Tag: Michigan (page 5)

We have apparently inoculated ourselves.  In the complaint Halbig v. Sebelius it is shown that an application of the law as-it-is-written means Michigan taxpayers are NOT eligible for subsidies, and NOT subject to the tax (penalties) assessment for failure to obtain insurance. Netright daily reports:

"Under the specific language of the law, tax subsidies (and tax penalties) on individuals and employers only apply in states that created these exchanges. It's right there in black-and-white -- as the availability of subsidies was expressly confined to qualified plans enrolled "through an Exchange established by the State."

Obamacare makes no mention of these subsidies being provided in federal exchanges.

The plaintiff argument on this point is clearly stated starting at about page 10 of the document.

A big THANK YOU to those who stood firm in their resolve against the state run exchange will be repeated as this case moves further along and the act is found even more unworkable as the miserable failure spawned by overreaching NEO-Democrat (read fascist/socialist) operatives in power.  It was theirs.  Let it remain owned by those who have no understanding of the constitution.

Recall that NOT a single (not even the squishy ones) Republican voted for this garbage.

Too much money to be thrown away apparently, so procedural changes will allow early law enactment, and potentially "save" the state $100 million on the Medicaid expansion legislators approved earlier this fall. A couple weeks shaved off the end of this session rolls the start date for the new medical WELFARE recipients to line up at the trough.

"The Michigan Senate plans to adjourn several weeks earlier than usual, which would allow the newly expanded Medicaid population to begin enrolling by mid-March, rather than early April.

While that's not a lot of time, it does add up, because Gov. Rick Snyder's administration has said the delay is costing the state about $7 million a day. Once the expansion takes effect, the federal government begins picking up the tab for other services the state is now paying for, and the state previously had budgeted for the expansion to begin Jan. 1."

The new Mayor and council however have a nearly impossible mission of making Detroit acceptable and inviting enough to attract new business and workers.  Aside from the problem of the obvious social decay allowed for decades, there is a problem of theft by government.  As the Mackinac Center rightly points out:

".. Michigan has been bailing out Detroit for years and it's only delayed the problems. In fact, Detroit gets favors from the state of Michigan that no other city receives, and the state has made these rules to try to get the city more revenue to deal with its problems.

Detroit is the only city in Michigan that can assess a utility tax. It is added on top of monthly bills charged to residents and businesses. The tax expired in 1988 but was resurrected in 1990.  .."

Perhaps they should pay attention:

The financing by shadow entities wouldn't matter a whit if the negative effect on our personal liberties by government action wasn't a risk. Isn't that the truly scary thing, that someone could literally buy an effect on your freedom, promote higher taxes for corporate, or individual welfare, advocate laws stealing property rights, or elect someone to see that you pay for another person's healthcare and personal 'choices?' (abortion, body mutilation, tatoos, sexual deviancy, etc.)

If we could stop such things as MEDC or other subsidy programming, complete streets, pure Michigan taxpayer subsidized cronyism, unchecked welfare, forced medical issues, controls on private business, and apply free market principles along with a consumption based (fair tax) revenue system, it wouldn't be so important to have great amounts of money spent to drive opinion. The need for some 'free speech' anonymity would be reduced or eliminated,

.. and the argument made moot.

I want to know who is coming for our liberty, and would like to celebrate those who would keep us free.  I want to know who is attempting to cage us in and applaud those tearing down the walls. It would be nice to have a motivational perspective on why any issue is important enough to spend massive amounts of money to promote.

In the end, SB661 will pass.  The house will possibly restore the struck out lines that allow funding from political party sources in contested primaries as a compromise. What I would like to see will not happen. Government is probably recognized appropriately as having too much power by enough legislators to stop it its passage, but it won't happen.  Some of those who agree with my view on transparency will still vote for it because they will be convinced that power of government can be turned on those (perhaps appropriately) who would challenge its subjective benevolence all too easily.

Schauer proposes hiking state minimum wage to $9.25 an hour

In the mean time, Rick Snyder's MEDC and Gary Peters are tirelessly working for Corporate Welfare schemes.

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a  new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any  nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great  battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a  final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might  live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not  hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the  unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It  is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us --  that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for  which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God,shall  have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people,  for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Abraham Lincoln - November 19, 1863

A recent in-box treat from the "Michigan Freedom Fund" declares a victory in the name of free speech.  The release says:

"LANSING, November 14, 2013 - Michigan Freedom Fund President Greg McNeilly today released the following statement after Senate Bill 661 passed 20-18 in the Senate:

...

"Government has no right to target and punish the free speech of individuals, whether or not it is unpopular or delivered through an unpopular medium.  Today, the Senate did the right thing by standing up for our rights and putting the Constitution first." "

Ruth Johnson apparently triggered a legislative action with a recent press release and intent on expanding reporting by shadow groups.

" LANSING, Mich. - Saying the public has a right to know who is behind some of the most negative advertising in political campaigning, Secretary of State Ruth Johnson today proposed a sweeping new disclosure rule.

"In a country where free speech is protected, these ads are part of the political landscape and we can't stop them - but when they try to influence an election, we can make sure the public knows who is paying for them," said Johnson, a long-time fighter for transparency in elections.

Specifically, Johnson's proposal targets political ads that try to persuade voters about the worthiness or unworthiness of a candidate or proposal without actually using the words "vote for" or "elect." They often encourage voters to contact a specific candidate, as in "call candidate Smith and tell her she shouldn't ignore senior citizens" or "go online to let candidate Jones know you care how he is wasting tax dollars."

Because of a loophole in Michigan law, those electioneering ads - which are carefully crafted to meet the letter of the law, but not the spirit of the law - do not currently require any campaign finance reporting. "

Considering the ridiculous assertion by Wayne Schmidt in 2012 that he was a superior gun rights advocate with his deceptive bright orange mailer which stated: "Vote on August 7 to protect your gun rights"; with no candidate carrying anti gun views in competition at that time.  The implication that voting for the challenger (myself) would imperil such rights was frankly, "Nutty"

Schmidt's progressive attitude with regard to big government, complete streets, expensive transportation schemes, expansion of welfare, and pandering to whomever is in power demonstrates a left of center (read: Democrat) socio-type,  and should hardly leave anyone comfortable with him protecting such rights anyhow.  And as for the gun positions, in 2012, he wasn't even rated by Michigan Coalition For Responsible Gun Owners like most other candidates.