Friday, July 10, 2009

Women and Mental Health Care... Health Care Reform... Kingston Progressive Posting... Response... Link... Empowering Women... Links... More

Two Videos that are VERY Pertinent to the World (yet another BIG TIME Health Care Reform Issue!) as We Know It...

["National Organization For Women Mental Health (Part 1 of 2)"; as submitted to You Tube by LarryMcMillen68 on July 27, 2008;]

["National Organization For Women Mental Health (Part 2 of 2)"; as submitted to You Tube by LarryMcMillen68 on July 27, 2008;]


I Copied and Pasted an Excerpt from the Kingston Progressive Blog (with link) and my entire response to same. It is highly recommended that you read the entry on the Kingston Progressive blog - along with the other responses - and really give some thought (This especially pertains to Women's rights groups and Human Rights groups) to this issue!


Excert from Mike's Blog and Link:

"Having a baby? If Sen. Chuck Schumer gets his way, the Federal Government will create a savings account at a local bank under your child's name. How much? How-bout a $500 initial deposit for each newborn U.S. citizen?

Schumer unveiled his plan this week to help children save money starting the day they are born. The American Saving for Personal Investment Act is one of the few initiatives that Schumer and Gingrich agree on. Newt had suggested something similar many years back.

According to the AP: The Fed will deposit $500 annually, but additional deposits can be made as well. Up to $2,000/year..."

--- "Newborn Savings Accounts"


My Response:


If I read this right - including your last post - this is going to - if passed - turn into another economic - and possibly even sectarian - injustice issue.

People that have a baby and $500-$2000 (or whatever) of "matching funds" will be yet another step ahead of people that have a baby and cannot come up (this is not unusual...) with these kinds of matching funds!

No wonder Newt likes it!

This (if passed...) also has the potential to put loads of money (on behalf of the children...) into the bank accounts of some right-wing religious groups (those that have access to - are wealthy enough - to provide the "matching funds") that don't believe in women's rights and/or birth control and/or freedom of choice
--- and thus (covertly or overtly) encourage their (these issues vary by group affiliation and other factors) female members to have large (the Mormons in Utah, the last I knew, had the highest rate of children in the U.S. - way beyond the rest of us...) broods of children...

Most of whom, if this were to be passed ... and one follows the dots..... would have a nice little nut egg for Joshua, Jeremiah, Mary, etc., etc., etc., etc. to start college with (Pat Robertson's University?????) - whilst the poorer children from the poorer families (often a result of teen pregnancies, abuse situations, date rape, etc... / inclusive of a lot of female-head-of family situations / and also disproportionately affecting minority groups....) that aren't able to grab onto this opportunity will be stuck in the same old "too bad for you, eh..."

Perhaps I'm not reading it right or understanding it all?

Whatever the case, I surely agree with your statement...

'[We] should watch this one.'

But not so much for the same reasons (although some valid concerns have been raised on that end as well) that your other writers have provided!"


["Thirty Years of Empowering Women 1976-2006"; as submitted to You Tube by ICRW on November 15, 2007;]


Pertinent Links:

Kingston Progressive Blogspot:

YouTube - ICRW's Channel:

"NOW's Feminist Action Agenda for 2009 And Beyond":



No comments: