Tuesday, June 10, 2014

Response Note 11

Annotate another source

9 comments:

David Castillo said...

“Marijuana Policy Project.” Arizona. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Feb. 2013.
The article tells us that in the very beginning of August 2012, Arizona Organix in Glendale became the first dispensary to begin serving patients. Attorneys tried to convince the judge to shut down the program but their argument was refused. In January 2013 a pool was taken and showed that 59 percent of Arizona voters supported the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act. They passed Prop 203 and Health Services have been issuing IDs to patients in need since 2011. In order to be qualified as a patient you have to have a serious need for the product and you can propose your story to Arizona’s Law Association. Arizona has some of the harshest penalties against marijuana use in the country. If you are caught with one-ounce marijuana it can be considered a felony and you can serve up to 18 months in jail. Arizona is ranked 16th in the country in terms of arrest per 100000 citizens. Arizona also passed a law that requires drug testing for public assistance recipients. Its important to read and learn about the harsh rules in Arizona compared to the other states that are about to become legalized and/or are already legalized. When comparing Arizona to California and Colorado it is clear that the use and legalization of marijuana is a much bigger deal in Arizona and that they most likely will not become a legalized state in the near future. This information will be helpful when we talk about the difference of recreational and commercial of marijuana because we will bring in the Arizona to compare their regulations on marijuana compared to California and Colorado.

F Santana said...


"CNN" What do you need to know about Health Care Reform.( Updated-8:47 am EDT. The June 18,2009. By Elizabeth Cohen CNN Senior Medical Correspond).
this news is talking, about the big change of health care system in the next 5 years from now. They said that people won't have the same health insurance they have or they don't have right now , because members of congress are gearing up- to reform the U.S. health care system.
At this time many Americans have no insurance, and 25 million more are undernourished . one of the mayor reason is that many employers have stopped offering insurance to employees, because of the high costs. The plans for the President Obama is to create a government -sponsored health insurance program that would be a option for all Americans, similar to now Medicare is now an option for Americans over 65.
The plan of the President has to pay this, is by identified "hundred of billions of dollars", that help finance health care reform.
Republicans in particular don't like the idea of having a government-sponsored health care insurance. the (Republicans) think Obama's plan is costly and will make health insurance more expensive, not less.
American Medical association (AMA), believes in health care reform, but don't believe that creating a public health care insurance option, is the best way to expand health insurance coverage.
Reading this article (news), help me understand more deep the issue about health care reform for Americans and also who health care reform affects. This information will help me to also to develop the essay that I have to write about health care reform.

F Santana said...


"CNN" What do you need to know about Health Care Reform.( Updated-8:47 am EDT. The June 18,2009. By Elizabeth Cohen CNN Senior Medical Correspond).
this news is talking, about the big change of health care system in the next 5 years from now. They said that people won't have the same health insurance they have or they don't have right now , because members of congress are gearing up- to reform the U.S. health care system.
At this time many Americans have no insurance, and 25 million more are undernourished . one of the mayor reason is that many employers have stopped offering insurance to employees, because of the high costs. The plans for the President Obama is to create a government -sponsored health insurance program that would be a option for all Americans, similar to now Medicare is now an option for Americans over 65.
The plan of the President has to pay this, is by identified "hundred of billions of dollars", that help finance health care reform.
Republicans in particular don't like the idea of having a government-sponsored health care insurance. the (Republicans) think Obama's plan is costly and will make health insurance more expensive, not less.
American Medical association (AMA), believes in health care reform, but don't believe that creating a public health care insurance option, is the best way to expand health insurance coverage.
Reading this article (news), help me understand more deep the issue about health care reform for Americans and also who health care reform affects. This information will help me to also to develop the essay that I have to write about health care reform.

Leonel martinez said...

Peter Schrank "Health reform may make Americans work less" Aug 24th 2013.American health insurance and employment are struggling a bit. During the Second World War, firms began using health insurance to scare workers and some employers. About 57 percent of employers now offer healt care, covering about 150 million people. Company provided insurance is not taxed, and also workers like it. All this has had strange effects on the labor market. Workers stay in bad jobs for fear of losing insurance. As the cost of insurance rises, employers lower wages. Health costs seem to depress hiring, too. A study found that from 1987 through 2005, industrial businesses that offered health insurance saw jobs grow a lot slower than those that did not. No such pattern was ever seen in those industries in Canada, where people receive health insurance from the government. Health care laws may help some while hurt others due to some of the new changes.Mr Obama has said that workers who like their company-provided insurance will be able to keep it. This is like promising that if you like sunshine, it will not rain. Actually, it is even more misleading than that. When he shakes up the health care market, employers will have no choice but to respond to his actions.

