Sustainability

It seems these days that the major buzzword is "Sustainability" Everyone is wondering if this activity is sustainable or if that product is sustainable. All of this is leaving me wondering why no one is questioning if our national debt is sustainable?

Take a minute to go to this Website and look at the actual numbers:
http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Right now the national debt per citizen is approx 344,000 and rising. Could you pay your portion off?

To me it only makes logical sense where this is going, and it is no place good. How can we as a nation possibly sustain this??? That is why I think that it is insane that we are even considering things like health care and climate change legislation which are not truly pressing, when the real emergency is the financial security of our country!

Robert D. Hales said in April 2009 general conference, "the four most caring words for those we love are “We can’t afford it.”" It is time our legislators started loving this country and showing discipline by eliminating the things that we cannot afford and helping us get out of this mess!

Health Care Town Hall with Congresswoman Titus

This past Monday evening I attended a Health Care Town hall hosted By Congresswoman Dina Titus. I found it to be a very fascinating experience and I appreciated it because I was introduced to several viewpoints which I never would have considered before. The crowd was very tough and riled up. I admire Congresswoman Titus for her patience and calm during the whole meeting. There were several hecklers looking for their 15 minutes of fame which I found to be very distasteful.

When asked whether she would enroll in the new health insurance option created by the government, Congresswoman Titus gave a hearty and sincere "Yes". For this I give her a lot of credit. Many of her colleagues would not do the same.

One point which was addressed which I found particularly interesting was the topic of allowing health insurance to be taken across state lines. I am for this because I believe that if their is a national public option I believe that insurance companies should be allowed to compete on a level field. However, Congresswoman Titus brought up an interesting point which was that each state has its own insurance commissioner with with its own set of rules an guidelines. So in order to make health insurance portable across state lines federal regulations will have to be created to allow exchangability. This is something that I had never considered before.

Another highlight was when Congresswoman Titus was asked about the financing for the new reform, one of the ways she said that it would be paid for was through addressing fraud and abuse in the current Medicare/Medicaid system. The crowd responded to this with a chorus of laughter. While I feel, and I am sure most people agree, that fraud has to be addressed in the new legislation because it is a huge drain and waste on taxpayer resources, I think such a negative reaction to this suggestion reflects the distrust and lack of faith that the population has in the government. Honestly I have to agree. The government of late has not done anything to restore our trust in their fiscal responsibility.

While addressing fraud and abuse are a step in the right direction, I still see no real way to pay for this new legislation. Despite what Congresswoman Titus believes, that this new plan could possibly make money, I still do not understand how that is possible. It is my perspective that if the government creates mandates and standards which all insurance companies are required to cover, the only thing that I can see that doing is driving the costs up for everyone. Mandates will not only create more costs for insurance companies to cover, which will than be passed onto the consumer, but they will also be able to charge more because everyone will have to have the same requirements whether they want to or not. While Congresswoman Titus did an excellent job clarifying the new leglislation, I still have many lingering doubts about how this will improve our healthcare delivery system.

Let me know what you think. Here is a link to a local news story about the town hall:

http://www.lasvegasnow.com/Global/story.asp?S=11342661

Book Review: The 5000 Year Leap

I recently finished this excellent book by Cleon Skousen. I highly recommend reading this book. This book is focused on the Constitution and briefly describes the events and thought processes that the Founding Fathers used to develop the Constitution. The main premise revolves around the belief that the Founding Fathers intended God and religion to be a part of this country and that they relied on God while developing the foundation of our government. Skousen has found through his research that the Founding Fathers were all men of faith, and while they firmly believed in freedom of religion, they also believed in the importance of relying on Divinity. Skousen lays out 28 principles which he has extracted from his research as to what he believes to be the most important guidelines the Founding Fathers relied upon and intended to remain as the foundation of our society. Some of them include: #2. People cannot survive under a Republican Constitution unless they remain virtuous and morally strong. #4. Without government religion the government of a free people cannot be maintained. #15. The highest level of prosperity occurs when there is a free-market economy and a minimum of government regulations. #27. The burden of debt is as destructive to freedom as subjugation by conquest.

This book has been cited as one of the primary texts currently influencing the remaking of the Conservative movement. Despite being written about 20 years ago, the taking points are very timely. It is a must read for anyone interested in maintaining conservative values in our country.

If anyone is interested in reading this book, just leave a comment and I will send it to you. I only have one copy however, so whoever is first will get it!

What do light bulbs have to do with it?

Bruce brought up an excellent point in his response to the healthcare debate video, "What do light bulbs have to do with it?" This is a very interesting question and I thought it deserved an answer.

By 2012, the government has mandated that all light bulbs manufactured must only be compact fluorescent bulbs and that all other types of bulbs be phased out by that time. The primary motivation behind this is to save energy as well as to dramatically reduce carbon emissions. This is all very well intended, it is good to save the earth. However, what is not widely discussed or publicized is that these light bulbs have a high concentration of mercury and if broken require a hazmat team to clean them up. So, if you break a light bulb in your home, in order to protect yourself from mercury poisoning, you must hire a hazmat team to come and clean it up at an expense to you of approximately $1200. When I discovered this I quickly changed out all low lying bulbs in our home to the now old fashioned tungsten ones. Since than my son has broken 2 bulbs. Thankfully, we did not need hazmat both times.

While this information is listed in small print on the back of the packaging, it is not widely know. The other issue is that these bulbs cannot be disposed of in the regular garbage or recycling. Did you know that? In order to be properly cared for since they are considered a hazardous substance they must be taken to a proper recycling facility in your area, as mentioned on the packaging. Where is this center, I have no idea. I am sure the extra car trip possibly cancels out the saved carbon emissions.

I am guessing that what Congressman Rogers was referring to in his tirade regarding government involvement in our lives is that the government often makes mandates with good intentions, like saving the earth, but often does not consider the unintended consequences. What are we going to do when our landfills are littered with hazardous mercury bulbs because no one knows where to dispose of them or bothers to take them to the proper facility? Possibly this is a trade off, (I am no environmentalist or scientist), but now we will have cleaner air but dirtier land? This is just an small example of the government getting involved in the details of our lives which has the potential to not work out exactly as intended. Many people, I think, are turned off by this potential with healthcare as well as other areas of reform. Let me no what you think....