Die If You Want To !

      In his article, An Argument for theDeath Penalty ACC blogger Tavar  Mark Conditt voiced his opinion in support of the death penalty. Using a case, presented by Todd Robberson, a writer for the Dallas Morning News, Conditt  argues why convicted murderer George Rivas’ execution was justified and well deserved. While I agree with Conditt that Todd Robberson is not an expert on the topic of death penalty, I do not agree that as a writer he cannot voice his opinion on the George Rivas death penalty case. Robberson was strong in his conviction, and clearly articulated reasons that would ensure “that the killer will indeed stay alive and be forced, every single day of his natural life to confront the fact of his crime”

Like Robberson, I believe that an eye for an eye will not stop the daily insensitive crime that is destroying our society although I realize that many times we are dealing with the devil.Yes I agree with Blogger Conditt “ that living criminals harm and murder again - executed ones do not.” However, it is important to note, that the executioner has botched evidence and presented incompetent witnesses. Statistics show that the State of Texas has one of the highest rate ofexecutions in the country. Since 1982, Texas has had 482 offenders with hundreds more on death row, including wrongly convicted victims. While that was not the situation with George Rivas' case, several of these “convicted criminals”  have been innocent minorities who were not able to afford adequate representation.

      It is good to know that as a convicted criminal on death row, George Rivas felt “like an animal in a prison.”  He and others like him “will spend their entire long lives, knowing that they will never, ever set foot outside a prison. They will never enjoy life on this planet as a free person. I want them to suffer in the blank, bleak unyielding solicitude of incarceration, for the duration of their natural lives. Then Die.”

   But instead of suffering as he should like an animal in a prison, and “confronting the magnitude of his crime” George Rivas is enjoying the freedom that he and Mark Conditt so desperately wished for.

 

Borrow Money

    "We've always encouraged young people: Take a shot, go for it, take a risk, get the education, borrow money if you have to from your parents, start a business," Romney said, as he addressed students at Otterbein University in Ohio. As I listened to those statements, I realize that whether the money is used for education or business, it shows how far removed Romney and the GOP are from the common people. How many young people can run to their parents to borrow $20,000? How many parents have $20,000 as disposable cash? How many parents have only one child ; what about their other children who might also want a loan? Of course if my parents have money, I would probably borrow ( if need to). from them before I borrow from an institution. I really wonder ; did Mr. Romney know his audience. Did he know that 100% of the students at Otterbein University received financial aid with 83% receiving federal loans and 13% receiving private loans. Does he know that the same can be said for students at other campuses?

       Ironically all of this is amidst the debate about Romney-Ryan budget passed by the Republican House, which makes it more difficult for young people to afford a college education. The Romney-Ryan budget would not only lock in the interest rate hike, it would also slash Pell Grant scholarships for millions of students, and eliminate work-study programs for nearly 130,000 students. Starting July 1, the interest rates  for federal student loans is going to double, jumping from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent. Tell me, how is this encouraging young people who are already clogged with other bills and unemployment?  Besides, these are the same $20,000 borrowing young people who are sneaking a rent free room at their parents’ homes.

           On Friday, April 27, New Jersey lawmakers approved a bill that would stop the Stafford student loans from doubling in July. Unfortunately the Bill as presented by the Republicans, would pay for the cost of the loan extension by cutting funds from the Prevention and Public Health Fund . While I must admit, that this present administration can do more to alleviate the situation of its citizens, it is still  focused on helping everyone, including, the middle class and the poor. For example, changing that law of doubling federal Stafford loan  could save more than 7 million new borrowers on average $1,000 a year, 

      Most students, even after graduation, are not rich by any means. According to The Federal Reserve Bank of New York estimates 37 million Americans have student loan debt, totaling $870 billion. School teachers like Devin and Sarah Stang are example of borrowers and their four young children who had to resolve to bankruptcy. Yes, they did “take a shot, take a risk, get the education,” and would like to borrow some money from their parents. Because they  “have to.” Sadly, Mr. Romney; their parents are out, looking for jobs! It’s the real world.

The Disrespect Of Women

     In the article “The Fight is Not Over”, written March 9,2012, ACC Government  student blogger Anh Nguyen discusses The media’s recent focus on “ The War on Women.” In that article she summarizes various viewpoints on the topic. By using the title “The fight is not over” Ms. Nguyen insinuates that the attack on women is not over. Unfortunately, she is right.

   I am not a woman, but the manner in which women are being manipulated, violated and dictated to, gives the impression that women are inanimate, voiceless objects, with no thoughts of their own. Women’s strength, women’s intelligence, women’s resourcefulness and women’s contribution to family and society are all undermined by selfish politicians, specifically The Republicans.

   Whether deliberate or not, the Republicans have displayed total disrespect to the freedom and rights of women, through some demoralizing policy proposals that portray women as stupid or incapable. There are many examples, including the fact that congress just voted for a Republican amendment to cut all federal funding from Planned Parenthood health center, providers of basic health care and family planning to American women. Just recently in March, Arizona passed a bill that gives doctors the right to withhold information about the health of a woman reproductive system. The republicans even have a bill that cut nutrition programs for poor, pregnant single mothers, and cut funds for a low-income kids' preschool program because they said “women should really be home with the kids, not out working.” Even if this is not a war, it is certainly an outright attack on women! No wonder Romney was quick to spin Hillary Rosen’s poorly chosen words that “Anne Romney has not worked a day in her life”. The attacks, continue; the women of this nation know who is violating their rights. It’s a battle field and as Nguyen states,The fight is far from over.

Throwing Out The Lifeline

      As the nine Supreme Court  Justices congregate, to decide on the constitutionality of the Health Care Law, Maryland’s health secretary Dr. Joshua  Sharfstein said he is worried about the 50,000 people nationwide who are enrolled  in a federally financed insurance program because they are seriously ill and cannot find coverage otherwise. Sharfstein is not the only one worried.  Mary Johnson, a 25 year old student who is on her  parents  insurance is also concerned. Paul Brown a preexisting diabetic patient is especially despondent; he sees the Health Care Law as a lifeline for his medication and his much needed treatment which now comes at a lower cost. “What will happen to me? I will surely die”, he groaned painfully.

   While the Law will not go into full effect until 2014, more than 30 new provisions of the law are already in place including young adults on parents’ insurance, people with preexisting illnesses on insurance ,and seniors on cheap prescription. However, according to the polls, the Law is not popular, with more than 50% indicating that the Bill be thrown out, because the mandate used in the Affordable Care Act that says that all Americans have health insurance or pay a penalty.

   Let me ask you ; if indeed the Health Care Law is unconstitutional, Do you think, Paul Brown living with diabetes, going to dialysis three times a week, will  worry about the constitutionality of the Law? Do you think that the parents of a young child with leukemia worry about the constitutionality of the Health Care Law? Do you think that the unemployed new graduate with loans, living with her parents, is worry about the constitutionality of the Law? Tell me .What do you think? Keep in mind that millions of Americans have already begun to benefit from the Law. According to YNN “Federal health officials estimate 54 million people nationwide including more than 3 million New Yorkers are now getting those services with no additional cost because of that provision.” What is important to remember, is that these people will be sick anyhow. And when they get sick, they will go to the emergency room which will hike up the price of all insurers. Those with insurance will pay the high price of those without insurance. Regardless of the situation, there will still be a high price to pay.

   Ironic enough, it is the same doctors, agencies and insurers who voted against the Bill, who are now struggling with the thought of the Law being over thrown. “Many of us did not get the bill we wanted, but I think having to start over is worse than having to fix this,” said Robert Laszewski, a health care industry consultant and former insurance executive who opposed the Bill. “The part I struggle with is how you undo two years worth of implementation,” said Dr. Glen R. Stream, president of the American Academy of Family Physicians. “It would leave tremendous uncertainty about what is the direction we’re going in and that uncertainty would obviously affect the patients directly.”

   That uncertainty has definitely unsettled patients like Paul Brown and  Mary Johnson. Meanwhile the nine Supreme Court  Justices congregate, to decide on the constitutionality of the Health Care Law, that major players who oppose that Law, now say that it saves money by keeping patients out of the hospital and emergency room.

Let Her Decide !

      On Tuesday, Journalist, John Celock reported in The Huffington Post that Arizona Senate approved a bill that prohibits a doctor from facing  medical malpractice lawsuit if the  doctor withholds  information that would lead the women to have an abortion. Republican Senator, Nancy Barto of Arizona sponsored the law because she did not want parents to sue doctors, if their children are born with disabilities.

     Blogger Susie Madrak followed that decision with an article in Crooks and Liars  entitled “AZ Senate Votes for Bill Allowing Doctors to Deny Pregnant Women Info about Genetic Testing.” Madrak condemns the Bill, saying that it was the same Republicans who were concerned about the Government “getting between citizens and their doctors” now doing the same ; the Republicans have been especially critical about the Democrats’ Affordable Care Act.

      Like Ms.Madrak,I am aghast to hear about the passing of the Bill. How could there be a bill that prohibits a doctor from giving a women informtion about genetic testing? What about that woman’s safety? What about the preparation for the new baby’s safety? Moreover, I do not think that parents would simply abort their child because he or she has a disability. I definitely agree with Madrak that parents should be informed about the state of their child. However, unlike Madrak, who said “not everyone can afford to take care of a child with a serious disability.” I cannot yet find myself equating the life of a child (if it were mine) with disabilities, with cost, bills, income and money. I do realize that she is being practical and realistic, and that money is a real issue which probably lead to the lawsuits by parents against the physician.

       I think a child with disability exudes unconditional love and god like innocence, but that does not stop the fact that parents need to know and decide if they want to have that experience or not. Like Madrak , I do not think that the government should come between a woman and her doctor. A woman needs to know the results of her genetic testing for her own safety and that of her child.

What Team Sport ! Play the Play !

        “Politics is a team sport” is  an article  written by opinion writer Charles Blow in the February 23 New York Times. In that article, Blow analyzes the words of Republican candidate, Rick Santorum in response to questions asked in Wednesday’s debate. In defending his support for No Child Left Behind, Santorum answered that he voted for it, although it was against his principles because “when you’re part of the team, sometimes you take one for the leader and I made a mistake. You know politics is a team sport. You’ve got to rally together.”

      Blow presented polls and surveys that show that Santorum’s RepublicanParty is against “team sport and rallying together” unlike the Democrats who believe in compromises for the greater good of the nation.  While I agree with Charles Blow that Santorum exposed his” legislative underbelly”, I fully disagree that it revealed a weakness of Santorum. In describing himself  in one word, Santorum said “courage.” What courage? Where is his courage to stand up for what is right, regardless of opposition from his Republican peers?  Of course I agree with Blow and Santorum that compromise is good. I readily admit that team sport is what this nation needs. However, and ironically that is what Santorum continuously attack president Obama about. All of the issues that he has criticized the President for, were brought about because President  Obama genuinely believes and practices this theme that "politics is team sport and sometimes you've got to rally together”. Unfortunately for Santorum, if his fellow Republican, Romney, had not “out” him, I would never had known that he went  “against his principles.”

     I agree with Charles Blow that "Santorum take on compromises is one of the more reasonable things he said lately". Sadly though , compromise is not one of the things he has practiced and ranted about  lately. Check his votes on earmarks. Then check his rants. Better yet; check his votes on Plan Parenthood. Then check his rants. Charles Blow, I am sure this man of courage will say “ I made a mistake “. But is it Jekyll or is it Hyde?

Leave No Child ...

     On Friday , February 10,2012, The Time Magazine published an article entitled The Beginning of the End for No Child Left Behind .Teachers, educators and even some parents involved with the public school education system, will painfully admit, that the strict requirements of No Child Left Behind had given them nightmares, taken away their jobs, and left more children behind, than ever before. No Child Left Behind enacted by Pres. George W. Bush in 2002, was a strong effort to get accountability by measuring student performance in the public school system
    According to the Time Magazine ,educators can now breathe easier with the Beginning of the end for No Child Left Behind. The Time magazine states that president Obama has granted a deal to every state to "set higher, more honest standards than the ones set by No Child Left Behind."

This an important article because for the ten years since its existence No Child Left Behind have impacted, the education system and the people involved with it. It had some good points because it tried to provide standards and accountability. Unfortunately some of the standards were unrealistic and impractical especially when it came to financial funding.