Bipartisan Safer Communities Act

It's no secret that the regulation of guns in this country needs some reform. It’s not uncommon for firearms to be sold online without the proper license to do so and without the buyer passing a background check first, both of which are standard practices to buy and sell guns in the United States. For decades citizens have cried out to their elected officials to do something about this issue, and while there have been policies implemented to try to stop guns from getting into the wrong hands, none have been successful in stopping the illegal sale of guns to felons, domestic abusers, or even minors who try to use unlicensed gun dealers as their ticket to owning firearms. By supporting the new changes being made to the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, there is a hope for a future where students will no longer fear the threat of a school shooting while attending their classes. 

The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act is a federal law that was passed in 2022 during the Biden-Harris administration which aims to help create safer communities for Americans by modifying gun control laws, mental health services, and school safety programs. The new changes being made to the law would cover any possible loopholes that are still allowing the wrong people to bypass the law and purchase guns. It would do this by creating clearer and more strict guidelines to ensure that firearm dealers must become licensed to continue to sell, removing loopholes for gun shows and online sales, and ensuring that all licensed gun dealers are performing background checks before selling. 

Much of the gun violence in America is caused by unlicensed gun dealers selling to people who would not have passed a background check. Even the tragic Columbine shooting in 1999 was the result of minors buying firearms from an unlicensed dealer at a gun show. Supporting these adaptations to the law and urging your representatives in Congress to do the same could be the difference between your child coming home from school or not one day. 

Illinois End of Life Options

 As some of you may know, the Illinois senate is currently looking at the Illinois End of life Options for Terminally Ill Patients Act (SB 3499). This legislation would allow a person to obtain a prescription medication they make choose to self-administer, to allow them a quick and peaceful death. Death is not always a short process, and can sometimes drag out and be excruciatingly painful, despite extensive efforts by the Hospice care team. I believe passing Bill 3499 would be beneficial to the patients in Illinois. It is well thought out with its criteria and safeguards.  

Allowing this type of drug to be accessible to patients can be dangerous and have some serious risks. The bill requires that the individual must be able to self-ingest the medication, have a life expectancy of 6 months or less, and be in a sound state of mind. To help prevent coercion, two physicians must assess the patient to deem them eligible and educate them on their end-of-life options. There are also provisions protecting the medical staff involved from liability and allowing the patient to change their mind at any time. With the requirement that the patient must be able to self-administer, this puts the patient in control of the situation.  

Having an option like this can bring extreme peace to a patient facing the end of life. Dying is a new experience for us all, and it can be scary with all the unknowns as a patient. No matter how much the medical team will educate you, knowing that there is still potential for long term suffering can cause man patients to become anxious. Other states offer end of life medication, and often the patient does not use the medicine. It is mostly that the patient is looking for the assurance that it will be peaceful, and they have the option if needed.  

The Illinois End of Life Options for Terminally Ill Patients Act (SB3499) would be a powerful addition to Illinois. Everyone deserves the right to be able to pass away peacefully, and with as little anxiety as possible. This bill covers all necessary precautions to assure the safety of Illinois residents, and it should be passed.  

Education Programs in U.S Prisons

 The current United States’ prison system has led to mass incarceration and a very high recidivism rate. Mass incarceration refers to the U.S having the highest incarceration rate in the world, and has led to a prison population growth of five hundred percent over thirty years. Including those in local jails, there are more than 1.9 million Americans incarcerated today. The United States also has one of the highest recidivism rates in the world. In a ten-year study done to measure re-arrest recidivism for persons released from state prisons, over eighty percent of people who had been incarcerated were arrested again before the end of the study. There is a saying often heard when talking about prisons that refers to prisons as schools for crime. With all of this in mind, the question of how to end mass incarceration and the high recidivism rate in the U.S must be answered, or at least we must be blaringly loud in asking this question of our elected officials. I believe that providing education and vocational training programs within prisons is an important and necessary (but not sufficient) good first step. 

