In this case, I was interested in the fact that Kenneth Starr refered to the Olympic Torch Relay as a "school sanctioned event." In fact, the Rally was sponsored by Coca-Cola and other private groups and drew a crowd of citizens. The high school did release their students for the event, and there were administrators and teachers among the students, but the student Frederick had not been in attendance at school that morning.
I feel that the case rests on whether this was an actual field trip in which students are expected to conform to a code of conduct, also whether the conduct itself was disruptive to the lessons, and whether or not the banner itself was "political" speech. Under the Tinker case, political speech is protected unless it's disruptive and that is the legal rule that the Supreme Court was asked to uphold.
I didn't think that the banner was political. I saw it as humerous, perhaps poking fun at the student clubs, or having a group of the high school student trying to get attention for themselves.
While the augument could be made that the students had to conform to the normal code of conduct, the Supreme Court was asked to make it's ruling based on the content of the banner. It was argued that the banner glorified drug use, in conflict with the district policies of education to prevent drug abuse. So, it wasn't that the banner itself was considered disruptive, it was the thoughts conveyed on the banner that the high school principal was disturbed by. The message "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" as Frederik told CNN, was "just a joke."
The student says that he was being deliberately provacative to test his free speech rights. In an telephone conference with reporters on March 2, 2007, just prior to the Supreme Court ruling, Joseph Frederick said “I conducted my free speech experiment in order to assert my rights at a time when I felt that free speech was being eroded in America. “The high school I attended advocated that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights did not apply to students. I was skeptical of my own free speech rights and I wanted to know more precisely the boundaries of my freedom. I guess we'll get to find that out soon.”
I did not see this public rally as a controlled field trip. Therefore, as a public event, this student was free to exercise his normal guarenteed rights of speech, political or otherwise. For instance, if he and his friends had worn a t-shirts that said "Bong Hits for Jesus," they would not have been suspended for ten days, or told to remove their clothes. In an earlier case, the Supreme Court has already given guidelines in which "Students, for example, cannot be punished merely for expressing their personal views on the school premises whether in the cafeteria, or on the playing field, or on the campus during the authorized hours unless the school shows that the speech would substantially interfere with the work of the school." Hazelwood, 484 U.S. at 266 (quoting Tinker, 393 U.S. at 512-13 .)
The School Board claimed that the banner was a reflection on the school administrators, and that if they didn't punish the student they would be accused of condoning the message of the banner. However, the public is understanding enough to know that this banner was the work of a student, on his own volition, and had nothing to do with what is being taught in school, other than the principle of free speech.The school felt that the banner had changed the message of the event and appeared to endorse or promote drug use, which was contradictory to the mission of the school. In a classroom, if a student were to stand up and take out a banner, that would disrupt the class and would be subject to punishment. But in the case of the public display of a humourous and nonsensical banner, nothing was disrupted. The rally continued and the school day continued.
In the Amicus Brief of the Student Press Law Center, they quoted a legal precedent "There is, of course, no constitutional exception for subject-altering speech. The government may not select which issues are worth discussing or debating in publicfacilities. Carey, 447 U.S. at 463."
Inside the classroom, I think that students should be allowed the freedom to state their opinions or their questions freely, even controversial ones. Where abusive languages comes into the picture, a treacher should also have the freedom to protect the rights of the victims of verbal abuse. The problem comes in when one person's right to free speech steps on another person's right to be protected from harassment or hatespeech.
I value the freedom of speech that we enjoy in the United States. I know that in many parts of the world, our freedoms are envied. The laws that protect my ability to state my opinions in a wide variety of public forums, and in the privacy of my own home as well are extremely important and worth defending, and testing, so that future generations will enjoy the same hard won freedoms we have.
Musings and tipping points in politics and civic engagement.
Monday, November 19, 2007
Sunday, November 4, 2007
Final Fantasy Congress Post
My team ended up #12. I was a little dissapointed by my "Change Agents," expecially Ruben Hinojosa who didn't score any points on legislation. Also, the Rookie Rahm Emanuel surprised me because I thought that as a leader in the Democratic Party, he would be more aggressive. But I now think that both these players are more of a backup team members and in order to get support on bills, you need a lot of those! I learned that there are people who are the "stars" in the Congress, people who are the front persons to lead major efforts to pass legislation. I also learned that many bills get introduced by one person but never gained much support. The legislators can then tell their constituants that they are busy introducing bills, even if those bills don't go anywere at all. That was very interesting to see.
