The criminalization of mental illness -- i.e., the imprisonment of individuals with a mental illness for behavior that is a symptom of their illness -- is a damaging, and increasing trend. Daniel Jason is just one of tens of thousands of individuals trapped by it.
David Gibberman | All Articles
Following the shooting at the Washington Navy Yard, there were predictable demands for gun control, any kind of gun control, no matter how unlikely that it would have prevented them. What went unremarked-upon is something proven to prevent individuals with severe mental illnesses from committing crimes: crisis intervention team (CIT) training for police officers.
Most Americans don’t know anything more about Britain’s National Health Service (NHS) than what they saw during the opening ceremonies of last summer’s London Olympics: dancing nurses and smiling children bouncing on spotless hospital beds. But recent healthcare scandals paint a less flattering portrait:
If Sen. Marco Rubio ever grows tired of basking in Sen. Chuck Schumer’s praise and takes time to carefully analyze the 1197-page Senate immigration bill that he co-sponsored, he’ll probably be unpleasantly surprised by what he discovers:
The unconscionable delays by the Department of Veterans Affairs in processing benefit applications are well known (and continuing). Less publicized are the hurdles the department has erected to prevent millions of wartime veterans and their spouses from receiving their earned aid and attendance (A&A) benefits (sometimes referred to as “enhanced monthly benefits”).
Following Newtown and other recent random mass shootings, demands for gun control have drowned out pleas to fix our broken mental health care system. But taking steps to improve our mental health care system not only would do more than gun control to prevent other random mass shootings but also would be a memorial to the victims and good for our society.
First, President Obama decided that the government can punish consumers if they don’t buy a particular product (e.g., health insurance). Now, his administration has decided that the government can punish consumers if they don’t buy a product that can’t be purchased because it doesn’t exist.
Because it looks like we’re stuck with Obamacare (unless Chief Justice Roberts grows tired of media adulation before other constitutional challenges to the law reach the Supreme Court), here are some tips to help you make money from the law:
Conservatives pride themselves on having a more realistic view of human nature than liberals. But conservatives have not had a realistic view of voters.
President Obama has proclaimed himself the protector of Medicare benefits and warned that a vote for Mitt Romney is a vote to cut such benefits. But he’s been ignoring pleas by Medicare beneficiaries, hospitals, physicians, and various consumer and health care organizations to change a policy that’s been forcing Medicare beneficiaries to forgo needed care if they can’t pay the thousands of dollars that the care costs.
When President Barack Obama and his groupies in the media say that Mitt Romney is out of touch with average Americans, they want us to believe that the president is in touch with average Americans. But why should we?
So much attention has been paid to the freedoms we’ll be losing under Obamacare (courtesy of Chief Justice Roberts) that we’ve tended to overlook the many other reasons to oppose the law --- reasons that should make even liberals hate the legislation.
I know this will surprise many people, but just because President Obama says that he and his fellow rich haven’t been paying their “fair” share of taxes doesn’t make it so. People agreeing with him because he uses the word “fair” might reconsider if they realized that his notion of what’s “fair” is rooted in a view of success that denies the American Dream.
1.) The amount by which the public debt --- the portion of the national debt not borrowed by the U.S. government from funds it administers --- has increased since President Obama took office is unprecedented, not politics as usual: more than $4.75 trillion (more than 75%), according to the Treasury Department. If the president’s second-term budget is implemented, he will end up (according to the Congressional Budget Office) increasing the public debt by $8.9 trillion. That exceeds the public debt incurred by all previous presidents combined --- by more than $2.6 trillion.