Posted on Leave a comment

Donald Trump Solves the Healthcare Crisis!

By: Sarah Ansari

Friday, October 3, President Donald Trump was admitted to the Walter Reed Medical Center, infected with COVID-19. Toupee matted with exertion, the president fought valiantly for his life, the fluorescent lights of the hospital illuminating the sheen of sweat on his leathery, orange-toned brow. Gasping for breath, the president could only whisper a faint, “wrong” when instead of going for the bottles of bleach known to be the cure-all for COVID, the doctors instead went for more traditional drugs. 

Perhaps if the medical professionals had listened to Donald, known by himself to be a “very stable genius”, he would have been released within the day. However, the doctors (now under investigation as foreign spies) refused to listen to the president tell them how to do their job.

Still, Trump displayed an amazing resilience in the face of adversity. Unlike the Americans spending months in crowded hospitals recovering from Corona or the 200,000 people who have died in the United States, Trump managed to recover within days. Some insist that he was only able to do so because of his access to free, top-notch healthcare and a personal team of the nation’s top doctors. However, the president put those rumours to rest. Ever magnanimous, Trump released a statement revealing the secrets behind his recovery:

I will be leaving the great Walter Reed Medical Center today at 6:30 P.M. Feeling really good! Don’t be afraid of Covid. Don’t let it dominate your life. We have developed, under the Trump Administration, some really great drugs & knowledge. I feel better than I did 20 years ago!

What his hands lack in size, Trump makes up for in his brains, solving a global issue with a single tweet. 

Tons of U.S. citizens lament the country’s healthcare crisis– talking about inflated costs for medical treatment, the way hospitals favour the rich (with poor people often going broke just to be treated), and the overall lack of accessibility of the system. But, with Mr. Trump’s sage words of wisdom, those issues are a thing of the past.

Don’t let it dominate your life.

Unlike the right to abortion, to Donald Trump, sickness is a choice, a question– and much like the question as to whether he should be re-elected, the answer is no

(Remember to vote!: https://vote.gov/)

Posted on Leave a comment

The USPS and the Delivery of Democracy

By: Atmanah Parab

The spread of the Coronavirus has forced a reevaluation of society at large for many. Among the myriad of questions being asked, one that stands out is: what is an essential service? What is a service so valuable that its provision trumps protection of health, safety and the bottom line? With an election, medicine deliveries and affordable shipping on the line, the USPS emerges as an example. Due to the fact that it is a service of massive value to Americans, its dissolution could be another nail in the coffin of American democracy. 

In the era of online communication, physical mail can feel antiquated and maybe even unneeded but the reality is that physical mail and services like the United States Postal Service are of vital importance to the function of the nation. However, the future of the USPS is highly uncertain between the unprecedented attack of COVID-19, restrictive legislation that weakens its functionality and the general neglect and dismissal from the Trump Administration. Not everything can be run as a business where the primary standard for value is profit and avoiding debt, and the USPS is one of the only egalitarian services offered by the United States government. 

As an article from The Economist puts it, the USPS is suffering “one acute and two chronic” ailments. The “acute” one being the exposure of USPS employees to Coronavirus resulting in tens of thousands of quarantined workers and in some cases, death. In addition to this, the threat of COVID-19 and the limitations placed upon the normal operations of businesses have resulted in less mail, exacerbating the trend of consistent financial losses by the USPS. 

The “chronic” issues with the USPS are structural and widespread patterns in function, that have only been worsening over time. First, the decline of first-class mail –“the most popular and economical way to send standard postcards, letters, large envelopes, and small packages”–is one of the most obvious issues for the USPS. With the advent of the internet, it is less efficient and more costly to communicate through mail. Second, the USPS has struggled as its services are gradually outpaced by technology but the agency is one of the most favored parts of the United States government. Despite being clearly valued by Americans, legislation and financial regulation has served to punish the USPS for its struggle to stay afloat and limit its function even further. An example of a bill passed in 2006 that requires the agency to provide for retiree healthcare up to decades in advance, this places a great deal of financial stress on the agency. 

There has been a historic movement to defund or privatize the USPS and orient its structure towards generating a profit rather than providing service the way it does. However, if the USPS and its status has been an issue warranting concern for decades, why is its current status so precarious? A recent and alarming continuation in this vein are the rhetoric espoused and actions taken by the Trump Administration in regards to the USPS. In the past month or so, Trump has gone from dismissing the USPS as “a joke” to blatantly admitting that the defunding of the USPS will have a derailing effect on the 2020 election to the random removal of mail processing machines in key states. When economic supplement funds were allocated to businesses and government entities alike to soften the blow of COVID-19 through the CARES Act, the proposed infusion into the USPS was cut down and debt relief was denied. In addition to this, the newly appointed Postmaster General has implemented several changes that have contributed to further degradation of services, “Internal Postal Service documents obtained by The Washington Post show that postal employees have been barred from working overtime hours and instructed to leave mail behind if it is processed late.” 

However, the point at which these delays become especially terrifying and apparent is when the 2020 election is concerned. Due to COVID-19 the safest way to cast a ballot (and hopefully the most popular way) is to mail it in. However, if the USPS is being purposefully hindered to the point of delay during regular volume mail traffic, the election could be a set up for disaster. It is also worth noting that due to the hyper-politicized nature of discourse about the coronavirus that people more likely to use absentee ballots as opposed to showing up to physically vote lean towards certain party identifications and demographics. These specific inclinations follow existing trends of wherein certain populations (conservative, older, rural etc.) are more likely to vote and not have their votes suppressed through the disproportionality of the electoral system, voter ID laws and systematic disenfranchisement. What’s worse is that there is an existing precedent of mail-in-ballots being arbitrarily discounted. That being said, to counter this effect and ensure democratic expression, voters who wish to vote by mail-in-ballot must be conscious of delivery times and send their ballots off far in advance. Other advice floating around the internet advises the determined voter to drop off their mail-in-ballots in person and to go as far as to get in contact with election supervisors to minimize the effects of Trump’s attacks on the USPS. 

Beyond the 2020 election, the USPS is integral to the function of this nation. Certain rural communities and regions are only brought mail, medicine and deliveries due to the USPS’s extensive service network. The absence of this agency or weakening to the point where more and more offices are forced to shut down will actively end chains of communication and medical delivery in places like Alaska. Even private alternatives such as UPS and FEDEX are significantly more expensive and often hand off their “hard to deliver” items off to the USPS as a national connector. In the absence of the USPS small businesses will likely suffer most with the lack of affordable delivery services. It is truly unfortunate but, the USPS, one of the largest forces that works to equalize a country that seems to be fracturing at the seams is now under attack.

Posted on Leave a comment

Why are People Talking About Repealing the 19th Amendment?

By: Hayley Morris

If you’ve been on Twitter, Instagram, or Tiktok in the past few weeks, you may have seen some posts regarding people discovering there is a movement to repeal the 19th amendment, which historically granted women the right to vote in 1920. When I first saw these posts, I was shocked, immediately googling the hashtag “repealthe19th.” Turns out, this has been a movement going on for a while, mainly by avid Trump supporters since he took office in 2016. But why?

Analysis from the 2016 election showed that if only women had voted, democratic candidate Hillary Clinton would have won by a landslide. On the flip side, this same statistic was drawn with only men voting, and republican candidate Donald Trump would have won by a far greater margin than before. This appeared to spark a gender debate in which loyal trump supporters began to suggest repealing the 19th amendment, which granted women the right to vote. Since this initial hashtag, it has cropped up every now and again, often to “mock” feminists and stir an already boiling political cauldron. Now the trend is back again, but it seems to be more serious for some. Why is this happening?

The most obvious reason points to the upcoming 2020 election between democratic candidate Joe Biden and the incumbent Donald Trump. Many early statistics portray Biden winning by a slim margin, a fact that has some loyal Trump supporters nervous. Taking the statistics from the 2016 election, these supporters appear to feel threatened by this survey and are once again calling for the 19th amendment to be repealed. 

The issue with this mindset is that it completely undermines democratic and fair elections. By noting that a greater majority of women tend to vote liberal and thus attempting to shove them out of the voting pool to ensure one’s preferred candidate wins, these voters are essentially claiming that they are OK with rigged elections and an undemocratic governmental and political system. Doesn’t that seem to contradict the American standards these voters go on boasting about every day?

In addition, female POC tend to lean even further to the left than just white women alone. Repealing the 19th amendment would disproportionately affect these groups, resulting in a much more skewed data pool. Ultimately, the suggestion of repealing a woman’s right to vote reflects the deep-rooted misogyny present within much of the American political system, arguing that a woman’s political views are “uneducated” simply because they contradict the belief of someone else. Silencing others reflects a failed and broken political state of mind. It is up to American voters to accept political differences on both sides of the fence to prevent further alienation.

Posted on Leave a comment

Dear Andrew Yang: I Voted. Why Are People Still Racist?

By: Christina Lee

This year marked an exciting milestone for me: it was the first year that I was able to vote! Imagine my excitement upon finally exercising my right as an American citizen in a democratic process that I know I must not take for granted. So, I voted, and it was great. But why did I still feel uneasy about walking around in public several weeks afterward, right before the enforcement of California’s shelter-in-place order?

My uneasiness felt eerily familiar, like that first day of kindergarten when I looked around the classroom and noticed that no one else looked like me. Or that unforgettably awkward time in middle school when my teacher confused me for the only other Asian girl in the class.

Sure, these are not blatant experiences of extreme racism, but they’re the foundational roots of little things that give rise to larger issues. The ignorance, the discomfort, the establishment of “otherness” and foreignness.

So when former Democratic candidate Andrew Yang wrote in his controversial op-ed for The Washington Post that he “felt self-conscious—even a bit ashamed—of being Asian” after receiving looks of distaste in public since the coronavirus outbreak, I felt that. We all did.

In fact, we were all on board when he spoke candidly about the country’s state of insecurity and fear following the pandemic. It’s not surprising that, in the words of Yang, “people are looking for someone to blame.” It’s human nature. It was bound to happen.

And then, things start to go downhill from there.

Yang writes in an almost humorously unnecessary and flippant manner: I obviously think that being racist is not a good thing. (Thank you for your insight, Yang!) Still, here’s the best part: But saying “Don’t be racist toward Asians” won’t work.

I’m afraid that even Yang himself doesn’t realize what he is implying.

If we start to adopt an attitude of believing that “not being racist can’t stop racism,” it is only symbolic of our giving up. If we truly begin to submit to the meek way of thinking that we must find other ways around combatting racism besides speaking up against it, it simply distracts us from our main goal and the glaring issue: saying “Don’t be racist toward Asians” should, in fact, work.

Yang tells me, my family, my friends, and the rest of the Asians in America to start showing some love for Uncle Sam to battle racism. “We Asian Americans need to embrace and show our American-ness in ways we never have before,” he writes. “We need to step up, help our neighbors, donate gear, vote, wear red-white-and-blue, volunteer, fund aid organizations, and do everything in our power to accelerate the end of this crisis.”

Maybe the Asian Americans making headlines for becoming victims of coronavirus-related hate crimes—being stabbed, being spat on, being cursed out—should have been wearing red, white, and blue. They should have known better!

Let’s be honest: if my wardrobe was the key to solving racism, I would have changed it years ago. Yang thinks sporting patriotic colors is the solution, so how will he explain the fact that people will inevitably notice my gold skin, monolid eyes, and dark hair?

Yang then suggests in an example of “patriotism” and poor taste that Japanese Americans during World War II “volunteered for military duty at the highest possible levels to demonstrate that they were Americans,” dismissing the hundreds of thousands of other Japanese Americans who couldn’t do so because they were busy being held in internment camps under a xenophobic government that justified their racism out of “military necessity.” In other words, they were trying to protect the other Americans from an “enemy,” the enemy being Japanese Americans. Or like today, the “enemy” is us.

In essence, Yang argues that we must forgo our Asian heritage because it is something shameful, dangerous, and suggesting of malintent in times of crises. He claims that we must try to blend in, that we must try to prove something that doesn’t and shouldn’t need to be proven, that we, Asian Americans, are the problem.

With a current president referring to the pandemic as the “Chinese virus,” our social and political atmosphere scares me. I’m afraid that we are not progressing as a society, that we are embodying the echoes of a scarred past, that Asian Americans and fellow minorities are giving in. I’m scared because the first Asian American political figure I’ve ever seen doesn’t quite understand the problem. Or perhaps he’s doing just that—giving in.

Let’s not let our fear make judgments for us. Let’s not give up our identity and roots to make others feel more comfortable with their ignorance. Let’s not allow ourselves to think that we are the problem, that we must accommodate. Fear is a powerful thing, but what’s even more powerful is that we can control it.