Today the Nation has some really heart-wrenching stories about real people without health insurance. The stories are in the people's own words, and the tone ranges from defeated to angry. The first story is from J. Travis Rolko, an uninsured college student who has been that way since s/he was 18.

I have been living with these conditions too long and I really don't want to do it anymore. I've been suicidal for a while and my one hope was health insurance reform (specifically the interim high-risk pools, ban on rescission, and the extension of maximum age on a family plan to 27). I've been happier for the past month since the Senate bill was passed, but stunningly, that all went away because of the sudden rise of Brown's support which virtually no one saw coming. Politicians almost always defend lack of progress by citing how slow Congress moves and how it's not an institution that makes sudden and/or radical changes, but this election at least partially proves them wrong. 

So my hope is almost completely gone and I don't want to continue living with these conditions. 

I'd like to see Senators tell this young person that s/he just has to keep living this way.

• An annual conference at Notre Dame explores diversity in business. [The Observer]
• A speaker at the University of Maryland seeks justice for women in the international coffee industry. [The Diamondback]
• A student at Indiana University is forming a Latino LGBT group to give support to students with similar experiences to his. [Indiana Daily Student]
• Princeton is seeing changes in their art and archeology department, which has a mostly male faculty and a mostly female student body. [Daily Princetonian]
• The University of California at Davis will have to defend itself against charges of discrimination brought by a group of former female wrestlers. [Inside Higher Ed]

Two Iowa legislators want to remove protection to lesbians, gay and transgender students from the Safe Schools Law, in and effort to reverse the Iowa's Supreme Court decision to legalize same-sex marriage.


Rep. Jason Schultz says he's not doing this to hurt gay, lesbian and transgender students, he's just trying to forward his agenda to make same sex marriage illegal here in Iowa. Let me get this straight (no pun intended), you want to take out the words that make it possible for a student to sue a school if they are being bullied for being gay and the school does nothing about it? He does not want to hurt them. He only wants to hurt them after they get to be 18 and want the same rights as their straight counterparts.
"The Bully Bill or Safe School Act doesn't protect anyone anyway. Schools are already doing this, so to remove few words doesn't change the intent or effect of the law," says Rep. Jason Schultz. Who the heck is this guy? Aren't laws enacted to protect people legally? Has this guy read the Constitution?
He wants to take out the wording in the Safe Schools Act, and all Iowa legislation, so lawmakers can debate same sex marriage on the floor. How about this: we just take all the gays out and tie them around a big tree and burn them. Then they'd go away. Let's just give all the homophobes more initative to flog us without penalty or legal action.
One of the commenters says, “I don't care if you oppose gay marriage, this is disgusting and vile. Going after students just because they are gay?” Isn't going after real people just because they are gay a little disgusting and vile too? There is a disconnect between perceptions of gay students and gay adults. Equal rights are equal rights, whatever your age. And one day, those kids are going to grow up and want to get married. What do you tell them then? “I helped to not get you bullied when you were in highschool, but now that you're older, I'll bully you by telling you that you can't get married!”

Either you are for gay rights for all ages, or you are not. There is no picking and choosing here.

Education is too often for the afluent. $40,000 can be too much for a young person to think about as they see their own parents struggle. And then, even if you get loans, there is the repaying of them. I am just beginning to grasp that I will be making payments every month until I am 33 if I stay employed and do not have to defer payments. For someone that is already struggling financially, college can seem unrealistic, to the detriment of our soceity both in loosing someone for the new workforce and adding to the number of people relying on government help.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Early College High School Initiative, along with other programs, gives low-income kids a chance to go to college for their last two years of high school, knocking out $20,000 in tuition, room and board for two years of college.

There need to be more programs like this, especially funded by the government. During this pivotal time when the low-income Americans are going from working in factories to reintegrating into information/technology jobs, it's imperative that we count the kids coming out of high school as part of the shift. Kids that once dropped out to work in menial jobs now find that those jobs no longer exist.

If our government is smart, more initiations will be taken like this, however it seems unlikely in this economic climate where the stimulus money for schools has just run out and schools face issues of funding.

Programs like this prevent poverty and homelessness. When money is not put toward education budgets, it tells that it's not a priority, it's not important. Let's prevent some of societies problems instead of putting bandage after bandage on them.

• A speaker at Yale reconciles religion and sexuality in a unique role as minister and sexologist. [Yale Daily News]
• A 48-hour film festival challenges students at the Tisch School of the Arts at NYU to make films in 48 hours and star a Tisch actor. [Washington Square News]
• Colleges object to the way URoomSurf, a roommate matching service, has been using Facebook groups to advertise their service. [Inside Higher Ed]
• Tracy Morgan shocks and gets laughs at Northwestern University. [Daily Northwestern]
• Justin Timberlake accepts the Hasty Pudding Man of the Year Award at Harvard. [Harvard Crimson]

An anti-abortion group targeting African-American women has begun putting up dozens of billboards around metro Atlanta, declaring black children to be “an endangered species.”

