Last evening, August 25, I participated for the first time ever in a Candidates' Forum. It was sponsored by the Dean Creek Volunteer Fire Department at their recently-built firehouse, about 20 miles southwest of Roundup. Seating capacity seemed to be about 70 people (this time overwhelmingly Republican) and most of the seats were filled. Statewide as well as local candidates were invited to speak. I felt prepared, thus relatively comfortable. There was time to speak to only two issues but I could have done with many more since I had studied them in depth.
My Opening Statement below speaks to one aspect of the Affordable Care Act. The other issue was ALEC, American Legislative Exchange Council, which I will address in my next post.
OPENING STATEMENT
"Thanks to Sally McRae, Christiane Sikora, and the Dean Creek Volunteer Fire Dept. for their efforts in making this Candidate Forum possible.
I say to you that I'm running as the Democratic candidate for the Montana House of Representatives. What does that mean? If I'm elected as your Representative of House District #40, how can you judge whether or or not I'm doing my job? This is how I see it.
The first part of my job is to listen. There are issues that impact you, there may be concerns you have. What are they? How do you feel about them? How do they affect you?
The second part of my job is to do the research, the footwork. That means finding out as much as I can about the issue, all sides of it. What are the facts? What's really happening as opposed to what someone else has said about it? Are there aspects to the issue that are unclear?
And, last but not least, the third part of my job is to communicate. It's not only important for me to get back to you with results but to also exchange information with others in the legislature.
Listen, research, and communicate is the method used in the following example. Recently, I asked a friend to name an important issue for her. She responded "Obamacare" and told me of an email she'd received recently that listed all the taxes we would have to pay as a result of the Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare. "You're kidding," I said. "No," she replied. "All the taxes are increasing! I'll email you a copy."
On that list of taxes were the following: "Top income tax bracket went from 35% to 39.6%; top income payroll tax went from 37.4% to 52.2%; Capital gains tax went from 15% to 28%; Dividend tax went from 15% to 39.6%; and Estate tax went from 0% to 55%.
To research, I went to the web and found an article at ConsumerReports.org. The title is called, "Does Obamacare raise taxes on ordinary Americans?" The answer is "...taxes have not been raised for ordinary, non-wealthy Americans to pay for the Affordable Care Act."
Out of the taxes in the ACA (Obamacare), only two apply to individuals.
1. High earners -- Those with earned incomes above $200,000 pay an extra 0.9% Medicare tax on all earnings over that threshold.
2. Wealthy investors -- This tax is applies to households with modified adjusted gross income of more than $200,000. It is estimated that the majority of these revenues will come from the richest 0.1% of taxpayers.
3. The rest of the taxes are directed at businesses, mostly those who stand to earn money from selling insurance, drugs, and devices to millions of Americans who are newly insured. Tanning parlors are paying a 10% excise tax on their services.
I communicated this information to my friend who asked for a copy so she could email it back to the original sender, clarifying a misunderstanding of taxes within the ACA. This communication is particularly important since the tax list sent to my friend made it sound as if all individual Americans would owe these taxes.
Clouding the facts of an issue does not help anyone, Republican or Democrat. My efforts to listen, research, and communicate, however, can make a difference. It is this method I will use with constituents and it will be the method I use when casting my votes in the legislature."
At the break, several people told me I had their votes. A Roundup male suggested if I didn't win this time, I should try again. He offered his help if and when I decide to try again (assuming that my competitor will be successful this last time, after which he will be retiring). All in all, my feelings include a sense of pride and doing the best I could do in that situation; there were many candidates and limited time. My fears did not materialize; I worked through them -- this time.
Tuesday, August 26, 2014
Saturday, August 9, 2014
Letters to the Editor:
(Written by Jim Garvey, published by the Billings Gazette, July 17, 2014)
Title: "Obama only has support in the Senate"
"Recently The Billings Gazette apologized for endorsing President Obama and we all make mistakes, even newspapers. This shows a mature approach to accepting responsibility; unfortunately President Obama is not a responsible leader.
I will not go into the litany of events to which this president has shown a complete lack of responsibility and leadership with regard to domestic and foreign policy.
To start impeachment proceedings against this president would be a waste of time and money. Since the majority in the Senate is Democratic and the president is the leader of the Democratic Party, therein lies the problem with this country -- 'party politics.'
If left up to 'the people,' he would receive an overwhelming vote of 'no confidence' along with the majority of those in Congress." [Editor's note: The Gazette did not apologize for or pull its endorsement of Barack Obama in 2008.]
(Written by Edith Sloan, published by the Billings Gazette, August 3, 2014)
Title: "Without supporting examples, claims are meaningless"
"Response to Jim Garvey letter of July 17: The very first statement Garvey makes is false. The Billings Gazette neither apologized for nor pulled its endorsement of President Barack Obama in 2008.
Garvey makes only general statements like "...is not a responsible leader" and "...has shown a complete lack of responsibility and leadership..." These types of statements mean nothing unless clarified by use of examples.
Garvey makes charges but provides no evidence. Thus the charges have no standing, no substance.
[The biggest problems of the Republican Tea Party are illustrated in Garvey's letter.] Today, much of what the Republican Tea Party spouts is inaccurate or false, includes general statements with no specifics, and makes charges without evidence. False, unclear statements purposely lacking in facts seek to confuse but do nothing to add to the national debate -- they are only waste."
(Written by Jim Garvey, published by the Billings Gazette, July 17, 2014)
Title: "Obama only has support in the Senate"
"Recently The Billings Gazette apologized for endorsing President Obama and we all make mistakes, even newspapers. This shows a mature approach to accepting responsibility; unfortunately President Obama is not a responsible leader.
I will not go into the litany of events to which this president has shown a complete lack of responsibility and leadership with regard to domestic and foreign policy.
To start impeachment proceedings against this president would be a waste of time and money. Since the majority in the Senate is Democratic and the president is the leader of the Democratic Party, therein lies the problem with this country -- 'party politics.'
If left up to 'the people,' he would receive an overwhelming vote of 'no confidence' along with the majority of those in Congress." [Editor's note: The Gazette did not apologize for or pull its endorsement of Barack Obama in 2008.]
(Written by Edith Sloan, published by the Billings Gazette, August 3, 2014)
Title: "Without supporting examples, claims are meaningless"
"Response to Jim Garvey letter of July 17: The very first statement Garvey makes is false. The Billings Gazette neither apologized for nor pulled its endorsement of President Barack Obama in 2008.
Garvey makes only general statements like "...is not a responsible leader" and "...has shown a complete lack of responsibility and leadership..." These types of statements mean nothing unless clarified by use of examples.
Garvey makes charges but provides no evidence. Thus the charges have no standing, no substance.
[The biggest problems of the Republican Tea Party are illustrated in Garvey's letter.] Today, much of what the Republican Tea Party spouts is inaccurate or false, includes general statements with no specifics, and makes charges without evidence. False, unclear statements purposely lacking in facts seek to confuse but do nothing to add to the national debate -- they are only waste."
Tuesday, June 17, 2014
ONE DOWN, ONE TO GO
Montana Primary Elections are over; there are five more months now before the General Elections. So where am I on this trip -- as a Democratic candidate for a mostly-Republican State House?
Lessons are learned. It's not always easy to take part in a process without really taking part in that process. My initial idea is that I can set the parameters of what I will or will not do as a candidate. After all, I had been asked to follow this path; I had not chosen it. I had agreed for my name to be placed on the ballot. But as the process unfolds, it becomes clear that choices must be made at each turn.
Take presentations/discussions among and between other candidates. Am I above it all? Or do I have something important to say about issues that concern people of District 40? Yes, I do have something important to say about issues and no, I am not above it all. I resolve to get more involved but plan to take it one step, one day, at a time.
I will do what I realistically can do. For example, in attending one meeting of the League of Women Voters (nonpartisan), I am encouraged to register people to vote. This seems more important knowing that the Montana ballot this year will contain an issue to rescind the right to register and vote on the same day (how does this impact populations like veterans who may return from duty and find themselves relocating?). It is also true that the more people who vote, the better represented are the views of the majority who live in that state. Look at what happens in those elections where only a small percentage of potential voters actually vote -- the minority rules. That should be the best reason to get people out to vote.
Last Friday is my first morning (10:00-noon) sitting in the entryway of our local IGA. This is where representatives of local organizations usually sit when conducting fund-raisers. With prior permission, I carry in my small library stand and several folding chairs, tape my sign that says, "Register to vote", stack my registration forms on the stand, and I'm ready for business.
"Are you registered to vote?" I query each customer who comes through the door. The overwhelming response is "Yes" usually with enthusiasm attached. A small minority (two maybe) say "No" and keep going. Then there are four people in those two hours who admit they are not registered and stop to fill out the form. One couple (youngish to middle-age) confesses this is the first time they've ever registered to vote. I immediately feel vindicated in spending my time and effort on this project.
I deliver my completed forms to the Courthouse at noon. A misunderstanding develops concerning whether or not voter registrations can be completed outside the Courthouse. However, the forms are accepted and I follow up with questions to the Elections Administrator on Monday morning. It seems that the only time voter registration forms must be completed at the Court House is 30 days prior to an election day. More Musselshell County voter registration forms are showered on me since it is clear my registration efforts will continue each Friday morning for two hours at IGA between now and early October.
This effort is much more preferable to delivering flyers to residents. I am there on a regular basis to help the voting process. I get to greet those I know and maybe meet those I don't know. An extra folded chair (that I control -- maybe) is available for those who are interested to sit, ask questions, discuss issues. And, who knows, the number of votes I receive in the General Election could increase from my Primary Election total of 145 (the Republican winner receives 749 and the Republican loser 441). There's a long way to go. Is it do-able? Of course!
Montana Primary Elections are over; there are five more months now before the General Elections. So where am I on this trip -- as a Democratic candidate for a mostly-Republican State House?
Lessons are learned. It's not always easy to take part in a process without really taking part in that process. My initial idea is that I can set the parameters of what I will or will not do as a candidate. After all, I had been asked to follow this path; I had not chosen it. I had agreed for my name to be placed on the ballot. But as the process unfolds, it becomes clear that choices must be made at each turn.
Take presentations/discussions among and between other candidates. Am I above it all? Or do I have something important to say about issues that concern people of District 40? Yes, I do have something important to say about issues and no, I am not above it all. I resolve to get more involved but plan to take it one step, one day, at a time.
I will do what I realistically can do. For example, in attending one meeting of the League of Women Voters (nonpartisan), I am encouraged to register people to vote. This seems more important knowing that the Montana ballot this year will contain an issue to rescind the right to register and vote on the same day (how does this impact populations like veterans who may return from duty and find themselves relocating?). It is also true that the more people who vote, the better represented are the views of the majority who live in that state. Look at what happens in those elections where only a small percentage of potential voters actually vote -- the minority rules. That should be the best reason to get people out to vote.
Last Friday is my first morning (10:00-noon) sitting in the entryway of our local IGA. This is where representatives of local organizations usually sit when conducting fund-raisers. With prior permission, I carry in my small library stand and several folding chairs, tape my sign that says, "Register to vote", stack my registration forms on the stand, and I'm ready for business.
"Are you registered to vote?" I query each customer who comes through the door. The overwhelming response is "Yes" usually with enthusiasm attached. A small minority (two maybe) say "No" and keep going. Then there are four people in those two hours who admit they are not registered and stop to fill out the form. One couple (youngish to middle-age) confesses this is the first time they've ever registered to vote. I immediately feel vindicated in spending my time and effort on this project.
I deliver my completed forms to the Courthouse at noon. A misunderstanding develops concerning whether or not voter registrations can be completed outside the Courthouse. However, the forms are accepted and I follow up with questions to the Elections Administrator on Monday morning. It seems that the only time voter registration forms must be completed at the Court House is 30 days prior to an election day. More Musselshell County voter registration forms are showered on me since it is clear my registration efforts will continue each Friday morning for two hours at IGA between now and early October.
This effort is much more preferable to delivering flyers to residents. I am there on a regular basis to help the voting process. I get to greet those I know and maybe meet those I don't know. An extra folded chair (that I control -- maybe) is available for those who are interested to sit, ask questions, discuss issues. And, who knows, the number of votes I receive in the General Election could increase from my Primary Election total of 145 (the Republican winner receives 749 and the Republican loser 441). There's a long way to go. Is it do-able? Of course!
Thursday, May 15, 2014
Mothers are Primary Breadwinners -- besides everything else they do!
Are you a mother of children under 18 and also earning a paycheck? Feeling tired, overworked, stressed? You are not alone. In almost half of all households with children (40%), mothers have become the primary breadwinners. A May, 2014, study from Pew Research Center reports that mothers-of-families-with-children-at-home not only care for them as mothers always have but many more now bring in most of the "bacon". In 1960, only 11 percent of households had a mother who was the major breadwinner.
Who are these breadwinners? First and foremost, they are women. What do we know about women who bring home paychecks?
For starters, we know that, for every dollar her male counterpart earns, a woman earns 77 cents. Black women earn only 64 cents and Hispanic women, 54 cents on the dollar.
We know that two-thirds of all workers who are paid the minimum wage or less in 2013 are women, and 60 percent of full-time minimum-wage workers are women.
We know that 22 percent of minimum-wage workers are women of color compared to less than 16 percent of workers overall.
We know that more than three-quarters of women earning a minimum wage are age 20 or older, and most do not have a spouse to rely on.
So I ask myself: How many of those mothers who are primary breadwinners, keeping their families afloat financially, earn $7.25 an hour, the current minimum wage? If she is earning that amount, working full-time and year-round, she is bringing home $14,500 annually. If she is earning only that amount, she is earning more than $4,000 below the poverty line for a mother with two children!
We have a problem. This is a problem for all women working outside the home but particularly for women earning minimum wage.
Who are these women? They prepare food and serve us in restaurants, they take our orders in fast food eateries; they wait on us in retail stores; they stock products in large chain stores; they assist and provide services in personal care; they are our building/grounds cleaning and maintenance people; they are the support for various office and administration, for healthcare and protective services, etc.
How can we help them?
(Sources: Huff Post, "Working Mothers Now Top Earners in 40 Percent of Households with Children: Pew", Hope Yen, May 15, 2014; National Women's Law Center, "Fair Pay for Women Requires Increasing the Minimum Wage and Tipped Minimum Wage", March 28, 2014; Pew Research Center, "Who Makes Minimum Wage", Drew Desilver, July 19, 2013)
Are you a mother of children under 18 and also earning a paycheck? Feeling tired, overworked, stressed? You are not alone. In almost half of all households with children (40%), mothers have become the primary breadwinners. A May, 2014, study from Pew Research Center reports that mothers-of-families-with-children-at-home not only care for them as mothers always have but many more now bring in most of the "bacon". In 1960, only 11 percent of households had a mother who was the major breadwinner.
Who are these breadwinners? First and foremost, they are women. What do we know about women who bring home paychecks?
For starters, we know that, for every dollar her male counterpart earns, a woman earns 77 cents. Black women earn only 64 cents and Hispanic women, 54 cents on the dollar.
We know that two-thirds of all workers who are paid the minimum wage or less in 2013 are women, and 60 percent of full-time minimum-wage workers are women.
We know that 22 percent of minimum-wage workers are women of color compared to less than 16 percent of workers overall.
We know that more than three-quarters of women earning a minimum wage are age 20 or older, and most do not have a spouse to rely on.
So I ask myself: How many of those mothers who are primary breadwinners, keeping their families afloat financially, earn $7.25 an hour, the current minimum wage? If she is earning that amount, working full-time and year-round, she is bringing home $14,500 annually. If she is earning only that amount, she is earning more than $4,000 below the poverty line for a mother with two children!
We have a problem. This is a problem for all women working outside the home but particularly for women earning minimum wage.
Who are these women? They prepare food and serve us in restaurants, they take our orders in fast food eateries; they wait on us in retail stores; they stock products in large chain stores; they assist and provide services in personal care; they are our building/grounds cleaning and maintenance people; they are the support for various office and administration, for healthcare and protective services, etc.
How can we help them?
- Low-wage working women deserve a raise. Within the last 30 years, the minimum wage has increased only three times. If it had kept pace with inflation since 1968, it would now be almost $10.80 per hour. The minimum for tipped employees is $2.13 which hasn't been changed in 20 years; it is one-third that of the federal minimum wage. Not only that but restaurant servers (largest group of tipped employees) experience poverty at nearly three times the rate of the workforce as a whole. And who makes up 70 percent of servers? You guessed it -- women.
- Increasing the minimum wage would boost wages for millions of working women and help close the wage gap. If the minimum wage were increased to $10.10 per hour, it would boost her annual earnings by $5,700 to a total $20,200, and pull her family of three out of poverty. If the minimum were gradually increased to $10.10 per hour by 2016, almost 30 million workers would receive a raise. Of those almost-30 million workers, over 7 million are parents. That includes almost 5 million working mothers which is 22 percent of all working mothers with children under 18. Since the majority of minimum-wage earners are women, increasing the minimum wage could close the wage gap by 5 percent.
- Raising the minimum wage would strengthen the economy. Raising the minimum wage lowers turnover, boosts worker efforts, and encourages employers to invest in their workers. Most of these workers need the income and spend it quickly, boosting the economy. For every $1 added to the minimum wage, those households spend an additional $2,800 the following year. Raising minimum wage does not cause job loss, even during periods of recession. In fact, the opposite is true: Raising minimum wage to $10.10 per hour would generate $22 billion in additional economic activity and around 85,000 jobs, estimates Economic Policy Institute.
(Sources: Huff Post, "Working Mothers Now Top Earners in 40 Percent of Households with Children: Pew", Hope Yen, May 15, 2014; National Women's Law Center, "Fair Pay for Women Requires Increasing the Minimum Wage and Tipped Minimum Wage", March 28, 2014; Pew Research Center, "Who Makes Minimum Wage", Drew Desilver, July 19, 2013)
Friday, May 9, 2014
A DAY LATE AND A DOLLAR SHORT
4:00am: Roll out of bed. Let out the dogs. Can't sleep any longer. A late nap the previous day screws up my sleeping pattern. Try another hour of sleep but doesn't help much. It's been a long weekend of writing -- mainly creating a new "Old Wild West" blog. With experimenting, trying and re-trying, I finally get my first image posted. Also research and write a post for the "Running Blue in a Red State" blog.
5:30am: Take a shower and get dressed. Cut up fruit for breakfast.
6:30am: Begin physical therapy exercises -- about a 43-minute routine. My email includes a message from my walking friend. "Do you want to walk on snow?" she asks. I look out the window, no snow. Respond that I'm out the door. That's when I feel the almost-invisible flakes on my face -- too light to see or stick.
7:30am: Our 30-minute walk is cold since neither of us has bundled up very well. We don't walk as far. I'm having some problems with knee pain; my new exercise routine of walking as fast as I can as far as I can seems to be a little too much too quickly. I come back inside after walking -- it feels good. Warmer but I'm also feeling invigorated.
8:30am: Review and return emails. Check to see if today is the deadline for sending in my "Candidate Finance Report" required by the state. Haven't solicited for fund-raising and haven't spent any money on my campaign. Won't be much of a report. Looks like I have several more weeks before the deadline -- thank goodness. Something I can put off for another day.
9:30am: I take another step today towards a "Weekend Room at the Nunnery". Come up with the idea in February to move my bedroom downstairs to the finished basement and use the upstairs bedroom for guests. It will be available on weekends for history buffs mainly. My house is built in 1920 and, during the late 1930's and 1940's, is the nunnery for St. Benedict's Catholic School next door. The School is closed in 1950 and is later bought by the community to house the present-day Musselshell Valley Historical Museum.
By renting this room on weekends, I can share my historical interest in the Old Wild West not just with writing but also in guiding others through the Museum next door and on possibly guiding more local, historical tours. I'm expecting this idea will meet several goals I had set for myself in January -- making hay while the sun shines while I'm still young(ish)and energetic(ish), making more friends and connections.
The move downstairs is still in transition. Today I gather odds and ends from both the upper bedroom and bath and reorganize my lower bedroom to make space for it all. Go to our local hardware for ideas on how to add shelf to a closet. End up recycling a piece of webbing for the purpose.
12:00 noon: Break for lunch. My motor is running down -- good time to catch some shut-eye.
2:00pm: The dogs are ready for their daily walk; the little ones around our town block and the medium one around several blocks. Still chilly so we don't dawdle.
2:30pm: While I begin preparing for our evening meal, I consider several opitons for a major thrust in my campaign. My focus is on getting out the vote and on discussing issues with women. I had considered earlier in April creating a bipartisan effort to get out the vote, even for the primary in June. The primary is for two Republicans -- the incumbent who lives in town and the newcomer who lives close to Billings. Maybe, I thought, the effort would not only help Tom, the incumbent, but also help myself become more known in the community since I've lived here just two years. After the primary, it would be each on our own but still working to get out the vote. Two knowledgeable friends, one Democrat and the other Republican, in Billings discourage my idea.
This morning, however, I receive an email from the Republican friend. He tells me the incumbent is moderate (which is what I'd expected) and the newcomer is the Tea Party. He suggests I do what I can to help the incumbent. Of course he does. My next step is to contact the Democratic contact for the state and get feedback. Does it make sense to create a bipartisan effort for getting out the vote when there is less than a month to do it anyway? And which is better for Democrats: for a moderate Republican to win the primary or for a Tea Party to win? If I am in a non-competitive race (as has been described to me by the state Dems), wouldn't it be better for the moderate-Republican incumbent to win rather than the extreme Tea Party? Wouldn't it be helpful to create a bipartisan effort with the moderate Republican?
5:00pm: Eat dinner and feed dogs. Prepare for a "Friends of the Library" meeting tonight at the Community Library.
6:30pm: Arrive early for the meeting. I walk in and see several tables to my left with workers sitting behind them. When I ask what is happening, I'm reminded that people are voting -- for members of the School Board. Voting?? Where have I been?? "You're a candidate for office and you don't remember to vote?" asks one of the FOL members. I rush over and vote (luckily my walking friend had let me know which two of the three names would be most helpful on the Board). On my return to our meeting, another member tells me that the Tea Party candidate has been in town the evening before holding a meeting. Where have I been?? I ask myself. I would like to hear what he has to say and how he explains himself.
It is now morning the next day. The friend who mows my lawn finishes and knocks at my door. While I write out my check, he tells me the Republican incumbent visits the Senior Center (basement of Museum) during lunch the previous day. Where have I been? A day late and a dollar short! (Maybe I should just go back to bed...)
4:00am: Roll out of bed. Let out the dogs. Can't sleep any longer. A late nap the previous day screws up my sleeping pattern. Try another hour of sleep but doesn't help much. It's been a long weekend of writing -- mainly creating a new "Old Wild West" blog. With experimenting, trying and re-trying, I finally get my first image posted. Also research and write a post for the "Running Blue in a Red State" blog.
5:30am: Take a shower and get dressed. Cut up fruit for breakfast.
6:30am: Begin physical therapy exercises -- about a 43-minute routine. My email includes a message from my walking friend. "Do you want to walk on snow?" she asks. I look out the window, no snow. Respond that I'm out the door. That's when I feel the almost-invisible flakes on my face -- too light to see or stick.
7:30am: Our 30-minute walk is cold since neither of us has bundled up very well. We don't walk as far. I'm having some problems with knee pain; my new exercise routine of walking as fast as I can as far as I can seems to be a little too much too quickly. I come back inside after walking -- it feels good. Warmer but I'm also feeling invigorated.
8:30am: Review and return emails. Check to see if today is the deadline for sending in my "Candidate Finance Report" required by the state. Haven't solicited for fund-raising and haven't spent any money on my campaign. Won't be much of a report. Looks like I have several more weeks before the deadline -- thank goodness. Something I can put off for another day.
9:30am: I take another step today towards a "Weekend Room at the Nunnery". Come up with the idea in February to move my bedroom downstairs to the finished basement and use the upstairs bedroom for guests. It will be available on weekends for history buffs mainly. My house is built in 1920 and, during the late 1930's and 1940's, is the nunnery for St. Benedict's Catholic School next door. The School is closed in 1950 and is later bought by the community to house the present-day Musselshell Valley Historical Museum.
By renting this room on weekends, I can share my historical interest in the Old Wild West not just with writing but also in guiding others through the Museum next door and on possibly guiding more local, historical tours. I'm expecting this idea will meet several goals I had set for myself in January -- making hay while the sun shines while I'm still young(ish)and energetic(ish), making more friends and connections.
The move downstairs is still in transition. Today I gather odds and ends from both the upper bedroom and bath and reorganize my lower bedroom to make space for it all. Go to our local hardware for ideas on how to add shelf to a closet. End up recycling a piece of webbing for the purpose.
12:00 noon: Break for lunch. My motor is running down -- good time to catch some shut-eye.
2:00pm: The dogs are ready for their daily walk; the little ones around our town block and the medium one around several blocks. Still chilly so we don't dawdle.
2:30pm: While I begin preparing for our evening meal, I consider several opitons for a major thrust in my campaign. My focus is on getting out the vote and on discussing issues with women. I had considered earlier in April creating a bipartisan effort to get out the vote, even for the primary in June. The primary is for two Republicans -- the incumbent who lives in town and the newcomer who lives close to Billings. Maybe, I thought, the effort would not only help Tom, the incumbent, but also help myself become more known in the community since I've lived here just two years. After the primary, it would be each on our own but still working to get out the vote. Two knowledgeable friends, one Democrat and the other Republican, in Billings discourage my idea.
This morning, however, I receive an email from the Republican friend. He tells me the incumbent is moderate (which is what I'd expected) and the newcomer is the Tea Party. He suggests I do what I can to help the incumbent. Of course he does. My next step is to contact the Democratic contact for the state and get feedback. Does it make sense to create a bipartisan effort for getting out the vote when there is less than a month to do it anyway? And which is better for Democrats: for a moderate Republican to win the primary or for a Tea Party to win? If I am in a non-competitive race (as has been described to me by the state Dems), wouldn't it be better for the moderate-Republican incumbent to win rather than the extreme Tea Party? Wouldn't it be helpful to create a bipartisan effort with the moderate Republican?
5:00pm: Eat dinner and feed dogs. Prepare for a "Friends of the Library" meeting tonight at the Community Library.
6:30pm: Arrive early for the meeting. I walk in and see several tables to my left with workers sitting behind them. When I ask what is happening, I'm reminded that people are voting -- for members of the School Board. Voting?? Where have I been?? "You're a candidate for office and you don't remember to vote?" asks one of the FOL members. I rush over and vote (luckily my walking friend had let me know which two of the three names would be most helpful on the Board). On my return to our meeting, another member tells me that the Tea Party candidate has been in town the evening before holding a meeting. Where have I been?? I ask myself. I would like to hear what he has to say and how he explains himself.
It is now morning the next day. The friend who mows my lawn finishes and knocks at my door. While I write out my check, he tells me the Republican incumbent visits the Senior Center (basement of Museum) during lunch the previous day. Where have I been? A day late and a dollar short! (Maybe I should just go back to bed...)
Monday, May 5, 2014
Equal Pay? Is Flexibility an Answer?
"By the time the average woman is 60 years old, she will have made $450,000 less than a man in the same exact position." For a black woman, it would be $440,023 less and for a Latina, $459,977 less. "That's like a fancy-ass house!" exclaims Laci Green in "Why I'm a...Feminist" YouTube video.
Is equal pay for equal work really a problem? "Well, no," respond Republicans. "Paychecks vary because of the occupations women hold. If a woman is a teacher, it won't bring in the same paycheck as an engineer might bring. So the problem is in the kind of occupations women choose compared to the occupations men choose." (Which comes first, the chicken or the egg? Do women get paid less because the job pays less, or do women get paid less because it is traditionally women doing the job?)
Claire Cain Miller, in her April 23,2014, article entitled "Pay Gap is Because of Gender, Not Jobs" finds that the disparity in pay doesn't happen as much between occupations as it happens within the same type of occupation. In reality, if pay disparity were greatest between types of jobs, women would "erase just 15 percent of the pay gap for all workers and between 30 and 35 percent for college graduates". One must look within particular occupations to see what's truly happening with pay disparity.
Fact #1 -- The pay gap "widens in the highest paying occupations, like business, law and medicine". For example, female podiatrists are paid just 66 percent of what male podiatrists earn while female economists earn 82 percent of what their male counterparts earn.
Some occupations, however, have been able to narrow the gap. Female computer software engineers make 88 percent compared to men while female pharmacists earn 91 percent of what men earn. And in some occupations like dental hygienists, H. R. specialists, and advertising sales people, the gap has disappeared altogether.
So what is happening within, rather than between, occupations that allows for more equitable pay?
Fact #2 -- The key to equalizing pay is "workplace flexibility in terms of hours and location". For example, some occupations value long hours, face-time at the office, and being on call. So if one works longer hours, puts in more face-time, or is on call, they are disproportionately rewarded with higher pay. An example might be the difference between a corporate attorney who works 80 hours a week and another who works 40 hours as in-house counsel to a small business. The corporate attorney gets paid more than double of what the in-house counsel is paid because of the value placed on those long hours, face-time, and being on call. (These are aspects of the job that, more likely than not, women with families would be less willing to do.)
On the other hand, "jobs in which employees can easily substitute for one another have the slimmest pay gaps, and those workers are paid in proportion to the hours they work". An example might be what has happened in the field of obstetrics in some locations. Rather than the obstetrician remaining on call around the clock for a birth, a doctor already working the 8-hour shift will take the case.
Another example is pharmacies. Because of changes in labor (more corporate ownership) and changes in technology (computerized data), pharmacists can easily substitute for one another. Payment is made for hours worked: those who work 80 hours get double the pay of those who work 40 hours. As a result, there is less of a pay gap between women and men (91 percent).
In most occupations, if the flexibility exists that allows for work to be done remotely or working at odd hours (presuming this is the flexibility women are looking for), the less likely there would be for gaps in pay between women and men, both of whom are doing the same work. (Source: "Pay Gap is because of gender not jobs", Claire Cain Miller, April 23, 2014)
Edith's question: Marissa Mayer has now been Yahoo's CEO for two years. Improvements at Yahoo have been noted both in salaries and attrition rates. However, Mayer has been criticized for not letting staff work from home, taking away that flexibility of work location. It would be interesting to know what, if any, movement there may be now toward pay disparity. It is also noted that Yahoo, despite its improvements, has not made Glassdoor's separate list of "50 best places to work". (Source: "Yahoo says Marissa Mayer has fixed its biggest problem", John Duling, @jmcduling, March 5, 2014)
"By the time the average woman is 60 years old, she will have made $450,000 less than a man in the same exact position." For a black woman, it would be $440,023 less and for a Latina, $459,977 less. "That's like a fancy-ass house!" exclaims Laci Green in "Why I'm a...Feminist" YouTube video.
Is equal pay for equal work really a problem? "Well, no," respond Republicans. "Paychecks vary because of the occupations women hold. If a woman is a teacher, it won't bring in the same paycheck as an engineer might bring. So the problem is in the kind of occupations women choose compared to the occupations men choose." (Which comes first, the chicken or the egg? Do women get paid less because the job pays less, or do women get paid less because it is traditionally women doing the job?)
Claire Cain Miller, in her April 23,2014, article entitled "Pay Gap is Because of Gender, Not Jobs" finds that the disparity in pay doesn't happen as much between occupations as it happens within the same type of occupation. In reality, if pay disparity were greatest between types of jobs, women would "erase just 15 percent of the pay gap for all workers and between 30 and 35 percent for college graduates". One must look within particular occupations to see what's truly happening with pay disparity.
Fact #1 -- The pay gap "widens in the highest paying occupations, like business, law and medicine". For example, female podiatrists are paid just 66 percent of what male podiatrists earn while female economists earn 82 percent of what their male counterparts earn.
Some occupations, however, have been able to narrow the gap. Female computer software engineers make 88 percent compared to men while female pharmacists earn 91 percent of what men earn. And in some occupations like dental hygienists, H. R. specialists, and advertising sales people, the gap has disappeared altogether.
So what is happening within, rather than between, occupations that allows for more equitable pay?
Fact #2 -- The key to equalizing pay is "workplace flexibility in terms of hours and location". For example, some occupations value long hours, face-time at the office, and being on call. So if one works longer hours, puts in more face-time, or is on call, they are disproportionately rewarded with higher pay. An example might be the difference between a corporate attorney who works 80 hours a week and another who works 40 hours as in-house counsel to a small business. The corporate attorney gets paid more than double of what the in-house counsel is paid because of the value placed on those long hours, face-time, and being on call. (These are aspects of the job that, more likely than not, women with families would be less willing to do.)
On the other hand, "jobs in which employees can easily substitute for one another have the slimmest pay gaps, and those workers are paid in proportion to the hours they work". An example might be what has happened in the field of obstetrics in some locations. Rather than the obstetrician remaining on call around the clock for a birth, a doctor already working the 8-hour shift will take the case.
Another example is pharmacies. Because of changes in labor (more corporate ownership) and changes in technology (computerized data), pharmacists can easily substitute for one another. Payment is made for hours worked: those who work 80 hours get double the pay of those who work 40 hours. As a result, there is less of a pay gap between women and men (91 percent).
In most occupations, if the flexibility exists that allows for work to be done remotely or working at odd hours (presuming this is the flexibility women are looking for), the less likely there would be for gaps in pay between women and men, both of whom are doing the same work. (Source: "Pay Gap is because of gender not jobs", Claire Cain Miller, April 23, 2014)
Edith's question: Marissa Mayer has now been Yahoo's CEO for two years. Improvements at Yahoo have been noted both in salaries and attrition rates. However, Mayer has been criticized for not letting staff work from home, taking away that flexibility of work location. It would be interesting to know what, if any, movement there may be now toward pay disparity. It is also noted that Yahoo, despite its improvements, has not made Glassdoor's separate list of "50 best places to work". (Source: "Yahoo says Marissa Mayer has fixed its biggest problem", John Duling, @jmcduling, March 5, 2014)
Wednesday, April 30, 2014
*S-T-R-E-T-C-H TIME to create a life we want: Five Steps
"Days just aren't long enough!" "I just can't get everything done in time!" "Too many projects and not enough time!"
Hold on. Maybe there's a solution. Maybe there's another way to look at the problem. The comments above illustrate the idea that time is limited. "There aren't enough hours in the day!" A day is only so long and that isn't enough.
Another way to view time is to see that it is unlimited. How do we do that? How do we figure out how to stretch the time we have? How do we get to create the life we want?
According to Howard Falco, we can change our perception of time. How do we interpret ourselves and the world? Our experience of time and how all things come together for us is rooted in that interpretation. "Learn to understand and trust the process of life. The universe birthed us into existence -- and we are the magnificent and perfect result." If that's true, then the universe will continue to support us on our journey through life. Less fear, less uncertainty; instead, more confidence, more peace. We can trust that our journey is as it should be. No need to hurry, scurry, worry. Whatever our intentions are when it comes to creativity, we can act on them. But we can do it in a way that reduces pressure on us and allows for more peace in the process.
Look at each moment as a teaching moment. How can we "work with life and learn from all challenges along the way?" This approach to our lives engenders "a powerful state of mind and has direct impact on our experience of time". Thus, the struggle to achieve becomes easier; we're not feeling like we are going against the current; we're in a mindset that allows us to go with the flow. It's amazing to see how what we want to have happen occurs naturally, without forcing or pressuring it to occur.
"To really master time, we must be willing to open ourselves up to a new way of looking at it." Try these 5 steps suggested by Falco:
1. Immediately stop living in regret. Give up "woulda, coulda, shoulda". Accept who we are in this moment. Focus our creative energy on honoring this newfound acceptance.
2. Trust there is a reason for every challenge and circumstance. Things are happening for us, not to us. "To everything, there is a season," go the famous words. Having expectations of the universe for what we want and when we want it actually works to add time to our journey.
3. Be present as much as possible. By being present, we can experience any messages that come to us through every person, situation and moment. If we're not paying attention, if we're moving too fast, we can miss valuable information life is presenting to us which would stretch our learning curve -- which in turn stretches time.
4. Learn to act on initial instincts. Don't hesitate or think too much. Acting on instincts allows us the fastest way to get from A to B as it relates to what we want. Determine to utilize instincts more. Have faith to go with the flow.
5. Build the faith to see time is never wasted. Each moment has purpose. Things of which we are unaware can be happening under the surface and working in our favor. "This helps to dissolve fear, resistance and pressure and increases crucial energy of faith. The more we can come to embrace that for this moment this is exactly where we are supposed to be on the journey, the more powerful we will become."
Mastering the precious commodity of time isn't so much about organizing it. It's much more "about the attitude we hold about ourselves and how this attitude affects every happening in our lives. Awakening to see the sacred connection between these two things by slowing down enough to be much more present is ironically the beginning of a new and much faster way of putting time on our side."
*Howard Falco, "How to Master Time: 5 Steps to Living a Timeless and Powerfully-Creative Life"
"Days just aren't long enough!" "I just can't get everything done in time!" "Too many projects and not enough time!"
Hold on. Maybe there's a solution. Maybe there's another way to look at the problem. The comments above illustrate the idea that time is limited. "There aren't enough hours in the day!" A day is only so long and that isn't enough.
Another way to view time is to see that it is unlimited. How do we do that? How do we figure out how to stretch the time we have? How do we get to create the life we want?
According to Howard Falco, we can change our perception of time. How do we interpret ourselves and the world? Our experience of time and how all things come together for us is rooted in that interpretation. "Learn to understand and trust the process of life. The universe birthed us into existence -- and we are the magnificent and perfect result." If that's true, then the universe will continue to support us on our journey through life. Less fear, less uncertainty; instead, more confidence, more peace. We can trust that our journey is as it should be. No need to hurry, scurry, worry. Whatever our intentions are when it comes to creativity, we can act on them. But we can do it in a way that reduces pressure on us and allows for more peace in the process.
Look at each moment as a teaching moment. How can we "work with life and learn from all challenges along the way?" This approach to our lives engenders "a powerful state of mind and has direct impact on our experience of time". Thus, the struggle to achieve becomes easier; we're not feeling like we are going against the current; we're in a mindset that allows us to go with the flow. It's amazing to see how what we want to have happen occurs naturally, without forcing or pressuring it to occur.
"To really master time, we must be willing to open ourselves up to a new way of looking at it." Try these 5 steps suggested by Falco:
1. Immediately stop living in regret. Give up "woulda, coulda, shoulda". Accept who we are in this moment. Focus our creative energy on honoring this newfound acceptance.
2. Trust there is a reason for every challenge and circumstance. Things are happening for us, not to us. "To everything, there is a season," go the famous words. Having expectations of the universe for what we want and when we want it actually works to add time to our journey.
3. Be present as much as possible. By being present, we can experience any messages that come to us through every person, situation and moment. If we're not paying attention, if we're moving too fast, we can miss valuable information life is presenting to us which would stretch our learning curve -- which in turn stretches time.
4. Learn to act on initial instincts. Don't hesitate or think too much. Acting on instincts allows us the fastest way to get from A to B as it relates to what we want. Determine to utilize instincts more. Have faith to go with the flow.
5. Build the faith to see time is never wasted. Each moment has purpose. Things of which we are unaware can be happening under the surface and working in our favor. "This helps to dissolve fear, resistance and pressure and increases crucial energy of faith. The more we can come to embrace that for this moment this is exactly where we are supposed to be on the journey, the more powerful we will become."
Mastering the precious commodity of time isn't so much about organizing it. It's much more "about the attitude we hold about ourselves and how this attitude affects every happening in our lives. Awakening to see the sacred connection between these two things by slowing down enough to be much more present is ironically the beginning of a new and much faster way of putting time on our side."
*Howard Falco, "How to Master Time: 5 Steps to Living a Timeless and Powerfully-Creative Life"
Sunday, April 27, 2014
HOW DID I GET HERE: Where I Stand
Taking a risk isn't half-bad. In fact, it's energizing.
I love life -- don't wish for the alternative.
Almost everybody is kind -- if I give them half a chance.
I feel alive and joyous -- most of the time.
I'm moving up -- to where I don't know.
I'm moving forward, ever forward.
I can't solve all the world's problems -- but I can damn well contribute my 2 cents worth.
When a door opens, I go through it.
I take on too many jobs but I'm convinced that, one of these days, I'll finish them all. Then die.
Life is hard but worth every minute.
I learn something new each day -- what joy!
Hurrah! I volunteer yesterday morning at our annual community clean-up. In the afternoon, I rake around my yard and fill 6 lawn bags of left-over leaves. I work for others, then at home. I give full measure of myself -- it's been a good day. It's spring in Montana!
Within the last several weeks, I settle on two goals for my Democratic campaign -- my low-key, off-the-radar, one-by-one campaign. My first goal is to get out the vote. In doing that, I want to first prepare voters, help them understand any referendum that appears on the ballot. There may be three: one on voting rights (taking away the right to register and vote the same day) and two on health care. One will expand Medicaid and the other will forbid the state from expanding Medicaid and from using funds or staff to administer the Affordable Care Act. The meaning and purpose of both of these must be made abundantly clear. It's been said that the voting rights referendum will be purposely confusing for voters.
My second goal is to focus on women and the impact that policies have on their economic well-being. This includes health-care policies, minimum-wage policies, equal pay for equal work, voting rights, all policies have an effect on women. No matter what others use as talking points, the fact that women are at least half our population means that they must be taken into account when discussing all policies.
Just how I will approach these two goals has yet to be determined. As I move forward, through research, listening and discussing policies with others, a way will become clear. Attending the Billings Chapter of League of Women Voters will supply clarity as well.
One thing I do know. My exercise program of the past two weeks will add strength to reach my goals. Walking every day, as fast as I comfortably can as far as I comfortably can, already makes a difference. Both my energy level and stamina are on the increase. Raking and bagging leaves into 6 lawn bags in one afternoon is a test I pass with flying colors.
What I accomplish in the end isn't as important as my willingness to try. Using my creativity in as many ways as is possible is really the goal here. After that, whatever will be, will be.
Taking a risk isn't half-bad. In fact, it's energizing.
I love life -- don't wish for the alternative.
Almost everybody is kind -- if I give them half a chance.
I feel alive and joyous -- most of the time.
I'm moving up -- to where I don't know.
I'm moving forward, ever forward.
I can't solve all the world's problems -- but I can damn well contribute my 2 cents worth.
When a door opens, I go through it.
I take on too many jobs but I'm convinced that, one of these days, I'll finish them all. Then die.
Life is hard but worth every minute.
I learn something new each day -- what joy!
Hurrah! I volunteer yesterday morning at our annual community clean-up. In the afternoon, I rake around my yard and fill 6 lawn bags of left-over leaves. I work for others, then at home. I give full measure of myself -- it's been a good day. It's spring in Montana!
Within the last several weeks, I settle on two goals for my Democratic campaign -- my low-key, off-the-radar, one-by-one campaign. My first goal is to get out the vote. In doing that, I want to first prepare voters, help them understand any referendum that appears on the ballot. There may be three: one on voting rights (taking away the right to register and vote the same day) and two on health care. One will expand Medicaid and the other will forbid the state from expanding Medicaid and from using funds or staff to administer the Affordable Care Act. The meaning and purpose of both of these must be made abundantly clear. It's been said that the voting rights referendum will be purposely confusing for voters.
My second goal is to focus on women and the impact that policies have on their economic well-being. This includes health-care policies, minimum-wage policies, equal pay for equal work, voting rights, all policies have an effect on women. No matter what others use as talking points, the fact that women are at least half our population means that they must be taken into account when discussing all policies.
Just how I will approach these two goals has yet to be determined. As I move forward, through research, listening and discussing policies with others, a way will become clear. Attending the Billings Chapter of League of Women Voters will supply clarity as well.
One thing I do know. My exercise program of the past two weeks will add strength to reach my goals. Walking every day, as fast as I comfortably can as far as I comfortably can, already makes a difference. Both my energy level and stamina are on the increase. Raking and bagging leaves into 6 lawn bags in one afternoon is a test I pass with flying colors.
What I accomplish in the end isn't as important as my willingness to try. Using my creativity in as many ways as is possible is really the goal here. After that, whatever will be, will be.
Friday, April 25, 2014
Beware of "False" Democrats
In my latest research, I uncover the March 27, 2014, issue of the Helena Independent Record that provides information on Medicaid expansion in Montana. Democratic Gov. Bullock and Lt. Gov. McLean sign a petition to qualify a voter initiative to expand Medicaid. If they garner enough signatures by June 20, the initiative (I-170) will appear on the November ballot. This initiative will "ensure 70,000 low-income Montanans no longer live under the threat of financial collapse or catastrophic illness, simply because they do not have adequate health coverage."
The April 3, 2014, issue of the same newspaper describes a second initiative that prohibits Montana "from using funds or staff to administer the Affordable Care Act and forbidding the state from expanding Medicaid..." This initiative (I-171) also needs to gather enough signatures to appear on the ballot. "It's a dangerous policy because it would eliminate our CHIP (Children's Health Insurance Program) and our Medicaid plan, costing thousands of Montanans the health care they depend on."
Meanwhile a lawsuit challenging the fiscal statement of I-170 is filed with the Supreme Court that later rejects the lawsuit. However, it's the group of three people who file the lawsuit that draws my attention: one Republican, one Democrat, and one MSU student. Wait a minute! A Democrat?! What is a Democrat doing in such a group?! Her name is Kathy Hollenback. The name rings a bell. I wonder if...
I email Lauren Caldwell, MDLCC Director, for a copy of a list she had sent out early in March. There it is: Kathy Hollenback is the last name in a list of 8 Republican Tea Party extremists who are running as "Democrats" in this year's Montana elections. They all file against true Democrats in primaries. The problem is first noticed in Gallatin County, where 5 tea Party extremists file. This same tactic is then seen in both Sanders and Teton Counties. Its purpose? To deceive voters and mislead the public.
The following is the list of 8 Republicans running as "Democrats" in Montana:
In my latest research, I uncover the March 27, 2014, issue of the Helena Independent Record that provides information on Medicaid expansion in Montana. Democratic Gov. Bullock and Lt. Gov. McLean sign a petition to qualify a voter initiative to expand Medicaid. If they garner enough signatures by June 20, the initiative (I-170) will appear on the November ballot. This initiative will "ensure 70,000 low-income Montanans no longer live under the threat of financial collapse or catastrophic illness, simply because they do not have adequate health coverage."
The April 3, 2014, issue of the same newspaper describes a second initiative that prohibits Montana "from using funds or staff to administer the Affordable Care Act and forbidding the state from expanding Medicaid..." This initiative (I-171) also needs to gather enough signatures to appear on the ballot. "It's a dangerous policy because it would eliminate our CHIP (Children's Health Insurance Program) and our Medicaid plan, costing thousands of Montanans the health care they depend on."
Meanwhile a lawsuit challenging the fiscal statement of I-170 is filed with the Supreme Court that later rejects the lawsuit. However, it's the group of three people who file the lawsuit that draws my attention: one Republican, one Democrat, and one MSU student. Wait a minute! A Democrat?! What is a Democrat doing in such a group?! Her name is Kathy Hollenback. The name rings a bell. I wonder if...
I email Lauren Caldwell, MDLCC Director, for a copy of a list she had sent out early in March. There it is: Kathy Hollenback is the last name in a list of 8 Republican Tea Party extremists who are running as "Democrats" in this year's Montana elections. They all file against true Democrats in primaries. The problem is first noticed in Gallatin County, where 5 tea Party extremists file. This same tactic is then seen in both Sanders and Teton Counties. Its purpose? To deceive voters and mislead the public.
The following is the list of 8 Republicans running as "Democrats" in Montana:
- SD09, Choteau-area -- David Brownell -- primary with Joan Graham (bonafide Democrat). Brownell runs as Repulican in 2008 for Pandera County Clerk of District Court. He could not name a Democratic issue he planned to champion (Great Falls Tribune).
- SD32, Bozeman -- Harry Pennington -- primary with Rep. Franke Wilmer (bonafide Democrat). Pennington's Facebook page has "racially-charged blather" and calls for Pres. Obama's impeachment (Montana Cowgirl).
- SD34, Belgrade -- Michael Comstock -- primary with April Bounamici (bonafide Democrat). Comstock is known as a "one-world conspiracy" theorist and "calls himself a 'Tea Party Extremist'" (Montana Cowgirl).
- HD13, Thompson Falls/Trout Creek -- Gerald Joseph Cuvillier -- primary with Weylin Achatz (bonafide Democrat). Cuvillier is "elected in 2011 as Vice-Chair of the Sanders County Republican Central Committee" (Montana Cowgirl).
- HD14, Superior/Plains -- Gerry Caldwell -- primary with Lloyd Wilkins (bonfide Democrat). Caldwell is running as a "conservative Democrat". He could not name a Democratic issue he planned to champion (Great Falls Tribune).
- HD62, Bozeman -- Dane Peeples -- primary with Rep. Tom Woods (bonafide Democrat). Peeples "is part of a local militia group called 'the Irregulars' and has an account on the Tea Party 'Patriot' Bulletin Board called the Constitution Club (Montana Cowgirl).
- HD63, Bozeman -- Laura Springer -- primary with Zach Brown (bonafide Democrat). Springer is an associate of Peeples (Montana Cowgirl).
- HD66, Bozeman -- Kathy Hollenback -- primary with Denise Hayman (bonafide Democrat). Hollenback's filing phone number and address are the same as Gallatin County Republican precinct chairman Dave Ponte (Great Falls Tribune).
Tuesday, April 22, 2014
Out-of-Whack Back? See if this works.
1. Use a yoga mat or blanket. Stretch it out on the floor. No pillows.
2. Sit on the mat and ease your back slowly down to the floor. Rest your head on the mat.
3. Bend your knees up with your feet flat on the floor. Keep them there for the duration of the exercise. Rest your arms along your sides.
4. At first, your back may not feel like it "fits" the floor. Just remain in this position for a while -- 5 minutes maybe. Gradually, you will relax and your body becomes more comfortable.
5. When you're ready, pull your heels close in to your buttocks. Push into the floor at your lower back and begin to lift your buttocks up.
6. At the same time and moving slowly, feel your back come up off the floor, one vertebra at a time. Keep raising your buttocks while also feeling each vertebra rise off the floor.
7. When you get to the neck, hold. Your back should be off the floor and your stomach and thighs as far off the floor as you can get them. Feel the pull in your upper leg muscles.
8. Slowly, begin to lower your back, one vertebra at a time. Bring your back down to the original position. Relax.
9. Follow these same instructions, completing 3-5 times, raising and then lowering your back.
I've observed this exercise as a part of a yoga lesson. I use it every several days. When my back gets tired, or feels like it's out-of-whack, just going through this exercise helps eliminate feelings of back discomfort.
In addition, I periodically take a nap flat on the floor. The position is the same as for this exercise only my knees are resting against each other (a pillow can be placed under the knees also). Whatever crookedness seems to be developing in my posture as I age, this exercise and nap help to straighten me out. I'm reminded to walk head up, shoulders back and belly tucked in. Can't beat that!
1. Use a yoga mat or blanket. Stretch it out on the floor. No pillows.
2. Sit on the mat and ease your back slowly down to the floor. Rest your head on the mat.
3. Bend your knees up with your feet flat on the floor. Keep them there for the duration of the exercise. Rest your arms along your sides.
4. At first, your back may not feel like it "fits" the floor. Just remain in this position for a while -- 5 minutes maybe. Gradually, you will relax and your body becomes more comfortable.
5. When you're ready, pull your heels close in to your buttocks. Push into the floor at your lower back and begin to lift your buttocks up.
6. At the same time and moving slowly, feel your back come up off the floor, one vertebra at a time. Keep raising your buttocks while also feeling each vertebra rise off the floor.
7. When you get to the neck, hold. Your back should be off the floor and your stomach and thighs as far off the floor as you can get them. Feel the pull in your upper leg muscles.
8. Slowly, begin to lower your back, one vertebra at a time. Bring your back down to the original position. Relax.
9. Follow these same instructions, completing 3-5 times, raising and then lowering your back.
I've observed this exercise as a part of a yoga lesson. I use it every several days. When my back gets tired, or feels like it's out-of-whack, just going through this exercise helps eliminate feelings of back discomfort.
In addition, I periodically take a nap flat on the floor. The position is the same as for this exercise only my knees are resting against each other (a pillow can be placed under the knees also). Whatever crookedness seems to be developing in my posture as I age, this exercise and nap help to straighten me out. I'm reminded to walk head up, shoulders back and belly tucked in. Can't beat that!
Sunday, April 20, 2014
Medicaid Expansion? You bet!
The numbers of uninsured in our country are decreasing, thanks to the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). They are decreasing at a faster rate in states where there has been Medicaid expansion. On average, the rate of the uninsured has dropped by 2.5 percent in states where there is Medicaid expansion but only by .08 percent in states where that expansion has been refused.
Take a look at the 8 million now signing up for Obamacare, particularly those insured for the first time. According to Ezra Klein, these latest figures show the percentage-point change in the insured rate from late 2013 to early 2014 (these are the rates at which people are becoming insured):
By ethnicity:
So why then, with 8 million signing up for Obamacare, do we still have 70,000 Montanans without affordable health care? Yes, most of them could appear in those statistical categories of ethnicity, age, and income presented above. The problem in Montana arises, though, because Republican legislators voted against expanding Medicaid. That means federal subsidies that would have been available through Medicaid (that would allow those earning 100 percent below the poverty level to qualify for subsidies and therefore be able to purchase health care) is not available to Montanans.
Why not?
"A majority of Republicans in the 2013 Montana Legislature...argue it would become too costly for the state and wouldn't improve health in the state," according to the Independent Record of 4/19/2014.
Too costly?
The numbers of uninsured in our country are decreasing, thanks to the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). They are decreasing at a faster rate in states where there has been Medicaid expansion. On average, the rate of the uninsured has dropped by 2.5 percent in states where there is Medicaid expansion but only by .08 percent in states where that expansion has been refused.
Take a look at the 8 million now signing up for Obamacare, particularly those insured for the first time. According to Ezra Klein, these latest figures show the percentage-point change in the insured rate from late 2013 to early 2014 (these are the rates at which people are becoming insured):
By ethnicity:
- White, non-Hispanic -- 1.9
- Non-white, non-Hispanic -- 3.8
- Hispanic -- 4
- 18-30: 4.3
- 31-49: 1.9
- 50-64; 2.3
- Below 138% of poverty line -- 4.7
- 138-399 of poverty line -- 3.6
- 400% mor more of poverty line -- 0.3
So why then, with 8 million signing up for Obamacare, do we still have 70,000 Montanans without affordable health care? Yes, most of them could appear in those statistical categories of ethnicity, age, and income presented above. The problem in Montana arises, though, because Republican legislators voted against expanding Medicaid. That means federal subsidies that would have been available through Medicaid (that would allow those earning 100 percent below the poverty level to qualify for subsidies and therefore be able to purchase health care) is not available to Montanans.
Why not?
"A majority of Republicans in the 2013 Montana Legislature...argue it would become too costly for the state and wouldn't improve health in the state," according to the Independent Record of 4/19/2014.
Too costly?
- Again, according to Independent Record, "Under the federal Affordable Care Act, the federal government will cover almost the entire cost of expanding Medicaid through 2016. After that, the feds' share of expansion costs will gradually decline to 90 percent by 2020."
- Maybe this is a good time to talk about other federal subsidies in Montana, who receives them and for how much. There is a "large amount of farm subsidies received by more than a dozen lawmakers...33 Montana legislators, 30 of whom are Republicans, benefited from farm program subsidies," reports the Bozeman Daily Chronicle, March 21, 2011. "...lawmakers, their spouses and businesses in which they had interests received a total of $7 million in farm subsidies between 1995 and 2009." One Senator's reasoning? "They [USDA] are for an affordable, safe food supply." This same Senator received $643,000 in farm subsidies since 1995..."
- Is it O.K. for Montana legislators to receive thousands of dollars in farm subsidies in order to create "affordable, safe food supply," but 70,000 Montanans cannot receive federal subsidies that allow them to purchase affordable health care?
- Would the Republican Montana legislators care to rescind their personal health care coverage in order to prove their point? That lack of health care coverage will make no difference in the improvement of their health?
- Poor health as a result of no access to affordable health care can result in poverty. "Poverty is both a cause and a consequence of poor health. Poverty increases the chances of poor health. Poor health in turn traps communities in poverty. Infectious and neglected tropical diseases kill and weaken millions of the poorest and most vulnerable people each year," reports Healthpovertyaction.org.
Friday, April 18, 2014
HOW DID I GET HERE: Forget the Bootstraps!
It's the seventh week now since I file for Democratic candidate for State House in Montana. The fear that has been with me from the beginning is mostly dissipating. Passing time helps. It's also true that, in sharing my candidacy with different community groups of which I'm a member, I'm gaining more confidence. Reactions seem to range from some acceptance to utter surprise to ho-hum. If anything can clarify my importance within the community, it's the "ho-hum, big-deal". It tends to keep me in touch with reality.
At the same time, I realize I'm also looking for affirmation. Is there anyone out there (within my small community) who thinks that what I'm doing is a great idea? When I share my down-in-the-dumps feeling with a local friend through email, she writes back, "I would vote for you. I know you would do the required research." But mostly with those I interact, my candidacy just pointedly does not come up in our conversations.
Leila, a friend from Billings, tries to explain the culture of this area, and Montana in general. She is born here, has lived for some years in California, but is back again in retirement. "People here," she says, "are expected to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. It's when a disaster takes place that neighbors come together to provide support."
Take, for example, Roundup's latest flood. This spring word gets out early as to possible flooding along the Musselshell River. Spring thaws upriver cause water to rise and begin to move downstream. Homes and businesses in low-lying areas prepare by moving equipment to higher ground. Community meetings led by the Department of Emergency Services are held regularly at St. Benedict Catholic Church. Reports are made on where the problems are, what is expected to happen with the fast-running water, and where help is needed. Beds and food are available for anyone who needs them. Even before the flood of 2011 and the fires of 2012, the community has been developing a program and process that jumps into action when disaster warnings come.
Other factors impact culture in the western states, however. The Billings Gazette, Nov. 25, 2012, reports that Montana "has been near the top in the nation in the rate of suicide for 35 years...The victims are military veterans, American Indians, senior citizens, and teenagers."
Suicides in Montana seem to come from not only a "cowboy culture" (pull yourself up by your own bootstraps), but also from the following:
(Billings Gazette, "High-Country Crisis: Montana's suicide rate leads the nation," Nov. 25, 2012)
It's the seventh week now since I file for Democratic candidate for State House in Montana. The fear that has been with me from the beginning is mostly dissipating. Passing time helps. It's also true that, in sharing my candidacy with different community groups of which I'm a member, I'm gaining more confidence. Reactions seem to range from some acceptance to utter surprise to ho-hum. If anything can clarify my importance within the community, it's the "ho-hum, big-deal". It tends to keep me in touch with reality.
At the same time, I realize I'm also looking for affirmation. Is there anyone out there (within my small community) who thinks that what I'm doing is a great idea? When I share my down-in-the-dumps feeling with a local friend through email, she writes back, "I would vote for you. I know you would do the required research." But mostly with those I interact, my candidacy just pointedly does not come up in our conversations.
Leila, a friend from Billings, tries to explain the culture of this area, and Montana in general. She is born here, has lived for some years in California, but is back again in retirement. "People here," she says, "are expected to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. It's when a disaster takes place that neighbors come together to provide support."
Take, for example, Roundup's latest flood. This spring word gets out early as to possible flooding along the Musselshell River. Spring thaws upriver cause water to rise and begin to move downstream. Homes and businesses in low-lying areas prepare by moving equipment to higher ground. Community meetings led by the Department of Emergency Services are held regularly at St. Benedict Catholic Church. Reports are made on where the problems are, what is expected to happen with the fast-running water, and where help is needed. Beds and food are available for anyone who needs them. Even before the flood of 2011 and the fires of 2012, the community has been developing a program and process that jumps into action when disaster warnings come.
Other factors impact culture in the western states, however. The Billings Gazette, Nov. 25, 2012, reports that Montana "has been near the top in the nation in the rate of suicide for 35 years...The victims are military veterans, American Indians, senior citizens, and teenagers."
Suicides in Montana seem to come from not only a "cowboy culture" (pull yourself up by your own bootstraps), but also from the following:
- Montana is a gun state. It is third in the nation for per capita gun possession. "People who live in areas with high concentrations of guns are more likely to die by suicide."
- Social isolation that comes with living in Montana. If there is a network of social support, there is a lower incidence of suicide.
- Widespread use of drugs
- A shortage of mental health professionals in the state
(Billings Gazette, "High-Country Crisis: Montana's suicide rate leads the nation," Nov. 25, 2012)
Wednesday, April 16, 2014
Stressed Out? Go Under!
Getting tensed up? Can't relax? Can't sleep? Try this.
1 -- Sit up in a chair, feet on the floor (or sit up in bed).
2 -- Close your eyes.
3 -- Slowly roll your head around in a circle to the right 3 times. Do the same to the left, signaling to your body that you are beginning to relax.
4 -- Breathe in deeply. Hold to the count of 5. Breathe out slowly through your mouth to the count of 10. Repeat 2 more times.
5 -- Breathe normally, keeping your eyes closed.
6 -- Focus solely on your breath. Keep your attention on your breathing.
7 -- Your mind will wander but, matter-of-factly, always bring it back to your breathing. Your mind will wander again but always come back to your breathing. Over and over.
8 -- Feel your muscles in your feet and legs begin to relax. Breathe. Up through your torso, allow your different organs to relax. Breathe. Your intestines, stomach, heart, lungs. Breathe. Your arms are relaxing with each breath. Your back is relaxing. Up through your neck and head. Breathe.
9 -- Bring your mind always back to breathing.
10 -- Take as long as you can to sit relaxed, loose, focusing on each breath. Bring your mind back to breathing each time it wanders.
11 -- Time may be 10, 15 minutes. 30 minutes. Or more. Within whatever time is available, this process will pull you under.
12 -- Open your eyes. Re-orient yourself to your surroundings.
13 -- Feel relaxed, refreshed. Ready to move on. Or to snuggle back into the covers, and sleep.
This is meditation. This is going under. Whenever stress takes over, take time wherever you are to close your eyes, slowly relax, focus on your breathing. It can work. Let it!
Getting tensed up? Can't relax? Can't sleep? Try this.
1 -- Sit up in a chair, feet on the floor (or sit up in bed).
2 -- Close your eyes.
3 -- Slowly roll your head around in a circle to the right 3 times. Do the same to the left, signaling to your body that you are beginning to relax.
4 -- Breathe in deeply. Hold to the count of 5. Breathe out slowly through your mouth to the count of 10. Repeat 2 more times.
5 -- Breathe normally, keeping your eyes closed.
6 -- Focus solely on your breath. Keep your attention on your breathing.
7 -- Your mind will wander but, matter-of-factly, always bring it back to your breathing. Your mind will wander again but always come back to your breathing. Over and over.
8 -- Feel your muscles in your feet and legs begin to relax. Breathe. Up through your torso, allow your different organs to relax. Breathe. Your intestines, stomach, heart, lungs. Breathe. Your arms are relaxing with each breath. Your back is relaxing. Up through your neck and head. Breathe.
9 -- Bring your mind always back to breathing.
10 -- Take as long as you can to sit relaxed, loose, focusing on each breath. Bring your mind back to breathing each time it wanders.
11 -- Time may be 10, 15 minutes. 30 minutes. Or more. Within whatever time is available, this process will pull you under.
12 -- Open your eyes. Re-orient yourself to your surroundings.
13 -- Feel relaxed, refreshed. Ready to move on. Or to snuggle back into the covers, and sleep.
This is meditation. This is going under. Whenever stress takes over, take time wherever you are to close your eyes, slowly relax, focus on your breathing. It can work. Let it!
Monday, April 14, 2014
Suppressing Voting Rights in Montana
As in other red states where there is a Republican majority in the legislature, Montana is at risk of losing voting rights. Suppression of the vote is a major Republican thrust throughout red states and Montana seems to be following suit.
Since 2005, Montanans have had the right to register to vote on election day. Same-day registration boosts participation in elections. It allows college students, who tend to move more frequently, to vote. It eases unnecessary burdens for blacks, for Hispanics, and for young voters, particularly those from under-privileged backgrounds.
Current same-day registration laws in Montana are already restrictive. They require that voter registration take place only at county election offices, not at polling sites. To follow the law, voters must drive to two different locations to vote on Election Day.
In their last session, the state legislature determined to defeat same-day registration. Other than the fact that affected populations tend to vote Democratic, there is no reason for removing this right. There is almost no in-person voter fraud found in the state. For what reason, other than suppressing votes, does the legislature want to remove this right?
Knowing that our Democratic Governor Bullock would veto it, the legislature has decided to take elimination of this right to voters. It will be a referendum on the November ballot this year, #126. My friend, Leila, reports that the actual ballot language is confusing, however. "The wording is deliberately difficult in hopes that it will pass and people won't understand it," she tells me. More information on this specific referendum will be forthcoming in early June when the Billings Chapter of the League of Women Voters will be discussing it (navigating the Montana Government website is all but impossible).
This referendum needs to be defeated. (1) It rescinds a right we currently have -- to register and vote the same day. (2) It makes voting more difficult. Voting is a right for all citizens, no matter their situation. Access to that right should be helped, not hindered.
How do we respond? (1) Take every opportunity to notify/educate voters about this move of the Montana Legislature. As soon as the specific language of the referendum is known, provide a clear explanation to voters, making sure they understand what a "yes"or "no" vote means. (2) Get out the vote. Begin a campaign early on to encourage all voters to practice their right to vote. Our legislators are our representatives; we must tell them what we want.
This is the beginning of an "Educate to Motivate" campaign in Montana. Let's get started!
("Montana GOP looks to end same-day voter registration" by Zachary Roth)
As in other red states where there is a Republican majority in the legislature, Montana is at risk of losing voting rights. Suppression of the vote is a major Republican thrust throughout red states and Montana seems to be following suit.
Since 2005, Montanans have had the right to register to vote on election day. Same-day registration boosts participation in elections. It allows college students, who tend to move more frequently, to vote. It eases unnecessary burdens for blacks, for Hispanics, and for young voters, particularly those from under-privileged backgrounds.
Current same-day registration laws in Montana are already restrictive. They require that voter registration take place only at county election offices, not at polling sites. To follow the law, voters must drive to two different locations to vote on Election Day.
In their last session, the state legislature determined to defeat same-day registration. Other than the fact that affected populations tend to vote Democratic, there is no reason for removing this right. There is almost no in-person voter fraud found in the state. For what reason, other than suppressing votes, does the legislature want to remove this right?
Knowing that our Democratic Governor Bullock would veto it, the legislature has decided to take elimination of this right to voters. It will be a referendum on the November ballot this year, #126. My friend, Leila, reports that the actual ballot language is confusing, however. "The wording is deliberately difficult in hopes that it will pass and people won't understand it," she tells me. More information on this specific referendum will be forthcoming in early June when the Billings Chapter of the League of Women Voters will be discussing it (navigating the Montana Government website is all but impossible).
This referendum needs to be defeated. (1) It rescinds a right we currently have -- to register and vote the same day. (2) It makes voting more difficult. Voting is a right for all citizens, no matter their situation. Access to that right should be helped, not hindered.
How do we respond? (1) Take every opportunity to notify/educate voters about this move of the Montana Legislature. As soon as the specific language of the referendum is known, provide a clear explanation to voters, making sure they understand what a "yes"or "no" vote means. (2) Get out the vote. Begin a campaign early on to encourage all voters to practice their right to vote. Our legislators are our representatives; we must tell them what we want.
This is the beginning of an "Educate to Motivate" campaign in Montana. Let's get started!
("Montana GOP looks to end same-day voter registration" by Zachary Roth)
Saturday, April 12, 2014
HOW DID I GET HERE -- Effects of Fear
It is now late into the third week after my filing for the Montana State House as a Democratic candidate. I have blown hot and cold at the thought of taking on this experience: running blue in a red state. Even during my March 3rd phone call with Matt, Democratic Field Director, my fear is palpable. In answer to his request of including my name on the November ballot, I respond, "You don't think I'll find a burning cross on my lawn some night?" He reassures me, because of where I live, that probably wouldn't happen.
On Sunday, at the beginning of this third week, I tell of my candidacy and share my fears with the UU Fellowship in Billings. They are supportive and encouraging. But I have yet to tell the first person in my town. Earlier in the week, I write several posts for my new blog. Since only a few know of the blog, there's little likelihood there would be a local response to anything I've written so far. Still, I worry about reactions from crazy people -- and lay low. In fact, in the previous week, a small circle of friends meets at my house. We each have a goal in mind when it comes to writing and we meet to provide ideas and support in that process. I do not mention the blog that might give away my secret.
It's only after a conversation that lends itself to my situation that I share with a Roundup citizen -- almost four weeks after I file. We are discussing an upcoming Trade Fair where local citizens running for local offices will have an opportunity to introduce themselves to Fair participants. There will be a table available for their literature as well. "Maybe I should introduce myself, too," I suggest. I go on to explain. She doesn't seem upset, only shows surprise because she hasn't yet heard anything about it. I laugh, "There's probably a good reason for that since you're the first person I've told here." At the Fair, the table for candidates will focus on their running for local offices; my candidacy is for a statewide office. I decline the idea of participating. I'm nervous about putting myself out there so quickly and publicly.
Midweek, our small circle of friends meets again at another member's home. This time I have the courage to mention my candidacy. The question that surprises me most is, "What if you win?" I laugh and tell them the story of my husband's experience in running for office in South Florida in the 1970's. "If I win," he said at the time, "I'm going to demand a recount!" This whole experience is beginning to feel like a game now.
The next week, I share my not-so-secret again with a larger community group. "I want to introduce you to someone," I say to the group after the meeting is adjourned, "who is a Democrat running for State House representing District 40." I pause. "And she is me," I finish.
"You?!" is the loudest response. She follows up with question concerning campaigning. I surprise myself in answering her, "I don't want to work that hard." Another mentions, "Oh, I'm neither Republican or Democrat."
My tension is beginning to ease a little. Maybe paralyzing fear has been unwarranted, I tell myself. With each step I've taken in sharing my candidacy, my fears have lessened. Maybe that's the secret, I tell myself. Honor my commitment first. Then, just continue what I've already started: take one step at a time, one day at a time. And trust the process.
It is now late into the third week after my filing for the Montana State House as a Democratic candidate. I have blown hot and cold at the thought of taking on this experience: running blue in a red state. Even during my March 3rd phone call with Matt, Democratic Field Director, my fear is palpable. In answer to his request of including my name on the November ballot, I respond, "You don't think I'll find a burning cross on my lawn some night?" He reassures me, because of where I live, that probably wouldn't happen.
On Sunday, at the beginning of this third week, I tell of my candidacy and share my fears with the UU Fellowship in Billings. They are supportive and encouraging. But I have yet to tell the first person in my town. Earlier in the week, I write several posts for my new blog. Since only a few know of the blog, there's little likelihood there would be a local response to anything I've written so far. Still, I worry about reactions from crazy people -- and lay low. In fact, in the previous week, a small circle of friends meets at my house. We each have a goal in mind when it comes to writing and we meet to provide ideas and support in that process. I do not mention the blog that might give away my secret.
It's only after a conversation that lends itself to my situation that I share with a Roundup citizen -- almost four weeks after I file. We are discussing an upcoming Trade Fair where local citizens running for local offices will have an opportunity to introduce themselves to Fair participants. There will be a table available for their literature as well. "Maybe I should introduce myself, too," I suggest. I go on to explain. She doesn't seem upset, only shows surprise because she hasn't yet heard anything about it. I laugh, "There's probably a good reason for that since you're the first person I've told here." At the Fair, the table for candidates will focus on their running for local offices; my candidacy is for a statewide office. I decline the idea of participating. I'm nervous about putting myself out there so quickly and publicly.
Midweek, our small circle of friends meets again at another member's home. This time I have the courage to mention my candidacy. The question that surprises me most is, "What if you win?" I laugh and tell them the story of my husband's experience in running for office in South Florida in the 1970's. "If I win," he said at the time, "I'm going to demand a recount!" This whole experience is beginning to feel like a game now.
The next week, I share my not-so-secret again with a larger community group. "I want to introduce you to someone," I say to the group after the meeting is adjourned, "who is a Democrat running for State House representing District 40." I pause. "And she is me," I finish.
"You?!" is the loudest response. She follows up with question concerning campaigning. I surprise myself in answering her, "I don't want to work that hard." Another mentions, "Oh, I'm neither Republican or Democrat."
My tension is beginning to ease a little. Maybe paralyzing fear has been unwarranted, I tell myself. With each step I've taken in sharing my candidacy, my fears have lessened. Maybe that's the secret, I tell myself. Honor my commitment first. Then, just continue what I've already started: take one step at a time, one day at a time. And trust the process.
Friday, April 11, 2014
How to Exercise -- for a campaign or a regular work day
Keep your mind clear and your body flexible. Follow these 10 early-morning stretches to wake you up and keep your motor running throughout the day. From head to toe, you will be ready for anything.
1. Head rolls: Do 10 head rolls (rolling from right shoulder around to the back to the left, to the front and back to the right). Do 10 head rolls to the left. Move more slowly as needed.
2. Shoulder rolls: Hunch and roll your shoulders backwards 10 times. Hunch them forward 10 times.
3. Large arm swings: Swing your right arm in a circle beginning with your arm at your side, swing forward, up, back then down. Do this 10 times. Do the same with your left arm. Then swing both arms together, first forward 10 times crossing them in the front, then backwards 10 times.
4. Tight arm swings: Stretch your arms straight out at the sides. Keeping them straight, rotate them in a tight circle 10 times forward, then 10 times backwards. Continue these complete rotations 5 times.
5. Side stretches: Place your left arm at your side. Bring your right arm over your head. At each count to three, bend, straighten, bend then straighten. Your left arm will move further down your side. Continue 10 times. Do the same with your right arm at your side and the left arm over your head, 10 times.
6. Belly-dancing rolls: Place hands on your hips. Bring hips forward, roll them to the right, around to the back, over to the left and forward again. Continue 10 times. Do the same but beginning to the left. The goal is to flex your body at the waist while keeping legs slightly bent.
7. Touching toes: Stretch legs apart, keeping them straight at the knee. Reach to the floor, bending as far as is comfortable. Each time you bend, your arms and back will stretch further. Do this 10 times.
8. Body twists: Keeping your legs apart after previous exercise, spread both arms out at the sides, and swing your body left then right, turning at the waist. Keep your legs straight with head facing forward. Do this 10 times.
9. Leg exercise #1: Lean against a wall. Bring your right leg up to your chest, use arms to pull it into your chest and hold for several seconds. Do this 10 times. Repeat with your left leg.
10. Leg exercise #2: Stand with legs together. Take one step forward with right foot. While keeping left heel on the floor, lean into that right leg bending it downward at the knee. Feel the stretch in your left leg. Hold. Bring your right leg back to original position and repeat 10 times. Do the same starting with your left leg.
Follow this routine each morning. These stretches demand about 15 minutes out of your day but very quickly can become one of the most satisfying activities you can give yourself. Have a good day!
Keep your mind clear and your body flexible. Follow these 10 early-morning stretches to wake you up and keep your motor running throughout the day. From head to toe, you will be ready for anything.
1. Head rolls: Do 10 head rolls (rolling from right shoulder around to the back to the left, to the front and back to the right). Do 10 head rolls to the left. Move more slowly as needed.
2. Shoulder rolls: Hunch and roll your shoulders backwards 10 times. Hunch them forward 10 times.
3. Large arm swings: Swing your right arm in a circle beginning with your arm at your side, swing forward, up, back then down. Do this 10 times. Do the same with your left arm. Then swing both arms together, first forward 10 times crossing them in the front, then backwards 10 times.
4. Tight arm swings: Stretch your arms straight out at the sides. Keeping them straight, rotate them in a tight circle 10 times forward, then 10 times backwards. Continue these complete rotations 5 times.
5. Side stretches: Place your left arm at your side. Bring your right arm over your head. At each count to three, bend, straighten, bend then straighten. Your left arm will move further down your side. Continue 10 times. Do the same with your right arm at your side and the left arm over your head, 10 times.
6. Belly-dancing rolls: Place hands on your hips. Bring hips forward, roll them to the right, around to the back, over to the left and forward again. Continue 10 times. Do the same but beginning to the left. The goal is to flex your body at the waist while keeping legs slightly bent.
7. Touching toes: Stretch legs apart, keeping them straight at the knee. Reach to the floor, bending as far as is comfortable. Each time you bend, your arms and back will stretch further. Do this 10 times.
8. Body twists: Keeping your legs apart after previous exercise, spread both arms out at the sides, and swing your body left then right, turning at the waist. Keep your legs straight with head facing forward. Do this 10 times.
9. Leg exercise #1: Lean against a wall. Bring your right leg up to your chest, use arms to pull it into your chest and hold for several seconds. Do this 10 times. Repeat with your left leg.
10. Leg exercise #2: Stand with legs together. Take one step forward with right foot. While keeping left heel on the floor, lean into that right leg bending it downward at the knee. Feel the stretch in your left leg. Hold. Bring your right leg back to original position and repeat 10 times. Do the same starting with your left leg.
Follow this routine each morning. These stretches demand about 15 minutes out of your day but very quickly can become one of the most satisfying activities you can give yourself. Have a good day!
Wednesday, April 9, 2014
The Affordable Care Act and Abortion
Understandably, there are many mistakes, misconceptions, and just plain confusion concerning the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). This has also been the case in the past when, for example, another big law, Medicare part D, was introduced during the George W. Bush administration. Although Democrats had many questions about the prescription drug benefit, they eventually supported it and actively encouraged constituents to apply for the benefit.
This has not been the case with the other side of the aisle when it comes to the Affordable Care Act. Purposeful confusion, misconceptions and downright lies from the Republicans have exacerbated what can already be a confusing law for many. Rather than clarify misunderstandings about the Affordable Care Act, Republicans in turn have done everything in their power to sabotage the law -- a law that can bring health care benefits to many who, up until now, have been unable to afford such coverage. Note the efforts of the House Republican caucus to repeal the law at least 50 times!
Thus, we have health care issues that have been totally misrepresented as they pertain to the Affordable Care Act. Take abortion, for example. The Affordable Care Act does nothing "to restrict or expand existing abortion law, while ensuring that federal funds cannot be used for abortion coverage or care." Specifically, the following is true:
"-Health plans cannot be required to cover abortion
-No federal funds for abortion coverage or abortion care
-No federal funds for abortion coverage in the community health insurance option
-Enrollees are guaranteed access to varied coverage in the exchanges
-No preemption of state or federal laws regarding abortion
-Conscience protections for providers and facilities"
(from www.dpc.senate.gov/healthreformbill/healthbill18.pdf)
This is not to say that I agree with the exceptions created for the health care procedure of abortion in the Affordable Care Act. To wit:
1. Whatever must be decided about a woman's pregnancy is between herself and her doctor. It has been said, "If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament." Until the time when men can get pregnant, it is the woman who gets to make the decision about what happens with her body and her pregnancy. Whether or not that decision includes an abortion is up to the woman. Everyone else, keep your hands off!
2. An abortion is a medical procedure that very few, if any, women who, growing up, would wish to have done. The reason for that is not because it isn't a safe procedure. Within Planned Parenthood, for example, abortion is a safe and effective medical procedure. The emotional toll can be almost overwhelming but, in clinics like Planned Parenthood, all aspects of a woman's health can be addressed.
3. If women would prefer not to go through an abortion and men would prefer women not have to go through an abortion, then towards that end, some actions can be taken. The following are examples:
MEN
a. Educate yourself concerning the reproductive system within your own body and in that of your sexual partner. The more you know about how the systems work, the better able you will be to prevent an unwanted pregnancy before it develops.
b. If you are sexually active, get a vasectomy. It is a quick operation performed under local anesthesia. At the very least, use a contraceptive. (A male latex condom has the highest rate of effectiveness for a contraceptive, male or female, at 86%.)
c. Do whatever you can to make sure your sexual partners have access to birth control.
d. Support those organizations that can provide access to safe birth control. One example of such an organization includes Planned Parenthood. Make every effort to be sure their doors stay open, that they are easily accessible, and that they are free from harassment of those who use their services. Planned Parenthood also provides sexual health services for men as well as women.
WOMEN
a. Do all in your power to keep yourself safe -- as much as is in your control. For example, know how much alcohol you can drink and still keep yourself safe.
b. Use contraceptives if you are sexually active. (About 85% of sexually active women who do not use contraceptives become pregnant within a year.) Consult with health clinics, such as Planned Parenthood, for a program of birth control. Some contraceptives are more effective than others. Demand that your sexual partner use birth control.
c. Aside from contraceptives, abstaining totally from any sexual activity is the only other way to prevent unwanted pregnancies.
d. Be assertive, aggressive in your right to say no to any unwanted sexual advances.
e. Protect yourself through learning as much about your health and reproductive system as you can. The more you know, the better equipped you will be to prevent unwanted pregnancies.
If, in the end, the goal is to do away with abortions, then the practical thing to do is to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Not all abortions can be prevented, like those that are needed because of rape or incest or because the pregnant woman and her doctor decide it is best for her health. But the numbers can be reduced if men, as well as women, take responsibility for that prevention.
If we say that the reason we want to do away with abortions is a concern for life, then let's take a look. Where is the concern for life when food for children in the SNAP program (food stamps) is reduced by billions in a Farm Bill? Where is the concern for life when unemployment checks for families including children are discontinued? Where is the concern for life when governmental programs that provide a safety net for families and children are continually assailed by Republicans? No one can know for certain when life begins but we do know when children are hungry. Walk the walk and forget the talk.
Understandably, there are many mistakes, misconceptions, and just plain confusion concerning the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). This has also been the case in the past when, for example, another big law, Medicare part D, was introduced during the George W. Bush administration. Although Democrats had many questions about the prescription drug benefit, they eventually supported it and actively encouraged constituents to apply for the benefit.
This has not been the case with the other side of the aisle when it comes to the Affordable Care Act. Purposeful confusion, misconceptions and downright lies from the Republicans have exacerbated what can already be a confusing law for many. Rather than clarify misunderstandings about the Affordable Care Act, Republicans in turn have done everything in their power to sabotage the law -- a law that can bring health care benefits to many who, up until now, have been unable to afford such coverage. Note the efforts of the House Republican caucus to repeal the law at least 50 times!
Thus, we have health care issues that have been totally misrepresented as they pertain to the Affordable Care Act. Take abortion, for example. The Affordable Care Act does nothing "to restrict or expand existing abortion law, while ensuring that federal funds cannot be used for abortion coverage or care." Specifically, the following is true:
"-Health plans cannot be required to cover abortion
-No federal funds for abortion coverage or abortion care
-No federal funds for abortion coverage in the community health insurance option
-Enrollees are guaranteed access to varied coverage in the exchanges
-No preemption of state or federal laws regarding abortion
-Conscience protections for providers and facilities"
(from www.dpc.senate.gov/healthreformbill/healthbill18.pdf)
This is not to say that I agree with the exceptions created for the health care procedure of abortion in the Affordable Care Act. To wit:
1. Whatever must be decided about a woman's pregnancy is between herself and her doctor. It has been said, "If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament." Until the time when men can get pregnant, it is the woman who gets to make the decision about what happens with her body and her pregnancy. Whether or not that decision includes an abortion is up to the woman. Everyone else, keep your hands off!
2. An abortion is a medical procedure that very few, if any, women who, growing up, would wish to have done. The reason for that is not because it isn't a safe procedure. Within Planned Parenthood, for example, abortion is a safe and effective medical procedure. The emotional toll can be almost overwhelming but, in clinics like Planned Parenthood, all aspects of a woman's health can be addressed.
3. If women would prefer not to go through an abortion and men would prefer women not have to go through an abortion, then towards that end, some actions can be taken. The following are examples:
MEN
a. Educate yourself concerning the reproductive system within your own body and in that of your sexual partner. The more you know about how the systems work, the better able you will be to prevent an unwanted pregnancy before it develops.
b. If you are sexually active, get a vasectomy. It is a quick operation performed under local anesthesia. At the very least, use a contraceptive. (A male latex condom has the highest rate of effectiveness for a contraceptive, male or female, at 86%.)
c. Do whatever you can to make sure your sexual partners have access to birth control.
d. Support those organizations that can provide access to safe birth control. One example of such an organization includes Planned Parenthood. Make every effort to be sure their doors stay open, that they are easily accessible, and that they are free from harassment of those who use their services. Planned Parenthood also provides sexual health services for men as well as women.
WOMEN
a. Do all in your power to keep yourself safe -- as much as is in your control. For example, know how much alcohol you can drink and still keep yourself safe.
b. Use contraceptives if you are sexually active. (About 85% of sexually active women who do not use contraceptives become pregnant within a year.) Consult with health clinics, such as Planned Parenthood, for a program of birth control. Some contraceptives are more effective than others. Demand that your sexual partner use birth control.
c. Aside from contraceptives, abstaining totally from any sexual activity is the only other way to prevent unwanted pregnancies.
d. Be assertive, aggressive in your right to say no to any unwanted sexual advances.
e. Protect yourself through learning as much about your health and reproductive system as you can. The more you know, the better equipped you will be to prevent unwanted pregnancies.
If, in the end, the goal is to do away with abortions, then the practical thing to do is to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Not all abortions can be prevented, like those that are needed because of rape or incest or because the pregnant woman and her doctor decide it is best for her health. But the numbers can be reduced if men, as well as women, take responsibility for that prevention.
If we say that the reason we want to do away with abortions is a concern for life, then let's take a look. Where is the concern for life when food for children in the SNAP program (food stamps) is reduced by billions in a Farm Bill? Where is the concern for life when unemployment checks for families including children are discontinued? Where is the concern for life when governmental programs that provide a safety net for families and children are continually assailed by Republicans? No one can know for certain when life begins but we do know when children are hungry. Walk the walk and forget the talk.
Monday, April 7, 2014
HOW DID I GET HERE: Let the Barrage Begin
It's mid-March, about two weeks since I filed as Democratic candidate for State House for District #40 in Montana. I've made the decision not to withdraw but to continue in this experience through the election in November. It is obvious, however, that official word has gotten out about my candidacy. This has not yet occurred in my town, however -- it's still quiet here. But there is now an official listing on the web of political candidates who have filed throughout the State.
How do I know this? A barrage of emails, snail mail, and surveys have reached my door, but mostly email. I did not realize how many demands would be made of a candidate the minute they file.
There are instructions from the Secretary of State about reports and deadlines that must be met throughout the campaign. From the statewide Democratic office, come guidance and ideas which can be helpful. Suggestions like ten tips for running a campaign I find useful. Other services, such as learning more about the voters in my District, are available if I'm willing to pay for them.
There are surveys that arrive, one after the other, via either email or snail mail. Besides the Montana Family Institute, there is a survey from Conservation Voters concerned about the water in Montana, from Planned Parenthood, from a gun-owners and hunters group, from Carol's List which is a group of women in political office who help other women candidates, from National Rifle Assoc., from NARAL which is a grass-roots pro-choice organization dedicated to protecting reproductive rights, from a group that calls itself Montana Campaign for Liberty, and from the Nat'l Assoc for Gun Rights with a return address of Fredericksburg, Virginia. If I answer the surveys, I will be considered for endorsement as a candidate from those organizations. The only organizations whose surveys I would even contemplate are Conservation Voters, Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and possibly Carol's List. The remainder are all right-wing based.
Invitations arrive. There is a reception sponsored by Billings Assoc., of Realtors. There is a request to attend a Legislative Health Policy Discussion sponsored by four healthcare organizations in Billings. There is a letter from the Montana Historical Society offering a tour of their Museum and Research Center along with a "behind the scenes" at the State Archives and Montana's Museum collections.
Ads appear, mainly through snail mail, for campaign paraphernalia that can be purchased: yard signs, door hangars, banners, brochures, stickers, buttons, key tags, postcards, business cards, etc., etc.
I am overwhelmed.
I review my campaign strategy. I understand now what is normally expected from a candidate running for office; it is represented in all that mail. But I determine to follow my own plan, a suggestion first made to me when it was requested that I put my name on the November ballot.
I put the barrage behind me. Instead, I focus on my campaign strategy of researching, writing, and answering questions. I can attack all three by creating a blog on the internet. But how do I create a blog? I know what a blog is and, years ago, even had one set up by my husband. But this time, I must do it myself.
YouTube is my teacher. I study several different YouTube videos on Friday, begin a blog tentatively on Saturday morning and have a basic blog completed by evening. Nagging questions about details are answered for me the next day by Sue, an expert in social media, at our UU congregation meeting. I also make a Tuesday appointment with a local teacher, Megan, who is knowledgeable. By Monday morning, though, I'm raring to go. I take the chance it will work, and publish my first post on my blog. It goes out through Facebook, my Twitter account and Google+. Megan takes a look and gives me high praise.
What results is another barrage but this time, it is entirely welcome. Emails/Facebook messages from friends and some family members stream in. Some remind me of the Rosie the Riveter poster from WWII: "You can do it!" I'm off and running.
It's mid-March, about two weeks since I filed as Democratic candidate for State House for District #40 in Montana. I've made the decision not to withdraw but to continue in this experience through the election in November. It is obvious, however, that official word has gotten out about my candidacy. This has not yet occurred in my town, however -- it's still quiet here. But there is now an official listing on the web of political candidates who have filed throughout the State.
How do I know this? A barrage of emails, snail mail, and surveys have reached my door, but mostly email. I did not realize how many demands would be made of a candidate the minute they file.
There are instructions from the Secretary of State about reports and deadlines that must be met throughout the campaign. From the statewide Democratic office, come guidance and ideas which can be helpful. Suggestions like ten tips for running a campaign I find useful. Other services, such as learning more about the voters in my District, are available if I'm willing to pay for them.
There are surveys that arrive, one after the other, via either email or snail mail. Besides the Montana Family Institute, there is a survey from Conservation Voters concerned about the water in Montana, from Planned Parenthood, from a gun-owners and hunters group, from Carol's List which is a group of women in political office who help other women candidates, from National Rifle Assoc., from NARAL which is a grass-roots pro-choice organization dedicated to protecting reproductive rights, from a group that calls itself Montana Campaign for Liberty, and from the Nat'l Assoc for Gun Rights with a return address of Fredericksburg, Virginia. If I answer the surveys, I will be considered for endorsement as a candidate from those organizations. The only organizations whose surveys I would even contemplate are Conservation Voters, Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and possibly Carol's List. The remainder are all right-wing based.
Invitations arrive. There is a reception sponsored by Billings Assoc., of Realtors. There is a request to attend a Legislative Health Policy Discussion sponsored by four healthcare organizations in Billings. There is a letter from the Montana Historical Society offering a tour of their Museum and Research Center along with a "behind the scenes" at the State Archives and Montana's Museum collections.
Ads appear, mainly through snail mail, for campaign paraphernalia that can be purchased: yard signs, door hangars, banners, brochures, stickers, buttons, key tags, postcards, business cards, etc., etc.
I am overwhelmed.
I review my campaign strategy. I understand now what is normally expected from a candidate running for office; it is represented in all that mail. But I determine to follow my own plan, a suggestion first made to me when it was requested that I put my name on the November ballot.
I put the barrage behind me. Instead, I focus on my campaign strategy of researching, writing, and answering questions. I can attack all three by creating a blog on the internet. But how do I create a blog? I know what a blog is and, years ago, even had one set up by my husband. But this time, I must do it myself.
YouTube is my teacher. I study several different YouTube videos on Friday, begin a blog tentatively on Saturday morning and have a basic blog completed by evening. Nagging questions about details are answered for me the next day by Sue, an expert in social media, at our UU congregation meeting. I also make a Tuesday appointment with a local teacher, Megan, who is knowledgeable. By Monday morning, though, I'm raring to go. I take the chance it will work, and publish my first post on my blog. It goes out through Facebook, my Twitter account and Google+. Megan takes a look and gives me high praise.
What results is another barrage but this time, it is entirely welcome. Emails/Facebook messages from friends and some family members stream in. Some remind me of the Rosie the Riveter poster from WWII: "You can do it!" I'm off and running.
Friday, April 4, 2014
A SCHOOL ISSUE
I open my newspaper today, April 2, and find a very attractive picture of Central School. That is the name of the elementary school in the town of Roundup where I live, population 1,800. Only this picture is not one I recognize. In fact, I read that it is an artist's rendition of what the School could look like if it were "repurposed."
Roundup is a small, old-wild-west town located in the south central part of Montana. Since its inception, Roundup citizens have committed themselves to providing for the education of those students living within Musselshell Valley. The first school's location is probably in Old Roundup, south of Musselshell River and near the mouth of Half Breed Creek where the McMillan cabin could be found. Mrs. James McMillan is the first teacher and begins classes in her cabin in 1882 without remuneration. She has 13 pupils. Throughout Musselshell County, 66 country schools will eventually come and go.
With the discovery of coal and the coming of the Milwaukee Railroad, the town moves to the north side of Musselshell River and takes the name of Roundup, changing the original village to Old Roundup. In 1908 with miners' families arriving in this fledgling town, a one-room public school is constructed on the northeast corner of Second Street West and Second Avenue. A year later in 1909, with the increasing population, a two-story, four-room wood building is constructed on the site now of Central School, just four blocks north and on the same street as the original school.
In 1911, the wood building is moved and replaced by the present-day stone structure. The west side of it is built in 1911 and the east side in 1912, doubling its size. This is the Central School, with additional modular rooms, that can be found in the center of town today. This is the structure that could be "repurposed."
There have been attempts in the past to raise money for a new school building on the edge of town but all three school bond elections have failed. It's been difficult for long-time residents to think their school might no longer be Central. Decision-making is stalled.
Until now, that is. Under the leadership of community leader, Bill Milton, a group made up of ranchers, business people, senior citizens, school officials and others have been meeting for more than a year. Architects, strutural engineers, citizens, school personnel, and even support and advice from the Montana Historical Preservation office have all been involved in discussions. Past rejections, future projections, community priorities have been reviewed. It is confirmed that Central School is fully suitable for long-term use as a school. In the next few months, the School Board will be making a comparison in cost between building a new school and repurposing the old one and making a decision. In the meanwhile, the community is requested to let the School Board know what they think.
This process of involving community so deeply in a decision about the future of the school is a win-win. It is reminiscent of the early days when residents pull together to provide education to all students, no matter what it takes. Whatever the final decision, it will be the right one.
(Source: Roundup Record-Tribune, April 2, 2014)
I open my newspaper today, April 2, and find a very attractive picture of Central School. That is the name of the elementary school in the town of Roundup where I live, population 1,800. Only this picture is not one I recognize. In fact, I read that it is an artist's rendition of what the School could look like if it were "repurposed."
Roundup is a small, old-wild-west town located in the south central part of Montana. Since its inception, Roundup citizens have committed themselves to providing for the education of those students living within Musselshell Valley. The first school's location is probably in Old Roundup, south of Musselshell River and near the mouth of Half Breed Creek where the McMillan cabin could be found. Mrs. James McMillan is the first teacher and begins classes in her cabin in 1882 without remuneration. She has 13 pupils. Throughout Musselshell County, 66 country schools will eventually come and go.
With the discovery of coal and the coming of the Milwaukee Railroad, the town moves to the north side of Musselshell River and takes the name of Roundup, changing the original village to Old Roundup. In 1908 with miners' families arriving in this fledgling town, a one-room public school is constructed on the northeast corner of Second Street West and Second Avenue. A year later in 1909, with the increasing population, a two-story, four-room wood building is constructed on the site now of Central School, just four blocks north and on the same street as the original school.
In 1911, the wood building is moved and replaced by the present-day stone structure. The west side of it is built in 1911 and the east side in 1912, doubling its size. This is the Central School, with additional modular rooms, that can be found in the center of town today. This is the structure that could be "repurposed."
There have been attempts in the past to raise money for a new school building on the edge of town but all three school bond elections have failed. It's been difficult for long-time residents to think their school might no longer be Central. Decision-making is stalled.
Until now, that is. Under the leadership of community leader, Bill Milton, a group made up of ranchers, business people, senior citizens, school officials and others have been meeting for more than a year. Architects, strutural engineers, citizens, school personnel, and even support and advice from the Montana Historical Preservation office have all been involved in discussions. Past rejections, future projections, community priorities have been reviewed. It is confirmed that Central School is fully suitable for long-term use as a school. In the next few months, the School Board will be making a comparison in cost between building a new school and repurposing the old one and making a decision. In the meanwhile, the community is requested to let the School Board know what they think.
This process of involving community so deeply in a decision about the future of the school is a win-win. It is reminiscent of the early days when residents pull together to provide education to all students, no matter what it takes. Whatever the final decision, it will be the right one.
(Source: Roundup Record-Tribune, April 2, 2014)
Tuesday, April 1, 2014
A PRAYER
There has been a law created, Oh Diety, called the Affordable Care Act. This law creates a Health Insurance Marketplace, a new way for individuals, families and small businesses to get health coverage. It helps uninsured people find health coverage. We beseech you, Oh Diety, to lend a helping hand in making sure all of our citizens receive this benefit.
NO!
It requires insurance companies to cover people with pre-existing health conditions. Our insurance company can't turn us down or charge us more because of our pre-existing health or medical condition like asthma, back pain, diabetes, or cancer.
NO!
It helps us understand the coverage we are getting. We have the right to get an easy-to-understand summary about a health plan's benefits and coverage.
NO!
It holds insurance companies accountable for rate increases. They are generally required to follow the 80/20 rule: to spend at least 80% of the money they take in on premiums on our health care and quality improvement activities, instead of administrative, overhead, and marketing costs.
NO!
It makes it illegal for health insurance companies to arbitrarily cancel our health insurance just because we got sick. The health care law stops insurance companies from canceling our coverage just because we made a mistake on our insurance application.
NO!
It protects our choice of doctors, covers young adults under 26, and provides free preventive care. We can choose any available primary care provider in our insurance plan's network. We may be able to get insured under our parent's plan if we're under 26 ears old. And there are many health plans that are required to cover certain preventive care services at no cost to us.
NO!
It ends lifetime and yearly dollar limits on coverage of essential health benefits. Insurance companies can't set a dollar limit on what they spend on essential health benefits for our care during the entire time we're enrolled in that plan.
NO! NO! NO!
Wait a minute. You aren't the Diety to whom we always pray. Who are you anyway? Who, did you say? John Boehner?! Ah, yes, that explains everything.
(Source: www.healthcare.gov)
There has been a law created, Oh Diety, called the Affordable Care Act. This law creates a Health Insurance Marketplace, a new way for individuals, families and small businesses to get health coverage. It helps uninsured people find health coverage. We beseech you, Oh Diety, to lend a helping hand in making sure all of our citizens receive this benefit.
NO!
It requires insurance companies to cover people with pre-existing health conditions. Our insurance company can't turn us down or charge us more because of our pre-existing health or medical condition like asthma, back pain, diabetes, or cancer.
NO!
It helps us understand the coverage we are getting. We have the right to get an easy-to-understand summary about a health plan's benefits and coverage.
NO!
It holds insurance companies accountable for rate increases. They are generally required to follow the 80/20 rule: to spend at least 80% of the money they take in on premiums on our health care and quality improvement activities, instead of administrative, overhead, and marketing costs.
NO!
It makes it illegal for health insurance companies to arbitrarily cancel our health insurance just because we got sick. The health care law stops insurance companies from canceling our coverage just because we made a mistake on our insurance application.
NO!
It protects our choice of doctors, covers young adults under 26, and provides free preventive care. We can choose any available primary care provider in our insurance plan's network. We may be able to get insured under our parent's plan if we're under 26 ears old. And there are many health plans that are required to cover certain preventive care services at no cost to us.
NO!
It ends lifetime and yearly dollar limits on coverage of essential health benefits. Insurance companies can't set a dollar limit on what they spend on essential health benefits for our care during the entire time we're enrolled in that plan.
NO! NO! NO!
Wait a minute. You aren't the Diety to whom we always pray. Who are you anyway? Who, did you say? John Boehner?! Ah, yes, that explains everything.
(Source: www.healthcare.gov)
Sunday, March 30, 2014
HOW DID I GET HERE: Final Decision?
Today is the day. It's Monday, March 10, and by 5:00 pm, I must make a final decision. Shall I withdraw my name from the race or continue as the Democratic candidate for State House, District 40, in red Montana?
For a week now, I've been in shock, trying to adjust to the fact that I agreed to have my name put on the November ballot. What does it all mean? How will it effect my life? How will it impact my daughter's life? Do I really want to do this?
I'm free from any worry about what the Board might think; that hurdle is behind me. I have not been chosen to serve on the Board of the organization for which I volunteer. But I am concerned now about the true feelings of my daughter when it comes to my running for office as a Democrat.
She has lived with her husband in this red community much longer than I have. She teaches at the local elementary school and has built close ties to friends. She takes most things in stride when it comes to my projects but is not built like me and doesn't have a fire in her belly about politics. In fact, she tends more towards moderation in most things. I do not want to cause her any embarrassment because of my choices. I determine early in this day to get her true feelings about this latest project. She has been my co-conspirator over this past week and has not yet shared my secret with anyone. But what does she really think? This will help in determining my final decision.
In my journal-writing this morning, I create a title for this possible project: Running Blue at 72 -- in a Red State. It kind of has a rhythm to it. When I propose it to my daughter, she too thinks it fits well. She also tells me that whatever I decide to do, she will be O.K. with it. It will not be a problem for her. We are each our own person, she says, and I should do whatever I think is right for me. Bless her.
It is now 2:00 pm, three hours left. I suddenly get into a panic. How will I do this? I'm not an extrovert; I'm an introvert. How do I think I can do all that is required? What will be the results when it comes to die-hard opposition? Will I be safe? I can't confront people about what they should do. I can't go around and knock on doors. I really can't put myself out there in this way.
Immediately, I sit down at the computer and send out S.O.S. emails to sympathetic and trusted friends. I tell them of my situation and panic and ask for advice, suggestions, feedback -- anything that could help. I have three hours left, I say. Within that period and even into the next day, to a person they respond with nothing but support and encouragement. You can do this! they tell me.
Shortly before 5 pm, calmness overcomes my panic. I know now what to do. I discover in the pit of my stomach what I really want. I want to go through this experience as a 72-year-old political-junkie neophyte, running blue in a red state. How many other people do I know who have done this kind of thing? But the kicker is that I want to write about it as I experience it -- that's what I really want.
The clock shows that 5 pm has come and gone; there's no going back. I'm in -- for the long haul.
Today is the day. It's Monday, March 10, and by 5:00 pm, I must make a final decision. Shall I withdraw my name from the race or continue as the Democratic candidate for State House, District 40, in red Montana?
For a week now, I've been in shock, trying to adjust to the fact that I agreed to have my name put on the November ballot. What does it all mean? How will it effect my life? How will it impact my daughter's life? Do I really want to do this?
I'm free from any worry about what the Board might think; that hurdle is behind me. I have not been chosen to serve on the Board of the organization for which I volunteer. But I am concerned now about the true feelings of my daughter when it comes to my running for office as a Democrat.
She has lived with her husband in this red community much longer than I have. She teaches at the local elementary school and has built close ties to friends. She takes most things in stride when it comes to my projects but is not built like me and doesn't have a fire in her belly about politics. In fact, she tends more towards moderation in most things. I do not want to cause her any embarrassment because of my choices. I determine early in this day to get her true feelings about this latest project. She has been my co-conspirator over this past week and has not yet shared my secret with anyone. But what does she really think? This will help in determining my final decision.
In my journal-writing this morning, I create a title for this possible project: Running Blue at 72 -- in a Red State. It kind of has a rhythm to it. When I propose it to my daughter, she too thinks it fits well. She also tells me that whatever I decide to do, she will be O.K. with it. It will not be a problem for her. We are each our own person, she says, and I should do whatever I think is right for me. Bless her.
It is now 2:00 pm, three hours left. I suddenly get into a panic. How will I do this? I'm not an extrovert; I'm an introvert. How do I think I can do all that is required? What will be the results when it comes to die-hard opposition? Will I be safe? I can't confront people about what they should do. I can't go around and knock on doors. I really can't put myself out there in this way.
Immediately, I sit down at the computer and send out S.O.S. emails to sympathetic and trusted friends. I tell them of my situation and panic and ask for advice, suggestions, feedback -- anything that could help. I have three hours left, I say. Within that period and even into the next day, to a person they respond with nothing but support and encouragement. You can do this! they tell me.
Shortly before 5 pm, calmness overcomes my panic. I know now what to do. I discover in the pit of my stomach what I really want. I want to go through this experience as a 72-year-old political-junkie neophyte, running blue in a red state. How many other people do I know who have done this kind of thing? But the kicker is that I want to write about it as I experience it -- that's what I really want.
The clock shows that 5 pm has come and gone; there's no going back. I'm in -- for the long haul.
Friday, March 28, 2014
*Believe the Facts, Not the Fiction: Negative side-effects of Obamacare have not materialized
Fiction: Obamacare will lead to a serious decline in full-time employment.
Fact: The number of part-time workers has fallen while full-time employment has grown. Since March, 2010, part-time workers has fallen by 300,000. In 2013, full-time employment has grown by over 2 million.
Fiction: Millions of Americans have lost their non-group, individual health insurance policy due to cancellations forced by Obamacare.
Facts:
a. Pre-Obama, ordinary changes in individual health insurance policies occurred from year to year and usually resulted in the consumer purchasing a new plan after a short period of time. Since the non-group market is highly volatile, just 17 percent retain coverage for more than two years.
b. Pre-Obama, close to 17 percent of individual policy holders were losing their individual market policies. Similarly, 18.6 percent (roughly, 2.6 million people) had plans cancelled as a result of Obamacare. This is a number well below the estimates of 5 million or considerably more being tossed about by Obamacare opposition.
c. Those who say their health insurance policy was cancelled? Over half is likely to be eligible for coverage assistance, mostly through marketplace subsidies. They can enroll in a Medicaid program or receive subsidies on the healthcare exchanges. Many if not most will be covered at a lower price while greatly improving the quality of coverage. One million, then, will replace cancelled policies with something that may cost more. This is far less dramatic, however, than what the Obamacare opposition has been saying.
Problem: With detractors pushing dire effects of Obamacare rather than educating them, many people are not aware of new state Marketplaces, few know if their state expanded Medicaid, and many lack confidence to enroll, make choices and pay premiums. As long as politicians, pundits and special interests continue to lie about what Obamacare means and what it does not mean to the American public, workable fixes that benefit the public and improve American health care cannot happen. Facts matter.
The latest: In the last three months of 2013, there has been a drop from 17.1 percent to 15.9 percent of American adults that are uninsured. This translates to 3 million to 4 million who are now getting coverage who did not have it before. There has been improvement in all demographics except Hispanics. According to Gallup, the number of Americans who still do not have health insurance coverage is on track to reach the lowest quarterly number since 2008.
*Entirely taken from FORBES, Rick Unger, Contributor, March 10, 2014
Fiction: Obamacare will lead to a serious decline in full-time employment.
Fact: The number of part-time workers has fallen while full-time employment has grown. Since March, 2010, part-time workers has fallen by 300,000. In 2013, full-time employment has grown by over 2 million.
Fiction: Millions of Americans have lost their non-group, individual health insurance policy due to cancellations forced by Obamacare.
Facts:
a. Pre-Obama, ordinary changes in individual health insurance policies occurred from year to year and usually resulted in the consumer purchasing a new plan after a short period of time. Since the non-group market is highly volatile, just 17 percent retain coverage for more than two years.
b. Pre-Obama, close to 17 percent of individual policy holders were losing their individual market policies. Similarly, 18.6 percent (roughly, 2.6 million people) had plans cancelled as a result of Obamacare. This is a number well below the estimates of 5 million or considerably more being tossed about by Obamacare opposition.
c. Those who say their health insurance policy was cancelled? Over half is likely to be eligible for coverage assistance, mostly through marketplace subsidies. They can enroll in a Medicaid program or receive subsidies on the healthcare exchanges. Many if not most will be covered at a lower price while greatly improving the quality of coverage. One million, then, will replace cancelled policies with something that may cost more. This is far less dramatic, however, than what the Obamacare opposition has been saying.
Problem: With detractors pushing dire effects of Obamacare rather than educating them, many people are not aware of new state Marketplaces, few know if their state expanded Medicaid, and many lack confidence to enroll, make choices and pay premiums. As long as politicians, pundits and special interests continue to lie about what Obamacare means and what it does not mean to the American public, workable fixes that benefit the public and improve American health care cannot happen. Facts matter.
The latest: In the last three months of 2013, there has been a drop from 17.1 percent to 15.9 percent of American adults that are uninsured. This translates to 3 million to 4 million who are now getting coverage who did not have it before. There has been improvement in all demographics except Hispanics. According to Gallup, the number of Americans who still do not have health insurance coverage is on track to reach the lowest quarterly number since 2008.
*Entirely taken from FORBES, Rick Unger, Contributor, March 10, 2014
Thursday, March 27, 2014
HOW DID I GET HERE: Pins and Needles
It is now four days since I file as Democrat for State House candidacy in the red state of Montana. I have not slept well since then. I've put myself in a position in this town of pushing upstream while the current is flowing downstream. I don't know what's going to happen next.
I do know, however, that the next Sunday is the Annual Meeting of an organization for which I've been volunteering the past year. At this meeting of the Board, a decision will be made about changing Board membership for the coming year. I have been approached twice, once last fall and once this spring, by two different Board members about my interest in serving on the Board. My original reaction is uncertainty since, get this, I prefer to do the volunteer work without getting involved in the politics of the organization! Yeah, right! But when the point is made that the Board is looking for people who are interested in the organization, I quickly affirm that yes, I am very interested.
The second person to ask about my interest in Board membership invites me to visit a Board meeting this spring prior to the one in which elections will take place. She suggests that it will give me a chance to see how the Board works and decide whether or not joining it will be something I want to do. I visit that meeting, observe the group and even feel comfortable enough to participate in a discussion. This coming Sunday then are the elections. I will be attending.
I am very nervous. My filing on Monday is a secret between my daughter and myself. What if word gets out too quickly about what I've done, that I've filed for elective office as a Democrat? It might ruin my chances of being invited onto this Board. Since first being approached, my interest in serving has increased and I'm looking forward to the possibility of an invitation. I am aware that my name is already listed as a Democratic candidate on the Statewide legislative website. I check after receiving my first survey. Possibly someone on the Board has also seen that list, or has heard about it. If so, will it have an impact on whether or not I'm invited on the Board?
In my head, I run through several scenarios. My name will be brought up -- it only makes sense since I've been approached twice by different Board members. The question then is how do I respond? Do I tell them about my candidacy before the vote or just let it pass? My worry is all about how big an impact my candidacy will have on the vote.
I walk toward the building where the Board meets. One member doesn't seem to see me right away, not until I make a point of waving. Another greets me soberly, making a point of the phone message she left, thanking me for installment of a faucet in one of the building's restrooms. The meeting room is quiet as first arrivals begin arranging placement of tables and chairs. I find a seat trying to be unobtrusive in this larger, more formal meeting of the Board.
Prior to the meeting's opening, a discussion across several tables between the President and Vice-President occurs. In answer to the President's question as to proper procedure for elections, the Vice explains the slate of members for whom they will be voting. There are the officers and then the rest of the slate. It seems that all those who are currently serving will be up for re-election. Am I hearing this correctly? It seems I do. The meeting is opened and the election passes quickly with no changes in Board membership. My name is not brought up, not even mentioned.
I'm feeling embarrassed. On my walk home, I review what has happened. Did I miss something over the last month? Should I have communicated with someone after the last meeting about my interest? It's almost as if there were a discussion prior to this meeting and a decision made.
I'm devastated. To what extent, if any, does my candidacy have on these elections? I don't know. But as several hours go by and I go over the meeting, my body begins to relax. Maybe this is just the way things work in small towns. My worries and concerns over what others might think begin to dissipate. The Board elections are no longer a problem. I'm free now, I realize, to act on my candidacy in the best way I see fit. I begin to stand straighter, pull my shoulders back, and look forward to the challenge -- until tomorrow. There are 24 hours before the deadline. There's no going back after that. Can I really do this thing?
It is now four days since I file as Democrat for State House candidacy in the red state of Montana. I have not slept well since then. I've put myself in a position in this town of pushing upstream while the current is flowing downstream. I don't know what's going to happen next.
I do know, however, that the next Sunday is the Annual Meeting of an organization for which I've been volunteering the past year. At this meeting of the Board, a decision will be made about changing Board membership for the coming year. I have been approached twice, once last fall and once this spring, by two different Board members about my interest in serving on the Board. My original reaction is uncertainty since, get this, I prefer to do the volunteer work without getting involved in the politics of the organization! Yeah, right! But when the point is made that the Board is looking for people who are interested in the organization, I quickly affirm that yes, I am very interested.
The second person to ask about my interest in Board membership invites me to visit a Board meeting this spring prior to the one in which elections will take place. She suggests that it will give me a chance to see how the Board works and decide whether or not joining it will be something I want to do. I visit that meeting, observe the group and even feel comfortable enough to participate in a discussion. This coming Sunday then are the elections. I will be attending.
I am very nervous. My filing on Monday is a secret between my daughter and myself. What if word gets out too quickly about what I've done, that I've filed for elective office as a Democrat? It might ruin my chances of being invited onto this Board. Since first being approached, my interest in serving has increased and I'm looking forward to the possibility of an invitation. I am aware that my name is already listed as a Democratic candidate on the Statewide legislative website. I check after receiving my first survey. Possibly someone on the Board has also seen that list, or has heard about it. If so, will it have an impact on whether or not I'm invited on the Board?
In my head, I run through several scenarios. My name will be brought up -- it only makes sense since I've been approached twice by different Board members. The question then is how do I respond? Do I tell them about my candidacy before the vote or just let it pass? My worry is all about how big an impact my candidacy will have on the vote.
I walk toward the building where the Board meets. One member doesn't seem to see me right away, not until I make a point of waving. Another greets me soberly, making a point of the phone message she left, thanking me for installment of a faucet in one of the building's restrooms. The meeting room is quiet as first arrivals begin arranging placement of tables and chairs. I find a seat trying to be unobtrusive in this larger, more formal meeting of the Board.
Prior to the meeting's opening, a discussion across several tables between the President and Vice-President occurs. In answer to the President's question as to proper procedure for elections, the Vice explains the slate of members for whom they will be voting. There are the officers and then the rest of the slate. It seems that all those who are currently serving will be up for re-election. Am I hearing this correctly? It seems I do. The meeting is opened and the election passes quickly with no changes in Board membership. My name is not brought up, not even mentioned.
I'm feeling embarrassed. On my walk home, I review what has happened. Did I miss something over the last month? Should I have communicated with someone after the last meeting about my interest? It's almost as if there were a discussion prior to this meeting and a decision made.
I'm devastated. To what extent, if any, does my candidacy have on these elections? I don't know. But as several hours go by and I go over the meeting, my body begins to relax. Maybe this is just the way things work in small towns. My worries and concerns over what others might think begin to dissipate. The Board elections are no longer a problem. I'm free now, I realize, to act on my candidacy in the best way I see fit. I begin to stand straighter, pull my shoulders back, and look forward to the challenge -- until tomorrow. There are 24 hours before the deadline. There's no going back after that. Can I really do this thing?
Wednesday, March 26, 2014
A Race to the Bottom
This ad appears in the March 12, 2014, issue of our small-town newspaper:
"ATTENTION SENATE DISTRICT VOTERS: Recently I have been informed by voters in Senate District 20 that my opponent Barry Usher has contacted them and told them that I had voted for Medicaid expansion. This is untrue. I did NOT vote for the expansion of Medicaid, in fact quite the contrary..."
The purpose of states' expansion of Medicaid in the Affordable Care Act is to enable those among us with the least amount of means, those earning 100 per cent below the poverty level, to receive affordable health care. They would be able to qualify for federal subsidies and thus be able to purchase health care insurance. Without Medicaid, they most probably cannot.
I can only surmise from the ad above that neither Mr. Ankney nor Mr. Usher want to be known for supporting Medicaid expansion in the Montana State Senate. Are we really seeking the lowest common denominator now in our country: see who can do the least to help those most in need?
During 2001-2003, my husband and I serve as Peace Corps Volunteers in Straldja, Bulgaria. Daily, we can see reminders of the country's poverty, particularly that of the older generation: pensioners (mostly women) who walk several miles into the country to gather twigs and branches, bundle them onto their backs, and carry them home for heat. Wheelchairs for the disabled are nowhere to be seen. Questions from pensioners always for us are about how much money we make as Americans; there is no such thing as Social Security in Bulgaria, no safety net on which to depend. There isn't a day that goes by that I don't thank my lucky stars for having been born in America.
Now I wonder. Where is our country headed if the "Party of No" continues to lead us ever downward? Efforts to trash the Affordable Care Act are only one example. Others include attacks on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, pensions built up over years of work, school lunches, Head Start, the SNAP program (providing food for working families whose wages can't meet basic needs), etc. -- many benefits about which Bulgarians are so envious. Meanwhile, there is a segment of our population that is doing very well. The Koch brothers are an example. Could people like them, the ones spending billions of dollars on GOP political races, be the reason that those running for office have lost all sense of neighborly decency, empathy, and compassion? That it's really about the almighty dollar?
Are we becoming a country known more for its poverty rather than for its plenty? Poverty in spirit as well as poverty in our own economic well-being? Is this where we are headed -- in a race toward the bottom?
This ad appears in the March 12, 2014, issue of our small-town newspaper:
"ATTENTION SENATE DISTRICT VOTERS: Recently I have been informed by voters in Senate District 20 that my opponent Barry Usher has contacted them and told them that I had voted for Medicaid expansion. This is untrue. I did NOT vote for the expansion of Medicaid, in fact quite the contrary..."
The purpose of states' expansion of Medicaid in the Affordable Care Act is to enable those among us with the least amount of means, those earning 100 per cent below the poverty level, to receive affordable health care. They would be able to qualify for federal subsidies and thus be able to purchase health care insurance. Without Medicaid, they most probably cannot.
I can only surmise from the ad above that neither Mr. Ankney nor Mr. Usher want to be known for supporting Medicaid expansion in the Montana State Senate. Are we really seeking the lowest common denominator now in our country: see who can do the least to help those most in need?
During 2001-2003, my husband and I serve as Peace Corps Volunteers in Straldja, Bulgaria. Daily, we can see reminders of the country's poverty, particularly that of the older generation: pensioners (mostly women) who walk several miles into the country to gather twigs and branches, bundle them onto their backs, and carry them home for heat. Wheelchairs for the disabled are nowhere to be seen. Questions from pensioners always for us are about how much money we make as Americans; there is no such thing as Social Security in Bulgaria, no safety net on which to depend. There isn't a day that goes by that I don't thank my lucky stars for having been born in America.
Now I wonder. Where is our country headed if the "Party of No" continues to lead us ever downward? Efforts to trash the Affordable Care Act are only one example. Others include attacks on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, pensions built up over years of work, school lunches, Head Start, the SNAP program (providing food for working families whose wages can't meet basic needs), etc. -- many benefits about which Bulgarians are so envious. Meanwhile, there is a segment of our population that is doing very well. The Koch brothers are an example. Could people like them, the ones spending billions of dollars on GOP political races, be the reason that those running for office have lost all sense of neighborly decency, empathy, and compassion? That it's really about the almighty dollar?
Are we becoming a country known more for its poverty rather than for its plenty? Poverty in spirit as well as poverty in our own economic well-being? Is this where we are headed -- in a race toward the bottom?
Monday, March 24, 2014
HOW DID I GET HERE: Do I Really Want to Continue?
Late Monday, March 3, 2014, I file as a Democratic candidate for State House in Montana. I have been convinced by the Field Director, Montana Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, that my name is needed on the ballot in November. All it takes is completing a form from the web, emailing it back to the Office of Secretary of State, and include a $15 filing fee. Too easy. Then comes the request for a completion of two more forms. Impatient but resigned, I finish them in due course.
It's Thursday morning and the sky hasn't fallen -- yet.
I find two official-looking pieces of mail in my box. The first is from the Secretary of State, confirming that indeed I am now a candidate running for statewide office. I turn to the second one with a return stamp, officious "MONTANA" in red on the top line and, in smaller print below, "Family Institute". Uh-oh. Is it what I think? I really don't want to know but I must open it anyway.
My heart drops to my stomach when I quickly review the letter and enclosed survey. As I suspected, this survey reflects issues propounded by the right wing. Statements are framed according to how they see the world. Topics range from schools (funding of public schools, allowing charter schools and home schools and state regulation) and healthcare (Medicaid, "domestic partners", companies opting out of Obamacare, abortion) to issues around "homosexuals" and sexual orientation. It ends with three statements about taxes, one statement about the 2nd Amendment (firearms) and the last statement about global warming and increased regulation.
As is typical of right-wing thought (everything is either black or white), the greatest percentage of statements begin with shoulds: "should allow, should be allowed, should be prohibited, should be expanded, should be amended" (reminds me of our parents telling us children what we "should" do when we were little).
Examples of statements include (responses graduate from Strongly Support to Strongly Oppose): "Abortion should be prohibited in all circumstances"; "Abortion should be prohibited, except in cases of rape, incest, or when the life of the mother is in danger". Nowhere is there a statement about a decision concerning pregnancy being made between a woman and her doctor; only that "abortion should be prohibited..." Two other examples are: "Homosexuals should be allowed to adopt children"and "Anti-discrimination laws should be expanded to protect sexual orientation in the same way that race, creed, nationality, and religion are protected". Nowhere is there an understanding that (1) children thrive in homes where there are warm and loving adults whether they are both male, both female or one of each, and (2) judging discrimination according to who people love is still discrimination. What difference does it make to any other individual who loves who?!
Government intrusion? In spades!
Oh, and if I choose not to complete the survey? This organization tells me they will go back into voting records, public statements I've made, voter guides and my party's platform to find answers. So be it.
But a groan escapes. Do I really want to put myself through this?
Late Monday, March 3, 2014, I file as a Democratic candidate for State House in Montana. I have been convinced by the Field Director, Montana Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, that my name is needed on the ballot in November. All it takes is completing a form from the web, emailing it back to the Office of Secretary of State, and include a $15 filing fee. Too easy. Then comes the request for a completion of two more forms. Impatient but resigned, I finish them in due course.
It's Thursday morning and the sky hasn't fallen -- yet.
I find two official-looking pieces of mail in my box. The first is from the Secretary of State, confirming that indeed I am now a candidate running for statewide office. I turn to the second one with a return stamp, officious "MONTANA" in red on the top line and, in smaller print below, "Family Institute". Uh-oh. Is it what I think? I really don't want to know but I must open it anyway.
My heart drops to my stomach when I quickly review the letter and enclosed survey. As I suspected, this survey reflects issues propounded by the right wing. Statements are framed according to how they see the world. Topics range from schools (funding of public schools, allowing charter schools and home schools and state regulation) and healthcare (Medicaid, "domestic partners", companies opting out of Obamacare, abortion) to issues around "homosexuals" and sexual orientation. It ends with three statements about taxes, one statement about the 2nd Amendment (firearms) and the last statement about global warming and increased regulation.
As is typical of right-wing thought (everything is either black or white), the greatest percentage of statements begin with shoulds: "should allow, should be allowed, should be prohibited, should be expanded, should be amended" (reminds me of our parents telling us children what we "should" do when we were little).
Examples of statements include (responses graduate from Strongly Support to Strongly Oppose): "Abortion should be prohibited in all circumstances"; "Abortion should be prohibited, except in cases of rape, incest, or when the life of the mother is in danger". Nowhere is there a statement about a decision concerning pregnancy being made between a woman and her doctor; only that "abortion should be prohibited..." Two other examples are: "Homosexuals should be allowed to adopt children"and "Anti-discrimination laws should be expanded to protect sexual orientation in the same way that race, creed, nationality, and religion are protected". Nowhere is there an understanding that (1) children thrive in homes where there are warm and loving adults whether they are both male, both female or one of each, and (2) judging discrimination according to who people love is still discrimination. What difference does it make to any other individual who loves who?!
Government intrusion? In spades!
Oh, and if I choose not to complete the survey? This organization tells me they will go back into voting records, public statements I've made, voter guides and my party's platform to find answers. So be it.
But a groan escapes. Do I really want to put myself through this?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)