In a very politically correct manner, and hidden in a long speech, the Lumberton School Board last night agreed that the Administration had been hiding millions of dollars from the School Board. While it is true that the federal grant money does not have to be voted on by the board in the yearly budget because the grant money comes in after the budget is already voted on, it is also true that once the money comes in the Administration cannot hide these funds from the School Board members who have been elected to oversee everything.
In a statement read by the School Board President, the School Board said that they cannot "fulfill their responsibility for oversight" as they were elected to do unless they know about all the money coming in and being spent. The School Board president said that from now on the School Administration must allow the Board to "review the use of these funds in the future." The School Board also said that they have "contracted an audit firm to conduct an internal audit" to do a complete review of the "the federal funds" that were hidden as well as all other financial operations of the District.
Did the school board make a big deal out of the issue? No. But that was expected because most school boards do not want bad press coverage. Did the school board do the right thing by telling the school administration to tell them about future money and by also hiring a firm to do a complete internal audit of finances? Yes! The Lumberton School Board, in a very quiet sort of way as to not bring attention to themselves, is standing up and fighting back. The people of Lumberton should be happy to know that their elected school board members are taking this issue of hidden money head on! Please note that this is a completely different school board than just a few years ago so the people did the right thing when they woke up and elected these new faces to the board. Now if only BISD could get some new faces to clean up their big financial mess....
Also note that my previous letter never mentioned anything about slealing money. The local newspaper did that. My previous letter simply said that they were not telling the school board about millions of dollars. The school board is elected by the people to oversee everything and the Administration CANNOT hide this money from them. Government needs to be more open and honest. I also believe there are Great people on the Administration and the Administration as a whole did nothing wrong. It was really one or two people that were not telling the School Board about the money... Lumberton ISD Superintendent Dr. Sims needs to come out and clarify what is going on here.
Sincerely,
David Bellow
mdbellow@gmail.com
Friday, February 18, 2011
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
More Government Spending does not equal Better Education
Education budgets around the nation have become extremely bloated over the past few decades while education has not gotten any better. Below are two interesting statistics. School spending needs to be reformed. Schools need to spend money on education instead of raising taxes to pay for non-educational waste.
Stat #1)
Nationally, Since 1970, inflation adjusted public school spending has more than doubled. Over the same period, achievement of students at the end of high school has stagnated according to the Department of Education’s own long term National Assessment of Educational Progress. Meanwhile, the high school graduation rate has declined by 4 or 5%, according to Nobel laureate economist James Heckman.
see chart at http://simplecomplexity.net/education-achievement-data/
stat #2)
on a state by state basis, the following chart shows that more money spent per pupil does not mean higher scores. In fact, some states that spend the least amount of money per pupil have much higher sat scores than states that spend the most. Utah spends less than half the money per pupil than what New York or Washington DC spends per pupil and yet Utah has much higher SAT scores.
see chart at http://www.datamasher.org/mash-ups/spent-student-and-sat-scores#map-tab for state by state spending and scores
Stat #1)
Nationally, Since 1970, inflation adjusted public school spending has more than doubled. Over the same period, achievement of students at the end of high school has stagnated according to the Department of Education’s own long term National Assessment of Educational Progress. Meanwhile, the high school graduation rate has declined by 4 or 5%, according to Nobel laureate economist James Heckman.
see chart at http://simplecomplexity.net/education-achievement-data/
stat #2)
on a state by state basis, the following chart shows that more money spent per pupil does not mean higher scores. In fact, some states that spend the least amount of money per pupil have much higher sat scores than states that spend the most. Utah spends less than half the money per pupil than what New York or Washington DC spends per pupil and yet Utah has much higher SAT scores.
