Summaries
Every party does it. Once a party gets control of a branch of government– let alone every branch of government– the party that just got into power is overwhelming concerned about keeping that power. In some ways this is good. It allows for moderate government to prevail, and usually it’s the case that the country is split, not totally supporting one view or the other.
However, it also produces a clouding of policy and opinion.
The Tempering Effect of Reelection
The problem with having a once strong partisan take a middle ground for expediency is that the partisan still holds the views that he had before he was elected, he’s just now tempering his views to hold onto power so that he can incrementally make his changes over time.
It’s the old frog in the pot scenario– where it’s easier for any group trying to exact radical change to perform that change slowly such that when the change happens the people will not know how it happened to them.
Healthcare, the Perfect Example
As early as the New Deal it was determined that the way to get America into a socialist nation was through passing a some major policy initiatives that would give the government complete control of our lives. It started with income tax, went to Social Security and the last pillar would be health care.
When then First Lady Hillary Clinton tried to enact a Heath Care Takeover back in the 90s, the people rejected it. That doesn’t mean the idea went away, it was just repackaged such that it’s come back with a vengeance– repackaged to get passage, and now having liberals suggesting that it should take on the characteristics of HillaryCare.
Inner Trembling
Whereas I believe that the House is willing to go through with the most liberal bill possible, I don’t think the Senate is totally prepared for it. Both houses of Congress realize that there are parts of this plan that the American people do not want– or could grossly miss-fire.
For example, should this bill pass and premiums skyrocket in cost, the American people will have the heads of their representatives– and the 1994 revolution will look like child’s play. If it turns out that many insurance companies go under because a cap is put in place, and people start seeing that they cannot get the service they used to get under the old plan, it’ll be really bad for the Democrats.
And yet, this is where the people that we elected to represent us believe that we should go. They fear that we are not as wise or smart as they are, and that our opinions of things are so childish– they believe we do not understand the big scope, and they are acting beneficially for us!
My Radical Approach
And this is the reason that I wish that we could have a button to kick every single elected official out of office as soon as their term expires (if not sooner) to be replaced by people that are in the private sector. Any person currently holding elected office should not be eligible to hold another elected office until spending time in the private sector equal to the amount of time of a term of the office they’re seeking.
The people we elect need to know how we think, need to get in touch with regular people again, to face the problems that we face and get back with the values that we have– those that make up our national identity.
Let’s put some better fear in our leaders– a fear that they will have to live under what they create, rather than living better. That they will be held responsible for the policies that they create, and that they can be removed if they fail to represent the people.
And please, can we stop the gerrymandering– clear all congressional districts and draw simple ones that cover rectangular areas such that the people that we send actually represent us instead of constructing districts that always send the same party/person.
We’re going to resurrect Pro-Life Fridays and start looking again at life in the womb by answering some more Pro-Choice questions.
This is an exciting time for the Pro-Life movement, for in the middle of a terrible health care bill came a surprise in the further limiting of Federal Funding when it comes abortions.
So, this should be an interesting topic as the question of life comes back to the foreground.
Advertisement: Weekend Kindness Building Relationships, one person at a time.
What is the pulse of the culture? Where is it going? What are the trends?
It is on Thursdays we’ll tackle some of the big issues of living in today’s society. We’ll talk about leaders and those that influence what is going on around us. We’ll talk about cultural trends and whether or not they’re inevitable.
On this day is where we’ll be applying a Biblical Worldview to all that’s going on around us.
Wednesday will be all about highlighting things that are going on at other blogs and news sources.
I’ll either take the time to highlight something in depth, bring up a comment thread that’s going on in the past on this site, or respond in comment form to something I’ve been reading.
This is your chance to get noticed—if you’ve contacted me in the past, this is where you’ll get your feature!
Tuesdays I’ve reserved for talk about Biblical issues, specifically how they relate to our society and culture. Though I would say that all of what’s written here is from a Biblical worldview and direction, on Tuesdays I want to try to focus in on what the Bible says about different topics specifically.
One of the things that I’ve been wanting to cover, and hopefully this will give me the opportunity, is the concept of the Old Testament law. Many times it is used to frustrate Christians because it is compared to today’s society and found less charitable than what we do today. However, I believe that if we look at what is there, we’ll find that there are some real treasures—some ways of dealing with problems that are much better, and sometimes much more practical, than what we do today.
This will also be the day for discussing Creation / Evolution and Atheism / Secularism.
I’m going to start trying to inject a little more discipline as well as try to keep to a given topic for each day with the hopes of helping me to remain more consistent in my blogging.
This week I hope to introduce the 5 or so topics I will be covering, and next week will be the first week with the new topics going.
That being said…
The idea of Money Mondays is that on Monday I’ll be discussing financial wisdom that I’ve found as well as my thoughts about what is going on in the current economy. It’ll be a mix of practical tips, things I’m doing as well as spotlights on some articles and what’s going on around us.
If you have any questions about how I handle things financially—other than what I make – Use the contact page or the comments below and I’ll try to answer!
Can the Federal Government of the United States force anyone to buy a good or service?
That’s the big underlying question in the Health Care Debate that our Representatives in the House and Senate refuse to comment on other than assuming that they have the authority. They assume that they can do whatever they please.
The question is, have these people that have sworn to uphold and protect the Constitution went too far?
Auto Insurance, Home Owners Insurance, etc.
The thing is, though the States have mandated that you pay for auto insurance (enforced by checks at the time of registration), you only need to buy it if you want to drive an automobile. It’s something that comes part of a different good that you have purchased.
