elbertcounty.net

"Just the facts M'am, Just the facts." -- Sgt. Joe Friday

You are here: Home / Archives for Growing Government

C-1 Bond language

By

Note where the C-1 Board increased the cost estimates used to justify the Bond.

More importantly, note how the ballot language – which will become the controlling law in this deal – clouds the source & use control of funding. The Board combined project estimates into ballot groupings, and then put everything under the funds flow from the BEST grants. Since the C-1 Board had analyzed the ballot language for some time before tonight -video- one could conclude that rigid internal control of Bond funds flow wasn’t an objective.

Also, the repayment cost of the debt of $3.8M is the real cost to the taxpayers. Focusing on the bond value as the measure of the impact of the debt, disguises the real cost of all the chosen projects. You need to add 40% to each project to estimate its indebted real cost. [Read more…]

Zoning a Gordian Knot

By

Planning commission workshop on special districts

“Your comments are appreciated in terms of developing a process that protects the health, safety, and welfare of Elbert County citizens.” (from Cover Letter)

The Recommended Financial Plan is all about collecting taxes by and for government.  Nothing in here protects the health, safety and welfare of Elbert County citizens.

The Draft Special District Regulation will determine that “The creation of the proposed special district will be in the best interests of the area proposed to be served.”  How will a group of government third party non-stakeholders know what is in the best interests of private citizens, let alone what will protect their health, safety and welfare?

The Draft Special District Information Requirements contains a process with no foreseeable end for encumbering applicants, perhaps subjects is a better word, to the whim of county regulators.  No standards, no absolutes, nothing in here might commit a bureaucrat to stamp an application approved.

The  Staff Report posits that the county shall be the arbiter of economic, financial, and market viability, of proposed special use districts.  Government bureaucrats who have never actually made a profit lack qualifications to make such assessments.

In sum, this process is a bundle of socialist clap trap commissioned by Rowland and Ross.  It is a make-work recipe for government bureaucrats and their contractors that is intended to stop the private sector in Elbert County from making any changes.  It protects the health, safety and welfare of Elbert County planners whom we apparently exist to serve.

B_Imperial

Rules

Emergency Flyer

By

Emergency Flyer home
Emergency Notice
Everyone knows about the County Clerk’s emotional distress over the budget.  Does this really constitute an emergency?  Are the citizens of Elbert County at risk of life and limb because they can only walk in to register their vehicles on a Monday or a Wednesday and the other days they have to mail it in?  Perhaps the County Clerk should seek a less stressful office.

Congress, defund this mess.

By

Below is a list of new boards and commissions created in the Obamacare bill.
1. Grant program for consumer assistance offices (Section 1002, p. 37)
2. Grant program for states to monitor premium increases (Section  1003, p. 42)
3. Committee to review administrative simplification standards  (Section 1104, p. 71)
4. Demonstration program for state wellness programs (Section 1201, p.  93)
5. Grant program to establish state Exchanges (Section 1311(a), p. 130)
6. State American Health Benefit Exchanges (Section 1311(b), p. 131)
7. Exchange grants to establish consumer navigator programs (Section  1311(i), p. 150)
8. Grant program for state cooperatives (Section 1322, p. 169)
9. Advisory board for state cooperatives (Section 1322(b)(3), p. 173)
10. Private purchasing council for state cooperatives (Section  1322(d), p. 177)
11. State basic health plan programs (Section 1331, p. 201)
12. State-based reinsurance program (Section 1341, p. 226)
13. Program of risk corridors for individual and small group markets  (Section 1342, p. 233)
14. Program to determine eligibility for Exchange participation  (Section 1411, p. 267)
15. Program for advance determination of tax credit eligibility  (Section 1412, p. 288)
16. Grant program to implement health IT enrollment standards (Section  1561, p. 370)
17. Federal Coordinated Health Care Office for dual eligible  beneficiaries (Section 2602, p. 512)
18. Medicaid quality measurement program (Section 2701, p. 518)
19. Medicaid health home program for people with chronic conditions,  and grants for planning same (Section 2703, p. 524)
20. Medicaid demonstration project to evaluate bundled payments  (Section 2704, p. 532)
21. Medicaid demonstration project for global payment system (Section  2705, p. 536)
22. Medicaid demonstration project for accountable care organizations  (Section 2706, p. 538)
23. Medicaid demonstration project for emergency psychiatric care  (Section 2707, p. 540)
24. Grant program for delivery of services to individuals with  postpartum depression (Section 2952(b), p. 591)
25. State allotments for grants to promote personal responsibility  education programs (Section 2953, p. 596)
26. Medicare value-based purchasing program (Section 3001(a), p. 613)
27. Medicare value-based purchasing demonstration program for critical  access hospitals (Section 3001(b), p. 637)
28. Medicare value-based purchasing program for skilled nursing  facilities (Section 3006(a), p. 666)
29. Medicare value-based purchasing program for home health agencies  (Section 3006(b), p. 668)
30. Interagency Working Group on Health Care Quality (Section 3012, p.  688)
31. Grant program to develop health care quality measures (Section  3013, p. 693)
32. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (Section 3021, p. 712)
33. Medicare shared savings program (Section 3022, p. 728)
34. Medicare pilot program on payment bundling (Section 3023, p. 739)
35. Independence at home medical practice demonstration program  (Section 3024, p. 752)
36. Program for use of patient safety organizations to reduce hospital  readmission rates (Section 3025(b), p. 775)
37. Community-based care transitions program (Section 3026, p. 776)
38. Demonstration project for payment of complex diagnostic laboratory  tests (Section 3113, p. 800)
39. Medicare hospice concurrent care demonstration project (Section  3140, p. 850)
40. Independent Payment Advisory Board (Section 3403, p. 982)
41. Consumer Advisory Council for Independent Payment Advisory Board  (Section 3403, p. 1027)
42. Grant program for technical assistance to providers implementing  health quality practices (Section 3501, p. 1043)
43. Grant program to establish interdisciplinary health teams (Section  3502, p. 1048)
44. Grant program to implement medication therapy management (Section  3503, p. 1055)
45. Grant program to support emergency care pilot programs (Section  3504, p. 1061)
46. Grant program to promote universal access to trauma services  (Section 3505(b), p. 1081)
47. Grant program to develop and promote shared decision-making aids  (Section 3506, p. 1088)
48. Grant program to support implementation of shared decision-making  (Section 3506, p. 1091)
49. Grant program to integrate quality improvement in clinical  education (Section 3508, p. 1095)
50. Health and Human Services Coordinating Committee on Women’s Health  (Section 3509(a), p. 1098)
51. Centers for Disease Control Office of Women’s Health (Section  3509(b), p. 1102)
52. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Office of Women’s  Health (Section 3509(e), p. 1105)
53. Health Resources and Services Administration Office of Women’s  Health (Section 3509(f), p. 1106)
54. Food and Drug Administration Office of Women’s Health (Section  3509(g), p. 1109)
55. National Prevention, Health Promotion, and Public Health Council  (Section 4001, p. 1114)
56. Advisory Group on Prevention, Health Promotion, and Integrative  and Public Health (Section 4001(f), p. 1117)
57. Prevention and Public Health Fund (Section 4002, p. 1121)
58. Community Preventive Services Task Force (Section 4003(b), p. 1126)
59. Grant program to support school-based health centers (Section  4101, p. 1135)
60. Grant program to promote research-based dental caries disease  management (Section 4102, p. 1147)
61. Grant program for States to prevent chronic disease in Medicaid  beneficiaries (Section 4108, p. 1174)
62. Community transformation grants (Section 4201, p. 1182)
63. Grant program to provide public health interventions (Section  4202, p. 1188)
64. Demonstration program of grants to improve child immunization  rates (Section 4204(b), p. 1200)
65. Pilot program for risk-factor assessments provided through  community health centers (Section 4206, p. 1215)
66. Grant program to increase epidemiology and laboratory capacity  (Section 4304, p. 1233)
67. Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee (Section 4305, p.  1238)
68. National Health Care Workforce Commission (Section 5101, p. 1256)
69. Grant program to plan health care workforce development activities  (Section 5102(c), p. 1275)
70. Grant program to implement health care workforce development  activities (Section 5102(d), p. 1279)
71. Pediatric specialty loan repayment program (Section 5203, p. 1295)
72. Public Health Workforce Loan Repayment Program (Section 5204, p.  1300)
73. Allied Health Loan Forgiveness Program (Section 5205, p. 1305)
74. Grant program to provide mid-career training for health  professionals (Section 5206, p. 1307)
75. Grant program to fund nurse-managed health clinics (Section 5208,  p. 1310)
76. Grant program to support primary care training programs (Section  5301, p. 1315)
77. Grant program to fund training for direct care workers (Section  5302, p. 1322)
78. Grant program to develop dental training programs (Section 5303,  p. 1325)
79. Demonstration program to increase access to dental health care in  underserved communities (Section 5304, p. 1331)
80. Grant program to promote geriatric education centers (Section  5305, p. 1334)
81. Grant program to promote health professionals entering geriatrics  (Section 5305, p. 1339)
82. Grant program to promote training in mental and behavioral health  (Section 5306, p. 1344)
83. Grant program to promote nurse retention programs (Section 5309,  p. 1354)
84. Student loan forgiveness for nursing school faculty (Section  5311(b), p. 1360)
85. Grant program to promote positive health behaviors and outcomes  (Section 5313, p. 1364)
86. Public Health Sciences Track for medical students (Section 5315,  p. 1372)
87. Primary Care Extension Program to educate providers (Section 5405,  p. 1404)
88. Grant program for demonstration projects to address health  workforce shortage needs (Section 5507, p. 1442)
89. Grant program for demonstration projects to develop training  programs for home health aides (Section 5507, p. 1447)
90. Grant program to establish new primary care residency programs  (Section 5508(a), p. 1458)
91. Program of payments to teaching health centers that sponsor  medical residency training (Section 5508(c), p. 1462)
92. Graduate nurse education demonstration program (Section 5509, p.  1472)
93. Grant program to establish demonstration projects for community- based mental health settings (Section 5604, p. 1486)
94. Commission on Key National Indicators (Section 5605, p. 1489)
95. Quality assurance and performance improvement program for skilled  nursing facilities (Section 6102, p. 1554)
96. Special focus facility program for skilled nursing facilities  (Section 6103(a)(3), p. 1561)
97. Special focus facility program for nursing facilities (Section  6103(b)(3), p. 1568)
98. National independent monitor pilot program for skilled nursing  facilities and nursing facilities (Section 6112, p. 1589)
99. Demonstration projects for nursing facilities involved in the  culture change movement (Section 6114, p. 1597)
100. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (Section 6301, p.  1619)
101. Standing methodology committee for Patient-Centered Outcomes  Research Institute (Section 6301, p. 1629)
102. Board of Governors for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research  Institute (Section 6301, p. 1638)
103. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Trust Fund (Section 6301(e),  p. 1656)
104. Elder Justice Coordinating Council (Section 6703, p. 1773)
105. Advisory Board on Elder Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation (Section  6703, p. 1776)
106. Grant program to create elder abuse forensic centers (Section  6703, p. 1783)
107. Grant program to promote continuing education for long-term care  staffers (Section 6703, p. 1787)
108. Grant program to improve management practices and training  (Section 6703, p. 1788)
109. Grant program to subsidize costs of electronic health records  (Section 6703, p. 1791)
110. Grant program to promote adult protective services (Section 6703,  p. 1796)
111. Grant program to conduct elder abuse detection and prevention  (Section 6703, p. 1798)
112. Grant program to support long-term care ombudsmen (Section 6703,  p. 1800)
113. National Training Institute for long-term care surveyors (Section  6703, p. 1806)
114. Grant program to fund State surveys of long-term care residences  (Section 6703, p. 1809)
115. CLASS Independence Fund (Section 8002, p. 1926)
116. CLASS Independence Fund Board of Trustees (Section 8002, p. 1927)
117. CLASS Independence Advisory Council (Section 8002, p. 1931)
118. Personal Care Attendants Workforce Advisory Panel (Section  8002(c), p. 1938)
119. Multi-state health plans offered by Office of Personnel  Management (Section 10104(p), p. 2086)
120. Advisory board for multi-state health plans (Section 10104(p), p.  2094)
121. Pregnancy Assistance Fund (Section 10212, p. 2164)
122. Value-based purchasing program for ambulatory surgical centers  (Section 10301, p. 2176)
123. Demonstration project for payment adjustments to home health  services (Section 10315, p. 2200)
124. Pilot program for care of individuals in environmental emergency  declaration areas (Section 10323, p. 2223)
125. Grant program to screen at-risk individuals for environmental  health conditions (Section 10323(b), p. 2231)
126. Pilot programs to implement value-based purchasing (Section  10326, p. 2242)
127. Grant program to support community-based collaborative care  networks (Section 10333, p. 2265)
128. Centers for Disease Control Office of Minority Health (Section  10334, p. 2272)
129. Health Resources and Services Administration Office of Minority  Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
130. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Office  of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
131. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Office of Minority  Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
132. Food and Drug Administration Office of Minority Health (Section  10334, p. 2272)
133. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Office of Minority  Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
134. Grant program to promote small business wellness programs  (Section 10408, p. 2285)
135. Cures Acceleration Network (Section 10409, p. 2289)
136. Cures Acceleration Network Review Board (Section 10409, p. 2291)
137. Grant program for Cures Acceleration Network (Section 10409, p.  2297)
138. Grant program to promote centers of excellence for depression  (Section 10410, p. 2304)
139. Advisory committee for young women’s breast health awareness  education campaign (Section 10413, p. 2322)
140. Grant program to provide assistance to provide information to  young women with breast cancer (Section 10413, p. 2326)
141. Interagency Access to Health Care in Alaska Task Force (Section  10501, p. 2329)
142. Grant program to train nurse practitioners as primary care  providers (Section 10501(e), p. 2332)
143. Grant program for community-based diabetes prevention (Section  10501(g), p. 2337)
144. Grant program for providers who treat a high percentage of  medically underserved populations (Section 10501(k), p. 2343)
145. Grant program to recruit students to practice in underserved  communities (Section 10501(l), p. 2344)
146. Community Health Center Fund (Section 10503, p. 2355)
147. Demonstration project to provide access to health care for the  uninsured at reduced fees (Section 10504, p. 2357)
148. Demonstration program to explore alternatives to tort litigation  (Section 10607, p. 2369)
149. Indian Health demonstration program for chronic shortages of  health professionals (S. 1790, Section 112, p. 24)*
150. Office of Indian Men’s Health (S. 1790, Section 136, p. 71)*
151. Indian Country modular component facilities demonstration program  (S. 1790, Section 146, p. 108)*
152. Indian mobile health stations demonstration program (S. 1790,  Section 147, p. 111)*
153. Office of Direct Service Tribes (S. 1790, Section 172, p. 151)*
154. Indian Health Service mental health technician training program  (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 173)*
155. Indian Health Service program for treatment of child sexual abuse  victims (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 192)*
156. Indian Health Service program for treatment of domestic violence  and sexual abuse (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 194)*
157. Indian youth telemental health demonstration project (S. 1790,  Section 181, p. 204)*
158. Indian youth life skills demonstration project (S. 1790, Section  181, p. 220)*
159. Indian Health Service Director of HIV/AIDS Prevention and  Treatment (S. 1790, Section 199B, p. 258)*

