Positions on: WAR ON DRUGS, GAY MARRIAGE, IMMIGRATION, & EDUCATION

By Ethan M. Boivie

Positions on: WAR ON DRUGS, GAY MARRIAGE, IMMIGRATION, & EDUCATION

Marijuana legalization. Let's remember the insanity that was Prohibition. The government decided that no one should be allowed to drink alcohol. This created a black market, gangsters started bootlegging, became rich, people were jailed for drinking, and many people were killed. The government realized Prohibition was a terrible policy and ended it. The gangs dissolved, violence ended, police chased criminals rather than drinkers, and we did not become a nation of alcoholics. Yet, years later, ignoring history, the government decided to make drugs illegal. Now a black market exists, and again we have violent gangs that deal drugs, and police and innocent bystanders are killed. The government wastes $8 billion dollars a year on this policy when the reality anyone is that wants drugs can get them. More kids try marijuana than cigarettes - that is not an effective policy. This is a terrible repeat of a past mistake, and the sooner we correct it, the safer the streets will be. Now, you all have friends or relatives, who have at some point tried marijuana or some other drug - I'd wager at least one of my opponents has as well. These people you know - Are they dangerous criminals? Do they belong in jail? I don't think they should be. I believe violent, harmful criminals should be in jail.

3/4 of people in jail for drugs are in for possession only. Prisons are overcrowded already, yet the democrats and republicans want to continue to send these non-violent offenders to jail. Inevitably, when this happens, violent criminals are released early. I've never smoked marijuana - I've never even smoked a cigarette, but I believe you have the right to do so. Tobacco is more harmful than marijuana, alcohol is abused far more often. If you believe that you should have the right to smoke a cigarette, drink a beer, or even in a woman's right to choose, then perhaps we should reconsider this ridiculous War on Drugs and acknowledge that you, not the government, own your body.

Also, if Prohibition ended, drugs would have warning labels, like cigarettes, alcohol and prescription drugs. The drugs would be safer, because they would be more pure, and people wouldn't be as likely to overdose. Also, drugs could be regulated and taxed, which would pay for drug rehabilitation programs. People seeking treatment would be able to do so in a similar way that alcoholics seek help, and the problem would be acknowledged as such. A person seeking help would not risk being fired by doing so, and would avoid the stigma currently associated with drug use. Treatment for drug abuse would be similar to treatment of alcohol abuse: more accessible and effective.

GAY MARRIAGE

I fully support equal rights for all people, regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation.

Advocating civil unions is an insult. The Supreme Court in its 1954 decision in the case of Brown vs the Board of Education ruled that "separate but equal" is inherently unequal. The idea of civil unions rather than marriage is contrary to the tenet that this country was founded on, that "all men are created equal." A common argument against gay marriage is a religious one, but we all now that in this country, there exists a separation of church and state.

These "moral" arguments against gay marriage prove to be without merit upon the realization that those attempting to justify slavery, to deny equal rights to women, and to oppose the civil rights movement, have used these very same arguments in the past.

The bottom line is the government has no right dictating with whom you can and cannot have a relationship. In fact, there is evidence that one of the reasons government involved itself in granting licenses in the first place was part of a effort to limit interracial marriages. We all agree that was offensive government policy, and future generations will look back on this issue and deem it just as ridiculous. Most importantly, this is an equal rights issue, and there is no compromise for equality.

IMMIGRATION

I believe that peaceful people that want to enter this country and this state seeking their fortunes should be allowed into this great land of equality and opportunity. If this were to happen, there would be no illegal immigrants, as there would be no reason for it, and our border patrol would be free to more effectively protect our borders from dangerous threats. The problem is that as lawmakers try to turn our free nation into a welfare state, people will inevitably want to come here not to be productive, but to have the government take care of them. That is not how we became the greatest country in the world. People should be free to come here and make something of themselves - they should be guaranteed the same promises of opportunity that our ancestors were granted, and we should welcome them with open arms, not open checkbooks.

EDUCATION

Non-school choice advocates are complaining because the level of acceptability is rising to where to 1/4 of students must be educated. 25% must reach a minimum - where they are just barely proficient enough to qualify for the next grade level. Any student can tell you 25% is not even close to passing, and public schools are complaining about it, saying they can't possibly meet this criterion.

School choice opponents claim that choice harms public schools, but research shows the opposite. A study by a Harvard economist (Carolyn Hoxby) found that public schools respond positively to competition from school choice, and raise their own productivity. In places such as Milwaukee, Arizona, and Michigan, where large numbers of students were eligible for and used vouchers, parents are able to send their children to a school of their choice, and students that remained in the public schools benefited as well - as the competition forces both private and public schools to improve - all students benefit.

As one of the few constitutional duties of the federal government is to provide a national defense, I consider education to be a matter of national security. Since educated populations are the most tolerant and informed, I believe that ensuring education to the population is vital to stability of the country. However, that doesn't mean perpetuating the status quo. Since the quality of education has continued to decrease, as the amount spent by the bureaucracies in place have continued to increase, I find it clearly evident that there must be a better way to educate California's youth. Evidence has shown that private schools cost less, offer a better quality of education, and are often a safer than public schools. The most important thing is that the children receive a safe, quality education, and if they are not getting one, then parents should have the right to move them without paying for both schools.