Biggest Opium Pushers In U.S. Are: U.S. Politicians & AG Jeff Sessions

In the United States, we have been hearing a lot about the drugs that are made from this plant over the past few years. I admit to those of you who don’t know me that I am neither a scientist, psychotherapists nor a medical doctor. I am just an average 61-year-old person who reads a lot and who pays attention to reality the best that I can. Even though I am not the smartest person in the U.S. I am a person that strives to be bluntly honest about everything even if I don’t personally like the results of the answer. Truth has ‘no spin’ to it! I have said a few times before on this website that there really is only one real Truth, and that is ‘God’s’ Truth. When you/we/I have an argument concerning any issue, if we can honestly say that we would stand before our Creator, look Him in His eyes and tell Him that we are speaking the Truth, then that argument would be the Truth, to the very best of our personal knowledge anyways. Either that, or we would be acting like a total idiot and or a fool because we would be condemning our own self on purpose.

I have a question for each of us, do we/you/I believe that the politicians in D.C. are looking out for our best interest or their own best interest? Do you believe that your Congressman/woman, Senator or President cares more about you, or about the lobbyist who is funding their next campaign and or their personal lifestyle? Now, before I get into the meat of this article on the Opium issue I will tell you up front that Marijuana legalization is something that I totally agree with. I believe, excuse me, I know, that Marijuana helps with nerve pain, I am 100% sure of that. Back when I was in the U.S. Army I was directly struck by a lightning bolt. Even Social Security says I am disabled even though the VA doesn’t agree that the lightning has anything to do with me being disabled no matter what the non-VA Doctors and other experts have to say about it. As most of you know the Federal Government and the crooked ignorant putz AG Jeff Sessions say that Marijuana is just as or even more dangerous than Heroin and they class Marijuana as a class one narcotic, just like Heroin. To believe the Federal Government’s argument a person would have to be either clueless just plain ignorant or ‘on the take.’ The Feds say that Marijuana has no medical value even though that is totally contrary to all of the scientific evidence that says the Feds are lying.

So, the argument comes down to, why does the Fed’s keep lying? Or, do you really believe they are simply that ignorant? As long as the Federal government continues this policy the VA is not allowed to prescribe Marijuana to the service-connected disabled Veterans. The VA has no problem pumping many billions of taxpayer dollars worth of pills into the disabled Vets every year whether we need them or not but they refuse to allow the Veterans to use God’s given Herbs for pain relief. What is even worse is that if the VA in one of their blood or urine test finds THC from Marijuana in your system, they will cold turkey you off of the drugs they are giving/selling to you. This is even though doing this to people on some of these medications can easily kill a person. Why would any remotely honest or caring person do that to people? The answer to this is simple folks, its money.

For those of you who don’t believe me, I am going to offer you some cold hard facts as to why I used the title of this article. Even if you are a person who says they would never ever smoke Marijuana, does that mean that you have any right to insist that others cannot, no matter what? I am going to use last November’s Elections in Arizona as a perfect example. This example shows just how dirty big Pharma is, I am going to show you just how much they want people to die from Opium use and the reason is simple, money!

Within everyone’s brain, there is what is called an MU Opioid Receptor. This is something that Opium sticks to in a person’s brain. Morphine is an Opioid drug, just like Heroin is so I am going to use them in this example. Even though Pharma made drugs like Morphine and Oxycontin are very expensive even on the street drugs like Heroin are amazingly cheap. Yet there is another man-made drug called Fentanyl, a synthetic form of Heroin that is even cheaper and easier to make than regular Heroin. Trouble is this that this street drug Fentanyl is about 100 times more powerful than Heroin and it is very deadly even to come into contact with very much of it at all. Fentanyl has become a major problem for first responders, EMS and Police as they do come into contact with it many times every day. These days Ambulances and Police Vehicles are being required to carry the ‘antidote’ for their own safety’s sake.

This ‘antidote’ is called Narcan and Narcan is a drug that is big Pharma made and distributed. Concerning Opium products like Heroin and Morphine the antidote, Narcan works quite well at knocking the Opium off of the MU Receptor yet it does very little to help get the Fentanyl off of the MU Receptor. Don’t get me wrong, people are still dying every day from Opioid overdoses also. The Fed said that Opioid overdoses are up more than 400% here in the U.S. since the year 2000. The big Pharma company’s who make Narcan know this fact very well, so do the politicians yet they prove to all of us that they do not care about all of these thousands of people who are dying nor their families, nor even the First Responders.

Now back to the 2016 Elections in the State of Arizona. The facts show that in the States that have made recreational Marijuana legal that Opioid overdoses and deaths are down about 50%. On a side note, in these states alcohol sales are down about 25%, think of how many people aren’t getting into car accidents because of drinking and driving. Also, think of how many domestic violence deaths aren’t happening in those States and how many fatal ‘bar fights’ aren’t happening. Yet the reality is that big Pharma companies make billions from their pharmacy-made drugs so just like last November in Arizona they pumped in many millions of dollars in false advertisements to try to get the people of Arizona to vote down making Marijuana legal in their State. The sad part is, they were successful in Arizona. The big Pharmaceutical companies have been pushing hard to get Narcan into every ambulance, police car, school, and home in America. There is only one reason for this and that is money, to heck with people’s lives, the only thing that really matters is a company’s profits. These Pharmaceutical companies know that Marijuana is a natural painkiller but they aren’t making any money off of a plant that anyone can grow in their own garden. Now, you do understand why I said that the politicians and people like AG Jeff Sessions want to keep Marijuana illegal don’t you? The answer is very simple, campaign contributions from these big Pharma Companies and because of many who own stocks in these same big Pharma Companies.

 

Here are some of the companies who put huge amounts of money into last November’s ‘anti-pot’ vote in Arizona. I got this information from (The Guardian, US News And World Report, Business Insider, the Huffington Post, and from Equities.com News.)

These companies are:

Chandler Pharma

Insys Therapeutics

Pfizer Inc

Walgreens Boot’s Alliance Inc

Amphastar Pharmaceuticals Inc

Mylan N.V.

Opnet Technologies Inc

 

Trump pardons former Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF THE WASHINGTON POST)

(ONE RACIST PARDONS ANOTHER?)(trs)

Trump pardons former Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio

 Play Video 1:36
Why Trump’s presidential pardon of Arpaio is controversial
President Trump pardoned former Maricopa County, Ariz., sheriff Joe Arpaio Aug. 25. Here’s what you need to know.(Patrick Martin/The Washington Post)
 August 25 at 10:52 PM
President Trump on Friday pardoned former Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio — a move that keeps one of his staunchest political allies out of jail and will likely cheer his conservative base, which supports both men’s hard-line views on illegal immigration.The unusual pardon — coming less than a month after Arpaio was convicted, and before his planned October sentencing — will further anger the president’s critics and is likely to worsen the president’s already tense relationship with the judicial branch, which he has repeatedly criticized.

A pardon is perhaps the only way to make Arpaio — a longtime county sheriff who gained national fame and notoriety for his aggressive pursuit of undocumented immigrants — a more polarizing figure than he already is.

The decision on Arpaio is the latest chapter in a line of historically controversial pardons granted by presidents — rare but not unprecedented uses of power that draw fire for being politically or personally motivated. ­Legal experts have compared an Arpaio pardon to the one President George H.W. Bush granted to former defense secretary Caspar Weinberger in 1992 over the Iran-contra affair, or the one President Clinton granted to fugitive financier Marc Rich in 2001.

