Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Paul W. Petska , Sr. Obituary
Senator's Column by Mike Johans
October 19, 2009
Back Door Deals Undermine Democratic Process
Dear Nebraskans,
Part of what makes our country great is the transparency that exists between citizens and their government. We make laws at the will of the American people; therefore it's your right to be as informed as possible about the laws that will significantly impact your life. Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that the health care reform debate will permit this level of transparency. Since the pertinent committees have passed their versions of the legislation, they must now be blended into one bill. This is where our transparent democratic process gets clouded by special interests and private deals, hidden from view from the public.
For the next step, Democrat leaders, Democrat Committee chairs, and even the White House will deliberate in closed-door policymaking sessions. It appears the bipartisan minority will not be invited to the table. The real outrage lies in the back-room deals these meetings will produce. This isn't a hypothetical. This is what's actually happening in Washington to shape health care reform.
We're already seeing it. For instance, under current proposals to pay for an expansion of Medicaid, the federal government will pass $37 billion in costs onto states already struggling to balance their budgets. Yet recently a deal was hatched for Nevada and four other states to have their entire Medicaid expansion costs paid for by the federal government. Furthermore, current proposals also levy a tax on high-value insurance plans-except in New York and a few other states where similar insurance plans are exempted from taxation. Why is it okay for Nevadans and New Yorkers to benefit from carve-outs while those in Nebraska and elsewhere foot the bill? Unfortunately, some promote true reform when the cameras are on, but cut special interest deals once the doors are shut.
The fate of health care reform now lies in the hands of a few members of Congress, with little accountability or transparency. These deals will be occurring at a time when our budget deficit is soaring to a record $1.4 trillion for 2009-that's triple the amount of money we borrowed in 2008. It's an injustice that this deficit could increase further because of decisions made behind closed doors. After all, this is indeed a government, as so movingly put by Abraham Lincoln, "of the people, by the people, for the people."
The bottom line is this: closed-door deal-making undermines our democratic form of government and manipulates the budget process to hide the true costs. It is a disservice to the American people. I imagine the product that emerges from that room will be loaded with special carve-outs at the expense of taxpayers. I support reform that increases access to insurance, brings down premiums, and provides care for pre-existing conditions. I support subsidies for those who truly cannot afford insurance to help them buy down premiums, deductibles, and co-payments. I support real malpractice reform that would curb costs by reducing defensive medicine. But I do not support "reform" that results from back-room deals and broken promises.
Governor's Column by Dave Heineman
A New Century Begins at UNO
Congressman's Column by Adrian Smith
"Czars" Need to be Held Accountable
Presidents always have surrounded themselves with advisors and counselors. Beginning with President George Washington, these individuals play an important role in public and foreign policy.
To date, the Obama Administration has appointed more than 30 new advisors to oversee various industries and governmental functions. Though each position has its own official title, these advisors have been commonly referred to as "czars" for their large areas of oversight responsibility. For example, the President has appointed advisors to oversee U.S. energy policy, border security, stimulus accountability, and safe schools, among numerous others. These positions are in addition to his Cabinet and sub-Cabinet.
Though czars have offered advice and counsel to presidents since the administration of President Richard Nixon - who appointed the first "Drug Czar" - through President George W. Bush and while these appointments claim to provide more government oversight, the recent expansion and increased numbers of czars represent an unnecessary expansion of the federal government and its bureaucracy.
Moreover, there must be more transparency regarding the job functions of these advisors, particularly because many of these individuals - unlike Cabinet secretaries, judges and other presidential appointments - have bypassed Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, which mandates the advice and consent of the Senate when the President appoints principle officers.
Specifically, the article reads the President "shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States." Without this oversight, answers to important questions about a person's motivations, professional conflicts, and qualifications are not known at least until a czar is already ensconced in office.
Especially in these tough economic times, taxpayers deserve to know what these new offices are costing. The median czar salary, paid out of the White House's administrative fund, is $172,000. Each office also includes a staff and transportation and travel budgets.
