SCOTUS Strengthens Citizens United Decision With Montana Ruling
Posted by Michelle Moquin on July 2nd, 2012
Good morning!
Another very important topic that might not have gotten much attention while SCOTUS was ruling Obamacare this past week.
Supreme Court strengthens Citizens United decision with Montana ruling
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday reaffirmed the right of corporations to make independent political expenditures, summarily overturning a 100-year-old Montana state law that barred corporations from such political activity.
The justices ruled in an unsigned opinion that Montana’s law was in conflict with the court’s 2010 Citizens United decision, which shifted the campaign finance landscape, opening the door to the massive political expenditures that have been shaping this year’s presidential race. The decision was 5-4, split along ideological lines.
Despite the Citizens United decision, the Montana Supreme Court had refused to strike down the state’s ban on election spending by corporations. Its judges cited Montana’s history of “copper kings” who bribed legislators. Advocates of campaign finance reform had hoped that the current wave of election-related spending would help make their case for the need to reconsider Citizens United.
Still, it was considered highly unlikely that the court, in its current configuration, would reverse itself on such a recent ruling.
The court issued a summary reversal without waiting to hear oral arguments in the case.
In a dissent, Justice Stephen Breyer wrote that “Montana’s experience, like considerable experience elsewhere since the Court’s decision in Citizens United, casts grave doubts on the Court’s supposition that independent expenditures do not corrupt or appear to do so.” But he acknowledged that the court was not likely to reconsider the ruling.
Advocates for stricter campaign finance regulations said they would continue their fight for tougher laws in Congress and the courts.
“Citizens and the nation are not going to accept the Supreme Court-imposed campaign finance system that allows our government to be auctioned off to billionaires, millionaires, corporate funders and other special interests using political money to buy influence and results,” said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21. “A major national campaign finance reform movement will begin immediately after the 2012 elections.”
*****
Readers: I don’t want our political system to be bought by the highest corporate bidder. And I’m tired of allowing corporations the rights of a living person. It’s just not right that the Supreme Court gave corporations, the rich, and anyone else who could afford it, the right to spend any amount of money they want to influence the passage of any issue.
Quite some time ago Anonz posted these words, and every so often I read them and post them to remind us what we’re up against. Today felt like a good day.
Destroy it by; (1) insisting that special interest groups not be allowed to lobby congress. (2) Out law PAC’s political contributions (3) get your Congress to fix the opinion rendered by the bought and paid for 6 of the Supreme Court who ruled that corporations can spend as much as they want on political issues and candidates.
I can now buy any candidate in either House. I can influence any law to my benefit. I can influence you and most americans to believe what I wish about any issue. Your crooked Supreme Court gave me the right to spend any amount of money to influence the passage or (sic) any issue.
Criticizing me may make you feel good, but it has no affect on anything I do. Voting to eliminate the people who keep the likes of me from being regulated would be effective in stopping me from profiting at your expense.
But I have no fear of that because you secretly envy the money and power I have. You dream of being one of us, so you allow us to have unfettered access to to the profit trough.
Sure I have more money that I will every be able to spend, but if you are too stupid to regulate me, and too stupid to make me pay my fair share of taxes, and if you continue to allow me to set up corporations with all the rights of a living person, I WILL CONTINUE TO GET RICHER AT YOUR EXPENSE.
And unfortunately, I will continue to brag, boast, be in your face about your STUPIDITY. Deciding whether to rant against me or to vote against me will determine whether you will wise up or remain a mat for me to wipe my feet on as I stroll to that feeding trough.
If those words don’t inspire you to do something…to vote for Obama in November, I don’t know what will. By the way, this won’t be the last time I post this before the elections.
This is one of the only real free speech blogs – no censoring ever. Blog me.
Nancy: I thought so too. I am HOPEing that when Obama wins in November he will jump on the opportunity to really let us see his moves.
Anonz: Funny, I’m out early this morning so I wrote my blog last night, quoting you, only to see your comment this morning, before I was about to click ‘publish’. Nice to see you here personally talking of love, and devotion, instead of your loyal aid “from the desk of…” sharing, although very important, the woes of the world. Your lady love is one lucky girl, and no doubt she knows it and awaits for your safe return to personally hear you tell her such sweet words. I’m glad to know you are alive and well, and I too wish you a safe return.
Peace & Love…
Lastly, greed over a great story is surfacing from my “loyal”(?) readers. With all this back and forth about who owns what, that appears on my blog, let me reiterate that all material posted on my blog becomes the sole property of my blog. If you want to reserve any proprietary rights don’t post it to my blog. I will prominently display this caveat on my blog from now on to remind those who may have forgotten this notice.
Gratefully your blog host,
michelle
Aka BABE: We all know what this means by now :)
If you love my blog and my writes, please make a donation via PayPal, credit card, or e-check, please click the “Donate” button below. (Please only donations from those readers within the United States. – International readers please see my “Donate” page)
Or if you would like to send a check via snail mail, please make checks payable to “Michelle Moquin”, and send to:
Michelle Moquin PO Box 29235 San Francisco, Ca. 94129
Thank you for your loyal support!
All content on this site are property of Michelle Moquin © copyright 2008-2012
“Though she be but little, she be fierce.” – William Shakespeare Midsummer Night’s Dream
" Politics, god, Life, News, Music, Family, Personal, Travel, Random, Photography, Religion, Aliens, Art, Entertainment, Food, Books, Thoughts, Media, Culture, Love, Sex, Poetry, Prose, Friends, Technology, Humor, Health, Writing, Events, Movies, Sports, Video, Christianity, Atheist, Blogging, History, Work, Education, Business, Fashion, Barack Obama, People, Internet, Relationships, Faith, Photos, Videos, Hillary Clinton, School, Reviews, God, TV, Philosophy, Fun, Science, Environment, Design, The Page, Rants, Pictures, Church, Blog, Nature, Marketing, Television, Democrats, Parenting, Miscellaneous, Current Events, Film, Spirituality, Obama, Musings, Home, Human Rights, Society, Comedy, Me, Random Thoughts, Research, Government, Election 2008, Baseball, Opinion, Recipes, Children, Iraq, Funny, Women, Economics, America, Misc, Commentary, John McCain, Reflections, All, Celebrities, Inspiration, Lifestyle, Theology, Linux, Kids, Games, World, India, Literature, China, Ramblings, Fitness, Money, Review, War, Articles, Economy, Journal, Quotes, NBA, Crime, Anime, Islam, 2008, Stories, Prayer, Diary, Jesus, Buddha, Muslim, Israel, Europe, Links, Marriage, Fiction, American Idol, Software, Leadership, Pop culture, Rants, Video Games, Republicans, Updates, Political, Football, Healing, Blogs, Shopping, USA, Class, Matrix, Course, Work, Web 2.0, My Life, Psychology, Gay, Happiness, Advertising, Field Hockey, Hip-hop, sex, fucking, ass, Soccer, sox"
July 2nd, 2012 at 8:19 am
Lower Blood Pressure with This Vitamin
Many of us swallow a daily multivitamin and assume that we’re getting all the vitamin C that we need.
After all, most multivitamins provide 100% of the USDA’s recommended Dietary Reference Intake (DRI) per day for vitamin C—75 to 90 milligrams (mg).
So we’re all set, right?
Well, a new analysis from Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore shows that getting even more than the DRI each day might go a long way in terms of reducing blood pressure or maintaining healthy blood pressure.
But how much is enough?
“C” IS FOR CONTROLLING PRESSURE
Scouring 45 years of medical literature, lead investigator Stephen Juraschek, a Hopkins MD-PhD student in epidemiology, and his colleagues looked at 29 clinical trials comparing blood pressure measurements among participants taking vitamin C supplements with those taking placebos.
The range of supplementation taken was 60 mg per day to 4,000 mg per day—the median amount was 500 mg per day—so most subjects were taking far more than the USDA’s recommended amount. Subjects took the supplements for, on average, eight weeks. Some had high blood pressure and some didn’t.
Results: Participants with normal blood pressure who took vitamin C had 3.8 points lower systolic blood pressure (the top number of the reading), on average, than the placebo group and 1.5 points lower diastolic blood pressure (the bottom number of the reading), on average…and those with high blood pressure who took vitamin C had 4.9 points lower systolic, on average, and 1.7 points lower diastolic, on average.
These reductions may not be as significant as the results you might get from blood pressure medications, but if your blood pressure is only slightly high, the vitamin might help keep your pressure in a healthy range or help you take less or no medication.
Juraschek told me that the dips in blood pressure are thought to result from vitamin C’s action as a diuretic—it prompts the kidneys to excrete more salt and water from the body, which can relax blood vessels.
MAY HELP, WON’T HARM
Again, this research was a meta-analysis of many studies, and each study was conducted slightly differently, so Juraschek can’t tell us exactly how much vitamin C is the ideal amount to take.
