The Foreign Service Officers in Iraq has the right to be upset at the new State Department Policy that was proposed concerning Iraq. This Policy says that they could either stay in Iraq or put their jobs at risk. They gave them no choice. That is not only the negative side of the story, they weren’t even told about the change in matter. It was said that the Foreign Service Officers weren’t told about the change in policy directly, but heard it from a news organization last week. Upon hearing this news, they called it a “potential death sentence”. In showing how upset the officers were; One veteran of the Foreign Service left some comments and said that “it is one thing if someone believes in what is going on over there and volunteers, but it is another thing to send someone over there on a forced assignment, I am sorry, but basically that is a potential death sentence and you know it, who will raise our children if we are dead or wounded?”. Another office said that “the rule should consider the dangers of a war zone, lack of security and regular rocket attacks on U.S. personnel”.
With all of these outbursts from the officers, Harry Thomas (Foreign Service Director General) said that the announcement made last week would inform 200 people as prime candidates and the selection would be done by Thanksgiving. Harry Thomas also said that the “Personnel chosen would be given 10 days to reply and unless they had a valid medical reason to refuse, those who decline could face dismissal”. Regarding that comment said by the Foreign Service Director General, it shows that they don’t care about how the Foreign Service Officers feel about the matter, they just want to get the supposedly job done regardless of any opposition. Like Thomas said, “We cannot shrink from our duty, we agreed to worldwide availability”.
To conclude this, because the Personnels agreed to “worldwide availability”, that doesn’t give the Director General or whoever is in charge of the affairs the right to put the officers where ever they want without the officers knowing about it. It was wrong what the State Department did on this issue. Next time, the person in charge should let the Foreign Service Officers know the step they were or are going to take because the officers are humans like everybody else, they have feelings, and loved ones who cares about them.
The New Iraq policy prompts angry words at the State Department article can be found on cnn.com
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/31/state.department.iraq/index.html#cnnSTCText
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
President Bush calls for change in the Military Disablility System
President Bush's Reform on the Military Disability System Nytimes.com
President Bush spoke about the changes that should be made on the Military Disability System on Tuesday, October 16. The President said that the system is old (it is an outdated system) and needs to change to meet the demand of the new world. He said that the military disability system had “fallen behind the times and had left too many disabled soldiers falling through the cracks”. The President said this because “Medical advances have enabled battlefield medics and hospitals to provide our wounded warriors with care that would have been unimaginable just a decade ago”.
This issue occurred to President Bush because the former Senator Bob Dole and former secretary of health and human services Donna Shalala recommended it. In addition to that the “commission that included disabled veterans and the wife of a disabled veteran, was appointed after articles in the Washington post exposed veterans living in shoddy conditions at Walter Reed Medical Center”.
Despite all of that, the proposal that the President sent to Congress was very reasonable. The proposal said that the Department of Veterans Affairs and Defense Department would have the authority to determine the levels of benefits and care that the injured soldiers received. President Bush also said that in his document that the agencies’ authorities would be separated and that “soldiers determined to be permanently disabled would move into the V.A. system, and receive care and compensation based on their loss of earnings and the impact of their injuries on their quality of life”. The President’s proposal also stated that “In an effort to remove the stigma from soldiers who might be suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, the president’s plan would allow all soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan to seek evaluations for the disorder, without having to first prove they have cause for feeling stress”.
Furthermore, President Bush says that this issue is very urgent and needs to put into law. However, few weeks ago, some members of the Democrats and Republicans said that the President’s administration was “not fast enough to address the problems identified by the commission”. Paul Rieckhoff (executive director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America) even said “we were frustrated that it took so long, but it’s good to see the President stand up and address it publicly and start to drive the train forward”.
Although, some people are saying that this proposal is taking so long to go into effect, but the President can’t do it all. Congress also has some saying in the matter.
President Bush spoke about the changes that should be made on the Military Disability System on Tuesday, October 16. The President said that the system is old (it is an outdated system) and needs to change to meet the demand of the new world. He said that the military disability system had “fallen behind the times and had left too many disabled soldiers falling through the cracks”. The President said this because “Medical advances have enabled battlefield medics and hospitals to provide our wounded warriors with care that would have been unimaginable just a decade ago”.
This issue occurred to President Bush because the former Senator Bob Dole and former secretary of health and human services Donna Shalala recommended it. In addition to that the “commission that included disabled veterans and the wife of a disabled veteran, was appointed after articles in the Washington post exposed veterans living in shoddy conditions at Walter Reed Medical Center”.
Despite all of that, the proposal that the President sent to Congress was very reasonable. The proposal said that the Department of Veterans Affairs and Defense Department would have the authority to determine the levels of benefits and care that the injured soldiers received. President Bush also said that in his document that the agencies’ authorities would be separated and that “soldiers determined to be permanently disabled would move into the V.A. system, and receive care and compensation based on their loss of earnings and the impact of their injuries on their quality of life”. The President’s proposal also stated that “In an effort to remove the stigma from soldiers who might be suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, the president’s plan would allow all soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan to seek evaluations for the disorder, without having to first prove they have cause for feeling stress”.
Furthermore, President Bush says that this issue is very urgent and needs to put into law. However, few weeks ago, some members of the Democrats and Republicans said that the President’s administration was “not fast enough to address the problems identified by the commission”. Paul Rieckhoff (executive director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America) even said “we were frustrated that it took so long, but it’s good to see the President stand up and address it publicly and start to drive the train forward”.
Although, some people are saying that this proposal is taking so long to go into effect, but the President can’t do it all. Congress also has some saying in the matter.
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
Should President Bush veto the new SCHIP bill that the senate just passed?
President George W. Bush threatened to veto the SCHIP program found on BBC NEWS
On September 28, 2007, the senate passed a bill "State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)". This bill is facing a veto from Bush. “Mr. Bush has threatened to veto the bill which he argues takes the program beyond its original purpose of insuring children from low-income families.” However, this renewed bill will focus on the higher income households; the majority of the senate (mostly democrats) are in support of that.
The supporters of this renewal of the bill said that “the extra money would come from raising taxes on tobacco products, including tax on a packet of cigarettes rising by 61 cents to $1 and that the extra funding would increase enrolment from the current 6.6 million children to 10 million, and dramatically reduce the number of uninsured children in the US, put at about nine million.” So this regulation is going to be based on taxes.
Inspite of that, the democrats are using this regulation to win more votes in their upcoming elections. “The legislation's backers of attempting to win political points ahead of 2008's presidential and congressional elections”. Thus this scheme is mostly beneficial to the middle class. As a result of that, the lower working class will be the ones that it would hurt the most.
With all that been said, the purpose of the SCHIP was to help working families who could not afford private health insurance but who earned too much to qualify for Medicaid - the government health care program for the poor”. The SCHIP hasn’t even covered all the kids who are eligible for it. So why renew it if it is not going to help the main targets?
I totally agree with Bush's plan and I think he should veto this bill because the renewed bill will target the wrong people and it won’t help the people who needs it the most. In other words, with the renewal of this bill, the middle class families would be more likely to drop their private insurance plans, and this will lessen the working lower class families’ chances to SCHIP.
I do hope that President Bush’s idea to veto this bill will go into effect!
On September 28, 2007, the senate passed a bill "State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)". This bill is facing a veto from Bush. “Mr. Bush has threatened to veto the bill which he argues takes the program beyond its original purpose of insuring children from low-income families.” However, this renewed bill will focus on the higher income households; the majority of the senate (mostly democrats) are in support of that.
The supporters of this renewal of the bill said that “the extra money would come from raising taxes on tobacco products, including tax on a packet of cigarettes rising by 61 cents to $1 and that the extra funding would increase enrolment from the current 6.6 million children to 10 million, and dramatically reduce the number of uninsured children in the US, put at about nine million.” So this regulation is going to be based on taxes.
Inspite of that, the democrats are using this regulation to win more votes in their upcoming elections. “The legislation's backers of attempting to win political points ahead of 2008's presidential and congressional elections”. Thus this scheme is mostly beneficial to the middle class. As a result of that, the lower working class will be the ones that it would hurt the most.
With all that been said, the purpose of the SCHIP was to help working families who could not afford private health insurance but who earned too much to qualify for Medicaid - the government health care program for the poor”. The SCHIP hasn’t even covered all the kids who are eligible for it. So why renew it if it is not going to help the main targets?
I totally agree with Bush's plan and I think he should veto this bill because the renewed bill will target the wrong people and it won’t help the people who needs it the most. In other words, with the renewal of this bill, the middle class families would be more likely to drop their private insurance plans, and this will lessen the working lower class families’ chances to SCHIP.
I do hope that President Bush’s idea to veto this bill will go into effect!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
