Changing the Dream

The anticipated winter storm has been drizzling on us since I woke up this morning. The forecasters say the system will stick around for over 24 hours. Last I heard (11 pm news) they think we might get 2-4 inches of something—a rain, ice and snow mix. Virginia has pretty mild winters, which makes such storm systems Events. In Michigan, where a single winter storm can dump a foot of snow on us overnight, we would call this negligible. Still, while I'm Michigan born, I'm mostly Virginia bred; so I have already laid in the water supplies in case the pipes freeze tonight, and have charged up the small camping generator in case the power goes out.

There are worse places to be in a winter storm. Out on the street is one of them.

Those who know me may have noticed that I don't talk about my family or my past much. I talk a lot about my busywork. I don't say why I fill my hours with meetings. I talk about my issues. I don't say why I am so passionately connected to them. But lately, it seems to me that we all need to talk about the whys. You can't forge a relationship with a statistic. A statistic has no feeling, a statistic has no story. We need to take the statistics, and the soundbytes that go with them, out of civic interaction and bring back the humanity.

Of all my sprawling, extended family--my mother was the eldest of 8, my father the youngest of 9--the only two who still live in Virginia are my mother and me. We moved here in 1972--my mother, my father, my half-sister, and me. One of my maternal uncles joined us for a couple of years in the mid-70s and then, again, six years ago. Of our teensified, 5-member, family twig, two of us have become homeless in this state, my half-sister and my uncle. And one of us (me) has felt helpless both times to be of any use in the face of their need. With my sister, I was admittedly too young to do anything but bear witness until she died before age 21 (I was 14 at the time). With my uncle, I was an adult, and still limited--by my lack of resources, by my temperament, by my inability to provide a stabilizing foundation for him.

There is a lot more to each of their stories--maybe I'll share them some day, maybe not--but my experiences with them informed my desire to be involved in some institution, some edifice, some place, that could have helped them in ways that I personally could not and still can not. The inability to help someone we love sharply defines our powerlessness in this world. We try sympathy, we try tough love, we do what we can, we pray to God. Sometimes it isn't enough. One person can not be an entire support network.

They are why I write about affordable housing and homelessness so often. They are why I'm involved with Compass.

Once, the extended family was the basis for our societal structure. Cousins to the third degree all lived within the same geographical area, everyone knew everybody else's business, and the family had the combined resources to take care of its own. Now, isolation rules. Broken families living hundreds of miles apart can not and will not provide the support an individual may need when their life comes crashing down around them. They may not even know when support is needed or what kind of support to give. People who have a large, connected, concerned family are blessed--and increasingly rare.

Homelessness, I sometimes think, is the natural result of the way we've chosen to focus the American Dream upon a small nuclear family living in a large, single-family home. That dream leaves no bulwark in the face of a rising divorce rate. That dream keeps us from really knowing our neighbors and our extended relatives because the literal space between us has created a much larger, metaphorical space. That dream keeps us isolated at times when isolation can only hurt us more.

Isn't it time we changed the dream?

Three Meetings and a Funeral

Sunday, Earth Week had its third meeting of the year, and as excited as I am about our line-up of activities, I surely wish ya'll would plan some activities for mid-week. We don't so much have an Earth Week as we have 2 overbooked Earth Weekends with time off for napping in between.

Monday, sometime after everyone said his piece on traffic issues, City Council approved the special use permit so that Compass, the homeless day center, can move into its new home. Congratulations, Compass!

Tuesday, the Rivanna Conservation Society had its board meeting, during which I drank a pot of coffee while we discussed improvements to Schier Natural Area, finding sponsors for the 2007 Rivanna River Days Calendar Brochure (click if you would like to list a river event or become a partner), the best procedure for sharing information from our own proprietorial research with the new Chville Commission on Environmental Sustainability (being both Advocacy chair for RCS and a Commission member, I shook hands with my inner schizophrenic for 20 minutes of discourse), and our Third Thursdays Brown Bag Lunch series on watershed issues (and about 2 dozen other topics).

Then I came home and looked up the results of today's roll call vote in both chambers on HB3113 and SB1403. Both passed. I'm appalled at the short-sightedness of the decision to merge all 3 citizen review boards into 1 entity. It is impossible to find 11 people to sit on the new "Environmental Quality Board" who are expert in all three media: Waste Management, Water Control, and Air Pollution. The new board will not be able to provide the same level of specialized knowledge, attention to detail, and competency that the individual boards had. Furthermore, by taking the permitting authority out of the board and handing it to DEQ, the General Assembly has completely cut the public out of the process. Is anyone else out there feeling that closed government love yet? Doesn't seem like anyone outside the enviro community cares, even though this bill--soon to be law--will effect municipal-level voices in land use, industry, and economic development as well as natural resources.

So, I'm hoping that enough people out there read this and call their state representatives to demand that the House bill's "re-enactment clause" stay in the final, reconciled version of the bill. If the Senate's version ends up on Gov. Kaine's desk, I'll be planning a funeral (or at least a memorium) for the last bastion of public voice in the regulatory process. Let me know if you'd like to come. Rum and tequila will be required; black armbands will be optional.

"Service Fodder" or Valued Employee?

(Wow! I was reading an ongoing debate on George Loper's site and responded to George with some of my thoughts. He actually posted them. I feel honored. So, here it is, reprinted from George's blog, for those of you who don't follow it.)

Dear George,

According to the Washington Post, the minimum wage bill passed the House of Representatives, 315 to 111. The proposed new minimum is $7.25. So, it looks like William Lyster will be firing employees relatively soon.

In his analysis, Mr. Lyster finds it ironic that the Living Wage campaign will necessarily result in fewer jobs. In his response, Mr. Foster finds irony in the concept that Mr. Lyster would bother to keep an incompetent employee on the payroll at $5.15, but wouldn't at $7.50. [Read whole ping-pong exchange at minimum wage index.]

I find irony in the whole debate. Mr. Lyster complains of disaffection among low-income workers, especially in the service industry, characterizing them as either new, uneducated, or possessing addiction problems which result in a lack of concern for and loyalty to their jobs.

I find the opposite to be generally true--disaffection comes not at the beginning of the job, but after the employee has been poorly managed, devalued, and/or mistreated. The term "cannon fodder" refers to footsoldiers put on the frontline in harm's way because they are considered expendable. In the workforce, we are creating "service fodder" by treating our entry-level workers as expendable. Both customers and employers show a jaw-dropping lack of respect to anyone earning poverty-level wages in the service industry.

If an employer invests in his/her employees--and investment can come in many ways, e.g., higher wages, increased educational opportunities, perks and benefits, kindness and consideration, competent management, positive work atmosphere, flexible scheduling, creative scope--then s/he will earn their loyalty and concern, which will, in turn, increase their happiness and involvement in their workplace regardless of their pay scale. Happy, involved workers generally give better customer service.

And since "loyalty" seems to be a buzzword for Mr. Lyster, I should add that loyalty is earned--it can not be taken for granted when most jobs are "at-will" contracts. It might be useful to think of each rung of employees as the "customers" of the next level above--what are you doing to keep them?

Just my two cents.

Tatyanna Patten (electronic mail, January 11, 2007)

House Passes Minimum Wage Bill

In a 315 to 111 vote, the House of Representatives passed an act increasing the federal minimum wage from $5.15/hour to $7.25/hour. That 315 tally included 82 Republicans who refused to toe the party line. 54 Republicans even abandoned ship and voted against a motion to add business tax breaks to the bill.

I'm guessing these guys are up for reelection in 2008.

Economic Caste as a Way of Life

MSNBC reports that December saw the creation of an additional 167,000 new jobs which left the year-end unemployment rate unchanged at 4.5%. However, the article also examines the growing divide between the graduate-degree haves and have-nots.

Once again, skilled, blue-collar jobs left the country in droves in 2006. They were replaced by positions in the education, health-care, and professional services industries at equal or higher average salaries. The problem is, of course, a skilled factory worker with a HS diploma or even Bachelor's education can not find work as a nurse, high school teacher, lawyer, or publicity manager without undergoing several years of retraining at the college and graduate level.

So, these middle-income workers, who often earned up to $22-25/hour for their specialized skill sets, are now taking minimum-to-low-wage jobs because you don't need a related degree in order to become a supervisor at Burger King or a meter reader for the gas company, but you do need to pay your bills on time and feed your kids.

The problem faced, time and time again, is that poverty breeds poverty. No one designs anything of quality for poor people because they can't pay for it. Therefore, what little income they have often goes out as soon as it comes in, not just because their debt-income ratio is so high, but also because they have to buy substandard goods and are constantly replacing or repairing them. This trend runs from housing (which I've brought up many times) to groceries to clothing and transportation.

The manufacture of toxic clothing can be addressed by lawsuits and regulation. Cheap mass transportation issues can be solved on a regional and state level, and benefit more than just the poor. But, by far, the most dangerous of these are the housing and food nexuses. Substandard housing, as we've seen even locally [1, 2, 3], comes with a nightmare of health issues in addition to the costs of reconstruction and/or finding a new place to live. The hidden cost in eating low-cost foods is in decreased health and increased medical costs. Yet, unfortunately, most people living below a living wage have no or minimal health insurance to help them address such health concerns as they arise. Instead, those health problems have to fester, unaddressed, while they continue work, until the problems cannot be avoided, by which time their care and treatment is financially exponential.

Really, poverty is big business, but it is definitely not a good quality business. It becomes a Catch-22, as the health issues mount and the work and income floods out the door, creating an abyss from which whole cultures still haven't risen, in spite of the health of their government's pockets (and here I'm talkin' Appalachia as well as Nigeria).

Enter Acumen Fund, which is a philanthropic venture capital group dedicated to identifying and giving financial boost to the best entrepreneurs and organizations focused on delivering critical, affordable goods and services--such as healthcare and housing. The Acumen Fund's goal is to improve livelihoods, health and opportunities for the poor, while proving there's money in doing it.

Looking for a fiscally savvy yet socially progressive firm to invest your money and/or time with? Check them out. They are trying to break the economic caste cycle permanently.

Hunting the Snark

In Lewis Carroll's The Hunting of the Snark, a group of wayward adventurers follow the lead of a mad Bellman in pursuit of a legendary (read: nonexistant) beast.

In Cville, strong argument could be made that our personal snark is affordable housing, and the posse gathered to pursue it has grown to an army over the last few years. The Daily Progress reported on the City Council meeting I mentioned previously in this blog.

What I find most interesting about Tuesday night's debate, however, was Kevin Lynch's discussion about the need to address the wage side of the equation. I don't disagree with his statements. But I doubt that employers will ever find basic burger flipping to be worth $10.50 or more per hour.

Let's say you work in Cville and you had to move to Nelson or Louisa to find a rent or mortgage you could afford. At some point, looking for work in Amherst, Waynesboro, or Richmond suburbs like Short Pump will be very attractive, just because of the shorter traveling distance. The lower-skilled your job, the more incentive you have to look close by, because, let's face it, gas is expensive.

I can not say it frequently enough, apparently: We need economic diversity in this town. Not this regional area, because there's a lot of bleedover to other metro regions once you are living 45 minutes from Downtown in a geographic section designed only for car transit. This. Urban. Area.

I know it seems unfair to ask Charlottesville City to bear the brunt of affordable housing and it certainly makes sense to address the Board of Supervisors for Albemarle County--but, beyond that, really, who else can we ask to take the lead in this kind of urban design? The outlying rural counties are equidistant to other city and town centers. It is our growth which is causing their headaches, not the other way around. So, IMO, we--meaning Charlottesville and Albemarle--have to be the ones who hunt the snark.

SWF Refugee

SWF refugee, mother of 2, new to area, seeks affordable 2-BR house close to floes, fishing.

[A friend sent me this photo--I don't know to whom it should be accredited, but I liked it so much I gave it a caption. If you know the photographer, please let me know. I'd like to at least acknowledge and link to him/her.]

U.S. v. Them

Not content with letting Senator-unelect George Allen get all the negative attention, Rep. Virgil Goode (R-Va, 5th Dist.) has put his ass on his shoulders by sending an anti-Muslim letter out to various constituents.

There aren't too many people, even Republicans within the 5th District, who are willing to go as far as Goode did in claiming that "American citizens [need to] wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration" to prevent a crimson tide of Middle-Easterners from taking over control of our nation. The only thing this letter proves is that Goode is a racist, a xenophobe, and, possibly an uneducated hack, since the Muslim representative from Minnesota has every right (and quite good reason) to request a Koran rather than a Bible--for that matter he could legally swear on Oxford's Unabridged Dictionary if he so wants.

