RE: The Wide Spectrum of Republican Presidential Nominees

http://iansapathy.blogspot.com/2011/04/wide-spectrum-of-republican.html?showComment=1303697595977#c3929307474250386210
In reading your take on the Republican party's presidential prospects for the 2012 election, I am envisioning Donald Trump's run at the Republican ballot as comparable to the recently televised public mayhem surrounding Charlie Sheen. Celebrity plus money plus high ratings equals media saturation. You are right to be concerned that Donald Trump's antics are hurting the party he is running under. The media will extensively cover the absurd, because it is America's guilty pleasure and we will watch. While I must admit that I do not support the Republican party, I would hate to see the 2012 race taken over by frivolous issues that distract from what is relevant.

I hope to see a worthy opponent rise out of the Republican party, and that would not be Donald Trump, and it certainly would not be Sarah Palin. Palin has shot herself in the foot repeatedly when she did allow the media to approach her, showing her lack of knowledge to put it kindly. Now she hides from the media, utilizing a strategy in which she carefully exposes the image she wants to convey to the public through limited and controlled interactions with the media. Could you imagine putting this person in a room with another world leader, allowing outrageous, un-vetted remarks to potentially harm our foreign relations? Think Blood Libel...

While Romney and Huckabee do bring the issues that Americans are concerned with to the presidential platform, I would like to see a new, unexpected Republican candidate surface. The current candidates are just too partisan in their approaches, and the country is already deeply divided. I think Obama has it in him to be great; his first term has been a slow start, dealing with the tremendous debt created in the Bush era and a woefully divided Congress. If we could get two candidates in the ring that would make eliminating partisan divisiveness their top priority, 2012 could be an intellectually stimulating election year.

Things would be really interesting if a strong minor party candidate emerges, but now I feel like I'm really dreaming...

Justice for All = Equal Access to the Courts

Every day in America courts make decisions about people’s lives, for better or for worse. Legal and financial resources are necessary to successfully navigate a court case and bring about just rulings. Imagine for a moment that you are an immigrant with a limited ability to speak English. How will you communicate effectively to the court? What if something as precious as the custody of your child is at stake?  Equal access to the criminal and civil court systems should be a basic human right. Federal law states that Individuals who have limited English proficiency have the right to equal and meaningful access to the courts, and yet many states are not in compliance. Meaningful access includes a combination of oral interpretation services and written translation of vital documents.

Recipients of federal funds must comply with federal laws. Texas criminal courts receive federal funding and must offer LEP populations equal access to the justice system through interpretation, translation and auxiliary aids such as a TDD, or Telecommunication Device for the Deaf.

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 Prohibits national origin discrimination by recipients of federal funds. Different treatment based on a person’s inability to speak English may be a type of national origin discrimination. The Americans with Disabilities Act requires state entities to provide American Sign Language (ASL) interpreters or auxiliary aids to ensure effective communication with D/deaf and hard of hearing individuals. Executive Order 13166 issued in 2000 further emphasizes that recipients of federal funding must provide meaningful access to LEP persons, such as the right to an interpreter, to comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and developed tools for recipients to use to offer meaningful access to LEP persons.

A study by the Brennan Center for Justice, Language Access in State Courts, found that 46% of the 35 states surveyed fail to require that interpreters be provided in all civil cases.

Follow the link below to read a compliance letter issued to states by the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division:

http://www.justice.gov/crt/lep/final_courts_ltr_081610.pdf

In Harris County, a mother is suing the courts for failure to provide an interpreter at her child custody hearings. As she bears the burden of paying for her own interpreter, her ex-fiancé repeatedly takes her to court, strategically exhausting the little money she has left to fight to keep custody of her child:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/7055110.html

While I would hope for willful compliance from states on this issue, it may take the loss of federal funding before states bring their courtrooms into compliance. Better a state temporarily lose a source of funding than another parent and child become permanently severed due to unconstitutional court practices.

Response to Anti-Abortion Laws Passed Yet Again

I agree that the passage of this South Dakota law regarding the 3 day waiting period before an abortion can be performed is a waste of the doctor's time as well as an insult to the woman in question's intelligence and ability to reason.

With that said, I believe there is a larger issue at play within this law; it strategically reduces abortions by delaying a time-sensitive procedure. A number of women will be prohibited from legally obtaining an abortion once they have surpassed the pregnancy time-line within which the abortion can be performed. This is an anti-choice tactic, and the 'successes' gained by it are artificial. The patient did not change her mind because she was enlightened by information she had not been exposed to before seeing a doctor, she ran out of time and was left with no choice.
Not only do poor women stand at risk to be disproportionately affected by this law, but women in abusive relationships and victims of incest also are impacted more profoundly. The safety aspect of the situation means that abused women must first find shelter and support before getting to a clinic; the abusive partner's reproductive coercion may be what led to the unwanted pregnancy in the first place and he is not going to let his partner have a choice about whether or not to continue with the pregnancy. Getting away from the abuser and into a domestic violence shelter can take weeks if placed on a waiting list due to lack of space at the shelter. Only after safety is addressed can the pregnant woman then explore her options about the pregnancy. It's too bad that she will then be re-victimized by a law that exerts further control over her body, minimizes her ability to make decisions, and questions her understanding of a subject she is all too intimately aware of.
Original blog:
http://politicalviewskelseysewalson.blogspot.com/2011/03/anti-abortion-laws-passed-yet-again-in.html