In this Dec. 18, 2013, photo, then-Maricopa County (Ariz.) Sheriff Joe Arpaio speaks at a news conference in Phoenix. President Trump has pardoned the former sheriff following his conviction for criminal contempt of court for intentionally disobeying a judge’s order in an immigration case. (Ross D. Franklin/AP)

But Arpaio’s pardon — the first of the Trump presidency — is a rarity among rarities. In recent decades, presidents have tended to issue controversial pardons at the end of their terms, not the beginning. The move raises questions about how often the president might pardon other political figures — and for what types of offenses.

In a statement announcing the pardon, Trump made no mention of Arpaio’s offense — criminal contempt of court — but praised his past military service.

“Arpaio’s life and career, which began at the age of 18 when he enlisted in the military after the outbreak of the Korean War, exemplify selfless public service,” Trump said. “Throughout his time as Sheriff, Arpaio continued his life’s work of protecting the public from the scourges of crime and illegal immigration.

“Sheriff Joe Arpaio is now eighty-five years old, and after more than fifty years of admirable service to our Nation, he is worthy candidate for a Presidential pardon,” the statement continued.

Arpaio’s lawyer, Jack Wilenchik, said simply: “Justice has been done.’’

In a tweet, Arpaio thanked the president “for seeing my conviction for what it is: a political witch hunt by holdovers in the Obama justice department!’’

Arpaio told the Associated Press that he appreciates the president’s action and will always stand by him. He said he will speak more about the matter next week.

 Play Video 2:55
What you need to know about former Maricopa County sheriff Joe Arpaio
Joe Arpaio’s illegal-immigration crackdown made him a polarizing figure and an early ally of President Trump. (Meg Kelly/The Washington Post)

The sheriff’s critics spent years trying to stop the police practices that Arpaio sanctioned and that they charge were discriminatory and abusive; in recent weeks, they had vociferously objected to the pardon that Trump repeatedly hinted was coming.

A deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union called the pardon “a presidential endorsement of racism.’’

“Trump has chosen lawlessness over justice, division over unity, hurt over healing,’’ said Cecillia Wang, the ACLU official. “Once again, the president has acted in support of illegal, failed immigration enforcement practices that target people of color and have been struck down by the courts.’’

The president traveled this week to Phoenix, where he suggested at a rally that he was on the verge of pardoning Arpaio, but said he would not do it that night because it would be “controversial.’’

Earlier this month, the president told Fox News he was “seriously considering’’ a pardon for Arpaio, who was convicted last month of criminal contempt for ignoring a federal judge’s order to stop detaining people because he merely suspected them of being undocumented immigrants.

Trump called Arpaio a “great American patriot” who had “done a lot in the fight against illegal immigration. . . . He has protected people from crimes and saved lives. He doesn’t deserve to be treated this way.”

Trump’s pardon came late on a Friday night, at a time when much of the country was focused on a Category 4 hurricane bearing down on Texas.

The reaction among advocates and Democrats was swift.

“President Trump is a coward. He waited until a Friday evening, as a hurricane hits, to pardon a racist ex-sheriff,” said Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), who represents Phoenix. “Trump should at least have the decency to explain to the American public why he is undermining our justice system.”

Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) also accused the president of “using the cover of the storm to pardon a man who violated a court’s order.”

Normally, pardon applications are submitted to the Justice Department, where they are scrutinized over a period of months before recommendations are made to the White House. Some applicants wait years to find out whether they will receive pardons or clemency.

Arpaio’s pardon came much faster, and it was not subject to a Justice Department review, according to officials.

Arpaio’s sentencing was scheduled for Oct. 5, and he had faced up to six months in prison.

Vanita Gupta, chief executive of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, said the president has “yet again damaged himself, the rule of law, and our country tonight. This pardon sends a dangerous message that a law enforcement officer who abused his position of power and defied a court order can simply be excused by a president who himself clearly does not respect the rule of law.’’

Arpaio’s lawyer has maintained that the prosecution of Arpaio was a political vendetta against a foe of the Obama administration and that therefore the political act of a pardon was a fair and just way to end the case.

Arpaio, the former sheriff of Maricopa County, Ariz., has long been an advocate for Trump and spoke in support of him at the Republican National Convention in July 2016. The men seem to have the same views on illegal immigrants and the use of harsh tactics against criminals or suspected criminals. Arpaio is well known in part for forcing his inmates to wear pink underwear and sleep outdoors in his Tent City Jail.

The legal saga surrounding Arpaio dates back years. In 2011, as part of a lawsuit, the then-sheriff was enjoined by U.S. District Judge G. Murray Snow from detaining people he thought to be illegal immigrants, when they were not charged with any other crime. Prosecutors alleged that Arpaio continued to do so, and last year, the Justice Department decided to pursue a criminal contempt-of-court case against him.

Critics said that his policy of detaining people on mere suspicion was racist and illegal, and that his refusal to honor a court’s order to stop was brazen. Arpaio’s lawyers argued that the judge’s order enjoining their client’s conduct was “not clear,” and they suggested that Arpaio was merely doing what others do routinely: turning over those in the country illegally to the U.S. Border Patrol.

Arizona Marijuana: Everything to Know About Marijuana Law in AZ

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF FACEBOOK.COM)

 

Arizona Marijuana: Everything to Know About Marijuana Law in AZ

 6

Brandi Atkins, an Arizona resident and former dancer, was diagnosed in late 2015 with a rare autoimmune disease that made her joints and muscles swell, causing chronic pain. She popped in and out of the hospital with a cornucopia of prescription medications handed out to alleviate her pain, ease her symptoms, and navigate around her type 1 diabetes. These medications would often clash with her disease and cause her blood sugar to soar. In desperation, she turned to medical marijuana.

Almost immediately, Adkins noticed an improvement in balance, palatable reduction in pain, and (most importantly) hope for her future. The dispensary she visited took the time to understand her specific concerns, her goals, and the particulars of her health conditions. Thanks to medical marijuana, Adkins feels like she can dance again.

This hopeful scenario plays out in dispensaries across Arizona, where more than 100,000 patients suffering everything from epilepsy to chronic pain find relief through medical marijuana.

It’s an interesting situation: legalized medical marijuana and dispensaries in one of the United States’ most conservative territories. How do these conflicting events coexist? Have you ever wondered what exactly is the state of medical marijuana affairs in Arizona? Here’s our in-depth explanation of everything you always wanted to know about Arizona’s Medical Marijuana Laws (but were too afraid to ask).

The road to marijuana legalization in Arizona

When the federal government originally passed the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937, the predecessor to the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, all American states had criminalized cannabis in one way or another. It wasn’t until the mid-1990s that Arizona state legislators began listening to decades-long calls for marijuana law reform.

In 1996, Arizona passed Proposition 200, allowing doctors to prescribe medical marijuana (specifically, controlled substances) to treat diseases or relieve pain in seriously/terminally ill patients. In order for a patient to use medical marijuana, a doctor had to provide scientific evidence to prove marijuana’s usefulness along with a second doctor’s opinion to the Arizona Department of Health Services. This caused conflict between supporters and opponents of medical marijuana, and started a lengthy battle over the law’s lack of specificity in addition to the language “prescribe.” For a doctor to prescribe medicine, the substance must first undergo FDA trials and doctors must specify the exact dosage and consumption methods to be used. Unfortunately, this rendered Prop 200 illegal on a federal scope and a medical marijuana program never materialized. It did, however, protect first-time drug offenders from prison sentences, which was a step towards decriminalization.

