Mar 23

¿Las Libertades Civiles Estadounidenses Reprimidas En El 2012?

Read this post in English

La semana pasada me topé con una noticia que tenía que ver con uno de los temas más controvertidos en los EE.UU.: el aborto. Las últimas noticias sobre este tema tiene que ver con la polémica de la  legislación contra el aborto de Virginia, que ha creado muchas protestas, especialmente en la capital estatal. Básicamente, poniendo en los términos más sencillos, la legislación requería que cualquier mujer en Virginia que quisiese tener un aborto tendría que tener un ultrasonido transvaginal invasivo que se quedaría en su expediente médico en la clínica de aborto durante siete años. Esta legislación fue una de varias que tratan sobre los procedimientos de aborto, incluyendo uno que se llama la legislación de la persona, donde se define un óvulo fertilizado como una persona. Otra legislación hubiese negado abortos financiados por el gobierno de mujeres  cuyos fetos tienen graves anomalías físicas y mentales.  Ya pueden ver por qué esto podría crear un tumulto entre las personas que apoyan el derecho a decidir en todo el país. Lo irónico de estas legislaturas es que los republicanos, que a menudo son vistos como los protectores de las libertades civiles y la promueven mínima intervención del gobierno, aprobaron estas legislaturas.

 

¿Es muy absurdo decir que esta estas legislaturas demuestran la intervención directa del gobierno?

 

Después de varios debates, la legislación del ultrasonido transvaginal fue diluida y se le hizo “opcional” para las mujeres.  Las otras dos legislaciones fueron derrotadas. Sin embargo, lo que aun es mas sorprendente es el hecho de que estas legislaciones fueron creadas en el 2012, treinta y nueve años después de que Roe v. Wade declarara que la Decimocuarta Enmienda de la Costitucion de los Estados Unidos se extiende al derecho de la mujer en decidir tener un aborto.  Lo que me parece que está sucediendo aquí es que hay una batalla entre las diferentes creencias que están sobrepasando algunos de los derechos fundamentales que se dan bajo la Constitución de los EE.UU.. Debido a que los tiempos han cambiado, parece que hay una necesidad de mayor control sobre las tradiciones religiosas, especialmente relacionados con el aborto.

 

Sin embargo, quiero señalar que el trabajo del gobierno, y por lo tanto los políticos que representan al gobierno, no están aquí para empujar sus creencias al pueblo.   Cualquier perspectivas que tengan las personas están protegidas por la Constitucion, y estas perspectivas no solo son las que son pro-vida, sino que también las que creen en el derecho a la decisión.  Mi punto aquí no es para convencer a nadie con mi punto de vista (esto lo dejo a los defensores más fervientes), sino para señalar que algo tan polémico como el aborto debe tener una base común de las libertades civiles. Ya se trate de las libertades civiles para protestar fuera de Planned Parenthood en contra del aborto, o si se trata de las libertades civiles en tener control sobre nuestros cuerpos.

 

Obviamente, el punto de vista sobre el aborto tiene que ver con las preferencias personales, pero lo que quiero destacar es que aunque algunos piensen que el aborto es bueno o malo, todos debemos de estar de acuerdo en que nuestras libertades civiles no deben estar en peligro de ninguna manera. Puede ser que el tema del aborto nos les incumba, pero las libertades civiles y el derecho a ellos debe preocuparles a todos. La razón principal que estas legislaturas fueron protestadas y derrotadas no fue porque los defensores del derecho creen que el aborto es moralmente bueno, sino porque la gente cree que deberíamos tener el poder para tomar decisiones por nosotros mismos. Va más allá de las perspectivas de los individuos, porque la ley no está hecha para la persona individual, sino para el pueblo general. Lo que hacemos dentro de los límites de la ley es la libertad que cada uno de nosotros tiene como ciudadano. Y cuando las leyes estrechan estos límites aun más, nuestra libertad se convierte cada vez menos accesible. Cada uno de nosotros decide si estar aquí en el internet, leyendo acerca de artículos como este. Si alguien pensara que esto es moralmente incorrecto, ¿se justificaría la restricción de nuestro derecho de hacerlo? ¿Especialmente en el año 2012 en Estados Unidos?

Share

Mar 22

Water Works

Earlier this week, I wrote a post about easy ways to make the most out of unavoidable fast food dining experiences. For this post I want to highlight another simple and effortless way to keep healthy. If you’re at all like me, then you love to stay active. There’s nothing I would rather do than play a pickup game with my friends. Needless to say, Spring is my favorite time of the year because of the beautiful weather and the chance it provides for outdoor activities. I make it my goal to try to sweat everyday while performing some type of physical activity. This is a great way to make sure you find time to have some fun, and release some energy and stress. Not to mention, it is great exercise and excellent for your health.

After I come home from playing basketball, or working out, or going for a run, or whatever it was I was doing, the first thing I do is go straight to the refrigerator to grab a cold drink. Now as you might know from reading some of my previous posts, I live in a typical college house with four of my buddies. So, I’m sure you can probably imagine the contents of our refrigerator. But, I push the soda, beer, sports drinks, and energy drinks aside, and go for the pitcher of water. During all my meals and throughout the day I try to drink water whenever it’s an option. This is an incredibly easy way to help keep healthy and fit. When I’m in the mood for something a bit tastier, I’ll choose a fruit juice.

The truth is that as of 2009 the average American consumes 50 gallons of soda and other sweetened beverages each year. That’s about 533 12-ounce cans of soda each year. A 12-ounce soda typically contains anywhere from 124-189 calories. So for convenience, let’s assume the average can of soda contains 150 calories. That means the average American consumes somewhere around (depending on the combination of types of drinks consumed) 80,000 calories each year from sodas and other sweetened beverages!

Sticking to water eliminates this massive amount of calories from your diet. But, even better is that water does not contain other ingredients, such as high fructose corn syrup, that are commonly found in sodas and other sugary drinks. Water is essential for our bodily functions and every bodily system uses water. Substituting sugary drinks with water not only reduces your calorie and fat intake, but it also actively reduces your body fat, as water has been shown to help reduce fat deposits. The benefits associated with water intake are virtually endless and go as far as reducing your risk of cancer.

Often times, clever marketing tactics fool consumers into thinking their beverage is beneficial to their health. For example, let’s take a look at the very popular drink, Vitamin Water. Even the name sounds like it must be one of the healthiest options out there… water fortified with vitamins. Truth be told, Vitamin Water has more sugar and more calories in a single bottle than a can of Coke. So, next time when you’re about to gulp down your favorite “healthy” drink take a quick look at the nutritional info and think about drinking a glass of water instead.

Personally, I try to drink water whenever possible, knowing that sometimes drinking something other than water is simply inevitable. Try to start making small adjustments in your diet until choosing to drink water becomes habitual. For example, you might want to start by eliminating that mid-afternoon soda refreshment that many of us have become accustomed to. Eventually, your beverage diet will consist primarily of water. And, when you are in the mood for something else, try a fruit juice or a glass of skim milk. These are two tasty and relatively healthy alternatives.

Water, is one of the most important substances for humans to consume. It’s refreshing, good for you, cheaper than most drinks, and luckily for many of us Americans it’s widely available. So, challenge yourself to start substituting your sugary drinks with water…you will soon be glad that you did.

Share

Mar 22

Policy Balancing Act

Have you ever imagined being the President of the United States?  I haven’t really, it stresses me out just thinking about the competing responsibilities.  Maybe you’ve been a die-hard environmentalist, or a strong businesswoman, or an unfailing pacifist up until your inauguration, but no matter how true you are to your convictions there will be inevitable issues that come up that encompass multiple policy areas and cause you to juggle competing, and equally important priorities.

The U.S. Commerce Department’s decision announced on Tuesday that it would apply 2.9 to 4.3% tariffs on solar panels imported from China is a recent example of how one issue can command multiple attention in different policy arenas.  This tariff comes as a result of speculation that the Chinese government has provided subsidies to solar panel manufactures, and if the Commerce Department finds through their investigation in May that the Chinese government is found guilty of dumping solar panels into the U.S. market at prices below their real costs, the tariffs could rise significantly.

Chinese solar panels in the U.S. market create both positives and negatives.  The President must weigh the interests of both American producers and American consumers, the interests of environmental activists and energy realists, and big stick fighters with carrot stick negotiators.

