As your Senate representative to DC, I will support QUALITY OF LIFE legislation to break the chains that restrain our pursuit of Life, Liberty and Happiness:

Introduction

Quality of life is unique to every individual American, some components have a higher priority than another. Therefore it is illogical for Washington to try and define it for us with one-size fits all “solutions”.

I think the politicians already know that; by forever adding links to our chains, it ensures fund-raising opportunities and a “reason” for us to re-elect them to correct components of that link, without ever removing that link.

Gee. Do you reckon that’s why the majority of our delegates to DC voted for Red Flag laws? They assure us that they are very Pro 2A, but that we really need to pass the Defense Reauthorization Act to move the bill along — think of the troops!  Umm, yeah, we do think of the troops, so why is this Red Flag even in there? Likewise, the use of Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) to sneak in additional Red Flag language.  Both of these Acts attempt to authorize seizure of guns without due process – a repugnant attack on the 2nd and 4th Amendments.

And so it goes, Congress passes sloppy bills and expect us to trust them to fix it later, and oh, please donate money to help fight muh opponents.

Quality In Healthcare

Most Americans were relatively happy with their healthcare insurance before ObamaCare came along and wrecked it.  No one denies that our insurance back then didn’t have systemic issues, namely premiums that grew faster than the rate of inflation, lack of portability and so on.

But these issues can be traced back to politicians, paid off by hospital, insurance,medical & pharamceutical lobbyists, tinkering with a system that always seems to work for the worse.  It’s the old playbook—create a problem (add a chain link), then ride to the rescue with a solution, oftentimes in the form of a mandate that only adds cost.  President Trump showed us the way to healthcare reform and it is up to us to continue the reforms.

Right To Try

Initiatives like “Right To Try”, We the People have the right, when fully informed to try alternative treatment plans in consultation with our chosen doctor. While the RTT bill signed in 2018 is a good first step, it needs to be expanded further to all matters concerning health, not just “life-threatening” diseases. As we are finding out now, the medical establishment can still deny HCQ or Ivermectin to an intubated and dying patient, because “all treatment options are not yet exhausted”. A loophole written by bought and paid for politicians.

We would do well to remember that experts are only experts in their chosen field. The adage that ‘to a hammer, everything is a nail’ is so true, ever more so in the medical industry. Cancer specialists are trained to zap cancer cells with lethal and poisonous chemotherapy and radiation as part of their treatment strategy.

Case in point, my mother was diagnosed with ovarian cancer at age 37 in the mid-70s. She was immediately placed on a regimen of chemo and radiation. The same regimen that was destroying her cancer cells was also killing off her good cells that she could have died from the “cure”. Long story short (my anecdotal tale of Laetrile), she learned about alternatives that were verboten by the American Medical Association (AMA), the largest associations of physicians, both DO and MD as well as by the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) and CDC.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for protecting the public health by assuring the safety, efficacy, and security of human and veterinary drugs, biological products, medical devices, our nation’s food supply, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation. The FDA also provides accurate, science-based health information to the public.

“Accurate and ‘science-based’”… Really? And when the FDA determines something to be heresy, they will not hesitate to use the full weight of government, including violence, to block dissemination of alternatives to their orthodoxy. But I digress…

The FDA banned laetrile even though it is merely Vitamin B-17. Mom traveled to Germany to learn more about it and received injections of it. Upon return to Flint, Michigan, Dad and I went with her for her appointment with her FDA-approved oncologist; he told her that based on lab results, he was giving her 3 to 6 months to live and should prepare accordingly. She informed him that she was removing herself from his care and would instead go all natural. The doctor was LIVID, insisting she must continue with his therapy. Before we left his office, he threatened to call the police and Child Protection Services to remove all 5 kids for “child abuse”.

The “doctor” wasn’t mad because of Mom being reckless, he was mad because he was losing a revenue stream. This is how our government and medical establishment “cares” for us, with threats and abuse.

