Texas representative Valinda Bolton, elected in 2006 to represent district 47 located southwest Travis County, shared her opinion in a argument that appeared in the Austin American-statesman last Wednesday. In "Texas counties should control their own destinies," Bolton argues on the limited power Texas legislature yields to districts. She aims to inform and persuade Texas residents to accept, understand, or contribute to a change. Strong reasoning and support is needed; she must lay out a clear analyze of the causes and effects of the problem and use relevant and current evidence to support her claim.

Bolton argues that Texas districts, specially the larger ones, need more local authority. She states that commissioners are not able to solve some of the problems faced by residents because the power granted to counties’ government is not enough to deal with local growth and development. She criticizes Texas legislature position in the issue declaring that bills regarding this matter have always failed in pass sessions; including a bill, proposed by her, that would give counties with more than 500,000 people the necessary “tools to manage land and water use.” According to Bolton, Texas ought to pass a legislation granting counties more local authority and control; this is the only effective way to solve such problems.

Bolton supports her argument with a recent vital event; she mentions the Hamilton Pool water contamination as an example of the kind of problem residents have to face due to counties’ lack of local control over development and she adds that “much will need to be done to reclaim” the pool. She also refers to a recent Austin America-statesman as a alternative source where readers can find more information to support her claims.

I consider this argument some how successful; I believe that if the author had engaged the opposition and presented good counterarguments the claim would be stronger and seem more credible. Bolton convinced me that county government is not always capable of dealing with local issues, but I’m not yet convinced that passing such legislation is the only way to deal with local growth and development issues.

If such legislation is passed, counties will be able to solve more problems and to make more decisions, residents will have lower taxes and more property rights, and Texas representatives will have more power and control.

The article Tax break on tickets? No, thanks posted in the Austin American-statesman on October 1, 2007 by the editorial board highlights an argument directed to Austin citizens that focus is to explain and defend a vigorously debated claim regarding a local controversial issue related to UT’s athletic department budget and tax breaks. To catch readers’ attention to this issue it is important to use appeals that match Austin citizens’ needs and values and also focus on motivating, and not on manipulating the readers. If the argument is not base only on opinions and presents solid evidence to support each point in the claim readers may accept or even adopt the board’s view on the issue.

The article argues about the tax break given through donations made to the UT’s athletic department. It points out that every year over $100 million of UT’s money goes to the the athletic department spending and that the millions earned from season passes sales also gives aways millions in tax break. The board outlines that instead of using the money to improve education, UT directs all the $15 million earned from ticket sales right back to the athletic department and states their position on the issue by defending deduction of taxes to donations that are somehow directed to education and opposing tax break to a donation that is beneficial only to the school’s sport department.

To support their claim the board mentions the amendment written by Austin Rep. Jake Pickle in the 1980s that permitted tax deduction through purchase of UT tickets and helped raise even more the athletic budget and states that after two years congress adopted his idea and gave the tax break but with a 20% lower deduction rate, and also comments on the work of writer Eric Dexheimer as an alternative source of support. For less, the article affirms that none of the Texas representatives questioned on the issue have not comment or taken a position on the issue.

This is definitely a successful argument, the claims are supported with accurate, relevant and appealing evidence and I am convinced that congress needs to review to issue and take measures to fix it. I have always believed that sports comes first at UT, having the best team seams to be more important than emphasizing on education, I know UT is a great school but that does not justify investing more in sports than in education.

Coaches are getting richer, athletes gets upgraded facilities and full scholarship and I’m sure UT fans are not complain about either sense they are saving tax money and investing on their team. What about the rest of Austin population? The ones who don’t spend money on tickets and have to pay full taxes and the students that do care about getting a real education have been taken for granted. Austin Representatives hold the power to make a change in congress, as long Congress ignores the issue UT will continue to spend millions on sports and giving away unfair tax brakes