Sensible Ideas

SHORT CUTS: Decentralization of Power | State Guard over National Guard | Veterans' Affairs | Federal Wage/Benefits Correction | Fair Tax | Small-Business Loans through Credit Unions | Energy Independence | Education | Immigration | Abortion | Separation of State & Church | Israel | Health Insurance | Medicare/Medicaid Reform | Social Security Reform | Electoral College | Term Limits | Congressional 9/12 Caucus | Credit Cards Reform | Water Management

 

Decentralization of Power:
We need to bring our politicians home and have them work from of their districts or state capital 70% of their time in office. The majority of their work, including committee meetings, procedural meetings, research and other preliminary leg work, could be done through conference calls or secure video conferencing rather than in Washington, DC. The constitution only requires congress to meet at least once a year. Congress has the ability to vote to redefine “session” as allowing for telecommuting. Members of congress would meet in Washington DC for final drafts of legislation, amendments to legislation and votes. By doing this, representatives would now become more accessible and accountable to their constituents. They would be able to attend Chamber of Commerce meetings for the counties represented in their districts. The money spent to run their offices would contribute to their districts, local economies. The local office would employ people who live in their district. The day to day business of the office would use local venders, suppliers, print materials, etc, which would all contribute to the local economy. Your representative could now work Monday thru Friday because they would not be traveling back and forth to Washington on Mondays and Fridays. For those who look at carbon footprints, think how much would be saved by not having representatives flying back and forth between their district and Washington every week. United States Senators could work from their states capital; thereby being more accessible to the state senators and could go back to working for the state. Bringing Congress home would have another benefit. Washington’s famous “K-Street” a.k.a. “lobbyist row” would have fewer opportunities to influence your representatives. Representatives would be able to spend off hours with their families – not special interest lobbyist. This is a common sense approach lowers cost and reduces the Federal government’s power and placing the power back in control of the people.

back to the top

STATE GUARD OVER NATIONAL GUARD:
We need to change the status of our National Guard and make them the State Guard. They are already funded using our state tax dollars, but are controlled by the President. Moving the Guard back under control of the State would allow Governors to activate the guard, Governors would control their movement, and the guard would not be deployed overseas without the Governor signing off on it. All the equipment, equipage, land and buildings currently occupied by the National Guard would be signed over to the State Guard. The states would now be responsible for maintaining the guard's readiness. As one who believes the federal government works for the state, making this transition moves us one step closer to maintaining state sovereignty.

back to the top

VETERANS' AFFAIRS:
I am an honorably discharged officer of the United States Navy. During my last tour of duty, I sustained a serious injury to my left hand. I have experienced “first hand” many of the problems veterans face within dealing with the Veterans' Administration bureaucratic jungle our government has created.

I offer these solutions: First, we need to have satellite facilities of the Veterans’ Administration (VA) so veterans are not forced to drive long distances (one way) to receive treatment or have their case files reviewed. The logical location for these facilities would be the existing reserve facilities. These satellite VA facilities would be staffed with active duty personnel from the four branches of service and supplemented by reservists on weekends. The Commanding Officer would be a medical officer with the rank of Lieutenant Commander, Major, or higher. Active duty and reserve personnel have a vested interest in seeing that veterans receive proper medical treatment because they, too, will be veterans one day. Active duty personnel and reservists do not punch a clock; they work until the job is done; they do not refuse work because it is “not in their job description;” and they would be concerned with the proper treatment, “NOT with the COST.” When you tell a military member to get something done - they get the job done. The reservists serving in the medical field are some of our country’s best doctors, nurses, and physician’s assistants because they maintain their skills while working in the private sector. Add the fact that reservists would now be able to remain in their home states for drills and you remove costs associated with flying them to other locations to serve their active duty.

My second recommendation is to replace the civilian head of the VA with an active duty medical flag officer (having one star or more) from one of the four branches of service. Each VA hospital would be staffed with a senior medical officer having the rank of Captain or Colonel from one of the four branches of service, as well. As current administrative and medical personnel retire, their replacements would be active duty and reserve personnel from the various branches of service. Within 5-20 years, every VA employee would now fall under the direction of the military. Costs would go down, legacy costs (civilian retirement benefits) would go away, quality of service would go up and accountability would likely increase.

