Making promises is easy for Presidents.  Delivering on them is another matter.  Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, for example, pledged to end poverty by declaring war on it.  The selling point of the “War on Poverty” was that massive up-front investments would end dependency and poverty.  Kennedy said, “We must find ways of returning far more dependent people to independence.”  Johnson wanted to “break the cycle of poverty” and “make taxpayers out of tax-eaters.”  A New York Times editorial of the day said, “The initial cost will actually be greater than the mere continuation of handouts.  The dividends will come in the restoration of individual dignity and in the long-run reduction of the need for government help.”  Since the passage of Johnson’s Great Society programs, we’ve spent $5.1 trillion in the war on poverty.  That’s right, five trillion dollars.  Many of the programs which were supposed to be temporary are now permanent and ever-growing fixtures in the Federal budget.  And poverty rates have not changed at all.

Now, on to the promises that President Obama and Congressional Democrats made to get sweeping health care reform passed.  First, Obama said we could keep our health insurance: “If you like your plan, you can keep it.”  In a recent Friday night document dump, an internal administration paper revealed that  87 million Americans will lose their current plans.  The number could be as high as 117 million.  The document is a collaboration of Health and Human Services (HHS,) Internal Revenue and the Department of Labor.  How is this possible?  HHS has the authority to revoke the “grandfathered” status of existing health plans, if the employer makes a change in the plan.  According to regulations already in place, 51% of existing employer-based plans will lose “grandfathered” status by 2013.

Obama and the Democrats also promised that health care “reform” would reduce the deficit.  To sell the program to us, they had to get the total cost under one trillion dollars.  The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) is the agency that gives the final word on program costs, although their estimate is only as accurate as the numbers given to them.  The original CBO estimate was a $940 billion cost from 2010 to 2019, reducing the budget deficit by $138 billion.  Sounds good, right?  But it’s not true.  Here’s how they made it look like less than a trillion: collect taxes up front starting in 2011, build up a surplus of these taxes, and don’t begin paying benefits until 2014.  Presto, you have “deficit reduction.”  But wait – there’s more.  They counted Medicare cuts twice, omitted payment rate increases (known as the “doc fix,”) and indexed benefits to the general inflation rates rather than medical inflation.  The real estimate of what the health care bill will cost:  as much as $2.5 trillion.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said, “We have to pass the bill to find out what is in it.”  We are finding out every day, and it isn’t what was promised.  As many as 33 states are mounting legal or legislative challenges to the bill.  With polls showing that many Americans want the bill repealed, Rep. Louise Slaughter, Democrat of New York, said “It’s just like trying to explain the Encyclopedia Britannica…” translation:  the public is too dumb to understand the bill.  We do understand it, and we understand that we have been lied to.

Michael A. Morrongiello

Congress has the Constitutional authority to levy taxes, fund all of the Federal government and declare war.  Because Congress is so powerful, the Founders wanted it to be responsive to the people.  That’s why each Congressman stands for election every two years.  President Obama’s ambitious agenda to transform America makes representation even more critical.

On March 8th Rep. Eric Massa resigned 14 months into his first term, his personal issues having exceeded his ability to control them.  We wish Mr. Massa and his family well and thank him for his service.  But now it’s time to hold a special election and give the people of the 29th Congressional district the representation they deserve.

To hold a special election, Governor Patterson must declare a vacancy and then issue a proclamation; the election follows in thirty to forty days.  First, Patterson said he would “call it as soon as possible.”  Then Patterson caught a case of the slows, his office repeatedly issuing statements that “no final decision has been made yet.”  The slows must be contagious.  Democrat county chairmen were still vetting candidates when Congress passed a $2 trillion health-care overhaul.  We in the 29th district were unrepresented during this vote. 

The county chairmen, including  Shawn Hogan and Cindy Emmer, issued this statement:  “It’s clear that a special election would prove to be very expensive, particularly considering so many counties in the 29th district are struggling financially.  Similarly, we cannot disenfranchise military voters who are currently serving overseas; we must take appropriate steps to make sure their votes are counted.  Gov. Patterson is rightfully taking these concerns into consideration and we believe he will make a decision that reflects what’s best for Southern Tier/Finger Lakes New York.”