Arizona tried once more to legalize medical marijuana in 2002 with Proposition 203, but the initiative failed, receiving 42.7% of the vote. A viable solution was not presented and approved until nearly a decade later.

In 2010, Arizonans voted to approve a much-revised version of Proposition 203, an initiative to legalize the medicinal use of marijuana. Proposition 203 authorized doctors to recommend cannabis as a therapeutic option, as opposed to prescribing a specific dosage of cannabis with strict consumption or application methods. This law also tasked the Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS) to regulate the “Arizona Medical Marijuana Act.”

Arizona’s current marijuana policy

The ADHS had until April 2012 to establish a registration application system for patients and nonprofit marijuana dispensaries, as well as a web-based verification platform for use by law officials and dispensaries to verify a patient’s status as such. It also specified patients’ rights, qualifying medical conditions, and allowed out-of-state medical marijuana patients to maintain their patient status (though not to purchase cannabis).

On December 6, 2012, Arizona’s first licensed medical marijuana dispensary opened in Glendale.

In 2012, Arizona legislators amended the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act to include college and university campuses in their non-consumption list, even if the cardholder was over 21 years old. However, in April 2017, this ruling was overturned by the Arizona Court of Appeals, and though colleges can privately prohibit medical marijuana on campus, lawmakers cannot make campus cannabis use illegal.

The people of Arizona took advantage of the Department of Health’s qualifying condition appeal process in 2013 when they petitioned to include PTSD, migraines, and depression among the list of qualifying medical conditions. Following due process, the Director of the ADHS denied the petition.

prop 205 arizona

While it seemed like the Arizona population was becoming more tolerant of cannabis, it proved too soon to jump to recreational legalization. In 2016, Arizonans narrowly voted no on Prop 205 by a margin of 48:52, which would have legalized the adult use of marijuana. Ballotpedia attributes this loss to heavy early campaigning by opponents of recreational marijuana years before the election process. Opponents such as Insys, the creators of Fentanyl, lobbied heavily against recreational cannabis — their CBD medicine passed the first phases of FDA trials earlier in 2016. This loss resulted in a significant surge in new medical marijuana patients, many of whom were waiting to get their card only if the recreational law failed to pass.

Despite various lawmakers’ attempts to place limitations on Arizona’s medical marijuana law, the program is growing larger each year. As of late June 2017, there were 132,487 Arizona marijuana patients, 155 dispensary licenses (up from 124 at the law’s passage), and 881 patient caregivers.

The “Arizona Medical Marijuana Act”

The “Arizona Medical Marijuana Act,” or AMMA, empowers Arizona doctors to recommend medical marijuana as a viable treatment option for Arizona patients diagnosed with at least one qualifying medical condition. With this recommendation, a patient may apply for an Arizona Medical Marijuana Card, a card that allows patients to possess, purchase, and use medical marijuana.

2.5 oz of cannabis, up to 12 plants, deliveries of marijuana, 25 miles from a dispensary

Arizona marijuana patients or caregivers may possess up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana at any given time, and obtain 2.5 ounces in a 14-day period from an Arizona medical marijuana dispensary. Patients can also be authorized to grow up to 12 marijuana plants for their own use, or otherwise, find a caregiver to grow cannabis for them if they reside more than 25 miles from the nearest medical marijuana dispensary.

Living as a medical marijuana patient

chronic pain, alzheimers, cachxia, cancer, crohn's disease, glaucoma, hepatitis c, muscle spasms, nausea, ptsd, sclerosis, seizures, two or more conditions

For Arizonans like Brandi Atkins — mentioned at the beginning of this article — who think medical marijuana might be right for them, patients must receive a recommendation to use medical marijuana from a licensed Arizona physician. The patient must have one of the below qualifying medical conditions, and their physician must determine that the patient indeed has a qualifying condition. The written certification would state the doctor believes, in their professional opinion, the patient would likely receive therapeutic benefit from medical marijuana use.

Arizona’s list of debilitating qualifying conditions

ALS, alzheimer's disease, cancer, glaucoma, hiv/aids, hepatitis c, cachexia/wasting syndrome, muscle spasms, nausea, seizures, severe and chronic pain

Once a patient has received their written certification from an Arizona doctor, they may apply to the ADHS for a Registry Identification Card, a card that grants patients and caregivers the authority to possess, purchase, and use medical marijuana legally.

To apply for a Registry Identification Card, patients must submit their written certification, the application fee, their personal information, and a statement declaring they won’t use their medical marijuana for nefarious purposes (i.e. sell it to kids). If a minor wants to be a medical marijuana patient, there are stricter rules to follow before they can qualify for their card. The ADHS website explains the application process in more detail.

The most “caring” of the bunch

Some patients in critical need of cannabis are unable to travel easily to purchase or even consume cannabis without some assistance. Arizona included regulations to cover the people who would take care of these patients, known as Caregivers, allowing them to assist patients (up to five) in the medical use of marijuana.

Whether taking care of a child or an elderly parent, this endeavor is a huge responsibility. Caregivers need to educate themselves on the different aspects of marijuana, like different strains, consumption methods, and their patients’ specific health needs. Arizona caregivers must follow all the same regulations as patients, including registering with the ADHS and carrying an ID card.

Don’t worry, the law protects you!

As federal law still classifies marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug (without medicinal value), Prop 203 and other medical cannabis laws were designed to protect citizens’ rights. Arizona medical marijuana patients are supposed to be treated like every other resident. The AMMA’s regulations protect the rights of patients and caregivers in certain circumstances:

  • A school or landlord may not refuse to enroll/lease to a qualifying patient unless failing to do so would incur ramifications under federal law.
  • Medical facilities cannot deny treatment to patients based on their status as a medical marijuana user.
  • Parental rights cannot be denied based on a parent’s status as an Arizona medical marijuana patient.

While these protections are essential, they do not provide for every eventuality. Employers may not discriminate against employees who are medical marijuana patients, and may not penalize them for a positive drug test. However, employees cannot use or possess marijuana during the hours of work. Employers may lawfully discipline and even terminate any employee who tests positive for marijuana if they used or possessed during work hours, even if the employee is a registered patient.

Despite nearly 20 years of progress toward decriminalization and regulation, Arizona is still one of the toughest states in the nation when it comes to marijuana. Even minor possession is a felony for those who aren’t medical marijuana patients, with a max sentence of 3.75 years and a $150,000 fine.

I’m a physician, what part do I play in medical marijuana?

“I have found in my study of these patients that Cannabis is really a safe, effective and non-toxic alternative to many standard medications.” -Philip Denney, MD, Testimony to the Arkansas legislature in support of House Bill 1303, “An Act to Permit the Medical Use of Marijuana,” Nov. 17, 2005.

Doctors are the gatekeepers to medical marijuana. In all medically legal states, doctors must fully evaluate their patients and determine whether cannabis is a fit for their medical needs and whether they have a qualifying condition. This places a lot of responsibility on doctors’ shoulders, which most Arizona doctors bear with professionalism and true concern for their patients. The physician must be a doctor of medicine, a doctor of osteopathic medicine, a naturopathic physician, or a homeopathic physician who holds a valid license to practice in Arizona.

medical marijuana doctors in arizona

Physicians meet patients, either in person or via telemedicine services, to determine if the patient has a qualifying condition before signing a written certification stating that, in their professional opinion, the patient has a qualifying condition and would likely receive therapeutic benefits from medical marijuana use.

However, Arizona courts have cracked down on some physicians who have turned their practices into “certification mills” due to their being no additional requirements for marijuana recommendations other than holding a valid license to practice medicine in Arizona.

Visiting from out of state?

Arizona allows non-Arizona medical marijuana patients the same rights and protections as Arizona citizens. This caveat makes sense … sort of.

The law states a Registry Identification Card, or its equivalent, issued by another state is valid in Arizona, except in that a visiting qualifying patient may not obtain marijuana from an Arizona marijuana dispensary.

This is a bit paradoxical. How is an out-of-state patient to access medical marijuana without purchasing from a dispensary or bringing it over state lines, which is federally illegal? Here’s how:

Another registered Arizona patient or designated caregiver can offer and provide medical marijuana so long as nothing of value is given in return, and the recipient doesn’t end up possessing more than 2.5 oz. of marijuana. This works, though it may be simpler to become a resident of Arizona.

Medical Marijuana Dispensary basics, keeping patients safe, obeying laws

inside a dispensary

All Arizona marijuana dispensaries are nonprofit organizations, a philosophy similar to out-of-state patients: “nothing of value may be exchanged for the transfer of medical marijuana.” While medical marijuana isn’t free, dispensaries may charge for medical marijuana as part of the expenses incurred during business operations. Patients can purchase up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana every two weeks, either as flower or an equivalent amount in concentrate, edibles, or other cannabis product forms.

As marijuana is still federally illegal (and valuable), security remains a  top priority. Dispensaries are required to use the ADHS online verification system to confirm each Arizona marijuana patient’s status as a patient and the amount of marijuana purchased over the last 60 days. This system is password protected and will not allow any access through an unencrypted internet connection. This online system does not include patients’ addresses or other personal information.

Dispensaries are also required to have a strong security system for their facility, including a single secure entrance. Medicating on the premises is forbidden. These heavy requirements go hand-in-hand with Arizona officials’ concern that marijuana products will encourage theft, violence, or negligent/illegal use.

Don’t be afraid to ask about the future

Though Arizona’s medical marijuana laws are full of sticky, complicated red tape, the program’s existence is still a huge step forward in the crusade for national legalization. Suffering patients in Arizona can find medical relief with our favorite plant and still enjoy protection from the law. Hopefully, after reading our guide, you now understand the nuts and bolts of how medical marijuana regulations work in Arizona.

Still want more information? Check out the Arizona Department of Health Services website at www.azdhs.gov.


Sources:

https://azmarijuana.com/links/legal/

https://azmarijuana.com/news/proposition-203-arizona-medical-marijuana-act/

http://norml.org/legal/item/arizona-medical-marijuana

http://www.azdhs.gov/licensing/medical-marijuana/index.php

http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000881#Arizona

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2017/04/06/ruling-overturns-law-banning-medical-marijuana-arizona-college-campuses/100145648/

http://blog.norml.org/2011/05/16/alternet-the-five-worst-states-to-get-busted-with-pot/

http://www.azdhs.gov/documents/licensing/medical-marijuana/debilitating/2013-july/medical-marijuana-debilitating-medical-condition-decision-form-jan-2014.pdf

https://ballotpedia.org/Arizona_Marijuana_Legalization,_Proposition_205_(2016)

https://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/arizona-ballot-measure-205-legalize-marijuana

http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2017/01/24/lawmakers-act-to-change-medical-marijuana-rules/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/09/09/a-maker-of-deadly-painkillers-is-bankrolling-the-opposition-to-legal-marijuana-in-arizona/?utm_term=.7428039f5547

https://www.forbes.com/sites/theemploymentbeat/2014/12/02/medical-marijuana-and-the-workplace-what-employers-need-to-know-now/#3ff5578b66b8

http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.source.php?sourceID=000593

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/arizonas-week-in-weed-pot-docs-cant-lie-on-forms-az-supreme-court-says-8277359

https://www.marijuana.com/news/2014/07/arizona-court-rules-that-medical-marijuana-patients-can-sell-weed-to-other-patients/

http://www.azdhs.gov/documents/licensing/medical-marijuana/reports/2016/2016-apr-monthly-report.pdf

ABOUT AUTHOR

V.P. Pence Is Floating His ‘Healthy Indiana 2.0’ Program To Replace Obamacare

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF THE NEWS SITE POLITICO)

When former Indiana Gov. Mike Pence embraced Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion with conservative twists — such as requiring enrollees to contribute to their care — critics lamented poor people would be locked out while backers cheered the program’s focus on personal responsibility.

Neither side’s expectations were quite borne out. Two years later, as the program emerges as a national model thanks to Pence’s role in the Trump administration, the reality on the ground shows what happens when political philosophy collides with the practical challenges of providing health care to tens of thousands of people, many of them in crisis.

Advocates for the poor in Indiana argue that liberal fears of depressed enrollment were overblown. More than 400,000 Hoosiers are enrolled, despite state requirements that low-income residents make nominal monthly contributions to their care or face stiff penalties.

Likewise, Republicans’ contention that the system would promote personal responsibility and prod beneficiaries to ration their care and make better decisions about what treatments to seek also turned out to be overly optimistic.

By all accounts, the expansion — known as the Healthy Indiana Plan 2.0 — has made a difference. Health officials in Scott County, Ind., a poverty-stricken community about 30 miles from Louisville, Ky., paint a picture of a program that’s bolstered a patchy social safety net — especially during a major HIV outbreak triggered by the opioid epidemic — without bankrupting the Hoosier State or punishing enrollees.

To be sure, the program isn’t perfect, they say. But they overwhelmingly give more positive reviews than not.

“I feel that it has been a good success,” said Dawn Sanders, an outreach worker for Covering Kids & Families of Indiana, a statewide consumer group working in Scott County. “It’s working.”

Healthy Indiana’s influence is expected to increase in the months ahead whether or not Obamacare survives, as state officials and the Trump administration look to replicate some of its conservative features, potentially unleashing a wave of new state restrictions on how non-disabled adults get coverage without any action from Congress.

“The Healthy Indiana Plan has long been, and continues to be, a national model for state-led Medicaid reforms,” HHS Secretary Tom Price wrote in response to senators after his confirmation hearing.

“It is important that Medicaid’s design helps its members to transition successfully from the program into commercial health insurance plans, as [Healthy Indiana’s] consumer-driven approach and underlying incentive structures encourage,” he told lawmakers.

Seema Verma, meanwhile, a Pence ally who helped design the program before she was tapped to run CMS, now has the power to give states greater flexibility to reshape their own programs according to conservative principles.

Kentucky and Arizona have already borrowed aspects of Indiana’s plan while others, including Wisconsin, could move to enact new limits that resemble the approach.

Indiana’s plan also provides a measure of political cover to lawmakers in red states where supporting Obamacare’s coverage expansion is still deeply controversial. Republicans across the country have found it easier to back an expansion of government-funded health care for the poor if it more closely resembles a private insurance market. Yet liberals remain deeply skeptical because of the way the system is designed to cut people off who don’t make monthly payments, at least temporarily.

