Wednesday, December 9, 2009

Healthcare Power Grab

I am definitely not a quitter, but I am a realistic sort when it comes to federal politics. Don't get me wrong, I still have some type of idealistic hope for state and local politics...but the federal level people still want a big federal government, no matter what ideology they profess. Their policies are self-perpetuating and self-important. That kind of power is intoxicating and a hard one to give up....once again, that intoxication is on both sides of the fence.

So I guess I am resigned to the fact that some type of HR 3200 will pass the federal legislature and be signed into law by our callowly persistent (or deviously groomed) President. We have given that power to people who have the tenacity and perverse tactical warfare mentality to make it happen...at all costs and against the wishes of the majority of their constituents. When you pull that lever at election time, it does have its consequences.

So now what...

Although this will not be the final product, I have read over the initial HR3200 (all 1018 pages of it) and it took my breath away. I see beautiful, feel good prose with great big holes left for interpretation and power grabbing opportunities. As I have always said about legislation of any type, the devil is in the details. I have seen state entities take seemingly "good" legislation and use it for their own dynastic purposes. "Legally" they can do it because of how the legislation is written and let me tell you, process reversal is a hell of alot harder than you think. I guess that is why there are so many lawyers in office or in positions of power. The person who knows the most rules(or knows how to use the rules)wins.

I received an email yesterday from a doctor who took the time to review HR3200 as I did. This is how he perceived the legislative double-speak. And yes, I double checked the references and they are dead-on in the bill.

Whatever we Americans finally end up with in this Healthcare Power Grab debacle, I can bet the farm we will see similiar storylines emerge.

Is he right?

Page 22 of the HC Bill: Mandates that the Govt will audit books of all employers that self-insure!!

Page 30 Sec 123 of HC bill: THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get.

Page 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill: YOUR HEALTH CARE IS RATIONED!!!

Page 42 of HC Bill: The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC benefits for you. You have no choice!

Page 50 Section 152 in HC bill: HC will be provided to ALL non-US citizens, illegal or otherwise.

Page 58 HC Bill: Govt will have real-time access to individuals' finances & a 'National ID Health card' will be issued!

Page 59 HC Bill lines 21-24: Govt will have direct access to your bank accounts for elective funds transfer.

Page 65 Sec 164: Is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in unions & community organizations: (ACORN).

Page 84 Sec 203 HC bill: Govt mandates ALL benefit packages for private HC plans in the 'Exchange.'

Page 85 Line 7 HC Bill: Specifications of Benefit Levels for Plans -- The Govt will ration your health care!

Page 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill: Govt mandates linguistic appropriate services. (Translation: illegal aliens.)

Page 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18: The Govt will use groups (i.e. ACORN & Americorps to sign up individuals for Govt HC plan.

Page 85 Line 7 HC Bill: Specifications of Benefit Levels for Plans. (AARP members - your health care WILL be rationed!)
Page 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill: Medicaid eligible individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid.. (No choice.)

Page 12 4 lines 24-25 HC: No company can sue GOVT on price fixing. No "judicial review" against Govt monopoly.

Page 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill: Doctors/ American Medical Association - The Govt will tell YOU what salary you can make.

Page 145 Line 15-17: An Employer MUST auto-enroll employees into public option plan. (NO choice!)

Page 126 Lines 22-25: Employers MUST pay for HC for part-time employees AND their families. (Employees shouldn't get excited about this as employers will be forced to reduce its work force, benefits, and wages/salaries to cover such a huge expense.)

Page 149 Lines 16-24: ANY Employer with payroll 401k & above who does not provide public option will pay 8% tax on all payroll! (See the last comment in parenthesis.)
Page 150 Lines 9-13: A business with payroll between $251K & $401K who doesn't provide public option will pay 2-6% tax on all payroll.

Page 167 Lines 18-23: ANY individual who doesn't have acceptable HC according to Govt will be taxed 2.5% of income.

Page 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill: Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes. (Americans will pay.)

Page 195 HC Bill: Officers & employees of the GOVT HC Admin.. will have access to ALL Americans' finances and personal records.

Page 203 Line 14-15 HC: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax." (Yes, it really says that!)

Page 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill: Govt will reduce physician services for Medicaid Seniors. (Low-income and the poor are affected.)

Page 241 Line 6-8 HC Bill: Doctors: It doesn't matter what specialty you have trained yourself in -- you will all be paid the same! (Just TRY to tell me that's not Socialism!)

Page 253 Line 10-18: The Govt sets the value of a doctor's time, profession, judgment, etc. (Literally-- the value of humans.)

Page 265 Sec 1131: The Govt mandates and controls productivity for "private" HC industries.

Page 268 Sec 1141: The federal Govt regulates the rental and purchase of power driven wheelchairs.

Page 272 SEC. 1145: TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS - Cancer patients - welcome to rationing!

Page 280 Sec 1151: The Govt will penalize hospitals for whatever the Govt deems preventable (i.e...re-admissions).

Page 298 Lines 9-11: Doctors: If you treat a patient during initial admission that results in a re-admission -- the Govt will penalize you.

Page 317 L 13-20: PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. (The Govt tells doctors what and how much they can own!)

Page 317-318 lines 21-25, 1-3: PROHIBITION on expansion. (The Govt is mandating that hospitals cannot expand.)
Page 321 2-13: Hospitals have the opportunity to apply for exception BUT community input is required. (Can you say ACORN?)

Page 335 L 16-25 Pg 336-339: The Govt mandates establishment of=2 outcome-based measures. (HC the way they want -- rationing.)
Page 341 Lines 3-9: The Govt has authority to disqualify Medicare Advance Plans, HMOs, etc. (Forcing people into the Govt plan)

Page 354 Sec 1177: The Govt will RESTRICT enrollment of 'special needs people!' Unbelievable!

Page 379 Sec 1191: The Govt creates more bureaucracy via a "Tele-Health Advisory Committee." (Can you say HC by phone?)

Page 425 Lines 4-12: The Govt mandates "Advance-Care Planning Consult." (Think senior citizens end-of-life patients.)

Page 425 Lines 17-19: The Govt will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. (And it's mandatory!)

Page 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3: The Govt provides an "approved" list of end-of-life resources; guiding you in death. (Also called 'assisted suicide.')

Page 427 Lines 15-24: The Govt mandates a program for orders on "end-of-life." (The Govt has a say in how your life ends!)

Page 429 Lines 1-9: An "advanced-care planning consultant" will be used frequently as a patient's health deteriorates.

Page 429 Lines 10-12: An "advanced care consultation" may include an ORDER for end-of-life plans.. (AN ORDER TO DIE FROM THE GOVERNMENT?!?)

Page 429 Lines 13-25: The GOVT will specify which doctors can write an end-of-life order.. (I wouldn't want to stand before God after getting paid for THAT job!)

Page 430 Lines 11-15: The Govt will decide what level of treatment you will have at end-of-life! (Again -- no choice!)

Page 469: Community-Based Home Medical Services = Non-Profit Organizations. (Hello? ACORN Medical Services here!?!)

Page 489 Sec 1308: The Govt will cover marriage and family therapy. (Which means Govt will insert itself into your marriage even.)

Page 494-498: Govt will cover Mental Health Services including defining, creating, and rationing those services.

Wednesday, December 2, 2009

Education vs Job Creation

First and foremost, I truly believe an educated workforce is a top priority in our state and in our nation. But let's look at the mechanics of it a little more closely.

I am considering going back to school and pursue a law degree. Do we need more lawyers? Probably not. But in my field, the knowledge of law is a very important tool in the toolbelt. I repeat, knowledge is a very useful tool.

However, if this consideration becomes reality, I will use this knowledge to be a better entrepreneur. I truly think America's greatest gift to us is the ability to own our own business or be self-employed. In my opinion, that is the American Dream.

My concern then, on the political front, is the roadblocks that seem to be popping up and the direction our nation is moving.

This blog entry from Stacey Campfield sums it up pretty well.

Education and jobs or independence and growth?

George Korda does an interesting article on the need for education in being the lynch pin to get good paying jobs. While he makes many great points (As usual) I tend to see the need in areas bigger then education.

What? Impossible you say? Education is the end all be all for a good future and life. Right?

Well, lets do some math. In the article it talks about how 40,000 people had already applied for a job at the new VW plant. 100,000 were expected to try and fill the 2,000 positions. Probably the known stipulation that a two year diploma was required to get a job kept some away.

Fine. Lets just say at least half of them knew and fit the requirement going in. No, Lets make it even harder then that. Lets say only one in ten had the requirement. Even though Tennessee has a much higher college graduation rate then that (it is in the mid 20's) we still have at least 4,000 well educated and qualified people to fill 2,000 job openings and that is an absolute minimum. I would expect it is more like half to two thirds knew and have the education and qualifications to fit the bill. That is more like ten people trying to fill every position. If we double the number of college graduates or even tripled it, would that suddenly in and of itself produce more jobs? No. You would just have 8,000 or 12,000 qualified and educated people trying to fill those same 2,000 jobs. Lack of a good education is obviously not the only thing holding people back from a good future.

The problem is clearly more a lack of jobs no matter what the qualifications are. Not the lack for educated people to fill those positions. What are we competing against? places like India, China and Japan who have an innovative, educated workforce willing to work at the same type job for pennies on the dollar compared to US employees.

This leaves us a few alternatives. Raise barriers to foreign imports? If we do that a few things will happen. The world will do the same thing to some of our goods. We would loose the high end products we have been selling overseas but would gain back the low end textile product manufacturing we lost. A mixed bag.

