Author Topic: Local government thread  (Read 1021 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2920
  • Gender: Female
Local government thread
« on: February 14, 2017, 04:27:12 PM »
We talk so much about the Federal government - lets check in on some of our local governments...

http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/artificial-insemination-parenting-bill-draws-lgbtq-criticism-n720641?cid=sm_npd_nn_fb_ma
Quote
Two Tennessee lawmakers want to do away with a 40-year-old state law granting legitimacy to children conceived through artificial insemination.
LGBTQ issues aside.... why does this need to be removed?


http://nbc4i.com/2017/02/14/cursive-writing-could-become-required-for-ohio-students/
Quote
Handwriting instruction in kindergarten through fifth grade to ensure that students develop the ability to print letters and words legibly by third grade and to create readable documents using legible cursive handwriting by the end of fifth grade.
Why are politicians setting curriculum? Is this normal?


http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/legislature/2017/02/10/wake-minimum-wage-vote-arizona-lawmakers-look-limit-ballot-initiatives/97581064/
Quote
bills that would impose additional limits on the ability of citizens to put an issue on the ballot are up for debate.
Near and dear to my heart AZ... lets take away the rights of the public, for the public's safety.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18232
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #1 on: February 14, 2017, 06:07:49 PM »
We talk so much about the Federal government - lets check in on some of our local governments...

http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/artificial-insemination-parenting-bill-draws-lgbtq-criticism-n720641?cid=sm_npd_nn_fb_ma
Quote
Two Tennessee lawmakers want to do away with a 40-year-old state law granting legitimacy to children conceived through artificial insemination.
LGBTQ issues aside.... why does this need to be removed?
Without reading the proposed bill, I'll give her the benefit of the doubt that there's a problem with the current law that she's trying to remedy. I'd certainly hope her fellow congressional fucksticks will look into that. Honestly, though, I suspect the picture in the article answers your question.

Quote


http://nbc4i.com/2017/02/14/cursive-writing-could-become-required-for-ohio-students/
Quote
Handwriting instruction in kindergarten through fifth grade to ensure that students develop the ability to print letters and words legibly by third grade and to create readable documents using legible cursive handwriting by the end of fifth grade.
Why are politicians setting curriculum? Is this normal?
States set requirements all the time. Doesn't generally bug me much. If you think about it, it's also the reason why accredited schools can't teach that the Earth is 4000 years old and Reagan was the son of God.

Also, despite my total incompetence at it, I'm a big fan of penmanship.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2920
  • Gender: Female
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #2 on: February 14, 2017, 06:12:34 PM »
re:curriculum
It seems strange to me to write a law about what is required to be taught. I guess I assumed that came from the State's Department of Education and not directly from laws.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18232
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #3 on: February 14, 2017, 06:23:58 PM »
My hunch is that it works from the bottom up. Local schools teach what they want so long as it meets standards set by increasingly higher authorities. I don't think actual curricula are dictated by the legislature, but standards would be. But I'm really speculating here. My hunch is that Bosk would have better insight into how it works.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2920
  • Gender: Female
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #4 on: February 15, 2017, 06:48:52 AM »
Some new winners...

http://www.denverpost.com/2017/02/14/oklahoma-republican-stands-by-calling-pregnant-women-hosts/
Quote
bill that would require women seeking an abortion to first obtain the written informed consent of the father
I can't even comment on how ridiculous this is.

http://www.npr.org/2017/02/14/515242288/iowa-moves-to-restrict-collective-bargaining-for-public-sector-workers?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20170214
Quote
About 180,000 state and local government workers would be prohibited from negotiating over issues including health insurance, seniority and extra pay. The legislation also leaves in place a provision that prevents workers from going on strike. And it includes provisions that would make it more difficult for unions to collect dues.
I don't really know a whole lot about unions, so I'm not entirely educated on this subject.

Offline Ben_Jamin

  • Posts: 7305
  • Gender: Male
  • Do a nice one for grandma
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #5 on: February 15, 2017, 08:43:33 AM »
I'll just say local govt is really screwy. It's like Bizarro world with them, maybe The Twilight Zone...better yet, The Outer Limits.
I don't know how they can be so proud of winning with them odds. - Little Big Man

I Love You...Poppin Fresh

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Whiskey Bent and Hell Bound
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 40221
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Dad 1943-2010
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #6 on: February 15, 2017, 09:07:43 AM »
Here in North Carolina, our state legislature is for the birds.

Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #7 on: February 15, 2017, 09:59:18 AM »
Well, at the state and (especially) the local level, it's the same "swamp" stuff you see on a national level but times ten.   Towns with prominent families will often have people on boards and in local government, and sometimes that extends to state government as well.  I know I'm not much of a fan of the State-level leadership here in Connecticut.  There are some good ones (Nancy JOhnson comes to mind), but I recall this story from law school:

I was applying to schools, and trying to decide where to go.  My roommate at the time was already in his first year at UConn, and I had things narrowed down to UConn and Georgetown.   I went to "audit" a class at UConn with a friend of my roommate (and now a close friend of mine as well; I'll call him "Lars") and sat through the class.  After, "Lars" and I met up with one of "Lars'" study partners - we'll call him "Robert" - and "Robert" introduced the person with him as also a prospective student auditing the class.  We'll call him "Kirk".  I talked with "Kirk" for about five minutes or so and we went our separate ways, and as we're walking to our car, "Lars" says, "It was rather nice of "Robert" to bring his friend "Kirk" to class; he didn't have to call him a prospective student, though.  There's no way he's getting in with that handicap."  (In short, my friend "Lars" thought "Kirk" was mentally handicapped).    Fast forward to my first week of law school in September, and sure enough, there's "Kirk" in my class and about a month in, he walks in with a stack of promotional flyers for his campaign for State Representative, a race which he won.  He served about 10 years in the State legislature, and now works in the State in varying capacities.   

This is not a lesson in "don't judge a book by it's cover" ("Kirk" wasn't handicapped in any way; he just presented himself horribly); it's a lesson that the bar is set pretty low at the state and local level. 

Offline Cool Chris

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 4627
  • Gender: Male
  • Rest in Peace
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #8 on: February 15, 2017, 10:09:17 AM »
Quote
bill that would require women seeking an abortion to first obtain the written informed consent of the father

I've thought about this a lot, without coming to a resolution. This bill aside... a woman is pregnant and it is "It's my body, it's my decision..." and after the child is born it becomes "Please send child support checks to this address...."

Quote
About 180,000 state and local government workers would be prohibited from negotiating over issues including health insurance, seniority and extra pay. The legislation also leaves in place a provision that prevents workers from going on strike. And it includes provisions that would make it more difficult for unions to collect dues.

It is illegal for public sector workers to strike here in WA state. They do it anyway, because no one ones to deal with the outcry of punishing teachers.
"Nostalgia is just the ability to forget the things that sucked" - Nelson DeMille, 'Up Country'

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #9 on: February 15, 2017, 10:19:28 AM »
Some new winners...

http://www.denverpost.com/2017/02/14/oklahoma-republican-stands-by-calling-pregnant-women-hosts/
Quote
bill that would require women seeking an abortion to first obtain the written informed consent of the father
I can't even comment on how ridiculous this is.

Yeah, I go both ways on this. I am adamantly pro-choice - I feel strongly that it is the woman's body and she can do as she pleases - but on the same token...  it's not really THAT black and white, is it?   Shouldn't there be some mechanism for that woman to take that responsibility?  Can you have a mechanism, say, that calls for "consent", but figuratively?  Meaning, if a woman I slept with becomes pregnant and wants to abort, she has to ask my "consent", and I can deny it, but that doesn't legally stop her from actually aborting the baby, but perhaps there are more stringent requirements?  And in exchange for that, if she opts NOT to abort, I then assume all responsibility for the baby? 

I struggle with the balance here.  Obviously the woman controls her body, but absent rape, or a handful of other circumstances, if we knowingly enter into coitus, with full knowledge of the results, is the sex the only benefit I (as a male) get out of this if things don't go according to Hoyle? 


Offline Ben_Jamin

  • Posts: 7305
  • Gender: Male
  • Do a nice one for grandma
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #10 on: February 15, 2017, 10:41:16 AM »
Some new winners...

http://www.denverpost.com/2017/02/14/oklahoma-republican-stands-by-calling-pregnant-women-hosts/
Quote
bill that would require women seeking an abortion to first obtain the written informed consent of the father
I can't even comment on how ridiculous this is.

