Letter to my Senator on HC bill

Discussion in 'Politics' started by windcatcher, Mar 25, 2010.

  1. windcatcher

    windcatcher
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    0
    No doubt you are a very sincere man with my interest at heart. Considering that we are essentially contemporaries and supposed to be equals under the laws which you help to pass, I would have higher regard for your integrity if you were able to provide our citizens with the same opportunity and health care which you and your peers, those whom we've elected, do enjoy.

    No doubt you consider that you have my best interest at heart: But that cliche is a tired excuse for failures in oversight of many governmental agencies, established by law in the House and Senate, such as the FDA, who are supposed to protect us, when they pass as safe and effective drugs, such as those 'researched' by bogus trials made up by doctors such as Scott Reuben, M.D. or they create an economic disaster to the farmers over a tomato crop in Florida because they guess at an outbreak of e-coli, and justify a disproportionate control and overreaction of enforcement and propose additional regulations on a prosperous industry (agriculture) which has served us well for centuries.... while a scant import[sic.... I meant 'inspection'] of drugs, foods, and products enter from China and elsewhere are[sic] imported in with contaminations of poisons, lead, mercury, bacteria, etc., or mislabeled in strength or by ingredients.

    If you were doing the job which I expect of you, instead of passing more legislation, you would be reviewing what already exist with a critical eye to repairing flaws, and realize the biggest one is when government assumes responsibility for the choices of the people and regulates or removes from them the resources of their own labor and innovation to help themselves and each other.

    I see you're planning on 'retiring' from your elected office and wish you well. You have served the public in office and are sure to do well in the public/private sector for your hard work. Daily, I worked for the public, in a health care facility, almost 22 years, paid low wages due to privatization, but grateful for the skills God gave me to work with a difficult and special population. I was grateful for my compensation which furnished my own necessities without much excess, and the withholding for taxes and etc., were a reminder to me of the obligations of others for the source of my income. My own integrity required that i either be content or move on, where I might be paid more but my personal commitment and skills were less utilized. It is sad to see that so many we elect, and so many who draw their salaries off the public purse, have little conscience concerning the stewardship of resources off which their salaries are drawn and their pensions are paid.

    The bottom line:
    I do not approve of your vote and even less so that you and others allowed it to pass in such a clandestined way.

    You have failed me.... and so is this current administration. If I had 100 complaints against the administration which exited, I have a thousand against this one now!
     
  2. windcatcher

    windcatcher
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    0
    Something I learned about tonight in my study group on the constitution:

    Whenever you elect a Congressman, or Senator from your district to represent you in Washington..... regardless of whether they are Democrat or Republican..... they do not have the free power to choose their own aides who will assist them in their official office. Instead, they are obligated to the party which elected them, for approval. This means, if the party is corrupt and overbearing in its influence.... it matters little what the personal integrity of the official being elected is, the insurmountable amount of the material he's expected to digest and make quick decisions on, his appointments to committees and committee work, his other public and private schedules, creates a dependance on the briefs and summaries given him by his staff as well as their honest appraisal of public input. IOW, the best well intentioned and 'honest' guy that you elect, may still be screwed over(please forgive the crast usage here) by the set up within his own party designed to control and manipulate him.

    This may be another reason to look well to those who are not already controlled by their party.... or consider the advantages of voting independent.... where party allegiance doesn't count.
     
  3. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    Interesting that came up in your study of the Constitution since it says nothing about parties or congressional aides. You guys must have as many rabbit trails as the Baptist Board :).
     
  4. windcatcher

    windcatcher
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oh, C4K, you might imagine the half of it. Tonight we did very well as our group was half the size it normally is as our regular teacher was out so some missed (and spring break is just beginning so some may be gone on vacation, hence their absence). Still we made it through discussion and study of 2 principles (#19, and 20) and the questions and had a lively discussion.

    Someone received an email that our Fl legislature, including the support and votes of our NW FL representatives and senators, had passed in favor of a constitutional convention. This was a great disturbance to many of us who have been studying our documents long enough, though recent, to know that a convention is much more involved and a far more serious undertaking than altering the constitution by an amendment ratification of the states begun by the Congressional House and Senate. So I returned and spent most of my time trying to look up reports to see if this was fact or fiction..... and still have not been able to confirm the information. The state senate just began their new session the 25th.

    What I did find is that Florida is already down as one of the states already on record for requesting a constitutional convention (the list is here) and is also on the list of 13 states who had recalled their application for a convention ( see here, which included the latest additions of SD and WY ). Essentially, 32 states have presented applications for a constitutional convention with only 34 required to start one. Although 13 of those states have rescinded their request (of which FL was one ....until yesterday, if the report is true and it has reversed on this), there is nothing which requires aknowledgement of their retraction. As it appears to most who have a deeper study of law (viewpoints of jurist and attorneys), 32 states still are recognized as having made formal application, only 2 states shy of the necessary 34 needed. That 12 or 13 states have regretted their application may not be a factor which allows them the right to withdraw once a formal application has been made.

    If we consider the stew over health care regulation.... just imagine the concerns over a constitutional convention. The one who wrote our constitution, allowed us only two ways to amend it. The first is more controled within the power of the people through the election process of their Senators and representative and can focus only on a particular issue at a time. But our founders, for whatever reason they thought proper at the time, did create an alternative way to amend the constitution which is doing the very thing which they did. Though there are many writings and quotes prevailing from that time to this which give us insight as to what their opinions and concerns were and the issues debated, they did not give us how the convention was constructed, how they determined order, how they determined the character and motivations of those attending were sufficiently 'vetted' and free of avarice or self promotion or challenged to focus beyond their own times, experience, and knowledge to create a document which could be a timeless response for future generations...... except it was by the providential response of God to the prayer requested by Ben Franklin.

    They already had a document, The Articles of Confederation, which functioned as a temporary contract or agreement to help unify the colonist; but, it was not acceptable; they met expecting to revise it and correct the flaws and the objections which they saw within it.... and wound up discarding it altogether to form the law by which government has functioned up to the present. While all were men of great passion and sincerity and depth of knowledge and experience, having drawn deeply of the wells of humanity's vast experience with government, and though some were highly motivated with personal ambition and pride, they were able, somehow, to recognize these and set themselves aside to hammer out a document which would enable future generations to live free in hope, and provide them a tool of government which would serve the purpose for law, justice, and protection, and provide a timeless responsiveness to their changing needs.

    If a constitution convention is called, who will be appointed to go, what will be the purpose, is there any way to insure that it is limited to addressing the one or two issues which seem to reocurr..... budgets, monetary reform, taxation? How might other issues like abortion or welfare or gun control or privacy rights, etc. be introduced and in the process create more divisions? How knowledgeable would these people be who would represent us and just how do they view the limits of government vs the limits of people?

    Obama is not alone when he calls the Constitution a negative document: From his vantage point and those in Washington, D.C., it is a restricting force to be reckoned with which restrains them from the free exercise of their power and will upon the people who could challenge them. There are many who have studied the Constitution as case law in courses for jurist, who exit the schools with the same opinion: Instead of viewing it as positive..... they view it as negative because regarding law..... it tells the government what its limits are (what it can't do) instead of setting limits on the people. These authorities and 'experts' do not see the value of laws kept closer to the people and within their control and purpose as needed in their community or state.

    I had hoped to open a new thread on this.... but since I introduced it here, I might as well present other links to sources of information so that those reading this thread have the earliest opportunity to begin studying this issue. By the time most people would be aware of such a movement... it may be too late for them to know anything about it or to have any real impact or input on this matter.

    Tea Party: attempts to hijack and turn it into a con con

    A worthy list of study, questions, and opinion related to the seriousness and understanding of what a constitutional convention could mean
     
    #4 windcatcher, Mar 26, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 26, 2010
  5. Dragoon68

    Dragoon68
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Excellent letter!

    I've been writing my representatives regularly for years. I haven't written them on this latest failure yet. I'm trying to claim my anger before I hit the keyboard. I'm disgusted with the whole lot of them - Republicans (my party), Democrats, and the rest. It's a bit like the Bible's description of righteous men - there's not one! There are in Congress, however, some far less righteous than others and in the White House it's a slam dunk for socialists!
     
  6. exscentric

    exscentric
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,253
    Likes Received:
    16
    As dribs and drabs of info come out about the plan people may start seeing why some didn't like it.

    Tanning salon tax, thousands forced into Medicaid plans that are barely functioning with no federal money to pay for it according to the news today - 600,000 plus in OR and we are near broke already. Should about put CA over the edge so we can add them to the bail out list - too big to fail you know.

    AT and T says it will cost them over a billion in the first quarter. Bet the phone rates are going to rise - well everything is going to rise I would guess:tonofbricks:
     
  7. Robert Snow

    Robert Snow
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Messages:
    4,466
    Likes Received:
    0
    Just more doom and gloom. I doubt one-tenth of your forecast come to pass. In the end, I believe this health care law will benefit the country as a whole. As long as we are predicting, I also think this will be accepted by most people when they understand it and it is enacted.
     
  8. sag38

    sag38
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,394
    Likes Received:
    1
    Mr. Flipflopper, please tell us what is so great about this bill that people are just going to want to kiss their senator on the mouth for voting on it? And, pray tell us how it is that you have such a great understanding of this bill's overwhelming benefits that somehow will trump the negative press that this bill is receiving?
     
  9. sag38

    sag38
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,394
    Likes Received:
    1
    That's what I thought! No, answers. Evidently there is just a blind belief in the talking points of the corrupt.
     
  10. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    Robert, it is impossible that this bill not will not affect working people. We renew our health insurance every January where I work, and it has gone up every year. But truthfully, the increases have been very modest and I have not had a problem with the increased rates. I am betting rates will increase at least 20% or more next renewal time. And, this renewal will probably occur well before January. And as you know, the employer pays a good portion of our premium, so they are going to be hit with a big increase as well. They will have to absorb the cost somehow, either raise the cost of product, or perhaps lay people off (or both).

    Right now, there are probably millions with pre-existing conditions who could not get insurance. That is truly unfortunate, and no one likes that. There are many programs to assist these people, although I am sure many have great difficulty getting this assistance.

    All of these people are going to get insurance now, and that is a great thing. But they are already sick and will immediately need services. Health Insurance companies traditionally operate on a very small profit margin, just 3-4% on average (that is a fact). These sick persons will immediately exhaust all profits and put them in debt. They will have no choice but to greatly increase rates. And now that there is no limit on how much coverage you have, they will have to greatly increase rates there too. Imagine someone with AIDS who needs continuous treatment for years (their lifetime).

    I cannot understand how you do not think this is going to immediatly cause rates to skyrocket. Plus, insurance companies will have to cut benefits, what else can they do? You will be paying much more but receiving much less.

    There is no way this cannot happen. It's basic economics.
     
    #10 Winman, Mar 29, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 29, 2010
  11. Bob Alkire

    Bob Alkire
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2001
    Messages:
    3,134
    Likes Received:
    0
    So true my friend. I believe it was the state of Mass. or Az. that found out to many high risk folks made it hard on their plan. You have to take in enough to pay the bill. Why is there a waiting list for certain kinds of medical service in places that has government run health care? The government can pay for only so much, so many have to do with out until their number comes up are they are called off of this earth.
     
    #11 Bob Alkire, Mar 29, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 29, 2010

Share This Page

Loading...