But since the people in the study were taking more than the USDA’s recommended amount of vitamin C and their blood pressure was lowered, then should we all be taking more than 75 mg to 90 mg per day?
There’s mixed advice from experts on the topic.
Juraschek takes a very cautious approach, saying that more research is needed before people increase how much vitamin C they take. He warned that doses larger than the USDA’s recommendation could lead to diarrhea or kidney stones in some people, such as those prone to those problems.
But we’re talking about vitamin C here! A vitamin that’s good for you that is naturally in many healthy foods. Personally, I’m not sure that so much caution is necessary, given that vitamin C is, generally speaking, quite benign.
Knowing that excess vitamin C is excreted in urine, I wondered how dangerous it could really be for most people, so I also talked to Daily Health News contributing editor Andrew Rubman, ND, medical director of the Southbury Clinic for Traditional Medicines in Southbury, Connecticut.
Dr. Rubman said that people who are prone to diarrhea or kidney stones might have problems consuming extra vitamin C, so those people, in particular, may want to be cautious.
“But that’s not most of us,” he said. “Chances are that most people—especially those who are prehypertensive (blood pressure between 120/80 and 139/89) or hypertensive (blood pressure of 140/90 or higher)—would benefit from taking more than 75 mg to 90 mg per day.”
If you’re interested in taking more vitamin C than you already do as a way of controlling blood pressure, discuss it with your doctor.
Sources: Stephen Juraschek, an MD-PhD student in the department of epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore. Andrew Rubman, ND, medical director, Southbury Clinic for Traditional Medicines, Southbury, Connecticut. The study was published in the April issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
July 2nd, 2012 at 9:14 am
The billionaires that were assured that they had bought the ACA decision are very angry with Roberts for switching his vote.
Roberts was willing to take the money to make the Mandate part of ACA unconstitutional, but he balked at striking the entire act as he felt that this would tell everyone that the issue was decided along political grounds rather than constitutional ones.
When he asked the other 4 to support him on this they told him, that he like they had been paid to strike the entire law and that’s what they intended to do.
Roberts tried to appeal to their sense of history and concern for the court’s legacy that would bear his name. But they refused to be concerned. They told him that when he took the money he had given up the right to be concerned about what history would say about the Robert’s Court.
I suspect that it must have occurred to Robert that he was essentially selling his soul and his future independence to those people.
He wasn’t willing at that time to go only so far. So he met with the liberal 4 and to their surprise said he would side with them if they allowed him to write the opinion with their agreement on key sessions.
He wanted them to agree to limit the powers of the federal government under the Commerce Clause and to call the Mandate a tax rather than a penalty or fine.
Anonz
July 2nd, 2012 at 9:43 am
Anonz, I can see the logic in your discourse. Scalia, Thomas, and Alito are often referred to as “strong conservatives,” meaning totally right wing politically when they decide cases.
Kennedy was seen as a conservative that used the Constitution as his starting point when interpreting the laws or issues before the Supreme Court.
But I guess that much money would make him go the way of the other 3 and just decide every case based on their political views and use the Constitution to justify that ruling.
Elliot
July 2nd, 2012 at 10:11 am
I don’t understand the people who say I like certain parts of the ACA but I don’t like Obamacare.
So do these idiots want to go back to the days of unlimited premium increases, pre-existing conditions, etc?
Can they hate the color of the president so much that they would side with those that want to return to the good ole insurance days?
Lois
July 2nd, 2012 at 10:16 am
Howie, is this unprecedented heat wave the result of Tsarmi’s anomaly that the aliens have been talking about?
I mean most of these states have NEVER had these kinds of temperatures. What’s next if Tsarmi isn’t brought back.
And why doesn’t someone bring him back? Isn’t he a TAO?
Scott
July 2nd, 2012 at 11:30 am
Can Conservatives Name ONE Mitt policy that they think will help the USA? Can Conservatives name ONE Mitt policy… at all?
July 2nd, 2012 at 11:32 am
Barack Obama has given the American people nothing but lies, misery, failed econonmy, and incompetent scandal ridden administration and they expect enthusiasm to still be there..
July 2nd, 2012 at 11:32 am
This president has the biggest crowds in history and some poll wants us to look at this and say wahat again ? We are through with the polls until we see a cell phone poll .
We don’t know who pays for these polls or who owns tthem but we do know their intention . It won’t work this time . We can call MSNBC and ask them to play fair and stop the nonsense . We want see the real polls that include everyone
July 2nd, 2012 at 11:36 am
The end of this great country took place when the Supreme Court
gave the OK to “Corruption Unlimited” …oh, sorry, I meant “Citizens United”…
No I didn’t.
July 2nd, 2012 at 11:37 am
The only vootes President Obama will not receive are those from angry old white men.
July 2nd, 2012 at 11:46 am
My relatives were laughing over drinks and dinner about the plight of “that nigger” Eric Holder. These are the same relatives that hang out with their black friends at work and tell the rest of us how equal minded they are.
Let us not try and imagine that a nation with a history of race based laws is going to find other principle to hang a hat on.
The culture of racism is akin to indelible ink here, it leave a mark on everything. There is not even the decency to go after Holder, if they must, with an honorable man instead of bottom of the barrel scrapings.
July 2nd, 2012 at 11:48 am
Take a look at these tea party states. These states are representitive of how the tea party would like the rest of the country to look. Broke, under educated and out of options.
July 2nd, 2012 at 11:50 am
The Grand Oil Party’s War on Women continues. Deny it? Read all about the GOP attacks at the link below, courtesy of Senator Gillibrand:
http://www.democratsenators.org/o/44/p/salsa/web/common/public/content?content_item_KEY=2382
Teapublican WAR ON WOMEN
1) 44 GOP bills on abortion
2) In Congress, Republicans have a bill that would let hospitals allow a woman to die rather
than perform an abortion necessary to save her life.
3) Republicans want to redefine rape to only cases of “forcible rape” to deny access to
women’s health services.
4) Republicans voted to change the legal term for victims of rape, stalking, and domestic
violence to “accuser.”
5) Republicans voted to restrict health services to low-income women in TX
6) Republicans voted to cut all federal funding from Planned Parenthood; the most trusted
provider of family planning in our country.
7) Republicans blocked the Equal Pay For Women Act
8) Republicans repealed The Violence Against Women Act. 2011, making it okay for men to
beat their wives in KS
http://www.civic.moveon.org/the31republicansenators/share.html?rc=emailc&id=40685-
20179184-E9pGgrx
9) The Republican-controlled House of Delegates took the first official step toward
regulating clinics in 2011 -mandating renovations and forcing closures.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/14/virginia-abortion-clinic- _n_1597229.html
10) Republicans want to cut nearly a billion dollars of food and other aid to low-income
pregnant women, mothers, babies, and kids.
July 2nd, 2012 at 11:51 am
Abortion is legal, its the Federal law of the land,Just because some legislators dont like it does not mean they can change it, they cant take peoples rights away this is the big problem Repubs think they can take everybodies rights away because they dont like it! Obama 2012 !
July 2nd, 2012 at 11:51 am
Abortion utterly destroys the human rights of millions every year.
July 2nd, 2012 at 11:52 am
Abortion is legal under the US Constitution and MS, along with every other state, is precluded from prohibiting it.
The standard of review is to make safe abortion available – NOT to start instituting local ways to scuttle the 14th Amendement, thereby placing women’s lives in jeopardy, simply to serve a conservative right/Teapublican political agenda.
We already fought and won this battle in 1974. We, the People not going back there
-EVER again.
VOTE – no matter what! Obama 2012
July 2nd, 2012 at 11:53 am
Yes, I think we are going back there – to correct a grievous mistake. “Oh, I made a stupid mistake and got pregnant. I have an idea – let’s kill the baby!” Yea – that’s how responsible adults act. The time for choice is BEFORE one gets pregnant.
VOTE – no matter what! Romney 2012
July 2nd, 2012 at 11:54 am
It might be fun to moralize, but people DO get pregnant by mistake. Mississippi already has one of the highest rates of teen pregnancy and tries not to teach children ANYTHING about contraception. If you don’t want to teach kids how to AVOID pregnancy, do you feel okay blaming them when they get knocked up?
This is what I understand of the GOP plan:
-No comprehensive sex ed
-No access to free/affordable birth control for poor people
-No planned parenthood to cover the gaps
-No abortions
-No prenatal care and women’s health screenings
-No supports for young mothers in need
-No head start or even kindergarten
Is that a plan that sounds good to you? Or would you rather live in reality and help people AVIOD having children they can’t afford to raise.
Nobody likes abortion. We just understand that it is necessary.
July 2nd, 2012 at 12:01 pm
I live in Jackson Mississippi, near the only abortion clinic left in the entire state of Mississippi. The clinic is called Jackson Women’s Health Organization.
I drive by that clinic several times a month. There were at one time several such clinics. The problem is the threats by so called “pro-lifers” to kill the doctors or their families, and bomb threats forced them away.
The doctors who fly in from Alabama, are literally forced to wear masks and disguises when they are driven to the clinic from the airport and escorted in under armed guards.
Armed security guards are at the clinic 24/7 as well as video surveillance of the parking lots and sidewalks. Welcome to Mississippi.
July 2nd, 2012 at 12:01 pm
Please explain to me where the CHOICE exists here for women and their own healthcare and why MS is not allowing women to MAKE THEIR OWN decision about their bodies and lives?
Thank goodness the judgeled against it…………..this time!
July 2nd, 2012 at 12:02 pm
Republicans could care less about women or choice. They do not believe in abortion or your legal right to choose to have one. Period.
It is based on their religious beliefs and they are determined to legislate their religious beliefs. I find that dangerous and scary. This will continue as long as they are in office. We, the people, have a little something to say about that.
Vote…take a friend.
Obama/Biden 2012.
July 2nd, 2012 at 12:03 pm
I maybe showing partiality in this, but the GOP has a lot of enablers and apologists in the puditry to the media. Rarely, from the likes of George Will to Fox News, are Republicans taken to task for, again in my view, policies that are damaging to the working people and the nation as a whole such as tax cuts and a war based foreign policy.
They distort the separation of church and state into a so-called right to religious freedom, as long as it’s christian; they resist any expansion of women’s rights whether reproductive or in employment; and they claim state’s rights whenever it suits their particular ideological agenda.
It’s rare that you have a few conservatives as Rupert Murdock and Chief Justice Roberts that break away from the GOP corral and speak their own minds. Almost sounds democratic.
July 2nd, 2012 at 12:04 pm
There are no individuals in Conservatism. They believe what they are told to believe and vote as they are told to vote. Regardless, conservatives are not a monolithic group. They are an alliance of five social groups with often contradictory agendas:
1. The wealthy, who want more wealth and power for themselves and less for everyone else. Their goal is to cripple government and eliminate the middle-class.
2. The economic Conservatives and Libertarians, who have made a bizarre religion out of their “free market” fairy tales. They want to destroy the social safety net and begin the Corporate State, though few can foresee the Orwellian society that would result.
3. Evangelical Christians, who want to be the censors of fashion, literature, and morals. They feel marginalized and ridiculed – and they have been marginalized and ridiculed. What they don’t realize is that the other groups in the Conservative coalition hold them in contempt every day but election day.
4. Racists, who want to re-segregate the South. They don’t admit it, but that would be the outcome if they had their way. They can’t say that they hate Obama because he is Black, instead they publicly oppose him by calling him a socialist, a Muslim, etc.
5. Lunatics, paranoids, gun-nuts, militia members, and others whose mental problems are expressed in their political attitudes. They are fanatical about their particular political fetish: guns, militias, conspiracy theories, the birthplace of the President, Death Panels, the federal reserve, the gold standard, whatever.
July 2nd, 2012 at 12:05 pm
So according to our US government, one can be thrown in prison for 5 years and fined up to 250,000 for destroying an eagle’s egg. Why would that be? It’s not an eagle until it hatches.
July 2nd, 2012 at 12:06 pm
Powerful. Logical. The libs won’t get it.
July 2nd, 2012 at 12:58 pm
Roland, there is nothing logical about what Nate said. It was was an idiotic attempt by a male to influence a woman. Let me break it down for you.
Incoherent analogy. 1) Eagle populations are endangered and we could loose them forever.
2) An eagle’s egg is separate from its mother’s body and can be maintained by any competent eagle or if need be, human being, until hatched and is able to fly on its own.
3) Human population is anything but endangered but could be considered to be too large for many parts of the planet to sustain the massive numbers.
4) Human females do not lay eggs (surprise!!!!) and the female must incubate her young within her own body.
I would suggest a read of a few actual biology books could help you understand, maybe.
Lucy
July 2nd, 2012 at 1:01 pm
Good morning to you all. I hope that the readers without power, get it back soon (me included). It’s been a long, and scorching weekend. But, that doesn’t stop the news, so let’s get right to it.
Six Big Ideas to Repeal and Replace Obamacare — Live this morning is the entire special issue focus on healthcare package. This week’s issue delves in to healthcare, and the pro-market, pro-taxpayer alternatives to the ACA. We have many writers and thinkers from all over the medical industry, giving their two cents on what works and what doesn’t. It’s a plethora of great material that you must read.
Sen. Tom Coburn: ‘We’re trying ‘Sovietize’ American health-care’ — “We’ve never really had real market forces since World War II controlling the cost of health care,” said the junior senator from Oklahoma. He sat down with my colleague Paul Dykewicz at our sister publication, Eagle Daily Investor, at his Capitol Hill office. Watch the video here.
