Political Issues of Interest

PRO:

Gun violence in the US is a problem, but implementing more restrictive gun laws will not solve this issue. After accounting for the fact that very few criminals obtain their weapons legally, and that the majority of gun deaths come from suicides, it is clear that restrictive laws on guns and the sale of weapons will not affect the gun violence in our country as much as it will affect the rights of law-abiding citizens and their right to bear arms.

Nate Swanson

CON:

The Second Amendment right is constantly manipulated. In 2020, there were a total of 34,357 deaths by firearms in the United States… Assault rifles are too common and accessible. An assault rifle is a rapid-fire, magazine-fed rifle designed for military use and can fire up to 12 violent rounds at a time. Clearly, these lethal weapons should never see the civilian world and they should remain on the battlefield. 

Mollie Durkin

PRO:

President Donald Trump failed our country when he ignored early warning signs and did not alert the American people of what may be to come. Once the asymptomatic spread was recognized, Dr. Fauci confidently promoted mask wearing and said, ‘We fully realized that there are a lot of people who are asymptomatic who are spreading infection. So it became clear that we absolutely should be wearing masks consistently.’ With rising mortality rates and no vaccine, the United States should have been focusing on staying distanced and minimizing the spread of COVID-19. Mask effectiveness has been proven to work in several different studies.”

Mollie Durkin

CON:

By denouncing a mask during these unprecedented times, President Donald Trump is instilling confidence and determination into the United States citizens. He is presenting a confident front for his people. Donald Trump understands the spirit of the United States people, he realizes that a major piece of our spirit is individuality. Telling someone and mandating a face covering law is not in line with our freedoms and beliefs. Wearing a mask also creates a major sense of fear.

Mollie Durkin

PRO:

Legal action against hate groups is justified due to the consistent rise in hate crimes. According to data provided by Orange County, CA, hate crime rates there have increased by 24% from 2019-2020. The exponential increase of hate crimes across the nation in these past for years is shocking and threatens minority groups in America. 

Perry Irons

CON:

A common counterargument to legal action towards ethnic hate groups is that it violates their First Amendment rights. Although the First Amendment does state that in the United States there is freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, those rights should not be protected when your speech and assembly jeopardize an ethnic groups’ safety. Even though justifying legal action against ethnic hate groups suppresses the individual rights of members of ethnic hate groups, it protects the community of minorities within the United States.

Perry Irons

PRO:

Felony disenfranchisement laws in the United States have racist roots. The current US criminal justice system disproportionately incarcerates Black Americans. For example, despite nearly equal rates for illegal drug usage between Black and White Americans, Black Americans are 5 times more likely to be convicted for drug crimes. This disparity results in Black Americans being 3.7 times more likely to be disenfranchised than non-Black Americans. To suppress the vote of Black Americans means that their beliefs are not represented in the leadership of our country. Felony disenfranchisement laws disproportionality take away a basic constitutional from one community and should therefore be abolished.

Priya Anand

CON:

The most frequent response to the abolishment of felony disenfranchisement laws is that an individual loses certain rights when they commit a crime and break the social contract. This argument implies that the constitutional rights that Americans value so deeply, are in reality, a privilege that can be taken away according to the circumstances.

Priya Anand

PRO:

In order to begin the crucial fight against climate change, fossil fuels must be replaced as the dominant source of energy across the globe. This is happening already in several places in the US as renewable energy facilities and wind farms are present in 69% of all congressional districts. Solar jobs have also increased by more than 20% in eight states during 2018. Renewable energy creates a much larger job market, with more than 3.3 million jobs already created in the young industry, outnumbering fossil fuel jobs by a factor of 3:1.

Finn Lukens

Without regulation, our waters will become polluted, the air we breathe will become contaminated, and life on earth will slowly die while we sit back and watch the average global temperature rise. I believe that it is essential to regulate all businesses’ greenhouse gas emissions, and any other forms of pollution, in order to protect life on earth.

