Jacksonville named best city for recreation

Parenting Magazine ranked Jacksonville top of its list of the 10 Best Cities for Recreation.

Jacksonville was recognized for offering the best recreational options for families, including abundant park space, sports facilities and outdoor activities. The magazine noted the city’s 75,235 acres of pools, gardens, beaches, playgrounds, sporting facilities and lakes.

There are 9,313.39 acres of parkland per 100,000 residents in Jacksonville, according to the magazine.

Jacksonville also ranked No. 75 on the magazine’s list of the Best Cities Overall.

Stephen Joost, Richard Clark apologize to council and constituents for steak dinner

Former Jacksonville City Council President Richard Clark and current Vice President Stephen Joost issued apologies today, saying they used bad judgment in leaving Tuesday night's council meeting early to meet up with Jaguars officials for a pricey steak dinner.

Joost's statements, released to media outlets: "I made an error in judgment. While I do not believe there was any impropriety, I created an appearance that reflects poorly on me, and on the government I serve. I apologize to my constituents, this community, and my colleagues. I learned a tough lesson."

Clark's letter, sent to council President Jack Webb:

"At our last council meeting I requested permission to leave early. I had a very busy day at both my business and at the Council and had not taken the time to eat. By 7:30 pm I had a 12+ hour day with no food and I was exhausted.

I stayed for the bulk of the action items on our agenda and then quietly took my leave. I had intended to get something to eat and go home but while leaving I ran into others who were going to get something to eat and I joined them.

I apologize for my poor judgment in accepting the offer to join them and for its appearance of impropriety. I assure you that it will not happen again."

Webb said he accepted both apologies on behalf of the council and considers the issue resolved. However, he said, he will remind the entire council that excused absences should be requested sparingly and only for illness or other pressing matters.

"Let's be mindful of our obligation to our colleagues and constituents to be present at council," Webb said.

Jacksonville library system's $190,000 consultant report criticizes reduction in hours

Consultants tasked with streamlining the Jacksonville library system gave their initial assessment to a library committee Friday. Among the things they noted were:

-Branches that had their hours cut to 20 hours per week are in areas that need libraries the most.

-Some branches in low-income areas do not have enough computers.

-Branches that are only open 20 hours per week are hot throughout the four hours they are open because air conditioning is not turned on prior to the opening. In one case, a branch was 80 degrees inside at opening.

-One branch had a kitchenette filled with children's supplies, which one consultant said was "just unacceptable."

-Many of the library branches have roofs that are intended for residential buildings, which can cause problems as much as leaks.

The consultants were critical of the board’s recent decision, forced by city budget cuts, to reduce hours at five branches to 20 hours per week — a move that saved $434,907 — because the impacted branches were in neighborhoods that depend on libraries most.

The consultants, who are being paid $190,000, met Friday with a library committee to go over the early results.

Cleared, and Pondering the Value of 27 Years

He also ponders, he says, whether to take a $2.2 million compensation payment from the State of Texas or file a civil lawsuit in the hope of exposing the truth about the investigation that led to his incarceration. To receive the compensation, he must waive the right to sue.

“What I really need to do is to make them pay for what they done to me,” he says. “Two-point-two million dollars is nothing when it comes to 27 years of my life, which I spent with mental torture and physical abuse.”

Mr. Green, 45, was set free by a state judge two weeks ago after DNA tests on the rape victim’s clothing proved that he could not have been responsible for the crime. His exoneration was the work of a new unit in the Harris County district attorney’s office dedicated to reviewing claims of innocence.

More than three-quarters of the 258 people exonerated by DNA tests in the last decade were convicted on the strength of eyewitness identifications, according to the Innocence Project, the Manhattan-based organization dedicated to freeing innocent prisoners.

In Texas, the problem is even more acute: identifications by eyewitnesses played a pivotal role in 80 percent of the 40 people who have been exonerated with DNA evidence.

At 18 years old, he was sentenced to 75 years.

Debts Rise, and Go Unpaid, as Bust Erodes Home Equity

Lenders wrote off as uncollectible $11.1 billion in home equity loans and $19.9 billion in home equity lines of credit in 2009, more than they wrote off on primary mortgages, government data shows. So far this year, the trend is the same, with combined write-offs of $7.88 billion in the first quarter.

But the borrowers argue that they are simply rebuilding their ravaged lives. Many also say that the banks were predatory, or at least indiscriminate, in making loans, and nevertheless were bailed out by the federal government. Finally, they point to their trump card: they say will declare bankruptcy if a settlement is not on favorable terms.

The delinquency rate on home equity loans was 4.12 percent in the first quarter, down slightly from the fourth quarter of 2009, when it was the highest in 26 years of such record keeping. Borrowers who default can expect damage to their creditworthiness and in some cases tax consequences.

Study: 8 Percent of U.S. Births to Illegal Immigrants

Eight percent of all babies born in the U.S. in 2008 belonged to illegal immigrant parents, according to a groundbreaking analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data by the Pew Hispanic Center. Under the 14th amendment to the Constitution, each child obtained U.S. citizenship at birth while one or both of the parents remained undocumented.

Pew estimates 340,000 of the 4.3 million newborns in U.S. hospitals in 2008 belonged to illegal immigrant parents. In total, 4 million U.S.-born, citizen children of illegal immigrants currently live in the country, according to the study.

Election Guide: Democratic Party Primary, Florida Attorney General

This guide is for the Democratic Party Primary, FL Attorney General.

The two candidates and their platforms:

1) Dave Aronberg.

• Graduate from Harvard Law School with honors in 1996.
  
• Currently a Florida Senator (since 2002).
  
• Assistant Attorney General in the Economic Crimes Division from 1999-2002.
  
• Wants to "de-politicize the Office of Attorney General and return its focus to public safety and consumer protection."
• He as "received national recognition" for his work to "close loopholes in Florida's sex offender laws."
• Supported a law that eliminates the statute of limitations for child victims of sexual violence.
  
• Will "tackle the problem of bullying in our schools."
  
• Opposes Senate Bill 6 saying it "was designed to punish teachers rather than improve public education."
  
• Sponsored the Choicepoint Bill which "required companies that maintain our sensitive personal data to alert us when our data is lost or stolen."
  
• Opposes the Ultrasound Bill which "would have required women to obtain and pay for an ultrasound in their first trimester - regardless of what their doctors recommended."
  
• As a State Senator, his office "returned more than $4 million to people who have been ripped off."
  
• Advocates focusing on mortgage and Medicaid fraud.
  
• Promises to use "every legal resource to make BP...pay for the damage they cause to Florida."
  
• Sponsored the "only ethics bill" that was passed this year. It "toughens the penalties for corruption at the local level."
  

Sources: http://www.davearonberg.com/home
FL Senate Website.


2) Dan Gelber.

• Elected to the Florida Senate in 2008.
  
• Member of the Florida House from 2000-2008.
  
• Assistant U.S. Attorney from 1986-1994.
  
• Graduated from the University of Florida Law School.
  
• Volunteer Big Brother since 1985.
  
• "Prime author of the Silver Saver prescription drug plan that delivered an enlarged prescription drug discount to Florida seniors."
  
• Has "fought to protect Florida's class size amendment...and overuse of the FCAT."
  
• Create an Investment Fraud Unit to Protect "Seniors and Savers."
  
• "Protect the right to loan modification."
  
• Will "go after the social networking sites that cater to young people and compel them to remove registered sex offenders" as well as push for a law "making it a crime for a convicted sexual predator to use a social networking site."
  
• Will "employ every statute at [his] disposal to make sure that Florida is a party to all possible claims arising from the BP spill."
  
• Fight Medicaid fraud and shut down pill mills.
  
• Plays the Wii.

Sources: http://www.dangelber.com/
FL Senate Website.

Election Guide: Democratic Party Primary, Florida Governor

This guide is for the Democratic Party Primary, Florida Governor.

The two candidates and their platforms:

1) Brian Moore.

• 35 years of civil involvement.
  
• U.S. Peace Corps volunteer from 1969-1972.
  
• M.A. in Public Administration from Arizona State University.
  
• 20 years in the HMO/Managed Care industry.
  
• "Immediate and unconditional withdrawal of American military and corporations from Iraq and Afghanistan."
  
• Repeal of Patriot Act I and II.
  
• Supports elimination of the use of torture.
  
• Conduct a War Crime Commission against the Bush administration.
  
• Opposes the Stimulus Bill unless "all financial and private institutions are nationalized and controlled by workers."
  
• He is an open Socialist.
  
• Advocates a National Health System.
  
• "Initiate a guaranteed income for all American families, working or not, at a level of $35,000 per year per adult."
  
• Phase out all nuclear power plants.
  
• End U.S. Cuban Embargo.
  
• Calls for treaty outlawing all weapons of mass destruction.
  
• Abolish CIA, NSA and Homeland Security.
  
• "Unconditional disarmament by the U.S."
  
• Support Kyoto Protocol.
  
• Legislate a 30 hour work week, six weeks leave, and a full pension.
  
• Opposes capital punishment.
  
• Stop America's participation in NAFTA, WTO, IMF, and World Bank.
  
• Promote a multi-party system.
  
• End U.S. arms sales throughout the world.
  
• Advocates a constitutional amendment "requiring binding vote of people on all issues of war or military intervention."
• Right of workers to form a union and to strike.
  
• $15 per hour minimum wage.
  
• A "steeply graduated income tax and estate tax."
  
• Federal ban on all forms of job discrimination.
  
• End all restrictions in law and work place, marriages and sodomy laws.
  

Sources: http://www.votebrianmoore.com/
Colbert Video with Moore.


2) Alex Sink.

• "26 successful years in business."
  
• Currently Florida's Chief Financial Officer.
  
• Put a stop to "Project Aspire, an $89 million, over-budget and under-performing state accounting program she inherited upon taking office"
• Launched initiatives like the Safeguard Our Senior Task Force to "protect older Floridians from financial fraud" and Florida Housing Help, a program that "provides assistance to Floridians facing mortgage foreclosure."
• She is the chair of Take Stock in Children.
  
• She was president of Florida's largest bank, in charge of over "$40 billion in customer deposits while supervising more than 9,000 employees in 800 branches."
  
• "Stabilize and expand small business."
  
• Creation of a Florida job-creation tax credit.
• "Increase efforts to market Florida as a retirement destination."
  
• Use her role to promote successful companies in Florida to the world.
  
• Expand R&D tax credits.
  
• "Leverage up to $2 billion for high-tech investment" from the Florida Retirement System Trust Fund.
  
• Create Energy Finance Districts which would "provide residential, commercial, and industrial loans to retrofit properties with energy-efficient systems."
  
• Create a small business ombudsman within the Governor's Office.
  
• Will "require that state regulatory agencies work together to simplify regulations."
  
• Create a "one-stop" web portal for start-up businesses.
  
• Require all top state agency officials to sign performance contracts with benchmarks.
  
• Create a "non-partisan watchdog office...to make state government more efficient."
  
• Invest in high-quality pre-kindergarten education programs.
  
• Invest in intervention programs to reduce crime.
  
• Eliminate numerous exemptions from competitive bidding requirements.
  
• Consolidate call centers, the state fleet management and "unneeded state property."
• Reduce state cell phone usage to save "$6 million" as well as the use office supplies to save an additional $14 million.
  
• Go after more federal transportation funding.
  
• Hire a contractor to help the state draw down more federal funds.
  
• "Merit pay for teachers and charter schools need to be part" of educational reform.
  
• Require full disclosure of state party credit card spending.
  
• Ban gifts from Vendors to State agency employees.
  
• Promote Florida's new Property Assessed Clean Energy program, "which allows local governments to offer low-interest loans to property owners for making energy-efficient improvement to their homes."
  
• Impose "stiff state fines" on private companies that knowingly hire undocumented workers.
  
• Veto any legislation that diverts money from the state's highway trust fund to other projects.
  
• Offer tax incentives for businesses to use rail.
  

Sources: http://www.alexsink2010.com/
MyFloridaCFO.com
Sink Unveils Alternative Energy Plan

Election Guide; Democratic Party Primary, United States Senator

This guide is for the Democratic Party Primary, United States Senator.

The four candidates and their platforms:

1) Glenn Burkett.

• Vietnam War Veteran.
  
• Opened up his own health club.
  
• "Florida should be the world leader in the production of solar energy."
  
• Against nuclear power plants.
  
• "People are not prescription drug deficient, they are nutrient deficient."
  
• "We should continue to follow the current laws for citizenship."
• Pro Choice.
  
• Supporter of the 2d Amendment.
  
• Favors "eliminating or drastically cutting subsidiaries for farming, oil companies, and transportation."
  
• Supports "keeping the military in Afghanistan and Iraq, but favors cutting defense spending elsewhere."
  

Sources: http://www.glennburkett.com/
Video of Burkett.
"About the Candidate."


2) Maurice Ferre.

• Supports early education.
  
• Supports Obama's Race to the Top fund and student loan reforms.
  
• "T. Boone Pickens' plan of shifting to natural gas fueled vehicles should be promoted."
• "Gay, heterosexual, or bi-racial couples should be allowed to enter a union just like anybody else."
  
• Against "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.
  
• Advocates the 2009 Hate Crime Bill.
  
• "There is no Chapter 11 for big banks, that's what's needed."
  
• "We need to return to simplified banking."
  
• Supports the Florida Hometown Democracy Amendment (Amendment 4).
  
• Supports sanctions against Iran.
  
• "The two state solution of Israel-Palestine is essential for peace in the Middle East."
  
• Those who are "financially solvent" and have "the ability to care for their needs" shouldn't get as much Social Security benefits as those who are not.
  
• "By 2030 the retirement age [should] be capped at 67."
• Opposes lifting Florida ban to allow oil drilling off the coast.
  
• Supporter of the original Health Care plan for reform.
  
• Does not support escalation in Afghanistan as it is "doomed to failure based on history."
  
• The U.S. "should gradually move to a universal health care system in which the government controls costs by setting prices for medical procedures."
  
• Former mayor of Miami.
  

Sources: http://mymauriceferre.com/
Palm Beach Post article.


3) Jeff Greene.

• "An incredible entrepreneur, Jeff has successfully built businesses and created jobs for more than 30 years."
• Moved to Florida in 1970.
  
• He is the "only candidate running for Senator who is an outsider, independent from the political system."
  
• Supports tax cuts for small businesses as well as expansion of the Small Business Administration's loan program.
  
• Supports expansion of federal R&D tax credits.
  
• "I will not take a penny from any special interest - or a contribution over $100 from anyone."
  
• Supports Financial Reform, specifically strengthening the Financial Consumer Protection Agency and the Federal Reserve.
  
• Supports green energy, however, "any plan adopted by the Senate will need to rebate money raised to the taxpayers in the form of direct rebates or tax cuts."
  
• Advocates expanding early childhood education as well as college tax credits for middle-class families.
  
• Supports Obama's current plan for Afghanistan and Iraq.
  
• "I support Roe v. Wade."
  
• He is a billionaire.
• The FBI is currently investigating his real estate deals in California "featuring the conversion of old apartments to condos, inflated sales prices to straw buyers and defaults."

Sources: http://www.jeffgreene.com/?no_splash=1
Forbes article.
"Who the Hell is Jeff Greene" article.
"Real Estate Dealings Need Explaining" article.


4) Kendrick Meek.

• Supported the Florida initiative to reduce class sizes in Florida's public schools.
  
• Began his career as a Trooper with the Florida Highway Patrol.
  
• Served in the Florida House from 1995 to 1998 and then in the Florida Senate from 1999 to 2002.
  
• Worked with Republicans to provide compensation for two Floridians who had been wrongly convicted of murder.
  
• Led a 25-hour sit-in "to protest the [FL] Governor's plan to roll back state policies that made sure all Floridians had equal education and workplace opportunities."
  
• "Voted for a $23 billion increase in VA funding."
  
• He co-sponsored HR 1211, which passed in 2009, to "fund and require gender-specific VA health care for our women vets for the first time."
  
• Co-sponsor of the End Veteran Homelessness Act of 2010, "which increases support for successful VA programs."
  
• Co-sponsor of HR 1513 which "provides for an annual, automatic cost of living adjustments for veterans' compensation."
  
• Graduated from Florida A&M University.
  
• Has "received an A rating from the National Educator's Association every year since 2003.
  
• Supports the Recovery Act that passed in 2009.
  
• Supporter of the Employee Free Choice Act.
  
• Against "any new offshore drilling."
  
• Advocates the use of U.S. forces to "protect civilians in Darfur."
  
• "Will help to ensure that we work with our allies to finish the job our military started in 2001" in Afghanistan.
  
• "Iran must not be allowed to secure nuclear weapons capability."
  
• The "only pro-choice candidate" in the race.
• Supported the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which ensures equal pay for equal work regardless of age, race, gender, religion, or national origin. It was signed by Obama into law in 2009.
  
• The "only candidate that has supported the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell since day one."
  