condolences

By

Critics painted me as a defender of the old guard.  Ha!  The only things I defended in this election cycle were competence, sound management, realistic thinking, and the rule of law.  Tragically, these bedrock principles did not win today in the Elbert County Republican Party primary.  Well, the principles still exist, and it appears I will have plenty more opportunities to defend them in the future.

Come November, commissioner choices will be between agenda driven liberals and, um, agenda driven liberals.  I’m sure this prospect has the New-Plains democrats, populists, and leftists, dancing in their switch grass patches tonight, however, consequences for the county will be grim.

We’ll see ubiquitous zoning and higher taxes.  We’ll see environmentalism and its basket of unfounded mythologies unleashed in a flurry of ersatz relevancy as they consume the public discourse.  We’ll experience these mythologies fail in an expensive protracted drama full of denial and blame.  We’ll see none of these agenda progenitors take responsibility when their no-growth, anti-industrial, country-in-county ideas further impoverish Elbert County.  We’ll see the few of us who use their 1st Am. right to dissent from these prevailing insanities called more names, if that’s even possible at this point.

I never wrote for the sake of the old guard.  I wrote for the sake of limited sound government.  A voting minority of Elbert County voted for bigger more intrusive government.  They made a big mistake, and the county government they’ve chosen for all of us will make us pay dearly for it.  That’s what unbridled government does to people and these people are all about the unbridling of government power.

The left has won.  You’re not going to like these new-strange bedfellows when they start implementing their plans for you.

B_Imperial

to zone or not to zone

By

ELBERT COUNTY REPUBLICAN PARTY
RESOLUTIONS FOR PLATFORM
2012

(partial list  –  all passed at Assembly 5/24/2012)

12. Be it resolved, the Elbert County Republican Party support and encourage responsible growth, respecting the rights of all county residents consistent with the goal of preserving the unique rural and natural character of Elbert County.

15. Be it resolved, the Elbert County Republican Party requests that the elected Board of County Commissioners implement the noxious weed control plan as directed by State Law.

16. Be it resolved, the Elbert County Republican Party request that the elected Board of County Commissioners adopt, implement and enforce a 300 year water supply plan based on actual water usage.

17. Be it resolved, the Elbert County Republican Party request that the elected Board of County Commissioners adopt responsible planning and development measures to ensure that growth pay its own way and ensure that new infrastructure demanded by new development is not subsidized by the taxpayer without a vote of said taxpayer.

– OR –

21. Be it resolved, the Elbert County Republican Party object to the expansion of Elbert County zoning laws.

~

Which will it be?  You can’t have it both ways.

This schizophrenic disconnect in the Republican Party Platform, approved yesterday at the 2012 County Assembly, is another symptom of our Elbert County uni-party implementation of the Republican Party.

Now, you could say the Resolutions Committee for the assembly failed in their mission to provide an internally consistent set of resolutions for the platform, however, it’s not really their responsibility to resolve this political question.

And, you could say that the Executive Committee of the Party is responsible because they suspended debate on the resolutions by assembly delegates, and thereby precluded the assembled body of Republicans from reaching a compromise.  But after tolerating season after electoral season of mixed-use Republicanism, it would have been highly contentious, perhaps even violent, for a bunch of lefties and conservatives to work their substantive differences out in the space of a few minutes of polite assembly “dialoging.”

Besides, these issues cannot be legitimately resolved by a set of self-selected delegates numbering less than 1 hundredth of 1 percent of the population.  Without a causal connection between voters and voting objects, be it candidate or issue, consent of the voters is cut off.

Enfranchised voters are the only interest group who can legitimately resolve this political question.

The Founders labored and argued for years to conceive constitutional methods to enfranchise voters and permit them to be governed legitimately.  Sadly, our caucus assembly system which disenfranchises voters at large does not meet that standard.  And muddying the preliminary waters by empowering a single party to clear both left and conservative candidates is a giant step further away from voter enfranchisement.

The way to fix this conundrum is to return Elbert County to a two-party system.  Would the Democrat Party tolerate a bunch of conservatives diluting their precious social and entitlement agendas?  Absolutely not!  Why then do conservatives around here allow the left to tromp all over their Republican Party?

The way to fix this problem is to nip it in the bud.  Make the change here:

ELBERT COUNTY REPUBLICAN CENTRAL COMMITTEE BYLAWS

Article III. POLICY

Section 4. Endorsements. The ECR acting as an entity, or the ECR elected officers shall not publicly support or endorse any Republican candidate that is involved in a primary who could represent Elbert County residents in a partisan race.

Change it to read something like the following:

ECR elected officers shall substantively analyze all Republican candidates with respect to information publicly available in local history as it relates to each candidates alignment with the Republican Oath and the Elbert County Republican Party Platform.  Officers shall report their findings to Precinct Committeepeople in a timely manner as the findings become known.

As things currently stand, ECR elected officers must withhold a relevant body of knowledge from the rest of the caucus and assembly process.  While done in the interest of fairness, the left games that good intention and turns it against the Republican Party from the inside.

Playing fair only works in an ethical environment.  The left have never played fair and Republicans should stop fooling themselves about it.

regulations ‘R’ us

By

List of New Bureaucracies in Obama’s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act – PPACA

(Note: This is just from the enabling legislation.  Each of these laws will spawn federal regulatory agency responses with tens of thousands of pages of CFR rules and federal bureaucratic enforcement.  In classic Orwellian double speak, nothing about this legislation will make health care more affordable.)

