SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: JohnM who wrote (1251)5/20/2003 3:27:58 AM
From: Bill Ulrich  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793597
 
Time has some interesting notes in their article about the MIA Texas demos:

Sure Beats Working
The Democrats in the Texas legislature go on the lam to avoid voting on a controversial plan.
They sing, they relax, they bond

By JOEL STEIN, Monday, May. 19, 2003

One reason politicians seem so dorky is that other than the filibuster, there aren't any cool
parliamentary procedures. But the ultimate move — the one that's making Aaron Sorkin even
more upset that he won't be writing The West Wing next season — is to halt a vote by hightailing
it out of town and then evading the cops looking to drag you back. It's always a ratings grabber,
like when some Republicans in the U.S. Senate locked themselves in their offices to quash a vote
on a campaign-finance-reform bill in 1988, causing a sergeant at arms to carry Bob Packwood
feetfirst to the Senate floor (after determining that Lowell Weicker was too heavy). The stunt
pulled by Democrats in the Texas legislature last week was to avoid a vote on redistricting the
state to create more Republican members of Congress.

It started two weeks ago, when House majority whip Tom DeLay came home to Texas to stir up
trouble. DeLay saw a chance to boost the Republican majority in Congress by redrawing the
congressional districts to give the Texas Republicans a 22-to-10 advantage. The Republicans drew
some funny lines, like the ones dividing Austin into four districts, one of them connecting the
capital to the border of Mexico 300 miles away. Though redistricting is usually done only after a
Census, DeLay had a pretty good rationale for wanting one, since Republicans beat the daylights
out of the Dems in Texas in the last statehouse elections yet had two fewer U.S. Reps for the
state.

Faced with a further erosion of their party's power, 51 of
the state's 62 Democratic lawmakers packed their
toothbrushes and at least one acoustic guitar last Sunday
and ran away. Without a minimum of two-thirds of the 150
legislators in their seats, a vote can't be held, but a house
rule allows the speaker to order the arrest of members
trying to thwart a quorum and force them back to their
seats. So, like Jesse James heading for the Oklahoma hills
to evade Texas Rangers, the Dems waited until the cover of
night, then met in small groups at an Embassy Suites
parking lot in Austin. With secrecy so tight that only the
group leaders knew where they were going, the Democrats
sneaked off, over the state border to the safety of
Ardmore, Okla., 300 miles away. Sure, they could have
gone to Mexico, but they wanted to show they were
serious. Being in Oklahoma is like self-flagellation for a
Texan.

Only one member was nabbed by Johnny Law, outside her
house. And several African-American Democrats chose to
go to work, in part because the Republican plans would
have created more black districts. In the end, 51 rebels
checked into a Holiday Inn, where they were booked two
to a room. Monday morning they went to the Denny's
attached to the hotel to work on strategy while fortifying
themselves with Moons over My Hammy (ham, cheese
and scrambled-egg sandwiches). At 3 a.m., the Democrats
were awakened and brought down to the Holiday Inn
basement, where they camped out with the media because
of tornado warnings.

On Tuesday, the 51 Democrats secured a conference room just across from the hotel's Gushers
Lounge, where the national media would later enjoy karaoke night. The meeting room was filled
with flower arrangements, cookie baskets, balloons, pizza and of course barbecue, all sent by
Democrats from around the country. By the next day, the renegade Democrats had drafted a
statement signed by not only the 51 but also a 52nd member, from an undisclosed location.
Perhaps a nicer hotel.

Back in Austin, bored Republicans spread out in the chamber with their feet on the antique
furniture. Two of them brought their mitts and played a pretty impressive game of catch. There
was also a Texas-size paper-wad fight. They designed milk-carton boxes with the faces of missing
Democrats, created a WANTED poster with shots of the rebels, established a toll-free number for
information on their whereabouts and made a deck of Iraq-inspired playing cards with pictures of
the Democrats on them. They even used the state's public-safety website to run an all-points
bulletin, a move the Democrats found offensive. Democrats got much more upset — Joe
Lieberman asked for an investigation — by reports that Texas officials had asked the feds to help
track lawmaker Pete Laney's plane. Outside the statehouse, Republican supporters dressed in
chicken outfits accused the Dems of cowardice. On Wednesday, Republicans, unable to think of
any new jokes, went home.

Poolside at the Holiday Inn, things weren't much more exciting until a package arrived from Willie
Nelson. Along with a note saying "Stand your ground," he sent red bandannas, T shirts and —
sources tell TIME — Willie Nelson whiskey. The Dems then broke into a campfire-style
sing-along of Merle Haggard's Okie from Muskogee from a second-floor balcony. A good time was
had by all. At a press briefing that evening, legislator Jim McReynolds said, "We have not heard
from Governor [Rick] Perry or Speaker [Tom] Craddick, but we have heard from the most
powerful Texan of all, Willie Nelson."

The Democrats planned to head back to Austin at midnight on Thursday, the deadline for a
preliminary vote on house bills. But a tornado warning scrambled their plans, and they boarded
two luxury buses (smoking and non) at 10:40 p.m. As the buses fought fierce winds and rain, the
Democrats watched Gladiator (nonsmoking bus) and The Fugitive (smoking bus). After arriving in
Austin at 4 a.m., they scrubbed up for a 7 a.m. rally and showed up at their jobs at 9. Though
they were met with some boos from the gallery and a lot of female Republicans dressed in fighting
G.O.P. red, the wayward Democrats did get some hugs from their colleagues across the aisle.
While Tom DeLay may be disappointed that his power grab seems to have failed, he has got to be
happy that he forced Democrats to bunk two to a room at an Oklahoma Holiday Inn.



To: JohnM who wrote (1251)5/20/2003 4:03:44 AM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 793597
 
UC Regents Reenter Racial Politics War - The board votes to oppose a measure on the March ballot that would stop California agencies from collecting most data on race.

By Rebecca Trounson - LA Times Staff Writer

Ward Connerly is a clever devil. This will pass in November in California.

SAN FRANCISCO - Stepping once again into the charged arena of racial politics, University of California regents voted Thursday to formally oppose a state ballot measure sponsored by regent Ward Connerly that would stop the state from collecting most kinds of racial data.

UC President Richard C. Atkinson, joined by faculty leaders, had urged the university's governing body to oppose the initiative, saying it could hurt the institution's ability to conduct research, inform public policy and evaluate the effectiveness of its efforts to eliminate discrimination.

The vote, 15 to 3 with board Chairman John Moores abstaining, followed two hours of often impassioned debate. Some regents called on the board to step back from considering such politically volatile issues and others exhorted their fellows to take a stand, at least on this one.

"It's important to let voters know the potential effect of this initiative," said regent Monica Lozano, who urged the board to vote to oppose the measure.

As the lopsided tally was announced, students who had filled the board's basement auditorium at the Laurel Heights campus of UC San Francisco, occasionally hissing at Connerly, broke into applause and cheers.

Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, Assembly Speaker Herb Wesson and state schools Supt. Jack O'Connell attended the session and urged a vote against the Connerly measure. All are regents by virtue of their elective offices.

"We should all say clearly and loudly that we are against this initiative," Bustamante said.

The vote was one of the first public tests of the controversial statewide initiative, which would bar the state and other public entities, including UC, from classifying people by race, ethnicity, color or national origin. Often called the Racial Privacy Initiative, the measure will be on the March ballot.

Coming two years after the repeal of the university's ban on affirmative action, a decision that allowed UC officials to step back for a time from the wrenching national debate over race-based preferences, the vote Thursday marked the regents' return to the sensitive issue of race.

Connerly, who championed the university's anti-affirmative action initiatives of the mid-1990s and helped lead the campaign for Proposition 209, the statewide initiative that barred racial and gender preferences for all public entities, appealed to the regents to endorse what he called a colorblind California.

He said his sponsorship of the measure stems in part from his experience as someone who is part black, part American Indian and part white.

Connerly urged the board to make "a common cause of eliminating America's horrible legacy of racism" and said the initiative's opponents risked "standing with the segregationists of the past in a belief that human beings should be divided, cataloged and subdivided" by race.

In response to concerns that the measure, if passed, would hurt medical research, Connerly also noted that the initiative has several exemptions. It would permit the collection of data to comply with federal law, to establish or maintain eligibility for federal programs, to prevent the loss of federal funds, and for medical research subjects and patients.

But opponents expressed fears that research on pressing medical and public health issues could be harmed nonetheless.

Jeremiah Mock, an assistant research scientist at UC San Francisco, told the regents that if it passes, the initiative could halt his research into the causes of the high rate of cervical cancer among Vietnamese American women.

That research is dependent on statistics collected by the state Department of Health Services, Mock said.

Jessica Quindel, a UC Berkeley graduate student in education, said she feared that passage of the initiative could hamper her research on how to improve the teaching of math to underrepresented minority students. "Please, please vote no on this information ban," she told the regents.

Gayle Binion, a UC Santa Barbara political science professor who heads UC's systemwide faculty organization, said research indicated that the measure "would be injurious to UC and to the state of California."

Regent George Marcus argued that UC should not weigh in on a political issue.

Marcus tried to postpone the vote indefinitely. When that failed, however, he voted with the majority in favor of the resolution.

Those voting against it were regents John Davies and Peter Preuss, along with Connerly. Moores, who last year held a fund-raising event for the initiative at his home, abstained in Thursday's vote, saying afterward that he considered it inappropriate to take a position on a political matter in his capacity as board chairman.

After the vote, Connerly said he believes the regents are out of touch with the state's mainstream voters.

"We may have lost touch with the regents, but we'll win at the ballot box next March," he said.
latimes.com



To: JohnM who wrote (1251)5/20/2003 6:22:37 AM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 793597
 
Here's Henrick Hertzberg's take in this week's New Yorker.


Andrew Sullivan really enjoyed it also. Here is his comment on the article.

RICK'S METAPHORS: One reason Hendrik Hertzberg is such a joy to read (even when you want to scream at him) is his use of metaphor. If you've read Tom Friedman for years, metaphors tend to put you into a defensive crouch. Sid Blumenthal served up a doozy in his book, "The Clinton Wars:"
Not only did [Clinton] have to navigate the vessel of state in a vast sea through unpredictable storms, but he had to build a safe harbor. His political ability to tack with the wind was usually interpreted as being rudderless. Even long-term policy gains - whether on the economy, crime or trade - were obscured because of short-term political losses. And Clinton himself, caught in the midst of howling winds, could not know whether and how much he was succeeding.Sea-sick yet? Yes, there's nothing so boring as a fully-extended metaphor. But Rick's specialty is the meta-metaphor. He takes a hoary old saying and throws it around a little, like hackensack. "Affirmative action is strong medicine, and, as with any strong medicine, no great distance separates the therapeutic dose from the toxic one." Not bad. But this one's a beaut:
In both cases [scandals at the New York Times and the Washington Post], the people at the top said the right things about accepting responsibility. At the Post, at least one head eventually rolled, but it rolled sideways, and it quickly rejoined its body and resumed its upward trajectory. (The head was that of Bob Woodward, who lost his job as metropolitan editor. He was immediately made assistant managing editor for investigations, the job he still holds.)Hilarious. And at the same time, vicious.
andrewsullivan.com



To: JohnM who wrote (1251)5/20/2003 6:27:49 AM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 793597
 
Here is another "Blair" story. This time a successful minority hire.

Unconventional Wisdom | A success story fit to print

By Tanya Barrientos - Philadelphia Inquirer Columnist

Much has been written about Jayson Blair, the young, talented, African American journalist who brought shame to the New York Times by fabricating facts and stealing the work of others.

But I've seen hardly anything written about Macarena Hernandez, the young, talented, Latina journalist who first brought suspicion of Blair's plagiarism to light.

I know her well. I am her mentor.

In 1997, the summer before she and Blair were summer interns in a program for minority journalists at the New York Times, she worked as an intern at this newspaper, with me as her guide.

Her story needs to be told.

Not only because it was her article that led to Blair's tragic fall. (He lifted her words about Juanita Anguiano, the mother of a missing soldier, and Macarena's editor at the San Antonio Express-News asked for an apology.)

More important, while Blair's story is one of tainted promise and ambition, Macarena's is one of a talented young woman who made very different decisions concerning her life and career.

I was impressed with her the moment we met.

A gifted young writer, she pulled herself up the ladder rungs of the American Dream.

A daughter of Mexican immigrants, Macarena worked with her parents and seven siblings in the fields of California, hoeing cotton and picking grapes as a migrant farmworker from childhood until she was 15.

She once told me that her father's only goal for her back then was that she land a job in a building with air-conditioning.

Luckily, teachers at her hometown high school recognized her potential and encouraged her to consider college. She had a hard time persuading her parents that it was a worthy pursuit. But they finally agreed to let her go.

She worked her way through Baylor University, and then earned a master's degree at the University of California at Berkeley.

Blessed with a natural gift for storytelling and a relentless drive to achieve, Macarena proved herself to be a fine journalist here and at the Times.

And just like Blair, she was asked to join the staff of the nation's most prestigious newspaper after completing the internship there.

She was thrilled, and I was thrilled for her.

Two days before she was to begin, her father, Gumaro Hernandez, was killed when a truck hit his car. I remember the telephone call and the stunned devastation in Macarena's voice.

What now?

Her mother, Elva, needed her, and she was the only unmarried daughter without other family responsibilities. So instead of taking the best job of her life, she moved back to the tiny town of La Joya, Texas, and accepted a job teaching English to remedial students at her old high school.

"I was so angry," she told me this week. "Because not only was my father taken away, but my career was completely derailed."

The editors at the Times told her she could always come back, and she wrestled with the decision daily.

But she decided to stay close to home, even after her mother got back on her feet, because she'd learned that family was more important to her than a Manhattan byline.

In April 2001, on her father's birthday, she began working as a reporter for the San Antonio paper.

Robert Rivard, the editor of the Express-News, has called her una joya - a jewel - and an example of the sort of talent that a top-notch affirmative-action program can discover.

Which, I believe, is a key point that has been lost in this ugly swirl of public accusation, deceit and contrition.

Blair and my friend Macarena traveled similar roads, up to a point.

But it's Blair's self-destruction that has lodged itself in people's minds. It's his fall that has prompted critics of affirmative action to say: See what happens when you establish special programs to help minorities achieve?

To them, I hold up Macarena's story. And mine. And those of hundreds of honest, hard-working journalists of color who go out every day and do affirmative action proud.
philly.com