“Then Shut It Down” – Unintended Consequences

This shutdown also has unintended consequences for every American. Due to a budget not passed by Congress, the government has had to close down some important parts of its government. I’ve already discussed the national parks; now, I’d like to touch a more personal area of the government shutdown: Education.

            I know many teachers, professors, and people who love education (whether it is teaching or just learning). I am still considering the teaching profession within the next five or ten years. Teachers are always getting the short end of the stick. Since the shutdown has taken place, the Department of Education (and the Departments of Public Instructions & Auxiliary)  has had to cease funding of grants and other funds. Why you may ask…because the two departments within the Department of Education are subsidies.  All subsidies within the Federal Government have ceased (which is why many are concerned that the Women, Infants, and Children – or W.I.C. program will hurt many Americans because it isn’t being funded at the moment).  This shutdown is severally hurting those educators that are trying to better the education of their students through grant funding. Not only are teachers in North Carolina getting….shafted...but now they are getting it from their own government!

            One of the “solutions” proposed by Congress is to back legislation called a “continuing resolution” (to clarify, I think I covered in the last post but if not then I’ll explain again), which essentially continues funding the government until a certain time period. The problem with this is that is postpones the political debate over funding by the same time period. In layman’s term, it “kicks the can down the road” which doesn’t benefit anyone. Now, if the House of Representatives could pass a continuing resolution with no riders attached (again, a “rider” is an amendment – so to speak – put into the legislation) because once a rider is attached, it will immediately create controversy resulting back to square one. If the House passes it, then the Senate should pass it as well so the President can sign it and the shutdown will be over.   This may sound very easy and should be easy to do, but when you have 435 voting members of one body (The House of Representatives) and fifty members of another body (The Senate) all trying to agree on one issue AND THEN having to have the President sign off on it as well, it becomes extremely challenging to accomplish.  This is why Political Science is in the “Arts & Sciences” category. It is an art and there is definitely science involved to alleviate the problems of government. Well, so go the theory.

From An Election & The Supreme Rulings…

Well, a lot has happened within the last post.  With a special election over and two monumental rulings, even a state in political chaos and new adventures for the politically savvy, there is never a dull moment in my life and keeping up with the changing times.

            To pick up from my last post, the special election in South Carolina did not turn out in my favor.  Elizabeth Colbert-Busch did not win the congressional seat against former governor Mark Sanford.  I can’t say I’m surprised, given it is the most conservative district in the country, if only for South Carolina.  I don’t blame the candidate for her loss; nobody should ever fault the candidate in these campaigns.  I would argue that false hopes and misguided name recognition lead to the blind support of the Democratic party standing behind her in this race.  I also think the Democratic party was reluctant to stand by her because she was too conservative a “true democratic candidate” for their liking.  In the end, it is the experience that matters, and it is important to always look towards the next election and work to win that one. The object is to fight to win the next election; but one should never forget their losses, as it drives the desire to win the next race.

            May transcended into June, and the end of June brought the month went out with a loud bang. On the twenty-sixth of the month, the United States Supreme Court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act and also cited the Proposition Eight case from California, that it has no legal standing which meant they wouldn’t rule on it; thus, it allowed for the lower court’s decision to be upheld (which stated that Proposition Eight was unconstitutional in the state of California).  Both of these cases are huge victories for LGBT-individuals living in the United States [and the overall fight for Marriage Equality in the country]. 

Personally, I view these as good things for the United States regarding progressing for progress’ sake.  I do not believe that marriage is being “re-defined” or that the country’s moral standing will fall and the wrath of God will come down hard against this great nation. Nay, I believe that marriage has been extended to those outside of the “traditional” marriage practice and the state of California has the right to pass laws that are within the constitutional boundaries of the law. Since I am not a resident of that state, the Proposition Eight ruling does not apply to me; what does however is the Amendment One that was passed by 60% of the North Carolina voting populace in last year’s election cycle. As far as the law goes in the state of North Carolina: “Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized”.  (NC Constitution, Article 14, Section 6)

            While we are talking about North Carolina, and the laws being passed within the state, it is important to focus on the General Assembly of the North Carolina State Legislature.  There have been a few bills that have been passed through the House of Representatives and/or the Senate that are not exactly promising when it comes to doing the best thing for the residents of the Tar Heel state.  The first issue is education and the battle to cut its funding. There is an incentive to have older teachers to retire early and to accept, as a parting gift, an extra $500.  The horrible thing is that it passed the House of Representatives! As far as I know, it is still being discussed in a senate committee. Let me backtrack a moment: After the election of 2012, the House, Senate, and Governorship went into the hands of Republicans (just stating a fact; this is how democracy works…whomever wins gets to be in power). 

