Paying to Retire

In the dark times of recession the talk of “reform” is up in the air. Currently, privatizing social security is one of the major reforms being considered. According to The Century Foundation, the Bush administration wants to create private accounts in order for each individual to pay for their own retirement. Under the current social security plan full benefits for the retired will last until 2042.

Conservatives argue that with the privatization of social security that GDP (Gross Domestic Product) will increase 5 percent creating $10 - $20 trillion dollars in profit as long as the system lasts. According to Deborah White of U.S. liberal politics, “President Bush said in 2005 the initial cost to American taxpayers for privatizing Social Security will be $2 trillion. If we take the amount needed to initialize private accounts and the current deficit of GDP the $10 - $20 trillion dollars barely scratches the surface of the continually growing deficit which in 2008 was cited to be 65.5 trillion dollars.

Once the private accounts are initialized, your retirement is subject to change due to fees and the stock market and depending on when you retire can affect how much your retirement is worth. Deborah White states that, “accounts will be reduced as much as 20% to 30% by fees charged by investment bankers, trustees and account administrators.” By charging these fees, private accounts for the middle and lower classes become substantially smaller creating a national savings issue.

Privatizing social security will only create more issues down the road. Although implementing a reform will fix the current social security issue, it will only shorten the time significantly of when the government will be forced to raise taxes. If the social security plan is left as is, the system that is currently being used will last until 2042 at worst, where if payroll taxes were put at a set amount of 2 to 4 percent resources would run out faster.

According to Deborah White, “The Social Security trust fund has accumulated a surplus of more than $1.5 trillion. That occurred because the fund collected more in payroll taxes from our paychecks than it paid out in benefit checks.” If we maintain the same social security plan that we have been using, funds will run short in 2042, but with the current payroll tax we will be able to fund 70% of social security after 2042. Although the $1.5 trillion would not last forever, the money could be used to fill the gap to increase the percentage of coverage given. The coverage may no longer be 100%, but the amount of time saved before increasing taxes will save more money overall, preventing younger workers from receiving little to no benefits at all.

Preserving social security for future generations is the key to the reform. Currently, young workers pay a social security tax in order to receive benefits when they retire. These benefits are suppose garuntee retirement benefits for whoever pays this fee. With the current social security plan funds will not be able to cover 100% coverage after 2042 for the people who are already paying for social security.

According to The Century Foundation, “younger generations will be the ones who bear the costs of transforming the program. The added costs arise from the huge increases in federal borrowing needed to finance the new accounts while continuing to direct payroll taxes toward existing benefits for current retirees.” If the U.S. government offers the 70% coverage plus the addition of the $1.5 trillion after 2042, the amount of money that an worker would have to save out of pocket compared to the taxes and federal borrowing that would have to be spent in order to implement private accounts would be significantly less preventing reduced national savings.

The implementation of private accounts would greatly reduced national savings. AFL-CIO(American Federation of Labor – Congress of Industrial Organizations) states, “privatization not only exposes workers to additional risks, it also substantially raises the costs of saving for retirement.” With the reform plan that the bush administration created, funding for social security would run out faster than if we had kept the current social security plan forcing the government to raise taxes in order to maintain benefits for retirees.

These private accounts are run like 401k plans and the money in these accounts are invested in the stock market. In the current recession, the stock market is down which if reform proposal was implemented your private account would be worthless if not negative. Relying on the stock market in our fluctuating economy is a large gamble to account retirement funds on. Due to fluctuations in the economy’s market, on average you would receive more benefits from the current social security plan then the average private account owner.

Most Americans believe that Social Security should not be privatized. There are many excellent, modest proposals to shore up Social Security long-term, that involve raising payroll taxes and/or making very minor benefits cuts decades from now. (And those proposals don't cost $2 trillion.)

If the payroll tax cap was raised to $200,000 per year, there would be no Social Security funding gap for more than 100 years. Raising the payroll tax cap would also eliminate the need for more funding and federal borrowing, increase national savings due to less federal borrowing, and increase retirement savings.

By increasing retirement savings, potential spending goes up along with actual spending. As spending increases, a demand must be met, so production increases. As, production increases, jobs are created in order to meet the demand of the people. When the unemployment rate goes down from the jobs being created, more payroll tax is being received due to the amount of workers creating more funds for retirees.

And the Obesity Epidemic Continues

Obesity has been a major issue in the United States recently. The latest statistics show that more than 60% of Americans are overweight and more than 30% are obese. Due to these figures, many schools, restaurants, health facilities, and other public institutions have begun to implement programs and courses that teach people about the importance of nutrition, exercise, and weight management and provide more nutritious food choices in order to get Americans healthier. One such school is Lincoln University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. A recent change in graduation requirements at the college states that every student must take a body mass index (BMI) test and those who receive a 30, which is considered obese, or above must then take a fitness class called “Fitness for Life” which meets three hours a week. Some students are outraged saying that “larger students are being singled out.”

Although it may be true that overweight students at the university are being singled out, it is more important that they take control of their lives and get healthier, even if it means being forced to participate in a class they do not want to participate in. For many students, the class could show them just how important nutrition, exercise, and weight control are and how much they affect one’s overall health since many people do not realize this. Also, some people who are overweight know they have a problem but are not motivated to fix it. They may find too much comfort in food and may be too embarrassed to workout and exercise. Most likely, if the students participate in the fitness class a few times and follow the tips and guidelines of the class, they will notice results and thus be motivated to keep striving for a healthier weight.

Also, people do not often realize how much being overweight or obese hinders their lifestyles. Being overweight prevents many people from enjoying certain things in life, such as playing sports and doing some physical activities, or sometimes even the most simple and mundane tasks. For example, a 400 pound San Jose man named Okamoni Fa recently missed a flight due to his weight. He was instructed to buy an extra ticket for the flight to Phoenix because of his size but failed in doing so since the flight was already booked. However, this is just one example of an inconvenience caused by weight. More importantly, weight can also affect how much time people spend playing with their children, grandchildren, etc.

Although all overweight people could benefit from losing weight, this is especially true for college students. For many students, college is already somewhat stressful; and for most the burden of being overweight only adds to this stress, sometimes causing self-esteem issues. Also, many people believe that the college years are the best years in life; in regard to this, students in college should be focused on their studies and having fun, not battling weight issues.

Another reason this fitness class is a good idea is because it could help prevent obesity in the future. If the students follow through with the class and change their habits for the better, they are more likely to teach their children healthy practices later on. This is important because most people learn their eating and exercise habits early in life during childhood. In addition, some people may see positive results of those who took the class and decide to make a positive change in their lives as well. In general, by requiring overweight students to take the fitness course, many others could be encouraged to start living a healthier lifestyle.

