Still a Republican, and still proud of it
By Jessica Peck Corry

This article originally appeared in The Denver Post on 10/24/2006

As a cub reporter in Washington, D.C., I was the lowest on the totem pole. I fetched more coffee than bylines, and one of my tasks included training new interns. What I learned from one intern taught me more than any newsprint could.

The intern was an 18-year-old from Anacostia, a D.C. neighborhood that is one of America’s most disadvantaged inner- city communities. She was the first from her family to graduate from high school and would be the first to go on to college.

She told me how her mother cried the day they found out she had been awarded the internship and that her entire church congregation said a prayer for her success the Sunday before she started at our M Street office.

While she grew up less than 3 miles from the nation’s Capitol, the intern had never set foot inside. It was, therefore, my duty to give her a tour. New to the world of politics, I was eager to flash my press credentials and use the congressional subway. I gave the intern a detailed, hour-long seminar on the workings of Congress, mentioning everything from conference committees to filibusters.

After the tour, I asked if she had any questions. “Yes,” she said, “What’s the difference between a Republican and a Democrat?”

I tried to explain to her as objectively as I could that Republicans were for smaller government and individual rights while Democrats prided themselves on helping the disadvantaged through the extension of government programs.

A decade later, however, I realize this distinction is not quite this simple and not quite so true. We need look no further than the last state legislative session, when both parties were all too often united in one mission: to expand the reach of government in our lives. Democrats handed out “Democrats love business” pins at the Colorado Capitol this year, and were joined by many Republicans in supporting a smoking ban and ignoring property rights. The unions made gains while small-business owners suffered.

If only our political parties were like sports teams and we could just believe they’d be better next season. Unfortunately, my party has been in a rough spot for more than a few years. Americans work until May just to pay their tax burden and the government - Democrats and Republicans alike - keeps asking us for more money to fuel its addiction to our wallets.

Some people ask me why I’m still a Republican. Why not just give up, they’ll ask. The reason: I believe in the party’s principles I espoused to that intern years ago and I believe I live them today.

My party is that of the late Sen. Margaret Chase Smith, after whom I named my daughter. Smith, a Republican from Skowhegan, Maine, was the first woman from either major party to launch a legitimate bid at the presidency. Smith fought hard for equal rights, while rejecting the notion that women needed to be given special preferences to succeed.

My party is that of Ward Connerly, a black man born into Southern poverty who transformed his life of disadvantage into one of a successful business career. When the government offered him race- based handouts in the 1990s, he declined, instead choosing to champion Proposition 209, a successful California measure that banned race and gender preferences altogether.

My party is that of Sean Duffy, a former adviser for Colorado Gov. Bill Owens, who courageously sent shockwaves through the GOP by announcing he would lead the campaign for Referendum I, a ballot initiative this fall that seeks to establish legal rights for same- sex partners.

Some things are worth fighting for. I believe in the party that could, and to a lesser extent, in the party I call mine today. Without those in the GOP like Smith, Connerly and Duffy to uphold our ideals of individual rights and the American Dream, I fear we will only continue our downward spiral toward an ethos where we all allow ourselves to become victims. I need only think of that intern from so long ago to remember why this quest remains essential.

sica Peck Corry (Jessica@i2i.org) serves as a policy analyst for the Independence Institute in Golden, where she specializes in civil rights, higher education, and land use policy.

See today’s Denver Post coverage of the ongoing debate over marijuana prohibition and Amendment 44, a citizen led initiative to change Colorado’s laws to allow for legal possession of small amounts of marijuana for adults over the age of 21.

From the Rocky Mountain News:

Debate on pot sizzles
Amendment 44 sides trade barbs, question the facts

By John C. Ensslin, Rocky Mountain News
October 19, 2006

A televised debate over legalizing marijuana became heated Wednesday night as the two sides accused each other of distorting the facts over the effect the measure would have on violent crime, other drug use and addiction among children.

“People who use marijuana are four times more prone to violence,” said Linda Roady of the anti-Amendment 44 group Guarding Our Children Against Marijuana.

“That is completely outrageous,” countered Mason Tvert of Safer Alternative for Enjoyable Recreation and campaign manager for Amendment 44. When he asked her to cite her source for the claim, she was unable to do so.

“I don’t profess to know all the statistics,” Roady replied, without backing off her assertion.

The exchange came during an hour-long debate on KBDI-Channel 12 on the amendment, which seeks to legalize possession of up to one ounce of marijuana for personal use by anyone 21 or older in Colorado.

If voters approve the amendment, Colorado could become the first state in the nation to approve recreational use of marijuana. Nevada is considering a similar measure.

At another point, Tvert tried to link Amendment 44 opponents to a Florida group that he alleged once withheld food from children and forced them to recite religious hymns as part of an anti-drug campaign.

