Very Good suggestions Leslie, The obstacles will be presented by the overwhelming influence of the pharmaceutical industry. On the positive side big pharma is very unpopular among the people.
1 Like
All of the public health foundations need to be terminated and the money that has been donated needs to be returned to the donors.
1 Like
Reorganizations of agencies above the Branch level are subject to Congressional approval, therefore, much can be done to eliminate problematic activists at the agency and Cabinet level.
Further, the ability of operating divisions and Cabinet level offices to “detail” staff to other duties while limited does exist and allows for short term changes to occur while permanent solutions are being implemented.
Officers of the Commissioned Corps of the US Public Health Service serve at the pleasure of the President and are subject to his orders through the Surgeon General of the United States, Great changes can be effected if the President exercises his authority.
1 Like
I know it’s common to defer to lawyers in robes, but I reject that approach as profoundly un-American. The US Constitution begins with “We the People,” not “We the Judges.”
The interstate commerce clause gives power to the federal government to ensure that interstate commerce is regular, stable, and (very specifically, as Madison reminded everyone in Federalist 42) to ensure that states don’t abusively tax products passing through their jurisdictions, which very nearly destroyed the American confederacy.
In practice, the FDA enforces monopolies and blocks market access, neither one of which are legitimate powers under the Commerce Clause. Issuing dietary guidelines and pretty much everything else FDA does is, likewise, not constitutionally legit.
1 Like
Thanks for putting this out there, Leslie. You definitely raise a number of good points worthy of serious consideration. Regarding the NCVIA of 1986, I don’t know that it would need to be repealed in its entirety. Instead, if we could revise it so that pharmaceutical companies are once again liable for vaccine injuries and deaths, then that in-of-itself should do the trick, so to speak.
As to your definition of “health freedom” (which I would call ‘medical freedom’), you define it as “the right to access and use the medical… modalities of one’s choice…” I don’t know that I necessarily have an issue with this, but people who are pro-life might argue that a pregnant woman (especially in their 2nd or 3rd trimester) should not have the right to access an abortion. Just something to consider.
2 Likes
I would hope for an executive order to that effect!
I interpret the suggestion of more inspections as more government. That’s what I meant.
Luke, I specifically use the term health freedom because it is more comprehensive than medical. My thinking is that health freedom pertains to a wide range of issues such as knowing what foods are GMOs or laced with Apeal or the right and access to using the medicines and healing modalities of our choice such as homeopathic medicine or chiropractic, if that is my preference. For my thinking, abortion is not a health or health freedom issue unless the mother’s life is at risk.
1 Like
Stop treating patients with chronic pain as though they are drug abusers.
This is precisely why WV v. EPA is so important; it reigns in the administrative rule-making process. All of the regulatory agencies have acquired unconstitutional authority to establish “laws” governing every aspect of our lives. CDC is even worse. They simply issue “guidelines” which are then wrongly interpreted has having the same level of authority as an administrative rule which is assumed to have the same authority as an actual law passed by Congress.
It would be interesting if a broad suit that seeks repeal of all administrative laws not authorized by legislation (e.g. OSHA standards) were filed that seek the overturn of those “rules”.
1 Like
I agree the bureaucracy must be brought to heel, but I’ve concluded the Judiciary is absolutely corrupt and can’t be relied upon to ensure constitutional governance.
I proposed a Constitutional Legitimacy Test for Federal Employees that President Trump could implement on Day One or any time thereafter. It would effectively preclude judicial meddling in the will of the American people (as ratified in the Constitution) and could reduce the illegitimate federal bureaucracy (and its pernicious regulations) to zero within less than one year.
Very well put together Leslie. Great work.
@Leslie-HFDF, your proposal’s scope and breadth are impressive. I’d like to expand on several of your core components, focusing particularly on the legal framework and implementation processes.
I propose to leverage your insights to develop a legislative approach for integration into public policy doctrine. As you’ve noted, the healthcare sector is just one area where corporate influence has significantly impacted governance and individual rights. My draft proposal, Policy to Establish the Separation of the Corporatocracy and the State, seeks to address:
- Corporate Overreach: Not only in health care but also in sectors like defense, where profit motives can lead to unethical practices, including profiting from war.
