As The Syrian Crisis Continues, It Increases In Complexity

Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahri called on Sunnis this week to devote their lives, money and expertise to overthrowing Assad. While thousands of Hezbollah fighters are deployed around Syria to tip the balance for Assad. This in itself really muddies the waters quite a bit. Then you add in the Hezbollah forces, that are being deployed in cities and rural areas, where the rebels have strength in numbers to crush them. They will face not just Syrians, but well-trained fighters tied to al-Qaeda as well, who have flooded in to fight from other countries.

So far, Assad’s forces have obviously had the upper hand in this debacle. Regime forces are relying on heavy air-strikes from Syrian war planes, to clear the way for their advances. Much like they did to overtake the stronghold of Qusair. The Free Syrian Army, a collection of rebel fighters, tried to hang onto the town by creating a network of tunnels and booby trapping nearly the entire city. "Some of the rebels IEDs, as well as the tunnels they built had the markings of Hamas," said Beirut-based journalist Nicholas Blanford.

Hamas had long been an ally of Hezbollah, but it split with the group over its attacks on fellow Sunni Muslims, aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood, as is Hamas, Blanford said. It was Hezbollah who helped build the Hamas tunnel network in Gaza, so they know how the structures are deployed. Thousands of Hezbollah's fighters from Lebanon are continuously streaming into Syria to help Assad take strongholds for the rebels, such as in Qusair this week, and that victory may turn the two-year battle in his favor.

While the West debates whether to intervene on the side of the rebels, and pushes for peace talks this month in Geneva, Hezbollah and its patron Iran have gone all in to keep Syria in the hands of an anti-American dictator. Unfortunately, these talks in Geneva are too little too late, and nothing will come of it. It’s just more rhetoric and political posturing, while innocent people continue to die.

And then there’s Iran… Iran is a Shiite Muslim theocracy and the Assad regime is headed by Alawites, who are a Shiite offshoot. But it is not the centuries-old divide in the Muslim world that prompted Iran to unleash the Shiites of Hezbollah, a force also known as the Party of God that Iran has trained and armed for years, according to the U.S. State Department.

"The Assad regime has always supported the Party of God - Iran's proxy in Lebanon - during the various Lebanese wars against Israel," says Nadim Shehadeh from Chatham House, a London think tank. "In addition, Syria has long been a conduit for Iranian weapons transfers to Hezbollah. "The party is a regiment of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and is acting in that capacity in Syria," Shehadeh said of Iran's military.

So what do we do? We as a nation do nothing. What we and the rest of the world need to do is call on NATO to enforce a no-fly zone, and bring this once peaceful protest movement to an end. Much like it was done in the Balkans in the 90’s. Seems like a no-brainer right? But if you support one side or the other, it seems you are supporting and giving terrorists momentum. These terrorist organizations are on both sides.

So this is what it has become, if you pick a side, you support terrorism. It’s either the rebels and Al-Qaeda, or Hezbollah, Iran, and Assad. Maybe we should just let all these terrorists kill each other off. While it would be fun to watch, it’s just not that simple. Assad’s regime is an oppressive and sectarian one. And thousands of innocent civilians have suffered under his rule. Remember this all started as a peaceful protest that began in March 2011, and just “went off” after a massive regime crackdown on the protestors. At the time of this writing, at least 80,000 people have died in Syria. While it may not be a popular decision, something has to give. And without outside intervention, this will escalate into a decade’s long war, involving many governments and their “ghost armies”.

Unfortunately the time to intervene is now. The U.S. needs to be done in the middle-east, and push NATO to take over the situation in Syria. I know it involves some commitment from the U.S.. But it would be many Nations under a single banner.

This will truly send a message. When Nations unite and start slapping this Assad fucker around.

Thoughts and prayers to those who gave all in this disgusting battle.


Arturo Dominguez
Contributor
New Politics and New Ideas
New Politics Nation


About New Politics and New Ideas/New Politics Nation: We are a community of logical progressive thinkers, who are for the progress of our Nation. We are trying to stop the political manipulation on Wall Street, the buying and selling of our elected officials, the destruction of our civil rights, and anything else anyone would like to bring up for discussion. Think of it as the largest, open to everyone Think-Tank in the world. Join us in the fight to take our country back!!!

Please visit our website at: http://newpolticsnewideas.wix.com/new-politics-nation, on Facebook at: https://www.facebook.com/New.Politics.and.New.Ideas and let’s start a discussion! You can also find us on Twitter at: @NPNI_Nation.THE TIME TO ACT IS NOW!!! LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD!!!

Who Would You Vote For in The Iranian Presidential Election?

Written by Arturo Dominguez   

Saturday, 01 June 2013 06:56 

 

 

Let’s assume it really matters for a minute. If you had to vote in the Presidential Elections in Iran, who would you vote for? “The Guardian Council” dictates who can run. And it seems that all of the current candidates elected by "The Guardian Council" have ties to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The fact that all applicants (Nearly 700 of them) have to be approved by "The Guardian Council" has been the subject of much debate. They have narrowed it down to eight candidates.

BBC News noted that all eight approved candidates were considered “hardline conservatives", with reformist candidates (notably former president and one of the founding member of the Islamic Republic Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani) having been barred from standing. The BBC's Iran correspondent James Reynolds commented: "the Guardian Council's decision kills off any sense of suspense over the result of Iran's forthcoming presidential election. We now know that the next president will be a conservative loyal to the ideas of the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei".

People will argue that these elections don’t really matter. That the president in Iran really has no power, and the real rule belongs to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Others would argue the opposite. But let’s continue to assume it does matter.

If it does carry any weight, then my opinion is that we should really look at Mohammad Gharazi. His campaign focuses on economic issues, and has promised to run an "anti-inflation" administration. He is the only independent candidate approved to run in the presidential election. He doesn't stand much of a chance, but he has the most promise when talking about change within Iran. Gharazi has said that if elected president his first priority would be to deal with Iran’s high inflation.

Gharazi has also said that he does not have money to spend on his campaign. On May 24 he declared “I don’t have anything but experience which I want to share with the people. It is good if they accept my experience. If not, I have to warn them that they will be once again in trouble and once again a government will hold the power which will take money from the poor and give it to the rich.” However, he has not spoken much about international affairs. He has said that he plans to run the government on "60 years of thought", (whatever that means).

So then, where does that leave Iran and its people? That is the big question. With the Ayatollah having so much power, and control of nearly every branch of government, do these elections really matter? I mean why bother. I know the U.S. government wants to see someone in there that will leave their oil in the open-market, and certainly wants to keep the situation as-is. In doing so they accomplish two things, one is keeping the people in fear of a nuclear Iran, and the “congressional military industrial complex” gets their oil.

But in all seriousness who would you vote for, if all the candidates have ties to Ayatollah Ali Khameni in some way? It doesn’t seem like change is on the horizon, and if the people were to attempt their own “Arab Spring”, they will be slapped back as they usually are. Uprisings in Iran are always dealt serious blows with a heavy hand.

So can we hope for a change in the political landscape in Iran? Sure, we can hope. Is political change in Iran really coming? Unlikely. I expect the situation to stay much the same as it is today. We can expect the status-quo for the foreseeable future. Iran will continue to sponsor terrorists at the behest of the Ayatollah, and they will continue to attempt to drag us into another war (Syria at the moment). As long as we are at war in the Middle-East, then we expose ourselves to the Iranian regime. This is the only way they can directly or indirectly go to war with the U.S., and attack our military. If we stay out of the middle-east, then they can’t do much to us, directly or indirectly.

So whoever wins in Iran doesn’t matter to our interests. The election is surely already rigged, with some of the most popular hard-lined conservatives leading the pack. None have any interest in working with us or even any of their neighbors to promote peace within the region. They want the instability, so they have an excuse to achieve more power. As civil wars continue to break-out all over the Middle-East, Iran continues to gain power and influence.

In the coming decades it is very possible that Iran will own the Middle East. And if they continue their state sponsored terrorism without being checked, we can expect a large war at some point. Not necessarily with us directly, but you can bet we will be involved in some way, shape, or form. The situation will certainly get uglier before it gets any better.

So if you and I were Iranian, I would say vote with conscience. Even though, it really doesn’t look like it matters…


Arturo Dominguez
Contributor
New Politics and New Ideas
New Politics Nation


About New Politics and New Ideas: We are a community of logical progressive thinkers, who are for the progress of our Nation. We are trying to stop the political manipulation on Wall Street, the buying and selling of our elected officials, the destruction of our civil rights, and anything else anyone would like to bring up for discussion. Think of it as the largest, open to everyone Think-Tank in the world. Join us in the fight to take our country back!!!

Please visit our Facebook page at: https://www.facebook.com/New.Politics.and.New.Ideas and let’s start a discussion. You can also find us on Twitter at: @NPNI_Nation.

THE TIME TO ACT IS NOW!!! LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD!!!



©2013 New Politics Nation

What’s The Bottom Line on Guns in the U.S.?

Written by Arturo Dominguez   

Wednesday, 22 May 2013 09:09 

 

 

While we watched our politicians ignore polls, and the cry of the people on gun control. We should better understand what’s really going on. Not only are lobbyists pumping money into political coffers, but our very own government is promoting fear, thus boosting gun sales.

Our government under our current President, as well as past Presidents, is giving criminal cartels, terrorists and the like, weapons and virtual amnesty to operate within our borders. You couple that with the criminal element, and the firepower they have been able to acquire, you have your fear. While the rest of the world criticizes us for being gun nuts, there are many situations where there is no choice but to be armed.

You look at home invasions in inner cities at all-time highs, crazy psychos shooting up schools, and all the other stupid shit you see on the boob tube involving guns, you have your fear. What makes most people in these situations feel secure? Owning and even carrying weapons, thus giving them the ability to protect themselves and their families. And this isn’t just inner-cities anymore; it’s spreading far and wide, coming to a town near you!

Let’s not muddy the waters here. I’m not saying we don’t need gun-control, because we do. But the government’s approach is backwards. All of this legislation is focused on new laws for law-abiding citizens. The focus must be shifted to the criminal element and then focus on regulation. I’m all for background checks, especially expanded checks that can see if someone is mentally stable to own a firearm. But until we can feel safer walking down the street in every community, don’t tell me what kind of guns I can own.

The government needs to have stiffer penalties for illegal firearms, period. Gun shows must be regulated unlike any other industry, and stop putting these “illegal” guns on the street. But since our government, their spending, and everything they do is based on the people’s fear, they will continue to let cartels operate on our soil, supply them with weapons, and promote gangland violence.

Therefore what choice does a Joe like anyone of us have, when it comes to protecting our families? A Rottweiler and a baseball bat? I mean let’s get serious here, places where I’ve worked there were guys with a past. I’ve worked with guys that were recovering addicts, junkies, all kinds of people. Not that I didn’t trust them, but you never really know someone, or their demons. I worked in the service industry for many years, and while employees get free maintenance service, I don’t use it.

The last thing I want is some guy I that barely know, knowing where I live, having access to my house, or anything like that. There have been incidents where employees who use the service were harassed by former employees who were let go for whatever reason. That’s some scary shit when you have children. After being so close to several incidents like that, I became a gun owner. I now have several guns to protect my family. My wife and my children are well versed in what a firearm can do; we go to the gun-range and promote gun safety. My guns are also secure, strictly for protection purposes.

Do I sleep better at night? Of course I do.


These are just my thoughts, and they seem perfectly logical to me. Join in the discussion and let’s talk about this issue and many others. Please visit our Facebook page at: https://www.facebook.com/New.Politics.and.New.Ideas and let’s start a discussion. You can also find us on Twitter at: @NPNI_Nation.

About New Politics and New Ideas: We are a community of logical progressive thinkers, who are for the progress of our Nation. We are trying to stop the political manipulation on Wall Street, the buying and selling of our elected officials, the destruction of our civil rights, and anything else anyone would like to bring up for discussion. Think of it as the largest, open to everyone Think-Tank in the world. Join us in the fight to take our country back!!!

The time to act is now!!! Let YOUR voice be heard!!!


Arturo Dominguez
Contributor
New Politics and New Ideas
New Politics Nation



©2013 New Politics Nation

Criminalizing Bullying in Schools - Parents Should be Held Accountable for Bullies

Written by Arturo Dominguez   

Saturday, 11 May 2013 02:36 

 

 

I am writing this article because my youngest of three boys is a recent victim of two bullies on the school bus. My child has been suffering at the hands of one particular bully for several months. And recently was attacked by two bullies on the school bus. Even after my wife had notified the bus driver of the incidents no less than three times in the last few months, as well as by my two youngest sons (who ride the same bus), notified the driver numerous times. The bus driver continually seated my youngest son right in front of the offending child, day after day. With absolutely no regard to the safety and welfare of my child let alone any child on the bus. We believe the bus driver was absolutely negligent in the matter.

