May I speak?

     With such uneven demographics in Congress many Americans feel as if their voice isn't being heard. In one blog entry, I discussed the misrepresentation found in Congress and whether or not this mattered. We trust our Congressmen and Congresswomen to govern our nation in the best interest of all of its people. But how can give them the power to make laws that shape our lives and society when so many voices aren't being heard? Many Americans are unhappy with our Congress and the decisions they are making, maybe it is time to vote in people who share our voice and can accurately represent us not only in the Senate, but especially in the House of Representatives.

     Our Representatives serve two-year terms, meaning we are capable to vote in a new Representative every two-years if we so desired. We would even be able to kick out every Representative and replace them the same election if we wanted to. We are able to see the voter's power at work in the House of Representatives because of its more reflective demographics. It more closely reflects our nation giving us a better "snapshot" or "yearbook." This may be due to the fact that this chamber was originally designed to be responsive to the people. The newer demographics reveal we didn't feel our voices being heard in the House and our evolving nation decided that this was not okay. We needed the all of the voices in our nation to be heard to govern and guide America.

     Senators are elected for six-year terms, yet only 1/3 are up for reelection every election period. This makes it arguably more difficult to shape the Senate to be more representative of our country. However, reelection rates show that the incumbent is not always as successful in the Senate as opposed to the House. The biggest challenge a Senator has to face while running for reelection is an opponent. All that is needed to replace out Senators and make them more representative of our country is a new candidate that can satisfy our needs. One that can accurately voice our opinions and make the best decisions for the good of our nation.

     Congress was originally intended to be the most powerful of our nation's government. Shouldn't we the people be accurately represented and have our voices be heard? Maybe voting in new candidates isn't the only way to get our Congress to better represent our nation. Maybe we could try to create a new branch, a "branch of the people." We could try to bring in randomly selected citizens every year or every time a defining or controversial law is being debated, educate them, and have them vote on the issue as well. How much power we should give to them and how much their vote matters in the final decision can be worked out should this become a possibility.

     One thing, however, is clear. Something needs to change. We need to change something so that our Congress, which was meant to refine and enhance public opinion, represents its people so every voice is being heard and every person feels included. We should not feel as if we are being ignored by our Congress, otherwise how could we trust them to solve our problems or generate legislation? Something needs to be done so that every voice in our diverse nation is heard, whether it be done by voting in new Senators and Representative or by adding a new branch. However slow of a process it may be we cannot continue to exclude American voices if we want America to grow and prosper.

From the mind of a Y chromosome

     Nadja's article "My body, my choice" makes some powerful arguments favoring abortions, and more importantly safe abortions. She argues that as a woman, she should have full control over her body and what happens to it. That unsafe abortions should never be an option for women as she may be placing her own life in danger such as the case of a 15 year old girl in 2009.

     Personally I agree with Nadja's stance in the sense that I agree with safe, legal abortions. However I do not believe I am truly pro-choice. Nadja makes the argument pro-choice is not synonymous with pro-abortion just as pro-life does not necessarily mean pro-birth. As a Catholic I believe I am pro-life. I wholeheartedly support abortions in cases of rape and when the mother's life is in danger. I do believe adoption is an option, however I do not completely rule out abortion as an option as well. I know orphanages are packed and many foster homes are nowhere close to being ideal environments for raising even a single child; my main concern is not necessarily the ability for a woman to do what she wants with her body but the welfare of the mother and of the child. If the mother's health is in danger, I support abortion. If the mother would not be able to care for the child, I support abortion. Many people fighting to make 100% of abortions illegal would not spare even a single penny to support the child.

     Abortions, however, are not the solution I would propose to combat unwanted or teenage pregnancies. I would much rather have my tax dollars spent on free birth control. I believe taking this proactive measure would be much safer and cost-effective than abortions. Having access to free birth control would be largely beneficial to our society, not only would we see a decrease in the number of illegal abortions and the deaths associated with them but we would also see a higher quality of life. This would be due to a decrease in the amount of unwanted children ending up in orphanages or abusive (or equally non-ideal) foster homes.

     In conclusion I support safe, legal abortions in many cases but I also support birth control as the primary tool for preventing unwanted pregnancies. I do not believe that abortion should be an issue of women's rights but about the health and well-being of the mother and especially the child. If a mother knows she will be unable to care for the child or provide them with a decent life, then she should have the option of abortion along with adoption.