Insurance companies are demanding that the insured assume a portion of the cost because there is no other control. Ultimately, prices are negotiated before service is performed. Crass and harsh as it may sound, medical care is still a market. That is why insurance companies issue price schedules. It is up to the patient (customer) to see that the doctors office or hospital (vendor) manages affairs efficiently.

So we fix the system with lists. Lists are still being taught. You cannot have a program without a list. This idea is so simple, we all think it is the answer to our problems. Yet, when we are faced with a terrible situation, the lists thrown at us overwhelm. We have lists of surgeries, of drugs, of side effects (which we have to recognize), of costs, of options, of interest rates, of doctors, of other practitioners, all of which is compounded by a list of symptoms that so overwhelmed our personal system to threaten our very quality of life, and cause us to seek help. Remember, we are expected to remove emotion for our current actions. Now is when the negotiations matter most, and when we should rely on our insurance companies’ list of costs. Unfortunately, they are not allowed into the examination room.

Thus, the answer is to have an insurance system for the basically reasonable, with copays. Those of a less litigious nature will follow the system, like lemmings. So be it. But for the extremes, and we know there will be some, we need reform. Doctors are trusted with great responsibility, and thus can make some extremely bad mistakes. The answer here is loser pays. The method to separate the men from the boys is to induce stress. Loser pays, will make people much less susceptible to ambulance chaser lawyers.

And so, we arrive at two critical answers to health care, that have nothing to do with doctors or hospitals, on the surface. However, politics is rarely about the surface. The under currents are our education system and our legal system. Each is driving health care costs up in exponential ways. Fixing each will change the philosophy we live by. We need to return to a place where we all understand what we are asking others to endure. We need to change the way we raise our young, and resolve our conflicts. Enact tort reform and our health care system will right itself.

However, our local laws and enforcement actions should prevent illegal immigrants from crossing our borders. Research reports $90 billion a year is spent on illegal aliens for welfare and social services paid for by American taxpayers.

Legal immigrants make a pledge to uphold our laws and support their new country. Legal immigrants make learning English a primary goal in their new American homes. Legal immigrants strive to give their children a new life and encourage them to assimilate into our culture.

Individual states must begin to examine new legal ways to protect their citizens from this invasion. I would suggest attaching a fee of 10 percent to 15 percent to every money order or wire transfer purchased by an illegal immigrant without a foreign or domestic passport, a legal VISA or MasterCard, a Virginia birth certificate, a legitimate state driver’s license, or a verifiable, valid Social Security card.

Fees collected would be retained by the county of origin for distribution to school boards, sheriff’s departments, and hospitals.

America is a complex nation and requires a hardy, educated people to sustain it. By any measure, the public school system has fallen down on the job. It is singlehandedly managing to deprive children of their dreams, parents of their pride, and America of its future.

Choice is required to bring competition to the government monopoly on public K-12 education. Choice will be a win for everybody - students, parents, teachers, taxpayers, and America’s future.

Current costs of public education are as high as $13,000+ per student per year in Richmond.

The idea in basic outline:

1. Assume the basis that a great quality education can be had for $5,000 per student per year. Reduce property taxes of businesses and homeowners accordingly. This makes all taxpayers happy.
2. Provide vouchers or cash directly to parents with children aged 5-18, one $5,000 payment per child. Parents may send their children to any school or teacher(s) they wish, or homeschool.
3. State provides minimal oversight and licensing requirements. Current public school infrastructure may be rented out by any teachers.
4. Teachers make out well. A good teacher will still be in demand, and at $5k (or more) per student, left to their own way of teaching, can have as few or as many students as they like. Good teachers will be able to make more income than currently.
5. Homeschooling parents can either pocket the cash, be required to submit receipts for reimbursement, or be allowed to put the $5k allotment of cash into Roth IRAs in the childrens’ names.
6. Parents of children not passing standardized tests will forego their payments. Alternatively, only provide payment after passing such tests. Teachers with too few passing students will be prohibited from teaching.

Because America still takes a traditional view of the family, many professional middle and upper middle class women voters with college educations feel guilty about having to choose between having a career or having children.

As a result of a spike in the cost of childcare, skilled women are being forced to drop out of work to raise their young children because they cannot find affordable childcare.

A way to increase the participation of skilled women in the workforce is for the government to make private childcare more affordable for all Americans - rich and poor alike! - through the use of free market principles - as opposed to the Democrat’s plan to increase daycare through government spending.

By making childcare more affordable, it will be easier for skilled American women to work, while at the same time, raising their children.

Here are two ways to make childcare more affordable:

A) Offer tax deductions for businesses that offer cash bonuses to their employees to help defray the cost of daycare.  Offer 200% income tax deduction (Maximum deduction of $10,000) to businesses that grant cash bonuses to either fathers and/or mothers in their employ with young children to help pay for child care.

For example, a business that offers one of its workers a $3,500 cash bonus to help pay the employee pay for  child care would get a $7,000 tax deduction on income taxes.  Bonuses will be tax exempt, both for the employee and the employer.

This option would be ideal for small and medium sized business owners who cannot afford to operate expensive on-site daycare for employees with children, but who could afford to give a decent cash bonus to their employees for child care.

With daycare cash bonuses, employees will be able to both work and raise children, and business owners will retain valuable workers and get a tax deduction to boot!

B) Much of the cost of childcare comes from labor costs which are passed on to the daycare users in the form higher tuition.

The government could reduce childcare operating costs - and the cost to of childcare to parents - by making all state licensed childcare centers and child care workers exempt from all Federal, state and local taxes except for 1% federal income tax for businesses and workers.

The less money childcare centers and childcare workers spend on taxes, the less money parents will pay to use daycare. Tax cuts for licensed daycare centers are the key to making childcare more affordable.

Since childcare is a very small part of the economy, making licensed childcare virtually immune from taxes will not significantly increase the deficit.

Remember, businesses do not pay taxes, customers do!

(The states, and the District of Columbia would be free to determine their own licensing guidelines for daycare centers.)

Making childcare more affordable through targeted tax relief will lift a great burden from the backs of working women across the US and help stimulate both the economy and promote motherhood.

Part 1 - a Security Transformation:
Then:
It should be noted that after 1991s, a decade of relative middle east inaction by the U.S. saw a WTC bombing, a US barracks in S. Arabia, 2 US embassies, and a U.S. Warship destroyed by Al Qaeda and nuclear proliferation in Iran, N. Korea, and Pakistan. The U.S was perceived as a paper tiger by Bin Laden and the growing jihaddist threat.
Now:
1) Iraq - talk about the benefits of dealing a death blow to Al-Qaeda in Iraq - which was called the main battlefield by Bin Laden & Al-Zwahiri
2) Afganistan - Taliban supporter before 9/11, no longer. Not perfect but much better.
3) Pakistan - Taliban supporter before 9/11, no longer. Pakistani nuke scientist A.Q. Khan nuclear proliferation network taken down.
4) Libya - surrenders nuke program (shortly after we invaded Iraq)

5) Iran - new intel report suggests that they halted nuke weapons program in 2003 (shortly after we invaded Iraq)
6) Lebanon - on the verge of throwing off Syria, first time in decades
7) North Korea - by focusing on Dem opposed 6 way talks, we are now in process of verifying Nuke program dismanteling.
Despite all predictions, no attacks on US soil since 9/11.

Think about it…

Why are colleges and universities so different? In this age of streaming video and hand-held satellite communications of audio, video and text, why are colleges still stuck on the model of seats in a classroom in expensive buildings with dorm housing and giant increases in tuition.

Wouldn’t a massive infusion of online learning generate major revenue for higher ed at significantly lower costs? 20 years ago, banking meant actually going to a bank. It doesn’t anymore. Imagine what the same transition in higher ed could bring.

HRAs could only be used for retirement and could be passed on without estate taxation.

HRA investments could be managed by any number of private or public investment tools, ideally adjusted by the owner’s age and other relevant measures.

Unlike typical 401ks and other retirement plans, which provide increased benefits to the well paid, the HRA system provides everyone based on how many hours they work, not how much they are paid. Even those at minimum wage would get the same HRA investment as Bill Gates.

Importantly, younger workers, who start out with lower wages and rarely contribute to their retirement, would benefit the most.

One might even consider offering HRAs for non-working spouses with dependents equal to the bread winners HRA.

One ought to be able to contribute more of one’s after tax income into one’s HRA if an individual chooses.

HRAs should be Roth like-investments — not subject to taxation upon withdrawal.

Currently, the cost would be less than 1/3 of the existing FICA payments. In a few decades, even those of limited means would get sufficient HRA retirement income to offset future benefits problems in Social Security.

Indeed, it’s possible to use the HRA system as a reasonably controlled way to evolve Social Security out of it’s [troubled] future.

2. With apologies to Mr. Cantor, eliminate the self-serving nature of modern politics by establishing term limits (three 2-year terms for the House, two 6-year terms for the Senate).

3. Reduce pork-spending and increase accountability by giving the President a line-item veto.

But little media attention has been paid to mothers who want to provide the best type of childcare a newborn can have - a stay at home mom! Many women want to stay at home in the first few years of their child’s life before returning to the labor market.

According to a recent Pew Research poll, increasing numbers of American mothers view staying at home to raise children, or taking on part time work, to be the ideal family option for them.

Unfortunately, these mothers cannot afford to stay at home and rely primarily on their husband’s income to support their family because, as the Heritage Foundation has pointed out, about 38% of the average working American’s income goes to federal and local taxes. As for part time work, regulations and high business taxes prevent many medium and small businesses from offering temporary jobs. As a result, many moms cannot afford to stay at home and raise their children.

The Republicans could help promote traditional nuclear family values, by using tax cuts to make it more affordable for American mothers to choose the option of staying at home, while also giving tax incentives for businesses to offer part time work.

Here are some free market initiatives that will help promote traditional family values:
1) A three year maternity tax holiday.
For three years, every dollar up to $15,000 a year a family earns would be exempt from all federal, state and local income taxes and also be exempt from an employee?s FICA taxes (the tax threshold would be indexed for inflation).
For married couples, a tax maternity leave would make it more affordable for moms to stay home and raise their newborn because less of their husband?s income would be going to the government in taxes, although working mothers would also receive the three year tax holiday.
2) Use retirement accounts as a form of paid maternity leave.
Retirement accounts could be used as a free market initiative to give stay at home moms “Paid maternity leave”. The government could allow a married couple or single mother with children 4 years or younger to withdraw up to $8,000 of savings from their retirement accounts without tax penalty. In this way, raising children would be more affordable for stay at home moms.
3) Double the child tax credit to $2,000 and index the credit to inflation.
4) Tax incentives for part time jobs and flex-work:
Give sizable tax cuts and credits to companies that offer new mothers in their employ Flex-work, such as working part time from home, flexible work hours, leave for family illness, part time work and extra time on holiday for mothers with young children. Flex-work would be more affordable for small and medium sized businesses that cannot afford to operate expensive on-site childcare.

When I tried to read the Immigration Reform bill, I received a message that the bill hadn’t printed yet. Of course some had access to it so I was able to read about the bill and hear about it on the radio.

I understand that Congress wants money for individual states — that is one way to get elected again. However, I think states should be responsible for the funding of cheese museums or transport to Disneyland. Why should my taxes be spent so people can get a cheap ride to see Mickey Mouse — that’s a piece of the pork that will not benefit me in any way, shape or form.

NCAA Division I-A (FBS) football has never and does not currently participated in a championship playoff, instead determining a mythical national championship based on biased sports writer opinion polls and complicated computer calculations.

Since public universities receive federal grants and other federal funding, I believe that this practice violates the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution guaranteeing equal protection to all under the law.

It is high time that Congress mandate that any university in the United States that receives federal or state funding for any purpose not be allowed to participate in any post-season competition without that competition being part of a national championship playoff.

Unfortunately with our “public” schools the problem is further magnified because no child can be left behind so everyone moves ahead. An example is: a child who recently began to slip in their grades by not completing their assignments was challanged by the parents upon notification by the school to begin bringing their work home. Later the school contacted the parents again saying that since the child was not turning in all of their work, they would be grading the childs work turned in and grading them accordingly, thereby the school could pass the child to next grade. The parents objected, but the school said there was no other alternative as the “No Child left behind” initiative mandated it so. I can not draw sides as there are probably many facets to this story to indicate better ways to solve this particular sanario, however my point is the education system is the underlying problem. Which brings me to the solution to this problem.

1. Reduce the Federal Department of Education to the point in that their only role is to set the minimum standards that must be attained for advancement through testing administered by an independent organization paid for by the Parent/Student from the funds they receive in vouchers.

2. Give a voucher to the responsible parent(s) to disperse at a school of their choice. This would include all monies that schools currently receive in funds from the Federal Government. Currently if a parent removes a child from a school and move them into a private school of their choosing, the parents are responsible for payment, and are allowed to deduct a portion of that payment at the end of the year from their taxes, while the school continues to receive funds for that child even though they do not attend that school. This would force the schools to become competetive.

3. Make it compulsory that one or both parents be involved in the education process by not just attendending Open House, but deciding what type of class level their child should attend, to the type of books are being administered for learning, the school location, length of class per subject, and even the staff and faculty that are hired. While each parent and child would be required to give of their time, in the long run all would benefit and as a side we and our children would receive a state of the art education. Not to mention we would feel a sense of satisfaction knowing our tax dollars were being more closely monitored by us.