SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Brumar89 who wrote (1001766)2/23/2017 12:05:21 PM
From: Brumar892 Recommendations

Recommended By
PKRBKR
TideGlider

  Respond to of 1575479
 
Massie Introduces Bill to Abolish U.S. Department of Education

FEBRUARY 7, 2017 BY SHANE VANDER HART

(Washington, DC) On the day Betsy DeVos was confirmed as the Secretary of Education by the U.S. Senate on a 51 to 50 vote with Vice President Mike Pence casting the tie-breaking vote; Congressman Thomas Massie (R-KY) introduced a bill abolishing the U.S. Department of Education.

He filed H.R. 899, a bill to abolish the federal Department of Education. The bill, which is one sentence long, states, “The Department of Education shall terminate on December 31, 2018.”

“Neither Congress nor the President, through his appointees, has the constitutional authority to dictate how and what our children must learn,” Massie said.

“Unelected bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. should not be in charge of our children’s intellectual and moral development. States and local communities are best positioned to shape curricula that meet the needs of their students. Schools should be accountable. Parents have the right to choose the most appropriate educational opportunity for their children, including home school, public school, or private school,” Massie added.

“For years, I have advocated returning education policy to where it belongs – the state and local level,” Congressman Walter Jones (R-NC), an original co-sponsor, said. “D.C. bureaucrats cannot begin to understand the needs of schools and its students on an individual basis. It is time that we get the feds out of the classroom, and terminate the Department of Education.”

Original co-sponsors include Congressmen Justin Amash (R-MI), Andy Biggs (R-AZ), Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), Matt Gaetz (R-FL), Jody Hice (R-GA), Walter Jones (R-NC), and Raúl Labrador (R-ID).

The very first Department of Education was created in 1867, but was downgraded to an office one year later and was wrapped into the Department of the Interior, then the Federal Security Agency. In 1953 the Federal Security Agency became the Department of Health, Education and Welfare and was given cabinet level status. While there have been a handful of education laws that were primarily fiscal in nature; the first federal K-12 education policy law, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, was not passed until 1965. The U.S. Department of Education as it exists today was founded until October 17, 1979 after President Jimmy Carter signed the Department of Education Organization Act which split the Department of Health, Education and Welfare into the Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services. The department began operation on May 4, 1980.

There has been a growing federal creep into education ever since. Massie in his press release noted that President Ronald Reagan wanted to cut the department.

On September 24, 1981 in his Address to the Nation on the Program for Economic Recovery, President Ronald Reagan said:

As a third step, we propose to dismantle two Cabinet Departments, Energy and Education. Both Secretaries are wholly in accord with this. Some of the activities in both of these departments will, of course, be continued either independently or in other areas of government. There’s only one way to shrink the size and cost of big government, and that is by eliminating agencies that are not needed and are getting in the way of a solution. Now, we don’t need an Energy Department to solve our basic energy problem. As long as we let the forces of the marketplace work without undue interference, the ingenuity of consumers, business, producers, and inventors will do that for us. Similarly, education is the principal responsibility of local school systems, teachers, parents, citizen boards, and State governments. By eliminating the Department of Education less than 2 years after it was created, we cannot only reduce the budget but ensure that local needs and preferences, rather than the wishes of Washington, determine the education of our children.

President Donald Trump, during the campaign, said to Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday when asked what he might cut, “But I may cut Department of Education. I believe Common Core is a very bad thing. I believe that we should be — you know, educating our children from Iowa, from New Hampshire, from South Carolina, from California, from New York. I think that it should be local education.”

In his book, Crippled America: How to Make America Great Again, written in 2015 Trump had even stronger language.

A lot of people believe the Department of Education should just be eliminated. Get rid of it. If we don’t eliminate it completely, we certainly need to cut its power and reach. Education has to be run locally. Common Core, No Child Left Behind, and Race to the Top are all programs that take decisions away from parents and local school boards. These programs allow the progressives in the Department of Education to indoctrinate, not educate, our kids. What they are doing does not fit the American model of governance.

