Privatizing Federal Programs and Goals

speaking at CPAC in Washington D.C. on February 10, 2011. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

It is becoming obvious to everyone that government will not fix government. We've elected all the politicians you can elect and nothing gets done that returns power to the people and reduces the size of the federal government.

Donald Trump is the final step in the process were everyone has given up on politicians and wants someone that will make a change. But he needs assistance for sure in the realization that more government is not the fix for government. More private enterprise and the motivation of profit is the only thing that will reverse all the issues that we face today.

I would like to examine one problem in society and how privatization could be the best possible cure. But lets all brainstorm through every issue and come up with solid plans to create private business that can profit by fixing what needs to be fixed. Including tax law, federal budgets, term limits, protection of the constitution, education, crime, violence, drugs, illegal aliens, regulation, financial stability, etc. For too long we have depended on the government. Lets get smart and creative and build systems that reward private businesses to fix all these issues and remove government from almost every role.

With drug addiction I think we could make three new enterprises or the expansion of current enterprises that would help to solve drug addiction.

1. The creation and maintenance of a national rating system developed in sprints by different technology firms to enroll, authorize, monitor, rate, and reward private companies that are working with individuals to end drug addiction. (This is already done for many different services in the private sector)

2. Private companies across the nation that find, market to, or are assigned drug addicted individuals that they work with through proven methods to reduce and eliminate their dependence. These companies would be rated by the drug addicted individuals and/or the families of the drug addicts. Drug testing would be performed on a regular basis and rewards would be given to each organization based upon their success. Companies with poor ratings would naturally be avoided by everyone and the ones with the best outcomes and ratings would be sought after. Rewards could continued for years for each individual so relapses would not be profitable for the companies.

3. Third party review companies (not government bodies) that would also be accepted, rated, and rewarded within the digital rating system. Their job would be to verify that the companies performing the care for the addicted individuals are actually getting the results that they say they are achieving. The providers would need to be audited by at least two different review companies before being rewarded for each individual. The auditing companies would be rewarded for their reviews.

The reward money would come from the federal government. Which would shut down every department that is currently fighting the war of drugs at the individual level and use a portion of that money instead on this completely private network of new small businesses.

This program doesn't have to be implemented at the federal level first. A state, a city or a small town that is receiving money to fight drug addiction can implement this plan and the results can become a best practice case study to be followed by other governments.

So what do you think of this federal government to private  company example? What conservative goal do you have that could be achieved by taking money and power away from big government and creating hundreds of small companies across the country that enrich communities and families?

Chris Christie Gives His Opinion on Sin and Being Gay

Governor of New Jersey at a town hall in Hillsborough, NJ 3/2/11 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Yesterday during an interview with Sean Hannity, Chris Christie stated that he did not think God would allow people to live a life in sin and he thought being gay was not a choice from his experience. I don't expect Christie to go very far in the primary and would not support him because he is left of everyone on every issue, but this issue got me thinking about those in my extended family that are gay. Here are some things that I noticed:

1. Their families were dysfunctional, possibly the most of all their cousins.
2. Their parents got divorced.
3. They came in contact with someone who was gay and was looking for a partner, much older in one case.
4. There was marijuana involved (for sure in one case).

Of course not everyone that experiences all four of these life situations ends up gay. And not every gay person has all of these experiences. I just thought it was interesting that their childhoods were both rough and then someone brought them into the lifestyle.

As far as God not allowing someone to live a life of sin, of course that is ridiculous, God allows all kinds of different people to live with all kinds of different sin. The weeds are not pulled until the final day, as the Bible states (Matthew 13:29). But Jesus forgave a life criminal hanging on the cross next to him right before he died, so there is salvation for everyone up until the end (Luke 23:32-43).

Making Sure Laws Are Targeted and Based On Reality

A CNN poll conducted in March of 2010Citation needed, days after the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was signed into law found nearly 3 in 5 Americans were opposed to the legislationClarify. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Making sure that laws passed in congress and regulations developed in the federal government are based upon facts, have solutions that have already been tested in real government bodies, and do not harshly affect those not involved in the solution; should be the goal of government. But so many times laws are passed based upon theory with no real world success examples and affect a large portion of the population adversely instead of helping the small portion of the population they are supposed to help.

Examples include Obamacare, Gay Marriage, and Free Public Education for Illegals. The last two were decisions by courts after the people voted and decided they did not want the benefit for the small group requesting it.

Obamacare is an obvious example of a terrible law that was to target a small group of uninsured Americans but instead centralized the entire industry, ending everyone's private policy, based upon some theory that was never successfully implemented on a smaller scale. European countries may have tried similar programs but they were not successful; Care decreased every time and the price went up. The law should have been targeted to the 20 million citizens that wanted insurance and was unable to afford to purchase it. Of course this block was able to get care by emergency room visits, but that was the issue presented why they needed this program.

Gay marriage affects less that 1% of the population but now Christian organizations across the country are being attacked causing harm to 50% of the population to help 1% gain a benefit. Does that make any sense? Pass a law that gives the legal benefits of marriage administered by the state and leaves all the religious organizations to continue to operate under their faith the way the have for centuries. But progressives in government are never happy allowing private organizations to operate without strict regulation. Even though they have no experience running an organization or any understanding of the reasons the organization is run the way it is.

And free public education for illegal aliens is a benefit to individuals that should not even be in the country but takes money away from students that are citizens. Democrats love the expansion of the education system and an increase in teacher union membership, but the costs has been too high. The education system has been split as citizens that can get away from poor performing schools do, and those that are taking advantage of their status in the country or do not have the means have no choice. Competition leads to best practices which then leads to successful schools.

Related articles

• Married Same Sex Couples Gain Equal Tax Benefits
• Gay Marriage Makes Filing Federal Tax Returns A Labyrinth

Eliminating Federal Agencies

The EPA was directed to set standards for radioactive materials under Reorganization Plan No. 3 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Federal Government Agencies that are wasteful and their functions can be performed better at a lower level of government, like State Government, should be phased out for the most part. Agencies like the Department of Education and the Environmental Protection Agency. The Department of Education could become an advisory board to state governments that should then push most decisions down to local levels. In that way they have no power to force states or local governments into curriculum that is not appropriate. Staff could be reduced by layoffs and attrition.

 The Environmental Protection Agency is a duplication of state agencies which have a better understanding of local needs and are not funded to the tilt when they prosecute violators. Having the federal agency become a best practices guide to the states and reducing staff and funding is ideal.

Any government program that can be outsourced to the private sector should be outsourced to the private sector. Private sector companies have more flexibility in hiring and firing without the long retirement funding needs of the government. They are usually run by more knowledgeable and enthusiastic leaders. And they operate outside of the political sphere, making corruption less likely.

Any government program that can be overseen at the state level should be pushed down to the state level were budgets are balanced, workers have more direct contact with customers, and law makers are more responsive to constituents. Just the same, any state programs that can be run by townships, cities, and county governments should be moved to these lower levels of government.

Related articles

• Free File Makes 2014 Tax Filing Easy
• Government Report Shows Former IRS Employees Still Accessing Taxpayer Data