In the article "For Native American Women, Scourge of Rape, Rare Justice" by The New York Times the US Senate has proposed a bill to grant more powers to Tribal Courts. The bill would allow the Tribal Courts to prosecute suspected non-Indians suspected of sexually assaulting their Indian spouses or domestic partners. This would help the reservations in reducing the amount of sexual assault that has now become common place. The rate of sexual assault has been recorded as 12 times the national average in the United States which to me is a ridiculous number.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/23/us/native-americans-struggle-with-high-rate-of-rape.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
With the rate of sexual assaults being so high on the reservations, what do you feel that we should do to assist the Native Americans? Also do you feel that the Senate's Bill will really help of is just a way to quiet supporters down?
Sunday, March 31, 2013
Thursday, March 28, 2013
Danielle Calandra
The article "Crow Indians' Lawsuit Against F.B.I. Agent to Proceed", was an article published in the New York Times February 1, 2013. This article was about a family that is a part of the Crow Indians who were allowed by the Supreme Court to proceed in a lawsuit against a F.B.I. agent who investigated a case involving a family member. Back in 2004 and 2005, F.B.I. agent Matthew Oravec investigated two deaths on the Crow Indian Reservation in Montana. The families are now able to continue their lawsuit against Mr. Oravec for not thoroughly investigating the deaths and for discriminating against Native Americans. This case is bringing the attention of discrimination in federal law enforcement against Native Americans into the public eye, and agents are being more closely watched.
Do you see discrimination against Native Americans as a problem in law enforcement? In what ways do you think that Native Americans are affected by discrimination in the legal system? Are there any ways we can move forward to avoid this?
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
Graham ?Bateman Current Event
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-03-19/politics/37838454_1_assault-weapons-ban-assault-weapons-gun-bill
My current even was on the recent changes to the gun restriction bill being pushed by Obama. The bill wanted to ban assault weapons and clips that can hold more than ten rounds. The senate dropped the ban from the bill, which has caused a large amount of controversy. Supporters of the bill believe that this ban should go through, and consider this a huge setback for Obama's gun control campaign. Many people oppose the bill (such as the National Rifle Association) because they believe that limiting people's access to guns is against their First Amendment right.
Do you think that the ban on assault weapons and large clips is restricting our freedom as Americans? Do you think that by dropping this ban, people will be at more of a threat?
My current even was on the recent changes to the gun restriction bill being pushed by Obama. The bill wanted to ban assault weapons and clips that can hold more than ten rounds. The senate dropped the ban from the bill, which has caused a large amount of controversy. Supporters of the bill believe that this ban should go through, and consider this a huge setback for Obama's gun control campaign. Many people oppose the bill (such as the National Rifle Association) because they believe that limiting people's access to guns is against their First Amendment right.
Do you think that the ban on assault weapons and large clips is restricting our freedom as Americans? Do you think that by dropping this ban, people will be at more of a threat?
Saturday, March 23, 2013
Sasha Barry Current Event
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/16/us/more-us-children-of-immigrants-are-leaving-us.html?_r=0&pagewanted=print
This article is about the immigrants who formed our country, and their children in today's society. These young people are deciding to emigrate back to their ancestral countries. The parents of these children feel that because of how hard they worked to get to America that it's a bad idea for them to move back to those countries. However, many of these children are highly talented college graduates looking for jobs that suit their degrees rather than small jobs in America at local stores and food franchises. These people are being encouraged to bring their American talent and ideas abroad, and are finding it easier to get better jobs and start businesses in other countries. Our government also is not keeping track of the emigration of former immigrants' children.
Why do you think these people are finding it easier to make a better living in other countries? Do you think this emigration from talented young people in America will affect our country? Why or why not?
This article is about the immigrants who formed our country, and their children in today's society. These young people are deciding to emigrate back to their ancestral countries. The parents of these children feel that because of how hard they worked to get to America that it's a bad idea for them to move back to those countries. However, many of these children are highly talented college graduates looking for jobs that suit their degrees rather than small jobs in America at local stores and food franchises. These people are being encouraged to bring their American talent and ideas abroad, and are finding it easier to get better jobs and start businesses in other countries. Our government also is not keeping track of the emigration of former immigrants' children.
Why do you think these people are finding it easier to make a better living in other countries? Do you think this emigration from talented young people in America will affect our country? Why or why not?
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Dan Borella Current Event
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/03/19/rand-paul-and-why-the-pathway-to-citizenship-question-is-so-delicate-for-the-gop/
This article was about Rand Paul and how he thought of the "pathway to citizenship." He had many different points that lead to a better outcome for the Republicans in the next election. For the most part, these are the people that the republicans missed during their previous campaign. Paul said that he was not looking for a new "pathway to citizenship" but he was looking for more of a protection of what already exists. He would not want to send illegal immigrants back home, but he would raise border control and keep more out. Another man, Bush, mentioned that he believes that there had to be some difference between people that are legally here and that are illegally here.
Do you agree with Paul and Bush in that the "pathway to citizenship" should remain, but there needs to be a difference between illegal and legal citizens? Why or why not?
This article was about Rand Paul and how he thought of the "pathway to citizenship." He had many different points that lead to a better outcome for the Republicans in the next election. For the most part, these are the people that the republicans missed during their previous campaign. Paul said that he was not looking for a new "pathway to citizenship" but he was looking for more of a protection of what already exists. He would not want to send illegal immigrants back home, but he would raise border control and keep more out. Another man, Bush, mentioned that he believes that there had to be some difference between people that are legally here and that are illegally here.
Do you agree with Paul and Bush in that the "pathway to citizenship" should remain, but there needs to be a difference between illegal and legal citizens? Why or why not?
Sunday, March 17, 2013
Maxine Baker Current Event
Nearing the end February, President Obama signed the revised renewal of the Violence Against Women first drafted by Joe Biden and his office in 1994. This act was to allow funding for the help of victims, women or men, to get justice and support after a violent and or sexual crime. The act was shut down by the Supreme Court because it "was an intrusion of states rights". The act was finally passed through Congress and was approved by President Obama who has only optimistic feelings for the act. “It didn't just change the rules, it changed our culture. It empowered people to start speaking out,” Obama said. This new law allows $659 million in funds for the investigation and prosecution against those that commit violent crimes. Also it allows funds for transitional housing, legal assistance, law enforcement training and hotlines. The renewal of this act will allow funding for the next 5 years. Another aspect of this act is the new law against prosecution on reservations. In the past, tribal courts were not allowed to try non-natives because of the fear of prejudice and false prosecution. This loophole allowed non-natives living on and off the reservation to attack women sexually and not have to worry about getting in trouble for it because there was nothing that the tribal court system could do about it. With the new act in place, tribal courts will now be able to try non-natives. If the accused does not think that they were given a fair trial because of the jury and judge all being native citizens, then the accused can take their case to federal courts.
Do you think that the law against tribal courts not being able to try non-native citizens was the right thing or the wrong thing to have in place? Is the law that tribal courts can now try non-natives revised in renewal of the act a step forward or a step back in the equality of all American citizens?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-to-sign-anti-violence-act-renewal-that-extends-protection-to-gays-native-americans/2013/03/07/549feecc-8703-11e2-a80b-3edc779b676f_story.html
Wednesday, March 13, 2013
Ali Tobin Current Event
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-immigration-hurdles-20130311,0,4603683.story
Today, 11 million illegal immigrants reside in America, making illegal immigration a well debated topic for the past few decades. Recently, eight senators (including four Republicans and four Democrats) have gotten together to try and create a bill to address illegal immigration, with the goal in mind to craft a bipartisan overhaul of immigration laws agreeing to a create a path to legal status. This proposal being created by the senators is considered a "broader immigration reform package" that goes hand in hand with President Obama's call to set a pathway to earned citizenship. Requirements the senators have formed include the illegal immigrant registering with Homeland Security Department authorities, to pay taxes that they owe from the time they migrated to America, and to pay a "undetermined" fine. This would grant probationary legal status, and still immigrants would be barred from receiving public benefits.
However, there are many uncertainties with this bill currently under construction. Aides predict the delay for a green card would be ten years or longer, and question how many visas to issue to high-tech specialists, how to keep track of those leaving he country, and how to pay for more Border Patrol officers. In a effort to resolve these issues, Negotiators from the AFL-CIO and the US Chamber of Commerce have worked with Senate to set a number for visas of both high-tech and low-skilled workers so that they fluctuate.
Bills like these have been created in the past, but destroyed in the process due to the conflict between labor and business leaders. Today, it has been reported that both organized labor and businesses now want a compromised immigration bill to pass, which represents 2 million workers. Laborer unions desire less visas because they believe too many immigrants would undercut qualified Americans seeking high-tech jobs, but business groups pushed for more visas for high skilled employees. Senators are working on this bill with hope that it will close a lot of holes in the illegal immigration debate.
From what is already drafted in this bill outline, how much of an impact, if any, do you think this bill will have on America if it is passed into law? Explain
Today, 11 million illegal immigrants reside in America, making illegal immigration a well debated topic for the past few decades. Recently, eight senators (including four Republicans and four Democrats) have gotten together to try and create a bill to address illegal immigration, with the goal in mind to craft a bipartisan overhaul of immigration laws agreeing to a create a path to legal status. This proposal being created by the senators is considered a "broader immigration reform package" that goes hand in hand with President Obama's call to set a pathway to earned citizenship. Requirements the senators have formed include the illegal immigrant registering with Homeland Security Department authorities, to pay taxes that they owe from the time they migrated to America, and to pay a "undetermined" fine. This would grant probationary legal status, and still immigrants would be barred from receiving public benefits.
However, there are many uncertainties with this bill currently under construction. Aides predict the delay for a green card would be ten years or longer, and question how many visas to issue to high-tech specialists, how to keep track of those leaving he country, and how to pay for more Border Patrol officers. In a effort to resolve these issues, Negotiators from the AFL-CIO and the US Chamber of Commerce have worked with Senate to set a number for visas of both high-tech and low-skilled workers so that they fluctuate.
Bills like these have been created in the past, but destroyed in the process due to the conflict between labor and business leaders. Today, it has been reported that both organized labor and businesses now want a compromised immigration bill to pass, which represents 2 million workers. Laborer unions desire less visas because they believe too many immigrants would undercut qualified Americans seeking high-tech jobs, but business groups pushed for more visas for high skilled employees. Senators are working on this bill with hope that it will close a lot of holes in the illegal immigration debate.
From what is already drafted in this bill outline, how much of an impact, if any, do you think this bill will have on America if it is passed into law? Explain
Monday, March 11, 2013
Ryan Seymour Current Event
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/colo-lawmakers-approve-lower-tuition-rates-for-immigrant-students-governor-expected-to-sign/2013/03/08/fe7c6f08-8814-11e2-b412-2e8596e7c927_story.html
For the past 10 years immigrants in Colorado have been working to get a bill passed that would allow illegal immigrants to receive the in state tuition rates that legal citizens have been able to take advantage of. They will be the 13th state to pass a bill like this. Previously illegal immigrants had to pay the out of state tuition at state schools. Finally after years of work the bill has been passed and is expected to be signed by the governor of Colorado later this week. After this is signed, many illegal immigrants that could not afford college will be able to. Some people, like Rep. Kevin Priola, pushed to have this signed because for illegal immigrants “…there is no country to go back to.” This move will provide those who have the ability to attend college the chance to. Other people, like Rep. Polly Lawrence, say that this move does not provide a brighter future and actually encourages illegal immigration.
Do you think illegal immigrants should be allowed to pay the in state tuition fees for colleges? Please explain why or why not.
For the past 10 years immigrants in Colorado have been working to get a bill passed that would allow illegal immigrants to receive the in state tuition rates that legal citizens have been able to take advantage of. They will be the 13th state to pass a bill like this. Previously illegal immigrants had to pay the out of state tuition at state schools. Finally after years of work the bill has been passed and is expected to be signed by the governor of Colorado later this week. After this is signed, many illegal immigrants that could not afford college will be able to. Some people, like Rep. Kevin Priola, pushed to have this signed because for illegal immigrants “…there is no country to go back to.” This move will provide those who have the ability to attend college the chance to. Other people, like Rep. Polly Lawrence, say that this move does not provide a brighter future and actually encourages illegal immigration.