I also learned that senority is a huge factor in who sponsors legislation. The Upper Senators were, far and away, the ones who introduced the most legislation. I imagine that many of their bills might come from a more collaborative process, but that these senior leaders are asked and expected to be the front person.I think that the game is very instructive but only if the student takes the time to get out of their game page and browse the site. One thing that could draw in more understanding is if there was a news crawl at the bottom of every page, like the stock ticker on TV, that would show the bill numbers that had some new activity that week. They already do show those on the "Research Legislation" page, but if it was spruced up into a real time crawl, that might grab more attention and encourage clickthroughs to learn more about those individual bills.
I also learned that senority is a huge factor in who sponsors legislation. The Upper Senators were, far and away, the ones who introduced the most legislation. I imagine that many of their bills might come from a more collaborative process, but that these senior leaders are asked and expected to be the front person.I think that the game is very instructive but only if the student takes the time to get out of their game page and browse the site. One thing that could draw in more understanding is if there was a news crawl at the bottom of every page, like the stock ticker on TV, that would show the bill numbers that had some new activity that week. They already do show those on the "Research Legislation" page, but if it was spruced up into a real time crawl, that might grab more attention and encourage clickthroughs to learn more about those individual bills.
Sunday, October 28, 2007
2008 Presidential Candidates: a website review (Blog 5)
Rudy Giuliani Rudy has a good website and he wants us to call him Rudy. I guess because of 9/11, he's in the same name recognition league as Hillary or Cher, and so he's capitalizing on that. He's the Big Crime Fighter, and people soak that up. His top story right now is demanding the cancellation of aid to Yemen for realeasing the mastermind behind the bombing of the USS Cole in 2000. Also, his prayers to CA victim of fires and praise for the firefighters. His YouTube page is a FOX news clip "Rudy's Close Call, Saved by one mob vote" We'll go after illegals and go after them the way we went after criminals in NY. Immigration, he knows is a passionate issue for people and he's got a very sharp focus on being the crime fighter for America. Looking deeper into the site, it seems obvious that he's the favorite FOX TV candidate and that is a turnoff to me.
John McCain website focused on his WWII career and POW status. I didn't get an immediate feel for what he wants to do for the country today. I learned more about his wife than I needed to know. And her page on volunteer info was all text, no interesting graphics or photos and it sort of bothers me that his charities are mostly all her charities! But mainly, I'm not that interested. She's not running. I thought that "Cindy's Recipes" was a weird feature. It was better to call them McCain Family Recipes as they didn inside each actual receipt. But, honestly, they weren't even that special. Rosemary Chicken with Spinich Salad? What's so special about that and what does it tell us about our candidate? This website is tedious and boring.
One thing that bugged me about all 6 out of the 10 websites was to be greeted with a "sign in" screen first. In some cases, that even caused a "runtime error" on my computer, which is a hassle. It's just too aggressive, in my opinion. I know it's hard to design a website to bring about a 'call to action' but I'd prefer a better approach than to simply put that in place of a "Welcome" message.
Hillary Clinton Once I got past the "sign in screen" on Hillary's site, there were some good features. I love the simplicity of the graphics. Her photos are very friendly as well. She creates a mood of being someone you can relate to. Her primary focus is to help the middle class, health care and women's issues. These are all very important for our country, issues that need help now. he interviews with her constituants were fantastic....really set a mood of someone they respect, trust and appreciate. It was a perfect blend. It was very smart to have the video clips throughout the About Hillary section.
In contrast, the Mitt Romney site was very poorly designed. It didn't "hang together" with an overall feeling. It was more of a template, very little custom design or creativity and way more text than photos and graphics. He's to a huge Red Cross logo splashed across the top. Does he want this website to be about the Red Cross, or about Mitt Romney as President?? This speaks to his ability to build a team of people around him and whether they have the sort of talent that we need from our next adminstration. His focus is mostly about 'family values' and that to me is more of a code word rather than a real political agenda. Like the other Republicans, he seems to want the status quo of low taxes and small government.
Gettting back to Hillary's site, she obviously isn't afraid to be aggressive, which appeals to a large segment of the population. For example, on her "HillaryHub" news section features a big photo of Sen. Obama and slams him for "attacking her character." I don't know if he actually did attack her character, but once that is screamed in a headline, it barely makes a difference if it's true or not. She is obviously determined to use every single day, including her own birthday, as an opportunity to raise money and get people to commit their support. She's a fighter, that's for sure.
I really liked John Edwards website. He is sort of a hipper, younger, better looking Al Gore. By placing Global Warming as his top issue, I think he can appeal to many of the liberals who have been won over by Gore career and that maybe the Edwards campaign is trying to position him that way. The family photo was also very appealing, but frankly for me that a bit of a turn off as well. He's taking on corporations, including the drug companies, and that's gutsy. On the down side, he has young children and his wife is battling cancer and I worry about a man who has that many pressures and demands on him. I kind of like it when the kids are already older and on their own. This next period in U.S. history is going to demand a full time President. I didn't care for his blog section. There were too many comments by Joe Blow, and many of them were the same hostile, griping tone that dominates the internet discussion boards. They are a real turn off. I'd rather listen to John and form my own conclusions.
Bill Richardson has a great story to tell. I really like this man and I've followed his career. The info was all there on his website, his story and character, but I wonder if other people are going to be as drawn into it. He has a lighter touch, not to clobber you over the head, and for a lot of Americans, they seem to need clobbering! Richardson lays out his views and the issues very well, very succinctly. But he's not going to be the showman that I think is needed in this race. His strength is that he can relate to the foreign issues of the day. He has experience oversees as well as governing a state and so he really does have a lot of the skills it takes to be a good President. I hope that he will be in the government for a long time and this campaign run will at least introduce him to another big chuck of Americans. He could be a great vice president.
Barack Obama website took a long time to load. That can be hard for people who don't have a fast connection. But at least he didn't put the "sign in" screen up front! A lot of the site was videos and commercials and, frankly, I didn't want to watch commercials because they are so manipulative. Like the one that showed his position on the war in Iraq. At first, he's giving a speech, and all of a sudden we hear a dozen citizens give their opinions in a script format. He did have some attractive photos of big smiles and it's that warmth that probably will get him a lot of support.....that and his position on cutting off funding for the war in Iraq. He positions himself as an agent of change and a person of conviction and committed to public service.
Fred Thompson just seems like a TV character, not a serious political leader. His bio is extremely short and I think his lack of depth is summerized by his quote, "“Occasionally, doors have opened to me,” Senator Fred Dalton Thompson told Chris Wallace of Fox News Sunday in a recent interview, “and I had sense enough to see that they were opening, and I would walk through them.” That doesn't inspire any great hopes for his leadership.
If the election were held today, I would vote for Hillary Clinton. This would be a 'prospective', expecting that she will continue to focus on the priorities that she has worked on over her entire lifetime. I think that she has some of the best connections in the world and will appoint a progressive Cabinet and will seek to work with all members of Congress to get some important legislation accomplished. She could secure a lasting legacy for her and her husband, by making good on her goals for improving the condition of the middle class and making great strides in affordable healthcare and championing the needs of women, not just in this country, but worldwide. She and Bill got beat up very badly by the conservatives and humiliated by a bogus impeachment trial. I think she can earn the respect of the country and I'd like to give her a chance to do it.
John McCain website focused on his WWII career and POW status. I didn't get an immediate feel for what he wants to do for the country today. I learned more about his wife than I needed to know. And her page on volunteer info was all text, no interesting graphics or photos and it sort of bothers me that his charities are mostly all her charities! But mainly, I'm not that interested. She's not running. I thought that "Cindy's Recipes" was a weird feature. It was better to call them McCain Family Recipes as they didn inside each actual receipt. But, honestly, they weren't even that special. Rosemary Chicken with Spinich Salad? What's so special about that and what does it tell us about our candidate? This website is tedious and boring.
One thing that bugged me about all 6 out of the 10 websites was to be greeted with a "sign in" screen first. In some cases, that even caused a "runtime error" on my computer, which is a hassle. It's just too aggressive, in my opinion. I know it's hard to design a website to bring about a 'call to action' but I'd prefer a better approach than to simply put that in place of a "Welcome" message.
