When choosing my topic, I chose it for many reasons pertaining to not only politics but the pursue the idea of cut down student debt and what that can do for families across the United States. I find it very interesting that these candidates believe that this is such an easy task to get done based on how much is borrowed. However, with a plan that sounds possible to the American people it can allow them to receive many votes. 

For example, if Bernie could prove he can make college free he would be leading without a problem but because this topic is politically impossible it makes that hard to accomplish. Enforcing a federal tax to eliminate college expenses by taxing the higher class families cannot be done and why Sanders is starting to get questioned on whether or not he is just trying to get the votes. This research question affects me because if it were to happen it would help my future a whole lot. Student debt is a real problem and the government just continues to get rich from it. Spending all this money to receive an education is crazy and should definitely be enforced, but just like any other plan it can have its problems. What makes me qualified to write about this is that all throughout the debates and videos on the news I continue to learn more on the perspectives of the candidates. Also, because this topic applies to me it makes it that much more interesting to write about (Lane).

In my first source it explains democratic candidate Bernie Sander's plan to practically make everything "free". Now obviously that is something we would all want but because he is a socialist he wants to satisfy the needs of the people. The central claim of this article is to describe the pros and cons that go into having no student debt. Obviously, a college education is needed in order to get a better job or be able to be educated enough to do what you want in the future. One of the major evidences in the article is that people feel like if college tuition were to be free or trimmed down students would slack a lot more because there is no financial stake involved. Encouraging them to work harder because of all the money being spent for you to be there is what pushes students to get their work done. 

The credibility of the writer is identified through his style and tone. Charles Lane writes primarily on politics and states what evidence proves his opinions on each topic written. It's stated as an argumentative because of the question asked on whether or not grades will drop because of no financial stake pushing students to become more successful. However, I don't believe drastically making tuition affordable will make students slack because I feel like it just depends on what kind of student that person is. The article was also written in 2015 and proves this is a credible source on the Washington Post news website. The different perspectives definitely lead the reader into changing their mind on the topic because each idea has its own evidence or background. Each politically acclaimed idea referring to this article create many questions on why or why not this can happen (Lane).

For my next source it goes into more financial terms and the significance behind it. A tax increase is something people aren't against but don't know if anything this extreme can get done based on how much the federal government gets in profits because of college education. It can revolutionize education, create more jobs, and rebuild the middle class in a perfect world. Noa Halff is very credible for writing this because he clearly states examples pursuing his claim on the topic. For example, using evidence behind state legislatures who use less tax help that is making college tuition unaffordable for a lot of families. This draws the attention of the reader by determining that many students are not able to receive the education they want because they can't receive help nor want the loans in the future. The major values of the article are that it doesn't give up the fact that this can be a realistic plan in the future. If it can get done it won't be at the extent some politicians want it to be at, but can be very affordable. Halff also provides evidence for having to borrow to much from the government and upper class families for this to be possible. You can't just take this money from them because they are wealthier than everyone else having trouble paying for their child's education. This definitely had me on the bubble with still being a supporter of Bernie Sanders. Yes, he has some great ideas but can they be done in the future is a question that you have to ask yourself (Halff).

In this source it goes more into terms of what everyone thinks about creating affordable college tuition for all universities. Hilary Clinton, Ben Carson, and Donald Trump all state their claims on college tuition but have a lot more on their minds than that. They understand graduation rates are lower because families are not able to afford it but feel tuition must be enforced. The writer writes her information on regularly advising consumers on paying and planning for college so she has evidence for knowing the financials stakes on college students across the country. These different perspectives affect my based on how I believe tuition can be cut down drastically if the right buttons are pushed. Education throughout the years has been an important topic on the news and in the eyes of people working in the department. For example, in some states where teachers are not being paid enough to support their family as they would want (Sourmaidis). 

In conclusion, students should not have to be forced not to receive the education they want because they don't have the money. Enforcing a federal law to regulate college tuition is not something that can be done overnight, but a plan that will revolutionize education forever. Therefore, the major evidence and claims focused on student loans is credible in each source and clearly states the statements shown describing the topic. 