• Believes that Florida's adoption ban for LGBT citizens is "wrong."
  
• Has sponsored legislation to expand access to the State Children's Health Insurance Program.
  
• Voted for the Affordable Care Act.
  
• Supports measures that would lower interest rates and mortgage payments for families at risk of foreclosure.
  
• Endorsed by Obama, Bill Clinton, Bob Graham, Bill Nelson, Alex Sink, and Corrine Brown.
  

Sources: http://www.kendrickmeek.com/
Meek's Voting Record.

Election Guide: Republican Primary, State Senator District 8

This guide is for the Republican Party Primary, State Senator District 8.

The two candidates and their platforms:

1) Charles Perniciaro.

• "Has never run for political office."
• A medical doctor for the Mayo Clinic.
  
• Currently serves as Director of Dermatopathology at Bernhardt Laboratories.
  
• Member of Beach United Methodist Church.
  
• Has lived in District 8 for 20 years.
  
• "Raiding the transportation trust fund to keep from having to balance the budget has to stop."
  
• Supporter of Jaxport.
  
• Against FCAT.
  
• "Businesses that intentionally use illegal labor should be prosecuted."
  
• "State government has to stop imposing unfunded mandates on local governments."
  
• Supports the state's efforts to block national health care.
  
• 2d Amendment supporter.
  
• "Central Florida's proposal to siphon 260 million gallons a day from the St. Johns River has to be stopped."
  

Sources: http://www.charlesperniciaro.com/index.htm


2) John Thrasher.

• Currently represents District 8 in the Florida House of Representatives and has since 1992.
  
• Championed legislation such as "Three Strikes, You're Out," "10-20-Life," "A+ Education Plan" and the largest tax cut in Florida history.
  
• Grew up in Jacksonville.
  
• Army Veteran (awarded two Bronze Stars).
  
• Law degree from the Florida State University College of Law.
  
• Served as general counsel for the Florida Medical Association for 20 years.
  
• Member of the Clay County School Board from 1986-1990.
  
• The "driving force" behind the Florida teacher merit pay bill.

Sources: http://www.electthrasher.com/
http://www.flsenate.gov/Legislators/index.cfm?Members=View+Page&District_Num_Link=008&Submenu=1&Tab=legislators&chamber=Senate&CFID=225906607&CFTOKEN=92365485
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/local/news-article.aspx?storyid=154826&catid=3

Election Guide: Republican Primary, Attorney General

This guide is for the Republican Party Primary, Attorney General.

The three candidates and their platforms:

1) Holly Benson.

• "Pro-life, rated A+ by the NRA, and like my mentor, Governor Jeb Bush...I am a free market capitalist."
  
• "Obamacare is unconstitutional and will have devastating consequences...[It] violates both the Commerce Clause and the 10th Amendment of the Constitution."
  
• Support the Arizona immigration law.
  
• In favor of "severe consequences for those who betray the public trust."
  
• Plans to create a Regulatory Strike Force to "identify and eliminate the red tape that is stiffling entrepreneurs."
  
• Served as Secretary in two state agencies.
  
• Member of the U.S. Congress for six years (Pensacola).
  
• Graduate of the University of Florida College of Law.
  
• "Our first obligation is to put the bad guys behind bars. And if that means funding new prisons, well let's fund them."
  
• Supports Marco Rubio for FL Governor.
  

Sources: http://www.hollybenson.com/
"Holly Benson on the Record" - Article.


2) Pam Bondi.

• NRA A Rating.
  
• Supports the Arizona Immigration Law.
  
• Prosecutor for over 18 years.
  
• Assistant State Attorney.
  
• Native of Tampa.
  
• Received the Tampa Bay Review's 2001 "Lawyers of Distinction" award.

Sources: http://www.pambondi.com/


3) Jeff Kottkamp.

• Graduated from the University of Florida College of Law.
  
• Member of the FL House of Representatives from 2000 to 2006.
  
• Currently the Lieutenant Governor of Florida.
  
• Endorsed by Sheriff Rutherford, and St. Johns Sheriff David Shoar as well as Stephen Wise.
  
• "Has Led Florida's efforts to shut down pill mills."
• A+ rating by the NRA and supporter of the 2d Amendment.
• ObamaCare unconstitutional according to the 10th Amendment.
  
• Supports the Arizona immigration law.
  
• "Supports protecting the life of the unborn."
  
• Plans to create a "corruption unit to prosecute government officials who violate the trust of Floridians."
  
• Plans to challenge the EPA's "imposition of water quality standards that would cause us more than double our property taxes."
  

Sources: http://www.jeffkottkamp.com/
"Candidate Profile" article.
Video of Kottkamp.

Election Guide: Republican Primary, Florida Governor

This guide is for the Republican Party Primary, Florida Governor (no candidate has chosen a Lt. Governor).

The three candidates and their platforms:

1) Mike McCalister.

• PhD in Management.
  
• Taught college, MBA, and Doctoral Management courses "from Tallahassee to Miami."
  
• Retired full Colonel with 33 years military service in the Guard, Reserves, and Active Duty.
  
• Worked in health care for over 20 years.
  
• A small business owner.
  
• Has a 9 page resume on his website (click "About Author" on his website).
  
• Author of his book titled "The Right Future for Florida and You..Starting Right Now."
  
• "If you fix the education system, the jobs will be there."
• Supports asking specific industries what should be done.
  
• Would eliminate the FCAT.
  
• "Doesn't believe the 14th Amendment grants citizenship to people born in the U.S. to illegal immigrant parents."
  

Sources: http://mikemccalister.com/
"Third Wheel" article.


2) Bill McCollum.

• Property tax freeze and a cap on local government spending.
  
• Lower FL corporate income tax by 1% to 4.5%.
  
• Provide tax credits for Research and Development.
  
• Exempt corporate income taxes for certain qualified small businesses for their first 10 years.
  
• Provide a sales tax exemption for certain high-tech equipment and infrastructure purchases.
  
• Create Florida's Venture Capital Council and Florida Genesis Fund to increase access to capital. Establish relationships with Florida's universities to profit from projects.
• A Rating from the NRA.
  
• Develop standards for pre-kindergarten curriculum.
  
• Phase out tenure by teachers.
  
• Supports Amendment 8 to "right size the class size."
  
• Require high school students to take at least one internet class.
  
• Develop the Florida "Back to Work Program" through competitive funding for programs.
  
• Against abortion.
  
• Supports Arizona's immigration law "as amended."
  
• Require immigrants to carry valid documentation or face up to 20 days in jail.
  
• Opposes same-sex marriages.
  
• Offer tax incentives for companies to locate or expand their shipping facilities within Florida.
  
• Currently the Attorney General of Florida.
  
• Expanded the Attorney General's Child Predator CyberCrime Unit.
  
• Law degree from the University of Florida.
  
• U.S. Navy Veteran.
  
• Member of the United States Congress from 1981-2001.

Sources: http://billmccollum.com/
http://myfloridalegal.com/pages.nsf/4492d797dc0bd92f85256cb80055fb97/1515ce372e59d1e885256cc60071b1c4!OpenDocument
"Unveils Controversial Immigration Reform Plan" article.
"Gives Contradictory Views on Gay Issues" article.


3) Rick Scott.

• Institute "Accountability Budgeting."
  
• Opposed to immigration amnesty.
  
• Committed to "conserving Florida's natural resources" and preserving the Everglades."
  
• He started Columbia Hospital in 1987 which is now "the 12th largest employer in the world."
  
• Co-founder of Florida based Solantic Health.
  
• Opposes Obama's "government-run public option."
  
• Supports a state constitutional amendment that prohibits the federal government from imposing Obama's mandate.
  
• NRA member and supporter of the 2d Amendment.
  
• "Rick will create jobs by keeping taxes low and limiting job killing regulations."
  
• In the 1990s, the FBI launched an investigation of the Columbia Hospital which "led to the company pleading guilty to criminal charges of overbilling the government." They "paid a record $1.7 billion in fines"

Sources: http://www.rickscottforflorida.com/home/
Sun-Sentinel article.
Tampa-Bay.com article.

Election Guide: Republican Primary, U.S. Senator

This guide is for the Republican Party Primary, United States Senator.

The three candidates and their platforms:

1) William Escoffery III.

• He is "no career politician."
  
• Physician with 40 years of experience.
  
• Attorney with Constitutional law training.
  
• Founder of The Medical Chiefs of Staff Coalition.
  
• Supports legislation to "roll-back the federal regulatory burden so that private enterprise can lead our nation back to prosperity."
  
• Against abortion.
  
