Blogging for America

I wrote the following in response to a series of discussions about generalizations about people because someone wrote that 30% of Republican Senators voted against an amendment that would deny appropriations to corporations which denied their employees their day in court. There were many "Republicans are people,too" replies. Here is my response:


In the United States we as reasonable beings persuade others by facts.
And, what ALL of you are forgetting is that WOMEN are people, deserving of respect, dignity, the protection of law, taking article 78 action, and taking legal action against the corporation when raped, assaulted or discriminated against when the corporation is protecting such actions. Corporations are not people though they have had the standing of citizens ever since Chief Justice Waite made a pre-argument statement that was recorded by the court reporter in Santa Clara County vs Southern Pacific Railroad [118 U.S. 394 (1886)] . (I discussed this, and the implications at Constitution Day, which a lot of you missed).

What happened was Sen. Franken offered an amendment to the 2010 Defense Appropriation bill which would deny contracts to corporations which restrict their employees from having their day in court--due process.
Here are the details that prompted this from Think Progress :
In 2005, Jamie Leigh Jones was gang-raped by her co-workers while she was working for Halliburton/KBR in Baghdad. She was detained in a shipping container for at least 24 hours without food, water, or a bed, and "warned her that if she left Iraq for medical treatment, she'd be out of a job." (Jones was not an isolated case.) Jones was prevented from bringing charges in court against KBR because her employment contract stipulated that sexual assault allegations would only be heard in private arbitration.
GOP Senator Jefferson Beauregard Sessions of Alabama called the Franken amendment a "political attack" of Halliburton, and was overreaching by ( somehow ) denying corporations due process. (Remember it was Halliburton/KBR which denies its employees due process in court.

Let me remind us all that there are stipulations about government appropriations that say if X happens or does not happen, appropriations will be withheld--for instance, if States want 100% of their Highway funds, they have to have alcohol drinking and purchase prohibitions on their books and enforced--aka the 21 year old drinking age; likewise States have to enforce the speed limit on federally funded interstates. . .
The Senators that voted against the amendment are listed below. Alexander (R-TN) Barrasso (R-WY) Bond (R-MO) Brownback (R-KS) Bunning (R-KY) Burr (R-NC) Chambliss (R-GA) Coburn (R-OK) Cochran (R-MS) Corker (R-TN) Cornyn (R-TX) Crapo (R-ID) DeMint (R-SC) Ensign (R-NV) Enzi (R-WY) Graham (R-SC) Gregg (R-NH) Inhofe (R-OK) Isakson (R-GA) Johanns (R-NE) Kyl (R-AZ) McCain (R-AZ) McConnell (R-KY) Risch (R-ID) Roberts (R-KS) Sessions (R-AL) Shelby (R-AL) Thune (R-SD) Vitter (R-LA) Wicker (R-MS)
Reach your own conclusion. Mine is that women are not afforded the same equality, same protections of our Constitution as corporations by some members of the Senate, who are in this case male and Republican. You are free to have your opinions, but you just can't have your own set of facts.

Labels: corporations, republicans, women's rights

Obama became the 3rd sitting US president to earn a Nobel Peace Prize---and at the time of nomination had only been a sitting for 2 weeks. It was his message of hope and peace, of nuclear disarmament and diplomacy, of cooperation rather than aggression that won the prize.
As Archbishop Tutu says " It is an award that speaks to the promise of President Obama's message of hope."
May this honor encourage him forward.

Labels: hope, Nobel Peace Prize, Obama

Montesquieu defined Political Virtue as the love of law and of one's country. And, that political virtue was arduous and hard to come by because to achieve it one had to move passed self interest to acting in the best public interest of all.


In the first case that the Supreme Court heard this year, in fact they came back early to hear it was a case concerning a corporation which is claiming that since corporations have the right of free speech, and that the FEC is trying to abridge this right (Citizens United v FEC). This standing of citizen is courtesy of a pre-oral argument made by the Chief Justice Waite in 1886 that the court was then of the opinion that the 14th amendment applied to corporations Citizens [ Santa Clara County v Southern Pacific Railroad (118US394, 1886)] that has become ingrained as precedent.

The interest of corporations is not equal to that of citizens--they have no vested interest in the state, in the community, in anything save turning a profit.

It is time that corporations either are held as citizens--and thus, must act not in their own self-interest (i.e., their own profit), but in the best interest of the public good--or they cease to exist.

The oral argument of Citizens United V FEC
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/08-205[Reargued].pdf

editorial with history of the impact of Ch.Justice Waite's pre-argument statement
http://media.www.lawrentian.com/media/storage/paper409/news/2001/11/16/OpinionsEditorials/Editorial.Corporations.Citizens-146509.shtml







http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/?s=Citizens+United+v.+Federal+Election+Commission



http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2008/2008_08_205

And that is because 51% of the people living in the United States are women who are regularly denied by the current health care insurance for being victims of domestic abuse (can we say re-victimized?) or for having delivered a baby via C-section; who are charged more for maternity coverage; and women pay higher premiums than males (on top of average women earning substantially less than men).

This information is from a report by the National Women's Law Center. http://nwlc.org/reformmatters/NWLCReport-NowhereToTurn-WEB.pdf

We need a health care reform now!
At minimum, if we keep the private health care insurance companies they should be made provide equal coverage to women (without raising the cost to males to insure profits). For instance, New York State has a law that says that there can not be "gender-ratings" when figuring out premium costs. Women should not be penalized or re-victimized by health care insurance companies.

This report should open all our eyes to the bias in the profit driven health care insurance industry. This report should be mandatory reading for all our legislators.

We need single payer health insurance.

Labels: healthcare insurance, NWLC, women

Labor Day, a day which for most of us marks the unofficial end of summer, after picnicking or beaching it today one last time we put away our proverbial white shoes and bathing suits, and look forward to the fall and the new school year. We have forgotten that Labor Day was first started by the Labor Movement in the late 1800s to honor the workers --the first Labor Day celebrated was in NYC in 1882. Labor Day did not become a national holiday until 1894.
We should take a moment today to reflect on what the labor movement gave to us--the 40 hour work week, safe(r) working conditions, child labor laws, minimum wages.

Of course, in today's economic climate some people blame the labor movement for our economic woes. the high wages paid to the auto workers are often cited for the collapse of the American auto industry is instead of auto executives for having tin ears and lack of foresight to build energy efficient vehicles and being paid too much, even as their companies were failing.

So, on this Labor Day in the time of high unemployment, stagnating wages, foreclosures, let us give thanks to the labor movement for the benefits we all enjoy. If we have to put the blame for our economic condition anywhere, put it on those who were/are so greedy their only concern is with the bottom line, not humankind.


Read Robert Reich's article: http://www.truthout.org/090609U?n

Labels: Labor Day

The need for health care reform reaches passed the medical needs to the financial needs of those currently with and without health insurance. Nicholas Kristof reported that a study from the American Journal of Medicine found that 62% of all bankruptcies in 2007 were because of medical debts--an increase of 50% since 2001; and most shockingly, 78% of the people declaring bankruptcy had health insurance.
The are are also many people whose claims are denied for many reasons--the illness or procedure is not covered by the health insurance contract, it is a pre-existing condition, the procedure is considered by the company to be experimental. . .
This points to a major concern--that the health insurance industry is not in business to protect health, but for profit. (see video clip below).
We need a program that will insure a healthy America--in more ways than one.
IMHO, Medicare for all.

Kristof's Op-Ed piece in Sunday's NYT:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/30/opinion/30kristof.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=Kristof&st=cse

The study from the American Journal of Medicine: http://download.journals.elsevierhealth.com/pdfs/journals/0002-9343/PIIS0002934309004045.pdf

video re: health care claims denied:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/06/denied-claims-placed-at-h_n_253160.html

Labels: Economy, health care reform

It seems that there are two versions of the facts about Health Care Reform. The Democrats' version and the Republicans' version. Recent research has shown that these versions are strongly held. Unfortunately, while people may hold their own opinions, they can not make up their own facts.
The other day a friend was told that she had her facts wrong, because she only listened to mainstream media. And her friend knows the truth about health care reform because "[she] think[s] Glenn Beck is the ONLY middle of the road libertarian that is right on. I am NOT liking what Obama is doing .. the health care issue sucks.. How can these fools vote if they don't read the damn bill.. and we hire them to do it.. It's their job to read it. It takes 10 professionals just to interpret it.. The seniors are not organized.. they are reading the bill and siting [sic] specifics."

So, I suggest that we all read the bill for ourselves, and not rely on second hand sources...and, surprise we might find that there are no "death panels," for instance. We might not like the bill, for any number of reasons, but we do not have to make up lies and "sell" them as facts.

HR 3200: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3200:


We should also ask the media and politicians from both sides of the aisle to be responsible, and promote truth. Call people on lies, correct misinformation.
While we can disagree about the role of government in health care, for instance, facts are facts. Medicare is a government health care program.



Bill Maher on Rachel Maddow http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#32469231

NBC Survey http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/NBC-WSJ_Poll.pdf

Daily Kos /Research 2000 poll http://www.dailykos.com/statepoll/2009/8/13/US/346

And, from Campus Progressives how we can civilly counter some of the tactics:

http://www.campusprogress.org/cribsheets/4449/rules-for-dealing-with-radicals

Labels: health care reform