Yeah, I go both ways on this. I am adamantly pro-choice - I feel strongly that it is the woman's body and she can do as she pleases - but on the same token...  it's not really THAT black and white, is it?   Shouldn't there be some mechanism for that woman to take that responsibility?  Can you have a mechanism, say, that calls for "consent", but figuratively?  Meaning, if a woman I slept with becomes pregnant and wants to abort, she has to ask my "consent", and I can deny it, but that doesn't legally stop her from actually aborting the baby, but perhaps there are more stringent requirements?  And in exchange for that, if she opts NOT to abort, I then assume all responsibility for the baby? 

I struggle with the balance here.  Obviously the woman controls her body, but absent rape, or a handful of other circumstances, if we knowingly enter into coitus, with full knowledge of the results, is the sex the only benefit I (as a male) get out of this if things don't go according to Hoyle?

Exactly. What if I do (as a male) want the child but she doesn't? What if, then, she decides to plead rape as an escape to having the child? There are some women that would do that. More likely the jury will side with the woman leaving the man in a situation, which usually is negated by the man agreeing to the abortion.
I don't know how they can be so proud of winning with them odds. - Little Big Man

I Love You...Poppin Fresh

Offline chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2920
  • Gender: Female
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #11 on: February 15, 2017, 12:40:38 PM »
wheeeeewww.... okay wow. Can we just apply this statement to rape to maybe show the issue with this type of thinking?
"Can you have a mechanism, say, that calls for "consent", but figuratively?"
No - I don't think so. If a relationship is healthy, likely there will be a discussion between the two involved. But, how can you govern communication and relationships for all different scenarios? I don't see that being possible while maintaining women's rights.

Offline Cool Chris

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 4627
  • Gender: Male
  • Rest in Peace
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #12 on: February 15, 2017, 02:51:27 PM »
Meanwhile, in Seattle, our leaders are not only throwing out the welcome mat for illegal Proper Legal Documentation Challenged immigrants, they are opening up their... ERRRR I mean taxpayers' pocketbooks.

http://www.kingcounty.gov/elected/executive/constantine/news/release/2017/February/15-immigration-refugee-rapid-response.aspx

http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/01/07/seattle-mayor-ed-murray-illegal-immigration-250k-protect-illegal-immigrants-trump

"Nostalgia is just the ability to forget the things that sucked" - Nelson DeMille, 'Up Country'

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #13 on: February 15, 2017, 03:08:00 PM »
wheeeeewww.... okay wow. Can we just apply this statement to rape to maybe show the issue with this type of thinking?
"Can you have a mechanism, say, that calls for "consent", but figuratively?"
No - I don't think so. If a relationship is healthy, likely there will be a discussion between the two involved. But, how can you govern communication and relationships for all different scenarios? I don't see that being possible while maintaining women's rights.

I don't disagree with you at all.  And let me be clear, I don't extend my concern to "rape"; you commit a crime, you don't get to reap the benefits of that crime, in any form or fashion. 

Offline chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2920
  • Gender: Female
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #14 on: February 17, 2017, 06:45:56 AM »
Something I can get on board with
http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2017/02/new-hampshire-house-passes-bill-that-would-require-courts-to-fully-inform-juries/
Quote
Final passage would bring to light the indispensable right of regular people sitting in the jury box to stand up against laws that violate basic rights or have been applied in a way that creates a miscarriage of justice.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #15 on: February 17, 2017, 08:28:02 AM »
Something I can get on board with
http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2017/02/new-hampshire-house-passes-bill-that-would-require-courts-to-fully-inform-juries/
Quote
Final passage would bring to light the indispensable right of regular people sitting in the jury box to stand up against laws that violate basic rights or have been applied in a way that creates a miscarriage of justice.


OOOOooooooohhhhhhhhh, I don't like this at all.  This in essence codifies and legitimizes the OJ jury, and that is not okay with me.   We don't empanel juries to determine what is "just" or not.   We vote for legislators to pass laws that determine what is "just" or not.    This will lead to activist juries, and what is the recourse?  Where is the check and balance?   If the jury nullifies, the judge can't overrule that finding (because of the Constitutional right to a trial by jury) and the prosecutor can't refile and try again (because of "double jeopardy").   The power is there, so in the most egregious of cases, it can be applied, but to apply that instruction to EVERY jury gives it the same weight as a "guilty" or "not guilty" finding.  I've actually sat on juries before, and it's not supposed to be easy, and the jury is not supposed to be able to assert their collective will, except in the most egregious of instances.  Their job is simple:  they find whether the facts support the charges.   They should be encouraged to do that job in the majority of instances.     

Offline chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2920
  • Gender: Female
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #16 on: February 17, 2017, 08:54:32 AM »

OOOOooooooohhhhhhhhh, I don't like this at all.  This in essence codifies and legitimizes the OJ jury, and that is not okay with me.   We don't empanel juries to determine what is "just" or not.   We vote for legislators to pass laws that determine what is "just" or not.    This will lead to activist juries, and what is the recourse?  Where is the check and balance?   If the jury nullifies, the judge can't overrule that finding (because of the Constitutional right to a trial by jury) and the prosecutor can't refile and try again (because of "double jeopardy").   The power is there, so in the most egregious of cases, it can be applied, but to apply that instruction to EVERY jury gives it the same weight as a "guilty" or "not guilty" finding.  I've actually sat on juries before, and it's not supposed to be easy, and the jury is not supposed to be able to assert their collective will, except in the most egregious of instances.  Their job is simple:  they find whether the facts support the charges.   They should be encouraged to do that job in the majority of instances.   

I'm not sure you understand... it is already the right of a person serving on the jury - this bill only requires them to be informed of that right.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18232
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #17 on: February 17, 2017, 11:43:19 AM »
While I agree with Stadler, he's capable of defending the stance far better than I so I'll leave it to him. However, jury nullification is not a right. It happens, and for the most part we let it happen because it tends to result when matters of extreme conscience arise.

And as an add-on question, if we allow a jury to acquit somebody because they don't like the law, do we allow them to indict somebody for the same reason? "Technically he was within the law, but he's such a genuine POS for doing what he did the law is inadequate. We have to make an example of him."
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline antigoon

  • Not Elvis
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 10134
  • Gender: Male
  • This was a triumph.
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #18 on: February 17, 2017, 11:45:25 AM »
I'm with Stadler on this one too. It's not something jurors should even be thinking about 99.9% of the time.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #19 on: February 17, 2017, 12:16:15 PM »
I could have sworn I replied to this, but apparently it didn't post.   

As el Barto said, this isn't a "right".  It's one of many mechanisms available to juries and none of them are read "mandatorily" to them at the time of instruction.   The jury has ONE job: be a finder of fact.  How do the facts at hand fit with the law?  Under that law, did the prosecution meet their burden of proof. 

If there is a circumstance where this is appropriate, the judge can advise, and at all times the defense can ask or advise.   

I go back again to the notion that jury nullification is a complete and utter rejection of the checks and balances inherent in our system, and I would think that the events of recent months have hammered home the idea that anything that promotes the skirting of the systemic checks and balances that we've relied on for centuries.   It's meant to right egregious miscarriages of justice; that one juror is "pro pot" shouldn't allow a conviction for possession be overturned.  That's not "unjust". 

Offline chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2920
  • Gender: Female
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #20 on: February 17, 2017, 12:44:31 PM »
I may have used "right" improperly - but the article I posted specifically says the bill is to inform the members of the jury of the option. I don't see any issues with informing a person of their options if they exist. I see this as a powerful detail each person should be able to weigh - does this law seem just. It seems more of a checks and balance on the judicial system in my mind.

In other news...
http://m.sacurrent.com/the-daily/archives/2017/02/16/texas-senator-shatters-table-trying-to-silence-woman-testifying-against-anti-abortion-bill

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #21 on: February 17, 2017, 12:52:59 PM »
I may have used "right" improperly - but the article I posted specifically says the bill is to inform the members of the jury of the option. I don't see any issues with informing a person of their options if they exist. I see this as a powerful detail each person should be able to weigh - does this law seem just. It seems more of a checks and balance on the judicial system in my mind.

