| Independent American Party Defending America's Principles of Independence and Liberty Participate in Committee of Correspondence Action |
- IAP Bulletin 091002 October 2, 2009
Independent American Party Stand
On Issues Of Health and Health Care
In regards to health care, debate on legislation in Congress seeks to
find the best way to govern the nation including to reform the health care
insurance industry that is available to the American people. The
Independent American Party makes the following statement on this
debate:
"This is the official stance of the Independent American Party on the issue of the
health care reform bill proposed in Congress. As a whole the Independent American
Party supports the need for quality health care as it will aid in sustaining life as
mentioned in the 14th amendment.
"We, however, do not support a health care reform that will impede on the
constitutional rights of each citizen. In the current health care reform bill, it is required
that all American citizens obtain and maintain health care. In the event you do not
have health care, you will be taxed 2.5 % on adjusted gross salary. If this were to
become law, the government has now taken by force our simple freedom of choice by
mandating health care for all citizens and imposing punishment making not having
health care a harmful act towards society.
"The most recent number that we have for this health care reform is
approximately 860 billion dollars over the next 10 years. The government mandates it
will take place no later than 2013. In addition to taking our civil liberties, they are
going to allow us to pay for this unconstitutional act via our tax dollars and pay for
illegal immigrants to have health care opportunities.
"While we agree in the need to enhance policing Medicaid, class D drugs and
the pharmaceutical industry through stronger sanctions, we believe there are other
alternatives that do not violate the Constitution. Some of our initial suggestions
towards solutions are to provide funding to private overseeing organizations that
police the health system and answer to the Congress. We should also look into
solving the root issue in the expensive tort claims that come to the courts yearly.
These solutions are both effective and cost efficient considering the state our
economy is in."
In addition to defending the right of people to have free choice in
matters of health care and health care insurance, we support the right of
people to have free access to all information on alternative and natural
means for the care of their health. Also, we support the right of the people
to refuse any intrusion into their person or property according to law in
the Bill Of Rights.
Concerning our freedoms for health care and health care
information, we call for support of the following legislation in Congress:
HR 3395 The Health Freedom Act.
This bill removes FDA’s power of prior restraint over all nutrient-disease relationship
claims. Under the bill, FDA may not prohibit any statement concerning a nutrient
affecting a disease (including treatment effects) from being made in the market and
may only act against a statement once made if it possesses clear and convincing
evidence that the statement is false. Presently FDA blocks an enormous quantity of
truthful information concerning the effects of nutrients and foods on disease from
reaching consumers. That barrier is removed by the Health Freedom Act, but the Act
preserves the power of the government to prosecute those who communicate
falsehood. The essential purpose of the First Amendment is to disarm the federal
government of the power to impose a prior restraint on speech. The FDA has
imposed a prior restraint for decades to the health detriment of the public. Passage
of the Health Freedom Act will restore constitutional governance by reasserting the
supremacy of the First Amendment over the Food and Drug Administration.
Health Freedom Act (Introduced in House)
HR 3395 IH
111th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 3395
To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act concerning claims about the
effects of foods and dietary supplements on health- related conditions and disease,
and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
July 29, 2009
Mr. PAUL (for himself and Mr. BURTON of Indiana) introduced the following bill; which
was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce
A BILL
To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act concerning claims about the
effects of foods and dietary supplements on health- related conditions and disease,
and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of
America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Health Freedom Act'.
SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON SUPPRESSION BY FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF
CLAIMS IN FOOD AND DIETARY SUPPLEMENTS.
***************************
For full text and information on H.R. 3395 go to links provided by
Congress.org. The bottom line on this legislation means this, special
interest groups will not be able to use the arm of the Federal Government
to suppress health claims made by people in their use of food and dietary
supplements. The health benefit information derived from the use of such
products will be information that cannot be denied to the general public.
HR 3394 The Freedom of Health Speech Act.
This bill prevents the Federal Trade Commission from taking action against any
advertiser that communicates a health benefit for a product unless the FTC first
establishes based on clear and convincing evidence that the statement made is false
and that its communication causes harm to the public. Presently, the FTC reverses
the Fifth Amendment burden of proof on the government when it charges advertisers
with deceptive advertising and then demands that they prove their speech true based
on contemporaneously held documentation or be deemed to have advertised
deceptively. The Fifth Amendment requires that FTC bear the burden of proving
advertising deceptive. It may not constitutionally shift the burden to the advertiser to
prove its statements not deceptive. The First Amendment requires that FTC not act
against speech unless the speech is provably false. It may not constitutionally accuse
a party of false advertising yet lack proof that the advertising is false and condemn
advertising based on an absence of documentation concerning the truth of the
statement rather than the presence of evidence establishing the falsity of the
statement.
- HR 3396 The Congressional Responsibility and Accountability Act.
This bill prohibits regulations promulgated from regulatory agencies from going into
effect unless passed into law by Congress in the way in which the Constitution
designates. Under Article I of the Constitution, the Congress of the United States, our
elected representatives, are the ones given the exclusive power to make laws. In
violation of the non-delegation doctrine, about 90% of all law created by the federal
government is the product of unelected heads of bureaucratic agencies, not our
elected representatives. From 1934 to the present, the Congress of the United States
has delegated executive, legislative, and judicial governing power to these agencies.
