Lots of stuff to discuss. Hope you all have the patience and time to digest it all.
Interesting perspective on Proposed Senate Bill 97 in your forward. My analysis is it is typical “fear mongering”. See discussion below.
Enclosed for your convenience is a copy of House Fiscal Legislative Analysis pertaining to Senate Bill 97. Permit me to comment on the Bill and ancillary issues pertaining to Public Private Partnerships (PPP’s) and infrastructure investment.
Senate Bill 97
The Bill authorizes the State and its various agencies to participate in Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) as a means to acquire private investment and management participation in state infrastructure projects. The objective of PPP’s is to facilitate private investment in infrastructure upgrades and repairs as a substitute for using taxation and state financed bonds as the sole remedy to pay for infrastructure needs. For example: The legislature raised the state taxes on fuels to pay for highway maintenance, construction and repairs, or alternatively, it could issue bonds secured by the State to be repaid with revenue either from the project (AKA TOLLS or USER FEES,) or increase taxes on the proletariat! Gas taxes or sales taxes.
As the Analysis confirms many states (other than Michigan) have now passed legislation authorizing their respective state agencies to enter into PPP’s as a basis to fund various transportation and other infrastructure needs (water and sewage). In the past I have referenced these projects as an alternative means to fund transportation and infrastructure needs in various letters to the media and others with copies to our relevant representatives.These copies are numbered and itemized below to refresh your memories. Several of the letters contain similar allegations and claims. My apologies for any redundancy. It is apparent the letters were of little interest to the recipients. So be it! It hasn’t been the first time. But, I digress. Mea Culpa!
READ MORE ►
You Betcha! (5)Nuh Uh.(0)
The False Political Narrative About the Sale of Health Insurance Across State Lines
FYI TO MICHIGANIANS:An abbreviated version of this was submitted to the Leelanau Enterprise for publication. Watch for it and share!
Congress and state politicians have proselytized a false narrative about the inability to sell health insurance across state lines. The simple solution is repeal the Federal McCarran Ferguson Law. Why?
Health insurance providers in each state are protected from interstate competition by the McCarran Ferguson Act of 1945. This law grants the states the sole right to regulate health insurance within their borders. It insulates health insurers from the legal effects of the Interstate Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. Consequently, McCarran Ferguson permits insurance companies to establish INTRASTATE insurance oligopolies or monopolies “sub silentio” by also exempting them from the Sherman and Clayton antitrust and anti-monopoly laws.
Insurance companies lobby state insurance commissioners, legislators and governors to protect their INTRASTATE oligopolies or monopolies, and when desirable for political or other economic reasons, mandate with the help of the state politicians the purchase of unnecessary insurance such as pregnancy coverage for women who are beyond child bearing age. This allows insurance companies to increase premiums for everybody even though the insured event is low risk for many within the insured pool.
Consider these insurance anomalies. About one-fourth of states require heath insurance to cover acupuncture and marriage counseling. Seven states require coverage for hair pieces and nine for hearing aids.
READ MORE ►
You Betcha! (11)Nuh Uh.(0)
Here’s How States That Expanded It Are Doing.
Jack Bergman needs to vote NO on the Ryan Plan for Obamacare reform. The hell with Snyder and the Rhinos in Lansing! DRAIN THE SWAMP! See Michigan results in the PDF attachment. —> ObamaCare-Expansion-is-Shattering-Projections
Why are we funding Medicaid for ABLE BODIED ADULTS?
From the Article at Daily Signal:
“But health policy experts say the Medicaid expansion has been detrimental to the budgets of states that embraced it and the resources available to populations the Medicaid program initially was designed to help.
“We see this as a moral issue, because what states have done is create this new category within the Medicaid program, which is a program that was originally intended to serve [the] aged, the blind, the disabled, low-income families, pregnant women—[those] we think about as the truly needy and truly vulnerable,” Nic Horton, a senior research fellow at the Foundation for Government Accountability, told The Daily Signal.
“Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion changed that in states that accepted it,” Horton said.
In a November report, the Foundation for Government Accountability examined enrollment projections for states that expanded Medicaid.
Twenty-four states projected that 5.5 million newly eligible Americans would sign up. In reality, the number of able-bodied adults who enrolled in Medicaid was more than double that, nearing 11.5 million, according to the most recent data available.
The Deplorable One!
You Betcha! (12)Nuh Uh.(0)
The illusionary right to privacy vs the rights of the unborn - Revisiting Roe v. Wade
This [past] week we have seen demonstrations and heard commentary pertaining to, and from advocates supporting, either a Pro Life or Pro Choice policy agenda. The majority of both have been engaged in strong and emotional, and often non-relevant rhetoric.
