Peer Commentary #2

I commented on Alexander Bainter's article about voters in Texas.

I must admit I am registered to vote, but I have never voted. I am just another statistic. Bainter makes a great argument that because Texas is like-minded, people don't see the need to vote. If they already think the Republican is going to win, they don't vote. I absolutely agree with what Bainter has presented in his article. He also has a very intriguing writing style, which allows for an easy read. Overall this is a great article written by Bainter.

Standardized Testing

Texas has recently switched to a new form of standardized testing, State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR). The new STAAR test replaced the outdated TAKS test, but is not any better than its predecessor. New legislation passed in 2013 was supposed to limit the number of standardized tests students would have to take each year, but those limits did not effect the preparation for them. Students still have to take a mid-year benchmark test to assess where they are at and they receive multiple packets with practice problems on them to prepare for a practice test. Standardized testing is time consuming and ineffective. Teachers are forced to change their curriculum to fit the needs of the government test, instead of teaching more closely to the course's actual curriculum. Instead of taking a weekly spelling test, elementary students now have to go through "STAAR boot camp". Students are losing out on proper education by having to focus on passing just one test per class every year. Even though Texas legislators reduced standardized testing just last year, they need to limit it more and limit the amount of preparation work that is also required for those tests.

Peer Commentary

I commented on Alexander Bainter's post about eliminating Democratic Primaries in Texas.

I understand the thought behind eliminating the Democratic Primary, but if it were eliminated we would lose part of our right to vote. Though most of us do not actually exercise our right to vote in the primaries it would not be fair to the people. The idea you have proposed does would probably help a Democratic candidate get elected to a State office because what they are doing now is not working. This article was well written and Bainter makes valid points, but it does not discuss our right to vote being infringed.

High-speed Rail System

Texas is one of the fastest growing states and one of the largest states. Transportation continues to be an issue throughout the state's largest cities. The Texas Central Railway plans to construct a bullet train system that will link the Dallas-Fort Worth area to Houston. The state should back this privately funded project and expand it. Not only should it link the DFW area to Houston, it should also include Austin and San Antonio. Many people commute between Dallas and Houston for work on a weekly basis and many also have family across these cities. The average travel time between these two cities is 4.5 hours by car and is expected to increase, whereas a high-speed rail system could make the journey in less than 1.5 hours. The implementation of this new system would mean a decrease in the number of automobiles on the highways which would reduce traffic congestion.

A new high-speed rail system would create thousands of new jobs in the state. Texas is not in an economic slump right now, but adding more high paying jobs never hurts. The addition of a high-speed rail would reduce emissions by reducing the number of cars on the highway. The United States has been behind many European and Asian countries on the development of a high-speed railway and Texas has a chance to lead the way for this new transportation system. The project should benefit the the state, but the Texas government should also provide financial support so it can connect the largest cities in the state.

Fracking

Ralph De La Cruz, editorial writer for The Dallas Morning News, took on the controversial subject of fracking in Texas in his recent article. Fracking is a type of oil drilling that uses large amounts of water and harmful chemicals. It is an effective way to increase productivity and efficiency in extracting oil. It has received a lot of criticism due to it being harmful to the environment. In Denton, Texas fracking has been banned inside city limits. 

According to Ralph De La Cruz banning fracking could actually hurt taxpayers. De La Cruz is no fan of fracking, but he points out that it has played a large part in Texas' economic fortunes. The surplus in state funds from the oil industry contribute to new transportation projects that would otherwise come from an increase in taxes. De La Cruz seems to be against banning fracking in order to keep taxes lower. I would have to agree with De La Cruz in allowing fracking because the oil industry is booming in Texas and if it keeps taxes lower then that is also a plus. I do find it funny that he basically says he is in favor of protecting the environment, but not if it costs him more in taxes. De La Cruz does not particularly have any credibility on the subject other than he is a tax payer who does not want to give the government any more money than he has to.

States' Rights

States' rights continue to be an issue in modern society. Tara Trower Doolittle, editor of the Viewpoints section of the Austin American-Statesman, gives us her thoughts on states' rights in her recent article titled States' Rights Arguments Can't Be Separated From History. She believes that the states aren't deserving of the power that the 10th amendment gives them, which states the powers not delegated to the United States are reserved to the states or the people. Her whole argument is stemmed from what Republican candidate Ken Paxton said about how states should be able to control every aspect of marriage, not just whether or not same sex marriages should be recognized. Doolittle, who is African American, brings up the Loving v. Virginia case, which invalidated any laws prohibiting interracial marriages. She tries to use the Loving case to make Paxton's ideas on states' rights seem ridiculous, but she failed to establish credibility on the subject by not using a direct quote from Paxton. She could be twisting Paxton's words just to throw the fact that she is part of an interracial marriage herself. Doolittle even says "with that logic it stands to reason" that Paxton basically wants to ban interracial marriages. She really has no evidence to make such a statement. Her closing statement is about how the federal government should take away all the power from the states in order to protect the people. I completely disagree with her belief that the federal government does a better job of protecting citizens each individual state. Texas does a great job of protecting its people, which is one reason people keep moving here. If you don't like the way things are run in Texas, don't move here.

Wendy Davis on Gun Rights

Davis Takes Friendly Fire on Gun Issue

This article is from The Texas Tribune and it involves Wendy Davis' new stance on gun laws. She has previously been against the American citizen's rights to own/carry firearms, but just a few days ago she stated that she supports open-carry of handguns. Open-carry would mean that someone could have a handgun on a holster where it can be seen. Currently the only way citizens can carry a handgun legally is by having a Concealed Handgun License and carrying it where it cannot be seen. This article shows that she is taking the side of her opposition, likely to earn votes from conservatives. While she may be trying to get more votes from conservatives, she is taking heat from other Democrats who strongly oppose open-carry legislation. This is an interesting article because we are in an election year and we are already seeing candidates working on swing voters. I find it funny that someone as liberal as Wendy Davis "supports" expanding our right to bear arms, especially after voting for legislation that would limit our second amendment rights. Sounds like a politician being a politician (lying to get votes) to me. This article should be read so you can see that when Wendy Davis picks a side, she sticks with it until the end.