WingRight
Public Policy
Quotes from Governor Perry on the Issues (in “Fed Up!”)
A website, Classical Principles, has posted some quotes from the Governor’s book, Fed Up!: Our Fight to Save America from Washington in a pdf, here.
Robert P. George: Serious GOP Debate
Set your video recorder to CNN at 3 PM EST on Monday, September 5 in order to watch Senator Jim DeMint, Congressman Steve King, and philosopher and bioethicist Robert P. George question the Republican candidates for President. The forum will not be a debate, but a series of individual interviews at the Palmetto Freedom Forum in South Carolina.
Professor George has been called the smartest man in the US and I’ve blogged about him and quoted him many times (best, here) at LifeEthics.org. As an admitted groupie of men like Professor George and Dr. Leon Kass (sorry guys), the Palmetto forum would be my dream forum!
“I think people are aware that things are not right,” George says. “They are not technical problems to be solved by choosing the best technocrat. . . . People have a sense that the problems run deeper than that, that they have to do, in a very significant measure, with a loss of fidelity over the years, a falling away from our own principles. . . . They are looking for a conversation that goes deeper.”
via A Serious GOP Debate – Robert Costa – National Review Online.
New labor move is anti-biz, jobs – Chicago Sun-Times
For 2½ years I spent 95 percent of my union-work time defending the incompetents, the lazy, the malingers and the malcontents. And they got paid the same as my fellow workers who showed up every day and gave their all to the job. What’s more, I saw how union rules frustrated management innovations to improve our journalistic product.
A few years later I moved on to another journalistic enterprise without a union. I saw merit pay raises given to the hard workers, no salary hikes to those who didn’t or couldn’t do the job, and eventual dismissal of anyone who couldn’t measure up to the demands of the magazine. Thus began my journey from liberal to conservative.
AP MISLEADS READERS ON RICK PERRY: Cherry-Picks His Statement on Border Security & Lies About Audience Reaction | The Gateway Pundit
The AP deleleted the part of Perry’s speech that including using “strategic fencing” and National Guard troops on the border.
Blogger Gateway Pundit tells us about more completel reports that tell the whole story, including “Weasel Zippers” and WHIO TV.
WILLisms.com
The next time someone claims Texas ranks “near the bottom” in education, ask them to read this post and get back with you.
The Heritage Foundation mocks Duncan’s “crocodile tears” and explains how mediocrity has become the name of the game in the national education discussion:
68 percent of districts across the United States are below the 50th percentile in mathematics achievement. In more than half of states, no more than three districts have average student math performance that would place students in the upper third of math achievement in international comparisons.
Indeed, while beating national averages is not necessarily anything to write home about, it is still critical to acknowledge that the Texas model, far from perfect, has
via WILLisms.com.
The Tax Foundation – Texas’ State and Local Tax Burden, 1977-2009
Texas ‘state and local tax rate, 1977 : 7.9%. Texas’ state and local tax rate, 2011: 7.9%
The Tax Foundation – Texas’ State and Local Tax Burden, 1977-2009.
Abortionists ordered to follow disputed ‘informed consent’ law
The court found constitutional the state’s decision to demand abortionists tell patients three things:
That the abortion will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being;
That [the patient] has an existing relationship with that unborn human being and that the relationship enjoys protection under the United States Constitution and under the laws of South Dakota;
That by having an abortion, her existing relationship and her existing constitutional rights with regards to that relationship will be terminated.
via Abortionists ordered to follow disputed ‘informed consent’ law.
Breaking: Obama asks EPA to withdraw proposed ozone rule | JunkScience.com
Wow, this would be great if it goes through!
From the “Junk Science” blog:
President Barack Obama has asked EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to withdraw the agency’s proposed toughened ozone standards, citing “the importance of reducing regulatory burdens and regulatory uncertainty, particularly as our economy continues to recover.” The President’s statement is below.
These are rules that would provide no health benefits but cost $1 trillion per year in compliance and kill 7.4 million jobs by 2020.
If EPA administrator Lisa Jackson complies with Obama’s request (no guarantee), this will be a hugely important victory for American workers and the economy, as well as those of us who have been fighting the EPA’s proposed ozone standards.
via Breaking: Obama asks EPA to withdraw proposed ozone rule | JunkScience.com.
Ethical dilemma in fetal stem cell research – UK stroke study | LifeEthics
Ethical dilemma in fetal stem cell research – UK stroke study
“The world’s first clinical trial of brain stem cells to treat stroke has recorded no adverse effects to date, BBC News has reported. The BBC website reports that research using stem cells to treat strokes “is set to move to its next phase” after independent assessors approved continuation of the trial of the experimental treatment. So far the therapy has been tested on three patients left disabled by strokes.”
via Stroke stem cell trial gets extended – Health News – NHS Choices.
The problem is that the cells were harvested from the brains of 12 week old aborted fetuses. The researchers at the University of Glascow, Scotland, working with the company, “ReNeuron,” harvested the cells, manipulated them with genes to induce them to become immortal stem cells that will divide infinitely and now have what appears to an endless supply of proprietary cells for future research and treatments of stroke victims.
More at LifeEthics.org: Ethical dilemma in fetal stem cell research – UK stroke study | LifeEthics.
Rick Perry was right on binational health insurance – Ezra Klein – The Washington Post
Here’s an explanation about the “binational health plan that I keep reading about. Unfortunately, the Legislature only approved a study and there’s never been a law actually allowing the sale of the insurance plans.
To clarify, what Perry referenced was not a merging of Mexico and the United States’ public health systems. It was not, as Wonkette put it, “U.S.-Mexico Obamacare.” Rather, he pointed to a newly passed Texas law, which directed the state to explore allowing private health plans to cover services in Texas and Mexico. Those plans would then be available to any Mexican national or American citizen working within 62 miles of the Texas-Mexico border.
There’s a lot to like about this idea.
First, it targets a big problem in Texas: a lack of insurance. With 26 percent of Texans lacking insurance, the state has the highest rate of uninsured people in the country. Those numbers are even higher in Texas’s border region, according to a 2003 Texas State Senate report.
Second, it’s a private market approach, that would allow insurers to meet an unfilled consumer need. A 2005 study showed that 72 percent of Mexico-born residents of the United States would be interested in a product that covered medical services in Mexico, especially if they had dependents in Mexico who could use those services.
The plan Perry referenced wouldn’t have the state create such a plan. Rather, it would alter Texas’s insurance regulations to allow private carriers to do so.
via Rick Perry was right on binational health insurance – Ezra Klein – The Washington Post.
Deja Vu All Over Again: Total US Debt Passes Debt Ceiling
See WingRight notes from early in August, here and here- back on August 9th, when the debt was “only” 14.591 Trillion. Did y’all notice how quiet this approach to the debt ceiling it?
Remember when
one month ago the US, to much pomp and circumstance, not to mention one downgrade, announced a grand bargain raising the debt ceiling from $14.294 trillion to something much higher, with a stop gap intermediate ceiling of $14.694 trillion, or $400 billion more. Well, as of today, or less than a month since the expansion, total US debt is at $14.697 trillion. Yep – the total debt is again over the ceiling, which means the US debt increased by $400 billion in one month. Score one for fiscal prudence. And while the total debt subject to the limit is still slightly less, at $14.652, one week of Treasury auctions and will be time for Moody’s to justify again why the US is a quadruple A credit.
via Deja Vu All Over Again: Total US Debt Passes Debt Ceiling… In Under One Month Since Extension | ZeroHedge. (Watch out for the comments, lots of little boys over there.)
State Representative Wayne Christian Endorses Governor Perry for President
Representative Wayne Christian has endorsed Governor Rick Perry for President. Representative Christian is a true conservative. He “was there,” and can tell the true story about Rick Perry:
“Fact is, as recently as a couple of decades ago, we had no Republican primary in my part of rural Texas.
“Thus, Governor Perry, who entered state politics farther back than me, was courageous enough to take a stand early on and join other statesmen like Ronald Reagan and Phil Gramm in acknowledging that the Democratic Party had left their conservative beliefs behind.
“Much has been criticized of Governor Perry’s initial support for the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC). As President of the Conservative Coalition of the Texas Legislature, I was deeply involved in that entire process. My rural district was directly in the path of the TTC and the project was largely viewed by my constituents as an abuse of the governmental power of eminent domain.
“Truth is, the TTC started as a expansion on the I-35 corridor. The plan was added to legislation by the Texas Department of Transportation (TXDOT) as a new “branch” of highway that ran from south Texas to the north right through my district. TXDOT presented facts that upon the completion of the Panama Canal expansion many of the trading freighters, which currently only serve the West Coast, would be able to bring their cargo to Texas ports.
“It was anticipated that this would place a tremendous burden on the current highway system as it heads north. However, the flawed TXDOT presentation of the plan and threats to private land ownership were not handled well. Citizens throughout Texas were insulted by the methods of potential property seizure, foreign control of Texas properties and other abuses.
“It was wrong, and when presented with the will of Texas citizens, Governor Perry put a stop to it.”
**********************
I applauded Governor Perry as he stood with the Texas House and Senate (and eventually the Texas Supreme Court) against some very vocal opposition to sign into law Rep. Hamilton’s bill preventing a potential land grab by the state. In this past session, Governor Perry declared eminent domain reform legislation an emergency item and saw it all the way through the legislative process until he signed it into law, strengthening the rights and protections of private property owners across Texas.
Texas Insider » Combs Announces Successful Short-Term Notes Sale
Texas Insider Report: AUSTIN, Texas – Today’s sale of $9.8 billion in one-year cash flow notes from the state of Texas was very well-received by the financial community. High demand for the notes drove the interest rate down to 0.27 percent – the lowest interest rate the state has received on its annual short-term notes.
“Texas had a very successful sale and the demand for these notes shows investors’ high confidence in Texas’ recovering economy and the state’s solid record of conservative fiscal management,” Texas Comptroller Susan Combs said. “Buyers bid about $31 billion – more than three times the amount offered for sale. And the resulting low interest rate is very beneficial to the state.”
Proceeds from the notes, known as Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes (TRANs), will be used to distribute state funding to public schools early in the upcoming fiscal year and to help state government manage its cash flow between the start of the fiscal year and the arrival of tax revenues later in the year.
The TRAN notes sold today will be repaid Aug. 31, 2012.
via Texas Insider » Combs Announces Successful Short-Term Notes Sale.
