Triad Conservative

Your Family's Medical Records Accessible to Social Service Agencies, Prisons, "First Responders", Schools in NC?

Within the last decade or so, liberty-minded citizens launched a protest with our state government because of the content of a form used for physical examinations required for entry into the public school system. The concern was that the schools-- and our government-- would have access to information about our kids they didn't need to have. The protest was successful, and the form was modified.

Let's fast forward about a decade.

Now, the vast majority of health care facilities in North Carolina are connected to the North Carolina Health Information Exchange (NC HIE). This is a division of our state government that houses a massive computer database containing the medical records of millions of North Carolina residents. 

Readers will recall that Republicans in the General Assembly created and funded this database several years ago. It was presented to the public as an advancement despite the obvious concerns regarding privacy and confidentiality.

The Exchange published an update earlier this month that contains some very interesting information. Check this out:

(N)early all responding HIEs have partnered with one or more of the following communities and social service organizations: correctional health, social service agencies, drug and alcohol treatment programs, first responders, school nurses or blood banks. The responding SHIEC HIEs are exchanging 3.3 billion messages annually and delivering 453 million alerts of admissions, discharges and transfers (ADTs) to HIE participants to improve coordination of care, including nationwide HIE to HIE alerts through the Patient Centered Data Home™ (PCDH) initiative.

“In North Carolina we are proud to be a part of the HIE fabric that is knitting connected communities of care across the nation and bringing much-needed health information to providers across a patient’s care continuum,” said Christie Burris, executive director for the NC HIEA. 

First responders typically include police, fire and ambulance. Will police have access to our medical records?

Social service agencies include those that take kids away from parents, and that intervene in cases of suspected neglect and abuse. Public schools have the power to advantage-- or to disadvantage-- certain kids and families. Police obviously have powers of their own over citizens.

These are all described as "providers" deserving of access to citizens' medical records that rightfully ought to be private and confidential.

Both major political parties now accept and encourage a profoundly statist approach to health care. The political conversation today does not consider whether there ought to be governmental intervention and control over medical care; or whether it should be reduced. Instead, both major parties discuss how much more intervention and control there should be.

Be sure to thank your Republican state legislators for creating this huge state government electronic database with your family's health information. 

Communist Presidential Candidates

And it ain't just Sanders: 

We Need an Immigration Pause

Tom Piatak, Chronicles: 

A prime example of radical change the mainstream conservative movement proved too timid to notice is the rapid demographic change brought about by the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965. The pace of change has been dizzying. The white student population in American public schools declined from roughly 85 percent in 1970 to 49 percent in 2015, according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). That number is projected to decline to 45 percent by 2027, according to the NCES.

This transformation was not natural but the result of government policy that has systematically favored immigration from non-European countries. If Burkean conservatism has anything to tell us at all, it is that such rapid change bodes ill for the body politic.

Indeed, even some leftists are beginning to see potential dangers posed by America’s demographic transformation. Recently, Tufts professor Monica Duffy Toft penned an article entitled, “Identicide: How Demographic Shifts Can Rip a Country Apart.” Toft began her piece by asking:

What happens to a country when its core national identity—its preferred image of itself in terms of race and religion—doesn’t match its demographic reality?…The answer, unfortunately, is ‘nothing good.’ Internal strife, perhaps civil war or collapse often precedes a decisive demographic shift...

The message from the (New York) Times and its myriad collaborators is clear: white Americans are suspect at best and evil at worst, and the country they created is rotten to the core. No wonder our politics are so turbulent.

Instead of doubling down on an approach guaranteed to increase rancor and division, we should instead lessen the dangers posed by rapid demographic change by slowing it down. The way to do that, of course, is to severely curtail legal immigration and to stop illegal immigration.

Such immigration pauses have been beneficial, allowing both recent immigrants to assimilate and reassuring older Americans that the country is still the one they loved. The alternative, as Professor Toft seems to recognize, is too terrible to contemplate.

Judicial Activism Alive and Well in North Carolina

I remember the old blog conversations from a decade ago or more. I would sound the alarm about the possibility of judicial activism in the state of North Carolina; and the former editorial page writer for the News and Record, Doug Clark, would insist that this is not a problem in our state. He argued that we had a culture of good judges, and that activism was not an issue here. He carried all the accumulated wisdom and the fund of knowledge many would deferentially presume to typify editorial writers.

