30 day review and comment, dump of regulations, and still no one knows what we’re dealing with, come January 1st:
To take one example, for the better part of a year states and groups like the bipartisan National Governors Association and the National Association of Medicaid Directors have been begging HHS merely for information about how they’re required to make ObamaCare work in practice. There was radio silence from Washington, with time running out. Louisiana and other states even took to filing Freedom of Information Act requests, which are still pending.
Now post-election, new regulations are pouring out from HHS—more than 13,000 pages so far and yet nuts-and-bolts questions are still unanswered. Most of what we know so far comes from a 17-page question-and-answer document that HHS divulged this week, though none of the answers have the force of law and HHS says they’re subject to change at any moment.
HHS is generally issuing rules with only 30 days for public comment when the standard is 60 days and for complex regulations 90 days and more. But the larger problem is that HHS’s Federal Register filings reveal many of the rules were approved in-house and ready to go as early as May. Why the delay?
****
In other implementation hilarity, no fewer than 18 Democratic Senators and Senators-elect came out last week against ObamaCare’s $28 billion tax on medical device sales—and not just the usual penitents from Massachusetts and Minnesota. The list includes Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin and Patty Murray.“With this year quickly drawing to a close, the medical device industry has receive little guidance about how to comply with the tax—causing significant uncertainty and confusion for businesses,” they write about the tax most of them voted for.
The last entitlement to get off the ground was President Bush’s Medicare prescription drug benefit. Those rules were tied up with a bow by January 2005, giving business and government nearly a year to prepare—and that was far simpler than re-engineering 17% of the economy. No one knows where the current magical mystery tour is headed, especially not HHS. via Review & Outlook: It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad ObamaCare – WSJ.com.
The recent killings have exposed a lack of ability on the part of family, doctors, mental health professionals and the legal community to determine in advance of their crimes that the men who murdered were a danger to others.
When there was evidence of mental illness – as in the case of the Virginia State and the Colorado movie theater killers – there was no legal way to protect others from harm.
This is where our State lawmakers should focus their energies.
I’m not sure about the legal precedent – maybe it’s the “every dog gets a bite” theory. (Remember the movie, “Minority Report?” There’s still a healthy belief in free will in our society.)
Physicians are trained to evaluate the evidence not only of our treatments, but of our screening and tests. Is there a way to diagnose and treat those who are a danger to others before they hurt someone? Are our markers for who is a danger to others sensitive enough?
Then, we need to address treatment of the individuals, themselves. is there effective treatment?
The mental illness of these very few individuals doesn’t change the right of everyone around them to defend – and to prepare to defend – themselves. If there isn’t a reliable marker or treatment for the individual, is there justification for “treating” the entire population by infringing on the right guaranteed in the Second Amendment?
History in Australia, China, and other countries where limits on gun possession are strong – or in Switzerland or Israel, where a large percentage of citizens are armed – does not support the efficacy of disarming law abiding citizens as a means to make everyone safer.
Those who question the right to keep and bear arms need to read about the Founders’ purpose in ratifying the Bill of Rights in the first place and review the process for amending the Constitution. If the right of the People to defend ourselves against any aggressor has changed, there is a Constitutional means to repeal the Second Amendment.
In the meantime, deciding who does and who does not have the right to keep and bear arms is equivalent to deciding who is and who is not “the People.” I don’t believe we want to begin a movement to base any limit – any infringement – on that right, any more than we want to limit the rest of the Bill of Rights.
Note that the providers are up to date and much more widespread than the few PP clinics. The numbers of patients served in 2011 are all before the new program was established along with the outreach by DSHS to contract with more doctors and clinics.
The dots represent approved state women’s health program providers as of October, such as clinics or private physician practices. Many have more than than one doctor at the location.The color designates the number of Medicaid Women’s Health Program clients the provider saw in fiscal 2011, the most recent year data is available.
Just in time for all those same-sex newly-weds in the state of Washington, the Obama Administration and Democrat-pushed ObamaCare taxes will kick in, taxing married couples as one for the first time since Social Security and Medicare taxes were instituted as “payroll taxes.”
From the New York Times:
Among the most affluent fifth of households, those affected will see tax increases averaging $6,000 next year, economists estimate.
To help finance Medicare, employees and employers each now pay a hospital insurance tax equal to 1.45 percent on all wages. Starting in January, the health care law will require workers to pay an additional tax equal to 0.9 percent of any wages over $200,000 for single taxpayers and $250,000 for married couples filing jointly.
The new taxes on wages and investment income are expected to raise $318 billion over 10 years, or about half of all the new revenue collected under the health care law.
