By Rep. Steven Thayn
I was listening to the radio this morning and the host said that the Republicans were poised to win in November and that all voters had to do was kick out all the Democrats. His inference was that all our problems would be fixed if we just had conservative Republicans in office.
Wait just a minute, not so fast. What makes you think that conservative Republicans are going to fix our nation’s problems? Where is the proof? Republicans have been in charge in the past and our problems got worse not better. I will grant that President Obama could possibly be the worst president in American history and that we need to replace President Obama and his liberal Democratic friends; but, the question remains with whom and what policies need to be replaced? I have three suggestions. Until I hear these three issues being discussed, I have no expectation that improvements will occur at the national level.
1. The federal government is too large with 63 percent of the federal budget goes to human services. Most, if not all, human service responsibilities need to be transferred to the state level where costs can be reduced and services improved.
2. The economy is in shambles. The key to stimulating the economy is increasing “the big five:” Logging, mining, agriculture, manufacturing, and energy production. “The big five” cannot be stimulated until environmental regulations are reduced and made business friendly.
3. The character of the American people is changing from a sense of personal independence to dependence upon government programs. The philosophy of human service programs needs to change from a focus on the short-term material needs of individuals to, a much more healthy approach, where long-term needs are addressed to encourage people to become independent and self-sufficient. Success of a social program should be measured on the number of people that no longer need help rather than the number of people on the program.
The problem in the past with the Republican Party and conservatives in general is that they have had virtually NO IDEAS on how to deal with real social problems. Until Republicans engage in solving real human problems using limited government principles, I do not believe our problems will improve.
Rep. Steven Thayn, R-Emmett, represents District 11 in the Idaho House of Representatives.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Who Wants to Help Reform Health Care
If any of you are interested in making health care more affordable in Idaho and would like to work on this issue between now and the next session, let me know. I have found some interesting facts about the Health Care system in Singapore that I have added below.
http://www.moh.gov.sg/mohcorp/hcsystem.aspx
Introduction to Medisave
Medisave, introduced in April 1984, is a national medical savings scheme which helps individuals put aside part of their income into their Medisave Accounts to meet their future personal or immediate family's hospitalization, day surgery and certain outpatient expenses.
Under the scheme, every employee contributes 6.5-9% (depending on age group) of his monthly salary to a personal Medisave account. The savings can be withdrawn to pay the hospital bills of the account holder and his immediate family members.
Contributing to Medisave
Typically, an employee would contribute between 6.5-9% of their wages to Medisave. Find out exactly how you are contributing to Medisave here.
http://www.moh.gov.sg/mohcorp/hcsystem.aspx
Introduction to Medisave
Medisave, introduced in April 1984, is a national medical savings scheme which helps individuals put aside part of their income into their Medisave Accounts to meet their future personal or immediate family's hospitalization, day surgery and certain outpatient expenses.
Under the scheme, every employee contributes 6.5-9% (depending on age group) of his monthly salary to a personal Medisave account. The savings can be withdrawn to pay the hospital bills of the account holder and his immediate family members.
Contributing to Medisave
Typically, an employee would contribute between 6.5-9% of their wages to Medisave. Find out exactly how you are contributing to Medisave here.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Gov. Otter Signs Health Freedom Act
Wednesday afternoon, Governor Otter signed the Health Freedom Act that directs the attorney general to take the Federal government to court if nationalized health care passes.
One of the questions from a reporter asked is if it isn't hypocritical to try to get the F-35 fighter jet to be based in Idaho while rejecting Federal health care.
The Governor did a great job answering the question. I would like to add a thought.
National defense is a Federal responsibility while health care is a state and personal responsibility. The Federal budget is borrowing 42 cents of every dollar it spends and 63 percent of the Federal budget is for human services. If human services were transferred back to the states, these services could be delivered at 30 percent less cost simply because of the inefficiencies inherent in Federal programs.
One of the questions from a reporter asked is if it isn't hypocritical to try to get the F-35 fighter jet to be based in Idaho while rejecting Federal health care.
The Governor did a great job answering the question. I would like to add a thought.
National defense is a Federal responsibility while health care is a state and personal responsibility. The Federal budget is borrowing 42 cents of every dollar it spends and 63 percent of the Federal budget is for human services. If human services were transferred back to the states, these services could be delivered at 30 percent less cost simply because of the inefficiencies inherent in Federal programs.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
America's Three Main Problems
We all know that America is headed the wrong direction. The question is what is the right direction?
I would suggest that we have three main problems.
First: the federal government is too big.
Second: the economy is struggling.
Third: the character of the American people is changing from independence to dependence on federal social programs.
The budget figures indicate the main reason why the federal government is too big is that 63 percent of the budget is used for human services. The human service budget is growing the fastest and seems totally out of control. Yet, the federal government thinks that it can reduce costs by nationalizing health care.
Possible solution: transfer human service responsibilities back to the states where they belong. This would reduce spending by 30 percent simply because of the inefficiencies inherent in the federal system.
The economy is struggling because of loss of private sector jobs. The private sector of the economy needs growth in the 'big five': mining, logging, agriculture, manufacturing, and energy. I don't see the economy improving until the 'big five' make a comeback and I don't see the economy making a comeback until environmental regulations are reformed.
Finally, the character of the American people is changing largely because of the growth of federal social programs. I believe that transferring social programs back to the state level, modifying them to move to a mentoring level instead of handouts, and reforming public education using my MAPP proposal are all good steps in this process.
I would suggest that we have three main problems.
First: the federal government is too big.
Second: the economy is struggling.
Third: the character of the American people is changing from independence to dependence on federal social programs.
The budget figures indicate the main reason why the federal government is too big is that 63 percent of the budget is used for human services. The human service budget is growing the fastest and seems totally out of control. Yet, the federal government thinks that it can reduce costs by nationalizing health care.
Possible solution: transfer human service responsibilities back to the states where they belong. This would reduce spending by 30 percent simply because of the inefficiencies inherent in the federal system.
The economy is struggling because of loss of private sector jobs. The private sector of the economy needs growth in the 'big five': mining, logging, agriculture, manufacturing, and energy. I don't see the economy improving until the 'big five' make a comeback and I don't see the economy making a comeback until environmental regulations are reformed.
Finally, the character of the American people is changing largely because of the growth of federal social programs. I believe that transferring social programs back to the state level, modifying them to move to a mentoring level instead of handouts, and reforming public education using my MAPP proposal are all good steps in this process.
MAPP in the Senate
Some of you may be wondering what is happening with the MAPP bill. On Thursday the 11th of March, the bill was debated on the floor of the Senate and was sent to the amending order to add a sunset clause. The Senate should go to the amending order on Tuesday. MAPP should then be sent back to the floor and pass.
There is only one Senator that is actively fighting against it, Senator Gary Schroeder from Moscow. What I find interesting is that each of his arguments used to defeat MAPP are actually reasons to support MAPP. For example, he suggests that we will have 13 year-old youth going to college.
I didn't know we were slowing kids down that much. But, if most kids could get through high school by age 13, as he suggests, then we really need to pass MAPP, let students finish early and then solve this problem of young people ready for college at age 13. Too many students ready for college at too young of an age seems like one of those problems we would like to have.
There is only one Senator that is actively fighting against it, Senator Gary Schroeder from Moscow. What I find interesting is that each of his arguments used to defeat MAPP are actually reasons to support MAPP. For example, he suggests that we will have 13 year-old youth going to college.
I didn't know we were slowing kids down that much. But, if most kids could get through high school by age 13, as he suggests, then we really need to pass MAPP, let students finish early and then solve this problem of young people ready for college at age 13. Too many students ready for college at too young of an age seems like one of those problems we would like to have.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Freedom, Mercy, Kindness, and Truth
Understanding politics is difficult because words have double meanings. Let me give you an example of a few.
Freedom can mean (A) ability and opportunity to choose or
(B) Freedom from consequences
Mercy should be given by (A) the individual through voluntary gifts or
(B) the state through forced redistribution of the wealth
Kindness can mean (A) telling a person what he wants to hear or
(B) telling a person what he needs to hear
Truth (A) changes with each individual or
(B) is the knowledge of the past, present, and future.
Of course with the second definition of truth, no one knows all truth. The definition simply alludes to the fact that the truth does exist and suggests that we should find it.
How is it found? The only clue was Jesus who said: "By their fruits ye shall know them" which I take to mean that consequences and reason can guide us in finding good public policy. A keen understanding of history is essential in this quest. If politicians cannot back up their policies with historical examples, I would beware of such a person and his policies.
Freedom can mean (A) ability and opportunity to choose or
(B) Freedom from consequences
Mercy should be given by (A) the individual through voluntary gifts or
(B) the state through forced redistribution of the wealth
Kindness can mean (A) telling a person what he wants to hear or
(B) telling a person what he needs to hear
Truth (A) changes with each individual or
(B) is the knowledge of the past, present, and future.
Of course with the second definition of truth, no one knows all truth. The definition simply alludes to the fact that the truth does exist and suggests that we should find it.
How is it found? The only clue was Jesus who said: "By their fruits ye shall know them" which I take to mean that consequences and reason can guide us in finding good public policy. A keen understanding of history is essential in this quest. If politicians cannot back up their policies with historical examples, I would beware of such a person and his policies.
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Drug Testing in order to Receive State Assistance?
Voters have long asked me why we can't drug test those on state assistance? Rep. Rich Wills has introduced such a bill that asked that the Department of Health and Welfare to:
"DRUG TESTING - COST STUDY - Stating findings of the Legislature and requesting the Department of Health and Welfare to undertake a study of the cost of implementing a random drug testing program of adults receiving public assistance and requesting the department to report its findings to the Legislature."
HCR 55 has passed the House. I like the bill. How can we really help someone on public assistance unless we understand their problems? If someone has a drug problem, we can't help them until we know.
"DRUG TESTING - COST STUDY - Stating findings of the Legislature and requesting the Department of Health and Welfare to undertake a study of the cost of implementing a random drug testing program of adults receiving public assistance and requesting the department to report its findings to the Legislature."
HCR 55 has passed the House. I like the bill. How can we really help someone on public assistance unless we understand their problems? If someone has a drug problem, we can't help them until we know.
Reelection
I just want to announce that I am running for reelection to the Idaho House of Representatives. I am pleased with my work on public education. It appears the MAPP bill will pass this session which will allow students to move through the system faster if they so choose and potentially reduce costs to the state.
I am also working on moving the Health and Welfare system to a mentor system and away from forced redistribution of the wealth. This is a long-term project; however, there is progress being made on this front. I would like to come back and work on it again.
Thanks for your support.
I am also working on moving the Health and Welfare system to a mentor system and away from forced redistribution of the wealth. This is a long-term project; however, there is progress being made on this front. I would like to come back and work on it again.
Thanks for your support.
Education Funding and the Environment
I receive communications on a daily basis asking that education funding be protected. These Idaho citizens correctly identify the importance of education. I want to point out that I and my fellow legislators do not want to reduce education funding; however, we are faced with two choices due to falling tax revenues:
1. Reduce education funding as well as funding to other state agencies
2. Raise taxes
I do not believe that raising taxes at this time is wise. Increasing taxes will cause even more harm to the economy. Tax revenues are down because the private sector of the economy is shrinking. If we want tax revenues to increase, we must stimulate the private sector of the economy.
The private sector will most effectively be stimulated by focusing on the ‘big five’: logging, mining, agriculture, manufacturing, and energy. The ‘big five’ will not be significantly stimulated unless the burden of environmental regulations is reduced. I do not believe that this recession can end until the ‘big five’ once again grow and expand.
Once the ‘big five’ start expanding, then tax revenues will increase allowing for increased public education funding. If the ‘big five’ continue to struggle, tax revenues will remain flat or even decrease further. I do not see the end of this recession until political leaders and citizens at the local, state, and federal level start discussing the need to reform environmental regulations. I do not mean their total repeal; but rather, recognition of the cost and damage done by the high cost of senseless environmental regulation.
There is a link between public school funding and the economy and natural resources. The economy cannot grow until the natural resource segment of the economy grows. The natural resource segment of the economy is struggling because of the weight of environmental regulations.
I believe that we have a choice to either embrace sensible environmentalism or endure continued public school funding declines. The American economy can't support both heavy-handed environmentalism and big government spending. There is an opportunity for school teachers to lead in creating balance between proper use of our natural resources.
1. Reduce education funding as well as funding to other state agencies
2. Raise taxes
I do not believe that raising taxes at this time is wise. Increasing taxes will cause even more harm to the economy. Tax revenues are down because the private sector of the economy is shrinking. If we want tax revenues to increase, we must stimulate the private sector of the economy.
The private sector will most effectively be stimulated by focusing on the ‘big five’: logging, mining, agriculture, manufacturing, and energy. The ‘big five’ will not be significantly stimulated unless the burden of environmental regulations is reduced. I do not believe that this recession can end until the ‘big five’ once again grow and expand.
Once the ‘big five’ start expanding, then tax revenues will increase allowing for increased public education funding. If the ‘big five’ continue to struggle, tax revenues will remain flat or even decrease further. I do not see the end of this recession until political leaders and citizens at the local, state, and federal level start discussing the need to reform environmental regulations. I do not mean their total repeal; but rather, recognition of the cost and damage done by the high cost of senseless environmental regulation.
There is a link between public school funding and the economy and natural resources. The economy cannot grow until the natural resource segment of the economy grows. The natural resource segment of the economy is struggling because of the weight of environmental regulations.
I believe that we have a choice to either embrace sensible environmentalism or endure continued public school funding declines. The American economy can't support both heavy-handed environmentalism and big government spending. There is an opportunity for school teachers to lead in creating balance between proper use of our natural resources.
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Why haven't we done this before?
Rep. Sharon Block introduced House Bill 610 in Health and Welfare Committee that directed the department of Health and Welfare to place children in foster care based upon the following criteria.
1. A fit and willing relative.
2. A fit and willing non-relative with a significant relationship with the child.
3. Foster parents and other persons licensed with the state.
This is one of the most common sense ideas that has come out of the legislature. Why hasn't the department being doing this in the past? Has the department of Health and Welfare not been in the business of keeping families together?
This bill is an example of the good things that can happen when government spending decreases and more innovative, low-cost methods must be used. Such as using the natural advantages of the family unit.
1. A fit and willing relative.
2. A fit and willing non-relative with a significant relationship with the child.
3. Foster parents and other persons licensed with the state.
This is one of the most common sense ideas that has come out of the legislature. Why hasn't the department being doing this in the past? Has the department of Health and Welfare not been in the business of keeping families together?
This bill is an example of the good things that can happen when government spending decreases and more innovative, low-cost methods must be used. Such as using the natural advantages of the family unit.
Health and Welfare: Should we have radom drug tests for welfare?
Today, Rep. Rich Wills introduced a resolution to ask the Department of Health and Welfare to undertake a study to check into the feasibility of giving random drug tests to those adults receiving state assistance.
The Democrats voted against the issue while the Republicans on the Committee voted for it. Why shouldn't we give drug tests to individuals? How can someone actually be helped to become self-sufficient unless their real problems are addressed?
The bill passed. It is House Concurrent Resolution 55.
The Democrats voted against the issue while the Republicans on the Committee voted for it. Why shouldn't we give drug tests to individuals? How can someone actually be helped to become self-sufficient unless their real problems are addressed?
The bill passed. It is House Concurrent Resolution 55.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)