Keep Austin Involved

I read "It is Time for Those Who Lead to Give a S***" by Melanie Warren. I have to start by saying that I'm slightly confused after reading this piece. Ms. Warren starts into her second paragraph by informing her audience about City Council meetings; how they are open to and for the public and even what day and time they are held. Directly afterwards, Ms. Warren then begs the question, "Have the people who are supposed to represent us become so inaccessible that it has made the average citizen apathetic and willing to be lead blindly because they feel they have no real choice, or for that matter a voice?" But I thought the "people who are supposed to represent us" are completely accessible? As stated in the previous paragraph, they meet openly for the public "on Thursdays, starting at 10:00 a.m." Also, I'm not sure if I agree with the idea that citizens are becoming apathetic because they find their Mayor and City Council members "inaccessible;" our citizens may have a sense of apathy towards voting and our legal structure but I would probably attribute that more to the fact that many of the citizens that reside in Austin are busy with their own lives to really take time out of their day to go to a 10:00 a.m. meeting.


One thing that I do agree with Ms. Warren on is that our citizens should probably know who our current Mayor is; personally, I did know that Lee Leffingwell is our current mayor but I wouldn't get too wrapped up in the idea that other people don't know that. I believe that the people who will be voting in the election for our Mayor will be educated on all possible candidates and yes, more people should probably be involved in voting on something as important as deciding who our mayor will be but I am still struggling with the idea that I am qualified to say what other people should spend their time on. 


As Ms. Warren starts to bring her writing to a close, she states that it is her belief that more people would become involved if our Mayor and City Council would "get off their butts" and engage the community. Ms. Warren also believes that our City Council meetings should be more accessible and entertaining and also that "teams" of people on behalf of our Mayor and City Council members to go out into our communities and engage them about topics of interest. Firstly, I remember from Ms. Warren's first statement about the accessibility of City Council meetings that they are easily accessible and open to the public; as far as them being more entertaining, I agree with Ms. Warren in that it is an optimistic thought...but I doubt it will happen. Secondly, I am wondering, who will make up these "teams" of people who will be going out to the communities and engaging? I assume volunteers would do this job because there is no way that the Mayor's office or City Council will be paying anyone to do this, but I also assume that there must be a lack of volunteers because if a group of people went up to the Mayor's office and stated that they would like to go out and engage communities about what is going on and what decisions he is making, he would welcome that with open arms....it's essentially free good PR.


All in all, I think that Ms. Warren made excellent arguments, even if I don't agree with them all. I very much enjoyed reading this post and look forward to more. 

Safe, Legal and Rare

It is quite known that I am not Rick Perry’s number one supporter. I would never use the word hate but I strongly dislike some of the things he has done over the years. The Texas sonogram law which has gained so much popularity recently is the new reason why I dislike Rick Perry so much. This law mandates that women who are seeking an abortion are required to get a sonogram at least 24 hours beforehand. Along with the sonogram, the woman seeking an abortion is required to visit with the doctor who is going to perform the abortion and be told about the baby that they are trying to abort. There are a few exceptions to this law; if the woman is raped or the child is a product of incest then the woman can opt-out sonogram requirement. Also, if the woman lives over 100 miles away from the clinic where the abortion is going to be performed, then the sonogram at least 24 hours prior no longer applies. The woman does not get out of the sonogram and the awkward discussion with the doctor aborting their child, but instead they just have to come to the clinic at least 2 hours prior to their abortion appointment to get all the details.

Is this really what we have come to? I mean, we get it, Rick Perry and his “good ‘ol boy” Republicans want to take away all rights that women have but now it’s getting a little out of hand. What right is it for someone to mandate that a woman has to get a sonogram and discuss her unborn child with a doctor at least 24 hours prior to aborting it/them/he/she? Rick Perry doesn’t have the ability to make abortion illegal (but sometimes I wonder if he’s ever heard of Roe v. Wade) but apparently, he is trying to make it as difficult as possible. Rick Perry believes that if he requires expecting mothers to get a sonogram before aborting their child, then it will pull on their heart strings and make them change their mind.

I tend to agree with Bill Clinton on the issue; “abortion should be safe, legal and rare.” I don’t’ necessarily support or practice my right to be able to have an abortion, but I do believe that other women who do, should be able to do so without this ignorant act. The Perry administration is actively attempting to force their beliefs onto us; it’s one thing for them to say that they are against abortions and do not support them, but forcing women to go through this process is flat out wrong. I bet Rick Perry wouldn't want his wife or daughters to ever be forced to do something they didn't want to do. Maybe he should think about that!