In model senate, I was called upon to fill the role of a Democratic Lobbyist speaking on behalf of the American Immigration Council, an advocacy group and voice for immigrants everywhere. I researched on the group, finding what services they provided, their perspective and dreams for the future of immigration in our country. I then used this information to fuel the patho and etho aspect of my speech, and attempted to intertwine a touch of logic and factual evidence.
I suppose my favorite memory in model senate was the initial research. Though it broke my heart, I desperately wanted to learn about refugees as it pulled on my fragile heart strings. I began to slowly understand the epidemic. A lot of this project proved to be difficult. The majority of it rose from others behavior, but I also think my attitude made this project even more difficult. Giving my speech was awful and I trembled in front of my peers eyes. I know to a degree it was my fault, I should have rehearsed countless more times. I believe I was engaged to the best of my ability, though I did not take this project particularly seriously, I gave every speaker my respect, tried to understand the various perspectives in the room and work to create amendments I hoped would unify the two parties. Overall, our bill is liberal at its base. However, there are republican amendments weaved in that I may not agree with but appreciate the other perspective. I don’t think this bill was necessarily that good, either. It was a bit too vague on everything and in my eyes should have focused profoundly more on education, compassion and opportunity. I think the unprofessional behavior of many students crippled this project's ability to create a realistic representation of Senate. I still think the system is rigged, that corruption runs through the veins of politicians as they can be bought out by Risa’s candy. Congress absolutely is broken, just being in this mock example, I saw how we sat on separate sides, deeply divided. People snickered comments about the other side, gossiping like children about their stupidity. I watched it all unfold, knowing I had my own bias of republicans, but it astonished me to see how divided we became in fake roles. Actually, it was terrifying and made me paranoid as I thought about the social behavior, the government pulling strings on society, the division as deep and large as the Grand Canyon between people. The corruption, the hate. Yes, I could be optimistic and lie to myself and you whispering there is good, but this project lowered my morale. I saw hope in small strings between the darkness, so fleeting and thin that it faded as quickly as it arose. Overall, the research presented itself as a smooth ride. However, the exhibition was a disaster. I felt stressed was when being forced to speak in front of judgemental peers, cough, Jonathan, cough TJ. I ended up leaving in the middle of my pathetic speech and cried in the bathroom, Dana found me though so it’s okay. I found it stressful how disrespectful and vulgar some of my peers were, it disgusted me. Their lack of humanity for other human beings pushed me to the edge of insanity as a few individuals laughed at Kodi's wonderful speech. I didn’t care for this project either, but multiple boys in my group made Anne cry with their absolute disregard, playing on their cell phones, yelling dilatory, snickering amongst themselves when their phones went off playing rap music. There absolutely should have been a teacher present, I was shocked by the series of events that occurred during our meetings. What also upset me was that Jonathan convinced everyone to vote unanimously, despite what their senators believed. He laughed as each of our amendments got shut down, sarcastically holding his red card with some annoying sense of pride with the unfair advantage he held of the majority. If I was forced to go through the grueling process of this project once again, I suppose I would attempt to be more positive about it and understand the validity of it and how it created rippling effects in our life every day. I would have dove into my research even deeper, trying to touch the sand of the political ocean. Its grains of corruption and humanity. To other students, I would say it’s really easy to get through this project, but try to understand that these issues are unraveling our country. Be even tempered, know when to hold your tongue, do not let the labels of Republican or Democrat divide you and your peers, they’re just words. It’s important to understand how our government is constructed, yes, and I know that this project seems far too long and boring, but get through it. I honestly disagree with thie length of this project and wish we hadn't done it. Few took it seriously, and it was drawn out far too long. We spent an entire semester on this project, and the next part of our senior year will be 'Senior Project.' It just seems a little ridiculous. I crave history and I think that Animas needs desperately to focus on that. Perhaps two months would have been adequete, but an entire semester proved to be too long, so many students lost interest and didn't take anything seriously. This year will be composed of two huge projects and I find it truly upsetting and that the learning in humanities is sometimes off balanced. I would strongly recommend considering reconstructing the first semester of senior humanities. A description of the project- what was it, what did we do, what did you do Your legislation Below is my speech "I would first like to thank the senators for hearing me today. My name is Teresa, and I represent the American Immigration Council, which is an advocacy group for immigrants worldwide. I am also speaking on behalf of the immigrants themselves to the best of my ability, and, in my eyes, equality at its core. I am addressing the Visa Reform & Enforcement Bill Number 2-2016, advocating for the passing of this proposed legislation. The American Immigration Council is a network of resources as well as an advocacy group. We provide services to immigrants of all status, breaking down the complicated laws and regulations into easy to digest material. We hope to create rippling waves of awareness in the country of the current immigration laws and regulations. Throughout my career, I have heard heartbreaking stories of mothers torn apart from their children, families broken, personal rights stripped. I have met young fathers not understanding how to complete the extensive paperwork for a workers visa so they could come here to the United States to support their family. It has brought me here, and with these experiences I am equipped with a glimmer of their perspective, a strong moral system and a voice to speak for this Bill. Overall, I do agree with the foundations of this bill at its core as it aligns with many of my values, and attempts to create a more reasonable immigration system. However, there are a few adjustments I see that are necessary to properly represent immigrants. The first aspect of this bill that was spoke strongest to me was student visas. I value education at its core and believe it should be more accessible for the bright young minds of the world to study in the United States. In my work, I have seen the transition from student visas to another form is not a smooth transition, and as a result many promising students with a desire to contribute to our society have been forced to leave. This bill addressed that head on, stating that the student visas would be changed into skilled worker visas. The idea behind it is correct, but it needs to go farther in depth and explain how applications will work as it is far too vague. They also spoke on visa distribution, another important topic. Currently, all countries are give 10,000 work permit visas to come into the United States. So Palau, a country of only 21,097 gets the same number of visas as Mexico, holding 122.3 million inhabitants. One clear flaw in our system is that there is an obvious demand from countries such as Mexico- but they are allocated the same number of visas. It is clear that the proposed refinement of distributing the visas to countries based on population and need would provide profound opportunity to many individuals. The proposed solution of funneling money from the ICE Budget into funding the federal check ups etc also settles well with me. It doesn’t makes sense that the budget ICE is currently standing at 13.56 billion dollars because illegal border crossings have been at their lowest since the 1970’s. It is true that there must be border enforcement and patrol to prevent drugs and massive waves of illegal immigrants into our country which would cripple the economy. However, this budget is far too large. The bill stated that the money taken from the budget would go into check ins from local Federal administration buildings to inform immigrants of upcoming expiration dates etc to prevent temporary workers from overstaying visas. But, I believe money should also be put into transition schools for immigrant children, advocacy groups for immigrants such as lawyers etc, and finally programs such as E-Verify which will strengthen our security in a different way. I agree with SECTION 1, in its entirety. Having worked with immigrants for the past five years, I know that the amount of paperwork and documents they need to fill for a simple one year or even seasonal job is absurd. These extensive files waste time, provide unnecessary confusion and arguably provokes some to illegally enter for the short time they’re