Not only do I believe that educational programs in prisons would be beneficial from my own morals and worldview, but the statistics support this idea as well. Researchers have found that inmates who participate in educational programs while in prison have forty-three percent lower odds of being reincarcerated than those who did not participate in the education programs (Davis, et. al. 2013). The RAND study also found that education and vocational programs helped with employment for inmates after their release. Employment after release for those who participated in said programs was thirteen percent higher than those who did not. Inmates who participated in vocational training programs were twenty eight percent more likely to gain employment after release than those who did not have the vocational training (Davis, et. al. 2013).

 Not only has the research shown that education and vocational programs within prisons help to lower recidivism rates, but they’re also cost effective. Results from the largest meta-analysis of education programs in prisons showed that with “a one-dollar investment in prison education reduces incarceration costs by four to five dollars the first three years post-release” (Davis, et. al. 2013). Findings from this same study have also shown that the cost per inmate for education programs is about one thousand and six hundred dollars. Re-incarceration costs are about nine thousand dollars per inmate, showing another reason as to why education programs in prisons are cost effective. 

Education is something that everyone should have access to. Without proper education, the options for someone to make a successful living become smaller and narrower. Now add the burden of having a prison record on top of that and your options are depressingly limited. Without the opportunity for education, you have no opportunity for growth. As it has been said many times before, knowledge is power, and knowledge has the power to change someone’s life. I ask my readers to take the information given about how beneficial education and vocational programs in prisons can be and reflect on how this could improve both individual lives and society as a whole. Education and vocational training programs within prisons can help save money, reduce U.S recidivism rates and tackle mass incarceration, and open the doors to a new life for many people. The next time you are given the opportunity to vote on policies and laws relating to the criminal justice system, keep these things in mind. 

Reference 

Davis, L. (2013, August 22). Education and vocational training in prisons reduces recidivism, improves job outlook | Rand. https://www.rand.org/news/press/2013/08/22.html 

Student says the Death Penalty is Imposed in a Racist Way

  It’s no secret that African Americans are heavily overrepresented in the criminal justice system. But today, I want to narrow the scope to talk about the racial disparities in the death penalty. In 2019, 52% of people on death row were black individuals, however, African Americans only make up about 13% of the United States population. Furthermore, a black individual is 17x more likely to end up on death row if their victim was white. This study reveals the implicit and explicit biases that the criminal justice system is plagued by. 

The best way I can explain the racism occurring in the criminal justice system is by telling you the story of Troy Anthony Davis. He was a black man executed by lethal injection on September 21, 2011. He was accused of the murder of a Georgian police officer; a crime he swore he did not commit. Leading up to the execution, the state was asked to reconsider the decision because 7 of the 9 witnesses withdrew their testimony. Despite this, the state moved forward with their decision to execute Davis. 

Troy Davis is not the only black man who was racially targeted in the criminal justice system. Pervis Payne is a black man who has been on death row for 33 years. He was sentenced for the murder of a white woman, a crime that he never plead guilty to.  Not only is he a black individual, but he also lived his whole life with a learning disability. This may have also played a part in the court’s decision to sentence him with the death penalty. 

It is crucial that we stand up for the black individuals that don’t have a voice. Go to events and get involved to stop this injustice. This needs to be done for African Americans like Pervis Payne, Troy Davis, and all of the other black individuals who suffered this racism. As spoken by Troy Davis, “The struggle for justice doesn’t end with me. This struggle is for all the Troy Davis’s who came before me and all the ones who will come after me.”

If you are interested in learning more about this topic, this is the article that I used to get my information: https://innocenceproject.org/troy-davis-pervis-payne-race-death-penalty/ 

Why Public Transportation Should Be Everywhere

 Public Transportation is something that not a lot of people think twice about. Many not use it, or do not need it. For some, it’s just so easily accessible that they do not have to worry about finding transportation. Public transportation can be anything from public buses, scooters, or a bike sharing system to a system like SMART, a senior service healthcare van transport. According to the APTA (American Public Transportation Associations) 34 million times each day someone boards public transportation, and my town makes 0 contribution to that. I personally am from a small town outside of Springfield, called Petersburg (population approximately 2,225). In this small town, we have a doctor’s office, a grocery store, a few restaurants, and a Dollar General. It doesn’t seem like much, but when you are elderly, and have a hard time getting around, you may have difficulties getting to these places to meet your daily needs. The issue with having these stores sporadically around the town is this: how do people get to them if they do not have a car? 

