasta, etc. What’s wrong with this picture? According to Harvard scientist Dr. Walter Willett, the original USDA Food Pyramid is terribly misleading and flawed. He states that the Pyramid has not kept up with scientific nutritional research. The original food pyramid made a number of blanket claims supporting its food list, such as, all fats are bad; all complex carbohydrates are good; protein is protein; dairy products are essential; potatoes are good for you; and there was no recommendation for exercise. Among Dr. Willett’s criticisms include the blanket statement that: “All complex carbohydrates are good.” Dr. Willet notes that six to eleven servings of carbohydrates are way too much, and that the Pyramid does not differentiate between refined carbohydrates, such as pasta, and truly complex carbohydrates, such as whole grain cereal and bread.  In an article published by NaturalNews.com, Mike Adams states: A new study says Americans are getting fatter thanks to an increase in their consumption of carbohydrates. Women, the study reveals, are consuming 335 more calories per day than they did in 1971, and men are consuming 168 more. That may not seem like much, but it sure adds up quickly. An extra 335 calories a day packs on an extra pound of body fat every ten days. The study says most of the increase in calories is from carbohydrates, but it leaves out perhaps the most crucial point of all: these are refined, processed carbohydrates <del>- the very worst kind. From a nutritional standpoint, you can’t paint all carbohydrates with the same brush. Whole grains and carbohydrates with a low glycemic index are, of course, far better for you than refined carbohydrates like white flour and refined white sugar. I’ve seen far too many studies lump all carbohydrates into the same category without regard for where they stand on the nutritional scale. </del> You see the same thing in the Food Guide Pyramid, which puts grains, breads and other carbohydrates as the “eat most” category of foods. That leads most people to falsely believe that eating a dozen doughnuts is keeping them in full compliance with the food guide pyramid, since doughnuts are technically breads and grains. To help explain how this correlates to food in school systems throughout America I am reminded of the “ketchup is a vegetable” controversy. From Wikipedia: <img class="alignleft" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f4/Stammtisch_Ruhrgebiet_Januar_2007_Oberhausen_Pommes.JPG/180px-Stammtisch_Ruhrgebiet_Januar_2007_Oberhausen_Pommes.JPG" alt="" width="180" height="213" /> (Ketchup alongside French fried potatoes) The ketchup as a vegetable controversy or ketchupgate refers to a proposed United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Food and Drug Administration directive, early in the administration of Ronald Reagan, that would have reclassified ketchup and pickle relish from condiments to a vegetable, allowing public schools to cut out a serving of cooked or fresh vegetable from hot lunch program child-nutrition requirements. The Reagan administration was, in fact, responding to a Congressional cost-savings mandate. The White House Office of Management and Budget estimated a potential US $1 billion annual savings in the cost of subsidized meals for low-income students. In reporting on the proposed directive Newsweek magazine illustrated their story with a bottle of ketchup with the caption “now a vegetable.” The proposed directive was criticized by Democrats and Republicans alike, and was never implemented. As we can see the FDA issued specific “guidelines” (which were really mandates) around the foods that could be served to students, all tied to federal subsidizing of meals for low income students. These guidelines led our public school systems to legally adopt the serving of meals that were “nutritious” according to those guidelines. Unfortunately for the poor souls that ate this food, we now have a generation of obese, disease, and cancer ridden people. (To complete the history of the original food pyramid on April 19, 2005, the USDA, now under assault from numerous scientific nutrition groups, launched their new food guidance system called “My Pyramid,” giving Americans a website to help them calculate their personal healthy food choices, based upon age and activity.) Why are we continuing to go along with this ridiculous system? In contrast to us paying billions for this “enlightenment from on high” the free market is more than capable of offering real, up to date information, without being told to do so by some government. As one example among thousands, the website noted above (Naturalnews.com) has a service for you to “Stay informed, empower yourself.” Each weekday, they email you breaking news on natural cures, green living, disease reversal and more. So there you have it. We can have a system that “empowers ourselves,” where we take responsibility for our own health and the health of our children and families; a system that gives us real opportunity for true wellness, long life and abundant health. Or we can continue to allow an unconstitutional, wholly ineffective, system warned against by the founders and specifically by Jefferson whom I must quote again: “If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls who live under tyranny.” Is it time yet for the Revolution?

2009-07-24T21:38:45Z

The FDA, the Food Pyramid, and Our Health

2010-02-11T00:06:56Z

It goes without saying that there is a momentum that has built up over the years that is now culminating in the pending implementation of some form of national health care. It appears we as a nation are going to succumb to an endless barrage of propaganda on how we are somehow "entitled" to some form of "free" medical care. How does the Constitution speak to this subject? First of all, it is quite clear there is no specific enumeration of powers given to the federal government to be involved in health care. This is also true of such subjects as agriculture, energy policy, and education. For over one hundred years, the federal government abided by the Constitution and the people were protected from the dictates of the federal government in these areas. As I have discussed in previous newsletters the founders were justifiably concerned that if power were allowed to re-accumulate in the federal government in non-enumerated areas, those with the most power would end up controlling policy. This would enable the powerful to command obedience from the people in ways that favored their particular interest group. The FDA, for example, now functions as an arm of the pharmaceutical companies. Despite the fact that we the people are told that the FDA is there to protect our interests, <a href="http://clicks.aweber.com/y/ct/?l=AIl4S&m=1dVY0GTn9IlNSX&b=1.UYInLsOdKUNUn358phyg" target="_blank">evidence</a> shows that officials ignore scientific findings about serious side effects of drugs they are asked to give their seal of approval. It is only after hundreds of thousands of people suffer extreme health problems and death that the FDA might intercede and "withdraw" their support for a particular drug. The problem with a "national health care" system that is mandated on employers, self employed individuals, and private citizens, is that no one knows what "health care" will receive the seal of approval by the government bureaucrat. Do you believe for a minute that powerful interests will not be seeking to have their "preferred" medical treatments sanctioned for acceptance in this system, while also seeking to disallow their competitors? What if you were facing a serious medical problem and, after extensive research, wanted to employ an "alternative" solution to your problem? Would you be forced to pay into the system that the government says is legitimate, and also pay for the treatment you prefer? We have seen a dramatic increase in the cost of medical services, AFTER the government became involved. Obviously, very few question invoices that are going to be paid by "insurance" or the "government." A true free market based on an informed and self-responsible citizenry would be vastly superior to any "government" mandated program. These are many of the reasons why the founders (and the people) were adamant that the federal government should play no role in these most important areas of life. In future newsletters I will continue to discuss how the involvement of the federal government (against the prohibitions of the Constitution) have dramatically decreased the quality of life in America, all as predicted by the founders of our nation. I will also discuss how easily we could implement non-government ("bottom-up") solutions that would dramatically improve the lives of Americans, while saving us billions in tax dollars.

2009-07-24T20:22:20Z

The Role of the Constitution in the Current Debate on National Health Care

2009-08-07T23:21:09Z

The goal of the 'liberals' — as it emerges from the record of the past decades — was to smuggle this country into welfare statism by means of single, concrete, specific measures, enlarging the power of the government a step at a time, never permitting these steps to be summed up into principles, never permitting their direction to be identified or the basic issue to be named. Thus statism was to come, not by vote or by violence, but by slow rot — by a long process of evasion and epistemlogical corruption, leading to a fait accompli.

2009-07-14T18:34:33Z

60 quote

The goal of the ‘liberals’ — as it emerges from the record of the past decades — was to smuggle this country into welfare statism by means of single, concrete, specific measures, enlarging the power of the government a step at a time, never permitting these steps to be summed up into principles, never permitting their direction to be identified or the basic issue to be named. Thus statism was to come, not by vote or by violence, but by slow rot — by a long process of evasion and epistemlogical corruption, leading to a fait accompli.

Ayn Rand

2009-07-14T18:34:34Z

Ayn Rand, _Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal_ (Signet, 1986) "Extremism," or The Art of Smearing.

Millions of Americans take dietary supplements every day, and the numbers are growing as the Baby Boom generation ages. More and more Americans understandably are frustrated with our government-controlled health care system. They have concluded that vitamins, minerals, and other supplements might help them stay healthy and less dependent on the system. They use supplements because they can buy them freely at stores and research them freely on the internet, without government interference in the form of doctors, prescriptions, HMOs, and licenses. In other words, they use supplements because they are largely free to make their own choices, in stark contrast to the conventional medical system. “But we live in an era of unbridled government regulation of both our personal lives and the economy, and Food and Drug administration bureaucrats burn to regulate supplements in the same manner as prescription drugs. “The health nannies insist that many dietary supplements are untested and unproven, and therefore dangerous. But the track record for FDA-approved drugs hardly inspires confidence. In fact, far more Americans have died using approved pharmaceuticals than supplements. Not every dietary supplement performs as claimed, but neither does every FDA drug.

2009-07-08T16:06:58Z

43 quote

Millions of Americans take dietary supplements every day, and the numbers are growing as the Baby Boom generation ages. More and more Americans understandably are frustrated with our government-controlled health care system. They have concluded that vitamins, minerals, and other supplements might help them stay healthy and less dependent on the system. They use supplements because they can buy them freely at stores and research them freely on the internet, without government interference in the form of doctors, prescriptions, HMOs, and licenses. In other words, they use supplements because they are largely free to make their own choices, in stark contrast to the conventional medical system. “But we live in an era of unbridled government regulation of both our personal lives and the economy, and Food and Drug administration bureaucrats burn to regulate supplements in the same manner as prescription drugs. “The health nannies insist that many dietary supplements are untested and unproven, and therefore dangerous. But the track record for FDA-approved drugs hardly inspires confidence. In fact, far more Americans have died using approved pharmaceuticals than supplements. Not every dietary supplement performs as claimed, but neither does every FDA drug.

Ron Paul

2009-07-08T16:07:21Z

Ron Paul, _Dietary Supplements and Health Freedom_ (2005) http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul246.html.

The cure for these problems? Remove the state backing from the AMA and FDA, and unleash the power and creativity of the free market. Many people have been brainwashed into thinking the state protects them. The truth is the exact opposite.

2009-07-08T16:03:34Z

42 quote

The cure for these problems? Remove the state backing from the AMA and FDA, and unleash the power and creativity of the free market. Many people have been brainwashed into thinking the state protects them. The truth is the exact opposite.

Bob Wallace

2009-07-08T16:03:36Z

Bob Wallace, Morris Fishbein - _AMA Enemy Of American Health,_ (2002). http://www.angelhealingcenter.com/AMA.htm

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay…If such a law is not abolished immediately, it will spread: multiply and develop into a system.

2009-07-07T19:42:37Z

Frederic Bastiat

2009-09-16T23:51:56Z

Frederic Bastiat, _The Law_ (Irvington-on-Hudson, New York, 1850) p. 13, 14.

You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot help the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by encouraging class hatred. You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than you earn. You cannot build character and courage by taking away man’s initiative and independence. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves.

2009-07-07T19:39:26Z

William J. H. Boetcker

2009-09-16T23:52:05Z

William J. H Boetcker, _The Ten Cannots_ (1916)