How do we define judicial activism? It is when rulings are inconsistent with the text, structure, logic and history of the Constitution (or of individual statutes).

We have recently seen two rulings in state courts that are great examples of judicial activism.

The first is the ruling by three judges on the North Carolina Court of Appeals that essentially invalidates a constitutional amendment passed by North Carolina citizens on the matter of voter ID. Civitas skillfully deconstructs the pile of horse manure that this decision represents. It appears that two of the three judges violated the state's Code of Judicial Conduct when they invalidated voter ID.

The second decision is a ruling in connection with the old, notorious Leandro case. Last month, a Superior Court judge ruled that the state's leaders must

"work expeditiously and without delay to take all necessary actions” to improve the state’s education system.

Therefore, a Superior Court judge effectively ordered our state legislature to spend lots more money on public education. While some would argue that more money does not purchase educational quality, it is quite clear what the court intends. The ruling is a flagrant violation of the General Assembly's jurisdiction as a co-equal branch of government; and an attempt to place the court's thumb on the scales to alter the balance of powers. It will be interesting to see how Republican leaders in the North Carolina House and Senate will ultimately respond.

Let's think about these two decisions. These are precisely what you get, of course, when you place democratic socialists in the courts.

But the state's Republicans have not done a good job of electing constitutional conservatives to the state's highest courts during recent years. And they have not even tried to use their legislative powers to restrain the state's courts from issuing activist decisions. We can blame these two decisions on the socialists, but in fact they represent Republican failures also. With all the advantages of being one of the two major parties in the state, and having controlled both the General Assembly and the governor's mansion for a period of four years, they had every opportunity to take effective action to prevent these ugly scenes.

But they did not.

NC Newspaper Travails

A couple of weeks ago, we learned that Warren Buffet was deep-sixing his investment in newspapers. Here in the Triad, the Greensboro News and Record and the Winston-Salem Journal will now be controlled by Lee Enterprises, which already had a managerial role with these papers. Don't expect much of a change in editorial policy.

Then this past week, we learned that McClatchy, which owns the Raleigh News and Observer and the Charlotte Observer, has filed for bankruptcy.

All of these papers, of course, are afflicted with recalcitrant, intractable left-wing bias. 

One cannot help but wonder what Buffet was thinking when he bought our local papers. Yes, he is the very definition of the limousine liberal; and perhaps he was trying to preserve the progressive/socialist long march through these particular institutions. But he is an extremely savvy investor, and surely knew it was a failing business model. Little changed under his leadership except perhaps further downsizing. Why sell it now? 

McClatchy's financial bankruptcy follows its longstanding demonstrations of ethical and moral bankruptcy. 

But the fact that it is taking advantage of bankruptcy law is another way of saying it is preparing to stiff its creditors and perhaps its vendors. It is officially granted relief from those who might try to collect on McClatchy's indebtedness. Remain mindful that this is an organization that pronounces itself competent to characterize and register editorial opinions on other persons and entities and movements. And they go running for bankruptcy protection because they cannot pay their own bills.

The business model these organizations followed-- alienating and angering huge portions of their readership with their frank bias-- virtually assured that many customers would head for the exit doors once online alternatives arose. Nobody wants to spend extra money for such a tainted product if they have other options. And now, many local communities no longer have viable local journalism. We certainly do not here in Greensboro.

There has been some talk that the tech giants would begin to fund local journalism, but that would not fix the underlying dynamic.

As these entities continue to circle the drain, there is no alternative with integrity on the horizon to provide local journalism once again.

 

Forbes Magazine Highlights Reductions in Regulations in NC

Forbes:

North Carolina’s Regulatory Reform Act of 2013, enacted after Republicans took complete control of state government in 2012, subjects a large share of state regulations to periodic review and sunset. In the seven years since that reform passed, it has produced real results. 

North Carolina’s Rules Review Commission subjected 19,361 rules to a periodic review process established by the 2013 reform. More than 2,000 of those rules (approximately 10%) have been repealed and roughly 5,500 (29%) have been returned to the rule-making process. 

