Obama Doesn't Understand Insurance

This was written by my brilliant husband, State Farm FSR extraordinaire! Really clears up the insurance issue.

--------------------------------------------------------

I should have gone on about this earlier, but I didn’t feel it necessary, or really, I just didn’t want to take the time. I wish I would have before because I could have pointed out many of Obama’s misunderstandings and explained things to you better. However, one issue recently mentioned again is more than enough.

Obama says he wants his healthcare plan to cover pre-existing conditions. Even if everything else he wants to do was a viable option – which it’s not – this one thing would cause so many problems it would totally disrupt the entire industry on its own. Aside from that, healthcare companies wouldn’t cover them on their own so it’d take a government takeover. This would trigger more problems than I could list if that happened.

However:

Getting coverage for pre-existing conditions sounds great. If you have some major sickness, you would want your carrier to pay for your care because they would have had to pay if you had coverage before you were diagnosed with your illness, right? Great idea….you may think…

Covering pre-existing conditions is an impossibility with insurance! Let me point out that health insurance companies will cover you for things you already have like high blood pressure or minor arthritis, maybe asthma, but not for something like cancer or diabetes, or any other major disease that can result in major treatment needs coming up. You will pay an additional rate if you have high blood pressure because you are a higher risk, just like people who have tickets or accidents in their driving history will pay more for car insurance.

Now you may say at this point, “Insurance companies are being greedy, they can’t do that. They can’t cover me for one thing and not for another.”

Let me give you an example with something you are probably more familiar with: your car insurance. Obviously, you know you have to have car insurance to have coverage when you have an accident. Say you don’t want to pay for the insurance (like 33% of drivers here in Oklahoma) so you don’t buy it. You are then involved in an accident where you are at fault. Just call up the insurance company and pay your first month, they’ll cover it, right? No, that would be called a pre-existing condition. You’ve already wrecked your car, they are not going to pay for that or the other person you hit. It just can’t happen. They would go out of business; it’s unethical to get a service for which you have not paid. You should have had insurance before you got in the accident.

Apply this same principle to health insurance. If you’re sick with something before you get insurance, they can’t give you new coverage. You should have already had health insurance. Even if you had to quit your job because of health, you have something called COBRA already available where you can keep your insurance for 18 months after you have quit working, regardless. Also, you can get in a state insurance pool that does not exclude anyone for anything.

No insurance company can reasonably cover pre-existing conditions. If the insurance company said they would do this, no one would get car insurance and then the rate all the good drivers would pay would be so astronomical it would be unaffordable, more than it already is. Insurance is about spreading risk. The insurance company has people (actuaries) who do lots of math all day and estimate out how many people are going to have accidents on average and they set premiums accordingly. People trying to get coverage for something that cannot be estimated would drive the industry into the ground. It’s not greedy to make money, it’s how business has to work. The insurance industry employees thousands of people and they have to earn a living just like every other industry. Did you know that Wal-Mart makes a profit? So does the movie theater, the restaurant….everyone does. They would go broke if they covered pre-existing conditions. No one would pay for insurance until they needed it. The companies would get stuck with major bills for major health conditions and would not be able to pay the claims of people who really paid for the service.

Insurance is designed as a transfer of risk system. You get it when you don’t need it to pay out when you do need it. You can’t buy life insurance when you just found out you have cancer and only 3 months to live. It doesn’t work that way. It goes back to welfare, wanting something for nothing. Society can’t function that way. Insurance definitely can’t function that way. They can’t pay for the guy who wasn’t responsible and didn’t take care of his insurance and let the guy who is responsible stuck with the bill.

Hope this makes sense. Bottom line, let competition rule the health insurance industry. Competition is what has driven this country forward and we are on the verge of letting it all go.

Don’t let that happen. Vote for freedom, vote to keep our Republic strong.

