With the 2012 Legislative session in mind, Rep. Peggy Mast sat down recently and compiled a list of the most important issues lawmakers will be facing in the coming year.
“I think it was the longest list I’ve ever had,” Mast said of the multitude of issues that will be addressed in 2012. And though many wonder what direction the state will take in 2012, Mast believes the issues are important enough to warrant much discussion.
“I do think that most of the agenda that our governor has proposed are things that need a debate,” she said. “People are afraid of the outcome, but how do we know if we can improve on something until we really debate it thoroughly and look at all sides?”
Topping her list is the issue of major reforms to the state’s school funding formula. Gov. Sam Brownback recently released an outline of the direction he hopes to see the state take in funding its schools to avoid lawsuits that have plagued the state for years. According to Brownback’s proposal, funding for schools would be limited at the state level, with local districts taking on more responsibility.
“I think it’s already frightening a lot of people, and it’s something we are going to have to address eventually,” Mast said. “That’s always the biggest concern, is who are the winners and who are the losers?”
Brownback’s proposal includes an increase in per-student aid to districts from $3,780 to $4,492 and eliminates weighted enrollment for special-needs students. It also would eliminate the cap on districts’ ability to levy taxes, which would increase the ability of districts with high populations to raise money. Many worry about the effect on districts without a broad tax base.
“The question is, how do we make it equitable so that we can thwart the lawsuits, because that’s really the main reason that we have to address this,” Mast said. “It’s a very complex thing, so the more simple we can make the formula, the better.”
It’s a matter of making accountability “closer to home,” she said. “Do we like the state raising taxes, or do we have more control over our local elected officials than we do the 165 state legislators who are going to determine whether or not to raise the sales tax?”
Another debate in the legislature will be redistricting. Every 10 years the state redraws the lines of its congressional districts, and the issue can be an emotional one for lawmakers, Mast said.
“When that occurred last time, my district changed by about 70 percent in regard to the people I represented,” she said. “It is an issue for a lot of people who fear that their district is going to change a lot or that there will be those forced to run against another incumbent who may be a friend. Or their district could be totally eliminated and gets absorbed into another district because of a population shift.”
Mast said redistricting is a debate that likely will fire up early in the session.
Another issue that will be big during the session is the reform of the retirement system for state employees.
“Nothing is quite as emotional as people who are nearing retirement and the fear that their retirement income could be impacted by decisions that we make,” Mast said. “I think we have really been sensitive about that, but this is a debate that has been delayed far too long.”
The KPERS retirement fund is imbalanced, and has been for some time, she said. One reason is the stock market crash and subsequent hard times, but there are other contributing factors, including poor investment decisions and the lack of an appropriate response in past legislative sessions.
“Financial hard times hit the state; and as a response, the Appropriations and Ways and Means people decided that they would forego something that didn’t seem obvious,” she said. “There was a lack of the state government budgeting for their full payment on KPERS.”
sail (anonymous) says...
Hmm the legis did not pay into kpers for several years and now its in trouble, well lets get a list published in the Emporia Gazzet of those legislators who put kpers into this finacial mess.Bad behavior deserves bad press.
December 27, 2011 at 2:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bubbadleroy (anonymous) says...
Well the law makers were using the money for other things that we all enjoyed, good roads, infrastructure, ect.
This being done while KPERS was enjoying a tremendous boon from the stock market. Now that the stock market has taken a fall, with inflation that is off the scale, the state now has no money to fund KPERS in the manner as in the past.
SOOOOO, benefits have to be cut, and new, less lucrative, retirement plans for all state workers.
Seems pretty simple as to what has to be done.
December 27, 2011 at 10:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
Sounds to me like lawmakers need to make a new law -- no borrowing from KPERS funds, EVER.
Sounds to me like they'd better start making payments to repay KPERS too. KPERS is not a freebie; those who are eligible for this retirement package have PAID INTO it for their entire working careers. At various periods, when workers were invited to contribute more, they did.
December 28, 2011 at 6:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sail (anonymous) says...
So the legis never thought the market would go down??? I would like a list of those dim bulbs published.
December 28, 2011 at 7:18 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
KPERS.
This problem needs to fixed now !
Before our taxes are raised to fix the existing shortfall, (and they will be, it's a monetary fact), the plan has to be changed to more of a 401k type contribution plan, with no guarentees, and a higher retirement age. This session legislators, no more procrastinating.
December 28, 2011 at 7:30 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
netloafer (anonymous) says...
I spoke to Don Hill about the KPERS problem 2 years ago. He acknowledged the problem. His soultion was increased EMPLOYER (you and me) contributions.
I don't think his position has changed.
The shortfall when I spoke to him was $8 billion. I don't think it's gotten any better in the past two years.
December 28, 2011 at 7:51 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
Hmmmm . Isn' t the problem with the KPERS retirement fund the same exact problem that the S.S. fund has had for years ?
You know, the syphoning of funds from one agency to fund another or to pay for a Legislators " Pet Pork Barrel " project or " Bail Out " one of their contributing " Constituants " businesses/company or pet project !
This problem seems to be a " Monkey See, Monkey Do " type of behavior .
Meaning, the Fed legislators do it, so the State legislators see this and they do it, so the county legislators do it, so the City leaders do it . This is a learned behavior, not a natural, common sense behavior.
This behavior is done, because there is no accountability or punishment for such behavior . The only ones punished by such behavior are the benefactors of the public " Retirement Funds " and those who will have their taxes raised to repay the " Public Funds " that have been " ROBBED " !
JMO
December 28, 2011 at 8:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
I still believe the state needs to make amends of some sort and begin repaying KPERS, even if it's only a little bit at a time. We all have to pay our bills, then so does the state. And it should make those payments with current funds, not new taxation.
December 28, 2011 at 6:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
The lights are on, is anyone home?
Tell us create, and Mast, Hill, or Longbine how the heck do you make up for a $8.3 BILLION DOLLAR shortfall, (over the next 30 years) without raising taxes?
December 28, 2011 at 6:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
This question is relevant considering that Kansas governor Koch, I mean Brownback, wants to lower income tax on his rich buddies and raise sales taxes on the poor.
Schools will be getting less overall funding, so it will be up to local options, (taxes), for education funding. Remember, (IT'S FOR THE CHILDREN).
Social services, (mental health drug counsling) have been cut, our county wants to take that up, and you, create are all for that.
Our extension office wants it's own taxing authority and will raise the mil-levy, you also like that idea.
But you don't want taxes increased to shore up one of your pension plans?
We all have to do our part, don't we?
December 28, 2011 at 6:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
Let the state tax the rich guys like you, Corbin.
You never fail to surprise me, but then again, you're the one who is one way and one way only. I believe in tackling each problem independently because there are all kinds of solutions out there. If all we do is stand like statues and proclaim NO NEW TAXES EVER, then there will never be a variety of solutions to consider.
December 29, 2011 at 8:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
Create
Thanks for my first good laugh of the day. I would venture that your retrement income is 2x my income.
You are the one that said no new taxes to shore up kpers, not I. All 3 of our reps were on the radio last week speaking of the kpers underfunding mess. All three said it had to be addressed and that we would not like the way it would have to be taken care of.
meaning: higher taxes.
You have retired from teaching and are drawing a kper retirement. That's good, as your employment with the state guarenteed you a retirement income.
After 30+ years of business I am getting ready to retire and over the years I have invested in various plans to provide for my retirement.
As you have stated on these threads before, the economy had wiped out much of the value of these types of investments and YOU prefer to keep your assets safe with c.d.'s.
KPERS has and is invested in the same types of funds that I am.
When these investments suffer downturns, KPERS funds suffer and so do I .
You and other KPERS participants however do not. Because if your retirement fund suffer, the taxpayers have to make up for it with increased taxes.
I DO NOT begrudge you or any other KPER member your retirement money. It was promised and should be paid.
But it is a monetary fact the state cannot sustain it and it needs to be changed . So beginning with new hires it should be a whole new ball game.
As far as your "tackling each problem independently", I would counter;
you ma'am, cannot see the forest for the trees.
December 29, 2011 at 9:04 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
b3bill (anonymous) says...
The Legislature is going to have to take the bull by the horns regarding KPERS. It is totally unsustainable in its current form.
About 30 years ago guaranteed life time pensions in most private industry was being phased out and replaced with the 401(k). KPERS needs to be handled similarly for current workers and not even offered to new workers.
Research by the Legislature into how corporations rolled workers out of pension plans and into a 401(k) would give some good insight. Plain and simple, everyone has to take full responsibility in directing their retirement investments, and not believe it is the continual duty of the taxpayers to provide a perpetual guaranteed retirement, no matter what.
Existing KPERS recipients must continue to receive their pension as per the agreement when they retired. I would like to see some kind of provision made that if a retired KPERS recipient decided to re-enter the workforce full time at a workplace with either 401(k) or KPERS, their KPERS would be rolled out and set up in a 401(k) or IRA, thus helping some to reduce the number on KPERS.
There will be decades of KPERS funding to continue to make by tax money for existing retirees, but the window into KPERS should be closed ASAP. The end of KPERS would be started and with the number of beneficiaries declining, the tax liability could begin lowering and eventually KPERS would be gone. That will be years from now, but the process to end KPERS has to begin.
December 29, 2011 at noon ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
hear,hear !
December 29, 2011 at 12:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
The " Syphoning " of retirement funds is not something that is " New " !
Can anyone say " TEAMSTERS " or " AFL-CIO " . And these were not even government controlled or taxpayer funded when they were robbed/defrauded of billions of dollars of retirement funds . These retirement funds were paid/supported by union workers .
Where there are large cashes of unguarded cash, there will be those with their hands in the cookie jar, grabbing as much as possible, before they are caught or the fund goes broke.
December 29, 2011 at 6:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
Good post, methusla and absolutely right. Yes, I remember the Teamsters and AFL-CIO funds defrauded of billions. That's private enterprise too.
You're right about large amounts of cash in retirement funds. In the case of KPERS, the state likes to point to mismanagement, but the state itself had it's hand in the cookie jar when it was overflowing. The citizens got their use of those cookies in the form of various projects that also featured employment for the many that worked on these projects. Why shouldn't the state repay what they used? But no, the citizens complain AFTER they have received their use of those funds.
Way to be fair.
Didn't know you paid such good attention to what I say around here, Corbin. Gotta have an arsenal I suppose. BTW, I wouldn't say 2X as much, but thanks for your tax dollars just the same.
December 30, 2011 at 7:48 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
create,
Good morning and you are more than welcome. And if the state, or fed comes up with a plan to cut your current benefits, I'll be there fighting for you.
To that point:
Wouldn't you say that ever increasing taxes, ANY TAX, is a round about way of decreasing your retirement benefits? Or a working persons income?
Of course I pay attention to what you say around here. I think your opinions fall in line with the average persons here in Emporia. It's always good to know the different opinions, beliefs and ideals of others. Even if I may not agree.
December 30, 2011 at 8:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
Methusla,
Yes it's true many a pension fund have been raided over the years. But the unions are small thieves compared to the government.
Can anyone say 'SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUND"?
December 30, 2011 at 8:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
But, But, Steve C., hasn' t the S.S. trust fund been raided primarly by individual congressman to benefit themselves or their district, constituants, or to bailout a business owned by a friend/themselves or just plain spent on nonsense ? And the sad thing is the rest of government/congress and " We turn a blind eye to this " Thievery ", because they/congressmen/women are also " raiding/robbing ", not only S.S., but other agencies as well !
Isn' t that called " Corruption in government, by elected officials " ?
Whereas, in the case of the unions, I believe that is called either " Racketeering, in some cases or just plain, out
right " Fraud " ?
And if we " The People " are going to continue to, not demand an end to the " Government Corruption " then we dexerve to be " Sheared " of our tax dollars, as if we were " Money Sheep " !
JMO
December 30, 2011 at 9:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
It doesn't matter what we call it,or who has done it, it has happened. As long as people look to the government to solve every problem and fix every injustice it will continue to happen.
As much as I love my country, (city and state), and as much as I would like to be a positive thinker for the future, I can only see a huge implosion happening unless things change quickly.
2012 will be the pivital year for America and the direction it takes.
It's gettig harder and harder, but I am still holding out hope.
December 30, 2011 at 9:54 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
Steve,
I don't think 2012 will be a pivotal year, due to circus going on with the Republicans I can't see Obama not getting reelected. If I had it my way I would take Ron Paul, but after him Obama is the next best pick in my book.
The big question will be if the majorities in the House and Senate shift, and if we get conned into a war with Iran. I have more faith in Obama with Iran because of how he handled Libya, if we do by some miracle get a republican president you can almost guarantee we will be fighting another trillion war, unless it is Paul, love his notions on foreign policy.
December 30, 2011 at 2:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
wirewatt (Ken Bazil) says...
The big thing I see about the KPERs is they expect COLA's and that should be stopped. The rest of us don't get a raise on our retirements. That would probably save a good portion of the .3 billion. They should get what they were promised and new hires start a different plan. However the retirement age needs raised to 62 with full retirement at age 65.
December 30, 2011 at 9:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
goodoleboy,
I think the election will be a pivotal point in 2012.
The republican party has put forth a horrible slate of candidates, (with the exception of Ron Paul).
Last election I was a Paul supporter, but fell for the "electability" hype and ended up voting for the "Hope and Change guy. MY BAD !
Hope and change has turned into poverty and despair.
Now the lame stream media have 1st ignored him and now are doing their best to destroy him with 22 year old newsletters that he has denied knowing about at the time. These were brought up in the last election also, and did not pan out .
the pundits keep talking about "electability". And the two party system keeps pushing it.
Everyone wants to vote for the winner. And look what it has got us. I honestly cannot see the differences in the other republican candidates and our current president.
So this election I am sticking with the guy who has the same beliefs that I have, whether the pundits think he can win or not. I'm donating to and will campaign for Paul even if he is not the republican candidate.
If a person votes for the one who can win, just because he can win, it is truly a wasted vote.
Before anyone jumps in about what a kook Paul is, I urge them to do their own checking on his record and his 'CONSISTENCY" over his years of public service. Don't count on the media pundits to make your choice for you.
Become involved or we'll have 4 more years, just like the last four.
December 31, 2011 at 5:48 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
http://news.yahoo.com/ron-pauls-fans-...
It's a good article, even with the slight slant in it.
in a poll this summer Dr. Paul versus Obama only had a 3 point difference.
December 31, 2011 at 5:58 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
At the risk of being called a reddog, found this link on facebook, (thanks sandman).
Notice how in prior Iowa primaries the pundits said it was soooooo important. Now that Dr. Paul could win, it doesn't matter
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3tPMG...
December 31, 2011 at 6:21 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
I would vote for Paul over Obama in a heartbeat, and if he cannot win against this field he never will. I have seen some staggering numbers on the support he garners for the younger vote. Unless he gets nomination I have no doubt we will get Obama again, which is better than the rest.
But I would really like to see Ron Paul as a choice.
December 31, 2011 at 7:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
My timeline of some sort of "conflict" with Iran is before Jan31, 2012.
Happy new years.
December 31, 2011 at 7:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
From a Dec. 30 Gazette article re: Dolly Madison pension funds -- "On Dec. 7, Schmidt said that he believed that Hostess will close at least two plants in the midwest, specifically St. Louis and Tulsa, and will have to file for some type of bankruptcy soon because of mismanagement."
MISMANAGEMENT! Private enterprise or union not paying attention? What about those workers' pensions? Wow!
December 31, 2011 at 8:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
Emporia can hope that the plant here is not closed. But with the shutting down of the 50 some office jobs here in 2013 does not bode well for the manufacturing side.
jmo
December 31, 2011 at 8:47 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
The only way any election year will be pivotal, is if any and all of those who are elected decide to start working " TOGETHER " as if they wanted to implement real change, for what's best for the country and " ALL OF THE PEOPLE ", instead of working so damned hard for themselves and those certain few people/businesses/corps or groups/parties of people, who manetarily back them via(campaign donations), buy(bribe) them, via lobbying efforts. And believe you, me, our elected officials are bribed, in a legal sort of way, called lobbying, by hired lobbyists.
Here is just an excerpt from a NYT article on congressional multi-millionaires.
Rarefied air
With millionaire status now the norm, the rarefied air in the Capitol these days is $100 million. That lofty level appears to have been surpassed by at least 10 members, led by Representative Darrell Issa, a California Republican and former auto alarm magnate who is worth somewhere between $195 million and $700 million. (Because federal law requires lawmakers to disclose their assets only in broad dollar ranges, more precise estimates are impossible.)
Their wealth has created occasional political problems for Congress’s richest.
Mr. Issa, for instance, has faced outside scrutiny because of the overlap of his Congressional work and outside interests, including extensive investments with Wall Street firms like Merrill Lynch and Goldman Sachs, as well as land holdings in his San Diego district. In one case, he obtained some $800,000 in federal earmarks for a road-widening project running along his commercial property.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45793299/...
Read the whole article and you will have some understanding why the government of our nation functions they way it does and passes laws, ammendments, etc. that only benefit either themselves or their " good ole boy " friends and associates. And doesn' t pass laws ammendments that will benefit the common poor working and middle class people of the nation.
I personally do not see any historic " all the people benefitting change coming any time soon " ! No matter who the candidates are, in any given election year.
JMO
December 31, 2011 at 8:51 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
Steve,
I guess the reason I like Ron Paul is, he sounds and thinks like me. To bad the rest of our elected officials don' t think like Ron Paul does !
JMO
December 31, 2011 at 9:05 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sail (anonymous) says...
The Iowa caucus count is being moved to a secret location,whats up with that...GOP must be concerned about something...
December 31, 2011 at 10:39 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
sail,
come next Tues night, there will be shouts of fraud and filandering. You just wait, it'll be fun to watch.
I know I kind of highjacked this thread, but the subject is interesting to me and I don't think people read the readers forums much.
It was good seeing you and the "bunch" last night. Hope you all have a happy new years eve night.
December 31, 2011 at 10:54 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
SAIL,
This is so funny. There are four of them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sM2v-...
December 31, 2011 at 9:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
Hey guys, what do you think of this upcoming 2012 " Revelation " ?
About 40,000 state laws taking effect at the start of the new year will change rules about getting abortions in New Hampshire, learning about gays and lesbians in California, getting jobs in Alabama and even driving golf carts in Georgia
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45819570/...
I would imagine that 99.9% of these new laws will not be enforceable .
So why pass them ?
December 31, 2011 at 10:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
meth don't much care anymore what other states do. The NDAA law passed in washngton should worry any intelligent American.
Beans, bullets and barbed wire.
January 1, 2012 at 3:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bubbadleroy (anonymous) says...
Wirewatt (Ken Bazil)
I have been retired on KPERS since 1/1/97 and have never seen a nickle
increase in my retirement. So don't have a clue what you mean by stopping expected COLA's.
BUT,,, I agree with everything else you said.
Now my thoughts on Ron Paul. I have watched his appearence on Jay Leno 2 times and I can not find one thing he said that did not make sense.
I to will vote for Ron Paul no matter what a Caucus does. If this country votes for Obama again I'll leave this country and never return.
January 1, 2012 at 3:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
After reading the Presidents statement on H.R. 1540 . I am not too worried about loosing any of my rights, that are and were guaranteed to my by the constitution and bill of rights.
Section 1021 affirms the executive branch's authority to detain persons covered by the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) (Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note). This section breaks no new ground and is unnecessary. The authority it describes was included in the 2001 AUMF, as recognized by the Supreme Court and confirmed through lower court decisions since then. Two critical limitations in section 1021 confirm that it solely codifies established authorities. First, under section 1021(d), the bill does not "limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force." Second, under section 1021(e), the bill may not be construed to affect any "existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States." My Administration strongly supported the inclusion of these limitations in order to make clear beyond doubt that the legislation does nothing more than confirm authorities that the Federal courts have recognized as lawful under the 2001 AUMF. Moreover, I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a Nation. My Administration will interpret section 1021 in a manner that ensures that any detention it authorizes complies with the Constitution, the laws of war, and all other applicable law.
continued,
January 1, 2012 at 4:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
continued,
Section 1022 seeks to require military custody for a narrow category of non-citizen detainees who are "captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force." This section is ill-conceived and will do nothing to improve the security of the United States. The executive branch already has the authority to detain in military custody those members of al-Qa'ida who are captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the AUMF, and as Commander in Chief I have directed the military to do so where appropriate. I reject any approach that would mandate military custody where law enforcement provides the best method of incapacitating a terrorist threat. While section 1022 is unnecessary and has the potential to create uncertainty, I have signed the bill because I believe that this section can be interpreted and applied in a manner that avoids undue harm to our current operations.
I have concluded that section 1022 provides the minimally acceptable amount of flexibility to protect national security. Specifically, I have signed this bill on the understanding that section 1022 provides the executive branch with broad authority to determine how best to implement it, and with the full and unencumbered ability to waive any military custody requirement, including the option of waiving appropriate categories of cases when doing so is in the national security interests of the United States. As my Administration has made clear, the only responsible way to combat the threat al-Qa'ida poses is to remain relentlessly practical, guided by the factual and legal complexities of each case and the relative strengths and weaknesses of each system. Otherwise, investigations could be compromised, our authorities to hold dangerous individuals could be jeopardized, and intelligence could be lost. I will not tolerate that result, and under no circumstances will my Administration accept or adhere to a rigid across-the-board requirement for military detention. I will therefore interpret and implement section 1022 in the manner that best preserves the same flexible approach that has served us so well for the past 3 years and that protects the ability of law enforcement professionals to obtain the evidence and cooperation they need to protect the Nation.
The preceeding is just part of the Presidents statement.
Go to http://www.democraticunderground.com/...
I don' t know whether it will put your minds at ease . But there is not much we can do about it now, anyway.
