Free Republic

This is hilarious. If Obama were actually trying to make private insurance cheaper for the businesses that insure their employees and people who buy policies on the individual market, the first thing he would do is increase payments to doctors for state/federal funded health care programs like Medicare, medicaid, MediCal(CA), etc. Those programs underpay doctors by a significant amount and private insurance pays higher contracted rates because of it.

Instead, he is looking to cut the medicare reimbursements which will again push up costs in the private market. Gee, I wonder why private insurance keeps getting more expensive.

NO - we don’t want them back. Can we send them to NY or Jersey or something? We have enough!

Taxing it would simply cause it to be treated the same as any other good in California. It would have a sales tax applied.

For the record, conservatives should support the sales tax in California because it is the alternative to higher property taxes (we have low property tax). A sales tax is one of the only regressive taxes in CA... its the only way we get the 50% of people who don’t pay CA income taxes to carry their share of the burden (since that same 50% enjoys the vast majority of the state funded services).

Yeah, man what? Is that your way of being dismissive because you don’t have a valid argument against the initiative?

Just checking.

Yes, Romneycare... the source of a great number of wrongheaded policies that have been advanced by democrats during the health care debate.

The Mass. reform should preclude Romney from seeking elective office as a Republican. The Mass. health care reform has been an unmitigated disaster.

I was driving back into downtown Sacramento at noon yesterday after a morning meeting with a new client and I decided to turn on the only local political talk radio show that focuses specifically on California issues - The Capitol Hour with Eric Hogue on AM 1380.

Hogue used to have a morning show in Sacramento and he can, from time to time, provide thoughtful commentary on our freak show of a legislative process. And, unlike a thousand or so local businesses in the Sacramento area, he knows how to correctly spell "Capitol". I have a special contempt for those who cannot.

The first topic raised by Hogue during his show was new initiative that would legalize marijuana in the California. If the proponents can gather the necessary signatures, the initiative should be on the ballot next year.

This initiative would legalize up to one ounce of marijuana ONLY in local areas that choose to legalize, tax, and regulate the use in their communities. There are other specifics, but this should suffice for now.

As a pragmatic libertarian type, I was expecting to hear the same reactionary anti-drug rhetoric that is typical whenever this topic is raised.

Proponent: "Pot is no more dangerous than alcohol. You never see a stoned guy beating his wife... blah, blah, blah."

Opponent: "Pot is a gateway drug, do we really want to send this message to our children... blah, blah, blah."

I was surprised to hear a series of calls from listeners - all conservatives - that were supportive of the initiative in broad terms. Meaning, they were supportive of the concept.

I was encouraged by the discussion not because I like to smoke pot - those days are behind me and I don't have time to be baked with a mentally challenging career, an 11 month old, and a baby on the way. Besides... I have a huge lawn. It would NEVER get mowed if I were stoned and then I would be THAT NEIGHBOR (you know who you are).

I was encouraged because it was the first time in a long time that I heard Republicans take a thoughtful approach to an issue that could easily be approached with the same old tired logic.

This is what I heard:

1. Why not let the state legalize pot and tax it? It would help address the budget deficit and keep taxes low for the rest of us.

2. We have clearly lost the war on prohibition, why not redirect those law enforcement funds to more pressing issues like monitoring sex offenders and enforcing laws that protect people and property?

3. Pot is supposedly a $14 billion industry in California alone. If we are anti-crime why would we continue to support a policy that directs $14 billion to drug cartels and gangs and helps to fund violent criminal enterprise?

4. Isn't this an issue of personal freedom and don't we invite the government further into our lives when we support this type of policy?

5. We have overcrowded prisons in California, we would save a considerable amount of money through legalization and we could avoid having to let other criminals out of jail (as is being proposed in CA).

Even if you stack up all of the concerns with the legalization of marijuana, these arguments clearly prevail.

I was encouraged to hear callers from a very conservative audience, one of them was even devout LDS, addressing this issue in such an enlightened manner.

It's time to get past the tired old arguments that have trapped us in prohibition. Lets all get over it... let people smoke pot if they want. Why do you even care?

-- Rotten Stinking Moderate