Does The Electoral College No Longer Work And Should We Make Changes?
In 2000 we have had the closest presidential election in the history of the United States. Vice President Al Gore has won the popular vote and yet fell short of victory by less than a thousand certified votes in the pivotal state of Florida. This means that under the system of the two hundred-year-old Electoral College, Texas Governor George Bush overcame the popular opinion of the entire United States to win the Electoral Vote.
Was this fair? Yes, because under the rules and laws established before this election was held the end result of Governor Bush winning the Electoral Vote is what determines the winner. As mandated in the United States Constitution and agreed upon by every state’s legislative law one cannot change the rules after the fact just because the national popular vote winner lost. Unfortunately, that is not the shared opinion of so many others.
Now we hear the rising echo of irate citizens and politicians calling for the abolishment of the Electoral College. In it’s antiquated format the popular vote winner can be beaten and “it’s not right”. Yet in order to do that we will have to rid ourselves of the ONLY true way for these United States to reflect “the will of the people” nationwide.
My suggestion is not to abolish the Electoral College and go solely with the popular vote. Rather, I suggest we need to tweak the system to better reflect the present and future structure of these United States. In order to do this we must first look at the history of the Electoral and why it appears to have become ill suited for our modern nation. Once that is accomplished I will humbly submit my suggestion for changes that need to be made.
The need for an Electoral College of voters arose when our founding fathers realized that the more dominantly populated states could perhaps ban together and literally control all of the elections and in essence, determine many advantages for their own self interests. How could we be called a United States when just four of the thirteen states could always determine who got any and every thing that they wanted or needed?
I suggest that they knew that “the will of the people” could never truly be reflected under a minority count of heavily populated states overwhelming the majority of states with less population but sharing an equal risk in governing this new republic. What they did was to allow each state to have Electors equal to their respective representatives within the Congress and Senate. In short, the states with less population were then equally more represented by their Electors during national elections.
What this meant was that the ability of the major population centers banding together to capture national elections and benefits was brought down to an equality that hasn’t been fully realized during the two hundred years since it was originally created.
Yet even with such unprecedented wisdom as that that they exhibited two hundred years ago there was still this eventuality of our population centers growing large enough to force national election results and the future direction of these United States.
I personally feel that the main reason for this is they never would have imagined that this country would grow from thirteen states and 3.5 million people into the monstrous proportions that it has grown to in just two centuries.
In the two hundred years since the Electoral College was created the United States has blossomed from 13 states with just a little over 3.5 million people to 50 states with almost 300 million citizens. Currently there are twenty-six states, which have populations that exceed the entire combined population of all the thirteen original states.
I suggest that our forefathers would not only be amazed at how well their fledgling Constitution has governed these United States but they would also in their unparalleled wisdom, recognize how out of proportion our population has grown.
James Madison and Thomas Jefferson, both Virginians, would probably be stunned to find that Virginia (the most populated of the thirteen original states) now ranks twelfth in rank among all the fifty states. This despite the fact that Virginia’s population is ten times what it was when the Electoral College was first created.
Currently there are eleven states with enough Electoral Votes to override all votes of the other thirty-nine states and Washington DC. As in 1780, where just four states could out vote the other nine through the popular vote, there is an Electoral Vote imbalance that is being created by the main population centers within these eleven states.
The Vice President won the national popular vote by capturing just twenty states and Washington DC. That means that Governor Bush won the Electoral Vote by capturing the remaining thirty states and their Electors by a narrow margin. Yet the argument still persists with the wails and cries being trumpeted for a national popular vote to determine, “the will of the people”.
This is where we can actually see how out-of-whack the Electoral College has become. The large population centers are dictating the outcome of not only state totals but also the national results. Which is what the Electoral system was created to prevent. With just the proper prodding or gifts any candidate can win the major city(s) within a state and capture the entire state Electoral.
In the 2000 Presidential Election this is evidenced in Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Washington and Wisconsin. All ten of these states were won by the margins of their largest populated county. Which was high enough to defeat all the other counties within their respective states. The question comes from this, how can just the largest most populated county shadow the will of all of the other counties within these states?
It’s the population, stupid! Yes, the same thing that compelled our founding fathers to create the Electoral College is now engulfing that same safeguard. I suggest that in all probability our population and growth alone is what may become the catalyst for the future failure of these United States.
So what do we do to license the Electoral College to once again maintain balance in our national elections? We should again look to our founding fathers to find the solution. When they created the Constitution they empowered us, their future citizens, with the ability to make changes through ratification. If they had felt so certain that their work was binding and without peril they would have set our covenants in stone.
That, they did not do. The most naked testimony to their wisdom is the fact that they knew that the United States would grow. They knew that changes would surely occur throughout time and a government would need to be able to adapt and reinvent itself when these changes came. Now is the time for changes to be made.
John DeJong is the lead creative designer for NotMeUSA. He has been writing humor for over twenty-five years. All of the statistical charts and data can be viewed by visiting: http://www.notmeusa.com and clicking on the Electoral College Changes.
How Do We End Illegal Immigration?
In the past few decades, our country has been besieged by a plethora of immigrants entering the United States under false pretense and without legal merit. These are what we refer to as illegal immigrants or aliens. Now even as you read the words, illegal immigrants, you doubtlessly think of Mexicans, right. Yet what I am referring to is ALL illegal immigrants and not just those flooding in from Central and South America. No, I am writing of ALL those who are coming in from countries all over the world.
Though billions of immigration enforcement dollars work to some degree we still cannot fully stop this stampede. Nor will we ever be able to fully block those who are intent upon entrance. There is just not enough manpower or money to cover every last inch of bordering land, air and sea. Safety in numbers is as true a statement today as the day it was first coined. So instead of trying to catch all of the foxes that are trying to get into the henhouse, why not remove the chickens? Now let me explain how we can completely stop the foxes or in this case, illegal immigration.
In concert with President Bush, all illegal immigrants must leave the United States within ninety days. This is where the President and I begin to differ on immigration. I submit that we will not expend another dime on hunting down illegal aliens after that ninety-day period. That is because after ninety days the enforcement of illegal immigrants will be turned over to the investigation of American employers who use illegal immigrants. In short, we will begin to act upon and enforce the employment laws that are already in place.
After the ninety-day period, any employer who is found to have illegal immigrants in their employ will be fined $10,000 per illegal and placed on probation for two years for each illegal found. They should not be incarcerated on the first offense. However, if they are caught employing an illegal a second time then the penalty will be grave. The second offense will result in a fine of $100,000 for each illegal in their employment and five years in prison with no parole. We must get serious if we are to stop illegal immigration.
Furthermore, their business and assets will be sold and the money generated from the sale will be used as an offset to enforcement costs. Additionally, there will be no bail allowed for their second offense of this crime. Therefore, if you are arrested for a second offense you had better be sure you have your harmonica with you because you will be staying in jail for quite some time.
Now what happens during the voluntary ninety-day relocation period? In order to insure that the illegal immigrants head back to where they came from we will need to remove all of the benefits that have been bestowed upon those who have violated our immigration laws. First, we act in accordance with the 14th Amendment when applying the law of citizenship. Despite what the supporters of illegal immigration claim, this Amendment should not allow for automatic citizenship for babies born here from illegal immigrants of foreign nations. So first off, we reclassify all illegal babies born on American soil to the status of their parents natural country of origin.
The illegal immigrants will no longer be allowed to send their children into our public schools. Nor will they be eligible for any government entitlements or other social programs. If they appear at any hospital or clinic with injuries or illness then they can be treated only after immigration officers have arrived to take them into custody for the purpose of deportation. The lone exception here would be life-threatening issues, which require immediate treatment. Yet the immigration authorities still must be notified even before this emergency treatment commences. Once all these measures are enacted, the illegal immigrants will depart on their own. If not, they will eventually be found anyway.
Once the illegal immigrants are back in their countries they can apply for entrance into the United States by way of work permits. They must list their experience and skills and other pertinent information. They must have some working knowledge and basic 6th grade understanding of the spoken and written English language. All schools will be directed toward teaching legal immigrant children the English language. There will be no more bi-lingual signs, voice mails or any other instruction in foreign languages because the English language will become the official language of the United States.
