Sen. Reid marginalizes Slavery

"Instead of joining us on the right side of history, all the Republicans can come up with is, 'slow down, stop everything, let's start over'. If you think you've heard these same excuses before, you're right. When this country belatedly recognized the wrongs of slavery, there were those who dug in their heels and said 'slow down, it's too early, things aren't bad enough'. When women spoke up for the right to speak up, they wanted to vote, some insisted they simply, slow down, there will be a better day to do that, today isn't quite right. When this body was on the verge of guaranteeing equal civil rights to everyone regardless of the color of their skin, some senators resorted to the same filibuster threats that we hear today," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV). I have been watching a lot of the health care debate this summer first hand and have witnessed a lack of bi-partisan approach to health care reform.

During August we heard from the media and Democrats that public radio and Republicans were using scare tactics to sway public opinion. When average Americans showed up at the town hall debates, they were marginalized by the media as a fringe group. Now, Sen. Reid is likening the debate on health care reform to slavery. WHAT!!!! Sen. Reid needs a history lesson as it was under a Republican president, Abraham Lincoln, that the country went to war in an effort to end slavery. I do not see how going to war with one's own citizens is a "slow down, it's too early, things aren't bad enough" approach; rather it says quite the opposite. Where is the deal, how can anyone, let alone the Senate Majority Leader, assert that health care reform debate equates to emancipation, suffrage, or civil rights is pathetic at best.

The words spoke; see above, by Sen. Reid marginalizes emancipation, suffrage, and civil rights. Health care is not a right nor does the current health care system restrict the rights of others. Health care costs are skyrocketing and premiums continue to rise thus making it difficult for all in America to afford health care insurance but health care is not a right. Does it make sense for a society to succeed that a robust health care system is required; yes. Does the current form of health care reform really reform health care; no. Not only that, Sen. Reid and House Speaker Pelosi do not need the support of one Republican in Congress to pass health care reform. So it begs the question: Who is really digging in their heels?

Those digging in their heels are one-issue Democrats. Sen. Nelson (D-Neb.) amendment to deny taxpayer funds to pay for abortion was killed on the Senate floor yesterday to which the Senator warned that he will filibuster the bill if strict abortion language is not put in the final version. On the other side of the issue, many in the House of Representatives vow not to support a bill unless a public option exists. Moderate Democrats are at odds with their more Liberal brethren. Yes, Republicans are not in favor of the type of reform being proposed but their votes are not warranted to pass "reform". But I digress.

The assertion made by Sen. Reid that health care reform ranks in the annuals of history with emancipation, suffrage, and civil rights just proves the lunacy that exists in the leadership of the Democrat party. Even though I am a white male, I feel outraged by the marginalized comments by Sen. Reid as it belittles those that gave their lives to emancipation, suffrage, and civil rights. We all agree that reform is needed in health care but Sen. Reid's statement trumps any fear mongering alleged during the August research. Or am I missing something? Is health care reform on the same level of emancipation, suffrage, and civil rights?

President Obama’s job creation program is short sighted

Today President Obama will be announcing that he wants to use bailout money to fund a new jobs program in order to stem the tide of unemployment rate that is still above 10%. The unemployment rate did decline over the past month, mainly due to people falling off the record. The national unemployment rate is "computed solely from the Current Population Survey (CPS) of about 60,000 households conducted by the Census Bureau. Residents of selected households are interviewed about their work experience. From these responses, the Bureau of Labor Statistics then estimates the size of the labor force and the number of people who are jobless" (http://dli.mt.gov/resources/howrate.asp). While statistics can be altered to establish the view one wants, we'd like to hope that our Government is not doing that as well. One thing the unemployment rate does not take into consideration is if people are working part-time or have taken a full-time temporary job.