Both sides could find their assumptions challenged based on the experience in places like Scott County.

The Indiana plan does punish people above the poverty line who stop making monthly contributions by locking them out of coverage for six months. But because most enrollees have incomes below the poverty line, lockouts have been rare, according to state evaluations of the first year of the program. Instead, those below the poverty line who don’t pay are bumped from plans with more generous benefits — including coverage of vision and dental care and better prescription drug benefits into skimpier plans with higher out-of-pocket costs.

“It sounds like, ‘Oh my gosh, people are going to have to pay.’ But people that were uninsured were paying for it already,” if they go to the doctor, said Beth Wrobel, who runs a federally qualified health center in Valparaiso, in the northern part of the state.

Diabetic patients who visited Wrobel’s clinic before the start of Healthy Indiana incurred significantly higher costs paying for their regular medical supplies and routine testing, she said. Now, under the more generous benefit package, “the most you have to pay is $26 a month, and that’s at the high end. Most of our patients pay between $1 and $10 a month,” Wrobel said.

“For the same amount that you were paying at that moment for your diabetic care, you could get medical, dental, behavioral health, optometry and pharmacy. [Healthy Indiana] treated the whole body,” she said.

Randy White, CEO of Fayette Regional Health System in Connersville, in the east-central part of the state, agreed that Healthy Indiana “is not harsh.”

If the liberal specter of a punitive system pushing out enrollees hasn’t quite materialized, neither has conservatives’ vision of a market-like system where patients with “skin in the game” make hard choices about their own health spending. That’s because family members, health workers and nonprofits are helping cover their out-of-pocket costs.

“With some people, I think [personal responsibility] might be a little bit lost,” Sanders said in her office at the Scott County Partnership, a nonprofit. “We try and do what we can in the little bit of time we have with them. But you can only give them so many pamphlets.”

About 2,100 of the enrollees who gained coverage through Indiana’s expansion live in Scott County, a poor, sparsely populated area that gained notoriety where an HIV outbreak took off two years ago, fueled by needle sharing and opioid abuse.

Sanders recalled how a man with substance abuse problems signed up for health coverage in the small town of Austin, Ind., which had set up a “one-stop shop” to get people enrolled and provide medical services like HIV screenings and vaccinations.

“He knew he had hit rock bottom. And he knew he needed help,” Sanders said. “He no longer lives in the area, but he had to be able to get away from this. He has stayed clean this whole time. He now has his children back. We have quite a few success stories, as far as that’s concerned.”

As of early April, there were 216 county residents with HIV, according to Scott County Health Department Administrator Michelle Goodin, but roughly three-quarters of the patients don’t have enough of the virus in their blood to spread it to others. New cases are still being diagnosed.

“We’ve got about 30 to 40 people usually that are HIV-positive in our facility,” said Sheriff Dan McClain, whose staff helps prisoners apply for Medicaid so that they can receive benefits, including mental health and substance abuse treatment, as soon as they are released. “We offer them a test for HIV and … we offer to sign them up for HIP 2.0,” he said.

With an ad-hoc support network fortifying the safety net, some liberal groups and Democratic lawmakers question whether the conservative tweaks are really adding value or simply burdening enrollees with unnecessary complications. Without those hurdles, they say enrollment would be even higher.

Progressives also fear that if the Indiana model is embraced in states that initially did traditional expansions of Medicaid, it would erode enrollment gains.

“Work requirements, lock-out periods, time limits and imposition of onerous premiums and cost-sharing on Medicaid families, who are generally living on a budget of roughly less than $15,000 per year, are not only punitive but also counterproductive in the long-term,” Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) wrote in a letter to HHS last month to discourage it from approving additional restrictions, many of which would be program firsts. “Requiring poor families to pay more than they can afford for care makes them less likely to access the care they need and less likely to maintain their coverage.”

State surveys of how Healthy Indiana is working present a fragmentary picture, and despite the program’s popularity in Indiana, there are some signs of hampered enrollment because of its complex structure and broader concerns about affordability. For example, roughly half of the enrollees in the more comprehensive benefit package worried about being able to afford their monthly payments. Left-leaning groups have used the data to raise flags about harmful implications for other states.

The first-year report also estimated that roughly 1,240 enrollees received financial help from nonprofits to pay their premiums, a paltry slice of overall enrollment. But residents here believe many more enrollees likely rely on family members, friends and others sources undetected by official surveys. Sanders and others pointed out that the premium cost of keeping someone covered in the program’s more generous benefit package — which includes vision and dental benefits as well as more robust coverage of prescriptions — is as little as $12 for an entire year.

“We’ve paid it out of our pocket many times at the office just to get them hooked up,” said Jeanni McCarty, a nurse at Foundations Family Medicine in Austin. McCarty said she has four family members affected by HIV and five relatives who have passed away from drug abuse-related problems.

Indiana officials by the end of the month will send CMS two more reports, including one that specifically examines the use of health savings-like accounts to help beneficiaries cover their costs. Pence’s successor, Republican Gov. Eric Holcomb, has already asked the Trump administration to extend the program through January 2021 with a handful of tweaks — though notably absent is a request to institute a work requirement as a condition of receiving benefits.

“We don’t want to put policies and programs in place that are not member-centric,” said Jennifer Walthall, secretary of Indiana’s Family and Social Services Administration. “Increasing barriers is not the name of the game.”

The West’s largest coal-fired power plant is closing. Not even Trump can save it

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF THE WASHINGTON POST)

The West’s largest coal-fired power plant is closing. Not even Trump can save it

February 14 at 6:51 PM

As a presidential candidate, Donald Trump promised to help revive the struggling coal industry.

It’s looking like a tough promise to keep.

In the past three weeks, owners of two of the nation’s biggest coal-fired power plants have announced plans to shut them down, potentially idling hundreds of workers. One plant in Arizona is the largest coal-fired facility in the western United States.

“[We’re] bringing back jobs, big league,” President Trump said Tuesday after signing legislation that would scrap requirements for natural resources companies to disclose payments to foreign governments. “We’re bringing them back at the plant level. We’re bringing them back at the mine level. The energy jobs are coming back.”

Yet even with his efforts to roll back Obama-era energy regulations, a lot of coal jobs won’t ever return, mainly because of harsh economic realities.

Case in point: The decision this week by the utilities that own the Navajo Generating Station outside Page, Ariz., to decommission the plant at the end of 2019, decades earlier than expected.

The 2,250-megawatt plant has faced increasing financial pressure in the face of record-low natural gas prices, which have made it more expensive to produce electricity at the facility than to purchase it from cheaper sources.

“The utility owners do not make this decision lightly,” said Mike Hummel, deputy general manager of Salt River Project, which operates the plant and owns it along with several utility companies and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.

“NGS and its employees are one reason why this region, the state of Arizona and the Phoenix metropolitan area have been able to grow and thrive,” he added in a statement. “However, [its owners have] an obligation to provide low-cost service to our more than 1 million customers, and the higher cost of operating NGS would be borne by our customers.”

Environmental activists welcomed the prospect of closing the plant, one of the biggest polluters in the country. The Navajo Generating Station was third on a 2014 Environmental Protection Agency list of major carbon-emitting facilities.

