Poyhonen's Blog

stories and commentary

Archive for the ‘Political Viewpoint’ Category

Term Limits

leave a comment »

Limiting the number of elected terms for Federal representatives seems like a good method of removing long kept public servants who longer serve the public or, in some cases, never served the public.   But who picks the candidates who run for elections to replace the existing congressman or senator?  Limiting the number of terms for any elected representative does not guarantee the replacement will be any different than the existing representative.  Yes, committee controls may be affected but the new candidate could be another denizen of the swamp who will grow to accomplish the same results of the ‘old’ creature who now retires to a lucrative ‘post’ service lobbying position.  My thinking is the concept of term limits is to replace  ‘poor’ representation with an individual willing to perform actual service for his/her constituency.  To be more clear, voters need the ability to select the candidates in order to avoid replacing one miscreant with another shill provided and sold by a party seeking power, not service.

Another point argued by those against term limits is the inception of bureaucratic amateurs replacing seasoned professionals.  This argument may seem specious on the surface but there do exist some honest bureaucrats who are not corrupt, (don’t ask me to provide names).  California has state term limits and the resulting chaos is available for the review of interested people.

Term limits sounds good on the surface but our election process; controlled by campaign money, disinformation, negative propaganda, and a corrupt academia supported by an even more corrupt media needs further analysis in order to avoid making the same mistakes over and over while seeking different results.

Health Care Reform Helps Insurance Companies Profit

We could subsidize Health Care service providers:

The cost of giving every licensed physician $100,000 would only be $90 billion per year.  This sounds ridiculous and expensive.  Ninety billion dollars spent with no detailed government oversight. People would have to pay co-pays and buy medical insurance without Government assistance.  Poor folk would get the same care without a lot of paperwork.  Dissolving Medicare and Medicaid would allow a free market to sell services for about fifty bucks a month per person. Yes, current payroll deductions would continue in order to augment compensation for all medical personnel relegating catastrophic health insurance to be bundled with car and home insurance schemes.

But:

No one seems to like the idea of giving tax dollars to doctors, nurses, and healthcare professionals.  No…, no, no, we can’t do that–our politicians, (and voters), would rather give insurance companies your tax dollars.  The enlightened goal is to provide everyone with a ‘plan’.  We are fated to accept the voters demand for subsidized health care insurance.

Payment of your medical bills gives dividends to stockholders and companies who are in business to make a profit.  They need to give higher dividends, don’t they?  After all, the yearly compensation for the Aetna CEO was a paltry twenty-seven million in 2016.  Stock options helped a lot.

Our health plans subsidize insurance companies in order for them to make money from your illness.  Sounds harsh, doesn’t it?  Your medical bill – if you can figure it out – includes profit for the stockholders, compensation for insurance sales persons, insurance executives pay, insurance buildings, advertising costs, and finally – your doctor’s salary.  The bookkeeping and bureaucratic overhead alone adds only about thirty percent to your bill.  The government argues that their portion of overhead is low.  That bears some truth because the bureaucratic efforts are made by the providers, (more on that later).  The government must ensure the fair and correct spending of your taxpayer dollars and their oversight requires massive record keeping and the development of forms.  Just remember–the government is here to help… to help…to help.

Some details collected from Justfacts.com:

Roughly, 60 minutes of paperwork are performed for every hour of emergency department care, 36 minutes of paperwork for every hour of surgery and acute inpatient care, 30 minutes of paperwork for every hour of skilled nursing care, and 48 minutes of paperwork for every hour of home health care. “Each time a physician orders a test or a procedure, the physician documents the order in the patient’s record. But the government requires additional documentation to prove the necessity for the test or procedure.”

  • “Many forms … must be completed daily by clinical staff to submit to the government to justify the care provided to skilled nursing facility patients.”
  • Medicare and Medicaid “rules and instructions” are more than 130,000 pages (three times larger than the IRS code and its associated regulations), and “medical records must be reviewed by at least four people to ensure compliance” with Medicare program requirements.
  • “A Medicare patient arriving at the emergency department is required to review and sign eight different forms—just for Medicare alone.”
  • “Each time a patient is discharged, even if only from the acute unit of the hospital to the on-site skilled nursing unit, multiple care providers must write a discharge plan for the patient. This documentation, as long as 30 pages, applies to all patients, regardless of the complexity of care received within the hospital or required post-hospital setting.”
  • In addition to regulation by state and local agencies and private accrediting organizations, hospitals are regulated by nearly 30 federal agencies.

