Next Step: Sovereignty Pledge

Lebanon, TN, August 31, 2009 – In response to what many see as a Congress that doesn’t represent their interests, State Legislators in thirty-seven states around the country have introduced resolutions affirming their sovereignty under the 10th Amendment to the Constitution. The next step? State Representative Susan Lynn (R) Lebanon is the first Tennessee legislator that has signed a pledge which promises much more.

“As the sponsor of Tennessee’s State Sovereignty Resolution, I’m happy to set a good example and be the first to sign the pledge promising to uphold state sovereignty.” Said Rep. Lynn.

While supporters have strongly backed sovereignty resolutions, many are wondering what the next step in holding our representatives accountable? According to Michael Boldin, founder of the Tenth Amendment Center, the 10th Amendment Pledge is a promise to do just that.

“Not only does the pledge affirm that it’s The People who are sovereign in the American system,” said Boldin, “but also, legislators who sign it are promising to take the next step – which is to nullify, or render void and inoperative, specific federal laws within the boundaries of this State.”

Nullification efforts have already stopped the Bush-era Real ID Act from being implemented. The Obama administration, recognizing the power of this state-level rebellion recently announced that they were looking to “repeal and replace” the law.

Supporters see this as a blueprint for other laws that they see as unconstitutional. Both Alaska and Tennessee have passed versions of a “The State Sovereignty Resolution”. And, according to the Tenth Amendment Center, as many as ten states will be considering legislation to effectively ban any future national health care plan.

“We must never forget nor cease to remind all that the states created the federal government and designed its powers to have limits.” Said Lynn

About State Representative Susan Lynn

Susan Lynn represents the 57th Legislative District in the Tennessee House of Representatives, serves as chairman of the House Government Operations Committee and sits on the Calendar & Rules and the Commerce Committees as well as the Small Business Sub-Committee.

About the Tenth Amendment Center:

The Tenth Amendment Center, a Los Angeles-based think tank founded in 2006, acts as an educational forum on issues related to the 10th Amendment and Constitutional governance. http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/

State Pledge

As a public office holder I promise that, as long as I hold office:

1. My votes will always be in favor of the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this State. Every issue. Every time. No exceptions. No excuses.

2. I do, and will continue to, oppose any and all efforts by the federal government to act beyond its Constitutional authority.

3. I will proactively introduce and support measures designed to adhere to the Tenth Amendment and preserve, to their fullest extent, the powers of the People in my district, and of the legislators and administrations of my State.

4. I will introduce, sponsor and support resolutions affirming the sovereignty of the People of this State under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

5. I will introduce, sponsor, and support legislation that nullifies, within my state, actions of the federal government which exceed its Constitutional authority.

6. I will introduce, sponsor and support legislation that provides such relief as is necessary and proper to provide fair redress to the citizens of my State in response to actions by the federal government which exceeds its Constitutional authority.

7. I will introduce, sponsor and support legislation which refuses federal funding made on condition that my State comply with federal mandates not authorized by the Constitution.

8. I will only vote in favor of a bill that I have thoroughly read, considered and understood.

9. I will be accountable to voters. Upon request, I will make public every vote I cast while in office.

10. I will keep this pledge public, and will provide a link on my website which directs constituents to the text of this pledge.

Tennessee Comes Out on Short End Under LCFS

Published in Saturday's Nashville Tennessean

By State Representative Susan Lynn, 57th District


TennesseeThe Waxman-Markey legislation has received a lot of attention for its Cap & Trade scheme; its been passed by the US House of Representatives and is currently being considered by the US Senate. Yet little has been made of something called LCFS or Low-Carbon Fuel Standards which would fundamentally alter the way in which Americans acquire, process and consume energy.

The New York Times reported that LCFS could be “extremely costly.”

A group of professors from California and North Carolina said the plan “cannot be efficient.”

And a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations said it “would exacerbate energy security problems without delivering compensating climate benefits.”

Unfortunately for Tennessee, our senior senator seems to be supportive of talk for a future Public Act requiring LCFS in the United States Code.Advocates claim that LCFS policy is a pain-free way to clean up our transportation sector while cutting down on tailpipe emissions of carbon dioxide.

Pain free? The laws of natural science and political science suggest otherwise. Despite Congress’s best efforts, the carbon content of the fuel in our gas tank is constant – emitting 19.4 pounds of carbon dioxide no matter where you get the gas, what kind of vehicle you put it in, or even which number octane you choose.

Yet to LCFS proponents, everybody wins – that is assuming you don’t drive a car, heat a home, or need a job.

The scheme attempts to take a bite out of global greenhouse gas emissions by having the federal government assign a carbon score to various fuel supplies based on the amount of energy it takes to bring those fuels through each stage of its production process – from finding the oil, to acquiring it, to transporting it, to refining it, and finally to using it in our vehicles in the form of gasoline or diesel.

As mentioned, since all fuels emit the same amount of carbon dioxide during combustion, what LCFS is really addressing is those fuels that are more energy intensive to bring to market.

Eliminate from circulation the reliable, affordable, fuels from friendly sources that dominate the market -- like the 2.5 million barrels of Canadian crude we import a day, and much of California’s and Colorado’s oil -- and we can clear the path for less affordable and less politically friendly forms of energy to have a stronger footing in our marketplace.

The scheme would initiate a de facto ban on North American oil purchases – crude oil from Canada, Mexico and much of the mid-Atlantic that policymakers in Washington find too “heavy” for their discriminating tastes.

Why aren’t LCFS advocates tripping over themselves to let you in on exactly who produces the “light, sweet” crude oil they desire? Maybe it’s because the answer is the Middle East, Africa, and just about every unstable, dictatorial regime in between.

Show of hands: Who prefers oil from Canada – our most important trading partner – over supplies controlled by OPEC?

Discriminating against North American energy would not only weaken our economic position in the global economy but it also would be a major blow to our national security.

So, what would a successful LCFS deliver? Increased American dependence on foreign oil. Check. More good-paying American jobs sent overseas. Check. Higher energy costs for every consumer. Check. And, since the “heavy” oil we reject will be gobbled up by our chief global competitors in India and China, higher worldwide carbon emissions to boot. Checkmate.

Let’s speak-up and let’em know we don't like any explanation of this one.

Start Representative Susan Lynn is the Chairman of the Government Operations Committee in the state of Tennessee House of Representatives; she is in her fourth term. She is the Chairman of the Commerce, Insurance and Economic Development Task Force for the American Legislative Exchange Council; an organization of 2000 conservative, free market legislators from across the nation (alec.org).

RNC Honors Women's Equality Day

Michael Steele and the RNC choose to honor Women's Equality Day today with a video saluting women in GOP politics.

I am very honored to be included in this salute; my GOP family heritage extends back to the WHIGs with my ancestor President William Henry Harrison.



Thank you to the RNC for remembering this great day, to the GOP for helping to grant women the right to vote and to Tennessee for being the 20th state to ratify the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which officially made womens' right to vote a permanent part of our Constitution.

Energy Citizens

Energy Citizens is hosting a rally against the Cap & Trade bill at the Wild Horse Saloon.

I will be speaking along with State Senator Jack Johnson and talk radio host Ralph Bristol.

The event is on Tuesday, August 25, 2009. Doors open at 11:30 am. Rally begins at 12:30 pm.

Energy Citizens web site: http://energycitizens.org/.

Photo of Senate Announcement

Susan with husband Michael and family friend Col. Mackey.

Mt. Juliet, TN.

August 17, 2009

Remarks from Press Conference

I want to thank my husband Michael for being here to support me and for helping me to arrive at my decision here today. I wish our son was here too, but he is a Staff Sergeant in the TN Air Guard and he is in Africa right now, and our sweet daughter Grace and her husband Ben are working this morning.


I first ran for the office of state representative at 38 years old. My first year of service was at 39, and now at 45 I want to say thank you once again to the people of my district for allowing me to serve them and to state that serving in the Tennessee General Assembly has been one of the greatest privileges and opportunities of my life.

With that same sense of gratitude to the voters, I announce that I will file next April to run for state senate in district 17 in order to expand and extend the mission of public service on which I embarked in 2002.

My first professional job was working for Scientific Utility Products Corporation as a manufacturer’s sales representative; there I studied important disciplines like service, delivery and follow-up from authors that seem like friends such as Harvey McKay, Zig Zigler, and Dale Carnegie. Believe it or not, their witness helped lead me to Christ. I learned about excellence from Nicklaus Golf Equipment - what a wonderful organization. At the Colony Hotel I was taught precision. From Lee Harrison; multi-tasking and on my own I learned compassion for the small business person.

Each of these jobs in their own way prepared me for running for public office.

