This article written on the blog "Britt's Texas Online," outlines the problems Texas is facing with overwhelming amounts of illegal immigrant populations. The author calls it "a problem" that needs to be stopped and asks if "our border patrol is functioning properly." She also brings up the statistic that Texas harbors the most illegal immigrants following Arizona. The last query the author raises is if "It is possible that we tend to look away because we do offer and depend on the immigration to fill job needs, but on the other hand a large percent are using our welfare that we pay for out of our hard earned money."
I actually have a very differing opinion about immigration in this country. The fact is, Texas is always going to have a very large immigration population from both illegal and legal immigrants because it is on the border of Mexico. This means, there are large amounts of Mexican, Latin American, and South American immigrants and it will always be as such, or at least more so than states not occupying a border. This is the same with Florida, they have a large Cuban population because that is the first state you hit when you travel across the Atlantic Ocean. So, keeping that in mind, instead of worrying about the amount of immigrants, which there will always be, why don't we focus on integrating them into our culture and make them functioning parts of society. They fill jobs because they work for cheap, so legalize them, give them a work visa, and make their employer pay taxes on them just as any other employee. Make the immigrants themselves pay taxes just like everyone else, then they're a functioning member of society. Also, I wonder how illegal immigrants are supposed to file for welfare because it is funded by government agencies, which would force illegal immigrants to prove citizenship if they wanted money and then they'd be on record with the government causing the exact opposite of "illegality." Also, the fact that most illegal immigrants are not on government record means that no one actually knows the true amount of illegal immigrants. These numbers are based on estimations that are believed to be true. There is no actual way of counting a "ghost" person. I do understand the problem that there is an increasing amount of illegal immigrants living in Texas, however, the problem is not if our border patrol is working, it's why we are so close-minded as to not allow these people to interact as part of Texas society. The United States is considered a "melting pot" after all is it not?
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Texas Youth Commission's Use of Pepper Spray
There is a big case going on right now in Texas courts regarding a policy implemented by the Texas Youth Commission that expanded the use of pepper spray to restrain youths in juvenile detention lockups. The TYC, per an October settlement in court, agreed to limit the use of pepper spray when detaining juveniles, and apparently has not complied. Each of the plaintiffs against the TYC has a mental illness or serious emotional disability, and one suffered skin burns after being sprayed three times with pepper spray to prevent him from harming himself. According to TYC officials, the pepper spray is supposed to be used in lieu of physical restraint. However, the extensive use has been seen to cause worse physical damage than actual restraint of the juveniles.
I understand the need for some sort of protection for the guards and the children who are hurting themselves or others, but I'm not sure that an expanded use of pepper spray to do so is a good idea. Not only is it painful, but it causes serious burns and it seems that TYC guards are misusing it. I actually feel that pepper spray should be used as a last resort to physical restraint. At least if they are restrained, it is not causing serious physical damage and they aren't able to hurt themselves or others. Neither method is perfect and unfortunately is still has adverse effects, but I would think the guards would want to cause the least amount of physical damage possible. Pepper spray does not physically restrain them and as seen from the child who suffered burns because he was repeatedly trying to hurt himself, it obviously does not do the job it was meant to. I can understand using pepper spray if the situation is getting out of hand or as a least resort for the guards, but it should not be used as a front line against the juveniles. Although they are incarcerated, they are still children and youths and should be treated as such.
Whats worse, is that the courts have already made their decision on the pepper spray policy and yet the TYC did not comply after it had promised to do so. There needs to be some kind of way to enforce this policy among TYC juvenile detention centers. If you would like to get more information about what is going on with the pepper spray use in Texas detention centers, visit http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/campaign/entries/2007/11/16/tyc_pepper_spra.html
I understand the need for some sort of protection for the guards and the children who are hurting themselves or others, but I'm not sure that an expanded use of pepper spray to do so is a good idea. Not only is it painful, but it causes serious burns and it seems that TYC guards are misusing it. I actually feel that pepper spray should be used as a last resort to physical restraint. At least if they are restrained, it is not causing serious physical damage and they aren't able to hurt themselves or others. Neither method is perfect and unfortunately is still has adverse effects, but I would think the guards would want to cause the least amount of physical damage possible. Pepper spray does not physically restrain them and as seen from the child who suffered burns because he was repeatedly trying to hurt himself, it obviously does not do the job it was meant to. I can understand using pepper spray if the situation is getting out of hand or as a least resort for the guards, but it should not be used as a front line against the juveniles. Although they are incarcerated, they are still children and youths and should be treated as such.
