GPHC county commissioner update

1. Public health is important, but not at the expense of liberty.
2. SB4 was designed to centralize public health through coercion. (WATCH THE VIDEOS)
3. The bill has a loophole that ties funding to administrative rules adopted by the State Dept. of Health requiring a choice between autonomy or funding. It is an unnecessary addon, the counties are already required to use the funds for the defined core public health services.
4. Supporters of SEA4 are confusing Medicaid expansion with public health. The US spends the most per capita on health yet it has the worst outcomes in developed countries. How will throwing more money at the problem help?

 
 
Everyone agrees Public Health is important. We are not trying to insinuate that it shouldn’t be a priority. BUT IT IS NOT AN EXCUSE FOR FISCAL IRRESPONSIBILITY, A LACK OF TRANSPARENCY OR COMMON SENSE.

The purpose of SB4 is to centralize public health creating a top-down approach to ensure “consistent & equitable” public health measures across the country. The intent to use coercion to centralize public health power was clear in the snippets from the Governor’s Public Health Commission meeting on June 30th meeting found here.

Legislators claim counties “maintain their authority” while ignoring a gaping loophole. Funding is tied to administrative rules set by the State Department of Health. However the law already requires that the funding be spent on the core public health services. The clause requiring counties to follow administrative rules is unnecessary.

Senator Tyler Johnson attended the July 24th 2023 Dekalb commissioners meeting and admitted this was a concern. Especially because administrative rules may be changed, historically, we have seen the health department act with a “heavy hand.”

He admits that he voted in opposition of the bill, but disappointingly, he encouraged the County Commissioners to accept the funding.

Why would he ask the commissioners to vote yes, when he was unwilling to? When asked, his only response was that these are taxpayer dollars and that we shouldn’t refuse them.
 
Supporters of opting in crowed about the need for more funding with emotional pleas related to the underinsured and homeless. While access to care is a significant issue. Primary care and disease management are not the role of public health. Aligning under-insured with appropriate programs and resources is the solution, not replicating Medicaid programs. Public health is not about disease management, it is PREVENTION. Wittingly or not, their testimonies were proposing an expansion of Medicaid through the public health system. This is a slippery slope towards socialized medicine and bigger government. At present the U.S. spends significantly more than other developed countries and yet has the worst health outcomes. Is it logical to believe that throwing money at this problem will improve the situation?
 
Commissioners should do the fiscally responsible thing, opt out.

Give the state legislature an opportunity to fix this mess and ensure a responsible, sustainable, and transparent plan is in place and FREE of financial strings.  The additional requirement of following administrative rules could only be for one thing. CONTROL.
Accepting this funding with the current requirements will render counties helpless against future lockdowns pushed by the state, federal and even global organizations.

You have two action items:

1. Tell your county commissioners to opt-out. ***If they have already opted in you can still opt out before getting the funds. See if your county already opted-in here.
2. Tell your state legislators to remove the financial strings and provide transparency. If the governor’s public health commission is truly about health, the legislature must remove the nonsensical requirement for compliance with “rules adopted by the state department.” IC 16-46-10-6

 

Here is a copy of the testimony I gave at the Dekalb County Commissioner's meeting.  Feel free to email, read or print copies and share with your commissioners.  

I would also like to correct something I said at the commissioners meeting today.  I spoke on the amount of funding the county would receive.  My calculations were wrong. Though I was reading "match" my brain interpreted it as "co-pay." 

The funding listed on the "opt-in amount" is the amount the county will receive from the state and is IN ADDITION to, not including, the county match. That means the calculations I made on the spot were INCREDIBLY wrong.

The actual figures make the offer of additional funds nearly impossible to decline. 

County health departments may see nearly a double in funding the first year and more the following years. One thing was clear, the specifics are not well laid out, the counties do not know their opt-in match nor can they provide specifics on the new budget totals.

This does not change the risk to liberty that these funds include. In fact, this information may add an additional level of concern. Clearly there is incredible motivation to ensure consistent, sustainable, and equitable public health measures.

I cannot place a price on freedom or our constitution, however not all feel the same way.  We are definitely fighting an uphill battle but that does not mean we quit. We must keep fighting, we must push through.

Even if your county has opted in, GATHER YOUR NEIGHBORS and go tell the commission to opt out before receiving any funds.