    [Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 37 (Tuesday, February 25, 2025)]
    [Senate]
    [Pages S1339-S1343]
    From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

               VERMONT STATE OF THE UNION ESSAY CONTEST FINALISTS

     Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I ask to have entered into the
    Record some of the finalists' essays written by Vermont High School
    students as part of the 15th Annual State of the Union Essay contest
    conducted by my office.
      The material follows:

                                   Finalists

                     AMY VAUGHAN, OXBOW HIGH SCHOOL, JUNIOR

           Climate change is at the forefront of issues in the nation;
         however, its effect on farming and food systems is often
         overlooked. Climate change poses a growing threat to
         agriculture through fluctuating weather patterns that cause
         crop losses and increase production costs (EPA). These
         disruptions jeopardize food security and threaten farmers'
         livelihoods. While the challenges are significant, an
         effective, sustainable solution is to support outreach and
         educational initiatives, particularly through university
         extension services. By increasing funding for these programs,
         farmers and other individuals can be equipped with the
         knowledge needed to adopt climate-resilient techniques,
         strategies, and practices (University of New Hampshire
         Extension). This approach will strengthen the agricultural
         industry's ability to navigate a changing climate.
           In recent years, farmers have faced increasingly
         unpredictable weather patterns, including severe droughts,
         flooding, and fluctuating temperatures (NOAA Research). These
         changes contribute to soil degradation, water shortages, and
         crop failure (Chicago EPA). A study from the United States
         Department of Agriculture found that ``Increased temperatures
         can also lead to issues like crop sunburn from extreme heat,
         which can reduce annual yields for farms by as much as 40%''
         (USDA Climate Hub). This, in combination with other climate
         issues, results in decreased farm revenue adding to farmers'
         struggles with financial instability (USDA ERS). Data from
         the Bureau of Economic Analysis states that ``agriculture and
         related industries contributed roughly $1.537 trillion to the
         U.S. GDP in 2023''. Given the importance of agriculture to
         U.S. food security and the economy, we can not ignore the
         effects decreased farm revenue would have on our society as a
         whole.
           One step towards a solution is strengthening educational
         outreach efforts which can support farmers in understanding
         how to deal with this rising challenge. Land-grant
         universities have historically played a vital role in
         broadcasting research-based agricultural knowledge to the
         farming community (Association of Public Land Grant
         Universities). These programs offer valuable resources on
         crop management, pest control, irrigation techniques, and
         more (UW-Madison Extension). Many extension services include
         these topics in their program objectives. However, despite
         the acceleration of climate change, many extension services
         are underfunded and ill-equipped to meet the growing demand
         for climate-specific information.
           Increased investment in these programs will provide farmers
         with timely, actionable climate advice. University-led
         outreach programs can teach farmers about climate-resilient
         practices such as regenerative farming, crop diversification,
         and soil health improvement techniques (University of New
         Hampshire Extension). Furthermore, extension services can
         introduce precision agriculture technologies to optimize crop
         monitoring and resource use. Addressing the impact of climate
         change on agriculture requires more than just technological
         innovation or policy reform. It requires empowering farmers
         with the knowledge and tools to adapt. By investing in
         outreach and education through university extension programs,
         the United States can build a more resilient agricultural
         system capable of weathering the challenges of a changing
         climate, ensuring long-

    [[Page S1340]]

         term food security and sustainable farming practices for
         future generations.

               OWEN STYGLES, BELLOWS FREE ACADEMY FAIRFAX, SENIOR

           The 1990 Children's Television Act sought to empower the
         FCC to regulate children's media, requiring that it hold a
         certain level of educational value, and that the
         advertisements aired during children's shows meet specific
         guidelines. This bill came to be as a result of the growing
         television entertainment industry, and the worries
         surrounding how it affected children's minds and development.
         It was also deemed important due to the nature of advertising
         towards children, as they are largely unable to distinguish
         advertisements from tv programs, and are easily influenced.
           I mention this bill because it lays a strong foundation:
         children's media needs to support development, and highly
         suggestible children need to be protected from advertisers. I
         especially highlight this second point, as there would be far
         fewer issues if children were not such an easily targeted
         demographic, furthermore, broadcasters would be less likely
         to fund shallow, attention-grabbing shows in the first place
         if they weren't as profitable, allowing higher quality
         programs to make way on their own.
           This all brings us to today, where children are switching
         away from television, and towards digital media, such as
         YouTube videos. This new media, of course, is largely
         unregulated in comparison to broadcast television, and
         advertisers are now at liberty to exploit children's
         unawareness to commercials once again. Not only this, but the
         nature of what kids view, outside of the ads, is also less
         valuable, as it is being made only to hold their attention
         until the next ad. Cocomelon, one the largest channels on
         YouTube, is a notable example of this. They feature a near-
         endless supply of videos geared towards children that aim
         simply to hold their attention for as long as possible. Using
         bright colors, songs, and sound effects, this content
         manipulates children into viewing for extensive periods of
         time.
           The exploitation of children's attention is an undervalued
         and often missed issue related with the rise of digital
         media. This does not mean, however, that healthy content is
         not present. Many educational programs, such as Sesame
         Street, have created an online presence that is far more
         constructive for children, and, most importantly, isn't
         structured around making kids watch as many advertisements as
         possible. Because of this, I think the center of the problem
         lies in how high quality content is easily bogged down by the
         onslaught of this lower quality content, as it is far easier
         and faster to create.
           Akin to how you find organic food by looking for the USDA
         stamp of approval, I think children's content online should
         be tested and labeled for its quality. This would give
         educational and developmentally useful content a way to stand
         out among the rapidly uploaded, low quality content. It would
         also provide a kind of ``guide'' for parents, which would
         make their job of overseeing what their children watch far
         simpler. While this solution isn't perfect, I believe it to
         be the best way to end this highly underappreciated issue
         that is actively impacting millions of children's
         development.

                   HANNAH SMILEY, MILTON HIGH SCHOOL, SENIOR

           For nearly two centuries, Church Street in Burlington,
         Vermont has been the heart of the state and the nucleus of
         the city--a lively community marketplace, bustling with shops
         and restaurants. In recent years, however, it has become a
         common controversial topic at gatherings or in any
         conversation; an issue that cannot be ignored. What was once
         a charming, safe city has become a dismal and even daunting
         area for Vermonters. What caused this change? The
         homelessness crisis that is plaguing the entire nation.
           Let's be clear; the issue isn't panhandling or encampments,
         rather it is the government's alarming lack of moral
         accountability and commitment to its citizens. The United
         States Department of Housing and Urban Development reports
         that over 653,000 Americans--a population greater than
         Wyoming and the same as Vermont--were unhoused this past
         year, yet societal stigmas or the ideal of American
         individualism have led this issue to be disregarded as a
         competition for mere existence, or survival of the fittest.
         Rather than focus on the root causes of inflation, low wages,
         and lack of government support, people place blame on the
         victims. Unhoused people are villainized for their attempts
         at survival. The housing crisis is complex, however, there
         are concrete solutions.
           The US government has the moral responsibility to fulfill
         its Constitutional promise; ``to promote the general
         welfare'' of all Americans. This includes addressing the
         homelessness crisis which directly affects the welfare of
         citizens. The most comprehensive solution must include
         immediate relief for unhoused communities and a means of
         addressing the root causes of this crisis. According to this
         formula, the best solution to solving this epidemic is
         ``Housing First'' initiatives. This approach to the
         homelessness crisis, developed in
           New York City has a form of publicly-funded permanent
         housing that includes additional support to aid unhoused
         people. In short, the ``housing first'' model is designed to
         move long-term unhoused individuals--``the majority of whom
         are living with mental illness, substance abuse disorders,
         and other serious health problems,'' adds the Coalition for
         the Homeless--into subsidized housing with the addition of
         community support services. This type of housing support
         allows unhoused people to see health improvements and is
         proven to be less costly than forms of temporary care such as
         emergency shelters and correctional facilities. In addition,
         prevention programs, such as discharge plans for youth in the
         foster care system and policy change regarding a living wage,
         are vital to America's future.
           Many argue that providing adequate aid to fix the housing
         crisis is too expensive to sustain. This has led to temporary
         ``fixes'' such as wiping out encampments, leaving unhoused
         people with limited options. This may be successful in easing
         the guilt for citizens as they won't see unhoused people in
         their communities, however, ignorance is not a solution.
         Unethical practices are extremely harmful to unhoused people
         and an ineffective use of funding.
           The US government must recognize the severity of this
         crisis and enact permanent policy to create long-term change.

                WINSLOW SOLOMON, VERMONT COMMONS SCHOOL, SENIOR

           Three-fourths of adults in the United States are overweight
         or obese, according to a new study in The Lancet, making the
         U.S. the most obese high-income country. The obesity epidemic
         is a national emergency threatening our health and economy,
         and Congress must act quickly to understand and address it.
           Obesity and overweight in American adults has risen quickly
         from just over half of adults in 1990 to three-quarters
         today. Increased consumption of energy and flavor-dense ultra
         processed foods engineered for irresistibility, limited
         access to expensive fresh produce, and normalization of
         sedentary lifestyles are all contributing to weight gain. New
         studies on the role of food-processing and genetics in weight
         gain show that more than calories and nutrients are involved
         in a healthy diet. The Lancet study predicts that the number
         of overweight people will reach nearly 260 million by 2050,
         growth that will put extreme strain on our society.
           The effects of overweight and obesity are numerous and
         extreme. According to the CDC, overweight and obesity lead to
         health issues from type 2 diabetes to sleep apnea, stroke to
         osteoarthritis. Adults with a BMI of over 25 (overweight) or
         30 (obese) are more likely to develop cancer and high blood
         pressure and experience worse mental health and early death.
         If we allow the obesity epidemic to continue, we will cause
         great harm not just to those suffering from obesity-caused
         diseases, but also to the economy and the healthcare system.
         A Joint Economic Committee Republicans report in 2024
         estimated that obesity will result in $9.1 trillion extra
         medical cost to the country over the next ten years.
           It is time for Congress to pass legislation making healthy
         lifestyles more economical for Americans. Addressing the
         obesity epidemic requires a multi-faceted approach, combining
         lifestyle change with medication and surgery. While new
         medications like Wegovy and Zepbound can offer quick changes
         in weight, their high costs are prohibitive on an individual
         and nation-wide scale. Weight loss from such drugs is quickly
         reversed after medication stops. The most effective, long-
         term means of battling obesity is change in diet and
         exercise. As recommended by the American Academy of
         Pediatrics and the American Heart Association, the government
         must consider subsidies for healthier foods, taxes on ultra
         processed foods and sugary drinks, limits on food
         advertising, and warning labels on obesity-causing foods. It
         is important to encourage healthy diet and exercise in
         schools, where habits start. Public discussion must avoid
         causing weight bias or fatphobia which cause mental harm to
         people suffering from obesity and make it harder for them to
         become healthier.
           Congress has been successful in improving Americans' health
         in the past: CDC data shows a drop over 30% in adult smoking
         since 1965 after acts banning advertisements and placing
         warnings on tobacco products were passed. Taxation of sugar-
         sweetened beverages in Chile and Mexico resulted in
         significant decreases in purchasing of 21.6% and 6.1%
         respectively. If we act now, we can offer a happier and
         healthier country to the next generation.

            ALEKSANDRA CIROVIC, WOODSTOCK UNION HIGH SCHOOL, JUNIOR

           The impacts of fossil fuel-driven climate warming were more
         evident and catastrophic than ever in 2024. Globally, 26 of
         29 warming-induced weather events caused over 3,700
         fatalities and displaced millions. Hurricane Helene left 230
         dead in the U.S., with rising ocean temperatures exacerbating
         the devastation. Climate change is among the most urgent
         crises we face. At the heart of climate change lies
         consumerism, where our insatiable desire for more products
         depletes resources and heightens carbon emissions. To address
         this, we must incentivize eco-friendly products, implement
         green taxes on high-footprint goods, and enforce stricter
         industry regulations to minimize waste.
           With a growing global population, the demand for resources
         has surged. Currently, the structure of our food systems
         enables significant food loss, contributing to global waste.
         According to National Geographic, over 1.3 billion tons of
         food is wasted each year. The pattern of waste extends to
         plastic

    [[Page S1341]]

         and other recyclables. The massive amounts of plastic waste
         that companies generate, from food packaging to clothing, is
         severely detrimental to our environment. The levels of
         plastic in the ocean are expected to quadruple over the
         coming years, highlighting the growing severity of the issue,
         according to the World Wildlife Fund. This culture of
         consumerism, driven by our unappeasable demand for products,
         produces overwhelming waste, accelerating climate change and
         threatening biodiversity.
           Our demand for goods releases toxic gases during production
         and delivery as well. We are consuming our planet's resources
         1.7 times faster than it can regenerate, as reported by The
         Guardian. The World Wildlife Fund's warning that, without a
         significant change in consumption rates, Earth ``will expire
         by 2050'' underscores the urgency of the situation. The rise
         in overconsumption has led to a higher demand for goods, and
         consequently, a greater reliance on processes that utilize
         fossil fuels. Overconsumption culture leads to higher
         reliance on dirty energy, directly threatening the climate by
         exhausting resources and increasing emissions.
           As a Youth Representative on the Vermont Climate Council, I
         witness how the effects of climate change are becoming ever
         more evident. From rising temperatures to unpredictable
         weather patterns and their impact, the need for action is
         undeniable. In my meetings and climate conversations, the
         urgency for transformative change grows stronger with each
         discussion. There is no doubt that climate change is the most
         unavoidable issue we face.
           We have the power to redefine the future. Our government
         can subsidize manufacturers meeting sustainability standards
         to reduce production costs and make eco-friendly products
         more competitive. It can also implement policies to
         incentivize green innovation and support sustainable
         technologies. Individuals purchasing energy-efficient
         appliances, electric vehicles, or sustainable products could
         receive tax credits. Green taxes on carbon usage and plastics
         can fund renewable energy, public transit, and sustainable
         development. Strict waste limits should be set for
         industries, with penalties for exceeding them. The government
         can enforce regulations to minimize pollution and promote
         responsible resource use. For the health of the world and its
         people, the time to act is now.

           ALLIE HAMILTON, MOUNT MANSFIELD UNION HIGH SCHOOL, JUNIOR

           In Shakespeare's iconic play *Hamlet*, the protagonist
         declares, ``These words like daggers enter in mine ears.''
         This allusion to a weapon of death serves as a powerful lens
         through which to explore the contentious topic of gun control
         in contemporary society. Gun violence, much like daggers,
         leaves wounds that resonate across families, communities, and
         nations. Gun control has been a subject of intense debate,
         particularly in the United States, where the Second Amendment
         enshrines the right to bear arms. In 2023, over 43,180 deaths
         in the U.S. were attributed to firearm incidents--more than
         the toll of war. These numbers are not just statistics; they
         represent lives lost, families devastated, and communities
         torn apart. As Hamlet struggled with violence, so too must we
         confront the deadly repercussions of gun violence. This
         ongoing conversation centers on regulating firearms--how to
         prevent crimes, reduce gun violence, and ensure public
         safety, all while respecting the rights of individuals to own
         firearms.
           The gun possession debate centers on the belief that
         citizens should have firearms for self-defense and protection
         against government tyranny. However, safety is essential for
         freedom to thrive. Research shows that countries with
         stricter gun laws have fewer gun-related deaths. For
         instance, after Australia enacted strict gun laws in 1996,
         firearm-related deaths, including mass shootings,
         significantly dropped. In contrast, the U.S. sees over 43,180
         firearm deaths annually, underscoring the need for stronger
         regulations. Stricter laws aim to balance individual rights
         and public safety, ensuring both liberty and life can
         prosper.
           Mental health must be part of the gun control discussion,
         as nearly 60% of U.S. gun-related deaths are suicides, many
         involving legally obtained firearms. The 2012 Sandy Hook
         tragedy, where the shooter had a history of mental health
         issues but easily acquired firearms, highlights the need for
         mental health evaluations in the gun purchasing process. By
         addressing both gun access and mental health, we can prevent
         tragedies, reduce violence, and save lives.
           The issue of gun control is undeniably complex. However, it
         is clear that balancing individual rights with the need for
         public safety is critical. Stricter regulations, greater
         mental health support, and public education on responsible
         gun ownership are necessary steps to reduce gun violence and
         ensure a safer society. The cost of inaction is too high-each
         preventable death is a tragedy, and every missed opportunity
         for reform prolongs the crisis. Freedom without
         responsibility leads to chaos; safety without liberty breeds
         oppression. We must find a balance between these forces. This
         issue is not just about policy-it's about human lives. The
         right to bear arms must be paired with the responsibility to
         protect others, ensuring that both safety and liberty are
         preserved. This is an urgent call to action--an intersection
         of gun ownership, public safety, and mental health that
         demands thoughtful, evidence-based change. The future of our
         communities depends on it.

                    LEO BEEBE, WINOOSKI HIGH SCHOOL, SENIOR

           This December, America's debt reached an all-time high of
         36 trillion dollars, and the deficit climbed yet again to two
         trillion dollars. This massive burden will have devastating
         effects on the economy and has already wreaked havoc on the
         federal budget. We are currently spending more money on the
         interest on the debt than on the military, and interest
         payments will only increase if nothing is done. At this very
         important moment for America, an honest and mature position
         on the budget is a necessity in our government. As such, an
         idea as costly as repealing the State and Local Tax (SALT)
         Deduction Cap should be viewed with caution at best, and
         outright disgust at worst.
           The SALT cap is a tax deduction that allows Americans to
         deduct certain state and local taxes from their federal tax
         receipt in order to avoid this money being taxed twice, once
         at the local level and once at the federal level. President
         Trump's Tax Cuts and Jobs Act instituted a cap on this
         deduction, limiting the deductible income to ten thousand
         dollars. It has been estimated by the nonpartisan Tax Policy
         Center that lifting the cap would cost the United States
         government 1.2 trillion dollars over ten years. This is a
         truly staggering sum, and would represent a massive drain on
         resources at a time when all federal expenditures need to be
         closely examined.
           Lifting the cap would also mean approving a massive
         giveaway to America's wealthiest citizens. The Tax Policy
         Center estimates that Americans making over 430,000 dollars a
         year would see three-quarters of the benefits of a lifted
         SALT cap. Considering the drastic cost-of-living crisis in
         this country, it is simply absurd to consider putting the
         needs of these wealthy Americans over the much more pressing
         needs of poor and middle-class Americans. All Americans would
         be better off if their government was able to pay down it's
         debt after twenty years of financial mismanagement.
           If the government really wanted to help everyday Americans,
         they would take the steps that are necessary to balance the
         budget and pay down our debt. Raising taxes on wealthy and
         middle-class Americans would be unpopular, but are necessary
         actions to restore fiscal health. Instituting far-reaching
         cost-containment measures for federal healthcare costs would
         save billions, as would a responsibly run single-payer
         healthcare program. While these proposals may seem
         unrealistic, they are much more sensible than lifting the
         SALT cap.
           This issue is not a partisan one. It is a moral one. When
         President Trump and many Democrats state their wishes to
         spend billions of our dollars annually on a giveaway to the
         wealthy, we should be as clear as possible in our
         denunciation of such ridiculousness. The deficit is not a
         state issue or a local issue, but a national issue.
         Therefore, we should reject out of hand unnecessary political
         giveaways that only benefit a small fraction of Americans.

                   EMILEE BROWNELL, ESSEX HIGH SCHOOL, JUNIOR

                                Saving Ourselves

           My dad, Seth Brownell, was a lineman for years. Growing up,
         he would consistently tell my sister and me about the
         importance of electricity and how our phones, iPads, and
         computers all use it to function. I never really gave it any
         thought until I got older and realized the effects of that
         power. Today, data farms require a tremendously high amount
         of energy; 1,000 terawatt hours is predicted to be the annual
         requirement for data farms by 2026. That is approximately
         identical to Japan's electric consumption. These farms
         require a significantly high amount of energy and are the
         main contributor for the carbon dioxide polluting our air.
           Because data farms require so much power, that means that
         more has to be made. The fastest way to do so is by burning
         fossil fuels which is responsible for 74% of the carbon
         dioxide emissions in the US. Generating power is the greatest
         factor in global warming. According to Landgate, one wind
         turbine takes up 80 acres of land and can affect the local
         wildlife. Solar farms require an excessive amount of space as
         well. Pivot Energy highlights that the average solar farm
         requires 10-20 acres of land; for every direct megawatt, five
         acres of buildable land is essential for success. Turbines
         and solar farms are an unreliable source that evidently
         depend on weather and don't work as quickly as burning fossil
         fuels.
           New nuclear energy can be key to countering this problem.
         The word nuclear often brings up difficult topics: Three Mile
         Island, the Chernobyl disasters, or the radioactive waste
         produced. However, since today's nuclear technology is more
         modern, it can be placed in rural areas, and society has a
         better understanding of it. Not only is less land required
         for new nuclear power, it's also always accessible and can
         produce much more power with minimal nuclear fuel because it
         has a higher energy density than fossil fuels. While many
         worry about the disposal of nuclear waste, only about 3% of
         it is the long lived, greatly radioactive form of waste. With
         that, isolation is required, but with the new high tech safe
         disposals that combine containment and geological deposits,
         waste is isolated for thousands of years protecting us and
         our environment. Though it does come with some risks, new
         nuclear power is a safe, low profit, efficient fuel source.
         It produces no emission, ultimately cleaning our air. Using
         new nuclear power prevents

    [[Page S1342]]

         carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere. The amount of
         carbon dioxide prevented is equivalent to removing a third of
         all cars around the world. The demand for a safe, low profit
         power source is rapidly growing, and new nuclear power meets
         all these requirements.
           Though nuclear power may seem like a scary, dangerous
         solution to the extensively high amount of energy data farms
         consume, ultimately it's the most reliable, safest solution.
         Not only does it save money, it also reduces the amount of
         carbon dioxide being emitted into the atmosphere, into the
         air that we breathe.

             SOFIA BUSH, MOUNT MANSFIELD UNION HIGH SCHOOL, JUNIOR

           With the patchwork of health insurance and care we call a
         system, many Americans are left in crippling medical debt.
         This makes the United States an outlier among industrialized
         nations, both in the systems we use and the startling
         incompetence within them. Every single industrialized
         country, except the United States of America provides
         universal health care (Vladeck). For affordable and efficient
         healthcare, Medicare in the US should be expanded into
         universal National Health Insurance.
           The way in which Americans receive and pay for health care
         today is deeply flawed compared to other countries, it is
         highly ineffective and significantly more expensive.
         Industrialized countries follow three main health insurance
         models, the Beveridge model, Bismarck model, and National
         Health Insurance model.
           Equitable access to care is a good indicator of the
         effectiveness of health care in a country. Compared to
         similar countries, the US has very inequitable access to
         healthcare. The Commonwealth Fund found that the US had the
         highest income related discrepancies in care, as well as the
         most ``instances of unfair treatment or feelings that health
         concerns were not taken seriously by health care
         professionals because of their racial or ethnic background''
         (Blumenthal et al.). This indicates inequitable access to
         care as unfair treatment leads to patients not receiving the
         care they need, as well as breaking trust between the patient
         and provider. These discrepancies reinforce the idea that
         this system is ineffective because it shows that it
         prioritizes some patients over others.
           Though healthcare in America is so ineffective, it's
         remarkably overpriced. Americans spent more than 16% of GDP
         on healthcare in 2023 (Blumenthal et al.). For context,
         that's about 1.5 times more than many countries with
         universal healthcare. This indicates that Americans are
         pouring money into a poorly performing healthcare and
         insurance industry.
           To make healthcare more affordable and effective, we should
         turn to the National Health Insurance model by expanding
         Medicare into mandatory universal healthcare. This would
         decrease inequalities and administrative challenges, and lay
         a foundation for a healthier nation, as treatment and
         preventative care will be more accessible. One estimate says
         that switching ``increases life expectancy by almost 2 years,
         grows the population size by 3 percent, and increases worker
         productivity through improved health'' (``Medicare for All:
         Comparison of Financing Options''). To fund this, there
         should be an income based tax increase, which would be
         cheaper than what most Americans pay for healthcare now.
           So, our healthcare system is more expensive with worse
         performance compared to other similar countries. Making
         Medicare universal would result in more effective and
         affordable care, which would build a foundation for a
         healthier nation. Healthcare is an issue that touches every
         one of our lives, though some more than others. But overall,
         to build a strong, healthy, productive nation, we must start
         with an effective and accessible health care system.

                 HAZEL O'BRIEN, TWINFIELD UNION SCHOOL, SENIOR

           On November 5th, 2024, California held elections to
         determine the representation of their state in the U.S. House
         of Representatives. Fifteen million voters across 52
         congressional districts pledged their ballots, and when the
         results became clear, the Democratic Party won 60% of the
         popular vote while the Republican Party won 40%. Despite this
         result, the seat share of the Californian delegation will be
         43 Democrats to 9 Republicans, approximately 83% to 17%. This
         is the plurality voting system in action, a process that left
         6,000,000 Californian Republican voters grossly
         underrepresented.
           Most elections in the U.S. use a plurality voting system,
         which drives political polarization as the party duopoly
         becomes entrenched, and demonization becomes a tactic to
         prevent spillage of voters between the parties. Though this
         system is deeply embedded in contemporary American democracy,
         there are paths to improvement. For one, we can look to the
         proportional systems that successful democracies implement
         abroad. A great example of a proportional election system is
         the use of multi-member districts. This method takes the idea
         of a congressional district and essentially lowers the
         threshold of popularity a party must receive to earn
         representation by increasing the number of seats held in the
         district; this way an accurate reflection of the entire
         voting public can be achieved as opposed to just the
         plurality opinion.
           Multi-member districts were once permitted in the U.S., but
         due to threats of misuse by segregationists in response to
         the Voting Rights Act of 1965, it was banned in 1967 under
         the Uniform Congressional District Act (UCDA). The UCDA had
         the aim of eradicating bloc voting, a system that utilizes
         multi-member districts to neglect minority representation. It
         unfortunately also set single-member districts as the only
         legal means to host elections for the House of
         Representatives, a major cause of our plurality system. The
         solution here is relatively uncomplicated on its face, the
         process by which laws are passed mirrors very closely the way
         in which they are repealed. With a simple bill intended to
         counteract and nullify the UCDA, a breakthrough is possible.
         If that bill included clauses detailing how to mandate
         standards of proportionality and representation, such as
         specifically banning abusive practices like bloc voting, then
         we could see significant changes with the successful
         installment of multi-member districts.
           Many in Congress will likely be resistant to the idea of an
         alteration considering it is directly tied to their positions
         of power. However, we can already see the movement necessary
         to make progress. Maine passed Measure 5, an act to establish
         ranked choice voting on the federal level, via citizen
         initiative in 2016. Alaska in 2020 also passed a similar
         measure through referendum. This demonstrates electoral
         reform is something the voting public considers a priority
         and by harvesting this momentum we can demand Congress to
         finally take action.

              MACKENZIE RUSSELL, HARWOOD UNION HIGH SCHOOL, JUNIOR

           Public education is crucial to the development of society.
         School prepares students with the knowledge and skills needed
         for civic engagement, and also provides a space where
         students can discover their interests and explore the
         pathways available to them--and teachers are the backbone of
         this whole system. However, schools struggle to achieve this
         purpose when staff inconsistencies arise. The teacher
         shortage--an issue that Senator Bernie Sanders has raised
         before--is a national problem currently affecting 86% of
         public schools across the nation (NCES). Though Sanders has
         advocated for something to be done about this, there hasn't
         been the support needed to put a solution into action. To
         make progress on this issue, solutions must address the
         multiple perspectives that many feel Sanders' proposal
         overlooks.
           Staff shortages are increasingly prevalent in our schools
         today. Public schools have trouble filling not only teaching
         positions but also bus drivers, substitutes, and food
         workers. As of October 2024, 35% of public schools were
         operating with at least one open position (NCES). Even with
         just one vacancy, class sizes and courses offered are often
         impacted. With fewer teachers available, many schools have to
         combine classes, which increases average class sizes. Not
         only does this provide less personalized and one-on-one
         learning for the students, but it places more pressure on
         teachers to accommodate more students.
           Compared to a decade ago, the number of people pursuing
         teaching has decreased by 20-30% (Aldeman), showing that
         college-age students' interest in teaching is declining. The
         main reasons are apprehensions about salaries and working
         conditions. Teaching positions earn less money than other
         jobs earned by a college degree, giving the job a huge
         downside for people choosing a profession. And furthermore,
         even if schools fill their teaching positions it's likely
         they won't be able to keep a steady staff team. In 2022, 55%
         of teachers decided to leave their job earlier than expected
         (Walker), often with stress or work overload factoring in
         this decision.
           The Pay Teachers Act was introduced to the Senate in March
         of 2023 (Stanford). The Act proposes a minimum wage of
         $60,000 for all full-time teachers--a number that could
         increase with promotions and experience like usual. A set
         minimum wage would address the disinterest in being a teacher
         due to the salary, but some argue that wouldn't solve the
         issue. Salary isn't the only downside many find in teaching,
         as in addition lots of teachers report difficult working
         conditions within their jobs. A solution to this national
         teacher shortage would need to recognize the concern with
         salaries as well as the work environment.
           To bring the suggested solution to fruition, and garner
         more support from opposing lawmakers, more importance should
         be placed on creating a more manageable and less stressful
         environment for teachers. In addition to offering a minimum
         salary of $60,000, benefits like sabbaticals or retention
         bonuses could incentivize new teachers to commit to the
         career. They ultimately would also allow teachers to de-
         stress, helping to renew their enthusiasm for teaching.

              MIA KONEFAL, SOUTH BURLINGTON HIGH SCHOOL, FRESHMAN

           The health of our citizens is the most rudimentary, yet
         fundamental part of what allows our nation to thrive. The
         skyrocketing prices of prescription medication, hospital
         trips, and doctor appointments, which are all necessary to
         ensure the safety and comfort of American citizens, is an
         issue that needs to be immediately addressed. With prices
         that just keep rising, I fear for the 16.9% of Americans who,
         according to the National Library of Medicine, report
         difficulty affording healthcare; I fear for the millions of
         people who struggle with or ignore pain and other health
         issues because they cannot afford treatment.

    [[Page S1343]]

           During recent years, the United States has experienced
         soaring prices of treatments, medication, and health
         insurance on levels not previously seen. Despite healthcare
         being undeniably necessary for our citizens, and therefore
         our country, to succeed and prosper, millions of Americans
         are unable to afford the treatment they need. According to
         the Centers for Medicare Services, in 2022, ``the healthcare
         spending in the United States reached $4.9 trillion,'' which
         means on average, each person in America spends $14,570 per
         year on healthcare. While these rising and unpayable costs
         are an issue across the globe, the rising costs are
         especially apparent in the United States. In fact, according
         to the National Institutes of Health, ``The United States
         spent approximately twice as much as other high-income
         countries on medical care.''
           Although several acts exist that attempt to combat the
         inflating prices of healthcare services, such as the ``Lower
         Costs, More Transparency Act,'' which passed the House of
         Representatives, and advocates for more price transparency in
         the healthcare sector, I believe that a large part of the
         issue lies in the simple fact that the United States remains
         an outlier in terms of per capita health care spending. The
         simple yet undeniable fact is that our citizens pay more for
         healthcare than citizens of any other country.
           To combat the skyrocketing prices of the healthcare sector
         in the United States: I would propose a multi-tiered plan.
         Firstly, the large, private pharmaceutical companies should
         no longer be permitted to put their own profits over the
         health of Americans. For decades these huge insurance and
         pharmaceutical companies have been able to rip off American
         people with high prices for medication and treatments that
         are necessities. A cap for what each individual can pay for
         medication per year should be implemented. Secondly, a
         national healthcare system, similar to Medicaid, which is
         guaranteed for those 65 and older, that guarantees healthcare
         for all, not just those who can afford it, should be
         introduced. Healthcare should become a constitutional right,
         not just a privilege for those who can pay.
           The unreasonable prices of prescription medication,
         insurance, and doctor's visits are actively working against
         our citizens, preventing our country from flourishing. If
         nothing is done, prices will only continue to increase and
         the percentage of Americans who are uninsured or cannot
         afford healthcare will likewise grow. Steps need to be taken
         to ensure the health of our citizens.

                              ____________________