Whats worse, is that the courts have already made their decision on the pepper spray policy and yet the TYC did not comply after it had promised to do so. There needs to be some kind of way to enforce this policy among TYC juvenile detention centers. If you would like to get more information about what is going on with the pepper spray use in Texas detention centers, visit http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/campaign/entries/2007/11/16/tyc_pepper_spra.html
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Reply to Take Action
Article commented on: http://ajiginthesaw.blogspot.com/
In response to the most recent post by "Texans We Are,"I completely agree with you that the younger generation should be more politically active. I also commend your efforts encouraging people to vote. However, I do not believe it's because "most Texans never hear about these elections." More so, that people do not place an importance on voting when they have other important things going on in their lives. I'm not saying that's right, but during election season there's no amount to the media avenues (TV news, talk radio, local newspapers) that cover the elections. If they don't hear about it, it's because they are trying not to listen. I also don't believe that politicians don't want "20 to 30 year old college students voting." As a matter of fact, it's completely the opposite. Politicians try to influence that audience particularly while they are garnering their political ideals. If they can convince the younger generation to take an active interest in their political campaign, then they have just gained a supporter for at least another 20 years. (Al Gore teaming up with MTV would be a good example.) The fact that the "60 year old upper-class business owners" are doing all the decision making is because theirs is a generation who believed it was a privilege to vote. They have a vested interest that the younger generation has yet to develop. As far as the "registration process [being] so difficult," it really isn't. Texas, as well as most other states, have tried to make it EASIER for EVERYONE to register. Going online to register, being able to register while you get/renew your drivers license, voters registration forms at post offices, this is all to get everyone involved. So, where does the true problem lie? Is it that all the avenues have been provided to us to register to vote and the "privilege" to vote needs to be re enforced among our generation, or is it that upper-class businessmen and difficult registration techniques have made it so difficult that only 5% of registered voters vote?
In response to the most recent post by "Texans We Are,"I completely agree with you that the younger generation should be more politically active. I also commend your efforts encouraging people to vote. However, I do not believe it's because "most Texans never hear about these elections." More so, that people do not place an importance on voting when they have other important things going on in their lives. I'm not saying that's right, but during election season there's no amount to the media avenues (TV news, talk radio, local newspapers) that cover the elections. If they don't hear about it, it's because they are trying not to listen. I also don't believe that politicians don't want "20 to 30 year old college students voting." As a matter of fact, it's completely the opposite. Politicians try to influence that audience particularly while they are garnering their political ideals. If they can convince the younger generation to take an active interest in their political campaign, then they have just gained a supporter for at least another 20 years. (Al Gore teaming up with MTV would be a good example.) The fact that the "60 year old upper-class business owners" are doing all the decision making is because theirs is a generation who believed it was a privilege to vote. They have a vested interest that the younger generation has yet to develop. As far as the "registration process [being] so difficult," it really isn't. Texas, as well as most other states, have tried to make it EASIER for EVERYONE to register. Going online to register, being able to register while you get/renew your drivers license, voters registration forms at post offices, this is all to get everyone involved. So, where does the true problem lie? Is it that all the avenues have been provided to us to register to vote and the "privilege" to vote needs to be re enforced among our generation, or is it that upper-class businessmen and difficult registration techniques have made it so difficult that only 5% of registered voters vote?
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Texas and the Death Penalty-In Depth
In my article entitled, Death Penalty Problem, I explained the author Goodman's views on the death penalty. I do not agree with the death penalty, especially after findings that the procedure is botched, but I would like to go more in depth about the death penalty and clarify exactly why I am sure it is a horrible procedure, despite the botched methods being used.
Some general facts about the death penalty are, there were 74 executions carried out in 1997 alone, and over half (37) happened to occur in Texas. Between 1977 and 1997, the USA put 432 prisoners to death, and over a third of those were in Texas alone. Per the previous article I wrote, I explained that Texas has now put on suspension all death penalty sentences until after the Supreme Court makes its decision on the use of lethal injection as the method. It has also been found, that there is a racial bias among prisoners sentenced to the death penalty. For example, although nearly half of all murder victims are black, 82.62 per cent of those executed nationwide were convicted of the murder of a white.A study conducted for the Dallas Times Herald in the mid-1980s showed that the killer of a white was anything up to 10 times more likely to receive a death sentence than the killer of a black victim. Of the 144 prisoners executed up to the end of 1997, 127 (88 percent) were executed for the murder of a white victim. Yet approximately 58 percent of murder victims in Texas are from ethnic minorities.
