Rainy Day Fund for Texas Roads

    The Legislature planned to cough up $1.2 billion from the Rainy Day Fund to build roads. The Legislature will let the voters decide in 15 months whether they want to use the Rainy Day Fund or not. The politicians in the Capitol allow the roads to fall into poor condition and no plan to repair it. This is caused by an ideology of against raising tax, also fees. Injecting $1.2 billion for a $4 billion project will not fix the problem, instead they are just putting 'band aid' on it. It looks like the government is trying to do something, but actually they are not doing much.

     In my opinion, the notions of not raising fees and taxes are just a way to gain popularity. Lowering taxes and fees might solve some problems, but poor and unsafe road condition is just another problem. Why would the government allow the roads deteriorate without any plans of repairing it? Instead of fixing the problem, they just stick a ‘band aid’ on it. Rather than using paved roads, they might downgrade it to gravel road to save money and maintenance fee. The government should also put the fast growth of Texas economy and population into consideration. These growths mean more vehicles are using the roads. More usage of the roads means more money needs to be injected for maintenance and new road. The more the Legislature postponing their actions in solving this problem, the more expensive it gets to fix it. If the deficit keeps accumulating, then the future state government will suffer from the huge deficit and blamed for it.

Re: "The Dirty Little Secret of Texas’ Big Business Success"

I found an article about tax system in Texas from Hashir Ali’s blog. His evaluation is well pointed out. The author also put a video of Texas’ pro-business advertisement to support his argument.  Many big businesses from other states like California, Illinois and New York move to Texas for lower state tax. I feel this is true since Austin, city where I live, is growing really fast in the last three years. Not to ignore Houston, San Antonio and Dallas. I also heard that many Californians moved to Texas because Texas created plenty of jobs. But, without sacrificing the poor people, all these greatness of Texas will not happen.

I agree that the tax in Texas can be said ‘regressive’ because everybody pays the same flat rate. True that the system of “flat rate” because everybody is paying the same amount of tax. But if we see it in more detail, the percentage of tax paid by poor people is more than the rich people. Which means the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

I also agree that Texas has put unfair tax system.  Regressive tax system will force the poor to be in the poverty condition endlessly. No way that the poor can get out from poverty. I also consider that progressive tax system is better to decrease the gap between the poor and the rich. Thus rich people cannot enjoy the super low tax anymore. 

Should the Texas Republican Ignore Hispanics?

Phyllis Schlafly, the founder of "pro-family" organization Eagle Forum, told conservative radio Focus Today last month Republican Party should spend time reaching out white people rather than Hispanic voters. Is her advice really helpful for state of Texas? From demographics data, Hispanic made up 40% of Texas population in 2013 and will grow at very fast rate. In 2030, it is projected that Hispanic will be 50% of Texas population. If the Texas Republicans follow her advice, no chance Republican will win in future elections. Its not like 100% of the Hispanics vote for Democrats, it is around 70% of the Hispanics.

Phyllis Schlafly said that Republican should focus on white voters rather than trying to reach Hispanics, because Hispanics do not understand anything about Bill of Rights. So should the Republicans ignore Hispanic voters? Is being racist will help the party gaining popularity? Nowadays, Americans have different of mindset than 50 years ago. People change from time to time. By being racist, not only will the party not gaining votes from Hispanics, but also new generation of whites and other races will go against racism. So Schlafly’s advice will not work for today’s situation. Rather than ignoring Hispanics’ presence in Texas, Republican should think ways to gain fame by giving what the Hispanic needs, such as better education and health service. 

Republican's Failure in Texas

On June 27, 2013, the Letters from Texas published an article about the founder of Eagle Forum, Phyllis Schlafly. The author, Harold Cook, responded to a news article about Phyllis Schlafly discrimination toward the Latino voters in Texas. Phyllis Schlafly said that Latinos will never vote Republican because they don’t understand Bill of Rights. Also, she stated that “Latinos are running an illegitimacy rate that’s just about the same as the blacks are.”

The author started with a sarcastic title that Republican was successful on reaching minority, but he started his first sentence about Republicans’ failure. The argument is that Republicans are trying to reach out Hispanics to vote for them, but Republicans has failed by showing no respect towards the Hispanics. The article showed Phyllis Schlafly’s statement about Latinos and gave a direct link to the news he evaluated. Then, he described the background of her, a little about her bio and how important she is to Republicans. He also argued that Republican-led Texas State Board of Education required children to learn about her in future history books. He put a picture shwoing a verse about  Phyllis Schlafly.
I agree with this author that Phyllis Schlafly has failed Republican’s goal of gaining popularity from the Latinos. The author argued mainly on how deceiving Republican is. At first he stated his claim, and then showed some background of the person he was talking about. His article is credible because he showed a picture of a verse about Phyllis Schlafly and an news article link to support his argument. Overall, the author made a strong argument and use clear evidence to support his claim. I would say his intended audience is Texans, especially Hispanics Texans. He concluded that Republican’s approach of improving public education is more of improving political lot with Latino voters.

The Shifting Meaning of Patriotism

The article from The Daily Texan that I evaluated is about shifting of patriotism in the United States. The author states that patriotism in children is mostly influenced by social studies textbooks that show an innocent portrait of the United States. But these children will learn that American pride or patriotism is more complex and evolves over time. 2003 was the year of ardent patriotism regarding to the US invasions of Iraq. The invasion delivers passion and George Bush’s presidential rating which soared during that year. A student from the article recalled that "blind allegiance to President Bush" during that year. 2003 patriotism was more of showing military power that was backed by the idea of spreading freedom abroad. In 2013, the patriotism of 2003 has dissipated and shifted to the notion of "working to change the nation for the better." Today's patriotism is more of participating in the processes of the nation and not a blind adherence to the leader. The author showed the 40 Acres as the evident of shifting patriotism, with the emergence of cultural centers like Center for Mexican American Studies and the Center for Women's and Gender Studies. Also, the author stated that he saw fewer American flags than decade ago on July 4. He concluded that 2013 version of patriotism is rich with diversity and better than decade ago.

I would the say the article is very good, the argument of shifting patriotism is well supported by opinions of some people. Also, the author gave an evident of emergence of cultural centers that support his argument. This article is intended for all Americans, showing that Americans are progressing and improving in the notion of patriotism. Patriotism in the US has evolved and will evolve again over time.

Views on Texas Abortion Laws

Daily Texan published “Views on Texas abortion legislation, regulation differamong religions” on July 8, 2013. This is an interesting article that gives the reader different perspective of abortion from different types of religions, regarding to the new abortion law approved by the government. The article gives three views of abortion from Muslim, Jewish, and Hinduism. The religions allow abortion if the pregnancy is life threatening. Mother always receives priority over the fetus. The people interviewed agreed that abortion is individual’s choice rather than being limited by religious ruling or law. It is not necessary for the state to dictate and hindering women’s choice. Abortion is more personal and complex issue, dependent on religious and moral views. The main reason why it is worth reading is because the article gives different insights on abortion. Also, they agreed that abortion is more about morality rather than by restricted government law.