Image from the New York Times

Last October, Amy Pelow started a support group in Oswego, New York for the parents and loved ones of heroin addicts. Pelow discovered her 17-year-old son was addicted to heroin when she received a phone call informing her that he had overdosed and was currently being hospitalized. She rushed to the Oswego Hospital to find his lanky, teenage body hooked up to machines and injected with various tubes. Since then, he has overdosed 8 times and rotated in and out of rehabs and jail multiple times.

Pelow calls herself a reformed ambulance chaser.

When she used to hear ambulances howling across the small-city sprawl of Oswego, she would instantaneously text and call her son. If he did not respond immediately, she would hop into her car and track the sound of the mechanical wailing. The whole time she would image her son’s unconscious body waiting at the end of her chase. But after six years, she has retired from this hunt.

The prevalence of heroin throughout this country is an epidemic that has claimed headlines and lives with increased frequency in the past decade. Heroin-related deaths across the country jumped 39 percent from 2012-2013 and the rate of heroin-related overdose deaths nearly quadrupled from 2002 to 2013, according to the CDC.

In New York State alone, the number of deaths attributed to overdoses of opioids – which does include both heroin and prescription painkillers such as Oxycontin – rose from 940 in 2004 to 2,044 in 2012 – 117 percent jump, according to the state Health Department.

In downtown Syracuse, there is a needle exchange program called ACR Health. In 2011, they had just 16 people picking up clean needles. This year, they are already at 753.

Although the statistical and anecdotal evidence revealing the extent of the heroin epidemic is clear and straightforward, the factors that created and sustain this situation are more complex. The most widely accepted theory behind the heroin epidemic is one revolving around regulation oversight and greedy pharmaceutical companies, according to a commentary recently published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

About twenty-five years ago, pharmaceutical companies started pushing the over prescription of opiate pain killers, such as OxyContin and Vicodin, in order to increase their revenues. The intensity of these drugs and the generosity with which they were prescribed led to high rates of addiction over time. Grandmas and teens, the rich and the poor started getting hooked on these serious pain killers.

Eventually, physicians and authorities realized this incredible rate of addiction and the government subsequently started cracking down on this excess of opiate prescription. Means were implemented to limit and monitor the amount of opiates a doctor could prescribe per a patient and data bases were established that tallied the amount of opiates patients received from different doctors. Measures such as these successfully decreased the availability of and access to this very addictive drug.

But then, tens of thousands of people were suddenly looking for a similar high that would blunt their withdrawal symptoms that felt like hell. It was at this time that ingenious Mexican drug cartels took this opportunity to flood the market with heroin, another type of opiate. And there was quite a substantial consumer base waiting to be exploited.

Laura Samson’s* brother started with pills and now he battles a sometimes 100-dollar-a-day heroin addiction. “I remember the day I found out he was a heroin addict, “Laura wrote in a blog post, “My body shook, I grew nauseous, and for the first time in my entire life, my heart hurt. His life would now be a constant battle between happiness, addiction, and the law.”

Laura’s story captures the heartache that more and more families and loved ones across that nation are experiencing as the number of heroin users creeps upwards. Their reality is a tortuous oscillation between insatiable fear for the life of the user and anger at the user for how they have reduced themselves and dragged all who love them into a terrify cycle of anxiety and hopelessness.

Images provided by author

In addition to the mental, emotional and physical turmoil that people addicted to heroin and their loved ones experience, another massive obstacle is defiantly placed between them and recovery: The overwhelming lack of resources.

Even if addicts want to quit, there is simply not enough room in rehabilitation centers nor enough effective rehabilitation practices and facilities. Some specialists in places like Central and Upstate New York offer intense, one-month rehabs. This way they are able to crank people in and out as there are so many addicts looking for help and not enough available services. But the relapse rates are incredibly high.

Laura’s brother went to a one-month rehab, which cost her family twenty-one thousand dollars. They had some insurance, but still went about ten thousand dollars into debt attempting to ensure her brother’s recovery. Even though they were willing to pay for a more expensive rehab, they had to call several different facilities several times a day to secure him a spot in one. After he was finally admitted, paid the hefty fee and completed the program, he relapsed about three weeks out and is currently back to using regularly.

Syracuse addiction specialist, Dr. Laura Martin, said the methadone clinic in Syracuse has five hundred spots for treatment and a standard year-long waiting list. She has a loose-leaf notebook in her office with several pages filled with the names of opiate and heroin addicts who have come to her office looking for treatment and who she just doesn’t have room for. Pelow’s son has been on a waiting list for treatment since this past July.

In response to this national epidemic, many cities across the US are starting to implement social and community based responses to the rampant use of heroin, as traditional approaches continue to fail.

In Santa Fe, New Mexico, Emily Kaltenbach, the state director for the Drug Policy Alliance of New Mexico says she is tired of seeing the same nonviolent drug offenders filling the court’s dockets and burdening taxpayers with expensive jail stays. She is trying to implement a community-based social program to divert people away from jail before they are fingerprinted, booked and charged.

In Ithaca, New York, the mayor is proposing a safe place for addicts to get high but under the surveillance of health specialists. This would also be a step toward addicts getting serious help.

Ithaca and Santa Fe are just a couple examples of the alternative measures being taking by city and state government to compensate for the futility of federal policies.

However, there is an opinion increasing in popularity that even the Obama administration is tentatively on board with. This is the idea that heroin use should not be treated as a crime and addicts should not be framed as criminals, but heroin addiction it should be seen as a disease. Secretary of State John Kerry said in a statement recently, “We are seeing tremendous advances in our understanding of drug dependency and our ability to address substance use disorders as a public health — rather than a strictly criminal justice — challenge.”

The primary approach of prohibition and criminalization has merely fed the cycle of addiction over the years. When Pelow’s son went to jail, she said he gained access to more networks to feed his addiction. A criminal record also compounds feelings of hopelessness, as now beating addiction and starting life again becomes that much more difficult.

The criminalization of heroin use and the punishment associated with this disease also feeds into the shame and stigma around it. Pelow said for years she would hid the fact that her son was a heroin addict because she was embarrassed and afraid of being judged.

Historically speaking, heroin has always been a drug with the notorious reputation of being one of the most intense, expensive drugs for the long-term, hardcore drug addicts passed out in a back ally.

But this stigma is no longer relevant, according to data such as the 2001-2002 National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism survey, which shows that lifetime opiate users (including heroin) fall across a gamete of educational, age, and financial lines. Fifty-seven percent have attended college. Thirty-five percent make less than $35,000 in their annual salary. Thirty-nine percent are female, which stands out as unusual since studies show that many forms of addiction tend to disproportionally target men. But with opiate addiction, it is men and women, high school drop outs and college graduates, people driving Hondas and people with Ferraris. Today, opiate and heroin addiction does not discriminate.

But experts, such as Dr. Martin, say this image still connected with heroin is a force that inhibits users from seeking help and doctors from extending it.

“Most doctors don’t want to have a whole bunch of addicts sitting in their waiting room because they picture an addict as coming off the streets with a blanket around them and sleeping on their floor and that kind of thing. But really they come in suits and ties and from their college campuses,” Dr. Martin said.

And people that work with heroin addiction, like employees at ACR Health in Syracuse, say that this archaic stigma prevents addicts from reaching out and trying to get help.

Decriminalizing heroin would help in combating the stigma around heroin use and perhaps encourage more addicts to pursue recovery. This decriminalization would also mean families would not have to also contend with the myriad of legalities around arrests and criminal offenses and it could make a terrible situation incrementally more bearable.

*Laura Samson is a pseudonym. She was comfortable sharing her story, but not here real identity.

[1] The title to my article is straightforward and direct, but it communicates the seriousness of this issue and article. Since heroin use and the tragedies surrounding it are so dire and bleak, I did not want to be creatively or playful with the title. I wanted to retain a serious and level tone, which reflects the tone throughout the piece.

[2] I started the piece with an anecdote, which I heard first hand in my hometown of Oswego. It is a jarring and sad story that I thought would not only pull readers in (or ‘hook’ them), but also personalize a story that is a lot of big and scary numbers. The story of Amy Pelow and her son does not really provide initial background or rationale, but it is supposed to immediately make people feel and care. It does provide exigency, as the heroin epidemic is a timely and relevant issue and the fact the Pelow’s son is hospitalized in the beginning shows even more the urgency of this issue.

[3] I think I provide multiple ‘ideas’ in this article, each with analysis and supporting evidence. First, I discuss the extent of the epidemic and the factors that have created that situation. I use a variety of statistics and sources when constructing this section. Then I discuss the complexity of the stigma and resources and community-based responses and the need to decriminalize heroin. I struggled with flow and fluidly in this piece, but I thought I manage ‘ideas’ and their analysis well.

[4] As mentioned before, clarity and fluidity were issues I had in this piece because I had so much information I wanted to include to show the melee that is the heroin epidemic and how it impacts people and how the country is trying to respond. I thought my presentation and especially my anecdotes made my take of this issue unique, in addition to my final argument to decriminalize heroin use and why that is important.

[5] I think most of the arguments and information I provided was backed up and flushed out and not vague or cliché. When I stated something, I provided examples or quotes or data to prove it. For example, I discussed the impact of heroin addiction on family and loved ones and I used Laura as an example of that.

