September 2007 | Main | November 2007
By J. Greg Schnacke
“I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil.”
— Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the Federal Reserve
When it comes to energy, America is at war.
This Speakout has not been edited.
By J. Greg Schnacke
“I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil.”
— Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the Federal Reserve
When it comes to energy, America is at war.
At war with those abroad who threaten our way of life, and control much of our oil.
At war with those at home who want to keep us dependent on foreign sources of energy.
Alan Greenspan says we need to acknowledge the Iraq war is largely about oil. Americans for American Energy says we need to acknowledge we have the resources right here at home to move closer to a goal shared by virtually all Americans: energy independence.
Becoming more energy independent is about preserving the American way of life. It’s about creating jobs and economic opportunities in the United States.
It’s about preserving and bolstering our national security.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 was a landmark bipartisan Congressional accomplishment. Years of work on both sides of the aisle produced a commitment to make our nation’s abundance of domestic energy resources available to all Americans.
But the energy bill passed by the U.S. House this summer, and the continuing energy discussion in Congress, are undermining those efforts and pose a very real threat to American consumers and families.
As a non-profit, grassroots-based organization, Americans for American Energy’s mission is to tell the truth about the need for more energy of all kinds from the North American continent.
We will work to support more oil and gas, clean coal, solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, hydropower, nuclear and energy efficiency across the board.
Our supporters have three core beliefs, central to the public policies we promote:
- America must reduce its growing addiction to foreign energy.
- America must develop a balanced portfolio of all domestic energy resources, including renewable and alternative energy supplies, clean fossil fuels, nuclear power, hydrogen and other advanced technologies.
- Americans must be smarter and more efficient in our energy use, while we grow our overall energy supply to support the standard of living we have come to enjoy.
In an increasingly dangerous world, Americans don’t like being dependent on foreign nations for our energy. Our energy security and a strong economy depend on our country working harder to be energy independent.
We need positive change in our energy policies. We don’t want a strategy that results in our energy dollars flowing to nations openly hostile to the United States.
What can state and federal government leaders do to help promote a greater reliance on American energy? They should do the following:
- Promote increased production of a balanced portfolio of American energy resources.
- Provide for economic incentives that encourage energy efficiency and energy conservation.
- Encourage new technologies that result in environmentally responsible development of renewable and alternative energy resources including solar PV, solar thermal, wind, biomass, geothermal, hydrogen and hydropower.
- Encourage environmentally responsible development of low carbon American energy resources, including increased utilization of North American natural gas supplies.
- Promote investment in the full range of clean coal technologies, with a goal to rapidly achieve near-zero emissions from coal-based electricity generation and environmentally sound coal-to-liquids production.
- Allow environmentally responsible access to America’s abundant oil and gas resources in areas like Alaska, the Rocky Mountain West and deep ocean areas.
- Reform and modernize outdated but well-intentioned laws such as the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act, in order to harmonize the twin goals of environmental protection and increased domestic energy production.
- Promote greater deployment of clean and safe nuclear power technologies.
Energy independence is an achievable goal, and the message from Americans is clear: We want action to protect the nation from an uncertain energy future.
J. Greg Schnacke is president of Americans for American Energy, a national non-profit coalition based in Golden, Colorado.
Colorado lost a superman in Zachariah Templeton
b>By
This Speakout has not been edited.
By
Loyal to his family, loyal to his friends, loyal to his fellow officers, and loyal to the people of the State of Colorado. The commander of the Colorado State Patrol also addressed the congregation. The image that was portrayed of Trooper Pendleton was one of a man whose life should be an inspiration to all of us. He was, and should continue to be, a role model for others.
Worldview bias on campus
By
This Speakout has not been edited.
By
Professors exist who, much to the dismay of those in support of the Academic Bill of Rights, use their classrooms as a liberal bully pulpit. One professor of this type was spawned out of the sociology department of the University of Colorado, and brought his condescending, pontificating self to CSU to teach a freshman sociology class. He had on any given day a captive audience of around 300, and while there were inevitably some sleepers, many were without a doubt knocked one rung closer to being hopelessly indoctrinated into the nonreligious left because of his outlandish and brutish attacks, which were wholly unrelated to sociology or any other academic area.
As a general rule of thumb, any and all viewpoints are acceptable in the public university system with the exception of those held by conservatives and especially Christians. I know of one conservative Christian professor who, rather nobly, feels obligated to give a letter to his seniors the last day of class detailing his beliefs, because he is not allowed to speak of them during class. Why are people like this professor silenced from their opinion but anything else on the opposite side of the spectrum is deemed OK?
Do not assume that those who are not atheistic or agnostic liberals are stupid. Faith and intellect are not mutually exclusive. Political conservatism and Christian worldviews can and do exist at the highest echelons of learning. A tax-supported state university should be no place for eradication of conservative or Christian thought and belief. If this worldview is never allowed legitimate expression, I fear the marketplace of ideas will become merely a place for indoctrination rather than honest critical exchange.
Teachers crushed by rules, regulations
By Elaine Gantz Berman and Jerry Wartgow
A multitude of complex and often counterproductive laws, rules and policies, which increase a fear of litigation, are undercutting education in Colorado. That’s the troubling message from a recent focus group study commissioned by Common Good Colorado, a nonpartisan organization working to restore common sense to Colorado law.
By Elaine Gantz Berman and Jerry Wartgow
A multitude of complex and often counterproductive laws, rules and policies, which increase a fear of litigation, are undercutting education in Colorado. That’s the troubling message from a recent focus group study commissioned by Common Good Colorado, a nonpartisan organization working to restore common sense to Colorado law.
The report, The New Three R’s: Rules, Regulations and More Rules, prepared by an independent professional focus group firm, presents the results of 12 focus groups composed of teachers and administrators from rural, suburban and urban districts across Colorado. Its findings include the following alarming facts:
More than half of the teachers said they had been threatened with a lawsuit.
Almost two-thirds of teachers and administrators said they experience a high to moderate degree of legal fear almost daily.
More than three-quarters of the participants rated the extent of legal and regulatory burdens, on a scale of 1 to 10, as 5 or higher; and half rated their burden as 7 or higher.
Nearly three-quarters of the participants reported spending 20 percent or more of their time on activities mandated by some rule or law that doesn’t make sense to them.
While the educators had no argument with the original intent and purpose of many of the laws and policies, they were distressed by the cumulative burden and compliance nightmare that occurs at the school level. They were particularly frustrated by paperwork without perceived purpose, a lawsuit culture that has changed the way they teach and how students learn, and by laws and rules that they do not believe serve the best interests of their students.
For example, focus group participants advised that disciplining chronically disruptive students becomes a lesson in paperwork compliance due to the regulations required to implement such laws as the Habitually Disruptive Rule, the State Truancy Law, the Schools of Choice Law, the Zero Tolerance Policy, and the Reasonable Physical Intervention Clause in Colorado’s Anti-Violence Code. One teacher reported: “The amount of paperwork our central office requires for a severe disciplinary action has doubled in eight years.”
Paperwork and compliance has a place in our school systems, but we have crossed a line of what is reasonable. A state or federal law affects almost every aspect of the school day. Teachers and principals are nervous about being sued when they carry out basic tasks like assigning a grade, issuing consequences for misbehavior, evaluating a teacher, breaking up a fight or being alone in a classroom with a student.
Beyond the negative effect on morale that results from regulations that seem counterproductive to educators, there is an equally troubling result of overregulation in the schools: The time required to comply with the multitude of laws cascading down upon our schools reduces the amount and quality of student engagement, jeopardizing meaningful teaching and learning. If we want the best education possible for our children, this situation must be rectified.
As veterans of successful and unsuccessful attempts to improve student achievement, we agree with the focus group participants that rules, regulations and more rules are the elephants in the room with respect to school reform. We must carefully assess the impact of current laws, rules and policies on teaching and learning. We must ensure that policies handed down from above help, rather than hinder, efforts to provide a sound education for our students. And, most important, we must not pass laws that preclude the exercise of common sense in their implementation.
Therefore, it is imperative that our elected officials, as they consider proposed bills for the 2008 legislative session, use common sense by not passing bills that will further burden our already overstressed education system with counterproductive compliance requirements.
Elaine Gantz Berman is a member of the Colorado State Board of Education and past president of the Denver School Board. Jerry Wartgow is a former superintendent of Denver Public Schools.
Posted by denver-admin at 01:16 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack'Access' has become excess
By David A. Lien
By David A. Lien
Colorado Backcountry Hunter and Angler, and Army JROTC instructor, Paul Vertrees calls it like it is: “On my morning break…I picked up my copy of the October 2007 issue of American Rifleman. The NRA is still operating under the guise of “protecting hunting and hunters.” The latest dose of misinformation and outright falsities comes from none other than the NRA President, John Sigler. In his article this month he states that closing the Turret Road in the proposed Brown’s Canyon Wilderness would make it off-limits to “elderly hunters, disabled hunters just back from Iraq and ordinary hunters like you and me, who can’t afford to spend days hiking into the place just for one day of hunting. So we fought the rule and won.” [1]
[ By Lucia Guzman For decades, many of us have been fighting for change in the Denver Public Schools, so that our kids can have the quality education that every child deserves. This Speakout has not been edited. By Lucia Guzman For decades, many of us have been fighting for change in the Denver Public Schools, so that our kids can have the quality education that every child deserves. For many years, our voices went unheard and, as a result, our children continue to languish in schools that are only compounding problems caused by poverty. The result is a dead end for our children, living as they do, in a great American city where only 9% of today’s ninth graders ever finish in a four year college, fifty percent drop out of high school, and only 50 African-American students are proficient on the 10th grade math test. If things do not change in Denver (and across all American Cities), the notion that our children will have any chance to participate meaningfully in a global economy or in this democracy is simply a cruel lie. Recently, we have a glimmer of hope in the winds of change at Denver Public Schools. Over the past two years, we have gained confidence that the district administration, school board and the greater Denver Business and non-profit community understand our sense of urgency and agree that the outcomes for our kids are intolerable. They have met us in our neighborhoods, in our homes, and in our community centers to discuss the reform in our schools. Although we all may not agree with every decision the superintendent and the board makes, I have no doubt about the community- wide commitment to make things better. This has been a big step in the right direction. I know there are a number of very fine schools in DPS. I want all of Denver’s parents to know that we are proud of those schools. However, there are so many schools in Denver where reform is desperately needed, and where the consequences of our failures are urgently felt. I want all of Denver’s children to have a chance to be successful. Our children cannot sustain a change in direction, especially one which has the potential of de-railing the reform plan underway at DPS. Recently, a slate of candidates has been endorsed and supported in an effort to unseat the current school board president and vice president; Theresa Pena and Bruce Hoyt. Pena and Hoyt, and my other colleagues on the school board have worked hard to become one of the strongest reform boards of education in the nation. Replacing Pena and Hoyt at this time would be extremely detrimental to the children of Denver. I know that change is difficult. I also recognize, as the superintendent is fond of saying, that we have the choice to embrace the politics of hope or exploit the politics of fear. I choose hope, and I plead with the parents and communities around our successful schools to recognize our plight, and support the continuing reform of the Denver Public Schools. Please vote in this election and support the current school board President, Theresa Pena and Vice President Bruce Hoyt. This may be our last chance to save our kids. Lucia Guzman is completing her second term on the Denver School Board representing Northwest Denver. By Floyd Edward Reinhardt and Eddie Reinhardt, Littleton Let’s give the Rocky Mountain News another chance! Let’s ask it to re-announce Gov. Bill Ritter’s statewide program, “Be There for Your Kids,” with the same exuberance they’ve used for the Colorado Rockies’ playoff victories. They can do better than “Grant aimed at assisting at-risk dads,” a one-column, seven-inch article several pages in from Page 1 on Oct. 2. By Floyd Edward Reinhardt and Eddie Reinhardt, Littleton Let’s give the Rocky Mountain News another chance! Let’s ask it to re-announce Gov. Bill Ritter’s statewide program, “Be There for Your Kids,” with the same exuberance they’ve used for the Colorado Rockies’ playoff victories. They can do better than “Grant aimed at assisting at-risk dads,” a one-column, seven-inch article several pages in from Page 1 on Oct. 2. What is more important in Colorado today than the governor’s efforts to help men become more aware of the importance of their influence in the lives of their children? This program is designed to promote responsible fatherhood across the state of Colorado. Just after the four F-16s arrived at the stadium to thrill baseball fans with their low formation flyover and just before the Oct. 1 Rockies-Padres game, Ritter unveiled a new program to be spearheaded through the Colorado Department of Human Services, under the direction of Rich Batten. The announcement was made to more than 100 people on the east side of the Capitol. “Fathers have a very important role in the lives of their children,” Ritter said. “At the end of the day, our future is only as strong as our children.” The governor explained that Colorado was the only state and one of two locations in the country — including Washington, D.C. — to be awarded a five-year, $10 million federal grant with the focus and intent of improving paternal relationships and parenting. The grant money is being used to fund community and faith-based programs that provide fatherhood skills training and healthy marriage/couple relationship training. The public awareness campaign includes coloradodads.com, a new Web site that is an all-encompassing resource for dads and families. Research shows that children who grow up without responsible fathers are significantly more likely to experience poverty, do poorly in school and engage in criminal activity. David Blankenhorn, founder of the Institute for American Values and author of Fatherless America, tells us that, “Fatherlessness is the most harmful demographic trend of this generation. It is the leading cause of declining child well-being in our society. It is the engine driving our most urgent social problems. Yet despite its scale of social consequences, fatherlessness is a problem frequently ignored or denied.” This program will work with low-income fathers, fathers of children with disabilities and single custodial fathers. The financial cost for fatherlessness in Colorado is not yet available, but the figures would be staggering. The emotional and life-changing cost of not having a dad at home in Colorado is incalculable. Let’s have a “do-over.” Let’s make sure everyone knows about the governor’s new fatherhood initiative, the “Be There for Your Kids” program. Littleton residents Floyd Edward Reinhardt and son Eddie talk about fatherhood at their Web site By W By W By A This Speakout has not been edited. By A By Dan Grossman It’s time for a national presidential primary. And as 20 states, including California, New York and Colorado, have moved their primary balloting to Feb. 5, 2008, we finally may be moving in that direction. By Dan Grossman It’s time for a national presidential primary. And as 20 states, including California, New York and Colorado, have moved their primary balloting to Feb. 5, 2008, we finally may be moving in that