The Soccer Mom Vote

A Moral War

I was never a girl scout. Or a brownie. As far as I know, my brother was not a boy scout. So I have a clean slate when it comes to my knowledge of the boy scouts. It seems like a fine organization. Politics aside, they seem to me to be making a great gift to boys all over the country.

On October 30, 2007, I attended the Capital Area Boy Scouts of America 2007 Distinguished Citizen Award Dinner in Austin honoring Texas Governor Rick Perry. (I was given a free ticket.) I went to the event, enjoyed a great meal, and had a great time with some friends. I was even looking forward to hearing our governor speak, but on that count I was sorely disappointed, and it is his speech that I want to write about.

The evening began with the pledge of allegiance, which I don’t think I’ve recited since junior high. (It totally comes back to you.) Then those who knew the Scout oath and law recited those. Here they are in case you don’t know them:

Scout Oath:

"On my honor, I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my country
And to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight."

And the Scout law:

“A scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent. "

We heard from some young scouts and saw a presentation about the good that these youngsters are learning and doing in their local chapter. Then Governor Perry spoke, and I include most of his speech here, because I think you should read it:

“They Boy Scouts have had my attention for a long time and they will have my attention until I take my last breath. I believe the boy scouts are the most significant and important organization in America. No other organization has salvaged more lives, built more confidence, or created more leaders. Scouting changed my life forever. And I think it should continue free of interference to do the same thing for young men for as long as America exists. I believe that because I am the product of scouting.”

Wow. OK. I can buy that. The experiences we have in our youth and adolescence really do shape who we are. Perry continued about the small Texas town where he grew up and how it was for him, a great place to live. He went on to praise the values and life lessons that the Boy Scouts uphold:

“Scouting teaches self-reliance and self-sacrifice. It teaches that good things come to those who work hard and follow through. It teaches you can never trade your integrity for something better. It teaches young scouts to respect one another, to respect those in positions of authority, a quality I might add that is sorely missing in today’s world. Of all the values I learned in scouting, I value reverence most of all.  Every day I acknowledge God’s power in my life and in this world. It is my relationship with Him that strengthens, gives me the internal power to face every day. And now more than ever, scouts, their supporters, need all the strength that we can get. For more than 40 years we have watched our culture decline while the attacks on the venerable institutions like scouting have mounted, as the culture has increasingly told young people to look out for number one, moral values are relative, if it feels good, do it. Lawsuit-happy do-gooders, they have sought to drive people of faith out of the public square, to sanitize the pledge of allegiance, our currency, our government buildings, even the scouting oath from even the mention of God. Judges have tried to expunge the word Christmas from the public dialog, activists have tried to force the scouts to conform to a social agenda that fits their narrow view, all of it, of course, in the name of tolerance. I happen to believe some of the most intolerant acts were often performed in the name of tolerance.”

What? Whoa. He lost me at Lawsuit-happy do-gooders. He continued, as follows:

“I’m proud to say that earlier this year I signed legislation that protects the right of school children to express their faith in our public schools without worrying about a trip to the principal’s office. See, when the supreme court decision in the Dale case -- when the United States supreme court affirmed the Dale case, the rights of scouts to set their membership standards as it relates to scout masters, those same organizations started threatening public schools and other publicly financed organizations for letting scouts use their resources, their buildings. For instance, in San Diego, facilities that had hosted scouting activities for as long as people can remember are now off limits. The department of defense gets attacked for hosting scouting events on DOD property that they have allowed to be used for 60 plus years and you see, you need to know that at its core, this is really not about the Boy Scouts. The scouts are merely a listening post on the perimeter. They’re sounding the early alarm of other impending attacks on our values and I don’t believe the attacks are going to let up.”

He is referring to a couple of things here. In 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court held that as a private group, the Boy Scouts of America have a right to forbid atheists and gays from serving in it. Following that ruling, some lawsuits followed in California (in San Diego and Berkeley). As a result, some locations that had previously allowed the Boy Scouts to use their facilities (rent-free in one case) stopped allowing them to do so based on the fact that they deemed those events to be discriminatory (closed to gays and atheists).

In other words, San Diego said to the Boy Scouts, ours is a public facility. You may use our public facility if your event is open to all members of the community. You may use our facility only if you are using it in a way that does not discriminate against any of the citizens of our city. That seems fair to me. Perry went on:

“So if you believe there is such a thing as right and wrong, if you believe that there are acceptable standards of behavior, if you believe that ethics cannot be made up on the spot, if you believe that judges need to make decisions based on the law rather than on popular opinion at the time, and if you believe that this very nation came into existence because of what George Washington called divine providence, then you have a stake in this war as well. At the beginning of this coming February, I’m going to plant my own flag in this war when a book that I have written on scouting is published. It’s my attempt to clearly state the importance of scouting values and to more clearly draw the battle lines in this very vital conflict. With it, I hope to let the world know that this conflict isn’t just an intellectual exercise. It is a battle for the very future of our country.”

Suddenly, he’s talking about war. I really have a problem with this rhetoric. Perry is attempting to create a divide between what seems to be his idea of good people who “believe there is such a thing as right and wrong” and… who else? Those of us who don’t support discriminating against gays or atheists? This language fosters an Us and Them mentality that is to me, absurd.

I am not a Christian. But I certainly can see the value of the Boy Scouts of America. It’s a fine organization responsible for helping young boys who might not have any other access to good role models. But I agree whole-heartedly with the decisions of California lawmakers who declared their buildings closed to anyone who would discriminate against their citizens. Does that put me in a category of “lawsuit-happy do-gooders” lacking in ethics who support judges who make decisions based on popular opinion as opposed to the law? According to Perry, it does. Perry concluded with the following:

“So today, my fear is not that somehow we’re going to lose our freedom to a superior power, but that the decay of our society will lead us to trade our freedom for shortsighted self-indulgence. For more than a generation, our culture has emphasized a message of self-indulgence and it’s at the expense of social obligation. We have reaped the consequences in the form of teen pregnancy, divorced and broken families, a cycle of incarceration that all too often joins young men with their fathers behind bars. The foundation of our government or I should say the foundation of our society - it’s not government or for that matter individual freedom, it’s the family. And the demise of the family is the death mill of any great society. Past generations didn’t fight to give our children the freedom to gun down other children. They didn’t die on the battle field to give parents the freedom to starve their babies because they wanted to spend their last dime on getting high. Our young men and women didn’t give their lives in battle so that video games and television and the internet could raise our kids rather than two loving parents. We must never mistake freedom for license. One is right and the other leads to oppression.”

Perry never had my vote, and he’ll never have it now (as if there was any question). I was disgusted by his black and white interpretation of right and wrong, his eagerness to divide a community along religious lines, and his blatant insinuation that the only valid definition of family is a traditional one that includes two heterosexual parents. Perry claims, along with most of the religious right, that we are fighting a Moral War. Maybe we are. But it seems to me that Perry and others like him are doing their very best to get the battle going.

the new black

I’m so excited to be the new black! . . .and, well, the old black, too.

I read about the new political darling—the black woman, and the beauty shop vote.

So, let’s see! Does that mean the candidates are going to cater to my vote? Barak Obama and Hilary Clinton are counting on my vote. Where do they stand on abortion? Well, they support it. I can’t vote for anyone that supports abortion. But abortion isn’t a black issue, you say. Really? Well tell that to the 14 million black babies that have been aborted. What about the fact that the black population in this country has dropped from 26% to 6% since Roe v Wade? And the fact that Margaret Sanger  first started pushing for legalized abortion specifically to eliminate the black population in this country? It’s high time abortion became a black issue.  Especially since it always was—we just didn’t know it.

White women view abortion as a last resort. Black women view it as birth control. So goes the saying, if

America has a cold, Black America has pneumonia.

Black women make up 6% of the nation’s population; they account for 37% of all abortions.

I would have to stand with Dr. Dobson and others who would say that if a candidate is not against abortion, then I cannot support them. It does not matter what kind of health care they promise. It doesn’t matter what kind of national defense platform they create. None of that matters as long as people continue to march through the meat grinder. Voluntarily.

The devaluation of life may start with the black community. Freakonomics suggests that abortion may have contributed to lowered crime rates.  Then Bill Bennett made the leap to suggest that aborting black babies might be a good thing.  He was being absurd, one would hope. But rest assured, it wouldn’t stop at the black community.  Devaluation of life does not play favorite colors. First it’s the unborn black, then the unborn every other race, then it’s the elderly, the disabled. . .    

There are some people that think having children is selfish. My question to them would be what are you saving the planet for?  Or rather for whom? So if they have their way, we have a safe, pristine, empty planet.  Well done. And we are playing right into their hands with this legalized abortion madness.  Not on my watch.

The Liberty Dollar- A Cautionary Tale?

The Federal Government appears to have shut down Liberty Dollar in Evansville, IN.  The company was dealing in "alternative currency" which is backed by silver.  Apparently the Federal Government doesn't appreciate it when you make your own currency.  Who knew?

In interviews, the owner of Liberty Dollar, Bernard Von Nothaus, states that he expects to be arrested.  He also claims that he is being persecuted because he brought a suit against the U.S. Mint to stop claiming that trying to spend or circulate the liberty dollar is a crime.  You can read more and watch news coverage here.

The FBI is not confirming that they, in fact, raided the shop and the Sunshine Mint in Idaho(where the coins are actually produced) last Thursday. They wouldn't be very good at their jobs if they copped to everything, would they?

Von Nothaus, despite his unfortunate last name, makes some excellent arguments about the U.S. dollar.  He also seems unflinching in the face of this turn of events.  The Washington Post had this quote from Von Nothaus,

Should he be charged, he said, "I'll turn it into my golden opportunity to validate the Liberty Dollar as a legal, lawful currency and save the country from a monetary collapse."

There are big questions here. 

Does the Federal Government have a right to keep people from bartering with one another using an alternative currency?  I see the public interest in not having counterfeit currency being used as genuine U.S. dollars.  However, since U.S. dollars are no longer backed by....well, anything, and these Liberty Dollars are backed by silver which is the counterfeit?

I see the public interest in having a normalized version of currency, but when one form takes a nose dive, is it in our personal interest to start looking at ways to protect the value of our own money?

Soccer Moms have so much to think about (ladies for the love of God I hope you've taken your turkey out of the freezer already) but this is an intriguing exercise in what we really think about he Federal Government and it's tactics.  As citizens, what are our rights?  As Moms what is in our best interest and the interest of our children's future. 

I'd love to know what you all think.

It's all about the Clintons

I have been thinking about writing about the Clintons for a while, but the recent story about Anita Esterday on NPR spurred me to action.  Is is possible you haven't heard about Anita?  She's a waitress at a restaurant called Maid-Rite in Iowa where Hillary and her entourage had lunch and then moved on.  In an unfortunate turn of events, Clinton decided to talk about Esterday (a single working two jobs mom) in her next few speeches.  What isn't clear is whether a tip was left for the hardworking mom and her co-workers.  The story from the Clinton campaign isn't clear; some accounts have a tip left on a credit card, others have a 100$ bill being left, all accounts from the campaign have a tip left.  Esterday and her co-workers say they didn't get anything.  In the grand scheme of things it seems unimportant.  But didn't someone once say that it's the little things that count? 

I always thought that if Hillary ran it wouldn't even be a question, I would vote for her.  I voted for Bill, at least twice (I lived in Chicago for a while).  I thought he was a good president and didn't care who he slept with (or had sex with or whatever those crazy kids are calling it these days).  He should not have lied about it, but I could forgive him.  I loved Hillary, her drive, ambition, and strength.  I thought her health care program should had a shot.  I LOVED the book.  She and Bill knew and understood what the country needed and would find a way to do it.  My faith was shaken when Bill granted China Most Favoured Nation trading status, but I stood by him.

Until this year, when I read his book.   Ugh, the man repulses me now.  Granted, it was a much more interesting read than I expected, but...all the rationalization for crappy decisions he made.  All the glossing over of his womanizing.  The thing reads like a campaign ad for Hillary.  Did you know she hung the moon?  Says so right here in this book.  And he talks about race so much.  Only if he doesn't mention someone's race at least once can you assume they are Caucasian of some sort.  He overplays to an embarrassing point his comfort with and affinity for anyone not of his own race/religion/insert whatever is expedient here.  Every single anecdote is followed by what important lesson he learned that later helped him in public office.  I was glad to finish it and move on to other books with more likable protagonists.

And the book reminded me how unhappy I was when he granted China MFN trading status, amid blatant and unapologetic human rights violations and in the wake of the Tienanmen Square Massacre.  It was a timely reminder, I was reading the book just as the first wave of lead-filled China made toys was recalled.  It would be easy to blame the current administration, it's such an easy target.  But in my opinion Bill takes at least part of the blame this time.

So what about Hillary and the tip?  Should it matter whether she/someone in her campaign leaves a tip for someone?  Maybe not, but to me a lot of life is in the small details, you can tell a whole lot about people by how they treat wait staff.  If you don't take care of the little things, how are you going to take care of the big ones?  You have to be aware enough of the people around you to make sure that your staff knows that you should ALWAYS leave at least 15%, if not 20%, of the total menu value of the meal for wait staff unless the service is abysmal (especially when the meal or part of it is complimentary). If you don't, then how will they best represent you as the voice of the "little person" that the Clintons purport to be?  And speaking of little things, wait wage is tiny.  Wait staff count on tips because their minimum wage is $2.13*.  Anita Esterday says she may vote for Hillary Clinton (a viewpoint which cost her income when the conservative owner of her nursing home job cut back her hours after hearing of Esterday's support for Clinton).  I'm still unsure and am not planning to vote in the primaries because I can't figure it out.

*Though they shouldn't, some restaurant owners take a portion of total tips as shown on the end of night credit card report--leave cash tips when possible to avoid this; also, many times the wait person has to give others a portion of the tips--bus staff, etc, often get tipped out of wait tips.

Doobie? Or Not Doobie? That is the Question.

Unless one is a complete and utter student of politics, it is difficult to know where such a huge field of candidates, such as what we have in this election cycle, stands on every single issue.  Heck, some of them seem to waffle from day-to-day or even within the confines of a single debate about where they stand.

Some of the issues in the forefront have been discussed here multiple times.  But really, when it gets down to it, everyone I talk to has those 2-3 key things that help them decide on a candidate.  As a Libertarian, I listen with great interest to politicians from both major parties though, obviously, since I have chosen a third party distinction on purpose, there is no one in either party who represents my views across the board.

Those big issues get all the headlines.  They’re sexy, they sell papers and grab the top spot in the evening news.  But I like talking about smaller issues with people, too.

Like pot.

Have I grabbed you yet?

I live in an area with a higher than average incidence of cancer cases.  My best friend is a 4-year breast cancer survivor.  With community fundraisers and events, it is not unusual that I think about cancer often.  It also got me thinking about medical marijuana, or what is also referred to as “compassionate use” of marijuana.  It seems like one of those topics that comes up when 60 Minutes decides to do a story on a cancer patient who has marijuana prescribed by their doctor.

I grew up, the love child of hippies who, not to be blunt, had no qualms about the recreational usage of marijuana.  Both parents eventually outgrew that phase in life about the same time Nancy Reagan told me and other elementary students all over America to “Just Say No”.

I’m not alone in this generation, discussing the topic of the war on drugs and medical marijuana with my contemporaries, we mostly have the same perspective.  I wanted to see what you thought and if you even know where “your” candidate stands and what the laws are where you live.

I’ve done a little of the homework for you. 12 States have passed medical marijuana laws since 1996: Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.

Except, someone help explain this to me, in 2005 the Supreme Court passed a ruling that the Feds can arrest a state-recognized medical cannabis patient.  Huh?   (The case was Gonzales, Attorney General, et al. V. Raich, et al., read the whole thing here if you wish.

This ruling does come up in town hall meetings on the campaign trail.  Wondering where your candidate stands?  The Marijuana Policy Project site has a great link with a grading system along with quotes from the candidates themselves and the speech in which they stated their position, regarding the federal government's role in performing raids on medical marijuana patients:

• Joe Biden - B+
• Hillary Clinton - A
• Chris Dodd - A
• John Edwards - A-
• Mike Gravel - A+
• Dennis Kucinich - A+
• Barrack Obama - A
• Bill Richardson - A+
• Sam Brownback - F
• Rudy Guiliani - F
• Mike Huckabee - F
• Duncan Hunter - F
• John McCain - F
• Ron Paul - A+
• Mitt Romney - F
• Tom Tancredo - A+
• Fred Thompson - Incomplete

This issue is increasing in significance.  When states pass laws that protect patients and the federal government pushes this "loophole" into the, don't misunderstand me here, war on illegal drugs (I have kids too, I'm not talking about anything except the issue of medical marijuana, so please refrain from using alarmist arguments that I'll be waiting for your kids after school with heroin and meth), we have a problem.  It needs to be resolved.

A Time cover story from back in 2002, the New Politics of Pot, shows a trend toward "going legit".

A Time/CNN poll last week found that only 34% want pot to be totally legalized (the percentage has almost doubled since 1986). But a vast majority have become mellow about official loopholes: 80% think it's O.K. to dispense pot for medical purposes, and 72% think people caught with it for recreational use should get off with only a fine.

To wrap up, I should give you full disclosure.  My parents smoked pot back in the 70s.  I have never smoked pot.  As a theatre major, I had many opportunities but it was just not a big deal to me to do it.  I live in a state where marijuana, even "compassionate" use, is illegal.  I would fully expect myself or anyone I know using marijuana to be arrested.  I am not, routinely (though I do fess up to a bit of a lead foot), a law breaker.

And to really mess with your heads, well, only for those of you who enjoy partisan politics, I'm going to highlight two examples from candidates and their positions:

Ron Paul has consistently voted, and cosponsored, the Hinchey-Rohrabacher amendment which would have barred the DEA from spending any money to raid or arrest medical marijuana patients and caregivers in the states that allow the medical use of marijuana.

And who says a candidate can't be swayed by the voices of voters?

John Edwards, who in 2004 was a strong opponent to ending the federal raids, told voters at a Derry town hall meeting, "we will not be going in and raiding the use of marijuana for medical purposes in states that have legalized it. I think where democracy has worked, where voters have decided this should be legalized, I will not as president go in and run contrary to the will of the people in those states where it has been legalized."

What do you think?  Do you live in a state where it is legal?  What have you noticed?  What does your favorite candidate say about medical marijuana?

Additional sources:
Drug Policy Alliance, Marijuana Policy Project, NORML

And more, if you are really not busy today:
VoteHemp,  VIP

When Love Hurts

Amidst all the October Breast Cancer Awareness events last month, another "cause," if you will, got overlooked in the shuffle. According to the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, October was also Domestic Violent Awareness Month.

What is Domestic Violence? "Sometimes referred to as domestic abuse...(it) occurs when a family member, partner or ex-partner attempts to physically or psychologically dominate another. Domestic violence occurs in all cultures; people of all races, ethnicities, religions, and classes can be perpetrators of domestic violence. Domestic violence is perpetrated by, and on, both men and women, and occurs in same-sex and opposite-sex relationships (wikipedia, emphasis added)."

In other words, this is abuse that could happen to any one of us.

Some frightening statistics (source - Virginians Against Domestic Violence):

5.3 million (Number of times American women are abused or stalked by an intimate parnter each year)

555 thousand (Number of serious injuries caused by domestic violence)

145 thousand (Number of women hosptalized for those injuries)

12 hundred (Number killed)

73 percent (Percentage of domestic vilence indicdents that go unreported)

8.8 million (Number of children who witness domestic violence each year)

30 percent (Percentage by which being abused as a child increases the chances of being arrested for vilent acts as an adult - and boys who witness domestic violence are twice as likely to abuse their own partners and children when they become adults)

4.1 billion (Dollars spent yearly on medical and mental health care as a direct result of domestic violence)

What can we do to help? TAKE ACTION NOW. Go to the NCADV website, and see what can be done (see the "take action" section near the bottom for all kinds of ideas).

The next victim could be your mother, your sister, your best friend, your daughter...or you.

And if you are being abused, important numbers to remember as you get out and get help:

The National Domestic Violence Hotline: 1-800-799-SAFE

The National Sexual Assault Hotline: 1-800-656-HOPE

How Are You Going to Vote?

No, I'm not asking WHO you are going to vote for at this point.

I'm more interested in HOW you are going to vote.

The difference?

The pollsters and the media are trying to convince us that we've already made up our minds.  Hillary is "ahead."  Barack is in "second-place."  Edwards and others are "trailing."

Doesn't all this sort of make you feel that the process is a fait accompli?  But it isn't.  Not one vote has been cast yet, and so many commentators and news analysts are already talking as if it's a foregone conclusion who the Democratic nominee is going to be. 

I actually heard Tim Russert say on the radio last week that the 2008 Presidential election was going to be over in two months!  The implication being that once Iowa and New Hampshire are done voting, there's no point in the rest of us showing up again until November!

So as you are considering WHO you are going to vote for (please promise me you'll vote), ask yourself HOW you're going to arrive at your decision.

Will you vote by concensus or by conscience?  Should we cast our ballots for the candidate who seems to have a better chance or has the lead or the one who resonates with our personal philosophies and views about what our country should be and could be?

I have one small glimmer of hope about this.

My husband is getting REALLY tired of hearing me say this, but as an old political science major, I can't help myself -- the polls we see on the news by CNN and ABC and NBC are national polls.  We don't have a national primary -- we have state primaries.  So unless we're going to take separate polls for Iowa and New Hampshire and every other state, there's only so much stock you can put in the national polls.  They're not necessarily showing us the real picture.

And don't be fooled by those polls.  Have you looked at the "margins of error?" One of my professors in college was adamant that unless the margin of error of a poll was plus/minus three percent or less, it wasn't any more than a guess with some numbers attached to make it look like it's not a guess.

The margin of error on some of the big news polls is as high as plus/minus seven percent!!

Some people may think that if Hillary Clinton is so far ahead at this point, why bother to take the time to show up on primary day?

Maybe I'm naive, but if we stopped listening to the polls and just showed up and voted for the candidate who each of us thought would do the best job, then maybe the best man or woman really would end up in the White House.

Who is Ron Paul and why is he running for President?

The sign was either hand made or designed to look that way.  It said Ron Paul for President '08 in stenciled letters. 

My husband said, "isn't that the guy who played Hellboy" 

"No, that was Ron Perlman.  I think.  I'm not sure."

The point was we had no idea who Ron Paul was and we were more interested in talking about Hellboy, which was a movie that we both really liked (no hate mail please).  Why should we discuss a guy we'd never heard of, another grey haired, white male running for the white house....I mean, dude, could you be more of a cliche?

THEN I started hearing about Ron Paul on the blogosphere all of the time.  People would comment on every political site about him.  Recently, a person with whom I've never discussed politics sent me a complete testimonial on why they were voting for Ron Paul.

So, I took the bait and started rooting around for info on this guy.  Here is what I found out.

He's 72.  Yikes.  Reagan was only 69 when he took office.

He's a medical doctor who claims to have delivered 4,000 babies, and really, why would someone lie about that?

He grew up in Pittsburgh but after time in the Air Force he and his wife moved to Texas for good.  I'm not sure how Pennsylvania feels about that.

He was in congress for a while in the late 70s and early 80s and then gave it up for 13 years.  He returned as Congressman for Texas' 14th district in 1997.  A post he still holds today.

Ron Paul is intriguing.  He doesn't like taxes, big government or an unbalanced budget.  He's against federal regulation of guns, the internet and the patriot act.  He's against federal regulation in general.  He voted against the Iraq war....how many people can make that claim?  He's pro-life. He's an idealist...and by all accounts he's got integrity in spades. 

He's a compass point, like a true north.  Never wavering.  Is that what we want in a president?  I'm not sure.  But given the list of alternatives, maybe he's worth a second look.

 

She Should Run

Women in politics have seen some great victories in the last few decades.  There are more women holding elected offices now than ever before, and we have our first female Speaker of the House in Mrs. Pelosi as well as our first major-party presidential candidate in Mrs. Clinton.  There are sixteen women in the U.S. Senate, 70 women in the U.S. House, and nine women governors.  We've come a long way, baby.

And yet the number of women running for office is still surprisingly low.  There's no reason to believe that women have less interest or skill in politics, but perhaps we need a little push.  Maybe, just maybe, we need someone to ask.

That's the idea behind the organization She Should Run.   The aim of this program, part of the Women's Campaign Forum, is to gather a list of 1,000 pro-choice women who should run for public office.  Paired with training and endorsement, it hopes to launch more dynamic women into public office, for anything from the local school board to the federal government.

Yes, this particular program is limited to women who take a pro-choice stance on abortion, but it does not discriminate based on party affiliation.  When I asked their representative, Brad Levinson, about the rationale for supporting pro-choice candidates, I got this thoughtful response:

"The Women's Campaign Forum, similar to organizations such as EMILY's List, made the decision to be a pro-choice organization for this reason:  as the WCF's central mission is about women's empowerment, they're of the firm belief that women would not be where they are today if it wasn't for their right to have control over their own reproductive decisions."

(links added by me)

If this is a statement you agree with, and you know some fabulous women who would make great leaders, consider adding their names to the list at She Should Run.  Check out their list of candidate resources.  They've even got a blog!  (Who doesn't?)

While you're there, consider adding your own.  There are many women in this Soccer Mom Vote community who would make outstanding elected officials.  Maybe it's time for you to take that possibility seriously.

Universal Health Care...No Thank You

A few days ago Soccer Mom Bobbi Jo wrote a passionate article suggesting the US should embrace universal health care. If you haven't already, I encourage you to read her article and the comments associated with it. Then come back here and read my article. I think by having both articles here at Soccer Moms we will spark some interesting debate and discussion. Please keep it civil (but then, you always do!).

It wasn't that long ago that people were actually responsible for paying for their own health care. No one expected a government entity to swoop in and save them from themselves. In fact, many of our parents and grandparents probably paid for a doctor visit out of their own pockets. Thomas Sowell writes

This was all before politicians gave us the idea that the things we could not afford individually we could somehow afford collectively through the magic of government. (Read the rest of his article discussing his thoughts on universal health care.)

For me, that really is the heart of the matter. Over the last forty years we've somehow come to the conclusion that we are owed something simply because we live in the United States of America. Every election we are ready and willing to hand over more of our responsibility to the government so we don't have to think about taking care of ourselves.

I would rather see us paying for our medical bills out of pocket and not relying on government for any of our health care issues. Then again, I'm a Libertarian and I'd love to see the government butt out of just about everything. I'm a fan of medical savings plans. These plans allow you to put aside money for your health care issues (including doctor visits, medicine, etc.). John Stossel explains why these savings plans work and actually save us money.

Here's another article by John Stossel outlining why universal health care and its lack of competition just can't work. In fact, he discusses Canada specifically.

As for the debate on S-CHIP? Please read this article from Reason Magazine that explains what that program was really doing and how we could fix it. You'll want to read through to the end; that's where it gets good. It's particularly relevant to Bobbi Jo's assertion that our capitalist mentality should be ditched in favor socialism. is not working (sorry to Bobbi Jo--I misunderstood her assertion!).

Speaking of S-CHIP--you know I have to bring this up--apparently those of us who don't want universal health care are heartless people who don't care about the children. Mark Steyn says it better than I ever could. Please read his article explaining why the real "war on children" is not changing our system for the better now (i.e., jumping off the government gravy train and taking responsibility for ourselves) and leaving it for them to pay for later.