RE: Our government needs to learn some things so school kids can, too

In Jennifer Klinger’s editorial, “Our government needs to learn some things so school kids can, too,” brought up very good points on how the education program in Texas has some serious problems. With all the cuts going on across Texas, it is not surprising you saw the effects happening this past school year and not just the next.

It is a shame that teachers, librarians, and certain classes are getting cut out of the budget. The worst is for the teachers, I think, because they are letting go the experienced ones who have taught for many years and replacing them with brand new ones, so they don’t have to pay as high a salary since it is their first year. Changing the style of teaching on how teachers have been taught in college to teach is very hard on them when they only have a summer to make whole new teaching plans and techniques. If you think about changing to block scheduling, yes it might not be good for the teachers but maybe for the students. Block scheduling is more like how college classes would be and will maybe help the students transition a little better into college. I say this because going from high school to college the big change for me was going from having the same 8 classes a day to going to only like 2 to 3 classes every other day.

Klinger also talked about the conservatives having big influence in the Texas budget cuts for education. I do agree because Republicans do have control over the Legislature and they are mostly all conservatives but the only way we can change this is to elect more Democratic officials into the Legislature to balance it. Raising taxes is against what conservatives believe in but they won’t raise them because that is what they believe. That is what their party platform is and they aren’t going to go against it because it may jeopardize if they get re-elected or not.

 There does need to be big changes very soon in Texas government because we are going more into debt, making huge budget cuts where they really shouldn’t be but this isn’t going to change over night. The Legislature isn’t going to change their ways until the people of Texas change the Legislature by electing different people who stand for the right thing, which is the Texas citizen. 

Is Texas' new law against First Amendment?

For many years, abortion has been a problem in Texas. You are either pro-life or pro-choice when it comes to this. Conservatives have been trying to make abortion illegal in the state of Texas and with a new law that will go into affect on September 1^st; they are one step closer to their goal.

The new law, which is being called Texas’ sonogram law, easily passed in the House and Senate because both are controlled by Republican and with Republican Governor Rick Perry, who was very quick to sign the law into affect. The law requires women who seek an abortion to undergo a few things before they can make their decision. At least within 24 hours before an abortion is performed, the women must have a sonogram which uses ultrasounds to create an image of the fetus. The attending doctor will be required by law to describe the fetus from the results of the sonogram images, including the heart beat, a medical description of the fetus, and what organs are present. The only way a woman can deny this is if the pregnancy was the result of sexual assault, incest or the fetus has a medical disability. Also, if doctors violate the law by not doing a sonogram and description, they face losing their medical licenses and a possible criminal misdemeanor prosecution with fines up to $10,000.

Taking a look at this law that is going to be in effect really soon, it is evident that it makes a doctor do something they don’t want to do and most likely have a woman to be forced to listen to something she has probably already considered on an individual level. A New York based abortion-rights advocacy group, Center for Reproductive Rights, has filed a lawsuit against the new Texas law saying it violates the First Amendment rights of the doctor and the patient and also that it is unconstitutional.

If women go to a clinic to receive an abortion, they most likely have thought long and hard about their decision and what they are doing. Our Texas government shouldn’t try to change their minds through implicated guilt at the last minute.  This is not to mention that Roe v. Wade allows for woman to have an abortion.

To know a little more about the law

Migraines can might make you lose

Migraines, they are the worst. You are lucky if you do not ever get one in your lifetime. In a blog post by Eileen Smith, who blogs about politics in Texas and nation wide, I was able to learn more about Michele Bachmann, one of the candidates for the Republican nomination in the 2012 U.S. presidential elections.

Smith talks about how Bachmann suffers from severe migraines - migraines that are so bad that there have been occasions she was unable to fulfill her congressional duties. Smith provides a link to an article from Politico which tells about many times Bachmann had to take a break because of her severe migraines. There was a time in May 2010 that her migraine forced her to go to her office and lie down in the dark.  This is causing the media to question how Bachmann’s severe migraines will affect her fitness for president. Karl Rove, who is from Fox news, believes that Bachmann should release her medical records so that U.S. voters can be reassured she is physically capable.

After reading Smith’s blog made me question if someone like this should run for office. But I agree with what Smith is saying that the media is taking Bachmann’s migraine issue and is blowing it up to make a big deal about something. Yes Bachmann can take medicine for her migraines but then who would want a president who is medicated with pain relievers all the time?

Smith also talked about the other candidate for the 2012 U.S. presidential elections, our own Gov. Rick Perry. Implying that she does not know which is better, having someone who has to take breaks because of severe migraines or someone who does not even do his work 70% of the time. She posted a link to another blog she wrote saying that the Bill White campaign asked for Governor Perry’s official work calendar for 2010 and according to it Perry did not do any state work on 24 out of 72 business days. Which personally is not surprising.

The blog post from Smith just opened my eyes to how hard it is going to be to pick a candidate I want to support for the 2012 U.S. presidential elections.

Perry-where are you going and why?

The Texas Public Information Act provides a citizen the right to access government records upon request, since all government information is presumed to be available to the public; however, certain exemptions may apply to the disclosure of information. In 2007, three major Texas newspapers asked the Department of Public Safety (DPS), the agency that handles the security of out-of-state trips for Gov. Rick Perry and his family, to provide travel documents to establish what expenses are charged to taxpayer’s money. DPS would not disclose the records saying it would compromise the Governor’s safety. The State Attorney General’s office decided that a summary of the Governor’s spending could be released but not the actual documents themselves, which in return had the newspapers sue for forcible disclosure under the Texas Public Information Act. The lawsuit went to two Texas courts both agreeing that releasing the records would not pose a danger to a person. However, when it was presented to the Texas Supreme Court the ruling changed.

           

According to the Editorial Board at the Austin American-Statesman, on Friday, July 1, 2011 the Texas Supreme Court essentially decided that government officials can deny information requests due to the safety of the person, even though the information is months after the event happened. The problem the DPS has now is to prove how some information is a risk instead of a vague claim. The Statesman editorial board agrees this is a good idea but the overall ruling is horrible. The other big part of the ruling was it made the Public of Information Act not just a matter of the Texas Legislature, who constructs our laws, but turned it into a court matter, which has never has happened before.

I understand to the full extent the editorial board’s opinion towards the Texas Supreme Court ruling July 1^st because it does limit them on sources of information that their own newspaper can acquire for future articles dealing with Gov. Rick Perry. The thing I am worried about in this ruling is that it made future public information issues more the matters of the courts that a legislative matter, which could be detrimental to the publics right for information.

Also, it appears one of the reasons the Statesman wanted to know the cost of these trips to the taxpayer is because he has presented no reason for doing these travels that would benefit the people of Texas but maybe benefit his desire to run for President of the U.S.-that possibly would not be legal, if true. This information is important to not only the people of Texas but also the citizens of the U.S.

Is the New Texas Law Unconstitutional?

            In The Daily Texan, there is an article discussing about how a group filed a lawsuit to overturn the sonogram law that passed in the last legislative session.  The group is Center for Reproductive Rights, which is New York based.  They filed the lawsuit saying the new Texas law, where it requires doctors to conduct a sonogram prier to performing an abortion, is indistinct and unconstitutional.  The law also requires more than just a sonogram being performed before an abortion, it makes the doctors have to describe the fetus’ features and allow a pregnant women to hear the fetal heartbeat.  The law only allows exemptions from this in cases of rape, incest, or when fetus has fatal abnormalities.  Republican Gov. Rick Perry, who opposes abortion, says the law is needed to protect the life of unborn babies.  Some supporters for the law also say it is important for the women to fully understand what she is doing.  In the center’s lawsuit they argue the speech puts unwanted stress and emotional strain on women before they are about to have a medical procedure.  The center has requested U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks to block the law for abortions being performed starting October 1^st because of the pending lawsuit.  Sparks hasn’t issued a ruling so far but said he will before October 1^st. 

            I selected this article because it addresses one of the most controversial topics not only for Texas, but also for the U.S.  I believe the law inflicts against woman’s rights to make decisions for herself tremendously and it is going to be very interesting to how the outcome of the center’s lawsuit is.