Is Shrinking the US Federal Government a Real Possibility?

It is always good when you see or hear bureaucrats communicating that they want to shrink government and make things efficient and useful.  Only doing that which adds value is a way of life in the real business world.

So I was happy (but skeptical) when I saw the White House website “21st Century Government – Campaign to Cut Waste” which stems from Executive Order # 13576 on Government Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Accountability from June 13, 2011. 

Here is a brief excerpt of the order:

“The American people must be able to trust that their Government is doing everything in its power to stop wasteful practices and earn a high return on every tax dollar that is spent.  To strengthen that trust and deliver a smarter and leaner Government, my Administration will reinforce the performance and management reform gains achieved thus far; systematically identify additional reforms necessary to eliminate wasteful, duplicative, or otherwise inefficient programs; and publicize these reforms so that they may serve as a model across the Federal Government.”

At the same website, I found the following post: “Building a 21st Century Government by Cutting Duplication, Fragmentation, and Waste”:

“Yet, the Administration will not wait for congressional action. Where we can, we are taking aggressive action to eliminate overlap and reduce fragmentation administratively across government (emphasis added).

You get the gist of what they are trying to sell.  Here is my favorite: Regulatory Reform.

Anyway, I came across something that I think was missed and I just need to get it off my chest.  In the grand scheme of all the hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars wasted each year due to government inefficiency and regulatory mismatches and red tape, I am sure this is a small drop in the bucket.  But a bigger concern than the wasted tax dollars, is the potential lack of access to clearly proven laboratory health services for millions of beneficiaries.

Here is the head scratcher.  The federal government funds health plans.  You know them as Medicare and Medicaid under the regulatory agency known as the CMS under the Department of Health and Human Services.  The Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius reports to the President. There are also Federal Employee Health Benefits Plans and I think they are regulated under the office of Personnel Management which I believe to be an independent federal government agency.

Lastly there is TRICARE, a Military Health System benefits entitlement program administered by the Department of Defense. It has its own Secretary, Leon Pannetta, who reports to the President.

TRICARE Management Activity or TMA recently released word of a new Demonstration Project for something called Lab Developed Tests or LDTs.  Below are pulled sections of a published  justification and mission statement derived from the Office of the Secretary of Defense pulled from the Federal Register: that is announcing the need for doing the whole demonstration project.  You may just want to read the whole thing to see the flow of TMAs thinking and justification.

An LDT is a test developed by a single clinical laboratory that
provides testing to the public but does not sell the lab kit to other
labs. In the past, these tests were relatively simple tests used to
diagnose or monitor diseases and other conditions within a single
laboratory usually at a local large hospital or academic medical
center. As a result the FDA has utilized enforcement discretion (where
the FDA does not enforce some or all applicable laws and regulations on
certain categories of products) of LDTs and has taken no action to
remove them from the marketplace.

In contrast to TMA, CMS regulations do not have a specific
requirement that devices be FDA approved. As a result CMS policy
provides a mechanism for the review and payment of non-FDA approved
LDTs (Section 522 of the Benefits Improvement and Protection Act). Non-
FDA approved LDTs which meet CMS’s standards are approved through its
National Coverage Determination (NCD) or Local Coverage Determination
(LCD) process. Once a LDT receives a LCD, it is considered a nationwide
Medicare covered benefit.

A demonstration project will be initiated by the TMA to test
whether CMS approved LDTs which have not received FDA medical device
510(k) clearance or premarket approval (therefore considered non-FDA
approved) are safe and effective for cost-sharing for TRICARE
beneficiaries. The LDTs for this demonstration would be limited to only
those that significantly inform clinical decision-making for
surveillance, surgical intervention, chemotherapy, or radiation therapy
for cancer.

What irks me as a taxpayer is that the DoD feels it has to expend however many hundreds of thousands or maybe even millions of dollars doing a complicated 3 year demonstration project to see if BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 tests and Oncotype gene tests (all are LDTs) can yield safe and helpful results to improve the health of TRICARE beneficiaries.

Why does TMA think it has to do all of this to prove something that likely is already proven by CMS?  What does TMA think makes a CMS patient different than a TRICARE patient?  If these lab tests are helping save Medicare or Medicaid lives under CMS, does TRICARE not think they can do the same for TRICARE lives, as if the payor source of the tests changes the outcomes?  It it ludicrous.

The only reason TRICARE is doing this is because the Code of Federal Regulations has divergent rules that permit the same federal government from paying or not paying for the same exact tests under different health benefit programs!  It is just a government red tape issue and not anything to do with proven and effective health care!