Recently a number of controversies have arisen over several of the czars appointed by President Barack Obama, drawing attention away from important issues such as health care reform and economic recovery.
Van Jones, the Administration's "green jobs" czar, created a firestorm in September when - among other revelations - it was shown he signed a petition asserting the American government had foreknowledge and was complicit in the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. Jones stepped down amid heavy criticism from both Democrats and Republicans.
I have heard from many of my constituents echoing my concern our country is turning too much power over to individuals who were not elected by the people and who do not answer to Congress.
With this in mind, I have cosponsored H.Con.Res. 185, which requests the President report to Congress the responsibilities and qualifications of each of his czars.
Another bill I support, the Czar Accountability and Reform Act (H.R. 3226), would prohibit the use of funds to pay either expenses or salaries of members of task forces, councils, or similar offices established by the President without the advice and consent of the Senate.
The Constitution of the United States grants Congress the responsibility to advise and consent in numerous areas of public policy, including the appointment of high ranking officials by the President. It is important Congress live up to that responsibility to ensure the American public knows exactly who is helping craft the policies which govern our nation.
Senator's Column by Mike Johans
October 13, 2009
Flawed Health Care Plan Would Affect Many Nebraskans
Dear Nebraskans,
As I write to you, the Senate Finance Committee has acted on the latest version of health care reform. I continue to believe we need to reform our health care system to bring down rising costs and shore up our delivery system. Paying for this reform is a big part of the debate. While tough financial decisions will have to be made, they must be made wisely. Therefore, it's important to look beyond Washington to determine how these decisions will affect you and all Americans, and your ability to access quality health care.
In particular, I'm concerned about the proposed Medicare and Medicaid program cuts being targeted to pay for this legislation. Specifically, the proposal passed by the Finance Committee outlines more than $517 billion in cuts to current Medicare and Medicaid programs. These cuts will affect the quality of care in Nebraska.
For example, more than $40 billion in cuts would be made to home health care services. Home health provides skilled nursing care and other health care services in the home to individuals who have an illness or injury. Preliminary estimates reveal two-thirds of Nebraska's home health agencies will lose money if these cuts become reality. Rural areas would fare worse, where an estimated 80 percent of home health agencies would be operating in the red. According to the National Association for Home Care and Hospice, Nebraska home health agencies can expect to lose more than $126 million over ten years under this legislation.
Hospice, which provides care for the terminally ill, is another Medicare program targeted for cuts. Currently, 97 percent of Nebraskans have access to 38 hospice programs across the state. However, under the proposed legislation, hospice programs nationwide could see $8 billion in cuts by 2019, an 11.8 percent reduction in hospice reimbursements. Nebraska hospice providers could be forced to reduce service areas, leaving portions of Nebraska without hospice care. These cuts would not be welcome news in Nebraska. A 2007 study shows nearly 100 percent of Nebraskans believed it was important that the terminally ill have the choice to die at home and 83 percent felt it was important to have health care professionals come to their home.
Many Nebraska hospitals are in the Finance Committee's bullseye. $45 billion in cuts are outlined for hospitals that serve a disproportionate share of Medicare and Medicaid patients. This includes nearly half of all Nebraska hospitals, which are already underpaid by current government programs and are struggling to stay open. These facilities would face up to $145 million in cuts, which would undoubtedly affect health care for Nebraskans.
If there is waste or fraud in the Medicare and Medicaid programs we must address it, but we must ensure access to quality care and services is not compromised. Savings found by eliminating waste or fraud should be reinvested in the programs to address their pending bankruptcy. I'll continue to examine these proposals, carefully assessing how Nebraskans are impacted by the decisions made in Washington.
Governor's Column by Dave Heineman
Get to Know the Nebraska Department of Correctional Services
Congressman's Column by Adrian Smith
72 Hours is Not Too Long to Read the Bill
Congress has the responsibility to craft reasonable legislation which serves the American public. Many of the issues Congress deals with on a regular basis are simply too important to be rushed. Unfortunately, Members of Congress are too often asked to make decisions on bills which can have more pages than major novels with only a few hours to actually read them.
On at least two dozen occasions in the 111th Congress, accepted transparency rules have been shelved in order to rush legislation to a final vote. These hasty votes can have severe consequences, such as the provision tucked into the Troubled Assets Relief Act (TARP) - a trillion-dollar package passed in just 15 hours - which had the effect of authorizing retroactive bonuses to executives of bailed-out insurance giant AIG.
According to the Sunlight Foundation, this year 24 pieces of legislation have been passed in less than 72 hours - including the Medicare Premium Fairness Act (7 hours), Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Act (10 hours), and legislation to impose an additional tax on the bonuses awarded by TARP to the very AIG executives described above (11 hours).
I voted against such legislation as the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act and the Auto Industry Financing and Restructuring Act in part because these spending measures were passed with haste and lacked the transparency in which sound legislation should be crafted.
The stimulus package which spent $790 billion (and which clocked in at 1,073 pages) wasn't posted on the government's website until after 10:00 p.m. the day before final passage. The infamous cap-and-trade legislation included a 316-page amendment added at 3:09 a.m. on the day of its passage. When Minority Leader John Boehner attempted to educate his fellow members by reviewing passages before the final vote, he was criticized for holding up the debate.
On June 17 a resolution was introduced to require legislation be available on the Internet for 72 hours before consideration by the House of Representatives. This measure (H.Res. 554) emerged in response to Congress passing the rushed, unsound legislation I have described above, which has radically expanded the government's role in our everyday lives and intruded on our free-market system.
The legislation would require all non-emergency legislation to be posted online, in final form, for at least 72 hours prior to a floor vote.
Like many of my constituents, I believe Members of Congress should be given enough time to properly read and evaluate legislation before voting. This bipartisan resolution merits consideration, and I have joined 182 of my colleagues in signing a discharge petition which, with 218 signatures, would automatically place H.Res. 554 on the House schedule for a vote, moving it out of the committee in which it has been languishing for months.
The "read the bill" push has gained the support of an overwhelming majority of Americans, government watchdog groups, and a bipartisan group of elected officials.
Both parties have been guilty of rushing through legislation without giving Members of Congress and the American people an opportunity to actually read the legislation before it is brought up for a final vote.
Now we have a bipartisan solution. It is an effort to bring greater accountability and transparency to how Congress spends the taxpayers' money.
The American people and their representatives should have a reasonable opportunity to read a bill and understand its impact and cost before a vote occurs. With health care reform legislation making its way through Washington, having the opportunity to review the legislation and to hear from constituents is not a luxury - it is a necessity.
Bobcat Youth finish season at 4-1
Mayor Schunk taps Albert Gray for Open Council Seat
Straight from the Horse's Mouth
County Board Proceedings
Monday, October 19, 2009
Commentary by R. Tone Kister
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Pheasants Forever Youth Mentor Hunt Successful
Monday, October 12, 2009
Congressman's Column by Adrian Smith
The Need for Missile Defense
It is an unfortunate reality: the world is a dangerous place. There are terrorist organizations and even entire countries which are enemies of freedom. It is our responsibility to provide an appropriate and timely defense against those who threaten our security, especially those who would use ballistic missile technology against America or our allies.
Unfortunately, it seems as if our country's policy is moving in the opposite direction.
President Obama's administration recently announced it is terminating the European missile defense system - 10 interceptors planned for deployment in Poland and a related radar site in the Czech Republic.
Instead, the Administration is shifting emphasis to focus on regional defenses, arguing the real threat is short- and medium-ranged missiles.
This unilateral decision undermines our allies, especially in Europe, who have provided steadfast support to our country's efforts against terrorists in Iraq, Afghanistan and throughout the world.
In advance of direct talks with Iran - which has publicly tested long-range missiles - many feel this is the wrong message to be sending.
The Iranian government's continued development of missile technology presents a very real, credible threat to America and our allies. Iran's expanding missile program and its past history must be taken seriously. Iranian behavior in the past year clearly demonstrates its intent and capability to develop long-range missiles.
Europe has no capacity to defend itself against long-range missile attacks, while America has limited defenses against long-range attacks.
The European deployment is the only system which can protect both the U.S. and Europe against the common threat of Iran once it is armed with nuclear weapons and the desire and capability to deliver them.
The ground-based midcourse defense interceptors in Poland and the radar site in the Czech Republic were, in fact, cost-effective and proven technologies offering protection from a long-range missile attack to both Europe and the U.S.
By taking one of our most important defenses off the table, the Administration has done little more than empower enemies at the expense of our allies.
In the last three years, our missile defense budget has been slashed by $1.2 billion, undermining our commitment to our allies and weakening our national security.
The threat to the U.S. from ballistic missiles is increasing, and Congress must take appropriate actions to safeguard our country.
Congress has an important role to play in the coming months. Republican leadership has called for comprehensive hearings on the decision to eliminate the U.S. missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic and the so-called "downgrading" of the Iranian threat.
As we move forward, I will continue to push for funding missile defense capabilities which will protect both Europe and the United States.
I am a supporter of legislation directing the Secretary of Defense to deploy ground-based interceptors as part of a missile defense system for the United States. Additionally, this legislation would restore funding by authorizing $500 million for the Missile Defense Agency.
Our nation and our allies need missile defense as a way to prevent attacks. Countries such as North Korea and Iran are improving their ballistic missile technologies and could pose a threat to our country's national security, to say nothing of the stability of the Middle East or Asia.
In the end, these are defensive weapons we hope never to use. However, even as we strive for peace, America and our allies must be prepared against all potential threats.
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Straight From the Horse's Mouth
Bobcats top Blue Devils
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Senator's Column by Mike Johanns
October 5, 2009
Broken Promises Not the Way to Fix Health Care
Dear Nebraskans,
Throughout his presidential campaign, President Obama routinely promised that no one earning less than $250,000 would see their taxes increased. In fact, he promised not to raise taxes for those individuals by "one single dime." Yet if the health care proposal currently being debated in the Senate Finance Committee were to become law, this promise would be shattered. I was very disappointed last week when a proposal requiring the fulfillment of this promise was voted down in the committee.
The Finance Committee's proposal contains an "individual mandate," which requires almost all Americans to have insurance. A report issued last week by the Joint Committee on Taxation and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) outlined the extent of the burden this would impose on the middle class. The report projects the federal government will raise about $2.8 billion via individual mandate penalties. The Finance Committee is depending upon the revenue from this tax to pay for health care reform. An astounding 71 percent of the money reaped from this tax-$2 billion-would be taken from those families earning $120,000 or less per year, or individuals earning $59,000. These are the very people President Obama swore to protect. This is a back-door tax increase, and a disingenuous way of dropping the hammer on the American people.
The most distressing part of this middle class tax increase is that the Finance Committee was given a chance to eliminate it. My Republican colleague and Finance Committee member, Senator Mike Crapo of Idaho, offered an amendment last week that would have required the legislation to abide by President Obama's promise. The language literally would have prevented the legislation from imposing any sort of tax on those who earn less than $250,000. Twelve Democrats voted against keeping the President's word, and essentially in favor of taxing the middle class. Only one Democrat voted with Republicans on this amendment, and unfortunately it failed 12 to 11.
In addition, the current legislation already passes costs onto state budgets by significantly expanding Medicaid coverage, which forces states to foot part of the bill. This would require states to either increase taxes or cut important programs.
The rhetoric of the health care reform debate is not matching the reality. Congress must put its "money where its mouth is" and keep the promises made to the American people. If this legislation passes, the middle class will find itself taxed on all sides. We'll face: a new health insurance system that passes new costs down onto states; an individual mandate that penalizes taxpayers directly; and a new 40 percent tax on many insurance plans, which is sure to be passed onto consumers through higher insurance rates. There simply has to be a better way than broken promises to reform our health care system.
A Nebraskan's View by Senator Ben Nelson
Monday, October 5, 2009
THINKING OUTSIDE THE BELTWAY
Health care reform being talked about in Washington is arguably the most significant health legislation since Medicare. It needs to be done right and it needs to include input from outside the Beltway, which is why I continue to hold public meetings with Nebraskans all across the state.
I’ve now held eight town hall-style meetings from one end of Nebraska to the other and may hold more as we continue to see details about the reform package. These meeting are important to me because I must know exactly what Nebraskans support when approaching such an important issue. I also want to respond to Nebraskans questions directly, one-on one.
Legislation Must Deliver for Nebraska
The President is leading the health reform effort and needs to continue to make clear what he supports so I can evaluate whether it’s the best approach for our state.
I am for bipartisan health care reform and am working to make sure we incorporate the best ideas from both Republicans and Democrats. I strongly believe in bipartisanship and think we must ensure Americans from across the political spectrum to have their say in these important reform efforts.
I am working to be constructive and not obstruct the President’s efforts to reform health care. As a result, I am keeping an open mind on every option for health reform—public plans, co-ops, private plans, trigger options and any other ideas that may come up--everything.
My vote is not on auto pilot or directed by inside the Beltway politicians. If it’s not good for Nebraska, I won’t vote for it.
Reduce the Cost of Health Care
From what I hear from Nebraskans, many would like to see reforms that reduce the cost of health care, preserve existing coverage most now have, provide for Nebraskans who don’t have health insurance and improve the quality of care.
The majority of Nebraskans who attended public meetings share my view that health care reform legislation should not cover illegal immigrants or provide funds for abortions. Unless explicit language is included in the bill prohibiting these measures, it will not get my vote.
In addition, the legislation must not raise taxes, add to the deficit or undermine the private coverage 200 million Americans currently have. It must not cut benefits or get between patients and their doctors. But costs must be brought under control because the day of reckoning is nearing.
Health care costs are on an unsustainable path upward. People who can’t afford it today are already victims of these increases, and there will be more victims as the costs continue to go up, unless we slow down that unsustainable growth.
I’m looking forward to seeing details as they unfold and will make sure that Nebraskans see them as well. My pledge to you is that your thoughts expressed during public meetings around the state will be heard. As more details become known I may hold more public meetings to continue getting your “outside the Beltway” thinking.
Monday, October 5, 2009
Blue Hill Youth Defeat Southern Valley
4-H Zoomed into National 4-H Week Thanks to Jeff Gordon, NASCAR and DuPont
This is National 4-H Week! The Webster County UNL Extension office joins thousands of other offices in saluting our 4-H members, clubs, leaders and volunteers. This year’s theme is “Meet the Future”. Ever wonder what the future will look like? Just take a look at your local 4-H today. It’s where young people explore, learn and discover in a safe environment. In 4-H, kids find their true passions, gain confidence and give back to the community. Celebrate 4-H’s efforts in helping today’s kids become tomorrow’s leaders.
National 4-H Week (October 4-10, 2009) took off with a speedy start this past Sunday, October 4th, as the 4-H emblem made its debut appearance in a NASCAR Sprint Cup Series race. The well-known national icon was featured on the `TV panel` of the No. 24 DuPont Chevrolet driven by Jeff Gordon at Kansas Speedway. The placement of the 4-H clover on the No. 24 Chevrolet was made possible through a generous donation by DuPont, sponsor of both the No. 24 team and of 4-H.
National 4-H Week is an annual celebration for the 100-year old youth development organization. The highlight of the week includes the highly anticipated, 4-H National Youth Science Day, which brings together millions of youth to participate in the National Science Experiment. This year`s experiment, “Bio-fuel Blast”, will introduce youth to alternative energy. DuPont is a premier sponsor of 4-H National Youth Science Day and the Bio-fuel Blast National Science Experiment.
"The appearance of the 4-H emblem on Jeff Gordon`s car in the Chase for the NASCAR Sprint Cup is a wonderful salute to 4-H by DuPont, and an amazing way for us to begin National 4-H Week," said Donald T. Floyd, Jr., president and CEO of National 4-H Council. "Now, millions of current 4-H`ers, 4-H alumni and racing fans alike can watch with excitement as the clover takes to the track for the first time." The Kansas event is the third in the 10-race Chase for the NASCAR Sprint Cup, and the 1.5-mile track is the site of two of Gordon`s 82 career victories in NASCAR`s premier division.
"4-H has been a leader among youth development organizations, enriching the lives of millions of young people for more than 100 years," said Gordon. "It is an honor to have such an iconic emblem featured on the DuPont Chevrolet and to provide such an exciting way to help the nation kick-off National 4-H Week."
4-H National Youth Science Day was created to spark an early youth interest in science education and to combat a national shortage of young people pursuing science in college and future careers. Participants in this year`s National Science Experiment will learn how cellulose and sugars in plants - such as corn, switchgrass, sorghum and algae - can be converted into fuel, and how alternative energies can be used in their own communities. Youth will create their own bio-fuel through Bio-fuel Blast, lead discussions about what they`ve learned, and see how their small creations are a part of a larger, global discussion.
Currently, more than five million youth across the nation take part in 4-H science, engineering and technology (SET) year-long programming that introduce youth to new areas of interest and help them explore environmental and scientific issues. 4-H “SET” programming span from robotics, rocketry, and computer science, to agricultural science, GPS mapping and renewable energy.
According to a longitudinal study by Tufts University, youth who participate in 4-H programs are more likely to get better grades in school, to seek out science classes, to see themselves going to college, and to contribute positively in their communities. In addition, 4-H youth have been shown to better resist peer pressure and are less likely to engage in risky behaviors.
About 4-H: 4-H is a community of six million young people across America learning leadership, citizenship, and life skills. National 4-H Council is the private sector, non-profit partner of National 4-H Headquarters at USDA. 4-H programs are implemented by the 106 Land-Grant Universities and the Cooperative Extension System through their 3,100 local Extension offices in every county across the country. In Nebraska more than 400 Extension staff across the state serve as primary contacts for the more than 135,000 youth and 20,000 volunteers. Learn more about 4-H at http://www.4-h.org/ or for Nebraska 4-H go to http://4h.unl.edu/ .
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Governor's Column by Dave Heineman
Oct. 2, 2009
Straight From the Horse's Mouth
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Pheasants Forever to Hold Youth Mentor Hunt
October 10th the Webster County Chapter of Pheasants Forever will hold their annual Youth Mentor hunt. This will be one of approximately 67 Youth mentor events that Nebraska chapters of Pheasants Forever will be conducting this fall. The hunt is limited to 16 youth ages 12 to 15 who have successfully completed their hunter safety course.
The event will start at the Rep Valley Trap shooting range near Rosemont beginning at 8:30 am, Saturday October 10.
Youth participating in this program will be given instructions in various hunting related topics such as dog training, hunter safety, land owner appreciation, wild life conservation and Blue rock shooting. There will be target shooting with 22 rifles. Also part of the day will be an actual pheasant hunt with a mentor and a dog handler. The day should be very rewarding and is designed to target those youth with a strong interest in hunting.
Special permission has been obtained from the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission to allow for hunting prior to the opening of the regular pheasant hunting season.
Activities are expected to conclude around 1:30 with a lunch prepared and served by volunteers from the local PF organization.
Advance registration for the event is required. Jamie Reiman of Blue Hill is the president of the Webster Co. chapter of Pheasants Forever. Other local members who will be assisting with the event include but not limited to Toby Alber, Michael Hall, Jason Fowler, Dave Kohmetscher, Bruce Kohmetscher, Ron Olsen, Terri Rose, Brad Wolfe, Casey Fangmeyer, Andy & Vicki Alber and Duane Krueger. Some members of the Little Blue chapter of Pheasants Forever have also volunteered their services for the event.
Pheasant Forever chapters and Nebraska Game and Parks commission have been combining their efforts to provide Youth mentor hunts since 1996. This is the third year for the Webster County Chapter to sponsor this type of event.