Still Fighting has moved! Check us out at
www.stillfighting.com!
December 29, 2005
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
Tuesday's Links
Activism
1000 Organizing Events and Counting. We've mentioned this before, but it's worth reminding everyone: Tomorrow is the Democratic Party's National Organizing Kickoff. And in keeping with what fueled Howard Dean's campaign, the DNC is relying on the grassroots to fuel the party. It's a wise idea, but it depends on you to make it work. "Tomorrow night - in all fifty states (and in 20 other countries) - Democrats will come together and begin the work that's needed to win in 2006 and 2008." If you want to host an event, you can go here to do so. If you just want to attend an event, search for one here. It's your country - be a part of taking it back!
News
Senators Agree on Detainee Rights. We've been talking about this for a few days now, and it looks like we're coming to some sort of consensus. Of course, the final "agreement" doesn't give detainees full rights, but given the fact that we're dealing with Republicans in power, Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) was lucky to get the concessions that he did. If today's vote passes (Note: The Republican version passed), detainees will have the right to appeal any military tribunal ruling. Although this is a big step for Democrats, it's still disgusting that we're having this discussion in the first place. Couple that with Cheney's desire to eliminate the McCain torture amendment, and we're embarrased to have people like that running the country.
Review of 'Plan B' Pill Is Faulted. We've speculated that the FDA delay in selling Plan B over the counter was politically motivated. Now we know that it was, as is evidenced by a GAO report that shows that approval was never going to be given, regardless of the outcome of the scientific review. The Government Accountability Office, the White House watchdog group, if you will, finally concluded that then-FDA Commissioner Mark B. McClellan and others were involved in the unsubstantiated disapproval. The GAO can't say for sure, because McClellan wouldn't speak to them. Still, we see once again that politics trumps science, and that's a sorry state of affairs for a government agency that depends on science to make educated decisions.
Parents Carry Burden of Proof in School Cases, Court Rules. This is just depressing. In a 6-2 ruling (with John Roberts recusing himself), the Supreme Court decided that parents who are unhappy with their school, district's special education programs must carry the burden of proof. What this means, generally, is that "parents who disagree with a school system's special-education plan for their child have the legal burden of proving that the plan will not provide the "appropriate" education to which federal law entitles all children with disabilities." (Sandra Day O'Connor's full 26 page majority opinion can be found here). In a way, this isn't fully the SCOTUS's fault. But what does that mean? The Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) was designed in such a way that schools must (with parents' consent) test students with special needs, and then create an IEP, or Individualized Education Program, for that student. The way IDEA was originally written in 1970 didn't make it clear who's responsibility it was to address issues with the IEP (it's been subsequently updated several times, but this has never been discussed). What this ruling says is that if parents feel that the IEP isn't working, it is the parents' responsibility to prove that it isn't. Surprisingly, the Bush administration initially favored the parents in this ruling, before, ahem, flip-flopping to the state's side when the decision came before the court. With the burden of proof on the parents, administrations won't be so quick to look so hard to make sure they are doing the right thing, particularly in more rural areas where money and expertise is limited. If the burden of proof were on the schools (that is to say, the experts), maybe schools wouldn't be so quick to jump and create an IEP that won't work.
Editorials
Health Economics 101. Paul Krugman's one of our favorite political writers, because he's not afraid to point out the moral shortcomings of the Bush administration, and to pull no punches. But he's at his best when talking about his area of expertise, economics, and explaining how it affects every day people. A side specialty of his is moral outrage, and discussing the health care system allows him to engage both his strengths. In his latest missive, he explains why the GOP solution to everything, namely, throw a little capitalism at the problem, won't work with health care. Preach on, Professor Krugman.
Facing the Reality of Choice. Progressives are pro-choice - that much is obvious. But as much as the right-wing would like to paint pro-choice people as pro-abortion, that's simply not the case. In fact, all reasonable pro-choice people want to reduce the number of abortions in America, which is an admirable goal. It's important to keep that perspective and understand how a women choosing to have an abortion is a tragic, difficult choice. We want less women to be forced into that decision, although we firmly believe it's an option they should have. This editorial outlines one woman's experience during a Planned Parenthood visit, and makes some good points that people on both sides of the abortion fence would do well to keep in mind.
