Why Would We Vote on a Tuesday? Blog Stage 8

Voting Day is something that I believe needs to be addressed and rearranged. Heather wrote a post called “Voting on Weekends” that I fully agree with. On November 7th 2017, I was unable to vote due to my very busy tuesday work load. In the mid 1800’s, the United States when the law for voting day to be placed on a tuesday was passed, the U.S was best described as an agrarian society. It makes sense that back then farmers needed more time to get to a voting station. Tuesday was established as election day for religious reasons as well. It did not interfere with the Biblical Sabbath or with market day which typically took place on Wednesdays in most towns. The problem is that we aren’t all religious farmers anymore! I agree that voting on tuesday is very random. There are many random laws that are completely illogical in context to the 21st century. A law should be passed for voting day to be moved to a more convenient day (like a holiday as was mentioned) or at least extended to last for longer than just a short one-day period.

Should Governments Help Pay for College? Blog Stage 7

“Should governments help pay for college?”— This is a controversial topic in both education and our economics. With the prices of higher education now, most adults who are returning to college would leap at the opportunity of a government-subsidized education. However, students fresh out of high school typically don’t recognize the benefits of government-financed classes and expenses. 

The topic of free education is sensitive amongst many in the U.S. for a number of reasons; Education is the only way to maintain a technological and developmental advantage over other nations. The United States has managed to maintain its reputation as the most innovative nation to date. What better way to maintain the American dream then to have a technologically wealthy nation. Higher education equals higher salaries and more opportunities. If the government were to pay for the nation’s higher education, the most prominent issue is where the government would acquire their funding from. The average cost of higher education is $87,000 to $115,000 for four years at a state university. Graduate programs will increase the cost and these figures are based on 2006 estimates; each year the cost continues to rise.

I believe that the government should offset the cost of college. While taxpayers would carry the burden in the beginning, government support of a college education will help to eventually eliminate the need for welfare in our nation. It can also help reduce the levels of family or class-related poverty and lessen street causing domestic abuse. Children of college graduates typically attend college. The average family cannot afford the crazy rising costs of college unless the parents themselves are college graduates. The topic of whether or not the government should pay for its citizens higher education is a very controversial topic with no simple solution. Regardless of my questions concerning finance, I do believe that the government should pay for our education.

Blog Stage 6; Comment on a Colleagues Work 1

Gabrielle wrote her blog stage 5 on the legalization of...marijuana. Often, many people write claims on their blogs that they do not care to support with evidence and I think that the contrary is very well done in this article. I agree entirely that marijuana should be legalized to help our state’s and nation’s economic growth. To continue to support our claims on why the plant should be legalized nationwide, in 2013 a A Gallup poll released revealing that for the first time in history, Americans are more in favor of legalizing marijuana than criminalizing it. Now, 58 percent of Americans are in favor allowing the plant to be legal. Prohibition doesn’t control the use of marijuana in the United States. States under prohibition gain nothing from it. The states spend their money, time, and resources enforcing it to no end. The states that have legalized marijuana have already acquired over $200 million in combined tax revenue compared to the other 46 states. The states are saving money in the police departments, courts, other essential agencies that are bothered with marijuana prosecutions.  

So many people may think having a large amount of THC in your body will lead to death, but that isn’t possible. Since marijuana has been around, not one single account of death from overdose of marijuana has been recorded or accounted for. Meanwhile in 2010, about 39,000 people died from drug overdoses. Sixty percent of those overdoses were related to prescription drugs. In that same year about 26,000 people died from alcohol related causes. So if cigarettes and alcohol are a higher health risk, then why isn’t marijuana legal as well?

In this article, you mention that one of the United State’s biggest national issues is the lack of jobs available in our country. I 100% agree that we would benefit economically from the increase in demand of labor and the marijuana industry in itself. If 81,000 new jobs have been created in california alone, there is no telling how much the U.S could flourish if all states legalized it for medical and recreational usage.

My Opinion on The U.S National Government: Blog Stage 5

There are a number of things that I find absurd when it comes to the topic of the U.S national government. If I could have it my way, President Trump would have already been impeached...or better yet, never elected.

Jobs are scarce and incomes are falling out of everybody’s pockets. After the financial meltdown of the first depression, congress passed emergancy funding to save our nation from a financial meltdown. Recently, congress has not taken precautions. A bill regarding changing the US government's credit limit has turned to a mess of a downfall in our economy. Meanwhile, congress enjoys automatic pay raises every year. Their annual income totaling over three times the income of an average US citizen.

The United States possesses all resources in order to go greener and contribute less towards global warming. We are considered to be the most technologically advanced country in the world, yet the US government doesn’t concern themselves with recycling and investing in research for better energy use. Where fracking occurs, heads are turned. Where money is made, you’ll find our government.

Redistricting. The act of redrawing district lines in order to learn towards one political side rather than the other. This must stop. This system only works to the government and the political parties advantages. I believe that it completely goes against our rights of choice and opportunity. The national government is taking its citizens votes and manipulating them to best suit their needs.

The electoral process is a mess and must be redesigned. In 2016, after his election and loss in the popular vote President Trump tweeted; “In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally.” Trumps opponent, Clinton, won 2.9 million more popular votes than the elected president. Because of the way the U.S national government has structured the presidential elections and system of voting, the voice of the Nation's people seem to be ignored. The U.S would benefit from a second bill of rights as Bernie Sanders suggests.

Our nation is led by President Trump. The day of Trump’s election, I was spit on by an angry Irishman for being American in a foreign country. Rather than the U.S giving off a positive image of our advanced and prideful nation, the image of Trump and just the ring of him name offends and brings out hatred in other countries. Trump has chosen to propose to divide the US with walls, rather than to unite with and assist our surrounding neighbors. Although I am a prideful and patriotic American, I do not feel pride for any of the current work of the US national government.

Is Bernie Back? Blog Stage 4

Joe Cunningham discusses the possibility that Bernie Sanders will be running for Presidency in 2020 against President Donald Trump in his most recent restate article. I believe that Cunningham wrote this article to inform active members of our political system of our possible candidates in the upcoming election of 2020. Bernie seems to be wanting to make a comeback by polishing up his knowledge of foreign affairs and the outreach to the labor movement. 

In the 2016 presidential election, Bernie was out of commentary and answers regarding US foreign policies and even the names of the higher power executives of other countries. His lack of knowledge in foreign affairs and leaders left Sanders in the dust behind Trump and Clinton.   If Sanders has made the change to his foreign political knowledge, he would be a fantastic candidate to run again Trump.  Currently, Trump has a 38% approval rate slowly trickling down, not ready for reelection in 2020. Incumbency will not help him out here and a strong candidate like Sanders may be just what the U.S needs to “Make America Great Again.

I agree with Cunningham that this is a great time for Sanders to make his comeback. But I disagree with Cunningham when he says that “Democrats would be foolish to let the Sanders Left dictate the party’s direction.”  Recently, much of the US public has proposed to impeach President Trump to allow Mike Pence to replace him as president. Cunningham states “From an objective stance, this is smart of Sanders if 2020 is in his sights. He got some solid grassroots support and was thwarted only by his own aforementioned weaknesses and his party establishment lining up against him.” Sanders would be a very dramatic and perfect replacement in the executive branch. He proposes for a second bill of rights to be written. Given that the last bill of rights was written in 1791, with the US’s current advance in technology, a second bill of rights may be the answer to the US economy. Although in the 2016 elections I was not a huge fan of Bernie Sanders myself due to his lack of knowledge, a strong democratic and socialist movement seems to be what the US needs after Trump’s proposals for walls and military threats towards North Korea.

Paris Climate Agreement

In the New York Times article "The U.S is Tackling Global Warming, Even if Trump Isn't"  by Michael R. Bloomberg and Jerry Brown, how climate change should be handled by the United States is heavily debated and Trump’s actions are heavily bashed upon. Climate change is not a threat that will occur in the future, but rather a threat that is very real and very current that needs to be address as soon as possible by all governments around the globe. I agree with the opinions of both Bloomberg and Brown surrounding the fact that it was wrong of Trump to take the US US out of the Paris Climate agreement. The majority of the US population supports the Paris Climate agreement yet the president chose to withdraw the United States from the agreement. Now, because the US is no longer apart of this agreement, I believe that the United States will no longer be one of the most top ranking countries for efficient energy use, there will be an even larger shortage of jobs than ever and we will be an even larger contributor to global warming. Although I agree with the author’s opinions and ideas on how the government should monitor and approach global climate change, the factual information that was provided in this passage is false.   In this article Bloomberg and Brown state that “The United States has still reduced emissions faster and farther than any other large nation” yet the United States is tied in 8th place along with South Korea on an international list of countries that are considered to be the most energy efficient. The authors of this article included false information in this article in order to make the president’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Climate agreement look even more negative than it already does. I agree that “The Paris agreement succeeded where previous attempts failed” and that it would be beyond beneficial to be apart of the Paris climate agreement as a nation. As a reader I 100% agree with the opinions of Bloomberg and Brown. Often times I bash on Trump’s stupidity as well. In the end of the article Bloomberg and Brown state that “we will not wait for washington” to make our energy use decisions for us.  We shouldn’t wait for washington and its time for US citizens to take action and stand up for the planet.

President Trump Begins to Use His Executive Power

National news is important, but International news takes the cake. On September 26th 2017, CNN released a news article called "Trump Warns of 'devastating' military option as North Korea moves jets". Being the entire executive board itself, President Donald Trump has the power to call for military power whenever he best sees fit. On Tuesday, he gave a speech declaring that the Unites States will go into North Korea using what he calls " our military option" (Trump) as a response to Kim Jung Un's "bad behavior" (Trump). Through a satellite, The US government was able to determine that North Korea is testing bombs. To show the how seriously the US is taking these threats from North Korea, Trump sent the air force to fly over North Korea.