Response to blog "NRA Takes Its Safety Off" by Shannon - Time For Change

Obama is known to the public as being a supporter for stricter gun laws as well as being a supporter to stop U.S. citizen from owning fire arms for personal protection. It is no surprise to hear about anti gun supporters trying to link the violent drug war in Mexico to the lack of reinstating a ban on U.S. citizen from owning assault riffles. Obama recently stated to Mexico’s president that he is backing away from his pledge to reinstate the 1994 ban on assault guns, but he will make all efforts to stop the flow of guns across boards. This was an obvious political move by Mr. Obama in an effort to save his political career. Since it is so early in his 4 year term and the subject has already been brought up on several occasions, this will not be the last attempt to gain more support for tighter gun control in the U.S. in order to pass his legislation.

The link between the U.S. gun laws and the exportation of U.S. guns is a real issue. Recently the owner of a gun shop called X Caliber Guns in Phoenix Arizona was arrested along with 2 others, for knowingly selling guns to the drug cartel and money laundering scheme, according to the New York Times and A.T.F. Current U.S. law does not require reporting the sell of assault riffles to the government. This makes it an easy target for the drug cartel to illegally obtain assault riffles through citizen with a clean criminal record, that’s until that person gets caught such as Mr. George Iknadosian, the owner of X Caliber Guns.

I do not agree with renewing the US ban on assault riffles on US citizens, but I do agree with the NRA in having a stricter gun law in regards to smuggling and the punishment for the crime to be stiffer. Since the weapons were smuggled across the boarder in support of a violent drug related purpose, the offender should be tried as an international criminal and should be treated as a member of the cartel. A jail sentence of any number of years does not seem to be enough to get the point across that this crime is not tolerated in the US. International crimes should apply which is equivalent to treason, large scale drug trafficking, black marketing, and aggravated kidnapping which all are occurring with the support of those who smuggle weaponry to the drug cartel. These crimes should be punishable by the death penalty. There should be no leniency in this matter since it pertains to not only US national security but to international security between boarders. Our government needs to be stern and just to those who violate such high crimes on humanity. The solution is not to ban US citizen from owning assault riffle but to punish those to partake in trafficking guns that were in their possession.

Switzerland is a great example of a country that has proven that gun control laws and ownership of riffles are not the main source to crimes. In Switzerland, there are over 2 million personally owned weapons which the government also supports even woman ownership, as a means of national security protection. It gives all its citizens the responsibility to protect their own country. The idea is pretty vague to see happen in other countries due to the fact that all Swiss men have to serve in the military and after being discharge to continue periodic training. Switzerland also has very harsh punishments for those who use a gun in the act of violence.

The best method to resolving the issues in Mexico is not only removing corrupted officials, but to have harsher punishments to those who use weapons in the act of violence. In the US, our government should have harsher punishments as well, for those who support an international crime and any gun related crimes. Also our government should start requiring a sales report of riffles as a temporary solution. To try and place a ban on US citizen from owning an assault riffle, in response to the violence in Mexico, is an unjust cause and I strong disapprove of this action.







Referenced Links

Newsmax.com report on Obama’s administration to reinstate 1994 US Band on Assault riffles.
BBC report on Switzerland low gun related crimes.
Foxnews.com report on Obama’s recent talk with Mexican Government in regards to the drug cartel.
NRA report on Anti gun laws and Governments attempt to blame US citizens for Mexico drug violence.
Crimes related to Capital Punishment

Voting Rights Act: Section 5 Needs To Be Amended

Voting rights has long been a scrutinized process in our nation’s history of voting, since America gained it’s independence from Britain. Our country has come a long way since then, with many revisions to how voting practices are conducted. The main concern of voting rights is discrimination towards race, gender, and minority groups. With the passage of the Voting Right Act of 1965, a milestone against a long history of discrimination, requires a periodic reinstatement of the Act by congress and signed off by the current president of the United States. Over 40 years have passed since the Act was first approved which brings up many questions to some previsions in the Voting Rights Act, such as section 5. Is it unconstitutional that congress can require a “pre-clearance” on certain jurisdictions that have had a history of voting discrimination? I believe that section 5 is constitutional, but it should apply to all states not just those who showed to be discriminative in the 1960’s.

Gerrymandering is a clear reason why section 5 of the Voting Rights Act is so important to remain in effect, even though gerrymandering is technically covered by section 2, “Pursuant to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. 1973c, jurisdictions covered by the Act’s special provisions must obtain preclearance of any redistricting plan prior to implementation.” Gerrymandering is a term used to describe a political party who redistricts its states boundaries to benefit that party in which it discriminates against race, color, and non English speaking groups. Texas had the most recent controversy with the Republican Party trying to gain the advantage for the 2004 mid term election. Texas is seen as being a Republican controlled state, but the fact is, democrats have dominated congress for 130 years. Gerrymandering had allowed the democrats to dominate for so long. Texas is not the only state to have issues with redistricting Arizona, Colorado, Illinois, Montana, North Carolina, and Rhode Island all have been under the spotlight in recent years.

Section 5 points out only nine states that are covered by this provision which is grossly unequal and unfair as a nation of fifty states. All states should be evaluated by the Attorney General every decade or as often as redistricting is being considered in that state. Discrimination these days are more technical and based off of good reasoning, it can be done legally. This is a problem that seems to lack the attention of the American public. What people fail to realize is how well developed our government tactics have become in order to gain control. Discrimination must be watched very closely, not only by law, but by the people who these laws it effect. Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act should remain constitutional and with all fifty states being included in this provision, it will continue the principle of the constitutional checks and balances.


1965 Voting Rights Act under question by the Supreme Court.
Bail out of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act
Section 5 Covered Jurisdictions
Voting Right Act: Section 5
Gerrymandering
Section 5 redistricting provision
Redistricting analysis
Texas Redistricting Controversy

Public Disillusion of Government Power

The Role of Government in the Modern American Reality is an article written by Maria T Carrillo.

Personal Liberties seems to be the key idea in Maria’s blog and I agree that Americans are giving up their rights based off of fear. The mass media is eating every crises and every opportunity to grab their audience’s attention. The thoughts of fear are consistently repeated and instilled in our mind which in turn, gives our government an open door to do what they want. An example is The Patriot Act which was sign by congress shortly after September 11th, contained many discrepancies that threaten our personal freedoms. We gave the government power to gain access to our medical records, tax records, information about the books we buy and rent from libraries with out probable cause, allowing the government to break into our home to conduct searches without telling us, wire-tap our phone lines, and detain who they feel is a threat to national security. All of this seems to be ok by the public eye, because they fear that terrorist could be right next door and they could be subjected to a threat. The president enabled his executive powers gaining more control over our lives. Since these orders were issued during an emergency, good luck on seeing them return to the original state before they were placed.

Today’s financial crisis is another example of how our government is taking control of our lives. Again the mass media is eating up at this opportunity to gain viewers attention by providing them with the latest update of how the market it doing. The public is in fear of what they call “the great depression” part 2. The government now owns several large banks, auto industries, insurance companies and more. Isn’t it the government who lessen the restriction on banks lending procedures, allowing them to lend as much as they wanted to who ever they wanted, causing this recession to occur in the first place?

Our freedoms are being taken away, one day at a time, regardless of how you may see or what ever the government may call it. Our freedom is on a thin line. Controls are in place to protect you and the future generation, but the nation fails to realize that we are capable of taking care of ourselves and our families when crisis do arise. If we rely on the government as they want us to, then we will be subjected to new laws that will insure the governments control and order. This can be done by the discretionary power the president has when he feels there is a national emergency. Are we willing to watch our freedom disappear? Will we remain in the illusion that our government will protect us? I believe our national government has too much power right now which our founding fathers tried to prevent when they ratified the Articles of Confederation to our National Constitution. I think it is time that people need to voice their opinion and force our national government to change. A great start would be to write to your congressman. Let freedom rein!

Lets Increase the Gas Tax

As our economy is deep within a recession, with millions of people jobless, our government is wondering how they are going to pay for the ongoing projects and our countries enormous debt. Many ideals have been proposed over the course of a year, but the one I would like to focus on is “The Gas Tax.” The United States Department of Transportation has proposed a mileage gas tax which many find it to be crossing the line of our liberty and personal freedoms. Our national government wants more tax payer’s money. My thoughts are that they evaluate their yearly pay raise and cycle that income elsewhere.

In general, the gas tax is revenue for the Transportation Department to continue to make improvements on highways and roads to accommodate a growing population. According to the Transportation Department, at the end of the fiscal year 2009, our country will be lacking billions of dollars for those projects. Currently, state gasoline tax is anywhere between 8 cent/gallon to 38 cent/gallon. This does not include the 18.4 cent/gallon tax that the federal government has imposed before state taxes. For example, Texas gas tax is 20 cent/gallon plus the federal gas tax of 18.4 cent/gallon equals 38.4 cent/gallon of gas. If all 519,576 valid driver license holders owed one car and fills up with 1 gallon of gasoline, it would be $197,438.88 total revenue for 1 gallon of gas (state receives $103,915.2 and federal receives $95,601.984); based off of 2008 Valid Licensed Drivers Data. Now, if you can just imagine that all licensed drivers and commercial licensed drivers all filled up their vehicles on one given day of the week, we would be talking about $3 billion per year, according to Texas Net Revenue by Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. If this data doesn’t blow your mind, than I seriously think we have a problem. Each state collects a gas tax as well as the federal government, explicitly for Transportation. Our government is collecting more than enough money for transportation and recently the Department of Transportation received $26 billion from the stimulus package.

The Transportation Department is proposing a GPS tracking device to tally up the number of miles a vehicle is driven and charging that driver a set price per mile. That sounds real great right? Think again! We are talking about a GPS tracking device that is tracking your every move. If you have any knowledge of the bible, this would be called “the mark of the beast;” 666. The government is gaining too much control over us and our liberties are slowly being taken away. Beyond the literary aspect, having to pay per mile doesn’t sound like a good idea since they are proposing the idea to increase more revenue. If you haven’t looked at your cell phone bill lately, look closely, there’s a government tax for accessing the interstate.

Since the mileage gas tax will take nearly 10 years to come up with a full scale innovation release plan, to place a GPS system in every vehicle tracking how many miles you drive, congress is proposing a 5 year federal gas tax increase. The plan is to increase federal gas tax 5 to 8 cents a year until it reaches 40 cents a gallon. That means that your grocery bill will increase along with this tax. So we are all going to be hurting.

Transportation taxes can be subdued if congress would stop giving themselves a pay raise every term. Since congress is being paid by our tax dollars and our economy is in recession, how about they cut their pay, not just freeze their pay until 2010? That extra money can be rerouted back into the economy and to the Department of Transportation, if they truly do need it. What happened to the ideal of “for the greater common good?” Right now it seems there is some wasteful spending going on and our check and balance system isn’t keeping the checks and balances even.

2008 Valid Licensed Drivers Data
Texas Net Revenue by Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts
House Freezes Pay Raise for 2010
2004 Congress Pay Raise
Transportation Chief Considers Taxing Miles Driven
Tax Rates by State

Medicaid in Need

Investing in Medicaid Funding Now Can Save Tax Dollars Later
Long Term Care is the topic of Tim Graves article on “Investing in Medicaid funding now can save tax dollars later,” a local contributor to the Austin Statesman editorial column. Graves is president/CEO of the Texas Health Care Association in Austin Texas. His article focuses on reforming the current Medicaid program funding which he says will reduce the future cost of Long Term Care for the elderly.
Medicaid was established in 1965 for eligible individuals and families with low incomes and resources. This program is a state ran program, with an over site by the federal government. According to the author, Texas is ranked 49th nationally towards the funding of Medicaid for its state. With the proper and adequate funding to Medicaid, the author states “can help reduce the number and frequency of hospital admissions by improving resident health, and increasing the capability of skilled nursing facilities themselves to successfully treat more complex medical conditions and incidents – at lower cost to taxpayers.”
Long Term Care needs, is what is being addressed in this article. Long Term Care is for the elderly that are no longer capable of taking care of themselves and those with chronic issues which they are in need of a 24/7, 365 day nursing assistance. As many as 60 nursing homes have closed in Texas due to lack of funding which the residents and nurses where sent else where. This is making it very difficult for the elderly who depend of their care locally.
The author is focusing on Texas Residents for their support of increasing Medicaid, but the primary audience would be Texas Political leaders, since they are the approving authority in passing the new program proposal which is specified at http://www.ahca.org. I agree that Medicaid funding should be increased for support of our local elderly. The author says we are paying about $106 compared to other states that are paying about $160 by the tax payers. I think it would be a good idea to increase Medicaid to $130 and keep it as a flat rate. This could reduce the cost of those hospital visits which are costing tax payers a lot of money, regardless if an individual tax payer see’s it affecting them or not.

Republican Party Down Fall

GOP Should Ask Why U.S. is on the Wrong Track is a commentary written by Ron Paul, a 10-term hardcore Republican congressman from Texas and two time presidential candidate who is described as a conservative, a constitutionalist, and a libertarian. In this article, the author speaks out against his own party and how they have been derailed from its core values. The current change in government dominance, a strong majority democratic politicians’, must have sparked the author to write this commentary. The question he asks “Where is our country heading?” centralizes the purpose of this article and his argument which he intends to express personal thoughts on this matter.

The author intended audience is mainly directed to the Republican Party but it is also to influence people to stand up strong for the Republican values and take charge. He states that Americans are in search of a change and that the opposing party chose there words wisely, giving that party the winning ticket. He expresses their change as “…that the change offered was no change at all, only a change in the engineer of a runaway train.” Republican core beliefs and promise to in shrink the size of government, limiting its power, sound money, and strict enforcement of the Constitutional laws, is what most Republicans endorsed in order to win at the polls for the past 2 terms. These core values soon faded once the party took office in 2000.

The only thing Americans saw from the Republican Party was more spending, more debt, economic down fall, an attack on civil liberties such as the Patriot Act, and unconstitutional wars. The author points out that American people have lost there trust in the Republican Party. Their credibility needs to be regained and the author says the solution is for his party to reaccess their core beliefs and stick to them through thick and thin. He believes that the Republicans must “…show how the country (not the party) that it can be put back on the right track.

If the party does not regain their credibility the author believes that his party will only be mimicking the Democrats with more spending, more debt, and more inflation with no future of slowing down the economic crisis. With that said, issues will remain a one-sided victory for the Democrats which are leading our country toward a “dictatorial powerful state.”

I believe that the Republican Party needs to regain their foot hold in the government and to get back on track, to the core values that established the party in the first place. The author opinions in his article are logical. Having two parties of equal representation allows for the checks and balances of government power to keep the most honored job, an honest job. This article has given me a sense of urgency and that I should demand a change to the Republican party and expect them to stand by its original beliefs.

Another Bank Bailout Plan

Bailout Plan: $2.5 Trillion and a Strong U.S. Hand, an article written by Edmund L. Andrews and Stephen Labaton of the New York Times, about the Treasuries plan to rescue banks. An unsuccessful proposal of $2.5 Trillion Rescue Plan presented by the new Treasury Secretary proves to be a tough bid. Timothy F. Geirthner presenting what has not been seen by the government since the 1930’s, a plan to flood the market place with money to help banks begin lending again. In doing so, the government will be more involved in the markets, regulating how the banks will lend money, and forcing the banks to become more transparent.

The Senate disapproves of this plan on the bases that the plan is not specific enough in the details. Three major parts of the plan have the least amount of details describing how this money will be put to use, the details of how it will regain credit and how it will turn the market around. Paraphrasing the President, “Wall Street is looking for an easy way out from this downward spiral, but with all the damaged made to the national and world markets; it will not be an easy road to recover from.”

This article puts the bailout into perspective. A good way to see where this economy is heading, knowing the mind set of the new head of the Treasury Department and his administrations planning scheme. The Senate is being careful of what they approve. With all that has gone wrong with the banks, it’s in their best interest to insure that any plan that comes to them, better have some strict binding regulations with a clear objective. If you care about how our tax dollars are being utilized, this is a good article to read.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/11/business/economy/11bailout.html?_r=1&ref=politics