Increase taxes on foreign owned companies or products sold in the U.S.? We would loose some of the foreign owned employers who employ large numbers of people such as VW, Toyota and others, but it would probably allow the US owned companies to bounce back a little. Expect the same thing to happen back to our world wide brands as well. a mixed bag.

Lower our standard of living, minimum wage and regulation to compete with the foreign factories over seas? (not something most politicos want to put on a mail piece for their next election) A mixed bag.

Lastly. The one many people seem to never talk about is creating or growing our own market and brands. America is full of independent, intelligent, hard working people. The problem is we have gotten into a mind set of thinking we need someone else to give us a job. That having a job in a big factory is the American dream. That is the ultimate goal now.

When did that happen? It used to be owning the factory, being the employer or the boss was the American dream!

I think all this talk about "Evil profits", class warfare and the "terrible big boss" have made us think that achievement is somehow bad. That, heaven forbid we ever start a company and succeed we might make money and have employees! What would the world think of us then? "Better not climb too high or dream too big. Might have people attack you and call you names. You'll get taxed and regulated more. Better just get an education and hope to get on at some factory job."

That kind of negative talk has to stop or we are in big trouble as a nation. What has to happen more then anything, is just like what happened when baseball became a battle of the "haves" and the "have nots". We need to look to starting up or reinvigorating our farm team system. We need to incentivize business ownership and entrepreneurship. Reward it. Let it profit, champion those who work, innovate, succeed and grow. Remove barriers and the stigma of starting businesses.

Education is great and yes, it is an important part. But if we do not start developing our own next generation of inventors or business people like Henry Ford (who they say couldn't print his own name) then no matter how educated we are, we will be in trouble. Our governors and presidents will forever be recruiting factories overseas. We will forever be begging for scraps off another mans table instead of dining at our own banquet of success.

I wish our guber candidates, instead of always talking about how with a new super educated student what a great foreign job recruiter they will suddenly be, would once in a while talk about how they will start motivating, incentivizing our own people and companies to start, expand and stay here.

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Integrity vs Political Expediency

Expediency - the doing or consideration of what is of selfish use or advantage rather than of what is right or just; self-interest.

Unless something goofy happens, we will not be electing a new TN house Speaker until January 2011. In the meantime, the debate whirls around letting current Speaker Kent Williams back into the Republican folds after his dastardly dash to the leadership position this past January. On Saturday, the GOP State Executive Committee will address the Williams reinstatement case.

The memory of the Speaker gamemanship maneuver still stings for some. Many of us political junkies were at the capitol that day for the historically significant vote. The GOP house majority had only been seen once in over a century. The message from the people had said "change"...and that included Tennessee as well. Thug rule had permeated the Tennessee legislature for way too long. The Tennessee Waltz was only a thumb in the dike. The people spoke loud and clear. And then the beast we call "politics" entered the room.

There were several of our brethren celebrating at Williams' victory party that night because they knew their chairmanships or other coveted appointments would be given by Williams. That is how the game is played.

To be fair, Williams didn't do a bad job as Speaker this past session, however, he did fragment a purpose...which I guess was the goal of the politicians all along. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. No matter what side of the aisle you sit on. It is always the people who lose when the devil gets his way.

So if I were sitting on that panel, I would have to go with Oscar Brock on this one. Integrity trumps expediency. I wish Jimmy Stewart's Mr. Smith would come to Nashville on Saturday.


GOP leadership seeks to block Williams from rejoining party

By: Andy Sher

NASHVILLE — Eighteen Tennessee Republican Party Executive Committee members are urging colleagues on the 63-member panel to reject any attempt to restore the GOP credentials of state House Speaker Kent Williams.

A letter to executive committee members dated Saturday warned that “the possibility exists that a motion to restore Kent Williams’ credentials as a bona-fide Republican will be raised at the next meeting of the State Executive Committee.” The panel meets Saturday.

“We pledge to uphold the decision of the State Executive Committee to bar Mr. Williams from appearing on the ballot as a Republican and ask for you to join our stand on principle in this matter,” said the letter from the group of 18, which includes Oscar Brock of Lookout Mountain and Dr. John Stanbery of Cleveland.

In January, Rep. Williams, of Elizabethton, voted with all 49 House Democrats to elect himself speaker over Republican Leader Jason Mumpower, of Bristol.

Then-Tennessee Republican Party Chairman Robin Smith, citing support from state executive committee members, later invoked her power to keep Rep. Williams from seeking re-election to the House as a Republican.

Since then Rep. Williams, who describes himself as a “Carter County Republican,” has sought to get himself reinstated. He supported Republican House members’ positions on a variety of issues this past legislative session and gave money to Republican Pat Marsh of Shelbyville, who ran in and won a special election.

A number of state House Republicans support his reinstatement.

Speaker Williams was not available for comment Monday.

Mrs. Smith gave up the chairmanship to run for Congress. Her successor, Chris Devaney, has said he is inclined to listen to executive committee members on the issue.

Mr. Brock said he’s standing on principle and doesn’t want to yield to “political expediency.”

“I think there’s times when honor and honesty and integrity matter, and this guy has displayed none,” Mr. Brock said.

“We think we have the vote to keep it (reinstatement) from happening, which I suspect and hope means the motion won’t be brought.”

Friday, September 11, 2009

9/11 - One Nation, Under God - Repost

Thought I would repost an entry from 9/11 of last year...



One of my favorite bloggers (and fellow political junkie) Lynn Sebourn had an entry today about Todd Beamer and his role in Flight 93's "takeover" by the brave passengers. It reminded me of my own 9/11 story.

We all know Todd Beamer's famous phrase "Let's Roll" before the ultimate crash, but do we remember his other last words with the 911 Operator who stayed with him on the phone before the crash?

I was living in Wheaton Illinois on 9/11. I had just dropped off my children at their schools (both Christian based), and was in front of the building where my first meeting of the day was located when I heard the news on the radio. The next few minutes were a blur, I went to my meeting but we were all too numb to discuss anything...we just sat there listening to the radio.

I called my children's schools and they were prepared and wanted to keep the children all there together. So I went to the one place where I knew I would be around people who were like me, numb. The Wheaton Sport Center, my home away from home. We sat in the lounge watching the events unfold, glued to the screen and thankful we weren't alone, thankful we didn't have a family member on one of those planes or in the World Trade Center.

Then we watched the Flight 93 story unfold and listened to Todd Beamer, one of our own, as he said the Lord's Prayer to the 911 Operator and we knew God was with him.
We couldn't be prouder at that moment. You see he was a Wheaton College graduate, home of another famous alumnus, Billy Graham. This college was one that held it's students to a higher, Christian standard. Todd Beamer was truly one of God's warriors.

So people may say God doesn't have a place in today's society, I say thank God it does...and I hope that we always stay "One Nation, Under God". We certainly need more people like Todd Beamer, honed by a Faith that supercedes self.

Saturday, August 29, 2009

Populism & Personal Responsibility

Populism - A political ideology that emphasizes government's role as an agent of the common man, the worker, and the farmer, in struggles against concentrated wealth and power.

Personal Responsibility - Ones ability to take care of oneself by means of, keeping healthy, managing ones emotions, keeping a sound mind, treating yourself with respect, etc.

One of my dearest friends is a journalist by trade and by passion. By all measures, most people would put him in the usual, populist-leaning main stream media category. And I guess, in a way, they would be correct. But he also makes me think too. The other day we almost came to blows over a heated discussion on personal responsibility and healthcare. He made me feel like Attila the Hun for thinking that people have a personal responsibility in their lifestyle choices that ultimately lead to expensive healthcare solutions...he even suggested that I was not a real Christian for feeling this way. That hit a nerve.

In a perfect and loving world, I think that all people deserve healthcare, protection from harm, protection from pain and suffering and the ability to live happily ever after. Peace on earth is on that list too.

But the question of the day still remains...WHO/WHAT is going to give that to you and HOW are they going to do it...and at what COST. Let's explore this further.

WHO/WHAT - Today's Populists believe that the government should be taking care of all these needs. One-stop shopping of sorts. Okay, centralizing decision making can be a good thing. But WHO is making those decisions? People who are poor, underprivileged, farmers, common men? No, usually it is people in the wealth and power business who are doing what they THINK those segments of the society need. I think this is the total irony of the Populist movement. Have you ever been poor and had some well meaning rich person give you a microwave when you really just needed your electricity turned back on? Yep, that is the type of cluelessness we are talking about here. But heck, the fella got a microwave that he can sell on the streets for what he really needs...but there is probably a law (or will be) that will fine him or put him in jail for doing that. My bad.

HOW - Today's Populists believe the end justifies the means as long as we are helping the poor, underprivileged, farmers, commen men etc. We (read government) know what is best for you, so here are some more laws to make sure you follow them or go to jail/get fined...for your own good of course. Have you ever had a judge/policeman/govt official find some law to spank you with so that you completely understand what he/she thinks is good for you? Populist empowered legislators LOVE making rules and laws to make people behave, because everyone knows the poor/common man just can't be trusted to make the "right" decisions or they wouldn't be poor/common, now would they? I really would love to call some of these "do-gooders" out as a plantation owner one of these days.

COST - What cost are you going to pay for having all of your needs taken care of? Freedom....people telling you how to live your life, and making sure you do it that way. Money...people taking most of your paycheck to do what they think is the best use of it. Personal Initiative...why should you have a new thought, idea or self-help plan, everything is being done for you. Will we finally lose the humanity that we were trying to propagate in the first place?

I know I am starting to sound like Ayn Rand these days, but there are unintended consequences for every new law that is passed. Personal Responsibility must make its way back into our legislatures nationwide. I want all the things that the Populists want, I just disagree with the WHO/WHAT/HOW/COST factors involved. And yes, as a Christian, I feel that God is okay with that.

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

Uncle Sam's Plantation

Star Parker wrote the book Uncle Sam's Plantation

I saw this gal in 2001 at a Dupage County woman's luncheon, I just love her perspective.

By Star Parker:

Six years ago I wrote a book called Uncle Sam's Plantation. I wrote the book to tell my own story of what I saw living inside the welfare state and my own transformation out of it.

I said in that book that indeed there are two Americas -- a poor America on socialism and a wealthy America on capitalism.

I talked about government programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training (JOBS), Emergency Assistance to Needy Families with Children (EANF), Section 8 Housing, and Food Stamps.

A vast sea of perhaps well-intentioned government programs, all initially set into motion in the 1960s, that were going to lift the nation's poor out of poverty.

A benevolent Uncle Sam welcomed mostly poor black Americans onto the government plantation. Those who accepted the invitation switched mind sets from "How do I take care of myself?" to "What do I have to do to stay on the plantation?"

Instead of solving economic problems, government welfare socialism created monstrous moral and spiritual problems -- the kind of problems that are inevitable when individuals turn responsibility for their lives over to others.

The legacy of American socialism is our blighted inner cities, dysfunctional inner city schools, and broken black families.

Through God's grace, I found my way out. It was then that I understood what freedom meant and how great this country is.

I had the privilege of working on welfare reform in 1996, passed by a Republican Congress and signed 50 percent.

I thought we were on the road to moving socialism out of our poor black communities and replacing it with! wealth- producing American capitalism.

But, incredibly, we are going in the opposite direction.

Instead of poor America on socialism becoming more like rich American on capitalism, rich America on capitalism is becoming like poor America on socialism.

Uncle Sam has welcomed our banks onto the plantation and they have said, "Thank you, Suh."

Now, instead of thinking about what creative things need to be done to serve customers, they are thinking about what they have to tell Massah in order to get their cash.

There is some kind of irony that this is all happening under our first black president on the 200th anniversary of the birthday of Abraham Lincoln.

Worse, socialism seems to be the element of our new young president. And maybe even more troubling, our corporate executives seem happy to move onto the plantation.

In an op-ed on the opinion page of the Washington Post, Mr. Obama is clear that the goal of his trillion dollar spending plan is much more than short term economic stimulus.

"This plan is more than a prescription for short-term spending -- it's a strategy for America 's long-term growth and opportunity in areas such as renewable energy, healthcare, and education."

Perhaps more incredibly, Obama seems to think that government taking over an economy is a new idea. Or that massive growth in government can take place "with unprecedented transparency and accountability."

Yes, sir, we heard it from Jimmy Carter when he created the Department of Energy, the SynfuelsCorporation, and the Department of Education.

Or how about the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 -- The War on Poverty -- which President Johnson said "...does not merely expand old programs or improve what is already being done. It charts a new course. It strikes at the causes, not just the consequences of poverty."

Trillions of dollars later, black poverty is the same. But black families are not, with triple the incidence of single-parent homes and out-of-wedlock births.

It's not complicated. Americans can accept Barack Obama's invitation to move onto the plantation. Or they can choose personal responsibility and freedom.

Does anyone really need to think about what the choice should be?

"The trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."

The Cost of "Free" - Part 2

When I listen to the libs talk about the Public Option as the end all be all solution for the healthcare reform movement, I am reminded of all the reasons why I don't trust government to do the job...Unfortunately, I also don't trust big business for almost the same reasons.

From Wikipedia:

Lack of economic freedom explains 71% of corruption. Below is a list of examples of governmental activities that limit economic freedom, create opportunities for corruption (incentives for individuals and/or companies to buy privileges or favors worth of money, from politicians or officials) and have in recent economic history also lead to corruption:

Licenses, permits etc.

Foreign trade restrictions. Officials may then, e.g., sell import or export permits.

Credit bailouts.

State ownership of utilities and natural resources. 'In analyzing India's state-run irrigation system, professor Shyam Kamath - - wrote: Public-sector irrigation systems everywhere are typically plagued with cost and time overruns, endemic inefficiency, chronic excess demands, and widespread corruption and rent-seeking.'

Access to loans at below-market rates. In Chile, '$4.6 billion was awarded to government banks in direct subsidies through "soft" loans' between 1940 and 1973.

Size of public sector

It is a controversial issue whether the size of the public sector per se results in corruption. As mentioned above, low degree of economic freedom explains 71% of corruption. The actual share may be even greater, as also past regulation affects the current level of corruption due to the slowth of cultural changes (e.g., it takes time for corrupted officials to adjust to changes in economic freedom).[17] The size of public sector in terms of taxation is only one component of economic un-freedom, so the empirical studies on economic freedom do not directly answer this question.

Extensive and diverse public spending is, in itself, inherently at risk of cronyism, kickbacks and embezzlement. Complicated regulations and arbitrary, unsupervised official conduct exacerbate the problem. This is one argument for privatization and deregulation. Opponents of privatization see the argument as ideological. The argument that corruption necessarily follows from the opportunity is weakened by the existence of countries with low to non-existent corruption but large public sectors, like the Nordic countries.[18] However, these countries score high on the Ease of Doing Business Index, due to good and often simple regulations, and have rule of law firmly established. Therefore, due to their lack of corruption in the first place, they can run large public sectors without inducing political corruption.

Like other governmental economic activities, also privatization, such as in the sale of government-owned property, is particularly at the risk of cronyism. Privatizations in Russia, Latin America, and East Germany were accompanied by large scale corruption during the sale of the state owned companies. Those with political connections unfairly gained large wealth, which has discredited privatization in these regions. While media have reported widely the grand corruption that accompanied the sales, studies have argued that in addition to increased operating efficiency, daily petty corruption is, or would be, larger without privatization, and that corruption is more prevalent in non-privatized sectors. Furthermore, there is evidence to suggest that extralegal and unofficial activities are more prevalent in countries that privatized less.

There is the counter point, however, that oligarchy industries can be quite corrupt ( "competition" like collusive price-fixing, pressuring dependent businesses, etc. ), and only by having a portion of the market owned by someone other than that oligarchy, i.e. public sector, can keep them in line ( if the public sector gas company is making money & selling gas for 1/2 of the price of the private sector companies... the private sector companies won't be able to simultaneously gouge to that degree & keep their customers: the competition keeps them in line ). Private sector corruption can increase the poverty/helplessness of the population, so it can affect government corruption, in the long-term.

In the European Union, the principle of subsidiarity is applied: a government service should be provided by the lowest, most local authority that can competently provide it. An effect is that distribution of funds into multiple instances discourages embezzlement, because even small sums missing will be noticed. In contrast, in a centralized authority, even minute proportions of public funds can be large sums of money.

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

The Cost of "Free" - Part 1

Boy, I certainly didn't realize how long it has been since my last post. A trip to the coast and a temporary move to Chicagoland can certainly put a crimp in a person's schedule.

But no matter how little I have been able to follow news etc., you can't escape the Health Care Reform discussion (and boy do I love the Town hall clips!).

As I have mentioned previously, I am very fortunate to have some brilliant friends on both sides of the aisle. In fact, if this reform issue were hashed out in a think tank with all of them in the room...I would be confident in the results and would vote "yes" for their solutions. In a perfect world, I would imagine our President would have that same thought process.

Unfortunately, the flaw in this current administration's solution is the "government" factor. Government structure is like the human body. Most everything has a purpose, functions don't have options (and if you come up with one, it usually messes up something else) and when you add weight to it...everything starts going to hell.

Case in point. I just finished a two-day ordeal getting an $18 PO Box. I did the transaction online two months ago then called and asked them to give me a PO Box # so that I could forward appropriate mail (which it appears is not a normal option). Got into town, stopped in to get my key...didn't have the required paperwork. Came in the following day with what I thought was the right paperwork (it wasn't)...was sent away again. At this point, I walk outside and said to myself "to hell with it" and walked back in to ask for another box and deal with the refund later or eat it because of the paperwork involved with that process. Time is money and the insanity of the process wasn't worth my own sanity.

Folks, I was dealing with an $18 PO Box in a relatively small town in BHO's backyard. Why in the world would I want to deal with a government-run health care system when the stakes are higher?

So I guess those people who are advocating for "Free" healthcare are either used to people messing with their time and money, they color in the lines and never ask for "options" on anything or they have so much time and money that they don't worry about those silly little things.

Me, I have to earn a living and I have never colored inside the lines. "Free" doesn't work for me when the government is involved in the process. Let's start thinking of other solutions.

Saturday, July 18, 2009

It Matters Who Governs - Monteagle

Many of you have read previous posts where I have ranted about the ineptness of my local government...especially when it came to infrastructure issues. We have had a complete systemic failure in our sewer treatment functions, we have run out of water and we have had horrendous audit reports with issues that haven't been corrected in 20 years. Now if that isn't bad leadership, I really don't what is. But hey, we allowed it to happen. It does matter who governs folks.

Fast forward to the elections of 2008, one woman decided to run for city council. She wanted to make a difference in the community that she loved. She was elected in spite of some of the local naysayers. She was off-handedly given the task of getting grants for the town. What harm could she do there. They didn't know Marilyn Nixon.

Identifying needs, finding grant money, getting the paperwork done and taking the steps necessary to get those grants is an arduous task even for the most functional of local governments. But Marilyn doggedly pursued the courses of action to make it happen. She fortunately had two, sometimes three other votes on the council that saw the logic and the possibilities. It does matter who governs folks.

Yesterday, the state announced that Monteagle was #1 on the list for Clean Water Stimulus money in Tennessee. Our local government had failed so badly at providing vital services, that we beat out all the other deserving local governments in Tennessee for this top dog spot in Obama's "free" cash extravaganza.

But no matter how I feel politically about all this Stimulus bs, I say "Go Girl" to Marilyn Nixon. Sometimes it takes a woman to get the job done. It does matter who governs.

Tennessee is preparing to spend $77 million in stimulus money on clean water and drinking water projects, including several local ones.

Topping the state's priority list of more than 300 projects are eight Southeast Tennessee water improvement projects for which state officials are offering quick funding opportunities.

For drinking water funding, the Ocoee Utility District in Polk and Bradley counties, the Big Creek Utility District in Grundy County and South Pittsburg in Marion County have chances to get a total of a little more than $10 million.

For clean water projects, Monteagle, serving Grundy, Marion and Franklin counties; Ocoee Utility District; Benton in Polk County; plus Cleveland and Athens may receive more than $14.6 million.

Tisha Calabrese-Benton, spokeswoman for the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, said money is allocated through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. She said the money will be combined with state funds for low-interest loans and grants.

If local communities decline the money or can't make deadlines, other communities will be considered according to the state's priority list, Ms. Calabrese-Benton said.

The federal money -- $57 million for sewer facilities and more than $20 million for planning, design and construction of drinking water facilities -- must be obligated by Feb. 17, 2010, state officials said. Utilities, water authorities or communities must have a signed construction contract or must have begun construction by the same date.

Many area utility officials could not be reached for comment Thursday, but Ocoee Utility District Manager Tim Lawson said his district has decided to put on hold a plan to build a water treatment system. The $1.6 million in funding will go to another project.

"We are proceeding with the drinking water application," Mr. Lawson said.

Two planned extensions will serve several hundred homes in Polk and Bradley counties, he said.

"We just don't think it's feasible for us to be able to start the (sewer) work by February, which we would have to do," Mr. Lawson said.

The state also is set to receive $458,806 to implement water quality management planning projects, including grants to three Tennessee development districts to conduct green infrastructure needs analyses.

Saturday, July 11, 2009

Racism

Yes, I believe we have finally come full circle. Where the color of a person's skin dictates special privileges or extra derision. We also seem to be moving into class warfare as well. When times are tough, the devil himself comes out to play. God help us all to see things with love instead of hate.

I received this email recently from a very passionate libertarian, I thought it was an interesting perspective on racism, liberalism and capitalism.

Fellow Americans,

Please know: I am Black; I grew up in the segregated South. I did not
vote for Barack Obama; I wrote in Ron Paul's name as my choice for
president. Most importantly, I am not race conscious. I do not require a
Black president to know that I am a person of worth, and that life is
worth living. I do not require a Black president to love the ideal of
America .

I cannot join you in your celebration. I feel no elation. There is no
smile on my face. I am not jumping with joy. There are no tears of
triumph in my eyes. For such emotions and behavior to come from me, I
would have to deny all that I know about the requirements of human
flourishing and survival - all that I know about the history of the United
States of America , all that I know about American race relations, and
all that I know about Barack Obama as a politician. I would have to deny
the nature of the "change" that Obama asserts has come to America .

Most importantly, I would have to abnegate my certain understanding that
you have chosen to sprint down the road to serfdom that we have been on
for over a century. I would have to pretend that individual liberty has
no value for the success of a human life. I would have to evade your
rejection of the slender reed of capitalism on which your success and
mine depend. I would have to think it somehow rational that 94 percent of
the 12 million Blacks in this country voted for a man because he looks
like them (that Blacks are permitted to play the race card), and that
they were joined by self-declared "progressive" whites who voted for him
because he does n't look like them.

I would have to wipe my mind clean of all that I know about the kind of
people who have advised and taught Barack Obama and will fill posts in
his administration - political intellectuals like my former colleagues at
the Harvard University 's Kennedy School of Government.

I would have to believe that "fairness" is equivalent of justice. I would
have to believe that man who asks me to "go forward in a new spirit of
service, in a new service of sacrifice" is speaking in my interest.. I
would have to accept the premise of a man that economic prosperity comes
from the "bottom up," and who arrogantly believes that he can will it
into existence by the use of government force. I would have to admire a
man who thinks the standard of living of the masses can be improved by
destroying the most productive and the generators of wealth.

Finally, Americans, I would have to erase from my consciousness the
scene of 125,000 screaming, crying, cheering people in Grant Park,
Chicago irrationally chanting "Yes We Can!" Finally, I would have to wipe
all memory of all the times I have heard politicians, pundits,
journalists, editorialists, bloggers and intellectuals declare that
capitalism is dead - and no one, including especially Alan Greenspan,
objected to their assumption that the particular version of the
anti-capitalistic mentality that they want to replace with their own
version of anti-capitalism is anything remotely equivalent to capitalism.

So you have made history, Americans. You and your children have elected a
Black man to the office of the president of the United States , the
wounded giant of the world. The battle between John Wayne and Jane
Fonda is over - and that Fonda won. Eugene McCarthy and George McGovern
must be very happy men. Jimmie Carter, too... And the Kennedys have at
last gotten their Kennedy look-a-like. The self-righteous welfare
statists in the suburbs can feel warm moments of satisfaction for having
elected a Black person.

So, toast yourselves: 60s countercultural radicals, 80s yuppies and 90s
bourgeois bohemians. Toast yourselves, Black America . Shout your glee
Harvard, Princeton , Yale, Duke, Stanford, and Berkeley.. You have
elected not an individual who is qualified to be president, but a Black
man who, like the pragmatist Franklin Roosevelt, promises to - Do
Something! You now have someone who has picked up the baton of Lyndon
Johnson's Great Society. But you have also foolishly traded your
freedom and mine - what little there is left - for the chance to feel
good.
There is nothing in me that can share your happy obliviousness.


ANNE WORTHAM

Anne Wortham is Associate Professor of Sociology at IllinoisState
University and continuing Visiting Scholar at Stanford University 's
Hoover Institution. She is a member of the American Sociological
Association and the American Philosophical Association.

She has been a John M. Olin Foundation Faculty Fellow, and honored as a
Distinguished Alumni of the Year by the National Association for Equal
Opportunity in Higher Education.

In fall 1988 she was one of a select group of intellectuals who were
featured in Bill Moyer's television series, "A World of Ideas" The
transcript of her conversation with Moyers has been published in his
book, A World of Ideas.

Dr. Wortham is author of "The Other Side of Racism: A Philosophical
Study of Black Race Consciousness" which analyzes how race consciousness
is transformed into political strategies and policy issues.

She has published numerous articles on the implications of individual
rights for civil rights policy, and is currently writing a book on
theories of social and cultural marginality.

Recently, she has published articles on the significance of
multiculturalism and Afrocentricism in education, the politics of
victimization and the social and political impact of political correctne
ss. Shortly after an interview in 2004, she was awarded tenure.

Wednesday, July 8, 2009

Cap N Trade

Wow. I got this little gem from one of my favorite political friends and now Coffee County GOP Chairman Lynn Sebourn. He is a braniac rocket scientist (really) who can crunch this information in no time flat. In fact, knowing him, he probably read the entire 1100 pages of the bill and can recite it verbatim.

What I gleaned from this Top 50 list is that the Cap N Trade bill is filled with the same bs that the left whined about...except this time it is big business (in bed with the Left), unions, EPA, ACORN and the federal government who gain. And the more government bureaucracy I see in all of these bills, the more I hyperventilate at the thought of it. Left, Right or Middle, the system is just plain broken. Period.

Have another cup of coffee and enjoy the read.

A Garden of Piggish Delights
Waxman-Markey is part power-grab, part enviro-fantasy. Here are 50 reasons to stop it.

By Stephen Spruiell & Kevin Williamson



The stimulus bill was the legislative equivalent of the famous cantina scene from Star Wars, an eye-popping collection of the freakish and exotic, gathered for dubious purposes. The Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill, known as ACES (the American Clean Energy and Security Act), is more like the third panel in Hieronymus Bosch’s Garden of Earthly Delights — a hellscape that disturbs the sleep of anybody who contemplates it carefully.

Two main things to understand about Waxman-Markey: First, it will not reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, at least not at any point in the near future. The inclusion of carbon offsets, which can be manufactured out of thin air and political imagination, will eliminate most of the demands that the legislation puts on industry, though in doing so it will manage to drive up the prices consumers pay for every product that requires energy for its manufacture — which is to say, for everything. Second, it represents a worse abuse of the public trust and purse than the stimulus and the bailouts put together. Waxman-Markey creates a permanent new regime in which environmental romanticism and corporate welfare are mixed together to form political poison. From comic bureaucratic power grabs (check out the section of the bill on candelabras) to the creation of new welfare programs for Democratic constituencies to, above all, massive giveaways for every financial, industrial, and political lobby imaginable, this bill would permanently deform American politics and economic life.

The House of Representatives, famously, did not read this bill before passing it, which is testament to either Nancy Pelosi’s managerial incompetency or her political wile, or possibly both. If you take the time to read the legislation, you’ll discover four major themes: special-interest giveaways, regulatory mandates unrelated to climate change, fanciful technological programs worthy of The Jetsons, and assorted left-wing wish fulfillment. We cannot cover every swirl and brushstroke of this masterpiece of misgovernance, but here’s a breakdown of its 50 most outrageous features.

SPECIAL-INTEREST SOPS
1. The big doozy: Eighty-five percent of the carbon permits will not be sold at auction — they will be given away to utility companies, petroleum interests, refineries, and a coterie of politically connected businesses. If you’re wondering why Big Business supports cap-and-trade, that’s why. Free money for business, but higher energy prices for you.

2. The sale of carbon permits will enrich the Wall Street investment bankers whose money put Obama in the White House. Top of the list: Goldman Sachs, which is invested in carbon-offset development and carbon permissions. CNN reports:


Less than two weeks after the investment bank announced it would be laying off 10 percent of its staff, ***Goldman Sachs confirmed that it has taken a minority stake in Utah-based carbon offset project developer Blue Source LLC. . . . “Interest in the pre-compliance carbon market in the U.S. is growing rapidly,” said Leslie Biddle, Head of Commodity Sales at Goldman, “and we are excited to be able to offer our clients immediate access to a diverse selection of emission reductions to manage their carbon risk.”

3. With its rich menu of corporate subsidies and special set-asides for politically connected industries, Waxman-Markey has inspired a new corporate interest group, USCAP, the United States Climate Action Partnership — the group largely responsible for the fact that carbon permits are being given away like candy at Christmas rather than auctioned. And who is lined up to receive a piece of the massive wealth transfer that Waxman-Markey will mandate? Canada Free Press lists:

Alcoa, American International Group (AIG) which withdrew after accepting government bailout money, Boston Scientific Corporation, BP America Inc., Caterpillar Inc., Chrysler LLC (which continues to lobby with taxpayer dollars), ConocoPhillips, Deere & Company, The Dow Chemical Company, Duke Energy, DuPont, Environmental Defense, Exelon Corporation, Ford Motor Company, FPL Group, Inc., General Electric, General Motors Corp. (now owned by the Obama administration), Johnson & Johnson, Marsh, Inc., National Wildlife Federation, Natural Resources Defense Council, The Nature Conservancy, NRG Energy, Inc., Pepsico, Pew Center on Global Climate Change, PG&E Corporation, PNM Resources, Rio Tinto, Shell, Siemens Corporation, World Resources Institute, Xerox Corporation.

One major group of recipients of the free money being given to industry in the form of carbon permits are the electric utilities, represented in Washington by the Edison Electric Institute. Along with the coal and steel businesses, the utilities are positioned to receive a huge portion of the carbon permits — some of which will be disguised as measures for consumers — and have become one of the nation’s highest-spending lobbies, working to ensure that their interests are served by cap-and-trade.

4. To the extent that the allowances actually generate government revenue, that money is going to be used for fraud-inviting projects of dubious environmental or economic value. Example: Some allowance money will be used to “build capacity to reduce deforestation in developing countries experiencing deforestation, including preparing developing countries to participate in international markets for international offset credits for reduced emissions from deforestation.” What are the chances of that being abused?

5. In addition to the permits, the bill also allows for the creation of “offsets” — the medieval-style indulgences of the carbon-footprint world. In fact, nearly all of Waxman-Markey’s carbon-reduction targets can be met with offsets alone through 2050, meaning decades before any actual reduction of greenhouse gases is required. That means huge new expenses for small businesses and consumers in return for basically zero environmental improvement. And how does one earn an offset to sell? Get a farm and cash in through such methods as, and we quote, “improved manure management,” “reduced tillage/no-tillage,” or “afforestation of marginal farmlands.” Translation: Plant some trees around the house and claim some extra credits on the land the government may already be paying you not to farm. And do a better job of handling your B.S. — but you’ll never do as good a job on that one as the authors of Waxman-Markey.

6. Because the cap-and-trade regime will disadvantage domestic refineries vis-à-vis foreign competitors, such as India’s powerhouse Reliance Industries, Waxman-Markey is attempting to buy them off with free permits — 2 percent of the national total will go to domestic refineries, at no cost.

7. Agribusiness is exempted from cap-and-trade controls, but the farm lobby will be given permits to sell and to profit from anyway. All carrot, no stick — precisely what this powerful industry lobby is accustomed to receiving from Washington.

8. Waxman-Markey strips the EPA of its oversight role when it comes to managing the offsets associated with American farms. At the behest of Cargill and other big players in the farm lobby, oversight will be entrusted to the USDA — basically a wholly owned subsidiary of the agriculture cartel, one of America’s most rapacious special-interest groups, which already is stuffed with subsidies and sops.

9. Waxman-Markey directs the EPA to ignore the real environmental impact of ethanol and other biofuels. The gigantic subsidies lavished on the farm lobby through the ethanol program encourage farmers to clear forest land to plant corn — a net environmental loss that the use of ethanol does nothing to offset. An earlier version of the legislation that would have accounted for land-use changes was altered at the farm lobby’s demand. Now, the EPA will be forbidden to rain the same pain on the ethanol gang that it’s going to rain on the rest of the economy — a minimum of five years’ (ahem) “study” is required before a ruling on whether ethanol should be treated the same as any other fuel, and the EPA, USDA, and Congress all must agree to act before Big Corn reaps what Waxman-Markey sows.

10. Rural electrical cooperatives are demanding that the offsets be awarded in proportion to historic emissions, and they probably will prevail. This means that high-polluting generators, such as the coal-fired plants typical of electric co-ops’ members, will be rewarded because they pollute more, while cleaner producers, such as those using nuclear and hydroelectric power, will be penalized.

11. The farm lobby will be rewarded for practices that do little or nothing to reduce greenhouse gases. One such practice is “no till” planting, in which farmers forgo plowing and plant seeds directly into the soil. Two peer-reviewed scientific papers suggest that no-till either does nothing to decrease carbon dioxide or actually increases the level of greenhouse-gas emissions by upping emissions of nitrous oxide — a much more powerful greenhouse gas. Now it’s not clear that no-till will reduce greenhouse gases, but the practice does make weed-control more difficult, meaning that it supports the market for herbicides such as Monsanto’s RoundUp. Guess who’s spending millions lobbying for no-till?

12. Waxman-Markey provides an excuse for trade protectionism. The bill will give the Obama administration broad new powers to enact tariffs on imports from jurisdictions that have not had the poor sense to enact similar legislation, meaning that it invites both politically driven trade protectionism and retaliatory measures from abroad in the service of an empty green dream. As the New York Times puts it:

A House committee working on sweeping energy legislation seems determined to make sure that the United States will tax China and other carbon polluters, potentially disrupting an already-sensitive climate change debate in Congress. The Ways and Means Committee’s proposed bill language would virtually require that the president impose an import tariff on any country that fails to clamp down on greenhouse gas emissions. Directed primarily at China, the United States’ biggest manufacturing competitor, the provisions aim to protect cement, steel and other energy-intensive industries that expect to face higher costs under a federal emissions cap.

13. Waxman-Markey channels billions of dollars into subsidies for “international clean technology deployment for emerging markets.” David H. McCormick of the Treasury Department recently gave a speech on the establishment of an $8 billion fund for that purpose; those who showed up to gets the specs on this new gravy train included Sequoia Capital, the United Steelworkers Union, the Clinton Climate Initiative, Ernst & Young, Duke Energy, SunPower, Honeywell, Shell, ConocoPhillips, Credit Suisse, Chrysalix Energy Venture Capital, and Goldman Sachs. If you’re wondering who’s going to make real money off of Waxman-Markey, this list would be a pretty good place to start.

14. Naturally, Big Labor gets its piece of the pie, too. Projects receiving grants and financing under Waxman-Markey provisions will be required to implement Davis-Bacon union-wage rules, making it hard for non-union firms to compete — and ensuring that these “investments” pay out inflated union wages. And it’s not just the big research-and-development contracts, since Waxman-Markey forces union-wage rules all the way down to the plumbing-repair and light-bulb-changing level.

NON-CAP MANDATES
15. The renewable electricity standard is the big one here. This would require utilities to supply 20 percent of their power from renewable energy sources (or “increased efficiency”) by 2020. The Senate was unable to pass a smaller mandate in 2007, because favored sources of renewable energy (wind power, for instance) just don’t work in certain regions of the country, and regional blocs can wield a great deal of power in the Senate. These blocs may be less powerful this time around, because the Democrats within them will be under a great deal of pressure to pass this bill. The renewable standard would force utilities to rely increasingly on expensive sources of energy like wind and solar — expensive because they are capital-intensive and must be located far away from urban areas, necessitating long transmission lines. You can thank Congress for adding yet another charge to your monthly utility bill.

16. The bill would create a system of renewable electricity credits similar to the carbon offsets mentioned above — utilities that cannot meet the standard could purchase credits from other utilities. One way or another, however, the cost is getting passed along to you.

17. The renewable standard excludes sources of power like nuclear and coal gasification, and perhaps that’s to be understood. Even though these sources are cleaner than traditional coal-burning plants, they violate a number of green taboos. What’s less understandable is the way “qualified hydropower” is narrowly defined to exclude hydropower from Canada. Again, the thing to remember is that Congress is less concerned with greening the environment and more concerned with greening the pockets of parochial interests.

18. The legislation calls for the establishment of a Carbon Storage Research Corporation (CSRC) to steer $1 billion annually into the development of carbon-capture technologies. The CSRC would be funded via assessments on utility companies. Hear that? It’s the sound of another charge being added to your bill. Evidence suggests that subsidizing research into carbon-capture technology is either futile (in the case of traditional coal-powered plants) or unnecessary (the technology for sequestering emissions from gasification plants already exists).

19. The promotion of carbon capture will require a host of new regulations — the bill calls on the EPA to create a permitting process for geologic sequestration (burying captured carbon emissions in the ground), regulations to keep the buried carbon from escaping into the air, and regulations to keep it from escaping into the water supply. All we need now are carbon guards to throw the carbon in solitary confinement if it gets too rowdy in the prison yard.

20. The bill imposes performance standards on new coal-fired power plants to encourage the adoption of carbon-capture technology. Ratepayers would pay more for electricity because of the efficiency losses associated with carbon capture.

21. The bill regulates every light fixture under the sun. Actually, the sun might be the only light source that isn’t regulated specifically in this legislation. There are rules governing fluorescent lamps, incandescent lamps, intermediate base lamps, candelabra base lamps, outdoor luminaires, portable light fixtures — you get the idea. The government actually started down this road by regulating light bulbs in the 2005 energy bill. This bill merely tightens the regulations, which means the unintended consequences produced by the 2005 bill — more expensive light bulbs that burn out quicker — will probably get worse.

22. The bill extends its reach to cover appliances as well. Clothes washers and dishwashers, portable electric spas, showerheads, faucets, televisions — all these and more are covered specifically in the bill. You thought we were kidding when we said this bill represents the federal government’s attempt to expand its regulatory reach to cover everything. We weren’t.

23. Appliances will be required to come with “carbon output” labels, and retailers will get bonus payments for marketing those that are certified “best-in-class.” The bill sets up a payment schedule to reward the manufacturers of these “best-in-class” products: $75 for each dishwasher, $250 for each clothes washer, and so on. So go out and splurge on that new super-energy-efficient refrigerator — under this bill, you already made a $200 down payment.

24. The bill requires the EPA to establish environmental standards for residences, meaning a federally dictated one-size-fits-all policy for greening every home in America. When you’re retrofitting your home according to EPA guidelines, it will come as little comfort to know that the government is reimbursing you for your troubles, especially if you’re doing the work around April 15.

25. The bill would affect commercial properties, too. In fact, all buildings would be governed by a “national energy efficiency building code” that would require 50 percent reductions in energy use in all buildings by 2018, followed by 5 percent reductions in energy use every three years after that through 2030. No one disputes that these changes will be costly, but Waxman-Markey supporters argue that they will pay for themselves through lower energy bills. This argument holds up only if we assume that energy prices will stay flat or fall over time. But the aforementioned carbon caps instituted elsewhere in this legislation make that prospect highly unlikely. Businesses and homeowners will pay twice — once to retrofit their roosts and again when the energy bill arrives.

26. The bill instructs the EPA to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions from mobile sources such as cars, trucks, buses, dirt bikes, snowmobiles, boats, planes, and trains.

27. It instructs the EPA to cap and reduce greenhouse-gas emissions from non-mobile sources as well. These two items would be bigger news if the Supreme Court hadn’t already cleared the way for the EPA to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions. President Obama will probably move forward on this front even if Congress fails to pass the cap-and-trade bill. He has already announced a strict national fuel-efficiency standard for cars, and the implications for other sources of greenhouse-gas emissions are not good.

28. The bill calls on the EPA to establish a federal greenhouse-gas registry. Businesses would be required to collect and submit data on their emissions to the EPA, creating yet another compliance cost for them to pass on to their customers.

29. The bill undermines federalism by prohibiting states from creating their own cap-and-trade programs. Nearly half of all U.S. states have already taken some sort of action to cap greenhouse-gas emissions by forming regional compacts and implementing their own emission standards. Understandably, these states support a federal cap so that they are not at an economic disadvantage to states that do not cap emissions. If these states want to hamstring their own economies in the pursuit of green goals, that should be their business. States that don’t see any reason to do so should not be forced to share in their folly.

GREEN DREAMS
30. Utility companies are directed to start laying the groundwork for a glorious future in which everyone drives a plug-in car. The legislation directs them to start planning for the deployment of electrical charging stations along roadways, in parking garages, and at gas stations, as well as “such other elements as the State determines necessary to support plug-in electric drive vehicles.” (States are directed to consider whether the costs of planning or the implementation of these plans merit reimbursement. Either way, you wind up with the bill.)

31. The secretary of energy is required to establish a large-scale vehicle electrification program and to provide “such sums as may be necessary” for the manufacture of plug-in electric-drive vehicles, including another $25 billion for “advanced technology vehicle” loans. As if Detroit hadn’t gotten its hands on enough taxpayer money.

32. The bill directs the secretary of energy to promulgate regulations requiring that each automaker’s fleet be comprised of a minimum percentage of vehicles that run on ethanol or biodiesel.

33. It includes loan guarantees for the construction of ethanol pipelines. Nearly every energy bill in the last five years has included loan guarantees for the construction of ethanol pipelines. Apparently, would-be builders of this vital infrastructure are still having problems getting financing.

34. Congress passed (and Obama signed) a “cash for clunkers” program as part of the war appropriations bill this month. Under the program, you get a rebate for trading in a used car for one that gets slightly higher mileage. The Waxman-Markey bill takes this concept and applies it to appliances, electric motors — basically anything that can be traded in for a more energy-efficient version. These types of programs generally fail cost-benefit analyses spectacularly because more energy goes into the production of the new appliances than would have been used if the old ones had just run their course.

35. The bill includes $15 billion in grants and loans to encourage the manufacture of wind turbines, solar energy, biofuel production, and other sources of renewable energy that have benefited from decades of such largesse already. Another $15 billion is not going to make these energy sources cost-competitive. Only carbon rationing can achieve that. One suspects the Democrats know this; that’s why they are pushing a carbon-rationing bill. The $15 billion is just another sop to the green-energy lobby to help grease the skids.

36. The bill establishes within the EPA a SmartWay Transport Program, which would provide grants and loans to freight carriers that meet environmental goals.

37. The bill requires the secretary of energy to establish a program to make monetary awards to utilities that find innovative ways of using thermal energy, as if utilities needed an extra incentive to discover a new, cheap energy source.

38. It includes another $1.5 billion for the Hollings Manufacturing Partnership Program. This program pops up repeatedly in discussions of programs that both liberals and conservatives think should be eliminated. It is corporate welfare, pure and simple.

39. It includes $65 million for research into high-efficiency gas turbines, another gift to the corporate world with little environmental benefit.

40. It includes $7.5 million to establish a National Bioenergy Partnership to promote biofuels. Economic barriers to the commercial viability of biofuel as an energy source have proven to be so insurmountable that even with all of the federal mandates and subsidies already thrown their way, the ethanol companies lined up with everyone else for a federal bailout when the financial crisis hit. The last thing consumers need is another full-time, federally subsidized lobbying arm for that industry.

VARIOUS LEFT-WING WISH FULFILLMENT
41. One of Obama’s most reliable constituencies, college administrators, will be given billions of dollars to play with through the creation of eight “Clean Energy Innovation Centers,” university-based consortia charged with a mission to “leverage the expertise and resources of the university and private research communities, industry, venture capital, national laboratories, and other participants in energy innovation to support cross-disciplinary research and development in areas not being served by the private sector in order to develop and transfer innovative clean energy technologies into the marketplace.” Meaning that the famous business acumen of the federal government will be applied to the energy industry.

42. Another Obama constituency, the community-organizing gang — i.e., ACORN — will be eligible to receive billions in funding as the bill “authorizes the Secretary [of Energy] to make grants to community development organizations to provide financing to businesses and projects that improve energy efficiency.” Think federally subsidized consultants paid $55 an hour to tell businesses to turn down their AC in the summer.

43. Waxman-Markey also enables Obama to indulge his persistent desire to use the tax code to transfer wealth from people who pay taxes to people who don’t — i.e., from likely Republican voters to likely Obama voters. The bill “amends the Internal Revenue Code to allow certain low income taxpayers a refundable energy tax credit to compensate such taxpayers for reductions in their purchasing power, as identified and calculated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), resulting from regulation of GHGs (greenhouse gases).”

44. Not only will Waxman-Markey slip more redistribution into the tax code, it will establish a new monthly welfare check. It will create an “Energy Refund Program” that will “give low-income households a monthly cash energy refund equal to the estimated loss in purchasing power resulting from this Act.”

45. Another new class of government dependents will be created by Waxman-Markey: Americans put out of work by Waxman-Markey. The bill establishes a program to distribute “climate change adjustment assistance to adversely affected workers.”

46. Waxman-Markey will create yet another raft of government dependents, but of a different sort — bureaucrats. The bill creates: a new United States Global Change Research Program, a National Climate Change Adaptation Program, a National Climate Service, Natural Resources Climate Change Adaptation Strategy office at the White House, and an International Climate Change Adaptation Program at the State Department.

47. And since everybody else is getting a check, Bambi gets one, too, in the form of money for “domestic wildlife and natural resource adaptation.”

48. States also get in on the action. The legislation allows each state to set up a State Energy and Environment Development (SEED) account into which the federal government can deposit emission allowances. States can then sell these allowances and use the proceeds to support clean-energy programs. They must set aside a certain amount of the money to fund federal mandates, but they are given broad discretion to use the rest by making loans, grants, and other forms of support available to favored constituencies. It’s federalism, of a sort — the wrong sort.

49. And, of course, everything includes a health-care component, even cap-and-trade. Waxman-Markey requires the Department of Health and Human Services to develop a “strategic action plan to assist health professionals in preparing for and responding to the impacts of climate change.”

50. Waxman-Markey dumps money into questionable “partnerships” and grants to study “emerging careers” in “renewable energy, energy efficiency, and climate change mitigation.” The first career to emerge, of course, will be managing grants to study emerging careers.

That’s our Top 50. We could go on. And on.

When Nancy Pelosi was advising congressmen to back this beast, she said they should not worry about the words of the bill they had not read, but think about four others: “jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs.” The legislation offers Pelosi perverse vindication: Waxman-Markey will create a lot of jobs for Wall Street sharps, Big Business rent-seekers, ACORN hucksters, utility-company lobbyists, grant-writers at left-wing organizations, college administrators, light-bulb-policing bureaucrats, and an army of parasitic hangers-on. It’s up to the Senate to stop it.

Monday, July 6, 2009

In America, Really?

I thought this article would be appropriate to pass on after our 4th celebrations.
M


"That Will Never Happen In America!"

Steve McCullough

June 17, 2009
1. What if I had told you in October 2008, before the last presidential election, that before Barack Obama’s first 100 days in office, the federal government would be in control of both the mortgage and the banking industries? That 19 of America’s largest banks would be forced to undergo “stress tests” by the federal government which would determine that they were “insufficiently capitalized” so they must be supervised by the government? Would you have said, “C’mon, that will never happen in America”?

2. What if I had told you that within Barack Obama’s first 100 days in office the federal government would be the largest shareholder in the US Big Three automakers – Ford, GM, and Chrysler? That the government would kick out the CEO’s of these companies and appoint hand-picked executives with zero experience in the auto industry and that executive compensation would be determined not by a Board of Directors but by the government? Would you have said, “C’mon, that will never happen in America”?

3. What if I had told you that Barack Obama would appoint 21 “Czars”, without congressional approval, accountable only to him – not to the voters – who would have control over a wide range of US policy decisions? That there would be a Stimulus Accountability Czar, an Urban Czar, a Compensation Czar, an Iran Czar, an Auto Industry Czar, a Cyber Security Czar, an Energy Czar, a Bank Bailout Czar, and more than a dozen other government bureaucrats with unchecked regulatory powers over US domestic and foreign policy? Would you have said, “C’mon, that will never happen in America”?

4. What if I had told you that the federal deficit would be $915 billion in the first six months of the Obama presidency - with a projected annual deficit of $1.75 trillion - triple the $454.8 billion in 2008, for which the previous administration was highly criticized by Obama and his fellow Democrats? That congress would pass Obama’s $3.53 trillion federal budget for fiscal 2010? That the projected deficit over the next ten years would be greater than $10 trillion? Would you have said, “C’mon, that will never happen in America”?

5. What if I had told you that the Obama Justice Department would order FBI agents to read Miranda rights to high-value detainees captured on the battlefield and held at US military detention facilities in Afghanistan? That Obama would order the closing of the Guantanamo detention facility with no plan for the disposition of the 200-plus individuals held there? That several of the suspected terrorists at Guantanamo would be sent to live in freedom in Bermuda at the expense of the US government? Would you have said, “C’mon, that will never happen in America”?

6. What if I had told you that the federal government would seek powers to seize key companies whose failures could “jeopardize the financial system”? That a new regulatory agency would be proposed by Obama to control loans, credit cards, mortgage-backed securities, and other financial products offered to the public? Would you have said, “C’mon, that will never happen in America”?

7. What if I had told you that Obama would travel to the Middle East, bow before the Saudi king, and repeatedly apologize for America’s past actions? That he would travel to Latin America where he would warmly greet Venezuela’s strongman Hugo Chavez and sit passively in the audience while Nicaraguan Marxist thug Daniel Ortega charged America with terrorist aggression in Central America? Would you have said, “C’mon, that will never happen in America”?

8. Okay, now what if I were to tell you that Obama wants to dismantle conservative talk radio through the imposition of a new “Fairness Doctrine”? That he wants to curtail the First Amendment rights of those who may disagree with his policies via internet blogs, cable news networks, or advocacy ads? Would you say, “C’mon, that will never happen in America”?

9. What if I were to tell you that the Obama Justice Department wants to limit your Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms? That the federal government wants to reinstate the so-called “assault weapons” ban which would prohibit the sale of any type of firearm that requires the shooter to pull the trigger every time a round is fired? That Obama’s Attorney General wants to eliminate the sale of virtually all handguns, which most citizens choose for self-defense? Would you say, “C’mon, that will never happen in America”?

10. What if I were to tell you that the Obama plan is to eliminate states’ rights guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment and give the federal government sweeping new powers over policies currently under the province of local and state governments and voted on by the people? That Obama plans to control the schools, energy production, the environment, health care, and the wealth of every US citizen? Would you say, “C’mon, that will never happen in America”?

11. What if I were to tell you that the president, the courts, and the federal government have ignored the US Constitution and have seized powers which the founders of our country fought to restrict? That our last presidential election may have been our last truly free election for some time to come? That our next presidential election may look similar to the one recently held in Iran? I know, I know what you say, “That will never happen in America”.

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Hopeless Romantic

Eliot Spitzer's indiscretions as Governor were tawdry, illegal and easy to disdain. Bill Clinton's indiscretions as President were sophmoric, shameless and filled with contemptible dishonesty. Mark Sanford's indiscretions, however, seem like something out of a romance novel. As a woman, and a hopeless romantic, I can't help but put Gov. Sanford in a whole different category. It is totally wrong for a logical person like myself to feel this way...he cheated on his wife, left his state without acceptable communication and possibly used state funds for personal fun...but man, the fellow has a heart and soul of a poet. If I was smitten before with his fiscal conservatism, I am definitely smitten now. Oh, it is just so wrong.


Posted on Thu, Jun. 25, 2009
Exclusive: Read e-mails between Sanford, woman
Sanford-Maria e-mails shed light on governor's affair


E-mails, obtained by The State newspaper in December, between Gov. Mark Sanford and Maria, a woman in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

At the time, efforts to authenticate the e-mails were unsuccessful. However, Sanford’s office Wednesday did not dispute their authenticity.

The State has removed the woman’s full name and other personal details, including her street address, e-mail address and children’s names.

McClatchy special correspondent Angeles Mase on Wednesday visited the 14-story apartment building in Buenos Aires where the woman lives, according to the e-mails, which included her address. A woman at the address answered to the name in the e-mails and, at first, agreed to speak to a visitor, but she declined after the visitor identified herself as a reporter.

Shown a photograph of Sanford, the doorman at the building said he did not recognize him. According to the doorman, the woman has two sons, one a teenager of driving age and the other younger. The e-mails refer to the woman’s two sons.

----------------------------------------------

From: Mark Sanford

To: Maria

Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 03:09:44 +0000

Dearest,

You are glorious and I hope you really understand that. You do not need a therapist to help you figure your place in the world. You are special and unique and fabulous in a whole host of ways that are worth a much longer conversation. To be continued ...

Have been having a few email problems as I am getting email through an aircard at the farm, where access to computer world is more than tough. Please let me know if you have gotten my last two eamils (sic) so I know it is working in getting to your part of the world ...

Another glorious day outside. Hope you are doing well, and am anxious to hear about your week. Know that I miss you. Unbeleivably (sic) hard to imagine it has been a week. Please also send your mailing address as I want to send you an insignificant something next week when I am back in civilization that I think you might find interesting given our conversation.

Want to write an indepth note with some thoughts on our visit when I know you are getting these emails. Hugs and much love. M

----------------------------------------------

From: Maria

Sent: Friday, July 04, 2008 4:26 PM

To: Mark Sanford

Subject: RE:

My beloved, (hope you also change the dearest ...)

I’am (sic) reading your last two mails sitting outside with a great seaview here in Ilhabela, a beautiful island near Sao Paulo. Have been thinking of you while watching the beautiful blue sea (a) great part of my day and remembering with a great smile on my face, the time we had spent together. As I told you before, you brought happiness and love to my life and (I) will take you forever in my heart. I wasn’t aware till we met last week, the strong feelings I had for you, and believe me, I haven’t felt this since I was in my teen ages, when afterwards I got married. I do love you, I can feel it in my heart, and although I don’t know if we’ll ever be able to meet again this has been the best that has happened to me in a long time You made me realized (sic) how you feel when you realy (sic) love somebody and how much you want to be beside the beloved. Last Friday I would had stayed embrassing (sic) and kissing you forever.

Don’t know why you think you bore me with the description of your farm. I am an urban girl but that doesn’t inhibit me from loving other things, specially if they are the ones you love. I was able to imagine the place with every single detail you wrote and had trassmitted (sic) me the love you have for your farm. It sounds to be a great and peaceful place and loved you had shared it with me.

Thanks for your beautiful words, I don’t know if I do need or not therapy but I have to find my new place in this new stage of my life. Life has been very generous with me and I want to return at least a little bit of what I have been given. I have time and think helping others who haven’t been as lucky as me will do me fine.

My address is (deleted by The State). It will be great finding at home once I am back, whatever you send me, I’ll keep it near my bed so as to feel you nearer.

Miss you so much... love you from the deepest of my heart. Sweet kisses.

----------------------------------------------

From:

To:

Subject: RE:

Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 01:42:46 -0400

Beloved back to you...

Got back an hour ago to civilization and am now in Columbia after what was for me a glorious break from reality down at the farm. No phones ringing and tangible evidence of a day’s labors. Though I have started every day by 6 this morning woke at 4:30, I guess since my body knew it was the last day, and I went out and ran the excavator with lights until the sun came up. To me, and I suspect no one else on earth, there is something wonderful about listening to country music playing in the cab, air conditioner running, the hum of a huge diesel engine in the background, the tranquility that comes with being in a virtual wilderness of trees and marsh, the day breaking and vibrant pink coming alive in the morning clouds — and getting to build something with each scoop of dirt. It is admittedly weird but one of my more favorite ways of escaping the norms, constant phone calls and formalities that go with the office — and it probably fits with my weakness in doing rather than being — though you opened up a new chapter last week wherein I was happy and content just being. Last point worth further discussion. Afternoon projects had me outside and by days (sic) end I pretty much looked like a homeless person ... but in this case a very content one. Enough about my love of heavy equipment and woods at sunrise ...