So yes, I am skeptical of experts who claim to hold all the secrets and know what’s best for us. More so when they resort to bullying and name-calling when challenged. Since then, I have learned of other research that showed great promise in curing, NOT treating, cancer. Cures, such as wormwood (Artemisinin & HCQ are derivatives) as is Ivermectin but squelched by the unholy alliance between Big Pharma, Insurance Industry and Healthcare Providers. These cancer killers zero in on cells with inordinate amounts of iron and bombard them with free radicals.

Wormwood also has therapeutic properties for many other diseases, such as common cold, malaria, heart disease and so on. Did you know wormwood is mentioned 7 times in the OT and once in the NT? Look it up. Or how breakthroughs like insulin was intended to be a gift to humanity, but corporations swept in, patenting the products and selling them at extortion-like profits. Part of that problem lies also in the unconstitutional distortions of patent laws, thanks to the corporate lobbyists – but that’s a discussion of its own.

Right To Reject

The corollary to RTT is the right to reject. To reject any vaccine, to reject “mandates” (not a law) or law demanding medical treatment. To reject anything that infringes upon our rights as a sovereign people. The right to prize one’s liberties and maintain unalienable individual rights. That includes soldiers, civilians and contractors maintaining their right to reject.

COVID-19

This holds true with the scam known as COVID-19.

• Beware of politicians that advocate mask wearing, social distancing and other ridiculous policies that infringe on our unalienable rights and liberties backed by the threat of their law enforcement stormtroopers.
• Never again can “medical authorities” assert remedies without presenting solid evidence that any layman can understand and decide for themselves whether or not to accept it.
• Never again can Big Pharma offer their “toxic sorcery” and avoid any liability for adverse reactions.
• Advocates for holistic alternative therapeutics shall not be restricted from sharing their insight with the public.

As your Senate representative to DC, I will fight to breakup the unholy alliance between Big Pharma, Insurance and Healthcare providers to restore the QUALITY OF HEALTHCARE.

Quality In Education

As parents are finding out, our public schools are infested with Marxists intent on indoctrinating our kids with CRT, gender dysphoria, porn, socialism and so on, instead of imbuing them with critical thinking skills and education that will properly prepare them for the future as functioning American citizens.

The critical race theory is just that, a destructive to social order theory and should be banned from the curriculum. It doesn’t end there, teachers, with the approval of school boards are trying to hide all the garbage they teach kids from their parents. And even when there are laws against teaching specific subjects, scofflaw teachers conspire to get around the law.

School Choice

What are concerned parents to do? Many would love to find alternatives, but unable to do so.  The common denominator is their family’s financial status. Imagine what flexibility they could have if the money we spend per student was portable?

The first step is to disband the Department of Education and unrestrain the free market in education by attaching federal monies for K-12 education to the parents to apply as they see best for their children. Aside from homeschooling, another attractive alternative is the “Pod” or “microschool” concept.

Rather than abandoning their passion for teaching, some educators are discovering that they can do what they love and avoid the bureaucracy and stress of a conventional classroom by starting their own microschools.

 

Microschools are modern twists on the quaint, one-room schoolhouse model, where small, multi-age groups of students learn together in more intimate educational settings, such as private homes, with individualized attention from adult educators and facilitators. Interest in microschools accelerated over the past year, as school shutdowns led parents to consider home-based “pandemic pods” to help their children learn in small, safe groups.

Some teachers were recruited to lead pods, while others set out to create their own learning communities and microschool models. These entrepreneurial educators are finding that they have many resources available to them to launch their own innovative schools.

If the parents could use $5,000 per child per year, the possibilities are endless.

There is also an over-emphasis on college education and a plethora of frivolous course studies that add nothing to advancing the quality of life.  There is an axiom that when the government pays the bills, it also dictates what will be taught.  As we have seen in the past, Common Core was an unmitigated disaster that was heavily promoted by Bill Gates and other anti-American globalists.

Ultimately, if we are serious about getting the federal government out of education, we must sever the financial strings that control education, including financial support for higher education.  With the devolution of the on-campus, administratively top-heavy, college model; vocational training and online courses will fill the gaps and drastically lower the cost of higher education that people need to advance in the workplace.

Naturally, this implies a phase-out of all federal involvement in education, including funding.  But I believe if the government leads the way, the states will follow suit and continue to permit and facilitate school choice at the state level.

