Tag Archives: legislation

Freedom Index, Which Congressional Representative Protects Your Freedom

On August 8, The New American published its Freedom Index. In it, researchers scored the votes of members of both he U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate based on ten bills of Constitutional significance. The ten bills included (1) H.R. 2 “Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act”, (2) H.R. 4 called “1099 Reporting Requirement Repeal” that was also part of Obamacare, and (3) H.C.R. 35 was a resolution to defund Obamacare.

The House passed all three bills but the Senate only approved because of its direct negative impact on business.

Because the Freedom Index is based on the founding legal view that freedom is protected by the strict limitation of Constitutional precept to all other federal law making, a vote for each of the three bills received a For Freedom score and a vote against each of them were given Against Freedom score.

So, how do Greene County, Ohio representatives measure up to protecting our freedoms?

Steve Austria scored 100% on the three bills and 70% on all ten bills.
Rob Portman also scored 100% on the three pro-Constitutional healthcare bills.

The scores of other notable Ohio politicians include:

Mike Turner (R-Dayton) who voted for all 3 bills (100%).
Dennis Kuninich (D) who received a score of 0 and only 1 out of the ten (Libya Troop Withdrawl bill)
Sherrod Brown (D) did vote for HR 4 “1099 Reporting Requirement Repeal” and the only other bill voted for was the Ethanol Subsides Repeal bill.

It is also worthy of mention that only the above republicans voted for legislation to end taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood’s abortion business.

To read the entire Freedom Index report, go to The New American website www.thenewamerican.com.

Pro-Abortion Legislation Introduced, Targets Pro-Life Healthcare Professionals

(Columbus) – Planned Parenthood and pro-abortion legislators gathered at the Statehouse today to promote the so-called “Prevention First Act”. The bill would force pro-life pharmacists, religious hospitals and pro-life taxpayers to provide or subsidize the morning-after pill despite religious or moral objections. The legislation would also require persons who took and adhere to the original Hippocratic Oath to violate its requirement that “I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy”.

“The abortion industry, yet again, attempts to characterize this recycled legislation an effort to prevent unintended pregnancies. In fact, it will prevent the exercise of freedom of conscience,” said Mike Gonidakis, Executive Director for Ohio Right to Life. “Violating the conscience rights of health care professionals could force some people to leave the profession, and ironically, decrease access to health care, rather than increase it,” said Gonidakis.

Although proponents claim requiring the provision of “emergency contraception” will decrease unintended pregnancies and abortions, a January 2007 Obstetrics & Gynecology study by leading proponents of the drug found that increased access to “emergency contraception” had not reduced the rates of abortion or unintended pregnancy.

Further, the so-called “Prevention First Act” would require hospitals to provide misleading information stating that “emergency contraception” does not cause an abortion or interrupt an “established” pregnancy. Pro-life Ohioans oppose the morning-after pill because it sometimes ends the life of a human embryo after fertilization by preventing implantation.

Ohio Right to Life expresses its opposition to the legislation for its blatant disrespect for the rights of pro-life Ohioans, and for its failure to respect the dignity of life by forcing increased distribution abortion-causing drugs.

Ohio Right to Life Late Term Ban Introduced into the Ohio Senate

Pro-life legislation introduced into the Ohio Senate this morning will ban late term abortions in Ohio. Similar to House Bill 78, the Late Term Ban introduced in the Ohio House last week, this legislation will save babies’ lives.

“This is a huge step forward in putting an end to abortion in Ohio,” State Senator Peggy Lehner, sponsor of Senate Bill 72 said. “When we know there is a way to protect both the mother and her child, it is our responsibility to protect them both.”

This bill would require physicians to test if a child was viable outside of the mother’s womb prior to performing an abortion after 20 weeks gestation. If the child is viable, the abortion cannot be performed. There is an exception for the physical health and life of the mother.

“This late term abortion ban legislation will save lives immediately when enacted. The overwhelming support of our pro-life leaders in the Ohio Senate demonstrates that our government is serious about enacting safeguards to protect babies’ lives,” said Mike Gonidakis, Executive Director of Ohio Right to Life.

