Blog stage 3

On February 25th, 2019, The Editorial Board from the New York Times published an editorial piece titled “Build Central America, Not a Wall.” This title alone is already powerful as the wall and border security is currently one of the main issues in America. The Editorial Board is a representation of the thoughts of the board, its editor, and the publisher, so these opinions are not from one entity alone. The intended audience for this piece is the general population in the US, with better reception coming from those who oppose the wall or who are undecided on the issue. They explore other options, with providing aid to Central America being the main topic throughout. El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras are plagued with gang violence and corruption; the main reason why people are attempting to flee to America. However, when those families arrive at the border, parents and children are separated. The Editorial Board believe that a more effective and humane option would be to fix the problem at the source so that immigrating north won't have to be their only option. The evidence they provide is not concrete, but it's not something to disregard completely either. When the Trump administration attempted to scale back aid, Congress denied it and provided $2.1 billion for the region for 2 years. Murder rates declined in 2018 but were still relatively high. However, they include a 2014 study that community-based programs ran by the US Agency for International Development reported 19% fewer robberies and 51% fewer murders. These pieces of information give them a fair amount of credibility and make their ideas and argument valid. Their logic is quite sound. Sure, it will take many years to truly bring change to Central America. However, if these changes were implemented and successful, there would be no border wall and less hostility between the US and Central America.

Blog Stage 2: Article Introduction

     On Thursday, February 14th, 2019, The New York Times posted an article titled "E.P.A. Will Study Limits on Cancer-Linked Chemicals. Critics Say the Plan Delays Action." I believe this article is worth reading as it is actually a big deal in terms of the E.P.A. as officials have described this plan as the "first-ever nationwide action plan" to finally address the harmful effects of man-made chemicals. PFASs or poly- currently have no regulation and are being manufactured in many products. They also are carcinogens that can lie dormant in humans for years. Their plan is to set regulations on the harmful PFAS chemicals found in water that are linked to cancer, low birth weight, and other reported health issues.
     While it is great that there are finally going to be regulations put on the harmful chemicals that are around us and that are found in our water supply, this is still a political issue so of course there's some drama within the department and article. Many people criticize the E.P.A. for not treating this crisis as a crisis should be treated, which is a fair point. This is an interesting article that people should read as it informs them on an important act by the E.P.A. and there's also a lot of shade thrown by senators and the acting head for the E.P.A. which is also really entertaining.