Obama: The president has said he favors making Social Security "solvent and viable" for the long run but did not include proposals for how to do so in his budget proposal. His budget did state, however, that he is "strongly opposed" to letting workers invest part of their payroll taxes in private investment accounts. When asked about the program during his first debate with Romney, Obama said, "it's going to have to be tweaked the way it was by Ronald Reagan and Democratic Speaker Tip O'Neill.
Reagan and O'Neill presided over the last reform of Social Security in That reform raised the retirement age slowly and increased the payroll tax rate, among other things. Obama also said that his grandmother, who had worked and paid into system, "understood that there was a basic guarantee, a floor under which she could not go. Related: Social Security benefits will get small cost of living bump. When Obama was running for president in he proposed raising payroll taxes on high-income earners.
But he said he would not support increasing the retirement age or cutting benefits. Last summer, during the debt ceiling negotiations, Obama said the framework created by the so-called Gang of Six -- a bipartisan group of senators -- was "broadly consistent" with his. That framework called on lawmakers to direct any savings from Social Security reform back into the program and not use them for deficit reduction.
Romney: The Republican nominee's economic plan states that "there are a number of options that can be pursued to keep the system solvent -- from raising the eligibility age to changing the way benefits are indexed Romney has said he would add a year or two to the retirement age.
Serious challenges remain in a corruption-riddled Afghanistan, particularly in the violence-stricken southern region of Kandahar. In killing Osama Bin Laden and assassinating many Al Qaeda leaders through controversial drone strikes, Obama "has refocused George Bush's 'war on terror' more squarely on terrorists," as The Economist noted in its final evaluation of the candidates.
In the third presidential debate, it was difficult to discern significant differences in the two candidates' view on foreign policy. Both have publicly advocated a pragmatic and conflict-averse approach to Egypt and Syria. Romney has vowed to take a more aggressive approach with China and Iran.
He's labeled China as a currency manipulator. He's also indicated he'd be more willing to support military conflict in Iran, alongside Israel. Every state recognizes the absolute right of its citizens to use deadly force when confronted with an immediate threat to their lives or those of their loved ones. Most states , starting with Florida twenty-five years ago, re-visited their concealed carry statutes giving practicality to this agreed upon right.
After all, what value is there in having a right self-defense in theory if the state effectively denies you the very means to enforce that right? The approaching firearm debate faced by the next Congress and president elected or re-elected , is legislation authorizing a person to carry a concealed handgun in any state in accordance with the restrictions of that state if they could possess or receive a firearm under federal law and they have a valid license or permit to carry from any state.
The National Reciprocity act, H. It has majority support in the Senate , but not quite enough for a cloture vote and has been held up till after this election.
The opponents of National Concealed Carry have pointed out a number of problems with the current bills which need to be addressed so Americans can travel across their own country with the means to defend themselves in a rational, legitimate, safe and justifiable manner. States laws on concealed carry run the gamut from Vermont Montana, Alaska, Arizona , where any adult may lawfully carry a concealed handgun without a state-issued carry license so long as their possession and intent is legal , to Illinois where no civilian can obtain a license because the law simply doesn't provide the lawful means to enforce one's inalienable right to life and liberty at the hands of violent predatory pond scum.
As currently written, neither H. Now that I've managed to tick off both sides of this debate, let me explain the problems and propose some hopefully useful solutions. We at the Independent Firearm Owners Association believe that all adult citizens who are neither violent criminals nor mentally deranged psychopaths should be able to obtain a license to carry which would be generally valid from sea to shining sea.
This license would in effect become an enhanced federal carry permit. It can and should be issued by state authorities once the applicant meets a recognized standard currently in force in several "shall issue" states such as Texas and Virginia. The applicant should be competent in of how to operate a handgun, familiar with the basic rules of gun safety and hold a fundamental understanding of the laws of "deadly force" as well as how they may differ from state to state.
0コメント