You see, I have three boys ages 8, 10, and 15 respectively. The 8 and 10 year olds ride the same bus home. They get dropped off by my wife in the mornings. So recently, (as previously stated) he was attacked on the bus, and upon retaliation (as instructed by me), he was informed the HE would be sent to the Principal’s office for disciplinary action. Now keep in mind he was defending himself. And according to Texas state law, if you’re being bullied, you are allowed to defend yourself without recourse. Texas is a provocation state, if you flip someone off and they beat your ass, it’s your own damned fault. Makes sense right?

This last incident he was left bruised in the face, and he is supposed to pay by being sent to the Principal’s office? We notified the school, requested a copy of the video from the bus, and even petitioned the school superintendent. We live in a small town of about 14,000 people, so it’s a podunk, good ole boy kind of town. Which in the end, I realize shouldn’t make a difference. Bullying in schools and particularly school buses is a nationwide problem. This is where the parents come into play.

The best ways to curb bullying is by criminalizing it, and hold parents accountable, simple as that. Most bullies come from households with aggressive parents who are even more negligent than the bus driver in question. Parents know when their kids are bullies, it’s typically pretty obvious and they also get reports from the schools. This bully for instance has a long history with this, and yet the parents take no action. He obviously doesn’t suffer any recourse because he continues to do it to several children on the bus, and at recess during school hours. The school can obviously only do so much, it is required by state law that he attends school. And teachers aren’t parents to your kids, they are teachers; it’s our job to be the parents.

Here’s where parents come in. In Texas children under the age of ten, cannot be criminally charged, in these cases the parents are charged. So if a parent doesn’t do anything to curb the violent behavior, then they should be criminally charged. If the child is ten or older, the child should be criminally charged. If this were to happen, bullying would be nearly defeated. It’s time to dish out harsher punishments for this problem; it’s the only way to curb it! It's a starting point at the least!

And then there are the bus drivers. At what point should they be held accountable for their inaction? What about the case of Patrice Sanders (bus driver) in Florida? She took teenagers to her house, so they can fight out their little dispute. In this case it was a total disregard for student safety on so many levels, it ridiculous! I mean where do they find these school bus drivers anyway?

These people need to be held accountable in some way as well. In the case in Florida, obviously there will be some sort of child endangerment charges. But, where do we draw the line? Should the driver in my case be held criminally negligent? I believe suspensions should probably be in order for first-time offenders. But if they continually ignore the cries of children, and complaints from parents, a child will eventually get seriously hurt. If that were to happen, the driver, along with negligent parents, or the offending student depending on age, should all be held criminally accountable.

These are just my thoughts, and they seem perfectly logical to me. Join in the discussion and let’s talk about this issue and many others. Please visit our Facebook page at: https://www.facebook.com/New.Politics.and.New.Ideas and let’s start a discussion. You can also find us on Twitter at: @NPNI_Nation.

About New Politics and New Ideas: We are a community of logical progressive thinkers, who are for the progress of our Nation. We are trying to stop the political manipulation on Wall Street, the buying and selling of our elected officials, the destruction of our civil rights, and anything else anyone would like to bring up for discussion. Think of it as the largest, open to everyone Think-Tank in the world. Join us in the fight to take our country back!!!

The time to act is now!!! Let YOUR voice be heard!!!


Arturo Dominguez
Contributor
New Politics and New Ideas
New Politics Nation

CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM BILL

November 26, 2011


Campaign Finance Reform Bill:

WHEREAS THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION PROVIDES THAT:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

I,                         , CITIZEN of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in order to form a better Union, by, for and of the PEOPLE, shall elect to provide a Constitutional Amendment or Law proposal resolving the current buying and selling of our Democracy through Campaign Financing and Special Interests. This proposal is based on the commonality in the voice of the millions of people, protesting the current situation across our Great Nation and The World. This would be a great opportunity to appease your constituents and seems very fair to the American People and Elected Officials alike. I adamantly insist that this issue be addressed, as I and millions of others, will be presenting it to every elected official in the House and Senate for review. My recommendations to Congress and the Senate are as follows:


1. United States citizens shall be free to contribute no more than $500.00, or it’s equivalent to any federal candidate during any election cycle. Notwithstanding the limits set forth as part of the First Amendment, Congress shall have the power to limit, but not ban, independent political expenditures, so long as such limits are content and viewpoint neutral. Congress shall set forth a federal holiday for the purposes of voting for candidates for Federal office. Non-citizens shall not contribute money, directly or indirectly, to any candidates for any Federal office.

2. No corporation or business entity of any type, domestic or foreign, shall be allowed to contribute money, directly or indirectly, to any candidate for Federal office or to contribute money on behalf of or opposed to any type of campaign for Federal office. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, campaign contributions to candidates for Federal office shall not constitute speech of any kind as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution or any amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Congress shall set a designated federal holiday for the purpose of voting for candidates for Federal office.

3. People, person, or persons as used in this proposal does not include corporations, limited liability companies or other business entities established by the laws of any state, in the United States, or any foreign state, and such corporate entities are subject to such regulation as the people, through their elected state and federal representatives, deemed reasonable and are otherwise consistent with the powers of Congress and the States under this Constitution.

4. Prohibiting all federal public employees, officers, officials or their immediate family members from ever being employed by any corporation, individual or business that they specifically regulated while in office; nor may any public employee, officer, official or their immediate family members own or hold any stock or shares in any corporation they regulated while in office until a full 5 years after their term is completed; a complete lifetime ban on the acceptance of all gifts, services, money or thing of value, directly or indirectly, by any elected or appointed federal official or their immediate family members, from any person, corporation, union or other entity that the public official was charged to specifically regulate while in office. Elected officials and public employees in regulatory roles may only collect their salary, generous healthcare benefits and pension. Any person, including corporate employees, found guilty and convicted of violating these rules in a court of law by proof beyond a reasonable doubt, shall be sentenced to a term of mandatory imprisonment of no less than one year and not more than ten years.

5. Members of the United States House of Representatives shall be limited to serving no more than four two-year terms in their lifetime. Members of the United States Senate shall be limited to serving no more than two six-year terms in their lifetime. The two-term limit for President shall remain unchanged. Serving as a member of Congress or as the President of the United States is one of the highest honors and privileges our culture can bestow. These positions of prominence in our society should be sought to serve one's country and not provide a lifetime career designed to increase personal wealth and accumulate power for the sake of vanity.


Nothing contained within this proposal shall be construed to limit the people's Constitutional Rights in any way; which rights are inalienable.



Regards,

CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM BILL

November 26, 2011


Campaign Finance Reform Bill:

WHEREAS THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION PROVIDES THAT:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

I,                         , CITIZEN of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in order to form a better Union, by, for and of the PEOPLE, shall elect to provide a Constitutional Amendment or Law proposal resolving the current buying and selling of our Democracy through Campaign Financing and Special Interests. This proposal is based on the commonality in the voice of the millions of people, protesting the current situation across our Great Nation and The World. This would be a great opportunity to appease your constituents and seems very fair to the American People and Elected Officials alike. I adamantly insist that this issue be addressed, as I and millions of others, will be presenting it to every elected official in the House and Senate for review. My recommendations to Congress and the Senate are as follows:


1. United States citizens shall be free to contribute no more than $500.00, or it’s equivalent to any federal candidate during any election cycle. Notwithstanding the limits set forth as part of the First Amendment, Congress shall have the power to limit, but not ban, independent political expenditures, so long as such limits are content and viewpoint neutral. Congress shall set forth a federal holiday for the purposes of voting for candidates for Federal office. Non-citizens shall not contribute money, directly or indirectly, to any candidates for any Federal office.

2. No corporation or business entity of any type, domestic or foreign, shall be allowed to contribute money, directly or indirectly, to any candidate for Federal office or to contribute money on behalf of or opposed to any type of campaign for Federal office. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, campaign contributions to candidates for Federal office shall not constitute speech of any kind as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution or any amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Congress shall set a designated federal holiday for the purpose of voting for candidates for Federal office.

3. People, person, or persons as used in this proposal does not include corporations, limited liability companies or other business entities established by the laws of any state, in the United States, or any foreign state, and such corporate entities are subject to such regulation as the people, through their elected state and federal representatives, deemed reasonable and are otherwise consistent with the powers of Congress and the States under this Constitution.

4. Prohibiting all federal public employees, officers, officials or their immediate family members from ever being employed by any corporation, individual or business that they specifically regulated while in office; nor may any public employee, officer, official or their immediate family members own or hold any stock or shares in any corporation they regulated while in office until a full 5 years after their term is completed; a complete lifetime ban on the acceptance of all gifts, services, money or thing of value, directly or indirectly, by any elected or appointed federal official or their immediate family members, from any person, corporation, union or other entity that the public official was charged to specifically regulate while in office. Elected officials and public employees in regulatory roles may only collect their salary, generous healthcare benefits and pension. Any person, including corporate employees, found guilty and convicted of violating these rules in a court of law by proof beyond a reasonable doubt, shall be sentenced to a term of mandatory imprisonment of no less than one year and not more than ten years.

5. Members of the United States House of Representatives shall be limited to serving no more than four two-year terms in their lifetime. Members of the United States Senate shall be limited to serving no more than two six-year terms in their lifetime. The two-term limit for President shall remain unchanged. Serving as a member of Congress or as the President of the United States is one of the highest honors and privileges our culture can bestow. These positions of prominence in our society should be sought to serve one's country and not provide a lifetime career designed to increase personal wealth and accumulate power for the sake of vanity.


Nothing contained within this proposal shall be construed to limit the people's Constitutional Rights in any way; which rights are inalienable.



Regards,

Contacting Your Elected Representatives. Worth It?

Does writing your elected officials really work? We all know the common answer to that question. "It doesn’t do any good", and it’s a essentially a complete waste of time.

But really, who writes their elected officials anymore? Anyone?

Here's why I ask. Our elected officials have become all too comfortable largely due to the complacency from a large majority of Americans. Which is fine...

I say that because their attitude can actually work in our favor. Politicians are not used to receiving in-your-face feedback from their constituents.

Certainly not massive amounts of it.

In speaking from my own personal experiences. I found that this type of action is still quite effective.

About a year ago I began on my seemingly impossible quest of fighting for school funding in Texas. It didn't take me very long to realize I wasn't alone in this endeavor.

Texans were facing budget cuts on a huge scale. Many teachers didn't know if they would have a job this year. The uncertainty was also a distraction for the Teachers we spoke to.

Several educators expressed concerns echoing each other: “I don’t know what to do if I lose my job, it’s next to impossible to focus on teaching with this hanging over your head”.

This was also mentioned in our meetings with Texas Education Association (TEA) and members of the Teachers Union.

The proposed cuts would have forced the closure of many schools around the state. It also called for eliminating the Head Start program and increasing class size beyond current standards.

I found this disturbing. With three children of my own in these schools, there was only one thing to do.

Time to fight.

I started the best way I knew how. I wrote my elected officials both state and federal, with along with a drafted-proposal calling for the use of Permanent School Fund dollars (more on that later).

After a while I started feeling almost purposefully antagonistic about it. I wasn't rude or anything like that. But I was persistent. Am I supposed to care if they're butt-hurt?

No, I'm not. It's their job to take our shit.

My little campaign began with e-mailing copies of my proposal to all of the elected officials from every district. I had recruited some friends and parents to help, the needed very little convincing.

The proposal read as follows:

"I am writing to you because of the dire situation we face with funding our public school system. I implore you to vote against cutting any funding for public schools.

• If you need to cut 4 billion dollars from schools, why not use some of the over 20 billion dollars in the Texas Permanent School Fund. This fund was created to assist school districts in need (over 160 years ago). I think we would both agree we have school districts in need. Taking 4 billion dollars from there would have little impact on the Permanent School Fund. Which conveniently reports how profitable there strategies are (check their website if your not familiar with the program)

• Additionally, if that doesn't suit you guys. Just use some money from the Rainy-Day fund. While it's not actually raining (which would be nice), it is definitely raining from a fiscal stand-point. Honestly I don't know how much "more rain" we need in that context.

• It seems as though you guys are trying to portray our Great State of Texas, as being poor and cash-strapped. All it takes is some simple looking around online, and I or anyone else can find billions of dollars within our state just sitting there... Waiting for what?

• It took me 20 minutes to find the billions needed to fund education in one of the already lowest-rated states. What's it going to take for you guys to see the big picture? You guys are dumbing down our children.

• Many school districts cancelled summer school. They failed to inform anyone until it was too late get a child in at an outside school district. So now people have to enroll their children into home-schooling programs like what Texas-Tech offers, so they can have what is entitled to them in the first place.

