On October 15, 2013, right-leaning blog UrbanGrounds posted a commentary piece titled Jack Harry Smith — Will the Oldest Man on Texas’ Death Row Die of Old Age Before He is Executed?. Written by Robbie Cooper, he expresses his opinion on the delayed execution of a geriatric male prisoner, Jack Smith, that has been on Texas death row for 30+ years. Mr. Cooper believes that Jack Smith should be executed, despite his ailing health, and I have to agree with him, but not for precisely the same reasons.

Cooper spotted Jack Smith on The Texas department of criminal Justice's list of inmates on death row, and took note of his age and sentence stretch. Jack Smith at age 40 was convicted of shooting down convenience worker Roy A. Deputter during a robbery in 1978. According to Cooper, Jack Smith, now 76, has been experiencing heart problems and has recently stopped taking his medication. Despite this, Mr. Smith apparently sought out habeas relief(for what part of his case, I'm not sure),which was rejected in June of this year.



Jack Harry Smith's mugshot 1978

Though the reasons behind Jack Smith's long stay on death row is hazy, it is clear that it's about time for him to move on. The author expresses about three points as to why he thinks Mr. Smith should be put to death. I agree with two of those points which is the obligation the state has to carry out Jack Smith's sentence as well as the cost to keep him alive is unnecessary. What I don't agree with is the author's belief that Smith's death will begin his longer sentence in the afterlife.

I agree with Cooper's point that Smith was sentenced to death and that the State of Texas has to honor that sentence. Like the saying goes, "justice delayed is justice denied", and this delay has been going on for long enough.

Also Cooper and even Smith himself made the point that taxpayers have been spending money to keep him alive for all these years. Like a hamster in a cage, but a lot less cute and domestic. This man has been cooped up, contributing nothing positive to the world for 35 years, and he's being kept alive for what? For some kind of legality bull? He was sentenced to death, he should be put to death. There is no reason, especially this late in the game, to tiptoe around putting this man's sentence into motion.

What I disagree with is the comfort Cooper seems to find in the thought that Jack Smith will continue his sentence in the afterlife, for I don't necessarily believe in hell or even heaven for that matter. I just see Jack Smith's death as a lifting of a burden that doesn't seem to even want to be a burden anymore. As well as affirmation of taking our legal system seriously and sticking to the results of court decisions.

In the end, it looks like Jack Smith is going to die either way, whether naturally or not. It's just unfortunate to see the cracks in our legal system, whether it was with Jack Smith's trial,  the sentencing or the following up of his sentence. Putting a person to death is already a complicated decision we don't need to make it worse by having a sloppy way of enforcing that decision.

On Tuesday, October 1st , 2013 The Austin American-Statesman published an editorial titled "Empty Desks, Unhappy Customers".  The article examines the possible reasons as to why there's a decrease in enrollment in AISD schools despite the increase in population in the city of Austin. The author puts the majority of the fault upon AISD officials’ experimental decisions and the reaction of district parents. Even though I agree with the authors’ standpoint, I'm not totally convinced by their argument.

This piece was apparently written by the "editorial board" of the Austin American Statesman. Who that is exactly, I cannot say. I also can't say whether or not this person (or persons) is qualified to address issues in this field. I am particularly wary since there's a lot of spouting of data, but not a whole lot of references. The one reference they do make is from some past article posted by their own paper, The Austin American-Statesman, but they don't even mention the title. It feels like this cocksure author's priority isn't to get all the facts from a variety of reliable sources, but rather from his/her like-minded coworkers. I have no idea if the Austin American Statesman is a biased paper or not, but as a stranger walking into this editorial, I'm a little put off by the shallow treatment.

Despite the nervous stomach, I still ate everything it fed me. I was moderately convinced by all of the author’s points concerning the decrease in enrollment. They spoke about how AISD failed attempts at improving schools which led to abandoned buildings where functioning schools once stood. Also, the increasing percentage of parents who send their kids to charter and private schools because they are looking for more adequate education options seemed reasonable.  The editorial also touches on the rising cost of living in Austin which in itself is having an effect on AISD enrollment.  More people just can’t afford to live here. But then again, my agreement with this author is strictly based on the pre-processed information that they submitted. I have no way of knowing, based strictly off of this article, whether or not the information is even accurate.

What is clear, though, is that this author disapproves of AISD's approach to reform. This is something I can full-heartedly agree with. Changes in education are going to need a lot of time, money, and consistency - three things that Texas isn't renowned for in regards to our educational systems. I think these botched, experimental projects that the AISD leadership have promoted is really just wasting a lot of energy and putting a strain on the AISD families’ trust and patience with their school district.