RT Edwards Inc.

What started out as a peaceful demonstration against Assad a few years ago has since escalated into a civil war killing at least 70,000 people affirms the United Nation.  The crisis has caused major concern around the globe prompting nonstop media coverage and continuous heated political debates. Islamist militants have emerged as the most potent of the anti-Assad rebels.

Today, May 15, 2013 the United Nation General Assembly will vote on a draft resolution that condemns Syrian authorities and accepts the opposition Syrian National Coalition as party to a potential political transition.  According to the Jerusalem Post, “the draft resolution condemns "all violence, irrespective of where it comes from," continued escalation in the use of heavy weapons by Syrian authorities, the shelling and shooting by Syrian troops into neighboring nations and human rights abuses. It also demands that the Syrian authorities grant unfettered access to a UN team investigating allegations that chemical weapons have been used in the conflict. The draft resolution further welcomes Arab League decisions relevant to reaching a political solution, but does not reference an agreement by the league that member states have the right to provide military support to Syrians fighting Assad's troops.

Russia, a close ally of Syrian President Bashar Assad, is opposed to the resolution, which was drafted by Qatar and other Arab nations and circulated among the 193 UN member states. Some Western diplomats said it was unlikely to win as many votes as a resolution that passed last year with 133 in favor: 12 votes against the previous Syria resolution and 31 abstentions and some countries did not participate. Russia was among those that opposed it. China, Iran, North Korea, Belarus, Cuba and other states that often criticize the West also voted against it” (REUTERS).

In response to the current crisis in Syria, the State Department announced on May 8, 2013 that the United States will provide an additional $100 million in humanitarian assistance to support those affected by the violence within Syria and the more than 1.4 million refugees across the region. This new funding is in addition to the nearly $25 million in food assistance for Syria announced by Secretary Kerry in Istanbul April 21. The United States remains the single-largest contributor of humanitarian assistance for the Syrian people, and with today’s announcement, is now providing nearly $510 million in humanitarian assistance.

The United States reaffirms our support and appreciation to those countries hosting refugees, and commends their efforts to provide protection and assistance to all who are fleeing the violence inside Syria. The United States recognizes the significant strains on local populations and the economic impacts of providing aid to refugees, and commends the hospitality of the citizens and governments who are welcoming refugees into their communities. We call on all governments to continue keeping their borders open to all who are fleeing the violence in Syria.

The $100 million will support the activities of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), both within Syria and as part of the regional refugee response in Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon. The funding will support: Jordan: Nearly $43 million; Lebanon:$32 million,Turkey: $9.5 million and inside Syria: nearly $16 million.

To see more of the press release click HERE

It seems unconceivable that an amendment yielding a “something better than nothing” or a hair line victory for gun control advocates while giving concessions to gun lobbyist couldn’t even pass in Congress 54-46- April 17, 2013 marked the date the U.S. Senate defeated a measure that would require background checks for individuals purchasing guns, despite the fact that roughly 90% of the nation favors them. What message does this send to the American people and what does this say about our democracy? President Obama called it a shameful day for Washington while the NRA called the defeat a "positive development”.

Did 41 Republicans and 4 Democrats forget about Columbine, Sandy Hook Elementary; Sikh Temple; Aurora, CO; Cafe Racer Espresso; Korean Christian College; Former Rep. Gabby Gifford/Arizona or did the power and money of the NRA supersede taking steps to help potentially save the lives of innocent women, men and children against senseless gun violence?  Are the American people not worthy of such protection? Is choosing to do absolutely nothing a better solution? Senators who voted against the bill insist their constituents asked them to vote no—Really? The last time the American people checked 90% was greater than 10%.  Lets also be clear that out of the 45, 24 of Senators preside over states where voters overwhelmingly support background checks (Mother Jones). To see a list of these Senators click here. To see a list of all the Senators who voted to block the amendment click here

Advocates for gun control vow that although the amendment proposed by Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) failed to capture the 60 votes needed to advance does not signify defeat but only marks the beginning of a grueling battle ahead.  

President Obama stated “this effort is not over and only represents the end of ROUND ONE”- and yes the President knows a little something about rounds after being defeated in the first 2012 presidential campaign debate, yet coming back stronger, harder, wiser and going on to not only win the next two debates but the election. He's in it to win it and it appears the majority of the the American people are with him.

You can’t just give any old speech at Howard University and not expect feedback!  As a very proud Howard University Alumni I feel compelled to comment on Congressman Rand Paul’s speech held on campus this week, April 10, 2013.  My comments are not meant to criticize, but enlighten and I encourage others to read his transcript and follow suite….

I was very disappointed in the Congressman’s speech not because I wasn’t open to hear what he had to say, but because he didn’t challenge my views, I didn’t feel compelled to question or reevaluate some of the policies I believe in.  Additionally, his speech did not feel sincere or genuine.  Another fellow Alumni also expressed her disappointment,“ He presented a horrible speech with odd jokes, awkward comparisons to black civil rights leaders and weird pop culture references in his struggle to sound relatable”.

I would like to commend the Congressman for his efforts to reach out to the African American Community as outlined in the Republican Party’s initiative, but I do suggest he reevaluate he his presentation before he gives his next speech to the minority community.  Here are just a few suggestions I thought would help:

Lesson 1: Know Your Audience…

• If you knew your audience you would have known police officers, bodyguards, campus security guards and a barricade in front of the podium was excessive and unnecessary.
• If you knew your audience you would have never gone to a historical black college, especially one as prestigious as Howard University and question their knowledge of black history nor attempted to give them a lesson on it either.
• If you knew your audience you wouldn’t have compared yourself to Jessie Jackson and assumed no one would be offended or quoted Toni Morrison, as if you really read anything she wrote- if you did my apologies
• If you knew your audience you wouldn’t have started your speech with “my trip will be a success if the Hilltop will simply print that a Republican came to Howard but he came in peace… SERIOUSLY…. or “my purpose for being here is I want government to leave you alone” REALLY…
• If you knew your audience you would have known that it’s really not important what the Republican Party stood for in the early to mid-1900’s, but it’s what they stand for now that matters to them
• If you knew your audience you would address policies that matter to them, not policies your party associates them with, like prison or handouts as referenced in your speech

Lesson 2: They Remember

• You stated that the “The Big Bad Government is always in our business, well they remember if there was no government there would be no Civil Right Act of 1964, no Brown v Board of Education decision, no Voting Rights Act of 1965, no Executive Order 11246 enforcing Affirmative Action ect….
• You stated your party backs education, but they remember it was your party that supported the Ryan budget plan in 2012.  This plan would have cut Pell Grants back to 2008 levels, eliminating recent increases for low-income college students.
• They remember what happened to the housing industry before Dodd-Frank, yet your party wants to deregulate and appeal Dodd-Frank and the Consumer Protection Act, which brought the most significant changes to financial regulation in US history. 
• They remember when after age 19 young adults/students could no longer be covered under their parents insurance, but since the Affordable Care Act, which your party wants to appeal, adults/students are now covered until age 26
• Although you stated that you support the Civil Rights Act, they remember during your interview with the Louisville Courier Journal in 2010 your answer was not an unequivocal yes, but that you didn’t like the idea of telling private business owners to abhor racism and in your interview with MSNBC with Rachel Maddox where she asked whether you thought a private business has the right to say we don’t serve black people, your response was yes.  Additionally when an HU student ask that you elaborate you stated that you were only concerned with the ramification and extensions of the Civil Rights Act….
• They remember that although your party runs on “balancing the budget”, the GOP hasn’t balanced a budget since 1960 under Dwight Eisenhower, a time when the Democrats held the majority in the House and Senate.
• In your speech you point to the Reagan years when “the economy grew at nearly 7% and millions upon millions of jobs were created and you point out that today, after four years of the current policies, one in six Americans live in poverty”, but they also remember the Bush years which you don’t reference.
• In your speech you state that “Jim Crow laws were a product of bigoted state and local governments”, but they remember the  long lines during the previous election, and the attempt to implement voter ids laws in many Republican held states and gerrymandering laws put in place after the 2010 census
• They remember the GOPs position on gun control, immigration, gay rights and the Fair Pay Act

Women in emerging and developing countries particularly women in the Arab world have been subjected to restrictions of their rights and liberties based on religion, culture and traditions for centuries.  Such impediments have created bearers in areas reflected in the legal system, the economy and education.   The speech by Terry Soneshine given on April 4, 2013, under Secretary for Public Diplomacy & Public Affairs captivated me and I thought I would share with others….

"Should we really care about increasing the role of women in the Arab world—beyond just feeling good about ourselves? If so, why should we? Will the full inclusion of women – practically speaking, politically speaking, economically speaking make a difference amid this uncertain, even chaotic transition? And how will we know what success looks like?

On the first issue – why care? Let me start by saying, fairness and human dignity are universal values. We tend to embrace those values, easily when it comes to talking about the global economy – level playing fields, fairness and transparency are essential, so men and women can compete on the basis of their talent and drive.

As First Lady, former Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton put it so simply yet so memorably: “Human rights are women’s rights and women’s rights are human rights, once and for all.”

And when it comes to human rights, there is a common set of liberties to which all human beings are entitled. Governments must enshrine, protect and enforce those liberties, so everyone is represented and all citizens are treated equally under law, regardless of creed, color or gender.

But let’s move a step beyond fairness and human rights. There is also an evidence-based reality. Study after study has confirmed that any country or region that ignores half its population undercuts its chances of success, politically, economically and certainly democratically.

