A state shouldn’t care only about its economy. The first thing a “true”, “free” state should think of is, certainly, its citizens. Some people would cry foul here: “why should we be burdened by people that don’t want to work? Let them pay their own bills!” But this is not what libertarianism is about. True libertarianism, and therefore freedom, is not violating the US constitution and invading people’s privacies needlessly. It’s about not enslaving other countries, and spending useless amounts of money with an imaginary war. So, if the state isn’t bad, is it good in every way? Should we let it take care of our lives?

No.

Our State is made by US, Citizens. Obama’s government is certainly not perfect. One example is his making of bold claims. He said he would end the war, for example. He didn’t. He said he would cut the government’s wasteful spending. Did he? Politicians have too many ties, and they should always be taken with a grain of salt. There is a chance that Obama’s government will turn tyrannical. If that happens, it is up to us to claim back our freedom. So, as a consequence, I do not think Obama’s government is evil. It is here to bring many taboos to the spotlight. As we discussed, health is one of them, but economic and education inequality are also taboos in the American society. My point of view about all this? I believe freedom is knowing you can count on your State, and that it actually supports you into times of trouble – not some sort of façade that hides a political agenda made to benefit only a rich minority. I expect our politicians to spend our resources wisely, and I truly think the US hasn’t been doing this for a long time – it’s just that we’re only starting to see this now.

The latest to come out about the bill is the news of nearly all health insurance plans may soon be required to offer women patients free coverage of prescription birth control, breast-pump rentals, counseling for domestic violence, and annual wellness exams and HIV tests. In the health care bill that was passed last year, the law directs the Obama Administration to draw up a list of preventive services for women that will require all new health plans will cover without any deductibles or even co-payments. All this is by the year long review requested by Kathleen Sebilius, Health and Human Services Secretary.

In a statement, Sebelius praised the committee’s work as “historic” and “based on science and existing literature.” she continued, “We are reviewing the report closely and will release the department’s recommendations … very soon.”

While I believe in personal freedoms, I also believe in personal responsibility. If someone wants to be sexually active while not trying to get pregnant, it’s is their responsibility to pony up for the expenses for that activity. How is it that the federal government feels that it has the right to force private industries to pay the costs for the decision for someone else? As we seen in the past, this decision by the Obama Administration will only affect other people who pay for health care and if the federal government is going to subsidize the program. Why is it the responsibility for the American tax payer to foot the bill?

It’s estimated that 41 million Americans are in “new” plans that these rules will apply, along with 98 million other people are “grandfathered” in policies exempt from the rules. Those “grandfathered” will lose that status if they make a host of changes to their coverage and/or payment policies. It’s expected that the number will increase to nearly 47 million more American will be under the new rules. Insurers will need to follow the new guidelines at the start of the next plan year within one year after Sebelius issues them.

As we see as time goes on and we have the opportunity to dissect the bill, we see the federal government’s purpose is to control the industry as they have done to so many other ones (auto, banking, etc.). Either way you look at it, there is no reason for the federal government to be involved in any industry no less the medical industry.

The rights of individuals have been put in the back burner in today’s political world. For example, to prevent terrorism, the government has imposed security measures and enforced racial profiling on individuals. I have traveled on many domestic and international flights in the past few years and have been subject to such security measures.

In fact, I was awaiting the arrival of a family member from a Northwest flight coming in from Amsterdam (a couple days after Christmas) when the irrational restrictions on individual freedoms became ever so obvious. A Nigerian man who felt sick in the plane and used the restroom multiple times was detained because a few days earlier another Nigerian mad tried to set off an explosive on the same flight heading into Detroit. The poor man just felt ill, and the government poured in Department of Homeland Security employees, sniffing dogs, police and ambulances. What a waste of resources and a horrible inconvenience! I waited at the airport for nearly five hours. I would expect the government to be able to handle security threat in ways that do not impose so severely on individual freedoms in this day and age.

In today’s political atmosphere, issues besides terrorism, including government bailouts and universal health care, are also infringing upon the rights of individuals. The U.S. government has swept into the everyday lives of Americans in a big way. Americans facing foreclosure are being offered government assistance and extra money for energy efficient utilities. Instead of encouraging an independent populous, the government at federal, state and local levels, is encouraging dependency.

Government bailout of the auto companies in Detroit is an example of exactly this. Now, Detroiters are turning to the government for more money to improve railways to Chicago and increase jobs. The government should promote the rights and abilities of individuals to improve their lives and those of their community. Universal health care is another bill being pushed by today’s Democrats to involve government to control an essential part of people’s existence i.e. their health care needs.

An individual deserves the right to decide their own health care plans. A competitive, privatized health care industry with few governmental regulations is the way to go. When it comes to government involvement, less is always better. Unfortunately, individuals freedoms are slowly disappearing and the United States is becoming more like Communist China by the day.

“Tonight’s speech was a reminder that, for decades, the policies of Republicans and Democrats alike have failed. Libertarians are asking people to take matters into their own hands. Instead of just complaining, we’re encouraging ordinary Americans to step up and run for Congress on the Libertarian Party ballot line.

I can say exactly the same thing about President Obama’s speech tonight that I said about George W. Bush’s State of the Union speech in January 2008: ‘Tonight’s State of the Union address went much as expected. Instead of calling for a more limited role of the federal government in American society, the President laid out plans that would only increase the government’s intervention into the realm of economics, health care, education and foreign policy.

I am weary of the President’s unspoken premise that only government–indeed, only the federal government–can accomplish good in our society.

President Obama seems to be totally blind to the concept that government can cause problems rather than solve them. His speech was filled with ‘More’: more handouts, more spending, more programs, more bailouts, more regulations. We Libertarians want less government, not more.

Not to be outmatched by the Democrats, the Republican Party conveyed its lack of seriousness in addressing this nation’s government spending problems by having Bob McDonnell, Virginia Governor for eleven (11) days, deliver its rebuttal to the President. If they were really serious about addressing the dire fiscal circumstances of this nation, they would have had Paul Ryan, a six-term congressman from Wisconsin, who has proposed the most serious plan of anyone in the two older parties to keep us from going off a fiscal cliff.

Last week, Alan Auerbach, Professor of Economics and Law at UC Berkeley and US government fiscal policy expert, said that the Democratic and Republican parties are in a ‘death embrace’ with their government spending. The only political party that is rationally and forthrightly addressing the need to cut government spending and end our culture of ever expanding entitlements is the Libertarian Party.

As Americans lose hope in Obama, we Libertarians are warning voters against running back to the Republicans who got us into such big messes in the first place. Republicans started the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Republicans made the false intellectual case for bailing out banks and car companies. Republicans argued that deficits don’t matter. Republicans gave us the giant Medicare expansion bill.

The President’s suggestion of a ‘spending freeze’ was especially ludicrous and insulting to the intelligence of Americans. The amounts involved are minuscule, and Congress won’t accept them anyway. Will Obama sign the spending bills that ignore his ‘freeze’? You bet he will. Instead, the President should demand across-the-board cuts in all areas, including entitlements.

The President talked a lot about jobs. Unfortunately, the policies he supports are responsible for most of the unemployment we see today. High taxes, minimum wage laws, hiring regulations, firing regulations, mandatory unemployment benefits, and other government interference make it much more difficult for businesses to hire and keep employees. As expected, the President’s prescription is to increase the dosage of this government poison.

While our nation is declining dangerously right now, a turnaround could be straightforward and simple with steps like these: 1. Bring our troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan; 2. Stop rewarding failed companies with bailouts; 3. Cut taxes and spending and let the free market work.

Finally, on the matter of political rhetoric, I call upon the two older parties to stop spoon feeding politics to the American people as if we are a bunch of overgrown children. These are difficult times that call for more than rhetorical flourish or positioning a group of diverse people around a politician. Older party politicians need to be specific about their proposed policies, as Libertarians are.

And, I know I’m probably just wasting electrons, but can’t we go back to the days in which the President sent a copy of his speech to Congress and left it at that. The speech last night took 1/7000th of an entire year. I think the vast majority of the American people would agree that we have better ways to spend our time.”

William Redpath has served as the Chairman of the Libertarian Party since 2006. For more information, or to arrange an interview, call LP Executive Director Wes Benedict at 202-333-0008 ext. 222.

The LP is America’s third-largest political party, founded in 1971. The Libertarian Party stands for free markets and civil liberties.

“The poll contradicts the claims of not only the White House, but also doctors’ own lobby — the powerful American Medical Association — both of which suggest the medical profession is behind the proposed overhaul. It also calls into question whether an overhaul is even doable; 72% of the doctors polled disagree with the administration’s claim that the government can cover 47 million more people with better-quality care at lower cost.”

“More than seven in 10 doctors answered “no” when asked if they believed “the government can cover 47 million more people and that it will cost less money and the quality of care will be better.”

“This response is consistent with critics who complain that the administration and congressional Democrats have yet to explain how, even with the current number of physicians and nurses, they can cover more people and lower the cost at the same time.

The only way, the critics contend, is by rationing care — giving it to some and denying it to others. That cuts against another claim by plan supporters — that care would be better”.

Read the rest of the article at the link above.

The Liberator is a free newsletter from the Libertarian site, Advocates for Self-Government. The latest issue has an article on health care being called a ‘right”.

The right questions to ask about medical care and medical insurance:

* Which laws, regulations, or government mandates drive up the costs of medical care, medicine, and medical insurance?

* Which of these laws, regulations, and government mandates can your state legislature and governor repeal? Which need to be repealed by the U.S. Senate, the House, and the president?

* Which government-granted privileges and special protections has government enacted for the benefit of pharmaceutical corporations, hospitals, doctors, nurses, lawyers, or insurance companies that make medical care more expensive?

* Which of these privileges and special protections can your state legislature and governor repeal? Which need to be repealed by the U.S. Senate, the House, and the president?

100 Stimulus Projects Guaranteed To Make Your Blood Boil, is from June but I wanted to share it with you. The article comes from American Thinker and is just a fraction of what our tax dollars are paying for.

A California skate park will get a $620,000 “facelift.” Plans to refurbish the skate park in Long Beach, California, had stalled for months as local funds put towards higher priority park projects. With $620,000 in federal stimulus funding available to upgrade the skate park, the city council decided to move forward.

$800,000 for a backup runway for the now famous airport to nowhere, also known as the John Murtha airport in Johnstown. This is critical, because if they were to lose their current runway, all three flights a day and 20 daily passengers might have to find an alternative airport.

Last, but not least is Free Talk Live, a pro-liberty radio show that you can listen to on their website.

Let’s take a look at the state of Maine. A state that had 128,000 citizens that were uninsured in 2003. At the time, Governor John Baldacci (D) signed into law a state-wide health care plan to combat the situation. By the time 2009 arrived, it would cover all of Maine’s citizens. The system would help keep control of hospitals and physicians to hold down insurance premiums. It was sold as a way to provide everyone insurance as well as save business and patients money. To top it off, it was stated that there would be no increase in taxes.

Well after five years of the program, not only has the program not save any money, but it has also cost the taxpayers of Maine $155 million and is still rising. Here’s how the program was supposed to work. There were to be two government programs that would cover the uninsured. The legislature greatly expanded MaineCare, the state’s Medicaid program. Today Maine families with incomes of up to $44,000 a year are eligible; 22% of the population is now in Medicaid, roughly twice the national average.

Then the state created a “public option” (where have you heard that lately?) known as DirigoChoice. The plan would compete with private plans such as Blue Cross. To get lower income Mainers to enroll, it offered taxpayer-subsidized premiums. (again, this sounds familiar) The plan’s original funding source was $50 million of federal stimulus money the state got in 2003. Over the years, the plan was to be “funded by the savings in the health-care system.”

During the peak of the program in 2006, only about 15,000 people had enrolled in the DirigoChoice program. That number has now dropped to below 10,000, according to Maine’s own reporting. About two-thirds of those who enrolled already had insurance, which they dropped in favor of the subsidized public option. So instead of the 128,000 that were uninsured, the actual number is only 3,400.

Most of what is in Maine’s health care program is actually in the Obama-care bill. So why bother with trying to have a national health care program when they can’t even get it to work on a small scale? If Obama and his friends are so into this bill, then may I suggest that we do a test on the actual program on the state level. Sort of like a “try it before you buy it” program. Try it in California for five years and let’s see how successful it is at that point. If it can survive without a constant need of federal stimulus money, then I say we go ahead with it on a national level.

I know it will never work. One because that it has already been tried in Maine as well as Massachusetts and Tennessee and each time it failed. Currently in Maine, a healthy single male at the age of thirty, pays a monthly premium of $762 while a citizen in the same condition in New Hampshire only pays $222.

This bill (HR3200) needs to be stopped and the discussion of health care reform needs to be re-focused to look at tort reform. A major part of health care costs come from malpractice insurance that the doctors need to have to protect themselves from from major law-suits. The lawyers have pushed the price of health care up from the class-action suits to individual cases. As for class-action suits, no one benefits from this type of practice other than the lawyers. Lawyers will pocket millions of dollars while the people who are affected by the situation only get a few dollars each as compensation.

Will Universal Health Care really work here in America? The answer is no. If you don’t believe it, then you need to go look for the information like I did.

The latest one to make the rounds features Congresswoman Shelia Jackson Lee, a Democrat from Texas. It shows Jackson-Lee answering and talking on her cell phone while a woman from the audience is asking a question. As you watch it, it seems that this Congresswoman isn’t even listening.

The Congresswoman was a guest on the Greta Van Sustren show on Thursday to have her chance to explain. Throughout the entire segment, Congresswoman Jackson-Lee was filibustering. She was being very evasive and only wanted to get the health care message out. When Greta asked her who was on the phone (in the video), she replied, she was wasn’t trying to be rude and apologized to the woman that asked the question at the town hall meeting. She continued with pushing the health care bill and stated that she has read all 1,100 pages of the bill. She finally confessed that she was on the phone with the “Hot Line” that was set up for the politicians to get assistance during tough questions at town hall meetings. Here’s one of the clips. You decide if she is being rude.

Jackson-Lee said that what she is trying to do is to convince the people that this is what’s best. What I want to know is, why is she trying to convince anyone? I may not have read all of the bill myself, but I have read a few highlights. This bill is not a bill to reform health care, it’s going to change it completely.

It’s a shame that the people that were elected to these positions aren’t listening to the people who voted them in. The politicians in Washington aren’t listening to the American people any longer and the only way to change that is to vote them ALL out when they’re up for re-election.

It’s a shame that many (if not all) of these politicians are just going through the motions of actually listening to their voters. Quite a few of them have canceled their meeting and the ones that are having one are just trying to pacify the crowd.

Arlen Specter (Republican turned Democrat) had a meeting this morning and from the way his posture and his actions gave me the impression of not really listening to the people. When one woman asked a question about health care. She read from the Bill that at a certain age, the persons coverage would be limited. If a seventy-four year old with cancer, that patient would not be given the treatment to fight the disease. The Senator gave a snappy answer as to the statement is just a lie and 1that that is not the case for the elderly. He immediately asked for the next question and did not go into detail of the bill.

These politicians no longer care about the American people and in my opinion should be voted out of office at the first chance that they come up for re-election. Not just the Democrats, but the Republicans as well. The position of a Senator or a Representative was never meant to be a career. It seems that all politicians have forgotten the fact that they work for us, the American people. We are their base and they need to be reminded of the fact. No matter who is up for re-election, they should be removed from the position. The political ties that they have made have gotten too big.

Stand up to the White House’s menacingly misguided attempt to monitor the free speech of American citizens.

From ABC’s The Note:

“Yesterday, White House director of new media Macon Phillips wrote a blog post urging readers to flag questionable claims about health care proposals.”

As Republican Senator John Cornyn wrote in an email to the president urging him to end the Big Brother program,

“By requesting that citizens send “fishy” emails to the White House, it is inevitable that the names, email addresses, IP addresses, and private speech of U.S. citizens will be reported to the White House. You should not be surprised that these actions taken by your White House staff raise the specter of a data collection program. As Congress debates health care reform and other critical policy matters, citizen engagement must not be chilled by fear of government monitoring the exercise of free speech rights.”

Read more here:
http://pumapac.org/2009/08/06/the-first-amendment/

This program is menacing and wrong, and it calls for action. Please send an email to the White House instructing them to brush up on their Constitution.

1. Send an email to Macon Phillips, aka Minister of Information, at flag@whitehouse.gov

2. Copy these emails into the BCC of your email: prowl@pumapac.org, hardball@msnbc.com, caffertyfile@cnn.com, comments@mclaughlin.com, Cavuto@foxnews.com, LouDobbs@cnn.com, hemmer@foxnews.com, headlinenews@cnn.com, Hannity@foxnews.com, gretawire@fox.com, charlierose@pbs.org

3. Encourage your friends, family, and co-workers to send an email.

Use this email, or edit it as you see fit.If you are not a PUMA member, please delete that line. Be sure to include the text of the First Amendment in your email. Short, sweet, and to the point.

Dear White House Minister of Information,

I am writing as a very concerned American citizen. I am also a member of Puma PAC, People United Means Action (http://pumapac.org). After reading about your program encouraging Americans to report instances of “fishy” speech by their sister and fellow Americans, we realized you had perhaps forgotten to read this before you got to the White House:

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Please brush up on the United States Constitution. It’s a rather important document, and it is especially crucial that people in your line of work are familiar with it.

Sincerely,
Your Name and State
Puma PAC Member