Issue before Congress
Research an issue that is currently or will be before Congress and write a persuasive letter to either Sen. Klobuchar or Sen. Franken on how you think they should vote. Be sure to cite your information in your letter the way we normally do and to use at least 4 sources. Use the business letter format.
I look forward to seeing what issues you'll pick and what your opinions are.
Post is due Monday, 2/22. For class on Tuesday, 2/23 please bring your letter printed out to class so that I can send it to Klobuchar or Franken for you.
Labels: Congress
posted by M. Aby @ 7:06 AM
39 Comments:
Dear Mr. Franken,
I strongly urge you to pass the Openness in Health Care Legislation bill. The bill calls for “any meetings held to determine the final content of sweeping health care legislation” to be held in “public view and not behind closed doors.”(1) If the health care reform the Senate is now debating on is as a positive change for America as it has been portrayed by the President and many in your party, then there should be no need to hold behind-closed-doors meetings about it. However, there have been private meetings about the reform that are not available to the public and this should not be.(2) If we wish to preserve a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, then debate should be made in plain view of the public. The debate is not an issue of national security, in the sense that if information is made public then our nation will be at risk of an attack, so there is no need to hide what is being said. The issue, in fact, involves the public in a very large manner and therefore those who are going to be impacted the most by the change should be those most informed. How can the public be informed if they do not know what is being said?
The private debate also makes Congresspeople less accountable for their words and opinions.(3) In a day of age when I see less and less responsibility by politicians, letting those same people voice their opinions without any accountability is scary to say the least. Congress has no right to shy away from being held responsible.
There is a beginning to every slippery slope. If we allow these types of meetings now, what will come next? We may very well see a time when every piece of legislation is talked about in private and the public has no knowledge as to what is being discussed. If you truly want to represent the people that elected you then you would vote for this bill. The people who elected you and your colleagues did so because they have that right; they did so because they want their voices to be heard. Those people deserve to see what their representatives in Congress are talking about and what they are saying, in order to know whether or not they are truly being represented. With all this being said I am confident you will make the right decision. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Ben Levine
1-http://www3.capwiz.com/c-span/issues/bills/?bill=14596431
2-http://cnsnews.com/news/article/55440
3-http://blog.heritage.org/2010/01/05/morning-bell-a-sham-of-a-process-for-a-sham-of-a-bill/
Dear Senator Franken:
I am writing to strongly urge you to pass the Education Opportunity Act of 2009. This legislation would “expand educational opportunities for all Americans by increasing access to high-quality early childhood education, strengthening mathematics and science instruction, and ensuring that higher education is more affordable, and for other purposes” (1). I feel that it is a bill that would improve the quality of education for not only Minnesotans but for all Americans. Education is invaluable to the productivity of society, and I ask that you do all that is in your power to get this legislation passed.
Minnesota has one of the best public education systems in the nation. My entire K-12 education has been through Minnesota public schools, and I have been presented with every opportunity imaginable to further my education and become more of an intellectual person. You believe in fully funding our public schools, providing American children with small class sizes, well-maintained facilities, access to school supplies, and paying and treating teachers as the professionals that they really are (2). Senator Franken, I believe that all American children should have access to the same quality of education that Minnesotan children receive. There should be uniformity in the quality of education in America, and unfortunately this is not currently the case. The Education Opportunity Act would enhance access to high quality early childhood education, child care, and extended learning services (3). It would improve secondary and post-secondary graduation rates, improve educational standards and assessments, and give American children more science and mathematical instruction (3). This is something that I strongly believe is important and beneficial to all Americans.
Higher education is becoming more and more costly for American families every year. I know this all too well, starting my freshman year of college this coming fall. I consider myself lucky to be able to afford to go to college. Some of my peers are not as fortunate. By increasing Federal grant aid to students and their families and providing tax incentives to make higher education more affordable (1), my classmates who cannot afford to go to college will be able to also get a higher education. This would improve the overall productivity of our society.
Currently, this bill seems to have fallen flat in the Senate. It was recommended to be considered by the Senate on January 7, 2009 (4). Since then, no progress has been made on it. Though it is placed on a calendar of business, it’s unclear of when it will be formally considered (4). Senator Franken, I implore you to get this bill moving again through the Senate. It will be a long process, and a long time before the effects of this legislation will be felt in American schools. Yet I feel that this is absolutely necessary legislation that needs to be passed as soon as it is able. Education is an invaluable resource. In America, everyone should have access to a high quality education. I have faith that you will make the correct decision. I hope that you will do everything in your power to get this legislation passed. Thank you for your time and your consideration.
Sincerely,
Sólveig Hommema
(1)http://www.tgslc.org/hea/bills_111.cfm#S7
(2)http://www.alfranken.com/pages/education
(3)http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s7/show
(4)http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dear Senator Klobuchar,
I work for a medical supply company who provides standard power wheelchairs to you constituents with a medical need for a power wheelchair as prescribed to them by their physician. Most of the customers at my company choose to purchase the power wheelchair because they have a medical conditions that will require its use for the rest of their life to do things that other people take for granted (1). People who have a life-long need for a power wheelchair should have the option to purchase their power wheelchair because the chair that we provide them is not a commodity-type item; it is a medical device configured to meet their unique needs (1).
I urge you to convey support for preserving the first month purchase option for power wheelchairs to Majority leader Reid and Chairman Baucus via the Senate budget neutral alternative that would achieve the same level of savings from a series of phased in payment reductions of 3.5% in the years 2011-2014 (3). Many believe that eliminating the first month purchase option is a way of shaving cots but it comes with a detrimental cost to the patients (2). There currently is not a bill in the Senate that relates to the first month purchase option for power wheelchairs but there is in the House but one is currently being worked out in the Senate (4).
The American Association for Homecare's Complex Rehab and Mobility Council has developed an alternative that would keep the first month purchase option that they call the "claw back" (4). However, this alternative allows CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) to view a purchase as a rental and ask for their money back if the patient didn't use their wheelchair for a full thirteen months (4). Basically it allows them to give a wheelchair out and then take it back if anything such as death or the worsening of a degenerative condition occurs which could put a great stress on the patient and thier families. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Laura Semrad
1. http://capitol.medgroup.com/
2.http://enews.penton.com/enews/homecare/homecare_monday/2009_06_22_homecare_monday/display
3. http://democrats.senate.gov/leadership/
4. http://homecaremag.com/mobility/wheelchairs/first-month-pwc-elimination-20090803/
Dear Mr. Franken,
I strongly support your efforts to keep pushing the public option through the "reconciliation" (1). Senator Richard Trumka brings up a valid point concerning the Senate acting. I believe that he is right in saying the Senate needs to get the 51 votes first because the House doesn't have votes in order to start back up the public option. The vote lies within the Senate, and it will be much more convincing if the Senate gets enough votes because it forces the House to respond to act (3). Also, Senate support needs to come first because acting first means that the Senate may be able to form a better consensus on the bill that would be able to bring the best results. The Senate acting first has extreme potential because even the Democratic Whip James Clyburn believes that the House Democrats will follow the Senate in pushing the public option (3).
The public option system is worth fighting for because it gives the effort of the most bipartisanship while cracking open barriers for millions of Americans to receive life-saving health care. I agree with the statements you said about the public option being able to hold down costs, stop insurance tyranny, and make sure Minnesotans are covered quickly (1). The public option also tests out the effectiveness of the private insurance companies because the protectors are worried that if the program runs well, the private insurance companies will fail, but in my opinion health care isn't a business, it's a right, and the public option addresses the right full on because it proves what health care plan can covers the most Americans (2). This needs to happen at the federal level because the states' public option programs will be too decentralized and ineffective as we've seen with previous Medicaid workings. The most cost effective solution would be at the federal level, so this bill will need to happen quick in order to save billions of dollars due to state budgets and unclear regulations(4).
With the fiscal situation handled and bipartisanship apparent, the public option needs to be pursued. As I have shown through opinions of important Democrats and the benefits of the public option, I believe that your political views and willingness to help Minnesota, I have faith that you will wholeheartedly support the public option. Thank you for taking the time to read this letter.
Sincerely,
Devin Long
1. http://www.startribune.com/blogs/84632042.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUgOy9cP3DieyckcUsI
2. http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_public_option_and_the_hope_of_health_care_reform
3. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/26/trumka-to-senate-dems-pas_n_437729.html
4. http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:r2AQB0UDJ0wJ:www.law.berkeley.edu/files/chefs/Public_Option_Economic_Analysis.pdf+public+option+benefits&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a
Dear Senator Klobuchar,
I am pleased to read that you have been in support of the recently talked about Families for Orphans Act, and I would like to encourage you to keep pushing this legislation forward (3). According to UNICEF, about 143 million children live as orphans, and they need help from nations that can give it, like the United States (2). It would be very helpful if the United States could upgrade our current system of dealing with foreign adoptions, in order to help additional hopeless children be paired with eager American parents (2). Children are truly the future, and I think that although there are always many pressing issues that need to be addressed in Congress, this one should be pushed to the forefront.
I understand that since the recent Haiti crisis, this piece of legislation has gained even more attention. Since the earthquake, about 497 orphans have been brought to the United States, and officials are working on even more cases (1). It worries me that if the United States does not get more organized on this issue, many children’s lives could be endangered, and child trafficking could increase (4). It is clear that the first choice for many of these children would be to stay in Haiti with relatives or guardians that are capable of providing them with a solid home, however, I think that the option of adoption to American parents is a very good one, and should be offered to those in need (1). I realize that at this time the situation in Haiti is very difficult, and it is hard to classify children as being orphans because many may just be separated from their families (1). This to me is just another reason to get this act passed, because the United States could play a vital role in helping these orphaned children. I think it seems very reasonable that the United States would add an office to the State Department to deal with these issues, and it will ultimately be another way to help Haiti, and to help orphans all around the world (4).
Thank you for your time, and I hope the Families for Orphans Act get passed in the near future.
Sincerely,
Kelsey Derby
1. http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/26/haiti.orphans/index.html?iref=allsearch
2. http://www.jcics.org/families%20for%20orphans.htm
3. http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3070/show
4. http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/01/27/haiti.orphans.overview/index.html?iref=allsearch
Dear Senator Franken:
I am writing you in hopes of persuading you to vote no on the current Health Care bill. As an aspiring doctor I find this issue on the the most important issues as I head off to college. Although this bill is attempting to aid the American people, it is falling short of the real reform we need. The current bill will increase costs and hurt the already damaged economy.
As of now there is a "Cadillac" tax being offered which would tax high end plans. The fact that unions are now excluded from the initial tax puts most of the burden for paying for the health care overhaul on small businesses and the wealthy. This deal for union comes at the expense of those who have to buy medial devices or prescriptions or have to send a family member to a nursing home [1]. Also since this excise tax is structured like a sales tax, it would be passed on to the consumer, increase premiums. In addition to this excise tax, insurance companies would be have a minimum Medical Loss Ration (MLR). This would require the company to spend at least 85% of the premium collected or rebate it to the policyholder. This would leave only 15% for taxes, making it almost impossible for the company to pay the 40% tax on "cadillac" plans [2]. Mandates would also cause an increase in price. Because their is now a required minimum, premiums will increase with the number of required mandates. On average a state imposes about 35 mandates which push premiums up about $1,294 per year [3].
This bill will also have a large effect on jobs and small business. The current bill would impose new costs on businesses regardless if they cover their employees or choose to take the fee [4]. The mandate structure in the House bill would take away incentives to hire new workers or expanded, which we desperately need in our current situation [4]. In the Senate version, firms with fewer than 25 workers would still be subject to the tax penalty if they do not offer insurance [4]. In order to off-set these new costs, firms would have to do one or more of the following: firing some of their labor force, putting more weight in part-time workers or contract workers, or containing wages [4]. On average small businesses would see an increase in premiums of about 19% within the first five years [5]. By 2019, premiums would have increased 28% on firms with fewer than 50 workers [5]. Unlike large corporations who can spread the cost through many employees, small businesses would have to 18% more in premiums than there larger counterparts [5]. There is also a surtax of 5.4% being proposed for individuals who make $500,000 and families who make $1 million [5]. On top of that small businesses would have to pay a payroll of 8% if one of their employees declined coverage, even if they got the coverage from elsewhere [6]. This would be 8% of the business' average salary, not the employee's. Obviously the more costs put on small businesses, the less likely they are to hire or keep employees. With unemployment so high these mandates would just hurt possible growth.
The bill is also opposed by a majority of doctors. two of every three practicing physicians oppose what is Washington is proposing [7]. "72% of the doctors polled disagree with the administration's claim that the government can cover 47 million more people with better-quality care at lower cost" [7]. Although supported by the American Medical Association, the bill has little support from doctors. 45% of those polled said they would consider leaving their practice or retiring early should the current bill pass [7]. The population is growing faster than doctors are being added to the field. the bill would increase patient loads by 18% without adding any new doctors (there is a steady decline in medical school enrollment since 1980). [7]. With just the current demand, there will be 159,000 fewer doctors in 2025 [7]. Even with the current system there is not enough doctors. And with the amount of time it takes to get through medical school, it would be difficult to add doctors into the system immediately. Britain has to import it's doctors from foreign countries because of the extreme lack of doctors. One third of their primary care physicians are flown into the country to practice [7].
Massachusetts passed an overhaul similar to the one currently being proposed. For the fourth straight year they have had a shortage of family and internal medicine. The percentage of primary care practices closed to new patients is the highest its ever been. seven of 18 specialties (dermatology, neurology, urology, vascular surgery, and obstetrics-gynecology) are in short supply. [7]. The premiums in Massachusetts alone are rising 22% faster that the whole United States [7].
I hope you will consider some of these facts when making your decision for your final vote. This is an extremely important issue, especially for Minnesota. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Jackie Heitzman
[1] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704281204575003040695279432.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_HealthCareReform26_4
[2] http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/wm2774.cfm
[3] http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=521533&Ntt=health+care
[4] http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/wm2753.cfm
[5] http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=511634&Ntt=health+care
[6] http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=482989&Ntt=small+business
[7] http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=506199
Dear Senator Klobuchar,
I strongly encourage you to vote for the first of many job-creation bills that will be up for voting on Monday February 22nd. "The chamber will vote on whether to proceed with a $15 billion measure that includes a one-year Social Security tax break for companies hiring new employees who have been out of work for at least 60 days. The package also would reauthorize the Highway Trust Fund, allow companies to write off equipment purchases, and expand Build America Bonds, which help state and local governments fund infrastructure projects" (1). These kinds of bills are absolutely necessary for the economy we are facing today. Jobs need to help be created in order to get our economy back on track. Although not everyone is satisfied with what the Recovery Act did last year, I believe that this jobs bill will be an up lift for economy. Although there is a lot of controversary between Republicans and Democrats right now whether the Recoverary Act of last year even did anything for the economy something needs to be done. On "The Democratic National Committee says of the stimulus anniversary that it's "doing exactly what it was intended to do" and said that Republicans are "willing to play politics with our economic security even when our economy was at the brink of collapse, preferring to see the president fail than to see the economy succeed" (3). I think everything possible that Congress can do at this point would be smart to do. Now is not the time for the blame game. ""The debate of whether or not the stimulus has in fact 'stimulated' our economy will continue for months, and possibly years to come," he wrote in a CNN.com commentary. "But the picture in Phoenix, Arizona, is clear: Because of ARRA, key projects are under way, our environment is improving and thousands of people are going back to work" (3). More of this needs to happen, therefore voting yes to creating more jobs will only do good for the economy. "Democrats are concerned that by breaking up the bills, Mr Reid has increased the chance that other important items, like topping up aid to the states and unemployment benefits, may go down to defeat" (4). Although many of these bills are going to be split up, passing all of them is crucial in order to get everything accomplished. A total value of around 80 billion seems reasonable for what Congress needs to push to get accomplished in this upcoming year of 2010, which is to get the economy back on track. I see that you made this statement on your website "I'm committed to working for economic policies that benefit all Americans. This means having a strong economy and a laser focus on job creation, affordable health care, homegrown energy and a federal budget that pays our way rather than piling up debt for future generations" (2). I hope you stand by this statement and vote yes for the job bill that will be voted on the 22nd. Thanks for your time.
Sincerely,
Julia Gross
1-http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/21/AR2010022103272.html
2-http://klobuchar.senate.gov/middleclass.cfm
3-http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/02/17/economic.stimulus.2010/index.html
4-http://www.economist.com/world/united-states/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15546365&source=hptextfeature
In summary Senator Franken, there needs to be action taken on the Supreme Court Case, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, immediately because the effects of the decision on the political areas will leave an unfair opportunity for corporations. Corporations are not individuals; they are a “superficial superficial network of people” (6). I thank you for your time in reading this and I hope to hear of a congressional movement to overturn the Supreme Court decision in the near future.
Sincerely,
Derek Landseidel
1) http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122805666&ps=rs
2) http://www.fox6now.com/news/witi-100121-campaign-finance,0,4497793.story
3) http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122843894
4) http://www.congress.org/news/2010/01/22/dems_have_few_options_on_court_ruling
5) Government in America AP Edition
6) https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=1594687385816014274
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Dear Senator Franken,
I am writing to you in regards of your idea for the reconciliation of the public option. I strongly urge you to reconsider this idea. The fact that the Democrats were unable to pass a bill with a 60 vote majority makes me wonder why you want to put so much effort into something that not all Democrats agree with. With reconciliation you only need 51 votes to pass the bill (1). Only needing 51 votes could make it easier to pass the bill, but do you really think that something as big as the country’s health care plan should be decided by the least majority possible? I don’t, I think the country’s health care plan should be supported by a majority of the public, not only by the majority of one party.
Senator Harry Reid has also recently approved of this idea of the reconciliation. He said he will “work with the White House and Democratic lawmakers to try to craft a public option that can overcome obstacles such as a bill-killing GOP filibuster” (2). To me this idea of reconciliation is an excuse for not getting the bill passed in the first place. The Democrats had a 60 vote majority to pass the bill, preventing any Republican filibuster, meaning this idea of reconciliation was not needed, but somehow a bill was never passed. Now with reconciliation, Democrats have a second chance to pass their bill, but after many months of debate, there is still no agreement. In another article Senator Reid said he will “craft a public option that can overcome procedural obstacles and secure enough to vote” (3). Yet again I wonder why after months of the majority in the Senate that, after losing that 60 vote majority there is a belief that now things will finally get passed.
President Obama recently said “we have to move forward on a vote” (4). He also suggested a few ways to get to a vote; one of those ways was similar to what happened in the days preceding Christmas Eve, which really did nothing. I think the best thing for you to do at this point is to focus more on the broad ideas. As of now it is clear that the Republicans are not going to support either the House or the Senate bill, so instead on trying to get public option back into the picture, find a plan that is more widely supported. This most likely means that many things will have to be taken out of the current bills to make them more widely acceptable, but it is also just the beginning. By passing a broader and more widely accepted bill, changes to the country’s health care plan has began, and will make it that much easier to focus on the more controversially debated proposals. I sincerely hope you reconsider your thoughts on the health care bill and I thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Kayla Meyer
1. http://www.startribune.com/blogs/84632042.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUgOy9cP3DieyckcUsI
2. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/19/AR2010021904215.html
3. http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/82491-public-option-revival-movement-gains-steam
4. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/06/health/policy/06health.html
Senator Klobuchar,
It is essential that you vote to pass the Employment Non-discrimination Act of 2009. This act would prohibit discrimination in employment based on sexual orientation or gender identity (1). America is supposed to be about equal opportunity for all, and the rejection of this specific legislation would deny all that America stands for. It is only fair that men and women, whether they be gay, straight, bisexual or transgender all have the same opportunities, especially in employment (as it applies in this case). There is no conflict on this issue between being gay and religion, because the bill would not apply to religious organizations (2). Seemingly the only argument ever against gay rights, religion, would not be an issue in the passage of this Act. I can think of no legitimate reason for you to vote against this piece of legislation, Mrs. Klobuchar.
There are currently twenty-one states that already offer such discrimination protections (3). I believe, however, that such employment discrimination should be protected by the 14th “equal protection to the states” amendment. This law, although particular states chose to support it, should be supported by the federal government as well. The constitution protects everyone from discrimination, and this needs to be implicated to gender orientation and gender identity as well.
As of now, this Act is not very publicly debated and known, but if you failed to support such an American cause, surely it would be a score for the media. Again, opposition to this bill would label you and all others who vote against it as homophobic, and anti-equality, and I don’t think you want those titles. As of now, it is estimated that there are currently 8.8 million gay, lesbian and bisexual people in the United States (5) as well as 1% of the population are transgender (6). That is a substantial amount of people, and to simply deny them employment protections ensured to that of straight people would be discrimination, which is not okay. Now I understand that some requirements are needed for certain jobs, but ones gender orientation has no effect on job performance whatsoever. Just as in Reed v. Reed where gender discrimination was deemed unconstitutional, gender orientation discrimination would no doubt also be found unconstitutional if such a case were to make it to the Supreme Court. In this way, it would be intelligible to pass the ENDA now, so that you aren’t put to shame and forced to pass it later.
The issue of gender orientation and gender identity is no different than that of discrimination between blacks and whites. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 created the EEOC which prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin (4). Why should sexual orientation and gender identity be any different than the above attributes? They shouldn’t. In this regard I strongly advise you to vote in favor of, and pass the Employment Non-discrimination Act of 2009. Thank you for your time, Senator.
Sincerely,
Courtney Iden
(1) http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:SN01584:@@@D&summ2=m&
(2) http://www.hrc.org/laws_and_elections/enda.asp
(3) http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/promise/291/expand-the-employment-non-discrimination-act-to-in/
(4) http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/civil-rights-act/
(5) http://gaylife.about.com/od/comingout/a/population.htm
(6) http://www.hrc.org/issues/9598.htm
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Citations:
1. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/21/supreme-court-sides-hillary-movie-filmmakers-campaign-money-dispute/
2. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/17/AR2010021701151.html
3. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_ts1137
4. http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/kerry-supreme-court-campaign/2010/02/02/id/348781
Dear Senator Klobuchar:
I am writing to ask you to reconsider your stand on the “don’t ask don’t tell” policy of gays in the military. I urge you to support the ban on this unfair, 17-year-old law, which bans gays from serving openly in the military (1). As President Obama has said, the law unfairly punishes patriots who only want to serve their country (1). The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mike Mullen, also agrees, saying the law unfairly forces gay troops to compromise their integrity by lying (2). These leaders are looking for a plan and a way to allow gays and lesbians to serve openly in the armed forces, thinking carefully about implementation and execution of the plan (1). They want to ensure that the changes aren’t too disruptive and allow time for troops to get used to the idea (4).
Reversing the military’s policy on gays would require an act of Congress and would be as big of a change as the 1984 executive order on racial integration in the military, yet it is one that needs to be done (3). Many Republicans and those on the fence about the issue have said they will support the ban if the army commanders support it. The head of U.S. Central Command, General David Petraeus, who oversees the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, has said that he supports the plan to move ahead cautiously (1). Petraeus has stated that troops in the field are not worried about the sexual orientation of their fellows, and that he has served alongside gays and lesbians (1). Petraeus believes skill matters more than sexual orientation (1).
It is important that you support this ban on “don’t ask don’t tell” if it is to get passed in the Senate. Democrats want to repeal the ban, but it is unclear whether they have the 60 votes needed. This is an issue that needs to be looked at, and the argument that implementation is “too hard” is not a valid one. A new study was recently released by Palm Center, a research group at the University of California, Santa Barbara (4). The study was on foreign militaries that have made transitions to allowing openly gay service members, and concluded that a speedy implementation of the change is not disruptive, contrary to the stated views of Pentagon leaders, who say repealing the ban would take a year or more (4). The report found that “there were no instances of increased harassment” as a result of lifting the bans in any of the countries that were studied (4). Openly gay members also did not cause large resignations or undermine moral (4).
Obviously, the only thing holding the United States back at this point is a reluctance to accept the gay and lesbian population. This goes back to the same kind of discrimination we forced upon African Americans; not allowing them to ride buses with whites and not allowing them to serve in the armed forces along with whites. This is an abomination of the principles this country was founded upon, and I urge you to support the ban on this policy. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Sarah Marti
(1) http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/congress/84903752.html?page=1&c=y
(2) http:/www.aurorasentinel.com/articles/2010/02/21/opinion/editorials/doc4b81c0f5aef59900298166.txt
(3) http://www.9and10news.com/Category/Story/?id=207755&cID=3
(4) http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/22/world/americas/22gays.html
Dear Senator Franken –
My name is Katie Jacobson and I am a senior this year at Jefferson High School in Bloomington, Minnesota. I implore you to support the Education Opportunity Act as proposed by Senator Harry Reid this past January [9]. Given today’s global and domestic, as well as economic and educational, atmosphere, the United States needs to take action in order to stay a leading world power.
The first part of this bill is “…increasing access to high-quality early childhood education and expanding child care, after school, and extended learning opportunities;” [1] Countless scientific research supports that fundamental learning occurs from birth until age five, including linguistic and cognitive gains, as well as emotional, social, regulatory and moral capacity progress [2]. The research done by Pre-K Now supports the fact that if children begin school without preparation, they may actually never perform as well as nor along with their already prepared peers [2]. This causes such a problem that “…Each year, more than 200,000 children repeat kindergarten” [2].
The second part of the Education Opportunity Act is “…improving accountability and assessment measures for elementary and secondary school students, increasing secondary school graduation rates, and supporting elementary and secondary school improvement efforts;” [1]. In 2006, fourteen states had high school graduation rates as low as 50.5% - 66.0% [3]. That is equivalent to 28% of our nation. According to a study by the Alliance for Excellent Education, conducted in 2009, more than 7,000 students become dropouts for each school day every year, translating into more than 1.3 million students who will not graduate as scheduled [4]. This also translates into a startling figure: if the dropouts from the Class of 2009 had graduated, the United States economy would have benefitted from nearly $335 billion dollars over those graduates’ lifetimes [4].
Thirdly, this bill calls for “…strengthening teacher preparation, induction, and support in order to recruit and retain qualified and effective teachers in high-need schools;” [1]. Unfortunately, the number of teachers leaving education is increasing [5]. Many teachers report leaving their profession due to low salaries and poor working conditions [5]. Sadly, many teachers leave teaching after only five years [5]. As the population continues to increase, the demand for teachers does as well.
The fourth part of the Education Opportunity Act is “…enhancing the rigor and relevance of State academic standards and encouraging innovative reform at the middle and high school levels;” while the fifth part of the act is “…strengthening mathematics and science curricula and instruction;” [1]. Currently, the United States “…trails behind [Singapore, Taiwan, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Hong Kong, Sweden, the Netherlands, Hungary and Slovenia] in average mathematics scores” according to a 2007 study conducted by the U.S. Department of Education [6]. This feeds a great concern that “…fewer college graduates will become physicians, scientists, or engineers” [6]. Although the United States has improved its ranking in education slightly, it is reported that the United States “…still cannot compete with its Asian counterparts… [and that this will put the United States] at a competitive [economic] disadvantage worldwide” [6].
Finally, the sixth part of this bill calls for “…increasing Federal grant aid for students and the families of students, improving the rate of postsecondary degree completion, and providing tax incentives to make higher education more affordable” [1]. In President Obama’s State of the Union Address for 2010, President Obama declared, “…because in the United States of America, no one should go broke because they chose to go to college” [7]. Between the 2008-2009 school year and the 2009-2010 school year, the average cost for college tuition and fees has increased between 4.1% for a private doctorate-granting college and 7.3% for a public two year college [8]. Other types of colleges – such as a public four year in-state college (6.5%) and a private four year college (4.4%) – fall between the 4.1% and 7.3% percentage increase range [8].
There is overwhelming evidence that the Education Opportunity Act need to be passed into law. If the United States hopes to continue leading the world, we need to be academically prepared. Our current educational system is not meeting the demands of today’s world: the United States must revise its education system in order to remain a major world power. Therefore, I urge you and the rest of Congress to support the Education Opportunity Act.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Katie Jacobson
Sources:
1) http://www.centeroncongress.org/lesson_plans/dlp_bill_education_opportunity.pdf
2) http://www.ascd.org/publications/newsletters/infobrief/vol15/issue4/full/Making_High-Quality_Early_Education_a_Priority@_Starting_at_the_Beginning.aspx
3) http://www.higheredinfo.org/dbrowser/index.php?measure=23
4) http://www.all4ed.org/publication_material/GradDropout_Rates
5) http://educationalissues.suite101.com/article.cfm/nea__todays_teacher_issues
6) http://www.realonlinedegrees.com/education-rankings-by-country/
7) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTMrs9vpoqg
8) http://education-portal.com/articles/Average_College_Costs_on_the_Rise.html
9) http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s7/show
Dear Senator Klobuchar,
I am writing to urge you to vote in favor of the American Clean Energy And Security Act of 2009, which is designed to create clean energy jobs, move towards cleaner technology, become energy independent, and reduce global warming (1). The act has successfully passed in the House of Representatives and just needs a Senate majority to vote in its favor before it can pass (2).
I believe that America must be a leader in limiting global emissions and climate change. In order to do this, legislation must be passed to ensure that we are taking appropriate steps in the right direction. This bill would create new, clean energy jobs that would lower the cost of current energy sources by using solar, wind and biomass energy, increase the amount of jobs in America by roughly 1.7 million, and dramatically reduce our dependence on foreign oil and other resources (3). It is clear by these estimates that passing global-improvement bills such as the American Clean Energy and Security Act will benefit more than just our environment; it will help boost our economy and the lives of millions of Americans.
By using renewable energy sources that are cleaner and more efficient, we reduce the impact that fossil fuels have on the environment. These impacts include polluting the air and water, damaging and killing various plants and animal life, creating toxic wastes, and causing global warming (4). All of these dangerous effects to our environment can be avoided. It is no easy task to get the nation and the world on board with promoting clean energy and living greener, but with help from our government and Congress, I believe that America can be a successful leader in reducing emissions and improving our environment. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Alyssa Brown
(1): http://edlabor.house.gov/blog/2009/07/safra-reliable-affordable-coll.shtml
(2): http://edlabor.house.gov/ newsroom/2009/07/chairman-miller-introduces-leg.shtml
(3): http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/16/us/16college.html
(4): http://articles.moneycentral. msn.com/CollegeAndFamily/CutCollegeCosts/HowMuchCollegeDebtIsTooMuch.aspx
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Dear Mr. Franken,
I am writing to you concerning the debate over the repeal of the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy. It is my opinion that this policy goes against American ideals and should be repealed. Although some have advocated the use of an exectuvie order to get rid of the policy, the ultimate decision will most likely be Congress' responsibility. That said, it is imperative you vote to repeal the policy.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates has recently spoken to the media about Don't Ask Don't Tell. Among his comments, he says, "I am mindful ... that attitudes towards homosexuality may have changed considerably -- both in society generally and in the military [since 1993]" (1). He is correct. There is less of a stigma around homosexuality. Consider a recent Zogby International poll of returning Iraq and Afghanistan veterans that found that 73 percent were personally comfortable around gays and lesbians (3). The poll was taken in 2006, and the percent has probably risen since. I am particularly fond of a remark made by Senator Barry Goldwater, who said, "You don’t have to be straight in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight" (2).
The biggest counterargument to the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell seemes to be that it would lessen the effectiveness of the military. Senator John McCain says, "Has this policy been ideal? No, it has not. But it has been effective." However, not everyone agrees. General Colin Powell has switched sides in this issue, having once supported Don't Ask Don't Tell and now condemning it. He says, "the principal issue has always been the effectiveness of the Armed Forces and order and discipline in the ranks," but argues the opposite of McCain, advocating the fact that there will be no significant drop in military efficacy (4). Thank you for your time in reading this letter and please consider everything mentioned above if and when the time comes to vote regarding this issue.
Sincerely,
Matt Ervin
1. http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/02/02/gays.military/index.html
2. http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/06/dont_ask_dont_tell.html
3. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/02/02/gates-backs-repeal-dont-ask-dont-tell/
4. http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/03/powell-favors-repeal-of-dont-ask-dont-tell/
4001 W. 102nd Street
Bloomington, MN 55437
February 22, 2010
Al Franken
320 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Franken,
First of all, I would like to congratulate you on your election into the Senate. I would also like to commend you on your continued support of healthcare reform. It appears that you have voted in support of any sort of health reform policy, including adding some amendments to the Senate Health Care Bill (1). I want you to know how important you vote is, with millions of people still uninsured the United States needs a comprehensive Healthcare Bill (2). The point of the matter is that we need to cut down on the $2.2 trillion dollars we spend on healthcare, and by creating a comprehensive healthcare plan we could possibly do just that (2).
Senator Franken, I want you to continue to push for healthcare reform. While many people are concerned about the economy and unemployment, I think that the priority should be passing healthcare (for now at least). By decreasing the cost of healthcare by 1%, nationwide 320,000 jobs will be created (3). That sure sounds like a way to help the unemployment rate doesn’t it? And by cutting down by just this one percent, the average family would have an extra $6,800 in their pocket per year (3). I urge you to pass a healthcare market exchange, such a market would drive down the cost of premiums across the board, and make all healthcare more affordable (3).
Now on to another current issue, your argument with David Axelrod. I think that you had every right to complain about the lack of informing the public (4). I think it is your obligation to bring these sorts of things up with the senior staff. Your main job is to serve your constituents, and passing healthcare reform is probably in their best interest, but if your constituents don’t believe that healthcare reform is in their best interest then you’re kind of stuck between a rock and a hard place. I think that it is in your best interest to make sure that your constituents understand the healthcare reform bill. In that sense I am glad that you are our Senator, we don’t need some wishy-washy sit in the back quietly Senator, we need a Senator who will stand up for what is best for Minnesotans. I urge you to continue to fight to educate the rest of us on the healthcare reform bill, and see if you can (with the help from other Senators) get the White House to chart a course to get healthcare reform passed and onto the President’s desk (4).
In conclusion, I want you to continue to support healthcare reform and fight for your constituents. I want you to continue to not be some quiet Senator sitting in the back twiddling his thumbs, I want you to be up in front fighting for us Minnesotans back home. I want you to continue to work to get healthcare reform passed, and help all Americans in the process. I thank you for your service to Minnesotans and the rest of the United States. I wish you the best of luck with your goals.
Sincerely,
Claire Leitgen
vote-smart.org
whitehouse.gov
http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/families/index.html
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0210/32561.html
Dear Senator Klobuchar:
My name is Leah Gustafson and I am a senior at Thomas Jefferson High School in Bloomington, Minnesota. I am writing to urge you to support the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act. As a future college student I'm faced with the complicated choice of where to go to school and how much I'm willing to pay for my education. My family lives comfortably and works hard, but it is nearly impossible for me to afford the rising costs of some distinguished college educations. I know that I am not alone with this struggle, since two-thirds of american students borrow money to pay for their college education [3], so I urge you to vote ‘yes’ to the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act. This act would benefit most students who require a loan to pay for college, and allow them to get the loan at a lower cost with a more stable loan because the process is taken back from private lenders [2].
The bill would also expand the availability if aid to low-income students through expanding the Perkins Loan Program and help middle class families by qualifying them for Pell Grants [2]. The bill provides a gradual increase of the Pell grant scholarship in accordance with the rising cost of living [3]. It will increase from 5,350 now to 5550 in 2010, and to 6,900 by 2019 [3]. For too long private lenders have been able to prey on college students charging them unfair interest rates, and sporadically raising them in the middle of their college education. Our community benefits from having college graduates in the workforce, but with the rising costs some students are unable to afford the education. The bill expands online education, and improves many community colleges, giving more opportunities to student from low-income families, which improves our 21st century workforce [1]. Best of all is that the Congressional Budget Office estimates that this new bill will save taxpayers $87 billion over ten years by switching to the cheaper direct loan program, and it would also reduce entitlement spending by over $10 billion [1].