While I was getting exhausted with one project after another at Coosaw work week, you were basking (I’m certain gloriously) on the beach..

Sounds great, hope to hear more about what sounds a great spot.

Will now finally get some sleep and write you a longer note with a few more profound thoughts tomorrow or Wednesday. In the meantime I send my love and hope you know I am thinking of you.. M

P.S. I do not want to raise expectations, when I say I will send something insignificant I promise I will do as I say! It wont (sic) be worthy of bedside placement ... was just going to find the movie the Holiday as we had spoken of it last Thursday. Its music was pleasant and made me think of you — its mood and the notion of a holiday (wrapped up in our case over two days) certainly fit as well ... (though our visit in some ways for me was as well less of a holiday than it was uncovering and realization of some things and feelings that again are worth longer conversation)

Had also hoped to find the cd of a song that played as I was flying home and also20made (sic) me think of you. Who knows if I can find the music ... so all you may be stuck with is a long released movie — and if you put it by your bed I really be worried! Love you, good night and kisses back to you ...

----------------------------------------------

From: Maria

Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 8:14 PM

To: Mark Sanford

Subject: RE:

My love,

I decided to rent a car and went by myself to the other side of the Island where it is located one of the best hotels. It’s name is DPNY Hotel and I find it quite interesting. I had lunch there in a restaurant on the beach with great seaview. I sat under a palm and ate a mixed green salad with grilled abacaxi (pineapple) and honey. in the afternoon I sunbathe and read on the beach. I ve started here “The age of turbulence” from Alan Greenspan which I highly recomend (sic) you. At five I left back to the small town had a coffee with pao de queijo (cheese bread which is something tipycal (sic) from Brazl (sic) and it’s delicious) read some magazines, walked around and finally back to meu Pousada that is hotel.

In the Island is taking place the sailing week and Rolex competition and this was the reason for choosing the place and also why luckily I am most of the time by my own. It may sound bad but it’s how I feel it. As I told you I shouldn’t have done this trip but I would have felt worst if I wouldn’t have come because it was too over the date, he is a very nice guy, great heart ... but unfortunately I am not in love with him ... You are my love ... something hard to believe even for myself as it’s also a kind of impossible love, not only because of distance but situation.

Sometimes you don’t choose things, they just happen ... I can’t redirect my feelings and I am very happy with mine towards you. Hope you have had a good day, guess with much work.

Send you all my love and goodnight kisses. Sweet dreams from down south. I’ll dream with you.

----------------------------------------------

From: Mark Sanford

To: Maria

Subject: RE:

Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 00:24:54 -0400

Sweetest,

It was indeed a long day. I am most jealous of your salad under the palm tree.

Three thoughts in one note now that I have a moment. One the travel schedule is about to get real busy (and this distresses me for the way it may well make it more difficult to get your notes over the next few weeks), two unfortunately all the feelings you describe are mutual, and three where do we go from here?

One, tomorrow leave at 5 am for New York and meetings. Will think about you on its streets and wish I was going to be there later in the month when you are there. Tomorrow night back to Philadelphia for the start of the National Governor’s Conference through the weekend. Back to Columbia for Tuesday and then on Wednesday, as I think I had told you, taking the family to China, Tibet, Nepal, India, Thailand and then back through Hong Kong on world wind tour. Few days home then to Bahamas for 5 days on a friends boat for the last break of the summer. The following weekend have been asked to spend it out in Aspen, Colorado with McCain — which has kicked up the whole VP talk all over again in the press back home.

Two, mutual feelings. I have been specializing in staying focused on decisions and actions of the head for a long time now — and you have my heart. You have oh so many attributes that pulls it in this direction. Do you really comprehend how beautiful your smile is? Have you been told lately how warm your eyes are and how they softly glow with the special nature of your soul. I remember Jenny, or someone close to me, once commenting that while my mom was pleasant and warm it was sad she had never accomplished anything of significance. I replied that they were wrong because she had the ultimate of all gifts — and that was the ability to love unconditionally. The rarest of all commodities in this world is love. It is that thing that we all yearn for at some level — to be simply loved unconditionally for nothing more than who we are — not what we can get, give or become. There are but 50 governors in my country and outside of the top spot, this is as high as you can go in the area I have invested the last 15 years of my life — my getting here came as no small measure because I had that foundation of love and support so critical to getting up in the morning and feeling you could give and risk because you already had a full tank of love in the emotional bank account. Since our first meeting there in a wind swept somewhat open air dance spot in Punta del Este, I felt that you had that same rare attribute. Above all else I love that inner beauty about you. That gift of yours is going to make a tremendous difference in (The State deleted sons’ names) life — and in anyone’s life who is blest to be touched by yours — you need to rest very comfortably in that fact. As I mentioned in our last visit, while I did not need love fifteen years ago — as the battle scars of life and aging and politics have worn on this has become a real need of mine. You have a particular grace and calm that I adore. You have a level of sophistication that is so fitting with your beauty. I could digress and say that you have the ability to give magnificently gentle kisses, or that I love your tan lines or that I love the curves of your hips, the erotic beauty of you holding yourself (or two magnificent parts of yourself) in the faded glow of night’s light — but hey, that would be going into the sexual details we spoke of at the steakhouse at dinner — and unlike you I would never do that!

Three and finally, while all the things above are all too true — at the same time we are in a hopelessly — or as you put it impossible — or how about combine and simply say hopelessly impossible situation of love. How in the world this lightening [sic] strike snuck up on us I am still not quite sure. As I have said to you before I certainly had a special feeling about you from the first time we met, but these feelings were contained and I genuinely enjoyed our special friendship and the comparing of all too many personal notes (and yes this is true even if you did occasionally tantalize me with sexual details over the years!) — but it was all safe. Where we are is not. I have thought about it and in some ways feel I let you down in letting these complications come into a friendship that I hope will last till death. In all my life I have lived by a code of honor and at a variety of levels know I have crossed lines I would have never imagined. I wish I could wish it away, but this soul-mate feel I alluded too is real and in that regard I sure don’t want to be the person complicating your life. I looked to where I often look for advice and counsel, and in I Corinthians 13 it simply says that, “ Love is patient and kind, love is not jealous or boastful, it is not arrogant or rude, Love does not insist on its own way, it is not irritable or resentful, it does not rejoice in the wrong, but rejoices in the right, Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things and endures all things”. In this regard it is action that goes well beyond the emotion of today or tomorrow and in this light I want to look for ways to show love in helping you to live a better — not more complicated life. I want to help (one of Maria’s sons) with film guys that might help his career, etc. I also don’t want you walking20away (sic) from some guy (I take it the younger guy you mentioned a t dinner) because of me — and what we both have to see as an impossible situation. I better stop now least this really sound like the Thornbirds — wherein I was always upset with Richard Chamberlain for not dropping his ambitions and running into Maggie’s arms. The bottom line is two fold, my heart wants me to get on a plane tonight and to be in your loving arms — my head is saying how do we put the Genie back in the bottle because I sure don’t want to be encumbering you, or your options or your life. Put differently, given I love you, I don’t want to be part of the reason you are having less than an ideal week in what sounds like a cool spot.

Lastly I also suspect I feel a little vulnerable because this is ground I have never certainly never covered before — so if you have pearls of wisdom on how we figure all this out please let me know ... In the meantime please sleep soundly knowing that despite the best efforts of my head my heart cries out for you, your voice, your body, the touch of your lips, the touch of your finger tips and an even deeper connection to your soul. I love you ... sleep tight. M

PS. I will make it a point in NY tomorrow to drop by a store and get that movie I promised to send your way ... I am encouraged to know you will not keep it beside the bed least we have tangible evidence of two pathetic figures missing each other far too much to live a few thousand miles apart!

----------------------------------------------

From: Maria

To: Mark Sanford

Subject: RE:

Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 23:22:29 +0000

You have not brought complication or are not bringing complication to my life, on the contrary you’ve fullfiled (sic) me with happiness and made me aware how you can feel when you love somebody. I can think with my head but only feel with my heart so I can’t avoid it even knowing is hopelessly impossible. The guy is the one I told you ,just three years younger than me, but I am not in love and won’t fall in love with time so I have to continue my way ... be alone for some time and if I am lucky enough will someday feel towards somebody, what I today feel for you. At least you made me realized it can happen.

I don’t know if I did understood (sic) well about what was unsafe or not safe. Before our mails use to have other contents ... if you want to go back to that and don’t write love things and so on because is not safe for you it’s ok with me, i (sic) love you and by no way would do something that can harm you, so please let me know.

I don’t know how we figure all this out and I am not interested in knowing. I prefer to think we’ll see each other again somewhere sometime in this life and in next. Will be missing you till then... . .

Have a great trip with the ones you love ... they are the kind of trips you will never forget and for your boys will be unworthable (sic) not only because of the places they will visit but for sharing all that time with you.

Send you millions of kisses that will last till we get in touch again. best wishes from the deepest of my heart.

P.S.: I don’t want to put the genius (sic) back in the bottle because I truly believe in freedom. I never gave you sexual details but now you don’t need to imagine you can close your eyes and just remember. I’ll do the same.