Let me begin by acknowledging that this email will not be addressed to one specific person, because the problem at hand is not a problem with a person but rather the problem is with the system. I have already spoken personally to —– and voiced my disapproval over a recent occurrence involving 2 girls in our care at —-.

Several weeks ago we were informed that our two girls, 15 years old and the other 12 years old, would be attending an independent living conference in Columbia with their caseworker, which they did. Upon returning from the conference, our 12 year old brought to our attention a book that she had been given at the conference entitled, 100 Questions You’d Never Ask Your Parents, written by Elisabeth Henderson and Dr. Nancy Armstrong.

Let me give you a sampling of some of the chapters in “this generation’s must read book about teen issues.” 1. What Does an Orgasm Feel Like? 2. What’s the Difference Between Orgasm and Ejaculation? 3. How Much Semen is there When a Guy Cums. 4. How Will I Know When I am Ready to Have Sex? To which this writer instructs, “Everybody is different and knowing when is right for you is an individual decision. There is no set age or time that defines it.” 5.How Do I Put a Condom On? 6. What Is the G-Spot? 7. Do I Have to Swallow? (Use your imagination) 8. What Is Anal Sex? 9. What Does Popping The Cherry Mean? 10. Where Can I Get Free Birth Control? 11. How Can I Prevent Pre-mature Ejaculation? 12. How Do I Tell My Mom That I’m Ready To Have Sex? – “Be straightforward about your thoughts, feelings and actions…Hit on the big points…that you are smart enough to use protection every time you have sex and that you have thought through the consequences.” These are merely a few of the 100 questions addressed and discussed in this most informative little book! And one more ironic question which is presented, “What Do I Do Now – I’m Pregnant!” That’s the best one of all and the answer will be, “Call DSS. They’ll take your baby!!!!”

Foster Care Review Board Members sit month after month and we wonder what in the world is going on that we should see such an abandonment of what is right and rational? Those who would instruct and inform our 12 year olds on the content above are doing nothing but perpetuating the insanity!! They are insuring that DSS will NEVER go out of business. We are fooling ourselves if we think that we are helping these children or our society by condoning such a blatant disregard of self-control and respect. We are, however, creating a generation of animals who operate off of instinct much like dogs in heat.  Most of you reading this would bust a vein if your child’s school gave out this book to your child. Why then would we place it in the hands of our foster children and then punish them when they get caught having sex in the bathroom stalls at school? Is it because they are wards of the state and we are so concerned about political correctness? 

The two girls who attended this conference from — who have been in our care for over 3 years. In that time we have poured our lives into theirs and sought to break the destructive cycles that so many are the products of, while teaching them what it really means to be self-controlled, honorable, respectable ladies who will give back to the world they live in rather than milking it like leaches. This resource flies in the face of everything —  believes and seeks to instill into our children.

Without question, these kids need the right information about the facts of life, which I realize not all of our foster parents are equipped to handle. But a conference and a book is also not the way to educate our children about such sensitive content. If this is how the great state of South Carolina chooses to inform our foster children, we have no room to complain when we get stuck with the consequences. Teaching and granting license are two different things entirely and it appears we don’t know the difference.

 

 

 

 

 

This 30 second spot was up on a few stations last week.

Evidently, the editors at the Anderson Independent don’t appreciate our message on family values. While copying the State Newspaper

in an editorial about women in government, they inferred that women in SC district 3 aren’t well represented. Incidentally, my wife and daughter (and an unknown amount of unborn baby girls) disagree with the sentiment.

It says:
…”That there is such a disparity in representation when compared to the state’s population should be cause for concern. Particularly when there are lawmakers who have exhibited such a lack of respect for health and reproductive rights for women, including our own Sen. Kevin Bryant, R-Anderson, who was behind the Senate measure to force anyone seeking an abortion to view an ultrasound prior to the procedure.

It was the “requirement,” the presumption that any woman seeking an abortion hasn’t given it more thought than any man can ever imagine, that gave us pause.”

To read the full editorial

At least they could have mentioned that the outgoing ladies of the Senate, Sen. Catherine Ceips (she was in the House last year) & Sen. Linda Short voted for the bill.

Barack Obama: “We need fathers to recognize that responsibility doesn’t just end at conception.”

Senator, I have a question for you. If, as you say, fatherhood begins at conception, when does life begin?

Now that we’ve got all this legislative stuff is over, I’m finally relieved to get home for four and a 1/2 months of hittin’ the pavement and spreading our positive message of reform. We’ve got a backyard scrap coming as we’ll have to deal with whatever the liberal democrats have in store. We’ll see what the voters decide to do in November, but we’ve never backed down from a brawl with big government whine and cheesers.

You know the good-ole-boy system is a monster, and we’ve been rattling its cage. Those benefiting from the “system” have us in their cross-hairs but we’ve gained ground on them.

We’ve seen some progress in Columbia over the last four years, but we’ve also seen a lot of resistance to change. You know as well as I do that there is still much unfinished business in the General Assembly. I am blessed to have your continued support and am asking for your help again now that re-election is around the corner. With your help, we can continue to challenge the status quo.

Our family values are finally getting the recognition they deserve and that you demand. I have been proud to contribute to victory on a number of issues such as defining marriage in our constitution, getting tough with child predators, combating wasteful spending and returning more money to you—the folks who earned it in the first place.

We must continue to stand firm for the principles we believe in and do what we know God expects of us. We must continue the fight, because our foes surely will not surrender.

We face great challenges in November. Our opposition has declared that taxes are not high enough and has promised to raise taxes. They believe government should grow even faster than the rate we are fighting now. They question our traditional family values and morals and wish to discard them. These liberal views are opposite of what you and I believe in.

 

I’d like to clarify some mis-information regarding H. 3912, legislation amending the medical practice act. Many constituents have contacted me asking me not to take away their healthcare rights. This legislation preserves their rights, and helps keep our ever rising healthcare costs in check. Unfortunately, we have fraud and abuse in our system, and we must allow some forms of checks while maintaining quality of care. There is a delicate balance between the two, and hopefully, this legislation is balanced.

I chose to over ride Governor Sanford’s veto on Wednesday 06.25 for several reasons.

In 2006, the legislature passed a revision to the medical practice act that inadvertently created an ambiguity on the issue of whether medical directors who perform utilization review and managed care services for insurers are “practicing medicine.”

The practice act was over fifty pages long and intended to deal with medical licensure and disciplinary issues.  However, what caused the confusion was one line in the definition section that mentioned “medical necessity.”  There was never any discussion of insurance issues either in committee or on the floor of either chamber.

Also, the Department of Insurance issued a bulletin after the practice act was passed in 2006, asking for clarification of the issue and notifying insurers that the Department’s position was that the practice act was not intended to apply to managed care activities by insurers that are subject to the Department’s regulations.

We worked on this legislation with representatives from the The South Carolina Medical Association and the South Carolina Alliance of Health Plans this session and developed a compromise on this issue.  The compromise contained in the bill makes it clear that applying health plan contract exclusions set by employers is not the practice of medicine.  It also states that approving health care claims is not the practice of medicine, and requires that claim denials for services that are allowed under the plan of benefits must be issued by a licensed physician who must adhere to national protocols and medical standards in making those decisions.

It is also very important to point out that this compromise added an additional level of patient – consumer protection:  the bill allows for the Administrative Law Court to review any disputes regarding whether the national standards and protocols for care called for in the bill have been met.

This compromise adds that additional layer of protection for consumers, without dismantling managed care – a serious undertaking that, I believe, will have a dramatic impact on rising healthcare costs.  It carefully addresses the balance needed between protecting consumers on the one hand, while avoiding creating a chilling effect on medical directors and insurers in SC.

I would argue that this is compromiselanguage, neither perfect for the insurance industry nor for the medical association.  Most importantly, I feel strongly that this is a step in the right direction for the patient-consumer and towards managing healthcare costs – something, even now, we can ALL agree we must do.

As a pharmacist and often times am caught in the middle of the prior authorization process. Even though it is burdensome at times, I do believe the process is necessary as it adds some checks and balances in our ever increasing healthcare costs. Hopefully this legislation provides a balance in the system that will allow for high quality of care standards, yet decelerate the escalating costs of health care and health care insurance premiums.

As you may know by now, the Governor’s veto of this bill was overridden in the SC House by a vote of 96 to 13 and in the State Senate by a vote of 34 to 5.  I hope this answers any questions you might have about why, after much deliberation with my colleagues in the legislature and thought, I decided to vote to override Governor Sanford’s veto on this bill.