I am totally against these programs and the Department of Education. It’s a disaster. We cannot continue to fail our children–the very future of this nation, (pg. 50-51).

President Trump’s commitment to cutting or even the reducing the U.S. Department of Education is uncertain with the current team he has assembled at the U.S. Department of Education. Even so the bill will likely receive strong resistance from not only Democrats, but moderate Republicans as well.

caffeinatedthoughts.com

As noted, Reagan wanted to kill Energy and Education. Now with the White House and both houses of Congress in Republican hands, these should be easy to achieve goals.



To: Brumar89 who wrote (1001766)2/23/2017 12:10:28 PM
From: Wharf Rat  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 1575479
 
Limited government policies leads to childhood leukemia

Study Finds Connection Between Living Near Oil and Gas Development and Childhood Leukemia
By Mike Gaworecki • Thursday, February 23, 2017 - 07:17

With the rise of new technologies like fracking and horizontal drilling, oil and gas development in the United States has exploded over the past 15 years. As development expands, it’s also pushing ever closer into areas where people live. It’s been estimated that today more than 15 million Americans live within one mile of oil and gas development.

The drilling process, of course, has the potential to emit toxic substances, including the carcinogen benzene, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and diesel exhaust, into the surrounding air and waterways. But researchers have long been trying to determine to what extent oil and gas drilling operations may threaten public health, particularly around cancer risk.

However, new research suggests that childen living in areas of high-density oil and gas development may face increased risk of health impacts, namely a certain type of leukemia, as a result of their exposure to pollutants associated with this activity.

In some parts of Colorado where oil and gas development is especially concentrated, hundreds of oil and gas wells reportedly lie within one mile of residential areas. And according to a recent study, children and young adults who were diagnosed with acute lymphocytic leukemia were 4.3 times more likely to live within 10 miles of an active oil and gas well than kids with other types of cancer.

This finding, published in the scientific journal PLOS One, applied to youth between 5 and 24 years old. The study did not find a connection between other types of cancer, such as non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and proximity to oil and gas wells.

“Over 378,000 Coloradans and millions of Americans currently live within a mile of at least one oil and gas well, and petroleum development continues to expand into residential areas,” Dr. Lisa McKenzie, professor with the Colorado School of Public Health at the University of Colorado Anschutz and the lead author of the study, said in a statement.

“The findings from our registry-based case control study indicate that young Coloradans diagnosed with one type of childhood leukemia are more likely to live in the densest areas of oil and gas sites. More comprehensive research that can address our study's limitations is needed to understand and explain these results.”

While oil and gas development can and does happen in urban areas (see: Los Angeles), McKenzie's team limited their research to Colorado's small towns and rural areas with populations under 50,000 people. They used data collected by the Colorado Central Cancer Registry to find more than 740 young Coloradans under 24 years old who were diagnosed with cancer between 2001 and 2013.

In order to analyze these children's proximity to oil and gas development at diagnosis, the researchers then employed information from the Colorado Oil and Gas Information System to determine both the coordinates of all oil and gas wells in rural Colorado and timing when each well was active.

The study team notes in the PLOS One paper that environmental factors such as pollution from oil and gas wells are unlikely to fully explain incidence of cancer on their own, but that they are a significant influence:

“A number of factors, including genetic predisposition and susceptibility, as well as environmental factors, come together in the development of childhood cancers through a two step process, the first of which likely occurs in utero. Environmental factors that may be associated with [acute lymphocytic leukemia] include in-utero and postnatal exposures to vehicle exhaust fumes, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and chemicals including benzene and other hydrocarbons.”

McKenzie and her co-authors called for more research to confirm their findings, recommending that those studies take into account nuances such the type and level of oil and gas development and production, the amounts of benzene and other pollutants, and pollutant levels at locations such as schools and childcare facilities.

But a key takeaway of the study seems to be that fracking and horizontal drilling have enabled oil and gas development to encroach more and more into places where people live (something the city of Greeley, Colorado, is grappling with firsthand), and as the researchers note, “This has the potential to expose a large population to oil and gas development related pollutants.”

desmogblog.com