But its closure would deal its community a significant economic blow. Between the plant itself and the Kayenta Mine — located roughly 80 miles away, it provides all the coal for the generating station — nearly 800 workers could find themselves out of work. Many are members of the Navajo and Hopi tribes, which also receive royalties from the plant. In their announcement, the plant’s owners said the tribes or others could still step in to operate the facility beyond 2019.

Less than three weeks ago, Dayton Power and Light reached an agreement with the Sierra Club to close its Killen and Stuart coal-fired power plants in Ohio due to economic reasons. The plants would close in June 2018, the company and nonprofit said.

The Stuart plant, built in the early 1970s, has a capacity of 2,440 megawatts. The Killen plant, built-in 1982, has a capacity of 666 megawatts.

Dayton Power and Light submitted a closure plan for approval by the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio. The utility said it would develop solar and wind projects generating at least 300 megawatts of power no later than 2022. It also proposed a variety of energy-efficiency steps and grid improvements.

The Sierra Club applauded the moves, which it said would save $37 million a year in health-care costs by avoiding more than 1,200 asthma attacks, 100 heart attacks and nearly 100 deaths linked to the two plants’ emissions. Both facilities are among the largest sources of pollution in the United States, affecting residents as far away as the Atlantic coast.

“The economics of coal are increasingly bad,” said Bruce Nilles, a Sierra Club lawyer. State governments and utilities commissions “will do a lot to prop up” ailing plants, he said, but “it gets increasingly expensive.”

Dayton Power and Light is a subsidiary of Virginia-based AES Corp.

Trump’s ability to save the Navajo plant and others like it is limited, despite his rhetoric. Even if his administration follows through on its promises to relax regulations on the coal industry, those changes aren’t likely to change coal’s fading market.

And if the owners of coal-fired plants lose money when they operate their facilities, keeping them running makes little economic sense.

Recent Immigration Raids in U.S. Cities

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF TIME NEWS AGENCY)

What to Know About Recent Immigration Raids in U.S. Cities

10:26 AM Eastern

Hundreds of undocumented immigrants were arrested in raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials in cities across the U.S. this week — the first widespread enforcement of President Donald Trump’s policy aimed at cracking down on illegal immigration.

Trump campaigned on a promise to take action against illegal immigration, pledging to deport up to 3 million undocumented immigrants by targeting those with criminal records. Notably, experts have challenged Trump’s estimates of the number of undocumented immigrants who have been convicted of crimes.

The raids took place at homes and workplaces in Atlanta, Chicago, New York, the Los Angeles area, North Carolina and South Carolina, the Washington Post reported, citing immigration officials.

Here are some key details to know:

This action follows Trump’s executive order on immigration
Trump signed an executive order last month aimed at cracking down on illegal immigration. It set a priority of deporting any undocumented immigrant who had been charged with a crime, convicted of a crime or had “committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense.”

But immigration officials said the recent raids were a “routine” enforcement practice.

“These are existing, established fugitive operations teams. ICE does not conduct sweeps or raids that target aliens indiscriminately,” said Gillian Christensen, acting press secretary for the Department of Homeland Security, according to CNN. “ICE only conducts targeted enforcement of criminal aliens and other individuals who are in violation of our nation’s immigration laws.”

Raids caused panic in immigrant communities
Recent arrests and deportations have affected people who were not considered a priority for deportation under the Obama administration.

Protests broke out in Phoenix this week over the deportation of a mother who had lived in the U.S. for 21 years and was arrested during a routine meeting with ICE on Wednesday. She had been convicted of a felony in 2008 for using a fake social security number to gain employment, but she was not previously considered a deportation priority.

Officials conducted similar raids during Obama’s presidency but prioritized immigrants who were deemed a threat to national security or public safety. Still, more than 2 million people were deported under Obama, leading some critics to label him “Deporter in Chief.”

The raids this week caused fear and confusion in immigrant communities, and immigrants’ rights advocates argued it was different than typical law enforcement action. Some groups issued guidance for dealing with ICE officials. In Austin, Texas, teachers handed out flyers to students, explaining “what to do if ICE comes to your door,” the Austin American-Statesman reported.

Democratic leaders and lawmakers spoke out about the arrests
“Angelenos should not have to fear raids that are disruptive to their peace of mind and bring unnecessary anxiety to our homes, schools, and workplaces,” Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti said Friday. “The Administration should take a just, humane, and sensible approach that does not cause pain for people who only want to live their lives and raise their families in the communities they call home.”

Texas Rep. Joaquin Castro confirmed there was a “targeted operation” taking place in the state and said he was “concerned” about the raids.

“I am asking ICE to clarify whether these individuals are in fact dangerous, violent threats to our communities, and not people who are here peacefully raising families and contributing to our state,” he said in a statement.

The Land: Israel And The Palestinians: And The U.S. And The Native Indians

 

Most people in the ‘wired’ world of today know about the struggles in the Holy Lands of Israel between the Nation of Israel and the displaced Palestinian population. For those of you who do not know the back story of this issue I will try to condense this issue into just a few sentences so as to not make a book out of this article. When World War Two broke out the Ottoman Empire ruled the current land of Israel. After the war the British took control of that region but in the U.N. in 1947 a resolution was passed to recreate the Nation of Israel so that the displaced Jewish population could have a Nation of their own again, and this came about in 1948. Because of all the turmoil in the U.N. about this issue the Jewish people were only given a small sliver of the land that they used to call home for over 2,000 years. The British had made an agreement with the U.N. that they would pull out of Palestine in May of 1948 and then give this land to the Jewish people for their homeland. It is sad that the people who lived there were displaced, these folks years later became known as the Palestinians, refugees, a people with no ‘home’. These ‘Refugees’ were eventually taken in by Jordan but were kicked out in 1967, again making them homeless. The Islamic people of the Middle-East own about 99% of the land in this region of the world yet none of them (except for the short stint in Jordan) would let them into their countries. Either this issue shows that the ‘Palestinians people’ are very lousy guests, and/or the Islamic countries of the region are really lousy hosts, or possibly both? I say that because a brother is suppose to take in and to help when their brothers and sisters are in need but the Islamic Nations have not done that.

 

In 1948 on the day that the British completed their pull out the tiny newborn Nation of Israel was attacked by all of their Arab neighbors in an attempt to push all of the Jewish people into the Mediterranean Sea. To make a long story shorter, the people of Israel won that war but just 19 years later the Arab Nations of the Middle-East attacked Israel once again in what has become know as the Six Day War. In this war which Israel won they captured a lot more land from the Arab population who had attacked Israel. Among the lands captured was the Golan Heights in the north and they captured the rest of Jerusalem, to the south they also captured the West Bank and Gaza all the way down to the border with Egypt. The people who started the war who were in the lands that Israel recovered were also now displaced adding to a lousy situation for the Islamic people who caused the war. By my understanding it is the land that Israel recaptured in that six-day war of 1967 that has been causing the biggest conflict with the U.N. (among others). It is this land that has become known as the “occupied territories”. Some world leaders think that Israel has no rights to this land and should not build anything on it.

