SAN FRANCISCO — Reporters from the Teen Observer headed to Pier 39 on Monday to ask people about what they believe is the most important issues in the upcoming presidential elections.
Those who spoke to us had a range of different important issues to them.
SAN FRANCISCO — The Teen Observer asked people at Pier 39 in San Francisco on Monday to write down the most important issue to them in the 2016 Presidential Election. Answers ranged from education to immigration and the war on drugs.
After traveling to Switzerland, Australia, China, Japan and Germany, Stephanie Viehman arrived back to America noting one substantial difference between those countries and her own: gun control.
“They can’t conceptualize why anyone would need them,” said Viehman, of Ohio, about people in other countries with stricter gun laws.
In the week after the June 12 Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, the U.S. Senate addressed several issues related to background checks and, once again, found itself nearly divided along party lines with some legislators and Washington, D.C. residents saying special interests are once again in charge.
Connecticut Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy introduced a measure that would have strengthened background checks for those trying to acquire guns. Further, the amendment, known as S.Amdt. 4750, would have put in place research on criminal and mental health history, immigration status, indictment status and drug use as a part of its background provisions.
It failed, garnering only one Republican vote.
“I’m disappointed by the results tonight, but far from surprised,” Murphy wrote in a news release on his website in June. “We knew breaking the NRA’s stranglehold on this Congress would be a long, uphill climb.”
This country is rising up to demand safer, stronger gun laws. Millions of Americans are speaking out & they will not be silenced.
— Chris Murphy (@ChrisMurphyCT) June 20, 2016
On the Republican side of the aisle, Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa introduced an amendment that sought to “address gun violence and improve the availability of records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System,” according to Grassley’s website. Democratic California Sen. Dianne Feinstein vetoed it saying it didn’t go far enough to protect the public.
“If we use very narrow lists, if we do that, we’re left with a bill that has no teeth and misses many individuals who shouldn’t be able to purchase guns,” Feinstein wrote on her website.
Residents and visitors interviewed this week in Northwest Washington, D.C. said they don’t trust adequate legislation addressing gun control will happen this year–an election year in which 23 Republican senators are up for reelection–and said many leaders use the Second Amendment as a shield to stop what they see as important next steps in the gun control movement.
“Today’s lobbying world is clearly why they’re against it,” Washington D.C. resident Paul Alagero, 57, said of background checks. “As much as everybody has the right to guns, it doesn’t mean everyone should have a gun.”
Many believe special interests and lobbying have taken over the debate and make it nearly impossible for conservatives on the Hill to take a stand on any issue related to the Second Amendment.
“It’s crazy,” said Rick Landry, 22, an American University law student.
The National Rifle Association each year donates millions to candidates in both parties although that money largely goes to Republicans, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, which wrote on its website that the NRA “is opposed to virtually every form of gun regulation.”
That powerful lobbying influences legislation, but a majority of Americans actually favor universal background checks.
A June 2016 Quinnipiac University poll showed 93 percent of Americans support gun background checks. That’s up from 86 percent who favored them, according to a 2015 Gallup Poll.
Viehman argued that a strong group like the NRA should be expected to have a lasting influence on the government. She said if they are that strong and wield that much power, they must represent the views of many Americans.
“Lobbying is what our country was founded on,” Viehman said.
Third party candidates run for the presidency of the United States every four years.
They never win, and likely won’t this year, but a leading polling group on politics found this election cycle has allowed a small breakthrough for third party candidates–they’re polling higher than they have in 20 years–with many American voters unsatisfied with the two major parties.
A June 29 Quinnipiac University poll, found when likely voters were asked about the possibility of third party leaders, the popularity of the two major party candidates dropped.
“Usually a potential benefit of third party candidates, even if they don’t win, is that they raise issues that are important to some voters, issues that the main parties are not addressing,” said Jan Leighley, a professor of Political Science at American University. “If the third party candidates can get the major parties/candidates to address these issues, that is an important accomplishment, even when they lose.”
Many people would like to see third parties better represented but don’t think they have a chance of getting a sufficient amount of votes.
Philip Herrera, 24, said his positions are closer to those of Green Party candidate Jill Stein, but he will vote for presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton in order to prevent a Donald Trump presidency, thinking Stein can’t win and believing there’s no chance for third party candidates in the current political system.
“We would need to rewrite the Constitution,” Herrera said if Americans wanted to get away from a two-party system.
