What is Technocracy?

OK-SAFE, Inc. -What is Technocracy?

Technocracy is the concept of government by technicians, i.e. scientists and engineers, who would oversee and administrate  government and the economy.

The framework for a North American Technate (an institutionalized and operational technocracy) was formulated in the early twentieth century by an influential group called Technocracy Incorporated.  This group eventually published a Technocracy Study Course in the mid-1930′s, noted below.

Excerpt from the Technocracy Study Course: “Technocracy is dealing with social phenomena in the widest sense of the word; this includes not only actions of human beings, but also everything which directly or indirectly affects their actions.  Consequently, the studies of Technocracy embrace practicably the whole field of science and industry.  Biology, climate, natural resources, and industrial equipment all enter into the social picture;” (page ix)

A Technate does not recognize God, individual rights,  representative government,  or national boundaries.  There is no constitution – the blueprint for a Technate is based on functional systems.

A Technate, as described, holds sway over all the resources of its extended territory, from minerals to man; it considers all types and classes of production and methods of distribution, and determines how much energy would and should be consumed in the process.

[NOTE: In Technocracy's worldview, resources include humans; human beings are considered animals - organisms that derive their food from other organisms.  Subject to the evolution process, and because humans are intimately involved in both production and consumption of energy, technocrats believe that it is appropriate to modify or "enhance" the human organism by scientific means (including genetic), to improve their performance. Read: Designing the Future: NBIC Technologies and Human Performance Enhancement, by James Canton, Ph.D. The activities and schemes detailed in this document could explain why Personhood efforts fail.  Pair this with 'transhumanism' and one begins to get the picture.]

Technocrats believe it is their job to balance production and consumption; this involves moving from the current “price-based” system (or whatever it is we currently operate with), to a system based on energy consumption – for instance, a “carbon” based currency system.

Originally, the technocrats envisioned issuing an Energy Certificate to each person at birth.  When that person used up all his pre-determined energy credits, well,  that would be it for him – no more energy allotment.

Goodbye, Bob.

Never Waste a Good Crisis

Technocracy was being promoted during the time a great financial crisis was facing the nation – the great Depression. Technocracy was offered up as a solution to the country’s ills.  The establishment of a Technate (government by technical experts) was seen as way out of what seemed an insurmountable problem. According to Patrick Wood, FDR was offered the position of ‘dictator’ over the proposed Technate, but refused.

We can expect that same pattern of behavior will repeat itself – a great financial crisis, followed by calls for an immediate solution.  Scripture says there is nothing new under the sun and efforts by man to control and dominate the affairs of others continues. The groundwork for a type of Technate has already been laid – all that is needed is the right ‘crisis’ to launch it.

The Course Book

The Technocracy Study Course book, produced by Technocracy Incorporated, was published in New York in 1934, 1935 and 1936, and in Canada in 1937 and 1938.  The digital copy was made available in 2008. (See below for links).

When you read through this Study Course, make special note of Lesson 20, The Nature of Human Animal, and Lesson 21, Technocracy: The Design.

After reading these chapters, a lot of what is happening today is made clearer – including liberty-killing sustainable development plans, schemes to control production and consumption; land and water use restrictions; health care and education reform; the purpose of Smart Meters and the Smart Grid; data collection systems and surveillance technologies; government “modernization” efforts that will lead to the outsourcing of government functions;  open borders and the disregard of constitutional government; and the rising up of a technocratic elite as ‘enterprise administrators’.

Comments below are from the Community Books website at http://archive.org/details/TechnocracyStudyCourseUnabridged

Technocracy Study Course

Author: M. King Hubbert
Keywords: Technocracy Study Course; Energy Accounting; Howard Scott; M. King Hubbert; TNAT; The North American Technate; Energy Certificate;
Language: English
Collection: opensource

Description

A complete digital scan of the Technocracy Study Course. This copy by TNAT The North American Technate. Google Technocracy technate for more associated information.

This is the 1945 edition. The last two chapters of this book contain the Technate design for North America.. the complete appendix.. after the design chapters.. are presented also.

The Technocracy Study Course introduces basic concepts of science, then relates those concepts to the idea of a scientific social design, secular and humanitarian, creative and life enhancing when the Price System abstract value system is not used, but energy accounting is.

The design based on the metrics of energy.. is the viable alternative to the present system referred to as a Price System. The Technate design precludes special interest groups. It is not a political system.

Investigate Technate design for an actual alternative system based on sustainable abundance within the context of our resource base.

Go to the upper left area where it says ”view the book” and click on the blue Pdf. to open this book. This book can also be read online by clicking that option.

Creative Commons license: Public Domain

Time for a Power Rebellion? Utilities Plan Rate Hikes – ah, those Smart Meters!

OK-SAFE, Inc. -  According to the political agenda known as sustainable development (aka Agenda 21), each person must reduce their energy consumption, or else it’s the end of the world, or something like that.  In other words, due to ‘climate change and human activity’ everyone, especially Americans, has to reduce their standard of living to subsistence level or else…

“Energy efficiency” is the talking point that seems to be everywhere – on the campaign trail, in state legislatures, at city council meetings, and new building codes. Being energy efficient is included in almost all sales pitches – from appliances to homes – and is part of the ‘going green’ agenda.

