El Colegio Electoral

If you think the Electoral College system is complicated, try explaining it to a group of foreigners. In Spanish.

Yeah.

You know, though, I learned an awful lot about why we have the electoral college (to equalize voter turnout discrepancies, give smaller states more power, and preserve the federal character of our nation, to name a few reasons), why maybe we shouldn't have the electoral system (it gives inordinate power to a small handful of "swing" states; it occasionally nullifies the popular vote; it discourages voter turnout in solidly "red" or "blue" states, etc.) and the history of the whole bizarre system (the Founding Fathers didn't want the President being able to claim that he had a direct mandate from the people, making him more powerful than the then-indirectly-elected Senate, or the still indirectly-elected Supreme Court, and they didn't want the uneducated masses to be choosing the leader of the entire nation because we are too, well, uneducated; disturbingly, Constitutional Convention delegates from the South favored the system because it allowed southern states to count slaves in the population census that determined their allotted number of electoral votes, but of course denied them the right to choose electors (aka vote). The latter = bogus; the first made sense at the time; and the second maybe still holds water?? okay, okay, sarcasm. Sort of). Thank you to Miss Mary and Wikipedia for the civics lesson.

It was gratifying to see how interested the our Mujeres Unidas were in the whole process, given that none of them could vote in this past election (still waiting on visas, permanent residency, and/or citizenship. Sigh). They wanted to know what the new president's views on immigration would be (hard to say, as he wasn't very forthcoming on policy specifics during the campaign--I'm hoping he'll be pro-immigration reform, like John McCain was before campaign strategy made his rhetoric migrate more towards the reactionary immigration policy of his base). They wanted to know why the Republican symbol is an elephant when Republican starts with an "R," not an "E" (good question; here's the answer). They had questions about what happens if electors vote against the state's popular vote (it's happened before, but most states have a slate of electors for both parties, and the slate belonging to whichever party's candidate wins in that state is the one that then casts all that state's electoral votes on December 15th. Nebraska and Maine, however, split their votes proportionally instead of using a winner-take-all system). They wanted to know if voting is obligatory--which might seem like an odd question, but it is in other countries such as Peru, where you are fined for not voting. I had an interesting conversation with my Peruvian friend/coworker Rosa about how, for three years, she toiled as an activist working to restore democracy during the Fujimori dictatorship, but she now no longer votes because she doesn't believe in being forced to make a choice, one way or the other (her family in Peru pays her fines for her). Another reason she disagrees with mandatory voting: it is a huge burden for poor, rural citizens who sometimes live up to five or six hours distant from their polling places and must lose a day's or more wages just to obey the law. Oh, and if you thought early voting lines were bad here, just imagine the traffic jams when EVERYONE has to get to the polls instead of just 30 or 40 percent of the population. Gives new meaning to the term "civic duty," no?

But seriously--what would it look like if voting was mandatory here? I believe that voting is a vital part of ensuring that our democratic republic functions as it's supposed to--really, it's the whole basis of our system. And of course, the more people vote, the more our government will serve as an accurate reflection of the people's will (at least in theory; I'm not allowing for shady political maneuvers, Congressional corruption, failed promises, wild misuse of expense accounts, etc.), and that's a good thing. So, again in theory (disregarding traffic jams), it would be great if everyone voted. And that will never happen if we are left to our own devices--apathy, ignorance, logistics, and those pesky other priorities called "work," "family," "health," etc. see to that. But it's a little Orwellian--taking away your free will about whether to exercise your free will--to make it the law of the land that one must vote.

Then I think of my South African friend Craig, who is weeks away from obtaining his citizenship, and how much he wanted to be able to vote in this election. And I think of our SafeSpace homies who, even though they have paid their "debt to society," they are, as ex-felons, ineligible to vote. And then there are folks like my buddy Scottie, who, simple soul that he is, wanted to vote for McCain/Palin because "That Sarah Palin sure is a nice-looking lady," but come Election Day, his registration hadn't come through and he had to cast a provisional vote, which most likely will not count--a vote lost to bureaucratic error.

So no, voting shouldn't be mandatory--but even though it's sometimes a pain to stand in line, and we have a seemingly counterintuitive, Rube Goldberg-ian system of electing our President, every single one of us with the right to register should be out there exercising our civic privilege (since, thanks to the freedoms outlined in our Constitution and Bill of Rights, we have no obligatory "duty" to do so. Sorry, Peru).

Ask Yourself: Who Would Jesus Deport?

WWJD--A New Twist on a (Very) Old Bracelet Acronym.***

One of my friends here is the manager of a fruit farm. He's been in the US for five or six years; he left his family farm in northern Mexico to work here as a migrant laborer when prices for Mexican corn couldn't compete with the low, low cost of subsidized grain imported from the US through NAFTA. He is part of a generation known as "NAFTA kids" who have sought a way to make a living in the US after their small family holdings fell apart in the wake of the trade agreement. The owner of one of the farms he worked on here in Mississippi recognized his experience and talent in agricultural management, taught him English, and hired him on as her foreman. Since then he has become her right-hand man, running the farm and getting involved in the organic food movement. He is a well-respected leader in the local Catholic Spanish-speaking parish, and he has spear-headed several projects aimed at bridging the gap between the immigrant community and the local Mississippian community. Mississippi is his home--his work, his spiritual life, his friends are all here, as is his goddaughter, of whom I am the godmother. If he is deported, to what "home" would he be sent?

Another friend of mine, Mercedes*, belongs to our Mujeres Unidas (Women United) empowerment and support group, as does her mother, Elisbeta*. At 19, Mercedes is the youngest of our participants, and truly represents the "next generation" of Latina immigrant women living in this country. Her mother, in search of a job that paid enough to support her family, brought her and her siblings into the country when Mercedes was about 6 years old. In a recent Mujeres Unidas gathering, Elisbeta told us how she used to send her daughter, who spoke no English at the time, to first grade with classmates who would relentlessly tease her during recess and rub her face in the dirt, yelling epithets she couldn't understand. Each day Mercedes would come home from school in tears, begging her mother to let her move back to Mexico and live with her grandparents, where everyone would speak the same language and no one would taunt her. Elisbeta told us that she wanted her daughter to learn English and to have a better life than she herself could ever hope for, and she couldn't imagine separating her family; but 13 years later, tearing up, she says "me sentí un monstro, un monstro horrible"--"I felt like a monster, a terrible monster"--for continuing to send her precious daughter through this awful gauntlet day after day.
Mercedes grew a thick skin, however, and her language skills developed until they matched the natural aptitude for mathematics, a subject without language, which her elementary teachers had noted in her. By the time she was in high school, she spoke English with no accent; she had proven herself to be a dedicated, intelligent student, graduating with her class and hoping one day to become a doctor. Upon graduating, however, she was not able to apply to any four-year colleges or universities, because she has no Social Security number. She is currently enrolled in community college, unsure whether she will ever be allowed to pursue a higher education in the land of her adolescence and young womanhood.

One more story: my friend Lauren* has been dating her boyfriend, Armando*, for over 2 years. Armando left his family and crossed the border in search of better job prospects--in his home city in Mexico a decent job, one that makes more than the 49 Mexican pesos (or $4.81 USD) daily minimum wage, is extremely hard to come by. He was stopped for a traffic violation--a broken headlight--by local law enforcement and thereafter detained by Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) in an overcrowded jail, where he slept on the hallway floor for several weeks before being sent back to Mexico with a permanent bar on his passport (meaning that he cannot legally return to the US, for any length of time, even on vacation. Ever).
After long, frustrating months of trying to find a stable job making enough money to contribute to his upkeep at his parents' home, he crossed back over the border at the risk of being incarcerated for multiple years. He has been able to find a more reliable stream of work here in the construction industry; but one traffic stop for something as minor as a faulty taillight would mean that he and Lauren will never be able to live together in this, her home country, even if they decide to marry. They would have to live separately, seeing each other only when she could take extended vacation; or she would have to move away from her family, friends, and home to Mexico and hope that they find work, and he would never be able to travel back to the United States with their children to see their American grandparents.
We are used to the question of the government's right to interfere in the bedroom of gay couples; what about mixed-legal status couples? Should a government be able to legislate your right to live with your spouse? As Lauren says: "The current law negates my ability to seek life liberty and the pursuit of happiness in my own country. Something I am supposed to be guaranteed."



So which one would Jesus deport?


I don't pretend to advocate for unequivocal opening of our borders to whomever wishes to come here (although I do believe that state and national borders are human creations which have no bearing on a person's God-given human rights, or his or her status as a human being, not an "illegal" or an "alien")--and I understand the sentiment of those who where born here or who immigrated legally and who wish to see others go through the process legally, to "get in line." But the truth is that our immigration system is severely broken, and for the vast majority of those wishing to come to our country, there is no "line"--no legal way to come to this country in order to put food in their children's bellies, or to work as the seasonal agricultural laborers, meat packing factory workers, or construction workers on which our economy relies**.

Until we achieve comprehensive immigration reform--and even afterwards--it is worth considering the question:

Who would Jesus deport?


*Not her real name.

**For Mexicans and many other Latin Americans, you must have a clean immigration record and you must have a clean immigration record and be the spouse, parent, child, or sibling of an adult U.S. citizen, or the spouse or unmarried child of a lawful permanent resident, who is willing to sponsor you. Even then, the process is long and arduous, and legal technicalities often close the door to those who would otherwise qualify. (Thanks to our immigration specialist Mary for that concise explanation of a complex policy!)

***I borrowed the title of this post from an article my boss wrote for the local paper--she, in turn, borrowed it from someone else In my opinion, it's too good not to pass on.

Dentist Oversight Committee

This is kind of a cheat post, since I basically copied and pasted it, but it makes a lot of sense to me and I think it gives a really memorable, understandable illustration of a controversial subject. It was sent to me by one of my bosom friends, a junior high science teacher in the Chicago Public Schools (and an everyday hero to me!). And given that the Hospitality State is at the bottom of the heap for education, it's definitely relevant to life here in the Mississip'.

"My dentist is great! He sends me reminders so I don't forget
checkups. He uses the latest techniques based on research. He
never hurts me, and I've got all my teeth.

When I ran into him the other day, I was eager to see if he'd
heard about the new state program. I knew he'd think it was great.

"Did you hear about the new state program to measure effectiveness
of dentists with their young patients?" I said.

"No," he said. He didn't seem too thrilled. "How will they do that?"

"It's quite simple," I said. "They will just count the number of
cavities each patient has at age 10, 14, and 18 and average that
to determine a dentist's rating. Dentists will be rated as
excellent, good, average, below average, and unsatisfactory. That
way parents will know
which are the best dentists. The plan will also encourage the less
effective dentists to get better," I said. "Poor dentists who
don't improve could lose their licenses to practice."

"That's terrible," he said.

"What? That's not a good attitude," I said. "Don't you think we
should try to improve children's dental health in this state?"

"Sure I do," he said, "but that's not a fair way to determine who
is practicing good dentistry."

"Why not?" I said. "It makes
perfect sense to me."

"Well, it's so obvious," he said. "Don't you see that dentists
don't all work with the same clientele, and that much depends on
things we can't control? For example, I work in a rural area with
a high percentage of patients from deprived homes, while some of
my colleagues work in upper middle-class neighborhoods. Many of
the parents I work with don't bring their children to see me until
there is some kind of problem, and I don't get to do much
preventive work. Also, many of the parents I serve let their
kids eat way too much candy from an early age,unlike more educated
parents who understand the relationship between sugar
and decay. To top it all off, so many of my
clients have well
water which is untreated and has no fluoride in it. Do you have
any idea how much difference early use of fluoride can make?"

"It sounds like you're making excuses," I said. "I can't believe
that you, my dentist, would be so defensive. After all, you do a
great job, and you needn't fear a little accountability."

"I am not being defensive!" he said. "My best patients are as good
as anyone's, my work is as good as anyone's, but my average cavity
count is going to be higher than a lot of other dentists because I
chose to work where I am
needed most."

"Don't' get touchy," I said.

"Touchy?" he said. His face had turned red, and from the way he
was clenching and unclenching his jaws, I was afraid he was going
to damage his teeth. "Try furious! In a system like this, I will
end up being rated average, below average, or worse. The few
educated patients I have who see these ratings may believe this
so-called rating is an actual measure of my ability and
proficiency as a dentist.

They may leave me, and I'll be left with only the most needy
patients. And my cavity average score will get even worse. On top
of that,how will I attract good dental hygienists and other
excellent dentists to my practice if it is labeled below average?"

"I think you are overreacting," I said. "'Complaining,
excuse-making and stonewalling won't improve dental health'... I
am quoting from a leading member of the DOC ," I noted.

"What's the DOC ?" he
asked.

"It's the Dental Oversight Committee," I said,"a group made up of
mostly lay persons to make sure dentistry in this state gets
improved"

"Spare me," he said, "I can't believe this. Reasonable people
won't buy it," he said hopefully.

The program sounded reasonable to me, so I asked, "How else would
you measure good dentistry?"

"Come watch me work," he said. "Observe my processes."

"That's too complicated, expensive and time- consuming," I said.
"Cavities are the bottom line, and you can't argue with the bottom
line. It's an absolute measure."

"That's what I'm afraid my parents and prospective patients will
think . This can't be happening," he said despairingly.

"Now, now," I said, "don't despair. The state will help you some."

"How?" he asked.

"If you receive a poor rating, they'll send a dentist who is rated
excellent to help straighten you out," I said brightly.

"You mean," he said, "they'll send a dentist with a
wealthy
clientele to show me how to work on severe juvenile dental
problems with which I have probably had much more experience? BIG
HELP!"

"There you go again," I said. "You aren't acting professionally at
all."

"You don't get it," he said. "Doing this would be like grading
schools and teachers on an average score made on a test of
children's progress with no regard to influences outside the
school, the home, the community served and stuff like that. Why
would they do something so unfair to dentists? No one would ever
think of doing that to schools."

I just shook my head sadly, but he had brightened. "I'm going to
write my representatives and senators," he said. "I'll use the
school analogy. Surely they will see the point."

He walked off with that look of hope mixed with fear and
suppressed anger that I, a teacher, see in the mirror so often
lately.

If you don't understand why educators resent the recent federal NO
CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT, this may help. If
you do understand, you'll
enjoy this analogy, which was forwarded by John S. Taylor,
Superintendent of Schools for the Lancaster County , PA, School
District.
Be a friend to a teacher and pass this on."