The issues we face today stem largely from the rise of a neo-oligarchy that has infiltrated various social systems for financial gain. There’s considerable overlap here; thus, rather than creating entirely new proposals, I aim to:
-
Integrate and Complement: Where my pharmaceutical industry proposal can either incorporate your topics or work in concert with them to address corporate power abuses comprehensively.
-
Legal and Implementation Details: Delve deeper into how these policies can be legally framed and practically implemented to counteract corporate influence on governance.
The challenge, as I see it, lies in:
-
Crafting Policies for Bipartisan Support: Ensuring that these reforms have wide legislative appeal and resonate with the general public.
-
Overcoming Media Bias: Addressing the influence of vested interests on media, which often acts to maintain the status quo rather than challenge it.
By working together, we can develop actionable, sound policies that not only tackle the immediate issues within healthcare but also address the systemic corporate tyranny across various sectors. I look forward to further collaboration to refine these ideas into effective policy solutions.
Here’s my draft for a Pharmaceutical Accountability and Transparency Act. I have a lot more to add in the replies. I find this platform a bit challenging to integrate the material into one more comprehensive proposal, as there would need to be a lot more supporting documentation, reference links, and information added.
1 Like
Very good start. Will take some structure legislative building. Do this with OMB to carry budget implications of agency restructuring but also to include forecasts wrt costs, whether up or down as well as recurring budget implications. Reegneer the performance metrics to show the positive impacts as well being and health measures for continuous public implications and results reporting as it relates to this impact to everyday Americans.
My name is Kayte Barton, I am high functioning autistic and I am a passionate advocate for improving health care for people with intellectual disabilities.
People with intellectual disabilities are more likely to find it harder to access healthcare.
We are more likely to have preventable diseases than the general population. The main one is obesity, which can cause other diseases. If we were able to find ways to make obesity care more accessible and easy to understand for people with intellectual disabilities, we could prevent the obesity caused diseases.
People with intellectual disabilities are also often excluded from research, both as participants and as research partners. The main reason is that they think that we don’t matter! You can accurately look at health care data if not all communities are included.
I am also very active in Special Olympics, they would be a wonderful organization to partner with in finding ways to improve healthcare for people with intellectual disabilities.
I am including a graphic to show you how much discrepancy there is!
I would love to meet with someone to discuss how we can include people with intellectual disabilities in your team. And make sure that we are including all populations in the US.
I hope to here back!
This bill, as currently written, will ram thru elective abortion-until-birth at the federal level. It grants pregnant women a right to insert the fatal digoxin shot into their belly to kill her unborn child, or have her child dismembered alive, or even have her child scalded alive through a saline abortion if she so wanted, at any time of the pregnancy, even if the child is viable, as treatment for her pregnancy condition, a condition which is never 100% risk free. It would allow her to swallow abortion pills, well beyond the recommended 10 weeks, and possibly give birth to her living child at home, all alone, with no medical supervision, at 15 weeks, 19 weeks, 22 weeks, where she will likely watch her child die, gasping for breath… (this has already happened because of unscrupulous abortion providers skipping in-person ultrasounds to date the pregnancy and with the advent of MAIL-ORDER abortions.)
Abortion lobbyist medical providers repeatedly refer to elective abortion as “healthcare,” regardless of the mother’s condition, or lack thereof. They repeatedly claim that abortion restrictions kill women. They will easily exploit this bill.
This bill will also make access to genital mutilation and puberty blockers an absolute “right.”
On top of all of that, taxpayers and insurance members will have to foot the bill for all these elective services. Medi-cal already covers abortion and trans treatments, for citizens, residents AND illegal aliens who are income eligible (I know because I’m an eligibility worker), and this bill would force all states to allow Medi-caid and Medi-Care to cover elective abortion, transgender treatments and all the other elective treatments that people will now have a “RIGHT” to demand. We will have to pay this stuff for prisoners, too. Remember, a right is a right. There will be nothing to stop the madness.
It is one thing to make a law saying that a person has a right to refuse certain treatments. If you left your bill at that, perhaps it would be fine with me.
However, you are also mandating that every person has a right to get whatever “treatment” they want, even if such a treatment, or lack thereof, serves as a “theoretical benefit” to others.
