Since reading further into the liberty movement, the one lesson I have learned to truly appreciate time and time again is that centralizing power, offers one easy target for special interests.  One strong reason lobbyists push to make as many decisions as possible settled on the federal level is one target to bribe, and push in their favor.  I whole heartily believe this is the primary reason for the erosion of state rights over the past 50+ years.

When we as a nation take the decision making powers away from the states, and centralize them in Washington, we make it easier for special interests to focus their funds, and maximize their ROI on donations.  When the issue is decided at the state level, imagine the logistics of trying to convince local legislators in all the states to rule in the favor that benefits the lobbyists clients the most.  In today's corporate America, it's far too costly and risky to spend the money on states, when you can simply spend it on one group, that has the power to force everyone in the nation a certain direction. 

For me, this is what Healthcare reform will ultimately accomplish: one fat, bloated, tax wasting target in DC to corrupt and bend to their ways, and trust me, it will become corrupt. 

Although Healthcare is not currently handled on a state level in the local state governments, the same idea can be applied to the numerous private insurance companies out there offering an insurance product.  While we remove the ability for the corporate insurance giants from playing dirty, we are opening up our well being, and general healthcare to the lobbyists in DC. Centralizing our care and the decisions made on our health direction to lobbyists with armed with millions of dollars ready to ensure their clients get the bulk of the tax money, and your care, an afterthought. 

Now I am no fan of the insurance industry, and they have brought this upon themselves.  Refusing to insure some people and the pre-existing condition issue has created this problem for them.  Everyone has a family member that has been treated unfairly by the insurance company; this is what has caused the outrage for healthcare reform.

We do need reform, but we must resist the urge push legislation that will add to the size of government, and reduce our freedoms via higher taxes, less choice, and more centralized power in DC.

Found this article on WIRED.com...

"As an ex-Brit, I’m well aware of the authorities’ love of surveillance and snooping, but even I, a pessimistic cynic, am amazed by the governments latest plan: to install Orwell’s telescreens in 20,000 homes."

£400 million ($668 million) will be spend on installing and monitoring CCTV cameras in the homes of private citizens. Why? To make sure the kids are doing their homework, going to bed early and eating their vegetables. The scheme has, astonishingly, already been running in 2,000 family homes. The government’s “children’s secretary” Ed Balls is behind the plan, which is aimed at problem, antisocial families. The idea is that, if a child has a more stable home life, he or she will be less likely to stray into crime and drugs."

I do understand that citizens in the UK are not born with the rights as we are in America, and our liberty is far more secure than theirs is.  This is distrurbing becuase we are all lead to believe that our greatest ally is alot like us, when in fact this just goes to show how off base our greatest ally is. 

The rationale of government survaliance in order to produce better children, is beyond my understanding as a liberty loving American.

Source: http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/08/britain-to-put-cctv-cameras-inside-private-homes/

Glenn Beck yesterday on his program mention a little interesting note about this CARS system that would have any Liberty minded person up in arms.  As a dealer principle, or the primary person who inputs all of the information into the CARS system, the system which dealerships use to process the trade-ins, the below warning is displayed.

"This application provides access to the DoT CARS system. When logged on to the CARS system, your computer is considered a Federal computer system and is the property of the U.S. Government. Any or all uses of this system and all files on this system may be intercepted, monitored, recorded, copied, audited, inspected, and disclosed to authorized CARS, DoT, and law enforcement personnel, as well as authorized officials of other agencies, both domestic and foreign."

Source: http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/28815/

This is completely unconstitutional.  That our government would even stoop to this level of verbage for those who must use the CARS system, is beyond reason.  Furthermore, do the dealers even have a choice?  Is it reasonable to ask them to decline that privacy warning, and NOT accept a consumers trade in?  Would the consumer shop there? 

In essence, the government institutes a hand out program for consumers, and then forces dealerships to hand over all access, and privacy of all content on their computer in order to take advantage of the American Tax Payer handout for those who can afford a new car. 

Even at a lower cost, do we really need to be bailing out those who can afford a new car right now? Who does this program truely help?  The only thing this does is temporarily support car dealerships as long as government is willing to hand over cash, and subsides the cost of a car.  Will it last forever?  What happens once the cash for clunkers funding is over?

An article I read today at AlterNet ( www.alternet.org ) suggests we ban Tobacco, claiming the adverse effects long term compared to those of banned substances.  I ask the question, should anything be banned?  Should we be prevented from using anything we want to? 

I personally have just kicked the habit of smoking tobacco, 9 days free from it so far, I understand the lack of breath, and other health reasons that smoking causes. 

"Cigarettes kill; 400,000 people die prematurely every year from smoking. When we analyze the harm from drugs, there is no doubt that cigarettes are the worst.  They kill more people than cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and all other illegal drugs combined."

Instead of banning yet another free choice, we should use this as a stepping stone of removintg the war on drugs, putting that money back into the hands of the people, and stop locking away non-violent citizens simply becuase they had a little dope on them for personal use.

Most people have the ability to get and use illegal drugs, open any medicine cabinet, and there is a variety of drugs that if used in ways not directed, would be considered illegal.  Most people decide to not use drugs illegally becuase it is not for them, think of the savings, and lower taxes we could see by stopping the wasteful and worthless war on drugs.

Source: http://www.alternet.org/drugreporter/141723/should_we_ban_tobacco/

In a report released this week titled "Combating Tobacco in Military and Veteran Populations", the Institute of Medicine strongly recommended to the Department of Defense (DoD) to curb smoking by veterans and active duty personnel and to go as far as ban it all together.  The recommendation points to the rise in health care costs associated with smoking related disease and details how those who have served in the armed forces are 10% more likely to use tobacco products than the average 1 out of every 5 American who smokes.

As the report notes, the DoD already spends $1.6 billion per year on tobacco related care.  Couple the steadily more expensive health care costs, and "personnel returning from Iraq and Afghanistan may be 50 percent higher [for using tobacco] than rates among non-deployed military personnel", you can see the writing on the wall for a budget crisis looming for the DoD.

This story caught the eye of Reason and Liberty becuase I wanted to pose the question, if the DoD were to ban smoking on bases,  would that be a infringing on a soldiers right to use tobacco, or is it simply a way of protecting the investment the United States Government made in training, and deploying their property in the best fighting shape it can?

(Source: Combating Tobacco in Military and Veteran Populations)