Rose Rivera said...

"NRA-ILA | Mental Health and Firearms." NRA-ILA. National Rifle Association, 24 Jan. 2013. Web. 2 June 2014.
My fourth source is an article/fact sheet from the NRA-ILA (Institute of Legislative Action) who is the lobbying arm of the NRA (National Rifle Association). The article indicates that the NRA has supported legislation that requires states and courts to provide the mental health records to the NICS system database, which is used by gun dealers, manufacturers and importers regarding background checks prior to selling a firearm to an individual. They continue to support reasonable efforts to fix America’s mental health system without violating an individual right to privacy with regard to their mental health records. They do oppose opponents who are trying to introduce newer legislation that would include those folks seeking counseling which the NRA believes incorporates broad disqualifiers concerning the mental health records of an individual. The article also provided information concerning numerous proposed mental health bills that are or have been introduced by states such as Colorado, Hawaii, South Carolina, Mississippi and Virginia to name a few. The NRA-ILA is a bias group that is focused primarily on ensuring our rights to bear arms under the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Andy Cuello said...

Sallum, Jacob. "Obama Says 'Stand Your Ground' Laws Encourage Violence." Reason.com. Reason, 19 July 2013. Web. 18 June 2014. This article talks about how Obama thinks that this law causes unnecessary violence. He states exactly that if people don’t have the duty to retreat then obviously right there should cause a red flag to everyone around. He also says even though the Stand Your Ground law had nothing to do with some cases, it still influences people to do what they want because of this law and cause violence. It put in their mindset that because this law is around, it lets people just think they can do anything by standing their ground, even if it means killing. This article also explains how what would of happened if Trayvon Martin was the one who shot Zimmerman and not the other way around, would the case still be the same? Would Trayvon be innocent because he was defending himself? Obama thinks this law should be revised because of how it’s misused in court and how people get saved from jail time because of this law. Obama also states that it is much better to just take the duty to not retreat and not stand your ground because it would take a lot of the violence out of the world.

Alma Mendez said...

A study that Estimates the Impact of the DREAM Act indicates that Dream Act applicants come from low income homes and are more likely to attend local community colleges and state universities, costing tax payers billions of dollars. Since enrollment and funding are limited at public institutions, the act’s passage will require tuition increases, tax increases to expand enrollment, or a reduction in spaces available for American citizens at these schools. Americans already find it difficult to pay for college, indicating that one out of three college students drop out before receiving a degree. The tuition costs are a major reason for the high dropout rate. Therefore, Dream Act applicants would make it more difficult for American citizens to obtain scholarships and grants being that "dreamers" would qualify for these benefits as well. Taxpayers would be contributing nearly $6,000 for each student that enrolls into college. A total cost of 6.2 billion a year, that is excluding other financial assistance they may also receive. However, advocates of the DREAM Act argue that it will increase tax revenue, because with a college education, applicants will earn more and pay more in taxes over their lifetime.
Camarota, Steven A. "Estimating the Impact of the DREAM Act." Www.cis.org. N.p., Nov.2010. Web.

Brenda Tamayo said...

Joseph Card. Ratzinger, "Considerations Regarding Proposals To Give Legal Recognition To Unions Between Homosexual Persons" www.vatican.va, June 3, 2003
Pope Benedict goes to say that a marriage is solely between a man and a woman and says that a marriage is supposed to be fruitful and multiply. There are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely close to God's plan for marriage and family. Marriage is holy, while homosexual acts go against the natural moral law. Homosexual acts “close the sexual act to the gift of life. Under no circumstances can they be approved”. According to the teaching of the church men and women with homosexual tendencies must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity. The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions. The Church cannot fail to defend these values, for the good of men and women and for the good of society itself.

Samaria Miller said...

subscribed by RSS. "Why the dealth penalty should be abolished." June 19, 2014 Web. www.icomdp.org
This article is talking about no matter how much people are commiting crimes, and doing bad things, there will always be cases of executions of innocent people. No matter how developed a justice system is.It will always somehow be a fail a human in some way. The death penalty is often used in a disproportional manner against the poor, minorities and members of racial, ethnic, political and religious groups.The death penalty also violates the rights to life which happens to be the most basic of all human rights. Public support for the death penalty does not necessarily mean that taking away the life of a human being by the state is right. There are undisputed historical precedences where gross human rights violations had had the support of a majority of the people, but which were condemned vigorously later on. It is the job of leading figures and politicians to underline the incompatibility of capital punishment with human rights and human dignity.It needs to be pointed out that public support for the death penalty is inextricably linked to the desire of the people to be free from crime. However, there exist more effective ways to prevent crime.