Coolest thing you’ll read today. 7 year old writes President Reagan in 1984 asking for disaster relief to clean up his room. Reagan responds.
Center-left Nieto wins in Mexico– Certainly going to be an election with a lot of ramifications for the U.S., as Gizzi writes this morning. “But in terms of dealing with the root causes of Mexicans fleeing to the U.S. — namely, violence and a lack of economic opportunity — Pena Nieto may offer some surprises. When it came to the ‘Wild West’-style gang wars that have long plagued Mexico, the PRI hopeful actually ran as more of a “law and order man” than Calderon, who once donned a military uniform to declare unconditional military action against gang leaders and drug lords.” Read more below.
That and a lot more below.
Onward and upward,
-Adam
July 2nd, 2012 at 1:12 pm
Venezuela legalized all drugs over 10 years ago and the country is wealthier and healthier for it. America seems to have a problem in following policies that actually work and prefer to follow failed policies like Japan’s lost decade of the 90′s – a path that the Fed Reserve is taking us down.
July 2nd, 2012 at 1:16 pm
Your Partner Won’t Go to Couples Therapy? Go Alone!
Maybe you’ve considered couples therapy, but your spouse refuses to try it. And you’ve thought about going alone, but figured what’s the point?
Well, a new study shows that going to couples therapy by yourself really can help.
It suggests that if one partner can learn to make adjustments, then the whole relationship can be changed for the better.
Now, if you are bristling at the thought of being “the one to change,” you have misunderstood my point. Going alone to couples therapy does not mean that you have “given in” or that your spouse has “won.” In fact, being the one to work with a couples counselor allows you to increase your influence and control over the situation—and there is some interesting research going on that shows that it works!
GOING SOLO VS. GOING TOGETHER
University of Denver researchers are in the process of conducting a five-year study that examines how working with two partners who live together compares with working with just one partner, in terms of improving a relationship.
Now, the researchers didn’t use traditional psychotherapy—they used a different sort of program. It doesn’t examine either partner’s childhood to help explain his or her current behaviors.
Instead, it focuses on an educational course that teaches relationship skills. When just one partner takes the course—let’s say the wife—she learns how to change her own mind-set and/or behaviors, not how to change her husband.
And that’s likely to improve the dynamic of the entire relationship. Her husband doesn’t have to “consciously participate,” so to speak—his wife is instructed to share what she learned with him, but he isn’t told that he must change his own mind-set or behaviors.
That said, if the wife starts acting differently, then the husband usually has to respond differently.
To date, more than 300 couples (all heterosexual) have participated. Each couple has been randomly assigned to one of three groups—in one group, both members of each couple attended a relationship skills course together…in another group, the men only or the women only took the same course…and the last group—the control group—received no training.
The researchers didn’t recruit couples that specifically had very troubled marriages at the start—some couples had more problems than others. Dr. Markman noted that no relationship is perfect and that all couples (from the very happy to the very unhappy) can benefit from improving communication.
LEARNING HOW TO COMMUNICATE BETTER
Not surprisingly, communication techniques were a big part of the skills training. One is the “speaker-listener technique” in which one person speaks while the other only listens—no interrupting, problem-solving, leaving or minimizing the speaker’s concerns—and then paraphrases back the speaker’s point.
Other skills include (but are not limited to) conflict resolution, understanding the other person’s expectations and how to identify and handle stress.
How did the couples do? To find out, I called up the lead researcher, Howard Markman, PhD, coauthor of the best-selling book Fighting for Your Marriage and a professor of psychology and codirector of the Center for Marital and Family Studies at the university.
Although complete data won’t be available until the study is finished, Dr. Markman said that the overall results so far show that one year after participating in the program, relationships improved most when both partners attended skills training…attendance by only the woman ran a close second…but attendance by only the man barely helped (in fact, the husband-attendance group tied for last place with the no-training-at-all group).
Nonetheless, Dr. Markman told me that in his clinical experience, couples counseling attended by only a man tends to provide some improvement in relationships—maybe it’s because these are men who choose to go.
In other words, going alone to couples counseling appears to be better than not going at all—especially if you’re a woman. These results held true no matter how troubled a couple’s relationship was at the start.
One reason that Dr. Markman thinks that women going solo may be more effective than men going solo is because women tend to be more motivated at improving a relationship and helping their partners learn the key skills for a successful relationship.
