Should your vote matter in a national election?

Every 4 years Americans vote for who our next president will be without knowing that their vote might not matter depending on the state they live in. In Maine and Nebraska there are laws in place that require the members of the Electoral College for either party to vote depending on the result of the popular vote and not based on their party affiliation or endorsement for either candidate. However, that still leaves 48 states that have processes in place that allow people to decide for them and essentially our votes may not ever be seriously considered. This is because even if there is a tie for president then the House of Representatives decides on who will win. I understand that these procedures are in place because it took much longer to count the votes and come to a conclusion in general when the constitution was written. This isn’t the case anymore because the exchange of information is exponentially greater than in 1803, when then 12^th amendment was written putting this policy in place.

Why do we still conduct elections this way? I believe that our country could see drastic changes in voter participation and involvement if we let people directly decide in national elections and not to mention policy and direction. Most people don’t vote because they feel like it doesn’t matter and to some degree that is true and not true. Local elections have a much greater impact on daily life and your vote truly counts, as opposed to a national election. The original creators behind these ideas knew our society could change rapidly and wrote accordingly. However, law can always be changed when it is dated and no longer serves a greater purpose.

Will I be able to afford a home when I graduate?

Study: Student loans are killing the housing market

I already knew that my generation isn't like my parents in the sense that one graduates high school, goes off to college, meets someone then gets married and buys a house. However, I had chalked it up to that my generation wanted to explore life and not be so quick to start families because they had lives to live too. It had never crossed my mind that no one could afford a house because of wanting to pursue an education that we're told is the 'right' thing to do.

It makes sense to me after reading the facts of life for a college graduate in today's housing market. If someone has just a monthly student loan payment of $250, reduces a household's buying power by $44,000. This isn't typical though because most people pay $750+, so only the people who are in the highest earning brackets are able to comfortably pay a mortgage.

The writer gave great insight as a college graduate who once had $60,000 in debt when all was said and done. They advised to take the high earning jobs when they are offered as opposed to working for a non-profit or something similar while you still have student loan debt. I think this is good advice because it's true. We are living longer so there will most likely be a right time to have a job where you feel like you're making a difference.

However, the real problem is that higher education is simply overpriced. Families shouldn't have to make financial suicide by taking out high interest loans in order to maybe ensure a better life post-graduation. The only solution would be to conduct a seriously drastic overhaul of the way we treat higher education and how it is paid for. Without solving this root problem, we're bound to never have stability for a majority of people once who attend and graduate college.

Is Perez the right choice to replace Attorney General Eric Holder?

Why Perez is a good choice to succeed Holder

The author doesn't touch too much on why Holder is resigning, however, he provided a brief history into who Perez is and why he would be a good fit. Obama has made the decision to not move forward with his immigration policy plans and has made the Latino community feel unimportant when they had been a strong core of voters who had helped him be elected president. Perez is from Dominican descent and grew up in the U.S. where he attended Brown University and Harvard Law despite his father dying when he was 12. This is something that the author may have thought other immigrants would relate to and I believe that it helped his argument by making Perez more relatable. His legal background alone should be a qualification to be considered for the next attorney general and the author brought on more evidence to support this. His experience working in the government would give him leverage because he is currently the Secretary of Labor. The author made sure to bridge his personal, political and legal backgrounds all together to form a solid foundation for replacing Eric Holder. His argument is free of any holes and I completely agree after reading this article. I would even go as far to say that it is not so much an ‘opinion’ piece and more of a ‘persuasion’. Unfortunately, the attorney general position is appointed and approved by legislature. I am not a member of the Senate or House of Representatives but if I could vote to have Thomas Perez be the next attorney general, I definitely would.