In New York’s 20th district, when Kirsten Gillibrand resigned to replace Hillary Clinton in the U.S. Senate, the special election was held in 64 days.  When John McHugh resigned his seat in New York’s 23rd district, the special election was held in 43 days.  As of  May 1st, it is 54 days since Massa resigned.  If a special is called, it will be another 30 to 40 days until the election.  What are we waiting for?  If no special election is held, we’ll break the record for non-representation in New York’s 29th of 184 days, set in 1827.

We should all contact Gov. Patterson and demand that he call a special election.  Democrat county chairmen and elected Democrats are our friends and neighbors; ask them to support the 654,360 people of the 29th in their desire to be represented in Congress.

Michael A. Morrongiello

Obama and the Democrats are poised to cram their big-government version of health-care reform down the throats of the American people. In poll after poll, a clear majority oppose Obamacare.  This doesn’t matter to Obama and the Democrats; you see, they know better.  They are on the verge of a life long Democrat dream; to take over all of health-care. The Democrats will use any means necessary, from bribery to legislative trickery, to achieve their goal. In spite of huge majorities in the House and Senate, they can’t quite manage to push it through. This is because of the principled and common sense opposition of ordinary Americans.  The final push is rumored to be this weekend.  Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Obama think that the pressure of a vote will push undecided Democrats to vote yes.  House Democrats must feel more pressure from us.  To stop Obamacare we must call house members, and keep calling them.  Here are the names and numbers of local representatives.

Michael Arcuri   1-315-793-8146

Dan Maffei            1- 315-423-5657

Bill Owens             1-315-782-3150

Chris Carney        1-570-585-9988

Paul Kanjersky     1-570-825-2200

To access the names and numbers of representatives across America please go to the NRCC Code Red website http://www.nrcc.org/CodeRed/targets/

We’ve all done great work so far.  Let’s keep up the pressure and defeat this grotesque monstrosity that is Obamacare.

Michael A. Morrongiello

The health-care debate is over.  Obama and the Democrats lost.  The American people said “no” to Obamacare from the Tea Parties to town hall meetings.  The people said “no” by electing Republican governors in Virginia and heavily Democrat New Jersey.  The people said “hell, no” by electing a Republican, Scott Brown, to fill the seat of the champion of socialized medicine, Teddy Kennedy.  In poll after poll, a majority of Americans oppose the House and Senate health-care bills.  In spite of this, Democrats are planning to ram Obamacare through the Senate using a procedure called Budget Reconciliation.

The Declaration of Independence states: “…to secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriving their powers from the just consent of the governed.”  These rights are the natural rights we’re born with.  We all start with the same rights, so none of us is superior, not senator, congressman or president.  We the people temporarily surrender power to our leaders to run the government, but the people are sovereign and the ultimate rulers of our country.  Therefore, our elected leaders must have our just consent, or permission, to pass laws affecting all of us.  They must follow the rules of governance, just as we must follow rules in our everyday lives.  It’s critical to the survival of our republic.  The Democrats are plotting to break the rules in the Senate, and they will use reconciliation to do it.

The Senate, unlike the House, requires 60 votes, known as a super majority, to pass legislation.  Reconciliation was designed for budgetary items.  A reconciliation bill needs only 51 votes to pass, a simple majority.  Using reconciliation to pass major legislation is a reckless power-grab.  Reconciliation wasn’t intended for legislation affecting 300 million Americans and fully one-sixth of our economy.  The Founders designed the Senate as a check to the more passion-prone House, saying “We pour legislation into the Senatorial saucer to cool it.”  This was designed to create deliberation and thoughtfulness.  In the words of Benjamin Franklin,”Passion governs, and she never governs wisely.” 

If the Democrat health-care bills were popular, they would have passed easily.  The plain fact is they are unpopular.  If the Democrats ram this through, they disregard the will of the people.

Lincoln said it best:  “If you want to test a man’s character, give him power.”  If the Democrats use reconciliation, their character will be on display for all to see and they will have earned the just contempt of the governed.

