At Los Angeles Times : Amber Dias couldn’t be sure what was wrong with her little boy. Chase was a bright, loving 2 1/2-year-old. But he didn’t talk much and rarely responded to his own name. He hated crowds and had a strange fascination with the underside of the family tractor. Searching the Internet, Amber found stories about other children like Chase — on websites devoted to autism. “He wasn’t the kid rocking in the corner, but it was just enough to scare me,” recalled Dias, who lives with her husband and three children on a dairy farm in the Central Valley town of Kingsburg. She took Chase to a psychologist in Los Angeles, who said the boy indeed had autism and urged the family to seek immediate treatment. But a team at the Fresno agency that arranges state-funded services for autism said Chase didn’t have the disorder. His problems, staff members said, were nothing more than common developmental delays that he would eventually outgrow. Unconvinced, Dias imagined the worst — that Chase would never have a girlfriend, a job, a place of his own. She pressed the agency to reconsider and hinted at a lawsuit. Finally, officials relented, and her son began receiving 40 hours a week of one-on-one behaviorial therapy. She had to hint about a lawsuit? God, that is awful. My wife’s grandparents lived in Kingsburg. For a while, we went down there from Fresno every week or two for dinner with the whole family. It’s total heartland territory. It feels like the Midwest, with all the agriculture and Scandinavian culture. Anyway, continue reading at the link .
Link:
Unraveling Autism
Victor Davis Hanson is the very best commentator on the illegal immigration crisis in California. Hanson’s don’t-miss book is Mexifornia: A State of Becoming .

Read the original:
VDH on Immigration, Multiculturalism and Amnesty
**Written by Doug Powers The proposed “industry funded fee” on fresh Christmas trees is being back-burnered. Nothing like some public backlash heading into an election season to put an administration in the holiday spirit. Actually, the delay appears to be in order to buy the Department of Agriculture some time to figure out a better way to explain to us why making things more expensive is always the best way to get a segment of the economy moving again. From The Hill : The Department of Agriculture on Thursday officially delayed a proposed 15 cent per tree fee paid by Christmas tree producers in order to fund a marketing and promotion effort to help boost tree sales. “Due to recent events, the regulations are stayed in order to provide all interested persons, including the Christmas tree industry and the general public, an opportunity to become more familiar with the program,” it said. Great tree industry promotion on the part of the Agriculture Department. Just as Christmas tree season approaches, they announced an initiative that gave consumers the impression that the cost of fresh Christmas trees would be rising. Traditionally that’s not the kind of news that gets businesses turnstyles moving faster, buy hey, who am I to argue with administration economists? **Written by Doug Powers Twitter @ThePowersThatBe
See the original post here:
‘Christmas Tree Tax’ Officially Chopped Down… For Now
AP – The U.S. Department of Agriculture says it will drop some sweeping reforms proposed for the meat industry if Congress cuts money for enforcing the changes.
Go here to see the original:
USDA: Funding cut could kill meat industry reforms
(AP)
Admin Update: Christmas Tree Tax: WH ‘Grinch’ Move Put on Hold 11/09/11 8:51PM _____________________ Yes, you can thank the Obama administration for this one (Heritage) President Obama’s Agriculture Department today announced that it will impose a new 15-cent charge on all fresh Christmas trees—the Christmas Tree Tax—to support a new Federal program to improve the image and marketing
Read this article:
Who’s Up For a Christmas Tree Tax?
AP – Is the Obama administration really taxing Christmas trees? No, but the White House said Wednesday it was reversing its decision to approve an industry-sponsored Christmas tree promotion program after conservatives accused the Agriculture Department of spoiling Christmas with a new tree tax.
Read more from the original source:
USDA yanks Christmas tree fees after criticism
(AP)
**Written by Doug Powers When I read that the federal government was getting involved in the Christmas tree industry, I couldn’t believe the first order of business wasn’t to remove the word “Christmas” from the name. Maybe that’ll come later, but for now the Obama administration is trying to help during a down economy, which of course involves a new business fee, which will cost consumers more. I can feel that recession lifting already. From Heritage.org : President Obama’s Agriculture Department today announced that it will impose a new 15-cent charge on all fresh Christmas trees — the Christmas Tree Tax — to support a new Federal program to improve the image and marketing of Christmas trees. In the Federal Register of November 8, 2011, Acting Administrator of Agricultural Marketing David R. Shipman announced that the Secretary of Agriculture will appoint a Christmas Tree Promotion Board. The purpose of the Board is to run a “program of promotion, research, evaluation, and information designed to strengthen the Christmas tree industry’s position in the marketplace; maintain and expend existing markets for Christmas trees; and to carry out programs, plans, and projects designed to provide maximum benefits to the Christmas tree industry” (7 CFR 1214.46(n)). And the program of “information” is to include efforts to “enhance the image of Christmas trees and the Christmas tree industry in the United States” (7 CFR 1214.10). The fee is 15 cents on all fresh trees for growers who sell more than 500 trees a year, a cost that will no doubt be passed along to consumers. I looked around a little and found an article in the Miami Herald that goes into this more from the growers’ perspective. The alleged point of the fee… or tax… or levy… whatever — is to stem the growth of the artificial tree industry to promote the sale of real trees (by making them a little more expensive?): Akin to similar programs that promote milk, beef and cotton, the new Christmas tree program will impose on U.S. domestic producers and importers an initial fee of 15 cents per tree. A 12-member board will direct the money to generic ads and other promotions, as well as research. The promotions, according to the Agriculture Department, will present “a favorable image of Christmas trees to the general public,” with the intent of improving the public “perception” of Christmas trees and, hence, their sales. Okay, the betting pool starts here: How long will it be until the first “Federal Christmas tree tax” waiver is issued? Probably when the first Christmas tree farm is unionized. If real tree sales don’t pick up as a result of this initiative, look for a “cash for artificial tree clunkers” program to be introduced by next Christmas to get the faux alternatives off the streets. **Written by Doug Powers Twitter @ThePowersThatBe
See the original post here:
A Christmas Tree Tax?