These numbers alone do not add up. The judicial system is too biased, as proven above, to administer a punishment as permanent as death with all of the biases and human errors that exist. The whole purpose of the judicial system is to provide equal justice and liberty for every US citizen, but so far, it has shown to do just the opposite. In an ideal world, minorities and majorities would be equally executed depending on the severity of the crime committed, but our country has just not gotten to that place. Until then, innocent people who may just have been at the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong skin color are being murdered under the name of justice, and Texas is at the forefront of it all. Thanks to the Supreme Court, Texas has ceased using the death penalty for now, but what happens when a fool-proof technology is found that eliminates the error involved with lethal injections. From the trend, it looks like Texas will be right back at the forefront.
To top it all of, racial minorities are over represented on Texas death row. As of Jan 1, 1998, Texas' death row comprised 436 men (171 white, 173 black and 89 Hispanic, including 11 Mexican nationals and three others) and six women (four white and two black): a total of 442. Is it possible that Texas is too eager to execute minorities due to an underlying current of racism? I will leave that for you to decide.
To read more about Texas and the death penalty go to http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510101998
Some general facts about the death penalty are, there were 74 executions carried out in 1997 alone, and over half (37) happened to occur in Texas. Between 1977 and 1997, the USA put 432 prisoners to death, and over a third of those were in Texas alone. Per the previous article I wrote, I explained that Texas has now put on suspension all death penalty sentences until after the Supreme Court makes its decision on the use of lethal injection as the method. It has also been found, that there is a racial bias among prisoners sentenced to the death penalty. For example, although nearly half of all murder victims are black, 82.62 per cent of those executed nationwide were convicted of the murder of a white.A study conducted for the Dallas Times Herald in the mid-1980s showed that the killer of a white was anything up to 10 times more likely to receive a death sentence than the killer of a black victim. Of the 144 prisoners executed up to the end of 1997, 127 (88 percent) were executed for the murder of a white victim. Yet approximately 58 percent of murder victims in Texas are from ethnic minorities.
These numbers alone do not add up. The judicial system is too biased, as proven above, to administer a punishment as permanent as death with all of the biases and human errors that exist. The whole purpose of the judicial system is to provide equal justice and liberty for every US citizen, but so far, it has shown to do just the opposite. In an ideal world, minorities and majorities would be equally executed depending on the severity of the crime committed, but our country has just not gotten to that place. Until then, innocent people who may just have been at the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong skin color are being murdered under the name of justice, and Texas is at the forefront of it all. Thanks to the Supreme Court, Texas has ceased using the death penalty for now, but what happens when a fool-proof technology is found that eliminates the error involved with lethal injections. From the trend, it looks like Texas will be right back at the forefront.
To top it all of, racial minorities are over represented on Texas death row. As of Jan 1, 1998, Texas' death row comprised 436 men (171 white, 173 black and 89 Hispanic, including 11 Mexican nationals and three others) and six women (four white and two black): a total of 442. Is it possible that Texas is too eager to execute minorities due to an underlying current of racism? I will leave that for you to decide.
To read more about Texas and the death penalty go to http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510101998
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
"Death Penalty Problem"
A commentary in the Boston Globe by Ellen Goodman entitled Goodman: A Problem with Execution outlines the author's feelings on the Supreme Court taking another death penalty case. This case is meant, not to decide on the constitutionality of the death penalty, but rather on the current popular method being used, the lethal injection. The Supreme Court is to make a decision on whether or not the lethal injection method should be used to execute inmates on death row. Of course, we all know, Texas is the foremost state in capital punishment.
Lethal injection, for those of you who don't know, is a drug cocktail. The first drug puts the inmate to sleep, the second paralyzes, and the third stops the heart. Goodman sites several cases in her article supporting the fact that, even with the "sophisticated" methods we have of killing an inmate painlessly, the injections, are in fact, botched. She sites the dyslexic doctor from Missouri who openly stated he miscalculated doses and the Lancet study stating that half of inmates were still conscious when they received the heart stopping drug.
