HOW MANY IS TOO MANY?

There were multiple statistics on the actual number of unplanned pregnancies that exist in the United States. Mississippi has the highest rate with 4 out of 10.  Another survey suggests one-third of all children born in the United States were unplanned. Interestingly enough, another category was included, untimed or mis-timed pregnancies. Seeing that some contraceptives such as the pill are only 99 percent effective, that one percent can also account for an unplanned pregnancy. Obviously, if you are using any form of contraception, a pregnancy can be construed as unplanned or untimed. These pregnancies are not limited to the poor or low-income women.

I have found that women can have screenings for about $45.00 from facilities such as the CommuniCare Health Center. There are clinics located in Kyle, San Marcos and San Antonio. The services are offered on a sliding fee scale and sometimes may be free depending on an individual's ability to pay. Documentation is required; therefore, some people may not want to apply. The real barrier to protection is lack of knowledge.

 Although funding will be denied for any facility that provides abortions, there is still help available. All clinics do not provide abortions.  It may take research on the part of the individual but help can be found. It is unfortunate that the shutting down of the Women's Health Program focuses on abortions. Some doctors do not accept patients with Medicaid, the military health insurance Tricare and other types of insurance. This does not stop an individual from finding a provider.

 I do agree that it is not up to the government to choose providers based on the abortion issue. However, most insurance plans have a network of doctors. It  means if you use a doctor out of network, you will pay more. The same applies to Women's Health. If the clinic provides abortions, the individual should find a clinic that does not. Governor Perry has vowed to foot the bill for the Women's Health program in the event the federal government closes its wallet.  Unplanned pregnancies are not a stigma simply because they are unplanned. This article did not specify but one would assume the issue is with unwed mothers in addition to poor mothers. However, there are married women who use the Women's Health Program. It is unfair to suggest someone who is married should monitor the growth of their family even if they use the Women's Health Program.

Women Just Can't Win

Politics can go too far. The fight for the right to choose to abort or not to abort is not a new fight. With the talk of the government being too big and interfering in personal freedoms, it is astounding that a program designed to help those with the most needs is first in line for demolition.  However, efforts have sunk to a new low to push personal agendas concerning abortion over the health and welfare of thousands of women.

 The government is scheduled to shutdown the Texas Women’s Health Program. Though the Obama Administration is pulling the plug on the funding, initially it was the Texas Legislature that included restrictions in the Medicaid Funding Bill. This bill was passed in 2011 but included a mandate that no funding could be used for facilities that provided abortion services. Even if the abortions at these facilities were not directly paid for with state funds, this mandate applies. 

Texas is the first state to have its Medicaid Family Planning Demonstration Program canceled by the federal government. Though Governor Perry is accusing President Obama of putting the needs of abortion providers over the well being of 100,000 women, it was the Texas Legislature that included the restriction in the bill in the first place. The Obama Administration is forced to withdraw funding.   

Governor Perry now plans to play the hero stating he will fund the women’s services even without aid of federal funding.  Texas is not a fan of federal government monies because the federal stimulus was turned down. Governor Perry wanted to play by his own rules.  Although  the Obama Administration can be applauded for standing its grounds, it is appalling that women will be left to fend for themselves in the already high cost health care arena. The state set the standard for the refusal of funding for clinics that provide abortions. Government Perry will do well to continue to fund the programs that he allowed to be cut.

No Bigger Fish to Fry

I am not sure if there is any problem bigger than the education of our children. Children truly are the future of this nation. Young people grow up to become adults who run the country.  Academic programs are cut across the nation. Teachers have lost their jobs across the nation. Most school districts have had to become creative with the strain on their educational budgets. It is not a matter of whether the parents can afford it; it is whether or not they are willing to make the sacrifice. Though parents traditionally make huge sacrifices to put their children through college, sacrifices may need to be made much earlier to secure a decent education for their children. I cannot speak to the NPR article reference because there is not enough information about where the $800 is coming from. 

