Sen. Mike Lee swings too hard for Romney

An old lawyer saying counsels counselors to bang on the law if they don’t have good facts, to bang on the facts if they don’t have good law and to bang on the table if they have neither good law nor good facts.

Senator Mike Lee is an old lawyer, trying to defend Gov. Mitt Romney’s pick of Gov. Mike Leavitt to head his White House transition team should he be elected president in November. And Senator Lee is definitely banging on the table.

Asked last week to explain how a man who spent the last couple of years making a fortune encouraging states to implement ObamaCare on the flimsy (and incorrect) reasoning that “local control” is an option under the law is now going to help lead the way on dismantling it, Sen. Lee turned to the famous straw man argument.

Lee dismissed worries about the fact that Leavitt was profiting from the implementation of President Obama’s health care law.

“If the rule were, you cannot be considered a conservative, or even palatable to any conservatives under any circumstances if you have operated in or especially made a profit in any area that isn’t 100 percent governed by free market, no one would qualify,” Lee said. “The truth is there are so many things, especially in the post-Obamacare world, where the market isn’t really free.”

Please. We aren’t talking about judging Gov. Leavitt a conservative or even talking at all about government-supported profit, much less demanding a complete absence of it. We are talking about measuring Leavitt’s credibility in the role of bolstering the already shaky credibility of a Republican nominee on the top issue that gives would-be supporters pause.

Banging on the table at a moment like this serves only to hold Romney back in a race he should be walking away with.

Red State has already asked nicely once.

Commonwealth of Kentucky v. Christians begins

The Kentucky Department of Insurance has acknowledged receipt of complaints against two Christian health sharing organizations for illegally selling health insurance to citizens of the Commonwealth.

The organizations are Samaritan Ministries and Christian Healthcare Ministries. The Department demanded, on Monday June 11, a response from them within two weeks.

Such religious-based health sharing organizations are exempt from ObamaCare mandates, sparing their members at least some of the negative effects of the federal law euphemistically dubbed by Congress the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act."

At issue is Kentucky law, which defines insurance as "a contract whereby one undertakes to pay or indemnify another as to loss from certain specified contingencies or perils called 'risks.'" This means essentially that most human interactions could constitute "insurance" and invite regulation under the state's insurance code.

An example I have been using is that if I sell you an umbrella on a cloudy day, I could be considered your insurance company under state law. It sounds ridiculous, but it applies to a law that is so overly broad as to be hazardous to our liberties.

A "religious publications exemption" found in state law has been cited as a way for these religious health sharing organizations to escape state regulation. But the Kentucky Supreme Court ruled in 2010 (Commonwealth v. Reinhold) that "the (sharing organization) must be set up so that one subscriber sends the money for assistance to the other subscriber without the money passing through an intermediary."


Both organizations fail on this point, though Samaritan in most cases at least usually operates merely as an information source linking financial needs with payors and suggesting payments.

So, in the eyes of the law, both sharing organizations are insurance companies and should -- again, under the law -- be regulated. Given Kentucky's overzealous regulatory regime, that means shutting them down.

The point of this exercise is that insurance regulation has proven in dramatic fashion to be at least counter-productive by providing an illusion of consumer protection as well as an impossible to miss negative impact on pricing of services. Before we fall for giving near-total control of our health care system to federal and state governments, we should take a closer look at how such control is and has been handled in Frankfort.

If we do that, we ought to agree to dismantle insurance regulation altogether.

Let's rock the health care debate

Kentucky has a history of being notoriously bad on health insurance issues. We now have an interesting opportunity to push back in a big way, but need some national help to do it.

In 1994, after the failure of HillaryCare, Kentucky destroyed its individual health insurance market by requiring insurers to accept all applications regardless of health status. Dozens of health insurance companies immediately left the state, leaving only one. The legislature subsequently restored some sanity to the marketplace, but some big problems remain.

Enter ObamaCare.

A small corner of the ObamaCare debate has escaped the national spotlight. That corner is occupied by religious-based health sharing organizations, which are exempt from the so-called Affordable Care Act.

Three such organizations, Christian Care Medi-Share, Samaritan Ministries and Christian Healthcare Ministries are at the center of a very quiet debate running right to the heart of what is wrong with the idea of government regulating health care.

In 2002, Kentucky filed a lawsuit against Christian Care Medi-Share, alleging that the company fit the state’s definition of an insurance company and needed to be regulated as such. This effectively destroys the company’s ability to operate in the state because their ability to avoid the state’s crazy quilt of mandates and their much lower premiums are what could make them a better choice for some consumers.

To their credit, Medi-Share refused to just go away quietly. They won exemptions in court while the state kept appealing. In 2010, the Kentucky Supreme Court ruled against Medi-Share and the state moved then to remove them from Kentucky.

To their credit, again, Medi-Share refused to leave. And this is where it gets really interesting.

Perhaps realizing they don’t want to get caught on the wrong side of the Affordable Care Act — actually worse than ObamaCare! — just as the fire gets really hot, Kentucky has stopped fighting to remove Medi-Share. They still tell callers to the Department of Insurance consumer information line that Medi-Share is operating illegally and shouldn’t be trusted to serve citizens’ health care financing needs, but there has been no official action against the company for almost a year.

And the sad truth is that, given the way the state law is written, Kentucky is on solid ground in persecuting the Christians who seek refuge from federal overreach through Medi-Share.

And that’s where the other Christian health sharing companies enter the story. A Kentucky Department of Insurance spokeswoman told me almost three weeks ago that further action against Medi-Share was imminent and that while Samaritan and Christian Healthcare had previously been investigated and found to be properly operating outside the bounds of state insurance regulation, they would be investigated again.

There has been no apparent official action since then. And the truth is Samaritan and Christian Healthcare also operate in conflict with Kentucky law.

Arbitrary application of the law is prohibited by Kentucky’s Constitution. State regulators have created a chilling effect on consumers and Christian health sharing organizations with their actions. The proper action is to enforce the law universally or to repeal it and allow this opportunity for health freedom to flourish.

Kentucky needs to repeal this worse-than-ObamaCare provision in state law by redefining “insurance” in KRS Chapter 304 to exclude health sharing organizations and we need to do it this summer in special session to prevent further harm to Kentucky Christians.

And if, in doing so, we expand those freedoms beyond just Christians, then so much the better. But to do any of this, we need to draw national attention to this fight. Please spread the word as widely as you can.

Score one for NFIB, sort of

A newly released state government survey on ObamaCare implementation in Kentucky shows widespread confusion and apathy even among Governor Beshear's hand-picked "stakeholders" about how the state should proceed with its key decision in the process, whether or not to set up a state-run health insurance exchange.

The results are so staggeringly bad they should give anyone looking at this issue without much prior understanding serious reservations about allowing Frankfort politicians to proceed with what will surely be a disaster.

In the report, titled Stakeholder Perspectives on Health Benefit Exchanges, surveys were sent out to 45 groups and individuals the Governor wanted to weigh in on ObamaCare. Of the 45, only 24 responded to any of the questions on the survey. Question number one asked if Kentucky should set up an exchange. Only 18 stakeholders answered that. Fifteen said yes. Most of those stated flatly that they wanted Kentucky to enable ObamaCare in the state by setting up an exchange without giving any reason for their answer. Most disappointing, the Kentucky Association of Manufacturers, which should know better, did elaborate. The KAM stated "Kentucky should operate its own Exchange to keep the governance close to home."

This position represents a fundamental misunderstanding about the structure of ObamaCare. State-run exchanges will only remain state-run at all as long as their actions please the federal government. Also, the Kentucky Farm Bureau apparently answered some of the survey questions, but took a pass on this one. Both KAM and KFB should know better than this.

