Seng Center w/ Jimmy Sengenberger

Seng Center 12/17 - Part One: Clear the Bench Colorado and Bill Nye the Science Guy

Seng Center — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 21:00:00 GMT

Part One of the December 17th edition of the Seng Center college radio show, starting with our third interview with Matt Arnold, Director of Clear the Bench Colorado, on the national news of his effort to oust the four Colorado Supreme Court justices up for retention in 2010!

Then host Jimmy Sengenberger pokes fun at Bill Nye the Science Guy, the Reverend Al Gore, Head Potentate and Grand Prophet of the Church of Climate Change of Latter-Day Liberals, and Copenhagen in a discussion of Climategate, global warming exaggerations, and the risks involved in massive anti-climate change policies.

For more information about Clear the Bench Colorado's effort to motivate Coloradans to vote NO on retaining the four inJustices on the Colorado Supreme Court who are up for retention in 2010, visit CTBC online at ClearTheBenchColorado.org.

Direct Link
58.91 MB Download

Comments are more than welcome! E-mailed Jimmy at http://mailto:jimmy@sengcenter.com/ or post on the site! As always, please be respectful in your remarks.

Tune in LIVE to Seng Center every Thursday night from 6-8pm MTN online at krcx.org, official website of KRCX 93.9 Regis University.

Seng Center 12/17 - Part Two: The Morality of the Free Market as the Solution to Healthcare

Seng Center — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 21:00:00 GMT

Part Two of the December 17th edition of the Seng Center college radio show, in which host Jimmy Sengenberger provides a lengthy but definitive case for the free market as the moral solution to America's healthcare woes. In addition, Jimmy explains why healthcare is not a right, mandating insurance coverage for preexisting conditions is not the particularly ethical thing to do, and what the real moral quandaries are with our current system - and how to ethically fix them.

Direct Link
48.49 MB Download

Comments are more than welcome! E-mailed Jimmy at http://mailto:jimmy@sengcenter.com/ or post on the site! As always, please be respectful in your remarks.

Tune in LIVE to Seng Center every Thursday night from 6-8pm MTN online at krcx.org, official website of KRCX 93.9 Regis University.

Seng Center 12/15

Seng Center — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 23:00:00 GMT

Our shortened December 15th edition of the Seng Center college radio show, in which host Jimmy Sengenberger clears up some of the disinformation that Obamacare proponents are using to jam through the bill and explains the hazards of healthcare reform as it has been proposed.

Direct Link
33.81 MB Download

Comments are more than welcome! E-mailed Jimmy at http://mailto:jimmy@sengcenter.com/ or post on the site! As always, please be respectful in your remarks.

Tune in LIVE to Seng Center every Thursday night from 6-8pm MTN online at krcx.org, official website of KRCX 93.9 Regis University.

Seng Center 12/10 - Part One

Seng Center — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 17:00:00 GMT

Part One of the December 10th edition of the Seng Center college radio show, in which host Jimmy Sengenberger analyzes President Obama's Nobel Prize acceptance speech and explains why his award is good for America. Jimmy then reexamines the significance of the ClimateGate scandal, takes the Reverend Al Gore, Head Potentate of the Church of Climate Change of Latter-Day Liberals to task for his distortions of the science-shaking scandal, and reacts to the EPA's declaration that carbon dioxide is a pollutant.

Direct Link
46.75 MB Download

Comments are more than welcome! E-mailed Jimmy at Jimmy@SengCenter.com or post on the site! As always, please be respectful in your remarks.

Tune in LIVE to Seng Center every Thursday night from 6-8pm MTN online at krcx.org, official website of KRCX 93.9 Regis University.

Seng Center 12/10 - Part Two

Seng Center — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 17:00:00 GMT

Part Two of the December 10th edition of the Seng Center college radio show, in which host Jimmy Sengenberger breaks down the Senate's healthcare "compromise," which includes a potential expansion of Medicare and guts Health Savings Accounts, and explains why the plan is really a wolf in sheep's clothing and why putting it into effect is hazardous to your health.

Jimmy then chats with Derek, a Regis University freshman and premed student, about the follies of government-run healthcare and Obamacare. He closes with a discussion of President Obama's phony "job creation" scheme.

Direct Link
60.49 MB Download

Comments are more than welcome! E-mailed Jimmy at Jimmy@SengCenter.com or post on the site! As always, please be respectful in your remarks.

Tune in LIVE to Seng Center every Thursday night from 6-8pm MTN online at krcx.org, official website of KRCX 93.9 Regis University.