Along with benefitting college students and their families, this bill also provides about $8 billion for early-childhood programs, and $2.55 billion for historically black colleges and universities [4]. Its important for america to achieve president Obama’s goal as returning once again to our place as number one in the world in adults with college degrees, and this is not only accomplished through loans. More and more of the middle class and low-income families have found it harder and harder to afford a college education. With expensive loans and little to no aid college is no longer an option for some students. I strongly urge you to pass the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act, which will help these students.
[1]. http://edlabor.house.gov/blog/2009/07/student-aid-and-fiscal-respons.shtml
[2]. http://www.youthradio.org/news/what-is-student-aid-and-fiscal-responsibility-act
[3]. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/18/education/18educ.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=Student%20Aid%20and%20Fiscal%20Responsibility%20Act&st=cse
[4]. http://themiddleclass.org/bill/student-aid-and-fiscal-responsibility-act-2009
Dear Mr. Franken:
I strongly urge you to support the upcoming legislation that amends the Higher Education Act of 1965, also know as bill number H.R.3221 (1). This bill was recently referred to a Senate committee and will soon be open for discussion on the Senate floor. The bill authorizes the measures necessary to fully maximize Pell Grant amounts beginning in 2010, which consist of federal aid to needy families for a college education. Also included in the proposed legislation are programs such as the College Access Challenge Grant program and the Completion National Activities program, which help families afford college tuition throughout the duration of the years without suffering from changing economic circumstances (1). Other aspects of this legislation include a Quality Assurance Program, which provides tools that allow institutions to promote better services to students and sustain continual support in the form of financial aid (2). These exceptional programs are some of the numerous beneficial facets of this bill.
Amendments to the Higher Education Act of 1965 have already been added, commencing the process of supply more aid. Recent developments have added scholarships to any student who had a parent die in active duty in the war overseas (3). Legislation has also included expanding research for techniques of expanding financial aid and providing student services without increasing government costs. President Obama has set forth strong goals of increasing Pell Grant tuition programs to just under $35 billion, a $12 billion dollar increase from previous years (4). The President’s strong support of these programs demonstrates their importance and emphasizes the fact that they should be supported and passed by members of Congress.
It is of the highest importance that this bill is passed. As a college-bound senior in high school I am experiencing first-hand the difficulty of finding an affordable college and being able to attend an institution for four years, as are a number of my classmates. Our generation of young adults is the future of our country, and without an education we will be unable to contribute and our society will fall apart in a number of years. Although it is difficult to see anything but the present, we must look ahead to the future and preserve the well-being of our country by assisting poor families in sending their children to college.
It is also a complex issue of individual rights. Should families with a more advantageous economic position be able to send their children to receive higher education while families who are disadvantaged cannot? This is unfair, as everyone has the right to a higher education and the chance to contribute to society after earning a degree. These are students who work extremely hard in their studies, are active members of their communities, and demonstrate financial need.
Once again, I strongly urge you to support the upcoming amendments to the Higher Education Act of 1965 that expand the federal aid given to college students. Although the country is experiencing a time of economic difficulty, this is an issue that must be given attention and assistance if our country is to continue operating the way we know it.
Sincerely,
Carissa Valeri
Student of Thomas Jefferson Senior High School
1.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/thomas
2.
http://www2.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/announcements/2005-2/040605a.html
3.
http://chronicle.com/article/Congress-Approves-Technical/47800
4.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35184587/ns/politics-white_house/page/2/print/1/displaymode/1098
Dear Ms. Klobuchar:
I am writing in support of the Education Opportunity Act of 2009. This bill is intended to “expand educational opportunities for all Americans,” as well as trying to make higher education more affordable for everyone (1). Education is a critical necessity in our country, and the more education people receive, the better you set the nation up for the future. I believe that Sen. Reid has the right intentions in mind with this act, and I urge you to help bring the bill to the forefront of the Senate’s calendar (2).
Education is an issue that affects every American for better or for worse. Throughout my K-12 experience in Bloomington’s public schools, I have had what I consider to be a substantial and supportive education, despite obstacles on the way. Opportunities have been presented to me that not every student is fortunate to have, and I am very grateful for the teachers and individuals who brought my education from teaching to a test to teaching to learn. I know you understand your own opinions far better than I do, but I do know that you support an individualized education, as well as good facilities, class sizes, and teachers that truly want to help (4). By assisting in a well-rounded education, this bill will help to assist in making Minnesota the truly remarkable place it is.
The bill itself I almost completely support. First and foremost I agree with Section 2 part 6 of the bill, which states that the bill will “…increase Federal grant aid for students and families of students…” and “…[provide] tax incentives to make higher education more affordable,” (3). Being a high school senior and leaving for college this fall, I understand the burden that a college education places on students and families firsthand. Through this bill, I hope that many more families like my own will be able to be helped a bit to get through the initial pains of going to college. I don’t believe any individual should be punished or be in debt for going to college. I also agree heartily with the policies in the bill about early education. Providing quality education early in children’s lives makes such a difference in so many ways about how they act when they grow older. The Education Opportunity Act would create easier access to early childhood education, as well as extended learning services (3). This coupled with benefits for students and children of all ages makes this bill a necessity in today’s America.
I know that this bill has been stalled in the Senate, and is currently on what seems to be an indefinite hold. I urge you to remember the students that would benefit so greatly from this bill, and to pressure Congress to step up and take the issue into their own hands.
1) http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s7/show
2) http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-7
3) http://www.centeroncongress.org/lesson_plans/dlp_bill_education_opportunity.pdf
4) http://klobuchar.senate.gov/issues.cfm
Dear Senator Franken,
I am writing this letter because I want you to consider the 46 million Americans who are currently without health insurance (1). Because of this fact, it is crucial that America develops some sort of public option or government run health insurance. There have been rumors that your fellow Senator Harry Reid has been pushing for the public option to be put through reconciliation, and I urge you to join him (2).
President Obama has been urging Congress to side with him and pass a sweeping new health care legislation for months. The fight has been long and arduous, but I plead that you do not give in to popular pressures and think of the increasing number of struggling Americans. Health care bills are currently the number one reason why someone goes bankrupt in America (3). Our country spends more money per capita on health care than any other nation, yet we are ranked 37th in the world behind such countries as Morocco and Costa Rica (4). We spend an inordinate amount of money on this issue, yet we still are not able to cover all of our citizens. This is a disgrace to everything that we consider American, and needs to be addressed immediately.
Something important to remember is that this is a growing issue. America’s population is constantly increasing, and this problem is only going to get worse and worse. It sounds cliché, but I don’t want to have to tell my grandchildren that America had the opportunity to help millions of people gain the most important security of all, health, and passed it up. The chance to do something great is still there, and I suggest you take that chance.
Sincerely,
Chris Shirriff
(1) http://www.usnews.com/blogs/erbe/2009/08/20/what-is-the-actual-number-of-americans-without-health-insurance.html
(2) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/19/reid-will-push-for-public_n_469483.html
(3) http://voices.washingtonpost.com/health-care-reform/2009/06/new_study_shows_medical_bills.html
(4) http://www.thefreemanonline.org/featured/ranking-the-us-health-care-system/
Dear Senator Klobuchar,
I am writing you to express my support for the new House Jobs Bill that was recently introduced for debate. I understand that leaders in Washington are planning on several economic recovery packages over the next few months, and I think this would be a good first step. I believe that the stimulus package that you passed last year has made progress in improving the economic well being of the country. According to economists, the stimulus prevented a recession and created about 2.5 million jobs (1). Obama has called for a continuing effort to fight unemployment. The average unemployment rate per state right now is at 9.7 percent right now (2). While Minnesota is slightly less at 7.3 percent, I think it is important that your focus is the country as a whole, not just the state. (3).
