by the University of Michigan

ANN ARBOR, Michigan.— Key to a child’s successful education is an environment in which he or she can learn safely. According to a report released today by the C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital National Poll on Children’s Health, only 26 percent of parents would give their child’s high school an “A” for preventing bullying and school violence, and 38 percent of parents would give their child’s elementary or junior high an “A.”

“Children who are victims of bullying can have serious health effects, including physical injuries and emotional problems such as depression, low self-esteem, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts and actions,” says Matthew Davis, M.D., director of the poll and associate professor of pediatrics and internal medicine at the U-M Medical School.

“Unfortunately, in the United States, we’ve seen some tragedies in the past few years regarding episodes of school violence that have gotten a lot of media coverage and upset many parents.”

In the U.S., an estimated 160,000 children miss school every day out of fear of attack or intimidation by other students, according to the National Education Association. Since 1992, there have been 250 violent deaths in schools, and bullying has been a factor in many school shootings.

“What this poll shows is that parents are still very concerned about bullying in their schools. About three-quarters of states nationwide have implemented bullying prevention laws that are designed to encourage, and in some cases force schools to present and deliver bullying prevention curriculum to students,” says Davis, who is also an associate professor septiembreof public policy at the U-M Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy. “But based on these findings, it doesn’t appear that those curricula or programs are working effectively.”

The poll asked 1,087 parents across the U.S. in May 2009 to assign their child’s school an A through F grade in five categories: overall safety, building security, bullying and school violence prevention, keeping students safe during a school-wide emergency, and keeping parents informed in the event of a school-wide emergency.

Parents grades for other school safety concerns: Overall safety: 59 percent of parents would give their child’s primary school an “A,” while 33 percent of parents would give their child’s secondary school an “A.”

Keeping parents informed in a school-wide emergency: 64 percent of parents would give their child’s primary school an “A,” while 46 percent of parents would give their child’s secondary school an “A.”

Keeping their child safe during a school-wide emergency: 62 percent of parents would give their child’s primary school an “A,” while 36 percent of parents would give their child’s secondary school an “A.”

Building security: 49 percent of parents would give their child’s primary school an “A,” while 33 percent of parents would give their child’s secondary school an “A.”

What parents can do?

Parents who have concerns about bullying in their child’s school can get involved in a few ways. Davis suggests parents become ­active in local safe school and safe community programs where bullying and violence prevention programs already exist.

In the few states where bullying prevention programs do not exist, Davis suggests parents get involved in the legislative process by advocating for bullying programs to be put in place using other states as examples.

“But right at home, there’s a way for parents to make a difference too,” he says.

“Parents can listen to their kids who are their eyes and ears in the schools, especially about issues of bullying. It can be really hard for children to bring up the topic of bullying so parents may need to ask directly about it and make home a safe place to talk about this important problem.”

by David Evans Teesdale

Mexico celebrated its traditional Grito de Dolores on Sept. 15 at the San Francisco Civic Center, while its consul general saluted the countries of Central American who were also celebrating their independence. (photo by Marvin J. Ramírez)

It is with great trepidation today that I reveal the dirty little secret about the Democrats’ health-care ‘reform’ bill, languishing in mark-up, that neither Democrats or Republicans want you to know. This is a secret so great, that even greater lengths have been gone to in order to make sure you never know about it. That secret, is of course, that the thousand page leviathan snaking its way through Congress will never pass. It will not become law, at least during Obama’s presidency.

There was some question, prior to his inauguration, ­as to how moderate an Obama Administration would be. Obama tacked to the center in the later stages of the presidential campaign and many expected that he had learned the hard lessons of Clinton’s ill-advised lurch leftward in the early days of his own presidency and would take a more centrist approach early on. Obama cleared up any of those debates within days of his inauguration, signing radical executive orders regarding abortion and terrorist detainees, and by pushing through the massive American Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The AERR (probably better spelled ERROR– Economic Retardation and Redistribution for Obama’s Re-election) has thus far been a colossal disaster.

Obama’s leftward lurches were noted by this author as early as January, and upon passage of the stimulus, I declared defi nitively that as a result of the stimulus battle:

“The Democrats stand to potentially be hammered in the 2010 mid-terms, if only Republicans in the Senate hold their ground and let the Democrats have their win now. It is costly for both sides, but Obama will have spent his political capital on a project only 37 percent of Americans support. You and I can kiss goodbye the notion of socialized medicine or other hair brained plans hatched 50 years ago by pseudo-socialists.” (Feb. 7, 2009).

Republicans largely stood their ground against the wasteful spending in the stimulus bill, and though it was not evident at the time, this helped to harden Americans against any more socialist-leaning legislation. It was to me evident then, that no plan for the nationalization of healthcare could ever pass muster.

However, I, like many others, was reticent to point this out and risk the disinterest and dis-involvement that would likely emanate from those activists who would otherwise be speaking out against this bill by calling their Congressmen and generally stirring the pudding. We’ve seen this phenomenon occur most recently during the cap and trade debate in the House, where a highly unpopular and dangerous bill somehow managed to squeak into a position dangerously close the Federal Register.

So why come out now at such a pivotal time in the legislative process and chat up how the bill is doomed? Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) recently stated that Obama’s health-care initiative is like his Waterloo. If Obama is defeated here, that may very well spell the end of Obama’s endeavors to reshape the American social and political landscape in his own very liberal image.

While the analogy is imperfect, as all analogies are, it is important to note that if Obama can be stopped on health-care—and he almost certainly will be stopped— Republicans can salvage what is left of America.

Though the stimulus plan has severely debilitated America by plunging us into nearly irreparable debt and by burdening future generations with a crushing tax, we may someday be thankful that the Obama Administration pressed for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, or ERROR, when they did. In doing so, the Obama White House lurched far to the left, and this bacchanalian spendthrift left America not just with a hang over, but a terrible after-taste, and has ignited opposition to further leftward power grabs. National health-care, which would destroy innovation, hinder care, raise costs, institutionalize a culture of death, deprive us of our liberties and relegate America to European style mixed-economic socialism, would be far worse.

The blows dealt by Obama’s stimulus package are severe, but not insurmountable. National health-care would radically transform America. With calls to Congressional offices running fifteen to one against the plans as they stand, Obama is on the ropes. A resounding defeat here would diminish Barack Obama’s future political capital and neuter the march toward a Fabian-styled social order. To utilize another imperfect, boxing analogy; now is not the time to relent. If this is truly destined to be a defeat for the Obama Administration, we should not be content to win by T.K.O. Just as the Duke of Wellington and allied forces saved the continent of Europe from Napoleon’s forces, we should not see Obama’s weakened state and let our guard down. Republicans and conservative Democrats should press Obama all the more fiercely. Let’s make health-care Obama’s Waterloo.

(David Teesdale, cam be reached at david.evans.teesdale@gmail.com.)

by the El Reportero’s news services

Adolfo Zaldívar

Adolfo Zaldívar, a lagging presidential candidate, withdrew on Sept. 14, from the presidential election. Zaldívar’s last minute withdrawal leaves five candidates in the race for the presidency. Nominations closed on Sept. 14 and the campaign starts, officially, today (Sept. 15).

The first round of the presidential election and the entire congressional election is on Dec. 13. The elections are shaping up as the closest since democracy was restored after the Pinochet dictatorship in 1990. Since then, the centre-left, quadripartite Concertación de Partidos por la Democracía has ruled the country.

Bachelet moves to end Pinochet-era copper funding for military

Chile’s President Michelle Bachelet sent a bill to congress this week calling time on an entrenched feature inherited from the Pinochet dictatorship: the appropriation for the military of 10 percent of copper export earnings.

The timing of the move is astute. It serves a dual purpose.

On the domestic front, it should boost Eduardo Frei, the presidential candidate for the ruling Concertación, who is lagging in the polls with just three months until general elections.

Resistance announces new protests in Honduras

The National Front against the coup d’état in Honduras announced that today they they will continue the protests in demand of restitution of the constitutional order and the return of President Manuel Zelaya.

The demonstrations of this Wednesday continue the multitudinous marches of yesterday around the country for independence day and constitute the 81st consecutive day against the military coup of last June 28.

The general coordinator of the Front, Juan Barahona, said yesterday that the protests will continue up to achieving the call to a national constituent assembly for the refoundation of the country.

In a proclamation read by Barahona before a multitude assembled in the Central Park of Tegucigalpa, the Front underlined that the new Magna Carta that should approve must “settel the bases of the real independence of the nation.”

Our Homeland is in a nonviolent insurrection against the usurper regime that assaulted with weapon the institutions of the State on June 28, underlines the text. (Latin Press).

Peruvian government after threads Abimael Guzmán’s book

The lawyer of the veteran chief of Luminous Footpath (Sendero Luminoso), Abimael Guzmán, is today on the verge of being processed judicially for the crime of apology of terrorism, after the presentation of a self-critical book of his imprisoned client.

The complaint was announced by the minister of Justice, Aurelio Pastor, and ­comprises both to the defender, Alfredo Crespo, and to Camen Hualla, for this one to have read in the launching of the book a letter of Elena Iparraguirre, also senderista leader and partner of Guzmán.

The text, “By hand and letter”, was presented last Friday and it reproduces manuscripts of Guzmán with part of his memoirs and a self-critical evaluation of the armed actions initiated by the Senderismo in May, 1980.

The activity of the group began to decline with the apprehension of Guzmán on Sept. 12, 1992, and at present it only produces a limited group of remnants that desobeys the boss’s order to leave the arms struggle.

The split, repudiated by Guzmán, has caused in less than one year, more year 50 casualties, mainly military, in a rural territory of the center of the country.

The book of Guzmán ratifi es his differences with the remnants, on having raised a conciliation from which the State admits that  there was a political war and approves an amnesty both for those up in arms, and for military men condemned for violations of human rights.

by Michael Coleman

The U.S. economic recession is hitting Hispanic households harder in the pocketbook than it is affecting other ethnic or racial groups, according to a new U.S. Census analysis.

Overall, there were 39.8 million persons living in poverty in this country last year (13.2 percent) vs. 37.3 million the year before (12.5 percent).

For Hispanics, the rate jumped 1.7 percent, up to 23.2 percent, more than double that percentage increase for any other group.

Overall, the plunge deeper into poverty revealed that for the first time in three years that our national income didn’t increase across the board.

Real medium household income fell 3.6 percent for all groups — $52,163 to $50,303. Hispanics suffered the greatest decline at 5.6 percent, dropping to $37,913. Their tumble rate was double that of whites as well as blacks.

Changes in health care statistics offered little more room for optimism. The number of persons without health insurance coverage rose from 45.7 million in 2007 to 46.3 million in 2008. The percentage of persons in the country without coverage — 15.4 — remained unchanged.

The percentage of uninsured Hispanics actually decreased. It dipped to 30.7 percent from 32.1 percent in 2007 to 30.7 last year. The total of uninsured Hispanics, at 14.6 million, however, was not statistically different in 2008 over the year before.

These and other findings were revealed Sept. 10 in a Census Bureau report titled “Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2008.”

Whites lost ground in the health insurance indicator, with 10.8 percent, and 21.3 million (10.8 percent) claiming no insurance in 2008, compared to 10.4 percent and 20.5 million (10.4 percent) in 2007. The uninsured rate and number for blacks comparing the two years were not statistically different.

The report also showed that in 2008 the poverty rate among the foreign-born population was 17.8 percent vs. 12.6 for the native-born, For naturalized citizens, it was 10.2 percent while for those who were not U.S. citizens is was more than double that, 23.3 percent For all children younger than 18 it was 19.0 percent.

Carmen Delgado Votaw, longtime children’s advocate both working on the Hill and serving on national culboards, expressed particular concern for Latino children, who make up a disproportionately high percentage of this group’s population.

The voices of young people are seldom heard, she said. In many states, including New York, those under 21 cannot legally serve on corporate boards, even with organizations devoted to addressing children’s needs, she pointed out.

The CPS ASEC is subject to sampling and nonsampling errors. All comparisons made in the report have been tested and found to be statistics.­