What’s interesting is that even non-attending spouses got some benefits from the program—not just the attending spouses. For example, when both attending and non-attending spouses were asked how helpful they found the three-to-five session program to be right after it ended, both partners said that the program was very helpful.
It could be that the men-only group had some early success, but that the success didn’t last a year later.
PUTTING THE FINDINGS TO USE
There are many potential reasons that a spouse might not participate in couples therapy—it isn’t always just a simple refusal to do so. For example, one spouse might have to stay with the kids…or have a completely different work schedule…or have a physical infirmity that makes travel difficult. And of course, some couples who could benefit from therapy don’t even live in the same city as each other.
So if one person won’t or can’t go to therapy, consider trying it alone. But no secrets! Dr. Markman stressed that his approach works best when the non-attending partner knows what’s going on and also wants the relationship to improve. This study suggests that it’s an especially good idea to try solo counseling if you’re a woman.
To learn more about the program that Dr. Markman used (it’s based on something called PREP: Prevention and Relationship Education Program), visit his site LoveYourRelationship.com.
He offers PREP-based workshops and couples counseling in Denver and Boulder, Colorado and relationship coaching over the phone. Or ask therapists in your area if they can teach you the PREP program. Costs will vary, as will insurance coverage.
Source: Howard J. Markman, PhD, professor of psychology and codirector, Center for Marital and Family Studies, University of Denver.
He is coauthor of Fighting for Your Marriage (Jossey-Bass) and cofounder of the site http://www.LoveYourRelationship.com
July 2nd, 2012 at 1:20 pm
I, for one, am looking forward to the end of a War on drugs that never needed to be. Talk about wasteful spending GOP. Hey GOP where are the jobs you promised us!? Go Obama!
July 2nd, 2012 at 2:18 pm
I’ve always had a soft spot for Anderson Cooper, but today he really shone:
“It’s become clear to me that by remaining silent on certain aspects of my personal life for so long, I have given some the mistaken impression that I am trying to hide something – something that makes me uncomfortable, ashamed or even afraid. This is distressing because it is simply not true. I’ve also been reminded recently that while as a society we are moving toward greater inclusion and equality for all people, the tide of history only advances when people make themselves fully visible.”
Thank you, Coop, for “officially” coming out.
We’re here and we’re queer!
/SB
July 2nd, 2012 at 4:09 pm
Is this proper behavior for an elected official?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Os__jAwJ6Wg
I don’t understand how states that typically vote democratic have elected these far right wing governers, such as this obese fool Christie in New Jersey, the dope in Wisconsin, the dope in Michigan. It’s hard enough to listen to the dolts in pure red states like Jan Brewer in AZ, Rick Perry in TX, and Rick Scott in FL without having to listen to the governors who do not seem to represent the values of a majority of their citizens. This must be a function of bad democratic candidates, misinformation by the moneyed interests, or lack of voter turnout. This American brand of democracy, which really isn’t democracy at all, is failing, and if Obama loses, it will be the death knell.
July 3rd, 2012 at 2:26 am
We have begun the meetings that will determine the out come to earth’s dilemma. Most will consider the threat to be of a serious nature.
Presently the TAO has put forth the argument that we should continue to lessen the severity of the anomaly created tweaks
by moving around the high and low barometric pressures that are the precursors to giant movements of the earths underground plates.
The TAO has enlisted the assistance of groups who believe they can assert equal pressure upon those plates that they predict will move as a result of the coming anomaly caused by Tsarmi’s absence.
The temptation to study tiny gradual shifts in time on a world is the draw for the Algo3//E8. They see the opportunity to use earth as some huge petri dish.
We believe that the Emperor will sense the change in the texture of time surrounding the planet once the rest of its solar system begins to feel the expanding time movement.
We are asking for a vote as early as the 12 of July. Look for a huge earthquake to occur in the Asiatic regions of this planet. The Algo3//E8′s anomaly map predicts an occurrence in the upper baltic areas of your planet prior to this event.
The Algo3//E8 believe they can alter that event to prevent the following earthquakes in the Asiatic regions of your planet. Thus righting time for the immediate circumstances involving the formation of breaks in time to prevent the touching of parallel worlds.
This is our notice that we will wait only until the 12 of July for a signal from those that have Tsarmi to return him. WE are 19 Mother consortiums representing Jn0//1 through 6 Regions of that which is known as the Milky Galaxy.
JbE
July 3rd, 2012 at 2:35 am
Joe, I believe it is either a manipulation of the true votes or simply the result of an organized minority of determined bigots to preserve the status quo.
Ginned up white fear that the OTW will take some sinister lead in government that will result in the kind of treatment to whites that their male led government leaders have routinely made the OTW citizens of this country endure.
Hence two thirds of white americans can be driven by fear or racism to vote not only white only, but for the party that implies that they are for white dominance in politics.
Lance.
July 3rd, 2012 at 2:45 am
Social Butterfly, I don’t understand why you believe that Anderson Cooper has “shone.” Unless you mean that he was a LSOS about his position until it became known that he would be publicly outed.
He is the typical rich coward who is attempting to use the current tolerance and support that we gays have worked so hard for to his advantage. He knows that the ratings at CNN are at an all time low and this is a feeble attempt to cash in on his coming out gay to increase the ratings of his show.
He did not make himself “visible” on his own volition. He knew it would not have the same value if it was seen that he was forced to admit that he was gay. So he pre-empted his outing by this grand standing.
Donald
July 3rd, 2012 at 3:10 am
Donald:
Have you noticed that all of the white pundits when they discuss the negatives that states can expect for not accepting Obamacare they talk in terms of the amount of money the states will lose.
Why is it whites can’t value life as much as they do money? It seems to me that it is so much as the billions of dollars those states will be losing as it is the number of lives that those states will cost their citizens.
How much efforts does it take to imagine how many people will die from the lack of proper medical attention. This does not count the quality of life that will decline because of the lack of prevention health care.
When it comes to abortion, the Right doesn’t hesitate to show the grisly results of some abortions. The Left should list the deaths in states that result from lack of proper medical attention because those states chose to not implement the ACA.
Let the citizens of those states hold their legislatures accountable. Arizona was able to get away with ignoring Medicaid for a decade because a few whites in that state hold enormous sway over the OTWs there. They did not want to provide for them medically so they were content to let them suffer and die prematurely.
The white conscious has its own unique non human way of functioning towards the OTW people they have police power over.
Paul
July 3rd, 2012 at 7:03 am
Lucy, thank you for pointing out the obvious to Roland and Nate, the 2 biology flunkies who clearly would push a woman under a bus for ‘not hatching her egg’ – maybe you two knuckleheads can go see Dr Suess’s Horton/Whoville movie and go lay an egg together : )
Health info: by the time people get to a ‘marriage counselor’ it’s usually a moot point, which is why a woman would benefit more, bc if she chooses to stay she needs help keeping her sanity (translation: gain communication skills, maybe that should be renamed: speak up for yourself more?) .
Try to remember that we are not that far above acting like chimps and most communication is happening on another level altogether, the unconsciously programmed one, (if want to shift that, you can to a great degree…) and the instinctual one (it’s not an out for explaining bad behavior, it’s biology, I could elaborate on this but I won’t right now).
Google the Johari model for a glimpse of what’s really going on in the unconscious soup, notice the ‘secret’ self – and yes, sometimes, most of the time, it’s even hidden from you (thus the word: secret) and that is likely why brain research can only go so far, the psyche is a deep/shallow, dark/light place. It’s tough to pattern or accurately predict anyone’s behavior based on that. It’s no wonder counseling and personality testing is so popular, peeps feel like they get a clue into their own uniqueness…
Anonz, is that really you, back and speaking on the subject of love? If so, you were missed, and your desk…well, it provides interesting information, but it’s the writer we’re all interested in, I’m very excited that you’re safe and sound.
I’ve been doing the blog back ass-wards lately, reading comments and commenting on that and then going back and reading posts (or the videos embedded) today is that last day of that, I’ll get caught up right now…
/SB, I’m glad Cooper did his announcement the way he did, and while I do think it was a pre-emptive maneuver on his part, it did not steal his thunder in my opinion. There’s a classy way to do things and a not so classy way to do things, when you’re under the gun is when you show which one you are, he came out in the classy department as far as I’m concerned.
Luv, Zen Lill
July 3rd, 2012 at 7:11 am
ahhh, and before anyone goes off half-cocked about me saying ‘speak up for yourself more’ I meant it in the kindest of ways, I know many a female pal who readily admits (after the fact) that she could’ve and should’ve been more verbal about her wants/needs. & if you’re going to start today, may I suggest keeping it brief, and no hinting, just say it (preferably) politely, if you’re not already underwater it’s helpful, and yes, males I’m talking to you, too, make your requests reasonable (and not too many: honey, can you pick this at his place and drop off my that at that place, wtf…NO is exactly how you’d respond to too much of that) and ask politely, we’re not your slaves, contrary to your chimpy beliefs : ) – ZL