Freedom and systemic reforms are key to lowering healthcare costs

Seng Center — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 23:00:00 GMT

Part Three of the Capitalist Manifesto for Healthcare Reform: Reforming the current system to lower costs. Adapted from a piece originally published by Jimmy Sengenberger in the Regis University Highlander newspaper.

The U.S. Senate is wrangling over a massive healthcare package that simply does not address the primary problem with our system: skyrocketing costs. In fact, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, premiums would rise by as much as $2,000 for a family policy. The government’s Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services assert a 5.1 percent increase in healthcare-to-GDP spending (to 21.1 percent, currently 16 percent) with reform compared to a 4.8 percent increase by doing nothing. And for those under 30, premiums could rise by 50 or 60 percent, according to Robert Zirkelbach of America’s Health Insurance Plans.

Congress should instead adopt the “Capitalist Manifesto for Healthcare Reform,” several specific, free-market fixes for healthcare. Previously in the series, I proposed several cost-cutting initiatives: increasing competition for individual consumers and permitting it across state lines and decreasing pharmeceutical regulation and permitting the importation of prescription drugs.

Now, in the third installment, we will examine lowering costs by freeing up medical malpractice, the regulatory system and Medicare and Medicaid, all critical reform components.

Reforming Medical Malpractice: If you’re a doctor, you better have malpractice insurance. Otherwise, you’re taking a huge risk. No matter what happens, even if a doctor does her job right and everything turns out well, you’re in danger of a class action lawsuit, known as “tort.”

According to Dr. Russell Turk, “[A] September survey of more than 5,000 obstetricians/gynecologists conducted by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' (ACOG) [found that] in Florida, the state with the highest premiums, ob/gyns pay an average of $195,000 annually…The ACOG survey found that 63 percent of ob/gyns report making changes to their practice due to the fear of liability claims or litigation. In addition, 8 percent said they had stopped practicing obstetrics altogether.”

Doctors across the country are in such risk of getting hit with a massive lawsuit that their costs in malpractice insurance are astronomical. I agree with Dr. Turk when he says, “I fully support the idea of doctors being penalized and disciplined when they have been negligent. But you can do everything right and still get sued for a poor outcome.” As he notes, this also affects how doctors practice medicine, like what risks they’re willing to take to save lives.

Medical malpractice concerns also encourage greater use of defensive medicine, meaning doctors conduct tests they wouldn’t otherwise do to prevent lawsuits. In fact, defensive medicine costs the system an estimated $70 billion a year. Doctors should neither be prevented from doing what is necessary to serve their patients, nor forced into doing what is unnecessary and costly, just to protect themselves.

Tort reform, therefore, is absolutely essential for doctors, which will in turn pass on lower costs to consumers and insurance companies. It is imperative that punitive awards for medical malpractice be capped. In addition, those things for which one can go to court to seek damages should be reexamined and limited somewhat to prevent the application of inappropriate pressure on doctors from doing what may really be necessary to serve the needs of their patients.

However, the reforms that are necessary to lower costs and doctors’ concerns cannot all be undertaken at the federal level, due to federalism. Therefore, there are actions that must be taken at the federal and state levels, and the feds should perhaps consider providing incentives to states to do their part. It is imperative that, as part of a comprehensive healthcare reform package, both levels of government begin taking steps to reform the oppressive tort laws that are strangling the nation’s medical practitioners and pushing costs up.

Don’t Hate; Deregulate: I know what you’re thinking. Deregulation…isn’t that what got us into financial crisis in the first place? In fact, as economist Walter Williams points out, “In the banking and finance industries [from which the crisis stems], regulatory spending between 1980 and 2007 almost tripled, rising from $725 million to $2.07 billion.”

Economist Jeffrey Friedman noted, “The financial crisis was caused by the complex, constantly growing web of regulations designed to constrain and redirect modern capitalism. This complexity made investors, bankers and perhaps regulators themselves ignorant of regulations previously promulgated across decades and in different ‘fields’ of regulation.”

Deregulation was not the real cause of the financial crisis; regulation was. Furthermore, the healthcare and financial sectors are entirely different in nature, and the fact of the matter is, healthcare is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the country. According to Duke University’s Chris Conover, a policy analyst at the Cato Institute, the net cost of health regulation is $169 billion a year, after subtracting beneficial regulatory costs. As with any industry,in order to pay for the dictates of the government, institutions of health are forced to raise costs, which extends to consumers in the form of higher prices—a whopping $1,500 per household in this case.

Bear in mind that the regulations I’m talking about are not your essential safety regulations, but $169 billion in excessive, burdensome regulations, like the tort system, FDA regulations like those addressed in Column #2 and regulation of health facilities.