Why couldn’t the Department of Defense and TMA just ask for an executive order to cut through the red tape of the regulatory mismatching that makes the same exact tests being able to be covered under Medicare but not TRICARE go away?

Think about it.   A TRICARE beneficiary becomes Medicare eligible at 65.  So what is so magic about a lab test all of a sudden being proven as safe and reliable for good health outcomes when the person’s benefit plan eligibility changes from TRICARE as primary payor to Medicare?  It is all red tape driven.  Cut the red tape and save patients time and save taxpayers money.
If it is good for the federal government to fund payment under Medicare, why not make it good for the federal government to fund payment under TRICARE and vice versa?  Fixing this issue now rather than doing a costly and wasteful demonstration project will certainly go a long way towards removing any skepticism that I have regarding the White House’s boasting on making government more efficient in the 21st century.

Daily Press Editorial Staff Knows Truth About Our Unhealthy Dependence on Government

The message is clear and many citizens have known this problem for years. So now what do we do? http://www.dailypress.com/news/opinion/dp-edt-spending-editorial-20120708,0,2415744.story

Legal Argument: Use of Case Law or Refer to the Constitution as Supreme Law of Land in Analysis of ACA

Here is an amazingly thought provoking argument against the Affordable Healthcare Act that uses the Constitution and not established Commerce Clause case law as its underpinning.  Several blog posts ago, I wrote that I wondered how much of my rights were left due to erosion from bad court decisions serving as precedent such as Wickard v. Filburn or Gonzales v. Raich before I actually became a full fledged ward of the state. In my amateur judicial mind, new case law appeared to just keep being based and built upon errant case law that was centered on politically expedient court decisions rather than constitutional interpretation.  If every new or subsequent challenge of unconstitutional law was brought before the court and weighed by the court only against established case law that was – to be frank, a bad opinion, then I postulated that our freedoms are quite doomed.  Supreme Court case law of the early to mid 20th century is not exactly a bulwark of pro-Constitutional rulings.  Fortunately, true legal scholars and professionals who understand the Constitution thought the same thing and banded together to write this argument as to why the Affordable Healthcare Act is unconstitutional. These friends of the court include one of my favorite organizations that support Liberty, The Downsize DC Foundation and DownsSizeDC.org

Amicus Curiae – DEPT. OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL., Petitioners, v. STATE OF FLORIDA ET AL., Respondents.

The analysis in this amicus urges the Supreme Court Justices to discard the bad habit of relying on Commerce Clause case law since much of the key decisions were from a politically packed court during FDR’s administration.  Instead, the respondents urge the court to look at the health mandate with a fresh new perspective, going back to the actual textual law that is the Constitution – The Supreme Law of the Land.  It really is an argument to behold with awe and great appreciation.  Hopefully a majority of the court will see the wisdom in this argument and overturn the low courts upholding of this constitutional abomination.  The Congress does not have free rein to do what it wants under the Commerce Clause.

Former Ronald Reagan solicitor general Charles Fried, now a Harvard Law Professor, thinks the opposite and that the current Supreme Court led by Chief Justice John Roberts should follow the bad precedent set by previous Supreme Courts and not overturn the ACA law as unconstitutional. “It would be plainly at odds with precedent, and plainly in conflict with what several of the justices have said before.” Here is a link to this opinion of the former conservative lawyer who served under Ronald Reagan.

It would be my hope that a fresh check against the text of the Constitution take place.  I don’t understand exactly what Fried is worried about if today’s court makes its own assessment of the Constitutionality of the law.  What is exactly is wrong if this court abandons the poorly thought out decisions from its predecessors?  Are not mistakes permitted to be corrected?

Waiting on the Supreme Court Decision Regarding Obama Care

The wait on the Supreme Courts ruling of whether or not the Affordable Health Care Act (ACA) is constitutional is akin to waiting for the surgeon to come out of the operating room after having just performed surgery to remove a cancerous tumor from a loved one’s lungs.  Only the surgeon can say whether or not the patient is going to live.  The ACA is the tumor. The deathly ill patient is a country once known to be a Constitutional Republic that went by the name of the United States of America.

Obama Care Gets its Day in Court and a Few Other Things on My Mind

My writing has slowed quite dramatically this past month or so.  It seems that not much is really happening that inspires me to write.  I mean, how much can any body rail against socialism and big government before it becomes redundant? So what else is there to write?

Things taking place now for which I am paying attention none the less are:

• Supreme Court hearing the constitutionality of Obama Care.  Hopefully they will find limits to the government’s powers with respect to the commerce clause.  Once they find it legal to compel an individual to have to purchase something from a private entity, then I am sure our constitutional republic is dead.  Charles Krauthammer’s recent article call Obama Care: The Reckoning has me so very optimistic.
• The stock market and its pointless fluttering day in and day out.  Maybe the above will cause it to do something – anything to give an indication of where this economy is headed.  I still harbor convictions that holding gold and silver are necessary to not falling prey to the federal reserves  monetary policy.
• The reconstitution of the York County Republican Committee here in Virginia.  I have left the committee in protest the last 2 bienniums as a result of the committee refusing to admonish the big government embracing on the part of supposed limited government members of the party (see https://livinghereinamerica.wordpress.com/2012/02/02/the-necessary-evil-of-local-gop-party-politics-to-engage-or-not-to-engage/ )  The Committee has a pro-Ron Paul supporter who is running for the chairmanship and there a numerous pro-Constitutional and Ron Paul supporters looking to make the party more conservative in terms of limited government than the other times I participated.
• The remaining period of free agency in the NFL
• The NCAA final four
• The NFL Draft

So as the above plays out, I lay low.  I get up, go to work, come home, enjoy some rest and relaxation with my family and do it again…wondering how long all of it is going to last.

The Stresses of Recurring Letdowns From Being an Individualist Amongst the Mainstream Masses

After reading what I just wrote below, this is sort of a disjointed non-cohesive writing.  I appreciate your indulgence should you choose to proceed. Thanks in advance – Robert 🙂

Super Tuesday has come and gone.  This is one of the busier days of the primary season leading up to the November 2012 general and presidential election.  This is the second consecutive presidential election campaign cycle that I have supported Ron Paul.

In between these two election cycles, I spent some of my free time attempting to be efficiently politically active in relating to my opposition to various congressional activities that are eroding freedom in the U.S.A.

Most people reading these words would agree that beyond the 2010 Republican house cleaning, not much seems to have changed in the “Big Brother and Big Government” landscape.  I am so very much looking forward to the Supreme Court of the U.S.A  giving Obamacare its day in court.  That noted, I know I am also setting myself up for a let down, because I find it almost a no-brainer that the Patient Protection – Affordable Health Care act is a Constitutional abomination.  If I see it as clearly being a no-no from a constitutional perspective, then I believe the liberal appointees to the Court will rule it as permissible.  Hence the let down.

A problem with the judiciary process as it stands today seems to be the issue of bad case law being allowed to remain in effect.  Previous judicial opinions set precedent upon which future decisions are handed down from other courts.  I could never quite wrap my mind around the issue of what if decisions that are delivered are wrong – even if the final decision is upheld on appeal?   That then leaves future courts to lean on these erroneous decisions, until at some point further into the future, all court cases have their decisions based on faulty application of the law.  What I am describing is a domino effect built on case law that gets further and further away from proper application of constitutional interpretation.   This seems to have been happening for the last 70 years.

Let me be clear that I know I am not a lawyer and will gladly cede superiority in this regard to the constitutional scholars.  But I am confident that the interpretation of the law will continue to be misconstrued and applied the more errant decisions are allowed to stand and serve as bulwark for future decisions.  That is why the Supreme Court nominating process is so important to conservatives.  We need a qualified judiciary to protect our constitutional rights from being trampled through erroneous legislative and regulatory outcomes.

Coming back from the sidetrack musing, it appears that my candidate Ron Paul is not doing well in the popular vote process that will lead to the GOP nomination for the 2012 presidential nomination.  That noted, the key is to seat delegates, and the mainstream media is not even reporting much on the dedicated base that Ron Paul has working at the grass roots level to secure delegates at the various local, district, and national GOP  conventions.  With providential intervention, perhaps we can get some influence in the process.  I was left feeling defeated after the 2008 campaign.

So while we wait to see how this campaign process plays out, I will get a “fix” on repairing the damage from Obamacare by tracking the Supreme Court hearing and sending out Tweets, emails, and posting my thoughts here on this blog.

Lately though, all of my energy and action put towards this effort of trying to remain free has exacted somewhat of a toll on me.  I know I can’t be alone in this regard.  There are hundreds of thousands of people who are supporting Ron Paul and the cause for saving Liberty.  If you find yourself feeling alone and frustrated and stressed out at the recurring letdowns that your efforts to push back big government are not yielding the results that you would like to see, then it might be time to try something different.

