MinorsVote.com
Editor
Editor@TheIndependentDaily.com
A short time ago we were contacted by Baxter Hankin, a young man located in Connecticut who is responsible (perhaps with other younger Americans) for the development of http://MinorsVote.com. MV, from this point on, is a site specifically dedicated to giving a political voice to our American youth.
He envisions local chapters being formed where each youth may provide an Opinion piece regarding his or her perspective on those Political issues that face the country today and into tomorrow. We not only applaud this idea, we celebrate it with him for many reasons, not the least of which is that it is our not-yet-franchised young people who will very shortly have to figure out what to do with the very stinky mess with which we’re about to leave them. (Certainly we’re not about to correct the outcomes of our abhorrent disregard for financial prudence, international relations, and environmental practices in the next 20 years or so.)
So, periodically, under this heading will appear a column by one of MV’s contributing writers. Look for it, and go to their site and explore. Remember: they’re a new publication but will steadily grow to become a substantial voice. Encourage this, please.
If you or your friends and associates have older school-age children, please refer them to http://MinorsVote.com.
The Archives for Minor’s Vote has been established here. To view past articles as they accumulate, access the hyperlink.
(By the way: We’ll edit only minimally letting the chips fall where they may so that the reader may better gauge the quality of thought and education our young people are experiencing. -ed)
Preparing for the Worst
Chris Horkachuck
(Newtown, CT., High School student)
Editor’s note: In the last 12 years our Defense Budget, exclusive of our Drone and other clandestine operations, has more than doubled. We now spend more than $650 billion per year, or ten times that of any other developed country in the world while casually observing the demise of our infrastructure and the curtailing of Food programs for the needy.
In recent years, it has become increasingly apparent that the East Coast, from its largest cities to its smallest towns, is exceptionally unprepared for natural disasters. From the billions of dollars in damage we incurred from Hurricane Sandy to the blizzard debacle in Atlanta just a few days ago, our leaders have either consistently failed or actively chosen not to protect our infrastructure from the damaging effects of Mother Nature at its worst. Despite a noticeable increase in violent weather the past few years, our public works organizations have always been one step behind, to detriment of us citizens who rely on them to provide the services we need to survive. And even in the face of the ever-increasing frequency of disasters like these, the organizations that are vital to our preparation and subsequent recovery from them clearly do not have the funds, equipment, or ability to adequately do their job, even with the lessons learned from past failings. So, how do we fix this problem? How can we assure ourselves and our loved ones that the next time a killer hurricane or massive nor’easter passes through our area, we will still be able to travel on the roads and get heat and electricity? Well, a good start would be increasing those companies and administrations’ budgets.
It’s certainly no secret that our economy is in rough shape. With our national debt at over $17 trillion and an unemployment rate of 7.3%, it would be logical to think that putting money into something as trivial as public works maintenance would be stupid, or even impossible. However, when discussing budgets and revenue, one would have to consider the economic impacts of these events. Total damage for Hurricane Sandy was $65 billion. Hurricane Irene before it cost $15.6 billion. While relative to our total debt, that doesn’t seem like too much, you can be assured that it is. Plus, that’s not even factoring the individual lost wages from people who couldn’t make it to work for the weeks following. If we could prevent such extensive damages from happening, or at least keep it to a minimum and clean it up with haste, those numbers would drop substantially in future storms. People can get out of their house sooner, which means they can go to work and provide for their family sooner, which means that they can boost the economy by shopping sooner. If kickstarting the process means hiring more workers and purchasing more efficient equipment, I firmly believe the cost would be worth it when storms like Sandy no longer even phase us, and we don’t panic every time the weatherman says a blizzard is coming. The only way for this to become a reality is to allow those maintenance companies to grow and expand with government money.
But again, I can see that some of you still want to know where that money could possibly come from. Well, let’s take a look at some of the other government budgets, shall we. I think a particularly interesting one is our military budget, which currently sits at a lofty $530 billion. Now, why in the world do we need that much money in our armed forces when we aren’t really involved in any major conflicts at this point? Surely some could be spared to protect our homeland from its actual number 1 threat, destructive weather. I’m not here to debate the necessity of a strong army, but do we really need to allocate $11.4 billion to the development of the F-35, a strike fighter jet that has continually proven to be expensive, difficult to control, and unreliable? Wouldn’t that be better spent stormproofing our buildings and power lines, or expanding our fleet of snow plows so the people working on this project can get there in the first place? If the first priority of the United States Armed Forces is to protect the American people, they should know that right now, the best way to do that is to give up a portion of their budget in order for them to be as prepared as possible for their largest and most unpredictable enemy.