In order to enter the USA they and their dependents will submit to fingerprinting and photo identification and they will have to be matched or sponsored with an employer certified by the immigration services. They will also be required to report to Immigration Services on a monthly basis to ensure that they have not relocated out of state without authorization. Any felony conviction or repeated misdemeanor offenses of an illegal immigrant will result in deportation without the possibility of ever returning to the USA.
Those employers who wish to employ legal immigrants will have to be certified by the United States Immigration Services. They will have to list the employee skills they need and the amount of people wanted. They will have to list whether the employment is of a permanent or temporary nature. The most important aspect of employing immigrants will be that the employers will be responsible for providing an equal rate of starting pay and benefits as those of their employees who are American citizens. That will prevent the slave labor or poor wages that are currently employed by many in this country.
The certified employers will receive a listing of immigrant employment applicants so that they can choose whom they want to work for them. They will be required to submit quarterly evaluation reports to Immigration Services about their immigrant employees as well as any problems or incidences of a disciplinary nature. In addition, all immigrant employees will only receive hourly wages/overtime and never a salaried position as long as their status is alien. Once they become United States citizens then their employment future will be maintained under the laws and jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Labor just as every other natural citizen.
Finally, each employer of three or more legal immigrants will help them choose one worker as an immigrant labor representative for the other workers. This labor rep will be responsible for submitting quarterly reports to the Immigration Service along with the employer report forms. He or she will also act as a liaison between management and the other immigrant workers.
If we are truly dedicated to securing and maintaining the American way, then we absolutely must get serious about it. We have to make certain that immigrants are fully deterred from entering this country without first being certified and authorized.
John DeJong is the lead creative designer for NotMeUSA. He has been writing humorous advertisements for over twenty-five years. All of the funny t-shirts, prescription pill bottles, and gag spray bottles were created by him. You can view these by visiting http://www.notmeusa.com
Practical Ways To Support Our Troops
Whether the war was something you chose to oppose or support, support for the troops is an important thing. Typically, many people feel unable to offer any means of support because such things in their mind suggest financial responsibility. While there is need for support in an economical sense, offering support to our troops isn’t limited to it.
Flying the American Flag has been one such emblem which leaves a signature of support for our military men and women. Newspapers across the country had even implemented this by creating print outs of the flag or other supportive logos to display in a window of your home. Of course this type of ideal has been enhanced by creating logos that have appeared on clothing, cups, magnets, and so on which can be purchased at affordable prices.
DONATE. When people see the word donate the first thing that comes to mind is money. There are other ways you can donate. Giving blood is one such example. It goes without saying that the need for blood will arise in times of war. Donate phone cards, frequent flyer miles etc. Many of these types of things are incentives for credit card holders or even utilized in other types of services.
You can also utilize donating techniques in providing food, toiletries, blankets, etc. that are always in need. What can even be more crucial and comes at no cost is simply, donating your time. Time is of the essence. Taking time to send cards and letters is such a minor thing but makes a world of difference to the men and women in our military. Operation Dear Abby is one of many models of support to connect the average American to a resource which will allow them to express their appreciation for the sacrifice our military personnel has made.
USA Freedom Corps offers several opportunities for you to volunteer to help support programs utilized to represent our efforts of ‘freedom’. Volunteering for programs implemented through Freedom Corps will not only show that you support the efforts of our troops, it also unifies you in their cause. Isn’t America’s freedom what we’re all trying to protect?
Another option is volunteering for public service. This is a broad area which can connect with your area of expertise. Education is a highly populated area of public service and it’s one of the most necessary as children are the keys to our future. The ways you can volunteer your abilities in this area are numerous. Even donating an hour of your time to read in a child’s classroom is a huge significance to their future.
When it comes to mind in regards to children, the numbers are building with those who’ve lost a parent due to the war. Whether they’ve left their lives forever or for a short time, support is widely needed. The Big Brother Big Sister Organization is non-profit and carries such significance in a child’s life. Isn’t their smile worth just a little of your time?
The author would like you to visit http://www.showyacare.com and http://www.showyacare.com/sitemap.php
Just So We Have Our Priorities Straight!
Well, let’s see: we’re still at war in Iraq, we are (rightly) worrying about a nuclear capability in Iran, we’re unable to compete in the international labor market, we are facing unprecedented trade and budget deficits as well as federal entitlement programs certain to run out of money in the next few decades, and we are experiencing unprecedented crude oil prices.
Our response? Our duly elected officials in Washington are debating gay marriage and flag-burning.
I cannot imagine that any responsible citizen, either on the right or the left (there no longer appears to be much of a center) does not find this disgraceful. And yet, somehow, we demand nothing more of those who, ostensibly, depend upon our votes, in order to take their seats in the Congress and the Oval Office.
It frankly does not matter, at least to me, whether one supports or opposes gay marriage. Firstly, it is not, in the judgment of this writer, a federal issue. Secondly, and more fundamentally, this boat has sailed. Whichever side of the question upon which any of us finds himself or herself, the societal legitimation of homosexual marriage is inevitable, and its opponents ought to stop “shifting the deck chairs on the Titanic.” One who is opposed to gay marriage always retains the option to subscribe to a religious group (Orthodox Judaism and Roman Catholicism, for example, spring to mind), in which gay marriage is not on the radar screen and the religious representatives of those movements will not, anytime soon, likely be called upon to sanctify such a union. As citizens of a secular state, however, we ought to find it easy to see which way the wind is blowing. The extent to which our secular society is bound up with the Judeo-Christian ethic has not been a constant, and has waxed and waned over time, for better, or worse.
Flag burning?! Is this really even an issue? Is there much of it going on? Come now, fellow citizens, we’ve got real problems in this country!
Is it possible that these two “huge” national questions have been entirely manufactured for the benefit of the public and to divert our attention away from a more substantive national agenda? Or is that just cynicism?
We have already lost our preeminence in manufacturing and are well on our way to losing our last remaining economic clout on the international stage: as the world’s largest consumer market. China is destined, in the not-too-distant future, to overtake us, by virtue of its sheer numbers, coupled with an ever-expanding economy. We no longer make anything of consequence here, mostly because of prohibitively high labor costs. So we are, at this stage, largely running on a service economy. But an international financial engine built entirely upon lawyers, accountants, real estate brokers and even investment bankers, is not what built the American Empire, and it will certainly not sustain it. We need, more than anything else, to figure out how to get back in the game, assuming that it is still possible for us to do so.
On the international political front, we need to focus on resolving things in the Middle East, both in Iraq and Iran and with respect to the Arab-Israeli conflict. It goes without saying that this is linked to the question of oil prices, and our national irresponsibility in forgetting the lessons we should have learned in the 1970’s is inexcusable. Only now, in the last few months, have we been hearing, for the first time in many years, about alternative energy sources, hybrid automobile engines, smaller cars, carpooling, etc. The rest of the world has been dealing with these kinds of oil prices for many years. Yet we seem to think we have a God-given right to cheap oil. Shame on us! We need to formulate solutions for Africa, and to address the horrors which would keep us awake nightly, if only we and our national media would pay attention. These are only examples of a laundry list of world problems that ought to be vying for our increasingly short attention span.
None of these issues is susceptible to an easy fix. They will, alas, require bipartisan effort and good will-a daunting challenge in an era of mutual recrimination and, frankly, inter-Party loathing in Washington. I stated earlier that it appears that there is no “center” left in this country. I think that is true among our representatives, but I pray it is not true of our electorate.
Absolutely nothing is going to change unless the American People demand it. So let’s demand it. Otherwise, we face the prospect of living in a country torn apart by pseudo-social issues and the question of protecting a flag which will decline in direct proportion to that for which the flag stands.
Copyright 2006
Warren R. Graham
Warren R. Graham is an attorney with the New York Law Firm of Cohen Tauber Spievack & Wagner LLP. He specializes in the field of Bankruptcy and Creditors’ Rights. Additional professional information on him may be found at http://www.ctswlaw.com.
E-mail: wgraham@ctswlaw.com
What Does It Mean To Be Politically Independent?
I have concluded of late that I could only consider myself a political independent if there is such a thing. I do not think I should be labeled Republican or Democrat, on the Left or on the Right or any other affiliation except to be a proud citizen of this United States and live by the principles on which this great nation was founded.
As far as I am concerned, our government, as it stands today, is in great need of an overhaul and a wake up call. I firmly believe that if our founding fathers could see the way our government and institutions run today, they would be greatly disturbed and dismayed on how far We The People have strayed from the principles that our republic was built on.
There was a time long ago and at the beginning of our republic and our experiment in democracy, that to serve in public office was considered a privilege and not a right. To serve in public office often meant financial sacrifice to those who gladly served the people and this great country, sacrifice or not.
Today most who serve in public office expect a windfall financially and are mainly interested in the influence they can gain to increase their wealth in office and for when they leave office. Where is the personal and financial sacrifice to serve? They look at their title as a possession and not a privilege. They pontificate to attempt to bend the will of the people to their ways of thinking instead of deriving their actions from the will of the people to whom they profess to serve. Some politicians become so entrenched in their governmental powers; they often feel themselves above the law.
Today’s politicians are a washed in a tsunami of lobbyists, who bend the ears of those in government in order to influence the politicians’ vote that will most benefit the interests of the lobby they represent. How often do we see politicians, who when they leave office, become pawns; working for one lobby interest or the other? Elected federal government officials need to be banned by law from working for a lobby for at least 5 to 10 years after they leave office in order to stop the habit of influence peddling after they in fact leave public office.
I dare say, I lay a good part of the guilt for the perversion of public office on We The People themselves whom have absolved their responsibility to impose and elect officials on their merit and desire to serve the people. They have abdicated their rights by allowing so-called public servants to make their own decisions of policy and directions for the public servants own benefit. “To hell what the people want!” they say. “We know what is best for them. Where would they be without us?” they say as they puff up their chests and proudly strut.
I always thought that there should be some sort of term limitations for all federal elected positions, not just for the presidency. Change is good, as it allows the government to refresh itself on a regular basis by bringing new ideas and approaches to work for the people.
When will We The People ever wake up and demand that the government of the people, for the people, by the people be truly put into the hands of the people and not political demigods’?
I see the slow demise of our republic if We The People are not brought to our senses. Will we follow the demise that history has shown us be-felled other once great nations and peoples? I would say, it is likely, considering the current state of affairs of government and the distance we have traveled from our roots of our democracy and our republic.
Bill Wallmuller aka Mr. Merokee is the founder of Merokee Enterprises: http://www.merokee-enterprises.com.com
With Liberty and Justice for All-Even Republicans
The purpose of this piece is to reassure its readers (and perhaps, its author), that civil liberties are not a concern relegated solely to the opponents of the Bush White House. Let me start off this essay by incurring much wrath in clearly identifying myself as a lifelong Republican, and a supporter of this Administration’s policies in the Middle East and in Iraq, in particular. Those whose judgment is so driven by obsessive hatred of George W. Bush that they prefer to see the failure of American interest in the international arena, than to endure a scintilla of success for Team Bush should, in any rational world, be ashamed of themselves for their lack of patriotism, to say the least. In addition, the readiness of some to declare his policies a failure smacks of intellectual dishonesty. Any student of history worth his or her salt knows that the success or failure of a policy-ANY policy-is not evident for at least fifty years, or more. Alas, however, we do not live in a rational, or an intellectually honest, world.
In spite of my political leanings, it is an unfortunate reality that our President is a divisive figure. Part of this is a function of his inability to project intelligence, and the resultant, and mistaken public impression (reinforced relentlessly and cynically by his detractors) of him as shallow and, indeed, stupid. I am naive enough to believe that idiots don’t make it to the White House, and that this President suffers merely from an enhanced form of his father’s estrangement from, and lack of fluency in, the English Language. That, coupled with a Texas drawl, a goofy grin and an inability to put forth bon mots in a spontaneous way, leaves the American public with a perception of him as something of a dimwit. Those who know the President personally (I am not among them) know this to be false. I agree wholeheartedly, in large measure because I have seen the man’s work and am, for the most part, satisfied with it. Irrespective of the views of both his supporters and detractors, history, most importantly, will judge him on his deeds and not on his media-created (or distorted) image.
Add to this a genuine weakness of this President: his apparent reliance on personal friendship and trust, in lieu, sometimes, of good independent judgment, and his willingness to subscribe to secrecy and close counsel for its own sake, and his constituency is left to wonder: “what is this not-very-intelligent guy up to? Perhaps he really does mean to drop a few nukes on Iran.” Now, as viscerally satisfying as “dropping a few nukes on Iran” may seem to some of us, it is probably bad policy, and even worse policy to leak to the media that it is even being considered.
Putting all of that to the side, however, and given this writer’s support for the War on Terror and the Bush policies in Iraq, what concerns me the most is the utter lack of public discourse on the real issues which arise from these policies. I refer, of course, to the price demanded of our civil liberties and the evolving change of balance as between our rights and the powers ceded to law enforcement. And when I allude to public discourse, of course, I am not referring to the debate among the talking heads on Washington Week in Review, and its three or four weekly viewers, or the weekly bloodsport/screamfest-passing-for-discussion known as The McLaughlin Group. Rather, I am wondering: what happened to the “public” in public discourse? In the middle of a war, in the midst of a crisis in which the “President” of Iran speaks of wiping Israel off the map, and at a time in which the arrogation of power to law enforcement has resulted in so-called “free speech” zones at which the public may gather to express their displeasure with government policy, the public discourse devolves into discussion of such earth-shattering concerns such as who will prevail on American Idol, or who will be America’s Next Top Model.
I am sure, perhaps with some justification, to be accused of intellectual snobbery in appearing to suggest that entertainment and silly diversion has no place in the midst of international crisis. That is not my contention. Indeed, we are nearly always in some international crisis, or other, and people-ALL people, virtually-need diversion from the horrors that face us as members of the human race. We certainly cannot reasonably be expected to devote all of our waking hours to consideration of the horrors of Darfur or the likelihood of a viable nuclear capability in the hands of Pyongyang. That way, of course, lies madness. No, we need Desperate Housewives. We must have Entertainment Tonight. And the goings-on of Scientologist cum Philosopher Tom Cruise as well as the canoodlings of the moment by Lindsay Lohan and her partying in the “boite de jour” with her Mom (am I the ONLY one who finds that more than mildly disturbing?) are of inestimable importance to our national consciousness.
But even allowing for all that, the question remains: why is the public largely apparently indifferent to the invasion of its constitutional liberties? Is it ignorance? Cynicism? Or worse, have we, by silence, tacitly consented to a fundamental shift in our relationship with our government as the payment for the perception (valid or not) of greater personal and national security. I would like to think that ignorance is the culprit, simply because that cause is most readily remedied by a concentration of concerned individuals screaming loudly enough to be heard above the fray of: “would you like fries with that?” Cynicism is a tougher nut to crack, suggesting, as it does, that people have considered the problem, to a greater or lesser extent, but feel themselves so disenfranchised and removed from the scions of power that any efforts would surely prove fruitless. The consent argument is most troubling of all, because it implies that those principles for which our founding fathers bled, and upon which this country stands, are really not very important to us, at least not at the moment the chips are down.
There are, to be sure, legitimate arguments for encroachments upon liberties in times of war. Every schoolchild knows (or would know, if our schools were doing their job) that good old Abe Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus for a time during the Civil War. Parenthetically, the rectitude of that action is still a subject of great debate among historians and constitutional scholars. Japanese-Americans were sent to concentration camps after Pearl Harbor (there’s not much debate about the moral defensibility of that action). And now, of course, we have issues such as the various provisions of the Patriot Act, the prospect of secret military tribunals, domestic spying and indefinite detention without trial at “Gitmo.” Are all these things a clear and present danger, per se, to our freedoms which must be fiercely resisted? Not necessarily. It should be pretty obvious to most people that military activities cannot be prosecuted effectively without a high level of secrecy. Interrogation of enemy operatives, especially in the terror milieu of the Middle East, cannot be accomplished entirely according to the Marquis of Queensbury Rules (there is, of course, a large gulf between fully according due process to enemy combatants and engaging in outright torture, notwithstanding the arguments of the “slippery slope-ists”).
No, my objection is to the lack of open discussion of these issues. It may be that national security requires that everyone open their bags for inspection as they enter the New York City Subways. It is a debatable proposition whether ethnic profiling for air travelers ought to be a tool available to law enforcement. It may be uncomfortable for some to hear, but it is nevertheless a fact that the horrors of September 11 were perpetrated by Arab Muslims, as has most (not all, to be sure) international terrorism in recent years. Our population needs to be protected by its government and military. Our borders need to be secure (we’re certainly doing a pretty poor job on that front). But the point is that these subjects need to be discussed, debated and yes, screamed about in the public domain, on the street, on blog sites, and around the office water coolers. Most of what I hear in those precincts concerns the latest episode of The Sopranos. (Not that the charms of that show are lost on me. Indeed, I have not missed a single episode of the five or six seasons of that show since it began airing some 27 years ago).
Long ago, we gave up any real right to privacy in this country. Madison Avenue saw to that, with its wholesale trading of customer lists and accompanying marketing data. What little was left was taken by the credit card companies, the internet and spammers. Commercial television ads for heated K-Y Jelly suggesting that we “see where it leads” followed by a knowing wink, have certainly removed what very little was left of the surprise and mystery of the bedroom for those of us who have not already been bombarded by internet porn over the last few years.
What, then, is left to us? Some of our allegedly constitutionally protected rights devolve from the implied right to privacy, to be found in the Bill of Rights. These include reproductive rights and, in recent years, newly “discovered” rights concerning sexual conduct. We still have some protections under the Fourth Amendment against unreasonable searches and seizures, but domestic spying is a potential threat to that. Do we want to do anything about that? Up to now, America’s answer has been…..silence. Other provisions of the Bill of Rights give us the right to counsel and trial by jury as well as the right to confront our accusers. Secret military tribunals put those rights at risk. Should we care? Do we care? Survey says???……..{Yawn}. Maybe our national security and defense do, indeed, demand the sacrifice of these rights. Maybe not. But the prospect of losing what little we have left of our Constitutional legacy because we are asleep at the switch is a horrifying proposition, to say the least. If we are going to cede these rights to our government in the name of safety and security, we ought to do so consciously. Security and freedom have always worked in inverse proportion. This is basic and self-evident. It has always been the fundamental mission of this Republic to find the ideal balance. I am sorely afraid, however, that we have stopped looking for it. There are a few (very few) people who seem to care. Unfortunately, and embarrassingly to me, personally, they are overwhelmingly to be found on the left. During the 2004 Presidential Election, when President Bush was making campaign appearances, there were, not surprisingly, anti-Bush demonstrators at most major venues. The security people assigned to the campaign designated so-called “free-speech” zones, usually many blocks from the site at which the President was to appear. In the most quotable line in many years, in this writer’s opinion, a woman (to whom I apologize for not knowing her name and thus, not being able to attribute the quote), said: “I thought this WHOLE COUNTRY was a “free speech zone!”"
Alas, however, those sentiments are few and far between. And regardless of whether we vigorously support or actively oppose the foreign policy of this Administration, we have a profound duty to ourselves, our children and our national legacy, to exercise that atrophied muscle we call “freedom of speech” and publicly, and in the harsh light of day, examine what price we are willing to pay in order to keep it, together with the other liberties we routinely take for granted.
Where is the outrage, people?
Warren R. Graham is an attorney with the New York Law Firm of Cohen Tauber Spievack & Wagner LLP. He specializes in the field of Bankruptcy and Creditors’ Rights. Additional professional information on him may be found at http://www.ctswlaw.com.
E-mail: wgraham@ctswlaw.com
What You Need to Know About the Green Card Lottery
The diversity Immigrant Visa program or also known as, the green card lottery is a congressional mandated lottery program which gives out green cards. It is only done was a year by the Department of State and is conducted under the terms of Section 203 (c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. It has provided a new class of immigrants that are allowed in the United States. The program allows up to 50,000 permanent resident visas to go out annually to people from countries with low immigration rates to the United States.
A green card is one of the most important things to have in the United States; you should be prepared to get ripped off. If you ever hear that you have to pay a fee, you are in the process of being scammed, don’t ever offer to pay for the green card lottery. There is not fee to enter the lottery and the winners are chosen randomly. It doesn’t mean you become an instant citizen either. The lottery only allows you to apply. Rather you are accepted is to the judgment of the American Government.
To enter, you can log online to www.dvlottery.state.gov. This site is only up and running during the application period. You are required to give a picture and any pictures of children or spouse under 21 years old. They all must be separate, no group photos. The site will list the requirements of the photograph.
The entry period is usually from October to December, but check with the State Department for future lotteries. You can only submit one entry during a lottery. Spouses will get a Diversity Visa based on the fact that their partner was selected. The requirements to enter are: Bring from an eligible country and by meetings the educational or training requirements. For the 2007 lottery, people from the following countries may not apply; Canada, China (only if from Hong Kong, Macau, or Taiwan), Colombia, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Haiti, India, Jamaica, Mexico, Pakistan, Philippines, Poland, Russia, South Korea, United Kingdom (unless from Northern Ireland), and Vietnam.
You should always check with the State Department to determine your eligibility. As for the education, you will only need to complete a twelve-year course of elementary and secondary education. You will also be accepted if you have two years of working experience within an occupation from the past five years. Check the Department of Labor to determine if the work experience qualifies you.
As for the Scams, don’t trust anyone who says they are affiliated with the U.S. Government. Only the U.S. government conducts the Green card lottery. Also, don’t trust anyone who says they have expertise or a special entry form. All applicants fill out the same form. Don’t believe anything that sounds too good to be true like everyone qualifies or their company has an increase of winners. Everything is random and cannot offer anyone anything special.
Copyright 2006 - Ivar Rudi. Ivar suggests you find great market for less by shopping online today. For more information and resources about this subject check out: http://www.green-card-lottery-guide.org/
What is the Green Card Lottery About?
The green card lottery is where the Department of State annually awards green cards to immigrants. This is a lottery that is done by a random computer selection. The technical term for it is the Diversity Visa program. The people that conform to the rules and learn to speak English will be able to enter the lottery program.
This is a great way for people that want to become residents of the United States without having to wait for many years. The immigrants that want to apply will have to obtain an application so that they can fill out the necessary paperwork in order to become a legal candidate for this program. This is a once in a lifetime chance for a lot of people and they will take the opportunity very seriously.
You can find the application for this green card lottery online. There are many federal websites that will help people obtain the applications so that they can get a head start on applying for this great program. Once the application is filled out and sent in, it will have to be reviewed. Once the government approves it, that applicant will then be placed in the lottery. There are no paper entries allowed anymore. It all has to be done online or electronic.
There are 50,000 green cards that are given out to many immigrants from all over. These people have complied with all of the rules and taken the time to do all paperwork and make themselves eligible for the program. The individuals that apply must have a high school diploma and two years in an occupation requiring at least two years of training or experience.
Each applicant is limited to one application in the green card lottery. If there is more than one application received, the individual will be disqualified. It is important to follow the instructions and the rules completely. There are so many qualified people that are thrown out of the green card program each year because of the multiple applications that are submitted.
If qualified a husband and a wife may apply to the green card lottery. They may each submit one application and it either is selected into the lottery the other would be entitled to derivative status. This will allow both of them to be entered into the United States. All of the entries must include the name, date and place of birth of the applicant’s spouse and all natural children.
This is an opportunity that you have to sign up for early in the game or you may miss your chance for approval. It is something that most people only dream about and knowing that there is the green card lottery leaves hope in the minds of many people that they will one day be allowed the same freedom of living in the United States.
Copyright 2006 - Ivar Rudi. Ivar suggests you find great market for less by shopping online today. For more information and resources about this subject check out: http://www.green-card-lottery-guide.org/
Welcome To Fantofa Articles Directory
Welcome To Fantofa Articles Directory