coming. The timeframe of an immigrant's stay should be reflected in the amount of paperwork. America’s economy is also partially dependent upon seasonal and untrained workers so it is pivotal that this bill addresses it. Not only that, but thinking with compassion, many of these workers are coming from Mexico in search of temporary jobs to send money back to their families. For example, in Mexico, 12% of the country live on 26.50 a week. The minimum wage of the US, 7.25 per hour, is 13 times the minimum wage of Mexico. Creating opportunities for seasonal jobs here in the United States is not only financially smart and necessary, but deeply improves the quality of other people's lives. Lastly, I agree with the proposed E-Verify. Given that many in this room believe parts of this bill are stripping our country of security, which is understandable, it is pivotal to our country and the peace of mind to many to enforce E-Verify at all businesses. This ensures that the people who enter the United States are here with integrity and that jobs are not being taken from massive groups of undocumented workers. Most of the faults I found within this bill simply stem a lack of explanation or depth. There were, however, a few problems that I could not avert my eyes from. Though the check ins are a wonderful idea, I believe that SECTION’s 5 Sub-SECTION C needs to be altered. It states that “If the temporary worker cannot find work after being terminated, then they will be deported 3 weeks after.” I believe that there should a larger time frame should only be enforced if the immigrant is not actively searching for a new job. If they are, in my eyes, it should be extended to 6 weeks. The refinements I see necessary in this bill is more depth explanation and expansion of concrete ideas, there is far too much gray area. I strongly align with the proposed idea of increasing the number of student visas, as eis one of the Immigration Council’s top priorities, it is not explained enough. The bill states that student visas will be distributed based on the need of colleges or universities. This to me came across as very vague. I do not believe that this is logical, there instead should be a cap on the total number of student visas. It also does not acknowledge how the visas will be distributed, and I believe a sub section should be added mirroring SECTION 2 where they are broken up based on population and demand. Overall, this section has a strong base, addressing the pivotal need of bringing new, young minds to America but needs to be polished. As I stated above with the ICE Budget, it is vague as to how much will be removed from it and only addresses spending it on Federal check ups. I believe a strong refinement to this bill would be expanding how the portion of this budget is spent and placing it in different immigrant resources. For example, since some members in this room may be worried that defunding part of ICE would result in a lack of security, part of the budget could go towards strengthening programs such as E-Verify. I can see this bill as the glimmer of a silver lining, trying to unify the diverse opinions in this room into one piece of legislation. While attempting to create opportunity it also weaves in accountability and integrity. I, like many of you, see room to weave our personal morals and beliefs into it, and I believe that this can be done. But at its roots, this bills foundation is strong, logical and justified. This bill must be passed to enforce our security where it must be strengthened- through sources such as E-Verify, while also lessening dependency on ICE. The definition of an immigrant is someone who comes to live in a new country. I don’t know how attached or detached you are to your roots of ancestry, but thinking through this abstract mindset, we all, at one point or another, are tied to the word immigration. If you dig deep enough in your trail of ancestry, you will see that the word American doesn’t solely compose you. African, Hispanic, Irish, Scottish, German, Polish;all of this hereditary intertwined to create you, a composition of different parts to create a whole as diverse as this nation. What is a country without opportunity? What is a country without security? What is a country without morals? What is a country without the richness found in its people? I believe today we must step out of the destructive boxes of political polarization. I believe today, we vote yes on the passing of this bill, and work together to create amendments that embodies the desires and perspectives in this room that vary as much as our ancestry. I believe today, we vote yes for unification, safety, integrity, education, morality, today we vote to do the right thing. Join my hand, raise your voice, and fight for a change."
0 Comments
Goal #1
I adore writing and I always will. I find myself to deeply resonate with the poetic justice and emotional truth of words. However, my arguments often tend to come from chaotic emotional standpoints, my writing using pathos and rambling, poetic thoughts that fail to follow the main point logically. Thus, one of my first and most pivotal goals is to strengthen my logical arguments. I feel as though I come across to the world as a joke, the things I am passionate about only being backed up by emotional and moral justification. I struggled a lot with my essay over naive cynicism. I tried to weave in poetic language and emotional evidence because it is what I know best, creating strong accusations without evidence. My work was a representation of this, reading like a personal response to the material instead of an essay. I believe I have to be diligent and rein in self control within my writing to contain my emotional side while feeding the logical one. This is especially important to me because when I enter the world, I want people to take me and what I care about seriously. Goal #2 Based on a mind that works like an endless, poetic ramble, I also tend to get off topic. It's difficult for me to stay on track when there are oh so many things to talk about. Also in my essay, I wanted to showcase how the media is affecting minds across the world, creating a detrimental mental construct. My overall thesis was asking what tools society can use to shift away from naive cynicism when it is broadcasted to us via technology. I then proposed another question, "How can we find a balance and silver lining between cynicism and optimism?" These two questions create two very different essays, and as a result. my essay became a jumbled mix of the two. I touched upon healthy cynicism and when it's not necessary, also fueling my other question. Because of two different purposes, my essay was confusing and hard to follow. In this current essay and others to follow, I want to create more structured guidelines for my essays before I begin writing all over the place from different ideas. I think for Naive Cynicism I want to focus more on finding a balance as it can be more easily answered by the tools necessary to shift away from naive cynicism. Goal #3 Lastly, I would like to work on my tone. I find in a lot of my school writings that they can come across as emotional journal entries. When I write, it often comes out of deep emotional experiences and because of this, I forget whom I am actually speaking to- the audience that is digesting this information. For example, my college essay has a bad tone at first. I focused strongly on how I dealt with negative things in the world, without meaning to, the amount and way I wrote this section of my essay made me appear negatively and in a light I didn't want to be under. I talked endlessly about how much I felt for the pains of the world, rambling on and on, the tone was dark and without a solution. Though people who know me well understand I was trying to explain the complexity and sensitivity of my emotions, to strangers I could come across as unstable and negative. Tone is extremely important in future writing because even if there is validity into what one is speaking, how it is showcased will ultimately affect the audiences opinions of it. College Essay Reflection The word capacity was extremely difficult for me, and for a long time I looked blankly at an empty google document, unsure of what words I could paint together to compose a picture, one that would define me within the constraint of a word limit. After a meeting with my college counselor, I learned my GPA and SAT scores, little condescending numbers on papers defining my future. I broke down when i saw most colleges accepted students with numbers far exceeding my own. She explained to me the profound importance of my college essay and letters of recommendation. I tried not to cry but left the room blinking quickly. I rewrote my essay about three times and am still constantly making changes. The fear, pressure and insecurity strangled me as I typed every single word. I imagined my essay making no dent on the readers soul, the sad canvas of broken words being tossed into the recycling bin. Yet another failure. Every sentence sounded wrong as I read it over and over, the carelessly poetic words I threw in for good measure would be laughed at as naive, what makes me unique as a human being would be scrutinized. My worth judged based on this piece of paper staring back at me. My essay was outlining my compassion to the world around me, how I could feel deeply for both the yin and yang of the world but regain my sense of purpose somewhere in the silver lining. I found it tragically ironic I could not even gain control while writing a silly essay. Anyways, what got me through this dilemma that seemed to have no end was simply remembering the experience. I cut down the darker side of my essay and wrote about Tirza, how the experience in the refuge had changed my life, that a little girl helped me find my sense of purpose. As soon as I remembered that, everything came easily. My humanities teacher Ashley gave me helpful advice as we went over my scrambled thoughts together, she pointed a flashlight in the direction I wished to travel; bringing up a pivotal point. I was showing the negative side of myself too much. My first attempts only consisted of how deeply I felt pain, and though it articulated a strong sense of compassion and sensitivity for the world, there was no solution to my constant emotional crisis. I went on and on about how I felt for Hiroshima and thoughts that ran through my head about any injustice. And after a certain point, it became a hopeless broken record. She reminded me of something I easily overlooked, that this essay is to showcase how I overcame and found balance between feeling the good and bad, where a sense of purpose flowered that has shaped my identity. My entire tone was shifted, in turn displaying a more happy girl who understands her ability and how to use it in the world. Now, more logically writing wise, I was repetitive. Something extremely beneficial was streamlining various paragraphs that basically were saying the same thing through different examples and metaphors. To an extent, an essay like that becomes boring to read, endless rambling on and on. Many of my sentences didn't make sense as I continued to rewrite my essay in such a rush I was unable to articulate myself and who I am. As soon as I found sight of the impact of this essay, beyond possible recycling bins, acceptance letters or judgmental thoughts, the prompt spoke clearly to me, the words flowing easily and concisely. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |