Immigration

The blog posted by Americans Pushing the Debt, title “Immigration:  Is This Our Country or Not?” is regarding the a few advantages and disadvantages of immigration, which is a huge battle and debate for our country.  The author has the audience think of the possibilities that immigrants could out grown our country.  The author does a great job with a breakdown of facts for both sides and is not opinionated as to what side the author favors.  As it was stated that an estimated 11.5 million illegal immigrants living in our country in 2011 but it is projected by the Center for Immigration Studies, the population of the United States is expected to increase by 167 million by 2060.  I agree with the fact that illegal immigrants do take the low paying job, such as food service and hotel cleaning that most Americans do not want due to low pay.  Others say immigrants are taking jobs away from less-skilled American citizens which also lead Americans to compete for jobs with the immigrants.  Also, the picture can not be completely perfect of having illegal immigrants in our country.  The author states over crowding, disease being brought over and the financial support placed on Americans to foot the bill and this is true.  Immigrants do take up a large amount of government resources without paying taxes or low tax rates.  The author could have mentioned the opportunity for terrorists and drug dealers.  Most illegal drug activity does come from Central and South America and we can not forget the history making, 9/11.  There are some rotten apples in the bunch but it does not necessarily mean every immigrant coming into our country is out to harm us.  Illegal immigrants come to our country for a better life and opportunity to make something of themselves and for their families.

Mandatory Drug Testing To Receive Welfare Benefits

The welfare programs in the states are here to assist those who are temporary down on their luck and unable to provide financially for themselves and their families.  Yet, there are those who abuse the benefits by purchasing drug with their benefits and as a result, many states are working on mandatory drug testing to receive welfare benefits. 

Many people agree with drug testing and feel if they must take a drug test to gain and maintain employment, why should welfare recipients be any different.  Drug testing will reveal recipients who are wasting taxpayer’s money.   Of course some will say it is unconstitutional because it violates their 4^th Amendment right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.  No one hears the people complaining how it is unconstitutional taking drug test for employment.  Those individuals want a job and the income.  For those who fail a drug test and become ineligible for assistance, their family will suffer without the help.  The blame can be placed on the parent for that.  The parent should think about their family first but then again, a druggie make rational choices.  It sound mean to make children suffer but a plan of action can be placed by having the welfare drug user go into a rehabilitation center or substance abuse class to keep the assistance.  The cost of testing is another factor which taxpayers or states would have to foot the bill for it.  Paying for months or years of assistance compared to a drug test is financial difference but taxpayer would be better off paying for a failing test than for supporting a drug user. 

Welfare should be made available in the United States; however it should be given to people who deserve it and who can be effective people in the workforce.  The government will not be able to screen every welfare recipient, but an easy way to weed out the people abusing the welfare system is to find the drug users and addicts.

Commentary – “No To Obamacare”

In a recent blog titled "No To Obamacare", published on Hill Country Politics, Hutson expresses her opinion of “Obamacare” and shared her experience with her healthcare provider.  Hutson does give a little insight of her journey with doctor visits as well as the traveling she encountered for chemotherapy treatments she received during her battle with cancer.  Hutson could have given more examples of either how her health insurance is not working for her or data from a survey reflecting how health care affects others, like herself.  I am sure Hutson is not the only person who feels this way towards health care.  I do have to disagree with her statement regarding doctors not wanting to deal with the insurance paperwork.  Doctors and others who provide medical treatments have a staff or medical billing section to handle the task of insurance paperwork.  Therefore, doctors are able to practice medicine.  I have been fortunate to have one of the best healthcare insurance plans from my employer even though I have to choose my doctors from a “network”.  In any case regarding my health, I am in control and if I do not approve of the doctor I selected or treatments, I have the option to go elsewhere.  I believe ever person with insurance has the same option as well.

Against The Odds - Oral Contraceptives

Examine what the world coming to when our president and government is mandating oral contraceptives to be part of the preventative medicine in health care plans.  There are better means of making other drugs or treatment free of charge than preventing future pregnancies. 

Pregnancy is not an ill ridden disease and sex is not a deadly medical emergency.  Our minds wonder why the president and the government express concern over the importance to support free birth control pills to insulin or medical equipment.  They are just giving the green light to have tons of sex and no baby.  The citizens of the United States should not have to fund their promiscuous lives.