In other news...
http://m.sacurrent.com/the-daily/archives/2017/02/16/texas-senator-shatters-table-trying-to-silence-woman-testifying-against-anti-abortion-bill

It's not a check and balance on the judicial system; that's the appeals process and the legislative process.   This is actually a "nuclear weapon".  There is NO recourse from this.  No appeal, no retrial, nothing.   

And if you're going to give THIS option, shouldn't you give all of them?   Juries have many options to them, and the instructions do not have any mandatory requirements for any of them.   Except this.  This is simply an invitation for an activist jury, and in a lot of ways undermines and/or contradicts the other requirements of the jury.   


Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18232
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #22 on: February 17, 2017, 02:06:53 PM »
And I'll ask again, if we're going to encourage jury activism, don't we have to accept it in both directions? If we're fine with "he definitely broke the law, but I don't want him to go to jail for it so 'not guilty'," then what's wrong with "he probably didn't do it, but he's a bastard and I don't want him on the streets. Guilty!"?
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2920
  • Gender: Female

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18232
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #24 on: February 18, 2017, 12:01:06 PM »
:rollin
http://www.abc10.com/news/nation-now/ky-bill-forces-men-to-get-wifes-ok-before-getting-viagra/45536844
That's funny, and I read it completely wrong at first. My initial thought was "somebody caught her husband stepping out on her." Turns out she's just being a smartass. A trait I appreciate when done right.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2920
  • Gender: Female
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #25 on: February 19, 2017, 12:49:43 PM »
I have no words... except I'm glad he resigned.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/02/19/utah-republican-argues-against-equal-pay-for-women-its-bad-for-families-and-society/?utm_term=.8dab8f22f557

If this is what he really meant to say... he really didn't do well communicating that.
“I want to clarify that the main focus of my letter was to express that I don’t feel the government should be dictating to private establishments what they must do in regard to employment, hiring, or wages."

Offline chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2920
  • Gender: Female
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #26 on: February 21, 2017, 06:44:57 AM »
Another one I'm glad is no longer in politics...
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/arizona-republican-suggests-sterilizing-poor-women
Quote
Pearce declared: “You put me in charge of Medicaid, the first thing I’d do is get Norplant, birth-control implants, or tubal ligations…. Then we’ll test recipients for drugs and alcohol, and if you want to [reproduce] or use drugs or alcohol, then get a job.”

Well this doesn't seem legal in any ways to me.
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2017/02/20/iowa-senator-wants-political-balance-among-university-professors/98167182/
Quote
institute a hiring freeze until the number of registered Republicans and Democrats on the university faculty fall within 10 percent of each other.
.
.
The bill would allow professors to register as "no-party," and they would not be counted. Chelgren said professors who want to be hired could simply change their party affiliation to be considered for the position.

Offline Podaar

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 5046
  • Gender: Male
  • Looks like Fish, tastes like chicken
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #27 on: February 21, 2017, 06:56:31 AM »
I have no words... except I'm glad he resigned.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/02/19/utah-republican-argues-against-equal-pay-for-women-its-bad-for-families-and-society/?utm_term=.8dab8f22f557

If this is what he really meant to say... he really didn't do well communicating that.
“I want to clarify that the main focus of my letter was to express that I don’t feel the government should be dictating to private establishments what they must do in regard to employment, hiring, or wages."

I wasn't aware he resigned. Great news.

Also, that repulsive little opinion he originally shared is nothing new around these parts. I think I remember that you live in Arizona, so it's likely that you encounter Mormons on a regular basis, but maybe not enough to be familiar with their "priesthood meeting logic." I guarantee that the vast majority of Utah legislators have heard this same "logic" on Sunday mornings for most of their adult lives. They're usually more careful about sharing the opinion, if they agree with it, with outsiders.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #28 on: February 21, 2017, 07:01:22 AM »
Another one I'm glad is no longer in politics...
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/arizona-republican-suggests-sterilizing-poor-women
Quote
Pearce declared: “You put me in charge of Medicaid, the first thing I’d do is get Norplant, birth-control implants, or tubal ligations…. Then we’ll test recipients for drugs and alcohol, and if you want to [reproduce] or use drugs or alcohol, then get a job.”