Some Bernie Sanders supporters will cast their votes for Stein over Clinton, according to the Green Party’s website.
Republicans disappointed with Trump are turning to Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson. Johnson’s slogan on his website reads, “Make American Sane Again,” a likely knock on Trump’s platform to “Make America Great Again.”
But despite the messaging of third party candidates, polls show their chances are small.The Quinnipiac poll showed Johnson getting 8 percent of likely voters’ ballots. Although Stein is absent from the ballot in 28 states, the poll showed she would receive 4 percent.
Ross Perot, who was not affiliated with a major party, captured 18.91 percent of the vote in 1992 and 8.4 percent in 1996. Since then, a third party candidate hasn’t garnered the same amount of attention.
In 2012, 1.69 percent of voters opted for third party candidates compared to 1.4 percent in 2008.
This year, third party candidates’ numbers are better but not enough to get people to think they have a shot at the White House.
“Third-party candidates can’t win this election,” said Chris Hartnett, a registered Independent voter who is still undecided about his November choice. “They don’t have name exposure.”
Esmat Hanano, 22, is unsatisfied with this year’s election and said none of the major candidates deserve his support. He has not, however, looked into possible third-party candidates and doesn’t know those candidates by name.
Garrett Schlichte, 21, believed third party candidates should get more attention, but won’t be getting it anytime soon. He said more parties and candidates would provide Americans with “a greater diversity of thought.”
Meg Bentley, 42, the director of biology teaching labs at American University, said the two-party system “just isn’t working.”
Although many students, faculty and staff at the Northwest Washington, D.C. campus, agree that the system could be improved with more visible third-party candidates, some say they’re a long way from taking hold of high office.
“Not anytime soon,” said Anila D’Mello, 26, of their chances.
Students and employees at American University on Tuesday said although this year’s presidential election seems more contentious than those in the past, voting still should be a priority.
Most agreed voting is an important part of being an American citizen, and said those refusing to vote in an election is a disservice.
“Crazy presidents happen when people don’t vote,” said George Howard, 18, who will vote in his first election in November.
Kathryn Ray, 65, an American University library researcher and former president of the League of Women Voters, said voters may never find a perfect candidate, but said voters should look for “one that best represents you.”
Ray empathizes with younger voters who may be dissatisfied with this year’s top two presidential candidates.
A Quinnipiac University poll from June showed among millennial voters, third party candidates were gaining ground against the two major parties, but still 6 percent of them said they’d stay home rather than cast a ballot.
But Pam Rivers-Salisbury, an 18-year-old American University student, won’t be among that number.
“Everyone should vote,” Rivers-Salisbury said. “If someone tells me they’re voting for [Donald] Trump, I don’t care. I’d be proud of them for voting.”
Even though someone may be a U.S. citizen, that doesn’t always mean they know the complete history of their country.
Some residents and visitors to Washington, D.C. had a tough time answering questions from the citizenship test given to immigrants.
When asked why we celebrate July Fourth Ricky Monroe, 55, said, “Was there a war or something?”
Monroe also did not know what year the Declaration of Independence was signed.
Spoiler alert: 1776.
In order for a foreigner to gain U.S. citizenship, he or she must show an understanding of the English language, speak in English clearly, and demonstrate knowledge of U.S. government and history. Of those who took the test in 2015, 91 percent passed.
Matt Garvey, 65, answered the practice citizenship questions like: name a war fought in the 1900s, where is the Statue of Liberty located or what ocean is on the West Coast. Others included: when was the Constitution written and how many members does the House of Representatives have.
Even though most people interviewed this week found little challenge with the test, when asked the question “what does the 4th of July celebrate” many were unsure.
Megan Kane, 59, said, “Did we sign something?”
This opinion piece does not express the opinions of the Teen Observer as a whole, only those of the authors.
BERKELEY, Calif. — August 2015, and kids are grudgingly readying themselves for the return of the school year. For most it means school supplies and last-minute, summer-homework cram sessions. For others, it’s accepting the anxiety of “will this be year?” The year for vaccinations.
An outbreak of measles in Disneyland brought state vaccination laws to the forefront of social and political dialogue. Nineteen were infected on what were intended to be fun trips to the amusement park. Outbreaks like these occur when “herd immunity” is lacking, meaning that enough people refused vaccinations to allow a disease to spread.
Yet, the Bay Area sees intense anti-vaccination action. In the 2013-2014 school year alone, 17,000 children went to school unvaccinated for philosophical exemption, while only 1,000 were exempted for medical reasons.
To prevent a local epidemic, a new law passed in California requires all students from pre-school to kindergarten to receive vaccinations with the exception of the medically compromised. These children rely on herd immunity to stay healthy, so a parent’s religion or beliefs are no longer grounds for exemption.
This law was not passed without opposition. Many parents have opted to homeschool children in order to avoid vaccines. These drastic measures were spurned by a now retracted investigation published by the British Medical Journal in 1998. The study by Andrew Wakefield has since been disproved in the face of opposition by the World Health Organization and the Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Any reasoning parents could use against vaccines is invalid in the eyes of not the only U.S. government but also the United Nations.
But for some parents, it seems the protection of their children and others still comes second to a personal philosophy rooted in ignorance and false information. Like drunk drivers, the perpetrators put themselves and those around them at risk. Refusing to vaccinate not only endangers that child but those around him or her who rely on herd immunity to stay safe.
Feature image: Amanda Mills, USCDCP, Public Domain 2015.
Standing between the 56 granite columns of the World War II Memorial donning shorts and a t-shirt, David Johnson, 31, toured the site with his wife and parents.
Sixteen months from the 2016 presidential election tourists like Johnson already are looking ahead to the barrage of political advertisements, speeches and debates that will shape the next year and a half. Regardless of political party, issues are diverse and the election season is expected to drag on.
“I would hope that they focus on the real issues rather than the crap that goes through the 24-hour news cycle,” said Johnson, who counts issues including net neutrality and money in politics as top election priorities.
Many citizens feel the need to elect a candidate who will focus on these issues and others.
Gregory Pratt, 27, said he would like to see the candidates address student debt, while Bianca Perez, 30, is looking for greater focus on the economy, especially for middle and lower classes.
“I hope people don’t vote based on party lines but instead on what the candidates have to say,” Pratt said.
Perez, however, had a different vision for the outcome of the election.
“I hope that we can get a candidate that can continue the progression of our country,” Perez said. “A lot of steps have been taken towards more acceptance in our nation, and I hope whoever the new candidate is can continue in that path.”
While most voters have high expectations and are passionate about the candidates’ talking points, some are skeptical and even indifferent.
Angel Cleves, 44, said that she doesn’t “really trust a lot of politicians. I guess. So that’s my concern: what they say they’re going to do, they do.”
American University graduate Logan Combest-Friedman was not keeping up with the election developments.
“I don’t have many expectations,” Combest-Friedman said. “It’s the same thing every time.”
Businessman and reality show host Donald Trump’s 2016 Republican presidential bid stirred strong emotions among District residents who, two weeks after his announcement, found a Trump White House unlikely.
“I think it’s stupid,” said American University student Emily Smith, 19. “I honestly just think he’s running for the publicity of it.”
Trump, 69, announced his intent June 16 to run for the Republican presidential nomination during a press conference at Trump Tower in midtown Manhattan. The 45-minute speech, featuring Trump making provocative statements on immigration policy, has been watched nearly a million times on YouTube.
“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best,” Trump said in the press conference. “They’re sending people that have lots of problems and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime, they’re rapists.”
Since his controversial campaign announcement, both NBC and Macy’s have cut ties with Trump in the respects of his television show, The Apprentice, and clothing line, Donald J Trump Collections.
Many interviewed this week in Washington D.C.’s Tenleytown neighborhood and on the campus of American University said Trump’s launch remarks were troubling but also noted his lack of a clear policy plan worried them, too.
Dan Bell, 21, found Trump’s candidacy comical.
“I think it’s hilarious,” Bell said. “It makes my day.”
Dan Bell’s sister, Amelia Bell, 24, added that America under Trump would be “like the Hunger Games,” referring to the popular dystopian fiction trilogy written by Suzanne Collins.
Both of the siblings expressed interest in voting for Hillary Clinton in 2016.
Rachel Nadelman, 38, took a break from an afternoon jog to answer questions about Trump’s candidacy.
“I don’t think in the end that anybody would really vote for him because he doesn’t have any substantial policy plans,” Nadelman said. “While he can speak in racist language because he’s not trying to get donors, overall he’s not going to get much of a following.”
