Iowa Conservatives Threaten Community College’s Funding For Hosting Bullying Conference

Iowa’s Christian conservative group The FAMiLY Leader is once again objecting to the Governor’s Conference on LGBTQ Youth, a yearly opportunity for students, teachers, and families across the state of Iowa to learn how to better protect LGBT young people from bullying. In the past, the group’s head Bob Vander Plaats has accused the conference of discriminating against straight students, even though allies are welcome.

At a press conference Thursday, The FAMiLY Leader and representatives from other groups (including hate group Concerned Women for America) objected to the conference for compromising the Bible’s teaching on homosexuality and using taxpayer funding in the process. Here’s FL’s Chuck Hurley admonishing LGBT advocates:

HURLEY: This Papa Bear is here to say, regarding the Governor’s Conference, stop coming after my kids and other people’s kids with evil propaganda. Stop twisting the Bible and stop using our tax dollars to do it. [...]

We’re here today to warn parents and to warn lawmakers and other who are responsible for protecting those children, and to urge them to protect appropriate action to protect those children, such as not letting them go to this conference next week, such as considering home and private education if their schools are teaching the things this conference is advocating — that Iowa school districts teach — and above all, teaching our children the truth about the Bible, sexuality, and bullying.

Watch the full press conference (Part 2 here):

This year, the group is specifically targeting Des Moines Area Community College (DMACC) for hosting the conference. A conservative student group, Young Americans for Freedom, filed a Freedom of Information Act request to confirm that the university was spending money to help fund the conference. Student Jake Dagel explained, “Diversity is not when you use my tuition money or our tax dollars to fund a conference that bullies people for their Christian or conservative beliefs.”

Sixteen lawmakers have threatened to cut DMACC’s funding for promoting groups “who pervert the Bible, teach our youth to engage in dangerous behavior, and target individuals like Jan Mickelson for hatred and bullying.” Mickelson is a conservative radio host in Iowa that regularly attacks LGBT equality on his show.

Unsurprisingly, none of the conservative religious leaders expressed any concern for the severe consequences LGBT youth experience when they are bullied or shamed by their community, including attempting suicide, homelessness, academic performance, and school truancy.

View the original article here

How South Asia’s ‘Hardline Buddhists’ Threaten Muslim Communities

The term “hardline Buddhist” may seem like an oxymoron, but it accurately describes the movement currently leading attacks on Muslim communities in South Asia. So far, though, the United States has done little to pressure the governments in question to halt the violence, to the chagrin of human rights activists.

Sri Lanka, where 69 percent of the population is Buddhist, is home to a small community of Muslims who kept a low-profile during the country’s lengthy civil war. Recently, however, a number of hardline Buddhist groups have sprung up, stirring anti-Muslim fervor among the majority Sinhalese ethnic group. These groups — that call themselves names like the Buddhist Strength Force and Sinhala Echo — accused the minority community of producing exam results “distorted to favor Muslims” and claimed that calves had been slaughtered indoors — which is illegal in the country’s capital. Neither claim has borne out, but they have led to mass protests and attacks against Muslims and their communities.

Most recently, a Buddhist monk-led mob in Colombo, Sri Lanka’s capital, swarmed and assaulted a Muslim-owned clothing warehouse on Thursday:

The BBC’s Charles Haviland in Colombo said the monks led a crowd which quickly swelled to about 500, yelling insults against the shop’s Muslim owners and rounding on journalists seeking to cover the events.

Five or six were injured, including a cameraman who needed stitches.

Eyewitnesses said the police stood and watched although after the trouble spread they brought it under control.

Similar persecution is ongoing against Myanmar’s Muslim communities, who make up only four percent of the total population. In the face of spreading violence, also kicked up by hardline Buddhists, Burmese Muslims are fleeing their homes, leaving behind destroyed mosques and shops. At least 40 people have died in the clashes since March 20, as the fighting moves closer to the capital. These most recent attacks have left some 12,000 people displaced from their homes, according to the U.N.

Tomas Ojea Quintana, the United Nations’ special rapporteur on Myanmar human rights, on Thursday said he had “received reports of state involvement in some of the acts of violence,” earning himself a rebuke from the Burmese government. President Thein Sein on Thursday said that his government would use force if need be to clamp down on the violence, but only as a last resort.

The violence against Burmese Muslims in general has found a particular target in members of the Rohingya ethnic group. Stateless due to their status under a 1982 citizenship law, many Burmese believe the Rohingya are illegal immigrants from neighboring Bangladesh. Because of this, the Rohingya have faced down violence and persecution for years, to the degree that some have called their situation a “genocide.” The group has caught the eye of hacktivist group Anonymous, which is now claiming credit for promoting more awareness of the Rohingya’s plight.

At present, the U.S. has backed President Thein’s call for calm, but not commented on the violence in Sri Lanka, nor taken apparent action to pressure either government to halt the attacks. This echoes previous instances of violence, such as in Sept. 2012, when the State Department urged Bangladesh to keep its borders open as Rohingya fled from Myanmar. President Obama, during his Nov. 2012 visit to Myanmar, called for greater protection of minorities in the country. So far, this call hasn’t not seemed to be heard in Myanmar and Sri Lanka.

(Photo: A destroyed mosque in Okpho, Myanmar. Credit: Ye Aung Thu/AFP/Getty Images)

View the original article here

Sequestration cuts threaten to undermine VAWA programs

The recent reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) was an event to be celebrated, not just because it reaffirmed the importance of the act itself, but also because in the course of the media clamor, countless Americans heard of VAWA for the first time, and learned just how vital it is in the lives of American women.
Yet just as VAWA and other critical programs such as the federal Family Violence Prevention and Services Act (FVPSA) are transforming American communities’ responses to gender-based violence, sequestration is threatening to undo the advances we’ve made, as well as stopping any forward movement.

Sequestration cuts five percent from all federal programs, regardless of intent or efficacy, including VAWA and FVPSA. This will have devastating consequences for women and children who must daily face the crimes of domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. VAWA is the single reliable source of funding toward the prevention of domestic violence. Domestic violence is far too prevalent – one in four women experiences domestic violence in her lifetime – and yet, private foundations don’t see it as a priority when determining their philanthropic intentions. Less than one percent of philanthropic support goes toward programs that address violence.
In the wake of the recent Steubenville verdict, let’s consider the Rape Prevention and Education Program (RPE), one of VAWA’s most crucial components. According to statistics gathered by RAINN (Rape, Incest, and Abuse National Network), an American is sexually assaulted every two minutes – the RPE supports the work of rape crisis centers and sexual assault coalitions across America, and a five percent cut translates to a loss of $2 million to those services. This in turn translates to 125,000 fewer school and college students receiving information about rape and sexual abuse prevention; 15,000 fewer rape hotline calls answered; and 7,000 fewer professionals trained in identifying sexual violence issues.

Not only do such losses represent the very height of cruelty and insensitivity, they also represent financial folly. Annual victim costs for rape are estimated at $127 billion – and this doesn’t include the costs of child sexual abuse. Simply put, rape is the most costly of all crimes. Saving money by not funding prevention and intervention is an abandonment of American women at a time of almost incalculable vulnerability, and will ultimately cost this country more than it saves.
This is equally true for cuts to programs that target intimate partner abuse: Domestic violence directly impacts one in four women and 15.5 million children every year; an average of three American women are killed every day by a current or former intimate partner.
According to Senator Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), federal government agencies, and the Campaign for Funding to End Domestic and Sexual Violence, sequestration will result in at least 106,020 fewer victims receiving lifesaving services -- some 70,120 victims won’t have access to domestic violence programs and shelters, and another 35,900 won’t get assistance in obtaining protection orders, crisis intervention and counseling, and other critical help.
And in spite of what some in Washington would have Americans believe, private philanthropy just doesn’t make up the difference. These are challenging, thorny, and painful issues – it can be difficult to draw donors, simply because the problems themselves are so ugly. For government to leave the well-being of millions of women and children to the vagaries of private charity is a flagrant abdication of duty to some of our most vulnerable citizens.
The passage of VAWA in 1994 represented a sea change in American culture. For the first time in history, our government acknowledged the pernicious and insidious nature of gender-based violence, and took real action to provide aid and comfort to victims, while also acting to change the reality that allows such crimes to occur.
Since that time, survivors of domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking have had unprecedented access to services that enable them to escape abuse, protect their children, heal from assault, and rebuild their lives. In 2012 alone, VAWA-funded programs provided lifesaving help to three-quarters of a million victims of gender-based violence.
Sequestration threatens to undo these gains for far too many women. Without the effective law enforcement and prosecution that VAWA makes possible, abusers are more likely to become repeat offenders; without programs like transitional housing and legal services, many victims have no alternative to staying with their partner, and are thus at an increased risk for homicide.
For the tens of thousands of women who will be hurt by these cuts, there is simply no alternative. Every day that Congress delays its response to sequestration is a day that proves harmful, even deadly, for victims of domestic violence and sexual assault.
Our elected representatives have a duty to serve all Americans, but particularly those who are most vulnerable. No political in-fighting can excuse inaction when so many lives are at stake. We urge Congress to act with all haste to resolve the sequestration, and restore the funding so necessary to the Violence Against Women Act.
Weinstein is executive director of Jewish Women International.

View Comments

View the original article here

Colorado Sheriffs Threaten Not To Enforce Their Own State’s Gun Laws

For months, local sheriffs have been objecting to federal efforts to stem gun violence in the wake of the Newtown massacre, claiming they violate “states’ rights.” Now, with a package of gun violence prevention measures awaiting the governor’s signature in a state that has seen some of the most deadly and high-profile mass shootings, several Colorado county sheriffs are threatening not to enforce their own state’s measures to expand criminal background checks and limit ammunition magazines if they are signed into law. The Greeley Tribune reports:

Weld County Sheriff John Cooke said he won’t enforce either gun-control measure waiting to be signed into law by Gov. John Hickenlooper, saying the laws are “unenforceable” and would “give a false sense of security.” […]

“They’re feel-good, knee-jerk reactions that are unenforceable,” he said.

Cooke said the bill requiring a $10 background check to legally transfer a gun would not keep firearms out of the hands of those who use them for violence.

“Criminals are still going to get their guns,” he said.

Cooke said the other bill would also technically ban all magazines because of a provision that outlaws any magazine that can be altered. He said all magazines can be altered to a higher capacity.

Cooke said he, like other county sheriffs, “won’t bother enforcing” the laws because it will be impossible for them to keep track of how the requirements are being met by gun owners. He said he and other sheriffs are considering a lawsuit against the state to block the measures if they are signed into law.

El Paso County Sheriff Terry Maketa also said Thursday that several of the laws are unenforceable and that he would willfully ignore the high-capacity magazine limit. And Cooke’s position appears to have the support of a number of other state sheriffs; during testimony calling the law unenforceable, 20 other county sheriffs stood behind him in solidarity.

Sheriffs’ assertions that the laws are simply too difficult to enforce and/or ineffective is the latest in a string of arguments by a contingent of county sheriffs opposed to any new gun violence prevention measures. Other sheriffs, several of whom are part of a fringe militia group whose members believe that sheriffs are the highest law enforcement authorities and vow to defy any law or order that violates their radical view of the Constitution, have argued that federal regulation violates states’ rights and the Second Amendment.

Conservative legislators are also already committing to repeal the ammunition magazine limit if enacted through a 2014 ballot measure.

Other measures that passed both houses of the Colorado legislature include a requirement that firearm buyers pay for their own background checks, a ban on online certification for concealed-carry permits, and a ban on gun purchases by people convicted of domestic violence crimes.

View the original article here

Pioneer ACOs Threaten To Walk

The Pioneer accountable care organizations have asked the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation to revise quality benchmarks the ACOs have to meet to qualify for Medicare bonuses, threatening to drop out of the program otherwise.

The Pioneer ACOs note 19 of 31 quality measures were set without anchoring methodology, reflecting a lack of data, according to a letter sent Feb. 25 and posted online by The Washington Post. The Pioneer and Medicare Shared Service Program ACOs suggest they can provide data to better inform the selection of empirical benchmarks.

The Pioneer ACOs also suggest some proposed benchmarks are too high, including those based on data from Medicare Advantage. "We believe there are fundamental differences between the experience of non-managed and managed populations that warrant consideration when establishing pay-related benchmarks," they wrote.

They "strongly recommend" Pioneer ACOs remain in reporting-only status for performance year 2013 so benchmarks can be rebuilt for 2014 performance. They requested a decision before April 2.

The letter was first reported by Inside Health Policy, which noted Wednesday that CMS Acting Administrator Marilyn Tavenner said she will meet this month with the Pioneer ACOs to discuss their demands.

"We all feel like we're pioneering an effort to convert our health care system from purely volume-based to a more value-based approach," Jim Hinton, CEO of Presbyterian Health Services in New Mexico, one of the Pioneer ACOs, told The Washington Post's Health Reform Watch blog. "So like any programs of a new size, there have been some start up and transition issues."

To learn more:
- read the ACOs letter
- here's the blog post
- see the Inside Health Policy follow up (subscription required)

Related Articles:
HHS unveils 106 new ACOs
ACOs for everyone
Obama win bolsters hospital ACO, reform efforts
Risks, rewards of Shared Savings vs. Pioneer ACO

View the original article here

Sequestration Cuts To Education Programs Threaten To Widen Education Gap Between Rich And Poor

The achievement gap between school districts in high-income neighborhoods and those in low-income ones is already more canyon than crack, and if $1.7 trillion in automatic sequestration cuts are allowed to go into effect on March 1, that gap could grow even wider.

Dozens of education programs would face reduced funding, but three crucial programs — No Child Left Behind, Head Start initiatives, and the Individuals with Disabilities Act — provide the most assistance to low-income students and also face the sharpest cuts if the sequester is allowed to go into effect, as the Center for American Progress’ Juliana Herman and Kaitlin Pennington detailed in a new report:

Altogether, the sequester would cut approximately $725 million from Title I funding, potentially affecting 2,700 schools, impacting 1.2 million students, and placing 9,880 education staff at risk of losing their jobs. [...]

Head Start and Early Head Start—a similar program for infants—both work to ensure that parental income does not determine whether a child will be able to learn during these influential years. But should sequestration happen next week, approximately 70,000 children will be kicked out of Head Start due to inadequate funding. [...]

If sequestration goes through, funding under the Individuals with Disabilities Act could be reduced by as much as $579 million.

In all, the report estimates, the cuts would impact as many as 1.2 million children, 30,000 teachers and 2,700 schools, the overwhelming majority of which will be from low-income communities.

Recent studies have shown the devastating correlation between income and student achievement. Since the late 1980s, the gap in metrics like college completion between students from high-income and low-income households grew by more than 50 percent.

View the original article here

Notice -- Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to Terrorists Who Threaten to Disrupt the Middle East Peace Process

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

NOTICE

- - - - - - -

CONTINUATION OF THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY WITH RESPECT TO
TERRORISTS WHO THREATEN TO DISRUPT THE MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS

On January 23, 1995, by Executive Order 12947, the President declared a national emergency pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706) to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States constituted by grave acts of violence committed by foreign terrorists who threaten to disrupt the Middle East peace process. On August 20, 1998, by Executive Order 13099, the President modified the Annex to Executive Order 12947 to identify four additional persons who threaten to disrupt the Middle East peace process. On February 16, 2005, by Executive Order 13372, the President clarified the steps taken in Executive Order 12947.

Because these terrorist activities continue to threaten the Middle East peace process and to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States, the national emergency declared on January 23, 1995, and the measures adopted to deal with that emergency must continue in effect beyond January 23, 2013. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency with respect to foreign terrorists who threaten to disrupt the Middle East peace process.

This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to the Congress.

BARACK OBAMA

Watch Hinna, Taejah, Julia and Grant read the letters they wrote to President Obama, asking him to do something about gun violence.

Editorial pages across the country today are lauding the President’s broad approach to address curbing gun violence in our nation

Learn more about the new Health Insurance Marketplace, which will kick in come October and mark the beginning of new health insurance and tax credits for millions of Americans.

view all related blog posts

View the original article here