The National Federation of Independent Business answered the question in unique fashion:

"Kentucky should hang back and watch the effects of Exchange development in other states. Draw contingencies for a variety of structures, but wait until the last possible moment to choose a path."

I don't know what is so hard about issuing a definitive "no" to a concept as bad as this, but at least the NFIB came close.
 

Why Kentucky Republicans folded on ObamaCare

A Beshear Administration report released over the weekend contains clear support for setting up an ObamaCare state-run health insurance exchange in Kentucky from such groups as Kentucky Chamber of Commerce and the state's Medical Association, Hospital Association, Optometrists Association, Manufacturers Association and Association of Chiropractors.

These organizations and the politicians they own are far more concerned with power and the massive flow of tax dollars into their preferred pockets than they are with citizens' rights, finances or ability to gain access to medical care.

Refusing to set up a state-run exchange is critical to avoiding the ravages of ObamaCare, even if the individual mandate is found unconstitutional later this month by the U.S. Supreme Court. Other states whose officials claim opposition to ObamaCare while quietly implementing it are starting to get noticed. Let's hope more people lend their voices to shutting down all implementation activities in Kentucky.

A special session of the legislature this summer to get this right is not too much to ask.

Beshear administration officials have been sitting on this report for nearly a year.

Forcing Steve Beshear to fish or cut bait

This afternoon complaints were filed with the Kentucky Insurance Department against two Christian health cost sharing organizations for operating in the state as illegal health insurance companies.

I filed the complaints and wanted to explain to you why.

Governor Steve Beshear is arbitrarily opposing a single Christian health cost sharing organization, Christian Care Medi-Share, for working to protect innocent Kentucky Christians from the ill effects of insurance regulation at the federal and state levels. To be fair, the state lawsuit against Medi-Share was initiated by the Paul Patton Administration in 2002 and the 2010 Kentucky Supreme Court ruling is on very solid ground in its ruling that Medi-Share was functioning in the state in violation of state law.

But that's where the case gets complicated. Medi-Share has not only asserted that the company should not be regulated as insurance, they have continued up to now to provide services and even advertise for new members on Christian radio.

The Beshear Administration had knowledge of Medi-Share's activities then and filed a July 27, 2011 motion for a contempt of court ruling with the Franklin Circuit Court. Since then the state has moved carefully so as not to draw attention to the case, however employees at the Kentucky Department of Insurance continue to tell citizens asking about the program that Medi-Share is not operating legally, implying that it should be avoided.

Meanwhile, other companies operating similarly to Medi-Share have not escaped the Governor's notice but have escaped any legal action.

Two weeks ago, a Department of Insurance spokeswoman told me two other companies -- Samaritan Ministries and Christian Healthcare Ministries -- had been examined and found to not be violating state law as Medi-Share has been, but that further review would be taken to see if they were still operating in accordance with state law. In the two weeks following that conversation, no such review appears to have taken place.

Based on the wording of the law and the opinion of the Supreme Court supporting the law and the state's action, both Samaritan and Christian Healthcare should not be allowed to operate in the state either. More on that here.

By operating quietly and not following up but telling interested callers to avoid Medi-Share, the Beshear is creating a chilling effect on the operations of Christian Care Medi-Share. The motive appears to be to damage the ability of some Kentucky Christians to escape the mandates of insurance regulation at the state and federal levels without attracting much attention to the effort.

And that is why I filed the complaints. Whether ObamaCare survives this month's U.S. Supreme Court ruling or not, consumers' needs to protect themselves against overzealous government regulation of healthcare will likely only grow. Christian health sharing programs such as these present a form of that protection. Forcing them to operate halfway in and out of the shadows serves only to exacerbate the chaos caused by government dictates in our health care decisions.

The Beshear administration and all of state government need to be dragged out in public and forced to explain why they should be able to harass innocent Christians and the service providers trying to help them survive in today's hyper-regulatory environment. When they are, their arbitrary enforcement of state law in this case will surely be found unconstitutional and the arbitrary nature of the entire insurance regulation scheme in Kentucky may be as well.

Call Steve Beshear on this, please

Governor Steve Beshear's inaction in his unconstitutional abuse of power episode against Kentucky Christians has reached epic proportions, creating a hostile situation for citizens seeking to escape the mandates of ObamaCare.

Beshear has left consumers in the lurch for nearly a year by refusing to enforce or renounce the court ruling in Commonwealth of Kentucky v. Reinhold. Of course the legislature has been no help either, but it's Beshear's court case.

The Commonwealth of Kentucky won its case against Christian Care Medi-Share, a religious based health cost sharing program, back in August 2010. The ruling, that the program should be regulated as an insurance company, effectively ran Medi-Share out of the state since coming into compliance with existing state insurance laws and regulations would eliminate any purpose for the program.

Medi-Share has continued to operate in Kentucky in violation of the law as have other similar cost sharing programs. Something has to give and it is the Governor's responsibility to see that it does. Beshear doesn't want to get caught attacking Christians before an election and taking away what little health freedom they have left.

But it is clear he wants to attack Christians and take away what little health freedom they have left. Otherwise, he wouldn't leave us all hanging so long waiting for a resolution on this issue. Beshear needs to come clean and either act to allow Christians to work around the already arbitrary and capricious state insurance regulations or admit that he wants the ability to control your health care decisions and doesn't want to hear you complaining about it.

Please call Governor Beshear at 502-564-2611 and tell him to either move to shut Christian Care Medi-Share down or to get out of their way and let them serve the health care needs of Kentucky Christians.

Certificate of Need: Kentucky's "Big Gulp" ban

Kentucky law requires health care providers to ask permission of Kentucky politicians in order to expand or offer new medical services. Big Medical, which funds powerful Frankfort politicians' campaigns, likes it that way so we get bipartisan nonsensical defenses of this approach, called Certificate of Need, every time someone asks.

We need to keep asking because Big Medical is running away with the game, regardless of what the Supreme Court rules later this month on the mother of all Big Medical bills, ObamaCare.

Every time you see hospitals and medical practices consolidate, you are seeing the end result of this over-regulation. Oh, and the higher prices less competition provides as well.

Essentially under Kentucky law, we are doing something much like Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York is doing to his citizens who like soft drinks. Only with a much higher price tag.

New Yorkers who want a 64 ounce Double Big Gulp of Mountain Dew now go to 7-11 and walk out with one cup. Under Bloomberg's intervention, the same gulper will need to buy four 16 ounce Mountain Dews for the same sugar and caffeine buzz, certainly at a higher price.

Under certificate of need, just as advancing technology could provide us innovations in healthcare in one big "cup," we are being forced out the door juggling four of them to make some politician happy.

If you live in Kentucky and hate the idea of Mayor Bloomberg's nanny state nonsense, please understand that we already have that and worse in Kentucky healthcare because of our certificate of need laws.

It's ironic but telling that Kentucky has been ushering in ObamaCare through its Department of Certificate of Need.

Maybe that has something to do with why Kentucky Republicans have been so squishy on ObamaCare.

Steve Beshear violating KY Constitution

Governor Steve Beshear's Department of Insurance is arbitrarily applying the state's insurance laws to persecute hundreds of Kentucky Christians attempting to escape the ravages of ObamaCare. 

He should have to leave us all alone or take on all of us together, at one time.

At issue is Commonwealth of Kentucky v. Reinhold, a case in which the Kentucky Supreme Court in 2010 ruled that Christian Care Ministry's Medi-Share program is an illegal insurance company that should not be allowed to operate in the state.

Despite the ruling, Medi-Share has continued to operate in Kentucky without interruption. The Kentucky Department of Insurance is aware of this fact, but has done nothing about it.

This inaction represents arbitrary application of Chapter 304 of the Kentucky Revised Statutes. Arbitrary power is denied the state government by Section 2 of the Kentucky Bill of Rights.

This arbitrary action undoubtedly creates a chilling effect for Kentucky Christians seeking to exercise what little health care freedom remains under the ObamaCare law. The "Affordable Care Act" specifically exempts religious-based health care sharing ministries from its mandates.

Kentuckians calling the Department of Insurance seeking guidance on Christian Care Medi-Share are informed that the organization is under a court order not to operate in the state. Given that Christian Care Medi-Share is the biggest advertiser among the sharing organizations in Kentucky, this information must have a negative impact on those seeking this route to protect themselves from federal dictates.

Kentuckians eager to see the U.S. Supreme Court overturn ObamaCare this month need to be aware that their state government is already moving past ObamaCare and not in a way that protects their rights.

As it turns out, there are other sharing organizations and their relationship to the state is noteworthy as well.  A Department of Insurance spokeswoman indicated two other such organizations were on the radar screen for further examination: Samaritan Ministries and Christian Healthcare Ministries.

Both of these organizations would clearly receive the same ruling from the Kentucky Supreme Court that Medi-Share did in Commonwealth v. Reinhold because they "transfer risk" and because they receive funds from members and pay them out for the benefit of other members.

We can look at this one of two ways. Either we should be grateful to Governor Beshear and his Department of Insurance for (sort of) protecting us from non-profit organizations with long track records of serving the health care cost needs of their members more efficiently than government-approved health "insurance" companies do or we should immediately move to repeal any state laws preventing us from taking advantage of one of the very few available exemptions from ObamaCare before it is too late.

I'm for the latter approach. How about you?

A different Supreme Court health care case

Lexington attorney Kent Masterson Brown has just now exhausted all other appeals in a lawsuit against the federal government to allow Medicare recipients to opt out of government health insurance, so he is taking his case to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Most people surely don't realize that the federal government has started forcing people to accept Medicare. Don't bother looking for it in federal law; it isn't there.

More about this very soon. Click here for some background on the story.

The case is Brian Hall et al., v. Kathleen Sebelius Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, and Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration.

Will Kentucky hire Michael Leavitt?

New Mexico is one of the states with Republican leadership who have drunk the pro-ObamaCare KoolAid claim that states have to go ahead and set up an ObamaCare health insurance exchange or the federal government will come in and do it for them.

News flash: the federal government will control the exchanges even in the states that set them up. The only real flexibility will belong to the states that refuse to play along.

Mitt Romney's chief of staff, Michael Leavitt is a huge ObamaCare profiteer who is convincing Republican state officials even in state's suing to overturn ObamaCare to go ahead and set up ObamaCare.

I can't imagine why anyone with the ability to read the bill and the regulations that go with it would believe that the federal government will allow them to run an exchange in conflict with federal desires. It is a dangerous and false assumption and the Republicans who go along with this are hitting for the wrong team. Don't believe me: read this.

New Mexico just paid Michael Leavitt one million dollars to set up their ObamaCare exchange. Kentucky leaders Steve Beshear, Greg Stumbo and David Williams as well as heads of the Department of Insurance, Cabinet for Health and Family Services and Deparment of Certificate of Need should immediately divulge any communications they have had with Michael Leavitt or any working with his firm Leavitt Partners since the Affordable Care Act became law.

Kentucky has no business playing this very expensive game. It will bankrupt us faster and we are already on the fast track. We must reject this nonsense vigorously, return what federal money we have already received and take immediate action to tie Governor Beshear's hands against the possibility of enacting ObamaCare via an executive order.

The salient point not to be missed is Beshear has been talking for years about moving us to the left on healthcare. After the Supreme Court ruling will be very chaotic regardless of the ruling and we are not ready for that. Too many of our official Republicans are still playing CYA games or worse. It's a luxury we can't afford.

Obama got your toaster, wants your bread

You may recall last year Illinois Senator Dick Durbin making banking reforms worse by dictating debit card fees banks can charge retailers.

While perhaps not noticing the subsequent price-shifting by banks and the increases by retailers to make up for the ObamaCard nonsense from 2011, you need to be warned that the 2012 version promises to be decidedly more prominent.

