On Our Bill of Rights Passed This Day in 1791

After the ratification of the Constitution, the First United States Congress met in Federal Hall in New York. Many of the delegates demanded a "bill of rights" that would guarantee individual liberties and freedoms in face of the powers granted to the Federal government. James Madison, the principle author of the Constitution and then a member of the US House of Representatives, initially opposed such an idea but fearing that the arguments of the anti-Federalists might lead to a rejection of the Constitutional project he then wrote and submitted 17 articles of amendment on June 8, 1789.

The Senate took up the bill and reduced the number to 12, by combining some and rejecting others. The House accepted the Senate's changes, voting on September 24th and 25th, 1789. Twelve articles of amendment were sent to the states for ratification. The first two proposed amendments, which concerned the number of constituents for each Representative and the compensation of Congressmen, were not ratified. Articles 3 to 12, however, were ratified over the next two years - 811 days to be precise and a number to bear in mind later - by three-fourths of the state legislatures, and now constitute the first 10 amendments of the Constitution. These amendments known as the Bill of Rights were ratified on this day in 1791.

We take these rights for granted all too often forgetting the long course of human history and the fact that these rights are not yet universal and remain denied across much of our world. But at the same time our American Revolution remains incomplete for we still suffer the tyranny of economic oppression and the obstruction of Senators who think themselves monarchs often acting more as ambassadors from entrenched and powerful interests then as true representatives of the people. This nation has long strived to provide a just and fair distribution of the national income and yet there are those who continued to advocate for the interests of the narrow and profane at the expense of the general welfare and ultimately against the national interest.

If today is a typical day in these United States that we all profess to love so much then today sixty of our fellow citizens will die for no reason other than for lack of health insurance. If today is a typical day in these United States, then 6,427 of our fellow citizens who more often than not actually have some insurance will file for medical bankruptcy. Most medically bankrupt families were part of our once broad middle classes before they suffered financial setbacks often through no fault of their own. Sixty percent of them had attended college and 66.4 percent had owned a home; 20 percent of families included a military veteran or active-duty soldier. Seventy-eight percent of the individuals whose illness led to bankruptcy had health insurance at the onset of the bankrupting illness; 60 percent had private insurance. Their pursuit of happiness denied to satisfy the avarice of a few.

If today is a typical day in the United States, a land of an unbelievable bounty, then today one in four children will not have had enough to eat. In 2008, nearly 17 million children, or 22.5 percent, lived in households in which food at times was scarce. What does it say about our nation and more acutely about our political leadership when we permit and they let nearly a quarter of our nation's children suffer from such want despite having the means to ameliorate such human suffering. If tonight is a typical night in the United States, then 200,000 veterans of our Armed Forces will sleep on the street or in a shelter. The main cause of their homelessness is not drug or alcohol abuse, their problem is part of a broader and more systemic one -the problem is stagnant income and a lack of affordable housing. These on-going economic problems reflect a lack of political will to tackle them and not a lack of a means or resources. The main cure for homelessness is affordable homes. Nine million low-income renter households nationwide pay more than half of their income for housing. In no community in the US today can someone who gets a fulltime job at the minimum wage reasonably expect to find a modest rental unit he or she can afford. We in these United States endure a life that no other advanced industrial society tolerates. It is not because we lack the resources but because we lack the political will to once and for all unshackle ourselves from the bondage of corporate servitude.

On January 11, 1944, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt proposed "the establishment of American standard of living higher than we have ever known before." His address that day in a State of the Union Address laid out a vision that included a second bill of rights for these United States that remains as yet unfulfilled thwarted now as then by a rightist reaction that seeks to perpetuate their power through monopolistic rent-seeking practices via a legislative fiat. In this nefarious scheme, they remain enabled by the poltroonery of our elected representatives who pretend to serve the national interest when in fact they exist but to serve the interests of those who finance their campaigns. The nation is, indeed, conscious of this fact.

This speech, reflective of long-cherished principles of the Democratic party, is as relevant today as it was then and I urge my fellow citizens, especially those who share the view a more noble cause does not exist than to ensure a fair society for only such a land is truly free, to take five minutes to listen to words that still speak to the promise of these United States.

There's more...

American Food Insecurity

It is the bleakest of news. In this country of plenty and nearly at the eve of our national celebration of thanks and remembrance, the Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack reported that 49 million Americans, or one in six, face food insecurity. The number represents a 36 percent rise year over year. Food stamps are now at all time record use with some 36 million Americans receiving a monthly assistance. Over the past two years, the rolls of those on food stamps have increased by 40 percent.

From the New York Times:

The number of Americans who lived in households that lacked consistent access to adequate food soared last year, to 49 million, the highest since the government began tracking what it calls "food insecurity" 14 years ago, the Department of Agriculture reported Monday.

The increase, of 13 million Americans, was much larger than even the most pessimistic observers of hunger trends had expected and cast an alarming light on the daily hardships caused by the recession's punishing effect on jobs and wages.

About a third of these struggling households had what the researchers called "very low food security," meaning lack of money forced members to skip meals, cut portions or otherwise forgo food at some point in the year.

The other two-thirds typically had enough to eat, but only by eating cheaper or less varied foods, relying on government aid like food stamps, or visiting food pantries and soup kitchens.

"These numbers are a wake-up call for the country," said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack.

Twenty-nince percent of Hispanic households reported food insecurity, compared with 27 percent of black households and 12 percent of white households. Serious problems were most prevalent in the South, then followed by the West and Midwest. Households headed by single mothers were the highest category among those facing food insecurity. About 37 percent of these reported some form of food insecurity compared with 14 percent of married households with children. Comprising the 49  food insecure Americans are 32.4 million adults (14.4 percent of all adults) and 16.7 million children (22.5 percent of all children).

The  terms used in the DOA survey to describe food security are:

* High Food Security: These are households that did not answer `yes' to any of the food insecurity questions.

* Marginal Food Security: This term captures families that answered `yes' to one or two of the food security questions, meaning they have has some difficulties with securing enough food.

* Low Food Security: Generally, people that fall into this category have had to make changes in the quality or the quantity of their food in order to deal with a limited budget.

* Very Low Food Security: People that fall into this category have struggled with having enough food for the household, including cutting back or skipping meals on a frequent basis for both adults and children.

Conservatives were quick to dismiss the findings. "Very few of these people are hungry," said Robert Rector, an analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation. "When they lose jobs, they constrain the kind of food they buy. That is regrettable, but it's a far cry from a hunger crisis."

Learn more on hunger in the United States from the Food Research and Action Center, a non-profit working to improve public policies and public-private partnerships to eradicate hunger and undernutrition in the United States.

There's more...


Advertise Blogads