gkaras20ahsgov-blog

[gkaras20ahsgov-blog]

Civic action extra credit evidence

[gkaras20ahsgov-blog]

Civic Action Assessment of Issue

1. I think my role as a citizen of this country is to be an active citizen instead of sitting back and waiting for change to happen. I can take action to meet the needs of my community and country by registering to vote and expressing my views on different issues in my area. I think a big role we play as citizens in the democracy we live in is using our right to freedom of speech. 2. In this class, I have learned that civic responsibility isn’t just a nation wide responsibility but also applies to the town I live in. There are decisions we can make as a community, like banning juul’s. This made me realize that I can hold a lot more civic responsibility, since it is so prevalent in my area. 3. I do feel that I have a greater responsibility to help address the problems my civic action issue has created because there isn’t a lot that is being done by the government to protect animals against abuse. Even though there is not much I can do on a wide spectrum, I can use my right to freedom of speech to advocate for ethical treatment of animals. I can also address the problem by voting for candidates who have a focus on rights of animals. 4. A couple of years ago, a did my Girl Scout Silver Award on raising awareness for euthanization of animals in shelters due to over crowding. I held a fundraiser at the Contra Costa Animal Shelter to raise money for the shelter to build more kennels to hold more animals. I also went to a Civil Council meeting at the Lafayette Library on November 11th to expand my knowledge on the issues being addressed in my area. The experience was very positive because I learned about issues that are being addressed in my area that I was never aware was occurring. 5. In the future, I am willing to do more by attending more council meetings and participate in protests for issues that I feel strongly about.

[gkaras20ahsgov-blog]

Executive Action Assessment of Issue

1. Trump has been working on proving the the U.S. is not running out of energy. America’s energy revolution has produced affordable, reliable energy for consumers, as well as providing high-paying jobs for small businesses. Carbon emissions have dropped to their lowest level in 25 years. Trump believes that American energy policy should balance environmental protection with economic growth. 

2. I agree with Trumps position on balancing both environmental protection and economic growth because it supports both the economy and the environment all in one. However, I’m not sure I fully agree with his statement that the U.S. is not running out of energy because I think the amount is definitely declining. 

3. Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency Andrew Wheeler

4. The cabinet’s mission statement is to maintain both a healthier and cleaner environment. Work towards having more effective partnerships and have greater certainty, compliance and effectiveness.

5. Jared Blumenfeld is the secretary of the department. He is professionally qualified because he is one of America’s most innovative environmental leaders. He has a lot of background in this agency because he has conducted more than 25 years of environmental policy and management experience at the local, national and international levels. 

6. The Environmental Information by Location would be suitable for responding to my issue because they have different ways to keep the environment clean and prosperous. This helps provide animals with a healthy and strong habitat. By humans doing there part in the Environmental Information, they can decrease the amount of harm animals face due to humans lack of taking care of the environment. 

7. This department is not one that Trump wants to cut funding and this is because he found a way to benefit the environment while also benefiting the economy. The U.S. economy is a very big focus in Trumps presidency, so he won’t cut the funding for environmental matters. For example, America’s energy revolution provided high-paying jobs for small businesses. Decreasing the funding on this cabinet would harm animals habitats. 

8. S- The subject of this article is that the forest services in Idaho is opposing bear - baiting. 

A- The author of this article is Keith Ridler. 

C- The context is that Federal authorities are contesting a lawsuit filed by environmental groups, who want to ban the use of bait to hunt black bears in national forests in Idaho and Wyoming. The environmental groups claim that allowing the use of bait could harm federally protected grizzly bears. 

A- The audience includes people who are involved organizations that work towards saving animals or are worried in the well being of bears.

P- The author of this article agrees with banning bear baiting because it is taking a toll on the bear population in Idaho and Wyoming.

S- The significance of this article is to raise awareness of the harm that is being done on bears and what we can do to prevent it. I agree with the article because I want to end humans abusing bears in the wild. 

[gkaras20ahsgov-blog]

State and Legislative Action

1. Kahan and East Bay Regional Park District Board Member Beverly Lane, toured the McCosker Creek Restoration and Public Access Project site at Robert Sibley Volcanic Regional Preserve. In her efforts to support our ecosystem, she secured $4 million in state funding for the project, restore a 2,000-foot section of creek in the upper San Leandro watershed. Kahan emphasizes that perservining our open spaces, protecting wildlife and our environment is crucial. She provided funding for the project because she is a proud partner with East Bay Regional Park District. With this project, Kahan hopes she can clean up the ecosystem and provide habitats for animals in the wild. I do agree with Kahan’s position because the 2,000 foot section of creek is covered in sink holes, making it impossible for animals to inhabit. By helping this small land by the creek, it will contribute to making our whole ecosystem cleaner. In 2019, Legislation passed a bill called Tesla Park Preservation. This bill allowed the conservation of Alameda-Tesla Expansion Area. The area housed many endangered species and a high abundance of natural resources.

State Senator Glazer doesn’t have a stance on ethical treatment of animals and I think this is because it might not be an issue that’s present in California. However, he is a lifelong environmental advocate. He led efforts that raised hundreds of millions of dollars to permanently protect open space in California and 25 other states. He has also casted important votes on California’s fight against global warming by setting new targets to reduce emissions. I think my issue or resolution falls under the state authority, but neither the State of California or Glazer doesn’t put it at the top of there list. I do agree with Glazers stance on protecting open spaces in California because it can preserve the wildlife. I do not agree with California and Senator Glazers lack of advocacy for ethical treatment of animals because I think it is an important issue. Glazer sponsored bill SB 1305, which allowed California’s first responders to provide pre-veterinary emergency care, on a voluntary basis, to an injured dog or cat at the scene of an emergency prior to transferring the animal to a veterinary care facility.

2. a) The bill number is SB 202. 

b) The bill was introduced by Senator Wilk on January 31, 2019. 

c) A violation of certain provisions of the Food and Agricultural Code relating to animals is a crime. This bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The last major action of the bill was that the California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

d) I would encourage representatives to support this bill because it prohibits any person from collecting blood from animals, or preparing, testing, processing, storing, or distributing blood from animals, for retail sale and distribution except in a commercial blood bank for animals that is licensed by the Secretary of Food and Agriculture.

3. Congressman Desaulnier doesn’t state his perspective on ethical treatment of animals. He does, however, believe that strong and forward-looking energy and environmental policy is not the enemy of economic growth, but a key driver of growth, innovation, and competitiveness. He many not be working towards preventing animal cruelty, but he is working on making the air quality better. He has not sponsored any bills that relate to my issue. 

Senator Harris doesn’t specifically list her perspective on my issue, however she has sponsored some bills that are related to ethical treatment of animals. Bill 2561 is a bill that amended the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 to clarify provisions enacted by the Captive Wildlife Safety Act, to further the conservation of certain wildlife species, and for other purposes. Bill 2562 is a bill that prohibits the importation, exportation, transportation, sale, receipt, acquisition, and purchase in interstate or foreign commerce of any live animal of any prohibited wildlife species. I support both of these bills because I feel that the are working towards decreasing animal cruelty. 

4. a) There are 14 bills that where passed that have to do with my issue.

b) House Bill 724 was the bill that resulted after the argument of whether or not animal torture should be a federal crime. Its called Preventing Animal Cruelty and Torture (PACT) Act. 

c) This bill would make it a federal crime for any person to crush, burn, drown, suffocate, impale, sexually exploit, or otherwise torture animals across state lines. It’d also make it a federal crime to engage in animal crushing on federal property. 

d) This bill has a huge impact on preventing animal cruelty because it makes animal torture a federal crime. People convicted under this act would face federal felony charges, fines, and up to seven years in prison.

e) I would vote yea for this bill because it rightfully punishes people who torture animals. With this bill, I think animal cruelty rates will decline because people wouldn’t want to risk being federally punished. 

f) This bill originated in the House. The Judiciary Committee and the Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security Committee have reviewed it. The Senate recently passed the bill on a voice vote. 

[gkaras20ahsgov-blog]

Political Interest Groups, and PAC Assessment

1. Identify one national interest group that represents your issue.

a) American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

b) "The ASPCA's mission is to provide effective means for the prevention of cruelty to animals throughout the United States."

c) 1. The organization was founded on the belief that animals are entitled to kind and respectful treatment at the hands of humans and must be protected under the law.

2. The Headquartered are in New York City. The ASPCA maintains a strong local presence, and with programs that extend there anti-cruelty mission across the country, they are recognized as a national animal welfare organization.

3. The ASPCA is concerned with welfare issues of animals in categories such as companion animals, farm animals, animals in research and education, animals in entertainment, sport and work, and wild animals.

4. The ASPCA’s policies are grounded in the belief that animals inherently deserve our respect, compassion and consideration of their needs.

5. The ASPCA’s policies are based on empirical evidence and are supported by scientific research that establishes animals’ capacity to feel pain and suffer.

d) ASPCA desires a certain policy where all companion animals should receive appropriate veterinary care. When founded, the ASPCA formation prompted the New York State Legislature to pass the country’s first effective anti-cruelty law.

e) The interest group is located in New York. There are no local meetings in the Bay Area.

f) People all over the world can get involved with the group via social media. You can also get involved by donating on there website. They also encourage animal adoptions on there website to reduce animal neglect. 

g) After reading the website, I thought it was interesting how ASPCA teamed up with Amazon Pets and Amazon’s Treasure Trunk for Adopt a Shelter Dog Month. 

2. Identify one state interest group that represents your issue.

a) PawPAC - California's Political Action Committee for Animals

b) PawPAC is the first organization dedicated to the election of candidates for state office in California who are committed to the well-being of animals. They help to make sure that the laws protect all animals, whether in farms, in the wild or in our homes.

c) 1. PawPAC is widely respected in the California State Legislature as effective in helping to elect candidates who will pass humane laws, through endorsements, contributions, and annual voting charts. 

2. They help by making sure that the laws protect all animals, whether they are used in farming, entertainment or research, or make their home in the wild or with people.

3. There ultimate goal is to promote the election of humane-minded legislators to office.

4. They believe that every legislator you vote for impacts the animals and their habitat, starting with the Governor

5. The PawPAC's believes there endorsement list is your guide to animal advocates in the legislature. 

d) One piece of Legislation is SB 580 (Wilk) Animal abuse criminals. It’s in support of 2-year bill, which requires animal abuse criminals seeking probation to undergo a psychological evaluation, followed by a course in humane treatment of animals.

e) PawPAC is located in all of California. But there contact center is in Downey California. The closest event is in SoCal on October 19th and 20th.

f) PawPAC is run by an all-volunteer Board of Directors. They encourage distributing literature, or joining in grassroots lobbying through social media. You can also help by donating, all money goes to campaign support.

g) On the website it says that the PawPAC has been protecting animals for 39 years and I found this interesting. 

I think the PawPAC is more organized and successful. On there website they include a long list of legislation’s and endorsements. 

3) Choose one PAC or Super PAC that pertains to your civic action issue.

a) Animal Wellness Action

b) It consists of current and former district attorneys, attorneys general, and other law enforcement leaders to promote appropriate enforcement of anti-cruelty statutes and work to strengthen the legal framework against animal abuse. Their work is guided by the notion that perpetrators of animal cruelty often demonstrate other socially dangerous behaviors.

c) Total receipt is $75,600 and they have spent $33,539. There’s $25,340 for begin cash on hand and $67,401 for end cash on hand. 

d) 52% of there budget goes to Democrats, while 48% goes to Republicans. In the House, Democrats receive a total of $20,800, while Republicans receive $13,500. 

e) There donors are from all over the states. This shows that this PAC is reaching out to a wide range of people. Many of the donors are retired, this indicates that this PAC is reaching out to an older crowd. 

[gkaras20ahsgov-blog]

Political Party Action

Republican Party: 

Brief Statement- On the Republican website, www.gop.com, doesn’t state there parties position on ethical treatment of animals. In other websites, they state that Republicans are considerately more likely to view medical animal testing as morally acceptable but are still against animal cruelty. The Republican Party may not include this issue on there platform because I may not be on the top of there list of concerns in America. 

Do you agree with their position? Why or why not?

I don’t agree with the Republican parties lack of concern towards animal cruelty because I think it’s an important topic that needs to be addressed. I also disagree with there stance on medical animal testing, I don’t think it’s morally acceptable

Democratic Party:

Brief Statement- The Democratic Party also doesn’t take the position of ethical treatment of animals. This party has a heavy focus on other issues such as the welfare of the less fortunate. 

Do you agree with their position? Why or why not?

I do not agree with this because I think the ethical treatment of animals should have a strong position on the Democratic platform. 

Libertarian Party:

Brief Statement- The Libertarian Party also doesn’t include the ethical treatment of animals on there platform. They are mainly concerned with issues regarding freedom from government and regulations.

Do you agree with their position? Why or why not?

