After a full 10 years of contacting representatives, gathering signatures, writing articles, and spreading the outrage, Students for Sensible Drug Policy, along with hundreds of supporting organizations was sure their determined efforts would finally pay off and that Congressional leadership would follow through with their pledge to repeal the counterproductive Aid Elimination Penalty of the Higher Education Act. However, we have yet again been terribly deceived.
If you’ve ever wondered why you’re asked about drug offenses when applying for federal financial aid through FAFSA, thank Representative Mark Souder (R-IN), who somehow managed to slip the AEP into the Higher Education Act in 1998 without any debate or vote. Since then, this amendment has denied over 200,000 students federal financial aid, and in turn access to education. While we assume the reasoning behind Souder’s action was that he thought it would decrease drug abuse, it’s done the exact opposite by forcing students to drop out of school, therefore increasing their risk of drug abuse and criminal activity.
Regardless of the penalty's intentions, it has blatantly attacked hard-working students, people of color, and the lower and middle class. Since the FAFSA already requires satisfactory academic progress in order for a student to be eligible for federal financial aid, the AEP only affects hard-working students who have been doing well in school. While African-Americans make up a fairly small portion of the population, racial profiling leads to an absurdly disproportionate higher number of African-Americans arrested for drug offenses. And since middle and lower class families are depending solely on financial aid, it’s easy to see why wealthy families may not be too concerned.
Many members of Congress who were on our side initially have informed us that they became terrified of facing negative attacks, fearing they’d be labeled as “pro-drug”. In reality,it is precisely the Aid Elimination Penalty they are supporting that continues to increase drug abuse and decrease education. Anybody who is against racial profiling, increasing drug abuse, and decreasing education should be against this penalty. Please fill out this pre-written letter and demand an explanation from your local legislators! Unless they hear from their constituents, they won’t realize what their people want and will continue to follow their misguided instincts.
The Obama pound, exchanged between Michelle and Barack on Tuesday night, marked a historic moment. Yeah, there's that whole first black nominee for president thing. But more significant, is the fact that the greeting which has been described by confused white journalists as a "fist bump," "closed-fist high-five," "a frat-tastic fist bump" and a "'Hezbollah' style fist-jabbing" is finally being introduced to mainstream culture. Read More »
A few months ago, I remember reading that birth control prices were sky-rocketing and thinking rather casually that this was just another in a long line of problems with the American healthcare system. I admit that I have often been one to argue that politics does not directly affect me. However, both these thoughts were disproved today when I discovered that politics will eventually hit home in one way or another. Upon walking up to the CVS Pharmacy window, I discovered that my birth control pill, under AETNA Insurance, had increased from $35 dollars to $60. Thirty-five dollars was quite an exorbitant of money for a prescription to begin with, but sixty dollars a month is absolutely absurd.
Granted, there are cheaper options that I can get my doctor to prescribe for me in the future, at least I hope. However, as there is no direct generic version of the drug I am on, I was forced to pay the $60 at this time and switching drugs will be a difficult task. What’s worse is that the insurance company gave me no advanced warning of this change in prices, but simply left me to discover thus on my own.
I had often wondered in the past why there are still so many unwanted pregnancies when a large array of birth control is readily available. However, if things continue at this rate, birth control pills will start to become a privilege of the upper and middle classes, not affordable to those who arguably need it most. I do not claim to know who is to blame for this change with certainty, though the easy target is the insurance companies themselves. Then again, recent initiatives like the 2005 Medicaid Bill that was just implemented in January decreased rebates pharmaceutical companies received for selling birth control to campuses at large discounts (this still wouldn’t help me though, as Georgetown will not fill birth control based on its Catholic morals.) In any case, measures such as these indicate that at least part of the problem is political. Without naming names, it is truly unfortunate when the politics of religion inhibit women from getting the medical protection that they are entitled to.
Check out this chart from Nielsen, a market research company that monitors television viewer and web user habits. They also survey users for demographic info like political ideology—below (click to enlarge), they display the constituency of popular political and news sites by the percentage of readers who identify as liberal or very liberal (in blue) and readers who identify as conservative, moderate or undeclared (in red).
It's hard to draw conclusions from the results, though, with readers divided up so shoddily. Lumping together moderate and undeclared readers with conservatives is decidedly unhelpful, and skews the chart considerably--on first glance, it appears that conservative readers dominate mainstream news sources, while liberals are sequestered on Mother Jones and The Nation.