Unless you specifically exclude elective abortion and transgender affirming surgeries/treatments, expect fierce resistance from pro-life and pro-family Republicans on this one. They’re going to pellet you with questions like, “what restrictions for abortion would this bill allow?” and “will this bill allow children to get puberty blockers or chop off their body parts without parental permission?”
It is also unclear what you mean by “it is immoral to force another individual to risk their life.” When pro-choice people complain about pro-life/abortion exceptions if the mother’s life is at risk, they say this exception is too vague. So what exactly counts in your law as “forcing another individual to risk their life?” Abortion lobbyists will assert that since pregnancy always carries a risk of life (no matter how small, in comparison to the child’s viability), that your law gives women the right to say, that if you refuse to give her a late term abortion, that you are forcing her to risk her life, in violation of this new law you are trying to pass.
Trans lobbyists will say that refusing to allow them to mutilate their genitals or chemically castrate themselves, that you are causing them to commit suicide, and therefore, you are “risking their lives.”
Here are the quotes that I find very concerning, in the context of abortion & trans treatment/genital mutilation: "in the event of injury or illness, all Americans must possess the absolute right to choose what medical interventions and treatments to accept and what medical or healing modalities to utilize in order to address illness or injury; Americans must be free to choose how to maintain their health whether that be through nutrition, supplements, herbs, drugs, or a myriad of healing modalities…
Health freedom can only exist in a free and moral society which values each and every member of that society. This prerequisite thus excludes medical mandates of any kind. It is immoral to force another individual to risk their life for the theoretical benefit of another. Moreover, government does not have the moral authority or power to dictate what medical products any American puts into or on his or her body."
People always want to quote the constitution. Well the constitution says that no “PERSON” may be deprived of their right to “LIFE, LIBERTY and PROPERTY” without “due process.”
It says “PERSON.”
Not “citizen.”
Not “American.”
“PERSON!!!”
That includes unborn children. Unborn children are people.
Therefore, it is unconstitutional to take away an unborn child’s “LIFE, LIBERTY or PROPERTY” without due process.
Nobody gave you a “right” to kill children in any way that you want to, just because a lying, for-profit industry claimed that just because they do it, it’s “healthcare.” It is one thing for the government to simply allow something to happen, to not enact penalties against something, even if it’s wrong. But nothing in the constitution allows the government to make the mutilation and destruction of children’s bodies a “right.”
1 Like
I recommend that the FDA, or whatever policy forum absolutely MUST DISCLOSE the presence of Glyphosate in food, drinks and pharma. It’s time to peel back Monsato’s influence on agriculture and present the threat of this toxin. As a resident of South Dakota, neighbors, farmers and I, all surrounded by commercial fields, have been combatting various types of cancer.
1 Like
Leslie, there are core legislative mandates for OSHA, NIOSH, CDC, and FDA that are predicated on the need to ensure the safety of work places, and our food supply. Reprograming employees from things that are not part of those core functions is not more government but rather greater ability protect workers and consumers. My best guess is that focusing on core legislative mandates will result in many fewer programs and employees.
The other day I spent some time on the NIOSH website and found that it has become an agency that is barely recognizable from that established in the Occupational Safety and Health Act. NIOSH is just one example.
CDC has a looooong history of reinventing itself despite congressional oversight. That has to stop. Programs need to be shut down. Core legislative mandates need to be fulfilled. For example, one of the very few regulatory functions that CDC has is responsibility for immigrant health. Why? To prevent the spread of communicable diseases that have been under control here from being re-introduced. How many CDC personal are deployed at immigrant arrival centers? probably close to none. Should CDC be involved in the vaccine business? Absolutely not. They’ve proven themselves to be untrustworthy.
It is this careful examination of core functions that will be essential to achieving the goal of a healthier America which is also an argument for a strong Assistant Secretary of Health, to oversee all of that. A tough, strong MD with government experience, perhaps someone from the armed services side with proven leadership skills would make a good candidate.
Agree to most points, adding: 1. Maybe we should also pay Federal Scientists better? And 2. Insurance has become too expense for so many, and it covers less and less. My Humana will cover only half the dental fees next year as it did this year, for example. There are folks on Obamacare who would wind up without any insurance?
I would just like to suggest that this policy would also include dental health. Your mouth is the gateway to your health.