Most Ponderstorm readers already know that our taxpayer-funded federal government is abusing its power. What I share below is a blatant example of such abuse of taxpayer funds. In short, I’m about to show you an actual piece of propaganda by the United States government and funded by the American taxpayer. It shamelessly and openly pushes an issue that is a central feature in Barack Obama’s radical leftist (and even Marxist) agenda.

On the homepage of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) website (www.hhs.gov) there is a button and link (screen capture shown on left; I added yellow highlighting for emphasis) pointing to another government-funded website named HealthReform.gov. This website clearly and prominently promotes the Obama Plan. Along with many misrepresentation of facts and abuses of government power, they even have the audacity to state their recognition within the “Innovations Gallery” that “celebrates the innovators and innovations who are championing the President’s vision of more effective and open government.” Who is behind the Innovations Gallery? Why, it’s WhiteHouse.gov! Shameless propaganda! And the reason given for this recognition is for “allowing Americans to take part personally in the health reform process.” Wait till you hear more about how HealthReform.gov is not about open government and citizen involvement for those who don’t want a government health care takeover.

So I clicked the “State Your Support” button to see what was up and couldn’t believe what I saw. Let me quote what this page read and also provide a clickable screen capture so you can see for yourself (again, I highlighted some of the very strong propaganda words used by our taxpayer-funded government to push a particular government-takeover agenda under the guise of “reform”). Let me quote the support letter American citizens are being asked to sign (there is no option to edit the message or offer anything but support):

Dear Mr. President,

We strongly support your commitment to comprehensive health reform.

This is not a luxury. The continuing, sharp escalation of health care costs for families, businesses, and government is unsustainable. Reform is imperative.

We believe that health reform must be enacted this year.

Reform is needed to help America’s families struggling with rising costs and those who are losing their insurance. At the same time, real health reform is crucial to keeping American businesses competitive in the world economy and for the country’s long-term economic viability. As our country faces economic challenges, the time for reform is now.

We support health reform that follows these principles:

• Protect families’ financial health
• Assure affordable, quality health coverage for all Americans
• Provide portability of coverage
• Guarantee choice of doctors
• Invest in prevention and wellness
• Improve patient safety and quality of care
• End barriers to coverage for people with pre-existing medical conditions
• Reduce long-term growth of health costs for businesses and government

During these extraordinarily challenging times, we need to put aside past differences and address the health and economic crisis. Our shared interest must come before narrow interests so we can achieve a health system that is affordable and provides high quality for all Americans. We will support your budget with its reserve fund dedicated to achieving health care reform in a fiscally responsible manner. Each of us must be prepared to contribute to achieving this fundamental goal.

By signing this statement we affirm our commitment to work with you and our Congressional leaders to enact legislation this year which provides affordable, high quality coverage for all Americans.

Okay, let me get this straight: The government is spending our money to influence those in government to adopt “reforms” that will lead to more government control of our lives. There is no way for anyone to voice anything but support (reminds me of dictatorships who have “free and fair elections” with only one candidate on the ballot). I know this kind of thing happens all the time in communist China, Iran, Cuba, and North Korea, but I though it was illegal for the United States federal government to spend public money lobbying for a particular partisan effort and to shut out opposing viewpoints. At the bottom of every page on this government web site is the line “This is an official U.S. Government Web site managed by the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.” This is un-American!

It is an extremely dangerous thing when the government can take our money under the force of law and then spend it to influence public policy decisions that will take even more of our freedoms away. This is nothing short of government propaganda and is wrong regardless of which party or person is in power! Wake up, Democrats, your freedoms are being lost also.

So what can we do about this? Well, I was hoping I could contact HealthReform.gov and voice my opposition to this abuse of power but the only online contact forms available there were very pro-government. Again, I quote these arrogant bureaucrats:

We want to hear what you think about health reform.

Share your story and send in ideas about why we need health reform this year

Show your support for President Obama’s commitment to health reform.

Clearly HHS doesn’t really want to hear what all Americans think about health reform. They only want to hear what pro-government takeover Americans think. So much for being a government “of the people, by the people, and for the people.”

