I've got a cold. No big deal, annoying, but it's even a mild one. I run out of Comtrex, my preferred cold pill, and fall back on Drixoral, my preferred allergy pill. I even run out of Nyquil, which helps me sleep better when I have a cold. So, I break down and go to the grocery store to restock. A couple Comtrex, one even has a "free sample" of some other sort of stuff, a couple Drixorals and a couple Nyquils. Normally, I like to have two, so that when one runs out I've got a backup until I can get more (obviously I didn't get back to the store soon enough last time).
I get up to the checkstand and make sure I'm getting paper bags so stuff doesn't fall out as soon as you set them down and start to point out that I'd gotten the last of a couple of things I had in the cart when I was interrupted: the cash register had decided I was a drug manufacturer. No shit: right there on the screen it said "Restricted access; exceeded DEA limit" or something close to that. It specifically mentioned the DEA. It seems that you are only allowed to buy 3 cold remedies at a time now, because they contain stuff meth labs use to make drugs. Also under scrutiny, and presumably under limits are Drano, some chimney cleaner, kitty litter and ice (actually, they didn't think ice was restricted, but apparently it's used in the process too). Even more, Sudafed is now required to be locked up and can't be out in the aisles.
Where is the insanity going to end?
We're not allowed to have anything remotely sharp on airplanes, we're not allowed to have our medicine to deal with colds, we have to wear seat belts even if they are likely to do more harm than good (on some people, like my mother). I've got a message to the government: get the fuck out of my life. Stop trying to protect people from themselves. Freedom means the freedom to do stupid things. It's their choice. If you want to fry your brains on drugs, fine. If I want to gamble that I won't be in an accident, or that if I am, I'll be better off without a seat belt, that's my choice. If insurance companies think otherwise, let them cut your medical coverage if you're in an accident and found to have not been wearing your seatbelt. And use some common sense in terrorist defenses: a fork or a pocket knife is no more of a threat to a plane full of passengers than a trained fighter with his bare hands is.
If we're not careful, we'll have to ask a bureaucrat for permission to leave the house.
This is NOT the America I grew up in. Get it back now before it's too late.
This is probably not too interesting to anyone, but I thought I'd just put down some notes about my experience going to a "Town Hall" meeting tonight...
I just got back from a Town Hall my state representative (Brad Avakian) held in Beaverton. I've never really gone to anything like that before, just a topical meeting on telecommunications back when the Internet started opening up that Ron Wyden held. That kinda left a bad taste because he didn't seem like he really wanted input.
I've been sending email to Rep. Avakian, and unlike most email I send representatives, he actually responds. I don't really blame the Federal level reps --- they must get tons of it, but still, it's nice to actually get feedback, even if he doesn't agree with what I'm suggesting.
As would be expected, the budget was a big portion of the discussion, including his feeling that we could make small cuts in tax credits ("expenditures") and make up the budget shortfall at least for the short term while a lot of philosophical wrangling goes on to try to solve the problem long term. Seems reasonable to me...
PERS also came up, and I think he's right about one thing there too: the negotiators screwed up big time in the contracts they made, but they are contracts, and the state has to live by them. They only last until the next negotiation, and then things can be fixed. Even the unions don't want the state to go bankrupt. The other thing, and people really should be evaluating their reps on this one and kicking some butts out, was that previous "short term" fixes involved raiding the PERS fund when things were going good and it could have been raking in the bucks along with everyone else. Borrowing against funds like that is snake oil and always has been. Though as I think about it, Brad wants to do that with some departmental reserves as well as reducing the tax credits. On the other hand, the departmental reserves are not investment funds, and this *is* a rainy day --- the economy tanking is a large part of the problem we're having even with the other problems.
A little bit went on about Mental Health issues, and how way back when Damasch was closed, the patients were supposed to go to transition housing that the legislature dropped the ball on (another thing people should be double checking their reps on!). Somewhere in here, a discussion broke out on the fundamental problem being Big Government vs Small Government, and one lady asked how the Small Government people could justify their position regarding people like the mentally ill who need drugs to maintain, and usually can't afford them. The answer was basically Small Government people feel that charities should pick up the slack.
I finally piped up and asked about the per-capita amounts and why there's such a crisis when the number seem in the middle of the private school figures, actually higher when some federal dollars are added in. The response was basically that the school boards are the ones that are supposed to be doing the micromanaging, which is a good point.
One of the more fiscally conservative attendees made a comment comparing private schools with public schools that was, shall we say, short on tact regarding public schools and for a bit, I thought violence might ensue, but the situation was defused and shortly after the meeting ended.
I waited in line to say hi to Rep. Avakian, since we'd exchanged some email, and the lady asking about how Small Government people justified their position came up to the guy next to me who'd indicated from his comments that he was in the Libertarian camp. It turned out he really is Libertarian, and did a good job of explaining the Libertarian viewpoint that they are compassionate, but they don't think it's the role of government to take care of people. People are of the mindset that the government will fix everything. If they know that's not the case, they'll take more responsibility for their actions. But people are still responsible to their community, and they'll take care of the people within those communities, giving his church as an example.
After she left, I talked to him a bit about my feeling that a lot of Libertarians are anarchists, which has kept me from joining the party myself. His position was that they aren't true Libertarians, and we talked about the positions a bit and voting systems (which I talk about in a previous entry here).
By then, the line had finally diminished and I said hi, and he thanked me for coming and encouraged me to come to more, being surprised I'd never been to such a thing before. As political as I am, I guess I'm surprised too ;-) I have wanted to before, but the timing was always off, and I can usually express myself better in email where I have time to think about what I'm saying anyhow. Still, being there in person probably makes more of an impression, and I'll try to be more active this way in the future.
I should get more involved with the school board as well; I have stayed out of it because without kids, I don't have much to say really, but on the other hand, if they're going to hold me responsible for paying for their kids education, then I'm going to have some say in how my money is being spent.