YGMedia

By Ava Motes

Sophomores Luka Verheul and Alden Harris argued their first appellate case this morning, surprising both themselves and their opponents when the judge ruled in their favor.

“I felt so unprepared, I can’t believe we actually won,” said Harris, “It still feels like we didn’t deserve it.”

The pair was competing against another group from their school, who had spent over a month assembling their arguments. Harris and Verheul, on the other hand, wrote their opening statements twenty minutes before the trial began. Underdressed and unconfident, they went into the trial under the presumption that they would lose gruesomely to their peers.

Verheul and Harris faced an array of obstacles over the course of this morning.

“We overslept, we forgot to print our brief, our carpool almost left without us because we were running late, and the suit I planned to wear didn’t fit anymore,” said Verheul, “it was just like every little thing that could have gone wrong did.”

Verheul forced to attend the conference wearing loose-fitting thrifted trousers, vans, and sweatshirt. He felt entirely out of place by comparison to all of the other competitors.

“I didn’t think they’d take me seriously. The other team walked in looking insanely professional, and I was in a hoodie,” said Verheul.

“The past 24 hours were just so stressful,” said Verheul, who had gone to bed at 2 a.m. after sleeping-over at Haris’ house the previous night.

They had expected to buckle-down on their preparations the night before, but procrastinated to the point that productivity was no longer feasible.

“We would just keep saying ‘let’s watch one more video on YouTube, then we’ll prepare.’” Verheul said, “We just got into this mindset of putting it off because we were just so nervous.”

Two weeks prior, Harris and Verheul missed the deadline for appellate brief submissions and feared that they would be barred from participating.

“I didn’t even feel like preparing anymore because it just seemed like we wouldn’t be allowed to come,” said Harris.

The shaken feeling accompanying such insecurities stuck with them both, even after they were told that they still had the opportunity to compete. This compounded with first-time jitters, leaving the pair feeling unstable in their knowledge of the case general appellate proceedings. They were unsure of what to expect, and it seemed as though their work leading up to the conference was insufficient.

“We really did know the specifics of the case well, but I was worried that we couldn’t hold up in heavy debate,” said Harris.

However, appellate trials are not the extensive due process debates that they are often made out to be. Such trials are controlled and contained, testing your knowledge and interpretation as opposed to your use of flashy argument tactics. Effective public speaking skills are important for swaying a judge to rule in your favor, but it is just as vital for attorneys to understand the foundation of their case and respond to questions clearly.

After Harris and Verheul realized that the trial would not function as they had feared, they were able to proceed with more confidence.

“What we had expected was just so much worse than how it actually was. Once we realized that we could do this, despite everything we had been telling ourselves, everything went well,” said Harris.

Ultimately, Harris and Verheul were able to surge ahead of their opponents.

“We were respectful and clear, and I think that really impressed the judge,” said Verheul. Despite their last-minute preparations, they knew all of the answers to the questions posed to them and were able to respond thoroughly.

“I think we just needed to realize that everything was okay, and we actually knew our stuff,” said Harris.

The pair were able to prove themselves during their first trial, giving them the reassurance they needed to proceed with success throughout the remainder of the conference.

By Ivan Kipp

A new bill proposed at the Austin YMCA Texas Youth & Government District Conference is seeking to promote affordable public college in Texas by implementing a gasoline tax. New Bern bankruptcy law firm has said that the bill was passed unanimously.

This bill was presented by Hays High School Delegate Dylan Cousins, who is a senior.

Delegate Cousins says that this bill will enact a “small to medium increase in gas tax” to ensure that any family making under 125,000 a year will be able to attend a two to four year program at any Texas public college for free given that they are residents in the state of Texas, take 30 credits per calendar year, and plan to stay and work in Texas following their graduation for the same amount of time they were apart of the program. 

Delegate Cousins claims that “we need to reduce student debt”, and that the state will do so by implementing the tax previously mentioned on gas. Cousins says that his bill “closely mirrors legislation in New York” and current practices at Rice University in Houston, Texas. The tax will be determined by the Texas Education Agency, who will evaluate the cost of implementing the bill and instruct the Texas comptroller to raise the gas tax to cover the costs, as stated in Cousins bill. Cousins also says that it “is of vital importance to the state” that the TEA reports these projected costs. To fluctuate accordingly with changes in the economy, the TEA will re-evaluate the cost and if necessary propose a change in the legislature.

Cousin argued that an increase in gas tax would “give Texas better education and will reduce student debt.”

Cousin added that the bill will only apply two or four-year public colleges, excluding private universities.

Delegate Nambala from Vista Ridge in support of the bill agreed that “we won’t have much pain, but mostly gain after passing or re-evaluation” of the bill.

Delegate Cousins said that the benefit of the reduced bachelor’s degree will benefit the lower class to a greater effect. According to the Economic Policy Institute, “college graduates, on average, earned  56% more than high school grads in 2015”.

This act shall take effect beginning the 2022-2023 school year for all public universities.

By Sierra Jackson

During Committee three, delegate Sangmin Yi,of Cedar Park High School,12, presented a bill declaring the homeless shelters that were currently being run publicly and privately to be reformed into a center where they will be able to learn basic and/or advanced skills used to achieve employment and rehabilitation. The bill was passed 10:0.

“I saw that if you just keep it as homeless shelters, the cycle is going to keep continuing where people are going get off their feet and try to become independent again, only to fall back into poverty because they don’t have the right skills or environment,” Yi said.

Yi argued, “by changing homeless shelters to homeless rehabilitation centers, it can provide them with an environment where they can join back the economy and society.”  

Additionally, Yi added that adding a rehabilitation component to homeless shelters would eventually “boost the economy because businesses can make donations to these centers and they will get first choice of picking people to work for their business.”

Although the bill was voted in unanimously, there was an amendment added. The amendment states that private shelters should not be included to this bill because they do not receive federal funding. The amendment was passed with a 9:0 ratio.    

By Christina Thies

A bill proposing the addition of an “other” or third gender option to state-issued driver’s licenses was killed in Committee Three session at Youth and Government District Conference. Delegate Alex Watson, 9, authored and presented the bill in hopes that it would provide the idea of inclusiveness into this critical identification. The overall idea of this bill was to refrain from classifying based off of sex, and instead provide a gender non-conforming option.

The bill was defeated 6 to 5.

Watson stated the idea behind his bill came from his participation in the GSA club at his high school.

“Through many stories shared by many members who have struggled with the discomfort of choosing a set gender, [I was able to grasp] the idea that something needed to be done,” Watson said.  

The opponents of the bill stated, “It would be more difficult for law enforcement and the judicial branch to identify individuals in the case of an accident”. Additional opposition cited possible increases in fraud as a reason this bill should not be passed. Some opponents expressed concern with the third gender creating unfair treatment, which could possibly alienate a group of people.

Watson argued it was a fundamental human right that people should be able to choose how they are perceived in society. Supporters of Watson said, “It should not be up to the government to choose how individuals are represented, but the individuals themself.”

Although the bill did not pass, Watson continues to advocate for non-conforming rights.

By Chloe Opelt

Although State Affairs and Legislative seem similar to some delegates, they are “actually quite different,” according to Claudia Huffman, a State Affairs delegate. State Affairs and Legislative delegates have weighed in on this topic, providing their opinions and knowledge of their duties at the YAG State Conference.

The similarities between the State Affairs and Legislative sections “mostly revolve around the debates,” according to Huffman.

“There are a lot of people that are very passionate about what they believe in and they like to debate as much as they can to get their voice out there,” she said. However, “they’re pretty much separate things,” she said.

Huffman mentioned “partners, a visual example, and pro-con debate speeches.” State Affairs proposals also pertain only to the state of Texas, while legislative bills concern all states, not just Texas. “State Affairs is a little more calm compared to legislative; sometimes [legislative students are] like lions at your throat,” said Huffman. “State Affairs can get like that too, not as often as Legislative though,” she said.

Wathila Ekanayake, a Legislative delegate, explained that Legislative and State Affairs are similar in that they “debate bills, make amendments, argue the pros and cons, and pass it based on the arguments made.”

“I feel like in legislative, when people are defending their ideas, they get really passionate and start to yell into the microphone,” said Ekanayake when asked about the severity of tones and volumes in the legislative sessions.

While the core processes of State Affairs and Legislative are similar, “they are very different things,” according to Huffman. “We have different ways of getting stuff done,” said Huffman as she expanded on her previous sentence. Huffman finished by stating that “they’re two separate groups for a reason.”