San Jose Plastic Bag Ban:

The city of San Jose has placed a ban on plastic retail bags. Grocery stores, pharmacies and retailers will be affected by the law, but nonprofit organizations and restaurants will not. During the first two years of the ban, the charge for a paper bag made with 40 percent post-consumer recycled materials will be ten cents. After two years, the charge will be 25 cents. The law is an effort to help reduce pollution and our carbon footprint in San Jose.

Pros:

It was obvious that plastic bag litter was getting a bit out of control in our city. The law is an effort to help reduce pollution and our carbon footprint in San Jose. This law will encourage everyone in San Jose to use reusable bags. This easy alternative to a paper bag can save our environment from much pollution. Although it may seem inconvenient at first to bring reusable bags to the store, once the people in San Jose get into this habit, it will become much easier both on us and the environment.

Cons:

However, as noble as the intentions may be, this law may not be the best solution to the problem. Reusable bags, although they do help us to reduce our waste, will not last forever. Additionally, some argue that it should be the decision of the store, not the city, to help reduce waste. For example, Urban Outfitters uses reusable bags instead of paper at their store. If you do not want a bag, they will donate the ten cents they would have spent producing the bag to a local charity. This is a great example of a retail store making a difference for the environment and the community through their own decisions; not the decisions of the government.

LGBT Equality Laws:

Many laws were enacted this year that made great progress for LGBT equality in California. A notable addition is the California Gay History Law. This law requires that social studies text books in California public schools must include gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender accomplishments. This July, the California Gay Bullying Law will also take effect. School districts will be required to have a uniform process for handling gay bullying complaints. Also, it will mandate that school faculty must intervene if they witness an incident of gay bullying.

Pros:

The California Gay History law not only educates about the LGBT community, but it also serves as a gateway for discussion on the topic in schools. The California Gay Bullying Law will hopefully make schools in California a safer place for gay students and bring an end, or at least a decrease, to gay bullying in California.

Cons:

Some Californians may believe that schools should not educate in public schools about LGBT history. Some religious groups object to the law because they believe homosexuality to be morally wrong. They do not want schools to be educating their children about this lifestyle and culture.

Tanning Bed Ban:

A new law in California bans the use of tanning beds for people under the age of 18. Before this law, the age restriction was 14 in California, but people between the ages of 14 and 18 could only use the beds with parental permission.

Pros:

Although being tan is glorified in society and the media, tanning beds are known to lead to cancer due to the intense levels of radiation exposure during tanning. This law attempts to protect minors from this harmful practice by restricting them from access and therefore protecting their health.

Cons:

Some believe that minors should have the right to use tanning beds if they choose. This law makes California the state with the highest restriction for using tanning beds.

California Handgun Open Carry Law:

As of January 1, California citizens may not openly carry a handgun. Before the law, anyone with a gun permit could carry an unconcealed handgun in California. This law, however, does not ban one from carrying a rifle or shotgun in California with a permit.

Pros:

Police officers support the new law because a situation can become potentially dangerous for a cop when an openly displayed handgun is involved. They cannot be certain if a handgun is loaded or empty. This law increases safety for not only police officers, but also all Californians.

Cons:

Although it is an effort to bring about greater safety in California, guns rights advocates condemn this new policy because they believe it infringes on their right to bear arms. As American citizens, they believe they should have the right to carry a handgun in public because of the second amendment.

The Dream Act:

The Dream Act will go into effect July 1, 2012. It allows undocumented students to apply for and receive financial aid at California public colleges and universities. Also, if the student meets the income requirements, they can apply for Cal Grants. However, these students may not receive aid from Cal Grants until all documented California residents have received the aid they are eligible for.

Pros:

This bill will allow undocumented students in California to receive an affordable college education. Undocumented students were brought to our country by their parents, so it is unfair to penalize them because of the actions of their parents. Many of them have been in America for as long as they can remember, and this country is their home. Through education, these students will be able to have a better life in the United States. Also, this law will not affect financial aid given to documented California students.

Cons:

Many tax dollars will be spent on this bill. Some citizens do not want tax dollars to be spent on undocumented persons and instead be spent on those citizens who do pay taxes in California. Those opposed to immigration worry that the Dream Act will encourage more immigration by providing inexpensive education to immigrant children. Parents may be more inclined to immigrate with their families to receive government aid for a good education.

I, among many, wondered why Iowa was the first state to hold a primary (which is actually a caucus there). It’s in the middle of the nation, is not first alphabetically, and doesn’t have the most people in the nation either, an honor which belongs to California.

It turns out that Iowa has always gone first every election year for no other reason than that they wanted to. Many states have tried to topple Iowa, as the publicity that comes with being first in the primary is impossible to duplicate. However, states are not allowed to move too much, and Iowa still holds its spot at the head, something that looks unlikely to change.

The Iowa caucuses, usually a deciding factor in the Republican nomination, happened on January 3. With a number of candidates vying for votes, including Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Michelle Bachman, Ron Paul, and presumed front-runner Mitt Romney, the likely winner was anyone’s guess.

Indeed, Iowa turned out to be a bit of a fiasco. The results were heavily disputed, and were eventually changed. Originally, Mitt Romney was said to have led by twenty votes, however, a later recount showed that votes were over counted in certain counties both for Santorum and Romney, leading to further investigation and a final decision that Romney had indeed won, but by a much slimmer margin of eight votes.

As with most primary seasons, the Republican race has quickly become a match of who could sling the most mud, resulting in a flurry of disparaging commercials started by extremely wealthy organizations known as super PACs. These super PACs quickly aligned themselves with a certain candidate and started searching for nitty gritty details about the other candidates that could be used to ruin their match. One such example is Herman Cain’s alleged relationships, something that ended up losing him his bid at candidacy.

“The super PACS have mainly created negative ads directed towards other candidates that pose a threat, and they’ve worked pretty well,” says junior Diana Le, who has been researching them for Speech and Debate. “Newt Gingrich, who was in the lead with 37% of the ballot, ended up in 4th place [in Iowa] after $4 million worth of negative ads from Restore our Future (Mitt Romney’s super PAC) were released to the Iowans in the weeks leading up to the vote.”

“No one really expected Gingrich to end in fourth place and no one even knew who Rick Santorum was until his super PAC created $500,000 worth of ads in support of him.  You see this complete reversal of the places in the polls, and it’s astonishing that the super PACs created the ads.  You begin to consider the enormous amount of power corporations and the wealthy have in politics.”

In fact, the wealth of the candidates came into play after both Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry’s campaigns died a slow and painful death. As their funding decreased after their poor showings in the first two primaries, their races came to a grinding halt by the third primary. Mitt Romney, the obvious front runner, is the wealthiest Republican candidate, with more than $32 million in donations, according to the New York Times’ “2012 Money Race.”.

Nevertheless, Romney’s wealth was not enough to help him avoid a rocky showing in South Carolina on January 21. Despite winning New Hampshire handily, he was surprised by a resurgent Gingrich in the conservative state, making pundits wonder if Gingrich could give Romney a run for his money.

Some even wonder if the California primary on June 5 could finally matter. Although that’s likely too late in the game to make a significant impact on the nomination, an article in the San Jose Mercury News suggested that this year’s topsy-turvy race might make California a deciding factor in the Republican nomination.

“It’s still a long shot, but the possibility of a contested June Republican primary in California is greater today than it has been in many years,” said Dan Schnur, a former GOP strategist who now directs the University of Southern California’s Unruh Institute of Politics.
Despite the unusual race so far, political pundits expect Romney to take the upcoming Florida, Maine, Nevada, Minnesota and Colorado primaries.

All in all, the elections have gone from a remarkably different band of candidates who then turned out to be slightly less different than we thought they were. Some dropped by the wayside, but in the end, we’re left with many of the same people who were running in the last election– including Barack Obama. According to Oliver Pursche, co-portfolio manager of GMG Defensive Beta Fund, as well as many others, Obama is expected to win re-election in 2012 and serve out his second and final term. Only time will tell who will win the top prize, but on the Republican side of things, it’s an open field. Anyone could rush in and get it.