Added bonuses to implementing this approach would be higher efficiency, accessibility, and accountability of the VA. Currently, when questions are raised, government just points fingers in every direction. We have a leadership deficit on top of a fiscal deficit and I believe these solutions would help move us in the right direction.

back to the top

FEDERAL WAGE/BENEFITS CORRECTION:
I have an “out-of-the-box” idea to cut spending by the federal government. I am calling for a resetting of all federal salaries/wages to the levels of January 1, 2006. This was a peak time in our economy - just prior to the economic downturn that began in 2007. Knowing that close to 50% of our working population is employed in some capacity by the government - my “sensible idea” may be political suicide. However, according to the December 10, 2009 edition of the USA Today newspaper, “Federal workers are enjoying an extraordinary boom time - in pay and hiring - during a recession that has cost 7.3 million jobs in the private sector. The highest paid federal employees earning $150,000 or more increased from 1,868 December 2007 to 10,100 in June 2009. When the recession started, the Transportation Department had only one person earning a salary of $170,000 or more. Eighteen months later, 1,690 employees had salaries above $170,000.” Resetting wages to the 2006 levels would result in a 10% pay cut. The private sector is absorbing 15%, 25%, and in some cases as much as 60% cuts in pay - for those fortunate enough to still be employed, so a 10% cut is reasonable. I would rather cut pay than cut jobs or force furloughs. The other reason for selecting a reference date is because I would not put it past our government to first quietly raise everyone’s pay by 12% and a few months later publicly cut pay by 10%. Everyone would tout how they are being responsible - operating like the private sector; but the net result would be an actual 2% pay raise. This is why I picked a date with known salaries to which Washington can be held accountable. State governments should also look at resetting salaries to a known date that would result in a 5-10% cut in pay, as well. I would do this before cutting jobs. Cutting jobs would add people to the unemployment rolls, result in loss of services, and it begs the question, “Why did you hire them in the first place if you can cut them so easily?”

The next item that needs to be addressed in the spending column is the civil service employees’ pension plans that are subsidized by the American taxpayer. This is bankrupting our nation as taxpayers are paying two people to do the same job; one who is retired at full pay or 75% pay and one who is actually doing the work. We need to transition pension plans over to 401K plans similar to the private sector, and yes, this includes Congress. The cut off date is still a rough figure, but for now, anyone hired after January 1, 2000 would be moved into a 401K plan held by the individual. These are still relatively new employees who have time to build up a retirement account. The government would seed the 401K account with a matching contribution of 3% of the employees’ pay multiplied by the number of years of service. Many private businesses provide matching contributions of 3% and this would be in line with the private sector. Not to mention that moving people over to privately held 401K plans and providing some money in the account retroactive to their initial hire date is the right thing to do. The goal here is to move away from funding unsustainable pension plans on the taxpayers’ backs.

The last item that needs to be addressed is the practice of “selling back” sick days/vacation days. The practice of government employees carrying over sick/vacation days year after year has resulted in a lump sum payment upon retirement that could equal two years of pay. This lump sum is based on the employee’s average pay over the last three years employed. The days saved are an accumulation over 30 years of service, including when their pay was much lower. This is on top of the pension package funded by the taxpayers. There should be a cap of 60 days that a civil service employee can accumulate or “sell back.”

Again, we are addressing the cost over the long term so that OUR children and their children do not have to address them years from now.

FAIR TAX:
The implementation of the Fair Tax would remove the burden our current tax system places on businesses and individuals alike. The Fair Tax would lower our costs in the checkout line by removing embedded taxes such as corporate income taxes, capital gains taxes, payroll taxes (this includes Social Security and Medicare taxes), the self-employment tax, the gift tax, and the death tax. In place of all these embedded taxes would be a 23% consumer sales tax on all retail sales of new goods and services.

With the Fair Tax, every family would receive a monthly pre-bate equal to the amount of sales tax on spending as determined by the Federal poverty level. The pre-bate represents the taxes on what it costs families of varying household size and composition to buy their necessities based on the Department of Health and Human Services Poverty Guidelines for each calendar year. With the pre-bate, a family of four would receive $537.00 monthly ($6,440.00 annually) to offset the taxes on basic household necessities. This means the family could spend $28,000 annually without paying any Federal tax. Without the income tax, individuals would be able to save more, businesses would be able to invest more, and foreign companies would want to move to the United States and American companies currently operating overseas would want to return to the United States. These companies would help our economy greatly by reducing our unemployment.

Social Security and Medicare benefits would not change. The source of revenue in Social Security and Medicare trust funds would be from consumer sales tax rather than from payroll taxes.

The Fair Tax moves the control of taxes back into the hands of individuals. You would only pay taxes on what you consume! Not on what you earn! It would allow you to determine how to spend your money - not Washington!

One other benefit of the Fair Tax is that it would tap into the hidden underground economy of illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants buy and consume and would then be subjected to the same tax requirements as citizens by means of the consumer tax.

The United States of America became a great nation because of our freedom and the ability to be rewarded for one’s hard work. The USA is one of the world’s youngest nations, yet became the dream of citizens from around the world as the place to live - a nation where you are free to keep what you earn.

In order to get this done, two strategies need to be implemented. First, when Republicans take back the house they need to appoint a congressman who co-sponsored the “Fair Tax” bill to the “House Ways and Means” committee. Second, we need to have employers, at lease once a quarter, review with their employees the amount of taxes paid to the federal government. The theory goes back to the days of your first job when you worked hard all week and in your mind did the math on what your check should be. You multiplied the number of hours by your hourly wage and this gave you a total of what your check should be. Then when you got your first check, almost everyone has the same response…”who the heck is FICA?” Remember that day? We need to get back to people knowing what they pay in taxes. Maybe then they will look to reform the system.

back to the top

SMALL-BUSINESS LOANS THROUGH CREDIT UNIONS:
Currently, credit unions are limited in how much they can lend to small business due to a cap set by Congress back in 1998. That cap is set at 12.25% of the credit unions assets. By doubling this cap to 25% of their assets, you free up billions of dollars the first year alone for small-business owners to create jobs. This is a regulatory change that would not increase the deficit, which in May crossed the $13 trillion mark, would not raise taxes and gives the small business owner the resources they need to grow. The credit unions were not part of the sub-prime mortgage meltdown caused by Wall Street and the big banks. Credit unions have conservative lending practices and over the last few years have seen business lending grow.

back to the top

ENERGY INDEPENDENCE:
Energy independence is vital to our nation’s future. America must reduce its dependence on foreign resources and take advantage of domestic resources. Nuclear power needs to be at the top of the page. Every election, politicians point out that the benefits from nuclear power would take at least ten years to realize. This has been the mantra for the last 20 years. In the campaign rhetoric for the 2008 elections, politicians were preaching that we need to look at all forms of energy, including nuclear. Now that the elections are over, these same politicians have decided to remove funding from programs that support nuclear energy. This same argument will resurface in 2010 and if we vote for the incumbent, we will find ourselves having this discussion again in 2012. It is amazing to me that our politicians keep looking across the pond to Europe as a model for so many programs for the United States, just not the nuclear energy programs of Europe.

Another positive step toward becoming energy independent is to drill for oil here and drill now. The United States needs to reduce its dependence on foreign oil and the only way to do this is to extract oil domestically and build more refineries. In 2008, politicians supported domestic exploration for oil and natural gas. Now that the election is over, the politicians move to block the very projects that would allow America to become independent.

Finally, the federal government should set one uniform standard for gasoline and move away from individual states determining what additives need to be in fuel sold in their states. Instead of 50 different blends of gasoline the federal government should set one standard blend for summer and one standard blend for winter.

I would also like to push the automotive industry in the direction of clean diesel technology. Today, Mercedes, Volkswagen, BMW and Ford have the technology that improves fuel economy by 30-40%. The infrastructure is already in place to distribute diesel fuel and it is the first byproduct created in the process of refining oil to gasoline. Both of these moves would reduce production cost for the refinery, reduce demand through increased fuel efficiency, and reduce the price you pay at the pump. None of these solutions replace our need to look to the future for alternatives; but let’s use common sense today toward solutions that will reduce demand, increase supply, and lower the price you pay in the end.

The federal government needs to take the initiative and require that all federal, state, and local government vehicles, with the exception of “first responders” run off natural gas within the next four years. School buses and public transportation need to be at the top of the list. You or I cannot go down to the local gas station and fill-up with natural gas, but the government already has fuel farms which can be easily converted to supporting natural gas, thereby slowly reducing our consumption and dependency on foreign oil. Once we have all the government vehicles converted, the next logical step would be requiring truck stops to provide natural gas stations. The conversion of all freight trucks to natural gas would continue to reduce our dependency on foreign oil.

I believe we should move away from producing ethanol from corn. A more logical solution would be to use switchgrass which has a 5 to 1 yield verses corn’s 1 to 1 yield. It makes no sense to me why we would promote ethanol as an answer to reducing our dependency on foreign oil. Corn is an annual crop which requires a lot of water to grow. It is created from a food resource and its creation requires using as much energy as it produces. Switchgrass gives a better energy yield, can grow in dry environments, and restores vital organic nutrients to farmed-out soils. Once switchgrass has been established in a field, it can be harvested annually or semiannually for 10 years or more before replanting is needed. The advances that have been made in the technology of gasification could enable switchgrass to yield a variety of fuels including synthetic gasoline, diesel fuel, methanol, methane gas and even hydrogen. The chemical by-products are useful for making fertilizers, solvent and plastics.

