Code Words

Trouble at the Border

2014-07-17T14:14:00.001-04:00

If the US was Africa or Europe, what's happening at our border with Mexico would be labeled a humanitarian crisis, not an immigration issue. In fact, NGOs would be en route. Sure, what's happening in Central America is not the kind of sectarian violence that is typically the cause of this kind of exodus, but it is, as the AP reporters Alberto Arce and Michael Weissenstein distinguished it, "criminal gang" violence.

For those Americans still struggling to grapple with this concept, think of it as the "War on Drugs" coming home--not via more needles in the arms of our kids or overdoses in clubs but via lives destined to carry out the drug trade if they don't escape.

I get it, humans take a while to absorb new information. We want to keep pressing square peg information into our existing round holes: People crossing our border with Mexico can mean only one thing: illegal immigrants. That understanding of this situation is, at best, misguided, at worst, criminal.

Are we, the American people, really so frightened of being hoodwinked by these children--potentially masquerading as victims--that we would dare to send them all back to the violence most of them are fleeing? Can we not stretch our imaginations just a bit to realize that this situation cannot be categorized as an illegal immigration problem?

Another problem with America's mentality is that we like to think we are impervious. Oceans to the west and east. Neighborly countries to the north and south. We don't get refugees en masse.

Of course, speaking of our neighbor to the south, we are so used to thinking of Mexico as an immigration problem that we are failing to interpret what is happening down there now through the proper lens. For those who fear immigrants, or at least illegal immigrants, the image of all of those "illegals" at the border is a frightening prospect. Will we have to feed them, clothe them? Will they be eating up our tax dollars? Who is paying for their social security? How many more will come if we don't send those kids right back home?

Has anyone considered that, seriously, the countries from which these kids are fleeing are at war, and, as happens in war, refugees are pouring out of their countries and into safer spaces?

In everyone's effort to make Americans sound less selfish than we are, I keep hearing, the American people are compassionate. As if America's compassion is better than any other place's compassion or as if, unlike other places, America is compassionate.

I think the US is different from other places, not because we are compassionate, but because we are not accustomed to war in our backyard, and, because we like to think of war as something that happens elsewhere, when it does come knocking, our first response is to close the door.

Holding Back 3rd Graders Who Don't Score "Proficient" on Reading Portion of MEAP

2013-10-31T10:03:00.001-04:00

This morning, the Detroit Free Press published an article titled "Bill Would Keep Kids in 3rd Grade if They Don't Pass MEAP Reading Test". The Michigan Rep proposing the legislation is Amanda Price, a Republican representing Park Township. If you look at the Michigan House GOP site, their headline is "Price Introduces Measure to Increase Literacy Rates in Public Schools".

When I read the headlines I just couldn't figure how failing third graders who do not pass the reading portion of the MEAP would "increase literacy rates"? I figured I must be missing a critical piece of Rep. Price's argument, so I took a look at the bill (House Bill No. 5111). I figured it must be at least ten pages long--or long enough to provide the nuanced solution required for such a complex problem. No, not ten pages. Not five pages. It's literally one page long. It says exactly what the DFP headline says: 3rd graders who don't score "proficient" on the reading portion of the MEAP will have to retake 3rd grade.

One lawmaker said he couldn't believe there was any controversy over this legislation. After all, it's a no-brainer: All 3rd graders should know how to read. The controversy isn't about the goal that every 3rd grader should be able to read proficiently. The controversy is in using the MEAP as the sole indicator for determining reading proficiency. The controversy is in suggesting that k - 2nd grade teachers aren't already doing their best work, that they really just need to be motivated with a larger stick--in this case, the knowledge that, if they can't get these kids to read, their soon to be third graders will fail third grade. The controversy is in dumbing-down this problem to this ridiculous premise that somehow parents will do more at home and students will work longer and harder if they only knew they could fail third grade.

The educational challenges that our nation faces are not going to be resolved through increasingly punitive, blanket measures. Yes, I totally want all kids to read proficiently by third grade. But the problems our kids face don't exist only in the classroom. Some simply don't test well. Others have no support at home. Others have loving homes, but parents are working all the time to insure bills are paid and food is available or the parents themselves may not have learned to be their kids' first teacher. Others come from homes where English is the second language, and the student may be the only one learning English. Others come from areas where survival is a daily challenge, so grades are the last battle to be fought. There is a never ending list of challenges for every kid and every neighborhood.

This proposed legislation adds one more layer of bureaucracy and pressure to an already burdened school system and home life. Our educational system does need work. We need to do better by our kids. But threatening everyone with failure won't get the results we all hope to achieve. Please urge your representatives to vote no on House Bill No. 5111!

Dearborn’s SMART Bond: A Smart Investment

2013-04-03T15:29:00.001-04:00

This year, the Dearborn Public Schools’ Board of Education is counting on voters to pass a $76 million bond called the Security, Modifications, Additions, Renovations, Technology, and Transportation (SMART) bond.

According to the Press and Guide, the SMART bond would be used for:

$3.6 million in bus improvements and purchases
$38 million in additions and projects
$21 million in roof and parking lot improvements
$12 million in technology purchases
$800,000 in grounds improvements
$600,000 in security improvements

Among school staff and parents, I imagine there is a great deal of support for this measure, but what about those people who oppose it. What are their thoughts?

To find out, I took a look at the reader comments section of a few online articles relating to the SMART bond. Normally, the reader comments sections are fraught with some pretty extreme viewpoints, so I usually read them for entertainment more than analysis. However, on the issue of the SMART bond, the voters will have the final say, and the people commenting are the voters. Whether their sentiments reflect a significant portion of the population remains to be seen, but it’s worth taking a look at what they’re saying:

If the school board trimmed the fat, then they wouldn’t need more tax payer money. Just let the voters have a look at the budget; we’ll be able to trim the fat without disrupting services.

Why do people always think there is so much fat in “the budget”? Why do people assume that one need only look at “the budget”? As if “the budget” is this magical thing that will tell you everything you need to know about running a school district of 19,000 students and over 30 sites.

It isn’t as if there is just one giant stream of unrestricted funding flowing into the district. The budget doesn’t tell you about the rules and regulations that come with each funding stream. It doesn’t explain the federal and state regulations or changing public policies or union rules.

We have become so used to questioning, doubting, and mistrusting our democratically elected officials that unsubstantiated cynicism is standing in for reasoned evaluation and accountability. This cynicism is leading to a mentality that screams: We don’t need elected officials as our surrogates. The people should have a direct say in everything. It’s like a board of directors gone rogue.

Our elected officials have critical knowledge of the systems they oversee and manage. Yes, those systems are often political, and, yes, everyone has an agenda. But those systems are comprised of intricate networks of funding, bureaucracies, and policies. It takes years to know these intricacies. Elected officials are the people making that investment of time and brain power, and we rely on them to do so. After all, if we are doing their jobs, then who is going to do ours?

Buses and bricks and mortar are so passé. How does a bond that pays for such antiquated tools expect to move the school district forward?

$12 million of the total SMART bond is slated for new technology. One would think that such a figure would speak for itself on moving the district steadily forward into the information age. But, alas, someone always has an even better idea.

In this case, the idea is to move to an Amazon.com learning environment. Screw those big box schools. We want cloud learning! No need to invest in building improvements. Let the buildings crumble around the kids as they sit in their ancient work spaces, holding their rudimentary writing tools. (Pardon our dust, snow, rain, heat. This long-term inconvenience means that one day you’ll be able to learn from your own home). Just think of what we’d save on transportation too! If we don’t need buildings, then we don’t need buses to get our kids to those buildings!

Despite being in its infancy, online learning at the k12 level has already had some success. However, it’s hardly a replacement for the mainstream physical classroom environment. The people making this suggestion assume that “school” is a single-purpose, one-way learning experience. They also assume that everyone has a home or that everyone has a home from which they could access a computer.

School is more than an information transfer from teacher to student. At its simplest, school is designed to level the playing field because homes and families are not all equal. It is a place where at-risk kids receive food and, sometimes, the care they can’t get at home. School is also about socialization and learning through multiple mediums using a variety of tools. School is about exposure to new ideas and concepts and opportunities. It is about building a community by investing in our children.

We’ve given lots of millage money for years, and what does the school district have to show for it? By now, Dearborn Public Schools should be ranked in the top 20.

The commentators didn’t specify in which top 20 ranking they wanted to be. Apparently, it’d just be good enough to be in the top 20 of something as evidence that our money made a difference, like a trophy after the big game. Nor did these commentators have any sense of how much money it actually takes to run a school district of any size, much less the fifth largest in the state.

If our citizens want to measure our success, we can only hope they have better metrics than some top 20 ranking. Here are a few: Dearborn Public Schools has a graduation rate of 82.53% which is 6.29% above the state rate. Our drop out rate is just .83% above the statewide rate. Our elementary schools retain music, art, and physical education as part of the core curriculum. The district boasts a strong extracurricular program complete with athletics, theater, music, model UN, and much more. We have a five year high school program, so students can complete an Associates degree while completing high school. We have a technical school and a center for math, science, and technology. These trappings are just one way to measure the district’s success to date. For me, the other measure is my first hand experience.

As the parent of school-age children, I have the opportunity to interact with my local branch of the school system on a regular basis. I speak with my children’s teachers and principal. About once a month, I visit my son’s school for an event or meeting. I keep up with the PTA news and attend meetings when I can. I volunteer for different activities with my son’s class, and I sit on the school improvement committee. All of this means that I have the opportunity to know some of the teachers as professionals and as individuals; to hear from the teachers and administrators about the challenges and successes of Dearborn Public Schools; and to learn from the experiences of other parents. I value this kind of access because, as a citizen investor, I get to see firsthand the value of my investment.

Dearborn Public Schools is an investment, just as our homes, neighborhoods, area attractions, and businesses are an investment. Investing in the schools is not merely about the children, it’s about the kind of community we want to be.

______________________________________________

This post is the last for Code Words—at least for a long while. I am grateful to everyone who read this blog and encouraged me to keep writing. I have loved this experience, but it’s time for me to try something new. I wish you all the best. Keep questioning; keep observing; keep thinking.

Thank you!!

Sources:

“2011-12 Graduation Dropout Snapshot.” MI School Data. State of Michigan. N.d. Web. 3 Apr. 2013. https://www.mischooldata.org/DistrictSchoolProfiles/StudentInformation/GraduationDropoutRate.aspx?Common_Locations=1-A,0,0,0~2-A,0,0,0&Common_SchoolYear=11&Common_Grade=Grade11&Common_Subject=ELA&Common_Subgroup_SchoolDataSet=Ethnicity&Common_Subgroup_GraduationDropout=AllStudents&Common_LocationIncludeComparison=False&Portal_Cohort=FourYear&Common_AssessmentType=SupportedIndependence

Carreras, Jessica. “Dearborn Schools’ Bond Refinancing Saves Taxpayers Nearly $1M.” Dearborn Patch. Patch. 26 Feb. 2013. Web. 3 Apr. 2013. http://dearborn.patch.com/articles/dearborn-schools-bond-refinancing-saves-taxpayers-nearly-1m

Carreras, Jessica. “Dearborn Schools May Ask for $76M Bond from Voters in August.” Dearborn Patch. Patch. 12 Mar. 2013. Web. 3 Apr. 2013.

http://dearborn.patch.com/articles/dearborn-schools-may-ask-for-76m-bond-from-voters-in-august

Carreras, Jessica. “Graduation Rates Up 6.5% in Dearborn Public Schools.” Dearborn Patch. Patch. 15 Feb. 2013. Web. 3 Apr. 2013.

http://dearborn.patch.com/articles/graduation-rates-up-6-5-in-dearborn-public-schools

Carreras, Jessica and Jenny Whalen. “Dearborn Superintendent’s Compensation Ranks 48^th in State.” Dearborn Patch. Patch. 22 Feb. 2013. Web. 3 Apr. 2013.

http://dearborn.patch.com/articles/dearborn-superintendents-compensation-ranks-48th-in-state

Hetrick, Katie. “Dearborn Public Schools Moving Forward with Bond Plan.” Press and Guide. Journal Register. 30 Mar. 2013. Web. 3 Apr. 2013.

http://www.pressandguide.com/articles/2013/03/30/news/doc5152105fd2ddc291603197.txt?viewmode=fullstory

Lai, Daniel. “Dearborn School Board Seeks Public Opinion on Election Date.” Dearborn Patch. Patch. 2 Apr. 2013. Web. 3 Apr. 2013. http://dearborn.patch.com/articles/dearborn-school-board-seeks-public-opinion-on-election-date#comment_6896490

Wallace, Christina. “Eliminating Arts Teachers Hurts Students, State’s Future.” Detroit Free Press. Gannett. 3 Apr. 2013. Web. 3 Apr. 2013. http://www.freep.com/article/20130403/OPINION05/304030046/Christina-Wallace-Eliminating-arts-teachers-hurts-students-state-s-future

Penises to the Left; Vaginas to the Right; Here I Am; Stuck in the Middle

2013-03-17T16:42:00.001-04:00

Public bathrooms are at the heart of the opposition to Royal Oak’s approved-yet-pending human rights law. Fred Birchard, a Royal Oak resident and leading opponent of the law, claims that the law would allow:

Men and boys who think they are women and girls to use women’s restrooms and showers and play on girls’ sports teams. That’s religious discrimination, association discrimination and a wicked policy” (Kavanaugh).

