Health Care double talk by David Axelrod

Needless to say, the White House’s top political adviser, David Axelrod’s doubletalk on healthcare is as big as his double chin. On yesterdays Meet the Press David stated that “this is the week where we will have this very important vote”. He further suggested that Democrats will “persuade” enough lawmakers to vote “yes”. Interesting to note is the manner in which the “persuasion” occurs. Lets begin with the administration retreating from its demands to strip the bill of pork deals. The White House originally demanded that all special deals be dropped from the bill. Their new position is that in lieu of dropping the special deals for any one state, that we now allow it, but include all of the rest of the states. Thus, the sweetheart deal for Nebraska, known as the “Cornhusker Kickback”, and costing the American taxpayer $100 million over the next 10 years can now be expanded to the rest of the 49 states. Using Nebraska, which by the way has a smaller population than Phoenix, AZ, as an example we can estimated that the projected 10 year cost for the 50 states to be a little over $17 billion. Maybe now you can understand why the $10 billion is so easy to say when Obama talks about the budget. You must keep in mind though that this is only one deal. We have separate “special deals” for New York, Montana, Connecticut, Florida and Louisiana just for starters. I am just wondering how our very own “blue dog” representative, Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, is digesting all of this? So far she says that she is very optimistic that the issue will be resolved in this next week. Does that mean she is: 1.) waiting for Nancy Pelosi to give her the go ahead to vote against it as there appears to be enough votes without hers, 2.) preparing her own list of special deals, 3.) waiting for the newest re-election polls, or 4.) getting the message that we don’t want this “cram it down their throat” legislation.

Let’s get back to the persuasion issue. According to Wikipedia, persuasion is considered to be a form of social influence. It is the process of guiding oneself toward the adoption of an idea, attitude, or action by rational and symbolic (though not always logical) means. While on the other hand there is bribery and Wikipedia defines bribery as, a form of pecuniary corruption, and an act implying money or gift given that alters the behavior of the recipient. According to Black’s Law Dictionary, bribery is the offering, giving, receiving or soliciting of any item of value to influence the actions of an official or other person in charge of a public or legal duty and is considered a crime.

The White House defines special deals as nothing more than persuasion, while the Congress defines them as reaching across the aisle in bipartisanship.

Common sense would lead us to decide that persuasion, as expressed by David Axelrod, the White House and Congress is really bribery. Or am I wrong. You be the judge.

Bipartisan politics is alive and well, or so it seems.

Everywhere we turn we hear that our two party system has gone to hell. And yes, on one or two issues that could be the case, but across the board it appears to be live and kicking, or does it? Setting the healthcare issue aside for a moment let’s look at what else is happening. Most recently we find that there is a bipartisan bill on Immigration on President Obama’s desk; the ball’s in the administration’s court.

Another battle looms ahead on Cap-And-Trade yet I see that there is a bipartisan bill in the Senate. The ball’s in that court.

The House and Senate both have pushed a bipartisan bill forward to preserve the space program. Fundamentally it is a “job” protection bill, but it is bipartisan.

Five Republican senators have backed the Democrats jobs bill. Not a lot, but signals some give; more bipartisan.

Republicans and Democrats, in a firm show of bipartisanship, call President Obama’s budget outrageous because it cuts subsidies to wealthy farmers. Together at last.

But, lo and behold, things were getting carried away, so what happens?

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid gets involved and rejects the jobs bill, although it is endorsed by the White House.

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd, decides to shuck the work accomplished with Republican Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee, and go it alone. Thinking is that if the Dems are going to cram healthcare through with “reconciliation” he might as well get this done the same way. Remember now, this is the same Chris Dodd that, along with Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, that supported the financial “Ménage à trois” that precipitated the 2008 collapse.

Obama proposes to cut the moon exploration program. But, partisan lawmakers were back at it yesterday.

And to cap it all off, we see that Nancy Pelosi has decided that “A bill can be bipartisan without partisan votes”.

Interesting “bits and pieces” from the Arizona Daily Star’s Friday edition

Healthcare legislation is putting the kibosh on Immigration reform. Seems that the Democrats push for healthcare at-all-costs; or maybe that should be “at any costs”, is creating a huge rift between them and Republicans that will preclude any type of meaningful governing. Apparently multitasking is not in the repertoire of our Senators and working on more than one problem at a time is out of the question. And by the way, what ever happened to creation of jobs for the unemployed. As an aside, maybe we need a tax on all jobs performed by offshore employees that provide onshore company profits?  Latest data shows that Homeland Security has deported 388,000 illegal immigrants through September 2009, up from 369,000 the previous year. This represents less than 3% of the projected 15 million here. Immigrant advocates are complaining that this deportation is severing families and must be addressed as quickly as possible. Absent any meaningful legislation the Latino voters might just stay home during this November’s midterm elections. All to which President Obama says he is committed to immigration overhaul, and agreed to have the advocates meet with Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano to discuss deportation policies. I noted in Tuesdays edition that they arrested a California man heading up a ring of illegal test-takers for predominantly Middle Eastern nationals. Hopefully Janet and the Pres will get a heads up on this.

The UA will be raising tuitions and fees somewhere between 10-20% next year in an effort to make up for the $100 million reduction in the state budget. UA President Robert Shelton had projected a need for a 31% increase. The article goes on to say that UA has reduced expenses by $40 million and will increase tuition and fees for $45 million more. Just a couple of observations: a.) Where and how did he come up with 31 percent; b.) $40 million plus $45 million don’t equal $100 million, c.) Where do they get the shortfall?, and d.) What happens if the sales tax increase fails? Looks like there are others out there asking the same questions. As recently as this minute the Regents have directed the universities to cut salaries.

The AZ legislature is moving a budget proposal forward that relies on voter approval of a sales tax increase and voter repeal of a 2006 mandate to fund programs for early childhood development. The legislation also wants to redirect the cigarette tax to fund programs other than that approved by voters. You can read all of the pros and cons by various legislators but it can all be wrapped up in the statement by Rep. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills who says, "We stand in a situation where, over the last decade, we grew government at a particularly fast pace because the money was there”. I guess we have to have faith that a recovery within a year or two is probable. Without that we are at the mercy of those who were born before “early childhood development” was available.

Just for the record, the state Senate has proposed a 5% cut in pay for state workers, but not all workers. The Senate rejected, 15-14, a proposal by Sen. Ken Cheuvront, D-Phoenix, to extend the across-the-board pay cut being mandated next year for most state workers to those who enact the budget. How do you like those apples?

Remember all of those taxes voted for by the electorate, cigarettes and alcohol? Well, guess what? They want more in spite of the fact that the governments mandate on warning users of the health problems associated with cigarettes and alcohol, along with tighter control on sales to minors, is counter productive to these taxes. But you have to love their reasoning. Americans love their vices, be it cigarettes, drinking or gambling and the government knows a good thing when it sees it. However, at some point the well runs dry. So, let’s get it while the getting is good. Keep in mind though that these taxes are the basis for starting new government funded programs and when the money dries up they go somewhere else to get it; they don’t close down the program. Also keep in mind, the major users of these products are those that can least afford them. According to statistics provided by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, Arizona is among the lowest income earners within the country.

Open letter to Rep. Gabrielle Giffords on healthcare.

How can you continue to support "any healthcare, at any cost" just for the sake of passing something. Doesn't our opinion count? Do you honestly believe that you people back there are the only ones that know what this bill contains? We have read this bill.

May I suggest that for starters you strip this bill of every "deal"; and you know exactly what I am referring to, and use that as the new starting point. No you say, we have come too far and are too close to turn back now. Or possibly you are in the corner of those who say turning back now will signal to the other side that we have lost. Maybe so, but the only side that matters is the American people, not the other side of the aisle. Put forth a proposal that is void of favoritism and I can almost guarantee that it will prevail. Isn't it better to have something that the majority of the people support?

You continue to champion the cause that there are 30 million people out there that need healthcare and I agree. But certainly not at the expense of the other 275 million, and certainly not at the expense of tearing our country apart. We are not against healthcare, but, we are against this "bill" and all of the debt it creates. I think that what rankles us the most is all of the sweetheart deals attached to it. What happened to the transparency that all of you championed as the new beginning?

Or maybe you just don't get the message. You buy into the "if we don't do it now, it will never get done" line from the administration. You cannot allow yourself to join the "strike now while the iron is hot" syndrome that supports the cram down philosophy created with majorities in both the Senate and the House. Working from the "bully's pulpit" will lead us nowhere.

And, another thing. Don't allow yourself to buy into the "it's only $10 billion philosophy" which supports the proposition that $10 billion is nothing when compared to the trillion you are proposing. All of a sudden you are all jumping on the Obama bandwagon that $10 billion is a mere speck on the globe when referencing any deal for the sake of passing this bill. Well let me tell you something you already know; $10 billion multiplied by as many times as I have heard the expression used, adds up pretty fast. You obviously heard the adage that American Airlines was able to pare $3 million annually and they did it $25 at a time. Well, why don't you see how you can pare $500 billion, $25 million at a time.

Why do you have to wait until November to get the message on how we feel about this legislation? Or, is it because you buy into the theory that if you “do it now”, we will forget it by November; don’t think so.

Heritage Funds are target of lawmakers.

Actually, the descriptive word, “lawmakers”, will be “lawbreakers” if they have their way. They of course references the state legislature and their theft of the Heritage Funds for use in “balancing the budget”, the same budget that they have managed to screw up year after year. I see that the Arizona Daily Star continue to provide dialogue on the pirating of the Heritage Funds by the Arizona legislature. Today’s Editorial section contains a piece authored by William C. Thornton that is a must reading for all of you that hunt, fish, camp, boat or picnic, since it is primarily you that have benefited from the Heritage Fund at no cost to the taxpayers. This article is a follow on from a previous editorial the Star published back on February 27, which was titled “Condor deaths are preventable” and referenced the Arizona Game and Fish Departments efforts to “Save the Condor”.

I encourage all of you to contact your legislator and tell them to “keep their hands off” of these funds.

Gun Control under any name is "GUN CONTROL".

Just another end around in the Obama administration's attempts to resurrect gun control. President Obama campaigned on a platform that he supported the right to bear arms, but his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton was allowed to commit his administration to pass UN legislation that would "Regulate small arms in the Hands of Civilians". The latter is a direct quote from page 27, the preface of Chapter 3 within the "How to Guide" of the SALW(Small Arms and Light Weapons) manual published by the UN.

The NRA has continuously battled the administration over this far reaching initiative and suggests that every citizen that supports the rights to own firearms needs to contact their congressional representatives and voice their disapproval.

The National Association for Gun Rights has a pre-printed petition that you can use to contact the Congress regarding your right to own firearms.