According to America’s latest political and economic movement, these companies’ executives would fall into the top 1 percent of the country. The other 99 percent would fall into the category of people represented by Occupy Wall Street.

Occupy Wall Street (OWS) began on September 17, 2011, when about 1,000 protesters gathered in Manhattan’s financial district and marched through the streets.

At first, very few people, sometimes including the protesters themselves, knew what the movement was about. It was not until about a week later, when the media began thoroughly covering the event, that most Americans knew the basic goal of OWS.

That goal, stopping greed, is the only thing that encompasses the entire movement. There is no single, official list of demands from the protestors. However, many want more income equality, bank reform and a decrease in corporate influence.

Some people have criticized OWS for this lack of official demands, claiming that it makes it disorganized and disunited. Others approve of it because they say that no single list could cover all of the problems America’s people face.

Since OWS started, it has inspired similar protests in thousands of cities across the globe, including Oakland.

Occupy Oakland was first catapulted into the foreground of the movement after police officers fractured the skull of Iraqi war veteran Scott Olsen when a tear gas canister hit his head at the Oct. 25 protest. Olsen is now considered a nationwide symbol of the Occupy movement.

On Nov. 2, Occupy Oakland held another protest. That time, the protest was peaceful until late at night, when some protesters set fires in trashcans, broke into buildings and vandalized walls with graffiti.

Occupy Oakland has condemned these protesters, calling them “anarchists” and accusing them of changing the peaceful message of the protest.

John Blackstone of CBS News said that he believes the perpetrators are possibly part of an international anarchist organization known as Black Bloc.

Anarchists or not, many middle class citizens and small business owners of Oakland do not support the movement.

Some recognize that the protesters themselves are not violent, but are unhappy because the protests attract violence. This causes the already cash-strapped city to spend more money on its police force and often takes away business for local shop owners.

In addition, the Nov. 2 protest shut down the port of Oakland. Import is one of Oakland’s main sources of revenue.

Many Oakland residents, protesters and non-protesters alike, are angered at Oakland Mayor Jean Quan for her inconsistent stance on the protests. At first, she was strongly opposed, but has since taken a supportive position.

She has offered to find a new location for the protests so local businesses do not lose any more customers. Many believe Quan is trying too hard to appease everyone.

The only certainty is that this movement will not just go away. Until their demands are met, these protesters will occupy the world.

Both candidates have interesting backgrounds that could heavily influence their potential as governor. Meg Whitman was born in New York, where she was part of the first few Princeton undergraduate classes that accepted women. Whitman entered college with the intent to become a doctor, but soon found out that business appealed more to her.

She then matriculated into Harvard business school. She found a job at Proctor & Gamble and later at Bain & Company, a global management consulting firm. Whitman then moved from a president and CEO position at Florist Transworld Delivery to Hasbro. Next, she got a job at eBay right here in San Jose and through improved executive leadership, profits and stock prices grew rapidly. In September of 2008, Whitman had an annual salary of $120,427,360, but thanks to her ownership of eBay stock she is thought to be the first female billionaire created in the Internet age.This is Whitman’s first foray into politics.

Jerry Brown was born and raised in the San Francisco Bay Area, and then attended Santa Clara University, a Jesuit seminary, UC Berkley, and Yale law school. Brown worked as a law clerk to California Supreme Court Justice Mathew Tobriner. He then found a position at an LA law firm called Tuttle & Taylor.

He was elected to the Los Angeles Community College Board of Trustees and, in 1970, as Secretary of State. Four years later, he became governor of California. Some of his most notorious political accomplishments and contributions include enacting collective bargaining for teachers and other public employees, starting the California Conservation Corps, and initiating the country’s first building and appliance energy efficiency standards making California a leader in solar and alternative energy. Brown appointed more women, Asians, Latinos and African-Americans to high government positions than any other chief executive. Brown ran for president twice and he also became Mayor of Oakland from 1999-2007.

According to a recent Public Polling Policy poll from September 21, 47% of possible voters will vote for Jerry Brown and 42% for Meg Whitman. A similar poll from

Pulse Opinion Research on September 18 found similarly close results.

A major hot topic for this election is of course the economy. The two candidates have contrasting economic plans with the current monstrous, $20 billion, state deficit:

Brown’s economic proposal:

• Jobs that promote energy efficiency
• Tax credits for manufactures
• Less market regulation
• Jobs made in areas of transportation, water infrastructure and clean energy
• Coordinate worker-training programs and tax incentives to companies

Brown has really been focused on creating green jobs.
Whitman’s economic plan:

• cut government spending (as much as $15 billion)
• Eliminate the $800 fee that new businesses are required to pay in California.
• Eliminate tax on factory equipment
• Provide a $10,000 credit for home  purchases

Whitman has been focused on bringing business back to California.

Candidate’s Position on the common highly-debated topics
Health care Reform
Brown supports a universal health care system, also known as single-payer health care. He supports a customer-insurance funded health care system instead of a government-run health care system. He supports President Obama’s health care plan.
Meg Whitman proposes that California should move towards opposing the new national health care plan because it would deepen the state’s budget deficit.
Same-Sex Marriage
Jerry Brown opposes Proposition 8. He refused to support the proposition as Attorney General (from 2007-present.)
Meg Whitman supports Proposition 8. However, she supports civil unions and recognition of gay marriages before Prop 8 was instated.
Abortion
Whitman favors Proposition 4, which requires minors to notify a parent prior to undergoing an abortion. Whitman does not support late-term abortion.
Jerry Brown has strongly supported women’s abortion rights. He has even drafted a budget reform plan to allow low-income women to get an abortion.

Candidate Platforms

Meg Whitman continues to highlight on her campaign website, “that she will create 2 million new private-sector jobs by 2015, offer job-creating tax cuts to put Californians back to work and encourage entrepreneurs to once again make our state the global center of innovation. She’s the only candidate who has created thousands of jobs in California.”

On his candidate website Jerry Brown emphasizes, “Our coastline, farmland, mountains, deserts and urban environments all make up the great and unique landscape of California.  They form the basis for tourism, agriculture, energy development, recreation and California’s ability to attract and retain businesses.  Protecting the environment is essential to our long-term prosperity.  I have long recognized that environmental protection and economic development go hand in hand and will continue to promote both as Governor.” The California gubernatorial race will come to an end on November 2, 2010.

This past week, the United States suffered a terrible loss of the “Liberal Lion” of the Senate, Ted Kennedy. Senator Edward Moore Kennedy died on Tuesday night after a grueling 15-month struggle with brain cancer at the age of 77.

The senator from Massachusetts had often been overshadowed by his influential brothers, President John F. Kennedy and presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, both of whom were assassinated. However, his 47-year career in the Senate was nothing short of legendary. Kennedy was first elected in 1962 at the age of 30, and went on to pass some of the most groundbreaking legislation in United States history. Some of his most noteworthy accomplishments included work on the Civil Rights of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the Americans with Disabilities Act in 1990, and the Family and Medical Leave Act in 1993. It is because of Kennedy’s influence that everyone has equal voting rights in America today and that the disabled have access to the resources they need to succeed. Kennedy had a famously voracious work ethic, and it certainly did not go to waste.

Because of his tireless efforts to aid in issues such as health care reform, Obama awarded Kennedy the Presidential Medal of Freedom in August. Now, Democrats are clamoring to put Kennedy’s name on the health reform bill currently in Congress. Kennedy’s funeral will be held on Saturday, August 29 at the Basilica of Our Lady of Perpetual Help in Boston.

Overall, Ted Kennedy was the model of all that a United States Senator should be; he was willing to reach across party lines to pass legislation for the common good, worked hard, and made the most of his career. Though his views often seemed radical at the time they were suggested, he made a profound impact on America as we know it and will be sorely missed.

Economic Policy

On day 25, February 13, the House of Representatives passed Obama’s $787 billion Stimulus Plan without any Republican support. Shortly after, the measure won approval in the Senate by a vote of 60-38. With Democrat control of Congress, it was significantly easier to override any Republican opposition, making this a controversial issue.