 

Israel was given a much larger piece of the land by God Himself somewhere around the human year of 1,800 B.C.. They lived on this land until about the year 630 A.D. when Mohammad’s army murdered their way through many countries including the land that belonged to Israel. So, here is where I want to start making some comparisons with land issues inside the U.S.. The Islamic people in Palestine had lived in what is now Israel for about 1,400 years before the U.N. gave some of it back to Israel, it is easy to understand why the ‘displaced’ people are mad at the people who now live on that land. Yet they refuse to accept the fact that there was ever a Nation of Israel before the time of Mohammad no matter how much evidence they are shown. What I am saying is the people of Israel simply took back some of what was their own in 1948 and then again in 1967. In 2005 the Israeli government in an attempt for peace gave back the ‘West Bank’ and the Gaza Strip so that the Palestinian people could have a home of their own since none of the Arab countries would ever allow them to settle in any of their countries. Land for peace is what this event was called, that concept failed, all it did was to give Israel’s haters closer Bases in which to attack Israel from. I have often wondered why if there is going to be a ‘two nation’ reality why can’t the ‘West Bank’ be given “Statehood” status? With Hamas ruling the Gaza Strip there is no way to allow them to become a State. So, who’s land is it in your eyes?

 

Now I would like to talk about the Native American ‘Indians’ and their rights to the land that we call America. A little over 500 years ago Europeans discovered North America and started settling it as if the land was barren of other human beings. Most Europeans did not consider the Indian people who were already here, and had been for thousands of years, as being humans, they demonized them as nothing but Savages. For the next 400 years Europeans kept marching west, killing the Indian people and taking their lands. By the late 1800’s America reached from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean and the Native Americans had almost been exterminated. When the newspapers in the east started showing and telling the people what was being done to the Indian people they raised such a ruckus that the extermination concept ended and the concept of Reservations began. The Indian people were ‘given’ the worst of the worst lands to be exiled upon, these were lands that the white man didn’t want, so the Indian people were forced to live there.

 

I am going to make a small example for the purpose of easy clarity. There is a large Navajo Reservation in southwest New Mexico and part of eastern Arizona. I am going to use them in this example. When Europeans discovered what is today the State of New Mexico less than 300 years ago they began ‘settling’ it by removing the Native Americans who had lived there for thousands of years. If today the Navajo people decided that they were tired of living on their Reservation and told the white, black and Mexican people to move off of their land or they would be removed by the Navajo Nation, what do you think would be the result? I know this would not happen, it’s just a conversation point, but what if the U.S. Government said, okay we agree with you so all non-Indian people have to leave the state of New Mexico, what do you think would happen? Now put that concept to all of the 50 States, if the United Nations and the World Court ruled in favor of the Native Americans and they told all of us non-indigenous people to pack up and get off of the Native Americans land, where would we all go? I honestly believe that the Native American people do have the right to tell us all to get off of their land, after all it was stolen by the end of a gun from them. Now back to Israel and the Palestinian people, the Islamic people stole the land  from the Jewish people at the point of a blade, they either had to leave their homes or die. What I am saying is that there is no such thing as Israel’s “occupation” of Arab lands, there is no such thing as Israel building on occupied lands. Just as the correct thing to do here in North America is to give back the occupied lands to its rightful owners because they were well established here long before Europeans crossed the Atlantic, the people of Islam should give back all of the land that was Israel before they were stolen from them. Here in North America there is an occupation” going on right now and has been for about 500 years. In Israel the only “occupation” going on is in the lands where believers of Islam are occupying land that belongs to Israel, it is not the other way around. I hope you liked the article, I am just trying to get people to think and to consider the truth of history.

IS YOUR MOM, YOUR WIFE, YOUR DAUGHTER, JUST ‘A THING’?

 

This morning I received a comment from one of the folks who follow this blog which made me think of the subject matter of this article. Their blog site is (thecomfortablecoop.wordpress.com). Their comment was about an article that I recently reblogged about the local and State standoff at Standing Rock North Dakota with the Indian folks there.  It was their view on how people view other people and about people in general not caring about or thinking about other people that made an old memory of mine come alive. This memory is what this article is about. This memory is about a real, true fact, there is nothing ‘made up’ in the article, I hope you enjoy the read. In fact, I have decided to simply do a copy paste of my response to her comment as I doubt that I could write it any better if I tried to do it again.

 

K.D., think about this one for a moment. I hate to say it is in our “white mans” culture still today, but I don’t know what else to call it. Still today we take care to relocate old grave yards of white folks if a city, county, or State government decides they need to build on that land or to even put a road through it but we still give Native Americans no such respect. I have an example for you of a case that has always bothered me. Just west of Wilcox Arizona is a small family owned business that was bought ‘as is’ just after WW-2 that has a small, old Museum, but with many very cool items in it, except for the ‘Main Attraction’. The big advertisements about this location is called (The Thing). It only cost $1 per person to walk through this Museum and it is well worth the cost. But, in the very last building is ‘The Thing’ which is under glass so that people can’t mess with it. What is this ‘Thing’? This business is located just a little east of Benson Arizona, between them is a beautiful rocky area called ‘Texas Canyon’, this is suppose to be where the Apache Chief Geronimo had his ‘hideout’. This (Thing) is basically a Mummy, it is a very crude Mummy, but still a Mummy. Of what? It is obvious at least to me that it is of an Indian woman who is holding a very, very small baby, as in a new born. To me it is obvious that this ‘woman’ must have died in child birth along with her baby. She must have been someone important in the Tribe for them to try to ‘Mummify” her, who knows, maybe even the wife or daughter of Geronimo? But really, the ‘Thing’? Can you just imagine the outcry if this had been a white woman and her newborn baby? This response is just my way of saying, I agree with you K.D.

 

Well, that is my little history lesson for the day I guess, I hope you liked the information. Most of my adult life was spent behind the windshield of a semi-truck driving all over the lower 48 States and all of Canada. I always enjoyed the scenery on interstates 10-20 and 40. This location is on interstate 10 on the south-side of the highway. It is a place that I stopped at several times throughout the years because they had a good amount of ‘truck parking’. They also have an excellent store of many different items that are made by ‘Indian’ people in the region, and their prices were always fair. It is a good ‘rest area’ plus they have a Dairy Queen inside. The reason I brought this location up is because I have always felt bad about this poor ‘unknown’ lady and her stillborn baby. Personally I do not know how such things can be legal in 21st Century America yet they obviously are. But my question to you is, if this ‘Thing’ was a white woman and her baby, would it be legal then?

 

I close my note to you today by coming back to the title of this article today. If this was your Mom, Sister, or Wife, and your Baby, how would it make you feel? Would it matter to you? Would you wrap your family member in a blanket, say she is a Mummy and sell her to the highest bidder? Folks, I’m just asking…. What’s your thoughts on this matter? Do the people at Standing Rock matter less because ‘their just a bunch of Indians’? Is it really true that here in the good ole USA that only big companies and big money really mean anything, or is it just because they are only a ‘bunch of Indians’? I think it is way past time for a new movement called “Red Lives Matter Too”!

What Is The Value Of The Dollar Inside The United States?

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF THE MICHAEL REAGAN REPORT)

Michael Reagan
Businesses Flee California

By Michael Reagan

It never occurred to me that one could do exchange rate calculations between U.S. states. I always thought exchange rates only applied to foreign countries.

For example: Does the 20-to-1 exchange rate for pesos and dollars make up for the risk of decapitation on a visit to Mexico? Or should I settle for the much lower 1.32-to-1 exchange rate for Canadian dollars to U.S. dollars and have a better chance of surviving my vacation?

The Tax Foundation has estimated the difference in purchasing power for a $100 bill in various states. The winner of the competition was Alabama where you get $115.34 in value for your Benjamin.