[6] I think I deeply researched this issue, but I do think my final argument of decriminalization could have been even stronger but I was not quite sure how to do that. But I covered many aspects of this issue, building a comprehensive stance and argument. I provide an overview of the epidemic and break down some of the complexities within this reality, like lack of resources or impact on family.

[7] I used a lot of sources and a diverse set of them from news articles to scholarly journals to academic essays to multiple primary sources.

[8] I think I meshed my sources into the article fairly well, but maybe I could have included them even more of them. I think I might have done the opposite of drop quoting. I researched this issue so much that I was confident to just write about it and probably could have referenced sources more.

[9] I think I could definitely persuade my audience that heroin use should be decriminalized. I tried to do this mostly through evoking emotion. I wanted to show readers how terrible this situation was for addicts and their families and how really it is not completely their faults for being there and grace and sympathy should be extended to them as opposed to judgement.

[10] I thought the first visual I used provided context for the increasing prevalence of heroin use in the US. I placed it is the beginning because it is one of the first aspects of this issue I address. I included the texts because I thought they might further evoke emotion from readers.

[11] My development was incremental. I started with too much information trying to include every aspect of this issue and slow edited some of that content out of the article.

[12] Yes, effective. But upon reflection, I think I probably could have included even more.

[13] I tried to use very powerful language and proofread several times so I think I used language effectively overall and presented myself as credible.

Will Bradley-Villarini

Professor Barone-Phillips

WRT205

4/24/16

                                         Race and Sports: Can Superman be Black?

Disclaimer for understanding: Cam Newton’s nickname is Superman based on a touchdown celebration that he performs where he pretends to rip open his jersey like superman does when he reveals his identity to go fight crime.

“To many whites, men of my vintage, men I knew, there was a sense that their game was being stolen. It was a very visceral racism.”- Frank Deford, NPR

Sports have been around for thousands of years in human culture. They date as far back as the early hundreds, or as long as military training has existed. Sport(s) is defined by dictionary.com as : “an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature”. Many white athletes feel as if there are spots are being taken by African-American players or players of different races (the quote above from Frank Deford). It’s quite ridiculous to think that because the definition of Sport says that it “requires skill”, therefore, no matter what skin color you are, if you’re skilled then you should be playing. In the modern 21st century, the argument of race in sports is still very present and it has a history, especially in the last 100 years or so with events such as the Civil Rights movement. Football is a great example of the ever-burning flame of racism that still exists in sports for a few reasons.

Historically, the franchise players or “star players” on the football teams have been the quarterbacks. At the beginning of the 2015-16 NFL season, only 6 starting quarterbacks out of the total 32 were of color (19.2%). Cam Newton, the MVP quarterback that led the Carolina Panthers to an 18-1 record and a Super Bowl is the spotlight of this article due to the attention he brought to the issue of racism in football. His unique set of skills, arrogance, and impressive dancing extracted a lot of hatred from white America. The issue of racism in sports is very present to this day, I’m going to cover the history of racism in sports and compare it to Mr. Newton and his story in the current time of 2016.

I personally believe that racism is currently alive and well in sports, especially in football. It’s not good for American culture along with sports and the industry as a whole. The sports industry in the United States makes $495 billion yearly, making it one of the biggest contributors to the U.S economy. If racism keeps causing debates in the sports world then it will continue to move backwards.

When looking into the history of race and sports it is crucial to look at the statistics of when players of color graced the field for the first time in each major sport. The NFL’s first black player was Marion Motley back in 1946. The MLB’s first was Jackie Robinson in 1947. And finally, the NBA’s first player of color was Chuck Cooper in 1950. Based on those statistics, there were exactly 0 players of color in America’s most popular sports before 1946. That statistic is baffling without a doubt and it’s concerning as well. Scientists from Smith College believe that this absence was due to a couple of factors. The reasons surround the idea that minorities are different from whites and that they are “inferior”. The first reason that Smith College gave was in regards to physical prowess. The belief that African-Americans have a physical superiority (running faster, jumping higher, increased reflexes) is “closely yoked to an anti-intellectualism that permeates black male culture” (Smith College, Page 2). This ideology of physical inequality leads to the caucasian player creating more inequality because of their resentment toward their own personal abilities. That comparison correlates with another discriminatory categorization of African-Americans by saying that they’re also not as “intellectual” as the white players. These ideologies are poisonous and they are still prevalent today.

Cameron Jerrell Newton is a 26 year-old black male who is going into his 6th season as the starting quarterback for the Carolina Panthers. In the 2015-16 NFL season, Newton led the Panthers to an 18-1 record, even adding a Super Bowl appearance. The Panthers were the favorites to win after a dominating season, however, the Denver Broncos’ unbreakable defense ruined what could have been a legendary season for Newton and the Panthers franchise. Newton received flack as the season progressed for a handful of reasons and he took it as an issue of racism. Newton came out in an USA Today article to say “I’m an African-American quarterback that may scare a lot of people because they haven’t seen nothing they can compare me to”(USA Today, Gluck). What makes Newton so “incomparable” is his ability to be dangerous both in the air and on the ground. Standing at 6’5” and 245 lbs., Newton was able to rush for 636 yards and 10 touchdowns, an incredible statistic for a QB, as well as throw for 3,837 yards and 35 touchdowns. Newton ended the season with a QBR of 99.4, a number viewed as off the charts, and earned the title of MVP. Cam saw the issue as White America being threatened by him because he was putting up Tom Brady-like numbers. However, the problem here is that Tom Brady is white and Cam Newton is black. In Cam’s eyes, that means that people are resorting to stereotypes and discrimination because a black man is putting up amazing statistics in a predominantly white position. Throughout history, the franchise player of NFL teams have been the quarterbacks. Charles K Ross, a professor and author on black culture’s input on this topic was stated as : “Who was going to be the face of your franchise and your product? A white man” (New York Times, Powell).

Some of the other aspects that make Newton a “threat” refer with how he behaves on the field. If you are familiar with Newton’s story, or if you have ever watched him play then you would know that the quarterback loves to dance, and perhaps too much. After every first down, every touchdown, and pretty much after any successful play, one can find Newton “hitting the dab”. The dab is a dance move where the person bends their head into the bend of their elbow in a swift motion. This dance was introduced to the public thanks to the Atlanta based rap group “Migos”. During a game against the Tennessee Titans, Newton rushed for a touchdown and proceeded to celebrate for around 15 seconds. His dancing was so extra that a defensive lineman by the name of Wesley Woodyard ran up to him in anger, followed by the referee running over to break the altercation up, however,  Newton kept going even as the ref yelled and pushed him away. In the post game conference Newton addressed the altercation. He explained how someone told him that they weren’t going to let him “hit the dab” anymore and he swiftly followed up by saying: “If you don’t like it, then don’t let me in (the end zone)”(Cam Newton, ESPN).  That statement comes across as pretty arrogant and it is understandable why that would enrage someone who is quick to rush to stereotypes, but Newton isn’t incorrect. Newton’s celebrations got Seattle Seahawks fans so mad that they started a petition to ban Newton from their stadium. Another on-field activity that Newton likes to partake in is the distribution of footballs to young fans after he scores a touchdown. Many spectators see Newton’s actions as distracting and time wasting. The fact that giving a ball to a kid that can’t be older than 10 years old can make somebody mad  shows how easy people rush to barrage Newton and his image.

Warren Moon, a legendary black quarterback went through a lot of the same hardships as Cam Newton, leading him to mentor the young QB in his time of need. Moon started in the NFL in 1984 as one of the first black starting quarterbacks in the history of the game. Moon broke plenty of boundaries, however, he was very talented and deserved to play. He received a lot of hateful  comments and death threats which makes one wonder how bad it must have been back in the 80’s compared to 2016. It made complete sense for Moon to mentor Newton and he had a lot of choice words about the NFL and racism along with advice for young Newton. In a recent article for the New York Times, Warren referred to the black players roles in the NFL by saying : “We were good for the athletic, reaction positions: run, jump, block” and followed up by saying : “ I felt like I was going out there half the time representing my race as opposed to representing my team and teammates”.(New York Times, Powell) These words by the legendary player proved very powerful. The difficulty of having to focus on representing your race in a sport instead of your team really exemplifies the importance of racial difference in sports at that time. Moon went on to explain that if he hadn’t been focusing on representing his race the whole time then he would have had an even better career.

Charles K. Ross, a history professor at the University of Mississippi and the author of “Outside the Lines: African-Americans and the Integration of the National Football League “ had some thoughts on the NFL from what he had learned throughout his career as a researcher of black culture. Ross analyzed that the franchise players have historically been the quarterbacks, and white ones at that. Therefore the business of the NFL and their teams’ money makers have historically been a white man in the pocket with the ball, with no room for a black man to take the helm. That reason led Ross to say : “Football was not ready to move into the 21st century”. (New York Times, Powell) The reason for saying that is because there were so many great talents of color that were ready to come into the NFL but the business model of the NFL as a corporation would get in the way of that.