No, I'm not proud to call Virgil Goode my representative--I worked for his opposition. But the stink being raised by leftists on some blogs has predominantly ignored the underlying need for immigration reform, and the reasons why Goode's immigration position finds traction with Americans from all walks, from George W. Bush to Bubba George Spradlin.

Folks, individuation is a well-known psychological process engendered by physical necessity and has documented by such great minds as Nietzsche, Freud, Jung, Darwin, Stiegler, Bohm, and Erikson. It starts when we're babies learning to differentiate between ourselves and our mothers once we're out of the womb. In the effort to define who we are, we define a lot of who we are not. Similarly, every tribe or nation since the dawn of human socialization has had to define who "we" are compared to "them" when faced with other people. We use a lot of different measures to come up with those definitions: physical characteristics, language and artistic skills, geographical location, ancestry, religious beliefs, cultural values, ethics and activities are just some of the variables that get thrown into the mix.

To repeat: Every tribe or nation since the dawn of human socialization has had to define who "we" are compared to "them." That is what immigration policy is about--setting the standards that create the definition of "us." Or, in this case, U.S.

The problem as I see it is that we are stuck thinking of ourselves as a "nation of immigrants," and, thus, unlike most western hemipshere countries which are also nations of immigrants, we've never put a premium on our own national culture. A lot of people would be surprised to think of the United States as having a national culture. The basis of our culture is not built on the 20th-century marketing of McDonald's, Coca-Cola, and Hollywood. It's built on the Bill of Rights, and we've been developing it for over 225 years. The freedoms granted under that document are what have allowed the McCokeywood popular culture to develop.

I don't fear Muslim input because Muslims are a very small percentage of the population--on par with Hindus, Buddhists or Jews--and Islam is not easily reconcilable to our principles of democratic government. But Judge Smails' points and mine from the afore-linked Waldo debate are born from the same set of reasonable doubts: Does American immigration policy threaten the fundamental rights guaranteed to every United States citizen by allowing those who do not share our governing principles and ideals to take part in our political system and, thereby, giving them the power to change it?

Goode's plan and attitude both blow technicolor chunks, but liberals taking irrelevant potshots at xenophobia do nothing to address the fundamental issues of immigration policy debate. A lot of the people with whom Goode's immigration ideas have traction aren't actually xenophobic--they are voters whose voices are being marginalized by new demographics within their districts and who have therefore become reasonably worried about whether these cultural differences will result in substantive changes in the laws which grant their freedoms and rule their lives. No one assuages such worry or converts anyone by using brute force and name-calling.

And, lest anyone think there's nothing to it, any part of the Constitution can be changed by a significant percentage of the voting population. It's a breathing, flexible document, so, yes, it could be strongly amended and sections repealed and replaced. If such events happen, will we still be the United States, or some other nation?

I see language as one of the issues, because 400 years of American history and centuries of law upon which these defining documents are based are written in English--how could a Spanish-speaking U.S. possibly understand the richness and depth of that legal heritage enough to respect and build on it?

Smails [and Goode] sees religion as one of the issues, because Islam does not respect cultural diversity--it does not tolerate religious freedom and it does not honor "equal rights" for all citizens in the same way we Americans understand and use that phrase. Could a politically-connected, predominantly Muslim group gain enough pull in the halls of U.S. power to use our separation clause against us by forcing us to condone their intolerance in the name of tolerance?

I invite everyone who is willing to consider the possible ramifications of open-door immigration and discuss policy measures that address it without fearmongering and fingerpointing to continue our debate here and give Waldo a well-earned rest. (51 posts! Is that a new one-day record for a single topic?)

Punching the One-Way Ticket

Another little-seen article, this time from the Daily Progress:

Businesses and insurance companies are starting to eye the potential savings of outsourcing health care from the world's richest country to the developing world.
. . . .
With an estimated 45 million uninsured Americans, some 500,000 trekked overseas last year for medical treatment, according to the National Coalition on Health Care. Asian hospitals in Thailand, India and Singapore have long been swarmed by medical tourists looking for tummy tucks and face lifts, but many glitzy, marble-floored facilities are now gaining reputations for big-ticket procedures including heart surgery, knee and back operations.

More article at Businesses May Move Health Care Overseas

Are there any other Boston Legal fans out here who recognize this plot? Oh, that's right. It's for real. So, raise your hand if you want to be packed off to the Pakistani border for your open heart surgery. If you do, you might want to rethink buying the round-trip ticket.