Jane Sturm asked President Obama if her then 100-year-old mother would have received a pacemaker under Obamacare. Jane’s mom is still going strong at 105. Jane asked the President, “Is there consideration given for a certain spirit?” The President’s chilling response (available on YouTube) was, “I don’t think we can make judgments based on people’s spirit…maybe you’re better off not having the surgery, but taking the pain killer.” Obama gave Jane’s mom less respect than the family dog. If this is what we can expect from health care reform, maybe we’d better attend Town Hall Meetings and ask questions. Here are some questions to ask your legislators:

1. Medicare is 38 trillion dollars in debt, and fraud is rampant. Amtrak is in constant need of subsidies. Health care on Indian reservations is abysmal. Given this woeful history, how can you justify government involvement in the health care of every American?

2. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the cost of this bill ranges from 1
to 1.6 trillion dollars. Won’t the tax increases needed to fund this program damage the already ailing economy? If taxes aren’t raised and money must be printed, won’t this add to already existing inflation pressures?

3. I understand that the President, Congress, and all other Federal employees are exempted from health care reform. If this is such a great plan, why don’t you and your family sign up?

4. President Obama promises that “if you like your health plan, you can keep it.” Yet on page 16 and 17 in the House bill, if anything changes in your copayment or deductible (which happens every year,) you must move into an “approved” plan or the government option. In other words, you CAN’T keep it. How will this help private insurance to compete?

5. The House health care reform bill (HR3200) cuts Medicare by 500 billion dollars to pay for health care reform. The cost of insuring the uninsured is far less than that. Plus, the uninsured are less than 16% of the population. Why change the whole system for 16%? Why not give the uninsured vouchers to buy health insurance? Will cuts in Medicare result in denied care for our seniors?

6. David Blumenthal, Obama’s National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, said doctors will have to take advantage of “embedded clinical decison support.” This is fancy language for telling your doctor how to treat you. Do you support having the government in the examining room with patients, “guiding” treatment?

7. Blumenthal also said (referring to Hillary Clinton’s failed effort at reform) that speed is essential to passing health care reform. Do you agree with that?

8. Blumenthal said it was “debatable” that the timely care Americans get is worth the cost. Do you agree with Dr. Blumenthal? Do you think it is advisable for Americans to wait for care? Is this enough for you to call on President Obama to fire Dr. Blumenthal?

9. The Hippocratic Oath is the pledge doctors take to do all in their power to help patients. Obama appointee Ezekiel Emanuel want to change that ancient and sacred creed to “move toward more socially sustainable, cost-effective care.” Wouldn’t this be a gross interference in the doctor-patient relationship? Will you call for President Obama to fire Ezekiel Emanuel?

10. As a followup, Dr. Emanual complained that “hospital rooms in the United States offer more privacy, comfort and auxiliary services than do hospital rooms in most other countries.” Do you agree that this is a problem? Do you want sick Americans to have less comfortable hospital rooms?

Democrats have long dreamed of government-run health care. They have all the votes they need. The only thing standing between them and achieving total control over our lives is public opinion. Get involved. Read, talk to your friends and neighbors, write and e-mail your legislators to stop passage of the government option.

“Ten more questions” to follow soon.

My fellow capitalists. I am seeking your opinion about Time Warner’s plan to re-organize the business model for the delivery and sale of high speed Internet offered as roadrunner. I am also seeking your input on Eric Massa’s response.

I believe it is a core principle of capitalism that a business has the right to evaluate and modify their business model how they see fit. Time Warner has identified a need to change based on their understanding of the their industry. I’m sure some people will end up paying more and others less. I think moving to a tiered consumption based system makes sense.

As for Massa there are few if any examples that I recall of a time government involvement has been a positive influence when regulating an industries pricing. This quote is a great example of how government is disconnected from industry “They have yet to explain how increased Internet usage increases their costs.” Mr. Massa also said “Time Warner has announced an ill-conceived plan” what gives him the expertise to evaluate their plan? Why do they need to explain how increased usage increases costs? Isn’t that the concern of the share holders and customers more than the government. Besides, it is typically the case that the more you consume the more it will cost with almost anything. I guess we should add high speed Internet to the bill of rights just under health care…

It is not acceptable for government to interfere with industry at this level. I believe these are the types of things that the majority of people will read and agree that Massa is doing the right thing. Unfortunately, government meddling like this is what leads to economic and industry issues long term. If capitalism is left alone, the natural order of free markets will decide what is acceptable.

http://www.the-leader.com/news/x1098997265/Massa-to-fight-Net-data-caps