Death Records Now

This is a list that I personally have compiled over the course of the last couple of weeks. It is not complete by any means, but I think it does give a sampling of my concerns as well as the concerns of many. Due to the length of the posting, I have not included links but have included the dates if one wanted to look it up.

ABORTION:
1.Voted against partial birth abortion ban- October 2007
2.He voted against requiring medical care for aborted fetuses who survive
3.Voted no on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP- March 2008
4.Voted no on prohibiting minors from crossing state lines for abortions- March 2008
5.Voted no on notifying parents of minors who get out of state abortions- July 2006
6.Voted against restrictions on public funding of abortion.- 2000

ECONOMIC ISSUES
7.Voted no on $40B in reduced overall federal spending- December 2005
8.Sponsored tax credit bill for providing 85% ethanol gas- April 2005
9.Voted no on CAFTA, Central America Free trade- July 2005
10.Mandates health care- February 2008
11.Voted to end $300 million worth of tax breaks for businesses.- 2004 (anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of economics understands that restrictive policy results in a reduction, not increase)
12.Believes that tax cuts on rich does not create jobs- May 2004
13.Voted to raise the minimum wage in Illinois from $5.15 an hour to $6.50 an hour over two years. – 2003 ( again, anyone with the slightest understanding of economics realizes that those adversely affected by such actions, are the individuals this measure is meant to help)
14.Favored single payer health care despite denial- January 2008
15.Successfully sponsored the Health Care Justice Act, a study of ways to implement a universal health care system statewide.- 2004
16.Free public college for any student with B average- July 1998
17.Voted against making permanent the repeal of the state’s 5 percent sales tax on gasoline.- 2000

CRIME/ GUNS
18.Voted against making gang members eligible for the death penalty if they kill someone to help their gang. -2001
19.Deal with street level drug dealing as minimum wage affair- October 2006
20.Death penalty should not discriminate by gang membership- October 2004
21.Questions harsh penalties for drug dealing- October 2007
22.Endorsed Illinois handgun ban- April 2008
23.Respects 2nd amendment, but local gun bans ok- February 2008
24.Voted against letting people argue self-defense in court if charged with violating local weapons bans by using a gun in their home. -2004
25.Voted no on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers- July 2005
26.In 1999, Obama voted against a bill barring early release for (criminal) sex offenders
27.He unsuccessfully sponsored limit of one handgun purchase per month. – 200
28.Unsuccessfully sponsored measure to expunge some criminal records and create an employment grant program for ex-criminals.- 2002

WAR ON TERROR
29.Restore habeas corpus for detainees in War on Terror- June 2007
30.Close Guantanamo and restore habeas corpus- June 2007

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION
31.Supports granting drivers license to illegal immigrants- November 2007
32.Voted yes on continued federal funds for ‘sanctuary cities’- March 2008
33.Extend welfare and Medicaid to immigrants- July 1998
34.Voted yes to allow illegal aliens to participate in social security- May 2008
35.Voted no on terminating legal challenges to English only job rules- March 2008

DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE
36.Opposed 1996 Illinois DOMA bill- March 2007
37.Opposes CA Prop. 8 define marriage as one man one woman- July 2008

MORAL AND COMMON SENSE ISSUES
38.Sponsored resolution rejecting photo ID for voting- September 2005
39.Obama voted “present” on a bill to keep pornographic book and video stores and strip clubs from setting up within 1,000 feet of schools and churches- 2001
40.Obama voted against filtering pornography on school and library computers
41.Obama voted for sex education for kindergarten children through the 5th grade
42.Include class based affirmative action with race based- October 2007
43.Supreme court was wrong on school anti-integration ruling- July 2007
44.Supports affirmative action in colleges and government- July 1998
45.National smoking bans only after trying local bans- September 2007
46.Voted no on declaring English as the official language of US government- June 2007
47.Voted against giving tax credits to parents who send their children to private school. – 1999
48.Jerusalem as joint Palestinian- Israeli capitol ok- July 2008