This is a method the pro-lifers call them, have started to use in recent years to call to as a sense of racial solidarity in black women.

The line pro-lifers use to attempt to dissaude women getting abortions is always “we can help you with adoption.” This kills me. There were 126,967 kids in foster homes in 2006, waiting to be adopted.  Washington, D.C., alone has 630 kids waiting to be adopted, 587 of  whom  are black. In 2006  the average wait for a  child in America  to be adopted  was  46.5 months. This does not even include children 16-years-old and older whose parental rights have been terminated  OR  those who have a goal of emancipation. 

It's always amazed me how pro-lifers equate adoption with abortion. A child put up for adoption will spend four years in foster care before they are adopted, and not always in the best conditions. The estimated 518,000 American children currently in foster care are among the most at-risk children in American society.[1] Research shows that adults who were formerly in foster care are more likely than the general population to succumb to poor life outcomes. Former foster children are more likely to become homeless, incarcerated, or dependent on state services.[2]

So the chances of being adopted are slim and if you don't get adopted and are raised in foster care, there is a great chance that you will be incarcerated, homeless or dpeneding on state services.

There should be billboards put up saying, “There is little chance your unborn child will be adopted. Your unborn child will spend four years in foster care and end up emotionally/mentally scarred. Your unborn child will end up homeless.”

Let's leave it up to the mother's to decide that one.

The New York Times reports today that the student loan industry has been working tirelessly over the past year to stall, delay, and potentially kill a plan that would take bank subsidies and put them in to Pell grants and direct loans. The legislation, called the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act, is the brainchild of the Obama administration and seems to be only garnering opposition among lenders who stand to lose expensive government subsidies.

Sallie Mae, the industry's heavyweight, has spent $8 million on lobbying in 2009 to block the legislation. The Times piece also noticed that student loan industry employees and political action committees (PACs) had also spent millions on campaign donations -- about $2.1 million industry-wide. Sallie Mae alone spent $194,000.

Although it's defeating to hear that the industry is so strongly opposing legislation will genuinely help students be able to better afford college, there is some good news. The administration seems determined to see SAFRA passed. It's already passed in the House, and the Senate seems to be waiting on what happens to health care reform to make a move on student aid. Like students have been doing for the past several months, they will simply have to wait and see what the Senate will do. 

• The biennial Sex Week begins at Yale tomorrow. The goal of the weeklong event is to bring in speakers and foster discussion on important but often taboo topics of sexuality. [Yale Daily News]
• Dartmouth College students held a candlelight vigil Thursday night called “Dartmouth Students Stand with Staff” to show solidarity with Dartmouth staff fearing layoffs in upcoming budget cuts. [The Dartmouth]
• Next fall, University of Minnesota will offer an “app building” class, which will teach students how to create “apps” for Apple devices. [The Minnesota Daily]
•  Director Spike Lee spoke Thursday Night at the University of Maryland at a lecture in honor of Black History Month. [The Diamondback]
• Students at George Washington University competed in a bidding war to win their top housing choices. Proceeds from the auction fund housing for low-income students. [The GW Hatchet]

For the very first time, a review of an abstinence-only program shows that the program was effective in delaying sexual intercourse among its participants. The study, published in the current issue of the Archive of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, stands as the only existing scientific evidence that shows that an abstinence-only program was effective.

Excited that science may for once be on their side, some opponents of comprehensive sex-ed are heralding this recent study as proof that the abstinence-only message not only works, but works better than comprehensive programs. But such claims grossly misinterpret the study. Abstinence-only proponents are choosing to see what they want to see, and manipulating the facts to back up their political agenda.

As it deals with the topic of sex-ed-- an extremely controversial issue in this nation--the study is highly susceptible to being misconstrued, apparently even by the mainstream media. The Washington Post published the misleading headline "Abstinence-only education programs might work, study finds"; The New York Times writes "Abstinence-only education is found to delay sex"; and The Christian Science Monitor remarks "it is the most comprehensive study...to bolster an abstinence-only approach to reducing teen pregnancy". As misinformation circulates around this recent study, here is what you need to know:

1. The "abstinence-only" program under review was more comprehensive than traditional abstinence-only curricula.
The program under review was actually more comprehensive than rigid abstinence-only curriculum. Instead of promoting an abstinence before marriage message, the program encouraged abstinence from sex until one feels ready, which is a very different message than the former. Because of that, the program does not actually meet the federal criteria of being an abstinence-only program.

Here's your daily dose of Campus Informer:

• Medical schools are grappling with how to deal with med students posting inappropriate photos on Facebook -- some include patients. [The Chronicle]
• Honors programs at community colleges are becoming more competitive as community colleges become more popular. [Inside Higher Ed]
• Students at Indiana University host a campaign to bring awareness to domestic violence by having men "walk a mile in her shoes." [Indiana Daily Student]
• Washington University is starting a study in D.C. program. [Student Life]
• Columbia University works to include African studies. [Columbia Spectator]

During the weeks following Focus on the Family’s announcement that it would be airing an anti-abortion ad during Sunday’s Super Bowl on CBS, there has been a lot of ruckus about the content of the spot, CBS’s decision to air this piece and not other politically oriented ads, and now its collaboration with the organization on the piece. The piece will feature University of Florida Quarterback Tim Tebow and his mother Pam Tebow, who discuss her decision not to have an abortion despite her illness while pregnant with Tim.

The debate will continue through Sunday’s game and at least into next week, but it got a little more interesting with the recent video responses to the Focus on the Family spot.

The Raging Grannies of South Florida weighed in on what they call the “corporate bull shit” of CBS to the tune of  “Three Blind Mice.”

I am convinced that conservatives can get away with talking about tax cuts and small government because the reality of these proposals has not been fully tested in this country. That is, until now.

Colorado Springs, one of America's evangelical, anti-tax meccas, is so low on funds that it will begin to cut government services that many would consider basic necessities. Of course, the city knew about the impending fiscal crisis and put a property tax increase on the ballot; however, anti-tax sentiment won out and voters voted a resounding no to tax hikes that would have plugged the budget's gaping holes. So now Colorado Springs will begin to really live the logical conclusion of their conservative rhetoric.

According to the Denver Post:

More than a third of the streetlights in Colorado Springs will go dark Monday. The police helicopters are for sale on the Internet. The city is dumping firefighting jobs, a vice team, burglary investigators, beat cops...Neighbors are encouraged to bring their own lawn mowers to local green spaces, because parks workers will mow them only once every two weeks. If that. Water cutbacks mean most parks will be dead, brown turf by July..."

I’m going to have an article up soon on our main page about the probable demise of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), a bill that I have frequently supported throughout my tenure at Campus Progress. (The bill would make it easier to organize unions, an almost impossible task these days.)

In preparation for my article I interviewed David Madland, the Director of The Center For American Progress’ American Worker Project, and a strong EFCA advocate. He has a quote in the forthcoming article, and his ideas certainly bear out my own.

Me: "What is the principal obstacle to labor law reform today?"

Madland: "The Senate."

But there were some things we talked about that I didn’t get to include in the article and I think they deserve some screen time to. Below you’ll find some excerpts about the reasons behind the near-universal conservative opposition to the bill, and my post interview comments are in italics.

If you read the Washington Post article about sex education yesterday, it would appear that abstinence-only education programs—the ones that progressives for years have fought against because they do not reduce pregnancy or STI rates—in fact work. Or at least, the headline reads, “Abstinence-only education programs might work, study finds.”

Except, of course, the "abstinence-only education program" touted by the headline was actually a comprehensive sex education program. And comprehensive sex ed programs work. We’ve known that for years.

The study focused 662 African Ameican students from four public middle schools and they were split into two separate groups: the "abstinence-only" group and the "safer sex–only intervention" group. It’s important to note that the abstinence-only part of the curriculum, as detailed in the Post article, involved “a series of sessions in which instructors talked to students in small groups about their views about abstinence and their knowledge of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases. They also conducted role-playing exercises and brainstorming sessions designed to correct misconceptions about sex and sexually transmitted diseases, encourage abstinence and offer ways to resist pressure to have sex.”

Sounds like a pretty comprehensive approach to teaching about sex. Reminds us of the Responsible Education About Life (REAL) Act sponsored by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) that has been stalled in Congress for years despite the fact that it advocates for a sex education curriculum that includes age-appropriate, science-based, and medically accurate information about both abstinence and contraception.

The study found that two years after the classes, just 33 percent of the students from the abstinence-only program had started having sex as compared to 52 percent of students from the safer-sex group, 42 percent from the comprehensive program and 47% of those from the group that received the general health education curriculum. The abstinence-only education program also had no effect on condom use.

On the surface, it would seem that this is a victory for conservatives who for years have touted abstinence-only education programs as the best means to ensure that no one has sex until they are married. But the ‘abstinence-only’ approach in this study worked specifically because it was not like other abstinence-only education programs. It didn’t take a moralistic approach; it talked about condoms and other safer sex products and it didn’t focus on abstinence only until marriage—just until the teens were ready. Here we have an ‘abstinence-only’ approach that worked because it was really comprehensive sex education, which study after study has shown is the best mean to delay sexual activity among young people.