Blogger Commentary
They Won't Stop Lying Until You Start Impeaching. Yesterday we linked to a Washington Post article entitled "Asterisks Dot White House's Iraq Argument." In it, the White House is called out for their pre-war intelligence. Also yesterday, the White House was quick to respond by saying that the problem was with the actual intelligence, and reminded us that the The Commission On The Intelligence Capabilities Of The United States Regarding Weapons Of Mass Destruction concluded back in March that "in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments." Stirling Newberry points out that the lying continues, and that it's got to stop. And the only way it's going to stop is with Democrats standing up and continuing to pour the pressure on the White House. Come on, it's been more than half a decade since our last impeachment - what are we waiting for?
Our Care vs. Their Care. Ezra Klein discusses a study that was released last week. It compares the patient care experiences in the following countries: Australia, America, Canada, Germany, England, and New Zealand. Not surprisingly, the U.S. ranks near the bottom in pretty much everything. Also not surprisingly, "the United States is an outlier for financial burdens on patients and patients forgoing care because of costs." Wait times are too long. Patients are dissatisfied. After-hours access is poor. How long before we can no longer claim to be the world's superpower with a straight face?
|
December 29, 2005
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
Tuesday's Links
Activism
1000 Organizing Events and Counting. We've mentioned this before, but it's worth reminding everyone: Tomorrow is the Democratic Party's National Organizing Kickoff. And in keeping with what fueled Howard Dean's campaign, the DNC is relying on the grassroots to fuel the party. It's a wise idea, but it depends on you to make it work. "Tomorrow night - in all fifty states (and in 20 other countries) - Democrats will come together and begin the work that's needed to win in 2006 and 2008." If you want to host an event, you can go here to do so. If you just want to attend an event, search for one here. It's your country - be a part of taking it back!
News
Senators Agree on Detainee Rights. We've been talking about this for a few days now, and it looks like we're coming to some sort of consensus. Of course, the final "agreement" doesn't give detainees full rights, but given the fact that we're dealing with Republicans in power, Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) was lucky to get the concessions that he did. If today's vote passes (Note: The Republican version passed), detainees will have the right to appeal any military tribunal ruling. Although this is a big step for Democrats, it's still disgusting that we're having this discussion in the first place. Couple that with Cheney's desire to eliminate the McCain torture amendment, and we're embarrased to have people like that running the country.
Review of 'Plan B' Pill Is Faulted. We've speculated that the FDA delay in selling Plan B over the counter was politically motivated. Now we know that it was, as is evidenced by a GAO report that shows that approval was never going to be given, regardless of the outcome of the scientific review. The Government Accountability Office, the White House watchdog group, if you will, finally concluded that then-FDA Commissioner Mark B. McClellan and others were involved in the unsubstantiated disapproval. The GAO can't say for sure, because McClellan wouldn't speak to them. Still, we see once again that politics trumps science, and that's a sorry state of affairs for a government agency that depends on science to make educated decisions.
Parents Carry Burden of Proof in School Cases, Court Rules. This is just depressing. In a 6-2 ruling (with John Roberts recusing himself), the Supreme Court decided that parents who are unhappy with their school, district's special education programs must carry the burden of proof. What this means, generally, is that "parents who disagree with a school system's special-education plan for their child have the legal burden of proving that the plan will not provide the "appropriate" education to which federal law entitles all children with disabilities." (Sandra Day O'Connor's full 26 page majority opinion can be found here). In a way, this isn't fully the SCOTUS's fault. But what does that mean? The Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) was designed in such a way that schools must (with parents' consent) test students with special needs, and then create an IEP, or Individualized Education Program, for that student. The way IDEA was originally written in 1970 didn't make it clear who's responsibility it was to address issues with the IEP (it's been subsequently updated several times, but this has never been discussed). What this ruling says is that if parents feel that the IEP isn't working, it is the parents' responsibility to prove that it isn't. Surprisingly, the Bush administration initially favored the parents in this ruling, before, ahem, flip-flopping to the state's side when the decision came before the court. With the burden of proof on the parents, administrations won't be so quick to look so hard to make sure they are doing the right thing, particularly in more rural areas where money and expertise is limited. If the burden of proof were on the schools (that is to say, the experts), maybe schools wouldn't be so quick to jump and create an IEP that won't work.
Editorials
Health Economics 101. Paul Krugman's one of our favorite political writers, because he's not afraid to point out the moral shortcomings of the Bush administration, and to pull no punches. But he's at his best when talking about his area of expertise, economics, and explaining how it affects every day people. A side specialty of his is moral outrage, and discussing the health care system allows him to engage both his strengths. In his latest missive, he explains why the GOP solution to everything, namely, throw a little capitalism at the problem, won't work with health care. Preach on, Professor Krugman.
Facing the Reality of Choice. Progressives are pro-choice - that much is obvious. But as much as the right-wing would like to paint pro-choice people as pro-abortion, that's simply not the case. In fact, all reasonable pro-choice people want to reduce the number of abortions in America, which is an admirable goal. It's important to keep that perspective and understand how a women choosing to have an abortion is a tragic, difficult choice. We want less women to be forced into that decision, although we firmly believe it's an option they should have. This editorial outlines one woman's experience during a Planned Parenthood visit, and makes some good points that people on both sides of the abortion fence would do well to keep in mind.
Blogger Commentary
They Won't Stop Lying Until You Start Impeaching. Yesterday we linked to a Washington Post article entitled "Asterisks Dot White House's Iraq Argument." In it, the White House is called out for their pre-war intelligence. Also yesterday, the White House was quick to respond by saying that the problem was with the actual intelligence, and reminded us that the The Commission On The Intelligence Capabilities Of The United States Regarding Weapons Of Mass Destruction concluded back in March that "in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments." Stirling Newberry points out that the lying continues, and that it's got to stop. And the only way it's going to stop is with Democrats standing up and continuing to pour the pressure on the White House. Come on, it's been more than half a decade since our last impeachment - what are we waiting for?
Our Care vs. Their Care. Ezra Klein discusses a study that was released last week. It compares the patient care experiences in the following countries: Australia, America, Canada, Germany, England, and New Zealand. Not surprisingly, the U.S. ranks near the bottom in pretty much everything. Also not surprisingly, "the United States is an outlier for financial burdens on patients and patients forgoing care because of costs." Wait times are too long. Patients are dissatisfied. After-hours access is poor. How long before we can no longer claim to be the world's superpower with a straight face?
|
December 29, 2005
1000 Organizing Events and Counting. We've mentioned this before, but it's worth reminding everyone: Tomorrow is the Democratic Party's National Organizing Kickoff. And in keeping with what fueled Howard Dean's campaign, the DNC is relying on the grassroots to fuel the party. It's a wise idea, but it depends on you to make it work. "Tomorrow night - in all fifty states (and in 20 other countries) - Democrats will come together and begin the work that's needed to win in 2006 and 2008." If you want to host an event, you can go here to do so. If you just want to attend an event, search for one here. It's your country - be a part of taking it back!
News
Senators Agree on Detainee Rights. We've been talking about this for a few days now, and it looks like we're coming to some sort of consensus. Of course, the final "agreement" doesn't give detainees full rights, but given the fact that we're dealing with Republicans in power, Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) was lucky to get the concessions that he did. If today's vote passes (Note: The Republican version passed), detainees will have the right to appeal any military tribunal ruling. Although this is a big step for Democrats, it's still disgusting that we're having this discussion in the first place. Couple that with Cheney's desire to eliminate the McCain torture amendment, and we're embarrased to have people like that running the country.
