Feb 23, 2012 | Economy, Healthcare, Take Action, Tea Party
By Dr. Harold Pease
Both parties have succumbed to the temptation of getting elected by promising ever more goodies from the public coffers, irrespective of constitutional limits, and to the point that they have irresponsibly enslaved our children with 15.25 trillion dollar indebtedness.
Everything is talked about in the presidential debates except this. We will just pretend it away. Why? Because both parties know that the cuts that have to be made to save the terminal cancer patient have to be drastic and advocating such to a population drunk with the idea that they are entitled to such is political suicide. Congress appears to be, or is, inept in solving this and other debt related problems.
Predicting a Super Committee failure, Freedom Works, a Tea Party affiliate, selected 12 of their own members and through the Internet invited 150,000 members to make suggestions on what should be done. Boldly they opened the unfunded liabilities door, Pandora’s box, the door neither party dares to open as potentially it could destroy career politicians and political parties.
What follows are their recommendations with respect to Medicare and Medicaid. Almost everyone knows that Medicare, 13% of the federal budget, growing at about 7% each year, is unsustainable. Formerly the favored method of controlling expenditures in this area was to limit reimbursement rates to healthcare providers rather than focus on fraud and the use of the free market to limit costs.
The Tea Party Debt Commission saw the Medicare program as outdated, inefficient, and corrupt and recommended six major changes that if followed would save, they predicted, $676,000,000 the first year and $2,030,843,000,000 in 10 years. These changes are first “let individuals opt out of Medicare under Senator Jim DeMint’s ‘Retirement Freedom Act.”’ Second, let all new Medicare beneficiaries after 2013 enroll in the Federal Employees’ Health Benefit Program (FEHBP) introduced by Senator Rand Paul as the “Congressional Health Care for Seniors Act.” Third, reduce Medicare subsidies to actual cost of hospitals’ graduate medical education. Fourth, maintain Medicare’s physician payment rates at the 2011 level. Fifth, convert the open-ended Medicaid program into a capped block grant to the states. And six, call on all states to reform their medical malpractice and product liability systems—tort reform.
Opting into the same Medicare program the members of Congress use, the second Tea Party change recommended, is much better for participants because it “relies on competing private insurers to provide benefits, and as a result has very little of the fraud and waste problems that plague today’s outdated and poorly designed Medicare system.” One wonders why Congress can make for themselves such a good system and leave us one with “somewhere between 10 and 20 percent of Medicare’s $450 billion annual budget being attributable to waste, fraud, and abuse….”
Converting Medicaid to block grants to states, Tea Party Debt Commission recommendation number five, is critical in stopping Medicare’s open ended liability. They argue that the program “has exploded into a semi-middle class entitlement that is bankrupting the states while providing low-quality care to poor families.” The conversion to grants “would give states the incentives and flexibility to focus scarce resources on those who truly need help.” It would also incentivize removing fraud.
Their answer to excessive medical malpractice awards that drive up medical costs for everyone was recommendation number six, state tort reform. They especially endorsed the “loser pays rule” so successful in the states that have it. Here those unsuccessful in winning frivolous lawsuits are punished thus discouraging such by others, especially lawyers, looking to benefit off the taxpayer. I once knew a woman who busied herself with multiple simultaneous frivolous lawsuits as a source of income because those sued would prefer to pay her, because it was less expensive, than to defend themselves.
Bottom line we can keep Medicare, even making it more efficient and sustainable, with six changes. It is not too late, but we need to realize our danger and move quickly to do so. Will Congress explore these changes with intent to make them? Not unless you ask them to do so.
Dr. Harold Pease is an expert on the United States Constitution. He has dedicated his career to studying the writings of the Founding Fathers and applying that knowledge to current events. He has taught history and political science from this perspective for over 25 years at Taft College. To read more of his weekly articles, please visit www.LibertyUnderFire.org
Feb 12, 2012 | Take Action, Tea Party
Dr. Harold W. Pease
With our national debt growing by $4 billion a day and Congress giving up offering any real solutions, we are a speeding train heading for a cliff. Most pretend the problem is not real or will just go away. No presidential candidate but Ron Paul even talks about it. Almost no one is ready for the hyperinflation and street crime that could follow if we do not act quickly and responsibly.