As your Senate representative to DC, I will support legislation to devolve the education industry away from Marxist so-called experts and unions and return full control for QUALITY OF EDUCATION to parents.

Quality in Infrastructure

Politicians have let our critical infrastructure decay, through misplaced priorities and corruption.  We all know about Flint, Michigan’s water crisis (where was the EPA?), but the truth is many municipalities are struggling to deliver quality water and sewage disposal.  Flint hits especially close to me since I spent my high school years there, and I’m dismayed at how much Flint has decayed over the 40 years since.  But is the water quality in Iowa any better?

Water Quality

Click to enlarge the Davenport Water Quality image on the left.

Marginally so.  While the EPA has been busy “crucifying” farmers and others who provide the backbone of our economy, they have not updated water standards in over 20 years.  According to Environmental Working Group, while Davenport’s water is in compliance with Federal water standards. However, legal does not necessarily equal safe. Getting a passing grade from the federal government does not mean the water meets the latest health guidelines.

Note: While the administrator who used the “crucify” term resigned, it is that systemic mentality that endures at most of our federal agencies.  It’s the same mentality that the EPA used drones to spy on farmers and ranchers.  Just because an act is legal, it doesn’t justify the intent.  The EPA has its #1 enemy and it is us, We the People.  How about EPA researcher simply do their studies, publish their recommendations, including all the underlying data (show their work) and leave the implementation and enforcement to the states?  There is no need for EPA SWAT teams running and gunning after Americans on their properties.

Then there are issues in the water delivery and sewage disposal infrastructure.  How often must we hear of breaks in the system due to old and crumbling underground pipes, where we learn a particular section is 50, 70 or even 100 years old?  We can and must do better than this.

As your Senate representative to DC, I will support legislation to improve our QUALITY OF WATER.

Bridges and Highways

It’s become an old joke about the pothole or sinkhole that swallowed a car.  But the cost in damages to American drivers is no joke.  While construction and maintenance of streets and highways are the responsibility of states and municipalities, residents need to be able to hold their officials accountable.  However, the interstate, which is a joint project between states and the federal government is no better off, and needs to lead by example.

The oldest interstate bridge in the US is the I-74 Bridge over the Mississippi River, between Davenport, IA and Moline, IL.  The first span was built in 1935 and an identical twin span built in 1961.  This bridge has been over a quarter century in the planning, securing funding and construction, and will cost over $1.2 billion to complete.

Much of the delay, not just this bridge, but any highway project, can be attributed to bureaucratic red tape and uncertainty in funding.  The process from planning to construction completion needs to be streamlined.  Bloomberg listed 7 federal policies that drive up the cost of building far more than they should – One of which, to permit foreign sources of materials can be disregarded outright.

Furthermore, we need a change in mindset about how we fund these projects.  Too often, we opt for the cheapest option, knowing that sooner than later, we will have to spend more to repair the inferior roads, when we could have invested a little bit more upfront for durability and longevity with a thicker concrete base and substrate upfront.  Advanced technologies, like recycled-rubber roads are not new; asphalt roads that incorporate rubber “crumbs” from shredded tires exist in the US, Germany, Spain, Brazil and China.  Newer technologies using the polymer fibers from tires has the unique benefit of potentially improving the resilience of concrete and extending its lifespan.  Using shredded tire chunks in the sub-grade insulation also leads to better drainage and helps reduce stress cracking of the concrete layer above.

As your Senate representative to DC, I will support legislation to improve our QUALITY OF INFRASTRUCTURE.

Transport Regulations

Truckers have a saying; “if the wheels ain’t turning, you ain’t earning“.

Nothing is more frustrating to a trucker than to own a brand new modern rig with the latest EPA mandated equipment, only to have electronic control modules glitch out requiring a tow to the nearest repair shop or to have an emissions component breakdown.  These repair costs can run several thousand dollars per incident, not to mention lost revenues.  Much of the “technology” under the hood are due to onerous EPA regulations that drive up the cost of productivity with little return on investment.