            Now the House Republicans are trying to pass laws to limit education funding, revise the tax structure, and even pass anti-abortion measures attached to a law that is against Sharia law. First things first, I AM NOT ADVOCATING FOR SHARIA LAW (set aside the fact that it is Constitionally impossible for any religious based law to be followed in the USA); all I am saying is that we need to separate the real issues from “non-real” issues.  For example, the House republicans and Senate republicans have either passed, or will pass, a restructured tax base to allocate for tax breaks to the residents of North Carolina; the problem is that both houses have different views on what is the correct tax base formula.  Even Governor McCrory has stated that he will veto any bill that comes across his desk that would raise taxes on the middle class (which both plans do; Senate plan has middle class families paying more than $30 in taxes and I’m not sure about the House plan, but I’ll look into it and get back to you). I consider this to be an actual issue. The “non-real” issue is which plan saves North Carolina families…the answer: both plans, and the Governor knows it (which is why he’ll veto it...as it would haunt him around re-election time).

[The North Carolina Senate will vote today on their tax bill: The Senate Bill is #394 and the House Bill is #998]

As for the abortion rider in the bill against Sharia law (again, is Sharia law really a problem in North Carolina? Seriously?), this is also a thorn in the side for Governor McCrory as he stated in his campaign to become the Governor that he would not sign bills into law that would further restrict abortions. The sad thing is it might become law even if he vetoed the bill because they have the votes in the House to override him. When it comes to the real issue, such as abortion, we seem t have a lame duck governor in Raleigh. To review: Real issue – restricting abortions; “non-real” issue – Sharia law ever becoming the law in North Carolina (as it would be unconstitutional under our own state constitution, and the fact that the United States Constitution is the true law over all fifty states [and the territories] and that North Carolina was in the “God-fearing” south). Come to think this about it, how is that bill not unconstitutional?

Politics: The Palmetto Way & the Ocean State Way

Well, I’m currently in South Carolina working on a campaign to elect Elizabeth Colbert Busch to Congress so she can represent South Carolina’s first district in the House of Representatives.  I’ve never worked on a campaign in South Carolina.  I think South Carolina has a better understanding of what “southern hospitality” is all about.

     The district itself is only twenty percent rural, or so I’m told.  The President won this district in both 2008 & 2012.  I think based on that information, my candidate should win; however, this isn’t my first election and it is really up to the constituents of the first Congressional district of the Palmetto State.  I believe Elizabeth Colbert Bush is a strong candidate against the former governor of the state, Marl Stanford.  After watching them debate, I think she has what it takes to win over the district.  She is a tough individual and knows the issues that matter to the district.  She tends to put the district first, as any respectable member of Congress should do.  She knows that the district still has pockets of conservative values and understands they still need a voice in Congress.  There is a term for an individual who is liberal on social issues; yet conservative on fiscal matters…the new term is “Blue Dog Democrat.” Another term, slightly older, is a “Dixiecrat” which is essentially a newer generation of a Republican post-Civil War. (At least, that is how I look at it.)

     I guess after really thinking about politics and the issues, I would be considered a Blue Dog in many ways. First, I was a Republican in high school and growing up.  I tend to focus on issues instead of party politics. I also believe that we need to be in control of our own monetary funds and other things that we earn; however, I believe we need to have safeguards to help those in society that are less fortunate or cannot help themselves.  I believe everyone should be equal under the law of the United States.  If you are a citizen, then you deserved to be treated like one and equally as others.  With only some of those beliefs I hold, I feel that I would cast an affirmative vote for Elizabeth Colbert Busch to represent my voice in Congress (and if I lived in South Carolina’s first Congressional District).

In other political news, the state of Rhode Island [and Providence Plantations] became the tenth state in the United States to pass Marriage Equality.  I am extremely proud of this accomplishment.  I drove up to the Ocean State to help out this successful campaign and met a bunch of wonderful individuals (both on the campaign team and the citizens who contacted their state representatives to pass the legislation).  This win in Rhode Island completes all of the states in New England to have Marriage Equality! I hope this will be the positive model for other parts of the United States to adopt, implement, and pass this historic trend to include Marriage Equality into a basic American right.  Hopefully in June, the United States Supreme Court will render their verdict on the right side of history.

From Sea to Shining Sea...One State at a Time

     Well, this week was certainly a wonderful one for Colorado. The state signed a law granting civil-unions to same-sex couples.  Within the past two years, the subject of LGBT rights has really been at the front of American politics. Just to remember some of these events, let's name some:

1) "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" got repealed;

2) Four states put measures on their state ballots and won (Minnesota, Maine, Washington, Maryland);

3) The United States Supreme Court will hear the arguments to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act AND Proposition Eight;

4) President Obama (finally) comes out in support of Same-sex marriage;

5) Colorado has passed civil unions;

6) Tammy Baldwin becomes the first Openly Gay Senator in US History (representing Wisconsin);

7) Nebraska is considering granting Same-sex couples the right of marriage; and

8) Rhode Island will be the next state to allow Same-sex marriage once it gets past in the state senate.

     Notice I end the list with Rhode Island.  This is because I have some news; for the next three months, I'll be in the state of Rhode Island advocating for the state to pass Same-sex marriage!  This is really exciting as I haven't lived in Rhode Island since 1994. I will be helping a state extend the basic right of happiness to all its citizens.  I truly believe within the next 15-20 years, this issue will no longer be an issue.  This same "Separate but equal" mindset regarding the LGBT community is just silly and will be yet another period in American history where we will not be proud of the way we handle change.  in fact, there is at least one other state considering Same-sex marriage in their own boundaries [and that state being Illinois].

    Disclaimer:  As I continue writing, the song "No llores por mí Argentina" :-D 

     Another major thing that has happened this week is the election of a new Pope.  Now, it is wonderful that he is the first Pope from Latin America; I wish him well.  However, even this is a setback for the church.  I suppose I could also argue that this strengthens the "Separation of Church & State" argument, but I won't. :)  

      Now, Pope Francis I (former Archbishop of Buenos Aires Jorge Mario Bergoglio) comes from  Argentina.  This is the same country that gave us Evita Perón and that WONDERFUL play that was on

Broadway that I did NOT get to see even though Ricky Martin was Che (no hard feelings of course…but I will see it soon enough).  Anyway, I digress. Now Argentina has allowed same-sex Marriage since July 2010.  The newly-elected Pope was a strong critic and the most vocal opponent against Argentina's position regarding the extension of marriage to same-sex couples.  I respect the establishment of religion, I truly do, but in the United States we have a separation of the two.  I think that when a rather high number of your congregation interprets the holy texts in a different manner that disagree with the official interpretation, it might be time to review the official stance on the matter.  I think the Catholic Church has done a remarkable thing while at the same time standing resolute.  I salute them for recognizing other minorities such as Hispanics being able to lead; but, I also think they are proving that just because a high number of their congregation don't follow their official word on the issue, they will not give into temptation to change their ways (and by the way, that pun was not exactly in my head at the time I wrote that).  There should be some sort of adoration for the Church, but since they don't dictate my life, then I really don't concern myself with what their position is regarding the matter. As I've stated before, within the next 15-20 years, this will be a moot point.

     Until then, I will be fighting to bring Marriage Equality to Same-sex couples in the state of Rhode Island & the Providence Plantations!

     By the way, I'm officially a UNC Tarheel fan. After living in North Carolina for the past 15 years, I've made my decision regarding the whole Duke/UNC rivalry thing.  For me, it's Public Vs. Private and I went with public. :)

Fired Up & Ready to Go - DNC Aftermath

     Well, I've had time to recover from all of the excitement of the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, NC.  What a wonderful experience! I enjoyed seeing, and meeting, so many new people.  I met so many amazing political figures; for example, I shared an elevator with General Wesley Clark (and met Congressman Kucinich)!!!  The speeches were wonderful and very inspiring as well!
     First things first, I was so honored to be apart of two historic caucuses!  For the record, I did attend four caucuses: The Hispanic caucus, the Disabilities Caucus, the LGBT caucus, and the Women's Caucus (I also attended the Small Business Council).  Each of these caucuses are important in one way or another to me.  The only thing I can really say, regardless of your political affiliation -you should at least go to one convention.  It is certainly a "wow" moment. I even got quoted in the StarTribune and appeared on MSNBC's Hardball With Chris Matthews!  There is so much I could write about my time at the DNC, but I will try not to bore you too much with it.
     In other news though, and I promise it isn't political, I'm taking a class at Western Carolina this semester.  Furthermore, I have been accepted as a non-degree seeking student next semester which will allow me to take classes and figure out what I really want to get my Master's degree in regarding a field of study.  I am still deciding whether it will be Public Administration or English with a concentration in Composition & Rhetoric.  Speaking of Rhetoric, the class I am taking this semester is...Political Rhetoric!  I love the class so far even though I'm not a fan of Immanuel Kant.
     Okay, back to politics for a second.  While I know that I wrote a blog entry supporting Hayden Rogers, I am really not sure if I can fully support him in the general election.  The main reason is that he is a "blue dog" democrat and I am a "yellow dog" democrat.  I know I certainly will NOT be voting for Mark Meadows (anyone who is endorsed by Rick Santorum will NEVER receive my vote). As for the governor's race....Walter Dalton all the way!  I also hope Minnesota will vote No on their amendment; and, I hope Washington State will approve Referendum 74. Maine & Maryland will hopefully vote in favor of the LGBT community.  With 50 days left, I will continue to campaign for all of the issues and causes that I believe and support.

By the way, it feels great to write a blog post and I really have to write more of them. Also, I'm the one waving in a white long-sleeve shirt and I think I am holding up four fingers chanting, "4 more years!"

            First Lady Michelle Obama speaking at the Women's Caucus!

NC Politics: Vote "No" on Amendment One on Tuesday, May 8th!

     I'm sorry it's taken forever for me to post this piece. I've had to to an extensive amount of research and studying.  Tuesday is an important day in North Carolina.  It is the day when voter will vote on Amendment One.  The text of the Amendment are as followed:

"An Act to amend the constitution to provide that marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this state."

     This will be added under a new section (Section 6) under Article 14 of the North Carolina State Constitution.

Now, this amendment is not only wrong and redundant, it is not constitutional according to both the United States and North Carolina constitutions.  It should be noted that North Carolina already bans same-sex marriage (and yes, that is also unconstitutional but that's another blog piece).  I'll present reasons why Amendment One is unconstitutional - I'll present the issues with the North Carolina Constitution and then I'll move onto the United States Constitution.

North Carolina State Constitution:

* Article 1 - Section 1

     "We hold it to be self-evident that all persons are created equal...with certain inalienable rights...life, liberty, the enjoyment of fruits of their own labor, and the pursuit of happiness"
 
     So everyone is created equal...except woman who are not married (but who to live with someone they are not married to), children who will be denied coverage because their parents are not married or because they have a parent living with someone who is covered under someone else's insurance (again, but are not married), or those that are already in a civil union, how does that make sense?

* Article 1 - Section 19

     "No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws; nor shall any person be subjected to discrimination by the State"

     So again, what if two people are joined in a domestic civil union?  What happens with their status? If this amendment passes, will their civil union become null and void?  How is that equal protection of the law? Those already in civil unions will be denied rights already granted to them and others that are married such as visitation, insurance, etc. Again, how is that equal under the law if their civil union is null and void?


I'm sure there are more areas of the North Carolina Constitution that would validate why Amendment One is a horrible piece of legislation, redundant, and just unconstitutional; however, I remembered I didn't go to law school (although I wish I had done so). Anyway, on to the United States Constitution.


United States Constitution:

* Preamble -

     "We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice...provide for the common defence promote general Welfare..."

     These three areas help protect women, children (as well as all citizens obviously), and allow citizens to help shape the nation as times change. Hence the "more perfect Union" part. Furthermore, those that have a civil union under the current justice system would be denied this if the amendment were to pass.

* Article 6 - Paragraph 2

      "This Constitution...shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."

     Supreme Law of the land...so federal trumps state??? (I know my legal friends are screaming the 10th amendment; HOWEVER, it does say that as well in the document. I read this to mean that even judges in other federal districts review and make rulings on other cases (for example, the 4th Circuit court would review a case ruled on by the 9th or 7th Circuit Courts to see if it has any bearing on their potential ruling...I could be wrong though - remember I didn't go to law school).

* Amendment 14 - Section 1

     "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

     Notice we have "Equal Protection of laws" again in the argument; however, this is at the federal level so it HAS to be upheld. To put it plainly, you can suspend a civil union's rights by passing a law that bans civil unions.


Again, I'm sure there are more areas of the United States Constitution that would validate why Amendment One is wrong and should not be passed.

If Amendment One were to pass, and I have already voted to ensure that it won't, it would be challenged in a court of law.  Even the Supreme Court would strike it down as unconstitutional.  There would be plenty of court cases for the United States Supreme Court to review and rule on the unconstitutionality of Amendment One.  Some of these cases are:

1. Loving v. Virginia (1967)
2. Lawrence v. Texas (2003)
3. Crawford v. Washington (2004)
4. Romers v. Evans (1996)*

* This court cases actually overturned a previous USSC ruling back in 1986. The 1986 Supreme Court Case was Bowers v. Hardwick. The main reason I saved this case for last - to list - is because it is strikingly similar to North Carolina (it was based in the state of Colorado).  I feel that this would be the main court case that would impact the Supreme Courts ruling regarding the unconstitutionality of Amendment One for North Carolina.

I strongly feel that this Amendment One is not justified and is unconstitutional. Furthermore, if we step back in history and words were added so that the proposed amendment would read, " An Act...to provide that marriage between one white man and one white woman is the only domestic legal union", then we would 1) have fought harder against it; 2) have had it struck down by the Loving v. Virginia Supreme Court Case of 1967; and, 3) have wondered why this piece of legislation is so discriminatory and a hindrance on progression for the United States of America.

To all voting citizens in North Carolina who read this; I urge you to vote "No" on Tuesday and vote against Amendment One.  It's not constitutional and it's not who we are as Americans.