Posts
02-25 Chapter 4 Parties and Elections
03-02 #4
03-04 Chapter 5 State Legislatures
Spring Break 03/09-13
03-16 #5
03-18 Chapter 6 State Governors
03-23 # 6
03-25 Chapter 7 Judges and Justice
03-30 # 7
04-01 Test #2
Monday, February 23, 2009
Assignment #5
Please read and respond to the following article:
The continuing fall of federalism
By GEORGE F. WILL Washington Post
http://www.thestate.com/editorial-columns/v-print/story/692551.html
Hopefully within two-three paragraphs please answer these questions:
Please use your critical thinking skills
Consider the source and the audienceWho is writing the news item?Where did the item appear?Why was it written?What audience is it directed toward?
What is the basic argument the author wants to make?
Please post the heading: Assignment#5 name (first initial last name)Please post your comments on your class blog.Please ID yourself (not your nickname).Due date:03-01-09 11:00pm
The continuing fall of federalism
By GEORGE F. WILL Washington Post
http://www.thestate.com/editorial-columns/v-print/story/692551.html
Hopefully within two-three paragraphs please answer these questions:
Please use your critical thinking skills
Consider the source and the audienceWho is writing the news item?Where did the item appear?Why was it written?What audience is it directed toward?
What is the basic argument the author wants to make?
Please post the heading: Assignment#5 name (first initial last name)Please post your comments on your class blog.Please ID yourself (not your nickname).Due date:03-01-09 11:00pm
Monday, February 16, 2009
Assignment #4
Please read and respond to the following article:
February 16, 2009
States and Cities in Scramble for Stimulus Cash
By MONICA DAVEY NYTimes
Well before President Obama’s stimulus package completed its tortuous path through Congress last week, state and local officials facing multimillion-dollar budget deficits, crumbling infrastructure and the prospect of massive reductions in services were already jockeying for the upper hand in deciding how the money should be spent.In Missouri, the Department of Transportation says that within 180 days of Mr. Obama’s signing the legislation it is prepared to begin 34 transportation projects, costing $510 million and with the promise of 14,000 jobs.Echoing the thoughts of many political leaders across the country, Mayor Frank C. Ortis of Pembroke Pines, Fla., says simply, “We have a wish list.” And high on that list is money to repair aging sewer pipes in his city of 150,000.When Mr. Obama signs the stimulus bill in Denver on Tuesday, it will release the biggest influx of federal dollars since the days of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society program. But it also is expected to set off a multitude of political battles across the map: between governors and legislatures, state capitols and city halls, and even between neighboring municipalities.Because the effectiveness of any stimulus plan depends on the money being quickly spent, whether state and local governments can work through the rules and resolve any disputes will have a large impact on the success Mr. Obama’s plan has in lifting the economy.Along with the money, there are complex rules to the sprawling, $787 billion federal plan that local politicians from governors to small-town mayors say they are only now beginning to grasp. And while states will have direct say on the use of much of the money — especially on infrastructure projects like roads and bridges — many spending decisions will still rest with officials hundreds of miles away in Washington.“Still, within the parameters given, there are a lot of policy choices and decisions states and localities have to make,” said Scott D. Pattison, executive director of the National Association of State Budget Officers.Mr. Pattison said he has faced a barrage of questions in recent days from state budget officials on matters like how much discretion states will have, how the money will be transferred and how it must be tracked.“This is all rather daunting,” he said. “It’s a lot of money, and this is happening fast.”While it offers a patchwork of spending, the plan also provides battlegrounds for untold intrastate political fights.“There is a tension that’s happening between mayors and governors across the country now about who is going to receive what dollar amounts and for what purposes,” said Mayor Michael D. Bissonnette of Chicopee, Mass., population 54,000.Mr. Bissonnette said that even before the legislation made its way for an official vote in Congress last week, the political pressure was mounting in his region of Western Massachusetts. A council of mayors and other leaders there was outraged, he said, to learn that one state proposal would send millions to the Massachusetts Turnpike rather than what he considers a backlog of local road and bridge projects.Experts said the authorities in the states will probably have great discretion when it comes to billions of dollars for a broad range of state needs, including roads, bridges and other infrastructure projects. And states also will have considerable say in how billions are spent on Medicaid and for education.The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials says the states have already identified 5,000 so-called “ready to go” transportation projects that could begin within a couple of months.“We have far more in the way of projects that are ready to go than we have money to fund them,” Kevin A. Elsenheimer, a Republican state representative and the house minority leader in Michigan, said. “And it’s naïve to expect that politics will not be part of the process.”Officials expect that politics will not be limited to the lawmakers. Spending decisions on education could pit urban school districts against suburban or rural ones; how billions are dispensed for energy could come down to how advanced, or not, one state might be when it comes to wind energy development; and in many cases, it will come down to whether extra money will be spent to save the job of a firefighter or a teacher.Some state legislators said they feared that governors might try to dictate where the money goes, although in most states lawmakers would ultimately need to approve any spending. And clashes are already brewing over broad philosophical differences, particularly in state capitals with leadership divided along party lines.For example, some governors said they opposed the notion that stimulus money be used to plug budget deficits while others said that might be needed.Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina, chairman of the Republican Governors Association, is among the most ardent opponents of the stimulus package, describing it as pork-barrel spending and bad policy and vowing — to the anger and chagrin of the Democratic members of the state’s Congressional delegation — not to take any of the money from Washington.“For every job the bill creates, American taxpayers will spend $223,000,” Mr. Sanford wrote in an opinion article in The State newspaper on Sunday. “If we add the cost of this bill to the previous efforts of the federal government to deal with the financial crisis, the American taxpayer is on the hook for $9.7 trillion.”He went on to write, “If the stimulus bill were a country, it would be the 15th-largest country in the world.”Governors and states hungering for the money will find themselves competing against other states. For example, states without enough eligible “shovel-ready” construction projects might have to pass up some money, which could then be granted to other states, said Michael Bird, a policy analyst at the National Conference of State Legislatures.There is also a flush of new money for Medicaid spending — $87 billion — but that, too, comes with strings attached.In Minnesota, for instance, Gov. Tim Pawlenty, a Republican, is expected to revise his budget proposal, which had suggested reducing the number of residents eligible for state health care programs as a way to close a deficit. But such cuts now could jeopardize any extra financing for Medicaid under the stimulus plan, because the bill penalizes states that change their Medicaid eligibility to save money.Everywhere, state leaders are busily checking, searching through more than 1,000 pages in the federal bill, to see how their unique circumstances might be helped or harmed.In some cases, the package has put some proposed state budgets for next year on hold until lawmakers can see how things play out, and several states plan to rewrite parts of their budgets to secure more federal dollars.In Arkansas and North Carolina, state authorities said they were concerned, though uncertain, whether they would receive less education money than other states. Neither state has a shortfall in its education budget, the officials said, and thus might not be eligible for as much education financing under the federal plan.“We don’t want to be penalized for not having a deficit,” said Chrissy Pearson, a spokeswoman for Gov. Bev Perdue of North Carolina.In Rhode Island, Steven M. Costantino, a state representative, said he worried that the state might lose out when it came to alternative energy because it had fewer resources already dedicated to areas like wind power.“I hope that states that are just starting to get involved in renewable energy would still receive money to expand their programs,” Mr. Costantino said.
Reporting was contributed by Robbie Brown, Michael Cooper, David M. Herszenhorn and Robert Pear.
Hopefully within two-three paragraphs please answer these questions:
Please use your critical thinking skills
Consider the source and the audienceWho is writing the news item?Where did the item appear?Why was it written?What audience is it directed toward?
What is the basic argument the author wants to make?
Please post the heading: Assignment#4 name (first initial last name)
Please post your comments on your class blog.
Please ID yourself (not your nickname).
