Senate to Determine Health Care Bill's Immediate Fate Saturday

An important reformation in American health care is currently the focus of the United States legislature. Saturday in the United States Senate will bring an important vote which could either push the Democrat-proposed bill onto the floor for debate, or uphold action with more delay. Currently every member of the Democratic caucus, including independents, will need to be behind the initial vote in order to have the bill move forward even with the constant wall of Republican opposition. Even if the bill moves to the floor, it is likely to be debated until well around Christmas. Then, if the bill actually manages to pass this round of the Senate, the House version of the bill and the Senate version of the bill will have to be reconciled. A defeat of the bill at this stage would be a large setback for the Obama administration, as they have spent much of their time in office working towards this reform. The main issue with the vote for Democrats is that some Democrats from conservative areas have to keep in mind the will of the people they represent. Even though the legislators are intelligent enough to make their own valid decisions, it's a matter of being reelected in the next election. It's hard to win an election without the support of the popular will a candidate represents. This collision of interests is what the 8pm vote Saturday night will bring forth into the light. The article link is here.

Hershey Finds Possible Bidding Partner in Ferrero

This topic may not seem important in the grand scheme of government, because after all, what does chocolate have to do with anything pertinent in today's society? Well the answer falls in the economy. Bidding wars between two large companies are normally a sign of either a strong economy, or an economy on the verge of bettering itself. The fact that Hershey has gone beyond the borders of the United States to find a bidding partner in Ferrero International SA shows that the company is serious about countering the $16.4 billion bid from Kraft. In the end, even though it is just a chocolate bidding war, this buyout could show just how confident some companies are in their yearly revenue and and intake in terms of spending ability. Article link is here.

Billions of Improper Spending in 2009

The White House recently reported that during the fiscal year for 2009, there have been approximately $98 billion worth of improper payments made by the federal government. This is around a 38 percent increase from the $72 billion in improper spending the government witnessed in 2008. What are the causes? Anything can cause such errors ranging from outright fraud to illegible signatures. One item that many suspect to be the culprit behind some the the misdirected money is the $787 billion economic recovery plan passed earlier in the year. The administration says that a sharp crackdown on the payments now will provide a solid base for less mistakes in the future. This most important consequence of this problem seems to be the fact that it will be hard to the country to recover from debt when it loses track of nearly $100 billion dollars in a single year. We can't borrow from China forever, after all. The link to the article is here.

Obama's Visit to Asia Leads to the Chinese Premier

President Obama's trip to Asia finally lead to the meeting between the President and the premier of the Chinese government, Wen Jiabao, on Wednesday. They first met in public in order to show a public cooperation between the two governments, then they met in private to discuss serious matters. In this discussion, the main topics were to be climate change, nuclear weapons, and human rights. This last issue was brought about cautiously, because no more strain was wanted between the two countries than what already exists. As far as the subject of climate change went, both leaders agreed to work toward cleaner technologies and a global agreement to lower greenhouse gas emissions. It seems that although this is a great step forward in the relationship between our two nations, it does not say much for the effort of actually reducing greenhouse gas emissions within the two countries. The United States and China are two of the most polluting/least green countries in the world, and as such they need to show an effort in cutting emissions themselves. If the world powers do not commit to cutting emissions in their own countries, small countries will not feel obligated to change their own way of living. This is a problem that I see with this agreement. Click on the image for a link to the article, or here.

"Uncle Sam sitting on a goldmine"

As the value of gold approaches record high prices, it is good to know who holds the most gold around: The U.S. government. Currently, the government has 261.5 million of ounces in depositories around the nation. With gold selling at 1,100 dollars an ounce, this gold amounts to around 300 million dollars in inert metal. With a yearly deficit of nearly 1.7 trillion dollars, 300 billion would hardly make a difference in paying off the debt. So why keep the gold instead of selling it? Economist Judy Shelton says that if the U.S. sold the gold at today's prices, in raise in value in the future would be seen as an opportunity missed. Geithner doesn't want to be the Treasury Secretary who sells the gold for something less than it is worth in another time. Also, many countries are collecting gold in order to create a sense of financial security, so the gold the U.S. could sell would go straight to other countries. The one thing that I wonder the most about this article and this concept is the cost of actually holding all of the gold throughout the nation. For all we know, the cost to keep the gold up to this point in time (over all the years) might add up to an amount somewhat close to the actual worth of the gold. It seems that the only reason we are holding the gold is to say to other countries, "look, we have some too!" Article link here.

Video: Pollsters on Health Care, 2010

Interesting video HERE. SEARCH FOR VIDEO TITLED Pollsters on Health Care, 2010. This video discusses the impact of the health care bill and the overall economy on the separate parties and the nation's trust in Washington. The most interesting point made was the fact that people, whether Democrats or Republican, are becoming fed up with the interest groups and other limitations that occur in Washington. The 2010 election could be a hard one for any incumbent because so many people are fed up with almost everything to do with Washington. Can the Obama administration weather the storm? It seems to me that the elections of 2010 will depend mostly on the state of the economy come time of the election. If it is better, the Democrats will be like more than if the economy is down. If is it down, it's likely that people will fall into republican support.

The Furious Michele Bachmann

The main rallying point for the protesters of the health care bill on Capitol Hill recently has not been one of the GOP's great, powerful leaders, but rather a well known, widely liked for her appearance women representative named Michele Bachmann. She is furious with the health care reform that could "take over" 18 percent of the American Economy, and she is making her voice heard in this matter. She does not go through the normal channels of the GOP, but rather goes around these methods and uses television appearance as her method to get messages across. And these messages are emotionally charged. With her never die attitude, some say that she could hurt the Republican Party. I say let her speak and say what she has to say, because the party itself should not have control over everything that its members release to the public. If the person believes it is necessary for the good of the country to give forth information and opinions, then the country has the right to hear opinions and make its own decision. The problem is that many people follow blindly without knowing true issues. The article link is here.

Life in Prison w/out Parole Unconstitutional for Juveniles?

Today, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments against the imprisonment of juveniles for life without parole. The arguments against this punishment focus around the 8th Amendments, stating that this harsh punishment could be considered cruel and unusual punishment. The main focus of the case is a mother who is in prison for a crime by association punishment committed as a minor, after the birth of her first child. Currently there are approximately 2,500 people serving life in prison without parole for crimes committed as juveniles. The interesting thing about this case is that many of these crimes were of the crime by association category, with the people convicted not actually committing the punished crime. The article can be found here.