Blog Stage 6

Classmate Andrea Coj responded to negative judgment towards Obama’s presidency in post titled "Blog 4" on her blog on December 3rd, 2014. It is evident from the article that Coj believes Obama has been doing his best to fix our country. Coj counter argues the article by describing how Obama “[made] an immigration policy” and does a decent job explaining this one reason. However, she fails to provide any other detailed explanation on why “Obama is not a bad president.” Because of this lack of support, Coj’s argument is not credible and is weak in structure. The amount of grammatical error also subtracts from her credibility. I suggest that she fix her grammar as it takes away from her professionalism. Instead of having three body paragraphs about one incident, I advise that each paragraph be another precedent where Obama help change or fixed one of the nation’s prolonged problems. The conclusion paragraph can be completely revised because it does not concisely restate the thesis. The last sentence of the conclusion can be deleted as it is obvious what Coj’s stance is and the sentence takes away from the overall message.

On Bad Terms

The U.S. prides itself on its freedoms and equality. However, I believe our system is fundamentally flawed. The first, and most prominent, mistake I’ve noticed about our system is the lack of term limits for a majority of positions. While presidency is limited to 2 terms, other equally important positions are unlimited, such as the senate and the House of Representatives. This would not be so bad if these politicians actually did their jobs but they don’t. Instead, they spend a majority of their time trying to get re-elected. In 2012, 91% of incumbents from the senate were re-elected. In that same year, 90% of incumbents from the House of Representative were re-elected. Again, these rates of re-election would not be bad if politicians were actually doing their jobs to get votes. However, that’s often not the case. These politicians are able to advertise better than challengers. After the ruling of U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, Justice John Paul Stevens said that “the right to choose representatives belongs not to the States, but to the people.” While I would love to be able to agree with his statement, I can not as today it seems that this right belongs to the representatives themselves. As for what we can do about this, there are a few things I can think of. First, we could limit the funding to political campaigns and eliminate PACs. This would stop politicians from wasting their time on fundraising because they wouldn’t be able to use the money they fundraised. Alternatively, we could put a limit on the number of terms a politician has. This would also help because incumbents would be less relevant, at least after they have served all possible terms. While these politicians would still be able to fundraise and waste their time on these activities, they would likely have at least one good term, their last, where they tried to fix things.

Where the Heck Is Everyone?

In Why didn’t people vote this year? by Jon Green of AMERICAblog, published on November 17th, 2014, the abysmal voter turnout of this year’s midterms were discussed. Only 36.4% of eligible voters cast their ballots, bringing the voter turnout rate to the lowest it has been since World War II. 45% of non-voters said they were unable to vote due to conflicts with school or work, missing a registration deadline, or not being able to make it to their polling location. This subset of non-voters is almost as large as the amount of people who actually voted. Having people who want to vote but can’t is obviously a problem. Green suggests three solutions to this problem: Opt-out voter registration, voting week and mail-in balloting. After giving explanations of each possible solution, Green presents a call to action to those in charge saying, “That the solutions are so easy only makes action that much more important.”
In this editorial, the author’s intended audience are those who are of voting age and care about politics. His purpose is to encourage reform in the way we vote. He claims that the solutions are there and can be easily implemented. Green supports his claim with examples of reform at the state-level, as well as with statistics. Green himself is fairly credible, having graduated with a degree in Political Science and high honors in Political Cognition. I agree with Green that there needs to be change. However, I am on-the-fence about mail-in voting. While it has been implemented in other states, I’m not sure it is the best course of action. Other than mail-in voting, I like the idea of a voting week and out-out voter registration.

People Hate Obama's Policies Because They Hate Obama

In this editorial from The Washington Times published on October 31, 2014, the author (kept anonymous in the article) criticizes Obama’s policies because they believe the policies are not working. Their purpose in writing this piece is to persuade voters not to vote for these policies. The author is somewhat credible, giving several statistics and facts but only one credited source. In addition, they make the audience feel resentful towards Obama’s policies by mentioned that the poorest 20 percent have seen their incomes fall under Obama’s policies and that many of the young people that voted for Obama have had to move back in with their parents. Personally, I have mixed feelings on this issue. I do not approve of any policy that does not do what it is supposed to. However, since this is obviously from the perspective of someone against Obama and his policies, it would not mention the good that has come from Obama’s policies. Improvements were mentioned; however, the author makes it clear they are not true improvements. For example, the author says low unemployment rates are lower because people have stopped searching for jobs. So, while the unemployment rates lowered because of Obama’s policies, they did not actually improve anything. Instead, the author tells us that these policies have sucked the hope out of the unemployed, making they feel as if it was impossible to get a job. So, while I agree with the author that some of Obama’s policies are bad, I can not agree all of his policies are bad. I think we need to pick and choose. We should keep what works and scrap what does not.

Ebola Scares the Crap out of People

On Sunday, October 19, 2014, the New York Times published an article titled "In U.S, Fear of Ebola Closes Schools and Shapes Politics". Since last month when a man infected with Ebola came to Dallas, the nation has been in shambles. Parents pulled their children out of a middle school in Mississippi after they found out its principal had been to Zambia, even though this nation was untouched by Ebola. Politicians from both parties are calling for the end of commercial air traffic between the United States and some African countries. Most public health experts say a shutdown would compound risks instead of alleviating them. The panic caused by Ebola mirrors those of the anthrax attacks of 2001 and the West Nile virus outbreak in New York City in 1999. However, has spread electronically, for the most part, instead of biologically. This panic caused by media is not limited to diseases. After the bombings at the Boston Marathon in 2013, researchers found that those exposed to a great deal of media within the first week reported more stress than the people who were actually there and survived. A lot of this fear comes from the health care system. Baruch Fischhoff says, “There are two elements to trust, one is competence and one is honesty.” While many know the disease is not easily transmittable, the fact that the hospital in Dallas has changed its story three times shows people that the system for managing this disease is imperfect.

I think this article is worth a read because it shows how easily people are manipulated by the media. The part about how people who were exposed to a great deal of media within the first week reporting more stress than those who were actually there and survived was particularly interesting. People usually like to be drama queens and blow situations out of reasonable proportion.