Powers Not Delegated

I'm a Constitutionalist and I make no apologies for bieng so.  Quite the opposite in fact.  Before any party affiliation I might claim, my first loyalty is always to the Constitution of the United States of America.  As such, the growth and expansion of the federal government not only frightens me, it angers me.  It is a blatant violation of an amendment that the Supreme Court and Congress have evidently forgotten about.

The 10th amendment is one of the most important and least regarded amendments to the Constitution.  So important that it had to be included in the Bill of Rights.  I've read the Constitution several times of course, but I could remember the exact words of the 10th amendment so I went back and checked today.  Something leapt out and smacked me in my face. 

The amendment itself is only 28 words long, but its intent can be summarized in a single word of the 28.  The text reads, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The writers of our Constitution were very careful about the words they used so the use of the word "delegated" in that amendment is not an accident of chance or a misunderstanding.  It was deliberate.

According to Mirriam-Webster, to delegate means to assign responsibility or authority.  This means that all rights first belonged to the states and a very fair few were "delegated" to the federal government.  What the states did not agree to let them have through ratification of the document is in no way under the authority of the federal government.

I know that for the few people who actually read my blogs that I am most likely preaching to the choir, but I continue to be baffled by the misinterpretation of an amendment made so obvious by the use of that single, very powerful word.

Wouldn't it be fun to have an organization of lawyers the size and power of the ACLU whose sole function was to pull every law passed by Congress into the Supreme Court as a violation of the tenth amendment?  Maybe then we could get the two branches of government who should pay it the highest respect to remember it actually exists.

The Sinatra Philosophy

I was watching Glen Beck this afternoon and he was talking about picking yourself up and starting over, and well, it got me thinking. A couple of songs popped into my head and they had the common theme of "when you get knocked down, get back up."

One of my favorite songs is Frank Sinatra's That's Life. And what a message it is. So true and sung with such strength and power. "That's Life. That's what all the people say. I'm flying high in April, shot down in May, but you know I'm going change that tune, when I'm back on top, back on top in June."

What a great philosophy of when I find myself flat on my face, I pick myself up and get back in the race. How shocking that he's not saying, I found myself flat on my face, blamed society and sued the whole damn place. Another song comes to mind for me too. This one from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (yes I still love that movie). The song, From the Ashes of Disaster Grow the Roses of Success. It's all about learning from your failure and starting over again. Another great message.

Finally, the song that comes to mind is an Old Fred and Ginger tune with a refrain of "I pick myself up, dust myself off, and start all over again."

What I find particularly interesting about these songs is that they're sung positively. The last two in particular have a really peppy tune indicating that this is a really good message. But it's a message we have shied away from. Life is hard and unfair. There will be times when you are flat on your face, dropped to your knees or knocked ass over tea kettle. Your life is not defined by how many times you get knocked down, but by how many times you get back up. If you get knocked out and decide to stay down, then you deserve to get stepped on by those who do rise again. People will reach out a hand to help you, but you have to take the hand and exert the effort to pull yourself up. Pick yourself up, dust yourself up and start all over again.

This is a hard thing for me personally to do. I over analyze everything and sometimes get to the point where I see so many negative possibilities that it's hard to move forward; but I was raised with the philosophy that the only person who can improve your situation in life is you. I have literally fallen off the horse and gotten right back on. I got bit by an ostrich that same day but that's a whole other story.

I write -- not just the blog but novels as well. I've never been published and the whole industry is really tough on the old ego. I wrote my first novel when I was 25 and I have to admit that it really sucked. But hey, it was 1991 and I wrote it by hand in a series of composition books. I didn't write another one until I was 30 and I had technologically advanced. This one started on a word processor and then progressed to a computer. I attempted to get it published but was inundated with rejection letters. A very demoralizing experience. I wrote another one a few years later, again I was rejected. I received some very nice and very encouraging rejection letters, but they were still rejections. But I didn't give up. At least not for long. I will continue to try.

My latest book is, I believe, my best chance for publication so far. It's a political suspense thriller where there is a plot to wipe out Congress and start fresh. Who doesn't want to read about Congress reaping what they've sown? But I'm still, in the eyes of the publishing industry, a first time author and it will be very difficult to get this published, and yet I've already started another novel. I won't give up. I can't give up. Being a published author is a dream I've had for most of my life and it is not one I will give up easily.