Well, you might say “they can walk!” What do we do for these elderly people who cannot walk miles, let alone with their hands full of sacks of heavy groceries? Some of them have no family, have no neighbor relationships, have no way at ALL of transporting themselves around the town. This is where the bare minimum of providing transportation comes into play. Just because we are a small and rural community does not mean that we do not deserve the equal right to public transportation that the larger neighboring cities do. As someone from a small town, I ask you this: do you know someone who benefits from public transportation? If so, how would their lives be affected if it was simply 1) taken away without warning 2) not available all together?  

In addition to some sort of public transit provision for elderly residents of Petersburg to get around town, we also ought to consider regional transport lines, so that people in towns like Petersburg and Salisbury could get into Springfield, or persons from Springfield could come out to Petersburg, and then get back home later in the day. Years ago, before cars dominated, there were small regional inter-urban commuter lines for trains to move people between outlying small towns and the larger regional cities. We lack a small bus service to get people around the small towns of Havana, Kilbourne, Petersburg, Athens, Pleasant Plains, Greenview, and Mason City. Yet, car ownership is expensive. Estimates of the cost of owning a car range from $800 a month to $1,000 a month, after you consider the cost of insurance, annual repairs and maintenance, gas, tires, and the cost of paying off a car loan or saving money to purchase a car in the future. For retired or frail elderly in rural areas, and for low-income families looking for work, but hoping to remain in their small rural towns, a regular and dependable system of public transit to get them to centers of employment or get them around the resources of their small town could be an important service. It would make rural small town life more livable. 

Abortion in America: An Analysis of Abortion Policy

 In 1973 the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe V. Wade ruled that abortion would be secured as legal across the United States. This meant that access to abortion would be guaranteed, no matter which state you resided in. The logic of the court was that a relationship between a doctor and patient (i.e. pregnant woman) was protected by a right to privacy, and the government had no business interfering in the medical decisions of a doctor and patient up to the point that a fetus had developed to near the point of “viability” when a premature birth could conceivably lead to a child who would survive. The idea of privacy rights was assumed based on the Constitution and documents from the time of the Constitution making it clear that the Bill of Rights in the Constitution were not a complete list of all rights enjoyed by citizens, and the unnamed rights could be assumed. As privacy was a concept that people at the time of the Constitution’s writing in the 1780s were well-aware of, and valued, it seemed to a majority of the court that the Constitution should be understood to protect abortion (at least in the first 23 weeks of gestation, until viability), and no state had any right to restrict this right. At the state level, state legislatures and governors could not overrule the federal ruling of a Supreme Court decision, so abortion was legal. In 2022 the Supreme Court overruled Roe V. Wade, bringing this decision back to the state level. Some states have their own policies on abortion, many dating back to pre–Roe V. Wade. These policies were not updated for decades because the federal ruling overruled any laws passed at the state level anyway. When Roe V. Wade was overturned June 24, 2022 in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, this put laws about abortion back into the hands of state governments, and many states had previous state level laws that came back into force. Some states had no laws preventing abortions; some states, like Michigan had archaic laws from 1931 banning all abortions no matter the reason. With the sudden overturn of Roe v Wade, Michigan was facing being forced into reverting to the prior laws. 

Abortion is a very controversial topic for many people. Some argue that it is considered murder and should be illegal. Some people believe that abortion should be legal up until 12 weeks, or 21 weeks. In some situations, it is believed to be acceptable to perform a live birth abortion. No matter the level of abortion, the topic is heated, and many people are either fiercely in favor of the right to abortion, also referred to as “pro-choice”, or against, referred to as “prolife”. 