The Tea Party Debt Commission was formed to provide the federal government a solution. Its final report summarized the problem, “Our government is doing too many things it can’t do well, or shouldn’t do at all, with money it doesn’t have. We are borrowing 43 cents of every dollar we spend….” They note that the “Government Accountability Office counted no fewer than 47 job training programs, 56 financial literacy programs, 80 economic development programs, 18 food assistance programs, 20 programs for the homeless, 82 teacher-quality programs spread across 10 agencies, and more than 2,100 data centers. All told, we have nearly 2,200 federal programs.” Government is bloated, inefficient, and wasteful.
A federal diet is long overdue, but what should we keep? The Commission’s assessment criteria hinged on four basic values: fiscal common sense, Constitutional limits, economic freedom, and personal self-reliance. For a program to remain, they reasoned, it needed to pass two questions: is it constitutionally authorized, and is it best carried out by the federal government, as opposed to states or private entities? Much of what the federal government does, the Commission found, unfortunately, does neither.
Boldly they opened the unfunded liabilities door, the door neither party dares to open as potentially it could destroy career politicians and political parties. They concluded that they could make Social Security “sustainable and actually improve benefits by harnessing the power of compound interest.” They noted, “Three decades ago, Chile embarked on a bold transformation of its retirement security system. Today, that system [SMART Accounts] is the envy of the world, giving seniors far better benefits than the old, government-run system ever did.”
Shortly thereafter three counties in Texas adopted the SMART Accounts program in favor of personal accounts and thus those retiring today do so “with much more money and have significantly more generous death and disability supplemental benefits than do Social Security participants.” Moreover, they “face no long term unfunded pension liabilities.” The Commission recommends that, “all state and local governments should have the option of opting into the ‘Galveston model.’ ” Learn more about this aspect of the Tea Party Debt Commission’s recommendations by visiting FreedomWorks.org/the-tea-party-budget.
The Tea Party Debt Commission suggests that “new workers born after 1981… invest one-half of their payroll taxes (7.65%) in a SMART Account, which they can use to fund their retirement and health care costs in retirement. If they prefer, they can give up their account and opt back into traditional Social Security at retirement.” The result of this modern approach to funding retirement embraced by the Commission, is that, among other things, it: “improves benefits, doesn’t increase the retirement age, doesn’t cut benefits for people in or nearing retirement, and doesn’t touch the existing Social Security Disability insurance program.” It also “reduces federal payroll tax receipts by about $500 billion over the ten-year period.”
The Commission also opened Medicare, the second major Pandora’s box of unfunded liabilities, but Tea Party recommendations giving Medicare seniors the right to opt into the privileged Congressional health care plan will require space not permitted here. It is, however, great stuff for a subsequent column.
The speeding train does not have to go over the cliff. There are great thinkers and solutions that can save us because they are not forced to do so within the parameters of self-interest and political parties. Fortunately the Tea Party works successfully outside these restrictions. Please tell your Congressman to seriously explore these recommendations especially in light of the fact that their plans have not worked. This train must get off the track that it is now on while there is yet time.
Dr. Harold Pease is an expert on the United States Constitution. He has dedicated his career to studying the writings of the Founding Fathers and applying that knowledge to current events. He has taught history and political science from this perspective for over 25 years at Taft College. To read more of his weekly articles, please visit www.LibertyUnderFire.org
Sep 12, 2011 | Take Action, Tea Party
BREAKING NEWS!!
President Obama has just confirmed that the DC earthquake occurred on a rare and obscure fault-line, apparently known as “Bush’s Fault”. Obama also announced that the Secret Service and Maxine Waters continues an investigation of the quake’s suspicious ties to the Tea Party. Conservatives however have proven that it was caused by the founding fathers rolling over in their graves.
This was an anonymous piece too funny to not pass on.
On a more serious note.
Just announced today, Monday, September 12, is a Tea Party GOP Presidential Debate in Tampa, Florida to be broadcast at 5:00 P.M. West Coast time also today. Tea Party People have not been satisfied with the type of questioning of candidates in previous debates that largely excludes seeking candidate views on the Constitution and the Federal Reserve. Why held the same day as the announcement of this debate and buried deep within the few newspapers that are willing to notify the public, was not answered by the California Wire Reports reporting the event but we thank them for what coverage they did allow. Dr. Pease
Dec 10, 2010 | Take Action, Tea Party
Click here for an Action Alert from the Tea Party
Dec 9, 2010 | Take Action, Tea Party
Via the TeaPartyPatriots.org:
**MUST CALL! VOTE TODAY!**
On Dec. 8 the Senate will take up the DREAM Act (S3992) as well as the Forced Unionization bill, deceptively named the Public Employee Cooperation Act (S3991). Below are the action items with links to information and target senator information.