Our government cannot think about giving tax dollars to health care professionals when paper pushers are more necessary to guarantee profits for insurance companies.  The massive government database contains items for every illness to include getting bitten by a duck or walking into a lamppost. They even have an item designation for walking into a lamppost for the second time.  Yes, the government will document your lamppost ‘problem’.

Who pays for all this?  You do.  Does the doctor really make out financially?  The admin persons at the hospital can make more than a surgeon.  Do you want that Admin professional in the operating room?  Don’t worry – admin is always there in spirit.  Someone must ensure the stockholders make a profit.  Is your deductible paid?  How much will the government kick in?  Does the patient ‘plan’ ensure this procedure is cost effective?  Everyone should be concerned with the last statement.  What happens if the procedure is not cost effective?   Does the cost/benefit/risk analysis allow a bone marrow transplant for a patient deemed terminal, (without one)?  Ask the insurance company or hospital admin – the only case I know of concerns a deceased mother of two who did not meet the criteria.

Whatever health care system you like should exclude stockholder dividends.  Your bill should not include a dividend to stockholders gambling on making money from your illness.  Some CEO should not be making millions each year by managing insurance schemes that profit from people requiring medical attention.  People are actually demanding government-sponsored monopolies because politicians tell them there is nowhere else to go and no other method of eliciting professional service.

All hospitals, including Non-profits, currently absorb the costs of services provided to the poor.  (Insurance covers costs in order to make a profit and do not include non-paying patients).  For example: According to the research by the research of Craig Garthwaite, Tal Gross and Matthew J. Notowidigdo, the cost of each poor patient in Tennessee is over a thousand dollars.  The hospitals lose money unless Medicaid shares the burden.  Your taxes pay for that as well.

A single payer plan will allow the Government to ‘help’ everyone by raising taxes and dictating the costs of all benefits.  ‘Medicare for all’ is a mantra for single payer advocates.  Sounds good, doesn’t it?  Cuba and Canada enjoy the benefits of single payer.  You may experience Canadian relatives taking residence in the USA in order to get medical attention but such activities would never happen if Our government took over health care and dictated the compensation to all medical providers.  Our government has a proven and cost effective record of … ‘helping’.  You can relax and feel secure when your doctor enters the operating room and tells you, “I’m from the government.  I’m here to help.”  Hopefully, you can understand the language used.

Twenty percent of our doctors currently come from foreign countries and there is a predicted shortage of doctors in our future but never fear – government insurance schemes will provide succor and it will only cost a couple TRILLION dollars.  Of course, we may have to deal with the government directing our lifestyles in order to keep premiums low and profits, um, manageable. Drinking soft drinks and eating meat may become as unhealthy as owning guns.  Government mandated bicycles could replace electric cars and who would want to go to school for 14 years to become a low paid doctor employed by the government?  A small increase in taxes, perhaps an extra TRILLION, might cover the expense but don’t worry, we can always raise taxes.

Now may we discuss subsidizing the providers instead of subsidizing insurance companies run for profit and controlled by government bureaucrats?

Did Jeff Sessions Lie?

leave a comment »

If you ever have to testify in court your legal council will invariably tell you three things.

Tell the truth, answer the direct question, and don’t embellish.

So when you are questioned, “I see that you purchased a Ford automobile and have been using it for transportation during the past two years. Have you had an accident?”

You have not been in any type of accident with your Ford so you answer, “No.”

“But I can show that you were involved in an accident while driving your sister’s Chevy six months ago – Ah HA!” The attack is meant to construe you as a liar.

The news media reports you as a liar. Your representative describes you as a liar on every available news outlet and the Federal Department of Justice is tasked to investigate your lying about personal driving habits and attempting to cover up Chevy fender benders. Cargate becomes a major news story. Ford is implicated in the cover-up.

Watch the questions put to Senator Sessions by Senator Franken.

Sessions did not lie.

Franken already knew that the answer to, “Have you ever met with that ambassador during the last couple of years?” would be, “Yes.” He had to trap his fellow Senator by wordsmithing a question that was contextually specific in terms of driving a campaign, (or Ford), so that it could be construed as misinformation. Of course they were all aware that meeting various ambassadors, (or Chevy’s), is also part of Sessions duties as a Senator.

Biased news agencies, also fully aware that meeting foreign ambassadors is integral to this Senator’s job, also needed a response to an obvious question given in a specific scenario they could employ to demean, smear, and falsely accuse someone of denying an act that was patently obvious and had public witnesses.  The paradox of this demeaning episode is that only dishonest people will construe his answer as being dishonest.

If this makes you fearful about being questioned under oath – just remember three things.

Tell the truth, answer the direct question, and don’t embellish.

Now, tell me, “When did you stop beating your wife?”