Regarding why we are not using some of the $5 billion dollar rainy day fund took a bit of research. According to the Statesman, the House budget-writing committee approved to use some of the $9.4 billion reserve fund to help with the current deficit.  However, Governor Perry emphatically insists no rainy day funds will be used for the 2012-13 budget.  A portion of the rainy day fund, $3.11 billion has been approved for use.   There is an amendment by State Rep-D Donna Howard, Austin, to pull an additional two billion dollars from the rainy day fund specifically for education.  There is a catch to the $2 billion. The rainy day fund must accumulate over $6.5 billion; the excess will go to education, if the amendment is passed. 

The author must be aware that someone is concerned about all children receiving a quality education and that there are those fighting for finances for education. Overcrowded classrooms always have been a problem, I agree. However, it is sad that there is no concern expressed for the "self-motivated and bright students." An overcrowded classroom can de-motivate the brightest student and his grades can begin to suffer as a result. I would hate to think that my daughter would get less of an education because she is a bright child.  I would hate to think that my daughter would have less compassion and concern because she is a bright child.  She was born a bright child.  No, she was born talented and gifted and I would hate to think that just because she is part of the Gifted and Talented program and self motivated that there is no concern for her. If parents and Texans should be concerned, they should be concerned with all students not just the students who need extra help.

SHOW YOUR FACE

I am for punishing the guilty and holding those accountability who dare steal another's identity. However, using a law, such as the Texas Voter ID Law to exclude minorities is quite another matter. Besides, there are already laws on the books to punish those who attempt to impersonate others at the polls. Discrimination by any other name is still discrimination. This voter law requires an individual to present a valid form of government issued identification before casting his or her vote.  Currently, if a voter registration card is presented, no further identification is generally necessary. Otherwise,  you will need a valid state driver's license or some other state identification card. This has been my experience at  the polls in my county.

The Texas Voter ID law was recently rejected by the Justice Department and with good reason. Texas is one of few states that have a process the state must go through before any changes can be made to its election laws. This process stems from the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and it protects the rights of minorities. If any election law reduces the voting strength of minorities that law is discriminatory in nature and therefore, not valid. If this Voter ID law is approved, many minorities, mostly Hispanic will be discriminated against.  There is a disproportionate amount of Hispanics and other minorities who do not possess state driver licenses or state identification cards. Therefore, they would not be allowed to vote under this Texas Voter ID Law. This voter bill was written by a Republican from the Senate and sponsored by a Republican from the House of Representatives. Republicans are traditionally known for standing on the side opposite the poor, elderly,  and the minority.

  

Identification cards are not issued free of charge. Individuals will be required to purchase an identification card.  This purchase may be of little significance to some but for others it will present a hardship. There are those who do not have the dollars it takes for a tank of gas or loaf of bread. They are not likely to spend money on an identification card to vote. It has been documented that Texans do not run to the polls to vote. This law negatively will impact elections and more voters will stay away from the polls.

The Texas Voter ID Law also can be seen as an attempt to shine the spotlight on illegal immigration. However, an illegal person would not seek to obtain an identification card. True to form, the Republicans attacked the President of the United States when this voter law was not passed by the Justice Department. Perhaps they should remember the difference between the executive and the judicial branches of government. 

I am very pleased the law has not been approved. The law will make it hard for minorities to vote.  Again, discrimination by any other name is still discrimination.

ONE IN THREE, REALLY!

I cannot figure out what upsets blogger, Mean Rachel the most, that the Texas Sonogram Law was passed or that people neglected to come out to vote against it.  The notion that the state of Virginia got more media attention appeared to hit a nerve. Rachel Farris, author of this blog written February 23, 2012 for the Huffington Post, is not complaining about the loss of life or dollars spent in abortions, she is using graphs and other news articles to try to prove the illiteracy and unconcern of Texas voters. This would have been a useful blog to answer the question about how stupid Texans are and whether or not it matters if they know what is going on in government. According to Mean Rachel, Texans are not interested in what is going on in their government except vague interest during legislative sessions.

Searching the Internet for facts is  like standing on the street corner taking a poll, you must be careful with your sources.  The answers found may be neither accurate nor scientific. This blogger would have us believe that only one in three Texans have access to and use the internet. With so many cell phones, net books, and tablets, I find that very difficult to believe. That would mean that the libraries have banned the public use of computers. My child's elementary school even allows access to the computer for Internet use. I checked out the link in her blog, it states three out of five uses the internet, which paints an entirely different picture.  That means, many may have access but fail to go online for various reasons. The heading in the article she referenced  is also misleading, it states one out of three but the article itself states "Only three out of five Texans use the Internet, placing the state near the bottom nationally, according to a survey released  today from the U.S. Census  Bureau."   

The misinformed apparently starts with Ms Farris. The focus of this author's blog I thought was to compare the two state's sonogram laws or the hoopla over the two. However, Ms Farris goes on and on about comparing the Internet accessibility, 75% in Virginia to Texans 10 points behind. It is her suggestion that if you do not have access to the Internet, you are not able to be a part of the political process. I disagree, to date, there is no Internet voting and most advertisement is done through television, newspaper, and street signs and so on.  I suspect there is a twinge of jealousy that someone else got the spotlight, and it was not big ole Texas.

Bag the Bag!

The Austin American Statesman editorial by the Editorial Board indicates plastic bags are recyclable but wreck havoc on the sorting machinery. The Austin City Council has been wrestling with the ban on bags for nearly five years. Apparently, certain single use plastic bags will be exempt from this ban for example, those unique to the newspaper industry. This editorial initially appears to be in support of the ban. If plastic bags, like those used for keeping newspapers dry, were on the chopping block they would be singing a different tune. The author stated they generally supported a ban with limits but a few paragraphs later says if bags can be picked up at the curb his position may change. It is hard to tell what his position is. The author throws the ball to Bob Gregory, the president of the Texas Disposal Systems (TDS) who has a proposal to add plastic bags to the current curbside pickup. Millions of dollars will be wasted in the name of educating the public. This author calls it educating residents on the new reality of life without plastic bags. As for the Bag the Bag idea, small bags have been put into big bags and placed curbside for some time now. The neighborhood in which I live currently has three huge trashcans for trash day. One is for regular trash, one is for compost and one is for recyclables. We pay for bottled water, paying for plastic bags is just another way to squeeze the consumer. From where I sit, the public will be paying for plastic bags or cloth bags one way or the other.  The editorial suggest the Austin City Council put the bag ban on hold and consider TDS's proposal. The is no mention of the environment in this article so I see it as an attempt to garner support for the TDS' proposal.  I disagree with the author's idea that exempting some bags is helpful. I also disagree with the notion that most residents would eagerly accept another curbside box, bag or trashcan. Partial bans are impractical. Before there was a ban on smoking inside an entire space, we would sit in a no smoking section in a restaurant and choke on smoke from across the room. It was just sensible to ban smoking in the entire room. As for the ban on plastic bags, the author seems to be for the ban if it works in his favor.

In a previous assignment, there was a discussion about whether or not Texans exhibited Exceptionalism.  As I read this article, I can only shake my head at the notion that this writer believes Texas´ shifting primary dates matters. Even if it is due to redistricting with congressional district boundaries "up in the air", the Texas primary will not determine the winner of the Republican race. The fact that Governor Perry endorses Newt Gringrich leaves a lot to be desired considering Mr. Gringrich said he hoped to be about even with Romney after the Texas primary. To even say that Texas can shape the race is clearly an exceptional frame of mind. I believe if you want to catch a glimpse of how big Texans really think of themselves and their ability to shape America, you just might enjoy this article.