direction. To the casual observer, the timing of state primaries and caucuses used to select the Democratic and Republican nominees for president is arbitrary and confusing, probably because it is arbitrary and confusing. Iowa and New Hampshire get the first crack at nominating major party presidential candidates. Actually, the answer begs the question. Iowa and New Hampshire get to go first because, traditionally, Iowa and New Hampshire have gone first. Both major parties have adopted rules that allow states to conduct balloting only in a window that runs from the first Tuesday in February (in 2008, that date will be Feb. 5) to the first Tuesday in June. Iowa and New Hampshire, for no other reason than tradition, have secured special treatment from the Republicans and Democrats and are allowed to hold their balloting earlier, although the Republicans have not written such exceptions into their rules. The result? Presidential candidates from both parties spend an inordinate amount of time and resources in two small states of little regional, let alone national significance. And the rest of the country is getting sick of it. It seems that every four years we see jockeying by states to move up their presidential primary or caucus dates to challenge the primacy of Iowa and New Hampshire. Next year Iowa will hold its caucuses on Jan. 14 and New Hampshire its primary on Jan. 22 (that date might change if Michigan, Nevada and South Carolina’s Republicans follow through with plans to hold their balloting before that date). New Hampshire law requires that its presidential primary be held prior to any state other than Iowa. The Democratic National Committee appears poised to strip Florida of its delegates to the party’s convention and four candidates have officially pulled out of the Michigan Democratic primary. All of this maneuvering and bickering does little to bolster confidence in a political system that already suffers from a serious affliction of cynicism and apathy. A national primary would do more to attract attention to these party contests on a broader scale as well as create a true test of candidates’ ability to craft and communicate a national policy agenda rather than his or her ability to pander to parochial and often obscure local interests. I understand the concerns of those who say that a national primary would result in the presidential races becoming nothing more than fundraising contests, because each candidate would be forced to buy expensive national advertising time in order to address the issues facing the entire nation. But, truth be told, most races of significance are already focused on fundraising. And if candidates are forced to compete for the support of Americans from across the country in the national marketplace of ideas, that will be a tremendous improvement. Fortunately, several states are moving in the direction of a national primary and are doing so without offending the sensibilities of party insiders. Colorado, along with Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho’s Democrats, Illinois, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico’s Democrats, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Utah, will hold their balloting on Tuesday, Feb. 5, the earliest date permitted by the major parties’ rules. Pundits are referring to the date as Super Duper Tuesday, and while it falls short of creating a national primary, it is a step in the right direction. The National Association of Secretaries of State has proposed a rotating regional primaries plan under which the states would be grouped into four regions and regional primaries would be held based on a rotating schedule. A lottery would be held to determine the order of the regional primaries in 2012, with the first region moving to the back of the line in 2016. This plan is intriguing and would be a definite improvement to the arbitrary status quo. However, it would exempt Iowa and New Hampshire. That tradition is, apparently, of critical importance. It is time that Democrats and Republicans selected the best people to vie for the presidency. It is past time that both parties dump the state-by-state approach to nominating their candidates and adopt a national primary that will give all voters a real say in who their nominees will be. Dan Grossman is the Rocky Mountain regional director and senior attorney of Environmental Defense. He is a resident of Boulder. By Reps. Andrew Romanoff and Rob Witwer One World, One Dream. By Reps. Andrew Romanoff and Rob Witwer One World, One Dream. The slogan China chose for the 2008 Olympic Games rings hollow half a world away. Murder, rape and torture have ravaged the Darfur region of western Sudan — a nightmare from which hundreds of thousands of victims will never recover. The Sudanese government is responsible for this genocide. And until recently, Khartoum could count on tacit support — and an official policy of “non-interference” — from its leading trade partner, arms provider, and diplomatic ally: the People’s Republic of China. Desperate to put a better face on its human-rights record, China is now trumpeting its efforts to help bring peace to Sudan. Behind the scenes, however, Beijing’s actions have not matched its rhetoric. China altered its approach to Sudan only under intense international pressure. As president of the United Nations Security Council, China played a key role in pushing through Resolution 1769 — which authorizes a hybrid U.N.-African Union peacekeeping force to be deployed to Darfur — and in getting Sudanese officials to agree to it. But China refused to vote for the resolution until it had been significantly weakened. China withdrew language imposing sanctions if Sudan refused to cooperate. And China neutered the peacekeepers’ ability to seize and dispose of weapons discovered in Darfur. While calling for peace, China has routinely defended the Sudanese regime in its attempts to sanitize accounts of the genocide. Undisputed reports from Darfur trace civilian deaths straight back to Khartoum, yet China has persisted in attributing the violence to occasional highway banditry and crime. Even as eyewitnesses described the disintegration of conditions in Darfur, China claimed the region was “basically stable.” A special relationship with Sudan puts China in a unique position to effect change. If Beijing means what it now says about human rights, it will: Increase humanitarian aid to Darfuri refugee camps. Suspend the sales of arms to Sudan until a peace process has succeeded and the violence has abated. Make it clear to Sudanese officials that there will be no “business as usual” until Khartoum cooperates with international demands. Publicly acknowledge the mass killings and human suffering that have torn Darfur apart. After the Holocaust, the world said, “Never again.” If we believe those words, we will speak out not only against those who perpetrate genocide but also against those who enable it. Andrew Romanoff is the Speaker of the Colorado House of Representatives and is a Democrat who represents Denver and Arapahoe counties. Rob Witwer is a Republican who represents Jefferson County. Romanoff sponsored, and Witwer co-sponsored, 2007 legislation in the General Assembly divesting Colorado funds from Sudan. By This Speakout has not been edited. By The airlines’ unrealistic scheduling practices have stranded thousands of passengers over the course of the summer yet their management has refused to accept responsibility. The airline companies have engaged in a propaganda campaign in an attempt to deflect attention from their own mismanagement and inefficiency. In the last few years, airline companies have begun to abandon large jets for smaller, regional jets flying more frequently into already busy airports such as Denver, JFK, and Atlanta. As airline companies compete for passengers, they push more flights into peak flying hours at these congested airports. They frequently attempt to schedule more arrivals and departures than airports can safely handle, causing massive delays as runways get clogged with flights. Add variables such as weather into the mix and flights get cancelled, leading to stranded passengers. Over the last few months, the airline companies have funded massive lobbying and public relations campaigns aimed at passengers and members of Congress, claiming that a new air traffic control system would completely solve the problem of delays. They maintain that small, private planes, or general aviation aircraft, are causing delays, and moreover, that the operators of these aircraft do not want to pay for modernizing our air traffic control system. Nothing could be further from the truth. With Congress currently working on a bill to reauthorize funding for the Federal Aviation Administration, the airlines have put forth a proposal that would shift their tax burden onto these private planes - and give the airlines a massive tax break. Yet contrary to the airlines’ propaganda, this bill would actually decrease funding for modernization, thereby harming our ability to pay for needed improvements. It is no wonder that the proposal has been all but abandoned in Congress. Both the Department of Transportation (DOT) and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) have gone on record stating that the current funding structure can successfully fund modernization. With this background, the House of Representatives recently passed an alternate bill, H.R. 2881 which will generate “historic” funding levels for modernization. The bill increases general aviation’s financial contribution by 40% but does not award the airline companies a tax break. H.R. 2881 also protects the general aviation industry for new pilots. Under the airline-supported proposal, general aviation would be crushed under a weight of new taxes and fees, making learning to fly prohibitively expensive and unappealing. This would eventually reduce the number of trained pilots available to work in our state, harming the businesses that rely on planes to serve customers in rural areas, and even the airlines themselves. To reduce the delays of this summer, Congress must adopt a bill that both funds modernization and protects general aviation. H.R. 2881 is such a bill. But in addition to this, the airlines need to schedule realistically, abiding by airport limitations instead of knowingly engaging in practices that harm the flying public. Instead of focusing on their pocketbooks, airline companies need to focus on the well-being of their customers and address their own problems instead of engaging in misleading propaganda campaigns. David Cole has flown for several airlines in the past thirty-five years, is recently retired from United Airlines, owns his own small airplane and is the flight program director for Colorado Northwestern Community College in Rangely. His flight program manages the Rangely Airport for its owner, Rio Blanco County. By Rep. Gwyn Green The proposal to connect the Northwest Parkway to C-470 has residents of the western metro area asking: Is it a Road to Nowhere, A Bridge Too Far, or a Lost Highway? By Rep. Gwyn Green The proposal to connect the Northwest Parkway to C-470 has residents of the western metro area asking: Is it a Road to Nowhere, A Bridge Too Far, or a Lost Highway? This latest pipe dream of beltway proponents comes from the failed Northwest Parkway which leased its operations to a foreign company. This foreign company, Brisa, promises two things: to raise tolls for the next 99 years for Coloradans and to give a $100 million payoff to the directors of the Northwest Parkway if they can complete the beltway. Let me bring you up to speed. While I’m doing this, hum along to that famous song, Won’t Get Fooled Again. When mayors and traffic engineers in the local governments of the Northwest Quadrant in Jefferson County met with the Colorado Department of Transportation in 2003, they asked for congestion relief. What they got was a beltway — even though CDOT’s own figures showed there wasn’t enough traffic to pay for it. Cost: $1.6 billion. So CDOT thought they would toll it, but found out tolls would only pay $600 million of the $1.6 billion. But now that Brisa’s in town, anything is possible. This foreign company wants our roads. They want to charge high tolls. Heck, they are already raising the tolls for the parkway from $2 to $3, with more raises to come. And if they don’t get enough toll revenues to satisfy their stockholders, then parkway directors have promised to let their roads parallel to the parkway degrade so that traffic will be forced to take the toll road. And traffic analysis after traffic analysis has shown that there is just not enough traffic on Colorado 93 to justify turning it into a 12-lane elevated toll road (CDOT’s toll road option) over the tiny town of Golden. The cost is prohibitive, financially and environmentally. A few years back, proponents of the beltway gathered together the cities and county involved and convinced them to pay for a good traffic analysis. It found that instead of a beltway, four lanes on Colorado 93 and four lanes on McIntyre and Indiana streets would solve traffic congestion. Why hasn’t this happened? Governments much more powerful than tiny Golden really want a beltway and use their considerable political power to try to get it. Whenever Golden dares to speak up, they are tarred as uncooperative. If Brisa gets the toll road it wants to complete the beltway, we can count on increased traffic congestion, more serious ozone violations, increased tolls, degraded side roads — and all of this for the next 99 years. To give this perspective, what happed 99 years ago? Well, for one thing, Henry Ford unveiled his invention of the automobile. What will our transportation options be 99 years from now? So don’t let beltway proponents fool you. A beltway will not solve congestion and will probably worsen it. It’s a boondoggle with no accountability, built upon a failed foundation. State Rep. Gwyn Green is a Democrat representing Lakewood. By John Andrews I This Speakout has not been edited. By John Andrews I By By By "Islamofascism, This Speakout has not been edited. By "Islamofascism, By This Speakout has not been edited. By By This Speakout has not been edited. By By This Speakout has not been edited. By By Kevin Trenberth In commenting on “Al Gore’s ignoble Nobel” (Oct. 19), Rocky Mountain News columnist Mike Rosen failed to recognize that the Nobel Peace Prize was given to the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change and Al Gore (in that order). As a scientist who has played a major role in IPCC for 20 years, Mike Rosen’s comments are not only offensive, they are mostly wrong. By Kevin Trenberth In commenting on “Al Gore’s ignoble Nobel” (Oct. 19), Rocky Mountain News columnist Mike Rosen failed to recognize that the Nobel Peace Prize was given to the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change and Al Gore (in that order). As a scientist who has played a major role in IPCC for 20 years, Mike Rosen’s comments are not only offensive, they are mostly wrong. To suggest that we will adapt to climate change as we have in the past is to grossly underestimate the rates and magnitudes of changes expected in the next century. Of course we will adapt, but with how much loss of life and hardship brought on by climate change? At least we should plan for the coming changes and currently we are not. The IPCC process is very open and the reports are thoroughly reviewed. In fact, most of the so-called “deniers” participate and their comments are fully taken into account. Gore’s statement that ice sheets melting in Greenland or the west Antarctic would raise sea level by 20 feet is correct, although it was misleading that he did not put a time frame on this for it to happen. His movie, An Inconvenient Truth, should be viewed by all schoolchildren; I recommend it. The shallow analysis by Rosen does him no credit. In contrast to his prediction that when future generations look back and regard Al Gore’s 2007 Nobel Peace Prize as “even more preposterous than Yasser Arafat’s Nobel for bringing peace to the Middle East,” I predict they will lament the wasted time in not getting our use of nonrenewable resources under control, and especially despise ignorant commentators who encouraged others not to take action. Kevin E. Trenberth is head of the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research. By Dr. This Speakout has not been edited. By Dr. Dr. By This Speakout has not been edited. By By This Speakout has not been edited. By b>By A This Speakout has not been edited. By A According to the Wikipedia: Regarding the origin of the al Qaeda, Robin Cook, the late British member of the late British member of Parliament and former foreign secretary, wrote in 2005 that “Al-Qaida, literally ‘the database’, was originally the name of a computer file listing the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Soviets.” Dr. Sa’ad Al-Fagih, a surgeon at Peshawar (where the Mujahideen recruiting happened) further explained that the computer database (al-Qaeda) was necessary to fix problems associated with a lack of documentation about the fighters who were recruited. Many other sources agree with this origin of the phrase Two possibilities here: Bin Laden either hired the mujahdin to do his work after the Afghanistan war and used the same list, or the connection was just convenient or happenstance. On the recreation of 9/11 last week, “I heard” the commentator say it was the work of terrorists an hour after it happened. Terrorist equated with Bin Laden, and the dubious connection was made. As for al qaeda (the list) in Iraq, logistics don’t jibe. It’s true that outsiders could easily sneak over the borders, but what would they do when they got there. Where would they live? who would they know? In that climate of horror and indecisiveness, strangers would probably be shot on sight. Another thing: How do they tell the difference between al qaeda, Sunni or Shia by sight? They all essentially look alike. I’m sure they don’t carry religious Ids with them, and they’re not about to admit it when arrested. What it all comes down to is: Sunnis and Shi’a families are identified by where they live, and where possible radical groups stay. I’ve followed the AP reports from the beginning, and all they talked about were the Shi’a and Sunni insurgent feud. Of course there were claims by those who claimed to be al qaeda, but it was all talk, not one report of al qaeda activity. Recently we hear that the al qaeda have miraculously emerged as active players, but again, the logistics don’t jibe. People just don’t conveniently appear out of nowhere. By This Speakout has not been edited. By In looking at your last pay-stub, one thing is obvious. You can see the deductions off the top for Medicare and your portion of health insurance. But the employer match, which would otherwise be take When one generation pays for another’s health care, an implied social contract is in force but its legitimacy is periodically re-examined. You see these old goats who smoked, ate pork rinds and guzzled beer instead of water and it b You can at least rationalize that you are one of the lucky ones who has health insurance. You work the new coffee bar at King Soopers and the union demands you have benefits, something that most employees at Wal Being coerced into paying for another generation’s entitlements is one thing, but being forced to pay for health care upfront through premiums years in advance and possibly never using it is another thing. What if I change jobs or health plans? By This Speakout has not been edited. By By This Speakout has not been edited. By By Sheila Bugdanowitz and Jean Galloway America’s baby boom generation has redefined our nation’s social, cultural, economic and political landscape for the last six decades. With more than 77 million boomers in the nation — and most of them still working — America’s largest generation will continue to shape the way we all live and work. By Sheila Bugdanowitz and Jean Galloway America’s baby boom generation has redefined our nation’s social, cultural, economic and political landscape for the last six decades. With more than 77 million boomers in the nation — and most of them still working — America’s largest generation will continue to shape the way we all live and work. Two recent reports forecast the future of boomers and the work force. The National Center for Health Statistics reports that the average American lifespan is now almost 78 years, up from 75.8 years in 1995 and 69.5 years in 1955. The U.S. Census Bureau reported that in 2006, nearly a quarter (23.2 percent) of people from age 65 to 74 were employed or looking for work, up from 19.6 percent in 2000. Putting these two facts together, a recent Rocky Mountain News editorial pointed out that “demographers wonder who is going to support the swelling number of post-retirement-age workers,” then answering that question with, “ ... one answer is they’ll be supporting themselves.” At Rose Community Foundation, we think the Rocky is right. Our Boomers Leading Change initiative is looking at how people in their mid-50s to mid-60s view their futures in the areas of work, lifelong learning and community service. For most, life after 65 won’t resemble the glossy brochures offering leisurely, carefree retirement lifestyles. Instead, most boomers’ futures include employment, volunteering and continual learning. (For the complete report, visit coloradoboomers.com.) Let’s look at employment. Our economy will falter if most boomers stop working at 65 or younger. With one boomer turning 60 every eight seconds for the next 18 years, there won’t be enough replacement workers to sustain our economy. Then consider the loss of talent, experience and “know-how.” With reduced incomes, most boomers will pay fewer taxes, spend less money and contribute less to charity. Factor in the longer lifespan, growing health-care costs and the expanding need for caregivers, and it seems clear that government, business and philanthropy need to think about how to keep mature employees happily employed. The good news is that baby boomers like to work. Some findings from our research on how metro Denver boomers see late-career employment: Six out of 10 plan to work beyond age 65. Half plan to change to part time or flexible work. Almost a quarter say they want to start a business. What matters most to late-career boomers are health-care benefits, involvement with others, retirement benefits and meaningful work. Many will need job income, but many others will keep working to remain productive, to enjoy workplace camaraderie and (particularly for men) because work is important to their identity. The not-so-good news is that few employers are thinking creatively about recruiting and retaining older, more experienced employees. Our thinking about work and retirement is antiquated. Boomers will trade off higher income for increased flexibility. Many want to work fewer hours, but still earn health benefits until they turn 65 and qualify for Medicare. The foundation has mobilized a group of boomer volunteers and others to find ways for boomers to live productive, meaningful lives as we move through our 60s, 70s, 80s and beyond. We hope this work will begin to shift public policy, business practices and the very way we think about tapping the human assets of older adults. We simply can’t afford to lose the talent, experience and leadership of the boomers through a failure to re-examine the shape and structure of work in our society. One of the biggest roadblocks is the way we think about the “R” word: retirement. For boomers, it’s a choice, but not the only one. Over time, we hope another “R” word will take its place: re-engagement. If tens of millions of boomers take the path of re-engagement in later life and redefine aging for succeeding generations, it will be their biggest contribution of all to social change. Sheila Bugdanowitz is president and CEO of Rose Community Foundation. Jean Galloway is principal of the Galloway Group, a consulting firm specializing in corporate philanthropy and community investment, and a trustee of Rose Community Foundation where she chairs its Committee on Aging. By Shepard Nevel When 14-year-old Marie sat down to discuss her college goals with her counselor at East High School, the advice she received was hardly encouraging. By Shepard Nevel When 14-year-old Marie sat down to discuss her college goals with her counselor at East High School, the advice she received was hardly encouraging. Despite the fact that Marie was a high-performing freshman in the top 10 percent of her class, the adviser told her not to waste her time. “You’re going to end up cooking or cleaning at somebody’s house.” Her face flushed with anger, Marie stood up, emphatically announced that “I am going to college,” paced quickly from the counselor’s office to the girls’ bathroom and began to sob. In fact, Marie Greenwood’s accomplished life could be considered an inspiration for the Denver school district’s energizing aspirations to transform urban education. Facing intractable racism at East, young Marie transferred in her sophomore year to West High, where the principal insisted that all students regardless of color would be treated with respect. Marie graduated third in her class and went on to Colorado State College of Education in Greeley (now the University of Northern Colorado) where she earned her degree in 1935. Marie recalls that when she started teaching 70 years ago, she had two goals. “I had to keep my job in the middle of the Depression and I had to keep the door open for others to come in.” Because the first African-American teacher hired by DPS on probation in 1934 did not work out, Marie was mindful that her success would affect other black teachers for years to come. And her starting teacher’s salary of $1,200 a year was like “manna from heaven,” Marie writes, because it enabled her to move her parents from a “dim basement apartment” to a more comfortable house. Every Child Can Learn is animated by a commitment to excellence that transcends race or income. “When I am teaching,” Marie writes, “no matter what the ethnic make-up of the class might be, those children are my children. I have control and I get the desired response.” After teaching at Whittier Elementary in northeast Denver until 1945, Marie went on maternity leave to start her family. She returned to teaching in 1953, first as a substitute and then in a permanent position two years later at Newlon Elementary in the Barnum neighborhood, a school that was all-white except for her own children. Newlon’s principal, Mildred Biddick, welcomed her to the school. Unfortunately, the school district was less receptive to the idea of an African-American teacher crossing the unofficial color line. The superintendent in charge of elementary education (named Bennett, no relation to current Superintendent Michael Bennet) tried to talk Marie into teaching at a northeast Denver school, which Marie declined. “I was the first American-American teacher to be assigned to an all-white school in the history of the Denver Public Schools,” Marie writes, “so every week Mr. Bennett called to see how ‘Mrs. Greenwood’ was getting along and Miss Biddick would tell him, ‘Mrs. Greenwood is doing just fine. She is one of my best teachers.’ By spring of 1956 he stopped calling.” The heart of Greenwood’s book is a collection of profiles of children who had been struggling, often labeled problem children at other schools, but who flourished under her tutelage. “Given time and patience,” Greenwood says resolutely, “every child can learn.” Marie is not the only pioneer in her family. Her late husband, Bill, who died in 1983, started his career at Lowry Air Force Base as an assistant custodian in 1940, cleaning the very offices that he would manage 10 years later as the base’s budget director and highest-ranking civilian. His office was right next to President Eisenhower’s “Summer White House” at Lowry. Although she retired from teaching in 1974, Greenwood continues to volunteer her time as a reading instructor at the K-8 public school in Montbello that bears her name. As DPS continues its commendable march toward reform, there is much to be learned by listening to the acquired insights of a remarkable woman who first stepped into a classroom, and into history, more than seven decades ago. Shepard Nevel, an attorney, has children enrolled in Denver’s public schools. By This Speakout has not been edited. By By Priscilla Dann-Courtney This Speakout has not been edited. By Priscilla Dann-Courtney Priscilla Dann-Courtney is a clinical psychologist and freelance writer. She is a resident of Boulder. By J. Bradford Churchill This Speakout has not been edited. By J. Bradford Churchill J. Bradford Churchill is a resident of Longmont. By This Speakout has not been edited. By By Andrew Wallach, Denver Like many people, I have looked on more than one occasion for a nongovernmental agency that uses volunteers and donations effectively and with a minimum of red tape to serve victims of international disasters. By Andrew Wallach, Denver Like many people, I have looked on more than one occasion for a nongovernmental agency that uses volunteers and donations effectively and with a minimum of red tape to serve victims of international disasters. Fortunately, at least one individual, and since then hundreds of others, have found a way to respond quickly and meaningfully to urgent needs local communities themselves identify after disasters. Hands On is the ultra-pragmatic vision of David Campbell, a generous New England businessman, some like-minded friends, and now more than a thousand volunteers. Most everyone involved has now shoveled mud, cleared adobe or brick rubble that was once someone’s living room, or cleaned mold from flood-battered homes. Or they may have helped local UNICEF staff and contractors set up and staff safe play centers for children of newly homeless families, or decorated simple wooden toys that will be gifts for local children, or filled backpacks with school supplies. In Pisco, a Hands On assessment team arrived 10 days after the Aug. 15 earthquake. Characteristically, they had already spent four days in the capital city of Lima learning about local resources and planning logistics. A few days later, Hands On staff had determined that volunteers could indeed help Pisco’s 30,000 homeless families with rebuilding, that the local government welcomed assistance, and that safe quarters for the volunteers could be acquired. On Sept. 8, three weeks after the quake, Hands On opened its center for Pisco volunteers. Volunteers are provided, at no charge, work tools, bunks, showers, and three meals a day. Lunches and dinners are prepared by two local women, who also help with laundry. (Hands On’s food budget and meals are similar to those of local communities.) Housekeeping, dishwashing, facility maintenance and field supervision are provided by volunteers. The benefits of Hands On work for volunteers are bountiful. The chance to work with local residents on demolition and simple construction projects they have requested is gratifying. Local residents frequently stop volunteers on the street to offer thanks and perhaps a shared beer. Work can be physically challenging if volunteers so choose. Pisco offers piles of rubble to clear and haul, collapsed rural irrigation ditches to rebuild, and, for now, a few small and simple prefabricated homes to assemble on cleared sites. But volunteers, who can choose new jobs each day, can elect less taxing work like the examples above. Recent volunteers have ranged from 20 to around 70 years of age. A typical Pisco volunteer is about 27. Hands On plans on being in Pisco at least through January, with many more volunteers very likely. For more on volunteering there, and to learn of some remarkable gift-giving opportunities, see their HODR.org Web site. One eloquent volunteer offering some farewell remarks paraphrased a favorite soccer player’s quote to describe Hands On: “Sometimes magic is little more than nothing.” In the case of Hands On, the means may be simple but the results are remarkable. Andrew Wallach (awallden@comcast.net) is a Denver resident temporarily living in the Peruvian Andes. He recently spent time volunteering with Hands On at their Pisco work site. By Mason Tvert, Citizens for a Safer Denver Should Denver law enforcers focus on muggings or marijuana? By Mason Tvert, Citizens for a Safer Denver Should Denver law enforcers focus on muggings or marijuana? Should they be fighting property damage instead of pot? Gangs and graffiti instead of ganja? Domestic violence instead of doobies? If you think so, then vote “Yes” on Initiated Question 100 (I-100), the final item on this year’s all-mail ballot in Denver. I-100 would designate possession of small amounts of marijuana by adults the city’s lowest law enforcement priority. In other words, it would direct the city to stop wasting its limited law enforcement resources — and our tax dollars — arresting adults 21 and older for possessing less than 1 ounce of marijuana. After all, Denver voters made it clear in 2005 that we do not want our city going out of its way to punish adults just for using a drug that every objective study has concluded is far less harmful than alcohol. Yet more adults than ever before — about 1,400 — were arrested in Denver for simple marijuana possession in 2006. To put this in perspective, consider Seattle, where a measure virtually identical to Initiated Question 100 was adopted in 2003. That city has seen a significant decline in adult marijuana arrests and prosecutions without any evident problems. Despite the city of Denver having about 17,000 fewer residents than Seattle, more than 23 times as many adults were arrested here for simple possession last year. This certainly did not lead to Denver being any safer, as Seattle maintained lower rates of violent crime and homicide during the same period. In fact, some Seattle city leaders are so pleased that they contacted Denver city leaders to let them know just how successful it has been. In formal letters sent to each of the Denver City Council members, Seattle City Council President Nick Licata and Councilman Tom Rasmussen wrote, “Seattle is proud to serve as an example of a city that has established a more sensible marijuana policy that is safe, effective and inexpensive.” Yet Denver’s city leaders have ignored this clear example of success, inexplicably choosing to fight the will of the voters rather than follow it. They say marijuana possession already is a low priority. Yet there is no doubt it is a higher priority here than it is in Seattle. They also continue to argue that marijuana possession is “just a $100 ticket” in Colorado. But they fail to take into account the multitude of consequences associated with one of these $100 tickets. Among the potential collateral damages for just one marijuana citation are loss of employment; the inability to gain future employment; loss of financial aid for college; loss of public housing benefits; loss of adoption privileges and the ability to serve as a foster parent; loss of Second Amendment rights to own a firearm; and, of course, the stigma associated with a drug conviction on one’s permanent criminal record. In the end, we must ask ourselves: Is it really worth it? Is it really worth disrupting and permanently damaging otherwise innocent people’s lives simply because they use marijuana? Is it really worth our police spending their time making these arrests when there are far more serious crimes occurring? Is it worth the time of our prosecutors, judges, and courts to deal with these cases when there are more pressing cases piling up each day? If you agree that is not worth it, please vote “Yes” on Initiated Question 100. Mason Tvert is the spokesman for Citizens for a Safer Denver. Find out more about Initiated Question 100 at www.SaferDenver.com. By Dave Schallert, Parker Imagine that you went to your local Grease Monkey or Jiffy Lube for a common oil change and no one there could or would tell you how much it cost. By Dave Schallert, Parker Imagine that you went to your local Grease Monkey or Jiffy Lube for a common oil change and no one there could or would tell you how much it cost. What if it had no prices posted for any of its services? How much for new wiper blades? How much for a new air filter? Wheel alignment? You certainly wouldn’t be able to figure out if you were getting a good deal. You also wouldn’t be able to compare its prices with anyone else’s in the oil change and car maintenance business. Now, let’s say you don’t care, because the work has to be done. So, you have the oil changed on your car. When the work on your car is done, imagine if the shop charged $200 for that oil change. But instead of you having to pay the bill with your own money, the Grease Monkey or Jiffy Lube simply sent the bill to your auto insurance company? Would you care? Would you know how much was charged only after your auto insurance company paid the bill? Would The Denver Post, Rocky Mountain News and every other Colorado media outlet be doing stories on how to fix Colorado’s auto insurance industry and demanding that uninsured motorists be provided with cheap or free auto insurance? Would a blue-ribbon commission be formed to look into what could be done about the looming Colorado auto insurance crisis? Would media stories be going on and on about the rising cost of auto care, as though this was an incontrovertible and inevitable fact of life? Or would the real question be why Grease Monkey and Jiffy Lube were charging people $200 for an oil change? Now, try to do the following with this story. Substitute health for auto, doctor or hospital for Grease Monkey/Jiffy Lube, and office visit for oil change, and you for your car, then re-read the story. Dave Schallert is a resident of Parker. By Grace-Marie Turner Is President Bush a liar who hates children? That’s what many of