Nation Bids Farewell to the Hon. Senator Edward M. Kennedy

By Padmini Arhant

The moment has arrived for the nation to acknowledge the final departure of their tireless and long serving representative, Senator Ted Kennedy, the youngest son of America’s beloved family.

Senator Kennedy, the brave survivor of many family tragedies was a true warrior in various aspects. The Senator zealously battled for the large segments of the society on significant issues and health care was the top priority among them. Senator Kennedy delivered the health care speech with sincere emotion and great concern for the neglected groups in our society.

Ted Kennedy was not prepared to settle for anything less than universal health coverage and clarified the urgency with authority and conviction. The Senator, as a veteran legislator was all too familiar with the opposition and the politics behind the ‘health care’ reform and anxiously looked forward to realizing his lifetime dream into eventuality. Therefore, it’s a test of the time for his colleagues on both sides of the aisle eulogizing the departed leader’s dynamic role in legislative history to legitimize their words into action in the matter that was appropriately the Kennedy ‘brainchild.’

In other historic issues, Senator Kennedy’s valiant declaration to endorse the candidacy of the then Senator Barack Obama led to the successful nomination and election of the President Barack Obama as the first African American breaking the long held tradition to the office of Presidency.

It’s poignant to specify that Senator Ted Kennedy had many aspirations and desires for his fellow citizens and strived to accomplish them ranging from civil rights to equal wages and opportunities for all in every possible social and economic front. Once again, despite the current political atmosphere pervasive of a legion across the party lines to represent the powerful and influential in the society.

Another phenomenal trend set by the audacious Senator was to join the minority legislators and party members in his opposition to invade a nation, Iraq based on hypothesis and concocted theories validates the experience, foresight and diligence, rare qualities in contemporary politics.

Life presents choices and decisions are consequential, sometimes with a reversible or irreversible state. Senator Ted Kennedy demonstrated repeatedly by seeking the arduous journey in legislative affairs that it’s easier to default on the promise to the constituents electing public officials to power to do the right for them but rather challenging to live up to the trust and expectations of the republic.

Ted Kennedy portrayed the latter with poise and passion.

Considering the long career span of Senator Ted Kennedy, it’s a daunting task to summarize the portfolio sparsely without compromising the achievements in the several hard fought legislative issues.

The nation comes together to bid farewell to the bastion of peace, freedom and equal rights for all Americans – natives, naturalized and others on American soil.

As we celebrate the life of Senator Edward M. Kennedy, his legacy must continue beyond the horizon of hopes in the American politics.

So long, Senator – May your soul rest in eternal peace.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Remembering the Service of the Honorable. Senator Edward M. Kennedy

By Padmini Arhant

The passing away of Senator Edward Kennedy, one of the longest serving public officials in the United States Senate has created a vacuum in the battlefield for humanitarian cause. Senator Kennedy’s representation on many issues remembered nationwide. Among them, the Senator’s relentless effort to bring equality and justice to the poor and underprivileged in the hallmark healthcare, education and immigration was commendable. There is more reason to pass the public option health care reform as a tribute to the deceased Senator.

Senator Kennedy fought for millions in not only his constituency but also the entire nation with passion and power. The Senator extended his service beyond shorelines in ways to resolve the international conflict such as the Northern Ireland peace process. Senator Kennedy was committed and dedicated in helping citizens of stars and stripes achieve their American dream.

The national recognition of Senator Kennedy as ‘The Lion of the Senate’ personified in the Senator’s role in every legislative matter of great value and importance to all people regardless of socio-economic status.

Senator Ted Kennedy lived up to the reputation of the Kennedy legacy in national service. As a true patriot, the Senator deeply cared and carried out the legislative duties and responsibilities diligently and frequently in a bipartisan manner, a monumental achievement in contemporary politics.

Senator Edward M. Kennedy will be truly missed by the nation, while his service commemorated now and in the future as the member of the iconic Kennedy family and the esteemed United States Senate.

No words can possibly heal the moment of sorrow except time.

Time is the best healer and trusting in the brighter tomorrow ease the pain experienced during the natural events in life.

I convey my heartfelt condolences to the Kennedy family, friends and the entire nation.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

P.S. Due to technical difficulty at the personal end, the delay occurred in posting the message earlier on. Please accept my apologies for the time lapse.

Judge Sotomayor’s Confirmation by the Senate Judiciary Committee

By Padmini Arhant

Supreme Court Justice Confirmation by the Senate Judiciary Committee

Heartfelt congratulations! to judge Sonia Sotomayor on her confirmation by the Senate Judiciary Committee to the highest court in the land.

Surviving a grueling confirmation hearing qualifies for a ceremonial victory. Judge Sotomayor exhibited perfection in the process that requires patience, knowledge, and skills to address issues and concerns set forth by the committee.

The final confirmation for a full Senate vote scheduled the following week will be a historic event. Besides complementing the existing judiciary talent and expertise, it would transcend identity politics that dominated since the President’s choice of the nominee for the United States Supreme Court.