Barack Obama wants your credit cards. Oh, it will be couched in the now-predictable populist language of Occupy Wall Street vulgarians, but make no mistake that fixing bank fees on credit cards isn't about sticking it to The Man or helping you with more affordable bank services.

Any shortage in fees banks experience due to congressional price fixing deals will only be extracted from consumers' wallets by other means, just like last time. And the times before that.

So later this summer when you hear Obama stooge Dick Durbin talking about trimming bankers' sails, please understand that it is you who will be up the proverbial creek without a paddle.

Please encourage your representatives to tell Durbin/Obama to stick to throwing little old ladies off cliffs to make the numbers "work" on his healthcare nonsense and to stop diversifying his efforts by meddling with our credit cards.

Is Mitch McConnell a "libatarian" too?

Plans for a 4th district GOP "Unity rally" in Boone County on June 4 have been stymied because former candidate Alecia Webb Edgington is refusing to commit to attending and standing behind Republican nominee Thomas Massie.

All the other candidates, Congressman Geoff Davis, former Senator Jim Bunning, Senator Rand Paul and Senator Mitch McConnell are all on board, but Webb-Edgington has the event on ice, which may have something to do with her animosity for conservatives with a certain libertarian bent.

Webb-Edgington campaigned vigorously against "libatarians" (her pronunciation) throughout the campaign.

Kentucky health freedom through the back door

It was reported here a week ago that Kentucky's Department on Insurance was attempting a crackdown on Christians in Kentucky seeking a religious exemption to ObamaCare.

Something appears to have gone wrong with those grand plans. Special Assistant Attorney General Stephen Taylor won't comment on official attempts to abuse Christians in Kentucky, though he is clearly operating within state law when he does so.

If state bureaucrats pulling the strings on Kentucky's insurance industry can't justify the amount of oversight they have already carved out for themselves now, how in the world are they going to handle challenges to the monumental overreach of ObamaCare?

Shut down Kentucky Dept of Insurance

A 2010 Kentucky Supreme Court ruling could be used to end the error of government regulation of private health care transactions and usher in freedoms many have forgotten ever existed.

Commonwealth of Kentucky v. Reinhold states that Kentucky can regulate anything that it finds to be "insurance." The Court further rules that agreements to shift risk constitute insurance. Taken literally, this could be applied to any interpersonal interaction. We shift risks between family members, neighbors, even strangers every day. Is a Boy Scout helping a little old lady across the street now her insurance company? Under the letter of the law, yes he is.

I hope this sounds as absurd to you as it does to me. The Commonwealth is using KRS 304.1-030, enacted in 1970, to arbitrarily limit healthcare options available to Kentuckians even under ObamaCare. Rather than suffer continued confusion under such unreasonable and capricious laws, we should instead repeal all statutes seeking to regulate insurance. Market competition is a much more efficient regulator than government decree anyway, and civil courts are available for dispute resolution at much less cost than big government.

It's completely understandable if you have to let this idea roll around in your head a while before taking action on it. We just need a few people willing to really fight for healthcare freedom in order to swing it back in our direction. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call me at 859-537-5372.

It's your baby: free market works in Kentucky

In Kentucky, only one individual health insurer covers maternity care. A 22 year old woman seeking health insurance with maternity coverage must pay premiums through a 12 month waiting period. The cost of this rider on an Anthem $2500 deductible plan with 0% coinsurance is $51.37 a month.

That's $1078.77 in premium for 12 months waiting period plus nine months gestation. Add on the $2500 deductible and you are over the market price Lexington OB/GYNs charge to deliver your baby.

It's clearly cheaper to skip maternity coverage and negotiate a cash price with your doctor. 

Incidentally, I called Dr. Blake Bradley in Lexington today. He delivered my fifteen year old son for a $2000 fee we negotiated at the beginning of my wife's pregnancy. His current price is slightly more than $2100.

