Plain & Simple
Syndicate
Created With Quick Blogcast
Plain & Simple
Americans + Canadians = Better Health Care?
A + B = C.
This seems to be the justification for American health care reform where:
A. Health insurance for all is good.
B. The Canadians love it eh!
C. The Americans will get better health care.
Unfortunately, the real equation is a little more complex and looks a little more like this...
A + B + (x + y + z) + 45.7 million votes + 1.5 trillion dollars = C
Where:
x = health and hospital corporations
y = insurance companies
z = political self interest
Placed in a word problem it would look like this:
Health care for all is a good thing...the Canadians love it. The hospital corporations, insurance companies and politicians will all work very hard to spend 1.5 trillion dollars to make it happen for the 45.7 million people who are forced to go without insurance. How many Americans will notice an improvement in care?
Answer: 0 (To see my work on this problem click here).
Plain & Simple: A + B does not lead to C in this case. I've said it before and I guess I have to say it again: "Insurance coverage does not equal health care." The interests of of the corporations will be met, but the needs of the people to see providers will be further strained. In the end, the proposed reforms won't t add up to better health care.
This seems to be the justification for American health care reform where:
A. Health insurance for all is good.
B. The Canadians love it eh!
C. The Americans will get better health care.
Unfortunately, the real equation is a little more complex and looks a little more like this...
A + B + (x + y + z) + 45.7 million votes + 1.5 trillion dollars = C
Where:
x = health and hospital corporations
y = insurance companies
z = political self interest
Placed in a word problem it would look like this:
Health care for all is a good thing...the Canadians love it. The hospital corporations, insurance companies and politicians will all work very hard to spend 1.5 trillion dollars to make it happen for the 45.7 million people who are forced to go without insurance. How many Americans will notice an improvement in care?
Answer: 0 (To see my work on this problem click here).
Plain & Simple: A + B does not lead to C in this case. I've said it before and I guess I have to say it again: "Insurance coverage does not equal health care." The interests of of the corporations will be met, but the needs of the people to see providers will be further strained. In the end, the proposed reforms won't t add up to better health care.
The Silver Lining to the Dark Clouds of Taxation
Some say every cloud has a silver lining.
According to a recent op-ed piece in the IndyStar, raising taxes on alcohol is a good thing because it will positively affect the amount of underage drinking in Indiana. The authors further point out that a portion of the tax should be put toward treating those with alcohol/drug addiction. Such a move would save society about $7.46 per dollar invested in such programs. It sounds good, except for one little problem...
It's called reality: Each year the states collect roughly $22 billion in revenue from tobacco taxes and the 1998 state tobacco settlement—a mere 7% of which would fully fund smoking prevention and cessation programs in all 50 states. Only 3 states fully fund such programs (Indiana isn't one of them). The other 47 divert the funds for "other needs."
Plain & Simple: Addicts live lives of lies and deception which destroy the well-being of themselves and those around them. If you ask an addict where the rent money went, they'll tell you "Something really important came up." Intervention is the term used when the addict is cut off the from his high, confronted about the long standing deception and forced to take responsibility for their actions. It is a difficult, but proven road to recovery. I really hate to rain on this parade, but the last thing we need is another tax for politicians to abuse. To many of these folks, it's their drug of choice. A little taxpayer intervention at the polls would be the real silver lining.
According to a recent op-ed piece in the IndyStar, raising taxes on alcohol is a good thing because it will positively affect the amount of underage drinking in Indiana. The authors further point out that a portion of the tax should be put toward treating those with alcohol/drug addiction. Such a move would save society about $7.46 per dollar invested in such programs. It sounds good, except for one little problem...
It's called reality: Each year the states collect roughly $22 billion in revenue from tobacco taxes and the 1998 state tobacco settlement—a mere 7% of which would fully fund smoking prevention and cessation programs in all 50 states. Only 3 states fully fund such programs (Indiana isn't one of them). The other 47 divert the funds for "other needs."
Plain & Simple: Addicts live lives of lies and deception which destroy the well-being of themselves and those around them. If you ask an addict where the rent money went, they'll tell you "Something really important came up." Intervention is the term used when the addict is cut off the from his high, confronted about the long standing deception and forced to take responsibility for their actions. It is a difficult, but proven road to recovery. I really hate to rain on this parade, but the last thing we need is another tax for politicians to abuse. To many of these folks, it's their drug of choice. A little taxpayer intervention at the polls would be the real silver lining.
Smoke and Mirrors
In an attempt to end the battle over work-place smoking, (i.e. in bars) the Indy Star and the anti-smoking lobby unsheathed the broad sword of science and assumed a position of triumph.
This weapon was honed by a report titled: "Estimating the Economic impact of Secondhand Smoke on Indiana in 2007." Today's star headlines conjecture that secondhand smoke is a problem costing Hoosiers $390 million a year. The only problem is that there is no hard data to support the conclusions of the study.
The data used for the analysis was based on hospital discharge reports, death rates and census data. Using such data would go something like this...
A 52 year-old, non-smoking male, 5'8" tall, weighing 350 lbs dies in the ER from a massive heart attack. Stricken with grief, his widow lights up a cigarette in the consultation room. The physician appropriately notes under social history that his spouse smokes. Researches conducting this study see his name pop up on the screen during their search and attribute this death to secondhand smoke--not his morbid obesity.
A child gets an ear infection. One of the parents admits to smoking-but never around the children. As above, the ear infection is attributed to second hand smoke.
You get the picture. It's not possible to prove secondhand smoke is the causative agent. I will concede that it is a contributor. However, attempting to attribute full culpability upon secondhand smoke is folly.
Plain & Simple: The danger here is that once again statistics are being put forth as hard evidence. This information will be used to outlaw the legal practice of smoking in privately owned and operated businesses. I don't fear the sword in this argument--It's big, but the edge is dull. What I fear is the still concealed dagger of junk science and false pretense which has been far more damaging in recent years. It's just one more example of political smoke and mirrors.
This weapon was honed by a report titled: "Estimating the Economic impact of Secondhand Smoke on Indiana in 2007." Today's star headlines conjecture that secondhand smoke is a problem costing Hoosiers $390 million a year. The only problem is that there is no hard data to support the conclusions of the study.
The data used for the analysis was based on hospital discharge reports, death rates and census data. Using such data would go something like this...
A 52 year-old, non-smoking male, 5'8" tall, weighing 350 lbs dies in the ER from a massive heart attack. Stricken with grief, his widow lights up a cigarette in the consultation room. The physician appropriately notes under social history that his spouse smokes. Researches conducting this study see his name pop up on the screen during their search and attribute this death to secondhand smoke--not his morbid obesity.
A child gets an ear infection. One of the parents admits to smoking-but never around the children. As above, the ear infection is attributed to second hand smoke.
You get the picture. It's not possible to prove secondhand smoke is the causative agent. I will concede that it is a contributor. However, attempting to attribute full culpability upon secondhand smoke is folly.
Plain & Simple: The danger here is that once again statistics are being put forth as hard evidence. This information will be used to outlaw the legal practice of smoking in privately owned and operated businesses. I don't fear the sword in this argument--It's big, but the edge is dull. What I fear is the still concealed dagger of junk science and false pretense which has been far more damaging in recent years. It's just one more example of political smoke and mirrors.
Did you hear the one about...
Did you hear the one about the state legislator who wanted to increase access to medical care?
To do so, she wrote a bill that required more doors at health clinics.
No, really!
Specifically, we're talking about the clinics located in pharmacies and big-box stores which typically treat the "routine" stuff. The proposed legislation would require such clinics to construct separate entrances, mandate the patient's primary care provider receive a detailed report of the clinic visit and that prices be displayed outside the exam room.
The author of said bill stated: "We're just trying to make sure that they meet standards like other physicians have to do."
Really? Well after 7 years in the ER, I've never sent detailed reports to a primary provider, nor have I seen a price-list in the waiting room. However, I do have a revolving door at the entrance-which never stops moving.
Currently the State Department of Health does not license these "walk-up" facilities, but regulates them through the license of the doctor in charge. Translation: A problem with the care rendered at such facilities holds the doctor in charge accountable-period.
Plain & Simple: Health care legislation must be in the best interest of the patient. The requirements of this bill will stifle competition, inflate the cost of routine medical services provided by these clinics and add more expense to the state. It's bad for patients and taxpayers, which are one in the same. And that's no joke.
To do so, she wrote a bill that required more doors at health clinics.
No, really!
Specifically, we're talking about the clinics located in pharmacies and big-box stores which typically treat the "routine" stuff. The proposed legislation would require such clinics to construct separate entrances, mandate the patient's primary care provider receive a detailed report of the clinic visit and that prices be displayed outside the exam room.
The author of said bill stated: "We're just trying to make sure that they meet standards like other physicians have to do."
Really? Well after 7 years in the ER, I've never sent detailed reports to a primary provider, nor have I seen a price-list in the waiting room. However, I do have a revolving door at the entrance-which never stops moving.
Currently the State Department of Health does not license these "walk-up" facilities, but regulates them through the license of the doctor in charge. Translation: A problem with the care rendered at such facilities holds the doctor in charge accountable-period.
Plain & Simple: Health care legislation must be in the best interest of the patient. The requirements of this bill will stifle competition, inflate the cost of routine medical services provided by these clinics and add more expense to the state. It's bad for patients and taxpayers, which are one in the same. And that's no joke.
What have you been smoking?
I still remember the old anti-smoking campaign that simply stated "Smoking Stinks."
I totally agree, but I have to tell you, statewide smoking bans stink for a different reason: attitude is one.
Instead of saying, "Let's help people quit smoking," the attitude is "Quit smoking you terrible people!"
I say we quit attacking the people and attack the problem!
The best way to deal with second hand smoke is to eliminate it's primary source: smoking.
"The states already collect nearly $22 billion a year in tobacco-generated revenue from tobacco taxes and the 1998 state tobacco settlement. Just seven percent of this tobacco money would be enough to fund tobacco prevention and cessation programs in every state at levels recommended by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Unfortunately, only three states - Maine, Delaware and Colorado - currently fund prevention programs at CDC-recommended levels."
Where does this money go? Up in smoke of course-which also stinks because it's increasing our taxes.
"Smoking prevalence among Medicaid recipients is approximately 50% greater than that of the overall U.S. adult population...persons receiving Medicaid are affected disproportionately by tobacco-related disease and disability..." which leads to greater health care costs paid for by taxpayers.
But that's not all:
Years ago, James P Siepmann, M.D. wrote an article titled: Smoking does Not Cause Lung Cancer using WHO and CDC data to make his case. In the end he showed that it certainly contributes to one's propensity to get lung cancer, but there are so many other risk factors that contribute to lung cancer that smoking can hardly be linked as THE cause. Remember, exercise leads to better health even if you smoke!
The studies that attribute thousands of deaths to second hand smoke are far from conclusive because of numerous confounding factors: poor diet, obesity, lack of exercise. Such bans are another example of a society wanting to take a pill, not responsibility, to achieve good health.
Plain & Simple: If you think this ban is part of the "solution", you have been smokin' something. Hoosiers should concern themselves with addressing healthy lifestyles and smoking cessation, not smoking locations. We've got bigger fish to fry--I mean bake. It's more healthful.
I totally agree, but I have to tell you, statewide smoking bans stink for a different reason: attitude is one.
Instead of saying, "Let's help people quit smoking," the attitude is "Quit smoking you terrible people!"
I say we quit attacking the people and attack the problem!
The best way to deal with second hand smoke is to eliminate it's primary source: smoking.
"The states already collect nearly $22 billion a year in tobacco-generated revenue from tobacco taxes and the 1998 state tobacco settlement. Just seven percent of this tobacco money would be enough to fund tobacco prevention and cessation programs in every state at levels recommended by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Unfortunately, only three states - Maine, Delaware and Colorado - currently fund prevention programs at CDC-recommended levels."
Where does this money go? Up in smoke of course-which also stinks because it's increasing our taxes.
"Smoking prevalence among Medicaid recipients is approximately 50% greater than that of the overall U.S. adult population...persons receiving Medicaid are affected disproportionately by tobacco-related disease and disability..." which leads to greater health care costs paid for by taxpayers.
But that's not all:
Years ago, James P Siepmann, M.D. wrote an article titled: Smoking does Not Cause Lung Cancer using WHO and CDC data to make his case. In the end he showed that it certainly contributes to one's propensity to get lung cancer, but there are so many other risk factors that contribute to lung cancer that smoking can hardly be linked as THE cause. Remember, exercise leads to better health even if you smoke!
The studies that attribute thousands of deaths to second hand smoke are far from conclusive because of numerous confounding factors: poor diet, obesity, lack of exercise. Such bans are another example of a society wanting to take a pill, not responsibility, to achieve good health.
Plain & Simple: If you think this ban is part of the "solution", you have been smokin' something. Hoosiers should concern themselves with addressing healthy lifestyles and smoking cessation, not smoking locations. We've got bigger fish to fry--I mean bake. It's more healthful.
You Get What You Need
"But Dad, I need that train!"
"I know it's very cool, son, but we can't afford it right now. Our property taxes went up, we're paying more sales tax than ever, and there's a $700 billion dollar bailout looming to cover a monster governmental screw-up for which I'll have to kick in more money."
"But Dad..."
"But dad nothing, I bought you a new stadium last year, which I'll be paying off for the rest of my life. I'm tapped out! I know you want a train but what you need is a fleet of buses and an appropriate infrastructure, like sidewalks and bike trails, so people can get to those buses. You can use the millions of dollars that would be spent maintaining a train to bolster Indygo. I want you to have regional mass transit, but we have to do so sensibly. I just can't afford a train right now!"
"We could float a bond issue and buy it on credit. We have a AAA rating right now."
"Son, I know they didn't teach you about credit in school, but buying with credit is not a good thing. Maybe someday we can afford the train. Just not right now. Go outside and ride your bike. Watch out for traffic, there are no bike lanes."
Plain & Simple: I'm glad we could have this little talk--maybe it will get through to supporters of a light rail system. Spending hundreds of millions of dollars on a train right now is irresponsible. There are cheaper alternatives that will cost a fraction of the light rail. We can't afford another bond issue or tax right now. Because I'm sensible, I'll push not for what we want, but for what we need: Sensible mass transit.
"I know it's very cool, son, but we can't afford it right now. Our property taxes went up, we're paying more sales tax than ever, and there's a $700 billion dollar bailout looming to cover a monster governmental screw-up for which I'll have to kick in more money."
"But Dad..."
"But dad nothing, I bought you a new stadium last year, which I'll be paying off for the rest of my life. I'm tapped out! I know you want a train but what you need is a fleet of buses and an appropriate infrastructure, like sidewalks and bike trails, so people can get to those buses. You can use the millions of dollars that would be spent maintaining a train to bolster Indygo. I want you to have regional mass transit, but we have to do so sensibly. I just can't afford a train right now!"
"We could float a bond issue and buy it on credit. We have a AAA rating right now."
"Son, I know they didn't teach you about credit in school, but buying with credit is not a good thing. Maybe someday we can afford the train. Just not right now. Go outside and ride your bike. Watch out for traffic, there are no bike lanes."
Plain & Simple: I'm glad we could have this little talk--maybe it will get through to supporters of a light rail system. Spending hundreds of millions of dollars on a train right now is irresponsible. There are cheaper alternatives that will cost a fraction of the light rail. We can't afford another bond issue or tax right now. Because I'm sensible, I'll push not for what we want, but for what we need: Sensible mass transit.
Attention Bargain Shoppers!
Question 1.
You enter a store to purchase a new MP3 player. The item lists two prices: $122 or $100. Which would you prefer to pay?
Question 2.
You need a new dishwasher. You are told you can pay $610 or $500 for the same unit. Which would you choose?
These questions seem ridiculous, but they're examples of questions Japanese educators actually pose to young students to help them understand money and the true cost of credit. The answers for most Americans are easy. Most will pay $122 for the MP3 player and $610 for the dishwasher because they'll pay with a credit card that charge an average of 22% interest.
---------------------------------------------
Instead of protesting the federal bailout for our current economic crisis, people should be protesting what's passing for education. Sure kids can pass calculus, but they can't balance a check book.
This is no bolt out-of-the-blue! A 1999 report by Lewis Mandell (Dean, School of Management- University of Buffalo) pointed out, "Millions of American teenagers graduate from high school every year without a basic understanding of how to manage their money." As we see now, the result is costly.
Unlike my incumbent opponent who chaired the Senate Education committee, I don't favor No Child Left Behind, and now you see another reason why. This costly program doesn't address a kid's need to think critically or practically. Such programs force our educators to abandon teaching the practical application of subject matter.
Plain & Simple: With proper education, many young adults would have passed on sub-prime loans, expensive car loans and buying everything with a credit card. Greedy people will always prey on the weak and ignorant. We trusted our Republican and Democrat leaders to protect the honest investor from economic catastrophe. They failed. I expect our state leaders to start educating our kids appropriately. If elected in November, I will work to make education mean something again. Don't allow our kids to be set up for failure any more. We can't afford it.
You enter a store to purchase a new MP3 player. The item lists two prices: $122 or $100. Which would you prefer to pay?
Question 2.
You need a new dishwasher. You are told you can pay $610 or $500 for the same unit. Which would you choose?
These questions seem ridiculous, but they're examples of questions Japanese educators actually pose to young students to help them understand money and the true cost of credit. The answers for most Americans are easy. Most will pay $122 for the MP3 player and $610 for the dishwasher because they'll pay with a credit card that charge an average of 22% interest.
---------------------------------------------
Instead of protesting the federal bailout for our current economic crisis, people should be protesting what's passing for education. Sure kids can pass calculus, but they can't balance a check book.
This is no bolt out-of-the-blue! A 1999 report by Lewis Mandell (Dean, School of Management- University of Buffalo) pointed out, "Millions of American teenagers graduate from high school every year without a basic understanding of how to manage their money." As we see now, the result is costly.
Unlike my incumbent opponent who chaired the Senate Education committee, I don't favor No Child Left Behind, and now you see another reason why. This costly program doesn't address a kid's need to think critically or practically. Such programs force our educators to abandon teaching the practical application of subject matter.
Plain & Simple: With proper education, many young adults would have passed on sub-prime loans, expensive car loans and buying everything with a credit card. Greedy people will always prey on the weak and ignorant. We trusted our Republican and Democrat leaders to protect the honest investor from economic catastrophe. They failed. I expect our state leaders to start educating our kids appropriately. If elected in November, I will work to make education mean something again. Don't allow our kids to be set up for failure any more. We can't afford it.
What's a Good Name for a Side-Kick?
Able to stop a speeding bullet...
More powerful than a locomotive...
Able to leap the State House in a single bound...(Probably not this last one)
It's a bird, it's a plane, it's...
GOOD LEGISLATION!
I've been meeting more and more citizens of this metropolis, and crime is a big concern. Well "Have no fear, The Underdog is here!"
If elected, I will sponsor legislation similar to the 10-20-Life legislation in Florida. The Florida State Department of Corrections says: "10-20-LIFE has helped to drive down Florida's violent-gun crime rates by 30 percent."
Wow! A simple piece of legislation that can have that kind of impact? Why haven't our legislators done this already?
Plain & Simple: One need not be a fabled crime-fighter to help protect the citizens of Indiana. Legislators refuse to flex a little muscle with the criminal element but have no problem strong-arming taxpayers for more money to fight crime. It's time someone in the State House showed the pen can be mightier than the gun. Disguised as your mild-manned Senator, in concert with my trusty taxpaying side-kick (that's you), we'll do just that!
Now, what's a good name for a crime-fighting side-kick?
More powerful than a locomotive...
Able to leap the State House in a single bound...(Probably not this last one)
It's a bird, it's a plane, it's...
GOOD LEGISLATION!
I've been meeting more and more citizens of this metropolis, and crime is a big concern. Well "Have no fear, The Underdog is here!"
If elected, I will sponsor legislation similar to the 10-20-Life legislation in Florida. The Florida State Department of Corrections says: "10-20-LIFE has helped to drive down Florida's violent-gun crime rates by 30 percent."
Wow! A simple piece of legislation that can have that kind of impact? Why haven't our legislators done this already?
Plain & Simple: One need not be a fabled crime-fighter to help protect the citizens of Indiana. Legislators refuse to flex a little muscle with the criminal element but have no problem strong-arming taxpayers for more money to fight crime. It's time someone in the State House showed the pen can be mightier than the gun. Disguised as your mild-manned Senator, in concert with my trusty taxpaying side-kick (that's you), we'll do just that!
Now, what's a good name for a crime-fighting side-kick?
Looking for a way to pay
Have you ever noticed that every government solution costs money?
Today's IndyStar editorial about funding for after-school programs says: "As with parks and other essentials that are threatened with funding shortfalls in this anti-tax climate..."
Hold the phone. Are we being accused of not wanting to pay to support after-school programs?
The way I see it, we already fund a solution.
How about this: state university students studying education are already subsidized by our tax dollars. Why not require education majors to participate in study hall/after-school programs as part of their degree training? They get experience and credit towards their degree, kids get tutoring, and we get the most for our tax dollars. I think this would be such a mutually beneficial experience, that even the private universities would want to participate.
Plain & Simple: We're willing to help others. We just want to do it in the most cost-effective manner possible. Why don't our legislators come up with these types of solutions more often? Well, elect me and I will.
Today's IndyStar editorial about funding for after-school programs says: "As with parks and other essentials that are threatened with funding shortfalls in this anti-tax climate..."
Hold the phone. Are we being accused of not wanting to pay to support after-school programs?
The way I see it, we already fund a solution.
How about this: state university students studying education are already subsidized by our tax dollars. Why not require education majors to participate in study hall/after-school programs as part of their degree training? They get experience and credit towards their degree, kids get tutoring, and we get the most for our tax dollars. I think this would be such a mutually beneficial experience, that even the private universities would want to participate.
Plain & Simple: We're willing to help others. We just want to do it in the most cost-effective manner possible. Why don't our legislators come up with these types of solutions more often? Well, elect me and I will.
What's your incentive?
Today’s IndyStar articles on the current legislative pension plan and
the similarly lucrative plan set to replace it, highlights the growing
concern voiced by many taxpayers —Are legislators working for us, or their own self-interest?
In the column, former Rep. Tom Kromkowski was quoted as saying: "Come on. There has to be some incentive to have good people run for office. You can't just say you're going to work for nothing."
Nothing? They are already being paid a salary, given an expense account and paid a per deim.
I don’t think anyone would say those we elect should work for free. And perhaps voters wouldn't mind giving a raise if they felt the job was getting done. Voters are unhappy because their elected employees took a bonus without earning it.
Plain & Simple: We need more legislators willing to invest in Indiana’s future, not themselves. We deserve legislators who are willing to invest their time addressing issues facing the rest of us. The job interviews are being conducted now. Voting for those who are benefiting from this pension scheme means you think you're getting the most from your elected employee. Well, are you?
In the column, former Rep. Tom Kromkowski was quoted as saying: "Come on. There has to be some incentive to have good people run for office. You can't just say you're going to work for nothing."
Nothing? They are already being paid a salary, given an expense account and paid a per deim.
I don’t think anyone would say those we elect should work for free. And perhaps voters wouldn't mind giving a raise if they felt the job was getting done. Voters are unhappy because their elected employees took a bonus without earning it.
Plain & Simple: We need more legislators willing to invest in Indiana’s future, not themselves. We deserve legislators who are willing to invest their time addressing issues facing the rest of us. The job interviews are being conducted now. Voting for those who are benefiting from this pension scheme means you think you're getting the most from your elected employee. Well, are you?
Where you been?
Well, I've been so busy I forgot to blog.
The truth is that I'm running a very active campaign. Starting with the May 6 primary, the Committee to Elect hit the polls handing out over 1100 informational brochures, a move that was very well received by voters. Since that time I've been working in the ER, knockin' on doors, attending meetings of all sorts, going to D.C. and attempting to be a good dad and husband.
Why does a state legislative candidate travel to Washington D.C.? Well, because I was asked.
You see, there's been a major shift in Libertarian politics, and Indiana is on the leading edge. Those in D.C. caught wind of Indiana's progress and wanted first-hand information.
Word first spread to D.C. through John LaBeaume of ElectionDissection.com. He asked me and 2 other active candidates to head to D.C. to talk with those in the know. We met with Dick Heller of recent second amendment fame and discussed his remaining concerns and learned his next moves. Lunch was spent with David Weigel of Reason Magazine and then off to visit with CEI president Fred Smith, followed by CATO Institute's Tim Lynch. Finally, we had a great meet and greet on Dupont Circle.
Plain & Simple: Libertarians doing the work is something people are not accustomed to seeing. I'm not here to make a statement. I'm electable, and many in D.C. have taken notice of myself and a few others in the Indiana '08 race. I just hope my hard work gets people in Indiana as excited as those in D.C.
The truth is that I'm running a very active campaign. Starting with the May 6 primary, the Committee to Elect hit the polls handing out over 1100 informational brochures, a move that was very well received by voters. Since that time I've been working in the ER, knockin' on doors, attending meetings of all sorts, going to D.C. and attempting to be a good dad and husband.
Why does a state legislative candidate travel to Washington D.C.? Well, because I was asked.
You see, there's been a major shift in Libertarian politics, and Indiana is on the leading edge. Those in D.C. caught wind of Indiana's progress and wanted first-hand information.
Word first spread to D.C. through John LaBeaume of ElectionDissection.com. He asked me and 2 other active candidates to head to D.C. to talk with those in the know. We met with Dick Heller of recent second amendment fame and discussed his remaining concerns and learned his next moves. Lunch was spent with David Weigel of Reason Magazine and then off to visit with CEI president Fred Smith, followed by CATO Institute's Tim Lynch. Finally, we had a great meet and greet on Dupont Circle.
Plain & Simple: Libertarians doing the work is something people are not accustomed to seeing. I'm not here to make a statement. I'm electable, and many in D.C. have taken notice of myself and a few others in the Indiana '08 race. I just hope my hard work gets people in Indiana as excited as those in D.C.
Ah the Choo-Choo!
Once again, it's time to discuss light rail in the Northeast corridor.
Last year I attended an MPO meeting where the glory of rail transit was endlessly touted. After the meeting, I spoke with the project consultant from HNTB. He admitted the best we could hope for with this rail system was a 3% reduction in traffic in the Northeast corridor. Now friends, is a 3% reduction really worth billions of dollars?
A recent Indystar editorial suggests the "First leg of the rail system must avoid misstep." I agree, and placing it in the Northeast corridor is a huge misstep. If you want to add a rail system, let's add a line from the new and improved airport to the, soon to be, bigger and better convention center.
Plain & Simple: The goal is to reduce traffic in the Northeast corridor, not to spend billions of dollars. I've advocated focusing on the growing telecommuting trend which would reduce traffic throughout the state. Check out Connecticut's telecommuting initiative. This program has had a great impact on employers and employees alike. Personally, I favor facilitating social trends, rather than forcing expensive (taxpayer-funded) options whenever possible.
Last year I attended an MPO meeting where the glory of rail transit was endlessly touted. After the meeting, I spoke with the project consultant from HNTB. He admitted the best we could hope for with this rail system was a 3% reduction in traffic in the Northeast corridor. Now friends, is a 3% reduction really worth billions of dollars?
A recent Indystar editorial suggests the "First leg of the rail system must avoid misstep." I agree, and placing it in the Northeast corridor is a huge misstep. If you want to add a rail system, let's add a line from the new and improved airport to the, soon to be, bigger and better convention center.
Plain & Simple: The goal is to reduce traffic in the Northeast corridor, not to spend billions of dollars. I've advocated focusing on the growing telecommuting trend which would reduce traffic throughout the state. Check out Connecticut's telecommuting initiative. This program has had a great impact on employers and employees alike. Personally, I favor facilitating social trends, rather than forcing expensive (taxpayer-funded) options whenever possible.
Let me BRAG about my tower
Over the last 3 years, Binford Redevelopment and Growth, Inc (BRAG) has spent a great deal of time and effort to redevelop the northeast corridor of Indianapolis.. Through private and corporate donations, volunteers have planted trees, installed flower beds, and brought in new businesses to take over vacant space. Last February, Mayor Ballard took time to acknowledge their accomplishments.
Now there will be another corporate donation to the BRAG area, one they didn't plan. It's a 50 foot cell tower that will be generously donated by T-Mobile. Marion County Zoning Board #3 granted a variance allowing T-mobile to place the tower near the entrance of Tanglewood Estates.
Despite the fact that a commercial site was offered, T-Mobile felt this neighborhood was a better location.
In the petition hearing, T-Mobile pointed to a Federal law which requires them to provide "good" service. But according to their website, they have a minimum of 3 bar coverage in the area this tower is to serve. That seem pretty good.
One Tanglewood resident went to a T-mobile store and inquired about switching carriers. When she inquired about the coverage in this area, she was told by the salesperson, "It's excellent."
Plain & Simple: Despite 70+ remonstrators in attendance at the hearing, the board felt the public would be better served by T-mobile then by consistent application of zoning. As far as I'm aware, there is no appeal process. This is another example of how government is serving big business so they can serve us better.
Now there will be another corporate donation to the BRAG area, one they didn't plan. It's a 50 foot cell tower that will be generously donated by T-Mobile. Marion County Zoning Board #3 granted a variance allowing T-mobile to place the tower near the entrance of Tanglewood Estates.
Despite the fact that a commercial site was offered, T-Mobile felt this neighborhood was a better location.
In the petition hearing, T-Mobile pointed to a Federal law which requires them to provide "good" service. But according to their website, they have a minimum of 3 bar coverage in the area this tower is to serve. That seem pretty good.
One Tanglewood resident went to a T-mobile store and inquired about switching carriers. When she inquired about the coverage in this area, she was told by the salesperson, "It's excellent."
Plain & Simple: Despite 70+ remonstrators in attendance at the hearing, the board felt the public would be better served by T-mobile then by consistent application of zoning. As far as I'm aware, there is no appeal process. This is another example of how government is serving big business so they can serve us better.
Tired of the Property Tax Debate?
I know you're tired of talking about property taxes. So am I!
Let's talk about education for a bit.
I recently received a report from an Indiana Dept. of Education analyst outlining the cost of health care premiums for all Indiana school districts. The 2007 cost for those health premiums: $1,085,905,824.30 (Yeah, that's billion).
Depending where you live in Indiana, roughly 40-80% of your property taxes fund education costs, including health premiums. Darn it! Now we're talking about property taxes. You see, they're related.
Health care costs influence education costs, and
education is paid for using property taxes. So, will
reducing health care costs indirectly decrease property taxes?
You bet!
Plain & Simple: Health care is largely responsible for increasing the costs of business, education, and property taxes. I've known this for some time. And now, you do too. As your Senator, I'll use my knowledge of the health care system to help reduce these costs to taxpayers, without compromising patient care or the student experience. Or should I just leave this to the other folks to fix?
Let's talk about education for a bit.
I recently received a report from an Indiana Dept. of Education analyst outlining the cost of health care premiums for all Indiana school districts. The 2007 cost for those health premiums: $1,085,905,824.30 (Yeah, that's billion).
Depending where you live in Indiana, roughly 40-80% of your property taxes fund education costs, including health premiums. Darn it! Now we're talking about property taxes. You see, they're related.
Health care costs influence education costs, and
education is paid for using property taxes. So, will
reducing health care costs indirectly decrease property taxes?
You bet!
Plain & Simple: Health care is largely responsible for increasing the costs of business, education, and property taxes. I've known this for some time. And now, you do too. As your Senator, I'll use my knowledge of the health care system to help reduce these costs to taxpayers, without compromising patient care or the student experience. Or should I just leave this to the other folks to fix?
Honor your commitment. I did.
The Democrat didn't show up for the forum. The Republican's ethics are in questions because he got caught campaigning on the people's time. Sounds like politics.
Most of you know I don't talk about national level politics, but this is an exception.
I was recently approached by members of a major party to run against my opponent. While flattering, and tempting, I had to say "No." Flattering, because they said I was a "great candidate." Tempting because it might have been an easier, and shorter, campaign. However, I made a commitment to friends, voters, and myself to run as a Libertarian. I stand by that commitment.
Andre Carson had two weeks to prepare for the forum. He wasn't ready, and rather than make a poor showing, he skipped. But, if he can't prepare for a forum in two weeks, how will he prepare for Congress in one month? John Elrod is stretched too thin and can't find time to do his job and run for the 7th District vacancy. So, he's forced to attend to his campaign, rather than deal with the major issues on the floor of the House.
