Shorter Statement on Waxman Challengers

So far, only two "viable" candidates will challenge Congressman Henry Waxman in 2014for the 33rd Congressional District.

 

Independent Hollywood Producer Brent Roske of Malibu will run a shoe-string campaign. Upon winning, Roske will share his seat with Henry Waxman for one year before taking the reins of office by himself. Refusing to criticize Waxman’s prior record, Roske might as well have asked: "Henry Waxman, will you marry me?"

Then there's spiritual author/lecturer/guru Marianne Williamson of West Hollywood, and Independent (?) who will caucus with Democrats. She aims to replace Waxman, now “serving” his fortieth year in Washington. Some political handicappers are actually taking Williamson’s campaign seriously. At least she is, since she provided flyers in the El Segundo public library a few months ago.

 

Williamson wants to redeem Washington and bring harmony to America. Humming a mantra and chanting “Ohm!” won’t do much good. A big, collective hug won’t bring bipartisanship, either. Summing up Waxman’s tenure in Congress as “I don’t know!” “I’m sorry!” and “We’re not broke!” would help.

 

Recently, LA Weekly published a cover piece on Williamson’s campaign to heal the soul of Congress, which has no a soul. Government does not need healing, but amputation (or sterilization). Like many self-help types, Williamson wants more government to restore our ravaged, savaged land. One unlikely article from the Ludwig Von Mises Institute (Liberty in Aquarius?) confirms the Big Government bent of spiritual gurus like Williamson.

 

As of now, the candidates for the 33^rd Congressional District are no good for the political soul. We need independence from Washington, not Independents going to Washington, who will support the same failed policies of more, careless government attempting to care for us.

 

So far, so little for individual liberty. Will anyone better step up to Waxman? At this point, I need a hug!

Marianne Williamson for Congress -- Or, Who Needs a Hug?

Spiritual author and motivational speaker Marianne Williamson is running for Congress.

She is running against Henry Waxman, who will be entering into his fortieth year in the Beltway this year.

So far, there are only two "viable" challengers against Waxman.

Brent Roske for Congress, or "Will You Marry Me, Henry?"
(source: roskeforcongress,com

Hollywood Producer Brent Roske of Malibu, who will run his campaign on a shoe-string, then offer to share the seat with Henry Waxman for one year before taking the reins of office by himself.

I glibly called his campaign: "Henry Waxman, will you marry me?"

Give me a break! I don't want someone to partner with the guy, I want someone who will remove the Washington insider outside of office for good.

Then there's Ms. Williamson.

Some political handicappers are taking this woman's run seriously.



Marianne Williamson for Congress? (Source: MDCarchives)

At least she is. I saw some of her Congressional flyers in the El Segundo public library a few months ago. She also made the Patch.com circuit some time ago, too.

She also grace the cover of "Natural Awakenings" Magazine in November. Of course, there was no mention of her Congressional run, since such blatant electioneering would violate California campaign laws.

Her column on middle age and discovering ourselves was not meaty reading.

We still have the power to redeem our lives, she claims. Does she have the sand to take away the 33rd Congressional District from Henry Waxman? Or the soul, or the substance, for that matter?

Spiritually speaking, as a New Age guru of sorts, one who lives just outside the 33rd Congressional District, the notion of redemption does not spring from our minds tabula rasa. There is an understanding inside of all men, inside of all humanity, that we live in this fallen earth, that death is an enemy, and that something needs to be done about it.

While her seemingly uplifting piece in "Natural Awakenings" seems to open  up new vistas of experience and life, she is merely spinning an old sale of humanized, old time religion.

If she read the Bible, she would find the perfect and accurate assessment of the living God, who through the death of His Son offers redemption to all who are willing to believe on Him (John 6: 29

Unfortunately, this Gospel is too much for human minds to bear, so caught up are we with our own powers, as if fallen humanity can help raise this fallen earth from nothing to something.

Williamson sits in coffee houses and encourages people to embrace their inner child. Washington is not a children's playground, or child's play, but the most exposed reservoir of selfish ambition, masquerading as service to one's country. Or the most partisan resistance to a governor gone wild, and expecting to get wilder.

No, Ms. Williamson, redemption in Washington will not be found in an Independent who will caucus with Democrats. She is playing the same card as Bill Bloomfield did in 2012, still convinced that an Independent in so partisan a fray can alter the balance of power.

