Underage drinking

I do realize that this can be a sensitive subject seeing as how alcohol is a culprit among the leading causes of teenage death in the United States, however, I do not believe that this tragic incidents such as the one in your article should set the barometer in the consideration of lowering the drinking age. The reality is that kids drink. Kids younger than 21 and 18 drink. That's no secret. Personally I have always believed in the theory of lowering the legal drinking age to 18 primarily based on the same beliefs you have.

The mere notion that adults have the option to willingly sacrifice their lives for a country that won't even let them kick back and blow off a little steam (steam probably caused by that very profession) is borderline offensive. On top of that, there is the ability to gain experience by consuming legally which might lead to the benefit of more responsible drinking. And an immediate benefit would be the number of arrests dramatically decreasing, which would probably yield the result of a decrease in future crime rates.

This theory has always reminded me of the controversy that has surrounded sex ed and distributing condoms in schools. Now just because you educate me on sex and give me something to use during sex doesn't mean I'm going to go crazy and start humping everything in sight. And who's to say most of those same kids haven't been having uneducated and unprotected sex. At least this way, this kids who do receive this education now have the option to be or not be sexually active knowing the possibility of contracting an STD or dealing with pregnancy.

I'm not saying this is a good not a bad idea, I'm just saying there are things to be considered when the topic of underage drinking arises. Do I think this will solve the epidemic? No. But it has the potential to help or decrease it. There is nothing more tempting to a teenager than the prospect of rebelling. What would happen if that was taken away?

Budget problems? Weird...

In order to stay consistent with my concern over budget cuts from anything involving education, I have chosen to discuss our state's current stance in that department.  The latest hot topic in Texas government is the current legislative session; particularly bills proposing budget cuts.  Controversy has arisen as a result of these bills and has become problematic between members in both the House and the Senate.  Debate is over which funds to cut in order to reduce our debt.  

But that's not the primary concern.  The main problem is the time constraint they are facing with only 31 days left.  Obviously the budget proposal is the necessary motive for these sessions, but debt is a simultaneous deterrent at the time also.  If the members don't reach a consensus in time it'll lead to a special session.

Senator Ogden proposed what he calls an "adequate" bill that he is struggling to get sufficient votes for and is the prime culprit of why decision making has dramatically slowed down.  Aside from that, the House and the Senate seem to be having a hard time reaching an agreement on the budget for the next two years to come.  The Senate is proposing a 12 billion dollar higher proposal than the House.  The amount difference is due to higher budgets for Health and Human Services, public schools, and scholarships proposed by the Senate, the House has cut funding form all these areas.

Another idea of Senator Ogden's was to dip into 3 billion dollars of the state's reserves in case the economy doesn't improve; which of course stirred up further controversy and continues to slow down progress even more.  Many say that using that back up would only worsen the situation and that we should save as much as possible, but the senator believes it necessary in order to further support those previously stated services.  No one is saying it's they are going to take out more money from the reserves, he is only keeping that option open in case the expected growth of the economy is not met.

Hopefully an agreement is made and a debate can start before a special session has to be held.  Most importantly, hopefully funds are not cut from the ever so important educational services.  Like I always say, priorities must be set and Congress must organize a level of importance to these services up for debate.  Education is the key to our future and aside from the most essential of services it should be last on the list of budget cuts.  This will have a very long and detrimental effect on the state in the long run if placed last on the list of importance.  Representatives need to take a long hard look at what is really worth keeping alive and what isn't, because they hold the fate of this state's potential.

Guns on campus

I decided to comment on your post because this is an area in which I have struggled with since word about this bill began to spread shortly after Colton Tooley opened fire on campus before turning the gun on himself. 

It directly affected me since I was one of the few students who actually passed by him on his way into the library. Remembering him turning around, smiling, and waving at a couple of us going into class with one hand while holding on to his weapon inside his coat with the other remains so surreal to me and still sends shivers up my spine. 

Since the incident, I have always consdiered the benefits and drawbacks of carrying a concealed weapon on campus. Much is to be considered. But this is the initial fear I had when debating whether I support it or not. It's no secret that while inebriated you become more reckless and make decisions that you normally wouldn't in sound mind. This can cause the obvious problem of the weapon being used for the wrong reason when the consequences are not measured. 