I drank alot at the opening day celebrations for the O's on Monday, so its taken 48 hours of sleep to get my head back to normal and write something down here. My last and first post talked a little about influences and how we should be wearier of them, but in a conversation with my friend Thor, I realized I left out a really important point.
First of all, I have to say how damn funny it can be sometimes when you've been drinking and you think you’re Ari-freakin-stotle. Like you're in the perfect state of mind to realize the answers to every question that mankind has. So back to the point I didn't make last time, which was how your parents affect your socio-political ideals and beliefs. Huge point I missed, but a difficult one to quantify or estimate, because of the factors associated with the role of parents in each individual's life.
Looking at myself, my parents are great, but the influence that my father's political beliefs have had in the development of my own has swayed in a number of directions. I'm 22 years old now, on the verge of having a real job, making real money and having real responsibilities, and I feel like I am far more likely to listen to my father and have educated discussions with him on politics and the economy than I was when I was a wiseass 16-year-old. That said though, I'm more educated now, and my days of impressionability have come and gone, the prime of which has taken place during the past 3-4 years I have spent in college. So while how my father thinks has and always will be important to me, this is one possible scenario of many.
I could have had parents that just didn't care, I could have not had parents at all, I could have spent all of my life rebelling against them or I could spend my own life not giving a rats a$$. Either way, I think it's important to consider what influence our parents had or didn't have in the development of our personality and our beliefs. Just a thought, maybe next time I'll talk about some real stuff.
Enough serious stuff, go O's, Best Monday ever, Markakis Awsome, thanks to Thor, keep it real, and Thanks for readin.
They ask him to weigh in on various politicians' fashion decisions, and pop the big question, "how much does image really matter on the campaign trail?"
What would you say a politician should avoid wearing, at all costs? Well, I hope no one's going out on the campaign trail wearing a pair of Crocs.
I love you. Are you referring to the Bush photo? Yes. And now you must ask me whether I was surprised, because the answer is no. I will summarize his entire fashion presentation in one phrase: shlumped-over and drooling. I hope I don't end up in some Iraqi prison for saying that.
Is there anything coming out this spring that we should pay attention to? Well, of course, the skinnier suit is in, but that's not going to happen for any of the candidates, except for maybe [Barack] Obama. But we don't want to see Mike Huckabee in a skinny suit, God knows.
Maybe one day we'll have a gay man in the White House. Now that would change the fashion landscape, no? I think maybe there already has been! Though not a fashionable one.
And don't forget...you can catch the newest episode of Project Runway at 10 PM EST tonight on Bravo. Will Ricky cry? Will Christian rave about his fast sewing abilities? Will Chris March be forced to run? Will Tim Gunn endorse a candidate? Tune in tonight to find out!
In an attempt to debunk Internet rumors that he is a Muslim who studied at a strict madrasa in Indonesia where he was taught Wahabism, was sworn into the United States Senate with a Qur'an, and that he refuses to pledge allegiance to the United States flag because of the aforementioned statements (or some variation thereof), Barack Obama has launched a website and EMail campaign complete with Youtube videos to try and re-assert his Christianity today. Read More »
Yesterday, I introduced you to CitizenSugar. Today, meet CitizenJane. CitizenJanePolitics is a new blog, trying to be "The Modern Girls' Guide to Picking the Leaders of the Free World".
Editor Patricia Murphy worked on Capitol Hill for 9 years, and is now aiming to cover politics through the eyes of women and help them make informed decisions in 2008.
Patricia is already making informed decisions on the blog. Today's top post features a picture of a pink glazed donut. I don't know what it has to do with politics, but it made me hungry for more.
I read this headline on the flat panel in the elevator at work today (yes, DC is the land of random flat panel TVs) and I wondered how Musharraf and his cronies don't understand what democracy really means? Read More »
Obama or Hilary, which would say more for American progress? Its a question that people have been throwing around for a long time including two of the greatest MCs of the time - Lupe Fiasco and Rhymefest. Read More »
Though it may not be much of a cinematic accomplishment (considering it was directed by Mike Nichols and features Philip Seymour Hoffman in a prominent role) Charlie Wilson's War makes a much needed statement about American foreign policy. Read More »
Since the Afghan diaspora first discovered it, Khalid Hosseini's landmark debut novel The Kite Runner has managed to be one of the most loved and loathed pieces of cultural art ever. Everyone had their opinions on the novel and its companion film -- was it good for Afghans or just "lifting your skirt over your head" as Afghans would say?
Now, the same questions are being asked of Hosseini's second novel A Thousand Splendid Suns. Having recently read it in its entirety in a single 24-hour period I can say that A Thousand Splendid Suns is indeed good for Afghans, and more importantly for Americans wanting to understand historical and political situation that created the current state of affairs in Afghanistan.
Shortly after the events of 9/11 Afghanistan, the Taliban, Al Qaeda, and Osama Bin Laden dominated the news, as if they all naturally went together and the Afghans had control or even a true engagement with the post cold war politics of Afghanistan.
I found that on Digg.com today and it reminds me of a conversation I had with a friend recently about Americans, "democracy," and the accesibility of politics done behind closed doors in a language the average person living in America would be hard pressed to understand.
There is always updates and news coming from my youth activism campaign that I can share with you everyday but I do not like to flood this website. I encourage you to visit my official website at http://www.ASHERHEIMERMANN.com for all of the latest news.
On Tuesday, December 4th at 5pm ET / 4pm CT, I will be hosting Asher Speaks Live for the first time in December. This will be a 90 minute radio show and you will be able to listen in as well as call in or e-mail to voice your opinion.
I've created three new profiles on some political social networking websites. Please visit http://www.ASHERHEIMERMANN.com and click on Newsroom to view those new profiles or to add me. You will also be able to add me on MySpace, Eventful, and Flickr and others.
Finally, I've updated my website with some new resources and action items. There is a petition and guestbook that you can sign. There is also a chatroom and blogs there. If you have any questions, please feel free to e-mail me at asher@asherheimermann.com.
Mr. Asher Heimermann
http://www.ASHERHEIMERMANN.com
Because if you don't, the whole scam may fall apart.
In the first two parts of this ongoing series on The Money Party, we discussed the fact that there is only one political party in the United States, The Money Party. It has two wings, Republican and Democratic. That party represents excessive concentrations of wealth in the hands of corporations, other organizations, and individuals. They put up the money and get what they pay for every time.
They make sure that the election system is rigged to rely on money like a junkie relies on heroin. The system takes care of them. They don't have to obey the same rules that we do. Why? Because they're above the law.
The Money Party owns the mainstream media entirely. NBC is really General Electric, ABC is Disney, CBS was Viacom but now it's just the name for a mega-corporation, and Fox is News Corp., the Rupert Murdoch financial empire. That's why it's called the corporate media. They're publicity shops, "corporate communications divisions," owned and controlled by Money Party members.
If you’re not watching Adult Swim’s late-night cartoon Frisky Dingo (12 am on Saturday nights/Sunday mornings), you’re missing out.
Why watch news about an ever more protracted primary race, when you can get into the ‘real’ race for the White House: Killface (D) vs. Cruise Zander (R).
Killface, a maniacal monster once bent on world destruction, offers the Democratic ticket a unique bounce: He saved the world from global warming. Sure, he was trying to blow the planet up—only inadvertently shoving it a smidge away from the sun—but it’s results that matter, right?
Today MySpace and MTV announced the details of the presidential candidate forums they will hold this fall. Hosted on college campuses across the country, broadcast on MTV and streamed live on MySpace, the forums seek to foster “candid, unfiltered” discussions between young voters and the major Republican and Democratic candidates.
As I write in an identical blog post at HuffPo, the blogosphere seems abuzz with optimism about the forums, the latest evidence that 2008 won’t be your mother and father’s election. “MTV and MySpace have hit up an interactive format with the potential to pioneer a whole new way of doing candidate debates/forums,” writes Michael Connery, co-founder of Future Majority, a prominent blog with well-done reporting on progressive youth politics. (Yes, that Mike Connery who came at Campus Progress back in June.)
“Tonight these styles that you will hear will do for you what they did for me, I mean, hopefully. Give you a sense of self, no longer so lonely.”
Kevin Coval, the first of four performers at Campus Progress’s annual Spoken Word event, started the night off with this pledge/prospect for the audience. I think everyone in attendance that night would agree this promise was thoroughly fulfilled by each artist.