Once again I don’t agree with this because I think they should be more concerned about the welfare of animals and branch out more on the issues they express on there platform.

Green Party:

Brief Statement- The Green Parties position on ethical treatment of animals is that humans don’t have the right to harm animals just because we can or because we are the superior race. They also don’t support goods being produced from exotic animals or endangered and believe they should be banned.

Do you agree with their position? Why or why not?

I agree with The Green Parties position on ethical treatment of animals because I feel that humans treat animals cruelly because they believe they are higher then them and this causes lack of sympathy. I also strongly agree with banning the production of goods such as shark fins, ivory from elephants horns and animal fur. 

Peace and Freedom Party:

Brief Statement- The Peace and Freedom Party also don’t include the ethical treatment on there platform. 

Do you agree with their position? Why or why not?

Just like the other parties that didn’t include ethical treatment, I don’t support there lack of support for the issue because it’s an important topic that deserves to be talked about. 

My Position:

I side with the green party the most when putting ethical treatment of animals into account, but I don’t agree with some of there other political views so I don’t think I would vote for the Green Party candidates. 

[gkaras20ahsgov-blog]

Constitutional Issues

1. The name of the case is United States vs. Stevens.

2. On April 20, 2010 the Supreme Court granted the request of the United States Department of Justice to review United States v. Stevens. The defendant in the case was Robert Stevens, who was convicted in January 2005 for violating Section 48 by selling three videos of dogfights and hog-dogging.

3. The Animal Legal Defense Fund’s asked the Court to recognize the protection of animals as a priority in government. Robert Stevens was convicted under 18 U.S.C. Section 48 for “knowingly selling depictions of animal cruelty of intention of placing those depictions in interstate commerce for commercial gain." On April 20, the Supreme Court granted the request of the U.S. Department of Justice to review United States v. Stevens. This case involved the sale of dog fighting videos.

4. The Constitutional question the justices were deciding was whether Section 48, a federal law that criminalizes the sale of depictions of animal cruelty, violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. 

5. The Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment was in question.

6. The court declined the government’s request to establish a new class of speech–depictions of animal cruelty–that is “unprotected” by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court will hold oral argument in the case this fall.

7. The precedent that was set by the court was that someone can’t be convicted for animal cruelty just for selling depictions and/or videos of actions of animal cruelty.

8. I strongly disagree with the court's decision to not convict someone of selling videos of animal cruelty. I side with Justice Samuel A. Alito because his vote wasn’t intended to suppress speech but instead prevent animal cruelty. He was more concerned that the majority holding will legalize the sale of illegal dog fighting. 

Twitter:

S - The subject of the article is that tickets for parks that buy and breed dolphins and whales for tourist attractions will no longer be sold on trip advisor. As well as a new addition to the 2016 animal welfare policy which banned ticket sales for parks allowing tourists to have physical contact with captive animals.

A - The author of this article is Tariro Mzezewa.

C - This source was produced October 2, 2019. This was a little after Trip advisor released a statement stating they would no longer sell tickets where attractions breed and buy dolphins and whales.

A - This was intended for an audience of people who buy tickets to parks that don’t treat there animals ethically. As well as people who have urged trip advisor to stop selling tickets to these parks and attractions. This doesn’t affect the reliability of the source because it’s not a biased article.

P - This article is objective because the author provides the policy and also presents the other sides response.

S - The author uses quotes from the statement made by trip advisor for evidence and competing perspectives. The significance of the article is to show that actions are being made to eliminate organizations that treat animals wrong for the form of human entertainment. Out of sheer love and respect for animals, I agree with trip advisors decision to stop selling tickets to attractions that breed and buy dolphins and whales. 

[gkaras20ahsgov-blog]

Media Assessment of Issue

1. Conservative media bias article- https://www.foxnews.com/politics/peta-asks-ocasio-cortez-to-promote-healthy-vegan-food-policies

2. S: The Subject of  the article is The Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) sent a letter to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. In the letter, they asked her to push for a Green New Deal and asked congress women to encourage more vegan food policies. 

A: The author is Stephen Sorace, Fox News. 

C: The context is that PETA feels that we need a vegan green new deal to help the earth, animals, and humans that are being poisoned by animal agriculture. 

A: The audience is people who have a strong opinion on or involved in animals rights groups such as Ethical Treatment of Animals. 

P: The author of this Fox News article is biased against PETA by referring members as a “combative activist group”. 

S: The significance of this article is to showcase PETA’s efforts to promote healthy eating for Americans in hopes to limit the country’s dependence on an animal food supply.

I agree with the article because I do think America is too dependent on animal food supply and we turn to unhealthy eating. PETA’s proposal could help both animals, humans, and the earth.

2. Liberal Article Source- https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/virgin-holidays-whales-dolphins-seaworld/index.html

S: The subject of this article is that the tourism company, Virgin Holidays, is no longer taking people to parks that have whales, dolphins or porpoises captive for human entertainment.

A: The author is Madeline Holcombe, CNN.

C: The context is that the company decided to end partnerships with theme parks like Sea World because of the criticism they are under for there harsh treatment towards the animals. This came to the medias attention after the CNN documentary “Black Fish”.

A: The audience is people who have a strong opinion on or involved in animals rights groups. This article is also for people who don’t support parks holding animals for human entertainment.

P: There biased is that because of the “Black Fin” documentary, they will start doing tours in the whales natural habitats versus supporting theme parks that cause harm to the animals. Virgin Holiday Company wants to encourage places like Sea World to treat there animals with respect.

S: The significance of this article is to raise standards in animal welfare in the tourism industry, support ethical sanctuaries, and encourage other parks to change their practices.

I do agree with this article because I think its important to let animals thrive in nature rather than be held captive for human entertainment.

3. Objective Article - https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-seaworld-dolphins/animal-welfare-activists-urge-end-to-seaworld-dolphin-shows-idUSKCN1T707Z

S: The subject of the article is that after the “Blackfish” documentary was released, there has been a movement to end SeaWorld’s killer whale performances and dolphin shows at the theme parks.

A: The author is Alan Devall, Reuters News.

C: The context is that a hotel news conference was held near SeaWorld’s San Diego park. The Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) issued a report documenting physical and behavioral harm that dolphins suffer from their use in live shows and confinement in captivity.

A: The indented audience is people who are against animal showcase theme parks and people who want to learn about the trauma these animals go through while being held captive. 

P: The article is objective because it is very factual and both groups statements are shared. For example, Dr. Heather Rally, a PETA Foundation veterinarian reported wounds and rake marks caused from the dolphins aggressive response towards there confined habitat. SeaWorld’s vice president of animal health and welfare, Hendrik Nollens, responded by saying that the dolphins are treated like royalty. 

S: The significance is that PETA hopes the conference held near San Diego SeaWorld will have the same impact that the “Blackfish” documentary had on creating a movement towards ending cruel treatment of animals in theme parks. The article’s significance is to also show both sides views and how they believe they have the animals best interests at heart. 

I don’t agree with everything in the article because I feel that SeaWorld is trying to cover up the visible scrap marks on the animals by saying that they are happy and treated right. 

3. The similarities between these three article’s is that they all mention PETA and the groups efforts to protect animals and the earth. The differences between the articles is that the Fox News article isn’t as supportive towards PETA’s efforts as the other two articles are. 

4. I identify most with the Reuters News article because its objective, gives specific facts, and shares both sides. This article enables me to form my own opinion about the topic and provide credible facts to back up my opinion.  

[gkaras20ahsgov-blog]

Conceptualizing the issue and assessing types of action

1. My civic action is ethnical treatment of animals. I chose this because I love animals and want to learn more about animal cruelty because I feel like the media doesn’t cover it that much.

2. This is an issue because humans rely on animals for various reasons. Since we are so dependent on certain animals, we don’t always have there best interest at heart. It’s easy to think that no harm is being done but this is not the case.

3. The first action we need to take to address this issue is to spread the word. This is what I hope to do on this social media platform. If we spark conversation, people will be more aware of the actions we can take to help our animals.

4. I am following 5 accounts on Twitter that pertain this specific issue. The first accounts I followed were @peta and @MercyForAnimals because they post daily about breaking animal news. This drew my attention because they posted stories that I have never read before and that isn’t covered by the media. I also follow @calparks because it’s a foundation that is dedicated to protecting, advocating and enhancing California’s state parks. This is especially important because protecting our state parks is one step we can take towards helping animals. @Animals1st is a good account that wants to raise awareness towards ending animal cruelty. @seta_offical is an account that posts happy animals and informs the media about animals that need your help. While reading tweets from @peta, I came across and article that alarmed me. It talked about how zoos are just now starting to cut back on using sharp metal hooks to control elephants.