Manufacturing subsidies and dumping are considered illegal by international trade agreements established under the World Trade Organization, but these illegal market steals have been one of the biggest ways China’s economy has been able to grow so quickly. Economically, Chinese solar panel imports now make up half of the U.S. market.  Foreign companies dominating U.S. markets poses a large economic problem for the U.S. President.  In 2005, the U.S. was importing $21.5 million in solar panels.  Last year, that amount grew to $2.65 billion.  The low prices of Chinese panels have certainly hurt U.S. manufacturers.  Three big solar companies went bankrupt in August, as low-Chinese costs lowered the cost of solar energy by two-thirds in the last four years.  One of these companies, Solyndra, has been in the news as congressional Republicans criticize the Obama administration for putting $500 million into an unsuccessful company.

The U.S. solar manufacturers’ request to investigate Chinese subsidies could lead to the most extensive review of market domination from Chinese subsidized imports.  The President’s administration’s approval of such an investigation clearly shows their support for American producers and their prioritization of producer side economics.  Still, the cheap Chinese prices do benefit solar panel installation companies, solar energy using businesses, and solar energy consuming households.

The low price of solar energy has helped make alternatives to fossil fuels a reality, and help in the U.S. clean energy initiatives, another policy arena that commands attention.  With the ability to purchase relatively cheap, renewable energy, the U.S.’s has a greater potential to be a greener nation.  There then comes a balance of putting economic policy or energy policy at the Continue reading

Share

Mar 22

Cambodia’s First IPO

Over the summer I wrote a blog post about the Cambodian Securities Exchange (CSX), which is the world’s smallest stock market—a stock market without stocks.  I explained that opening a stock market without any companies listed for trade was not as crazy as it sounded; opening a market marks a new phase of economic development and can encourage foreign investment.  It’s not an unprecedented move, and though it can take a few years (or even a decade) for companies to list on the market and a true exchange to form, opening a stock exchange is a strategic decision that can have huge benefits in the long term.  I was a bit skeptical, though, since Cambodians typically have little trust in banks and tend to keep their money in cash, so I wondered if anyone besides the elite would attempt to invest in the market.  I also noted that there were strict regulations companies had to meet before they could list in the market and wondered how long it would take for any corporation to meet those requirements.

Well, as it turns out, Cambodia’s first initial public offering (IPO) will occur on April 18th, with the final offering price announcement date set for March 29th—just a week away!  Phnom Penh Water Supply Authority is a state-owned company, and as such the state will retain 85% ownership, or 73.9 million shares, with the rest of the stocks available to Cambodian and non-Cambodian investors. Allowing foreigners to purchase the stock is crucial, as it dramatically improves the prospects for the IPO. In fact, it is estimated that over 100 foreign investors have already displayed serious interest in Cambodia because of the securities exchange, meaning that the market is already working for the Cambodian economy, even though the first IPO is still a few weeks away.

To prepare the population for the eventual stocks, Phnom Penh Securities has organized 200 trading seminars to teach people stock market basics, since most do not know what a stock is, much less how to trade.  Over 5,000 Cambodians have attended, proving that traditional distrust in banks (Cambodia’s savings rate is only 14.4%) has not stemmed interest in the new securities exchange.  Of course, we will still have to wait and see if that interest translates into actual trading, but the interest in stock market crash courses is a good sign.  One young woman who was interviewed about the stock market even said that she plans to invest as much as one-third of her monthly salary in the market.

This display of trust, however, does not mean that everyone trusts the new market.  Cambodia was ranked 164th in the world in Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index, ahead of only North Korea, Myanmar, and Afghanistan in Asia.  This means that the government and any companies which list in the market will have to work very hard to ensure that everything is transparent and operates smoothly.

Another concern is that this interest in the market will fade after this initial “boom,” as neighboring Vietnam and Laos have already experienced.  It can take a long time for markets to steady after cycles of booms and busts, so the inevitable drop in interest is not a bad thing, but simply a natural part of stock market maturation.  Still, it’s something that the CSX will have to watch out for, as it will be impossible to grow the market quickly once the boom ends.

Despite these concerns, there is still good cause for optimism.  It may take a while, but this stock market will ideally do a lot for the Cambodian economy.  More courses on stock market basics would certainly help, as it could encourage trust in the markets, and encouraging transparency and accountability will also help.  What do you think could be done to encourage people to invest in the market?

Share

Mar 21

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Six Months Later

Gay rights groups, activists, and the LGBT community in general has been in the public eye for so many reasons over the past handful of years. With marriage equality slowly creeping up, state by state, and Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell being repealed, everyone has been pretty busy. With the six month anniversary of DADT upon us, I want to take a look at where we’ve come since gays were given the right to openly serve in the military, free of worry about losing their jobs.