Right next door to my home state of California, my former home state (went to high school there) of Arizona nets you $103.73 for your hundred smackers.

While in California your $100 is worth $88.97. Only in New York, New Jersey and of course Washington, D.C. could you get less for your money.

Is it any wonder Spectrum Location Solutions found 9,000 businesses left California between 2008 and 2015 in search of pastures where their greenbacks had more impact.

Joseph Vranich, president of SLS, told the Dallas Business Journal “companies are leaving California to escape escalating costs and regulations can move to Texas or Nevada that have no income tax and high relative purchasing power. I even wonder if some kind of ‘business migration history’ has been made.”

In the same interview Varnish estimated that California escapees have enjoyed “astonishing” operating cost savings from 20 to 35 percent.

That’s what happens when nanny state government decides to put the golden goose on an Ex-Lax diet to pay for its “compassionate” big government.

Some states claim to be “open for business” while California has “opened up on business.”

The top ten states that have enjoyed to California’s government-induced business exodus are Texas at the top followed by Nevada, Arizona, Colorado, Washington, Oregon, North Carolina, Florida, Georgia and Virginia.

The California counties that have suffered the largest loss of businesses are just the ones you would expect: Los Angeles, Orange, Santa Clara, San Francisco, San Diego, Alameda, San Mateo, Ventura, Sacramento and Riverside.

Proving that after a while business realizes California may have good weather, but you can’t take a climate to the bank.

Breitbart observed, “The Tax Foundation established a direct inverse correlation between purchasing power and the percentage level of state tax rate. California, with a 13.3 percent top state tax bracket, leads the nation.”

A dubious distinction that costs the remaining residents in lost employment opportunities.

Michael Reagan is the son of former President Ronald Reagan and chairman of the League of American Voters. His blog appears on reaganreports.com

 

 


Reagan Reports for America
1501 Northpoint Parkway, Suite 104
West Palm Beach, FL 33407 USA
reaganreports.com

Trump, His Wall And Mass Deportations Of At Least 20 Million People

 

Most everyone here in the U.S. knows by now that a big part of Donald Trumps early popularity was when he started talking about building a huge wall between Mexico and all of the adjoining states namely California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas. I wish to make a few things straight with you before I get into my commentary today and that is I am not a fan of Mr. Trump, or Ms. Hillary nor either of their political parties. I am a person that believes in law and order but the law and order I believe in is Scriptural laws. We are all told to obey mans laws unless they are contrary to God’s laws and this is the way I believe. In this article I am going to give my personal beliefs on how we here in the U.S. need to handle our border issues as well as how to address the issue of many millions of illegal immigrants that are already here in the States.

 

When it comes to politics I am a registered Independent because I agree with some of the things that each of the National parties trumpet and I very much dislike some of each’s platform issues also. Since my teen years I have found myself to be a person that would have been a good mediator by trade. I started realizing this when I had friends that were very different from each other and would get into fights with each other yet I liked both even though they were different. I could never understand why I could get along with these people just fine but they could not get along at all. I bring this philosophy to today’s headline, if you can please consider my thoughts on this issue before you get all ticked off at me because I may not agree with your set in stone ideas.

 

I agree that every country needs to have secure borders so that they can know exactly who is in their country. I am for putting up a high large Plexiglas see through wall as a border with Mexico and with Canada with multiple entry points in every border state. This would be for the purpose of making it easy for people who want to visit our country to be able to do so without any problem, legally. This type of border would make it to where Mexico and Canada could also know who is coming into their countries from the U.S.. Don’t be to shocked with this concept, there are quite a few Mexican politicians who want to have a wall built on their Southern Border so that they can control the influx of people streaming into their country from Latin America and South America. If Mexico did this it would be a good thing for the U.S. also as many thousands of people coming from those regions are simply going through Mexico on their way to the U.S.. I am not at all anti-immigrant whether it be Mexican folks or folks from countries south of Mexico but every country needs to try their best to keep gang members, drug smugglers and other terrorist from crossing into their country. I know that most of the people coming into the U.S. across our southern border are simply people who are trying to find work so that they can feed their families and or they are trying to flee the violence of gangs and drug cartels. The Democratic party seems to be in favor of just opening up our borders so that everyone and anyone can come in at will. The Republican party seems to simply be anti poor people and seem to consider all the poor people coming across our southern border as evil people trying to destroy our country. I believe that both of their philosophies are quite ignorant as both policies will destroy our country in the end.

 

The U.S. media has been saying for years now that there are about 11 million illegal immigrants within our borders, I most humbly disagree with that figure. I traveled the lower 48 states for over 30 years in a commercial truck making pickups and deliveries and stops in every state many many times. One of the things that I couldn’t help but notice was that all over the country in all the big cities and in thousands of small towns was the very high Hispanic populations in the work places and walking the streets of their town. I personally believe that there are probably at least seven or eight million illegal folks just in California alone. I honestly believe that the 11 million the media talks about is actually most likely double that figure.

 

Mr. trump has stated several times that he thinks it is a good idea to deport all of these folks that are here illegally and I do understand the argument for this but in the end, this would be a horrible human catastrophic mistake. This would be a worse mistake than what was done to the Japanese people during world war two. Think about it for a moment please, if our government did go through with such a removal policy we would tear the moral fiber of this country apart. We would be hunting down millions of people like they were rabid dogs, removing parents while leaving their children to fend for themselves or being but into the welfare system. This policy would cause hatred that would never be cooled off. This ignorant policy would destroy whole towns, businesses, Churches and families for generations. No matter who wins in the November elections we as a Nation must invent a good and fair policy concerning both our borders and the illegals that are here right now. We need a policy to help give the people who are here now a very direct path to citizenship as long as they have not gotten into any physical violence trouble while they have been here, do not have any felony warrants out for their arrest and are not gang members. We should deport these trouble makers or arrest them and put them into prison. Yet we must not treat the people who are here simply trying to earn a living to support their families as if they are terrorists. Many people who are here from countries in South America are here trying to flee the violence and the gangs in their home lands, we must not put them back into those situations. About a week ago I watched a TV program that was showing people taking the oath and becoming U.S. citizens and I believe the figure they gave was that about 780,000 people each year get their legal citizenship this way. The program said that the majority of these people were from Mexico. Since we allow 780,000 each year now I believe that we as a country should allow lets say about one million people per year this benefit with about 700,000 of those folks being people from Mexico and or people from Latin or South America. Well, so much for my attempt at being a fair mediator, what are your opinions?

Itsallaboutyu

UNDERSTANDING CHANGE BEGINS WITH OURSELVES

rosmaninho e alecrim

Artesanato (de)coração

Rezenhando

A Cultura POP de A a Z!

Tempero e Fogão

Adepta da CozinhaTerapia desde os 11 anos. Compartilhando meus pratos preferidos do interior de São Paulo para o mundo. Porque a cozinha rompe fronteiras e tempera vidas!

लेखनी चलती रहे....!

अहिंसा परमोधर्मः, धर्म हिंसा तथैव च।

My Perspective

Explaining the spidery corners of current affairs, ranging from politics to the nitty gritty news stories

Maroccfood

An all round blog on Moroccan food, my own recipes, home remedies as well as product reviews

Africa Zwelibanzi

Monarch Of Poetry

Anything but Ordinary

My way out of ordinary .

beyondimagination

Create and Believe

%d bloggers like this: