The Welfare System Must Go Through Another Reform.

My first original editorial was about the welfare reform, it was a very factual post that informed readers, and discussed both sides on the issue. And therefore it complied with the ethic code of journalism. I am once again writing about this almost forgotten issue that has been keeping corruption alive.

The reason why I am once again writing about the welfare reform is because I believe that the poor is being left behind and furthermore, being unheard. As humans we should be concerned about a group of people being unheard, and that is because in order to be better than we are, we must consider an idea that we cannot come up with on our own. The more points of views we have, the more solutions to our problems we have. This is very important in the days that we are living. Some natural phenomenon are unlikely (for example hearing everyone’s point of view, or prevent volcanoes from warming up the earth), however, we can take diminish people’s need of suffering by making them more educated just like we can diminish the amount of carbon dioxide by creating electric cars.

Back in my first original editorial (that was highly factual), I mentioned how little regulation is made by the federal government on the welfare fund that is given to the state. The foundational reasons why the Personal Responsibilities and Work Opportunity Act are not being respected when we look into, for example, the state of Arizona. In the state of Arizona one in every four children lives in poverty, yet the state cut the five-year per lifetime eligibility limit. In 2014 the state of Arizona cute the lifetime eligibility limit to one year. The country watches cases just like Arizona happening and nobody takes a stand to protect the rights of those with little knowledge. We see so many protests defending the rights of women towards abortion, but we rarely see protests defending the idea of education for all. There is no “undue burden” placed on states due to miss management of a fund that will help the poor advance.

With my view given in this post, and the facts that were given in this editorial and my first one I call for another reform on welfare. The welfare must be regulated, the fund must be renewed, and we as a society must make sure that our laws are not placed in vain.

Comment On a Colleague's Editorial.

 I decided to comment on a post by We the People… I personally find the topic of Vaccines very interesting, and both pros and cons have really interesting opinions and points about the issue. The editorial is titled Vaccines as a Requirement?

The first paragraph is very well written, and the quotes from Big Bang Theory makes it interesting for readers (I am a fan). I am personally for vaccinations, and I believe that the national government should also be because of economic reasons. I do agree that we are healthier and cleaner than past centuries; however, we must keep progressing as humans and diminish as many diseases as we can. That way we will not have to spend so much money on medical assistance, as you have mentioned. What I am trying to say is that if we target a specific disease and we all work together (by getting vaccinated) to exterminate the disease. Small pox could be used as an example. Overall, this is a very well written editorial with really good information in it, and a strong point of view.

Conflicts Between Parties and the Hierarchical Structure of The House of Representatives (Blog II)

Posterior to the Orlando shooting on June 12, Democrats have been trying to pass a bill that would let the attorney general on two of the FBI’s most serious terrorist watch lists from being able to buy guns. Democrats in the House of Representatives are now participating in a sit in to gain a vote that will send the bill to the Senate. There was a fifteen hour filibuster in the Senate with the same goal.

This one article from Times is titled Democratic Sit-In on Gun Control Law Could Last for Days and according to it, the sit-in might go on through the Fourth of July weekend. According to this source, the sit-in started on Wednesday due to the lack of votes on the possible new bill. Democrats kept giving speeches and showing off faces of victims until Thursday morning. Their ultimate goals was to have Speaker Paul Ryan to allow a vote on a law that will keep terrorist suspects from buying guns. The Speaker of the house argues that the bill has already failed in the Senate, but his argument does not keep Democrats from both the lower house and senate to continue the sit-in. Cameras were turned off in the House of Representatives which led to Democrats live streaming their sit-in through social media. Republicans retrieved from the house and adjourned it, they said that the house will remain adjourned until July 5.

This is a very interesting article because it shows a conflict between the two parties, and it allows the public to better understand the hierarchical system that exists in the House.

How is the welfare reform doing after twenty years? (Original Editorial)

The term welfare refers to the federal program that took place during the Great Depression. In 1935 Congress authorized Aid to Dependent Children, ADC. It served as primary assistance to windows, orphans, divorced or disserted mothers and their children. By 1939 the program served 700,000 people and two-thirds of eligible children were not enrolled. The program grew slowly but firmly in the next two decades. In 1992 the program covered 14.2 million people in need. The ADC was becoming very expansive and some beneficiaries were taking advantage of it; these were just some of the facts that made it obvious that the system needed some sort of reform.

In 1992, Bill Clinton was elected president and promised to “end welfare as we know it.” Although President Clinton signed the bill, he vetoed the first two welfare reform bills. Bill Clinton stood against radical welfare reforms and did not sign the bill before a compromise. Congress wanted to give the states total responsibility over the funds for food stamps, and Medicaid. On the other hand, Clinton wanted to preserve national standards and guarantee that the poor would receive food stamps and Medicaid coverage. He argued that Medicaid and a better day care support was essential to help disabled and poor children. President Clinton wanted to give the states an option on whether or not to use the Federal block grant money to pay for vouchers in order to help families pay for diapers, clothing, medicine, and school supplies for the children; meanwhile, Congress wanted to use Federal money to afford vouchers for families that exceeded the five year limit on cash assistance.

In August 22, 1996 Clinton finally signed the bill, and the “welfare reform” took place. The welfare system was renamed to Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, its name was just one of the changes that took place. Some of its major changes included: recipients were no longer guaranteed benefits upon eligibility, the Child Care and Community Development Block Grant was introduced in order to include more families, it required recipients to find a job and start working within two years of receiving benefits (some states also required community service from recipients within two months of receiving benefits), and it placed a five year lifetime limit on assistance; however, states could shorten the five years period and exempt up to twenty percent of the cases due to hardship reasons.

Eligibility requirements of welfare programs:

• A basic lack of gainful employment opportunity through either lack of places of employment or lack of job skill.
• A commitment to self-sufficiency is necessary before any potential recipient can begin to receive benefits. Heads of household must enter into an agreement they will become self-sufficient within a certain time frame.
• A commitment to cooperation must be signed by the heads of household that they will comply with and continue all regulations and requirements while receiving aid.
• Dependent children must be living in the household. There are some very few exceptions, but generally all dependents must be within the home.
• All minors must be attending school during school days.
• All minors and dependents must be fully and appropriately immunized.
• The recipient must be 18 years of age.
• You must be a legal and permanent resident of the state to which you are applying.
• You must be a citizen of the United States or a qualified non-citizen legal resident, (restrictions apply).
• A commitment to complete accuracy and honesty during the program.
• All monetary resources must be divulged. This includes cash within the home, in checking or savings accounts and items of value in possession such as jewelry or electronics.
• A household financial budget must be created and adhered to.

There are still critics arguing that people might become too dependent on the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, they argue that it is possible for a family to exceed the five years limit that is set on the Act, which is a possibility that is rather unlikely. But let’s talk about what is likely, and in fact, what has been happening. With little enforcement and plenty of options for states to use welfare money however they find beneficial, the welfare reform is not actually doing great. It was a great deal during the first years when the American economy was also bustling, but in the beginning of the twenty-first century a lot of people (including single mothers) lost their jobs. The recession of 2007 and 2008 was also a rough time for the needy, let’s also remember that in a world of changing technology the poor is mostly always behind. So how good did the welfare reform really do? I’d say it gave the poor the needed boost during the first years, and merely a couple months close to stability nowadays. The $16.5 billion has remained the value of the fund since it started, meaning that it is now worth one-third less than it was when Clinton signed the bill. Also meaning that the poor is staying behind and so is our society. As President Bill Clinton said “we cannot build our own future without helping others built theirs” so let’s start it from scratch so that the future can be a better place than the present is.

The Democratic Party from Inside.

When an election arrives to the point where there are only two candidates running against each other, they must pick their vice presidents, or "running mate." This commentary was made by Eileen Rivers to USA Today, it is titled Punchlines: For Democrats, an all female ticket? This is one of the "Punchline" videos that USA Today has been releasing, and on this particular video, Jimmy Fallon and Stephen Colbert jokes about our candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. The overall picture is that candidates now have the task to pick a vice president, or running mate, and the Democratic Party is encouraging Hillary to choose Elizabeth Warren. This is a commentary on the democratic attitude towards not only electing a woman as a president, but also as a vice president. They referred to the democratic decision as "an all-female ticket."

This commentary made think about what might be going on within the Democratic Party. Nowadays, the push towards helping minorities “get there” is much stronger than it was ever before. The United States finally legalized gay marriage nationwide, and the number of feminists keep growing every day. Moreover, we just had the very first African American president in the history of the United States. President Obama has a character and seems very bold and still with his government, in other words, his presidency was consistent with his political ideas and he did not show conflicts with congress. The Democratic Party must know that the next president must have at least the comparable boldness that President Obama has, because congress is mostly Republican, their acceptance of Democratic policies are not easily passed. If the Democratic Party wants a victory in this election, their candidates must be polite, and know how to work with both sides as Obama did. The President must satisfy Congress, their Political Party, and the American public. Personally, I believe that Hillary Clinton has had a lot of scandals and those may influence the way congress might look at her. If elected, she will have to be very bold and serious about her policies.

Greetings From Your Classmate!!!

Hello everyone!! My name is Larissa Santos, I turned 19 years old last week, and I am very excited for the knowledge that we will all gain with this class. I have been living in Austin for five years now, and its been a good experience, I plan on transferring to Texas A&M University in College Station, so I kind of need to keep my focus during this time at ACC. I hope we have a great five and a half set of weeks!!!