Politics

This short editorial in The Christian Century argues, with sound evidence, that the best way to reduce the incidence of abortion is to make it legal and safe:

The countries with the lowest abortion rates in the world are Belgium and the Netherlands, where abortion is legal and covered by national health insurance…
Judging by abortion rates, one would have to conclude that what Bush (following Pope John Paul II) calls a “culture of life” is actually flourishing more in Western Europe than in Latin America. And there are reasons for this. Belgian and Dutch women are well educated about contraceptives and have access to them…The Belgians and Dutch can also rely on generous government provisions for health care, child care and parental leave, which means raising a child is a more sustainable prospect…
Such evidence suggests that most people will choose against abortion if other ways of regulating family size are available. They will also choose against abortion if they have some confidence that the community around them will help them with medical care and child care.

William Saletan offers a well written recap of the president’s State of the Union address:

Tonight’s State of the Union Address demonstrated again that President Bush is a man of very clear principles. He’s just flexible about when to apply them.
He’s for historical reflection when a Democratic program has lost the context that initially justified it: “Social Security was created decades ago, for a very different era. In those days, people did not live as long. Benefits were much lower … Our society has changed in ways the founders of Social Security could not have foreseen.”
He’s against historical reflection when a Republican war has lost the context that initially justified it. All that matters is the new rationale: “The victory of freedom in Iraq will strengthen a new ally in the war on terror, inspire democratic reformers from Damascus to Tehran, bring more hope and progress to a troubled region …”
He’s against scaring you if you’re 55: “I have a message for every American who is 55 or older: Do not let anyone mislead you. For you, the Social Security system will not change.”
In the next sentence, he’s for scaring you if you’re below 55: “For younger workers, the Social Security system has serious problems that will grow worse with time. … We must pass reforms that solve the financial problems.”

Now that I’ve quoted half the article, you might as well go read the other half.

The Richmond (Virginia) Times Dispatch reports on the activities of the state legislature:

With only a week left to act on all legislation introduced by their respective members, the House and Senate yesterday argued over matters ranging from “traditional marriage” license plates to state budget procedures.
The House of Delegates squabbled before tentatively endorsing the special state plates that would include the capital-letter words “TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE,” as well as a symbol, two interlocked golden wedding bands over a red heart.
Del. L. Scott Lingamfelter, R-Prince William, who sponsored the legislation, said it would merely embrace 4,000 years of history on marriage and show children that “traditional marriage is fundamental.”

I’m glad that the Virginia state legislature has state business so well in order that the legislators have the time to devote to such dire issues as this.

A recent study shows that abstincence-only sex ed did not reduce the incidence of teen sex. In fact, it seems to have increased it:

The study showed about 23 percent of ninth-grade girls, typically 13 to 14 years old, had sex before receiving abstinence education. After taking the course, 29 percent of the girls in the same group said they had had sex.
Boys in the tenth grade, about 14 to 15 years old, showed a more marked increase, from 24 percent to 39 percent, after receiving abstinence education.

Go, conservatives!

(Click for larger image)

From Ananova News Service: Police in Germany are hunting pranksters who have been sticking miniature US flags into piles of dog poo in public parks.
Josef Oettl, parks administrator for Bayreuth, said: “This has been going on for about a year now, and there must be 2,000 to 3,000 piles of excrement that have been claimed during that time.”
The series of incidents was originally thought to be some sort of protest against the US-led invasion of Iraq.
And then when it continued it was thought to be a protest against President George W. Bush’s campaign for re-election.
But it is still going on and the police say they are completely baffled as to who is to blame.
“We have sent out extra patrols to try to catch whoever is doing this in the act,” said police spokesman Reiner Kuechler.
“But frankly, we don’t know what we would do if we caught them red handed.”
Legal experts say there is no law against using faeces as a flag stand and the federal constitution is vague on the issue.

A few days ago, I commented on Josh Marshall’s theory that Bush’s social security privatization effort was motivated by a desire to keep the federal government from having to pay back all the money that it has borrowed from the social security trust fund. I criticized Marshall for offering a theory, but no supporting evidence.
Well, now Bush is flat-out lying about the solvency of social security, saying that it will be ‘insolvent’ in 40 years or so.
It’s projected that in forty years or so, Social Security will have start paying out more money than it receives in taxes, thereby drawing on the trust fund that it is currently accumulating.
If the federal government did not pay back the money that it has borrowed from the trust fund by that time, then the president’s statements would be true. Maybe he’s getting people used to the idea that social security will go bankrupt soon so that when he proposes not paying back the loans, many people won’t question it. It’s still just a theory with no concrete evidence, but I’m trying to make sense of the president’s moves.

I’ve been pondering President Bush’s possible motivations for his Social Security privatization push, and the only thing I can come up with is this: the private sector sees that massive pile of money sitting in the Social Security trust fund doing virtually nothing (well, except financing the federal deficit) and would really like to use it to capitalize commercial enterprises.
Joshua Marshall offers another, more nefarious, motivation: Social Security privatization is the first step in Bush’s plan to keep the federal government from having to pay back the trillions of dollars it has borrowed from the trust fund–and to destroy Social Security in the process.
I’m just as willing as the next liberal to believe that Bush is capable of such a nefarious act, but as compelling as Marshall’s idea sounds, he offers no explanation of exactly HOW privatization is the first step. When someone hypothesizes an entire chain of events that would tie the administration’s current efforts to this dastardly goal, then I’ll analyze it and see if it seems logical and fits the facts. Until then, I’m inclined to think it’s just your run-of-the-mill Republican privatization effort–granted, on a scale that’s unprecedented in American history.

One of my coworkers has decided to leave the company. His last day will be this week. Since his last day at our company would be just a few days before Christmas, I asked him if he would be able to take the holidays off and start his new job in January. Aside from needing the paycheck to support his family, he said, he needed to start his new job in December so that he would not have a month without health insurance.
In our industry, it’s common practice for companies to continue a quitting employee’s benefits through the end of the month and to start a new employee’s health insurance benefits on the first of the month after the employee’s start date. My coworker is using this system as designed to ensure he has continued health insurance through his transition.
After talking to my coworker about this, I realized that this same consideration has played a major role in two job changes for me as well. So much for ‘fringe’ benefits (I notice that in recent years, the ‘fringe’ has been dropped). If you think about it, it’s a somewhat crazy system.
Of course, I try not to take for granted that I work in an industry where good health insurance that starts soon after employment is a pretty standard benefit.

Conservatives often claim that America is ‘a Christian nation.’ Although I can counter that claim generally, I’ve often wanted to be able to cite specific evidence. Ms Magazine has summarized that evidence. Nice.