Is Pepper Spray Dangerous?

Recently I read one of my classmate's blog and I really support them in what they're trying to do. This article was about how Texas Youth Commission officials have come to an agreement to restrict the use of pepper spray on unruly youths. Limiting this usage will...in my opinion show that the cops, our very own Austin Police Department will know when to use or not to use the pepper spray. It will show that the cops have class or kind of say not to overbuse their powers. Also I believe that its kind of a habit to the APD to resort to some kind of violence(beating on runaway suspects, beating them with their stick, etc) and they kind of forget to ask themselves if this situation is bad enough to resort to violence or in this case pepperspray. My classmate/friend named Ahmad who wrote the article also agreed the the Texas Youth Commission are doing a right thing, "I believe it is inhumane," is what he said. Warning a youth before resorting to pepperspray will be better than just spraying him without seeing what he did wrong, instead of running away from the cops. Overall his article was right in my opinion that what the Texas Youth Commission is doing is for the good of all people and also public safety.

Austin sergeant fired for fatal shooting

Tony Plohetski wrote an article November 27. 2007 about the chief of police department named Art Acevedo firing Sgt. Michael Olsen for fatally shooting a man(Kevin Brown)during a foot pursuit outside an East Austin nightclub in June, saying in a blistering 10-page report that Olsen unnecessarily fired a second shot into his back as he lay facedown before giving him a chance to comply with an order to show his hands. Acevedo said " Olsen demonstrated poor judgment, showed a lack of common sense and failed to follow his training in the moments before the June 3 shooting" In response, Olsen answered that he was investigating a report that Brown had a gun and that Brown began to flee. He said he fired when Brown reached toward his waist, as if drawing a weapon. After reading this I believe what Art Acevedo did was in the intention of good and justice was served as he fired Olsen from the police department. Olsen has had a poor history of mistreating minorities for a while now and it took this young black male for people to finally see that he does not fit as an officer. As of this year the citizens of Austin has made a good choice of picking this new chief of police from California.

reply to "Texas Standardized Testing"

Reading this post about standardized testing really got me and I totally agree because teachers these days basically all they do is get the students ready for the test. I believe that teachers need to structure their lesson plan to teach the curriculum and at the same time prepare the student to put all of that knowledge in pencil when it comes down to testing. The state of Texas seems to think that Standardized testing is the answer for showing the progress of the students and their ability to comprehend the curriculum set by Texas standards. The problem with this is that some students don’t really have good test taking skills and end up doing bad even though they really knew the subject. I also agree that standardized testing can make a student feel that he is not measuring up to the standards and that they are not as smart as their fellow classmate because they failed. I know this for a fact because I happen to be this student in middle school but still passed that grade because of practice. Basically standardized testing is to me is not really the answer on measuring a student’s knowledge on different subjects, but its required you pass this test before you can move on to the next grade or even get your diploma. Texas needs to develop or improve this system of testing a student’s knowledge on various subjects.

Why you should be registered to vote....

You live in a democracy and that means that you get a say in who runs your country and by way of this privilege you also get a say about how your country is run. The whole point of the voting system is so that our government won’t get “corrupted” and so we can nominate the right people to take care of our country. I’m taking history right now and in the old days people fought for what our government is today, for our government to be based on a voting system. Basically people like Thomas Paine said that if the government had too much power then it would eventually become corrupted. That’s why it should be based on “common wealth,” which meant we the people should have a say in what is going on. Right now elderly people are the most reliable voters. They have the highest percentage of voters of any age group. And because of that, old people get what they want. This is why we need more voters that are young. If you're running for public office, you better be protecting the interests of old people because old people will vote you out. On the other hand, young people don't vote in large numbers and it's not worth a politician’s time to put a lot of effort in courting the young vote. Not that youth isn't important, but if politician A focuses on the young voters and politician B focuses on the old voters, politician B wins, because old people turn out. Turn out is very important because the people who turn out and vote are the ones that rule. If you don't turn out, you lose. If you show up and vote, and get your friends to show up and vote, you are doing a service to the interests of young people. Voting is a tremendous gift. Believe it or not, young people just like you in other countries actually fight and even die for this right; a right that so many youth in democratic nations take for granted. You should vote because you can!

Toll Roads

An article that I recently ran across really got my attention because I can relate to this issue. It is an article by a lady named Sarah Eckhardt who is a Travis County Commissioner that addresses the issue on toll roads about how we can’t really rely on state and federal government for money that is needed to build our transportation system and etc. In this article, Eckhardt is all about toll roads but doesn’t like the fact how the money is used for market-based spending and the toll road plan as proposed presents serious problems of inequity that we can, and must, address. Basically the proposed toll plan would create a two-way system of roadways where those who can afford it will have the "choice" to access the fast lane and the rest of us will go slow on the same road system we currently share equally.

Those who make the choice will easily be paying five times more in transportation taxes than commuters of similar wealth who do not have a toll road stretched between the home and place of work. This "use tax" can be diverted from the toll road on which it was charged to other transportation projects in the CAMPO region, enabling a dangerous dependence on toll taxes and solo car travel. So whether you are rich or poor, this proposed toll plan has some sort of unfairness for you. This is why she is offering an amendment that controls the revenue generated from a toll project to the corridor in which tolls are collected. All of this meaning it would limit the use of any revenue beyond construction, maintenance and operation costs to improving the non-tolled options in and around the toll project. Under these amendments the toll tax will go away when the construction debt is all paid. I believe that Eckhardt presented this issue very well and that she is right on target with this new amendment because it will hopefully take toll taxes away and no longer has inequities for either the poor or rich because we the people are already paying enough taxes. Also the building of toll roads would decrease the the traffic issues that we are currently experiencing.

For further information regarding this toll plan, go to statesmans

Medicare cuts?

The U.S. House of Representatives is thinking of and proposing a bill called the CHAMP
Act which is a bill that makes deep, damaging Medicare cuts to seniors' care. The House supporters of this bill, the Children's Health and Medicare Protection Act of 2007 claim it will help 'America's Greatest Generation' of seniors. In fact, data from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reveals that the CHAMP Act would sharply cut the Medicare funding that America's oldest, sickest seniors depend upon by $2.7 billion over five years.

If the CHAMP Act were to become a law it would create a real bad situation. Texas would suffer the 4th largest cut in the nation in conjunction with having the 4th lowest Medicaid reimbursement rate in the nation. Another thing this bill would cause is that it would have severe negative repercussions on every one of our state's nearly 90,000 nursing home residents, and every one of the more than 100.000 caring employees who work long, demanding hours in more than 1100 Texas skilled nursing facilities to care for those least able to care for themselves. Cutting down on Medicare would greatly affect the elderly because they are already old and can’t work anymore, so how can they pay for insurance? Now more than ever we need the help of our Texas Congressional Delegation, many of whom sit on the powerful U.S. House of Representatives Energy and Commerce and Ways and Means Committees to help kick this proposed Medicare cuts out. These cuts threaten to reduce care for Texas' most vulnerable population of frail, elderly nursing home residents by $168 million over five years – the 4th largest cut on a national basis. We must not let this stand. Since Members of Congress are now back home listening to their constituents, it is essential for all of us who care about the future for our grandparents, our parents and even ourselves to ensure that congressional delegation understands why these ill-advised, short-sighted Medicare cuts should be dumped.

For more details concerning this proposed bill, visit

Statesman.com

Community College Funding...

State leaders are talking about funding money for community colleges but details are not quite up to date yet because they have not agreed on a plan to make it happen. The topic right now is $154 million dollars in state funding for community colleges that Governor Rick Perry vetoed in June. He and the colleges disagree on how health care costs for college employees should be split between the state and local taxpayers and students. Perry wants community colleges to get the $154 million in vetoed funds and about $50 million more, with much of it spent on performance incentives and financial aid programs that Perry championed during the session. But in order for this to happen there must be a budget board meeting with Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and House Speaker Tom Craddick, R-Midland. This is interesting the only thing that caught my eye is that they are going to raise tuition which I think they already did by increasing student fees by $2 per credit hour.

To read up more about this go to

Statesman.com