But another option to consider is how reponsible people seeking their concealed weapon lincense would behave in a possible future gunman rampage. Let's say Tooley had actually opened fire on those he encountered along the way in to the library, if someone mentally stable and using their best judgement had been around and carrying his/her personal weapon they would have been able to stop him and possibly prevent the wounding or even killing of innocent bystanders. 

I am by no means giving my full support to this proposed bill, I definitely still have mixed feelings about the entire issue, but that is something to consider. Which would be the lesser of the two evils?

Opinion of Texas State and Local Government

Standing back and surveying the effects that government has on it's citizens, it is notable that all states function in (essentially) the same manner in terms of their Constitutions and three branches of government. Obviously this is due to the Constitution based republic style of government that our country functions as.  So, in order to give the best critique of our state's government I will attempt to narrow down this broad concept and focus on political party control.

What distinguishes us from other states is the vast spectrum of diversity among our people.  There is so much variation among our population's ethnicity, backgrounds, ideology, socioeconomic status... the list could go on for days.  And all these distinctions become more noticeable as you travel from region to region.  You could almost say that Texas stands as a nation all it's own.

Along with these differences among our state's citizens comes choosing sides.  When forming opinions about the government, most people establish their political party preference, giving them something to fall back on because they can relate to a particular party's stance.  The results in determining ones political ideology and affiliating oneself with that chosen political party is directly linked to which party will become the dominant one in mandating how all citizens will be governed.  I can relate it all to a big puzzle, one piece links to another until they are all strategically placed in to completion.  Political parties are the basis of each candidate's platform running for office, individuals select their preferred party based on the development of their ideology, this preference comes from their background and the culture that they are a part of that was created by their environment, which in turn leads them to vote or not vote for our future leaders accordingly.  It's a given that Texas is a Republican dominant state, but this stems as a result in the shift of principles among the Democrats' ideology during the Civil Rights movement and completed with the rezoning battles.  However, as years progress and ethnic minorities become increasingly more and more the majority (as patterns have shown), the possibility exists that the Democratic party will regain its throne and rise as the dominant party once again. 

As it stands, Texas government hasn't faced much more problems than any other state given the nation's current economic condition.  Overall, we are facing the same tough decisions necessary to improve our situation.  It is tremendously unfortunate that our debt is so great that we are having to dip into our funds for education and it is something that I completely disagree with, but there doesn't seem to be any way around it.  But this is just one of many pieces of legislature that is made as a result of the Republican party establishing their dominance in this state.  I can not say whether things would be different if the Democratic party were in power and making decision based on their more liberal inclinations.  As I said initially, the choices we make, whether it be which political party we agree with or vote for or if we even  choose to vote at all, directly influences how we will be affected in our daily lives.

Will work for Pre-K

I was instantly drawn to this blog solely on the basis of the youtube video with the picture of the little girl holding the 'Will work 4 pre-k' sign.  That was rough.  

In Education: Tell It Like It Is, Michael Hurta presents the education cuts in the legislature in the rawest and sugar coated free way.  He makes an obviously valid point in bashing Republicans in being the culprits of the state's educational downfall.  There is no question or possible way to doubt that this will be extrememly detrimental to not only our state, but also to our entire nation's future.

House Bill 2485 seems to delineate the most rational and pragmatic solution- at least it would prevent further damaging effects.  As the writer says, Representative Scott Hochberg wouldn't even vote for the bill he created himself, but at least it would place all schools at an equilibrium.  It's a tremendous shame that we've dug ourselves in to a financial hole so deep that it is now having damaging effects the education system, but this bill it's 1,000 times more reasonable than denying a good education to our nation's future.  

Along with the kids, are teachers.  It seems like this bill would prevent many of them from losing their jobs.  And of course there will be cuts, but probably not as much then if left in the hands of others.  There's no denying that all districts will be losing a ton of money, that is more than clear, but it seems that at this point there is no other way around it.  

It seems really sad that pulling funds from education is now necessary because of poorly made decisions in the past.  Hopefully some other solution is found because this should be a last resort.  Maybe the all mighty power of the written/typed/shouted word can prevent this from happening.  New ideas could have the power to avoid this all together.

