The Role of Power

In my colleagues post "The power of time" he discusses the unlimited number of terms the Governor of Texas can stay in office and what effect this can have on the people. Compared to the President of the United States who may only be in office for two terms, then must step down, the Governor of Texas has the power to remain in office as long as possible with the exception of being impeached.
I do not believe that the power the Governor of Texas has could result in negative outcomes. After all, we are the ones who vote in the end, we have the final say. The Governor does not make any rash decisions that will upset the public because they know they need our support to remain in power. I see how the length of time in office such as Governor Perry's can prove success and invite favoritism, but change will happen eventually, whether it is trying to move up and become President, or an embarrassing fail in your campaign and eventually resigning.
I do not agree that there is any essential need for a change in the Governor of Texas's limit in office. I don't believe Governor Perry has, nor will he exceed and abuse his power as the Governor. The Governor is just a man looking for votes and support because in the end, that's what he relies on.

DNA Testing Controversy

For almost seventeen long anxious years Hank Skinner has be a man on death row constantly testing the system, hoping to find a way out. In 1995 Skinner was convicted of murdering his girlfriend and her two children and sentenced to death. At the time of his conviction Texas "didn’t have a post-conviction DNA testing law" to aid Skinner; however since then a law has been established and has "loosened restrictions" multiple times. Skinner has previously requested for a post-conviction DNA testing on three occasions that he believes will prove his innocence, however all three of those requests were denied. Skinner stated that he could not have committed the murder do to the fact that he was intoxicated and unconscious.
Although Skinner meets all the requirements in order to be eligible for the DNA testing, it's hard to believe he will be granted the testing considering all the recent failed attempts. There is obviously a glitch in the system and the enforcing of this law considering the post-conviction DNA testing drama alone has been going on for over a decade. The man should have been executed or released by now, instead of this long drawn out process. I do however understand that this is a man's life at risk, and with the numerous accounts of convicts being proven innocent in the past through this method, they want to be extremely sure and careful. I'm sure the time and extra effort that would go into an extra DNA test would contribute to the denial as it did in past cases such as the Ricky McGinn conviction in 1995 where the evidence was not enough to save the defendant and he was still executed.
I cannot say whether I think he is innocent or not although his case seems rather weak, but I do believe some change needs to made so this process cannot be dragged out like this and innocent people are not put to death in our system.

Bigger in Texas

In the article The Big State Complex written by my colleague, they discuss the magnitude and overwhelming errors made in the Texas Constitution. They make the point that the Constitution should be evaluated and revised to clean up, instead of left in this sloppy and poorly written format.
I do agree with my colleague in that the Constitution is definitely way too long containing many unnecessary bills that have no right there. I like the comparison to the other states Constitutions to really give a perspective to the reader on how large the Constitution is, stating no other state has a larger Constitution with "The only exception...is Alabama." I believe in Texas that when the undereducated people hear that we have an absurdly large Constitution, they think of it as a good thing and something to be proud of, just like my colleagues quote "Everything's bigger in Texas." With the majority of the voters not having a clue what they are voting for one the bills, they free willingly vote "yes" on so many new bills just raising the total to an even more tremendous amount constantly.
As much as I do agree that the Constitution is due for a tune up, I don't believe it will happen. With the effort required to make theses revisions, I cannot seeing anybody stepping up and taking the initiative. With the counterargument that the Constitution has gotten us this far, I think it is here to stay.

Abortion Law Appropriate?

In the article Supreme Court Won't Reinstate Abortion Sonogram Law, the author Emily Ramshaw discusses the feelings towards the newly proposed law that we make the women have a "sonogram and hear a description of the fetus before terminating a pregnancy." The reason for doing this is with the intention of striking an emotional attachment between the mother and the fetus possibly causing her to change her mind.
I believe that abortion is a way of murder and I do like this law; as long as these mothers still have their free will to decide the final outcome of the baby I see no real problem with this. Even though I see it as taking a life, for the good of the child, I feel in particular cases, abortions may be the right choice. If a young girl is raped and had no intention of having a child, I don't see it necessarily selfish or inhuman to get an abortion. If they keep it, that completely alters and probably ruins their life, as well as a lot of embarrassment that comes with it. Who is to say who is allowed an abortion and who isn't though? I feel it should still be a choice of the carrier, but if we have something to give them another perspective on it, I think that should be allowed. I think some of the argument against this law may be that the girls, who are most likely pretty young, or that's what the stereotype is, are already extremely emotional in the position that they are in, and with the feeling of pressure or being judged might push them into making a decision they really do not want or will regret. When it comes down to it, in some cases, families might now even have the money to get an abortion.
I think it may be one of those cases where people might think differently if they were put into the situation. In the end, these soon to be mothers should have the right to decide the final outcome of the baby, however I do like the idea behind this law and fid it clever.

Perry on the Hot Seat

On the blog Mean Rachel a post titled "The Blnd Response" attacks Governor Perry's motives and accuses him of lying and taking the easy way out. This post attempts to call out Governor Rick Perry on is lack of care and effort with the true needs of the people, portaying the image that he sits in his high chair all day long and looks out for only himself, and his campaign rather than whats really the issue. The author is definitely not a Perry supporter and it's clear that this post was intended for an audience who feels the same. Considering most of the points in this post are opinion based and have no quotes or evidence, it would not be difficult for somebody who disagrees with this post to create a counterargument. Although it is easy to agree with a post such as this if you are not in favor of Perry because it is exactly what you want to read or already believe. The author constantly insults Perry's motives, calling them easy saying "What's not easy, and what requires a little more hair gel than quoting passages from Joel, is actual work" however everything the author says is without textual evidence or any quotes, therefore basing it all off his own opinions in the entire post. The logic behind their argument may be understandable and make sense, because who says that Perry truly knows what is going on with the people and that he understands what "work" people are faced with, but thats something we have no proof of. As well as having no evidence to support their argument, the post is extremely brief and does not really go into any detail on the issues it mentions. I don't necessarily disagree with argument the author makes against Governor Perry, however the support and structure of the argument is poor and a weak one.

Enforcing Water Conservation in Texas

Being Texas locals we all understand the severity of the current drought we are all experiencing.  In an article in the Austin American Statesman titled "Water Conservation a Habbit We Must Keep" makes an argument supporting the strategy of the Government creating laws helping conserve our water supply and penalizing those who choose to be irresponsible and waste water.
In reading this article, the author does a a good job of targeting their audience correctly, although it's hard to target the wrong audience in this case. Just about everyone in Texas is suffering from this drought and are in desperate need of water and the main point of this article is supporting the more efficient use of water. In the case of their argument I doubt there are too many protesting, besides the stubborn old men who want nothing but a green lawn and a shiny car. The author states their argument in the article not at just one particular point, but throughout the entire passage, although it is clear what they insists on us doing and what actions they think are acceptable. They ephasize the values of the problem by adding a statement made by Ray Benson, leader of the band Asleep at the wheel who insisted people to think of water "like it was your son or daughter". The evidence used by the author supports the argument well because they use facts to support their argument rather than their own beliefs. They discuss in the article the positive impact occuring from the stricter water restictions set in, such as on "Aug. 13, 2001, when we used 240.3 million gallons. We have not used as much water in a single day since, despite the fact our city's population has grown by 20.4 percent." I like the point made by the author and the difference made by the enforcements and actions taken by the people. I believe that nobody is a real loser in a case like this because it is during a time when we all have the same problems.

Perry Gains Support in Interesting Fashion

Some people see death as the ultimate punishment, taking away an individual's right to live, however on the other hand some people see it as a way of escaping their consequences. In an article by Jim Henson in the Texas Tribune, it addresses the somewhat disturbing amounts of applause and cheering from the audience at the presidential primary debate when Governor Rick Perry was questioned about his record setting number of sentenced executions. Governor Perry showed no guilt for these executions, as it is only helping him gain supporters, and therefore voters. According to multiple polls taken in Texas on people's opinions on the use of the death penalty over 75 percent of the voters were in favor of the death penalty and out of that small amount who are not in favor of it, only 16 percent said they "strongly opposed" the death penalty. I believe that the reason for this support of the death penalty is these people want justice, and believe that these convicted felons deserve a punishment equal to the crime that they committed. I also believe that it is because of fear; the peace of mind they will receive knowing that someone they fear cannot harm them. Personally I believe that being forced to sit in a cell for the rest of your life with no chance of getting out, is much more of punishment than death. In that case it seems like death is a way of escaping rather than a punishment. I expect no change in Perry's method, as it seems to be working in his favor.