Hearing that something your poured your heart and soul into and worked on for months, maybe even years, is worthless in the eyes of the marketplace is one of those situations that will drop you to your knees. It's hard to hear once, it's even harder to hear over and over again. I once received four rejection letters in the same day. That was really hard to bounce back from, but I did.

What saddens me is that the message has changed from the get back up and try again, to a message that you can't possibly succeed so let the government take care of you. It's such a cruelty to so many people. Many of the American people need to relearn the lesson that life isn't fair and instead of dwelling on it you need to just suck it up and move on.

Failure is never an excuse to stop trying.

Misinformation Volume II

The idea that a new government program for health care will explode the deficit or cause an increase in taxes is "misinformation" according to the white house. President Obama (I really hate having to type that) has stated firmly and repeatedly that the program will be deficit neutral so why do we insist on applying our own brands of logic to the claims?

Obama says deficit neutral but the Congressional Budget Office says $1 trillion in set up and then an explosion of costs.

Obama says that Medicare is bankrupting us so the best solution is to expand it to everybody. (I still haven't figured out how that is logical.)

Obama says that he can pay for it with savings from cost controls. Ummmm, OK. What are those cost controls going to be exactly? Will it have anything to do with stopping doctors from whacking off your limbs willy nilly in an attempt to charge you more?

Obama says that by having everybody covered the costs will go down because people won't be going to the ER as much, but aren't the highest volume of people using the ER those already on Medicaid? I'm missing the logic again.

Obama says that he won't vote for any bill that grows the federal deficit - this claim is a little hard to swallow considering that he's already quadrupled it in 6 months. Yep, Mr President, we can see you're a real fiscal conservative.

As a cost savings initiative Obama plans to lower the re-imbursement rate to health care providers for the services they give Medicare patients. The re-imbursement rates are already pretty low so if they go much lower it's going to start costing the doctors to do the test. Forget making money, they'll be bleeding it.

Hmmmm, an interesting way to implement rationing isn't it. If the government tells a doctor they will be re-imbursed $1,000 less than their costs for a particular procedure how long do you think those procedures will continue to be performed? If it's a break even I think many doctors would still do it, but if it throws them into a negative balance I can't see them continuing. Wouldn't it be interesting to require a bailout of our medical professionals due to the new Medicare re-imbursement rates. Especially since Obama already think the doctors get $30,000 - $50,000 for taking your foot when they actually only get #350 -$750. He's only 10 times higher than the actual so we should definitely be able to trust his numbers.

There are only 2 ways to make the public option (path to single payer) deficit neutral and that is to either raise taxes or to charge premiums for the public option which will cover the medical cost payout. Considering that the people don't want or can't afford the premiums of the private sector, I doubt the public option would look much better.

How about you first do a little research, real analysis into what is driving the cost of health care up. Hire an independent team of process improvement analysts to determine exactly where the issues lie (because I frankly doubt that doctors really are cutting off people's feet just to get more money) and fixing those first and see how it goes.

One last little tidbit that I just have to share -- As much as Obama talks about the importance of routine care and how we need to expand Medicare type coverage to all, he might want to keep in mind that routine care is not covered under Medicare.

God and Science Are Not Mutually Exclusive

I am a believer in God because of the questions that science cannot answer. For instance, even if the creation of the universe could be tracked back to a single atom that exploded, (the big bang theory) where did that single atom come from. So I believe in God for purely intellectual reasons.

The whole idea that science and God is mutually exclusive is preposterous. God said He created the world in 7 days, but those are 7 of His days not ours. As geology shows rock formations hundreds of thousands of years old, this does not conflict with God. Could it be instead that these are the rock formations that occurred as God shaped our planet? I personally find geology fascinating. I live in an area of limestone where caves are prevalent. Seeing rock slides and cave ins that look dangerous but have been that way for thousands of years does not make me question God, it makes me see Him. The majesty of Marvel Cave in Branson for example, always brings me closer to God. We talk about the shifting of continents which have resulted in some of the most beautiful vistas on earth. Can these not be explained by science but still attributed to God?

Dinosaurs are another issue. Nowhere in the Bible are the dinosaurs mentioned. But God created the animals before he created man. So how much of our time passed between those two. Is it beyond the realm of belief that God would create dinosaurs and then eliminate them in order to give man oil? I don't think so. He knew what He was creating in us. He knew what we would become and what we would need.

For me, science is simply the discovery of how God makes things work. Science does not exclude God, nor does God exclude science. The belief that if something is from God it can have no logical explanation has always baffled me. Though God works in mysterious ways, I see this more as the path of our lives than the workings of our anatomy or our earth. The best analogy I ever heard was that our lives are an embroidery that we view from the back. A mishmash of colors and threads going from this direction to that. But still following God's plan. And from God's perspective, that mishmash forms a beautiful picture. Being exactly what it is supposed to be.

The idea that we are moving farther away from God saddens me. He is the answer to all questions. And as we advance as a people, we do not need him less, we need him more. What has happened to In God We Trust? What has happened to "endowed by his creator"? One of my favorite parts of the Declaration of Independence is the very beginning. "When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to absolve the political bands which connect them to another, and to assume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires they declare the causes which impel them to separation." What I love about this is Nature's God. Not claiming one God over another, but acknowledging a God over nature.

I'm not saying that if you're a scientist you have to believe in God, but it does not preclude you from it either.

Many people claim that the Bible is fantasy and myth. I disagree. But much of it was dictated by God whose ways are not our ways. How many time does He tell us that in those documents? I'm not saying that I don't have questions. I have many that I ask him on a daily basis. One of them is why I'm still single living with a bunch of cats instead of a man who loves me. But there are many others. Being the inquisitive being that I am, I have a list to take with me when I die.

Government "Help"

With all of this talk about government run healthcare, and the government competing with private insurers (now that's fair), I though I'd take a look at how well government agencies run the other organizations that are supposed to "help" us. This story of one person's experience with government agencies is the perfect illustration, at least for me, on why government should never be given control over something as important as our healthcare.

My niece is 26 years old and physically and psychologically disabled. Due to both her physical and emotional issues she is unable to hold to a job. A doctor testified to this. However, it took her over a year to get disability insurance. Why? Because it is standard operating procedure for government disability to automatically decline all claims the first time they are filed. But isn't this what the government accuses private insurance of doing? Vilifying them for it? She had to get a lawyer and take her claim to court in order to get her benefits. Then her lawyer, from legal aid, was not going to be able to attend the hearing and Aimee, my niece, had to go on her own. She was told she had to read a statement to the judge. This is great except that one of her issues is that she's severely learning disabled and has a very difficult time reading. Not to mention her emotional issues of having to stand up there by herself. I was unable to be with her because she lives 1,300 miles away from me.

Once her claim was approved and was supposed to begin, she didn't get a check. This is because the person in charge of the county benefits didn't submit the cancellation paperwork. What was her option to get this resolved....wait until the person submits the paperwork. In the meantime they had cancelled her food stamps but not the other benefits so she was still reliant on the county but had no food stamps for the month. They had cancelled those you see and had no emergency process to get her any for the month. And she has a small son. The next thing that happened was that she was shorted in her benefits. She didn't get the amount that she was supposed to. Again she goes and tries to get this resolved and what they tell her is, "I've fixed it in the computer and it will be right next month." But what about this month? She just has to do without that money that her budget was based on. And it was a significant chunk of her benefits. Just imagine if your employer forgot to cut your check and told you the amount would be right next week but they couldn't get you anything this week.

But wait, it gets even worse. Her case worker has now been found to be embezzling the food stamps from the recipients. Aimee did not get hers at all for June, and she was not the only one. The computer showed them going out, but they never appeared on her card. So what is being done to get her food for the month? Nothing. She has been told that everything is frozen until the investigation into the case worker is completed. So she's just SOL again.

In these situations it becomes clear that the bureaucracy is more important than the people. There is no emergency process in place to take care of issues or mistakes. The mistakes of the government staff are instead carrying by those they are supposed to be helping. It's horrible to be told that your food budget is gone for the entire month, but imagine if this happened to you with your healthcare. What would happen if your file was misplaced? Would you be denied your treatment? Probably.

I have my own personal story with the Social Security Department. I lost my social security card and applied for a replacement. They sent me a letter saying that I needed to verify my date of birth because I had submitted that I was born in one year and they had my date of birth 10 years earlier. A typo on their part. I submitted the verification. Then I received a request for a copy of my birth certificate. So I sent off for a new birth certificate (I'd lost that too) and sent a copy in. Then I received a letter from the Social Security Dept saying they needed the original. By the time I could take off work to get in to give them my birth certificate (I wasn't sending it through the mail) they admonished me for taking so long to come in because now they had to re-enter the information in the computer. It doesn't matter that coming in meant I had to leave work because they're only open during regular working hours, I had inconvenienced them and they let me know it. I finally did get my new card but it took me 8 months in order to correct THEIR mistake.

And this is the same type of process that we want for our healthcare? I sure don't.