California Conservative

As California goes, so the nation? Let’s hope not.

We thought this was worth posting in its entirety, c/o WSJ.

–
California as No. 1
July 17, 2008; Page A14
Wall Street Journal

New York City has long been the highest tax jurisdiction in the United States, but California politicians are proposing to steal that brass tiara. California faces a $15 billion budget deficit and Democrats who rule the state Legislature have proposed closing the gap with a $9.7 billion tax hike on business and “the rich.” There’s a movie that describes this idea: Clueless.

The plan would raise the top marginal income tax rate to 12% from 10.3%; that would be the highest in the nation and twice the national average. This plan would also repeal indexing for inflation, which is a sneaky way for politicians to push middle-income Californians into higher tax brackets every year, especially when prices are rising as they are now. The corporate income tax rate would also rise to 9.3% from 8.4%. So in the face of one of the worst real-estate recessions in the state’s history, the politicians want to raise taxes on businesses that are still making money.

This latest tax gambit was unveiled, ironically enough, within days of two very large California employers announcing they are saying, in the famous words of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, “hasta la vista, baby” to the state. First, the AAA auto club declared it will close its call centers in California, meaning that 900 jobs will move to other states. “It costs more to do business in California,” said a AAA press release, in the understatement of the year.

Then last week Toyota announced it is canceling plans to build its new Prius hybrid at its plant in the San Francisco Bay area because of the high tax and regulatory costs. Adding to the humiliation is that Toyota will now take this investment and about 1,000 jobs to a more progressive and pro-business state: Mississippi. (more…)

Regarding California politics, how often can we ask that question?

According to an article by Jim Sanders in the Sacramento Bee, bipartisan sponsors will introduce a bill to give away state taxes to newborns:

California would give every newborn child a tax-free $500 savings account under legislation scheduled to be unveiled Wednesday.

The measure, Senate Bill 752, will be presented at a 1:30 p.m. news conference by state Sen. Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, and Sen. Bob Dutton, R-Rancho Cucamonga.

The bill is meant to persuade more families to invest for the future, beginning when their children are very young.

SB 752 estimates that state costs would total about $270 million.

Well, that’ll discourage obstetric tourism. The folks in Rancho Cucamonga who thought they had elected a conservative in Sen. Bob Dutton might consider snowing his office under in (polite) protest mail.

How about instead the legislature cut state taxes by the amount it wants to give away?

Nah. Never happen.

Written by Red County, California

There are many reasons to oppose Gov. Schwarzenegger’s flawed plan to ‘reform’ California’s health care system. Below are my top 5. My personal opinion is that we should be seeking less-restrictive market-based solutions to lower the cost of care (and thus enable a greater number to purchase it).

1. “Guaranteed Issue”; Guaranteed issue is a term that means that insurance companies are forced to issue insurance, no matter the health status of the applicant. Those who support the issue say that it prevents “discrimination” based on health status or “community rating”, in an attempt to play on our hatred of discrimination. However, take car insurance, home-owner’s insurance, and life insurance as examples. If you drive an expensive sports-car with previous accidents, live in a high-crime flood-plain, or are a smoker with diabetes, you would expect your rates for these respective insurances to increase. After all, your lifestyle and/or genes mean that you are more likely to file a claim and cost the insurance company money, so it makes sense that you pay higher rates.

Guaranteed issue does nothing more than spread the blame. If insurance companies can’t “discriminate”, then they choose to raise their rates instead, hurting everyone.

2. Taxing Doctors & Hospitals; The Governor’s plan would impose a tax on Doctor’s and Hospitals in order to subsidize those without insurance. This Socialist-mentality makes no sense. Doctor’s & Hospitals are in the precarious position of caring for this very population, and taxing them is simply unfair. Should we tax landlords and tenants to subsidize homeless shelters? Tax Restaurants to feed the hungry?

Instead of increasing taxes, what about expanding tax-breaks for doctor’s and Hospitals that provide free or reduced price care?

3. Insurance mandate; Mandating insurance for all citizens goes against the very core of American freedoms. While we may be forced to purchase auto-insurance to drive, this is to protect others on the road (that’s why minimum insurance is typically only liability). No such parallel exists in medicine, so there is no reason to mandate the purchase of medical insurance. (more…)

Just when I thought global warming activists couldn’t sound sillier, I read an article like this which proves me wrong. Here’s the silliest-sounding claim I’ve heard yet:

GLOBAL warming will take a toll on children’s health, according to a new report showing hospital admissions for fever soar as days get hotter. The new study found that temperature rises had a significant impact on the number of pre-schoolers presenting to emergency departments for fever and gastroenteritis. The two-year study at a major children’s hospital showed that for every five-degree rise in temperature two more children under six years old were admitted with fever to that hospital.