• The schools failed the children as educators and are now forced to turn their backs on them and lose the opportunity to make it right. They failed the students because they didn't know if they would have a job next year. This was obviously weighing on their minds on a daily-basis (that's all the faculty talked about at the school functions), this in turn results in less focus on the job and at the task at hand... Educating our children!

• This falls solely on our representatives shoulders, you guys failed our teachers, and most importantly our children.

• Enough damage has been done, it's time to make it right!

• VOTE NO ON CUTTING SCHOOL FUNDING AND USE THE PERMANENT SCHOOL FUND, OR THE RAINY-DAY FUND! PLEASE DON'T FAIL THE FUTURE OF OUR EDUCATION SYSTEM!

• BRING UP THE PERMANENT SCHOOL FUND, THEY MIGHT ALL JUST THINK YOU'RE A GENIUS!"

OK, so it’s truncated for brevity, because if I posted the whole thing you would be here a while reading it.

You get it. I was a little brutal.

A week or two goes by, and I start getting response letters from ALL of them. Most were telling me that they don’t represent my district, and who I should contact for answers.

As if I didn't know...

What I found most intriguing, was how many replied saying they weren’t aware of the Permanent School Fund at all or what it was even for.

I know what you're thinking. How the heck did these guys get elected?

I followed up their feeble response letters by making contact with the Presidents of the TEA and the Teachers Union respectively, and presented my proposal to them.

Interest and enthusiasm for the idea was pretty high and I was immediately informed that after careful review, it would presented in their next sessions.

About that time, Texas State Senator Steve Ogden replied to me in a hand-written letter. My representative was the only hold-out at this point. But, came across as sincere and understanding.

The letter however, amounted to the typical political side-stepping that the Texas politicians are well known for.

And then he lost me.

He tried to "explain" how the blame falls on the federal government for the school funding shortage. Then he said, with all the sincerity in the world, that he felt as though his hands were tied.

His hands were tied...

Fine.

Because all of that pestering with phone calls, emails, and faxes paid off. We also had the help a few state representatives including Senator Steve Ogden.

I'm guessing he was able to untie his hands after all...

So here we are, yesterday was election day, and guess what happened? Texas House Joint Resolution 109 (Proposition 6) was passed.

WE WON!

The people voted and successfully passed Prop 6, thus releasing more money from the Permanent School Fund and saving our schools.

For now.

But it's still a win. We'll take it. 

The resolution should not only offset the federal cuts (which we did a few months ago with the “Rainy-Day” fund), but it will now provide additional funding to keep schools open and continue programs like Head-Start.

Now don’t get me wrong, I am not trying to, or want to, take credit for the passing of this bill. I will however, take some credit for pestering the heck out of our elected officials, and even educating a few of them in the process.

I certainly can’t leave those of you who participated either. This was truly a team effort.

Most of the representatives that had a positive response and who agreed with us in principle, are the ones credited for authoring the bill (go figure).

All kidding aside these are the guys that put the pen to the paper and made it work, and the best part about it is…

The Texas Legislative Budget Board issued a fiscal note about HJR 109 to the House Committee on Appropriations on April 30, 2011.

According to the fiscal note:

• "No fiscal implication to the State is anticipated, other than the cost of publication."
• "The cost to the state for publication of the resolution is $105,495."
• "No fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated."

So does writing your elected officials work?

Yes. Yes it does.

Write your elected officials, as much as you can, as often as you can. Let them know how and what you feel about the issues and the job they are doing. Or should I say not doing?

With millions of letters, e-mails, and phone calls coming in, they will begin to see the commonality in the grievances of the people. At that point, they will be forced to act, or we will be seeing some new faces in Washington soon!

Our success in the battle school funding is what got us started. Now we can't stop.

Since then, we have gotten a little deeper into politics and the fight for what's right in this country.

Adding in the help of some close friends and colleagues we have started a community to bring about change in America through civil discourse and sharing knowledge.

The organization is to be known as the New Politics Nation Initiative.

This movement is for all of us to come together in the same way we came together to get the school-funding we needed. Except now we have moved on to all of the issues facing our nation.

It's an open to everyone type of environment. We are a non-partisan unbiased group of citizen thinkers focused on maintaining progress on both a societal and governmental level.

Let's do this!

Make sure to follow our Social Media:

On Facebook: facebook.com/newpoliticsnation

On Twitter:
twitter.com/NPNI_Nation

On Instagram:
instagram/newpoliticsnation