Gay couples begin attack on U.S marriage law
Joanne’s attempt to include her spouse Ann to her federal health insurance was rejected. The couple, legally married under Connecticut law, are denied insurance as federal law does not recognise their union. They plan to file a law suit against the Government on the Marriage Defence act of 1996 law, prohibiting recognition of gay marriages by federal government. The laws suit was issued through the gay right organisation, “Gay, Lesbians advocates and defenders”. A July ruling by Boston federal judge over the same issue attempted the Obama administration to appeal this decision. Lawsuits against the federal government involve plaintiffs from New York, Connecticut, New Hampshire and Vermont. A union for civil rights filed a suit on the government on behalf of Edith Windsor, over payment of federal estate tax. Ms. Windsor, and spouse, their Spyier, who died last year, were married in 2007 in Toronto, and had been together for forty four years. Gay marriages performed in other states are recognition in New York and had the couple been heterosexual, there would have been no tax payment. The definition fro marriages except for gay and lesbian couples have always been left for the state with no interference from the federal government. This is lack for respect for homosexual marriages, noted by Ms. Bonauto Mary, who is a director of a civil rights group for gay and lesbians. This, she says, is a violation for equal protection rights (Pederson & Metzien, 2007).
The justice department I Massachusetts defended the marriage law earlier this year, and would do the same if the law suits go through. However, this new cases would pressurize the President to support gay rights. As much as Mr. Obama supports civil unions, he does not support same sex marriage, and thus requested a repeal of the marriage defence act, as he found it discriminatory. Mr.Obama however admits to have been rethinking his stand on this matter, s he said at a liberal meeting, that his attitude evolved. Thirty one state in America passed laws blocking gay marriages. However, five states and Columbian district allow it. To demonstrate political involvement in this matter, who had unanimously voted for the allowance of same sex marriages were removed by lower votes. National marriage organisation chairwoman, Maggie Gallagher, supported the marriage defence act as she argued that neither the founder nor American majority would like to recognise same sex marriages legalized in the constitution. The couple, Pederson and Maitzen had been together for twelve years after marriage in Connecticut, but Ms. Pederson’s attempt to enrol her spouse on the health benefit program for federal employees as has been denied. Ms. Meitzen, a social worker, has health problems, and this enrolment would save them a lot of money. The view current law as discriminatory, as it recognise heterosexual marriages, but not homosexuals (Schwartz, 2010).
Legalizing weed pros and cons
This article analyses the pros and cons of legalization of weed in California and other states.
Marijuana, commonly known as weed, is the grow form of cannabis Sativa, that is dried and smoked for both recreational and medical reasons. It is also a spiritual enhancer in some places. Cannabis has psychotic and psychological chemicals that excite the mind. Marijuana has been illegal for its linkage with crime and violence. However, it is used for medical purposes in almost thirteen states in the U.S. California is one of the states benefiting from weed revenue, and this would rise, if the referendum to legalize goes through. The referendum proposes that citizens over the age of twenty one are allowed to possess marijuana of up to one ounce as well as its growth in a plot of size five by five feet.
Advantages of marijuana legalization
It acts as a source of revenue for the government, and the money that would be saved on enforcement. Its user and supporters argue that marijuana use is as harmful as alcohol and tobacco consumption, which are legal, and so should weed, is. Its medical benefits especially for patients of cancer, glaucoma, and AIDS, has also been cited. The amount of money spent on preventing its illegal trade would be saved and regulated for other uses. Legalization would also reduce the number of illegal activities involve with its trade. It would also reduce the pressure on the criminal justice systems, as cases in weed possessions will decrease, leading to the trial and conviction of other serious cases. Another advantage is that it will ensure that the freedom of choice is not infringed upon. The revenue earned from legalization would surpass USD 14 billion, easing the economic problems in the countries
The disadvantages of weed legalization
Prolonged use of weed can have severe effects on health and the well being of human beings. Weed user often escalated to the use of other harder and harmful drugs like cocaine. People involved in weed trade are usually involved in other legal activities. It is also not good for law enforcement agents to support drug use. Marijuana on the social and moral arena is viewed as debilitating activity that should be controlled. Marijuana has pervasive effects on the brain like paranoia, mood swings, hallucinations and motor ability impairment (Nair, 2010).
