Commentary: A Drought We Cannot Ignore

In Matthew Young’s blog post, “Doing What it Takes to Pretend You’re Not in Texas,” Young brings light to the current drought in Texas that is worsening over time, and people are the main problem. His take on water conservation has reminded me of the vast majority of people who actually are not aware of how they are wasting water and even more importantly, how they can save water.

I do not believe that water restrictions alone are enough to conserve a sufficient amount of water for the upcoming years, however, but that the citizens of this state must also be willing to comply and do more conserving on their own part.

Certain methods of saving water at home include: keeping the shower time to five minutes or under – which could save up to 1,000 gallons per month, watering the lawns once every three days in the summer and once every five days in the winter, inspecting the landscape irrigation system regularly for leaks or broken sprinkler heads, teaching children to turn off the faucet after each use, and many more simple methods inside and outside of the house. There are numerous resources available for informing the public about preservation methods as well.

The epitome of water conservation is to use our water wisely and care for it properly, and it is crucial so for the future generations to be ensured of a sufficient amount of clean water and reduced use of electricity for waste water services. With a finite resource of water available – seven percent of the whole Earth’s saltwater is not available for drinking, and only one percent is available for drinking water – people, wildlife, and nature are at risk of endangerment, as water is essential for food and sustaining life. Not only that, water helps us in our daily activities, such as cooking and cleaning.

I appreciate Young’s post because this topic should be brought up for the public’s attention; the water drought is having a more prevailing effect on our lives and should not be stored in the back of our minds with lesser priority. I agree with Young that water is only becoming more of a scarce resource, increasing its importance in our lives that we need to do our best to preserve. Not only should we conserve water, but we should protect it from pollution and waste, for the importance of nourishing all life dependent of water.

People cannot continue to disregard this upcoming disaster, and many are oblivious of even the impact that the minute changes in their water usage can have on water conservation. If we encourage more citizens to follow these procedures, a whole lot of people doing them will add up in the long-run, but it takes the first step of changing our lifestyle. Each of us depends on water for life, so the responsibility of conserving water should not rest only on the government, but should be a job for the everyday person.

Capital Punishment: Retribution for the Righteous

People naturally respond to incentives. As for the case of punishment, people are inclined to steer away from it, which is why capital punishment continues to exist in Texas. However, the reason capital punishment is still a case debated today is because of differing opinions towards the level of justice that should be permitted.

Settling how far capital punishment should go has been an issue floating in the air for a while, and my take on it is that Texas should continue using only lethal injections on those who committed severe cases, but also, giving them an extra choice of whether they would prefer to be detained for a life-time, rather than facing the needle against their will.

For many people, capital punishment confronts their religious stance on murder. My question is, would it be as wrong to take their life if it was their choice? The space allotted for prisons is shrinking, yet there is not a decreasing amount of people disobeying the law. This leaves Texas to take major action against severely punishing those who have committed the worse crimes for the benefit of the community.

I see capital punishment as saving lives by ridding of the ones who hindered the lives of others from subsisting. This type of punishment does not seem so outrageous, as well, in comparison to the atrocious crime that the person probably willingly committed. The method of lethal injection is as subtle as I can imagine putting someone to death can be, and behind the science of it, the chemicals of the injection are strong enough to knock out a person’s conscience in up to five seconds.

Capital punishment is necessary to deter murder by putting the fear of death into future, would-be criminals. Society has a moral obligation to protect the safety and welfare of citizens, even if it means punishing those who have proven to be detrimental to society. My only addition to the law is that justice can be given in the hands of the criminals if Texas gives them the choice of death or permanent isolation, to mark the middle-ground between what might be justifiable or unfair. 

"Bag Ban" Benefits

After reading Wes Davis’ take on the “Bag Ban” in Austin, I commend his lengthy opinions on both the pros and cons of ridding plastic bags.

Disadvantages of ridding these non-biodegradable bags include the convenience to the consumers, such as being able to wad them up into small amounts and store them in packed tight spaces, requiring less space and composed of less weight than paper bags, and convenience to retailers, as plastic bags are very cost-effective at a fraction of a cent per piece, in comparison to five cents or more per paper bag. As for me personally, I enjoy using plastic bags as my trash bags for the tiny trash cans that are easily transportable. I agree that even going to the grocery store, while forgetting my bags to take with me, is a pain at times.

Some of the advantages that Davis had not mentioned include the durability and strength of paper bags over plastic ones, as I am able to transport a variety of belongings without the paper bag ripping on me. Also, I agree with Davis that the economic benefits for the store must be greater now that people are obligated to buy bags at the checkout.

As far as convenience and costs goes, plastic bags conquer paper bags; however, the cost on the environment definitely does not compare to these overhead benefits that might come with the ban.

Davis states that discontinuing the use of plastic bags is obviously good for the environment, but he does not delve into how exactly the environment benefits or is harmed. This leads me to take an expanded view on the effect of this ban towards the environment.

Plastic bags are detrimental to the environment through the way they degrade -- in fact, these bags take an enormous length of time to degrade, and end up breaking down into contaminating particles that pollute the soil and nearby water sources. This means damage to the marine life; many aquatic animals mistake the bags for food, resulting in the death of around 100,000 marine animals a year. Thousands of birds also die from swallowing and choking on the discarded particles. Even more, the non-renewable source of petroleum that is used to make plastic bags could be used for transportation or heating.

Though very few, the advantages that plastic bags have on the environment include its smaller weight, which reduces to less solid waste in the landfill. According to EPA, the manufacturing of paper bags requires 40 percent more energy to produce them, contributes 70 percent more air pollution, and adds 50 percent more to water pollution.

My only other contention, or added opinion, is that I do not believe ridding of the plastic bags will help the nation’s garbage management, which is crucial for a solution concerning our situation now. We are in need of a cost-effective process for collecting and recycling the remaining plastic bags that still circulate, or at least to find a way for these bags to degrade safely so to not clog waterways and spoil the landscape.

I agree with Davis in that the benefits of the ban exceed the disadvantages, especially since the condition of our environment is what we should be taking care of the most. The condition of the earth is what will sustain the life that inhabits it; therefore, I place much higher priority in supporting the legislation that helps preserve marine and human life. I also find reusable bags to be very handy and effective, and the economic benefits reign towards the ban on plastic bags.

In all, the environment and economy is greatly aided through this bag ban; we are able to contribute to the collecting, disposing, and street-cleaning costs, and also reduce the numerous bags that are being wastefully thrown away. I believe that this ban should be upheld in other states for the betterment of our environment and economy.

Unlikely but Necessary Reform for Immigration

A severely broken immigration system calls for needed remedy, but prospects show that this remedy is unlikely to come anytime soon. Many complain that illegal immigration is actually hurting the economy more than helping it; reasons behind this include: drainage of resources, as immigrants use the money earned to send off to relatives in their home countries, and avoidance of paying taxes, yet are still able to use free health care, food stamps, and other services meant for citizens. Most importantly, the low-income jobs that illegal immigrants do for the state still dissatisfy the unemployed, as some argue that they are just as willing to take on these jobs.

House leaders call for more border security, enforcement on immigration laws, and a fixed system to strengthen the economy. The key component towards helping our economy, however, is the legalized workforce that will come from citizenship.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that by 2023, the immigration reform would lead to an increase of 10 million people, which in turn, would significantly increase the number of people in the labor force and boost economic output and productivity. Average wages for all U.S. workers are expected to increase, and the amount of capital investment will also grow, helping the country’s GDP and economic prospects improve. The housing market would be enhanced with more demand and higher prices, and the growth in jobs would allow for more entrepreneurs to rise up to the demand of a broken economy.

On a moral side of the issue, families of illegal immigrants will not have to be broken apart, but instead, will have the opportunity to support each other and be protected from abusive employees. Immigrants can receive fair wages that contribute to the economy.

The United States is inevitably becoming a nation of immigrants, as immigrants continue to be a crucial component to building our state up and contributing to businesses. Interests of the legislature should be gradually directed towards matching the interests of the immigrants, as they are the focus of much of today and compose a large percentage of the United States' population. Especially for the state of Texas, the rising population of Hispanic Americans calls for needed legislation concerning their futures.
The main roadblock that prevents reform from taking place is the lack of agreement between Democrats and Republicans on legalization and citizenship, rather than on these economic and moral considerations. Passing this reform not only necessary, but is also a win-win situation for both the business sector and for illegal immigrants.

Racial Tension Beneath the Human Race

An article constructed by Dennis Prager, a blogger on the Texas Insider, caught my attention because it raised up a question of race and how the President has impacted it. In fact, Prager claims that Obama has had no effect on the racial tensions that do still exist beneath the curtains of the Zimmerman case and other daily happenings. Prager goes deeper into the subject of race, however, by pointing out that "racial tensions" are lies and are not portrayed in the fashion they are meant for. If the term "racial tension" were used properly, then this would mean both sides of the case should be morally equal at fault. Prager defends his view by bringing up the history of the 1991 anti-Semitic riots in Crown Heights, where journalists tied the incident of blacks attacking innocent Jews as acts of "racial tensions." Especially in today's society, Prager notes that "racial tensions" have steered towards blacks' relationship with whites.