There has been little if any discussion on the laws pertaining to abortion as it has evolved (Roe v. Wade and its progeny), and whether the law as determined in 1972, that was based on the state of science and medical information pertaining to embryology as it existed then, would be sustained today.
There is perceptual fear among those that support Pro Choice that if Roe v Wade were to be re-examined based on the medical and scientific knowledge pertaining to embryology known today, that the medical, scientific and legal support for the findings in Roe would either be superseded or limited.
An intelligent discussion pertaining to the basis for either a Pro Choice or Pro Life policy requires an understanding of the Supreme Court’s rationale that established a limited right to an abortion as set forth in Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) and subsequent and related decisions.
READ MORE ►
You Betcha! (7)Nuh Uh.(0)
Cronyism alive and well in Lansing with renewable energy mandate 'lighting' it up.
The Michigan Chamber of Commerce and the two energy oligopolists in Michigan, through their lobbyists are attempting to railroad through a lame duck Michigan legislature Senate Bill 437. The bill would line the pockets of the energy oligopolists with subsidies and alleged necessary rate increases. The “climate change” advocates are being bribed to support the legislation because the legislation includes the production of more renewable energy in Michigan via windmills, etc. pursuant to Granholm’s 2008 Renewable Energy Mandate.
The following quote is from the linked article that substantiates the claim that in view of the 2016 Presidential Election results the legislature should stand fast and not support this wind fall profit package to the energy oligopolists and climate change advocates.
QUOTE: “The election of Donald Trump as the next president of the United States and the GOP maintaining control of the U.S. House and Senate means the key reason for pushing forward with Senate Bill 437, a bill that will revise utility regulations in Michigan, has effectively gone away.”
READ MORE ►
You Betcha! (8)Nuh Uh.(0)
While the women in the media and other “never Trumpers” fret over Donald Trump’s alleged personal versions of the Vagina Monologues, they ignore how Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are destroying this country with consistently bad decisions and policy pertaining to the safety and security of this nation.
They and their minions of deceit, with a compliant Congress and incompetent Justice Department, cover up their failures and border line acts of treason. See link below (the fold) to the Benghazi failure and coverup.
Don’t you think it is time to use rational thought, reason and facts to determine the future of American sovereignty and exceptionalism? Regrettably, too many voters and the media are focused and rely on “genitalia” identification, alleged sexual improprieties and political party loyalty to do their thinking.
READ MORE ►
You Betcha! (6)Nuh Uh.(1)
Clinton, Trump and Wallace Fumbled the Abortion Question/ Supreme Court Discussion
It appears both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump and the media (Chris Wallace) know very little if anything about the legal parameters pertaining to the alleged “constitutional right” to an abortion.
This conclusion is based on the discussion pertaining to the candidates’ position on abortion set forth in last night’s debate. The same is true for the main stream media and their “puppet” hosts, authors and pundits who defend Planned Parenthood. In short they don’t know enough to know what they don’t know.
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), ruled that an illusionary right to privacy existed under the “penumbra” of the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment. A decision that has been criticized by many constitutional scholars on both sides of the aisle. This granted a limited right to a woman to have an abortion. Judge Blackmun held there is a broad right of privacy, although not explicitly set forth in the Constitution, that lurks in the “penumbras and shadows” of the Bill of Rights. This right of privacy allegedly grants women a right to have an abortion. Really? Contrary to popular belief, the Bill of Rights is not a positive grant of rights to the citizens, but a negative Bill of Limitations on what the Federal Government may not do, namely interfere with the rights retained by the states under the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution.
READ MORE ►
You Betcha! (9)Nuh Uh.(1)
Subject: Look At The Numbers Michiganians
A vote for Rubio or Kasich in Michigan is a vote for a RINO brokered convention. Look at the numbers.
Rubio will not win Florida! Why? Northern Florida…aka the “red neck riviera”, will probably go for Trump. Southern Florida, which is predominantly Cuban Americans, will go for Cruz. Why? Rubio’s support for amnesty and immigration reform allowing more Mexicans and Puerto Ricans and other non Cuban “Hispanics” into the U.S. will be his downfall.
Cubans trace their heritage back to mother Spain as do the Argentines and Chileans. They are the true Hispanics. Lyndon Johnson bastardized and generalized the term Hispanic to mean all persons living in Latin America. There is significant bias and prejudice in Southern Florida between Cuban Americans and Mexicans, Puerto Ricans and other Latin American cultures that do not derive their heritage and roots from mother Spain. They are predominantly perceived by Cubans as indigenous Indians.
READ MORE ►
You Betcha! (19)Nuh Uh.(2)