his critics are asking in the opinion pages of major newspapers across the country. Why else, they say, would he refuse to sign a bill providing health insurance to poor kids? By Grace-Marie Turner Is President Bush a liar who hates children? That’s what many of his critics are asking in the opinion pages of major newspapers across the country. Why else, they say, would he refuse to sign a bill providing health insurance to poor kids? This kind of rhetoric is wrong and misleads readers about the facts. There is no debate over whether to reauthorize the SCHIP program so it can continue to provide insurance to needy children. That’s a given. The debate is about whether children in middle-income families should be added. The president is absolutely right in insisting that SCHIP focus on its core mission of needy children. When SCHIP was created in 1997, the target population was children whose parents earned too much for them to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to afford private insurance. The president wants the program to focus on children whose families earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty level. In today’s dollars, that’s $41,300 a year. About two-thirds of the nation’s uninsured children already are eligible for either Medicaid or SCHIP but aren’t enrolled. Raising the income threshold won’t solve this core problem. The other big problem is that states are using SCHIP dollars to insure adults. Fourteen states cover adults through SCHIP, and at least six of them are spending more of their SCHIP dollars on adults than on children. For example, 78 percent of SCHIP enrollees in Minnesota are adults, 79 percent in New Mexico and 72 percent in Michigan. With these statistics in mind, the Bush administration issued a ruling in August requiring states to demonstrate they had enrolled 95 percent of eligible needy children before expanding the program. Yet the bill that Congress passed, and which the president vetoed, nullifies that ruling and effectively refuses to agree that needy kids should get first preference. Instead, the congressional measure would give $60 billion to the states over five years to enroll millions more “children” — although many of them will, in fact, be adults. Others will be from higher-income families. New York, for instance, could submit a plan that would add children in families earning up to $83,000 a year to SCHIP. New Jersey could continue to cover kids whose parents make up to $72,000. All the other states would be allowed to cover kids in families with incomes up to $61,000. Most children in these higher income families, unsurprisingly, are already covered by private insurance. According to the Congressional Budget Office, 77 percent of children in families earning more than twice the poverty line have private health insurance now. No one doubts that SCHIP is a vitally important program for needy children, and that our nation needs to do a better job of helping working families afford health insurance. But giving the states incentives to add middle-income kids to their SCHIP rolls will prompt families to replace private insurance with taxpayer-provided coverage. This is completely backward. The goal of SCHIP should be to provide private coverage to uninsured children. If Congress would send the president a bill that does that, he says he would sign it in a minute. Grace-Marie Turner is president of the Galen Institute, a nonprofit research organization focusing on free-market solutions to health care reform. By John J. Sweeney and Mike Cerbo The single most compelling reason to expand the State Children’s Health Insurance Program is also the simplest: It’s the right thing to do. In America, every child should have a fair shot at growing up to be an astronaut, a ballet dancer, a firefighter or president. No child should be forced to give up these dreams because of health problems that could be managed or even prevented with proper care. In America, every child should have health care. By John J. Sweeney and Mike Cerbo The single most compelling reason to expand the State Children’s Health Insurance Program is also the simplest: It’s the right thing to do. In America, every child should have a fair shot at growing up to be an astronaut, a ballet dancer, a firefighter or president. No child should be forced to give up these dreams because of health problems that could be managed or even prevented with proper care. In America, every child should have health care. If that’s not a good enough reason to vote to override President Bush’s veto of full funding for children’s health, there’s also a powerful fiscal argument. Prevention makes good economic sense. In today’s twisted health care marketplace, it’s about the only thing that does. At most, Bush says he will sign legislation that contains not a penny more than the existing level of funding for children’s health insurance. At today’s level, some children who have health care through SCHIP would lose their insurance, and none of the remaining 180,000 uninsured kids in Colorado would get covered. Bush’s veto comes at a time when fewer and fewer employers are offering health coverage to their workers, and increasingly those who are offered health insurance at work can’t afford to buy it. A recent study by the Kaiser Family Foundation shows that health insurance premiums rose at nearly double the rise in either workers’ wages or inflation. There are virtually no reasonable policy arguments for not extending coverage to families like these. SCHIP has been a success. The health status of those enrolled in the program has improved. That fact has implications any fiscal conservative should appreciate. Children with coverage are having fewer asthma attacks and therefore winding up in expensive emergency rooms a lot less. No surprise there. Prevention works. Studies have even shown that children enrolled in SCHIP saw a notable improvement in school performance and attendance. As the president who promised to “leave no child behind,” Bush knows that for education to make a difference in the life of a child, that child has to be healthy enough to show up for school and pay attention. An educated work force is vital to today’s information economy. The economic list goes on. Medical costs are responsible for as many as half the 1 million or so personal bankruptcies filed each year. Businesses lose productivity when working parents have to stay home with sick kids. Today’s unhealthy child is, without intervention, tomorrow’s chronic-disease patient. These fiscal realities beg the question of why Bush chose to veto health care for children while millions of working families live one broken bone or asthma attack away from financial ruin or worse. The fact that children’s health care is a good investment for the country should fit right in with his ideology. Perhaps he is concerned about the impact SCHIP will have on insurance company CEOs, who might lose a few million dollars. If that’s the case, it’s time the president get his priorities straight. Kids should see a family pediatrician regularly instead of whoever happens to be on call at the emergency room when someone’s sick. They should be helped to get healthy and stay healthy, not just treated when it’s too late. Children are our future, and more of them are uninsured than ever. John J. Sweeney is president of the AFL-CIO. Mike Cerbo is executive director of the Colorado AFL-CIO. By Ed Nichols As a fourth-generation Coloradan, I was honored to recently become the Colorado Historical Society’s president and CEO. In this position, I have a mandate to assist this 128-year-old organization to better promote and share Colorado history. By Ed Nichols As a fourth-generation Coloradan, I was honored to recently become the Colorado Historical Society’s president and CEO. In this position, I have a mandate to assist this 128-year-old organization to better promote and share Colorado history. The Colorado Historical Society has worked to create a world-class Colorado History Museum, but our current facility is inadequate to help us achieve our goals. In 2005, an Urban Land Institute study confirmed that CHS and the Colorado Judicial Department have outgrown their shared city block and that the museum should move to a new location. We investigated many sites for relocation, and, in the spring of this year, one distinct location rose to the surface: Civic Center. Why Civic Center? A civic center is a complex that contains governmental functions and offices, performing arts, museums and other cultural facilities. A civic center is also about people — where people gather to foster important civic and cultural exchanges on a daily basis. Most would agree that, apart from the annual festivals, Denver’s Civic Center park currently lacks this type of daily exchange. Why? A recent space-use analysis showed one reason may be because most people tend to skirt this area because of unclear entry points, a lack of amenities and perceived safety issues. CHS is proposing an estimated $100 million investment in Civic Center to develop a new Colorado History Museum on the west side across from the historic McNichols/Carnegie Library building. This plan also includes restoring the historic building, which would house the Stephen H. Hart Library and Denver’s Office of Cultural Affairs. Include amenities like food service and what is created is a venerable destination in Civic Center, one that attracts people from all over the state and the world daily. Tens of thousands of children, families and seniors — tourists and residents alike — already visit the Colorado History Museum. Relocating the museum into Civic Center doesn’t just provide CHS with a new location that will help us achieve our goals, it also is the location itself that is exceptional. The site reinforces to visitors and residents, locally and statewide, that we, as Coloradans, value our heritage. CHS and the city have discussed this proposal in a variety of public forums since July, and will continue the discussion until late October. During these discussions, some say Civic Center should remain as is. But is the status quo best for Civic Center? The city charter allows for a museum in Civic Center. So, if not this, then what better proposal is there to activate this space, while the museum and the McNichols restoration funding go elsewhere? I, for one, feel that the synergy of benefits for the museum, the McNichols building with the library and DOCA, Civic Center and a city-state partnership are a unique opportunity and warrant this move. It is a partnership that could help reclaim Civic Center as a place in which all are comfortable and proud to gather and explore who we are today, where we are going and the collective history that defines us. Therefore, I challenge that we discuss this proposal not in terms of what might be lost, but rather what will be gained. Let’s focus on how working together we can engage people in Civic Center. Ed Nichols is president and CEO of the Colorado Historical Society. He also serves as board chairman of the Central City Opera House Association. By Michael Stretchberry, Denver Vincent Carroll’s recent column “Doors half closed” (On Point, Oct. 2) is right on. Denver’s rec centers provide a very limited service. Not only are the center hours slim, but also the services offered are slim. And often I cannot rely on the services available on days and times as listed in the rec center catalog. By Michael Stretchberry, Denver Vincent Carroll’s recent column “Doors half closed” (On Point, Oct. 2) is right on. Denver’s rec centers provide a very limited service. Not only are the center hours slim, but also the services offered are slim. And often I cannot rely on the services available on days and times as listed in the rec center catalog. I use the Denver rec centers for aerobics fitness classes and the weight room. The weight rooms vary from crowded but good at Washington Park to limited at other rec centers. But most of my frustration is not being certain I can get a quality aerobics class at the rec centers. I have lived close to the Washington Park center since 1986 but have never thought the aerobics classes were worth using. Compare the Denver rec centers with the South Suburban Parks and Recreation system. Wow! They know how to offer rec services, and they have won awards for their rec centers. They are always open, even most holidays. And the hours are great; Saturday and Sunday when families want to use them, they are available all day! I don’t know of any Denver rec center open on Sunday near me, and on Saturday the services and hours are so limited as to be useless to me. If the Denver rec centers want to save money, why not just close them all day, every day? Of course, that is not what should happen. For the past few years, I thought the problem was that prices were too low and the rec centers could not afford to offer decent services. I always thought this was a “welfare” mentality. But prices have gone up recently and I think that is very appropriate. However, quality still lags, and new and attractive services have not been added. I have come to the conclusion recently that the organization of the rec centers is wrong. There are too many centers, and they are too small. Therefore, they don’t have the capability to offer a wide variety of services throughout the day. No wonder the traffic to the centers is slim. The South Suburban system has just a few centers, but they are big and can offer many rec opportunities for all ages. Denver needs to close down most of the small centers and make bigger regional centers with full services offered. An indoor pool with kiddie areas as well as adult areas would be great. I don’t know of any Denver center with this. Racquetball courts would be great. Today’s small centers don’t and can’t offer either pools or racquetball courts. So, why come to the Denver rec centers? There is nothing to do. The situation is a downward spiral: There are few reasons to go to a rec center, so few show up. The hours are cut to save money. Then, fewer people can come to the center, and fewer services are offered in those limited hours. The centers don’t take in enough money to operate with quality, so hours are cut to save money. You see the point. Something drastic has to happen. The current system is not working. Consider other ways of doing business: fewer but bigger centers? Add services like those mentioned above in affluent areas and charge more for those services? But don’t shut down each rec center for a week each year to clean them, as is the practice now. That is ridiculous; a sure way to lose clients. South Suburban never closes. Think outside the box. Michael Stretchberry is a resident of Denver. By Rep. Doug Lamborn Less than one year ago, Democrats campaigned and won on promises to create a more open and accountable legislative process in Washington. Has our new majority had a change of heart? Did they support earmark reform and transparency only because it sounded good at the time? I certainly hope not. By Rep. Doug Lamborn This Speakout has not been edited. Less than one year ago, Democrats campaigned and won on promises to create a more open and accountable legislative process in Washington. Has our new majority had a change of heart? Did they support earmark reform and transparency only because it sounded good at the time? I certainly hope not. While Republicans were still in the majority, they implemented key earmark reforms that required all earmarks in all tax, appropriations, and authorizing bills to be open to full disclosure. At the time, Democrats running for office said Republicans had lost the trust of the American people and these measures were too little too late. However, once these Democrats took control, they did away with these Republican earmark reforms, and their demands for transparency and openness abruptly ceased. Like many Americans, I assumed Democrats with their new majority would, with my full agreement, "adopt rules that make the system…transparent so that we don't legislate in the dark of night, and the public and other members can see what is being done." This was promised by Democrat Leader Steny Hoyer just two weeks after the 2006 election. Thus, in June, when Chairman David Obey announced that earmarks would be slipped into appropriations bills after the bill had been passed, my Republican colleagues and I were surprised and outraged. Republicans then fought strenuously for American taxpayers, arguing that they are entitled to know how every penny of their hard-earned tax dollars is being used. Under increasingly critical public pressure, the Democrat leadership finally relented and determined that earmarks would be included in some appropriations bills. However, they still refuse to bring earmarks within tax and authorizing bills up for public scrutiny. Republicans have continued to demand that this level of transparency be brought to every earmark request in every bill-whether it is authorizing, tax, or appropriations-as was the case at the end of 109th Congress. It is my firm belief that two elements of reform must be met. These are that each earmark must be transparent as to who requested it and that each earmark must be subject to debate. Some earmarks may be justified, if they address a legitimate national interest such as defense. It is also better when they come out of money already authorized, as opposed to creating a new program out of thin air. But this cannot be discerned without debate. Unfortunately, the Democrat leadership has not agreed to this type of reform. Nor has it permitted a vote on Republican Leader John Boehner's House Resolution 479, which would make all earmark requests open to challenge and debate on the floor of the House of Representatives. Last week Republicans filed a discharge petition, which I signed, in an effort to bring H.Res. 479 to the House floor for a vote. The petition currently has 160 signatures; it requires 58 more signatures to compel a vote. Openness and accountability are not partisan issues. I encourage my colleagues across the aisle to actively participate in this effort to create a culture of honesty and fiscal responsibility on Capitol Hill. I know that many of the Democrats elected last fall sincerely believe, as I do, that federal spending is out of control. Like me, they ran for office because they wanted to do something about it. Every day, as I walk through the halls of Congress I see signs posted outside the offices of members of the Blue Dog Coalition, a group of fiscally conservative Democrats in the House, which read "Today the U.S. National Debt Is: $8,994,000,000,000" and "Your Share is:29,000." Nonetheless, many have voted to increase federal spending by billions and done nothing to reform the earmark process. The American people made it clear that they do not tolerate hypocrisy, and currently, less than 12% of the public approves of the job Congress is doing. The time has come for the Democrats to uphold their campaign promises and join the Republicans who are fighting for transparency, accountability, and fiscal responsibility. Doug Lamborn (www.lamborn.house.gov) represents Colorado's 5th District in the U.S. House of Representatives. By Tina Myers, Westminster To abuse, assault and murder a 3 year old is okay. To have too many animals in your home, forget to pay traffic fine, shoplifting or some other crime that hurts know one but the person doing it, you find yourself in jail for several years. Murder a small child and spend little or no time in jail. What is wrong with today’s legal system? By Tina Myers, Westminster This Speakout has not been edited. To abuse, assault and murder a 3 year old is okay. To have too many animals in your home, forget to pay traffic fine, shoplifting or some other crime that hurts know one but the person doing it, you find yourself in jail for several years. Murder a small child and spend little or no time in jail. What is wrong with today’s legal system? Are we trying to slow down the population growth by allowing these people to go free and do it again? I am the mother of a now 16 year old boy who was abused from the time he was born until he was 4 months old when his mother and father nearly killed him. He is one of the lucky ones, why, because the Dr.’s and Nurses at Children’s Hospital cared enough to take control of the issue. Not child services. They wanted him to go back to parent’s who did not care enough about him to coddle and love, but to begin breaking bones when he was just a couple days old and continue until he suffered serious life threatening injuries at 4 months. The parents were ordered to spend 45 days in jail on work release. Spent only a very small part of that time. Wow, pretty serious for what they did. Over the past several years, there have been other infants and young child that have been murdered by his or her own parents or someone related. Children’s Protection Services were aware in all cases that the child’s well being was in jeopardy. What action did they take? NONE. Now the children are dead. The horrible story of Neveah Gallegos was the last straw. Maybe it is time for Child Protection Services, the Police and our legal system to begin doing what they are being paid to do. Protect the innocent, not sit on your butt at a big desk and get paid lots of money for doing it. How long does this have to go on? My son is a survivor and a very lucky young man to have had people care enough to make sure he never went back into an environment that would cause him more pain and possible death. What is our legal system and what do they do? Witness protection program? No, most of them are dead. Child abusers, molesters and murderers, they continue to walk the streets. Angel Montoya and Miriam Gallegos. Now what? They are free. Angel has been charged in the past for abuse and molestation, he continues to walk free. Who will be his next victim? Who will be the next innocent child beaten, murdered, molested that Children’s PROTECTION Services is aware of and what will they do about it? It is time to protect the small children who have done nothing wrong, the only thing they have done is love, and want to be loved in return. I hope all persons involved in this very sad story can live with themselves. The mother, Angel, the Case worker from Child Protection Services and the Judge. God Bless you Little Neveah. You are now at peace and will never have to undergo the ugliness of abuse or hurt again. The angels now surround you with their love. Rest in Peace Little Princess! Tina Myers is a resident of Westminster. By Krista Kafer, Littleton Recently, a small group of Boulder High School students staged a walkout because they could not bear to hear the words “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance. By Krista Kafer, Littleton Recently, a small group of Boulder High School students staged a walkout because they could not bear to hear the words “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance. One such student told the Rocky Mountain News the group will continue to protest until the school segregates those who wish to say the pledge so “the rest of the school doesn’t have to listen to them.” Colorado law, which requires school districts to provide an opportunity for willing students to recite the pledge, explicitly exempts students who wish to abstain. The offended in this case are every bit as hypocritical; their made-up substitute pledge references the U.S. Constitution, the very document that affirms every American’s right to free speech — even those Boulder High students who want to say the pledge. According to the First Amendment, the federal government cannot prohibit free speech, religious expression or peaceful assembly, control the press or prevent citizens from petitioning their government. On the contrary, the purpose of government, according to the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, is to protect individuals’ inalienable, God-given rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, of which freedom of expression is an important part. The purpose of government is neither to give nor take individual rights but to preserve them equally. Individuals have an equal right to expression because they “are created equal,” to quote the Declaration of Independence. No one has the right to silence another. In some countries, the government actively or passively enables one tribe, ethnic or religious group to trample the rights of others. The power of government is used to censor minority views. Blasphemy is punished. To be sure, the offended in America would like the government to grant them power over the speech of others. They would like a “heckler’s veto,” to use Chief Justice William Rehnquist’s words. The late justice noted in his concurring opinion in Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, upholding voluntary recitation of the pledge, that the “Constitution only requires that schoolchildren be entitled to abstain from the ceremony if they chose to do so.” Colorado’s Constitution is even more specific about freedom of expression. It says, “No law shall be passed impairing the freedom of speech; every person shall be free to speak, write or publish whatever he will on any subject.” Although the General Assembly may not infringe on the right of expression, it continues, those who abuse that liberty may be found guilty in court of libel by a jury of their peers. So what are the offended to do without a heckler’s veto? They can turn off the radio and quietly eat their pie. Alternatively, they can engage in the free discourse and debate that is essential to a thriving democracy. No matter, they cannot silence others. No one has a right not to be offended. Krista Kafer is a freelance writer living in Littleton. By Chris J. Wiant The ongoing coverage by the Rocky Mountain News of the work of the Blue Ribbon Commission for Health Care Reform (commonly called the 208 Commission) has, we hope, increased the public’s awareness of the problems associated with trying to provide coverage to the uninsured and underinsured, and reduce health-care costs for all Coloradans. By Chris J. Wiant The ongoing coverage by the Rocky Mountain News of the work of the Blue Ribbon Commission for Health Care Reform (commonly called the 208 Commission) has, we hope, increased the public’s awareness of the problems associated with trying to provide coverage to the uninsured and underinsured, and reduce health-care costs for all Coloradans. While 770,000 Coloradans are without health insurance, twice that number of citizens do not have dental insurance and, therefore, lack access for preventive and restorative services. They must wait until their dental problem becomes a medical emergency before they are likely to get service. However, if they live in one of the eight counties in Colorado without a dentist, they might have to travel a long distance even for emergency care. And only about half of our counties in Colorado even have a safety-net dental clinic for the underserved. Further complicating the problem, 18 counties in Colorado do not have a dentist who will accept Medicaid. And absolutely no public funding in our state pays for dental care for adults. The human and economic costs of dental disease are staggering. Pregnant women with untreated dental disease are at risk of giving birth pre-term. Those with diabetes have a harder time controlling their blood sugar. Immune-compromised individuals risk systemic infections stemming from oral infections. Pain from untreated oral disease leads to problems with eating, learning and speech, and results in lost time from work or school. Over the past five years, Caring for Colorado has invested $7.5 million to build the capacity of the state’s oral health safety-net providers. Through our Oral Health Improvement Project we learned that, on average, 50 percent of the children seen had untreated dental decay, making tooth decay the most common disease among children in Colorado. In addition, 15 percent of pregnant women seen had never been to a dentist before. Some communities in Colorado have been compared to Third World countries based on the level of dental disease seen in children there. I’m sure all Coloradans would agree that this unacceptable. Dental disease can lead to many of the same consequences as other serious infections in the body. However, we often neglect to consider that our oral health needs the same attention to prevention and treatment of disease. Poor oral health combined with the absence of accessible oral health services, will undermine the health improvements that Colorado hopes to get from its health-care reform efforts. Therefore, it is my hope that Colorado’s Blue Ribbon Commission on Health Care Reform takes seriously the need to include dental care as part of an overall strategy in fixing our health-care system in Colorado. Chris J. Wiant, M.P.H., Ph.D., is president and CEO of the Caring for Colorado Foundation. By Amanda Stevens, Lakewood Colorado has a new education ritual: the Back-to-School Scores Blitz. We devour the Rocky Mountain News’ CSAP edition every August, with shouts of praise and shivers of disappointment echoing from various corners of the state. With all these scores available, why are we still seeing so little progress, especially in the learning gaps between minority students and white students and between the rich and the poor? By Amanda Stevens, Lakewood Colorado has a new education ritual: the Back-to-School Scores Blitz. We devour the Rocky Mountain News’ CSAP edition every August, with shouts of praise and shivers of disappointment echoing from various corners of the state. With all these scores available, why are we still seeing so little progress, especially in the learning gaps between minority students and white students and between the rich and the poor? The reality is that more progress in student learning is already happening. The current reporting of Colorado Student Assessment Program test scores punishes where there should be praise. I disagree with those who see standardized tests as evil. On the contrary, CSAP helps me better understand my students and my own teaching. So what’s the problem? CSAP stops being a tool and becomes a bludgeon when it is mishandled. Consider for example my home turf. I teach in a small town in the heart of the Denver area — sandwiched between behemoths Denver, Littleton and Englewood — that values its small size. We are neighbors from one corner of our tiny district to the other. We take the triumphs and failures of our fellow citizens personally, especially the triumphs and failures of our schools. Under the current system of reporting scores, our district looks to be in a sorry state. As reported in the Rocky, we hold some of the lowest reading, writing and math scores in the metro area. We are categorized on our school report card as low achieving, with the minor note that we are improving. However, there is much to celebrate that is currently ignored, perhaps even unknown. Indulge me by reading a few highlights from our middle school: Sheridan eighth-graders improved in proficient paragraph writing, from 32 percent to 42 percent, and in proficient essay writing (generally five paragraphs long) from 40 percent to 68 percent. The only information reported by the state: 21 percent proficiency overall. In 2006, Sheridan Middle School was weak in vocabulary: 42 students with extremely low scores, and only five with advanced scores. Through hard work, we transformed our vocabulary scores: only 18 had extremely low scores, and now 18 held advanced scores — 12 of which maxed out the grading scale (the students earned every possible vocabulary point, getting no vocabulary questions wrong). We fulfilled all requirements for annual yearly progress at all grade levels (sixth, seventh and eighth) in reading. We actually met the requirements for annual yearly progress in math and reading in 48 out of 54 subscores. Our minority and English-language learners grow in learning at the same rate as our white and English-only students. The gap in learning is there, but these students are not falling further behind. In fact, our English-language learners consistently grow at a faster pace than other students. Economics is not destiny. Though 86 percent of our students receive “free or reduced” lunch status, a clear indicator that the family earns less than it needs to support all its members, our students accomplish great things. Why are they still subject to a system that does not give them their due? They deserve better. Compare students to their own performance in past years, rather than comparing one year’s eighth-graders to another year’s eighth-graders, which reveals little beyond the fact that no two groups of kids are the same. Compare districts with similar size and makeup, not merely geographic proximity; this will enable us to recognize, celebrate and learn from districts that succeed against the statistical odds. Report significant gains in subscores, rather than merely trumpeting failures in overall scores, which reveals the socioeconomic realities of a district more than its educational excellence or lack thereof. Stop highlighting the “best” and “worst” scores of schools with no regard to factors like income or the number of subgroups, unfairly rewarding predominantly white, middle-class schools. William Butler Yeats said, “Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire.” Scores are powerful. In today’s education sphere, statistics can be weapons that bludgeon or tools that build. Let us wield them with passion and compassion, with nuance and optimism. If you have the pleasure of knowing real students, not just their numerical representations, you too know they deserve it. Amanda Stevens is a language arts teacher at Sheridan Middle School. She is a resident of Lakewood. By Jessica Peck Corry You’ve got to give credit where credit is due. Ward Churchill is a man who will not give up. By Jessica Peck Corry You’ve got to give credit where credit is due. Ward Churchill is a man who will not give up. While the University of Colorado spent more than two years and hundreds of thousands of dollars to kick him off its Boulder campus, he’s back — now teaching an unsanctioned class that espouses the same discredited “facts” that got him fired in the first place. To Churchill’s misguided minions, he remains a hero in the crusade for academic free speech. Too bad they believe the First Amendment only applies to those who support their shared perspective. At a Tuesday evening lecture, titled ReVisioning American History: Colonization, Genocide and Formation of the U.S. Settler State, only those with favorable perspectives were allowed to attend. Two male organizers who doubled as bouncers turned away at least three male students, calling them “agitators.” At least one of the organizers also scuffled with a Boulder Daily Camera reporter who tried to enter the lecture. Ultimately, only 30 or so attendees — mostly bright-eyed followers drinking way too much of the Churchill Kool-Aid — made it past the screening process and inside the door to the classroom in CU-Boulder’s Eaton Humanities Building. In a written introduction to Tuesday evening’s lecture, as reported by the Camera, Churchill was not compensated for his time leading the first of what he hopes will be an ongoing course. It will carry no academic credit and, according to the introduction, is “in no sense bound by the rules supposedly governing courses offered in the university catalogue.” While Churchill’s actions as a disgraced former professor are certainly free from the confines of a simple course catalog, they are not free from the requirements of university policy governing public accommodations. CU specifically prohibits discriminatory actions by those hosting events anywhere on its taxpayer-funded campuses. First, even if the event was booked as “private,” university policy still dictates that event organizers must not discriminate against people on the basis of a variety of protected characteristics — including their creed or basic set of core beliefs. And second, while “private” event organizers are allowed to ban the media, why would they? What has Churchill got to fear by respecting the free speech rights of others, including reporters? If he believes in the power of his positions, he should welcome all willing to hear them. This all reminds me of a lesson that CU should have learned years ago. In 2003, the university came under public scrutiny after the Independence Institute revealed that CU students were using university rooms to host racially segregated events. While the discrimination then was based on race — and Tuesday’s was based on ideology — the intent of organizers remains the same: Segregation is OK as long as they’re the ones perpetuating it. For those who missed out on Tuesday’s event, there is good news. According to organizers, he will be back at least three more times in the next month, with future sessions focusing on colonialism, genocide and racism. But if you happen to disagree with him, just hope that you can get a foot in the door. Body armor may be a good idea. Jessica Peck Corry is the director of the Independence Institute’s Campus Accountability Project. She can be reached at Jessica@i2i.org. By Mark Speckman I read the recent Rocky Mountain News article on the Golden Fire Department billing people for their services outside of their jurisdiction. While the city of Golden may make this sound as though it is an ethical and fair practice I do not believe that it is. To me it is a shameless attempt to shake people down for money. Writing off the majority of what they are owed doesn’t make it right. This Speakout has not been edited. By Mark Speckman I read the recent Rocky Mountain News article on the Golden Fire Department billing people for their services outside of their jurisdiction. While the city of Golden may make this sound as though it is an ethical and fair practice I do not believe that it is. To me