The founding fathers warned that this combination would give birth to tyranny, self-
dealing, and corruption and would be the death of liberty. Because the unelected
bureaucracy makes the laws, the nation has been transformed from a republic into a
bureaucratic oligarchy. Congressman Ron Paul’s Congressional Responsibility and
Accountability Act restores constitutional government by returning to Congress the
responsibility to make laws, thereby making them once again accountable for the
laws to those who elect them.
Another extremely important piece of legislation concerning the
general welfare and health of Americans, that needs support from every
American, is the following H.R.3069.
****************************
Comprehensive Comparative Study of Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Populations
Act of 2009 (Introduced in House)
HR 3069 IH
111th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 3069
To direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct or support a
comprehensive study comparing total health outcomes, including risk of autism, in
vaccinated populations in the United States with such outcomes in unvaccinated
populations in the United States, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
June 26, 2009
Mrs. MALONEY (for herself, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. GORDON of Tennessee,
Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. LANGEVIN, Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida, Mrs.
NAPOLITANO, and Mr. KENNEDY) introduced the following bill; which was referred
to the Committee on Energy and Commerce
A BILL
To direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct or support a
comprehensive study comparing total health outcomes, including risk of autism, in
vaccinated populations in the United States with such outcomes in unvaccinated
populations in the United States, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of
America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Comprehensive Comparative Study of Vaccinated and
Unvaccinated Populations Act of 2009'.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds as follows:
(1) Securing the health of the Nation's children is our most important concern as
parents and stewards of the Nation's future.
(2) The Nation's vaccine program has greatly reduced human suffering from
infectious disease by preventing and reducing the outbreak of vaccine-preventable
diseases.
(3) Total health outcomes are the best measure of the success of any public health
effort, including security from both chronic and infectious disease.
(4) Childhood immunizations are an important tool in the pursuit of childhood health.
(5) The number of immunizations administered to infants, pregnant women, children,
teenagers, and adults has grown dramatically over recent years.
(6) The incidence of chronic, unexplained diseases such as autism, learning
disabilities, and other neurological disorders appears to have increased dramatically
in recent years.
(7) Individual vaccines are tested for safety, but little safety testing has been
conducted for interaction effects of multiple vaccines.
(8) The strategy of aggressive, early childhood immunization against a large number
of infectious diseases has never been tested in its entirety against alternative
strategies, either for safety or for total health outcomes.
(9) Childhood immunizations are the only health interventions that are required by
States of all citizens in order to participate in civic society.
(10) Public confidence in the management of public health can only be maintained if
these State government-mandated, mass vaccination programs--
(A) are tested rigorously and in their entirety against all reasonable safety concerns;
and
(B) are verified in their entirety to produce superior health outcomes.
(11) There are numerous United States populations in which a practice of no
vaccination is followed and which therefore provide a natural comparison group for
comparing total health outcomes.
(12) No comparative study of such health outcomes has ever been conducted.
(13) Given rising concern over the high rates of childhood neurodevelopmental
disorders such as autism, the need for such studies is becoming urgent.
SEC. 3. STUDY ON HEALTH OUTCOMES IN VACCINATED AND
UNVACCINATED AMERICAN POPULATIONS.
(a) In General- The Secretary of Health and Human Services (in this Act referred to as
the `Secretary'), acting through the Director of the National Institutes of Health, shall
conduct or support a comprehensive study--
(1) to compare total health outcomes, including risk of autism, in vaccinated
populations in the United States with such outcomes in unvaccinated populations in
the United States; and
(2) to determine whether vaccines or vaccine components play a role in the
development of autism spectrum or other neurological conditions.
(b) Qualifications- With respect to each investigator carrying out the study under this
section, the Secretary shall ensure that the investigator--
(1) is objective;
(2) is qualified to carry out such study, as evidenced by training experiences and
demonstrated skill;
(3) is not currently employed by any Federal, State, or local public health agency;
(4) is not currently a member of a board, committee, or other entity responsible for
formulating immunization policy on behalf of any Federal, State, or local public health
agency or any component thereof;
(5) has no history of a strong position on the thimerosal controversy; and
(6) is not currently an employee of, or otherwise directly or indirectly receiving funds
from, a pharmaceutical company.
(c) Target Populations- The Secretary shall seek to include in the study under this
section populations in the United States that have traditionally remained unvaccinated
for religious or other reasons, such as Old Order Amish, members of clinical
practices (such as the Homefirst practice in Chicago) who choose alternative
medical practices, and practitioners of anthroposophic lifestyles.
(d) Timing- Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Secretary shall issue a request for proposals to conduct the study required by this
section. Not later than 120 days after receipt of any such proposal, the Secretary
shall approve or disapprove the proposal. If the Secretary disapproves the proposal,
the Secretary shall provide the applicant involved with a written explanation of the
reasons for the disapproval.
********************************
In God We Trust
In Honor Of Those
Defending Our
Rights, Click On
The Flag
Defending Our
Rights, Click On
The Flag
In Honor Of Those
Defending Our Rights,
Click On The Flag
Defending Our Rights,
Click On The Flag