In Prager's words,

"Once one understands that 'racial tensions' is a euphemism for a black animosity toward whites and a left-wing construct, one begins to understand why the election of a black president has had no impact on most blacks or on the left."

I personally do not believe that racial tensions have become as narrow as blacks against whites. Racial tensions will never disappear from the human race, but even more, will continue to exist between several different races, only hidden from news coverage; because of the United States' history of segregation of blacks and whites, it's only likely that these tensions will still be uncovered and unnecessarily emphasized. As history denotes, unfair treatment did not only concern African Americans, but Japanese Americans were internalized in camps during WWII, and even today, people are mistreated or faced with prejudice because of whatever ethnicity they may be.

When Prager states that the term "racial tensions" is used falsely, however, I agree in that it has been brought out of proportion in regards to the situation it is placed in. Racial tensions have become more publicized between how whites and blacks conflict with each other, yet the issue might not involve race in the first place, or the hatred towards the other side is only brought up because of the history behind race relations. This kind of publicity has ignited the assumption that much of this hatred still underlines the motives of many Americans; focusing on race blurs the lines of the incident when it comes to verifying and seeking the truth behind what actually happened. Even if the incident involves race, the tension usually leans towards the minority, emphasizing even more of the hatred that exists because of the history of white supremacy.

As for what has changed since President Barack Obama's election, I did not expect any racial tensions to improve on the basis that our president is African American. Prager's point that racial tensions don't improve because people hold onto the assumption that whites are racist speaks some truth -- when a case such as Zimmerman comes up, so much attention is placed on the color of skin rather than the center of the situation. These strained relations persist because Americans are not able to let go of the prideful, protective attitude they store towards their own race.

Immigration Reform: Compromise From Both Sides

The issue of immigration has frequently caught my interest, and I strongly favor granting full citizenship to illegal immigrants in our country, but this particular editorial written in Dallas News brings up a different side of the issue I had not considered: granting legalization, which is only permanent residency status, without the benefits of citizenship. I agree with the author of this article, who states that compromise is needed, although very tough to reach. With more than an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in our country -- contributing to our work force, relying on the prosperity and economic opportunity the U.S. offers to raise their families, but not being effectively monitored, protected, or taxed -- this issue is becoming increasingly crucial to resolve. Passing of the legislation will take both sides of the issue to be willing to cooperate, however. As Republicans demand a revamped border security and Democrats desire a better immigration program, an agreement on both sides does not seem near.

The author’s idea of legalization is one I do not believe will be any easier to agree on, though. I imagine many families being unsatisfied with only being granted residency; in fact, legalization seems to disparage the immigrants’ purpose and capacity to contribute to their country, as if to assume that they only are needed for workforce and miniscule activities. To truly be named a U.S. citizen is a proud label I would expect many immigrants to want to claim, and certain benefits, such as working for the federal government and voting, are not granted without citizenship. Also, a strong group of people who disagree with legalization argue that it would take away too many jobs and deplete the government services.

I noticed that the author also left out evidence and facts concerning what legalization could do for our country and why it is necessary. Legalizing 11 million people could mean adding to our GDP an estimated $2 billion each year. The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) states that undocumented immigrants have already contributed $10.6 billion through sales, property, and income taxes, which could rise to $12.6 billion after legalization if immigrants paid more in federal, state, and local taxes. The Center for American Progress reports that 200,000 new jobs could be added through immigration reform. Non-economic benefits include an increased reporting of crimes and reuniting of families.

The author seems to be voicing his opinion for the general public to be aware of how essential this legislation is, but I expected more detail concerning the extent of its necessity – from bettering our economy to creating a viable society for hard-working people to improve their lives.

A Fight for Life

     Texas Republicans are inching forward in their success towards House Bill 2, the anti-abortion legislation that has caused many to riot and is deemed as one of the most restrictive anti-abortion bills in the U.S. The Texas Observer published an article concerning the Texas Senate passing the legislation, which is now required to gain Gov. Rick Perry’s approval, but the journey of this legislation has been a rough debate between Republican and Democratic senators who zealously fight for their case. This bill has not only stirred up a heated battle between legislators and political parties, but commoners are also actively involved, aggressively speaking out their pro-choice or anti-abortion sentiments.

      This article particularly caught my attention because it portrays much of the inside action in the photos – in light of the protests, both sides of the debate, and social media even. Although this bill is focused around a particular subject, it is interesting to see from this article how legislation can affect numerous people and have them riled up for a cause that would typically only challenge women and their rights. However, this article clearly shows how the issue of abortion is bringing together people of various backgrounds because of the commonality that ultimately resides in every person – the value of life. I suggest this as a read for others to gain interest in how strong of an impact this issue could potentially have on our future, as Democrats in a Red state continue to charge forward to make change while Republicans as well stand ground.