Gov
41 views | +0 today
Follow
Gov
Curated by Nikolas
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Rescooped by Nikolas from U.S. Politics & Government
Scoop.it!

Barack Obama’s big government vacation: the president adds nearly $4 million to the national debt with his lavish Hawaiian holiday – Telegraph Blogs

Barack Obama’s big government vacation: the president adds nearly $4 million to the national debt with his lavish Hawaiian holiday – Telegraph Blogs | Gov | Scoop.it

Around $4 million (£2.6 million) – the expected total cost to the US taxpayer of the Obama Christmas family vacation to Hawaii according to the Hawaii Reporter (hat tip: Rob Bluey at The Foundry).


Via Jeff Quinton
more...
Ben Flinchbaugh's curator insight, February 12, 2014 7:51 PM

This article deals with government because it talks about national debt. National debt is a big part of a government and typically a president wants the national debt to be low. This article talks about Obama, the president and very important figure of the government, going on an expensive vacation to Hawaii and increasing the national debt by another $4 million.

Siobhan Chantigian's comment, February 14, 2014 12:41 PM
It seems completely unfair that the president can go on lavish vacations with our hard earned money. Also how can we when the US is in so much debt?
Morgan Poe's curator insight, September 7, 2015 7:53 PM

The $400 million dollars Obama spent on his vacation home in Hawaii is nearly 100 time more than the average annual salary of the american worker.Travel costs alone for the president and his entourage via Air Force One in addition to a United States Air Force C-17 cargo aircraft to transport the presidential limos, helicopters and other support equipment, amounts to a whopping $3,629,622. Housing for security costs an estimated $151,200, and hotel rooms for the president’s 24-strong staff a further $72,216. Based on these figures the total cost to the federal US taxpayer is a staggering $3,853,038. If you add in local taxpayer cost, the total public expense is $4,113,038. I feel that this article is bias toward republicans. I also feel that taxpayer money should not be wasted on the the vacation house of one man.

Rescooped by Nikolas from Gov
Scoop.it!

Religion run amok? Hobby Lobby's case comes to the Supreme Court

Religion run amok? Hobby Lobby's case comes to the Supreme Court | Gov | Scoop.it
On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court is slated to hear 90 minutes of oral arguments in a case that will determine whether bosses who have religious objections to birth control can deny their female employees the contraceptive coverage to which they are entitled under federal law.

Via Kristin Blom, Nikolas
more...
Kristin Blom's curator insight, March 23, 2014 12:14 PM

This article is about law because it talks about a Supreme Court case being heard. It is about Hobby Lobby's boss denying women to have birth control under their medical insurance plans. It is not all types of birth control, however, just the ones that prevent the implantation of an already fertilized egg. The reason the bosses are denying such coverage is because of their religious beliefs. in the past, it seems like imposing your religious beliefs hasn't gotten much support in the Supreme Court, but it will be interesting to see what happens with this decision. 

Kara long's comment, March 30, 2014 8:38 AM
Kristin, I definitely agree with you that it will be really interesting to see what happens with this decision. Some of the people quoted in the article were saying that by denying employees this birth control because of religious beliefs, they are harming the employees. I don't think this technically harms employees, they would just have to use other kinds of birth control. I think it is great that Hobby Lobby's boss is fighting for his religion and what he believes in regardless of my opinion on birth control
Evan Richardson's comment, March 30, 2014 11:20 PM
This article was an interesting read, even humorous at some points. As for the question at hand, I think that Hobby Lobby should in no way be able to prevent their employees insurance plans from containing all types of birth control. Sure we as a country care about religious freedom, but doesn't the executive's beliefs impede on others? I think that in a way the company is punishing those that use or need to use birth control simply because they are employed there. The article is made even more hilarious by the wacky claims of the company, they make for a good read.
Rescooped by Nikolas from Disability Issues
Scoop.it!

Personal Independence Payment Time Table « Dla « Disability Online

Personal Independence Payment Time Table « Dla « Disability Online | Gov | Scoop.it
Personal Independence Payment The govenment have issued a statement on the time table of  claims and transitions to PIP for existing DLA claimers The… (RT @WelfareAdvocacy: The govenment have issued a statement on the time table of claims and transitions...