I’ve decided that I’m releasing a report that’s just as scientific as this one that listening to crap like that will cause you to go deaf. Or at least make you wish you had. Where do they come up with this crap? Is this crap the result of them using very expensive drugs that cause illusions? Or perhaps they have an over-active imagination? Or is it that they’re former used car salesmen who haven’t gotten over their need to tell whoppers? Perhaps all of the above? (more…)

I was in Sacramento this past weekend where a panel of medical experts discussed Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s recent proposal to socialize medicine in California.

Included in the panel of experts was a Schwarzenegger representative; a bureaucrat pulled right out of Central Casting, a wrinkled pear-shaped figure concealed by fading polyester.

The physicians represented more than 100 years of medical study and practice. One expert, a Canadian who enjoyed socialized medicine until his “wife became crippled while waiting 18 months for surgery” reminded us why people served by socialized medicine come to the US for care. Other experts lamented the obvious disconnect between Schwarzenegger’s proposal and the real world.

The most powerful speaker of the group was Dr. Linda Halderman. Her passionate advocacy for healthcare was matched only by her beauty. Even when interrupted by Rudy Giuliani’s visit, I sensed that most of us couldn’t wait for her to continue.

She outlined many issues and suggestions related to her posts on American Thinker – posts that deserve everyone’s careful review.

In What’s Your Doctor Worth? Halderman, a Board Certified General Surgeon, describes the bureaucratic distractions that make it almost impossible to treat patients in California.

A woman was referred to Dr. Halderman after her mammogram showed a suspicious area.

Five or ten faxed pages arrive on my assistant’s desk. She calls the Gynecologist’s office to request additional material, including copies of the mammogram report, the patient’s contact information and insurance data-if the
patient is insured.

Dr. Halderman describes the lengthy process of reviewing her case, confirming insurance eligibility, charts, x-rays, medical records, interviews and examinations:

I examine her carefully, assessing not only for breast abnormalities, but also for swollen glands in eight regions of the body. A heart and lung exam is done to identify problems that would make her a higher surgical risk, and the neurological, abdominal and musculoskeletal evaluations provide evidence for or against tumor spread.

After reassuring her patient and frightened family, she filled out forms, ordered more testing, poring over “the list of codes required by Medi-Cal to identify the visit, choosing the most appropriate ones and hoping they don’t merit automatic rejection of the bill (a frequent occurrence, prompting up to nine months of back-and-forth debate with Medi-Cal).”

Dr. Halderman describes the tearful second visit, the patient’s fear, diagnosis, treatment and the confused feelings related to a life-threatening illness. (more…)

At the 2004 Republican National Convention, Arnold Schwarzenegger told how he first became involved in American politics when he came to this country in 1968. It started when he was watching coverage of the presidential race between Richard Nixon and Hubert Humphrey.

“I heard Humphrey saying things that sounded like socialism, which is what I had just left,” he said. “But then I heard Nixon speak. He was talking about free enterprise, getting government off your back, lowering taxes and strengthening the military. Listening to Nixon speak sounded more like a breath of fresh air. I said to my friend, “What party is he?” My friend said, “He’s a Republican.” I said, “Then I am a Republican.”

… But a funny thing happened on the way to Sacramento. It seems that Schwarzenegger, like Nixon, has “grown” — which is how the media condescendingly describe it when a politician becomes more liberal over the years. By this measure, he has become more massive than ever, since announcing his latest proposals on health care and global warming.

The governor has decided that every single person in California must have health insurance, including illegal aliens. “If you can’t afford it, the state will help you buy it,” he promised. Under his plan, the government would force businesses with as few as ten employees to provide their health insurance. It would also micromanage how insurance providers may spend their revenue, and levy new taxes on doctors and hospitals.

In other words, this policy would deter small businesses from hiring, make the state less attractive to doctors and insurers, and encourage even more illegal immigration. Moreover, it would provide incentives to increase health care costs and insurance premiums, to which the state would likely respond with price controls. So much for free enterprise.

Last September, Schwarzenegger signed a bill that essentially commits his state to abide by the Kyoto Protocol, by reducing carbon dioxide emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020. When Bill Clinton signed onto Kyoto in 1997, the Senate voted against its ratification by a count of 95-0. Many of the senators had surely planned to stay in office beyond the compliance date of 2010, at which point they would have been held accountable. Schwarzenegger, however, will be long gone from the governor’s mansion when the bill for his binge of feelgoodism comes due. (more…)

After SB 840, the bill within the California State Legislature that would socialize medical coverage within the state, was vetoed by Gov. Schwarzenegger, Senate Pro Tem Don Perata (D) is proposing a plan that would tax businesses and individuals in order to pay for health care for the poor. The plan is different from SB 840, in that it only provides the free-ride health care to the poor. All employees and employers (even those who already pay for their own care) would be required to pay into (read: “be taxed into”) a system that would provide the care for the uninsured.

When presenting his proposal, Sen. Perata stated

There would be an employer contribution and an employee contribution. If you want to call that mandates, yes. There’s no free ride

For clarification purposes, he means no free ride for businesses and individual tax payers. By definition, it is a free ride for those receiving the free medical care.

Gov. Schwarzenegger has already stated his dedication to tackling the Health Care issue in 2007 and in his next term. Though he has not issued any details of his plans, he has expressed his opposition to socialized medicine, as well as any plans that would increase taxes.

I will be watching this legislation closely.

Cross-Posted at The Gentle Cricket

“I think it’s good that there are new ideas and new blood because Washington was stuck. They could not move forward, not much was accomplished. I think it was terrible. I think the people have spoken in America, all over the United States and have sent a very clear message to Washington.”

Howard Deant. Harry Reid. Nancy Pelosi. “New ideas”? “New blood”? Arnold, if you’re going to fawn, get with the talking points: “a new direction.” What does that mean? Retreat.

Steve Frank adds:

Governor Schwarzenegger goes beyond congratulating the Democrats for winning the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. He is HAPPY they won Congress. Maybe now we know why this year he did not help his GOP ticket. Maybe NOW we know why he made just ONE ten minute speech, in Columbus, Ohio, for the President in 2004. Seems he prefers Democrats to Republicans in Washington. As Paul Harvey says, “Now You Know The Rest of the Story”.

Sad story.

Well, at least somebody is happy…

But it’s a bittersweet victory. We know that since The Governator-Lite will just go back to appeasing Democrats being “bipartisan,” there will be no major reforms and the state will just spend more taxpayers’ money.

And why not? They know how easy it is coming back for more, every election.

My friend, Bob Rosebrock, makes an excellent case in an article about the how the HOV lane on our freeways not only causes more traffic and congestion, but is clearly undemocratic, gives preferential treatment to a special class of drivers and denies equal access to public transportation. He calls for opening the HOV lane to all drivers on election day - November 7th to allow voters a free flow of traffic so they can make it to the polls.

I agree. Let’s all get behind opening the HOV lane to all drivers on Election Day and see how traffic is really improved. Read his article below. It makes a lot of sense.

NO VOTER LEFT BEHIND

“Freedom of the Freeway”

By Robert L. Rosebrock

Of the many privileges we enjoy as a democratic society, ‘freedom to vote’ is paramount for our country’s survival. Equally important for our personal survival is ‘freedom of movement,’ because without it we could not travel to and from work or accomplish a multitude of our endeavors, including going to the polling station to vote.

To ensure that our citizenry has accessible maneuverability, it is a primary function of government to facilitate our public freeway system so that all motorists have uniform liberty to mobilize his or her self in their pursuit of happiness. To the contrary, our individual mobility has been seriously curtailed under California’s Transportation Control Plan that was implemented more than thirty years ago. As a result, our freeway traveling is unjustly regulated with an ideological‘wall of separation’ that discriminates against millions of motorists based simply on passenger or vehicle preference.

This restrictive barrier is the preferential-treatment carpool lane, also known as the High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) law, which rewards special driving privileges to motorists that have a single passenger or drive alone in a hybrid car. And for those motorists who do not or cannot conform to this doctrine, they are unfairly penalized with inferior driving conditions. Such laws are inequitable, divisive and contradictory to the basic principles of democracy and violate America’s trusted creed of “With Liberty and Justice for All.”

We must never forget that there’s a big difference between equal opportunity and equal treatment. In his book “My American Journey,” former Secretary of State General Colin Powell rightfully declared: “Equal rights and equal opportunity mean just that. They do not mean preferential treatment.” But why doesn’t our government practice this?
(more…)