“Friendship parallels and strategic partners”
President Obama in India, New Delhi
Mr. Obama termed U.S relationship with India,” the definition of the twenty first century”. Apart from the states relationship, the two principals, Mr. Obama and Prime Minister Mannmohan Singh, have a personal relationship, as Mr.Obama called Mr. Singh, his “guru” and in turn Mr Singh called Mr Obama, “A personal friend and a charismatic leader”. The U.S and India has a long and complicated relationship that started before independence, through the cold war, to the recent reconciliation. The two states share democratic and multi cultural values. The improved relationship between the two countries coincides with the personal bonds between the two leaders. Ronin Sen, former India ambassador to the U.S, views the relationship as very important as the two are leaders of the world’s largest democracies. President Dwight D EIsen. However, regarded India’s first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal warmly. On his 1959 visit to India, the president and the prime minister visited villages together, and the president was welcomed everywhere he went, by adoring crowds. When Nehyu's daughter, India Gandhi became India’s prime minister in 1966, the U.S president, Lyndo B. Johnson was easily charmed by her during her visit to the U.S on that year. Because of this, the president over stayed at the home where Ms. Gandhi was, and was invited for dinner. Ms. Gandhi had a noxious relationship with President Richard Nixon, but upon meeting the newly elected president, Ronald Reagan in Mexico, they became friends, to the surprise of many. Lalit Mansingh, a former foreign secretary, said that India and the U.S managed to maintain their relationship through the cold war. Atal Bihari Vajpayee, India’s prime minister during 1998-2004. Had same ideologies, similar to President W. Bush, and was able to negotiate agreements to end India’s nuclear exile (Polgreen, 2010).
Is Obama’s war with the U.S chamber of commerce over?
President Obama’s war with the U.S chamber of commerce that has lasted two years could be cooling off if he is believed. Top officials in the chamber’s headquarters have been drawn on the other side of Lafayette Park, since the president began his strategy for health care reform. Tom Bonohue, the chamber’s chief executive accuse the president and his administration of Pursuing an “ill advised course of government expansion, major tax increase, massive deficits and job destroying regulations.” Mr Obama on the other hand accuses the chamber of an illegal transfer of money from foreign sources to aid the republicans during elections. Tim Geither, treasury secretary had a meeting with Mr. Bonohue regarding international economy. In a news conference, Mr. Obama almost cancelled claims that his ideas were anti business. He admitted that he had not handled well the relationship with the business community. Mr. Obama hinted that his goals to create “new rules of the road”, regarding business should be better balanced with appreciation, so that firms that struggle to further economy are backed up. He also hinted that his biggest responsibility to the business community and the country was to boost the U.S business sector. The policy and the steps he would take to achieve these is the question that remains unanswered. In a news conference, the president disclosed that we would leave with American executives in his Asian trip, hoping to open foreign markets to more business. A strategy for this included a meeting with Mr Geither and Mr. Bonhue, in which they discussed the Asian trip, issues of the G20 economic summit, china and the South Korea, as disclosed by a unanimous administration source.
The meeting was constructive an international economic front. Asia’s vice president said she would credit Mr. Obama over his negotiations over trade pack with South Korea. However both sides now have victories as Mr. Obama passed the new health care reform, and the chambers, helped republicans gain control of the House (Shear 2010).
McCain’s Rocky relationship with the Hawkeye state
McCain is indicated to have a cool but complicated relationship with the republicans in lowa state. Only four percent of the voters admitted to vote for him, making him fifth in the state. McCain’s associates publicly admitted that He would not be spending time and energy in Lowa. The state is off McCain’s campaign map. McCain is rather troubled by his poor performance in Lowa, as compared to New Hampshire, where he drew sixteen percent of the votes. Figures by the Democratic party show that McCain spent thirty six days of campaign in Lowa, which was considerably lower that of the past senators and governors. Mitt Ramney, former Massachusetts governor spent fifty seven days, while Mike Huckabee, Arkansas’s former governor spent fifty eight days of campaign in lowa. Mr. McCain had planned to repair his relationship with conservative leaders in an attempt to win Lowa voters, a strategy, which failed as they could not perceive hi as conservative. He blames his problems in lowa, on illegal immigration in that state. Lowa republicans however have the same concern, giving credibility to McCain’s claims.
However, McCain’s problems began before these immigrations. In 2002, he avoided Lowa campaigns, citing lack of funds to campaign in both lowa and New Hampshire, as the reason. In 2002, McCain gained a sixteen point victory over George W. Bush, in New Hampshire, making the state his comfort zone. Lowa voters are however alert and watchful of McCain. His campaign finance restrictions and the constant public breaks with Mr. Bush, are issues that republicans in Lowa are aware of, and as conservatives, do not agree with. On a trip through lowa, McCain sensed the tension and avoided talks concerning his opposition to federal ethanol subsidies, and instead concentred more on immigration talks (Nagourney, 2007).
“Palin Wades into republican midterm primaries.”
Karen Handel, the last candidate to win Republican most coveted prize of the year, reminded voters to vote for Sarah Palin. Ms. Handel had become the 50th candidate to win Palin’s appeal, evidenced by the Palin’s posts on her face book page, praising Handel. Palin had left public office by stepping down as Alaska’s governor. She later became a television celebrity and a best selling author. She now plans to be much visible on campaigns, especially after Labour Day. With this, she is leaving a mark on the 2010 mid term elections, and if this is simply to amplify her image or a strategy for future politics, is secret Palin can answer to herself. Her Organisation, Sarah PAC, had raised $ 866,000 and in turn, donated $87500 to republican candidates. This was revealed through the organizations’ quarterly fiscal report. The donation triggered speculations regarding her 2012 political ambitions. After her separation with Senator John McCain, Ms. Palin failed to receive campaign donor’s list, which she had helped build. Most of her endorsements came from California, Florida, New York, Tennessee and Texas, while she had donations from al the fifty states.
Right now, her contributions are directed to women, except for Senator Lisa Murkowski, of Alaska, where she supported Mr. Branstad. Social conservatives have however criticised Palin over her decisions, arguing that she was guided by her politics, over principles. Georgia Right to life, an anti abortion group, accused Palin of supporting any available female republican candidate. However, Ms. Handel these accusations as “petty politics”
Ms. Palin’s daughter, Bristol, publicly announced her engagement to former boyfriend, and the cover of U.S weekly, making Palin concentrate more on her family obligations, and ignore the politics. Despite her rare appearance on campaigns, most republican candidates continue to clamour for her support. Palin has extended her support to Nikki Haley, South Carolina governor, Ann Marie Buerkle of New York, Marry Fallin of Oklahoma, and Mr. Branstad of Lowa (Zeleny, 2010).
“For the intensively political and partisan DeLAy, an unusual election day in court”
Tom DeLay, a republican congressman from Austin, wished to cheer his party on the Election Day, but found himself in a Travis county courthouse, over money laundering charges. Mr DeLAy is a leader of a former House majority. He resigned in September 2005, after induction. On the day of the election, Mr. DeLay was lucky to have voted earlier I his home town Sugar land. He termed the charges against him as “political vendetta” with no criminal substance. He said that he had been sidelined, citing the delay of the case to reach trial. the claims that National political actions has bee used to route corporate donations made for candidates has led to a ban on corporate money in Texas legislative races. Mr, DeLay is accused, of conspiring with Jim Ellis and John Colyandro, to channel $190,000 in corporate donations, to republican candidates, fro the 2002 legislative race. The money was gathered by his political action committee. His state committee, “Texans for a republican majority” sent the money to the republican national committee. It is illegal to use corporate money donations directly on voters, under the Texas law. The donations can however be used on administration costs. With DeLay’s help, powerful democrats were ousted out of congress as Republicans took control of the Texas legislature in 2002, leading to an election of a republican as a speaker, for the first time, since reconstruction. Delay’s downfall began with the 2005 indictions over his ties with a convict lobbyist, Jack Abramoff, who tried to influence on Capitol Hill. Dick DeGuern, Mr. DeLAy. He argued that there was no proof that the money was sent to Texas. DeLay’s daughter, Daniela DeLAy Garcia, testified for her father, and said the committee, “Texans for a Republican majority” was formed on the same principles as “Americans for a republican majority” which gad been successful through collecting funds for campaigns, in order to increase republican representation, by dislodging democrats from the legislature. Ms. DeLay’s testimony is to continue (McKinley, 2010).
References
McKinley, C. J. (Nov. 2, 2010). For the intensely political and partisan DeLay, an unusual election day in court. New York: New York Times
Nair, T. (Oct. 22, 2010). Legalizing weed pros and cons. Buzzle.com
Nagourney, A. (Nov. 19, 2007). McCain’s rocky relationship with Hawkeye state. New York: New York Times.
Pederson, J. & Metzien, L. (2007). Gay couples. New York: New York Times
Polgreen, L. (Nov. 8, 2010). Friendship parallels a strategic partner. New York Times: New York Times
Schwartz, J. (Nov. 2010). Gay couples begin attack on U.S marriage Law. New York: New
York Times Shear, D. M. (Nov. 4, 2010). Is Obama’s war with the U.S Chamber of commerce over? New York: The Caucus
Zeleny, J. (July 17, 2010). Palin wades into republican midterm primarie. New York: New York Times