But when I say that for me, public service is a mission, it really is. A mission I have fully dedicated myself to so that I can serve my fellow citizens as their voice in a way that they would do for themselves.

Since our state senator's announcement this past June that she intends to seek the office of Wilson County Mayor in 2010, I have spent time traveling throughout the 17th District in order to meet the people and visit with the local elected officials. This wonderful experience has brought me many new friends, and I have learned much about the strengths and needs of the area.

It is evident that an attentive and experienced legislator is what is necessary to immediately start meeting the needs of the area. I would be proud to accept the challenge of working for my fellow citizens throughout the 17th district to help with the many infrastructure, economic development and education needs of the area; whether working to bring new jobs to Clay County, voting to finance the repair of bridges in Smith and DeKalb Counties or helping with school improvements in the upper Cumberland region; I pledge to the citizens that I will do my best to help with the crucial needs of the area just as I have dedicated myself to the issues of Sumner and Wilson Counties over the past seven years.

Through my strong conservative convictions I work to support Jeffersonian Principles such as limited government, states' rights, free enterprise and our constitutional rights. By traveling the 17th district what I have found is that the citizens of the area are like me; they’re conservative; and I am proud to share my strong conservative record with them; much of which is documented on my new website at http://www.votesusanlynn.com/.

I look forward to working for the citizens of the 17th district and will make sure that government stays within the bounds of its purpose, ensures that free enterprise is easily conducted, offers a quality education to get our young people off to the best start and so that government creates and maintains safe transportation corridors.

With great excitement, I look forward to undertaking this challenge.

If you are in the 17th district, I ask you today for your vote and for your support.

Thank you for being here.

Lynn for State Senate Press Release

State Rep. Susan Lynn (R- Lebanon) announces her intention to seek
District 17 State Senate Seat

MOUNT JULIET, TN-Representative Susan Lynn has announced her intention to file a petition next year for the 17th District Tennessee State Senate seat being vacated by State Senator Mae Beavers (R-Mount Juliet). Addressing local business leaders, residents and friends at the Mt. Juliet Chamber of Commerce, Representative Lynn stated that "serving in the Tennessee General Assembly has been one of the greatest privileges and opportunities of my life. Today, I announce that I am running for state senate in order to expand and extend the mission of public service on which I embarked in 2002."

The Representative explained her approach of reaching her decision to run for higher office by stating that "Since our state senator's announcement this past June that she intends to seek the office of Wilson County Mayor in 2010, I have spent time traveling throughout the 17th District in order to meet the people and visit with the local elected officials." She continued, "This wonderful experience has brought me many new friends, and I have learned much about the strengths and needs of the area."

The 17th Senatorial District is composed of , Cannon, Clay, DeKalb, Macon, Smith, Trousdale, Wilson and a portion of Sumner County in Hendersonville. Lynn further stated, "It is evident that an attentive and experienced legislator is what is necessary to immediately start meeting the needs of the area. I would be proud to accept the challenge of working for my fellow citizens throughout the 17th district to help with the many infrastructure, economic development and education needs of the area; whether working to bring new jobs to Clay County, voting to finance the repair of bridges in Smith and DeKalb Counties or helping to fund school improvements in the upper Cumberland region; I pledge to the citizens that I will do my best to help with the crucial needs of the area just as I have dedicated myself to the issues of Sumner and Wilson Counties over the past seven years."

Noting her service as a conservative legislator who works to support Jeffersonian Principles such as limited government, states' rights, capitalism and our constitutional rights, Lynn mentioned several examples of her work that are now law such as the Regulatory Flexibility Act, Tennessee State Sovereignty Resolution and the Religious Freedom Protection Act. "The citizens of the district are conservative; I am proud to share my strong conservative record with them; much of which is documented on my new website at votesusanlynn.com."

Lynn assured that she remains firmly and unshakably against a state income tax and continues to sponsor legislation to lower the sales tax on food; "years ago, I was on a special task force that drafted a bill for a sales tax holiday which I now vote to support annually in order help my district with the expenses of raising a family."

Susan Lynn has represented the 57th Legislative District in the Tennessee House of Representatives since 2002 when it was first redistricted. She is the chairman of the House Government Operations Committee and a member of the House Calendar & Rules Committee. Further, she has served for seven years on the House Commerce Committee and the Small Business Sub-Committee. In addition to her legislative duties, Rep. Lynn serves as Task Force Chairman of the Commerce, Insurance and Economic Development Task Force for the influential American Legislative Exchange Council. She holds a Bachelor of Science degree in economics with a minor history. A member of the First Baptist Church of Mt. Juliet, Rep. Lynn makes her home in Lebanon with her husband Michael. They have two adult children - Michael Lynn, Jr., a staff sergeant in the Tennessee Air Guard, who is engaged to wed SSG. Alissa Saunders; and a daughter, Mrs. Grace Douchette and husband Benjamin; both are employed by Publix Supermarkets.


###

NOTE: The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is the nation's largest nonpartisan, individual membership organization of state legislators, with over 2,000 legislator members from all fifty states, and 85 former members serving in the U.S. Congress. www.alec.org

City Paper Sizes up Senate Races

State Senate could get extreme

Sunday, August 2, 2009 at 11:00pm

http://www.nashvillecitypaper.com/content/city-voices/post-politics-state-senate-could-get-extreme

ALEC Waxman Markey Opposition Letter

Dear Representative:

On behalf of the undersigned 186 state and national leaders, Legislators, heads of think-tanks, activist groups, business owners and organizations representing millions of American families, taxpayers and energy consumers, we urge you to oppose H.R. 2454, “The American Clean Energy and Security Act,” also known as the Waxman-Markey plan (or Cap-and-Trade/Capand-Tax).

This bill was recently passed out of the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee and we are urging all members of Congress to oppose consideration of this bill. This bill raises taxes on American families, increases the cost of energy, and eliminates American jobs. These are not proposals we can support.

The Waxman-Markey bill you are asked to consider will increase energy costs by $1,500 annually for the typical family of four. Further, the Heritage Foundation estimates that even with the estimated 26 percent reduction in electricity use, electric bills will increase $754 with the Waxman-Markey plan.

Additionally, from 2012 to 2035, a typical family will spend $12,200 more on its electric bill than in the absence of Waxman-Markey.

Despite the attempts in Waxman-Markey to decrease gas consumption by 15 percent, gas prices will still increase. As a result of the Waxman-Markey plan, an average American family of four will pay an additional $596 for gas usage in 2035. From 2012 to 2035, the Waxman-Markey plan will cost them an additional $7,500 in gas costs.

Before all the damage is done from Waxman-Markey, a family of four will see its direct energy costs rise by $22,800 from 2012 to 2035.

The Waxman-Markey plan does not just raise taxes and increase energy costs; it is expected to end 1,105,000 American jobs annually. The proposed Cap-and-Trade scheme will result in a loss of nearly 2,500,000 million American jobs. America needs economic policies that lead to job creation, not job destruction. This proposal is not something we are prepared to accept.

Table I - Percentage of Electricity that Meets Congress’ Definition of ‘Carbon-Free Renewable’ Energy for Each State

AL 2.5 HI 5.4 MA 0.7 NM 4.5 SD 1.9
AK 0.2 ID 5.5 MI 2.0 NY 1.6 TN 1.0
AZ 0.1 IL 1.4 MN 9.2 NC 1.5 TX 3.9
AR 2.9 IN 0.3 MS 3.1 ND 4.7 UT 0.6
CA 12.6 IA 7.3 MO 0.2 OH 0.3 VT 7.1
CO 5.9 KS 3.8 MT 2.3 OK 3.4 VA 2.9
CT 0.1 KY 0.5 NE 0.8 OR 5.8 WA 4.4
DE 2.1 LA 3.1 NV 3.8 PA 0.9 WV 0.4
FL 1.3 ME 23.8 NH 5.0 RI 2.1 WI 2.6
GA 2.3 MD 0.5 NJ 0.4 SC 1.7 WY 2.0

As indicated in Table I, the Waxman-Markey-mandated Federal Renewable Electricity Standard (RES) (which requires the nation to derive 10 percent of electricity from renewable sources by 2012 and 25 percent by 2025) is simply unrealistic given our current situation. Fourteen states (in bold boxes) are currently receiving less than one percent of their electricity from “renewable” sources.

Forcing this unrealistic mandate without an opt-in option or state-defining renewable option will do nothing more than increase the cost of electricity on rate paying consumers.

States that cannot meet with RES will be face monetary penalties from the federal government. These penalties will be passed onto consumers in the form of higher fees and taxes which they simply cannot afford. Further, by not allowing states to define what is “renewable” in their region, the bill inaccurately assumes that Maine has the same resources available as California. This illconceived logic should not be part of any national energy strategy.

Further, the bill calls for the 2050 CO2 emissions rate to be 83 percent lower than the 2005 emissions rate. However, as seen in Table II, 36 states (in bold boxes) produce their energy using over 80 percent carbon-based fuels. This proposal will cripple state economies, as energy is overwhelmingly derived from carbon-based fuels. Sadly, consumers will experience negative effects from unrealistic goals when they result in higher taxes, increased fees, and higher prices.
Table II - State Percentage of Energy Supplied by Carbon-Based Fuels

AL 76.3 HI 94.9 MA 90.8 NM 97.8 SD 84.1
AK 97.8 ID 64.6 MI 86.8 NY 77.5 TN 81.8
AZ 80.9 IL 46.6 MN 85.4 NC 78.1 TX 95.0
AR 77.5 IN 98.6 MS 85.1 ND 95.9 UT 98.3
CA 82.7 IA 90.4 MO 93.6 OH 94.0 VT 52.9
CO 97.6 KS 89.5 MT 79.9 OK 97.0 VA 81.1
CT 75.1 KY 97.4 NE 83.5 OR 59.3 WA 53.1
DE 99.4 LA 91.1 NV 92.1 PA 80.4 WV 98.5
FL 87.4 ME 64.5 NH 68.0 RI 97.0 WI 86.2
GA 81.8 MD 84.6 NJ 84.3 SC 65.8 WY 97.8

A recent poll indicated that 52 percent of registered American voters oppose the cap-and-trade
policy contained in the Waxman-Markey plan. Fifty-eight percent said they were unwilling to pay additional money for electricity to combat climate change. Sixty-eight percent disagreed with the notion that Congress should enact a carbon tax to encourage consumers to decrease their electricity usage. In addition, more than 50 percent opposed any carbon tax used to fund energy research.

Moreover, 73 percent of respondents placed the economy first among issue priorities. Based on the evidence above and many other detrimental effects of this disastrous bill, we urge you to oppose the Waxman-Markey Cap-and-Trade/Cap-and-Tax bill as a tax increase that American families simply cannot afford, and energy policy that we cannot accept.

For more information, contact Brian Johnson at Americans for Tax Reform at bjohnson@atr.org or 202-785-0266.

Sincerely,

Alabama Policy Institute, Gary Palmer
Alabama State Representative Greg Wren
Alabama State Senator Steve French
Alliance for Worker Freedom, Brian M Johnson
American Civil Rights Union
American Conservative Union, David Keene
American Council for Health Care Reform, William Shaker
American Shareholders Association, Ryan Ellis
American Solutions, Dan Varroney
Americans for Prosperity, Tim Phillips
Americans for Tax Reform, Grover Norquist
Americans for the Preservation of Liberty, David Ridenour
Arizona State Representative Cecil Ash
Arizona State Representative Debbie Lesko
Arizona State Representative John McComish
Arizona State Representative Nancy Barto
Arizona State Senate Majority Whip Pamela Gorman
Arizona State Senator Jack Harper
Arizona State Senator John Nelson
Arizona State Senator Johnny Key
Arizona State Senator Ron Gould
Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce
Arizona State Senator Sylvia Allen
Center for Fiscal Accountability, Sandra Fabry
Center for Individual Freedom, Jeffrey Mazzella
Charles W. Baird, Ph.D., Professor of Economics, Emeritus, CSU East Bay
Citizen Outreach Project, Doug Bandow
Citizens for Responsible Government, Joseph Andrews
Citizens United, Chuck Muth
Clean Oceans Technology Coalition, Joel C. Mandelman
Club for Growth, Andy Roth
College Republican National Committee
Colorado State Senator Scott Renfroe
Connecticut Center-Right Coalition, D. Dowd Muska
Connecticut State Representative Bill Hamzy
Connecticut State Representative John Piscopo
Council for Citizens Against Government Waste, Erica Gordon
Eagle Forum, Phyllis Schlafly
Ethan Allen Institute, John McCalughry
Evergreen Freedom Foundation, Amber Gunn
Florida Center-Right Coalition, Rick Watson
Florida State Representative Alan Hays, DMD
Florida State Representative Sandra Adams
FRCAction, Tom McClusky
FreedomWorks, Matt Kibbe
Frontiers of Freedom, George Landrith
Georgia Eagle Forum, Nancy Schaefer
Georgia State Representative Ed Setzler
Georgia State Representative Melvin Everson
Georgia State Representative Randy Nix
Georgia State Representative Tom Rice
Georgia State Representative Wendell Willard
Georgia State Senate Majority Leader Chip Rogers
Georgia State Senator Chip Rogers
Grassroots Institute of Hawaii, Dick Rowland
Hawaii State Senator Sam Slom
Hispanic Leadership Fund, Mario Lopez
Illinois Policy Institute, John Tillman
Illinois State Representative Dave Winters
Independence Institute, Jon Caldara
Indiana Eagle Forum, Pat Schneider
Indiana State Representative Cindy Noe
Indiana State Representative Eric Koch
Indiana State Representative Jeff Thompson
Indiana State Representative William Ruppel
Indiana State Senator Brandt Hershman
Institute for Liberty, Andrew Langer
Kansas State Senator Mary Pilcher-Cook
Kansas State Representative Don Meyers
Kansas State Representative Marc Rhoades
Kansas State Representative Sharon Schwartz
Kansas State Senator Tim Huelskamp
Kentucky State Representative Mike Harmon
Let Freedom Ring, Colin Hanna
Louisiana Republican National Committeeman, W. Ross Little, Jr.
Louisiana State Representative Nickie Monica
Louisiana State Representative Scott Simon
Maryland Center-Right Coalition, Richard Falknor
Maryland State Delegate Nic Kipke
Maryland State Representative Richard Sossi
Maryland State Delegate Gail Bates
Michigan Eagle Forum, Violet Vestevich
Minnesota Eagle Forum, Bonnie Nugent
Minnesota State Senator Mike Jungbauer
Mississippi Center for Public Policy, Forest Thigpen
Mississippi State Representative Becky Currie
Missouri State Representative Bob Nance
Missouri State Representative Cynthia Davis
Missouri State Representative Dwight Scharnhost
Missouri State Representative Shane Schoeller
Missouri State Representative Stanley Cox
Missouri State Representative Tim Flook
Missouri State Representative Walter Bivins
Missouri State Senator Jim Lembke
Montana State Representative Bob Lake
Montana State Representative Cary Smith
Montana State Representative Chas Vincent
Montana State Representative Gary MacLaren
Montana State Representative Mike Miller
National Center for Public Policy Research, Amy Ridenour
National Taxpayers Union, Duane Pardee
Nevada Eagle Forum, Janine Hansen
New Hampshire State Representative Betsey McKinney
New Hampshire State Representative Beverly Rodeschin
New Hampshire State Representative Jennifer Coffey
New Hampshire State Representative John Reagan
New Jersey State Assemblyman Michael J. Doherty
New Mexico Former State Representative Frank Bird
New Mexico Former State Representative Justine Fox-Young
New Mexico Former State Representative, Senator & Lieutenant Governor Jack Stahl
New Mexico Former State Senator Mickey D. Barnett
New Mexico Republican Party, John E. Rockwell
New Mexico Shooting Sports Association, Paul Lisle
New Mexico State Senator Steve Neville
New Mexico, Bernalillo County Sheriff, Darren P. White
New York Assemblyman Greg Ball
North Carolina Deputy Republican Senate Leader Neal Hunt
North Carolina State Representative George Cleveland
North Carolina State Representative Mitch Gillespie
North Carolina State Representative Pat McElraft
North Dakota State Representative Chuck Damschen
North Dakota State Representative Ken Svedjan
Ohio State House Assistant Minority Whip Sean Chichelli,
Ohio State House Minority Whip John Adamns,
Ohio State Senator Bob Gibbs
Ohio State Senator Kevin Coughlin
Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs, Inc., Brandon Dutcher
Oklahoma State Representative Colby Schwartz
Oklahoma State Representative Leslie Osborn
Oklahoma State Representative Mike Sanders
Oregon State Representative Matt Wingard
Oregon State Representative George Gilman
Oregon State Representative John Huffman
Pelican Institute for Public Policy, Kevin Kane
Pennsylvania Eagle Forum, Fran Bevan
Pennsylvania State Representative Daryl Metcalfe
Pennsylvania State Representative Jeff Pyle
Pennsylvania State Representative Kathy Rapp
Pennsylvania State Representative Matthew Baker
Project 21, Deneen Borelli
Property Rights Alliance, Kelsey Zahourek
Quantum Communications, Charlie Gerow
RightMarch.com, Dr. William Greene
Samuel Properties, Ltd., Patty Terrell
Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council, Karen Karrigan
Smart Business Hawaii, Sam Slom
Society of American Florists, Jeanne Ramsay
South Carolina State Senator David Thomas
South Dakota State Representative Val Rausch
Talbott Advisors, Inc., Fenton R. Talbott
Tennessee Eagle Forum, Bobbie Patray
Tennessee State Representative Ben West, Jr.
Tennessee State Representative Susan Lynn
Texas Eagle Forum, Cathie Adams
Texas State Representative Joe Driver
The Harbour League, Eli Gold
The Rule of Law Committee, Bill Shaker
Utah State Representative Bradley Daw
Utah State Representative Lorie Fowlke
Utah State Senator Ralph Okerlund
Virginia House of Delegates Member Kathy Byron
Washington State Minority Whip Bill Hinkle
Washington State Representative Jan Angel
Washington State Representative Shelly Short
Washington State Senator Val Stevens
West Virginia House of Delegates Member Troy Andes
West Virginia State Delegate Jonathan Miller
West Virginia State Delegate Ronald Walters, Sr.
West Virginia State Representative Troy Andes
Wisconsin State Representative John Nygren
Wisconsin State Representative Leah Vukmir
Wisconsin State Representative Mike Huebsch
Wisconsin State Representative Robin Vos
Wyoming State Representative Allen Jaggi
Wyoming State Representative Amy Edmonds
Wyoming State Representative David Miller
Wyoming State Representative Peter S. “Pete” Illoway
Wyoming State Representative Sue Wallis

ALEC on Cap and Trade

Click here: http://www.alec.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Cap_and_Trade

In 2008, ALEC adopted the following position on climate change:

"Climate change is a historical phenomenon and the debate will continue on the significance of natural and anthropogenic contributions. ALEC will continue to monitor the issue and support the use of sound science.

Regardless, the economy is becoming more energy efficient. Each year we emit less carbon dioxide per dollar of economic output. In fact, carbon dioxide emissions per dollar of GDP declined 41.3 percent between 1981 and 2005. This impressive improvement has taken place without greenhouse gas emissions regulations or taxes."

Oppose the Cap and Trade 'Tax' Increase Bill, H.R. 2454

Click the link below to take action on this issue.:http://www.votervoice.net/link/forward/jbs223753.aspx

Stimulus reason for All Payer Claims Database?

Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan
Betsy McCaughey

Understanding Cap-and-trade

Don't understand cap-and-trade? Listen to this...

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=105285865&ft=1&f=94427042

HB2318 - Governor's Energy Bill

Mandating Politics

The traditional police powers of government are health, safety, welfare and morals.

This means that the state might see fit to intercede through laws by limiting your activity if there is an unseen danger in what you do that could have a significant effect on another individual; thus jeopardizing that individual's right to life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness in a tangible way.

For instance; health inspections have increased cleanliness, cutting down on diseases that could severely impact your health. Safety inspections ensure that unseen dangers, like in electrical wiring or gas hook-ups, are minimized. Welfare typically refers to some sort of fraud - it is why we inspect bank records. Morals normally refer to activity, perhaps that concerning drugs or alcohol.

Strangely, the state is wanting to add energy efficiency to it's police powers. HB2318 changes Tennessee code 68-120-101, the law on statewide building construction safety standards, to include energy efficiency.

It is one thing for the state to take precautions because something may seriously jeopardize your health, or safety, or all that you have worked to earn, or to keep you from being a danger to others when you are under the influence of drugs or alcohol, but to police energy efficiency?

People already have an incentive to build energy efficient homes or to purchase energy efficient appliances - its called a utility bill.

For the state to get involved and create mandates is for the state to become involved in political decisions that favor some parts and supplies over others; certain businesses over other businesses; certain policies and political philosophies other others.

People naturally balance what they can afford with what they will save and examine the margins to see how far they want to go. Mandating politics is not good policy - and it moves us further still from freedom.

Economic Liberty and the Constitution, Part 1

by Jacob G. Hornberger, June 2002

Police powers and mercantilism

...The courts, however, had not limited the concept of “police powers” to laws proscribing violent crimes, such as murder, rape, theft, and burglary. Instead, the concept had been vaguely defined as the power to enact laws relating to the “safety, health, morals, and general welfare” of the public, a definition that opened up a Pandora’s box that harkened back to the era of mercantilism, an economic system that characterized European life during the 1600s and 1700s.

Under the old mercantilist system, the government had the power to regulate the most minute aspects of people’s economic affairs. Consider, for example, the cloak industry. The government prescribed how many cloaks should be produced in the nation, as well as sizes and colors. Regulations even outlined exactly how the nation’s weavers were to do their weaving.

Why were these extensive regulations necessary? Because if the government did not regulate the production of cloaks, it was believed, there existed the distinct possibility that people might end up with no cloaks to wear, which would mean that they might very well freeze to death. After all, what if everyone forgot to make cloaks one year? Or what if they didn’t make them in sizes that would fit the people?

Section by Section Analysis - All Payer Claims Database

Title: Bill Number: HB2289/SB2239


This brief document summarizes some of the major components to HB2289 (SB2239) which is currently being considered by the Tennessee General Assembly.


Summary

The bill creates a government database of Tennesseans’ private healthcare claims. Each Tennessean that has private health insurance would be listed in the database, and all claims for care that they receive would be transmitted to the state by private health insurance companies for compilation in the database.

For example, if you went to the doctor today with a cold, and again on Friday with bronchitis, then by Monday you were admitted to the hospital with pneumonia all of that data would be submitted to the state so that the department of finance and administration can follow the progress of your illness and treatment.

The enormity of this database cannot be overstated. For instance, Blue Cross / Blue Shield processes 38,000 insurance claims per hour. Each of the claims would become part of the database.

Several New England states and Minnesota have already instituted similar databases. Minnesota’s health dept has recently begun dictating health protocols to doctors and insurance companies - what business the state has interfering in private healthcare transactions is yet unanswered.

As outlined in the bill, the government wants the private healthcare data of her citizens’ so that the Commissioner of the TN Department of Finance and Administration (presently Dave Goetz) can carry out several stated objectives including:

Improve health care accessibility and affordability,

Identify health care needs,

Determine the capacity and distribution of existing health care resources,

Evaluate the effectiveness of programs on patient outcomes,

Review costs,

Provide publicly available information on providers’ quality of care.

REMEMBER! This data is privately paid for information on private individuals who are making claims to private insurance companies. Frankly, the government has no business having such private information or performing any of the above duties when you privately pay for your healthcare.



Section by Section Analysis

Section 1; Adds the National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) to the Tennessee Code under insurance company utilization review agents in 56-6-704.

NCQA is a non-profit organization that “promotes the adoption of strategies that we believe will improve care, enhance service and reduce costs, such as paying providers based on performance, leveraging the Web to give consumers more information, disease management and physician-level measurement.”

In a letter dated March 6, 2009 to President Obama from this non-profit organization praised the president for his White House Healthcare Summit and for moving us toward “comprehensive health care reform we need.”

Their criteria for which insurance companies must comply contains 6011 data fields on patients for evaluating cost and quality. Some large insurance companies already belong to this organization and comply with the 6011 data sets - however, others do not already comply.

Amendment 1

Section 3 - Definitions;

Bill contains no definition for;

· All Payer Claims Database
· National Standards in Section 3 (c)(2)(A) or Section 3 (f)(1)(C).
· HEDIS information in Section 3 (f)(2)(A). Some HEDIS information is based solely on surveys.
· National multi-collaborative stakeholders found in Section 3 (c).


Section 3 (c); Tennessee Health Information Committee

· No requirements for meetings of the committee or for the call of meetings or for the format.
· There is no sunrise date for the committee.
· Under the proposed law, the Commissioner of Finance and Administration would take recommendations from the newly established “Tennessee Health Information Committee.” The committee is to be comprised of 19 members, only one of whom “represent[s] health care consumers”; all of whom may view all of the information on the database. It is unclear why oversight of the database and the functions is housed within the Department of Finance and Administration, as opposed to the TN Department of Health.

Section 3 (c)(2)(A); Calls for the committee to develop a description of data sets based on “national standards” - National standards is not defined.

Protected Health Information; Not any specific part of the bill restricts the submission of “Protected Health Information” (PHI) to the state of Tennessee - “Protected Health Information” is a dataset of 18 fields of personal information identified by HIPAA’s Privacy Rules. The bill does not preclude the state from getting your PHI; only three of the 18 fields of the PHI may not be included in the Database. In fact, HIPAA expressly allows the government to receive your Personal Health Information - http://privacyruleandresearch.nih.gov/pr_08.asp.