Do you think illegal immigrants should be allowed to pay the in state tuition fees for colleges? Please explain why or why not.
Thursday, March 7, 2013
David Sacco Current Event
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/03/should-we-give-visas-to-immigrants-who-create-startups/
Sen. Jerry Moran proposed a solution that will help create jobs for all Americans. Two weeks ago he proposed the idea of giving special visas to immigrants who launch businesses that create jobs. The proposal, known as Startup Act 3.0, would only give these visas to immigrants in the US on a student visa or and H1-B visa (An H1-B visa is given to immigrants with specialized skilled workers). Once the visa is given, the immigrant entrepreneur would have to hire at least two full time non family member workers within the first year of receiving the visa. If they do that then they are granted three more years in the US during which they have to hire five more full time employees. Then they may apply for permanent residency (Green Card). This proposal does not allow immigrants a path to citizenship. Rather it allows them to live in this country for as long as they like so that they may continue to grow their business. The Kauffman Foundation estimates that in 10 years, 500,000 to 1.6 million new jobs will be created.
Critics of this program say that the idea that so many jobs will be created. Critics also say that there are easier methods for immigrants to acquire a green card and start a business. Ross Eisenbray, vice-president of the Economic Policy Institute, has concern about the enforcement of the program's requirements.
Do you think that this program can be enforced so that immigrants follow the requirements rather than acquiring a green card by some other method? If yes, explain what could be done to enforce this program. If no, explain how it can't be enforced.
Sen. Jerry Moran proposed a solution that will help create jobs for all Americans. Two weeks ago he proposed the idea of giving special visas to immigrants who launch businesses that create jobs. The proposal, known as Startup Act 3.0, would only give these visas to immigrants in the US on a student visa or and H1-B visa (An H1-B visa is given to immigrants with specialized skilled workers). Once the visa is given, the immigrant entrepreneur would have to hire at least two full time non family member workers within the first year of receiving the visa. If they do that then they are granted three more years in the US during which they have to hire five more full time employees. Then they may apply for permanent residency (Green Card). This proposal does not allow immigrants a path to citizenship. Rather it allows them to live in this country for as long as they like so that they may continue to grow their business. The Kauffman Foundation estimates that in 10 years, 500,000 to 1.6 million new jobs will be created.
Critics of this program say that the idea that so many jobs will be created. Critics also say that there are easier methods for immigrants to acquire a green card and start a business. Ross Eisenbray, vice-president of the Economic Policy Institute, has concern about the enforcement of the program's requirements.
Do you think that this program can be enforced so that immigrants follow the requirements rather than acquiring a green card by some other method? If yes, explain what could be done to enforce this program. If no, explain how it can't be enforced.
Wednesday, March 6, 2013
Ford Polia Current Event
An illegal immigrant from Nepal, crossing the border between
Mexico and Texas was found to have XDR-TB (Extremely Drug Resistant
Tuberculosis). Today, border crossings screen for
diseases. Illegal immigrants don't go through this screening process so they
can bring deadly diseases into the country. This man traveled through 13
countries to get to the United States and came in contact with many people
along the way. He carried a case of TB that is resistant to 8 of the 15
commonly used medications to cure Tuberculosis, including the two most commonly
used. The strain of Tuberculosis that he was infected with has only been found
in one other person in the United States. He is currently in "medical
isolation" in the Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention
facility
Drug Resistant Tuberculosis is a large issue in third world
countries where healthcare is poor.If a Tuberculosis treatment is not carried
out fully the disease can mutate and become more drug resistant and deadly. It is difficult for infected illegal immigrants that have been
deported to continue their treatment in their home country. This is the case especially if the country they are deported to
does not have good healthcare. Plus, Extremely Drug resistant diseases are
difficult to treat and often cannot be treated effectively in these
countries. If the disease is not entirely treated, it can mutate and become
even more drug resistant.
Does the United States have the responsibility to provide medical care to illegal immigrants? Why or Why not?
Does the United States have the responsibility to provide medical care to illegal immigrants? Why or Why not?
