By Mayor Anna Little
Perhaps the most inspiring moments of my political life have been the impassioned discourse in which I've participated at recent constitutional rallies and conservative town hall meetings. The passion and conviction of the individuals in attendance has given life to a movement from coast to coast throughout the United States. Choosing to run for elected office is a significant moment in the life of an elected official. While I have run for election before, my campaigns have never felt so significant as this one does today.
The United States of America is in crisis. The economy is ailing, jobs are scarce, and government stimulus or bailouts promise to perpetuate these conditions by driving taxes higher, increasing the cost of doing business. Employers not only hesitate to hire due to these conditions, but they consider downsizing to weather the economic storm. Layoffs have left families without health insurance at a time when job loss makes payment of medical bills difficult or impossible.
The government solution to health care, while noble in concept, again drives taxes higher, and when implemented may drive individuals into bankruptcy and employers out of business. Further Americans are frightened that a government option for healthcare means government directed rationed care, eliminating doctor patient privilege and patient treatment choice. In this moment when financial stress is at an all time high, Americans now fear that they will not be able to obtain good quality, timely medical care for themselves or for their loved ones.
Terrorism at the hands of anti-American groups has finally touched American soil. Americans are demanding that the borders of this nation be secured to protect the constitutional rights and the safety of American citizens. A call to action has been heard from coast to coast for strict enforcement of existing immigration law, especially against those immigrants not legally present in the United States. In essence, the American people are stating that laws on the books in this country must be strictly followed and enforced. When immigrants come to America, the country of immigrants, they must come legally in respect of America's immigration law.
The conditions described above have caused Americans from all walks of life to rise up, leave their homes, and gather in public meeting places to discuss these issues, and create a plan of action. At these gatherings I have met neighbors, friends, military veterans, mothers, and grandmothers. The list can go on. The common theme is patriotism, demonstrated by a devotion to the American flag and the history of this nation's founding. Since visiting Washington DC as a college student on a Washington Center Internship I have carried the inspiration of the founding fathers with me as I serve in government. The participants in this Tea Party movement are singing to my soul.
Our founding fathers gave birth to a nation governed in self-determination "…of the people, by the people, and for the people…" As the founders rose against military occupation, taxation without representation, and the bailout of a tea company, Americans today are rising against representatives who hear but fail to listen, who act independently without representing the views of the people they serve. Constituents are demanding that elected representatives take direction from the people, not politics and special interests.
In essence Tea Party 2010 is against taxation with false representation. Our founders had to use muskets and violent revolution to achieve their goals. Today we use their legacy, the Constitution of the United States, and the election process to effect a peaceful revolution in Congress. I am honored to be a candidate representing these proud and passionate Americans, and working with them in 2010 when the People Will Take Government Back.
Mayor Anna Little of the Borough of Highlands is a former Monmouth County Freeholder and a Candidate for Congress in the June 8 Republican Primary Election for Congressional District 6.
President Trump’s Magic Show Begins
18 hours ago
Posts
16 comments:
"Further Americans are frightened that a government option for healthcare means government directed rationed care, eliminating doctor patient privilege and patient treatment choice."
Are you kidding me??? My father was just denied by his insurance company, medication prescribed by his doctor becaause each pill costs $6.40. He's 87 years old and it was too expensive for the insurance company to pay. Are you in anyway telling me that rationing is not happening NOW? By some pencil pusher at the insurance company? Gimme a freakin' break with this crap. And to say that we have "false" representation when you just don't like the politics is as disingenuous as they come. Maybe we should be up in arms that the republicans don't represent us in what we're trying to do. The party of absolute NO to anything remotely resembling help for the little guy. What a bunch of pure crap.
I have private insurance through my employer and am a very healthy almost 30 year old male. My private insurance that I pay today's rates into for coverage of today's medicine and science, does not cover medications that cost $7 per pill. I can choose to pay more for such coverage but have opted to not pay additional premiums for such access.
Further, I suspect that if I was paying today's rates into a system today for coverage I'll get 57 years from now, then a $7 pill I paid for today is:
1) Not likely to exist
2) Maybe going to be equivalent to buying a single Tylenol when I'm 87.
Rick, I do hope that as your father ages, modern science and medicine can help keep him as pain free and healthy as reasonably possible, but (and I'll acknowledge that we're of two very different mindsets on the issue so I don't expect you to agree with anything I suggest) do consider that, like most other people his age, he probably:
1) consumed lots of fried foods, undercooked eggs and meat
2) ran through the DDT cloud
3) inhaled fumes from engines burning leaded fuels
4) inhaled cigarettes directly or indirectly in restaurants, houses, cars, trains, airplanes, his office, etc
5) had his shoes checked for proper fitting with an x-ray machine
6) watched the motion pictures 3ft from a cathode ray tube
7) painted the walls with lead based paint
8) the walls were coated in asbestos
.. just to name a few things that probably weren't such a good idea in hindsight. I carry a cell phone in my pocket and hold it to my head, so perhaps I shouldn't point to what seem like dumb things human did that seem like obviously bad ideas.
So I say this much, insurance denying 100% coverage of a $7 pill shouldn't be a shock, it doesn't mean that the pharmacy won't fill the prescription or your father can't have it, it just means that his insurance doesn't cover that pill. IMO, as harsh as it may sound, pay for better/more insurance or pay for the pill(s). I'd be shocked if the system he paid into was advertising "hey, in 50 years, we'll cover the latest and most expensive medicines 100%!". If they did advertise such non-sense, it would take a fool to believe such a story.
Terrific discourse, Anna. I am sure you authored it yourself as opposed to the opposition who has hired a machine to present her case.