Part of the reason for the disruptions in the supply train logistics and delivery backlogs are due to California’s insane emmission regulations that have removed 2/3rd of the trucks from operating in their ports.

Furthermore, DOT and EPA regulations also do much to make life that much more difficult for owner/operators to comply with; such as arbitrary cut-offs for hours on the road.  Too often, good, safe and professional drivers are punished by regulations implemented as an over-reaction to bad drivers.  Bottom-line, the increased cost of doing business ultimately gets passed down to the consumer in increased cost of freight.

These regulations not only affect the trucking industry, it also impacts farmers with their large agriculture machines and the construction heavy equipment.

As your representative to DC, I will support legislation to make owner/operators profitable again while implementing meaningful and quantifiable regulatory reform.

Quality in Consumer Products

You bought it, you should own it. Period. You should have the right to use it, modify it, and repair it wherever, whenever, and however you want. Fostering repair will give people access to affordable products, make a huge dent in the e-waste problem, and create jobs.

We are lending money we don’t have to kids who can’t pay it back to train them for jobs that no longer exist. That’s nuts.
––– Mike Rowe

Right to Repair

Repair.org is an advocacy organization dedicated to ensuring that once a customer has bought something, they have the right to repair it.  At the state level, since 2014, a total of 32 different states have begun working on Right to Repair legislation to make it crystal clear that manufacturers cannot use parts-pairing tools to block repair.  State legislatures are responsible for contracts as part of general business law.  Contracts protecting consumers from Unfair and Deceptive Acts and Practices (“UDAP”) contracts are already on the books.  State by state, legislators are amending existing law to limit the damage done by unfair and deceptive contracts.  Such contracts, including End User License Agreements “EULA” are inherently deceptive as they cannot be negotiated by the consumer, are presented post-purchase, and fundamentally alter the intent of the purchase.

Nearly all industries using digital electronic parts in their products are using EULA and other forms of contracts in an unfair and deceptive manner to protect their repair businesses from competition.  It is the abusive contract, and not the technology, that is the focus of legislation.  Any industry or product category that is exempted from legislation is being granted a de-facto repair monopoly.

The Massachusetts Automotive Right to Repair law was innovative and has proven effective.  With many years of experience with repair of computerized parts within motor vehicles it is proven that Right to Repair does not make consumers unsafe, does not open products to new forms of illegal hacking, and does not limit innovation.

At the Federal level, work needs to be done to remove the threat of copyright violations for most repair activities.  In October of 2018, the US Copyright Office agreed that consumers should be able to fix their stuff — even if it means someone has to break a software lock.  Even better — it’s now legal to hire someone to help you fix your stuff.

June, 2017: The Copyright Office also conducted a separate study on the potential need to reform Section 1201 (known as “Anti-Circumvention”) for Congress.  This study agreed with Right-to-Repair organization that Section 1201 / DRM is a serious impediment to repair, and recommended a permanent exemption for repair and maintenance for everything except gaming equipment.

It remains up to Congress to take up the recommendation and file legislation.

SUPREME Court; Repair.org filed an Amicus brief with ASCDI, EFF, Public Knowledge in support of Impression Products v Lexmark heard in the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS).  Repair.org won — impressively.   SCOTUS ruled emphatically that manufacturers have exhausted their control over products with the initial (“first”) sale.  Once sold — they cannot tell the new owner what to do.

As your Senate representative to DC, I will support legislation to restore the RIGHT TO REPAIR for all Americans.

Quality of Environment

Of course Americans want a clean environment, clean air, clean water, clean lands, clean energy and we lead the world in that effort. The problem with global initiatives is that typically they put the US taxpayers on the hook to pay for the rest of the world.

These “treaties” ignore the massive pollution churned out by China, India and other developing nations.  While we laud the efforts by these countries to clean up, we must say no to financing it for them and at the same time further restrict our economy.  Simply put, if all these nations came up to our standards, the world would be a much cleaner environment.

Not that we would sit on our laurels, continuous improvements in technology will continue to bend the “pollution curve” ever downwards.  Furthermore, when it comes to clean energy, nothing can compare to nuclear energy, it is the cleanest, most reliable and cheapest form of energy, but environmentalists refuse to acknowledge that fact.

The problem with many “Green” initiatives is that they are ideologically driven without a pragmatic cost-benefit analysis of efficacy to the environment.  Too often, the products have a hidden carbon footprint that when properly factored in cancels out touted returns on investment and are environmentally harmful in other ways.

Furthermore, many federal agencies that are tasked with environmental issues are staffed by unelected ideologues that formulate regulations on their own to impose unrealistic standards on consumers and industries.  And they back it up with onerous fines and mandates.  Simply put, any regulations promulgated by these bureaucrats need to come from our legislators who are accountable to the citizens.  Instead, many of these legislators quietly approve of these unelected running amuck, instead of holding them to account.

Not all “Green Tech” is environmentally friendly

From The Big Cover Up: Wind Industry Burying Millions of Toxic Turbine Blades In Landfills

… “The municipal landfill in Casper, Wyoming, is the repository of at least 870 discarded blades, and one of the few locations in the country that accepts the massive fiberglass objects.

Built to withstand hurricane winds, the turbine blades cannot easily be crushed or recycled. About 8,000 of the blades are decommissioned in the U.S. every year.

Once they reach the end of their useful life on electricity-generating wind turbines, the blades have to be hacked up with industrial saws into pieces small enough to fit on a flat-bed trailer and hauled to a landfill that accepts them” …

The real cost of solar and wind

“The main problem with either wind or solar is that they generate electricity erratically, depending on the wind or sunshine. In contrast, a fossil-fuel plant can generate electricity predictably upon request. Blackouts are very expensive for society, so grid operators and designers go to a lot of trouble to make sure that blackouts are rare. Adding wind or solar to a grid does not mean that existing fossil fuel plants can be retired. Often, neither wind nor solar is working and at those times a full complement of fossil fuel plants, or sometimes nuclear or hydro plants, must be available. Both wind and solar have pronounced seasonality.”

“Wind behaves erratically hour to hour. Even though the Texas 18,000-megawatt system has thousands of turbines spread over a wide area, the net output is erratic changing by thousands of megawatts in a single hour. These shifts must be balanced by fossil-fuel plants slewing their output up and down to compensate and keep load matched to generation.”

As we saw in the recent “Big Freeze”, Texas’ energy network collapsed, not because it was too cold, but because both federal and state regulators refused to permit Texas to crank up the fossil fuel plants to fill the gap, because of “concern for EPA pollution limits”.  Never mind that the blackouts caused far more damage than the claimed environmental damage.  Another example of unaccountable regulators ignoring economic science.

“Viewed from the effect on the economy, adding wind or solar electricity provides the benefit of reduced fuel consumption in backup fossil fuel plants. This saving in fuel amounts to about $15 per megawatt hour, the cost of natural gas to generate a megawatt hour of electricity.  The cost of coal is similar. The backup fossil-fuel plant still has to have its full staff and may have more costly maintenance due to the up-down style of operation forced by the introduction of erratic energy. If the renewable energy costs more than $15 per megawatt hour, then it is not competitive. Wind or solar power actually costs around $80 per megawatt hour.

How can I claim that wind or solar cost $80 when power purchase agreements at $25 per megawatt hour are often touted in the press? Even at $25 the wind or solar is far from competitive. The gap between $80 and $25 is accounted for by subsidies. The $10 difference between $25 and $15 is also a subsidy because the purchaser is paying $25 for the electricity that could be generated in a backup fossil fuel plant, that already exists and that must exist, for $15.”

“No utility would buy $80 renewable electricity to replace $15 fossil fuel electricity. A stand-alone, enterprise wind or solar plant would be a huge economic failure because there would be no market for overpriced electricity. The entire renewable electricity industry is actually a government boondoggle. Neither, is renewable electricity an economic method for reducing CO2 emissions as has been made clear by the most important proselytizers for global warming such as Climate Scientists for Nuclear.”