In the mean time, this bill could be a good starting line in at least preventing further deteriorating effects.  It's unfortunate that this is the best solution, but it's better than nothing.  At least it's a jumping off point.  I guess the silver lining is that we're in it so deep, there's no way other than up from here.

Can't maintain stability on such shaky ground

When it comes to anything that deals with distributing budgets all I ever hear is uncertainty.  It seems like a consensus is never reached when dealing with what is important and what isn't.  Of course that is to be expected... we aren't robots, and neither are Texas legislators.  But education should never be an option to consider taking out of the budget and should always be at the top of the priorities list.

I fully support and beleive that Congress should spare advanced placement courses.  Granted I do understand that we are on a tight budget and that we need to be bringing in revenue some how, but cut our youth's generation some slack.  I'm extremely grateful that I got out of taking Spanish in college, all I had to do was take a class and an exam, and I don't think anyone should be denied that type of assistance.  If you're smart enough to get in to an AP class then I think you've earned the priviledge to have still the option to do so.

Now I know the whole notion of raising higher income taxes is a little touchy, but maybe further consideration should be vested upon that then reducing education advancement.  And no I'm not an expert in that department, but I honestly don't think it would dig us in to a deeper hole, from what I've researched it seems like a sensible solution.  Like I said before, you won't get different results if you never try anything different.  My opinion is simply that education cuts should never be considered, at least not before the wealthier population (those who can acutally afford all those college hours) could potentially help solve our economic crisis.

To be consistent with my last entry, I do realize that our higher education system is facing the financial assistance cut, but (at least to me) doesn't it seem logical that if the students won't be receiving as much monitary assistance to attend college, that in order to eventually get them in (some pay is better than no pay) it would be in our best interest to save them money and allow them to knock out some credits for free while they're still wide eyed and bushy tailed?  That's my rationalization, and although I don't have a tremendous amount of experience in understanding the structure and functions of the complexity of government, it makes sense to me, the lowly tax paying citizen.

Like the author points out, there will always be large debate over which plan will cost us less, but why not try something new and see how it turns out?  Cutting useful programs that not only save time, but motivate those students who are devoted to pursuing their college career will be detrimental in the long run.  The debate could go back and forth all day- is it cheaper to cut AP courses?  Is it cheaper to eliminate more college staff in these undergrad courses?  Is it cheaper for the state to put the burden on those who have to pay for these classes in college rather than knocking them out for free (or at a dramatically lower rate) in highschool?  Who will it hurt?  Who will it benefit?  Which is worth the risk?  At the end of the day, it's in the hands of the legislators, and I think they should be cognizant of our nation's future.  To whom much is given, much is tested.

Hope you all have trust funds

This is my second semester at UT- yes, my transfer hours still allow me to take pre reqs at ACC, and this happens to be the only one I needed.  Seeing that I still have to take at least one class here I'd say it's pretty obvious just how expensive higher education really is, even the assistance I receieve from the Army isn't enough to cover tuition (not to mention books, parking permits, etc...)  I'd say the university's shortfall is really going to cost us in the years to come.  I found it really admirable and reassuring in reading The Daily Texan that my fellow classmates are just as concerned about it as I am.  They're mere presence at the meeting was significant in displaying a representation of the entire student body which I can guarantee is worried about the funding of their future is one way or another.  In my opinion, it made an even greater impact because President Powers is being hospitalized and was unable to attend.  The entire meeting was centered around improving government funding to higher education institutions in TX.  This is a challenge, since the hole is so deep, but those speakers who attended stressed the importance of handling this situation, even though it will not be resolved quite easily and will take sacrifices.  I want to remind people when reading this article and considering why it is so important that a good education is the most sound and valuable investment one can make, especially now in the state of our nation's economy.  Sacrifices should be made, funds should be reallocated (as suggested in the article), but they should not be depleted from our education and what fuels a better tomorrow.  New funding formulas should be proposed, given the urgency of the discussions in the meeting.  Hopefully new recommendations will yield better results.  The tremendous cut of financial aid proposed for the upcoming year will be extremely detrimental to us students, but with luck a remedy will be found.