Skip to main content

Home/ Government Diigo/ Group items tagged Transit

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Raj Dhaliwal

Expanded Transit Services - Raj Dhaliwal - 0 views

Raj Dhaliwal champions Expanded Transit Services in Ward 5! Building on successes like added stops, extended routes, and increased frequency on Routes 136 and 59, Raj is committed to further improv...

Expanded Transit Services Raj Dhaliwal

started by Raj Dhaliwal on 09 May 25 no follow-up yet
Jeremy Vogel

What's wrong with Congress? It's not big enough - 4 views

www.cnn.com/...index.html

Government politics congress

shared by Jeremy Vogel on 20 Aug 12 - No Cached
Cameron Pick liked it
  • Jeremy Vogel on 20 Aug 12
     
    "But how did our national legislature get to the point where only 10% of Americans approve of its actions?" "The answer: Congress no longer represents the will of the people, and it hasn't for a very long time."
  • ...6 more comments...
  • Jared Holcomb on 21 Aug 12
     
    With the way this is set up, i think its a well though out article. at first, i thought more people, more power, but its really to let the little guy have a voice, which i think is the biggest problem with the government today. A lack of connection.. Anybody agree with that?
  • Drew Koesters on 21 Aug 12
     
    George Washington warned us in his farewell address to avoid political parties. Now look at where they have gotten us. A House and Senate gridlocked in a partisan conflict in which none of the average people they are supposed to represent are even acknowledged.
  • Mallory Huggins on 21 Aug 12
     
    I agree with the general idea of this. I think a Congress of 3,000 people is extreme, but I definitely agree that Congress should be expanded. We have a populations of over 300 million and only 435 people in the House, and that proportion is pretty ridiculous. There is definitely a lack of connection between representatives, because it is impossible to connect with nearly a million people.
  • Alex beck on 21 Aug 12
     
    The problem with this is that at this point it may be too late to get a smooth, efficient transition to any other form than the one we have, and the few ways there are to acheive this goal either involve massive chaos, which most find undesireable, or change so slow that we will never be satisfied with the transition's results, whether they achieve our preferred outcomes. Also, the shift could cause exploitation of congress that would be even worse for the people than our current predicament. So really, we are almost as well off just starting from the roots and reconstructing in the new way, despite the many downsides.... At least as far as I can tell. I can't say I have given the topic much thought.
  • Ashtyne Madsen on 21 Aug 12
     
    I agree with the article and these comments because the House is supposed to represent "normal" Americans and and they wouldn't be able to do that with so few representatives.
  • Jeremy Vogel on 21 Aug 12
     
    Alex I have to disagree that the few ways to do this would cause chaos or move slowly. With the current setup we redraw districts and move them from one state to another based on population data received from the census every ten years. So lets say that today we decide to double the number of representatives to 870 starting in 2020 (the next census year). That would mean we would have 8 years to figure out the math, which can't be all that difficult in my opinion if they are able to do it every ten years when they redistrict, to find out how many congressional districts each state gets. Then when the new state district maps are drawn in 2020 after the census instead of drawing 435 districts we would draw 870. This way could work because we already move districts from state to state with population changes so states have experienced additional congressional districts being added to their district maps. I hope this made sense, it did in my head.
  • Alex beck on 22 Aug 12
     
    It did in fact make good sense. I concede that the physical transition, so to speak, would be fairly simple, however I am more concerned that the math would not be that simple to adjust and still aquire the desired results. I can't say that I have a lot of reasonably credible sources, but as a citizen, my concerns would be that the transition would just cause the same issues, but with twice the ammount of people being paid to do the job. As far as I could tell, there is no way to be certain that the adjustment would work as desired, so my question is: do you have a method that would ensure that we would not just be paying twice the price for the same job with the comfort of more poeple doing it? I don't think I saw anything regarding that, so I hope that is a reasonable question.
  • Eric Cavanaugh on 22 Aug 12
     
    I think Congress is just bossy............ that is why they are not big enough..
Victoria Holcomb

Mom is ticketed for letting her two year old son pee on the street - 0 views

video.msnbc.msn.com/...49019180

news

shared by Victoria Holcomb on 13 Sep 12 - No Cached
  • alex widick on 14 Sep 12
     
    you gota go you gota go
  • ...9 more comments...
  • Eric Cavanaugh on 18 Sep 12
     
    That is crazy. I get that peeing on a street, is nasty... But it was a little kid, they can't hold it forever....
  • Katelyn Owen on 18 Sep 12
     
    I mean I would understand that if it was an older child to ticket her but it was a little boy and yeah it is gross but he's still little he didn't know better.
  • Charlene Zimmerman on 18 Sep 12
     
    I agree with Eric, except for the fact that she could have found a place to go in for her son to go to the bathroom. The police should have been a little bit more understanding with the age of the child.
  • Jake Warnke on 18 Sep 12
     
    wow..... i agree with eric
  • Cameron Pick on 19 Sep 12
     
    It doesn't matter if you're 2 or 20 it violates the law. Its called indecent exposure and it violates the law.
  • Alex Snipes on 19 Sep 12
     
    I agree with Cameron. If I was walking on the street I definitely wouldn't want to see that no matter who it was. She could have taken her son into a near by business and asked to use their restroom.
  • Hope Philbrick on 19 Sep 12
     
    I agree with Charlie I think the police overreacted
  • dalton schaaf on 19 Sep 12
     
    I agree with charlie also. I think that the mom should have been warned instead of given a ticket.
  • Rainie mccubbin on 19 Sep 12
     
    I agree with Alex a parent is suppose to teach their child healthy things to do and to pee in places where you shouldn't isn't a healthy thing to do.
  • Payton Whiteaker on 21 Sep 12
     
    Wow, just wow. I bluntly support the mother in this situation. First, it may be against the law, but can you hold a 2 year old accountable for understanding every law? Those that will say, the mother should have stopped him, it's either, in the grass in his pants, and they were out, so should that kid have to walk around smelling like Urine all day, and probably contract some sort of rash from it? Second, the officer lectured the mother. Since when does anyone have any say as to how a parent raises her child? Every person they news crew interviewed agreed with her. So, obviously, the mother has quiet a bit of support. Third, a sanitation issue? Let's take a look at the average dog. The kid does this once, 50 dollar fine. I bet you can have any dog walker have there dog go, and they won't receive a 50 dollar fine. I know I am comparing a human child to a dog, but still, the kid is 2. Just like a dog going in public, he does not know any better. For everyone that calls that a sanitation issue, there is likely to have been at least 1 dog to have pee'd there as well, probably more. Lastly, indecent exposure. By definition, indecent exposure is the deliberate exposure in public or in view of the general public by a person of a portion or portions of his or her body, in circumstances where the exposure is contrary to local moral or other standards of appropriate behavior. Let's go back to the dog reference. Since, by definition, this is not just applicable to humans, should every dog walker receive a 50 dollar fine every time they let there dog outside? Having 4 dogs, I would receive a 200 dollar ticket every 1-2 hours a day anyone in my house is home. Over a 24 hour period, I would probably receive about $3200 in fines. To add on, the term deliberate, as used in this form, would require the careful consideration of actions. This 2 year old did not consider anything other then probably, "I gotta go!!!" The definition of indecent exposure itself should override the tic
  • Kirstina Michl on 21 Sep 12
     
    For me personally, if I were a parent, I'd try to get my child to a bathroom, but that woman didn't deserve to be ticketed for that. If she were the one doing the peeing, I'd understand the ticket because she's an adult. But the little kid is only two, and knows nothing about indecency or sexuality or all that. (Or, at least, I hope he doesn't . . .) But it's also like Payton said about the whole dog deal. Dogs also know nothing about indecency. They obviously know about mating as they get older, but dogs aren't humans, so they don't know how to or not to be decent. And while the little kid is human, he obviously still knows nothing about either subject at that age; he hasn't lived long enough.
jborwick

U.S. mom gives birth in transit, gets stranded - CNN.com - 0 views

www.cnn.com/...index.html

shared by jborwick on 15 May 15 - No Cached
  • jborwick on 15 May 15
     
    Soon she found herself facing an unlikely predicament. With her U.S. health insurance not covering the mounting medical fees her newborn son requires, the hospital had initially withheld his birth certificate. And without a birth certificate, the U.S. embassy cannot issue a passport for baby Kyuss to return home to Iowa.
bigslide

House Republican introduces anti-trans legislation that could lead to genital exams for... - 36 views

www.lgbtqnation.com/...ead-genital-exams-school-girls

shared by bigslide on 01 Feb 21 - No Cached
  • bigslide on 01 Feb 21
     
    so it says "House Republican introduces anti-trans legislation that could lead to genital exams for school girls"
  • ...21 more comments...
  • bigslide on 01 Feb 21
     
    Im angry about this be because it's already been moving to pass in Mississippi, Connecticut, and Tennessee. It's sad to see so many people retaliate against the trans-community. They see us as disgusting monsters. They don't feel bad when they take away the rights of trans youth because of their lack of understanding of what being transgender actually is. I'm not speaking for all trans people, but I would have rather never been born than to be trans. for many reasons because most are too personal to say. and when old 1900s people take away our basic rights, and others seem to never care, it angers me.
  • thepriceisright on 01 Feb 21
     
    This is simply disgusting. Have people really become this ignorant and transphobic? Maybe they should... hear me out here... mind.their.business
  • thomaschau on 01 Feb 21
     
    I personally agree that transgender women should be banned from women sports because biologically they are still male and for all of human history males have been proven to physically superior to females and when you put a transgender women whos been a male for most of their life vs a women whos been a woman all of her life it's gonna be pretty obvious whos gonna win I would hate to be a girl in a wrestling team and get destroyed by a transgender women whos been a male for the longest time ever.
  • lamador794 on 01 Feb 21
     
    I disagree with the House of Republicans introducing anti-trans legislation that could lead to genital exams for females. America is a free nation where everyone has the right to choose and be identified based on their gender decision. As a female and one day future mother, I suggest not allowing this legislation because it will only spread narcissism and homophobia. Females should never be forced to go through an "examination" to prove their gender. The First Amendment guarantees our right to free expression and we should maintain it active no matter what.
  • ataylor074 on 01 Feb 21
     
    I disagree, I think people have a right to be who they want and have a right to participate in the things that they want. Just because you fear what you don't understand doesn't mean you can force HUMANS to go through these traumatizing experiences so you can tell them they can't do something. They have a right to play sports if they want to and people shouldn't stand in their way.
  • kredding147 on 01 Feb 21
     
    I completely disagree with this. This is teaching young girls that it's okay for people to expect you to show them their genitals, this is teaching young girls that they don't have the choice to say no, this is teaching young girls to let old white men control our lives and the way that we handle our bodies. This is only adding to the rape culture of the present day by teaching girls that we don't have control over our bodies.
  • allisonwalker on 01 Feb 21
     
    I disagree with this whole thing. Females have privacy and should keep it. I don't even see the big deal in allowing someone who identifies as female to play a sport that is only for girls. People should be able to be who they identify as without facing discrimination. I thought we've moved on already.
  • noahsandbothe on 01 Feb 21
     
    I disagree with the legislation. No one should have to have their genitals checked just to play sports in general. Also, people in the trans community already face enough humiliation and bullying, the old white men writing the legislation should stop worrying about what sports trans people play and instead work on attempting to end the global pandemic at hand.
  • jacobknauss on 01 Feb 21
     
    how do you not see the problem with trans people playing sports? Men are scientifically stronger than females creating an unfair advantage. These trans people will just take opportunities away from women, like scholarships. If you are say a female wrestler, would you want to wrestle a male? No, because it's unfair.
  • jtaulborg103 on 01 Feb 21
     
    I disagree with this completely. We should not have to show our genitals or get them checked in order to play sports. The trans community gets so much hate and suffers enough as it is. The people writing the legislation need to quit being so concerned with the trans community and what sports they're playing and also quit trying to pass laws that could invade young womens privacy. It's disgusting that this is even being considered.
  • aburianek421 on 01 Feb 21
     
    Personally I think people should be allowed to do what they want, transgenders playing sports included. Politicians spend too much time creating conflict and fighting among themselves, which creates division among the people too
  • bigslide on 01 Feb 21
     
    I also feel like most don't really care about the highschool sport. They just don't want trans people participating. I think when they imagine a trans woman, they think of a pedo looking dude, or very masculine. When in reality, many trans women look very much like women. I understand a physical sport, like wrestling, but that's basically it. Maybe weight lifting, but everything else is just based on the fact that some people don't understand the transgender mind and body and how they work. Who cares about high school or middle school volleyball that much to be so concerned to want to check any women's genitals? invasion of privacy and just embarrassing.
  • milo_nordman on 01 Feb 21
     
    I 100% disagree with this. First off girls shouldn't have to show their genitals in order to play sports, it's an invasion of privacy and just disgusting. And secondly, this legislation perpetuates the idea that trans women aren't women, which simply isn't true. If a trans woman, or just a trans person in general, wants to play a sport on the team that aligns with their gender identity they should be able to.
  • jacobknauss on 02 Feb 21
     
    I completely disagree with the statement "I also feel like most don't really care about the highschool sport". These high school athletes put in many hours of their week into participating in their sport. These people care a lot. For some kids, this could be their only way out of a bad situation they are in. Also, it's not only wrestling that this would create an unfair advantage. Basketball, Soccer, Softball, Volleyball, Swiming. The list just goes on. If you say that "Most people don't care" you must not be involved in any type of sport seriously.
  • bigslide on 03 Feb 21
     
    true, I don't participate in sports. I guess I didn't think about how big and important even middle school sports can be, and I'm sorry bout that. What I was trying to say before is that most of the people passing these laws don't care about the sport. They just don't. They see Biden allow trans people back into the military, and they got mad. Another thing is that for the people saying it's a disadvantage, idk what to say to ya'll. Yall All could ban mentally disabled girls because it could "bring the team down". yall could ban stronger girls with muscle because they are "too strong compared to the other girls and its unfair". Anyone can make excuses to discriminate against a group they don't understand or care about and make it sound like they have the best of intentions. And maybe they do, but the fact they think they can stop the freedom of that individual because its unfair to them, shows the lack of understanding they have on that issue. I'm a trans person, and I personally live through small micro-aggressions and just blatant transphobia in my own house every day. So when I see discrimination with no consiterate thought on how to solve an issue (instead of finding a solution, they just ban people from playing all together) that's when I have an issue. I'm sorry this is long btw (:
  • greenleighd on 08 Feb 21
     
    the fact that they could say "I also feel like most don't really care about their highschool sport" is wrong the people who participate in their high school sports aren't just doing it for fun that may be one of the only ways they can start a career they want or it may be their only way to get out of a bad situation they also take hours out of their weeks to perfect their skills I personally think most people just don't understand the time & dedication.
  • peytongrenoble on 08 Feb 21
     
    I don't think that it should truly matter as long as they are doing what they need. The girls who are putting time and dedication into the sport should get to play, that is all that matters.
  • nick_rice on 08 Feb 21
     
    I agree with the ban because I feel it would always result in an unfair advantage however if there are ways to make it fairer then I suppose I would have no real problem with it
  • tkoesters274 on 11 Feb 21
     
    I disagree with this because it could allow children to think that other people looking at their genitals and that's just disgusting. Also, I feel like someone who is transgender is going to be taking certain hormones to change their body and while they are transitioning they shouldn't have the possibility of being looked at in this way because trans people already struggle with body dysphoria and this may just worsen it.
  • lhunter952 on 01 Mar 21
     
    I feel like if you were born a male then it is fair to switch to a female or do whatever makes you happy but, it is definitely unfair for someone with the genetic make-up of a man to be competing against women in sports. Man are known to generally be stronger and more athletic than women and I feel like if they were competing in a physical activity it would never be fair.
  • noahsandbothe on 27 Apr 21
     
    This is a disgusting bill that has begun passing in some conservative states. The people writing these don't understand that Transgender (Male to Female) start hormone therapy that degrades their muscle building and strength overall so people would not have that much of an advantage. Also, no one is upset if it was a Transgender female to male.
  • jdogan on 27 Apr 21
     
    Whether you think transgender athletes should be able to participate in sports or not I think this bills is unacceptable and unethical because it allows for a challenge where an examination of the students genitals is required. In high school sports a place known a lot of times for coaches sexually assaulting young athletes and taking advantage of them I don't think under any circumstance a proposition like this should be acceptable.
  • tsilva588 on 27 Apr 21
     
    I do believe that this bill violates citizens' rights and is unethical. People should be allowed to be trans and should be allowed to identify as one. However, when it comes to sports they still should be separated because even if I was a woman it is still conflicting with nature. If the woman/woman is ok with the competition then it's fine to me.
jessicasolorio

Joe Biden and climate change: 10 executive actions President-elect Biden is planning - Vox - 5 views

www.vox.com/...n-climate-change-senate-runoff

shared by jessicasolorio on 09 Nov 20 - No Cached
  • jessicasolorio on 09 Nov 20
     
    Thankful Biden is aware of the danger we put our environment in and I think it's a smart way to spend government money and use his power.
  • ...2 more comments...
  • scarney230 on 09 Nov 20
     
    i am so glad biden is looking into and wanting to clean energy, carbon neutrality by the middle of the century, and massive federal investment to drive these changes. i think that is great and we need change is this environment
  • eoneal271 on 16 Nov 20
     
    I think that it is a good thing Biden is going to rejoin the Paris climate agreement again. It will only help this country become cleaner.
  • jcooley186 on 16 Nov 20
     
    I'm happy that Biden is going to be looking more into climate change and implementing more things to help keep our planet healthy.
  • lennxbrown on 11 Jan 21
     
    I'm also happy Biden is going to focus on the environment more. I just hope he can stay alive long enough to do so.
1 - 7 of 7
Showing 20▼ items per page