In a recent Newsweek article titled “The Right Way Back,” Michael R. Bloomberg offers his advice to the new president. As mayor of New York City, a businessman and a father of two girls, he gives his ideas—“take ‘em or leave ‘em.” His focus is on the economy and key areas of reform, which include infrastructure, energy, immigration and education.

Regarding infrastructure, Bloomberg states a bold plan would help middle-class Americans by creating jobs, but also prepare the nation for growth and innovation. He would call the plan a “New New Deal: investing more, more wisely, and getting bigger returns.” In order to invest in this new infrastructure, earmarks must be reformed, but not totally removed from government.

Energy production is the most critical building block in the structure of the new economy. Due to our increased dependence on foreign oil, both parties have offered wise suggestions on how America can become self-reliant within energy production. A few steps that are necessary to achieve this goal include both short-term ideas, such as nuclear power and offshore drilling, and long-term initiatives, such as a carbon tax, higher energy-efficiency standards and investments in green jobs. Bloomberg writes that America can either generate green energy, therefore creating millions of green jobs and revenue for the economy, or it can further drain the national debt by purchasing green power from other nations.

Immigration, often a hot-button topic among Americans, is in dire need of reform. Bloomberg suggests that our current plan is allowing brilliant minds to escape after they have earned degrees from American universities further draining our economy. In order to retain current innovators in our own country a few things will need to be accomplished. “The elements of the most practical and effective plan combine ideas from both the left and the right: imposing tighter border security; creating a 21st-century worker identification card that will allow employers to verify the legality of a job applicant and allow the federal government to enforce the law; increasing lawful opportunity for those seeking the American Dream; and—following in the footsteps of President Regan—allowing those who are here illegally the chance to earn the right to stay.”

Bloomberg suggests that education reform will only be accomplished with “top-to-bottom change…. that means higher standards, higher salaries, merit pay, tenure reform, school report cards, a longer school day and more.” He insists that the money America spends on education may be enough, but it is not spent correctly. If the correct modifications are made within the education system, there is no stopping the future of America in its return as “an economic superpower.”

In order to pursue any political agenda, the partisan divide must be healed, something that can only be done by showing respect, building trust and letting both sides taste victory. Bloomberg suggests that following these steps, resisting Washington rule and being honest with the American people will enable the next president to accomplish “a bold, independent agenda” within the next four years, no matter who may be sitting in the Oval Office.

In the Oct 27th Newsweek an article entitled "Just Saying No to Abstinence Ed will run and its writer, Laura Beil, makes a few really good points that seem obvious, but are not really out there. She discusses an organization in East Texas called Virginity Rules, which sponsored various road-side billboards promoting abstinence until marriage, one of which was a collection of girls in white evening gowns and tiara's proclaiming to be "waiting" for their Prince Charming. This organization, which has just lost its federal funding, has been promoting abstinence for nearly ten years, and they fit right in in East Texas. I was shocked to discover that approximately 95 percent of Texas Public Schools only teach abstinence education. In today's society, I feel it is necessary that teens experience sex education. We live in a society today where teen pregnancy, sexual transmitted infections and AIDS are common terminology and prominant in the main-stream media. It seems absurd to me that a public school system would fail to educate its students about the consequences of unprotected sex.
As I have said in the past, I attended a small, private Christian school for my primary education. Abstinence was the only education we recieved, and it was mostly "sex is something for married people to know about" and that was about it. I was lucky, I had parents who openly discussed any questions I had growing up, but many of my classmates were not. It wasn't until an Advanced Placement Biology course was established in my school that the reproductive chapter became anything more than a quickly-skimmed overview that was forgotten soon after.
I feel that schools and organizations can promote abstinence while still providing sex education. I don't see why the two paths seem to be forced to butt heads. Yes, abstinence is a more personal choice and less scientifically based, but why not make it a personal and educated choice?
Furthermore, I feel that by providing more funding to abstinence-only education systems, the government is sensoring what students learn in school. It's just like the creation/evolution debate. Both the personal/faith-based and scientific stances should be taught side by side. Education is, simply put, learning, and simply being told not to participate in sex until marriage is not educating someone, its limiting their knowledge.