No More Entitlement And Fiscal Irresponsibility, No To RyanCare

Unacceptable.

RYANCARE: 5 Serious Problems With The Republican Replacement For Obamacare

1. It Retains Requirements That Insurance Cover People With Pre-Existing Conditions.
…nonsensical notion that government could force insurance companies to cover those with pre-existing conditions. This turns insurance companies into piggy banks rather than insurance companies…

2. It Creates A Back Door Mandate.
…allow insurance companies to charge an elevated 30% fine for those whose insurance lapses…

3. It Creates Individual Healthcare Subsidies.
[Tax credit is just another name for subsidy]

4. It Subsidizes Medicaid
…allow the feds to cover Obamacare Medicaid expansion…

5. It Subsidizes High-Risk Pools On The State Level.
…sends $100 billion to states over the next ten years…This, of course, won’t be nearly enough…

This bill would just, maybe, delay Obamacare’s implosion but it too will financially implode on our backs.

As an added bonus it also appears to give benefits to illegal immigrants. Further, the “phase” thing is a dead end road. As I understand it, the first bill can pass under reconciliation whereas any others can (and will) be blocked by Democrats. So much for a repeal.

No mention of buying insurance across state lines (and hopeful breaking the employer-insurance link to shift things to something like the auto insurance system we have). No, that’ll be in the ‘next phase’…to nowhere.

Mike Lee and Rand Paul, among others (like Tom Cotton), are on the right track:
Lee Statement on American Health Care Act

As one Gab user stated:

2009: Barry does O’Care.
2010: R’s promise to repeal O’Care if they get House; R’s get House
2011: nothing
2014: R’s promise to repeal O’Care if they get the Senate; they get the Senate
2015: nothing
2016: R’s promise to repeal O’Care if they get the presidency; they get presidency
2017: RINOcare™

 

Bountiful Halts City Hall Project For Now, Looks To Keep Plaza Boondoggle

Some good news. The Bountiful City Council has pulled back and stopped the new city hall project and will shortly cancel the contracts for it. From the Better Bountiful group that opposed the project:

The Better Bountiful Committee and its many supporters welcome the Bountiful City Council’s decision to cancel their plans to build a new city hall.  The City Council and Mayor have heard the voices of the people and will now invest funds to properly maintain our current City Hall rather than abandon it.  That is a decision we welcome.   We particularly appreciate those City leaders who took the time to listen and discuss the matter with us.

All major plans involving taxpayers’ money are always best accomplished when citizens are allowed a voice at the ballot box. We assume the City Council will apply that principle to the proposed Downtown City Plaza, major infrastructure improvements, and all other similar plans going forward.

The city council also sent out a release citing the reason for the cancellation was to “promote community harmony over the new building.” Hopefully that’s the case but I doubt the motives are so pure. As Fox 13 notes: “The lawsuit was the tipping point for the city.” The city council also held a special (previously unscheduled) closed session meeting to discus “pending litigation” on February 21 (6 days before the release).

The city council plans on continuing with the next pet project (the plaza) and certainly doesn’t appear to embrace Better Bountiful’s request that residents be able to vote on it: “The Downtown Plaza will also remain a priority, and will require a new contract to complete.” They continue to justify this by saying it’ll ‘revitalize Main Street’. People aren’t going to go shop there because of a cute plaza or gleaming city hall and Main St. isn’t in disrepair (it’s a pretty, quaint area). Besides locals, Main St. is a hassle to get to and doesn’t have any store(s) to draw significant traffic to the area. It will remain a local shopping area unless something drastic happens (think huge project redeveloping a massive area and road infrastructure). The constant pet projects gambits justified by saying “revitalize Main St.” are tiring.

I’ve said it many times. Politicians don’t give up on pet project easily. They won’t hear either. I’m glad the new city hall was stopped but one to point one last thing out: Milton Friedman continues to be proven right, these unnecessary pet projects rarely fail despite opposition. As Better Bountiful notes:

This outcome is a reflection of many hundreds of hours of hard work, many thousands of dollars, and some of the best community teamwork…

Read the above linked post and you’ll understand why that quote proves Friedman right despite this being one of the rare successes by “diffused interests”. If you don’t see the connection, drop a comment or use the contact page.

