TT Note: This story is highly disturbing. How could any alleged counselor tell a minor they didn't need to report this abuse? How could any alleged counselor look at themselves in the mirror after telling a minor that it's really not a big deal to be 14 and pregnant by a 31 year old man? How far do these clinics go on a daily basis?
/PRNewswire/ -- A Planned Parenthood counselor in Birmingham was caught on hidden camera telling an alleged 14-year-old statutory rape victim that the clinic "does sometimes bend the rules a little bit" rather than report sexual abuse to state authorities. This is the seventh Planned Parenthood clinic implicated in a multi-state child abuse scandal involving the deliberate and unlawful suppression of evidence of statutory rape.
Lila Rose, 20-year-old UCLA student and Live Action president, went undercover at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Birmingham and told a counselor that she was 14-years-old, pregnant by her 31-year-old "boyfriend," and needed a secret abortion so her parents would not find out about her sexual relationship with the older man.
After telling the counselor that her "boyfriend" is 31, Rose asks, "Is it a problem about my boyfriend?" The counselor, identified as "Tanisha" in the video, responds, "As long as you consented to having sex with him, there's nothing we can truly do about that." Rose then says that her boyfriend "said he could get in big trouble," and Tanisha acknowledges that "he could, especially if your parents find out that he's 31." She then tells Rose that the clinic manager, OB/GYN Dr. Desiree Bates, "sometimes does bend the rules a little bit" and states that "whatever you tell us stays within these walls" and "we can't disclose any information to anybody."
Alabama code 26-14-3 requires health professionals to disclose suspected cases of sexual abuse to state officials immediately.
"The law is explicit about a healthcare provider's duty to report, yet Planned Parenthood pretends they cannot say anything," Rose notes of the investigation. "Planned Parenthood increases its business and influence by circumventing state reporting laws, but inflicts terrible harm upon the vulnerable young girls sent back to statutory rapists."
In the video, Tanisha also seems to tell Rose that a signature from an "older sister that's over the age of 18" or someone "with the same last name" could function as a substitute for parental consent so Planned Parenthood could perform an abortion on a minor. Alabama Code 26-21-3 specifies that the written permission of either a parent or legal guardian is necessary before a minor may obtain an abortion.
The new video is sixth in Live Action's "Mona Lisa Project," a nationwide undercover investigation that documents Planned Parenthood's repeated noncompliance with state mandatory reporting laws for sexual abuse of minors. Alabama is the fourth state to be implicated in the controversy, along with Arizona, Indiana, and Tennessee. Recently, the investigation of a clinic in Memphis, TN assisted state legislators in their effort to successfully divert nearly $1 million in taxpayer subsidies from Planned Parenthood to law-abiding local health clinics.
"When to 'bend the rules a little' means hiding a case of statutory rape from Child Protective Services and looking for ways around the parental consent requirement, then Planned Parenthood is directly responsible for ensuring that statutory rapists can continue their abuse of young girls," Rose says.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Monday, June 29, 2009
Announcing the Release of Demographic Winter Part II - 'The Demographic Bomb'
TT Note: Manipulated to fail? Interesting story and theory to read.
/PRNewswire/ -- SRB Documentaries is pleased to announce the release of "Demographic Bomb: demography is destiny," the long-awaited sequel to 2008's "Demographic Winter: the decline of the human family."
Barry McLerran, producer of both documentaries, observed, "Like 'Demographic Winter,' 'The Demographic Bomb' deals with rapidly falling birth rates and their consequences for humanity in the 21st century."
Viewers of "Demographic Winter" heard from demographers, sociologists, economists and historians on the demographic crisis confronting us.
McLerran commented: "'Demographic Bomb: demography is destiny' explores the history of the modern population-control movement -- how it persuaded the public that there are too many people in the world, and how these fallacies became institutionalized."
Among those interviewed in "Demographic Bomb" is Paul Ehrlich of Stanford University, author of 1968's The Population Bomb, which popularized the myth of overpopulation.
Mathew Connelly of Columbia University (author of Fatal Misconception: The Struggle To Control World Population) reveals how organizations, institutions, governments and the United Nations manipulated and coerced families, evaded political accountability and violated basic human rights to achieve their population-reduction agenda.
Former Yale Professor of Economics Jennifer Roback Morse, USC Professor of Urban Planning and Demography Dowell Myers, Harvard PhD Nick Eberstadt, Harvard MBA, Harry Dent (author of The Great Depression Ahead) and Nobel Prize winning economist Gary Becker uncover the roots of the crisis that has shaken the world's economies.
McLerran noted: "'Demographic Winter' predicted the financial crash of 2008 to within 12 months. 'Demographic Bomb' reveals how this is just the beginning."
"'Demographic Bomb' shows what happens when countries comprising 80% of the world's economy have plummeting numbers of workers, consumers and innovators - leading to falling consumer spending, and too few workers to support the elderly," McLerran disclosed.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
/PRNewswire/ -- SRB Documentaries is pleased to announce the release of "Demographic Bomb: demography is destiny," the long-awaited sequel to 2008's "Demographic Winter: the decline of the human family."
Barry McLerran, producer of both documentaries, observed, "Like 'Demographic Winter,' 'The Demographic Bomb' deals with rapidly falling birth rates and their consequences for humanity in the 21st century."
Viewers of "Demographic Winter" heard from demographers, sociologists, economists and historians on the demographic crisis confronting us.
McLerran commented: "'Demographic Bomb: demography is destiny' explores the history of the modern population-control movement -- how it persuaded the public that there are too many people in the world, and how these fallacies became institutionalized."
Among those interviewed in "Demographic Bomb" is Paul Ehrlich of Stanford University, author of 1968's The Population Bomb, which popularized the myth of overpopulation.
Mathew Connelly of Columbia University (author of Fatal Misconception: The Struggle To Control World Population) reveals how organizations, institutions, governments and the United Nations manipulated and coerced families, evaded political accountability and violated basic human rights to achieve their population-reduction agenda.
Former Yale Professor of Economics Jennifer Roback Morse, USC Professor of Urban Planning and Demography Dowell Myers, Harvard PhD Nick Eberstadt, Harvard MBA, Harry Dent (author of The Great Depression Ahead) and Nobel Prize winning economist Gary Becker uncover the roots of the crisis that has shaken the world's economies.
McLerran noted: "'Demographic Winter' predicted the financial crash of 2008 to within 12 months. 'Demographic Bomb' reveals how this is just the beginning."
"'Demographic Bomb' shows what happens when countries comprising 80% of the world's economy have plummeting numbers of workers, consumers and innovators - leading to falling consumer spending, and too few workers to support the elderly," McLerran disclosed.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Friday, June 26, 2009
OKK Trading To Pay $665,000 Civil Penalty for Violating Federal Lead Paint Ban and Other Child Safety Rules
As part of its commitment to protecting the safety of children, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) announced today that OKK Trading, of Commerce, Calif., has agreed to pay a $665,000 civil penalty (PDF) for failing to comply with a 30-year old ban on lead paint on toys, as well as violating other federal child safety standards.
The penalty settlement, which has been provisionally accepted by the Commission, resolves CPSC staff allegations that from November 2007 through August 2008, OKK Trading knowingly imported and sold toys with paints that contained lead levels that exceeded legal limits. In 1978, a federal ban was put in place which prohibited toys and other children's articles from having more than 0.06 percent lead (by weight) in paints or surface coatings. Lead can be toxic if ingested by young children and can cause adverse health consequences.
The penalty settlement also resolves CPSC staff allegations that OKK Trading knowingly imported and sold toys, games, rattles, pacifiers, and art materials that violated the Federal Hazardous Substances Act. These allegations include:
From December 2004 through August 2008, OKK Trading imported and sold toys that had small parts in violation of CPSC regulations. To protect young children from choking, aspiration, or ingestion hazards, federal law prohibits toys intended for children under three from having small parts.
From November 2004 through January 2005, OKK Trading imported rattles that violated CPSC's safety requirements for rattles.
From July 2007 through January 2008, OKK Trading imported and sold pacifiers that violated CPSC's safety requirements for pacifiers, including the prohibition on small parts.
From January 2005 through April 2007, OKK Trading imported toys and games that violated CPSC's labeling requirements for balloons, small balls, and small parts.
From September 2005 through April 2007, OKK Trading imported art materials that violated CPSC's labeling requirements.
The settlement also covers staff allegations that from May 2007 through December 2007, the company knowingly exported noncompliant toys in violation of federal notification requirements.
OKK Trading informed CPSC that it received no reports of incidents or injuries involving the products covered by this settlement. In agreeing to the settlement, OKK Trading denies CPSC's allegations that it knowingly violated the law.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
The penalty settlement, which has been provisionally accepted by the Commission, resolves CPSC staff allegations that from November 2007 through August 2008, OKK Trading knowingly imported and sold toys with paints that contained lead levels that exceeded legal limits. In 1978, a federal ban was put in place which prohibited toys and other children's articles from having more than 0.06 percent lead (by weight) in paints or surface coatings. Lead can be toxic if ingested by young children and can cause adverse health consequences.
The penalty settlement also resolves CPSC staff allegations that OKK Trading knowingly imported and sold toys, games, rattles, pacifiers, and art materials that violated the Federal Hazardous Substances Act. These allegations include:
From December 2004 through August 2008, OKK Trading imported and sold toys that had small parts in violation of CPSC regulations. To protect young children from choking, aspiration, or ingestion hazards, federal law prohibits toys intended for children under three from having small parts.
From November 2004 through January 2005, OKK Trading imported rattles that violated CPSC's safety requirements for rattles.
From July 2007 through January 2008, OKK Trading imported and sold pacifiers that violated CPSC's safety requirements for pacifiers, including the prohibition on small parts.
From January 2005 through April 2007, OKK Trading imported toys and games that violated CPSC's labeling requirements for balloons, small balls, and small parts.
From September 2005 through April 2007, OKK Trading imported art materials that violated CPSC's labeling requirements.
The settlement also covers staff allegations that from May 2007 through December 2007, the company knowingly exported noncompliant toys in violation of federal notification requirements.
OKK Trading informed CPSC that it received no reports of incidents or injuries involving the products covered by this settlement. In agreeing to the settlement, OKK Trading denies CPSC's allegations that it knowingly violated the law.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Thursday, June 25, 2009
76% of African-Americans Want Delay on Climate Legislation Until Economy Recovers
TT Note: One would think that Congress should realize the economy is in more dire need of help. But then, how many members of Congress will be helped in their own pocketbooks by the climate change bill?
PRNewswire/ -- 76% of African-Americans want Congress to make economic recovery, not climate change, its top priority, says a newly released nationwide poll of African-Americans conducted by the National Center for Public Policy Research.
The poll's release comes as the U.S. House of Representatives is planning a Friday vote on the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade climate bill. The legislation, if adopted, is expected to reduce aggregate GDP by $7.4 trillion in an effort to reduce global warming.
The survey of 800 African-Americans, 80% Democrats and 4% Republicans, found significant concern that government action on climate change would have a harmful and disproportionately negative impact on the African-American community.
Among the key findings:
* 38% believe job losses from climate change legislation would be felt most strongly in the black community. 7% believe job losses would fall most on Hispanics and 2% on whites;
* 56% believe Washington policymakers have failed to adequately consider economic and quality of life concerns of the black community when addressing climate issues;
* 52% of respondents don't want to pay more for gasoline or electricity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 73% are unwilling to pay more than 50 cents more for a gallon of gas; 76% are unwilling to pay more than $50 more per year for electricity;
* Black Americans are virtually deadlocked on plans to reduce emissions if it would increase prices and unemployment. 44% opposed reductions under these circumstances, 45% supported them.
* 76% want Congress to make economic recovery the top priority.
"An overwhelming majority African-Americans want Congress to fix the economy before turning its attention to climate change," said David Ridenour, vice president of The National Center for Public Policy Research, who directs the group's Center for Public Opinion Policy Center, which issued the poll.
"Significantly," Ridenour continued, "not only were 80 percent of the respondents self-identified Democrats, but 67 percent self-identified as 'strong Democrats.' As African-Americans are a core constituency of the party, if the Congressional leadership ignores this, it does so at its own peril."
The survey was conducted by Wilson Research Strategies and has a margin of error of +/- 3.4%. It can be viewed at: http://www.nationalcenter.org/BlackOpinion.html .
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
PRNewswire/ -- 76% of African-Americans want Congress to make economic recovery, not climate change, its top priority, says a newly released nationwide poll of African-Americans conducted by the National Center for Public Policy Research.
The poll's release comes as the U.S. House of Representatives is planning a Friday vote on the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade climate bill. The legislation, if adopted, is expected to reduce aggregate GDP by $7.4 trillion in an effort to reduce global warming.
The survey of 800 African-Americans, 80% Democrats and 4% Republicans, found significant concern that government action on climate change would have a harmful and disproportionately negative impact on the African-American community.
Among the key findings:
* 38% believe job losses from climate change legislation would be felt most strongly in the black community. 7% believe job losses would fall most on Hispanics and 2% on whites;
* 56% believe Washington policymakers have failed to adequately consider economic and quality of life concerns of the black community when addressing climate issues;
* 52% of respondents don't want to pay more for gasoline or electricity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 73% are unwilling to pay more than 50 cents more for a gallon of gas; 76% are unwilling to pay more than $50 more per year for electricity;
* Black Americans are virtually deadlocked on plans to reduce emissions if it would increase prices and unemployment. 44% opposed reductions under these circumstances, 45% supported them.
* 76% want Congress to make economic recovery the top priority.
"An overwhelming majority African-Americans want Congress to fix the economy before turning its attention to climate change," said David Ridenour, vice president of The National Center for Public Policy Research, who directs the group's Center for Public Opinion Policy Center, which issued the poll.
"Significantly," Ridenour continued, "not only were 80 percent of the respondents self-identified Democrats, but 67 percent self-identified as 'strong Democrats.' As African-Americans are a core constituency of the party, if the Congressional leadership ignores this, it does so at its own peril."
