The Right to Choose;

The following post is in response to a fellow colleagues blog stating their stance on abortion in Texas. To view that post in its entirety please see: http://brianarogers.blogspot.com/2008/04/abolish-abortions-in-texas.html

I strongly disagree with your stance on Texas making abortion illegal. First off I hate the use of abortion as birth control, and am a huge supporter of the alternative method of adoption. Having said that, I do not think making abortion illegal will boost the adoption numbers as much as some other already high stats that are out there. The numbers you’d likely see skyrocket would be child abuse, orphanage population, self terminated pregnancies, infant abandonment, and welfare. The fact of the matter is not everyone has the means, intelligence, or time to go through the steps to put a baby up for adoption and if abortion was outlawed in many cases these unwanted babies would be born into very desperate situations and likely difficult lives. As a parent it is difficult for me to imagine someone terminating their pregnancy, but I also know that in order for that heart wrenching decision to be made it is likely that it was the best thing. I was scared when my wife was pregnant but I was also ready and committed to the good raising of that child and it still tested my patience to the very brink of my capabilities. I can only imagine what that experience would be like for a mother with no help who didn’t want to be a mother in the first place but lawfully had no choice. My belief is that child would not be receiving adequate care and faces a huge likelihood of abuse. In my opinion by banning abortion you are taking away a women’s right to do what’s best for them and their unborn children. I do not believe this is an easy decision for most women to make, but in the end it should be their decision and not the state governments.

Jason Lundin

Worthless Solution

Building a giant fence that would divide the US from Mexico is absolutely absurd. What is even more ridicilious is that the US government is placing this huge unsightly wall right through people’s property. What this means is that these property owners essentially have hundreds, even thousands of acres that are useless to them because it will sit on the other side of this wall. The reason for this, explains the Department of Homeland Security, is to cut costs. In this day and age is this really what we should be spending hard earned tax dollars on? A wall that our future generations will someday tear down and wonder why we ever built it in the first place. The wall that is being built is not going to stop the flow of illegal immigrants into this country, just slow it down temporarily until they cut holes, dig tunnels, find ways around etc .,etc. Instead of spending millions of dollars on a fence, and the lawsuits of the property owners, why not put that money into repairing the Mexican economy in order to reduce the desire to come to the U.S. These people aren’t coming over here to ruin our country or steal from us, they’re coming to work for a better life and provide for their families. The vast majority of them achieve that by doing the labor that most Americans don’t want to do. They are building our houses, pools, roads, businesses, farming our crops, etc. These are hard working people who want a piece of the American dream and they are not asking us to hand it to them, they are working hard for it. I agree we can’t just open the US, due to safety concerns and laws, but in the year 2008 there has to be a better way than building a wall. We don’t have to build a wall to stop Canadians from coming in so why can’t that be achieved in Mexico. In my opinion the American government doesn’t want Mexico to be as successful as Canada, we need for them to have a struggling economy so that they will come over here and bust they’re ass for next to nothing. They’re struggling country provides us with cheap labor, sad but true. I think if we stopped constructing walls, outsourcing to china and focused on building up Mexico we could eventually gain control of the immigration issue. This is by no means an easy fix that will happen overnight but I certainly don’t think putting up a fence is the answer.
Jason Lundin

Austin Smoking Ban?

The following response is in regards to a fellow colleagues blog concerning the recent developments in the Austin Smoking Ban.
This blog can be viewed at:
http://herdeman79.blogspot.com/2008/03/hey-austin-butt-out-of-smokers-business.html

I have to disagree with you on this topic. Laws like these are difficult decisions to make but in the long run are for the good of our nation’s future. In 50 years it will probably seem ridiculous that this was even up for discussion. By making this ban I think its sending a clear message to the next generation that we are aware of the effects of smoking and trying to minimize the amount of new smokers. It would be ridiculous for us to just keep cruising along fat, dumb, and happy all the while knowing that multi-billion dollar companies are marketing poison to our kids and we are not trying to take steps to stop it. When people are trying to get these laws passed they are not saying to themselves this will be great I am going to really stick it to the business owners, they are saying good another bump in the road for lung cancer emphysema etc. This is just a small step that needs to be taken toward the eventual bankruptcy of the tobacco companies making money off killing people. It took a very longtime for people to have been smoking long enough for us to gather enough information to be certain of the effects of smoking and now that we know, it would be irresponsible not to at attempt to phase it out. It probably won’t happen in my lifetime and who knows how many generations it will take, but when it does happen it will be our generation in the history books they will be crediting for it.

Should Texas Go Solar?

Texas needs to mandate solar powered homes and businesses. New construction should conform immediately, and existing homes and businesses need to have a time frame to be retro fitted. This is undoubtedly a difficult task. I feel as though as one of the largest and fastest growing states we have the opportunity to be the flagship for the rest of the country. This technology is out there and has been for some time, it is irresponsible for us not to be using it. Homes that have this system installed are capable of actually acquiring a credit on their electric bill if they don’t consume as much as they produce. Now I’m not saying this should happen overnight, I understand it’s not that easy, but at the same time we need to get the ball rolling. Ten years seems to be a reasonable time frame. If tomorrow Texas law mandated that within ten years all homes would need to be solar equipped, and there would be a substantial tax break for those who comply early I believe Texans would jump on board. In the long run these systems pay for themselves. Now I can already hear the complaints, I can’t afford it, how am I going to come up with the money? Those who qualify as low income could receive government low interest financing with a payment that would likely work out to less than their old electric bill. This is not impossible, it can be done, it might not be easy but it is the right thing to do for the future. Regardless of your stance on climate change or the environment no one can deny that oil is not a renewable resource. So if it’s not renewable, and more homes are being built everyday it only makes sense that if we can build self sufficient homes we do so. I think most will find it hard to argue with the logic of efficiency. When I had my home built 2 years ago I was not offered the option to install solar panels but I was asked to fill out a survey that asked if they had been available to me would I have opted for it. That tells me something, it would probably be happening everywhere already if it was profitable for the builders. So why not make it profitable to the builders with tax breaks and incentives for the first to comply. Any time major changes take place there will always be people who oppose, but in this case, for the good of our children, and our children’s children it needs to be done.

Jason Lundin

Mayor Issues Public Apology;

This blog is in regards to an article out of the Austin American Statesman. It discusses Mayor Will Wynn’s public apology for an incident that took place in March 2006. According to the police report the Mayor was having a party at his downtown condominium when he met an uninvited guest by the name of Luke Johnson. Upon meeting, Johnson questioned the Mayor about whether Will or Wynn was his first name. Wynn believed this individual to be mocking him and asked Johnson to leave. There was apparently an exchange of profanity and the Mayor ended up forcefully escorting the individual off his property. It seems as though both sides of the story vary depending on who’s telling it. In my opinion this is not news. If I had a skirmish at a party in my own home and physically escorted an uninvited guest off my property and told him to f*** off I guarantee it wouldn’t make the front page. In addition I would be willing to bet the cops wouldn’t charge me with assault. This is a college town and I am positive this sort of thing happens every day. I understand as a public figure they are held to higher standard, but I don’t feel as though the Mayor acted any different than most people would. This seems overboard to me. By this standard if someone comes to your home uninvited, you don’t have the right to remove them. That’s funny to me, considering in the Great State of Texas you have the right to protect your property with deadly force if you feel it necessary. Once again the media has blown something out of proportion in order to make news out of a non-news worthy story. I’m sure all the hoopla around this story is taking the Mayor away from much more important duties. As far as I’m concerned the Mayor doesn’t owe anyone an apology.
Jason Lundin
For more information see:
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/03/07/0307wynn.html

Battle For Texas Latino Voters

This post is in regards to an article in the Austin American statesman. In the article it states how crucial the Hispanic vote is going to be to Clinton and Obama in the Texas primary. It discusses the strategy of former politicians who have had success with the Hispanic voters in Texas. Some analysts place Hillary at an advantage because first job in politics was to register Hispanic voters in south Texas. In addition Bill Clinton brought stimulation to the region during his term in the white house, which the Clintons are hoping will play a role with the Hispanics at the poles. Some analysts have Hillary at a 2 to 1 advantage over Barack. Others say Barack’s momentum is unstoppable and has erased any advantage that Hillary may of had. Both candidates have taken similar stances on the “bread and butter” issues such as education, jobs, the economy, and the withdraw of troops. So it seems this will be a battle of who the Hispanics would prefer an African American male or a white female. All this back and forth strategizing to me only raises one question. Do either one of these candidates even truly care at all about the Hispanic community. All of a sudden there is this huge push to get the Hispanic vote. If this was a blow out, they probably wouldn’t be getting this kind of attention if any at all. If I were Hispanic I would find this insulting. “My vote is important when it suits your needs. Prior to now it didn’t seem to matter”. If the Hispanics were of such great importance to these candidates why are we just now seeing all the Spanish campaign ads. I believe the Hispanic community should do their homework and go back to early in their campaign and see which candidate seemed to find the Hispanics important to them from the beginning and disregard any last minute push that may be taking place currently. In my opinion anything being done now just seems like lip service. I would say too little too late. I know that this is how politics works but it just seems so transparent to me. I believe this article should be read by all Hispanics before they cast their vote. Maybe it will sway them maybe it won’t but they should be aware that their political importance to the candidates may be short lived.
For more information see: http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/02/20/0220latvote.html

Bay City's Nuke Plan

In the community of Bay City there are plans in the works to expand the South Texas Project (nuclear power plant) from two nuclear reactors to four. There was a public meeting held recently to go over the details of the project and discuss the environmental issues associated with the proposed expansion. More than two hundred citizens were in attendance. Many were dissatisfied with the focus the elected officials chose to put on the meeting. The meeting which was supposes to discuss environmental issues, spent more time on the economic advantages. This plan is undoubtedly due to the extreme growth in power needs and the desire for clean energy to combat climate change. In my opinion more nuclear power is not the route we should be taking. With all the technological advancements that have been made over the years the governments answer to our problems lies with technology we’ve had all along. This seems like a recipe for disaster. We are consuming too much power so let’s build more terrorist targets; this logic makes no sense to me. I think that money would be better spent putting solar units on peoples residences rather than building huge cancer plants in these peoples backyards and justify it by taunting them with good jobs. The reason we didn’t go completely nuclear years ago is because of the nuclear waste that is produced and the possibility of disaster. Has our dying thirst for power outweighed our personal safety? I think this article would be of interest to anyone who consumes power.

For More Info Please See:

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/stategov/stories/MYSA020608.01B.nuclear.370e134.html