A year ago, you probably recall uproars happening what seemed like every other day about the prospect of overturning DADT in the military. People were literally treating the issue as if it would bring us to the end of the world. Would the possibility of having to serve with a gay soldier deter others from joining the military? Would those currently serving retire their camouflage if they happened to find out that someone in their unit was a lesbian or gay man? The idea of our military wasting away seemed to be a pretty prominent one.

But what were people really that scared of? The argument that I heard the most was that straight soldiers were afraid to sleep in the same rooms as gay soldiers.  Honestly, I feel senseless and uneducated even typing that. I’m not sure how people got the idea that gay soldiers were peeping toms or night time lurkers, but I think it’s a

Image from noble.americaadrift.com via GenderAcrossBorders.com

pretty ridiculous one. I think the fact that numerous gay soldiers hid their relationships, one even for thirty years, in order to continue to serve their country, is a fairly logical sign that their intentions were not to hit on straight people. Furthermore, the coinciding fact that non gay soldiers threatened to leave the military if DADT passed is a good indication that their loyalty is not nearly as strong as the former.

With that said, what has happened in the past six months of having an LGBT accepting US military? The answer: not much. Many gay soldiers returned to the military with no disasters or catastrophic events. Some who had left the military before DADT was repealed were asked if they would return to service. A microscopic two percent of soldiers decided to change their housing situations after finding out about a gay soldier in their unit. The majority claimed that they were completely unaffected. Others had already known about gay unit members before the repeal of DADT, and hadn’t even been concerned then. The fact of the matter is, it’s Continue reading

Share

Mar 21

It’s Not All Bad – Healthy Decisions in Fast Food

While I write a lot about obesity problems in the United States, I’m like most people in that I love to eat. I love steaks, pizza, pasta, burgers, fries, quesadillas, and of course my all time favorite…fried chicken. In all honesty, I can’t remember ever choosing to order a salad at a restaurant. Hey, I’m a college student on a budget with a massive appetite, what do you expect? It’s hard to justify a $15 meal from Wholefoods when I can get twice as much food for half the price at one of the numerous fast food chains located within walking distance from my house. Luckily for me, I’m young and have time to exercise and play sports, which helps to counterbalance my sometimes less than stellar diet. However, I also keep in mind some simple dietary tips when ordering my food.

The truth is that fast food is cheap, delicious, filling, and has managed to creep into every aspect of our lives. I can grab a burger at my local gas station, a Domino’s pizza pie at my school’s legendary Cameron Indoor, some sesame chicken as I walk to class, and even a corndog at the local Costco after I finish shopping. Fast food is everywhere. It’s hard to avoid, especially as you walk by a fast food restaurant and are greeted with such a delicious smell that your mouth actually begins to water. Don’t forget the numerous patrons inside as they munch on juicy cheeseburgers with grins so wide they can barely chew their food.

Let’s face it, the vast majority of us indulge our taste buds every once in awhile with our favorite fast food meals. Some of us probably indulge more than we would like to admit. However, sometimes we’re left with no choice. The lack of food options often forces us to grab a bite at a fast food restaurant. Luckily, it is possible to eat at one of these restaurants without having to one-up your pants size post-grubbing. Many fast food chains have added healthy options to their menus, and some companies even pride themselves on their incorporation of healthy ingredients in all their menu items. Subway, one fast food chain that tends to serve healthier options than your typical burger joint, has even surpassed McDonald’s as the top fast food chain in terms of number of stores.

However, chances are you’ll most likely find yourself inside a fast food restaurant other than Subway in the near future. Therefore, let’s take a look at some ways to eat “healthy” at a typical fast food chain. The easiest way to cut down the fat and calories is to refrain from – as hard as it might be –the fries and soft drinks. A large soda and a large order of fries at McDonald’s totals 810 calories and 25g of fat. Substituting these options with bottled water and a side salad will save you 790 calories and all 25g of fat. That was easy. Now, let’s take a look at our main meal. I know what you’re probably thinking, “Yes, I know I should order one of the numerous boring and tasteless salads right?” Not necessarily. While the salads are obvious healthy options, you can treat yourself to a bit of a tastier meal. Keeping with McDonald’s menu, you can order a “Premium Grilled Chicken Club” with no mayo and only consume 410 calories and 11g of fat. Don’t worry about taste, that sandwich still has bacon and cheese on it. So now your entire meal is 430 calories and only 11g of fat, and I promise you’ll be satisfied.

In this example, I decided to take a look at McDonald’s menu because McDonald’s is a very generic and typical fast food restaurant that most people are familiar with. But, most fast food chains have similar options that will allow you to customize your meal to meet your own health standards. Some common menu items to remember to avoid are fries, soft drinks, “special sauces”, fried foods, and sugary deserts. You don’t need to be a dietician to make health conscious choices at fast food restaurants.

I am not advocating for the consumption of fast food, and I am a strong opponent of food deserts. However, I do understand that many times people are almost forced to eat at one of theses restaurants. Therefore, it is important to understand ways in which you can make your fast food experience a relatively healthy one. When looking for food options, the word cheap is often synonymous with unhealthy. Fortunately, with a little knowledge this doesn’t have to be the case. I am not arguing that fast food restaurants can be healthy alternatives to more expensive food establishments, but I do believe remembering to take advantage of certain options can help to make the most of an unavoidable situation.

Share

Mar 21

¿Quién está en control de agua?: El 6 º Foro Mundial del Agua

Read this post in English

Hace dos años viajé a Perú por un trabajo voluntario a través de la organización ProWorld en New York University. El trabajo que nosotros hicimos allí fue construir estufas de barro con chimeneas que salían afuera de las viviendas para mejorar las condiciones respiratorias de las familias.  Sin embargo, lo que más me impresionó durante este viaje, además de las condiciones de respiración pobres de las cuales estas personas vivían, fue la preocupación por el agua que muchos de los líderes de la comunidad demostraban.

El Agua?

Muchas familias rurales (y ¡urbanas!) carecen de acceso al agua potable en el Perú, como en muchos otros países de América Latina. En ese entonces, yo tenía muy poco conocimiento del problema del agua y la privatización del agua en la cual muchos países latinoamericanos están envueltos. En aquel entonces, todo lo que escuchaba eran las mujeres preocupadas de Cusco hablando acerca de  cómo la mayoría de los aspectos de sus vidas se basan en la necesidad de agua, desde sustentar a sus familias a ganarse la vida mediante la agricultura. Ha sido un largo camino desde entonces, con un montón de reflexiones sobre cómo el agua, el elemento más esencial de la vida, pueden carecer en el siglo 21.

 

Estas mujeres indígenas en el Perú, sin embargo, no son las únicas que se ocupan de este tema o la idea de que el acceso al agua es un derecho-el derecho a la vida humana. El Consejo Mundial del Agua (World Water Council) se creó en 1996 en respuesta a esta creciente preocupación de la comunidad mundial: “Al proporcionar una plataforma para fomentar los debates e intercambios de experiencias, el Consejo tiene como objetivo llegar a una visión estratégica común sobre los recursos hídricos y la gestión de los servicios de agua entre todos las partes interesadas en la comunidad del agua “. De esta manera, el Consejo Mundial del Agua estableció el Foro Mundial del Agua (World Water Forum), que se reúne en un país anfitrión cada tres años; el Primer Foro Mundia del Agua tuvo lugar en Marrakech, Maruecos.

 

La visión a largo plazo que se estableció sigue siendo promovida hoy como una visión de la Vida y del Medio Ambiente para el Siglo 21.

 