And there are demographic realities in the Arab world. Young people—including girls – are a disproportionate majority, with youth unemployment being among the highest numbers globally. This youth bulge will continue at least until 2030. These facts put empowering young people of both genders at the top of any agenda.

Another fact: Young women are the largest cohort in higher education in many countries in the region and represent the next generation of human capital. If we limit that pool of emerging problem solvers, we will limit their unique perspectives and experiences, skills, and solutions.

According to a World Bank study, women in the Arab world have the lowest rates of employment of any region. The economies of the Middle East will never reach their potential without women playing a significantly more active role in the work force.

But let’s go beyond economics. Women are frequently the ones most intimately connected in their communities and with their families – and thus uniquely positioned to prevent extremist ideology creeping in. They are the community’s most frequent teachers of respect and tolerance. But they can also bring their attributes to more than so-called “women’s issues,” including conflict resolution, economic policy, and political leadership.

All across the region, women are already taking the initiative – women like Tawakkul Karman, now a 34-year-old mother of three from Yemen, a co-recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 2011 for her nonviolent efforts to enhance women’s safety and human rights, and peacebuilding. Or in the UAE, Minister of Development and International Cooperation, Lubna Al Qassemi. Or scientists like Dr. Ansam Sawalha, whose science camp “GO Girls” is bringing educational opportunities and scholarships to girls and women in the Palestinian Territories.

Imagine the effect on the entire region, if the Tawakkuls, Lubnas, and Ansams are no longer individual exceptions, but regular citizens – building infrastructures of democracy, freedom, dignity, prosperity, and innovation in their countries.

It is essential in today’s Arab world that women actually govern. In Yemen, you could say that 28 percent of the delegates at the National Dialogue are women. But the truth is: Women hold very few seats in decision making circles. Women only have three out of 72 seats in the new Syrian Opposition Coalition.

And in Egypt, where the abuse of women has violated not only their bodies, but also their right to free expression and their right to take part in their country’s transition, only nine women legislators won seats in the parliamentary elections.

It has been left to women in civil society – such as the National Council of Women – to stand up against recent official pronouncements that distort religion to deny rights to women.

There is an inherent conundrum here: Women are needed in decision making circles to bring about political change. But, until there is change, women will have difficulty in attaining influential political positions.

I am building for you a solid case. The evidence couldn’t be more clear-cut: Women are the bellwether, the barometer and the building bricks of greater economies, democracies and countries. So, yes, we should care – because when we stop talking about women in the Arab World, governments and economies backslide. Women are sidelined. And there is a retreat.

With retreat come failed expectations, violence, and suppression of rights—everyone’s rights. The cost of this systemic discrimination – and failure to harness women’s contributions – has consequences for prosperity, stability and even violent extremism.

Two weeks ago, I had the opportunity to hear from 16 young women from the Middle East and Northern Africa, who were participating in one of the State Department’s International Visitor Programs. We invited them to the United States – as we do through our Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs – to experience our culture, meet with American counterparts, get training in their fields, and build networks that can enhance their futures.

They were parliamentarians, members of civil society, professors, and election monitors. They were fighting in the trenches of pushback, hostility, and institutionalized resistance – and they did not believe in retreat.

The women from Egypt were particularly moving when discussing their challenges. They talked about the tear gas they face every single day. It comes in different colors. Sometimes, it’s the kind that burns your skin. Or takes your breath away. One woman joked: We’re addicted to it.

What they didn’t joke about was the horrific rape and sexual violence in their country. They described how – during demonstrations – men surround women like a pack of football players in a huddle. Then one by one, they take their turns. Raping.

We are following these developments in Egypt very closely. And none more so than Secretary Kerry – who has shown his commitment to women throughout his 30 years in the Senate – and who vowed at his confirmation hearings to carry forward Secretary Clinton’s work to institutionalize women and girls at the center of American foreign policy.

As Secretary Kerry said this week – and I quote: “President Obama and the Administration share real concerns about the direction that Egypt appears to be moving in. It is our hope that there is still time to be able to turn the corner. But the recent arrests, the violence in the streets, the lack of inclusivity with respect to the opposition in public ways that make a difference to the people of Egypt, are all of concern today.”

As we condemn the attacks and urge the government to prosecute those responsible, we also recognize that sexual violence is endemic across society – and not only in Egypt, but across the region.

I’m pleased to note: The 16 women also shared positive stories. One Moroccan woman told me she was the youngest female parliamentarian in Morocco. She was the first girl in her village to go to school, to attend university, and to become elected to public office. She said she was determined to make sure her exceptional story would become every Moroccan girl’s normal story.

Another woman from Iran escaped from her country during the Green Movement demonstrations and the subsequent regime-led crackdown. Since then, she said, she has been working to reach out to other women – to produce democratic change.

Those are the stories that transform societies. And they were echoed in other ways by the other women who were there – a minister of social affairs in Sudan working to protect children and women. A legislator from Iraq fighting for women widowed or disabled by three decades of conflict. A Palestinian woman working to support higher education in her community.  They were unanimous about what they are fighting for: Freedom and dignity. And as I found out, certain words are more than abstractions to them. When I told them that – I preferred to say the “gender space” instead of  “women’s space,” one women said: “In my world, you can’t say the word ‘women’ enough times.”

Their message was clear: They want the world to pay attention. And they refuse to be sidelined, abused, and marginalized even violent extremism.”

To read more of Terry Soneshine speech click HERE

The US has had their fair share of “too big to fail” companies and bailout fiascos.   We are sympathetically watching as the crisis in Cyprus unfolds effecting innocent Cypriot taxpayers/depositors: The Cypriot banking system was insolvent and desperately in need of a bailout.   Like Ireland, this island banking system has expanded rapidly over the years and currently has assets equal to almost 7 times its GDP, making the system too big to fail, but also "too big to save." Funding needed to recapitalize the banks was estimated to be around 17B euros (almost 100 percent of Cypriot GDP) making it impossible for Cyprus to resolve its crisis alone (Asli Demirgüç-Kunt).

According to the Washington Post “European leaders on Monday, March 25, 2013 hailed a last-minute bailout for Cyprus as an important step in defending their unified currency, but some officials and analysts questioned whether the deal raised new problems that could still threaten the survival of the euro. The arrangement will grant Cyprus $13 billion in emergency loans from an international group of lenders but will force the country to shutter its second-largest bank and will push massive losses on large depositors there. The deal effectively wipes out Cyprus’s appeal as an international banking haven but saves Europe from cutting off support to one of the 17 nations that use the euro currency”.

On Thursday March 28, 2013 Cyprus's banks reopened from a nearly two-week hiatus with little sign of disorder among depositors, even as the country's politicians pointed fingers over who was to blame for the financial sector's meltdown.  President Nicos Anastasiades ordered the creation of a three-member committee to investigate the roots of the economic malaise engulfing the island.

Why has CPI or in particular Chained CPI been a topic of discussion on the hill and a major concern for most Americans.  How many American’s are familiar with CPI and Chained CPI? 

CPI stands for Consumer Price Index (CPI).  It is a measure of the average change over time in the prices paid by urban consumers for a market basket of consumer goods and services.  The CPI affects nearly all Americans because it is used as an economic indicator, a deflator of other economic series and a means of adjusting dollar values.  The Bureau of Labor Statistics gives and excellent explanation:

CPI is the most widely used measure of inflation and is sometimes viewed as an indicator of the effectiveness of government economic policy. It provides information about price changes in the Nation's economy to government, business, labor, and private citizens and is used by them as a guide to making economic decisions. In addition, the President, Congress, and the Federal Reserve Board use trends in the CPI to aid in formulating fiscal and monetary policies.  The CPI and its components are used to adjust other economic series for price changes and to translate these series into inflation-free dollars. Examples of series adjusted by the CPI include retail sales, hourly and weekly earnings, and components of the National Income and Product Accounts.

An interesting example is the use of the CPI as a deflator of the value of the consumer's dollar to find its purchasing power. The purchasing power of the consumer's dollar measures the change in the value to the consumer of goods and services that a dollar will buy at different dates. In other words, as prices increase, the purchasing power of the consumer's dollar declines.

The CPI is often used to adjust consumers' income payments (for example, Social Security) to adjust income eligibility levels for government assistance and to automatically provide cost-of-living wage adjustments to millions of American workers. As a result of statutory action the CPI affects the income of millions of Americans. Over 50 million Social Security beneficiaries, and military and Federal Civil Service retirees, have cost-of-living adjustments tied to the CPI. In addition, eligibility criteria for millions of food stamp recipients, and children who eat lunch at school are affected by changes in the CPI. Many collective bargaining agreements also tie wage increases to the CPI.

To learn more click HERE

What is Chained CPI? Chained CPI is one of many ways to approximate the impact to consumers' pocketbooks of rising or falling prices. Although many economists believe that it is an improvement over conventional CPI measures, some lawmakers are hesitant to entertain it due to its impact on fixed-income seniors. During the recent federal budget and debt ceiling talks in Congress, the term "chained CPI" was raised as a possible way to reduce the deficit. The concern is that the change in accounting procedures would affect how much is paid out in future Social Security benefits and the amount of tax revenue generated.  Dylan Mathew explains how Chained CPI works in his article “Everything you Need to Know About Chained CPI in One Post”:

Numerous government programs, most notably Social Security benefits and the income thresholds for tax brackets, are indexed for inflation. But inflation can be measured in a number of ways. The tax code, for instance, uses CPI-U (Consumer Price Index – Urban), which measures prices for consumers in urban areas, to adjust the income cutoffs for different tax brackets. Social Security uses CPI-W, which is like CPI-U but only counts prices paid by urban wage-earners, not all consumers.

Various deficit-reduction frameworks, including Bowles-Simpson, Domenici-Rivlin and the Gang of Six plan, would convert all programs using CPI-U or CPI-W to a third measure — called C-CPI-U, or chained CPI. Most inflation measures, including CPI-U and CPI-W, track the price of a certain basket of goods. That basket could include, say, a year’s supply of propane. When propane costs go up, CPI-U and CPI-W include that as an increase in the cost of living.

But some people would just stop using propane if its price went up. They’d switch to electric heating, or a geothermal system, or a wood stove. So their actual heating costs wouldn’t go up as much as CPI-U and CPI-W would suggest. Chained CPI attempts to take “substitution effects” like this into account. Thus, its number generally rises more slowly than other metrics.

That adds up to a big cut in Social Security benefits. Imagine, for example, a person born in 1935 who retired to full benefits at age 65 in 2000. According to the Social Security Administration, people in that position had an average initial monthly benefit of $1,435, or $17,220 a year. Under the cost-of-living-adjustment formula and 2012 inflation, that benefit be up to $1,986 a month in 2013, or $23,832 a year. But under chained CPI, the sum would be around $1,880 a month, or $22,560 a year. That’s a cut of over 5 percent, and more as you go further and further into the future

The results by using chained CPI for taxes are also striking. The Tax Policy Center calculated the income tax increases that would be caused by a switch to chained CPI. They’re not big — a little more than $100 a year for most families — but they’re oddly regressive.  The group getting the biggest tax hike is families making between $30,000 and $40,000 a year. Their increase is almost six times that faced by millionaires. That’s because millionaires are already in the top bracket, so they’re not being pushed into higher marginal rates because of changing bracket thresholds. While a different inflation measure might mean that the cutoff between the 15 percent and 25 percent goes from $35,000 to $30,000, the threshold for the top 35 percent bracket is already low enough that all millionaires are paying it. Some of their income is taxed at higher rates because of lower thresholds down the line, but as a percentage of income that doesn’t amount to a whole lot.

All told, chained CPI raises average taxes by about 0.19 percent of income. So, taken all together, it’s basically a big (5 percent over 12 years; more, if you take a longer view) across-the-board cut in Social Security benefits paired with a 0.19 percent income surtax. You don’t hear a lot of politicians calling for the drastic slashing of Social Security benefits and an across-the-board tax increase that disproportionately hits low earners.

To read more of this article by the Washington Post click HERE

Now that you have had a chance to learn a little more about Chained CPI, what do you think, is it bad or good for America?  

The world is watching, yet here we go again, self manufactured crises! Americans are frustrated with the relentless gridlock imposed by Congress, particularly the GOP’s unwillingness to compromise on anything- hence a 15.6% approval rating according to a Gallup pole conducted by RCP.  How can Congress kick not one, but multiple critical issues down the road- sequester, continuing resolution and debt ceiling, meanwhile, do nothing to actively resolve  the issues.  This is unacceptable and unheard of in the everyday workforce. Yes sometimes a manager will allot additional time to resolve a complex issue or complete a project, but that extra time is spent on actively working the issue and submitting a  final solution/product on time if not before…. Anything less would be grounds for termination.

How did we get to this point of sequestration?  Back in 2011, Republicans demanded spending cuts in exchange for raising the debt ceiling, which was unprecedented.  Democrats on the other hand wanted a more balanced approach to include revenue and spending cuts instead of just cutting critical programs that boost our economy, help the middle class and poor.  Both parties decided if they couldn't make a deal by 2013, they would just do these automatic cuts that nobody likes- the cuts were supposed to be a tool to pry open the gridlocked political process. According to an article written by Melissa Block, “the whole design of these arbitrary cuts were to make them so unattractive and unappealing that Democrats and Republicans would actually get together and find a good compromise of sensible cuts as well as closing tax loopholes ect. This was all designed to say we can't do these bad cuts; let’s do something smarter. That was the whole point of the Budget Control Act- this so-called sequestration ."  Well so much for that idea, it’s now 2013 and gridlock remains at an all time high and Congress is no closer to reaching a deal to reduce the national debt than they were in 2011.

The American people are smart and do not buy the ridiculous insistence made by some that sequestrations not all gloom and doom- Well I guess if you consider furloughs, termination of contracts, compromising national security, domestic investments and core government functions un-alarming then your right. According to Politico, “Sequestration is a blunt and indiscriminate instrument. It is not the responsible way for our nation to achieve deficit reduction.”

To See the Potential Impact of Sequestration on Federal Agencies (Washington Post)….

Click HERE

During reconstruction the path to “full” voting rights for “all” American citizens was long, often brutal, unfair, and very challenging. Unfortunately, particularly in the last election some of those challenges have resurfaced. The 15th Amendment (Voting rights) ratified in 1870 is specifically dedicated to protecting the right of all citizens to vote, regardless of their race; The 19th Amendment: (Women’s voting rights), ratified in 1920, gave all citizens the right to vote, regardless of sex; 26th Amendment (Voting age), ratified in 1971, gave all citizens age 18 or older the right to vote.  If we truly value these rights and are determined to make a difference, we must participate in not just presidential elections but local and state elections as well.

Americans appear to have become so distracted with the enormous media coverage of general elections that they have lost focus on local and statewide elections.  These elections are just as important as presidential elections if not more because they affect how we live and how tax dollars are spent in our communities. In the 2010 elections most districts reported less than 50% turnout rates.  Why is that?  Did Americans forget that state elections impact national legislation?

As a consequence to very low turnout, Republicans where overwhelming sent to our state legislature.  This enabled them to draw the congressional map in their favor through redistricting until 2020 (when the next census is taken). They campaigned on job creation, yet appear to have become the party of NO, blocking virtually every proposal or piece of legislature that even remotely looks like a job creator or a compromise.

Federal elections occur every two years, on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. Every member of the House of Representatives and about one-third of the Senate is up for reelection in any given election year. Therefore, if we are tired of the gridlock in Congress and want to ensure that our voices are heard, we must start preparing now for future elections which all start with our local municipal and county elections.

With all the outrage and media coverage over gun violence, I hadn’t felt the need to write/blog about it simply because I thought doing something about gun control was a no brainer.  That is until I heard the President of the NRA and some Republicans respond with just plain crazy talk.  How can anybody ignore that theres been 31 school shootings in the US since Columbine or 20 children and 6 adults killed in Sandy Hook elementary; Six Sikh temple members killed; 12 people killed during the midnight premiere of The Dark Knight Rises in Aurora, CO; 5 killed at Cafe Racer Espresso in Seattle, WA; 5 black men shot in Tulsa, Oklahoma, in racially motivated shooting spree, 3 died;  7 killed at Oikos University, a Korean Christian college in Oakland, CA; Former Rep. Gabby Gifford (D-AZ) was shot in head, 19 others shot and 6 died.. Unfortunately, it doesn’t stop there, the list goes on and this doesn’t even include everyday homicides that aren't covered by the media.

To suggest that gun control violates the Second Amendment is simply not true.  When I hear this statement thrown around so carelessly I have to wonder if those who make such accusations know what the 2nd amendment  says because there is no relation between the right to bear arms and implementing measures to control violence.  I applaud the President's courage and unwavering determination to act quickly- On January 16, 2013 he unveiled aggressive proposals for curbing gun violence while pressing Congress to pass universal background checks and bans on military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines.  He also used his presidential powers to enact 23 measures that didn't require the backing of lawmakers.  The president's executive actions include:

Ordering federal agencies to make more data available for background checks; appointing a director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (which he did on); Directing the Centers for Disease Control to research gun violence; Ending limits that make it more difficult for the government to research gun violence, such as gathering data on guns that fall into criminal hands; Requiring Federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations; Giving schools flexibility to use federal grant money to improve school safety, such as by hiring school resource officers and giving communities grants to institute programs to keep guns away from people who shouldn't have them. 

What’s not to like about this proposal!  Nearly 6 in 10 Americans want stricter gun laws in the aftermath of the Newtown shooting (Associated Press-GfK poll).  For David Keene to flat out state the President’s measures are all feel-good proposals and they don’t prevent mass shooting is ridiculous and void of compassion. 

I was moved by Former Rep. Gabrielle Gifford’s (D-Ariz.) testimony urging Congress to Act, “Violence is a big problem. Too many children are dying. Too many children. We must do something. "It will be hard, but the time is now. You must act. Be bold, be courageous, Americans are counting on you." I stand with Ms. Gifford and urge all American’s to call their Congressman and Congresswomen to pass legislation now….

Raising the debt ceiling does not, as many on the Right would suggest, give the President a blank check to continue spending whenever he wants, however he wants. The debt limit is merely the maximum amount that the U.S. government can borrow, it doesn’t authorize new spending; instead, it provides the funding to pay for spending commitments that Congress has already incurred. So why are Republicans holding the debt-ceiling hostage with budget issues unrelated to paying our country’s bills?

In the past, the process of increasing the debt ceiling has largely been a formality that occurred frequently but took place outside of the public eye that is until Obama became President. Coincidence? I often wonder since the current debt is partly a result of obligations incurred long before he came into office?

For now the debt ceiling issue has been kicked down the road like many other demanding issues.  This seems to be the new normal. Why isn’t Congress, specifically Republicans who appear to be the obstructionist party held to the same standards of everyday Americans- if you don’t do your job or continuously miss deadlines you get fired?  I suppose that is the reason for Congressional elections except it appears that the odds are against Democrats in 2014 through 2020 elections due to redistricting and the polarization of the electorate that will probably limit the number of pickups Democrats can get even in a good Democratic year. Translation- that can either mean more gridlock and kicking cans down the road or some serious sole searching done by the Republican Party.

The American people long for the days of true bipartisanship where a political action consisted of a compromise or joint effort between the two parties.  Where decisions were made all for the good of the country/people- black, white, blue, purple, old, young, rich and the poor… I believe in a two party system, but I also believe that if  “Today’s” Republican Party want to continue to be a relevant force in the future they must make sincere strides to reach mainstream Americans which include women, African Americans and Latinos without cheating or changing the rules of the game during elections.  The divisive political climate manufactured by the GOP needs to also cease. This will not only benefit their party, but the country as a whole.  

I have always had profound respect for Colin Powell and value his opinion on various issues that effect our nation.  He appears to be a straight shooter. He doesn't just go along to get along with his party, but speaks what he believes to be truth and what he believes to be wrong/inaccurate.  Hence the reason I am providing the link to the video/transcript of the interview he did with David Gregory on Meet the Press Sunday, 1/13/13.. I think it is an absolute must see/hear or read:

Rape is a major global issue…Eastern Congo has been called the "rape capital of the world- reports record that 48 women are raped every hour; in Europe Sweden has the highest rape rate, yet the lowest conviction rate. In the US it is estimated that every two minutes someone is raped (Rainn Organization). 

One rape is one too many: This list contains the % of rapes (% of total population) against women by country.

1. New Zealand- 1.3 %
2. Austria: 1.2%
3. Sweden: 1.1
4. Finland: 1.1%
5. Australia: 1%
6. United Kingdom: 0.9%
7. Netherlands: 0.8%
8. Slovenia: 0.8%
9. Canada: 0.8%
10. France: 0.7%
11. Italy 0.6%
12. Switzarland: 0.6
13. Denmark: 0.4%
14. United States: 0.4%
15. Belguim: 0.3%
16. Saint Kitts and Nevis: 0.3%
17. Portugal: 0.2%
18. Malta: 0.1%
19. Japan: 0.1%

SOURCE: UNICRI (United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute). 2002. Correspondence on data on crime victims. March. Turin via NationMaster DEFINITION: victimized by sexual assault (as a % of the total population). Data refer to female population only. Crime statistics are often better indicators of prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime, than actual prevalence.

Many people are unaware of these startling statistics because sexual assaults are often quieted or go under-reported unless the incident is so heinous it manages to reach the media like in the recent case in Ohio: Two high schools football players were charged with sexually assaulting an incoherent high school girl and posting the video online shortly after the attack and joking about it.  Or the horrific case in India where a 23-year-old university student was raped for hours on a bus as it drove through its capital and then thrown off the bus afterwards.

It is because of the overwhelming public response to these two cases and the recent rhetorical attacks on women and their rights that I am troubled and utterly shocked that the 112^th Congress failed to renew the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).  This is a major concern because VAWA is credited with improving the criminal justice response to violence against women by:

• Holding rapists accountable for their crimes by strengthening federal penalties for repeat sex offenders and creating a federal “rape shield law,” which is intended to prevent offenders from using victims’ past sexual conduct against them during a rape trial;
• Mandating that victims, no matter their income levels, are not forced to bear the expense of their own rape exams or for service of a protection order;
• Keeping victims safe by requiring that a victim’s protection order will be recognized and enforced in all state, tribal, and territorial jurisdictions within the United States;
• Increasing rates of prosecution, conviction, and sentencing of offenders by helping communities develop dedicated law enforcement and prosecution units and domestic violence dockets;
• Ensuring that police respond to crisis calls and judges understand the realities of domestic and sexual violence by training law enforcement officers, prosecutors, victim advocates and judges; VAWA funds train over 500,000 law enforcement officers, prosecutors, judges, and other personnel every year;
• Providing additional tools for protecting women in Indian country by creating a new federal habitual offender crime and authorizing warrantless arrest authority for federal law enforcement officers who determine there is probable cause when responding to domestic violence cases. 
VAWA has ensured that victims and their families have access to the services they need to achieve safety and rebuild their lives by:
  • Responding to urgent calls for help by establishing the National Domestic Violence Hotline, which has answered over 3 million calls and receives over 22,000 calls every
  • Improving safety and reducing recidivism by developing coordinated community responses that bring together diverse stakeholders to work together to prevent and respond to violence against women,
  • Focusing attention on the needs of underserved communities, including creating legal relief for battered immigrants so that abusers cannot use the victim’s immigration status to prevent victims from calling the police or seeking safety, and supporting tribal governments in building their capacity to protect American Indian and Alaska Native women.  To see White House Fact Sheet in its entirety click HERE

 How could Congress allow VAWA to expire? According to MSNBC

“House Republicans made VAWA a partisan issue even though previous Congresses have twice renewed the law without a fight, but not this time. In April, the Senate passed its own version of VAWA that preserved programs and extended protections to victims who are lesbian, gay, transgender or who live in tribal areas, where rape has increased 55% from 2000 to 2010, according to federal data. Under current law, tribal courts don’t have the authority to prosecute domestic violence when carried out on tribal land by non-Native Americans.

The House, however, adopted its own version in May that rolled back established programs and stripped away protections for immigrant women, and made it harder for those who are illegally in the country and victims of abuse or crimes to obtain legal status as part of a special program known as the U Visa.  The Eric Cantor refused to budge, and the Senate insisted existing protections remain in place. An eleventh-hour attempt by Vice President Joe Biden to revive negotiations failed largely because GOP leaders rebuffed the Senate's expanded protections”.   See article in its entirety HERE

Failure to reauthorize VAWA is heartless, inexcusable and sends a negative message across the globe. We are better than that- No woman should be denied protection regardless of who she is or where the assault took place.  The American people are urging House Republicans to pass the Senate version.

Happy New Year and Congratulations to all our newly elected female members arriving to Congress! “After a wave of unprecedented legislative attacks on women's reproductive rights, pay equality and medicare, “the 2012 election will go down in history as a groundbreaking, glass-ceiling-smashing milestone for women” (Huffington Post).  The 113th Congress will have 102 female members to include: 78 women in the House (58 Democrats & 20 Republicans) –An increase of 5 more than the previous year of 73; 20 in the Senate (16 Democrats & 4 Republicans)- an increase of 3 from the 17 women in the previous year (12 Democrats & 5 Republicans).  Thanks to the power of the vote, nearly a quarter of the women serving in the 113th Congress are freshmen, I trust they will represent the will of the people, (which by in large concurs with the message the President campaigned on) and accomplish great things that disproportionately affect women including helping to reduce gridlock in Congress…

Democratic Newcomers to the House

Arizona - Ann Kirkpatrick, Kyrsten Sinema

California - Julia Brownley, Gloria Negrete McLeod

Connecticut - Elizabeth Esty

Florida - Lois Frankel

Hawaii - Tulsi Gabbard

Illinois - Cheri Bustos, Tammy Duckworth

Nevada - Dina Titus

New Hampshire - Ann McLane Kuster, Carol Shea-Porter

New Mexico - Michele Lujan Grisham

New York - Grace Meng

Ohio - Joyce Beatty

Washington - Suzan DelBen

Republican Newcomers to the House

Indiana - Susan Brooks, Jackie Walorski

Missouri - Ann Wagner

Democratic Newcomers to the Senate

Hawaii - Mazie Hirono

Massachusetts - Elizabeth Warren

North Dakota - Heidi Heitkamp

Wisconsin - Tammy Baldwin

Republican Newcomer to the Senate

Nebraska - Deb Fischer

Incumbents Re-elected to the Senate (all Democrats)

California - Dianne Feinstein

Michigan - Debbie Setabenow

Minnesota - Amy Klobuchar

Missouri - Claire McCaskill

New York - Kirsten Gillibrand

Washington - Maria Cantle

On Thursday, December 13, 2012 U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice withdrew her name from consideration for the Secretary of State candidacy after weeks of relentless unfair attacks by Sens. John McCain, Lindsey Graham and many other Republicans for the her role covering the Sept. 11 attack on a U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya. 

I am deeply saddened by the GOP’s inability to acknowledge that the ambassador was speaking from unclassified talking points given to her by the CIA at a very early stage in the investigation: This type of gross disregard for the facts demonstrates how people hear what they want to hear to sometime mask other underlying motives….

I for one know how it feels to work hard, advance in education and become an expert in a field only to have someone come along and question your professional experience, discount your education, assassinate your character and stunt the advancement of your career.  I pulled threw my experience by drawing energy/strength from President Obama’s commitment and dedication to our country despite countless, relentless undeserved attacks from his critics.  I figured if he continued to be the best he could be for others then I could too.

Susan Rice was President Obama’s senior foreign policy advisor during his presidential campaign and now our U.N. Ambassador. She started her government career in 1993 with the National Security Council as the director of international organizations and in 1997 assistant secretary for African affairs. Rice attended Stanford University in Palo Alto, California where she received her bachelor's degree in history.  In 1986, she went on to attend University of Oxford in Oxfordshire, England where she earned her M.Phil. and D.Phil. in international relations, and wrote a dissertation that examined Rhodesia's transition from white rule. Her paper won the Royal Commonwealth Society's Walter Frewen Lord Prize for outstanding research in the field of Commonwealth History, as well as the Chatham House-British International Studies Association Prize for the most distinguished doctoral dissertation in the United Kingdom in the field of International Relations (Biography.com)….