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Nicole Mooar Current Event
Article link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/many-immigrants-in-the-us-stop-midway-along-the-path-of-citizenship/2013/03/03/91b3e844-813c-11e2-b99e-6baf4ebe42df_story.html
The article was about the view points of immigrants trying to apply for citizenship and the benefits of becoming a citizen in the United States. Citizenship rates have increased because of the Immigration Act that was enacted during the 1990's. Based on your race or ethnicity, the citizenship rate can be different. Central Americans, citizens living in southern North America, have the lowest citizenship rate and Southeast Asians have the highest. Today, immigrants, with green cards, struggle with deciding whether or not to apply for for citizenship. Some immigrants do not want to lose the rights of their country of origin, cannot not pay for the application fee, or they can't speak or read English (the citizenship test is all in English.) Others feel the need to do it because they are afraid of getting deported back to their country. These difficulties prevent immigrants from taking the test because it's too much of a struggle. The United States offers the right vote to those who are legal citizens. You are also allowed to sponsor other immigrants of your family. Lastly, you feel fully engaged in your society and have the power to make a difference. The path to citizenship is a very important topic because it's very beneficial to the immigrants themselves but also our country. Being a citizenship will take away all the restrictions that the immigrants have to live by in the United States.
Do you think that we should change the process to citizenship for immigrants? If yes, what are some changes we should have to make the process harder or easier? If no, explain your reasoning.
Hannah Meyer Current Event
Link to article
Mitt Romney is blaming his loss of the 2012 campaign on the fact that he did not connect to Hispanics or Latinos. These group of voters did not agree with his opinion opposing any illegal immigrant to becoming a citizen or to even live in the U.S. permanently. Romney does not agree with the reform package that Obama has now, which is that it will take a long time to become a citizen but still gives people the opportunity. Overall, Romney regrets that he did not connect with this group and felt that his campaign in this area was weak. He wishes he had improved his opinion in a way that he could have gotten votes from this race.
Do you agree or disagree that Mitt Romney lost the 2012 Presidential election because of his lack of connection with the minority populations of America? Why or why not?
Mitt Romney is blaming his loss of the 2012 campaign on the fact that he did not connect to Hispanics or Latinos. These group of voters did not agree with his opinion opposing any illegal immigrant to becoming a citizen or to even live in the U.S. permanently. Romney does not agree with the reform package that Obama has now, which is that it will take a long time to become a citizen but still gives people the opportunity. Overall, Romney regrets that he did not connect with this group and felt that his campaign in this area was weak. He wishes he had improved his opinion in a way that he could have gotten votes from this race.
Do you agree or disagree that Mitt Romney lost the 2012 Presidential election because of his lack of connection with the minority populations of America? Why or why not?
Sunday, March 3, 2013
Dan Kallin Current Event
Article: Republican Lawmaker: Obama should back of immigration reform
Link: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-house-chairman-obama-immigration-reform-20130227,0,7128297.story
Summary of Current Event:
In this article the opinions of United States lawmakers are discussed regarding Barrack Obama's immigration reform proposal. One Republic representative from Virginia, Robert Goodlatte, said that Obama should not be working on an immigration reform proposal, saying that Obama should leave the job to congress. Goodlatte said that a top-down approach has never worked in the past, meaning sending bills from the executive branch down to the legislative branch has not worked before. Goodlatte also did not approve of the content of this bill because he does not believe that Obama should make a path for eleven million illegal immigrants to become citizens. One thing that many senators and representatives agree on, including Goodlatte, is that making an immigration reform bill has to be a bipartisan effort, which means that both republicans and democrats in congress have to work together if they want to create a successful immigration reform bill. Senators such as John McCain have already been working with the president to try to create an immigration reform bill.
Question: Should the president be working on a proposal to send to congress, doing what Robert Goodlatte calls "a top-down approach" to making legislation? Please explain your opinion.
