Plymouth 2/20/10 Leibham listening session

Just a quick update-My apologies to Mr. Leibham for misspelling his name. I hope that my readers will be good enough to correct me if I do so again. It was entirely unintentional.

I went to another listening session for Mr. Leibham. There are 9 short videos taken before my batteries ran out.


This is a question about SB460. SB460 is a bill that would allow an individual to get a prescription for drugs to treat certain STD's for their partner without requiring a physician to examine that partner. There are so many reasons that this is wrong that I am a bit baffled as to how such a proposal would make it to bill form.


This segment is a follow up question about the rules as to how long our legislators may have to examine a bill before being required to vote on it.


This is a question about Mr. Doyle's unconscionable Global Warming bill which is currently before the legislature. Did you hear that, my fellow Wisconsinites? A 30-50% increase in your energy bills. Can you afford that? We'll be taking the lead in personal bankruptcy filings if this goes through. We haven't felt the entire economic impact of the last budget yet. My pockets are pretty well empty at this point. There were two local mayors at this session and both said their cities can no longer come up with the money to remain in compliance with the state's unfunded mandates.

Here's the message, Mr. Doyle and WI legislature- "THERE IS NO MORE MONEY, STOP SPENDING."


The question was where are we now as regards the legislature's/governor's continuing attempt to change joint and several liability to make it impossible to afford auto insurance in WI.


This was a question regarding legislation, AB 751, introduced by some folks who are pushing the National Popular Vote movement. This would disenfranchise WI voters by giving WI electoral college votes to the winner of the popular vote in a presidential election regardless of how the people of WI vote. The next two videos are a continuation of this question.






Mr. Leibham is answering a question regarding the influence of lobbyists on his opinion. There was a follow up question as to whether or not a constituent could visit Mr. Leibham's office and get the same access as a lobbyist. The answer is YES. Please visit your legislators and let them know what you are thinking.


This was a question about illegal aliens and how we can control our costs with regard to the drain they cause on social services.

This is where I ran out of battery power. One of Mr. Leibham's better statements was that his colleagues didn't understand why he was printing up Legislative Update fliers to let his constituents know what the legislature is doing. Another constituent quipped that "Madison is where logic goes to die".

There were also questions about:

• WI healthcare amendment - This would not go into effect until after Obamacare is passed, if it passes.
• There was a question on the proposed radio tax. As that is a national rather than state issue, Mr. Leibham has no control over the vote on that.
• Mayor Meyer(sp?) from Sheboygan Falls asked why the state of Wisconsin continues to engage in structural deficits.
• There was a question about the UW Hospital's decision to perform late term abortions. (In my opinion, an abominable practice which has yet to have been shown to have any significant medical benefits to the mother.)
• There was a question about SB 439. This legislation is referring to the ability to convert a traditional IRA into a Roth IRA.
• AB 458. This was recently signed into law by Mr. Doyle. In essence, this disenfranchises WI parents from making decisions about the proper curriculum for sex education classes for the children in their school districts. This is a continuation of a disturbing and dangerous trend to inflict government upon our children under the misguided and arrogant opinion that declares that parents are too stupid to know what is best for their children and therefore government must step in and make our parenting decisions for us. Luckily, we may still opt to not provide a sex education(or reproductive health or whatever your district calls it)class in our districts. On the up side, eliminating that class should save us some money.
• There were questions brought up about why the entire state should bear the cost of Mr. Doyle's wish -a high speed train from Madison to Milwaukee. Now, aside from the obvious concern, that this would lose money like a dog sheds hair, I have to ask myself, why do we need such a thing? There is already a bus route between Milwaukee and Madison that is cheaper than the estimated $20.00 - $33.00 per trip cost of this train and that would be just as fast. Because the estimated trip time for this high speed rail line is -brace yourselves-about an hour and a half. That's right, this wonderful high speed rail line that will cost more than a bus ticket (Bus ticket is $19.00 with multiple pick-up and drop-off sites in both cities, unlike the train.)will get you there at the same speed as driving. So the governor and our legislature want to spend nearly a billion dollars to create a money pit that services only Dane and Milwaukee Counties, while taking business from the bus companies who currently provide perfectly adequate service, and they think the rest of the state should be on the hook for the continuing costs. May I refer them back to the message under the global warming bill video? It's equally applicable here.
• Mr. Leibham encouraged citizens to oppose the .5% sales tax increase being requested by the County of Sheboygan. The belief expressed throughout the room was that Sheboygan County needs to reduce spending rather than increasing taxes.

It was a well-attended meeting and Mr. Leibham remarked that the Sheboygan session had also been well attended.

After seeing what sorts of legislation our legislators have been considering, both in Mr. Leibham's pamphlet and on the WI legislature site (Proclaiming that the ancient Macedonians were Hellenes? Really? This requires legislation?) maybe I ought to be submitting my own legislative proposal for the protection of our children's Constitutional rights to someone other than Mr. Leibham. At least mine has the virtue of asking for the restoration of a right that has been defacto and unjustly removed by the courts. I will share it here. If any of you wish to submit this language to your own legislators, be my guest. Here's the text:

Whereas, the State of Wisconsin recognizes that minor children have the same rights to due process and protection under the law as every American citizen; and

Whereas, it is unreasonable to expect a minor child to understand their rights and be able to properly exercise his or her Constitutional rights in his or her own protection in the face of authority, and under the coercion that can, currently, or at any time hereafter be applied to said child; and

Whereas, the right of school officials, administrators and police school liaison officers to exercise the privileges of "in loco parentis" have been unaddressed, leading to the violation of our children's civil and 5th amendment rights;
Therefore, be it resolved that the right of school officials, administrators, and police school liaison officers, or any of their designees to exercise the powers of "in loco parentis" shall not extend to questioning a student about any issue that could result in the filing of a criminal complaint without having a parent, legal guardian or legal representation, chosen by the parent or legal guardian, who shall act in the best interests of the child, present during questioning.

Be it also resolved that school officials shall not be held criminally liable for acting to protect the students, the school and it's environs in the case of an immediate threat.

Or maybe I ought to just be grateful for what we still have. Get involved folks, it's your state.

"Saying, There was in a city a judge, which feared not God, neither regarded man:
And there was a widow in that city; and she came unto him, saying, Avenge me of mine adversary.
And he would not for a while: but afterward he said within himself, Though I fear not God, nor regard man;
Yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me.
And the Lord said, Hear what the unjust judge saith.
And shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them? "~Luke 18:2-7

Quick Update

The Constitution Rally was well attended with ~1,000 or so people (by my own count ). I wasn't particularly pleased to see Sen. Leibham(R-Sheboygan, Manitowoc and Calumet Counties) as a speaker, as I think we need to keep the presentations party neutral. He was encouraging folks to support the Health Care Freedom Amendment, a piece of legislation that might preserve our right to make our own healthcare choices.
Would it also prevent us from having to have a national ID in the form of a healthcare card linked to our health records and bank accounts? Would it prevent us from being burdened with the regulatory and fiscal concerns related to the national bill? I'm not so sure it would.

I wouldn't have minded hearing about the bill that was to come up for consideration before the Senate this week to disenfranchise the voters of this state by giving all of WI's electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote in a presidential election, but I don't recall that being mentioned. Such things make me wonder if any of our legislators understand the difference between a republic and a democracy.

I was also disappointed to see the table reserved for a representative of the democratic party still vacant. Personally I would like to see that fiscal sanity and support for our Constitution is a goal of both of the largest political parties. If we must have them(which I dispute) the parties should agree that fiscal sanity and respect for our Constitution is good for America as a whole. But then, if that were the case, why would we need a TEA Party movement?

The Sheboygan Press, in true MSM fashion declared: "TEA Party riding on Republican momentum". I suppose the MSM is just itching for a way to categorize the TEA Party movement as something, anything other than what it is: We the People declaring our authority over our legislators and our government.

The Sheboygan Youth Symphony was wonderful. Kudos to all the young musicians and Dr. Rich as well.

"Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil;
Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow. "~Isaiah 1:16-17

What to do with your Saturday in Wisconsin

If you're up for a trip to Madison, there is a Rally for Life at the capitol this Saturday.

You Are Invited ……
10 a.m. Workshop – Effective Community Organizing to Stop Planned Parenthood
Calvary Lutheran Church
701 State Street
(Parking Ramp Across the Street)

Statewide Pro-Life Rally on the UW-Madison Campus
Saturday, February 6, Noon
Library Mall
Following the Rally, we will walk
to the Madison Surgery Center,
1 S. Park St.

For More Information, Contact:
Jolene (608) 289-8122, totally4life@yahoo.com

If you don't have the time to make a trip to Madison, and are in the Sheboygan area, you could attend the Sheboygan Liberty Coalition's Constitution Rally.





Then on Sunday, if you need a reminder of why we need to protect both our children and our Constitution, the Sheboygan Area Youth Symphony will be performing at the Wiell Center.

"Children's children are the crown of old men; and the glory of children are their fathers."~ Prov 17:6

State of the Union?

I still don't know what the state of the Union is after watching Mr. Obama's speech. It seemed to be more of an exercise in insulting the American people, the Supreme Court and those members of Congress who refuse to do his bidding, than an update on where we are now.

I will freely admit that I did not watch the entire speech. We were at a Bible study during the first bit and when we got home, my three lie/speech limit was quickly reached. (Actually my son was working on his SOTU Barack Bingo card and had to shush me. His exact words were "Mom, I can't hear if he's saying anything on my card with you back there saying "liar, liar, pants on fire".

Here are just a few of the bits that really annoyed me.:
The overwhelming evidence for global warming - Has no one told Mr. Obama that when the base information for a scientific conclusion can be shown to be fallacious or questionable that the conclusion then becomes fallacious/questionable as well?

I refuse to pass this burden on to future generations - The deficit/debt has been regulated to the point that it will double under his administration, with his encouragement and approval and he can comment about not wanting to pass on burdens to future generations?

No lobbyists in my administration. There are at least 12 former professional lobbyists employed by this administration.

Transparency - Really?, then where is the C-Span coverage of the closed door meetings on healthcare?

We must increase our exports by ?% - Does he think he can force the citizens of other countries to consume more of our products legislatively?

America must lead - And I'm to take this seriously from a man who has spent a part of nearly every international trip he has taken apologizing for America?

Does this man, or his speechwriters, believe that none of the American people can remember things longer than a goldfish? But at least I'm not a member of the SCOTUS or Congress who had to sit there politely while he insulted them to their faces. So, I wonder what the state of the union is when the individual currently sitting in the office of the president believes such behavior is appropriate for this speech.

"He that speaketh truth sheweth forth righteousness: but a false witness deceit"~Proverbs 12:17

Cadillacs Anyone?

Insurance companies use a number of criteria for determining how much a policy will cost. Among these are the occupation of the applicant, the services that applicant wants covered, the applicant's age and location. This is not to give them an excuse for denying coverage. Businesses want to serve you-that's how they make money. It is rather to determine how much they will be likely to have to pay out during the course of a year's coverage. Jobs like carriage driving, construction and custodial work are far riskier than a typical office job. Higher risk = higher premium. Older people tend to have more claims than younger people. The body wears out. Older = higher premium. People who live in large cities have a higher risk of things like auto accidents or violent crime than those who live away from people. Living in a high risk area= higher premium. If an applicant wants to cover every conceivable medical test and procedure known to man, that's also going to cost more.

Unfortunately, Congress has decided to use the cost of any given insurance policy as a guide to what that policy covers. They have declared that a policy that costs ~ $23,000/year for a family or ~$8,500/year for an individual must be a "Cadillac plan". By which they mean to imply that such a plan is only purchased by the evil, greedy people who have "played the system" to be better off than "ordinary" people. They are using the cost of the policy as an easy button to convince the American people that those who can afford such policies, ought then to be fined so that everyone can get coverage. In addition to ignoring the risk factors that go into the pricing of health insurance policies, they are lying to the American people for yet one more power grab. One more huge shift towards collectivism.

The truth is that someone who works at a risky job in a big city will pay far more for the same coverage as someone who works at a low risk job in a small town. For Congress to ignore this, and penalize the high risk worker, essentially for taking a high risk job, is going to cost America yet more jobs and make it that much more difficult and expensive to get anything done that requires a high risk worker.

America is all about risk. We value the freedom to take risks and the freedom to fail. That includes failing to have adequate coverage. It includes the risk of incurring a lifelong debt to pay for the medical services that one would receive in extremis, regardless of one's ability to pay.

Our medical system is not broken. I have read that the real impetus for this legislation is that doctor after doctor and clinic after clinic are refusing to take Medicare/Medicaid patients on a non-emergency basis anymore, because those patients are served at a loss to the doctor/facility. That, rather than being conspiracy theory, type collectivism pushers, Congress is just so stupid as to think that by providing no way out for healthcare providers and insurers, and taxing the dickens out of the rest of us to pay for it, it will solve the problem.

If that's the case, I wonder what they will do when, in 3-4 years, all the baby boomers are retired and aging and the 45% of healthcare providers polled retire because they don't care to be forced to work under the provisions of this bill. How will Congress "fix" the healthcare system then?

The unions who supported this Congress and this administration into office suddenly realized that many of their members have healthcare plans that put them into that "Cadillac" category by price. Upon realizing this, did they throw their weight against the legislation? Did they have a sudden revelation of patriotism to impel them to protect their members through opposing this unconstitutional and unconscionable legislation that will destroy the American health care system? No, they paid to play, so they just went to their pet legislators and collected their payoff.

It is time and past for America's Union workers to remember that they are the power behind the unions and that they are Americans first. Congress isn't the only place that needs a change of personnel.

"Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God's: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it. " ~Duet 1:17

We the People or Obama the king?

A New York Times article entitled " In Health Talks, President Is Hands-Off No More " came out today.The first paragraph says: "President Obama has taken full control of the health care negotiations, casting himself for the first time in the role of mediator between the House and Senate during a 72-hour marathon of talks that have turned his White House into a de facto Congressional conference. "
How very nice that Congressional Democrats are willing to share what they are doing with the president, when they have been unwilling to show their employers, the American people, what they are doing to the future of our health care system.
I thought it was the role of Congress to craft legislation and the role of the president to give it his approval or his veto.

"When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn. "~ Prov 29:2

So much to post about, So little time.

Here we are, at the beginning of a new year and the challenges before us are myriad and mounting. I'd like to take a moment raise awareness of this issue.
UNICEF has announced that Somalia plans to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child treaty, leaving the US as the only UN member state still holding out. This Treaty is appalling in it's generality and scope. In my opinion, the US should not sign on to this treaty for a number of reasons.

• This sentence, in the preamble to this treaty takes a definitive stand on when life begins:
  "Bearing in mind that, as indicated in the Declaration of the Rights of the Child, "the child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth" (emphasis mine) Combined with Article 6 section 1( "1. States Parties recognize that every child has the inherent right to life.") I think this effectively outlaws abortions-all abortions. I, personally, am in favor of outlawing abortion, even in the case of rape or incest, because in my view that child did not commit the crime. I do, however, strongly object to a lack of consideration for the life of the mother. A couple who must choose between the mother's life and that of her unborn baby for health reasons has enough stress without the government sticking their two cents worth into that decision.
• This treaty would create an unconscionable financial burden upon the nation as Article 6 states:"2. States Parties shall ensure to the maximum extent possible the survival and development of the child." This is further strengthened by Article 7, sections 1 and 2, which state:"1. The child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have the right from birth to a name, the right to acquire a nationality and. as far as possible, the right to know and be cared for by his or her parents. 2. States Parties shall ensure the implementation of these rights in accordance with their national law and their obligations under the relevant international instruments in this field, in particular where the child would otherwise be stateless."
• Article 7, sections 1 and 2 also leave a whole lot of leeway for government interference with the raising of our children. Article 7 section one could be read as saying the child has the right to be cared for by his/her biological parents. Then section 2 says the State must make this possible. Article 7 , section 1 may outlaw adoption as well as egg and sperm donation. Because the state would be required to ensure the child "the right to know and be cared for by his or her parents".

Now this may all sound fairly innocuous, until you factor in the idea that the state must make possible a parent's ability to raise their child. This opens the door not only to abuse on the part of the state, but abuse of the state on the part of the citizenry. I have heard teen aged girls plotting to get pregnant so that they can go on welfare and get out of their parent's houses under the current welfare system of the state of WI. How much worse would this become under this treaty? Can't find a job-or just don't want to? Don't worry, the government is bound by international treaty to make you able to care for your children. Isn't the character of young girls like the ones I overheard degraded enough without adding this sort of temptation? This treaty says parents(plural) That means all those young men getting their machismo on by fathering children they don't care for could also demand benefits from the government, does it not?

This treaty, in mandating that the government provide for such things, also creates a mandate for in-home checks by government officials. In home checks on every child, not just those who have been reported as at-risk for one reason or another. In home checks with government criteria to be met whether the government's criteria for a healthy home matches your own or not.

I think we are better than that. If you don't like the possibilities for government meddling in our private lives and the lives of our children contained within this treaty, I would strongly suggest you check out Parental Rights.org. Sign the petition and join the fight.

"Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward.
As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man; so are children of the youth.
Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them: they shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate."~ Psalm 127:3-5