1. Retiree Reserve Trust Fund (Section 111(d), p. 61)
2. Grant program for wellness programs to small employers (Section 112, p. 62)
3. Grant program for State health access programs (Section 114, p. 72)
4. Program of administrative simplification (Section 115, p. 76)
5. Health Benefits Advisory Committee (Section 223, p. 111)
6. Health Choices Administration (Section 241, p. 131)
7. Qualified Health Benefits Plan Ombudsman (Section 244, p. 138)
8. Health Insurance Exchange (Section 201, p. 155)
9. Program for technical assistance to employees of small businesses buying Exchange coverage (Section 305(h), p. 191)
10. Mechanism for insurance risk pooling to be established by Health Choices Commissioner (Section 306(b), p. 194)
11. Health Insurance Exchange Trust Fund (Section 307, p. 195)
12. State-based Health Insurance Exchanges (Section 308, p. 197)
13. Grant program for health insurance cooperatives (Section 310, p. 206)
14. “Public Health Insurance Option” (Section 321, p. 211)
15. Ombudsman for “Public Health Insurance Option” (Section 321(d), p. 213)
16. Account for receipts and disbursements for “Public Health Insurance Option” (Section 322(b), p. 215)
17. Telehealth Advisory Committee (Section 1191 (b), p. 589)
18. Demonstration program providing reimbursement for “culturally and linguistically appropriate services” (Section 1222, p. 617)
19. Demonstration program for shared decision making using patient decision aids (Section 1236, p. 648)
20. Accountable Care Organization pilot program under Medicare (Section 1301, p. 653)
21. Independent patient-centered medical home pilot program under Medicare (Section 1302, p. 672)
22. Community-based medical home pilot program under Medicare (Section 1302(d), p. 681)
23. Independence at home demonstration program (Section 1312, p. 718)
24. Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research (Section 1401(a), p. 734)
25. Comparative Effectiveness Research Commission (Section 1401(a), p. 738)
26. Patient ombudsman for comparative effectiveness research (Section 1401(a), p. 753)
27. Quality assurance and performance improvement program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 1412(b)(1), p. 784)
28. Quality assurance and performance improvement program for nursing facilities (Section 1412 (b)(2), p. 786)
29. Special focus facility program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 1413(a)(3), p. 796)
30. Special focus facility program for nursing facilities (Section 1413(b)(3), p. 804)
31. National independent monitor pilot program for skilled nursing facilities and nursing facilities (Section 1422, p. 859)
32. Demonstration program for approved teaching health centers with respect to Medicare GME (Section 1502(d), p. 933)
33. Pilot program to develop anti-fraud compliance systems for Medicare providers (Section 1635, p. 978)
34. Special Inspector General for the Health Insurance Exchange (Section 1647, p. 1000)
35. Medical home pilot program under Medicaid (Section 1722, p. 1058)
36. Accountable Care Organization pilot program under Medicaid (Section 1730A, p. 1073)
37. Nursing facility supplemental payment program (Section 1745, p. 1106)
38. Demonstration program for Medicaid coverage to stabilize emergency medical conditions in institutions for mental diseases (Section 1787, p. 1149)
39. Comparative Effectiveness Research Trust Fund (Section 1802, p. 1162)
40. “Identifiable office or program” within CMS to “provide for improved coordination between Medicare and Medicaid in the case of dual eligibles” (Section 1905, p. 1191)
41. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (Section 1907, p. 1198)
42. Public Health Investment Fund (Section 2002, p. 1214)
43. Scholarships for service in health professional needs areas (Section 2211, p. 1224)
44. Program for training medical residents in community-based settings (Section 2214, p. 1236)
45. Grant program for training in dentistry programs (Section 2215, p. 1240)
46. Public Health Workforce Corps (Section 2231, p. 1253)
47. Public health workforce scholarship program (Section 2231, p. 1254)
48. Public health workforce loan forgiveness program (Section 2231, p. 1258)
49. Grant program for innovations in interdisciplinary care (Section 2252, p. 1272)
50. Advisory Committee on Health Workforce Evaluation and Assessment (Section 2261, p. 1275)
51. Prevention and Wellness Trust (Section 2301, p. 1286)
52. Clinical Prevention Stakeholders Board (Section 2301, p. 1295)
53. Community Prevention Stakeholders Board (Section 2301, p. 1301)
54. Grant program for community prevention and wellness research (Section 2301, p. 1305)
55. Grant program for research and demonstration projects related to wellness incentives (Section 2301, p. 1305)
56. Grant program for community prevention and wellness services (Section 2301, p. 1308)
57. Grant program for public health infrastructure (Section 2301, p. 1313)
58. Center for Quality Improvement (Section 2401, p. 1322)
59. Assistant Secretary for Health Information (Section 2402, p. 1330)
60. Grant program to support the operation of school-based health clinics (Section 2511, p. 1352)
61. Grant program for nurse-managed health centers (Section 2512, p. 1361)
62. Grants for labor-management programs for nursing training (Section 2521, p. 1372)
63. Grant program for interdisciplinary mental and behavioral health training (Section 2522, p. 1382)
64. “No Child Left Unimmunized Against Influenza” demonstration grant program (Section 2524, p. 1391)
65. Healthy Teen Initiative grant program regarding teen pregnancy (Section 2526, p. 1398)
66. Grant program for interdisciplinary training, education, and services for individuals with autism (Section 2527(a), p. 1402)
67. University centers for excellence in developmental disabilities education (Section 2527(b), p. 1410)
68. Grant program to implement medication therapy management services (Section 2528, p. 1412)
69. Grant program to promote positive health behaviors in underserved communities (Section 2530, p. 1422)
70. Grant program for State alternative medical liability laws (Section 2531, p. 1431)
71. Grant program to develop infant mortality programs (Section 2532, p. 1433)
72. Grant program to prepare secondary school students for careers in health professions (Section 2533, p. 1437)
73. Grant program for community-based collaborative care (Section 2534, p. 1440)
74. Grant program for community-based overweight and obesity prevention (Section 2535, p. 1457)
75. Grant program for reducing the student-to-school nurse ratio in primary and secondary schools (Section 2536, p. 1462)
76. Demonstration project of grants to medical-legal partnerships (Section 2537, p. 1464)
77. Center for Emergency Care under the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (Section 2552, p. 1478)
78. Council for Emergency Care (Section 2552, p 1479)
79. Grant program to support demonstration programs that design and implement regionalized emergency care systems (Section 2553, p. 1480)
80. Grant program to assist veterans who wish to become emergency medical technicians upon discharge (Section 2554, p. 1487)
81. Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee (Section 2562, p. 1494)
82. National Medical Device Registry (Section 2571, p. 1501)
83. CLASS Independence Fund (Section 2581, p. 1597)
84. CLASS Independence Fund Board of Trustees (Section 2581, p. 1598)
85. CLASS Independence Advisory Council (Section 2581, p. 1602)
86. Health and Human Services Coordinating Committee on Women’s Health (Section 2588, p. 1610)
87. National Women’s Health Information Center (Section 2588, p. 1611)
88. Centers for Disease Control Office of Women’s Health (Section 2588, p. 1614)
89. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Office of Women’s Health and Gender-Based Research (Section 2588, p. 1617)
90. Health Resources and Services Administration Office of Women’s Health (Section 2588, p. 1618)
91. Food and Drug Administration Office of Women’s Health (Section 2588, p. 1621)
92. Personal Care Attendant Workforce Advisory Panel (Section 2589(a)(2), p. 1624)
93. Grant program for national health workforce online training (Section 2591, p. 1629)
94. Grant program to disseminate best practices on implementing health workforce investment programs (Section 2591, p. 1632)
95. Demonstration program for chronic shortages of health professionals (Section 3101, p. 1717)
96. Demonstration program for substance abuse counselor educational curricula (Section 3101, p. 1719)
97. Program of Indian community education on mental illness (Section 3101, p. 1722)
98. Intergovernmental Task Force on Indian environmental and nuclear hazards (Section 3101, p. 1754)
99. Office of Indian Men’s Health (Section 3101, p. 1765)
100. Indian Health facilities appropriation advisory board (Section 3101, p. 1774)
101. Indian Health facilities needs assessment workgroup (Section 3101, p. 1775)
102. Indian Health Service tribal facilities joint venture demonstration projects (Section 3101, p. 1809)
103. Urban youth treatment center demonstration project (Section 3101, p. 1873)
104. Grants to Urban Indian Organizations for diabetes prevention (Section 3101, p. 1874)
105. Grants to Urban Indian Organizations for health IT adoption (Section 3101, p. 1877)
106. Mental health technician training program (Section 3101, p. 1898)
107. Indian youth telemental health demonstration project (Section 3101, p. 1909)
108. Program for treatment of child sexual abuse victims and perpetrators (Section 3101, p. 1925)
109. Program for treatment of domestic violence and sexual abuse (Section 3101, p. 1927)
110. Native American Health and Wellness Foundation (Section 3103, p. 1966)
111. Committee for the Establishment of the Native American Health and Wellness Foundation (Section 3103, p. 1968)

the planners attorney

By

Jerry Dahl, an attorney employed by the Elbert County Community and Development Services Department, advises the public about his stance on county oil and gas regulation, at the Planning Commission meeting last night, 1/26/2012.

Audio here: Jerry Dahl at EC Planning Comm 1_26_2012.wmv

It is reasonable to conclude from his remarks that Mr. Dahl is promoting a county “right” to further regulate oil and gas development, and that he foresees the need for the county to litigate the question.

As an attorney Mr. Dahl represents his client’s interest, and the client is Richard Miller, the director of the Community and Development Services Department.  Mr. Miller introduced Mr. Dahl and it is fair to conclude that Mr. Dahl accurately represented Mr. Miller’s interest.

So, the director of planning wants to regulate oil and gas development at the county level, and he’s hired an adversarial attorney who shares that interest.

And who are the people to be regulated by these forces?  You and me.  The county has an attorney sworn to zealously defend their interest, because all attorneys take an oath to zealously defend their clients’ interests, against you and me.

Should our tax money be used to fund an adversarial legal process that is aimed at us?

History repeats

By

Hitler told the Reichstag

“The government will make use of these powers only insofar as they are essential for carrying out vitally necessary measures…The number of cases in which an internal necessity exists for having recourse to such a law is in itself a limited one.”

He also promised an end to unemployment and pledged to promote peace with France, Great Britain and the Soviet Union. But in order to do all this, Hitler said, he first needed the Enabling Act.

Enabling Act, Article 1

In addition to the procedure prescribed by the constitution, laws of the Reich may also be enacted by the government of the Reich.

Enabling Act, Article 2

Laws enacted by the government of the Reich may deviate from the constitution as long as they do not affect the institutions of the Reichstag and the Reichsrat.  The rights of the President remain undisturbed.

Barak Obama, State of the Union, 1-24-2012

Some of what’s broken has to do with the way Congress does its business these days.  A simple majority is no longer enough to get anything -– even routine business –- passed through the Senate.  (Applause.)  Neither party has been blameless in these tactics.  Now both parties should put an end to it.  (Applause.)  For starters, I ask the Senate to pass a simple rule that all judicial and public service nominations receive a simple up or down vote within 90 days.  (Applause.)

The executive branch also needs to change.  Too often, it’s inefficient, outdated and remote.  (Applause.)  That’s why I’ve asked this Congress to grant me the authority to consolidate the federal bureaucracy, so that our government is leaner, quicker, and more responsive to the needs of the American people.  (Applause.)

the cost of regulation

By

“Every year regulatory compliance costs U.S. businesses $1.75 Trillion. That would be enough to hire 43 Million workers.”

See this short youtube video at Episode Two: Economic Freedom in America Today.

Regulation is not only a Federal problem.  Regulation is pernicious, at every level of government.  Today Elbert County has a clear choice whether or not to greatly expand our county’s regulatory reach into energy development matters it knows next to nothing about.

At the county level the force of regulation is imposed through zoning law.  Our county’s Community and Development Services department works every day to write, refine, expand, detail and enforce their ubiquitous vision of a perfectable society.  They want to save this land and this county from its people because, essentially, they don’t trust the people.

They think they are wise stewards who, with a third-party steward’s interest, have a more valuable right to forecefully impose their vision about a sound local economy, than the stakeholders and property holders in the county have in doing so for themselves.

Zoning regulators think that by stopping people from the pursuit of economic activity, they serve a higher purpose of preservation of our local world.  This of course begs questions of preservation for what?  For who?  For when?  And for why?

Of course they have answers for all of these questions.  The answers are myths — myths consisting of more tenuous myths in a great pyramid of “smart,” sustainable, no-growth, enviro-jihad mythology.

The future beneficiaries of county zoning and regulation don’t exist.  They are a myth–not real–and unless you’re a believer, not even foreseeable.  The great probability is they will never come to exist because future unforseen circumstances will change everything long before these present day socio and eco myths can ever be tested, long after they are forgotten in favor of some future mythology as yet unkown.

Man took matters that used to be in God’s domain and invested them in Gaia, the environment and universe-trekking aliens. That’s what humans do at the margins of their knowledge where observation ends and speculation begins–we create mythologies–myths that we love.   And then we create the legalities to enforce those mythologies.

Regulatory zealots consider this sort of talk heresy.  They believe that the forced perfectibility of man and the environment is actually possible.  Just as the power that was – the Church – once defended Ptolemy’s geocentric universe against the heresy of Copernicus, so too the regulatory powers of today know, without a shadow of doubt, that they know best, and that they can sufficiently describe, legislate, and enforce a set of rules to govern our behavior, for our own best interest.

To even imagine they could succeed at such a task is a pinnacle of hubris.  When has an authoritarian process ever led to a best outcome for its subjects?  When have a small minority of minds ever created the economic output of a diverse population acting in their own interests?  The regulatory model cannot succeed.

Regulation makes inevitable change much more costly.  The regulatory parties in government who do this to us have no personal skin in the game–only myths and the iron fist–a deadly combination.  Ironically, the regulatory mission of governing progressives is about the most regressive thing they could do.

If we can’t stop creating mythologies, at least we should learn to stop legalizing them.

~

Operational Conflicts Waiver

By

Proposed Elbert County Oil & Gas Regulations and Permitting Process
Part II, Section 26.2 Review Procedures

I. OPERATIONAL CONFLICTS WAIVER

A waiver to these Regulations shall be granted if or when the application of the requirements of these Regulations actually conflict in operation with the rules of the Oil and Gas Conservation Act or implementing regulations.

1. All applications where a waiver due to operational conflicts is requested shall be processed as a Major Oil & Gas Facility and heard in a noticed public hearing by the Board of County Commissioners. The Applicant shall have the burden of pleading and proving an actual, material, irreconcilable operational conflict between the requirements of this section and those of the Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Commission in the context of a specific application.

Translation: You have to prove an operational conflict exists between interpretations of the county and interpretations of the state regulations.

2. For purposes of this Section, an operational conflict exists where an actual application of a County condition of approval or regulation is contrary to State statutory or regulatory requirements and where such conflict would materially impede or destroy the Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation  Commission’s goals of fostering the responsible, balanced development, production, and utilization of the oil and gas resources in the State of Colorado in a manner consistent with protection of public health, safety, and welfare, and protection of the environment and wildlife resources.

Translation: The county determines the standard by which it will accept a conclusion of an operational conflict.

3. County requirements in areas regulated by the Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Commission that fall within County land use powers necessary to protect the public’s health, safety, and welfare pursuant to the application presented, and which do not impose unreasonable burdens on the Applicant, or materially impede the State’s goals, shall be presumed not to present an operational conflict.

Translation: The county will interpret when an operation conflict exists and whether the conflict presents an unreasonable burden to the applicant.

4. If the Board of County Commissioners determines that compliance with the requirements of these Regulations results in an operational conflict with State statutes or regulations, a waiver to this section shall be granted, in whole or in part, but only to the extent necessary to remedy the operational conflict. The Board of County Commissioners may mitigate any impacts by conditioning the approval of a waiver as necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. Any such condition shall be such that the condition itself does not conflict with the requirements of the Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Commission.

Translation: The county says whether a waiver that they might offer will satisfy the conflicting state requirement.

5. If the Applicant, or any person entitled to receive notice of the original application for the Oil & Gas. Facility, wishes to seek judicial review of a final Board of County Commissioner’s decision on the operational conflict waiver request, appeal to the district court shall be pursuant to C.R.C.P. Rule 106(a)4.

Translation: If you don’t like it, sue us.

Cmmr. Schlegel grows govt.

By

From: Kurt Schlegel
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 12:22 PM
To: Marvin and Nancy Maul; Del Schwab; John Shipper
Cc: Richard L. Miller
Subject: DRAFT Elbert County Oil and Gas Regulations
Good Afternoon Mr. Maul,

Thank you for sending me your thoughts / opinions regarding County based land use regulations.  I have followed the recent actions that have been taken or deferred by other Counties regarding the adoption of specific land use regulation relating to Oil & Gas Exploration.  As County Commissioners we are tasked with adopting and enforcing land use rules and regulations in order to protect the property values of all property owners in the County.

I believe it is County government’s duty to ensure that Oil & Gas exploration in Elbert County is done responsibly and  staff has worked diligently to incorporate lessons that have been learned from other Colorado counties in our proposed Oil & Gas Regulations.  Please be aware that these DRAFT regulations have nothing to do with the actual drilling / hydraulic fracturing / harvesting of resources processes.  These are regulated by the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC).  Our County regulations are designed to ensure the public safety by designating traffic / haul routes for equipment, specify where and how equipment can be stored safely, how waste byproducts are handled and stored, etc.  In addition our staff has worked to ensure that the proposed regulations do not pre-empt any regulation already in place by the State of Colorado.  I invite you to review the DRAFT document which is available on the Elbert County website at http://elbertcounty-co.gov/dept_CommunityandDevelopmentServices.php

As I stated previously, the County is also responsible for the enforcement of all zoning and land use regulations.  The taxpayers expect this service and are entitled to this regulatory authority that is designed to protect everyone’s property values and ensure the public’s safety.  The fact that we will have clearly defined what is expected of all surface activities associated with oil and gas exploration will make it easier for staff to enforce, thereby saving the taxpayers money in the long run.

I appreciate your input and invite you to attend, or be a part of, the Planning Commission’s review process.  Their first meeting to discuss the DRAFT Oil & Gas Regulations is scheduled for Thursday – 26 January, 2012 at 6:00 pm.

Sincerely,

Kurt C. Schlegel

Elbert County Commissioner; District 2
215 Comanche Street
Kiowa, CO  80117
303-621-3139
Kurt.schlegel@elbertcounty-co.gov

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From: Marvin and Nancy Maul
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 3:05 PM
To: Del Schwab; Kurt Schlegel; John Shipper
Subject: Oil and gas regulations

To the Elbert County Board of County Commissioners:

This refers to the draft of new oil and gas regulations being prepared by Richard Miller, Director of the Elbert County Community and Development Services that I understand will be brought before the Board for a vote shortly.

I would suspect that by now the Commissioners are aware of the lead editorial contained within the January 9 issue of The Denver Post entitled “Current fracking rules enough” which summarizes pretty well the intent of the editorial.  I understand as well, that at least two Colorado counties (Arapahoe and Gunnison) have been convinced that their proposed oil and gas proposed regulations represent an unnecessary duplication of regulations already adopted by the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation  Commission, and are withdrawing them.

With all due respect I am concerned that actions taken by the Board to date as I understand them, seem to indicate that Elbert County is moving toward adoption of a 60-page set of regulations, tailor-made for Elbert County, even to the point of hiring outside counsel to aid in the drafting of the document. I cannot understand (and I refer again to the Denver Post article) why the County feels the need for a set of regulations that will largely superimpose over the existing COGCC regulations

Further, we recognize that Elbert County as with most other governmental entities across the country is in a financially precarious position.  Adding the regulatory purview  of Mr.. Miller’s proposal to the county’s populace would include not only the direct costs of the consequences of the regulations as well as additional costs imposed by the mechanisms for enforcement of the regulations.  How many new employees will Miller be able to add to his department if these regulations with resultant enforcement are adopted?  It seems to me that in view of the state’s regulatory actions, the County’s tacking on of these new costs will represent a highly wasteful use of taxpayers dollars, and it’s not as if the environmental concerns of the County’s residents were being overlooked!

Finally, as an Elbert County taxpayer, I am wondering if, in the event the County decides along with the other counties to instead adopt the COGCC regulations, will the County be able to recover some of the funds being expended on the outside lawyers?!

Sincerely yours,

Marvin O. Maul
Colorado Springs, CO

duplicating government

By

Let’s see how many instances of regulatory duplication you can find in the proposed Elbert County Oil and Gas Regulations, and regulations already enforced by the COGCC at the state level:

Draft Oil and Gas Regulations for Elbert County, 12-27-2011 Version

Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission – Cross Reference

Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission – Rules and Regulations Table of Contents

(See the RULES heading at http://cogcc.state.co.us/ for detailed rule text.)

~

Should there be any duplication of regulation between Elbert County and Colorado?  No.

