Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: ARP Press Release: Coalition Call

Expand Messages
  • Guy McLendon
    Anthony, I ve just now glanced at the ARP Platform ... I m ok with many planks ... immigration is not un-reasonable ... fiscal responsiblity is very good.
    Message 1 of 8 , Feb 5 6:51 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Anthony,
       
      I've just now glanced at the ARP Platform ... I'm ok with many planks ... immigration is not un-reasonable ... fiscal responsiblity is very good.  However, the National Health Care plan sounds like a chapter from Hillary Clinton's book.  Most libertarians, or alternatively ... folks who generally want to have a lawful government, generally agree that the Constitution must be enforceable.  It appears from the ARP's Platform that your leaders are not clear on the concept of having constitutionally enforceable limits on the power of government officials.
       
      Please glance over this speech that I'm about to deliver at a LWV meeting:  http://www.mclendon.net/active/LWV.htm
       
      ... and, discuss with me what ARP's position is on Constitutional compliance based on some type of fixed view that adheres to entrenchment.
       
      My concern at this point is that it'll be impossible for ARP and RLC to co-sponsor candidates due to our having excessively large philosophical gaps ...  If possible, I'd like to see those gaps closed, so that we can cooperate organizationally.
       
      Respectfully yours,
      Guy McLendon
      RLC Nat'l Coalition Liaison
       
       
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2005 8:12 AM
      Subject: ARP Press Release: Coalition Call

      Please feel free to foreward this Press Release on to anyone you feel may be interested.  It will take everyone working on this effort together to make this a possibility.  I have also attached the Word document should you wish to utilize it that way.

      Anthony

      ARP Coalition Call: Press Release

      We the members of the American Reform Party (ARP) believe that now, more than ever, there is a need for a popular uprising in America. Under the "two-party" system, America has become a polarized nation, leaving those of us in the middle wondering whose side we should be on. The focus of the major parties on issues that divide us has prevented us from focusing on the issues of real reform that our country desperately needs. We believe that it is time for a Centrist Revolution, and are calling on all other interested parties to come to the negotiation table and collaborate on those issues that we hold to be most important to us all. We are not interested in bogging ourselves down with issues that are inherently divisive. We are willing to work together, compromise, and negotiate with other activist organizations in an effort to liberate the United States of America from the duopoly that has produced an extremely elite, powerful group of individuals who control our Nation with fascist-like methodology.

      This is a call for action from the People of America. For too long we have been complacent because thatÂ’s "just the way it is". We believe that it is our duty as citizens to provide the fourth and final "check and balance" on our government. The centralization of wealth and power in America is threatening our individual rights. Our public airwaves have been corporatized so that a handful of media moguls control the information that we base our votes on. Our healthcare system has turned into the most profitable industry in America, yet we have worse healthcare than ever. Everywhere we look, it is apparent that "We the People" are no longer the most important factor in America. It is time for us to unite, and take this nation back. We hope to diversify politics and broaden the political voice so that there are more than just the narrow "two parties". There are a myriad of viewpoints and opinions that all deserve to be heard, and shared, yet the "two-party system" chokes out that diversity. Now is the time for Americans to stand up to the corruption that is eating away at the very foundations of our America.

      Together, we can build a Coalition that will work to elect independent and third party candidates in the 2006 elections, and field a Presidential candidate in 2008 that will truly represent "We the People". We are not a nation of extreme leftists, or rightists. We are not a nation of people who smear each other with political propaganda. We are a nation of good, honest, hard working people who want to live rich, full lives and spread our joy and happiness by example, not by force. Americans, unite about what we agree on. Stop letting the divisive cloud of judgement and opinion stand in the way of common sense reform and policy.

      To become involved, and work together, please contact the ARP Coalition Committee Chair, Anthony Partin at: anton.cwith@...



      MSN Premium helps protect against viruses, hackers, junk e-mail & pop-ups.
    • F Worley
      Folks, I m deeply concerned about a plan that is being talked about in California and wanted to know if RLC would take any action. The plan is to Require by
      Message 2 of 8 , Feb 6 6:45 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Folks,
         
        I'm deeply concerned about a plan that is being talked about in California and wanted to know if RLC would take any action. 
         
        The plan is to "Require" by law that all citizens of California carry health insurance, along the same lines as required vehicle insurance. 
         
        While the socialist implications of the plan, (and right now it is only a plan that Gov. Arnold has talked about and some in the legislature are considering proposing) bother me, my great concern is how exactly is it going to be enforced.
         
        No doubt that at first enforcement will be minimal in order to get it passed, but what happens when lower middle class folks, who won't get it for free, suddenly become unemployed and can't pay for it?  Do they lose their kids for being "bad parents?"
         
        Is RLC planning any action on this?  We should attack (politically speaking of coarse) early and often.
         
        Frank

      • DGHarrison
        Enforcement, indeed. We in Minnesota already have a health care service tax added to our medical bills. That is, each time we visit our doctors, there is a
        Message 3 of 8 , Feb 6 10:52 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Enforcement, indeed. We in Minnesota already have a "health care service
          tax" added to our medical bills. That is, each time we visit our
          doctors, there is a surcharge added to the cost of services in order to
          pay for uninsured or nonpaying users of health care services. It is only
          a matter of time before some liberal thief requires that all health
          insurance policies include a surcharge to provide insurance for all
          those who do not obtain their own insurance. We here in Minnesota are
          already penalizing owners of vehicle insurance policies by charging them
          additional fees for "uninsured motorists" and "under insured motorists."
          An additional and separate fee is charged for each class of miscreant
          driver -- I say "miscreant" because it is unlawful to operate an
          uninsured vehicle in Minnesota. So, if you get in an accident with
          someone who has no insurance (usually an uninsurable drunken driver),
          your insurance carrier will be compensated for its unrecoverable losses.
          You pay for yourself and you pay for the drunk! The same thing will
          happen with medical coverage. No matter how illegal it is to lack proper
          insurance coverage, there will be people who do not have coverage, and
          the state will require surcharges on everyone else's policies to cover
          the uncovered. You go to the doctor and you pay for yourself and you pay
          for the the other guy, too. What a bunch of bullshit!

          So, penalties will not accrue to the uninsured -- they will be added
          onto those who acquire their own medical insurance. Redistribution of
          wealth is alive and well in Kalifornia as well as Moneysota.

          Doug Harrison
        • F Worley
          Doug, agreed, So I think we need to formulate a plan of action to directly counter this offensive before it grows legs. I oppose both the mandatory insurance
          Message 4 of 8 , Feb 6 12:27 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            Doug,
             
            agreed, So I think we need to formulate a plan of action to directly counter this offensive before it grows legs.
             
            I oppose both the mandatory insurance requirement, and the potential overtaxation, creation of a new government beast and the potential for obscene enforcement.
             
            RLC should quickly develop a position on this and a plan to counter act it.  But we must be agressive and be the "go to" guys when media are looking for someone to speak inteligently on the opposition.
             
            Car insurance may be a perfect example of how mandatory medical insurance won't work.  Mandatory insurance has not brought down my insurance bill at all.  Mandatory Seatbelt laws were also put in place to "save" us money on insurance.  Didn't happen. 
             
            Mandatory insurance could easily be used as the catalyst to regulate everyone eating, smoking and exersize habits.  And no, I am not exagerating.
             
            So fellow RLC'rs.  Are you ready to take on this issue?
             
            Frank

            DGHarrison <DGHarrison@...> wrote:
            Enforcement, indeed. We in Minnesota already have a "health care service
            tax" added to our medical bills. That is, each time we visit our
            doctors, there is a surcharge added to the cost of services in order to
            pay for uninsured or nonpaying users of health care services. It is only
            a matter of time before some liberal thief requires that all health
            insurance policies include a surcharge to provide insurance for all
            those who do not obtain their own insurance. We here in Minnesota are
            already penalizing owners of vehicle insurance policies by charging them
            additional fees for "uninsured motorists" and "under insured motorists."
            An additional and separate fee is charged for each class of miscreant
            driver -- I say "miscreant" because it is unlawful to operate an
            uninsured vehicle in Minnesota. So, if you get in an accident with
            someone who has no insurance (usually an uninsurable drunken driver),
            your insurance carrier will be compensated for its unrecoverable losses.
            You pay for yourself and you pay for the drunk! The same thing will
            happen with medical coverage. No matter how illegal it is to lack proper
            insurance coverage, there will be people who do not have coverage, and
            the state will require surcharges on everyone else's policies to cover
            the uncovered. You go to the doctor and you pay for yourself and you pay
            for the the other guy, too. What a bunch of bullshit!

            So, penalties will not accrue to the uninsured -- they will be added
            onto those who acquire their own medical insurance. Redistribution of
            wealth is alive and well in Kalifornia as well as Moneysota.

            Doug Harrison

          • John David Galt
            ... I haven t heard about this but would like to know details. What is the penalty for non-complying? And how will the state handle people who have been
            Message 5 of 8 , Feb 6 12:52 PM
            • 0 Attachment
              F Worley wrote:
              > The plan is to "Require" by law that all citizens of California carry
              > health insurance, along the same lines as required vehicle insurance.

              I haven't heard about this but would like to know details. What is the
              penalty for non-complying? And how will the state handle people who
              have been unable to get health insurance? Will the state insure them,
              or just parcel them out to companies through some kind of "assigned
              risk" plan like the existing one for auto insurance?
            • F Worley
              John, Right now it is only being floated so details are not forthcoming. I could not find the original article I had read, I think it was on Drudge, but I
              Message 6 of 8 , Feb 6 1:27 PM
              • 0 Attachment
                John,
                 
                Right now it is only being floated so details are not forthcoming.    I could not find the original article I had read, I think it was on Drudge, but I went back and couldn't find it.  In the original article it said that Gov. Arnold had publicly supported the idea, but this article which is from January, says that Arnold opposed the idea.
                 
                This article also does not paint it the way the other article did as being Mandatory for all citizens, instead it looks like it was written by someone who likes the idea.  If I find the article I origenally saw, I'll post the link as well.
                 
                Frank

                John David Galt <jdg@...> wrote:
                F Worley wrote:
                > The plan is to "Require" by law that all citizens of California carry
                > health insurance, along the same lines as required vehicle insurance.

                I
              • F Worley
                Here is another article that explains the plan I m concerned about. http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/12013883p-12884334c.html Frank
                Message 7 of 8 , Feb 6 1:32 PM
                • 0 Attachment

                  Here is another article that explains the plan I'm concerned about.

                   

                  http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/12013883p-12884334c.html

                   

                  Frank

                  www.frankworley.com

                   

                   

                • Douglas Lorenz
                  I commented on this piece of legislation on my website back on January 20th. http://www.douglorenz.com/index.php/Perspectives/sen_don_perata_what_me_worr y/
                  Message 8 of 8 , Feb 6 3:31 PM
                  • 0 Attachment

                    I commented on this piece of legislation on my website back on January 20th

                     

                    http://www.douglorenz.com/index.php/Perspectives/sen_don_perata_what_me_worry/

                     

                    California voters killed the previous attempt to do this very thing with a referendum.  I can’t imagine that Schwarzenegger would sign something like this…

                     

                       Doug

                     


                    From: John David Galt [mailto:jdg@...]
                    Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2005 12:52 PM
                    To: RLC-Action@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: Re: [RLC-Action] California Medical Insurance Plan

                     

                    F Worley wrote:
                    > The plan is to "Require" by law that all citizens of California carry
                    > health insurance, along the same lines as required vehicle insurance.

                    I haven't heard about this but would like to know details.  What is the
                    penalty for non-complying?  And how will the state handle people who
                    have been unable to get health insurance?  Will the state insure them,
                    or just parcel them out to companies through some kind of "assigned
                    risk" plan like the existing one for auto insurance?


                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.