In 2019 North Carolina lawmakers enacted House Bill 590, a follow up reform intended to address the more than 60% of rules that avoided scrutiny through the process set up by the 2013 reform. With the enactment of HB 590, all rules will now be subject to review on a regular basis. 

Jeff Hyde from Greensboro now chairs the Rules Review Commission. A gentleman from Colfax, Paul Powell, also serves on the Commission. Yet another person serving is former NC State Senator Tommy Tucker.

Hyde is the first non-attorney who has chaired the commission. Other members are listed here.

This is a worthy endeavor; and it is very good this activity is taking place.

The Buttigieg Party

Now that we have apparent results from both Iowa and New Hampshire, we can make one observation about the horse race. Pete Buttigieg seems to be leading Bernie Sanders by one delegate. (His surname, by the way, is an unfortunate reminder of his sexual proclivities).

Part of the reason for his lead is the democratic socialists' method of apportioning delegates. Sanders has won the popular vote thus far, but trails in delegates. This is the same party that makes a huge deal over the Electoral College, and that continues to claim unspeakable victimization because of it. 

But what does Buttigieg's performance thus far say about the party?

First, it appears that some of their kingmakers and major donors think that a small-city mayor who has very good communication skills, but with little track record on national issues, is a marketable product that will win them the executive branch.  It matters little that the formulaic rationalizations he employs make little sense. He makes them sound good, and that is what matters. He will get favorably depicted by the corrupt media.

Second, these same kingmakers might be wagering that his homosexuality and his gay marriage will be a plus, just as Obama's race was regarded as a plus a dozen years ago. The image of him kissing his "husband" on the debate stage is of little concern to these folks.

Third, they perceive that he will be viewed and represented as moderate. This is the eternal scam they employ to obfuscate the reality of who they are. For instance, his proposal to extend Medicare to all who want it likely seems reasonable to many people on the surface. They do not tell you, however, the reality-- that it would quickly make private insurance non-viable.

I have no idea who the democratic socialist nominee will be. The emerging field seems to make a brokered convention more likely this year than I have ever seen because all of the serious contenders have some major liabilities. There has been much discussion about those who might be "waiting on the sidelines".

Trump's strength at the moment also is a factor, but his campaign and the national GOP itself cannot get overconfident. Former President George H.W. Bush, for instance, was riding very high after the Gulf War in 1992, but circumstances turned on him very quickly. Much can change between now and November. They still have to turn out their base at election time. They still have demographic challenges that get worse with each passing day.

But the ultimate meaning of Pete Buttigieg's strength thus far is a tragic reality about the party to which he belongs. It is a party that has been in open rebellion against God's expectations for many years. And those in such a state of rebellion can win worldly successes; but ultimately will lose severely when the decisions that matter most are being made.

Great Southern Thinker: R.L. Dabney

I came across a great article on a notable 19th century philosopher/ theologian from an area near Staunton, Virginia-- R.L. Dabney.

Zachary Garris, Chronicles: 

Dabney understood the logical outcomes of progressive policies. This helped him to make insightful predictions of where progressive ideas would lead, such as the secularization of public schools and the disintegration of the family...

Dabney rejected the new egalitarian spirit that was spreading throughout America. He instead embraced the older order in which social hierarchies permeated all aspects of life. Dabney believed in equality only in the sense that all humans are equal before the law, or what he called “the equality of the golden rule”...

In contrast to Jacobin egalitarianism, Dabney saw hierarchy as essential to all of life, including to the familial, ecclesiastical, and civil spheres. He believed the Bible teaches that all humans are under an authority. Every child is born under the authority of his or her parents, and the husband is head of his wife in marriage. Both the Bible and the natural world teach that men and women have different roles in society, with God giving women the high calling of motherhood.

Yet, egalitarianism rejected these differing roles and advocated for women’s involvement in all spheres of life. The early feminist movement pushed for women to serve in roles traditionally reserved for men, including that of pastor. Dabney specifically attacked this practice in his essay, “The Public Preaching of Women,” writing:

[T]hese Scripture doctrines assume that there are orders of human beings naturally unequal in their inherited rights, as in their bodily and mental qualities; that God has not ordained any human being to this proud independence, but placed all in subordination under authority, the child under its mother, the mother under her husband, the husband under the ecclesiastical and civil magistrates, and these under the law, whose guardian and avenger is God himself.