Review of 'Plan B' Pill Is Faulted. We've speculated that the FDA delay in selling Plan B over the counter was politically motivated. Now we know that it was, as is evidenced by a GAO report that shows that approval was never going to be given, regardless of the outcome of the scientific review. The Government Accountability Office, the White House watchdog group, if you will, finally concluded that then-FDA Commissioner Mark B. McClellan and others were involved in the unsubstantiated disapproval. The GAO can't say for sure, because McClellan wouldn't speak to them. Still, we see once again that politics trumps science, and that's a sorry state of affairs for a government agency that depends on science to make educated decisions.
Parents Carry Burden of Proof in School Cases, Court Rules. This is just depressing. In a 6-2 ruling (with John Roberts recusing himself), the Supreme Court decided that parents who are unhappy with their school, district's special education programs must carry the burden of proof. What this means, generally, is that "parents who disagree with a school system's special-education plan for their child have the legal burden of proving that the plan will not provide the "appropriate" education to which federal law entitles all children with disabilities." (Sandra Day O'Connor's full 26 page majority opinion can be found here). In a way, this isn't fully the SCOTUS's fault. But what does that mean? The Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) was designed in such a way that schools must (with parents' consent) test students with special needs, and then create an IEP, or Individualized Education Program, for that student. The way IDEA was originally written in 1970 didn't make it clear who's responsibility it was to address issues with the IEP (it's been subsequently updated several times, but this has never been discussed). What this ruling says is that if parents feel that the IEP isn't working, it is the parents' responsibility to prove that it isn't. Surprisingly, the Bush administration initially favored the parents in this ruling, before, ahem, flip-flopping to the state's side when the decision came before the court. With the burden of proof on the parents, administrations won't be so quick to look so hard to make sure they are doing the right thing, particularly in more rural areas where money and expertise is limited. If the burden of proof were on the schools (that is to say, the experts), maybe schools wouldn't be so quick to jump and create an IEP that won't work.
Editorials
Health Economics 101. Paul Krugman's one of our favorite political writers, because he's not afraid to point out the moral shortcomings of the Bush administration, and to pull no punches. But he's at his best when talking about his area of expertise, economics, and explaining how it affects every day people. A side specialty of his is moral outrage, and discussing the health care system allows him to engage both his strengths. In his latest missive, he explains why the GOP solution to everything, namely, throw a little capitalism at the problem, won't work with health care. Preach on, Professor Krugman.
Facing the Reality of Choice. Progressives are pro-choice - that much is obvious. But as much as the right-wing would like to paint pro-choice people as pro-abortion, that's simply not the case. In fact, all reasonable pro-choice people want to reduce the number of abortions in America, which is an admirable goal. It's important to keep that perspective and understand how a women choosing to have an abortion is a tragic, difficult choice. We want less women to be forced into that decision, although we firmly believe it's an option they should have. This editorial outlines one woman's experience during a Planned Parenthood visit, and makes some good points that people on both sides of the abortion fence would do well to keep in mind.
Blogger Commentary
They Won't Stop Lying Until You Start Impeaching. Yesterday we linked to a Washington Post article entitled "Asterisks Dot White House's Iraq Argument." In it, the White House is called out for their pre-war intelligence. Also yesterday, the White House was quick to respond by saying that the problem was with the actual intelligence, and reminded us that the The Commission On The Intelligence Capabilities Of The United States Regarding Weapons Of Mass Destruction concluded back in March that "in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments." Stirling Newberry points out that the lying continues, and that it's got to stop. And the only way it's going to stop is with Democrats standing up and continuing to pour the pressure on the White House. Come on, it's been more than half a decade since our last impeachment - what are we waiting for?
Our Care vs. Their Care. Ezra Klein discusses a study that was released last week. It compares the patient care experiences in the following countries: Australia, America, Canada, Germany, England, and New Zealand. Not surprisingly, the U.S. ranks near the bottom in pretty much everything. Also not surprisingly, "the United States is an outlier for financial burdens on patients and patients forgoing care because of costs." Wait times are too long. Patients are dissatisfied. After-hours access is poor. How long before we can no longer claim to be the world's superpower with a straight face?
