Has Illegal Immigration caused the need of Immigration Reform?

In this viewpoint based on experimental research, Merino attempts to show that illegal immigrants create a threat to the safety of the nation and that they drain resources. The author discusses the cost of criminal aliens and the states that contain the largest number of criminal aliens. Furthermore, she proposes four reforms in order to create solutions for the problems that she addresses.


Merino uses many statistics when describing the cost of criminal aliens and also when discussing the states with the most criminal aliens. The author shows that the states with the largest number of illegal immigrants are the same states that have the highest federal prison system cost. Additionally, she mentions the number of illegal immigrants that are in the United States and relates that number to the number of illegal immigrants who are in jail. As a whole, Merino’s report is descriptive, factual, and well-researched.

           

                                        

As an author and editor, Noel Merino is aware that the most common and effective way of convincing an audience is through the use of logos, which is the appeal to logic. She uses statistics throughout the majority of her report which makes her argument seem very convincing and trustworthy. It is especially trustworthy because Merino uses statistics that have been collected by state records. I agree with this argument because based off of the author’s evidence, it does seem like the cost of caring for illegal immigrants is getting increasingly higher because the number of illegal immigrants is increasing.

In this article based on Erwin Chemerinsky and Sam Kleiner’s research, they attempt to showthat past Presidents and the current President have taken executive action in order to limit or stop deportation on the basis of humanitarian reasons. One of the abilities of a President is to decide whether or not the Department of Justice should enforce a certain law. The authors also show that presidents of both parties have adjusted the immigration policy to favor their own goals.

                                 

Chemerinsky and Kleiner relate key points throughout their article, such as the discussion of prosecutorial discretion where they indicate that prosecutorial discretion is higher with immigration because the treatment of foreign citizens very much impacts the nation’s foreign affairs. They also show how deportation can affect humanitarian grounds as well as the prosecutorial discretion.

This article uses all three audience appeals. An example of emotional appeal would be when  Chemerinsky and Kleiner mention that human suffering and hardship is brought on by the separation of families due to deportations. There are countless amounts of appeal to credibility within this report, such as the listing of former and current Presidents’ who tailored the immigration policy, along with how they did so (Chemerinsky, Kleiner). The appeal to logic is brought on by discussing the court cases to support the claims. Overall, was descriptive, well-researched, and informative which makes me agree with the arguments.

"Illegal Immigrants Pose a Safety Threat and Drain Resources." Illegal Immigration. Ed. Noël Merino. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press, 2015. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "Criminal Aliens."Fairus.org. 2012. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 16 Oct. 2016.

Chemerinsky, Erwin, and Sam Kleiner. "Obama Has the Law—and Reagan—on His Side on Immigration." New Republic (18 Nov. 2014). Rpt. in Immigration Reform. Ed. Noël Merino. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press, 2016. At Issue. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 16 Oct. 2016.

1st Presidential Debate of 2016

 On the evening of September 26, 2016, millions of Americans were sat in front of their TV screens awaiting the first Presidential Debate of 2016. This was the night in which two people who have gained fame over the years would present their ideas on topics in order to gain the votes and support of Americans. On the right side was Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton while on the left was Republican candidate Donald Trump. I never had a huge interest in politics, but I watched the debate nonetheless, thinking that I would just complete the assignment I had to do and continue on without any difference in my opinion on politics. However, the more into the debate I got, the more I realized that I support Hillary Clinton because of her appeal and ideas for bettering America.

                                         

Hillary definitely had a strong connection with her audience. Hillary mentions that she comes from a humble background, with her father running his own small business while  Donald Trump was able to gain his fame by starting off with a very "small" loan of multiple millions of dollars in which he built into a multi-billion company. Hillary grew up in an average middle-class family while Trump grew up in a business environment. Clinton's emotional appeal was prevalent when she spoke about raising the national minimum wage, increasing taxes on the wealthy, and helping the working families.

The Democratic Candidate also had a very professional mannerism throughout the night. Despite all of Trump's "facts" and accusations, she maintained a calm attitude and responded without raising her voice. For example, when Donald brought up the topic of her email scandals, she apologized and recognized her mistake. Additionally, throughout Trump's comments of Hillary not creating any progress as the Secretary of State, she continued on without creating a deeper issue.

                                     

Clinton's credibility has been made known the Americans long before the debate. For one, she is the former First Lady of the United States. She has already had multiple years of experience in the office as being former President Bill Clinton's wife. Secondly, she is the Secretary of State, showing that she constantly works with the President and is well aware of the issues that need to be taken care of.

To sum up, I believe Hillary Clinton won this debate. Instead of causing a scene every time Donald made an accusation, she was able to smile and laugh it off. The American audience can tell through her calmness, appeal to the lower class, and experience that she would be more fit to be President of the United States. If you would like to watch the debate and get in on the action that occurred, click here.

How Sweatshops Effect Cambodia

The article Where Sweatshops are a Dream discusses the effect of sweatshops in Cambodia. Another topic that is discussed is the fact that sweatshops don't exploit enough people for the amount of poor and homeless. The author, who lived in East Asia for multiple years along with his wife who is from China, has a gained a large understanding of sweatshop jobs. Kristof assumes his readers have some knowledge about the ongoing poverty in Cambodia.

The purpose of this article is to make people in well-developed countries understand that although sweatshops are thought to be miserable and unsanitary, people in less-developed countries, such as Cambodia, would much rather work there than not have a job at all. The author, Nicholas D. Kristof, states his purpose directly which makes it easy for the audience to identify his opinion on sweatshops. In order to accomplish this purpose, he has a neutral appeal to Barack Obama, Democrats who favor labor standards in trade agreements, and people who live in developed countries. In this article, the author advocates for safer and more sanitary working conditions in the sweatshops, showing he doesn't want the removal of sweatshops, just improvement in quality. You would think that even poor would hate being in such terrible conditions with very low pay, but to them, sweatshops are a way to get out of the sun and at least make some money to survive.

                                                   

Cambodian garment sweatshops

The author uses logos, ethos, and pathos throughout his argument in order to appeal to the audience. Logos is used when Kristof mentions Obama and the Democratic attempts to create labor standards in trade agreements. He also says that Cambodia is trying to create wage minimums and better working conditions for factory workers. The author proves his credibility through the use of ethos by using quotes from people who work in dumps. He creates emotional appeal by stating the quotes from a mother who has not been able to bathe her child since he was two. 

The author's thesis is that sweatshops are beneficial for the poor and should have improved working conditions and increased wages. Kristof organizes is article by providing evidence in the form of facts and quotes, then gives his refutation of his argument, and lastly provides his own opinions on sweatshops based off of the multiple years he lived in Cambodia. He has an informal approach throughout his explanation of his topic. 

                                         

Nicholas Kristof made a very persuasive and clear argument. However, it would be even more persuasive if he had added statistics and charts to prove his point. Overall, he refuted his argument and supported his claims effectively in order to persuade the audience. 

http://america.aljazeera.com/content/ajam/articles/2015/3/11/cambodian-garment-workers-rise-up-and-face-a-crackdown/jcr:content/headlineImage.adapt.1460.high.Cambodia_garmentworker2_031115.1426333086294.jpg

http://d279m997dpfwgl.cloudfront.net/wp/2015/04/0410_sweatshop.jpg

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/15/opinion/15kristof.html