Implementing this body mass index test and the fitness course especially for overweight students into the list of graduation requirements is an excellent way to help fight obesity; however, the officials at Lincoln University are going about it in a slightly unfair way. Many students like Tiana Lawson believe that instead of singling out those that are overweight by requiring only them to take the Fitness for Life class, everyone should be required to take it. She wrote in the student newspaper, “If Lincoln truly is concerned about everyone being healthy, then everyone should have to take this gym class, not just people who happen to be bigger.” She presents a valid point: just because some people are in a normal weight range does not mean they are healthy. Everyone should learn about nutrition and exercise, not just those with weight problems. So by making every student take the course, instead of just those that are overweight, more people would benefit rather than just those with a body mass index of thirty or above.

Overall, the body mass index measurement and fitness class requirements are good, proactive notions that would be beneficial to those attending Lincoln University; however, the fitness course should be mandated on all students at the college, rather than just the overweight students. Because obesity has greatly increased in America in recent years, these school officials are taking the right steps to fight it, although their methods could be improved. By including these steps as graduation requirements, participants are provided with important health information that could not only benefit them but other Americans as well in the future. If more schools in America take steps such as these, we can put an end to the obesity epidemic.


By: Kirsten Robinson

The President won't quit, why should kids?

Mr. Obama says he's for civil liberties. At least according to the first two minutes of this video.

Now, granted, he is referring to civil liberties in relation to counterterrorism, but he also mentions the Constitution.

Refresher: the Constitution says nothing about banning products. The federal government has no right to regulate the commerce in the United States.

Refresher: the Constitution was established to ensure that our government is representative of its constituents and abides to its citizens wishes.

It seems that Mr. Obama isn't quite the constitutional scholar.

Recently President Obama signed legislation that banned flavored tobacco products. The reasoning? To stop kids from making the mistake he made and take up smoking at a young age. So just because Mr. President made some poor decisions, otherwise normal, taxpaying, and responsible individuals are prevented from buying certain tobacco products. This sounds more tyrannical than free.

Now, I don't smoke cigarettes, but I do occasionally partake in the smoking of clove cigarettes, and by occasionally, I mean one or two packs a year. Unfortunately for myself, these products are no longer available. I was not tricked by the evil tobacco companies when I was thirteen into this decision, I started when I was 18, on my own accord.

While we're at it, why not ban fruity alcohol? I see more 13-year-old girls on Myspace pounding back Smirnoffs more than taking a drag off of minty cigarettes. And I mean, while we're at it, let's get rid of Captain Morgan, that pirate could easily be mistaken for a character of off Pirates of the Caribbean. And let's ban NASCAR and racing video games, because that shows children that speeding is OK.

The fact is, making a law based on what a child may or may not do is by no means fair, free, civil, or any of those synonymous words. And it shows what little faith President Obama has in the average American youth. How do Americans expect children and teens to make healthy choices when there isn't an actual choice.

And on an economic level, do we really need to be reducing the amount of products on our shelves in a time when we're supposed to be putting money back in the economy?

This legislation makes no sense. Have another smoke, Mr. President.

Political Correctness = 12 Sacrifices

By: Sara Jacobi

On November 5, 2009 at Fort Hood, a military base in Texas, Major Nidal Malik Hasan opened fire and killed 12 individuals and wounded 31 others.

Major Nidal Malik Hasan was an Army psychiatrist, United States officials told NBC news. After practicing for six years at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, he was transferred to Fort Hood at the age of 39. Major Hasan was scheduled to be deployed overseas to Iraq on November 28th of this year.

Major Hasan , who is Islamic, was born in and registered to practice medicine in Maryland, Virginia where he earned his medical degree from the University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda. According to www.msnbc.msn.com in a news article telling the events of Fort Hood and the history of Major Hasan, his medical records never revealed any disciplinary actions or formal complaints filed against him. However, while at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, he received a “poor evaluation” according to www.msnbc.msn.com who got this information from an official who spoke with the Associate Press. Unfortunately all he was allowed to discuss was that Major Hasan had received a “poor evaluation” but could not explain anything further.

Okay, so enough with the shooter’s background and history, allow me to get to my actual point with these things. In the months, weeks, days and hours leading up to the shootings at Fort Hood military base, there were several signs and warnings that should have jumped out to United States officials. While some of these signs and warnings were noticed, they were not necessarily noticed and addressed within a timely manner. If you ask me, and several others whose opinions I have received, I believe that it was just a matter of trying to be politically correct.

Everyone wants to be politically correct in order to avoid offending somebody unintentionally, which to an extent I understand, but at some point I think it is important to call it like it is. In this case, it seems that due to warning signs officials should have said “to heck with political correctness we need to stop what is going on, now”. Instead foxnews.com says it in an excellent manner, “the United States military treated Major Nidal Malik Hasan with kid gloves, even after giving him a poor performance review”, which I previously discussed.

In the same news report found on www.foxnews.com, where Major Hasan is said to have been treated with “kid gloves”, it also states that several warning signs were there. Fox news stated that Major Hasan was justifying homicide bombings, making an effort to reach Al Qaeda, and was speaking words of anti-American hatred.

Political correctness seems to be a major issue here. In the Fox news report it states that the issue in this situation seems to be that there is a political correctness climate in the military. The military officials do not want to address something and come across as questioning an individual’s religious belief because they are afraid of an equal opportunity lawsuit.

I agree, with being careful when you address someone about their religion and beliefs, in fact, I think that is important. I believe if a person feels like they are being attacked they are less likely to work with you and give you the information you are trying to receive. In the case of the shootings at Fort Hood military base, political correctness should have been thrown out the window.

One of Major Hasan’s former classmates, Lt. Col. Val Finnel stated that Hasan’s loyalties were obviously not with the United States of America. Even back in medical school. Lt. Col. Finnel stated that Major Hasan had given a presentation of the justifications of homicide bombing. Again, according to www.foxnews.com, Lt. Col. Finnel stated “He was a lightning rod. He made his views known and he was very vocal; he had extremely radical jihadist views”. When your own classmate and friend calls you out in such away as that, I think it really says a lot.

With so many warning signs and indications that this man was clearly not a fan of the United States, why not keep a close eye on him. I know he is one person and that our government is busy, but seriously, when a classmate from medical school, whom you have spent many hours in classes and labs with, calls you out and even says higher ranked officers and their professors saw the signs and warnings, why not pay extra close attention to this individual. In the end it boils down to being politically correct.

Political correctness is all about dancing around somebody else’s feelings, emotions, opinions, morals, and beliefs, but there is a boundary when enough is enough. I am for world peace, do not get me wrong, but when you have an individual such as Major Nidal Malik Hasan openly making justifications for homicide bombings, (which I am almost one hundred percent positive the United States Army does not encourage), telling his classmates the he is a Muslim first and that he holds the Islamic Law before the United States Constitution, making effort to contact Al Qaeda, and so on and so forth, I think it is time to say good bye to political correctness and hello to the situation on hand which needs to be addressed immediately, regardless of political correctness.

Although government and military officials may not have had anything warning them that there was going to be a specific attack on Fort Hood on this specific date, the signs were there. Lt. Col. Val Finnel, stated “They should have confronted him – our professors, officers – but they were too concerned about being politically correct.”

When it reaches the point where it appears that other innocent individual lives are at risk, it is time to move past the political correctness, over step the boundaries there, and address the situation at hand.

In the case of Fort Hood, if government and military officials had not been so concerned about being political correct with Major Hasan, perhaps those 12 individuals who were sacrificed would still have their life; their families would still have their husbands and wives, their sons and daughters, their brothers and sisters. Perhaps the next time, when warning signs are there, especially after being ignored for years just like Major Hasan’s signs were, maybe we could forget being politically correct and prevent another incident such as the one at Fort Hood.



References:

The Economy Stole Christmas

The holiday season is just around the corner and the question heard most around this day of feasting and family gathering is: What are you thankful for? The picture I included above is meant to be rather ironic when you read the rest of my blog; because this blog is about the economic effects this recession has had on the upcoming holidays. 15.7 million Americans are currently unemployed and 35.6% of those have been unemployed for 27 weeks or more. As you can imagine there are some families that a financial loss of that magnitude would be devastating to. Some families will be scaling back significantly, or even eliminating holiday festivities. I think this year more then any in recent history we should reach out to friends and neighbors and bring back the holiday spirit that I remember from when I was younger.

Has the government done enough to rectify this devastating economic situation? Pundits argue that the employment rates are always the last to recover after a severe economic downturn. The economy is back on the rise, the housing market beginning to see a re-bound, and job cuts are slowing more than expected, so the short answer then I think would appear to be that yes, the government has successfully negotiated the worst economic downturn since The Great Depression.

So then is the worst over? Economists agree that the worst may be behind us but that there is a long road to recovery that still looms ahead. The Commerce Department announced last month that the economy grew at a 3.5 percent pace in the third quarter, a strong signal that the economy is entering a recovery phase. Despite the hopeful signs the pace of the recovery is expected to be slow because of high unemployment and tight credit. Economists note that sluggish consumer spending will continue to weigh on the economy. The economists also predict rebounds in housing, growth from business spending as more companies restock lean inventories, and a rise in stock prices.

The matter of the fact is that there are still plenty of Americans without enough money left to put a proper thanksgiving dinner on the table, and even fewer that are looking forward to the countdown to Christmas that begins the day after. If the stimulus action taken by the government was effective then when can Americans expect unemployment to bottom out, or even begin to get better. Economists on the National Association for Business Economics or NABE predict that the current job loss rate, which shows signs of slowing, should bottom out by the first quarter of 2010, and most also agree that the 7.3 million jobs lost since the beginning of this recession should be re-gained by the end of 2012.

In a pre-Thanksgiving speech President Barack Obama had this to say “"We cannot sit back and be satisfied given the extraordinarily high unemployment levels that we've seen, we have only taken the first step in curing our economy." The next step that needs to be taken has yet to be clearly laid out by the administration but it is clear that any future steps will include a healthy dose of patience and faith. "Something that our economic team emphasized is that there are core strengths to the American economy that will put us in good stead over the long term," Obama said. He said the key is bridging that gap toward a more prosperous time and promised he won't let up "until businesses are investing again and businesses are hiring again."

With an end to this recession perhaps in sight it still seems only slightly easier to breathe this holiday season. Hope for the future is all some families have right now, a hope that tomorrow might bring a brighter day. Hope however does not put food on the table or presents under the tree. I am reminded of a Christmas cartoon that still runs every year; The Grinch Who Stole Christmas. Remember with me if you will of the scene when the Grinch has stolen all of the worldly goods of the people of Whoville, and what he discovers is that when they awake Christmas morning to find no presents under the tree or food in their cabinets they still are happy and grateful for what they do have: each other. This may be the same realization for literally millions of Americans. Faith sometimes can only take you so far, but this blogger, however idealistic the notion may be hopes that Americans across this great country of ours remember those that are less fortunate and remember the things they are truly thankful for.

Now of course I am not necessarily advocating that you go outside Christmas morning and take your neighbors hand in yours and dance around a Christmas tree; rather I am suggesting that in true American spirit it would be a good idea to make sure that special attention is given to those that are less fortunate. Helping out in a soup kitchen for example during these tough holiday times might be a viable solution or volunteering for any number of causes that struggle during this time of year. It could be as simple as making a donation or kind gesture, or even just a prayer would do. This holiday season make sure that you look at everyone around you with a kinder eye and maybe a smile, because none of us are immune to being in their position.


Happy Holidays Everybody
A Blog by Kyle Forry

Crazy captain of the seas

Whale Wars is a discovery channel series about Captain Paul Watson, his crew, and their controversal efforts in saving whales.

I watched the show a few times during season one, and I contributed it with a large portion as to why I no longer enjoy television.  Simply put, the captain is blatantly irresponsible, the crew dangerously undertrained, and their efforts overtly catastrophic.  I had every intention of stumping this already sinking ship into the abyss, but after a little background research I find that I, simply put, can't.  While the methods of Captain Watson have several fallacies he has so far, despite appearances and critics, held to an idealogy and impromptu code that I find worthy.

Yes, shocking revelations I admit and one of my former strongest arguement against Captain Watson is that he is clearly risking the lives of his young, untrained, volunteer crew.  All those adjectives are, without a doubt, true.  Including the intregal volunteer part.  Call his crew what you may, brainwashed and stupid seem to be the norm of the debate forums, but they are individuals whom made a personal choice.  The fact that they are willing to risk their lives for what they believe in is in my opinion extremely noble.  I personally know strikingly few people who honestly have found something they would bite the bullet for.  On the otherhand I can't seem keep track of  all the people who critize other for acting on their beliefs...

Another presumption I had about the Captain is his methods or more so the legallity of his methods.  It came to my surprise that he has never been charged; though no country actively supports his efforts either.  Both of which are due to the fact that while risky he isn't doing anything illegal, just politically incorrect.  According to the International Whaling Committee, commercial whaling has been deemed illegal worldwide.  Which to me, makes captain Watson like the pesky environmentalist who makes sure you leave your campsite exactly like it was before you got there.  Sure, it is annoying and perhaps you wouldn't mind seeing him trip and fall in his own selfrighteous muck, but the reality is that if people simply followed the law or better yet their own moral compasses they wouldn't have to be bothered by him.

So the final arguement has to lay on the cultural aspects of the people/countries that continue commercial whaling.  Being big on respecting others traditions I find that this is the one topic where Captains Watson's noble ideas seem to flounder.  No individual or collection of individuals should be able to simply stop another group from an age old hunting tradition, but if the prey leaves their territory then tradition yields to practicallity.  Still, I have had the fortune to see whales up close and they truely are  majestic animals, but just because I feel they are of a higher intelligence doesn't mean I have a right to halt another from eating them.  I don't hold it against my friends for eating dog and I hope HInduist don't hold it against me for eating the occasional pig or cow.  This arguement is change when you threw in the global perspective.  What a country does within their own boundaries is one thing but when they cross into international waters then they should have to respect that laws of the international committees.  Since it is in international waters that captain Watson and his crew nonviolently advocate internationally recognize whaling laws I can't see why they can't continue as that pesky neighbor.

Captain Watson and his crew are acting on their beliefs and doing it in an way that the only people who can get really hurt are themselves.  The traditions of the whaling countries matters up till those countries wish to act in the international waters then they have to adher to those laws.  Furthermore, since there are laws prohibiting commercial whaling it is sometimes up to the people to enforce those laws.  This is what I think Captain Watson and his crew are doing.


Jeff   
          

I'm quite sure they will say so.

"The Director of the United States Secret Service shall take appropriate actions to develop a national network of electronic crime task forces, based on the New York Electronic Crimes Task Force model, throughout the United States, for the purpose of preventing, detecting, and investigating various forms of electronic crimes, including potential terrorist attacks against critical infrastructure and financial payment systems. "

"when the United States is engaged in armed hostilities or has been attacked by a foreign country or foreign nationals, confiscate any property, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, of any foreign person, foreign organization, or foreign country that he determines has planned, authorized, aided, or engaged in such hostilities or attacks against the United States; and all right, title, and interest in any property so confiscated shall vest, when, as, and upon the terms directed by the President, in such agency or person as the President may designate from time to time, and upon such terms and conditions as the President may prescribe, such interest or property shall be held, used, administered, liquidated, sold, or otherwise dealt with in the interest of and for the benefit of the United States, and such designated agency or person may perform any and all acts incident to the accomplishment or furtherance of these purposes."
- The U.S. Patriot Act (2002)

These are some of the most terrifying quotes of legislation I have ever had the displeaure to read. It also happens to be a great example of one of the major flaws in the American voting system: ambiguity.

This idea of using ambiguous statements to allow wiggleroom within documents that govern our lives is absolutely horrid.

The text above allows for the government to record the private conversations of American citizens.

It kind of reminds me of V for Vendetta, in the aspect of extreme amounts of govermental interference, especially with the idea of phone monitoring.

Although that is the the basis of what is quoted, most people wouldn't be able to intereperet it that way, and they won't ever say it that way. It couldn't say that and be approved by the public, so legislators used clouded text in order to pass legislation.

This practice is done in order to create confusion and misunderstanding within questionable legislation for those who take the time to read what they are voting on.

It seems, though, that this may be an outdated and unneeded practice. It seems that now, we are able to use direct language, however atrocious it may be.

The Florida Constitutional Amendment 2 says:

"Inasmuch as marriage is the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized."

That's a pretty direct, not to mention discriminatory, statement. Even that, though, is misleading. Those pushing this legislation made it an issue about gay marriage, which won them votes. What they failed to metntion was that Amendment 2 would take away rights from more straight, civally unionized couples than gay couples, at about a three-to-one ratio.

This is a great segway to the idea of changing out voting system. The passing of such horrible excuses for care of our country are a sure sign of a need for change.

An idea I have heard, and happen to think is grand, is the idea of eliminating the voting age and imposing a competency test. The test would be different for each piece of legislation, just a simple questionaire to see if you understand what it is you are voting on, but uniform for every person.

It would eliminate the problem of bad legislation through the simple fact that the reason said legislation is passed is because people don't take the time to read it. If they don't read it, they won't be able to vote on it.

Eliminating th eage limitation for voting is another thing I think must be done, but only in concert with something such as a competency test.

Throughout my entire time in high school, I was angered by the fact that I couldn't vote, simply because I know more about who and what was on the ballot than most people who were of legal voting age that I spoke to. The same could be said about the majority of my friends.

If you know what the issues are, and understand them, you should be able to vote. If you don't, you shouldn't. It's a very simple process.

Logan Hartwig

Skinned Alive

Animal fur is a symbol of luxury. Because of the many different colors and patterns available, it is often used in clothing. But there is one thing you must realize. In order to get the fur, the animal must die. There is no possible way for a skinned animal to live. It is unable to re-grow its skin. Without skin, an animal would bleed to death or succumb to infections, insects or exposure.

Skinning an animal is cruel. It deprives an animal of its life and fur so that some person can dress up in luxurious pelts. Although the Unites States has a set of rules and guidelines about the way animals are treated before slaughter, our supply of fur is not limited to those that are skinned here. China does not follow these guidelines.

In China, 35 million fur skins (65% of China's pelt trade) are traded annually at the Shangcun Market in Hebei province. That is 35 million animals that were killed for their skins. The video above was secretly recorded by the Swiss Animal Protection (SAP) in February 2005. The video reveals that not only are animals kept in small wire cages with barely enough room to turn around; they are also subject to much cruelty.

One by one, the animals are lined up, awaiting their fate. Many of the animals are captured from the wild or produced in a mass breeding facility. The animals are ripped from the cages by their tails or with a metal pole around their neck. They are then slammed to the ground, stunning them as well as resulting in broken bones. Unable to move, they lie there convulsing in pain and trying to escape.

They are hung up by their tailes or legs and are slowly and painfully skinned alive. The skinning process begins at the feet, allowing time for the animal to suffer as the skinner slowly makes his way towards the head. The limbs that are free wriggle around, searching for escape. If the animal begins to struggle, it is bashed on the head until it is unable to move. Others are held to the ground as they are being skinned. Their breath is raspy because of the blood filling the lungs as a result of the beatings. Struggling results in their neck or head being crushed.

The remaining body is thrown into a heap of other skinned bodies; some of which are still alive. Writhing in pain, the animals slowly die of their injuries and blood loss. Breathing, heartbeat and eyelid movement was evident for 5 to 10 minutes after the animal was skinned. The whole time, the creature must be in agony. If you have ever received a really bad burn, you know how painful it is. This is because your skin was burnt off, revealing the soft tissue underneath. Now imagine that your whole body was burned. You would no longer have any skin to protect you. Any touch to you would be agony. If this happened to you, you would probably be screaming at the top of your lungs, wishing you were dead. No care is taken for the animal's wellbeing. There is no mercy; no merciful euthanasia beforehand. They are forced to lie still as their skin is ripped from their body. This is just cruel.

Humans do not need fur to survive. It is just a mere luxury item. There is no longer a need to cover oneself with fur to keep warm. Other material such as wool and cotton can be used to make clothing. However, because people enjoy the look of animal fur, faux fur was designed to help save animals lives. However, it is sometimes difficult to tell the difference between real fur and fake fur. In fact, clothing is often mislabeled. In some cases, fur that was labled as faux fur was actually raccoon, fox, rabbit, mink, dog, cat, or tanuki, also known as a raccoon dog.

The reason behind this mislabeling is because of the lax regulation of fur farms in China. With this in mind, in 2003, 40% of the united states imports of fur garments came from China, reaching a value of $1.8 billion dollors. China is one of the worlds largest fur producers, numbering as many as 10,000 farms, all of which reguarly kill animals for their fur.

In order to get around the rules, if animal fur was used, it was not labeled as animal fur. Because of this, there is often a misconception that it is faux fur. In order to increase the demand for fur, it is often combined with silk, wool, suede and leather. Animal fur can be dyed and undergo various treatments to make it look synthetic. After all, it is easier to simply dye real fur than to create each individual strand of fur required for fake fur.

People who buy fake fur in an attempt to help stop the skinning of animals may actually get tricked instead. In fact, animal fur has become commonplace. It is sometimes even found in children's toys and furniture. The only way you are to be sure you are not purchasing animal fur is to not buy any type of fur; real or fake. When you purchase fur, you are supporting the fur trade. You are helping them operate by giving them your money. If people do not stop buying fur, there will always be a market for it. That means that animals will continue to be killed for thir fur; killed so that people can carry around their dead skin.

It is unfair to the animal. It does not have a say in its fate. It is brutally beaten and forced to stand still as it is being skinned alive and then left, bleeding to death and in agony on a pile of corpses. If you wish to have the look of animal fur without the actual animal, consider faux fur but make sure you really know what it is before you buy it. You could be buying an animal's remains.

Lisa Hilburn

Over Before It Begins

The college basketball season is great time where you underdogs like George Mason rise up and knock over powerhouse schools such as Duke and players make a name for themselves to the nation and put their schools on the map.

Recently, the time after the season has been filled with scandal and disappointment. Louisville coach Rick Pitino got the ball rolling three weeks after the FinalFour, when he went to the feds to report an extortion attempt made against him by a woman named Karen Sypher, who was accusing him of sexual impropriety.

I'm also not sure that the Pitino story is over, largely because he has yet to publicly answer questions about it. And make no mistake, he has questions to answer. For example, during his public apology Pitino repeatedly referred to "that indiscretion six years ago." And Louisville athletic director Tom Jurich justified the school's decision to keep Pitino by telling my colleague Tim Layden that "one night he made a bad decision, and we've just got to deal with that." If it comes out that Pitino has cheated on his wife on other occasions and given the details of the case you have to wonder if there are going to be more embarrassments for Pitino and Louisville.


In June, USC coach Tim Floyd resigned after an NCAA investigation into O.J. Mayo's recruitment. Later, we were informed of the embarrassing behavior of Carl Henry, the father of Kansas recruits Xavier and C.J. Henry. Carl was so upset that a reporter from the Kansas City Star had the audacity to quote him accurately that he threatened to pull his sons' commitment from Kansas. Bill Self, Kansas head basketball coach, had to visit the Henrys home in Oklahoma to make sure the Henry boys were still coming.

The latest story came this week with the news that the NCAA has removed Memphis 2008 NCAA tournament runner-up appearance because Derrick Rose's SAT score was not valid after the season ended. If Mario Chalmers' three-pointer at the end of regulation in the title game had rimmed out, then we would have had the first case of a basketball national championship being removed because of cheating.

The fact that these stories caused barely a ripple in the sports world shows the state of the game. People just aren't shocked anymore when they hear that something dishonest is going on in summer basketball.

John Calipari's moving to Kentucky should have been a huge gain for college hoops. He's a well-known coach expected to revive one of the nation's most storied programs. Calipari was headed for an impressive legacy, but now he will be forever known as the only coach to have two Final Four appearances vacated by the NCAA.

In case you think this run of bad stories is over, there are plenty more to choose from. The O.J. Mayo case at USC has yet to be decided. Mississippi State is still awaiting word on whether freshman forward Renardo Sidney can play this season. The school has already ruled Sidney academically eligible. Either a high-profile recruit will be forced to sit, or an entire sport will make fun of the NCAA's decision to accept whatever twisted explanation the Sidney family offered to explain how they could live in high-priced neighborhoods in L.A. with no money.

There is also the case going on at UConn regarding the alleged actions of former manager turned Josh Nochimson. That case has not been forgotten about, but because of all the other scandals it is not mention as often. If the allegations reported against UConn are even close to correct, yet another of the nation's most prominent programs is going to get put on years of athletic probation.

We have not even heard the last from Calipari about the penalties against Memphis. We know it is not like him to remain silent. The 2008-2009 college basketball season just ended last march. College basketball needs some shaping up starting from the athletic directors who hire these coaches, down to coaches who are responsible for the players.

Maurice Thomas

Adam Lambert Performance

As I do not have cable and am generally unexposed to pop culture, I heard about the Adam Lambert performance on the American Music Awards from my grandmother. It seems as if the openly gay singer has garnered a substantial degree of controversy surrounding his performance Sunday. During the performance he kissed one of his musicians on the lips. The musician was also male.

Apparently, since the incident about 1,500 angry Americans have called ABC to complain. According to a Huffington Post article, "They're outraged," said Timothy Winters, president of the Parents Television Council. "They just can't believe the nature of the content, the explicit nature, and how much graphic content there was."

As it relates to pointing out the irony and hypocrisy of this situation, I do not really know where to start. But I think this will be fun.

Let’s get the obvious analogies out of the way. “Graphic and explicit content” is cited as being the source of the parents’ anger. What about the virtual violence that we subject our children to on a regular basis? Here are some numbers from the Center for Teaching Science at csun.edu. Number of murders seen on TV by the time an average child finishes elementary school: 8,000. Number of violent acts seen on TV by age 18: 200,000.
Percentage of Americans who believe TV violence helps precipitate real life mayhem: 79.

Ok, so most of us believe that exposing our children to this material will “help precipitate real life mayhem,” but apparently we are complacent enough with that reality to not pick up the phone and let ABC know about it on a nightly basis.

And we all know that TV is generally saturated with hetero-normative sex, constantly. We seem to have gotten somewhat use to that fact as well.

Now, what if Lambert had been kissing a woman? Certainly we would not have had the public outcry that resulted from him kissing another man. His behavior simply violated what we consider to be our family values, right? If we allow the GLBT community to rewrite the traditional strictures defining marriage and thus violate its sanctity, we will initiate this country’s downward spiral along the slippery slope of moral ambiguity. Our family structures will crumble and our children will surely be corrupted and their futures compromised, right?

Well, the bad news for the conventional family values proponents is that conservative hetero-normativity has already imploded and is dying. With the divorce at 50% for first time marriages, 67% for second marriages, and 74% for third time marriages, and infidelity rates at an all time high (recent studies reveal that 50-60% of married men and 45-55% of married women engage in extramarital sex at some time or another during their relationship) {Atwood & Schwartz, 2002 - Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy} it is safe to say that the “sanctity” of marriage has already been bastardized by the very people who claim to strive for its protection.

If we want our children to grow up aspiring to live the virtues and family values that we pretend to extol, hopefully they are not modeling their lifestyles in accordance with what their parents are exhibiting.

And not only have the “straights” certainly not been good stewards of the “gift of marriage,” but their apparent paranoia surrounding what the GLBT community will do to it is entirely unfounded, empirically anyway. We have not had enough queer couples raising kids to conduct studies at a scale that would offer any legitimate insight into this issue. Fortunately, that is rapidly changing and research findings will begin to see the light of day in the very near future.

So, given that the sanctity of marriage has already been catapulted into the depths of existential oblivion and the “concern for the well-being of our children” is just a post-hoc rationalization for our discomfort, what are conservative Americans really trying to protect? Why did so many people freak out when they saw a flamboyant male entertainer kiss another male on TV?

I would assert that conservative Americans are simply trying to preserve the customs, traditions, and social structures that they have blindly been conditioned to live in accordance with, despite the inherent irrationality and social divisiveness in doing so. These people are generally admittedly xenophobic and fear dictates the knee jerk reactions that they display in response to any shred of exposure that they have to unfamiliar alternate lifestyles and realities. They even go so far as to construct appeals to the divine in order to explain their intolerance.

One might suggest that the joke is ultimately on them for their willful ignorance, but that is not really true, as a brief look at American history can demonstrate. The potential harms to minority communities by prejudiced or discriminatory ideals and actions are substantial, as I am sure anyone reading this will recognize.

The acknowledgement of this fact has recently manifest in American law with the passage of the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act, which expands U.S. hate crimes law to include a victim’s actual or perceived gender, sexual orientation, or gender identity.

Finally, I would like to address that perhaps another phenomenon that the overt reaction to Adam Lambert’s live television antics demonstrates is that parents are now utilizing TV as a tool for raising their children. Studies show that most American kids watch about 4 hours of TV per day. Does that not indicate another hypocrisy on the part of the “family values” people? Just the fact that the Parents Television Council even exists is frightening enough; like parents and TV are teaming up to ensure the well being of our youth, together.

The response that this situation evoked should be reserved for situations in which a parent deems that a teacher or mentor has misguided a child. But American families have elevated TV into those positions, so we get riled up at it.

Rusty Black

Cold Holiday Season

Brian Achatz

One of the best things about the holiday season is tradition, and unfortunately, due to the current economic times, some families may be having trouble keeping up with their normal holiday activities. However, regardless of the dwindling economy, there is one day every year where America can count on billions of dollars being circulated through our economy; “Black Friday.”

The day after Thanksgiving, Black Friday is arguably the biggest shopping day of the year, and no matter the state of the economy, there will be tens of millions of people out, competing to spend money, buying gifts and burning gas from store to store. These shopping fanatics will be out at absurd hours of the night. Many stores open at midnight and sales in fact, peak from 1-4 A.M. on that Friday.

In fact, on Black Friday, online shopping increases 150% higher than the average day in November. When including in store sales as well, overall sales increase a whopping 310%. These are huge numbers showing the change in one weekday in the month of November. People really get excited for this day each year, statistics show a significant amount of eager shoppers begin looking up the Black Friday deals in August, a whole 4 months before the day itself. People don’t even anticipate their own or loved one birthday’s that far in advance. This is amazing to me

Deals are available for all different types of items and gifts, but some of the most anticipated deals this year consist of a 32” Television for under $250, a folding Razor Scooter for $25, and a portable GPS for $59. Naturally people get very excited and competitive for these deals, which is fine, but their actions due to their insatiable need to get the gifts for their loved ones and savage mentality is why the traditions of this day must come to a stop.

Not a year goes by where we don’t hear a negative story about Black Friday on the news. Something dealing with no doubts some unacceptable behavior. Whether it be violence, vandalism, or stealing, it is going to take place on Black Friday.

On a previous Black Friday, a 34-year-old Wal-Mart Employee was killed in a stampede of people. He was simply doing his job, which, on Black Friday consisted of attempting to keep a 200 person crowd calm. He was unsuccessful and trampled. I’m sure he did not go into work expecting to be over powered and killed just so people could get gifts for themselves and their family.

Employees aren’t the only ones at risk though. In the same stampede, a young pregnant lady was knocked to the ground as well. She was lucky to hold on to her life as well as her child’s. On the otherside of the Nation, violence with consumers occurred too. Last Black Friday, November 28th, 2008, two women, accompanied by men, broke out into a fist fight. Coming to their defense, each man happened to be carrying a loaded gun, drew their weapon, and shot the other man to death. All this taking place ironically, at a Toys-R-US store in Palm Desert, California.

On a less serious, yet still important note, there are stories every year of robberies and shoplifting as well. In the dark non-populated areas of the parking lots, people are robbed for their money and hundreds of dollars worth of gifts that the just spent hours to earn.

All of these actions and consumer antics bring me to my main point about Black Friday and the holiday season, that consumerism has reached an unacceptable level. People are more focused on the gifts and shopping deals than the holidays and family tradition.

Children are starting to lose sight of the holidays as well. All that seems to be important to their little hearts is getting as many gifts as possible and playing with their new toys. They have little concept of family time, tradition, and the true gift of the holidays; giving. The value of gift giving is being severely diminished by the great deal of consumerism in our society.

I can recall being a child being very excited for the holidays. Sure I was a kid and was excited for a remote control car or a new video game, but there was always two things that captivated my total interest: making “monkey bread” with my Mother and playing Charismas Day, one on one basketball against my Dad. I was only treated to monkey bread twice a year, Christmas and My Birthday, so getting the chance to buy the ingredients, prepare the bread, and, of course, devouring it was a huge deal to me. As far as basketball with my Dad, sure I did get to shoot hoops with him every weekend, but on Christmas Day, I had my one chance of the year to beat him.

I remember, a few years after my little sister was born, on her third Christmas, watching her open presents for the first time. My parents and me were so amused at her opening her gifts. We were laughing because she spent more time playing with the ribbons and the boxes than the toys themselves. It was really great to see her just enjoying not what was in the box, but the tradition of Christmas day itself.

So maybe this Friday, November 27th, there will be millions of people out and about in the wee hours of the morning, and the majority of the Nation may be looking forward to this “Holiday,” but I know what’s really important to me on that day. I will be looking forward to sleeping in, drinking egg nog, playing backyard football, being with my Family and carrying on other special traditions that don’t include stomping out my neighbors for a new digital camera.


SOURCES

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27957714/

http://gawker.com/5099813/wal+mart-employee-killed-in-black-friday-stampede

http://www.blackfriday.fm/

New Guidelines

As a young woman I have been taught many things by my parents and my doctors. From an early age I remember my mother dreading the awful mammogram appointment but never missing her appointment for it was for her health. Granted my mother is not a spring chicken she still knew she needed to go to be an excellent example for her daughters.
The medical societies and groups who set medical standards had a standard of women getting a mammogram yearly starting at forty and cervical exams starting at eighteen or after becoming sexually active. Now within a single week new professional medical “studies” have been published that severely changes the guidelines so many of us women understand and try to follow religiously. A federal advisory board made a controversial recommendation that women begin routine mammograms at age fifty, rather than at forty. ACOG (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) would change it from eighteen to twenty-one for a cervical cancer screening or a Pap test.
I understand that yes we are in a recession, and money is tight for everyone in every different aspect but aren’t we putting women’s health at risk. Preventative health care is cheaper and safer in the long run, by preserving lives.
“The new guidelines, announced this week by the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), contradict the long-held advice of organizations such as the American Cancer Society and the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, which recommend that women begin getting annual mammograms at forty” this federal advisory board also says that Most women in their forties should not routinely get mammograms, unless there is a family history, women from fifty to seventy four should get a mammogram every other year instead of every year and that the value is breast self-exams have no value and shouldn’t be taught The USPSTF guidelines cause confusion and bring to mind of possible political accusations of health care rationing. For awhile this group sided and agreed with other medical associations but this change in policy leaves doctors confused in which policy to follow. Many doctors disagree with these new guidelines for many patients within their forties have had breast cancer caught by mammogram findings, and caught early enough for various forms of treatment and less aggressive procedures.
“The government panel of doctors and scientists concluded that getting screened for breast cancer so early and so often leads to too many false alarms and unneeded biopsies without substantially improving women's odds of survival.”
As a woman I think a false alarm would be less detrimental to your health, instead of finding out you actually have breast cancer and it has become advanced.
I am not paranoid but just a few days after the USPSTF released their new guidelines there was another round of changing guidelines. This time around it was ACOG changing the guidelines on cervical cancer screening. The “timing of cervical and breast cancer screening guidelines is called coincidence”.
The ACOG new guidelines are accordingly; after age twenty-one women should have a Pap test every two years instead of every year, women thirty and older can be examined once every three years but it may still be appropriate for women to visit their doctor annually for a pelvic exam. Their previous guidelines ACOG had recommended that women receive their first test three years after having sex for the first time, or no later than age twenty-one with annual checkups after that.
ACOG's revisions reflect a trend toward a more conservative approach to managing the cervical abnormalities that sometimes lead to cancer. So now instead being pro-preventative they are hoping for an occasionally preventative test that will catch cancer before serious administration care is needed.
The ACOG's recommendations come less than a week after the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, the panel who released new guidelines for breast cancer screening the federal government. The task force recommended that women begin mammograms at age fifty instead of forty and decrease the frequency thereafter.
By changing its guidelines, ACOG is breaking ranks with the other main authorities on cervical cancer. The American Cancer Society and the USPSTF both recommend that women get their first Pap test within three years of having sex, or by age twenty-one.
The doctors for ACOG say that less frequent screening for cervical cancer will still catch abnormalities that lead to cancer. However these just doesn’t sit well with me, less frequent
However some Doctors, patients and lawmakers argue that this the revised recommendation combined with the changing of mammogram standards saying this might be the first step toward health care rationing. Others think it's another attempt by the government to cut costs on preventative medicine. Both of these ideas mean less preventative care and more costly administration costs in the long run.
Many people, doctors and cancer survivors are upset about the new guidelines for they might prevent the sick from receiving life-saving treatment in time, if their cancer goes undetected for years. Cervical cancer is a slow forming but within the supposed time frame that ACOG suggests pre-cancer cells can transform into cancer cells. In addition breast cancer is a fickle disease, the speed and type of cancer often widely differs, and exams that occur every other year might prove too late to catch it before serious intervention is needed.


Kristen Kendall

Animal abuse
Animal abuse is widespread not just in our community but around the United States and the rest of the world. We have heard it on the news with stories ranging from Michael Vicks dog abuse scandal to one of a dog found at a gas station dump with all four legs broken and eyes glued shut. Many advocacies of animal abuse include the following organizations: AnimaNaturalis, Animal Aid, Animal defense League, and In Defense of Animals.
According to the animal advocacy group, ASPCA, support teams like disaster response teams and the Police Blotter led by this organization work together in order to decrease of eliminate dog fighting, puppy mills, farm animal cruelty, cockfighting, animal hoarding, tethering, and many others.
Many successful attempts have been made at rescuing the innocent domestic pets, but the violence still goes on. From our side, we who are against animal abuse, it seems like something horrific and unimaginable. Supporters for animal rights cannot fathom what would cause a person to behave in such a manner towards an animal. Though we may never be able to see the world as it pertains to animals through the eyes of their abuser, it is certain that some type of motive whether sick or twisted, lies beneath the case of action.
People get a high from doing different thing; maybe animal abuse is part of the list of rules. Reasons for such attitudes may range from gambling to just plain entertainment. Both of these reason stood true for Michael Vick and his dog fighting ring. Bad Newz Kennel was the name, and dog fighting was the game that occurred there often with fights that were worth up to $5,000 or more. Unfortunate contestants that did not perform well were executed by drowning, electrocutions, or shooting. In fact, to counteract Michael Vick’s negative action against animals, the animal organization In Defense of Animals is recruiting demo organizers for upcoming NFL games.
According to Michael, he did not feel the magnitude of his actions until the prison guard slammed Michael’s cell gate shut. “Then I felt the magnitude of what I had done,” Mr. Vick stated on a CBS sports anchor James Brown. He also felt the loneliness of being away from family and friends. Going to prison was merited for such reckless attitude and lack of moral character in some aspects.
As was stated above owners that are connected with animal abuse may do so intentionally or unintentionally. In Mr. Vick’s case, it was intentional because of its premeditated origin. However, the claim of intended affliction upon animals may not hold true to every person. An online survey about why a person might abuse an animal revealed that it can be carried out intentionally or unintentionally. Many of these people do not have the slightest clue that what they are doing is cruel. Let’s take for example that some people don't realize what kinds of shelter different animals need. They may keep a dog in their yard with a doghouse that is on the ground and gets flooded with water when it rains, or they keep their dog on a short chain all of the time. Even though it is cruel for an animal to live in such conditions, it is nothing compared to braking the limbs of any animal, annoying or not, and gluing their eyes shut. Needless to say, it still goes on today as we speak. There comes a place where the line gets drawn between intentioned or unintended actions. Nearly all of these people can learn to understand that they are being cruel through education and increasing their awareness of the needs of our animal neighbors.
Unlike unintentional abusers, the biggest group of animal abusers is those who engage in it on purpose. According to an online source, this group of individuals is usually young and has trouble facing up to their peers and friends. Another solution is the fact that the owner takes his or her emotion on the animal instead of channeling it through another source, perhaps a wall. Other assertions include having control over an animal, retaliating against an animal, or having the pleasure of shocking peoples for amusement.
Animal abuse does not just stop at the stereotypical starving of domestic animals, but continues on to negative actions such as puppy mills, farm animal cruelty, cockfighting, animal hoarding, and tethering.
One treatment of dogs and cats that animal rights organizations have observed is that of puppy mills. A puppy mill is described as “a commercial dog breeding facility that is operated with an emphasis upon profits above animal welfare and is often in substandard conditions regarding the well-being of dogs in their care.” In addition to the substandard conditions that these animals are raised in before shipment to pet stores abroad, they are at high risk of developing respiratory ailments and pneumonia, as well as hereditary defects such as hip dysplasia. Furthermore, mill dogs are more prone to have problems with their temperament. The strange thing with these mills is that organizations with animal rights are mostly powerless in their attempt to reform the living conditions of the animals being bred.
Animal Hoarding is kind of similar to puppy mills in the fact that domestic animals are housed in large quantities. The only difference is that hoarded animals are not bred but kept in a single living quarter without proper car from their owner. The owners of such animals, hoarders, are deeply attached to their pets and find it extremely difficult to let the pets go. As an online source stated,”They typically cannot comprehend that they are harming their pets by failing to provide them with proper care. Hoarders tend to believe that they provide the right amount of care for their pets.” Such blind overly-loving zealots are typically older adults, mostly senior citizens, who have lost a spouse and therefore have transferred their love to the second most important thing in their life-pets.
There are different forms of animal abuse out there and they carry payments ranging from jail sentences to huge fines. Do your part in fighting against such ill-treatment of animals by being a strong voice in your community. Groups such as the ASPCA, Animal defense League, and In Defense of Animals are there waiting for your call. Each one of us can make a difference one animal at a time. (1070wd, mark)

Steroid Use in Sports

Drug use and sports have had a long, sordid history. Athletes make their living off of race or game results, leading them to look for any advantage they can get over their opponents. This has led so many drug scandals over the last few years that people are almost becoming desensitized to it.

First of all, science has come so far along that we aren’t even sure what constitutes an unfair advantage anymore. Athletes can have eye surgery to give themselves perfect vision, i.e. Tiger Woods. Swimmers can use wetsuits produced by Speedo that allow them to break numerous world records in a single day. Time Trial bikes keep becoming more aerodynamic, making these types of races more about what the cyclist can afford and less about the hours and hours of training. While all these examples blur the line between what and what isn’t acceptable, pretty much everyone agrees that taking illegal drugs to gain an advantage over others clearly gives an athlete a clear advantage.

There also seems to be some unfair sentencing in the punishments handed down for drug use. Recently, Kansas City Chief’s wide receiver Dwayne Bowe was suspended for just four games after testing positive. Rashid Ramzi, winner of the gold medal in the 1,500 meter run at the Beijing Olympics, had his gold medal taken away and will be given a ban that will last up to two years. While I understand that the punishments were given out by two different commissions, these differences sound absurd to me. To me this shows that the public almost expects these kinds of things to happen to their athletes and is willing to allow for some bias in the punishments.

As to what should happen to people caught using performance enhancers, I can’t really say. Austria recently created an amendment that would send athletes to jail for up to ten years after testing positive for drugs. This issue was brought up after Austrian cyclist Bernhard Kohl tested positive for EPO after last year’s Tour de France. Since he was caught before the law is in place, he won’t have to worry about jail time. He did however quite cycling altogether after getting a two year ban from racing.

Speaking of the Tour, it doesn’t seem like a year can go by without a few racers testing positive for EPO. While yes, there was a period of time where it wasn’t banned and everyone was using it. But it has been banned for years now, yet people continue to risk their entire careers to use it. Many fans believe that this kills the integrity of the sport altogether, refusing to even pay attention to pro cycling. But this doesn’t just apply to the elite racers. This doesn’t just apply to cycling either. Elite level triathletes have also been caught using blood boosters. The problem with this is that drug testing in triathlon isn’t as stringent as cycling, mainly because it hasn’t been a huge problem until lately. While pro racers and elite triathletes may get most of the blame, some Cat I racers and age group triathletes have also been caught with these drugs. This shows that the problem may only get worse before it gets be

While 10 years may be a bit drastic, punishments do need to be harsher. Fines against professional athletes more often than not are just a joke. With the ridiculous amounts some make, essentially no amount of money can really hurt them. Instead, the bans placed on them need to be longer, as in maybe an entire season or two. While this may seem excessive to some, I believe the thought of not getting payed for a year or two may be enough motivation to stop drug use.

To me, this is a personal issue. As a cyclist, the idea that someone next to me at the start line may win simply because they have money and a lack of morals bothers me to no end. While I agree that people tend to do whatever is necessary to get a paycheck, the line has to be drawn somewhere. An elite athlete should be willing to put in the hours necessary instead of just opening their wallet.

Cody Dey