The so called “transportation system” in Austin Texas

            While reading the blog “The so called transportation system” written by Carrie, it is difficult to not shake my head in agreement. While making the point about the ridiculous traffic in Austin, Carrie begins to present the reader with crucial evidence from the Austin Chamber regarding “high incidents and fatality rates” to make her case. Traffic costs the city of Austin, a lot. “This very congestion costs Central Texans $930/year per person!!!” She makes the case that not only does traffic cost time and headaches, it hurts the local economy. Sitting in traffic means less time to purchase goods, and causes more time for pain and agony. It doesn’t help that the city of Austin’s population and growth rate is exploding. With an increase in people migrating to the rapidly growing city, it doesn’t do a bit of help for the already horrific traffic problem. “Austin Chamber says that in the next 25 years Texas will see population increase of 65%, road use increase by 214%, and state road capacity.

            However, growth doesn’t seem to be the only problem pointed out by Carrie. It is the fact that the local government has done almost nothing to combat a worsening traffic highway model. Instead of focusing on a light rail system (which only applies to a small % of the Austin population), the government should be focusing on public transportation. An idea of hers includes the production of double decker busses so that they “take up less room on the road than those God awful extended busses” In conclusion; we need to be innovative when it comes to the means of tackling our flawed transportation system. In order for that to ever be accomplished, the people of Austin must make their voices heard.

On October 19^th 2015, the State of Texas made the decision to cut off funding for Medicaid to Planned Parenthood clinics due to the apparent “undercover videos” that discussed matters of human tissue. The Republican Governor Gregg Abbot ordered an immediate investigation following the videos posted online. However, Planned Parenthood is doing their best to strike back quickly claiming that thousands of women across the state who seek non-abortion health services through Medicaid at its clinics will suffer. "It is completely outrageous that Texas officials are using these thoroughly discredited, fraudulent videos to cut women off from preventive health care, including cancer screenings, HIV testing, and birth control," (Executive vice president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America) Legal minds across Texas however say that the move made by Gregg Abbot might not even be legal. This move made could result in legal action, especially since a Louisiana Judge ordered that Medicaid funding must keep up for an additional 14 days. The Lawsuit brought up against the state of Louisiana states that the state couldn’t legally end funding for non-abortion services like breast-cancer screenings or gynecological exams. The Governor made the claim that the cutting of funds "is another step in providing greater access to safe health care for women while protecting our most vulnerable — the unborn." However the Governor doesn’t realize how many women are suffering because of the current cuts. It doesn’t make sense to cut the entire funding for Medicaid when Planned Parenthood provides far more services than abortion.

The University of Texas packed with guns?

I chose to read my classmates article "The University of Texas packed with guns?" on the current law/controversy surrounding the Campus Carry bill. For some background information, Texas will allow students and faculty to carry concealed firearms (with campus permission) starting in August 2016. The author of the article believes that the Texas government should not allow people “any forms of firearms on campus” His first argument against campus carry consists of a “changing atmosphere” within the classroom. He argues that once both professors and students are aware of the individuals carrying, they would become psychologically fearful of them. “Professors would fear inviting students into their offices to talk about a failing grade if they think that students are armed.” I feel this is a great point made, as professors/TA’s are constantly holding office hours. Typically, office hours/meetings are not always about the happiest subjects. Either a student is confused, or concerned about his or her grades in the class. College is an emotional place, and students are constantly under stress and pressure. His second argument consists of the current local government increasing security measures around the state. This would consist of a strong campus police force with professionals trained to react to “school shooter” type scenarios. These two arguments presented by the author are strong and well written. I feel both arguments can be agreed to by both parties in Texas, as they consist of common sense ideas.

The state and local Government of Texas should do everything in its power to institute election-day voter registration. Many states including Texas require its citizens to register weeks before Election Day, making it fairly hard for people to vote. The easier it is to vote, the more Texas residents will. However, Texas seems to be holding out on the idea of same day voter registration. The four states with the best voter turnout happen to be states with same day voting registration. The state of Texas has awful voter turnout, ranking 47^th in the entire country. However, the idea of same day registration scares people. The Republicans in particular love that citizens take 1-2 weeks in order for registration to be completed.

This low voter turnout has contributed to the Republican dominance in Texas. High voter turnout in almost every scenario has been seen to benefit democrats. In fact, instead of making it easier, republicans in control want to make it even more difficult to vote. They can do this by passing a voter ID law, making it especially hard for those to become registered to vote. It is another step to take in the already difficult voter registration process. For people in small rural areas, it is fairly difficult to travel to the DMV or a state agency that prints Texas identification cards. This means that people won’t take the time to get an ID, because their vote seems worthless. In a conservative state like Texas, it should be the government’s job to make voting easier for the people. However, it is in the best interest of the republican lead government to keep people away from this years polling booths.

Today, women remain far less likely than men to seek public office. Only recently in 1984 has there ever been a woman on the national major-party presidential ticket. The opinion article "Pro-Con Would more Women makefor better government?" on The Dallas Morning News clearly states the pros and cons of more women becoming a part of the legislative process. According to research, this lack of women in todays government can stem anywhere from the socialization of young men towards “leadership roles”, to even boys’ greater participation in organized competitive sports.

            On the pro side of the argument, the argument is made that adding more women to the legislative process would be for the better. A more accurate representation of the country (an equal representation of men compared to women), would enhance debates and offer a wide arrange or potential solutions to the problems we face today. The tone of the Congress might even change for the better. At the current stage, Congress is 80% White, 80% male, and 92% Christian. These are large differences for our representative demographics, as only 63% of the population is white, less than 50% are males, and the country only amounts to 76% Christian. These ratios are well off balance and do not provide an accurate “representation” of this country on a whole.

            The argument for fewer women to represent the nation stems from the idea that “political values must outweigh the importance of gender” The idea is that if there are 20 women in the Senate, and your political views differ with 16 of those women, then there is a problem. It is often that political conversation is always about achieving gender parity in elected office, rather than the important ways that women actually impact political life. According to the author, men and women are different in that they share “different talents, aptitudes, and interests” A rather weak argument from the offer

            I think that readers should give the article a change, but realize that this is an opinion-based piece. A lot of the author’s logic stems from assumptions about women and what they seem to “only focus on” as the author makes clear. Some points are well made and clear, and some are senseless. However, it is worth the read to see the other side of the argument on why women should not equally represent the number of men in Congress. 

Joe Deshotel, the author of the article “Pope Francis’ Visits Shined Light on the GOP Misplaced Priorities in Texas” in the Burnt Orange Report.  He has hit the nail right on the coffin when it comes to shedding the light on the GOP’s misplaced priorities during the recent visit from Pope Francis. The author does a great job of calling out the current frontrunners in the GOP for the Presidential election.  “Just as the front runners for GOP’s presidential nomination were debating whether a Muslim should even be allowed to occupy the White House, we were reminded how conservatives drummed up fears that John F. Kennedy’s Catholic faith would render him a papal puppet.” However it is not only the national politicians that are making the news over their “faith”, current Texas Governor Greg Abbot was recently attacked questioning his “faith” over a silly Facebook post that offended a very few extremists. However, Greg Abbot isn’t new when it comes to using his faith to guide his political agenda. Abbot has used religion time and time again to whip votes on wedge issues. Governor Abbot proposed a VERY political “Life” initiative at the exact time Planned Parenthood was on every news channel in America. All this talk coming of course while Texas still has the largest number of uninsured children in the nation. “Reproductive health care isn’t the only target of GOP pitchforks. Their policy priorities fail to acknowledge that caring for the environment, the poor and the sick were Jesus’ words, not the Pope’s.” Numbers and statistics don’t lie.

The author does a very good job of providing numbers, facts, statistics and proof that the GOP’s current agenda is largely politicized and often panders to the very religious. Most GOP members only seem to agree with the Pope’s message just as long as it coincides with the mindset of their voters back home. Overall I feel that author did a great job in pointing out a few of the many hypocrisies that the GOP holds.

After watching the second GOP debate September 16th, 2015 on CNN, I was shocked to see that US senator Ted Cruz fell mostly silent. Instead of seeing the flamboyant Cruz we typically see, we saw a reserved, quiet US Senator. Perhaps this was his attempt to appear "Presidential", unlike the many other candidates on stage. Instead of choosing to join the endless bombardment against the current front runner in the GOP (Donald Trump,) Cruz instead chose to talk about the problems that currently face the Obama Administration. It also seemed as if CNN chose to ignore Cruz. On September 16th, 2015 The Texas Tribune published an article which stated, "CNN moderator Jake Tapper did not ask Cruz a question until nearly thirty minutes into the two-hour debate." He spoke clearly on the issues that are currently most important to American people. Cruz consistently mentioned the idea of defunding planned parenthood, and chose to criticize the Iran nuclear deal just negotiated by the Obama Administration. This article was very informative and explained in great detail how Senator Cruz conducted his behavior during the debate.