For anyone to state that Ms. Rise is unqualified to be Secretary of State, I think, is a gross misstatement and a great disservice to our country.  I agree with the President “ her decision to remove her name demonstrates the strength of her character, an admirable commitment to rise above the politics of the moment to put our national interests first.”  I don’t know about anyone else, but despite what has happened, I believe the best of Susan Rise is yet to come! 

Friday, December 14, 2012, during an emotional address to the nation on the horrific mass shooting in Connecticut that killed 20 children and 8 adults the President stated, “We’re going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics,” President. Obama said, listing the devastation wrought by other gun violence, from a recent attack in an Oregon shopping mall to the shootings in a movie theater in Aurora, Colo., in July (New York Times). 

My heart goes out to the victim's loved ones and I join the President and the world in sending prayers and condolences to all of them

Ever wonder where on earth the Democrats got the donkey as a symbol of their party, and how the Republicans got the Elephant?  Well according to an interesting article I came across they didn't pick there mascots- they got stuck with them! Here’s the story:

Their origin as symbols for the parties is attributed to a political cartoonist, Thomas Nast, who used the donkey and the elephant in cartoons drawn for Harper's Weekly in the 1870's. Why Nast chose the donkey and the elephant is a pretty complicated story, and requires some understanding of the politics of that day. 

Nast combined these two symbols together for the first time in an 1874 cartoon for Harper's Weekly, called "The Third Term Panic." He drew a donkey disguised in a lion-skin, trying to scare away the animals in a forest. One of the animals frightened by the donkey's roar was an elephant - a symbol for Republican voters, who were abandoning President Ulysses S. Grant's quest for a 3rd term, and in Nast's view, were falling into a trap set by the Democrats. You can see the original Nast cartoon on by clicking HERE

The cartoon was based on a scandal of the day -  a hoax which had been foisted on its readers by the New York Herald newspaper. The Herald ran a deliberately false story about animals breaking out of the zoo and foraging for food throughout Central Park. Around the same time, the Herald was running a series of editorials against a 3rd term for President Ulysses S. Grant, calling the possibility "Caesarism." In Nast's cartoon, the donkey disguised as a lion is roaring out "Caesarism," and scaring away the elephant.  The donkey was a stand-in for the Democratic-leaning Herald newspaper, and the elephant stood for the Republican party.

Other cartoonists of the time picked up the idea of the timid elephant representing Republicans, and that symbol for the party became widely recognized and accepted by the general public. Nast's cartoon showing a duplicitous donkey attacking a weak-minded elephant, became a handy symbol for other cartoonists wanting to represent Democrats attacking Republicans.

Popular recognition of the image overrode the party's own wishes - the Democratic party has never officially adopted the donkey as its emblem, but came to accept the reality that the symbol had stuck.  The donkey had been used earlier in our history as a political symbol. In the 1828 presidential campaign, Andrew Jackson was labeled a "jackass," for his populist views. Jackson proudly seized the label and began using donkeys on his campaign posters. During his presidency, cartoonists sometimes used the donkey to illustrate President Jackson's stubbornness on certain issues. After Jackson, the donkey symbol largely faded, only to be revived again by Thomas Nast in his 1870's cartoons.  

Over time, Republicans came to view the elephant emblem as a sign of strength and intelligence, and officially adopted it as their emblem, while their opponents portrayed it as a timid and clumsy behemoth. Democrats seized the "jackass" label, and transformed it into a clever and courageous donkey. As is still true today, it's all in the spin! 

Click HERE to see original article

The pledge began in 1986 under the endorsement of Ronald Reagan where Republican candidates and elected officials would solemnly bind themselves to oppose any and all tax increases. The pledge has since become a de rigeur for Republicans seeking Federal and State offices and is a necessity for Democrats running in Republican districts (Braynard Group).  

During the 112th Congress, 236 Representatives and 41 Senators signed the pledge and for the upcoming 113th Congress, 219 Representatives and 39 Senators have signed the pledge. 

As the fiscal cliff draws near and the deficit continues to balloon, a growing number of Americans are concerned and frustrated with the GOP’s commitment to the Norquist Pledge.  Many question why such a pledge even exists given the fact that it is not a legal requirement to hold or run for office. 

The only oath our elected officials should be obligated to make is to the American people; a piece of paper should not supersede what’s in the best interest of our country… I often find myself wondering how does such a pledge sustain such power and longevity- especially after its opposition by the American people in the recent presidential election?

The Republican’s “non-negotiable stance and unwillingness to raise taxes on the top 2% is unacceptable and unjustifiable. The President's proposal to raise taxes on those making over $250k is a proven strategy that will “help” to reduce the deficit and create shared responsibility- currently the middle class pays more than their fair share…

As the fiscal cliff looms ahead and the battle for a tax increase continues, the American people will remain vigilant and remember those elected officials in the 2014 election who retracted their pledge, honored the will of the people and put country before politics.

Click HERE to view the 112th Congressional list of those who signed the pledge

Click HERE to view the 113th Congressional list of those who signed the pledge

The Horns of Africa is the world’s most vulnerable region, beset by extreme poverty, hunger and global climate change, notable a drying and warming of climate during the past quarter century.  These scourges are leading to the spread of violence and war, and war is contributing to global instability (The Guardian, 2012).  

Earlier this year, after experiencing the worst drought in 60 years famine ended in Somalia, Ethiopia, Kenya, Djibouti and Uganda, yet millions of people are still fighting for their lives .  A press release issued by Hillary Clinton revealed that more than 2 million people in Somalia and 9 million people overall need urgent humanitarian assistance.  The Secretary also stated that the US will add $58 million in assistance to the approximately $1.3 billion in emergency sent in 2011.  “The US is fighting chronic food insecurity by helping communities diversify and adapt their livelihoods, improve smallholder agricultural and other efforts so they can become resilient.”

It’s important to note that a CRS Report to Congress revealed that “the humanitarian emergency is complicated by political and security pressures within, between and among the various countries in the region.  The recent deterioration of security conditions along the Kenya-Somalia border security incidents within the Dadaab refugee camp complex in northeast Kenya and increasing restrictions by al Shabaab, an Islamist insurgency led by Al Queda affiliate, on humanitarian access in Somalia all have had impact on the relief effort.” 

We are thankful to the US and the International community for their efforts and response to the crisis thus far and understand that there is still much more work to be done.  To read more about the crisis and how to help or donate click HERE.  To see the Secretary of State’s entire press release click HERE.

The American people officially and overwhelmingly echoed the words of 2008 “we want Barack Obama to be the President of the United States.” On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 with record number turnouts, his marching orders were solidified, stay the course and complete the mission that God has called you to do.

Despite rumors of low momentum, his supporters stayed the course and true to the mission “FORWARD”.  I can show you better than I can tell you was clearly the strategy. Thanks to will power and determination 53% of women voters, 71% of Latinos, 93% of African Americans, 60% of young adults, 73% of Asians, 39% of white voters and others carried him to victory, winning the popular vote and all battle ground states with the exception of North Carolina.  If that wasn’t momentum then I don’t know what is.

During the President’s powerful victory speech he told the nation "the best is yet to come." "Our economy is recovering" A decade of war is ending.  A long campaign is now over. And whether I earned your vote or not, I have listened to you. I have learned from you. And you've made me a better President. With your stories and your struggles, I return to the White House more determined and more inspired than ever about the work there is to do, and the future that lies ahead." 

The American people overwhelmingly back the President of the United states and concur with his statement "we are all in this together".  We will remain engaged and will not re-elected officials who wish to ignore the will of the people and impose their own agenda without compromise. 

Congratulations to the American people and the President on a victory well deserved.  I look "FORWARD" to four more years of great leadership.  Here are a few accomplishments in the President's first term, particularly in the first two years when Democrats controlled both houses:

• Passed Health Care Reform- signed Affordable Care Act (2010)
• Passed the Stimulus- signed $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (2009)
• Passed Wall Street Reform- signed Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (2010)
• Ended the War in Iraq
• Began Drawdown of War in Afghanistan
• Eliminated Osama Bin Laden
• Turned Around U.S. Auto Industry- GM & Chrysler
• Recapitalized Banks
• Repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell
• Toppled Moammar Gaddafi
• Told Egypt Hosni President Mubarak to Go
• Reversed Bush Torture Policies
• Improved America’s Image Abroad
• Kicked Banks Out of Federal Student Loan Program
• Expanded Pell Grant Spending
• Created Race to the Top
• Boosted Fuel Efficiency Standards
• Coordinated International Response to Financial Crisis
• Passed Mini Stimuli
• Began Asia “Pivot
• Increased Support for Veterans
• Tightened Sanctions on Iran- Signed Accountability, and Divestment Act (2010)
• Created Conditions to Begin Closing Dirtiest Power Plants
• Passed Credit Card Reforms- Signed Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility, & Disclosure Act (2009)
• Eliminated Catch-22 in Pay Equality Laws- Signed Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act in (2009)
• Protected Two Liberal Seats on the U.S. Supreme Court
• Improved Food Safety System- signed FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (2011)
• Achieved New START Treaty: Signed with Russia (2010)
• Expanded National Service- Signed Serve America Act (2009)
• Expanded Wilderness and Watershed Protection: Signed Omnibus Public Lands Management Act (2009)
• Gave the FDA Power to Regulate Tobacco- Signed the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (2009)
• Pushed Federal Agencies to Be Green Leaders
• Passed Fair Sentencing Act (2010)
• Trimmed and Reoriented Missile Defense
• Began Post-Post-9/11 Military Builddown
• Let Space Shuttle Die and Killed Planned Moon Mission:
• Invested Heavily in Renewable Technology
• Crafting Next-Generation School Tests
• Cracked Down on Bad For-Profit Colleges
• Improved School Nutrition- In coordination with Michelle Obama, signed Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act (2010)
• Expanded Hate Crimes Protections: Signed Hate Crimes Prevention Act (2009)
• Brokered Agreement for Speedy Compensation to Victims of Gulf Oil Spill
• Created Recovery.gov
• Pushed Broadband Coverage
• Expanded Health Coverage for Children: Signed  Children’s Health Insurance Authorization Act (2009)
• Recognized the Dangers of Carbon Dioxide
• Expanded Stem Cell Research
• Provided Payment to Wronged Minority Farmers- signed Claims Resolution Act (2009)
• Helped South Sudan Declare Independence