I’m not placing all my eggs in one basket with switchgrass as the sole end-all and be-all; but you get a better yield from switchgrass, it produces more valuable by-products, and finally, it is not a food resource. We can use common sense solutions and American ingenuity to move to energy independence and I think it is time!

back to the top

EDUCATION:
First, the United States Constitution does not authorize the Department of Education and the federal government should not dictate education policies. The Department of Education has become a huge bureaucracy that wastes billions of our tax dollars that would be better off left in the control of the states and local communities. Parents, teachers, and local community leaders should be making decisions about how our children are taught.

With that being said, I do believe there should be administrative procedures in place that allow teachers to transfer between districts as well as states without losing earned personal leave days or credit for years of service. When a teacher moves to another district or state, the dollar value of his or her personal leave time would be forwarded to the new school system - thus removing any potential financial burden placed on the new school system should the teacher need to take a greater number of personal leave days than normally granted under the current system.

Second, I believe in a voucher system that would allow parents to choose the most appropriate education setting for their child. Vouchers would put the parents in the leadership role of educating their child by allowing parents to decide where to spend their tax dollars to educate their child. If a private school can offer a better education than the public option, let the parents use a portion of their tax dollars to offset the cost of private education. A small portion of their tax dollars remain with the public school, thereby increasing the public schools’ revenue without having the cost of educating the child. It is through competition that improvements will be made.

Third, all schools need to maintain high standards and acknowledge that some students are going to fail. Not every child learns at the same rate or puts forth the necessary effort to learn the material. Some children will need additional educational support to grasp the material. Some will need remediation and extra reinforcement. We need to move away from teaching a book, teaching a calendar-driven curriculum, or teaching a test and move back to teaching children – for mastery. All children can learn – but proper opportunity must be given. A house without a proper foundation will not stand. A child without a proper educational foundation will not progress. Learning and discipline go hand in hand. Learning cannot happen in chaos. Clear discipline procedures must be in place. The practice of passing students to the next grade level because we fear damaging their self-esteem actually damages their chances for success. This practice is a disservice to the student, to the teacher in the next grade level, and to a society that is depending on the citizens our schools produce.

Local governments provide the facilities, teachers, books, educational standards and a safe learning environment. Parents need to be held accountable for ensuring their child does his or her homework, goes to bed at a reasonable time, that the child is clean, has clean clothes, and eats breakfast before going to school. The child needs to accept responsibility for his or her actions. If a child chooses to misbehave at school rather than complete the assigned work, his antics become a distraction in class for others. That child needs to be held accountable for his choices. We need to move away from schools being viewed as daycare where parents drop their children off for someone else to raise. Schools are not here to raise your children, but rather to educate future adults.

One additional item that needs to be addressed regarding education is the burden illegal immigration places on our education system. If the child is not a citizen or legal resident of the United States, then that child is not entitled to receive a free public education or to receive public assistance. Over and over we hear that “it is not the children’s fault.” But it is not my child’s fault either. If we do not address this now, it will continue to plague us for decades. How often do we see new schools built only to have mobile classrooms line the outside of the school when the school doors open? There is also the added cost of salaries for teachers trained in teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL), benefits for those teachers, study materials for students who are here illegally, and free or reduced price lunches and breakfasts - all under the umbrella that “it is not the child’s fault.” This equates to millions, possibly billions of our tax dollars being taken from you in support of illegal activity.

We need to recognize that college is not required for everyone to be successful. Those that choose to learn a trade instead of going to college need to be celebrated as much as those who choose college. It is interesting that the left always looks to Europe for ideas, but has not adopted their approach to high school. In most European countries, when children reach high school they have the opportunity to choose between going to college or learning a trade. Starting in 11th grade, students that choose to learn a trade would attend vocational high schools where the first part of the day would focus on academics and second part of the day would focus on the trade they have selected. Much of our day to day living depends on skilled labor and many career paths are available including automotive repairs, HVAC, plumbing, stylist, chefs and the list goes on. These courses should be taught by Subject Matter Experts (SME) not requiring standard teaching credentials. Under the current system, if Bill Gates or Steve Jobs wanted to offer their time to teach computers to high school students, they would not be allowed because they do not have teaching credentials. But who better to teach computers? A journeyman electrician certified by the IBEW (International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers) could certainly teach your child basic electrical skills. Our skilled labor force is shrinking and we need to recognize their value. By providing our children this choice, more young adults will be able to enter the workforce having the necessary skills to be successful right out of the gate.

And lastly, we need to talk about a plan to raise the standards in our public schools.  Just as Rome wasn’t built in a day, we cannot fix our schools in a year. My proposal is to add an intermediate grade between Kindergarten and 1st Grade which we’ll call “Readiness.”  Because some children are either not ready academically or maturity for 1st grade, you have another year of learning for them to grow.  Having an extra year to prepare will allow those students the move forward without attaching a stigma associated when you retain a child shall in 6th grade.  Second, when you provide this additional grade level, raise the standards for Kindergarten and continue to raise the standards every year for the next grade level as that year group advances.  For example, we start with Class of 2023 which is beginning Kindergarten this fall.  The standards are raise this year in Kindergarten and next year as Class of 2023 moves to the 1st grade, you raise the standards of 1st grade.  The standards would continue to be raise for each subsequent grade level as Class of 2023 advances.  To address the problem with the students currently enrolled that our system has failed; we need to provide afterschool programs that are voluntary for those students who wish to be challenged.  We cannot force the kids to take these afterschool programs, and if the child becomes a distraction to the other students, they are removed from the program.  As Class of 2023 graduates to the next grade levels, the after school program for the grade level would be discontinued.  This way, no after school programs would be provided when Class of 2023 enters their senior year. 

Raising the standards over the next 12 years, coupled with a better vocational system mentioned earlier will allow our children to graduate contributed to our society at an earlier age.

 

back to the top


IMMIGRATION:
We must secure the borders. Let’s build the fence where possible on our southern border. Politicians preach how a fence will cost too much, almost $25 billion. We hear there is no money to build a security fence, yet they have no problem passing a $750 billion stimulus package, all of which is borrowed (with interest) to bail out Wall Street. When your roof leaks, you fix the roof before you repair inside damages caused by the water. In conjunction with the security fence, we need to remove all loop holes that allow illegal immigrants to obtain aid and entitlement funds.

One of the ideas I mentioned on Neal Boortz’s show over two years ago was using reservists from all four branches of service to assist border patrol in the handling of illegal aliens caught crossing the border. Instead of going overseas during their two weeks of active duty, we need to change some billets to allow reservists to serve on our border processing illegal aliens back to their country of origin. This puts the border patrol back on point faster to continue to guard our country. This solution increases the size of our border patrol without increasing the deficit. The two weeks active duty is already funded.

Another solution that will not cost tax payers a dime is to address the issue of birthright citizenship. The Fourteenth Amendment was passed in 1868 to prevent anyone from excluding slaves and their descendants from possessing Constitutional rights. It was not enacted so that someone could illegally enter the United States, have a child, and claim that child is a citizen of the United States. Citizenship should not be based just on the fact that you are born in the United States, but should also be tied to the requirement that at least one parent is a citizen or legal resident of the United States. If neither parent is a citizen or legal resident of the United States then the newborn child becomes a citizen of their parents’ country of origin.

We need to enforce Visa rules and deport anyone who overstays their Visa or otherwise violates the law. Amnesty is not the answer and the fact that our elected officials would want to reward illegal behavior violates the argument that we are a nation of laws. Our laws need to be enforced, not selectively ignored in order to get more voters. “E-verify” is an online system run by the Department of Homeland Security. It is designed to match an employee’s name with his/her Social Security number. Congress needs to pass and fund “E-verify.” Then companies found employing illegal immigrants and not using the system should face stiff penalties. For the first offense, upper management and Human Resources should pay a hefty fine. If a second offense occurs, the company should face a 30 day suspension of their business license. The company could reapply for their business license after 30 days. This may seem harsh, but if the goal is to protect American jobs, we need to have rules in place that motivate companies to hire Americans or legal residents.

Lastly, we need to end welfare for illegal immigrants. The United States welcomes immigrants who seek opportunity, work hard and play by the rules. However; we should not pay for illegal immigrants who repeatedly use hospitals, clinics, schools or other social services. If an illegal immigrant walks into a hospital seeking medical care, they should receive the care, and then be deported immediately following the care.

back to the top

ABORTION:
On this issue it will probably be said that I’m trying to have it both ways, but seeing how this issue seems to always surface you should know my opinion on the subject. I am against abortion; but I do not believe the federal government should be the judge on this. That decision should rest with each state and NO federal taxpayer dollars should be used to help fund organizations that perform abortions, specifically, “Planned Parenthood.” I would support a law requiring children under the age of 21 to have parental consent before an abortion could be performed.

One of the greatest gifts God has given us is “free will.” It is this freedom that allows us to make decisions and to follow a path that God has chosen. The decision on whether a woman can have an abortion rests between the woman and her faith in God. Should a woman become pregnant, I would hope she could turn to her parents, her faith, and her church to assist her through this choice. Should she choose not to keep the child, churches should be allowed to assist with adoption. There are many deserving families who have not been blessed with a child and would love to adopt.

I would like to see the federal government fund free birth control to girls under the age of 21, administered by the girl’s doctor, not a government entity. Parental notification would be needed for children under the age of 18. And let’s clear this up now; abortion is not a form of birth control. Funding of this free birth control would come from ending new recipients to the WIC (Women, Infants, and Children) program or any welfare programs that enable single mothers. If a single mother is currently on the program, she and her child are covered, but new recipients would not be added nor would new dependents for those already covered. The financial responsibility of raising a child needs to fall on the mother and the father, not the taxpayers.

back to the top

SEPARATION OF STATE AND CHURCH:
We hear all the time from those on the left that the church should not have influence on state policy. Conversely, the state should not try to dictate what the church must accept. Two examples that come to mind are same-sex marriage and abortion. Same-sex civil unions should not use the term marriage because I believe that is a religious term referring to the union between a man and a woman as witnessed by God. You can give the civil union another name, just not the name marriage. The majority of Christians do not want to dictate how individuals live their lives, but they also do not want individuals using the power of government to tell the church what God must accept. If the issue is that legal rights granted to marriage are not granted to civil unions, then the existing laws that provide or deny civil unions’ legal protections should be examined.

The next example mentioned is abortion. A Catholic funded hospital should not be forced by law to perform abortions. This goes against their beliefs and could force these hospitals to close. Christians should not have their tax dollars taken from them by force and then used to fund abortions when their beliefs tell them this is wrong. If people on the left are going to preach the separation of church and state, they must accept separation of state and church.

back to the top

ISRAEL:
When it comes to my support of Israel, I believe Charles Krauthammer said it best: "Israel is the very embodiment of Jewish continuity: It is the only nation on earth that inhabits the same land, bears the same name, speaks the same language, and worships the same God that it did 3,000 years ago. You dig the soil and you find pottery from Davidic times, coins from Bar Kokhba, and 2,000-year-old scrolls written in a script remarkably like the one that today advertises ice cream at the corner candy store." They live on the land given to them by God and I stand with them in my support.

Some may not like this answer. If the religious aspect of the answer is the problem, look at it another way. Given that the United States stands for freedom, it is in our best interest to support other nations that also support a free democracy.


HEALTH INSURANCE
Nationalization of health insurance is not the answer. Rather, we should allow the free market to solve health care costs by changing the tax code as it affects insurance purchases. Individuals should have a choice of participating in employer funded health insurance coverage – OR – having those funds paid directly to the employee to set up his/her own coverage. Individuals could purchase their own insurance or collaborate with organizations outside of work to reduce premiums. For example: a local church congregation could pool their resources and find the best coverage available for their needs. Membership to the congregation would give a stronger bargaining power in order to lower premiums. Unions should be able to unite with other unions to negotiate for the best rates for their members. Likewise, small business owners should be able to collaborate with one another for the same results. Open up Medicaid and Medicare to families whose incomes fall below the poverty level as determined by the Department of Health and Human Services. We could further open up competition by allowing health insurance coverage to be purchased across state lines. Insurance commissioners for each state would work together to assist Americans when a complaint is filed in their state.

Reducing government mandates and regulations would streamline the process and save time and money. You don’t have to look any further than Medicaid and Medicare to see that increased bureaucracy reduces effective results. It is as if the government says, “Wait…wait, there has to be a harder way.” More time spent on administrative cost means less time spent on care.

There should be an increase or removal of the limits on Health Savings Accounts (HSA) while also reducing regulations that currently discourage their use. The government has placed so much paperwork on the use of HSAs that the majority of people do not use them. If you have an HSA, you should be allowed to transfer funds from your HSA to someone else’s HSA without any tax penalty to either person. Upon your death, you should be allowed to will the balance of your HSA to another individual’s HSA without any tax penalty on the receiving individual.

Additionally, we need to reduce some regulations to allow nurse practitioners to hang their own shingles, under the umbrella of a medical practice, in order to diagnose and treat patients up to a specific level of care including non-surgical illnesses. About 80% of all diagnoses can be handled by nurse practitioners. Allowing these health professionals to open their own offices would increase competition in the field and reduce costs.

The last item but one of the most important to reducing health insurance cost is to pass Tort Reform. Frivolous lawsuits have pushed medical malpractice insurance beyond reason. Too many people see malpractice lawsuits on par with winning the lottery. Medical insurance premiums go up because it is cheaper to pay than stand and fight. Maybe the juries on medical malpractice cases should be made up of only doctors? Who better to understand the complexities of the medical field than someone in the medical field? Given the chance, doctors will weed out their own when it reflects on them.

back to the top


MEDICARE/MEDICAID REFORM:
Medicaid and Medicare are going broke and government is not taking steps to solve the problems.  A common sense solution that would save billions a year would be to change how prescriptions are filled.  My proposal is the following:  If the prescription drug is also available in a generic brand that is covered by your local pharmacies (Walmart, Kroger, Public, CVS, Tracy’s Medical Center, etc.) under their $4.00 programs, then Medicaid and Medicare would not cover the prescription.  We are talking about $4.00.  At some of the pharmacies, you can get a 90 day supply for $10.00.  There are thousands of generic brands currently covered under the $4.00 programs and 2-5 new generic drugs are being added every week.  Generic brand programs are not controlled by the government and would be managed by the pharmacies. Private business provide the solution.

back to the top


SOCIAL SECURITY REFORM:
The system is going broke and needs to be overhauled.  My proposal moves social security into private accounts that are owned and controlled by the individuals rather than the government using your money and dishing it out on their terms.  The new plan needs to allow for the transfer of funds from one social security retirement account to another social security retirement account free of any tax burden.  Because you own the account, upon your death, families will have the means to leave their children and grandchildren money to help fund their retirement, thereby creating generational wealth.  The first thing that needs to happen is that social security revenue be spent only on social security benefits, not vote buying entitlement programs.  Remember Al Gore talking about a “lock-box.”  Whatever happened to that “lock-box?”  Well, in order to save social security, we need to pass legislation that puts this so called “lock-box” into a reality.  Second, remove taxes placed on social security benefits. The money retirees receive on social security has been earned and if an individual chooses to continue to work while on social security, bless them.  Only new income should be considered taxable income.  This will improve a retiree’s standard of living and it’s time our county thank them.

Then we need to move in a direction that privatizes social security so that individuals control their future, not the government.  My proposal is a 20 year plan to wean us off the entitlement mentality while still funding social security in its present form.  Every 5 years the percentage of wages paid by the employer and employee into social security would get smaller.  Currently, 7.5% is withheld from both the employer and employee.  In five years, only 6% would be withheld and it would be reduced by 2% every five years until at the end of 20 years you would be left with a fixed 1% being withheld from employers and employees.  This fixed rate of 1% would fund the 5% of population that does not work or save for retirement.  A portion of the money withheld would go into individuals 401K retirement accounts with the percentage deposited adjusted based on the taxpayers’ age.  Below is just a suggestion, but lets you see where I’m headed.  

1) 55 years of age and up: Entire amount withheld from both the employer and employee goes into the employees 401K retirement account.  We need to build this up fast so they can retire on their own.

2) 45-55 years of age:  20% from the employer and 80% from the employee withholdings goes into the employees 401K retirement account.  Again, build it up because in 20 years that 45 year old will be 65 and on their own.

3) 35-45 years of age:  0% from the employer and 60% from the employee withholdings goes into the employees 401K retirement account.

4) 25-35 years of age:  0% from the employer and 40% from the employee withholdings goes into the employees 401K retirement account.

5) 16-25 years of age:  0% from the employer and 20% from the employee withholdings goes into the employees 401K retirement account.

Employees would be allowed to increase the amount withheld from their check and deposited into their “private” 401K retirement account; up to 20.0% of their earnings, all pre-tax dollars.  The amount withheld not placed into the employee’s 401K retirement account would be used to fund social security for those already on social security.  Every year as new recipients’ reach retirement age, the dollar amount receive by the new recipients from the Social Security Department would probably be smaller than those already on social security.  The amount is dependent upon the number of years taxpayers has been afforded to fund their own retirements.  Again, this is a rough draft and I expect the percentages to be adjusted to fund social security.  But the goal is to reduce cost and the power government places on taxpayers.

back to the top


ELECTORAL COLLEGE:
After the 2000 election between Bush and Gore, we heard that the Electoral College needs to be replaced with popular vote.  “Majority rules,” so to speak.  Our founding fathers addressed the problem of equal representation for smaller states and through the Electoral College.  Each state is allocated the same number of electors as it has Representatives and Senators in the United States Congress.  Three electors are allocated to Washington, D.C.  In total there are 538 electors.  My suggestion is that rather than have the majority vote for the state take all the electors of that state, each district’s elector should cast his or her vote based on how their district voted.  The remaining two electors cast their votes based on majority vote for their state.  This would prevent single issue politics from carrying an entire state.  Every district would now be represented which would prevent states like California and New York from swinging the entire election.

back to the top

TERM LIMITS:
If you asked me this question three years ago, I would have been in favor of term limits.  Listing to Jamie Dupree on the Neal Boortz radio show caused me to re-think the idea.  Jamie pointed out that term limits are already in place because of Congressional elections are held every two years.  Voters can “limit terms” with their votes.  Second, if you limit the incumbent to only two terms, then the lobbyists and federal staffers who are not elected will be drafting all legislation, allowing Washington insiders to run the show.  It is because of this argument that I have rethought my stance and feel a better solution is to have representatives work from their district 70% of the time.  I detailed this idea at an earlier section of the website under “decentralization of power.” We should also change the structure of their benefits. 

