Welcome Home Vietnam Veteran's Day

Well, here is one I can agree with Senator LeMieux about. This is LONG overdue. This one bill is not enough for me to like or support Senator LeMieux, but it is a great idea.

Senator LeMieux wrote: "

Designating a "Welcome Home Vietnam Veteran's Day"

Recently, I joined efforts to designate March 30th as a nationally recognized day to honor the courage and sacrifice of the 58,000 Americans who died, and the more than 300,000 wounded during the Vietnam War.

While some states and localities set aside a day of appreciation for these brave individuals, a national day of honor will provide the fitting recognition these veterans deserve.

Our nation is truly grateful for the sacrifices made by our veterans while serving in South Vietnam and throughout Southeast Asia."

Federal Takeover of Health Reform?

Okay, someone explain this one to me. The Republic Party is now into Repeal and Replace the Health Reform LAW. What are a couple of the things they want? Lets start with Tort Reform, limiting medical malpractice awards. As it stands now, tort laws regarding medical malpractice are governed by state law. The Republic Party wants to replace state law with...umm...Federal law, taking state protections away and replaced with Federal protections. Who decides what those protections are? The Federal government, that's who. Wait, aren't the Tea Party/Republic Party the ones who want less Federal control over states right? The second change would be the ability to buy insurance across state lines. Each state governs their own insurance industry. To be able to sell across state lines would require Federal standards that would trump state insurance controls. Who would set those standards? The Federal government. Wait, aren't the Tea Party/Republic Party the ones who want less Federal control over states right?

What the Health Reform law does do with regards to buying across state lines is simply this, it sets minimum standards for what the insurance industry can offer it's customers. While you cannot buy across state lines necessarily, at least the minimum standards would be set for all Americans. Seems like a fair compromise to me. For now.

Before the right wing complains much more, think about what you are wanting to do first.

Recess Appointments

Before our Republic friends try to make issue of the recess appointments OUR President has made, may I refer them to Article 2 of the US Constitution, Section 2, "The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.".

The President at his/her discretion has a constitutional obligation as they see fit to fill vacancies. In their judgment they may do so during a recess as authorized specifically in the US Constitution. Whine as the Republic party may, this is completely within the obligation and authorization within the constitution.

Filled out my 2010 Census Form today

I was so tickled to get my census form, if for no other reason to make a political statement.

The only thing they got out of me was my name and number of people in my household, the other questions I left blank.

The constitution requires us to take a head count every ten years, no where does it say anything about breaking us down by age, sex or race. I have always been insulted when asked what my race is. My vote and apportionment has nothing to do with race or sex or age. I mean, if I were a Negro, do I get counted twice? Is there some special rule if I am a certain age or sex? Of course not. There had better not be. We are supposed to be a color-blind society, we do not discriminate due to sex or age (or so they say). I considered the questions irrelevant and unconstitutional and wrote as much on the form. I hope their computer chokes on my reply.

I recommend all who have yet to fill out the form to do that same. Answer the names and # of people living in your home. That is all they need to know.

Charlie and Marco...what are Floridians thinking?

I will be the first to admit I like Charlie Crist. As Governor of Florida he has shown himself to be quite the pragmatist. Charlie recognises the fact that he is Governor for all the people, not just Republicans, but Democrats and Independents, all citizens of the state. Marco Rubio has no clue as to what that kind of job entails. As a representative of ALL the people you have to take into account the NEEDS of ALL the people, not just Republicans as he has shown he is only interested in serving. Charlie on the other hand knows how to do what is best for ALL, to find a balance. What concerns me most about Rubio are statements such as this, “He’s not going to stand up to Barack Obama. I will." Stand up to the President of the United States? What good would it do to stand up to the President of the United States? What does he mean? Does it mean he plans on some sort of coup? As a US Senator, there are rules to follow and he will find that he as part of the minority party there is no chance in hell he could prevent the President from performing his constitutional obligations.

Lets say Rubio is elected as an antagonist, a single cog in the minority. What can he do as one person to prevent the will of the majority? To overcome a Presidential veto his party will need a super majority to do so, which is an absolute impossibility. No, Rubio has a choice. Join the party of NO and accomplish NOTHING for the people he represents or he will be compelled to act in the capacity worthy of being a US Senator. Now, he can waste his time with his political diatribe and accomplish nothing or he can work within the system to get part of what he wants, or believes his constituents want.

Floridians can save a lot of time and trouble by electing Charlie Crist. Charlie knows what it is like to represent all Floridians. Sure he accepted stimulus funds, what choice did he have? If he had said no, the legislature would have overridden his decision, after all the way the law was written, the legislatures had the option to override the governor. See South Carolina as an example. The legislature overrode the governor and accepted the money. Governor Perry of Texas who claims not to have accepted stimulus funds in his campaign ads lied. Texas was awarded 13 billion dollars, of which 1.2 billion has already spent. Had Charlie Crist refused the money, he would have been run out of town on a rail.

There is a saying, we can disagree without being disagreeable. Rubio chooses the latter. Is being a jerk and disagreeable what Floridians really want? I think not.

Solution for the US Post Office

So that we are clear, the US Post Office (USPS) is a constitutionally mandated function of the government. No matter what happens, it must survive as does the Congress.

When the USPS became a separate entity, limitations were placed upon it by Congress, these limitations by their nature prevent the USPS to evolve with changing times.

Here is one solution that will help. Compel by law that any business or web-based entity to offer USPS as a shipping option instead of offering one, such as UPS or FedEx.

I cannot tell you how frustrating these companies are when I ask that my item be shipped via USPS. 99% percent refuse to do it. The one's that will, use the hybrid UPS/USPS system, which is just as bad as the UPS system. The explanations run from, we won't use USPS, we cannot track (untrue), no one wants it or no one asks for it. The truth is, they have made deal with UPS or FedEx to get lower rates, which USPS cannot do, the playing field is not even level. The thing is, the lower rates are not passed on to the customer, it just feeds the company's bottom line. Even if the shipping is 'free', the cost in time is not worth it if you use anything but USPS.

Let me give you a couple of examples to make my solution relevant and clear. I want to buy an item online from a company and it ships on a Wednesday, if they use UPS I will get the item the next Tuesday, maybe Monday. If it is shipped via USPS Priority Mail, I will have it by Friday or Saturday.

Now, if I buy a small item from company A and all they use is FedEx, I will pay $6.95 for FedEx and take 5 business days. If I want the same item with 3 day service, I would pay $13.95. If the company used Priority Mail, their cost would be less than $5 and I would have no problem paying say $7.95 to get the same service as FedEx, except USPS delivers on Saturdays for free.

As a consumer buying a product, I would like to have the option of using the best shipping method, my choice not the vendors.

The problem is we are sheep and will lay down for these companies.

If compelled by law to at least offer USPS, we as the consumer and as American's will have a real choice. I am sick and tired of being told, I have no choice, I have to accept it because it's the way it is, when it does not have to be that way.

I do not see a problem making it a law since the constitution established the postal service and all the law would do is ensure it's viability.

Give us a choice.