On December 8th, 2010 my fellow classmate wrote the editorial entitled "What to do about these pesky drug cartels..." which dealt with the topic of how to handle the increasing violence in Mexico and other nations of Latin America due to the drug cartels and drug trade.
In many editorial pieces, the writer is trying to achieve an end goal within their article. This goal may be to better inform the reader, to reinforce a decision the reader has already made or to persuade the reader to change their position on any given topic. No matter what scenario the author is pursuing, the end result is that things are usually black and white in the article and clear right and wrong. These articles are reminiscent of the view Hollywood has taken on life where all life's problems can be addressed within a half hour sitcom and everything ends with a feel good wrapped up ending. Everything has and does have closure.
The article written by Dan bucks against this trend and better mirrors the reality of life and its choices. When dealing with the topic of what to do with the drug cartels, he points out several choices that the government can make or already has tried leading to results not as successful as projected or defined as failures. The end result is an article that ends without a Hollywood wrap up but leaves the reader with the question of "What is the right solution, if there is one, in handling the drug cartel and the violence associated with it?" It is a great article because it causes the reader to use critical skills and cognitive thinking to define the problem and come up with a proper solution of their own. The article can and does create discussion with others which creates better informed individuals as they debate the pros and cons of each choice that has been made or can be made.
I agree wholeheartedly with all of Dans assessments on the choices that the government may make in the future or already have in the past. We have already sent troops to other countries to the south to better deal with supply issues through the use of seizure techniques and training locals only to be greeted with limited success and failures. Even then, if we are not even able to police the production of marijuana or other narcotics in our own nation, how are we expecting to achieve total victory in other foreign nations? How are we to proceed without stepping on the sovereignty of other nations in a bid to fix a problem that we have helped to create and fuel in our own nation?
We can decriminalize marijuana and make it legal but there are many other drugs out there such as cocaine that add a power base to drug cartels. Even then, drugs are not just fueling the drug cartels as they dabble in other areas including human trafficking for prostitution or smuggling of immigrants and racketeering amongst many other illegal activities.
In my childhood a character appeared on a television show called "The Simpsons." One of his famous lines quoted were "Damned if you do, damned if you don't" which summarizes the view Dan has expressed in his article in a round about manner. No matter what choice our government may make in handling the rise of drug cartels and their violence, no choice is exactly a solution yet to not do anything is an even worse solution.
In the end, what can we truly do about this problem if anything at all?
Monday, December 13, 2010
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Blog Stage Seven
On November 2nd, 2010, the state of California voted on Proposition 19, a piece of legislation to decide whether or not to legalize marijuana in the state of California besides its current status of medical exemption. The proposition did not pass the state vote but supporters vow to bring the legislation up for another round of votes in the near future. The topic of legalization of marijuana has gained quite a bit of momentum in recent years with expansion of decriminalization and/or recognition of the legal uses of marijuana for medical purposes in over 15 states. The question, now raised is if, or when will Texas discussion the topic of the decriminalization of marijuana and its legalization and, if so, is legalization of marijuana a solution to seeking out a solution to a budget deficit we are facing?
Currently the state of Texas faces a shortfall in its budget for 2012 in the neighborhood of $18-24 billion dollars based on who is surveyed. The discussion of marijuana should be raised as a factor in addressing the deficit. One main area of the budget that marijuana would have a dramatic area of impact is the penal system.
Right now, projections have the Texas Penal System requesting $6.55 billion dollars, less than its current budget by 5%, yet has still been asked by the Governor to decrease its budget by 2%-5% more. To achieve that it will be required to lay off 3,100 guard officials while maintaining the same level of prisoners incarcerated. On average, about 12% of those incarcerated in Texas are due to drug related charges stemming from Marijuana. We can decrease those incarcerated by eliminating marijuana status of being an illegal controlled substance and raising the bar to acceptable levels of possession and use. Some of those incarcerated were due to intent to sell or transportation. With marijuana being freely available, it will eliminate the need for many of the mules transporting marijuana or those selling on the streets. With the decrease in incarcerated prisoners, who cost, on average $30,000 each, we can lower the necessary funds to the penal system while maintaining those cut jobs and providing a more safe work environment for both guards and prisoners as the incarcerated to guard ratio decreases.
During the 1920's and 30's, organized crime gained strength and power due to the prohibition of alcohol. In recent years drug cartels have gained the same level of strength and power due to the designation of marijuana as a controlled substance creating a war on drugs. This war on drugs is costly in both terms of manpower, monetary expenditure and lives. With the legalization of marijuana, we can eliminate one of the main pillars of support that give rise to the power of drug cartels. This will result in less funds being spent on the war on drugs, it will decrease crimes being committed and citizens being incarcerated by the state freeing up resources and those killed as a result of the actions put into motion by the drug trade will be saved.
In California, a state that is very similar to the state of Texas in the social demo-graphs of its citizens, it was projected that the legalization of marijuana would raise over $1 billion in revenues from taxes with most surveys pinning it at $1.4 billion in raised revenues. Besides the decrease in expenditure to pursue marijuana as an illegal controlled substance, revenue can and would be raised through its sales helping to decrease the budget deficit even more so.
There are many reasons why to support the legalization of marijuana with the biggest being the Texas creed. As Texans, we pride ourselves on personal liberties and individualism. We value our personal freedom and responsibility for our own selves in this life. This choice, this liberty we have that allows us to make a choice and exercise does not go against the liberties of others. We have to ask, do we need another form of government control in our lives to dictate and control a personal choice which goes against our belief in a decentralized limited government?
I will leave the concerns raised dealing with the topics of ethnics and morality for another day. For now, I leave you with understanding that the decriminalization and legalization of marijuana is one outlet of several that will be needed to address the upcoming budget crisis in Texas.
Currently the state of Texas faces a shortfall in its budget for 2012 in the neighborhood of $18-24 billion dollars based on who is surveyed. The discussion of marijuana should be raised as a factor in addressing the deficit. One main area of the budget that marijuana would have a dramatic area of impact is the penal system.
Right now, projections have the Texas Penal System requesting $6.55 billion dollars, less than its current budget by 5%, yet has still been asked by the Governor to decrease its budget by 2%-5% more. To achieve that it will be required to lay off 3,100 guard officials while maintaining the same level of prisoners incarcerated. On average, about 12% of those incarcerated in Texas are due to drug related charges stemming from Marijuana. We can decrease those incarcerated by eliminating marijuana status of being an illegal controlled substance and raising the bar to acceptable levels of possession and use. Some of those incarcerated were due to intent to sell or transportation. With marijuana being freely available, it will eliminate the need for many of the mules transporting marijuana or those selling on the streets. With the decrease in incarcerated prisoners, who cost, on average $30,000 each, we can lower the necessary funds to the penal system while maintaining those cut jobs and providing a more safe work environment for both guards and prisoners as the incarcerated to guard ratio decreases.
