Progress on Modern Day Issues

With the inaguration of the 44th president of the United States, change is immenent. President Elect Barack Obama has put forth plans to deal with many of today's national problems. Obama recognizes many of the modern day issues that we discussed in class on Friday. After Friday's discussion I felt compelled to not only better understand, but to inform about what our next president plans to do about these issues. Some of the major issues we came up with in class were education, health care and the environment. I found all of his plans on the official Obama website. His plans go as such:

Education:

He wants to heavily reform No Child Left Behind. Also, Obama plans to invest in childhood education, adequately fund all schools and get high-quality teachers at those schools. If done like promised, this could be major progress in the department of education. Hopefully, Obama's goals are not too idealistic, because education is important.

Health Care:

Obama is a big fan of universal health care. This means he wants equal and affordable health care for all. Hopefully we can call this progress. Although our nation preaches equality for all, universal health care is a big question mark. It does not seem to work in Canada, because there is a big need for doctors. This causes a lack of quality doctors, which makes their doctors "worse." Is Obama's plan progress? In my opinion: yes and no. According to Emerson, "society never advances. It recedes as fast on one side as it gains on the other," (Emerson 36). I feel this is very true with Obama's health care plan. It is progress to give everyone health care, but we regress when we add less capable doctors. Again, hopefully we are making "progress" or that our progress is more positive than negative.

Environment:

Personally, I feel that the issue of global warming is our most important issue and needs a lot more focus than it is being given. Obama wants to invest in alternate fuel sources and create 5 million more "green" jobs, but I don't think this is enough. If our environment goes, we all go.

Overall, I do think that progress is being made because these issues are being addressed. Previously, the issue of global warming has not received enough attention. I am optimistic that our changes for the future will help solve these problems.

Technology Kills!

To many, technology may seem great. Most people simply embrace new technology, rather than question it. There are so many consequences, both positive and negative, that go along with new technology. After we talked about new technology in class yesterday, I could help but wonder if we will ever find out that these new technological devices are harmful. In our grandparents generation, smoking was considered the cool thing to do, just like having a cell phone, ipod or car is today. Now we know that cigarettes kill; will our grandchildren look back on us and say how could we use cell phones? Personally, I subconsciencely believe that we will look back and find that cell phones do cause tumors. Doctors at the Brain Tumor Center at Duke University think that my uncle's fatal brain tumor was formed from the overuse of his cell phone (along with the overuse of artificial sugars). After loosing an uncle, my family has become more hesitant to use cellular devices. My mom does not like when I carry my cell phone in my pocket either, because she thinks it will cause some sort of funky thigh tumors. She also prefers it when I use speaker phone becuase may reduce my risk of getting a brain tumor. Is she right? I don't know; I'm not a doctor. But I hope that she, along with numerous doctors who have these type of theories, is wrong so that my generation won't suffer.

Another technological issue that drives me crazy is new cars. Cars are flat out scary. The fact that pretty much any 16 year old kid can drive a car is even scarier. One of my (unamed) friends has hit 4 cars backing out of his drive way. Another one of my (unamed) friends has hit a fire-hydren, turned into the woods and hit a car on his way to school. Maybe my friends aren't the best drivers, but how can these kids be permitted to control automobiles that could kill someone. i have also heard that there are students at NTHS that drag race, which is extremely dangerous. I'm not saying that 16 year olds should not be given license; I am saying that modern day technology can have terrible consequences and should be taken used with care. Hopefully, I am worrying over nothing, but technology should not be taken lightly.

The 26th Amendment: The Right To Vote

The 26th amendment states: "The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age of older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age." Bottom line, anyone who is eighteen or older can vote. That means that some high school seniors can vote. Wow! Think about it; if we were all a year or two older we would be able to vote. How are we possibly old enough to know who is the best fit leader of our great nation? How are high school seniors old enough to know this? In the last couple of years, it seems a popular motto has been embraced by many celebrities and political activists: "Vote or Die!" (as seen on the left). I have some serious issues with this slogan and even this amendment.

To me, the motto encourages even those who have not done appropriate research or know anything about either canadite to vote. Is that what voting is about? To me, a presidential candidate should win because people truly support his/her views over those of his/her opponents. After asking many of my voting-eligable friends about their political preferences, it seemed that these kids knew very little, yet still had strong feelings. When asked why one (anonymous) student openly supported Barack Obama, he replied that he simply didn't want Governor Palin to be in the White House. When pressured further about his response, I found he had no information to back up his claim. Another student, who openly supported one (unamed) candidate told me that they supported him because their parents do. Another student told me that they supported a certain candidate because they agreed with his view. I was excited to finally hear a knowledgable response, but when I asked which views they supported, they told me "all of them; i don't know; i guess because my parents support them."

Although there were some students who were educated upon the viewpoints of the candidates, I was shocked at the overwhelming number of potential voters that knew practically nothing about either candidate. Honestly, I began to question whether we should raise the voting age, but why does it matter if the person is 18 or 21? If they don't take time to investigate at the age of 18, who's to say that they will when they are 21? For this reason, I strongly urge a new motto for voting: "Vote AND RESEARCH or Die." Hopefully more people will start to research both of the candidates in future elections, in order to elect the best and truly most supported candidate. I am optimistic that the choice of Barack Obama for president will be a good one, and hopefully the people who voted for him actually supported the views that he holds.

13 Year Old Child Left in Nebraska

Last month, a mother from Michigan, drove her 13 year old son to Nebraska and left him there. As we discussed in class, Nebraska is the only state that has a safe-haven law that allows parents (or anyone else) to leave children at hospitals within the state until they are 18 years old. Government officials in Nebraska, according to an article in Tacoma Washington's News Tribune, say this law "should be used only for children in immediate danger." What does this mean? Why not put simply put your child or children up for adoption, instead of abandoning them? According to the article, an out of work, widower named Gary Slaton has abandoned 9 out of his 10 children at hospitals in Nebraska because he felt overwhelmed. Is this right? Since the law took effect in July, 18 children from states outside of Nebraska have been taken to and abandoned in Nebraska. Personally, I think that this is awful. How can a parent do this to their child? How can our government allow this to happen? There is a reason that the other 49 states do not implement this law, so then why doesn't the government interfere and strike it down in Nebraska?

Upon reading about Nebraska's safe-haven law, I wondered if it violated the Constitution or if taking this law away would be a violation of the Constitution. After looking over our Bill of Rights sheet from class, I felt that this issue related to two different amendments. First, I thought that the 8th amendment had a lot to do with Nebraska's safe-haven law. According to the article, many of the children or teenagers who are abandoned in Nebraska had uncontrollable behavioral problems. Abandonment is thus the parent's form of punishment. Does this violate the 8th amendment then? Can this be considered cruel and unusual punishment? I believe it is a very unusual punishment and that it is also cruel to leave a child in a different state due to behavioral problems. So yes, in my opinion it does violate the 8th amendment. Or is it a parents right to leave their child in Nebraska? Could this be considered part of the ninth amendment as a given right? Personally, I think that leaving your child in a different state is a cruel and unusual punishment. What do you think?