In the meantime, enjoy the success. Ultimately, the only way to have a lasting success is to elect local/state/national representatives who respect limiting government to core functions.

Unknowingly Register To Vote And Let Utah Sell Your Personal Information

State Representative Handy (also backed by Senator Adams) has a bill (HB159) that will automatically register anyone to vote who gets a driver’s license. The only way to avoid this is to opt-out (that is, the state demands you register or catch the fine print and be inconvenienced to opt-out of such).

To begin with, I think it is everyone’s duty to cast an informed vote. However, voting (and registering thereto) is a deeply personal choice and is something that should not be forced on others nor set up in a manner where you may unknowingly register to vote simply by filling out a mundane form. Right off the bat, the bill fails muster with this alone.

In Utah, however, registering to vote also means that the State will turn your information into a money making scheme by selling it to anyone willing to pay the Lieutenant Governor’s office. I’ve been tracking this for years. The only way to avoid this is to qualify and make your record “private” (contact your County Clerk for details on qualifications). This defacto public release results in a threat for unknowing voters who have security concerns (eg domestic abuse survivors etc) along with scam targets (the elderly via the list containing birth dates).

While some progress has been made to restrict list distribution, it remains up for sale. State Representative Becky Edwards is trying to further restrict information that is released but faces another uphill battle against political crony interests, both major political parties, and lobbyists* who believe they’re entitled to data mine your information, without your consent. All because you wish to fulfill a civic duty.

Certainly, the list should be made available for voter/vote result vetting by the media and concerned groups. However, we’re not even close to that. It’s still effectively available for anyone’s use as they please. It needs to stop.

Please contact your Representative/Senator and ask them to end this practice. Ask them to support HB348.

Addendum: Speaking of security concerns, Republican voters in general may have this. Just think if the black block folks buy or are provided a copy of the list. Wouldn’t it be nice to have such upstanding young people intimidate protest at your front porch…

*Inexplicably, the libertarian-leaning Libertas Institute, whom I often find common ground with, is also opposed to this. They too feel entitled to government forcing you to cough up your personal information for their organization & lobbyists to use as they please. Not sure who that possibly melds with respect of individual rights/freedoms…
UPDATE: See comments section for Libertas statement. Thanks to Mr. Melendez for adding their perspective.

Utah’s Fake News And Single Sided Compassion: Park City ICE Action

Here’s a case study of local Utah media ginning up emotion by spinning a mundane report and presenting only one side to suit their bias/narrative.

A few days ago, Utah news outlets ran with a report that Park City Latinos were ‘panicking’ and in ‘fear’ after being targeted by ICE. Here are a few examples: ABC4, Fox13, SLTrib, etc.

The news was spun for some emotional pap and glossed over the following:

  1. Only those who committed crimes (besides entering illegally) were arrested: “According to Park City police the arrests were part of a normal operation by ICE agents and only those with criminal records were taken into custody.”
    “He said his son and nephew were taken but he was left behind despite being in the U.S. illegally.” (ABC4)
    Additionally, the SL Trib states that some of them had re-entered (ie been previously deported).
  2. The operation was a normal operation – it was under Obama’s guidance as Trump is just issuing new guidance (just today) and has thus not yet been implemented. Yet the media would prefer you believe all this angst is due to some Trump policy. It’s BS just to try to demonize Trump or any enforcement, for that matter (under Obama, it ok but the same thing under Trump is of the devil…).
  3. Given they have a criminal background (felonies), it seems the media and the virtue signalling organizations, couldn’t give a rip about the possible victims these guys have left in their wake. Nope, it’s all about families being separated.
    Here’s the thing: plenty of citizens and legal immigrants commit crime and are separated from their families understandably, no one cares about them no should they (“If you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime”). There we care about victims. BUT if an illegal immigrant flouts our law at the border/visa entry point and commits additional crime…well, that’s different! No, it is not!
  4. Speaking of Trump policy: Here’s a gem from today. Apparently, he’s cool w/ DREAMers committing ID theft and not having to inform the victim thereof. Nope, they get the same free pass Obama gave them. So no, they sure don’t have much to be ‘fearful’ of.
  5. The media continues to intentionally conflate illegal immigrant with “immigrant”. The two are very different things.
  6. Lastly, why is this stuff only focused on Hispanics? They are aware that plenty of illegal immigrants who are (hopefully) deported aren’t Hispanics, right? Sure they know – but that doesn’t fit the ‘racism’ narrative they’ve been pushing all these years (especially now that Trump is in office).