Under ObamaCare, this free market success story will be a thing of the past. And if Governor Beshear intends to leave the free market intact in the event of a Supreme Court ruling against ObamaCare, he needs to make that clear right away. Otherwise, it certainly looks like he wants to push us to the left on healthcare regardless of what the Supremes say.

Kentucky healthcare reign of terror to expand

Governor Steve Beshear's insurance officials in Frankfort are preparing to expand discrimination against Christian health cost sharing programs that are actually exempt from ObamaCare.

The Kentucky Department of Insurance, already pursuing a contempt of court ruling against Christian Care Medi-Share, will widen its regulatory scope tomorrow to include sharing organizations Samaritan Ministries and Christian Healthcare Ministries.

A 2010 Kentucky Supreme Court split decision (Commonwealth of Kentucky v. Reinhold) against Christian Care Medi-Share will be used to shut down Samaritan and Christian Healthcare.

Kentuckians participating in these sharing programs or any others should contact their representatives and demand that state government leave this small corner of freedom in the health care marketplace alone. And since this applies directly to only a small number of Kentuckians, anyone who believes in freedom and opposes government tyranny in all forms should join them.

Next up in Kentucky: Craig Astor

Congressman Brett Guthrie has supported raising the debt ceiling, oppressive government and bad Republican candidates in primaries against tea partiers.

Just got this notice on my Facebook page:

Anyone know who Craig Astor is? It's just about time to find out.

Tea party should stop government broadband

The full U.S. Senate will be taking up the 2012 Farm Bill soon. When they do, Senator Rand Paul would do well to push for defunding the Rural Utilities Service Broadband Loan Program to get government out of the way and lower the cost of internet for consumers.

Kentucky has more municipal broadband projects than any other state on a per capita basis. In fact, only Washington state's twelve projects exceeds Kentucky's eight, but on a larger population.

A 2010 Reason Foundation report found that Kentucky had the tenth most competitive broadband market in the nation. Government involvement has been promoted as necessary to provide services in rural areas, but that line has been thoroughly debunked.

A group of government watchdog groups this week urged trimming back the federal loan program, but  I think we all expect Senator Paul to not stop at half-measures, nor can our state afford them.

Is David Williams done in 2014?

A quiet election in terms of statewide notice, yesterday's 15th Senate district race could have larger implications including the ouster of Senate President David Williams not just from leadership, but from office altogether in the middle of Gov. Steve Beshear's second term.

The race featured Chris Girdler, a Hal Rogers-backed establishment candidate who spent around $200,000 to win the primary. His three tea party opponents, Mark Polston, Todd Hoskins and AC Donahue combined to spend only a small fraction of that total.

Hoskins, the only Casey Countian in the race, dropped out late and endorsed Polston. He stayed on the ballot, though, and pulled 2% of the vote though he clearly was able to transfer much of his support to Polston.

Donahue refused to fall in behind Polston and held tough to draw 7.3% of the vote. Given Polston's 9.63% loss to Girdler, it's hard not to conclude that a united insurgent effort all along may well have been successful.

Conservatives ought to resist the temptation, though, to praise Hoskins and criticize Donahue. Both were outstanding candidates and both should be encouraged to stay heavily involved. The hollowness of moral victories aside, the quality of these candidates speaks well for the movement in a more rural part of the state. It's almost all good news and portends growth in the future.

Girdler, 32, will be very interesting to watch in the Senate. Protecting his right flank will be important as tea party strength continues to grow but he also has to be wary of a challenge from the left. Senate President David Williams tried to take Pulaski and Russell counties in redistricting and started showing signs of moving to Somerset. He clearly has Girdler in his sights.

Girdler supporters executed a fairly successful whisper campaign claiming that David Williams supported Polston in this race so that he could take Pulaski and Russell in 2013 redistricting and run against Polston in 2014.

If Girdler moves to embrace and be embraced by the tea party quickly, the pieces may fall into place for squeezing Williams out of the Senate in 2014.