Prairie Fire Journal

Starting in 2014, most Americans would be required to carry health insurance except in cases of financial hardship. A Congressional Budget Office analysis, released Thursday, estimated that 4 million households would be hit with tax penalties under the law for failing to get insurance.

For weeks now, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Beck, Palin, et. al., have been howling about how under the new health care law you can go to jail for not getting health insurance. The response from Democrats and progressive pundits has been a loud chorus of "IT AIN'T SO!"

Guess what? The left is wrong and the right is right on this point. IT IS SO! The Democrats have been spinning these as "fines." But what they generally forget to tell you is these aren't your ordinary civil fines. These are fines issued to you by the IRS in the form of tax penalties.

If you don't pay these fines, you not only risk the possibility of going to jail (as you would, say, for not paying a traffic fine), but also the possibility of having your wages garnished, or your bank accounts and property seized. The IRS can conceivably take your home, if that's what it takes to satisfy a tax lien against you for not buying health insurance.

I'm not one to get roped into right-wing hysterics. This isn't hysterics, it's grounded in this simple fact: The health insurance fines are IRS-issued tax penalties, and as such, the IRS will have the same power to collect them as it has for collecting any other tax liability an individual may owe the federal government. That means they can do anything to you from garnishing your wages to seizing your home to putting you in jail in order to collect their fine.

Imagine that, the federal government now has the power to force you to buy health insurance from a private corporation or else face the possibility of having your home seized and your butt thrown in jail. That's scary, that's unAmerican, that's unconstitutional, and it should be fought by the state AGs all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary. I hate to say it, but I'm with the right on this one.

I received an email newsletter today from Texas Republican Senator John Cornyn. It starts out like this:

REAL STORIES, FROM REAL TEXANS
Your Turn: Tell Sen. Cornyn How The New Health Care Law Affects You


Sen. Cornyn wants to hear real stories from real Texans about how the new health care law will affect them, their families, and their businesses. These personal stories will provide Sen. Cornyn with real-life scenarios to share with his colleagues in Washington and demonstrate the effects of the health reform law on hard-working Texans.

But then it goes on to say:

To share your story with Sen. Cornyn, which he will share with others in Washington and across the country, please email a written story that addresses a question below to realstories@cornyn.senate.gov.

#1 What Does The New Health Care Law Mean For Your Business?
#2 How Will The New Health Care Law Affect Your Ability To Hire New Workers?
#3 How Will The New Health Care Law Affect The Choice And Costs Of Benefits For Your Employees?

Notice that the questions only concern how the new health care law will affect business. Nothing here asking how workers will be affected. Nothing here asking how families will be affected, unless it's the families of business owners. I get the impression from this newsletter that Senator Cornyn is only concerned about business. Not that I didn't already know that.

Happy Easter to all who visit this blog.

Ann Coulter's security handlers decided to cancel a speech the queen of hate was scheduled to give Tuesday night at Canada's Ottawa University. The reason given for the cancellation was safety issues allegedly due to the possibility of violent protesters. Come on, this is Canada we're talking about here.

The more plausible reason for Coulter's cancellation is the real possibility that she might have been arrested under Canada's hate speech laws had the speech taken place. Coulter reportedly never even arrived at the university prior to the cancellation. In light of an email sent earlier to Coulter by the university Provost reminding her of Canada's hate speech laws, Little Miss Bigot might have decided the atmosphere was ripe in Ottawa for her to get arrested.

Coulter was worried about her safety alright; safety from being arrested in a foreign country for violating their hate speech laws.

U.S. Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-TX 19th) finally had enough of being an irrelevant nobody in Congress, so, like an obstinate little child, he bellowed out "baby Killer" while Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) was speaking on the floor of the house during Sunday evening's final debate on the health care reform bill.

I'm not a fan of Bart Stupak and have previously called him a Republican posing as a Democrat. In fact, Stupak and Neugebauer are pretty much kindred spirits when it comes to attacking women's reproductive rights. Neugebauer was simply showing the true stripes of the anti-abortion movement. If you're not toeing their line 100 percent of the time, they'll turn on you like rabid dogs.

I just thought it was an odd moment for Neugebauer to say what he said. But, then again, Neugebauer is a first-class oddball. It was funny watching national media commentators stubble over the pronunciation of "Neugebauer." That just goes to show how much of an obscure nothing Neugebauer really is. After the "baby killer" story dies out, so will any further mention of Neugebauer in the national media. In the meantime, Neugebauer is showing is two-face hypocrisy, touting his "rebellion" as part of fundraising efforts while at the same time offering a public apology for his crude behavior. A true conservative!

