Imperiled monarch butterfly to get $3.2 million boost By Todd Leopold
The monarch butterfly has been hurt by habitat loss, environmental problems, and crop changes in recent years. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced that it is launching a campaign to save the butterfly. They are partnering with other groups such as the National Wildlife Foundation to raise awareness of the butterfly's problems. The Fish and Wildlife Service has begun its campaign with $1.2 million and will also provide $2 million to fund conservation projects. They plan to encourage "responsible gardening" and chemical pesticides. This effort couldn't have come at a better time because the amount of butterflies migrating has declined from 1 billion in 1996 to 33 million.
The Fish and Wildlife Service's campaign will drastically help the monarch butterfly population in the U.S. I think it is weird that they waited so long to conserve the butterfly population because it has clearly it has been in sharp decline for awhile. They could have prevented the decrease in monarchs if they had acted sooner. Also, I think its crazy how it takes millions of dollars just to raise awareness, but I still think it is a great cause. The Fish and Wildlife Service's efforts will hopefully help cultivate a rebirth of monarchs in the U.S.
Tuesday, February 10, 2015
Tuesday, February 3, 2015
Bakery Discrimination
Christian bakers face government wrath for refusing to make cake for gay wedding By Todd Starnes
A judge in Oregon ruled that the owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa did discriminate against a lesbian couple in 2013 when they declined to provide a wedding cake because it would have violated their Christian beliefs. The discriminated couple knew that the laws were on their side because Oregon state law bans discrimination against LGBT people in places that serve the public. The bakery owners received heavy backlash after the incident and after several protests and boycotts by LGBT activists the couple was forced to close up shop. There is another court date set for March 10 in which the owners could be ordered to pay $200,000 in fines and damages.
This case marks an increase of the enforcement of legislation against discrimination of those in the LGBT community. It raises questions of religious liberty and discrimination. I think that it is interesting that the bakery owners declined the couple even though there was legislation in place that specially states that they can not discriminate based on sexual orientation. I know this is not the only incident of discrimination, so I think it will be interesting to see how each state will handle the situation.
A judge in Oregon ruled that the owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa did discriminate against a lesbian couple in 2013 when they declined to provide a wedding cake because it would have violated their Christian beliefs. The discriminated couple knew that the laws were on their side because Oregon state law bans discrimination against LGBT people in places that serve the public. The bakery owners received heavy backlash after the incident and after several protests and boycotts by LGBT activists the couple was forced to close up shop. There is another court date set for March 10 in which the owners could be ordered to pay $200,000 in fines and damages.
This case marks an increase of the enforcement of legislation against discrimination of those in the LGBT community. It raises questions of religious liberty and discrimination. I think that it is interesting that the bakery owners declined the couple even though there was legislation in place that specially states that they can not discriminate based on sexual orientation. I know this is not the only incident of discrimination, so I think it will be interesting to see how each state will handle the situation.
Tuesday, January 27, 2015
Teachers Must Pay
Teachers Take Union Dues to Supreme Court By Allie Bidwell
A group of California public schoolteachers petitioned the Supreme Court on Monday to hear a challenge to change laws requiring teachers to pay union dues even though they may disagree with union positions. If this continues to the Supreme Court this could change the way unions operate throughout the country. The lawsuit is aimed at the California Teachers Association and Christian Educators Association International. The ten plaintiffs claim that California's "agency shop" law is unconstitutional and violates their First Amendment rights because they force them to pay union dues regardless if they are a member. Teachers in California pay almost $1,000 annually in union dues.
If this case wins in favor of the plaintiffs there could be drastic changes to the way unions operate in the U.S. "Agency shop" union laws would be considered unconstitutional, so teachers who do not support the union can save their money. I think that teachers have a right to decide whether or not they participate in union activities and programs. Also, they should not have to pay almost $1,000 every year for something that they do not believe in. I hope that this case continues to the Supreme Court and the teachers petition is heard.
A group of California public schoolteachers petitioned the Supreme Court on Monday to hear a challenge to change laws requiring teachers to pay union dues even though they may disagree with union positions. If this continues to the Supreme Court this could change the way unions operate throughout the country. The lawsuit is aimed at the California Teachers Association and Christian Educators Association International. The ten plaintiffs claim that California's "agency shop" law is unconstitutional and violates their First Amendment rights because they force them to pay union dues regardless if they are a member. Teachers in California pay almost $1,000 annually in union dues.
If this case wins in favor of the plaintiffs there could be drastic changes to the way unions operate in the U.S. "Agency shop" union laws would be considered unconstitutional, so teachers who do not support the union can save their money. I think that teachers have a right to decide whether or not they participate in union activities and programs. Also, they should not have to pay almost $1,000 every year for something that they do not believe in. I hope that this case continues to the Supreme Court and the teachers petition is heard.
Wednesday, January 21, 2015
Obama's very long to-do list
Obama's 2015 State of the Union to-do list By Rebecca Kaplan
In 2014, President Obama told Congress that if they do not do their part he will exercise his executive power. In his 2015 address, there was no such threat. Most of his proposals however, require Congress to act. His to-do list included exercising the veto power because Congress is now in Republican hands. It also covers curing disease with the help of the human genome. This means that he hopes to launch an initiative to help cure diseases like cancer and diabetes with treatments that are based on a person's genetic makeup. Other topics on his to-do list are a call for net neutrality, and balancing civil liberties with aggressive surveillance methods. He needs Congress' help on a few items on his list one of which requires them to overhaul the tax code so that he can implement his plan to make child care more available and affordable. A few other items, are for Congress to pass the Healthy Families Act, for them to increase the minimum wage, and infrastructure. In regards to education, Obama needs Congress to support his plan for two free years of community college and the reduction of student loan payments.
All of Obama's plans are large and vast plans that need the approval or support of Congress. Their support however is very unlikely because he no longer has Democratic support in both houses or in either house for that matter. Obama has a hard road ahead of him, but most of his plans will benefit the country if implemented. I think that Obama has too long of a to-do list which he most definitely will not complete in this year or in the rest of his presidency. Also his list will not be completed because of the lack of support in Congress. Some of his items are interesting such as the humane genome project because it does not seem like something a president would support, but it will benefit the country. Overall I think Obama's State of the Union address consisted of great ideas and plans, but sadly without the support of Congress most of it will be just talk.
In 2014, President Obama told Congress that if they do not do their part he will exercise his executive power. In his 2015 address, there was no such threat. Most of his proposals however, require Congress to act. His to-do list included exercising the veto power because Congress is now in Republican hands. It also covers curing disease with the help of the human genome. This means that he hopes to launch an initiative to help cure diseases like cancer and diabetes with treatments that are based on a person's genetic makeup. Other topics on his to-do list are a call for net neutrality, and balancing civil liberties with aggressive surveillance methods. He needs Congress' help on a few items on his list one of which requires them to overhaul the tax code so that he can implement his plan to make child care more available and affordable. A few other items, are for Congress to pass the Healthy Families Act, for them to increase the minimum wage, and infrastructure. In regards to education, Obama needs Congress to support his plan for two free years of community college and the reduction of student loan payments.
All of Obama's plans are large and vast plans that need the approval or support of Congress. Their support however is very unlikely because he no longer has Democratic support in both houses or in either house for that matter. Obama has a hard road ahead of him, but most of his plans will benefit the country if implemented. I think that Obama has too long of a to-do list which he most definitely will not complete in this year or in the rest of his presidency. Also his list will not be completed because of the lack of support in Congress. Some of his items are interesting such as the humane genome project because it does not seem like something a president would support, but it will benefit the country. Overall I think Obama's State of the Union address consisted of great ideas and plans, but sadly without the support of Congress most of it will be just talk.
Monday, January 5, 2015
Immigration Battle
President Obama allies bank on immigration backfire By Seung Min Kim
Republicans voted to extend the Department of Homeland Security's funding through February in an attempt to try to defer the fight against Obama's executive order until their party had a majority in both houses. Obama's allies are eager for a fight because they believe it will be good politics for them and bad for the GOP. It will be bad politics for the republicans because their attempts to overturn Obama's executive order will make them seem hostile to immigrants and Latinos. Despite the bad politics, Republicans hope that the temporary shut down of DHS will cause a change to Obama's executive order. On February 27, the ending day of funding, most of the department's employees will continue to work. This is because their jobs are essential or they are not funded appropriated by Capitol Hill. During the shutdown in October 2013, DHS employees continued to work despite the shutdown because their jobs are "necessary for the preservation of the safety of human life or the protection of property” and their paychecks were withheld until after the shutdown. Therefore Republicans hopes that the lack of pay to employees could cause a change to the executive order. The wildcard in the attempt to overturn Obama's immigration plan is the lawsuit filed by 24 states. There will be a hearing on January 9th.
The Republicans attempts to overturn the executive order will only cause a lack of paychecks for DHS employees, and won't change the Obama administration's minds. Also, I agree with the article in that the strong efforts to overturn the order will only create bad politics for the Republicans. Overall I think the cut of funding after February for DHS is not a good idea because that department is an essential part of our country's functions. The Republicans should have found a better way to deal with the situation.
Republicans voted to extend the Department of Homeland Security's funding through February in an attempt to try to defer the fight against Obama's executive order until their party had a majority in both houses. Obama's allies are eager for a fight because they believe it will be good politics for them and bad for the GOP. It will be bad politics for the republicans because their attempts to overturn Obama's executive order will make them seem hostile to immigrants and Latinos. Despite the bad politics, Republicans hope that the temporary shut down of DHS will cause a change to Obama's executive order. On February 27, the ending day of funding, most of the department's employees will continue to work. This is because their jobs are essential or they are not funded appropriated by Capitol Hill. During the shutdown in October 2013, DHS employees continued to work despite the shutdown because their jobs are "necessary for the preservation of the safety of human life or the protection of property” and their paychecks were withheld until after the shutdown. Therefore Republicans hopes that the lack of pay to employees could cause a change to the executive order. The wildcard in the attempt to overturn Obama's immigration plan is the lawsuit filed by 24 states. There will be a hearing on January 9th.
The Republicans attempts to overturn the executive order will only cause a lack of paychecks for DHS employees, and won't change the Obama administration's minds. Also, I agree with the article in that the strong efforts to overturn the order will only create bad politics for the Republicans. Overall I think the cut of funding after February for DHS is not a good idea because that department is an essential part of our country's functions. The Republicans should have found a better way to deal with the situation.
Tuesday, December 9, 2014
The CIA is Found Guilty of Torture
Top takeaways from the CIA torture report By Jeremy Diamond
The Senate Intelligence Committee released their 525 page summary that assessed the CIA's use of "enhanced interrogation techniques" in the post-9/11 era. One of the reports biggest conclusions found that the CIA's "enhanced interrogation" included torture. The CIA claimed in its defense that the coercive interrogations "saved lives", but the Senate committee refutes this claim in its report. The committee also found that the enhanced interrogation did not accurately obtain information. There was false confessions obtained during these interrogations that lead the CIA to pursue dead ends. The report went on to disclaim 20 examples that the CIA used to defend their enhanced interrogation program. Some other conclusions of the report included that torture did not help the CIA find Osama bin Laden, there has been a death of a detainee after being chained naked to a concrete floor, the CIA misled the White House, Congress, and other agencies, and two government psychologists started a company that brought in $81 million on interrogations.
The Senate Intelligence Committee's report will have drastic impacts on how the CIA will conduct its interrogations in the future. Also the report covered multiple issues, so there will be reform in many areas of the CIA. I think that it is good that the information is coming out and the CIA is being held responsible. I am surprised it took this long for the report to come about, and I am interested in what action Congress or the committee will do from this point on.
The Senate Intelligence Committee released their 525 page summary that assessed the CIA's use of "enhanced interrogation techniques" in the post-9/11 era. One of the reports biggest conclusions found that the CIA's "enhanced interrogation" included torture. The CIA claimed in its defense that the coercive interrogations "saved lives", but the Senate committee refutes this claim in its report. The committee also found that the enhanced interrogation did not accurately obtain information. There was false confessions obtained during these interrogations that lead the CIA to pursue dead ends. The report went on to disclaim 20 examples that the CIA used to defend their enhanced interrogation program. Some other conclusions of the report included that torture did not help the CIA find Osama bin Laden, there has been a death of a detainee after being chained naked to a concrete floor, the CIA misled the White House, Congress, and other agencies, and two government psychologists started a company that brought in $81 million on interrogations.
The Senate Intelligence Committee's report will have drastic impacts on how the CIA will conduct its interrogations in the future. Also the report covered multiple issues, so there will be reform in many areas of the CIA. I think that it is good that the information is coming out and the CIA is being held responsible. I am surprised it took this long for the report to come about, and I am interested in what action Congress or the committee will do from this point on.
Tuesday, December 2, 2014
Animal Cruelty
Death and the goddess: The world's biggest ritual slaughter By Manesh Shrestha
Officials estimate that that up to 10,00 buffalo calves and 150,000 goats will be offered to Gadhimai, the goddess of power, during the annual superficial ritual in Nepal. The thousands of people killing animals athe temple of Gadhimai for this ritual is the biggest religious mass slaughter in the world. The projected numbers this year are lower than those in 2009, due to the efforts by animal rights activists. In that year there were 20,000 buffalo calves killed and 200,000 goats were slaughtered. The participants are licensed by the Gadhimai Festival Management, even though many activists have gone to the courts in Nepal to halt the sacrifices. Due to the large amount of animal sacrifice during the ritual, many of the animals used are "illegally" transported to Nepal for the ritual. Activists have tried to halt the illegal transportation of animals as well as change the attitudes of participants and end the animal cruelty.
If the activists are successful in changing the attitudes of those who participate in the sacrifice there will be a surplus of animals to Nepal's economy due to the lack of ritual sacrifice. If the activists are successful in banning ritual sacrifice in this area without the support of the locals, there could be backlash and riots among the festival goers. I think that it is wrong that they are killing thousands of animals, and I agree with the activists in that they are trying to change the mindset of those participating and discouraging animal cruelty. Also, it doesn't make sense for people to ship in animals just so they can kill them for the ritual.
Officials estimate that that up to 10,00 buffalo calves and 150,000 goats will be offered to Gadhimai, the goddess of power, during the annual superficial ritual in Nepal. The thousands of people killing animals athe temple of Gadhimai for this ritual is the biggest religious mass slaughter in the world. The projected numbers this year are lower than those in 2009, due to the efforts by animal rights activists. In that year there were 20,000 buffalo calves killed and 200,000 goats were slaughtered. The participants are licensed by the Gadhimai Festival Management, even though many activists have gone to the courts in Nepal to halt the sacrifices. Due to the large amount of animal sacrifice during the ritual, many of the animals used are "illegally" transported to Nepal for the ritual. Activists have tried to halt the illegal transportation of animals as well as change the attitudes of participants and end the animal cruelty.
If the activists are successful in changing the attitudes of those who participate in the sacrifice there will be a surplus of animals to Nepal's economy due to the lack of ritual sacrifice. If the activists are successful in banning ritual sacrifice in this area without the support of the locals, there could be backlash and riots among the festival goers. I think that it is wrong that they are killing thousands of animals, and I agree with the activists in that they are trying to change the mindset of those participating and discouraging animal cruelty. Also, it doesn't make sense for people to ship in animals just so they can kill them for the ritual.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)