Mr. Pawlenty has been quick to call out this new jobs bill. He has said that the bill will be a waste of money that will just create larger government (4). Now I am not an advocate of large government, but if there was ever a time for it to be introduced, I think this would be it. If Obama and economists think that stimulating the economy through government spending, then we should at least consider their request. Republicans will be quick to call out that spending will only increase the budget deficit. However, what they need to realize is that this spending is temporary and won’t contribute to the deficit long-term (1).
This bill will also be an opportunity to show bipartisanship that Americans desire to see. Obama promised to work harder with Republicans in his State of the Union Address. The Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, said he would like to open the bill up for debate and amend it (4). This will be a chance to find a compromise between both parties. What you come out with may not be the amount that Democrats originally wanted, but this bill will be a step forward. The Jobs Bill doesn’t have to solve all of the countries problems, but why not try to solve a few of them?
Sincerely,
Dan Larson
Bloomington, MN
1. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/20/opinion/20sat1.html
2. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/18/us/politics/18obama.html
3. http://www.bls.gov/bls/unemployment.htm
4. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/22/us/politics/22govs.html?ref=politics
4733 W 111th St
Bloomington, MN 55437
February 21, 2010
Senator Al Franken
DC Office
320 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Franken:
I strongly encourage you to pass legislation in response to the latest Supreme Court ruling concerning campaign financing. In a recent poll done by the Washington Post, it said that 80 of poll respondents opposed the ruling, with 65 percent that answered they “strongly opposed” (1). Not only are these results shockingly high, but there is also strong disapproval across party lines with 85 percent of Democrats and 76 percent of Republicans (1). These results show how much bipartisan support there is against this ruling, and that many Congressmen and women would be interested in passing new legislation to solve the issue, making the process way quicker.
If legislation is not passed before the next election, there will only be more interest group influence, which I believe has hurt out political system (1). Interest group influence strays legislators away from their true beliefs because they feel they have to support their campaign donors, especially those that donating the largest amounts of money. This prevents legislation from being productive for many reasons, but most importantly it is not what the legislators were elected to do. They are elected to voice the opinion of the people by representation, the root of democracy. If this does not happen because the representatives have conflicting interests due to company and interest group donations, the whole concept of democracy falls apart, and steadily creates an elitist society.
Candidates already have a difficult time differentiating their opinions from those of interest groups and I think this new court ruling will only make the situation more difficult not only for the candidates but also those watching the television ads (4). It has been found that the majority of Americans get their political knowledge from television. If they think an interest group is depicting the stance of a candidate, when they are actually stating their own belief but then encouraging the support of that candidate, viewers may get confused, and be discouraged to vote as a result (4). Voter turnout is at a dismal 50 percent in recent years, and in order to be a successful democracy this percentage must be raised. Also, this new court decision goes against the previous precedent that was set only six years ago (3). I believe the court should have the power to overrule themselves to fit the changing society, but I have a difficult time believing society change in such a huge way from only six years ago.
Senators Charles E. Schumer and Chris Van Hollen have already proposed a new bill that could be put into effect before the elections in 2010 (2). Their new bill would demand candidates to list their top five campaign contributors and make the contributors disclose its political expidentures to their shareholders (2). Although this bill does not directly reverse the Supreme Court ruling, it at least affects companies that would donate to candidates. I do not think their bill goes far enough and there must be more regulation, however, I still encourage you to vote in favor for this bill because I believe something needs to be done before these 2010 elections.
Thank you for you time,
Georgia Rowekamp
Sources:
1. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/17/AR2010021701151.html
2. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/15/AR2010021502993.html
3. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/21/
4. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122843898
6001 West 106th street
Bloomington, MN 55438
February 22, 2010
Senator Amy Klobuchar
1200 Washington Avenue South, Suite 250
Minneapolis, MN 55415
Dear Mrs. Klobuchar:
My name is Addison Byrne, and I am a senior at Jefferson High School in Bloomington, Minnesota. I am writing to ask you to reassess your opinion of the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” military policy.
In 2008, 619 people and in 2009, 428 were discharged from the Air Force, Army, Marines, and Navy because they violated the “don’t ask don’t tell” policy (1). If citizens are dedicated and wish to serve their country, they should not be denied that right based solely on their sexual orientation. Instead, they should be judged on their skills and performance during all training and activities within their job description. General David H. Petraeus, the commander of the United States Central Command who oversees the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, stated that in the military, “skill matters more than sexual orientation”(2). Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Michael Mullen said, “No matter how I look at the issue, I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy which forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens” (3).
During the State of the Union address, President Obama addressed the 17-year-old “don’t ask don’t tell” policy, stating: “This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are” (1). This act of Congress would be seen as the largest “upheaval to the military’s personnel policies since the 1948 executive order on racial integration” (2). However, just as the 1948 integration order was in the name of equality, so is the removal of “don’t ask don’t tell”.
As of February 2, 2010, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Michael Mullen were planning to create a group to assess how to carry out a full repeal of the “don’t ask don’t tell policy”. This group would address issues such as: whether gay soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines will face any restrictions on exhibiting their sexual orientation on the job; whether the Pentagon will be obligated to provide for their domestic partners; and whether straight military personnel could be compelled to share quarters with homosexual personnel (1). Senior officials who support the group and who advocate for policy change state that they want to move slowly, wanting to ensure that the changes will not cause disruption and that troops have time to become accustomed to the idea (2). However, most western, non-American militaries allow homosexuals to enlist in the service and show no problems with allowing gays and lesbians to be honest about their sexuality (3).
At the University of California, Santa Barbara, the research group Palm Center, is studying foreign militaries and the transition to permitting openly homosexual service. Their reports conclude, “in foreign militaries, openly gay service members did not undermine morale, cause large resignations or mass “comings out” and that there were no instances of increased harassment as a result of lifting bans” (4). The Palm Center also found that none of the countries studied provided troops with segregated facilities, and that benefits toward domestic partners was in accordance with the country’s existing benefits for gay and lesbian couples (4). All of the countries that implemented this change did so within only a few months, which allowed for little disruption to the armed services (4).
Denying citizens the right to serve this country’s armed forces based on their sexual orientation is discrimination that is currently being implemented by the federal government. The same federal discrimination was placed against African Americans not too many years ago, when all facilities were segregated. I strongly urge you to reconsider your position on the “don’t ask don’t tell” policy. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Addison Byrne
Work Cited
1. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/01/AR2010020103711_pf.html
2. http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/congress/84903752.html?page=1&c=y
3. http://www.aurorasentinel.com/articles/2010/02/21/opinion/editorials/doc4b81c0f5aef59900298166.txt
4. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/22/world/americas/22gays.html
4001 W. 102nd St.
Bloomington, MN 55438
February 22, 2010
Mrs. Amy Klobuchar
Senator
302 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Klobuchar,
I am writing to encourage you to vote for the current health care legislation that President Obama is proposing. Obama has worked on this bill so that it combines the best aspects of both the Senate and the House bill to have a stronger opportunity to pass and effectively attend to our healthcare ills. (1) While his new proposal is fiscally larger than the former bill, it would still reduce the budget deficit by $100 billion over 10 years.
