To that end, on April 26, 2010, the President of the European Central Bank, Jean-Cluade Trichet, delivered a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) called, “Global Government Today.”

Forbes online summarized the Trichet speech to the CFR as follows: “The President of the European Central Bank, Jean-Claude Trichet, told Forbes that global governance is extremely necessary if we want to prevent another financial crisis.”

Robert Rubin, Chairman of the CFR, signaled his support and that of the CFR for global government by responding to Trichet as follows: “Jean Claude, you were terrific.”

By his remarks, Trichet, was reinforcing the position of European Union President, Herman Von Rompuy, who recently announced: “2009 is also the first year of global governance.”

The primary institution of global governance, according to Trichet, will be the Global Economy Meeting (GEM) held in Basel, Switzerland. Trichet explained that this body, with its agreements, “has become the prime group for global governance among central banks.” GEM is a committee of the Bank for International Settlements, a non-governmental organization controlled by none other than the large banks of the world.

The UN’s World Bank President and CFR member, Robert Zoellick, explained how this will happen. Said Zoellick: “If leaders are serious about creating new global responsibilities or governance, let them start by modernising multilateralism to empower the WTO, the IMF, and the World Bank Group to monitor national policies.” That means that the big banks—which Trichet referred to as a parallel government—will give global institutions the power to regulate national policy.

Doing so creates a global government.

If global government becomes a reality, the United States will no longer be a free and independent nation but will rather be under the control of the global government body.

Last fall’s environmental conference in Copenhagen was intended to establish global control of energy, and now the World Health Organization has called for the power to collect taxes to support its efforts.

International agencies that collect taxes, other international agencies that control energy—these are additional components of global government. The rush is on big time, and most Americans, including most lawmakers, have no idea about what is happening.

In addition the International Education program known as International Baccalaureate (IB), which is sponsored and controlled by UNESCO (a branch of the UN), is now taught in over 800 U.S. schools, and is subsidized by state and federal tax dollars. In a various articles I have pointed out that IB is the prototype of global education—being developed and tested right here in the United States—another key component of global government.

On top of all this, state lawmakers are eagerly trying to qualify for “Race To The Top”—the federal education program which has states writing curriculum standards that conform to “international standards.” Translate “international standards” to mean UNESCO curriculum standards.

The tentacles of global government are penetrating our nation from all sides—and by his intention to sign the proposed environmental accord at Copenhagen, President Obama has made it clear that he enthusiastically supports global government. We need to seriously ask if we as a nation have either the will, or the means, to stop it.

(Members are: Allen Quist, candidate for Congress;  Brian Davis, MD, Rochester; Scott Wright, MD, Rochester;  Paul Double, Winona;  Katie Jones, pharmacist, Mankato;  Michael Van Norstrand, MD, La Crosse, WI., others to be added)

PRESS RELEASE – FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Quality healthcare is a keystone of the Minnesota 1^st District’s economy and is a major reason that living and working in southern Minnesota is such a privilege.  It is no surprise that the state of our nation’s healthcare system, together with the state of the overall American economy is of highest concern to 1^st District voters.  The recently passed Senate healthcare bill, now known as Obamacare, clearly fails to recognize the excellence that American medicine has achieved, ignores the real problem of rising healthcare costs, fails to address the greatest needs we have in our healthcare delivery system and prevents competition in a free marketplace from playing any significant role in building an equitable American healthcare system.  Allen Quist believes this is unacceptable and will work to repeal Obamacare which is clearly meant as a stepping stone to a nationalized healthcare system.  In its place, Allen Quist and fellow Republicans will engage healthcare leaders from our region to create a truly reformed, free market, healthcare delivery system with transparent goals that:

• Enhances competition in the health insurance industry nation-wide and drives down cost
• Provides a secure foundation of healthcare available to the low-income uninsured and the uninsurable with pre-existing conditions
• Prevents Washington bureaucrats from distorting the delivery of healthcare through backroom deals and self-serving rules that usurp personal rights and State constitutional authority
• Provides for non-partisan management of Medicare and Medicaid that guarantees that healthcare will be available for our senior citizens
• Decreases the burden of unjustified litigation against healthcare providers driven by trial lawyers seeking only their own personal gain
• Has a cost which is contained and is visible and does not increase the power of the IRS as an enforcement agency
• Rewards quality of healthcare delivered, not quantity of services charged to patients
• Does not make insurance companies or the government the arbiter of quality healthcare

The Democratic incumbent has voted with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid for a politically driven system that will put our children trillions of dollars in debt in a European-style social system.  Allen Quist knows what he believes and will speak for us with a powerful voice in Congress.  As the campaign to replace the Democratic incumbent advances toward the general election, Allen will present specific proposals to accomplish each of these goals.