I decided to take a few weeks off from it.  I wanted to clear my head and spirit.  So I read a fiction book and tried to distance myself as much as I could from the politics and news.  Coming back from that, I am thinking I want to try a different tact and just share my thoughts with others. In support of that, I am also trying to introduce more people to an two organizations that can help by carrying the load, allowing me to be reminded that I am not alone.  These organizations are The Campaign For Liberty and Downsize DC.

I am glad that I am blessed to have the mind and personality to not fall in lockstep with the masses and that I can think and act on my own accord. But sometimes that can stress the heck out of you and derail you from wanting to continue.  A good way to recover from the stresses of this worldview is to connect with like minded individuals who share your viewpoints.  We are not alone.  The passions that fan the flames of freedom lie within all of us and we are all inextinguishable.  Stay strong and stay passionate.

Sovereign Citizens, the Watchful Eye of the FBI, and the Founding Fathers

Recent news accounts like this of the FBI’s announcement that it has concerns with people who claim themselves to be Sovereign Citizens evokes thoughts of our country’s founding.  The patriots who were associated with country’s founding fathers had to consider the threat of apprehension by the authorities when they were contemplating whether or not to break free from the rule of King George and Great Britain.  It is no small thing to break free from an established government.  That is why the American Revolution was so historic in the annals of human history.

Sovereign Citizens have taken a different interpretation of current prevailing viewpoints of what it means to be an American and living in the United States. In essence, they seem to want to separate themselves from the current laws of the land and live by a different set of rules from the mainstream citizens.  They appear to describe the current laws as illegitimate when pitted against the rights American are described as having as written in the Constitution.  In the video that runs on their website, the woman makes a reference to the USA as a corporation to which the Sovereign Citizens do not want to participate.  I have come across other references about this Corporation over the years and have been interested in learning more about it but then abandoning the issue altogether due to time constraints and thoughts about what does it really matter any way?  Maybe the Sovereign Citizens just had more time and interest in seeing what it is all about.  I am not sure.

Today in the year 2012, the vast majority of citizens are law abiding taxpayers of which many have serious concerns and objections about how our elected / appointed representatives are managing our national, state, and local governments.  It would be members of this segment of American society who organized the Tea Party and /or might be active in the Libertarian political party.  Many people who follow the current rules of the  electoral and political system have expended a good many years of their lives and personal resources to try and get more Constitutionally compliant leaders into government at all levels.

Anybody who has followed American political events over the past 70 years knows that the Republicans and Democrats backed by highly financed special interest groups have claimed wins in most if not all major political campaigns for public office.  It would be very frustrating for any normal person to begin to think that there has to be a better way to push back the problem of the wrong people being elected to run the government because they have what appears to be an inappropriate ability to wield greater influence than a majority of most individual citizens in the election.

Maybe that is what led to this group that calls themselves Sovereign Citizens.  When I think of them and why they do what they do, there is a part of me that can sort of relate and understand and maybe even agree with the rationale as to why they would want to “not play by the rules” of the prevailing form of government.

Let me be clear, I do not condone violence and aggression against other people including the lawful authorities.  That noted, for purposes of trying to understand their behavior and actions so as to learn and maybe improve the situation that is causing the FBI to escalate their surveillance of this group, perhaps Sovereign Citizens simply have more courage to push back and defend themselves from the government in a fashion that based on their political beliefs, can lead to what looks like violence and aggression against the State.

Obviously there is a stigma that mainstream society attaches to people who are members of such fringe groups.  But I get a sense that the fringe is growing.  Maybe the Sovereign Citizens are just an early version, a way-out in-front organized group ahead of the game.  Sooner or later it seems inevitable that more and more supposedly Free People who have become frustrated with their government run amok would form in this coalesced fashion if unable to realize the changes they see as being needed to save their way of life because of a corrupted and unconstitutional electoral and political system and government.

What I wrote above does not seem to differ much with what Thomas Jefferson and the Founders had to wrestle with when they decided to break free from Great Britain.  On the outset of the Revolutionary War, they wrote and affirmed with sacred honor the Declaration of Independence.  The words below from that historic document tied to our country’s founding seem to mimic in some part at least, to what might be compelling the Sovereign Citizens to opt out of the current rule of law.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Framed in this light, are the Sovereign Citizens really that bad or just that misunderstood by the current authorities?

Daily Press Editorial: RIP, GOP Republican Party….

…needs to come to its senses; right now it’s circling the drain

http://www.dailypress.com/news/opinion/dp-edt-ripgop-editorial-20120221,0,7473479.story

How refreshing to see a major media source that shares my very Libertarian like opinion.  Before too long, I wouldn’t be surprised to see them giving Ron Paul more attention.