it is a shameless attempt to shake people down for money. Writing off the majority of what they are owed doesn’t make it right. The article said that Alpine rescue was on scene but did not make the rescue but would have done so for free. Did anyone offer Mr. Seals the option of picking his rescuers? I can’t imagine that anyone would pick the agency that wanted to charge over an agency that would do it for free. I am familiar with both organizations. I have been a paramedic since 1984. I have an extensive resume in emergency medical services. If Golden does not want to expend the resources on nontaxpayers then they should have left the rescue to other agencies. They would argue that they are legally obligated to respond. They may have a point, but there are other agencies that would have responded (as evidenced by the fact that Alpine rescue did respond). To me it comes back to what the reasonable man could have expected. If I get a ride in an ambulance I can reasonably expect that I am going to be billed for their services. If I am fortunate to have health insurance they probably would have paid the bill. I have the opportunity to prepare for the financial obligation. Mr. Seals had no way of knowing that if he had an accident that he was going to be billed for the rescue and subsequently no way to prepare for it should the need arise as it did in this case. Would someone who was hit by drunk driver be charged for extrication services when the only thing they did wrong was put themselves at risk in an area that Golden might respond to? Who is monitoring Golden for ethical conduct and billing practices? The questions just keep coming. It would be interesting to know (as a resident of the West Metro Fire Protection District) why they didn’t pursue trying to get some money. Did they not pursue it because they felt it was unethical and unfair? Having said all of this I need to make a couple of points and declare my biases. I am all for billing people who ski out of bounds or take reckless chances. They know what they are doing and are assuming the risk. It isn’t clear in your story if Mr. Seals was acting in a reckless manner. I would think not as he was not charged with criminal activity and no one seems to have made that allegation. I understand that running a fire department is expensive. When I was last in management in emergency medical services it was costing about $350,000 per year to keep one paramedic-staffed ambulance in service 24/7. I am sure it much higher now. Money is always tight. Good stewardship is important everywhere but what Golden is doing just doesn’t seem right. My view of this is tainted, as I believe that everyone should have universal access and coverage for basic health care. In the end it seems to me that Golden is being opportunistic and taking advantage of situations to try and scrounge a few extra dollars. I agree with Alpine Rescue. Even though I am a health-care provider, I will think twice about calling for help. Imagine someone without my training and experience trying to avoid calling for help and the end result is that more people get hurt or even killed. Is that good public policy? For the amount of money Golden is collecting I would think that it would not be worth their effort or the negative publicity. I encourage the Rocky to contact other agencies and find out their policies. This issue deserves public discussion. As Jefferson County Sheriff Ted Mink pointed out, it is pretty rare for departments to engage in this practice. I hate to legislate a solution for this, but if it becomes widespread practice it may require one because it is just plain wrong. Mark Speckman is an EMT-paramedic. By Daryle Conquering Bear, Denver Today, there are more than 8,100 children in foster care in Colorado. By Daryle Conquering Bear, Denver Today, there are more than 8,100 children in foster care in Colorado. They will remain in the foster-care system for an average of almost two years, and 40 percent will move more than three times. Too many will be separated from their brothers and sisters, be moved far away from friends and family, and will never know when — or if — they will come home again. As a member of the Lakota Sioux tribe, I also loved my culture. I looked forward to the day when I could participate in powwows and sweat lodges — rites of passage that would mean that I was becoming an adult. Foster care took both my family and my culture away. When I entered foster care, I was separated from my brothers and sisters. At first, we saw one another every week, and tried to stay as close as we could. But then my brothers and sisters were moved to another town and I didn’t see them for more than a year. One brother ran away from his group home and was sent far away. I moved four times while I was in foster care — living in two group homes and two foster homes. Moving from place to place and getting used to different schools and rules made it hard to stay connected to my culture and my family. I missed so many important moments – my sister’s birthday, my brother’s high school graduation, Christmas and other holidays. Culturally, I wasn’t able to participate in the events that I had so looked forward to. As a result, I often feel like an outsider in my own tribe. During my time in foster care I read books about ceremonies and events that I should have been experiencing firsthand. Today, at events like powwows, I feel like a spectator, not a participant. It doesn’t have to be this way. Changes can be made to the foster-care system that would allow young people to stay connected to two things that define them — their family and their culture. Also, Congress is considering the Tribal Foster Care and Adoption Access Act. This would allow Indian tribes direct access to federal funds to help children and families in their communities. If this had been enacted when we were entering foster care, maybe we could have had been placed with an American Indian foster family who would have helped us to remain close to our culture. Or maybe my family could have received the support we needed to be able to stay together. My experiences in foster care have taught me how important culture and family are. We need to make certain that no other child has to endure the unnecessary losses I did. Daryle Conquering Bear is a student at Northeastern Junior College in Sterling and is a member of the state Task Force on Foster Care and Permanence. He is a resident of Denver. By Tristan Gorman This Speakout has not been edited. By Tristan Gorman By Jennifer Young At the eastern edge of Colorado’s rugged San Juan Mountains, along the headwaters of the Rio Grande, lie 22 miles of rail — a small section of which I clambered over as a child. Now older, I walk my dog down the dormant tracks, stomping through thick brush and skirting aspens that have sprouted between the rotting ties. I let go of the leash and watch the part-sled dog bound in and out of the wildflowers. By Jennifer Young At the eastern edge of Colorado’s rugged San Juan Mountains, along the headwaters of the Rio Grande, lie 22 miles of rail — a small section of which I clambered over as a child. Now older, I walk my dog down the dormant tracks, stomping through thick brush and skirting aspens that have sprouted between the rotting ties. I let go of the leash and watch the part-sled dog bound in and out of the wildflowers. Soon, our modest excursions will come to an end. Tourists, as many as 600 a day, will ride a train through this river valley, resurrecting a railroad long discarded. Resurrection, however, is pitting one community against another and adding spice to my family’s dinner conversations. The railroad, part of the original Denver & Rio Grande built in the 1870s, connects the small towns of South Fork and Creede. Two dozen miles separate these rural communities; many more separate their aspirations. South Fork residents view a tourist train as a boost to their flagging economy while the majority of Creede prefers, like my parents, to keep its town small and familiar. Opponents are trying through litigation to silence the coming whistle, but so far, the train is still on track, with volunteers at work on restoration. It is an old story: change confronts status quo; quo resists; change comes anyway. It is an old story unfolding anew here, where railroads are remnants of the Old West, visible reminders of the race for ore that pushed settlements farther into the frontier. These aging lines are now hastening forward the New West, where tourism thrives — some say leeches — on nature’s nexus with history. For less than $100, a tourist can discover wildlife, rousing scenery, ramshackle mines and Pony Express hideouts — all from the belly of a train. As Frederick Jackson Turner once observed, “The appeal of the undiscovered is strong in America.” Three miles outside of South Fork, on the way to Creede, sits my family’s cabin, separated from the river by the railroad. The two ribbons of steel masquerade as an appendage to our property. We sometimes position our cheap lawn chairs in the middle of the tracks to get a better look at Del Norte Peak. We don’t own them, but somehow the tracks feel like ours. The real owner, Don Shank, president of the Denver and Rio Grande Historical Foundation, purchased the right of way in 1999, after decades of disuse. Shank points to the Durango & Silverton Narrow Gauge, which hauls more than 200,000 tourists a year, as a success worth emulating. For Mom and Dad, Shank is persona non grata. It would be easy to dismiss my parents’ sentiments as the cry of the NIMBY. But they came here, to this land of soaring cliffs, majestic aspens and bad Mexican food, to escape the inertness of suburbia. Why should they trade the quietude of morning — now spent gazing at the river and sipping coffee — for the shrill sound of a train? In Creede, people worry that it will alter not just their mornings but their way of life. For them, the lyrics of folk singer Richard Thompson (All that’s left now of the old days — damned ol’ coyotes and me) are more cautionary than entertaining. But it is the old days of the West that charm and entice the tourist. The frontier once satisfied a zeal for independence and a longing for expanse. Now, left without a frontier, tourist trains help recast one. In our cabin hangs a painting of the Rio Grande and Denver Southern. It is affective, the image of the train moving swiftly through the mountains on a snowy evening, conjuring up romantic notions of what came before, of men and women in search of destiny, however manifest. It is this abiding spirit of the pioneer that tugs. My parents might scoff at this delicate treatment of the train (as well they should), but come on — trying to stop a train is like, well, like trying to stop a train. As for my dog and me, we will listen for the whistle and then find a different path for our walks. Jennifer Young is a freelance writer living in Colorado Springs. By This Speakout has not been edited. By By Mike Archer This Speakout has not been edited. By Mike Archer. . . .
A total of 76 percent of person with disabilities surveyed do not believe that the restrictions on mechanized use in the Wilderness Act diminish their ability to enjoy wilderness.
Besides, any game warden will tell you that 9 out of 10 folks on ORVs are young men in their 30s, healthy and fully capable of walking. They make a conscious choice to use ATVs—cutting corners and doing things the easy way.
Like Paul Vetrees, I’m a veteran, and like Paul, I find the NRA’s use of elderly hunters and Iraq veterans to support its position of supporting the ruin of wildlands and wildlife despicable. I hope you do too.
David A. Lien is the
[
[
[
[5]
[
youreokkid.com.
As an Armenian American, I am offended at the lowest common denominator in our collective thinking: A resolution condemning
Turkey has many issues today, some still stem from their ancestral doings. Current issues in Turkey include an over 11. .
Fast forward to 2007: We support the Kurds for their help in Iraq while we support Turkey for allowing us to use Incirlik Air
At the same time, The U.S. brought Turkey into NATO, significantly built up its military and consistently backed its membership in the European Union. Washington granted most-favored-nation trading status to Turkey, resulting in some $7 billion in annual trade between the two countries and $2 billion in U.S. investments there. Remember when Ankara turned down Washington’s request to use Turkish bases to launch the Iraq invasion? Ankara just recently ignored Washington’s protests by massing 60,000 troops at the Iraq border this month as a prelude to a widely expected attack in Iraqi Kurdistan. Ironically, the cyclical destructive element of . .
Give bicyclists a brake — share the road
This particular accident occurred as I was crossing the street on a crosswalk, and collided with the car. I had looked before crossing, but failed to see the vehicle, and she failed to yield, as well. She sustained an injury solely limited to her car
It is Colorado state law that when riding upon or along sidewalks or crosswalks, cyclists be given the same rights as pedestrians. However, local ordinances prevent this
Especially in downtown Denver, bikes are fast! But to fight the misconception car drivers have of bicycles is difficult, especially without a casing of metal, plastic, and airbags surrounding you. So, if cyclists aren’t legally allowed on the sidewalk, and we have to fight to remain on the road, then where should bicycles be ridden? I think the answer to this question is quite simple and should be obvious: bike lanes!
Let’s be honest, there are tons of bikes in the Denver-metro area; it’s a great city to ride a bike in. There are some bikes lanes on streets mainly in the suburbs, but I think they should be put in on every road! It would be a very beneficial thing to do
GUEST COLUMN: A national primary?
Why? Is it because the small, homogenous populations of Iowa and New Hampshire are representative proxies for primary voters across the country? Um, no. Is it because the two states represent important economic or social sectors that are critical to the future of the republic? Um, no.
After all, it is the president of the United States we are electing, not the governor of Iowa.
A hollow Olympic dream
Flight students around the country hope to see a bright future in the field
Beltway proposal a boondoggle
I think policy-makers ought to be accountable. That means no 99-year contracts. It means not building an unnecessary vanity beltway. It means not selling our infrastructure to foreign companies — especially one like Brisa, which comes into the game with negative bond ratings. It means not guaranteeing foreign companies’ profits at the expense of our citizens.
At issue is whether unions and other dues-based organizations should be given access to city employees’ paychecks, or whether these groups should collect money directly from their members. Question 200 would take our city government out of the role as middleman and leave employees’ private decisions private.
Right now, there is nothing preventing any group, including political groups, from coming in and collecting automatic deductions from city employees’ paychecks. Some people might like the idea of the NRA raising extra money that way, and others the ACLU. But that shouldn’t be the role of government.
As long as the money that funnels through the city payroll system can come back to finance a candidate’s election or influence her vote on a specific issue, we citizens can lose confidence in our officials. Passing Question 200 prevents the problem.
The city would be safeguarded from making financial transactions for special interests, but would keep deducting the things it’s supposed to deduct. Our county commissioners had the foresight to approve this policy, and no harm has been done.
Like Arapahoe County, Centennial’s payroll system still will be required to withhold taxes, make payments for health insurance and deposit pension funds, and fill court-ordered obligations to collect alimony and child support.
As for city employees who wish to have deductions made for their favorite charities
All this also means the city payroll department will stay focused on essential services, and only on charitable causes close to the heart of its employees.
Employees who want to give money to associations, dues organizations, or political groups will have the same right to do so. Personal checks and electronic deposits through banks or credit unions give them that right and give them that control, but will keep government out of it. Question 200 is just the right thing to do.
History museum doesn’t belong in Civic Center
So now that Civic Center Park is the preferred site it needs to be sold to the public. To this end there are several arguments. The first being that many historic plans show a twin building to the Carnegie building. But one has to remember that the size of the park and elements within it have changed over the years, as well as the density around it. Once the City and County building was constructed, there was no longer a mention of a “mirror building.” I invite you to go to the Greek Theater and imagine a four-story building rising up10 feet away from its steps. Or stand on the corner of 14th and Bannock and imagine a building blocking your view of the park.
Much stress has been placed on the ability of the museum to activate the park, but can it really? Once the visitors come in the front door of the museum, they will need to have a reason to go out the back door and into the park. The same social ills and neglect that keep people out of the park today will still exist tomorrow. A building, in and of itself, won’t change them. There has been some money committed in the proposed bond issue to fix some of the historic structures, but there needs to be much more of a commitment if the park is to become a place to enjoy for an hour or an afternoon. More activities like the Civic Center Conservancy’s Farmers Market, or a cultural center in the Carnegie come to mind.
And that brings us to another selling point. If we let the State build the museum in the park, they will renovate the Carnegie. But this renovation was also included in the two other proposed sites and shouldn’t be the deciding factor. The renovation of the Carnegie is an important part of the park’s master plan and the City should find a way to do it regardless. Giving away open space in our park should not be the price tag.
And we can’t ignore the future. What happens when the museum needs to expand? It has already moved three times in its history. Unless we give up more open space the museum will have to move, leaving the City with an aging building in Civic Center Park that can only be used as a museum.
The Colorado History Museum is an important institution for the State and the City. Our Mayor and our Governor should give it a higher priority than empty office space, commit the necessary funds, and find it a home without compromising downtown open space.
The ‘Islamofascist’ lie
Fascism, an authoritarian ideology that places nation (and often race) above the individual, is characterized by the presence of a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition. These criteria are not met by any Islamist movement (or Arab government, for that matter). Even al-Qaida doesn’t resemble what we think of as a fascist movement (e.g., Franco’s Spain or Mussolini’s Italy); it lacks the nationalist and racial dimension, and its targets are for the most part the nationals of countries that are attacking Arab or Muslim countries — not quite the same thing as forcibly suppressing (domestic) opposition.
In fact, referring to Islam as a single entity is inaccurate. It is a religion believed in by hundreds of millions of people around the planet, and it is broad enough to encompass hundreds of currents and points of view. A monolithic Islam or Muslim point of view does not exist.
Not surprisingly, the most incessant warnings of potential Islamofascists lurking around every corner tend to come from neoconservatives who are staunch supporters of Israel and who advocate wars against Arab and Muslim countries in part to advance what they refer to as Israel’s security.
The list of proponents (by no means exhaustive) includes David Horowitz, founder of Students for Academic Freedom (a group that monitors the political leanings of academics and claims that professors treat conservative students unfairly) and editor of the conservative pro-Israel Web site FrontPage Magazine; neoconservative Frank Gaffney, founder and president of the think tank Center for Security Policy; one-time CIA Director James Woolsey, who is a member of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) Board of Advisors and has called for the bombing of Syria; defeated Senator Rick Santorum, who now as program director of the Ethics and Public Policy Center promotes the theme that America is slumbering while “Islamic fascism” gathers steam; Eliot Cohen, a neoconservative advisor to US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice who began advocating war against Iraq soon after the 9-11 attacks despite the lack of a connection between that country and the attack; and columnist Clifford May, who warns of “jihadists” and “Muslim supremacists” on the warpath.
Pro-Israel advocates lead the vilification campaign against Islam and Arabs — as a people, a civilization, and a culture. They would have us believe that Muslims around the world pose a threat to the United States and that their ultimate goal is to impose Islamic law on the western world — a gutsy line of attack to take at a time when Muslims are being killed in record numbers in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, and the occupied Palestinian territories.
And now these same feverish minds have formalized their obsessions and taken them to college campuses around the country. The vilification campaign, labeled Islamofascism Awareness Week (22 -26 October) and spearheaded by Horowitz, includes on its roster of speakers well-known vilifiers of Arabs and Islam. In addition to Horowitz and Santorum, there is Daniel Pipes, founder of Campus Watch (another watchdog group that has dossiers on faculty who are the least bit critical of Israel and its policies) and a virulent attacker not only of what he chooses to define as “radical Islam” but also of American Muslims, whose affluence, stature, and enfranchisement he views as threatening. Pipes is leading the attack against an Arabic language bilingual school in Brooklyn on the grounds that teaching Arabic leads to teaching Islam and pan-Arabism, which are dangerous to US students.
Another “expert” speaker is Robert Spencer, director of Jihad Watch (a program of the David Horowitz Freedom Center) and author of several Islam-bashing books.
The threat to the US does not come from Islam or from Muslims but rather from increasingly criminal US policies, advanced by the war hawks in government, think tanks, and in the media. Our lawless, unprovoked pummeling of Iraq appalls the world: 100,000 Iraqis killed in the first Gulf war, 1 million through the medieval-type sanctions that the US engineered, and about 1,083,000 Iraqis since the 2003 invasion (antiwar.com estimate). The same cheerleaders of the Iraq war are urging a US attack on Iran (an item high on Israel’s agenda). A campaign has been underway to demonize Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, and sanctions are being threatened. The pattern is sickeningly familiar.
When a religion is vilified, those who believe in it can be disposed of without creating a domestic uproar.
That seems to be the real purpose for using the Islamofascist label. We must reject the bogus excuses given by the US government to wage perpetual war on third-world nations for the sole purpose of securing US and Israeli hegemony over the region.
The devil is in the health-care details
This chart compares the payments that different categories of payers pay and it is very revealing. First, private sector payers, essentially everyone with insurance, is paying 31
Medicare and Medicaid pay 25
There is another group of payers who represent less than 10
I suspect that this situation is driving the health
The cruel irony is that health reform as proposed by the 208 Commission will do nothing to relieve the stressed circumstances of private
Hospitals, in the very short run, might shift costs less from payer to payer, but their costs will continue to rise and inflation will wipe out any gains made. It will be like the false promises of removing no
More than anything, the Lewin Group analysis demonstrates that the rivalry in the health
Federal Center health concerns
The Lone Ranger is tossing off a shot of whiskey with the gang. They have promised him a piece of the action, and he has laid down his six-shooter.
When the people come to him with their hands clasped in a plea to save the park, he sneers at them like Dick Cheney. He is a law unto himself. There will be no glorious last-minute rescue, no reining in the runaway greed that covets Denver’s jewel, the People’s park. The Lone Ranger has sold out. Worse, he may have planned the whole thing.
The stated mission of the Colorado Historical Society, which runs the Colorado History Museum, is to ‘collect, preserve, and interpret the history of Colorado for present and future generations.’ Civic Center Park (accent on the PARK) is in the most important historic district in the state. So the Colorado Historical Society is going to take care of the park alright—it’s going to move in and spread out, in the misguided hope of boosting sagging attendance at the Museum. The City will not protest because it believes, by some unfathomable logic, that this will move the transients out of the park (it will?). The State will not protest, as it needs to slot this institution somewhere central in Denver, difficult in so expensive, so densely settled an area. Can’t you just see them looking out the window at that huge “unused” expanse of trees and lawn right in front of them, saying ‘Hey, we could kill two or three birds with one stone here: Not only do we solve the problem of where to relocate the Museum, but we overcome any objection by the Historic Preservation Committee of the CHS by giving it to them. Brilliant! Bwah-ha-ha-ha!
Who’s left to defend the Park? Only the People. And the People are being asked to vote on some bonds soon, bonds for “maintaining civic center park” (Issue No. 1E) and refurbishing city buildings (Issue No. 1F). Could that be where the money for the museum relocation project is hiding? You want to keep your park, People? Then you know what to do. You, the People, are the new, the true Lone Ranger now
Mostly wrong on warming
Today I read the opinion piece, “Stripping down the price of health care
He used the analogy of Jiffy Lube submitting your claims to a third party insurance company. First, this does happen when you get into an auto accident. Your repairs are submitted via third party claims, and you never know what the real cost of repairs are. If an auto repair shop does their job right, they tell your insurance company what they need. Then they do it faster, cheaper, and pocket the extra money.
But, let us continue to extend this analogy to health care. Let’s say that you are the owner of Jiffy Lube, and you are not allowed to charge what you want for your services. Let’s say that you have to submit your charges to a third party. Let’s call that company United CarCare, or Pacifi-CAR, or perhaps the government funded Medi-CAR. And let’s say that for every oil change you did, they paid you a different price. Moreover, they will not tell you what they will pay you. They claim that they never received your bill, even though you submitted it electronically and they sent you an electronic receipt. Then they won’t pay you, because they claim you submitted it too late.
Then, United CarCare arbitrarily reduces what they pay you every year. They tell you that the wiper blades you replaced should have been done at another appointment, and therefore, they do not have to reimburse you for the wiper blades. And well, the price of oil has gone up, but they feel that it has been factored into what they paid you.
Oh wait! It gets more fun! Because they never pay you in less than 90 days, you have to hire a
United’s response is that their costs have risen dramatically, and it’s all your doctor’s (I mean Jiffy Lube’s) fault. It’s all his fault even though they just raised your insurance rates by 30%, and they raised your deductible by 30%. And, well, how can they pay their poor, desperate CEO the $1
Meanwhile, all of your clients are mad that their deductible has gone up, and they never pay you the money that they owe. You eat that money (usually in the $100,000 range) every year. Why? Because all of your clientelle think you’re a rich doctor (I mean Jiffy Lube owner)
I would be amazed if Mr. Schallert would give up nearly 20 years of his life and hundreds of thousands of his hard
Talk to all of the people in Canada who come across the border to get life
There may be some benefits to goverment
The government needs to help the people who cannot help themselves. The poor and the working class who are underinsured need desperate help. But you cannot keep asking the medical community to foot the bill. We will all need to pay our fair share, and stop complaining! Stop blaming your doctor for this mess, it’s not his/her fault! I, and many other doctors, went into this work because we wanted to make a difference in people’s lives. In pediatrics, we truly love the work. We love children. But it is a very complex job. None of us like the business side of medicine.
Follow the money on the upcoming bond/tax increase elections
And, many editorials telling voters to approve all 9 issues
And, many editorials telling voters to approve all 9 issues
This election is squarely about Denver citizens and taxpayer
Conclusions:
a)
b)
. . . . . . . . . .
But every year the press reports that the Cop. . . . . .
Something that is not advertised is that for the past three years there has been a conference in Denver on the same day as the Columbus Day protest “Ending Colonial Legacies” (the press is aware.) This conference was created by Indian people for Indian people in order to give the Indian people who are sick of Glenn Morris, Russel Means and Ward Churchhill’s exploitation of Indian people (just to get a good photo shot) in Denver an alternative to the protest.
Most importan. .
Of course Glen Morris would know this. .
Once the connection was made, and Bin Laden was pegged as the the terrorist behind all the attacks against us, the media went along and al qaeda and Bin Laden have been joined at the hip ever since.
Paying for others’ health care
But, there is a glitch. You are basically healthy. You exercise, eat right and have not yet hit the “zone” where life’s chronic abuses have become illness. So, here you are struggling to pay the rent and make payments on your car and student loans and a lion’s share of your income is going to pay for something for someone else or for illus
My family from their beginning here has championed America. They have stood up and strived to be American. English was mandatory. “We are in America now. We speak American.” My family has a certain pride when it comes to patriotism. It was a privilege to become American. America stood for individualism and opportunity.
My wife and I moved from California to Colorado this year, in a way coming back to my American roots. And I have a warning to Colorado from my experiences in the state I grew up in.
Today there are over 20 million people in this country who mostly refuse to learn English, resist assimilation into American culture, and refuse to cast off the binds of the “Old Country.
One way outlaw immigrants resist assimilation into our culture is tenement housing. The standard of living in many other countries around the world is considerably lower than ours. It is a way of life to have as many as four families living in one dwelling unit, each family sharing a room. This sort of tenement housing is necessary because of the horrid state of their economy. Outlaw immigrants who started coming to the United States during the last “amnesty” outbreak during the mid-1980s, saw no problem with sharing housing among several families. For example, a family would go to an apartment and rent a four-bedroom unit. Three other families would chip in for the deposit. The four families would live in the apartment and save a lot of money by splitting the rent. Landlords began to get wind of this and started charging more for rent. The four families would easily afford the increase.
Rents began to go up. The same happened to the housing market. The housing market in California was affordable to most middle-income families during the early 1980s. With a large portion of migration into California being outlaw immigrants since then, several families would get into a single home. These homes are jokingly called “clown houses.
Because of their outlaw status, many of the drivers in California do not have a license and therefore are not compelled to get insurance. The State Legislature of California has been trying to issue a driver’s license to outlaws. Their claim is that by giving driver’s licenses to outlaws, it will compel them to get insurance. If these outlaws have been driving with no license or a fake license for however long successfully, why would they stop now and have to pay insurance? Outlaws also tend to be overly cautious while driving and will go the minimal speed. .
Outlaw immigrants also take advantage of our education system. I remember one week day about 15 years ago, I was taking the trolley (light rail) from San Diego down to the International Border. I was the only passenger in the car. It was about 2:45 in the afternoon. At a stop in Chula Vista (a few miles from the Border) school busses were dropping off a whole lot of students with backpacks and lunchboxes. These children rushed to the trolley and filled the car I was in. Not one word in English could be heard. The end of the trolley line is only 200 feet from the International Border Crossing. When we reached the end of the line, all the children got up and filtered through the Crossing. This happens every school day. .
A few months ago it was big news that emergency rooms all over Southern California were closing down. The main reason for this colapse was due to people having no way of paying and the hospital, by law, having to treat them. It is NO secret that the majority of these people are outlaw immigrants. The health care system in California was being drained financially by outlaws that would use their services without the threat of deportation. These emergency rooms were vital to many citizens who rightly deserved their services.
Every single outlaw immigrant in this country who trampled across our border has trampled across the dignity, national ethic and service to this country in three great wars, of my ancestors. They will hijack our political system by calling those who oppose them racist. In a way, hijacking the work of great Americans like Martin Luther King Jr. by using the “race card
Sam Gallucci is a resident of Castle Rock.
Posted by denver-admin at 12:00 AM
| Comments (2)
| TrackBack
For over two hundred years there was no compulsory education in this country. It was only in the 1870’s that states started mandating, under threat of force, that children begin attending schools up until a certain age. In places like Barnstable, Massachusetts government force meant going to school, quite literally, at gunpoint. This is a history the children of Boulder have most assuredly never learned or that those who indoctrinate them have never taught. But while we are certainly less free than our ancestors, we can rest assured that our schools have become the “great melting pot” when it comes to indoctrinating our children in what it means to be an American, right? Not anymore. And here is where the defenders of government education fail to recognize just what it is they have wrought.
You see, when you argue for compulsory schooling, what you get is what the government gives you in a one size fits all package. Parents are told where to send their kids to school based on their ZIP code, period. Should you wish to exercise the same freedom to choose that one uses whenever shopping for food, gas, or toothpaste, your choices are to either homeschool your children or send them to a private school despite the fact you already pay taxes for the government schools you have deemed unfit to educate your children in the first place.
Those who continue advocating for the current government monopoly in education must understand the consequences of the one size fits all deal you are getting. In exchange for a “free education” you get government indoctrination. From math programs that fail to teach students multiplication tables to reading programs that de-emphasize phonics and leave many of our students illiterate, you get whatever curriculum, pedagogy, and values the state is cooking.
This Boulder nonsense should also put to bed the oft repeated argument against school choice that bloviates about how our government must run education so that we can all be assimilated in “common American values.”
As we see in Boulder the last thing they are getting in their schools are values that most Americans share. If you doubt it, go visit your local high school sometime and start randomly asking students to recite for you even two of the rights contained in the Bill of Rights, and to define what those rights mean. Their answers will tell you all you need to know about just what it is government compulsion breeds and why it is that those who demand the nanny state take care of all their educational needs are the last ones who should be complaining when that same state demands total and complete fidelity.
Re-engaging aging boomer workers
GUEST COLUMN: An inspiration for DPS
Marie not only went to college, she ended up making history, twice, as the first African-American to earn a tenured teaching position in Denver Public Schools (in 1938) and the first to be assigned to an all-white school (in 1955). And now the still-vibrant 94-year-old adds to a remarkable legacy with her recently published book, Every Child Can Learn, that recounts her successes with some of her most challenging first-grade students and offers opinions that have relevance to DPS’ current mission.
To be rewarded, teachers must produce
“S
Teaching is a profession where the rewards for accomplishment should be highly correlated to results produced. To simply reward poor teachers with a pay raise of any significance is counterproductive. Situations where the CSAP scores are stagnant call for a stagnant salary or in many cases a severe reduction in salary. In many professions, workers are “at will” employees which either produce according to specifications and expectations or they are properly disciplined, reduced in stature and salary or removed from service. It is time to rethink the concept that salaries can only increase and an increase employee involvement is the remedy.
The teacher’s union seems to think that higher teacher salaries, more teacher involvement in curricula design and more say in school reforms will solve the problem. This defense has more holes in it than the Denver Broncos defensive unit.
My grandparents were devoted to the Yankees
This banging on the steering wheel moment brought me back to high school when suddenly that guy who never looked interesting, looked really cute after a summer in the sun. The Colorado Rockies are making my heart skip. Suddenly Saturday night is taking on a whole new mystique as they go to bat for their third win. I liken myself to those fair-weather runners I see on the trails in early spring. As they jog on by in crisp Lycra, I silently wonder, “Where were you when the snow was blowing?” And now where was I when the Rockies were struggling to find their footing?
My husband and I pass up a good movie to make room for the excitement of nine good innings. Suddenly the too big TV my husband purchased a few months ago has new meaning. The really green baseball field looks beautiful and the purchase doesn’t seem like such a whacky husband thing. I don’t ask if the bottom of the inning is the beginning or the end
Watching baseball feels like fishing. It is very calming, somewhat meditative, until the batter hits a big one. Catching a fly ball or a fish starts feeling one in the same. Then everyone sits down, breathes in and waits peacefully for the next exciting moment. In truth I fell asleep before the game was over. But I did keep the radio on in the bedroom
Columbus not the first to import violence to New World
But this is the age of vilification. Some individuals who consider themselves heirs of those Columbus destroyed either directly or indirectly, intentionally or unwittingly, consider it their duty to point up every negative allegation about every white European who ever sullied this land with his allegedly fascistic presence. The “noble savage” was destroyed by the greedy white man, according to the simplistic modern interpretation of an extraordinarily complex historical reality.
When Columbus discovered America, many natives were already hard at work hating and destroying each other. The difference now was simple: those who dealt with Europeans dealt on an uneven technological plane that left the natives at a significant disadvantage when it came to warfare.
Let me take the example of a locally well-known group that is usually regarded as peaceful, thought by many to be innocent victims of U.S. imperialism: In 1837, a group of Cheyenne raiders went deep into the territory of a group they were about to make one of their bitterest enemies, the Kiowas. Their aim was to steal horses. Unfortunately for them the raiders were discovered before they could succeed in their mission, and the Kiowas, correctly assuming they were up to no good, surrounded them and killed them all. The Cheyenne were angry and planned revenge. The following summer they sent out warriors for a sneak attack on the Kiowas.
One group of Cheyenne tricked and massacred a group of Kiowa men who were out hunting buffalo and unprepared for war. Another group murdered a dozen defenseless women who had been caught out digging roots, and in the invasion of the village the Cheyenne cut down fleeing women alongside the men.
Among these Cheyenne was Black Kettle, a young man who would later be a chief. His sympathetic biographer, Thom Hatch, wrote these things of his band in a panegyric called Black Kettle: The Cheyenne Chief who Sought Peace but Found War.
Hatch also wrote of a series of raids into Mexico in the early 1850’s. The Cheyenne went far to the south to attack Mexicans who had done them no harm, hoping to enslave them and take their livestock. The first raid went poorly and this touched off another round of hostilities. The United States stepped in and brokered a treaty to end hostilities.
As a chief, leading his people during a brewing war between the United States and many hostile tribes in 1864, the best Black Kettle could do was to beg indulgence for his inability to prevent young members of his band from engaging in terrorism, depredations, and murder. The Peace Chief could not produce evidence of peace.
Columbus did not import violent death to the Americas. The Cheyenne were engineers of unprovoked attacks, murderers of defenseless women, takers and keepers of slaves, and perpetrators of surprise attacks on villages of unsuspecting victims before they ever ran afoul of the United States military. There were both European and native liars, cheats, brigands, and murderers, and there were others who were innocent and strove for something better. It behooves us to consider the facts from both sides carefully before we lay too much blame on one side or the other.
It is an interesting phenomena to observe: Leftists generally and genuinely seem to believe that individuals are basically good at heart, and if only there is sufficient self-esteem present, individuals will overwhelmingly be helpful and supportive of each other. Faceless entities, such as evil “corporations” and selfish “nations” are presumed to be inherently narcissistic and greedy, along with the amorphous “rich.”
Even both MoveOn.org and the NRA are made up of individuals. In fact, what is arguable the most darling tenet of the left in current times, namely the beneficial aspects and value of “diversity,” relies upon the principle that individuals effect the views, policies and behaviors of whatever groups they are involved with.
Is nationalism delusional? Campos thinks so. Leftist. . ”
A great way to help in a disaster
Hands On Disaster Relief, a small nonprofit agency based in Massachusetts, began work after the Christmas 2004 earthquake and tsunami in Southeast Asia. Hands On continued with an expanded operation in Biloxi, Miss., after Hurricane Katrina, then in the Philippines after a horrendous volcanic mudflow. Now they are responding very effectively to a catastrophic earthquake centered on the coastal Peruvian town of Pisco in coastal Peru.
Informality, flexibility and responsiveness are hallmarks of Hands On volunteer operations. Word-of-mouth and internet bulletin boards quickly brought notice of the Hands On effort to previous Hands On volunteers and to travelers in South America. By late September, more than 40 volunteers were working. A week later, more than 50 were on-site. After a couple of crowded nights, Hands On staff quickly acquired an additional facility.
That’s the main problem with our health care system and health insurance industry.
Specifically, the president has vetoed a bill expanding the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, designed to provide health coverage to lower-income children. One nationally syndicated columnist went so far as to call Bush’s rationale in vetoing the bill a “pack of flat-out lies.”
GUEST COLUMN/Override SCHIP veto? Yes: President ignores moral, fiscal arguments
So, it is hard to fathom why Bush vetoed legislation that would retain health coverage for the nearly 6 million children already enrolled in SCHIP — including nearly 50,000 in Colorado — and expand coverage to millions more.
History museum belongs in Civic Center
We are not the first to consider a building for this space. For the past century, prominent urban planners and architects envisioned a complementary building across from the McNichols building, and the city’s 2005 master plan for Civic Center slated this lawn to be developed as either a formal garden or a structure. Our proposal respects the city’s master plan and the historic integrity of Civic Center — including the trees.
They were not the quality I expected. So, I go to other rec centers close by but get disappointed all too often when the normal aerobics instructor doesn’t show or can’t make it. Substitutes are evidently not available. The Cook Park center does a good, consistent job.
That brings in lots of people, and the centers can be run efficiently.
Freedom to speak, not to avoid offense
Although a silly teen stunt, the walkout reflects a larger effort by the offended to silence those with whom they disagree. Rather than engage in discourse and offer their own ideas, they shout down speakers, censor skeptics, try to halt parades, ban holiday celebrations, shamelessly smear their opponents and occasionally throw pies. The offended like to use the word “tolerant,” but their actions show they truly abhor diversity of opinion.
In the U.S., no group can legitimately use the power of the federal government to silence another group or individual. Rep. Mark Udall’s congressional resolution denouncing radio personality Rush Limbaugh comes eerily close. As does Sen. Ken Salazar’s effort to force the radio host to apologize for a misconstrued statement that offended the left. Censuring individuals is not their job, quite the opposite. Anyone can turn off the radio. It is not the place of government to do it for him.
With liberty comes responsibility. Slander or libel can land you in court. Drop the F-bomb into a
quarterly report or, say, a public university newspaper column and you might express yourself out of a job. Words have consequences. Employment, reputation and relationships depend on the wise use of liberty. Even so, it is not the place of government to referee.
However, that information has focused on medical costs and coverage with little mention of another urgent priority: access to oral health care.
Successes like these — measured by CSAP — have been ignored far too long. Rather than demoralize hard-working staff members and further disenfranchise successful struggling students (no, I don’t consider this an oxymoron), let’s celebrate the movement forward that we are making. With this in mind, I have a few recommendations:
Churchill's clouded comeback
University spokesman Bronson Hilliard emphasized to the Camera that the event was “private” — which is allowed under university policy — and yet the exclusionary tactics used Tuesday night raise serious concerns about the actions of Churchill and his supporters.
Ultimately, students of all perspectives can — and should — be able to host controversial on-campus events at public universities, including the University of Colorado. In doing so, however, they are rightly prohibited from excluding those who might look or believe differently than they. Perhaps this is a little detail that Churchill left out of Tuesday evening’s syllabus.
Keeping family, culture alive
I know how they feel. I entered foster care in Colorado at age 13 and “aged out” five years later.
I loved my five brothers and sisters. I was the oldest, so I looked out for my siblings and tried to be a good role model. My youngest sister was my best friend.
American Indian families are very close. As the oldest brother, my role would have been to pass along knowledge to my younger brothers and sisters. After the age of 13, I never got to be either the older brother or the tribal member I wanted to be.
Congress is considering two pieces of legislation to help on both fronts. The bipartisan Kinship Caregiver Support Act, introduced in both the House and the Senate, would allow children to leave foster care and live permanently with grandparents and other relatives. It provides supports and services to relatives so they can meet the needs of the children in their care. If this type of help had been available, my grandmother might have been able to care for me and my brothers and sisters. We could have remained together as a family.
Equality is a basic value in the U.S., and this American value is manifested in the merit system: the belief that all working people have a right to be judged by the quality of their work. Every American citizen should have an equal right to earn a living based on performance, not identity. Historically, Congress has passed laws prohibiting employment discrimination based on race, religion, gender, national origin, and disability. These laws, ensuring that prejudice does not unfairly limit employment opportunity, are essential to realizing the Fourteenth Amendment’s promise of equal protection under the law. ENDA will ensure workplace equality for all Americans by protecting GLBT workers from employment discrimination.
Some opponents say ENDA confers “special rights” on GLBT Americans, but ENDA would give no more rights to GLBT citizens than to straight citizens. A heterosexual who was refused a job or promotion on the basis of sexual orientation could sue for damages just as a homosexual could. Further, ENDA prohibits discrimination based on one’s actual and perceived sexual orientation or gender identity, meaning if a heterosexual employee were discriminated against because he/she was perceived to be homosexual, that heterosexual employee would also be protected by ENDA. The bill also protects all employees, including heterosexuals, from discrimination based on their associations with GLBT employees. If ENDA confers “special rights” on GLBT Americans, then it confers the same “special rights” on straight Americans, as well.
ENDA would not require affirmative action or force employers to hire or promote employees based solely on their sexual orientation or gender identity.
In fact, ENDA explicitly excludes any affirmative action based on sexual orientation or gender identity. ENDA does not require anyone to hire or promote a GLBT employee; it simply makes it illegal not to hire a qualified individual only because of his/her sexual orientation or gender identity. This bill is meant to protect qualified candidates from losing employment opportunities to discrimination, not to force employers to favor an unqualified candidate based on who that person is. ENDA also exempts the U.S. armed services, churches and church-operated schools, and employers with fewer than 15 employees from the sexual orientation and gender identity provisions. ENDA is intended to ensure employment equality in tax-payer funded public institutions and American businesses, many of which are already in support.
Corporate America is already in favor of equality in the workplace. As of January, 2007, 430 of the Fortune 500 Companies have adopted non-discrimination policies which include sexual orientation, and 121 of these have policies that include gender identity. These companies recognize that equality in the workplace is a benefit to all employees, employee relations, and the company as a whole, and that prohibiting discrimination is sound business practice. It’s time for the federal government to pass legislation that reflects what the private sector already knows to be fair and beneficial for American workers.
ENDA is not a leg up; it’s a level playing field. It will not create “special rights” for GLBT workers; it will not require affirmative action or force employers to hire anyone not qualified for the job; it will not apply to religious organizations, the military, or to small businesses with fewer than fifteen employees; and it will not impose unreasonable restrictions or undue burden on American business. ENDA will simply prohibit employment discrimination, allowing qualified, hard-working Americans the opportunity to earn a living based on their abilities and performance. ENDA will ensure the time-honored American values of fairness and equality are a reality for all American workers.
Tristan Gorman is a resident of Denver.
A bullies’ behavior is both abusive and discriminatory. The long term effects of bullying cause harm to the target physically, mentally, and emotionally. In addition, workplace bullying is costly to the business, the community, and the state. Cost prohibitive areas include, but are not limited to: workman’s compensation, lawsuits, rehiring and training costs, welfare, unemployment, disability, health care, court settlements, sick leave, and lowered business production and services.
A workplace bully typically targets competent employees and threatens them with repercussions if they report the bullies’ behavior, even to the point of violating First Amendment Constitutional rights. Like abusers in domestic violence, bullies also exhibit a Dr. Jeykl and Mr. Hyde behavior that is frustrating to the targets. They are polite, charming, and agreeable around others and only demonstrate their bullying behavior when they are alone with the target. They will undermine the employees’ productivity, set up situations designed for failure, and make sure that the targeted employee can not succeed at their tasks. Bullies harass, lie, humiliate, and do everything in their power to create a fear filled work environment. Once other employees are aware of the bully’s tactics they will often gang up on the targeted employee in an effort to save their own job. Typically, a business or organization that has a bully within their organization also has other problems such as mismanagement, theft and corruption.
Across the state of Colorado, targets of workplace bullying have lost their jobs, been forced out of employment, been forced into the welfare system, have suffered from anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and many other health related illnesses. Around the country, workers have lost their way of life while others have committed suicide.
Single parents are hit especially hard when they lose their only source of income and have dependent children. The loss of finances can then become coupled with the loss of a home which combined with emotional damage and physical illness can be devastating to entire families.
While legislation cannot correct the entire problem, it will go a long way to holding bullies accountable for their behavior and eliminating from the workplace those whose behavior is counterproductive to the entire workforce.
Goodbye to the corner store
Grocery stores have changed a lot over the last two generations or so. Its all about the
The first store I remember, in the 195
The store was smaller than the produce department of today’s large chains.