— Norman Rogers
Author of Inconvenient Facts About Dumb Renewable Energy

RFS is NOT environmentally friendly

In an Iowa Standard Opinion piece about Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), Janna Swanson writes:

I have been fighting back against the onslaught of industrial wind and their excessive power lines since 2013 with the Coalition for Rural Property Rights, National Wind Watch and The Preservation of Rural Iowa Alliance. A few years ago, I and a few others fighting wind met with Americans for Prosperity seeking help. They wanted us to come out against the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) along with other renewables. Because two of us farmed and sold much corn to ethanol, we declined.

Fast forward to today and I now see why I need to come out against the RFS. The RFS is keeping Iowa’s fortunes tied to the whims of the federal government. If we accept money from the government, we also accept the strings that are attached. In the case of the RFS the strings attached are industrial wind, industrial solar, excess power lines, large scale batteries, electric vehicle charging stations, and carbon capture pipelines. It is like paying $500 to receive $5.

The government needs to be removed from the marketplace. Government should not be giving anyone taxpayer money. They should not be deciding who should buy what. This is the problem with the RFS. Is ethanol a good product? Then prove it, market it, sell it. Do not let the government force the sale. No farmer I have ever met wants to be forced to do anything so don’t be involved with forcing others to buy your product.

Most Iowans recall that Sen Chuck Grassley saddled us with the “Unfrastructure Bill”, claiming that Iowa needed it for our bridges, roads & broadband. Only after the Bill was passed and signed did we find out what all was in it. Roughly 10% is dedicated to “infrastructure”, meaning Iowans are on the hook for 1000% of our total share of that Bill.

What Sen Grassley didn’t tell us is about the “Heartland Greenway”.  A hocus-pocus boondoggle of a pipeline to “mitigate” the increased CO2 emissions cranked out by our ethanol plants as they massively drain resources to convert food into fuel. From a project management perspective, why didn’t the pro-RFS lobby think of this before starting? Assuming that Co2 is indeed a problem. At least 90% of this pipeline will be built within Iowa (click to enlarge the image on the left).

For a family farmer with 100, 1,000 or 10,000 acres, such a land grab will hurt their business model and make it more difficult to turn a profit. But what of the Homesteader with their “tiny” 5, 10 or 20 acres? A pipeline running through their property would devastate their hopes and dreams of self-sufficiency. How is it any different from 2 Samuel chapter 12 where the prophet Nathan confronts King David to when a rich private interest takes land away from the little guy and shares the proceeds with “friends and allies”?

v5. David burned with anger against the man. “I solemnly swear, as the Lord lives,” he said to Nathan, “the man who did this certainly deserves to die!

v6. And he must pay back four times the price of the lamb because he did this and had no pity.”

Our Creator makes it clear that it is an evil to deprive anyone of their pursuit of life, liberty and happiness in order to protect their own riches and to gratify themselves.

Never mind the bureaucracy and red tape that all who work the land for their living have to put up with. Time and time again, unelected bureaucrats have proven that they cannot be a better steward of the land than the landowners themselves. Climate change is NOT a compelling interest of the federal government, rather it is a scheme by the New World Order to impoverish the Common Man for the benefit of the elites.

The time to break the chains that bind the stewards of our lands and resources is long overdue!

IceAge Farmer has an excellent primer on this landgrab.

Electric cars are NOT environmentally friendly

While electric cars have come a long ways, thanks to leaps in technology, they are still far from being viable without massive subsidies. Not to mention a massive upgrade in our electrical grid to charge all the cars.

What is rarely discussed is the “carbon footprint” that goes into building the cars. Mining for toxic lithium leaves massive scars on the earth. And then after a few years of operation, the batteries need to be replaced, if available.

This is a boneyard near Paris, France with hundreds of electric powered cars. Mind you these are only cars used by the City of Paris and not personal vehicles. All of these have the same issue,… the battery storage cells have given out and need to be replaced.  Why not just replace them you ask? Well two reasons. First the battery storage cells cost almost double what the vehicle cost new, and second no landfill or disposals will allow the batteries to be disposed of there. So these green fairy tale electric cars are all sitting in vacant lots while their batteries drain toxins into the ground.

As your Senate representative to DC, I will support legislation to devolve federal agencies and bring responsibility for QUALITY OF ENVIRONMENT control back to the States.