“We want to work together with the other side,” said John McCain (R-Ariz.). “And this is not the example that I think the American people want us to exercise.” However, Democrats begged to differ. “By investing in new jobs, in science and innovation, in energy, in education … we are investing in the American people, which is the best guarantee of the success of our nation,” said Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

On day 38, February 26, the Obama administration released an overview on its 2010 budget plan. This plan required a total of $3.55 trillion, which would be distributed among defense, economy, education, energy, health, homeland security, justice, taxes and transportation.

On day 64, March 21, the administration’s Treasury Department asked Congress to grant the government the power to seize and take over failing financial institutions as a means of ameliorating the dire economic situation.

“We must ensure that our country never faces this situation again,” Treasury Secretary Thomas Geithner told lawmakers. “To achieve that goal, the administration and Congress have to work together to enact comprehensive regulatory reform and eliminate gaps in supervision. We need to strike the right balance between encouraging investment and prudent risk-taking to get our financial system moving again,” he said.

Some believe that Obama should deregulate the market and let capitalism run its course, while others argue that our economy needs governmental intervention to recover from its current state. Some believe the stimulus package is Obama’s presidential campaign promises put into action, while others maintain that he ought to focus on the economy and refrain from spending money on non-urgent causes.

Domestic Policy

On day 15, February 14, Obama signed a children’s health insurance plan bill, which extended health coverage to four million additional uninsured children, providing a large increase to his plan to reformat the nation’s health care system. President Bush vetoed similar bills twice during his term. This boost in coverage will be funded by a 62-cent increase in the federal excise tax on cigarettes, which makes the total federal excise tax $1.01 a pack.

On day 49, March 9, President Obama lifted the restrictions on federal funding for stem cell research, fulfilling a campaign promise. “Medical miracles do not happen simply by accident,” Obama said. “They result from painstaking and costly research; from years of lonely trial and error, much of which never bears fruit; and from a government willing to support that work.” Although the moratorium on federally funded stem cell research will give many research institutions the tools they need to study embryonic cells, the moral objection many citizens have to harvesting cells from human embryos still remains.

On day 92, April 27, Obama called all Americans to volunteer and signed a $5.7 billion national service bill that triples the size of the AmeriCorps service program over the next eight years and expands ways for students to earn money for college through volunteering.

“I’m asking you to help change history’s course, put your shoulder up against the wheel,” Obama said. “And if you do, I promise you your life will be richer, our country will be stronger, and someday, years from now, you may remember it as the moment when your own story and the American story converged, when they came together, and we met the challenges of our new century.”

Foreign Policy

On day 39, February 27, Obama spoke at Camp Lejune in North Carolina to U.S. Marines about his plan to withdraw American combat forces from Iraq by August 2010, promising to drastically scale back one of the nation’s longest and costliest military efforts. The President also noted that approximately 50,000 troops would remain in Iraq to support the government and ensure security until the end of 2011.

From day 75 to 79 Obama visited with government leaders and the citizens of Prague and Turkey and U.S. soldiers stationed in Iraq. Speaking before 20,000 people outside the Prague Castle gates, he emphasized the dangers of illegal weapons and the U.S.’s commitment to establishing an international nuclear test ban treaty.

In Turkey, Obama addressed the Parliament and highlighted the U.S.’s desire to build a strong partnership regardless of religious differences. “The United States is not at war with Islam,” said Obama. “In fact, our partnership with the Muslim world is critical in rolling back a fringe ideology that people of all faiths reject.”

On April 7, Obama made an unannounced stop in Iraq to get a firsthand look at the conflict and express his gratitude to U.S. troops for their efforts. In his speech to the soldiers, the President focused on the critical role they are playing in ensuring the U.S. leaves Iraq with a safe and stable government.

Over the course of the Obama’s first 100 days in office he also met with an assortment of leaders from other countries, including Canada, Japan, Great Britain, China, Brazil, Ireland, Australia, Russia, South Korea, Jordan, Afghanistan and Pakistan. In the past few months, Obama has traveled to distant nations, encouraged our troops in the Middle East and at home and passed legislation that will forever change our economy, health care system and scientific abilities. Yet, the first 100 days are merely a snapshot of what is to come.