Brandon Marshall, a wide receiver for the New York Jets holds a different position on the Cam Newton debate. Marshall stated : “I don’t think it’s racial. I just think that there’s a box that we put our quarterbacks in and we say, ‘This is how you’re supposed to be” .(New York Daily News, Walder)  Cam Newton is definitely a unique character. He’s loud, wears crazy outfit, and loves “dabbin” all over the place so it makes that he doesn’t fit the description. However, he then continued to say: “This is how Peyton Manning did it, this is how Joe Montana did it, Tom Brady, so you do it the same way”.(New York Daily News, Walder) Marshall coincidentally compared Cam to three of the most famous white quarterbacks in the NFL who are cardboard cutouts, in a sense that they all act in the same quiet and “professional” way.

I do not see why dancing and crazy outfits would make people so mad if it weren’t a race thing. If Tom Brady did the same things would everyone really be mad? I don’t think so, I think that the white fans would eat it up and that the African-American community would be the ones taking offense to it, once again making it a race issue. No matter what direction it travels, this seems to be a race thing.

Racism in U.S sports needs to be addressed publicly. There needs to be a campaign to end the problem, because it’s taking away from the entertainment of the sports and the consumers who keep the industry alive. A great example of a campaign to end racism is in Fútbol, better known as soccer in the United States. As some might know, soccer is the most popular sport in the world. There are an estimated 2.2 billion fans in the soccer world. There have been campaigns worldwide and even in the MLS (Major League Soccer, the American soccer league) to try and combat racism in the “beautiful game”. These campaigns go by the names of “No to Racism” and “Fútbol for Hope”. They have millions of supporters and are successfully moving to eliminate racism by increasing public awareness of intolerance and discrimination in fútbol, as well as developing ideas and strategies on how to fight them. 

This movement is fantastic for the fight against racism, but why aren’t America’s most popular sports taking actions like these to combat racism? This issue is huge and it is changing the game. These actions are surely being taken in some form by the NFL, however, if a corporation as powerful and wealthy as the NFL hasn’t even attempted to create a campaign as dynamic as European Fútbol has, then some questions could be reasonably asked. Maybe it’s because the other big corporations linked with the NFL are against it, or maybe it goes against their business ideas. Nobody really knows, but something needs to happen because we can’t keep living like the world was 100 years ago, as well as ignoring the issue as a whole.

Cam Newton is a great delegate for this everlasting issue because his story is relevant and shows the true colors of some people in American sports today who still see pigmentation as a dividing factor. Everyone is subject to their own opinions, however, I see this as a real matter of discrimination by White America who feel like all of the white players are being kicked out of sports. I can see why that would enrage some but lets go back to the definition of sport. It clearly states : “ an activity requiring skill or physical prowess”. If you are more skilled, black or white, then you deserve to be playing. The better you are, the more interesting the sports will become. People need to stop caring about the skin color who is taking who’s spot and start realizing that the better players are the ones making the sports that they love so dearly more amazing.

If you’re from Philadelphia and you’re an Eagles fan, whose team happens to be entirely filled with black players (or white, or mixed) and you win the Super Bowl, then there should be no problem at all. Your team was the best, that is all. Other teams, and their supporters shouldn’t decide it’s because their kicker is white or “It’s because their defense is full of big black guys”, they should applaud them because they were the best. Hate them for being good, be jealous, just don’t make race the issue to throw your stereotypes at.

The sports world is filled with stereotypes, jealously, hatred, and idiocy. We need to come together as a country to enjoy the sports that we love and not argue over other pointless issues that really don’t have anything to do with sports. People are getting mad because they feel insecure or because they need someone to blame, so why not go with the classic “blame the black guy” approach from 200 years ago? The sports industry is important to the economy and to the enjoyment of the hundreds of millions of viewers that keep the industry alive. Stop worrying about whose playing in the games and start worrying about whether your team will have a good season or not.

The Panama Papers Have Shown Us that Nobody Can Be Trusted

By Evan Becker

Lionel Messi, arguably the best soccer player, and a person who made roughly $731,579 dollars per game for his club team in Barcelona is not a man who needs more money. Honestly, if you were to ask most people, they would be content if they made that much money in a year and considering that the median household income for an American family is $81,000 dollars per year, Lionel Messi is not short on cash compared to the rest of the world. The fact that Lionel Messi is that rich shouldn’t be surprising, he is the best player on the best team for the most popular sport in the World. For the entertainment that he brings to fans, I would say that he is adequately paid. But, On April 3^rd, 2016, Lionel Messi was named as a conspirator in the Panama Papers, indicting him on hiding his money in an offshore account in an attempt to avoid paying his taxes for what he has earned.                                                                                                             The Panama Papers is a huge collection of documents and other information being investigated by the ICIJ, an international team of journalist’s intent on showing the world the truth about all of these elected officials and other incredibly rich people who need to avoid paying taxes. This accusation is damning because not only does it show the amount of greed that Lionel Messi, it shows that he went through the time and the work, away from the game, to shield his money in an offshore company. Is Lionel Messi an evil person for what he has done? Probably not. But, being named in the Panama is not a good sign for him since now his name is connected to Vladimir Putin, Mauricio Macri and the now resigned, Prime minister of Iceland among many other corrupt government officials. Each of these people had their own reasons for setting up an offshore account, but all of these officials need to be held accountable for what they have done. The Panama Papers have given us concrete proof for the first time that worldwide leaders and businessmen are stockpiling wealth while avoiding paying their taxes. These leaders need to be punished correctly for their actions.

According to the Panama Papers, creating one of these off-shore shell companies is in fact very easy. All these people would have to do, is to visit the local office of a “little-known but powerful law firm based in Panama, Mossack Fonsenco.” At there local office, you can create your own company, must likely under the name of a family member, and instead of using that company to do things, you just deposit your wealth into it, and avoid paying your taxes. To go along with not paying taxes, nobody will even know that this company exists, so all money deposited there has no background or trace, meaning it can come from anywhere. It is for that reason that the Panama Papers is so damning because not only are these officials not paying their taxes, but we also have no idea where they got their money from. An ancient Chinese proverb says “If you want no one to know, don’t do it” which in the context of the Panama Papers means that since they didn’t want anyone to know where they got their money from, it most likely comes from somewhere bad.

The number of world leaders named in the Panama Papers is actually shocking, but it is only one piece of the pie. According to the ICIJ, Mossack Fansenco has set up over “214,488 offshore entities connected to people in more than 200 countries and territories.” This number is astronomical, since it is not cheap to set up these companies, so the fact that over 200,000 people thought it would be necessary to set up an illegal off-shore company to hide the evidence of their wealth is abhorrent. By having over 200,000 people on their roster for people who have created these companies, it is evident that this type of activity is extremely commonplace for business men and other rich people around the world.

With over 200,000 clients, that means there are over 200,000 people or companies that needed to hide the evidence of their wealth. The firm has helped everything from “Africa’s diamond trade, the international art market and other businesses that thrive on secrecy.” to “The firm has serviced enough Middle East royalty to fill a palace. It’s helped two kings, Mohammed VI of Morocco and King Salman of Saudi Arabia, take to the sea on luxury yachts.” All of these organizations are shrouded in secrecy, so it would make sense for each of these industries to be involved with these offshore companies. But, having kings and princes involved in this scam indicates that people do use these companies to hide their wealth.

The reaction to the release of the Panama Papers has been extremely varied from country to country. The most encouraging country to take action has been Iceland. In 2013, future Prime Minister Sigmundur David Gunnlaugsson ran for Prime Minister on the platform of not being corrupt. But when he was named as an owner of an offshore company in the Panama Papers, Iceland’s citizens were less than pleased and the very next day, an estimated 10,000 citizens of Iceland rallied in Reykjavik, Iceland. The photo above shows the central downtown of Reykjavik. Edward Snowden said on Twitter that “The population of Iceland is only 330,000. Largest protest by percentage of population in history?” Following this protest, Gunnlaugsson initially denied any and all allegations against him, by saying ““I have not considered quitting because of this matter nor am I going to quit because of this matter.” But after 3 straight days of complete protest, The Prime Minister resigned in disgrace, and democracy had worked again. Clearly Iceland had a very strong and coordinated response to the allegations against its leaders, but unfortunately not every country has the kind of free flowing information that Icelandic citizens.

In China, “Family members of at least eight current or former members of China’s Politburo Standing Committee, the country’s main ruling body, have offshore companies arranged though Mossack Fonseca. They include President Xi’s brother-in-law, who set up two British Virgin Islands companies in 2009.” But, the difference between China and Iceland, is that China is not a true democracy, and in response to the corruption allegations against the leaders of China decided to censor the online discussion of the Panama Papers and “Checks by the BBC found that by the end of the day many of those posts had disappeared, with at least 481 discussions deleted from the hashtag’s Weibo topic page, and other posts shared on Wechat also deleted.” By not allowing free discussion of their people to discuss this critical issue, not only are the leaders of China insinuating their guilt, again if they had done nothing wrong, then there would be nothing to censor. So in an attempt to quell the masses, they have resorted to censoring logical discussion and not allowing the tales of their corruption to reach the ears of their own citizens.

The leaders of Russia have resorted to questioning the reporters’ credibility and the truth behind some of their actions in addition to shamelessly censoring all conversation. During a radio broadcast where Putin was questioned about the Panama Papers, he said that “They are just trying to cause confusion” By questioning the intentions of the journalists, he himself is trying to cause confusion on what to believe. Clearly, the State run news outlets of Russia are not going to question whether Putin is fit to run his country if he is connected to an offshore company. Instead, they will attack the credibility of the journalists who uncovered these documents and in doing so, they will persuade the public masses to just let this type of scandal go unaccounted for. Putin knows exactly what he is doing when he says these types of comments, and it is purely a smear attempt to distill public out cry so he can continue to stay in power.

The Panama Papers though, have yet to name any Americans, which is a large reason that they have not garnered the type of reaction and outcry that has been seen throughout the rest of the world. By not naming any prominent Americans, the ICIJ must not have uncovered their names yet, or they are withholding the information to release it at a later time where the news would have a greater impact. If the ICIJ has not released any American names by election day in November, then there must not be any names on the list worthy of note.

The Panama Papers have opened the window for the people of the world to see exactly how the wealthy retain their wealth without giving it back to the people. The 1% have stolen, racked up assets, and then hid them all in off-shore companies to avoid any government knowledge of what they have done and it is thus imperative for the people of the world to stand up to this type of corruption. It really feels like the Panama Papers have changed how everyday people view the world. This controversy is more complicated than it would appear because we don’t know where they get their money from, they could even be using their stockpiled wealth to do great things around the world. But, if you are a leader of a major country in this world, you can not afford to be corrupt because of businesses are corrupt and the government is corrupt, who do the people have to look to in times of distress? The answer is in the end it must come from the people to insist that there is a worldwide institutional change. More countries need to take the actions of Iceland and peacefully protest against their leaders so that the world can become a fairer place. The Panama Papers will end up being either the most effective avenue for change in world history, or the most depressing if nothing comes of it.

The average salary of a Division I men’s football coach is $1.64 million, and $1.5 million for their counterpart, men’s basketball coaches whose team makes it to the NCAA tournament. Yet, the NCAA a “non-profit” organization had an annual revenue just shy of $1 billion in 2014 according to USA today, with 90 percent coming from March madness alone. With major college sports generating this type revenue year-in and year-out it’s difficult to grasp where all of this money is truly going, and why hasn’t it been returned to the stars of the show, the athletes. A majority of people may be unaware of the reality of this grueling business and its corruption. Throughout this piece I would like to bring forth the issues behind the scenes and discuss the potential, but controversial, topic of paying college athletes. Although division I college athletes are legally amateurs by the NCAA rules, they are acting as full-time employees to the university and generating millions in revenue of which they are not seeing a penny of. In the big picture, scholarships are not adequate compensation for the revenue being produced, and therefor college athletes should receive stipends beyond their scholarships.

Discrepancies among the NCAA

With an annual revenue of $912.3 million in 2015, the NCAA is considered a 501(c) (3) organization. Meaning that they are tax exempt under the IRS, and are pooled among other organizations such as Red Cross and the Salvation Army. But, in economic terms, the NCAA would qualify as a monopsony. This means that they are one buyer within a market of unlimited sellers, and in this case the sellers being the athletes selling themselves to colleges and receiving zero for their labor. The organization has made it clear that they will not condone the paying of college athletes that they consider to be “amateurs.” The term amateurism is expressed on NCAA.org and described as being the “bedrock principle of college athletics,” and “being crucial to preserving an academic environment in which acquiring a quality education is the first priority.”

In 2012 the NCAA signed a 14-year agreement with CBS and Turner Broadcasting System for the rights to March Madness worth $10.8 million. In 2016 this contract was extended to 2032 in another $8.8 million deal. $1.5 million is the cost for a 30-second advertisement spot during the tournament. (Read more about revenue breakdown)

The underlying statement being made here is that these are “student-athletes,” with an emphasis on the student. However, graduation rates may tell a different story. There are two measures to ensure that an athletes earn a degree. First the U.S. Department of Education’s Federal Graduation Rate, and second the NCAA’s Graduation Success Rate. According to the NCAA, 100 percent of the members of the Duke men’s basketball team who entered as freshman in 2007 graduated. But, the federal measurement, which takes into account the percentage of full-time college student-athletes who enter as freshmen and finish with a specific degree within six years, calculated that only 67 percent of male players during that time period actually graduated. There is a large discrepancy among these numbers that may be due to the NCAA failing to take into account the “one-and-done” players, career ending injuries, or even drop outs. As long as these players were in good academic standings before their departures, they are also added to the positive graduation rates.

Where is all the money going?

               Coach Krzyzewski, head coach of the Duke men’s basketball made a whopping $7,233,967 last year, along with another $5,400,000 made by John Calipari, Kentucky men’s basketball coach. Clemson University have written plans to build a $55 million complex solely for men’s football that includes sand volleyball courts, laser tag, movie theatre, barber shop and other amenities. Combined 48 of the schools from the wealthiest conferences spent $772 million on all athletic facilities. But, according to CBS News, only 3 percent of men’s basketball programs turned a profit last year. This may be due in part to cost pressure from the top schools to pay the coaches extremely high wages. Also, a report released by Delta Cost Project found that Division I universities on average spend about three to six time as much per athlete than they do on academics per student. Reminder, the NCAA’s main opposition to paying athletes is that they are “students first.” It’s hard to believe that these college athletes aren’t considered full-time employees that putting in over 40 hours of work just related to their sport each are students-first. After practice, film reviews, and scheduled lifting the players can finally get to their schoolwork. Such high demands of being an athlete have recently been linked to pooling athletes’ into general majors together. Evidence shows that the majority of college athletes have chosen a major in general studies. This due to a lack of ability to maintain the balance between their sport demands and school, or even because the coach told them to in order ensure eligibility. What does this say about the universities and the employees (coaches) who are supposed to be looking out for the best interests of the student-athletes? This situation has been corrupted and solely geared towards maintaining eligibility for top players in order to win games, rather than planning and pursuing a career for the future. The matter of fact is that college athletes being exploited for their work, or in this case their athletic performance while continuously turning nearly $1 billion into a yearly loss by wastefully spending money on extreme facilities that are exclusively geared towards athletic benefits and not academics. The NCAA and institutions pride themselves on the notion of having the best interest of the student-athletes in mind, but I’m not so sure this is the reality.

Reality of Full-rides

Not only is the money being generated by college sports an at-large issue, but the cost of being a full-time student-athlete on a full scholarship is often misleading. People often assume that there is a surplus of full-scholarships, or that scholarships are more than enough to “hand out.” However, the average amount of money awarded to division I athletes was $13,821 for men and $14,660 for women. Also just about 3 percent of all high school athletes will receive a complete full ride to play in college. There are also strict rules that have been put in place by the NCAA that establishes how many scholarships each team at a university can receive. Only six sports, commonly referred to as “head-count” sports, which include football, men’s and women’s basketball, women’s gymnastics, volleyball and tennis, have enough full-scholarships to cover the team in its entirety. On the other hand the rest of the collegiate sports teams are limited by the NCAA as to how many full rides that they receive.

This is the breakdown of full-scholarships per team allotted to the non-head count sports by the NCAA

Yet, this organization has an annual profit of about $145 million and is only returning about $12.3 in expenses for scholarships to the universities. This could be the biggest discrepancy for the NCAA and one of the main reasons that player’s unions and other people are demanding reform. In the 2011-2012 fiscal year, a study was conducted by Ithaca College researchers that reported the average expenses that a college athlete was required to pay beyond their scholarships was about $4,000. “Free rides” fail to cover the cost of living for a typical college student, but these athletes are still students before anything. Cell phone bills, gas money, groceries and rent for housing off campus are just a few of the additional expenses that a college student may see. These expenses may be taken care of if the players were able to have a part-time job, but once again the NCAA bans in-season work. Often it can even be difficult for athletes to find the time or money to get in three meals a day with their schedules. Recently University of Connecticut basketball start Shabazz Napier spoke out about this issue and stated, “there are hungry nights that I go to bed starving.” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFdRk2DYolM)

Opportunity for Reform

The NCAA has a significant issue that must be attended to within the near future. With the multimillion dollar enterprise claiming itself as a non-profit organization through the IRS, it has come to a point of college athletic exploitation. The organization continues to fight off any efforts to find more money to pay student-athletes directly through stipends, but also wishes to leave the gap between their profits and the limited number of scholarships allotted to the non-head count sports. Also, they are holding onto their belief that these athletes remain students-first, when there is an abundance of evidence that points directly to men’s basketball and football simply being farm systems for the professionals to pick from. It seems that there needs to be a re-evaluation as to how much money is being spent on facilities and coaching, and more time spent of finding ways to bring the money back directly to the athletes themselves. After all, these college athletes are indeed the money-makers.

References

Deford, Frank. “Deford: Paying College Athletes Would Level The Playing Field.” NPR. NPR, 2 Apr. 2014. Web. 5 Apr. 2016. <http://www.npr.org/2014/04/02/297898279/deford-paying-college-athletes-would-level-the-playing-field>.

“NCAA.org – The Official Site of the NCAA.” NCAA.org – The Official Site of the NCAA. NCAA, n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2016. <https://www.ncaa.org/>.