For those who are pro-choice there are many arguments. The most common argument for choice is bodily autonomy. A person should have the right to choose what they wish to do with their own body. Many women find themselves pregnant despite their precautions. Sometimes this is due to failure of birth control; for others, it has been due to the lack of control of the situation, or consent; in other words, they are raped. Prior to Roe v. Wade, abortions were being performed “in back alleys”, or other unsafe conditions. Many times, these abortions would lead to serious complications for the woman, and commonly result in death. Making abortions illegal was not stopping them from happening, it was just forcing them to be completed in ways that were not regulated or considered safe. Another argument of many prochoice supporters is that a fetus is not viable until 24 weeks (with modern science this is closer to 21 weeks—about 5 months—now). If a baby were to be born prior to 21 weeks (about 5 months) they have slim-to-no chance of surviving. There are so many situations that lead a woman to seek abortions, and pro-choice supporters believe that it should only be up to the mother and her medical professional to decide which path is best for her situation. Abortions performed after the 18th or 19th week of gestation are almost always conducted because the fetus has a terrible health problem that will cause suffering and death within hours of birth, or because carrying the baby to term would create a strong possibility of death for the mother. 

On the other hand, pro-life supporters also have arguments. They believe the fetus has a heartbeat as early as 18 days (about 2 and a half weeks) after conception, and the baby has a right to life equal to the right enjoyed by persons who have been born, because the moment that a life becomes of concern to the state and worth protecting begins early, perhaps when the heart starts to beat. In some states people believe that once the baby is conceived, it has its own rights to have a chance of living a life. Conception is rarely defined—is conception the fertilization of the egg by the sperm (1st hour), the implantation of a blastocyst on the uterine epithelium (end of first week), or formation of the umbilical cord (end of the third week)?  These supporters believe it is not the mother’s place to decide whether the baby should be able to be born or not. Adoption is always an option for the mother. Pro-life supporters believe that a mother who does not want the pregnancy should carry out the pregnancy to full term and put the baby up for adoption. In this case, the mother would not have any legal responsibilities for the child, and the child also has a chance to live a long successful life. There are also medical risks that come with abortion for both the mother and baby. The mother knows that risks of the procedure, but the baby does not. Pro-life supporters believe it is not the place for anyone to put a child through the procedure of abortion, as this can cause pain and even lifelong consequences in the case of a failed abortion. 

With these arguments, we are left to look at the whole picture of abortion. There are many cases where abortion is performed safely and successfully ends the pregnancy. This is the best solution for some women. In other situations, there may be medical complications leaving the woman to still be pregnant and carry out a pregnancy of a baby who has serious medical defects due to the failed attempt at abortion. 

It is hard to determine when life begins. A heart may beat at 18 days (about 2 and a half weeks) after conception and the fetus still would not be viable to live outside the woman's body at that phase. Looking at these arguments, do we consider this to be the start of life? Or is the start of life when the fetus is viable outside the womb without the mother? Is it the woman's choice to decide what is best for her life and her body, or does she lose that right once she becomes pregnant because the zygote or embryo or fetus has a right to life that should take precedence over the mother’s right to choose whether to carry to term? 

To have an abortion performed one must seek medical attention. The medical provider will evaluate the situation, and in a state that allows abortions, if the gestation is prior to 24 weeks, they may proceed. Few doctors would proceed after 18 or 19 weeks gestation unless there were indications that the fetus had severe problems or the mother had health complications, as abortions used merely for birth control are usually conducted soon after a pregnancy is noticed.  The medical unit providing an abortion will make the woman partake in informed consent, which means the women will be given information about the procedure, the risks, and the benefits. Then providers also mention the alternate options. According to https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/data_stats/index.htm “93% of reported abortions in 2019 were performed at or before 13 weeks (about 3 months) of pregnancy, 6% were conducted between 14-20 weeks (about 4 and a half months) and 1% were performed at or after 21 weeks (about 5 months)”. The abortions that were performed at or after 21 weeks (about 5 months) were due to medical necessity. Many times, these abortions are performed due to some sort of medical reasoning that is usually life or death for the mother. 