Jim Rasor, Royal Oak’s city commissioner and leading supporter of the law, says that the law is desirable because of its economic benefits and that Birchard and his supporters are just trying to scare people into supporting their own prejudice (Kavanaugh). According to Rasor, in municipalities across the country, similar human rights laws have been passed, and, in those places, transgender persons have not crossed the anatomical barriers of bathrooms or sports teams (Kavanaugh). Technically, that’s true; at least as far as my limited research suggests.

In Maine, a school refused to allow a 12 year old transgender girl (male-to-female) to use the girls’ bathroom, so the Maine Human Rights Commission (MHRC) attempted to ban schools from gender separation in athletics, student organizations, and, yes, bathrooms (Macedo). A court ruled against the ban (O’Connor).

In Colorado, a school reversed its policy from allowing a six year old transgender girl (male-to-female) to use the girls’ bathroom to, instead, requiring her to use the boys’ bathroom, staff bathroom, or nurse’s office bathroom. The girl’s parents filed a complaint claiming this decision was in violation of Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act. This case is still in process (O’Connor).

Though neither case has, as yet, come out in favor of transgender children, there is no doubt that Birchard and others like him see the writing on the wall: Change is coming. They fear that human rights laws will open up bathrooms and locker rooms to all manner of lewd and sinister behaviors. Commenting on the MHRC's proposed ban, Ken Trump, president of an Ohio-based school security consulting firm said:

If my kid walks into a girls’ bathroom and sees a man in there, the child is going to instinctively feel that something’s wrong. If you create an entirely new climate where anything goes, you’re going to create increased confusion, and those with ill intentions could take advantage of that confusion and decreased ability to make a distinction (Macedo).

Trump’s argument that kids might be confused about who should or should not be in the bathroom has merit. It’s a concern worthy of thoughtful discussion. However, after listening to this school security expert, we are left with an image of an adult male towering over a little girl in an elementary school bathroom. That’s definitely a discomforting image, but it has nothing to do with gender identity.

Another opponent of the MHRC proposed ban, Reverend Bob Celeste, told Fox News: “There’s not a whole lot of spaces that a girl can expect privacy, but the bathroom should be one of them. There’s not a whole lot of spaces that a boy can expect privacy, but the bathroom should be one of them” (Macedo). When we talk about a “girl” or a “boy” expecting privacy, the discussion is already moving in the wrong direction. Individuals deserve some level of privacy. Individuals are not defined solely by their anatomical parts any more than they are solely defined by their skin color or religion.

Any change that seeks to undo over 125 years of accepted social practice is bound to face this kind of idealistic, exaggerative, and fearful thinking, so it’s a matter of course. But, seriously, since when has the public bathroom, as an institution, lived up to this image as a private, safe space?

Talk about identity confusion: The public bathroom is a space in the middle of a public place attempting to create a minimal level of privacy. As such, public bathrooms are the perfect places to participate in all manner of transgressions. As Larry Craig, the Republican Senator arrested in an airport men’s room, can attest and as Jerry Seinfeld humorously points out: The gaps between the doors and the stall walls (not to mention between the floors and bottoms of the stall walls) are perfect for peeping—or, in Craig’s case, flat out soliciting. And let’s not forget the bully in the middle school bathroom waiting for some poor soul with a full bladder.

So, let’s not idealize public bathrooms. They’re often dirty and smelly, with broken door locks or toilet flushers, lacking soap, toilet paper, and paper towel. Most people try to get the hell out of them as quickly as possible. They’re just private enough to prevent people outside the stall from a full-on view of your face and intimate anatomy. Thus, allowing you to pee, poop, or puke without facial recognition. But, make no mistake; you are totally identifiable by your shoes.

That said, the issues of modesty, privacy, religion, and accepted social practices pose legitimate questions. Such a significant social change will need to be preceded and accompanied by education and communication at all levels of society, from the federal government to the family dinner table. Laws like the one attempting to be implemented in Royal Oak mark the beginning of these conversations.

.........................................

As I wrote this blog, there were points I wanted to mention that simply did not fit in to the post. Here’s a short list:

College campuses are blazing the path to gender-inclusive bathrooms. We could learn much from the different models being tested.
Transgender students often end up with bladder infections because they refrain from using public bathrooms out of fear of harassment.
Coy Mathis is the Colorado first-grader mentioned in this post. Definitely check out Colleen O’Connor’s story and the picture gallery of Coy. She is a beautiful child, and her face is a sobering reminder that there are many families and children out there struggling with gender identity and the social stigma that comes with it. No matter what you think about the issue, it’s wise to remember that it is a human issue.

Coy Mathis
(AP Photo by Brennan Linsley)

Sources:

Kalfus, Elly. “The Ethics of Gender-Segregated Bathrooms.” Ethical Inquiry. Brandeis University. May 2012. Web. 17 Mar. 2013. http://www.brandeis.edu/ethics/ethicalinquiry/2012/May.html

Kavanaugh, Catherine. “Royal Oak Human Rights Law in Limbo.” Daily Tribune. Journal Register. 14 Mar. 2013. Web. 16 Mar. 2013. http://www.dailytribune.com/article/20130314/NEWS01/130319775/royal-oak-human-rights-law-in-limbo#full_story

Macedo, Diane. “Maine Commission Moves to Ban Gender Specific Bathrooms, Sports Teams in Schools.” Fox News. Fox News Network, LLC. 9 Apr. 2010. Web. 16 Mar. 2013.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/04/08/maine-commission-moves-ban-gender-specific-school-bathrooms-teams/

Muller, David. “Gay Rights Supporters Fighting Repeal of Royal Oak’s Anti-Discrimination Ordinance.” Mlive. Michigan Live, LLC. 14 Mar. 2013. Web. 16 Mar. 2013. http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2013/03/metro_detroit_group_urges_roya.html

O’Connor, Colleen. “Colorado Parents of Transgender 1^st-Grader File Complaint Over Restroom Ban.” The Denver Post. MediaNews Group. 26 Feb. 2013. Web. 17 Mar. 2013.

http://www.denverpost.com/frontpage/ci_22674172/transgender-fountain-1st-grader-banned-from-girls-bathroom

Proxmire, Crystal A. “Non Discrimination Ordinances Spread City by City.” Between the Lines. PrideSource. 10 Jan. 2013. Web. 16 Mar. 2013. http://www.pridesource.com/article.html?article=57830

“Resources.” Unity Michigan. Unity Michigan. N.d. Web. 16 Mar. 2013. http://www.unitymichigan.org/resources/

Stone, Cheryl. “USC Pushing for Gender Neutral Bathrooms.” The Gazette. University of Western Ontario. 20 Oct. 2011. Web. 16 Mar. 2013. http://www.westerngazette.ca/2011/10/20/usc-pushing-for-gender-neutral-bathrooms/

Tessaro, Emilia. "Seinfeld Live at Sony Centre Recap." EmiliaThoughts. WordPress. 9 May 2012. Web. 16 Mar. 2013. http://emiliathoughts.wordpress.com/2012/05/09/seinfeld-live-at-sony-centre-recap/

Images:

http://www.smosh.com/smosh-pit/photos/funniest-bathroom-signs

http://www.smosh.com/smosh-pit/photos/22-craziest-bathroom-signs-ever

Linsley, Brennan. "Coy Mathis." Denver Post. Associated Press. 25 Feb. 2013. Web. 17 Mar. 2013.

http://photos.denverpost.com/2013/02/27/photos-6-year-old-coy-mathis/#6

Keep Dearborn Honest

2013-03-05T14:47:00.001-05:00

Recently, my son's social studies project brought the whole family to Dearborn City Hall. The assignment was to visit various city landmarks and favorite places, take a picture, and compile the photos into a book titled “Dearborn, My Community”. So, there we were running around in the snow in front of city hall, snapping photos. The picture that caused an internal political debate for me was the one of my son standing in front of the Orville L. Hubbard sign. As I snapped the photo, I cringed and clung to the hope that we wouldn’t have to include that photo in the final product.

Among other things, the sign notes that, “Hubbard was an effective administrator who paid attention to small details and public opinion. He made Dearborn known for punctual trash collection.” If you didn’t already know that Hubbard’s most significant legacy was racism, you might miss the hidden meaning behind the words: “paid attention to…public opinion,” “known for punctual trash collection.” He did care about the opinion of his white constituents who kept him in office for 30 years. As for trash, it turns out, the phrase “Keep Dearborn Clean” started under Hubbard, but was mostly understood to mean “Keep Dearborn White” (Good).

Of course, the sign makes no direct statement on Hubbard’s race record, not even a footnote. It would be a copout to say such signs are not intended to be controversial: If you are going to put a sign in front of city hall memorializing a man best known for his racist policies and then make no mention of this part of his legacy, then you are inviting controversy. Adding insult to injury is the statue of Hubbard which also stands right outside city hall.

Obviously, I’m not writing about something new here. These monuments have received press attention in the past. In James W. Loewen’s Lies Across America: What Our Historic Sites Get Wrong, the Hubbard statue is listed as one of the top 20 monuments that should be “toppled” ("Down with..."). Of course, Hubbard's sign and statue are not unique in that they pay tribute to a person who may have done great things but whose social or ethical conscience was at best questionable and at worst detrimental to society. Henry Ford, as well as many other historical figures in our history, fit the same bill.

Nevertheless, an opportunity is approaching to make some kind of change to the Hubbard tributes. Dearborn City Hall is relocating. There is talk of the grounds in front becoming a city park. One of the names being considered is Hubbard Park (Carreras). Naming the park after Hubbard just because it already has these two monuments is as strange as consulting with the Hubbard family on how they would feel about the statue being moved--to the new city hall or to the center of the existing park. Why is the question not about removing the statue? Shouldn't city leaders want to stop reaffirming Hubbard's one-sided legacy--whether or not the family approves? If removing the statue is too costly an option, then add a new placard that speaks honestly about his legacy. Definitely do not move it to the new city hall and definitely do not make it the centerpiece for a new park.

In the end, my son opted to include the photo in his project. That's fine. History should not be buried, but I made sure he knew that Hubbard, despite his accomplishments, was a man who did not like people who were different from himself. That part of his legacy is far more important than trash collection.

Sources:

Carreras, Jessica. “City Hall Move Could Result in Relocation of Hubbard Statue, War Memorial.” Dearborn Patch. Patch. 31 May 2012. Web. 5 Mar. 2013. http://dearborn.patch.com/articles/city-hall-move-could-result-in-relocation-of-hubbard-statue-war-memorial

“Detroit: The History and Future of the Motor City.” N.p. N.d. Web. 5 Mar. 2013. http://detroit1701.org/HubbardStatue.htm

"Down with Orville Hubbard." MetroTimes. Detroit Metro Times. 19 Jan. 2000. Web. 5 Mar. 2013. http://www2.metrotimes.com/news/story.asp?id=12567

Good, David L. “Orville Hubbard: The Ghost Who Still Haunts Dearborn.” Detroit News. Media News Group. 18 Jul. 2000. Web. 26 Oct. 2012.

http://apps.detnews.com/apps/history/index.php?id=139

Hood, Anne B. “Statue of Orville Hubbard at City Hall.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 17 Jan. 2008. Web. 5 Mar. 2013. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Orville_Hubbard.jpg

More of the Same

2013-02-18T23:00:00.000-05:00

In the February 3^rd edition of the Detroit Free Press, journalist John Carlisle recounted the public comment portion of a recent Detroit City Council meeting. A few of the regular attendees had this to say:

We should never have to lose our island and have outsiders waltz into our city, a black city, and take over our park.
[The Belle Isle deal is] a plan to have us out of Detroit and that island out there….They don’t want that island out there for black people to enjoy. They want to turn that island into something other than a black island. Detroit is under attack. It’s under assault.
We should never have to lose our island and have outsiders waltz into our city, a black city, and take over our park.

Because of their seeming lunacy and outright bigotry, these statements may seem unworthy of consideration. But they illuminate a valid fear that is probably shared by many of Detroit’s black residents: If whites are responsible for improving the city, then blacks will be shut out. Whites will move in to enjoy the prosperity that they have created, and blacks will be stifled—economically, politically, and socially. This history played out once already—except that, back then, it was blacks moving in and whites moving out. The results of this traumatic shift are evident today, not only in the city’s and the region’s landscape but also in the hearts and minds of those whose families lived it.

When viewed from this perspective, it’s not a mystery why many of Detroit’s black residents want to claim the city as their own, want its pending prosperity to grow from their own influence—not that of rich, white men or young, white hipsters. Better, perhaps, to own a crumbling home, than to own nothing. Theirs is a battle cry—though a faltering one: A reminder that, although racism may not take the form of separate drinking fountains and burning crosses, it still exists in powerful but subtle ways.

Sadly, though, in idealizing Detroit’s blackness, these residents chain the city to a history that they themselves would not have chosen, to a present that is born out of that history, and to a future that looks like more of the same.

Sources:

Carlisle, John. “Giving Voice to Detroit’s Worries.” Detroit Free Press. Gannett. 3 Feb. 2013. Web. 3 Feb. 2013. http://tablet.olivesoftware.com/Olive/Tablet/DetroitFreePress/SharedArticle.aspx?href=DFP/2013/02/03&id=Ar00400

“Letters: Dear Detroit Don’t Shut the Door on Outsiders.” Detroit Free Press. Gannett. 17 Feb. 2013. Web. 17 Feb. 2013. http://www.freep.com/article/20130217/OPINION04/302170140/Letters-Dear-Detroit-Don-t-shut-the-door-on-outsiders-

“Letters: Why So Angry About Detroit.” Detroit Free Press. Gannett. 10 Feb. 2013. Web. 17 Feb. 2013. http://www.freep.com/article/20130210/OPINION04/302100106/-1/7daysarchives/Letters-Think-what-Belle-Isle-s-6M-could-bought

Scheduling Change

2013-02-12T09:37:00.001-05:00

Beginning with last week's post, I will be posting every other week. So, I will post new content by February 18th. I hope you are all well, and thank you for reading!

The Legality of Trust

2013-02-03T10:25:00.000-05:00

In 2008, voters in Macomb, Oakland, and Wayne Counties approved collection of a .10-mill tax to support the Detroit Zoological Society. A couple of weeks ago, the Detroit Free Press revealed that several Wayne County cities have been withholding a portion of those dollars for their Downtown Development Authorities (DDAs) and Tax Increment Financing Authorities (TIFAs).

Although all cities in Macomb and Oakland Counties have given every dollar collected from this mill to the zoo, over the last five years, as many as 36 cities in Wayne County have withheld some of the funds. Today, that number is down to 15: Our beloved Dearborn, along with Dearborn Heights, Grosse Pointe City, Grosse Pointe Park, Hamtramck, Harper Woods, Huron Township, Melvindale, Northville, Plymouth Township, River Rouge, Romulus, Taylor, Van Buren Township, and Wyandotte (Kavanaugh).

On the legal front, the cities’ actions are supported by the opinion of the Miller-Canfield law firm and opposed by both the former and current Attorneys General (Mike Cox and Bill Schuette, respectively) (Abdel-Razzaq, “Woodhaven”). Some cities are pressing ahead with a lawsuit, so the courts will have the final say. But the legality of the action is really a sideshow.

These cities are directly contradicting the explicit will of the people and seeking legal justification to do so. Wyandotte’s mayor, Joe Peters, said the zoo is, “important to the kids and families. But what about our communities? These funds are going right into our downtowns…and now they want to take $18,000 from us?” (Laitner). That’s a pretty upside down view: That $18,000 never belonged to the city; the residents approved those dollars specifically for the zoo. Taylor Mayor Jeffrey Lamarand acknowledged that his constituents have no idea that a portion of their zoo tax never makes it to the zoo, but, he said, “whose responsibility was it to educate the voters?” (Laitner). So only certain bucks stop at city hall? Why should elected public officials, responsible for stewardship of our tax dollars, tell constituents how their dollars are being utilized?

Many of the 15 cities plan to continue capturing a portion of the zoo millage as well as to follow the same procedure with the recently passed Detroit Institute of Arts millage. Andy Meisner, the treasurer of both Oakland County and the Oakland County Zoological Authority said it best, “The bottom line is the zoo is really an economic development driver for the region and when people approved a zoo millage they did it to help fund a regional attraction….I sympathize with TIFAs and DDAs…It’s not that they aren’t doing important work but this isn’t an appropriate source of funding for them” (Kavanaugh).

These cities breached the trust of the voters. If the courts do not hold them to account (and, perhaps, even if they do), then, on Election Day, the voters certainly should.

Sources:

Abdel-Razzaq, Lauren. “Use of Detroit Zoo Tax Money Defended.” The Detroit News. Media News Group. 23 Jan. 2013. Web. 2 Feb. 2013. http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130123/METRO01/301230350

Abdel-Razzaq, Lauren. “Woodhaven Tried to Repay Zoo Tax Funds in ’09, Documents Show.” The Detroit News. Media News Group. 24 Jan. 2013. Web. 2 Feb. 2013. http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130124/METRO01/301240478

Kavanaugh, Catherine. “Cities Keeping Part of Detroit Zoo Tax; Lawsuits Likely.” The Macomb Daily. Journal Register. 22 Jan. 2013. Web. 2 Feb. 2013. http://www.macombdaily.com/article/20130122/NEWS01/130129849/cities-keeping-part-of-detroit-zoo-tax-lawsuits-likely#full_story

Laitner, Bill. “Wayne County Communities Keeping Some Zoo Tax Money for Downtowns.” The Detroit Free Press. Gannett. 21 Jan. 2013. Web. 2 Feb. 2013. http://www.freep.com/article/20130121/NEWS05/301210077/Wayne-County-communities-keeping-some-zoo-tax-money-for-downtowns?appSession=63733711749655&RecordID=&PageID=2&PrevPageID=&cpipage=2&CPISortType=&CPIorderBy=

Rogers, LeAnne. “Clarification Expected on How Cities Collect Zoo Tax.” Observer and Eccentric. Gannett. 27 Jan. 2013. Web. 2 Feb. 2013. http://www.hometownlife.com/article/20130127/NEWS24/301270393/Clarification-expected-how-cities-collect-zoo-tax

In Lieu of Post, Read These

2013-01-29T09:45:00.001-05:00

So sorry for the delay in breaking the news, but, sadly, there is no post this week. I'll spare you the excuses, but I do have some interesting articles I've been holding on to that should keep you entertained:

From Reason: MLK's Contested Yet Universal Blueprint for Freedom

From Think Progress:
Santorum: US Needs Immigrants to Grow Its Population
At Long Last, Fox News Admits the Stimulus Helped Everyday Americans

From Slate: The Conservative Left

Have a great week!

Gun Control: The Low-Hanging Fruit

2013-01-22T00:00:00.002-05:00

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.—U.S. Constitution, Article II

The spirit of the Second Amendment says that the people should bear arms to insure against a government from within or without imposing its will without the people’s consent. And, in this day and age, if we the people are going to go up against our own, or anyone else’s, military, then we definitely need semiautomatic and fully-automatic weapons and, generally, every manner of high tech weaponry we can get our hands on. I make that statement in all seriousness, yet, even as I write it, I find it ludicrous.

Our government is never going to allow us to put tanks in our garages or fighter jets on our own personal runways, and the all-weapons movement seems to accept those facts. But, they’ve chosen the next best line in the sand: semiautomatic weapons. If we choose to stockpile a few of those, it’s our Second Amendment right to do so. Still, I fail to understand that strategy. When the Marines or Green Berets throw grenades into our living rooms are these weapons supposed to protect us? Is the idea that we should all take up residence in the woods, so that we can more effectively stave off such an attack, should it occur? (Yes, my imagery is totally based on that 1984 Patrick Swayze classic Red Dawn. Although in that film, it was the USSR throwing grenades on American soil).

All of this thinking only goes as far as the Second Amendment implies. The Second Amendment stops short of insuring the right to hunt or to own any weapon we choose. Yet, proponents of the all-weapons movement argue that prohibiting the purchase of assault weapons (ill-defined term that it is (Goode)) is a slippery slope, a first step in the slide toward the loss of all kinds of freedoms (Bell). This argument is given despite that the government limits personal liberties regularly: Wear a seatbelt; don’t put your trash out too early; buy auto insurance; obey traffic signals; obey the speed limit; don’t slander; don’t take without purchasing; children must attend school between the ages of six and 18; don’t yell fire when there is no fire; etc. All of these rules, regulations, and laws are enacted to insure the safety and comfort of the whole. Why should rules about guns be any different?

Is the drive to obtain or to simply have the right to obtain semiautomatic weapons really about the best hunting tools, the potential for a someday revolt of the people or a military coup, or simply the desire to maintain the most vigorous interpretation of the Second Amendment because that amendment has become synonymous with the National Rifle Association (NRA) and the NRA is fueled by the gun industry?

I’ve read and listened to David Keene, NRA President, in a couple of interviews. He’s well-spoken, calm, armed with plenty of historical knowledge and statistics that directly oppose statistics provided by the interviewers. In one interview, with PBS’s Judy Woodruff, he said:

Well, we tried a ban on assault weapons. The only thing that is different is—and, remember, Judy, that an assault weapon has to be listed because there’s no functional difference between a so-called assault weapon and any other semiautomatic rifle.

So, this time, they’re saying, well, if it has a pistol grip, it’s dangerous. If it doesn’t have a pistol grip, it isn’t dangerous. Now, that’s absurd from a functional standpoint, because it’s the same gun, the same rifle. And the only difference is cosmetic.

So, banning something for cosmetic reasons is not going to cause—is not going to cure the problem (Woodruff).

Well-played, Mr. Keene. You can just see him, like the Tasmanian Devil, running circles around Ms. Woodruff. Mr. Keene is arguing that the government is pulling a hoax. It is creating new rules that don’t solve the issue, and it’s doing it at the expense of civil liberties. Yet, when the dust settles, you realize that these bans are designed to limit the limits even as they aim to keep the bad guys from getting weapons. This balancing act is performed to protect the liberties of responsible current (and future) gun owners.

In fact, the government is doing what it’s supposed to do: Insure the safety of everyone without infringing any more than necessary on personal liberty—including the option to purchase a particular weapon. What the NRA calls the failure of government is actually the art of compromise. Unfortunately, compromise often means that the journey to real change is a slow one. Nevertheless, government is working as it was designed to work. It just doesn’t have the luxury of standing in its own rightness.

Of course, David Keene is right on at least one point: A ban on assault weapons alone won’t cure the problem, but, then, no one thing will. The goal is not to cure; it is to take preventive measures. The goal is to limit opportunities for these tragedies to take place. These tragedies rear their head at the intersection of some of this country’s most significant problems: guns, violence, and mental health care. Figuring out what guns should be legal is far simpler than tackling mental health. We can only hope that greater energy and time will go into that debate.

This conversation doesn’t even begin to touch on the violence occurring in our urban neighborhoods where our children live with violence and fear every day. Where school might be safe, but every where else is a danger zone.

The NRA argument is a distraction from the discussions that need to be taking place, and the politicians who cow tow to the NRA sell out their constituents even as they stock up their campaign war chests.

Sources:

Beekman, Daniel. “Connecticut Shooter Used Heavy-Duty Weapons Registered to His Mother to Kill Her and 25 Others.” New York Daily News. N.p. 14 Dec. 2012. Web. 20 Jan. 2013. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/ct-school-shooter-made-combat-weapon-article-1.1220431

Bell, Larry. “The Slippery Slope of Gun Control: Time to Stand on Firm Ground.” Forbes. Forbes.com, LLC. 15 Jan. 2013. Web. 20 Jan. 2013. http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2013/01/15/the-slippery-slope-of-gun-control-time-to-stand-on-firm-ground/

Block, Melissa. “NRA Head: Registry of Gun Owners Would be Very Dangerous.” NPR. N.p. 11 Jan. 2013. Web. 21. Jan. 2013. http://www.npr.org/2013/01/11/169172198/nra-head-registry-of-gun-owners-would-be-very-dangerous

Goode, Erica. “Even Defining ‘Assault Rifles’ Is Complicated.” The New York Times. The New York Times Company. 16 Jan. 2013. Web. 21 Jan. 2013. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/17/us/even-defining-assault-weapons-is-complicated.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0

“Jon Stewart Takes on NRA Over ATF Limitations on Enforcing Existing Gun Laws.” Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc. 17 Jan. 2013. Web. 20 Jan. 2013. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/17/jon-stewart-nra-limiting-atf-law-enforcement_n_2495301.html

Kempa, Darcy. “Assault Weapons Ban Would Not Have Prevented the Sandy Hook Shooting.” Policymic. Mic Network Inc. Dec 2012. Web. 20 Jan. 2013. http://www.policymic.com/articles/21139/assault-weapons-ban-would-not-have-prevented-the-sandy-hook-shooting

“Our View: Executive Orders on Gun Control Wouldn’t Stop Adam Lanza.” lenconnect.com. Gatehouse Media Inc. N.d. Web. 20 Jan. 2013. http://www.lenconnect.com/article/20130120/OPINION/130119361/1007

Red Dawn. IMDb.com. IMDb.com, Inc. N.d. Web. 20 Jan. 2013. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087985/

Red Dawn. IMDb. IMDb.com. N.d. Web. 20 Jan. 2013. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087985/

“Second Amendment.” The Free Dictionary. Farlex, Inc. N.d. Web. 20 Jan. 2013. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Second+Amendment

Spangler, Todd. “President Barack Obama’s Gun Proposals Raise Hope, Concern.” Detroit Free Press. Freep.com. 17 Jan. 2013. Web. 20 Jan. 2013. http://www.freep.com/article/20130117/NEWS15/301170293/President-Barack-Obama-s-gun-control-proposals-raise-hope-concern

Webb, Lee. “What Exactly Is an Assault Weapon?” CBN News. Christian Broadcasting Network. 19 Jan. 2013. Web. 21 Jan. 2013. http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2013/January/What-Exactly-Is-an-Assault-Weapon/

Woodruff, Judy. “NRA President David Keene Rejects White House Gun Control Approach.” PBS NewsHour. MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. 15 Jan. 2013. Web. 20 Jan. 2013. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/social_issues/jan-june13/keene_01-15.html

From Homogeneity to Diversity and Back

2013-01-14T15:12:00.001-05:00

While it is well known that diversity is growing nationally overall, three Pennsylvania State University researchers set out to look at local diversity trends. In September 2012, they published their findings: Racial and Ethnic Diversity Goes Local: Charting Change in American Communities over Three Decades. They found that diversity is most prominent in coastal and southern regions with high populations, plenty of rental housing, many foreign-born residents, various occupation options, and military and/or government employment hubs. With or without these characteristics, though, ethnic diversity is on the rise everywhere. In the last 30 years, metropolitan, micropolitan, and rural areas have all experienced an increase in diversity.

Of course, if you’ve been anywhere in the last 30 years, you already knew this. Today, when I visit places I frequented in my youth, I can’t help but notice that the faces are far more diverse. Unfortunately, physical diversity of a space far outpaces the mindset of those living in that space. Basically, we have the appearance of diversity without the belief system to support it:

Whites’ responses to diversity are of particular concern. Studies of racial residential preferences indicate that those whites who associate the presence of minorities with a reduced quality of life are prone either to exit diverse neighborhoods or not to move into them at all (Lee).

This concern is the question on which the researchers concluded their study: Is the trend of growing ethnic diversity really a trend toward increasing homogeneity of particular ethnic groups:

Could this type of white avoidance, exacerbated by continued minority growth, portend a bleak prognosis for the racial and ethnic diversity of entire communities, not just neighborhoods? The increase in Hispanic and black minority places hints at potential departures from the diversity master trend. Moreover, a separate analysis identifies a few places that have already ‘bucked the trend’: they reached their peak diversity in 1980 or 1990 and have since become more homogenous (Lee).

History has shown that cordoning off any single population type, blacks, Jews, low-income, mentally ill, has detrimental consequences for society as a whole. However, given this study, the difference is that ethnic groups may end up self-cordoning. Therefore, despite personal, professional, and academic knowledge to the contrary, I felt obligated to ask the question: Is homogeneity really so bad?

To that end, I stumbled upon a Brookings Institution article, “Beyond Sushiology: Does Diversity Work?” Author Peter Skerry admonishes those who support diversity because it means a more colorful world where we all get to eat foreign food. (Full disclosure on this one: On my last visit to a Chinese restaurant, I ordered that oh-so-authentic Chinese delicacy known as General Tsao’s Chicken). Skerry does an excellent job of covering an array of research that advocates for both sides of the debate. He wisely argues that diversity is so often accepted as a good thing that we fail to address the challenges inherent in it. In fact, he suggests we are actually afraid to admit that diversity has as many pitfalls as homogeneity. I think he’s right.

Just as fear of the Other will prohibit honest dialogue, so will fear of questioning the challenges brought on by diversity. I remain a staunch advocate for diversity, and I agree with the Penn State researchers: If homogeneity is the long-term result of the rising diversity trend, then society is not improving. Yet, I am certain that without a respectful, thoughtful, and ongoing conversation about the realities of diversity—language barriers, truth in stereotypes, fear of assimilation, cultural behaviors, and fear of minority status (Skerry)—the genuine fulfillment of equality and acceptance will never materialize.

Sources:

Florida, Richard. “America’s Most and Least Diverse Metros.” The Atlantic Cities. The Atlantic Media Company. 9 Sep. 2012. Web. 13 Jan. 2013. http://m.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-and-economy/2012/09/americas-most-and-least-diverse-metros/3206/

Lee, Barrett A., John Iceland, Gregory Sharp. Racial and Ethnic Diversity Goes Local: Charting Change in American Communities over Three Decades. Pennsylvania State University. 2012. Web. http://www.s4.brown.edu/us2010/Data/Report/report08292012.pdf

Skerry, Peter. “Beyond Sushiology: Does Diversity Work?” The Brookings Institution. N.p. Wint. 2002. Web. 14 Jan. 2013. http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/2002/12/winter-affirmativeaction-skerry

Napoleon Celebrates Emancipation by Playing Race Card

2013-01-07T17:52:00.001-05:00

Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863. In that moment, he granted freedom to 50,000 slaves. As Union troops spread word of the Proclamation (carrying “miniature copies”), tens of thousands more slaves gained freedom (Holzer). But, as American history has proven since then, words and mindsets are just as binding as physical shackles. So it was with unintended irony that, 150 years to the day, prospective Detroit mayoral candidate, Benny Napoleon played the race card.

At a celebration marking the anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation held at Detroit’s New Bethel Baptist Church, Benny Napoleon commented to reporters that, “’It’s our Detroit, and we’re going to keep it for Detroiters’” (Wilkinson). Asked if his competitor, Mike Duggan (former CEO of Detroit Medical Center), could effectively represent Detroit residents while living in the affluent Detroit neighborhood of Palmer Woods, Napoleon replied, “’Hell, no. Palmer Woods is not Detroit’” (Wilkinson).

Despite how often the race card is played in politics, I’m astounded every time. But the icing on the cake is always when the politicians attempt to walk the proverbial horse—no matter how large—back into the barn. Within 24 hours, Napoleon was on Twitter, Facebook, and WDET’s Craig Fahle Show attempting to do just that: What he really meant was that all people who support Detroit—whether they live in Detroit or not—are Detroiters. As for Palmer Woods, of course it is part of Detroit. In fact, all of Detroit should aspire to be like Palmer Woods. That’s all he was trying to say….Uh, what?

Napoleon, like every other politician to ever pull the race card, just needed a bogeyman. He tried to show his audience that he was like them by showing how his opponent is supposedly not like them. The bogeyman, Mike Duggan, is white, lived in Livonia, and then moved to a rich neighborhood in Detroit. Whereas Napoleon, “lived next to abandoned homes, dealt with high car insurance rates and felt the fear…stemming from the city’s high crime rate” (Wilkinson). Duggan is an outsider, and outsiders haven’t lived Detroit, so they can’t lead Detroit. The beauty of this tactic is that Napoleon never has to discuss the issues or his record or that of his opponent.

Despite the many critical issues facing Detroiters (lighting, security, economic vitality, and education), on the 150^th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation, Benny Napoleon suggested that Detroiters should be primarily concerned with whether or not their mayoral candidate is street-enough. Napoleon’s words are not merely a gaffe; they are symbolic of the kind of leadership that has so often kept Detroit shackled to decay and stagnation.

Sources:

“Benny Napoleon Clarifies Palmer Woods Remarks.” The Detroit News. MediaNews Group, 2 Jan. 2013. Web. 6 Jan. 2013. http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130102/METRO01/301020398

“Benny Napoleon Explains Comments about Palmer Woods.” Craig Fahle Show. WDET, 3 Jan. 2013. Radio. 7 Jan. 2013. http://www.wdet.org/shows/craig-fahle-show/episode/benny-napoleon-palmer-park/

Holzer, Harold. “A Mighty Act: The 150^th Anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation.” The Daily Beast. The Newsweek/Daily Beast Company, 1 Jan. 2013. Web. 6 Jan. 2013. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/01/01/a-mighty-act-the-150th-anniversary-of-the-emancipation-proclamation.html

“Update: Benny Napoleon Clarifies ‘Palmer Woods is not Detroit’ Remark.” Deadline Detroit. N.p. 2 Jan. 2013. Web. 6 Jan. 2013. http://www.deadlinedetroit.com/articles/3209/napoleon_goes_after_duggan_in_mayoral_race_palmer_woods_is_not_detroit

Wattrick, Jeff. “The Mike Duggan Interview: ‘I expect to raise expectations.” Deadline Detroit. N.p. 11 Nov. 2012. Web. 6 Jan. 2013. http://www.deadlinedetroit.com/articles/2613/the_mike_duggan_interview_i_expect_to_raise_expectations

Wilkinson, Mike. “Napoleon Takes Verbal Swipe at Duggan: ‘It’s our Detroit.’” The Detroit News. MediaNews Group, 2 Jan. 2013. Web. 4 Jan. 2013. http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130102/METRO01/301020323/1409/metro/Napoleon-takes-verbal-swipe-Duggan-s-our-Detroit-

Happy New Year!

2012-12-20T08:51:00.001-05:00

I'll be back online next week. In the meantime, check out this article from Salon.com:

Salon: How feminism caused Sandy Hook, according to the right. http://goo.gl/mag/V5BhqaQ

Out Sick

2012-12-16T20:03:00.002-05:00

Thanks to everyone who is reading this blog. Due to illness and the coming holidays, I won't be posting my own thoughts for the next couple of weeks, but I did want to leave you with some food for thought:

Chief Justice Antonin Scalia on Homosexuality:
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/dec/11/nation/la-na-scalia-gays-20121212

Soledad O'Brien on "Black in America":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxkDfcFcvOo&feature=youtube_gdata_player

http://inamerica.blogs.cnn.com/category/documentaries/

Lame Duck Sprinting

2012-12-10T14:30:00.001-05:00

Stop me if you’ve heard this one: A lame duck walks into an abortion clinic and says, “Your door frames aren’t wide enough. You need to shut down this clinic.” The doctor on staff says, “Is this a joke?” The duck replies, “No, this is religious freedom.”

Michigan House Bill 5711 is just one of a series of bills passing through the Michigan legislature in the name of religious freedom. How does the size of a doorway relate to the ability to practice one’s religion? Well, it depends on the location of the doorway: If it’s in an abortion clinic, then, apparently, it has everything to do with religious freedom. HB5711 will:

Regulate abortion clinics as surgical centers by imposing strict physical building requirements on them, such as minimum doorway sizes and minimum square footage. The regulations could effectively shut down some clinics in the state (Bassett).

The bill also, “includes a provision that ends telemedicine abortions, which are commonly used by women in rural and medically under-served areas of the state” (Bassett). Planned Parenthood Advocates of Michigan claims that 21 of 83 Michigan counties have no local obstetrician-gynecologists, “so telemedicine allows doctors to prescribe medication abortions to women in early stages of pregnancies through a phone or internet consultation” (Bassett). Most startling about this legislation is that, just last July, a bill expanding telehealth services easily passed through both houses and was signed by the governor (Bassett, Perna). So, it’s not that telehealth services are bad overall; they’re just bad when it comes to women’s reproductive rights.

If HB5711 wasn’t so funny, maybe this one will be: A doctor informs a rape victim that the rape resulted in a pregnancy. The woman wants an abortion, but is informed that her insurance (in fact, no insurance plan in the state) will cover the surgery. The woman cries, “But abortion is legal!” The insurance company responds, “Yes, and so is religious freedom.”

Senate Bills 612, 613, and 614 will:

Prevent all insurance plans in Michigan from covering abortion unless a woman would die without the procedure. The measures do not include exceptions for rape, incest or pregnancy complications that would jeopardize the mother’s health. Private insurance companies will be given the option to carry a separate abortion coverage policy that the woman would have to pay for in addition to her regular coverage (Bassett).

Never mind who gets nominated to the Supreme Court; abortion doesn’t need to be outlawed outright. In Michigan, piece by piece, access to abortion can simply be stripped away: Strapping clinics with unnecessary regulations, banning telemedicine abortions in areas where face-to-face medical access is logistically hampered, preventing insurance companies from covering abortion. In the end, it doesn’t matter if it’s legal because if there are enough hurdles, abortion will, in effect, be illegal.

Okay, let’s try one more: A gay man walks into a public university counseling office seeking counsel on his relationship with his boyfriend. The counselor says, “Sorry, I can’t help you with that. I’ll refer you to someone who approves of your lifestyle.” The gay man says, “Is this a joke?” The counselor says, “No, this is religious freedom.”

If you’re asking yourself why anyone would work at a public university as a counselor and be unwilling to work with clients with different lifestyles, then you’re on the right track. Yet, back in 2009, Democrat Tupac Hunter introduced legislation that would allow college students in psychology, social work, and counseling degree programs to deny counseling services to clients if such services conflicted with their religious or moral views (Ford, “SB 518”). Michigan House Bill 5040, the “Julea Ward Freedom of Conscience Act” passed through the House, then stalled in the Senate (SB 518) (Maynard “Republican Endgame”).

Yet, far from shying away from the Julea Ward bill, just a few days ago, the Senate passed SB 975, the “Religious Liberty and Conscience Protection Act” which allows all persons in the health care field, employers, doctors, nurses, and pharmacists, to deny services based on conscience objections. Most intriguing about this bill is that Michigan already allows health care professionals to opt out of providing abortions. Under this new bill, in cases of life threatening emergencies, health care professionals could not deny service, and, in all cases, they could not deny service based on “individual status” which apparently means sexual preference and race (Gray).

Hmm, so what would this law be allowing providers to opt out of? According to Planned Parenthood Advocates of Michigan, the law uses such broad definition that any service, such as blood transfusions or vaccines, could be denied. Making the law even more threatening is the fact that it applies to whole institutions, not simply individuals: “For example: Some areas of the state only have Catholic hospitals. If they are allowed to refuse certain services, individuals that live in the area will have no other source of care” (Planned Parenthood).

Supporters of this legislation think the opposition is “ridiculous” for suggesting that a doctor might not provide service to an AIDS patient (Gray). After all, all doctors take the Hippocratic Oath. If that’s the case, then why do we need the legislation at all? If doctors are above the pettiness of making lifestyle judgments, what do we need this legislation for? Right, I forgot, this is about protecting religious freedom.

The conscience objection law not only adds another hurdle to abortion and contraception access but also to health care access generally. With this legislation, patients will have to shop for doctors based not only on their geographic location, years in the field, and reputation, but also on their religious and moral preferences, and all of this presumes that they can actually locate a doctor within their area.

What other business gets to record all of your most personal information (disease, pregnancy, drug use, allergies, traumatic events, etc.), then say, “Hmm, my religious beliefs prohibit me from helping you with your problem. Why don’t you try this other doctor?” There is something inherently wrong with this model. Health care is a business designed to serve all consumers because good health is important not only for the individual patient but for society as a whole.

With the pace at which these laws are getting passed through Michigan’s legislature, it is clear that even lame ducks can sprint. They just can’t learn new tricks.

Sources:

“2011 Senate Bill 518.” Michigan Votes. Mackinac Center for Public Policy, n.d. Web. 10 Dec. 2012. http://www.michiganvotes.org/2011-SB-518

Bassett, Laura. “Michigan Abortion Legislation Package Moves Forward.” Huffington Post. Huffington Post, 6 Dec. 2012. Web. 10 Dec. 2012. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/06/michigan-abortion-bills_n_2253380.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

Ford, Zack. “Michigan House Passes Anti-Gay ‘License to Condemn’ Counseling Bill.” Think Progress. Think Progress, 15 Jun. 2012. Web. 10 Dec. 2012. http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/06/15/500434/michigan-house-passes-anti-gay-license-to-condemn-counseling-bill/?mobile=nc

Gray, Kathleen. “State Senate Approves ‘Moral Objection’ Bill that Would Allow Providers to Deny Health Care.” Detroit Free Press. Detroit Free Press, 6 Dec. 2012. Web. 10 Dec. 2012. http://www.freep.com/article/20121206/NEWS06/121206072

Maynard, Mark. “For those of you who were wondering what the Republican Endgame Would Look Like….” MarkMaynard.com. MarkMaynard.com, 7 Dec. 2012. Web. 10 Dec. 2012. http://markmaynard.com/2012/12/this-is-what-the-republican-endgame-looks-like-womens-rights-gay-rights-public-education-all-being-systematically-dismantled-this-week-in-michigan/comment-page-1/

Maynard, Mark. “New Legislation in Michigan Senate would empower health care workers to discriminate….” MarkMaynard.com. MarkMaynard.com, 4 Dec. 2012. Web. 10 Dec. 2012. http://markmaynard.com/2012/12/new-legislation-in-the-michigan-senate-would-empower-health-care-workers-to-discriminate-on-the-basis-of-sexual-orientation-and-religion/

Perna, Gabriel. “Michigan Governor Signs Telemedicine Bill.” Health Care Informatics. Health Care Informatics, 6 Jul. 2012. Web. 10 Dec. 2012. http://www.healthcare-informatics.com/news-item/michigan-governor-signs-telemedicine-bill

“Reproductive Legislation in Michigan.” Planned Parenthood Advocates of Michigan. PPAM, n.d. Web. 10 Dec. 2012. http://miplannedparenthood.org/page/reproductive-legislation-michigan

“Rights of Conscience vs. Civil Rights.” Pew Research Center Publications. Pew Research Center, 3 Jun. 2010. Web. 9 Dec. 2012. http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1612/legal-conflict-between-religious-beliefs-and-antidiscrimination-protections-in-health-care

Sands, David. “’Julea Ward’ Bill Passed in Michigan House Allows Religious Counseling Students to Deny Gay Clients.” Huffington Post. Huffington Post, 14 Jun. 2012. Web. 10 Dec. 2012. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/14/julea-ward-bill-freedom-of-conscience-act-in-michigan-house-allows-discrimination-against-gay-clients_n_1597658.html

“SB 518. The ‘Julea Ward Freedom of Conscience’ Bill.” MPIPP 3.8. MPIPP, n.d. Web. 10 Dec. 2012. http://www.mpipp.org/Newsletters/newsletter-volume3-number8.htm

The New Minority: US-Born Techies

2012-12-02T19:24:00.000-05:00

Last week, as I reviewed the Global Detroit Study, I was impressed with all of the statistics on immigrant contributions to the American economy. But what the study indirectly conveyed was that US-born residents are lacking in entrepreneurial spirit and technological ingenuity and education. And that was the side of the issue that most caught my attention.

In fact, the US is ranked 17^th in the percentage of its college graduates earning degrees in science and engineering, and this ranking is lower than decades ago (Comm on Science, Rising). According to the 2005 National Assessment of Education Progress, 40% and 50% of American students are testing below minimum levels in math and science, respectively (“STEM Facts and Figures”).

The picture for minorities is worse. In math, 60% of Latinos and 70% of blacks tested below math level. In science, 70% of Latinos and 80% of blacks tested below level (“STEM Facts and Figures”):

Today, 43 percent of school-age children are of African-American, Latino, or Native American descent. Yet of more than 70,000 U.S. engineering bachelor’s degrees in 2009, less than 13% were awarded to under-represented minorities (Adkins).

Of the national class of high school freshman in 2001, only about 70% graduated (which means our nation is bleeding 30% of its teenagers before college even starts). Of that 70%, only about 68% went on for degrees. Of those degree seekers, only about 15% pursued a STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) degree. Only just over half (55%) of STEM degree seekers were projected to actually graduate with a STEM degree. That’s just 4% of the original high school freshman class (“STEM Facts and Figures”)!

The picture painted by these statistics is hardly reassuring, and it is not one that can be wholly corrected by immigration. Nor should it be. Immigration is a piece of the puzzle, but, if America is going to maintain its status as a technological leader, it will have to attract foreign-born workers as well as develop US-born workers. Big business, government, and education will all play critical roles in paving the way for US-born techies, especially through initiatives like Educate to Innovate and Project Lead the Way. Locally, individuals can mentor at a local school or donate to the local education foundation. Businesses can communicate with schools and colleges to help grow the curriculum that will produce students they want to hire.

Along the way to full fruition of these initiatives, though, Americans will have to reinvent how we relate to our nation’s low-income families and minorities. The continuing drain on public school spending and the often insurmountable cost of college are high hurdles for America’s underprivileged (and middle class). By 2050, minorities will be the majority, yet the economic and academic disparities between them and their white counterparts remain a lead weight around America’s neck—not to mention those suffering with the disparities.

Sources:

Adkins, Rodney C. “To Keep America Great, Students Must Be Taught to Innovate.” US News and World Report. US News and World Report, 16 Jun. 2011. Web. 2 Dec. 2012. http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2011/06/16/to-keep-america-great-students-must-be-taught-to-innovate

Bennett, William J. “U.S. Lag in Science, Math a Disaster in the Making.” CNN. CNN, 9 Feb. 2012. Web. 2 Dec. 2012. http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/09/opinion/bennett-stem-education/index.html

Bertram, Vince. “Industry, Educators Build In-roads to STEM Success.” US News and World Report. US News and World Report, 15 Aug. 2012. Web. 2 Dec. 2012. http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/stem-education/2012/08/15/industry-educators-build-in-roads-to-stem-success

Charette, Robert N. “STEM Education Funding in the U.S.—Is More or Less Needed?” IEEE Spectrum. IEEE Spectrum, 8 Jun. 2012. Web. 2 Dec. 2012. http://spectrum.ieee.org/riskfactor/at-work/education/stem-education-in-the-us-is-more-or-less-needed

Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy. Expanding Underrepresented Minority Participation: America’s Science and Technology Talent at the Crossroads. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2011. Web. 2 Dec. 2012. http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12984&page=R1

Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy. Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2007. Web. 2 Dec. 2012. http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11463&page=R1

Dyssegaard Kallick, David. Immigrant Small Business Owners: A Significant and Growing Part of the Economy. New York: Fiscal Policy Institute, 2012. Web. 2 Dec. 2012. http://www.immigrationresearch-info.org/report/fiscal-policy-institute/immigrant-small-business-owners-significant-and-growing-part-economy

“Global Detroit Study.” Global Detroit. Global Detroit, 11 Aug. 2010. Web. 21 Nov. 2012.

http://www.globaldetroit.com/resources/publications/

Gyawali, Pratistha. “Absurd U.S. Immigration Policies Amount to Economy Sapping Talent Drain.” Forbes. Forbes, 30 Jul. 2012. Web. 2 Dec. 2012. http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/07/30/absurd-u-s-immigration-policies-amount-to-economy-sapping-talent-drain/

Johnson, Randy. “STEM Jobs Act is a Start on Needed Immigration Reform.” Free Enterprise. Free Enterprise, 29 Nov. 2012. Web. 2 Dec. 2012. http://www.freeenterprise.com/immigration/stem-jobs-act-start-needed-immigration-reform

Kurtzleben, Danielle. “Census: Foreign Born Getting STEM Degrees at Higher Rates than Native-Born.” US News and World Report. US News and World Report, 17 Nov. 2011. Web. 2 Dec. 2012. http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/11/17/census-foreign-born-getting-stem-degrees-at-higher-rates-than-native-born

Mackie, Calvin. “State of Emergency: The Ominous U.S. Crisis in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education and Training.” Teachers of Color. Teachers of Color, 16 Nov. 2009. Web. 2 Dec. 2012. http://www.teachersofcolor.com/2009/11/state-of-emergencythe-ominous-us-crisis-in-science-technology-engineering-and-mathematics-stem-education-and-training/

National School Foundation Association. National School Foundation Association, n.d. Web. 2 Dec 2012. http://www.schoolfoundations.org/

Office of the Press Secretary. “President Obama Launches ‘Educate to Innovate’ Campaign for Excellence in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (Stem) Education”. White House. White House, 23 Nov. 2009. Web. 2 Dec 2012. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/president-obama-launches-educate-innovate-campaign-excellence-science-technology-en

“Open for Business: How Immigrants Are Driving Small Business Creation in the United States.” Partnership for a New American Economy. Partnership for a New American Economy, Aug. 2012. Web. 2 Dec. 2012. http://www.renewoureconomy.org/open-for-business

Partnership for a New American Economy. “On Passage of the STEM Jobs Act in the U.S. House of Representatives.” Mike Bloomberg. Mike Bloomberg, 30 Nov. 2012. Web. 2 Dec. 2012. http://www.mikebloomberg.com/index.cfm?objectid=5276B698-C29C-7CA2-F34E18030A20A23D

Project Lead the Way. Project Lead the Way, n.d. Web. 2 Dec. 2012. http://www.pltw.org/

“Skills Gap in U.S. Manufacturing Is Less Pervasive Than Many Believe.” The Boston Consulting Group. The Boston Consulting Group, 15 Oct. 2012. Web. 2 Dec. 2012. http://www.bcg.com/media/PressReleaseDetails.aspx?id=tcm:12-118945

“STEM: Facts and Figures about the State of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Education.” WRAL Tech Wire. WRAL Tech Wire, 26 Apr. 2010. Web. 2 Dec. 2012. http://wraltechwire.com/business/tech_wire/news/blogpost/7485144/

From"The Christian Science Moniter": Fiscal Cliff 101

2012-11-25T08:59:00.001-05:00

'Fiscal cliff' 101: 5 basic questions answered - That seems like a lot of things to happen at once. Where did it all come from? - CSMonitor.com

Welcoming Michigan Initiative: Immigrant Impact

2012-11-24T22:33:00.001-05:00

Published in August 2010, the Global Detroit Study provides evidence on the significant impact immigrants have on Michigan’s economy and how we can keep growing our immigrant population. Reviewing the study on the heels of the presidential election, I couldn’t help but be reminded of the popular catchphrase that I heard so much during the campaigns: “We are a nation of immigrants”. In the case of our chugging national economic situation, “we are a nation of immigrants that needs immigrants”—especially in southeast Michigan.

The study’s “Michigan Immigrants Fact Sheet” is a great set of talking points for anyone looking to make the case for immigrants on an economic, rather than altruistic, basis:

Between ’96 and ’07, Michigan’s foreign-born were more than three times as likely as US-born residents to start new businesses.
Between ’90 and ’05, Michigan’s foreign-born were six times as likely as US-born residents to start a high-tech firm.
If all illegal immigrants were removed from Michigan, the state would lose $3.8 billion in economic activity, $1.7 billion in gross state product, and approximately 20,339 jobs.
In ’05, Arab-American employment accounted for $7.7 billion in total earnings in the four counties of the Detroit metropolitan area, generating an estimated $554 million in state tax revenue.
In Michigan, as of 2009, 86.6% of children with immigrant parents were considered “English proficient”.

But, sadly, despite these well foot-noted, factual figures, I can hear the responses of those who are at least quasi anti-immigrant, “Yeah, they create businesses, and now Dearborn looks like the Middle East. The Mexicans are taking our jobs. Immigrants come here, and now forms have to be written in three languages.” In some cases, the triggers are easy to spot: different dress, different language, different alphabet, and different religion. It’s not enough that a once empty storefront is now an active business or a vacant house is now owned. The business or the house is foreign-owned because the American who owns it looks and speaks…differently. Some will say it’s about losing our national identity, but that’s a red herring. Is an American any less American if his skin color is brown or her birthplace is another country? Remember, “We’re a country of immigrants”—mostly. (American Indians have the market on being original residents).

The end result of this kind of mistrust is a divided community: US-born residents, as I’ve previously written, tend to isolate or move away. Of course, immigrant residents tend to insulate within their immigrant communities. There is some logic to this: Veteran immigrants assist new immigrants to navigate the new country. Veteran immigrants speak the same language. Immigrant communities insure the continuation of cultural traditions from the home country, and, no doubt, there is significantly less judgment. (Ah, yes, those last two items, the preservation of cultural traditions and the fear of judgment, are common ground in both the US-born and immigrant communities).

In an effort to integrate divided communities and create a more welcoming state for immigrants, the Global Detroit Study recommended and is implementing the Welcoming Michigan initiative, a part of the Welcoming America initiative. Piloted in four communities, Sterling Heights, Hamtramck, the Chadsey-Condon neighborhood in southwest Detroit, and Hartford in west Michigan, the idea is pretty simple: conduct outreach events that bring immigrants and US-born together. The events range from roundtable conversations to ethnic festivals to neighborhood clean up events to cooking classes. All events have the same goal: get US-born and foreign-born together, in the same space, so that they can develop new perceptions based on first person interactions, rather than on fear-generated rumors and stereotypes.

While I support this grassroots approach, I’m also skeptical. The attitudes I encounter seem intractable. There is a willingness to believe lies if they support what one already believes and a willingness to dismiss truth if it is contrary to what one already believes. (Case in point: Birthers). Yet, I see no other way of moving our communities forward. Those who are open-minded will be the first to attend the Welcoming Michigan events. For those who have no interest in changing their minds about immigrants, cultural exchanges will not be enticing. Yet, those first participants will, hopefully, recruit others, and those others will recruit others and so on. The process of integrating mindsets is a marathon, not a sprint.

Though, after 200 years, one would think we could have crawled past the finish line by now.

(On a side note: In addition to its focus on cultural exchanges of food, music, and dialogue, the Welcoming Michigan initiative might consider entrepreneurial events in which successful foreign-born entrepreneurs are partnered with would-be US-born entrepreneurs to provide insight and coaching. If a US-born resident is feeling shut out of his own community, one potential way for him to reconnect is through business ownership).

Sources:

“Global Detroit Study.” Global Detroit. Global Detroit, 11 Aug. 2010. Web. 21 Nov. 2012.

http://www.globaldetroit.com/resources/publications/

Mathis, Jo. “Plan for Detroit: Immigrants Bring Money.” The Bridge. The Center for Michigan, 11 Oct. 2011. Web. 24 Nov. 2012.

http://bridgemi.com/2011/10/plan-for-detroit-immigrants-bring-money/

“Michigan Immigrants Fact Sheet.” Welcoming Michigan. Welcoming Michigan, n.d. Web. 24 Nov. 2012.

http://welcomingmichigan.org/sites/default/files/WelcomingMichiganImmigrantFactSheet.pdf

Takers

2012-11-18T22:29:00.000-05:00

If the information coming out of the Census Bureau isn’t convincing, the racial voting statistics from the presidential election make the issue unavoidable: If the GOP is going to win the presidency in the future, it needs to attract more minority voters—especially Hispanics. The question is how does a party which benefits from exclusionary principles become inclusive without losing its exclusivity?

The GOP as an exclusive party may be easier to understand if it is contrasted against its main rivalry, the Democratic Party. The Democrats believe in government leveling the playing field, so they support programs that benefit low-income people and minorities. It's the principle of inclusion: If one does well, all do well. I know that can sound a bit Pollyanna-ish, but, for the sake of brevity, I think it works. On the other hand, Republicans believe that the playing field starts out level for everyone--whether white, poor, minority, or rich. Therefore, everyone should succeed solely on their own merits. Republicans see themselves as, in a word, earners. The Democrats are takers or supporters of takers. It’s the exclusionary principle of zero-sum: If others win, it’s at our expense.

Nowhere is this idea better illustrated than in Mitt Romney's own words:

There are 47%...who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims…who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing…And they will vote for this president no matter what….I’ll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives (Romney).

He is describing the antithesis of the Republican Party: "victims", "entitled", lack of "personal responsibility". Though he never says "low-income" or "poor", there is no doubt that those are the people he is describing: Takers are low-income people who receive government benefits. (Side note: The 47% is more like 50%, and, for the most part, they are low-income working families and seniors who are benefiting from the tax code just as the 1% do (Pugh)).

It's not only the poor who are takers; minorities are takers as well. During election night coverage, Bill O’Reilly, host of Fox News’ The O’Reilly Factor, elaborated on Romney’s point about the 47%:

It’s a changing country. The demographics are changing. It’s not a traditional America anymore. And there are 50% of the voting public who want stuff. They want things, and who’s going to give them things? President Obama. He knows it, and he ran on it. And, whereby, 20 years ago, President Obama would’ve been roundly defeated by an establishment candidate like Mitt Romney, the white establishment is now the minority. And the voters, many of them, feel that this economic system is stacked against them, and they want stuff. You’re gonna see a tremendous Hispanic vote for President Obama, overwhelming black vote for President Obama. And women will probably break President Obama’s way. People feel that they are entitled to things, and which candidate between the two is going to give them things (O’Reilly)?

O’Reilly doesn’t exactly make clear what things women, blacks, and Hispanics will want, but he doesn’t have to. Anyone watching the Republican Party knows: abortions, government benefits, and green cards. The words may be harsh, but they are honest and generally believed by Republicans: Minorities are takers.

In another example of this minorities-as-takers thinking, right-wing news outlets have reported with disdain on the United States Department of Agriculture's "Reaching Low-Income Hispanics with Nutrition Assistance" program which is an offshoot of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Started under President George W. Bush, the program is designed to educate legal Mexican immigrants to the United States about food benefits for which they qualify. Republican Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama is spearheading an effort to overhaul SNAP and says, "An immigration policy should seek to bring people to the United States who will be able to function independently without government subsidies" (May).

Disturbing as it is, the Republican view that 50% of the American populace is made up of low-income people and minorities who suck off the teat of society and contribute nothing back is exactly what makes the party exclusive…and losing. (Never mind that some of those 50% count themselves as Republicans). The party will have to disentangle “the taker” from minorities which means distancing itself from a tool which, in recent years, has worked well: white fear.

Recently, Chris Hayes, MSNBC host of Up with Chris Hayes claimed that racism is a Republican, not a Democratic, characteristic, and he was proven wrong. Results from the 2008 American National Election Study show that the percentage of racists in both parties is about the same (Sides and Tabarrok). Yet, Hayes’ comment is not without a kernel of truth: “Appealing to white resentment of minorities is an important part of the Republican brand in a way it’s not for Democrats, even if plenty of racists still inhabit the Democratic Party” (Drum “No, Republicans”). Even inside the Republican Party, this bigotry is acknowledged. Journalist and conservative Bernie Goldberg told Bill O'Reilly, "There is a strain of bigotry...running through conservative America" (Drum “Bernie”).

White fear is no longer useful, though. Mitt Romney took 59% of the white vote to little effect (“Race”). It’s time for the Grand Old Party to highlight its sameness with the Other. Texas’ first Latino senator, Ted Cruz, believes the Republican Party can win over Hispanics by appealing to them as a hard-working, prideful lot who are intimately tied to their religions: “[Hispanics] have conservative values. Hispanics don’t want to be on the dole” (Lizza 55). Generally, the GOP’s traditional social values (anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage) align with those of black and Hispanic ethnic groups. Indeed, if the 2008 California referendum on gay marriage is any indication, this approach could work quite well.

While it would be refreshing to see minorities far more evenly distributed among the parties, the idea of the rise of another “moral majority” (remember the explanations for Bush’s reelection in 2004?) is frightening. Yet, with this last election’s overwhelming support for gay marriage and ousting of Republican men saying ridiculous things about rape, it’s not clear that gays and pro-choicers are scary enough “takers”. But, then, there are always low-income people: Those who would seek to manipulate the tax system just so they can pay for groceries and rent.

Sources:

“2008 Time Series Study.” The American National Election Studies (ANES). ANES. ANES, 11 May 2009. Web. 18 Nov. 2012. http://www.electionstudies.org/studypages/2008prepost/2008prepost.htm

Drum, Kevin. “Bernie Goldberg on Conservative Bigotry.” Mother Jones. Mother Jones, 08 Feb. 2012. Web. 18 Nov. 2012. http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/02/bernie-goldberg-conservative-bigotry

Drum, Kevin. “No, Republicans Don’t Have a Lock on Racism, but…” Mother Jones. Mother Jones, 22 Aug. 2012. Web. 18 Nov. 2012. http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/08/no-republicans-dont-have-lock-racism

Joe. “A Racially Polarized Country: White Men Lose One.” Racism Review. Racism Review, 08 Nov. 2012. Web. 18 Nov. 2012. http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2012/11/08/a-racially-polarized-country-white-men-lose-one/

Joe. “White Voters Overwhelmingly for Romney: No Post-Racial America.” Racism Review. Racism Review, 04 Nov. 2012. Web. 18 Nov. 2012. http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2012/11/04/white-voters-overwhelmingly-for-romney-no-post-racial-america/

Lizza, Ryan. “The Party Next Time.” The New Yorker. 19 Nov. 2012: 50-57. Print.

May, Caroline. “USDA Partnering with Mexico to Boost Food Stamp Participation.” The Daily Caller. The Daily Caller, 19 Jul 2012. Web. 18 Nov. 2012. http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/19/usda-partnering-with-mexico-to-boost-food-stamp-participation/

O’Reilly, Bill. “It’s Not a Traditional America Anymore.” YouTube. YouTube, 6 Nov. 2012. Web. 18 Nov. 2012. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFJH8mY-UyI

Pugh, Tony. “Romney’s ’47 Percent’—Here’s Who’s Actually Not Paying Federal Taxes and Why.” McClatchy. McClatchy. 18 Sept. 2012. Web. 18 Nov. 2012. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/09/18/168914/romneys-47-percent-heres-whos.html

“Race and Results.” CNN. CNN, 15 Nov. 2012. Web. 18 Nov. 2012. http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/race/president#exit-polls

Roberts, Sam. “Projections Put Whites in Minority in US by 2050.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 17 Dec. 2009. Web. 18 Nov. 2012. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/18/us/18census.html?_r=0

Romney, Mitt. “Mitt Romney’s ‘47 Percent’ Comments.” YouTube. YouTube. 18 Sept. 2012. Web. 18 Nov. 2012. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2gvY2wqI7M

Sides, John. “Are Racists Only in One Political Party?” The Monkey Cage. The MonkeyCage, 19 Aug. 2012. Web. 18 Nov. 2012. http://themonkeycage.org/blog/2012/08/19/are-racists-only-in-one-political-party/

Tabarrok, Alex. “Racism by Political Party.” Marginal Revolution. Marginal Revolution, 19 Aug. 2012. Web. 18 Nov. 2012. http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2012/08/racism-by-political-party.html

Vick, Karl and Ashley Surdin. “Most of California’s Black Voters Backed Gay Marriage Ban.” Washington Post. The Washington Post, 07 Nov. 2008. Web. 18 Nov. 2012. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/06/AR2008110603880.html

Shopping for an Identity: Color Options

2012-11-11T12:10:00.002-05:00

Last weekend, I went birthday gift shopping for a four year old girl. I had decided that this was the perfect opportunity for me to purchase those cool, pink Legos. Yes, until writing this post, I liked those pink Legos. It was refreshing to add pinks and purples to the existing primary color landscape. I especially liked the set titled “Olivia’s Invention Workshop” which prominently displays a chalkboard with mathematical calculations scribbled on it. It screamed: Smart and feminine in what is still very much a man’s world.

As I re-read my first draft of this post, though, I got stuck on the word “feminine” in the statement above. Everything else I had written in the post was supposed to suggest that pink did not have to be a girl’s color, but, clearly, I had bought into it as such. “Olivia’s Invention Workshop” was feminine because the color of the packaging was pink.

In 2007, a study concluded that adult women seemed to favor pink. It was theorized that this preference might be genetically built in, so our women gatherer ancestors could easily spot colorful fruits (Choi). In 2011, other researchers studied babies and found that girls’ preference for pink and boys’ dislike of it do not begin until about age 2 ½ (Jarrett). Whether nature, nurture, or both, there is no doubt that in 2012 America, a boy swinging a purple bat will be teased. Boys come to know, almost instinctually, that pink is a “girl’s” color because they only ever see it in two places: the Crayola box and girls clothing (Ralph Lauren notwithstanding).

Why can’t we open up the entire color palette to both boys and girls? Why is it that Lego decided whole sets of pink and purple bricks marketed in pink boxes were better than just adding some pink and purple bricks to existing sets? Do we need the so-called girls’ version of a baseball bat? Why can’t baseball bats just have some colorful designs in a variety of colors—where pink and blue co-exist on the same bat? For toy manufacturers, dividing the genders along color lines is more lucrative (Maglaty). After all, the family with a boy and a girl will need a blue bat and a pink bat, instead of one colorful bat. But, as a society, we are limiting our boys’ imaginations when we put everything that is supposed to be interesting to them in black, brown, green, and blue. And, so long as we are separating gender by color, then girls are limited by perception. After all, when you head into a business meeting do you put on the pink suit or the blue one?

Of course, color combinations extend beyond gender. As I perused the Legos, thinking I had it right with the boyish toy in the girlish color, I realized that I’d have to select an ethnicity! At first I only saw the brown-black skin-hair combination. But the birthday girl is not visually African-American. Was it racist to think that I shouldn’t purchase the brown-black option for a girl who appears white?

Ah, but, then I saw the white-blonde skin-hair option and quickly realized that my thoughts about the brown-black option were not racist. It was just that neither of these skin-hair combinations looked like the birthday girl. In truth, I don’t know what the four year old’s ethnicity is, but her mom appeared, possibly, Hispanic.

Probably, at this point, I should have moved on to a different gift idea. But isn’t the purpose of these ethnic options not only to see our own image represented and thus know we belong, but also to see the other images as belonging as well? If that was true, then it would make sense to select one of these two options. But is this too much of a social statement to make at a four-year old’s birthday party? Ugh!

What’s this? I missed one: white-brown! There she was; the four-year old’s image on a box of pink Legos! Mission accomplished…sort of.

In all my analysis over gender and ethnicity, I barely considered price and fit. Was this Lego set worth the cost? Were Legos a good gift for this little girl that I knew almost nothing about? How fun is it, really, to build a Lego room—invention workshop or not? It’s so hard for little, four-year old hands to snap the invention tools into those clips that Lego passes for hands! This mental debate went quickly: I left the Lego aisle and headed for that mostly gender- and ethnicity-neutral safety zone: board games.

Sources:

Choi, Charles Q. “Women Hardwired to Like Pink, Study Suggests.” LiveScience. LiveScience, 20 Aug. 2007. Web. 11 Nov. 2012. http://www.livescience.com/1820-women-hardwired-pink-study-suggests.html

Jarrett, Christian. “At What Age Do Girls Prefer Pink?” The British Psychological Society Research Digest. BPS Research Digest, 5 Sept. 2011. Web. 11 Nov. 2012. http://bps-research-digest.blogspot.com/2011/09/at-what-age-do-girls-prefer-pink.html

Maglaty, Jeanne. “When Did Girls Start Wearing Pink?” Smithsonian. Smithsonian, 8 Apr. 2011. Web. 10 Nov. 2012. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/When-Did-Girls-Start-Wearing-Pink.html?c=y&page=2

Fair Play

2012-11-04T16:37:00.000-05:00

In my area, when houses go up for sale, there are those neighbors who are pretty honest about wanting whites to move in. And there are those who say skin color doesn’t matter, so long as they keep up the lawn. But, “keeping up the lawn” is just another way of saying, “we’ve seen the blighted, inner-city, and we don’t want that or the people who represent it in our neighborhood”. This is the racism that is so much a part of our suburbanite composition that we don’t notice it for what it is—institutionalized, through decades of zoning codes, codes of ethics, racial covenants, redlining and later, after the Fair Housing Act of 1968, through the cowardice of people in power and the machine of bureaucracy (Hannah-Jones).

These racist attitudes are not unique. Across the country, decades of institutionalized racism have perpetuated the myth of the white bastion. In her article “Living Apart: How the Government Betrayed a Landmark Civil Rights Law”, Nikole Hannah-Jones asserts that the Fair Housing Act was supposed to roll back the instruments of institutionalization and “affirmatively further” housing integration, but, as anyone anywhere in the country can see, this did not happen. Cities are geographically divided along racial/ethnic and income lines. And in many white neighborhoods, a battle exists in the hearts and minds of residents who want to keep their neighborhoods white at the expense of insuring equal opportunities for the Other.

In a related article, “Soft on Segregation: How the Feds Failed to Integrate Westchester County”, Hannah-Jones analyzes the case and history of Westchester County, NY where this battle is playing out in the legal system. Sued in 2006 for falsely claiming on their HUD funding applications that they had complied with the Fair Housing Act, the county fought back and lost. According to the provisions of the 2009 settlement, the county is required, over seven years, to build 750 affordable housing units in its “whitest jurisdictions” and to market that housing to blacks and Latinos. So unpopular was this settlement that the County Executive who agreed to it lost his re-election bid to his competitor, Rob Astorino, whose campaign rested primarily on residents’ anger over the settlement. Nearly four years after the settlement, Westchester remains non-compliant with its provisions.

Astorino argued that “the issue is about class, not race. ‘I would love to live in Chappaqua next to the Clintons or Governor Cuomo, but I don’t have the economic means to do it’” (Hannah-Jones, “Soft on Segregation”). While his county remains in violation of the Fair Housing Act, Astorino cannot admit that its housing development strategies are racist. However, his assertion that classism is more defensible than racism is ludicrous. As Hannah-Jones notes, “the connection between race and class can be nearly inextricable, particularly when certain zoning requirements—called ‘exclusionary zoning’ by fair-housing advocates—are present.”

Over the years, the white, homogenous-leaning suburbanites I have spoken with think that success is a matter of perseverance. They think that, were they themselves born into similar circumstances as those in poor, black neighborhoods, they would work hard and climb out of poverty to the position they are in today. They want to continue reaping the benefits of institutionalized racism, but they don’t want to admit that it is what has allowed them to live in the safe and well-tended neighborhoods they don’t want to share with the Other: “More than 20 years of research has implicated residential segregation in virtually every aspect of racial inequality, from higher unemployment rates for African Americans, to poorer health care, to elevated infant mortality rates and, most of all, to inferior schools” (Hannah-Jones, "Living Apart").

Westchester and my own neighborhood, these are the norm, but there is always an exception: Montgomery County, Maryland. In 1974, against much resistance and after years of hurdles, Montgomery initiated its own affirmative housing integration plan. Today, “it remains one of the nation’s richest counties, yet segregation has fallen well below the national average” (Hannah-Jones, “Living Apart”). Why did they do this when no other county would? Joyce Siegel, the county housing commissioner at that time, said, “’We saw the segregation. It was a fairness issue—that one part of the county wasn’t going to have more affordable housing than another. We had to be fair’” (Hannah-Jones, “Living Apart”).

Fair. It’s the rule we learn from the time we’re old enough to grab the other kid’s toy. Don’t cheat. Everybody gets a turn, then we all win.

Sources

Hannah-Jones, Nikole. “Living Apart: How the Government Betrayed a Landmark Civil Rights Law.” ProPublica. ProPublica, 29 Oct. 2012. Web. 3 Nov. 2012. http://www.propublica.org/article/living-apart-how-the-government-betrayed-a-landmark-civil-rights-law

Hannah-Jones, Nikole. “Soft on Segregation: How the Feds Failed to Integrate Westchester County.” ProPublica. ProPublica, 2 Nov. 2012. Web. 3 Nov. 2012. http://www.propublica.org/article/soft-on-segregation-how-the-feds-failed-to-integrate-westchester-county

Sugrue, Thomas J. The Origins of the Urban Crisis: Race and Inequality in Postwar Detroit. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 1996. Print.

Symbols of Multiculturalism: Pork, Mosques, and Fear

2012-10-29T00:26:00.000-04:00

Last month, journalist Daniel Denvir wrote a thoughtful analysis of the city of Dearborn, Michigan as a symbol of multiculturalism, a place where Arabs and Muslims have found acceptance; where different cultural traditions share the same space; and where, through entrepreneurship, Arab-Americans have revitalized decaying parts of the city. As a response to those extremists whose celebrity was built on the myth that Dearborn is under Sharia law, his article is a priceless rebuke: "The neon signage on the enormous buildings housing the Pantheon Club and BT's Executive Club [strip clubs] are among the city's most conspicuous landmarks....Then there's the matter of the Dearborn Sausage Company, churning out its famous pork products across the street from a Southend mosque".

Dearborn’s image as a multicultural city is a point of pride for many of its residents. Yet, for others, that multiculturalism feels like an encroachment, not a gift. Like most residents, I have come to understand the coded, and not-so-coded, language of neighbors who prefer to insulate from, rather than associate with, Arab-Americans and Muslims. They won’t visit the neighborhood park or swim at the local pool; some want to relocate to cities that symbolize white homogeneity. For these residents, cultural differences mean values differences. As it stands, extremists, the Debbie Schlussels and Terry Joneses of the world, are the only ones reflecting these fears, so it is their self-affirming vitriol that stands-in for thoughtful discourse (Denvir).

But, thoughtful discourse isn't really what we need—yet—talking only works if someone opens the proverbial door. What we need right now is to get people opening their doors. So, those who embrace multiculturalism will need to reach out to those who do not. Not in a formal, I-love-multiculturalism button-wearing kind of way. No, this is an organic process. It’s asking that friend to dine in East Dearborn, to visit the Arab American National Museum, to cycle around Levagood Park, or to tour the city’s Art in Public Spaces. It's taking the opportunity and accepting the invitation. This is how residents re-engage with their city; this is how we grow a sense of belonging and association and develop an appreciation for the contributions of all residents. This is how our city becomes more than a symbol of multiculturalism. It becomes a model for multiculturalism.

Sources:

“About Debbie.” Debbie Schlussel. Debbie Schlussel, n.d. Web. 28 Oct. 2012. http://www.debbieschlussel.com/bio/

Denvir, Daniel. “Dearborn: Where Americans Come to Hate Muslims.” The Atlantic Cities. The AtlanticCities, 25 Sept. 2012. Web. 27 Oct. 2012. http://www.theatlanticcities.com/neighborhoods/2012/09/dearborn-where-americans-come-hate-muslims/3360/

Warikoo, Niraj. “Quran-Burning Florida Pastor Terry Jones Speaks Near a Dearborn High School about What He Says Is Bullying by Muslim Students.” Detroit Free Press. Detroit Free Press, 11 Oct. 2012. Web. 28 Oct. 2012. http://www.freep.com/article/20121011/NEWS02/310110180/Quran-burning-Florida-pastor-Terry-Jones-speaks-near-a-Dearborn-high-school-about-what-he-says-is-bullying-by-Muslim-students

Shell Game: Women’s Health at the Expense of Religious Freedom?

2012-10-21T14:44:00.001-04:00

On Saturday, October 20^th, across the country, the Nationwide Rally for Religious Freedom (a.k.a. Stand Up for Religious Freedom) organized another round of rallies protesting Obamacare (a.k.a. the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) as an infringement on a religious institution’s right to practice its religion.

Per a recommendation by the Institute of Medicine, Obamacare requires employers, including religious institutions, to provide contraception services on their insurance plans. For churches and other houses of worship, the law provides an accommodation which requires the insurance company, rather than the employer, to pay for contraception (Sonfield). According to the Stand Up for Religious Freedom movement, this accommodation is just a “shell-game” whereby insurance companies will pay for such contraceptives with the money paid to them by religious institutions.

But if the accommodation is a shell game, so is the conviction that Obamacare represents an assault on religious freedom. The conflict over contraception is not a case of the government imposing some secular ideology on religion. Rather it is the offshoot of the involvement of religion in the secular economy. To fulfill its mission, religion has opted to take part in secular society through the establishment of hospitals, schools, churches, and other businesses. Through these businesses, religion pursues its mission of proselytizing, healing, serving those in need, and delivering its doctrine to the masses. Both secular society and religions benefit from these businesses, but these institutions are businesses. As such, they must follow applicable tax, finance, and employment laws and regulations. Despite an anti-contraceptive doctrine, religious institutions are bound to an economic reality that ties employment to health care and individual health care to the whole society.

Entirely exempting religious institutions would ignore the many societal and economic benefits of making contraception accessible, including minimizing the risk of unintended pregnancies, appropriately spacing pregnancies, timely pre-natal and infant care, and promoting women’s educational and financial success (Sonfield). All of these benefits have broader implications for American society as a whole.

If the shells are taken off the table, the legitimate issues are revealed: Women’s health and women’s impact on society and the economy. It is women who must shoulder the emotional and economic responsibilities of an unintended pregnancy, and, if they falter, society must pick up the slack. Despite these realities, religionists speak only of the value of the embryo, the sanctity of marriage, and the freedom of religion (Tollefsen). All the while, beneath these shells, lies the tangible life of the woman.

Sources

“About the Institute.” Institute of Medicine of the National Academies. Institute of Medicine, n.d. Web. 21 Oct. 2012. http://www.iom.edu/About-IOM.aspx

“About President Obama’s HHS Mandate.” Stand Up for Religious Freedom. Stand Up for Religious Freedom, n.d. Web. 20 Oct. 2012. http://standupforreligiousfreedom.com/mandate/

Draper, Electa. “Catholic Church Defends Birth-Control Stance Amid Strong Opposition.” Denver Post. Denver Post, 20 May 2012. Web. 20 Oct. 2012. http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_20664414

“Health Care Law Gives Women Control Over Their Care, Offers Free Preventive Services to 47 Million Women.” U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 31 Jul. 2012. Web. 21 Oct. 2012. http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2012pres/07/20120731a.html

Sonfield, Adam. “The Religious Exemption to Mandated Insurance Coverage of Contraception.” American Medical Association Journal of Ethics Virtual Mentor. American Medical Association, 14.2 (Feb. 2012). Web. 21 Oct. 2012. http://virtualmentor.ama-assn.org/2012/02/pfor1-1202.html

Tollefsen, Christopher. “Contraception and Catholicism.” National Review Online. National Review, 16 Feb. 2012. Web. 20 Oct. 2012. http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/291220/contraception-and-catholicism-christopher-tollefsen

Reframing the Fear Narrative

2012-10-14T09:03:00.000-04:00

A few weeks ago, in response to the "Innocence of Muslims" movie trailer, several world leaders called on the United Nations to enact anti-blasphemy laws. These leaders had an opportunity to deflate the extremist narrative, but, instead, they became a party to it.

In asking for such laws, these leaders (Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi, Yemeni President Abd Rabbo Mansour Hadi, Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari, and Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, to name a few) justified the extremist belief that Muslims need others to behave or they themselves will not (a.k.a. Muslims are innately violent). These leaders missed the opportunity to highlight the fact that, of the 1.6 billion Muslims on the planet, only tens of thousands demonstrated. Even one million Muslims demonstrating is only .000625 or 0% of the total, global Muslim population. Put another way: Instead of protesting, almost every Muslim on the planet stayed home, went to work, took the kids to school, went to dinner, read a book, went to Mosque, met friends for coffee, grocery shopped, cleaned the house, prayed, or did some other activity that was not demonstrating against this movie.

Instead of suggesting that Muslims need protection from hate speech, world leaders should have pointed out that radical speech begets radical responses. Those who preach hate are counting on radicals to act. As Steve Coll wrote in the October 1 issue of The New Yorker, some of these protests were organized by “fringe political parties and radical activists”. Such protests “do not typically attract even a large minority of the local faithful”. These protesters were “shock troops, comparable to Europe’s skinheads or anarchists”.

Even in their call to temper freedom of expression through social responsibility, world leaders only helped emphasize the polarizing West-versus-Islam narrative. Freedom of expression is not the problem, and social responsibility is not the answer. Extremists do not respond to laws, logic, or social responsibility. These things are the antithesis of their mission. Mark Basseley Youssef (a.k.a. Sam Bacile) is a US citizen who made a movie and put it on YouTube, but he is not representative of Western ideals. He’s an anti-Muslim radical.

Then there is the video itself. World leaders and the media repeatedly and primarily describe the video as portraying the Prophet Muhammad as a war-mongering pedophile, womanizer, and fraud. While that description of the video’s message is accurate, the video should be just as repeatedly and primarily described as haphazard, unintelligible, low-budget, and soft-porn. Rather than a call to arms, this video is an embarrassment, a joke, not on Muslims or supporters of tolerance but on anti-Muslim radicals. Is this the best propaganda they could produce? (Will those actors ever find work outside of the porn industry?) Considering nearly 100% of Muslims did not protest the video, why can’t world leaders and the media acknowledge that this video is a message by extremists, for extremists. The rest of the world is too busy living to take this thing seriously.

All too often, radicals control the narrative. Whatever is the most shocking grabs the most headlines. Whoever screams the loudest gets heard. The rest of the world barely has time to view a movie trailer on YouTube, much less stop their lives to go protest about it. It is for world leaders, those with a built-in pulpit, to create an alternative narrative from that of the radicals. They have to present, repeatedly, and in many forums, the narrative of reason and logic. Doing so does not minimize the impact of radical violence and hate speech, but it puts it in the proper perspective. Rather than such actions consuming the entire frame, they should be viewed for what they are: one small part of the entire picture.

Sources:
“Algeria at UN: Limit Free Speech, Protect Islam.” NPR. National Public Radio, 29 Sept. 2012. Web. 9 Oct. 2012. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=162013363
Bacile, Sam. “Muhammad Movie Trailer.” YouTube. YouTube, 2 Jul. 2012. Web. 13 Oct. 2012. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAiOEV0v2RM
Coll, Steve. “Days of Rage.” The New Yorker 1 Oct. 2012: 21-22. Print.
Craig, Iona and Sara Lynch. “Violence Tied to Anti-Islam Film Rises Across the Middle East.” Detroit Free Press. Detroit Free Press, 17 Sept. 2012. Web. 13 Oct. 2012. http://www.freep.com/article/20120914/NEWS07/309140093
Kaleem, Jaweed. “At the United Nations, Organization of Islamic Cooperation Calls for Ban on Insulting Prophet Muhammad.” The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 30 Sept. 2012. Web. 9 Oct. 2012. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/30/united-nations-organization-of-islamic-cooperation_n_1927166.html
“Man Behind Anti-Muslim Film to Appear in Court.” Associated Press. Associated Press, 10 Oct. 2012. Web. 11 Oct. 2012. http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_289563/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=dzNLdSbg
“Pakistanis Protest Against Anti-Islam Film.” NPR. National Public Radio, 29 Sept. 2012. Web. 11 Oct. 2012. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=162003958
“The Future of the Global Muslim Population: Projects for 2010 – 2030.” Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. Pew Research Center, 27 Jan. 2011. Web. 9 Oct. 2012. http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1872/muslim-population-projections-worldwide-fast-growth
“The Worldwide Protests Against Anti-Islam film Innocence of Muslims: By the Numbers.” The Week. The Week, 17 Sept. 2012. Web. 13 Oct. 2012. http://theweek.com/article/index/233439/the-worldwide-protests-against-anti-islam-film-innocence-of-muslims-by-the-numbers