Entonces, ¿qué tan eficaz ha sido esto y que tan verdadero es que el consejo representa las visiones de todos los países alrededor del mundo?
En el Segundo Foro Mundial del Agua (La Haya, Holanda en 2000), Medha Patkar, una activista social India habló en contra de la privatización del agua. En su discurso, habló de cómo el agua se ha convertido en una mercancía que puede ser comprada, vendida, comercializada e invertida. Su principal argumento en su discurso fue que el agua debe ser un derecho–algo que se nos ha concedido a través de la naturaleza. Muchas de las críticas que he visto tratar con este punto tiene que ver con el hecho de que la producción del agua potable cuesta dinero, sí, como cualquier otro bien. Lo que me preocupa sin embargo, no el agua potable como un producto gratis por que es un hecho de que cuesta dinero producirla. Mi preocupación es con la privatización del agua a empresas extranjeras en algunos países (como en Perú).
En primer lugar, sabemos que el agua es esencial. En segundo lugar, sabemos que cuesta dinero para producir agua limpia para sobrevivir. Sin embargo, creo que cuando las organizaciones internacionales, como el Consejo Mundial del Agua, crear proyectos como el Foro Mundial del Agua, debe haber una dirección clara hacia la responsabilidad de cada gobierno (no empresas extranjeras) en la producción de agua potable para sus ciudadanos. Creo que el Foro Mundial del Agua es una buena iniciativa para tener una discusión global sobre este tema porque nos afecta a todos. El Consejo Mundial del Agua y el Foro Mundial del Agua se han ocupado de algunos de los problemas que otras organizaciones internacionales no han discutido, pero ¿es eso suficiente?
Este año a partir de marzo 12 a 17, el Sexto Foro Mundial del Agua se encuentra alojado en Marsella, Francia. El apoyo hacia este foro ha incrementado desde que comenzó hace quince años, con miembros que representan a más de 150 países. Por supuesto, debo mencionar que el Consejo Mundial del Agua es financiado principalmente a través de las cuotas de membresía. Con esto en mente, la verdadera pregunta aquí es ¿quiénes son los que deciden lo que es mejor para las mujeres rurales en el Perú?
Es maravilloso pensar que tal vez las mujeres en Cusco tendrán el agua potable por la cual han luchado durante años. Pero ¿a qué costo? La privatización del agua se ha convertido en un arma en contra de ellas, no porque tengan que pagar con dinero que no tienen, sino porque es una limitación de sus derechos. Si El Banco Mundial financia el proyecto para la privatización del agua en países como Perú, ¿que control tiene el gobierno peruano en el sector de la sanidad? ¿Qué sucede cuando las personas están en extrema necesidad de agua pero se ven limitadas por las estipulaciones del Banco Mundial?
Cuando nos fijamos en las organizaciones internacionales como el Consejo Mundial del Agua, no debemos asumir que ellas son totalmente responsables de resolver los problemas globales. Al contrario, creo que estas organizaciones deben ser analizadas de una manera que tengan el objetivo de facilitar un diálogo entre países y promuevan cambios a través de gobiernos y ciudadanos correspondiente de cada país.  La solución debe de ser fomentada de una manera local poniendo presión en gobierno locales y no buscando una solución mágica en organizaciones internacionales.

 

Share

Mar 20

U.S. Civil Liberties Taken in 2012?

Last week I stumbled upon a news event that had to do with one of the most controversial issues in the U.S: abortion.  The latest news on this issue has to do with the controversial Virginia anti-abortion legislation, which has created many protests, especially in the state Capitol.  Basically, putting in the simplest of terms, the legislation meant that any woman in Virginia who wanted to have an abortion had to have an invasive, transvaginal ultrasound that would be held in her medical record at the abortion facility for seven years.  The bill was one of several that dealt with abortion procedures, including one that was called the personhood bill, which would have defined a fertilized egg as a person. One of the other bills would have refused government-funded abortions to poor women whose fetuses have gross mental and physical abnormalities.  You can already see why this would create such a controversial uproar on behalf of pro-choice advocates everywhere.  What’s ironic about these bills is that Republicans, who are often viewed as protecting civil liberties and promoting limited government intervention, passed these bills.

 

Is it too far fetched to say that this is direct government intervention?

 

The transvaginal ultrasound bill was later watered-down to make it “optional” to women and the other two bills were killed.  Yet what is so shocking is the fact that these bills were created in 2012, thirty-nine years after Roe v. Wade declared that the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution be extended to a woman’s right to decide to have an abortion.  What I think is happening here is that there is a battle of differing beliefs that are surpassing some of the basic rights that are given under the U.S. Constitution.  Because times have changed, there seems to be a need for more control over traditional religious views, especially dealing with abortion.

However, I want to point out that the government’s job, and hence the politicians that represent the government, are not primarily here to push their views on the people.  Whatever views each person has, first and foremost, are protected by the Constitution, and one of these views protected is not only pro-life but also pro-choice.  My point here is not to persuade anyone with my point of view (I leave that to the more fervent advocates), but to point out that something as controversial as abortion should have a common ground of civil liberties.  Whether it is civil liberties to protest outside of Planned Parenthood against abortion or whether it is the civil liberties to have control over our bodies.

 

Obviously the view on abortion has to do with personal preferences, but what I want to emphasize is that whether you believe abortion is right or wrong, we should all agree that our civil liberties should not be jeopardized in any way.  Sure, abortion might not even be a concern of yours, but civil liberties and the right to them should be everyone’s concern.  The main reason why these bills were protested and killed was not because pro-choice advocates believe that abortion is morally good, but because people believe that we should have the power to make choices for ourselves.  It goes beyond the perspectives of individuals because the law is not made for the individual person, but for the people as a whole.  What we do within the limits of the law is the freedom that each of us has as a citizen.  And when the laws squeeze these limits tighter, our freedom becomes less and less accessible.  Each of us chooses whether to be here online, reading about articles such as these.  If someone thought it were morally wrong, would it still be justified to restrict us from choosing to do so?  Especially in 2012 in America?

Share

Mar 20

Urban Sprawl and Obesity

In the past, I’ve discussed factors that influence obesity rates, marketing of poorly nutritious food, the need for an injection of fresh produce in certain communities, and much more. However, I have yet to specifically address the impact of physical activity on maintaining a healthy weight.

I started to think about simple ways to stay physically active during the average person’s daily routine. As I walked around my university’s campus tossing around different ideas in my head, it hit me. Why not discuss the very activity in which I was partaking in at that moment? Yes, I’m talking about walking. More often than not, technological advancements are aimed at improving convenience. Cars, trains, boats, and planes – all are useful because they make traveling long distances easy and convenient. However, this convenience leads to a reduction in physical activity. The more affordable and more prevalent vehicular transportation becomes, the less people walk.

Furthermore, urban sprawl is very common in newer cities within the U.S. Urban sprawl is largely responsible for automobile dependency and often causes more people to drive or take other forms of vehicular transportation rather than walking.

For millions of people, their average day consists of waking up, driving to work, sitting at their desk all day, driving home, relaxing and going to sleep. As you can see, this daily schedule leaves very little room for exercise and physical activity. I believe that walking can prove to be very helpful in combatting obesity rates. Statistics show a high correlation between percent of commuters who drive with the percent of people that are obese for counties within the United States. These statistics are very noteworthy, but not surprising. It is important to remember that correlation does not imply causation, however this correlation suggests a strong link between walking and obesity rates.

I personally believe that in our attempt to reverse the growth of obesity rates, we overlook obvious solutions. Eat healthy, lift weights, run, do yoga, the list goes on. However, very rarely will you hear, “go walk.” Walking to work is a very efficient use of time, in that you are staying physically active while making your necessary commute.

Unfortunately, walking to work is not a viable option for millions of Americans living in cities affected by urban sprawl. The long distances needed to travel make walking to work unrealistic. The average traveling distance for Americans in the U.S. to get to work is approximately 15 miles. Urban sprawl’s influence on employment dispersion is commonly referred to as “job sprawl.”

Job sprawl is a major issue for numerous reasons, but in relation to health, it forces millions of people to drive rather than walk, depriving them of much needed physical activity. One study shows that urban sprawl could be associated with physical activity and health outcomes. Another notes an established correlation between physical activity and residential density. It makes perfect sense, a person is much more likely to drive to work, or anywhere for that matter, when his/her desired destinations are far distances apart.

More needs to be done to combat this nation’s growing problem of urban sprawl. Not many organizations address this issue, and one of the only organizations dedicated to fighting urban sprawl is Smart Growth America. The truth is that not enough people understand the severity of sprawl and its detrimental effects on people’s health. Therefore, I believe that organizations that are dedicated to eradicating the obesity epidemic, such as Let’s Move!, Shape Up America!, NFL’s Play 60, etc., should start to include urban sprawl in their issues they aim to fix. These organizations, as well as many others, are well-established and well-respected groups that already have earned much respect, and can be very influential in trying to combat urban sprawl. With these groups on board, the general public will become more aware of urban sprawl’s effect on our nation’s obesity rates, but even more importantly, these groups are more likely to stimulate policy change and government intervention because of their already established credibility and large followings.

I believe that this goal of garnering support from large organizations creates an opportunity for a new, smaller organization to form. This group’s goal should not be to help stop urban sprawl, but rather it should be to try to convince the large obesity-related groups to include urban sprawl in their issues they are trying to tackle. This group would need to convey the importance of eliminating urban sprawl in relation to reducing obesity rates and improving health. Its mission and focus should be aimed solely at other groups and not the general public.