All through the bill it implies that the state will have Protected Health Information.
See:

Section 3 (c)(3)(A) & (B)
Section 3 (c)(5)
Section 3 (d)(1) - one of the most obvious spots
Section 3 (f)(2) - another very obvious spot
Section 3 (d)(2)(A) asserts that “source” or “draft” information used to construct or populate the database will exist.

Nowhere does it state that the data set will be fully de-identified before the state receives the information from the insurance companies.

Section 3 (c)(2)(B); Requires the Committee to develop a method for the submission of data. NO METHOD IS DESCRIBED IN THE BILL.

Once an all payer claims database is established health insurance issuers must submit data in a standardized, electronic form, for inclusion in the database. The data submitted will include information on patients, their claims, the quality of care received, pricing rates, costs of care, and possibly other information in conformity with the National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA).

Section 3 (d)(2)(b); The information will be made available to virtually any branch of state government.

Section 3 (e); Excludes only three pieces of personal information from the All Claims Database; name, address, and social security number. This is startling to anyone that knows anything about datasets and privacy. HIPAA identifies 18 fields of protected health information that must be excluded in order for complete privacy to be assured. The inclusion of any of the remaining 18 fields puts patient privacy at risk.

This section should expressly state that none of the 18 fields of Protected Health Information will ever be received by the government.

Section 3 (f)(1)(A); States that all group health plans and health insurance issuers shall provide electronic health insurance claims and eligibility data in accordance with the committee and state rule. Why is eligibility data included if we do not know the persons identity? Again, there is no statement that Protected Health Information will be omitted.

Section 3 (f)(1)(B); Allows the committee and the commissioner to request any additional information from insurance companies that they deem.

Section 3 (f)(1)(C); States the committee and commissioner shall strive for standards and procedures that reflect “national standards”. No definition of national standards exists in the bill.

Section 3 (f)(2)(B); This unfunded mandate forces insurance companies to change the way they receive claims from providers to the very same format that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services requires claims to be submitted.

Section 3 (f)(3); Insurance companies that fail to submit patient information to the state shall be fined up to $100 each day of delay. It is unclear whether this fine applies to the failure to file all records, or whether it is assessed per record.

Fiscal note: The TN General Assembly Fiscal Review Committee notes that the legislation will increase State expenditures by more than $200,000. That is an improbable amount for such an expansive database with continuing analysis. In Minnesota the compilation of the data base cost $1.2 million for just the first 18 months and the analysis was $3 million.



Additional Analysis
By TCPR

Vagueness – The bill’s language is extremely vague when describing the “duties” of the Commissioner of Finance and Administration with regards to his utilization of this database. For instance, one duty is “evaluating the effectiveness of intervention programs on improving patient outcomes.” It is unclear by what standards the commissioner is to use when making such evaluations.

Effectiveness – It is unlikely that a database, while comprehensive in nature, will allow members of the newly created TN Health Information Committee (THIC) to develop meaningful and effective recommendations that increase public health without years of extensive analysis. Billions of dollars are spent each year in the U.S. to improve public health yet the fiscal note for this legislation is just over $200,000. The likelihood of success with such a meager expenditure, especially among a myriad of other, more sophisticated research, is weak at best.

Access to Data – The proposed legislation gives access to otherwise private and confidential health care data to any “departments of state government” if the information is disclosed with the purpose of achieving the duties (of the Commissioner of Finance and Administration). Given the vagueness of the “duties” as noted supra, access to this sensitive information is given to nearly any governmental agency in the state of Tennessee.

As with all public databases, there is a significant chance the information could become compromised. This could occur from a computer “hacker” or from someone within state government (as was the case in the State Trooper’s office last year). Exposure to liability should this sensitive data become publically available is virtually infinite and could open the state to decades of litigation from around the country. Also troubling is the potential to cross-reference health care data with other databases such as school records, criminal records, and travel logs.

It should also be noted that numerous public websites already exist that allow consumers to “shop” for a health care provider that meets their needs. These websites exist without sharing identifiable or sensitive information. Thus the state already has data from which to study health care from a public policy perspective.

Privacy – As the proposed law is written, patients and health care providers are unable to exempt themselves from this database. Similarly, there is no “opt-in” provision that would apply the new law to only those choosing to be a part of the government maintained database. The law states that it will comport with all applicable Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) regulations, however this is misleading. HIPAA, by its own terms, does allow for private health care information to be shared with state agencies in certain instances and this law seems to fall within those rules. HIPAA does, however, seem to establish a reasonable expectation of privacy (between patient, provider, and insurer) and this law may unconstitutionally violate that constitutional right.

TN Residents Only? – The bill, by inference only, seems to apply only to Tennessee residents however, it is not clear that lawmakers have contemplated how to the law should apply to part-time residents, those that visit TN-based health care providers, those that work for a TN-based company though they live out of state, Tennesseans with out of state dependents, etc. Requiring insurance companies to submit data without a way to meaningfully limit the law to Tennesseans subjects both insurance companies and the state to great litigation exposure.

Costs to Consumers & Insurers – The legislation’s current fiscal note is less than $200,000 but this only takes the cost to the state government into account. Furthermore, even the fiscal note is a gross under-estimate. In Minnesota, where similar legislation passed, the cost of the program exceeded $4 million in less than 4 years. Insurance companies are likely to incur great costs when forced to conform to an electronic form as prepared by the NCQA. These costs are likely to be passed along, eventually, to consumers. Thus the stated goal of “improving…affordability of patient health care and health care coverage” is thwarted from the start.

Finally, insurance companies will have to disclose otherwise proprietary information which, according to the proposed law, is subject to “public release” via report. While this could lead to greater price transparency, it could also lead to forcing insurance companies to exit the state in favor of states that allow them to retain some competitive advantage. Again, the stated goal of “improving accessibility” could be drastically harmed if this legislation becomes a law.

Hagar the Horrible

State Wants Medical Records Database WSMV

Opponents: Gov't Shouldn't Get Involved In Individuals' Health
Reported By Cara Kumari

"The purpose here is to build as broad a set of population health data as possible so that we can really improve quality of care and efof care in Tennessee," said Finance Commissioner Dave Goetz.


http://www.wsmv.com/health/19593168/detail.html

Cap-and-Trade article in the Tennessean

Please see my article in the Tennessean on cap-and-trade -
http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009905280319

"This energy policy to reduce carbon emissions is neither upfront nor affordable. Cap and trade is a complex and confusing scheme that will do little to help the environment."

Eagle Forum wants to help you fight state attack on your medical privacy

http://www.tneagleforum.org/custpage.cfm/frm/40436/sec_id/40436

Tennessee Center for Policy Research on Claims Database

The Tennessee Center for Policy Research has issued a fascinating analysis of the All Payer Claims Database and issued their analysis for review.


State Wants to Collect Private Healthcare Data

"Costs to Consumers & Insurers – The legislation’s current fiscal note is less than $200,000 but this only takes the cost to the state government into account.

Furthermore, even the fiscal note is a gross under-estimate. In Minnesota, where similar legislation passed, the cost of the program exceeded $4 million in less than 4 years. Insurance companies are likely to incur great costs when forced to conform to an electronic form as prepared by the NCQA.

These costs are likely to be passed along, eventually, to consumers. Thus the stated goal of “improving…affordability of patient health care and health care coverage” is thwarted from the start."

All Claims Payer Database Commentary

Blue Collar Muse doesn't like All Claims Payer Database either -

"Of all the Orwellian nightmares people have suggested you be concerned about, it would be difficult to find one more universally despised than the idea one’s medical records are available to the state. "

See full article here http://conservablogs.com/bluecollarmuse/2009/05/26/tn-hb2289-gives-goverment-access-to-private-medical-information/

HJR108 PASSES HOUSE

HJR 108 passed the Tennessee House tonight!

Thank you for your support.


The Resolution now moves to the Senate where Senator Jamie Woodson will carry the bill.

The vote was 85 Ayes, 2 Noes, 3 present not voting and 9 not voting.

Rep. Susan Lynn

All Payer Claims Database - Update 2

The All Payer Claims Database seeks to establish a comprehensive database for the private healthcare transactions of every Tennessean by forcing insurance companies to turn their claims data over to the state through the passage of HB2289.

But wait, this is your privately paid for information! The state is not entitled to this information. Yet, the Administration hopes to convince state legislators that the state has a rational state interest to review your private healthcare data.

The bill lists several reasons but truly each are items you should, and do, privately determine for yourself.

As the Administration tries to comfort state legislators with assuring words stating that your identity will not be disclosed. An important question remains, disclosed by whom? All though the bill it sounds as if the state will know your identity. But the state protests that it will comply with all HIPAA Privacy Rules concerning your Private Health Information (PHI).

So are we to assume that the insurance companies cannot turn your identity or PHI over to the state? No we should not. That is because while HIPAA’s privacy rules protect your PHI from disclosure for private use, HIPAA rules allow disclosure without authorization for several other purposes.

That’s right; your private health information can be disclosed without your consent to public health authorities and health oversight agencies for the prevention or control of disease, injury, or disability, and for oversight activities authorized by law.

So when the state says it will comply with HIPAA Privacy Rules you should answer back - Big Deal!

Please remember, you have the right to self determination, and that is largely why our founding fathers broke away from Great Britain and formed our great nation. The peoples' natural rights - their right to self determination was being abridged by an overbearing government.

Be jealous of your privacy and defend it. Our forefathers and many more since died for your right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Do not give up so easily that for which they paid so dear a price.

I know I will never stop defending your rights but your voice will help make a difference - http://www.capitol.tn.gov/.

Thousands of records 'lost' by NHS

Thousands of personal medical records have been lost by the NHS in the UK.

An article published yesterday tells how "A total of 140 security breaches were reported within the NHS between January and April this year."


Additional related articles can be found here.

ALEC: Cap & Trade - A New Tax on Energy

...For example, a recent study by CRA International for the National Black Chamber of Commerce concluded the legislation would cost the U.S. economy $350 billion and 2.3 million to 2.7 million jobs each year from now to 2030. This is a net loss meaning they took into account all the “green” jobs the bill promises to create. To read that study, click here.

Read ALEC brief.

All Payer Claims Database update

Tennessee state government wants to get into the healthcare business big time! There is pending legislation to collect all of the data on your privately paid for healthcare transactions.

The Governor’s administration is pushing HB2289. As amended the bill claims that the state government needs your information to;

“Improve the accessibility and affordability of patient health care and health care coverage”

“Identify health and health care needs and inform on health and health care policy”

“Determine the capacity and distribution of existing health care resources”

“Evaluate the effectiveness of intervention programs on improving patient outcomes”

“Review costs among various treatment settings, providers, and approaches”

“Provide publicly available information on health care providers’ quality of care”

The plan is to mandate that your insurance company transmit all of your healthcare transactions to the state. You will be assigned a unique encrypted patient identifier by your insurance company. This identifier will be used by the state to track all of your healthcare transactions so that they can evaluate you according to the criteria listed above. Your doctor will also receive a unique healthcare provider identifier; but he or she will be fully identifiable.

What if you should want to opt-out? Well, you can’t. We tried very hard in the House Government Operations Committee this week to make that possible for you and your doctor but we were defeated on a party line vote. Should your insurance company refuse to comply with handing over your information it will receive a $100.00 per day fine from the state.

I want you to understand the breadth and the enormity of this plan. I asked just one of the major health insurance companies in Tennessee how many claims they process. 32,000 per hour; or 256,000 per day was the answer.

So I ask you to consider; why does the state of Tennessee need that much data, and that much detail about your healthcare transactions?

I asked a few public policy groups to take a look at the legislation. They responded with alarm. Some of their comments are that “…this is an avenue to centralized control over medical decisions...and the building of a brand new expensive bureaucracy that will use the data to issue reports to further secure their control over medical decision-making.” And, “Whoa. This bill is very scary. Not only is there no opt-out provision, but looking at claims data is the way to implement price controls.”

From what I’ve been able to learn several states have recently instituted similar databases and several more are considering bills at this time. Most all use a company called the Maine Health Information Center which is affiliated with the National Claims Data Management System. These are non-profit organizations set up to accept and analyze massive amounts of healthcare data.

Recently a similar plan was instituted in Minnesota. The cost was $1.2 million for the databasing of claims data on all Minnesotans for just the first 18 months. Additional costs for analyzing the data are $3.0 million dollars per year.

Yet the state of Tennessee claims that this bill will cost Tennessee little more than $200,000 per year. Perhaps that is because the bulk of the cost is borne by your insurance company.

I fail to see how legislators mandating insurance companies to turn over your healthcare transactions to the state cannot violate the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution; unreasonable searches and seizures. Surely, passage of this legislation would constitute a seizure by the state of Tennessee of private, and privately paid for detailed information for which the state has no business having and for which they have no compelling, rational or legitimate use.

Outgoing administrations often start thinking of their next job early. Perhaps the Governor and some of his cabinet members have big plans in the ever growing healthcare information field.

I hope that you are concerned about this bill because your voice does make a difference. This is one bill that should go away. Please take the time to contact your legislator to learn more and to express your feelings about this legislation; http://www.capitol.tn.gov/.

Word of the day

Thank you to Tom Lee for our word of the day as the Chair always tries to avoid this activity in Government Operations -

kerfuffle

Part of Speech: n
Definition: disorder, commotion; also written curfuffle, kafuffle, gefuffle

All Payer Claims Database

What is the All Payer Claims Database? That is the name of the system the Governor’s administration wants to put in place to collect all of the data on your healthcare transactions - whether you are private pay, insurance pay, Medicare or Medicaid.

The government claims it needs your information to;

“Improve the accessibility and affordability of patient health care and health care coverage”

“Identify health and health care needs and inform on health and health care policy”

“Determine the capacity and distribution of existing health care resources”

“Evaluate the effectiveness of intervention programs on improving patient outcomes”

“Review costs among various treatment settings, providers, and approaches”

“Provide publicly available information on health care providers’ quality of care”

I asked a few public policy groups to take a look at the legislation. They responded with alarm. Some of their comments are that “…this is an avenue to centralized control over medical decisions...and the building of a brand new expensive bureaucracy that will use the data to issue reports to further secure their control over medical decision-making.” And, “Whoa. This bill is very scary. Not only is there no opt-out provision, but looking at claims data is the way to implement price controls.”

The administration claims through all of this your identity will be safe because the government will give you a unique encrypted patient identifier. Your doctor will receive a unique health care provider identifier as well. But wait, if the government is giving you the identifier wouldn’t that mean they know who you are or else how can they give it to you…and why?

What if you should want to opt-out? Well, you can’t. And should your doctor refuse to comply with giving over your information he or she will receive a $100.00 per day fine from the state.

Recently a similar plan was instituted in Minnesota. The cost was $1.2 million for the databasing of claims data on all Minnesotans for just the first 18 months. Additional costs for analyzing the data are $3.0 million dollars per year. The next phase of educating physicians was another $100,000+, and about $45,000 per year in expenses for the state’s health dept. Of course the cost to the doctors for sending the data has never been calculated.

But the state claims that this bill will cost little more than $10,000 per year.

I hope that you are concerned about this bill because your voice does make a difference. This is one bill that should go away. We do not need to collect such data, and some believe that such collection may violate the Fourth Amendment.

Brushing up on energy schemes

There are several energy schemes with which we need to acquaint ourselves because of their potential damage to our pocketbooks.

Just imagine the suffering your family and your budget would face if they were all put into effect.

Legislation in the federal and state government is trying to accomplish this right now.

They are plans that violate good business ethics and economic fairness. We need to be aware of these schemes and the damage they will do. Sadly, our own American government is trying to impose them.

Renewable Portfolio Standards
Require increased production of energy from renewable sources. These sources are not necessarily less expensive or more efficient than other sources.

RES Credit Trading Programs
Renewable energy credits are tradable environmental commodities which represent proof that 1 megawatt-hour (MWh) of electricity was generated from an eligible renewable energy resource1. Many power generating companies don't or can't readily use renewable sources of energy to produce power for their customers. Therefore, under this scheme, they will have to purchase the credits from power companies that do use renewable sources so that they can prove to the federal government that renewable sources were used. Obviously, this added cost whose only legitimate effect is to make power more expensive for customers.

Cap & Trade
Is a regulatory scheme used to control pollution by placing a cap on large manufacturers’ emissions. Should they stay under their assigned cap they can trade (or sell) the unused portion of their cap to another manufacturer that has exceeded their assigned cap. This does virtually nothing to decrease pollution, or encourage increased production, but it obviously increases manufacturing costs.

Decoupling Mechanisms
Refers to the disassociation of a utility's profits from the actual volume of a customers' usage. Instead a given rate of return is aligned with revenue targets; rates are annually adjusted based on these targets. The point is to disconnect the utility's desire for net revenue from sales volume. Most customers expect to be charged for the volume of fuel they use, plus average fixed costs and a fair profit. Decoupling destroys the formula used for years which is most fair to consumers.

Utility Conservation Programs
Utilities are incentivized to sell less product by encouraging energy conservation among their customers. They are rewarded for the decrease in product sales volume due to the conservation efforts with annual price increases to make up for their lost net revenue. Fair market practices dictate that if a consumer conserves they should receive the benefit for their conservation efforts. Under this scheme the utility receives a rate increase for any conservation efforts whether aided by the utility or accomplished by the customer.

RINs Trading Programs
Renewable Identification Numbers are assigned to batches of fuel that have been blended with ethanol. Oil companies use the RINs numbers to prove to the federal government that they are meeting the federal mandates for ethanol blending. Small retailers want the state to prevent the oil companies from restricting their ability to blend. This is because when the retailers do the blending themselves they are given possession of the RINs number. The small retailers then sell the number back to the oil companies because they need the number to prove to the federal government that the fuel was indeed blended. This transaction costs up to 12 cents per gallon. Guess who really pays for this? You, the consumer.

Automobile Carbon Taxes
Next on the horizon is the idea to tax you for your car's emissions. I don't have a lot of information on this yet but look out for this as well.

Tea Party Photos

I just received some Tea Party photos from the Nashville party.

Label me

So I don’t like the idea of local governments enacting menu labeling...

I received an email from a friend who was not happy to learn that I am the sponsor of a bill to clarify that local governments may not enact menu labeling; a growing trend where government requires restaurants to provide patrons information on the nutritional content of their offerings.

Supporters of menu labeling love the idea because they feel it will surely cure the “obesity epidemic”; even though American society has grown heavier not slimmer since other food labeling laws have come into effect.

Objectors say they see menu labeling as more of the nanny-state government movement. Further, it creates a burden on citizens (business owners) that is far too great. Modifying menus or ingredients becomes inflexible due to the expense of changing menu board, menu and drive through signage; additionally utilizing a lab to determine the nutritional content of offerings is exceedingly expensive. It is consumers that will pay these costs through higher prices.

Many question if the added expense is actually useful enough to pay for. Isn’t it common knowledge that if starchy potatoes fried in oil can make you fat then supersized starchy potatoes fried in oil will probably make you, well, fatter?

However, my friend’s email, and my bill, raise a whole new issue. She feels that local governments are closest to the people and are more inclined to understand what laws they need therefore I should not be trying to stop them from employing such an ordinance if they want to do so.

It is very important to understand that the only reason local governments exist is because the state has granted them a Charter to exist. A Charter is like a Constitution and grants local governments permission to govern themselves through ordinances within the range of their Chartered powers.

To be clear, Local government ordinances cannot circumvent state law. For instance, local governments cannot make their own criminal laws; it would violate equal protection of the law for there to be varying penalties for murder in different counties or communities.

Local governments can fill a void in state law if there is no state law on the subject in effect, and the ordinance is inside of the powers specified in their Charter.

In time the state sometimes finds it necessary to take action and impose an overriding state law to replace a selection of dissimilar ordinances on the same issue. For example, the state may find that varying ordinances among the local governments are too numerous, too differentiated, and in need of standardization due to a compelling, a rational or a legitimate burden created for citizens to comply with. Local menu labeling ordinances are a good example of this.

If a requirement for menu labeling is ever put in place I hope people can agree that it is truly a measure that would be best imposed broadly, perhaps by the federal government, because even the variance among the states creates too great a compliance burden for citizens.

Harvard University was one of the first to require menu labeling. They have abandoned the project due to complaints that it aggravated students' eating disorders. If you want to read more about the Food Police there is a very good article by the Consumer Rights League. I recently had Jim Terry from Consumer Rights speak at my task force at ALEC.

Yep, you can officially "label me" as one of those that is not in favor of government instituted menu labeling on any level for many reasons.

Mt. Juliet Tea Party

Thanks to Sherrie Orange for organizing and recording our Tea Party!

KIMSEY WINS!!!

This morning Matthew Kimsey beat out many other well qualified interns to become the 2009 Governor of the Intern General Assembly.

Matthew is the intern for Rep. Susan Lynn, Chairman of the House Government Operations Committee. She was asked if she feels her endorsement had any influence on the race.

"Matthew is a spectacular intern. I'm so proud. I knew he could do it! He's learned so much. I think his qualifications and his excellent candidate commercial speak for themselves." Said Rep. Lynn.

Matthew is under the direct supervision of Cyndie Todd, assistant to Rep. Lynn.

Ms. Todd was asked if she thought Matthew's issues propelled him to victory. She stated "No, I think it was all that time on Facebook that paid off for him. Now maybe he'll stop lallygagging and get some work done. There's just not enough room in this office for two politicians."

CONGRATULATIONS MATTHEW!!

WE KNEW YOU COULD DO IT!!!

From Cyndie and Rep. Lynn!!!

Join the Facebook HJR 108 Group

HJR 108 is a Resolution to support state sovereignty and the Tenth Amendment.

Join the HJR 108 Facebook group and show your support for state sovereignty.

HJR 108 will be heard in the House on Tuesday, March 31 at noon.

Legislative Survey

Please click here to participate in my new legislative survey!

Thank you!

Rep. Susan Lynn

HJR 108 State Sovereignty

State sovereignty is a big deal to state legislators; hopefully, it is to you as well. It is what keeps the federal government from over stepping its constitutional bounds.

Today many state legislators, including some in Tennessee, have decided it is time to affirm state sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and demand the federal government halt its practice of assuming powers and of imposing mandates upon the states for purposes not enumerated by the Constitution.

The history of the formation of our federal government is long and complex but what the framers sought was a government that protected man’s natural rights; declared by the Declaration of Independence to be the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; better interpreted to mean that all men, by nature are equally free and independent with the right to work, acquire property and pursue their own individual happiness.

When the Constitution was drawn, the various states in existence already had Constitutions with several enumerated rights. Therefore, many of the framers believed that it was not necessary to include individual rights in a federal constitution. They feared that in doing so, the Constitution might incorrectly be construed as a document which limited the rights of the people and of the states.

Eventually the supporters of a bill of rights won out, and the Bill of Rights was drafted to guarantee equal rights for all Americans but compromise also brought the Tenth Amendment guaranteeing limits on federal power;

1. Freedoms of speech, press and religion

2. People's right to keep and bear arms

3. Protection from quartering troops

4. To be free of unreasonable searches and seizures

5. Right to due process and the prohibition of double jeopardy

6. Trial by jury and other rights of the accused

7. Right to civil trial by jury

8. Prohibition of excessive bail, as well as prohibitions against cruel and unusual punishment

9. Protection of rights not specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights

10. Powers reserved for the states and people

As you can see, the various rights are not necessarily rights that exist in the state of nature but rather rights designed to affirm and protect our natural rights; for example, freedom of the press protects liberty, and trial by jury protects life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

The state sovereignty movement seeks to remind the federal government that the Tenth Amendment ensures that "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

After all, the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states. However today, in 2009, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government. Many powers and federal mandates are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution; this limits our freedom and costs taxpayers untold billions of dollars - or should I say trillions?

I believe that it is time we step forth as other states are doing and affirm Tennessee's sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States. We should also demand that the federal government halt and reverse its practice of assuming powers and of imposing mandates upon the states for purposes not enumerated by the Constitution. Tennessee HJR 108 will do just that. With your support, hopefully, we can begin to reverse the federal power grab.

Populism Ignites in Chicago

Rick Santelli on CNBC's Squawk Box

The trading floor buzz on whether the government's plan to save the economy will actually help the markets.

Obama's Rhetoric Is the Real 'Catastrophe'

In 1932, automobile production shriveled by 90%
By BRADLEY R. SCHILLER, Wall Street Journal


"Consider the job losses that Mr. Obama always cites:

In the last year, the U.S. economy shed 3.4 million jobs - 2.2% of the labor force. From November 1981 to October 1982, 2.4 million jobs were lost - 2.2% of the labor force, the same as now.

Job losses in the Great Depression: 1930, the economy shed 4.8% of the labor force. In 1931, 6.5%. 1932, another 7.1%. Jobs were being lost at double or triple the rate of 2008-09 or 1981-82.

Unemployment rates: The latest survey pegs U.S. unemployment at 7.6%. 1982 peak (10.8%). Peak in 1932 (25.2%). You simply can't equate 7.6% unemployment with the Great Depression.

Real gross domestic product (GDP) rose in 2008, despite a bad fourth quarter. The Congressional Budget Office projects a GDP decline of 2% in 2009. That's comparable to 1982, when GDP contracted by 1.9%. It is nothing like 1930, when GDP fell by 9%, or 1931, when GDP contracted by another 8%, or 1932, when it fell yet another 13%.

Auto production last year declined by roughly 25%. That looks good compared to 1932, when production shriveled by 90%.

The failure of a couple of dozen banks in 2008 just doesn't compare to over 10,000 bank failures in 1933, or even the 3,000-plus bank (Savings & Loan) failures in 1987-88.

Stockholders can take some solace from the fact that the recent stock market debacle doesn't come close to the 90% devaluation of the early 1930s."

Mr. Schiller, an economics professor at the University of Nevada, Reno, is the author of "The Economy Today" (McGraw-Hill, 2007).

Thank you StateHouseCall.org

TN Lawmaker Pushing to Discontinue CON

Cites Feds warning that protectionist regs "undercut consumer choice, stifle innovation and weaken markets' ability to contain costs"

By Mark Todd Engler

CatholicVote.org

CatholicVote.org

Posted using ShareThis

DOJ and FTC issue joint statement on CON

Agencies Say CON Laws Undercut Consumer Choice, Stifle Innovation andWeaken Markets' Ability to Contain Health Care Costs

WASHINGTON — In a joint statement to the Illinois Task Force on Health Planning Reform, the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) stated the agencies' position regarding certificate-of-need (CON) laws, saying that the laws undercut consumer choice, stifle innovation and weaken markets' ability to contain health care costs. Today's statement reiterates the agencies' ongoing efforts to promote competition in health care.

State CON programs generally prevent firms from entering certain areas of the health care market unless they can demonstrate to state authorities that there is an unmet need for their services...

Ralph Bristol Show WWTN 99.7

Thank you Ralph Bristol for having me on your show this morning.

Listen to the clip.

First posted information about Kent Williams in 2007

The Tennessee Politics Blog posted an item about Kent Williams' comments which received a lot of comments on April 2, 2007.

Jama Oliver posted on April 2, 2007.

TOPIX Posted a number of items on April 12, 2007 and after.

The first media contact about Kent Williams 2009

This morning Jason Mumpower misspoke and stated that I contacted the the media.

That is not true.

The first media contact that I received was by email below. Days later when I spoke to Mr. Kleinheider I told him that I didn't want to talk about it.

This is all exactly why women don't come forward with such complaints. It is very difficult for me to understand why if a woman requests to be treated professionally, and needs assistance to make that happen, she is later condemned as though she was the perpetrator.

Thank you Chris Clem

Thank you to former State Representative Chris Clem who writes in response to a public letter from Speaker Williams' sister;

http://politics.nashvillepost.com/2009/01/22/chris-clem-on-the-kent-williams-sexual-harassment-allegations/

Comment on media access to member complaint

What follows is a timeline for the recent events of this week and before.

Nearly two years ago, an incident occurred which was witnessed by a few. It has been well documented so I will not go into further detail except to say that I sought assistance from my leadership because I did not feel that I was being taken seriously in my request to be treated with professional courtesy.

At that time, a group of Nashville bloggers found out about the incident; they recounted the events on their blogs. The Nashville media observed the discourse and contacted me for comment. I declined to comment on the incident and so did my leadership.

After the election last week, I was contacted by a Nashville blogger that had knowledge of the incident two years earlier. He asked me if I would like to comment on his blog. I declined once more and immediately called my caucus leader to inform him that I was contacted by the blogger. We agreed to remain firm in our position not to comment on the incident.

On Sunday night the press started calling me. I refused to comment. Their phone calls persisted all day on Monday at which time I still refused to comment. In addition, they repeatedly contacted my leadership. In the early evening on Monday some media informed our press secretary that they intended to issue a public records request to our leadership for any information pertaining to the incident. When leadership arrived at the office on Tuesday morning members of the media were waiting with their requests for public information.

Until this time I was unaware that a file existed. However, in retrospect, it does make sense that the leader would document a serious incident even if only to safeguard his own actions. Although he has received much criticism, I can only imagine the critique if he had refused to hand over the file. Considering all that the leader has been through, I think that he has been very professional about everything.

I hope you will understand if I do not wish to comment any further on the incident. I believe that the information that has already been made public speaks for itself.

Thank you for the many kind words of support. I know that I have done nothing wrong. It is a difficult situation that one cannot ever win. That is why I sought to handle it privately.

Cover Tennessee Expanding

Thank you to Heartland's Healthcare News for asking for my comments on
Cover Tennessee.

Thomas Sowell

The recent demonstrations over gay marriage has caused me to look up Sowell's articles where he explains that marriage really limits the rights of individuals', it does not expand them.

"Marriage is not a right extended to individuals by the government. It is a restriction on the rights they already have." 2005

"In other words, marriage imposes legal restrictions, taking away rights that individuals might otherwise have." 2006

Thank You Ralph

Ralph Bristol of the Morning News on Supertalk 99.7 FM has asked me to become a permanent cast member on his show. I will be on to talk about state government each Monday at 6:40 am.

Thank You Slater and the Nashville Post

Thank you to Michael Slater of West Tennessee's TJ Radio Network and to the Nashville Post for the mention today about my interview with Slater on the Copeland Cap.

Sam's Mention

Thank you! For the mention by Sam's Club CEO Doug McMillon.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4U1oAjOlQQ&eurl=http://politics.nashvillepost.com/page/2/

Susan Lynn did what?

My opponent is trying to say I voted wrong...you be the judge.

He attacks on Big Oil, education and the minimum wage.

Big Oil

Each year the House Democrats pass a resolution for the US Congress asking them to investigate the oil companies for price gouging. This is done for partisan reasons and passes with a scant few votes.

Is the resolution effective? No. Not once has it ever even been acknowledged by the US Congress.

The Republicans try to amend the bill to ask the US Congress to drill domestically. The Democrats kill this amendment!

So this year I tried to explain a little economics to the Democrats and that is that oil is a commodity. If the price of oil goes up on the Commodities Exchange the price of oil, and the price of gasoline, will follow. The oil companies buy the oil for refining and must pay the commodity price. This price is passed on to us as consumers.

I further explained that while the oil companies make profits in the billions of dollars, as a percent of revenue they earn about 8% profit. Sure they earn a lot dollar-wise because they sell a whole lot of gasoline.I also pointed out that while oil company profits are 8% of revenue, left leaning companies like Google earn profits at 30% of revenue. Should we investigate Google for price gouging too?

And I asked, what about the drug companies, most make 20%, 22%, even 30% profit - and most drugs are paid for with tax payer dollars - Now frankly that sounds like something to investigate.

And what about the taxes they pay? Businesses like oil companies actually pay billions of dollars more in taxes than they make in profit, taxes passed on to you and me when we make a purchase. Why don't they think the government is tax gouging?

There are only 7 American oil companies. They have direct access to only about 7% of the world's oil. Foreign nations and foreign oil companies control 93% of the world's oil. Why would the Democrats want to weaken our American oil companies by attacking them and refusing to enable domestic drilling?

Many Americans are invested in American oil companies through their pension fund, retirement plans and money markets. Why would Democrats want to weaken these companies and destroy American savings?

If anything funny was going on with the recent spike in oil it was on the Commodities Exchange and this IS being investigated by the federal government without a request from the Tennessee General Assembly being at all necessary.


Improving our schools

My opponent implies that I voted against our schools - NOT TRUE!

The bill he is referring to, HB2354 is the cigarette tax. The bill barely passed, receiving only 59 votes out of 99.

In actuality, I voted against using the cigarette tax, a declining source of revenue, to fund education.

If we are serious about funding education we will fund education out of the General Fund and not with a source of revenue that is in decline - leaving our school children short.

Last year the Governor cut $69 million dollars out of the education budget because the cigarette tax had come up short in collections.

I believe it is immoral for school children to have to depend on smokers for their education, and it makes me angry that things such as a bunker would be funded and education would be cut. The Republicans have a plan to fund education first - a plan the Democrats killed in a tabling motion - see amendment 3, Democrat motion to lay on the table.

Raising the Minimum Wage

My opponent obviously wants Tennessee to have our own minimum wage, separate from the federal minimum wage because that is what the Democrats tried to pass - it failed.

He also seems to approve of that wage being linked to the Consumer Price Index - an idea that uses circular reasoning.

This bill is considered to be a JOB KILLER BILL by small business owners (NFIB, Tennessee Chamber of Commerce).

It is clear that the best way to help a low wage person make more money is by improving their skills so that their labor is worth more to an employer. It is not by causing inflation in the economy which only makes the low wage person's life more difficult.

Please see my article: Circular Reasoning and the Minimum Wage. This article about this bill was published by a national magazine and received much praise.

By the way, the bill my opponent mentions in the mailer is not the Minimum Wage Bill - it is HB3402 a bill that exempts from the County Powers Relief Act any county in which at least 51 percent of the real property is owned by the federal government and dedicated as a national forest...it didn't pass either.