During the 1920's and 30's, organized crime gained strength and power due to the prohibition of alcohol. In recent years drug cartels have gained the same level of strength and power due to the designation of marijuana as a controlled substance creating a war on drugs. This war on drugs is costly in both terms of manpower, monetary expenditure and lives. With the legalization of marijuana, we can eliminate one of the main pillars of support that give rise to the power of drug cartels. This will result in less funds being spent on the war on drugs, it will decrease crimes being committed and citizens being incarcerated by the state freeing up resources and those killed as a result of the actions put into motion by the drug trade will be saved.
In California, a state that is very similar to the state of Texas in the social demo-graphs of its citizens, it was projected that the legalization of marijuana would raise over $1 billion in revenues from taxes with most surveys pinning it at $1.4 billion in raised revenues. Besides the decrease in expenditure to pursue marijuana as an illegal controlled substance, revenue can and would be raised through its sales helping to decrease the budget deficit even more so.
There are many reasons why to support the legalization of marijuana with the biggest being the Texas creed. As Texans, we pride ourselves on personal liberties and individualism. We value our personal freedom and responsibility for our own selves in this life. This choice, this liberty we have that allows us to make a choice and exercise does not go against the liberties of others. We have to ask, do we need another form of government control in our lives to dictate and control a personal choice which goes against our belief in a decentralized limited government?
I will leave the concerns raised dealing with the topics of ethnics and morality for another day. For now, I leave you with understanding that the decriminalization and legalization of marijuana is one outlet of several that will be needed to address the upcoming budget crisis in Texas.
Friday, November 12, 2010
Blog Stage Six
On Friday, Oct. 29th 2010 my fellow classmate, George Aguillon, wrote an article entitled “Abdallah’s Law.” This article discussed a new piece of legislation being spearheaded by Rep. Chris Turner referred to as “Abdallah’s Law.” The new law being proposed will allow the use of previous DWI convictions in other states to be admissible in the state of Texas. Previously, in the state of Texas, prior DWI convictions in other states were not a factor in cases pending in Texas. One of the reasons why this is an issue is that most states, such as Ohio which is a factor in the reasoning behind the law, constitute DUI’s as a misdemeanor while Texas constitutes DUI’s as a felony.
The article Abdallah’s Law is a well written article. The author showed he researched his topic extensively prior to posting an opinion on the subject. When reflecting his opinion, the author did not revert to the use of raw emotion to win over the reader but instead used scientific reasoning and observable data to reason with the reader. It allows the reader to be pulled into the subject, to become informed of the topic of debate and left to coming up with their own opinion without being forced or coheres into a conclusion or taking on the same side as that the author may carry.
Do I agree with the article? I am left undecided. I am fine with and support the proposal to include the admission of DUI convictions from other states in current states being prosecuted in Texas. There is no federal law dictating a standard for DUI and so it is left up to the states to interpret the consequences of a DUI. Some have an issue with this but forget that the United States is, in a way, a confederation of states that has unified under a national government but still each one retain a level of individual sovereignty. If Texas wants the ability to classify DUI’s at a felony level and allow admission in court of other states convictions they should retain the right to as long as they are not prosecuted for those crimes committed that violated those state laws and not the laws of Texas.
However the problem I see with the current law is the structure that follows. If previous convictions are allowed, what will then happen? Longer sentencing for those convicted in the state of Texas? More individuals placed behind bars? Are the current laws and programs in place a successful deterrent towards those that drive while under the influence so that if other individuals come into the state it will deter them as well? How much will the unintended consequences of this law cost the tax payers? One cannot put a price on life so if the author addressed this subject with maybe comparable statistics such as a decrease in the amount of roadway fatalities with an increase in the severity of DUI laws that would go above and beyond in addressing many tax paying citizens questions or concerns.
Again, in my opinion George Aguillon wrote an excellent opinion article.
The article Abdallah’s Law is a well written article. The author showed he researched his topic extensively prior to posting an opinion on the subject. When reflecting his opinion, the author did not revert to the use of raw emotion to win over the reader but instead used scientific reasoning and observable data to reason with the reader. It allows the reader to be pulled into the subject, to become informed of the topic of debate and left to coming up with their own opinion without being forced or coheres into a conclusion or taking on the same side as that the author may carry.
Do I agree with the article? I am left undecided. I am fine with and support the proposal to include the admission of DUI convictions from other states in current states being prosecuted in Texas. There is no federal law dictating a standard for DUI and so it is left up to the states to interpret the consequences of a DUI. Some have an issue with this but forget that the United States is, in a way, a confederation of states that has unified under a national government but still each one retain a level of individual sovereignty. If Texas wants the ability to classify DUI’s at a felony level and allow admission in court of other states convictions they should retain the right to as long as they are not prosecuted for those crimes committed that violated those state laws and not the laws of Texas.
However the problem I see with the current law is the structure that follows. If previous convictions are allowed, what will then happen? Longer sentencing for those convicted in the state of Texas? More individuals placed behind bars? Are the current laws and programs in place a successful deterrent towards those that drive while under the influence so that if other individuals come into the state it will deter them as well? How much will the unintended consequences of this law cost the tax payers? One cannot put a price on life so if the author addressed this subject with maybe comparable statistics such as a decrease in the amount of roadway fatalities with an increase in the severity of DUI laws that would go above and beyond in addressing many tax paying citizens questions or concerns.
Again, in my opinion George Aguillon wrote an excellent opinion article.
Friday, October 29, 2010
Blog Stage Five
Will the Republicans gain control of the House and Senate on election day? Will Californians be the first state to vote on and make the drug Marijuana legal? This election day, November 2nd, 2010, there is excitement in the air as many of these questions and more will be answered after months of speculation. Voters will turn out in mass to the voting booths set up across the nation to decide which candidates will help carry this nation and decide the direction we will head towards for the next few years on both a national and local level. Besides voting for candidates, voters will be faced with many other propositions that will directly affect their local community. Unfortunately, looking at the ballot this year, I noticed one piece of legislation that is absent but is desired by many in my local area; the annexation of Pflugerville into the Austin Community College district.
Pflugerville is a community that started off the 1980’s as only a city of several hundred citizens but has recently been certified as having over 51,000 residents as of early 2010. With the tremendous growth in the community, the city has begun to show its own strength and separate identity from the larger cities of Round Rock and Austin by attracting dozens of major commercial companies and larger industrial corporations bringing growth and future to the community. With the explosion in growth and the housing population there has been an establishment of new educational facilities but one glaring omission is access to an institute of higher learning.
To be annexed into the Austin Community College district there are several steps involved. Mainly a resident must gather the signatures of at least 5% of the voting public in the given community. After a series of steps that involve the signatures being turned in and verified for accuracy along with an explanation to the community if annexation election passes, they are placed up for vote in the general elections in either May or November. In the general elections the community as a whole can decide whether to be part of the Austin Community College district.
Many residents have expressed concern for being annexed because it will lead to higher taxes on property. It will lead to a property tax increase of $.09 per $100 dollar assessed property value. This sounds like a very expensive proposition but on the value of an average $160,000 home, it only amounts to an extra $110 a year or, each month, about $12. The increase is barely noticeable on an average mortgage payment of $1,420 a month.
Some residents have stated that the cost of community college is already low compared to a four year university. Right now the cost of attending Austin Community College out of district is on average around $4,900 vs the cost of in-district is $1,700. The savings of annexation can be, on average, up to $6,000 or more on a two year program. As of 2008 there were over 1,177 households in Pflugerville out of 10,000+ that have an individual attending Austin Community College that are paying these higher “Out of District” fees. Looking towards the future over half the households have children under the age of 18 that can potentially benefit as well from lowered fees at Austin Community College. With an only $.09 per $100 property tax increase, you SAVE money by paying the property tax over the average ownership of the property vs the upfront cost of college.
Recently, as of last week, I preformed an informal study of 32 parents at Hendrickson High School during a recent layover after a marching band practice. I discovered that 10 children will be moving to within Austin city limits to attend the community college after graduation. They are relocating to pay a lower fee and due to the lack of community transportation to and from Austin Community College and Pflugerville. That is a loss of potential revenue in the form of employment and sales taxes due to the loss of residents departing the local area. The loss of residents are ones who may not return later on with the addition of their higher education that may benefit the local area with future businesses. Also, due to the fact that the payments are higher, many are applying for student aid from the government which means that even if you do not pay through property taxes specifically to be apart of Austin Community College, your tax dollars will still, in the end, be paying for these individuals maybe even themselves or their own family to attend the institution of higher learning.
It may not be enough time to be on the general ballet this November but the annexation of Pflugerville into Austin Community College district is a goal we should all set in the elections to come. Everyone has the opportunity to benefit from those who cannot afford an education, those already enrolled to those that will reap the benefits of having a better educated work force and community to live along side. It is planning for the future for those that may attend or have family that may attend in the years to come as the cost of higher education goes up each year with the most recent increase being, on average, 7.9% across the nation.
Pflugerville is a community that started off the 1980’s as only a city of several hundred citizens but has recently been certified as having over 51,000 residents as of early 2010. With the tremendous growth in the community, the city has begun to show its own strength and separate identity from the larger cities of Round Rock and Austin by attracting dozens of major commercial companies and larger industrial corporations bringing growth and future to the community. With the explosion in growth and the housing population there has been an establishment of new educational facilities but one glaring omission is access to an institute of higher learning.
To be annexed into the Austin Community College district there are several steps involved. Mainly a resident must gather the signatures of at least 5% of the voting public in the given community. After a series of steps that involve the signatures being turned in and verified for accuracy along with an explanation to the community if annexation election passes, they are placed up for vote in the general elections in either May or November. In the general elections the community as a whole can decide whether to be part of the Austin Community College district.
Many residents have expressed concern for being annexed because it will lead to higher taxes on property. It will lead to a property tax increase of $.09 per $100 dollar assessed property value. This sounds like a very expensive proposition but on the value of an average $160,000 home, it only amounts to an extra $110 a year or, each month, about $12. The increase is barely noticeable on an average mortgage payment of $1,420 a month.
Some residents have stated that the cost of community college is already low compared to a four year university. Right now the cost of attending Austin Community College out of district is on average around $4,900 vs the cost of in-district is $1,700. The savings of annexation can be, on average, up to $6,000 or more on a two year program. As of 2008 there were over 1,177 households in Pflugerville out of 10,000+ that have an individual attending Austin Community College that are paying these higher “Out of District” fees. Looking towards the future over half the households have children under the age of 18 that can potentially benefit as well from lowered fees at Austin Community College. With an only $.09 per $100 property tax increase, you SAVE money by paying the property tax over the average ownership of the property vs the upfront cost of college.
Recently, as of last week, I preformed an informal study of 32 parents at Hendrickson High School during a recent layover after a marching band practice. I discovered that 10 children will be moving to within Austin city limits to attend the community college after graduation. They are relocating to pay a lower fee and due to the lack of community transportation to and from Austin Community College and Pflugerville. That is a loss of potential revenue in the form of employment and sales taxes due to the loss of residents departing the local area. The loss of residents are ones who may not return later on with the addition of their higher education that may benefit the local area with future businesses. Also, due to the fact that the payments are higher, many are applying for student aid from the government which means that even if you do not pay through property taxes specifically to be apart of Austin Community College, your tax dollars will still, in the end, be paying for these individuals maybe even themselves or their own family to attend the institution of higher learning.
It may not be enough time to be on the general ballet this November but the annexation of Pflugerville into Austin Community College district is a goal we should all set in the elections to come. Everyone has the opportunity to benefit from those who cannot afford an education, those already enrolled to those that will reap the benefits of having a better educated work force and community to live along side. It is planning for the future for those that may attend or have family that may attend in the years to come as the cost of higher education goes up each year with the most recent increase being, on average, 7.9% across the nation.
Friday, October 15, 2010
Blog Stage Four
Recently Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo made a call for a new “Driving While Ability Impaired” law to go after those with a blood alcohol level under .08. In response Radley Balko wrote an opinionated article that called to abolish such drunk driving laws. On October 12th, 2010, the politically charged blog “Grits for Breakfast” published an opinion piece entitled “Balko: Abolish DWI laws to focus on impaired driving” by Scott Hanson in regards to both the suggestion for a new law and the article piece written by Radley Balko. The author, Scott Hanson, is a respected individual in the journalist field as he has contributed several pieces to well known news media outlets.
The opinion article is written in support of Radley Balkos rebuttal to the suggestion of a new law by Police Chief Acevedo. The article is written for general audiences since this new law will end up causing a ripple effect that will affect all of us as citizens. The enforcement of this new law will tie up manpower of the police force which will result in higher costs and lower standards of public safety. He maintains what feels is a neutral tone throughout the article and publishes statistical facts that back up his opinion to show it is not just a subjective opinion but has observable scientific data.
The opinion piece written by Scott Hanson is based around the case made to justify such a law by Radley Balko. The article utilizes statistical information to back up the authors opinion that Radley Balko has a valid point in reasoning that we should abolish the DWI laws. Scott Hansons article utilizes statistical data to establish creditability for his opinion besides his educational background and experience. It has been established through research and studies that people are willing to put trust and faith within the results of studies if it utilizes a simple system of numbers. The thing, though, is that the data itself may be neutral but how it is represented can be manipulated by the individual who is presenting it to the public. How Scott Hanson presents the information, it is in an effective manner that has helped to convince and reinforce my feeling that Scott Hansons opinion is valid and correct and is something we, the citizens of Austin and the state of Texas, should look into doing.