That being said, President Obama is want to use the leftover Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funds to go to new construction project and small business loans to assist main street America rebound. "It means that some of that [leftover] money can be devoted to deficit reduction. And the question is: Are there selective approaches that are consistent with the original goals of TARP," said President Obama (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2009/12/08/2009-12-08_bam_to_toss_tarp_on_jobless_woes.html). The trouble I see in this thought process is twofold. First, President Obama is trading a potential short-term gain (jobs) for long-term debt since new construction jobs will be temporary employment and will not be paid back thus the deficit continues to grow. Secondly, TARP is meant to be used as a slush fund; rather TARP was established to rescue the failing financial sector.

The door was opened though by using TARP funds to bailout the automotive industry. The door needs to be closed on TARP and the money needs to be applied to the deficit. If the president is serious about job growth and sustained job creation then it is time for the Obama Administration to look to nuclear power. Many detractors of nuclear power state it takes 8 to 10 years to get a plant fully functional. All the better I say then. That means that Americans can enjoy 8 to 10 years of constant construction work after which more jobs will be created; jobs that cannot be outsourced. Not only will the building of nuclear power plants bring sustainable, high paying jobs it will assist in the "Green" initiative going on.

As I wrote June 8^th in my blog entry "Obama short sighted on summer job program" that "According to the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), a nuclear power plant generates "approximately $430 M in sales of goods and services in the local community and nearly $40M in total labor income." Nuclear power plants employ between 400 to 700 permanent jobs while offering, according to NEI, "36 percent more than average salaries in the local area." NEI estimates that during the construction phase a new nuclear power plant will create "1,400 to 1,800" jobs with a peak of 2,400." Does it not make sense to kill two birds with one stone by ramping up the establishment of nuclear power plants? The data provided by the NEI is for just one plant; imagine the job creation if each state started the construction of two or three power plants tomorrow.

Again, my question is why is nuclear energy not being given higher priority when it comes to Obama's energy and job creation policies? Instead Obama wants to tap TARP, which has its own legal issues to start with, and establish a pattern with TARP as a slush fund. Sort of reminds me when Congress decided to bring SSN into the General Fund. President Obama needs to allow the unused TARP funds to go to the deficit and focus on real job creation; nuclear power.

Climate Change: Manmade or Mother Nature??

Today marks the start of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen. In recent weeks news has come out about the reporting being done by those who tout that Carbon Dioxide is pushing Earth to the breaking point. Hackers exposed a mass amount of emails from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that lead speculation and challenged the creditability of the data being reported. Since that time Phil Jones has stepped down from his leadership role at the lab but will remain on staff to continue research. In a statement Jones said, "What is most important is that [Climate Research Lab] continues its world leading research with as little interruption and diversion as possible. After a good deal of consideration I have decided that the best way to achieve this is by stepping aside from the Director's role during the course of the independent review." Just a side note, I attempted to link to the statement but it has been taken off the website where it was originally posted.

I recall from my elementary education that plants need Carbon Dioxide to survive and the biggest producer of Carbon Dioxide; you and I. Human beings by their very nature contribute more to the levels of Carbon Dioxide than any coal plant, SUV or other manufacturing plants. It has been interesting since the hacking of documents that our major news outlets have done nothing to investigate the emails; rather they are busy reporting on Tiger Woods. Why is this? UN Environment Program Director Achim Steiner lays claim to the hacked material is, "not climategate, its hackersgate. Let's not forget the word 'gate' refers to a place where data was stolen by people who were paid to do so. So the media should direct its investigations into that" (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/climate-email-theft-likened-to-watergate-break-in/story-e6frg6xf-1225807887910).

Why hasn't there been a debate on the science surrounding the issue of manmade climate change? When Al Gore speaks he does not take questions very often and the media is not allowed in either. Gore's movie, An Inconvenient Truth, lost a huge court case in the United Kingdom earlier this year due to a number of inaccurate claims made by the movie. Researchers at the University of Minnesota-Morris and Wisconsin found that aspen trees are responding positively due to the excess Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere. "What this means is our beloved forests are recognizing change. There was a 'what if' question that frequented the study…Its results concluded that aspen responded well to carbon dioxide, which is fascinating," said Rick Lindroth about the research he co-authored (http://www.mndaily.com/2009/12/06/trees-benefit-carbon-dioxide).

