Search posterous

Search all posts and users. Type a name, type a favorite song title, whatever! See what comes up.
  

More posterous blogs











More recommended blogs »

Here are posterous posts filed under policy...

Press Release

For Immediate Release
Wednesday, December 2, 2009

Libertarians opposed to new war plans for Afghanistan

 

WASHINGTON - The Libertarian Party (LP) today expressed its opposition to the Afghanistan war plans announced by President Barack Obama last night.

Wes Benedict, Executive Director of the LP, said, "Rush Limbaugh should buy Obama a nice cigar. The liberal president has done exactly what the conservative leader wanted: escalate the war."

William Redpath, Chairman of the Libertarian National Committee (LNC), commented, "This is further evidence that the differences between Republicans and Democrats are, at most, rhetorical. This president, whose votes made him the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate, has just announced an escalation of a foreign war. His campaign promise of 'Change' now sounds a lot more hollow."

Redpath continued, "Some congressional Democrats may make a rhetorical show of opposing Obama's decision, but that is all it will be. Obama is guaranteed to get the additional troops and funding that he wants."

Redpath continued, "Instead, Congress should re-assert its authority in matters of war, by passing legislation that terminates the president's authorization to make war in Afghanistan, and that calls for an orderly withdrawal from Afghanistan. If the president vetoes it, Congress should override the veto."

In September 2008, the LNC adopted a resolution calling for a military withdrawal from Afghanistan.

Benedict commented further, "One problem with the president's strategy is that it demonstrates a hyperinflated fear of terrorists. When we act worried and threatened, we make the terrorists feel like they're having their intended effect, which encourages them to keep doing what they're doing."

Redpath continued, "According to the Cato Institute, 'the U.S. military's counterinsurgency doctrine says that stabilizing a country the size of Afghanistan would require far more troops than the most wild-eyed hawk has proposed: about 600,000 troops.' President Obama is proposing to put a total of about 100,000 troops in Afghanistan, which won't come close to accomplishing anything."

Redpath concluded, "The president's speech was surprisingly content-free. The speech was nearly all platitudes, which is typical for politicians, particularly presidents. Will someone please restore substance to American political discourse?"

For more information, or to arrange an interview, call LP executive director Wes Benedict at 202-333-0008 ext. 222.

The LP is America's third-largest political party, founded in 1971. The Libertarian Party stands for free markets and civil liberties. You can find more information on the Libertarian Party at our website.

###

 

via lp.org

 

Filed under: policy

If the President was still in the Senate, would he vote for his Afghanistan plan ?  Answer = No !


Filed under: policy

Lessons of War / Afghanistan re-du / Watch this episode, you won't be sorry

Filed under: policy

Kevin says...

 Karen Cantor, former Apple executive, was recently appointed to head the Office of Educational Technology for the Department of Education. According to the departments website the main goal of the Office of Educational Technology is to " maximize technology's contributions to improving education through developing national educational technology policy and implementing policy department-wide."

Ms. Cantor was a former teacher and technology director in Alaska. According to an online article in Education Week the choice of Ms. Cantor drew widespread praise from educational technology advocates.

 At Apple, Ms. Cantor was responsible for running the Distinguished Educator program and the teaching and learning content on the Apple Learning Interchange, The Apple Learning Interchange is an online network of teachers who share teaching ideas for use in the classroom.

It is nice to have someone with Ms. Cantor's educational experience and business and technology background. Hopefully she can implement policy that will bring systemic change to technology integration in America's schools. At the same time it will be important for her to channel funds to states to support her policies. Time will tell if Ms. Cantor was a wise choice.

Filed under: Policy

nickpetten says...

I recently attended a forum called, Taking Effective Action. The forum was part of Opportunities Waterloo Region's Community Conversations Series. The forum gave some practical advise to develop a toolkit of steps to impact policy change. The presenter was Nancy Dubois. Nancy has been a consultant with The Health Communications Unit (THCU) since 1998. She works with groups across the province in areas of planning, evaluation, policy development, sustainability, health communication and comprehensive workplace health.

Opportunities Waterloo Region, or just Opportunities for short, acts as a regional convener – a community support organization - exclusively focused on facilitating poverty prevention and reduction strategies, providing opportunities for the community to generate ideas and take action, building on existing assets and increasing community strengths.

The organization is currently underway in a campaign to influence public policy at a regional level. That campaign is for the Living Wage. The Region of Waterloo is considering implementing a Living Wage Policy for its employees and contractors and Opportunities is hard at work to inform the councillors and the citizens of the region to support such a policy. Click here for a PDF of a report from the Social Services for the Living Wage.

Here are some notes on the Conversation:

What is Policy?

  • At a macro level, policy provides more equitable access to the determinants of health; determinants such as income, housing, etc. Nancy comes from a health promotion background, so many of her speaking points make reference to health related policies, however, she did drive the message that health is very closely related to other measures of the quality of life of an individual.


