Schools Sending ‘Fat Letters’ To Parents About Overweight Children

STUDIO CITY (CBSLA.com) — Many schools are sending notes home to parents, telling them their children are overweight.

Lauren Schmitt, a registered dietitian, starts the school year by checking out the weight of hundreds of preschoolers in the San Fernando Valley.

“We look at growth charts and percentiles. And when a child is at 95 percent of their…we can look at weight for age or weight for height…that child would be considered obese,” she said.

By October, CBS2’s Suraya Fadel reported that parents will get what is called “healthy or unhealthy” letters. Kids call them “fat letters.”

Schmitt said out of the 900 2 to 5-year-old children she looks at, roughly 200 are listed as obese.

“We let the parents know in a gentle fashion, but we also send out a ton of handouts to try to help that family,” she said.

Experts said 19 states around the country are cracking down on childhood obesity with similar letters.

“Every year there are a few phone calls from parents who are upset,” said Schmitt.

Many districts in Southern California, such as Riverside County, choose to follow state guidelines and instead send test results of the child’s body mass index to their parents.

“It shouldn’t be a stigma. It’s not a way to categorize someone. It’s just showing that this child has increased risk to be obese as an adult, which then could lead to quite a few chronic diseases,” said Schmitt.

The dietitian said the goal is to empower and educate parents with the tools to make healthier lifestyle choices for children.

Via: CBS Los Angeles

Continue Reading...

Senate to Vote on Syria on … 9/11?

Rep. John Culberson, R-Texas, told reporters Thursday that House leaders expect the Senate to vote on the Syria resolution on Sept. 11.

Reading an email off his phone from his chief of staff, Culberson indicated that Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., thinks the Senate will vote on the Syria resolution next Wednesday.

While the House may not always have the best idea of what is going on in the Senate, “Cantor expects the Senate to vote on 9/11,” Culberson said, parroting the guidance email.

While the Sept. 11 anniversary might seem like a curious day to hold the vote, Culberson thought it was fitting.

“How could it be any clearer? That’s the perfect day to do it,” Culberson said. “They need to defeat it to honor the victims of 9/11 and we will not give aid and comfort to al-Qaida and the psychopaths that carried out the 9/11 attacks.”

That theory, however, may be complicated Senate rules.

If Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., moves to put the resolution on the floor Sept. 9, a test vote on the resolution would likely occur on Sept. 11. Sixty votes would be needed to bypass any blockade to bringing the measure up. If the measure gets past that Wednesday vote, a vote on final passage could occur on Sept. 12, if all senators agreed. However, any senator could attempt to filibuster, which would push a final passage vote to Sept. 14 — one hour after midnight — unless a time agreement could be reached.

Of course, the night of Sept. 13 is Yom Kippur, and with the House likely needing more time to woo votes, the Senate is unlikely to be in session.

The week of Sept. 16 seems a more realistic target for final passage.

Anything, however, is possible in the Senate with unanimous consent.

Via: Roll Call

Continue Reading....

Down With The Living Wage

Before we dismiss economics as a non-science, let’s recall its wisdom about the dangers of government intervention in markets.

---

A recent opinion piece in the New York Times by Alex Rosenberg and Tyler Curtain, both trained as philosophers of science, asks the intriguing question: “What is Economics Good For?” “Not much” is their largely skeptical answer. They argue that economics is a second-rate science, while the physical and biological sciences sport more impressive credentials. For all its use of fancy mathematics, they argue that “the trouble with economics is that it lacks the most important of science’s characteristics—a record of improvement in predictive range and accuracy.” Unfortunately, this increasingly fashionable view that economics is not a science too often leads people to endorse unwise regulatory policies.

Illustration by Barbara Kelley

Their column sparked a reply by the Harvard Nobel Prize–winning economist, Eric Maskin, who argued that even if economics fails the test of prediction, it offers explanations of phenomena just as the other sciences do. Maskin was chastised by a number of readers who denied, with good reason, any distinction between explanation and prediction. A theory that purports to explain something but predicts nothing is, intellectually, not very compelling.

So what, then, is economics good for?

Economics as a Guide to Politics

Rosenberg and Curtain’s argument misses the point. The purpose of economics is not to shape social institutions; it is to solve some of the tough and important problems of daily life, like how society can allocate resources efficiently. In this regard, it is not unlike physics. Physics has serious trouble probing the secrets of dark matter, or even predicting the next time an asteroid will crash into planet earth. But it does well building bridges and designing supercomputers. Ultimately, Rosenberg and Curtain’s emphasis on big economics leads us astray both analytically and politically, distracting us from what economics can really do.

Via: Defining Ideas

Continue Reading....

Will Democrats Forgive Obama for Blowing His Second Term?

Before the confetti settled on election night in 2012, President Barack Obama’s administration and supporters were ready to get to work. As a number of media outlets observed – or warned, depending on your perspective — second-term presidents usually have a short window to achieve significant legislative accomplishments. Between 12 and 18 months into a second presidential term, the window closes. Exogenous events or increasing excitement surrounding the next presidential contest overtake the current president’s ability to capture the attention of the nation and, with them, the Congress.

Now, nearly nine months into the president’s second term, Obama is already developing the symptoms associated with lame duck syndrome. Most of Obama’s predecessors who were not wrestling with an unpopular war or a debilitating scandal had already or were on track to achieve their legacy accomplishments by this point in their second terms. But this president seems to be captive to events. Never having had the best relationship with Congress, Obama’s every effort to pass major legislative reforms has been stymied by unwilling allies and unhelpful adversaries. Furthermore, the president appeared to lack concentration. Before the debate over this reform or the other was complete, the president had shifted focus to the next all-consuming crisis. As a result, Obama’s political capital is today greatly diminished.

The president’s second inauguration and his last State of the Union address contained a laundry list of progressive legislative objectives; a higher minimum wage, universal pre-school, immigration reform which includes a pathway to citizenship, and a parade of infrastructure projects. But Obama’s most pressing objective, the project which he marshaled the most emotion advocating for in his January address before Congress, was the passage of stricter gun laws. Obama’s domestic agenda had been derailed just weeks prior by the horrific massacre of children and teachers at a Connecticut school. The minds of his base of Democratic supporters were myopically focused on the need to do something in response.

The president and his allies in Congress spent precious weeks focused on enacting new gun laws in spite of polls which showed voters did not view new gun laws to be a priority. In the end, there would be no new federal gun laws – the political support simply was not there.

Via: Mediaite.com

Continue Reading....

Chuck Todd: GOP Actually to Blame for Obama Denying Red Line Comments

On Wednesday's MSNBC Daily Rundown, minutes after President Obama denied setting a "red line" on Syria's use of chemical weapons, chief White House correspondent Chuck Todd excused the obvious falsehood: "I think it was clear that the President was trying to depersonalize the Syria issue a little bit....to say, you know, 'Stop making this about the President personally, depersonalize this.'" [Listen to the audio or watch the video after the jump]

Following those instructions from Obama, Todd proceeded to blame Republicans for the President trying to distance himself from his own red line: "...there are some House Republicans who are looking at this only view – through the prism of their disagreements and dislike for President Obama rather than the policy itself. And so [the White House is] trying to make the policy argument, 'Forget who's in the seat as commander-in-chief, would the United States believe this was a red line no matter who was president?'"

On NBC, Todd spun Obama contradicting himself as simply having "redefined" the red line. Todd declared: "The President is making the case that this is everybody's problem on Capitol Hill, everybody's problem in the world community."

Via: Newsbusters

Continue Reading.....

Despite Boehner's Denial, Rumors Persist He'll Step Down

House Speaker John Boehner denied again Thursday through his aides that he plans to step down after the 2014 midterm elections even though some of his closest allies have told reporters that the Ohio Republican has had enough of the high political drama and intraparty feuding on Capitol Hill.

"These inside-the-Beltway parlor games take place every two years," Boehner spokesman Michael Steel told The Huffington Post. "The speaker has made clear publicly he intends to remain in his position in the next Congress."

Urgent: Should U.S. Strike Syria? Vote Here 

But all summer long, the rumors started by former Boehner aides and others close to the speaker have continued, despite his previous denial in July that he has no plans to give up his leadership gavel.

"He has to say that," a former GOP leadership aide, identified as a member of Boehner's inner circle, told The Huffington Post. "The minute you say [you're leaving], you're done. Everybody around him thinks this is his last term."

Stepping aside may be the better part of valor in the long run, given the tension surrounding his re-election as speaker in January. Tea Party Republicans angry over his handling of the budget and debt-limit crisis sought to deny him the 218 votes he needed to remain in the speaker's chair. He ended up winning by only 220 votes

Via: Newsmax

Continue Reading....

The Colorado Challengers

They oppose arrogance as much as they oppose gun control. 

Of such general interest is next Tuesday’s recall election in Colorado — and so ubiquitously has the event been characterized as a national “litmus test” or “referendum” — that it is easy to forget that there are real candidates involved in the process. Invariably, it is the more powerful political forces that garner the attention of the media: the NRA, Michael Bloomberg, “the gun lobby,” and the “advocates of stricter gun control” are typically the proxies of choice. But on the ground it is a different story. There, in Districts 3 and 11, the fights are personal, and the larger forces at work are distilled into the candidates representing them. Thus, while Americans fixate on the undercurrent, in Pueblo talk is of “Giron vs. Rivera” and in Colorado Springs the question is whether voters are “for Morse or for Herpin?” It is the answers to these questions, not the national debate, that will ultimately determine the outcome.

Via: National Review Online

Continue Reading...

Kerry Bentivolio: Why this veteran opposes war with Syria

Being the only congressman to serve in both the Vietnam War and the latest conflict in Iraq, I can tell you that I know a little bit about war. I’ve seen the misery it can cause—both on the battlefield and at home. From civilians who’ve had their homes caught in the middle of the fighting to families in the United States going through sleepless nights worrying about their loved ones serving overseas, war is not something to take lightly.

George Washington always gets brought up whenever military intervention is discussed in our country. I, too, have been thinking about the wisdom of the father of our country as I’ve examined the debate over bombing Syria. Our first president’s warning about entangling alliances is often remembered. However, something else stuck out to me as I read his Farewell Address this time around.

In regards to bombing the Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria, this passage is more pertinent: “We may choose peace or War, as our interest guided by justice shall Counsel.”

What has been happening in Syria is truly a human tragedy. The nation has been torn apart by civil war. Tens of thousands have either lost their lives or been driven from their homes. It is without a doubt that Assad is not a friend of ours.

However, it has also been made clear that those who oppose him have direct ties to al-Qaeda. Whoever wins this war will not be affectionate toward the United States.

What, then, is “our interest guided by justice” as it relates to involving ourselves in the Syrian fight? In other words, what is the objective of any American mission? On Sunday, Secretary Kerry explained the president’s reasoning: Assad used chemical weapons against his own people, breaking international treaties that only the United States can enforce

Via: Detroit News

Continue Reading...

Tale of Two St. Petes: As Obama visits Russia, US voters dubious on Syria strike

While President Obama was in St. Petersburg, Russia, on Thursday, trying to sway skittish allies to back a military strike on Syria, thousands of miles away in St. Petersburg, Fla., residents were leaving little doubt that Obama has a lot of work to do if he's to gain their support for military action. 

Lawmakers in and around the coastal city say their constituents are almost uniformly opposed, or at least cautious, on a strike. Rep. Kathy Castor, D-Fla., who represents the city, wrote to Obama saying her neighbors are "extremely wary of military action." 

Republican Rep. Rich Nugent, who represents a nearby district, told FoxNews.com his office has gotten 1,800 calls and emails opposing action in Syria, and only 17 in favor. 

"You usually don't see any kind of split like that," Nugent said. The overriding concern, he said, is that America could get drawn deeper into the fight. 

The lawmakers are not alone. House members across the country are fielding thousands of calls and emails from constituents telling them to oppose the Obama administration's push for a military strike. Though Obama is winning on one front -- he's gotten the endorsement of congressional leaders, and of a key Senate panel -- he's clearly losing when it comes to the battle for public opinion. 

Via: Fox News

Continue Reading...

SUSPENDED: Michigan State removes prof who went on anti-Republican tirade

Michigan State administrators have suspended Prof. William Penn for the remainder of the semester, after he was caught on video going on an anti-Republican tirade on the very first day of his literature class.

In an email to students Thursday morning, Dean Karen Wurst of the College of Arts & Letters, cited his "inappropriate, disrespectful and offensive" comments. 

"On Aug. 29, during your Literatures, Cultures, Identities course, Professor William Penn made comments he has acknowledged were inappropriate, disrespectful and offensive and may have negatively affected the learning environment," she wrote. "Once MSU was made aware of the situation the Office of the Provost immediately began a review." 

"As a result, Penn's duties have been reassigned, and he will not be teaching this semester," she added. "A new instructor is being assigned to your course."

WATCH: MSU Prof. benched after going on an-anti Republican tirade in class

It was unclear from the letter whether Penn will be suspended with, or without pay but the letter did make it clear that he will not teach again in 2013.

Via: Campus Reform

Continue Reading....

NYT: OBAMACARE INCREASES TAX RATES 12 TIMES MORE THAN ROMNEYCARE

During the rancorous debate over Obamacare, President Barack Obama and his team said the president's healthcare plan was modeled on the system Republican presidential challenger Mitt Romney implemented in Massachusetts.  

However, a New York Times analysis by University of Chicago economics professor Casey B. Mulligan finds that Obamacare's impact on nationwide marginal tax rates will be 12 times greater than the rate increases under Romneycare in Massachusetts.

The finding holds critical implications for employment and work hours.

"It follows that the effect of the Affordable Care Act on employment and work hours would be roughly 12 times as great as the effect of the Massachusetts law," writes Mulligan. "The bottom line was that it was wrong to expect the two laws to have had the same effects."

Mulligan added: "Call me gloomy, but I'm one economist who thinks that adding, on average, five percentage points to marginal tax rates will noticeably depress the labor market, while adding a few tenths of a point in Massachusetts did not."

Obamacare's myriad delays and blown implementation deadlines have given Republicans a key issue for the 2014 midterm elections. The Republican National Committee recently launched its #ObamaCosts publicity campaign to highlight how Obamacare is killing jobs, lowering healthcare access, increasing premiums, and weakening the U.S. economy. 

Obamacare's grand opening is in 25 days.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...