2006
Week 12
March 24, 2006

Hi

Post Script on last week's flap. We voted to strip the amendment which was to trim Planned Parenthood and, in reaction, send more $$$ to rural health clinics for low income women. It also had a sentence in there that was designed to crimp Planned Parenthood but actually limited other clinics in health care. So, that is gone, plus the extra dollars.

The really disappointing part of all this is that the senator who provided the deception is completely unrepentant. Sort of like: if your cause is noble you can do as you please. Well, we all have had causes that were noble, and sometimes we felt most anything could be justified. But we do not do it and we ought not do the justify spin.

The flap of this week centered on a lobbyist. His name was shouted out on the floor by the offended senator, but I doubt he welcomed the publicity.

We have had a feud between doctors, chiropractors and physical therapists since I have been there. Like, who qualifies for Medicare payments? Who can file a medical lien? How do we distinguish between levels of training? The doctors and chiropractors have settled the wording on liens, but we have not acted on it. This week the fuss centered on "manipulation." We know quite a few folk try out for manipulation, but that is not it.

We were told that chiropractors can manipulate a joint, while p. t.'s may only move it. It is not that simple, but after two years of hearings, fighting, fussing and promising, they settled on some wording. Our health committee agreed to it and we were ready to adopt it one night when the lobbyist (who had agreed to it) tried to stall it with another amendment because, we were told, the chiropractors did not have their lien bill yet. So the p. t.'s should wait in line. This is nuts. When a bill is cleared to go, after two years and steady review, can we let someone's feelings get in the way? Like managing a Kindergarten. We wasted much time, pulled the bill -- and so other necessary corrections to statutes are also gone. The lobbyist did not show up the next day. Wise move.

The same senator who called this act "classless" contrasted it with "a high class act." Our Speaker spoke passionately for his amendment which would kill the campaign finance limitation act. He lost, and then helped his adversary move on with an amendment to the legislation, to fix most of its problems. It was truly a class act.

His protest against the limitations statute was one of the most eloquent speeches I have heard .... and I have heard many. His words flowed, his ideas flowed and it was all done in elegant language. Most of us did not agree with him, but it is wonderful to have a fiery challenge in a public forum. I will share one idea, to made this a bit more specific. He maintains that limiting spending limits free speech. That is certainly true, but it is also true that if you do not have money for your campaign you cannot afford "free" speech. Free speech costs money, especially on TV, and if your opponent has a limitless supply of $$$ you will almost surely lose. We may not be selecting "the best."

Therefore, we set limits. There are two sides to everything and I did enjoy the debate.

I have grumped about so called "tax cuts" before, so will keep this short. We did it this week.

Those campaigning for office want something to talk about, so we voted out a package that cuts every taxpayer by $1.75 per week for the next three years. Please BE SURE to put that into the economy or we will not reap the immense ripple benefits.

You are waiting breathlessly to hear how we did this. Keep breathing. We cut $250 million over the next three years. We will get $120 m. of that by adding to the property tax. (Isn't this fun?) We hope that the economy does better than we expected (don't forget the spin from the tax cut) and give us $150 m. more. Let's see. That leaves $70 m. Oh well, let's take it out of our savings account.

My cynicism shows because this is ridiculous. In fairness, the package had an excellent spread -- even increased Homestead Exemption limits, to help the elderly pay those property taxes. I also had a lot of fun, teasing my colleagues who claim to be hard core against increased spending. When you are not cutting expenses, tax cuts are spending. We were about to vote to spend $9 million for one of the cuts and I complained pointedly to those close by. One said "It is only 9 million, Lowen. Not a big deal." Words of a true conservative. Another responded to my jibes with "My people really want this." O my. If a family said "It is only 9 thousand and we really want to do it" -- though they did not have the money -- we would call them dysfunctional.

Many good small things happen in the midst of these items that cause me to grumble. I should make a list sometime .... things like access to nursing homes, transportation for the handicapped and improved communication. It would be a long list.

Hang in there,

Lowen