January 1, 2012 at 4:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
meth,
"Moreover, I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a Nation. My Administration will interpret section 1021 in a manner that ensures that any detention it authorizes complies with the Constitution, the laws of war, and all other applicable law."
PLEASE NOTE THE WORDS
MY ADMINISTRATION
INTERPRET
It's a funny thing about laws. They last longer than the adminisrations that pass them and interpret them.
January 2, 2012 at 6:14 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
meth,
You should also remember that "our president" also promised to shut down Guantamamo.
January 2, 2012 at 6:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
I remember when Obama was running for president, a number of people said that if he was elected, they would leave the country. Hmmm, they're still heeeere.
Me too, bubba, I've been on KPERS retirement too and have not seen ANY cost of living raises. Never will either. Yet people continue to harp. Why? Something to harp about maybe. I suggest that they should have gone to work for an organization that featured KPERS retirement if they want a pension like that. Oh wait, not enough salary offered in those organizations? Awwwwwww...guess those folks will just have to continue to harp as usual. I've seen the same kind of complaining about Veteran's benefits and pensions by people who have neither served in the military nor would have never thought to make it a career. Yet they harp. Oh well.
As far as presidential promises, most who run for president make promises and statements they can never carry out because once they DO enter office, they quickly learn about the many, many things they can't really do after all. We need to be aware of that or we are not informed voters who can separate the wheat from the chaff. Then we become nothing but a bunch of naysayers and conspiracy freaks.
Methusla, thanks for your post re: HR 1540. I appreciate the information, and had looked this up myself not long ago. I hesitated to place it on this forum, however, because as with so many other things, all the definitions and info in the world will not stop the naysayers. They enjoy the negativity so Happy New Year to them, one and all.
January 2, 2012 at 8 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
I too saw the President's statement on this, I came to the exact same conclusion as Steve. I do think Obama would do the right thing, but some of nuts I have seen running on the Right currently.... would you really trust a Bachmann, Perry, or even a Palin with that kind of power. In this circumstance I would actually consider leaving the country.
January 2, 2012 at 9:03 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
All anyone can do, when it comes to Bills and Laws is, interpret them, in a manner that suits them. The problem is, if you try and interpret anything with a " closed " mind, how can one intrepret anything " fairly " ??
I for one, believe that our current President, does have an open mind, as far as any politician can have an open mind. Given the influences and pressures that are put on them and the corruption, power, greed and outside influences that abounds in political and government circles.
However there are those certain individuals that are absolutely closed minded. in all walks of life and professions. And I don' t believe that I need to throw any names around, as I think most of us know who these individuals are . There are plenty of these individuals around, even in Emporia, Ks..
Steve C., you are right about promises made by not only " Our President ", but by all of our so called " Bi-partisan " elected officials . But, we all also need to remember that our elected officials/representatives are only human and subject to all of the frailties of being human, including " Greed, Corruption, Power and Outside Influences " !
Also, one man cannot force anything to be done, especially when it comes to Government, Governing .
Truth is, even the sensible and wise Ron Paul cannot accomplish anything " BY HIMSELF " if elected President, he or anyone will need the co-operation and backing of the " outside controlled " U.S. Congress and Congressmen/women " !
JMO
January 2, 2012 at 9:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
gosh, who said they would move away if President Obama was elected? No one that matters was it?
January 2, 2012 at 12:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
Yep, everything is fine here folks. Nothing to see. Move along now.
Let's just keep doing what we have been doing the last decade with a smile on our face and let the kids pay for our selfishness.
As long as I get mine, screw everyone else.
Does that sound familiar?
January 2, 2012 at 12:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sail (anonymous) says...
I agree Steve, now is not a time to be optimistically blind,
January 3, 2012 at 5:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sail (anonymous) says...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2r1JS...
January 3, 2012 at 5:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sail (anonymous) says...
interesting utube about the ndaa,some might find enlightening.
January 3, 2012 at 5:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
Here is an even more, " seemingly to the point message " by Ron Paul .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeCpLc...
January 3, 2012 at 5:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
Here' s another Ron Paul statement, that is exactly what I have been saying for a long time, about politic, political parties and politicions being " owned " by the same " elite " individuals, businesses and corporations .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKEObC...
January 3, 2012 at 6:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
And yet another fact, by Ron Paul, that has the ring of sensability and truth about it, that noone wants to hear !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hzl7Tw...
Sorry for pulling a reddog on you !!
RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT !!
January 3, 2012 at 6:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )