Plus 2000 pages of law and 13,000 pages of regulations (and how many lines of code?). Minus, read the Constitution (or at least Article I section 8 on what topics the Feds can legislate on, and Amendments 9 and 10).
Since home schooling often gets excellent results for a lot less money, and private schools for somewhat less money, let the public schools save money by paying students to leave. Voluntary spending cuts! Parental involvement! Variety! Freedom! If it costs Rick Smith $10,000 per child per year, let Tennessee rewrite its laws to offer each child a $5000 spending cut scholarship if they leave, and Rick gets to keep the other $5000. For every 8 students who leave, every student left in the Rick's system gets another dollar.
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." If your reporters got increased access, does the regime have some reason for feeling cheated? Did your reporters, when asked to be careful about the call-in, say at once, No sir, we're going to report on that too, or did they maintain a silence that could be taken as consent? Or...? (I don't know; I'm asking. Report, please.)
And if you're covering mayors, have you noticed some TFP failure to warn us, when Mayor Littlefield was running for re-election, that he might raise taxes, and raise stormwater fees, and annex people's property? Those seem like things that close coverage of city paperwork might have discovered, but they came up as unpleasant surprises that had been shoved under the rug until he got re-elected. Going to try harder next (this) time?
For some legal details, inquirer, go to National Review online, or Human Events, current articles on this case.
Morally, if the owner, or even a shareholding majority, think the murder of little babies is evil, why force them to subsidize it? Workers can buy their own murderous drugs, or get jobs elsewhere.
Even in a free country, we don't need freedom to do what most people agree on. We need freedom to do something different, something most people disapprove of, or consider less than the best.
An article linked from NR said economies grow fastest where governments spend 26% of GNP. The US are spending about 39% right now (DC + state + local). For growth, cut government by a third. Jesus is libertarian. Repent or perish, as the Pope warned the mafia.
From a friendly communist professor's syllabus on the robber barons I learned that the US economy grew faster A.D. 1840-1860 than it has grown in any 20-year-period since. In those days banks printed their own money (no federal reserve) with an underlying gold standard, and the cabinet had about six departments (no huge bureaucracy). GOP outreach? Libertarian populism: growth instead of jobless "recovery," opportunity instead of redistributing power to overpaid bureaucrats. Guess Who is rather libertarian?
Who would Jesus discriminate against?
"There is more joy in Heaven over one sinner who repents, than over 99 righteous people who don't need to repent." (I suspect some holy sarcasm after the comma [not that NT Greek had commas.])
Joy over the terrorist being crucified with Jesus who accepted capital punishment and rebuked his fellow, but not over the terrorist who complained that crucifixion was cruel and unusual punishment. Joy over the woman taken in adultery if she did indeed, as Jesus ordered her, Go break up with your significant other ("Go stop sinning"). Joy over the Corinthian who repented of trans-pagan fornication, and over previous repenters (I Cor 6:9-11). Joy over Israel when she repented and God raised up judges to slaughter her enemies, but not over Sodom...
Luke 24:47 Let repentance and forgiveness of sins (in that order) be preached in the name of Jesus...beginning among God's own people. Forgiveness and 'gospel' can be rather vapid without repentance, without acknowledging God's standards and our failure to meet them, our failure to even want to try to meet them, our failure to... as per II Cor 7:10-11.
Replacing a secular hat with one that pays tribute to Noah, whose family of 8 survived the Flood in the Ark when the rest of the world was condemned to drown for their wickedness? Repent.
Put down your gun and trust the government that promised 'If you like your health insurance you can keep it. Period.' ?
The government that 'passes' laws (by bribes) so we can find out what's in them, and what bureaucrats are going to write into them? That can't build a website in three years? That ignores its own laws, its own deadlines, and its own Constitution?
Put down your gun and trust the government that takes nine minutes to respond to a 9-1-1 call? (Not blaming the heroes who need nine minutes, but can the one on the spot wait that long?)
Put down your gun and trust the government whose air-conditioned groupies and lawyers in suits second-guess the people who call 9-1-1, the government whose 'justice' system often seems to be government of, by, and for the lawyers instead of seeking truth and doing justice for the people? Can George Zimmerman trust the government that persecuted/prosecuted him for doing what a black man being beaten that way by a white man would rightly have done?
You may live in such a leap of faith, but I'm a Christian. There are limits to my credibility. Jesus is the truth; big government is fantasy. Trust a government that promises more than it is paying for?
Shrink the government so it can do less damage, offer fewer bribes, and offer less concealment to crooks.
But coming from the party of Jefferson Davis and his loathsome paternalism (he had more bureaucrats than Lee soldiers), the party that thinks 2000+ pages of laws and 10,000+ of regulations can improve health insurance by forcing healthy people to pay sick people to be sick (Singapore lets you keep what you save, paying yourself to be healthy), the party that can run election websites but not (yet) insurance websites it's had three years to prepare, the party that resisted real civil rights and now takes the racist attitude that blacks need special help, but won't let them escape lousy tax-paid schools...hmph. The devil is the father of lies.
Write more insurance policies covering more people, with more comprehensive coverage on each, while cutting costs? No wonder the computers crashed.
Singapore makes everyone put 7% or so of their income into health savings accounts from which they pay for whatever they need. So they have coverage, very flexible to meet the needs of each, and they also have an incentive to save, since they can keep what they don't spend. How about that as an alternative to O'Liarcare? (Source: Kevin Williamson at National Review Online.)