Blog Feed

The state of California made cuts to many medical facilities and doctors due to their lack of money. This is seemingly allowed in the Medicaid Act, section 30(A). In three different cases the state was sued, one being the Independent Living Center of Southern California. They each won their cases, stating that if the cuts in funding went through then the quality of their services would also suffer and not meet up with the standards of the Medicaid Act. However the Director of Heath Care Services has brought the case to the Supreme Court.

In the Case: California Director Toby Douglas v. Independent Living Center of Southern California, Petitioner Schwartz claims that the 30(A) clause of the Medicaid Act - A Spending clause that says services are paid by the state with recognition to the economic stability of the state itself - is too genaral and does not allow a single service to enforce the Act when finances are cut due to the state’s own recession. Basically saying 30(A) is not enforcible and wants there to be a amendment that allows private services to sue and claim the appropriate reimbursement for their work.

Petitioner Kneedler disagrees saying that Medicaid is an agreement between the Federal Government and the States. Not the private facilities within the states. Schwarts and the other hundreds of thousands of doctors shouldn’t be able to sue becuase it would cause problems across the state when hundreds of judges can make different judgements for each similar case. That would be unfair. Yet he does agree that 30(A) is not complete.

Education reform and public education, in the role of the fight against standardized teaching, is a widely liberal approach. Liberal believes tend to favor he idea of public education, because it supports all children in the U.S. Recently, many movements have pushed towards the reform of public education because many believe that the people making decisions about the curricullum and standards of schools do not represent education in all parts of the United States. 

Many people, both liberal and consertive approach education in a more standardized way. These create specific standards for students in specific grades, which is sometimes viewed as treating students as if they are all the same. Educators around the country are pushing for reform in the system which has resulted in some political effects. On a national level, the most recent legislation has been the addition of secondary standards to the "No Child Left Behind Act" which was signed into law in 2001. These changes have been minor, but show examples of the voices of these lobbies being heard.

I believe that youth that are in better shape lead a happier life, than teens that are overweight and obese. Currently, the biggest supporter is Michelle Obama, she is running her own "Move your Body Campaign" along with her pushing legislation on a bill that will make food in school cafeterias healthier. Locally, however an organization by name Sports Teaching and Reaching Students (otherwise known as STARS.) Opposing middle school athletics is the Philadelphia school district, it's not as though they hate it, they are cutting it because they think it less important than other 

Locally there is no pending legislation, however the bill proposed by Michelle Obama to improve school lunch's has been approved. I would like to see all middle schools have interscholastic sports and possibly intramural sports too. 

I am lobbying for a change in marital law in the city of Philadelphia. Same sex marriage is only legal in 6 states currently but Pennsylvania’s congressional representatives are not majorly in favor of making this legal in our state. Joe Sestak hopes to lobby for this as well and unseat Arlen Specter. My main motivation to lobby this topic is basically the fourteenth amendment. Although I’d be stretching the meaning slightly, I feel that disallowing same sex marriage is infringing upon the rights of American citizens. For gay couples one person might be the worker while one is the homemaker. In different sex couples this means the house person receives benefits from the other’s job. However, if same sex couples aren’t allowed to marry, the partner receives no benefits.

This isn’t protecting American citizens. Homosexuality isn’t a choice, just like race and gender aren’t choices. Why should homosexuals be treated differently because of something they cannot control? There was once a time that colored people were prosecuted but that was deemed unconstitutional. There was a time where women were treated unfairly but that as well was deemed unconstitutional. Why is this any different?

Currently there is almost 50% support in Pennsylvania for same sex marriage, which is 8 points higher from last year. Hopefully a change in representation will change perspective. 

Todays New: A family divided

After the traitors of Thebes Polynieces and his allies were destroyed, Creon stepped into power. To bury and honor Etecoles, with full military rights and honors was half of his first command. The second was to leave his brother and his fallen comrades on the battlefield to rot. All the Thebian people were hesitant because of gods’ decree as to how the dead should be cared for but would surely support this decree. However, not all the people in Thebes accepted and carried out Creon’s order.

Soon after Creon mad his orders and will clear, the guards on watch at the gates of Thebes found the body of Polynieces with a thin layer of soil covering it. The culprit was at large. This enraged Creon so he threatening to charge the guard who made the discovery with treason. Eventually the truth came out, and with further under more investigating it was found that…

The sister of Polynices and Ismene, Antigone went one night with a child’s shovel and began to cover the body of Polynices with dirt and disobeyed King Creon.

Antigone tries to defend herself by explaining that it is her duty to bury him no matter what her relationship with him was. By burying him she will be allowing him into the underworld and therefore sending him home, to the dead. From the beginning Creon made it clear, anyone that who is caught trying to bury him will be sentenced to death. His plan was to make an example of whoever tried to bury Polynices, by killing them.  

Thebian Tells Weekly was told by the sister of Antigone Ismene, that Antigone told said that she would disagreed with Creon’s commands and she would bury her brother regardless of what Creon says or does to her.