I am a strong believer that walking – specifically walking to work – is a valuable and relatively untapped resource for helping to combat obesity in our nation. Unfortunately, urban sprawl creates a barrier for millions of Americans who might otherwise choose to walk to work. Current organizations involved with improving health and obesity rates should pay more attention to the importance of urban sprawl.  Once large and credible groups take this issue under their wings, then hopefully we might start to see a change in policy and government regulations.

Share

Mar 19

Technology in the Classroom

My senior year of high school, my AP Calculus classroom was given a grant from the state of Pennsylvania for “technology”.  This meant we had a SMART board and twenty laptops (even though there was only nine people in the class).  I will admit it was pretty fun to pick out the colors from the SMART board and draw our sine and cosine graphs virtually instead of with chalk, but I never quite understood the forced fifteen minutes a day spent somehow incorporating laptop computers into limits and integrals.  I was always uncomfortable with the specific guidelines for allocated time PA put on our classroom in order for us to keep our grant.  There was always something that did not sit well with me about the fact that our well-off countryside public high school didn’t really need the money from the PA Education Department.  Surely there were other schools in our state that were in much greater need than ours, and maybe for this reason I felt uncomfortable moving away from traditional pencil and paper and into the new world of technology.

The saddest part about this antecdote is that I was in high school just five years ago.  The rate at which technology is being integrated into the school system is growing exponentially in recent years.  Teachers are using technology in the classroom as a new tool for added learning potential.  The use of technology can be seen through such things as SMART boards, laptops, tablets, and online computer assignments.  The use of technology is going even further as teachers explore a new teaching technique where their classroom time is spent reviewing hands-on examples, and the students’ homework is to view online videos of the teacher’s lecture.  Other uses of technology are spreading constantly.  This year, the non-profit I work for Turning the Page started a literacy through photography program, allowing the kids to use photo journaling as a way to inspire their creative and descriptive writing.

A strong positive argument for the use of technology is that it gives students an active role in their learning.  A student will have to make decisions about how to generate, locate, display, or explore information.  With lecture listening or textbook reading, the student loses their decision making power and becomes less invested in the material.  With interactive technology, students set their own goals and can potentially receive immediate evaluation of their work.

There are more specific findings that point to technology based learning as an important component of our country’s future education path.  The Department of Education accumulated results from over 1000 empirical studies which found online learning in K-12 as well as at the university level to lead to “modestly better” performance.  These findings may be the reason more and more educators are assigning online assignments where students can check their own work and receive feedback to their own specific mistakes.

Additionally, teachers can track students progress much more efficiently.  Some statistics claim that after a week of online activity, a certain program can predict with 70% accuracy the likelihood of the student’s failure of the course.  While predictions such as these must be considered cautiously, as they could create self-fulfilling prophecies or teacher bias, they can also be seen as an important tool for teachers to track student progress and have empirical data on their students’ strengths and weaknesses.

Proponents of technology in the classroom also point to their cost-saving potential.  Financially, a switch from traditional textbooks to e-books could lead to estimated savings of $600 per student annually.  Home schooling can now be completed via online sessions, and even in the higher education world virtual credit has become an affordable alternative to ever increasing traditional college courses.

There is no doubt that technology is spreading rapidly, but is it spreading widely?  Just five years ago, only a handful of senior classrooms in my school had SMART boards, now they’re entering more and more classrooms at each grade level.  In some districts across the country, laptops are being provided to students at an elementary school age.  Even though technology might be the preferred new teaching method, is it realistic and accessible for use by all teachers?

Cost-saving strategies through technology (such as ebooks mentioned above) could be a way to close the achievement gap by bringing access to similar quality educational resources to students in every school district, but what about the more expensive tools?  As in my case, SMART boards and laptops were provided by state grants, but not all districts across the state received the same technology.  When some public schools are still unable to afford appropriate calculators for trigonometry and calculus classes, is it really fair that fourth grade students are allowed to use iPads in their classroom to complete their multiplication problems?

As technology inevitably spreads in our education system, it is our responsibility to make sure its use does not widen the academic achievement gap even further.  Without prohibiting technology’s effective use by our wealthier students, how do we make sure the financially disadvantaged do not have to pay the academic price?  Potential solutions could be the fair and equitable distribution of technology grants from the state and federal government, the free and abundant access to computers in public libraries, and the increased exposure to technology provided by the non-profit sector (as is the case with Turning the Page’s photography program).  Technology in the classroom has a place in our country’s educational future, we just need to make sure that statement is true for every student if we want to shrink the achievement gap and provide an equitable educational system for the entire country.

Share