In fact, Conover’s research has shown that while roughly18,000 Americans die from lack of health insurance, 22,000 die due to health services regulation, and seven million uninsured owe their state to excessive regulation. Cutting back on those unnecessary and cumbersome, but targeted and non-essential requirements/restrictions at both the federal and state levels would free up the market and enable health providers to lower costs.

Fixing Medicare and Medicaid: Medicare and Medicaid are the two most prominent government-run healthcare programs currently on the books. Medicare provides medical insurance for the elderly, and Medicaid is a massive federal-state partnership affording healthcare to the poor and indigent. While both of these programs are well-intentioned, they are financially unsustainable and require updates for application in a 21^st century world.

Medicaid is a drain on federal and state budgets. To help control costs, states should be given near-absolute flexibility in determining how Medicaid is to be doled out—not more money. In fact, how Medicaid funding is given to the states encourages fraud and waste. And both Medicaid and Medicare reimburse doctors at as much as 30 percent below the normal rate—meaning costs are distributed to others. Fraud, abuse, waste and inefficiency need to be identified and cut from both of these programs. Fund distribution methods must be altered, and we must reexamine who is allowed to benefit from them, particularly from Medicare.

We need to start taming the Medicare leviathan, which has $89.3 trillion in unfunded liabilities. The layman’s solution to Medicare lies in allowing qualified individuals to opt out of the program if they so choose; slapping a grandfather clause on the 2003 Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit, meaning that those who are not currently on the program will not receive expansionist Part D benefits; and making Medicare means-tested, meaning that folks like Bill Gates would be ineligible for benefits.

Whether or not a person qualifies for Medicare benefits should rely on several factors, principally income level but perhaps also including yearly expenses, savings and the number of dependents. The switch to a means-tested structure should pertain solely to those who are currently under the age of 50 or 55; that way, all who are already anticipating on entering the Medicare program soon will be able to. The program will slowly work its way down, and the increased cost burden it shifts to the private healthcare industry will shrink as a result.

By taking these three critical steps toward reforming what we've got right now and thereby expanding freedom in the marketplace, we will undoubtedly be able to pull the brakes on skyrocketing healthcare costs as our system speeds on its way to the cliff of no return.

Seng Center 12/3 - Part One

Seng Center — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 15:00:00 GMT

Part Two of the December 3rd edition of the Seng Center college radio show, in which host Jimmy Sengenberger counters the Climate Alarmist argument that global warming skeptics lack "peer reviewed" credibility, analyzes President Obama's "jobs summit" as a phony way to stem the tide of a jobless recovery, and proposes a host of market-based ways to dig the nation out of the recession with the utmost speed, efficacy, and potential for long-term growth.

Direct Link
48.31 MB Download

Comments are more than welcome! E-mailed Jimmy at Jimmy@SengCenter.com or post on the site! As always, please be respectful in your remarks.

Tune in LIVE to Seng Center every Thursday night from 6-8pm MTN online at krcx.org, official website of KRCX 93.9 Regis University.

Seng Center 12/3 - Part Two

Seng Center — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 15:00:00 GMT

Part Two of the December 3rd edition of the Seng Center college radio show, in which host Jimmy Sengenberger counters the Climate Alarmist argument that global warming skeptics lack "peer reviewed" credibility, analyzes President Obama's "jobs summit" as a phony way to stem the tide of a jobless recovery, and proposes a host of market-based ways to dig the nation out of the recession with the utmost speed, efficacy, and potential for long-term growth.

Direct Link
44.6 MB Download

Comments are more than welcome! E-mailed Jimmy at Jimmy@SengCenter.com or post on the site! As always, please be respectful in your remarks.

Tune in LIVE to Seng Center every Thursday night from 6-8pm MTN online at krcx.org, official website of KRCX 93.9 Regis University.

Seng Center 11/19 - Part One

Seng Center — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 17:00:00 GMT

Part One of the November 19th edition of the Seng Center college radio show, starting with another "Pink Panther Moment" focused on breaking down the truth about the "deficit cuts" that will supposedly result from the proposed healthcare bill. Then host Jimmy Sengenberger debates Regis University Democrat Michael DeGregori on the 9/11 terror trials in New York City and the War in Afghanistan.

Direct Link
55.89 MB Download

Comments are more than welcome! E-mailed Jimmy at Jimmy@SengCenter.com or post on the site! As always, please be respectful in your remarks.

Tune in LIVE to Seng Center every Thursday night from 6-8pm MTN online at krcx.org, official website of KRCX 93.9 Regis University.