TABLE 10. Number of reported abortions in 42 states, by known weeks of gestation* and reporting area of occurrence — selected reporting areas,† United States, 2019 

State/Area	Weeks of gestation							Total abortions reported by known gestational age
	≤6	7–9	10–13	14–15	16–17	18–20	≥21
	No. (%)§	No. (%)	No. (%)	No. (%)	No. (%)	No. (%)	No. (%)	No. (% of all reported abortions)¶
Alabama**	1,280 (21.3)	2,807 (46.8)	1,257 (20.9)	317 (5.3)	163 (2.7)	133 (2.2)	46 (0.8)	6,003 (99.9)
Alaska	292 (23.0)	639 (50.4)	271 (21.4)	64 (5.0)	—††	—††	0 (—)	1,269 (99.9)
Arizona	3,863 (29.5)	5,985 (45.7)	2,079 (15.9)	496 (3.8)	261 (2.0)	245 (1.9)	168 (1.3)	13,097 (100.0)
Arkansas**	479 (16.2)	1,265 (42.7)	862 (29.1)	150 (5.1)	82 (2.8)	97 (3.3)	28 (0.9)	2,963 (100.0)
Colorado	3,639 (40.4)	3,666 (40.7)	1,062 (11.8)	198 (2.2)	150 (1.7)	110 (1.2)	173 (1.9)	8,998 (100.0)
Connecticut	4,046 (45.7)	3,155 (35.7)	947 (10.7)	263 (3.0)	175 (2.0)	164 (1.9)	95 (1.1)	8,845 (96.1)
Delaware	536 (26.3)	1,071 (52.5)	328 (16.1)	73 (3.6)	16 (0.8)	6 (0.3)	9 (0.4)	2,039 (99.9)
Florida	52,850 (73.5)	11,641 (16.2)	4,843 (6.7)	973 (1.4)	691 (1.0)	699 (1.0)	217 (0.3)	71,914 (100.0)
Georgia	16,086 (43.6)	13,864 (37.6)	4,396 (11.9)	927 (2.5)	653 (1.8)	752 (2.0)	229 (0.6)	36,907 (100.0)
Hawaii	678 (33.9)	861 (43.0)	268 (13.4)	80 (4.0)	43 (2.1)	49 (2.4)	22 (1.1)	2,001 (99.9)
Idaho	493 (32.9)	707 (47.1)	257 (17.1)	37 (2.5)	—††	—††	—††	1,500 (99.1)
Indiana	1,924 (25.2)	4,055 (53.1)	1,618 (21.2)	9 (0.1)	8 (0.1)	17 (0.2)	6 (0.1)	7,637 (100.0)
Iowa	1,652 (46.3)	1,305 (36.6)	412 (11.6)	68 (1.9)	58 (1.6)	54 (1.5)	17 (0.5)	3,566 (100.0)
Kansas	2,761 (40.0)	2,722 (39.5)	921 (13.4)	195 (2.8)	121 (1.8)	137 (2.0)	37 (0.5)	6,894 (100.0)
Kentucky	1,302 (35.5)	1,493 (40.7)	550 (15.0)	116 (3.2)	65 (1.8)	109 (3.0)	29 (0.8)	3,664 (100.0)
Louisiana	2,815 (34.6)	3,567 (43.8)	1,274 (15.7)	273 (3.4)	173 (2.1)	38 (0.5)	0 (—)	8,140 (100.0)
Maine	595 (29.5)	996 (49.3)	317 (15.7)	48 (2.4)	33 (1.6)	31 (1.5)	0 (—)	2,020 (100.0)
Michigan	9,016 (33.0)	11,496 (42.1)	4,055 (14.9)	1,110 (4.1)	667 (2.4)	584 (2.1)	353 (1.3)	27,281 (99.8)
Minnesota	3,597 (36.7)	3,845 (39.2)	1,381 (14.1)	379 (3.9)	194 (2.0)	216 (2.2)	187 (1.9)	9,799 (98.6)
Mississippi	1,117 (35.0)	1,421 (44.5)	468 (14.7)	171 (5.4)	16 (0.5)	—††	—††	3,194 (100.0)