“That allegation is borderline slanderous,” countered Dr. Dave Krahl of Save Our Society from Drugs. “He is making allegations that are unsubstantiated and untrue.”

About the only thing both sides agreed upon was that there needs to be better education on anti-drug efforts.

Jessica Corry, of Guarding Our Children Against Marijuana Prohibition, described herself as a Republican mom who views anti-drug campaigns as a waste of money.

She disputed Roady’s claim that marijuana users are more prone to violence.

“People who use marijuana don’t go out and beat each other up - people on alcohol do.”

Tvert said his group is not claiming that marijuana is a good thing for people to use.

“We never said that marijuana is harmless,” he said. But by decriminalizing the drug, he said, more people might be less inclined to use alcohol, which he contends contributes to other social ills.

See CBS 4’s site for coverage of the October 18th debate over Amendment 44.

Other diseases have ribbons, too
By Jessica Peck Corry

This article originally appeared in the Denver Post on 10/13/2006

Warning: This column might be so politically incorrect that you may feel the need to send me harassing e-mails. During October, this sacred month commemorating breast cancer awareness, our commitment to the cause may be diverting our attention from diseases in greater need of our attention.

Earlier this month, more than 65,000 walkers and runners came together in Denver for the nation’s largest Race for the Cure. In T-shirts emblazoned with pink ribbons, accessorized with pink socks, pink hats and matching pink shoes, participants made their way through Denver in support of survivors and finding a cure.

The pink-ribbon craze has become a national phenomenon topped only by our addiction to “American Idol.” Here are just a few of the pink items you can buy that advertise as providing financial support for breast cancer research: a $250 cashmere sweater, $16 underwear, $3 lip balm, crystal toe rings, and Campbell’s soup.

The shoe company New Balance advertises more than 30 “pink ribbon” items, ranging from women’s golf shoes to men’s “co-survivor” T-shirts. Costco sells pink ribbon lint rollers in bulk. Kitchen-Aid features an entire Cook for the Cure line. Target has 46 “pink ribbon” items on its website. That’s before you get to eBay, which has more than 2,000 such items listed.

I thought I had seen it all - that is, until last weekend, when I saw a hemp-based lotion bottle boasting a pink marijuana leaf. Talk about market saturation. The only thing missing now are pink Halloween pumpkins.

Breast cancer awareness has become a marketing tool of savvy corporations. It’s a smart move. Pink sells. We eagerly buy products marked up in the name of giving back. One example: The upscale vacuum company Oreck boasts on its website that it donates $50 from the sale of each of its $550 Pink Ribbon XL Ultra cleaners to the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation. Meanwhile, if you want the XL Ultra without the pink ribbon, you’ll need to plunk down $500. Who is making the donation now?

While we can pat ourselves on the back for opening our wallets in support of fighting breast cancer, another approach is warranted to get the best bang for our buck in the effort to save lives.

We need to talk about heart disease and lung cancer, the two top killers of women. According to the American Cancer Association, lung cancer will take more than 160,000 lives this year, four times the number of breast cancer deaths. Every year, nearly 40 percent of all U.S. deaths are caused by heart disease, while all cancers together cause 23 percent.

To be fair, we must also stop focusing solely on women. Heart disease and cancer’s toll on our men are equally astounding. According to the ACA, more than 230,000 men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer this year - more than the 211,000 women who will learn they have breast cancer.

Let’s also talk about colon cancer, the second-deadliest cancer for men. While most women are comfortable (or at least familiar) with regular mammograms, men continue to neglect colon and prostate screenings, only going at the nagging of their wives.

Why aren’t we out walking in droves for men, encouraging colonoscopies and prostate exams? We neglect these essential tests because they’re embarrassing or awkward. Silence is killing our men.

Part of our public focus is simply the result of outstanding work by the Komen Foundation. Certainly, it provides a model for other organizations to implement. This assumes, however, that we’d open our wallets to other causes with the same fervor. About 1,000 people came out for the American Lung Association’s Run the Register event this year.

Yes, breast cancer is deadly, but we need to put its toll in perspective. There is an entire rainbow of ribbons we should also be wearing: teal stands for ovarian cancer, clear stands for lung cancer, yellow is for bladder cancer or sarcoma, while periwinkle is for esophageal and burgundy for multiple myeloma. Wear ivory with burgundy if you want to support head and neck cancer and purple for Leiomyosarcoma. Colon cancer’s ribbons are brown and prostate cancer’s are light blue.

Confused? If you want to show your support for those suffering from any type of cancer, you can wear a lavender ribbon. But wait. Some websites list lavender as the color for sexual harassment awareness, with Paula Jones championing the cause. Lavender is also the color of choice for epilepsy consciousness. There are even ribbons for Restless Leg Syndrome sufferers.