Well this doesn't seem legal in any ways to me.
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2017/02/20/iowa-senator-wants-political-balance-among-university-professors/98167182/
Quote
institute a hiring freeze until the number of registered Republicans and Democrats on the university faculty fall within 10 percent of each other.
.
.
The bill would allow professors to register as "no-party," and they would not be counted. Chelgren said professors who want to be hired could simply change their party affiliation to be considered for the position.

Requiring "sterilization of poor women" is likely illegal.

But why would the latter be illegal?   It's silly, given that it is so easily spoofed - some would argue our PRESIDENT did that - but it's not illegal, any more than having a quota or women or minorities is illegal under "Affirmative Action".   We often think that political party is a "choice", but more and more evidence is being discovered that shows that there may be a genetic component to political affiliation.  So unless you're willing to say "well, it's okay that we hire basically only men", why would you be willing to say "we'll hire only Democrats"?   

Offline Podaar

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 5046
  • Gender: Male
  • Looks like Fish, tastes like chicken
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #29 on: February 21, 2017, 07:18:26 AM »
Poe? Is that you?

Offline chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2920
  • Gender: Female
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #30 on: February 21, 2017, 09:20:12 AM »

But why would the latter be illegal?   It's silly, given that it is so easily spoofed - some would argue our PRESIDENT did that - but it's not illegal, any more than having a quota or women or minorities is illegal under "Affirmative Action".   We often think that political party is a "choice", but more and more evidence is being discovered that shows that there may be a genetic component to political affiliation.  So unless you're willing to say "well, it's okay that we hire basically only men", why would you be willing to say "we'll hire only Democrats"?

For discussion sake - you're a proponent for affirmative action?

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #31 on: February 21, 2017, 10:21:04 AM »

But why would the latter be illegal?   It's silly, given that it is so easily spoofed - some would argue our PRESIDENT did that - but it's not illegal, any more than having a quota or women or minorities is illegal under "Affirmative Action".   We often think that political party is a "choice", but more and more evidence is being discovered that shows that there may be a genetic component to political affiliation.  So unless you're willing to say "well, it's okay that we hire basically only men", why would you be willing to say "we'll hire only Democrats"?

For discussion sake - you're a proponent for affirmative action?

Honestly, and for the sake of discussion, I am not at all a fan of affirmative action. 

Offline chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2920
  • Gender: Female
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #32 on: February 21, 2017, 11:57:59 AM »

But why would the latter be illegal?   It's silly, given that it is so easily spoofed - some would argue our PRESIDENT did that - but it's not illegal, any more than having a quota or women or minorities is illegal under "Affirmative Action".   We often think that political party is a "choice", but more and more evidence is being discovered that shows that there may be a genetic component to political affiliation.  So unless you're willing to say "well, it's okay that we hire basically only men", why would you be willing to say "we'll hire only Democrats"?

For discussion sake - you're a proponent for affirmative action?

Honestly, and for the sake of discussion, I am not at all a fan of affirmative action.
So you're original discussion point is purely about the semantics or my choice of word - "illegal"? As to the content, I'm guessing you're not a fan of the actual proposal in question? I'm assuming since you likened it to something you are not a fan of.


Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #33 on: February 21, 2017, 01:50:30 PM »
Yeah, I wasn't at all arguing with you; just commenting that it probably WOULDN'T be "illegal".   I am not a fan of the proposal in question.  They should hire who is the best teacher, period.    White, black, man, woman, gay, straight, Republican, Democrat (and pay them the same).   

Offline chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2920
  • Gender: Female
Re: Local government thread
« Reply #34 on: February 21, 2017, 04:22:12 PM »
I feel like I have to use a translator sometimes for you Stadler lol

New AZ bill and I have no idea if this is good or bad
http://www.ahwatukee.com/business/article_ac63796a-f53d-11e6-8c1b-e3e1a87f142a.html
Quote
Legislation awaiting a final House vote would carve an exemption in existing laws that require people to report ‒and pay taxes ‒on capital gains. So, if you buy art, jewelry or an antique car for $10,000 and sell if for $12,000, you owe the state tax on that $2,000 profit.

But Rep. Mark Finchem, R-Oro Valley, argues that's not true if you're buying U.S. gold coins. He said it's simply exchanging one form of U.S. currency for another.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2017, 06:42:16 PM by chknptpie »