|
Wednesday, 01 September 2010 3:42 |
|
Dear Editor:
On September 8, select Indiana lawmakers have a unique opportunity to dramatically impact the health and wellness of Hoosier residents and workers throughout the state while significantly reducing health care costs associated with many chronic diseases caused by exposure to secondhand smoke.
The ability to recommend the Indiana General Assembly pass a comprehensive smokefree air law that covers all workplaces, including restaurants and bars, is in the hands of less than two dozen state senators and representatives who comprise the Health Finance Commission
Advocating on behalf of the health of Indiana workers who are exposed to secondhand smoke in the workplace is the Indiana Campaign for Smokefree Air (ICSA). A grassroots coalition of more than 400 organizations comprised of many of the state’s most influential and active public health advocates, medical professionals, and public interest groups, the ICSA is stronger and more committed than ever before that the Indiana General Assembly pass a statewide comprehensive smokefree air bill that protects all workers.
Twenty-seven states and Puerto Rico have enacted comprehensive smokefree air laws that include bars and restaurants. While lawmakers in all of these states faced tough opposition from special interest groups such as Big Tobacco and others, the evidence that smokefree air laws are good for health and for the economy proved irrefutable.
The health ramifications of secondhand smoke are devastating. Each year, more than 1,200 adult nonsmokers die from exposure to secondhand smoke. A 2009 report from the Institute of Medicine concluded that secondhand smoke exposure increases the risk of coronary heart disease and heart attacks and that smokefree air laws can have a substantial impact in reducing this risk.
Additionally, exposure to secondhand smoke places an unnecessary burden on the state’s health care expenditures. A 2009 study by researchers from the Bowen Research Center of the Indiana University School of Medicine concluded that the overall cost of health care and premature loss of life attributed to secondhand smoke for Indiana residents in 2007 totaled more than $390 million.
All credible econo mic studies show communities with comprehensive smokefree workplace laws have not seen a negative impact on the hospitality industry or any other sector. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a comprehensive review of 97 studies from eight countries found that smoking restrictions did not have a negative economic impact on restaurants and bars.
Finally, public support for a comprehensive smokefree air law among Indiana registered voters has consistently increased over the past few years. In 2009, 81 percent of voters agreed that all workers in Indiana should be protected from secondhand smoke in the workplace.
The simple fact is, no exposure to secondhand smoke is safe – period. Support for smokefree air laws throughout the country is only getting stronger, and members of the Health Finance Commission should do right by the people of Indiana and recommend the General Assembly pass a strong, comprehensive smokefree air law that covers all public workplaces, including bars and restaurants.
Over the next several months, the Indiana Campaign for Smokefree Air will rally supporters throughout the state to make their voices heard, because no Hoosier should be forced to choose between their health and their paycheck.
Danielle Patterson, Chair
Indiana Campaign for Smokefree Air
Director of Government Relations, American Heart Association Dear Editor: On September 8, select Indiana lawmakers have a unique opportunity to dramatically impact the health and wellness of Hoosier residents and workers throughout the state while significantly reducing health care costs associated with many chronic diseases caused by exposure to secondhand smoke.
|
|
Thursday, 26 August 2010 10:40 |
|
Dear Editor:
The new financial reform law is a good reminder of how much takes place in Washington after a bill gets signed. In the nation's capital, says former Congressman Lee Hamilton, "Legislation Is Just The Start."
You might imagine, now that President Obama has signed the massive financial reform package into law, that the issue is behind us. Hardly. In a way, the president's signature was just the starter's pistol.
This is because, despite its length - over 2000 pages - and the many months of negotiations that went into crafting it, the financial overhaul measure leaves countless issues to be resolved later by federal regulators and the lobbyists who will try to influence their decisions. It is a textbook example of the limits inherent in a legislative product, and of the manner in which Congress relies on a mix of concrete action and ambiguous ball-punting to cobble together a majority.
The law undoubtedly changes the nation's financial landscape. It creates a new Bureau of Financial Consumer Protection; strengthens regulation of financial holding companies; regulates derivatives; places new limits - the so-called "Volcker Rule" - on the amount of money a bank can invest in hedge funds and private equity funds; buttresses the Securities and Exchange Commission; and tries to discourage excessive risk-taking.
It is also filled with the sorts of compromises the legislative process demands. The "Volcker Rule" was written off, watered down, and then somewhat re-strengthened on its way to passage. The consumer protection agency was initially to be a standalone regulator, but then was placed within the Federal Reserve in order to calm some concerns. The language on derivatives went through a complex series of balance-seeking negotiations between those who wanted highly restrictive regulation and those who opposed it.
The result is a grand and sweeping law that nonetheless leaves many issues unresolved and much room for interpretation in the future. When you have such ambiguities in new statutes - as is frequently the case - it amounts to an invitation to further struggle on the part of the bureaucrats who must give shape and form to the ideas contained in the measure, and the lobbyists whose clients have much at stake in the results.
According to an analysis by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the measure calls for 350 rules to be formulated, 47 studies to be conducted - which is Congress' way of signaling action on an issue without actually making any decisions - and 74 reports. The creation of new entities - the consumer protection agency, a board of regulators to assess risk in the financial system - also will engender much executive-branch maneuvering and back-and-forth with Congress as they're set up and staffed.
Moreover, lobbyists don't stop work when a law is passed; in some ways, that's when their work truly begins, as they strive to build relationships with the regulators who will oversee their industry and try to influence the regulations that will soon enough begin to flow from various executive-branch agencies.
The difference, of course, is that for all its faults, Congress is a relatively transparent and accountable institution. What takes place in regulators' offices is far less visible. As the activity surrounding financial reform now passes beyond public view, political considerations will become less important but the stakes will grow higher. Out of the public's eye, the special interests' influence will grow, and arguments about how to interpret the language contained in the law will blossom - and, inevitably, spill over into the courts. For years to come, there will be enormous demand for lawyers capable either of making sense out of ambiguous legislative language, or of making the strongest possible arguments in favor of interpretations that just happen to favor their clients.
Yet in the end, it's the executive branch that benefits most from what Congress has done. The entire measure is a significant gift of power to federal agencies and financial regulators, who now have to make decisions about how they intend to wield their power. You can already see how significant their role will be in the early maneuvering over who might head the new Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection: each possible appointee, who must be approved by the Senate, would approach the job differently, and in the weeks following the bill's passage the nuances of their approaches were probably the hottest single topic of debate over breakfast, lunch and dinner tables in Washington.
It is important to remember, in the end, that the authority to act is not the same as acting. That is why, while Congress made some important decisions in the process of crafting its bill, the true import of the financial reform package will only reveal itself gradually. There is an old saying in Washington that nothing is ever decided for good there. For legislation, that's certainly true.
By Lee H. Hamilton
(Lee Hamilton is Director of the Center on Congress at Indiana University. He was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives for 34 years.) Dear Editor: The new financial reform law is a good reminder of how much takes place in Washington after a bill gets signed. In the nation's capital, says former Congressman Lee Hamilton, "Legislation Is Just The Start."
|
|
Thursday, 19 August 2010 9:24 |
|
Dear Editor:
It has been confirmed, insanity rules in Washington, DC, August 5, 2010, in the Senate of The United States of America a bill was passed. It says, “Senate Amendment To House Amendment To Senate Amendment.” Its short title, and this is true, says: Section 1. “This Act may be cited as the “ _____ Act of _____.” In the House of Representatives the same bill says: Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, Section 1. This Act may be cited as the “ _____ Act of ______.”
You read right, our Congress actually passed a bill with no name. Sort of like that old tune, “I rode through a desert on a horse with no name.” In this case, however, Congress assumes the rear end of the horse. I would refer to them as bozos but that would be an insult to clowns.
This bill originally started out as being a bill to modernize the air traffic control system, improve the safety, reliability, and availability of transportation by air in the United States, provide for modernization of the air traffic control system, reauthorize the Federal Aviation Administration, and for other purposes. However, under Title I it deals with “EDUCATION JOBS FUND.” And boom, just like that, there went $10,000,000,000 to teachers’ unions. Not to mention the other 16 billion for the other purposes, whatever they might be. It was voted on and approved without one member of The House reading it. So, who wrote it?
More insanity: We, as legal American citizens are going to get whacked with several tax increases as of January 1, 2011. Here are some of what you should expect in the first wave: Expiration of the 2001 and 2003 Tax Relief legislation. In this law, the Republican Congress enacted several tax cuts for investors, small business owners, and families. These will all expire on January 1.
Personal income tax rates will rise. The 10 percent bracket rises to 15 percent. The 25 percent bracket rises to 28 percent. The 28 percent bracket rises to 31 percent. The 33 percent bracket rises to 36 percent. The 35 percent bracket rises to 39.6 percent. HIGHER TAXES ON MARRIAGE AND FAMILY: The “marriage penalty” (Narrower tax brackets for married couples) will return from the first dollar of income. The child tax credit will be cut in half from $1,000 to $500 per child. The standard deduction will no longer be doubled for married couples relative to the single level. The dependent care and adoption tax credits will be cut out.
THE RETURN OF THE DEATH TAX. This year there is no death tax. For those dying on or after January 1, 2011, there is a 55 percent top death tax rate on estates over one million dollars. A person leaving behind two homes and a retirement account could easily pass along a death tax bill to their loved ones.
HIGHER TAX RATES ON SAVERS AND INVESTERS. The capital gains tax will rise from 15 percent this year to 20 percent in 2011. The dividends tax will rise from 15 percent this year to 39.6 percent in 2011. These rates will rise another 3.8 percent in 2013.
The second wave concerns “OBAMACARE.” In this wave there are over twenty new or higher taxes. Several will go into effect January 1, 2011. They include: The “Medicine Cabinet Tax.” Thanks to Obamacare, Americans will no longer be able to use health savings accounts (HSA), flexible spending accounts (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA), pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin). There is more in this wave, but I will go on to the third wave.
The third wave: The Alternative Minimum Tax and Employer Tax Hikes (AMT). When you prepare to file your tax returns in January of 2011, you will be in for a nasty surprise. The AMT won’t be held harmless, and many tax relief provisions will have expired. The major items include: The AMT will ensnare over 28 million families, up four million from last year. These families will have to calculate their tax burdens twice, and pay taxes at a higher level. The AMT was created in 1969 to ensnare a handful of taxpayers. SMALL BUSINESS EXPENSING WILL BE SLASHED. Fifty percent expensing will disappear. Small businesses can normally expense (rather than slowly deduct, or “depreciate”) equipment purchases up to $250,000. This will be cut all the way down to $25,000. Larger businesses can expense half of their purchases of equipment. In January of 2011, all of it will have to be “depreciated.” One of the most astonishing and cruel twists to OBAMACARE is that on your next W2 you will see the inclusion of your health insurance as “taxable income!” Even though you did not get the money, you will be taxed on it. Fantastic, isn’t it! There is more in store for us so check with your accountant or HR manager before tax time.
More insanity.There is so much talk by this administration about jobs. You have probably heard it, “These jobs are shovel ready.” Did you know that only eight percent of those Obama has surrounded himself with have ever had a real job? They wouldn’t know which end of the shovel goes in the ground. And beside that, only half of the stimulus money has been spent and unemployment is hovering at 10 percent.
More insanity. It is difficult to keep up with the Czar thing. But here are just a few of Obama’s Czars. Jeffery Crowley: AIDS Czar. A radical homosexual and gay rights activist. Believes in gay marriage and a special status for homosexuals only, and complete free health care for gays. David J. Hayes, California Water Czar. He is a senior fellow of the radical environmentalist group, “Progress Policy.” He has no training or experience in water management whatsoever. Lynn Rosenthall, Domestic Violence Czar. Vicious anti male feminist. She supports male castration. Joshua DuBois, Faith Based Czar. Political Black Activist, Degree in Black Nationalism. Anti-gun ownership. What the hell does a faith based Czar do? There are so many Czars dedicated to the internal destruction of the United States it would, or should, frighten you if you knew them all.
And just one more sample of the insanity taking place in Washington, DC. This is heart breaking. The headline read, “Students Silenced for Singing the National Anthem at The Lincoln Memorial.” A couple of months ago a group of students from the conservative Young America’s Foundation were so moved by The Lincoln Memorial they broke into The National Anthem. They were removed by the U.S. Park Police because they “were in violation of Federal Law and their impromptu performance constituted a demonstration in an area that must remain ‘completely content neutral.’ Dear Editor: It has been confirmed, insanity rules in Washington, DC, August 5, 2010, in the Senate of The United States of America a bill was passed. It says, “Senate Amendment To House Amendment To Senate Amendment.” Its short title, and this is true, says: Section 1. “This Act may be cited as the “ _____ Act of _____.” In the House of Representatives the same bill says: Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, Section 1. This Act may be cited as the “ _____ Act of ______.”
|
|
|
Thursday, 19 August 2010 9:21 |
|
We have come to a time of great change in mental health, which has admittedly created some apprehension and fear; but it is in fact a very exciting time, as we must now move our system of mental health into the future.
It is estimated that 23% of all American adults suffer from a diagnosable mental disorder in any given year, and one out of every five young persons suffers from some form of emotional disturbance.
Mental illness impacts all of us in one way or another whether we are a consum er, family member, or friend of a person with a mental illness or addictive disorder. Often persons with mental illness self-medicate in an attempt to cope with the symptoms of their illness, becoming addicted to substances including alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs. Hoosiers aged 18-25 have the highest rates of prescription drug abuse (16% which is higher than the national average of 12%). Adults in Indiana report alcohol abuse and dependence at rates similar to the national average (7%), but the most effected age group is 18 to 25 year olds with 17% reporting alcohol abuse or dependence. Rates of smoking are two to four times higher in persons with mental illness and addictive disorders than the general population – and some estimates are as high as 75%.
These numbers paint a grim view of reality. We know that treatment works so why don’t people get help? People do not acti vely seek treatment for many reasons, and when they do, it is often unavailable because their insurance will not pay for it. Even though the recently passed parity law is a huge step forward, we have a long way to go before all insurance companies believe that treatment works and recovery is possible.
And that is the goal – that everyone with a mental illness or addictive disorder has the help they need to live fully in recovery.
Transforming our system has not been, and will not be, quick nor easy, but it will create recovery for our consumers--as well as opportunities for providers and policy makers. The possibility of recovery should increase the demand for key community-based services that we know will work, such as peer support and mentoring programs. A successful system must be accountable, organized, efficient, accessible, and equitable using evidence based programs and policies.
The Governor, through FSSA and the Division of Mental Health and Addiction, has commissioned a Transformation Working Group with a charge to change the current system focus to consumer recovery. This new direction will change the way we provide services and how those services are paid for, whether they are in the community or in a state hospital.
The state has recently changed its methodology for payment for community services, in a way that is consistent with this new direction; and further, it has provided a plan for state hospitals that will promote the provision of services in the least restrictive setting possible. Through participation from consumers, providers, family members, government officials, mental health professionals, and academics, a transformation work plan has been developed that will create a social norm of acceptance and recovery, reducing the stigma surrounding mental illness and addictive disorders.
Recovery from mental illness and addictive disorders is a journey of healing and personal transformation, enabling people to live their life to the fullest potential in a community of their choice.
We have before us the opportunity to help make that happen.
Stephen C. McCaffrey is the President and Chief Executive Officer of Mental
Health America of Indiana. Dear Editor: We have come to a time of great change in mental health, which has admittedly created some apprehension and fear; but it is in fact a very exciting time, as we must now move our system of mental health into the future.
|
|
Thursday, 12 August 2010 3:52 |
|
Dear Editor:
I just wanted to take time to say “Thank You” to all my family and friends and the Town of Churubusco. The response to the benefit was overwhelming and it proved what community really means. I will cherish the time I was able to spend with everyone for the rest of my life. I am proud to say I grew up in Churubusco. Also, I would like to thank the local merchants who gave to the silent auction: Egolf’s IGA, Lloyd and Susie Hoot of Huntertown, K&K’s Video, The Chocolate Thimble in Huntertown, Dave Bolinger, DDS, Lassus BP, Cobbletone Golf Course, Mountaintop Cafe, Eel River Golf Course, Klopfenstein’s Home Rooms on Lima Road, Steve and Margaret Cullison, Anytime Fitness of Fort Wayne and Pat Rahrer of Green Center.
A special thank you to Susie Barnhart-Smallwood for coming up with the idea to have this benefit and her first helper, Harold Norman. The problem with thanking people and listing names is the overlooking of someone, so please forgive me if I missed you.
Again, Thank You from the bottom of my heart.
Tyler Swoverland
Dear Editor: I just wanted to take time to say “Thank You” to all my family and friends and the Town of Churubusco. The response to the benefit was overwhelming and it proved what community really means.
|
|
Thursday, 12 August 2010 3:51 |
|
Dear Editor:
The Tuesday, August 3 opinion page of the Journal Gazette carried an article authored by a Mr. Jesse Kharbanda titled “Washington needs leadership from Lugar on energy policy.” Had there been no photograph of Mr. Kharbanda, I would have surmised he to be a wise elder whose comments come from years of experience in the energy field. His image portrays a young man whose idealism clearly is rooted in things other than facts.
He has clearly not read any of the climate bill legislation, similar to those who have proposed it. For example, he asserts that if we move forward on this massive legislation, we would no longer be dependent on foreign oil. Had he conducted meaningful research he would have discovered America has an abundant amount of untapped energy that cannot be exploited because of a powerful environmental lobby, and an inept Congress.
He also continues his thesis bringing in the climate experts. It has been proven a major portion, if not nearly all of the data was corrupted, manipulated, and completely prostituted to the advantage of those who want to implement this legislation. Their data is suspect at best, and very, very shabby at worst.
Mr, Kharbanda points to the Gulf oil spill as a reason to halt that type of drilling, remember he wants us free from foreign oil, but what has been discovered is the oil that spilled was of a different variety, is more easily displaced by natural selection, and not as crude as the word suggests. Not to mention the national resolve of America to “Git’er done.” However, a spill is still a spill, and economic damage has been inflicted.
Mr. Kharbanda cited China for some reason, I can only hope he was referring to some sort of engineering accomplishment yet to be revealed. The China I am familiar with is the one that had the Olympics which was nearly altered due to extreme, very extreme air pollution. Also let us not forget this is a repressive country where Mr. Kharbanda might not have the freedom of the press to call on a Chinese leader to get with the program. And of course, there is that matter of 60-100 million people exterminated by Mao. Sorry, Mr. Kharbanda, you picked the wrong country to illuminate.
Mr. Kharbanda refers to fossil fuels. The notion that all the oil being produced by mother earth and developed into a usable commodity was somehow the result of a lot of dinosaurs is absurd. If oil is the end product of decaying animals then why are skeletal remains still being unearthed? Too, how did all those dinosaurs got so far below the surface of the oceans, and then even farther below the ocean floors? And in a liquid state that can be refined to not harm the internal combustion engine. The term fossil fuel needs to be eliminated from the engineering manuals being taught to the young and impressionable.
Mr. Kharbanda is spot on when he calls for leadership concerning this issue of energy policy. Perhaps he needs to be reminded we have the Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA). Laboring within this one United States agency could answer many question he has. Another bloated piece of legislation is not the answer.
What Mr. Kharbanda needs to contemplate and address is the movement itself. Cap and Trade has nothing whatsoever to do with “helping” the environment. It has everything to do with power, control and money. Cap means just that. AEP and NIPSCO would have “caps” on the amount of carbon emissions they could produce. Keep in mind here we as humans produce carbon emissions. They could, however, under this bill “trade” credits to a third world country (give that country money) to then produce what we, their customers, need in the way of energy. In other words, your energy bills and mine would dramatically increase because of being held hostage to this legislation. Also, like any other bill produced by Congress, it is impossible to deal directly with the core issue. For example, if Mr. Kharbanda would visit page 957, line 15, paragraph (D), he would have seen this: Consider strategies that engage youth and young adults (including youth and young adults working in full-time or part-time youth service or conservation corps programs - (i) to provide the youth and young adults with opportunities for meaningful conservation and community service; and (ii) to encourage opportunities for employment in the private sector through partnerships with employers. It goes on at length to describe essentially what a Cub Scout and Boy Scout does.
I would also call Mr. Kharbanda’s attention to Section 6009 on page 978. This section is titled National Fish and Wildlife Habitat and Corridors Information Program. One of the “terms” deals with, I am not making this up, Geospatial Interoperability Framework. This section also goes on to define what terms “Secretary” means, what the term “Program” means, what the term “System” means.
In a nutshell, this legislation is without question the most dangerous, and egregarious assault on the United States since anything FDR or Wilson did to us, not for us. Anyone reading this letter should avail themselves to read the bill and encourage Senators Richard Lugar and Evan Bayh to oppose it for the benefit of not only Hoosiers, but of all Americans, Mr, Kharbanda needs to read the bill.
Dave Cooper,
Churubusco
Dear Editor: The Tuesday, August 3 opinion page of the Journal Gazette carried an article authored by a Mr. Jesse Kharbanda titled “Washington needs leadership from Lugar on energy policy.” Had there been no photograph of Mr. Kharbanda, I would have surmised he to be a wise elder whose comments come from years of experience in the energy field. His image portrays a young man whose idealism clearly is rooted in things other than facts.
|
|