Article: Republican Lawmaker: Obama should back of immigration reform
Link: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-house-chairman-obama-immigration-reform-20130227,0,7128297.story
Summary of Current Event:
In this article the opinions of United States lawmakers are discussed regarding Barrack Obama's immigration reform proposal. One Republic representative from Virginia, Robert Goodlatte, said that Obama should not be working on an immigration reform proposal, saying that Obama should leave the job to congress. Goodlatte said that a top-down approach has never worked in the past, meaning sending bills from the executive branch down to the legislative branch has not worked before. Goodlatte also did not approve of the content of this bill because he does not believe that Obama should make a path for eleven million illegal immigrants to become citizens. One thing that many senators and representatives agree on, including Goodlatte, is that making an immigration reform bill has to be a bipartisan effort, which means that both republicans and democrats in congress have to work together if they want to create a successful immigration reform bill. Senators such as John McCain have already been working with the president to try to create an immigration reform bill.
Question: Should the president be working on a proposal to send to congress, doing what Robert Goodlatte calls "a top-down approach" to making legislation? Please explain your opinion.
Friday, March 1, 2013
Brooke Mega Current Event
On Wednedsay, three-hundred illegal immigrants were relaesed from an Arizona State Prison. As a border state, Arizona has a large population of illegal immigrants from Mexico, Central America, and South America. Some of these immigrants have been arrested for comitting various crimes, such as driving without a license. Others were arrested due to their lack of American citizenship. The release of these prisoners lead to a heated debate between Republican officials and Human Rights Activists. Overall, the Republican officials believed that the release of these aliens was unnecessary, dangerous, and harmful to the economy. On the other hand, Human Rights Activists beleive that these immigrants should be released because they fell prey to the government of Arizona. They also think that releasing the immigrants will benefit the country, because they would not have to invest money into their incarceration any longer.
In regards to the questions mentioned in class, these immigrants were originally incarcerated for both crimes commited, and illegal citizenship. Also, once released from prison the immigrants were released into America, not the country that the emigrated from.Since the release, the country has continued to release two-thousand more illegal immigrants from prison. This month, the Department of Homeland Security plans to release three thousand more illegal immigrants. The states who have released immigrants, and are still currently doing so include: Arizona, California, Georgia and Texas.
While considering both sides of the argument, what opinion do you agree with more? Based on this opinion, state what you beleive the next step should be regarding the inprisonment of illegal immigrants in America? If you do not agree with either opinion, please state your reasoning as well.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/release-of-about-300-illegal-immigrants-from-federal-custody-in-arizona-stirs-up-debate/2013/02/27/d564d38e-8126-11e2-8074-b26a871b165a_story.html
Current Event: Brandyn Greeno
Link to article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/30/us/politics/obama-issues-call-for-immigration-overhaul.html?_r=0
For many years has been a very controversial topic in America. Congress cannot agree whether to leave the immigration policy the way it is, or to change it by setting a limit to how many people can enter America, and coming up with a decision on what to do with people who are here illegally. President Obama decided to call on congress to take action, and come up with a plan that will solve this problem. He knows that immigration is a very emotional topic, but he feels he is making the right choice by calling on congress to change it. He approached congress and told them he wanted a bill that would allow current illegal immigrants to receive their citizenship if they can show they can be outstanding citizens by paying taxes, and not breaking the law.
President Obama wants to take immediate action towards ending illegal immigration. He wants all illegal immigrants currently in America to step forward, complete their obligations (paying taxes), and become legal citizens. Do you believe this is a good first step? Why? If not than what do you believe would be a good first step?
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/30/us/politics/obama-issues-call-for-immigration-overhaul.html?_r=0
For many years has been a very controversial topic in America. Congress cannot agree whether to leave the immigration policy the way it is, or to change it by setting a limit to how many people can enter America, and coming up with a decision on what to do with people who are here illegally. President Obama decided to call on congress to take action, and come up with a plan that will solve this problem. He knows that immigration is a very emotional topic, but he feels he is making the right choice by calling on congress to change it. He approached congress and told them he wanted a bill that would allow current illegal immigrants to receive their citizenship if they can show they can be outstanding citizens by paying taxes, and not breaking the law.
President Obama wants to take immediate action towards ending illegal immigration. He wants all illegal immigrants currently in America to step forward, complete their obligations (paying taxes), and become legal citizens. Do you believe this is a good first step? Why? If not than what do you believe would be a good first step?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)