President Obama suspended his campaigning Monday as Sandy devastated the east coast, leaving millions without power and causing massive damage in New Jersey and New York City.   On Wednesday he traveled to New Jersey to get a first-hand look at the damage with Republican Governor Chris Christie, who praised his handling of the disaster.  Sadly many members of the Governor's party criticized him for doing so.  

Presidential candidate, Mitt Romney helped with disaster relief in Ohio Tuesday, although at the GOP primary debate in June he stated that he would "absolutely" shut down FEMA and transfer its responsibilities to the states. "If you can go even further, and send it back to the private sector, that's even better," he added (Huffington Post).  Given Romney’s history of flip flopping or inability to stand his ground on any given issue, it’s hard to ascertain if he now regrets his words or just regrets announcing his plans to the public… 

Hurricane Sandy is estimated to top the $60 billion mark in economic damages.  In light of this, the American people understand that FEMA’s role is crucial.  The primary purpose of FEMA is to coordinate the response to disasters that occur in the United States and overwhelm the resources of local and state authorities. The governor of the state in which the disaster occurs must declare a state of emergency and formally request from the President that FEMA and the Federal government respond to the disaster.

In response to Sandy FEMA will provide assistance with temporary housing, home repairs and loans to cover uninsured property loss.  They are also assisting with the coordination of power restoration and distributing water, food, blankets, and cots.

The FEMA web site has a Sandy page where residents can find answers to the questions below by clicking HERE 

• How to register for assistance
• How to find shelters or search for shelters via text
• How to download FEMA smartphone app
• How to download Red Cross Hurricane App
• Volunteer
• Donate

President Obama and Mitt Romney took to the stage at Hofstra University last Tuesday for a town hall style debate, debate #2- an excellent forum that gave voice to everyday issues by ordinary people.  Last night the 3rd and final debate was held at Lynn University on foreign policy with side discussions on the economy and domestic affairs.

The polls suggest that the first debate revitalized Governor Romney's campaign and re-energized his base as he proved to be well prepared, aggressive and his policies and flip-flopping went unchallenged.

The last two debates shifted in the President's favor with polls confirming strong performances.  He was presidential, consistent, passionate, earnest, factual and exposed Romney's untruths/flip flopping, matching him rhetorically blow by blow.

Now that the presidential debates have ended, what next?  In two weeks Americans will hopefully flood the poles and vote in record numbers- not just for the presidency, but also for their state representatives who’s roles are just as important. 

The stakes are high, this election is a clear choice between two different visions.  One of which is critical to the survival of the middle class with equal access to health, wealth, opportunity and education.

As we head to the poles and cast our votes let us not forget words of wisdom echoed by our ancestors who fought for our right to vote:

• A leader who stands for what he or she truly believes is consistent, passionate, unwavering and doesn’t move wherever the wind blows
• When a leader shows you who they are behind closed doors, believe them
• Be fair in your judgment and assessment of ones record, don’t expect him or her to perform miracles that realistically no one could possibly perform in one term
• Vote based on issues that not only benefit you, but everyone- we are the “United” States
• Race and gender should never matter, but truth and integrity should
• A leader who is transparent has nothing to hide or lose
• A good leader says what they mean and mean what they say 
• If a leader changes his or her mind on a issue or multiple issues, it's important to admit to it and provide a clear, sincere explanation why.  A leader who does not do so lacks integrity and can't be trusted
• Words void of content and action lack leadership

Vice-President Joe Biden and vice-presidential candidate Paul Ryan covered a lot of ground in Thursday’s night debate on domestic and foreign affairs.  The masterful performance leveled the playing field for the President (after last week’s debate) and highlighted stark differences between the two political agendas on taxes, the economy, healthcare, social security, abortion, Libya, Iran, Syria and Afghanistan.

As we consider who ‘s the winner and who’s the loser of the debate, lets not forget that a Vice President stands a 1 in 3 chance of eventually becoming president and essentially upholding the policies of their predecessors. The U.S. Constitution provides that should the president die or become disabled while in office, the "powers and duties" of the office are transferred to the Vice President.  With this in mind who do you think is ready to lead?  Who will uphold a vision/agenda that will benefit “all” Americans?  If you can answer these two critical questions after watching the debate then you have determined who the winner is. 

For fun lets take a history quiz:

As defined in the constitution, what are the duties of Vice President? 

As President of the Senate, the Vice President has two primary duties: to case a vote in the event of a Senate deadlock and to preside over and certify the official vote count of the U.S.

Can you name the Vice Presidents who inherited the Presidency?

Four Vice Presidents who inherited the office because of  an assassination

1. Andrew Johnson for Abraham Lincoln in 1865
2. Chester Arthur for James Garfield in 1881
3. Theodore Roosevelt for William McKinley in 1901
4. Lyndon Johnson for John Kennedy in 1963

Four Vice Presidents inherited the office through the natural death of the incumbent

1. John Tyler for William Henry Harrison in 1841
2. Millard Fillmore for Zachary Taylor in 1850
3. Calvin Coolidge for Warren Harding in 1923
4. Harry Truman for Franklin Roosevelt in 1945

One became President due to resignation

The Day of the Girl is about highlighting, celebrating, discussing, and advancing girls lives and opportunities across the globe while exposing countries like West Africa, South Asia, North Africa/Middle East, and Latin America where many girls are forced to marry between the ages of 12-16. The husbands are typically several years older, sometimes decades older. 

It is estimated that 25,000 girls get married every day.  As a result, young girls are either unable to attend school or drop out at an early age.   These young women are essentially robbed of future opportunities and risk severe health problems. Young girls are not physically and mentally ready for marriage, sex and having babies. Child brides often suffer from domestic violence and endure forced sex. Many others experience constant pain and even death as a result of complications during pregnancy and childbirth (Day of the Girl Organization, 2012).

Today Secretary Hillary Clinton spoke to a group of visiting girl scouts in honor of the first-ever International Day of the Girl.  The Secretary began her speech addressing the incident of the 14-year-old Pakistan girl, Malala Yousufzai, who was active in speaking out for a girl’s right to obtain an education. Malala blogged about her views and essentially became a young activist for all girls in Pakistan. Because of her courage, yesterday she was attacked and shot by extremists who were against girls getting an education, speaking for themselves and becoming leaders….

Secretary Clinton went on to say “I think we should be dedicating our efforts to brave young women, some of whose names we will know and some we will never know, who struggle against tradition and culture and even outright hostility and sometimes violence to pursue their hopes, their God-given potential to have a life of meaning and purpose and make contributions to their families, their communities, their countries, and the world. So yesterday’s attack reminds us of the challenges that girls face, whether it’s poverty or marginalization or even violence, just for speaking out for their basic rights”  

In her closing speech she shared some of the (refocused) initiatives that the State Department is launching to try to prevent child marriage and promote girls’ education. To see entire speech click here

Millions tuned into their televisions Wednesday, October 3, 2012 to watch the 90-minute presidential debate held in Denver. Polling’s suggest Mitt Romey was a clear winner based on his style and energy.  Do you agree?  Is that enough?  According to the GOP, Mitt Romney’s performance was a game changer, but I have to wonder should American people base their future on style and energy instead of content and facts? Some believe Mitt Romney was a classic example of a man exhibiting characteristics that had a lot to lose, he was relentlessly untruthful, over aggressive, abandoned many of his campaign and party positions without blinking an eye, co-signed on popular issues that he and his party denounced up until the day of the debate (true to his form, a flip flopper), and totally disregarded the rules set forth by the moderator- who by the way did not challenge him on one issue.

