Posted on 06/01/2004 7:32:47 AM PDT by .cnI redruM
So where is 'Miguel Estrada' ...when we (so desperately) need him?
ACTUALLY, I think it was 'a few more' than just 'three times'...
The state of California is already running on borrowed money. That is NOT because we are taxed too little. It's because the legislators are SPENDING too much. The taxpayers are tired of continually bailing out the legislators' inane little pet programs and bad decisions.
It's NOT just about whether this program you are advocating is, on balance, a positive thing. In ADDITION to it being objectively determined to have total positives exceeding its total negatives (of which I am STILL not convinced), it ALSO needs to be judged by the taxpayers to have MORE net positive value than all the other things which are currently, and simultaneously, competing for their same (finite) earnings. Further, the taxpayers need to be convinced, even IF it were to be determined to be a worthy program, that GOVERNMENT is the entity most qualified to do the job, AND that it is a job that government is AUTHORIZED to do (without FURTHER judicial mangling of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.)
I cannot speak directly to the quality of this particular program. Perhaps you are correct that it is on balance a positive thing. I CAN tell you however, that a significant number of Ortiz' past grand ideas wouldn't pass the SMELL test with voters if strictly subjected to the analysis described above.
Most of these grand schemes are not subjected to ANY real scrutiny whatever. Many of the past and current problems in this state have been caused by legislators NOT doing this analysis THEMSELVES prior to initiating legislation or, if they HAVE, not being truly honest with the taxpayers about the results of such analysis. For that reason, California legislators as a group are notorious all over the country as not being careful with the people's money.
Further, it is part of the Liberal disease (with which many in this state are afflicted), to never even CONSIDER the concept of 'limited resources'. Typically, it's "Oh let's commit funding for this or that inane little pet program, project or study now, and then, when we run out of money, we'll just threaten the taxpayers that we're going to have to put little old ladies out into the street, or fire half of the police force if we can't raise their taxes to pay for it.
Taxpayers are currently providing government, at one level or another, roughly HALF of everything they, the taxpayers, earn. In return, taxpayers are treated to waste, duplication of effort, pork barrel spending, and bookkeeping crooked enough to make the worst corporate accountant blush. and thats just with the good programs.
I, for one, would like politicians like Sen. Ortiz to start being a little more careful with the people's money, and to stop assuming that all 'problems', even make-believe ones, are best 'solved' by ever-increasing the size of government.... but I won't hold my breath waiting.
The demand for 'free goods and services' in any society is infinite, and will always exceed the supply.
I was thinking the same thing. Give me a sack of Tacos and I will give them a test sample of toxic body waste.. :)
I do not mean to flog a dead, or at least very weary horse, but here is an example today of the reasons for concern over pollutants that are accumulating in the human population.
Flame retardant in breast milk raises concern
Canadian women have second-highest level in world, Health Canada finds
By MARTIN MITTELSTAEDT
Globe & Mail
ENVIRONMENT REPORTER
Monday, June 7, 2004 - Page A9
The breast milk of Canadian women contains the second-highest levels in the world of a compound used as a flame retardant in computer casings and household furniture, according to a new survey compiled by Health Canada.
The highest amounts of the contaminants, known as polybrominated diphenyl ethers, or PBDEs, were detected in the milk of nursing U.S. mothers.
But women in Canada had levels about five to 10 times those in other advanced industrial countries, such as Japan, Sweden, and Germany.
The amounts in U.S. women were double those in Canada, and exceptionally high compared to those elsewhere in the world.
The international comparison was made by Jake Ryan, a research scientist at Health Canada, who is presenting the finding later today at a conference in Toronto devoted to the controversial chemicals, which some scientists fear may be as dangerous as the polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs, that were banned as an environmental hazard in the 1970s.
Health Canada official Samuel Ben Rejeb said the department is studying why levels in Canadian women are so much higher than elsewhere in the world.
Health Canada and Environment Canada recommended last month that some forms of PBDEs be declared toxic and eliminated from use. The European Union has already issued restrictions on the substances, and several U.S. states plan to follow suit.
"This is a poster-child chemical for something that ought to be zeroed out," says Tom Muir, a researcher at Environment Canada who has studied PBDEs and is worried they may be contributing to thyroid disorders and children's health problems.
Although the federal government is proposing restrictions on PBDEs, Health Canada concluded that human exposure from sources such as breast milk had not yet reached harmful levels.
But Mr. Muir said PBDE levels in the breast milk of a small number of women surveyed in North America are approaching the critical concentrations associated with health impairment from PCBs.
The highest reading in Canada was of one woman who had 956 parts per billion of PBDEs in the fat of her breast milk.
The highest in the U.S. was just over 1,000 ppb. The average breastfeeding woman in Canada has concentrations of about 60 ppb. Samples were taken in all regions of Canada.
PCB concentrations become of concern when they reach 1,250 ppb, according to Mr. Muir.
Health Canada said confidentiality reasons prevented it from seeking clues on why concentrations seem to vary so wildly.
Mr. Ryan based his findings on a survey of almost all of the studies in the world that have analyzed mothers' milk for the chemical. Scientists have checked milk samples from Sweden and Japan dating back to the early 1970s, finding almost no PBDEs.
But over the past three decades, increasing amounts of PBDEs have been added to consumer products such as TV sets, computers, and the polyurethane foam used in furniture to make them less likely to burn during a fire.
Levels in human milk have been rising in tandem with the growing use of the product, and in Canada are now four times those in the early 1990s.
International comparisons made by Mr. Ryan indicate that breast milk has about 100 times more PBDEs than samples collected 30 years ago.
Health Canada has been studying the chemical because of fears it is a new pollutant in the food supply.
"We were interested in PBDEs as a new emerging class of persistent organic pollutant," said Mr. Ben Rejeb, who is associate director of Health Canada's bureau of chemical safety.
He said that while levels of most other harmful industrial chemicals found in breast milk, such as DDT, PCBs, and dioxin, have been falling in recent surveys, PBDE concentrations have risen rapidly.
"This is unlike the other persistent organic pollutants."
Health Canada denied a request from The Globe and Mail to interview Mr. Ryan about his findings, but had Mr. Ben Rejeb answer questions about his colleague's work.
It is not known exactly how PBDEs migrate from consumer products into human tissue. They have been found in household dust and sewage sludge, in many fatty foods such as meat and fish, and in wildlife.
Although there is little research on human health and PBDEs, recent animal experiments with the chemical have linked it to learning difficulties, memory impairment, and alterations in thyroid hormone levels.
The similarity of these effects to those of childhood attention-deficit disorders, and the rising tide of adult thyroid problems, have led to calls for studies into whether PBDEs and other pollutants play a role in these ailments.
Mr. Ben Rejeb said Health Canada has been checking PBDE levels in food to see if there is a link to the breast-milk findings.
The department has found the contaminant is present at about the same levels in Canadian and European food, suggesting the high Canadian readings in breast milk are due to some other source.
Because they're in computers and furniture, PBDEs are probably found in large numbers of homes and offices.
But they are also present in many manufacturing companies and recycling centres that deal with high-technology waste. "It would have to be related to the use of PBDEs," Mr. Ben Rejeb said.
"So, how about those Mets???"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.