* * *

Marriage Penalty in the U.S. House and Senate Health Care Bills

(Mankato, MN) – “The House and Senate Health Care bills contain a huge marriage penalty for the American middle class.” Allen Quist said today.

Following is the complete statement by Allen Quist on the marriage penalty:

“There is a huge middle class marriage penalty hidden in the House and Senate health care bills. The penalty becomes evident by evaluating questions like the following: How much would two single people, each making $30,000 per year, pay for private health insurance if the Pelosi bill was in effect now? The answer is $1,320 per year for both individuals combined (based on the premium limits and subsidies outlined on the charts below). But how much would they pay for the same level of insurance under the Pelosi bill if they were to marry? Their combined cost would then be about $12,000 a year (the estimated cost for private insurance).

“Health insurance premium costs for two adults with equal incomes if the Pelosi bill was in effect now:

“Once the income of Americans exceeds 400% of the Federal Poverty Level, there are no limits on the premiums they can be charged, and their premiums are no longer subsidized. The poverty level is much higher for two people living unmarried as compared to the same two people being married. That is why citizens in many cases will pay far more for insurance if they are married. Why should married people be subjected to financial discrimination?

“This extraordinary penalty people will pay, should they marry, extends all the way from a two-person combined income of $58,280 to $86,640, a spread of $28,360. A large number of people fall within this spread. As premiums for private insurance escalate, as expected, the marriage penalty will become substantially larger.

“The Senate bill also creates a marriage penalty, in this case by imposing a new tax on individuals who make $200,000 annually but it also applies to married couples making $250,000 each year. This marriage tax on the affluent, however, is just the tip of the marriage penalty iceberg in the Senate bill.

“The Senate bill stipulates that two unmarried people, 52 years of age, with private insurance and a combined income of $60,000, $30,000 each, will pay a combined cost of $2,483 for medical insurance. Should they marry, however, they will pay a combined cost of $11,666 for insurance—a penalty of $9,183 for getting married (based on tables available here).

“This substantial marriage penalty applies to persons on individual insurance, but, as the Heritage Foundation’s Bob Moffit said: ‘if an employer has a health care benefits package that is 12 to 13 percent of payroll, and they can solve their problem by paying an 8 percent payroll tax [into the Exchange], I think they’re going to do it,’ (New York Times, 9-30-09). And Howard Dean said that, ‘small business won’t need to buy health care for its employees any more’ (Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace, 11-29-09).

“Businesses will shed their employees and health care dollars into the Exchange, but the dollars that are paid back out will be directed only to those who make less than 400% of the Federal Poverty Level. Those above the Poverty Level will receive none of their previous insurance benefits from businesses. For that reason the new system is income redistribution on steroids.

“ ‘Household’ is defined in both bills as including those who can be claimed as dependents for federal income tax purposes thereby clarifying that adults can avoid the marriage penalty by living together unmarried. The new system provides a huge incentive for doing so.

“The bills additionally contain De Facto salary caps. How much would a married couple pay for private insurance under the House bill if their income was $58,000 per year?  The answer is $2,088. But what if their income increased by $1,000? Their annual premium would then be about $12,000. The economic penalty for going off the subsidized system is so severe that it will be difficult for people to increase their earnings beyond 400% of Poverty Level. The Senate bill works essentially the same way.

“Senior citizens and small businesses have already been identified as big losers in the health care bills. Married citizens in the middle class need to be added to the list.”

Official summary of premium limits and subsidy levels in the House bill*

Federal Poverty Levels now in use:

• Single person = $10,830
• Two person household = $14,570
• Three person household = $18,310
• Family of four = $22,050

400% of Federal Poverty Level:

• Single person = $43,320
• Two person household = $58,280
• Three person household = $73,240
• Family of four = $88,200

*  Chart provided by The House Committees on Ways & Means, Energy & Commerce, and Education & Labor, October 29, 2009.

Media advisory: Allen Quist bio and high resolution photograph available on the About Allen page.

I begin with a conversation I had recently with my son in-law who runs an automobile repair shop north of Grand Marais, near the Canadian border. I asked him if he had ever repaired cars owned by Canadians who were coming here for medical care. He said, yes he had. He also said it was not that unusual. I then asked if he ever repaired cars owned by U.S. citizens who were traveling to Canada for medical care? He replied, “Are you kidding? Why would anyone do that?”

He was reflecting what we all know—that Canadians come here for health care because we have more to offer. Why should we make radical changes to our system only to move to something that is decidedly inferior?

The answer to that question lies in statements by the President’s Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, who has said, “Never let a crisis to go to waste.” And:  “They [crises] are opportunities to do big things.” That means “big things” in the mind of Rahm Emanuel, of course.