Missouri	86 (5.8)	496 (33.7)	505 (34.3)	130 (8.8)	87 (5.9)	112 (7.6)	55 (3.7)	1,471 (100.0)
Montana	599 (38.2)	628 (40.1)	211 (13.5)	51 (3.3)	34 (2.2)	34 (2.2)	11 (0.7)	1,568 (100.0)
Nebraska	976 (47.2)	683 (33.0)	284 (13.7)	62 (3.0)	46 (2.2)	16 (0.8)	0 (—)	2,067 (100.0)
Nevada	3,214 (38.6)	3,510 (42.1)	1,078 (12.9)	250 (3.0)	142 (1.7)	89 (1.1)	52 (0.6)	8,335 (99.1)
New Jersey§§	8,513 (39.3)	7,499 (34.6)	2,923 (13.5)	961 (4.4)	638 (2.9)	613 (2.8)	514 (2.4)	21,661 (97.7)
New Mexico	1,487 (42.7)	957 (27.5)	381 (10.9)	80 (2.3)	73 (2.1)	101 (2.9)	406 (11.6)	3,485 (88.4)
New York City	22,364 (44.9)	17,579 (35.3)	5,579 (11.2)	1,335 (2.7)	897 (1.8)	934 (1.9)	1,096 (2.2)	49,784 (100.0)
North Carolina	9,598 (33.9)	12,098 (42.8)	4,432 (15.7)	982 (3.5)	672 (2.4)	484 (1.7)	15 (0.1)	28,281 (99.4)
North Dakota	435 (38.8)	447 (39.9)	180 (16.1)	42 (3.7)	17 (1.5)	0 (—)	0 (—)	1,121 (100.0)
Ohio	5,523 (27.5)	9,070 (45.1)	3,558 (17.7)	848 (4.2)	531 (2.6)	477 (2.4)	95 (0.5)	20,102 (100.0)
Oklahoma	2,177 (43.6)	1,835 (36.8)	710 (14.2)	125 (2.5)	64 (1.3)	64 (1.3)	16 (0.3)	4,991 (99.9)
Oregon	4,064 (47.2)	2,924 (33.9)	949 (11.0)	241 (2.8)	129 (1.5)	149 (1.7)	160 (1.9)	8,616 (99.2)
Rhode Island	929 (44.4)	705 (33.7)	270 (12.9)	90 (4.3)	52 (2.5)	32 (1.5)	13 (0.6)	2,091 (99.6)
South Carolina**	1,063 (20.8)	1,970 (38.6)	1,740 (34.1)	298 (5.8)	8 (0.2)	13 (0.3)	9 (0.2)	5,101 (100.0)
South Dakota	64 (15.6)	224 (54.8)	—††	—††	0 (—)	—††	7 (1.7)	409 (98.8)
Tennessee	1,836 (18.9)	4,939 (50.9)	2,188 (22.5)	436 (4.5)	176 (1.8)	119 (1.2)	9 (0.1)	9,703 (99.8)
Texas**	22,356 (39.0)	22,721 (39.7)	8,232 (14.4)	1,870 (3.3)	957 (1.7)	838 (1.5)	301 (0.5)	57,275 (100.0)
Utah	1,018 (34.8)	1,185 (40.6)	478 (16.4)	92 (3.1)	51 (1.7)	67 (2.3)	31 (1.1)	2,922 (100.0)
Vermont	550 (46.0)	423 (35.4)	129 (10.8)	32 (2.7)	21 (1.8)	22 (1.8)	18 (1.5)	1,195 (100.0)
Virginia	7,917 (50.8)	5,215 (33.5)	1,938 (12.4)	121 (0.8)	131 (0.8)	170 (1.1)	90 (0.6)	15,582 (99.9)
Washington	7,046 (41.0)	6,768 (39.4)	2,061 (12.0)	420 (2.4)	265 (1.5)	273 (1.6)	363 (2.1)	17,196 (99.6)
West Virginia	325 (27.5)	536 (45.3)	235 (19.9)	58 (4.9)	18 (1.5)	—††	—††	1,183 (100.0)
Wyoming	18 (58.1)	12 (38.7)	—††	—††	0 (—)	0 (—)	0 (—)	31 (100.0)
Total	211,179 (42.9)	178,985 (36.4)	65,739 (13.4)	14,471 (2.9)	8,581 (1.7)	8,064 (1.6)	4,882 (1.0)	491,901 (99.6)¶¶