While no one will argue that air quality is important and combating smog in our major cities is needed. The trouble is the debate is not being done on the science for the most part; rather it is being debated on emotion. When the science is used by those pushing the notion of "manmade" climate change, it appears they may have cooked the books or the data. But we may never really know because very few people are asking the tough questions or investigating the data manipulation taking place. How do we discuss climate change going forward? President Obama has delayed his trip to Copenhagen until later in the conference when nearly all other world leaders will be there. Why will Al Gore, or others like him, debate those that do not buy in to the "manmade" angle to climate change?

Hamburg City Council Agenda – December 8, 2009

7:00. Call City Council Meeting to Order @ 7:00 PM

• Pledge of Allegiance
  
• Miscellaneous Business (Public Comments)
  
• Agenda Review (Added Items) and Adoption
  
• Old City Business (Memo)
  
• Approve Minutes for November 10, 2009
  

 

7:10. Fire Department Report

• US Fish & Wildlife Grant
  
• 2008/2009 FEMA Grants
  
• Training Reimbursement
  
• Toy Drive Breakfast – December 6, 2009
  
• Safety Recall – 2001 Ford Econoline
  
• Fire Department Officers for 2010
  

 

7:15. Hamburg Baseball Club

• MN Lawful Gambling Permit (52 Club Raffle)
  

 

7:20. Scott Qualle (MNSPECT)

• Agreement and Contract for Building Inspection Services for 2010
  

 

7:30. 2010 Final Tax Levy and Final Budget (Set & Adopt)

• Public Comments on 2010 Final Budget & Tax Levy
  
• 2010 Final Tax Levy Certification to Carver County
  
• 2010 Final Budget
  
• City Fee Schedule for 2010
  
  • Set Public Hearing to Adopt City Fee Schedule
    

 

8:00. Dennis' Report (Public Works & Utilities)

• Storm Sewer Repair (City Shop)
  
• 420 Maria Avenue Curb Stop
  
• Picnic Tables (Paint)
  
• Community Hall/Community Center Repairs
  
  • Tables (5) for Community Center
    
  • Cooling Fans/Electrical Repairs/City Shop Door
    
  • Wall Heaters/Fans
    
• Fire Hydrants Recall
  
• Carver County's Proposed 2010 Projects – 2010 Permit Fee Schedule
  
  • Meeting Wednesday, December 16, 2009 @ 10:00 AM
    
• LMCIT Loss Control Survey on June 11, 2009
  
• General Maintenance Schedules
  
• Project List (Added Items)
  

  
   

8:20. Deputy Clerk Report

• Delinquent Utility Bills Report
  
• Request for Time-Off
  

 

8:30. City Clerk/Treasurer Report

• Employee Reviews for City Employees
  
  • 2010 Wages and Benefits
    
• Ordinance Number 133
  
  • Chapter 160: Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance
    
  • Resolution Number 2009-12
    
• Ordinance Number 134
  
  • Chapter 95.06 of the Hamburg City Code pertaining to (A) Definition of kennel and (B) Kennel as a nuisance.
    
• 2009/2010 Prosecution Contracts Amendment
  
• Approve Cigarette Licenses for 2010
  
  • Parkside Tavern
    
• I/I Abatement Program Update
  
• December 22^nd City Council Meeting (Cancel)
  
• Time Off Requests (December 2009)
  
• Informational Items (Comments)
  
  • School Board Referendum Vote
    
    • December 1, 2009
      
  • Business & Professional Directory for Hamburg
    
  • Ehlers and Associates (Potential Refunding of Bonds)
    
  • MN Rural Water Association (Assistance from Cities)
    
  • City Offices Closed December 24^th & 25^th for Holidays
    

 

9:15. City Council Reports

• Councilmember Mueller Report (Sewer & Water)
  
• Councilmember Cummiskey Report (Streets)
  
  • Handicap Bathroom for Hall
    
• Councilmember Trebesch Report (Buildings)
  
• Councilmember Barnes Report (Parks)
  
• Mayor Malz Report
  

 

9:30. Approve Claims for December 2009

• Resolution Number 2009-13
  

 

9:35. Adjourn City Council Meeting

"The times set forth above are estimated.  Some subjects may take a longer time to discuss and take action on; some subjects may take less time than set forth."

 

COMMUNITY HALL & PARK ACTIVITIES

 

NOVEMBER            20 – Lions Club Poultry Bingo

 

DECEMBER            12 – Christmas with Santa (Lions Club)

 

COMMUNITY CENTER (FIRE HALL) ACTIVITIES

 

 

NOVEMBER             2 – Hamburg Lions Club

                 8 – Washington Lake 4H Club

                10 – Hamburg City Council Meeting – 7:00 PM

                10 – Young America Township Meeting

                11 – Veterans Day Holiday – City Offices Closed

                16 – Hamburg Lions Club

                17 – Central Public Schools – 7:00 PM

                24 – Public Hearing – Ordinance #133 – 6:30 PM

                24 – Public Hearing – Ordinance #134 – 6:45 PM

                24 – Hamburg City Council Meeting – 7:00 PM

                26 – Community Center Rental – Betty Sprengler

                30 – Hamburg Fire Department (Relief Association) – 7:00 PM

 

 

DECEMBER             4 – Hamburg Lions Christmas Party

                
5 – Community Center Rental - Jasmine Riedel

7 – Hamburg Lions Club

8 – Hamburg City Council Meeting – 7:00 PM

                 8 – Truth in Taxation Public Comment Meeting – 7:00 PM

                13 – Community Center Rental – Cindy Hoernemann

                15 – Firefighter One & Two Training

19 – Community Center Rental – David Schneider

                20 – Community Center Rental – Carol Herrmann

                21 – Hamburg Lions Club

                22 – Hamburg City Council Meeting – 7:00 PM

                24 – Christmas Eve Holiday – City Offices Closed

                25 – Christmas Day Holiday – City Offices Closed

                25 – Community Center Rental – John Kuenzel

                28 – Hamburg Fire Department (Relief Association) – 7:00 PM

 

Sen. Mikulski’s Pandora Box Amendment passes

Yesterday the Senate starting moving forward with the amendment phase of health care reform. Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) proposed an amendment (http://mikulski.senate.gov/_pdfs/BAI09N48.pdf) will require all health plans to cover comprehensive women's preventive care and screenings at no cost to women. The amendment passed 61-39. Currently the Sen. Reid's (D-NV) health care bill relies on the United States Preventive Services Task Force to recommend minimum coverage. It was the US Preventive Services Task Force that created a stir in the health word with their recommendation that women wait until 50 years old before getting mammograms.

Not only will mammograms be available for women at no cost so will cervical cancer screenings, pregnancy and postpartum depression screenings, screenings for domestic violence, annual women's health screening, and family planning services but will not include abortion; at least not yet. Passing the bill on the surface seems like a no brainer but it is a slippery slope. Remember the goal of health care reform is to reduce skyrocketing premiums and eliminate waste, inefficiencies, and fraud in the system to reduce costs. The amendment, as scored by the CBO, will cost taxpayers $940 million over 10 years. By requiring insurance companies to provide these preventative screenings will not result in the goals of health care reform.