It follows that the health care bill is also about “big things,” big ideas–the ideas of Rahm Emanuel and those who think like him. One of the most important “big things” for Rahm Emanuel is government-run health care. The bill in Congress is not about “reform.” It’s all about the federal government running things at the expense of our freedom.

For example, you now can decide if you want to buy health insurance or not. It’s a free country. It’s up to you. But under this bill, that freedom is gone. By law you must have insurance, and if you don’t, you will be fined and can even be put in prison. Your freedom to make that decision is gone.

Let’s go to a second example: You now can decide which insurance company to do business with.  Under this bill, that freedom becomes an illusion—the reason being that all insurance companies are forced to join the “Health Insurance Exchange” where they will essentially be run by the government.  You can choose the company, but in reality it doesn’t matter because all the choices are the same.

A third example—you can now decide what medical treatment is right for you. It is a free country—you decide. The Pelosi bill, in contrast, creates what it calls the “Medical Benefits Advisory Committee.” We will just call it “the Committee.”  The Committee will decide the parameters, the limitations, within which you can make your decisions.

Notice what has just happened—in a free country we the people put limitations on the government. That is what we mean by “limited government.”  That is the purpose of our Constitution.  But in the Pelosi bill, the government puts limits on us. We have crossed the Rubicon. We have been changed, transformed, from a nation of limited government to a nation of limited people. That’s what this bill is all about.

What to do? Congresswoman Michele Bachmann of Minnesota’s 6th district is asking those who can to come to the front steps of the nation’s Capitol on Thursday, 12:00  noon, for a press conference on this bill. I will be there. If at all possible, you need to be there, too. We need to demonstrate by our being there that this bill is absolutely not acceptable in our free land.

If you can’t be there, you need to be calling and writing your senators and representatives in Washington. Find out who the good ones are and who the bad ones are. Get on the case of the bad ones. Call and write them not just once, but repeatedly until they come to their senses and agree to vote ”no.” It was Everett Dirksen who said, “The more I feel the heat, the better I see the light.” We have way too many Senators and Representatives who need to feel that heat.

Every generation in our country has fought the fight for freedom. For George Washington it was the War for Independence; for Abraham Lincoln it was the Civil War; for Ronald Reagan it was the Cold War. And for us—it it this war, it’s the battle against the Nanny State, the battle to remain a nation where we are free indeed. This is our fight, this is our time. Let us not shrink from the task. Let us leave to our children a nation of people who are still free.

The American Dream consists of liberty and opportunity. Liberty means the freedom of self-government and the freedom to conduct our lives as we see fit. Opportunity is being able to pursue our goals in life without undue restrictions. It means being able to improve our station in life through our own initiative and hard work.

Sadly, the American Dream is now being undermined. The health care proposal (HR3200) now in Congress—which amounts to a government takeover of the health care industry—means that patients and their families, in consultation with their doctors, will no longer be able to make important health care decisions. Under this proposal those decisions will be made by bureaucrats in Washington. This new system requires a serious loss of freedom as well as a loss of the quality of health care we can receive

The estimated cost for this health care proposal is $1 trillion over the next ten years–$13,000 for every family of four in our nation. This will be our cost for our own loss of freedom as well as for a reduction in the quality of our health care.

Health care is really a state issue. Congressional leaders are making it a federal issue because they are hungry for power. They think they can run our lives better than we can.

The American Dream is also being compromised by Congress through excessive government spending resulting in unsustainable government debt. The $787 billion stimulus package alone—one bill—passed into law in February of 2009, added $10,000 of new government debt for every family of four in America. As Milton Friedman often said, ‘There is no such thing as a free lunch.’ At some point this debt must be repaid.

Then there is the $1.4 trillion deficit for fiscal year 2009. That amounts to $18,500 of new debt for every family of four—in just one year! In addition, those in power in Washington are planning to add $1 trillion in debt each year for the next ten years with no end in sight. That totals $130,000 over the next ten years of new debt for every family of four—added on top of the huge debt our nation already has. This debt will bankrupt our nation! Congress has clearly lost its way.

On top of all this, the House of Representatives, in July of 2009, passed the infamous Cap and Trade bill. The Heritage Foundation estimated that this bill, when fully implemented, will cost each family of four $6,800 each year in higher energy and related costs. And how will we benefit from this new mandated expense? The results will be too small to even measure! Meanwhile, China, a country that is not this foolish, is positioning itself to overtake our nation as being the new economic super-power of the World.

It should be obvious to most anyone that the bills now being passed by Congress will do immeasurable harm to our nation and to every citizen in our nation. Because of the direction Congress has taken, we are losing the American Dream.

All of us need to do our part to turn this around. Every generation of Americans, in some way, has had to fight the fight for freedom. This is our fight. This is our time. Join with us in this all-important battle to restore what America is really all about. Join with us in restoring the American Dream.