Folks are encouraged to buy Energy Star this or that, build energy efficient homes, install programmable electronic thermostats, unplug unused items and turn off lights.  Many businesses have been, or are being, remodeled or redesigned, including changing lighting fixtures, HVAC units and thermostats, windows, and even their hours of operation, all in the name of energy efficiency.

Power companies are installing (forceably so in many cases) the so-called Smart Meters on homes and businesses. These surveillance meters are supposedly more efficient than the existing analog meters, and are to reduce the cost of delivering energy to the consumers. The utility companies plan to eventually adopt time-of-day metering, to encourage consumers to change their power usage to off-peak-demand times.

Implied in these efforts is the notion that homeowners and businesses will reap financial benefits from these energy efficiency strategies, and will see reductions in their energy bills.  Everyone will save money, right?  (And the planet, of course.)

Not so fast.  Reducing folks’ energy bills is not really part of the plan; controlling consumption and raising rates is.

Utility rate increases, the natural next step in the Smart Meter/Smart Grid agenda.

It’s a no-win situation for the consumer – no matter what a person or business does to reduce their  energy usage, their energy bill is not going to go down.

Short of being off the grid entirely, or returning to a type of aboriginal living, there is no way to avoid what’s coming.  (Aboriginal living is not so far fetched – some in the “low-carbon initiative” movement are actually advocating this.) It doesn’t matter how much folks reduce their energy consumption, the rate they pay for energy (power) will only go in one direction – UP.

Sounds like it’s time for an Energy Rebellion

Rate increases are already being proposed in smart metered Idaho – and they’re coming soon to a state near you.  What will you do? Live with or do something to try stop it?

See the excellent action plan below, from researcher Vicky Davis.  In the meantime, follow this link to the Oklahoma Corporation Commission webpage dealing with Smart Meters.  Start reading here.

Opportunity Knocks… Let’s Answer It 

Note:  This was written for the people of Idaho, but everybody pays an electric bill so the suggestions offered here apply to people in all states.  Find your electric utility regulator’s website, get familiar with it, find out how to comment.  Watch for the next press release on a rate increase request and then spring into action. 

Yesterday, Idaho Power issued a press release that was published in the Idaho Statesman proposing an 8.5 percent increase in our monthly power bills “citing increased operating costs”.

Idaho Power pushes for rate increase
April 28, 2012

As part of its annual proposed rate adjustment, the state’s largest utility is proposing an overall 7.1 percent rate hike for residential customers. That means the average monthly bill would increase $6, from $83 to $89 per month.

The time when people are most receptive to new information, is when something happens to them directly and personally.  A significant increase in electric utility rates hits everybody – directly and personally.  In these hard economic times, an increase in the electric bill like this one provides us with an opportunity to present that new information.  It doesn’t matter that this opportunity begins with electric utility rates.  It’s the opportunity to talk to people about a subject that is guaranteed to interest them and to introduce them to the subject of Agenda 21 at the same time.  Energy restriction and control is at the heart of Agenda 21 – and the increase in electric rates demonstrates how.  The incentives are misaligned.  Your “reward” for conservation and efficiency is that you will pay more for less – and you have no choice because electric service is essential for all in an advanced country.   To be blunt about it, they’ve set up a racket.

Here is an article about electric rate decoupling – and don’t be fooled by the time limitations set for the decoupling.  They just extend the date when it expires.

Utility Decoupling:  Giving Utilities Incentives to Promote Energy Efficiency

The following image is of a paragraph in the 2006 National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency, Page (Adobe):

Idaho Public Utilities Commission Order 30267, Case No. IPC-E-04-15  (initial decoupling order)

What we found out in Idaho is that it wasn’t Idaho Power that was pushing Smart Grid, Smart Meters and “Demand Side Management”, it was the Idaho Public Utilities Commission (IPUC).  The IPUC is not acting in the interests of the people of Idaho, they are implementing the policies of NARUC – and NARUC is responding to the North American Energy Standards Board (NAESB) – and NAESB is working with NIST and the Department of Energy (DOE).

Here is the suggestion for all Tea Party Groups, 9-12, property rights groups, – all groups fighting Agenda 21.

Rally your members for an all out campaign to reach your neighbors.   Prepare a flyer with the information below and hand it out everywhere – grocery stores, shopping malls, anywhere people are congregated.   The front side should be about the electricity rate increase – the back side about Agenda 21.   It would be great if you could organize public meetings to tell people about Agenda 21 and advertise those meetings on the flyer.

Ask the people to send a comment about the rate increase to the Idaho Public Utilities Commission.  The comment can be emailed or a letter can be written.  The comment must include the Case Number and their name and address.

Also, include the name and address of their state legislators – representatives and senators and ask them to send a copy of their comment and/or a letter to them about the out of control costs for essential services.