• Believes Obama is a "radical Muslim sympathizer."
• Against government bail-outs.
  
• Opposes all restrictions on gun ownership (except by "certified, crazy people."
• "Absolutely opposed to amnesty for illegal aliens."
  
• Supports legal immigration and wants to require an English proficiency test for citizenship.
  
• Supports English as the official language of the U.S.
  
• "100% against the Obama Health-Care Plan."
  
• Advocates tort reform, use of Heath Savings Accounts, eliminating most federal government involvement in health care, private Medicare/Medicaid and allow importation of low-cost drugs.
  

Sources: http://www.senatebill.us/Health%20Care.htm


2) William Billy Kogut.

• Opposes amnesty for illegal immigrants.
  
• Audit U.N. and Federal Reserve.
  
• Fair Tax proponent.
  
• Provide "all necessary funding" for the War against Global Terrorism.
  
• Support gun rights.
  
• Penalize employers of illegal immigrants to the point where it "would not profit them to hire them."
  
• Supports traditional marriage.
  

Sources: http://kogut2010.intuitwebsites.com/
Video of Kogut.


3) Marco Rubio.

• Hire one civilian employee for every two that leave government.
  
• Use TARP funds to pay the debt.
  
• Cancel unspent stimulus funds which "could save nearly $300 billion."
  
• Ban all earmarks.
  
• Pass a Constitutional Amendment requiring Congress to balance the budget.
  
• Require any new federal tax to be approved only by a 2/3 vote of Congress.
  
• Supports proposals that "would allow individuals and businesses to check-off an amount, up to 10% of their tax bill, to be dedicated to retiring the national debt. Congress would have to match the amount."
  
• Freeze federal non-defense, non-veterans spending at 2008 levels.
  
• Give the president the line-item veto.
  
• Permanently extend the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.
  
• Permanently end the death tax.
  
• Stop the Value Added Tax.
  
• Repeal "ObamaCare."
  
• Prevent a national energy tax.
  
• Oppose efforts to strip away workers' right to a secret ballot.
  
• Allow individuals to purchase health insurance across state lines.
  
• Incentivize the use of electronic medical records.
  
• Give individuals the same tax break given to businesses when they buy health insurance.
  
• Increase the number of Community Health Centers.
  
• Allow "patients to switch insurance coverage...without risking pre-existing condition exclusion."
  

Sources: http://www.marcorubio.com/
"Rubio Calls for Federal Layoffs" article.
Rubio interview with Wolff Blitzer.

Federal government to provide $3B in housing aid

The Obama administration is providing $3 billion to unemployed homeowners facing foreclosure in the nation's toughest job markets.

The Treasury Department says it will send $2 billion to 17 states that have unemployment rates higher than the national average for a year. They will use the money for programs to aid unemployed homeowners. Some of those states already have designed such programs.

Another $1 billion will go to a new program being run by the Department of Housing and Urban Development to provide homeowners with emergency zero-interest-rate loans of up to $50,000 for up to two years.

Police union files unfair labor suit against Peyton

The Jacksonville police union says Mayor John Peyton broke state law by sitting at a lunch table with two officers, trying to persuade them on the city’s need to get employees to take a paycut and calling the union boss a “jackass.”

The Fraternal Order of Police filed an unfair labor practice claim against the city this week, saying Peyton was attempting to go around the union leadership during his impromptu lunch discussion with the officers Aug. 3.

The complaint stems from a discussion Peyton had after walking into a Subway sandwich shop in Lakewood and seeing two police officers, one of whom was in uniform.

Peyton asked to sit down, and the officers agreed. After some small talk, Peyton started discussing the city budget and issues with the police contract, according to the union filing. Peyton then pulled out an iPad and started showing the officers charts that show the city’s growing financial problems if union concessions are not achieved, according to the complaint.

Peyton then said Cuba’s refusal to take concessions was hurting the union and that Cuba was a “jackass,” according to the complaint.

“To sit there and tell FOP members their leader is leading them down the wrong path is inappropriate and it’s also a violation of the law,” police union attorney Paul Daragjati said.

Both officers declined comment through Daragjati, who said neither of the men had ever spoken with the mayor before.

Cuba has done his share of name-calling in the past year. In the first bargaining session last fall, Cuba called some of the City Council members “buffoons” and he has also referred to Peyton as the “Millionaire Mayor.”

New Jacksonville Bus System Expected to Cost $90 Million

Downtown is just the first stage of the public transportation project. It will be city-wide by 2016

"Basically what we plan to do is have smaller vehicles that go into neighborhoods and collect the people and bring them to these main lines.

Each stage will cost an average of $18 million and will take approximately a year to complete.

* Downtown enhancements - $12 million
* North corridor - $18 million
* Southeast corridor - $16 million
* Southwest corridor - $19 million
* East corridor - $25 million

The grand total will be $90 million, according to JTA.

New Figure for 2010 Census: $1.6 Billion Under Budget

The bureau said Tuesday, for instance, that its 2010 count would cost about $1.6 billion less than budgeted. This works out to about 11 percent less than the $14.7 billion appropriated over 12 years for the 2010 count, and 22 percent less than budgeted for this year.

Census enumerators knocked on the doors of 47 million households that did not return the mailed questionnaire, the bureau reported. Enumerators failed 22 percent of the time to interview the residents personally and had to rely on neighbors or building managers for information about those households. Ten years ago, those so-called proxy reports accounted for 17 percent of the enumerator follow-ups.

On the other hand, enumerators discovered occupants in 27 percent of the 5.6 million addresses that had been considered vacant or that could not initially be found, and at 3.1 million addresses that were provided at the last minute by the Postal Service.

This was still the most expensive census ever. For the 2000 count, the bureau’s budget was $7 billion, but it underspent by $305 million, or less than one-twentieth of the 12-year budget.

Delaney named to state rail commission

Gov. Charlie Crist has appointed University of North Florida president and former Jacksonville mayor John Delaney to the state’s passenger rail commission.

Delaney will serve on the nine-member Florida Statewide Passenger Rail Commission — tasked with monitoring passenger rail development — until Aug. 9, 2014.

The commission was created in 2009 after the Florida Department of Transportation received $1.25 billion in federal stimulus funding to build high-speed rail service between Orlando and Tampa.

Fla. expected to get $1.3 billion from jobs bill

Florida is expected to get about $1.3 billion from a new federal jobs bill for education and Medicaid benefits.

President Barack Obama signed it into law Tuesday shortly after it passed in Congress.

Gov. Charlie Crist said he was "grateful to our federal partners" for the legislation. It should help avoid teacher layoffs and cuts in Medicaid and other state spending.

Nearly $800 million is expected for Medicaid and $555 million for schools. Crist says that's enough to employ more than 9,100 teachers.

Tracking Big Corporate Donors

A majority of companies said they expect their charitable donations in 2010 to be about the same as in 2009 — a year in which cash giving fell by 7.5%. Of the 102 firms that answered the question, 73% predicted a flat 2010.

Sixty-eight companies decreased their cash giving in 2009 to $3.9 billion, the first time since 2003 that cash contributions from businesses in The Chronicle's survey have dropped. Fifty-four percent of businesses gave less cash, 30% gave more, and 16% gave roughly the same. But donations of cash and products increased by nearly 5% last year, as companies sought to compensate for the decline in cash by offering other types of assistance.

The biggest cash contributor was Wal-Mart, the largest company in the U.S. It gave $288.1 million in 2009. (The discount-store chain stepped up its commitment to charity even more in May, when it announced a $2 billion, five-year pledge to fight hunger.) AT&T was No. 2, donating $240 million, and Bank of America was No. 3, giving $209.1 million.

The top donors of cash and products were Pfizer, in New York ($2.3 billion); Oracle, in Redwood Shores, Calif. ($2.1 billion); and Merck, in Whitehouse Station, N.J. ($923.2 million).

Fla. universities rank high in minority graduation

The Washington, D.C.-based Education Trust on Monday released its rankings of minority graduation rates for the 50 states and District of Columbia.

Florida ranked 5th with a 50.9 percent graduation rate for black students and 6th with a 57.1 percent rate for Hispanics.

The 11 Florida state universities posted a 59.9 percent graduation rate for all students to rank 10th.

Fla. universities rank high in minority graduation

The Washington, D.C.-based Education Trust on Monday released its rankings of minority graduation rates for the 50 states and District of Columbia.

Florida ranked 5th with a 50.9 percent graduation rate for black students and 6th with a 57.1 percent rate for Hispanics.

The 11 Florida state universities posted a 59.9 percent graduation rate for all students to rank 10th.

Bong ban aims to smoke out head shops

One month ago, a state law went into effect that prohibits him from selling water pipes, air pipes and hookahs. The state now classifies those items as ``drug paraphernalia.''

Head shop owner Jay Work calls them ``art.''

``This is a $3,800 pipe,'' says Work, owner of Grateful J's Dead Head Shop, pointing to a four-foot-tall glass structure anchored by something that looks like a mix between a rose and a brain. ``You could put this in your dining room, next to a van Gogh painting.''

As of July 1, Florida law makes it a first-degree misdemeanor for a store to sell paraphernalia if 75 percent of a tobacco store's annual profits don't come from the sale of tobacco. No more than 25 percent of profits can come from drug paraphernalia -- a list that includes water pipes, hand pipes, hookahs, punctured metal bowls and chillers.

After failing to persuade the Legislature that the new law is unfair, Work and 29 other owners of small head shops have sued to keep the state from banning the bong. Going to court is the only way to prevent their niche businesses, which typically sell small amounts of tobacco, from going under, Work says.

``This is what happened with porn,'' Work says. ``They put in so many regulations that the small adult stores couldn't survive. Have you been to an adult store lately? Now, they're the size of Wal-Mart.''

Popularity rises for pet health insurance

From 2003 until 2007, the number of cats, dogs and exotic animals insured in the U.S. increased 56%, a study by research group Packaged Facts indicates.

Dogs led the pack in 2008, with an estimated 2 million insured.

Cats followed with an approximate 900,000 insured, data provided by the American Pet Products Association indicates.

While that accounts for only about 3% of all dogs and 1% of cats, the numbers are expected to surge because of the increasingly widespread perception of pets as family members.

In 2010, pet owners are expected to spend $47.7 billion on their pets, compared with $45.5 billion the year before, according to the American Pet Products Association.

What Caused So Many Americans to Move to the Cities in the Late 1800s?

Industrialization led to the development of the modern city. Railroads created many boom towns. In addition, many cities contained everything an American could ask for: entertainment, banking institutions, and manufacturing industries. The city offered citizens an increased standard of living as well as a better future.

The city population increased greatly during the early 1900: "by 1910 nearly half the nation lived in cities large and small" (Davidson 571). Most of this increase was attributed to the great global migration. Many immigrants came to America because factories offered "better pay and fewer hours" (Davidson 571). In addition, immigrants were lured into America with "false promises of high paying jobs and unimagined riches" (Davidson 571). Lastly, technology improvements made travel easier. Instead of the old steamship, which often took weeks or months to travel, it now took only "one to two weeks to cross the Atlantic aboard steam-powered ships" (Davidson 572).

Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

What Social and Political Problems Did the South Face During Reconstruction?

The South faced many social and political problems during the Revolution. One of these problems was created by the Radicals new plan itself: "While slavery had been a complex institution that welded black and white southerners together in intimate relationships...after the war...planters increasingly embraced the ideology of segregation" (Davidson 486). The controversial issue of segregation was a natural consequence of the Union's Reconstruction efforts. Instead of the ideal (black equality), emancipation would lead to increasing violence and racism in the South.

Another problem in the South during Reconstruction was racism. Republicans often terrorized black voters who wanted to use their new right to vote. The most famous group that accomplished this terrorism was the Ku Klux Klan founded in 1866. The Klan used violence to intimidate blacks from voting: "violence and intimidation prevented as many as 60,000 black and white Republicans from voting, converting the normal Republican majority into a Democratic majority of 30,000 (Davidson 490).

While I believe racism was most likely present in the South during Reconstruction I have found, with a little bit of research, that the idea of racism wasn't the main focus of the Democratic agenda during the Democratic Convention in 1868. The main focus during the Democratic National Convention, the event that would lead to the party's presidential nomination, was about Republican rule in the South: "The party platform accepted the demise of slavery and secession, but in effect demanded the end of Reconstruction by calling for the return of authority to the states, the non-renewal of the Freedman's Bureau, amnesty for all former Confederates, and military retrenchment." It would only make sense that Southerners would vote in support of this agenda - why would they want troops in their backyards? This could also help to explain how Grant's "popular margin was only 300,000 votes" (Davidson 487).

http://elections.harpweek.com/1868/Overview-1868-1.htm

Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

What was the Spoils System?

The spoils system was a form of corruption that was used extensively during the late 1800s. The spoils system consisted of jobs that were offered to citizens who would return the offer with loyalty to the city Bosses. Most people wouldn't turn down a government job: "these positions represented the first steps into the middle class" (Davidson 578).

Civil service reform became important during the 1880s due to the increased corruption from the political machine and bosses. Taxpayers were fed up with the amount of corruption in government. For example, "During his reign in the 1860s and 1870s, Tweed swindled the city of New York out of a fortune": over six million dollars (Davidson 578). The consequences of the spoils system eventually caused citizens to demand civil service reform: "Inflated taxes, extorted revenue, and unpunished vice and crime" were just too much to bare (Davidson 578).

Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

What was the Freedmen's Bureau?

The Freedmen's Bureau was a federal department that was created by Congress to "supervise the transition from slavery to freedom on southern plantations" (Davidson 484). Only 550 agents were assigned to supervise this transition in the South. The agents created contracts between many "white planters and black laborers, specifying not only wages but also the conditions of the employment" (Davidson 485). The goal was to protect blacks from discrimination and unfair treatment in the workplace. As with any other federal program, however, many agents "were tools of the planter class" (Davidson 485). The Bureau enforced the contracts through the Freedmen's Courts: "These new courts functioned as military tribunals, and often the agent was the entire court" (Davidson 485). By 1872, the Freedmen's Bureau was dissolved.

The Freedmen's Bureau's work in the South also led to increased educational opportunities for blacks. The Bureau set up various educational institutions in the South which would later be replaced by public schools. They also trained teachers to work in the South. By 1869, "most of the 3,000 teachers in freedmen's schools were black" (Davidson 483).

Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

Discuss the Labor Unions of the Late 1800s

Although labor unions were present before the Civil War, they did not begin to truly catch on until the late 19th century. One of the first labor unions was The National Labor Union (NLU) which "attacked the wage system as unfair and enslaving and urged workers to manage their own factories" (Davidson 560). The NLU advocated an eight hour work day and decent wages for their workers. Another important union was The Knights of Labor. Created in 1869, the Knights "looked to abolish the wage system. In its place they wanted to construct a cooperative economy of worker-owned mines, factories, and railroads" (Davidson 560-561). Lastly, the American Federation of Labor (AFL) supported increased wages and fewer hours, similar to the Knights and NLU. AFL leaders "chose to organize highly skilled craftworkers because they were difficult to replace. [They] bargained with employers and used strikes and boycotts only as last resorts" (Davidson 501).

The concerns of labor unions were absolutely valid. Many industrial workers spent over 12 hours a day working in harsh conditions: "By 1900, most of those earning wages in industry worked 6 days a week, 10 hours a day" (Davidson 557). In addition, "each year from 1880 to 1900 industrial mishaps killed an average of 35,000 wage earners and injured over 500,000" (Davidson 557). The pay for such work was harsh as well. With over 20 million workers in the industrial complex in 1900, "one American in eight (nearly 10 million) lived below the poverty line" (Davidson 556).

I am a bit confused, however, to just how bad the wages were. For one, the book doesn't really state what the wages were specifically. Second, the wages had to be high, as the book explains that immigrants were coming to America to work at these factories. According to a study by the Bureau of labor, the hourly wages of a production worker during the early 1900s was $3.80. At the same time, however, the per capita income was $4,200. If the average workweek was 53 hours, as described by the study, then that would mean, through simple calculations, that the average industrial worker made $10,472. Wow! That's a pretty decent wage - even today! Is this right? And if so, did the unions have that much room to complain? (especially when the average income was only $4200?).

http://www.bls.gov/opub/cwc/cm20030124ar02p1.htm

Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

Were the Impeachment Charges Against Andrew Johnson Valid?

Section 2, Article 2, of the U.S. Constitution states: "The President...shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." According to this section, the impeachment charges against Andrew Johnson were not valid. He did not commit any actual crime to warrant an impeachment. While Johnson did try to "obstruct Reconstruction legislation," he has the duty to do so (Davidson 479). According to Section 1, Article 2, of the U.S. Constitution, the executive is required to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States." If Johnson felt that the Congress was acting in contrast to his view of the Constitution, then Johnson not only has a right, but he has a legal duty to fight back.

The clash between Johnson and the Radical Republicans was inevitable. Similar to other periods of time when the executive and legislative branch differed in party, a clash was bound to occur. The fact that the Radicals wanted to take southern property away from their owners and to give it away to blacks shows how radical the Radicals truly were (Davidson 478). It was a time that matched any other in America; when politics and propaganda reigned supreme.

To end, one piece of the Radical propaganda: "Governor Oliver Morton of Indiana proclaimed that 'every bounty jumper, every deserter, every sneak who ran away from the draft' was a Democrat; everyone 'who murdered Union prisoners" (Davidson 477).

Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

Was Reconstruction a success or failure?

Reconstruction was, of course, a success. After all, if it wasn't for Reconstruction, America would be different and I would most likely not be born. At the same time, however, Reconstruction could have been improved. Indeed, it should have been improved as the consequences of the Reconstruction continue to haunt us today.

This is a hard question for me to answer honestly as my opinions differ from the majority. I believe that the South should have seceded as they wanted to originally and we should have never went to war in the first place. The North was more powerful both in the number of people as well as economically. Eventually, I believe, the South would have either re-entered the Union or, at minimum, would have been contained to a small portion of the Eastern coast of present day United States. In addition, a cultural diffusion most likely would have occurred as well. Instead of being forced to end slavery and have black "equality", citizens would have chosen to change the system slowly from a culture shift (which would have had to start in the North).

The Reconstruction had numerous negative consequences that could have been most likely solved (though it would take much longer) by the people themselves through a change in culture. Segregation tore apart the small, yet reliable, relationship between blacks and whites in the south. Within a short period of time after Reconstruction, "every southern state had enacted segregation as law...Soon a complex web of 'Jim Crow' statutes had drawn an incredible color line separating the races" (Davidson 505). I urge anyone to drive around throughout Jacksonville and you will continue to see this same line separating the races. Until we as a people, not through government but through culture, demand social change, racism and segregation will continue now just as it did during the Reconstruction. In fact, it will continue much the same just as it has since the dawn of civilization.
Does anyone know where I can look to find how many slaves were beat by their masters? I am looking for a percentage. Or can anyone recommend a book that looks HONESTLY and OBJECTIVELY at slavery so that I can learn just how bad it really was?

Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

What were the Palmer Raids?

With the end of World War I came the "red scare." Americans, threatened by the new Communist government in Russia began to criticize American radicals. The worry was for naught, by the end of 1919, there were only 40,000 Communists (at least according to party affiliations) in the United States. Throughout that same year, some radical Americans chose to fight back, much like our founders did. The radicals sent explosives to numerous cities and, in response, "many Americans assumed that an organized conspiracy was being mounted to overthrow the government" (Davidson 687).

The attorney general of the United States, Mitchell Palmer, began a series of raids in late 1919 that continued to early 1920. The raids were conducted often without warrants: "In a single night in January, government agents...took 4,000 people into custody without warrants, sometimes beating those who resisted" (Davidson 687). The support for raids ended when Palmer put buildings under state guard and nothing happened. Four months later, bombs exploded on Wall Street killing 35 people and hurting 200 others; yet, public support continued to fall (Davidson 687).
Once again, the Palmer raids, specifically the bombing at Wall Street shows how important our reactions are to important events. Americans supported the Palmer raids, as the raids continued for months, and then, when something actually happened (the Wall Street bombs) people chose to not care.

The Palmer Raids were an abuse of civil liberties and were not necessary to defend the country. Those who advocated communism were just a minor sect of the American people. With only 40,000 Americans, the idea of a revolution was a little far-fetched (as is most politics). The raids were also unconstitutional as the Supreme Court has stated on numerous occasions that warrants are needed to invade private homes.

For some asinine reason, the U.S. was scared of the spread of communism (and many still are today). The U.S. already had/has numerous institutions and policies in place that already advocate communistic and socialist beliefs. Sadly, we continue to remain ignorant regarding such policy, adding to the possibility of similar Palmer raids in the future.

Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

What was the Reservation Policy?

The reservation policy of the federal government was introduced in 1851 with a policy of Indian "concentration." The government "pressed tribes to sign treaties limiting the boundaries of their hunting grounds to 'reservations'...where they would be taught to farm" (Davidson 511). American settlers would often break the treaties by "squatting on Indian lands and demanding federal protection" (Davidson 511). The federal government would then send troops to protect settlers from Indians.

I believe he U.S. should have done absolutely nothing regarding Native Americans. It would have been extremely interesting to see exactly how American settlers would have protected themselves. Most likely, they would have had to assimilate or establish close trade connections with the Indians. This would have most likely created a tight relationship between the two groups possibly making it more difficult to fight one another. This whole process reminds me a lot of the situation in Palestine between Israelis and Palestinians. Israel often promises to punish settlers who move into Palestinian territory, yet Israel does nothing to stop them from moving their in the first place. At the very least, the government shouldn't offer protection to individuals who aren't even in their land, at least according to world treaties, in the first place as it only adds more fuel to the fire.

Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

How Should the Disputed Election of 1876 Have Been Resolved?

I really don't understand exactly how the election process works in the first place. It just seems that it is entirely open to corruption. For example, how am I able to know that my vote counted? How do I know that someone didn't change it? At the same time, however, if anyone did change votes, through whatever trickery they want (such as not being able to read the ballots), I still don't think the number of changed votes would be that significant. Otherwise voters would catch on. I would much rather have my vote be based on money.

I also don't really understand how "Republican canvassing boards in power" were able to disqualify "enough Democratic votes to give each state to Hayes" (Davidson 491). What does "disqualify" mean? Were votes thrown away?

It also doesn't seem fair that the Republican controlled Congress was able to choose who made up the 15 member electoral commission. Indeed, the vote was based entirely on political party, thus giving Republicans the win. Is a vote of 8-7 really the kind of majority we as voters should want when selecting the position of president, the most powerful position in the world? It just does not seem democratic at all.

Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

What was the Square Deal?

In 1902, while running for a second term as president, Theodore Roosevelt defined one of his policies called the "Square Deal." In this philosophy, Roosevelt believed that growth was natural and that organizations within the American capitalist system would counterbalance each other: "big labor would counterbalance big capital...and so on" (Davidson 650). While private corporations would have power, the federal government would be ready to step in to solve problems and to make sure the system was fair to all.

I believe Roosevelt's square deal policy had more negative results than positive. For one, Roosevelt was often willing to use federal troops to end strikes. I believe this was both ethically wrong and unconstitutional. Under the first amendment, individuals have the right to peacefully assemble; specifically, Congress cannot make any law "respecting" this right. Using federal troops to break up strikes is unconstitutional as federal troops are maintained and were created by Congress. The use of force by the government only made it more difficult in the future for citizens to make substantive changes in the economic system. Secondly, although Roosevelt did not oppose business monopolies, he often supported legislation that made it more difficult for true competition to occur in the marketplace. He supported the creation of a Department of Commerce, enacted the Elkins Act, and compromised with the Hepburn Railway Act.

Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

What Problems Did the American Cities Face in the Late 1800s?

American cities in the early 20th century faced many problems. Many Americans and new immigrants lived in awful conditions. Some slept and labored in rooms with over 15 people. The slums and tenements they lived in were often dangerous and unsanitary. Even with the help of state laws, "ordinary blocks contained 10 such tenements and housed as many as 4,000 people. The airshafts became giant silos for trash. They blocked what little light had entered and, worse still, carried fires from one story to the next" (Davidson 577). The poor living conditions often contributed to an increase of disease as well. Disease "in the 1870s killed tens of thousands...Almost a quarter of children born in American cities in 1890 never lived to see their first birthday" (Davidson 276).

Many of the poor housing conditions found throughout American cities during the early 20th century continue today. For this reason, I don't agree with many of the policies that were formed in response.

While I think the discovery of new sanitation devices such as the toilet were important, I also think that the government takeover of water and electrical companies was damaging in the long run. For one, high prices kept the use of electricity and water down. A price increase, which would have occurred due to the increase in demand from new immigrants, would have required workers to move to other locations to reside (thus increasing that local economy) and would have likely curbed many of the problems we face today. With government control of water and electricity, the government was able to keep prices low for everyone (this policy continues today). What happens in response is that many people don't often care about how much power or water they use. Why would you, if the price is kept artificially low? While many blame big businesses for global warming (or whatever it is you want to call it), I believe government has just as much responsibility, if not more.

Bottom line: I think conditions would have improved as educational and job opportunities would have eventually allowed new immigrants to move to places with better conditions. For anyone who believes cities today are not that bad, I highly suggest you travel to beautiful cities like Detroit and Chicago, and to be honest, parts of Jacksonville.

Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

Compare Roosevelt, Taft, and Wilson

Theodore Roosevelt, the youngest president to ever hold office, believed that the U.S. president could do anything not directly stated in the Constitution. Roosevelt's Square Deal was a perfect example of this power. The Square Deal philosophy was defined by a system in which "big labor would counterbalance big capital...mediating when needed, was a big government that could ensure fair results for all" (Davidson 650). Roosevelt created the Department of Commerce and strengthened the Interstate Commerce Commission. He also passed the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 and the Meat Inspection Act. Finally, Roosevelt "added nearly 200 million acres to government forest reserves...and enlarged the national park system (652).

William Howard Taft, "ended up protecting more land than Roosevelt, and he pushed Congress to enact a progressive program regulating safety standards for mines and railroads, creating a federal children's bureau, and setting an eight-hour workday for federal employees" (Davidson 653). He also supported and would pass the 16th Amendment which created a graduated income tax.

Woodrow Wilson, a Democratic progressive, began his presidency by lowering the high tariff rate. In 1913, he created the Federal Reserve which "sought to stabilize the existing order by increasing federal control over credit and the money supply" (Davidson 656). He also passed two important progressive legislations: The Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 and The Clayton Antitrust Act. Both Acts were meant to curb the abusive corporate practices of the time. Wilson's support of the British blockade of Germany in 1915, would eventually lead to the entrance of the U.S. in World War I.

I suppose Roosevelt was the most successful of the three. Roosevelt implemented important, at least according to public support, progressive policies with the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 and the Meat Inspection Act. In addition, Roosevelt had fewer unintended consequences overseas as his diplomatic policies differed from Wilson's and Taft's (as Roosevelt's were less confrontational - at least relatively speaking).

Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

What Prompted American Entry into World War I?

The sinking of the Lusitania by Germany on May 7, 1915 prompted American entry into World War I. The Lusitania was a British passenger ship that was used to ship war materials. Secretary of State Bryan put Britain's shameful act perfectly: It was "like putting women and children in front of an army" (Davidson 671). Germany suspected the Lusitania contained war supplies so they, like any other intelligent nation would have, used a torpedo to ship the Lusitania. In February 1916, Germany then declared the use of submarines to attack ships regardless of whether they were neutral or not. This made complete sense, at least to the Germans, as Britain had a blockade which "reduced American contraband commerce with the Central Powers to a trickle" (Davidson 670). Unfortunately, U.S. President Wilson issued an ultimatum to Germany which stated that the U.S. would end diplomatic relations with Germany if they did not stop attacking neutral ships. Like most ultimatums, it would fail. Germany, wanting American goods and access to the Atlantic, resumed unrestricted attacks and the U.S. eventually declared war on Germany.

Another reason the U.S. went to war was the use of propaganda. Propaganda was used to gain American support for war against Germany. Americans saw Germany as an imperial nation (which of course is hypocritical since the U.S. basically did the same thing to Native Americans): "Americans read British propaganda about spike-helmeted "Huns" raping Belgian women, bayoneting their children, pillaging their towns" (Davidson 670). The Zimmerman telegram proved to be just as useful to those who wanted to go to war with Germany. The U.S., once again, handled the situation perfectly. They responded by ordering "gun crews aboard merchant ships and [directing] them to shoot U-boats on sight" (Davidson 672). And guess what the response was by Germany? Yes, of course, they attacked: "by the end of [March] U-boats had sunk nearly 600,000 tons of Allied and neutral shipping" (Davidson 672). The war was officially on shortly after, in spite of Wilson's campaign promises to "Keep Us Out of War" (Davidson 672).

Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

What was the National Origins Act of 1924?

The National Origins Quota Act of 1924 amended the first National Origins Act that was passed in 1921. The goal of both Acts was to curb the large number of immigrants that were coming to America during the early 20th century.

The first Act "capped all immigration at 350,000 and parceled out entry by admitting up to 3 percent of each nationality living the United States as of 1910" (Davidson 707). The 1924 Act "cut the quota to 150,000, reduced the percentage to 2, and pushed the base year back to 1890" (Davidson 707-708). The 1924 Act also created a Border Patrol to protect U.S. borders.

The National Origins Act, according to the text, became legislation because of "American bigotry and prejudice...Alarmed white native-born Protestants warned that if the flood [of immigrants] continued, Americans might become...as worthless and futile" as those in minor civilizations (Davidson 707).

While I believe some Americans felt this way, I believe the Act was created because of money. White or black, really anyone who had a job, people had a great deal to worry about with the increased immigration by the turn of the century. Just like today, and just like a thousand years ago, companies exist to make a profit and will do almost anything to do so. One of those things include hiring cheap labor. By the end of the 19th century, Asians and southeastern Europeans were being using as this cheap labor. Thus, those with jobs had the most to fear and were willing to support legislation that theoretically increased job opportunities for native born Americans.

Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

Was the Espionage Act Reasonable?

The Espionage Act was reasonable, at least according to the way in which humans have historically reacted to war. At the same time, however, I believe the Espionage Act was unconstitutional and should not have been created, especially in a nation that supposedly welcomes free speech and other personal civil liberties.

The Espionage and Sedition acts "set out harsh penalties for any actions that hindered the war effort or that could be viewed as even remotely unpatriotic" (Davidson 678). The Acts were created to augment the 100 percent Americanism that erupted in the late 1910's. During this time, it was considered un-American and unpatriotic to be either an alien, radical, pacifist, or dissenter.

Unfortunately, the Supreme Court supported the Espionage and Sedition Acts: "in Schenck v. United States, the Court unanimously affirmed the use of the Espionage Act to convict a Socialist party officer who had mailed pamphlets urging resistance to the draft" (Davidson 679). Schenck actually presented a valuable point. He believed that the draft was unconstitutional according to the 13th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which states: "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime...shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." Is not the draft, which requires specific individuals to join the military regardless of whether they want to or not, "involuntary servitude"? Yet the Supreme Court, Congress, and the President all supported such legislation that was clearly and without a doubt unconstitutional. In addition, the Schenck ruling created an arbitrary "clear and present danger" test which would prove to curtail the freedom of speech in the future.

Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

Reasons for the Prohibition

Prohibition came into effect because it had wide backing among Americans (or at least the elite who control the agenda). Catholics, corporate executives, and scientists all believed that prohibition would help society in numerous ways. They believed that prohibition would "promote an efficient and healthy workforce " and it would stop the corroding of "family life" (which we still have problems with today) (Davidson 709).

In addition, the all-knowing scientists of the day (who, even today, we trust almost full heartedly) believed "that the use of alcohol as a beverages detrimental to the human economy and whereas its use in therapeutics, as a tonic or a stimulant or as a food, has no scientific bases" (Spirit of America by Eric Burns).

I believe Prohibition was a decent (I don't agree with the ideals but I wouldn't necessarily condemn it) social experiment in which government should not have been involved. Instead, I believe individual citizens and associations should have advocated responsible consumption as well as focus on educating others regarding the negative consequences of alcohol consumption.

Unfortunately, government intervention with the 18th Amendment would lead to numerous unintended consequences. First, the consumption of hard liquor increased (and, as we all know, liquor can take any situation a little over the top). Second, prohibition led to increased gang violence. This was a time when individuals like Al Capone began to appear in cities throughout the United States. Finally, prohibition, as with most legislation, effected the poor more than the rich: "only the well-to-do had enough money to drink regularly without risking death or blindness, the common effects of cheap, tainted liquor" (Davidson 709).

Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

What was the New Deal?

The New Deal was a national policy created by Franklin D. Roosevelt to combat the problems of the Great Depression. FDR advocated "action, and action now" and he supported the use of the executive to implement such action.

FDR began the New Deal by implementing policies he thought would help Americans. The Home Owners' Loan Act provided mortgage relief for many Americans. The Federal Emergency Relief Administration "furnished more than $1 billion in grants to states, local areas, and private charities" (Davidson 736). He also created the Civil Works Administration, the Tennessee Valley Authority, and the Civilian Conservation Corps, programs that provided employment for over 5 million Americans. The idea behind providing relief to workers, advocated by John Maynard Keynes, held that increased spending would help the troubled economy get back to normal. During the New Deal, FDR created numerous agencies to support Keynes' philosophy.

Through the New Deal, FDR tried to prevent future depressions from occurring. FDR created the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), through the Glass-Steagall Banking Act, to prevent banks from closing. He also passed the Securities Exchange Act which created a federal agency to regulate the stock market. Finally, he passed the National Recovery Administration which "established minimum prices and wages and maximum hours...[and] outlawed such practices as child labor and sweatshops" (Davidson 738).

Overall, I believe that the New Deal was a failure. The most significant consequence of the New Deal was that it provided a political environment in which anything could happen. Throughout a period of ten years, governments around the nation advocated the use of social programs and the use of public monies to combat the Great Crash and its effects. This created an environment in which businesses could not adapt which prevented them from expanding or taking risks (i.e. loans, which is what was needed for the economy to get back to normal).

In addition, the federal government passed legislation that, like today, helped only the few rather than the majority. The CWA and CCC only helped those who passed the requirements. Millions still were without jobs. The Agricultural Adjustment Agency gave loans to farmers which led to the consolidation of farms (the few were now in control of the many) and the crops that could have been sold were instead destroyed so that prices would remain high. So, while many Americans supposedly faced starvation, farmers, supported by the government, destroyed the food that could have fed them.

Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

Causes of the Great Depression

The Great Depression was caused by numerous variables. First, speculation - "buying and selling on the expectation that rising prices will yield quick gains - had taken over the stock market" (Davidson 717). As in any other era, people wanted to become rich instantly. Second, the increase of the monetary supply by $6 billion from 1922 to 1929 contributed to increased growth and credit. Once again, people wanted more and they wanted it now. Finally, the Great Crash damaged the economy tremendously: "At their peak in 1929 stocks had been worth $87 billion. In 1933 they bottomed out at $18 billion" (Davidson 717).

Speculation, the increase of the money supply, and the stock market crash in late 1929 contributed greatly to the Great Depression. In response, following Murphy's law, businesses began to fail. With failure came a decrease in employment and wages. All these conditions would contribute greatly to the Great Depression.
The text focuses on the following causes of the Great Depression: 1) overexpansion and decline in purchasing power; 2) consumer debt and uneven distribution of wealth; 3) failures of the banking system; 4) little government regulation; and 5) economic ignorance (Davidson 718-719).

The Great Depression led to the loss of employment for over 13 million Americans. Family incomes declined by 40% and many could not afford even basic necessities. The Great Depression also led to an increased government role in American society; the New Deal would drastically change society.

I personally believe that the Great Depression (the Depression, not the recession) was caused by U.S. and global governments, specifically the way they reacted to the Great Crash and its subsequent downfall. In addition, many of the policies began by governments during early 20th century contributed greatly to the event as well.

In response to the Great Crash, many nations around the world abandoned the gold standard. In response, the value of their currencies decreased as the money supply increased. Thus, a dollar was not truly equal to a dollar; its value was constantly dependant on the number of monies that was created. In addition, governments around the world raised tariffs to "protect" themselves from foreign competition. When tariffs are raised, corporations are then made to increase the cost of goods (if they want to maintain their profit margin). This would prove to hurt the poorest of Americans (especially with the Smoot-Hawley Tariff).

I believe the recession, was caused by government, but more importantly caused by greedy people throughout the world. Just as in today's world, people want to make a lot of money and they want to make it now. So, people generally get credit in order to live in such a way. Credit, when used incorrectly (as it usually always is) leads to enormous consequences - you would think after thousands of years we would understand this.

Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

The Reconstruction Plans

Abraham Lincoln's Reconstruction plan was known as the 10 percent plan. His plan required 10 percent of qualified voters to take a loyalty oath to the Union. The voters could then create a state government. "The new state constitution had to be republican in form, abolish slavery and provide for black education" (Davidson 473). Lincoln did not require, however, political or social equality for black Americans.

Radical Republicans' Reconstruction plans were much stricter than Lincoln's 10 percent plan. The goal of the Radicals Reconstruction plans was to "make emancipation a war aim..It proposed that Confederate states be ruled temporarily by a military governor, required half the white adult males to take an oath of allegiance before drafting a new state constitution, and restricted political power" (Davidson 473). The Radicals focused on social and political equality and believed it was their duty to enforce southern states to follow the laws of Congress.

Andrew Johnson's Reconstruction plan was similar to Lincoln's: "He prescribed a loyalty oath that white southerners would have to take to regain their civil and political rights and to have their property, except for slaves, restored...Johnson announced that once a state had drafted a new constitution and elected state officers and members of Congress, he would revoke martial law...Suffrage was limited to white citizens who had taken the loyalty oath (Davidson 474). Like Lincolns plan, Johnson did not require political and social equality for blacks.

Both Johnson's and Lincoln's Reconstruction plans were strong because they made the transition, for southern states to enter back into the Union, easier than the Radical's plan. They did not focus on political and social equality which would make it easier to gain political support from southerners. Regardless, the goal of all three plans were to absolve slavery in the Union.

If I had to choose between the three, which I would not if I was a voter at the time, I would most likely advocate the Radical's Reconstruction plan. The Radical's supported black voting rights and passed the 14th Amendment, actions that would improve the Union in the long run. Regardless, all three plans had numerous negative consequences (as the war did in general as well). Blacks were not considered equal, though they were defined as equal by law, and would not for many years. Even to this day, racism and discrimination continues.


Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

Differences between Taft and Roosevelt

Theodore Roosevelt's "Big Stick" policy was defined by the growing military might in America. Roosevelt increased the use of American military forces throughout the world to "police...surrounding premises" (Davidson 663). In contrast to the Monroe Doctrine of 1823, the Big Stick policy held that "across the globe, great powers would...check each other, much as big government held business in check at home" (Davidson 663). Roosevelt used military might to display the increased responsibilities of the American government. In 1907, Roosevelt sent the "Great White Fleet" on a world tour (Davidson 664).

William Taft's "Dollar Diplomacy" amounted to "substituting dollars for bullets" (Davidson 664). Taft advocated the use of private funds to promote economic stability. He believed that a robust world economy would mean peace for all nations involved. Unfortunately, Taft's efforts of Dollar Diplomacy came with a great deal of corruption and led to increased rivalries between nations.

They were both effective, I suppose, in the fact that the American economy would grow profoundly during the first few decades of the 1900s. Personally, however, I believe both policies were ineffective as they had numerous unintended consequences. Roosevelt's Big Stick policy would lead to problems with Cuba and other Latin American nations. In addition, the "Great White Fleet" "spurred Japanese admirals to expand their own navy," which would lead to increased conflicts (Davidson 664). At the same time, Taft's Dollar Diplomacy only made America more reliant on other countries - this effect would be felt during the Great Depression. In addition, Taft's "efforts to strengthen China with investments and trade only intensified rivalry with Japan," contributing to further conflicts between the U.S. and Japan in the future (Davidson 664).

Davidson, James, Brian Delay, Christine Heyrman, Mark Lytle, and Michael Stoff, Nation of Nations: A Narrative History of the American Republic Volume II: Since 1865. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

Guide: Nonpartisan Ballot (August 24, 2010) Duval County Election

According to my ballot, the only election is for Circuit Judge, Fourth Judicial Circuit, Group 25.

The two candidates are:

1) Samuel P. Garrison.

2) Mark Hulsey.

Below is a little bit of research I found on the two candidates. Hopefully it will help those who have no clue who these guys are (which is most likely 99% of voters; fortunately, I suppose, only a few will actually vote). Sadly, neither candidates discuss any actual legal opinions on their websites. So, good luck choosing one of them!

1) Samuel Garrison:

• Currently an Assistant State Attorney in the Fourth Judicial Circuit.
• 10 years of legal experience.
• Supported the establishment of the Clay County Victim Service Center.
• Endorsed by Sheriff Rutherford, Public Defender Shirk, and Senator Wise.

Sources:

http://jacksonville.com/interact/blog/sportsrgood/2009-12-30/sam_garrison_to_run_for_judges_seat

http://garrisonforjudge.com/

2) Mark Hulsey:

• 30 years of trial experience.
• U.S. Army veteran.
• Volunteered "hundreds of pro bono legal hours" with local organizations.
• He runs his own law firm.
• Born and raised in Jacksonville, Florida.
• "Accepted Jesus Christ as his Savior at age 15."
• Endorsed by John Delaney, Tommy Hazouri, Daniel Davis, Michael Corrigan, Kevin Hyde, Dr. Johnny Gaffney, and Mike Hogan.

Sources:

http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/401019/mandarin/2010-04-21/some-background-mark-hulsey

http://votehulsey.com/endorsements.html

Key Vote: Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2011

Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2011

- Vote Passed (251-167, 14 Not Voting)

The House approved this $126.3 billion legislation funding the Department of Transportation, the Department of Housing and Urban Development and other related agencies. The bill now goes to the Senate.

Rep. Ander Crenshaw voted NO