In response to a lot of questions I've been getting on exactly what a "Conference Report" or " Motion to recommit with instructions" is, I've decided that I should use my pathetic mastery of CSPAN lingo to educate the masses. Here is a list of parliamentary procedures in the United States Congress, complete with my real definition.
Senate
Filibuster: A chance for Southern conservatives to delay a Civil Rights Bill, or neo-cons to stop an anti-war measure from passing. Although, when you're in the minority, it can be defined as the "Thank ****ing God" rule. Unlike what you see in some movies, and what they tell you in history classes, filibusters don't consist of some old guy reading a phone book for 24 hours anymore. Now, someone will file a "cloture" (see below) motion to cut off debate, which needs 60 votes to pass. Essentially, this means that any controversial legislation in the Senate needs 60 votes, which makes things impossible to enact.
Cloture: The 60 vote threshold needed to end debate. That is why, even though a party may be in the "majority," it has very little power unless it can gather 60 votes. This rule is very nice though when you're in the minority, so we can stop things like the Flag Burning Amendment.
Motion to proceed to the motion to invoke cloture: Yeah, that really is the name for things people could be voting on.
Tabling: To table a bill or an amendment means to kill it by majority vote. So when Jim DeMint proposes that we take every dollar out of the Federal Government, we can say "shut up."
Motion to Instruct the Sargent-at-arms: This is one of my favorites. A Majority leader can invoke this rare procedure by majority vote, which would require the sargent-at-arms to physically bring people to the chamber. And you think CSPAN is NOT entertaining?
President Pro Tempore: The Vice President of the United States is constitutionally supposed to preside over the Senate, but he is too busy planning the destruction of the world. Therefore, the duty is given to the President Pro Tempore. This is usually the senior Senator from the majority party, (currently Robert Byrd of West Virginia). However, this guy is usually too frail or lazy to perform the duty himself, so he hands it off to Freshman Senators as a "hazing" ritual. Therefore, freshman in the majority party have to sit and preside over the debate (really they're probably doing crossword puzzles).
Roll Call Vote: Senators, contrary to conventional wisdom, don't all come to the floor for the vote immediately. Usually, the clerk will read all of their names to an empty chamber, and then the Senators will lazily meander to the floor when they are done with their donut. They go up to the desk and announce their vote, before immediately going back to talk with lobbyists about that special project in their state. Therefore, a process that should take a few minutes, takes a freaking half hour.
House of Representatives
"My good friend, the gentleman from Missouri": That ***hole across the aisle.
Motion to Recommit with Instructions: Usually, the House Minority can't do anything, because the rule for debating a bill is agreed to by majority vote. They are entitled to a motion to recommit, which is basically a way to add something to the bill that will either alter its meaning completely, or kill it. For example, on a bill to give Voting Rights to DC, Conservatives offered a motion to recommit that would remove DC's handgun bill. Usually these things don't pass, except when some moderates feel like they need to vote for it to save face in their district.
Speaker of the House: The Speaker of the House usually doesn't preside over the House during normal debates. She's probably too busy eating Ghiradelli Chocolates. Therefore, other House members from the Majority party get the priviledge of shutting people up, and calling on them to speak.
House and Senate:
Conference Committee: Usually, the House and the Senate pass different versions of the same bill. Probably the House's version is more extreme (as the founders intended) and the Senate has served as a cooling saucer. Thus, they must reconcile a bill in "Conference." These conferences consist of members of both parties in proportion to their membership in each chamber. Once they hammer out a compromise, both chambers vote on the final bill, called the "Conference Report." Of course, none of this will happen if one Senator prevents it. (I'm looking at you again, Jim DeMint)
Parliamentary Inquiry: A way to guise a political statement in the form of asking a question about procedure.
Point of Order: Making a point that the rules of the chamber are being broken. The presiding officer will decide if the point is valid (obviously they side with their own party, the majority). The chamber than votes on the ruling of the chair. The majority wins the vote, and members contemplate why they have wasted valuable time.
I hope this is helpful to those of you who are interested in politics, or are at least interested in a "CSPAN Drinking Game"
Please remember that Campus Progress' terms of use do not allow promoting or endorsing any particular political party or candidate for office. Posts or comments that do this will be deleted.
The Obama pound, exchanged between Michelle and Barack on Tuesday night, marked a historic moment. Yeah, there's that whole first black nominee for president thing. But more significant, is the fact that the greeting which has been 
Posts
