Saturday, December 19, 2009
Friday, December 11, 2009
Tuesday, December 01, 2009
Opinion: Is this a good plan or not? Was this a good speech or not?
Excerpts: Obama would start Afghanistan withdrawals in 2011
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/01/obama.afghanistan/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/01/obama.afghanistan/index.html
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Analysis:Is the separation of church and state a current debate, or have we already settled on a proper balance?
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/23/kennedy.abortion/index.html
P.S. REMEMBER YOUR TAKE-HOME TEST IS DUE WEDNESDAY.
P.S. REMEMBER YOUR TAKE-HOME TEST IS DUE WEDNESDAY.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
A filibuster!!!
If you want to see the beginnings of what a filibuster looks like, turn on C-SPAN 2 right now! Three senators asking each other questions they already know the answer to. Awesome! Cloture vote schedule for 7:00 p.m. our time tonight. It might start even earlier so tune in at 5:00. Listen for how the following vote: Blanche Lincoln, Mary Landrieu, Nelson, and Lieberman. At this point everyone but Lincoln has said he or she will vote for cloture.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
At Carroll University, 100 N. East Ave., Waukesha, WI 53186
“Changing Times: The Life of Barack Obama”
· Glen Jeansonne (Co-author of this book and UWM professor) and David Luhrssen (Co-author of this book and Editor/film critic at Milwaukee’s Shepherd Express)
· Monday, November 30—6pm
· Stackner Ballroom (Campus Center)
· FREE and open to the community
· Glen Jeansonne (Co-author of this book and UWM professor) and David Luhrssen (Co-author of this book and Editor/film critic at Milwaukee’s Shepherd Express)
· Monday, November 30—6pm
· Stackner Ballroom (Campus Center)
· FREE and open to the community
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Opinion: What are the current strengths and weaknesses of the GOP? The Democrats?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2009/11/06/VI2009110602967.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/14/AR2009111402729.html
You must look at this to help you understand congressional preference over the years:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/gop/interactive.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/14/AR2009111402729.html
You must look at this to help you understand congressional preference over the years:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/gop/interactive.html
Sunday, November 08, 2009
Opinion: Does it matter that only 1 Republican voted for the healthcare bill in the House?
AN HISTORICAL VOTE:
Hours after President Obama exhorted Democratic lawmakers to "answer the call of history," the House hit an unprecedented milestone on the path to health-care reform, approving a trillion-dollar package late Saturday that seeks to overhaul private insurance practices and guarantee comprehensive and affordable coverage to almost every American.
How they voted:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/votes/house/healthcare/index.html
Hours after President Obama exhorted Democratic lawmakers to "answer the call of history," the House hit an unprecedented milestone on the path to health-care reform, approving a trillion-dollar package late Saturday that seeks to overhaul private insurance practices and guarantee comprehensive and affordable coverage to almost every American.
How they voted:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/votes/house/healthcare/index.html
Sunday, November 01, 2009
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Analysis: What do you think the Republican and Democratic prospects are for 2010?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/17/AR2009101700890.html
Remember: Analysis is different than Opinion. See the definitions at the top of the page!
Remember: Analysis is different than Opinion. See the definitions at the top of the page!
Tuesday, October 06, 2009
Sunday, October 04, 2009
Analysis: What will the policy decision be regarding a new strategic plan in Afghanistan?
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/09/23/afghanistan.strategy/index.html
p.s. the current blog-posting window goes through Oct. 11 due to Homecoming.
p.s. the current blog-posting window goes through Oct. 11 due to Homecoming.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Analysis: What do you think the final outcome will be this year regarding the health care debate?
Reform Bill Will Address GOP Fears
But Affordability Questions Remain
By Lori Montgomery and Shailagh MurrayWashington Post Staff Writers Tuesday, September 15, 2009
The chairman of the Senate Finance Committee said Monday that he will propose an overhaul of the nation's health-care system that addresses a host of GOP concerns, including blocking illegal immigrants from gaining access to subsidized insurance, urging limits on medical malpractice lawsuits and banning federal subsidies for abortion.
But even after Max Baucus (D-Mont.) spoke optimistically of gaining bipartisan backing, lawmakers continued to haggle over a question at the heart of the debate: How can the government force people to buy insurance without imposing a huge new financial burden on millions of middle-class Americans?
Even within his own party, Baucus confronted a fresh wave of concern about affordability. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) declared himself dissatisfied with the chairman's plan, which, like other congressional reform proposals, would require every American to buy health insurance by 2013.
"Additional steps are going to have to be taken to make coverage more affordable," Wyden said, "and my sense is that will be a concern to members on both sides of the aisle."
Under the Baucus plan, described in a "framework" he released last week, as many as 4 million of the 46 million people who are currently uninsured would be required to buy coverage on their own, without government help, by some estimates. Millions more would qualify for federal tax credits, but could still end up paying as much as 13 percent of their income for insurance premiums -- far more than most Americans now pay for coverage.
People further down the income scale would receive much bigger tax credits, effectively limiting their premiums at 3 percent of their earnings. But experts on affordability say even those families could find it difficult to meet the new mandate without straining their wallets.
"We're talking about the equivalent of a middle-class tax increase," said Michael D. Tanner, a health-care expert at the libertarian Cato Institute. "Yes, they're paying it to an insurance company instead of to the government. But, suddenly, these people are paying more money to somebody."
A plan drafted by House Democratic leaders would offer more generous tax credits, but it would cost more than $1 trillion over the next decade.
Baucus's team of three Democrats and three Republicans from the Finance Committee has labored for months to cut that cost as it crafts a reform plan that could win support from both parties. By squeezing the size and scope of the subsidies, the negotiators have lowered the cost to a more politically palatable $880 billion -- within the range President Obama specified last week in a speech to Congress.
But a smaller bill would mean less help for people -- particularly those who earn too much to qualify for Medicaid but too little to easily slip the equivalent of a second rent payment into their budgets.
According to the latest Census data, about three-quarters of the uninsured earn less than 300 percent of the poverty level, or about $32,500 for an individual and $66,150 for a family of four. Nearly half are childless adults. In surveys, many say that they are not offered coverage by their employers or that they simply cannot afford it.
The centerpiece of the Baucus proposal is a series of "exchanges" where people without access to affordable coverage through their employers could apply for government subsidies and choose among a range of private insurance options. The plan would not, as liberals have demanded, create a government-run insurance option to compete with private firms, but would finance the creation of state or regional cooperatives run by consumers -- a concession aimed at winning over Republican lawmakers.
Baucus and his colleagues wrangled Monday in the hopes of persuading Republican Sens. Charles E. Grassley (Iowa) and Mike Enzi (Wyo.) to support the measure. The two conservatives have stayed at the bargaining table all summer, despite GOP leaders' strong opposition to the reform effort.
Baucus said the strategy is working. "Senators on and off the committee, their comfort level is starting to come up a bit," he told reporters. "I believe, in the end, we'll have some significant bipartisan support." But the chairman said Monday night that he will move forward Wednesday with or without Grassley, Enzi and Sen. Olympia J. Snowe (Maine), the most moderate Republican involved in the negotiations. He said the bipartisan group, known as the Gang of Six, would continue to negotiate until the full committee begins work on the bill next week.
Baucus said he will comply with Republican demands that illegal immigrants would receive "no benefits" through the new insurance exchanges. Meanwhile, negotiators are crafting a provision that would authorize states to start pilot projects to try to lower health-care costs by reducing the number of malpractice lawsuits, an approach similar to the one Obama outlined in his speech. "States would be given resources to help them experiment with what works best," said Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), another participant in the talks.
Also unresolved Monday was the question of how to pay for an expansion of Medicaid to cover every U.S. citizen whose income falls below 133 percent of the federal poverty level, about $14,500 for an individual or $29,500 for a family of four. Governors in both parties strongly oppose an expansion that is not fully financed by the federal government. The Senate negotiators are scheduled to brief governors by conference call Tuesday afternoon, and Baucus predicted they would be "pleasantly surprised."
"The Medicaid costs," he said, "are not going to cost states near as much as feared."
Under the Baucus plan, subsidies would be offered to people who earn up to 400 percent of the poverty level ($43,000 for an individual or $88,000 for a family of four) in the form of tax credits that would be paid directly to the insurance company of the person's choice. The credit would be calibrated on a sliding scale to ensure that people at the bottom of the income range paid no more than 3 percent of their earnings for premiums while those at the top would be liable for as much as 13 percent.