Via Jane Young
more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Nikolas from Indian Consumer complaints & reviews
Scoop.it!

Indian Consumer Forum for complaints and reviews - bookcomplaints.com:  Worst Roads in India-Madya Pradesh State Govenment-Madya Pradesh State Government Mumbai - bookcomplaints.com

Indian Consumer Forum for complaints and reviews - bookcomplaints.com:  Worst Roads in India-Madya Pradesh State Govenment-Madya Pradesh State Government Mumbai - bookcomplaints.com | Gov | Scoop.it
Worst Roads in India-Madya Pradesh State Govenment-Madya Pradesh State Government Mumbai - bookcomplaints.com,Roads, Bridge, Other Infrastructure Mumbai, Recenty I travelled to Delhi from Mumbai. Roads in Maharashtra are good but when I reached MP, Roads are very very bad a..., Roads, Bridge, Other Infrastructure Mumbai,,reviews,complaints

Via bookcomplaints
more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Nikolas from Government & Law - Evan Richardson
Scoop.it!

U.S. government cracking down on shoddy contractors : Business

U.S. government cracking down on shoddy contractors : Business | Gov | Scoop.it
Suspensions and debarment actions have increased dramatically since 2009.

Via Evan Richardson
more...
Evan Richardson's curator insight, May 22, 2014 2:13 AM

This article discusses how various government agencies are becoming more strict when it comes to contractors.  They are trying to make sure that taxpayer dollars are not wasted, and thus they are trying to weed out only the best of the best contractors.  I fully support these actions, as building a strong infrastructure is just one of the many ways to help our country prosper.

Kara long's comment, May 23, 2014 2:00 PM
I fully agree with what these government agencies are trying to do. It is great that they are trying to make sure taxpayer's money is not wasted. I think it is good they are trying to use only the best contractors, but what about those contractors that are just starting a business. I think there needs to be a way to give these new contractors a chance to prove themselves. Overall, I support the action of these agencies trying to improve our infrastructure and efficiently use taxpayer's money.
Kristin Blom's comment, May 23, 2014 7:02 PM
I am glad these contractors are being held more accountable. No one likes to pay taxes. The money that people to have to give to the government needs to be used for the right purposes. No one wants to work with a business that is only in it to make money. This goes for all people and our nation too.
Rescooped by Nikolas from CP ALEC Intervention
Scoop.it!

Daily Kos: ALEC - The Medicare Experiment

Daily Kos: ALEC - The Medicare Experiment | Gov | Scoop.it

While we are busy trying to find members of the American Legislative Exchange Council and trying to catch ALEC legislation before it gets implemented, ALEC has moved on to their next area of US destruction – their federalism focus. To put it bluntly and in ALEC’s words from their 2011 publication EPA’s Regulatory Train Wreck: Strategies for State Legislators:

 

Reclaiming State Sovereignty
With the growing threat of overbearing federal authority in a several areas, legislators are looking to new strategies to push back against the Leviathan and reassert Tenth Amendment authority. ALEC’s recent “Restore the Balance” initiative offers a series of model bills and proposed constitutional amendments to emphasize state powers.8 From interstate compacts to the so-called Madison Amendment, available tools have been thoroughly discussed

 

The topic for this diary was brought to my attention by an excellent diary by Kossack War on Error that I strongly recommend you read – it’s short and to the point and gives you the background for where I am about to go.


Via Dillon Culbreth
more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Nikolas from Gov & Law- Kristin
Scoop.it!

Religion run amok? Hobby Lobby's case comes to the Supreme Court

Religion run amok? Hobby Lobby's case comes to the Supreme Court | Gov | Scoop.it
On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court is slated to hear 90 minutes of oral arguments in a case that will determine whether bosses who have religious objections to birth control can deny their female employees the contraceptive coverage to which they are entitled under federal law.

Via Kristin Blom
more...
Kristin Blom's curator insight, March 23, 2014 12:14 PM

This article is about law because it talks about a Supreme Court case being heard. It is about Hobby Lobby's boss denying women to have birth control under their medical insurance plans. It is not all types of birth control, however, just the ones that prevent the implantation of an already fertilized egg. The reason the bosses are denying such coverage is because of their religious beliefs. in the past, it seems like imposing your religious beliefs hasn't gotten much support in the Supreme Court, but it will be interesting to see what happens with this decision. 

Kara long's comment, March 30, 2014 8:38 AM
Kristin, I definitely agree with you that it will be really interesting to see what happens with this decision. Some of the people quoted in the article were saying that by denying employees this birth control because of religious beliefs, they are harming the employees. I don't think this technically harms employees, they would just have to use other kinds of birth control. I think it is great that Hobby Lobby's boss is fighting for his religion and what he believes in regardless of my opinion on birth control
Evan Richardson's comment, March 30, 2014 11:20 PM
This article was an interesting read, even humorous at some points. As for the question at hand, I think that Hobby Lobby should in no way be able to prevent their employees insurance plans from containing all types of birth control. Sure we as a country care about religious freedom, but doesn't the executive's beliefs impede on others? I think that in a way the company is punishing those that use or need to use birth control simply because they are employed there. The article is made even more hilarious by the wacky claims of the company, they make for a good read.
Rescooped by Nikolas from Referendum 2014
Scoop.it!

New Statesman - Why federalism won’t save the Union

New Statesman - Why federalism won’t save the Union | Gov | Scoop.it
The reality is that most Scots support greater fiscal autonomy and, so far, attempts to draw a line in the sand at the status quo - or, worse still, the Scotland Bill - have only played into the hands of the SNP. It makes sense, then, for unionists to seize the initiative by embracing federalism - or some variant of it - and handing Scots responsibility over the bulk of their financial and economic affairs. This would undermine the drive toward separation by sating the Scottish appetite for more self-government.

 

But would it?

Via Peter A Bell
more...
Lakin's curator insight, April 16, 2014 1:17 PM

This article is related to government and law because it is talking about federalism and how it can't save the union. The union right now over in Ukraine is barely keeping it together with the rule of federalism. With this understanding they are trying to seek out other ways to improve it. By that they looked at the Scottish appetite that is more self-government that they liked. As well looked at other opportunities for the government. Do you think they will switch the union to a different government or just make changes? 

Reed Klunder 's comment, April 20, 2014 2:28 PM
In this article the Scots definitely need to figure out what they want to do. It was very back and forth but I don't think Federalism will help. That's a huge change and it doesn't really go a long with the rest of the United Kingdom. It's interesting to see that they are considering being a Federalism economy because you need to be able to provide a lot and I'm not sure if the Scots can do that.
Madison Blazing's comment, May 9, 2014 9:58 PM
This article discussed an interesting topic regarding a Federalistic economy for Scotland. There are some specifically beneficial aspects of adopting this system as well as some clear draw backs. The article mentioned that many of the Scottish leaders have a growing appetite for more independence and self government. I think that despite the many benefits,turning to Fedealism may be difficult because of Scotland's reliance on others nearby.
Rescooped by Nikolas from Amendment News Video
Scoop.it!

Our rights violations

In the U.S. our rights are being violated. Freedom of speech, rights to bear arms, and the prohibitation of exsessive fine and unusuaul crimesare being violated. The constutional amendments protects are rights from tyhe government and the most important are the 1st, 2nd, and 8th amendment.


Via Brad Wysokinski
more...
Logan Felten's curator insight, May 27, 2014 9:11 AM

We're all entitled to our own opinions based on the 1st amendment. The 1st amendment protects your freedom of speech along with religion, symbols and press.

 

Rescooped by Nikolas from Gov
Scoop.it!

