viernes, 10 de octubre de 2014
jueves, 5 de junio de 2014
MESA PANEL "VIOLENCIA DE GENERO"
LOS INVITAMOS MESA PANEL de "VIOLENCIA DE GENERO" ENFOQUES MULTIDISCIPLINARIOS DE LA PROBLEMÁTICA.
EL DÍA : VIERNES 06 DE JUNIO A LAS 09:00 HS EN EL AULA 19 DE F.H.CsYS. UNSE.
EL DÍA : VIERNES 06 DE JUNIO A LAS 09:00 HS EN EL AULA 19 DE F.H.CsYS. UNSE.
DISERTANTES:
LIC. MAGDALENA RAMIREZ
DRA. LUZ MARIA UTRERA.
C.P.N. MARIANELLA LEZAMA HID
LIC. MAGDALENA RAMIREZ
DRA. LUZ MARIA UTRERA.
C.P.N. MARIANELLA LEZAMA HID
martes, 3 de junio de 2014
Bill Clinton Works To Reduce Prescription Drug Abuse
Pat Warren reports Clinton opened a Johns Hopkins University town hall meeting on prescription drug abuse with a disturbing story.
Former President Bill Clinton described the death of two acquaintances who drank beer and took Oxycontin.
“Both of them were given these pills by their lady friends who were totally ignorant of the biochemistry of what was going on. They just said, `This will give you a buzz,’ and it did. After which they fell asleep and never woke up,” he said.
The Clinton Health Matters Initiative and the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health highlighted the consequences of ignorance.“Neither of them was trained enough in human biology to have any clue that they were about to deaden the portion of their brain that told their body to breathe while it was asleep so they never woke up,” Clinton said.
The CDC has declared prescription drug abuse an epidemic. Forty-five percent of drug fatalities are attributed to prescription drugs and the National Institute on Drug Abuse says “Because these medications are prescribed by doctors, many assume that they are safe to take under any circumstances.”
The Clinton Foundation is supporting the distribution of medication that can counteract prescription abuse.
“Let’s assume that the FDA approval means there really will be easier, understandable, much more user-friendly ways of getting the medications into the bodies of people who need it before they die,” Clinton said.
Reducing risk and promoting safe use is a top priority.
The Clinton administration promotes global health and wellness.
esse Jackson: LBJ's legacy under assault
LBJ’s legacy under assault
BY JESSE JACKSON
June 2, 2014
Fifty years later, former President Lyndon Johnson got the tribute he more than earned. Four presidents praised his contribution. The Great Society, the War on Poverty, Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act opened doors that had been locked. “I lived out the promise of LBJ’s efforts,” said President Obama, rejecting the cynicism of those who would dismantle Medicare and food stamps, signature LBJ achievements. Bill Clinton praised LBJ for demonstrating “the power of the presidency to redeem the promise of America.”
Getting our history right is vital. For decades, LBJ’s achievements have been slighted. Liberals scorned him because of the war in Vietnam, and finally drove him to not seek re-election. Conservatives loathed him because of the Civil Rights achievements, with Republicans moving to displace Democrats as the party of the South. The War on Poverty, which dramatically reduced poverty in America, was dismissed as a failure, as the anger of the cities exploded. New Democrats dismissed him for believing in big government, as they tacked to a conservative era.
In fact, as the Civil Rights Summit at the LBJ Library in Austin, Texas, recognized last week, Johnson was a giant, standing with Franklin Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln as presidents who saved America. Under Johnson, the scourge of segregation was finally ended, and equal protection under the law moved from a lie to a promise. Millions were lifted from poverty, as the poor were provided a ladder up out of despair. Johnson’s reforms — Civil Rights, Voting Rights, Immigration, Medicare, child nutrition, food stamps and more — were nearly as great as those of FDR, and never matched since.
Johnson was propelled by a massive movement for Civil Rights, as Americans moved at the courage and dignity of ordinary heroes willing to stand up or sit down, protest or march, suffer abuse and jail for their rights. He was helped by allies like Dr. Martin Luther King. In the wake of the assassination of JFK, he had a legacy that he could invoke. But his leadership, passion, energy and skill were indispensable. President Obama invoked one of LBJ’s famed lines: “what the hell is the presidency for if not to fight for causes you believe in?”
Acknowledging Johnson’s greatness in our rearview mirror is important in part because it may help our vision looking forward through the windshield.
Today, America is more unequal than ever. Our schools are segregated, by race and by class, separate and unequal. We rank second to the lowest among industrial nations in the assistance we provide to the poor. In LBJ’s time, we enjoyed a broad middle class — for many, there were good jobs and good benefits. Now the middle class is sinking; we suffer mass unemployment with the jobs that are being created too often low pay and part-time. The millennial generation is graduating into the worst economic straits since the Great Depression.
And across the country, basic rights are under assault. State after state, particularly across the South, are passing measures to suppress voting — limiting voting days, ending Sunday voting, demanding voter ID, stripping the right to vote from non-violent drug offenders who have served their time, and more. The Supreme Court has weakened the Voting Rights Act, and is rolling back affirmative action. Republicans in the Congress want to turn Medicare into a voucher, gut Medicaid and turn it into a block grant, slash food stamps, Pell grants and other support for the vulnerable. A detailed analysis by the Center of Budget and Policy Proposals finds 69 percent of the cuts in the budget just passed by Republicans in the House come from programs from poor and low wage workers.
We do well to honor Lyndon Johnson. He understood the power of government to make America better. But it is not enough to honor his legacy. It is time to stir ourselves, as he pushed himself, to not simply defend his contributions, but to extend them to meet the challenges of our day.
June 2, 2014
Fifty years later, former President Lyndon Johnson got the tribute he more than earned. Four presidents praised his contribution. The Great Society, the War on Poverty, Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act opened doors that had been locked. “I lived out the promise of LBJ’s efforts,” said President Obama, rejecting the cynicism of those who would dismantle Medicare and food stamps, signature LBJ achievements. Bill Clinton praised LBJ for demonstrating “the power of the presidency to redeem the promise of America.”
Getting our history right is vital. For decades, LBJ’s achievements have been slighted. Liberals scorned him because of the war in Vietnam, and finally drove him to not seek re-election. Conservatives loathed him because of the Civil Rights achievements, with Republicans moving to displace Democrats as the party of the South. The War on Poverty, which dramatically reduced poverty in America, was dismissed as a failure, as the anger of the cities exploded. New Democrats dismissed him for believing in big government, as they tacked to a conservative era.
In fact, as the Civil Rights Summit at the LBJ Library in Austin, Texas, recognized last week, Johnson was a giant, standing with Franklin Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln as presidents who saved America. Under Johnson, the scourge of segregation was finally ended, and equal protection under the law moved from a lie to a promise. Millions were lifted from poverty, as the poor were provided a ladder up out of despair. Johnson’s reforms — Civil Rights, Voting Rights, Immigration, Medicare, child nutrition, food stamps and more — were nearly as great as those of FDR, and never matched since.
Johnson was propelled by a massive movement for Civil Rights, as Americans moved at the courage and dignity of ordinary heroes willing to stand up or sit down, protest or march, suffer abuse and jail for their rights. He was helped by allies like Dr. Martin Luther King. In the wake of the assassination of JFK, he had a legacy that he could invoke. But his leadership, passion, energy and skill were indispensable. President Obama invoked one of LBJ’s famed lines: “what the hell is the presidency for if not to fight for causes you believe in?”
Acknowledging Johnson’s greatness in our rearview mirror is important in part because it may help our vision looking forward through the windshield.
Today, America is more unequal than ever. Our schools are segregated, by race and by class, separate and unequal. We rank second to the lowest among industrial nations in the assistance we provide to the poor. In LBJ’s time, we enjoyed a broad middle class — for many, there were good jobs and good benefits. Now the middle class is sinking; we suffer mass unemployment with the jobs that are being created too often low pay and part-time. The millennial generation is graduating into the worst economic straits since the Great Depression.
And across the country, basic rights are under assault. State after state, particularly across the South, are passing measures to suppress voting — limiting voting days, ending Sunday voting, demanding voter ID, stripping the right to vote from non-violent drug offenders who have served their time, and more. The Supreme Court has weakened the Voting Rights Act, and is rolling back affirmative action. Republicans in the Congress want to turn Medicare into a voucher, gut Medicaid and turn it into a block grant, slash food stamps, Pell grants and other support for the vulnerable. A detailed analysis by the Center of Budget and Policy Proposals finds 69 percent of the cuts in the budget just passed by Republicans in the House come from programs from poor and low wage workers.
We do well to honor Lyndon Johnson. He understood the power of government to make America better. But it is not enough to honor his legacy. It is time to stir ourselves, as he pushed himself, to not simply defend his contributions, but to extend them to meet the challenges of our day.
A simple thank-you
Luz --
I like to think of my concerts as a place for friends to come together and have a good time.
Under the stars? Even better.
That's why I'm pretty excited about the chance to invite an OFA grassroots supporter like you to be a backstage guest at an outdoor show of mine in Chicago next month.
Any grassroots donation before midnight will automatically enter you for the chance to be there -- and the flight and hotel are on OFA.
You've worked hard this year -- the organizing you did to help 8 million Americans get enrolled with health insurance is no small feat. And I've seen you take on the members of Congress who still live in denial about climate change.
I'm impressed by what you do, and how you've proved time and again that there's no substitute for good, old-fashioned grassroots organizing when it comes to fighting for change.