Ruth M. Wimer, a tax lawyer at McDermott Will & Emery, said the taxes came with “a shockingly inequitable marriage penalty.” If a single man and a single woman each earn $200,000, she said, neither would owe any additional Medicare payroll tax. But, she said, if they are married, they would owe $1,350. The extra tax is 0.9 percent of their earnings over the $250,000 threshold.
Since the creation of Social Security in the 1930s, payroll taxes have been levied on the wages of each worker as an individual. The new Medicare payroll is different. It will be imposed on the combined earnings of a married couple.
The NYT article advises us all, that since our employers may not (!) know how much our spouses make, we need to make sure our employers take out enough taxes each pay period or to begin making extra estimated payments on our own.
Are you all ready for increased taxes and continued borrowing of 40 cents or more on every dollar the Federal Government spends? Looks like that’s where we’re headed:
President Obama’s lead negotiator in the “fiscal cliff” talks said the administration is “absolutely” willing to allow the package of deep automatic spending cuts and across-the-board tax hikes to take effect Jan. 1, unless Republicans drop their opposition to higher income tax rates on the wealthy.
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said in an interview with CNBC that both sides are “making a little bit of progress” toward a deal to avert the “cliff” but remain stuck on Obama’s desired rate increase for the top U.S. income-earners.
“There’s no prospect for an agreement that doesn’t involve those rates going up on the top two percent of the wealthiest,” Geithner said.
via White House ‘Absolutely’ Willing To Go Off The Fiscal Cliff – ABC News.
And it’s not just tax increases for the “rich,” either (those, including small business owners, who earn over $200,000 a year). Obama wants carte blanche to unilaterally raise spending and the debt ceiling.
Obama, speaking at a meeting of 100 CEOs, warned Republicans that he would not accept a so-called “doomsday” deal that extends tax cuts for middle-income earners before the end of the year but nothing more.
I’m in the middle of reading Willie Nelson’s latest book, the semi-biographic stream of consciousness, Roll Me Up and Smoke Me When I Die: Musings from the Road.
I enjoy the stories about his life and family, but I’m continually irritated by his confused comments on politics and ethics.
It really knocks me for a loop when I encounter someone like Mr. Nelson, who has obviously thought long and hard about certain issues but doesn’t seem to understand the basics of ethics or logic. Because he doesn’t know *why* some things are right and others are wrong, he ends up proving one of the homey proverbs he quotes in the book: if you don’t stand for something, you’ll end up falling for anything.
I love to hear Willie Nelson and his songs. My husband and I went to see his band play at the Majestic Theater in San Antonio last January and were very impressed by the Nelson concerts — both of them. Lukas Nelson’s band, Promise of the Real, opened for his father and sons Lukas and Mikah joined the Nelson family on the stage.
It’s tempting to reference Laura Ingraham’s book, Shut Up and Sing, along with the theory and demand behind it. Just because a person is a great singer, songwriter and guitar player, doesn’t mean he’s a great person, much less that he’s a great philosopher or thinker. It certainly shouldn’t mean that his philosophy should be given greater weight than that of other people because of his celebrity and access to the press.
The fact is that Mr. Nelson is a leader and he influences a large number of people. It’s a shame it’s not for the right reasons.
In this book, Mr. Nelson praises the Occupy Wall Street protests, says he agrees with Warren Buffet “that it just ain’t fair for people like us to have all the advantages,” and states that the Second Amendment shouldn’t apply to today’s weapons because they aren’t designed for hunting, only for killing people. His religious comments are mostly just silly ramblings.
However, the cause Mr. Nelson is best identified with – and the one for which it would be simplest to correct his logical errors – is the legalization of marijuana. He writes about his founding of the “TeaPot Party” in the book. Mr. Nelson’s reason for legalizing marijuana is simply that people want to smoke it and there are other legal substances that are worse. And he proposes a Statist’s plan as flimsy as his utilitarian ethic: “Tax it, regulate it and legalize it!” to raise money for the Government:
It’s already been proven that taxing and regulating marijuana makes more sense than sending young people to prison for smoking a God-given herb that has never proven to be fatal to anybody. Cigarettes and alcohol have killed millions, and there’s no law against them, because again, there’s a lot of money in cigarettes and alcohol. If they could realize there is just as much profit in marijuana, and they taxed and regulated it as they do cigarettes and alcohol, they could realize the same amount of profit and reduce trillions of dollars in debt.
Nelson, Willie; Friedman, Kinky (2012-11-13). Roll Me Up and Smoke Me When I Die: Musings from the Road (p. 20). William Morrow. Kindle Edition. (accessed 12/03/2012)
It might surprise some people that I – the self-proclaimed “hot air under the right wing” – agree that marijuana shouldn’t be illegal to grow, own or use. I base my belief on a plain reading of the US Constitution. How on Earth can our Federal government outlaw a plant that literally grows like a weed and doesn’t require manufacturing or processing to use? In fact, my theory as to why the plant is illegal is because it would be hard to regulate and tax.
Or maybe not.
Back in the mid-1990’s, I attempted to grow a traditional herbal medicine garden and ran into trouble obtaining Oriental poppy seeds, Papaver somniferum. Most of the orders I placed were cancelled, so I started doing some research. I learned that the Clinton Administration was raiding gardens and arresting people for growing and sharing the seeds of heirloom plants passed down from their mothers. This was in spite of the age-old use of the plants in gardens and herbal medicine, as well as the ready availability of food grade fertile Oriental poppy seeds for cooking and baking.
The more I thought about it, I came to the conclusion that the Federal government’s “War on Drugs” is not Constitutional and it’s not conservative. I agree with Mr. Nelson that this “war” is a costly abuse of government that strengthens organized crime and too many American freedoms have fallen as collateral damage. But the reason is not because people want to abuse drugs or because the Government could make money off the taxes. It’s because there’s no justification for outlawing a plant in the Constitution.
This is what happens when we the People don’t know our own Constitution and allow our Legislators to habitually pass abusive laws: the infringement of our inalienable rights.
Hitting the debt ceiling, borrowing 40 cents of every dollar we spend, and about to go over the “fiscal cliff” if a compromise isn’t worked out. The Obama strategy is to spend more, borrow more and pretty much sabotage the “bipartisan” deal.
How grand is that?
And who does the New York Times blame?
via Republicans Balk at Obama’s Short-Term Stimulus – NYTimes.com.
The Obama administration is arguing that the sluggish economy requires a shot in the arm, and it included tens of billions of dollars of little-noticed stimulus measures in its much-noticed proposal to Congressional leaders last week. But Republicans have countered that the country cannot afford to widen the deficit further, and have balked at including the measures in any eventual deal.
Maybe they could tax all lottery winnings at 100%?
The actual liabilities of the federal government—including Social Security, Medicare, and federal employees’ future retirement benefits—already exceed $86.8 trillion, or 550% of GDP. For the year ending Dec. 31, 2011, the annual accrued expense of Medicare and Social Security was $7 trillion. Nothing like that figure is used in calculating the deficit. In reality, the reported budget deficit is less than one-fifth of the more accurate figure.
Why haven’t Americans heard about the titanic $86.8 trillion liability from these programs? One reason: The actual figures do not appear in black and white on any balance sheet. But it is possible to discover them. Included in the annual Medicare Trustees’ report are separate actuarial estimates of the unfunded liability for Medicare Part A the hospital portion, Part B medical insurance and Part D prescription drug coverage.
As of the most recent Trustees’ report in April, the net present value of the unfunded liability of Medicare was $42.8 trillion. The comparable balance sheet liability for Social Security is $20.5 trillion.
via Cox and Archer: Why $16 Trillion Only Hints at the True U.S. Debt – WSJ.com.
If you believe that the multiple headlines focusing on Grover Norquist are a coincidence, I’ve got ocean front property in Arizona to sell you.
Governor Rick Perry explains why Texas won’t create a State Obamacare health insurance exchange:
Setting aside the obvious fact that health insurance is readily available under current conditions — the problem has been price, not availability — these exchanges represent nothing more than another federal power grab in the guise of a supposedly free market.
States were given the option to set up and execute their own exchanges — at their own expense. The fine print, however, specified that the exchanges would have to follow all rules and guidelines imposed by the federal government, with little to no flexibility. The kicker: Many of these rules and regulations are unknown.
Again, this is par for the course as we continue down the road to fiscal disaster at the hands of ObamaCare.
In Texas, Medicaid spending already accounts for nearly 25% of our general revenue spending, and its costs are only expected to continue skyrocketing.
While the president has promised to subsidize states for Medicaid costs in the near term, in the long term, states are going to be on their own.
ObamaCare has already begun to affect many companies, too, with some publicly announcing plans for layoffs in order to make up for increased insurance-related costs.
Governor Rick Perry wrote a letter to Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sibelius:
Gov. Perry’s letter said. “It would not be fiscally responsible to put hard-working Texans on the financial hook for an unknown amount of money to operate a system under rules that have not even been written.”
The Texas Institute for Health Care Quality and Efficiency Draft Report is posted for public comment.
You only have a day and a half to comment, since the next meeting of our Board of Directors is Thursday, November 15th. All comments should be sent by 1 PM on Wednesday, November 14th.
The following downloads are available:
Report 2012-001: 2012-001-Draft-Report.pdf
Appendix E: AppendixE.pdf
Appendix F: AppendixF.pdf
Instructions on submitting your comments are here.
Now, for a few comments on my observations as a Board member:
Believe it or not, the time frame from the passage of the legislation in SB 7 last June, 2011, to today and in anticipation of preparing for legislation beginning in January, 2013, is too tight. The Institute’s staff and coordinators did a good job of herding cats in the Board. In addition, the Board members worked hard to make all the meetings, to participate, and to contribute. We have met at least once a month, sometimes more than twice, since our appointment. The Board isn’t paid or even reimbursed for expenses by the State, and many gave up work in order to attend meetings far from their homes.
I haven’t commented on the draft until now, because the Board received our first full copy for review and comment on November 2, and comments were due by 5 PM, Election Day, November 6th. We’re all appointed by the Governor — it stands to reason that a few of us would be actively involved in the election and campaigns. I didn’t even open the email until Nov. 7.
I’m not happy with the length of the report, but I guess the nuances of our discussions over the last few months needed to be documented somewhere. Go to the page 34 in the pdf, numbered “26” in the Draft, for the actual recommendations made by vote in the Board meetings.
Finally, my main concern has been with the bureaucracy and regulation that the members of the Board have sometimes appeared to support. In the end, I believe that we have limited recommendations for regulation and “hassle factors” more than some would like. My hope is that the Legislature will decide to focus initially on implementing any new measures in our own State health plans and not interfere directly in private health care practice and systems, except where and when the State foots the bill.
Since President Obama won reelection, I believe that the ability of the 83rd Texas Legislature to adapt and react to Federal Regulations – Obamacare – will be improved by the work of the Institute.
All women are potential bimbos, all media reports are reliable, and email is a secure way to threaten your romantic rivals, right? In the case of Paula Broadwell, the story doesn’t make sense. Next, we’ll hear comments from James Carville (or David Axelrod) about trailer parks and $100 bill.
Or, are we all being treated to the latest version of “bimbo eruptions,” the false trashing of women by the Clinton Administration of the 1990’s? If you remember that far back, every single woman who claimed that Bill Clinton had abused her was painted by the Clinton Administration and subsequently by the media as liars who were women scorned, jealous and mentally unstable.
We’ve been told that former Army General David Petraeus resigned as Director of the CIA because he had been having an affair. His alleged mistress, Paula Broadwell, a married mother of two, was an honor graduate from West Point, retired from the Army after attaining the rank of Major and recognition as a military expert. and a former intelligence officer. She was a Lt. Colonel in the Army Reserves and a member of the FBI anti-terrorism force. We are to believe that at 40 years old, this highly accomplished woman went around the bend, and became jealous of another woman, a friend of the Petraeus family, and the FBI discovered that she had been sending “anonymous” emails to the other woman.
(At 19 minutes into the speech, Broadwell mentions that General Petraeus was undergoing radiation therapy for prostate cancer when they met. This makes me even more doubtful about the affair story.)
It turns out that Ms. Broadwell may have come under heightened scrutiny after she spoke to the alumni association at the University of Denver (where she had studied in October. During the question and answer period, she made the very controversial claim that the annex at Benghazi, where our Ambassador was killed on September 11, 2012, was being used to hold captured Libyan militia prisoners, and that’s why the US forces were attacked.
The video was posted online, although it’s been removed by the University from many others, including Front Page News, At least as of 5 PM on Monday, November 12th, the video is available on YouTube, here,
and at Human Events, that I found after a Google search on the title of the video, “Alumni Symposium 2012, Paula Broadwell.” If the videos all disappear, here’s a quote about Benghazi , at least:
“The challenge has been the fog of war, and the greater challenge is that it’s political hunting season, and so this whole thing has been turned into a very political sort of arena, if you will,” she said. “The fact that came out today is that the ground forces there at the CIA annex, which is different from the consulate, were requesting reinforcements.
“They were requesting the – it’s called the C-in-C’s In Extremis Force – a group of Delta Force operators, our very, most talented guys we have in the military. They could have come and reinforced the consulate and the CIA annex.
“Now, I don’t know if a lot of you have heard this but the CIA annex had actually taken a couple of Libyan militia members prisoner, and they think that the attack on the consulate was an attempt to get these prisoners back. It’s still being vetted.
via Petraeus’ Mistress Claims Benghazi Annex had Libyan Islamist Prisoners.
More on the probable Obama Administration trend toward limiting energy production through reglation.
The Interior Department Bureau of Land Management issued a new plan which closed 1.6 million acres of federal land across Colorado, Utah and Wyoming from oil shale development. The new restrictions removed the majority of the area that had been allocated in its plan issued in 2008. Instead, the BLM has issued two leases making 700,000 acres available only for research and development. The reasons cited were environmental concerns on the wilderness characteristics of the land and endangering sage grouse habitats…
View original post 1,976 more words
Perhaps we could convince the Powers That Be that recovery from Hurricane Sandy calls for emergency measures and a kinder EPA?
Take a look at this New York Times article on energy regulations from yesterday. I fear that due to the Obama re-election, the limits on US Energy source production, the restrictions on new refineries and plants, the mandates that choke current mining, drilling, manufacturing and processing will get worse through regulations from the Executive Branch, especially the Environmental Protection Agency.
Believe it or not, there are supposedly educated people convinced that “fracking” contaminates our water sources, ignoring the fact that the gas is 8000 to 10,000 feet under ground and water aquifers are much more shallow, at an average of around 500 feet below the surface. Even that Scientific American article admits that it’s highly unlikely that fracking is the cause of any contamination, given the relative depths. Note that the testing was near “natural gas wells,” and the authors blamed leaky pipes for the presence of gas in water, not the fracking. However, they apparently did not test near other well types or near gas pockets that weren’t tapped by humans.
And finally, perhaps it’s time for We The People to convince our Governors, State Attorneys General, and both State and Federal Legislators to invoke the 9th and 10th Amendments.
Here’s the data:
The solution is to cut the growth in spending and to grow the economy.
Republicans need to understand that we Republicans who voted re-elected the Legislators that we re-elected and elected the new ones that were elected because we expect them to stand strong: No increase in the debt limit. Continue all the current tax rates. Get out of the way of business and industry!
Triple and double counting early vote sheets? What else will be found?
Canseco’s campaign alleges that officials in Maverick County double- or triple-counted some of the early vote sheets. A complaint to the Secretary of State indicates that Canseco’s campaign found a minimum of 57 duplicate votes when reviewing a list provided by the Maverick County Elections Office. The campaign also alleges that another county used photocopied ballots, a criminal offense, and that an extended delay in counting votes from other counties left “other questions unanswered.”
via Canseco Alleges Voter Fraud in CD-23 — 2012 Congressional Election | The Texas Tribune.
Update from KUT news: “Editor’s note: The Secretary of State’s office updated the total vote count, reducing Gallego’s lead over Gallego from 13,534 votes to 9,222 in the final count, after the original publication of this article.”
Is Florida’s Representative Allen West being cheated out of his re-election?
Late last night Congressman West maintained a district-wide lead of nearly 2000 votes until the St. Lucie County Supervisor of Elections “recounted” thousands of early ballots. Following that “recount” Congressman West trailed by 2,400 votes. In addition, there were numerous other disturbing irregularities reported at polls across St. Lucie County including the doors to polling places being locked when the polls closed, in direct violation of Florida law, thereby preventing the public from witnessing the procedures used to tabulate results. The St. Lucie County Supervisor of Elections office clearly ignored proper rules and procedures, and the scene at the Supervisor’s office last night could only be described as complete chaos.
Daniel 4:30-35 “And the king answered and said, “Is not this great Babylon, which I have built by my mighty power as a royal residence and for the glory of my majesty?”
“While the words were still in the king’s mouth, there fell a voice from heaven, ‘O King Nebuchadnezzar, to you it is spoken: The kingdom has departed from you and you shall be driven from among men, and your dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field. And you shall be made to eat grass like an ox, and seven periods of time shall pass over you, until you know that the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will.’
” Immediately the word was fulfilled against Nebuchadnezzar. He was driven from among men and ate grass like an ox, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven till his hair grew as long as eagles’ feathers, and his nails were like birds’ claws.
“At the end of the days I, Nebuchadnezzar, lifted my eyes to heaven, and my reason returned to me, and I blessed the Most High, and praised and honored him who lives forever, for his dominion is an everlasting dominion, and his kingdom endures from generation to generation; all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, and he does according to his will among the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand or say to him, ‘What have you done?'”
(E-Sword English Standard Version)
“We the People” rule this Nation, which is a democratic republic. When I hear the usual justification of the fictitious “separation of church and state” as, “Give unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and unto God,that which is God’s,” I know that the People are Caesar.
Not only that, but that we are each, individually, to do our own personal duty to the Lord. No where does the Bible say that we should take from others for the common good or force others to give unto either Caesar or God!
Are we more like another king, Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon, who thought his success and security lay within himself? Are we paying for our hubris and that of our neighbors because we don’t give God the glory He is due?
Pray that our reason returns to us.
Next stop: getting our money back from the Feds!
Granted a legal victory Thursday by a federal appeals court, state officials said they will begin working quickly to exclude Planned Parenthood from the Women’s Health Program, which provides contraceptives and health care to low-income women.
The state also reversed course on funding for the health program, saying it would seek to have the federal government continue funding it, rather than switching to a state-funded program as planned.
“In Texas we choose life, and we will immediately begin defunding all abortion affiliates to honor and uphold that choice,” Gov. Rick Perry said.
Thursday’s ruling by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was expected because it reaffirmed an August opinion that said Texas could legally exclude Planned Parenthood — or any organization that provides abortions or promotes the procedure — from the program.
But in a new wrinkle, state officials said the court victory will prompt them to press the federal government to continue providing money for the program — a reversal of U.S. policy that could save tens of millions of dollars in state money but is unlikely to happen without a fight.
via Texas seeks to keep federal money for women’s health program | www.statesman.com.
Think you can keep your doctor under ObamaCare? Look around at how many of your neighbors have lost their docs just this year, due to the new hassle factors, including mandates for electronic medical records, constant threats of cuts, and repeated delays in payment and changes in the rules.
For the last 10 to 20 years, the question has been whether your doc would keep seeing you after you turned 65 and became Medicare eligible.
Over the next couple of years, the question will be whether your doc will still practice. If he or she does, the question will be whether he will be allowed by law to continue to see you and how the local hospitals divide up all the ObamaCare “exchange” patients. If you’re very lucky, your doc, who will be forced to chose one and only one of the “Accountable Care Organizations,” will choose the same one you’re assigned to.
The Physician Foundation surveyed over 13,000 doctors about their plans for practicing as the regulations and requirements for ObamaCare kick in. The result of the survey, the largest in U.S. history, reveal that over the next 4 years, more than 50% of docs are planning to cut back their hours or services, change to a concierge, cash only, practice or quit the practice of medicine altogether.
The report is here, and this is the Executive Summary:
Executive Summary: American patients are likely to experience significant and increasing challenges in accessing care if current physician practice patterns trends continue, according to a comprehensive new survey of practicing physicians. One of the largest physician surveys ever undertaken in the U.S., the research was commissioned by The Physicians Foundation.Physicians are working fewer hours, seeing fewer patients and limiting access to their practices in light of significant changes to the medical practice environment, according to the research, titled “A Survey of America’s Physicians: Practice Patterns and Perspectives.” The research estimates that if these patterns continue, 44,250 full-time-equivalent (FTE) physicians will be lost from the workforce in the next four years. The survey also found that over the next one to three years, more than 50 percent of physicians will cut back on patients seen, work part-time, switch to concierge medicine, retire, or take other steps likely to reduce patient access. In addition, should 100,000 physicians transition from practice-owner to employed status over the next four years (such as working in a hospital setting), the survey indicates that this will lead to 91 million fewer patient encounters.
via A Survey of America’s Physicians: Practice Patterns and Perspectives.
There’s a cold wind blowing in a formerly hot place!
The Houston Chronicle and the Detroit News have both come out in favor of Republican candidate for President, Mitt Romney!
Texas’ Attorney General, Greg Abbott, in a letter to the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, on the plans by the UN “partner” organization to “watch” our voting in Texas:
“The OSCE may be entitled to its opinions about Voter ID laws, but your opinion is legally irrelevant in the United States, where the Supreme Court has already determined that Voter ID laws are constitutional.
“If OSCE members want to learn more about our election processes so they can improve their own democratic systems, we welcome the opportunity to discuss the measures Texas has implemented to protect the integrity of elections. However, groups and individuals from outside the United States are not allowed to influence or interfere with the election process in Texas. This State has robust election laws that were carefully crafted to protect the integrity of our election system. All persons—including persons connected with OSCE—are required to comply with these laws.
WingRight.org was referenced by another blogger who listed “a woman’s right to chose” as her first reason to vote for President Obama.
We all know that what that woman is choosing is to end the life of her own child. Usually, nearly 97% of the time, both mom and baby are healthy. And far too often, she doesn’t feel like she really has a choice.
I contend that the protection of the right not to be killed should be the first reason to vote against Obama and all Democrats, from the President on down to the local County and State offices.
The right to life – the right not to be killed – of a human being is the primary inalienable right. If that right is not protected, then all other rights are subject to the power of others; they are also infringed. What is liberty, if one human or the State can determine that some humans aren’t human enough to have their God-given right not to be killed defended by the rest of us?
The fact is that all women undergoing an elective abortion already have a sonogram. The standard of care for abortion or any procedure requiring instrumentation of the uterus now includes a an ultrasound examination. The law in Texas not only ensures that the standard of care is followed, but that the timing allows the woman to be fully informed before the abortion, and before she is sedated and prepped for the abortion.
The same law that ensures that the woman will be offered a chance to see her sonogram and hear the heartbeat also makes sure that she’s referred to agencies that will help her actually have a “choice.” The Woman’s Right to Know Act included the mandate that women and girls be given access to a ) list of all the resources (State, Federal, private and charities) that are available to help the mother while she’s pregnant and after the baby is born. The State Department of Health Services compiles the list, using funds raised by licensing those abortion facilities.
The purpose of Government, according to the Declaration of Independence is to “secure” our inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The Preamble of the Constitution of the United States goes further, stating that the government not only protects those of us who are citizens, but must also “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” Vote to protect our “Posterity,” the children of tomorrow.

This is the front page of Google News — There’s no mention of the news about real-time emails and White House knowledge of the ongoing attack! I had to search “Benghazi emails” specifically to find coverage of the story.
Reuter’s and Yahoo each have a story about Secretary of State Clinton’s comments on the “Facebook” claim by a militant group – but no front page coverage of the real-time emails from the State Department in Libya about the attack in Benghazi.
Update, 2 PM CDT: Google News now has the story, 3rd or 4th on the page. However, the coverage still focuses on when the White House knew about the claim of responsibility. I’m glad that interest has forced the upgrade in coverage. However, I don’t believe that what they knew about the source of the attack should be the focus. Forbes has it right, with their article about the inadequate response to the attack.
Here are 3 opportunities to meet some of those people on the Republican ticket that I hope you will vote for:
Justice Bob Pemberton,Republican and incumbent candidate for the Third Court of Appeals, will be at a reception hosted by (my) Comal County Commissioner, Precinct 4, Jan Kennady, on Wednesday, October 24 at the Emme Sealy Faust Library (Next to the Sophienburg Museum), 401 W. Coll St., New Braunfels, Texas, from 5:30 PM to 7:30 PM.
Dr. Donna Campbell, the Republican candidate for Texas’ Senate District 25 will be at a reception and fundraiser in her honor hosted by the Guadalupe County Republican Women on Thursday, October 25, at Lake Breeze Ski Lodge, 225 Ski Lodge Road, McQueeney, TX, from 5:30 to 7:30 PM. Tickets are $50. There will be refreshments and a cash bar. Please RSVP to “Sue” at 830-305-0371.
Susan Narvaiz, the Republican who is facing “Layoff Lloyd Doggett” in the new Congressional District 35, will be at the reception in her honor at Frieheit Country Store on Thursday, October 25, from 5 PM to 7 PM. The Freiheit is pronounced “fry height” and is located in New Braunfels, at 2157 FM 1101.
The first day of early voting in Comal County yielded double the voter turn out on the same day in 2008, with more than 3100 voters compared to 1700.
I voted on the second day, and was pleased to find that the Comal County Voting Center on Landa Street in New Braunfels was up to the task. The County has designed an efficient and organized Center, with fast moving lines and 3 stations set up to check in voters.
I cast my first “straight Party” ticket since 1992, today. The first “page of the electronic ballot offers the option to vote for one Party or the other, and a vote for Republicans took me through each page of all the candidates and offices, allowing me to review and view the names of each candidate I voted for and to see who I wasn’t voting for. I hope that those of you who are tempted to just vote the top of the ticket or for a few candidates will consider taking my endorsement of the Republican candidates all up and down the ballot, with the ease of the straight Party vote! You’ll get the well known candidates, like Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, Donna Campbell for SD 25, Susan Narvaiz for Congressional District 35 and Kevin Webb for Comal County Commissioner, Pct 3, and you also support judges like Scott Fields, Jeff Rose and Bob Pemberton!
No matter where you live in Comal County, or where your regular voting place is, you can cast your ballot at any of the early voting places or times. Here’s the early voting opportunities in Comal County:
• New Braunfels: 345 Landa, Suite 101. Oct. 23-26, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.; Oct. 27, 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.; Oct. 28, 10 a.m. to 3 p.m.; Oct. 29 — Nov. 2, 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
• Canyon Lake: CRRC Community Center, 125 Mabel Jones Dr. Oct. 23-26, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.; Oct. 27, 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.; Oct. 28, 10 a.m. to 3 p.m.; Oct. 29 — Nov. 1, 9 a.m. to 7 p.m.; and Nov. 2, 7 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
• Bulverde: Bulverde / Spring Branch Library, 131 Bulverde Crossing. Oct. 23-26, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.; Oct. 27, 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.; Oct. 28, 10 a.m. to 3 p.m.; Oct. 29-Nov. 1, 9 a.m. to 7 p.m.; and Nov. 2, 7 a.m. to 6 p.m.
• Garden Ridge: City Hall, 9400 Municipal Parkway. Oct. 23-26, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.; Oct. 27, 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.; Oct. 28, 10 a.m. to 3 p.m.; Oct. 29 — Nov. 1, 9 a.m. to 7 p.m.; and Nov. 2, 7 a.m. to 3 p.m.
It’s not just Presidents and SenatorsL some of us will be asked to vote on school bonds and other bond issues when we go to the polls this year. How do you feel about Texas voters who have saddled ourselves with the Nation’s second highest level of local – county, city and school – debt?
The State of Texas lowered the level of local property tax, taking on more of the financial responsibility formerly covered by school and county property taxes. The next thing we knew, the local governments took the opportunity to raise those rates, again and to beg for bond issues, effectively wiping out the intended savings. The thing of it is that voters did this to ourselves and our neighbors!
But for the purposes of this discussion, let’s not worry too much about the debt. (Though it should be noted Texas is only barely trailing New York and California in terms of total state and local debt.)
We should instead confront the common claim made by proponents of school bond proposals: that it will make schools better. It will certainly make the buildings better, or at least more expensive. But will schools, the education provided, be improved?
Despite the hoopla, a new coat of paint, or even new walls, won’t ensure a better education. Only parents and teachers can deliver that.
When looking at the total spending reported to the Texas Education Agency, school districts only spend about 50 percent of your money on instruction. Building more buildings won’t improve that statistic, or produce better academic outcomes.
One thing that can immediately improve education is putting more resources – a greater percentage of school money – directly toward instructional expenses, and less on administration and non-teaching positions.
Let’s try spending more money in the classroom, rather than simply on a classroom.
via Innovation, Not Debt, Key To Better Schools | Empower Texans.
Reason Magazine points to the video of a revealing interview with the Chair of the Democratic National Committee, Florida’s Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz by “WeAreChange.org” after last week’s Presidential debate. Watch this video!
Note: I corrected my original title.
A fellow Texas Medical Association member asked me today how I felt about TexPAC – was it even worth giving them money and “what about their endorsements for judges?” He had been surprised to notice the TMA’s endorsement of some Democrat candidates after the Judicial endorsements caught his eye. (He even asked whether the list was just a pet of some of the more wealthy docs in the TMA.)
I explained that, while the TMA generally opposes ObamaCare, the Association unfortunately has what they call the “friendly incumbent” rule. I also agreed that the policy doesn’t explain all of the choices on the TexPAC list. But for the most part, It’s virtually a given that the PAC endorses the incumbent in a race, even if the candidate doesn’t agree with the TMA on such vital issues as ObamaCare and the (Un-) Sustainable Growth Rate (“SGR”) or even the “RAC audits.” (“Recovery Audit Contractors” – *private* contractors who audit Medicare “providers” – doctors and hospitals, and earn more for finding more “fraudandabuse.”)
The policy – along with the heavy-handedness of some of the leaders of the PAC – leads to such debacles as their mistaken endorsement of Jeff Wentworth, who opposed tort reform, over Dr. Donna Campbell, the eventual winner (by a 2 to 1 vote!) of the Texas Senate District 25 Republican Primary,
I suggested that he include a note about his disagreements with the PAC in any check he writes in the future. As for this election, I advised my friend – who is very opposed to ObamaCare – to ignore any recommendation that didn’t have an “R” for “Republican” in front of the candidate’s name – especially when it comes to the candidates for our Third Court of Appeals: Scott Fields is a much better choice for conservative voters than the incumbent. (I could say the same about Congressional District 35, where I hope my neighbors will vote for Susan Narvaiz, rather than Layoff Lloyd Doggett.)