Summary:

The state of California reduced rates of reimbursement from Medicaid to the recipients, which is a Federal-State law. But State law cannot trump Federal law because of the supremacy clause in Article 6 that basically states that Federal law is supreme.

Arguments:

California-

They are using Article 11 as a defense. Article 11 refers to a state's immunity against being sued by an individual.

Douglas-

The prosecution is using the Ex parte Young case in their argument. The case was about when Minnesota limited railroads charge, which violated the 14th amendment and was sued by shareholders of the railroad

Prediction:

I think the court will give the individuals the right to sue California because the Supreme Court will take into account the Federal Government before the State Government. 

Our government can say as much as they want that all money is fair game for any candidate to use in anyway they please, because that's true. This is where the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) comes into play. But this handy Act wasn't always as restricting as it is now in 2011. Before 1974, it was perfectly okay for corporations and groups to fund election campaigns, and most candidates took as much as they could, such as Richard M. Nixon. One of the most notorious presidents in American history, Nixon was funded $2.8 million by issuance executive W. Clement Stone during his re-election campaign. Of course, after the Watergate scandal, Congress needed to spring into action to help reform the trust and confidence of the public. What's one thing they choose to do? Reform private financing for election campaigns. 

So, much to some candidates disappointment I'm certain, the FECA was amended. Now, corporations, labor organizations, federal government contractors, and foreign nationals are prohibited from contributing to election campaigns. Also, in federal campaigns, a contributor may not make a contributions in another's name or place a donation of more than $100. For the rest of the contributors (individuals, national parties, political committees, etc) there are several contribution limits they have to follow. 

Alright, so what's my problem? Everything seems all hunky-dory now, right? Nope. The FECA still has its loopholes, the most important being soft money. While corporations and lobbyists can't make contributions to and individual candidate, they can put funds into the political party finances. The candidates then take the necessary funds from these finances. So, there is basically just a middle-man in the situation now, but the candidates will still get their money. But wait, political parties and candidates need to disclose where they get their contributions according to FECA. Well, of course they do - to the federal government. When was the last time you actually heard a candidate openly list all their sources of money in a speech? That would be ridiculous. Some voters may actually connect some dots along the money trail. 

So, while some people are completely open to their opinions and even have valid points about "stupid voters," but its the tricky politicians at work, too. This is why I propose we put a lock on donations. Why is it okay for Sarah Palin to ask donations from her supporters during a time of desperate economics times just so she can think about running for president? Seriously? Corporations need to get their little noses out of elections altogether. In the state our country is in, the last thing candidates need to be doing is spending millions of dollars to just bash their opponents on TV. It isn't' even fair since the people from the smaller political parties won't get the same kind of funding as the larger ones for the campaigns. No one will hear the little guy when the big guy is shouting at the top of his lungs. There is currently a Bill pending, Fair Elections Now Act. This basically calls for fair political funding to help gain public confidence in a time of government distress. It speaks of a government funding pool that will take away the power of big donors and better control private funding by putting more weight on public funding. So, who supports this Bill? Senator Dick Durbin and Rep. Walter Jones are all for it, saying that more time desperately needs to spent on fixing the issues than raising more money for advertisements. Common Cause is a group that is majorly pushing for the Bill to be passed. Of course, there are many candidates currently running for office such as Rick Perry that have no problem with private funding and corporations to help with their election campaigns to push along their career. So, the question is, what do the voters want to see?  

However, Philadelphia City Council introduced two bills that will pass regarding to city bikers and other bikers in Philadelphia. (Click here for more information)
The Regulations for bicycles in Philadelphia are a bit stricter than the laws of the State.  Click here for more information!

By this saying, it's proving that bikes are legal and that it can be on duty at all times. However, in able to ride bikes around without violating any rules, you must know the PA. Law and Philly retraction. 

The Pennsylvania laws are stating that bikes are consider as a vehicle and will be generalizes with all traffic rules. There are penalties for bikers as well as for drivers on any street of PA./Philadelphia. 

Philadelphia Bike laws

This law will help defense my lobbying cause, since bikers have to follow the same rule as any other vehicle and they are consider as a vehicle. It is not fare that bikers do not have there on lanes on any street and at any part of the city/state. Since they have to follow the same law they should have the same respect and rights. Bikes are considered as a vehicle so they are not illegal and therefore they should also have the own parking/place to stores their vehicle in the city!

Here are more stories regarding to voices from the Citizens and the City Council of Philadelphia.



For Citizens opinions

Click here!

Click here!



For City Council opinions

Click here!

1) En el tiempo de las Mariposas por Julia Alvarez
La historia es fictional pero tiene eventos factual.

2) Elige este libro porque el año pasado en Español 4 vimos la película pero como falte escuela no pude ver la película completa. Pienso que la mejor  manera de saber de la vida de las hermanas Mariposas es por el libro.

3) Me gusta como Dedé tiempo comenta en todo lo que hace. Es como si alguien le esta leyendo el libro y ella comento en ciertas cosas.

4) Primero fue difícil leer el libro pero aprende que necesito leer lo de voz alta para comprender lo que estoy leyendo.