Homework for Tuesday

We're voting on four state questions on Tuesday. Here is the text from the Oklahoma State Election Board, along with some small commentary by me.

http://www.ok.gov/~elections/sq_gen08.pdf

--------------------------------------------

Issue: Property tax exemption for disabled veterans
State Question 735
Legislative Referendum 343
Originating Legislation: HB 1808 (2007)
Principal Authors: Senator Mike Mazzei, Representative Randy Terrill
Election Date: November 4, 2008

Ballot Title (as re-written by the Attorney General)
This measure amends the Oklahoma Constitution. It adds Section 8D to Article 10. The measure takes effect January 1, 2009. It creates an exemption from personal property tax. The exemption would be for the full amount of taxes due on all household personal property. The exemption would apply to certain injured veterans. It would also apply to those veterans’ surviving spouses.

To qualify for the exemption an injured veteran would have to meet certain requirements. First, a branch of the Armed Forces or the Oklahoma National Guard would have to have honorably discharged the veteran from active service. Second, the veteran would have to be an Oklahoma resident. Third, the veteran would have to be the head of the household. Fourth, the veteran would have to be one hundred percent permanently disabled. Fifth, the United States Department of Veterans Affairs would have to certify the disability. Sixth, the disability must have occurred through military action or accident, or resulted from a disease contracted while in active service. The Legislature could pass laws to carry out the exemption. Such laws could not change the amount of the exemption.

Personally, I think Vets don't see nearly enough benefits, particularly disabled Vets. If someone is rendered unable to work as a result of them taking a bullet or a grenade to keep me and my family safe, I'll pick up the slack for their property tax. Vets already have difficulty seeing the full benefits they are already entitled by law. I have no problem adding this to the list in the hope that it relieves the sacrifices they and their families have made for their country. -------------------------------------------------------------------

Issue: Applications for property tax exemptions State Question 741
Legislative Referendum 344
Originating Legislation: HB 3354 (2008)
Principal Authors: Senator Jim Wilson, Representative Randy Terrill
Election Date: November 4, 2008

Ballot Title (as re-written by the Attorney General) This measure amends the Oklahoma Constitution. It would add a new Section 22A to Article 10. This section is related to exemptions from property taxes. It would require a person or business to file an application for an exemption. No exemption could be granted prior to filing an application. The Legislature may write laws to carry out the provisions of this section.

I see justification for this bill for two reasons. 1) Randy Terrill is listed as a co-author, and I trust his judgment. 2) There was recently unearthed by Rep. Mike Reynolds a list of people who received personal and business property tax exemptions from Gov. Henry, with no paper trail or regular justification. We need such paper trails to verify these exemptions are given justly, not as kickbacks or rewards. -------------------------------------------------------

Issue: Rights of hunting, trapping, fishing and taking game or fish State Question 742
Legislative Referendum 345
Originating Legislation: SJR 38 (2008)
Principal Authors: Senator Glenn Coffee, Representative Randy Terrill
Election Date: November 4, 2008

Ballot Title (as approved by the Attorney General)
This measure adds a new section to the State Constitution. It adds Section 36 to Article 2. It gives all people of this state the right to hunt, trap, fish and take game and fish. Such activities would be subject to reasonable regulation. It allows the Wildlife Conservation Commission to approve methods and procedures for hunting, trapping, fishing and taking of game and fish. It allows for taking game and fish by traditional means. It makes hunting, fishing, and trapping the preferred means to manage certain game and fish. The new law will not affect existing laws relating to property rights.

This bill has been given the stamp of approval by the NRA, so it's probably alright. ----------------------------------------------------------------------

Issue: Sales of wine by winemakers State Question 743
Legislative Referendum 346
Originating Legislation: SJR 29 (2008)
Principal Authors: Senator Tom Ivester, Representative Danny Morgan
Election Date: November 4, 2008

Ballot Title (as re-written by the Attorney General)
This measure amends Section 3 of Article 28 of the Constitution. It requires a customer to be twenty-one and physically present to purchase wine at a winery, festival or trade show. The measure changes the law to allow certain winemakers to sell directly to retail package stores and restaurants in Oklahoma. The change applies to winemakers who produce up to ten thousand gallons of wine a year. It applies to winemakers in state and out of state. Those winemakers may not also use a licensed wholesale distributor. They must sell their wine to every retail package store and restaurant in Oklahoma that wants to buy the wine. The sales must be on the same price basis. The sales must be without discrimination. Those winemakers must use their own leased or owned vehicles to distribute their wine. They may not use common or private carriers. If any part of this measure is found to be unconstitutional, no winemaker could sell wine directly to retail package stores or restaurants in Oklahoma.

Honestly, I'm not sure what to make of this one. Winemakers who produce 10,000 gallons of wine a year can sell directly to retailers, but not to distributors? And there is a caveat "just in case" this measure is found to be unconstitutional? I'm all for free trade, but this seems to be a measure limiting certain regulation by imposing other regulation. I just don't know. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts. --------------------------------------------------------------

Contact For More Information:

The Senate staff members listed below may be able to provide further information on the state questions listed in this legislative brief. However, the provisions of Section 16-119 of Title 26 of the Oklahoma Statutes prohibit state officials from directing or authorizing the expenditure of public funds to be used in support of or in opposition to measures being referred to the people for a vote, and provide misdemeanor penalties for offenses. In addition, rules of the Ethics Commission prohibit the use of public funds, property or time to influence the results of a ballot measure. Due to these restrictions, the information on state questions that the Senate staff is able to provide may be limited. Committees raising or expending funds in support of or in opposition to a state question are required to register with the Ethics Commission (www.ethics.ok.gov).

State Questions 735 and 741: Joanie Raff, Legislative Analyst Judy King, Staff Attorney

State Question 742: Jeri Trope, Legislative Analyst

State Question 743: Lexa Shafer, Legislative Analyst Selden Jones, Staff Attorney

Prepared By: The Oklahoma State Senate, Senate Staff Senator Mike Morgan, President Pro Tempore Senator Glenn Coffee, Co-President Pro Tempore

The Audacity of Audacity

NEWSFLASH: Tonight, for the first time in American history, a presidential candidate be delivering a State of the Union address prior to the presidential election.

Barack Obama will be speaking tonight, taking over nearly all major network and cable news stations.

I suggest we all honor ABC's decision not to air the 30-minute Obamamercial and watch Pushing Daisies.

Or read. Or do laundry. Do anything else.

Updated: Blocked?

So, this is odd.

I tried to share the link to this blog with a friend of mine on facebook via the new instant messaging tool they have.

It was blocked:

Because it's facebook, they can't tell me who reported it or why.

You know, not that we're adults or anything, but I would imagine that if you had a problem with something a person wrote - an independent blogger, not even a major news outlet - you might mention it to the blogger rather than just reporting the link to block others access to it.

In fairness, facebook has not blocked all access to this link from their site (yet). I'm just not allowed to share the link via messenger anymore.

Just odd.

Update:

Facebook has unblocked my link. No notice or explanation. maybe it was a fluke. Who knows. But it's cleared up now.

A Blessing in Disguise?

Obama being elected President, while impalpable to anyone who reads the Constitution, is not the worst thing that could happen to us. Obama’s power will largely depend on the Congress he has to work with.

For weeks, we’ve been anticipating a Democrat surge in the Senate, envisioning a horror movie in which the ultra-liberal President Obama is allowed to ride roughshod over Truth, Justice and The American Way by the Democrat super-majority in the Congress.

But how likely is that scenario?

This is just a theory, and I may (God forbid) be completely wrong, but just bear me out.

Let’s not look at this from the perspective of the Presidential election. What hasn’t received much press is the battle for the House and Senate.

Perhaps, a few weeks ago, the horror movie seemed inevitable. Eight years of media-fueled Republican/Bush hatred drilled the image of a Blue Capitol into the minds of Americans.

Then, the Bailout Bill.

Since then, has there been more anger toward a Congress since the War Between the States? (The draft, maybe. And they’re the side that keeps suggesting bringing that back). Trillions of dollars have been lost on the Stock market. Homes values nation-wide have dropped 17%.

Even Saturday Night Live acknowledged that the Democrat Majority was responsible for the Bailout and for the irresponsibility that led to it, making Bush look like a pawn in the Democrats’ evil plan.

Subsequently, they had to pull and sanitize the skit. Gee, wonder why.

Is it possible that the Democrats are actually losing ground? We aren’t hearing much about Democrats retaining seats from the MSM. The Dreaded Murtha finally looks like he’s going to get the boot. Cindy Sheehan was running against Nancy Pelosi. Barney Frank has been exposed as a nutcase. (Or, as I like to call him, Future Cartman.)