Home Owner’s Insurance is necessary mostly because most people get their money to purchase the house through a bank, that demands that the house be insured so that they do not lose their investment. Flood insurance is optional.
The Difference Is Federal
The problem with comparing these with what the Federal Government is trying to do is that where States may have done these things, most of what the Federal Government tries to do is through something called the Commerce Clause that allows the Feds to regulate commerce across states.
However, this current health care bill doesn’t allow the purchase of insurance from other states, and it’s forcing people to purchase insurance either in their state or from the Federal Government (if the “Public Option” passes).
So how exactly is mandating that people buy insurance fitting in with Congress’ ability to regulate commerce?
The only way I can see it is that they are going to say that it lowers the price by requiring people to get in. But that’s sketchy at best.
What if This Provision Fails?
Our Founders never envisioned having the government force people to buy things. So it’ll probably fail a Supreme Court test. But what happens when this part of the plan fails?
Oh, you’ll like this—the rest of the bill is kept in force, so the main cost-cutting part goes down, and we assume a bigger bill. Great, eh?
What About the Precedent?
If this provision passes, what would be the result on future legislation—what would be the precedent?
In a recent interview with CNSNews.com, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R.-Utah), a longtime member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said that it was “not constitutionally sound” for Congress to mandate that individuals buy health insurance.
“But here would be the first time where our [federal] government would demand that people buy something that they may or may not want,” said Hatch. “And, you know, if that’s the case, then we didn’t need a ‘Cash for Clunkers,’ all we had to do is have the federal government say you all got to buy new cars, no matter how tough it is on you. You know, they could require you to buy anything. And that isn’t America. That’s not freedom. That’s not constitutionally sound.” [CNS News – Sen. Ben Nelson: ‘I’m Not Going to Be Able to Answer That Question’ of Where Constitution Authorizes Congress to Force Americans to Buy Health Insurance]
So, that leaves us in a pickle either way—seems best if the bill doesn’t pass at all!
The sad part is, it’s no longer shocking. First it was racy photos, and now a “sex tape” that has appeared showing former Miss California, Carrie Prejean, in an erotic display that she says was for a boyfriend at the time, she was alone, and she is a teenager in the video.
The tape surfaced and Miss Prejean was in court against Miss USA for taking away her title—she had previously held the title of Miss California until racy pictures and failure to perform her duties as laid out in her contract had that title taken from her. During the trial, the existence of the tape caused both sides to settle.
Sexting and Erotic Videos
Technology has paved the way to make things that were once private public. Ever since there were cameras, people have been taking photos with the expressed purpose of eliciting a sexual response. Some do it for profit, others to attract/keep a boyfriend, and others for the power that it seems to convey.
Cell phones with cameras and the proliferation of photo sharing web sites have made it worse. Just about anyone with a camera and an Internet can grow a massive audience, and they can also attract money—for more and more exposure.
The Personal Video
However, more people are getting ensnared because they fail to take into account that something that’s recorded may one day find the light of day, regardless of whether they even remember doing it.
Photos that are taken by a person in some stage of undress and sent to another may find their way to all the person’s friends. And the more erotic the pose or the film, the more there is a chance that can come back to haunt them.
Photos taken and posted on sites like Facebook, Twitter, and other social networking sites can be seen by “friends” that you may not have wanted to share with.
Before You Use that Camera…
I would strongly caution anyone to think twice before taking that picture that you think will be “just for the two of us.” Think about what would happen if other parties were to find that photo. How would it effect your family/children.
Then think about whether or not it’s necessary. Odds are that it is not.
Advertisement: Weekend Kindness Building Relationships, one person at a time.
A movie director/entrepreneur named Ray Griggs had a great idea. He would create an iPhone application that would show the information of every member of the current Congress/Senate in an easy to use and highly entertaining manner.
He asked an artist to come up with bobble-heads for each member, which would shake when you shake the phone and that you could tap, as something cute, and it would have the complete information there.
Turns out Apple didn’t think it was so funny.
Apple In Complete Control
The thing is that Apple has a monopoly on its device. Applications can only be purchased from the Apple store, and that means that any application going through that store is seen as coming with the approval of Apple. What this means is that if Apple deems an application as “objectionable, for example, materials that may be considered obscene, pornographic of defamatory” then it really doesn’t matter what we think.
And to some degree I totally agree. It’s their company, their product, and if they don’t want to put an application on their closed walled garden, that’s up to them.
Just don’t expect people to stay customers if someone comes along with a more open and better solution.
Our System
And that is the beauty of our system—choice. If we don’t like what person “A” offers, we can find person “B”. If we think that we would like to live in a different place, buy a different product so be it.
It’s when there are monopolies that problems come into play. When choice is limited, there’s stagnant innovation, there’s high prices, and a genuine lack of choice.
Some examples:
- It wasn’t until Mozilla’s Firefox came on the scene 5 years ago that Microsoft finally decided to update their web browser. Before then, no innovation.
- Verizon FIOS has begun to offer high speed and phone service in direct competition to Time Warner Cable (in my area, anyway), and that has seen some price wars.
Federal Government
The Federal Government is the greatest monopoly of all, and it only seems to want to get larger. The latest is health care. Either the people behind the latest reforms are clueless, or this is a concerted effort to take over the insurance industry.
And yet the Federal Government pays lip-service to choice because they know that people will not choose to get on a highly brittle plan all on their own.
No monopoly is good, unless you’re the one that has all the properties. There are anti-monopoly laws for a reason. When will we apply them to the Federal Government?