From a non-partisan perspective, I found Mitt Romney’s performance to be just that, a “performance” and an insult to the American peoples intelligence: How can a Presidential Candidate tell the American people with a straight face that he cares about the middle class, Medicare and Medicaid, but behind closed doors (with distain) discount 47% of them! How can a Presidential Candidate in one breath praise (for the first time mind you) a healthcare plan he put in place in Massachusetts and on the other hand say he is going to appeal the Affordable Health Care which was an exact replica.   How can a Presidential Candidate vehemently criticize Obama for cutting $716 billion from Medicare when his running mate, Paul Ryan has that same $716 Billion cost savings in his budget plan! For the record, that $716 billion is a cost savings that is mostly wrung from health-care providers, not Medicare beneficiaries — who, as a result of the health-care law, end up with new benefits for preventive care and prescription drugs.  How can a Presidential Candidate say he is for education when Ryan’s plan will cut Pell Grants back to 2008 levels, eliminating recent increases for low-income college students?  How can a Presidential Candidate state that he is for transparency, but won’t even produce his taxes, or explain what loopholes in the tax code he’s going to close… Can the American people trust a candidate who’s claimed throughout his entire campaign that his economic plan included a $5 trillion tax cut, but now claims he never said that….How can a Presidential Candidate run on Deval Patick’s, governor of Massachusetts record and claim as his own when it comes to maintaining a great school system and creating jobs!

I do agree that this first debate was not President Obama’s best performance- a lot of missed opportunities to call Romney out, but at least he stuck with the facts, remained consistent, didn’t over power the moderator, provided content/substance on the issues and spoke truth to the American people. 

It doesn't matter whether the next president is Republican, Democrat, Independent, white, black or blue, but was does matter is who the American people can trust.

As if the stark difference in views between Mitt Romney and President Obama aren't enough, here are a few other reasons why you should vote (by the Safety and Justice Organization).

Voting is a way to speak your mind and let your voice be heard! Your vote is your voice. When we vote, we are actually telling elected officials and lawmakers how we feel about education, public safety, social security, health care, and other important issues.  

One voice, one vote really does count! Remember: there is power in numbers, and when we vote and get our family members to vote, we can truly make a difference. If you don’t vote for what you believe in, others will – and you may not like the outcome.   

Our children are depending on us to represent their voices too! Because our children can’t vote, we have to do it for them. That’s how we make our concerns about schools, safety, housing, and other issues heard. When we vote, we are looking out for our kids, and their futures.

Voting changes communities! Do you ever wonder why one neighborhood gets passed over for things it needs, while another seems to get it all? One big reason is voting. When we vote, we can get results that we can actually see.

Vote to effect change! It was through elections that we voted in officials who were champions for civil rights. Voting is our chance to make a difference in our own lives and within the world.

Believe it or not, voting is a way of honoring our history! As long as our country has existed, there have been people who didn’t want us to vote. There were several freedom fighters that stood up for the right to vote. Well, those times may seem ancient, but there are still people today who don’t want us to vote. It’s now our turn to stand up and vote to preserve the honor of those who went before us.

Last but not least, because it gives you credibility!  Often times, we voice our concerns to elected officials, but if we aren’t voting, our concerns may not matter at all to them. Voting can actually give you the credibility to make your concerns a top priority for legislators

Download free “Election Protection” smartphone app by texting 90975 and text OURVOTE 

-        get your registration status

-        Get help registering to vote

-        See what type of machine you vote on

-        Access voting rights FAWs for all 50 states

-        Find your polling place

-        Call or email to get answers to your voting questions or problems

Watch RNC livestream by clicking here . See highlights of DNC by clicking here. If you need more DETAIL see Bill Clinton’s speech by clicking here 

Hassan Sheikh Mohamud emerged as the new president of Somalia yesterday, September 11, 2012, raising hope for its citizens after decades of civil war.  In a statement the new president promised to bring peace back into the international fold, establishing Somalia’s first stable central government. Hassan Sheikh Mohamud has his work cut out for him though, he inherits an ongoing war, a humanitarian crisis, fragile institutions and deep-rooted warlordism.

Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton, released the following press statement yesterday:

“I want to congratulate President Hassan Sheikh and the Somali people on yesterday’s election. I commend former President Sheikh Sharif for his humility in conceding the election. With the election of a New Federal Parliament and Speaker, the national constituent assembly’s adoption of a provisional constitution, and the election of a new president, Somalia has completed its political transition. This significant achievement is the result of years of hard work - by Somalis and the international community. I especially want to thank the African Union, the United Nations, and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development for their critical contributions.

We applaud these steps toward a responsive, representative and accountable government and Hassan Sheikh’s commitment to inclusive governance. But there is still more work to be done. The United States calls on Somalia’s new leaders to continue the reform effort and to work together to create a better future. We are committed to helping the new government strengthen democratic institutions, improve stability and security, and deliver results for the Somali people.”

There is really no right or wrong way to define success simply because the term itself is subjective.  That being said, I think it is useful to analyze the different perspectives because it helps us to identify were we are in life. After all if you don’t know what success means to you it’s impossible to recognize the road that leads you there. 

Webster’s dictionary defines success as a favorable or desired outcome; the attainment of wealth, favor or eminence.  I can’t think of a better tangible example where two parties demonstrated stark differences in their view of success than at the Republican and Democratic National Conventions.

At the RNC it appeared that the majority of the speakers equated success with their (or that of their parents) creation of big businesses. That is, the more money you make, the more successful you are. By the time the convention ended millions of average working citizens who did not necessarily earn “big money” felt the need to reevaluate their own matriculation in life and question their success.

At the Democratic National Convention the majority of the speakers equated success to an action rooted in the selfless desire to influence and help improve the quality of life for all and not just a selected few. In other words, it’s not the money/big business that makes a person successful, but the impact it has on others and the driving force or motivation behind the business, commitment or policy.  By the time the DNC convention ended millions of average working citizens who did not necessarily earn “big money” still felt empowered.  They did not have to question success- they felt success.  Many were sitting right next to success- teachers, firefighters, police officers, military, doctors and the list goes on…  

Lastly, after the conventions, I asked my 15-year-old son what success meant to him. He simply stated “I don’t want to be remembered by how much money I make or the things I possess, but by the lives I touch and what I did with the money in the interim to positively impact the lives of others”.  I thought that was quite profound and couldn’t be prouder of his response.

It all started months ago with two divisive comments made at the presidential debates by Newt Gingrich, who called President Obama the Food Stamp President and a Welfare King.  I believe and hope other Americans feel that those statements were utterly insensitive and extremely disrespectful… I am proud of President Obama or any president who feels a since of moral obligation to help those who can’t care for themselves or need a little push in the right direction, such as the disabled, the elderly, those who are temporarily unemployed, military recipients who seek an education through the GI bill and single parents who need assistance feeding their children or keeping them healthy. Why can’t Congress find common ground between cost and compassion?

Proponents believe that welfare should be eliminated because “some” abuse the system, but think it is perfectly ok for others to manipulate the tax system by hiding money in Swiss bank accounts or taking advantage of tax loopholes to avoid paying higher taxes.  I for one am tired of hearing welfare recipients dehumanized- made to feel like their asking for a handout or a drain on society while others find it perfectly acceptable for Big Banks and Fortune 500 companies to receive bailout money for a disaster they created… or watch as the GOP relentlessly fight for prolife while vowing to eliminate and or drastically reduce the funding for programs that help sustain life. 

Since those infamous comments by Gingrich, the GOP has claimed that President Obama removed the work requirement from welfare.  Yesterday at the 2012 Republican convention, Rick Santorum made the same allegations. This would be ok if it were a true fact, but it has been proven false time and time again by Fact Check and other reputable sources, yet knowingly Mitt Romney has endorsed the same claim in a number of ads.  

What is Welfare and what is it used for?  Welfare is a federally funded program that began in the 1930's during the Great Depression. The US government responded to the overwhelming number of families and individuals in need of aid by creating a welfare program that would give assistance to those who had little or no income. In 1996 the Republican Congress passed a reform law signed by President Clinton, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act that gave the control of the welfare system back to the states. Under the act, the Federal government gives annual lump sums to the states to use to provide money or services to citizens who are in need. In turn the states must adhere to certain criteria to ensure that those receiving aid move from welfare to work. Let’s be clear, since President Obama has been in office he has endorsed this same policy…

Welfare is used by all races, both white and black almost equally according to the statistics by the Department of Commerce.  Studies show that people cycle in and out of welfare- on average, they only use it for 2-5 years. 

Here is a link from the Department of Commerce (July, 2012) that provides a some additional statistical facts about welfare: http://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/

Here we go again, is the GOP seriously talking about women’s body parts again!  According to Rep. Atkin women can’t get pregnant during a rape assault….he and other members of his party believe that when a traumatic experience such as rape is undergone, a woman secretes a certain secretion which has a tendency to kill the sperm." What, are you kidding me, this theory is ludicrous, to state otherwise simply blows my mind…There is no scientific evidence of this, in a recent article by Franke-Ruta, she states that “this theory is contemporary equivalent of the early American belief that only witches float.”

What does Rep. Atkin mean by his latest attempt to define rape, "for rape to be considered rape it has to be legitimate or forcible, a word inferred from H.R. 5939 which was co-sponsored by Paul Ryan and the majority of the GOP?  President Obama responded in a press conference by stating that there is no differences in rape, rape is rape.

What rape isn’t forced? Is there such an instance? With that being said, let’s pause for a moment and define “rape” as stated in the Webster’s Dictionary.  “Rape is an act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person.” Hum, I think it is safe to conclude that the answer to the latter question is no.

Why do Akin and co-sponsors/supporters of H.R. 5939 keep enforcing this crazy theory? Well it appears to justify a ban on all abortions, politically speaking, rape "needs to be defined differently," says The Atlantic's Franke-Ruta. Whether its "legitimate" or "forcible" or "assault rape," it must be sold as "something that does not result in pregnancy." In my opinion rather than insult a women’s intelligence by stating such nonsense, why not simply say (rather people agree or not) it is there moral belief abortions should be banned, nothing more or nothing less?

The State Department spokesperson, Victoria Nuland, released this statement to the press Wednesday, August 15, 2012.

“Today the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) sent a strong message to the Assad regime by suspending Syria’s membership in the OIC. The United States commends the OIC for its action and commitment to a peaceful resolution in Syria. Today’s action underscores the Assad regime’s increasing international isolation and the widespread support for the Syrian people and their struggle for a democratic state that represents their aspirations and respects their human rights.”

Paul Ryan, House Budget Committee Chairman and Romney’s vice-presidential select makes headlines with his budget plan.  

Democrats state that Ryan’s proposal will end Medicare as it is known today and Republicans believe that the program will go bankrupt without major changes like those proposed in Ryan’s plan.  

How will Ryan’s budget plan affect you?  Let’s take a look at some of its key issues. 

Ryan’s plan would privatize Medicare.  That means transforming Medicare into a voucher system where future retirees would get subsidies to buy private insurance. The GOP is correct in continuously stating that those changes will not take effect until 2023- does that somehow make it more acceptable?   

According to a statement made by the Congressional Budget Office, “under the Ryan’s plan spending would rise to $7,400 per beneficiary in 2030. That’s compared to a scenario that incorporates expected changes to law and projects Medicare spending to rise to $9,600 per beneficiary, about 75% more than current levels (Robert Schroeder, 2012).”

Ryan’s plan would repeal the Affordable Care Act: See my two blogs below on the affordable Care Act and you decide whether this is a good move.

Ryan’s plan would cut Pell Grants back to 2008 levels, eliminating recent increases for low-income college students.

Ryan’s plan would repeal Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act which brought the most significant changes to financial regulation in US history.  Do you remember what happened to the housing industry before Dodd-Frank?

According to Ezra Klein’s summary of the Ryan’s plan,

the plan proposes eventual elimination of Fannie Mae and Freddie MAC, winding down their government guarantee and ending taxpayer subsidies. It Supports increasing the guarantee fees Fannie and Freddie charge lenders in order to bring private capital back, shrinking their retained portfolios, and enacting various measures that would bring transparancy and accountability to the GSE."

Ezra's summary also states "that the Ryan plan converts Federal share of Medicaid spending and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), better known as food stamps into a block grant that's indexed for inflation and population growth.  To offer some context, health-care cost often increase at twice the rate of inflation or more.

To read Ryan’s budget plan in its entirety click here

Congratulations to our US Olympians!  We are VERY Proud of all of You!

http://www.nbcolympics.com/medals/index.html

10 states, Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Wisconsin have passed new laws that require voters to show photo identification. Most of which were passed by Republican-controlled legislature who assert the new rules will help ensure fair voting and reduce fraud.  Hum really? What a coincidence that all 10 states account for 127 electoral votes- that’s half the 270 needed to win the presidency.

When I heard about the redistricting of counties in some states I raised one eyebrow, but when  I learned that in some states citizens needed a state issued id to vote I thought ok, no big deal ….that until I learned a bit more: (1) in some states college ids are no longer accepted?  What, are you kidding me? I know when I was in college a student ID was all I had and forget about having extra money to purchase a state id- I imagine the elderly and disabled who are on fix incomes have this same issue. ….According to the Brennan Center report; (1) more than 10 million eligible voters live more than 10 miles from the nearest full-time state ID-issuing office. About 500,000 of them do not have access to a vehicle, and most live in rural areas with limited public transportation, (2) some state-run ID offices are open at irregular hours and the bureaucracy involved can be challenging.  For example, in Wisconsin offices are only open on the fifth Wednesday of every month.  In many other states like Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi and Texas, the ID offices are open only part-time in areas with relatively large populations of blacks and Hispanics.

Additionally, the Brennan Center report estimated that one-quarter of African Americans, 16 percent of Hispanics and 18 percent of Americans over age 65 do not have the type of ID that the voting laws require.

Is this deja-vu (Jim Crow Laws): Between 1890 and 1910 laws were passed to make voter registration and electoral rules more restrictive, with the result that political participation by most blacks and many poor whites began to decrease, ten of the eleven former Confederate states, starting with Mississippi, passed new constitutions or amendments that effectively disfranchised most blacks and tens of thousands of poor whites through a combination of poll taxes, literacy and comprehension tests, and residency and record-keeping requirements. Voter turnout dropped drastically through the South as a result of such measures.

For the first time in history, Under the Affordable Care Act, women will now have access to life-saving preventive care without incurring out of pocket cost.  Finally affordable coverage is becoming a reality for approximately 47 millions women in the US.  August 1, 2012, marks the day that private health insurance plans began covering additional women’s preventive services that include:

• Well-woman visits
• Screening for gestational diabetes, which help protect the mother and her child from one of the most serious pregnancy-related diseases
• Breastfeeding support, supplies and counseling
• Screening and counseling for interpersonal and domestic violence
• Contraception and contraceptive counseling
• HPV DNA testing
• STI counseling
• HIV screening and counseling

Neal Heywood, 41 year old British businessmen was found dead in China in November.  Initially his death was attributed to a heart attack or drinking binge, but three months later the case was reopened after a formal request by British government.  Chinese authorities charged Gu Xilai, wife of Bo Xilai, now ex rising politician (and her aide) with his murder. Bo, is the son of a revered Communist revolutionary, and party secretary of the metropolitan area of Chongqing.  Gu and her aide Zhang Xiaojun, are alleged to have poisoned Heywood together over money discrepancies according to a state-run Xinhua news agency. The charge comes on the eve of the London Olympics where attention to the case will most likely be diverted, a coincidence or not?

As the crisis in Syria rises and Bashar al-Assad's power slowly crumbles, concerns are rising over what will happen next. … According to a news article on Monday, July 23, 2012 “Syria threatened to release its chemical and biological weapons if the country faces a foreign attack.  Meanwhile, Foreign Ministry spokesman Jihad Makdissi stressed that the weapons are secure and would only be used in case of external attack. “No chemical or biological weapons will ever be used, and I repeat, will never be used, during the crisis in Syria no matter what the development inside Syria, he said.”  

According to a CNN report, “Not all observers agree it's the beginning of the end game for al-Assad, but all are sure there's no clear road map for what lies ahead”. I’m certainly no politician or expert on foreign affairs, but the crisis in Syria certainly concerns me and I will continue to keeping my eye on what goes on…

I am deeply saddened by the tragedy that transpired on Friday, July 20, 2012 when James Eagan Holmes, 24, killed 12 people and wounded approximately 58 at a midnight screening of the new Batman movie in Aurora, Colorado, a Denver suburb.

We still do not know why, and will never truly understand what leads anyone to randomly kill innocent fellow human beings.  Whatever the reason the end doesn’t justify the means.

I agree with President Obama who called the shootings a reminder that life is fragile and "such evil is senseless - beyond reason.”

My heart goes out to all the victims and their families, my condolences and prayers are with them.  If you would like to join me in offering your condolences, add a comment

Toni Edwards

The Senate was unsuccessful in advancing legislation that would require independent groups to disclose the names of contributors who give more than $10,000 for use in political campaigns.

The measure, known as the Disclose Act (Bill Text 112th Congress (2011-2012) S.3369.PCS) was blocked by the GOP- 51 to 44 votes on a procedural motion. It needed 60 votes to move forward. 

The White House, in a statement, said the bill was needed so Americans would "know who is attempting to influence the nation's elections." Without the bill, it said, "Corporations and wealthy individuals will continue to be able to shield their donations from disclosure."

I personally think this bill was a no brainer and should have passed with flying colors by both parties. What happened to transparency? What’s the big deal, why is it a secret? If you truly believe in something or someone wouldn’t you be proud of your name being associated with the person or the cause? 

Tell me what you think….Should independent groups be required to disclose the names of their contributors? 

Currently In Vitro-Fertilization is excluded from fertility services offered through the VA.  Sen. Patty Murray recently introduced a bill into Congress that would give veterans and their spouses access to in vitro fertilization services for the first time.

The bill, known as the "Women Veterans and Other Health Care Improvement Act of 2012," proposes to expand reproductive treatment and care options for veterans and extends fertility treatments to spouses.

The bill also tackles other issues affecting women veterans by creating a pilot program providing child care to veterans seeking readjustment counseling and requires the VA to improve outreach to women veterans so women can better access VA health care and benefits.

And the bill requires the VA to facilitate more research on the long-term health care needs of veterans, including issues such as gender-specific infections and severe reproductive and urinary tract trauma in the battlefield.

The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the Affordable Care Act was groundbreaking, historic! I truly believe the decision was absolutely the right thing to do, what’s your opinion? Before you comment, let’s take a look at what the ruling means for millions of Americans:

Let’s young adults stay on parents until age 26

• Ends insurance co. power to cap the amount of care a person can receive
• Stops insurance co. from canceling coverage when someone’s sick
• Lowers the cost of Medicare for our seniors
• Requires insurance co. to cover preventive care free
• Strengthens & protects Medicare by increasing penalties and fraud
• Stops insurance co. from denying coverage to children with pre-existing conditions
• Ends insurance co. power to increase rates without justification
• Provides Americans with rebates from insurers who spend frevously
• Gives tax credits to small businesses
• In 2014, Ends discrimination against anyone with pre-existing conditions
• In 2014, Prevents insurance co. from charging women more than men and overcharging those who need care the most
• In 2014, Creates state-based marketplaces where people can easily compare and shop for insurance