POLITICS
49.Statement: owes unions who endorse him, that’s why he’s in politics- October 2006
50.No money from lobbyist, but money from bundlers who lobby ok- July 2007
51.No money from lobbyist, but money from spouse of lobbyist ok- April 2007
52.Nearly $200,000,000 in unreported campaign contributions

Regarding numbers 42-44, there have been many studies that have clearly shown quota systems and specifically in the higher educational institutions have created undue hardship on those who are supposed to benefit from such programs.
Richard- I appreciate your openess, thank you. As far as points 11 and 12, research macroeconomic theory and you will find what it is that I am speaking of. There was however an attempt in relatively recent history to implement the same type of policies – commonly called restrictive- the individual at the helm at that point was Pres. Carter. Prior to that, we have another example for which the similarities are striking- we affectionately know this period as ‘The Great Depression’. Though there are some, few, that would argue, it is generally accepted that the depression was prolonged due to the restrictive policies followed by FDR.
Richard- just an additional side note regarding number 13. I have to assume that since you are in disagreement with 11 and 12, 13 would pose a problem as well. To understand the implications of number 13 you would need to look up microeconomic theory.
Richard- your link is in regards to deficit spending. I would argue as would most economists, that there are some inherent benefits in regards to deficit spending, but yes, there are limitations as well. Points 11, 12, and conversely 13 are in respect to restrictive policies. Let’s put it this way; if you as an individual have just found out that your taxes are going to increase lets say 10%- the monies that you take in are going to decrease as well right? OK, so if you have 10% less money coming in, then it would be reasonable to expect that you would reduce the money going out on items not necessary right? Well, business is the same way. If business tax goes up then business is required to reduce costs to maintain profitability. Reducing costs for business may entail; reduced work force, less investment (infrastructure). This reduction results in reduced revenue (tax), higher unemployment.
I have read reports regarding Senator Obama’s tax proposal and barring any unknown disclosures; the top 5% of earners would be taxed at a rate of 49-50%. In economic speak, this incentivizes that these earners would now transfer earnings to localities where penalties are not as great- in English, these people/ businesses would move their operations to countries that would allow them to keep as much of their profits as possible. Look at auto manufacturing as an example, the rustbelt states were taxing at such a high rate, that many manufacturers have moved to states or even countries with lower tax rates.
Richard- I’m not making the claim that these individuals will move residence, but merely the home country of said business entity. Now this may entail a physical move or a paper move. Recently Senator Obama has referred to 1000 corporations having headquarters in one building in the Bahamas- I believe. This example is exactly what I am referring too. If the fed increases the incentive for businesses to move off-shore or even relocate, then tax revenue does in fact decrease. There is an overwhelming amount of historical data supporting this assertion and no, that I am aware of, data that would disprove it. I have been in the business world for twenty years and have watched the ebb and flow of business practice. The one constant has been that a correctly run business will by whatever means possible, try to remain profitable.
One last bit of data, and this being purely anecdotal; During the 80’s Michigan state and local governments began raising taxes. The assumption was increased tax revenue. What actually happened was that many businesses found that even with the loss of existing facilities, it was more beneficial for them to relocate and sell assets in Michigan. Many other businesses didn’t have that opportunity and went into foreclosure. I, like many Michiganders, was forced by taxation and loss of jobs to move from my home. Prior to all of this, many Michigan communities were experiencing revitalization. Policies however quashed this growth. In fact, Michael Moore got his start there because of a film he did called "Me and Roger". Though a purely one sided view, it was the story of the death of Flint Michigan- and yes, I did live there at the time. If memory serves me correctly, Flint held the record for per capita murders during that time. So increased taxes do have affects- but are we ready for them?

Well done. At least you’ve researched it. Many of the items you list are the reasons I do support Obama – so we’ll agree to differ.

However, I will question your assumptions in point 11 and 12.

There’s so much info here on this link – you’ll have a field day – but it’s quite interesting ( for example it has the national debt and inflation recorded year by year by President since 1780 ish on the spreadsheet at the bottom under sources – you need to select the worksheet).

You’ll figure it out – but look at Fig 1 which shows the climb in National Debt. And look at Fig 3 together with the narrative underneath which shows the "change" by President for the last 50 years.

You will see that Democrat policies have been more successful (Clinton, Carter and Johnson) and that tax decreases have not had the anticipated effect.
http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

.EDIT: Point 13 – The minimum wage is arguable. First should there be a minm wage? And then what level is it set.
It’s a matter of judgement. I have a view that says it should be set in areas wider than one state.

Generally – I have to say it’s difficult to compare the pre war period with the post war period – because so much has changed. The lessons are different – the balance is different.

I’ll come back and give you a counter argument for Point 12 shortly. I have to attend to something briefly.

OK POINT 12 – I say increasing tax on rich does not affect jobs. The higher the income the more their money is spent outside their domicile country – holidays, overseas property. Taxation takes the money into "federal" control. That is then spent within the US – on infrastructure, on defence – or even as lower tax for low earners who spend on local goods and services. So taxing the rich helps the economy more than not taxing them.
A counter argument to this is that the rich move out – but thats a matter of balance again when compared to other countries. But bear in m ind – most choose to remain in the US and enjoy the benefits it offers . Lower tax countries are low for a reason – they don’t offer the same environment or other benefits.

EDIT: Just read your updates. Regarding business tax. Businesses are in the the US because thats where their market is. It’ not just about tax rates. Businesses also consider the benefits of a legislative framework – what redress they have on unpaid debts for example. One of the central planks of Obamas policy is to tax the many US companies who continiue to do business in the US but have chosen to register their business outside US to avoid paying US taxes. For example, over 12000 US companies are now registered in the Cayman Islands yet 99% of their market is in US. They are simply re-registering their office, tax advisors told them to. They still do the same business in the US -but pay their tax to Cayman Is not US. Obama is going to close that loophole. The money will be taxed from where it is earned – not where it is accounted. All these companies are doing is aviding the tax they should legally pay. That puts them back on equal status with their competitors – often smaller companies – who have been unfairly put at a disadvantage. It doesn’t mean jobs are lost. It actually encourages more investment – because only profits are taxed. If they re-invest – they avoid tax. .

I’ve got to go out soon. I’ll check this page later.

EDIT: Yes – a "paper office " as you call it. Thats whats been happening. You can keep lowering taxes – but if they find a country with a lower tax – they move – or re-register. They can hop from the Bahamas to somehwere else for a 1% difference. Obama plans to change the tax point. If they’ve done the business in the US they’ll pay US taxes. They can keep their paper office – but there will be no point. It’s been done in Europe where they had the same problem. Some of the finace companies still amnage to get round it – because they can "earn" moeny in the paper office. But manufacturing industries, service industries, distributive industries, retail businesses will no longer be able to avoid paying their legal tax contribution.

BTW I also have been in business, corporate and private for 33 years – and points 29 and 30 we could never agree.
Must go. Thanks..

 

 

A recent Washington State Institute of Public Policy that study found one ofthe nation’s largest treatment programs for incarcerated male sex offenders had no impact on recidivism rates.

Lifetime Sex Offender Recidivism: A 25-Year Follow-Up StudyDepartment of Psychiatry University of Toronto

24/7 G.P.S Real Time Tracking, an answer needed yesterday, here today.

The technology is widely available, it is currently used on newer model cars. Of course it is not being monitored to spy on the driver, it has however saved countless lives during a medical emergency in an accident scenario. When medical assistance is needed for an emergency situation, it provides exact location specific information. The driver pays a small monthly monitoring fee, and most automobile manufactures install the equipment as an option.

The other benefit is during an accident it easier for the driver and insurance company to prove driving speeds, driving habits, driving hsitory,etc.

It proved pivotal in the not so long ago case of the mother, Laci ,and unborn child, murdered by their husband and father Scott Peterson. It provided insight into his travels and locations during the investigation that proved irrefutably his whereabouts and locations during their disappearance, police traced his “in car” G.P.S. system for times and dates.

The thought I have on this is simply this, We place people on house arrest, they are required to wear an ankle bracelet or wrist bracelet that if removed revokes their probation and parole. When removed it alert officers when the parolee comes in to report for probation, it is tamper resistant and is easily identifiable if removed and placed back on in most cases.

These people pay a small monthly monitoring fee and set up cost to activate and maintain the monitoring system. This releases the probation officer from as many on site verifications of the convicted/ house arrestee. Freeing up manpower and resources to other needs in the department and communities.

Not to mention jail space overcrowding and cost of housing inmates the community saves.

It is also a great deterrent, knowing if they mess up they will get caught.

This brings us to The Child Protection Community first legislative efforts at policy change.

The policy in question is the 24/7 G.P.S. real time tracking of all convicted sex offenders while on probation and parole. UNCONDITIONAL, Federally Mandated Mandatory Minimum of all offenders across the board. No more bumper stickers where simply borrowing another car negates the bumper sticker, or Driver License I.D. tags, just the ankle or wrist bracelets that are hard to ignore and easy to spot.

We order all convicted sex offenders to be placed on the 24/7 G.P.S. regardless of sentencing ,monitoring for length of probation or parole for 1st time offenders. Regardless of crime details. If a two time looser then requirement is life no exceptions, a true Minimum Mandatory Federally Mandated condition if ever released from incarceration. If death occurs life without as a minimum mandatory, first offense. Especially if death occurs and they are ever released.

This would be funded Federally at first to get it started, then both the set up and monitoring would be paid for by the convicted, as part of their probation and the continued monitoring as part of their continued restitution. The same way the house arrest parolees are required to pay a set up fee for their own monitoring and monthly fees as part of their own probation.

The end result of the Federal money would be to help install the tattler system’s, once the program was in place and functioning.

The Tattler system is simply a reverse house arrest system linked to wi-fi technology, that if the ankle bracelet or wrist bracelet comes with in a certain radius of the tattler system, it flags the proper authorities as to a threat and also with the current technology, tells them the vital information on the offender that has set it off. These tattlers are placed into all areas of concern with no exception. If there is a school system tattler or daycare set off then , then it is considered a higher priority than say a park. Regardless it alerts police to the danger and they can respond immediately to the area of concern. Also equipping police cars with the tattler lets them know if they are in the vicinity of a convicted offender and his conviction information and criminal history. This is vital as the difference in sex crimes varying, enabling the police to differentiate between a severe threat and a moderate one. Thus responding correctly.

The G.P.S. system can give police a detailed history of offender’s whereabouts, location history,, conviction history, description, age, etc.

This history can go back as far as 30-60-90 days or months and years, to establish future probabilities and threat levels of each offender.

The benefits of this system are immeasurable,

1.Less manpower, one person can monitor 1000x more offenders and without leaving the police station, from a computer.

2.Public sense of safety and security goes up.

3. Less expenses and resources on these offenders. This leaves more money, manpower, and resources to other areas in the community that need it.

4.Potentially less recidivism rates, knowing if they do it again they are being watched and recorded at all times.

5.More accurate statistics federally and locally based on more accurate monitoring records than previously available.

6. Better policies and legislation as a result of #5.

7.During a missing child alert, one officer can immediately, from the station, track the location of the last known whereabouts of child and rule out all false leads where a molester is concerned , and narrow the direction of the search to those known offenders that were in the area.

While this is not a cure all, it is a step in the right direction. Saving money and resources as well as the lives of our young. The technology is available and is so much cheaper than the current system in place. It’s effectiveness is obvious and badly needed.

Are our children worth it?

Mine are, and that is why I am pushing for this.

 

By signing up as a member you are supporting this effort and many others to come. we are going to present this and other legislation to lawmakers next year to change this system and many others. There is a better way.

“Not One In Vain, Not One Forgotten, Not Ever!”

Register today for free, as a member,

www.childprotectioncommunity.com

~Joey Tillman

Joe Tillman
http://www.articlesbase.com/parenting-articles/247-gps-real-time-tracking-for-all-sex-offenders-682888.html