Whenever a company, large or small, is taxed more, in this case told to cover additional services for free, the cost of the new tax is passed along to the consumer. The company does not feel charity and absorb the cost. So ask yourself, who is going to pay for the new services being offered at no cost? Everyone that pays a premium or uses a clinic or hospital for other services since the insurance company will need to recoup their "free" services someplace else. The slippery slope aspect comes into play because the next step will be to cover preventative screenings for men too. It only makes sense from the same rationale being applied to the requirement of preventative women screenings being offered for free. Then what? Everyone will see their premiums increase and the fees for other clinic and hospital services as well.

Now do not get me wrong. I think it is important for people to obtain preventative screenings to ensure themselves better health as they age. Where I struggle is to cloak this amendment and others like it, under the guise of "Health Care Reform". It is not reform to require an insurance company to provide services for free when the goals is to reduce costs and make insurance affordable for all. The Republicans offered, what some call a dual amendment, an amendment that would remove the US Preventative Task Force from the equation and leave preventative medicine decisions in the hands of the medical profession. That amendment failed.

I do not like sounding like a broken record, especially when some construe that to me being an ideologue, but in order to get real reform in the industry we need to open up competition. The easiest way and cost effective way to achieve increase competition is to remove the anti-trust exemption and allow interstate commerce of insurance. Allow the free market forces to work for the next three years, either bill being proposed wouldn't enact "reform" for at least three years from passage, and pass a law or regulation that prevents insurance companies from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions. Americans will find that by going this route that free market forces will achieve the goals of reform in regards to lower premiums and costs. Some may argue that if that is the case, "Why does it not already take place?" To that the answer is simple; anti-trust exemption.

The questions to ask ourselves going forward are: Does the amendment create a slippery slope? If so, is the slope worth it? Does the amendment assist in health care reform? Does the amendment reduce costs? Will the amendment make health insurance more affordable for all? Nearly everyone one of these questions were ignored or not brought up when debating the amendment. We cannot obtain real reform on emotional decisions.

Matthews Marginalized West Point Cadet’s after Obama’s Speech

After President Obama spoke to United States Troops at West Point, Chris Matthews, MSNBC's host of the Chris Matthews show, said afterwards about the cadets in attendance, "It seems like in this case there isn't a lot of excitement. I watched those cadets they were young kids, men and women, who are committed to serving their country professionally it must be said as officers. I didn't see much excitement but among the older people there, I saw, if not resentment, skepticism. I didn't see a lot of warmth in that crowd out there that President chose to address tonight. And I thought that was interesting. He went to maybe the enemy camp to make his case today." Did I miss something? Tell me why, Mr. Matthews, a group of people who have been told there are murders by the Democrat party and seen their General in the Afghan arena treated like a leper during the discussions.

Those cadets that lacked the "excitement" and held "resentment or skepticism" of the plan being laid out by President Obama may be justified after the manner Obama's administration has treated the military community during the Presidential campaign and after coming into office. If I were a cadet in the crowd my ethusiasm would be diminished too as my Commander-in-Chief telegraphed the plan of battle. Matthews attempted damage control later in the night on his show by saying, "I used the wrong words and worst than that I said something that is just not right and for that I deeply apologize." The mistake was referencing our cadets at West Point the "enemy camp" for President Obama for which your apology rings hollow.

Matthews went onto say, "As those who watch me regularly probably got right away, my point was that the military up at West Point was probably a skeptical audience for President Obama given his strong position against the war in Iraq and generally more dovish image." The one thing Matthews has been successful at is prove that a) he is not a news source, b) lacks original thought, and c) lost his tingling feeling. Instead of focusing his assessment on the content of Obama's speech, Matthews focused on the reaction by the crowd. Why? Perhaps the crowd's reaction was accurate reflection of the plan being laid out.

We all agree that an open-ended war is not an answer nor will it reverse the economic trend being experienced. At the same time, what fool gets before a national audience and tells the world the battle plan? Before anyone gets to crazy, I understand that he did not expose the tactical plan. Rather he telegraphed to the Taliban and other insurgeants that after to 30,000 troops hit the ground you will have just 18 short months to hunker down until we are gone. Then after that, the country is yours. The cadets in the room were not alone in their disappointment with President Obama, the international community is not gushing over the revealing of the plan either.