The opinion article is written in support of Radley Balkos rebuttal to the suggestion of a new law by Police Chief Acevedo. The article is written for general audiences since this new law will end up causing a ripple effect that will affect all of us as citizens. The enforcement of this new law will tie up manpower of the police force which will result in higher costs and lower standards of public safety. He maintains what feels is a neutral tone throughout the article and publishes statistical facts that back up his opinion to show it is not just a subjective opinion but has observable scientific data.
The opinion piece written by Scott Hanson is based around the case made to justify such a law by Radley Balko. The article utilizes statistical information to back up the authors opinion that Radley Balko has a valid point in reasoning that we should abolish the DWI laws. Scott Hansons article utilizes statistical data to establish creditability for his opinion besides his educational background and experience. It has been established through research and studies that people are willing to put trust and faith within the results of studies if it utilizes a simple system of numbers. The thing, though, is that the data itself may be neutral but how it is represented can be manipulated by the individual who is presenting it to the public. How Scott Hanson presents the information, it is in an effective manner that has helped to convince and reinforce my feeling that Scott Hansons opinion is valid and correct and is something we, the citizens of Austin and the state of Texas, should look into doing.
Friday, October 1, 2010
Blog Stage Three
On September 29th, 2010 an opinion piece was published on the statesman.com entitled “Texas messes with Islam.” The article deals with the recent changes to education materials such as textbooks that the Texas school board have passed.
This article was written by an unknown author. Due to the authors anonymity, I am unable to verify their credentials. The article, though, is posted on the statesman.com therefore the individual must have a background that justifies his presence on the website. Why? Readers place trust in their media companies to keep them properly informed. If media companies are found to dispel facts or information that are incorrect, it would cause their readers to lose trust and faith in their reporting resulting in a loss of readership. It is also viewed as a civic responsibility of the media companies to properly inform their readers of current and political events, a distinguish many companies strive for.
I feel that the writers anonymity is a bit of an issue. One of the reasons why to write an opinionated article versus a straight factual article is that you do not have to be biased but are there to present and persuade a reader to your viewpoint you are presenting. Displaying your name and being proud of your work displays strength which translate into leadership to the casual reader which helps to gain their trust and to have them view more favorably your argument and maybe even have them believe in the same view point you are presenting.
The article deals with the topic of Texas recently passing motions to limit the references to Islam in textbooks. The author has aimed the article so this event is viewed in a negative light. The main focus of his article is not so much the change that is being presented but society being more concerned about political correctness then allowing the students to have access to an unbiased total view of the material that will better inform and challenge them.
His arguments are based on more of an opinion and observation then scientific fact or measurable data therefore it is hard to back up his claims he is presenting. The writer can better back up his claims based upon studies that have already been preformed in the field of psychology. Since he discusses “material that will better inform and challenge them” then he can focus on the field of cognitive psychology due to its field of study in the higher mentality processes of the human condition and how denying all opportunities can affect a human being and their behavior in the future.
The writer needs to understand, though, that there is always going to be a skewed perspective or biased view in any material written. In high school we did a project where the class was given ten factual bits of information and were told to write a summarization including all those facts. Each of our reports written were different from one another due to social conditions and our life's experiences guiding us on how we presented the facts. What he considers bias is not the same to others whereas what he views the truth may not be the same for others.
I agree overall with the tone of the article but not the facts or perspective that was presented by the writer. Also I am understanding as well that there is so much out there that is of historical significance I know we cannot expect our children to learn and understand every aspect and that some items need to be left out if viewed as of least importance. If they are of importance to you and those are your children then it should be up to you, not a text book or an educator to present those views or historical events and values to your child.
This article was written by an unknown author. Due to the authors anonymity, I am unable to verify their credentials. The article, though, is posted on the statesman.com therefore the individual must have a background that justifies his presence on the website. Why? Readers place trust in their media companies to keep them properly informed. If media companies are found to dispel facts or information that are incorrect, it would cause their readers to lose trust and faith in their reporting resulting in a loss of readership. It is also viewed as a civic responsibility of the media companies to properly inform their readers of current and political events, a distinguish many companies strive for.
I feel that the writers anonymity is a bit of an issue. One of the reasons why to write an opinionated article versus a straight factual article is that you do not have to be biased but are there to present and persuade a reader to your viewpoint you are presenting. Displaying your name and being proud of your work displays strength which translate into leadership to the casual reader which helps to gain their trust and to have them view more favorably your argument and maybe even have them believe in the same view point you are presenting.
The article deals with the topic of Texas recently passing motions to limit the references to Islam in textbooks. The author has aimed the article so this event is viewed in a negative light. The main focus of his article is not so much the change that is being presented but society being more concerned about political correctness then allowing the students to have access to an unbiased total view of the material that will better inform and challenge them.
His arguments are based on more of an opinion and observation then scientific fact or measurable data therefore it is hard to back up his claims he is presenting. The writer can better back up his claims based upon studies that have already been preformed in the field of psychology. Since he discusses “material that will better inform and challenge them” then he can focus on the field of cognitive psychology due to its field of study in the higher mentality processes of the human condition and how denying all opportunities can affect a human being and their behavior in the future.
The writer needs to understand, though, that there is always going to be a skewed perspective or biased view in any material written. In high school we did a project where the class was given ten factual bits of information and were told to write a summarization including all those facts. Each of our reports written were different from one another due to social conditions and our life's experiences guiding us on how we presented the facts. What he considers bias is not the same to others whereas what he views the truth may not be the same for others.
I agree overall with the tone of the article but not the facts or perspective that was presented by the writer. Also I am understanding as well that there is so much out there that is of historical significance I know we cannot expect our children to learn and understand every aspect and that some items need to be left out if viewed as of least importance. If they are of importance to you and those are your children then it should be up to you, not a text book or an educator to present those views or historical events and values to your child.
Friday, September 17, 2010
Blog Stage Two
"Austin Grocer Unhappy Her Story is in Perry Ad"
On September 15th, 2010 The American-Stateman published an article by Brian Gaar titled"Austin Grocer Unhappy Her Story is in Perry Ad." The article revolved around citizen Peg McCoy who was displeased to find that her store, Farm to Market Grocery Store, was featured in an ad by Rick Perry who is currently running for re-election for governor of the state of Texas. The issue lies within the fact her store logo was used within the ad without permission. The citizen requested her store be removed from future advertisements which the campaign committee for Rick Perry has failed to do. They stand by the use that the use of the logo was due to public domain; video was shot from a public sidewalk therefore it is allowed for public use.