Should a county with tight budgetary constraints that has had to materially cut back work hours and numbers of personnel be taking on duplicative regulatory functions already addressed by the State of Colorado?  No.

~

Elbert County can ill afford an oil and gas regulatory empire headed by a czar of Community and Development Services.

The American Community Survey

By

U.S. Supreme Court
ICC v. Brimson, 154 U.S. 447 (1897)
Interstate Commerce Commission v. Brimson
No. 883
Argued April 16, 1894
Decided May 26, 1894
154 U.S. 447

“Power given to Congress to regulate interstate commerce does not carry with it authority to destroy or impair those fundamental guarantees of personal rights that are recognized by the Constitution as inhering in the freedom of the citizen.”

“The inquiry whether a witness before the Commission is bound to answer a particular question propounded to him, or to produce books, papers, etc., in his possession and called for by that body, is one that cannot he committed to a subordinate administrative or executive tribunal for final determination. Such a body could not, under our system of government and consistently with due process of law, be invested with authority to compel obedience to its orders by a judgment of fine or imprisonment.”

“Neither branch of the legislative department, still less any merely administrative body, established by Congress, possesses or can be invested with a general power of making inquiry into the private affairs of the citizen. Kilbourn v. Thompson,

Page 154 U. S. 479

103 U. S. 168, 103 U. S. 190. We said in Boyd v. United States, 116 U. S. 616, 116 U. S. 630 — and it cannot be too often repeated — that the principles that embody the essence of constitutional liberty and security forbid all invasions on the part of the government and its employees of the sanctity of a man’s home and the privacies of his life. As said by MR. JUSTICE FIELD in In re Pacific Railway Commission, 32 F. 241, 250, “of all the rights of the citizen, few are of greater importance or more essential to his peace and happiness than the right of personal security, and that involves not merely protection of his person from assault, but exemption of his private affairs, books, and papers from the inspection and scrutiny of others. Without the enjoyment of this right, all others would lose half their value.”

Now, see: 

The American Community Survey

~

megalomaniac

By

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, we’re not done yet. I’ve got five more years of stuff to do. But
not only saving this country from a great depression. Not only saving the auto industry. But
putting in place a system in which we’re gonna start lowering health care costs and you’re
never gonna go bankrupt because you get sick or somebody in your family gets sick. Making
sure that we have reformed the financial system, so we never again have taxpayer-funded
bailouts, and the system is more stable and secure. Making sure that we’ve got millions of
kids out here who are able to go to college because we’ve expanded student loans and
made college more affordable. Ending Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Decimating al Qaeda, including
Bin Laden being taken off the field. Restoring America’s respect around the world.
The issue here is not gonna be a list of accomplishments. As you said yourself, Steve, you
know, I would put our legislative and foreign policy accomplishments in our first two years
against any president — with the possible exceptions of Johnson, F.D.R., and Lincoln — just
in terms of what we’ve gotten done in modern history. But, you know, but when it comes to
the economy, we’ve got a lot more work to do. And we’re gonna keep on at it.

12-11-11 60 Minutes with Obama interview

planning hubris

By

Problems with the 07-2011 Draft Oil & Gas Regs proposed for Elbert County Zoning

Page 5:  “…unless approval has been granted pursuant to these regulations from the Director of Community & Development Services (C&DS) or the Board of County Commissioners (Board).”
Are we setting up an unelected czar of oil and gas zoning enforcement, unaccountable to the voters?

Page 6:  “the County Attorney or where the Board deems it appropriate, the District Attorney……may [act]”
Here again, should enforcement of zoning be allowed without the approval of an elected official?

Page 21:  “Safety practices in accordance with state and federal law, including the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970….”
Elbert County should not be in the business of enforcing federal OSHA law.

Page 23:  “The oil and gas facility shall not cause significant degradation of wildlife, including any federal, state or Colorado Natural Heritage Program-identified species of concern, or to their habitat.  At a minimum, the operation shall comply with the CDOW’s recommended…..”
The CDOW, Colorado and the federal government can enforce their own wildlife regulations.  Elbert County does not need to duplicate those efforts.

Page 23:  “When planning facilities, the Applicant shall consult and reference the current wildlife concurrence data, including the CDOW’s Natural Diversity Information Source database…”
Bio-diversity is buzzword science with no greater purpose than stopping development.  It has no place in industry zoning regulations.

Page 25:  “install wildlife crossovers and escape ramps where the trench crosses well-defined game trails”
Presumably this would be for the really smart or well trained wild game, who know how to use such devices.

Page 26:  “The applicant shall identify the proposed source of fresh or potable water required for the oil and gas facility and dust control, along with a letter from the Colorado Division of Water Resources or a copy of the Water Court decree indicating that the water supply source is acceptable for the use at the oil and gas facility.”
Here again, water regulation falls outside of Elbert County’s jurisdiction.  It’s a matter for the State Engineer.

Page 37:  “the right of the county to determine land uses”
Isn’t it the people’s right to determine land use within allowed limits?  I thought government in America was based on limitations, not rights.

Page 39:  “No oil and gas facilities shall cause a reduction in solar radiation…”
Isn’t it a reach to blame the existence or absence of solar radiation on an oil well?

Page 39:  “Greenhouse Gas Reduction”
Zoning regulations should not incorporate the spurious science of global warming language.

Page 40:  “The county finds that the standard industry practice of injecting highly toxic substances under high pressure into the earth for the purpose of fracturing geologic formations poses an unacceptable risk of polluting these invaluable ground water resources.”
This statement ascribes a harmful intent to the oil and gas industry as a “standard practice.”  The statement is prejudicial, unfounded, and not conducive to sound science or good industry relations.

If the Community and Development Services department needs a toxic blend to regulate, look to the toxic combination of subjects below under which this post is filed.

Thomas Jefferson

"It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself."

Aristotle

"Only an armed people can be truly free. Only an unarmed people can ever be enslaved."

Karl Popper

“A theory which is not refutable by any conceivable event is nonscientific. Irrefutability is not a virtue of a theory (as people often think) but a vice.”