IPUC Case information on the rate increase:

Case Number:  IPC-E-12-07
Date Filed:       April 4, 2012

IPUC Case information

Here is a sample of a citizen comment on another matter, but it shows the information that should be included:

Sample Comment

If you want to file your comment electronically, use this link:

IPUC Case Comment Form

If you want to write a letter, the following is the address.  All correspondence whether electronic or paper, should include the Case Number:

Idaho Public Utilities Commission
PO Box 83720
Boise, ID 83720-0074

This is a golden opportunity – but it is time limited.

Vicky Davis
April 29, 2012

Agenda 21 and You? Conference in Norman, OK Saturday 4-28-12

Sponsored by our friends at the Norman Tea Party in Norman, OK, the UN Agenda 21 and You?  conference promises to be very educational.

Guest speakers include:

• Cathie Adams – Pres. Texas Eagle Forum. Cathie has attended several UN meetings and frequently speaks about Agenda 21.
• Donna Wilson – A Texas researcher on the Council of Governments (COGS) – how they are involved in implementing Agenda 21 locally.
• Robert Semands – Pres. GEL (Govern Edmond Locally). Robert will speak on Agenda 21, Smart Meters, and the vocabulary of Agenda 21.
• Patrick Wood – Editor of the August Review and the August Forecast. Patrick will be addressing technocracy, Agenda 21 and sustainable development.

The conference will include small group time, networking opportunities and introductory materials which will be emailed to attendees in advance.

See invitation below, as sent out by special guest speaker Patrick Wood.

Dear Friend,

On Saturday, I will be addressing the Norman, OK Tea Party on the timely subject of Technocracy, Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development. If you are in Oklahoma, north Texas or even Kansas, I encourage you to attend and get some great information. It will be from 10:00am-3:00pm and the details are below. Please RSVP if you want to attend so they can estimate the food requirements for lunch.

UN Agenda 21 Conference
APRIL 28, 2012, 10:00 AM – 3:00
First Assembly of God Church of Norman
2500 E. Lindsey
Norman, OK 73071
Cost $20.00 per person or $35.00 per couples
Email to teaparty@weblawman.com
Or call 405-360-1716

As always, please repost this invitation into Facebook, Twitter, Linkedin, etc. to let others know as well.

Yours for Liberty,

Patrick Wood, Editor
The August Forecast & Review

Obama admits GOP Governors Suing Against Obama Care are Helping him “…behind the scenes…”

As in many other states, conservative grassroots organizations have ended up fighting against establishment Republican party members in order to stop the progressives’ take-over of health care.

In this case, Kansans have been discovering to what degree Republican Governor Sam Brownback has been playing both sides of the issue.

This from Richard Fry of SOCK (Stop Obama Care in Kansas), a Kansas group pushing back against “Obama Care” in that state for the last year:

Obama admits GOP Governors Suing Against Obama Care are Helping him “…behind the scenes…”

Obama has now admitted that “…some of those [GOP Governors] who filed suit [against Obama Care] are actually behind the scenes working with us to prepare for a day when we’ve got exchanges in these states….” I’ve been ringing that bell since June that Gov.  Brownback’s implementing OC by stealth was part of a national plan involving GOP Govs.  (NOTE: OC=Obama Care)

At that time I identified Oklahoma and Indiana. Now we have identified this happening in South Carolina, Mississippi and South Dakota. They were all using the same game plan. First they tried by stealth (like Brownback) then they made the same excuses as Brownback did i.e., OC is “…an unconstitutional law but the law of the land…”, “… we can do it our way not the OC way…”, “a state exchange will give us more flexibility…” and after being forced to give back the federal EIG, finding “alternate” sources of funding. Then the Governor simply rams it through via his administration as is happening in Oklahoma and South Dakota.

They used “controlled opposition”, in Kansas by Rep. Landwehr, Sen. Cook and Bev Gossage. Gossage stated “there is no such thing as a good insurance exchange” and kept saying “the governor just needs to be educated.” Now she denies that the Governor is in fact implementing OC when an examination of the contract and funding documents could allow no one to conclude otherwise.  

In Gossage’s defense, the last time I asked her she had not even read the current funding rule and I am not sure she reviewed the KMED now called KEES contract.  

They also used “controlled confusion” i.e., the Governor says we are doing an “insurance exchange” while the Lt. Gov tells us we are not doing it among other deceptive activity.

It is interesting to note that this technique of jointly employing “controlled opposition” and “controlled confusion” was used to get the NDAA through Congress and to now defend it. NDAA is the most direct and comprehensive attack on our Liberty in over one hundred years.

 If the President justifies NDAA to employ his National Defense Resource Preparedness Executive Order such might very well be used to brush aside all protests and  implement, under our current national “ emergency”, both Obama Care and the current version of Real ID. Then we will all be unwillingly plugged into the global information data hub.

 

 Thanks globalist Gov, this silent coup d’état was supported by you.

Richard D. Fry

The Intolerable Acts

www.theintolerableacts.org

816 853 8718

Health Privacy Rights – Interview with Dr. Deborah Peel on America in the Balance

OK-SAFE, Inc.  recently had the opportunity to interview Dr. Deborah C. Peel, founder and Chair of Patient Privacy Rights, a non-profit organization formed in 2004 to promote patient privacy and the protection of personally identifiable health information. (patientprivacyrights.org).

Dr. Peel is also supporting the 2nd Annual International Summit on the Future of Health Privacy, to be held June 6-7, 2012 at the Georgetown Law Center in Washington, D.C.

http://www.healthprivacysummit.org

This summit is free, and will be available via live-streaming if you cannot travel to D.C. for this important event.

 

Follow this link to the 3/14/12 America in the Balance interview:
http://www.truthinfocus.org/radio/america_in_the_balance.php

• We live in a “digital universe” – everything you do online leaves a digital trail
• Everything you do online is valuable to someone -  including gaining access to your Social Security number
• The most valuable information is any kind of health information – this information sells for more
• Health information is bought and sold online – including your personal prescription information
• Electronic health records – pharmacies, hospitals, and labs sell the information. Generally, it is sold for two reasons – 1) to sell you a product, and/or 2) to sell profiles of you to various purchasers – from drug companies, to health insurers, or for business analytics information
• Despite the laws that says employers are not supposed to discriminate based on health information – they do.
• Genetic bias is not supposed to take place – but it does
• Paper records did not cause health information to be leaked out – only when a third party was brought into the picture via electronic means did personal health information leak out.
• This electronic health information system is dangerous – not only to us, but to our children and their future.
• Quote: “Your diagnosis and your genes do not tell us how you will live and what your life will be like.”
• HIPPA is not about protecting your privacy – in fact, patients really don’t have any privacy rights.
• There are problems with “mHealth”, or mobile health, i.e. the use of Smartphones, I-pads, etc.- to view personal health information  Currently, this information is not encrypted, nor is there a way to control the access to it.
• The Health Information Exchanges mean any party to the exchange can pull your information before you get to your provider.

Although people may not have a way to opt out of all health information sharing systems, there is a Consent Form form available on the Patient Privacy Rights website, that you may like to print out and share with your health care provider to try to minimize the likelihood of your personal health information being shared.

Link to Consent Form on PPR site: http://patientprivacyrights.org/media/Consent_Form.pdf

Listen to the entire 3/14/12 interview on Truth in Focus radio:

http://www.truthinfocus.org/radio/america_in_the_balance.php

This is probably one of the most important rights issues we are facing today.

HHS Issues Final Rule on Health Insurance Exchanges

OK-SAFE, Inc. – Just released is the much anticipated Final Rule  on the controversial health insurance exchanges.

Issued March 12, 2012 by the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, these rules will dictate how the exchanges are to function, how they are to be governed, and what flexibility the state’s have if they decide to establish one.

As OK-SAFE has indicated all along – it doesn’t matter if the state establishes an exchange or the the federal government establishes it, the end result will be the same: the insertion of a third party into the traditional business model to create a managed “marketplace” – a marketplace that controls both the supply side and the demand side of health care. One that links patients, providers and payers into one technological network.

The model is the message.

Government will determine both the health care plans available (“certified” and “qualified”), as well as the health care providers patients can use, while giving lip service to such things as choice, competition, and clout.

Follow this link to read the entire HHS Final Rule.

Below are two announcements on the HHS Final Rule.

From U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services website:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 12, 2012

Contact: HHS Press Office (202) 690-6343

Policies give states more flexibility to establish Affordable Insurance Exchanges

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius today announced policies to assist states in building Affordable Insurance Exchanges.  Starting in 2014, these one-stop marketplaces will allow consumers and small businesses to choose a private health insurance plan and offer the public the same kinds of insurance choices as members of Congress.

The policies released today will help states in designing their Exchanges to best meet the needs of their consumers.  They offer states substantial flexibility as they design a marketplace that works for their residents.

“These policies give states the flexibility they need to design an Exchange that works for them,” said HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. “These new marketplaces will offer Americans one-stop shopping for health insurance, where insurers will compete for your business. More competition will drive down costs and Exchanges will give individuals and small businesses the same purchasing power big businesses have today.”

Today’s policies provide states with the guidance and certainty they need as they continue to work to build these marketplaces for their residents for operation in 2014. The policies offer guidance about the options on how to structure Exchanges in two key areas:

• Setting standards for establishing Exchanges, setting up a Small Business Health Options Program (SHOP), performing the basic functions of an Exchange, and certifying health plans for participation in the Exchange;
• Establishing a streamlined, web-based system for consumers to apply for and enroll in qualified health plans and insurance affordability programs.”  Rest here.

From HealthCare.Gov:

Affordable Insurance Exchanges: Choices, Competition and Clout for States

The Exchange final rule includes standards for:

• The  establishment and operation of an Exchange
• Health insurance plans that participate in an Exchange
• Determinations of an individual’s eligibility to enroll in Exchange health plans and in insurance affordability programs
• Enrollment in health plans through Exchanges
• Employer eligibility for and participation in the Small Business Health Options Program (SHOP)

This final rule is the latest in an ongoing series of steps to help states develop Exchanges. As of February 22, 2012, 49 states and the District of Columbia have received Exchange Planning grants, while 33 states and the District of Columbia have received Exchange Establishment grants. HHS is continuing to provide technical assistance to states, including technical consultations, monthly user groups, working groups on core functions, and conferences.”  Rest of announcement here.

Our recommendation is unchanged – don’t build an exchange in the state of Oklahoma.  Of course, SB 1629 will be hovering in the wings, ostensibly to wait for the Supreme Courts decision on the constitutionality of the individual mandate – but not on the exchanges, eh?

Time to stand your ground – vote NO on SB 1629 regardless of SCOTUS decision.

Insurance Exchange Bill on “Hold” Pending Supreme Court Action – OK Senate Changes Mind on SB 1629??

OK-SAFE, Inc. – In a very interesting move the OK Senate on Thursday (3/8/12) issued a press release stating that, “legislative leaders and the chairmen of the Joint Committee on Federal Health Care Law have opted to wait until the outcome of the Supreme Court proceedings before moving further forward with SB 1629.”

SB 1629 would have established the “Health Insurance Private Marketplace Network Trust”, governed by an appointed Board, that would administer a premium assistance plan (low income insurance, Medicaid), and assist small businesses and/or employees to purchase employer-sponsored insurance.

In other words, a state-based insurance exchange, tying users of Medicaid and private insurance together; a sort of public/private partnership exchange.

But, those phone calls, emails, in-person lobbying, and robo calls, all objecting to an insurance exchange (state-based or otherwise), paid off.   One bad bill has been stopped.

For now.

Score one for the people of Oklahoma!

However, in politics, there is always a Plan B.   What Oklahomans can expect is some other tactic being used to achieve the same end – the establishment of some sort of web-based insurance exchange in the state of Oklahoma, that will tie into the health information exchange, which is being advanced by the Oklahoma Health Information Exchange Trust (or OHIET), unstopped.

What may happen is the utilization of the existing HUB law (HB 2026 in 2009) passed a few years ago, to create an exchange, possibly bidding out some service to a third party.  (See details below press release.)

Send Thank Yous

If you would like to send a thank you for putting SB 1629 on hold, you may want to contact the following legislators, in addition to your own Senator:

• Senator Brian Bingman – bingman@oksenate.gov
• Senator Gary Stanislawski – stanislawski@oksenate.gov
• Rep. Kris Steele – krissteele@okhouse.gov
• Rep. Glen Mulready – mulready@oksenate.gov

 

Below is the text of the 3/8/12 Press Release, issued jointly by Senate and House leadership.

Oklahoma State Legislature

For Immediate Release: March 8, 2012

SB 1629 is on hold pending Supreme Court action

The Legislature will wait until after the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality of the federal health care law before proceeding with Senate Bill 1629, legislators announced Thursday.

The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule this summer, perhaps as early as June, on a legal challenge brought by several states alleging the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional.

Should the high court overturn the law, the possibility exists that health insurance exchanges would not be necessary. And should the high court uphold the federal law, nuances within the majority opinion could help legislators craft the most effective Oklahoma-based marketplace possible to defend against the imposition of a federal exchange.

Given these dynamics, legislative leaders and the chairmen of the Joint Committee of Federal Health Care Law have opted to wait until the outcome of the Supreme Court proceedings before moving further forward with SB 1629. If the court upholds the law, the Legislature is already prepared to continue defending against federal intervention into the Oklahoma health care market.

“There are many common-sense solutions conservatives can agree on to lower the cost of healthcare, expand access and choices to more individuals, and increase the quality of our care – all through tried-and-true principles of the free market,” said Sen. Gary Stanislawski, R-Tulsa, co-chairman of the Joint Committee on Federal Health Care Law.

“These are ideas worth pursuing, and we eagerly await the Supreme Court’s repeal of ObamaCare so we can begin the very serious business of addressing our healthcare challenges with solutions that expand freedom instead of government,” Stanislawski said.

The Joint Committee on Federal Health Care Law met five times throughout the interim to determine the effect the law will have on Oklahoma. Among its recommendations was to craft a state-based marketplace in order to prevent the federal government from imposing a federal exchange in Oklahoma.

“If the court doesn’t reject this law as we hope, developing a state-based exchange remains our best defense against unwanted federal intervention,” said Rep. Glen Mulready, R-Tulsa, the committee’s other co-chairman. “We think we have fashioned a good plan. We are willing to wait to ensure we have the best possible solution to protect Oklahoma from federal intervention.”

Legislative leaders supported the committee co-chairmen’s decision.

“Republicans in the state Senate will do everything in our power to block ObamaCare in Oklahoma. When President Obama rammed through a trillion dollar unconstitutional assault on the healthcare freedom of Oklahomans, he proved his values are fundamentally at odds with ours,” said Senate President Pro Tempore Brian Bingman, R-Sapulpa. “The fight to preserve healthcare freedom is far from over.”

“Developing a state-based solution has always been and remains the best, most realistic way to defend against a federal exchange. The reality is we’re not yet at the point where we absolutely have to deploy that defense,” said House Speaker Kris Steele, R-Shawnee. “Should the time come, we’ll be prepared to act thanks to the groundwork the committee has laid for us.”

For more information, contact:
Nathan Atkins
405.521.5605
atkins@oksenate.gov

John Estus
405.962.7674 desk, 405.706.0084 cell
john.estus@okhouse.gov

Title 36, Section 4601 – 4603:

Article 46 – Health Care for Oklahomans Act

§ 4601. Short Title

§ 4602. Duties of Health Care for the Uninsured Board

§ 4603. Program to Encourage Individuals to Enroll in Health Insurance Programs – Referral of Uninsured Individuals to the HUB

This is the section of law last year’s HB 2130 was attempting to amend.  This will bear watching for the rest of this session.

 

HR 1004 Discharge Petition Rally – Wednesday at the Capitol – Be There!

OK-SAFE, Inc. – OK-SAFE will be joining other Oklahoma grassroots activists at 9:00 am on Wednesday, March 7, 2012 at the OK Capitol* to petition for Open Government in the Oklahoma Legislature.

Wednesday’s effort is being spearheaded by Kaye Beach of Axxiom for Liberty.  This citizen rally is meant to secure the remaining signatures necessary to cause HR 1004 to be discharged from committee and move directly to the House floor for debate and a vote.

HR 1004, by Rep. Charles Key, simply states that if a legislator requests that his bill get a hearing in the committee it has been assigned to, the chairman of that committee must hear the bill and allow a vote.  It’s that simple.  As it stands now, a committee chairman, under direction of the Speaker, can prevent a bill from ever being heard in committee, effectively exerting top-down control of the legislative process.

Below is an excellent post by Kaye Beach detailing the purpose of HR 1004 and instructions for Wednesday’s efforts.

HR 1004 Discharge Petition-Calling All Oklahoma Activists for Representative and Open Government!

By Kaye Beach, March 2, 2012.

Blog Post Excerpt:

One More Chance – The Discharge Petition

House rules allow for discharge petitions as a means to get a bill brought out of a committee for a vote on the House floor.  We need the signatures of 66 House members to get HR 1004 (read HR1004) discharged from committee and on the House floor for a vote.

Right now we have 45 signatures but we need a minimum of 66 signatures.  That means we need 21 more signatures in order to get HR 1004 to the floor for a vote.

Your help is needed!

On Wednesday March 7, 2012, grassroots activists from across Oklahoma interested in ensuring transparent and representative government throughout the entire legislative process will meet for a petition drive for HR 1004 at the Oklahoma State Capitol at 9 am. 

RSVP on Facebook!  Oklahoma Action Alert – HR 1004 Discharge Petition Drive

Read entire post here.

*Folks will initially meet in the first floor rotunda area for instructions, then head upstairs.  The media has been invited.

SB 1629 – Exchange “Marketplace” Bill Models ObamaCare

OK-SAFE, Inc. – Things are “getting curiouser and curiouser” in the Oklahoma legislature.  According to some Senate Republicans, if you’re against “ObamaCare,” you would be for a bill implementing “ObamaCare.”

Alice in Wonderland  pretty well sums up what it felt like when SB 1629 was being presented by Tulsa Senator Gary Stanislawski.   To read a great parable about the Senate’s Health and Human Services committee meeting see the Oklahomans for Liberty site here.)

For the record, OK-SAFE opposes legislation that facilitates the implementation of “ObamaCare” health reform, and therefore opposes SB 1629, establishing a state-based exchange called a marketplace.

Senate Bill 1629 by Pro-Tem Brian Bingman, which passed by a vote of 7-2 on Monday,  would establish the very insurance exchange, or “marketplace” model called for in the PPACA, aka “ObamaCare.” Even though the Republican members of the Senate Health and Human Services committee said they oppose “ObamaCare,” not one of them voted against SB 1629, or even mentioned the actual content of the bill,  which included the creation of yet another trust to oversee the exchange/marketplace.

The word marketplace is alternately used to describe an exchange; the word exchange has now become too notorious to use.  Curiously, Sen. Tom Adelson has submitted an amendment to the bill, nullifying it if the Supreme Court shoots down PPACA, or if a new Congress does.

The Individual Mandate

Most of the questions in this committee were about the “individual mandate” (not included in the bill.) A fraction of the Affordable Care is about the individual mandate; most of the rest of the bill deals with items such as the exchanges and the reconfiguration of the insurance market.

The committee members either hadn’t read the bill, or they were working from talking points or a summary; they did not discuss what the bill actually says.

SB 1629 Creates a Marketplace/Exchange and Another Trust – The Middle Man Model

SB 1629 creates a public-beneficiary Health Insurance Private Marketplace Network Trust.   [See diagram below]

This Marketplace Network Trust would (initially) do two things: 1) take over and administer the premium assistance program (Insure Oklahoma) from the OK Health Care Authority, and 2) “develop and implement a marketplace assistance program to assist small businesses in the offering of employer-sponsored insurance purchased from the private market insurance carriers.” (In other words, an insurance exchange.)

This new trust has a twin called the Oklahoma Health Information Exchange Trust, or OHIET.  Created by  stealth in the last week of session in 2010, the OHIET is busy establishing the network of networks that facilitate the transfer of electronic health records everywhere.

Why would insurers be advocates for an exchange?  “Insurance companies are urging state officials to set up exchanges because they generally prefer state regulation.  In addition, they stand to gain because the United States Treasury will send subsidy payments directly to insurers on behalf of low- and moderate-income people who enroll in health plans offered through an exchange.”(National Center for Policy Analysis article here.)

Kinda explains SB 1629 doesn’t it?

The Model as Devised by SB 1629This diagram depicts the middle-man model. (For a great explanation of the not-free-market model, see the Vicky Davis article entitled The Model IS the Message.)

OK-SAFE Summary of the Bill:

• Section 1 of the bill describes the legislative intent: to expand the “mission” of Insure Oklahoma by “moving the administration of the Insure Oklahoma program from the purview of the Oklahoma Health Care Authority to a state public trust established in this act.”

Translation: they’re moving management of government-sponsored insurance from one state bureaucracy to a newly created one.

•  Section 2 establishes the new trust – B. The Health Insurance Private Marketplace Network Trust shall be established as a state-beneficiary public trust.
•  Translation: Oklahoma (government) is the beneficiary of the trust.

• Section 2 defines the trust governance:  C. The Health Insurance Private Marketplace Network Trust shall be governed by a Health Insurance Private Marketplace Network Board.

Translation: This section increases the power of the Executive branch due to powers of appointment; Fallin would get to appoint most of the Board members.  Board members are unelected and not accountable to the public.

• Of the 7-member board Governor Fallin would appoint three  members, the Pro-Tem and the Speaker each appoint one; the other two are Insurance Commissioner John Doak and Secretary of Health and Human Services Dr. Terry Cline (also appointed by Fallin.)

•  C. …The board of trustees shall consist of seven (7) members as follows:

1. One member appointed by the Governor representing health insurance carriers granted a certificate of authority by the Oklahoma Department of Insurance;
2. One member appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives representing consumers and who has purchased policies through the Trust or is reasonably expected to purchase policies through the Trust;
3. One member appointed by the Governor who shall be a health care provider;
4. One member appointed by the Governor who shall be a representative of employer groups;
5. One member appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate who shall be an insurance agent or broker;
6. The Insurance Commissioner – (John Doak)
7. The Secretary of Health and Human Services- (Terry Cline).

•  F. The board of trustees shall promulgate rules as necessary to implement the provisions of the act.

Translation: The appointed board will be insiders, and they can make the rules for the trust, not the legislature.  Also the board members elect the Executive Director, who will likely be Dr. Cline – just as was proposed in HB 2130 the HUB bill.

• Section 4 is New Law authorizing trust to administer a premium assistance program for low-income individuals, and to assist small businesses (up to 250 employees for a for- profit; up to 500 employees for a not-for-profit).  This was the Insure Oklahoma section, being defined for the trust.

• Section 5 reads in part:  A. The Health Insurance Private Marketplace Network Trust is authorized to develop and implement a marketplace assistance program to assist small businesses in the offering of employer-sponsored insurance purchased from private market insurance carriers which shall go into effect January 1, 2014. 

• E. The board of trustees shall, by rule, determine the funding mechanism for the marketplace assistance program authorized in subsection A of this section

Translation: The new trust is given full authority to develop and implement the exchange (oops, marketplace) in any manner they see fit. The board of trustees can make any rules they’d like to govern the funding mechanism.  Nothing in this section prohibits the trust from seeking federal funding, including federal grants that are available for states to develop an exchange – one was called the Early Innovator Grant, remember?

• Section 6 severs Insure Oklahoma from the OHCA, and gives it to the trust.  Section 7 deals with waivers.

 

• And finally,  Section 8 of the bill reads:  NEW LAW   A new section of law not to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes reads as follows:
  The Oklahoma Health Care Authority is hereby directed to seek any and all Federal approval necessary to implement the provisions of this act.

This really shows the legislative intent.  Federal approval.  And Stanislawski said it would not be “ObamaCare” compliant?  Want to bet?

[Aside: One wonders how and where that 40% excise tax will fit in once that becomes effective by 2018?]

