Category Archives: Political

Homeland Security

Posted on by
Reply

UCSB graduation 2013With Janet Napolitano leaving her job as head of Homeland Security to become president of the UC system, I’ve found myself imagining her transition as metaphor. How great it would be if this move symbolized a rebalancing of priorities, with public education deemed as important as anti-terrorism spending in keeping us secure.

Just a few weeks ago, my daughter graduated from the University of California at Santa Barbara. She began her college career the same day general strikes were held on every UC campus to oppose slashes in public funding and huge tuition hikes. Protesters were angry that the Master Plan, which ensures affordable, excellent education as a linchpin of California’s well-being, had been betrayed. Over the next four years students continued to pay more for less, in part because of the recession, but largely because of anti-tax sentiment throughout the country. Austerity fervor led to widespread divestment in the programs and institutions that ensure a prosperous and fair society. For my daughter’s California cohort, this meant fewer course offerings, larger classes, more time needed to graduate, and huge debt—if students could afford or find a place among the shrinking slots in higher education at all.

In my daughter’s senior year, Californians, rejecting anti-tax absolutism, passed Proposition 30, interrupting the perpetual cycle of budget cuts and escalating tuition.

When we arrived for graduation, the mood on campus was festive and hopeful. Naturally, I was proud of my daughter as she walked across the stage to receive her diploma. But I was just as proud of the visionaries who devised the Master Plan, and of voters who finally acted to stop its dismantling.

The dream of ensuring opportunity for every student has been tarnished. Maybe it will shine again as we realize that Homeland Security includes taxpayer commitment to public education. After all, it’s one of our best defenses.

*

This piece appeared July 29, 2013, on KQED’s Perspectives.

 

The Verdict

Posted on by
2

George Zimmerman Not Guilty

There are factions, there are groups, there are people that would want to take the law into their own hands as they perceive it or be vigilantes in some sense. . . they will always present a threat to George and to his family.

– Robert Zimmerman Jr., commenting on CNN following his brother George Zimmerman’s acquittal in the Trayvon Martin murder case

Irony is not dead. But Trayvon Martin is. And so is justice.

 

Like Everybody Else

Posted on by
Reply

I wrote this just after my friends Ann and Joan got married  in 2008, during the brief window before California’s Proposition 8 was passed. In honor of enduring love, and of Proposition 8’s demise this week, I’m running it again. What has the Supreme Court’s historic rulings on marriage equality meant for you?

Hands in MarriageAnn and Joan got married recently. The brides were radiant in their silk tunics, silvery hair, and sensible shoes. After waiting 17 years to walk down the aisle, they’d earned their comfort.

Like any couple getting married, Ann and Joan vowed to love, honor, and cherish each other until parted by death. They could pledge this with more certainty than the average newlyweds, having already lived through so many years of for better or for worse.

Ann vowed to try not to throw things away. Joan promised she would try to throw things away. That’s what comes from being forced to wait nearly two decades for marriage. You know one another’s foibles so well that what used to drive you crazy now deepens your love. You know it’s precisely your differences that bring balance. You know it’s the trying that counts.

The brides spoke in honor of their dead parents. When Ann first revealed she was gay, her mother responded, “It’s about time you figured it out.” Ann quipped that her father would have loved to give her away to Joan, if she were the type to let herself be given away to anyone.

Joan’s family was less embracing. Her mother died when Joan was 24, fearful that her daughter would suffer terribly from a hostile culture. Joan knew her mother would be delighted that her fears had not come true, and that her life was rich with love and happiness.

Guests were invited to place a rose in a silver vase and share what this wedding meant to them. There was an outpouring of hope and gratitude and joy. By the end, the vase was crammed with roses of every hue.

I grew up dreaming of bridal bouquets and my bridesmaids’ matching sashes. I didn’t know what blooms would be in season when I married, or whether my color scheme would be driven by the daffodils of spring or the chrysanthemums of fall. But as a straight woman, I knew I could count on having a season.

Now there is a season for everyone.

Opponents to same-sex marriage argue that gay people shouldn’t be granted special rights. But what is so special about wanting to be treated like everybody else? It’s not just gays who benefit—it’s all of us. My joy in realizing my childhood dreams is enhanced because Ann and Joan are no longer excluded from having such dreams.

I also cannot imagine how, as some claim, same-sex weddings threaten marriage between men and women. My feelings for my husband deepened as I listened to the readings about love, friendship, and commitment that Ann and Joan chose for their wedding. A marriage that draws its strength from discrimination is not a marriage at all.

Surely Ann and Joan don’t really need the state to affirm their love and commitment. At 60-something, they can buy all the bath towels and appliances and flowers they want. They can even buy a lawyer’s time to secure most of the rights that straight couples take for granted. But without the state’s sanction, something is missing.

Now we all have what money can’t buy: Inclusion and equality.

At the end of the ceremony, Joan and Ann grinned through their tears while we all cheered and wept like crazy.

“This is something we never dreamed would happen,” Joan said. “We never imagined that we could get dishtowels and kitchen gadgets, like everybody else,”

At last they can.

And at last we can give them.

 

Hostile Dependency

Posted on by
3

Cartoon of dog biting the hand that feeds it

Why is it that regions of the country with a high proportion of people who rely on the safety net tend to elect politicians who vow to slash it?

Many factors help explain this phenomenon. Differing world views and values, voter apathy, misinformation, and political manipulation of wedge issues all contribute. But the psychology of hostile dependency is also at play.

A New York Times article examines criticism of the safety net by those who increasingly depend on it. It notes that middle-class people who are angry at, but reliant on, government “are frustrated that they need help, feel guilty for taking it and resent the government for providing it.”

Parents of adolescents may recognize this pattern. Teenagers, still dependent but longing to be free, often chafe against them. It’s an age-appropriate version of biting the hand that feeds you.

Hostile dependency suffuses not just families but politics. “Hands off my Medicare!,” shouted by anti-government protesters, echoes Get Out of My Life, but First Could You Drive Me & Cheryl to the Mall?, a popular book for parents of teens.

This sheds new light on today’s political landscape. America is a young country, with all the exuberance, idealism, frustration, and self-absorption of adolescence. Youth, combined with culturally ingrained tropes of freedom and self-reliance, define our national character.

It’s hard to integrate the equal imperatives of dependence and independence that define a well-balanced individual or society. Distinguishing between what fosters or stymies growth is not always clear. The task is further complicated by our national fixation on going it alone. We often mistake need for failure, abandonment for freedom.

Like the tumult of adolescence, perhaps this reactivity will subside as America moves toward a more secure identity in which interdependence is embraced rather than repudiated.

 

 

A Week to Remember

Posted on by
3

Janine, my writing friend and guiding light of Write On, Mamas, keeps us inspired and productive by providing a constant stream of encouragement, writing opportunities, and writing prompts. This week’s was to write at least 100 words on Things I’d Like to Remember from this Week. Here’s mine–what would you like to remember?

Rainbow flag

I want to remember that this was a great week for Marriage Equality, with a conservative-dominated Supreme Court overturning the federal Defense of Marriage Act and allowing same-sex wedding bells to resume ringing in California. Supreme Court Building

I want to forget that those bells are still not allowed to ring in 37 states, and that the same Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act just the day before.

I want to remember that wanting to forget is no solution. Neither is opting out through demoralization. But I will probably resort to both.

Chimney emissionsI want to remember that this week President Obama took steps to curtail greenhouse gas emissions, and that he will probably disappoint me by approving the Keystone Pipeline in a few months.

I want to remember that staying committed through disappointment is a hallmark of maturity, and an absolute necessity for marriage, parenthood, friendship, and good citizenship.

I want to remember Wendy Davis in her pink sneakers preventing for a brief moment the erosion of women’s reproductive rights in Texas.

Wendy Davis's pink tennis shoes

I want to remember the miracle of Nelson Mandela, and that a good life comes not so much from miracles as from character and hard work.

Nelson Mandela

I want to remember that progress is a process of lurching back and forth.

 

 

 

Domestic Surveillance

Posted on by
3

NSA SealNow that we’ve learned that the NSA is routinely mining data from Verizon and other huge communication corporations under the rationale of stopping terrorism, how about some more user-friendly applications?

For instance, I’ve got a stack of Verizon call details I need to analyze to see which of the hundreds of numbers we call should go into our “Frequently Called Numbers” list of ten freebies. Are my short but numerous calls to a local number burning up more minutes than my long monthly chat with my brother in Massachusetts? Who, by the way, is my daughter calling in Albuquerque? And is he treating her right?

Verizon logoIt would save me a lot of time, money, and anxiety if the NSA could just take a minute from their Al-Queda-hunting number-crunching and run my numbers. God knows an assist from the NSA would be a lot faster than waiting for our daughters to respond to my request for the numbers they call most often, or to tell us about anyone significant in their lives. On a slow day, maybe the NSA could even order a little domestic drone surveillance on the girls’ young gentlemen callers.

It’s a clear win-win: the Administration quells a PR nightmare by helping families across America save money on their phone bills and get clued in to their children’s lives. Who cares about a little erosion of civil liberties in exchange for better household management?