Seng Center 11/19 - Part Two - Dennis Gallagher Exclusive

Seng Center — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 17:00:00 GMT

Part Two of the November 19th edition of the Seng Center college radio show, featuring our wide-ranging chat with Denver City Auditor, history-making former State Legislator, and Regis University Professor Emeritus Dennis Gallagher. Dennis and host Jimmy Sengenberger chat about a host of topics, including the backstory of the famous, taxpayer-saving "Gallagher Amendment" to the Colorado Constitution; "a comity of [phony stimulus] errors"; political shakeups of and expectations for the 2010 elections; and much more.

Direct Link
50.68 MB Download

Comments are more than welcome! E-mailed Jimmy at Jimmy@SengCenter.com or post on the site! As always, please be respectful in your remarks.

Tune in LIVE to Seng Center every Thursday night from 6-8pm MTN online at krcx.org, official website of KRCX 93.9 Regis University.

Seng Center 11/12 - Part One - Mark Hillman

Seng Center — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 04:00:00 GMT

Part One of the November 12th edition of the Seng Center college radio show, featuring our exclusive, in-depth interview with Mark Hillman, RNC Committeeman for Colorado. Mark and host Jimmy Sengenberger chat up a storm about healthcare, the unconstitutional shenanigans of the Colorado Supreme Court, the 2010 elections, and much more!

Direct Link
55.76 MB Download

Comments are more than welcome! E-mailed Jimmy at Jimmy@SengCenter.com or post on the site! As always, please be respectful in your remarks.

Tune in LIVE to Seng Center every Thursday night from 6-8pm MTN online at krcx.org, official website of KRCX 93.9 Regis University.

Seng Center 11/12 - Part Two

Seng Center — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 04:00:00 GMT

Part Two of the November 12th edition of the Seng Center college radio show, in which host Jimmy Sengenberger discusses the approval of the House healthcare bill and its potential defects if law, summarizes his proposed "Capitalist Manifesto for Healthcare Reform," reveals how we can insure the uninsured the free market way, and pokes at "The Reverend" Al Gore's "revelations" about global warming.

Direct Link
46.3 MB Download

Comments are more than welcome! E-mailed Jimmy at Jimmy@SengCenter.com or post on the site! As always, please be respectful in your remarks.

Tune in LIVE to Seng Center every Thursday night from 6-8pm MTN online at krcx.org, official website of KRCX 93.9 Regis University.

KRCX Seng Center 11/5 - Exclusive with Ken Buck, GOP U.S. Senate candidate

Seng Center — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Our shortened November 5th edition of the Seng Center college radio show, featuring our exclusive, in-depth interview with Ken Buck,Republican candidate for U.S. Senate. For more information about Buckand to get involved in his campaign, visit him on the web at www.BuckForColorado.com.

Direct Link
45.38 MB Download

Comments are more than welcome! E-mailed Jimmy at Jimmy@SengCenter.com or post on the site! As always, please be respectful in your remarks.

Tune in LIVE to Seng Center every Thursday night from 6-8pm MTN online at krcx.org, official website of KRCX 93.9 Regis University.

Satire: Santa Claus is a registered Republican!

Seng Center — Fri, 25 Dec 2009 20:00:00 GMT

Here's some Christmas satire fun to warm up your holiday in the cold.

Investigation thrusts Santa Claus, a registered Republican, into controversy

The 2008 election is well past over, but an investigation into the legal voter status of Santa Claus has concluded that the famed philanthropist is a registered Republican in Alaska, his adopted American home.

Claus was spotted voting in Anchorage last November, and an anonymous phone call placed to Alaskan election officials by a man claiming to be “one of Santa’s little helpers” accused Claus of voter fraud, prompting the investigation.

“An iceberg of evidence has confirmed that Kris Kringle, aka Santa Claus, is a legally registered voter. Furthermore, we have concluded that Mr. Claus is Republican, and we suspect he supported John McCain in the 2008 election,” stated Jack Frost, head of the Committee to Investigate the Legal Voter Registration Status and Citizenship of Santa Claus (CILVRSCSC),an entity created by the Alaskan Voter Board against the wishes of 2008Republican vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin. “We also believe that Governor Palin violated ethics rules by receiving gifts from the jolly ‘ol Saint.”

The bi-partisan commission also included Republicans Mr. Grinch, of Whoville, and multibillionaire banker Ebenezer Scrooge, of New York City, along with Democrats Frosty T. Snowman, of Wasilla, Palin’s Alaskan hometown, and Yukon Cornelius, a prospector in Anchorage and a former associate of Claus.

CILVRSCSC concluded within a month that Claus is, in fact, a naturalized citizen of the United States, but further inquiry has led to conclusions about his political affiliation. With Christmas around the corner, the commission decided to announce the results of its wide-ranging investigation.

“I’m a Republican,” said Grinch. “You might not think that Santa’s a Republican because he gives joy to every child each Christmas, but we’ve found that the way he treats his workforce, his Christian views, his wealth and decision to evade corporate and personal income taxes by operating in the North Pole makes him an undeniable Republican.”

According to Forbes magazine, Stanley Twinkleflake, a North Pole elf and former employee at Santa’s Christmas Workshop, Inc., was banished last year from the North Pole, along with three other elves. The reason, Claus gave, was that Twinkleflake was working to undermine the workshop through unionization.

Elves like Twinkleflake and other critics assert that the little fellas are working long hours in harmful conditions, at below minimum wage.

Claus has recently stirred controversy over his support of Wal-Mart’s refusal to provide health insurance for its employees. That controversy reached its height last year when it was revealed the Claus has himself refused to provide his elves with health insurance.

Claus has also entered into some legal issues. He insists on maintaining his workshop in the North Pole, where the U.S.government has no oversight whatsoever.

“It was bad enough trying to make wooden rocking horses and sleds during the depths of an arctic winter,” Twinkleflake told Forbes. “But nowadays all the kids want is electronics. You try working with all those chemicals in perpetual darkness. It’s practically a sweatshop. I just hope college kids start boycotting all presents made at Santa’s Workshop.”

Last month, Ester “Bunny” Bumble, Claus’s senior spokesperson, disputed critics in an interview with Magical Creatures Quarterly.

“Elves are immortal. With a guaranteed life of forever, why would they need health insurance? We stand by our position,” she said.

“Santa Claus doesn’t need illegal immigration from Mexico or to ship his workshop overseas to China to find low-wage workers,” said Holly Stockingstuffer, columnist at The Holiday Times, whose recent article critiquing Claus’s environmental practices, “Santa and Global Warming,”has won praise from Nobel prize-winner Al Gore. “Have you seen their size and their pointy ears? No non-magical human would even think of hiring guys like that. He’s got them right where he wants them.”

The only elf known to have left the North Pole is Buddy Hobbs, who turned out to be a human after all when he found his father in New York City.

“Santa? I know him, I know him!” said Hobbs “Sure, he doesn’t have the World’s Best Cupof Coffee there, but his affinity for elf culture makes things really friendly up at the North Pole. The Santa haters are wrong—he’s not a cotton-headed ninnymoggins!”

Ebonezer Scrooge once refused to give to charity until he was visited by three ghosts twenty-three years ago. He now gives$500 million annually out of his own pocket—and he proudly admits he is a registered Republican.

“I’m a Republican because I’m a conservative,” said Scrooge. “Ever since meeting the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come, I have chosen to give millions of dollars of my own money to good causes each year—just like Santa spends his own money on toys and gives them to children out of his own good will, not because of government redistribution.”

Claus has long been known for his infinite amount of wealth. As Forbes reported in 2005, Santa’s Christmas Workshop produces roughly 700 million toys valuing more than $14 billion a year.

“He could spend that money on himself, buy a condo in Vail, a tropical island in the Caribbean. But he doesn’t. He uses it to spread joy to kids,” said Scrooge.

Critics,however, don’t see much kindness in the way Clause operates. Each year he produces a list using a crystal ball; he sees kids when they’re sleeping and knows when they’re awake. If Claus finds a given kid nice, they get a present; naughty ones receive a lump of coal.

“Kringle is a Christian extremist,” said Michael O’Donnell, former television talkshow host who produced last year’s documentary film Sicko: Claus, Wal-Mart, and the Republican Conspiracy. “Every year he runs around claiming to spread‘Christmas cheer’ through his gifts—but in reality, those kids who do not fit within his narrow view of morality find a lump of coal in their stockings! If that isn’t radical Christianity and evidence of a right-wing extremist, I don’t know what is.”

Critics also point to Claus’s use of the crystal ball as inappropriate surveillance. The American Civil Liberties Union filed a complaint against Claus four years ago. Since the U.S. government has no jurisdiction in the North Pole, however, the practice has not been discontinued.

“This is just like the Bush Administration’s warrantless surveillance program,” said ACLU attorney Jen Stamper. “He’s spying on people without permission to see if they’re ‘good’ or not. We are calling on President Obama to distance himself from Claus.”

Claus’s wealth, the way his business operates, his Christianity, the fact that he’s white and old, the red color of his suit and his charitable contributions combined to reveal his Republican voter status.

The final piece of evidence: Alaska voter rolls have him registered as “Republican.”

Forbes Magazine’s “Fictional 15” and 2005 article “Santa Claus” were used for this piece. The rest of the article is the author’s original work. Merry Christmas from Seng Center!

An investigation has concluded that the one known

as Santa Claus, now mired in controversy, is a

legally registered Republican.

Regulatory changes necessary to lower prescription drug costs

Seng Center — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 01:00:00 GMT

Part Two of the Capitalist Manifesto for Healthcare Reform: Lowering prescription drug costs. Adapted from a piece originally published by Jimmy Sengenberger in the Regis University Highlander newspaper.

Ronald Reagan once said, “Individual freedom and ingenuity are at the very core of everything we’ve accomplished.”

Indeed, everything that has made America great has come from empowering the people, including and especially when it comes to the market. Capitalism has been the engine of prosperity for this country going back to its founding. As such, I am now proposing that Congress and the President consider the “Capitalist Manifesto for Healthcare Reform,” several specific, free-market fixes for the healthcare problem.

In the first article of this series, I examined the importance of breaking down two critical barriers to competition: the third-party based system that sets consumers apart from paying and decision-making and state laws prohibiting insurance purchases across state lines. Cost and affordability, not quality of care, are the key issues with our healthcare system. So let’s look at another way in which we can directly empower the individual beyond increased choice and expand affordability—by adjusting policies surrounding the importation of cheaper prescription drugs.

High Costs: Prescription drug costs often contribute greatly to higher healthcare costs. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, the number of prescriptions purchased in the U.S. between 1994 and 2004 was a whopping 68 percent, with prices averaging increases of 8.3 percent yearly during that period. “Although still only a modest part of total health care spending in the U.S (11 percent),” they note, “with so many people relying on prescriptions, the cost implications loom large for the American public, health insurers, and government payers.” The problems lie in Research and Development spending—specifically, patents and FDA regulations—and the fact that importing prescription drugs is illegal under current U.S. law.

Patents: Both patents and FDA regulations are significant contributors to $800 million in costs to launch a single new pharmaceutical product—costs which result in higher prices for consumers. First, patents are designed to give a company temporary monopoly on the product so that they can recover their R&D spending. A patent lasts 20 years, yet as the CATO Institute’s Roger Pilon points out, “the effective life for drug patents is about nine years.” Logically, the shorter the time, the higher companies must charge per unit during that time to make up for the costs. This process must be changed to permit the same amount of patent time that other products have.

FDA Regulations: Then there are regulations. Today, according to PHRMA, the process of discovery to FDA approval takes an average of 12 to 15 years. As such, many people who would accept the risks involved suffer during this time. As economist Milton Friedman suggested, “[T]he one big development you could make would be to go back [to the situation where you have] the FDA certify safety…but not efficacy, and let the market itself work in determining efficacy.”

Indeed, the FDA should test only for safety and allow doctors and consumers to judge efficacy, which would decrease costs substantially and thus allow for cheaper medications. By altering the regulatory process, more innovation and development will result in addition to lower prices.

Prescription Drug Importation: Finally, current law makes it illegal for prescription drugs to come to the U.S. from anyone other than the American producer. As of now, they must be approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for importation. Consequently, competition between prescription drug providers is stifled, as U.S. manufacturers lack the incentive to cut prices to beat out lower-priced contenders. But individuals, states and cities are already beginning to avoid these laws and import drugs from other countries. This should be made official: by permitting the importation of lower-cost prescription drugs from countries like Canada, consumers will have a larger list of affordable, cheaper medications to choose from.

Of course, we do have a right to know if what we’re buying hasn’t been FDA, so what’s to say that the government can’t mandate that imported prescription drugs say “NOT APPROVED BY FDA” in big, bold letters and be placed in sections stating “NOT APPROVED BY FDA” in the pharmacy? Leave it up to me and my doctor, not big brother Sam, to decide whether or not I want to buy a cheaper drug from Canada, approved by their version of the FDA, instead of the more expensive product from Georgia.

There are other concerns as well. The Heritage Foundation’s Nina Owcharenko, for instance, makes a good point: prescription drugs in other, Westernized countries are fixed in accordance with price controls, which would distort the international market and advantage foreign manufacturers.

However, we must recognize that the vast majority of R&D costs are being paid for by the Americans, with other countries essentially getting a free pass. The U.S. is the only nation where market dynamics of supply and demand play out in pharmaceuticals—and with good reason. Price controls in other countries, as Owcharenko points out, reduce R&D spending (not costs) for new drugs by as much as $5 to $8 billion each year and trials for new medical compounds by as much as 50-60 percent.

But as long as the ban on importation is in effect, American drug manufacturers are going to recoup their R&D costs here instead of pushing supply and demand principles on other countries—meaning higher prices for us. Essentially, prices are set differently in the U.S. from other countries, meaning the U.S. shoulders the cost burden.

By eliminating the importation ban, other countries will have no choice but to react to supply and demand principles, as American manufacturers will find it necessary to cut prices at home and raise them abroad. Thus, other countries will have to share in R&D costs, which is long overdue.

As Roger Pilon notes, pharmaceuticals can use contractual agreements (to do such things as restrict drug resale), limits on supply, and export pressures, among other things, to help ensure that foreign countries are not undercutting the company. In effect, American manufacturers will be encouraged to do whatever they can to discourage importation in order to maintain their market share, which can be done by lowering prices here and raising prices elsewhere.

Should the U.S. government repair the patent process, refocus FDA regulations and permit the importation of prescription drugs, Americans of all stripes will surely benefit from a noticeable reduction of healthcare expenses.

KRCX Seng Center 10/29 - Part One - Tom Tancredo Unplugged!

Seng Center — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 23:00:00 GMT

In Part One of the 10/29 edition of the Seng Center college radio show, we sit down with the ever-controversial former Congressman Tom Tancredo!

Ever wondered the inside scoop behind Karl Rove's admonition that Tancredo never "darken the doorsteps of the White House," or the real backstory behind the former Congressman's icy relationship with John McCain? We got it! In this exclusive interview, the 2008 presidential contender finally goes unplugged on a college campus, without liberal interference. He gives us the inside scoop into his political forays while in Washington, D.C. and tells us his unadulterated views on Barack Obama, illegal immigration, multiculturalism, and much more!

(Note: Due to recording issues, the beginning of the show and interview are not included in the podcast.)

Direct Link
71.69 MB Download

Comments are more than welcome! E-mailed Jimmy at Jimmy@SengCenter.com or post on the site! As always, please be respectful in your remarks.

Tune in LIVE to Seng Center every Thursday night from 6-8pm MTN online at krcx.org, official website of KRCX 93.9 Regis University.

KRCX Seng Center 10/29 - Part Two

Seng Center — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 21:00:00 GMT

Part Two of a very special 10/29 edition of the Seng Center radio show, in which host Jimmy Sengenberger sums up his interview with controversial former Congressman Tom Tancredo, has some fun on healthcare with the three possible reasons for the Democrats’ relentless insistence on a big-government “solution,” and reveals how we can lower prescription drug costs by addressing regulation and permitting the reimportation of prescription drugs. Plus we take another…interesting call from Ethel in Missouri.

Direct Link
45.55 MB Download

Comments are more than welcome! E-mailed Jimmy at Jimmy@SengCenter.com or post on the site! As always, please be respectful in your remarks.

Tune in LIVE to Seng Center every Thursday night from 6-8pm MTN online at krcx.org, official website of KRCX 93.9 Regis University.

KRCX Seng Center 10/22 - Part One

Seng Center — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 02:00:00 GMT

Part One of the 10/22 Seng Center radio show, in which host Jimmy Sengenberger discusses the unconstitutional, un-American health insurance mandate and the Democrats' unyielding attempts to radically alter our nation's healthcare system. He also plays his acclaimed speech on the federal debt, "America's Fiscal Crisis," which was given on the steps of the CO State Capitol on 9/19/09.

Direct Link
48.94 MB Download

Comments are more than welcome! E-mailed Jimmy at Jimmy@SengCenter.com or post on the site! As always, please be respectful in your remarks.

Tune in LIVE to Seng Center every Thursday night from 6-8pm MTN online at krcx.org, official website of KRCX 93.9 Regis University.

KRCX Seng Center 10/22 - Part Two

Seng Center — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 01:00:00 GMT

Part Two of the 10/22 Seng Center radio show, in which host Jimmy Sengenberger discusses Pay Czar Kenneth Feinberg's forced cuts of executive pay, the White House war with Fox News, and the decreasing popularity of the global warming myth.

Direct Link
40.1 MB Download

Comments are more than welcome! E-mailed Jimmy at Jimmy@SengCenter.com or post on the site! As always, please be respectful in your remarks.

Tune in LIVE to Seng Center every Thursday night from 6-8pm MTN online at krcx.org, official website of KRCX 93.9 Regis University.

