This week we’ll be looking at the same issue the president is: financial services regulation. But we’ll be reaching some different conclusions than he has.

Would you believe that the very regulations the president will pitch this week in New York will actually weaken the financial services industry and make bailouts more likely?

Check the blog this week to find out why.

Today we focus on the marketing of NASCAR. I’ve always been interested in marketing–how businesses market themselves to their target audiences. And few do this any better than NASCAR:

http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/stories/2006/05/29/smallb2.html

As this article puts it:

“So what has NASCAR done to be so successful? First and foremost, it understands and manages the brand. NASCAR is more than a sport; it is a lifestyle. NASCAR officials have worked hard to build both functional and emotional equities into their brand. The functional attributes include nonstop thrilling and exciting entertainment, action and teamwork. Emotional attributes include being genuine, open to all, like a big family, and athletes that are role models and down-to-earth regular people. This combination creates a powerful connection to the fans and attracts sponsors.”

These are great lessons for anyone in any business. We could all do worse than to market ourselves as well as NASCAR markets itself.

NASCAR is big business; and it’s about to get even bigger. Here is blog that some business professors at Virginia Commonwealth write that focuses exclusively on the business of racing:

http://blog.vcu.edu/nascar/

According to this blog, NASCAR is looking to expand its horizons and move into the Middle East. As the writer notes:

“By expanding into the world of Middle East, there would be many benefits for NASCAR and the United States. One of the benefits would be expanding the fan base of NASCAR and promoting the sport. Addition of new sponsors to the game would benefit the sport, teams, tracks, cities, government and so on. Additionally, all of the current sponsors would benefit by getting international exposure and recognition.”

So don’t believe any of the hype you may have read about NASCAR being in decline. On the contrary, it’s full speed ahead for NASCAR as it looks to drive into new markets in new parts of the globe.

This week is NASCAR week in Texas with the big race coming up this weekend at Texas Motor Speedway. So it’s a good time to talk about what an amazing event Nascar is.

And it’s not just rednecks who are paying attention:

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/04/rick-perry-teams-up-with-nasca.html

Politicians have been intrigued by NASCAR since President Reagan appeared at a race in 1984 to salute Richard Petty. But now, Governor Rick Perry is taking it to a whole new level. By sponsoring the Bobby Labonte car, Perry’s name will be in front of the hundreds of thousands of fans at the track and the millions watching on television at home.

Pretty smart move, isn’t it? We’ll be talking about why NASCAR is such a hot commodity the rest of this week. So check in each day for our blog.

Here is another reason why I believe we can still fight back on health care: because the real law hasn’t even been written yet.

Here is something interesting that many people don’t know about the legislative process. Once a law is passed by Congress, it then has to have accompanying regulations that are written by the relevant agency. In this case, the Department of Health and Human Services will write what are called “rules” that explain exactly how the law will be implemented and enforced. And typically, the bureaucrats writing these rules have great discretion.

So I encourage anyone reading this blog who is concerned about the new health care law to contact the Department of Health and Human Services today and voice your concern. Go to www.dhs.gov and let the government know you how feel before it’s too late.

Today we are back on our topic of what can be done about the new health care law.

And we’re going to talk briefly about the action being taken by the attorneys general of several states. Essentially, they are filing a lawsuit that argues that the federal government does not have the authority to regulate whether an individual purchases a product or not. This would be the first time in history that it’s happened. It turns out, the Commerce Clause of the Constitution gives the federal government the authority to regulate “interstate commerce,” that is, business transactions between companies doing work across state lines. It says nothing about individuals.

And since individuals are not allowed to purchase health care plans outside of their state, there is no way this new law meets the Constitutional standard.

Let’s hope the court recognizes this and rules this new health care law uncontitutional.

This week our blog will focus on where we go from here on health care. And believe it or not, this battle is far from over.

There is plenty that state governments and local citizens can do to change the new health care law.

We’ll explain how this week on the blog.

Today we conclude our series on what’s in the health care bill by looking at something that many in the media have missed: health savings accounts.

HSAs were signed into law by President Bush in 2003. They allow individuals to set-aside money into an IRA that is tax free. So, rather than pay for medical expenses with insurance, the HSA allows you to grow money tax-free and then use that money to cover whatever medical expenses you may need. Typically, individuals still purchase catastrophic insurance to pay for major medical emergencies.

HSAs seems to be working. So why would we want to scale them back? Yet that’s exactly what Obamacare does. It limits the amount of money that an individual can contribute to an HSA to $2500. That’s not nearly enough money to make HSAs work for most families, which frankly, is why that dollar amount was chosen. The creators of Obamacare don’t want people paying for their own health care with savings.

Did anyone read this bill before we made it a law?

Here is something else that is bad about the new health care law: the reforms start later; the taxes start now.

That’s because the administration deliberately set the new changes to begin after the 2012 election; but to cover the costs over a ten-year period, the administration will start their new fees and taxes immediately.

http://www.heartland.org/healthpolicy-news.org/article/27359/Obamacare_All_Pain_No_Gain.html

As the article notes:

“The 10 percent tax on tanning salons starts this year. Beginning in 2011 our drug bills will rise because of a $2.5 billion tax on name-brand drugs and removal of the tax exemption for over-the-counter drugs purchased using a Flexible Spending Account. The penalty for nonmedical Health Savings Account (HSA) distributions will also double. Seniors will begin losing benefits as a result of cuts in the Medicare program. The average Medicare Advantage Plan enrollee will lose nearly $200 in benefits in 2011—rising by a dozen times that amount ($2,437) by 2019. Seniors in traditional Medicare plans will lose only $22 in 2011, but this will rise to $1,137 by 2019.”

Again I ask: did anyone think this through before we passed this law?

Young people voted in record numbers for President Obama in 2008. In 2014, they will pay for it:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hLAMW_KTqY_JVMQF-gNn3O0_uUcQD9EOIBQO0

That’s because that’s the year all Americans will be required to purchase health insurance. According to a study by the Associated Press, young people purchasing their own health insurance on the open market will likely face an increase in their premiums of “17 percent on average, or roughly $42 a month….”

Why is this? As the article notes:

“The law relies on…young adults to shoulder more of the financial load in new health insurance risk pools. So under the new system, [young Americans] could expect to pay $300 to $500 a year more.”

In other words, to help pay for older Americans’ health care, Obamacare will make young people pay more than they are paying now. Much more.

Again I ask: did anyone think through this before we made it a law?

This week we continue our series on the new health care law and some of the items that you might not know about.

Today, we focus on a constitutional aspect of the law. Remember when we talked last week about the bill requiring individuals to purchase health insurance? Did you know that this marks the first time in American history that the federal government has required an individual to purchase a product?

And there is a reason why it’s the first time: because it’s not constitutional. The Commerce Clause of the Constitution gives the federal government the right to regulate companies that transact business across state lines. But it says nothing about requiring individuals to purchase anything.

That’s why several states have already filed suit. Obamacare may well be unconstitutional.

Today we end the week of blogs about health care by talking about one of the biggest tragedies of all in this new law: abortion.

Democrats say the new health care law will not create taxpayer funded abortion. But it will. Here is how: now that everyone will be required to purchase insurance, people will be buying all kinds of plans, including some that cover abortion services. But since many people will not be buying insurance plans with federal subsidies, in effect, the taxpayers are covering their expenses should they ever need an abortion.

The “fix” that Democrats proposed for this was for President Obama to issue an executive order saying that abortions can not be paid for with taxdollars. But executive orders can be changed by any president. A law is a law and can only be changed by an act of Congress.

That’s why I think it’s likely we will see taxpayer funded abortion. And what a shame that is.

Today we end our series on taxes with a call to action.

This weekend the House of Representatives will vote on the Obama health care bill that will include new taxes. But you can do something about it. Call the Congressional switchboard and ask to speak to your representative. The number is:

(202) 224-3121

Call today and say “no thanks” to this new health care plan and these new taxes.

So let me get this straight: the president of the United States is going to try and raise taxes by using a procedural move that avoids the House of Representatives even voting on it?

Yes, you read that correctly. The president wants to pass his health care bill (which includes tax increases) using a process called “deem and pass.” It essentially “deems” that the Senate bill is good enough and just sends it onto the president for his signature. The House doesn’t even vote on it.

Are you kidding me? The Constitution specifically gives the House of Representatives the responsibility for all tax measures. So any vote to increase taxes must be voted on by the House. And yet the president wants to find a way around this because he knows he doesn’t have the votes in the House.

Whatever happened to change we can believe in?

This week USA Today ran a front page story about rising gas prices:

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/2010-03-08-gasoline-prices_N.htm

As the article notes:

“The national average price for a gallon of gasoline is up 9 cents in a month and will likely crack $3 in coming weeks, given a typical spring rally before the summer driving season, oil and gas analysts say.”

This still makes no sense to me. With the economy in a recession, people are driving less and therefore demand is less. So why are prices going up? The reason is because the gas market operates differently than other markets. A foreign oil cartel controls prices.

Isn’t it time we did something about that?

So gas prices are heading back up. That’s expected as we approach the summer and the driving months. But it’s also a good time to re-examine why gas prices are so out of whack and why we need to re-focus our efforts on renewable energy.

That’s what we’ll be talking about this week on the blog. Join us each day!

Here is what I think the president should do as he gets ready for the health care summit this week: he should drop this new plan he’s just introduced:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-02-22-health-care-revision_N.htm

Wasn’t the whole purpose of the summit to start over on health care? Then why is the president trying to resurrect bad ideas like raising fees and fining small businesses?

And what does it say about the president’s willingness to work with Republicans that he is already announcing a plan before the meeting is even held?

Today we continue our series on what Obama should do next, particularly with the budget.

Of course, a big part of the budget is taxes. Here is an interesting fact: in 2011, the Bush tax cuts from 2001 will expire. That means that marginal tax rates will increase, capital gains tax rates will increase and dividends tax rates will increase. In other words, a huge tax increase is coming.

But Obama could change that. He could call for extending the Bush tax cuts, or better yet, making the tax cuts permanent. At a time of great economic challenge, we need lower taxes now more than ever.

Today we continue our series on what Obama should do in his budget. One thing he shouldn’t do is raise taxes:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/100201/us/usreport_us_budget_backdoortaxes

Unfortunately, it looks like this budget might attempt to raise taxes using the “back door.” Here is how: the Bush tax cuts of 2001 are schedule to expire in 2011. If Obama lets them expire, taxes will go up for millions of Americans.

Are you an investor? Your taxes will go up. Are you an income taxpayer? Your taxes will go up. Are you a teacher who uses an education tax credit? Your taxes will go up. Trying to inherit your family’s land? Your taxes will go up.

President Obama can and should stop this right now by calling for the continuation of these tax cuts…otherwise we’ll all be paying more.

This week, we continue our series on what’s next for President Obama. And the timing couldn’t be better.

President Obama will soon unveil his new budget. I’ve got some ideas on what should and shouldn’t be in there. After all, politics is about money. So the budget is the place to look to see how a president wants to lead and where he wants to go.

Check back in each day this week for more on what President Obama should do next.