The survey was conducted by Wilson Research Strategies and has a margin of error of +/- 3.4%. It can be viewed at: http://www.nationalcenter.org/BlackOpinion.html .
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Big Automaker Bankruptcies Leave Injured Without Recourse
TT Note: Now isn't this just a kick of the old tires. It would appear that the bankruptcy of Chrysler got a big bonus in protecting itself from any future claims of personal injury from their manufacturing process. Gee whiz. They couldn't run their company properly. Did they make their cars correctly? And now GM is looking for the same protection?
The fall of some of the great American automakers has had a profound impact on many communities, as plant and dealership closings and lay-offs force many families into long unemployment lines. But the impact of the Chrysler and GM bankruptcies does not stop there. If the current Chrysler bankruptcy plan is upheld and GM receives a similar plan, these companies' bankruptcies could hurt many more Americans for years to come.
Chrysler Insulated from Pre-Bankruptcy Injury Claims
Chrysler's Chapter 11 bankruptcy included a protection never included in a bankruptcy before: protection from future personal injury claims by consumers who bought Chrysler vehicles before the company entered bankruptcy. This means that anyone who purchased a car from the company prior to the bankruptcy and who later is injured or killed by a defect in the vehicle will not be able to sue the company for damages for the injury or wrongful death.
How did this happen?
During bankruptcy, Chrysler was split into two companies: the "old" Chrysler and the "new" Chrysler.
The old Chrysler keeps all of the company's bad debts and liabilities, including any lawsuits filed against the company prior to the bankruptcy filing. The old company is also responsible for paying out any personal injury judgments or settlements entered against Chrysler before the bankruptcy. Thus, personal injury victims become part of the long list of unsecured creditors who are owed money by the company, but who have little chance of actually receiving it. Unsecured creditors are only paid if there are any funds left over after the secured creditors' debts have been satisfied.
The new Chrysler, on the other hand, emerges from the bankruptcy with the old company's assets, but none of its debt. However, this normally only includes the debt existing at the time of bankruptcy and not any potential future debts or liabilities. In Chrysler's case, the bankruptcy court determined it would be unfair to impose responsibility on the new company (which is owned in large part by Fiat and the US and Canadian governments) for future personal injury claims concerning vehicles purchased before it even existed.
GM Seeking Similar Personal Injury Claim Protection
GM's current Chapter 11 filing is expected to include a similar request for protection from personal injury claims on cars bought before the company entered bankruptcy. If the bankruptcy court allows GM to do this - which it is likely to do - the impact could be devastating for personal injury victims. While Chrysler is one of the smallest car manufacturers in the country, GM is the largest, selling more than 2.9 million vehicles in 2008. Allowing GM to shield itself from personal injury lawsuits could potentially silence thousands of Americans who have been hurt by the company's products.
Re-Victimizing the Victims
It is patently unfair to consumers to give Chrysler and GM a free-pass on lawsuits for injuries caused by vehicles purchased before the companies went into bankruptcy. The court's decision leaves consumers with no means to recover their unpaid medical bills, lost wages and other expenses from the manufacturers, when they are hurt by defective parts or the defective design of their cars.
It is even more unfair when considering the fact that court had other options available to protect consumers. For example, the bankruptcy court could have created a victim compensation fund or another type of fund that could be used to pay out personal injury or wrongful death claims against the automakers. A similar plan was used in the asbestos cases when the liable companies went bankrupt.
The court also could have decided not to allow the companies to skirt their responsibilities and made the new Chrysler and GM companies liable for any claims arising out of vehicles purchased before the bankruptcies. After all, both companies have agreed to uphold the warranties on cars purchased before the bankruptcies, so why not also guarantee the safety and workmanship of these vehicles? It seems counterintuitive that the automakers are willing to replace defective parts, but they will not accept responsibility for any harm caused by these same defective parts.
At this point, it is unclear whether a company can shield itself from liability for a future claim that may or may not happen. Some legal scholars and practicing attorneys are raising questions about whether it is a violation of a consumer's due process rights for the court to take away a person's future right to sue.
Consumer protection groups, including the Center for Auto Safety and Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety, plan to challenge the Chrysler bankruptcy judge's ruling on appeal. Until then, consumers who thought they were helping out American automakers by buying their cars before they went into bankruptcy will be left with no legal protections, rights or safeguards should they be injured by a defectively built or designed GM or Chrysler vehicle.
Article provided by The McClellan Law Firm
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
Fayetteville, Peachtree City, Tyrone
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
The fall of some of the great American automakers has had a profound impact on many communities, as plant and dealership closings and lay-offs force many families into long unemployment lines. But the impact of the Chrysler and GM bankruptcies does not stop there. If the current Chrysler bankruptcy plan is upheld and GM receives a similar plan, these companies' bankruptcies could hurt many more Americans for years to come.
Chrysler Insulated from Pre-Bankruptcy Injury Claims
Chrysler's Chapter 11 bankruptcy included a protection never included in a bankruptcy before: protection from future personal injury claims by consumers who bought Chrysler vehicles before the company entered bankruptcy. This means that anyone who purchased a car from the company prior to the bankruptcy and who later is injured or killed by a defect in the vehicle will not be able to sue the company for damages for the injury or wrongful death.
How did this happen?
During bankruptcy, Chrysler was split into two companies: the "old" Chrysler and the "new" Chrysler.
The old Chrysler keeps all of the company's bad debts and liabilities, including any lawsuits filed against the company prior to the bankruptcy filing. The old company is also responsible for paying out any personal injury judgments or settlements entered against Chrysler before the bankruptcy. Thus, personal injury victims become part of the long list of unsecured creditors who are owed money by the company, but who have little chance of actually receiving it. Unsecured creditors are only paid if there are any funds left over after the secured creditors' debts have been satisfied.
The new Chrysler, on the other hand, emerges from the bankruptcy with the old company's assets, but none of its debt. However, this normally only includes the debt existing at the time of bankruptcy and not any potential future debts or liabilities. In Chrysler's case, the bankruptcy court determined it would be unfair to impose responsibility on the new company (which is owned in large part by Fiat and the US and Canadian governments) for future personal injury claims concerning vehicles purchased before it even existed.
GM Seeking Similar Personal Injury Claim Protection
GM's current Chapter 11 filing is expected to include a similar request for protection from personal injury claims on cars bought before the company entered bankruptcy. If the bankruptcy court allows GM to do this - which it is likely to do - the impact could be devastating for personal injury victims. While Chrysler is one of the smallest car manufacturers in the country, GM is the largest, selling more than 2.9 million vehicles in 2008. Allowing GM to shield itself from personal injury lawsuits could potentially silence thousands of Americans who have been hurt by the company's products.
Re-Victimizing the Victims
It is patently unfair to consumers to give Chrysler and GM a free-pass on lawsuits for injuries caused by vehicles purchased before the companies went into bankruptcy. The court's decision leaves consumers with no means to recover their unpaid medical bills, lost wages and other expenses from the manufacturers, when they are hurt by defective parts or the defective design of their cars.
It is even more unfair when considering the fact that court had other options available to protect consumers. For example, the bankruptcy court could have created a victim compensation fund or another type of fund that could be used to pay out personal injury or wrongful death claims against the automakers. A similar plan was used in the asbestos cases when the liable companies went bankrupt.
The court also could have decided not to allow the companies to skirt their responsibilities and made the new Chrysler and GM companies liable for any claims arising out of vehicles purchased before the bankruptcies. After all, both companies have agreed to uphold the warranties on cars purchased before the bankruptcies, so why not also guarantee the safety and workmanship of these vehicles? It seems counterintuitive that the automakers are willing to replace defective parts, but they will not accept responsibility for any harm caused by these same defective parts.
At this point, it is unclear whether a company can shield itself from liability for a future claim that may or may not happen. Some legal scholars and practicing attorneys are raising questions about whether it is a violation of a consumer's due process rights for the court to take away a person's future right to sue.
Consumer protection groups, including the Center for Auto Safety and Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety, plan to challenge the Chrysler bankruptcy judge's ruling on appeal. Until then, consumers who thought they were helping out American automakers by buying their cars before they went into bankruptcy will be left with no legal protections, rights or safeguards should they be injured by a defectively built or designed GM or Chrysler vehicle.
Article provided by The McClellan Law Firm
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
Fayetteville, Peachtree City, Tyrone
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Drug Legalization Would Be 'Catastrophe', Says Ex-White House Drug Spokesman Bob Weiner; Drugs Have Not 'Won The War'; Op-ed Letter in New York Times
/PRNewswire/ -- Former White House Drug Policy Spokesman Robert Weiner is attacking the arguments of the most recent drug legalization advocates: "They invite a catastrophe of greater drug use, car crashes, school and work dropouts, hospital emergency room cases, and crime including domestic violence and date rape."
Weiner, the spokesman for the White House National Drug Policy Office from 1995 to 2001, states in an op-ed letter today in the New York Times:
"Legalization would be a catastrophe. (Some) use the analogy of legal alcohol. But we have an estimated 15 million alcoholics in this country and 5 million drug addicts; do we want the 5 to become 15?
"Parents, police and the American people know that taking away the incentive of the normative power of the law would increase drug use and related car crashes, school dropouts and work absences. That is why the law has remained in place.
"Hospital emergency rooms would be flooded, and crime would return to the crisis levels of the 1970s and '80s, when drug use was at its highest. Domestic violence and date rape would be substantially higher. The majority of arrestees in 10 major American cities recently tested positive for illegal drugs, a remarkable indicator of a link between drugs and crime.
"I disagree with those who assert that drugs have 'won the war.' With a comprehensive anti-drug strategy in place, involving foreign policy, enforcement, education, treatment, prevention and media, America's overall drug use has declined almost by half in the past three decades -- from 14.1 percent of the population in 1979 to 8.3 percent now -- who used drugs in the past month. In addition, cocaine use, including crack -- the source of much of the former record-high violent crime numbers -- is down 70 percent. Want to go back?
"The new director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, R. Gil Kerlikowske, and another recent drug czar, Gen. Barry McCaffrey, are both correct that we must remove the phrase 'war on drugs' and fight drugs like a cancer, which can be managed and treated."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Weiner, the spokesman for the White House National Drug Policy Office from 1995 to 2001, states in an op-ed letter today in the New York Times:
"Legalization would be a catastrophe. (Some) use the analogy of legal alcohol. But we have an estimated 15 million alcoholics in this country and 5 million drug addicts; do we want the 5 to become 15?
"Parents, police and the American people know that taking away the incentive of the normative power of the law would increase drug use and related car crashes, school dropouts and work absences. That is why the law has remained in place.
"Hospital emergency rooms would be flooded, and crime would return to the crisis levels of the 1970s and '80s, when drug use was at its highest. Domestic violence and date rape would be substantially higher. The majority of arrestees in 10 major American cities recently tested positive for illegal drugs, a remarkable indicator of a link between drugs and crime.
"I disagree with those who assert that drugs have 'won the war.' With a comprehensive anti-drug strategy in place, involving foreign policy, enforcement, education, treatment, prevention and media, America's overall drug use has declined almost by half in the past three decades -- from 14.1 percent of the population in 1979 to 8.3 percent now -- who used drugs in the past month. In addition, cocaine use, including crack -- the source of much of the former record-high violent crime numbers -- is down 70 percent. Want to go back?
"The new director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, R. Gil Kerlikowske, and another recent drug czar, Gen. Barry McCaffrey, are both correct that we must remove the phrase 'war on drugs' and fight drugs like a cancer, which can be managed and treated."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Think the Economic Outlook Is Bad for You? Try Being an Aging Woman
/PRNewswire/ -- With major U.S. corporations declaring bankruptcy and the housing market persisting in its decline, can the financial picture get any worse? If you're an aging woman, the answer is yes.
A report released today by the Women's Institute for a Secure Retirement (WISER) tackles this issue head-on. Based on interviews and a day-long roundtable discussion with more than 30 retirement experts, How Can Women's Income Last As Long As They Do? moves beyond the traditional debate over how to amass savings for retirement and focuses instead on what to do with assets once retirement comes. The report asks the fundamental question: "How can our society protect our nation's older women against significant financial risks in retirement?"
Convened by WISER, retirement experts met in Washington to identify the appropriate role of government, employers, the financial services industry, families and women in making sure women's income lasts as long as they do. The WISER report is based on the roundtable discussion and survey research provided by Mathew Greenwald & Associates and the MetLife Mature Market Institute.
The concerns about retirement income insecurity are not new: People aren't saving enough, they're not investing intelligently, and they aren't going to have enough money to live 30 years or more in retirement. When it comes to women in particular, these concerns are far more pressing:
-- Women at age 65 are expected to live, on average, another 20 years --
four years longer than men. Money they have saved for retirement, if
any, must last longer than men's.
-- Less than half of today's working women have access to pension or
retirement savings plans at work.
-- Women are likely to spend some of their retirement years alone due to
widowhood or divorce. For women age 85 and older, only 13 percent are
married with a spouse present.
-- Nearly 40% of older women living alone depend on Social Security for
almost all of their income, and more than half would be living in
poverty were it not for their Social Security benefits.
"Women are at real risk of living a life of poverty in their older years," says Cindy Hounsell, President of WISER. "As a group, we tend to live longer, earn less, and take time away from paid work to care for our families, and we have less in retirement savings."
The reality is that one in five single women age 65 or older lives in poverty. But common retirement planning guidance leaves us all at risk. The goal, according to many advisers, is to save enough money to support our life expectancy. But people -- especially women -- don't need life expectancy income, they need lifetime income. The gap between these goals is the crisis confronting millions of women in retirement.
"With workers losing so much of their retirement savings to our volatile economy over the past year, being able to stretch what's left over a lifetime is even more important," says Hounsell. "All of us have a responsibility -- employers, government, the financial industry, and individuals -- to find a meaningful solution to retirement poverty for women."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
A report released today by the Women's Institute for a Secure Retirement (WISER) tackles this issue head-on. Based on interviews and a day-long roundtable discussion with more than 30 retirement experts, How Can Women's Income Last As Long As They Do? moves beyond the traditional debate over how to amass savings for retirement and focuses instead on what to do with assets once retirement comes. The report asks the fundamental question: "How can our society protect our nation's older women against significant financial risks in retirement?"
Convened by WISER, retirement experts met in Washington to identify the appropriate role of government, employers, the financial services industry, families and women in making sure women's income lasts as long as they do. The WISER report is based on the roundtable discussion and survey research provided by Mathew Greenwald & Associates and the MetLife Mature Market Institute.
The concerns about retirement income insecurity are not new: People aren't saving enough, they're not investing intelligently, and they aren't going to have enough money to live 30 years or more in retirement. When it comes to women in particular, these concerns are far more pressing:
-- Women at age 65 are expected to live, on average, another 20 years --
four years longer than men. Money they have saved for retirement, if
any, must last longer than men's.
-- Less than half of today's working women have access to pension or
retirement savings plans at work.
-- Women are likely to spend some of their retirement years alone due to
widowhood or divorce. For women age 85 and older, only 13 percent are
married with a spouse present.
-- Nearly 40% of older women living alone depend on Social Security for
almost all of their income, and more than half would be living in
poverty were it not for their Social Security benefits.
"Women are at real risk of living a life of poverty in their older years," says Cindy Hounsell, President of WISER. "As a group, we tend to live longer, earn less, and take time away from paid work to care for our families, and we have less in retirement savings."
The reality is that one in five single women age 65 or older lives in poverty. But common retirement planning guidance leaves us all at risk. The goal, according to many advisers, is to save enough money to support our life expectancy. But people -- especially women -- don't need life expectancy income, they need lifetime income. The gap between these goals is the crisis confronting millions of women in retirement.
"With workers losing so much of their retirement savings to our volatile economy over the past year, being able to stretch what's left over a lifetime is even more important," says Hounsell. "All of us have a responsibility -- employers, government, the financial industry, and individuals -- to find a meaningful solution to retirement poverty for women."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Amid Democrat Division on Health Care, House GOP Unites Behind Better Solutions to Expand Access, Lower Costs
TT Note: These stories are quite disturbing. What I am seeing is a push to increase my taxes for the healthcare I already enjoy, and quite possibly having to give up my healthcare for what the Washington bean counters say is best for me. Take a stand America and let your representatives know your wishes on this subject.
Anyone watching the weekend news shows noticed a very clear trend: Democrats in Washington are all over the map about what to do on health care. Take a look:
ON A “PUBLIC PLAN,” WHICH IS A GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF HEALTH CARE:
- On CNN’s State of the Union yesterday, Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-ND) predicted, “I don’t think the votes are there.”
- Yet on NBC’s Meet the Press, Vice President Biden insisted, “[The President] does want a public plan.”
ON A PLAN TO FINANCE A GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER BY CUTTING HEALTH CARE DEDUCTIONS:
- On ABC’s This Week, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius expressed the President’s renewed support for “shaving” health care deductions.
- Sec. Sebelius made this assertion even as This Week host George Stephanopoulos reminded her, “All the major leaders on the Finance Committees and the Ways and Means Committee have said that’s not the way they want to go.”
ON A PLAN TO BANKROLL HEALTH CARE “REFORM” BY TAXING BENEFITS:
- On Fox News Sunday, Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) said, “This is unnecessary.”
- Yet on Meet the Press, Vice President Biden left the door open to this tax hike. When asked if the President wouldn’t sign a bill that taxed Americans’ health care benefits, the Vice President responded, “I didn’t say that.”
As Democrats try to sort this out amongst themselves, House Republicans are moving forward with common-sense solutions that will reduce costs, expand access, and increase the quality of care in a way that America can afford. Led by Rep. Roy Blunt (R-MO), the House GOP’s and his Health Care Reform Solutions Group is crafting a plan to:
- Expand access to affordable, quality care regardless of pre-existing conditions;
- Protect Americans from being forced into a government-run plan, making certain that medical decisions are made by patients and their doctors, not Washington bureaucrats;
- Let Americans who like their health care coverage keep it, while giving all Americans the freedom to choose the plan that best meets their needs; and
- Reform medical liability rules to block junk lawsuits from driving up health care costs for families and small businesses.
The disagreements among Democrats on health care are a reflection of the Democratic leadership’s insistence on rushing legislation without a clear understanding of what the plan will do, who it will impact, and how it will be financed. In reality, health care reform is too important to get wrong. House Republicans believe that to make health care more affordable and accessible, it cannot deny care, raise taxes, and allow bureaucrats – rather than doctors and patients – to make key health care decisions. And their health care solutions are a reflection of that. Rather than wrangling with one another over a government-run plan, isn’t it time for Democrats to reach out to Republicans in support of a health care reform plan that works?
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Anyone watching the weekend news shows noticed a very clear trend: Democrats in Washington are all over the map about what to do on health care. Take a look:
ON A “PUBLIC PLAN,” WHICH IS A GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF HEALTH CARE:
- On CNN’s State of the Union yesterday, Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-ND) predicted, “I don’t think the votes are there.”
- Yet on NBC’s Meet the Press, Vice President Biden insisted, “[The President] does want a public plan.”
ON A PLAN TO FINANCE A GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER BY CUTTING HEALTH CARE DEDUCTIONS:
- On ABC’s This Week, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius expressed the President’s renewed support for “shaving” health care deductions.
- Sec. Sebelius made this assertion even as This Week host George Stephanopoulos reminded her, “All the major leaders on the Finance Committees and the Ways and Means Committee have said that’s not the way they want to go.”
ON A PLAN TO BANKROLL HEALTH CARE “REFORM” BY TAXING BENEFITS:
- On Fox News Sunday, Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) said, “This is unnecessary.”
- Yet on Meet the Press, Vice President Biden left the door open to this tax hike. When asked if the President wouldn’t sign a bill that taxed Americans’ health care benefits, the Vice President responded, “I didn’t say that.”
As Democrats try to sort this out amongst themselves, House Republicans are moving forward with common-sense solutions that will reduce costs, expand access, and increase the quality of care in a way that America can afford. Led by Rep. Roy Blunt (R-MO), the House GOP’s and his Health Care Reform Solutions Group is crafting a plan to:
- Expand access to affordable, quality care regardless of pre-existing conditions;
- Protect Americans from being forced into a government-run plan, making certain that medical decisions are made by patients and their doctors, not Washington bureaucrats;
- Let Americans who like their health care coverage keep it, while giving all Americans the freedom to choose the plan that best meets their needs; and
- Reform medical liability rules to block junk lawsuits from driving up health care costs for families and small businesses.
The disagreements among Democrats on health care are a reflection of the Democratic leadership’s insistence on rushing legislation without a clear understanding of what the plan will do, who it will impact, and how it will be financed. In reality, health care reform is too important to get wrong. House Republicans believe that to make health care more affordable and accessible, it cannot deny care, raise taxes, and allow bureaucrats – rather than doctors and patients – to make key health care decisions. And their health care solutions are a reflection of that. Rather than wrangling with one another over a government-run plan, isn’t it time for Democrats to reach out to Republicans in support of a health care reform plan that works?
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Thursday, June 11, 2009
U.S. Senate Casts Historic Vote to Regulate Tobacco Products
/PRNewswire/ -- The following is a statement of Matthew L. Myers, President, Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids:
The U.S. Senate today delivered a truly historic victory for America's children and health by approving legislation to grant the U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulatory authority over tobacco products. Forty-five years after the first U.S. Surgeon General's report linking cigarette smoking to lung cancer, the most deadly product sold in America will no longer be the least regulated product sold in America.
Today's 79-17 vote underscores the bipartisan consensus that the time finally has come to end the special protection the tobacco industry has enjoyed for too long and at such great cost to the nation's health. The House passed similar legislation 298-112 in April, and Congress is expected to quickly send a final bill to President Obama, who is eager to sign it into law. This legislation represents the strongest action Congress has ever taken to reduce tobacco use, the leading preventable cause of death in the United States. If effectively implemented, it will significantly reduce the number of children who start to use tobacco, the number of adults who continue to use tobacco and the number of people who suffer and die as a result.
We applaud Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA), the bill sponsor, for his leadership and tenacity in championing this legislation. This bill adds to his incomparable legacy of improving the health and health care of all Americans. We applaud the many senators who have played a leadership role in this effort, including Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT) who shepherded the legislation through committee and the Senate floor, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA). This is truly bipartisan legislation. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) has been a leader on the legislation for the past several years, and the bill received critical support at every stage of the Senate debate from Senators Susan Collins (R-ME), Charles Grassley (R-IA), Richard Lugar (R-IN) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME).
This legislation is an essential step toward improving health and reducing health care costs in the United States. Tobacco use kills more than 400,000 Americans each year, sickens millions more and costs the nation $96 billion annually in health care bills. Yet, until now, tobacco products have escaped the FDA's common-sense regulations that apply to every other product we consume, from food to drugs to cosmetics. The lack of regulation has allowed tobacco companies to market their deadly and addictive products to children, deceive consumers about the harm their products cause and manipulate their products in ways that make them even more harmful and addictive. This legislation at long last will stop these harmful practices.
This legislation will grant the FDA the authority and resources necessary to regulate the manufacturing, marketing and sale of tobacco products. Among other things, it will:
-- Restrict tobacco advertising and promotions, especially to children.
-- Stop illegal sales of tobacco products to children.
-- Require large, graphic health warnings that cover the top half of the
front and back of cigarette packs.
-- Ban misleading health claims such as "light" and "low-tar."
-- Strictly regulate all health claims about tobacco products to ensure
they are scientifically proven and do not discourage current tobacco
users from quitting or encourage new users to start.
-- Require tobacco companies to disclose the contents of tobacco
products, as well as changes in products and research about their
health effects.
-- Empower the FDA to require changes in tobacco products, such as the
removal or reduction of harmful ingredients or the reduction of
nicotine levels.
-- Fully fund the FDA's new tobacco-related responsibilities with a user
fee on tobacco companies so no resources are taken from the FDA's
current work.
This legislation has strong, bipartisan support across the nation. It has been endorsed by more than 1,000 public health, faith and other organizations (www.tobaccofreekids.org/reports/fda/organizations.pdf). A poll last year found that 70 percent of American voters support FDA regulation of tobacco products (www.tobaccofreekids.org/fdapoll/). It has been endorsed by scientific authorities including the Institute of Medicine and the President's Cancer Panel. The long-overdue regulation of tobacco products is an enormous achievement for America's health.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
The U.S. Senate today delivered a truly historic victory for America's children and health by approving legislation to grant the U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulatory authority over tobacco products. Forty-five years after the first U.S. Surgeon General's report linking cigarette smoking to lung cancer, the most deadly product sold in America will no longer be the least regulated product sold in America.
Today's 79-17 vote underscores the bipartisan consensus that the time finally has come to end the special protection the tobacco industry has enjoyed for too long and at such great cost to the nation's health. The House passed similar legislation 298-112 in April, and Congress is expected to quickly send a final bill to President Obama, who is eager to sign it into law. This legislation represents the strongest action Congress has ever taken to reduce tobacco use, the leading preventable cause of death in the United States. If effectively implemented, it will significantly reduce the number of children who start to use tobacco, the number of adults who continue to use tobacco and the number of people who suffer and die as a result.
We applaud Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA), the bill sponsor, for his leadership and tenacity in championing this legislation. This bill adds to his incomparable legacy of improving the health and health care of all Americans. We applaud the many senators who have played a leadership role in this effort, including Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT) who shepherded the legislation through committee and the Senate floor, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA). This is truly bipartisan legislation. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) has been a leader on the legislation for the past several years, and the bill received critical support at every stage of the Senate debate from Senators Susan Collins (R-ME), Charles Grassley (R-IA), Richard Lugar (R-IN) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME).
This legislation is an essential step toward improving health and reducing health care costs in the United States. Tobacco use kills more than 400,000 Americans each year, sickens millions more and costs the nation $96 billion annually in health care bills. Yet, until now, tobacco products have escaped the FDA's common-sense regulations that apply to every other product we consume, from food to drugs to cosmetics. The lack of regulation has allowed tobacco companies to market their deadly and addictive products to children, deceive consumers about the harm their products cause and manipulate their products in ways that make them even more harmful and addictive. This legislation at long last will stop these harmful practices.
This legislation will grant the FDA the authority and resources necessary to regulate the manufacturing, marketing and sale of tobacco products. Among other things, it will:
-- Restrict tobacco advertising and promotions, especially to children.
-- Stop illegal sales of tobacco products to children.
-- Require large, graphic health warnings that cover the top half of the
front and back of cigarette packs.
-- Ban misleading health claims such as "light" and "low-tar."
-- Strictly regulate all health claims about tobacco products to ensure
they are scientifically proven and do not discourage current tobacco
users from quitting or encourage new users to start.
-- Require tobacco companies to disclose the contents of tobacco
products, as well as changes in products and research about their
health effects.
-- Empower the FDA to require changes in tobacco products, such as the
removal or reduction of harmful ingredients or the reduction of
nicotine levels.
-- Fully fund the FDA's new tobacco-related responsibilities with a user
fee on tobacco companies so no resources are taken from the FDA's
current work.
This legislation has strong, bipartisan support across the nation. It has been endorsed by more than 1,000 public health, faith and other organizations (www.tobaccofreekids.org/reports/fda/organizations.pdf). A poll last year found that 70 percent of American voters support FDA regulation of tobacco products (www.tobaccofreekids.org/fdapoll/). It has been endorsed by scientific authorities including the Institute of Medicine and the President's Cancer Panel. The long-overdue regulation of tobacco products is an enormous achievement for America's health.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Monday, June 08, 2009
The Debt Highway
TT Note: Wow. This video really puts the current government spending into perspective. I know I'm not comfortable with the speed at which we are going. How about you?
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Sunday, June 07, 2009
Newspaper Print Ads Like Falling Off the Cliff
TT Note: All you have to do to verify this story is to look at the newspapers that get delivered to your home. They keep shrinking due to lack of advertisers. The recent economic woes have really hit this industry hard. Is the lack of unbiased reporting also contributing to the newspapers' demise?
From Terrible To Terrifying: Newspaper Ad Sales Plummet $2.6 Billion In Q1 2009
by Robin Wauters
Nothing like a telling graphic to illustrate what most have been expecting, albeit probably not in this order of magnitude. Veteran media exec Alan Mutter discovered some horrid statisticsabout the state of ad sales for American newspapers on trade organization NAA’s website, and published his view on the Q1 2009 numbers on his blog. They don’t look pretty.
The stats show that total newspaper ad sales dropped by an unprecedented 28.28% in the first quarter of 2009, a deep plunge.....http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/02/from-terrible-to-terrifying-newspaper-ad-sales-plummet-26-billion-in-first-quarter/
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.artsacrossgeorgia.com
Arts Across Georgia
From Terrible To Terrifying: Newspaper Ad Sales Plummet $2.6 Billion In Q1 2009
by Robin Wauters
Nothing like a telling graphic to illustrate what most have been expecting, albeit probably not in this order of magnitude. Veteran media exec Alan Mutter discovered some horrid statisticsabout the state of ad sales for American newspapers on trade organization NAA’s website, and published his view on the Q1 2009 numbers on his blog. They don’t look pretty.
The stats show that total newspaper ad sales dropped by an unprecedented 28.28% in the first quarter of 2009, a deep plunge.....http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/02/from-terrible-to-terrifying-newspaper-ad-sales-plummet-26-billion-in-first-quarter/
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.artsacrossgeorgia.com
Arts Across Georgia
Saturday, June 06, 2009
Mattel, Fisher-Price to Pay $2.3 Million Civil Penalty for Violating Federal Lead Paint Ban
Mattel, Fisher-Price to Pay $2.3 Million Civil Penalty for Violating Federal Lead Paint Ban
Penalty is highest ever for CPSC regulated product violations
As part of its commitment to protecting the safety of children, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) announced today that Mattel Inc., of El Segundo, Calif. and its wholly owned subsidiary, Fisher-Price Inc., of East Aurora, N.Y. have agreed to pay a $2.3 million civil penalty for violating the federal lead paint ban.
The penalty settlement, which has been provisionally accepted by the Commission, resolves CPSC staff allegations that Mattel and Fisher-Price knowingly (as defined in the Consumer Product Safety Act) imported and sold children's toys with paints or other surface coatings that contained lead levels that violated a 30-year-old federal law. In 1978, a federal ban was put in place which prohibited toys and other children's articles from having more than 0.06 percent lead (by weight) in paints or surface coatings. In 2007, about 95 Mattel and Fisher-Price toy models were determined to have exceeded this limit. Lead can be toxic if ingested by young children and can cause adverse health consequences.
This civil penalty, which is the highest for violations involving importation or distribution in commerce of a regulated product and is the third highest of any kind in CPSC history, settles the following allegations:
Mattel imported up to 900,000 non-compliant toys between September 2006 and August 2007, including the "Sarge" toy car and numerous Barbie accessory toys, and distributed most of them to its retail customers for sale to U.S. consumers. The "Sarge" car was recalled in August 2007 and the Barbie toys were recalled in September 2007.
Fisher-Price imported up to 1.1 million non-compliant toys between July 2006 and August 2007, including certain licensed character toys and the Bongo Band, GEOTRAX locomotive, and Go Diego Go Rescue Boat toys. Most of these toys were distributed to retail stores for sale to consumers. The licensed character toys were recalled in August 2007, the Bongo Band and GEO TRAX toys were recalled in September 2007, and the Go Diego Go Boat toys were recalled in October 2007.
"These highly publicized toy recalls helped spur Congressional action last year to strengthen CPSC and make even stricter the ban on lead paint on toys," said CPSC Acting Chairman Thomas Moore. "This penalty should serve notice to toy makers that CPSC is committed to the safety of children, to reducing their exposure to lead, and to the implementation of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act."
This settlement also resolves other potential matters. In agreeing to the settlement, Mattel and Fisher-Price deny that they knowingly violated federal law, as alleged by CPSC staff.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Penalty is highest ever for CPSC regulated product violations
As part of its commitment to protecting the safety of children, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) announced today that Mattel Inc., of El Segundo, Calif. and its wholly owned subsidiary, Fisher-Price Inc., of East Aurora, N.Y. have agreed to pay a $2.3 million civil penalty for violating the federal lead paint ban.
The penalty settlement, which has been provisionally accepted by the Commission, resolves CPSC staff allegations that Mattel and Fisher-Price knowingly (as defined in the Consumer Product Safety Act) imported and sold children's toys with paints or other surface coatings that contained lead levels that violated a 30-year-old federal law. In 1978, a federal ban was put in place which prohibited toys and other children's articles from having more than 0.06 percent lead (by weight) in paints or surface coatings. In 2007, about 95 Mattel and Fisher-Price toy models were determined to have exceeded this limit. Lead can be toxic if ingested by young children and can cause adverse health consequences.
This civil penalty, which is the highest for violations involving importation or distribution in commerce of a regulated product and is the third highest of any kind in CPSC history, settles the following allegations:
Mattel imported up to 900,000 non-compliant toys between September 2006 and August 2007, including the "Sarge" toy car and numerous Barbie accessory toys, and distributed most of them to its retail customers for sale to U.S. consumers. The "Sarge" car was recalled in August 2007 and the Barbie toys were recalled in September 2007.
Fisher-Price imported up to 1.1 million non-compliant toys between July 2006 and August 2007, including certain licensed character toys and the Bongo Band, GEOTRAX locomotive, and Go Diego Go Rescue Boat toys. Most of these toys were distributed to retail stores for sale to consumers. The licensed character toys were recalled in August 2007, the Bongo Band and GEO TRAX toys were recalled in September 2007, and the Go Diego Go Boat toys were recalled in October 2007.
"These highly publicized toy recalls helped spur Congressional action last year to strengthen CPSC and make even stricter the ban on lead paint on toys," said CPSC Acting Chairman Thomas Moore. "This penalty should serve notice to toy makers that CPSC is committed to the safety of children, to reducing their exposure to lead, and to the implementation of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act."
This settlement also resolves other potential matters. In agreeing to the settlement, Mattel and Fisher-Price deny that they knowingly violated federal law, as alleged by CPSC staff.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Thursday, June 04, 2009
Obama Administration Abandons American Workers, Refuses to Implement E-Verify Requirement
/PRNewswire / -- Billions of dollars in stimulus aid can be used by federal contractors to hire illegal workers because of the Obama administration's cancellation of a requirement that they use the E-Verify system. As unemployment soars in the U.S., taxpayer-funded assistance will be used to hire illegal aliens, according to Californians for Population Stabilization (CAPS).
"It is simply appalling that millions of Americans have lost their jobs, yet we are spending stimulus dollars to hire workers who have broken our immigration laws," said Diana Hull, the President of CAPS.
Nearly 6 million jobs have disappeared from the United States over the last year and a half, and unemployment hit a 25-year peak of 8.9% in April. The administration has promised to crack down on businesses that knowingly hire illegal workers, but it is delaying this measure to apply workplace rules to federal projects.
"Obama and other politicians claimed they were creating jobs for American workers with this huge stimulus package. Then they turn around and displace U.S. workers by failing to enforce our immigration laws," Hull noted.
The delay in the executive order until September was the fourth postponement this year. The new rule, if implemented, would require contractors to confirm the employment eligibility of all persons hired during a contract term with the federal government. E-Verify is free to employers, and 12 states now have some form of legislation to mandate its usage.
"Cancellation of E-Verify is unforgivable because this program is so effective. It is a clear signal that effective immigration enforcement is not a real goal of this administration," said Hull. "Struggling American workers and their families deserve better."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
"It is simply appalling that millions of Americans have lost their jobs, yet we are spending stimulus dollars to hire workers who have broken our immigration laws," said Diana Hull, the President of CAPS.
Nearly 6 million jobs have disappeared from the United States over the last year and a half, and unemployment hit a 25-year peak of 8.9% in April. The administration has promised to crack down on businesses that knowingly hire illegal workers, but it is delaying this measure to apply workplace rules to federal projects.
"Obama and other politicians claimed they were creating jobs for American workers with this huge stimulus package. Then they turn around and displace U.S. workers by failing to enforce our immigration laws," Hull noted.
The delay in the executive order until September was the fourth postponement this year. The new rule, if implemented, would require contractors to confirm the employment eligibility of all persons hired during a contract term with the federal government. E-Verify is free to employers, and 12 states now have some form of legislation to mandate its usage.
"Cancellation of E-Verify is unforgivable because this program is so effective. It is a clear signal that effective immigration enforcement is not a real goal of this administration," said Hull. "Struggling American workers and their families deserve better."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Wednesday, June 03, 2009
Who will hold the leaders accountable? The media?
TT Note: Newsweek asks who is checking the media coverage? When will the media begin to really examine our leaders?
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
China Blocks Twitter, Flickr, Others as Tiananmen Anniversary Looms
TT Note: So, the Chinese government doesn't want free speech on the web right now. But it's ok if google still works over there. How long before some in our own government decide to take this road here? Recent stories kind of make me wonder.
Thursday is the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre, and as a foretaste, Chinese users were denied access to Blogger, Flickr, Twitter, Livejournal, Tumblr, the Huffington Post and Microsoft's Live.com, Hotmail, its MSN Space blog tool and its new search engine Bing, according to various reports.
"Looks like Twitter has been.....http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,524339,00.html
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Thursday is the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre, and as a foretaste, Chinese users were denied access to Blogger, Flickr, Twitter, Livejournal, Tumblr, the Huffington Post and Microsoft's Live.com, Hotmail, its MSN Space blog tool and its new search engine Bing, according to various reports.
"Looks like Twitter has been.....http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,524339,00.html
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
In Wake of Foreclosures, Mosquitoes Pose Serious Issues
TT Note: I have to admit it. I hadn't realized this potential consequence of foreclosure. With all the rain the south has seen recently, there is already a bumper crop of mosquitoes. Be sure to help us all by letting your health officials know where large bodies of water are standing in your neighborhood.
(BUSINESS WIRE)--Although national consumer confidence has risen in recent months, the recession is still significantly affecting homeowners. RealtyTrac reported in April 2009 that national home foreclosures were up 32 percent over just one year ago. More, according to CNN, Nevada, Florida, California and Arizona continue to lead the nation in foreclosures, accounting for more than 50 percent of foreclosed homes in April alone.
While these foreclosure figures underscore the current economic conditions, the National Pest Management Association (NPMA) reminds homeowners to remain vigilant of an ancillary issue stemming from continued increases in vacated homes – potential mosquito infestations in the summer months, especially in and around those foreclosed properties with backyard pools.
The abandonment of pools due to foreclosure is important as mosquitoes breed in stagnant water. When pools are not maintained and/or properly treated, the potential for a significant mosquito infestation rapidly rises. Considering that the standing water that collects naturally in empty flower pots or bird baths provides a terrific opportunity for mosquito breeding, an abandoned swimming pool offers an even greater chance for a major pest infestation that can affect the homes adjacent to the foreclosed property.
“Mosquitoes are not only a nuisance pest but also, a major health threat,” said Greg Baumann, senior scientist for the NPMA. “While associated with causing itchy welts, these pests can also transmit West Nile virus (WNV). In fact, the Center for Disease Control reported that WNV resulted in more than 1,300 human cases and 44 fatalities across the U.S. in 2008. Awareness of conducive conditions for mosquito breeding, especially in and around foreclosed homes, is the key to preventing potential mosquito infestations and limiting WNV in 2009.”
If concerned regarding a foreclosed property with a backyard pool, homeowners should contact their local health department. If concerned by mosquitoes on their own property, homeowners can visit Pestworld.org for prevention tips or to find a local pest professional who can identify and treat the problem.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.artsacrossgeorgia.com
Arts Across Georgia
(BUSINESS WIRE)--Although national consumer confidence has risen in recent months, the recession is still significantly affecting homeowners. RealtyTrac reported in April 2009 that national home foreclosures were up 32 percent over just one year ago. More, according to CNN, Nevada, Florida, California and Arizona continue to lead the nation in foreclosures, accounting for more than 50 percent of foreclosed homes in April alone.
While these foreclosure figures underscore the current economic conditions, the National Pest Management Association (NPMA) reminds homeowners to remain vigilant of an ancillary issue stemming from continued increases in vacated homes – potential mosquito infestations in the summer months, especially in and around those foreclosed properties with backyard pools.
The abandonment of pools due to foreclosure is important as mosquitoes breed in stagnant water. When pools are not maintained and/or properly treated, the potential for a significant mosquito infestation rapidly rises. Considering that the standing water that collects naturally in empty flower pots or bird baths provides a terrific opportunity for mosquito breeding, an abandoned swimming pool offers an even greater chance for a major pest infestation that can affect the homes adjacent to the foreclosed property.
“Mosquitoes are not only a nuisance pest but also, a major health threat,” said Greg Baumann, senior scientist for the NPMA. “While associated with causing itchy welts, these pests can also transmit West Nile virus (WNV). In fact, the Center for Disease Control reported that WNV resulted in more than 1,300 human cases and 44 fatalities across the U.S. in 2008. Awareness of conducive conditions for mosquito breeding, especially in and around foreclosed homes, is the key to preventing potential mosquito infestations and limiting WNV in 2009.”
If concerned regarding a foreclosed property with a backyard pool, homeowners should contact their local health department. If concerned by mosquitoes on their own property, homeowners can visit Pestworld.org for prevention tips or to find a local pest professional who can identify and treat the problem.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.artsacrossgeorgia.com
Arts Across Georgia
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