This crap has been going on for years and will only increase if allowed. Certainly, the media and illegal immigration proponents/enablers will continue the one-sided compassion and attempt to ‘wag the dog’ for the foreseeable future. I hope the dog is now alert enough to this crap and will bite the fake news media’s hand.

Food: A New Sin Tax For Utah?

That’s right. I’m going to say it again: Food is perfectly eligible as a sin tax.

…and by sin, I’m referring to the politician’s and crony organizations’ sin.

Utah legislators are contemplating raising taxes on food because they’re worried about a budget shortfall. It’s funny how that may be the case after we’ve spent, bonded and redirected who knows how many millions or billions on crap outside the proper role of government. I guess all those cute ‘it only costs a tenth/half percent of the budget or it’s just a few dollars a day’ projects add up and you start to fall short for important stuff…like more useless projects government shouldn’t be involved with.

Rather than just slapping everyone with another tax hike, maybe they should look at cutting some of the crony capital junk (UTA, Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce front group boondoggles come to mind, among others). How about also ditching wasteful incremental budgeting with all it’s skunks, while your at it?

On the local level, we keep hearing that RDAs for a new, unnecessary city hall building won’t raise taxes. As I said in the past, it’s robing Peter to pay Paul and the piper will come calling when taxing entities find they’ve fallen short of money because the RDA etc. ate some of it up. The above is another example of the fallacy of the city council’s argument.

Finally, politicians don’t own all the guilt. The public (you and I) will band together to form groups demanding stuff like recreation centers, theaters, RAP taxes which impose on budgets and, ultimately, on families. Hopefully, we’ll consider the propriety and whether it’s a core governmental function or not next time we want something, else we’re our own worst enemy.

Tax Vampires: Our Schools Now Is The Latest Political Elites’ Front Group

In December, I highlighted an article on front groups used by Utah political power brokers (with the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce as the typical hub). The latest front group they’ve come up with to raise you taxes is “Our Schools Now”.

With the legislative session, Our Schools Now has popped back up to make their push to convince you to raise everyone’s taxes. Don’t fall for it. This is a good time to review the article that traces all the connections and front groups used by the people you aim to benefit from this latest push:

WHO CONTROLS UTAH? An Investigative Report on Utah’s Elite Political Brokers

It’s not just the DC swamp that needs to be drained. We need the “drain the swamp” in Utah as well.

Predictable Goat Rope: Bountiful City Nixes Citizen Vote On New City Hall

A few weeks ago I warned:

Cities and politicians don’t like to lose on these things…politicians will use whatever they can to invalidate a petition or, failing that, pull an end run around a vote outcome…

My post linked to a Clipper article about the city ‘interpreting’ their vote on the city hall. You can guess how they interpreted the vote. Here’s the summary of where things stand from the petition gatherers:

CITY REJECTS CITIZENS’ REFERENDUM
Says New City Hall is Not Up to the Voters

The City of Bountiful on Friday Jan 27th, officially rejected the referendum petition signed by over 4000 Bountiful residents.   “Administrative acts are not referable” to the voters, wrote City Recorder Shawna Andrus about the City’s decision.  In other words, the City claims that the October decision to build a new city hall and plaza—officially the “Bountiful Downtown Plan”—was a mere administrative decision not subject to voter approval.

