Paper Or Plastic?

The first thing you hear when you walk into a grocery store is, paper or plastic?  Or should I say, kill a tree or choke a fish?  The debate between these two items has been getting bigger and bigger as environmental awareness is becoming a bigger deal in Texas.

Austin stores are now starting to ban plastic bags because they clog landfills and arehazardous to animals. According to the NW waste management website, Bags by the Numbers, an estimated 14 billion plastic bags are used in the US every year.  It takes 20+ years for plastic to biodegrade, and only 1% of plastic bags are ever recycled.  The rest are dumped in landfills and the ocean. An estimated 100,000 marine animals are killed every year due to plastic bags.  After hearing all of this information, one might suggest that paper bags would be a better option, but they are just as bad.  About 14 million trees are cut down in order to make paper bags.  Also, paper bags are much more costly to make.  There is 50% more air pollution and it takes 40% more energy to make paper bags versus plastic bags.  Both methods for bagging your groceries are equally bad.  The best solution is a reusable bag. 

Austin is already doing their best to promote reusable bags, but this has to spread to everywhere in Texas.  Many stores in Texas like HEB and Target are heavily promoting reusable bags and only use paper bags when necessary.  This is a great start but I believe that a statewide ban necessary to produce serious change.  This may seem like going overboard, but without a statewide ban, serious change will never take place.  The reason why billions of plastic and paper bags are still being produced today, is because people still don’t take it very seriously.  An alternative solution, which some stores already do, would be to charge people that don’t bring their own bag.  Over the years, Austin has been labeled as a “green” city, now it is time to spread that label to the entire State of Texas.  

Threat of terrorism mandates law-abiding Texans provide full fingerprints for driver licenses

Ms. Yvonne Larsen posted an editorial titled “Threat ofterrorism mandates law-abiding Texans provide full fingerprints for driverlicenses” in the Big Jolly Politics blog, on June 19^th, 2014.  The blog was based on an article posted by The Dallas News Watchdog, regarding a new law that requires people to provide a full set of fingerprints to renew or get a driver’s license.   

The author believes that the new law is surrendering our personal information and should not be allowed. Her intended audience are all Texans that have a driver’s license, or are going to receive a driver’s license.   She wants to spread the word that we are giving away personal information by allowing the DMV to record your fingerprints even if you haven’t been arrested.  I disagree with this statement.  By allowing the DMV to record fingerprints, they are actually protecting you from fraud.  Many occupations such as law enforcement, military, and medical care, already require fingerprints and they don’t have any problems. I also believe that your fingerprint isn't “personal information.” Yes your fingerprint is unique to you, but it can only be used as identification purposes unlike your address or social security number; which nobody hesitates to give out when getting their driver’s license.  

The author also mentions that “the surrender of your personal information is not limited to fingerprints.”  Since 2010, “Texas has been using facial recognition software to match driver’s license photos with government databases looking for persons wanted by law enforcement for various reasons.”  I partially agree with her above statement.  I understand the reason why some people would feel uncomfortable with this because your picture is “personal information”, but I don’t have a problem with it.  The government uses this facial recognition software to minimize the abuse of Texas driver’s licenses by criminals and terrorists.  If using facial recognition software has caught criminals in the past, then it should be used when necessary.

 

The author makes the statement that credit card companies don’t need fingerprints, so the DMV doesn't either.  This is a valid point, but the technology is now being tested. The article, Forget Credit Cards-Swipe Your Finger Instead, from The Fiscal Times, talks about using fingerprints to buy goods, instead of swiping a credit card.  This will make the process more secure and stop criminals from stealing your money. 

The author is very enthusiastic about her opinions on this issue, but I don’t believe that she provides enough proof the back up her arguments.  Fingerprints required for new driver’s licenses will only provide you with more protection from criminals.   

Here we go again: Texas redistricting

In the article “Herewe go again: Texas redistricting”, published by My San Antonio, the Express-News Editorial Board talks about the constitutionality of gerrymandering.  Gerrymandering is, according to the Oxford dictionary, to “manipulate the boundaries of (an electoral constituency) so as to favor one party of class.”  To an ordinary person, this sounds extremely illegal as it is basically discriminating against certain groups of people to favor a political party.  

The authors intended audience are the Texas voters, specifically Democrats and minorities.   This is because the gerrymandering in the State of Texas is targeted to minimize the power of Democratic voters. The author emphasizes that “gerrymandering for partisan purposes is as illegal as doing it to rob racial and ethnic minorities of representation.”  It is a form of discrimination as it indirectly prohibits minorities from letting their voice be heard. 

The author emphasizes that Texas, and Republicans, are not the only ones that do this; Democrats also do it.  The author even jokes by saying that “even educated Greens do it, or would if their numbers reached critical mass.”  The purpose of this was to stress that this is not only a local issue, it is a nationwide issue that has to be fixed. 

The author provides a solution to this issue by referencing former Justice John Paul Stevens’ book. Although the best solution for tackling the issue of gerrymandering is to making it entirely illegal, this is unlikely to happen.  The author provides a reasonable solution by stating that the next best solution is to take redistricting out of State legislative’s hands altogether.  He states that the redistricting should be in the hands of an independent redistricting commission. Some States have already implemented this solution, and it has been proven to work.  In article by the League of Women Voters, “New Report Examines InauguralCalifornia Redistricting Commission,” the author, Maggie Duncan, found that this process of an independent commission exceeded expectations.  The commissioners actively sought input from the public, and it was proven to be a success. 

The author provides valid evidence to support what most people already agree to be an illegal activity.  The fact that gerrymandering is perfectly legal is because the people in charge are the ones making the rules. The citizens need to be actively involved in local Government to makes these changes happen. 

Climate Scientists: Texas is Missing an Opportunity

The Article

The issue of climate change has been a very controversial topic for many years.  Here in the State of Texas, the extremely conservative government rejects all efforts in reversing climate change.  This article sheds some light on what is actually happening with our environment with proof from climate scientists, and Rice University professors. Texas is the highest producer of greenhouse gasses, and the total amount produced by Texas alone is greater than the next two States combined.   Sea levels are rising every year, and temperatures keep going up, causing extreme drought. Because of this, farmers are forced to move further north because of the excessive heat and lack of water.  The leaders in Texas don’t want anything to do with climate change, so progress can never be made. Governor Rick Perry and Attorney General Greg Abbot have rejected every effort to combat global warming, and have spent over $350,000 suing the environmental protection agency.  The issue of climate change is growing exponentially, but since climate change is a “liberal issue”, most republicans in office immediately reject it.   I encourage everyone to read this article because this issue will never go away.  Until something drastic gets done, the State of Texas will always fall behind in the efforts to protect the environment.