Call Your Senator and Say NO to ObamaCare SB 1629

OK Senate Switch board: 1-800-865-6490, or 1-405-524-0126

Republican Senators who voted Yes in Committee for SB 1629 on 2/27/12:

1. Senator Brian Bingman:                 1-405-521-5528                 Email: bingman@oksenate.gov
2. Senator Gary Stanislawski:           1-405-521-5624                 Email: Stanislawski@oksenate.gov
3. Senator Rick Brinkley:                    1-405-521-5602                 Email:Brinkley@oksenate.gov
4. Senator Brian Crain:                        1-405-521-5620                 Email: crain@oksenate.gov
5. Senator Rob Johnson:                    1-405-521-5592                 Email: johnsonr@oksenate.gov
6. Senator Dan Newberry:                1-405-521-5600                 Email: newberry@oksenate.gov
7. Senator Steve Russell:                   1-405-521-5618                 Email: Russell@oksenate.gov

Joint Committee Finally Releases Report – Big Surprise! They Want Exchange AND Another Trust

OK-SAFE, Inc. – After almost a two month delay, the Joint Legislative Committee on Federal Health Care Reform has finally released it’s final report, 3 weeks after the start of OK legislative session.

The Governor and Leadership had seen the committee report much earlier, and legislation implementing the committee’s findings has already been planned and reserved.

No Big Surprises

The Legislature’s February 22, 2012 press release contained no big surprises, especially for those who have been following this state’s years-long implementation of health care reform, via both the HITECH Act of 2009 and PPACA (“Obama Care”).

There was no real surprise either, when yesterday (2/21/12) it was confirmed that SB 1116, a bill to repeal the title of law that created the Oklahoma Health Information Exchange Trust (OHIET), would not get a hearing in the Senate.

The Senate Leadership, and it’s author Sen. Brian Crain, made sure the bill would not get heard.

February 22, 2012 Press Release Excerpt:

“The committee’s final report (attached) recommends that Oklahoma: Continue to fight the federal health care law in court; better educate the public about ways to improve their health; prepare for a dramatic expansion of Medicaid eligibility due to PPACA; begin developing a market-based state health insurance exchange in order to prevent imposition of a federal exchange in Oklahoma; form a permanent legislative committee to monitor issues related to the federal health care law; and increase medical residency programs in order to address current and future doctor shortages – particularly in rural areas.

What the committee is not mentioning here is the fact the work to align Oklahoma with all the technology provisions of both the HITECH Act of 2009, and the PPACA, has already been started, facilitated by legislation creating electronic health records, and by the creation of a public trust called the Oklahoma Health Information Exchange Trust, or OHIET.  If the state builds an exchange, it may say OKLAHOMA (Insure Oklahoma) on the outside, but the inside functionality, and IT standards, will be all federally compliant and interoperable.

The release continues:

“Regarding health insurance exchanges, the report recommends Oklahoma begin taking steps to implement a state-based, free market health insurance exchange. The recommended exchange is similar to the one in development by the state of Utah since before PPACA’s existence. Utah’s exchange model was recommended to the committee by U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn. The recommended Oklahoma exchange would be housed in Insure Oklahoma, which would be spun off from the Oklahoma Health Care Authority and turned into a public trust.”

Besides pointing out the clear contradiction in the statement “state-based, free market health insurance exchange”, (you can’t have both state involvement AND be free-market), this release just confirms the state of Oklahoma, under Republican leadership, is ready to implement a federally compliant exchange, while giving the appearance of fighting “Obama Care”.

Another Trust?

The OHIET is a public-beneficiary trust that was created by stealth in the last week of May 2010.  It is responsible for the implementation of the technology infrastructure in this state that makes “Obama Care” work, establishing the ‘network of networks’ linking the patient (that’s you), the providers, and the payers.   The OHIET operates with no legislative oversight, and as the State Designated Entity (SDE), they can solicit and receive federal grants, award contracts, issue bonds, and incur debt.

In fact, due to timeline extensions by the HHS they could end up soliciting the very same $54M Early Innovator Grant that Gov. Fallin “rejected” in the spring of 2011.

The OHIET is currently using federal grant money to operate (see the Challenge Grant), and are busy awarding each other contracts for health information exchange.

The OHIET trust model was drafted by the law firm Crowe and Dunlevy.  One assumes that this same firm has had a hand in drafting the proposed insurance exchange trust language, transforming Insure Oklahoma into an insurance exchange.

It is virtually impossible to terminate a trust; there has to be political will in the Legislature anyway to make to make it happen.  The Oklahoma legislature, under Republican Governor Mary Fallin, does not want to stop the implementation of health care reform, aka “Obama Care.”

Instead, the Republican-led OK Legislature wants to keep on doing what they’ve been doing – implementing “Obama Care” while giving the appearance of opposing “Obama Care.”

It’s an election year – time to flip some Houses.

Both Committee Chairs – Sen. Gary Stanislawski and Rep. Glen Mulready have indicated they would not have supported SB 1116, saying they prefer a patient “opt-in/out” option.  This, of course, would leave the OHIET, and it’s agenda, intact.

February 22, 2012 Press Release in it’s entirety is available here.

The Final Report of the Joint Committee on Health Care Law is available here.