Competition is key to real healthcare reform

Seng Center — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 23:00:00 GMT

Part One of the Capitalist Manifesto for Healthcare Reform: Boosting competition. Adapted from a piece originally published by Jimmy Sengenberger in the Regis University Highlander newspaper.

President Obama is right. When it comes to healthcare, the status quo is unacceptable. Too many people are without access to affordable health coverage, and millions of people are uninsured through no fault of their own. We need change. But President Obama’s government answer is not the way to go.

Capitalism has been the engine of prosperity for this country going back to its founding. As such, I am now proposing that Congress and the President consider the “Capitalist Manifesto for Healthcare Reform,” several specific, free-market fixes for the healthcare problem. The most critical aspect of reform, and the starting point, must be increased competition—something else President Obama claims to favor.

Putting You in Control: There’s a basic principle in economics that isn’t talked about all that much, but it stands true thanks to human nature: If someone else—a middleman—is putting up most of the cash for something people really want—or need—they’re going to get it more. You’re not worried about the cost—someone else is paying. This is exactly what happens with healthcare.

Government regulation and policies have essentially mandated a third party-based system that forces the consumer to work through health insurance companies, HMO's, employers and other middlemen that pay the supplier. 84% of all personal healthcare spending is made through private health insurance, the government or other private expenditures that are not directly from the patient.

Encouraging the third-party system are tax exemptions for employer-provided health insurance that the millions of self-employed and small business owners and workers who pay on their own do not receive. Own a big business? Congrats—you get a nice little tax exemption for healthcare! Run that mom-and-pop shop down the street, or your own home-based business? Tough. As Seinfeld’s Soup Nazi would put it, “No tax exclusion for you!”

These government incentives, policies and regulations put in place, in large part by the federal tax code, do nothing more than exacerbate the problem. Because of the third-party-payer system, health providers aren’t competing for individual consumers—they’re contending for large corporations like Target and Cisco. The problem here is that individuals are separated from the cost, driving up prices (premiums), and thus taking away decision-making authority of the patient.

Not a day goes by where we don't see commercials for Geico, AllState and other car insurance companies competing over who provides the best service at the lowest price—competition absent from healthcare because of the third-party system. To fix this, the government must equalize the healthcare tax exemption across the board so that everyone, not just middlemen and big business, will benefit from it. That means small businesses as well as individuals, all of whom will then be far more equipped to go out and find an affordable health insurance plan for themselves, their families, and their employees—plans that are right for them.

We should also examine the other policies and regulations that encourage the third-party system. As a result of both of these decisive actions, costs will go down. Making these adjustments to the current system would open up the market to increased competition by allowing consumers to shop around on their own, decreasing costs substantially while maintaining high quality.

Expand the Sphere of Competition: In his recent speech to Congress on healthcare, President Obama acknowledged the extensive concentration of business in the health insurance industry. As he pointed out, “75 percent of the insurance market is controlled by five or fewer companies. In Alabama, almost 90 percent is controlled by just one company.” While there are some issues with the calculation of these numbers, he is generally correct—the market is highly centralized and void of real competition. Another fundamental reason for this problem is again government-created: the inability to purchase health insurance plans across state lines.

Thanks to the 1945 McCarran-Ferguson Act, which granted states the ability to use licensing laws to prevent trade with insurers in other states, John in Colorado cannot purchase a plan from a company licensed in Arizona; instead, he must buy a plan from a firm in his state. Health insurance is largely regulated by the states, which require that any plan an individual insurance purchaser wishes to buy must comply with all of that state’s regulations. This advantages both insurers and regulators in maintaining psuedo-monopolies in their respective states, in turn hurting consumers, who have few lower-cost options available to them.

Congress should do what it is granted by the Constitution and mandate that every state recognize insurance licenses of other states. According to the CATO Institute, “Letting individuals and employers purchase health insurance from out of state could reduce the number of uninsured Americans by as many as 17 million, or one-third of the most-cited estimate of the number of uninsured.” An individual state’s regulations, as CATO points out, need not be changed and can be enforced in the other states.

But what about states’ rights, you say? If ever there were an area where the feds can play a legitimate role, it’s this. The Commerce Clause in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution explicitly grants Congress authority to regulate interstate commerce. What was one of the big reasons they did this? Because each state had its own tariffs between states under the Articles of Confederation—basically the same thing as these obstructionist regulations.

By asserting its rightful authority to break down barriers to insurance purchasing across state lines via repealing McCarran-Ferguson, Congress and the President will strike a considerable blow to insurance market concentration, truly boosting the “choice and competition” that Obama likes to talk up. If done alongside dismantling the third-party system, we will see costs begin to lower for everyone—all without a massive, trillion dollar government overhaul.