Commentary on Lifting the Bar's editorial published in Stage Seven.

 Including Texas, more than half the nation's governors say they oppose letting Syrian refugees into their states. Legally, states have no authority to do anything because the question of who should be allowed in this country is up to the federal government. However, But this objection can make things much more difficult if the states refuse to cooperate.

 I agree with the Lifting the Bar's statement that Texas should be trying to contribute in some way to the world's problems, but I am not so sure about that Syrian refugees should be welcome in Texas.

 I saw so many praising comments about the articles related to Syrian refugees greeted by Canada, and some Americans are even saying "We need to move to Canada." I think that each country must help those people, some people might say that this is so inhuman, but if I was a leader of a country, I would not put my people at risk by allowing the entry of those refugees.

 I do not think that U.S. government's agencies' background check can guarantee that the refugees are clear, and I also think that nothing can actually read a person's mind. Another thing I do not understand is that how people are so sure that women and children are far from terrorism. Moreover, if we allow the refugees to settle down here, we will have to keep an eye on them just in case. The government might need special policies, manpower or other resources for them. I question that enough people will be willing to pay for the refugees or not since this is going to be a long-term process, and it will not be helpful enough from just donations. On top of that, I am worried about the refugees as well. We cannot put those people anywhere. There will be many welcoming Americans, but we also cannot say that the refugees can stay near them because they greeted them. In the worst case, the refugees will have to stay near people who protested the admission of them, and apparently they will be discriminated.

 I do not say that we should ignore the Syrian refugees. I think the government should help the refugees in some way, but they also need to approach the admission of the refugees in this country more carefully.

 In October, Texas announced that they would stop funding any care for poor women at Planned Parenthood clinics after the release of a series of videos showing Planned Parenthood staff discussing about fetal tissue sales and price negotiations after abortion procedures, and Planned Parenthood sues Texas over plans to cut off Medicaid funding.

 I strongly disagree with the idea of Texas state's decision.

 First of all, Planned Parenthood offers not only cancer screenings for underprivileged women but also family planning services. I believe that many women at Planned Parenthood clinics could identify abnormal growth and prevent it from developing into cancer. If the state cuts off Medicaid funding, thousands of other women could lose access to similar services, such as pregnancy tests, contraception and cancer screenings.

 Also, state officials argue that they cannot support illegal abortion practices and handling of fetal tissues. However, only a few Planned Parenthood clinics provide abortions, and the proportion of abortion cases isonly 3.0 percent, which means 97 percent of their services are for family planning services and cancer screenings for poor women.

 I think that Texas state should not cut off Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood. In my opinion, it does not make sense to cut off those services for poor women just because of a small minority of the cases which are not even clear if they were illegal or not. On top of that, I believe that it would cause more problems related to STDs, STIs or cancers if those women have no access to screen diseases.

Commentary on Bluebonnet Politics' editorial published in Stage Five

 Personally, I think there is no point to increase funding toward improving bus stops if there are not many people who are actually using them. Also, I do not think Austin’s public transportation is that bad. I lived in Los Angeles and New York, and even though I had a car, I used public transportation in all three cities when I think it was more convenient. 

 I actually prefer to use Austin’s public transportation. It is true that we have just a few seats at the bus stops, but I think that is better than we have plenty of places to seat which cannot be controlled, full of trash or homeless people, just like other big cities. Moreover, if you only use public transportation, you would check arrival times on the Metro app. To do so, you do not need to wait for a long time. They do not arrive always on time, but they do not ridiculously late as well.

 Thus, I think the government should increase funding towards something else, not improving bus stops unless the majority of people in Austin are dependent on public transportation. 

No Guns on Campus.

 Senate Bill 11 provides that license holders may carry a concealed handgun throughout university campuses, starting Aug 1, 2016. Even though many students, staff, alumni and parents oppose guns in the classrooms, offices, dormitories and on UT campus, Texas legislators sponsored this law, and finally Texas legislation allowed license holders to carry concealed firearms on campus, in dormitories or other residential facilities.

 I strongly disagree with this idea that more guns make us safer. Also, I do not think that concealed handgun licenses have had any impact on crime rates.

 First of all, the presence of firearms will lead to an increase in accidental shootings. There are many cases being reported where students shoot people in their access, and in many cases end their own lives. Moreover, studies show that over half of college students contemplate committing suicide, and I think that the presence of firearms has a close relation to the chance of suicide by firearms.