Nocera, Joe. “Let’s Start Paying College Athletes.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 31 Dec. 2011. Web. 21 Apr. 2016. <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/01/magazine/lets-start-paying-college-athletes.html>.

Sanderson, Allen R. and John J. Siegfried. 2015. “The Case for Paying College Athletes.” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29(1):115-38.

Strachan, Maxwell. “NCAA Schools Can Absolutely Afford To Pay College Athletes, Economists Say.” The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 27 Mar. 2015. Web. 12 Apr. 2016. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/27/ncaa-pay-student-athletes_n_6940836.html>.
Zirin, Dave. “An Economist Explains Why College Athletes Should Be Paid.” The Nation. The Nation, 27 Mar. 2015. Web. 18 Apr. 2016. <http://www.thenation.com/article/economist-explains-why-college-athletes-should-be-paid/>.

With the presidential race in full swing, a controversial topic that has been on the horizon for years back is Planned Parenthood and the argument of the government funding this organization. Now most of the republican party is against Planned Parenthood, whether it’s because they don’t want to support an organization that provides abortion because of their faith or morals, or just don’t find it important enough to spend money on. Texas was the first state to defund Planned Parenthood but not soon after, Alabama, Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, and North Carolina followed behind as well as Utah, Wisconsin and Ohio.

No matter what age or how much money you have you should be able to make informed, independent decisions about health, sex and family planning. Taking that away from anyone is violating their constitutional rights. The states that do provide funding provide the organization with 500 million dollars each year.

What many don’t realize, is this money goes to only 3% of the service that this whole political debate is about; abortions. The money used for abortions comes from private’s donors as well as fees, which isn’t the only service Planned Parenthood provides. These pro-life, anti-planned parenthood supporters need to realize what they are trying to stop. All they seem to be focusing on protecting is the life of fetus rather than the life of a living, walking, breathing grown woman. The organization really is putting 9% of this government funded money to cancer screening and prevention, 42% goes to STD testing and treatment as well as 34% to contraception. Many of these services young and underprivileged depend Planned Parenthood to be provided with these extremely important services.

Although Planned Parenthood receives money from private donors, it still needs government funding, which makes up for 41% of its revenue, the largest source of money they receive. That is a tremendous amount to take away from an organization. Many planned parenthoods go out of business because they cannot maintain to upkeep the clinics, raising prices for patients, turning hundreds of women away.

According to Texas’s Policy Evaluation project, which is working to track reproduction health outcomes in Texas, there were dramatic results since Texas was the first to defund Planned Parenthood in 2011. There was a 35% drop in claims for birth control implants and pills because many couldn’t afford it anymore. This then created an increase in births by 27%, Showing disadvantaged woman were struggling to get the contraceptive care they really need. Many politicians claim they are putting this money instead towards to health care providers and give lists of other possible places to visit. Indiana even offered a woman’s prison as an alternative…But just from looking at the results in Texas it clearly isn’t true. These health care providers, are out of reach from the impoverished communities that need it the most.

Planned Parenthood is extremely beneficial for young girls as well. Because of the unrealistic and ineffective “Chasity education programs” that were passed in 1981, Many schools provide lessons of abstinence instead of teaching kids how to be safe about their own bodies and sexual behavior. Planned Parenthood provides a safe and comforting place, where these young women can go to, to educate themselves about protection and safety as well as a place to go to get help if they cannot afford it or speak to a parent about it. It is commonly warned that denying these young woman good information about their own bodies and confidential health care services could have tragic consequences. For example, in 1988, Reckie Bell, a 17-year-old became pregnant and being too afraid to tell her parents and not being able to afford a legal abortion, died from an illegal one. Unfortunately, this was not the only time something like this happened to a young, afraid and vulnerable teen.

As a young woman, I feel safe knowing if I or any loved one is ever in a situation like pregnancy, the need to be tested for an std or cancer or even just a place to go to talk or ask questions, my state provides us with an organization that we can go to for it all. I believe every woman should be able to feel this way.

With the government being Planned Parenthoods largest source of money, the government needs to keep finding this organization so they can continue to help educate, care and prevent pregnancies for woman of any age, color or income as well as give them the choice to what they want to do to their bodies.

Works Cited:

“A Warning To Both Parties On Planned Parenthood And Abortion.” NPR. NPR, n.d. Web. 25 Apr. 2016.

Denbow, Jennifer M. “Abortion As Genocide: Race, Agency, And Nation In Prenatal Nondiscrimination Bans.” Signs: Journal Of Women In Culture & Society 41.3 (2016): 603-626. LGBT Life with Full Text. Web. 25 Apr. 2016.

Laguens, Dawn. “Planned Parenthood And The Next Generation Of Feminist Activists.” Feminist Studies 39.1 (2013): 187-191. LGBT Life with Full Text. Web. 25 Apr. 2016.

Netborn, Deborah. “After Texas Stopped Funding Planned Parenthood, Low-income Women Had More Babies.” Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, n.d. Web. 25 Apr. 2016.

“Planned Parenthood | Official Site.” Planned Parenthood | Official Site. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Apr. 2016.

Stevenson, Amanda J., M.A, Imelda M. Flores, Ph.D, and Richard L. Allegeyer, Ph.D. “Effect of Removal of Planned Parenthood from the Texas Women’s Health Program — NEJM.” New England Journal of Medicine. The New England Journal of Medicine, Mar.-Apr. 2013. Web. 25 Apr. 2016.

Homeless Families in America.

How do we take care of our most valuable and vulnerable assets.

For Kayla, 12, and her brothers, Kyle and Mitch ages 7 and 3, respectively, it happened after their mother had been in a car accident. Katherine, a single mother of three, living from pay check to pay check and sometimes having to take on two jobs to support the family, she was doing her best to raise her children as kind, understanding, and compassionate. Knowing her situation was volatile, she always took the opportunity to use it as a teachable moment, to show her kids that they could get through anything as long as they work hard and stick together. Then came the car accident. By no fault of her own, the course of her and the children’s life would be changed instantly and without warning due to an unaware driver running a red light and demolishing the car she was already struggling to pay for. A hospital stay and a damaged car beyond repair led to a set of circumstances beyond her control. Loss of a job and a pile of bills with no way to pay them, she barely had enough money to feed her kids let alone the money for bus fair or a babysitter so that she could go out and search for new employment. This downward spiral would soon lead to eviction and homelessness for this family of four. Without the time, money, or resources necessary to combat this overwhelming situation, she was forced to pack what clothes and essentials could fit into four small back packs and find some way to move forward.

As with so many families and children who become the victims of these unforeseen situations that are beyond their control, homelessness is just one unfortunate circumstance away. Serious illness, accident, or a death in the family can put many of these individuals at great risk of not being able to make ends meet when tragedy strikes. Due to the lack of affordable housing, decreasing government supports, combined with an unsteady job market, many of the challenges facing today’s families are forcing them to live a fine line between poverty and homelessness. Those most profoundly affected are the children in these families, the most vulnerable and in need of our help. It is our obligation to help take care of these children, again, the most vulnerable, most promising young lives the future has to offer. Many of these children are being raised by a single mother who is often times the victim of domestic violence, physical, and mental abuse. Left on their own to raise a family, many of these women must take on two or three jobs just to keep a roof over their heads and put food on the table. Without an adequate support system, many are pushed to the brink by the stress and uncertainties caused by living pay check to pay check, meal to meal. All of this is unintentionally passed on to the children who witness and live through these struggles. Many reports show that the children who experience these type of unstable living conditions grow up with post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, chronic health issues as well as mental health issues.

Although the federal government has taken great effort to bring down the number of chronically homeless individuals and veterans, children and families have not received the same benefits, and their numbers are rising. According to The National Alliance to End Homelessness, 564,708 people were homeless on a given night in 2015. Of that number, 206,286 were people in families, and 358,422 were individuals. About 15% of that population, 83,170, are what’s considered chronically homeless individuals. These chronically homeless individuals are what most of us see as the national face of homelessness, the unwashed, unkept, and foul smelling human beings commonly referred to as bums, or bag-ladies. In realty these homeless are commonly the victims of mental and physical abuse, sufferers of mental illness, and most times at the mercy of an alcohol and/or drug addiction. As a society, we have grown accustomed to the homelessness that surrounds us. Usually with little more than a glance, we walk by them, ignoring their pleas for help or spare change, pretending not to hear them. We pretend not to see them, looking down at our cell phones as if there something important pending or looking away as if something has caught our eye, any reason to not acknowledge or make eye contact with them.

However, amongst the four categories of homeless recognized by the National Alliance to End Homelessness, (Families, Veterans, Chronic, and Youth), it is Youth homelessness, a mostly silent and mostly invisible majority that posts the most surprising and staggering statistics. Of the numbers of homeless children ages 1-17, 51 percent are under the age of six, and the disheartening list goes on. 1 in 45 children, or rather 1.6 million kids will experience homelessness, and nearly 40 percent of the homeless population are under the age of 18. According to Covenant House, a privately funded agency providing food, shelter, and crisis care to homeless and runaway youth, 41% of homeless kids witnessed acts of violence in their homes, 36% indicated that someone in their family used drugs regularly, 19% reported being beaten with an object, 19% reported that they have endured sexual abuse, and 15% reported that someone close to them had been murdered. Of all the research conducted by various homeless advocacy groups, the Covenant House statistics concluded that without decisive action and the allocation of sufficient resources, the nation will fail to reach the stated federal goal of ending family homelessness by 2020, and child homelessness may result in a permanent Third World in America.

So much more can and must be done to help and aid these families and the children who are at great risk of the consequences that accompany an uncertain future. On April 29th over 180 women in five cities across the country slept on the streets with a goal of raising $345,000 for the homeless youth at Covenant House. The third annual Sleep Out: Mothers Edition included moms, grandmothers, aunts, foster moms — women who care about kids and want to make a difference. As stated by Covenant House President Kevin Ryan, “The amazing women participating in this Covenant House Sleep Out are sending a loud and clear message to homeless kids – that we stand with them in their struggles, and celebrate their courage, their resiliency, and their dreams for a better life, what a beautiful message to send as Mother’s Day approaches.”

There is no singular image to portray homelessness in this country. Within the four recognized categories of homelessness, Chronic, Families, Youth, and Veterans, individuals of all ages, geographic areas, occupations, and ethnicities are affected. To think of these homeless individuals as lazy, addicts, or have somehow brought this on themselves or that they choose to be homeless is an absurd and careless notion. This is not a choice and to assume so is ignorant and wrong.

As covenant house has stated, the issues surrounding childhood homelessness reach far beyond just providing hot meals, a warm shower, and a clean bed, there is a wide range of deep-seated psychological, physical, and economic reasons for youth homelessness. The list of unthinkable situations these children are put in are endless. It’s sickening, sad, and heartbreaking to know that these young lives, full of imagination, adventure, and hope are forced to experience the fear, shock, and dismay caused by homelessness and by no will or fault of their own. These homeless families with young children are at a risk different from other homeless and therefore must be treated differently for these needs and risks.

As for Katherine and her three children, Kayla, Kyle and Mitch, their situation has changed. But one wonders at what unnecessary cost. Through guidance and a strong support system that included help from homeless advocates, complete strangers willing to give of their time, money and energy, Katherine and her children were able to bounce back and return to a life of somewhat relative normalcy. A stable job, new car, and a secure roof over their heads has provided a foundation on which to rebuild from. However, the damage done through this experience has left emotional scars and damage that will not soon heal in the minds of these young children, and these experiences manifest themselves in heartbreaking ways. Kayla, the oldest of her siblings is most definitely experiencing the symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder and is displaying behavior most associated with a newborn baby. Her brothers, Kyle and Mitch are also showing similar signs of trauma, often waking up in the night screaming and crying due to nightmares, often asking their caring and comforting mother if they are at risk of becoming homeless again, fearing that it all could be taken away once more.

In the spirit of it takes a village, this crisis of family homelessness should be a call to arms for any and all individuals who not only have the time, money, and/or resources to contribute and help, but to those who have the empathy and compassion to make a difference in the lives of those living on the edge of poverty and homelessness, and the children who are the unwitting victims of a social system that contributes to living conditions far beyond the control or understanding of a child. The impact we can all have on a child’s sense of security and well-being is immeasurable. We are all capable of extraordinary behavior, going above and beyond when tragedy befalls our fellow human-beings. However, it is usually a catastrophic event out in the open that grabs us and pushes our instincts to help into action. With this problem, family and childhood homelessness, it is the most vulnerable and at risk members of our society who slip through the cracks and go unnoticed. We can all make a difference in the lives of these children. We are all somebody’s child.

Most people look at Bernie and say that he is too old to be the 45^th president. If elected president, he will be the oldest president at 75 years old. The first Google suggestion I received when typing in Bernie Sanders was what was his age. People also point out that before becoming a presidential candidate Sanders was a part of the socialist party before becoming a part of the Democratic Party. While age is important, people shouldn’t count him out of the race for president just because of his age. Like the saying “with age comes wisdom.”

Bernie Sanders has held a seat in political power since 1981 where he became the mayor of Burlington, Vermont. From 1981 till now He has been in some shape or form a part of the government. This alone shows that he has more than enough experience to have what it takes to hold his own in office. Even though his party has changed that does not mean his ideas and experiences changed. He still has the same motives for running as a presidential candidate as a democrat that he had when he was a socialist. With all of his experience he will make a fine president.

Bernie knew he wanted to make a difference politically from a young age. “A guy named Adolf Hitler won an election in 1932. He won an election, and 50 million people died as a result of that election in World War II, including 6 million Jews. So what I learned as a little kid is that politics is, in fact, very important.” Bernie said this quote at a young age. Bernie’s family was affected by the holocausts with many relatives on his father’s side being killed. It was at this moment that Bernie knew that politics where important and he wanted to be a part of them and make a difference for the better and to make sure that something like Hitler being elected does not happen again.

Bernie went to the University of Chicago and studied political science. While at the University of Chicago, Bernie was a part of a few groups/organizations that were involved with politics and political issues. It was through his school that Sanders joined the Socialist party. He was a part of many groups that wanted to change a lot of the laws that affected segregation. In 1962 he led the University of Chicago sit in where a group of students sat outside the university president’s office until he changes the rule that did not allow African American students to live in the same dorm buildings as White students.

Bernie attended the march on Washington in 1963 where Martin Luther King Jr. gave his “I Have a Dream Speech”. In the same year Sanders was arrested in Chicago for protesting with a large group of both White and African American people protesting against segregation. This was just one of the many run ins with the police Sanders has had trying to fight for what he believed to be right.

In 1980 he ran for mayor of Burlington, Vermont and was elected. Where he served as mayor for 4 terms. In 1990 He was elected as a representative in the House. Sanders served in the House from 1991 until he was elected to the Senate in 2006. He still serves the senate to this day.

All of these past experiences should prove to many people that Bernie is a competent candidate and has many important political  experiences in his past that have shaped who he his and what he stands for. They have also made him into the presidential candidate we all know today.

In an article posted by The Washington Post today, April 25, Sanders admitted that he will fight to the end even though he knows that in the end Hilary will most likely win due to her large lead in front of him. He said he intends to continue fighting in the race until he finds a reason to quit or the last vote is cast.

Reflection

1. The title shows what the article is about and grabs reader’s attention. The lead is creative and clever and draws readers into the text and provides insight with in the first few sentences. Also provides insight into the controversial issue.
2. The introduction begins with the controversial issue and goes into further detail as the paragraph goes on. Provide enough background information to understand the controversial topic.
3. The writer offers a strong idea and strong evidence that helps the writers point.
4. The writer shows clarity of thought and evidence of style in their writing.
5. The writer knows that New York Times readers will challenge ideas or underdeveloped ideas so they tried to be as clear as possible and explain everything.
6. The controversy is well researched and is developed into a persuasive argument. Much research has been done into topic.
7. The writer only used a total of four sources for their assignment.
8. The sources are brought up in the assignment by creating a hyperlink to the source in the sentence where the source is being used.
9. The writer does a good job persuading the reader about their topic and claims. The writer could have included more arguments for and against their topic.
10. The writer has two pictures in there assignment that shows visually what they are talking about.
11. The writer shows some improvement on the topic through the peer editing and group editing.
12. The writer uses hyperlinks to effectively cite where the information they are talking about is from.
13. There are no grammar issues and the writers attention to sentence structure helps establish the writers authority and credibility.

Not many people would argue against the belief that education is a vital part of humanity, but some still do not treat it as such. Young minority and non-minority students are being put through an educational system that, admittedly, has many flaws. The most concerning flaw occurs right at the end of these student’s academic careers: college. A student faced with the financial and mental burden that is college will at times make a decision that can impact them financially 15 years later.

Now, the fact that an 18 year old, who has come out of high school with only an introductory economics class under their belt must make a decision worth tens of thousands of dollars is absurd to begin with. For some students, this decision costs months of potential in the job industry, along with any additional debt they acquire. This opportunity has been especially difficult for low income minority students across the country. A Demos analysis on the Federal Reserve’s 2013 Survey of Consumer Finances shows that, on average White high school dropouts have around the same wealth as a Black college graduate. These numbers are what discourage minorities from attending university. They figure that if they’re not going to be making as much money as a White high school dropout, there is no point in going to college. People like Michelle Obama are trying to avoid adoption of this mentality by young minorities. While the Obama Administration has implemented programs to aid minority students, such as the Student Loan Forgiveness Program, it fails to address deeper socio-economic problems faced by minority students who end up dropping out of college.

This article from The Guardian displays a quote by the First Lady telling graduates of Booker T Washington high school, a school mainly comprised of minority students, to pursue an education. It reads “’Do you hear what I’m telling you… Because I’m giving you some insights that a lot of rich kids all over the country – they know this stuff, and I want you to know it, too. Because you have got to go and get your education. You’ve got to.’” While the First Lady’s words certainly seem sincere, all of the numbers point against her arguments.

Not only are minority students making less money on average than their White counterparts, they also have on average more student debt. A Gallup study on student loan disparities between race shows that 50 percent of black college graduates will leave their college with more than $25,000 in student loans. This is significantly more than the 34 percent of white graduates with more than $25,000 in student loans. The choice many minorities must make ends up losing them thousands of dollars either way. One must choose between only achieving a high school degree and living in poverty or going to college and acquiring thousands of dollars in debt.

In addition, this Bloomberg article cites a study done by the University of California, Los Angeles. It has shown that “The average student loan bill for both groups is about $8,000. But that’s half the $16,000 average wealth of black families and only 7 percent of the average $124,000 wealth of white families.” The staggeringly low average black family wealth has made many black students unable to afford such bills, making them default on their loans and sometimes even drop out.

Many minority students have decided to try out the college life, and end up defaulting on the loans they have. This ruins credit scores and can make buying a car, home or even acquiring a job impossible. This situation has plagued many minority households, and adds another figure to the staggering amount of low-wage workers in our country. The outcome of one’s life can start as early as age 17, which is a frightening thought. Many of these minority students come from a household where their parents, while supportive, do not know enough about economics to assist their children.

Not only is the financial aspect of the student loan system sometimes too much to bare for these minority students, but the social aspect as well. There have been many students, much like the person telling their story in this New York Times article that have ended up not being able to afford college due to family issues. The article tells of a minority student in their mid-twenties, reminiscing about their decision to default on their student loans. “By the end of my sophomore year at a small private liberal arts college, my mother and I had taken out a second loan, my father had declared bankruptcy and my parents had divorced.” Familial issues, such as parent’s divorce or the death of a parent are expected to not interfere with student loan payment by the government, which is absurd. The Obama Administration could easily fix this issue by giving more forgiveness to students of families with these issues.

The Obama Administration has been attempting to update the previously ineffective Student Loan Forgiveness Program. While they’re headed in the correct direction with this Program, the fact remains that the average student loan is unnecessarily high. Student loan debt levels have reached $1.35 trillion in the United States alone. Debt has risen by an average of $100 billion per year since 2007. The average student loan debt amount for a person ages 25-35 is $20,000. For some minority graduates, this is higher than their yearly income. While education has been increasing and unemployment has been decreasing, student loan level is getting to a point where college will be simply unaffordable for many households across the country.

We’ve seen politicians like Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders make promises to help the enormous student debt issue. There is no guarantee that Sanders will take office, however. Also, like Mrs. Obama, talk is not only cheap; it’s $20,000 in debt. Every year these political figures wait to make a move to fix the debt problem, $100 billion is taken from these student’s pockets. At the current rate, the student debt level is set to surpass the current mortgage debt level in less than a decade. It is a problem that, many times, in order to acquire the debt that comes with a mortgage, we must first undertake student loan debt. The repercussions of waiting for a politician to fix the student debt problems can range from graduates losing their homes to much worse. The economy and job market will not just wait for someone to come around and fix it, so we have to take action as soon as possible to help students avoid a grim future.

To help these young adults, we must first educate them in financial decisions they will make in the future. From my understanding and experience, economics classes teach these teens about GDP on the macro-economic scale, but fail to stress the importance of decisions the teen will be making in the next 10 years of their lives. Many counselors will tell students to go to college, no matter what kind of debt the student may acquire. This way of thinking does not benefit the student at all. If the student did not achieve as much as they would have liked to academically, I’d would highly advise them to take a semester, or even a year off to gain work experience, and more importantly, wisdom. It would be more beneficial than spending thousands of dollars getting a degree that would land them in the same job position that they would have been in, had they worked instead of going to school.

Writer Gerard Kelly touches on these issues in his piece, It’s Poverty of Ambition, not Student Debt, that’s Keeping Poor Children Away from University. He asserts that “The biggest hurdle poor pupils face is mental, not financial. They think that university isn’t for them. Thanks to the antics of the NUS et al their fears are reinforced.” Students from all around the world are facing this heavy burden, and the stress and anxiety that comes with it. At times, one can sympathize with some students’ decisions to drop out of college, although many are against it.

The Obama Administration has been urging minority students to stay in school, no matter the cost. While they seem to have the best interest of these students in their minds, the current student loan debt situation is a hurtle that some minority students simply cannot overcome. Many of these students end up dropping out of school, 69 percent of them stating student loan debt as the reason. These students end up going against the Obama Administrations intentions, therefore, some action must clearly be taken to make attending school seem more appealing to these students. Either a much needed lowering of tuition across colleges or additional funding from the government must be provided. This same government, by the way, has profited over $1 billion from Federal Student Loan programs in the last decade.

While data shows that minority students are, on average, being affected most negatively by these loans, the government does not discriminate when it comes to taking money from students. This is a problem for minority and non-minority students alike. The only demographics profiting from these outrageous debt levels are the government and the institutions that set these prices. We should not let money restrict our education.

Today, one of the most controversial figures in the entire world is Donald Trump. For awhile, Donald Trump was known for being an aggressive, wealthy businessman who was constantly offending people with his public comments and actions. Trump is now the center of attention in the United States because he is the front-runner for the Republican nomination for president.

In the past, Donald Trump has proven time and time again what an incredibly offensive and arrogant man he chooses to be. During his run for president, Trump has continued to show the country just how crazy he can be with numerous comments and political antiques that have left people stunned.

After the first GOP debate on August 6^th, Trump had some crude things to say about Megyn Kelly, a political commentator and journalist for Fox News and the host for the first GOP debate. The day after the event, Trump commented, “She gets out and she starts asking me all sorts of ridiculous questions, … You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever. In my opinion, she was off base.”

A year ago, if you told people that Donald Trump would own the majority of the Republican vote for president, most people would call you crazy. Today, many people say that there is no way that Trump will win the election, even though he is about to win the Republican nomination. The reality is, there is a good possibility that Trump can end up winning the election. However, there is a good chance that his presidency would bring a great deal of turmoil and hardship on the United States. If elected president, Donald Trump will ruin America.

Before we dive into how Donald Trump is the worst choice for president, we should try to understand why Trump is in this promising situation of becoming the Republican presidential candidate. The main thing Trump was known for before he started running for president was suing people.

Trump would always threaten and tarnish people on social media but, whenever someone would say something slightly offensive about him, he would try to publicly humiliate the person by filing a lawsuit against them for slander. Throughout the presidential race, Trump has basically been doing the same thing but, against the other candidates; which, unfortunately, is politics.

The reason Trump has such a far lead in the presidential race is because he is a great politician. He would constantly take jabs at Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio but, whenever they would retaliate he would act like the victim and deny that he ever slandered anyone. People love watching Trump because he is entertaining and unpredictable; people want to see what he is going to do next. The only problem is, with all this attention, Trump ended up becoming a very popular candidate for the white, not-so-bright voters.

Whenever Trump promoters give their reasons as to why they love Trump, they always give vague reasons that make him a great politician but, no hard evidence or reasoning that would make him a great president. These voters say things like “He’s going to make America great again,” or “He’s a great businessman, he’ll run the country like he runs his business.”

Since Trump is so far ahead in the polls, he must share some attributes with past successful, American politicians. In 1987, David G. Winters, a Psychology professor at Wesleyan University, conducted a study on the appealing qualities of past U.S. presidents from Washington to Reagan. Winters found out that many of the past presidents have held the constant of being natural leaders with the ability to charm the American people with their unique, personal appeal and performance. To Winters, the charismatic leader has, “a certain quality of personality by virtue of which he is set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities.”

Even though Donald Trump is a horrible person, he is a natural leader. Trump has been making hard decisions his entire life. In 1971, he was given control of his father’s real estate company at the age of 25. Since then he’s been in charge of hundreds of business proposals, philanthropic endeavors, and entrepreneurial ventures that most leaders have never even been exposed to. These high-stress, high-stakes experiences have made Trump into the confident, “don’t hold back” cowboy he is today, and people seem to admire him for it.

Trump is a powerful leader and he draws a crowd pretty much everywhere he goes but, being a good leader doesn’t make you a good fit to be president. Many of the voters really have no idea what they’re talking about when they are voting for Trump; they simply admire the illusion of Trump as a confident and cunning politician. However, if Trump becomes president, we cannot change our decision once he swears into office once we realize he is a complete fraud.

Trump’s idea of a perfect America would be a world power with a strong military that fights its own battles and helps no other country. That idea is called Isolationism, the belief that it is in one’s best interest to take care of one’s own problems without worrying about anyone else’s problems.

Trump has gone on the record to say that he will isolate the United States by getting rid of their affiliation with treaties like NATO and NAFTA. Trump also wishes to stir the trade waters with countries like China and Mexico by threatening to cut off negotiations with the countries and start so called, “Trade Wars.” He wishes to take the sweatshops out of these countries and bring those factories to the United States. “I’ll take jobs back from China, I’ll take jobs back from Japan. The Hispanics are going to get those jobs, and they’re going to love Trump.” Donald Trump made these comments in July of 2015, during his trip to the U.S.-Mexican border.

This is incredibly offensive. Donald Trump believes just because he cuts ties with countries like Japan and China, that automatically makes room for jobs in America. The “jobs” Trump is referring to are jobs in sweatshops that pay their workers next to nothing, and Trump just assumes that these jobs will simply transfer over to the United States and members of the Hispanic community are so poor that they will just flock to these minimum wage jobs as soon as they get the chance.

Donald Trump has notoriously been known for being a bigot and a racist. Before and during his run for president, Donald Trump has demonstrated to the public that he is a racist. Donald Trump treats each racial group as a monolith. He treats each race as if they are in their own world where everyone in that race only acts according to their stereotypes. Instead of acknowledging that there’s as much variety among white people as there is among Muslims, Latinos, and black people, Trump puts each race into their own category.

Trump has had many opportunities to prove to the voters that he is not the prejudice chauvinist people think he is. The most prominent being the three times he danced around the question of whether or not he renounced the support of former KKK leader David Duke during a televised interview on CNN. Each time Trump was asked about white supremacy or David Duke, he neither confirmed nor denied any affiliation with David Duke or any white supremacy group.

Trump’s exact words were, “I don’t know anything about what you’re even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists,” he said. “So I don’t know. I don’t know — did he endorse me, or what’s going on? Because I know nothing about David Duke; I know nothing about white supremacists.”

Trump knew he was lying but, he also didn’t want to deny anything that would come back to bite him if the public found out the truth. He did not want to look like a supporter of white supremacy but, he also wanted the white supremacist’s vote on Election Sunday. Apparently, Trump decided votes were more important than being associated with the KKK.

A major reason Donald Trump’s presidency will most likely harm the reputation of the United States is because Trump is a dangerous man. During his run for president, Donald Trump has said and done some pretty insane things. Even though Trump has changed many of his political views throughout the presidential race, he has stayed true to his beliefs on torture, war, and how to deal with outside threats.

Today, President Obama is firmly against torture but, Trump has made it clear that he wants to reinstate all forms of torture, especially waterboarding, and went on record to say he wants to implement “much worse forms of torture.” When talking about national security, Trump talked about how America looked weak because we didn’t torture our prisoners and he went on to say “We have to beat the savages.”

Apparently, Trump has big plans for the military; namely, making the military stronger and more aggressive towards hostile countries. Many military officials have spoken out about how they would not follow through with any of the wicked plots Trump has planned for the military. Trump responded by suggesting he would force the military to carry out his objectives regardless if they agreed with the plan or not.

When asked about North Korea, Trump said he would consider giving nukes to South Korea and Japan to fight their own battle with North Korea instead of having America get involved. This involves Trump’s whole isolationist movement that has the United States refusing to help any other countries in need; so instead, Trump just wants to give the victim country giant, dangerous weapons and have them deal with the situation on their own.

Aside from fully supporting torture and possibly giving other countries nukes, Trump publicly promoted a war crime on Fox News where he said in order to stop the terrorists, “We have to take out their families; We have to go after their wives and children.” If Barrack Obama, or someone we would expect more out of, said something like this on national television, it would be a huge deal, but it was Donald Trump who people expect to say something this insane.

If Donald Trump becomes President, he will ruin America in one way or another. Trump may start a war through offending a hostile country, using the military to carry out heinous war crimes, or by isolating the United States and leaving less powerful countries to fend for themselves. America cannot have a President who is a racist that doesn’t respect each race equally because America is the land of freedom and equality. If Donald Trump is elected President, we have no idea what he is going to do but, many signs point to bad things.

WRT 205/Spring 2016                                           Grading Rubric: Unit III NYTs Magazine

[1]  How well does the title provocatively focus the reader’s attention, as well as the lede? Is it thoughtful, creative, clever? Does it lead the reader into the text and provide some insight into the issue?

I really tried to think of a title that would encompass the main point of my article as well as properly resembling a title one would see in the actual New York Times. The title draws the audience in because of how current the topic is, who the topic may affect, and the wit behind the title; using Trump’s slogan against him is pretty clever, if I do say so myself. Once a reader reads a witty title like this, about a character like Donald Trump, most likely, they’re going to be drawn in by it and forced to find out what is in the article.

[2]  How well does the introductory section of the article invite the reader into the paper, as well as offer up exigency?  How does it locate a problem or controversy within a context that provides background and rationale?

The intro section of the article basically lays out how the argument fits the title and how the argument will be expanded upon within the article. The article has four sections before it hits the main argument and the sections really lead up to show exactly how awful of a person Trump has been in the past, as well as present reasons why Trump will be an awful President.

[3] How well does the writer offer up a strong ‘idea’ that requires analysis to support and evolve it, as well as offers some point about the significance of evidence that would not have been immediately obvious to readers.?

A lot of people may think Trump is unsuitable to be President but, I believe my article shows the stage past that, the part that people think can’t happen, that is, what will happen if Trump becomes President? This article helps expand the idea around what exactly Trump may or may not do if he gets in the White House.

[4] How well does the writer show clarity of thought; uniqueness of presentation; evidence of style; and historicized topics?

Personally, I know I did my very best to present the argument “If Trump becomes President, he will ruin America.” I know it is an aggressive agreement but, if Trump does end up as president, something insane or drastically wrong is bound to happen and the purpose of my article is to startle readers to a point of realization that this idea makes sense. In my article, I do  y best to touch all the sides of Trump that people should see in order to make an informed decision on who they are voting for in the upcoming election.

[5]  How well does the writer recognize that a NYTs Magazine audience will challenge ideas that are overgeneralized or underdeveloped or poorly explained? (that is, did the writer avoid cliché and vagueness or address points/issues readers are likely to have?)  How well did the writer decide about how to develop, sequence, and organize material?

It’s difficult to create the perfect argument and I know my argument is too strong but, there is a give and take between how accurate an argument is and the ability of the article to draw in readers. One wishes to develop an argument that is both well-thought-out and intriguing to an outside audience but, it’s tough when a writer has to be both accurate in all the material involved in the article as well as attractive to others. I tried to organize my material in a way that started with the light stuff at the beginning and ended with the heavier stuff that will leave the reader stunned.

[6]  How well does the writer research a controversy, develop a persuasive stance, utilize research about the topic,  and join the ‘debate’ by making an argument of importance?

My main job in writing this article was to get the facts when it came to what exactly Trump has done and said in the past to help prove he is an unsuitable presidential candidate. Hopefully, by gathering enough facts and making enough significant points I can show my audience just how dangerous Trump can be with the power of the country behind him.

[7]  How well does the writer meet or exceed research expectations of assignment requirements (6 appropriate secondary sources, 1 visual source, (or more) and primary research? ).

In total, I believe I had 7 or 8 secondary sources and the required scholarly and primary source. I included an image at the beginning of my article but, media wasn’t really required when talking about Trump because it is more about what Trump says that captures his outrageousness rather than any image. The Primary research included the exact transcript of the Fox News interview where Trump said we have to take out the terrorist’s families, which I hope audiences will be shocked by the most.

[8]  How well does the writer integrate secondary and primary sources (that support and complicate the topic) effectively into the text, introducing and contextualizing them, and “conversing” (i.e. no drop-quoting) in ways that deepen and complicate the analysis?

I did my best to use the primary and secondary sources together as ways to show people of Trump’s madness. I really tried to help make the flow of the article great, where one subject naturally transgresses into another subject without people stopping and saying, “Why is this here?”

[9 How well does the writer persuade an audience to consider claims made from a particular position of authority on which you have built your research?  How strong and effective is the writer’s use of rhetorical tools (ethos, logos, pathos)?

I really tried to persuade audiences with common sense and fear. I tried to show the ridiculous things Trump has done repeatedly in the past and the terrible things Trump is capable of if elected president. I really gave a strong effort to show the ethical and logical reasoning behind my argument by displaying the type of immoral man Trump is and why we cannot have an untrustworthy man like Trump making all the decisions for a world power.

[10] How well does the writer select appropriate, interesting, revealing visual?  Has the writer placed a visual strategically in the essay and provided relevant commentary on and/or analysis of them?  Do the visuals contribute to the essay in meaningful ways (i.e. would the essay be affected if the writer took the visual away)?

I really tried to focus on the content and wording of my article to make the most sense out of my argument but, the reason I chose that specific photo of Trump because it was ironic in a way. Trump consistently will throw-up a peace sign at many of his rallies and public events but, I find it funny that a man who uses a sign for peace so often is one of the most aggressive and hostile presidential candidates in American History.

[11] How well does the writer show development of final article using various drafts, in-class peer editing and workshops, and/or teacher comments?

In my first couple drafts, I didn’t end very strong with my conclusion but, in my final draft, I really tried to end with a summarization and the full meaning of the article. I would continuously change and edit my article based on the feedback from the different activities from class and I really did my best when going from the 800 to 1250 to 1600-word draft to change things around in order to make the most logical and convincing article about why Trump should not be president as I could.

[12] How well does the writer use hyperlinks—are they effective/appropriate?

I did my best to encompass hyperlinks within the article in place where I used direct quotes or facts or in spots where readers may want to learn more about the subject or if they don’t know exactly what the article is discussing. The hyperlinks in my article are effective because they provide the most specific information on every topic I hit on within the article.

[13]  How well did the writer edit for grammar, style, and usage effectively? Does the writer’s attention to sentence level issues help him/her establish authority or credibility on the issue?

The overall structure of my article involves correct grammar and proper style and sentence structure to help keep readers reading the article and understanding that I have done my research. If a reader identifies any errors or any repetitiveness in an article, it is typical that he or she will stop reading the article or cease to believe any of the article’s content; so, it is important for the authors to be through and knowledgeable when writing their article.