Cindycated Shawcross

Former President Carter Speaks Out About Racism

Thu, 22 Oct 2009 20:31:07 -0400

On September 15^th, Former President Carter made a statement in reference to Joe Wilson’s outburst “you lie” and the mood of some of the opposition to President Obama saying that he felt “…an overwhelming portion of the intentionally demonstrated animosity toward Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he is African-American. I live in the South, and I’ve seen the south come a long way, and I’ve seen the rest of the country, that shared the south’s attitude toward minority groups, particularly African-Americans.” Nevertheless, racism “still exists and I think it has bubbled up to the surface because of a belief among many white people, not just in the south but around the country, that African-Americans are not qualified to lead this great country. It’s an abominable circumstance and grieves me and concerns me very deeply.”

Now, despite the white house essentially dispatching Carter’s statements, there is a heated debate over the issue of race which, unfortunately, is detracting from Obama’s intense efforts to do his job as president and, in particular, to pass healthcare reform. But, the comments by Carter are shared by many in America, both minorities and non. Everyone agrees that the “debate” in this country over policy issues have “coarsened”, but the way in which that “coarsening” has manifested is what many minority leaders, as well as Americans of all persuasions are calling “racist”.

Examination of this election cycle illustrated Carter’s point. During Obama’s campaign for the presidency we saw images and comments that many called “racist” like a California GOP group putting Obama on food stamps surrounded by images of fried chicken and watermelon; where conservative groups sold “Obama Waffles” showing Obama, on the cover in an Aunt Jemima style box with yet another image of Obama wearing Islamic headdress on the bottom of the box. Carter and other pundits have equated Joe Wilson’s “outburst” as the tip of the iceberg in a climate that has shown protesters and Congressional leaders questioning Obama’s legitimacy through the “birther” movement, as a non-citizen and as an illegitimate president; where people are crying out “we want our country back” implying that Obama is not one of them. The examples of overtly racist rhetoric and threats against the life of President Obama are too many to enumerate here, but they are clearly unlike anything we have ever seen in history.

The debate during Obama’s presidency, especially during town hall meetings on healthcare, have only served to widen the divide. When referring to the types of behaviors, signs, and arguments (like that of Joe Wilson) aimed at Obama, Carter put it well when he said, “Those kind of things are not just casual outcomes of a sincere debate on whether we should have a national program on health care,” he said. “It’s deeper than that.”

Most recently, an outcry from conservatives over Obama’s Presidential address to American students again raised questions about race. Many news sources were criticizing the President for “indoctrinating” children with a socialist agenda before they had even heard the speech. Lowell Wolff, Administrator for Community Relations and Planning for Fargo Schools said there were many calls from concerned parents even before the speech aired; some of which he described as “intense”. Wolff pointed out that the school system is a publicly funded entity headed by the president, and noted that the scuttlebutt over the speech actually presented many “teachable moments”. He noted that activists requesting that the president’s speech not be aired could be equated to “censorship”, and asked “Does not the president also have the right to free speech?”. Ironically, after Obama spoke, he received many calls by parents which felt all school children should have been required to watch the speech.

Fargo School Superintendent Rick Buresh stated that although there were calls protesting Obama’s speech, he did not sense that any were specifically “racially” motivated adding that he felt that many people were simply misinformed and thought Obama’s speech had something to do with healthcare reform. Commenting on President Carter’s observations on race, Buresh stated that he felt much of the sentiments were a symptom of a “hypersensitive public in a highly charged political climate”. The Fargo school system did give teachers the option of showing the speech to students if it fit into the curriculum and/or the students’ schedules, and according to school officials, many students did get the opportunity to watch the presidents speech. Superintendent Buresh stated that after seeing the speech he found nothing objectionable about it; that in fact the schools strive to send the same message the president gave to students and that it was great “to have the president of the United States reinforce that message”.

John Strand, serving on the school board said he was pleased that “there was no roadblock in Fargo that would prevent student bodies from viewing the speech”, adding that it was a sign of respect to the presidency that Fargo made this choice when others were choosing to censor the speech. Although Grand Forks and East Grand Forks schools did not air the speech, they did give teachers a choice to show the speech to their students in the future. However, most school officials interviewed were really caught off guard and quite surprised by the reaction to a simple presidential address. Superintendent Buresh said, “We are in a very polarized media climate”, and “maybe this a part of our new reality”

As a growing Latino population continues to gain political representation; and while the minorities in America continue to call for equity, even in our own Fargo-Moorhead area, politicians seem oblivious to the political suicide that they are courting by polarizing our country over the issue of race. My 16 year old daughter, Sara Siqueiros, said it best when she complained that she had not had the opportunity to watch the presidents address to students and that Latino and other minority children need to see minorities in leadership that they can look up to. She added, “You know mom, America thought that we passed the ‘big test’ in showing we are not a racist nation by electing Obama as our President. But it is how we respect him throughout his presidency that is the real test”. Out of the mouths of babes…….

The Reasons Why I Should Stop Asking for Healthcare: And Other Things I Learned About the Public Option in Washington DC

Thu, 22 Oct 2009 18:21:00 -0400

Picture of Sen. Al Franken at Breakfast before our Conference

I was recently in DC representing People Escaping Poverty Project (PEPP), at a conference co-hosted by Reps. Peter DeFazio (OR) and Tom Perriello (D-Va.) with speakers including Congressman and triple Board Certified (in Internal Medicine, Allergy, Asthma & Immunology, and Diagnostic Laboratory Immunology), Dr. Steve Kagen, (D-Wisc.), House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) and attended by at least 36 congressional staffers. The Democratic members came to support a report released by the Center for Community Change and the Center (CCC) for Rural Affairs on rural communities’ attitudes toward health care reform. Moderating the event was

Washington Post writer Ezra Klein

who talked about the “true cost” of healthcare reporting that:

The average health-care coverage for the average family now costs $13,375, according to Kaiser [Family Foundation’s 2009 Employer Benefits Survey]. Over the past decade, premiums have increased by 138 percent. And if the trend continues, by 2019 the average family plan will cost $30,083. Washington Post, Ezra Klein, staff writer (Sept. 20, 2009) from “You Have No Idea What Health Costs, If You Did, You Might Just Want Real Reform”

The report issued by CCC highlighted stories from people across many rural states. see http://www.statefairstories.org ). According to the report, entitled “Sweet The Bitter Drought: Why America Needs Health Care Reform,” 82 percent of rural counties are classified as medically under-served areas. Medicaid and Medicare accounted for 60 percent of revenues in rural hospitals. Furthermore, during 2006, twenty-five percent of family farmers with insurance reported debt from medical expenses. There is a seventy percent chance that if you are a rural American you are under-insured or uninsured than if you are from urban America.

Those who spoke at the conference, like myself, talked in detail about how people in rural communities are facing the same problems the rest of Americans in the country face with access, affordability and quality of coverage; that we in rural America also suffer the same level of damage to our local economies due to the crushing burden put on small businesses, entrepreneurs, small companies, farmers, and the self-employed. A poll of rural communities showed overwhelming support from all rural states for a public option. But being from ND, I already knew all of that and had already heard time and again from its people; how healthcare costs had broken them; how they lost a loved one because they couldn’t continue coverage; how many of them don’t even have healthcare. After listening to the speakers and the members express their support, I walked out of the conference with a feeling of hope.

Unfortunately, when I visited my own member’s office (Sen. Conrad) and listened to many of the members of the Senate finance committee that evening on C Span, I was left with quite a different impression of our healthcare future. Sen. Conrad’s staff did explain that he would not support Sen. Rockefeller’s amendment which had a pubic option because it tied costs to Medicare reimbursement rates, and this would hurt North Dakota. However, Conrad did not vote for Sen. Schumer’s amendment either which also contained a public option and did not tie rates to Medicare. Although the Senator’s Aids (both in Fargo and DC) repeated that the Senator was “focused” on healthcare reform and acknowledged the problems with the current system, I could not get a response from anyone as to why the Senator could not support a public option. I was told by one aid in DC that there are not 60 votes for a public option, but Conrad’s “co-op” has nowhere near 60 votes either, so this left me quite confused about what the Senator will do to help people desperate for healthcare coverage in North Dakota.

I decided to look for answers elsewhere. As I listened to others on Capitol Hill while in DC, and later on C Span and on talk radio and TV, I realized that despite all the pleas, the common sense, and the overwhelming support for a public option in healthcare reform, there were some very frightening arguments in opposition.

Here is what I learned. Apparently, there are dozens and dozens of reasons why we should not pass a healthcare bill with a public option. To be fair, I cannot do justice to all the arguments I have heard, but here are some of them:

More Fraud And Abuse

If you thought that only the insurance companies can gouge you (and commit fraud against federal government programs like Medicare and Medicaid) – but you

would be wrong! If a “government run” option becomes available to people, that system could also possibly be abused by people who may lie about who they are. Of course this is conjecture, but the opposition supposes it could happen. Essentially, the message is that fraud and abuse of the “system” will still be there – but insurance companies won’t be the only ones perpetrating it if a public option passes.