Due date:02-22-09 11:00pm
February 16, 2009
States and Cities in Scramble for Stimulus Cash
By MONICA DAVEY NYTimes
Well before President Obama’s stimulus package completed its tortuous path through Congress last week, state and local officials facing multimillion-dollar budget deficits, crumbling infrastructure and the prospect of massive reductions in services were already jockeying for the upper hand in deciding how the money should be spent.In Missouri, the Department of Transportation says that within 180 days of Mr. Obama’s signing the legislation it is prepared to begin 34 transportation projects, costing $510 million and with the promise of 14,000 jobs.Echoing the thoughts of many political leaders across the country, Mayor Frank C. Ortis of Pembroke Pines, Fla., says simply, “We have a wish list.” And high on that list is money to repair aging sewer pipes in his city of 150,000.When Mr. Obama signs the stimulus bill in Denver on Tuesday, it will release the biggest influx of federal dollars since the days of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society program. But it also is expected to set off a multitude of political battles across the map: between governors and legislatures, state capitols and city halls, and even between neighboring municipalities.Because the effectiveness of any stimulus plan depends on the money being quickly spent, whether state and local governments can work through the rules and resolve any disputes will have a large impact on the success Mr. Obama’s plan has in lifting the economy.Along with the money, there are complex rules to the sprawling, $787 billion federal plan that local politicians from governors to small-town mayors say they are only now beginning to grasp. And while states will have direct say on the use of much of the money — especially on infrastructure projects like roads and bridges — many spending decisions will still rest with officials hundreds of miles away in Washington.“Still, within the parameters given, there are a lot of policy choices and decisions states and localities have to make,” said Scott D. Pattison, executive director of the National Association of State Budget Officers.Mr. Pattison said he has faced a barrage of questions in recent days from state budget officials on matters like how much discretion states will have, how the money will be transferred and how it must be tracked.“This is all rather daunting,” he said. “It’s a lot of money, and this is happening fast.”While it offers a patchwork of spending, the plan also provides battlegrounds for untold intrastate political fights.“There is a tension that’s happening between mayors and governors across the country now about who is going to receive what dollar amounts and for what purposes,” said Mayor Michael D. Bissonnette of Chicopee, Mass., population 54,000.Mr. Bissonnette said that even before the legislation made its way for an official vote in Congress last week, the political pressure was mounting in his region of Western Massachusetts. A council of mayors and other leaders there was outraged, he said, to learn that one state proposal would send millions to the Massachusetts Turnpike rather than what he considers a backlog of local road and bridge projects.Experts said the authorities in the states will probably have great discretion when it comes to billions of dollars for a broad range of state needs, including roads, bridges and other infrastructure projects. And states also will have considerable say in how billions are spent on Medicaid and for education.The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials says the states have already identified 5,000 so-called “ready to go” transportation projects that could begin within a couple of months.“We have far more in the way of projects that are ready to go than we have money to fund them,” Kevin A. Elsenheimer, a Republican state representative and the house minority leader in Michigan, said. “And it’s naïve to expect that politics will not be part of the process.”Officials expect that politics will not be limited to the lawmakers. Spending decisions on education could pit urban school districts against suburban or rural ones; how billions are dispensed for energy could come down to how advanced, or not, one state might be when it comes to wind energy development; and in many cases, it will come down to whether extra money will be spent to save the job of a firefighter or a teacher.Some state legislators said they feared that governors might try to dictate where the money goes, although in most states lawmakers would ultimately need to approve any spending. And clashes are already brewing over broad philosophical differences, particularly in state capitals with leadership divided along party lines.For example, some governors said they opposed the notion that stimulus money be used to plug budget deficits while others said that might be needed.Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina, chairman of the Republican Governors Association, is among the most ardent opponents of the stimulus package, describing it as pork-barrel spending and bad policy and vowing — to the anger and chagrin of the Democratic members of the state’s Congressional delegation — not to take any of the money from Washington.“For every job the bill creates, American taxpayers will spend $223,000,” Mr. Sanford wrote in an opinion article in The State newspaper on Sunday. “If we add the cost of this bill to the previous efforts of the federal government to deal with the financial crisis, the American taxpayer is on the hook for $9.7 trillion.”He went on to write, “If the stimulus bill were a country, it would be the 15th-largest country in the world.”Governors and states hungering for the money will find themselves competing against other states. For example, states without enough eligible “shovel-ready” construction projects might have to pass up some money, which could then be granted to other states, said Michael Bird, a policy analyst at the National Conference of State Legislatures.There is also a flush of new money for Medicaid spending — $87 billion — but that, too, comes with strings attached.In Minnesota, for instance, Gov. Tim Pawlenty, a Republican, is expected to revise his budget proposal, which had suggested reducing the number of residents eligible for state health care programs as a way to close a deficit. But such cuts now could jeopardize any extra financing for Medicaid under the stimulus plan, because the bill penalizes states that change their Medicaid eligibility to save money.Everywhere, state leaders are busily checking, searching through more than 1,000 pages in the federal bill, to see how their unique circumstances might be helped or harmed.In some cases, the package has put some proposed state budgets for next year on hold until lawmakers can see how things play out, and several states plan to rewrite parts of their budgets to secure more federal dollars.In Arkansas and North Carolina, state authorities said they were concerned, though uncertain, whether they would receive less education money than other states. Neither state has a shortfall in its education budget, the officials said, and thus might not be eligible for as much education financing under the federal plan.“We don’t want to be penalized for not having a deficit,” said Chrissy Pearson, a spokeswoman for Gov. Bev Perdue of North Carolina.In Rhode Island, Steven M. Costantino, a state representative, said he worried that the state might lose out when it came to alternative energy because it had fewer resources already dedicated to areas like wind power.“I hope that states that are just starting to get involved in renewable energy would still receive money to expand their programs,” Mr. Costantino said.
Reporting was contributed by Robbie Brown, Michael Cooper, David M. Herszenhorn and Robert Pear.
Hopefully within two-three paragraphs please answer these questions:
Please use your critical thinking skills
Consider the source and the audienceWho is writing the news item?Where did the item appear?Why was it written?What audience is it directed toward?
What is the basic argument the author wants to make?
Please post the heading: Assignment#4 name (first initial last name)
Please post your comments on your class blog.
Please ID yourself (not your nickname).
Due date:02-22-09 11:00pm
Saturday, February 14, 2009
SC legislative action for the week of Feb. 8
The Associated Press
The 4th week of the legislative session:
---
OBESITY-HEALTH CARE: South Carolina's public employees may have to prove they're fit and not flabby to avoid a hike in their health insurance premiums under legislation being tweaked to gather support. A Senate Finance subcommittee delayed voting on a proposal to charge obese public workers an extra $25 monthly. Sen. Greg Ryberg of Aiken wanted to tie the surcharge to employees' body mass index, a weight and height measurement - applying it if the BMI exceeds 30, the threshold for obesity. Ryberg says he would be willing to rewrite the bill as an incentive rather than a punishment, by increasing everyone's premiums, then giving a discount for fit workers. Specifics on how that would work are unclear. After the meeting, he said fitness may still be tied to BMI or body fat. He hopes to have his bill back on the agenda within a month.
---
FURLOUGHS: South Carolina agencies could take employees' pay into account when requiring unpaid leave under legislation approved by the House. The bill now heads to the Senate. State law now allows agencies to require furloughs of up to 10 days, but the requirement must be across-the-board. Officials complained the mandate disproportionately affects low-paid workers who can least afford to have money taken from their paychecks. The bill keeps the maximum furlough at 10 days, but it allows furloughs to be implemented by department or by pay scale. The bill does not apply to schools.
---
PAYDAY LENDING: South Carolina legislators on Wednesday overwhelmingly approved a bill aimed at preventing residents from being trapped in a cycle of debt through payday lending. Critics, however, contend the bill does not go far enough to stop the industry from preying on the poor. The proposal prevents consumers from taking out more than one loan at a time, with a maximum loan of $600. An online database would instantly report when a loan is made. Lenders would have to check it to ensure customers don't have outstanding loans elsewhere. Lenders could charge $15 for every $100 borrowed on a two-week loan. The bill requires the industry to let customers go into an extended payment plan if they can't meet that deadline, without incurring any extra fees. The bill now heads to the Senate, which approved restrictions last year that died in the House. Opponents hope the Senate will require that customers wait a week between loans.
---
DRUNKEN DRIVING: Drunken drivers will start facing different penalties depending on whether they're tipsy or trashed. The new law that took effect Tuesday ties tougher sentences to the amount of alcohol in drivers' bodies. It also increases penalties for repeat drunken drivers and closes some legal loopholes that critics said allowed suspects to escape punishment. The law creates a tiered penalty system based on how many times drivers are convicted and how much alcohol they have in their system. The blood-alcohol limit is 0.08 percent. The new penalties get harsher at 0.10 percent and again at 0.16 percent.
---
JUVENILE JUSTICE: Spending cuts at the Department of Juvenile Justice and further reductions expected as part of efforts to balance the state budget threaten both the safety of children in state custody and South Carolina's compliance with a 2003 settlement of a federal lawsuit, a consultant warned in a report. The agency charged with incarcerating and rehabilitating the state's young offenders has lost 20 percent of its budget, or about $23 million, since July. Director Bill Byars said he can't manage all of the cuts without jeopardizing safety and needs to run a $7 million deficit. If he can't, he said, he'll risk breaking the federal lawsuit settlement. Nonetheless, budget writers have told Byars to prepare for deeper budget cuts for the fiscal year beginning July 1.
---
STATE BUDGET-HOSPICE: South Carolina's Medicaid agency has decided not to eliminate a hospice program as planned, enabling more than 100 poor patients to continue getting end-of-life care, the state health department said Wednesday. The cut, expected to save the state $1.5 million through June 30, would have affected about 125 hospice patients funded solely through Medicaid - dying patients too young to qualify for Medicare, Department of Health and Human Services spokesman Jeff Stensland said. The number represents about 6 percent of hospice patients statewide. The agency's planned Feb. 1 elimination of the program for Medicaid-only patients had been put on a 30-day hold. Agency officials decided to drop the cut, knowing legislators were demanding they keep the program running, and that federal stimulus money could help them do that. The agency also lifted a Dec. 31 freeze on accepting new patients in the program, Stensland said.
---
UNEMPLOYMENT: A bill giving Gov. Mark Sanford control of the agency that handles jobless claims advanced with unanimous support Wednesday from a subcommittee amid questions from legislators on how the measure would help put workers back to work. Apart from renaming the Employment Security Commission as the Workforce Department and making it a part of the Sanford's cabinet, the bill's only other substantial aim is to eventually take unemployment benefit appeals out of the hands of the commission's three members and put them before administrative law judges. The bill sailed out of a Senate Labor, Commerce and Industry subcommittee, run by the bill's sponsor, Sen. Greg Ryberg, R-Aiken. Ryberg's committee members were skeptical the bill would do anything to solve the issues at the crux of current problems: the nation's third highest jobless rate and a trust fund for benefits that went broke and now operates mostly with the help of federal loans.
---
MIXED MARTIAL ARTS: A bill allowing mixed martial arts contests in South Carolina won initial approval Tuesday. The increasingly popular sport combines elements of karate, judo, jujitsu and kickboxing. Proponents say mixed martial arts has evolved from its no-holds-barred past to a regulated sport broadcast on TV. The bill by Republican Rep. Jim Merrill of Daniel Island and co-sponsored by 24 other House members was sent to the full Labor Commerce and Industry Committee. The measure would repeal South Carolina's ban on such fighting events.
---
DOCTORS-ELDERLY PATIENTS: Plans to attract a few more doctors to South Carolina to specialize in caring for elderly patients are falling prey to a state budget hemorrhage. South Carolina had became a national model by setting up a $145,000 program to repay the loans of doctors who take fellowships in the specialty as long as they commit to staying in the state and taking Medicaid and Medicare patients. The recession that has cut $1 billion from a $7 billion budget has also caused the loss of one of four $35,000 fellowships. Now, the remaining money is in doubt as House budget writers plan to cut $410 million from spending for the fiscal year that begins July 1.
---
TEACHER-ASSAULT PROTECTION: A South Carolina proposal aimed at protecting teachers and other school employees from student attacks has advanced. Students who seriously injure a teacher on school grounds or at a school-sponsored event would be guilty of a felony, punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $5,000. The Senate unanimously approved the measure Tuesday and sent it to the House. The bill also allows assaulted teachers to sue a convicted student.
The Associated Press
The 4th week of the legislative session:
---
OBESITY-HEALTH CARE: South Carolina's public employees may have to prove they're fit and not flabby to avoid a hike in their health insurance premiums under legislation being tweaked to gather support. A Senate Finance subcommittee delayed voting on a proposal to charge obese public workers an extra $25 monthly. Sen. Greg Ryberg of Aiken wanted to tie the surcharge to employees' body mass index, a weight and height measurement - applying it if the BMI exceeds 30, the threshold for obesity. Ryberg says he would be willing to rewrite the bill as an incentive rather than a punishment, by increasing everyone's premiums, then giving a discount for fit workers. Specifics on how that would work are unclear. After the meeting, he said fitness may still be tied to BMI or body fat. He hopes to have his bill back on the agenda within a month.
---
FURLOUGHS: South Carolina agencies could take employees' pay into account when requiring unpaid leave under legislation approved by the House. The bill now heads to the Senate. State law now allows agencies to require furloughs of up to 10 days, but the requirement must be across-the-board. Officials complained the mandate disproportionately affects low-paid workers who can least afford to have money taken from their paychecks. The bill keeps the maximum furlough at 10 days, but it allows furloughs to be implemented by department or by pay scale. The bill does not apply to schools.
---
PAYDAY LENDING: South Carolina legislators on Wednesday overwhelmingly approved a bill aimed at preventing residents from being trapped in a cycle of debt through payday lending. Critics, however, contend the bill does not go far enough to stop the industry from preying on the poor. The proposal prevents consumers from taking out more than one loan at a time, with a maximum loan of $600. An online database would instantly report when a loan is made. Lenders would have to check it to ensure customers don't have outstanding loans elsewhere. Lenders could charge $15 for every $100 borrowed on a two-week loan. The bill requires the industry to let customers go into an extended payment plan if they can't meet that deadline, without incurring any extra fees. The bill now heads to the Senate, which approved restrictions last year that died in the House. Opponents hope the Senate will require that customers wait a week between loans.
---
DRUNKEN DRIVING: Drunken drivers will start facing different penalties depending on whether they're tipsy or trashed. The new law that took effect Tuesday ties tougher sentences to the amount of alcohol in drivers' bodies. It also increases penalties for repeat drunken drivers and closes some legal loopholes that critics said allowed suspects to escape punishment. The law creates a tiered penalty system based on how many times drivers are convicted and how much alcohol they have in their system. The blood-alcohol limit is 0.08 percent. The new penalties get harsher at 0.10 percent and again at 0.16 percent.
---
JUVENILE JUSTICE: Spending cuts at the Department of Juvenile Justice and further reductions expected as part of efforts to balance the state budget threaten both the safety of children in state custody and South Carolina's compliance with a 2003 settlement of a federal lawsuit, a consultant warned in a report. The agency charged with incarcerating and rehabilitating the state's young offenders has lost 20 percent of its budget, or about $23 million, since July. Director Bill Byars said he can't manage all of the cuts without jeopardizing safety and needs to run a $7 million deficit. If he can't, he said, he'll risk breaking the federal lawsuit settlement. Nonetheless, budget writers have told Byars to prepare for deeper budget cuts for the fiscal year beginning July 1.
---
STATE BUDGET-HOSPICE: South Carolina's Medicaid agency has decided not to eliminate a hospice program as planned, enabling more than 100 poor patients to continue getting end-of-life care, the state health department said Wednesday. The cut, expected to save the state $1.5 million through June 30, would have affected about 125 hospice patients funded solely through Medicaid - dying patients too young to qualify for Medicare, Department of Health and Human Services spokesman Jeff Stensland said. The number represents about 6 percent of hospice patients statewide. The agency's planned Feb. 1 elimination of the program for Medicaid-only patients had been put on a 30-day hold. Agency officials decided to drop the cut, knowing legislators were demanding they keep the program running, and that federal stimulus money could help them do that. The agency also lifted a Dec. 31 freeze on accepting new patients in the program, Stensland said.
---
UNEMPLOYMENT: A bill giving Gov. Mark Sanford control of the agency that handles jobless claims advanced with unanimous support Wednesday from a subcommittee amid questions from legislators on how the measure would help put workers back to work. Apart from renaming the Employment Security Commission as the Workforce Department and making it a part of the Sanford's cabinet, the bill's only other substantial aim is to eventually take unemployment benefit appeals out of the hands of the commission's three members and put them before administrative law judges. The bill sailed out of a Senate Labor, Commerce and Industry subcommittee, run by the bill's sponsor, Sen. Greg Ryberg, R-Aiken. Ryberg's committee members were skeptical the bill would do anything to solve the issues at the crux of current problems: the nation's third highest jobless rate and a trust fund for benefits that went broke and now operates mostly with the help of federal loans.
---
MIXED MARTIAL ARTS: A bill allowing mixed martial arts contests in South Carolina won initial approval Tuesday. The increasingly popular sport combines elements of karate, judo, jujitsu and kickboxing. Proponents say mixed martial arts has evolved from its no-holds-barred past to a regulated sport broadcast on TV. The bill by Republican Rep. Jim Merrill of Daniel Island and co-sponsored by 24 other House members was sent to the full Labor Commerce and Industry Committee. The measure would repeal South Carolina's ban on such fighting events.
---
DOCTORS-ELDERLY PATIENTS: Plans to attract a few more doctors to South Carolina to specialize in caring for elderly patients are falling prey to a state budget hemorrhage. South Carolina had became a national model by setting up a $145,000 program to repay the loans of doctors who take fellowships in the specialty as long as they commit to staying in the state and taking Medicaid and Medicare patients. The recession that has cut $1 billion from a $7 billion budget has also caused the loss of one of four $35,000 fellowships. Now, the remaining money is in doubt as House budget writers plan to cut $410 million from spending for the fiscal year that begins July 1.
---
TEACHER-ASSAULT PROTECTION: A South Carolina proposal aimed at protecting teachers and other school employees from student attacks has advanced. Students who seriously injure a teacher on school grounds or at a school-sponsored event would be guilty of a felony, punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $5,000. The Senate unanimously approved the measure Tuesday and sent it to the House. The bill also allows assaulted teachers to sue a convicted student.
Monday, February 9, 2009
Assignment #3
Please read and respond to the following article:
Trade-Offs in the Stimulus Package
By Madison Powers, CQ Guest Columnist
http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docid=news-000003023588
Hopefully within two-three paragraphs please answer these questions:
Please use your critical thinking skills
Consider the source and the audience
Who is writing the news item?Where did the item appear?Why was it written?
What audience is it directed toward?What is the basic argument the author wants to make?Please post the heading: Assignment#3 name (first initial last name)
Please post your comments on your class blog.Please ID yourself (not your nickname).
Due date:02-15-09 11:00pm
Trade-Offs in the Stimulus Package
By Madison Powers, CQ Guest Columnist
http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docid=news-000003023588
Hopefully within two-three paragraphs please answer these questions:
Please use your critical thinking skills
Consider the source and the audience
Who is writing the news item?Where did the item appear?Why was it written?
What audience is it directed toward?What is the basic argument the author wants to make?Please post the heading: Assignment#3 name (first initial last name)
Please post your comments on your class blog.Please ID yourself (not your nickname).
Due date:02-15-09 11:00pm
Monday, February 2, 2009
Assignment #2
Please read and respond to the following article:
Government has to make choices families, businesses don’t
By CINDI ROSS SCOPPE Associate Editor
http://www.thestate.com/scoppe/v-print/story/659528.html
Hopefully within two-three paragraphs please answer these questions:
Consider the source and the audience
Who is writing the news item?Where did the item appear?Why was it written?
What audience is it directed toward?What is the basic argument the author wants to make?
Please post the heading: Assignment#2 name (first initial last name)
Please post your comments on your class blog.Please ID yourself (not your nickname).
Due date:02-08-09 11:00pm
Government has to make choices families, businesses don’t
By CINDI ROSS SCOPPE Associate Editor
http://www.thestate.com/scoppe/v-print/story/659528.html
Hopefully within two-three paragraphs please answer these questions:
Consider the source and the audience
Who is writing the news item?Where did the item appear?Why was it written?
What audience is it directed toward?What is the basic argument the author wants to make?
Please post the heading: Assignment#2 name (first initial last name)
Please post your comments on your class blog.Please ID yourself (not your nickname).
Due date:02-08-09 11:00pm
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)