The Single Most Important Thing You Need To Know About The Womens March

Women March Downtown Los Angeles

Taxation without representation. Today women make up 51% of the U.S. population and ONLY 19% of congress - this is taxation without representation. 

The march was an uplifting event in support of women and women's rights and issues of importance to women. The numbers of women in attendance proved women feel marginalized in today's America and are deeply concerned about their rights in the future. And that is why women showed up by the hundreds of thousands all around the world, to demand to be heard!

Secondarily, the natural consequence of being for something is rejection of anyone or anything real or perceived that would seek to remove, violate, or minimize those rights as seen by each unique individual in attendance. As a minority, a woman, a mom, a daughter, a sister, a business owner, a working mom, a friend of women and the mom of a child with disabilities I was there because women have to be represented in America. Today women make up 51% of the U.S. population and ONLY 19% of congress - this is taxation without representation.  This is why I stayed up and knitted pink hats, took my kids, and fought all of the transportation challenges of the day. So glad I got to be there and showed my daughter what democracy looks like in the USA. God Bless America!

So happy to be there with my children and friends

White House Website Just Scrubbed of LGBT, Climate Change, Healthcare and Civil Rights Mentions

White House Website Scrubbed of LGBT, Climate Change, Healthcare and Civil Rights Mentions

All of the Obama administration's web content on LGBT, Healthcare, Civil Rights, and climate change are no more.  The pages have been archived and deleted as part of the Trump transition plan.  Were millions of Americans, affordable healthcare, US history and Climate change just erased? 

For reference, here is what the website looked like during Obama's last days in office:

 

And here is what the updated version looks like:

  

Obviously, there will be a transition period and time for the new administration to shape policy, but ......why this? Signals a stark difference in attitude

Teachers Call Trumps Billionaire Education Secretary Nominee Public Education Enemy #1

Trump nominee for Education Secretary faces fierce criticism from teachers unions that she is working against public education. 

This belief was reinforced when billionaire Betsy DeVos - dubbed public school enemy # 1 -  refused to answer important direct questions critical to people with limited financial resources and those with disabilities. And perhaps most surprising response came when questioned by Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut the safety of our children in school. Her response on having guns in schools; guns in schools could 'protect from potential grizzlies' . 

When asked does she agree that schools who receive federal funding be held to the federal law? Specifically of IDEA (Individuals with disabilities act), bullying and violence? She was nonresponsive and when pushed,  finally said she would leave bullying to the states and she never responded to the question on IDEA.  When asked if vouchers - a program she has championed - would be made available to children enrolled in both special education and general education, she did not respond, rather she skirted the question and referred to a scholarship program in Florida. 

My question now is, how does someone seeking the highest education post in the United States, and a critical post for the future of this country not have a response to these legal, ethical and moral questions?

Asked outright by Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont whether she got the job because of her family's political contributions, DeVos said: "As a matter of fact I do think that there would be that possibility. I have worked very hard on behalf of parents and children for the last almost 30 years."

On tuition-free public colleges and universities, DeVos said: "I think we also have to consider the fact that there is nothing in life that is truly free. Somebody is going to pay for it."

She skirted Sanders' question on whether she would support making childcare free or much more affordable for low-income families as is the case in many countries, saying only that she felt strongly about "parents having opportunities for childcare for their children."  

"But it's not a question of opportunity," Sanders fired back, raising his voice. "It's a question of being able to afford it!"

Responding to fierce criticism from teachers unions that she is working against public education, DeVos told the committee that she would be "a strong advocate for great public schools."

"But," she added, "if a school is troubled, or unsafe, or not a good fit for a child — perhaps they have a special need that is going unmet — we should support a parent's right to enroll their child in a high-quality alternative."

Ethics and morality play a role in education, and it seems to me Ms. DeVos is unclear on her position when it comes to those less fortunate then herself.