Hillary Clinton Once I got past the "sign in screen" on Hillary's site, there were some good features. I love the simplicity of the graphics. Her photos are very friendly as well. She creates a mood of being someone you can relate to. Her primary focus is to help the middle class, health care and women's issues. These are all very important for our country, issues that need help now. he interviews with her constituants were fantastic....really set a mood of someone they respect, trust and appreciate. It was a perfect blend. It was very smart to have the video clips throughout the About Hillary section.
In contrast, the Mitt Romney site was very poorly designed. It didn't "hang together" with an overall feeling. It was more of a template, very little custom design or creativity and way more text than photos and graphics. He's to a huge Red Cross logo splashed across the top. Does he want this website to be about the Red Cross, or about Mitt Romney as President?? This speaks to his ability to build a team of people around him and whether they have the sort of talent that we need from our next adminstration. His focus is mostly about 'family values' and that to me is more of a code word rather than a real political agenda. Like the other Republicans, he seems to want the status quo of low taxes and small government.
Gettting back to Hillary's site, she obviously isn't afraid to be aggressive, which appeals to a large segment of the population. For example, on her "HillaryHub" news section features a big photo of Sen. Obama and slams him for "attacking her character." I don't know if he actually did attack her character, but once that is screamed in a headline, it barely makes a difference if it's true or not. She is obviously determined to use every single day, including her own birthday, as an opportunity to raise money and get people to commit their support. She's a fighter, that's for sure.
I really liked John Edwards website. He is sort of a hipper, younger, better looking Al Gore. By placing Global Warming as his top issue, I think he can appeal to many of the liberals who have been won over by Gore career and that maybe the Edwards campaign is trying to position him that way. The family photo was also very appealing, but frankly for me that a bit of a turn off as well. He's taking on corporations, including the drug companies, and that's gutsy. On the down side, he has young children and his wife is battling cancer and I worry about a man who has that many pressures and demands on him. I kind of like it when the kids are already older and on their own. This next period in U.S. history is going to demand a full time President. I didn't care for his blog section. There were too many comments by Joe Blow, and many of them were the same hostile, griping tone that dominates the internet discussion boards. They are a real turn off. I'd rather listen to John and form my own conclusions.
Bill Richardson has a great story to tell. I really like this man and I've followed his career. The info was all there on his website, his story and character, but I wonder if other people are going to be as drawn into it. He has a lighter touch, not to clobber you over the head, and for a lot of Americans, they seem to need clobbering! Richardson lays out his views and the issues very well, very succinctly. But he's not going to be the showman that I think is needed in this race. His strength is that he can relate to the foreign issues of the day. He has experience oversees as well as governing a state and so he really does have a lot of the skills it takes to be a good President. I hope that he will be in the government for a long time and this campaign run will at least introduce him to another big chuck of Americans. He could be a great vice president.
Barack Obama website took a long time to load. That can be hard for people who don't have a fast connection. But at least he didn't put the "sign in" screen up front! A lot of the site was videos and commercials and, frankly, I didn't want to watch commercials because they are so manipulative. Like the one that showed his position on the war in Iraq. At first, he's giving a speech, and all of a sudden we hear a dozen citizens give their opinions in a script format. He did have some attractive photos of big smiles and it's that warmth that probably will get him a lot of support.....that and his position on cutting off funding for the war in Iraq. He positions himself as an agent of change and a person of conviction and committed to public service.
Fred Thompson just seems like a TV character, not a serious political leader. His bio is extremely short and I think his lack of depth is summerized by his quote, "“Occasionally, doors have opened to me,” Senator Fred Dalton Thompson told Chris Wallace of Fox News Sunday in a recent interview, “and I had sense enough to see that they were opening, and I would walk through them.” That doesn't inspire any great hopes for his leadership.
If the election were held today, I would vote for Hillary Clinton. This would be a 'prospective', expecting that she will continue to focus on the priorities that she has worked on over her entire lifetime. I think that she has some of the best connections in the world and will appoint a progressive Cabinet and will seek to work with all members of Congress to get some important legislation accomplished. She could secure a lasting legacy for her and her husband, by making good on her goals for improving the condition of the middle class and making great strides in affordable healthcare and championing the needs of women, not just in this country, but worldwide. She and Bill got beat up very badly by the conservatives and humiliated by a bogus impeachment trial. I think she can earn the respect of the country and I'd like to give her a chance to do it.
Friday, October 26, 2007
Fantasy Congress Post #5
In order to get the highst scores, such as kpjjangnan's team, a Player must bring in heavy hitter upper Seniority holders. A case in point is Ted Kennedy. My top two point earners for Legislation sponsored is Joseph Biden with 264 bills and John McCain with 235 bills. However, kpjjangnan (the 3rd highest scorer as of today) has scored big with Kennedy who clocks in with 340 bills to his credit. I also have noticed that Supporting Lineups and Rookies on most of the top teams don't actually have such great stats. That's why it's imperative to go with the heavy hitters on the top of the senority ladder. Also, I noticed that those members in Whip positions such as Barbara Boxer and Russ Feingold have a lot of points as well. They are trying to keep the Party together and have to set a good example with their own aggressive legislative activity.
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Chapter Ten Terms
My teammate, Connie, has posted a wonderful wrap-up of our Chapten 10. The vocabulary Terms are listed here:
http://conniepolitical101.blogspot.com/
http://conniepolitical101.blogspot.com/
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Fantasy Congress Trade: Post #4
I traded Carol Shea-Porter (D) from NJ for Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D) from SD. I wanted to stay with a woman, but Carol had not earned very many points in the past two weeks. Stephanie has more experience in office and it looks like she is very active in sponsoring bills. She also seems like she can get bills passed because she works with in a more bipartisan way than some other Democrats.
I like that she was a teacher because that means she probably cares about kids which, in turn, means she has a concern for the future. But she is also a lawyer, which means that she knows how to work hard and knows the law. On a personal level, she looks like she takes good care of her heath -- she's trim and has good posture and, frankly, I think that's a good symbol of self-respect and discipline. I want a hard worker but someone who has a chance to get things accomplished. She's rated very high, fourth on the list of Legislation introduced. I also like that she's got a high attendance rate. That shows commitment to stick around and work. She's working on a Farm bill that seems like it has a chance to pass. I hope to see some bills pass in this Congress.
Her website says she is an 'independent' voice in her state. She is a member of the Blue Dogs, moderate Democrats that are committed to fiscal discipline and strong national security. She is also on the global warming committee which I think shows a person who is unafraid to think about big changes in the way that our resources have to be protected. I wanted to pick someone who votes as a Maverick and she has a score of 520 which is high.
I like that she was a teacher because that means she probably cares about kids which, in turn, means she has a concern for the future. But she is also a lawyer, which means that she knows how to work hard and knows the law. On a personal level, she looks like she takes good care of her heath -- she's trim and has good posture and, frankly, I think that's a good symbol of self-respect and discipline. I want a hard worker but someone who has a chance to get things accomplished. She's rated very high, fourth on the list of Legislation introduced. I also like that she's got a high attendance rate. That shows commitment to stick around and work. She's working on a Farm bill that seems like it has a chance to pass. I hope to see some bills pass in this Congress.
Her website says she is an 'independent' voice in her state. She is a member of the Blue Dogs, moderate Democrats that are committed to fiscal discipline and strong national security. She is also on the global warming committee which I think shows a person who is unafraid to think about big changes in the way that our resources have to be protected. I wanted to pick someone who votes as a Maverick and she has a score of 520 which is high.
Sunday, October 7, 2007
Fantasy Congress update #3
I choose two of the current Presidential candiates for my team. At the outset, I wondered how their attendance would be effected. In the case of John McCain, his attendance has been very low, 48.5%. Hilliary Clinton os clocking in a fairly respectable 90.1%, which seems good considering the demands of her time.
To give credit to McCain, he is my top scorer in sponsoring legislation, currently as 230, so he's no slacker! At the same time, I'm keeping a close eye on his Maverick status. He has worked closely with the Democrats on a number of bills and I know he's in a tough situation, having to prove his loyalty to Republicans during the race, but if he doesn't show the courage to stick to his ideals on a few close votes in the coming months, I'll be a bit dissapointed.
I've also been dissapointed with Ruben Hinojosa because he has yet to score any points on legislation, but perhaps it is just a matter of time before he some points. I picked him because I noticed that he had very high numbers on the legislation that he sponsored, but I guess he must have put a big bunch of bills up before I picked him. He was a replacement for my original pick as supporting line up. The one he replaced was a black woman from Northern California, Barbara Lee, and I had expected her to be a real rabble rouser. But she didn't earn any points for the first week with me so I looked around to replace her. Now I wonder if I made a mistake! What I've learned from this is that I have to have patience. It makes sense that they aren't going to be active in sponsoring legislation every day or even every week. Now I know.
To give credit to McCain, he is my top scorer in sponsoring legislation, currently as 230, so he's no slacker! At the same time, I'm keeping a close eye on his Maverick status. He has worked closely with the Democrats on a number of bills and I know he's in a tough situation, having to prove his loyalty to Republicans during the race, but if he doesn't show the courage to stick to his ideals on a few close votes in the coming months, I'll be a bit dissapointed.
I've also been dissapointed with Ruben Hinojosa because he has yet to score any points on legislation, but perhaps it is just a matter of time before he some points. I picked him because I noticed that he had very high numbers on the legislation that he sponsored, but I guess he must have put a big bunch of bills up before I picked him. He was a replacement for my original pick as supporting line up. The one he replaced was a black woman from Northern California, Barbara Lee, and I had expected her to be a real rabble rouser. But she didn't earn any points for the first week with me so I looked around to replace her. Now I wonder if I made a mistake! What I've learned from this is that I have to have patience. It makes sense that they aren't going to be active in sponsoring legislation every day or even every week. Now I know.
Friday, October 5, 2007
Voters for Peace and Security
I just found a new website at Peace Action that lists all the Presidential candidates. It's another resource for researching our representatives and the future President.
http://peaceactionwest.typepad.com/onthespot/candidates.html
http://peaceactionwest.typepad.com/onthespot/candidates.html
Sunday, September 30, 2007
The Powers of Congress
The video drove home the point that a populace needs to be educated about it's government before they care about getting involved. When the character at the post office was just complaining, he wasn't thinking about the broad powers of Congress and how they touch his everyday life. Once he began reading and thinking about it, he realized that those powers are not just words on paper, but they translate into thousands of encounters with our federal government every year. I agree that people who don't know anything about how government works tend not to have a desire to participate in it.
If there was one thing I could change or improve in our legislative branch, it would be a mechanism where federal mandates to the States are not abused. It seem too easy to put on demands under the federal grants programs, but very hard to take them off. For instance, the drinking age used to be set by the States. However, the Federal transportation grants put mandates that all the States now conform to. So now the entire decision or the research or the science behind those laws is discouraged from local review, in practice. The decision is federalized and therefore is out of the hands of States, Municipalities and other local governments who won't even discuss the issue, which mean that the People cannot weigh in with as much direct say into the matter. This is just one example of how the Federal government has become unduly dominant over the States.
The No Child Left Behind mandate is another example, where the Federal government is forcing all the States to rework curriculum and testing but not even given them the resources to do it. Some of these mandates seem like they are just the form of tyranny that the founders tried to protect us from. I would like there to be some sort of accountability for Federal laws, where they have subject to review and where the States can take a firm hand on their own laws whenever possible. If inititives and innovation is encouraged among the States, then maybe some of the lethargy and obstruction to change that is discussed in Chapter 11 could be avoided.
If there was one thing I could change or improve in our legislative branch, it would be a mechanism where federal mandates to the States are not abused. It seem too easy to put on demands under the federal grants programs, but very hard to take them off. For instance, the drinking age used to be set by the States. However, the Federal transportation grants put mandates that all the States now conform to. So now the entire decision or the research or the science behind those laws is discouraged from local review, in practice. The decision is federalized and therefore is out of the hands of States, Municipalities and other local governments who won't even discuss the issue, which mean that the People cannot weigh in with as much direct say into the matter. This is just one example of how the Federal government has become unduly dominant over the States.
