I Don't Approve My Tax Dollars to do That: Fight another Civil War.

There are times I honestly believe our nation is led by groups of toddlers. States calling for secession following Obama's reelection is one of those times.

We went over this in 1860. A state cannot secede from the Union. Just because you disagree does not give you the right declare yourself as your own country.

The states in dark blue seceded when Lincoln was elected. They did not listen when he vowed not to dissolve or prohibit slavery. They simply assumed the Republican elect would and thus left the Union. At least this time the states have witnessed Obama in office for four years.  In a way, it's a little surprising to me how so much of the Civil War was fought on and devastated Southern land and yet Southerners persistently call for secession. This time they are joined by several northern even die-hard blue states but it makes one wonder, have you already forgotten how bad the Civil War was? 

Photo credit: http://www.ushistory.org/us/32e.asp

Petitions have been filed to the “We the People” website on behalf of twenty states: Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, South Carolina (shocker), Tennessee, and Texas (no surprise there).

Don't get married if you threaten divorce every time things get rough or you fight. Same thing with being part of a nation. 

Photo credit: http://www.reasonstosecede.com/whatissecession.shtml

He won the popular vote AND the Electoral College. Get over it.

Citing the Declaration of Independence, secessionists believe that it is their right to abolish and institute new government if they feel the government has failed to uphold its responsibilities (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57548572/states-petition-to-secede-from-union). My inner history major would like to point out that while the Declaration is an extremely important document, we govern ourselves according to the Constitution. Therefore the Constitution has the final say on secession. And as we determined 150 years ago, secession from the Union is unconstitutional. Done. End of story.

The We the People site allows people to communicate with the White House and submit petitions for things that they would like to change or see changed. Petitions that receive 25,000 signatures within a 30-day deadline will be reviewed. Texas' plea for secession currently has 22,000. They have until December 9th. 

Photo Credit: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83776.html

I am sick and tired of hearing dissatisfied people automatically crying secession instead of trying to fix the problem. If you are really that unhappy with the direction of the government, run for office. Volunteer for a campaign. Get involved on various committees. Actively work to change things instead of throwing in the towel and declaring you’re better off on your own. Much of our nation’s greatness stems from our disagreements. It is remarkable that so many people have different political philosophies yet can get together and govern a nation. We sacrificed so much to be a nation – why throw that all away?

In my history class last semester, we discussed why Washington differed from the other Virginia elite. He sought a larger government with more authority and a federal military while many of his fellow Virginias favored a much smaller government and fewer taxes. My professor, Joseph Ellis, pointed out that Washington saw first hand why a big government was necessary. His officers and many of the men who fought were Northerners. They needed soldiers and supplies but the government did not have the power to authorize and distribute them effectively. It’s time the Southerners remembered the sacrifices the North made to make this nation a reality. If we can be scrappy Yankees taking on the leading military power in 1776, we’re not going to give up that easily in 2012 either. 

I don’t approve my tax dollars to do that: fight another civil war. 

I Don't Approve My Tax Dollars to do That: Get Further Involved in the Middle East

“We’re not your grandfather’s America anymore”

Thomas Friedman is one of my favorite NY Times Op-Ed columnists. This week he posted an interesting column on what Obama’s reelection meant for the relationship between the United Stated and Israel.

According to Friedman, “Obama has his marching orders from the American people.” Such orders involve turning our attention back toward conditions at home rather than problems abroad. We want out of present conflicts and to stay out of future ones. Let someone else do the dirty work for once. For Israel, that ideology means “Don’t count on America to ride to the rescue.”

Photo credit: http://www.legendsofamerica.com/ks-hollenberg.html

Tensions have increased over the course of four years between the Obama Administration and the Israeli government. Prime Minister Netanyahu even openly supported Romney (that worked out well for you, Mr. Netanyahu, didn’t it?). Friedman dubbed such alignment with the conservative right wing as foolish on his part because that is no longer “the rising political force in America.” He would have been better off to associate and make friends with the Democrats. Oh wait, he already snubbed Vice President Biden.

A September 2011 meeting between President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu. The two have not always had the greatest relationship, particularly in regards to Iran's nuclear program. 

Photo credit: http://rt.com/usa/news/us-israel-iran-nuclear-773/

 But the biggest change is what we ourselves have realized about meddling in the Middle East: it doesn’t work so we need to stop trying. As Friedman writes,  “We can provide the mediation and even the catering, but it has to start with them.” We can no longer march into an area and demand obedience and respect. It is not fair to us, as our valuable tax dollars get sucked dry remediating another country’s conflict, and it is not fair to country we’re trying to support. They have to be able to support themselves. Assistance is one thing; becoming a nation’s military foundation is another.

Under the Bush administration, Americans were much more supportive of Israel, especially since we lacked powerful Middle Eastern allies. Under Obama, however, that support has shifted in favor of the Palestinians and increased the percentage of people who identified as neutral or no opinion.

Photo credit: http://www.californiapatriot.org/magazine/2009/09/the-special-us-israel-relationship-a-case-for-the-continued-support-of-israel/

The only America I remember is a nation at war. Now a legal voter, I have my own fair share of concerns that reside within our nation’s borders. I want affordable health care. I want an affordable college education. I hope someday to be able to achieve what I consider my version of the American dream. I cannot necessarily do that while my government squanders MY money away in the Middle East. It’s time my money and my president finally return home.

I don’t approve my dollars to do that: get more involved in the Middle East.

I Approve My Tax Dollars to do That: Impose Tougher Regulation on the Prescription of Narcotics

From a very young age, we’re taught that doctors are “good guys.” Alongside police officers and firemen, doctors help us and are people we can trust. Whatever they prescribe us or inject us with is supposedly safe.

If that is the case, then why have prescription overdoses claimed more lives than heroin or cocaine?

In recent years, attention about misuse of prescription drugs has been directed toward situations in which they are attained illegally: the robbery of a pharmacy, a teenager swiping pills from a parent or sibling’s medicine cabinet, the raiding of a stash at a hospital. Much less focus has been placed on when a doctor has actually prescribed the drug. A Los Angeles Times report half of the patients who accidentally or intentionally overdosed in Southern California had a prescription for “at least one drug that attributed to their death” (http://www.latimes.com/news/science/prescription/la-me-prescription-deaths-20121111-html,0,2363903.htmlstory?main=true)

The majority of people who use pain relievers recreationally get them from friends or relatives but approximately one-fifth obtain them from their doctors. This graph excludes those who do take pain relievers for actual chronic pain.

Photo credit: http://discoveringalcoholic.com/category/prescription-drug-abuse

The Times uncovered some harrowing statics about some doctors having ten or more patients die from prescription drug overdose where the drug they prescribed was the primary agent in the patient’s death. Most never face criminal prosecutions and have spotless records with the California Medical Board. Recently the prescription of narcotic painkillers has shifted from exclusive use in cancer and other terminally used patients to becoming “among the most popular prescription drugs in the United States.” Nationally narcotic painkillers are responsible for approximately 15,500 deaths annually.

The number of drug-induced deaths has rapidly increased over the past decade. Now second only to motor vehicle fatalities, the number of drug-induced deaths has surpassed even gun shot deaths. What the chart fails to distinguish however is the number of suicides as a result of intentional drug overdose. I assume that such deaths would be categorized as suicides but they also pertain to the drug-induced category.

Photo credit: http://www.whitehouse.gov/ondcp/prescription-drug-abuse

 How do we still maintain the accessibility of aggressive narcotic painkillers while reversing the escalating trend of overdose-related deaths? Patients who have tried exhausted alternative forms of pain therapy should be allowed access to stronger medication. At the same time, something that struck me about the Times article was how many of Dr. Vu’s patients to whom he prescribed narcotic painkillers were mentally unstable. That class of drugs requires that you be responsible, cognizant and mindful of their power. Thus I support the Times’ proposition to track the correlation between patient deaths and prescribing doctors. If he or she has had a certain percentage of his or her patients overdose and die, in Dr. Vu’s case there were 16 deaths as a result of the medications he prescribed, they should lose their license. Prescribers need to take the severity and strength of these drugs more seriously before automatically resorting to Hydrocodon or OxyContin. Someone needs to be held accountable for essentially putting a gun in these victims’ hands.

A table showing the drugs most commonly abused. Note that all categories are identified as "highly addictive." Two of the three also warn of death if used improperly. My doctor offered to prescribe me Hydrocodon when I was 16 for a back injury. Even as the daughter of two medical professionals, I didn't trust myself with such a powerful drug. I was shocked that she even suggested it. 

Photo credit: http://well.wvu.edu/articles/the_411_on_prescription_drug_abuse

I approve my tax dollars to do that: impose tougher regulation on the prescription of narcotics. 

After the Election: Why the Republicans Shouldn't Be So Surprised

The saying goes, “the winner takes it all.” The presidential election is no exception. Romney will be lost to the history books, quickly overtaken by the next GOP hotshot while Obama, his legacy already cemented with his election four years ago, will continue to make an impressive mark. But the election results did more than deny the GOP the position of commander-in-chief. They revealed that Party members are sporting a new accessory: earmuffs.

Yes, earmuffs.

In reading various articles after Election Day, much of the consensus reveals that despite their supposed shock, the Republicans would have seen the writing on the wall had they paid attention. Their reaction to Romney’s fairly decisive loss shows how much the Republicans were completely oblivious to the wants, expectations and actions of American voters. Michael Barone, co-author of The Almanac of American Politics, predicted a 315-electoral vote win for Romney. George Will called 321 for Romney. Karl Rove showed he was no more mature than a five year old, blubbering and throwing a tantrum on Fox News. How could they be so misguided?

 Map of Tuesday's presidential election results in each state. Florida has since officially awarded its electoral votes to Obama. The Republicans claim to be "shellshocked" by the devastating loss but Romney lost by over 100 electoral votes. Even with California, that is no small feat. Of six major  swing states, Ohio, Michigan, Colorado, Florida, Virginia and Iowa, Obama won 5, despite the many claims by Republicans to sweep the swing states. 

Photo credit: http://media2.abc15.com//photo/2012/11/09/electoral_map_cnn_20121109112711_640_480.JPG

I recommend two articles, the first a NY Magazine editorial and a NY Times blog (written by the Times ‘ Editor).

Both articles related that the Republicans’ isolated themselves in their own bubble, discrediting and faulting any source that predicted anything but a landslide win for Romney. By only acknowledging sources and reports that favored them, they tricked themselves into believing a fantasy. What I still don’t understand though is how this could happen on such a national level? The Republican Party is one of two main political parties in the United States. How could they be so out of touch with the 2012 voters?  

In googling images for the map of the electoral college by state, this came up. The author wanted to show the election results if white men, the key Republican demographic, were the only ones allowed to vote.. No surprise that forty-five of the fifty states went red, even die-hard blue California. Thankfully, white men are not the only ones allowed to vote. It's time for the Republicans to acknowledge that.

Photo credit: http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/news_cut/archive/2012/11/if_only_white_men_could_vote.shtml

One source I read immediately after the election described your typical Republican: white and male. The problem with targeting that particular demographic is that its control on political power is declining with the rise of women and minority voices. The shocking and completely infuriating dismissal of rape by Todd Akin in August, for example, was just one sign of how out of touch the Republican Party is. If he truly felt like he could openly say that and not start a riot (or more importantly lose him the election), then that shows the Republicans have a real problem. Guess what? He lost in Missouri to a Democrat.

It baffles me. Top party leaders are supposed to be astute, savvy and clued into the talk of the nation. We tried to inform them but the Republicans cut their communication lines. It’s not our fault they got handed a defeat. The voters did our job. Now, rather than whine like a group of preschoolers, they ought to re-evaluate who who today’s Republicans ARE. Plural. If the Republicans continue to limit themselves to the rich white man’s club, they’re going to keep losing. Maybe we’ll witness the a rise of new political parties.

I Don't Approve My Tax Dollars to do That: Ignore Climate Change

It’s been about a week and a half since superstorm Sandy smashed into the East Coast. We’ve seen remarkable relief efforts and even an unexpected change of heart from New Jersey Governor Christie who sang Obama and the Fed’s praises the week before the election, much to the dismay of the Romney campaign. Today, a snowstorm slammed into the already battered East Coast. An additional 417,000 people on top of those still without power from Sandy are now without power (ABC World News Tonight). So what is this crazy weather that seems increasingly common?

“We have weather on steroids.”

That’s the current situation as described by Eric Cooley, senior vice president of the Environmental Defense Fund. It’s not so much that climate change is causing storms; instead climate change is making them stronger. Warmer ocean temperatures equates to more energy for storms to feed off of. The atmosphere is warmer and thus retains more moisture, which becomes drawn into storms and dumped on unsuspecting land. It’s also costly. In the last thirty years, not including 2012 data, losses from weather disasters have totaled $1.06 trillion dollars. (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-01/weather-on-steroids-is-global-warming-stupid-paul-barrett.html)

Maybe now people will start paying more attention to climate change.

I don’t approve my tax dollars to do that: ignore climate change. 

My Thoughts on the Outcome of the Election

After months of intense campaigning, Obama emerged as the projected victor of the 2012 US presidential election. I care about the outcome of the presidential race, but there were three other contests, four including my own state’s senatorial race, whose outcomes worried and excited me almost as much as that for president. They were the ballot votes on gay marriage in Maryland, Maine and Washington.

What is unique about this particular ballot vote is that it had never before succeeded. Massachusetts, Iowa and the other four states that currently allow same-sex marriage were not decided by a popular vote: their courts deemed such discrimination unconstitutional. When attempting to pass same sex marriage via the popular vote, even Maine shot the proposition down 53% to 47% several years ago (http://bruni.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/07/maine-and-maryland-say-we-do/).

Now in 2012 things are starting to change. Obama is the first president to openly support gay marriage. Maryland and Maine passed gay marriage in their respective states with promising results thus far predicted for Washington (their submit their ballots in the mail so actual numbers take longer to determine). Wisconsin elected the first gay senator, Tammy Baldwin. To me, these results symbolize a change in attitude in the American population. People have finally realized that the failure to include all people and families in law is flat-out discrimination, religious preferences and propaganda aside. It’s acknowledgement that we are not so different after all and do not deserve to be denied our rights.

There is still a lot of work to be done. Thirty states have banned gay marriage in their constitutions. But if the number of states allowing gay marriage can jump from six to nine states overnight, there may just be hope that those numbers will be reversed by the time by moms turn 65.

Thank you, American voters, for supporting my family last night.  

I Approve My Tax Dollars to do That: Redefine Assault

“It’s no big deal, I’m gay, I don’t want her – I was just having fun.”

Partially as a result of the buzz surrounding Amherst and its failure to properly prosecute rape, assault is a hot topic on college campuses. Then someone shared an article with me describing a new area of un-scrutinized assault: gay men inappropriately commenting on or touching women.

I want to preface this by saying I acknowledge the volatility and controversy of this subject. If you have not read my previous posts, I’m the proud daughter of a same-sex couple so I do not write this to perpetuate homophobia, especially toward gay men. I also do not intend to stereotype gay men. This was hard for me to write about, particularly because of my family structure, but something I felt compelled to comment on.

Author of the article, Gay Men’s Sexism and Women’s Bodies, Yoko Akili addresses a the trend of identifying gay men as the “experts of women’s fashion and by proxy women’s bodies.” Such a position of knowledge and expertise has apparently made some gay men feel entitled and “comfortable” evaluating and manipulating women’s bodies like a piece of pottery. They consider their unsolicited criticism or touch as “benign” because they are not sexually interested.

I have a problem with this. Rather, I have a BIG problem with this. First off, it is never okay to grope someone intentionally. Gay or straight, invading someone’s personal space like that is violating and degrading. It’s time we define assault once and for all. Touching someone inappropriately, regardless of age, sexual orientation, gender, hair color, eye color, height, weight, etc, is not okay and should be prosecuted as such. Though already established in the legal books, it now needs to become equally socially unacceptable. Such practice starts in schools, teaching kids to not only report it but to intervene if they see something inappropriate. Young kids must observe older ones standing up for what’s right rather than giving into the pattern.

Secondly, there is already so much in the media and society chipping away at a women’s image about body. The last thing we need to do is add more scrutiny. I don’t understand why it’s okay for a guy to point out a woman’s “thunder thighs” or “muffin top” yet a woman can’t openly smirk at a guy’s beer belly to his face. How are women supposed to accept and praise their bodies if the group of men not even sexually attracted to them scolds them for not fitting a particular stupid mold? Speaking as someone who spent much of middle school and high school having a bad relationship with food and my body, the negativity comes from all directions. Women cannot stop it on our own. We need allies. Clearly in this case, some of the guys we have turned to be our allies have turned against us.

It's hard enough already to look in the mirror and be satisfied. Why do people have to make it harder?

Photo credit: http://eatingdisorderstreatment.com/eating-disorder-programs-miss-melissa-had-a-thought/ 

I approve my tax dollars to do that: redefine assault.