In a Texas case that could have implications for other voting rights cases nationwide, the Supreme Court on Friday Jan 20, rejected a lower court’s redistricting plans for the state’s new electoral seats, which could pose constitutional concerns.

According to the 2010 Census, Texas’ population grew by more than four million people in the last decade – 65% of which is attributed to Hispanics – giving the state four additional seats in the U.S. House of Representatives and requiring changes in the election districts for the State Legislature.

Under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, jurisdictions labeled as historically discriminatory in electoral procedures (including Texas) must submit plans for changes affecting voting to the Attorney General or the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The Texas Legislature’s initial set of election maps had not been approved at the time of Texas’ first primaries, leading the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas to create its own map for use in the interim.

The Texas court’s map gives greater voting power to the new population, which is largely minority, whereas the Legislature’s map seems to dilute the electoral power of the Hispanic and African American voters. The Supreme Court determined that the lower court had overstepped its authority, and ordered it to adhere more closely to the original plan.

“Election redistricting is an extremely important and delicate undertaking, with many opportunities for the empowerment or disenfranchisement a particular group of citizens,” said Benny Agosto, HNBA National President and Texas resident. “The HNBA is concerned about the constitutional implications of this decision, and the potential ripple-effect on redistricting disputes in which Latino voters’ rights are at stake.

As a national advocate for Latino voting rights, the HNBA will continue to follow these developments closely to ensure that democracy is not being compromised.”

“Protecting the Hispanic community’s electoral voice and the right to elect their candidate of choice is paramount. HNBA stands behind efforts to ensure that redistricting maps comply with the Voting Rights Act. Maps in Texas, and throughout the country, must account for the growth in the Hispanic population,” added Celeste Villarreal, HNBA Vice President of External Affairs.

The article Supreme Court Decision Could Hurt Latino Voters appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

On December 19, Lung Cancer Alliance (LCA) praised Senator Scott Brown for his support for the first comprehensive lung cancer legislation now pending action in the Senate and the House of Representatives.

The Lung Cancer Mortality Reduction Act, S. 752 and H.R. 1394, is a bicameral, bipartisan call to action on the leading cause of cancer death.  Senator John Kerry is one of the primary sponsors of the Senate bill that was introduced earlier this year. Other supporters from the Massachusetts congressional delegation include Congressman Barney Frank, Stephen Lynch, John Olver and John Tierney.

Lung Cancer Alliance’s President & CEO Laurie Fenton-Ambrose said, “We are thrilled to see this strong bi-partisan recognition of the urgent need to have a better plan of action to address all aspects of lung cancer which we hope will continue to grow and include all members of the Massachusetts delegation.”

Lung cancer is by far the leading cause of cancer death worldwide, nationally and in every ethnic group. According the National Cancer Institute estimates, this year, in Massachusetts more people will die of lung cancer – 3,490 – more than the combined total of deaths due to breast cancer (760), colon cancer (980) and prostate cancer (640).

Diane Legg, LCA-New England Co-Director said, “As a seven year survivor of lung cancer, it is reassuring to know that our elected leaders have heard our stories, have become better educated about the disease and have become proponents of a call to action that would put life-saving, cost-saving, cancer reducing benefits in motion.”

Rich Monopoli, LCA-New England Co-Director said, “Sadly, the impact of lung cancer goes beyond epidemic yet few people even know that today 80% of lung cancer patients have never smoked or had already quit, often decades ago.  That is why support for a more coordinated and comprehensive plan for this disease is so important – as it will help reduce lung cancer’s stigma and reverse decades of neglect.

The Lung Cancer Mortality Reduction Act is win-win for all and I am hopeful that the entire Massachusettsdelegation and their New England colleagues will join our call to action.” LCA has been building a network of support for the call to action which includes leading research, veterans, and minority health and labor organizations.

The legislation, H.R. 1394 in the House and S. 752 in the Senate, calls for the Departments of Health and Human Services, Defense and Affairs to develop a coordinated research, prevention, early detection and treatment effort with the specific goal of cutting lung cancer mortality in half by the end of the decade.

Lung Cancer Alliance is the only national non-profit dedicated to providing support and advocacy for those living with or at risk for lung cancer.  LCA is committed to reversing decades of stigma and neglect by empowering those with or at risk for lung cancer, elevating awareness and changing health policy at both the federal and state level. For more information visit: www.lungcanceralliance.org.

Image Courtesy of   http://www.flickr.com/photos/massgovernor/

The article Lung Cancer Alliance Praises Senator Scott Brown for Support appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

“Progress in preventing HIV in the United States will be set back, while little will be done to provide additional care and treatment to people already living with HIV/AIDS in our country,” said Carl Schmid, Deputy Executive Director of The AIDS Institute, commenting on the final Fiscal Year 2012 spending bill to be voted on by Congress on December 16.

“This is especially disappointing in light of the optimism expressed by national and global leaders just two weeks ago on World AIDS Day,” he continued.

At the insistence of the House of Representatives, the bill would reinstate a federal funding ban of syringe exchange programs, a scientifically proven method to prevent HIV and other blood borne infections, while not increasing drug use. Additionally, the bill would resurrect failed abstinence-only-until-marriage programs, but only at a minimal level of $5 million.

Despite an estimated 50,000 new HIV infections each year and over 240,000 people unaware of their infection, funding for HIV prevention at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) would be cut by $10 million. Surprisingly, this cut would be to its school health HIV program. The CDC reports that young people aged 13–29 accounted for 39% of all new HIV infections in 2009.

The bill flat funds the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program except for a $15 million increase, originally proposed by the Senate, for the AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP). The Ryan White Program provides care and treatment to over 550,000 low-income people with HIV/AIDS. According to NASTAD, there are currently 4,155 people in 12 states on ADAP waiting lists and over 445 people in six states who have been disenrolled from the program due to budget constraints and growing enrollment.

On World AIDS Day, President Obama, recognizing the need for additional funding for both care and treatment for low income people with HIV/AIDS in the U.S., announced $50 million in additional funds for the Ryan White Program. As part of that announcement, ADAP would receive an additional $35 million. While it is not known yet how the funds will be distributed, taken together, the $50 million in new ADAP money could eliminate the ADAP wait lists if it is distributed to the wait list states.

“We are extremely grateful to both President Obama and the Congress for continuing to recognize the importance of providing medications to people with HIV/AIDS and the serious funding gap for ADAP,” commented Michael Ruppal, Executive Director of The AIDS Institute. “While it is far from enough to meet the growing need, these increases are a very positive development.”

According to HRSA data, the number of ADAP clients served nationally has grown an astounding 40 percent from FY07-CY10. Under the bill, funding for medical research at the National Institutes of Health would increase by $299 million.

The final bill, which is a product of negotiation between the House and the Senate, is far better than the one introduced earlier this year by House Labor, HHS, Education and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Denny Rehberg.

That bill would have decimated the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program by cutting its budget from $105 million to $20 million, eliminate all Title X spending, and the entire Prevention and Public Health Fund. Additionally it would have prevented implementation of much of the Affordable Care Act. The bill also includes an across the board 0.189 percent cut, meaning all programs are subject to being cut even further

Jose Gil / Shutterstock.com

The article HIV/AIDS Programs in US Largely Funded by Federal Spending Bill appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) made an unexpected return to Congress on Monday to vote on the debt ceiling bill. Seven months after being shot in the head in Tucson, Arizona, Giffords recovery has astounded doctors.

House Minority Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) introduced Giffords to thunderous applause and a standing ovation. Colleagues shook Giffords hand and welcomed her back to her job for the first time since she was critically injured during a political event that left six dead.

“I have closely followed the debate over our debt ceiling and have been deeply disappointed at what’s going on in Washington,” Giffords said, in a statement from her office. “After weeks of failed debate in Washington, I was pleased to see a solution to this crisis emerge.

I strongly believe that crossing the aisle for the good of the American people is more important than party politics. I had to be here for this vote. I could not take the chance that my absence could crash our economy.”

Giffords voted in favor of raising the debt ceiling which passed through House by a margin of 269 to 161. Her office, in a statement, noted that in December 2009 and again in February 2010, she had objected to raising the nation’s debt limit. This vote, the statement added, “was substantially different, with the strength of the U.S. economy hanging in the balance.”

After the vote was cast, Giffords received multiple additional rounds of applause, as Pelosi called her “the personification of courage.”

“Her presence here in the chamber as well as her service throughout her career in Congress, brings honor to this chamber,” Pelosi said. “Thank you, Gabby.”

Assistant Democratic Leader James Clyburn (D-S.C.) said he found out that Giffords would show for the vote when he saw her, hinting that Pelosi and others in the know played it close to the vest.  ”I just said, ‘I love you, glad to have you back, great to see you,’” he said. “I only found out when I saw her. [It was] a little emotional.”

Jared Lee Loughner, of Tucson, has been charged in the shootings that injured Giffords and others.

The article Giffords Returns for Historic Debt Vote appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

With the prospect of a debt default looming just over the horizon, the House of Representatives tonight passed compromise legislation to raise the debt ceiling.

The House voted in favor of the bill by a margin of 269-161 after a dramatic day of legislative wrangling on Capitol Hill. Although the compromise was announced last night, the leaders of both parties had to spend much of today trying to win over their respective caucuses.

The bill is essentially a modified version of John Boehner’s (R-OH) plan, which passed the House last week. It would immediately raise the debt ceiling by $400 billion, while allowing President Obama to order a $500 billion increase in the fall, unless both houses of Congress vote to block it. It also imposes spending cuts of $1 trillion by setting ten-year caps on the budgets of Cabinet agencies.

A further debt ceiling increase of up to $1.5 trillion will be granted if Congress can offset it through additional spending cuts. A special bipartisan committee of both houses will be responsible for proposing these cuts, but if the committee cannot agree or Congress does not enact their proposals, the White House will be empowered to order across-the-board cuts, including reductions in defense spending and farm subsidies. However, the debt ceiling increase could still go through if Congress approves a balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution and sends it to the states for ratification.

Neither side ended up truly winning the day. While Obama and the Democrats got their wish for a debt ceiling increase that will see them through the 2012 election, they will not be able to raise taxes on the wealthy in order to reduce the debt. And while the Republicans succeeded in wringing deep spending cuts from the Democrats, the agreed-upon cuts are not as deep as the ones the House passed last week. It is also far from certain that a balanced-budget amendment will actually go to the states since it is no longer required in order to raise the debt ceiling.

Like most compromises, this one was not to everyone’s liking. Presidential hopeful Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) announced her intention to vote against the bill, claiming that it did not cut spending enough. “Someone has to say no, I will,” she said.

At the other end of the political spectrum, the co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Rep. Raúl M. Grijalva (D-AZ), also lambasted the bill. “This deal weakens the Democratic Party as badly as it weakens the country. We have given much and received nothing in return,” he said.

The Senate will likely take up the bill tomorrow, where it is almost certain to pass, given the bipartisan show of support in the House and the fact that a debt default could be just around the corner if they balk.

The article House Passes Debt Ceiling Increase: No True Winner appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The House of Representatives has passed the Budget Control Act proposed by their Speaker, John Boehner (R-OH), by a vote of 218-210.

The bill passed without any support from the Democrats and, despite an intensive lobbying effort by Boehner and the rest of the House GOP leadership, twenty-two Republicans broke ranks to vote against it as well.

Speaking in support of his bill, Boehner said that he “stuck my neck out a mile trying to get an agreement with the president of the United States. I stuck my neck out a mile. And I put revenues on the table in order to try to come to an agreement to avert us being where we are.”

“But a lot of people in this town can never say yes. This house has acted and it is time for this administration to put something on the table, tell us where you are,” he continued.

The House was originally supposed to vote on the bill last Thursday, but Boehner abruptly postponed the vote at the last minute when it became apparent that he did not have enough support. Another round of intensive arm-twisting ensued, and Boehner agreed to tweak the bill to make it more palatable to the Tea Party faction of his caucus.

The original bill called for a $900 billion increase in the debt ceiling and spending cuts worth $917 billion. This increase would only tide the government over until 2012, at which point the issue would have to be revisited. However, Boehner’s legislation contained provisions for a bipartisan committee to come up with further spending cuts, at which point the debt ceiling could be raised again. As a result of pressure from the Tea Partiers, Boehner agreed to a further amendment that would require Congress to pass a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution and send it to the states for ratification before the debt ceiling could be raised a second time.

Once the bill arrived in the Senate, Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) moved to ‘table’ (i.e. kill) it. That motion was agreed to by a vote of 59-41 that saw several Republican senators join the Democrats in opposing Boehner’s plan. Now the Senate will likely turn its attention to Reid’s own proposal to solve the debt ceiling crisis, with a final vote likely to occur sometime during the early hours of Sunday morning. But it is almost certain to receive a chilly welcome from the House, and, with only days to go before the August 2^nd deadline, a solution to the debt crisis seems as remote as ever.

Image Courtesy of  http://www.flickr.com/photos/republicanconference/

The article John Boehner’s Budget Control Act Passes Dies in The Senate appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Republican and Democratic lawmakers have been engaged in intensive negotiations for weeks to figure out how to lift the $14.3 trillion debt limit but a devastating default looms as the two parties have yet to reach agreement. President Barack Obama addressed the nation with his frustration over the deadlock: “Once again, the economy will be held captive unless they [Republican lawmakers] get their way. This is no way to run the greatest country on earth.”

“Every day that goes by without a deal will see investors become a bit more defensive,” said Omer Esiner, chief market analyst at Commenwealth Foreign Exchange in Washington to Reuters. The stalemate has shook the American position in global markets and experts say that failure to reduce the government deficit by $4 trillion over the next 10 years will downgrade the United States.

President Obama said in a televised address on Monday “I have told leaders of both parties that they must come up with a fair compromise in the next few days that can pass both houses of Congress – a compromise I can sign. And I am confident we can reach this compromise.” Leaders of both parties have insisted that they will not allow the United States to default but so far, demands from both sides have been irreconcilable.

Republican lawmakers say the lift of the debt ceiling must be accompanied by even larger reduction in spending, reflecting the Tea Party line to shrink government. Meanwhile, the Democrats want to shield Medicare and Medicaid to secure old and poor Americans — they want any cuts in the healthcare system to be balanced by changes in the U.S. tax code, something that Republicans in the House of Representatives have staunchly refused.

Because of the division between Republican control in the House and Democratic sway over the Senate, it seems unlikely that their competing plans will win bipartisan support by August 2, when the US ‘runs out of cash to pay its bills’.

The article Obama’s Speech on US Debt Deal Reveal Deadlock a Week Before Deadline appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Although there are real problems in this country, the House Republicans is instead focusing on light bulbs. That is right. Forget a double-dip recession, global warming, attacks on equality and spending cuts-we have light bulbs to consider!

Fortunately the asinine bill was voted down. But not before a ridiculous amount of time was wasted. The House of Representatives voted on whether to repeal light bulb efficiency standards that are set to take effect at the beginning of 2012 because it infringes on personal freedom. Yes, these same politicians don’t mind infringing on personal freedom when it comes to abortion or gay marriage, but damn the light bulbs.

I feel like I am writing for “The Onion” right now.  The new standards that the House is now looking to repeal would save the United States billions of dollars each year. But, cutting spending is only necessary when it will hurt the poor and the elderly. Not make rich people change their light bulbs.

“This is about more than just energy consumption, it is about personal freedom,” said Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas), a sponsor of the new bill, in a statement earlier this year. “Voters sent us a message in November that it is time for politicians and activists in Washington to stop interfering in their lives and manipulating the free market. The light bulb ban is the perfect symbol of that frustration. People don’t want congress dictating what light fixtures they can use.”

Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee and the lead sponsor of the light bulb provision when it was introduced as part of a Republican-backed energy bill signed into law in 2007, has since walked back his support for the standards: He told The Hill‘s Andrew Restuccia, “It was never my goal for Washington to decide what type of light bulbs Americans should use.

The public response on this issue is a clear signal that markets – not governments – should be driving technological advancements. I will join my colleagues to vote yes on a bill to protect consumer choice and guard against federal overreach.”

Of course, overlooked by these overpaid windbags is that the new law would not ban incandescent bulbs. The law sets goals that are technology-neutral, and manufacturers have already developed more efficient incandescent bulbs that are available and on the market today.

The Better Use of Light Bulbs Act failed to garner the two-thirds majority needed for passage. The vote was 233-193.“Fortunately, the Republican attempt to repeal minimum efficiency standards for light bulbs failed,” said Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), the ranking member of the Natural Resources Committee and a senior member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, in a statement after the vote.

“But it is a reflection of how radical the House Republican majority has become that a bipartisan, common-sense provision supported by both industry and environmentalists was threatened with repeal, and that the House wasted its time on such a matter when we have much more important work to do to create jobs and reduce the deficit.”

Image Courtesy of  http://www.flickr.com/photos/gageskidmore/5484346132/in/photostream/

The article Republicans to Americans: Screw Jobs-Let’s Focus on Lightbulbs! appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

House Republicans have introduced a bill designed to crack down on “illegal” immigration.  House immigration subcommittee chairman Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.) said last month that he will introduce a bill within the next month to mandate the use of an illegal-worker detection system, E-Verify.  The detection system is already mandatory for government agencies and contractors.  It is also used voluntarily by nearly 250,000 businesses to check the legal status of potential hires, however critics say to make E-Verify mandatory would severely hurt U.S. agriculture by depriving farmers of cheap labor.

Gallegly believes that by making E-Verify a requirement for all businesses, it would force all the undocumented workers out of the country.  “If there was ever a need to do something quickly, when we have 14 million Americans who aren’t working today, I think they deserve to be put in the front of the line,” the California Republican said at a hearing on the use of E-Verify.

Farm owners maintain that very few U.S. citizens want the types of jobs taken by undocumented workers.  The jobs are usually low-paying and backbreaking work such as fruit-picking.  Last year, a drive by United Farm Workers called “Take Our Jobs” and promoted by Comedy Central host Stephen Colbert seemed to highlight that claim–few Americans will work agricultural jobs, even with record high unemployment.

David Cox, the chief executive of a California fruit-growing company, said he has hired a few naturalized Americans, but some quit almost immediately and others said they plan to leave as soon as they can find another job.  “As the economy improves, there will be much fewer to do this kind of work,” Cox maintains.   “If E-Verify became mandatory, we would lose most of our workforce overnight.”

Although designed to promote the economy, many experts feel this bill will likely hurt the economy, driving food prices even higher and increasing the demand for cheaper imported food.  “Pressing harder on the gas without fixing the vehicle will only hurt our economy,” Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), the ranking member of the immigration subcommittee, said.  “Particularly in agriculture, mandating the use of E-Verify would reverse the polarity of the magnet, shipping millions of jobs overseas.”

It would also be expensive to implement.  Bloomberg News Service estimated it would cost small businesses $2.6 billion annually to apply E-Verify if it became mandatory.  Another problem is that Immigration and Customs can only deport so many people a year.  They do not have the resources to deport the amount of people that may need to be if E-Verify became mandatory.

The article House Rep. Gallegly Proposes Anti-Immigration Legislation appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.