More Cost

When Joe Wilson felt compelled to scream “You Lie” at the president during his joint address to the houses of congress on healthcare, he wasn’t the only one who was thinking it. Most republicans and a small number of democrats also agree that Obama’s promises were false; especially when it comes to the cost aspect. Obama did promise that not a penny would be added to the deficit to fund healthcare reform. But, as I listened to the opposition, I found that insurance companies wil

l be required to offer - - across the board - - a minimum of services and benefits (even for the cheapest of plans). This, many argue, will inevitably raise the cost of premiums for all. But wait, there’s more! Employers who are now not giving you raises because of exorbitant healthcare premiums will not be the only ones suffering. That is if you have a job or insurance to begin with, I’m assuming.

Unwanted Government Intrusion

Employers who otherwise did not offer insurance will now have to buy insurance. That’s going to cost them money they could have used to pay you more money! Instead of money, you will only have your health.

People who otherwise didn’t have insurance as small business owners, or self-employed persons will now be required to have health insurance. Subsidies will help people afford the insurance but there will still be costs that these people were not making before. So, if you wanted to spend your life without ever once having to see the inside of a doctor’s office, even if your life depended on it - - there go your rights!

And companies who purchased “Cadillac” plans for their executives would be taxed on any fancy “extras”. Won’t that discourage the wealthy to be healthy? What is even worse is that there will be a “cap” on how much insurance executives can

earn! You may live longer due to having better healthcare coverage Americans, but you won’t be able to enjoy it on the mediocre wages you will earn (especially if you were insurance executive)!

Your Current Coverage Won’t Exist Anymore

If a government run option is available, opponents argue that no insurance company in the public sector will be able to compete with the low low prices of the government run plan. Therefore, in order to keep insuring their employees, employers will switch to the government run plan and the plan you had – which you were probably happy with, won’t exist anymore. Essentially, the government will

become the “Walmart” of insurance, offering discounted prices that no “mom and pop” insurance company will be able to beat. Pretty soon, all the small town insurance store fronts will be closed and the big government giant “public option” plan will be the only player in town.

In essence, the fear is this: a public option could affect capitalism, could raise your premiums, could decrease your coverage, and might lower your wages. For those of us without a job or health insurance, these fears are moot. But for the many Americans who still hold on to their jobs, and have insurance through their employers, these fears could just sway them to oppose a public option.

Your Healthcare Will Be Rationed

Opponents of healthcare reform realize that with all Americans (or at least most) being able to finally access care – there will be a run on hospitals and clinics. There will be so many people, and so few doctors to treat all these new people that healthcare will have to be rationed. Again, this is an assumption, but a scary one. I was already aware of rationed care by health insurance companies – who currently decide what treatment is covered, who is covered, for how much, and for how long. So, I’m not sure who to be more afraid of, the insurance companies who are rationing my care or the “possible” rationing of care that is supposedly going to take place if a public option is passed.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, about 20 percent of Americans did not have health insurance in 2008, and Americans are loosing their jobs at an estimate rate of between 14,000 and 23,000 per day! So, if most people get their healthcare through employment, being unemployed puts thousands into the category of the non-insured daily. For those of us without adequate coverage or without insurance of any kind – there is no rationing. There is nothing. We just die. How many? Well, one study (by the Urban Institute) estimates 137,000 Americans died between 2000 and 2006 because of a lack of health insurance. The same study projects that between 2008 and 2010 another 7 million will lose their insurance. If job losses reach 10%, then it is estimated that another 6 million will lose their insurance. All tallied that would be 50- 60 million uninsured and un-cared for Americans.

What Do We Have to Lose?

After seeing arguments and fears of opponents of a public option, I have to say – I’ve seen scarier “B” list horror flicks. Nothing really scares the heebee-jeebees out of you more than being uninsured and sick, or dying. That is the type of fear that faces nearly a quarter of Americans daily (for those who are uninsured) and nearly all Americans who are under-insured or stripped of a stable financial future by exorbitant healthcare costs. So, even though the opposition’s fears are scary, they pale in comparison to the lump in your breast you cannot have checked or the ultrasound you can’t afford that will tell you if cancer has spread to your lymph nodes; the fear of leaving your children orphaned or watching someone you love die because they’re too poor to afford insurance in our sick-care system. The fear of dying trumps all else. So, what can we lose by adopting the public option?

As a country, adopting the public option means we will “lose” uninsured people. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that when fully implemented (healthcare reform legislation proposed in H.R. 3200) the number of uninsured nationwide will fall from 51 million to 16 million. In North Dakota, the number of uninsured would drop from 74,000 to 16,000 (a 78 % decline!). So, except for covering uninsured people, the distribution of insurance coverage would essentially remain largely unchanged under H.R. 3200 for North Dakota. In other words, people happy with their healthcare plans would keep what they already have and be unaffected. All those new insured persons will generate new revenue for ailing North Dakota hospitals and decrease the losses for uncompensated care. The

public option would, according to CBO, literally save North Dakota hospitals millions. Although Sen. Conrad has proposed a co-op plan he hoped would gain bi-partisan approval CBO assessed that co-ops will not work saying that “[T]he proposed co-ops had very little effect on the estimates of total enrollment in the exchanges or federal costs because, as they are described in the specifications, they seem unlikely to establish a significant market presence in many areas of the country or to noticeably affect federal subsidy payments” (emphasis added).

I believe North Dakotan’s are smart enough to see through the thinly veiled

arguments to scare us out of fighting for our own lives…..but I’m not flinching. We’ve already lost too much to stop now. Contact your members and let them know how you feel!

Tom Perriello (D-Va.)

House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.)

Dr. Steve Kagen, (D-Wisc.)

This is so sad. Children trying to reunite with their parents....

Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:48:06 -0400

This is so sad. Children trying to reunite with their parents. How many die in their efforts? Being orphaned of one or both of your parents is already a high price to pay for being born in a 3rd world environment where poverty forces parents to make decisions between raising thier children (for as long as they can all survive or watching them starve) or leaving them behind in their countries of origin and going somewhere to make money to keep them alive, fed, educated and safe. As a mom I can’t think of any parent who wouldn’t do anything they had to do to save their child’s life. What a scar on our national history that we are keeping children from their parents.

Getting it Right: The Census and Why You Should Make Yourself Count

Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:24:21 -0400

Census workers will soon be taking to the streets to gather information about America’s demographics. This information is crucial to state and local governments for funding purposes; important to identifying needs for services, trends, and business practices. But, for Latinos, the Census has historically been greeted with skepticism and fear. And rightly so; history has shown that information gathered in the Census about minority populations has led to misuse in the form of disenfranchisement to voters; targeted character assassination of ethnic groups; Internment Camps, mass deportations and more.

However, the consequence of undercounting and lack of representation of the true make-up of communities is underfunding. Lack of funding has already hit hard in our F-M region and the six-figure loss in funding usually hits already underfunded communities when it hurts most. Lack of funding goes hand in hand with a decrease in accessibility to a myriad of social services; underrepresentation of minority groups and creates a cloak of invisibility for already disenfranchised groups. Clearly, the approach of fear of the Census is not the answer. Some minority groups are even calling for boycotts of the Census – again anticipating the worse. But having disenfranchised and under-counted minority groups, like Latino’s doesn’t just hide them from unwanted government intrusion and abuse; it just continues to deprive them. As a Latina, this concerns me because it deprives Latinos and organizations who serve them from knowing the numbers of their potential clients. It deprives Latinos of the knowledge of each other; perhaps even isolating communities of color, and preventing them from networking and gaining access to services.

Not knowing the numbers of their own population, Latinos are depriving themselves of community and support. Latino’s are also depriving themselves of equal representation in local and national government, school boards, jobs, business practices, legal assistance, and – perhaps most importantly – policy making.

I remember when the census worker came to my house when I was a little girl. I translated for my parents what the census worker said for us to do. I could feel the fear my parents had about giving this complete stranger private and confidential information about the most intimate details of their life and livelihood. For many of the questions that my parents couldn’t comprehend the reasoning for, or the wording of - - the census worker did not leave it to our interpretation, instead telling us what we should answer according to the worker’s perception. This is a crucial point, because in the process of being “counted” and identified, we were also being told, not asked, who we were. Self identification is essential to a “free” person and even the current census form does not clearly identify Latino’s as a “race”. Instead, anyone of Mexican-American decent is counted as “Caucasian” of “Mexican American ethnicity”. So, what is the harm in that? Well, if you ask a Latino whether they consider themselves Caucasian, most will immediately say “NO”. However, through a treaty, all Latino’s are “Caucasian” and unless you relinquish your right to self-identify as some other race, your only option is to mark that you are a Pacific Islander, Native American, or African-American. Many who cannot stomach the options will write in “Mexican-American” in the “other” category. However, this doesn’t matter, because technically – Mexican-American is not your race, but your ethnicity so again – you are back to being Caucasian, whether or not you identify as one or enjoy the benefits and access to services of those who recognizably “look” Caucasian.

The fact is, there are many issues that Latino’s need to be involved in if they want change. A wise friend of mine once said to me when I was at a crossroads in my career, “Well, you can be one of the people complaining about the institutional problem, or you can be part of the institution and work at changing it from the inside”. So far, fearing the Census, however merited, has not served Latinos well or any minority group for that matter. Furthermore, the apathy and paranoia over Census participation has hurt the communities which we live in. Although most Latinos steer clear of seeking assistance from community agencies for a variety of reasons (ranging from being stereotyped, cultural conditioning to seeking support from church or family; or fear of government intrusion) the communities in which we live thrive or suffer based on the funding they receive from the private and public sector. And the quality of life we help to create in our communities extends beyond working, paying taxes and caring for our families. It requires us to be responsible and responsive to improving the communities where we live so that the education, services, roads, and governments that represent us and serve us are top notch; not just for us, but for our children, our neighbors, our extended families, our community services, and those generations who will follow us.

Having said all that, people do need to arm themselves with complete information and have the opportunity to ask questions and receive reassurance of their concerns; find out how to apply for jobs within the census, and find out how the census will affect their community and agencies serving them. That opportunity is here!

Education, discussion, and reforming the Census process for future generations are all essential to an effective Census count. However, for many communities like Latino’s, the local news or for-pay newspaper is not their main source of information; it is word of mouth. Information meetings that will address concerns for traditionally undercounted and underrepresented communities will be held so that people can ask city leaders, census workers, and other key minority leaders for answers and change. Attending these information meetings is crucial to addressing the issues with the Census.

The Fargo-Moorhead 2010 Census Public Education Training and Conference will be held on October 24, 2009 from 10:00am-3:00pm at the Fargo Public Library (102 North 3rd St). People Escaping Poverty Project (PEPP) is taking the lead to form a regional Census Coalition that will work together to coordinate Census outreach activities and involve organizations and communities in one of the most significant and historic Civic Engagement efforts of the new millennium: Census 2010! Community members, organizational representatives, government representatives, and the media are encouraged to join us at the October 24^th Leadership Training that will be supported by the D.C. based Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund and the Main Street Project of Minneapolis, MN.

The Conference is free. Please RSVP to duke@pepp.org or call PEPP at 218-236-5434 for More Information. For organizational information please contact:
Steven Renderos (952-594-9263) / steven@mainstreetproject.org
Duke Schempp (218-236-5434) / duke@pepp.org
Yoke-Sim Gunaratne (701-526-3000) / ysg@culturaldiversityresources.org
Erica Swanson (202-263-2859) / swanson@civilrights.org

The Raul and Zach radio show on 1100 AM (Friday from 8:00 – 9:00 pm) will feature a panel ready to answer questions and dialogue about the upcoming census count. Be sure to tune in and call in with your concerns. Panelists will include:

Cindy Shawcross

PEPP Board Co-Chair

Hannah Garcia

Minneapolis Complete Count Committee

Duke Schempp

Executive Director, PEPP

Steven Renderos

Media Justice Organizer, Main Street Project

Cathy Montoya

Senior Program Manager, Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund (LCCREF)

You can feel the tension in this city! It is so interesting how...

Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:06:40 -0400

You can feel the tension in this city! It is so interesting how all people who are saying this death was not “race” related are non-minority.

Sharing my personal healthcare story with members of congress...

Wed, 07 Oct 2009 00:00:00 -0400

Sharing my personal healthcare story with members of congress and staffers. It was an honor to be there representing People Escaping Poverty Project and the millions of people who do not have the opportunity to share their stories.

Giving Sen. Dorgan letters from North Dakotan’s in favor...

Thu, 13 Aug 2009 14:04:29 -0400

Giving Sen. Dorgan letters from North Dakotan’s in favor of healthcare reform

Letter to the Editor re: Town Hall Meeting in Casselton, ND - Fargo Forum

Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:54:35 -0400

I went to this town hall meeting and was the first to speak to Sen. Dorgan on the issue of healthcare reform. Even though Sen. Dorgan began by marveling at how North Dakotan’s town hall meetings are not like those being sensationalized in the media; the meeting itself took a negative turn. The people who show up at these meetings - - whether organized paid dissenters or not - - are disrupting the democratic process. Those who calmly raised and waited their turn to speak, raised their hands and didn’t scream, boo, and act like an uncivilized mob went mostly unheard. Those who waived papers, threw them on the floor, shouted out comments/questions and acted rudely were allowed to speak ahead of those who waited and behaved. Where is the justice in that? I personally recognized many of the people at this town hall meeting who were there to share their concerns and questions with the Senator — people on both sides of this issue. Yet, their voices were drowned out by those of the unruly. And the news reports that evening both on TV and in print did not accurately represent the tenor of the meetings. There were just as many, if not more, people at the town hall meeting in favor of healthcare reform and access to affordable healthcare for all. However, I did not see that angle of the story represented in the news. T

If the Senators and Representative for North Dakota allow themselves to be intimidated by such tactics, they will be making a grave mistake. Those of us who are going to these town hall meetings and behaving civilly and with respect are not silent or powerless. We are just not rude. And we WILL be expecting our representatives to do right by everyone in North Dakota, not just those who shout the loudest expletives.

Sincerely,

Cindy A. Shawcross.

The Homeless Save Homes: The Gladys Ray Shelter Gives Back

Thu, 02 Apr 2009 17:53:00 -0400

Fargo-Moorhead has seen better days. The two cities grinded to a halt after being pummeled by out of control flood waters and non stop snow storms. But this community is no stranger to flooding or other forms of adverse weather. This is - - after all - - North Dakota and Minnesota we’re talking about.

What is even more remarkable than the toughness of the people of this area is watching them come together in times of adversity. And no one knows adversity better than the homeless of Fargo-Moorhead. At the Gladys Ray Shelter located at 1519 1st Avenue South, many of the residents were helping with the flood fighting efforts. Russ, a guest advocate at Gladys Ray Shelter, expressed awe with the efforts he saw. “It really was inspiring to see so many of “Our Guys” returning each night after devoting their entire day to the sandbagging effort and immediately requesting 4 or 5 a.m. wake ups so they could get right back to the fray the next day”.

Jay (not his real name), just one of the many guest at the Gladys Ray Shelter who volunteered to help in the flood fighting efforts, said that he put in over 100 hours over an eight day period. He worked filling sandbags at the old sanitation building, at the Fargodome, and then bringing water and helping feed volunteers and workers with the Salvation Army. He recounted the pride he felt after having volunteered: “Today the captain of the salvation army group that I was working with told me that I should get an award for what I did. My comment to her was, ‘the only reward I want is the opportunity to do this again’”.

I found the efforts of Jay and others like him at the Gladys Ray shelter surprising and ironic, given that they - - who are homeless - - made such efforts to help save homes for other people. But Jay saw it differently, “I’m looking at it like this. The City of Fargo provides us this shelter and the volunteering gave me a chance to give back to the community because the City of Fargo is giving to us.”

Gladys Ray Executive Director, Jan Elliassen wasn’t surprised either. “It certainly doesn’t surprise me”, she said, “So often when we talk about somebody and how they may be experiencing homelessness, they are pegged as homeless and they lose their identity. They just become homeless and people forget that they have families and they feel like they’re part of a community too. Not having a home doesn’t mean you don’t feel like your part of a community. It doesn’t mean that you don’t feel like its your responsibility to get out and help and do whatever you can to make sure that “home” – the community being home – stays safe”.

Gladys Ray guest advocate, Russ, echoed this view saying, “Well, who are the homeless really? They are of course people, just like you and I- Sons, Fathers, Daughters, Mothers…How many paychecks away from homelessness are those who find it so easy to judge those in less fortunate circumstances?” and he added “The irony is that a disproportionate percentage of the homeless are veterans- whose present circumstances are a direct result of the psychological and or medical traumas sustained while serving their country; or Native Americans – who as a culture have been consistently swept under the rug so-to-speak and de-humanized. The case could be made in both instances that neither of these groups have ANY reason to care about “the system”, yet there they were fighting to save that very system with no reward; and in many cases in lieu of working a paying day labor gig”.

Elliassen explained that whether or not the homeless of our community or the Gladys Ray Shelter have been embraced by the community, the homeless of our community are still going to stand up and help keep this community safe because they are all invested in keeping the community safe for everyone as well as themselves. “Also, it speaks to the staff’s ability to provide a place for them where they can rest, be safe, and have access to whatever they might need to (clean up, take care of wounds, etc). The staff makes sure that they’re taken care of”.

Elliassen applauded the efforts and competence of her staff noting that “They made sure that shelter was open every day when it was supposed to be no matter how many people showed up, they made sure that they were able to find a place for everybody to sleep”

And that’s not all they provide. According to Elliassen, Gladys Ray doesn’t just provide shelter to the homeless, it gives them dignity and a sense of community. “Being a person that stays at the shelter, there is a sense of community right within that shelter. Which in turn, I believe, makes you feel like a part of a larger community. So often people think that the folks that are homeless and stay in the shelter don’t appreciate the fact that they have a safe place to stay. A place where the staff will treat them with respect and where everybody around them is expected to be respectful. I believe a number of the folks that stay there (Gladys Ray) definitely feel a sense of community and they feel connected to the people around them.”

And it seems that Elliassen is correct about the shelter’s impact on the homeless. Jay expressed the level of comfort that he felt at the Gladys Ray Shelter. The people here are laid back. They like to joke around. The staff has been a blessing, especially Russ. He’s among one of many of the staff members here that is actually willing to sit down and listen to you if you have a problem or if you just want somebody to sit and joke around with. The staff are really excellent people. I couldn’t ask for better people to be around”.

And Jay also learned a lot about the strength and resilience of the people of the Fargo-Moorhead area. Recalling his work with other volunteers, he noted how upbeat people were, “Most of the people seemed pretty happy, which was a little bit surprising given the situation. Fargo has a lot nicer people than I thought it would, given it’s a pretty decent sized city.”

Yes, Jay, I agree. It is astonishing to find such goodness coming out of such a tragic situation. But it seems that in situations like the one facing Fargo-Moorhead, we manage to come together and get to see the good in our community. Jay offered this, “It’s nice to see the people come together because under normal circumstances you don’t see it. I like the fact that it brings together not only our culture but other cultures too. I’ve seen a lot of German people out there, lots of Africans, lots of Asians, etc…mass cultures coming together and helping out the community”.

And the hope is that we’ll remember these times when we’ve stood together to become a tighter knit community. Russ, guest advocate added, “Our homeless citizens proved beyond a doubt that they are very much a part of the Fargo-Moorhead community, and I have high hopes that we as a society will respond positively to their efforts”.

WHAT WOMEN WANT: MASLOW DIDN’T HAVE A CLUE

Thu, 02 Apr 2009 17:52:05 -0400

It is obvious to me that Maslow was a man when I studied the hierarchy of needs and the order in which he set them up. I can agree with the general premise that “people” have certain needs and that without fulfillment in one area, they can’t achieve fulfillment in another. However, the order which Maslow claims “people” need these things is questionable to me as a woman. The first glaring controversy is that “sex” is listed as one of our first needs of “survival,” or physiological needs. The major flaw of the hierarchy of needs is that it ignores the difference between woman and man. It discusses needs essential both to men and women without addressing how those needs are prioritized by the different sexes. Maslow completely left women out. In order to consider the needs of women, Maslow would have to rearrange the hierarchy of needs differently for women and for men.

For example, I’m willing to concede that people need sex, even women. But, there is no way in hell that it is in the same category of “survival” needs like breathing, food, sleep, water, shelter, etc. No way! I almost wonder if this was Maslow’s sneaky way of convincing women everywhere that MEN needs sex and that this is a “survival” need. “Honey, I know you’re pissed off at me but I NEED to have sex. I need it the way I need air and food!”

But, assuming that we as a society take into account this “male” need for sex, then we HAVE to include woman’s need for intimacy and communication in that first rung of needs. Sooner or later (usually sooner rather than later) in a sexual relationship a woman NEEDS intimacy and communication. Women prefer to have it BEFORE the sex. It is as essential for women as is security of the family and body. Women with child bearing in mind would have deep reservations with trusting the care and safety of a child to someone they themselves cannot trust emotionally. In fact, if it were not for the fact that Maslow put sex on the first rung of needs, the discussion would be quite different for a Woman. Women can have intimacy without the sex, although men seem to have a harder (if not impossible) time with that concept.

I instinctively know that without the so-called “intimacy” that sex affords us with men, we’d likely have none. This is not because intimacy cannot be achieved by other means, but simply because men have chosen sex as their preferred (and in some cases ONLY) method for achieving intimacy. In fact, there are many tales of romantic and intimate love between two people that never involved sexual contact. Men refer to those as “chick books” or “chick novels” or “chick flix.” So, intimacy as a woman understands intimacy—is a myth as far as men are concerned. No thanks to Maslow.

So, I’m left wondering… is it impossible for women to seek communication and intimacy with their male partners while putting sex LAST simply because of some Maslow-dictated “biological NEED?” Or have men simply latched onto this theory and become lazy sex addicted junkies supported by their peers in science and sociology —like Maslow—threatening us women into the belief that if we don’t put out, men will drop out. I believe as woman we should debunk this myth of Maslow’s and (short of having him excommunicated for his blunder) simply have a woman correct this mess by publishing something appropriate and inclusive.
What we need is the woman’s perspective injected into this argument… and perhaps a WHOLE NEW pyramid of hyerarchy. JUST FOR WOMEN! One that acknowledges OUR needs as women—needs that are essential for health and function as well as survival. A pyramid that acknowledges that sexual intimacy (which in Maslow’s pyramid doesn’t appear until the third rung) has to exist FIRST in a relationship with a woman. That sex without intimacy is not a priority for many women because it lacks security, safety of health and well being and other more important essentials. A pyramid that recognizes that intimacy takes WORK.

I believe up to now, this has been pondered by any estrogen laden brain many a time. However, the reason why it has not yet been done is pretty clear. We live in a man’s world. Men not only want to continue to live in their fantasy land of easy one-liners about how they “need” sex. They prefer to continue in the comfort of this sex excess and sloth, they don’t want anyone pointing out other methods of “intimacy”—a concept now alien to the post-Maslow generation.

If men continue to believe that “sex” is a priority on the order of breathing, eating and excreting, the romance in the lives of their partners are dead for sure. What person wants to hear that regardless of the intimacy in a relationship, sex (sans the intimacy) is still required as much as food and air? There are many ways of achieving intimacy with others, and men need to explore these outlets and practice them to become proficient and comfortable with their use. Rather than a booty call, maybe they should purchase a Hallmark card, call a friend, or eat a pint of Häagen-Dazs! Regardless of the options, a solution should be rendered. Women deserve a pyramid that puts our need for intimacy FIRST.

For Valentines day this year, forget the roses and chocolates boys! Get her some intimacy instead!

More Bad News/Mas Malas Noticias

Thu, 02 Apr 2009 17:50:58 -0400

We all know the economy is bad. We hear it everyday on the news, and we see it all around us. More and more of the people that we know are unemployed and more appear every day. Many of those who still have jobs are talking about no overtime, reduced work weeks, and temporary layoffs. Could things possibly get any worse?

If you are a Mexican-American…the answer is: Yes.

I’m not going to beat around the bush, we all acknowledge that immigrants to the U.S. have always come to this country and done some of the toughest jobs. Mexican-Americans are no different. “North For The Harvest, Mexican Workers, Growers, and the Sugar Beet Industry,” the new book by Jim Norris, discusses some of the hardships and challenges endured by Mexican workers in Minnesota/North Dakota’s Red River Valley. Specifically, Norris highlights the breakthroughs made by workers to improve their job prospects, wages and working conditions. These trials are echoed across America, and the efforts have brought small but hard won improvements.

But with the economic downturn things are bound to change. Workers, once ready to fight for better jobs, working conditions, and wages will probably just be fighting to keep a job. The phenomenon is already starting to take shape. Employers are cutting corners everywhere they can. They will be much more likely to fire “difficult” and “non-productive” workers than they layoff or fire other workers. During a recent conversation with my father, he illustrated how pressure in his workplace is driving people out. He explained that typically, minorities will encounter discrimination and harassment in the form of unfair and unequal scrutiny from supervisors such as intense inspection of your work and ever increasing demands for speeds and higher production.

“Usually”, he said, “people put up with this. But when they’ve established themselves in the company for decades, you will find those that will complain and demand change. That’s going to change now. Recently, I watched a man who had worked at the factory for over two decades get fired for protesting unfair treatment. People will be much more careful to protest anything in these times.”

And that’s the bad news. The demand for jobs and lack of employers will result in a more uncomfortable work environment for many. People who would once protest unfair treatment will find they have to endure it. Unsafe working conditions will be overlooked rather than facing unemployment. And hard work will be harder. But there is some good news. The Mexican-American community will not be the only one suffering in this economy. All Americans will face similar issues and be affected by them to differing degrees. However, the Mexican-American is no stranger to hard work, challenges and overcoming insurmountable odds. We have to be prepared to meet the coming challenges with dignity, resolve and hope.

————————————————————————————————————————

Ya sabemos todos que la economía esta mala. Lo oímos a diario en las noticias y lo vemos alrededor de nosotros en todo. Cada día más de la gente que conocemos esta desempleada y más aparecen cada día. Muchos de aquellos que todavía tienen empleos hablan de reducciones en horas extras, reducciones en sus horas de trabajo, y de despidas temporales. ¿Es posible que pudieran empeorar las cosas?

Si usted es un Mexico-Americano la respuesta es: Sí.

No me voy a andar tras de las ramas, todos reconocemos que los inmigrantes a los EE.UU siempre han venido a este país y han hecho los trabajos más difíciles. El mexicano no ha sido diferente. North For The Harvest, Mexican Workers, Growers, and the Sugar Beet Industry,(acerca del los trabajadores en la Cosecha, cultivación y proceso del betabel y la industria azucarera) el nuevo libro por Jim Norris, habla de las privaciones y los desafíos de los cuales han sobresalido los trabajadores Mexicanos en el Valle del Río Rojo del Minnesota-y Dacota-del-Norte. Específicamente, Norris destaca las brechas logradas por estos trabajadores para mejorar sus perspectivas de trabajo, salarios y condiciones de trabajado. Estos desafíos se repiten a través de América así como los esfuerzos que han traído pequeñas mejoras ganadas a duras penas.

Pero con el descenso económico las cosas están dispuestas a cambiar. Aquellos trabajadores que alguna vez estuvieron listos para luchar por mejores empleos, condiciones de trabajadoras, y sueldos; ahora probablemente lucharán tan sólo para mantener sus trabajos. El fenómeno ya comenzo a tomar forma. Los patrones comienzan a cortan esquinas en todas partes donde pueden. Es mucho mas probable que despidan a trabajadores “difíciles” “y no productivos” antes de deshacerse de otros trabajadores. Durante una conversación reciente con mi padre, él ilustró como las presiones en su lugar de empleo están conducidas a sacar a la gente. Me explicó que típicamente, las minorías ven discriminación en la forma de acoses y escrutinio injusto por parte los supervisores que son en proporciones desiguales a los demás trabajadores; como son las inspecciones intensas y rutinarias; demandas crecientes de velocidad y demandas de producción más alta. Por lo general”, él dijo, “la gente aguanta todo eso. Pero cuando ya se han establecido en la compañía durante décadas de trabajo, se puede comenzar a ver aquellos que se quejarán y exigirán cambio de trato e igualdad. Pero ahora, eso va a cambiar. Recientemente, vi como sacaron a un hombre que había trabajado en la fábrica durante más de dos décadas por protestar maltratados en su trabajo. Esto va hacer que la gente tenga mucho mas cuidado al protestar por cualquier cosa durante estos tiempos”

Y estas son las las malas noticias. La demanda de empleos y carencia de trabajos causarán un ambiente de trabajo más incómodo para muchos. La gente que antes protestaría una por trato injusto encontrará que ahora tienen que soportarlo. Las condiciones inseguras de trabajo serán pasadas por alto antes de tener que afrontar el desempleo. Y los duros trabajos, serán más duros. Pero si hay una buena noticia. La comunidad Mexico-Americana no será la única en sufrir en esta economía. Por lo tanto, todos los americanos afrontarán cuestiones similares y serán afectados por a diferentes grados. Sin embargo, Mexico-Americano no es ningún forastero para trabajar duro, los desafíos y para vencer probabilidades insuperables. Tenemos que estar listos para enfrentar los desafíos próximos con dignidad, resolución y esperanza.

Latino Leadership Needed Now More than Ever/ El Liderazgo Latino Es Necesario Ahora Más que Nunca

Thu, 02 Apr 2009 17:49:04 -0400

The economic times are hitting hard everywhere. Non-profit organizations have always had to fill needs in our communities in times like these. All across America we hear about the tough times ahead for funding non-profit organizations. The loss of services from this important resource will hit communities hard. The fear that many needy people will fall through the cracks is very real.

This will be especially true for organizations that help Latinos. Generally, organizations that specialize in services to a specific sector of the population will have less funding sources. By their very nature, non-profits that cater to the needs of the Latino population will be one of those types of non-profits that will need to be creative in securing funding.

Developing Latino leadership and working in cooperation among agencies will be crucial during these tough economic times. That is why there is a great need for people to attend the upcoming Latino Leadership Coalition being sponsored by the two leading Latino Organizations in the Fargo-Moorhead area: Mujeres Unidas and Centro Cultural. The Coalition seeks to form a united voice for the Latino Community. Something the Latino Community has intelligently sensed the need for and which will serve it well in the coming years. The meeting will take place at Babb’s Coffee House, 604 Main Ave. in Fargo on March 5, from 4:30 to 6:30 p.m.

The issues that will face the Latino community during economic hardship will not all be addressed by government, social services, and institutions. The need for specialized non-profits such as Mujeres Unidas and Centro Cultural will continue to be crucial to the lives of Latinos in our area.

———————————————————————————————————————

Los problemas económicos están pegando fuerte en todas partes. Las empresas sin fines lucrativos siempre han ayudado suplantar las necesidades en nuestras comunidades en tiempos difíciles como éstos. En toda América ya se saben las dificultades que se esperan para poder financiar las empresas sin fines lucrativos. La pérdida de servicios que proveen estas empresas significaría la perdida de un recurso muy importante para la comunidad. El temor que existe es que muchas personas necesitadas se quedaran sin ayuda alguna; una preocupación muy real.

Esta dificultad será doblemente real para empresas que se dedican a la ayuda de Latinos. Generalmente, las empresas sin fines lucrativos que especializan en dar servicios a un sector específico de la población tendrán menos fuentes de financiación. por su naturaleza, las empresas sin fines lucrativos que sirven las necesidades de la población Latino serán uno de grupos que sufrirán en estos tiempos y que tendrán que buscar formas creativas para asegurar la financiación necesaria.

El Desarrollo del Liderazgo Latino y la cooperación entre las agencias Latinas será inprecindible durante estos tiempos económicos duros. Por eso hay una gran necesidad de que la gente asista la Coalición de Liderazgo Latino patrocinada por las dos mayores Organizaciones de Latino en el área Fargo-Moorhead: Mujeres Unidas y Centro Cultural. La Coalición procura formar una voz unida para la Comunidad Latina. Una necesidad esencial que la Comunidad Latino ha palpado con inteligencia y que la servirá bien en los años próximos. La reunión ocurrirá en la Cafetería Babbs, 604 Main Ave. en Fargo el 5 de marzo, de 4:30 a 6:30 pm.

Las situaciones que afrontara la comunidad Latina durante la privación económica próxima no se resolverán únicamente con la ayuda del gobierno, por asistencia social, o de otras instituciones. Por lo tanto la necesidad de mantener y buscar fondos para organizaciones especializadas como Mujeres Unidas y Centro Cultural seguirá siendo crucial a las vidas de la gente Latina en esta comunidad.

Ilegal Immigrants Taking Your Jobs?/¿Estan Tomando Sus Empleos los Inmigrantes Ilegales?

Thu, 02 Apr 2009 17:46:34 -0400

The recent stimulus package passed by President Obama promises many hundreds of thousands of jobs in construction. Unfortunately, a wrench has been thrown into this story. Economic experts claim that 300,000 jobs would be occupied by illegal immigrants because of the lack of verification of legal status to work through Department of Homeland Security E-verify programs.

The intent to place fear and anger into the hearts of Americans is clear. Why would our country allow illegal immigrants to take jobs from American citizens in a time of economic crisis? However, the truth is, this seems more like a tactic to distract from the real problem.

Employers already have the means to verify legal status of workers. They are required to do so under the law and have either avoided or ignored the law. Employers are able to do so because there is no enforcement when they break the laws. Those punished and deported are the illegal workers that were lured into the jobs in the first place.

Some states, like Arizona, are complaining that with the economic crisis undocumented workers are in great need. But instead of struggling to seek employment in the US, they are returning to Mexico because of the harsh economic and anti-immigrant sentiments currently pervading in the U.S. Political pundits like Pat Buchanan say that it is “unpatriotic” for illegal workers to get jobs in these hard economic times.

The real question is, how do employers compete in a system where jobs are going overseas to find cheap labor? Do they suddenly begin to pay higher wages for service level jobs in the middle of an economic depression?

The truth is, we need to either poop or get off the pot! We can’t continue to demand that illegal immigrants stop working the jobs we need them to do cheaply, while crucifying them at the same time. And if we decide we need the scapegoat of illegal immigrants to help us direct our anger about the injustice in our economy, then we also need to address the role of greedy employers who are trying to make capitalism work in the U.S. We can’t have our cake and eat it too.

————————————————————————————————————————

El paquete de estímulo económico pasado recientemente por el presidente Obama promete muchos cientos de miles de empleos en trabajos de construcción. Lamentablemente, un tirón ha sido lanzado en esta historia. Los expertos económicos afirman que 300,000 empleos serían ocupados por inmigrantes ilegales debido a la carencia de la verificación del estado legal para trabajar por medio del programas E-verify (verificación electrónica) por el Departamento de la Seguridad de la Patria.

La intención de introducir temor y coraje en los corazones de la gente Americana es clara. ¿Como podría permitiría nuestro país que inmigrantes ilegales tomen empleos que podrían ocupar ciudadanos Americanos precisamente en tiempos de la crisis económica? Sin embargo, la verdad es que esta estrategia parece más bien ser una táctica para distraer a la gente del verdadero problema.

Los patrones ya tienen los medios para verificar el estado legal de trabajadores. Se les requiere hacerlo conforme a la ley y sin embargo lo han evitado u o han ignorado la ley. Los patrones son capaces de hacer esto porque no hay ninguna imposición en contra de ellos cuando rompen las leyes. Los castigados y deportados son los trabajadores ilegales que fueron atraídos en estos empleos en primer lugar.

Algunos estados, como Arizona, se quejan que con la crisis económica los trabajadores indocumentados están escarneciendo y en gran necesidad. Pero en vez de luchar para buscar empleo en los EE.UU, estos trabajadores indocumentados se están regresando a México debido a los sentimientos ásperos económicos y anti-inmigrantes que actualmente penetran en los EE.UU. Cabecillas políticos, como Pat Buchanan dicen que es “no patriótico” permitir que trabajadores ilegales puedan conseguir empleos en estos tiempos económicos difíciles. ¡Él siente que los patrones que se quejan de que no pueden conseguir trabajadores documentados para hacer el trabajo que el emigrante ilegal hace con gusto por salarios bajos significa que los patrones están fallando! Su deber es de trabajar mas duro para alistar reclutas y insertarse de alguna manera entre la populacion de Latinos y Afroamericanos que están desempleados.

¿La pregunta real es esta: Cómo pueden competir los empleadores Americanos en un clima donde los empleos son exportados al extranjero para conseguir trabajadores baratos? ¿Quizás pensamos que los empleadores podrán de repente comenzar a pagar salarios más altos para empleos de nivel de servicio en medio de una depresión económica?.

¡La verdad es que tenemos que tomar una determinación defintiva! No podemos seguir exigiendo que los inmigrantes ilegales dejen de trabajar empleos que necesitamos que hagan a sueldos bajos y seguir crucificándolos al mismo tiempo. Y si decidimos que vamos ha usar el inmigrante ilegal para ser el chivo expiatorio para ayudarnos a dirigir nuestra cólera sobre la injusticia en nuestra economía, entonces también tenemos que analizar al papel de los patrones avaros que tratan de realizar el capitalismo en los EE.UU a cualquier costo. No podemos chiflar y comer pinole!

The Luck of the Irish/La Suerte del Irlandes

Thu, 02 Apr 2009 17:43:46 -0400

I don’t have a drop of Irish blood in me. But every year I wear green clothes and raise a pint of green ale to celebrate St. Patrick’s Day. I even wear the “kiss me I’m Irish” buttons. Why do I (or why do we all) become Irish every year on March 17?

This St. Patrick’s Day celebration—with all the flags of Ireland flying proudly next to American flags—got me thinking about the luck of the Irish immigrants in America. As immigrants go, the Irish enjoy great popularity and acceptance in America.

It also got me thinking how Mexicans have much in common with the Irish. Like so many other immigrants, the Irish came to the U.S. fleeing from starvation and oppression. And like Latino immigrants, the Irish also came here without resources, facing discrimination and marginalization. Mexicans and the Irish even share a special day in history that is commemorated by Mexicans on St. Patrick’s Day every year. The celebration commemorates the Irish-Mexican martyrs of St. Patrick’s battalion.

During the Mexican-American war, 600 Irish-American soldiers defected from the American army and fought against the U.S. invasion of Mexico in 1847 at the St. Patrick Battalion. Historians speculate that desertion among immigrant soldiers occurred in the U.S. because of mistreatment by nativist senior officers. Other reasons for defectors to Mexico include shared religious values, better wages, and land grants offered to soldiers in Mexico.

The Irish were not the only defectors to join the Mexican army during the Mexican-American War. The battalion also included German, Canadian, English, French, Italian, Polish, Scottish, Swiss, and Spanish immigrants. It even included some African Americans. All were granted Mexican citizenship upon entering Mexican service even though the majority of these defectors (especially the African Americans who were slaves to American Southerners) had never been granted American citizenship. So, it seems that opportunity and survival have always been a major reason for immigration to any country.

The climate in America today toward immigrants, especially those from Mexico, is guarded at best and hostile at its worst. But history marches on and so do immigrants seeking survival and better futures. Perhaps that is why as an American I proudly enjoy the multicultural celebrations of the many immigrants that have enriched this country. And that is also why the Irish martyrs of the St. Patrick day battalion will continue to be part of my traditional celebration each St. Patrick’s Day.

So it seems that, historically, immigrants have come across the same obstacles for survival and progress in America. But this still leaves me wondering how despite our commonalities with the Irish, Latino immigrants still do not enjoy the same acceptance Irish immigrants have found in the U.S. My experience of Latino-American celebrations is quite different than cultural celebrations like St. Patrick’s Day. One major difference is that Latino celebrations are poorly attended by non-Latinos. People often are offended that Latino celebrants wave Mexican flags saying that this practice is unpatriotic, that celebrating Mexican culture and history shows a “failure to assimilate.”

But, the Irish have assimilated into American culture so profoundly that they can celebrate their ethnicity and culture and the American public rejoices with them. I wait for this to happen for Latino immigrants but fear it will not happen in my lifetime. Whether they be Irish, Latino, or any other of the many diverse cultures in our area, all cultural celebrations enrich and educate us. So why can’t cultural celebrations make us feel happy instead of defensive? Perhaps with time, celebrations of Latino cultural events will be part as intricate a part of the American fabric as green beer and St. Patty’s Day parades.

—————————————————————————————————————-

No tengo una gota de la sangre irlandesa. Sin embargo, cada año me pongo ropa verde y me tomo una cerveza verde para celebrar el día de San. Patricio. Inclusive, me pongo los gafetes que dicen “Besame, soy irlandesa!” ¿Por qué nos convertimos en irlandeses cada año el 17 de marzo? Este día de San. Patricio la celebración me hico pensar—con todas las banderas de Irlanda al lado de banderas Americanas—que suertudos son los Inmigrantes irlandeses en América. Entre los Inmigrantes, los Irlandeses disfrutan de gran popularidad y aceptación en América.

También me puse a pensar en que el Mexicano tiene mucho en común con el Irlandés. Como tantos inmigrantes, los Irlandeses vinieron a los EE.UU huyendo del hambre y la opresión. Y como el Inmigrantes Latino, los Irlandeses también vinieron aquí sin recursos, y bajo el yugo de la discriminación y la marginalización. Los Mexicanos y los Irlandeses compartimos un día especial en la historia que se celebra en Mexico el día de San. Patricio. La celebración recuerda los mártires Irlandeses-Mexicanos del Batallón de Patricio.

Durante la guerra Mexicana-Americana, 600 soldados irlandeses desertaron del ejército Americano y lucharon contra la Invasión Estadounidense de México en 1847 en el Batallón de San. Patricio. Los historiadores especulan que desertores entre los soldados inmigrantes ocurrió en los EE.UU debido al maltrato por oficiales de alta graduación con sentimientos anti-inmigrante. Otros motivos que causaron desertores al ejercito de México incluyen valores religiosos compartidos, mejores salarios, y subvenciones de tierra ofrecidas a los soldados Mexicanos. Los Irlandeses no fueron los únicos desertores a la unión estadounidense durante la Guerra Mexicana-Americana.

El Batallón también incluyó inmigrantes alemanes, canadienses, ingleses, franceses, italianos, polacos, escoceses, suizos, y españoles. Hasta incluyó a algunos americanos-africanos. Mexico concedió ciudadanía mexicana a todo soldado por su servicio al ejercito, aunque en los estados unidos la mayoría de desertores inmigrantes nunca tuvieron esperanzas de ciudadanía (sobre todo los americanos-africanos que en ese entonces eran esclavos de los habitantes del sur América). Parece ser que las oportunidades y la supervivencia siempre han sido razones principales de la inmigración a cualquier país.

Actualmente, el clima en América hacia los inmigrantes, sobre todo aquellos de México, es cauteloso, si no es que hostil. Pero la historia sigue marchando adelante así como los inmigrantes que buscan la supervivencia y un futuro mejor. Quizás por eso puedo disfrutar las celebraciones multiculturales que han enriquecido este país y hacerlo orgullosamente como Americana. Y quizás por esa razón también continuare celebrando a los mártires irlandeses del Batallón de día de San Patricio cada año.

Like this cartoon, I thought we in North Dakota were within the...

Thu, 11 Dec 2008 16:58:30 -0500

Like this cartoon, I thought we in North Dakota were within the community standard too! But, in the community of states, we seem to rank…in the top 3 most corrupt states in the union! WOW…..

North Dakota Corruption Ranking

Thu, 11 Dec 2008 16:51:07 -0500

North Dakota Corruption Ranking:

Given the scandals in politics across the nation, North Dakota should focus its efforts to prevent from finding itself in the same boat. Government institutions like Workforce Safety and Insurance have been in the spot light for scandals. We should be vigilant to root out corruption everywhere.

Congrats to the Governor

Sat, 06 Dec 2008 17:50:56 -0500

The following is a letter/email sent to Governor Hoeven by Sylvan Loegering of the North Dakota Injured Workers Support Group. I am posting this letter with Sylvan’s permission here for everyone to see.

HERE IS THE LETTER

Governor Hoeven,

Congratulations on your reelection. As you know when the citizens of North Dakota voted overwhelmingly to keep you in office. they also voted overwhelmingly to put you in charge of improving WSI. The North Dakota Injured Workers Support Group is ready, willing and able to assist you in the process of reviewing the treatment of employees injured on the job and recommending appropriate changes in procedures and in the law. In responding to our group’s questions during the campaign you said, “The mission at WSI is taking care of injured workers and we have got to make sure that that is being done.” and, “I will work to insure injured workers receive adequate and timely benefits and compensation.” A large part of your lasting legacy as governor of North Dakota will be how well you follow through on those comments. The ND Injured Workers Support Group is ready, willing and able to help you follow through on your good intentions. I and/or other members of our group would like to meet with you to discuss WSI issues.

Sylvan Loegering, Volunteer Coordinator, NDIWSG 602 8^th Avenue East West Fargo, ND 58078 701-282-8714

Other key members:

Todd Loegering, founder, 701-730-4488

Cindy Shawcross, Claims Assistance Coordinator, 701-205-1791

Following are additional comments for you to consider:

We ask you not to rely solely on what you are told by WSI representatives. A good example of why this is important can be found by looking at the spin put on the 2008 performance evaluation done by Berry, Dunn, McNeill & Parker (BDMP). A news item in the Forum on September 30, 2008, headlined “WSI feels vindicated in new claims report” says, “WSI interim CEO Bruce Furness and some members of the WSI boards Audit Committee were pleased about the positive report.” Bruce Furness was quoted as saying, “We think it’s good and we should brag about it.” Speaking of Bruce Furness, you said in your pre-election comments, “Since he’s been there, WSI has made real progress.” Injured employees have not felt that “progress”. If you want the complete story, visit with injured employees and read the complete BDMP report personally.

Let me assure you that the injured employees we have been in contact with are not malingerers trying to take advantage of the system. They are truly injured and have been denied benefits which they would have received in almost any other state in the union. The lopsided vote on Measure 4 was a direct result of voters seeing injured family members and friends being denied benefits and having the deck stacked against them as they try to get benefits they feel they deserve. BDMP says, “North Dakota is the only jurisdiction in the United States where the payer (WSI) makes the final administrative decision in disputes between payers and injured workers.” BDMP also said, “WSI and the State of North Dakota should seek legislative changes such that administrative decisions are made by an independent, impartial hearing authority from a government agency separate from WSI.” Using common sense the citizens of North Dakota have made this change for us in Measure 4.

BDMP also said,”Many of the system features combine to reduce the opportunity for the injured worker to properly prepare to present his or her case, and create the perception of a system that favors WSI.”

North Dakota’s citizens are aware of the system’s flaws and want them corrected.

Injured employees have been reporting that benefits are being denied more frequently than they were a few years ago. WSI denies any concerted effort to deny benefits. BDMP says “We identified impacts on claims processing related to a change in philosophy that occurred during 2006-2007 in which adjusters were encouraged to investigate all new claims for prior injuries or pre-existing conditions more thoroughly. Multiple factors, including the change in philosophy and practices to incentivize prompt claim submission did result in increased rates of denied claims.” and, “…. while the initial denial rate has increased since FY2004, the percent of initial denials that were ultimately reversed has actually decreased over the same time period.” Using 20,000 injuries per year as a base and the percentages quoted by BDMP, calculations indicate that about 500 more injured employees per year are being denied benefits now than was the case just a few years ago.

Injured employees have been reporting that WSI uses Independent Medical Examiners from out of state and that these IME reports result in loss of benefits. BDMP says, “Of the IME claims evaluated by BDMP with completed IME reports, 35% of the IME physicians agreed and 65% disagreed with the treating physician. Of the IME claims evaluated, only 18% were completed with North Dakota physicians, while 82% were scheduled with Minnesota physicians.” This means that over ½ of the time when an injured employee has an IME a doctor from out of state disagrees with the treating physician. Injured employees are not exaggerating. The larger point is that IME’s (regardless of where they are from) disagreeing with the treating physician two out of 3 times says there is something wrong with North Dakota’s medical system or with the IME program. This deserves a lot longer look.

Injured employees have reported benefits being denied unfairly because of “pre-existing” or “degenerative” conditions. The afore-mentioned news article mentions that out of 100 denied claims 24 were denied for “other reasons”. BDMP says “20 of the 24 claims denied with “Claim Comment” as the reason were denied because the adjuster believed that the reported injury was not work-related or was an aggravation/trigger of a pre-existing condition.” and “BDMP observed that the North Dakota Statute is more conservative than most other jurisdictions with respect to treatment for specific conditions.” BDMP says,”While many jurisdictions have begun to try to address the issue of the compensability of claims with preexisting injuries and/or conditions related to the aging process, few have gone as far as the North Dakota statute,…” If we want valuable employees treated as well in North Dakota as they are in other states we need to change the laws.

Injured employees report being tailed and videotaped by WSI investigators looking for possible fraud and tell us that when they report fraud by employers WSI does nothing. BDMP says, “WSI does not have a comprehensive employer and provider fraud program in place…..” BDMP pointed out that correcting this deficiency had previously been recommended in 2004 and 2006. If we want an efficient workers’ compensation program we need to guard against fraud from sources other than injured employees.

Speaking of previous recommendations, “

BDMP determined that 57% of the 109 PE2006 recommendations were”Fully Implemented” in that WSI management concurred with the recommendation and took action to implement the recommendation. 19% were partially implemented in that some action has been taken but further action is required. Finally, 24% were not implemented and includes those recommendations that WSI did not concur with and chose not to implement.” In your responses to our group’s questions you said, “I support audits that will make sure the agency is on track and fulfilling its mission and obligations to injured workers, North Dakota businesses, and the people of North Dakota.” You also said, “I will work to see that the changes recommended are implemented.” The 2008 BDMP report contains 47 additional recommendations. On behalf of the citizens of North Dakota we, the ND Injured Workers Support Group, call on you to actively follow through on these commitments.

BDMP recommends that a study group formed of all the stakeholder groups be brought together to review how other jurisdictions’ statutes handle these important Workers’ Compensation issues.

We wish to point out that even though the WSI Board of Directors has individuals who are injured employees, we do not feel the Board adequately represents the position of injured employees. The ND Injured Workers Support Group and/or its advocates want a seat at the table as these discussions unfold.

FINAL THOUGHTS BY ME

The suggestions being made in the letter above to the Governor Hoeven by the North Dakota Injured Workers Support Group are important. Under the Governor so far, WSI has run amok and continues to fail the workers of North Dakota. In the future, we all need to remind Gov. Hoeven what he promised. The law has failed to protect injured workers from WSI’s tactics and unjust policies. The legislature has failed to protect injured workers from unfair laws. Now we need to let Governor Hoeven know that we expect him to keep his promise to North Dakotans! Here is how you can contact Gov. Hoeven. It will take you 5 minutes to contact him, but the message will be clear - Gov. Hoeven, please do what you promised and protect the rights of workers in North Dakota NOW!

Write him :

600 East Boulevard Avenue
Bismarck, ND 58505-0001

Call him :

701.328.2200 · Phone
Fax him :

701.328.2205

email him :

governor@nd.gov

Video of WSI Story on Fox News (click here to watch video)

Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:51:00 -0500

Video of WSI Story on Fox News (click here to watch video):

This is the news report about Maria Nolasco, an Injured Worker and Member of the ND Injured Workers Support Group who had her hearing before the Legislative Committee.

In Maria’s case, WSI decided to terminate her benefits because she would not attend English as a Second Language classes that they had set up for her. Maria was not trying to avoid learning English, rather, she was in excrutiating pain from a severe ankle break, could not (and still cannot) walk, and does not know how to drive. Maria has not attended school more than 25 years; is functionally illeterate, and only has a 3rd grade education from Mexico. Her husband (Jesus) is totally disabled and at the time WSI ordered her to attend ESL classes, he had just undergone major surgery and had suffered a hospital aquired infection during surgery that required IV antibiotics. Therefore, Maria had neither strength, the means, nor the abiltiy to attend the classes required by WSI. WSI did not take any of the factors mentioned into account before deciding to require a woman who is unable to speak English, drive, or walk, to attend ESL classes. Furthermore, WSI ignored the letter of Maria’s treating doctor’s office stating that she was in no condition to attend ESL classes. In fact, the letter written on Maria’s behalf stated that the letter intended to address the denial of Maria’s benefits. Maria Nolasco argued (through her interpreter, yours truly) that she appealed by having her treating doctor address the appeal in writing and responding with a medical opinion why she could not be asked to attend ESL classes. Maria further argued that the rule which requires an injured worker to appeal in writing, should be overlooked in this instance because of the extenuating circumstances.

Through their attorney, Tim Whalin, WSI essentially replied that WSI has to draw a line somewhere. In other words, extenuating cirucmstances be damed. If Maria could not reply in writing herself and had her medical provider do so for her, this did NOT constitue a request for appeal. Therefore, they did not intend to reverse their decision.

During the hearing, several committe members voiced their concern that the criteria for appeal had essentially been met in Maria’s case, but for the requirement that SHE write the appeal in English to WSI (which of course, she could not do). After the hearing, the chair of the Committee himself, Chairman Kaiser, came to speak to me and told me that he would be personally contact WSI and asking them to review and reconsider their desicion in Maria’s case. Although he stated that he had no authority over WSI and could guarantee they would change their decision, he did say he would ask them to reconsider the determination they had made in this case. To date, the Nolasco family has not heard anything from either the committee, nor WSI.

So much for WSI’s intent to change their image from being an agency that is unfair to injured workers and calloused to their outcry for justice.

High Plains Reader

Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:21:49 -0500

High Plains Reader :

To see the article in the HPR website, go to this link. There, you can also read comments from the public. Feel free to add your own here, or there!

Article I wrote for the High Plains Reader - This WEEK

Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:20:34 -0500

Who’s the Terrorist?

On October 30, the Arabic Language and Cultural Student Association (ALCSA) hosted “Obsession: A Public Panel on Radical Islam” at NDSU’s Memorial Union.

Sarah Mayo, ALCSA President, stated in the press release that the discussion would allow North Dakotan’s to begin to address “Islamophobia and xenophobia” in our community and our country as well as discuss the need for “hate crime” legislation in North Dakota.

Whether the goals of the ALCSA were met is hard to say. Few people asked questions after the panelists gave their prepared statements to listeners. Most of the questions asked seemed more like monologues in support or opposition to the DVD and its message. Other “questions” sounded more like critiques of the panelists’ point of view.

Panelists included Dr. Ahmed Afzaal, Concordia professor of Islamic religion and history; Dr. Jarret Brachman, NDSU professor and formerly director of research at West Point’s Combating Terrorism Center; Scott Hennen, radio talk show host on AM 1100 The Flag; and Matthew von Pinnon, editor of the Fargo Forum. The moderator of the panel discussion was Dr. Daniel Klenow, dean of Sociology at NDSU.

Each panelist received three questions prior to the discussion. The questions were (1) Should the Obsession DVD have been distributed? (2) An evaluation of the content of the DVD; (3) What was the impact of the DVD, if any?

Matt von Pinnon, the first to speak, vigorously argued “This is exactly what a newspaper ought to do”, explaining that the DVD elicited a community conversation.

To hear him tell it, one might easily assume it was always the intent of the Forum to bring about this “discussion” of what he called “an important issue”. In fact, Matt remarked the panel discussion at NDSU would not have occurred if not for the release of the DVD while adding sheepishly “some of you might find that to be wrongheaded of me”.

Matt claims that it was not wrong for the Forum to distribute the “ideological message” of the Obsession DVD. While some readers of the Forum were offended by the “political” nature of the DVD, Matt finds nothing wrong with that.

According to von Pinnon, The Forum essentially asked itself if the DVD violated laws or drove people to violate any laws. Matt acknowledged that the public might debate that the DVD did indeed drive people to violate laws. However, the Forum’s answer to those questions was “no”.

The public did indeed “debate” that the viewing public acted out in hate following the distribution of the DVD by the Forum. Even Dr. Ahmend Afzaal reported his wife and daughter were verbally attacked in the week following the release of the DVD. The Concordia professor also argued that there was a very clear message and call to action in the DVD.

Von Pinnon argued there was no “take away” message from the DVD in his defense of the Forum’s decision to distribute it.

Dr. Afzaal, however, argued there definitely was a take home message adding, “it doesn’t have to be obvious. No one has to actually say it. But it is there.” Dr. Afzaal explained “if you watch the film without suspending your critical faculties, it is very easy to recognize that this film does not need any outside critique. This film very effectively deconstructs itself”.

Afzaal went on to explain how: the DVD first required the acceptance that “the west” and “radical Islam” were mutually exclusive, distinct entities. Afzaal boiled down the DVD’s message to a “us versus them” mentality and a classic fight of “good against evil”. He asserted the DVD could be deconstructed in five steps:

(1) Radical Islam has launched a war against “the west”;

(2) The reason “radical Islam” launched this war is stated in the title “obsession”; with the obvious assumption that “the west” goes to war for good reasons but “radical Islam goes to war for bad reasons;

(3) “The west” must do something about the threat facing it from “radical Islam”; adding that obsessed people are irrational and that “You don’t listen to obsessed people. You kill them;”

(4) Since “radical Islam” is irrational and violent, “the west” must deal with “radical Islam” in equal measure to their irrationality, by going to war against them.

Dr. Afzaal also asked the audience questions to ponder about the USA and its policies (using “we” to mean Americans and “they” to define “radical Islam”:

1. If they are obsessed with world domination, are we not?

2. If they are religious fanatics, what are we?

3. If they are liars, are we not?

4. If they are terrorists, aren’t we?

5. If they are racist, who are we?

6. If they are genocidal maniacs, are we not as well?

Afzaal maintained it would “take great courage” for the Forum to admit it had made a mistake, even alluding to “ideological sympathy” as a possible reason why for the Forum’s steadfast defense of the DVD’s distribution, but reiterated a passionate appeal that the Forum admit its error.

Von Pinnon made no such apology on the Forum’s behalf in response to Dr. Afzaal’s plea.

Scott Hennen expressed shock and disbelief that Dr. Afzaal could somehow draw a moral equivalence between “The United States of America - - the greatest country on the face of the earth - - and people like Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda”. Hennen continued his critique of Afzaal’s statements asking “Are we at war? Yes! We’re at war! And It’s like Pollyanna over here!”

He also pointed out that the information contained in the DVD was all factual and taken from newsreels that Americans are rarely able to see. Hennen relayed some of the more sensational parts of the DVD, describing that children and toddlers were saying things like “ I hope Bush dies in flames and I want to go to Ariel Sharon and kill him with a gun”, and “I want to tell Bush I think he’s a pig and I hope he dies”.

In true radio talk show/rock star fashion, Hennen offended some of the public with some of his views, but drew applause from others.

Hennen also offered that the DVD provided a service to Americans that the “mainstream media” had failed to deliver by informing them that “these things are going on”, while pointing out that “radical Islam” was only a sect of an otherwise peaceful religion.

He elaborated that the DVD lets Americans know that there are some people that seek to dominate the world; will kill others because they disagree with them, have a “culture of hatred” and are willing to indoctrinate children adding “I’ve never seen anything sicker in my life”.

Hennen supported the Forum’s decision to distribute the DVD adding that the public are “thinking people” who can decide for themselves. He argued that parents need to be vigilant about what their children see. “I can’t let my twelve year old son read the sports page cuz there’s some adult book store ad”.

At one point, Hennen even trotted out the tried and true “I have good friends of the Muslim faith” statement. He interrupted panelists, as well as members of the public and made sweeping statements about America and its values such as “All this country has ever done is give freedom!” and “We are a freedom loving people”, in his familiar booming voice.

Hennen also had the distinction of being the only panelist to overtly show aggression toward another panelist, namely Dr. Afzaal, asking questions like “Someone like this is teaching our children?”, followed by what appeared to be concern that Concordia allow Dr. Afzaal’s ideas to be taught to “our children”.

In the end, Hennen stated that his Muslim friends were also sickened by the actions of radical Islam and called for “more peaceful Muslims to speak out about” and distinguish themselves from “radical Muslims” by saying “that’s not us”.

Perhaps the most interesting discussion of the DVD and its impact on the public came from Dr. Jarret Brachman.

Brachman started out by noting the importance of the discussion held at NDSU and differentiating his statements from other panelists as “more academic.”

He expressed frustration with the DVD from a national security perspective, explaining the danger of lumping Al Qaeda with other groups that operate in the name of Islam using terrorist methods on more local agendas like Hezbollah and Hamas do.

Brachman also explained that one of Bin Laden’s tactics has been pool all people of the Islamic faith under one umbrella. He argued that it was not “useful to paint them with the same broad brush” as the DVD has done, adding that the “DVD is counter productive to the intentions of those who produced it” because it “plays directly into the hands of Bin Laden” and helps him recruit more terrorists.

Dr. Brachman explained that America has been very successful at affecting the operations of Al Qaeda which has prompted their response to operate as an “insurgency”. This distinction is important in that, as Brachman explained, insurgencies can only be successful when “the insurgents are able to blend in with the people” where they are operating.

This blurring of lines allows insurgents to use a Maoist encirclement strategy to “blend in with the host population” and recruit from those populations as well as their own sympathizers. Therefore, diferentiating radical Islam from mainstream Islam is not useful to terrorist recruitment strategists.

Dr. Brachman also showed how Al Qaeda has “tried to split the world into two halves” pitting those who are “with them” against those who are “against them.” Dr. Brachman compared the DVD’s message to the tactics used by AL Qaeda showing how they both make the same argument that “the world can be divided into two. There are those who are with us (Americans) and there are those who are against us”.

He also illustrated how the DVD’s message compares to radical Islamic terrorist tactics of “blurring the lines” between radical Islam and mainstream Islam.

Although Dr. Brachman did not directly address whether the DVD should have been distributed by the Fargo Forum, he did clearly demonstrate how its distribution and the “consequences” were “very problematic” from a National Security perspective.