She ends, "We are tinkering, tinkering, tinkering to avoid the possibility that we can't have our death penalty and our humanity too." In this aspect, I would have to agree with her. The end result of the death penalty, no matter how the person is actually executed, is ultimately death. Whether it be injections, hanging, drawing and quartering, or the overly "cinematized" firing squad, someone always ends up dead, as we Texans seem to know all too well.
My question, however, is this. Why spend time worrying about how the execution is carried out? Is it because we feel more humane sleeping at night knowing we killed a person, but he or she died painlessly? While I am all for killing people with dignity, I have to wonder, if we are so worried about the methods used (in fact Texas has actually suspended all death row sentences pending the Supreme Court decision) why use it at all? It obviously has not been done right no matter how many technological advances we have dedicated to the act, so why waste the time? I would feel worse knowing that I told someone they would die painlessly and in all reality, they felt every agonizing second of it and couldn't express the pain. In fact, I have a feeling the paralyzing drug is more for the executioners rather than the executes. Either way, I am taking Goodman's side in this situation. I see the irony in this situation.
Read this article for yourself at http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/10/11/1012goodman_edit.html
Lethal injection, for those of you who don't know, is a drug cocktail. The first drug puts the inmate to sleep, the second paralyzes, and the third stops the heart. Goodman sites several cases in her article supporting the fact that, even with the "sophisticated" methods we have of killing an inmate painlessly, the injections, are in fact, botched. She sites the dyslexic doctor from Missouri who openly stated he miscalculated doses and the Lancet study stating that half of inmates were still conscious when they received the heart stopping drug.
She ends, "We are tinkering, tinkering, tinkering to avoid the possibility that we can't have our death penalty and our humanity too." In this aspect, I would have to agree with her. The end result of the death penalty, no matter how the person is actually executed, is ultimately death. Whether it be injections, hanging, drawing and quartering, or the overly "cinematized" firing squad, someone always ends up dead, as we Texans seem to know all too well.
My question, however, is this. Why spend time worrying about how the execution is carried out? Is it because we feel more humane sleeping at night knowing we killed a person, but he or she died painlessly? While I am all for killing people with dignity, I have to wonder, if we are so worried about the methods used (in fact Texas has actually suspended all death row sentences pending the Supreme Court decision) why use it at all? It obviously has not been done right no matter how many technological advances we have dedicated to the act, so why waste the time? I would feel worse knowing that I told someone they would die painlessly and in all reality, they felt every agonizing second of it and couldn't express the pain. In fact, I have a feeling the paralyzing drug is more for the executioners rather than the executes. Either way, I am taking Goodman's side in this situation. I see the irony in this situation.
Read this article for yourself at http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/10/11/1012goodman_edit.html
Monday, October 1, 2007
Inconsistencies in Texas Courts
An article in the Houston Chronicle entitled, Sentencing leniency: One criminal's many cases, outlined one repeat offender's long record and the lack of consistency in sentencing this particular criminal.
Kevin Earl Lee, a cocaine-addicted, homeless, war vet with over 20 years of criminal history including theft, drug possession, assault, burglary, and trespassing was recently sentenced to the minimum sentence of 6 months in jail for his repeat offenses when the prosecutor agreed to a plea agreement. Lee has a total of 28 convictions.
Chuck Rosenthal, the senior district attorney for the county in which Lee was convicted, states that Lee's prosecutor, Tina Ansari, "now regrets giving Lee a minimal sentence." She is "embarrassed" and she has "realized she made a mistake."
Most of Lee's crimes were misdemeanors and state jail felonies, so he is considered a "petty criminal," but how long and how many crimes does he have to commit for the state to consistently punish him? He has been given the minimum or no sentence so many times, that over 20 years of committing crimes he still has not learned his lesson. Had the state given him a harsher sentence, he may not be in the position that he is now, homeless and a petty thief.
What boggles me, is that Texas is a state that has the highest track record out of the whole United States when it comes to sentencing prisoners to death row. Granted, none of Lee's crimes were deserving of a death row sentence, but it surprises me to see how inconsistent the state courts are in sentencing the lesser criminals. You would think that a state so adamant about executing people would have stern sentences for even its small time crooks. After someone has had as many convictions as Lee had, you think it would be time to truly punish him with harsher sentencing. Lucky for him, he has been able to avoid being sentenced as he should, but in my opinion, a lack of stern sentences perpetuates the cycle of criminal acts because there is no lesson being learned.
Rosenthal said his senior prosecutors will discuss how to offer more consistent and uniform sentences to defendants willing to plead guilty, so there is less disparity among the courts. They will submit a proposal to him for approval. That is a good start, but like I always say when it comes to approvals and matters of state, act upon it first, and then I will believe you.
If you want to read this article for yourself, you can find it at
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/5157126.html
Kevin Earl Lee, a cocaine-addicted, homeless, war vet with over 20 years of criminal history including theft, drug possession, assault, burglary, and trespassing was recently sentenced to the minimum sentence of 6 months in jail for his repeat offenses when the prosecutor agreed to a plea agreement. Lee has a total of 28 convictions.
Chuck Rosenthal, the senior district attorney for the county in which Lee was convicted, states that Lee's prosecutor, Tina Ansari, "now regrets giving Lee a minimal sentence." She is "embarrassed" and she has "realized she made a mistake."
Most of Lee's crimes were misdemeanors and state jail felonies, so he is considered a "petty criminal," but how long and how many crimes does he have to commit for the state to consistently punish him? He has been given the minimum or no sentence so many times, that over 20 years of committing crimes he still has not learned his lesson. Had the state given him a harsher sentence, he may not be in the position that he is now, homeless and a petty thief.
What boggles me, is that Texas is a state that has the highest track record out of the whole United States when it comes to sentencing prisoners to death row. Granted, none of Lee's crimes were deserving of a death row sentence, but it surprises me to see how inconsistent the state courts are in sentencing the lesser criminals. You would think that a state so adamant about executing people would have stern sentences for even its small time crooks. After someone has had as many convictions as Lee had, you think it would be time to truly punish him with harsher sentencing. Lucky for him, he has been able to avoid being sentenced as he should, but in my opinion, a lack of stern sentences perpetuates the cycle of criminal acts because there is no lesson being learned.
Rosenthal said his senior prosecutors will discuss how to offer more consistent and uniform sentences to defendants willing to plead guilty, so there is less disparity among the courts. They will submit a proposal to him for approval. That is a good start, but like I always say when it comes to approvals and matters of state, act upon it first, and then I will believe you.
If you want to read this article for yourself, you can find it at
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/5157126.html
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Texas Toll Ban
An article in the Austin American Statesman entitled, Texas Toll Ban Added to Transportation Bill, outlines a few key amendments that the Texas government is trying to implement in order to slow down the amount of toll roads being put up in our state.
The ban proposed by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, as an amendment to the $106 billion dollar spending bill already passed by the Senate, states that no toll can be built on existing Texas roadways. While this does not stop the Texas Department of Transportation from building new toll roads, it does keep TxDot from using existing routes as part of those roads. (For all of us from Round Rock, that means 620 would not have been used as part of 45.)
Another interesting fact about this article is that another bill added to the tail end of the Transportation Bill, was the banning of "Mexican trucks" from U.S. roadways. What exactly they consider a "Mexican truck" would be interesting to know.
None of us like paying to drive on a road, so it's important to know what they are doing with the new toll roads, exactly how much money will be spent on them, and how much our taxes will increase because of them.
To all my readers, check this information out at: http://www.statesman.com/news/content/gen/ap/TX_Toll_Roads.html?
The ban proposed by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, as an amendment to the $106 billion dollar spending bill already passed by the Senate, states that no toll can be built on existing Texas roadways. While this does not stop the Texas Department of Transportation from building new toll roads, it does keep TxDot from using existing routes as part of those roads. (For all of us from Round Rock, that means 620 would not have been used as part of 45.)
Another interesting fact about this article is that another bill added to the tail end of the Transportation Bill, was the banning of "Mexican trucks" from U.S. roadways. What exactly they consider a "Mexican truck" would be interesting to know.
None of us like paying to drive on a road, so it's important to know what they are doing with the new toll roads, exactly how much money will be spent on them, and how much our taxes will increase because of them.
To all my readers, check this information out at: http://www.statesman.com/news/content/gen/ap/TX_Toll_Roads.html?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