**ACTION ITEMS**
- Click here for information and a list of targeted senators to combat theDREAM Act.
- Click here for information and a list of targeted senators to combat theForced Unionization bill
Your Tea Party Patriots National Coordinator Team,
Debbie Dooley, Jenny Beth Martin, Mark Meckler, Sally Oljar, Diana Reimer, and Dawn Wildman
Jenny Beth Martin (jennybethm@gmail.com, on Twitter @jenuinejen, on Facebook)
Dawn Wildman (dmwlaw1@cox.net)
Mark Meckler (mark@teapartypatriots.org)
Oct 13, 2010 | Take Action
By Dr. Harold Pease
Most wish to protect liberty in their voting but may not know how to do so. Media accounts of candidate activities and/or their public statements by themselves rarely give enough information to vote intelligently; and candidate debates, at least on the state, county, and city level, are poorly attended. One wonders if candidate charisma along with color, size, and number of signs displayed are not the most significant factors for most voters in making a selection. Sadly the rule of thumb is that he who spends the most money wins the election.
There are a few things you need to do in order to protect liberty with your vote. First formulate a philosophical base that should go far deeper than the rhetoric of a political party. My own base begins with my strict Christian background. Regardless of party or ideology, I want my public servants to emulate such solid values as honesty, integrity, morality, etc. I also would like to believe that when confronted with tough decisions they, like Washington and Lincoln, would not hesitate to ask God to illuminate their understanding.
Next, become immersed with the writing of our Founding Fathers as they have already traversed the same ground that we now tread and for the same reasons. Parliament was ever so ready to impose more rules and regulations upon them. The cause of the American Revolution was excessive government–consult any U.S. History text. Immerse yourself in the Constitution. Stay firm to it regardless of party ideology. Individual liberty cannot be maintained by straying too far from that document or from the collective philosophical base of that group of early patriots. Make their collective ideological base your own.
Their philosophical base consisted of many elements. Space permits my covering only two or three. They believed that governmental power should be limited and strictly defined in a contract with the people. (See U.S. Constitution, Art. I, Sec. 8; Art II, Secs 2-3; and Art. III, Sec. 2). Liberty lovers cannot support candidates who are ignorant of these limitations or who work to increase government influence outside these Constitutional parameters. Nor should tax monies be collected and spent outside these specific grants of power. When this happens, power flows non-stop to Washington D.C. and away from the states and the people. Once gone it is seldom returned. Have your federal candidates read Art. I, Section 8, and are they willing to live within those parameters?
State candidates must be aware of federal limitations, and must be willing to oppose federal intrusion even if bribed not to do so by federal grants. Are your state, county, and city candidates strong enough to “just say no” to the temptation to get “free” money to sell their authority? Career politicians almost always sell their “birthright” to stay in office. We must apply more scrutiny to them. Said another way: when considering a candidate for public office, does this person actively work to keep decision-making power as close to the people as possible—even if it is unpopular to do so—or is his usual answer to every governmental dilemma more government and more money to fund more programs? The latter candidate is sure to leave us with less freedom and less money.
Another basic premise of the Founding Fathers that is crucial to the preservation of liberty is that we should never elevate to a higher level of government that which could be resolved at a lesser level. In other words, the county should never assume as part of its governance load that which the city could and should do. Nor should the state assume the prerogatives of the county, or the Federal Government those of the state, county, or city. Those who make the decisions are less accessible, less accountable to local influence; and the program, now managed from hundreds or thousands of miles away, usually costs more because of less efficient management. This principle will also help with respect to propositions for those states that have them. In other words: Could this function be handled at a lesser level of government? If yes, then your vote should be no.
My last piece of advice is to remove from office as soon as possible those addicted to debt. China already owns 10% of us. Propositions are normally called bonds rather than debts to deceive the public who very likely would not support them otherwise. George Washington excused only war as a legitimate reason for debt. Education might be a second but my experience says that they too should wait for more prosperous times.
I hope this helps. We are indeed in trouble and need to return to our base to survive. Together let us bring better people to the front lines. Our liberty is at stake.
Dr. Harold Pease is an expert on the United States Constitution. He has dedicated his career to studying the writings of the Founding Fathers and applying that knowledge to current events. He has taught history and political science from this perspective for over 25 years at Taft College.