Instead of billing this study as a victory for abstinence education, it should be spun as a victory for comprehensive sex education. In fact, the Guttmacher Institute says the "abstinence" program in the study "does not meet the restrictive federal criteria … programs that, until this year, were eligible for federal abstinence-only-until-marriage funding." The way this story was spun as a win for abstinence is another example of progressives losing ownership over their terms, and this is detrimental to our capacity to lobby for our causes. The real message must get out: Comprehensive sex education is how you delay sexual activity among teens, as even this study proves.

The next time the Washington Post publishes a story on this topic, let’s make sure that the headline reads like so, “New study confirms what we’ve known for years: the more comprehensive the approach to teaching about sex, the more likely teens will delay engaging in sexuality activity.”

--Arielle Fleisher

Yesterday, President Obama conceded that the energy bill in the Senate may not include a cap on carbon. This is a part of a shift in the White House to focus on jobs and the economy rather than complex and arduous campaign issues like health care and climate change. During the president’s question and answer session yesterday, Obama responded to a statement that placed energy efficiency, conservation and renewable energy before cap-and-trade and “avoid negative impacts on our economy.” Obama stuck to his talking points from his state of the union address by saying that cap-and-trade is a market-based solution that has worked in the past. But he also admonished for the first time that the jobs and efficiency portions of the energy bill may be separate from a cap-and-trade bill.

"The most controversial aspects of the energy debate that we've been having: the House passed an energy bill and people complained that, 'Well, there's this cap-and-trade thing,'" Obama said, according to a White House transcript. "We may be able to separate these things out. And it's conceivable that that's where the Senate ends up."

Here's your daily dose of Campus Informer:

• New research on multi-tasking is inefficient -- and worse, gives students a false sense of confidence about their abilities. [The Chronicle]
• Charitable giving to colleges and universities was down nearly 12 percent in 2009. [Inside Higher Ed]
• Caucus turnout among University of Minnesota students for the Minnesota governor race was unusually low this week. [Minnesota Daily]
• University of Texas-Austin students seemed more worried about the closure of a campus cafe than about potential tuition hikes and spending cuts at a forum over budget proposals this week. [Daily Texan]
• At Wesleyan University, the administration has dropped the requirement for fraternities to be co-ed. [Wesleyan Argus]

REPORTER: You are not in favor of a repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell. Why not?

HUNTER: No, because I think it's bad for the cohesiveness and unity of the military units, especially those that are in close combat, that are in close quarters in-country right now. It's not the time to do it. The military is not civilian life, and I think the folks that have been in the military, that have been in these very close situations with each other, there has to be a special bond there. I think that bond is broken if you open up the military to transgenders, to hermaphrodites, to gays and lesbians.

REPORTER: "Transgenders and hermaphrodites"?

DUNCAN: Yeah, that's gonna be part of this whole thing. It's not just gays and lesbians, it's a whole gay, lesbian, transgender, bisexual community. if you're going to let anybody in, whatever sexual preference they have, that means the military's probably going to let everybody in. It's going to be like civilian life, and I think that would be detrimental for the military.

Conservative projections on the real fiscal rate of return on public educational investments are high:10% for high quality preschool programs, 15% for innovative K-12 reforms like First Things First, and 10.3% for investments to encourage college access and graduation.

“If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.”

CampusProgress is proud to present The Plaza, a daily blog that brings news from Spanish-language media outlets to an English-speaking audience.

Budget Doesn’t Benefit Latinos - La Opinión

As for immigration, the budget orders more than $1.6 billion for the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, with an order to identify and remove undocumented immigrants who commit crimes, including support for key programs like Secure Communities.

On top of that, the budget mentions a requirement of $137 million for the US Citizenship and Immigration Services agency to finance programs like E-Verify and the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program. Department of Homeland Security officials specify that $103 million would be destined for E-Verify, while the remaining $34 million would be destined for SAVE.

Finally, $10 to $18 million was allocated to a program to identify and promote citizenship through educational and preparatory programs.

According to Grisella Martínez director of legislative affairs for the National Immigration Forum, she can see that “the focus is on the functions of DHS relating to national security,” although they are still analyizing the budget.

Month Of March “Crucial” For Immigration Reform – BBC Mundo

Illinois Democratic Rep. Luis Gutierrez, indicated that after Congress’ spring recess, the first objective for lawmakers will be the mid-term elections scheduled for November.

“We have to insist” for a change to the US immigration system, said the Congressman, who attended a series of activities in Los Angeles this week to make immigration reform part of the national debate this year.

The political leader called for a “large demonstration” for March 21 in the US capital, in order to appeal the government for immigration reform.

Census Boss Tries To Convince Immigrants In Texas – Univision

The census bureau puts Webb County, where Laredo is located, among the most difficult to count in the country, along with rural areas in Alaska and South Dakota.

…

Speaking to several residents of the colony, many of whom speak only Spanish, Groves tried to put an end to their fears. He stressed that census information is confidential and will not be released to other government agencies.

Tips? Know a good newspaper to read en español? Tell me about it on Twitter.