That's why I want to offer this opportunity as a simple thank-you to OFA supporters like you for everything you do for our country.
If you win, you and a guest will be able to kick back on a free flight to Chicago, and be my VIP guests at the show.
Chip in to support OFA's work before midnight, and you'll be automatically entered to join us:
http://my.barackobama.com/James-Taylor-Backstage-Pass
Thanks -- hope to see you soon,
James
P.S. -- I'm told that any entry made today counts twice, so make sure you get your name in the hat.
I like to think of my concerts as a place for friends to come together and have a good time.
Under the stars? Even better.
That's why I'm pretty excited about the chance to invite an OFA grassroots supporter like you to be a backstage guest at an outdoor show of mine in Chicago next month.
Any grassroots donation before midnight will automatically enter you for the chance to be there -- and the flight and hotel are on OFA.
You've worked hard this year -- the organizing you did to help 8 million Americans get enrolled with health insurance is no small feat. And I've seen you take on the members of Congress who still live in denial about climate change.
I'm impressed by what you do, and how you've proved time and again that there's no substitute for good, old-fashioned grassroots organizing when it comes to fighting for change.
That's why I want to offer this opportunity as a simple thank-you to OFA supporters like you for everything you do for our country.
If you win, you and a guest will be able to kick back on a free flight to Chicago, and be my VIP guests at the show.
Chip in to support OFA's work before midnight, and you'll be automatically entered to join us:
http://my.barackobama.com/James-Taylor-Backstage-Pass
Thanks -- hope to see you soon,
James
P.S. -- I'm told that any entry made today counts twice, so make sure you get your name in the hat.
Perspectivas feministas del Derecho" seminario intensivo UBA 14 a 31 de julio
Información General
Directora:
Dra. Diana Maffía
Coordinadora:
Mag. Patricia Gómez
Válido para el Programa de Actualización en Género y Derecho
Cupo de inscripción: mínimo 15 / máximo 50 alumnxs
Clases del 14 al 31 de julio, de lunes a jueves, de 15 a 17.30 y de 18
a 20.30 hs.
Directora:
Dra. Diana Maffía
Coordinadora:
Mag. Patricia Gómez
Válido para el Programa de Actualización en Género y Derecho
Cupo de inscripción: mínimo 15 / máximo 50 alumnxs
Clases del 14 al 31 de julio, de lunes a jueves, de 15 a 17.30 y de 18
a 20.30 hs.
Programa:
Justicia Reproductiva y Derechos Humanos
El uso del litigio local e internacional como herramienta de avance
del principio de igualdad y no discriminación
Violencia de Género y Derechos Humanos de las Mujeres
Sexo, género y sexualidades en la construcción ciudadana y en los
Derechos Humanos
Homicidios de mujeres y violencia cotidiana. Mirada sociológica y
traducción jurídica
Las mujeres en las carreras jurídicas
Falso SAP y peritaje forense
Androcentrismo en el lenguaje jurídico
Docentes:
Agustina Ramón Michel: Abogada (Universidad Nacional de Tucumán,
medalla de plata). Cursó una maestría en Relaciones y Negociaciones
Internacionales, FLACSO-Universidad de San Andrés. Becaria Fullbright
y estudiante de maestría en derecho en la Universidad de Texas en
Austin. Investigadora adjunta del Centro de Estudios de Estado y
Sociedad en el Área Salud, Economía y Sociedad del CEDES. Es profesora
en la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad de Palermo. Ha escrito
artículos sobre aborto y patentes farmacéuticas, así como colaborado
en la publicación de libros y trabajos sobre derechos sexuales y
reproductivos, aborto y derecho a la salud.
Beatriz Kohen: Socióloga, con un Doctorado en el tema del Género en la
Justicia de Familia, es Investigadora del Observatorio de Género en la
Justicia perteneciente al Consejo de la Magistratura de la CABA.
Dirige el Centro de Género y Derecho de la Universidad de Palermo.
Enseña en la Maestría en Derecho de la UP y en la Maestría en Género
de la UCES, así como en el Programa Género y Derecho del Centro de
Formación Judicial de la CABA. Ha desarrollado programas relacionados
con Justicia y Género en prestigiosas organizaciones de la sociedad
civil. Es autora de numerosas publicaciones en la materia
Claudia Hasanbegovic: Doctora (Ph.D) en Políticas Sociales por la
Universidad de Kent (Inglaterra), MA en Género por el Instituto de
Estudios Sociales (Holanda), Diploma en Mujer por la Universidad
Internacional de la Mujer (Alemania), abogada (UNLZ) e investigadora
feminista. Consultora internacional, ejerce la abogacía y la docencia
universitaria. Ex prosecretaria letrada de la Corte Suprema de
Justicia de la Nación (2008-2011), asesora ad honorem del Consejo
Nacional de la Mujer en la reglamentación de la Ley de Violencia
contra las Mujeres 26.485
Diana Maffía: Doctora en Filosofía (Universidad de Buenos Aires),
docente e investigadora del Instituto Interdisciplinario de Estudios
de Género (IIEGE-UBA). Fue Defensora del Pueblo Adjunta en Derechos
Humanos y Equidad de Género, Legisladora de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires
y Consejera Académica del Consejo de la Magistratura. En la actualidad
es Directora del Observatorio de Género en la Justicia, del Consejo de
la Magistratura de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Dirige el Programa
Permanente de Actualización en Género y Derecho (Centro de Formación
Judicial) y el Curso de Actualización en Género y Derecho (Facultad de
Derecho, UBA)
Mariano Fernández Valle: Abogado. Máster en Derecho, con orientación
en Constitucional y Derechos Humanos (Universidad de Palermo).
Diplomado en Derechos Humanos y Procesos de Democratización (Centro de
Derechos Humanos, Facultad de Derecho, Universidad de Chile). Integra
la Comisión sobre Temáticas de Género de la Defensoría General de la
Nación, y es docente en la Universidad de Buenos Aires. Fue
investigador del Centro de Derechos Humanos de la Facultad de Derecho
de la U. de Chile, Codirector del programa de Justicia de la Fundación
CIPPEC y becario residente del Instituto Internacional de Sociología
Jurídica deOñati, País Vasco.
Mercedes Cavallo: Abogada (Universidad Torcuato Di Tella), Magister
(LL.M.) en Derechos Sexuales y Reproductivos de la University of
Toronto y Postítulo en Mujeres y Derechos Humanos de la Universidad de
Chile . Fue Prosecretaria Administrativa en la Corte Suprema de
Justicia de la Nación. Fue Directora del Área de Derechos Económicos,
Sociales y Culturales en la Asociación por los Derechos Civiles.
Actualmente, es Secretaria del Juzgado Nacional en lo Criminal y
Correccional Federal n°4 de la Capital Federal. Integra el Consejo
Asesor del Programa de Salud Integral Adolescente del Ministerio de
Salud de la Nación, donde también fue consultora y capacitadora.
Paola Bergallo: abogada, graduada con honores de la Universidad de
Buenos Aires, maestra en derecho por la Universidad de Columbia, y
Doctorada por la Universidad de Stanford. Profesora e investigadora de
la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad de Palermo. Fue becaria de la
Fundación Hewlett, el Consejo Noruego de Investigaciones y el Programa
de Derechos Humanos de la Universidad de Harvard. Dirigió diversos
proyectos de investigación interdisciplinaria sobre temas de salud,
género y derecho en el Centro de Estudios de Estado y Sociedad y la
Universidad de San Andrés. Asesora del Observatorio de Género del
Consejo de la Magistratura del Poder Judicial de la Ciudad de Buenos
Aires.
Patricia Gómez: Licenciada en Ciencia Política (Universidad de Buenos
Aires), Magister en Derechos Humanos(Universidad Internacional de
Andalucía) y Doctoranda por la UniversitatAutònoma de Barcelona.
Investigadora del Instituto Interdisciplinario de Estudios de Género
(IIEGE - UBA). Ha desarrollado actividades de investigación y docencia
de grado y posgrado en instituciones europeas, latinoamericanos y
argentinas. Asesora en la Legislatura de la Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos
Aires y en la Defensoría del Pueblo de la Ciudad. Actualmente es
Secretaria de Investigaciones de la Red Argentina de Género, Ciencia y
Tecnología (RAGCyT)
Silvia Chejter: Socióloga. Profesora titular de la Facultad de
Ciencias Sociales de la Universidad de Buenos Aires. Docente del
Doctorado de Estudios de Género de la Universidad Nacional de Córdoba
y Directora del Centro de Encuentros Cultura y Mujer. Especialista en
políticas públicas de género, abordajes de la violencia hacia las
mujeres, violencia sexual, discursos de violencia, derechos de las
mujeres, etc.-. Su libro más reciente es La decisión judicial y el
sexismo. Ediciones del Puerto, 2014 autora de numerosas publicaciones
nacionales así como en Francia, Canadá, Chile, Uruguay, Brasil,
Alemania y Estados Unidos. Editora de la publicación anual Travesías.
Sonia Ariza: abogada de la Universidad Externado de Colombia, cursó el
master en Derecho Constitucional y Derechos Humanos en la Universidad
de Palermo en donde también es docente e investigadora en el programa
de Justicia Reproductiva. Ha trabajado en diversos proyectos de
investigación sobre derechos sexuales y reproductivos, especialmente
relacionados con la implementación del aborto no punible y objeción de
conciencia sanitaria. También en temas relacionados con violencia de
género y trata de personas con fines de explotación sexual
Virginia Berlinerblau: médica, especialista en Psiquiatría Infanto
Juvenil, especialista en Medicina Legal, residente y ex jefa de
residentes del Hospital Ricardo Gutierrez. Desde 1993 Perito médica
forense. Co Autora de las Guías de Buenas Prácticas para el abordaje
judicial de NIños, Niñas y Adolescentes víctimas o testigos de
delitos, auspiciado por JUFEJUS, ADC y UNICEF, set. 2014, Premios
Aniceto Lopez de la Asociación Médica Argentina y premio Cátedra de
Medicina Legal por trabajos sobre Abuso Sexual Infantil. Docente
universitaria en Psiquiatría Forense Infanto Juvenil.
Jesse Jackson: Great Divide could spur populist movement
Great Divide could spur populist movement
BY JESSE JACKSON
May 26, 2014
Congress will end the month of May without renewing jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed that were cut off at the end of last year. House Speaker John Boehner rails against the Obama administration for failing to create jobs, but apparently blames unemployed workers for not having one.
There is a stark divide between the actions in Washington and the opinions of most Americans. Americans overwhelmingly support broad sensible reforms that will help working families, including renewing unemployment benefits.
A new study released by the Campaign for America’s Future, “The American Majority is a Populist Majority,” reports on recent polling data.
Nearly three fourths of Americans (73 percent) favor increasing the federal minimum wage to $10.10 an hour. Republican House Speaker John Boehner won’t let that come to a vote in the House, and Senate Republicans have blocked it in the Senate.
Three fourths of Americans (75 percent) favor a government job creation program to hire 1 million people. The Congressional Progressive Caucus budget that proposed a large jobs program got less than 100 votes in the House.
Nearly three fourths of Americans (71 percent) favor increasing government investment to build and repair roads, bridges and other infrastructure needs. But Congress has failed even to replenish the Highway Trust Fund that is about to be exhausted.
Thus far, this divide between public opinion and congressional action has had confusing political fallout. Congress is near record lows in public approval. But Republicans who have obstructed virtually every reform seem to be profiting. Pundits now favor them to keep control of the House and possibly take the majority in the Senate.
A big reason for this, we’re told, is the fall off of Democratic voters from the core of the Obama majority — people of color, young people and single women.
They were hit the hardest in the economy and have struggled in the so-called recovery. Like most Americans, they don’t have time or energy to sort out Washington’s bickering and figure out who is to blame. So generally, the party of the president gets more of the blame.
What is missing is an independent moral voice, a movement that isn’t about left or right, Democrats or Republicans, but is challenging legislators from the moral center. Without that, Democratic operatives tend to extol technique, the techniques they’ve mastered to target, contact and get out their voters. Republican operatives tend to emphasize money, the money they are able to raise from the billionaire and corporate lobbies that play an increasing role in our elections.
Citizen movements with a moral voice transform politics. In many ways, this was the lesson of Obama’s victory in 2008. He sensibly caught the wave of mass public dismay at the Iraq debacle. The candidacy of his primary opponent, Hillary Clinton, was in many ways capsized by that wave. His Republican opponent, John McCain, couldn’t overcome the desire of Americans for change.
Could a citizen’s movement upend expectations this fall? A populist movement is stirring in the country. We see it in the cities and states raising the minimum wage, not waiting for Washington. We see it in the protests of low wage workers in the fast food industry, in the Moral Monday’s mobilizations in North Carolina now spreading to other states. We see it even in the rock star status accorded to the French economist Thomas Piketty and his book “Capital in the Twenty-First Century” on inequality.
If this continues to build, the pundits may be surprised. Voters may turn out in greater numbers than expected either to punish incumbents or to support challengers who carry a populist message. Washington political pros tend to focus on the results of polls, but polls are but a snapshot of passing attitudes. Movements don’t respond to polls; movements mold opinion. The next months may be more interesting than many now expect.
May 26, 2014
Congress will end the month of May without renewing jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed that were cut off at the end of last year. House Speaker John Boehner rails against the Obama administration for failing to create jobs, but apparently blames unemployed workers for not having one.
There is a stark divide between the actions in Washington and the opinions of most Americans. Americans overwhelmingly support broad sensible reforms that will help working families, including renewing unemployment benefits.
A new study released by the Campaign for America’s Future, “The American Majority is a Populist Majority,” reports on recent polling data.
Nearly three fourths of Americans (73 percent) favor increasing the federal minimum wage to $10.10 an hour. Republican House Speaker John Boehner won’t let that come to a vote in the House, and Senate Republicans have blocked it in the Senate.
Three fourths of Americans (75 percent) favor a government job creation program to hire 1 million people. The Congressional Progressive Caucus budget that proposed a large jobs program got less than 100 votes in the House.
Nearly three fourths of Americans (71 percent) favor increasing government investment to build and repair roads, bridges and other infrastructure needs. But Congress has failed even to replenish the Highway Trust Fund that is about to be exhausted.
Thus far, this divide between public opinion and congressional action has had confusing political fallout. Congress is near record lows in public approval. But Republicans who have obstructed virtually every reform seem to be profiting. Pundits now favor them to keep control of the House and possibly take the majority in the Senate.
A big reason for this, we’re told, is the fall off of Democratic voters from the core of the Obama majority — people of color, young people and single women.
They were hit the hardest in the economy and have struggled in the so-called recovery. Like most Americans, they don’t have time or energy to sort out Washington’s bickering and figure out who is to blame. So generally, the party of the president gets more of the blame.
What is missing is an independent moral voice, a movement that isn’t about left or right, Democrats or Republicans, but is challenging legislators from the moral center. Without that, Democratic operatives tend to extol technique, the techniques they’ve mastered to target, contact and get out their voters. Republican operatives tend to emphasize money, the money they are able to raise from the billionaire and corporate lobbies that play an increasing role in our elections.
Citizen movements with a moral voice transform politics. In many ways, this was the lesson of Obama’s victory in 2008. He sensibly caught the wave of mass public dismay at the Iraq debacle. The candidacy of his primary opponent, Hillary Clinton, was in many ways capsized by that wave. His Republican opponent, John McCain, couldn’t overcome the desire of Americans for change.
Could a citizen’s movement upend expectations this fall? A populist movement is stirring in the country. We see it in the cities and states raising the minimum wage, not waiting for Washington. We see it in the protests of low wage workers in the fast food industry, in the Moral Monday’s mobilizations in North Carolina now spreading to other states. We see it even in the rock star status accorded to the French economist Thomas Piketty and his book “Capital in the Twenty-First Century” on inequality.
If this continues to build, the pundits may be surprised. Voters may turn out in greater numbers than expected either to punish incumbents or to support challengers who carry a populist message. Washington political pros tend to focus on the results of polls, but polls are but a snapshot of passing attitudes. Movements don’t respond to polls; movements mold opinion. The next months may be more interesting than many now expect.
lunes, 19 de mayo de 2014
Help Spread the Word About Water
Friday, May 16, 2014
Help Spread the Word About Water
Back in September, the First Lady joined the Partnership for a Healthier America (PHA) to launch Drink Up, a campaign to encourage everyone to drink more water.
PHA is now challenging everyone to spread the word about water and how it powers you during life's important moments. Whether it's finishing a race, helping your kids through a big test, or sitting down for a family meal, share how water is part of your life using the hashtag #spreadthewater on Twitter and Instagram.
New Findings on Water Consumption
In addition to people joining in the movement, we are also excited that the campaign is starting to see results. Recently, Hank Cardello, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, shared an article about Drink Up and the campaign's successful approach in bringing together various companies and entities around the goal of encouraging Americans to take a simple step to improve their health by drinking more water.
Highlights of progress include a recent report by the Natural Marketing Institute reporting from a survey of 40,000 consumers that the number of eight-ounce servings of plain water drunk per day from all sources, including bottled, tap, and filtered, was up 2.7% for the quarter ending March 31, 2014, compared with the fall quarter of 2013 when Drink Up was launched.
In addition, restaurant data reported by NPD Group show that tap water servings rose 3% in the quarter ending December 31, 2013, compared with a 1% gain for the entire year.
While it is great to begin to see these results, we know there is more work to be done. We look forward to continuing efforts to encourage Americans of all ages to drink more water.
And remember, you are what you drink, and when you drink water, you drink up!
Thirsty for more? Visit www.youarewhatyoudrink.org to get involved.
For the full recap of recent activities and to get involved, visit the Let's Move! blog, like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.
LOGRO de AMJA en la IAWJ
Asociación de Mujeres Jueces de Argentina
Estimad@s soci@s:
Tenemos el orgullo de comunicar que tras haber postulado desde AMJA a la Dra. Susana Medina de Rizzo como Presidente de la International Association of Women Judges, la Dra. Medina ha resultado Presidente Electa para el periodo 2014-2016. La decisión constituye un claro resultado de la incansable y eficaz tarea que desplegara y abre un camino de enorme trascendencia para AMJA y para la IAWJ.
***********************************
Un hasta siempre a Carmen Argibay
Asociación de Mujeres Jueces de Argentina
La partida de un ser querido nos enfrenta al desafío de aprender a vivir extrañando. Marca nuestra vida para siempre.
Eso nos empezó a ocurrir con el fallecimiento de la Dra. Carmen Argibay.
Con sensibilidad, calidez, decisión, firmeza e independencia abrió un camino y dejó una huella indeleble que nos sigue inspirando
Con sensibilidad, calidez, decisión, firmeza e independencia abrió un camino y dejó una huella indeleble que nos sigue inspirando
Supo decir con los hechos aquello por lo que luchó.
Mostró la situación de las mujeres cuando nadie lo hacía y, consecuente con su pensamiento, fundó la Asociación de Mujeres
Jueces de Argentina.
Jueces de Argentina.
Su vida fue la síntesis de la coherencia y el compromiso.
Los más vulnerables, los más desprotegidos sentirán su ausencia.
La República la extrañará.
Partió una grande.
AMJA manifiesta su infinita tristeza y su firme compromiso de continuar su legado.
Descanso eterno y en paz para Carmen.
Virginia Simari
Presidente
***********************************
Jesse Jackson: Outrageous kidnappings show why U.S. needs better policy toward Nigeria
Outrageous kidnappings show why U.S. needs better policy toward Nigeria
BY JESSE JACKSON
May 13, 2014
An outrage against decency — the kidnapping of over 270 young girls in northeastern Nigeria by the Islamic terrorist group Boko Haram — has brought Nigeria international attention, however unwanted. The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously to hold Boko Haram accountable for crimes against humanity. Michelle Obama voiced her outrage at the grotesque kidnappings. The U.S., China, and Britain sent advisors to help locate and free the little girls. The protests inside Nigeria — led significantly by grieving mothers — have received international attention.
Moslem religious leaders from Saudi Arabia to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation have condemned the kidnappings. The Nigerian government has belatedly begun to respond, with President Goodluck Jonathan announcing that he hoped that the “kidnap of these girls will be the beginning of the end of terror in Nigeria.” The popular revulsion has yet to be translated into action on the ground, and even that is not sufficient. The U.S. should use this moment not simply to help bring back the kidnapped young girls, but to also bring forth a comprehensive U.S. policy towards Nigeria.
In many ways, the global reaction to this tragedy seems like a throwback to the days of the Cold War. Then, Africa would get attention only when there were reports — often distorted — of communist infiltration or communist insurgencies. Only when threatened would sub-Saharan African countries sneak into the newspapers or pierce the consciousness of the White House, much less the American public.
This neglect is costly. Nigeria is not simply a poor African country plagued by Muslim terrorists who kidnap little girls. It is a country of 170 million people, one fourth of the population of Sub-Saharan Africa. It is a vital cog in security across Africa, dispatching more troops on peacekeeping missions than any other nation in the world.
This year, Nigeria was recognized as the largest economy in all of Africa. It is the largest producer of oil in Africa, and the world’s fourth leading exporter of liquid natural gas. Europe is the largest importer of its oil. For decades, it supplied the U.S. with about 10 percent of its oil, and now that number is down to about 5 percent as U.S. production expands at home. Its economy is increasingly sophisticated and diversified, with services providing an ever-higher percentage of GDP. It has 120 million cell phone subscribers. Nollywood — its burgeoning movie industry — is now ranked at about 1.5 percent of its economy and employs over a million people. The size of the economy would earn it membership into the G-20, or other major international bodies. Nigeria is the second highest recipient of U.S. investment in Africa. And an estimated 1.5 million Nigerians and Nigerian Americans live in the U.S.
It also has the highest number of people living in extreme poverty — $1.25 a day or less — in Africa. It has a democratically elected government, but one that has been plagued by corruption.
The kidnappers of the girls, Boko Haram, pose a growing threat. Violence in the isolated and impoverished northeast is spreading. Boko Haram indicts the government for corruption and violence. It promises to enforce Sharia law across the territories. To date this year, according to United Nations figures, Boko Haram has killed more than 1,500 people. It is well funded, well organized and deadly. It will take significant international assistance and coordination to root it out.
Providing assistance in trying to save the kidnapped girls is beneficial. But the U.S. needs to have a far more comprehensive policy towards Nigeria — and sub-Saharan African in general. Nigeria is far more important to us than Ukraine is. Yet the U.S. government is fixated on Ukraine, and relatively disengaged from Nigeria. We should not need the threat posed by Boko Haram to make us realize the importance of Nigeria. Isolating and crushing Boko Haram, while engaging and helping to build Nigeria, should be a centerpiece of U.S. policy and attention.
May 13, 2014
An outrage against decency — the kidnapping of over 270 young girls in northeastern Nigeria by the Islamic terrorist group Boko Haram — has brought Nigeria international attention, however unwanted. The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously to hold Boko Haram accountable for crimes against humanity. Michelle Obama voiced her outrage at the grotesque kidnappings. The U.S., China, and Britain sent advisors to help locate and free the little girls. The protests inside Nigeria — led significantly by grieving mothers — have received international attention.
Moslem religious leaders from Saudi Arabia to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation have condemned the kidnappings. The Nigerian government has belatedly begun to respond, with President Goodluck Jonathan announcing that he hoped that the “kidnap of these girls will be the beginning of the end of terror in Nigeria.” The popular revulsion has yet to be translated into action on the ground, and even that is not sufficient. The U.S. should use this moment not simply to help bring back the kidnapped young girls, but to also bring forth a comprehensive U.S. policy towards Nigeria.
In many ways, the global reaction to this tragedy seems like a throwback to the days of the Cold War. Then, Africa would get attention only when there were reports — often distorted — of communist infiltration or communist insurgencies. Only when threatened would sub-Saharan African countries sneak into the newspapers or pierce the consciousness of the White House, much less the American public.
This neglect is costly. Nigeria is not simply a poor African country plagued by Muslim terrorists who kidnap little girls. It is a country of 170 million people, one fourth of the population of Sub-Saharan Africa. It is a vital cog in security across Africa, dispatching more troops on peacekeeping missions than any other nation in the world.
This year, Nigeria was recognized as the largest economy in all of Africa. It is the largest producer of oil in Africa, and the world’s fourth leading exporter of liquid natural gas. Europe is the largest importer of its oil. For decades, it supplied the U.S. with about 10 percent of its oil, and now that number is down to about 5 percent as U.S. production expands at home. Its economy is increasingly sophisticated and diversified, with services providing an ever-higher percentage of GDP. It has 120 million cell phone subscribers. Nollywood — its burgeoning movie industry — is now ranked at about 1.5 percent of its economy and employs over a million people. The size of the economy would earn it membership into the G-20, or other major international bodies. Nigeria is the second highest recipient of U.S. investment in Africa. And an estimated 1.5 million Nigerians and Nigerian Americans live in the U.S.
It also has the highest number of people living in extreme poverty — $1.25 a day or less — in Africa. It has a democratically elected government, but one that has been plagued by corruption.
The kidnappers of the girls, Boko Haram, pose a growing threat. Violence in the isolated and impoverished northeast is spreading. Boko Haram indicts the government for corruption and violence. It promises to enforce Sharia law across the territories. To date this year, according to United Nations figures, Boko Haram has killed more than 1,500 people. It is well funded, well organized and deadly. It will take significant international assistance and coordination to root it out.
Providing assistance in trying to save the kidnapped girls is beneficial. But the U.S. needs to have a far more comprehensive policy towards Nigeria — and sub-Saharan African in general. Nigeria is far more important to us than Ukraine is. Yet the U.S. government is fixated on Ukraine, and relatively disengaged from Nigeria. We should not need the threat posed by Boko Haram to make us realize the importance of Nigeria. Isolating and crushing Boko Haram, while engaging and helping to build Nigeria, should be a centerpiece of U.S. policy and attention.
Conferencia "Experiencias exitosas en el fortalecimiento de la seguridad ciudadana: Centros Comunitarios de Justicia y Tribunales de Resolución de problemas"
Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación
La Comisión Nacional de Acceso a Justicia (CNAJ) que preside la vicepresidenta de la Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación, Dra. Elena Highton de Nolasco, invita a usted a la conferencia “Experiencias exitosas en el fortalecimiento de la seguridad ciudadana: Centros Comunitarios de Justicia y Tribunales de Resolución de problemas”. Disertarán el juez interino de la Corte Suprema de Justicia de Nueva York y juez presidente del Centro Comunitario de Justicia Red Hook en Brooklyn, Estado de Nueva York, Dr. Alex Calabrese, y el director de Capacitación y Asistencia Técnica del Centro para la Innovación de Tribunales de la Ciudad de Nueva York, EE.UU, Dr. Julius Lang.
El evento tendrá lugar el jueves 29 de mayo de 2014 a las 12:00 en la Sala Benjamín J. Gorostiaga –Puerta 4052-, Talcahuano 550, 4to piso, del Palacio de Justicia.
***********************************
Secretaría
Asociación de Mujeres Jueces de Argentina
Perú 359 6º Of. 604 (1067) CABA
Tel. 011- 4331-7843
martes, 13 de mayo de 2014
Fallecimiento de la Dra. Carmen María Argibay
La Asociación de Mujeres Jueces de la República Argentina (AMJA) despide con profundo pesar a su fundadora, la Sra. Ministra de la Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación, Dra. Carmen María Argibay, mujer de profundas e inclaudicables convicciones democráticas y referente ineludible de la lucha por los derechos de las mujeres.
Acompañamos a su familia y amigos en este difícil momento.
TAKE ACTION: New York State law is failing children – help pass the Trafficking Victims Protection & Justice Act by June
|
lunes, 12 de mayo de 2014
o to the Premiere of Orange Is the New Black with the Cast
|
Cook Dinner with Me at Eataly in New York
|
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)