I know that you have supported the Democrat’s health care bill in the past, but I urge you to take an even larger stand against those who spread lies about what this bill actually does. (2)I have had enough of the republicans dominating the air waves with lies and misinformation about this bill that makes an attempt to make a situation better for millions of Americans. Voters in your constituency voted for you to speak out against injustices. Please do this. (3)
The Democrats are currently perceived to be struggling nationwide, but I know that with a strong presence and passage of this healthcare bill, Americans will reinvigorate their faith in the entire system. This bill is something that our country desperately needs. Our desperate need for a healthcare overhaul is proved by anthem’s blue cross raise of costs for its customers. Also, according to Steve Poizner, California Insurance Commissioner, they have broken the law over 70 times. These kinds of abuses need to be removed from our system. (4)
As a high school student, I haven’t faced firsthand the problems in our healthcare system, and I hope to never have to. With many of the stories and facts about the system, I am honestly scared to grow up and have to deal with our corrupted, broken, and fraudulent health care system. Please do something about this problem. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Jacob Sandry
Student
(1) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/22/AR2010022204789.html
(2) http://votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=65092&type=category&category=38&go.x=19&go.y=15
(3) http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/0222/Obama-s-healthcare-plan-gets-chilly-GOP-reception
(4) http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-anthem-claims23-2010feb23,0,186309.story?track=rss
10341 Wyoming Ave S
Bloomington, MN 55438
February 22, 2010
Senator Al Franken
DC Office
320 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Mr. Franken:
I am a senior at Jefferson High School in Bloomington, Minnesota. I am writing to you to urge you to pass the Education Opportunity Act of 2009. I believe that the Education Opportunity Act will revolutionize the education system and create a stronger program for generations to come. School has been with me since I was three years old in preschool and will continue with me for the rest of my life. Next year I will be going to college and I plan on majoring in education. I would love to see the education system thrive so that more children can live the lives they want to as they grow up and I believe passing this bill will make that hope a reality.
This includes six measures all of which are very important to the future of education. The first measure asks for “increasing access to high-quality early childhood education and expanding child care, after school, and extended learning opportunities” (1). Early childhood does have some short term effects however its long term effects is what is going to change society. Generally children who partake in early education have higher IQs and have greater high school education rates. As well, they have better socialization skills including better people skills and less criminal activity. Finally it is a better financial situation. While for two years of preschool it costs $12,000 per student, they save taxpayers $90,000 for each child in early childcare education. This is through a reduction in welfare, criminal costs, higher taxes paid for higher earnings and less of a cost for special education. (2)
Another important part of this bill that I would like to address is the second part aimed at “increasing secondary school graduation rates, and supporting elementary and secondary school improvement efforts” (1). According to the United States Department of Education statistics from 2007, the national freshman graduation rate from 2005-06 was 73.2 %. Furthermore, the graduation rate dropped from the year before where it was at 74.7%. With the large population of high school students in the United States that is a huge change. I would hate to see the graduation rate keep at this amount with more and more jobs requiring skills that not only include a high school diploma, but go beyond a high school diploma. This is obviously something that needs attention now rather than waiting a few more years and having these numbers even lower (3).
The final part of this bill that I would like to address is the sixth part of the bill that states, “increasing Federal grant aid for students and the families of students, improving the rate of postsecondary degree completion, and providing tax incentives to make higher education more affordable” (1). I believe that there are many undiscovered, talented people out there that could be a huge influence in society in a positive light if only they had the funds to achieve their full potential. Every year there are approximately 14 million FAFSA forms that are submitted, asking the government for some sort of aid for education purposes. There are about $500 billion in student loans that the government handles which is a lot of money. That much money does not cover full education costs of all 14 million people that are asking for assistance each year and it would change our society if more people could afford to obtain college degrees. (4)
I want to thank you for your time that you took to read this letter and I would appreciate it if you were to vote for the Education Opportunity Act of 2009. I believe this will enact many positive changes and create a better society not only in the school systems but for the United States in general. There will be millions of lives that would greatly appreciate this being passed and will continue to place its mark on lives for years to come.
Sincerely,
Allie Kalkman
(1) http://www.centeroncongress.org/lesson_plans/dlp_bill_education_opportunity.pdf
(2) http://www.sharingsuccess.org/code/bv/ec1.html
(3) http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009064.pdf
(4) http://studentaid.ed.gov/PORTALSWebApp/students/english/aboutus.jsp
Dear Senator Frankin,
I am writing in hopes of convincing you to support President Obama’s plan to overhaul the No Child Left Behind Act (2). Although the intentions of this act were noble, the outcome has been anything but. The reality is that standardized test scores are not viable as the only way to measure success in schools (1). The focus of our education system should be on helping each child succeed and be ready to compete in a global business community- and not on cutting funding for schools that are already struggling. That said, some components of the current legislation are valid- like clauses that hold schools accountable to employ only quality teachers (4). Standardized tests are important as one aspect of measuring a child’s abilities- but they should not be the only way. Despite the focus in recent years on improving such scores, evidence shows that improvement in standardized math tests is slower now than in years before the No Child Left Behind Act was passed (3). This is clear proof that the goals of the legislation are not being accomplished. The United States is the leading world power, and without a new, strong generation of leaders, we will surely lose this position. Please support President Obama as he looks to improve and reform K-12 education in our country.
1. http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/n/no_child_left_behind_act/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier
2. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/01/education/01child.html
3. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/15/education/15math.html?_r=1
4. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/05/opinion/05fri1.html
I enjoyed reading your posts. You picked a wide variety of topics. I look forward to reading your respones to each other. :) M
This comment has been removed by the author.
I am writing to support and enforce Alyssa Brown’s letter to Senator Klobuchar on the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. Alyssa urges Senator Klobuchar to support and vote for this Act, stating its positive impacts and showing that American should be a leader in this area.
Put forward by the House Energy Committee, this new climate bill was given high marks by the Environmental Protection Agency (1). It will reportedly “drive the clean energy transformations of the U.S. economy” (1). While Alyssa talked about the benefits of the bill, she didn’t address the opposing party that is against the bill.
Republican opponents of the cap-and-trade policy part of the bill say it is a hidden energy tax, and John McCain called the House version an “irresponsible, ill-conceived and distorted version of a cap-and-trade system” (1). The EPA, however, assumes that carbon prices would range from $13 to $17 a ton in 2015, and would rise by around 5% a year (2). This is what participants in the European Union cap-and-trade program are paying (2). Despite a slightly higher cost, which is inevitable with a new energy plan, analysis suggests that renewables like wind and solar would rise to 26% of the nation’s energy by 2010 (2). Without this policy, renewables will remain at 14%, dismally low.
Massachusetts Democrat Ed Markey, countering the Republican opinion, stated that “the savings will pile up for consumers,” as one of the bill’s provisions will update energy-efficiency weatherization (2).
So, all in all, this bill is a great idea for the U.S., as Alyssa stated. She covered a lot about the positive environmental impacts of the bill. Therefore, even with a slightly higher cost for Americans, the benefits will be worth it, as shown by the Environmental Protection Agency.
(1) http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/21/epa-releases-analysis-of-climate-bill/?scp=2&sq=American%20Clean%20Energy%20And%20Security%20Act%20of%202009&st=cse
(2) http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2454
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home