Ohio law currently permits abortions through all nine months of pregnancy, up until the moment of birth. Most experts agree that an unborn child can feel pain by 20 weeks. In 2009, 613 children were killed at 20 weeks of life or later in Ohio. 116 of those babies suffered death after 24 weeks. One case was documented at 35 weeks.

Health Care Reform Consensus: It Will Harm Millions of Small Businesses

By Daniel Downs

Small business employs more people than large corporate establishments. By comparison, small businesses employ 50.2 percent of all American workers, while large corporations employ only 49.8 percent. Depending on the statistical source used, the number of Americans employed by small businesses is between 60 to 69 million. Self employed entrepreneurs make up between 32 to 38 percent of small businesses.

Small businesses also lead the nation in creating new jobs. According to Small Business Trends, two-thirds of all new jobs are created by small business. http://smallbiztrends.com/2009/11/who-creates-the-most-jobs.html

So why do Congressional Democrats favor the interests of big business? Why does their health care reform legislation give them large deductions for self-insured health care? One answer might be elite the liberal Congressional millionaires maybe attempting to protect their investments self-insuring corporations. Another possibility maybe that big corporations have better lobbyists, but who cares?

The largest and best employers in America are overwhelmingly opposed to Congress’ health care reform legislation. They oppose it not only because it gives unfair breaks only to large corporations but also because it will raise the cost of doing business, and threatens the ability of small firms to grow their business and create new jobs.

One aspect of the legislation specifically targets the construction industry, according to the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council. “The bill singles out the construction industry by not exempting businesses in this sector from the “play-or-pay” employer mandate that other firms with 50 or fewer employees are exempt from.” Interestingly, the government defines small business as firms with 500 or less employees. Consequently, many other small businesses will be adversely affected by the unfunded mandates.

About one-third of the 22 million self-employed cannot even afford health insurance. Those who do purchase health coverage have experienced double-digit premium increases every year, making it difficult to retain insurance, according to the National Association for the Self-Employed (NASE). Because the Senate tabled an amendment that would have given a 50 percent deduction to small businesses, the cost of adequate health care will continue rise if the Democrats health care bill passes.

As outlined by the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), Congress’ health care reform will significantly increase the cost of health care to small businesses in the following ways:

The legislation includes a new $60 billion tax that falls almost exclusively on small business because the fee (tax) is assessed on insurance companies, which is confirmed by the Congressional Budget Office. This cost will be passed on to small business in the form of higher premiums, at least 10 percent higher. The cost of health care insurance is already 18 percent higher for small businesses than for large corporations. And, as previously stated, the new legislation exempts self-insuring large corporations from the additional costs.

Because employer mandates assess multiple penalties based on the income of full-time employees, there will be job loss, greater reliance on part-time employees, and harm to entry-level and low-wage workers.

The new reporting requirements increases administrative costs by $17 billion.

Small business with high rates of employee turnover may be put out of business because of a $600 fine for not providing all employees health insurance within 60 days.

Congress’ health care reform also limits previous cost saving options like tax-exempt Health Savings Accounts.

According to Small Business Coalition for Affordable Healthcare, a government-run health care plan cannot compete fairly with the private market and threatens to destroy the marketplace, further limiting choices.

http://www.smallbusinesshealthcarecoalition.com/Portals/2/KeyVote-Senate-%20H.R.%203590%20-%2012-2.pdf

One thing is certain; the health care reform of congressional Democrats will be neither affordable nor free-market friendly. Those are a few reasons why small businesses should petition their representatives. Small business owners can also sign the SBECs “Not On Our Backs” Small Business Health Care “Not On Our BacksPetition to voice their opposition to the proposed national health care legislation.

An Open Letter to the U.S. Congress

Below is a letter sent to Xenia Citizen Journal by a local citizen and patriot. This patriot encourages anyone reading it to copy it, revise it as desired, and to email it to your representatives in the U.S. House of Representatives.

* * * * * *
 

Congressman,

Please co-sponsor and/or support H.R.1207, an effort to audit the Federal Reserve. Recently, it has come to light that there is little to no accountability to the people on the part of the Federal Reserve. While the citizens of this country are required by law to give an accounting of every penny they come in contact with, the Federal Reserve has never been held to the same standard. During this time of extreme economic crisis, the people deserve an accounting of where our money is going. Currently there are 11 co-sponsors for this legislation, and it is enjoying bi-partisan support. Your efforts in supporting this important legislation would go a long way in proving to your constituents that you not only hold the Federal Reserve to the same standard as you do your constituents, but it would also show that you believe in transparency. Anything less than support for this resolution suggests that you are in favor of secrecy and a lack of accountability to the people who pay the bills. We pay the tab; we have a right to know where our money is going. Unlike recent bills that were voted in favor of, that had hundreds of pages and just a few hours to read, this bill can be read in under 5 minutes. I encourage you to take the time to read it, and then move to support it. Thank you in advance for your attention on this important legislation. I have every expectation that you will do right by your constituents and support this measure

Respectfully,

Ohio Democrat Seeking to Outlaw ‘Pit Bull Terrier’ Ownership

Why in the world do Ohioans keep voting Democrats into office. There are a bunch of unreasonable, if not always immoral, dictators. Here is a perfect example of their dictatorial bent.

In the “Final solution proposed in Ohio” published by the Ronaoke Times, Nona Nelson reports that Cincinnati Democrat Rep. Tyrone Yates introduced House Bill 568, Sec. 955.111 last week. The bill amends Sec. 955.11 of the Ohio Revised Code first by omitting pit bull dogs from the category of vicious dog, and then by adding the new sections criminalizing owner of pit bull dogs. The text of bill is as follows:

(A) Beginning ninety days after the effective date of this section, no person shall own, keep, or harbor a dog that belongs to a breed that is commonly known as a pit bull dog.

(B) Not later than ninety days after the effective date of this section, a person who owns, keeps, or harbors a pit bull dog on the effective date of this section shall surrender the dog to the dog warden. Not later than ten days after receiving the dog, the dog warden shall euthanize the dog.

(C)(1) Beginning ninety days after the effective date of this section, if an officer has probable cause to believe that a dog is a pit bull dog, the officer may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction for a search warrant. The court shall issue a search warrant for the purposes requested if there is probable cause to believe that a dog is a pit bull dog.

(2) After obtaining a search warrant, an officer shall seize the pit bull dog and surrender the dog to the dog warden. Not later than ten days after receiving the dog, the dog warden shall euthanize the dog.

In a report by MyFox Clevelend, Rep. Yates is quoted, saying, “I think eliminating vicious dogs is as important to reclaiming our cities as controlling gun violence and making sure our young people are going to school.” He forgot to mention eliminating transfat and making certain immorality is legally protected.

Opposing Yates is Dave Vickers, Director of the Humane Society of the United States. He said, “Enforcing leash laws will keep most of the attacks from happening…. dogs very rarely attack on a leash because they can be pulled back.”

Nelson also found it interesting that two organizations seldom in agreement of legal matters oppose this bill. The Humane Society and the American Kennel Club are campaigning against the bill. Nelson says she plans to launch her own campaign. She intends on sending a letter to Yates asking him to withdraw this bill and not punish innocent dogs and their families for the deeds of human criminals.

Yates bill is the first step to a doggie of the Nazi final solution. It will open the door to criminalizing owners of any breed of dog that can be regarded as vicious. As pointed out by Nelson, breed specific legislation already exists “in other states, counties and cities that bans not only bully breeds, but rottweilers, Dobermans and German shepherd dogs.” According to the Vickers, it is home insurance companies that will determine which breeds are dangerous.

Nelson is right. Bills like Ohio HB 568 set a dangerous precedent and infringes on the rights of law-abiding citizens, but then infringing on our rights has never been of great concern to Democrats.

The bill has been sent to the State Government and Elections Committee.
Because it has no co-sponsors, the bill will likely get lost in the Committee. Nevertheless, your representative should know what you think about bills like HB 568. You can join the Humane Society, American Kennel Club, and pit bull owners like Nona Nelson in opposing HB 568 by writing, emailing, faxing, or calling your state representatives.

Go here to access the Ohio House directory and here for the Ohio Senate directory.