Argument with Humor

For my argument with humor, I chose a political cartoon by Garry Trudeau out of the Star-Telegram. It depicts Sarah Palin as a figurine, like a barbie, that a little girl just received, and her mom is reading the directions about her. The doll says things like, "Obama wants to raise taxes" and "God's will has to be done to get that gas line built!" The instruction booklet that the mom is reading says things like "Enjoy your Sarah sound bites...if you play them enough times, after a while they will actually sound true" and "to hear Sarah before she was reprogrammed by the McCain campaign, press her nose twice." This is an example of satire. Clearly, one can see the problem that the creator of this cartoon is trying to inform us of. I think that the cartoon has a better effect on people than just simply stating things like this because it is funny, and it is hard to get mad, even if you do not agree with what he is saying.

OP-ED

Many proposals have been brought forth on how to solve the nation’s health care problem, one of which is universal health care, but universal health care is too drastic an approach because we don’t have that many uninsured people in the first place. Proponents of universal health care use statistics that blow our small uninsured problem into one that seems much bigger than it is. They say that the number of uninsured Americans is between forty and fifty million Americans, but according to the Census Bureau report “Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2005,” it is actually about twenty million, which is about seven percent of the population. They arrived at this conclusion by subtracting the uninsured people that are not citizens, which is about ten million. Then, according to the same report, “there are 8.3 million uninsured people who make between $50,000 and $74,999 per year and 8.74 million who make more than $75,000 a year.” That is about 17 million people who should be able to purchase health insurance because they make considerably more than the median household income of about $46,000. So if you subtract non-citizens and those that can afford to buy their own health insurance, the remaining number of insured people is about twenty million which is only about seven percent of the population. (I would like to point out that I realize these statistics are a few years old but that I have looked at the latest Census Burea report, and the results have not changed much.) This is not to say that there is not a problem, but the problem is much smaller than proponents of Universal health care would like you to know. Just to make the case stronger, another study was done by the Kaiser Family Foundation, and they reported that the number of uninsured Americans who do not qualify for current government programs and make less than $50,000 a year is between about 8 million and 14 million which is only about 3 to 5 percent of the population. Surely, these statistics will not sway the beliefs of every one, so I will now discuss some of the major potential problems of universal health care coverage.

First of all, many people believe that there could not be anything wrong with “free” health care, but in reality, universal health care is not free. We would pay for it with our taxes which means that the people working hard for their money will be paying for those that do not work or those who do not make enough money. I do believe that everyone should be able to have access to health care, including those that do not have enough money to purchase coverage, but after doing research, the portion of the population that can absolutely not afford it is very small, and such a drastic move such as universal health care is probably not the best solution. Second of all, healthy people that have good dietary and exercise habits would have to pay for those that do not take care of themselves such as people that over eat and people that smoke, both of whom require health care procedures that are much more expensive. Furthermore, those with bad habits would have no incentive to change because their health care will be provided to them, no matter how expensive it might be. Another downfall of universal health care coverage is that costs would be much higher than they are now because patients are not likely to limit their visits to the doctor or their use of drugs. People will go to the doctor for things that they normally would not, for example a cold or a head ache-- something that would pass without treatment from a doctor. Another bad outcome of the coverage would be that both doctors and patients will most likely lose flexibility. The patient will not get to choose their doctors because that will now be the government’s decision. The doctors will also not get a choice in the patients they see and will most likely, not get to choose the methods they would like to treat the patient with which could potentially lead to poor patient care. In addition, many doctors enjoy the privileges and life they have now. With the loss of private practice options and possibly a lower pay, many potential doctors may decide not to pursue the profession because it no longer provides the benefits that it once did. Furthermore, with universal health care, comes the possibility that citizens may even lose some of their personal freedoms. The government would be more likely to put higher taxes on items that are not health-conscious, such as fast food, smoking, alcohol, and other things that may decrease the health of an individual. Finally, just because someone is uninsured, does not mean that they do not have access to health care. There are many nonprofit and government-run organizations that provide services to those without insurance and to those that can not afford to pay.

I, like most of the caring people of this nation, believe that people have a right to health care, but our specific situation does not constitute the need for such a drastic policy as universal health care. John Goodman and his colleagues from the National Center for Policy Analysis have been studying this problem for twenty-five years, and have come up with a way to solve the problem without any new taxes or any new spending programs; his solution encompasses McCain’s health care proposal of giving tax credits to those that purchase health insurance and gives every American the ability to receive quality health care coverage. After reading about his solution, I also believe that this or perhaps another similar plan would be better fitted for our specific situation and would cause us a lot fewer problems.

Argument of Definition

For my article of definition, I chose "There goes the neighborhood ban on political signs" from the Dallas Morning News. It talks about how Coppell homeowners association tried to force a man to pull up his yard sign supporting Barack Obama. What he was not aware of is that there is a relatively new state law that prohibits associations from being able to ban "reasonably sized political signs." This "reasonably sized" is an argument of definition because someone must define what reasonable actually is and give some reasons to prove it which the law does- no larger than 4X6 feet. State Senator Eddie Lucio said that "legislators wanted to strike a balance between residents' rights to political expression and associations' attempts to prevent eyesores." Again, another argument of definition would be defining what exactly are the residents' rights and what exactly is an "eyesore."

For my venue, I chose Newsweek because I want my audience to be people with different opinions, and after talking to my workshop group, I learned that Newsweek caters to just about everyone. I want to educate readers about universal health care coverage and the many problems that would most likely come about if it was implemented. In my process of choosing, I first decided my audience and then decided Newsweek was a good fit.

Argument of Fact

For my argument of fact, I chose the article, "Officials expect storm of voters for the elections," by Anthony Spangler, and it is from the Star Telegram. This article basically just talks about how officials are expecting a huge turnout at the polling place this year since the presidential election is getting more attention than normal. It says that the turnout in March primaries was about 33% of the county's registered voters, which is the highest percentage for a primary in 20 years. Also, officials are expecting a higher turnout of voters because more people are asking to volunteer at the local party offices-- about four times the normal number. Both parties are working very hard to get people registered to vote. As of now, 30,000 new voters have registered since March. This article not only gives these facts to the reader, but it also includes helpful information on how to register to vote, when the deadline is, and how to find your polling location. I think this article fulfills the qualities of an argument of fact based on what chapter seven says. Although it does not really challenge beliefs and assumptions, it does make the public aware of information, and it educates the reader. This article also follows the Toulmin argument. It makes a claim and then gives supporting evidence and good reasons as to why this claim is true.

Letter to the Editor

Author’s Note



This is my first draft of the Letter to the Editor. It is not at all rough in that I have been trying to correct any errors that I see, and I have already asked a couple people to read it and to tell me what they thought I needed to correct. I like the fact that I was able to find some very credible statistics to counter the author’s argument, and the fact that I can say that I have some authority to argue the subject because I am a Nursing major and that I know Nursing majors that already have hospital experience. I am worried that my argument might now seem whole. I kind of feel like something might be missing, but I don’t know what it is. I worry that I don’t express myself fully, and that maybe it might be easy for someone to argue back against me. I would like encouraging but still helpful responses on anything that I can do to make my argument more complete and convincing. I don’t really know what else to add/change to make this letter better.
 

To the Editor:
The September 7, 2008 Editorial article “Universal health-care system is essential” contends that a Universal health care coverage system is crucial and is, in fact, the only way to fix our current health care problems. While the author makes an effort to provide substantiating data and figures, his argument does not seem totally accurate. Although, it is quite obvious that some of our citizens in United States are suffering from lack of health care, I do not believe that the situation is really as bad as the article indicates. I also do not believe that a Universal Health Care system is the best solution to our problems.
I am very interested in the delivery of health care, and am currently studying to be a nurse at Texas Christian University. While I have not had actual clinical experience and am not an expert in the delivery of care, I am in my second year of studies and have taken some nursing classes. I have also talked to some students that our older than me and who are already involved in their clinical studies. When I asked some of them what they thought about Universal Health care, they told me that from their experiences in the hospital, they just could not see how it could work- there are too many problems associated with it.
When I read this article, a couple of things bothered me and after doing some research, I would like to comment on them. First of all, I wouldn’t say that the nation’s health care is “broken;” it just has some problems like any policy in any nation has problems. Second of all, I think that the statistics used to express the point exaggerate the situation. The uninsured problem is not as bad as the writer is making it sound. When reading the article, the author makes it seem like there is a huge amount of people that are uninsured and suffering from lack of health care and that there is nothing that they can do about it. According to the Census Bureau report “Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2005,” “there are 8.3 million uninsured people who make between $50,000 and $74,999 per year and 8.74 million who make more than $75,000 a year. That is roughly 17 million people who ought to be able to ‘afford’ health insurance because they make substantially more than the median household income of $46,326.” In addition, the Kaiser Family Foundation says that the number of uninsured Americans that do not qualify for government programs and make less than $50,000 a year is between 8.2 million and 13.9 million which is between 2.7 and 4.6 percent of the population; this is a much smaller portion of the population than proponents of Universal Health Care would have you believe. Finally, this article is very general in the sense that it does not really mention how implementing Universal Health Care is going to work and how it is going to fix anything, and assuming that Universal Health Care coverage is the only option, the article also does not even mention any of the potential problems that the United States is bound to face. It simply says that Universal health care is “challenge members of the next Congress can ill-afford to ignore.”

Universal health-care system is essential
Sunday, September 7, 2008 11:23 AM PDT

Sept. 7 Daily News editorial

The presidential nominees of the two major political parties have spent the past couple of weeks mostly trying to pump up their followers and tear down one another. Little speaking time has been allotted for such wonkish topics as health care. But the nation’s broken health-care system surely will loom large for whichever candidate moves into the White House on Jan. 20, 2009.

A new survey by the nonpartisan Commonwealth Fund shows that a growing number of Americans are struggling to pay medical bills and accumulating medical debt at an increasing rate, according to Washington Post writer Sopan Joshi. The survey found that two-thirds of the working-age population was uninsured, underinsured, reported a medical bill problem or did not get needed health care because of cost in 2007. Sixty-one percent of those reporting problems with medical bills and medical debt were insured at the time they required medical care.

Sara Collins, an assistant vice president of the Commonwealth Fund, told Joshi that, “Health-care costs are climbing much more rapidly than incomes or the growth in the overall economy. What is notable is how these problems are spreading up the income scale.” The survey found that four in 10 moderate-income families, those earning from $20,000 to $40,000 annually, were without medical insurance in 2007, up from 28 percent the previous year. Eighteen percent of families earning from $40,000 to $60,000 were uninsured in 2007, compared to 13 percent in 2006.

These are trends that no elected official can ignore. The rising cost of health care is battering families and the national economy, alike. It’s squeezing employers large and small. Some analysts say double-digit increases in employer-sponsored health insurance premiums are adversely affecting hiring decisions and encouraging the outsourcing of jobs overseas. There is no relief in sight. The federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services projects that health-care costs will increase by almost 7 percent annually over the next decade.

Restraining health-care costs is going to require a major, top-to-bottom push for comprehensive health-cafe reform. Piece-meal reforms won’t do. Many leaders in business and industry already have come to this realization. The National Coalition on Health Care, a group that includes representatives of business, industry, labor and civic organizations, has called for what amounts to a universal health-care system.

The Commonwealth Fund has joined that call, arguing in its latest study that universal health-care insurance is essential to improving health care in the nation. Building a consensus on how best to provide universal care will be a challenge, given the many competing interests. But it’s a challenge members of the next Congress can ill-afford to ignore.

Editorial Project Topic

For my Unit 1 topic, I chose the subject of Universal Health Care. The Editorial that I chose is from The Daily News Online, and it is called "Universal health-care system is essential." It talks about how many Americans are uninsured and struggling to pay medical bills. It says the health-care costs are going to require a comprehensive health care reform, and that Universal Health care is the only way that it will work. I disagree with the author of this article because I think that Universal or National Health care will not solve this nation's problems for many reasons. Just a few of my reasons are that the people that make more money will be paying for everyone's health care, doctors salaries may drop, and med students may decide not to pursue being a doctor, and those with healthy habits will have to pay for those with unhealthy habits(smoking, obesity). I chose this article because Medicine is something that I am very passionate about which is the main reason that I am studying to be a nurse. I would like to say that I do believe that all people deserve access to health care, but I do not believe that Universal Health Care coverage is the way to do it.

Presidential Election

Many different issues are important to me when considering who I will vote for in the election this year. As of right now, I have not made the choice of who I will vote for, but these are a couple of issues that will guide my decisions.

I am very interested in what both candidates are planning to do about the health care situation, and the fact that 46 million Americans are uninsured. Something new and innovative must be done so that every American has the chance and opportunity to receive medical care without drastically affecting those that provide the health care, like nurses. As far as I know, both candidates have a plan on how to fix this large uninsured problem.

I am also interested in both candidates' immigration policy. The number of undocumented immigrants in this country has increased drastically in the last decade, and it is affecting everyone. I think that border states need to enforce stricter security, and that employers hiring illegals need to be punished, and my choice of presidential candidate will need to want these things as well.

Energy consumption, the climate, and the environment are also very important to me. I do believe that global warming is happening, and that we need to drastically reduce the amount of energy we are using and the emissions that they are creating. I want the next president to work very hard in trying to reduce our foreign dependency on oil, and also try to find a way to become reliant on other, cleaner forms of energy.

As I said, I am not sure who I want to vote for this year, but these issues are very important to me, and I need to do some research on both candidates to see which one fits best with what I want and expect.

Argument with Logos

For my argument that uses logos, I chose "Students mark 21st birthdays with 'extreme' drinking: 44% say they blacked out after going beyond 'bingeing'" from USA Today. This article discusses how many college students spend their 21st birthday. The writer uses a lot of statistics based on findings from various University studies. The studies conducted different surveys and interviews to find out the percentage of those that drank, how much they drank, and the consequences that they experienced afterwards. The article does make sure to mention that no nation-wide studies have been done, but that there have been many University studies that have found similar results. The studies found that, on average, women celebrate their 21st birthday with nine drinks, and men celebrate theirs with twelve drinks, and that of all students studied, about 78% of them suffered bad consequences. A study also found that once a person turns 21, they drink more often, but the amount decreases. In addition, it found that drinking after driving increases by 6% after turning 21. I believe this article was written to argue whether or not the drinking age should be changed, or to discuss what measures need to be taken to reduce the binge drinking of college students.