This argument and the use of the logo because it is seen in public domain disturbs me greatly. I work for several non-profit groups and prior to any published media or documentation we search out and receive permission (or are denied) by all individuals involved including business and locations. This store, used in the Rick Perry ad, now looks to the observer as if they are endorsing the candidate or were recipients of the policies put into effect by the governor. The use of “public domain” is disturbing. What if I am just walking along a sidewalk and a camera crew films me then slaps me in a commercial talking about how common men support Rick Perry? It now will look, to the observer that I support Rick Perry due to the ad.
I feel this article is deserving of the attention of other readers as it provides an insight into how a political campaign works. It reminds the readers that, in the world of politics, do not take everything for face value and tat there might be another side to each story presented.
Participation Topic #1 - Discussion Board
Exceptionalism- the state of being special, exceptional or unique; the belief that a particular nation does not conform to an established norm
The question is raised “Do Texans exhibit Texas Exceptionalism” and I believe that the answer is a resounding yes based on the definition listed by Wikipedia. Why do Texans believe that their state is an exceptional place though?
Texas is very unique from other states that form the United States of America. To begin with, Texas has a very unique historical background that differs greatly from most of the rest of the United States. Texas was part of, originally, several other foreign countries prior to its admission into the Union. Also, at the time of its acceptance into the United States, Texas was its own independent country, a distinction that only Texas can lay claim to. With the multiple changing of hands, Texas has a very unique and differentiating cultural and demographic make up then the rest of the country. It belongs in a league of only a few states that have a major “minority” make-up of its citizens. Its size dwarfs not only the other states that make up the United States but is also larger then many other countries in the world with a GNP that also rivals theirs as well. Within the United States, three of the top ten cities by population are located within the boundaries of the state of Texas. The state is vastly rich in resources and is self sufficient unlike many other states where if they were cut off from the rest of the United States would suffer greatly.
With all of these facts, Texans display a sense of pride within themselves that is not exhibited in other parts of the country. This is a positive factor as it promotes involvement within their state and their communities. With citizens that take pride in their communities, are positive & more involved produce citizens that are more well informed of the decisions that they make politically as well as promotes civic & government involvement. [Link]
Friday, May 14, 2010
Blog Stage Eight
Re:
On Monday, May 3, 2010 Francella aka Ms. Political wrote the blog article entitled
Napolitano calls Arizona immigration law a ‘cry of frustration’. After reading her blog entry I would have to disagree with her position on the topic and the foundation of her blog entry itself.
Francella wrote the subjective question “....what happens if I forget my wallet and get pulled over and have nothing? Are they going to ship me away?” With that statement I realized Francella had not taken the time to actually read the new law she was arguing against. Her article is based upon her reaction to the subjective views others have posed and not one she had gained herself. Within the law, if she had read it, gave her the answer which stated “......a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person. Any person who is arrested shall have the person’s immigration status determined before the person is released. The person’s immigration status shall be verified with the federal government pursuant to 8 united states code section 1373(c).” At that point, after all attempts by the state to clear you you would be turned over to federal authorities for processing. The law points out the different forms of legal identification pieces that are legal and what will transpire of none are present. It is no different then what currently is going on.
Francella wrote that “......hispanics like myself who have never even stepped on Mexican land are being pulled over because they look hispanic.” This law is not even in effect so what cause would officers have to pull individuals over for immigration status right now? The new law even states “A PEACE OFFICER MAY LAWFULLY STOP ANY PERSON WHO IS OPERATING A MOTOR VEHICLE IF THE OFFICER HAS REASONABLE SUSPICION TO BELIEVE THE PERSON IS IN VIOLATION OF ANY CIVIL TRAFFIC LAW AND THIS SECTION.” For someone to be pulled over they have to be in violation of a civil traffic law or other probable suspicious activity. Recently when I was at the side of the roadway dealing with car issues a police officer stopped to assist. During the course of assistance he requested registration and a drivers license. This I did freely. As a citizen choosing to live under a ruling government it is an agreement that under natural law I extend some of my civil rights and liberties to enable the executive power above protect the others. This officer was doing his duty and being cautious. It happens everyday to everybody. Why the sudden outpouring if it only happening to hispanics in Arizona. Why does it suddenly gain the title of racial profiling?
My issue is that she raises the issue of the law recently passed in Arizona dealing with the crime of illegal immigration but then mixes up a crime with the process of legal immigration. She wrote “There has to be a better way of cracking down on immigration reform.” This law is dealing with a felony under Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, "Improper Entry by Alien.” It has nothing to do with the process of immigration or its reform, both of which are legal processes in the United States. It is addressing the issue of a criminal act and an enforcement of a law that is already in place set by the federal government.
The author is right that this nation is a nation built upon generations of immigrants. My family, including myself, are immigrants but we are legal immigrants. We processed through the system, we paid our fees, we did what was necessary. Why do we have to abide by the system while others do not? This law is dealing with a crime that is not being addressed, not immigration itself. If Arizona does not enforce a law then it makes passing and creation of laws mute. If you are lax on one law then you become lax on all.
The author repeatedly refereed to racial profiling. You cannot but help that statistics are against an individual group. If a teenage boy is pulled over and get a ticket where are the shouts of age discrimination? Statistically speaking, young males between 18-25 are involved in 21% of all fatal accidents which were caused by wreck-less driving and speeding prior. You cannot help but the fact that right now a large percentage of people that will be caught by this new law will be hispanic due to the fact that right now statistically speaking a large majority of those that are illegal are of hispanic in nature or the fact that in the area that this law takes affect a large percentage of the population is hispanic.
Again overall I do agree with the Francella that immigration reform is needed but that was not suppose to be the basis of the article which drifted and intermixed two separate topics as if they were the same. Original intent was the law in Arizona dealing with a felony which Francella lost me on. Her article forced me to look up the law personally due to the fact I could not believe that simple questions such as the ones she asked were not answered in this new law. Researching the law caused me to become her opposition. I just wish the author had taken the time to properly research and even read the new law before writing a subjective opinionated piece with an informed perspective and not based on the emotions derived from the perspective of others that have influenced her through their own writings. Writings based on pure speculation cause me to lose faith in the writer.
Monday, May 3, 2010
Blog Stage Seven
Harry Reid and Immigration in the United States by Scott Cameron
Abortion. Religion. Civil Unions. Death Penalty. Many of these topics of discussion have been at the forefront of politics and debates within the citizens of the United States for years now. One topic, however, that is easily overlooked yet has been brimming under the surface since the foundation of the first colonies that would later become the United States of America has been the discussion of immigration.
Immigration has always been an issue for the citizens within the United States since the foundation of this nation. It boils to the surface in cycles which match the cycles of the waves of immigrants that come to this nation from differentiating geological locations with each wave and in time with the cycle of domestic growth, recessions, and depressions. The issue is so deeply imbedded that we have even had major political parties that had their platform based solely around the ideals of immigration such as the Know Nothing Party. during the 1840’s and 1850’s.
Recently the Senate Majority leader, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, spoke up for the need of immigration reform. At a speech given in Las Vegas, Nevada on April 10th, 2010, Senator Harry Reid stated to the crowd “We need to do this this year” in reference to immigration reform. Both houses of congress have their agendas filled with many other issues prior to recess including nominations for Supreme Court, bank reform, and the climate bill which the topic of immigration might push to the side. I question the timing and the motives for taking up the topic of immigration in the houses of congress; why here and why now?
The hispanic population is the largest minority population within the United States. The hispanic vote is fast becoming one of the most influential and sought out vote within this nation. In the state of Nevada the hispanic vote makes up 12% of the registered voters and is one of the fastest rising groups of voters in the state. Hispanics are a majority democrat but tend to lag behind in actually voting vs. other counterparts in the state and nation. Currently Harry Reid is trailing his state in most major surveys and polls by several percentage points in the upcoming elections this fall.
I question if Senator Harry Reid intentions are genuine or not. If Senator Harry Reid has been apart of the Senate now for 23 years why now suddenly make immigration reform a top priority by dumping other initiatives already well underway in the houses? Why after 23 years suddenly make it a top priority that needs to be passed in a matter of several weeks?
It seems that Senator Harry Reid is latching onto the issue of immigration in a desire to gain a topic for his platform to run on since right now there is no strong topic of discussion for political parties to latch onto this upcoming election year. I question if Senator Harry Reid is reaching out onto the issue of immigration to attract the hispanic voters to the poll both knowing that a majority of them are democrat and will vote for partisan candidates which would gain him votes. I question if Senator Harry Reid is picking up this platform is abusing his senior and high ranking position within the Senate to control the agenda for personal gains or manipulate the system in his favor.
Immigration reform needs to be done but it needs to be done right. It needs to be preformed under the context that it is what is best for the nation and the interests of the nation versus the politicians own personal interests and the interests of special interest groups. This topic has been taken up many times beforehand but have been hindered by personal opinion and politics that have led to weakened and failed results that have led us to the indecisiveness that our nation now suffers from on a daily basis. This political issue has been raised many times beforehand and been dealt with in the same manner as in years gone by. History has a tendency to repeat itself.
Please, politicians, let us learn from our past and mistakes committed previous so we are not doomed to repeat them again in the future.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Blog Stage Six
Response to "Gay Marriage Being Counted in the Census Bureau" by Danielle Zamora
When viewing the world of politics and law, it is imperative for an individual to leave their own personal convictions and values at the door. The individual must base their choices solely on an interpretation based on how the laws are written, the constitution that this nation is founded upon and remember to always place the greater good of the nation and others above what your own values and beliefs may be telling you to do.
I recently read the blog commentary written by Danielle Zamora titled “Gay Marriage Being Counted in the Census Bureau” and I feel that she has failed to keep this in mind. The final outcome of her article is against the legalization of same sex marriage. I agree with that final outcome but I believe that the logic that led her to that conclusion is flawed and my view on why the definition should be untouched at this time comes from a different prospective.
The majority of the article uses religion as a basis of decision for argument against same sex marriage. Her commentary even states that we are a Christian nation. The United States was founded as being ambiguous towards religion. We do not have a state religion and have purposely separated state from religion and cannot let religion define our interpretation and creation of law.
The author is correct in that the definition of marriage as being between a “man and woman” was defined as coming from religious interpretation. If we open up marriage to interpretation and change where is the end point or stoppage to change. If we open up and allow same sex marriages then we should open up to the idea of polygamy. If marriage is no longer between man and woman who is to say that a man cannot claim that he is now married to his goat or an inanimate object? Doesn’t that individual have as much as a right as the same sex couple that want to change the definition of marriage to what they deem fit as being proper or what a valid marriage is in todays world?
If claiming that holding onto the definition of marriage as being between man and woman is discrimination and imposes upon the freedom and rights of others then I ask who is to set the boundary or deny the rights of all other groups other then just same sex couples?
If you are to base your decision solely on religion then you have now crossed the line of separating religion from state and are allowing religion to dictate policies. You are basing an interpretation on a personal belief. You also crossed the line of denying the rights of and infringing upon the rights of other citizens of this nation.
I believe strongly that there is no problem unless there is a solution. The solution to this issue? I believe that the governments involvement in using marriage as a defining characteristic of an individual should be removed. Being defined or given different treatment based on your marriage status creates a society of division and inequality. Citizens are taxed differently, given different rights and treated differently based on this one characteristic.
Since marriage is a definition and institution created by religion it should stay within the confines of religion itself and out of national state matters and policies. If same sex couples or other citizens of this nation want recognition of their unions as official marriages then it is up to the religion they follow who defined marriage to discuss the topic of same sex marriages and whether or not they are authorized or deemed “moral” in their eyes. Yes it would require reworking of current laws but the establishment of an unbiased nation of equality would be worth the time and effort.
Through this choice everyone is equal and the same in the eyes of the law. There is no discrimination, nobody is forced to abide by a law they do not believe in or was written based on a personal biased view of the world. It is up to the individuals religion to decide the moral and ethnical implications of their lifestyle choices and whether or not to recognize those individuals choices.
Monday, April 5, 2010
Blog Stage Five
New Abortion Laws in Ohio by Scott Cameron
Imagine. You are hungry and so you enter a restaurant to have a cheeseburger. After you place an order you are escorted outside where you are forced against your choice and will to first met and become familiar with the cow you are about to digest in the burger. You ask why you have to do this. The reply of the staff state it is now policy due to a change in law that granted an interest group, Vegans, power over and control of a portion of your civil liberties and privacy.
Sound like a far fetched idea? In the state of Ohio it can soon may become a reality. Recently a series of laws were passed dealing with the issue of abortion with some of those laws as intrusive and trampling of your personal freedoms as the idea posed involving the vegan group. In one instance, before you receive an abortion you are required to undergo an ultrasound and listen to the heartbeat of the unborn fetus.
The founding fathers of our nation based the development of this country on the idea of the Law of Nature by Locke. The belief is that everyone has a law of reason in which individuals will reframe from causing harm to another individuals own life, liberty, or property. Locke also was strong in the separation of the church and state. In this nation, with its founding, some rights are extended to the government for protection of others and to prevent the rule of the tyranny of the majority/minority over others as laws passed for a special interest or group may be good for one but not the other and the focus is of the greater good of the nation and its citizens.
In the instance of Ohio the law of nature and the position of the government in those citizens life have failed. The rule of a special interest group has overruled and infringed upon the rights and liberties of another group of individuals. The law makers that passed this law were influenced upon their own beliefs with many coming from their religious beliefs and passed the law due to personal interest over the interests of their constituents and the better of the nation.
I see the future. When you go to use a piece of paper you must first be escorted outside where you sit under the shade of a tree and look at it five minutes prior to your use of paper to appease new laws passed in the interest of environmental groups concerned with the life and death of plant life in the world. This future is the direction this nation is heading thanks, in part, to the recent law passed by Ohio and the framework it has provided for future laws to deprive individuals of their liberties and rights.
Assignment # 5
Blog Stage Five: Original editorial or commentary #1
>> View/Complete Assignment: Blog Stage Five: Original editorial or commentary #1
Stage Five: Original editorial or commentary #1
Deadline: April 5, 2010
Write a substantial (250-500 words) and original editorial or commentary about U.S. national government. Post this article to your blog.
Send me the direct link to the post you’ve written using Blackboard’s Assignment feature before the deadline.
>> View/Complete Assignment: Blog Stage Five: Original editorial or commentary #1
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Blog Stage Four
FROM THE EDITOR: Why do newspapers endorse candidates? Because they should
Recently the primaries were held on March 2nd here in the state of Texas. Leading up to the primaries. Several newspapers and other media outlets announced who had their support. Up until this point in time I never thought much of the practice but after taking American Government now for several weeks I began to question the practice.
On October 25, 2009 an editor named Bob Unger wrote an editorial piece for the Standards-Times newspaper based on the east cost titled “Why Do Newspapers Endorse Candidates? Because They Should.” Bob Unger has been the editor in cheif at the Standards Times now for five years. Unfortunately I have not been able to find any other qualifications on the individual but know that for an individual to achieve that position he must be a well respected experienced individual.
In the article “Why Do Newspapers Endorse Candidates? Because They Should” Bob Unger makes the argument on why his newspaper makes a choice to endorse a candidate that is running for an elected position. He also continues on to point out not just why they chose a candidate but the criteria and how they make their selection. This article is written so that any everyday reader can pick up the article and understand the newspapers position and the choices that they make. The article helped me to better understand this practice but even with the information I still have to question the practice and how it is carried out.
Most individuals give a level of trust to the media and what information is being disseminated. Unfortunately, newspapers are written by men which have a proven track record through history of being incorrect or corrupt time and time again. There is a history of Bob Unger and his newspaper being incorrect in their stories or information distributed to the public such as, for example, an episode dealing with a “Little Red Book Hoax.”If Bob Unger and his media have a track record of being incorrect then how do you know they are correct in the candidate they endorse? Bob wrote that they interview each candidate for an hour as part of the selection process. What questions do they ask? Who chooses these questions? What were their responses? Bob Unger fails to make any mention of this in the article. He states that it is up to himself and one other individual to make the choice. That places a tremendous power in two individuals hand, more power then their should be. What if these individuals chose a candidate for other then what they feel is best for their readers? With their position, there is a large possibility or temptation for corruption to rear its ugly head into the process.
The main issue I have with the process is it defeats the democratic process. It is up to the voters to decide if the candidate best represents their interests. The public is very persuasive and easily influenced by outside sources. How many voters would of voted for a candidate other then what the newspaper endorsed or how many voters that were undecided made up their minds for the endorsed candidate drawing votes from what may of been the opposition? Even up to election day, depending upon surveys and studies, there may be between 5%-10% or more voters undecided. The newspaper just influenced the outcome of the election.
I understand the medias freedom of speech and the right to express their opinion but I believe that newspapers and other media outlets should hold themselves to a higher standard and only report just factual information and leave it up to the voters to decide who, in their own view best represents their interests. Voters gain confidence in their choice and decision. If an external factor makes their decision they may end up unhappy with their voting choice and gain cynicism about their governmental system and withdrawal from the democratic process which undermines and destroys the foundation of what allows our nation to function.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Blog Stage Three
Analysis: Untruths have consequences in Politics
Ron Fournier is the acting bureau chief for the Associated Press formally working as the AP’s chief political writer and online political editor. His background is extensive in the field of politics and, at one point in 2006, was asked to fill an “advisory role” in communications for John McCains presidential campaign. Ron Fournier is a knowledgeable and well respected individual in his field.(source: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ron_Fournier)
Recently Ron Fournier wrote the Opinion Article Analysis: Untruths have Consequences in Politics for the Associated Press on Sat, Feb 20th, 2010. (source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100220/ap_on_an/us_consequences_of_untruths_analysis) The main portion of the article written discusses Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney and the truth, or lack there of, in several speeches given recently including highlights of a speech given this week at the Conservative Political Action Conference
The target audience upon first reading felt aimed at democrats as it had a majority of the article dedicated to a Republican who is a possible candidate for a presidential run in 2012 but upon further analysis the article appeals to all voters as a whole.
The articles main focus is on a speech given by Mitt Romney at the Conservative Political Action Conference this week. The author felt that the speech was filled with incorrect factual information when Mitt Romney was addressing Democrats and their political figureheads. The article, though, I feel lacks any concrete scientific data. Most of the bullet points brought up by the author can be viewed as being subjective or his interpretation of the points that Mitt Romney was trying to make. To combat this, the author could of included specific quotes by Mitt Romney or specific dates and events to back up his evidence or opinion that Mitt Romney was incorrect in the information he was disseminating during his speech. These items would of helped in a better side by side comparison on the search for the “real truth”.
Unfortunately, even though Mitt Romney is a large portion of the article, I believe the point of the article is to point out the inconsistencies that all politicians in todays current political climate are committing.
Ron Fournier stated, in reference to the inconsistencies of politicians the following:
“Such distortion and dishonesty cause Americans to be increasingly skeptical of — even cynical about — their political institutions and leaders. Once people lose faith in the political system, they're less likely to vote, less willing to pay taxes to support government-run programs, less motivated to run for office themselves and — sociologists say — they're even less likely to get involved in their own communities.”
This statement captures my feeling and the feeling of other voters perfectly. This article does not point out the incorrect factual information that Mitt Romney gave but it is using Mitt Romeny as an example of politicians overall that are in power right now in Washington, DC. It does not matter if the politician is a Republican or Democrat but all politicians are the same and we are given a choice between the better of “two evils” and, in this instance, I believe the article is successful in proving its point to the reader.
Assignment
Name
Blog Stage Three: Substantial commentary or criticism #1
Instructions
Stage Three: Critique an editorial or commentary from a national newspaper
Deadline: March 1, 2010
Write a substantial (250-500 words) critique of an editorial or commentary (NOT a pure news article, but an article where the author is making an argument) about U.S. national government from the opinion/editorial/commentary section of one of the national newspapers listed in the suggested sources. Provide an embedded link to the work you are critiquing. Evaluate the author’s intended audience, the author’s credibility, and their argument (including their claim, evidence, and logic). You may agree or disagree with the author. A guide to critical thinking is available under the Handouts link in Blackboard. Post your critique to your blog.
Send me the direct link to the post you’ve written (not a general link to your blog) using Blackboard’s Assignment feature before the deadline.
Blog Stage Three: Substantial commentary or criticism #1
Instructions
Stage Three: Critique an editorial or commentary from a national newspaper
Deadline: March 1, 2010
Write a substantial (250-500 words) critique of an editorial or commentary (NOT a pure news article, but an article where the author is making an argument) about U.S. national government from the opinion/editorial/commentary section of one of the national newspapers listed in the suggested sources. Provide an embedded link to the work you are critiquing. Evaluate the author’s intended audience, the author’s credibility, and their argument (including their claim, evidence, and logic). You may agree or disagree with the author. A guide to critical thinking is available under the Handouts link in Blackboard. Post your critique to your blog.
Send me the direct link to the post you’ve written (not a general link to your blog) using Blackboard’s Assignment feature before the deadline.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Blog Stage Two
Health Care Reform
Currently our nations elected officials are in the midst of a battle over the reform of the nations health care system. Bills containing two different versions of health care reform has passed both the houses of congress but were mainly created and passed along partisan lines. If health care reform is not passed then this country will face even more woes then those if the bills do pass.
Health care spending hit over $2.5 trillion alone last year while growing faster a share of the economy then any other time in half a century. If a health care reform is not pushed forward these numbers will become unchecked and continue their spiral climb. Medical costs are rising in this weak economy causing healthy people to drop coverage causing rates to increase for those left on the plans.
If no bill is passed “More employers will drop coverage. More consumers will get increased co-payments and deductibles,” said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore. By 2019, it is estimated the number of uninsured will rise to 54 million americans. Insurers would be able to continue to deny coverage individuals with medical problems or drastically increase their premiums. Something needs to be done. A something is better then a nothing which is what we are currently facing.
This article and the passage of some version of health care reform is important to every citizen of this nation. Health care is a bipartisan issue affecting everyone. It is time for the parties to put aside their differences and come together. The two parties have in the past united to pass important pieces of legislation such as the Civil Rights. Its time for them to unite once again. Health Care reform is also a set up for the future as both parties face other large bipartisan issues such as Social Security and Immigration.
Source Article:
Fox News: Failure of Health Care Overhaul Will Add More Woes
Currently our nations elected officials are in the midst of a battle over the reform of the nations health care system. Bills containing two different versions of health care reform has passed both the houses of congress but were mainly created and passed along partisan lines. If health care reform is not passed then this country will face even more woes then those if the bills do pass.
Health care spending hit over $2.5 trillion alone last year while growing faster a share of the economy then any other time in half a century. If a health care reform is not pushed forward these numbers will become unchecked and continue their spiral climb. Medical costs are rising in this weak economy causing healthy people to drop coverage causing rates to increase for those left on the plans.
If no bill is passed “More employers will drop coverage. More consumers will get increased co-payments and deductibles,” said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore. By 2019, it is estimated the number of uninsured will rise to 54 million americans. Insurers would be able to continue to deny coverage individuals with medical problems or drastically increase their premiums. Something needs to be done. A something is better then a nothing which is what we are currently facing.
This article and the passage of some version of health care reform is important to every citizen of this nation. Health care is a bipartisan issue affecting everyone. It is time for the parties to put aside their differences and come together. The two parties have in the past united to pass important pieces of legislation such as the Civil Rights. Its time for them to unite once again. Health Care reform is also a set up for the future as both parties face other large bipartisan issues such as Social Security and Immigration.
Source Article:
Fox News: Failure of Health Care Overhaul Will Add More Woes
Monday, February 1, 2010
Participation Topic # 1 - Discussion Board
Against Direct Electronic Democracy
With the rapid advancement in technology now being incorporated into every aspect of our lives, it now raises the question as to how, or if, it will be integrated into the governmental system that has been in place since the foundation of our nation. The question arises with the technological advances mankind has achieved, should we move towards a more direct electronic form of democracy? For myself, I believe that our nation is not yet ready to advance to this state.
Our forefathers had in the insight to set up a representative democracy that has generally worked through the years. With the two party system in place, it forces our representatives to in-compass the large majority of the bell-curve that are the individuals they represent. Our representatives are able to funnel through the voices and help focus and direct our governments attention to the most pressing issues that we face. In a direct democracy our government would come to a crawl or standstill due to the need to address every individuals voice and concerns. Also, a representative is able to help protect the minority while a direct democracy may lead to a demagoguery. (source: http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/direct-democracy/pros-and-cons.html)
With the current system, there is fraud and corruption but it is limited in scope and is considered controlled. In an electronic system the ability to commit fraud and corruption has been simplified. Proponents of a new electronic system sometimes state it will be more cost effective but the government has a proven record of projects running well over costs and projects. A direct democracy will become a large "....referendum which is slow and expensive, and can result in public apathy and fatigue." (source: http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/direct-democracy/pros-and-cons.html)
Lastly, with an electronic form of direct democracy brings a new way for the general public to become part of the system. Several generations of Americans have not grown up around technology and may have their voices lost due to inability to participate in a system they are unfamiliar with or being leery of a different system. It is the post Generation X crowd, the Millennias, that thrive on the advances of the electronic age that utilize the system to its full potential that will be the greatest success story once they come of age and replace the older generations.
Prior to the question being asked "Should the United States adopt an electronic direct democracy" I was ill informed on the subject. After looking at the many available sources of statistical information and studies, I have concluded that at the current time the United States is not yet ready to make this transition and adopt this modification to our current government.
Our forefathers had in the insight to set up a representative democracy that has generally worked through the years. With the two party system in place, it forces our representatives to in-compass the large majority of the bell-curve that are the individuals they represent. Our representatives are able to funnel through the voices and help focus and direct our governments attention to the most pressing issues that we face. In a direct democracy our government would come to a crawl or standstill due to the need to address every individuals voice and concerns. Also, a representative is able to help protect the minority while a direct democracy may lead to a demagoguery. (source: http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/direct-democracy/pros-and-cons.html)
With the current system, there is fraud and corruption but it is limited in scope and is considered controlled. In an electronic system the ability to commit fraud and corruption has been simplified. Proponents of a new electronic system sometimes state it will be more cost effective but the government has a proven record of projects running well over costs and projects. A direct democracy will become a large "....referendum which is slow and expensive, and can result in public apathy and fatigue." (source: http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/direct-democracy/pros-and-cons.html)
Lastly, with an electronic form of direct democracy brings a new way for the general public to become part of the system. Several generations of Americans have not grown up around technology and may have their voices lost due to inability to participate in a system they are unfamiliar with or being leery of a different system. It is the post Generation X crowd, the Millennias, that thrive on the advances of the electronic age that utilize the system to its full potential that will be the greatest success story once they come of age and replace the older generations.
Prior to the question being asked "Should the United States adopt an electronic direct democracy" I was ill informed on the subject. After looking at the many available sources of statistical information and studies, I have concluded that at the current time the United States is not yet ready to make this transition and adopt this modification to our current government.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)