"Oddly, I can say that in many ways my Greek experience gave me wonderful opportunities. Nonetheless, my epiphany came when Greece's economic collapse and the government's implosion revealed just how reliant on the government we are, and just how vulnerable to government mismanagement we are."
I dunno, I communicate with my Congresspeeps all the time.
Here's the latest, from Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R) Texas:
April 12, 2012
Dear Gerry:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the health care reform law that was enacted in March 2010. I welcome your thoughts and comments.
I voted against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act because I believe that it authorizes a government takeover of our private health care system, it will do nothing to restrain the runaway growth of health care costs, and it will increase federal spending and deficits by trillions of dollars in coming years. Although not a single Republican Senator voted for the bill, the measure was approved and signed into law by President Barack Obama in March 2010.
Buried in the 2,000 pages of legislation are scores of provisions that will restructure how we can obtain health care services. From government-mandated health insurance to new regulations on doctor-patient relationships, the new law will replace our current system with government control.
During Senate consideration of the legislation, I offered an amendment to allow states and American taxpayers the opportunity to opt out of the bills key provisions, including higher taxes, unfunded mandates, and penalties. I also authored an amendment that would have delayed new taxes imposed by the legislation, and another amendment that would have had the Senate go on record regarding the constitutionality of the health care bill.
My amendments and virtually all other attempts to address crucial problems with the legislation on the Senate floor were squelched by the Senate majority. But in the wake of President Obama signing the measure into law, twenty-seven states filed lawsuits in federal court that challenged the constitutionality of the law and its individual health insurance mandate (i.e., stipulations that every American must buy government-dictated health insurance, or pay a penalty to the Internal Revenue Service). Two federal district court judges ruled subsequently that part or all of the new law is unconstitutional. After the federal appeals court process ran its course, the U.S. Supreme Court put review of the health care law on its docket for 2012.
In March 2012, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments about several constitutional issues raised by the health care law. I was fortunate to be able to attend one oral argument session and came away convinced that several Justices had an excellent grasp of the fundamentally important constitutional questions raised by the health care law. A decision is expected to be handed down in June. Most observers expect the Court to be closely divided, as it has been on most controversial issues in recent years.
In the meantime, the Obama Administration is accelerating implementation of the new law, and forcing states to incur millions of dollars in costs that may be wasted, if the law is found to be unconstitutional. For this reason, I introduced the Save Our States (SOS) Act, which would suspend implementation of the health care reform law until the Supreme Court renders its final decision. I have attempted to offer my bill as an amendment to other legislation, and I remain hopeful of getting a vote on my bill soon, before states and businesses are required to spend additional millions on a new law that may be found to be unconstitutional in a few months.
In 2011, a provision in health reform took effect; it states that Health Savings Accounts or Flexible Spending Accounts (privately funded, tax-exempt accounts used by millions of working families for out-of-pocket health care costs) could no longer be used to buy over-the-counter medications unless a doctor writes a prescription. In response, I introduced S. 312, the Patients Freedom to Choose Act, to overturn this restriction and also repeal the new $2,500 federal cap on private contributions to Flexible Spending Accounts.
Also troubling are the extraordinary steps the Obama Administration has taken to exempt scores of favored corporations and labor union health plans from the new law. It's clear that the law's huge costs and consequences will fall on Medicare recipients, individuals and families who buy their health care coverage, and small employers that offer job-based insurance benefits.
There are better health care solutions that will actually lower costs, expand access to quality care, and increase patients choices. The right approach would keep patients at the center of our health care system, reduce the costs of overbearing government regulations, eliminate lawsuit abuse, and allow small businesses to pool their insurance purchasing power. It would bolster family doctors and community hospitals, and support a competitive health care system that encourages individuals to make health care choices according to their needs and wants not government rules.
I am the lead cosponsor of the Health Care Freedom Act of 2009 (S. 1324), authored by Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC). This bill would provide tax credits for individuals who purchase their own insurance so that the coverage they buy is portable. It would implement nationwide medical malpractice reform. It would create a web portal for easy comparisons of competing insurance plans and allow individuals to purchase insurance across state lines. It would also give flexibility to states to set their own health insurance rules. Unfortunately, the Senate majority has not allowed a vote to be taken on these commonsense reforms.
You are among thousands of Texans who have written to express their views on this crucial topic. Please be assured I will continue to do all I can to reverse and overturn the new law, and replace it with a sensible plan to contain costs and improve health care quality, while emphasizing the strengths of our system.
I appreciate hearing from you, and I hope you will not hesitate to contact me on any issue that is important to you.
Sincerely,
Kay Bailey Hutchison
United States Senator
284 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
202-224-5922 (tel)
202-224-0776 (fax)
http://hutchison.senate.gov
-- Edited by gerryvz on Wednesday 16th of May 2012 11:19:39 PM
The president doesn't control the purse, Congress does. Although the President can sign or veto a Congressional spending bill, ultimately you should be calling your congressman if you're concerned about excessive government debt.
No he does not set how large the purse is, however he sure is responsible for how fast he spends the money in said purse.
Do I need to remind you that the Democratic party (Obama is a Democrat) controlled the purse for the first few years? I think they called it a "Super Majority" IIRC.
But yeah.. Every since the Republicans took the house (aka the purse) spending has been somewhat curtailed. Obama isn't on vacation every other week, but now it's an election year so we might as well consider him on Vacation until November, at which time he will be fired by the American people.
__________________
What is to give light must endure burning -- Viktor Frankl
Thank you for contacting me regarding the Keystone XL pipeline. I welcome your thoughts and comments.
The Keystone XL pipeline is a proposed $7 billion private sector infrastructure project that would transport 700,000 barrels of oil from Alberta, Canada to refineries in Texas. Texas refineries are in a unique position to take on the very large quantities of oil from this pipeline. Our states 26 refineries account for more than 25 percent of total United States oil and approximately 5 percent of worldwide capacity. If completed, it has been estimated that the pipeline development would create up to 20,000 construction and manufacturing jobs, and as many as 100,000 jobs at refineries and other businesses.
International pipeline projects like Keystone XL require a Presidential Permit. Keystone XL has been studied and reviewed for the past four years by one dozen different federal agencies, including in a comprehensive environmental impact statement. By any measure, it is the most-studied pipeline in history. Nevertheless, President Barack Obama has been hesitant to make a decision on the required Presidential Permit.
With so many badly needed, good-paying jobs at stake, Congress intervened late last year by attaching an amendment to legislation that extended unemployment benefits and temporary payroll tax reductions. In an attempt to move the pipeline project forward, the amendment directed the president to decide whether the project would be in the national interest and, if so, to conclude the permitting process within 60 days.
Unfortunately, on January 18, 2012, President Obama rejected a Presidential Permit for Keystone XL. In my view, the President missed a huge opportunity to boost the national economy and create thousands of jobs in more than a dozen states, including Texas. In Texas alone, the pipeline construction would produce an estimated $2.3 billion in private investment and generate more than $48 million in new tax revenue.
Notwithstanding the President's decision, efforts to move Keystone XL forward are continuing. The pipeline would be an important step for our energy independence and security. In contrast to the instability in the Middle East and in other oil-producing regions, Canada is one of our most trusted allies and a friendly neighbor. Keystone XL could essentially eliminate our Middle East oil imports. Without the pipeline, however, Canadian crude oil will be sold to China and other nations.
I will continue to look for ways in which Congress can work to keep the Keystone pipeline as an option for America to go to work and lower energy costs by increasing supply. I appreciate hearing from you. I hope you will not hesitate to contact me on any issue that is important to you.
Really, you bothered writing to a senator who already agrees with you on everything?
I wrote my Republican congressman John Kline a couple times to give him a piece of my mind, and got very similar letters pertaining to the issue I was concerned about. His staff simply changed the recipient name and address and sent it out, totally disregarding the fact that I disagree with him.
Really, you bothered writing to a senator who already agrees with you on everything?
Yeah, I live in a place called the State of Texas, where a good majority of the population is like minded in their philosophy on things, and where our representatives actually believe the same thing (and represent) the population.
Isn't it great when your congressfolk actually are aligned with you? And they're in Washington representing your viewpoint? I know it's a foreign thing PowerStroker, but tt's a great feeling! You should try it sometime. Given your mindset, I'd think that a move to New York, Michigan or California would be right up your alley.
Believe me, I lived in the People's Republic of Oregon for 13 years. I know what it's like to live in a place where your views are not represented. And that's a big reason why I moved my family to Texas, for a better life: better schools and education system (thank you Gov. George W. Bush), stronger economy, lower taxes, less crime, no depressed real estate .. you name it. Did I mention I got a 9% raise moving here (no state income tax)? Woo-hoo !!