I remember how terrible the experience of Sandy’s aftermath was. No electricity, no heat, no flushing the toilets for more than a week. It was miserable, and I was one of the lucky ones. I could’ve been sleeping in some homeless shelter in Queens because my house was swept away, or searching for one of the 78 American victims of the storm’s violence. Just the other day, I could’ve been sleeping in my wrecked car in Atlanta for several days, or forced to spend a night in school. I never want to have to do that, and I certainly don’t want anyone else to have to do that. As Americans, we should expect a certain degree of preparedness and helpfulness from our government in times of crisis, a degree which I feel has been sorely lacking during the more severe recent occurrences. That’s why I plead that our “wise” leaders pay attention, and shift around their budgets so the various disaster relief and preparation organizations actually have the resources they need to keep people and property safe and secure during emergencies. If we can avoid blacking out all of Lower Manhattan or bring the entire population of Atlanta to a standstill, then in God’s name, why don’t we? This measure can save property, save livelihoods, and save lives. Increasing the budget of organizations like FEMA and the Red Cross will make certain our readiness for whatever Mother Nature plans to throw at us next.
Sources:
Plumer, Brad. "America’s Staggering Defense Budget, in Charts." Washingtonpost.com. TheWashington Post, 7 Jan. 2013. Web. 29 Jan. 2014.
Severson, Kim. "Atlanta Officials Gamble on Storm and Lose, and Others Pay the Price."New York Times. The New York Times Company, 30 Jan. 2014. Web. 30 Jan. 2014.
Sharp, Tim. "Superstorm Sandy: Facts About the Frankenstorm." LiveScience. TechMedia Network, 27 Nov. 2012. Web. 28 Jan. 2014.
My Opinion Counts
(To vote is to voice that opinion)
Baxter Hankin
(Founder of Minor’s Vote and High School student)
“Why me?” many people ask. “How could I do that? I’m just some average person.”
This attitude is reflected by current voter participation. In the most recent presidential election, only 58.2% of eligible Americans voted. The percentage is lower in the recent 2013 Election Day for local governments. These numbers raise a serious question: Why are many Americans not voting?
Mainly, US citizens feel as if they are powerless. In a nation of over 300 million people, the average citizen feels as if their vote is minuscule in the larger picture. If you look at statistics, this is simply false. The outcome of the 2000 presidential election was determined by a margin of just 537 Floridian ballots: A few more people deciding to vote could easily have negated this difference.
So let’s assume that you have this kind of voting power: because you do. Let’s assume that you lived in Florida at that time. What if you campaigned and got 538 more people to cast a vote for Gore instead of Bush? The entire outcome of the election would have been different. Our president would have been different. Our nation, policy, infrastructure, and everything, would be different. Regardless of whether that change is positive or negative, you have the ability to create that kind of change. You have the power to change the course of this country, to follow a path that better represents what you believe in.
However, in most presidential situations, a few hundred votes won’t do much. Write a few editorials. Start a campaign. You could change the entire future of this nation, by simply telling people what you believe and why it makes a difference in everyone’s lives. If people understand the impact of their vote, enough of them may change their opinions to change the election’s outcome.
Maybe you’re voting for a local representative in an election, or for your town budget. After all, presidents are only elected every few years. Often, these smaller elections come down to just a handful of ballots. For example: In my hometown of Newtown, CT, there are frequent votes that decide the town budget. A few years back, the budget was rejected by a margin of less than ten votes. If a few more of our 28,000 residents had cast their votes in favor of this budget, our lives would have been changed. Regardless of whether you wanted a combination of higher taxes, better schools, and better town facilities, every person’s vote then made a difference. If one person brought just a few of their friends to vote “yes,” our town and our lives would be different.
Finally, there is the example of the involved activist. I know some of these people: ranging from advocates of new domestic legislation, to supporters of human rights across the globe. Without supporters of change and improvement, ranging from a few of my friends, to Mahatma Gandhi, Abraham Lincoln, and Malala Yousafazai, their movements would be significantly weakened.
If there is no one advocating for what you believe in, why can’t you advocate? After all, if you don’t step up to the challenge of fighting for yourself, no one else will. All it takes is determination. The leaders listed above came from a wide variety of backgrounds. They only needed the determination to free their people, to protect the concepts of democracy and freedom, to pursue an education.
Now, I ask you: Does your opinion still have no value?
Peaceful Prevention of Nuclear Proliferation
Matthew Argraves
(High School student)
Unilateral military force by the United States to prevent nuclear proliferation is not justified.
Unilateral military force won't stop nuclear proliferation in a country. In fact unilateral military force makes nuclear proliferation more likely as seen in Israel's unilateral military force of bombings nuclear reactors in Osirak, Iraq on June 7, 1981. Iraq recovered and continued to pursue their nuclear program. This preemptive strike did the exact opposite of stopping Hussein's nuclear program but actually accelerated it.
“By demonstrating Iraq’s vulnerability, the attack on Osirak actually increased Hussein’s determination to develop a nuclear deterrent and provided Iraq’s scientists an opportunity to better organize the program. The Iraqi leader devoted significantly more resources toward pursuing nuclear weapons after the Israeli assault” (Washington Post)
This shows that Israel’s unilateral military force was not effective at completing its goal of stopping Iraq’s nuclear proliferation. This sets a precedent that unilateral military forces are unjust under the just war theory because they don’t have a reasonable chance of success. Similar reactions are expected if military force is used against the Iranian nuclear program.
US Defense Chief Robert Gates believes, “Military force against the Iranian government, which has refused global calls to rein in its suspected nuclear enrichment program, would bring together a divided nation, it will make them absolutely committed to obtaining nuclear weapons” (AlterNet).
This means that attacks on Iran will cause NPT withdrawal and accelerate its nuclear program. These two points prove that unilateral military force does not delay nuclear proliferation but in fact does the exact opposite, making it unjust. Thus the US goal to stop nuclear proliferation (through) unilateral military force will not do the job.
To add to this point, there are benefits of using diplomacy over military might. Historically diplomacy has stopped nuclear proliferation as in the example of South Africa and Ukraine. In 1989 South African dismantled its nuclear weapons due to diplomatic pressure from the US, Soviet Union, and France.
Similarly, Ukraine exchanged its inherited nuclear weapons to Russia for disarmament in exchange for money from the US all through diplomacy. Diplomacy is a better option than war because it saves human lives from combat, saves taxpayer money, and it creates better relationships with foreign countries.
Recently Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, “has pledged to reduce tensions with the West over the nuclear issue” (The Hindu). We should take advantage of the new opportunity for diplomacy due to a new presidency in Iran. These statements can be very promising in stopping nuclear growth in Iran.
So why should the US not pursue the promise of diplomacy and but instead jump to the use of military force?
As stated by Rebecca Griffin, the political director of Peace Action, from the Daily Gazette, “U.S.-run war simulations have shown that a strike on Iran is likely to lead to a wider regional war…” (Miami Herald). Using diplomacy is more justified than war because it will insure peace not violence and death.
As a third argument, unilateral strikes to preemptively end a future threat are shown to not work throughout history. Examples of this are Pearl Harbor and Hitler's Invasion of Russia which both ended terrible for the attacking countries.
This is even reflected today in US politics. Originally the US was planning on bombing Syria due to chemical weapons because they had the support of other countries. Once other countries jumped off the bandwagon the US knew that their unilateral military force would not be effective which is why our government is turning to diplomacy instead.
“According to the overwhelming majority of international relations (IR) scholars, the costs are very high. We evaluate the key arguments that underlie this assessment, namely that increased U.S. unilateralism will: (1) spur the formation of a coalition to check U.S. power; (2) reduce efficiency gains through lost opportunities for institutionalized cooperation; and (3) undermine the legitimacy of the American-led international order. We conclude that the theoretical arguments that IR scholars advance do not show that a shift toward unilateralism necessarily has high costs. Our analysis reveals the need to, first, distinguish clearly between criticisms of unilateral policies based on procedure and those based on substance and, second, to recognize the weakness of current procedural arguments”(Atlantic International University).
The importance of this shows that if the US wants to maintain its international power, have less enemies, and reduces cost then it should use multilateral military approaches.
In summary, Military force against nuclear proliferation does not work and is unjust under the just war theory, Diplomacy is more effective in stopping nuclear proliferation than unilateral strikes as seen in history, and Unilateral approaches are faulty battle plans that usually backfire and have high costs. “President Clinton asked the commander of U.S. forces in South Korea about the bottom-line cost if war broke out on the Peninsula. "A million and a trillion," Gen. Gary Luck replied. Facing the prospect of a million people dead and a trillion dollars in industrial damage”(CNAS). With the cost of such a flawed and pointless approach shown in this quote, and all other reasons, unilateral military force by the United States to prevent nuclear proliferation has been proven to be unjust.
Understanding the Syrian Conflict
Akash Ahuja
(16 years old. Junior at Newtown High School in Newtown, CT)
If you have read any newspaper this past weekend, then you’ve most likely read or seen an article on US interaction with Syria. If you haven’t been paying attention, Syria has been in a bloody civil war for nearly two and a half years now. The problem lies in both religion and cruel government. The people of Syria are, for the vast majority, Sunni Muslim. The entire government, however, is Alawite, a branch of Shiite Muslim. However (and I do see their point), most all Sunni Muslims don’t even agree that Alawites are even close to the Muslim ideology. Syria started its rebellion at around the same time as the rest of its neighbors in the famous Arab Spring, but their conflict has been lasting much longer. Around a week and a half ago, about 1400 civilians died due to chemical weapons used by the government army. Nearly 400 of these casualties were children. The Secretary of State, John Kerry called the attacks and the reports from hospitals an “inconceivable horror”.
With this redoubled attack by the government, President Obama has started a push to enter the conflict in Syria and end their war. He certainly has reason to make this argument; over 3,500 people checked themselves into hospitals near the Damascus area with symptoms matching those of nerve-agent exposure. There are already currently five American destroyers and one Marine amphibious assault ship in the Mediterranean, ready for action as soon as the order is given. For all the death, why hasn’t anyone led the charge into Syria?
Simple answer is that we live in the 21st century and things have to be more complicated than that. To start off, Obama cannot just send the order to attack, especially with our current deficit. In 2009, Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace prize, specifically mentioning his “multilateral diplomacy”. Obama doesn’t have this kind of worldwide agreement, and he doesn’t even have it in his own party. 54 Democrats in the House of Representatives signed a letter cautioning the President against an “unwise war” and to work towards “international consensus”. As of yet, only the French President Hollande has offered Obama support in a war against Syria.
Due to the negative response Obama received, he has made the decision to back off for a while. Too many people have criticized a strike against Syria, and even though Nobel Peace prizes can’t be revoked, Obama doesn’t want to ruin his public image and act out of character. Despite being 100% lined up for the attack, the President backed off and asked for a vote in Congress. This move will allow the country to move as a whole nation, and give time for the U.N and the Arab League to make decisions of their own.
And now, the world waits for Congress’ decision. And it will be a close one. In most polls, decision to act in Syria was split nearly 50-50. In terms of morals, all can agree that the world cannot let the Assad regime go unpunished. An actually debatable question is if the U.S can afford committing to yet another Middle Eastern conflict. Our trend of being the “world’s police force” is for the greater good, but we’ve wreaked havoc on our economy by keeping it up for so long. The decision is a tough one to make, and I’m sure controversy will surround Congress no matter what conclusion they arrive at. But in the meantime, we wait to hear from them.
Americans Should Demand Humane Treatment of Prisoners
Kate Dunbar
(High School Senior. Debate Team Captain. Newtown High, Newtown, CT)
Injustice exists in America. Everyday. Any place. Anytime. But the problem is that even in a country where issues of justice are brought to the attention of millions, the amount of actions being done to correct these injustices is staggeringly low. One of these examples of injustice that needs to become a priority for the American people to fix is the current situation at Guantanamo Bay Detention Facility.
Guantanamo Bay Detention Facility located at a U.S. Naval Base in Cuba currently consists of a few camps in which the unlawful detention, torture and questioning of civilians suspected of potential terrorist crimes or plots against the U.S. have been detained. Most people do not know of these camps. While a lot of buzz was generated when these camps were first investigated under the Bush Administration, there was not enough outrage to change our government’s stance on the justification of having these camps. But the fact of the matter is that the human rights abuses occurring at these camps can no longer be ignored. Take for example the case of Mohammed al-Qahtani.
There are a lot of documented abuses that occurred at Guantanamo. Mohammed al-Qahtani is just one prisoner who had to endure all kinds of abuses at the hands of the United States. Some examples of these abuses include: Waterboarding; Beatings; Stress positions (forcing prisoners to stand or crouch for hours); Sexual abuse (female interrogators pretending to rub menstrual blood on a chained prisoner’s face, e.g.); Torture by music (ear‐splitting music for hours on end, which has been proven to induce states of psychosis in prisoners after just a few hours); Sleep Deprivation (sometimes for weeks on end, another tactic known to induce psychosis in prisoners); Temperature extremes; Forcible beard shaving (a form of religious humiliation that was also used on religious Jews by Nazi soldiers); Prolonged isolation; Threats of rendition, and threats against prisoners’ families. This torture without any regard to Geneva Conventions standards for the treatment of prisoners has to stop. As powerless as average citizens may feel, these human rights abuses can change with citizen outrage channeled into action.
This is where young, active citizens can make a huge difference. If more outreach is done to talk to senators, representatives and officials at the White House, making this issue come to the forefront of the American Justice System could be just around the corner. There are a lot of options at hand to keep national security protected and provide more just options to the detainees. Some of these options include military trials or at the very least modifications to the unjust conditions in the camps.
Change can be just around the corner, if people prioritize these issues of injustice and let their voice be heard as to what kind of country they want to be living in.
Injustice cannot be allowed to continue. Human rights must be protected. Please write to your representatives and urge them to stop the abuses at Guantanamo and to close this detention center. Hearings need to be held to determine what percentage of these detainees are actual enemy combatants, then have those cases investigated and those detainees reassigned to other facilities where humane treatment can be assured.
What is the Common Core?
Akash Ahuja
(16 years old. Junior at Newtown High School in Newtown, CT)
(Note: After reading the following, read our rebuttal below.)
The Common Core bill has lost some attention, but it is still a relatively new piece of legislation, and definitely one that we minors need to know more about. The Common Core is made to iron out the differences between state education. Currently, each state decides for itself the best way to teach its children, with no federal intervention. However, some of the problems are in standardized testing. A proficient score in reading for a Massachusetts student is not necessarily the same as proficient for a Montana student. If standards are set too low in a state, then students may think that they are successful while in reality they are sub-par in comparison to the rest of the country. The new bill will set national standards, so students are actually prepared for real world expectations. Fortunately, experts persist in saying that the Common Core is NOT a curriculum, so teachers can still teach the way they want to.
But there are still hesitations. Despite the experts pressing that it is not a fixed curriculum, it is a fixed test. The teachers are going to be pressured to teach strictly to the test, and that may limit the variety of things a student can learn. Another low point is that reading standards are taking a huge turn. Not for the worse, per se, but not necessarily for the better. Reading standards in the Common Core dictate that informational reading, nonfiction such as newspapers and other articles, will take up half of elementary school curriculum and about 70% of 12th grade English class. At first glance, this may appear like a great idea. After all, with all of these movies and video games, it is an easy argument to say that youth are too invested in fictional stories and no learning is done. And I can agree with that to an extent. But informational reading is plain boring, especially to any elementary school student. The fear that many concerned teachers and parents have is that these early on informational reading requirements will start driving children away from reading from an early age. They could grow to despise reading, and they might not even attempt books for fun, not even poetry or any good classic novels.
More problems lie with the teachers and how they feel. Many are frustrated by how the men writing this bill is not in a classroom and do not understand the difficulty of getting students to participate, and adding more complex skills included in the Core are not going to help. The standardized tests are going to standardize teaching, and keeping up with the rigorous demands are going to leech off their creativity (especially with the reading).
Unfortunately, it is very hard to decide whether the Common Core Bill will be good or bad for America as a whole. Seeing the benefits in national standardized testing is easy to see, but difficulties with teacher support and student opinion make this a heavily debated topic. Because we need to deal with politicians in this country, you most likely have to experience at least some of the change in your schooling. Ask your teachers what they think! Ask your parents what their opinion is. Write a letter to your local senator and tell them about how the bill is working and what is good about it, or what needs changing. And please tell us what you think at MinorsVote.com.
More to the Point...
(A rebuttal to the MV Common Core Opinion, above)
Editor
Editor@TheIndependentDaily.com
Nothing has done more to denigrate the quality of education than standardized testing on which far too much time is spent assessing student capabilities in a regimen of Q&A specific to the tests being administered.
Education is Literature, Science, Mathematics, History... From this wellspring of knowledge garnered at a youthful point in life the student may draw upon his or her knowledge in other seemingly disassociated fields, analogizing from a synthesis of those things he or she knows, a response to a given situation or circumstance.
Today’s teachers aren’t educators: they’re proctors in a sea of disenchantment and frustration with the lack of free learning and association being experienced. This is not intellectual growth; it is teaching our children to march in lockstep.
Today’s educational system is designed to further bury our future citizens in ignorance: to keep them from learning from our past so that we may have a more directed world tomorrow. Examples abound, and I have witnessed the regressive nature of what qualifies as learning today to that of 20, 30, 40 years past over my professional life. The result is dismal.
Rari nantes in gurgite vasto. Those very few who survive the educational system of today, whose true life skills and capabilities extend beyond the realm of a specific data set the purpose of which is to answer questions that have little tangibility in life, are the few destined to be our only creative resources as a result. The vast majority who do not will live out their lives as slaves in an economic machine the point of which is to further enrich those who are at the helm.
Education ought to be fundamental and fluid, based on the needs and curiosity of the child, providing basic skills and simultaneously liberating the near-genius or genius specialty within every one of our children.
Too bad the debate continues about testing structure rather than asking the much larger question, “Why are we doing this?”
The United States today has fallen far from her post as international leader in education. Today we rank far below 20th position overall. Cuba – our long-standing political football – ranks first in quality of overall education in the world – along with New Zealand, Finland, Australia and others.
We are 40th or so for those experiencing and completing a college level education, and one need look no further than local news blogs, Facebook, or other media to witness the failure of our secondary educational system.
This debate ought not be, How best to standardize tests, but, How to return to a meaningful curriculum. What an inane experiment this has been: What irreparable harm it has done.
We must let our teachers...teach. Liberate our teachers and you will liberate the minds of our children.
Immigration Situation
A. D. Harper
(High School Student, Rocky Mount, NC)
Immigration in America is a very touchy subject. According to the Department of Homeland Security, in 2012 alone 757,434 people were naturalized and became legal U.S. citizens. But the problem we have now is with the Illegal immigrants, the majority of which come from Mexico looking for job opportunities, and sometimes just government benefits.
Our borders need to be kept in check. We had roughly 11 million illegal immigrants enter the USA in 2010, taking jobs from hardworking Americans and getting benefits that only citizens are entitled to, all the while not paying taxes or helping society. So am I saying I'm against immigration? No. But we need legal immigrants who have had background checks and who have gone through the proper process of becoming a citizen.
So here's basically what is being proposed in the Senate.
The USA would set up a system to allow illegal immigrants become legal, over time. Set it up for illegals to turn themselves in, pay a penalty and make them start paying income tax. Make sure they learn to speak English. Allow them to continue living and working in the U.S. but WITHOUT any government programs or benefits. After ten years they can become a naturalized citizen assuming they haven't broken any major laws. This plan allows those who are applying for legal immigration already keep their place in line and not be moved to the back as many on the complete and total amnesty side would have us do.
Our nation was built by immigrants, and I want immigration to thrive. But immigrants should pay taxes just like the rest of us, and make an attempt to come here legally. Not just hop a fence or grab a boat over the border on a whim. We need a safe and secure country and a reasonable immigration system, along with a secure border, will help provide that.
This "Path to citizenship" is surprisingly bipartisan; it’s a compromise between the far-right crowd who want all illegals deported, and the far-left crowd who wants every illegal made a citizen overnight. We need more Bills like this, something that is actually done by both political parties in the best interest of our nation.
Gun Control: A Letter to Congress
Sarah Clements
(Age: 17. Senior, Newtown High, Newtown, CT.)
My name is Sarah Clements, and as your constituent; as a Sandy Hook Elementary graduate of 2006; as a daughter, a sister, and a friend; as a Newtowner; and as the daughter of a Sandy Hook Elementary School teacher, I am writing to you today to ask for your support on an issue about which I feel very strongly. On December 14, twenty of my young, beautiful neighbors had their lives abruptly and unfairly ended, as did six honorable women. It is still hard for me to come to grips with. As I write this, my hands still shake. I not only can’t believe it, it just doesn’t make sense, and I have recently become overwhelmed with a constant, lingering fear because I know it still happens every day. Nine other children are taken every day from gun violence in the U.S. (along with anywhere between 30-90 adults) and I physically, emotionally, and mentally cannot handle it any longer. That is why when I say Newtown (including me) won’t back down until something is done, I say the absolute truth.
Even before what happened in my town, I was for gun control. That does not mean “taking away all the guns” or dispensing of our Second Amendment rights, as extremists would like other Americans to believe. It means we want safe towns so that parents do not have to fear sending their kids to school, so that couples can go on a date night to a theater like normal, so that eager families can go Christmas shopping in peace and excitement, so that devoted community members may worship their religion without violence, so that there is no more emotional scarring like what I and all of my fellow Newtown citizens are trying to recuperate from. No town should ever have to go through what mine is going through, yet every day the number of towns that is subject to the torment increases.
One way I am healing myself is by advocating for common sense safety. There is so much change that must go into this, including a change in American culture. But one step that is included in this change is a change in gun culture. There is no way anyone can say that amid this plague of gun violence, it has nothing to do with guns. In fact, everything that plays into the crimes must be addressed. Common sense. Are we going to wait until we all know someone who lost a loved one? That is unacceptable. 30,000+ dead a year is unacceptable. Nine children taken per day is unacceptable. The unfathomable act that happened in my town—that my beautiful, strong, caring, loving, tight-knit, peaceful, quiet town—will now be known for is unacceptable. It is a national disgrace and embarrassment when compared to other first-world, industrialized, "civilized" countries. So I ask that you please help to pass common sense gun laws, as it is the least we can do.
On the 26th of January, I marched on Washington. I was joined by my community members, my dad, over 6,000 Americans, and 26 of the friends I lost who walked with us in spirit and love. I marched because of my mother, because of my town, and because of the numbers killed by senseless gun violence. Because these are not just numbers; they are brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers; these are thousands of good deeds, volunteer hours, smiles, Valentine's cards, weddings, jobs, futures, families lost. Because I will be forever changed by that day. Marching gave me hope that my country can do better. I marched because I was surrounded (literally and figuratively) by members of the government that I know and trust. (I trust you to do the right thing.) I also marched with thousands of friends I will never formally meet. There were people of every age (newborn to 80s+), gender, religion, ethnicity, and state. I was surrounded by a small sampling of America. We are diverse—there were mothers, daughters, sons, fathers, grandparents, neighbors, godparents, cousins, teachers, pastors, rabbis, voters, people from Newtown and people from Texas and people from Alaska—and we have coalesced around a common goal. This is what America looks like. This is what citizenship looks like. This is what democracy looks like.
I marched, but it was just my first step, and it should just be yours, too. Please... do not let my friends pass in vain. If what happened in my town is not the turning point, I do not know what is. This cannot continue to be the disgusting and embarrassing status quo of the U.S. Please consider reinstating the assault weapon ban, banning high capacity ammunition magazines, requiring background checks for all guns, enforcing at least a 28 day waiting period, requiring mandatory gun safety training before the ownership of a gun, outlawing bullets that literally shatter in the body, and increasing productivity of the ATF, Dept. of Education, and gun research.
No one needs a magazine that fires 60 bullets in a few seconds. That is for the battlefield only; that is not self-defense. The man who shot up my elementary school shot each person multiple times, literally tearing them apart. They were 6 and 7. The school nurse’s car in the second row in the parking lot was hit by a bullet that went through the door, into a seat, and ricocheted back out. That was a car meters away… imagine what that did to my friends. This is what we are left to picture and think about. My beloved third grade teacher and role model was shot three times. It was her daughter’s birthday that day. She is still recovering, and she is one of the most positive and inspirational people in my life. But still, she was shot three times and needs countless surgeries. All the teachers I know at the school are emotionally scarred. Some people in town can’t sleep, some can’t eat, some (like many of us) cry randomly on and off, and many are not fit to work. I am telling you the worst of the worst in my town, not because it symbolizes us at all right now, but because it proves it’s not “just a gun” or “just a bullet” or “just a hobby” or “just one time”. It’s all of this… aftermath. Please stop letting the gun lobby and the NRA bully you around. They simply want to make a profit, even if that means 30,000+ deaths a year and teachers being trained to shoot a weapon (I know MY mom trained to teach, not to shoot). Just remember, as American people, we did not elect the NRA for anything. We elected you to keep us safe and to do the right thing.
There is an old Native American proverb that says, “We did not inherit the Earth from our ancestors. We are borrowing it from our children.” Keep this in mind, because as a junior in high school, I am between childhood and adulthood. I have heard countless stories of children in my town and all over who are scared every day because their friends died from a “bad man with a gun”, a direct and very real quote. Their best friends passed before they were even out of elementary school, unable to grow up to be an artist or a fireman or a politician. How do you tell a child his best friend Dylan, or her best friend Olivia won’t be coming back next week? Hundreds of parents had to do that after 12/14, and thousands around the country had to explain to their kids why they were crying.
Then, I look to the other side, the adults who are foolishly going back and forth with the same dialogue, going nowhere. It is quite upsetting to say the least. Sure, this is a glimpse into my town and my friends and our future generation. But if I told you the incredible strength, resilience, and love that was radiating from my town, it would not be the full truth because you have to feel it. Only when you experience pain that you can literally feel, that makes you double over and scream, that makes your hands shake, that makes you have anxiety attacks, that makes you think of being sad when you recognize that you are happy for once, can you truly experience—truly feel—love. It can’t be described. As Martin Luther King Jr. said, “Darkness cannot drive out darkness. Only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate. Only love can do that.” Please lead with love.
Newtown can, must, and will become a symbol of hope and change, and I hope that continues. As the Sandy Hook Promise says, we want to be remembered, “not as the town filled with grief and victims, but as the place where real change began.” Please let this come true. I co-created a video called "Make Your Own Sandy Hook Promise" that is now on YouTube, and I urge you to watch and share it with your fellow officials, as it sets the tone for common sense laws and humane conversations. My principal, who is one of the strongest individuals I have ever met, who lost one of his best friends Mrs. Dawn Hochsprung that day, gave us a mantra on the first day back to school that we have all memorized: Our collective strength and resilience will serve as an example for the rest of the world. I have total faith that it will. So help to make that reality.
As my town continues to heal, you must help us. We are all Newtown, and each person's son or daughter is everyone's son or daughter. When we stand together, we stand a chance. Thank you.
Editor’s Note: In this journal we have repeatedly implored our readers to consider all children worthy of our love and protection. We would hope that those who mourn the murders of children in Newtown might equally mourn the murders of children in Iraq, Afghanistan, Nigeria, and in any place where a child has become an acceptable collateral casualty of war. An occulted voice that is sometimes silent against violence can never be heard. Read, Obama Pleas for Background Checks... below
Snowden and Party Polarization
J. M. Duckworth
(Writer for Minor’s Vote)
By now most of America has heard the story of Edward Snowden, the ex-NSA contractor who fled to Hong Kong after divulging information about the government’s extensive spying program against US citizens. If you’ve been keeping up with the news, you know that the country is split between hailing him as a hero and burning him at stake for “betraying” the good ‘ole stars and stripes. Not surprisingly, most Republicans are in favor of the latter, while the Democrats embrace the former.
The Snowden incident has become another ridiculous political plaything for the two parties to fight over in an attempt to discredit the other and garner support for themselves, all while never resolving the issue at hand. Every incident or problem this nation has is a cause for debate and mudslinging by both parties and nothing ever gets done. This isn’t even that controversial of an issue- a government employee informs the public that their human rights are being violated. Big deal. Where did the decision to declare him a traitor come from?
Edward Snowden is supposed to be protected under whistleblower law, yet he is being charged with two counts of espionage and theft. He left for Hong Kong to avoid being prosecuted illegally, and then to Russia. Not because he’s sympathetic to the Russians, but because it was the only country that would allow him in. His decision to try and seek asylum in China, Russia, Cuba, Venezuela, and Ecuador is not because he “hates freedom” as some have suggested, but because those countries would not extradite him to America. He has also applied for asylum in Austria, France, Switzerland and Poland among other places, but this was conveniently left out of most of the recent articles I’ve read.
There are also rumors that Snowden is feeding information to Chinese and Russian intelligence agencies that could potentially damage relations between those countries and ourselves. Russia and China have both denied questioning Snowden and we’re not in any position to call their bluff. Snowden has not leaked any information to any other country but ours, and fled the states to avoid a possible death penalty. So why is he a traitor in any ones eyes?
Could it have to do with party polarization? The whole incident could be easily resolved with both parties just accepting the facts and reaching a conclusion. But no one seems to make decisions based on fact any more- they make decisions based on what they think their voter base will like. Maybe 25 years from now, when the public has forgotten all about Snowden, the proper decision will be made. But not now. For now, exploiting this man is just another way to get one more vote.
The Electoral College
Akash Ahuja
(16 years old. Junior at Newtown High School in Newtown, CT)
Believe it or not, we’re all going to start hearing about the new presidential candidates in about a year. Every four years, these politicians spend about two or so years filling ad space with their optimistic promises and hopes for America. Then, they wait for the results to pool in from that fateful Tuesday in November.
Although these runners are working for each individual vote, the Electoral College is the true final deciding factor. This is weakening the famous democracy of our country that we have worked for, sacrificed for, died for. The popular vote is the superior way to really find the majority opinion on any debated topic.
The Electoral College, first of all, does not give all voters a voice. In a country where freedom of speech and equal representation are things that we are extremely proud of, we surprisingly overlook our own elections. If your state has a majority vote for a Republican, then all of the people who voted for the Democratic candidate have their vote unaccounted for. (The Electoral points are winner-take-all, which means that the loser loses more than just the outcome: they lose their voice in the national count. According to the U.S Electoral College’s official website, only Maine and Nebraska split electoral points. All other states give 100% of their points to one candidate only.)
If you happen to live in any of the other 48 states in this country, our kind government couldn’t care less how you voted if you aren’t part of the majority in your state. From sea to shining sea, an American is an American and of equal voice, right? Not so.
Think about it this way: We have about 120 million people voting in each election, and their votes are going to make up 538 points. 120 million divided by 538 is 223,048 voters per point. However, in some other states, the number of voters per point may be different. Alaska had 300,495 voters in the last election, having just over 100,000 voters per point. In California, the 13,038,547 voters boil down to 237,065 voters to complete each point. If you didn’t follow that math, you just have to trust me for this next part.
This makes the weight of a voter in Alaska about 2.23 times what it would be worth in a fair system, yet in California, a voter’s weight is 0.94. This is unfair to Californians because each citizen is worth less than if they were living in any other state. In Alaska and other states, each voter can sometimes be counted worth 2 Americans.
This is unjust.
In our Declaration of Independence, it says very clearly that all men are created equal. Well, (to) have an Alaskan be worth over twice as much as the average citizen was obviously not the Founding Fathers’ plan. The Electoral College does not represent people equally state-to-state.
The Electoral College does not realistically represent the actual majority opinion of the population. There are 4 cases of presidents winning the popular vote, yet losing the Electoral College: Jackson v. Adams, 1824, Tilden v. Hayes, 1876, Harrison v. Cleveland, 1888, and Gore v. Bush, 2000 are all examples of injustice being served to a candidate who (was) clearly supported by more people than his opponent.
Another example was in 1984, where 40.5% of the popular vote went to Walter Mondale, and yet he only received (majority support) in Minnesota and Washington, D.C. That equates to about 2.4% of the total electoral votes. (As an aside, in 1992, unlucky Ross Perot of the Reform Party won 19% of the popular vote, but no Electoral votes.)
How can a majority of people want someone to be elected and that person loses? If this country is run by the people, why has the minority candidate won in a total of four presidential elections?
In the recent 2012 election, the Electoral College skewed results by making it appear as though Obama’s victory was overwhelming. Obama beat Romney by 3:2 in the Electoral College, but only won the popular vote by 5 million votes. (Editor’s note: About 58% of the qualified electorate actually voted, or about 125,000,000 of those qualified to vote in America. Read, Pakistan: Explosive Politics, elsewhere in this journal.)
So the difference is really only 4% of voters. The Electoral College made it appear as if a wide majority favored Obama when the margin is but a mere fraction under closer scrutiny.
Now, because the Electoral College clearly does not do a good job of representing the people, it is unfair to the voters in different states, and denies a voice to the losing side per state. The Electoral College needs to be abolished and (the) popular vote needs to be the only way to elect a president. We need to fight back for our voice, and not let the government take it away in a process that caters to slight majorities or, in some cases, negates the popular sentiment and decision of the majority.
While listening to some governors, senators, congressmen, and the like tell you about how they have a better plan than their opponents, keep in mind that you have a reasonable chance of your voice going unheard.