IDs For Voting Blog Critique

The blogger of The Red White & Blue, Emily Velazquez created a post on election day (Are You Who You Say You Are?) referring to the discussion about the requirement of state issued identification cards for the process of voting. In this article she described the effects of the choice should it be enacted mostly in a negative perspective such as party strength diminishing from excluded groups. The reasons behind the suggested change for voting requirements is given in her writings and have legitimate claim to why it would be done. Yet her argument against it is listed out in a even pace though could of used some distinct separation via line breaks.

The view was well proposed as Democratic leaning parties would affected such as low-income, elderly, and minority though specifics could have been added on. By specifying particular groups and why they were more Democratic sided would add a better understanding of why they are affiliated via the blog post. Understanding the how of these groups the audience can get a better grasp of the impact of the new ID ruling discussion.

The use of statistics helps fulfill the need of reliability of the information to back the idea, a good addition to the post. The belief that the numerical value does come to contribute to the information is innate I believe to a general audience. I would of liked to have seen more fleshing out of the argument though she did an admirable job of presenting all the information to the reader. It is in my humble opinion the post conveyed its main point quite well though could stand to see a more refined structure.

Park Nit Pick

In local Austin legislature proposition nine that would allow city to lease areas such as parks to schools, an already long standing assumption. The passing of this proposal would change very little however the opposite would change much of the relationship between the education and government relationship. The fair use of the land allows resources to be shared in loo of the expensive development of land for school playgrounds and/or sports fields. This is not to say that the possible abuse of the open use would lead to large sporting events such as football games or other large events on parkland.

The legal issues that run with the proposal is that it has not been an official offense for the schools, yet nothing has been made to approve it as well. In the end the failed passing of proposition nine would more than likely lead to advocates for the open use of the parks or demand for more funding for building the fields the schools feel would be due. The loose wording seems a concern for others who follow the story as it could be misconstrued to give too much reign of public parkland for more lucrative ventures such as business or housing development.

The further stretching of such limited funds would possibly put strain on the city council budget though that reasoning along would put backing up to the passing of the legislation. As well as conflicts with the proposition not passing brings more legal issues with leasing limited land. It is in my humble opinion that this idea of making official the shared use would simply cover possible future issues should they arise.