The bottom line: In the rush for pink DustBusters and $50 pink candles, we have lost focus of our other priorities. This year, in lieu of a pink ribbon, I’ll be wearing brown and light blue in support of my husband - another nagging reminder of my commitment to his prostate and colon health and, ultimately, our life together. Oh, the romance.

Jessica Peck Corry (Jessica@i2i.org) serves as a public policy analyst with the Independence Institute in Golden, where she specializes in civil rights, higher education, and land use policy.

“Diabesity” killing our children

by Jessica Peck Corry

DenverPost.com

Golden - Leave your child in a car on a hot summer day and you will likely be arrested. Instead, take her across the parking lot to McDonald’s for a Big Mac. People may stare, but they likely won’t say anything. The problem: Both decisions have potentially fatal implications and yet the latter is ignored.

Joel Hahnke, a physician at the Phoenix Children’s Hospital, recently coined the term “diabesity.” Writing for the Arizona Republic, he noted that Type II diabetes, usually brought on in older adults struggling with weight issues, is increasingly being diagnosed in young children. The cause, he says, is childhood obesity.

According to the National Institute of Diabetes & Digestive & Kidney Diseases, a full 80 percent of all Type II diabetes diagnoses stem from obesity. Nearly 200,000 Americans under the age of 18 are now diagnosed as diabetic. Even more frightening, when our children reach the age of 25, eight out of 10 of them can expect to be overweight. The implications for diabetes’ impact on our future is almost too much to contemplate.

Unfortunately, Hahnke’s perspective that we must identify and attack the childhood obesity epidemic represents a perspective not heard frequently enough in our medical communities. Too often, doctors - afraid of shattering the fragile self-esteem of our children - say nothing when they see an obese kid come into the office. Children are perceptive, however; if a kid is fat, she knows she’s fat. I can speak from experience, having had a few chubby years of my own.

It’s normal for every kid to go through an awkward stage. What we are seeing today, however, is far from an “ugly duckling” phase. Fueled by 32-ounce sugared sodas and candy bars, kids are served Ritalin for breakfast and insulin for lunch. We cannot figure out why they bounce off the walls at school and yet can barely get off the couch once home.

It’s easy to blame multimillion-dollar McDonald’s or Coca-Cola advertising budgets. It’s easier to blame busy work schedules or video game addictions. Activists are starting to blame the government for not doing enough. Legislative efforts have been laughable.

In New Mexico, lawmakers passed a measure geared toward improving the eating habits of children, yet failed to pass a bill that would have imposed stricter standards upon themselves. Its language stated that House members guilty of “first-time possession of an unhealthy snack item” faced a $100 fine and community service hours focused on informing kids about the evils of junk food. While the bill was a joke, taxpayers should not be laughing.

At the end of the day, parents must take responsibility. If we were to infect our children with any other disease than diabetes - say, the AIDS virus or smallpox - our society would be outraged and rightly so. Yet, we say nothing as this epidemic steals away childhood from too many of our kids, making it nearly impossible to play sports, walk to school without getting winded, or even sit comfortably on a school bus seat.

Perhaps most concerning, according to Hahnke, is the lack of concern we show for “diabesity.” Because being “overweight and obesity are so common today, public and personal perceptions about body size are changing,” he writes. “People may not feel that they or their family members are overweight because compared to someone else they know, they really aren’t ‘that bad.”‘

Today, the average obese diabetic can expect to cut eight years off his lifespan.

I know a thing or two about diabetes. I have Type I diabetes, a form of the condition most frequently determined by genetics, not weight. My three siblings have all suffered from one form of diabetes or another. I’m the daughter of a diabetic mother who had endured two amputation surgeries by the age of 55. It’s not a pretty disease, but I’ve learned to manage it. Today, I have blood sugar levels of a non-diabetic and my doctor tells me I can expect to live a full and normal life.

If we love our kids, we’ll do the right thing and give them this same hope for a bright future. We’ll take away the Big Macs and help them shed a few pounds. We wouldn’t leave them in a hot car on a summer day; they deserve not to be left alone at the dinner table, either.

Jessica Peck Corry (jessica@i2i.org) is a policy analyst with the Independence Institute in Golden, where she specializes in higher education, civil rights and land-use policy.

This article originally appeared in The Denver Post on 9/25/06.

Visit the NBC 9News Web site to learn more about the Petition Rights Amendment and to get a balanced perspective on the initiative as Jessica debates House Speaker Andrew Romanoff, D-Denver.

See Jessica debate Rick Reiter about Amendment 38, the Petition Rights Amendment by visiting CBS 4’s election site.