Capitalism Magazine – “Francisco’s Money Speech” from Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged

We all tend to have unfinished or uninitiated activities or tasks or things that we would like to get around to doing some day.  If we had the luxury of all the time in the world, we could continually keep from doing today what we would hope could be put off until tomorrow.  Unfortunately, we know all too well that none of us is promised tomorrow.  During the year 2010, one particular as yet to be completed task on my list was beginning to gnaw at me.  I had yet to read Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged.

Someone carrying not yet completed desired to-do tasks around in their mind was popularized as a person having a”Bucket List”.  This came about several years ago after actors Morgan Freeman and Jack Nicholson teamed up on the big screen to make a movie about two aging men and the stories behind them acting out some of the activities on their list of things to do.

As a liberty minded individualist who first learned about Atlas Shrugged years ago from my good friend Gerry back when I was just starting high school,  I grew into adulthood simply thinking that I did not have the time to read it.  How silly of me.

Once I finally got a copy and started reading it just 2 years ago, what I once thought was going to be a labored read turned into a labor of love with the book. The labor was simply the time needed to read it.  Once started, I found I could not put the book down.  It was both a philosophical work and an adventure story all rolled into one.  Like most other things we procrastinate from doing, I found and made time to read it once I realized I enjoyed it.  How silly of me to put it off in favor of what I thought was my busy schedule.

My reading sessions turned into an escape of sorts.  I completed it in about 2-3 weeks, taking about an hour or so daily.  Looking back at the time, Atlas Shrugged served as a balm of sorts for what ailed me insofar as my complete sullied attitude and morale relating to the bad economy, our federal debt, President Obama’s and Harry Reid’s and Nancy Pelosi’s individual health care mandate in the Affordable Healthcare Act, the wars and our country’s overall malaise.  Reading this book helped me see that these problems that are in part based on collectivism and statism are not new.  Ayn Rand wrote of them in the 1950’s.  It helped me refocus my mind as to how I might better cope with what seems the the degradation of our free society.  In many respects, it had me rethink about dedicating some time to writing this blog.

One of my favorite parts of the book was Francisco’s money speech.  Not coincidentally, other readers must also have enjoyed it, as it was very easy to find numerous references to it with a simple google search.  I have provided the link to it below so that it might serve as a primer of sorts for you.  After reading it, maybe reading Atlas Shrugged will be something that you will add to your bucket list.     This topic of sound money is very appropriate for our times.  Many mainstream economists are proclaiming that the recession is ending and that our economy is headed in the right direction. Those of us who look at the economy through the lens of the Austrian school of thought think otherwise.  The threat of a third round of quantitative easing looms and with it, our beloved freedoms take even more of a beating.  Candidate Ron Paul holds the issue of sound monetary policy as a main component of his platform for restoring America.

Please take a moment and read Ayn Rand’s views on money, as told by one of her amazing characters, Francisco D’Anconia.  And as usual, thanks for reading my thoughts here at Wake Up America!

Capitalism Magazine – “Francisco’s Money Speech”

Obama is Fixing Economy? Homeowner Mortgages Continue to Default Leading to Foreclosure Proceedings

Today’s online and print versions of the Daily Press newspaper show a still astonishingly high number of public notices for property mortgage foreclosures.  http://classifieds.dailypress.com/classifieds?category=public_notice

I am a bit confounded as thought I recalled the President indicating during his State of the Union Address last month that his economic recovery plan was working.  There is similarly positive indices posted at the various National Associate of Home Builders websites.  http://eyeonhousing.wordpress.com/ and http://www.nahb.org/default.aspx . Apparently, news of the recovery in progress has not yet reached my community’s housing market.

Today’s 30-year fixed rate are still hovering just over the all-time lowest rates at 4.00%.  http://www.bankrate.com/mortgage.aspx

So why are so many people here still going facing foreclosure when there is a chance to save the property by doing a refinance to a much more affordable rate?  There could be a number of reasons.  Maybe they are unemployed.  Maybe the appraised value of the property has plummeted and they are very much upside down.  Regardless, if one small metropolitan service area such as the lower Peninsula of the Hampton Roads area of Virginia (Cities of Newport News, Hampton, Poquoson, Williamsburg, and counties of York and Gloucester) has 128 published foreclosure notices then clearly the economy is not yet on the road to recovery.

Call me confused and dumbfounded.  Or better yet a skeptic. I am that same guy who also thinks the stock markets are oversold and headed for a steep decline.  But that’s another post for another day.