The No Child Left Behind mandate is another example, where the Federal government is forcing all the States to rework curriculum and testing but not even given them the resources to do it. Some of these mandates seem like they are just the form of tyranny that the founders tried to protect us from. I would like there to be some sort of accountability for Federal laws, where they have subject to review and where the States can take a firm hand on their own laws whenever possible. If inititives and innovation is encouraged among the States, then maybe some of the lethargy and obstruction to change that is discussed in Chapter 11 could be avoided.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Picking my First Fantasy Congress Team
When I picked my initial team members, I first selected experienced Members who had a strong track record on voting for important human rights issues because that is my top priority. I find that foreign affairs is an area where a person is challenged to be independent, to follow one's heart, and you often have to choose between Bad and Worse, rather than Good or Bad. Issues like human rights and war and foreign aid and helping people around the globe can bring out the best in people, and that was why I went with Joe Biden, John McCain, Tom Lantos. These guys are gutsy leaders who I have learned to respect since I first became familiar with their actions during the violent and tragic breakup of former Yugoslava and the war in Bosnia . Also, I picked people who I consider to be "change agents" such as Hillary Clinton, Maxine Waters and my rookie from ILL, Rahm Emanuel. I am going to be curious about is whether the Presidental candidates are too busy campaigning to tend to their Congressional duties!
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Healthcare a Pressing Issue
The most pressing topic in American politics today is healthcare. To begin with, we now see that many of our cultural habits are, in fact, unhealthy. Alcohol, fast foods, sugars, fats and chemicals are being consumed at every level of society and we see illnesses ranging from cancer to diabetes to heart failures being attributed, at least partially, to the lifestyle choices of our people. We also have genetically engineering foods that are showing up in the food chain. We see the effects of pollution in respiratory diseases. The aging population is confronting American families with more seriously ill elderly people, many of whom become totally dependent on others for years.
Because the national government has a role in helping maintain the basic health services to the poor and low-income, through Medicare and Medicaid, the funding of national health-related initiatives is critical, and growing. According to Sen. Edwards campaign, over 47 million Americans U.S. are without insurance, and those people tend to use emergency rooms for their care. I think that the government must play a very large roll in making sure that our health care system is robust and effective.America needs to invest in the infrastructure of clinics and hospitals. There should be a national commitment to build thousands of local health clinics that serve smaller populations based around neighborhoods.
We need to help fund the education of health care workers. There is a serious shortage of nurses and the private sector isn't keeping up with the demand. As baby boomers retire, the number of nurses is expected to drop very dramatically, so this is a time when a national initiative to partner with industry to bring in new trained medical workers. Currently, the cost of education is so high and the academic standards are so restrictive, that it's hard to see how the "free market" will bring in the workforce needed. And nurses aren't the only ones in short supply, the number of physicians is dropping as well. Again, the costs of education for doctors is tremendously expensive, and we need a national commitment to bring in lots more people and from many social-economic backgrounds so that they can serve their own communities.
There is a pressing need for health education and the public sector ought to be involved. Unfortunately, the "illness industry" is a lot more lucrative than the "healthy life style" industry, and the government ought to be far more involved in promoting and educating our populace. The concepts of preventative treatments and changing lifestyle issues such as more frequent doctor visits, and making them more affordable, are needed in order to bring the people into the social contract of taking responsibility for their own health. We also need to boost research in alternative medicines and diet and healthy living options and to put this information into the education system, beginning in the earliest grades, so that we raise a more responsible and educated populace. These topics can and should be part of the curriculum of public education, which is another area that the government is involved in.
Just one small example of this would be to examine all the contracts for soda and junk food machines that are on practically every college campus in America. The school boards know that obesity and malnutrition are a problem, but walk into any college bookstore and you are hard pressed to find any "real food" being sold. Because so much public money goes into our public schools and universities, it seems that a national drive to improve the food offered on these sites could be in the public interest.The funding of single-payer insurance, or "universal coverage" and other plans are being debated among the Presidential candidates. One thing is certain, the federal and state and local governments are all going to be pressed to address our national health issues, and it's going to take a lot of resources. But if the national makes this a commitment, we may see how "an ounce of prevention is worth more than a pound of cure."
Because the national government has a role in helping maintain the basic health services to the poor and low-income, through Medicare and Medicaid, the funding of national health-related initiatives is critical, and growing. According to Sen. Edwards campaign, over 47 million Americans U.S. are without insurance, and those people tend to use emergency rooms for their care. I think that the government must play a very large roll in making sure that our health care system is robust and effective.America needs to invest in the infrastructure of clinics and hospitals. There should be a national commitment to build thousands of local health clinics that serve smaller populations based around neighborhoods.
We need to help fund the education of health care workers. There is a serious shortage of nurses and the private sector isn't keeping up with the demand. As baby boomers retire, the number of nurses is expected to drop very dramatically, so this is a time when a national initiative to partner with industry to bring in new trained medical workers. Currently, the cost of education is so high and the academic standards are so restrictive, that it's hard to see how the "free market" will bring in the workforce needed. And nurses aren't the only ones in short supply, the number of physicians is dropping as well. Again, the costs of education for doctors is tremendously expensive, and we need a national commitment to bring in lots more people and from many social-economic backgrounds so that they can serve their own communities.
There is a pressing need for health education and the public sector ought to be involved. Unfortunately, the "illness industry" is a lot more lucrative than the "healthy life style" industry, and the government ought to be far more involved in promoting and educating our populace. The concepts of preventative treatments and changing lifestyle issues such as more frequent doctor visits, and making them more affordable, are needed in order to bring the people into the social contract of taking responsibility for their own health. We also need to boost research in alternative medicines and diet and healthy living options and to put this information into the education system, beginning in the earliest grades, so that we raise a more responsible and educated populace. These topics can and should be part of the curriculum of public education, which is another area that the government is involved in.
Just one small example of this would be to examine all the contracts for soda and junk food machines that are on practically every college campus in America. The school boards know that obesity and malnutrition are a problem, but walk into any college bookstore and you are hard pressed to find any "real food" being sold. Because so much public money goes into our public schools and universities, it seems that a national drive to improve the food offered on these sites could be in the public interest.The funding of single-payer insurance, or "universal coverage" and other plans are being debated among the Presidential candidates. One thing is certain, the federal and state and local governments are all going to be pressed to address our national health issues, and it's going to take a lot of resources. But if the national makes this a commitment, we may see how "an ounce of prevention is worth more than a pound of cure."
My Fantasy Congress Team: "ChangeAgents"
Upper Senators: John McCain (R) and Joseph Biden (D)
Lower Senators: Hillary Clinton (D) and Ken Salazar (D)
Allstars: Tom Lantos (D) and Maxine Waters (D)
Supporting: Barbara Lee (D) and Tom Udall (D)
Rookies: Rahm Emanuel (D) and Carol Shea-Porter (D)
Lower Senators: Hillary Clinton (D) and Ken Salazar (D)
Allstars: Tom Lantos (D) and Maxine Waters (D)
Supporting: Barbara Lee (D) and Tom Udall (D)
Rookies: Rahm Emanuel (D) and Carol Shea-Porter (D)
to see my updated listing: http://www.fantasycongress.com/members/team_info?teamID=76708
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Intro
I am a return student and have a plan to transfer for a degree in music education. My main goal is to help return arts education back into the public school system. I have a lifelong interest in politics, ecology and the peace movement. My parents came to the U.S. in 1957, with three young children and a desire to leave the scars of WWII far behind. From my dad I picked up an internationalist/humanitarian point of view. From my mom, well -- she was a counterculture beatnik so I picked up a liberal view from her. I am married and my husband and I own a business, our second one in twenty years. My son is a freshman in college, so hopefully we'll get our degrees about the same time!
This summer, I joined a bluegrass band as a guest vocalist and guitar player. It was great fun. We played nine gigs and I learned a lot of beautiful music, some of which was over 100 years old. Bluegrass music often has political overtones, with laments over the Civil War, the Dust Bowl migrations, and the lives, the loves and the religions of common people.
This summer, I joined a bluegrass band as a guest vocalist and guitar player. It was great fun. We played nine gigs and I learned a lot of beautiful music, some of which was over 100 years old. Bluegrass music often has political overtones, with laments over the Civil War, the Dust Bowl migrations, and the lives, the loves and the religions of common people. Here we are at the Ananda Ashrama in La Crescenta. The band is called the "Bluegrass Billionaires."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)