And we have the Bailout Bill to thank for this.

Had we actually squashed the Bailout, none of this would have been exposed. The frustration toward the Democrat legislative branch would have been kept at a simmer rather than the raging boil it is now.

Again, this is all theoretical, and it may not affect Obama in the slightest.

But Jack Murtha is losing his seat. SNL spoke against Democrat leadership and got punished. People are noticing.

And it all comes back to the Bailout Bill.

Irony is a…

Vote Dana Murphy!

We're voting for more than just a President next Tuesday. And the future of our country relies as much, if not more, on state and local elections than it does on the national ones.

This letter is written by Charlie Meadows, President of OCPAC, the premier Conservative PAC in Oklahoma.

Read and vote DANA MURPHY next Tuesday!!!!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Members and friends of the Oklahoma Conservative Political Action Committee (OCPAC)

I wanted to send out this special e-mail about the short term corporation commission race between Jim Roth and Dana Murphy. I am often asked if these e-mails can be forwarded? By all means please do, as I think most Oklahoman’s don’t know much about this race. Also, if this has been forwarded to you, and you would like to receive our e- mail on a weekly basis, just send me your name and e-mail address and I will add you to our list. Send to: charliemeadows@peoplepc.com.

I believe McCain and Inhofe will win in November with sizeable margins. Therefore the most contested statewide race this year will be the Corporation Commission race between Republican Dana Murphy and the Democrat incumbent Jim Roth. This is a special election as Roth was appointed to the position about a year and a half ago by Governor Henry.

There may be a small number of people who have been reading the Oklahoman closely and on a regular basis over the past 3 or 4 years who may know that Jim Roth is an out of the closet homosexual. However, most Oklahomans are unaware of his un-natural sexual perversion. I don’t believe he makes any mention of his homosexuality on his web-site nor has the liberal Tulsa World informed their readers about that information, though they have endorsed him.

In brief, the largest PAC in the nation supporting homosexual candidates considers this one the most important races in the nation (see www.victoryfund.org). In addition, Jim Roth’s Corporation Commission Campaign was a sponsor of the 2008 Gay Pride Parade held earlier this year in Oklahoma City (see www.okcpride.org). Then of course, when Roth was a County Commissioner in Oklahoma County, he supported having pro-homosexual books accessible to small children in the Oklahoma County libraries. Have you ever wondered why the homosexual community from all over America would contribute tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of dollars to Jim Roth’s corporation commission race in OKLAHOMA?

The hyper-tolerant, anything goes liberal crowd will say, all of that character stuff, integrity and sexual preference does not matter. To talk about it is only a diversion from the business at hand. The only thing they will suggest as important, is how well a person does their job. Therefore I want to examine the job performance of Roth as a corporation commissioner.

In one of his TV adds he portrays himself as a tough advocate of the people who stood up to those BIG UTILITIES and said NO to a two billion dollar rate increase. In his silliest commercial, he portrays himself as a penny pinching paperclip counter, a conservationist wanting to save money for the ratepayers. While it is true he voted against the rate increase request, it was actually1.8 billion not 2 billion dollars, he is most likely going to cause the ratepayers to pay far more for electricity in the future. An estimated $5 billion more for electricity over the 40 year life of the generation plant he voted against.

You see, he voted against building a high-tech clean burning coal fired generation plant, next to an existing clean burning coal fired plant. As the administrating judge at the corporation said, this expansion will save the ratepayers significant money over the many years to come.

Roth, will say it was too risky and the utilities shouldn’t be allowed to collect money for the plant before it is built. Again, this is not watching out for the ratepayers as the sooner the utilities could start collecting rates to pay for the plant, the less they would have to borrow and thus this would be less interest that rate payers would eventually have to pay. By the way, what is risky about a coal fired power plant? They have been used for a long time, and the new ones are much improved and much cleaner.

Three of the state’s utilities were going into an unusual partnership in building this expansion which would have saved the ratepayers $100 million dollars in construction costs alone rather than each of them having to build or buy separate facilities. It was estimated the utilities spent up to 50 million dollars in engineering and planning costs to get the project to a vote before the commission said no in a 2 to 1 vote. However, later on, Roth voted for a rate increase to allow the utilities to recover that cost.

Without the badly needed generation capacity, American Electric Power-PSO of Oklahoma was forced to ask for a rate increase to purchase 2 smaller natural gas generation plants. Roth voted for that rate increase. OG&E was forced to purchase a gas fired plant along with the GRDA, and Roth voted for that rate increase. Commissioner Bob Anthony, always the rate payer’s friend, refused to vote on that rate increase as a protest about the higher rates consumers were going to have pay for electricity in the future.

Then of course the popular thing to do today is to be in favor of wind generation as well as other renewable energy. So OG&E requested a huge rate increase to build wind farms in far Northwest Oklahoma and the transmission lines to get that electricity to the metropolitan areas or to be able to transmit that electricity to sell out of state.

Here is the dirty little secret about electricity generated from wind. When the turbines are moving they are producing cheaper electricity. Yet, all of the significant cost to those giant windmills and perhaps much of the cost for the transmission lines is a duplication or a doubling of the cost for infrastructure.

The reason is that wind is not a reliable source of electricity. On those brutally hot days of Summer, when there isn’t a whisper of a breeze and the demand for electricity is at peak load, we have to have enough TRADITIONAL generation capacity to provide the necessary electricity. These are high demand times when the wind produces little to nothing and we must pay twice for the generation capacity.

So the question must be asked, where has Jim Roth saved the consumers any money? I would suggest he has cost the ratepayers more and in the long run, much more. If that is the case, why would Mr. Slickster shaft the ratepayers as a commissioner then tell them he was watching out for them?

You might not have to go any further for that answer than to understand who it is, besides the homosexuals, that are supporting and funding his campaign. Raising huge sums of money for him are none other than multi-millionaires and billionaires such as Aubry McClendon, CEO of Chesapeake Energy, George Kaiser of Kaiser Oil and the Bank of Oklahoma, as well as Clay Bennett, married into the Gaylord family and managing partner of the new OKC Thunder NBA basketball team.

McClendon has spent millions in Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas fighting the construction of generation plants which would use coal and therefore not buy gas to make electricity. I don’t think it takes a rocket scientist to suspect his reason to oppose the coal fueled plants would be to force the utilities to build or buy gas fired plants of which he will be most happy to sell them all the gas they need. I actually want them to sell a lot of gas, but to power autos with, and not to make electricity. That would actually help to make us become less dependent on foreign oil.

One of Mike McCarville’s blogs recently revealed that according to e-mails which were made public in the Seattle trial to move the NBA Sonics to OKC, Jim Roth hinted at the close alliance he shares with McClendon. In a 2007 letter which he subsequently wrote to the sports editor of the Seattle times he said, “From the beginning, Clay and Aubrey initiated a genuine kindness and friendship toward my partner and me. They have publicly and consistently supported me, even pushing back when right-wing attacks have occurred.”

It appears there is a close relationship between these powerful men and Roth, who certainly went to bat for them when the homosexual community in Seattle was attacking them while they were in the process of moving the team to Oklahoma.

Bottom line, I believe Roth is a puppet on a string for people that I believe want to control and use the regulatory power of government for their personal purposes. I also believe, if Roth wins, he will use this election as a launching pad to a future U.S. Senate race or perhaps Governor some day.

On the other hand, I believe Dana Murphy is honest, independent (can’t be bought), is supremely prepared as she has a degree in geology, law and was a hearing judge at the commission for several years. I also believe she wants to serve in this capacity with no intention to run for another office sometime in the future. I believe Dana will seek that delicate balance which is the best for the oil and gas industry and the consumers at the same time. That is the real job of a corporation commissioner. I urge folks to vote for Dana Murphy and support efficient and effective government for the benefit of all Oklahomans.

Charlie Meadows
charliemeadows@peoplepc.com

Intellectuals for McCain/Palin '08

Laura Ingraham asked educated listeners on her radio show to thumb their noses at RINO elitists and join her youtube channel and show their support for McCain/Palin '08. This is a small sampling I collected.

The first video is Laura's.