Perry Irons

CON:

Climate change, while an undeniable fact, does pose some economic harm as well as its good. In transitioning to renewable energy, the roughly 1.1 million people employed in the fossil fuel industry in the United States would suddenly be out of jobs, and it would take some time before renewable alternatives provided similar levels of jobs to replace them.

Finn Lukens

PRO:

Ultimately, modern America is a country of monopoly, and companies such as Walmart, Google, and Facebook need to be broken up immediately. Over the past 20-30 years, these companies have controlled exorbitant amounts of their respective markets while absorbing countless smaller companies on their way. In their pursuit to dominate, all three companies have used uncivilized practices to stifle innovation and have hurt thousands of small business owners along their blazing conquests… With Walmart, Mom and Pop shops that could historically feed two to three families while providing a quality earning for “the little guy” simply have no chance. Therefore, so long as these monopolies remain, the American dream is simply a fallacy.

Collin McDonald

CON:

There is a counterargument to be made that big businesses such as Facebook, Google, and Walmart are, in many ways, beneficial. Firstly, they do employ millions of American workers. Walmart is actually the largest employer in the US. Additionally, families with lower incomes rely on Walmart to buy cheap, fairly high-quality food, and one could argue these families are better off because of the stores. On the tech side, students, researchers, and companies have undoubtedly become more efficient due to the convenience of Google searches, maps, and mail. Additionally, Google and Facebook have both argued that no one is forcing consumers to use their products, and therefore, they do not have unchecked power over the consumer.

Collin McDonald

PRO:

China presents a much larger security threat to the United States than Russia. Although Russia has caused notable interference in our election process and has sown distrust and division amongst the American people, ultimately, these attacks pose a much more indirect and less pressing threat than those of China. Over the past decade, Chinese espionage and cyberattacks have proliferated, leaving the US government and its citizens vulnerable… Additionally, in recent cybersecurity news, the company TikTok—owned by the Chinese based company ByteDance—has faced much scrutiny from American lawmakers. Like other large social media companies such as Facebook, TikTok collects a wide variety of data, including contacts, location, search history, age, phone number, credit card info, etc.

Collin McDonald

The United States’ current administration has reached a level of isolationism not seen since before WWII. The precedent for global American involvement was set as a result of its involvement in the Cold War. In an effort to combat communism, it was essential that the US provided political, economic, and military aid to rebuilding countries around the world. It is this relationship, contrary to the president’s messages, that has established and continues to look to the US as the world’s superpower. As other global powers like Russia and China seek to incorporate many smaller, weaker democracies into their spheres of influence, it must be  the position of the US to stand with its democratic allies and re-enter these key agreements. If the United States does not maintain its current level of influence around the world, many countries will find themselves clinging to either autocratic regime for economic or military protection, and be corrupted into authoritarianism themselves.

Finn Lukens

CON:

This illusion of American exceptionalism and superiority pushed the American government to enter a war without attempting all of the non-military alternatives. It emboldened high profile officials to underestimate the cost of war in the spirit of blind patriotism.  At the end of the day, the government is supposed to serve the American people. Their top priority is to ensure the welfare of their citizens.  Therefore, military action should be the absolute last resort.

Rebecca Lee

PRO:

The benefits of marijuana legalization are not just theoretical outcomes that were created on spreadsheets, but facts that have been proven in real life. The state of Colorado legalized the recreational use of marijuana and the benefits are indisputable. In 2019 alone, the state of Colorado collected $302 million in taxes on state sales that totaled over $1.7 billion. Based on these results, many studies show that federally legalized marijuana could generate over $105.6 billion dollars in federal tax revenue…In fact, in many states marijuana is already legal in a medical capacity. This is probably the best evidence to legalize marijuana nationally.  Its success as a prescription medicine has brought relief to millions of people so far.  Under the supervision of a trained professional, marijuana is a drug that can be taken safely, is extremely effective, and can generate millions or even billions in dollars of revenue.

Dylan Denenberg

CON:

Some people fear if this product were to become legal that a lot of social issues could arise. The argument is that this is a drug and a substance that will be abused thus leading to the use of dangerous, more addictive drugs. This fear of it being a gateway drug is among the arguments used against legalization.

Dylan Denenberg