Warning: Imported from old college This post was moved from an older website hosted on a college server. These have been unedited and contain many mistakes. But, whatever.
After Social Security: Red, Blue and Rainbow, I received a couple of interesting e-mails and posts that I would like to share with everyon.
|
|
Atrios replied: "this isn't correct. Privatization won't allow people to dictate who gets survivor/dependent benefits, only presumably the balance of their private account if they die before retirement. These are different things." This is pretty much the typical response I received as a result of using the word "benefit." (no link, sent by e-mail) |
|
|
President of the Log Cabin Republicans Patrick Guerriero writes, "great work...pg" (no link, sent by e-mail) |
|
|
The wonderful Christiana Dominguez (CMC alum at Hastings Law) writes, "...Statutory language would be required to ensure that contract (probate too?) law allowed for beneficiaries to collect despite almost guaranteed next-of-kin, or other challeneges seeking to terminate agreements as violative of public policy.." (link) |
|
|
Robert Tagorda (CMC alum at Kennedy Gov) writes, "given how high-profile the issue is, gays and lesbians are bound to face more pressure than they normally do to toe the Democratic line...Nonetheless, Andrew writes in a pretty clever closing line, 'This dialogue should come out of the closet.'" (link) |
| "...only one thing can explain the failure of gay political groups to embrace the president's call for reform: politics over progress." (link) | |
| Perhaps, my favorite post from an extremely nice person. Robin writes, "I think issue by issue affiliation is a big advance over mindless Bush hatred - and it's smart politics, too. UPDATE: By the way, it's great to see so many young adults across the political spectrum thinking seriously about policy issues and getting involved." (link) | |
|
|
Rick Heller writes, "the sort of out-of-the-box perspective that is bound to make Republican proponents and Democratic opponents uncomfortable." (link) |
|
|
Replying to the line-(Gay activists have little to lose from such support of Social Security privatization), Polizeros writes, "Sure they do. We all do. Privatization is almost guaranteed to provide us all substantially less benefits. Do you want your retirement money managed by Wall Street? Do you trust Wall Street to do the right thing? Well of course you don't. Nor should gays trust Bush to do the right thing for them. It's a given that he won't. Moreover, this is triangulation."(link) |
|
|
A good response titled, "'Crumbs' for gays in Social Security plan." Marcus Pun of Oakland writes, "This offering of crumbs from the right is like being offered a jar of Tang in the middle of the desert as you're dying of thirst... If you're gay and 50, it's too late under the Bush plan to make any real financial gain with privatization. The Bush plan also would reduce your existing benefits... By the time my theoretical 50-year-old old gay is collecting Social Security, a whole new generation of lawmakers will think the ban on same-sex marriage is stupid." (link) |
|
|
Thanks to Don't Amend.com for a link to the News cycle. (link) |
|
|
Thanks to AGR for the link. |
|
|
Thanks to Beautiful Atrocities for the sidebar. (I can't find the link now...) |
|
|
Thanks to the wonderful people at CMC Public Affairs and Communications for their press release. It explains how I came up with the idea. NOTE: if you have something cool happen to you, contact Public Affairs. (link) |
These bloggers and websites provided some interesting analysis to the debate, and I am more informed on the topic of social security than most of my college peers. Indeed, I discussed this issue in-depth and have come to the conclusion that social security is a worldview choice between social insurance and personal insurance. Although I strongly support creating a solvent social security system, I do think that there are parts, like same-sex benefits, that should be fixed. Many thanks go to Professor Pitney, Professor Weinstein, and Professor Spalding for all of their help in getting this piece published. Aside from giving me an opportunity to be published, CMC has taught me lifelong thinking and writing skills. CO Politics (Things have gotten HOT)... Amazing things are happening for Colorado politics, but the Republicans know that this is their time to take back the state or see the gradual loss of Colorado to the Democrats. So the upcoming fights (and possible places I will be working)... CD3 - John Salazar's race: Big things will be happening to try and destroy the Salazar political machine. If John loses, then it opens up vulnerabilities in Mark Udall's 2008 Senate race, and eventually Ken's re-election. CD7- Ed Perlmutter is in! The State senator who gave me advice on my college essay in a Jeffco gymnasium is going to run against Bob Beauprez. If there is any race that I would love to work for, it would be his. If Bob Beauprez runs for governor, then Perlmutter would be the leading candidate for this spot. Governor's Race- Colorado Pols discusses that it will likely be a race between Holtzman/Beauprez/McInnis (R) v. Bridges/Romanoff/Hickenlooper. Repubs- My bet is on either Bob Beauprez or Scott McInnis. Beauprez will not want to keep his House seat, it is too volatile for him to move up in leadership, and he will always face tough elections every two years (especially with a Dem advantage). McInnis on the other hand has a even choice. He had a great career as a legislator and is now being paid "very well" at Hogan and Hartson, so he's got nothing to lose. McInnis has the best chances state wide, but Beauprez will have the most to gain. Dems- Bridges has money, Romanoff has legislative experience, and Hickenlooper has serious natural appeal. The Dems will have a good mix of folks to choose from. All three have great potential- all three are strong dems and know how to fundraise. My thoughts are that Romanoff will not run because he hasn't developed enough experience in the legislature yet, and because he doesn't know how to run state wide. In addition, I think he's waiting for Diana Degette's spot, but she won't leave soon, now that she is Deputy Whip for the Dems. It will most likely be Bridges because Hickenlooper likes being mayor. Unfortunately, the Dems will not have a strong politically experience candidate for Governor any time soon, but having Bridges on board will make the race strong because of the money advantage. Go go website links! The Death Clock- Find out when you will die? I've updated the website's Links and News page with more Colorado resources and movies I'm excited about, for example, Sin City. Mommy Madness (Newsweek)- An interesting article to the plight of the American mother. The solution is simply that men have to start taking the load and acting like mothers as well. Parenting is now a shared load. The American Patriot Network?- I love how these words are thrown about pejoratively. If you hate taxes, and believe in weird flags, then you should check this site out. The Best of Craig's List- This is hilarious, A compendium of hilarity. That's all for now. Tune in next week when I actually put up the DC gallery, fix my About page, and start working on my class assignments.