Freedom of the press applies to everyone -- yes, even bloggers (1st amendment)

Freedom of the press applies to everyone -- yes, even bloggers (1st amendment) | Gov | Scoop.it

Analysis:  Recent stories have shown bloggers and reporters are posting pictures up and doing things such as videotaping police. Emily Good of Rochester, NY was recently caught by a cop when videotaping him off of her camera. He went over to her and told her to stop and stated it was illegal. When taken to court, she was later charged with obstruction of justice for arguing with a police officer. As it turned out, the police officer was wrong. Videotaping the police and anyone else in a public place is perfectly legal in New York state. The chief of police apologized later on and found out that the 1st amendment does protect these citizens who are deciding to do this. I don't agree with the 1st amendment toward this situation. I feel that everybody should have their own privacy, especially a cop. Why should somebody be able to videotape somebody else or take pictures of somebody else if it isn't okay with the person being captured on camera? I know that if somebody was videotaping me or taking pictures of me, i would feel that its against my personal property and i would definitely say something. I do agree with the 1st amendment, but when it comes to invading personal property, i feel its not right.

 

 

this article relates to the 1st amendment and freedom of speech. this article is asking if freedom of speech applies to internet bloggers


Via joe mangione, Nikolas
Nikolas's insight:

this article is talking about vidotapeing and picks in puplic place and the privacy that follows and the laws that effect this weather they are right or wrong 

more...
Lauren Heim's curator insight, April 13, 2014 8:33 PM

I understand that it's part of the first amendment but I don't know if I completely agree... I feel like that is an invasion of privacy but at the same time it's part of the first amendment and depending on what was going on, I would probably videotape it too. 

Mitchell Forrest Enerson's curator insight, April 23, 2014 9:44 PM

It is great to see that even the Chief of Police understands that he is not above any citizens. All of the police work should be shown to the people just as any citizen's is. People are often shown and portrayed poorly but when it comes to police officers they seem to be always taken as great people. They are not above the law and need to be treated just as any other citizen of the United States.

 

Austin Robertson's comment, April 27, 2014 6:08 PM
I agree with mitch. I think if there was a sense of equality in this world it would avoid a lot of fighting. All most people want is to be heard. When people see police getting the same treatment as a normal citizen it s gonna make people happy.
Rescooped by Nikolas from Gov
Scoop.it!

CNN.com International - Breaking, World, Business, Sports, Entertainment and Video News

CNN.com International - Breaking, World, Business, Sports, Entertainment and Video News | Gov | Scoop.it
CNN.com International delivers breaking news from across the globe and information on the latest top stories, business, sports and entertainment headlines. Follow the news as it happens through: special reports, videos, audio, photo galleries plus interactive maps and timelines.
more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Nikolas from anonymous activist
Scoop.it!

Boehner: House will not pass bill to re-open govenment until Obama agrees to negotiate | Washington Watch | McClatchy DC

Boehner: House will not pass bill to re-open govenment until Obama agrees to negotiate | Washington Watch | McClatchy DC | Gov | Scoop.it

Speaker John Boehner said Sunday that the House of Representatives will not pass bills to re-open the federal government or raise the debt limit unless President Barack Obama comes to the negotiating table.


Via Iam Legion
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Nikolas
Scoop.it!

CNN.com International - Breaking, World, Business, Sports, Entertainment and Video News

CNN.com International - Breaking, World, Business, Sports, Entertainment and Video News | Gov | Scoop.it
CNN.com International delivers breaking news from across the globe and information on the latest top stories, business, sports and entertainment headlines. Follow the news as it happens through: special reports, videos, audio, photo galleries plus interactive maps and timelines.
more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Nikolas from Jenn Shong -Amendment 7
Scoop.it!

Rep. Hastings Speaks on His Amendment #7 to H.R. 6082

The 7th admenment being dissused in the  House floor. 


Via Jenn
more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Nikolas from News You Can Use - NO PINKSLIME
Scoop.it!

Dictator Obama IGNORES Supreme Court Decision re. Sodomite Unions [no surprise, where a lot of his funding comes]

Dictator Obama IGNORES Supreme Court Decision re. Sodomite Unions [no surprise, where a lot of his funding comes] | Gov | Scoop.it
Obama IGNORES Supreme Court

Via #BBBundyBlog #NOMORELIES Tom Woods #Activist Award #Scoopiteer >20,000 Sources >250K Connections http://goo.gl/ruHO3Q
more...
Rescooped by Nikolas from Gov and Law: Kara
Scoop.it!

1 in 4 Obamacare enrollments affected by technical bugs | WashingtonExaminer.com

After refusing for weeks to detail the extent of back-end problems with healthcare.gov, the Obama administration on Friday said a technical bug affected approximately 25 percent of enrollments on the federal exchanges in October and November.

Via Katie Biggs, Kara long
more...
Katie Biggs's curator insight, December 6, 2013 5:52 PM

December 6, 2013   Current Event

 

Yet another problem with healthcare.gov! This is time it affected a whopping 25 percent of applicants. That means that one in every four people who applied had an issue with their application. Issues range from applications being dupilicated or having major errors in their information. Some were not even transferred to the insurers. Without these applications the insurers will have no way of knowing who signed up for Obamacare and what type/extent of coverage they need. This could be a catastophic disaster. 

 

Although the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Julia Bastille, assures us that the site is running much more smoothly and has seen a "traffic spike," I tend to not believe it. I think it will take some more time before the website is fully functioning. We can give the Obama administration some slack considering this is the very beginning of the healthcare website. More than 3.7 million American consumers have done so and visited the website in the past week or so. Maybe they will finally get the website up and running. It would definitely be a very efficient way for insurers to gather the necessary information for their applicants.

Kara long's curator insight, March 4, 2014 10:33 PM

Many people trying to apply for health care through the government's online site have had a hard time. About 25 percent of enrollments have faced this technical bug. Either insurers are receiving the wrong information from the site or there are missing sheets. This could harm those expecting to be insured.

Evan Richardson's comment, March 10, 2014 12:48 AM
I think that people blasting HealthCare.gov don't even know a smidgen about networking and IT. Sure, you would think that with the time and resources the government had that they would be able to make the website function correctly, but you need to realize that the people working on this had a strict deadline to meet, and that all programmers make mistakes. The version of the website that was put out on release was most likely a rushed beta build, and the servers that the IT guys had prepared simply could not handle the load of encrypted data. I know that many people may be having problems, but it is far and away better than pen and paper.
Rescooped by Nikolas from us constitution
Scoop.it!

Freedom of the press applies to everyone -- yes, even bloggers (1st amendment)

Freedom of the press applies to everyone -- yes, even bloggers (1st amendment) | Gov | Scoop.it

Analysis:  Recent stories have shown bloggers and reporters are posting pictures up and doing things such as videotaping police. Emily Good of Rochester, NY was recently caught by a cop when videotaping him off of her camera. He went over to her and told her to stop and stated it was illegal. When taken to court, she was later charged with obstruction of justice for arguing with a police officer. As it turned out, the police officer was wrong. Videotaping the police and anyone else in a public place is perfectly legal in New York state. The chief of police apologized later on and found out that the 1st amendment does protect these citizens who are deciding to do this. I don't agree with the 1st amendment toward this situation. I feel that everybody should have their own privacy, especially a cop. Why should somebody be able to videotape somebody else or take pictures of somebody else if it isn't okay with the person being captured on camera? I know that if somebody was videotaping me or taking pictures of me, i would feel that its against my personal property and i would definitely say something. I do agree with the 1st amendment, but when it comes to invading personal property, i feel its not right.

 

 

this article relates to the 1st amendment and freedom of speech. this article is asking if freedom of speech applies to internet bloggers


Via joe mangione
more...
Mitchell Forrest Enerson's curator insight, April 23, 2014 9:44 PM

It is great to see that even the Chief of Police understands that he is not above any citizens. All of the police work should be shown to the people just as any citizen's is. People are often shown and portrayed poorly but when it comes to police officers they seem to be always taken as great people. They are not above the law and need to be treated just as any other citizen of the United States.

 

Austin Robertson's comment, April 27, 2014 6:08 PM
I agree with mitch. I think if there was a sense of equality in this world it would avoid a lot of fighting. All most people want is to be heard. When people see police getting the same treatment as a normal citizen it s gonna make people happy.
Nikolas's curator insight, May 27, 2014 10:21 AM

this article is talking about vidotapeing and picks in puplic place and the privacy that follows and the laws that effect this weather they are right or wrong