It's far from perfect, but it's a start in the right direction. Too much power still resides in the hands of insurance companies. But the Democrats did show that they could put aside their differences long enough to accomplish a significant beginning to health care reform. America still has a long way to go. Hopefully this is a sign that the Democratic Party is getting a spine and putting aside the delusion of bipartisanism.

Here it is March 1st, and the Texas Workforce Commission still has not released the unemployment figures for January. TWC usually releases its unemployment report around the third week of the month following the month it is reporting on. The reason for the delay is most likely because Governor Rick Perry doesn't want TWC issuing any bad unemployment news ahead of the Republican Primary tomorrow. In the two years that I've been following TWC's monthly unemployment reports, they have never been this late. Rick you really are a rascal. It will be interesting to see if the January report comes out this week after the primaries.

Long before utility deregulation became a conservative craze, the City of Lubbock had two electrical-utility companies competing for business. That changed recently when Xcel Energy sold off most of its electrical grid within the Lubbock city limits to city-owned Lubbock Power and Light (LP&L). Now there is only one electrical company in Lubbock, and it's owned by the city government.

Xcel Energy won't be totally out of the loop. LP&L has little electricity-generating capacity of its own and buys most of it's electricity from Xcel. Still, LP&L has long claimed that it can provide Lubbock customers with electricty at a cheaper rate than Xcel. In other words, a government-owned utility can more economically meet the needs of the city than can a privately owned utility.

I find it somewhat amusing that in a city as conservative as Lubbock, where the wingnuts are always railing against socialism, that socialism has proven to be a better means of providing electrical service to residents than a private capitalist corporation. The following statement appears on LP&L's website:
LP&L and Xcel Energy have reached a mutually beneficial agreement that will allow LP&L to purchase Xcel Energy’s electricity distribution system within the city and to serve all of Xcel Energy’s Lubbock retail electric customers. Since 1942 Lubbock has been served by both companies, resulting in duplication of electric power services, lines, poles and substations. Both companies have determined this to be an inefficient and intrusive way to provide electricity to the community.

Thanks Lubbock for proving that capitalist competition isn't always the better way.

As the 2010 political races heat up on the Texas South Plains, we are once again presented with the spectacle of conservative hypocrisy. It's a battle between candidates who on the one hand decry big government and deficit spending, while on the other hand grabbiing as much taxpayer money for their respective districts as they can get their hands on.

South Plains conservatives conveniently ignore the fact that if it wasn't for big government projects, most rural areas would still be without electricity. They seem to forget that the Canadian River Municipal Water Authority that provides drinking water to the major cities of the Panhandle-South Plains region exists because of major assistance from the Bureau of Reclamation and from other federal agencies and grants.

South Plains farmers wouldn't have the modern system of paved farm-to-market roads they now use if it wasn't for big government spending. They certainly couldn't have afforded to pay for those roads themselves. And I doubt that too many of those farmers are in favor of cutting government spending on farm programs and subsidies. Yet, the majority of them vote for conservatives who claim to be against big government spending. That is hypocrisy!

South Plains conservatives opposed the Obama stimulus package, but local government officials are tickled pink about any grant money or construction projects coming their way on account of it. Naturally, the same conservative politicians who opposed the plan are taking credit for delivering the assistance. That is hypocrisy!

South Plains conservatives say they want fiscal conservatism to rule in Washington, D.C., but they're all trying to get Texas Tech University to Tier 1 status so the university can snag hold of millions in federal research dollars. Not to mention the millions of dollars Tech currently receives in government assistance. That is hypocrisy!

I could go on, but what would be the point? Conservatives are hypocrites, and their hypocrisy knows no bounds. You can't claim to be against something and then take credit for its success. You can't say you're opposed to government debt but not be willing to give up your government subsidy. But that's exactly what South Plains conservatives are saying and doing. That is hypocrisy!

Texas Democrats have an opportunity to give Rick Perry an eight-month head start on his packing. If enough Democrats will crossover and vote in the Republican Primary on March 2, there's an excellent chance that Rick Perry will be knocked out of the 2010 governor's race before it even begins.

Under the Texas Election Code, a registered voter in this state can vote in the party primary of their own choosing. Just because you voted in the Democratic Party Primary in 2008 doesn't mean you have to vote in it this year. The best opportunity for Democrats to knock Perry out of office is by voting for Kay Bailey Hutchison in the Republican Primary on March 2, 2010.

Democrats can do this. Knockout Perry at the get-go and that will dishearten his far-right base. If Hutchison wins the Republican Primary, the right won't be as enthusiastic about getting out the vote in November. By using this strategy, whether the Republicans win or the Democrats win the governorship, we will know for certain that Rick Perry will be gone. That in itself is a Democratic victory.