That would amount to more than $700 a month for a family of four making $66,000 a year -- significantly more than most people at the same income level now pay, according to research conducted by Linda Blumberg, a senior fellow in the Health Policy Center at the Urban Institute. Families earning less than 300 percent of the poverty level also would be eligible for assistance with deductibles and other out-of-pocket expenses, but families who earn more would be on their own.
"That group does spend in the neighborhood of 12 percent of their income. But it's not just the premium. It includes out-of-pocket spending," Blumberg said, adding that the Baucus plan "is going to be somewhat of a wakeup call."
Families that do not purchase insurance would face penalties on their annual tax returns of up to $1,500 a year if they make less than 300 percent of the poverty level, or $3,800 a year if they make more.
But Senate Finance Committee negotiators are quick to point out that a hardship waiver would be available.
"We're doing our very best to make the insurance requirement as affordable as we possibly can," Baucus said, without driving up the overall cost of the bill.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/14/AR2009091403573.html
But Affordability Questions Remain
By Lori Montgomery and Shailagh MurrayWashington Post Staff Writers Tuesday, September 15, 2009
The chairman of the Senate Finance Committee said Monday that he will propose an overhaul of the nation's health-care system that addresses a host of GOP concerns, including blocking illegal immigrants from gaining access to subsidized insurance, urging limits on medical malpractice lawsuits and banning federal subsidies for abortion.
But even after Max Baucus (D-Mont.) spoke optimistically of gaining bipartisan backing, lawmakers continued to haggle over a question at the heart of the debate: How can the government force people to buy insurance without imposing a huge new financial burden on millions of middle-class Americans?
Even within his own party, Baucus confronted a fresh wave of concern about affordability. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) declared himself dissatisfied with the chairman's plan, which, like other congressional reform proposals, would require every American to buy health insurance by 2013.
"Additional steps are going to have to be taken to make coverage more affordable," Wyden said, "and my sense is that will be a concern to members on both sides of the aisle."
Under the Baucus plan, described in a "framework" he released last week, as many as 4 million of the 46 million people who are currently uninsured would be required to buy coverage on their own, without government help, by some estimates. Millions more would qualify for federal tax credits, but could still end up paying as much as 13 percent of their income for insurance premiums -- far more than most Americans now pay for coverage.
People further down the income scale would receive much bigger tax credits, effectively limiting their premiums at 3 percent of their earnings. But experts on affordability say even those families could find it difficult to meet the new mandate without straining their wallets.
"We're talking about the equivalent of a middle-class tax increase," said Michael D. Tanner, a health-care expert at the libertarian Cato Institute. "Yes, they're paying it to an insurance company instead of to the government. But, suddenly, these people are paying more money to somebody."
A plan drafted by House Democratic leaders would offer more generous tax credits, but it would cost more than $1 trillion over the next decade.
Baucus's team of three Democrats and three Republicans from the Finance Committee has labored for months to cut that cost as it crafts a reform plan that could win support from both parties. By squeezing the size and scope of the subsidies, the negotiators have lowered the cost to a more politically palatable $880 billion -- within the range President Obama specified last week in a speech to Congress.
But a smaller bill would mean less help for people -- particularly those who earn too much to qualify for Medicaid but too little to easily slip the equivalent of a second rent payment into their budgets.
According to the latest Census data, about three-quarters of the uninsured earn less than 300 percent of the poverty level, or about $32,500 for an individual and $66,150 for a family of four. Nearly half are childless adults. In surveys, many say that they are not offered coverage by their employers or that they simply cannot afford it.
The centerpiece of the Baucus proposal is a series of "exchanges" where people without access to affordable coverage through their employers could apply for government subsidies and choose among a range of private insurance options. The plan would not, as liberals have demanded, create a government-run insurance option to compete with private firms, but would finance the creation of state or regional cooperatives run by consumers -- a concession aimed at winning over Republican lawmakers.
Baucus and his colleagues wrangled Monday in the hopes of persuading Republican Sens. Charles E. Grassley (Iowa) and Mike Enzi (Wyo.) to support the measure. The two conservatives have stayed at the bargaining table all summer, despite GOP leaders' strong opposition to the reform effort.