Bloomfield actually believed that he would force Nancy Pelosi and John Boehner into a room and get them to negotiate which committees he would sit on, should he win the election in 2012.

Such chutzpah was duly rewarded. He lost 54-46. A swing of five points would have netted him the win. Then again, what would the constituents of the 33rd Congressional District have won for the effort?

Last week, LA Weekly ran a cover piece on her desire to bring peace to Washington and heal the soul of Congress.

Congress does not have a soul, and government does not need to be healed as much as amputated or euthanized. Like a lot of self-help, lotions and potions guru-types, she wants more government to help bring peace to our ravaged, savaged land. No, Ms. Williamson, the answer is not more of the state, but to state that we need less of the state in our lives.

I remember an article from the Von Mises institute, which investigated the political impulses of these Spiritual gurus. Their conclusion: they end up favoring more globalizing, concentrating power. So much for individual liberty, or redemption.

Frankly, looking over the prospective challengers who will take on Henry Waxman in 2014, I need a hug! A Hollywood something, a spiritual something else, and perhaps a Manhattan Beach billionaire without much but lost of money.

How sad, how uninvolved, how independent of any novel ideas or real hopes can a political campaign get?

I need a hug!



Who Will Run Against Waxman in 2014?
(Source: US Congress)

Waxman and the LA Times

“Your time was up, Mr. Waxman!” – Rep Ed Whitfield (R-Kentucky)

Congressman Henry Waxman announced concerns about the Los Angeles Times last month, and the Tribune Company agreed to meet with him to discuss long-term plans to salvage the sinking media conglomerate. Because of bankruptcy restructuring, the Tribune Co. will spin off the newspaper portions into a separate company, Tribune Publishing.

In a letter to the Tribune’s chief executive, Waxman wrote:

"I am concerned that corporate actions the Tribune Co. is taking may not be in the best interests of the Los Angeles Times.”

The report continued:

Waxman said the company’s placing the newspaper unit into debt to pay a cash dividend to Tribune will "undoubtedly enrich the Tribune Co., but it may do so at the expense of the financial health of the Los Angeles Times and the other papers in the newspaper unit, all of which are already facing financial strains."

How did the paper end up in such dire straits? In late 2008, the Los Angeles Times acknowledged that the paper’s owner, Tribune Co., filed for bankruptcy. The article admitted that plunging advertisement revenue featured in the paper’s fiscal problems. Of course, the $12.9 billion debt load is nothing to sneeze at, either. Where did all the debt come from? According to earlier reports, declining revenue for the newspaper industry as a whole.

Still, why does Waxman want to save the LA Times? The paper is one of the most reliable, howbeit hardly viable, liberal mouthpieces in the greater Los Angeles area, of course. The unrepentant liberal bias of this publication cannot be ignored, including its frequent articles and editorial which hammered Kevin James, the socially liberal, fiscally conservative Republican candidate for LA mayor in 2013. The Times editorial board called the California billion dollar bullet train boondoggle a “worthy gamble”, even though the costs have tripled, and one poll registered that 52% of California residents want the bullet train project stopped (plus frequent endorsements for liberal, Democratic candidates).

Above all, one may assume that Waxman’s efforts to save the LA Times rest primarily on the paper’s promotion of the failing and decrepit Affordable Care Act, a piece of legislation, a monstrous one at that, which has forced the closure of clinics, along with pushing doctors into earlier retirement, along with the healthcare.gov glitches unending.

Consider the following headlines over the past few years touting the Affordable Care Act:

Seeing the positive changes brought by the healthcare law

Obamacare health plan enrollments rise sharply in December

White House issue new tip sheet for Obamacare consumers

The umpteenth Obamacare fix

In the above column, the Times editorial board offered up the impression that the Affordable Care Act was not a matter of hubris, but a necessary government action. The same government which was supposed to insure the uninsured has not uninsured the insured, with millions more still unable to access affordable health insurance.

Some other LA Times headlines on Obamacare:

Last-minute surge of health law sign-ups

California health exchange tops 400,000 enrolled prior to deadline

Other news sites, including Breitbart as well as local, conservative, and national affiliates throughout the country have reported the rising number of health insurance recipients losing their health insurance, or finding that premiums are rising beyond their  capacity to pay. Other reports share that millions of Americans will just pay the fine rather than get health care.
Further down in the article on the fate of the LA Times, the paper offered one of the most leading statements:

“In an interview, Waxman wouldn’t say what actions, if any, Congress could take.”
What can Congress do for the LA Times? Offer a bailout? Tribune Co., like many newspaper industries, has not shifted effectively with the rapid technological advances. Of course, the untrammeled bias of the paper has likely turned off potential readers, too. Diverse studies confirm the left-leaning elements within the LA Times.

Yet returning to the idea that Congressman Waxman could, or even should, do something to resurrect the LA Times. Congress getting involved in the content and dissemination of media? Such tinkering from the state in the media has happened before, with disastrous results for the Fourth Estate keeping the three branches of government accountable in our country.

The last thing that any Congressman should be considering is laws which will bolster the press. Do we really want journalists and their corporate leaders taking money from Washington? One can only imagine the distortion of current events and news reporting which would follow.

Granted, picketers lined up to protest the Koch Brothers potential purchase of Tribune Co, including unions, and half the Times’ staff pledged to resign should they take over. Then again, if the libertarian-leaning conservatism of the Kansas oil magnates could bring in more readers and greater revenue, working and middle-class employees connected with the Times should not be so hasty to reject the offer. Ultimately, the Koch Brothers’ decided against purchasing Tribune Co., citing that such a venture would “not be profitable”.

Much like the Affordable Care Act, and certainly any moves from the federal government to rescue the LA Times.

Re: ObamaCare: What Would You Like to Tell Them, Henry?

Walking in Manhattan Beach last month, I met a gentleman who had posted a piece of paper on his minivan.

 

The white sheet with back letters read:

 

“My insurance was cancelled because of ObamaCare.”

 

I would have never expected someone to air such a frustrating grievance, but such outrageous outcomes must be shared.

 

When I discussed the issue, he told me that because of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, his insurance coverage was cancelled. His heart doctor had informed him that if the law passed, he would quit his practice.

 

I wonder what Waxman was thinking when he helped pass the Affordable Care Act. The law has created the exact opposite of its intended effects, and all the emails in the world cannot cover up the continuous incompetence of this ill-conceived legislation.

 

In 2012, shortly before the June primary, Congressman Henry Waxman admitted in a House budget committee hearing that he did not know that General Motors went bankrupt.

The colleague asking about GM7, Mick Mulvaney of South Carolina, reminded him: “Well, it did. I am surprised you hadn’t heard about it. It was the second largest bankruptcy in US history, if not the largest.”

 

Relating how retired teachers and police officers’ pension funds were defunded to bail out GM, Mulvaney asked: “Since you supported the bailouts, what would you like to tell them?”

 

On behalf of every resident of the 33^rd Congressional district who is losing his health insurance, or struggling to find a doctor, or paying higher health care premiums because of ObamaCare, Henry

Waxman’s signature legislation, I ask the Congressman:

 

“What would you like to tell them?”

 

To everyone reading, I ask:

 

“What would you like to tell Waxman? What should happen to him in 2014?”

Waxman: Exempt Me, Too!

I encourage every resident of tghe 33rd Congressional District to contact Henry Waxman, or tweet to him:

#Exemptmetoo from #Obamacare

It's about time to use every tool at our disposal to deal with this terrible law.

Henry Waxman: "Is it Important that I read [the Obamacare Regulations]?"

Congressman Henry Waxman avoids public comments on Obamacare. He has avoided comments from other people, including constituents,

on major issues.

Waxman fumbled on the basic laws regulating steroid abuse and controlled substances, even though he was the Chairman of the House Oversight Committee investigating the issue.

Waxman has admitted on camera that he did not know that GM went bankrupt.

He also said twice that "We're not broke!", even though the national debt has soared to seventeen trillion dollars, and a growing part of that debt results from President Obama's annual trillion-dollar spending sprees and the rising costs of Obamacare.

Waxman's most recent gaffe exposed that he has not read the thousands of pages of regulations promulgated from Obamacare, or the assumption one concludes is that he does not have to.

What gives?

Penny Star, reporter for CNS News, gathered the following from Congressman Waxman:

CNSNews.com: "What I was going to ask you is if you've read those [10,535 pages] of regulations."

Waxman said: "Have you read them?"

CNSNews.com: "No. Have you read them?"

Waxman said: "Is it important that I read it [The Obamacare Regulations]?"

CNSNews.com: "Do you think that the American people should read it? I just asked you a very honest question. Whether you've read them? It's a yes or no question."

Waxman: "I think it is a propaganda question, and I refuse to talk to you about it."

First of all, about Congressman Waxman and legislation. He has admitted in a town hall before that he does not [3: 50 - 4: 20] read every bill which he votes on. Yikes!

Then, about the length of Obamacare:

2,500 pages of legislation was passed in the dead of night in March, 2010. How many Congressmen likely read the bill? One things for sure, Waxman not only has admitted that he does not read every bill, he sometimes does not read his own legislation.

The length of the Affordable Care Act alone should have prevented Congress from passing it, or President Obama signing it into law.

This legislation has faced scrutiny and setbacks ever since.

Loopholes in Obamacare can compromise an individual's getting health insurance.

Doctors are retiring in large numbers because of this law.

Obamacare has decimated the insurance industry in ten states.

The law is hurting major companies.

Individuals face rising penalties if they do not acquire health insurance.

There is too much in this law for anyone to ignore, least of all the Congressman who helped write it. By the way, the same paper which printed Waxman's opinion piece on Obamacare also denounced the first day of California's Medicare Exchanges, Covered CA, as "lame". Contrary to initial reports, only five hundred thousand, not five million, visit Covered CA the first day, and the number of hits diminished considerably the next day.

About the growing reams of Obamacare regulations, here is a picture taken earlier in 2013. From the floor to the ceiling, with a red ribbon all around it, Obamacare (regulations and all) is the only thing still holding together, compared with the health care industry, the medical profession, and to some extent the United States Constitution, which are unraveling because of the law.

So, of course an independent-minded reporter or constituent would want to know whether his Congressman, or the person crucial to the law's language and passage, has read the law and the growing number of regulations attached to the law.

I called Congressman Waxman's Manhattan Beach office, and I was directed to his LA office instead. When I mentioned his comment that he refused to answer questions about whether he had read the regulations of Obamacare, I was put on hold. I waited for two minutes, and then hung up. No one at the office answered me. I called a second time, and the gentleman who answered the phone informed me that Congressman Henry Waxman was aware of the law, and the regulations in the Federal Register pertaining to the law were so great, that any Congressman who read them would be getting even less done than the current Congress right now.

I had to ask: why pass such a law in the first place?

Perhaps it's time for more people in the 33rd Congressional District to give Congressman Henry Waxman a call. Maybe he should he explain why he does not have to explain whether he read the reams of regulations of Obamacare, which every American has to endure. Maybe he would also like to explain why he supports a law which is forcing businesses to cut hours or lay off workers, as well as push doctors out of the medical profession, and even frustrates unions who sill want their health plans protected.

Give Congressman Waxman a call, and let him know what you think:

Washington, DC Office
2204 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-3976
Fax: (202) 225-4099

Los Angeles Office
5055 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 310
Los Angeles, CA 90036
Phone: (310) 652-3095 / (323) 651-1040
Fax: (323) 655-0502

Manhattan Beach Office
1600 Rosecrans Avenue, 4th Floor
Manhattan Beach, CA 90266
Phone: (310) 321-7664
Fax: (323) 655-0502

Congressman Henry Waxman's Take on Obamacare -- and the Truth

Congressman Henry Waxman released another email in preparation for his 2014 run for Congress. Should the ill effects of Obamacare continue, Waxman will face a harder time convincing voters throughout the 33^rd Congressional District to turn out and vote for him, since he does not have the Obama campaign bringing in votes for him, as he did last year (and Romney will not be depressing the Conservative vote).

Dear Friends,

Republicans have voted more than forty times to defund, delay, or repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA).  They have shut down the government and are threatening to default on our federal debt if they don’t get their way.  But as these machinations play out in Washington, DC, the ACA’s health marketplaces launched as scheduled in all fifty states. 

The broken Medicare exchanges have failed Americans throughout the country.

Waxman’s blatant lie that the Republicans have shut down the government cannot go unchecked, uncorrected. The Democratic Party Leaders in Congress shoved the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act on the American People through backroom deals, budgetary shenanigans, and irascible reconciliation efforts. Democrats in the House, who wanted to stay in office in swing-states and red-state districts, resisted this law.

One Democrat remarked that losing his seat in Congress for Obamacare was worth it, only to trot out every empty argument for the law, all of which have ended up not measuring up the expectations laid out by President Obama. The comments on the same page reveal the true sentiments of his constituents: they were glad to get rid of him.

The Republican Majority, with help from a growing caucus of moderate and sensible Democrats, has voted again and again to continue funding the government, yet at the same time to delay the individual mandate and to repeal the medical device tax hurting businesses all over the country. House Reps want to fund veterans’ affairs, national parks, and the City of Washington D.C., but Democrats continued to reject these appropriations on the floor of the House or in the US Senate, where Majority Leader Harry Reid has shot down any negotiations to end the shut-down between President Obama and the Republicans in both chambers.

California consumers can visit California’s marketplace at Covered California and compare plans and prices from a menu of health insurance options.  They can also determine whether they are eligible for financial assistance to make their coverage more affordable.  

No they cannot. The LA Times recently reported that the paper overestimated the number of people who visited Covered California. Glitches and hick-ups along the way have prevented many people from getting insurance, while those who had insurance plans claim that their premiums have increased.

As a member of a local union, I received a letter from the health insurance work-fund which informed me that my health insurance premiums will be increasing in the next year. I thought that Obamacare was originally known as “the Affordable Care Act”. What gives?

Covered California should be “Cover-up in California”, as in the number of health insurance companies which have left the California Medicare exchanges because of the prohibitive costs.

According to a recent report by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), individuals across the country will be able to choose from an average of 53 plans from eight different health insurance issuers, which far exceeds the options available in the current individual health insurance marketplace.

The Department of Health and Human Services is the government institution dead-set on dressing up Obamacare as a caring and compassionate program. Of course they will advertise that people “will be able” to choose. Promises, promises. The department is facing lawsuits from religious groups, has already issued exemptions to a law touted as “great”, and is wasting millions of dollars trying to convince people to join.

 This competition is resulting in lower prices, with the average plan premium coming in 16% below the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates even before taking into account the new financial assistance available to lower income households.  Simply put, consumers will find choice, competition, and value as they shop for their 2014 health insurance.

No it isn’t. I have spoken with constituents, I have heard from business owners, and I have learned from health care professionals that whatever pretended competition was expected from this law has not created the lower costs anticipated by the Obama Administration.

As you know, a number of benefits in the ACA are already in effect, including provisions that prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage to children with preexisting conditions, eliminate lifetime limits on coverage, allow young adults up to age 26 to stay on their parents' health insurance plan, and provide seniors with prescription drug discounts, free annual wellness check-ups, and preventive care without copays and deductibles.  

This classic line to justify individual, small business, and employer mandates is losing salience, seriousness, and relevance. Parents are losing their health insurance, so what good is it to provide the children coverage until their twenty-six anyway? Young people leaving college want jobs, and they want to purchase their own health insurance. One gentleman at a local seminar on Obamacare asked how the IRS is going to assess his coverage through his parents if he is no longer a dependent on their tax returns? Good question!

In California’s 33^rd Congressional District, more than 12,000 seniors have already received prescription drug discounts of more than $17.5 million; 236,000 individuals now get preventive services without co-pays, premiums or deductibles; 7,500 young adults have health insurance coverage on their parents' plans; and 31,000 children cannot be denied coverage due to a pre-existing condition.

I would like to see the statistics which justify these assertions, as I am sure would many voters in the Santa Monica Bay. Insurers in Beverly Hills, nurses in Redondo Beach, and health care professionals throughout the South Bay would differ on the actual benefits of this law.

As with any new large program, the launch of the ACA will have some initial snags that will have to be worked through.  I am optimistic that California’s experience will be smoother than many areas around the nation because our State has embraced, not fought, the law and it has worked methodically to implement it. 

Those glitches and snags have given way to frustration and delays across the country.

The United States now joins every other advanced nation in making health care a right, not a privilege.

What advanced nations is the Congressman referring to? In Great Britain, rationing and long lines have become the norm for health care. In Canada, residents will seek out black-market health care clinics just to get help. In most cases, individuals suffer in long lines, meeting with one bureaucrat after another, assuming that resources are available. Towns often hold a lottery, and the lucky winner’s prize is to meet with a family doctor.

Regards,

Henry A. Waxman