by Chuck Norris

Health care reforms are turning into health care revolts. Americans are turning up the heat on congressmen in town hall meetings across the U.S.

While watching these political hot August nights, I decided to research the reasons so many are opposed to Obamacare to separate the facts from the fantasy. What I discovered is that there are indeed dirty little secrets buried deep within the 1,000-plus page health care bill.

Dirty secret No. 1 in Obamacare is about the government's coming into homes and usurping parental rights over child care and development.

It's outlined in sections 440 and 1904 of the House bill (Page 838), under the heading "home visitation programs for families with young children and families expecting children." The programs (provided via grants to states) would educate parents on child behavior and parenting skills.

The bill says that the government agents, "well-trained and competent staff," would "provide parents with knowledge of age-appropriate child development in cognitive, language, social, emotional, and motor domains ... modeling, consulting, and coaching on parenting practices," and "skills to interact with their child to enhance age-appropriate development."

Are you kidding me?! With whose parental principles and values? Their own? Certain experts'? From what field and theory of childhood development? As if there are one-size-fits-all parenting techniques! Do we really believe they would contextualize and personalize every form of parenting in their education, or would they merely universally indoctrinate with their own?

Are we to assume the state's mediators would understand every parent's social or religious core values on parenting? Or would they teach some secular-progressive and religiously neutered version of parental values and wisdom? And if they were to consult and coach those who expect babies, would they ever decide circumstances to be not beneficial for the children and encourage abortions?

One government rebuttal is that this program would be "voluntary." Is that right? Does that imply that this agency would just sit back passively until some parent needing parenting skills said, "I don't think I'll call my parents, priest or friends or read a plethora of books, but I'll go down to the local government offices"? To the contrary, the bill points to specific targeted groups and problems, on Page 840: The state "shall identify and prioritize serving communities that are in high need of such services, especially communities with a high proportion of low-income families."

Are we further to conclude by those words that low-income families know less about parenting? Are middle- and upper-class parents really better parents? Less neglectful of their children? Less needful of parental help and training? Is this "prioritized" training not a biased, discriminatory and even prejudicial stereotype and generalization that has no place in federal government, law or practice?

Bottom line: Is all this what you want or expect in a universal health care bill being rushed through Congress? Do you want government agents coming into your home and telling you how to parent your children? When did government health care turn into government child care?

Government needs less of a role in running our children's lives and more of a role in supporting parents' decisions for their children.

Children belong to their parents, not the government. And the parents ought to have the right — and government support — to parent them without the fed's mandates, education or intervention in our homes.

Kids are very important to my wife, Gena, and me. That's why we've spent the past 17 years developing our nonprofit KICKSTART (http://www.kick-start.org) program in public schools in Texas. It builds up their self-esteem and teaches them respect and discipline. Of course, whether or not they participate in the program is their and their parents' choice.

How contrary is Obamacare's home intrusion and indoctrination family services, in which state agents prioritize houses to enter and enforce their universal values and principles upon the hearts and minds of families across America?

Government's real motives and rationale are quite simple, though rarely, if ever, stated. If one wants to control the future ebbs and flows of a country, one must have command over future generations. That is done by seizing parental and educational power, legislating preferred educational methods and materials, and limiting private educational options. It is so simple that any socialist can understand it. As Josef Stalin once stated, "Education is a weapon whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed."

Before so-called universal health care turns into universal hell care, write or call your representative today and protest his voting Obamacare into law. Remind him that what is needed in Washington is a truly bipartisan group that is allowed an ample amount of time to work on a compromise health care law that wouldn't raise taxes (for anyone), regulate personal medical choices, ration health care or restrict American citizens.

COPYRIGHT 2009 CHUCK NORRIS DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

FULL TEXT: http://docs.house.gov/edlabor/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf  (type in page 838 at top left of pdf frame to go directly to the page)

From page 838 -840

838
1 SEC. 1904. GRANTS TO STATES FOR QUALITY HOME VISITATION PROGRAMS FOR FAMILIES WITH YOUNG
3 CHILDREN AND FAMILIES EXPECTING CHILDREN.
5 Part B of title IV of the Social Security Act (42
6 U.S.C. 621–629i) is amended by adding at the end the
7 following:
8 ‘‘Subpart 3—Support for Quality Home Visitation
9 Programs
10 ‘‘SEC. 440. HOME VISITATION PROGRAMS FOR FAMILIES
11 WITH YOUNG CHILDREN AND FAMILIES EXPECTING CHILDREN.
13 ‘‘(a) PURPOSE.—The purpose of this section is to im

14prove the well-being, health, and development of children
15 by enabling the establishment and expansion of high qual

16ity programs providing voluntary home visitation for fami

17lies with young children and families expecting children.
18 ‘‘(b) GRANT APPLICATION.—A State that desires to
19 receive a grant under this section shall submit to the Secretary for approval, at such time and in such manner as
21 the Secretary may require, an application for the grant
22 that includes the following:
23 ‘‘(1) DESCRIPTION OF HOME VISITATION PROGRAMS.—A description of the high quality programs
25 of home visitation for families with young children
26 and families expecting children that will be sup-

839
1 ported by a grant made to the State under this sec

2tion, the outcomes the programs are intended to
3 achieve, and the evidence supporting the effective

4 ness of the programs.
5 ‘‘(2) RESULTS OF NEEDS ASSESSMENT.—The
6 results of a statewide needs assessment that de

7scribes—
8 ‘‘(A) the number, quality, and capacity of
9 home visitation programs for families with
10 young children and families expecting children
11 in the State;
12 ‘‘(B) the number and types of families who
13 are receiving services under the programs;
14 ‘‘(C) the sources and amount of funding
15 provided to the programs;
16 ‘‘(D) the gaps in home visitation in the
17 State, including identification of communities
18 that are in high need of the services; and
19 ‘‘(E) training and technical assistance ac

20 tivities designed to achieve or support the goals
21 of the programs.
22 ‘‘(3) ASSURANCES.—Assurances from the State
23 that—
24 ‘‘(A) in supporting home visitation pro

25 grams using funds provided under this section,

840
1 the State shall identify and prioritize serving
2 communities that are in high need of such serv

3ices, especially communities with a high propor

4tion of low-income families or a high incidence
5 of child maltreatment;
6 ‘‘(B) the State will reserve 5 percent of the
7 grant funds for training and technical assist

8ance to the home visitation programs using
9 such funds;
10 ‘‘(C) in supporting home visitation pro

11grams using funds provided under this section,
12 the State will promote coordination and collabo

13ration with other home visitation programs (in

14cluding programs funded under title XIX) and
15 with other child and family services, health
16 services, income supports, and other related as

17 sistance;
18 ‘‘(D) home visitation programs supported
19 using such funds will, when appropriate, pro

20 vide referrals to other programs serving chil

21 dren and families; and
22 ‘‘(E) the State will comply with subsection
23 (i), and cooperate with any evaluation con

24 ducted under subsection (j).....

pg 842 (Shark clause, bureaucracy must feed or die.)

MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT.—Beginning with
13 fiscal year 2011, a State meets the requirement of this
14 subsection for a fiscal year if the Secretary finds that the
15 aggregate expenditures by the State from State and local
16 sources for programs of home visitation for families with
17 young children and families expecting children for the then
18 preceding fiscal year was not less than 100 percent of such
19 aggregate expenditures for the then 2nd preceding fiscal
20 year.  (Must keep growing)

This applies to Indian Tribes, too (pg 841) .  So if the Akaka Tribe is formed, US Gov't social workers will be sent to check up on every Hawaiian family.  And they have a financial incentive to keep expanding.   "Sovereignty", eh?