Rick Perry revives hope for tort reform
While maintaining our strong protections from the 2005 Texas tort reform, the Governor advanced a new law this year that will further protect everyone in Texas. With the new “loser pays” law, we should see fewer frivolous lawsuits and the monetary judgements from genuine litigation against wrong-doers will not be eaten up by legitimate legal expenses.
Imagine this: Emily, whose right kidney has failed, goes to the hospital for a transplant. Instead of replacing her right kidney, the surgeons mistakenly replace her left kidney. Left with her failed kidney and an uncertain transplant, Emily sues for medical malpractice. After months of costly litigation, Emily’s original damage claims are swallowed up by the cost of her legal fees.
Should she, the injured party, bear the costs of litigation?
This example demonstrates the problem of the “American Rule,” which is nearly universal in the American legal system with regard to torts. The American Rule requires each party to pay its own litigation costs, regardless of outcome. Most other Western democracies use the “English Rule,” or “loser pays,” which quite literally means that the loser pays the costs of litigation for all involved parties.
via Rick Perry revives hope for tort reform | Washington Times Communities.
Herald-Zeitung (Gesundheit!) and the AP: Dumb and Dumber
I was shocked to see that this morning’s printed version of my own hometown paper, the New Braunfels Herald-Zeitung, featured a front-page article, “Texas to appeal judge’s ruling,” stating that Texas’ ultrasound law would force women to “undergo an invasive vaginal ultrasound.” This is a lie. Perhaps the problem is that the author only quoted a lawyer for the New York firm that sued the State of Texas.
(The piece isn’t on the website, but it’s a reprint of the article by April Castro, available at the Houston Chronicle .)
As Federal Judge Sam Sparks wrote when denying the plaintiff’s claim that the law did not provide equal protection under the law because it only applied to women, “This legitimate interest obviously justifies “singling out” abortion providers and the patients thereof, because they pose a serious potential risk to “the life of the fetus that may become a child.”’
The State of Texas regulates physicians, not patients and HB 15 is a set of conditions that a physician must meet before performing abortions. The Supreme Court has acknowledged (along with other thinking human beings) that States (We the People, the rest of us) have a legitimate interest in promoting the life and health of both the woman and her unborn child and in protecting them from fraud and coercion. Nothing in the wording of the law would force anyone to undergo an “invasive vaginal ultrasound.”
Regardless of the oft-repeated claim that an ultrasound is not medically necessary, it is standard of care prior to all abortions. The website of one of the plaintiffs, Alan Braid, MD’s Reproductive Services of San Antonio, informs potential patients that an ultrasound is included in the abortion fee and “to determine the length of your pregnancy.” It is also standard of care to use the Ultrasound to guide instruments being introduced into the vagina and uterus.
Sparks objected to the mandate that physicians must describe any cardiac activity or development of limbs and internal organs. This is medical information that belongs to the woman, not ideology.
Sparks also claimed that the State intends to “brand” women by having them sign an informed consent paper and the inclusion of that paper in what he called “semi-private, at best” medical records. He is afraid that the record might be used in the future in lawsuits against the doctor, ignoring the fact that this would only happen if the woman who owns the medical information is the one suing the doctor.
(Edited for better sentences, 10:15 AM. BBN)
Office of the Governor Rick Perry – [Press Release] Statement by Gov. Rick Perry on Injunction of Sonogram Law
Gov. Rick Perry today issued the following statement on U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks’ injunction against Texas’ recently-passed sonogram legislation:
“Every life lost to abortion is a tragedy and today’s ruling is a great disappointment to all Texans who stand in defense of life. This important sonogram legislation ensures that every Texas woman seeking an abortion has all the facts about the life she is carrying, and understands the devastating impact of such a life-changing decision. I have full confidence in Attorney General Abbott’s efforts to appeal this decision as he defends the laws enacted by the Texas Legislature.”
Obama: clueless or arrogant?
President Obama has announced his intention to address a joint session of Congress on night of the first Republican debate, September 7, 2011. Maybe the White House just didn’t know that NBC was set to broadcast the debate?
Believe it or not, the President’s press secretary indicates that the answer to my question is “arrogant:”
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said “of course not” when asked whether White House officials chose the time of Mr. Obama’s speech to interfere with the Republican debate. “One debate of many was not reason not to have a speech when we wanted to have it,” he said.
According to Politico, one of the sponsors,
“Carney added that POLITICO and NBC News are “welcome” to reschedule the debate.”
According to the New York Times blog, The Caucus,
NBC News, Politico and the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation; it is to be televised by MSNBC, CNBC and the Spanish-language network Telemundo and streamed on the Internet by Politico. It is to be moderated by NBC’s Brian Williams and Politico’s John Harris.
Critique of Judge Sam Sparks’ Opinion on Texas Ultrasound Law (part 2)
See Part 1, here
Media reports say that due to the injunction by Federal Judge Sam Sparks, the Texas Ultrasound law will not go into effect at all until a higher court rules on it. However, the Judge does note that there is a severability clause and that his injunction is narrow. I’m waiting to see opinions from lawyers as to whether abortionists will be held to parts of the law that are not specifically under injunction.
In the meantime, I wonder how many women will meet the abortionist before they are gowned and sedated for the procedure and how many will insist on seeing their sonograms?
In the second half of the Opinion by Judge Sam Sparks, the Judge outlines the specific complaints brought against the new law, HB 15, (text of the law, here ) . Most of those complaints are dismissed, even as the Judge continues to call the new law “unwise” and ultimately imposes an injunction against enforcement.
Sparks disagrees with the Plaintiffs, the Center for Reproductive Rights out of New York, that the definitions of “medical emergency,” “sonogram,” “in a quality consistent with current medical practice,” and “in a manner understandable to a layperson” are unconstitutionally vague. He also disagrees with the Plaintiffs on whether or not “visit” and “abortion-related services” are unclear to most people.
The major complaints upheld by the judge appear to be that the law doesn’t allow for multiple-physician practices or for a switch if the original doctor who informed the woman about her ultrasound cannot, “through some unforeseen circumstances,” perform the abortion, requires a woman to sign an informed consent acknowledgement, and forces the physician to “advance an ideological agenda.” Sparks also does not like the word “soley,” for reasons that I don’t understand.
It is true that one purpose of the law was to ensure that women were given informed consent by the physician who was to perform the abortion, “in a private and confidential setting.” Most abortionists had been satisfying the 24 hour waiting period and informed consent the same way that Dr. Alan Braid’s Reproductive Services of San Antonio, had: over the phone or by referring the woman to the information on the Internet.
However, it doesn’t appear that Sparks overturned these requirements, since the injunction overturns the objection to the requirement that women receive private and confidential informed consent and the exception for those who live more than 100 miles from the abortion clinic. The opinion only finds fault with the lack of accommodations for “unplanned substitutions.”
The judge makes a surprising statement about the requirement that a copy of the informed consent be inserted in the medical record of the woman:
Compounding this problem is newly-added section 171.0121, which requires both that a copy of the above certification be placed in the pregnant woman’s medical records (presumably permanently), and that the facility that performs the abortion retain a copy for at least seven years.See H.B. 15, Sec. 3 (adding TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 171.0121). Given the nature of the certification and the Act’s retention requirements, it is difficult to avoid the troubling conclusion that the Texas Legislature either wants to permanently brand women who choose to get abortions, or views these certifications as potential evidence to be used against physicians and women.
Sparks says that the medical record is “semi-private,” and is concerned that it might someday be subpoenaed for use in a court case. The only time that these would be seen in Court is if the woman herself sues the doctor.
Sparks also engages in a bit of ideological speech of his own about the requirement for the abortionist to describe “the presence of cardiac activity,” and “the presence of external members and internal organs.”
“ The Court does not think the disclosures required by the Act are particularly relevant to any compelling government interest, but whatever relevance they may have is greatly diminished by the disclosures already required under Texas law, which are more directly pertinent to those interests.”
and, from page 50:
The net result of these provisions is: (1) a physician is required to say things and take expressive actions with which the physician may not ideologically agree, and which the physician may feel are medically unnecessary; (2) the pregnant woman must not only passively receive this potentially unwanted speech and expression, but must also actively participate—in the best case by simply signing an election form, and in the worst case by disclosing in writing extremely personal, medically irrelevant facts; and (3) the entire experience must be memorialized in records that are,at best, semi-private. In 7 the absence of a sufficiently weighty government interest, and a sufficiently narrow statute advancing that interest, neither of which have been argued by Defendants, the Constitution does not permit such compulsion.
Edit to add this question: How can a doctor “not ideologically agree” with the facts visible on the sonogram when describing heart or limbs?
In my opinion, the worst part of the ruling is Spark’s legal-speak on “compelling’ and his insistence on bringing back the ever-moving line of “viability:”
Second, while Casey refers to the government’s interest in potential life as “important,” “substantial,” and “legitimate,” it stops short of characterizing it as “compelling.” Indeed, one of the holdings of Roe v. Wade, and one this Court does not interpret Casey as having overruled, was that “[w]ith respect to the State’s important and legitimate interest in potential life, the ‘compelling’ point is at viability.”
Tell me, Judge Sparks, just what is “viability?” 24 weeks, 20 or 18 weeks?
link to Part 1 and “sticky” added September 5, 2011 12:19 PM BBN
Doing the work skilled providers won’t
Will someone tell me why it is logical for Federal Judge Sam Sparks to assume that “less-skilled providers” will be willing to meet the “onerous requirements” that more-skilled providers won’t?
” The Court has grave doubts about the wisdom of the Act, but that is no legal basis for invalidating it. The Act’s onerous requirements will surely dissuade or prevent many competent doctors from performing abortions, making it significantly more difficult for pregnant women to obtain abortions. Forcing pregnant women to receive medical treatment from less-skilled providers certainly seems to be at odds with ‘protecting the physical and psychological health and well-being of pregnant women,’ one of the Act’s stated purposes.”
Critique of Judge Sam Sparks’ Texas Ultrasound Opinion
I’m a doctor, not a lawyer, so I may not understand all of the words and references in the opinion, but I’m shocked that any self-respecting Federal Judge would allow such a frankly biased opinion out of his office. Perhaps Sparks doesn’t mind burning his chances of ever being appointed to another Court, and is quite happy with his life time appointment in the Federal Court at Austin.
I’m halfway through the ruling and thought I’d post some thoughts before these comments got too long.
Sparks decided that it’s not really important for the Plaintiffs to be someone actually harmed by the Law in order to have standing in his Court. He approved the class action suit filed by a New York State corporation, The Center for Reproductive Rights, who filed a class action suit on behalf of all the abortionists in Texas, supported by affidavits from three abortionists:
- 1. Alan Braid, MD is the only one of the three who lives and works in Texas. He owns a privately owned abortion clinic in San Antonio, Reproductive Services, S.A. http://www.reproductiveservicessa.com/
- 2. David A. Grimes, MD, inventor of the partial birth abortion and instructor in “family planning and OBGyn at the University of North Carolina. In 1995, Grimes testified in favor of forcing residency programs and residents to perform and train doctors in abortion http://www.nchla.org/issues.asp?ID=28 “Making abortion training a routine part of any residency…will put abortion back in the mainstream of medicine.”
- 3. Anne D. Lyerly, MD, from the University of North Carolina at Chapell Hill, who was once the chair of the ethics committee of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. She testified *against* conscience rights before the Bush President’s Bioethics Council in 2006.
If R. v. W. isn’t found to be gross misconduct, this ruling should be. Sparks can’t resist a revealing his prejudice and mocking the legislature.
Citing Planned Parenthood of Se. Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 846 (1992), a US Supreme Court ruling on abortion limitations and Equal Protection, Sparks not only has to admit that the Texas law is legitimate under prior law and Court rulings, but that:
“This legitimate interest obviously justifies “singling out” abortion providers and the patients thereof, because they pose a serious potential risk to “the life of the fetus that may become a child.”’
However, he goes on to admit his prior bias:
“The Court has grave doubts about the wisdom of the Act, but that is no legal basis for invalidating it. The Act’s onerous requirements will surely dissuade or prevent many competent doctors from performing abortions, making it significantly more difficult for pregnant women to
obtain abortions. Forcing pregnant women to receive medical treatment from less-skilled providers certainly seems to be at odds with “protecting the physical and psychological health and well-being of pregnant women,” one of the Act’s stated purposes. H.B. 15, Sec. 12(1). However, rational basis review requires this Court to accept even tenuous rationales for the advancement of a legitimate government interest.
In short, if the Texas Legislature wishes to prioritize an ideological agenda (2) over the health and safety of women, the Equal Protection Clause does not prevent it from doing so under these circumstances. Accordingly, the Court must reject Plaintiffs’ Equal Protection arguments. (p. 20/55)
That footnote (2) ?
“2 It is ironic that many of the same people who zealously defend the state’s righteous duty to become intimately involved in a woman’s decision to get an abortion are also positively scandalized at the government’s gross overreaching in the area of health care.”
S
“(It) is difficult to avoid the troubling conclusion the Texas Legislature either wants to permanently brand women who choose to get abortions, or views these certifications as potential evidence to be used against physicians and women,” Sparks wrote.
Text of Sparks’ Ultrasound Ruling available
Here’s the ruling in pdf. More after I’ve read it.
The larger order with explanations is here. (update at 7:25 PM, BBN)
Update, 7:07 PM
Okay, it appears that he’s placed an injunction on any enforcement of the law at all.
However, in addition to the histrionic statement the the State would “permanently brand women” for signing informed consent forms that would be placed in their private medical records, the Judge shows further poor judgement by this section:
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants are ENJOINED from enforcing the penalty provisions of the Act against either a physician or a pregnant woman if the physician does not place the sonogram images where the pregnant woman may view them, or does not make audible the heart auscultation, if the pregnant woman elects not to view the images or hear the heart auscultation;
There is, of course, no penalty in the law for women if the abortionist “does not place the sonogram images where the pregnant woman may view them,” etc.
For years in Texas, we have had formalized, scripted informed consent for hysterectomies, sterilizations, radiation therapy and electroshock therapy. And yet, no one notices or cares.
Does anyone claim that a patient is being “branded” if his doctor explains his cardiac ultrasound? Would you go to surgery if he didn’t have a conversation with you after the echocardiogram and before the procedure?
Federal Judge Sparks places injunction on Texas Ultrasound Bill
The news reports so far only contain very brief statements which appear to be from the same press release. More as soon as I can find the actual ruling.
However, all the reports tell us that Judge Sparks said Texas ultrasound bill will ” “permanently brand women who choose to get an abortion.” Aren’t medical records private? How histrionic can this judge be? The woman’s statement will be part of her medical record. No one will see it except the abortionist.
He also said something to the effect that the doctor’s “First amendment rights” are infringed by State mandated informed consent. Please tell that to all of the doctors who have followed a strict Texas law on informed consent for hysterectomies, sterilization, radiation therapy and electric shock therapy.
It doesn’t look as though the judge struck down the part that requires a doctor to perform the informed consent himself, 24 hours before the procedure. Good. By requiring the same standard of informed consent that most of us would expect from our heart doc before a catheterization or by-pass, the law will be enough to make elective abortions prohibitively expensive for the mills to make any profit.
Spin on Spin (What Sarah Palin’s supporters are saying about Rick Perry)
I could be writing funny jokes about President Obama missing the bus under which he intends to throw America.
Instead, I got side tracked by a tweet claiming that Governor Perry is not honest.
“A Time for Choosing” is a pro-Sarah Palin blog that published an August 29, 2011 post titled, “Perry Campaign: Everything in “Fed Up!” Was Meaningless BS,”
Needless to say, no Perry staffer said such a thing. Instead, the author takes a mish mash of articles from the Los Angeles Times, the Hill, the Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal and builds himself a strawman.
He claims the Governor lies because he repeatedly told us he had no desire to run for President, ignoring the fact that the Governor told us that conversations with his wife in June of this year led him to have a change of heart.
As for the rest of the piece, A Time for Choosing’s author, who claims to have read the Governor’s book, Fed Up!: Our Fight to Save America from Washington, echoes the claims that the Perry campaign is denying the book has any relevance, and that the Governor is “walking back” or has “tempered” his stand on the strong views expressed in it.
Perry told a Wall Street Journal reporter to read the book when the reporter repeatedly insisted that Perry
“. . . suggested the program’s creation violated the Constitution. The program was put in place, “at the expense of respect for the Constitution and limited government,” he wrote, comparing the program to a “bad disease” that has continued to spread. Instead of “a retirement system that is no longer set up like an illegal Ponzi scheme,” he wrote, he would prefer a system that “will allow individuals to own and control their own retirement.”
However bad it is for SS to be “at the expense of respect for the Constitution,” nowhere in the book does it say that Social Security violates the Constitution.The reporter suggests that the Governor “suggests.”
The author quotes the Hill referring to the Washington Post’s comments on an email from Perry staffer, Mark Miner:
The 16th Amendment instituting a federal income tax starting at one percent has exploded into onerous, complex and confusing tax rates and rules for American workers over the last century. The need for job creation in the wake of the explosion of federal debt and costly entitlement programs, mean the best course of action in the near future is a simpler, flatter and broader tax system that unleashes production, creates jobs, and creates more taxpayers. We can’t undo more than 70 years of progressive taxation and worsening debt obligations overnight.
Here’s what the book actually proposes:
“Second, we should restrict the unlimited source of revenue that the federal government has used to grow beyond its constitutionally prescribed powers. One option would be to totally scrap the current tax code in favor of a flat tax, and thereby make taxation much simpler, easier to follow, and harder to manipulate. Another option would be to repeal the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution (providing the power for the income tax) altogether, and then pursue an alternative model of taxation such as a national sales tax or the Fair Tax. The time has come to stop talking about fixing the broken and burdensome tax code and to take bold action to replace it with one that is not a burden for the taxpayer and that provides only the modest revenue needed to perform the basic constitutional functions of the federal government. America needs a fairer, flatter, and simpler system, one which working families can complete without having to hire a bevy of professionals to assist them.” Perry, Rick; Newt Gingrich (2010-11-15). Fed Up!: Our Fight to Save America from Washington (pp. 182-183). Little, Brown and Company. Kindle PC Edition. (accessed 8/29/11)
I want to believe that the bloggers’ problem is using interpretations/spins from several reporters, on a book they evidently either didn’t read or didn’t understand to build your premise on. If that is the case, though, why would he a headline that appears to be a quote from a staff member when it’s an obvious, biased interpretation by the blogger?
Politics at Texas Medical Board
Dr. David Stevens, CEO of the Christian Medical and Dental Association believes that the Texas Medical Board’s review and limitations on adult stem cell treatments is politically motivated.
It does appear that the Board is responding to politics.
“Meanwhile, Stevens believes criticism of Governor Perry’s recent adult stem cell procedure is politically motivated. (Listen to audio report)
The Republican presidential candidate had back surgery July 1, where his own stem cells were removed and injected back into his body. But shortly after, the Associated Press published a story in which several doctors criticized the decision as too “experimental” and “risky.” But Stevens believes those doctors are playing more politics than they are science. He points out that Perry consulted with his orthopedist, Dr. Stanley Jones, who is a well-respected physician.”
The Board heard the proposal on Friday, August 26. The Board would impose Federal regulations and a formal ethics board oversight for “off label” or experimental use of medications or treatments.
We doctors use our judgement at times to treat our patients using medications, procedures and equipment in ways that are considered “off label.” (For instance, the “morning after pill” therapies were at first unofficial use of oral contraceptives, long before Plan B was on the market.)
The Board should adjust their criteria to whether or not the patient gave full, proper informed consent obtained and is the treatment inherently ethical in likely outcome and goal?
US law enforcement to expand training in Mexico
Police training has been a significant part of the Merida Initiative, which outlined the U.S. partnership with Mexico and Central America in the drug war and has committed $1.4 billion since 2008. However, the focus now shifts to historically out-gunned and ill-prepared local forces ducking bullets and facing ominous threats on a daily basis.
Mexico received $327 million for police training in fiscal 2009 from the U.S. State Department through Merida, placing it behind only Afghanistan and Iraq in total funds received for police training from the departments of State or Defense, according to a report from the Government Accountability Office in April.
via The Associated Press: US law enforcement to expand training in Mexico.
Answer to Bias Against Governor Rick Perry
“We would be wise to remember a universal truth: No government has ever taxed and spent its way to greater prosperity.” Governor Rick Perry, 2005
This is in response to a post by blogger “MarkAmerica” at FreeRepublic.com. Unfortunately, there are many bloggers out there making the same accusations and false statements. Hopefully, this will clear up some of the questions less biased people might have.