Regarding "ambrosiajr's" comment, you still don't get it. Lord help me I will try to explain
1)Of course med ins. co's are trying to cut back, but you can appeal and fight them. You have no such luxury in a gov't program.
2)Yes, False reresentation of the bill, as in the gov't bill reducing premiums (false) reducing the gov't deficit (false). My favorite was BHO claiming premiums will be reduced by "3,000%". Is that accurate? Please.
You forgot one thing Jimmy, which should trump all others....he was in the Pacific Theater during WWII for 3 years fighting for his country.
My point is that all the bellyaching about how care will be rationed, is just a red herring since it already is. And, its done by the insurance companies.
Then I think we agree with the same point Rick, insurance companies, private or gov't run, work within a broken Ponzi scheme we call the insurance game and as Anna Little, among others, seem to suggest, the real solution is to change the rules of the insurance game, not add a new player to the game; to suggest that it'll be acceptable for the new player, the gov't, to ration care because the old players ration care doesn't help anyone or fix any problems.
PS - Maybe your father served with my grandpa in WWI - feel free to show him these pictures and see if he can help identify a few people/places/things:
http://picasaweb.google.com/jim98bata/GrandpaWWIIPictures#
To "Mark" (why quotation marks around my name is anyone's guess)...anyway, he did appeal it and they still turned it down. Even with an appeal coming straight from the Dr. as to why she prescribed those particular meds.
And she didn't say it was false representation of the bill...she said taxation with false representation which is not quite true. These people were elected by the majority. That's not false representation. You don't like it because these are not your brand of politics. Only.
I think its you that just doesn't get it "Mark".
Jimmy, I'm not saying its right for anyone to ration care. I'm just saying that it shouldn't be a talking point since it happens now.
And, you're right, it needs to be fixed. But, the insurance companies sure as hell aren't going to fix it themselves, now, are they.
It's a talking point because Frank Pallone and Obama are operating under the false belief that by making the Gov't an insurance company (the public option) the problem that is insurance companies being unable (really just unwilling) to pay such claims will go away. As you say, the insurance companies (Gov't option company included) sure as hell won't fix themselves.
Again, adding players to the insurance game doesn't fix the problem. The current (no public option) gov't gimmick just keeps the game going longer by adding a new source of funds (that is requiring all people to participate) into the Ponzi scheme. The solution requires that the rules, not the players, of the game be changed.
Anna,
If we didn't have Dave Corsi running in my District, I'd be asking you to move into my area.
Ambrosiajr, Grab a copy of the Newest Tea Party Times. It has a great listing of the time line set for the Health Care Bill. Once you read down the list, your going to realize that if you think things are bad now, just wait. You'll be praying for a miracle, and I think that miracle you'll be looking for, you can find in the Tea party.
Together we are strong and together we will get it Constitutional once again. Theirs gonna be a whole Lot of rescinding and recalling around here very very soon.
Everyone should read "The 5000 Year Leap" (if you haven't already)it will change all of your views and yes, even change your life. Of course unless your a Socialist/Communist.
"Ambrosiajar" I provided quotes around your name for ID purposes only. I am so sorry about your dad. If the company turned down your appeal, see if another step exists. If not, contact the drug mfger diresc, they may help.
I am not opposed to you. I am opposed to a gov't HC bill (have you seen the number of edicts contained in it that have nothing to do with HC?)because I identify it as a leftist radical hoax to abridge our freedoms. The ruling leftist could care less about anyone but their own agenda and their own cronies. Please see that
No Mr. Ambrosia health care is not rationed by your insurance company your father can still get waht he needs it just costs him.
Under a government single payor plan which is what the Democrats have said they are working towards if the government says it is too expensive you will not be able to buy it anywhere in the USA. If you need surgery and the government does a cost benefit analysis and decides you do not qualify it will be illegal for you to get that surgery in the USA.
The other alternative is that the government says you can have the pill but the Pharm company can only charge you 25 cents per pill. The pharm company decides it is not worth it so they will stop making it for sale here in the US. Those are thw only options that will be available to a government that will have to control costs. This is just economics 101. Under either scenario your poor father will not get the medecine / treatment he needs to stay alive. Thats rationing
A better solution is for the government to get out of health care altogether and let competion bring down the cost of both health care and insurance.
You mean, where it is now? Oh yes, and its working so great.
Where we are now is not a free market.
States have laws that limite the number of MRI facilities and other medical providers their can be.
Insurance can not be sold across state lines and is not portable.
Myriad government subsidies and insurance plans distort natural market forces.
Tax law also distorts the market.
No not where we are today. That will not do the trick
Ahhh, its nice to see some healthy political debating. This goes to show why Anna will kick Franks buttt in November. Ambrosiajr, thanks for making the point that Anna is the better candidate.
I just cannot believe there is no help for an 87-yr.old who needs a particular med.. what about the manufacturer-ask them for a reduced rate, with financials and backup.. what about(oops, we're sounding like a Gooch speech, here!) the state PAAD for seniors, pd. for by casino revenues?.. if all else fails, why not contact the county's Ofc. on Aging, go over there to their Freehold Boro ofc., and bring the backup, and tell them you need them to hook you up, for whatever program does still address these circumstances, while they still can: there's also a drug discount card he can get there..hurry,though, soon, anybody, say, 50 and up, will just get denied everything, or die before they hit the end of the line.. with this gov't-controlled mess coming, it'll truly be a huge step back in time, to when our parents and grandparents just went along for as long as they could, then they just sadly passed.. this will be the first generation seeing a WORSE total standard of living thanks to "Obamaland, top to bottom!..
Post a Comment