Council member John Pitt explained his support for rejecting the referendum.  “I see the city hall decision as clearly an administrative decision since it involved no laws, no ordinances, no tax increase, and no zoning changes,” he said.

During December, 4126 citizens signed a petition asking City leaders to put the matter on the ballot next November.  The petition was submitted to the Davis County Recorder who then forwarded it to the City.  Although the City claims the petition was “insufficient,” the message from voters was crystal clear, say the co-sponsors: “Let the taxpayers decide how their money is spent.”

Bryan Anderson, one of the co-sponsors, said that before he started gathering signatures, he did not know how intensely Bountiful residents felt about the City’s plan.  “I now know for sure that the majority of Bountiful residents are against the idea.  Of the hundreds of signatures I gathered, I only met one person who was actually in favor of the idea,” said Anderson. “People didn’t just sign their name in favor of referring the matter to voters, rather, they spoke of their frustration with our city leaders’ decision.”

In October, the City Council voted to demolish the University of Utah Extension building (formerly Stoker School), sell off the current city campus for mixed use development and a bus station, and build a new city hall and plaza on the Stoker site.  Estimates of the cost of the plan vary from $15 million to $22 million dollars.

Council member Richard Higginson admitted at the October City Council meeting that the current city hall “could probably stand for another 60, or 80, or 100 years.”  But, he said, “That’s not the issue.”  “City Hall is just in the way right here for the transit-oriented development” the City Council wants to build on the current city campus.

“What ‘transit-oriented development’?” asks co-sponsor Dean Collinwood.  “Have the citizens ever been given a chance to vote on such a scheme?  Have they ever agreed to have rapid transit busses running in front of the single-family residences near City Hall?   This is a scheme that exists only in the minds of the City Council.  It doesn’t exist in the hearts of the citizens, because they have never been given a chance to vote on it.”

Under Utah law, voters can make some policies directly, without having to go through elected representatives, explained Dean Collinwood. To do so, the issue must involve a “local law,” defined by the Utah Code as any “ordinance,” “resolution,” or “master plan.”

“Clearly, the Bountiful Downtown Plan, a massive project to alter the location of Bountiful’s seat of government, sell off or demolish several pieces of valuable city property, develop Five-Points, and turn the city campus into a rapid transit bus station, fits the legal definition of a master plan perfectly,” he said.

In City documents, the master plan is known as the “Bountiful Downtown Plan.”  City leaders often refer to it as “the plan,” “the project,” or “the comprehensive solution.”  Council member John Pitt calls it “the $22 million redevelopment plan.”  City Manager Gary Hill explained that the idea was to “take advantage of the property around Stoker that the City owns to develop into a plaza, and then to develop…the area around [the current City Hall] as a transit-oriented mixed use development, and then to take advantage of those ideas and reinvest money at the Five-Points area.”

The problem, says Dean Collinwood, is “the people who would pay for it were not asked to approve it.  That’s about as un-American as you can get.”

Half the states in America and all the states in the western half of the country allow popular referendums so that matters can be put forward for direct vote by the people or to recall elected officials. The referendum petition that citizens recently signed was such an effort.

One city-owned property cited for demolition under the Bountiful Downtown Plan is the Stoker School building which is listed on the National Historic Register and which has been used for some thirty years as the University of Utah’s Bountiful Extension.  The Extension caters to some 1200 students a year.  University officials have indicated that if their building is demolished, the University will leave Bountiful and South Davis County permanently.  A group of citizens has already started the process of asking a judge to stop the demolition.

Another part of the masterplan is to sell off the current city campus and turn the space into a bus station surrounded by mixed-use, high density buildings.  Library officials have indicated that the Library is already short on parking space, and that if the city hall campus is filled up with buildings, they will not have space for Library patrons to park…

What I said two weeks ago bears repeating: “Politicians will protect their pet projects tooth-and-nail.”

City politicians have had a field day over the last decade or so heaping new pet projects, taxes, and costs on citizens. It needs to end. The council and mayor should be voted out next election an allow for a fresh start with a focus on core city services/functionality rather than personal legacy building.