legislation
The bills that Congress reject are as informative as the ones it does. Reviews of all the legislation that meet their fate in government halls.
Mental Health and Firearms
On December 14th, 2012, Adam Lanza committed the second most lethal mass shooting in American History. After killing his own mother and then twenty-six adults and children at the local elementary school, America was left with the burning question of not only why this happened, but how it could have been prevented(1). Lanza was clearly mentally ill, and it played a major role in him committing this atrocity. It did not take New York State’s Governor, Andrew Cuomo, and the State Senate and Assembly long to respond to this tragedy. On January 15th, 2013, the New York Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act, or SAFE Act, was signed into law(2). The SAFE Act has many different components, but one section that has bothered both Second Amendment supporters and mental health professionals is that regarding mental hygiene. Specifically, section 9.46. This section requires that a mental health professional file a report to the local director of community services if he or she feels that the patient is, “’likely to engage in conduct that would result in serious harm to self or others(3).’” While this sounds reasonable and productive in preventing future tragedies like Newtown, this law is deeply flawed when it comes to mental health.
By Evan Brady8 years ago in The Swamp
The Quiet Battle To Return Pre-Existing Conditions to What It Was
There is a quiet war being waged on people with disabilities also known as a pre-existing condition. As a child, I knew about this war since getting covered for my type-1 diabetes was hard. Many people have pre-existing conditions. Heartless politicians want to make sure these people do not get coverage. The American Health Care Act is a step backwards even if they still cannot charge sick people more for insurance. The House has no idea what they are doing with regard to how this impacts people with pre-existing conditions. Insurers can stop covering, even for people with continuous coverage.
By Iria Vasquez-Paez8 years ago in The Swamp
Crisis Point
Thinking back to the financial crisis of 2008, one would think that another such economic catastrophe would somehow elude us. It was just ten years ago that the United States plunged the world into the worst financial disaster since the Great Depression. Yet here we are, a decade later, no wiser and even more foolish. You would have thought that we would have learned from our mistakes, but time and time again, history proves that we are still prone to repeat mistakes of the past. When will we ever learn? Today, what we have is déjà vu of the 2008 financial crisis. So what we have now are almost the same set of circumstances that are poised to unleash an economic debacle more sinister and more devastating than the one in 2008. To understand how this is happening, we first have to look at what transpired leading up to the 2008 crash.
By Dr. Williams8 years ago in The Swamp
Should Self Identification Replace Gender Recognition Certificates?
I'm in quite a unique position to write this piece; as both a transgender woman and a budding journalist, I'm seeing two sides to a heated debate—and I'm seeing the reasonable points of both sides.
By Skylar Rose Pridgeon8 years ago in The Swamp
Health Promotion
The Ottawa Charter was the First International Conference on Health Promotion (1986). The Charter’s main aim was to continue identifying action to help achieve targets from the World Health Organisation (W.H.O.), "Health for all by the year 2000" (1981). It was a response to rising expectations for a new public health movement around the world. Many involved in health education were critical of the medical model of health and the blaming of people for their individual behaviour. The Ottawa Charter brought together a growing recognition that illness was highly related to health education and promotion, and that promotion required a wide interpretation with the active participation of people and stakeholders.
By Elizabeth Keigher8 years ago in The Swamp
Is Britain Today an Ageist Society?
Ageism is defined by The Oxford English Dictionary as “Prejudice or discrimination against people on the grounds of age.” Over the last 25 years, Britain has undergone noticeable demographic changes, particularly among older people. A study by the Rowntree Foundation in 2010 revealed that not only are people living longer – the population of people aged 85 years and above had risen by almost 680,000 over the last two and a half decades, there is also a change in living arrangements. The extended family is no longer a trend, due to changes within family units in general, and the cost and implications of residential care meaning that increasing numbers of older people are living alone, with or without help from outside agencies, (Falkingham et al, 2010). Given these demographic and social changes it is concerning that ageism is ubiquitous in Britain, often unconsciously (Donnellan, 2005). This essay will focus on two key issues where ageism exists; employment and healthcare. It will provide evidence to prove that ageism is a problem; conversely it will also discuss the measures that are being taken to combat the issue.
By Michelle Spittle8 years ago in The Swamp
Delisting of the Yellowstone Grizzly Bear Population From the Endangered Species List and the Trump Administration's Vital Mistake
In August of 2017, twin orphaned grizzly bears were admitted to the Riverside Discovery Center and Zoo in Scottsbluff, Nebraska by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The bears’ mother was illegally shot and killed by a black bear hunter in June. Wildlife officials thought that the two yearling brothers would survive on their own, but as they became used to using humans to feed them, they were captured and transported to the Riverside Discovery Center where they will serve as an educational experience for visitors from around the country. In July of 2017, the grizzly bears of Yellowstone National Park were delisted from the endangered species list that they had been protected by for 42 years. The species has been protected under the Endangered Species Act since 1975 and have grown back from fewer than 150 bears to an estimated 700 whom have led the US Fish and Wildlife Service to believe the population has met the requirements to be considered recovered. Recently, the Trump Administration has changed some of the requirements regarding animals listed as an Endangered Species. Nowadays, it appears that bears that wander away from protective boundaries such as National Parks can be hunted and killed. Although their numbers have improved, conservation groups such as The Humane Society and Native American tribes greatly oppose and are lining up to sue to stop the delisting since they believe that the bears need to continue to be protected under the Endangered Species Act as climate change has left the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem in uncertainty. The Center for Biological Diversity, the Sierra Club, the National Parks Conservation Association, and the Northern Cheyenne tribe filed a lawsuit in August challenging the US Fish and Wildlife Service's June Yellowstone grizzly delisting. By looking at the grizzly bears in Yellowstone National Park, one can see that delisting the grizzly bears from the Endangered Species list will be dangerous for the species itself due to hunting, climate change, and a lack of adequate food sources.
By Sierra Spears8 years ago in The Swamp
