A recent editorial in the Dallas News talks about the legislature passing the bill that extends the DNA evidence testing. The author briefly demonstrates his favor of the bill because he says, “some of them gather to offer moral support when a new innocent brother secures his hard-won freedom”. So many people are imprisoned for crimes that others committed, and having this bill passed would allow those who are behind bars to show that they are innocent people. 
       The author then goes into a specific example, and uses the Michael Morton case, a man who spent 25 years in prison for the murder of his wife but after evidence was tested it showed that the real killer was out in the streets. With the advance in technology we can now do better testing and figure whose DNA is contained in the evidence. The author clearly states what happened in the Morton case and says that Morton's lawyers fought for years so that court could approve to test a bandana that was found near the home where his wife was bludgeoned to death. 
         The author summarizes with stating that it’s a good change that gives courts a clearer direction and avoids fatal errors like imprisoning an innocent person for something that they didn't do. His intended audience is anybody who is interested in new bills that are passed or those who are imprisoned but are really innocent and have evidence that can be DNA tested.
          I agree with the author because I think it's very good change that they can expand the access to DNA evidence testing. It provides specific examples and gives great argument to choose a side. Who would ever go against this bill, I can only think of the people who are really the ones who committed the crime.                                                                                                                                                                                                               

        In an editorial from The Dallas News the reader talks about the Affortable Care Act that is generally referred to as the Obama-care which is the landmark health reform legislation passed by the 111th Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama in March 2010. The reader is saying how it might affect millions of Texans. To be exact the writter provides the reader with specific statistics and said that in 2016 if the U.S. Supreme Court sides with the plaintiffs in King vs. Burwell 1.7 million in Texas would be uninsured. 
        I believe this is a well written editorial because it gives specific examples, it provides the reader definitions to words or bills that are introduced , and even presents statistics not only how it can affect our state but also nationwide. The editorial also provides senators opinion about how they feel towards this situation. The writter states that if the Affordable Care Act fails many people won't be able to afford health insurance and that will cause a dramatic rise of uninsured people, since Texas already leads in to be the state with the most people to be uninsured .
         Senators have been trying to search for ways to fix this issue so they introduced the bill HB 817 that says that the state will run healthcare exchange that would allow our state to continue to receive federal subsidies, and allow the people to maintain their healthcare coverage.
         I believe this is a very important informative editorial which its primary audience is any of the people in texas who did sign up with the Affordable Care Act or any other person that can be affected by this changes. I believe that the writter couldn't have have done a better job in this editorial because it provides the reader with very important information along with what solutions there can be to fix this issue.