My recommendation is to contact HHS directly and strongly (yet respectfully) voice your views on this abuse of power and being forced to pay for government propaganda. You can do this via the HHS online contact form and as follows:

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
200 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20201

Telephone: 202-619-0257 (although listed on the web site, it is no longer in service)
Toll Free: 877-696-6775

I called the toll free number and the HHS comment line for the Office of the Secretary is 202-205-5445. You have to leave a message.

My recommendation is to fill out both the online contact form and to call them. You can read more about this propaganda and the efforts of Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) to investigate. You may wish to encourage Senator Grassley to put even more pressure on HHS to remove this propaganda immediately.

In my opinion, after the recent massive financial bailouts and other interventionist federal actions (and in some cases nationalizations) within our economy (i.e. the private sector), several pressing questions remain unanswered. I have been pondering on five of them for some time now. These are listed below in no apparent order.

1. If bad loans got us into this situation, then why is there so much effort to get banks to loan even more money?

If there is a dollar to be made and people are free to act in rational ways, then somebody creative will find a way to earn that dollar. My thinking is that in spite of the negative news regarding financial markets right now, there remains a market for loaning money to people with good credit. If this is the case, then there must be people willing to make a profit in such a market and so they will loan money to those with the means to pay them back. No crisis there.

On the other hand, the market for people with bad credit (i.e. people who you shouldn’t loan money to) has dried up and rightfully so. That should be a good thing. It made no sense to make risky loans but such actions were encouraged by foolish government policy that distorted reality and created an artificial market for bad loans. No loans to people who should not get loans means no crisis there either.

So let’s fast forward to now. I want to know why there is all the fuss about banks not loaning money then? It’s good banks are not making more bad loans. To push them to loan on a large scale again seems to me to further push us into the mud. We’re supposed to be getting ourselves “unstuck” but loaning more would seem to do just the opposite and compound our already bad situation. That doesn’t make a bit of sense.

2. Bailouts rewards bad performance.

Corporate leaders are paid to lead. Part of leading means avoiding problems. It seems to me that we have a bunch of bad leaders at many financial institutions (and in government) since they led their companies (and federal policy) on a path of suicide. Why should the government reward these guys with a bailout? Seems to me that such actions simply reward their poor judgment and punish those who kept their companies out of trouble.

As for the auto industry in particular, I have some specific thoughts along these lines. They were on an unsustainable path by operating at a loss and piling up debt for so long. Instead of cutting back, rethinking, retooling, living within their means and building products that customers want (and will turn a profit), they were unwilling to change. A bailout will just put off the invevitable and reward their past negatives. Where is the incentive to adjust to market forces and make an honest profit by pleasing customers like all other businesses have to do? Furthermore, a bailout invites the government to meddle within an essential American industry. That’s an incredibly dangerous proposition.

3. Bankruptcy and subsequent restructuring allows serious change to occur quickly.

Bankruptcy can give a company temporary relief while forcing hard decisions to be made and implemented under court order. In some cases, ownership changes as assets are sold or even repossessed. Physical assets, however, don’t disappear just because ownership changes. In most cases of high profile companies, ownership changes don’t kill the company. Just because ownership or the company name changes doesn’t mean the demand for that type of product ends. Good news! That means, then, there is still a market for those products.

Think again of the American auto industry. If General Motors were to go bankrupt, the demand for vehicles would not cease. Somebody would still build cars in most of those General Motors factories. The other companies could not step in overnight and build enough cars, trucks and parts to meet consumer demand. That means there is still a huge market for, and thus incentive, to keep General Motors alive.

If left alone, I predict that instead of collapse, bankruptcy and much-needed restructuring would occur within the American auto industry. The result would be an industry that is much stronger and more competitive for the future after undergoing the tough decisions needed now.

4. We’re on a slippery slope to socialism and nationalization (i.e. communism).

I alluded to this thought above. I don’t like the federal government taking taxpayer money (or borrowing money that taxpayers will have to repay) and “buying” or assuming ownership of private companies or even parts of them. I see no Constitutional authority for such a move and it is highly contrary to the tenets of capitalism.

This economic downturn is not a problem with capitalism. Instead, it is a problem caused by government interference that distorted free markets by preventing them from properly regulating themselves and rooting out bad loans and risky behavior. In short, government created this problem and now we’re asking government to fix it? How foolish is that?

5. Finally, why have certain leaders not been fired for their incompetence?

We have a Treasury Secretary that serves at the will and pleasure of the President. There are leaders in Congress that oversee financial committees and other influential boards and administrative bodies. Corporations and banks have leaders. Surely these leaders should have seen this problem coming years ago. After all, they are paid to prevent problems such as this.

The very fact that so many of our leaders, from the Treasury Secretary down to corporate executives, either didn’t see the problems or failed to warn of them makes these individuals part of the problem. Instead, and making the case even worse, it seems many of these leaders contributed greatly to the problem. That scenario suggests they are guilty of inept leadership. Simply put, they are incompetent.

In short, those incompetent individuals who contributed to this problem should be fired and replaced with competent individuals who will work to get their companies and our country out of debt and on a solid financial footing. I’m troubled that I can think of nobody who has been fired for their part in creating this problem. Instead, they are awarded billions to spend and authorized with questionable powers to “fix” what they either helped create or failed to avert. That response seems about as reasonable as giving gas and matches to an arsonist.

So, in conclusion, these five ponderings have occupied a great deal of my thought (and frustration) over the past few months. Please share your ponderings below.

Let me clearly state that I don’t like or approve of the recent federal intervention in the United States economy. Government policy over the past three decades, pushed to extremes by left-leaning and radical groups like ACORN and using the Community Reinvestment Act, created the corrupt lending environment that was exploited by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to produce the toxic mortgage situation in which we find ourselves. So, since government is primarily responsible for this crisis, why should we then trust government to fix the problem they created?

This unfavorable economic environment is not a shortcoming of capitalism. It is a direct result of government manipulation within our economy for the benefit of a few people. Sometimes manipulation gives an unfair advantage to the rich and sometimes the poor. In this current environment, those who should not get a loan it were encouraged to borrow beyond their means.  While historically no bank would loan money under such terms, Fannie and Freddie created an unnatural market for banks to offload risky mortgages. The result was the poisoning of our entire financial system.

Unfortunately, as is often the case, the federal government stepped in and removed even more of our individual freedoms and made our economic system less of a capitalistic one and more like a planned economy under socialism. To give you an idea of the extent of the change, we’re now talking about the government owning or nationalizing large portions of our banking system. We’re also talking about government confiscating taxpayer money to buy up and refinance failing mortgages. We’re also talking about government, not shareholders, owners or investors, telling companies how much they can pay their employees and how to run their businesses. Sounds more like the old Soviet Union than what the Founding Fathers set up, doesn’t it?

This is an extremely dangerous precedent that will severely damage our economy in the long run. It makes the American taxpayer the ultimate holder of risks that the market should allocate to willing investors. It also gives government enormous control over our economy, our money and our everyday lives. In effect, a government bureaucrat will soon be deciding who can borrow, how much they can borrow and under what terms. In the name of fairness and environmentalism, other factors will probably be imposed later like how large our house can be and whether we really need what we can afford.

Instead of the massive bailout that was adopted, I wish government had essentially stepped out of the picture and removed as many of the artificial market distortions imposed on our economy as possible. True, those who foolishly risked assets would go bankrupt but those assets would not disappear (yes, all those over-mortgaged houses would not evaporate into thin air and people would still have places to live). Instead, those assets and failing institutions would be transferred to their creditors who would carry on the business of finding renters and owners for them. The system would have adjusted and done so relatively quickly compared to this permanent fix imposed by the government.

Furthermore, such a capitalist move would have injected more fairness and rational decision-making into our economic system instead of advancing our nation down the slippery slope of socialism. Power corrupts. Whether power is concentrated in the hands of government or unfair markets, it still corrupts. The best fix would have been for government to ensure that free markets existed and then to step back and let the incredibly creative innovations of the American people solve the crisis.

In conclusion, the current economic crisis was caused by government intervention in the first place and will not be fixed by yet another bigger government intervention. It is utter foolishness to grant government more power to tinker with our economy. It is especially dangerous to further empower those same forces who pushed the radical agenda that first took our government down the destructive path of socialism decades ago. Furthermore, I’m also very troubled by the lack of real resistance to this massive erosion of our precious American freedoms.