A Substantial "Critique"

In the article, For better health, pay Perry no mind, an editorial for the Austin American Statesman, the author asks legislators to go against Perry's recent letter that says that Texas will not increase Medicaid or set up health insurance, which was sent to the Obama administration.

Although the author specifically says, "We call on legislators...", I don't think that the legislators are his intended audience. Why not? Well, I think that the legislators only really listen to two things, votes and money. One man's opinion doesn't matter a lot to them, not on an issue like this where they're likely to simply vote along party lines. Rather, I think he's trying to reach the voters, who can then tell their elected officials, with the force of numbers, that this is what they want to have happen. Votes make things happen, and if he can get the voters to speak, he has a much better chance of causing something to happen than if he is one person talking. This is why I think his audience is the voters.


This author is very credible. He lists many, many facts, all of which would be easy to check. This means that he is very unlikely to lie about any of his facts, essentially guaranteeing that they are true. Not only does he have facts, he's in the Austin American Statesman, the largest newspaper in central Texas. They have good staff, and generally write good articles. Thus, the combination of numerous facts and writing for a reputable paper give this author significant credibility.


His argument is sound and well written. He keeps a level tone throughout his article, and presents things as if that's just the way they are. He also has emotional appeals, though they're not explicit. His mentions of the people who benefit from this care, and of saving money by doing this now are meant to make his readers feel that they personally will benefit and save money. His mention that Texas is #1 for the number of people without health insurance is an appeal to Texan pride. Because he has all of the elements that a good argument should - he's logical, has emotional appeals, and presents a very credible front - this is a very effective argument, and it has convinced me that I'd rather, "pay a dollar now to keep someone as healthy as possible," so that I don't, "pay for it later when they're sick."