What needs to happen with our health care is helping those who need high blood pressure medication, insulin for their diabetics’ needs or chemotherapy for cancer patients.  These are the things that count because people can actually die without those types of medications and are costly.  A cancer patient will be more grateful for a free chemotherapy session to kill the cancer cells that consume their body.  I seriously doubt some young adult will die because she did not have sex or did not receive her dose of birth control pills.  President Obama and the government seem concern that Horny Helen does not run out of birth control pills before she hits a fraternity house for a night of boozing and sex.  If that is their main concern, then the ill citizens of our county are in deep water. 

Blame Game On Single Parents For Gun Violence

On October 17, 2012 Wendy Fontaine posted a blog in The Blog in The Huffington Post titled, “Why Mitt Can’t Blame Us Single Parents for Gun Violence”.  Her blog is about last night’s presidential debate where presidential candidate, Mitt Romney suggested single parents is the reason for gun violence in the United States when a member of the audience asked the candidates about keeping assault weapons off the streets.  The audience is single parents of America.  

The argument Fontaine tries to address is that single parents are not the problem of gun violence in United States and believes other single parents share the same view as her.  The blame should not be targeted solely on single parents.  As a single parent, Fontaine disagrees with Romney’s theory.  Fontaine states blame can be placed on married parents too as her gives examples such as the assault on Arizona Congresswoman and the shooting in the Colorado movie theater which were taken on from single men with no children.  Another example used was the Columbine High School massacre was taken on by two male students who were raised by their married parents and President Obama was also raised by his single mother which he is now the president.  Fontaine expresses her way of parenting her six year old child and comes off as a wonderful and caring parent as well as her tiresome single parent label, as if it a bad thing.  The only fault I find in Fontaine’s blog is she has only been a parent for six years and in that time frame cannot speak from experience or should not be insulted by Romney’s suggestion.  Overall, Fontaine does a great job bringing facts to the table to stand up for single parents who have raised their children to adulthood without bringing guns to the street.

If I had the chance to address Romney’s generalization face to face, I would let him know I was at one time a single parent raising a daughter without government or public assistance.  I can say I raised one hell of a daughter who was not running the streets while growing up with a gun in her hand or became a teenage pregnancy statistic.  My daughter received a high school diploma, is a certified pharmacy technician, and now back in school to become a pediatrician while employed with a government agency. 

Paid Family Leave in the United States

On October 2, 2012, USA Today published an article “U.S. Needs Paid Family Leave” written by Duncan Black.  In his article, he discusses how the United States should have paid parental leave not only working moms but working fathers as he discovered during a trip to Sweden.

I believe Mr. Black intended audience is targeted at new parents, soon-to-be parents and future parents as he mentions the “gender equity in the workplace and at home”.  As Mr. Black supports the paid parental leave, he believes it affects the parents jobs and paychecks if not in place. As a parent, I disagree with Mr. Black’s opinion because the Federal Family and Medical Leave Act exist for parents.  Employers would not fire an employee based on a birth of a child and the need to care for an infant.  This is why the leave act exist.  I am fortunate to work for the government which has sick and vacation time for me to accrue and use during my absence.  Mr. Black mentions people who choose not have children or unable for whatever reasons but states it part of life and newbie parents should receive a paycheck.  It is a choice to become parents or not, but those people who do not or never will have children will not benefit from this leave.  The government should not adopt the paid leave regardless of who it will benefit.  I would leave it to the employer to make the call of such leave.  Mr. Black does not have children and should not speak of something he has no knowledge of. 

September 17, 2012

On September 16, 2012, Fox News.com posted a news article by Elizabeth Prann regarding the Federal Prison Industries intercepting work for their prisoners from the hard working American people who produced military uniforms, only to add more citizens to the unemployment lines.

The government is taking away jobs from law obeying citizen to have the done work in prisons by prisoners who are in there for federal offenses.  The government claims even with the 15% cost increase per uniform to be produced in prison who help these cons later in society as reducing the impact of them committing another crime and prepare them for society.  The government states it is a law for this situation as they have “first dibs” for work productivity in the prison system.  The government is being blinded or does not care if the unemployment lines will increase as well as the rise in government assistance.

I find this article of interest because of the way the federal government is not thinking about their citizens, only their prisoners.  It shows they rather not assist in securing employment for the outside world but rather behind prison walls.