However, the vehement opposition from the right side of the political aisle authenticates the partisanship prevalent in every national matter. The following news report citing the conservatives’ principles for future nominees – to prioritize fidelity to the law over personal emotions and prejudice is contradictory to their own doctrine and nine years late… considering the Presidential election outcome in the year 2000.

Judiciary Committee OKs Sotomayor for high court – Associated Press July 28, 2009.

Even though they never stood a chance of defeating Sotomayor, her Republican opponents said they gained ground during the confirmation process by getting Democrats to agree that judges should above all be faithful to the law — an idea they said counters Obama’s stated view that a justice should have “empathy.”

“We agreed that judges should be impartial and not pick winners and losers based on some subjective empathy standard or whatever is in the judge’s heart,” said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas. “We’ve defined where the judicial mainstream is … and we’ve set expectations, I believe, for future nominees.”

My best wishes to Judge Sonia Sotomayor, the imminent justice to the United States Supreme Court with her challenging new career and look forward to the voice of the democracy legitimized per the constitutional rule based on the humanitarian law.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

U.S. Foreign Policy in the 20th and 21st Century

By Padmini Arhant

The United States foreign policy in the twentieth and twenty first century viewed by allies and adversaries differently depending upon the U.S. engagement viz. modus operandi in the conflicts of the affected regions.

Throughout the twentieth century, the United States direct and indirect dominant role brought peace and chaos to the world order, ominously the Cuban crisis and the infamous Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos war combined with constant interventions in the Korean Peninsula, the Americas, the Middle East, Africa as well as South and South East Asia.

With the exception of sparing the world from Nazi and fascist rule in Europe and elsewhere – a significant contribution to the birth of democracies in Japan and Western Europe,

Ironically, the subsequent U.S. foreign policy mostly enabled the rise of brutal regimes and totalitarianism particularly in the under developed, poor and impoverished parts of the world.

The colonial British dethroned by the Imperial U.S. foreign policy primarily responsible for the status quo in the Middle East, while other European and Mediterranean colonialists – France, Netherlands, Spain, Greece and Portugal leaving their trademark in Africa, Asia and the Americas.

World witnessed the emergence of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Theocracy in Iran following the overthrow of U.S. backed monarchy Shah of Iran including the predecessors and the successors in the entire Middle East aided by the contrived U.S. foreign policy driven by selective internal and external political interests focused on personal agenda.

Much to the operators’ surprise, their misguided policies led to the formation of terror organization such as Al Qaeda and the coronation of its leader Osama Bin Laden, a former Mujahedeen trained by CIA and the U.S. professional armed forces during the confrontation with the Afghanistan invaders, the former Soviet Union.

Given the track record of military aggression and perpetual violence by the profiteers representing the military industrial complex successfully causing carnage and destruction around the world up until now,

The cold war era might have curbed huge conventional and nuclear clashes between the two Superpowers in the 60’s and the 70’s but certainly facilitated the lucrative arms race specifically the nuclear arsenal between the rich and poor nations.

Late twentieth century comprising the Soviet Union disintegration along with nuclear fragmentation in that politically unstable vast region left the field open for U.S. foreign policy dominance in the world.

The United States foreign policy architects wasted no time in the invasions and occupations on the national security pretext and supporting their ‘ally’ Israel in the highly volatile Middle East or promoting ill-conceived democracies in the Western hemisphere through military coups.

The United States reputation until the 2008 Presidential election, as the leader of the free world and the Superpower tarnished because of the failed U.S. foreign policies for most part of the twentieth century and well into the twenty first century. Again, U.S blunders complemented with Iraqi invasion contributed to the neglect of the U.S. mission in Afghanistan to eliminate the strengthening Al Qaeda and Taliban forces from the northwestern Pakistani turf.

Further in the Middle East, as a defense surrogate the United States’ sworn allegiance to Israel against potential threats and attacks from Iran, Syria, Lebanon through Hezbollah, and Palestinian Gaza through Hamas is another factor for skepticism towards the ‘Western partner, USA’ among the Arab nations controlling the ‘oil’, the world’s most required natural resource.

Although, the strange predicament of U.S. surrogacy towards Israel and platonic relationship with the Arab world defended by declaring energy independence to undermine Arab stance in this matter, the reality of it is at least a decade away if not longer considering the Washington stalemate in the energy bill pending Senate approval.

The existing Israeli illegal invasion and occupation of Palestinian territories through settlements expansion must end to resolve the relic Israeli-Palestinian issue.

Meanwhile, in the Iranian political crisis and nuclear program, the recent rhetoric from the key White House representatives is not helpful as it creates unnecessary obstacles on the path towards democracy and stability in the Middle East such as Iraq and inevitably Iran.

Aside from pursuing the independent Palestinian state free of Israeli control in any form or shape and ensuring Israel’s safety and security as a sovereign state, it is paramount for Iran to free itself from the repressive theocratic regime for long lasting peace in the Middle East.

Fortunately, the current developments by the Iranian dissent galvanizing pro-reformist movements and the moderate clerics’ defiance to validate the rigged June 12 election results are optimistic and encouraging in terms of the possible democratic Iran evolving amidst reprehensible pro-democracy crackdown and human rights violation.

Any assertion by the United States proclaiming Israel’s sovereignty as a precursor for military strikes against Iranian hypothetical nuclear proliferation could be immensely detrimental to the United States, Israel, Iraq, and the remaining international security.

Why United States must refrain from controversial political posturing in an effort to defend Israel against alleged Iranian nuclear threat?

And

Why Israel should abandon any military option against Iran?

1. Firstly, Iran embroiled in the political crisis following the courageous decision by the pro-democratic Iranian population to seek twenty first century governance that guarantees fundamental human rights and economic relief with jobs, distribution of oil revenues through investment in common national growth and development.

2. Iranian theocracy fractured from the political turmoil delineating the moderate clerics from the hardliners with respect to unlawful killings, arrests and clamp down in the wake of forming the theocratic rule with their nominee Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, an unpopular choice even among the
Ayatollahs representing the theocracy.

3. During the political transitioning in Iran any such statements by the United States – “Israel has a sovereign right to strike Iran’s apparent nuclear site and that the United States will not interfere in Israeli mission with the reaffirmation from the State Department that strike against Israel will be an attack against the United States” sever than serve the purpose.
———————————————————————————–

ABC’S SUNDAY TALK ON JUNE 5, 2009: “This Week” Host George Stephanopoulos

Three times, I asked Biden if the Obama Administration would stand in the way of an Israeli military strike. Three times, he repeated that Israel was free to do what it needed to do. “If the Netanyahu government decides to take a course of action different than the one being pursued now, that is their sovereign right to do that. That is not our choice.”

A subsequent interview with the Secretary of State – Hillary Clinton.

“CLINTON: I would make it clear to the Iranians that an attack on Israel would incur massive retaliation from the United States.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

STEPHANOPOULOS: Is it U.S. policy now?

CLINTON: I think it is U.S. policy to the extent that we have alliances and understandings with a number of nations. They may not be formal, as it is with NATO, but I don’t think there is any doubt in anyone’s mind that, were Israel to suffer a nuclear attack by Iran, there would be retaliation.

STEPHANOPOULOS: By the United States?

CLINTON: Well, I think there would be retaliation. And I think part of what is clear is, we want to avoid a — a Middle East arms race which leads to nuclear weapons being in the possession of other countries in the Middle East, and we want to make clear that there are consequences and costs.”
————————————————————————————–
Analysis – By Padmini Arhant

President Obama’s candidacy pledged towards relentless diplomacy and peaceful negotiations in all foreign policy matters including the Middle East, assuring a dramatic shift from the Bush administration’s formula involving military action to resolve any political crisis.

The commitment reversal in the Iranian matter would deeply hurt the administration’s credibility in the Middle East as well as among the nations, the President is attempting to outreach for better international relations i.e. Russia and its allies.

United States and Israeli positions could also be misconstrued as provocative and derail the ‘behind the scenes’ progress developing in Iran. Besides fomenting fear and concern among the Iranian population already mortified from the latest violence, it could escalate tension in the neighboring Iraq adjusting to the gradual U.S. troops withdrawal from its cities with the hope of seeing complete timeline withdrawal by 2011.

United States will be officially presenting itself complicit in the catastrophic event with similar overtures not barring double standards in anything related to Israel.

Above all, the economic impact is even greater with respect to crude oil stocks superficially skyrocketing based on the speculative ramifications of Israeli strike against Iran (an OPEC member and one of the leading oil producers) on United States watch.

Moreover, Israel’s unilateral action against Iran would isolate Israel and exacerbate Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s status as a hardliner even though the Prime Minister now appearing to reconcile terms with the two states solutions vital for the Israeli-Palestinian future and,

Notwithstanding the proposed Israeli military action jeopardizing the Arab states’ recognition of Israel as a sovereign state and a viable peace partner in the Middle East.

As for the rest of the world, the terror attacks will substantially increase by default, embolden the weakened Al Qaeda in Iraq and Pakistan with vigorous recruitments through mere propaganda that U.S, and ally Israel preparing yet another military action against an Islamic nation Iran after the prolonged occupation in Iraq.

In light of the projected precarious scenarios, United States being the world leader has a moral responsibility to prioritize diplomacy and non-violence over military attacks either directly or by proxy.

It’s time for the United States to make a conscientious departure from the disastrous old ways proven counterproductive and write a new chapter in history by remaining a trustworthy partner and a reliable negotiator for all nations in the establishment of global peace.

Opportunities are rare and power guided by wisdom produce positive outcome.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

July 4, Independence Day

By Padmini Arhant

July 4th is a memorable day for all Americans to cherish the freedom of choice in every respect as citizens of this great nation.

The American society not only celebrates freedom like most free nations across the world but also strives to liberate those deserving equality no matter where they belong.

The President’s inspiring call to serve humanity on this day resonates with the patriots’ decision to pledge their valuable resources that enabled the Independence Day commemorated with joy through spectacular fireworks decorating the night.

The courageous troops in harm’s way protecting the freedom rejoiced by many on this day of Independence remain in most citizens’ thoughts and prayers all year around.

American freedom is the envy of the world, however regretfully the citizens’ privacy as well as civil liberties compromised in the past and present time with the wiretapping and monitoring private citizens’ communication by NSA warrantless surveillance in the wake of national security – a scapegoat in the divisive matter.

Freedom is a precious gift not possessed by all. There are millions on earth desperately seeking choices in life and often deprived of fundamental rights. While, in the land of the free and the home of the brave – freedom sometimes taken for granted with respect to the second amendment or the fourth amendment exhibiting excessive firepower figuratively and otherwise.

In view of the status quo related to citizens’ safety and privacy, freedom exercised with care and humanitarian concern is an ideal guide to those aspiring to be free.

The happiness from the Fourth of July legacy will continue to flow beyond expectations and shared by those dependent upon the leader of the free world for life honored with independent will.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant
P.S. Please stand by for views and analysis on important issues concerning the State of California and the nation in general.

National Day Service

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 12:43 PM, First Lady Michelle Obama wrote:

Tere’s an old Thomas Edison quote I’ve always liked: "Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work." It’s no secret that our country faces some enormous challenges right now, and meeting them will take a lot of hard work. But in that work lies an equally great opportunity — a chance to serve. And I do believe the chance to serve is a precious gift indeed. Service has played a transformative role in my life — bringing me tremendous joy and helping me find the path that led to where I am today. As a parent, I believe service is a great way to demonstrate values and to teach our children firsthand what it means to commit to a purpose beyond ourselves. It should be a part of everyone’s life. From the moment someone can walk to the day they leave this planet, service should be a part of how we give back, how we say thank you, how we express our gratitude for the lives that we’ve been given. So I’m deeply honored for this chance to support our United We Serve initiative and Organizing for America, and I hope you’ll be able to participate this weekend. Please sign up now to volunteer at a local event: http://my.barackobama.com/hcserviceattend Thank you, First Lady Michelle Obama —————————————————————————————- On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Padmini Arhant wrote: Dear Michelle, National Health Care Day of Service organized through ‘United We Serve’ initiated by the Corporation for National and Community Service is indeed a great occasion for every American to get involved in raising awareness as well as being part of the solutions to the national crisis – the citizens’ health. The concept – ‘Health is Wealth’ should not even be a debate leave alone a contentious issue on the Hill right now with the weak, fragile and the physically ailing population across the socio-economic strata desperately requiring healing to the prolonged pain and suffering endured by millions every hour. Several compelling real experiences shared by thousands of affected citizens deserve action since the embattled health care proposal by President Obama brought to national attention for long overdue legislation. I have no doubt that every caring American generally known for the generosity with their time and resources across the nation and abroad will respond to community service in any aspect regardless of political affiliations. I wish the “United We Serve” success in the dedication to humanitarian service. Thank you for the opportunity to be part of the worthy cause. Best Wishes Padmini Arhant

Supreme Court Nominee

By Padmini Arhant

President Barack Obama announced his nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor as the next Justice of the United States Supreme Court replacing Justice David Souter retiring after twenty years of service.

The nomination is currently under scrutiny with intense speculations on the debate expected to unfold during the Senate confirmation hearing in July 2009. United States Supreme Court is the highest judiciary on land, decisions made by the appointees of the judicial system immensely impact human lives, often leading to a landmark ruling for years to come as evidenced in –

Brown vs. Board of education,

Roe v. Wade and,

The 2000 Presidential election between the former President George W. Bush and the former Vice President Al Gore in recent memory.

President Obama’s message reinforce the relevance —

“A nomination for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land is one of the most important decisions a President can make. And the discussions that follow will be among the most important we have as a nation.”

Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s extensive career and personal profile appears to represent the essence of the judicial system requiring excellence in all legal faculties prominently the constitution and the general rule of law governing our society. However, impressive academic and career achievements are never without controversies as infallibility is not in human nature.

Considering the Supreme Court justice has an awesome responsibility to be part of the collective decision-making dilemma, confirmation hearing premised on due diligence and forthright presentation would provide necessary clarifications on many pertinent issues concerning society. Further, transparency in recognition of the challenges confronting the highest court whose decisions are “as stated by the President – serious and consequential” minimizes skepticism among the general mass.

Since political representations substantially influence the process, maintaining objectivity is in the republic’s interest. The elected officials are obligatory primarily to the people in a democracy protected by the constitution and the rule of law. There have been several issues brought to attention regarding the nominee, Judge Sonia Sotomayor. While some of them described as ‘caricature’ routinely experienced by aspirants seeking the highest positions on land, other matter deserve attention and unequivocal response from the nominee.

After careful review of reports and editorials, it is clear that both left and right political factions and various women’s groups desire a position related to the opinion, speech and actions of Judge Sonia Sotomayor, given the dynamics of the Supreme Court Justice role in the judicial hearing.

The specific interests in this context are –

1. The conservatives from the right raise the issue about ‘Identity Politics’ in reference to the comment on judicial expertise between a Latina judge and a white male counterpart in light of different life experiences. –

The statement rests on general assumption about distinctive race and lifestyle predicted to impact judgment due to unique background.

In addition, the categorical representation – “A person is what his or her race, ethnicity, gender or sexual preference is, and members of a particular category can be represented – understood, empathized with – only by persons of the same identity.” –

The claim suggests exclusivity in serving a particular segment and alienates the ability of those to relate to an assorted category. Such situation could apply conversely implying the representatives’ inability to deal with groups other than their own.

2. Another contentious matter from the political right is the affirmative action and the constitutionality of racial preferences in university admissions and the criteria of necessity.

Affirmative action was justified and served well for the people deprived of fair and equal opportunities post civil rights period. In the twenty first century though a milestone reached with the first African American as the 44th President of the United States, it’s far from perfection. Nonetheless, remarkable progress made until date in numerous fields and occupation.

Therefore, the status quo affirmative action is more harmful than being helpful with the race rather than merit based criteria. Besides marginalizing the once majority now diminishing with the steep rise of minorities, the preferential treatment is a setback for the intended minority possessing intellectual equivalence to others in equal settings. Even the genuinely qualifying minority likely perceived as the affirmative action beneficiary.

3. As an appellate judge, upholding a district court’s dismissal of the New Haven, Connecticut fire fighters’ complaint denying them promotions because there were no African Americans upset a large group of the conservative and moderate members in the political party crying foul and condemned as reverse discrimination. Judge Sotomayor quoted to have expressed “Appellate courts where the policy made.”

Reports indicate that Judge Sotomayor not only follows and defends the rule of law but also respects precedence applicable to prior rulings.

Court rulings precedence could serve favorably or otherwise as noted in the world famous 2000 Presidential election declaring the former President George W. Bush, the winner.

Senate hearing must seek response from the nominee to clear the air in the fire fighters case –What would be the ruling without any constraints i.e. free of quotas for the minority group?

Unveiling the political left’s fear and frustration in the absence of any view on bona fide issues such as Roe v. Wade, the Presidential Power given the past eight years excessive use of power, Death Penalty and Gay Rights are few among the priorities in societal matter.

In the Pro-Life vs. Pro-choice, the reports reveal accordingly:

Source: Washington Post and San Jose Mercury News, May 28, 2009.

1. “Judge Sotomayor’s ruling on abortion was on the conservative side. In the ruling, she said the Bush administration had the right to prohibit abortions by overseas organizations receiving U.S. funding, as well as the right to prohibit the groups from speaking out against the restrictions.

In this case, the article noted that Judge Sotomayor was following the court’s precedents, something she might not do if she were on the Supreme Court. “There is no doubt that Judge Sotomayor’s philosophy is that she is not only a practitioner of activism, but a defender of it.”

Source: Los Angeles Times, San Jose Mercury News, May 28, 2009.

“In her only abortion-related decision, she did not come down the way abortion-rights groups would have liked:

2. In 2002, Sotomayor rejected a challenge to President George W. Bush’s “Mexico City policy,” which required foreign groups to pledge that they would not support or promote abortion.

Sotomayor spoke for a three-judge panel that upheld the policy as constitutional. The government “is free to favor the anti-abortion position over the pro-choice position and can do so with public funds,” she said.

3. Yet another incident that matter to women’s groups…

Source: Los Angeles Times, San Jose Mercury News May 28, 2009.

Two years ago, Sotomayor joined an appeals court ruling that threw out a challenge to a school district’s policy that required teachers to notify a parent if they knew a girl was pregnant. The court said the teachers had no legal basis for objecting to the policy.”

With respect to overseas organizations receiving U.S. funding for family planning – President Bush’s policy was fortunately overturned by President Obama upon swearing into the office. Nevertheless, the Senate Democrats must pose the question to the nominee in this regard given the incumbent administration’s reversal of the ruling.

President Barack Obama repeatedly pledged to the American electorate on the campaign trail about his pro-choice position and commitment to the constitutional protection granted to women under Roe v. Wade, with an assurance of his Supreme Court nominee reflecting the same.

Meanwhile, during his speech at Notre Dame the President in an effort to strike a chord with the anti-abortion majority approached the controversy through reduction in abortions and exploring adoptions.

Although, abortion is not always the first choice and in most circumstances never a hasty decision by majority of women, all accessible avenues to reduce abortion should be the goal. This must be entertained with the choices made available to every woman entitled to freedom as a human being in a democracy.

There is a correlation between Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s personal background and the conservative ruling in abortion issue with no evidence of her support for Roe v. Wade.

The analysis not directed as a personal attack, the highest court lifetime appointment beckons to scrutinize the possible reason in the coveted pro-choice v. pro-life matter.

Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s cultural and religious background traditionally favors having children and large families are common. Unfortunately, Judge Sotomayor having lost her father at an early age deprived from that experience and combined with a medical condition of juvenile diabetes posing greater risks for pregnancy and complications during childbirth probably advised against child bearing. Judge Sotomayor’s personal profile confirms there are no children.

Judge Sotomayor’s ruling in the abortion matter as cited above leads to the thought of identifying the situation with ‘richness of her life experience,’ while threatening the core constitutional protection of other women’s choice.

Women’s groups for pro-choice are justifiably concerned and urging that –

“All Americans deserve to know where the next Supreme Court justice stands on Roe v. Wade.”

In the 2008 Presidential campaign, Roe v. Wade was the wedge between the Democrats and Republicans in attracting women’s votes. The trend will continue in the 2010 mid-term elections.

Despite the above facts, Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s nomination is historic enriched with a Hispanic heritage, humble beginning, stunning academic and professional record. Judge Sotomayor being a female justice would enhance the gender deficiency in the nation’s highest court.

Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation subject to clarifications on all of the above issues would strengthen the American diversity in the United States Supreme Court.

I wish Judge Sonia Sotomayor success in the confirmation hearing.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

California Special Election Results

Predictably, the voters declared their verdict. Some are good while others aren’t in the following manner–

Source: Data from San Jose, Mercury News, May 20, 2009 – Thanks

Prop 1 A – Spending cap and temporary tax hikes for two years with a “rainy day” fund – Failed
Yes, (35.5%) 1.1 million votes defeated by NO (64.5%) 2 million votes.

Prop 1 B – Education funding plan – Failed! (Shocking!).
Yes, (39%) 1.2 million votes thrashed by NO (61%) 1.9 million votes.

Prop 1 C – Borrowing against future lottery proceeds – Failed
Yes, (37%) 1.1 million votes rejected by NO (63%) 1.9 million votes.

Prop 1 D – Redirecting funds from children’s services – NO (Desirable result), therefore good outcome. – Yes (36%) 1.1. million and NO (64%) 2 million votes.

Prop 1 E – Diversion of funds from mental health services – NO (Yet another positive result).
Represented by Yes (35%) 1 million and NO (65%) 2 million votes.

Prop 1 F – No raises for elected officials – Passed (Thoughtful decision).
Yes (a whopping 75%) 2.3 million votes and NO (25%) 765,357 votes.

————————————————————————————————-
Perspective:

Prop 1 D, E, F results are welcome and justified.

Prop 1 A and C – Obviously, voters are either confused or caught in the tug o’war between spending cuts and tax hikes opponents respectively. Similarly, 1 C failure attributed to voters’ unwillingness to acknowledge the severity of the crisis.

Prop 1 B – Failure underscores the urgency to fund education, enabling future voters and lawmakers to exercise reasoning faculties within on life choices.

The negative outcome beckons to review the demography objecting the educational funding. In a vigorously competitive global economy, the electorate and the legislators alike discarding educational funding indicative of crisis in the educational system.

It’s a matter of concern when legislators and the electorate prioritize politics over prudence in education and health care.

Recent reports have consistently confirmed the United States’ poor achievements in the International Standardized testing against stellar performance by students from Singapore, Finland, South Korea, China, Japan and India.

Is it the United States’ students fault for lagging behind in the international academic contest?

No, unfortunately the fault lies in the inadequate funding towards K-12 education, community colleges and state universities routinely targeted for political reasons. The public school system is a victim of partisanship prevalent in the state legislature and widespread in the national budget prompting endless debates to defend the programs essential for survival and success in the global economy.

United States as the leader of the free world, economic power and pioneer in many fields is contemplating on investment in education and health care, the two most important aspects of human life. It’s no rocket science to figure out that healthy and educated population are a valuable asset to the economy and national productivity.

Ironically, United States’ sharp criticism against the so-called third world poor literacy rates will be an inevitable reality at home, if the policy makers in the state and federal legislations continue to divert and slash funds from education, the fundamental requirement for productive workforce.

The proof of the pudding visually demonstrated in the famous “Jay Walkers” segment of “The Tonight Show with Jay Leno.” In one particular episode, a high school student is unaware of the current “President of the United States,” President George W. Bush at that time and, there were many clueless of the current affairs and events in their homeland during that show. Again, students benefit from quality education by teaching professionals with credentials and that’s only possible with sufficient funding to the school systems.

Contrarily, in another instance, an African student from the Ivory Coast, familiar with the economic struggles was well informed in general knowledge and world events.

Another important reason for education to be a top priority is the bridging of the widening gap between the haves and the have-nots.  Whenever legislators eye on education and health care spending cuts, the worst affected population are the lower income and the poorest of all. School districts with poor academic results often eliminated from funding and they are historically located in poor neighborhoods.

Lack of funding leads to bigger class rooms with skeletal teaching staff juggling between teaching and administrative work.  In some schools, teaching staff expected to play multiple roles as a counselor, disciplinarian, librarian and an administrator.

Even the innovative, entertaining Hollywood is restricted in assigning simultaneous roles for the lead cast in the movies.  Perhaps, these school districts deserve an “Oscar” equivalent for making the most with their host, the teaching staff.

What is severely lacking in the educational system consequently reflected in the decisions made in Sacramento… Washington D.C.?

Critical thinking and creativity are conspicuously missing in the policies and major legislations.
Any recent display of creativity has been paradoxical …for example.

In the past eight years, creativity thrived in the contemporary unprecedented housing, stock market and financial debacles and in national security – the ever controversial Guantanamo Bay, torture, wiretapping, renditions, global insecurity all of the excitement contained in a volcano and pleasantly gifted to the succeeding administration of the President Barack Obama.

Voters on their part have also been creative in more than one respect and that’s exclusive for California with Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger representing the golden state in Sacramento and not so long ago President George W. Bush in Washington D.C.

Such representations confirm the thought process in the electorates’ mind while casting ballots in the major elections and legislative matter.

Similarly, the damages are visible in the Propositions 8 (Same Sex Marriage) and 1 B (Educational funding cut) when ideology prevails over logic.

In addition, political and corporate systems benefit from pragmatism against failed applications taught in the basic education, starting as early as pre-school during the cognitive skills development. Curriculum should emphasize and encourage young minds to be visionaries and forward thinkers and help them evolve into swift problem solvers.

How does the educational funding cut affect the poor neighborhood school districts?

Anytime funding is differed and diverted from educational programs, the poor neighborhood schools face shutting down and the venue becomes the fertile ground for gang violence and crime.

When this happens, a sizable youth population fall prey to drugs and violence burdening the jail and prison system. The culmination of such events directly impact the state budget with a substantial diversion from education and health funding and allocation towards criminal justice.

Evidently, the state could avoid the cyclical pattern and invest in education and health care as a rescue scheme to protect future tax payers in the community and national interest.

Poverty and disparity exist as long as failed policies and ideologies persists.

Further, Prop 1A, B and C failure echo the sentiments of partisan politics and special interests, viewed as the nemesis to democratic electoral process and legislative matter.

Funding education and health care is the best strategy for common progress in the state and nation.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

California State Affairs

By Padmini Arhant

Special Election:

Sacramento is struggling with the fiscal budget crisis and dependent on California voters to help the legislators finalize on the tax hikes and spending cuts through ballot measures scheduled on Tuesday, May 19, 2009.

There are important issues on the ballot awaiting voters’ yah or nay that deserve attention.

Proposition 1 A: Controlling state spending, extending temporary taxes 2 years – Yes (due to status quo).

Hard times teach all a lesson to review, reflect and respond to the situation. In the current crisis – the polarization among the majority and minority with the two-third majority vote compliance creates gridlock in the legislative matter. In addition, the deepening state crisis has little room for negotiations, hence requires prudence in the legislations.

Those in favor of spending cuts justified in their position as long as the cuts are not affecting the vulnerable groups like children, elderly, disabled, mentally ill patients and vital programs such as K-12 and community college education. The possible areas for funds diversion or elimination should be the ones that are no longer valuable in revenue or benefit to the community at large. Often, previous budgets might have funding for a particular project or service that might be redundant and need re-evaluation prompting to either replace or discard, as it may be appropriate.

Temporary tax hikes for two years is a reasonable measure to deal with the economic realities including the credit crunch by the service oriented government sector.

Proposition 1B: Restoring $9 billion owed to schools – a resounding Yes.

As stated earlier in the blogposts titled Balancing California Budget and California Budget Deficiencies on this website, it’s improper to classify funding towards education as ‘spending’ rather than ‘investment.’

K-12 and college education is the foundation for any economy. The work force being the engine of the economy dependent on quality education and training essential to succeed in the highly competitive global economy.

Investment in early education and community college as well as state universities is an absolute priority without exception to eliminate socio-economic disparities contributing the related problems…poverty, disease, crime etc.,ultimately affecting the general economy.

Proposition 1 C: Borrowing $5 billion from future lottery profits – Yes (Based on reality).

Prop. 1A principle applies over here. Borrowing funds in the financial market with severe liquidity crisis is a challenge and any available avenue to salvage the budget deficit is a better strategy.

Proposition 1 D: Diverting the money earmarked for children’s services – Positively NO.

Again, the service adequately qualifies as an ‘investment.’ Children are the future and depriving them from programs benefiting their welfare is counterproductive.

Proposition 1 E: Diverting money from care for mentally ill – NO (Not a viable option).

Despite being immoral to marginalize the feeble for the sake of able, expecting positive outcome from diversion is a misconception.

Proposition 1 F: Denying raises to lawmakers, governor – Unequivocally Yes.

Compromises and sacrifices serve the society well during difficult times particularly when it happens from the top bottom rather than the other way around.

—————————————————————————————————

Budget Deficit Reconciliation:

According to news reports, the budget deficit laid out in two scenarios – Ballot measure approval or failure.

Upon approval the deficit stands at $15.4 billion, contrarily the failure would yield a staggering $21.3 billion through mid 2010 and could get worse if the revenue projections do not correlate with actual earnings around that time.

The estimated total budget for the fiscal year starting in July 2009 is $84 billion.

Obviously, the disproportionate combination of revenue loss and investments/expenses yielded a stalemate.

The economic downturn led to the severe loss in tax revenue directly affecting the funding for various services and programs. Meanwhile, the recipients and beneficiaries of the services remain constant or increased since the last budget.

California confronted by the urgent action to resolve the financial crisis. Government organizations are predominantly service sectors engaged in providing public services to the residents of the state, counties and cities. In such atmosphere, the only and perhaps the major source of income is taxes collected from individuals, corporations, levies, fees and other charges that may be applicable on various items.

When the economy slides rapidly as it has since 2007, it drastically affects the income source via taxes. Unfortunately, the percentage of population receiving the services that typically represents investments/expenses, do not always drop to accommodate the economic decline.  If anything, it either remains unchanged or rise gradually increasing the burden on the budget.

It’s human nature to assume false sense of security during economic boom that leads to an ill-prepared situation for inevitable budget crisis. Combined with the common error is the ideology of the legislators who hold the crisis hostage to justify their political means. Regrettably, actions of this nature by ‘Kamikaze’ pilots produce devastating results.

Many compelling reasons provided to vote for the propositions served on the ballots scheduled early next week. Obviously, the importance laid on the opportunity to derive $6 billion borrowing from the future lottery earnings to survive the immediate crisis.

The circumstance is somewhat similar to SOS from the protective-gearless team at the cliff edge requesting the rescue squad (the voters in this case) to assist them in descending the slippery slope with minimal skull and bone injury.

Since the solution to the budget crisis relies on the revenue and spending equation, exploring ways to generate the deficit amount- $21.3 billion urgently needed to resolve the crisis. It appears that a wide area in spending cuts reviewed and essential programs and services streamlined to meet the challenge. Any further measures to divert funds from these sources i.e. Prop 1B, D and E, would exacerbate the crisis in the long run. It’s noteworthy that preventive care is always cost effective than cure.

The best alternative is to examine the revenue path to raise income for the burgeoning problem. No matter how one circumvents the situation, temporarily raising taxes is an irreversible reality and the only guaranteed avenue to salvage the deficit debacle.

1. Sales tax on items purchased via on-line is legitimate and widely applied around the world.

2. Gasoline tax would be appropriate around this time, considering the decrease in oil prices
recently.

3. In the transportation sector – airport tax, port fees, levies, import duty, quota items,
documentation fees and charges are some areas worth revising.

4. Closing state tax-evasion loopholes to derive income is yet another reliable source.

5. Marginal increase in the parking fees at beaches and parks are attention-worthy.

6. Sale/Leasing government buildings to federal agencies and corporations seeking sports
venues would be suitable for income source.

7. Issuing drivers license and allowing all undocumented workers to register their vehicles
would not only generate income for the state, it would also strengthen state and national
security with the documentation of all residents in the state.

Subsequently, acquiring vehicle insurance by the undocumented workers would minimize the burden on registered owners in addition to stimulating the economy through insurance industry.

8. Entertainment tax receipts from the philanthropic entertainment industry would sufficiently
provide for the deficit cut.

9. In the environmental front – cap and trade emission upon legislation should create opportunity for
state income.

10.The state should not discount borrowing from the federal government given the ‘bailout’ season
prevailing in Washington right now.

11. Among the spending cuts – Abolition of death penalty in California and elsewhere would be a groundbreaking rule aside from being earth shattering for the opponents. Besides reflecting the contemporary modern society, it is morally, ethically and financially right on target.

According to legal professionals directly involved in the state criminal justice system, millions of dollars squandered on the perennial appeals and criminal proceedings leaving the inmates on death row for an indefinite period.  Instead, life sentence without parole and having them involved in the activities that would pay for their upkeep in the prison is the ideal strategy. Prison systems and jails in the state would benefit from a major transformation in serving as the reform and revenue center rather than a medieval archive and a liability on the taxpayers.

The legislators’ iron will to defend their failed policies and ideologies has contributed to the special election event in California on May 19, 2009.  Voters across the state of California must realize that abstinence from voting any time in a democracy is renunciation of personal and constitutional right.  The moral equivalence of discarding the exclusive right would be to entrust life in the hands of the lawmakers primarily responsible for the embarrassing fiscal mismanagement.

Desperate times calls for desperate measures and the electorate have an awesome responsibility towards themselves, families and fellow citizens to exercise diligence and cast ballots in saving the golden state from potential bankruptcy.

Special election is a reminder that two-third majority law in budget and other legislation in both state and federal level best replaced by a simple majority rule for democracy to function efficiently.

Californians can only save California on the brink of collapse on Tuesday, May 19, 2009 with an overwhelming majority approval of the Propositions as recommended above.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

« Previous Page — Next Page »