Senator Hubris Staff Meeting & Discussions Concerning the DOJ

leave a comment »

Senator Hubris plopped into a padded chair situated at the head of a table lined with sycophant staff members and immediately reached into the basket of croissants placed in front of him.

“Any good news this morning?” he asked around a mouthful of pastry.

“Well, we got the attorney general on the run,” one excited staff member piped enthusiastically.

“I called our press operatives to make sure they report his guilt,” press secretary Bob smiled in satisfaction.

“Is he?” Hubris asked while eyeing the basket.

“Doesn’t matter,” another staff member reported, “he’s guilty until proven innocent.”

“Technically,” Bob hesitated, “he’s completely innocent but we have the media on our side as well as many members of congress eager to play along. Our delays at cabinet membership changes have successfully kept the DOJ populated with our hirelings and they have orders to assure his guilt. We even have support from across the aisle.”

“Support?” Hubris grabbed another croissant.

“Yeah,” an older staff member cleared his throat before continuing, “They knew there was nothing and were very willing to support an investigation of nothing – but we trapped them with this new accusation and now we can hoist them on their own petard, so to speak.”

“Excellent,” Hubris beamed at his brilliant group of cohorts.

“What about research, Sally?” Hubris pointed at the only woman on his staff. “Have we got anything else?”

“We…ll,” Sally hedged by shuffling her papers, “We have a connection where his plane was on the tarmac of an airport at the same time as a passenger plane carrying two foreign ambassadors.”

“Of course!” Hubris pounded the table, “We can accuse him of a clandestine meeting.”

Sally shook her head slowly, “Not sure if we want to link planes on tarmacs with attorney generals and secret meetings. The ice may be a bit thin in that arena.”

“I know what you are inferring,” Bob remonstrated, “and our media minimized the reports on those meetings with our DOJ and besides – the constituents have already forgotten the incident.”

“What about the fact,” an exuberant member repeated himself, “the Fact, I say – that the new AG ate at a restaurant that had immigrant servers with visas originating from the country in question.”

“Huh?” Hubris joined several staff members looks of incredulity.

“Meetings with foreign waiters,” the young man continued, “cunningly made to look innocent but when we question him…”

“Ah…, Did you ever direct orders to foreign nationals during the campaign?” Hubris’ smiled like a Cheshire cat in a Disney movie.

“He’s bound to say no,” Bob leaned back in his chair and dreamily looked at the ceiling.

“Did you accept bribes from foreigners…?”

“A refill of his coffee cup,” Sally chuckled.

“Did you give money?”

“Tipped the waiter, no doubt,” Hubris amazed his staff at being the only person they knew who could sneer in delight.

“I’m really glad we can feed the media with accusations that will drown out that last speech,” Bob pursed his lips in satisfaction.

“Yeah – I was afraid we would have to live with that for over a week,” Hubris agreed.

“I also have some leaks programmed to reinstitute the race factor,” Bob’s assistant finally joined the conversation. “This idea of bringing jobs to the inner city is definitely a racist act.”

“There is a danger in allowing people to get jobs and education beyond our control,” Sally offered some analysis. “Minorities with jobs can move out of the generous havens we provide. They could even buy books and begin reading unsanctioned treatises that talk about humanity, history, and character. We really need to keep people unemployed and dependent. Think of the consequences if all our constituents uncovered the truth. We need to control the minorities and make the others feel guilty. Our power depends on it.”

The entire staff nodded in agreement, save one.

“Huh?” the original speaker remonstrated, “I can tell you as a community organizer that we OWN the inner cities.”

Bob frowned, “I wouldn’t put it quite that way,” he murmured.

“We only control the food, housing, and education,” Hubris instructed. “This administration will never get by our years of academic indoctrination and control of the media.”

“To your credit Alphonse,” Bob turned to his assistant, “we only own the social media and teachers union. We always tell the people they are free to choose among the choices we provide.”

“Well, if you want a riot, Alphonse looked chagrined, “I can get you one.”

“Thanks Alphonse,” Hubris tried to lighten the moment. “You have done an excellent job in the past and rest assured we will call upon you and your peculiar talents quite often in the near future. By the way – I had the bank funnel millions of dollars of ‘penalties’ largess into your social justice organization.”

“Is that legal?” Sally questioned.

“Of course,” Hubris quickly replied. “The funds are a penalty and we put into law a provision to allow penalties to be placed into a slush fund of ‘our’ choosing instead of returning funds to customers who were ripped off by banks and other institutions. You see, it’s not a tax and involves no tax payer monies. It’s even a legal tax deduction for those involved. No political financial constraints or ethics overhead and the only people losing money are those people who were not compensated for being ripped off. And they will never know.” Hubris chuckled before continuing, “We can fund all sorts of organizations and community events, including Alphonse’s group.”

“Thank you, sir,” Alphonse twitched his head side to side in nervous enjoyment, “the demonstrators’ wages have been rising along with the violence requirements.”

“Well it seems our people in the DOJ still have control so is there any other new business?”

The staff became quiet until Hubris directed a question to a small man seated at the far side of the table, “Harry – what about the huge history book that I am writing? Have you finished it yet? Might have to make it into two books with all that stuff I gave you, eh?”

Harry stuttered, “I wrote exactly what you told me but the fact checkers have questioned most of the content.”

“How many pages have I written so far?” Hubris pressed.

“Only ten pages are left but that includes the table of contents which looks like we may be losing another page,” Harry looked down at the table in shame.

“Fire those checkers and put back that content,” Hubris huffed. “What have you got for the back cover dialogue?”

“Its gluten free,” Harry replied, thankful he had something positive to report.

How to Repeal and Replace Obamacare and Avoid All the Complaints

leave a comment »

Think about the complaints and concerns instigated by the dire thought of repealing Obamacare:

People would lose the free services provided by Obamacare.

The Government would lose tax income provided by Obamacare taxes.

Democrats will complain and spin any replacement concepts as insufficient – and probably racist.

 

My suggestion is to consider Replacing Obamacare before repealing the act, mandates, and taxes.

Replacing Obamacare with a concrete system would allow all supporters and detractors to review the efficacy of the replacement – before – dissolving Obamacare.  The concerns of replacement aspects will be answered, improvements can be made, and costs can be determined so that health services can be available before the ACA collapses due to an inherent poor design seemingly created for income redistribution rather than health care. The added bureaucracy is astonishing, (and adds about 30% to the cost of health care).

 

The largest issue in this method is cost.  The government would be paying for two health systems during the SHORT time allowed for a comprehensive review.  Still, the added cost can be justified as the price of getting the new system right.  One might note that paying for the medical costs of disadvantaged folk is likely to be a cost in both systems so that should not be considered an additional expense.

The second largest issue is also cost – in terms of lost revenue gained by ACA taxing of citizens already taxed by Medicare.

 

Politically oriented complaints and accusations, name calling, and reports comprised of misinformation and ‘spin’ will be provided by many politicians and media pundits more concerned with gaining self serving power than serving citizens.  Such is the divisive state provided by the last decade of politicians and this proclivity will not suddenly disappear, however, logical and sincere debate should be encouraged for a short period.  Creating another 2000 page series of laws crammed into an Act cannot be allowed.

 

Sounds simple – well, no – but I believe the concept is more reasonable that Repeal and Replace.

What do you think?

Questions for American Security Officials Concerning the Russian Hacking of the Election

leave a comment »

There is public information available decrying ‘hacking’ being performed by the U.S., Russia, China, and North Korea. The current and most prominent complaint in the U.S. accuses Russians of hacking the presidential election.

Our government’s accusation does not concern ballots, voting machines, or the counting of votes but is targeted at the release of emails ‘hacked’ from the DNC and John Podesta’s emails. The emails demonstrate some interesting items:

Hillary Clinton supports fracking and thinks opposition to is a Russian plot supported by Russian oligarchs.

The DNC and Hillary campaign conspired to defeat Bernie Sanders

Campaign debate questions given to Hillary prior to the debate

Pay for play regarding Cisco

The Clinton Foundation received many millions for Saudi Arabia and Qatar after Hillary had full knowledge that those countries covertly funded ISIS.

There are many, many more emails that demonstrate corruption, hypocrisy, collusion, and deceptive activities. The leaked emails led to the resignation of Democrat National Committee Party Chair, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, as well as several other high ranking members of the DNC. The loss of so many officials, exposed as being corrupt, might be thought to have had a significant impact on Hillary’s campaign efforts but Debbie Wasserman Schultz was hired by Hillary to be an honorary chair of Hillary’s 50 state program to elect Democrats around the country so the DNC loss of Debbie can be viewed as a gain to Hillary’s campaign.

Voters review of the leaked information, leading to the disdain of the candidate, seems to be the key complaint and result of alleged Russian hacking – even though Wikileaks denies Russian or any State involvement.  The Russians, however, are still being blamed for Hillary’s loss of the election. They are accused of releasing ‘hacked’ emails whose review by voters discredited Hillary as a candidate.

The content of the emails needs to be considered. No one has disparaged the DNC for Podesta’s risotto recipe, (also leaked in the emails), but the legitimate and validated content disclosing corruption and dishonesty seems to have had an impact of some level as yet to be determined. There has been no quantitative analysis on the level of voter response due to the release of the emails content.  Some questions to our security operatives may bring some light to the (Russian?) hacking operation regarding the presidential campaign:

If the content is unimportant – why is this hacking considered so appalling? For example: There is no interest in bank camera surveillance until something illegal or unethical transpires during the video.

Were the initiators of the emails paid by Russians? Did Podesta, Hillary, and DNC operatives get remunerations for writing the content of the emails?

Is there a money trail from Russia to the content writers of Podesta’s emails? Perhaps they were coerced in some manner?

Did the content providers actually mean what they wrote?

The same can be said for James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas videos that exposed Hillary and DNC funded operatives fomenting violence at Trump rallies and other disingenuous activities. The Democrats railed against the videos because they were surreptitiously garnered but the content of the videos exposed many lies, misinformation, and negative propaganda created by Democrats and Hillary campaign officials to mislead the public in regards to D. Trump. Was O’Keefe paid by the Russians to make the videos or were the persons being recorded being paid by the Russians?

Will President Obama also force O’Keefe to leave the United States?

So far, the only money trail discovered from Russia leads to the Clinton Foundation – but the provided questions are for those investigators of the great election hacking propaganda production being foisted upon American citizens.   Unfortunately, the answers would provide a much needed focus on actual election campaign problems inherent in the DNC, News Media, Academia, and our Executive branch of Government in terms of honest discourse, and as such, they will never be asked.

Nevertheless, in regards of this article, be aware that many states governments, even allies, have hacking endeavors and your technical and private information should be protected with vigor.

———————————————————

There are many avenues to explore and the following list of reference sites is not even a beginning foray into exposing the corrupt activities of Hillary Clinton.

http://www.wnd.com/2016/10/how-hillarys-campaign-chief-hid-money-from-russia/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-greene/the-russian-hack-absolute_b_13656802.html

https://theintercept.com/2016/12/29/the-guardians-summary-of-julian-assanges-interview-went-viral-and-was-completely-false/

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/12/12/13919702/russian-hackers-donald-trump-2016

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/10/20/13308108/wikileaks-podesta-hillary-clinton

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/18/undercover-video-shows-democrats-saying-they-hire-/

Written by poyhonen

January 4, 2017 at 4:25 am

Ideas to Support Draining the Swamp

leave a comment »

  1. Delete 30% of all civil service positions.
  2. Limit new regulations and laws to only 2 pages of documentation.
  3. Move the United Nations to a Montana wilderness area. Beautiful setting and a boom for construction in Montana. Attendant countries, diplomats, and administrators would have to pay the local economy for buildings, homes, airports, transportation, and energy. (The current UN building can be employed as a homeless shelter).
  4. Many of those laid off civil service workers can be temporarily employed by deleting or reducing existing written laws to conform to the two page rule. All federal laws should be written so any common citizen can understand the content and desired results of the laws and regulations.
  5. Combine Homeland Security with the FBI and reduce/replace the two top management tiers of most agencies, (CIA, NSA, FTC, EPA, FCC, DIA, DEA, etc.).
  6. Delete BLM, and return 80% of all current Federal lands to the States.
  7. Make English our national language and stop printing other languages at taxpayers’ expense.
  8. Fund inner city Pod transportation for an infrastructure upgrade that will be the envy of the world. (The construction will also provide good jobs for depressed areas and one way to improve inner city problems is to offer a method of escape not provided by local government).
  9. Curtail Request for Changes in existing and future government contracts and ensure that knowledgeable professionals perform design, (not necessarily some military ranking officer with little or no understanding of technical issues). Review the contract process in its entirety. I would suggest a review of the Lockheed Skunk works process that built the SR-71 in 20 months, (1962 and it is still the highest flying, fastest man operated airplane ever built).
  10. Cut existing agency contracts by 50%. Seems harsh but there really is a LOT of fat and it is growing. The personnel cuts in suggestion number 1 will help in this regard. Some contracts may expire under this edict. Good. Rewrite the requirements and issue another contract at a more reasonable price.
  11. Sell unused government buildings or give them away – stop maintaining them.
  12. Exile many criminals instead of incarcerating them – (violence related crimes). Rehabilitate others that demonstrate merit. Long prison terms deserve exile instead of incarceration.  This ‘out of the box’ list comprises only twelve areas of potential improvements. Such changes cannot all be accomplished immediately or simultaneously because of the massive disruption that will be caused by thousands of people losing jobs but when the draining begins, it must be done with a full commitment to lowering the cost and adverse effects of a bloated government. Many more bipartisan opportunities exist. What are yours?