Plain & Simple: Although this is a great opportunity for Carson and Elrod to capitalize on a national congressional seat, the timing is all wrong. I didn't throw my hat in the ring to run for office last week. I started to prepare years ago. I'm ready to debate anyone at anytime. Further, I understand the temptation to take the easier road. But Mr. Elrod made a commitment to the voters. That requires not diverting his attention during this short, but very crucial, legislative session. If either of these men want to run for this office, they should do so when the time is right. Not when the path is easiest.
Most of you know I don't talk about national level politics, but this is an exception.
I was recently approached by members of a major party to run against my opponent. While flattering, and tempting, I had to say "No." Flattering, because they said I was a "great candidate." Tempting because it might have been an easier, and shorter, campaign. However, I made a commitment to friends, voters, and myself to run as a Libertarian. I stand by that commitment.
Andre Carson had two weeks to prepare for the forum. He wasn't ready, and rather than make a poor showing, he skipped. But, if he can't prepare for a forum in two weeks, how will he prepare for Congress in one month? John Elrod is stretched too thin and can't find time to do his job and run for the 7th District vacancy. So, he's forced to attend to his campaign, rather than deal with the major issues on the floor of the House.
Plain & Simple: Although this is a great opportunity for Carson and Elrod to capitalize on a national congressional seat, the timing is all wrong. I didn't throw my hat in the ring to run for office last week. I started to prepare years ago. I'm ready to debate anyone at anytime. Further, I understand the temptation to take the easier road. But Mr. Elrod made a commitment to the voters. That requires not diverting his attention during this short, but very crucial, legislative session. If either of these men want to run for this office, they should do so when the time is right. Not when the path is easiest.
Testing their will and our willingness
Today begins the 2008 session of the Indiana General Assembly. Property taxes seem to be all the buzz. To be honest, I'm most interested to see who wins out at the end of the session...the elected or the electorate.
As I've been saying for almost two years now, the best possible property tax reform would:
1 Amend the Indiana Constitution to never again touch property for the purposes of taxation.
2. Cap state spending
3. Reduce government spending
4. Replace the reduced, but still needed, revenue using a combination of the taxes and fees Hoosiers already pay.
Capping spending and tying it to population growth and inflation does not cut government back, but keeps it constant in real per capita terms. --Dr. Bill Styring, economist.
Plain & Simple: Will our elected officials do what the electorate demands? Well, there are elected officials who back property tax elimination. Can such a plan possibly pass with the current composition of our General Assembly? Probably not. But then again, they were able to pull together last session and make water the official beverage of Indiana. Finally, are you willing to accept less than the best possible property tax reform?
As I've been saying for almost two years now, the best possible property tax reform would:
1 Amend the Indiana Constitution to never again touch property for the purposes of taxation.
2. Cap state spending
3. Reduce government spending
4. Replace the reduced, but still needed, revenue using a combination of the taxes and fees Hoosiers already pay.
Capping spending and tying it to population growth and inflation does not cut government back, but keeps it constant in real per capita terms. --Dr. Bill Styring, economist.
Plain & Simple: Will our elected officials do what the electorate demands? Well, there are elected officials who back property tax elimination. Can such a plan possibly pass with the current composition of our General Assembly? Probably not. But then again, they were able to pull together last session and make water the official beverage of Indiana. Finally, are you willing to accept less than the best possible property tax reform?
This Ain't Rocket Science
I spent yesterday morning at the State House listening to a committee
hearing on property tax circuit breakers. Needing a break from the subject, I got into a conversation with an acquaintance regarding
elimination of the property tax.
Our conversation took an interesting twist. We started discussing how in the 1960's John F. Kennedy decided to put a man on the moon. He asked me, "Is eliminating property taxes tantamount to putting a man on the moon?"
Of course not. After he refreshed my memory on all the steps that had to occur so Neil Armstrong walk on the moon, I added a small but vital piece to the conversation.
I remember reading that before JFK announced to the world that America would put a man on the moon, he consulted NASA director Wernher von Braun and asked, "What would it take to put a man on the moon?" Von Braun's answer: "The will to do it."
Plain & Simple: This is not rocket science people. All the vehicles we need to eliminate the property tax are in place. We need to rely on Economists like Bill Styring who have already figured out how to make it work. Elimination of property taxes should be easier than putting a man on the moon. One small step from our legislators, would be one giant step for Hoosiers.
Our conversation took an interesting twist. We started discussing how in the 1960's John F. Kennedy decided to put a man on the moon. He asked me, "Is eliminating property taxes tantamount to putting a man on the moon?"
Of course not. After he refreshed my memory on all the steps that had to occur so Neil Armstrong walk on the moon, I added a small but vital piece to the conversation.
I remember reading that before JFK announced to the world that America would put a man on the moon, he consulted NASA director Wernher von Braun and asked, "What would it take to put a man on the moon?" Von Braun's answer: "The will to do it."
Plain & Simple: This is not rocket science people. All the vehicles we need to eliminate the property tax are in place. We need to rely on Economists like Bill Styring who have already figured out how to make it work. Elimination of property taxes should be easier than putting a man on the moon. One small step from our legislators, would be one giant step for Hoosiers.
That'll fix it...almost
The sub-headline reads: Expert: Daniels' plan many come closer than most to fixing problem.
Me: Oh, it won't fix the problem?
Expert: No, but it comes close!
The article took the time to compare Indiana's tax mess to the plight of 5 other states. Unfortunately, it didn't look at Pennsylvania or Texas for some different ideas.
Roughly 2 dozen jurisdictions in Pennsylvania use what is called a " Land value tax." It doesn't include things like capital improvement in accessing land value. It looks at the land only. This is more equitable than our system, but wasn't mentioned.
Texans are looking at the idea of eliminating their property taxes. But don't let that get out, Hoosiers might get some bright ideas.
Plain and Simple: Coming close to fixing the problem is not good enough. If our elected officials don't get serious, Hoosiers might only come close to paying their property taxes.
Me: Oh, it won't fix the problem?
Expert: No, but it comes close!
The article took the time to compare Indiana's tax mess to the plight of 5 other states. Unfortunately, it didn't look at Pennsylvania or Texas for some different ideas.
Roughly 2 dozen jurisdictions in Pennsylvania use what is called a " Land value tax." It doesn't include things like capital improvement in accessing land value. It looks at the land only. This is more equitable than our system, but wasn't mentioned.
Texans are looking at the idea of eliminating their property taxes. But don't let that get out, Hoosiers might get some bright ideas.
Plain and Simple: Coming close to fixing the problem is not good enough. If our elected officials don't get serious, Hoosiers might only come close to paying their property taxes.
Governmental waste of time
Afters months of toil, the Tax and Financing Policy Commission has devised a plan to relieve the property tax burden. Their conclusion...shift the tax.
The chairman of said commission is pictured holding what he called "a road map for the General Assembly." The roughly 1000 page 'road map' shouldn't be too difficult to follow. Not surprisingly, the roads to "spending caps" and "budget cuts" were not included on that map. Don't expect legislators to visit these points of taxpayer interest.
I am surprised the Commission recommended the Constitutional cap. The Constitution should not be amended for less than elimination of property tax. Our Federal tax code has been amended over 10,000 times since 1980 and no longer serves as a guiding document, but a confusing step by step instruction manual. The Indiana Constitution will suffer the same fate as the tax code when the General Assembly decides to amend the cap to a higher level...and they will.
Plain & Simple: One Commission member said "We did hear. We did listen." Yet they still came to the same conclusion they held at the beginning of the Commission. Many of us would be more than willing to participate in a real discussion on tax relief. But then again, they wouldn't listen to distinguished economists and legal authorities, why would they listen to us silly tax paying voters?
The chairman of said commission is pictured holding what he called "a road map for the General Assembly." The roughly 1000 page 'road map' shouldn't be too difficult to follow. Not surprisingly, the roads to "spending caps" and "budget cuts" were not included on that map. Don't expect legislators to visit these points of taxpayer interest.
I am surprised the Commission recommended the Constitutional cap. The Constitution should not be amended for less than elimination of property tax. Our Federal tax code has been amended over 10,000 times since 1980 and no longer serves as a guiding document, but a confusing step by step instruction manual. The Indiana Constitution will suffer the same fate as the tax code when the General Assembly decides to amend the cap to a higher level...and they will.
Plain & Simple: One Commission member said "We did hear. We did listen." Yet they still came to the same conclusion they held at the beginning of the Commission. Many of us would be more than willing to participate in a real discussion on tax relief. But then again, they wouldn't listen to distinguished economists and legal authorities, why would they listen to us silly tax paying voters?
Dandelions and bandaids
How many more times will we hear the poll tested platitude "We can't afford to put a band aid on this any more..." Using this rhetoric shows a lack of understanding of the body and our government.
The current situation in Indiana is not equlivant to a small abrasion or cut on the human body. Putting a band aid on a cut helps that cut go away...forever. It's a temporary dressing which facilitates a permanent fix. A better analogy would be to equate government problem solving strategies to a dandelion in my yard.
For many years, politicians have been lopping the top off the dandelions that keep popping up. They strut around the yard showing voters how hard they're working to fix our weed problems. But the roots of the dandelions have been left behind. Inevitably, there will be more dandelions popping up next year. The problem compounds year after year until voters question: "What happened to my yard?"
Politicians then stand back and say "See what a pretty garden we've made!" They try to convince voters they are so progressive. "Where once there was dull lawn, now we have created a sea of yellow flowers. Trust us, it's the best thing for your lawn."
The only way to end the cycle, and reclaim our lawn, is to nurture the roots of your grass. Doing this will produce a thicker, healthier lawn and choke out the dandelions and other weeds (like quack grass and crabgrass). Putting down weed killer is only a temporary solution. Making the turf strong and tall is a permanent fix.
Plain &Simple: Nurture the grass roots. It's the path to a stronger, healthier state.
The current situation in Indiana is not equlivant to a small abrasion or cut on the human body. Putting a band aid on a cut helps that cut go away...forever. It's a temporary dressing which facilitates a permanent fix. A better analogy would be to equate government problem solving strategies to a dandelion in my yard.
For many years, politicians have been lopping the top off the dandelions that keep popping up. They strut around the yard showing voters how hard they're working to fix our weed problems. But the roots of the dandelions have been left behind. Inevitably, there will be more dandelions popping up next year. The problem compounds year after year until voters question: "What happened to my yard?"
Politicians then stand back and say "See what a pretty garden we've made!" They try to convince voters they are so progressive. "Where once there was dull lawn, now we have created a sea of yellow flowers. Trust us, it's the best thing for your lawn."
The only way to end the cycle, and reclaim our lawn, is to nurture the roots of your grass. Doing this will produce a thicker, healthier lawn and choke out the dandelions and other weeds (like quack grass and crabgrass). Putting down weed killer is only a temporary solution. Making the turf strong and tall is a permanent fix.
Plain &Simple: Nurture the grass roots. It's the path to a stronger, healthier state.