To MarkAmerica:
Incredulously, your statements here imply that you are privy to the thinking and motives not only of Governor Perry, but of Mark Davis! Your comments are skewed bias and nothing more useful than shotgun accusations without evidence to back them up.
You falsely state that the Governor does not represent the same ideals as those of us in the Tea Party. I attended my first Tea Party event on February 27, 2009 in San Antonio and I say that you are flat wrong. Governor Perry met with 3 separate Tea Party groups on Tax Day, April 15th, 2009 – the day he’s accused of suggesting that Texas might secede. We know he never suggested any such thing, but he has always firmly stated his belief in small government, less taxation, and greater accountability to the people.
You also falsely claim that Governor Perry has less in common with regular Texans than with Wall Street “types.” I think his history is at least more familiar to Texans: he grew up far away from the city on a tenant farm, became an Eagle Scout, flew C-130’s as an Air Force pilot, and spent a few more years back on that farm as an adult.
You falsely claim that the Governor is uninterested in individual rights. A review of his speeches and of his books prove that to be a lie. He said in his first State of the State in 2001, that “We must preserve freedom and opportunity by extending it, one Texan at a time.” In his 2003 State of the State address, the Governor made his concern for the individual even more clear by telling the Legislature to remember that “behind every government program, there is a real taxpayer funding it.” He also reminds us that “The right to life is a fundamental right declared by our forefathers” and has consistently championed prolife laws each session.
Your false claim that the Governor only talks tough when he’s running for office is easily dis-proven by looking at 2003, when he had just won re-election for four years. Texas, like the Nation was reeling from the financial fallout of September 11, 2001. The Governor had already led State agencies to cut spending for the fiscal year by 7-13% and called on the Legislature to pass the first budget to cut State spending since World War II by prioritizing education, security and “fiscal responsibility, because neither of these priorities can be met unless our spending is disciplined.”
The Governor has always been adamant about cutting taxes, too. He’s repeatedly called for cuts in property taxes. Look at this, from the 2005 “State of the State”speech:
It is time to cut property taxes for the hardworking people of Texas. In fact, let’s not only give Texans property tax relief…let’s give them appraisal relief too.
Texans don’t like taxation without representation, and they are sick and tired of taxation by valuation.
The time has come to draw a line in the sand for the taxpayer: Let’s cap appraisals at three percent.
If you oppose a three percent cap on the philosophical grounds of local control, I can respect your position. But then I would hope you would be consistent, and advocate for the repeal of the ten percent cap on the same basis. There is no point in being lukewarm on this issue. Either be hot or cold; either provide real appraisal relief, or none at all. But let’s stop this false pretense of taxpayer protection at ten percent.
You falsely claim that the Governor has had a “more recent conversion” on tightening border security, ignoring the fact that Texas spends about a (edit 21:00 8/28/11) 100 dollars of our own tax funds each year to secure the border. Back in the Spring of 2001, he vetoed a driver’s license bill because it didn’t limit illegal aliens. He has consistently demanded that the Federal government do its job on border control by authorizing National Guard deployment. In 2005, he used money from his own office budget to increase funding for local law enforcement and set aside a task force from the Department of Public Safety.
You falsely accuse that the Governor is guilty of “corporate-cronyism.” The Governor promotes privatization rather than growth of government and taxes wherever possible, encourages Texas to compete with other States for jobs and business investments, and most of the business owners appreciate his efforts. Our 2005 tort reform – and the new “loser pays” law – has benefited every business except the trial lawyers. The Toyota plant that opened in San Antonio and a $3 billion dollar Texas Instruments plant are just two strong examples that our Texas policies work to bring jobs to Texas.
Your false claim that the Governor is a “statist” is ridiculous. The entirety of the book Fed Up!: Our Fight to Save America from Washington is proof against your statement. Here’s just a couple of quotes:
“The statists believe in a powerful, activist central government that advances a radical secular agenda in the name of compassion. The hide behind misguided notions of empathy and push token talking points about fighting for the little guy, all the while empowering the federal government to coercively and blatantly undermine state-, local-, and self-governance.” Location 320
“The truth is, I don’t care what party the statist is in. The fact of the matter is, it is the statist, and those who support or enable him, who is the problem. For too long he has undermined this country by empowering the national government at the expense of liberty. An America defined by the statist in Washington is an America doomed to fail.” ” Location 338
(both quotes from Perry, Rick; Newt Gingrich (2010-11-15). Fed Up!: Our Fight to Save America from Washington. Little, Brown and Company. Kindle Edition., the Kindle PC edition. And, no I don’t get a dime from Amazon.com, either. I just do my homework.)
Since you dismiss anything since 2010, here’s an earlier example that the Governor has a clear understanding about personal responsibility, opportunity and a better understanding than most about the differences in power of local governments, the States and the Federal government. He testified before the US House of Representatives against federalization of emergency first responders in 2005. (Testimony here.) (Yes, the response of Washington to the crises after Katrina was to propose to federalize EMS.)
I’ve blogged on the Gardasil Executive Order at LifeEthics.org since February, 2007 and have written more in the last month at WingRight.org. It’s foolish to continue to claim that the Governor was bribed by $6000 in donations (he raised $20 million dollars that year). There is no evidence that the Governor had any motive other than to decrease disease, speed up the coverage of the vaccine by private insurance, and to strengthen parents’ rights by making it easier for them to opt out of any or all mandatory vaccines.
Which leaves the TransTexasCorridor. That was a now-defunct attempt to solve a lot of problems including the need to move more traffic and freight faster, safer and outside city congestion by a combination of privatization and tolls. We had concrete examples of the need for more roads leading across the State during the evacuation of South Texas in response to Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Ike. The Governor encouraged the 2005 law to protect private property rights through the control of eminent domain and signed even stronger protections this year.
Conservatives and Republicans shouldn’t forget that our enemy is big federal government and that States are better suited and have the Constitutional authority to try many more solutions to many more problems. As someone who’s been accused of being a “Perry operative” due to my answers to the multiple political rants against Governor Perry, I assure you that some of us have sincerely come to the opinion that Governor Perry should be our next President by the same process that others have decided to advocate for their own particular candidate. We recognize that in his 10 years as Governor, he has boldly practiced what he professes: that States should be “laboratories of democracy.” Not every experiment works, but the Governor has demonstrated that he can learn from mistakes and has the flexibility to change course when the people object.
Perry bills feds $350M for immigrant inmates – Houston Chronicle
AUSTIN – Gov. Rick Perry has asked the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to reimburse Texas $350 million to cover costs for jailing illegal immigrants.
In a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, the top-tier Republican presidential candidate blamed the federal government for not securing the border with Mexico, allowing illegal immigrants to cross over and use taxpayer-funded resources
via Perry bills feds $350M for immigrant inmates – Houston Chronicle.
55% Say Abortion Morally Wrong Most of the Time – Rasmussen Reports™
Slightly more voters continue to classify themselves as pro-choice rather than pro-life when it comes to abortion, but a majority still believes it is morally wrong.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 48% of Likely U.S. Voters say, generally speaking, on the issue of abortion, they consider themselves pro-choice. Forty-three percent (43%) describe themselves as pro-life. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Pro-choice voters have slightly outnumbered pro-lifers in surveys for several years.
Still, 55% believe abortion is morally wrong most of the time, a finding that shows little change since April 2007. Thirty percent (30%) think abortion is morally acceptable in the majority of cases, while 15% are undecided.
via 55% Say Abortion Morally Wrong Most of the Time – Rasmussen Reports™.
Vaccines don’t cause autism, but aren’t perfect:Institute of Medicine
A new review, more support for long term safety of vaccines along with evidence that anything that has an effect can have a side effect.
The Institute says its vaccine report is its first comprehensive safety review in 17 years, prompted by the government’s Vaccine Injury Compensation program that pays damages to people injured by vaccines.”Vaccines are important tools in preventing serious infectious disease across the lifespan,” Clayton said. “All health care interventions, however, carry the possibility of risk and vaccines are no exception.”The report cleared flu shots’ suspected link to Bell’s palsy and asthma and examined more than 100 other possible side effects, only to find “convincing evidence” of the following 14 side effects linked to vaccines: Fever-triggered seizures from the measles-mumps-rubella, or MMR, vaccine – which rarely cause long-term consequences Brain inflammation in some people with immune problems, also from MMR Viral infection from the chickenpox varicella vaccine resulting in widespread chickenpox or its painful relative, shingles. Pneumonia, hepatitis or meningitis, occasionally results from varicella vaccine Severe allergic reactions known as anaphylaxis from six vaccines: MMR, chickenpox, hepatitis B, meningococcal and tetanus. Fainting or a type of shoulder inflammation also generally linked to vaccinesThere’s also evidence of short-term joint pain in some women and children from the MMR vaccine, and anaphylaxis from the human papillomavirus, or HPV, vaccine – but the Institute says there’s no proof.
via Vaccines don’t cause autism, but aren’t perfect: Report – HealthPop – CBS News.
Ted Cruz praised in “Fed Up!” by Governor Rick Perry
I’m about halfway through the book, Fed Up! by Governor Rick Perry and found these notes about the service of former Solicitor General Ted Cruz, who is running for Senator from the State of Texas.
On the death penalty for child rapists:
Texas supported Louisiana. Our able solicitor general Ted Cruz argued the case on behalf of Texas and eight other states, defending the authority of democratically elected legislatures to determine the appropriate punishment for the very worst rapists. (p. 100). Kindle Edition.
On the World Court mandate that Texas review cases of illegal aliens:
Somewhat shockingly, to me at least, President Bush then issued a memorandum attempting to order Texas and other states to review convictions of those not apprised of their consular rights. The case proceeded to the U.S. Supreme Court, where Solicitor General Cruz again argued our case. Neither I nor my friend Texas attorney general Greg Abbott believed that the United States should be forced to obey the World Court or that the President had authority to order the state courts to do so. In a 6–3 opinion authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Court agreed, and Medellin was executed on August 5, 2008.
(p 101 location 1649)
Click here to get your “Choose Life” license plate
Rick Perry RickPAC
Yes, I'm still for Governor Perry!
RickPAC
SiteMeter
WingRight 