Baucus said the strategy is working. "Senators on and off the committee, their comfort level is starting to come up a bit," he told reporters. "I believe, in the end, we'll have some significant bipartisan support." But the chairman said Monday night that he will move forward Wednesday with or without Grassley, Enzi and Sen. Olympia J. Snowe (Maine), the most moderate Republican involved in the negotiations. He said the bipartisan group, known as the Gang of Six, would continue to negotiate until the full committee begins work on the bill next week.
Baucus said he will comply with Republican demands that illegal immigrants would receive "no benefits" through the new insurance exchanges. Meanwhile, negotiators are crafting a provision that would authorize states to start pilot projects to try to lower health-care costs by reducing the number of malpractice lawsuits, an approach similar to the one Obama outlined in his speech. "States would be given resources to help them experiment with what works best," said Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), another participant in the talks.
Also unresolved Monday was the question of how to pay for an expansion of Medicaid to cover every U.S. citizen whose income falls below 133 percent of the federal poverty level, about $14,500 for an individual or $29,500 for a family of four. Governors in both parties strongly oppose an expansion that is not fully financed by the federal government. The Senate negotiators are scheduled to brief governors by conference call Tuesday afternoon, and Baucus predicted they would be "pleasantly surprised."
"The Medicaid costs," he said, "are not going to cost states near as much as feared."
Under the Baucus plan, subsidies would be offered to people who earn up to 400 percent of the poverty level ($43,000 for an individual or $88,000 for a family of four) in the form of tax credits that would be paid directly to the insurance company of the person's choice. The credit would be calibrated on a sliding scale to ensure that people at the bottom of the income range paid no more than 3 percent of their earnings for premiums while those at the top would be liable for as much as 13 percent.
That would amount to more than $700 a month for a family of four making $66,000 a year -- significantly more than most people at the same income level now pay, according to research conducted by Linda Blumberg, a senior fellow in the Health Policy Center at the Urban Institute. Families earning less than 300 percent of the poverty level also would be eligible for assistance with deductibles and other out-of-pocket expenses, but families who earn more would be on their own.
"That group does spend in the neighborhood of 12 percent of their income. But it's not just the premium. It includes out-of-pocket spending," Blumberg said, adding that the Baucus plan "is going to be somewhat of a wakeup call."
Families that do not purchase insurance would face penalties on their annual tax returns of up to $1,500 a year if they make less than 300 percent of the poverty level, or $3,800 a year if they make more.
But Senate Finance Committee negotiators are quick to point out that a hardship waiver would be available.
"We're doing our very best to make the insurance requirement as affordable as we possibly can," Baucus said, without driving up the overall cost of the bill.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/14/AR2009091403573.html
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
What are your thoughts on the Sotomayor confirmation hearings?
(...did you notice that today is 07...08...09?)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/07/AR2009070701605.html?sub=AR
Sotomayor critics step up rhetoric before hearing
By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS The Associated Press Wednesday, July 8, 2009; 12:34 AM
WASHINGTON -- Conservatives stepped up their criticism of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor on Tuesday, but it was unclear how far Senate Republicans were willing to go to create bumps in what appears to be a smooth road to confirmation for President Barack Obama's first high-court choice.
Even as the Senate's top Republican suggested that Sotomayor let racial bias cloud her rulings, he and other GOP senators refused to say whether they would accede to conservative activists' demands to try to delay a final vote to confirm her until September. At the same time, the National Rifle Association raised what it called "very serious concerns" about Sotomayor based on her stance on weapons rights, yet it stopped short of opposing her, citing its "respect for the confirmation process."
The fresh critiques of Sotomayor came as the American Bar Association, a national lawyers' group, rated her "well-qualified" to be a justice after its members conducted scores of confidential interviews with her colleagues and pored through her record and writings to assess her integrity, qualifications and temperament.
Democrats and civil rights leaders rushed to defend Sotomayor against charges that she's an activist who would allow racial bias to interfere with her decisions.
The White House gave senators a lengthy briefing book on Sotomayor that highlights key rulings in areas including criminal law, freedom of speech and religion, women's issues, gun and property rights, and immigration.
The 129-page document describes the judge in glowing terms, repeating often that she shows judicial restraint and is a moderate. It says she has a "record of judicial excellence and, for each case that comes before her, has narrowly applied the law to the facts of the case."
The Senate Judiciary Committee is to open hearings Monday on Sotomayor's nomination to replace Justice David Souter on the Supreme Court. If confirmed, she would be the first Hispanic to serve there.
(this article continues at the link above)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/07/AR2009070701605.html?sub=AR
Sotomayor critics step up rhetoric before hearing
By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS The Associated Press Wednesday, July 8, 2009; 12:34 AM
WASHINGTON -- Conservatives stepped up their criticism of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor on Tuesday, but it was unclear how far Senate Republicans were willing to go to create bumps in what appears to be a smooth road to confirmation for President Barack Obama's first high-court choice.
Even as the Senate's top Republican suggested that Sotomayor let racial bias cloud her rulings, he and other GOP senators refused to say whether they would accede to conservative activists' demands to try to delay a final vote to confirm her until September. At the same time, the National Rifle Association raised what it called "very serious concerns" about Sotomayor based on her stance on weapons rights, yet it stopped short of opposing her, citing its "respect for the confirmation process."
The fresh critiques of Sotomayor came as the American Bar Association, a national lawyers' group, rated her "well-qualified" to be a justice after its members conducted scores of confidential interviews with her colleagues and pored through her record and writings to assess her integrity, qualifications and temperament.
Democrats and civil rights leaders rushed to defend Sotomayor against charges that she's an activist who would allow racial bias to interfere with her decisions.
The White House gave senators a lengthy briefing book on Sotomayor that highlights key rulings in areas including criminal law, freedom of speech and religion, women's issues, gun and property rights, and immigration.
The 129-page document describes the judge in glowing terms, repeating often that she shows judicial restraint and is a moderate. It says she has a "record of judicial excellence and, for each case that comes before her, has narrowly applied the law to the facts of the case."
The Senate Judiciary Committee is to open hearings Monday on Sotomayor's nomination to replace Justice David Souter on the Supreme Court. If confirmed, she would be the first Hispanic to serve there.
(this article continues at the link above)
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Culture War. Conventional Political Participation. Public Opinion. Interest Groups. Bully Pulpit. COMMENTS?
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama ventures to America's foremost Roman Catholic university, where the country's deep divisions over abortion and stem-cell research have moved to the forefront in a time of war and recession.
A storm blew up immediately after the University of Notre Dame invited Obama to address Sunday's commencement exercises. It still rages, with anti-abortion activists promising to disrupt the president's appearance at South Bend, Ind., where he was also to receive an honorary degree.
Students opposed to abortion rights attended an all-night prayer vigil to protest Obama's visit, and 200 people prayed at a packed Alumni Hall Chapel.
More than 100 protesters gathered and 23 marched onto the campus Saturday. Police say they arrested 19 for trespassing and four were also charged with resisting law enforcement.
In Washington on Sunday, the head of the Republican Party said Obama should be denied the honorary degree.
Obama supports abortion rights but says the procedure should be rare. The Catholic Church and many other Christian denominations hold that abortion and the use of embryos for stem cell research amount to the destruction of human life and are morally wrong and should be banned by law.
The contrary argument holds that women have the right to terminate a pregnancy and that unused embryos created outside the womb for couples who cannot otherwise conceive should be available for stem cell research. Such research holds the promise of finding treatments for debilitating ailments.
Within weeks of taking office in January, Obama eased an executive order by President George W. Bush that limited research to a small number of stem-cell strains.
A storm blew up immediately after the University of Notre Dame invited Obama to address Sunday's commencement exercises. It still rages, with anti-abortion activists promising to disrupt the president's appearance at South Bend, Ind., where he was also to receive an honorary degree.
Students opposed to abortion rights attended an all-night prayer vigil to protest Obama's visit, and 200 people prayed at a packed Alumni Hall Chapel.
More than 100 protesters gathered and 23 marched onto the campus Saturday. Police say they arrested 19 for trespassing and four were also charged with resisting law enforcement.
In Washington on Sunday, the head of the Republican Party said Obama should be denied the honorary degree.
Obama supports abortion rights but says the procedure should be rare. The Catholic Church and many other Christian denominations hold that abortion and the use of embryos for stem cell research amount to the destruction of human life and are morally wrong and should be banned by law.
The contrary argument holds that women have the right to terminate a pregnancy and that unused embryos created outside the womb for couples who cannot otherwise conceive should be available for stem cell research. Such research holds the promise of finding treatments for debilitating ailments.
Within weeks of taking office in January, Obama eased an executive order by President George W. Bush that limited research to a small number of stem-cell strains.
Saturday, May 09, 2009
This makes sense...maybe he should call Kevin Bacon to fix it for him!
FINDLAY, Ohio – A student at a fundamentalist Baptist school that forbids dancing, rock music, hand-holding and kissing will be suspended if he takes his girlfriend to her public high school prom, his principal said.
Despite the warning, 17-year-old Tyler Frost, who has never been to a dance before, said he plans to attend Findlay High School's prom Saturday.
Frost, a senior at Heritage Christian School in northwest Ohio, agreed to the school's rules when he signed a statement of cooperation at the beginning of the year, principal Tim England said.
The teen, who is scheduled to receive his diploma May 24, would be suspended from classes and receive an "incomplete" on remaining assignments, England said. Frost also would not be permitted to attend graduation but would get a diploma once he completes final exams. If Frost is involved with alcohol or sex at the prom, he will be expelled, England said.
Frost's stepfather Stephan Johnson said the school's rules should not apply outside the classroom.
"He deserves to wear that cap and gown," Johnson said.
Frost said he thought he had handled the situation properly. Findlay requires students from other schools attending the prom to get a signature from their principal, which Frost did.
"I expected a short lecture about making the right decisions and not doing something stupid," Frost said. "I thought I would get his signature and that would be the end."
England acknowledged signing the form but warned Frost there would be consequences if he attended the dance. England then took the issue to a school committee made up of church members, who decided to threaten Frost with suspension.
"In life, we constantly make decisions whether we are going to please self or please God. (Frost) chose one path, and the school committee chose the other," England said.
The handbook for the 84-student Christian school says rock music "is part of the counterculture which seeks to implant seeds of rebellion in young people's hearts and minds."
England said Frost's family should not be surprised by the school's position.
"For the parents to claim any injustice regarding this issue is at best forgetful and at worst disingenuous," he said. "It is our hope that the student and his parents will abide by the policies they have already agreed to."
The principal at Findlay High School, whose graduates include Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger, said he respects, but does not agree with, Heritage Christian School's view of prom.
"I don't see (dancing and rock music) as immoral acts," Craig Kupferberg said.
___
Information from: The Courier, http://www.thecourier.com
Despite the warning, 17-year-old Tyler Frost, who has never been to a dance before, said he plans to attend Findlay High School's prom Saturday.
Frost, a senior at Heritage Christian School in northwest Ohio, agreed to the school's rules when he signed a statement of cooperation at the beginning of the year, principal Tim England said.
The teen, who is scheduled to receive his diploma May 24, would be suspended from classes and receive an "incomplete" on remaining assignments, England said. Frost also would not be permitted to attend graduation but would get a diploma once he completes final exams. If Frost is involved with alcohol or sex at the prom, he will be expelled, England said.
Frost's stepfather Stephan Johnson said the school's rules should not apply outside the classroom.
"He deserves to wear that cap and gown," Johnson said.
Frost said he thought he had handled the situation properly. Findlay requires students from other schools attending the prom to get a signature from their principal, which Frost did.
"I expected a short lecture about making the right decisions and not doing something stupid," Frost said. "I thought I would get his signature and that would be the end."
England acknowledged signing the form but warned Frost there would be consequences if he attended the dance. England then took the issue to a school committee made up of church members, who decided to threaten Frost with suspension.
"In life, we constantly make decisions whether we are going to please self or please God. (Frost) chose one path, and the school committee chose the other," England said.
The handbook for the 84-student Christian school says rock music "is part of the counterculture which seeks to implant seeds of rebellion in young people's hearts and minds."
England said Frost's family should not be surprised by the school's position.
"For the parents to claim any injustice regarding this issue is at best forgetful and at worst disingenuous," he said. "It is our hope that the student and his parents will abide by the policies they have already agreed to."
The principal at Findlay High School, whose graduates include Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger, said he respects, but does not agree with, Heritage Christian School's view of prom.
"I don't see (dancing and rock music) as immoral acts," Craig Kupferberg said.
___
Information from: The Courier, http://www.thecourier.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)