 On top of that, guns disrupt the academic atmosphere of a university. If you are sitting in a class knowing that your classmates or your professor might be armed, that must alter the environment. In the same way, for professors and teaching assistants, lecturing in front of hundreds of students knowing that some of them are potentially armed encroaches upon the atmosphere of the classroom.

 I believe that college students and professors should not have to deal with guns on campus, and Texas legislation should not allow people to carry firearms on campus.

Political ads only work on Low Information Voters.

 On Wednesday, October 14th, 2015, the Texas Insider published an article, Voters Know More About the Kardashians Than the Bushes & Clintons.

 Lynn Woolley, the writer of this article, starts his argument, sdaying “Jeb Bush has a huge campaign war chest, and he is beginning to use it. For someone like me and probably you, that means nothing. My decision on Jeb Bush was made long ago. The decision is “no” and it is not going to change. But Mr. Bush and the rest of the field knows that most people are not like us. Most people are not paying attention”.

 He also pointed out that a rush of heavy TV and radio buying leading into a primary election will absolutely move the needle. It is because the voter that does not read a newspaper or listen to talk radio will judge a candidate by advertising alone. That is why politicians spend a great deal of their time fundraising instead of working at the job they were elected to do. Moreover, he claims that if people would start caring about their country enough to know these candidates, political ads would not work.

 I think his intended audience is Americans who do not really care about what is happening in America, including myself. Lynn Woolley is a Texas-based, syndicated talk-show host in his daily 3-hour analysis of politics and current events. Some people say that The Lynn Woolley Show was all about “bottom-up government” even before the Tea Party movement, and I am pretty sure he has some decent political views compared to most people who are politically clueless.

 It would be more comfortable to read if he would use less extreme examples to illustrate his point of view. However, I completely agree with his argument, "If they cared, they would know what is happening in America. If they knew what is happening, they would be alarmed. If they were alarmed, they would cast intelligent votes".

  

Opposing guns on campus at University of Texas at Austin.

 On Wednesday, September 30th, 2015, the Austin American Statesman published an article about opposing guns on campus at University of Texas at Austin.
 A strong majority of speakers at the University of Texas at Austin’s first campus carry forum on Wednesday night voiced concern about the contentious law that will allow licensed Texans to carry concealed handguns in campus buildings.
 University of Texas at Austin professors said “Twelve Texas legislators sponsored this law supposedly to make us safer; but most recent studies say that more guns make us less safe. No mass murder or campus shooting has ever been stopped by an armed student or professor. Researchers at Texas A&M University have shown that concealed handgun licenses have had no impact on crime rates.” Also, the chancellor of the UT System, former Navy Seal Admiral William McRaven, argued “the presence of handguns will lead to an increase in both accidental shootings and self-inflicted wounds.”
 While the gun lobby and those legislators who passed SB 11 are concerned about the Second Amendment, the professors, staff, and students at UT Austin are fighting to protect their First Amendment right to freedom of speech. Right now, 150 UT Austin professors have signed a petition saying they will refuse to allow guns in their classrooms, and a petition from UT Students Opposing Campus Carry has more than 5,000 signatures.
 The authors of this article are the professors of the University of Texas at Austin, and they clearly encourage their students to sign the petition and join them to protest campus carry and the legislators who voted for it. The authors are co-chairs of Gun Free UT, and they have been dealing with this issue by participating many public discussions, so I think their argument is pretty convincing.
 In Addition, guns disrupt the academic atmosphere of a university. Sitting in a class, knowing that fellow students might be armed alters the environment. For professors and teaching assistants, lecturing in front of a hall of hundreds of students knowing that some are potentially armed encroaches upon the sanctity of the classroom.
 I think college students should not have to deal with guns on campus, and professors should not have to worry about students bringing guns to class. 

Workplace Deaths Up in Texas.

According to The Texas Tribune, more people died on the job in Texas than any other state in 2014, according to data released yesterday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The report showed that 524 people died in Texas from work-related injuries last year, up from 508 in 2013. Texas deaths accounted for over 11 percent of the nation's total for 2014. Texas far exceeded other states, with California as its closest competition with 334 deaths. Most deaths occurred in transportation-related incidents. Even though Texas’ booming economy over the past decade might affect the number of people killed on the job, I think we should take this result more seriously, why Texas has led the nation in total workplace deaths in 11 of the past 14 years and whether the people are given adequate protection and safety information or not.