Elected officials should pay into a 401K plan for retirement much like the private sector does.  While in office and upon retirement, all medical and dental coverage would be administered by the Veterans’ Administration.  Maybe then, when it directly affects them and their families, our congressmen would take an active interest in providing quality care to our veterans.  If representatives want additional coverage, they will have to pay for it themselves. 

Currently there is a plan being offered by some Republican congressmen to limit Senators to three terms and Congressmen to nine terms.  People hear “term limits” and they start supporting the plan.  The problem with this plan is that they both equal 18 years of service.  Eighteen years is the magic number that gives congressman and senators full salary, full medical, and full dental benefits for life.  So when my daughters reach middle-age, they will be paying full salary for three people to do one job!  Two people that are retired and one actually doing the job!  We need to go after these benefits.  My plan places the burden of retirement directly on the Representative, not on the taxpayers.  There is one other issue to consider when candidates say they believe in term limits.  Nobody can name one elected official who campaigned on term limits then actually left office when they met the term limit.  They always fall back on the line that “they have more work left to do.”  After saying all this, I will support legislation that limits Congressman to three terms and Senators to one term. But in full disclosure, I will put more effort into limiting benefits.  It is these benefits our elected officials enjoy that is bankrupting our country.

back to the top

CONGRESSIONAL 9/12 CAUCUS:
There are almost 200 Caucuses, even one called “The Professional Pro Sports Caucus”, that are based on special interests, ethnic background, or race.  They continue to reach out to your representatives for more and more of your money.  I’m not one to add to the growth of government, but I would like to see one caucus based on the Principles and Values that our founding fathers believed in and promoted on the Glen Beck show.  As a result, I propose we develop the “Congressional 9/12 Caucus” whose membership is made up of representative that believes in the 9 Principles and 12 Values listed below: 

The 9 Principles:
1. America is good.
2. I believe in God and he is the center of my life.
3. I must always try to be a more honest person than I was yesterday.
4. The family is sacred.  My spouse and I are the ultimate authority,
   not the government.
5. If you break the law you pay the penalty.  Justice is blind and no
   one is above it.
6. I have a right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, but there
   is no guarantee to equal results.
7. I work hard for what I have and I will share it with who I want to. 
   Government cannot force me to be charitable.
8. It is not un-American for me to disagree with authority or to share
   my personal opinion.
9. The government works for me.  I do not answer to them, they answer
   to me.

The 12 Values:
Honesty; Reverence; Hope; Thrift; Humility; Charity; Sincerity; Moderation; Hard Work; Courage; Personal Responsibility; Gratitude.

If our leaders would legislate using these principles and values as their moral compass, rather than special interest, our country would be able to move back in the direction our founders envisioned.

back to the top

CREDIT CARD REFORM:
Three regulations I would like to see put in place relate to consumer debt. Banks should not be allowed to increase credit card limits without the individual signing a letter requesting the increased credit limit. If an individual‘s credit card is maxed out, why would you increase their limit unless your goal is to keep consumers in debt? Second, banks cannot increase credit card limits if the average daily balance for the past 90 days is greater than 50% of the card’s current limit. Third, banks should not be allowed to adjust interest rates once an account is opened. Often banks use late payments as a means to increase the interest rate. If the individual is late, their credit would be suspended until the account is current, but the interest rate remains the same.

back to the top

WATER MANAGEMENT:
The city of Atlanta is facing a water shortage and a federal judge has granted the state three years to work out a solution with Alabama and Florida. The first two solutions are about conservation. I would recommend a change to the building codes that would require adding a recirculation pump to water heaters upon their installation. New construction would have to meet this requirement during construction and homeowners would have to add the recirculation pump when their current water heater is replaced. The goal being that within 12-15 years every water heater in Georgia would have this device installed; thereby reducing the wait time on hot water which will also reduce water consumption.

The next addition would be the requirement of installing a cistern on all new home construction having more than four bathrooms. This requirement would be added to the building codes on new construction for apartment buildings, condominiums, office buildings, shopping centers and all federal and state buildings.

Another positive step would be to set the water flow level leaving Atlanta to be consistent with the amount of water that flows into Lake Lanier. The logic being that if Lake Lanier had not been built, the natural flow of the Chattahoochee River would be equal to what enters Lake Lanier.

The last item we need to move forward on is building additional reservoirs that are owned by the state. It takes approximately six years to build a reservoir and possibly another three years of negotiation to purchase the land needed to build the reservoir. While the state looks for a legal solution with Alabama and Florida, we need to move forward now with all the processes in building new reservoirs.

back to the top