Stage Eight: Comment on a colleague’s work #2 | My Commentary: "Delayed in Austin"

Blog Stage Eight

Stage Eight: Comment on a colleague’s work #2

In Ms.  Ileana Krau’s editorial “Delayed in Austin”, Kraus maintains that the City of Austin waited too long for a change that should have been dealt with years ago. She is talking about the subject of traffic in Austin and she believes that it will not change anytime soon. In response to her opinion, I would have to agree with what she says.

Statistical facts Kraus mentions include:

-Austin as third ranked of worse traffic in the United States

-Dallas, San Antonio, and Houston follow close behind Austin.

-Corpus Christi and El Paso also topped it off on the list of Top 14 Cities of worse traffic

Ms. Kraus points out that Austin is smaller than LA and Washington but because of city growth and expansion within the past decade and a half, the problem is getting worse.

The truth is Ms. Kraus is right, Austin is definitely on the list of fastest growing cities in the United States. 

What I found rather interesting was that she said, “It is expanding faster than the network of travel is expanding.” She proceeds to elaborate on various ways for people to find a way out of traffic.

Although I-35 is now extended to four lanes southbound (downtown) and northbound, traffic is still great. Kraus recommends a possibility to extend I-35 below ground. I thought about this for a second before reading on, and found myself in agreeing completely with what she had to say next.

Though this idea is a good one, it may actually be counterproductive because the project no doubt will take at least a good couple of years to complete. It’s not a wise choice and would actually worsen traffic. Kraus then explores the possibility of a train system in Austin. She reasons that a train system would not function well as it does in New York or London because the area that needs to be covered is much bigger and thus requiring more stops.

“The system of busses would have to be adjusted to train or subway stops, so that the two systems could work well together,” says Kraus. Just last winter 2012, I took a vacation and spent about two weeks in Washington state. I observed many things very foreign to a Texan such as myself. I loved just how well the train station and bus systems worked hand in hand together. To me, this seemed totally out of my universe. I had never seen buses share some tunnels with trains, it appeared to me almost like a cultural shock.

The problem is finding the area to place the track in which people would have to agree to give up their land for the city’s use. Not many Austinites would be willing to give up their land to contribute to something bigger than themselves. So another possibility Kraus brings up is car-free zone downtown.

The idea of people commuting on trains is not bad. I think it would save many people gas money since they would have to only drive their cars to a train state or park pretty close to downtown. The concerns I have with this is lack of familiarity. For one, Austin inhabitants are new to the concept of commuting via train in which punctuality and time may ultimately be affected. Not citizens of Austin are familiar with traveling on a train, although public transportation such as bus is increasingly becoming a necessity especially for university students.

This being said, proliferation of parked cars near downtown would force the city of Austin to have to create more parking spaces. To sum it up, Kraus has given a number of possible changes Austin could implement, however all of these possibilities would take time to implement. She has given this some good thought into pros and cons of the situation.

In the end, she concludes that, "All these are only ideas that should have been considered when the city started growing rapidly. But nobody seemed to have made a real plan. One thing is clear: the traffic situation in Austin won't change any time soon. They waited way to long for a change to happen." It's a harsh reality, but I think she proves her point, and I totally agree with her opinions.

Stage Seven: Original editorial or commentary #2 | My Commentary: "Education Chairmen Join Algebra II Fray at SBOE"

Blog Stage Seven

Stage Seven: Original editorial or commentary #2

In Morgan Smith’s “Education Chairmen Join Algebra II Fray at SBOE” article, I learned about opposing views on the subject matter of whether algebra II should be included as a required course for high school students to graduate. I found it rather amusing to hear both sides’ claims.

The Senate Education Chairman, Dan Patrick, had this to say, “The idea that we think as a board or a Legislature that every one of those 5 million students must have algebra II to live the American dream is fool's gold.” While Celina Moreno, staff attorney for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund argued, “The inclusion of algebra II is critical to ensure students' opportunities aren't limited going forward.” I can see where both sides are coming from. To add on to Patrick’s opinion, House Public Education Chairman Jimmie Don Aycock mentioned, “There are many children that we are crowding to the side of the system because they do not see relevance in their courses.”

My two cents are as follows. I understand what Patrick is saying, and I believe it holds some truth to what he is saying. While algebra II is a big hindrance in students graduating from high school, not to mention, most of them will never again use it after they take the class, I concur with Moreno’s sentiment. I am a high school graduate, who HAD to take algebra II, although I failed it because of lack of comprehension, I still saw the benefits of taking the course. Ultimately, I was on par with my fellow classmates in the end who proceeded to take pre-calculus. After taking pre-calculus, I stopped and no longer continued on to calculus. That’s where Aycock proves a great point. Many children, including myself when I was in their shoes a couple years ago, do not see the relevance in taking many courses because in the end it does not hold any part to their success later on in life.

This is my personal sentiment. I believe those who want to pursue higher education even if it is community college, should be required to take algebra II. Taking algebra II at the minimal was my saving grace because for one the concepts stuck. Proof of this was I passed the TAKS with a commended performance which ultimately allows me to be able to take “college mathematics” as a substitute for college algebra and have my math credits accounted for and done. I enjoy math, but I won’t be doing it for the rest of my life. Math fascinates me but indeed it is definitely not my forte - I don’t absolutely need it for my intended career. I also was spared of taking math placement tests and classes that I already took prior in high school. Algebra II is important for those who want to be successful in college; Texas government needs to at least keep the education at this standard. It is not too high – I think Algebra II should be just the minimal all students should take if they hope to achieve have a decent high school diploma.

Stage Six: Comment on a colleague’s work #1 | My Commentary: Voter ID Laws - The Troubles are There

Blog Stage Six

Stage Six: Comment on a colleague’s work #1

In Mrs. Ileana Kraus’ “Voter ID Laws – The Troubles are There” original editorial, Ms. Kraus claims that it would have been sensible to take care of people who don’t possess IDs before the voter law was passed. I absolutely concur with the said statement. The voter ID law is overall a big hassle.

This voter ID law calls for voters to possess at least one out of seven legal photo IDs. The problem is the hassle of voting is very meticulous – if there’s even one tweak in the placement of middle name’s initial, you would have to confirm this through legal documentation. It’s not worth time and effort to vote if such a small issue of name initial placement proves to be the biggest hindrance in voting for a minute or two. I don’t agree with people who claim that the new voter ID laws don’t cause any change to votes on Election Day. There are many reasons why this statement is invalid besides the fact that they have to show identification upon voting.

Though it makes logical sense for a person to be required to possess a form of identification to vote, that is not the underlying problem. Ms. Kraus maintains that the problem is not that people don’t desire ownership of an ID, but rather not all people have one. She goes on to say that after the law was passed, DPS made an effort to extend office hours so people could apply easier for IDs.

The bottom line is they extended hours only after the laws were passed. Ms. Kraus argues that it would have made more logical sense to consider people without an ID before the bill was signed and placed into effect. In the long run, requiring voters to have an ID to vote limits their options if they don’t meet the requirements of the law. I couldn’t agree more with her sentiment about requiring all citizens to have one of seven forms of identification upon becoming a citizen of Texas. It definitely would have averted any frustrations on Election Day.

She also lists and reveals more obvious problems about post-election day. Lastly, she asserts that “the problem lies not in the law itself, but in the way it was enacted.” She reasons, “If a law had been passed first, that Texans of the age of 18 to have an ID, there wouldn’t have been many reasons to be against the law of voter IDs.” Such a brilliant deduction, I’m on par with the logic there – well said Ms. Kraus!

Stage Five: Original editorial or commentary #1 | The Lack of Knowledge Behind Texas State and Local Government

Blog Stage Five

Stage Five: Original editorial or commentary #1

            There seems to be no discretion about what Texas citizens know about government at the state and local government. First off, the reason why all this is important is because WE (referring to Texas citizens including myself) live in Texas and our opinion. Our opinions are subject to our needs. We pay taxes to the state and the utilization of those taxes must be considered. That being said, we need the right representatives to make our voices known but there’s a flaw in that. Many people don’t know who they should vote because of the lack of education and comprehension of what that candidate stands for.

            Without any knowledge behind our government, virtually a person surrenders their voice unless in the decisions of the government and public policy. Foremost, more and more power is being handed down from the federal government to the states. Which means: for us Texans, our representatives, senators, and governor are being allocated more power to make decisions for us –the citizens of Texas. All of us have a vital role in government, regardless of motivation, we SHOULD have some involvement in saying what and how should our local government handle that power.

            The theme behind this editorial and commentary is citizens’ needs. The more power our local government has, the more we should contribute to its decision making. If the quality of education needs improvement and mending, it’s up to the citizens to demand the need for improvement of the educational system.

            The local government is CLOSER to us, figuratively speaking and literal. Citizens have power to make changes faster at the local level. For example, the abuse of the usage of water – the local government understands the scarcity of water especially during the summer. This concern for the distribution of water should not be taken lightly especially since with the City of Austin’s inclination to be serious states of drought very so often. A person concerned about this matter can campaign to the government about different approaches and methods to conserve water.

            All in all, I personally would not be so concerned with the lack of knowledge of our government weren’weren't for this class. The state education code requires students to learn about Texas State and Local Government. The comprehension of how government functions at the local level is the key to better communicating our needs as citizens. I feel this class is imperative to take, simply because we (students) are the future. The decisions made today will ultimately affect the way we live months and years to come.

             

Stage Four: Critique an editorial or commentary from a Texas blog | My Critique: A Good Steward…When Caught

Blog Stage Four

Stage Four: Critique an editorial or commentary from a Texas blog

In Ross Kecseg’ “A Good Steward… When Caught” article, the author claims that those responsible of oversight are guilty of abuse by insisting that their lifestyle is in need of lavish corporate perks and prestige. He believes the guilty party should instead, “Find a job in the private sector and stop sticking North Texans with [their] bar tab.” I completely agree with Kecseg on this matter. Is it really required for city officials such as the mayor to purchase a $1,500 bottle of wine? That is just unacceptable. Let’s investigate this even further.

 Here is some background information. First and foremost, Mireya Villareal, did a thorough investigation of the utilization of funds by officials at the Dallas-Fort Worth airport. The CBS journalist discovered that multi-million dollar funds were spend on travel expenses to domestic and international destinations that include Las Vegas, Dubai, and South Korea. What were these expenditures? These expenditures were first class-airfare, chauffeured limousines, 5-star hotels and $7,000 dinner tabs along with shocking alcohol purchases. Now was all this necessary? Of course not! Think about the money abused here, add them all up, there is so much you can do with that $2.2 million. Like say perhaps donate it to a hospital?

The airport is paid for by traveler fees and airlines. However since it is a public subsidiary of joint owners, the city of Dallas and Fort Worth appoint eleven out of twelve members as trustees to oversee the airport. Trustees can be mayors, city council, and other staff members. One of whom was the Dallas Mayor, Mike Rawlings who is responsible for oversight and accountability. Accountable is not the right word for this mayor who ordered three bottles of wines worth $1,500 a piece along with a $7,300 dinner with Korean Air executive. That excessive abuse of money was only reimbursed after the mayor discovered that CBS had launched a thorough investigation of where and how the campaign funds were allocated to.

 Was this truly a legit business expense? Here’s his reasoning, “Because we need to be good stewards. We do not need to be spending $1,500 a bottle on wine… It was good for the city, but I didn’t want the citizens to pay for it.” Be good stewards, or be major league suck ups and appease international officials? No doubt, I would never pay so much for a bottle of wine in my entire life. How exactly is this good for the city? Why should we even have to pay for it in the first place, you made that call without the citizen’s knowledge, Mr. Mayor and Mrs. Mayor (yes, officials do take their spouses to enjoy a meal worth the equivalent price of seven Apple Macbook Pros.) 

 The truth is Kecseg is right about airlines being attracted to access to profitable routes. Lavish favors do not secure routes between international destinations and DFW. “If your lifestyle requires lavish corporate perks and prestige, find a job in the private sector and stop sticking North Texans with your bar tab,” says Kecseg. I agree with you my fellow Texan. Kecseg as of now runs the DFW office for Empower Texans and Texans for Fiscal Responsibility. The way he titled his blog pretty much sums up how I feel: the mayor was only a "good steward" when he was caught by CBS doing a thorough investigation.

Stage Three: Critique an editorial or commentary from a Texas newspaper | My Critique: Just one more thing about Rick Perry’s future …

Blog Stage Three

Stage Three: Critique an editorial or commentary from a Texas newspaper

In Jody Seaborn’s “Just one more thing about Rick Perry’s future” article, the author claims that Perry’s future seems very dim in his intention to run for president. In fact, she even goes to say that, “[ Perry ] may have blown his best shot.” Personally, I would have to agree with Mr. Seaborn’s opinion, an editorial writer and columnist, in the Austin American’s Statesmen newspaper.  

Perry’s candidates in 2012 didn’t have the best standing, as a result it got him nowhere. Seaborn’s uses the metaphor of comparing such candidates to “outright jokes.” I think that’s a harsh thing to say, but more along the lines of what many would say too. Here’s my two cents: I’ve lived in Texas my whole life, for about 20 years, 21 years coming this November 24, 2013. My prime concern would be the educational system placed in Texas. So far, in contrast to other states, Texas has ever been so makeshift. Polices after polices revised, no stability. In the long, the educational system is not as efficient as it could be with Perry as governor.

Come the Republican Primary field in 2016, Rick Perry will have to face many candidates: Marco Rubio, Chris Christi, Jeb Bush, Paul Ryan, Rand Paul, Bobby Jindal. This right here is a good list. Ted Cruz will probably be Perry’s biggest obstacle in the Republican Primary. Texas as of now is a Red Sea with blue dots; however with the proliferation of Hispanics migrating to Texas, we are seeing phenomenal change in the demographics of it all. That being said, Hispanics are not fond of Republicans in general, especially Perry.

Perry must prepare wisely and be sure to evade another “Opps”moment. What he needs to lay down are hardcore facts, things that will appeal to the public ethically and emotionally, but moreover logically. All in all, 2016’s candidates seem much stronger than 2012’s. In the end, someone will prevail as the winner of the nomination. Will Rick Perry even make it far enough to have the vision of even winning the White House? That seems very dire, don’t you think?

Stage Two: Article introduction and colleague’s blogs | State Gets Waiver From No Child Left Behind

Blog Stage Two

Stage Two: Article introduction and colleague’s blogs

State Gets Waiver From No Child Left Behind

The article I’m presenting before your eyes talks about the state of Texas securing a waiver from the No Child Left Behind.
The government had previously planned to intervene due to the failure of school districts to meet 100 percent of students passing reading and math exams for 2014. However, now only a low percent of schools will have to abide by federally prescribed interventions. Initially some school districts were asked to set aside 20 percent of their funds for tutoring which is now, no longer going to be the case.
The waiver is important because without it - school districts would have to face sanctions that may force restructuring for the sole reason of not being able to meet the condition that all students pass reading and math exams.
All in all, the Texas Education Agency aims to maintain flexibility for school districts as much as possible in its agreements with the government at the federal level.