see chart at http://www.datamasher.org/mash-ups/spent-student-and-sat-scores#map-tab for state by state spending and scores
Financial Corruption in Texas Schools
This Thursday at 7PM, the Lumberton School Board will reveal that the School Administration had been hiding, and spent, several million dollars last year without the knowledge of the School Board. To put this into perspective, the LISD Budget was only about 30 million last year. Several million on top of that is a huge chunk of change. The Administration has acted as though practices such as these are no big deal because this is how it has been done for many years. This is east Texas after all where old Democrat politicians have controlled the political landscape and have been doing what they want behind the scenes. In this instance, the LISD Administration has been applying for federal grants and taking and spending the money without informing the School Board of the grant money or having the School Board vote to spend the grant money. I am not saying they stole the money or used it for non-educational expenses. I do not know what they spent it on and I would hope it was all on educational expenses. But ergardless of how they spent the money, the fact is that they have been secretly getting and spending millions of dollars without telling or getting approval from the School Board members who were elected by the people to oversee everything. That is a scandal. It is not that much of a surprise though because this is long time Democrat controlled east Texas politics at work and because the LISD Administration was also found recently to be lying to the auditor about debts LISD owed. The LISD Attorney had been receiving IOU’s from the Administration for some time. When the School Attorney needed the money he finally came out and asked for payment and that is when the School Board discovered the debts owed because the Administration had been lying to the Board, and the Auditors, about debts owed. This Thursday the School Board will reveal the Administration’s cover-up. (unless of course they decide to push back the issue to a later board meeting in hopes that things will quiet down). Lumberton ISD Superintendent Dr. Sims needs to come out and clarify what is going on here.
What is the point of all this? The point is that this situation in Lumberton is not unique. The fact is that the entire educational system is becoming corrupt. Money is being raised and spent all over the state with little or no accountability. Education costs are 40% of the budget in Texas while the average education costs of the other States is only about 30%.[1] Financial reform is needed in order to save money from being wasted and to make education better by focusing money on education and not so many side projects.
For example, just down the road from Lumberton is a city called Beaumont, TX. This place is a cesspool of waste. The city is just over 100,000 people and the superintendent of this medium sized city is very likely the highest paid public official in Texas. He receives a 360,000 base salary per year (plus extras) to run the School District.[2] The waste does not end with his salary. The BISD passed a few hundred million dollar bond recently and the bond was voted on to pay for a long list of things, but then BISD tried to use the money to pay for something completely different. For instance, they tried to tear down an historic school using the bond money even though they had sold voters the bond on the premise that the school would not be torn down. A judge granted an injunction on using bond money to tear down the structurally sound historic school.[3] Even worse, BISD is looking into building a hotel and convention center right by the new Educational Support Center (Football Stadium).[4] The School District wants to use extra bond money and other taxpayer education funds to build a hotel and compete with private businesses? Something is wrong here. The people are being swindled, taxes are getting raised, and education is suffering.
Statewide, school administrators are currently attacking our Governor, Rick Perry, because he refused federal money for education due to the strings attached. Governor Perry did the right thing. Instead of blaming the Governor’s defending of our state’s educational sovereignty , the best use of our time is in cracking down on the waste in Texas Schools that is sucking up so much of the money we already have here in the State.
Local school districts should have freedom to determine their own education locally by an elected school board. I am in no way advocating for the state to make specific financial or educational decisions regarding local education. In fact, some of the reason that schools have money problems is also due to unfunded legislative mandates.[5] So I am not advocating for the State to take educational decisions out of local control. What I am advocating for is reform that requires schools districts to spend their taxpayer money on EDUCATION and not so much on non-educational waste. Also, the local communities need to be protected from local political machines that hide the finances from the people and that deceive the people with tax increases from shady bonds elections.
Here are some ideas:
1) 1) When the people of a School District vote to raise taxes for a bond, that bond money needs to be spent on exactly what the people voted on and if there are major changes in how the funds are to be spent then there needs to be a new vote. Leftover bond money should be used to pay down the bond debt and not spent just because you have it extra.
2) 2) School Administrators should not so easily be able to get grants for the school without the knowledge of the school board members who are elected to control the budget.
3) 3) School Districts, especially in this tight economical setting, should spend money on education and not so much on completely off the wall, non-educational things like building a hotel. School Districts should especially not be able to create a non-educational business that competes with hard working private businesses.
I am not sure how much of this can be done on a legislative level, but certainly the people should know about this so, at the very least, they can take action themselves through voting. Beaumont is starting to. see a change already. The people of Beaumont have woken up and recently they did a petition to change the way the school board is elected so they can crack down on this taxpayer fraud. It is interesting to know that the wake up of the people and the crackdown on the government waste coincides with these old democrat counties turning republican and bringing in new conservative leadership. Jefferson County, Beaumont, TX, recently elected their first county wide Republicans in nearly 150 years right at the same time that the people are waking up to the BISD taxpayer waste.[6] Hardin County, Lumberton, TX, just had many new Conservative Republicans elected to county offices and also to the School Board, and many of the old Democrats are switching over to the Republican Side. This switch happened right at the same time that Lumberton voters started waking up to educational waste and they just rejected an unnecessary 30 million School Bond.[7] Like Beaumont, Hardin County is also starting to wake up to the waste in their good old boy, decades long Democrat controlled county. So as People wake up to the fraud and waste of the Government, these very same people start voting Republicans into office to clean up the mess that the old democrats left….. interesting how that goes hand in hand
Sincerely,
David Bellow
Friday, January 14, 2011
Joe Straus Opposition NOT anti-Semitic
I am tired of hearing the liberal media try to say that Hardin County Conservative Peter Morrison was "anti-semitic" because of his opposition to Straus. It is funny how the liberal media, and the moderates and democrats who supported Straus, all try to deflect debating the actual issues by making absurd claims of anti-semitism. Give me a break. Peter Morrison did not even mention that Straus was a Jew. Peter rightly pointed out that Straus's spiritual leader and mentor was for abortion and on the planned parenthood board. That has nothing to do with religion and has everything to do with whether or not Joe Straus is for killing babies. Take the fact that his mentor is for killing babies and add that to Straus's own words that he is fine with abortion laws and that he believes abortion is just a "wedge issue" and well, you get the idea, he does not care about the babies that are getting killed in the modern day genocide called abortion. It had nothing to do with religion and everything to do with abortion. But I guess if you were backed up against the wall and did not want to debate the facts then you might throw out an absurd claim of anti-semitism to distract people too.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Joe Straus Re- Elected – Still a GREAT year ahead!
Joe Straus Re- Elected – Still a GREAT year ahead!
Joe Straus was re-elected today. Congratulations
It was no secret that I was in favor of a new speaker because I am elected to the State Republican Executive Committee to protect and preserve our Republican platform and beliefs. I believed that someone who agreed most of the time with the Republican platform would be better suited to be the lead the Republican majority than someone who sometimes agrees with the ideas of the Republican Platform. Anyone in politics knows that it is hard to oust the person in power and that proved to be true today.
That being said, Joe Straus was elected and I respect that he is the speaker and we need to come together and move forward. That does not mean we have to forget come next State Rep election cycle which of our representatives did not listen to their constituents. But right now we certainly must move forward and come together and try to have a productive legislative session. The Speaker election is over so let’s come together on the Republican Ideas that we agree on and work together to make things happen. It is ok to have different opinions about people or ideas, but at the end of the day we MUST come together and get through the legislative session.
To be honest, this might be a GREAT legislative session. You see, when Straus got backed up against the wall with claims that he was not conservative enough, he started making huge conservative promises to conservative reps to secure votes. Promises he might never have made before. I believe he will hold to those promises because he will be working extra hard to prove he is conservative. On top of that, all of the conservative State Reps who voted for Straus against the desire of their constituents will now have to work extra hard to push conservative legislation this session to make their constituents happy and not want to kick them out of office.
So at the end of the day, If Joe Straus keeps his conservative promises, and if the conservative State Reps are working extra hard to make their constituents happy again, then this can be a great year for Conservative Republican legislation. But it took conservatives standing up and making noise to get these promises made so thank you everyone who stood up and said we need to stand more closely to our Republican values.
So Joe Straus, I did not support you for speaker, but if you hold true to your promises you made to allow fiscal AND social conservative agenda to move forward, then this could be an amazing year for the Republican Party and I really look forward to seeing what we can accomplish together now that the speaker race is over.
Now let’s get to work!
Sincerely,
David Bellow
State Republican Executive Committeeman – Senate District 3
www.DavidBellow.com
Sunday, January 2, 2011
Hardin County Resident, David Bellow. is Battalion Soldier of the Year
*Lumberton Resident is Soldier of the Year*
The Hardin County Conservatives is Proud to Announce that the 1/133
FA Battalion Soldier of the Year, for the second year in a row, is our very own Hardin County Conservative David
Bellow.
Specialist Bellow, 26, rose to the top of his
Army National Guard unit with several outstanding accomplishments this past year
to become his unit's Soldier of the Year. He then
went up to the Battalion level where he went up against the best soldiers
of the other units in the Battalion. He won at the
Battalion level to become the Battalion Soldier of the year. The Soldier
of the Year represents everything a soldier should be from physical
abilities to Army knowledge. He will then be pushed up to the Brigade
level competition to be considered for the Brigade Soldier of the year and then
the next step would be state and then national soldier of the year
competitions.
On top of receiving an award for his outstanding achievement, SPC Bellow will
have his picture displayed for a year at the entrance to the 1/133 FA
Battalion Headquarters on College Street in Beaumont, TX.
Bellow is going to Officer Candidate School and is training to be an Officer.
www.DavidBellow.com
The Hardin County Conservatives is Proud to Announce that the 1/133
FA Battalion Soldier of the Year, for the second year in a row, is our very own Hardin County Conservative David
Bellow.
Specialist Bellow, 26, rose to the top of his
Army National Guard unit with several outstanding accomplishments this past year
to become his unit's Soldier of the Year. He then
went up to the Battalion level where he went up against the best soldiers
of the other units in the Battalion. He won at the
Battalion level to become the Battalion Soldier of the year. The Soldier
of the Year represents everything a soldier should be from physical
abilities to Army knowledge. He will then be pushed up to the Brigade
level competition to be considered for the Brigade Soldier of the year and then
the next step would be state and then national soldier of the year
competitions.
On top of receiving an award for his outstanding achievement, SPC Bellow will
have his picture displayed for a year at the entrance to the 1/133 FA
Battalion Headquarters on College Street in Beaumont, TX.
Bellow is going to Officer Candidate School and is training to be an Officer.
www.DavidBellow.com
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
my mom, Paula Bellow, is with Jesus
Paula Bellow Funeral Service this Thursday 10AM
The funeral service will be at 10am this Thursday (December 23rd) at Calvary Baptist Church on Dowlen in Beaumont, TX we will not only remember and celebrate her LIFE in Christ but we will also rejoice that our mom is now in the presence of her God and Savior, seeing him face to face, full of Glory and great joy. There will also be a reception at her daughter’s home (123 Selman St, Lumberton, TX) following the memorial service. If you would like to visit with our family before then, there will be a visitation at Broussard’s Mortuary tomorrow (Wednesday, December 22nd) from 5pm – 8pm on Hwy 96 in Silsbee, TX.
Thank you everyone for your prayers, emails and support. Jesus listened and she went peacefully into the arms of Christ. That is the best Christmas present she could ever get.
Paula Bellow raised 10 children who love and serve the Lord. She would tell everyone about Jesus everywhere she went and she touched literally thousands of lives through her years of ministry and many came to know Jesus because they saw Jesus in her. Even though she was dying of cancer she praised Jesus everywhere she went. Calvary Baptist Beaumont made a video of her talking about her cancer and praising God. (I will post the amazing testimony video on youtube) The faith she displayed showed others that Jesus is real and gave them faith.
Click Here to see video of Paula Bellow Praising God even though dying of Cancer. Amazing Testimony Video!
She loved Jesus and her family and God did amazing miracles in her life to get her this far and God allowed her family to all be with her and talk to her before the passed. But we did not say goodbye and only said see you later. We might mourn but not like those who do not know Christ. Our mourning comes with the Hope and Joy that she is with Jesus and we will see her again.
Praise God for his amazing plan. May others know Him and the peace and salvation He brings.
In Christ,
David Bellow
The funeral service will be at 10am this Thursday (December 23rd) at Calvary Baptist Church on Dowlen in Beaumont, TX we will not only remember and celebrate her LIFE in Christ but we will also rejoice that our mom is now in the presence of her God and Savior, seeing him face to face, full of Glory and great joy. There will also be a reception at her daughter’s home (123 Selman St, Lumberton, TX) following the memorial service. If you would like to visit with our family before then, there will be a visitation at Broussard’s Mortuary tomorrow (Wednesday, December 22nd) from 5pm – 8pm on Hwy 96 in Silsbee, TX.
Thank you everyone for your prayers, emails and support. Jesus listened and she went peacefully into the arms of Christ. That is the best Christmas present she could ever get.
Paula Bellow raised 10 children who love and serve the Lord. She would tell everyone about Jesus everywhere she went and she touched literally thousands of lives through her years of ministry and many came to know Jesus because they saw Jesus in her. Even though she was dying of cancer she praised Jesus everywhere she went. Calvary Baptist Beaumont made a video of her talking about her cancer and praising God. (I will post the amazing testimony video on youtube) The faith she displayed showed others that Jesus is real and gave them faith.
Click Here to see video of Paula Bellow Praising God even though dying of Cancer. Amazing Testimony Video!
She loved Jesus and her family and God did amazing miracles in her life to get her this far and God allowed her family to all be with her and talk to her before the passed. But we did not say goodbye and only said see you later. We might mourn but not like those who do not know Christ. Our mourning comes with the Hope and Joy that she is with Jesus and we will see her again.
Praise God for his amazing plan. May others know Him and the peace and salvation He brings.
In Christ,
David Bellow
Friday, December 17, 2010
David Bellow to submit Motion for Summary Judgment in Obamacare Lawsuit
Southeast Texas Resident, David Bellow, will file a Motion for Summary Judgment in his individual lawsuit against the Federal Government regarding the Healthcare Bill.
Bellow filed the lawsuit pro se the day after the Healthcare Bill was passed. Bellow argued that the federal government does not have the constitutional authority to force him to engage in commerce by forcing him to purchase a private health insurance plan or face a penalty. This is also known as the individual mandate requirement of the Healthcare Bill. Bellow also argued that the bill would violate his 4th amendment rights because the government would have full and unwarranted access to his private health records (and those of all Americans) in order to determine if he has “qualified insurance” or not. It would also violate his rights by not allowing him to make his own health decisions because the plaintiff’s private health decisions might not fit the government’s standard of what they determine to be “qualified”.
The Motion for Summary Judgment is a request asking the presiding judge to rule on the constitutionality of the healthcare bill without needing to go to a trial.
Along with the Motion for Summary Judgment, Bellow will provide, as evidence, a copy of the ruling from Commonwealth of Virginia vs. Sebelius. The federal judge in that case granted the plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment and ruled that the individual mandate section of the Healthcare Bill was unconstitutional. This ruling sets a precedent that should be carried over to Bellow’s case and Bellow’s Motion for Summary Judgment should be granted and the presiding judge should rule in favor of the plaintiff by declaring the healthcare bill unconstitutional.
Timetable of events:
1) Bellow filed lawsuit against Obamacare – click here
2) Government responded with a Motion to Dismiss claiming Plaintiff has no standing
3) Bellow responds to Motion to Dismiss claiming he does have standing – click here
4) Bellow will file Motion for Summary Judgment on Monday, Dec. 20th, 2010
Click here for a copy of Commonwealth of Virginia vs. Sebelius
Bellow filed the lawsuit pro se the day after the Healthcare Bill was passed. Bellow argued that the federal government does not have the constitutional authority to force him to engage in commerce by forcing him to purchase a private health insurance plan or face a penalty. This is also known as the individual mandate requirement of the Healthcare Bill. Bellow also argued that the bill would violate his 4th amendment rights because the government would have full and unwarranted access to his private health records (and those of all Americans) in order to determine if he has “qualified insurance” or not. It would also violate his rights by not allowing him to make his own health decisions because the plaintiff’s private health decisions might not fit the government’s standard of what they determine to be “qualified”.
The Motion for Summary Judgment is a request asking the presiding judge to rule on the constitutionality of the healthcare bill without needing to go to a trial.
Along with the Motion for Summary Judgment, Bellow will provide, as evidence, a copy of the ruling from Commonwealth of Virginia vs. Sebelius. The federal judge in that case granted the plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment and ruled that the individual mandate section of the Healthcare Bill was unconstitutional. This ruling sets a precedent that should be carried over to Bellow’s case and Bellow’s Motion for Summary Judgment should be granted and the presiding judge should rule in favor of the plaintiff by declaring the healthcare bill unconstitutional.
Timetable of events:
1) Bellow filed lawsuit against Obamacare – click here
2) Government responded with a Motion to Dismiss claiming Plaintiff has no standing
3) Bellow responds to Motion to Dismiss claiming he does have standing – click here
4) Bellow will file Motion for Summary Judgment on Monday, Dec. 20th, 2010
Click here for a copy of Commonwealth of Virginia vs. Sebelius
David Bellow Response to Government's Motion to Dismiss in Obamacare Lawsuit
The Federal Government filed a motion to dismiss my lawsuit that claims Obamacare is unconstitutional.
Below is my response to the Motion to Dismiss:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
Beaumont Division
Michael David Bellow Jr.
Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTION NO: 1:10-CV-00165
JUDGE RON CLARK
MAGISTRATE KEITH F. GIBLIN
v.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES et al.’
Defendants.
___________________________________________/
Plaintiff’s Response to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
1) The United States Constitution, in Article III, section 2, gives Federal District Courts jurisdiction to hear cases involving constitutional rights and federal law. This is called Federal Question Jurisdiction.
This Plaintiff’s complaint clearly pertains to issues involving constitutional rights and federal laws, and is not just simply one individual’s dislike of government policy.
2) Standing is simply the plaintiff’s ability to show the court that the law in question is connected to a harm that the plaintiff is or will receive. The law will clearly affect the plaintiff because the plaintiff is forced to pay for a private health service or pay a penalty to the government.
The plaintiff did not present more information about himself in the original complaint, other than he is an American Citizen, because that is all the information needed because this law applies to ALL American citizens.
The Defendants, in their motion the dismiss, admit that all American citizens must maintain a minimum level of health insurance coverage or face a penalty starting in 2014, unless the individual is exempt. Here is the information about the plaintiff that the court needs: The plaintiff is a 26 year old working male and does not get free health insurance coverage and is not exempt from having coverage. Therefore the plaintiff must pay for health insurance coverage, a private health service, or the government will penalize the plaintiff, therefore directly damaging the plaintiff through an unconstitutional extension of power that amounts to a direct tax. The penalty not going into effect until 2014 has no effect on the fact that, as the law stands, the plaintiff must pay for private healthcare coverage or face a government penalty. The plaintiff does not need to wait until he is hurt to file a lawsuit when the plaintiff can clearly show that he WILL be hurt. This lawsuit is to prevent the plaintiff from being hurt by a clearly foreseeable damage.
The damages do not only pertain to a monetary penalty. The damages also pertain to a direct infringement of plaintiff’s constitutional rights. Even if the defendants offered free health insurance coverage for the plaintiff, the fact is that the plaintiff has no option to not have any health care coverage at all. Nowhere does the constitution allow the government to force all individuals to have health insurance. The defendants might have a constitutional authority to regulate commerce and regulate health insurance, but the defendants do not have any constitutional authority to force all individuals to actually engage in said commerce. For instance, the government can regulate the auto industry, but the government cannot force everyone to buy or have a car (even if it was given to them for free). The defendants cite Baldwin v. Sebelius as a reason to dismiss the plaintiff’s case because in Baldwin v. Sebelius the court dismissed the case because the plaintiff could have changes in his job or age that would qualify him for minimum coverage by 2014. This does not apply to the plaintiff because the plaintiff in this case does not want minimum coverage by 2014 and instead the plaintiff believes it is his constitutional right to decide to have no private health coverage at all and the defendants forcing the plaintiff to have coverage extends beyond the defendants’ authority and infringes on the plaintiff’s constitutional rights.
The damages also extend to an infringement of plaintiff’s personal medical decisions and the privacy of their medical records. The defendants, in their motion to dismiss, state that some individuals will be exempt if they can show that they have a health insurance policy that would qualify as minimum coverage. This statement opens up an entirely different and more complex issue than what has already been addressed. First of all, how will the government know whether or not to penalize plaintiff for not having qualifying health insurance unless the government has complete access to plaintiff’s private health records, which would be an infringement of an individual’s fourth amendment rights. Second, what is considered qualifying health insurance? This seems to indicate that the government will approve all healthcare plans. That means that the plaintiff’s private treatment choices could be determined by what the government determines that all health insurances must offer, or not offer, in order to be qualified. This practice of the government determining what qualifying health insurance is will predetermines plaintiff’s potential treatment options. The defendants determining what is qualifying or not could also go against an individual’s First Amendment rights. If the government says that, in order to be qualified, all health insurance policies must offer abortion, and the plaintiff does not believe in paying for abortions because it is against his religion, then that individual is being deprived of their right to practice their religious beliefs. These questions of how the defendants will access plaintiff’s personal health records, and how the defendants will determine what is qualifying insurance, present issues that are serious enough to be examined by the court.
Conclusion
The defendants’ Motion to Dismiss should not be granted.
Respectfully submitted and signed this 11th day of December, 2010
_______________________________
Plaintiff, Michael David Bellow Jr.
Below is my response to the Motion to Dismiss:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
Beaumont Division
Michael David Bellow Jr.
Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTION NO: 1:10-CV-00165
JUDGE RON CLARK
MAGISTRATE KEITH F. GIBLIN
v.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES et al.’
Defendants.
___________________________________________/
Plaintiff’s Response to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
1) The United States Constitution, in Article III, section 2, gives Federal District Courts jurisdiction to hear cases involving constitutional rights and federal law. This is called Federal Question Jurisdiction.
This Plaintiff’s complaint clearly pertains to issues involving constitutional rights and federal laws, and is not just simply one individual’s dislike of government policy.
2) Standing is simply the plaintiff’s ability to show the court that the law in question is connected to a harm that the plaintiff is or will receive. The law will clearly affect the plaintiff because the plaintiff is forced to pay for a private health service or pay a penalty to the government.
The plaintiff did not present more information about himself in the original complaint, other than he is an American Citizen, because that is all the information needed because this law applies to ALL American citizens.
The Defendants, in their motion the dismiss, admit that all American citizens must maintain a minimum level of health insurance coverage or face a penalty starting in 2014, unless the individual is exempt. Here is the information about the plaintiff that the court needs: The plaintiff is a 26 year old working male and does not get free health insurance coverage and is not exempt from having coverage. Therefore the plaintiff must pay for health insurance coverage, a private health service, or the government will penalize the plaintiff, therefore directly damaging the plaintiff through an unconstitutional extension of power that amounts to a direct tax. The penalty not going into effect until 2014 has no effect on the fact that, as the law stands, the plaintiff must pay for private healthcare coverage or face a government penalty. The plaintiff does not need to wait until he is hurt to file a lawsuit when the plaintiff can clearly show that he WILL be hurt. This lawsuit is to prevent the plaintiff from being hurt by a clearly foreseeable damage.
The damages do not only pertain to a monetary penalty. The damages also pertain to a direct infringement of plaintiff’s constitutional rights. Even if the defendants offered free health insurance coverage for the plaintiff, the fact is that the plaintiff has no option to not have any health care coverage at all. Nowhere does the constitution allow the government to force all individuals to have health insurance. The defendants might have a constitutional authority to regulate commerce and regulate health insurance, but the defendants do not have any constitutional authority to force all individuals to actually engage in said commerce. For instance, the government can regulate the auto industry, but the government cannot force everyone to buy or have a car (even if it was given to them for free). The defendants cite Baldwin v. Sebelius as a reason to dismiss the plaintiff’s case because in Baldwin v. Sebelius the court dismissed the case because the plaintiff could have changes in his job or age that would qualify him for minimum coverage by 2014. This does not apply to the plaintiff because the plaintiff in this case does not want minimum coverage by 2014 and instead the plaintiff believes it is his constitutional right to decide to have no private health coverage at all and the defendants forcing the plaintiff to have coverage extends beyond the defendants’ authority and infringes on the plaintiff’s constitutional rights.
The damages also extend to an infringement of plaintiff’s personal medical decisions and the privacy of their medical records. The defendants, in their motion to dismiss, state that some individuals will be exempt if they can show that they have a health insurance policy that would qualify as minimum coverage. This statement opens up an entirely different and more complex issue than what has already been addressed. First of all, how will the government know whether or not to penalize plaintiff for not having qualifying health insurance unless the government has complete access to plaintiff’s private health records, which would be an infringement of an individual’s fourth amendment rights. Second, what is considered qualifying health insurance? This seems to indicate that the government will approve all healthcare plans. That means that the plaintiff’s private treatment choices could be determined by what the government determines that all health insurances must offer, or not offer, in order to be qualified. This practice of the government determining what qualifying health insurance is will predetermines plaintiff’s potential treatment options. The defendants determining what is qualifying or not could also go against an individual’s First Amendment rights. If the government says that, in order to be qualified, all health insurance policies must offer abortion, and the plaintiff does not believe in paying for abortions because it is against his religion, then that individual is being deprived of their right to practice their religious beliefs. These questions of how the defendants will access plaintiff’s personal health records, and how the defendants will determine what is qualifying insurance, present issues that are serious enough to be examined by the court.
Conclusion
The defendants’ Motion to Dismiss should not be granted.
Respectfully submitted and signed this 11th day of December, 2010
_______________________________
Plaintiff, Michael David Bellow Jr.
Friday, November 5, 2010
Help My Mom Fight Cancer
This is David Bellow
My mom's cancer has spread and we are trying to pay for her to start a new treatment.
We are doing a big Garage Sale fundraiser and if anyone has some good stuff they would like to donate to the Garage Sale then please contact me! mdbellow@gmail.com or 409 656 5128
For drop-off locations in your area, please contact Misty at: theLaengers@hotmail.com
Also people can dontate money to help fund the treatment.
you can actually donate fast and easy online here: http://paulabellow.chipin.com/
The cancer had already spread to several places over the past 7 years including her bones and both lungs but now it has spread to her brain. She needs to receive brain radiation and begin treatment at the Burzynski Clinic soon but doesn't have the funds to cover the initial up-front fees and deposits.
Also, to raise funds, we are hosting a Benefit Garage Sale & Silent Auction at 1st Baptist Church of Conroe TX on Saturday, November 13th. We are collecting items for the garage sale all across southeast Texas.
So please come and/or donate items for the garage sale and silent auction!
You can follow my mom's progress by joining the facebook group "Support Mother of 10 in Her Fight Against Cancer" or by becoming a free member at www.carepages.com/carepages/PaulaBellow
My family especially asks for your prayers during this difficult journey and thanks you ahead of time for your support!
My mom's cancer has spread and we are trying to pay for her to start a new treatment.
We are doing a big Garage Sale fundraiser and if anyone has some good stuff they would like to donate to the Garage Sale then please contact me! mdbellow@gmail.com or 409 656 5128
For drop-off locations in your area, please contact Misty at: theLaengers@hotmail.com
Also people can dontate money to help fund the treatment.
you can actually donate fast and easy online here: http://paulabellow.chipin.com/
The cancer had already spread to several places over the past 7 years including her bones and both lungs but now it has spread to her brain. She needs to receive brain radiation and begin treatment at the Burzynski Clinic soon but doesn't have the funds to cover the initial up-front fees and deposits.
Also, to raise funds, we are hosting a Benefit Garage Sale & Silent Auction at 1st Baptist Church of Conroe TX on Saturday, November 13th. We are collecting items for the garage sale all across southeast Texas.
So please come and/or donate items for the garage sale and silent auction!
You can follow my mom's progress by joining the facebook group "Support Mother of 10 in Her Fight Against Cancer" or by becoming a free member at www.carepages.com/carepages/PaulaBellow
My family especially asks for your prayers during this difficult journey and thanks you ahead of time for your support!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)