"Never before has a speech by President Barack Obama felt as false as his Tuesday address announcing America's new strategy for Afghanistan. It seemed like a campaign speech combined with Bush rhetoric – and left both dreamers and realists feeling distraught," wrote Gabor Steingart in his piece "Searching in Vain for the Obama Magic" published in Der Spiegel (http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,664753,00.html#ref=nlint). United Kingdom Prime Minister Gordon Brown said, "I call on all our allies to unite behind President Obama's strategy. Britain will continue to play its full part in persuading other countries to offer troops to the Afghanistan campaign" (http://www.reuters.com/article/gc05/idUSTRE5B133L20091202). Sir Jock Stirrup, UK's Chief of the Defence Staff, said, "There's absolutely nothing wrong with having targets and milestones against which we can measure progress and against which to be frank we can force the pace" (www.telegraph.co.uk). But Sir Stirrup also warned "that a British withdrawal in earnest could not begin until 2014" (www.telegraph.co.uk).

If our most powerful ally is looking for 2014 and the Nobel Peace Prize winner is saying July 2011 – who is right? Also, perhaps the reason why the cadets and senior officers at West Point held their perceived point of view is due to their military training and understanding of the situation. Maybe the media and pundits, like Chris Matthews, should remove their Obama-colored glasses and see the speech and plan from the military perspective.

Open Enrollment: A win for free market society

I know that President Obama spoke last night (my children were upset as they were looking forward to Charlie Brown) about troop escalation in Afghanistan, Tiger Woods overhyped situation, and the shooting of police officers to the commuting of a 16 year-old racist are all viable topics for today. BUT I must acknowledge the hailed school reform established 20 years ago; open enrollment. The Star Tribune ran an article on the front page yesterday called "Big school districts lose big as students leave." According to the article 12,000 students fled the Minneapolis Public school system resulting in a loss of $154 million of funding for the system. The focus of the article is on the "downward spiral" of school budgets due to student losses and state government budget cuts. Why? I understand that as students go so does the budget for the district.

The focus on the dollar aspect is what drives bad companies out of business and appears to be driving poorly run districts out as well. Yesterday the school district that I reside in held a referendum to approve a bond sale, see "ISD 108 Superintendant Corlett visits Hamburg to discuss $10.2 M bond referendum" post November 18^th for more information, to excavate the elementary school and update the middle/high school ventilation, heating and cooling systems. All major expense items that do not get consideration for earmarks within the original budget process for school districts. Per the Star Tribune article the reported budget for the Minneapolis public school system is $500 million.

Now if one had an annual budget for $500 million and did not have to worry for about capital expenditures, can someone help me understand how difficult it would be to retain business? The trouble with budget cuts, and other tough decisions, made by School Boards and Superintendant's is the teacher's union noose they find themselves in. Many of the cuts to personnel in the school system are made on a Last In, First Out process which keeps higher, longer tenured staff on the dole instead of trimming the fat of under-performing staff members. In order for districts, like Minneapolis, that is seeing a decline in enrollment it is time to take a systematic quality approach to stem the tide.

Yesterday I did take a moment to send in similar comment to the Star Tribune and they were published in today's paper or you can see them online at http://www.startribune.com/opinion/letters/78275577.html?elr=KArksc8P:Pc:UHDaaDyiUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUr. My comments start at the bottom of the webpage and extend to the next page. Open enrollment is a win/win situation for parents, students, and schools as it demands that educational pursuits are at the forefront of all school board decisions. If that means that not every sport or after school activity is offered in all school districts then so be it. Where my children go they do not have hockey or lacrosse and if my children decide they will want to participate in such activities I will find a place for them to do that; not demand the school develop a program. The focus of schools need to be on education; starting with providing educators worth their salt and not tenured fat cats. Am I alone in this thought?