In Dabney’s view, hierarchy is also fundamental to the civil sphere. Everyone is born under government authority, and in the early American system, the right to vote was limited. Dabney opposed the movement pushing for women’s suffrage on the basis that wives were under the authority of their husbands. He knew women’s suffrage was just the beginning of rebellion against the old order, and he believed the movement would undermine the unity of marriage and the headship of the husband. In overthrowing Christian hierarchy and biblical gender roles, Dabney predicted that women would lose both their place of honor in society and the protection that Christianity had given them. The movement for women’s rights would be destructive towards women, the family unit, and society as a whole. “When America has had a generation of women who were politicians, instead of mothers, how fundamental must be the destruction of society, and how distant and difficult must be the remedy!”, he wrote in an 1867 book...

Along with many Southern theologians, Dabney also embraced the hierarchical roles of master and slave, so far as the practice conformed to the Bible’s teaching. However, Dabney’s support of hierarchy went beyond the roles of husband and wife, parent and child, and slave and master. He also held that people differ in their social status and ability, seen most clearly in political leadership...

Dabney’s view of hierarchy begins with God having authority over all humanity. From this stems human authority structures and the roles God assigns to each person. Humans are unequal in the sense that the husband is the head of the household and government has authority over citizens. Dabney’s understanding of divine authority entailed a rejection of John Locke’s social contract theory and the Enlightenment teaching that government is founded on the consent of the governed. Instead, he held that God instituted government as one of the many forms of hierarchy in life. Everyone is under some authority, with subordination being the “natural state” of man.

Conservatives so often trend towards progressivism because they abandon their principles, leaving us to ask what exactly they are conserving. “This is a party which never conserves anything,” Dabney wrote of the political conservatives of his day. “What was the resisted novelty of yesterday is to-day one of the accepted principles of conservatism…. American conservatism is merely the shadow that follows Radicalism as it moves forward towards perdition.”

Today’s conservatives should take heed of Dabney’s words. If they want to fend off the attacks of leftist progressivism, they must embrace genuine conservative principles. This starts with rejecting egalitarianism in all its forms and embracing the bedrock principle of hierarchy. 

Country Music's "Deplorables" Manifesto

I have really enjoyed watching the "Country Music" series on PBS. 

One song with which I was completely unfamiliar was a huge hit called "Okie from Muskogee" by Merle Haggard. It verbalized middle America's opposition to the political and cultural maneuvers that were being pulled by the left during the 1960's. It was a statement that today would be made by Hillary Clinton's "deplorables":

City of Greensboro: Climate Change is Causing Local Rain, Flooding

We learn at Triad City Beat that the city of Greensboro's official position is that the recent rains we have been experiencing, and any flooding we experience this week, are due to "climate change".

Approximately a dozen years ago, we were experiencing drought conditions. The lakes upon which we had relied for drinking water became extremely low; and the city had to install water lines to connect to surrounding municipalities that had more ample water supplies.

I remember lots of rain and flooding when I was a kid. In fact, flooding dates all the way back to biblical times.

But all observable, severe weather phenomena today must be automatically attributed to climate change, because it is the overarching theme to which we must adhere with religious fervor. It is the prism through which we must view all current events.

These people simply don't understand the concept of random variation.

Business Dictionary:

Random Variation: Variability of a process (which is operating within its natural limits) caused by many irregular and erratic (and individually unimportant) fluctuations or chance factors that (in practical terms) cannot be anticipated, detected, identified, or eliminated.

We see this in medicine. For instance, a person's blood pressure will go up and down somewhat throughout the day. Dynamic systems, by definition, do not remain static.

When I was a teenager, we had a couple of winters that were very cold, with lots of snow and ice. Reporting in the media suggested that we were headed to a much colder future according to certain experts. There is an enormous temptation to over-interpret current observations, and presume that will be the future pattern. It can be an enormous source of bias.

Weather varies. Climate varies over time also. Some weeks, and some years, are much more dry than others. Some are more wet than others.

The Chicken Little alarmism that leads to school systems being shut down is another matter entirely.

But these people really do not understand how silly they look when they say all these things.