By: Quentin Miller

On July 26th, 2017, Trump tweeted out this: “After consultation with my Generals and military experts, please be advised that the United States Government will not accept or allow Transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military, our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail.”

On January 22nd, 2019, this ban was put into temporary action by the Supreme Court, despite there being multiple lower court cases going on. 

In the wake of controversy related to the 2020 election, many Trump supporters have been trying to defend these actions to win over support of the LGBTQ+ community for Trump. Claiming that, just as Trump said, it was for economic reasons only.

Here’s why that’s factually incorrect.

First of all, he didn’t just claim it was for economic reasons. While he did say it was for the military budget, he also claimed it was to prevent “disruption that transgender(s) in the military would entail,” a blatantly transphobic statement claiming that transgender people are somehow disruptive, dramatic, or a burden. 

Second of all, if you do any research on the topic, you will learn that almost no medical  insurance in the U.S. covers facial reconstruction, hormone treatments, or genitalia reconstruction. Those are the only medical procedures that trans people “need” to go through, to transition. The health insurance issued to all U.S. army members, regardless of rank or division, is called Tricare. And while it is an extremely nice health care program, according to its own website, Tricare.mil, it only covers cosmetic surgery under these conditions: 

• Correction of a birth defect (includes cleft lip).
• Restoration of a body form following an accidental injury.
• Revision of disfiguring and extensive scars resulting from neoplastic surgery (i.e., surgery that removes a tumor or cyst).
• Reconstructive breast surgery following a medically necessaryTo be medically necessary means it is appropriate, reasonable, and adequate for your condition. mastectomy.
• Reconstructive breast surgery due to a congenital anomaly (birth defect)
• Penile implants and testicular prostheses for conditions resulting from organic origins or for organic impotency.
• Surgery to correct pectus excavatum.
• Liposuction when medically necessary.
• Panniculectomy (tummy tuck) performed in conjunction with an abdominal or pelvic surgery when medical review determines that the procedure significantly contributes to the safe and effective correction or improvement of bodily function.

None of these apply to transgender people. This means, the U.S. military wouldn’t even be paying for these treatments.

Third of all, let’s just say there was a contract change, and Tricare would be responsible for paying for transitioning treatments. If we do the math, the argument that this is too big of an economic burden on the U.S. is still ridiculous.

There are anywhere between 2,000 and 15,000 people in the military (counting active duty and reserve troops). Now, I’m going to be doing an extremely high ball estimate, so we’re going to use 15,000.

Now, the most expensive set of treatments a trans person can get is, genitalia reconstruction (aka gender reassignment surgery), facial reconstruction, and hormone therapy. A reasonable estimate for the cost of these surgeries is about $61,500 upfront plus $1,500 a year for continued hormone therapy.

But, many transgender people aren’t interested (these people could be non binary, or could be using other non surgical methods of dealing with body dysmorphia) or have already had these transitions, so let’s cut the amount of trans people in half.

Let’s also take into account that those prices are for the average consumer, not insurance companies. Insurance companies negotiate prices that they pay hospitals for treatments, meaning they get massively discounted prices for everything. And the insurance company with the most bargaining power is, you guessed it, Tricare. So let’s just cut the cost in half, which is still way higher than what the military would be paying. So we’re left with 7,500 x $30,750 and we get an initial cost of  $230 million plus $750 a year for every transgender person taking hormone therapy, which can be stopped and continued at any time.

Just a reminder, the annual budget of the military is approximately $721,531,000,000, with around $200 billion of wiggle room. So, the military would be able to pay for the initial treatment of every transgender person in the military 3,137 times over, not even including the $200 billion they normally spend over their allowed budget. And again, that is an extremely high estimate for how much they would actually be paying.

So, not only would the government not have to pay anything at all, as cosmetic surgeries for non medical reasons aren’t covered, it would barely even be a dent in their budget.

So, the only possible reason that Trump could have for not wanting transgender people in the military is because he wants to discriminate against them, which isn’t surprising coming from the man who was sued by the Justice Department for discrimination in the past.

• https://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/ct-mun-blaser-column-holiday-cards-tl-1227-story.html

By: Quentin Miller

I don’t think it’s controversial to say that Trump has made some very sketchy statements about race/ethnicity in the past, but just how bad is his racism? Here’s a list of things he has said publicly about many different races and ethnicities, organized by said races and ethnicities (all following facts have been checked by ‘USA Today’ and PBS.)

Black people: 

• Implied that laziness was a trait found in lots of black people, insinuating that black people are to blame for systemic issues.
• Referred to black protesters as thugs.
• Claimed that a group of black men should have been executed before proven guilty (The Central Park 5 case).
• Used, and continues to use, the term “the blacks”.
• Asked what black people have to lose, saying they don’t have jobs or money.
• Supported “stop and frisk” policies, which allowed police officers to pull over anyone for seemingly no reason, which increased police violence against minorities by a disproportionate amount.
• Said that areas of high amounts of black populations are “like hell”, saying that getting shot is very common in these areas.
• Asked a black reporter if the CBC are her friends. 
• Asked why the Civil War was necessary, implying that slavery is somehow not a big enough motivator.

Hispanic people:

• Referred to Mexican immigrants as rapists, drug dealers, and overall criminals, then corrected himself by saying “some” are good people.
• Tweeted a picture of him eating a taco salad and captioned it “I love Hispanics”
• Claimed that immigrants (while he did not say Hispanic immigrants it can be inferred by the previous talking points in his speech) were stealing black jobs, trying to turn black people against immigrants.
• Claimed he would force Mexico to pay for a wall to stop illegal immigration, further demonizing Hispanic immigration 
• Referred to immigrants as animals.

Asian people:

• Called the coronavirus the Chinese virus. 
• Called the coronavirus the Kung Flu

Muslim/Middle Eastern people: 

• Temporarily banned immigration from the Middle East.
• Says that we should have more white immigrants from places like Norway and less Middle Eastern immigrants escaping from actual wars 

Jewish people:

• Refused to acknowledge Jewish people during a speech about the Holocaust.
• Apologized for not acknowledging Jewish people, also claimed he was the least anti- Semitic person ever.

By: Olivia Knafla

The death penalty, otherwise known as capital punishment, has been a very controversial subject for quite some time. There are many arguments both for and against the death penalty, and in this article we will be exploring both sides and their reasonings.

The first argument that we will be looking at revolves around the following idea: many people who would otherwise commit a violent crime are deterred from doing so as they don’t want to risk execution. However, there is no real proof of this situation ever taking place, or at least any that has been recorded to date. I won’t stay on this topic for too long, however, it was worth mentioning as it is commonly brought up in debates between whether the death penalty is right or wrong.

The death penalty also presents a financial issue. According to the Death Penalty Information Center (DIOC), it costs more to execute a prisoner than it does to keep them incarcerated for the rest of their life. It’s not necessarily the execution itself that is so expensive (sometimes reaching the millions), but instead, the extensive trial leading up to it.

Under the Constitution, every U.S. citizen is granted the right to a fair trial, meaning that oftentimes death row inmates require very experienced lawyers. On top of that, DNA testing is a common thing to be used in these trials, and it’s not exactly cheap.

Outside of the trial, death row inmates spend their entire stay on death row apart from general prison populations. They stay in special buildings, which require additional upkeep and guards. From the DIOC again, it is stated that these buildings alone cost states millions more annually than what it would have taken to sentence these inmates to life imprisonment.

All this being said, for those against the death penalty, this presents a solid case for their argument, saving both money and human lives. However, many people who are in favor of the death penalty argue that justice cannot be thought of in financial terms. Some people believe that the money is worth spending to rid the world of criminals who have committed the worst of crimes, and many people have expressed that opinion on online forums such as Reddit and Quora. 

The final issue we will be looking at today is that of false conviction. This is possibly the most spoken about, and it presents a great controversy among people.

It is estimated that 1% of the US prison system, or roughly 20,000 people, have been falsely convicted. However, when we focus solely on death row inmates, that percentage only increases.

A study by The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences concluded that roughly 4% of people on death row were, and are likely, innocent. As of July 2020, states have executed 1,516 people since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976. If you calculate 4% of that number, that leaves you with 60 people who were executed after being falsely convicted.

For those against capital punishment, this is enough evidence to get rid of it altogether. And while false execution is a serious risk and is not something to be overlooked, many people in favor of the death penalty believe that this is a risk worth taking.

On top of that, the trial leading up to the execution of an individual is quite thorough, with years or even decades between sentencing and execution. It is estimated that nearly a quarter of death row inmates in the United State die of natural causes while awaiting their execution date.

To conclude, there are many arguments that are both for and against capital punishment, and many people who believe in the statements for both sides. There are plenty of reasons to take one side or the other, but it seems that the controversy of this issue will not be going away anytime soon.

When it comes down to it – is it moral to punish somebody by taking their life? That’s for you to decide.