Tuition Costs

The cost of attendance at public universities in Texas has increased by 90% since the 2003 deregulation of tuition by Texas Legislature. According to SavingForCollege.com, a student attending a public university for 4 years is projected to spend $38,300 in tuition and fees and the national student debt is in the trillions. Pell grants for low-income families will only cover up to $6,000 each year for tuition costs making only a dent in overall cost of attendance. The tuition increase is getting out of hand and students in Texas are not able to afford the education they need and deserve in order to reach their career goals.

According to Forbes, the average salary for a person just out of college with a bachelors degree is $45,000. However, this number fluctuates drastically depending on which bachelors degree. For a person attending private school, averaging at about $129,700 in debt after four years according to SavingForCollege.com, having this salary will take years upon years to pay off student loans. However, that's even if you can find a job after graduating. Since 2007, the unemployment rate for college graduates has increased from 5.7% to 8.8% and the underemployment rate has increased from 9.9% to 18.3%, according to the Economic Policy Institution. It is becoming more and more difficult to even find a job after receiving a bachelors degree leaving people wondering if paying all that money for college is even worth it.

One reason for the tuition increase is due to the increased number of hired faculty and staff and universities. Also, class sizes are increasing drastically. However, state and national government should provide more funding to universities and provide more scholarships and grants to perspective students in order to give everyone a chance to get the education they deserve. Lowering the cost of tuition in Texas will benefit the population as a whole and will allow for more opportunities for students coming from low-income families.

"UnEqualRights Ordinance" Review

As a liberal, I am very willing to discarding traditional values and open to new behaviors and opinions. Equality is a very big part of my life and I feel that everyone should be able to express who they are as long as they are not harming or putting others in harms way. That is why and article titled “Repeal the Houston UnEqualRightsOrdinance” really caught my attention.

The author, David Jennings, begins his article with “we have one more day to stop an egregious assault on the rights of women and children to be safe when they use the restroom.” Wow, now he really has my attention. Basically, this article was written to persuade people into signing a petition that will put Mayor Parker’s ‘Sexual Predator Protection Act’ into a referendum.

The ordinance is to protect citizens from discrimination “on the basis of sex, race, ethnicity, national origin, age, familial status, marital status, military status, religion, disability, genetic information, or pregnancy” (Tony Merevick). Though it is largely focused around the LGBT community, it is a very broad discrimination ordinance protecting all kinds of people. This ordinance also gives the LGBT community the right to choose which restroom they feel most comfortable using. If a transgendered woman would like to use the women’s restroom, this ordinance will allow them to do so under protection. Jennings argument is only based off of this sector of the ordinance. He feels as though by allowing this, the city of Houston is allowing sexual predators to go into the women’s restroom and assult/molest young girls and women and protecting them through this ordinance.

I do understand his concern and where he is coming from. I have a 2-year-old niece that I love to death and would never want to see anything happen to her.  In his article, he says that he is biased on the topic because he is the father and grandfather of girls. However, this is not a valid argument. This a slippery slope argument; “if we allow transgendered men to use women’s restrooms, sexual predators will rape our girls and women.” It upsets me that the LGBT community is almost always criticized on the basis of sexual conduct. Homosexuality is not perversion and can definitely not be compared to bestiality as Phil Robertson once did. I think it’s funny how this ordinance is banning discrimination in sectors including housing and employment on all types of backgrounds and people are only focusing in on LGBT discrimination.

Though I do understand where he is coming from when speaking of the protection of women and children, this ordinance is not going to put anybody in harms way except for the LGBT community with regards to religious and anti-gay extremists in the restrooms.

"Turning College Into a No-Thought Zone" review

I recently read an editorial by Virginia Postrel entitled "Turning College into a No-Thought Zone." Basically, the column is about a student who is now suing Citrus Community College for violating his First amendment right. Vincenzo Sinapi-Riddle, the student suing the public college, was talking to a student about signing a petition to "condemn spying by the National Security Agency" when he was told that he could be ejected from the campus for violating the "speech-zone rule."

According to the article, the only place on campus to participate in "expressive activities" takes up only about 1.34 percent of the entire campus away from common walkways and quads. Postrel goes on to discuss how unconstitutional this is and how a public campus is still government property and protected by the first amendment right. Postrel does a very good job in gaining credibility throughout the article and providing great evidence to back up her point. In her article she writes "Legally, a public university is a type of public forum — not as open as a public sidewalk or park, perhaps, but nonetheless government property subject to the First Amendment." I agree completely with this statement.

I'm assuming that Postrel's audience would be college students and advocates for freedom of speech on college campuses.

Texas Republicans: Homosexuality "a chosen behavior"

On Tuesday, June 10th, W. Gardner Selby of the Austin American Statesman published an article entitled "Texas Republicans: Homosexuality "a chosen behavior.'" According to the article, the platform that homosexuality shouldn't be an acceptable lifestyle alternative in today's society was approved by delegates June 5-7. Their stance is that homosexuality is indeed something that men and women choose to be rather than the coined "born this way" opposing belief. According to research brought up in the article, sexual orientation is not a chosen behavior. However, there is not scientific evidence currently proving that homosexuality is genetic or biological. Being homosexual, meaning the sexual impulses one feels towards the opposite sex, will not ever go away and is not chosen, according to research. In the article, it is brought up that "it's possible for someone who's gay to choose, through sheer willpower, to ignore their impulses and abstain from homosexual activity." I enjoyed reading this article to better understand the beliefs opposed to mine. As a gay man, it is interesting to see how some people actually believe that men and women, boys and girls, actually choose to be something that society looks down upon. That someone would choose to be something that would get them bullied day in a day out. To choose to be something that will get them disowned by their parents and family.