In my opinion the United States must set the example for the rest of the world and steer away from the use of nuclear weapons. Spending an obscene amount of money on something we don’t want other countries to have is absurd. What kind of message will we be sending if we spend $100 billion dollars on nuclear facilities. One that encourages dangerous countries like Iran and North Korea to keep and even increase their nuclear weapons.
I completely agree with my classmates editorial on the subject that this nuclear budget proposal is terrible management of government spending. In the last decade the American people have experienced the countries worst economy since the Great Depression. This is the worst time to spend ungodly amount of money on nuclear weapons that may cause more harm than good.
This expensive proposal was presented by President Obama in an effort to gain support from republican senators for his plan to decrease nuclear weapons in the world. A poll taken by CNN last year shows that Americans are against spending money on weapons and support plans to decrease the amount of weapons of mass destruction in other countries. It seems to me that if Obama wants to please republican senators he is going to have to endure major criticism from the public.
Monday, November 28, 2011
Thursday, November 17, 2011
Let’s Move – An Initiative Created by Michelle Obama
In February of 2009 First Lady Michelle Obama launched a campaign called Let’s Move, in an attempt to make America's youth healthier. Over the past thirty years childhood obesity rates in the U.S have tripled. If we continue on the same track nearly one third of children born after 2000 will suffer from diabetes. A combination of factors has contributed to the decline of America’s health.
As a result of education cuts gym class and some after school sports are rare. Also video games, the internet, and TV are children’s alternative to playing outside. Another factor, American parents are busier than ever making it much more convenient to pick up fast food on the way home. To make matters worse portion sizes in the restaurant industry have increased over the last three decades. The average American now ingests 31% more calories and 15 pounds more sugar than in 1970.
Let’s Move is a great plan to create awareness around this important issue. The initiative has created many tools to help parents in getting their children to eat healthy. The USDA created My Plate, which reminds parents and kids that a healthy meal includes half a plate of fruit or vegetables. The USDA is also in the process of making nutritional facts easier to see when purchasing food at the grocery store.
Another great change Lets Move has sparked is in the restaurant industry. The movement is influencing restaurants to make their kids menus healthier. As a restaurant manager it is frustrating at times to have to adapt to changes in society. However, this is one change I am 100% behind. What is frustrating, is most corporate restaurants would rather make more money by increasing portion sizes to increase their prices than have a healthy youth. I am proud to say that I work for a corporate restaurant that cares about the consumers that keep us in business. Outback Steakhouse is launching a new kids menu that offers healthier alternatives. Kids who eat at Outback can choose from apple juice and orange juice opposed to sodas. They can also choose a healthier side, a fruit cup or steamed broccoli with no butter. A choice they will not make, all proteins offered on the new menu will be prepared using no butter. I hope other restaurants will take our lead and modify their menus to help kids grow up healthy.
I do feel that our current government could do more to end obesity. I feel that cutting education funds that have caused schools to cut gym class and recess is a huge contributing factor to this growing problem. Until the government makes this change it is our responsibility to help end this problem. Lets all do our part for Lets Move!
Friday, November 4, 2011
The anniversary of the controversial Patriot Act is approaching. The Patriot Acts were passed in 2001 after the terrorizing events of September 11th. The Acts gave the government the ability to spy on any person the government thought might be a terrorist. This allowed the government to stop and search anyone they wanted to without having any reason. Because of this many people believe, including one of my classmates who commented on the subject, that the government has used these acts over the years to unlawfully spy on the American people. Many share the belief that the government has used these Acts to spy on people based on their race rather than suspicion of terrorism. Many also feel that the Acts interfere with our constitutional rights.
I firmly agree with my classmate. These Acts should have never been passed in the first place. The fact that Congress felt pressured to take action to make the American people feel safe is no excuse. In fact as my classmate mentioned they made American people scared of the capabilities the government acquired with passing these Acts.
The legislation passed in Arizona is another example of laws passed that infringe on our rights as citizens. I hope that the American people force the government to remove the acts. I feel that removal is the only solution. If the Acts are only revised I feel the government will still abuse it. I think the government should abide by the notion that no one should be stopped and searched without clear evidence of criminal activity. Only then will we be considered a true democracy.
I firmly agree with my classmate. These Acts should have never been passed in the first place. The fact that Congress felt pressured to take action to make the American people feel safe is no excuse. In fact as my classmate mentioned they made American people scared of the capabilities the government acquired with passing these Acts.
The legislation passed in Arizona is another example of laws passed that infringe on our rights as citizens. I hope that the American people force the government to remove the acts. I feel that removal is the only solution. If the Acts are only revised I feel the government will still abuse it. I think the government should abide by the notion that no one should be stopped and searched without clear evidence of criminal activity. Only then will we be considered a true democracy.
Friday, October 28, 2011
Preventing Immigration
Being a Mexican American I have been asked many times at checkpoints traveling from state to state my citizenship. I realize that by looking at my appearance that, I, perhaps could be an illegal immigrant. It is still very offensive, however, that my Anglo friends are never asked. It makes me feel like I look suspicious because of the color of my skin, which I cannot change. So because some Border Patrols agents have no better way of catching terrorist or immigrants I have to suffer through aggressive questioning. This is blatant racism and I find it very hard to believe that this is not evident to everyone.
The Border Patrol Headquarters in Washington sent orders last month to the agents patrolling northern border states to stop routine searches of buses, trains, and airports. Agents said soon after the Obama administration announced that border patrol agents would concentrate their efforts on deporting immigrants engaging in criminal activity, the orders were received. For years border patrol agents have patrolled these areas looking for immigrants who have just crossed the border. Agents search buses, trains and planes as well as question suspicious looking people who might be illegal immigrants. The orders specify that the only reason an agent should search in any of these public transportation areas is if there is a confirmed illegal immigrant. Tenured agents believe these searches help prevent illegal immigration and terrorism. They said many immigrants participating in criminal activity often head straight to transport to different parts of the country. The orders left many of them confused as to how they would be able to obtain information about illegal immigrants at these locations without patrolling them. The activity of these agents is now to sit in their trucks and patrol the actual border. Officers report their agents are already bored with the lack of activity. There is no wonder, Jack Barker manager of Greyhound transportation in NY said agents would check nearly every bus leaving the station for suspicious activity.
These actions have long been criticized by civil rights activists. Doug Honig, spokesman of the American Civil Liberties Union said the orders were a step in the right direction. I firmly agree. Border Patrol agents need to be at the border prevent the immigrants and terrorists from being able to cross. If the problem were stopped there we would not need to frighten travelers and tourist with gun presence. Not to mention that it infringes on our civil liberties. It is clearly racial profiling to question a person already in the United States. If you question one then it is only fair to question all, and that is unfathomable. This is very similar to the agents and police officers in Arizona. If a person resembling a Mexican crosses paths with an agent or officer and are questioned the person must cooperate and prove citizenship. Anglo Americans are not forced to this sort of questioning. It is extremely offensive to be questioned by an agent or an officer about criminal activity only on the assumption that you look different so are likely an immigrant. However, no matter the race, it is unfair to question an innocent person traveling. It seems to me that the agents are wasting time trying to catch immigrants who got away amongst innocent Americans. Instead they should be evaluating there systems at the border to figure out why they were able to cross. I grew up in El Paso, TX where immigration and the crimes it causes are far worse than in northern states. As a little girl I visited several bus stations and never once saw an agent searching buses or questioning any Mexican Americans.
I hope that the Border Patrol Headquarters in Washington will send agents detailed order on how to patrol a border, because they clearly cannot get the job done.
The Border Patrol Headquarters in Washington sent orders last month to the agents patrolling northern border states to stop routine searches of buses, trains, and airports. Agents said soon after the Obama administration announced that border patrol agents would concentrate their efforts on deporting immigrants engaging in criminal activity, the orders were received. For years border patrol agents have patrolled these areas looking for immigrants who have just crossed the border. Agents search buses, trains and planes as well as question suspicious looking people who might be illegal immigrants. The orders specify that the only reason an agent should search in any of these public transportation areas is if there is a confirmed illegal immigrant. Tenured agents believe these searches help prevent illegal immigration and terrorism. They said many immigrants participating in criminal activity often head straight to transport to different parts of the country. The orders left many of them confused as to how they would be able to obtain information about illegal immigrants at these locations without patrolling them. The activity of these agents is now to sit in their trucks and patrol the actual border. Officers report their agents are already bored with the lack of activity. There is no wonder, Jack Barker manager of Greyhound transportation in NY said agents would check nearly every bus leaving the station for suspicious activity.
These actions have long been criticized by civil rights activists. Doug Honig, spokesman of the American Civil Liberties Union said the orders were a step in the right direction. I firmly agree. Border Patrol agents need to be at the border prevent the immigrants and terrorists from being able to cross. If the problem were stopped there we would not need to frighten travelers and tourist with gun presence. Not to mention that it infringes on our civil liberties. It is clearly racial profiling to question a person already in the United States. If you question one then it is only fair to question all, and that is unfathomable. This is very similar to the agents and police officers in Arizona. If a person resembling a Mexican crosses paths with an agent or officer and are questioned the person must cooperate and prove citizenship. Anglo Americans are not forced to this sort of questioning. It is extremely offensive to be questioned by an agent or an officer about criminal activity only on the assumption that you look different so are likely an immigrant. However, no matter the race, it is unfair to question an innocent person traveling. It seems to me that the agents are wasting time trying to catch immigrants who got away amongst innocent Americans. Instead they should be evaluating there systems at the border to figure out why they were able to cross. I grew up in El Paso, TX where immigration and the crimes it causes are far worse than in northern states. As a little girl I visited several bus stations and never once saw an agent searching buses or questioning any Mexican Americans.
I hope that the Border Patrol Headquarters in Washington will send agents detailed order on how to patrol a border, because they clearly cannot get the job done.
Monday, October 17, 2011
Moving Forward
Protesting is democracy at its finest. It displays a groups conflicts with its government and their undying effort to create the change desired. Shamus Cooke’s latest blog on the Occupy Movement caught my interest for this reason. It describes not only how Corporate America is squirming and hoping that the Occupy Movements dissolve but also what the movement needs to do to keep momentum and gain supporters.
Cooke is attempting to speak to both the working class that makes up the 99% that are both actively and inactively participating in the Occupy Movements. He stresses to this audience that the 1% are terrified that this movement will spread. In an attempt to crush protests mayors, police and the media in protesting cities are portraying false negative perceptions of the Movement such as disunity, drug use, and violence. Cooke persuades that in order to combat the enemies attempt to destroy the movement the 99%, needs to agree on and promote common demands that are important to all participants. Cooke worries that without stating these demands the Movement may not gain many more supporters and worse the current participants may lose interest with no clear victory, ending the Movement and allowing the 1% to continue to gain Americas wealth. Cooke is a social service worker, a trade unionist and a writer for Workers Action. With his experience in protesting for workers rights and socially funded programs his opinion on the Movements plan of action may be very beneficial to Americas 99%.
There are several obvious national demands, according to Cooke, that polls have repeatedly shown Americans support. They are to tax the rich, create a federal public jobs program, fully fund Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, education, health care and end the wars. Cooke suggests that the Movement demand that the 1% be taxed to help fund these programs. Cooke points out that these issues are important to the broad 99% and it is important to stay focused on these and not smaller individualistic demands to ensure growth for the movement. Cooke gives an example of the working class movement on the 1930’s and 40’s that resulted in progressive change for America hoping that the Occupy Movement will spark this type of change.
I think all of America is waiting to see what will happen next with the Movement. Will the it grow and make the rich of America mend the economy or will it dissipate and continue to allow the 1% to get away with Americas wealth. Action does need to be taken in order to keep the Movement moving. I agree with Cooke, with a list of demands people will be more likely to start and continue to participate until the goal is accomplished. Without a set of goal in sight people tend to lose the drive to move forward. Without the reward of accomplishment incentive is lost. I also think that politicians will be forced to respond to these protests if there are demands that the Movement wants the government to meet. In both campaigns for election and in interviews with those already in office these pressing issues will be forced on these politicians to answer. It will force them to create a plan to meet the demands set by the Movement. Protesting a list of demands will further induce change. It would be amazing to not only witness but also be apart of the most influential movement to produce massive governmental change.
Cooke is attempting to speak to both the working class that makes up the 99% that are both actively and inactively participating in the Occupy Movements. He stresses to this audience that the 1% are terrified that this movement will spread. In an attempt to crush protests mayors, police and the media in protesting cities are portraying false negative perceptions of the Movement such as disunity, drug use, and violence. Cooke persuades that in order to combat the enemies attempt to destroy the movement the 99%, needs to agree on and promote common demands that are important to all participants. Cooke worries that without stating these demands the Movement may not gain many more supporters and worse the current participants may lose interest with no clear victory, ending the Movement and allowing the 1% to continue to gain Americas wealth. Cooke is a social service worker, a trade unionist and a writer for Workers Action. With his experience in protesting for workers rights and socially funded programs his opinion on the Movements plan of action may be very beneficial to Americas 99%.
There are several obvious national demands, according to Cooke, that polls have repeatedly shown Americans support. They are to tax the rich, create a federal public jobs program, fully fund Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, education, health care and end the wars. Cooke suggests that the Movement demand that the 1% be taxed to help fund these programs. Cooke points out that these issues are important to the broad 99% and it is important to stay focused on these and not smaller individualistic demands to ensure growth for the movement. Cooke gives an example of the working class movement on the 1930’s and 40’s that resulted in progressive change for America hoping that the Occupy Movement will spark this type of change.
I think all of America is waiting to see what will happen next with the Movement. Will the it grow and make the rich of America mend the economy or will it dissipate and continue to allow the 1% to get away with Americas wealth. Action does need to be taken in order to keep the Movement moving. I agree with Cooke, with a list of demands people will be more likely to start and continue to participate until the goal is accomplished. Without a set of goal in sight people tend to lose the drive to move forward. Without the reward of accomplishment incentive is lost. I also think that politicians will be forced to respond to these protests if there are demands that the Movement wants the government to meet. In both campaigns for election and in interviews with those already in office these pressing issues will be forced on these politicians to answer. It will force them to create a plan to meet the demands set by the Movement. Protesting a list of demands will further induce change. It would be amazing to not only witness but also be apart of the most influential movement to produce massive governmental change.
Monday, October 10, 2011
Prohibition
A series on the subject of the failure of Prohibition by filmmaker Ken Burns has created a buzz around ending drug prohibition. Former senior policy advisor to President Obama's drug czar, Kevin A. Sabet warns that alcohol prohibition is much different from drug prohibition in his article “Prohibition’sReal Lessons for Drug Policy.” Many who support ending drug prohibition reason since alcohol prohibition did not succeed then neither will drug prohibition so it should end. In Sabet’s article he warns this is not sound logic by highlighting the benefits of prohibition, the reason for its failure and the lesson we should take from its policies.
Sabet points out the differences in the two types of prohibition to explain how the failure of alcohol prohibition does not dictate the effectiveness of drug prohibition. First, the consumption of alcohol was never prohibited like drugs are, only the distribution and sale of it was prohibited. Second, Congress and the executive branch had no interest in enforcing the laws of prohibition unlike the constant enforcement of our drug laws today. Sabet also argues that the substances and societies views on them are different. Unlike drugs alcohol is a substance that has been accepted and used by almost every society since biblical times. Prohibition also decreased the consumption of alcohol and cases of cirrhosis of the liver among Americans. Sabet also explains that we learned that from legalizing alcohol big corporations are the ones that profit from the substance, encouraging lower taxes on it to increase use. The increase in use causes negative effects on people and society. For example tax dollars are used to provide alcoholics with treatment for addiction.
I do not agree that all drugs should be legalized but I do believe there would be some benefit to legalizing marijuana. Of course everyone knows that consuming alcohol has many negative side effects. However that does not change the fact that the American people have a right to consume it. Most drugs are too harmful to make legal but marijuana is one drug that is milder than alcohol. Legalizing would allow law enforcers to concentrate on more dangerous and addictive drugs like crystal meth. Unlike alcohol marijuana is not addictive and does not cause the accidents or wild behavior alcohol does which would mean no negative effects on society. I do not believe that in legalizing marijuana we would be able to solve any economic problems but it is a mild substance that does not require the same government control as other more dangerous substances. Tax dollars could then either go towards the prohibition of other drugs or to a different government program.
Monday, October 3, 2011
Political Participation
In today's society I feel like there are only few ways to politically participate while making a significant difference in the government. Protesting is one way many people with shared political views can influence the decisions of Congress and political leaders.
The protesting group Occupy Wall street has camped and protested in Manhattan's Financial District for two weeks. Some issues they protest, global warming, corporate greed, and social inequality. NPR recently reported in an article titled "Hundreds Arrested After Protest on Brooklyn Bridge" that the group recently marched to the Brooklyn Bridge and spilled onto the road resulting in the arrests of hundreds of protesters. The article reports on whether the arrests were necessary, however when it comes to this type of political participation, arrests attract media and media attracts public attention. Protesters may not welcome arrest or violence from police but reports by the media on these events help the cause of the protest gain recognition from the public and government officials forcing attention on the issue. Of course a protest can gain attention without the negative results of violence or arrests. An example of this were the protests at the Capitol in Austin over immigration laws. The protests may not have changed opposing views but it definitely created interest on the issue forcing politicians to take a stance.
The article also reports that there were protests in Los Angeles, New Mexico, and Boston in support of the Occupy Wall Street Group. This is an example of how effective protesting is. The quick attention a protest causes among the media, word of mouth and the Internet allows participants to spread quickly throughout the nation. As we saw in the Immigration Protests this causes politicians to consider the issue and include an opinion on it in their campaign, allowing the public to vote for the politician that shares their view on the issue.
Protests are also easy to participate in. A participator can protest as long as they please and only need to know the location of the protest. Many protests also gain participants that are at first only spectating but may feel compelled to join because they share the same views on the issues being protested. I am always looking for easy ways to influence my government and protesting is at the top of my list.
The protesting group Occupy Wall street has camped and protested in Manhattan's Financial District for two weeks. Some issues they protest, global warming, corporate greed, and social inequality. NPR recently reported in an article titled "Hundreds Arrested After Protest on Brooklyn Bridge" that the group recently marched to the Brooklyn Bridge and spilled onto the road resulting in the arrests of hundreds of protesters. The article reports on whether the arrests were necessary, however when it comes to this type of political participation, arrests attract media and media attracts public attention. Protesters may not welcome arrest or violence from police but reports by the media on these events help the cause of the protest gain recognition from the public and government officials forcing attention on the issue. Of course a protest can gain attention without the negative results of violence or arrests. An example of this were the protests at the Capitol in Austin over immigration laws. The protests may not have changed opposing views but it definitely created interest on the issue forcing politicians to take a stance.
The article also reports that there were protests in Los Angeles, New Mexico, and Boston in support of the Occupy Wall Street Group. This is an example of how effective protesting is. The quick attention a protest causes among the media, word of mouth and the Internet allows participants to spread quickly throughout the nation. As we saw in the Immigration Protests this causes politicians to consider the issue and include an opinion on it in their campaign, allowing the public to vote for the politician that shares their view on the issue.
Protests are also easy to participate in. A participator can protest as long as they please and only need to know the location of the protest. Many protests also gain participants that are at first only spectating but may feel compelled to join because they share the same views on the issues being protested. I am always looking for easy ways to influence my government and protesting is at the top of my list.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)