“Canada is extremely progressive in terms of health promotions.” - Nancy

  • Good for Canada. I was not aware of this and it made me proud. A number of times, Nancy made reference to anti-smoking campaigns in Canada and how successful they have been. I have noticed that compared to other countries, when I look around in a populated area in Canada, there is a noticeable lack of smokers. Good clean air for all!


Why take a policy approach?

  • This question makes sense considering the audience in the room. Many of the participants of the conversation were coming from the non-profit sector that are actively engaged in community building projects and campaigns to influence attitudes. Other approaches that these organizations may take to influence and inform populations of people are awareness campaigns (large scale events to inform people of an issue), and educational campaigns (for example, the anti-smoking campaigns that used advertisements to inform people of the ill effects of smoking).


“Good” Policy is...

  • economically feasible
  • politically acceptable
  • socially acceptable
  • administratively and technologically possible


What kinds of policy work is the Ontario Government doing in regards to poverty reduction?

  • Bill 152: Poverty Reduction Act (May, 2009)
  • Ontario Poverty Reduction Strategy (Dec 2008)
  • Full-Time Kindergarden


Nancy provided everyone with a handout on how to do policy work. It is a short and clear step by step process to engage in policy change.

Click here to download a PDF of the full handout--it is a great resource.

Here is a really short version of it:

Policy Development OWR CCS<div style="font-size:11px;font-family:tahoma,arial;height:26px;padding-top:2px;">View more presentations from npetten.</div></div>

 

Filed under: policy

Scott says...

The default position is that we ebook readers are always engaged in some form of wrongdoing.  We are charged more.  We don’t get the book at the same time.  We are constrained in how we use our books, on what devices we read them on, with whom we can share them.  We are not considered legitimate customers if we do not leave our house and buy a paper copy.

Sharing is a fundamental part of reading.  Sharing is a reader’s way of saying “try this, I think you’ll like it. There is no risk here.” It’s a way of building a relationship with another reader so that the next time you are reading a book, you can say, “get this” and that person will go and buy it, solely on your recommendation.  From one reader to another, there is no greater expression of trust than to buy on another reader’s recommendation.

Sharing is part of creating the reading community. Sharing seeds reading.  It creates and generates more interest in reading. Why is this important? Because the biggest threat to authors’ livelihood is not piracy.  It is not casual sharing.  It is a declining readership.  It is rising rates of illiteracy.  It is alternative forms of entertainment.

Filed under: policy

prestonhaley says...

Filed under: policy

The choice to buy frozen matters more than organic vs. conventional or wild vs. farmed.

Find out why here: http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/global-study-salmon-shows-sustainable-food-isnt-so-sustainable-27545.html

Filed under: policy

Andrew says...

Narrator

Our very planet depends on them. Yet they remain nature's most elusive scientific species, inhabiting some of the world's most delicate and daunting academic environments. But thanks to new breakthroughs in high speed cameras and email files, metascientists are finally beginning to understand their mysterious behaviors and complex social interactions. Tonight on Iowahawk Geographic: step inside the Secret Life of the Climate Researchers.

French Horn Fanfare Theme

Fast-cut montage of walrus mating with polar bear, astronomer peering through telescope into neighbor's window, cheetahs chasing penguins on the Serengeti, scientists filling out NSF grant proposals

Dah dat dat DAAAH dat, dah daht duh dah dee-dah dee dah-dah!

Narrator

This is the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom, home of one of the largest nesting populations of climate scientists in Europe.

Gentle ant's-eye scene of idyllic campus lawn, strewn about with drunken mating undergraduates

Each year it attracts magnificent migratory flocks of graduate students, adjuncts and visiting faculty from across the northern hemisphere.

Shots of jumbo jets landing at Heathrow; herds of climate researchers busily milling at Duty Free shops, retrieving baggage, phoning for prearranged limo service

Within minutes of arriving on campus, the migratory researchers approach the entrance of the Climate Research Unit and perform the secret credential dance, fiercely displaying their prominent curriculum vitae. This signals to the security drone that they can be trusted with the sacred electronic lanyard badge that will grant them entrance to the hive's inner sanctum.  

During the upcoming research season, this hive alone will produce over 6 million metric tons of grant-sustaining climate data guano, but until recently little was known about the elusive genus of homo scientifica living inside. Where do they come from? What strange force draws them here year after year? In order to unravel the mystery, Iowahawk Geographic documentary filmmaker David Burge undertook a painstaking one-week project to finally capture the climate researchers in their native habitat.

In this exclusive footage, Burge warily approaches the hive's security drone, disguising himself as smelly graduate student. Burge has theorized that as a member of the lowest stratum in the hive's social system, the drone likely enjoys partying. He reaches into his backpack and offers the drone a pint of Guinness and a small bag of weed in exchange for the hive's internal security tapes and email files. Success.

The never-before seen security tapes obtained by Burge provide a rare glimpse into the inner working of the climate research hive and its amazing guano production. In this sequence, we see one group of researchers entering the hive each carrying a datum they have retrieved from a distant climate measuring station. This is the cause of much excitement among their colleagues, who buzz around in a grant-writing frenzy.

Infrared heat map film of highly agitated researchers

But there's a problem: as the worker researchers attempt to store each raw datum into the neat honeycomb hockey stick structure provided by the hive's Alpha Grantwriter, they discover that few will fit. The infrared shows them growing cool with fear. This signals the climate researcher's instinctive behavior to begin viciously beating, rolling and normalizing the data into submission. According to Dr. Nigel V.H. Oldham, professor emeritus at Oxford University's Centre for Metascience, this violent data dance is what makes climate researchers unique among breeds of scientists.

Professor Nigel V.H. Oldham

Like other species in the order homo scientifica, the climate researcher gathers and organizes data to lure grant money to the hive. In contrast to those other species, however, the climate researcher has evolved a set of complex violent behaviors to insure any data leaving the hive is perfectly adapted to nature's most lucrative and sweetest grants. It really is a marvel of natural selection, and explains why the climate researcher continues to thrive in any kind of weather condition....

READ THE REST... iowahawk.typepad.com

This piece is referring to the unfolding ClimateGate scandal. If you haven't heard about it yet, don't be surprised. Most media outlets talk about Anthropogenic (man-created) Global Warming (AGW) as if it is already established indisputable scientific fact.

I'm mostly skeptical of claims like this, not because I am a scientist, but because anytime "science" blends with politics - it inevitably becomes ideological (if you don't agree, you are bad), rather than scientific (if you don't agree, that's good. Curiosity about why things are the way they are, is the foundation of science). The fact that Al Gore is the chief proponent of AGW, should be a sign, not to just write off his opinion, but to at least approach the topic with a measure of skepticism. (Political alignment is irrelevant. If Al Gore were substituted with George W. Bush or Dick Cheney, it wouldn't make AGW one bit more or less true, or scientific.) Also, red flags seem especially appropriate whenever any 'science' a) claims to be "closed," or that the "debate is over," (For example - here's the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change Report which argues the opposite) or b) predicts doom and gloom on an apocalyptic scale... "unless..."

And I can't stress this point enough: Whether or not you agree that man is causing detrimental climate change is not the issue. The issue is that AGW has entered the political body and there is already legislation (Cap and Trade) on it being written which will cause drastic changes to our economy. And make no mistake - additional fees or taxes on companies to regulate their carbon emissions WILL have drastic effects. Most notably with regard to jobs, and the poor. Rising costs of energy and products, due to climate legislation will take a huge toll on people who are already hardest hit by lack of jobs and/or poverty.

If we are going to pass legislation in regard to AGW - we had better be absolutely certain that we know:

 

  1. Beyond a reasonable doubt - AGW is a Fact,
  2. How much the legislation will cost, 
  3. Who will pay for it?, and most importantly
  4. Will the legislation address the problem?

 

If AGW is just speculation - why would we need legislation? 

If the legislation will cost everyone a fortune (Important: remember the Seen vs. the Unseen), not just in jobs and rising costs, but also in restricting personal liberty - there must exist no possible alternative.

If the proposed political action will not fix the problem - but will instead dramatically damage the poor and unemployed - then it is an unscientific and irrational policy, and must be rejected.

Remember, once a law is passed to tax businesses or people for their carbon emissions - it is highly improbably that it will ever be repealed even if the 'scientific claims' on which it is based are disproven in the future. Governments do not readily give up taxes.

With that in mind, here's ClimateGate in a nutshell

Basically - some hackers got their hands on a ton of emails between a notable group of climate scientists who are leading the charge for the idea that man is causing climate change through carbon emissions (AGW). The emails reveal many disturbing things, from attempts to manipulate the data to fit their hypothesis, unlawful destruction (hiding) of data contrary to their position, and even spite against other scientists who disagree with their position.

Obviously - if this is true - then it is a big deal given everything we just discussed.

Here are some articles to get you started:

 

 

Filed under: policy

matthewr says...

The National Mediation Board, which oversees labor relations in the air and rail industry, this month moved to overturn 75 years of labor policy.

The board plans to stack the deck for organized labor in union elections. Under a proposed rule, unions would no longer have to get the approval of a majority of airline workers to achieve certification. Not even close. Instead, a union could win just by getting a majority of the employees who vote. Thus, if only 1,000 of 10,000 flight attendants vote in a union election, and 501 vote for certification, the other 9,499 become unionized.

A few questions: Will this lead to more US jobs or less? Will this lead to more affordable ticket prices or less? Do companies grow and produce more jobs, capital, wealth and innovation with a unionized workforce or do they shrink, slash jobs, lose capital, bleed wealth and slack on innovation? Was there anything to learn from Boeing giving the middle-finger to Washington?

Filed under: Policy