You may have heard that mayoral candidate Gery Chico’s education agenda includes a proposal that the Chicago Public Schools provide each student with a laptop to use in class and at home.
I wondered how long it would take one of the candidates to propose this. It sounds really good and might even be relatively affordable, depending on which computer maker steps up to the plate with a jaw-dropping volume discount. Chicago is, after all, the third-largest school district in the country.
Chico won’t be the only mayoral candidate to jump on the laptop bandwagon, and he’s certainly not the first local politician to suggest laptops are the definitive tool of empowerment for our schoolchildren.
In the spring of 2006, then-Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn floated a proposal to equip 13,000 public school seventh-graders and their teachers with laptop computers; he called them the “textbooks of the 21st century.”
I was still working as a teacher then, but I wrote a Sun-Times guest column pointing out what should still be obvious to all: The major factor in the success of students is a low student-to-teacher ratio. Knowing that, any money Illinois can scrape together to pay for efforts to improve student achievement should be spent on getting more well-trained teachers into classrooms so students don’t have to be packed together like sardines. It shouldn’t be spent on silver bullets.
And four years later, I’d still say laptops are no silver bullet.
Ofer Malamud, an assistant professor of economics at the University of Chicago, co-authored a study released last January that investigated educational outcomes after low-income families received vouchers to help them buy computers. He and Cristian Pop-Eleches of Columbia University found that while students gained improved computer skills — a benefit that should not be undervalued — there was no significant improvement in grades. The students with the computers, in fact, earned lower grades on average in three key math and language subjects.
Why? Because at home — regardless of Internet connectivity — the kids used the equipment to play games. Duh.
Likewise, a Duke University paper published last June looked at the arrival of broadband service in North Carolina between 2000 and 2005 and found that, in that time, middle school students’ math and reading test scores dropped. One explanation, the researchers said, was the kids’ new access to Web-based entertainment.
This is not to denigrate Chico’s education agenda, which includes considerably more than just a call for laptop computers, nor is it to say that computers necessarily have no place in a classroom. Dueling studies contradict each other.
I can point to school districts across the country that sing the praises of their send-a-laptop-home programs, but I can just as easily point to school districts in Liverpool, N.Y., Richmond, Va., Costa Mesa, Calif. and Broward County, Fla., that have reported laptop-related cheating, student hacking and exorbitant repair costs accompanied by little or no academic gains.
The important thing to remember is this: While a laptop computer can be a powerfully useful tool of education, it’s not the superman schools have been waiting for to swoop in and rescue struggling students. You can’t just slide a laptop across a student’s desk and assume that his or her intellectual curiosity will save the day.
With realistic expectations, good planning and loads of cash for training, a take-home laptop program could be a success. Before getting them into kids’ hands there would have to be a tremendous amount of training for teachers who, if not flat-out technophobic, are unfamiliar with how to teach classes that integrate laptops. You’d also need a robust outreach plan for parents to make sure they know how to drive positive academic results.
To properly prepare for life in the real world, students need as much access to computers as possible — for academic use. But nobody should assume the benefits of a laptop in every backpack automatically outweigh the costs.
Being bilingual is a blessing -- except when it's a curse. Imagine you're a family member of a recent immigrant or a deaf person who communicates only by sign language.
You're tagging along with mom, dad or grandma on a doctor's visit and the next thing you know you're called into an exam room to help explain to your loved one that there's something wrong. Never mind if the illness is of a personal nature or if it's heart-breaking or scary, you are duty-bound to be an intermediary in a delicate, complex medical conversation.
This happens all the time. Our medical centers are challenged by increasing numbers of patients whose English is not as good as their native language and by a shortage of trained medical interpreters.
Over the years, health-care providers have had to learn to handle patient issues with increased privacy and proper respect, but those efforts often sputter when there is no affordable professional available to translate.
Technology is stepping in, providing medical centers with highly trained medical interpreters 24 hours a day through the Video Interpreter Network, a national program being piloted in Chicago hospitals. Medical interpreters can be dialed up on a computer monitor to speak face to face with a patient and his doctor.
"Five of our member hospitals in the Chicago area have these systems up and running and the Network is in use nationally in hospitals in California, Texas, Washington, D.C., and New Mexico," said Dr. Michael Wahl, director of the Metropolitan Chicago Healthcare Council, which is helping 244 member and associate Illinois hospitals to learn and use the new technology.
"We estimate that nationally 10 percent of patients have low English proficiency. In Chicago it's about 15 percent, and you can imagine how difficult it is for health-care providers to deliver services in a compassionate, efficient way," Wahl told me. We talked the day before hospital administrators from across the state were to gather at the University of Illinois Medical Center to learn how the video link works.
Health-care facilities have relied on costly in-person medical interpreters who are fluent in a select few languages. Some interpreters use phone services, which can be cheaper but -- depending of the language -- still run as high as $3 a minute.
After the expense of buying and installing equipment, the Video Interpreter Network costs about 80 cents a minute.
"We can't charge Medicare or an insurance company more for patients who require translation, so it's really on the hospital's dime," Wahl said. "But we can't provide quality care if we can't speak with the patients."
Wahl estimated that nonprofit hospitals in Illinois spent more than $14 million on medical interpretation services in 2008, a financial burden that smaller suburban and rural hospitals -- where immigrants increasingly are showing up -- are finding especially tough. The alternative in a pinch, now frowned upon by hospitals, is to use untrained translators such as family members, children and non-professional hospital employees.
Dr. Ervin Hire, a medical oncologist at Mount Sinai Hospital, which started using the Video Interpretation Network in 2008, says he likes that the system allows family members to be just that: family.
"Sometimes we have bad news to tell patients and you start speaking about end-of-life issues. Is the granddaughter capable of speaking about these emotional topics? Is she telling the patient what I said correctly?" Hire said. "With an interpreter, I know what I'm saying is being communicated properly, and that's helpful for the whole family."
November 8, 2010 BY ESTHER J. CEPEDA, Chicago Sun-Times
Is it that bad? Is heading the Chicago Public Schools so grinding, so arduous, that Ron Huberman couldn't hang in there a few months longer until the incoming mayor put someone new in place?
It may well be. Still, it seems criminal that he couldn't wait it out just a little while longer so that the Chicago school system wouldn't be forced to stop concentrating on education and staffing matters and instead deal with the uncertainty that the impending musical chairs will bring. But Mayor Daley said it best: If someone doesn't want to be around anymore, it's pointless to try to force it.
Because the mad scramble to see who will be put in the critical position of CEO -- the one we'll have for a long time, as opposed to the one who has little chance to warm the seat for more than six months -- has begun ahead of schedule, the most important question is now in the spotlight: Should CPS' top leader be a business executive or an educator?
Daley has always seen the school system as a business puzzle that only a seasoned executive could sort out, and that's not a bad way to look at it. The day-to-day responsibilities of running CPS Inc. is a $5.5 billion enterprise -- almost 70 percent of which is exclusively dedicated to teacher and staff personnel costs which go up every single year.
Educators, of course, see the top leadership role as one that requires not only extensive higher education in pedagogical theory and educational leadership, but also a firm grip on curriculum and methods for instructing all students, regardless of background. Most think this can come only after having stood in front of classrooms filled with hungry, depressed, exceptionally bright or otherwise unique students.
The reality is that CPS needs a leader that is neither more nor less than an exceptional teacher or brilliant business mind -- it needs someone who is both.
Eons ago, the trajectory of the average school teacher was to graduate from high school into a college education program and then probably spend an entire career at the school where the initial student teaching semester was done. A few would maybe get an advanced degree and move into administrative leadership roles and certainly none of them would have any real-world business or management experience.
That tide turned about fifteen years ago. The demand for teacher training programs for disillusioned doctors, lawyers, marketers and other professionals who wanted to get into classrooms skyrocketed. Then highly competitive programs such as Teach for America and schools run by groups such as the Knowledge is Power Program started booming. They cultivated young wiz kids who knew they eventually wanted to be entrepreneurs, political giants or CEOs but chose to spend a few months training to teach low-income students for a few years.
The reality is that aside from the standard reasons -- politics, posturing and power plays -- neither the current nor the future mayor has to make a gut-wrenching choice between a CPS leader who can navigate the complex details of various federal education programs and their statutory requirements or one who can read between the lines of the profit and loss pages of a financial report.
Regardless of what teachers or bureaucrats prefer in a leader, the students and parents who rely on the Chicago Public Schools deserve nothing less than someone who knows exactly how to run both a successful business and a successful classroom.
In the slicing and dicing of the electorate by age, gender, race, ethnicity, geography, income, political affiliation, marital status, education level and propensity to vote, one type of engaged -- probably disillusioned -- voter tends to slip through the cracks:
Single moms.
The very term "single mom" conjures up an array of stereotypes that generally revolve around the twin anchors of under-education and a reliance on welfare benefits. But single moms are an educated, hardworking, aspirational and rapidly growing part of our community -- and they need the time and attention of our elected officials.
"Candidates should really think about what's most important to single moms -- quality child care and education for our kids and for us. That would really help us focus on making our lives better and help us make our whole community better," says Emily Carrazco, a divorced 34-year-old who everyday wakes and feeds her 7-year-old daughter and 3-year-old son, drops them off at two different schools, then makes to her way to the Loop for a full workday.
Carrazco told me her experiences as a single mom during a short break in her hectic day as an accounts payable clerk.
This was two days after the Eleanor Foundation, a Chicago organization that funds economic security programs for households headed by working moms, released a report shattering old inner-city single mom stereotypes.
According to the report, "Changing Conditions in a Changing World," women-led households have increased 9.77 percent -- more than double the rate of "traditional" households in the Chicago region since 2000.
The number of households headed by single working mothers earning lower-to-moderate incomes grew 18.5 percent between 2000 and 2008, with significant increases in the suburbs, resulting in a third of a million women-led households in the Chicago region.
According to the report, which used 2008 census data, these women are increasingly Hispanic and educated. The percentage of women with less education than high school declined to 18 percent of the total population of women studied, while the percentage of women with a college degree or higher degree increased to 13.
They also work hard for their money. Strikingly opposite the stereotype of the freeloading single mom, 78 percent of these women were employed and only 7 percent were unemployed -- and reported that they were actively looking for work -- representing a 10 percent drop in unemployment in this group since 2000. Of the single moms with a job, 79 percent worked more than 35 hours a week and only 6 percent received any public assistance in the 12 months before the survey.
"It's rough when we're viewed as on welfare, not pulling our own weight," Carrazco says. "I really have to do work of two people, and it's hard to make ends meet. I don't have access to a lot of assistance programs because I don't make a large enough income to live comfortably month to month and I don't make a low enough income to qualify for affordable housing, foods stamps or free childcare. It is the struggle we face day to day."
Carrazco's challenges are magnified by city living. Unlike most suburban single moms, Carrazco deals with two separate private schools for her children because she doesn't want her kids going to the low-performing public schools. Because she has to drive her kids, she can't use public transportation and ends up paying outrageous downtown parking fees, reducing her limited funds even more.
Like other single moms, Carrazco says she has high hopes for Tuesday's election.
"What I'd most like the elected candidates to do is really think what we go through," she says. "Forget about what's politically correct or what others would like to hear and really think about how they'd handle their lives with the challenges single moms face. Would their views be different. Would they run their offices differently? I would hope so."
A little over a year ago, I wrote a column headlined "Recovery? Worst ahead for some," pointing out the green shoots that were, at that time, emerging in the economy.
Christy Romer, then on the President's Council of Economic Advisers, had just reported that 1.1 million jobs were added in the third quarter of 2009, 21,000 Oprah fans had swarmed the Magnificent Mile, and Steve Jobs had just introduced an iPod equipped with a video camera and radio tuner.
The clouds seemed like they would soon part.
But in that same column, I quoted Terry Mazany, president and chief executive officer of the Chicago Community Trust, who was the voice of cold reality.
"Nationally, there's talk of the green shoots of an economic recovery, but we know that in a three-year cycle, the pain of 2009 will prove to have been the easiest," Mazany said back then.
I called Mazany a few days ago, after the Chronicle of Philanthropy reported that donations to the nation's biggest charities dropped 11 percent last year, the worst decline in the two decades since the Chronicle started its "Philanthropy 400," which ranks organizations that raise the most money from private sources. The drop in contributions was nearly four times as great as the next-biggest annual decrease -- 2.8 percent in 2001 -- when charities similarly struggled to raise money from recession-battered donors.
"If you recall, a year ago I told you this would happen because foundation funding, for the most part, experiences a lag effect, and we knew that in 2010, 2011, 2012, we'd continue to see reduced foundation grant-making," Mazany said. "There is a compounding factor -- we are just now starting to experience the pain of the state budget cuts. Up until Sept. 30, when federal funding officially ended through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the stimulus artificially masked the state budget's underlying weakness, and the impact is now twice as great."
At an early October panel discussion on the issues Chicago's minorities should ask political candidates, I and other attendees got an earful about exactly what havoc the state budget mess is wreaking on those who have been slammed the worst by this recession's long tail.
Amy Rynell, of the Social Impact Research Center at the Heartland Alliance, put the need in perspective. "According to our most recent census numbers, one in every five people in Chicago are living in poverty and one in every 10 are living in extreme poverty," she said, emphasizing that those hit worst are minorities.
A report released by the Pew Research Center just last week measured the rates at which different groups lost financial ground. They found it to be 50 percent of all whites, 66 percent of blacks and 70 percent of Latinos.
Sylvia Puente, executive director of the Latino Policy Forum, told the crowd at the panel discussion: "The budget crisis is having a devastating impact on the Latino community and the small, grass-roots, nonprofit community organizations, who were struggling before the crisis hit. They're giving up a lot just to stay open and continue providing services."
While there are no simple answers to how to keep the safety net from continuing to fray, Mazany stepped away from his self-described role as Mr. Doom and Gloom to offer a few silver linings. Because of the belt-tightening, he predicted, organizations will become more innovative to make the most of their resources and rely less on public dollars.
And, he said, the Chicago Community Trust will again this year offer a Unity Challenge Fund, which fills budget gaps for organizations caught in the state reimbursement molasses.
"Though most of us are saving everything we've got because of the uncertainty of the times, individual contributions do remain strong," Mazany said. "And we continue to stress to individuals who haven't lost their jobs to please consider donations to those living in poverty and are the most vulnerable."
If you hadn't heard, last Wednesday the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning approved "GO TO 2040," the first strategic regional plan since Daniel Burnham's in 1909.
You'll be happy to know it's designed to guide development and investment decisions for the next 30 years in the seven counties that make up the Chicago area.
But I'll stop right there because I'd bet 10 bucks most Chicagoans have never even heard of the agency.
Five years ago, the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning was formed with the aim of getting representatives from Cook, DuPage, Kane, Kendall, Lake, McHenry, and Will counties to coordinate efforts to strengthen the entire region. The alternative was to continue to compete with each other for limited resources.
Considering the tensions that have existed between the city and the suburbs since the 'burbs started attracting more and more Chicagoans and businesses, the creation of the agency was a feat in itself and a long time in coming.
It would have been easy for the agency to fall on its face in trying to shape this regional plan. After all, planning isn't sexy, consensus-building can be painful, and frankly, though we've been in special pain for the last two years with the Great Recession, things have been rough for a lot longer than that.
But the plan presented by the agency last week is far-reaching, pragmatic and nuanced. It takes issues we face daily -- such as housing prices that make it hard for people to live near their jobs and traffic congestion that makes for soul-crushing commutes -- and calls for specific investment and development solutions.
The plan touches on water and energy conservation, open space and even on the promotion of sustainable local food. And it offers detailed recommendations for transportation projects -- the rehabbing of aging infrastructure, new construction, public transit improvements and expanded freight networks -- that promise the most bang for our limited bucks.
The plan points out that our schools and work-force development efforts are not keeping up with those in other major centers of commerce -- in the U.S. but also in other countries such as Brazil and China -- and lays out ideas for developing skilled workers to achieve the innovation that will help the Chicago area complete in a global marketplace.
The entire GO TO 2040 plan is a big, thick book, www.cmap .illinois.gov, chock full of ideas that came up through diverse committees and were shaped by the comments of more than 35,000 residents.
Think about that: The average block party committee goes to war over whether to have competitive lawn darts or bean bag tossing, yet the agency's strategy is the result of a consensus among organizations representing the whopping 1,226 separate and independent units of government in northeast Illinois.
The plan offers ideas for reforming state and local tax policy and for improving residents' access to government information.
But most importantly, the plan calls upon all these disparate units of government to coordinate investments of scarce dollars. The challenges facing the entire Chicago region require individual players to forgo a piece of the pie today in order to ensure that there's even a pie tomorrow.
It's worth your time to look into the bold recommendations the agency has outlined, and I'll be writing about them in depth in the coming months. Not every proposed offered will be carried out in the next 30 years, but it's comforting to know that, at long last, we again have a plan.
The 29-day sit in at Whittier Elementary School continues on with parents and supporters still camped out in a makeshift library in a former field house, with the hopes that the Chicago Public Schools system will renovate the structure and make it a permanent library. They say independent experts have found the building to be structurally salvageable.
But CPS insists the building is structurally unsound and must be demolished, creating space for a new play area.
The parents experienced a triumph of sorts last week when the City Council ordered CPS to turn the gas in the field house back on. All the same, the families occupying the field house are drinking bottled water, sleeping on inflatable mattresses and living in conditions that CPS CEO Ron Huberman has called ''unsafe'' and ''an accident waiting to happen.''
''Keep in mind my background was head of emergency management. I know an unsafe situation when I see one,'' Huberman told WBEZ-FM (91.5). ''That is a small building. That building has no carbon-monoxide detector. That building has no fire-suppression system. It's now full of books and it's full of kids. That makes us very, very nervous.''
But jittery nerves have not been enough to bring an end to what any reasonable person would call a disaster waiting to happen.
How things got to this point is beyond me. But with a lame-duck mayor, a possibly lame-duck schools CEO, and a city captivated by February's mayoral election, maybe it's not surprising the standoff has yet to be resolved.
Just for kicks, I talked to most of the declared or contemplating mayoral candidates to see what they would do. Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart declined to comment because he's not officially in the race. U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez declined to comment and, to my puzzlement, Rahm Emanuel's ''Tell it like it is'' campaign also refused to weigh in. The rest of the field, of course, said they never would have let such an outrage get so out of hand, which admittedly is easy to say.
Ald. Robert Fioretti (2nd) cut straight to the chase: ''An elected school board offers way more checks and balances than an appointed one.''
State Sen. Rickey Hendon said the same and added: ''They should build them the library even if they have to build one from the ground up -- that would satisfy the people and that's the most important thing a mayor can do. The money? There's always money.''
Both U.S. Rep. Danny Davis and businesswoman Carol Moseley Braun said they never would have let the situation get to this point. ''I would have called my superintendent in immediately and ensured that the parents would be sat down with and listened to so I wouldn't have to step in,'' Davis said.
And Moseley Braun said she would have raised private funds for the new library, if necessary -- anything to ''not discourage parental involvement.''
Jay Stone, a clinical hypnotherapist, and state Rep. Annazette Collins said they'd listen, listen, listen to parents. But Collins said she wouldn't necessarily give in. ''Though I would try to negotiate, you have to understand that everybody in the school district wants a new school lunchroom, playground, library,'' Collins said. ''You can't give in just because parents sit in. What if everybody did this?''
Gery Chico and Miguel del Valle both shook their heads that such a situation could still play out in Chicago, where Latino parents have had to stage hunger strikes to get schools built. Both practically guaranteed their own school leaders would not get themselves into this sort of mess, but del Valle said he'd "encourage CPS to work it out themselves.''
And Chico thinks the parents are aiming too low. ''They should ask for the park and the library," he said. "It can be done. It kills me that parents have to agonize over such a small issue -- this should have been solved by now.''
All easy to say from the sidelines, but it does feels like February might bring a much needed breath of fresh air.
Rahm Emanuel's official entry into Chicago's mayoral race and the probability of the Bears making it to Super Bowl XLV?
Answer:
Both topics are taking up space and time in the heads of plenty of people who are eligible to vote in the Nov. 2 election but probably won't because "I didn't know" how/when/where or when the deadline to register was and, of course, "What's the point?"
We all have other things on our minds. I totally get that. I'm personally focused on procuring good Chihuahua-size Halloween costumes. But while watching the posturing of all the would-be Chicago mayors these last few weeks has been tons of fun, that's all anyone with an interest in local politics seems to want to talk about, which means the Nov. 2 elections are being totally eclipsed by next February's election for mayor.
Which is exactly why I blew in a call to the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners last week to ask how things are shaping up.
My first conversation was with spokesman Jim Allen.
"It's quiet -- and it's alarmingly quiet," he said. "People have leap-frogged to February. Given the significance of the issues confronting the country right now and the major offices on the ballot, our concern is that too many voters have put November 2nd on the back burner."
My next call went to the Chicago chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations, a Muslim civil liberties advocacy organization which, in partnership with the Illinois Coalition of Immigrant and Refugee Rights, has been doing extensive community outreach to get people registered to vote. Spokeswoman Amina Sharif was as struck by the lack of interest as I am.
"I don't understand why people aren't passionate about getting out to vote," she said. "So many major things are happening right now . . . but people are just fed up and it makes them apathetic to vote."
Ali Malik, the council's New American Democracy Project fellow, says he's seeing apathy in neighborhoods across the city -- it's rough out there.
"We know people don't vote in midterm elections like they do for presidential elections," Malik said. "But I'm telling people that for us in the Muslim community it goes far beyond the controversy over the proposed New York City Ground Zero mosque. There is serious Islamophobia going on and we need to vote for people who will represent all voters equally."
Like the council, African-American, Latino and other special interest groups are hitting would-be voters with issues specific to their concerns to get them to register to vote.
So consider yourself informed: Tuesday, is the last day to register to vote. You have to be a U.S. citizen, at least 18 on Election Day and a resident of your precinct 30 days before the election. A simple Google search will yield the city or county website where you can find your nearest voter registration location, and while you're at it, you can learn about grace period voting, early voting and absentee ballot voting, just in case.
As for "What's the point?" Well, politics literally disgust some people, and I completely understand that, too -- some politicians give us plenty of reason to feel disgusted. But that's not a fantastic reason to pass up the opportunity to pick the person you least hate to make decisions on critical issues that will impact you directly.
Langdon D. Neal, chairman of the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners, put it to me this way: "While there's this great interest in who is going to be the next mayor of Chicago, let's not forget the enormity of the offices up in the air in November. You've got the leaders of all branches of government from federal on down. There's the U.S. Senate, the governor, the president of the County Board to state legislative and judicial races -- they will all have an enormous impact in our lives, let's not overlook it."
From the moment the iconic black-and-white archival footage rolls, then fades into shots of impoverished Latin American children playing ball to the tune of Jose Feliciano’s sweet rendition of "The Star-Spangled Banner," Ken Burns and Lynn Novick’s new documentary is a magic carpet ride through the last 20 years of baseball.
Never mind your crummy job (or lack thereof), never mind the pressures of everyday life — heck, never mind whether you’re a fan of the game or not. The momentum of this film carries you effortlessly off on the beer ’n’ hot dog, roasted peanut-scented American romp called baseball.
Manager Joe Torre and the Yankees celebrate after winning the 2000 World Series, less than a year before baseball would help New York and the nation heal after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
"The Tenth Inning," a two-part, four-hour documentary, is the next chapter in the 1994 series "Baseball." From the crippling 1994 strike to the increasing dominance of Latino and Asian players, to mega-stadiums, interleague play and the wild card, we see America’s national pastime at its best and worst. Two decades of ups and downs — from doping scandal darlings Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa and Barry Bonds to the Cinderella-story Boston Red Sox — are put under a microscope and into the context of baseball’s past heroes and villains, then held up to the mirror of today’s America.
With the same deep love of the hallowed institution that permeated "Baseball," "The Tenth Inning" wastes little time in tackling the 100-pound gorilla in the diamond and jumps right into a discussion of what doping has done for — and to — the game. But it does so by first putting the issue of steroid use into the context of other soap-opera-esque discrepancies that have hovered at the margins of the game since its infancy: bribery attempts, game-fixing conspiracies and corked bats.
Then, Burns walks the issue home, straight into our medicine cabinets.
"We are a society that turns to performance-enhancement drugs for everything. There’s vitamins, sleeping aids — there’s Viagra!" Burns said back in August when he was in Chicago to pre-screen his film for WTTW members. He was echoing the very point that historian Paul Thorn made near the beginning of the first night’s episode: "We live in a time when we think anything can be cured by medication. If you want to talk about a performance-enhancing culture, let’s look at Viagra, Levitra, all the things that are advertised on daytime TV. This is the time we live in. We believe that modern medicine can make us supermen."
The film’s writers, David McMahon, Novick and Burns, don’t merely rely on luminaries such as comedian Chris Rock to point out that human nature dictates most people would take steroids to make it big in the big leagues. They anchor two decades’ worth of lightning-quick record smashes on the story of how Barry Bonds went from being a frustrated, mostly ignored son of a record-setting right fielder to the buff, steroid-popping home run king who never felt he’d gotten the respect or the due he deserved from both ballclubs and fans.
Based on exclusive pre-screenings, there is already some criticism of the documentary that implies the filmmakers went easy on Bonds by telling his personal story in such heart-wrenching detail, but Burns continually points to the bigger picture beyond any one player. The filmmakers point out the role fans played in Bonds’ saga, but Burns says the tension between succeeding and succeeding at any cost essentially boils down to the complexities of being human in our modern world. "Baseball is a precise mirror of who we are," Burns said.
This is not to say that "The Tenth Inning" dwells just on scandal; there are many complex and intertwined themes. For instance, the stories of immigrant baseball players and their struggles are woven throughout the film. And those stories dovetailed nicely with the business and marketing aspects of the game that are both a threat and an opportunity as baseball becomes more global and America becomes more diverse.
One particularly touching section of the documentary recalls what happened to baseball in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on New York City’s World Trade Center. Then-Yankees manager Joe Torre talks about the morning the attacks occurred while archival footage plays, taking the viewers directly back into the moment before recalling Tuesday, Sept. 18, 2001, when the Yankees resumed play against the White Sox in Chicago.
Images of fans holding signs saying "We are all Yankees" immediately bring us back to Burns’ basic premise: that baseball reflects the continuing evolution of a diverse America seeking to hold its athlete heroes to high standards even while forgiving their peccadilloes in order to enjoy the game, warts and all, and that this instinct binds us together as a community.
Burns and Novick also spend time on the 1994 strike, and the dramatic way then-hero Roger Clemens brought an ethic of hard work and fan love to the game and drove a resurgence in the game’s popularity.
Though there have been phenomenal changes to how athletes get into the game and fans experience it — enhanced minor league baseball recruitment and marketing; split screen; real-time viewing; smart-phone apps for fans to follow games, which bolster fantasy leagues, and whole communities devoted to following baseball from a strictly statistical viewpoint — Burns and Novick were not able to fit it all into this installment.
"The biggest criticism I ever hear is about all I’ve left out, which is actually a huge compliment," Burns said. "But I think we did get in some really important turning points in this inning.
"Baseball reflects who we are as a community, as a country. It reflects the sentimental values we hold dear and is the greatest game that has ever been invented," Burns said. "It has a rhythm; it’s like breathing."
Burns’ reverence and enthusiasm are present in almost every moment of this film — from the looks on the faces of impoverished children in the Dominican Republic who play their hearts out with broom-handle bats in the hopes of becoming the next Sammy Sosa, to the looks on fans’ faces when the infamous "Bartman ball" was exploded, to testimonials from Boston fans about how life-altering was the Red Sox’s 2004 World Series win — their first in 86 years.
This is a TV experience well worth blocking out two evenings’ worth of time. Viewers will not only revisit where baseball has been for the last 20 years but also catch a glimpse of what it might look like for generations to come.
Esther J. Cepeda writes a weekly column for the Sun-Times
Eventually, the dogpile will clear. Those likely to declare they have what it takes to lead this city of hot winds and big shoulders will either garner the dollars, personal support and 12,500 valid signatures to legitimately get on the ballot to make a go of it, or be left with a decent story about how many people called him (or her) on that gorgeous September afternoon when Mayor Daley called it quits.
Those who make it beyond "hopeful" status to see their names on the ballot will have a unique opportunity to change the way campaigns are run and politics is played in this town. They will have it within their power to eradicate from our city's lexicon that hideous phrase "the Chicago Way," which implies nothing less than self-serving, graft-slinging corruption.
That whole "vote early and often" and "we don't want nobody nobody sent" Chicago Way shtick is way past its prime and must be allowed to pass into history, just as the images from the bloody 1968 Democratic convention have.
What Chicago needs on the road to Feb. 22, 2011, is not just a good, clean fight, but a smart one.
Chicago being, well, Chicago, it may be too much to ask that there be no hitting below the belt, tripping, pushing, holding, biting, spitting or hitting after your opponent is down. All the same, here's my candidate tip sheet for a spirited 10 to 12 rounds toward City Hall's fifth floor:
• Don't waste our time by exaggerating on the hustings. You will be embarrassed if you didn't actually invent the Internet, fight in Vietnam or teach poor kids to read -- and despite your best efforts, someone will call you out on it. Get your annoying Aunt Millie -- the one who never really liked you much -- to attend all your public speeches and tell you in blunt terms when you've oversold your "humble Chicago roots." Every candidate needs someone who keeps them from believing their own hype.
• Understand, value and respect the experiences, needs and viewpoints of Chicago's diverse population, but don't oversell scant interactions or present yourself as a cheerleader for causes you may not even understand. For example, if you've never had firsthand experience with Chicago's ultra-diverse Hispanic community aside from eating really great Mexican food, vow to learn. But for the love of Pete, don't pander -- no one's going to buy it.
Back in July, a candidate for statewide office sent out a press release announcing he was reaching out to Chicago's Latino community by meeting with local educators and business leaders. Yawn. I've heard nothing since. Double yawn.
• While we're talking about race and ethnicity, let me say this: Anyone who really cares about ensuring that all the residents of Chicago thrive will care principally about visionary leadership, relationship-building and management skills. So please, don't exploit or ignore the differences between the many ethnic, racial or special-interest groups jockeying for power -- harness them.
• About your experience: Spend less time telling us what you did in the past and more time convincing us how you'll scale your skills to tackle the headaches you'll inherit in May 2011. And yes, the challenges are huge, but channel Daniel Burnham and let this city know you intend no little plans.
• Strike a fair balance in working for both the Chicago that serves the people who actually live here and for the Chicago that drives the economies of the surrounding six counties. It's cool to snub your nose at suburbanites, but our fortunes are tied up together, and metropolitanwide alliances cannot be undervalued.
And while you're at it, don't underestimate the leadership and naked determination necessary to keep Chicago on the national and international stage.
Good luck to the candidates for mayor of the best city in the world. In the enduring words of my favorite ring announcer, Michael Buffer: "Let's get ready to rrrrrrrumble!"
As unemployment continues to cast its shadow across the country's present and future, young people poised to become the first in their family to go to college are asking themselves whether an expensive degree really is the smart choice.
Here we are, 15 years after a movement to promote college to qualified low-income and minority students got under way, and many of the very people who were supposed to be empowered by that degree are out of work. Of all young adults with degrees, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 17 percent are unemployed or not seeking work.
"People are starting to lose their faith in the promise of college as being the way out of poverty and the way to create a better life," said Phil Jackson, executive director of the Black Star Project, a Chicago nonprofit that has been on the front lines of college access efforts since its inception in 1996.
"The families I come into contact with look around them, see the degreed professionals in their communities who sacrificed so much to go to college and are now sitting at home unemployed," he told me. "They're no longer believing the hype about college being the path to a better life. They say, 'You can be just as unemployed without a degree.' "
I called Jackson on a hunch that headlines were scaring away the very people who could best influence a young student to take a shot at college: parents.
He shocked me with this first-hand account: "For months we have been promoting Saturday morning college preparation sessions that give families the opportunity to talk one-on-one with colleges and university academic and financial aid representatives from across the country. I had one school tell me, 'Bring us your qualified students, we are willing to sign them up on the spot.' We promised them a good turnout, screamed about the opportunity from the rafters, and do you know how many families came out? Not one person showed up."
Jackson's observations seem to back up data showing that faith in a college degree as a sure ticket to a prosperous future is eroding. Last month, the Wall Street Journal reported that in a survey of 3,000 people "63.5 percent said a college education is still a good financial investment for young adults given rising costs, compared to 79.1 percent last year and 80.9 percent in 2008."
There are more opportunities for those who attain a college degree or professional certification compared with those who immediately join the work force in low-paying unskilled jobs. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 2009, the unemployment rate was 9.7 percent for high school graduates but just 5.2 percent for those with bachelor's degrees. Median weekly earnings for college grads were $1,025, compared with $626 for high school grads. Even after you figure in the cost of repaying student loans, it works out in subsequent earning years.
Unfortunately, those figures don't speak much to a low-income family that has to decide whether to encourage their student to embrace the completely unknown quantity of college. The tradeoff between finding a job after high school and earning a small income today in exchange for taking out frighteningly large student loans on the promise of more money and opportunities later -- if the kid graduates -- is a difficult decision for a family with no college experiences.
For years, scholars have known that family influence is the most important factor in determining whether a student will go to college. As parents lose faith in the higher education system, at least a solution to the problem is clear. In the quest to get academically capable, low-income students into and through college, it's more important than ever to reach into the home to explain the long-term, lifetime monetary and non-monetary value of a degree to families with no college experience.
Regardless of higher education's many broken promises, there can be no doubt that when students and families question whether a college degree is a good investment, the answer is yes, in the long-term, a solid education will pay untold dividends.
The United States of America has been buffeted by the winds of transnational change and the storms of our punctured economy. As a nation, we're looking in the mirror and wondering if what we see is the America we all thought we knew.
Times being as tough as they are, there is a growing chorus of people inclined to look at me -- and others whose skin is brown and have the gift of speaking a second language -- and very literally say things like: "I don't know you, why are you here? You're dragging our schools and our job market down. You need to go back home."
Home? I was born in a hospital on the North Side of Chicago, grew up 1.2 miles west of Wrigley Field. Ironic: My soccer-crazy family moved from south of the border to a country where the language is studded with baseball metaphors and settled a stone's throw away from one of the game's crown jewels.
Alas, I never really took to baseball. But I always reveled in its status as the quintessential symbol of Americana -- as patriotic a pastime as kissing your mom and eating apple pie. So when documentary filmmaker Ken Burns swept through town last week to promote "Baseball: The Tenth Inning," a four-hour follow-up to his 1994 Emmy-winning documentary, I sat down with him to talk about that mirror of America we call baseball.
In the first three minutes of the film, broadcaster Keith Olbermann gives this stirring testimonial:
"Other sports have some interest in its own history and will occasionally make reference to it but [in] baseball . . . it's there. You come in the start of the game or the start of the season or the start of your own family, you feel as if you're joining the river midstream and all that has gone before. You can enjoy as much as if you were there, it's as simple as that."
Gulp. That's exactly how I feel about the Latino population's integration into our country -- we're joining the great American river midstream.
Not everyone sees it that way, but even as anti-Hispanic sentiment has geared up in the last few years, there has been no lack of talented Latino players being actively recruited to enliven our national pastime.
Ever since 1928, when Emilio Navarro blazed the Hispanic major league trail by becoming the first Puerto Rican to play in the Negro Leagues, Americans have been able to see Hispanics not just as resource-sucking immigrants, but as sports heroes who make the game -- and our country -- better.
In the new documentary, Burns and his co-director, Lynn Novick, delve into the Hispanic contribution to baseball with great compassion, presenting a fascinating and honest look at the rise of Latino players in the game.
While we're on the subject of baseball, by the way, Burns gave me his take on White Sox manager Ozzie Guillen's recent inflammatory complaint that new Latino players don't get the red carpet treatment that superstar Japanese players get.
"Guillen was absolutely right," Burns said without hesitation. "Sure, it's not economically viable to provide translators to individual players, but we always have to be sensitive to the needs of new players."
When I asked Burns if he thought the current anti-immigrant atmosphere threatened to dull fans' love of the game, he said that hateful nativist sentiments are harming our society in many ways, and he tried to put it in historical context.
"There is this 'otherness' that people fear," he said. "And right now, the Latino population is growing and this is just a continuation of the story, this demonization of the 'others.' "
In time, he predicted, this will pass for Latinos, as it has for so many other groups.
"Baseball is such a precise mirror of who we are," Burns said. "It is the story of immigration -- and assimilation. There were the Italians, the Irish and of course now the Latin Americans; the most common names in baseball today are Ramirez and Rodriguez."
Burns revels in holding up this mirror to America, and in "Tenth Inning" he shows us the America that he sees -- this magnificent, diverse, baseball-loving melting pot.
It's that time again: Teachers all over the country are tingling with excitement about getting back to school to meet and inspire a fresh new crop of students.
This fall, almost 300,000 new teachers will bring their diverse life experiences, plucky creativity and genuine idealism into the nation's schools.
Chillingly, 150,000 or so of them will quit teaching before their fifth year.
Had I not thrown in the towel after just two heartbreaking years, by this time I'd have already pulled out lesson plans to begin tweaking my instruction. Instead, I'm among the wistful who chose not to go on.
The difficulties that grind new teachers out of the noble profession are tragically complex: the socioeconomic challenges of students, lack of teaching supplies or up-to-date books, large class sizes, parental apathy, long hours, low pay and the solitary nature of the work.
These perennial teacher frustrations could easily be blamed on society's inability to provide students with the best circumstances possible or the sometimes stifling culture created by school administrators. But blame never helped a student or a teacher succeed.
Though there's no magic wand to cure the ills, we still have a responsibility to students to slow the revolving teacher door. A good start would be to insist on training programs that properly expose prospective teachers to the harsh realities of today's classrooms.
Most, if not all, teacher preparation curriculums require observations in multiple types of classrooms. What prospective teachers don't get is meaningful interaction with students, parents, peer teachers and administrators.
"The kind of training a student teacher gets in pre-service is almost always a simulated experience in which the expert teacher makes it all look seamless because that teacher has already done all the thinking and practicing," said Ellen Moir, chief executive officer of the New Teacher Center, a California-based organization focused on teacher and administrator initiation.
"There needs to be real, hands-on understanding of the demands of the job," she said.
Though there may be no way to adequately prepare a teacher for some of the heart-rending life experiences students from all backgrounds bring into the classroom (developmental delays, chronic illness, violence and drug addiction were just a few issues that wore me down), it's reasonable to expect schools to provide strong support for teachers new to these realities.
I vividly recall one of my principal's favorite sayings: "I love new teachers because what they lack in experience, they make up for with passion and energy."
Too often that passion and energy is taken for granted; the light that burns twice as bright really does burn half as long.
Those who entered teaching so they could "make a difference" for kids and society often put in 60-hour weeks in the classroom, make home visits and spend their own cash on lessons and supplies.
When this effort is exhausted with little immediate return, disillusionment and depression set in.
With no trained mentor in place to help, you can bet the light will soon burn out.
"The best, most effective way to keep eager new teachers in our schools is to provide comprehensive induction programs so that the minute they get hired they'll receive high-quality . . . on-going mentoring." Moir said. "And not just the old 'buddy system.' "
Chicago, by the way, had been using the New Teacher Center model.
Nearly 1,100 new teachers in 380 schools received intensive mentoring last year. But the program was axed in June, a victim of budget cuts.
All 54 teacher coaches were fired, though the center plans to use private money to hire seven coaches back and is negotiating with the school system to run a smaller program this fall.
High-quality mentoring is being practiced in many schools but the concept needs to gain firmer traction nationwide -- even in tough budget times.
More support is needed if we want to keep idealistic new teachers in our children's classrooms and off the dropout list.
In the decade since my daughter, Wren, died at birth, not much has changed for parents who have to endure such sorrow. There are still no iron-clad preventative measures mothers can take to guarantee their baby will make it through what is commonly an effortless pregnancy.
According to the Centers for Disease Control, every year more than 25,000 babies between 20 and 42 weeks of gestation are stillborn in the U.S. -- a shocking 10 times the number of deaths occurring from Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. This clocks out to about one stillbirth every 20 minutes.
Though advances in prenatal care have had a deep impact on infant mortality rates over the last 30 years, obstetricians are at a loss to explain why stillbirth rates remain as they do, or why the complex mystery continues to cut across geographic, racial, ethnic and socioeconomic lines.
One thing, however, has changed dramatically since I simultaneously said hello and goodbye to my stillborn baby girl: Economic times have gotten a lot tougher.
Today the Great Recession is increasingly squeezing stunned parents who thought they'd be struggling to pay for diapers and formula but instead are both grief-stricken and financially unprepared to deal with the expenses of burying their infant.
Enter the Dempsey Burdick Memorial Foundation, which provides headstones for struggling families who can't afford to buy proper grave markers for their lost babies.
It began in 2003, when grieving dad Kevin Burdick noticed the many rotted and broken plastic markers on the baby graves surrounding his own daughter Dempsey's memorial in an Arizona cemetery. He believed helping other parents complete the grieving process would be the best way to honor his daughter. "We've had a lot more requests this year. . . . We helped as many families in 2009 as we did in the previous three years," Burdick told me. "Families who have had this devastating loss, they're out of work, they don't have health insurance, they lose a baby and when you add the medical bills, funeral expenses, then consider a tiny marble stone that typically starts at $600 but can top the thousands -- forget it!"
The still-nascent foundation takes heart-rending written and e-mailed requests from all over the country, primarily through its website, and has so far helped 21 families in 13 states. The tiny staff, under Kevin's leadership, verifies need and vital records with agencies in each parent's home county, then negotiates with the cemetery and local monument companies to create and install a customized headstone.
Kevin began the foundation with his own money, but this year's increasing demand requires fund-raising efforts. The waiting list, which includes a Chicago mom hoping for a marker to place on her daughter's grave in Mount Hope Cemetery, is swelling.
As it turns out, those efforts also provide healing experiences for families who've had to face the agony of losing a baby. For instance, Malory Jimenez, a 26-year-old mother of two from Boston who lost her baby, Janessa, in May 2009, told me she encourages her family, friends and Internet support group peers to donate to the foundation so other grieving families can begin the healing process by memorializing their baby's brief life.
"When Janessa passed away we were devastated," Malory told me. "Though my husband and I had scrounged up $300 after the funeral, we just couldn't afford the marker. To think we couldn't give her the one and only thing she'd ever need, the one thing the grief counselors said we needed to cope with this loss . . . to think that there would be nothing to mark her grave . . . it killed us."
Of Dempsey's foundation and the headstone it provided, Malory says: "They were the light in the darkness that allowed me, my husband and son to go on."
Amazingly, some things -- the human capacity for both pain and benevolence -- also haven't changed in the decade since my Wren fluttered away. Though not long enough, she briefly lived in a world where even amid a symphony of unimaginable grief, there still ring notes of generosity and grace.
You've heard of "manteca?" It's the rendered pork fat -- a k a lard -- used in traditional Latin American cooking to fry anything and everything from plantain chips to chicken to bananas that have been stuffed with cheese and dipped in batter. Yummy!
Manteca makes food delicious. And Latinos love it. A lot. Too much, in fact. So much it's killing us.
OK, so it's not all the fault of our beloved manteca, but talk to most Latino moms or grandmas about healthier cooking and you'll see them instinctively slit their eyes with an expression that screams "Oh no, don't even think you're going to take my lard from me."
And how do you argue with your abuelita?!
This is what the Latino community is up against as leaders attempt to keep the twin evils of obesity and Type 2 diabetes from decimating the current and next generation.
It's a challenge the Miracle Center, a Northwest Side organization that offers arts programs for neighborhood kids, is tackling head-on through its Healthy Lifestyles Campaign. Funded in part by the Illinois Department of Public Health and the University of Illinois at Chicago's National Center for Excellence in the Elimination of Disparities, the campaign employs skits, cooking demonstrations and dance classes to teach kids what it means to live a healthy lifestyle -- knowledge they can take home to the entire family.
"The families are harder to reach than the kids," Youth Development Director Vanessa Torres told me on a steamy Thursday afternoon, when the day's exercise activities were taking place out in the shade under streams of alternating rain and cooling sprinklers.
"When we reached out to families through focus groups and through community presentations, we got a lot of pushback. They immediately think, 'This is trying to change our traditional Puerto Rican or Mexican food which is made with a lot of love, manteca, and oil.' They say, 'You can't change it, these are our roots,' " Torres said.
But in the face of such resistance, knowledge is a powerful tool, Executive Director Mary Santana says.
"Many parents just didn't know how this eating was affecting their kids' bodies," she said. "They didn't know what healthy food was until their kids helped them understand a few things about basic nutrition, and even about how marketers target Latino consumers with 'biggie' sizes and lower-cost unhealthy snacks."
All the same, it's a tough sell. Just ask Ryan Negron, 16, who has worked on creative projects for the program, helping to design posters, campaign slogans and a pitch on YouTube.
"I just didn't know anything about Type 2 diabetes or what the Body Mass Index was -- I had no clue," said Negron, a sophomore at Lincoln Park High School. "But it hit close to home; I'm tall so I thought I was OK, but I was overweight. I never expected it, but it got me to start getting in shape.
"My parents were pretty supportive. They were glad someone was teaching me about this stuff, especially because there are a lot of people in my family who are overweight," Ryan continued. "But my friends took some time. When I told them why I was getting healthy, some of them said, 'That's not cool -- they're pretty much calling you fat.' But I'd tell them, well, when you think about it, I am. When they want to get healthy, I tell them how and what to do."
It is absolutely beautiful to talk to a young person who is not frightened or overwhelmed by his body, but instead is active, informed and advocating for others to take better care of themselves.
The heartbreaking statistics -- one out of two Hispanic kids is overweight -- demand more full-community initiatives like this one to improve our health.
"It's a challenge, sure," Santana said. "We'll never put the manteca away for good, but maybe some days we can compromise with olive oil."
Last week, my Sun-Times colleagues Fran Spielman and Rosalind Rossi reported that Mayor Daley is considering Mary Ellen Caron, founder and former principal of his daughter's Catholic elementary school, to be the Chicago Public Schools' chief education officer.
My eyebrows raised. An administrator with little experience with the expansive, highly political bureaucracy of the country's third-largest public school district as chief education officer? Could Caron scale her past experience at an elite private school to the daunting tasks of eliminating achievement gaps, increasing academic rigor, managing meaningful evaluation processes and building capacity among teachers and administrative staff in a system beset by poverty's ills?
Maybe. Maybe not. But either way, two sentences in the story raised the eyebrows of many online readers: "If Mary Ellen Caron is tapped as chief education officer, she would be the first white and non-CPS educator to assume that post since Daley won control of the city's public schools in 1995. Over the last 15 years, the top CPS education post has been held by three successive African- American women, all former CPS principals in a system that is 45 percent black, 41 percent Latino and 9 percent white."
The comments board lit up:
"White? Oh my gosh, she's being judged by the color of her skin, and not based on character? Maybe this is what you Black and Hispanic people should know: RACE has no bearing on her qualifications. I'm sick of the race card."
Another reader wrote: "You mean Chicago has become so bad that black people only must fill positions previously filled by black people. That is racism! Come on, if someone said only white people can be governor of Illinois there would be protest marches in Springfield, and the media would be jumping up and down yelling racism."
And so on and so on.
I agree the position shouldn't be a black entitlement -- nor should it be a Latino entitlement, though 41 percent of CPS students are Hispanic. Every CPS student is entitled to the most qualified person for the job, regardless of political viability, personal relationships or skin color.
As it happens, diversity hiring has been at the top of my mind lately. When President Obama chose Elena Kagan as his Supreme Court pick, she was criticized for her racial hiring record at Harvard. As Boyce Watkins, a prominent African-American scholar, put it: "Kagan did not hire a single African American tenured or tenure-track faculty member. This says, very clearly, that Elena Kagan doesn't care about black people, at least when they are applying to be professors. . . . With all the applications that poured in every year from top black attorneys, she didn't feel that one single black, Latino or Native American scholar was qualified to teach at Harvard university?"
I have discussed both of these news items -- the Caron story and the Kagan story -- with a wide variety of people, and their reactions have been passionate. Dividing into two camps, some insisted that hiring of any kind should be a strictly merit-based, color-blind affair, while others insisted that strong measures must be taken to get people of color fully integrated into every workplace at every level.
Because I agree with both camps, I blew in a call to Gloria Castillo, president of Chicago United, a group that promotes equal access to professional opportunities, to help me square these seemingly opposing views.
"Yes, there has to be a commitment to accessing great talent, and there has to be a commitment to casting a wider net in order to find it," Castillo told me. "For doubters, I'd say do the research. Read Scott Page to learn how diversity of all kinds leads to more positive outcomes."
Page is the author of The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools and Societies.
And that, it seems, really is the best way to reconcile the two camps: Go the extra mile to find the very best applicants, including minority ones, for any position, and then be truly color-blind in making the final decision.
That won't necessarily diversify an organization as quickly as anyone would like, but it is the best way to ensure that diversity is equitably practiced in every workplace. And it does so in a way that no one feels discriminated against, unfairly assisted or disadvantaged or a victim to ethnic or racial entitlements.
Now that President Obama has given his definitive immigration law reform speech -- he said we need it but he didn't task anyone with making it happen -- and the Justice Department has filed its legal challenge to Arizona's law on grounds that state law should not preempt federal law, let's take a look at another, related topic: English language fluency.
It's one necessary ingredient in garnering popular support for any immigration reform.
The issue of not being able to easily communicate with newcomers to our neighborhoods, schools and businesses is one bone of contention people love to chew on, and it transcends any particular ethnicity or language.
The following comments from a widely circulated chain e-mail I received are representative of a popular opinion: "Today's American is not willing to accept today's new kind of immigrant any longer. Back in 1900 . . . people had to get off a ship and stand in a long line in New York and be documented. They made learning English a primary rule in their new American households and some even changed their names to blend in with their new home. They had waved goodbye to their birth place to give their children a new life and did everything in their power to help their children assimilate into one culture."
Concerns that newcomers don't want to become "real Americans" who will fully commit to our language -- much less our culture or values -- underlie the battle to reform our ineffective immigration system. Any reasonable reform plan must make English language fluency a required stepping stone on the path to legal residency.
Surrounding this touchy subject are two myths to be busted: that immigrants don't want to learn the language and that there aren't enough people to teach them. The truths are, of course, more complicated.
It's no secret that it's tough for immigrants of diverse nationalities to take classes to improve their English skills. Each day is a struggle for survival before adding impossible class times, money for books or supplies, child care issues or other barriers.
It's up to us as a nation to take a long honest look at how we -- merchants, marketers, customers, employers, neighbors -- can break down those barriers and encourage English-language fluency for all our residents. This effort would create both a sense of shared community and a multi- language bilingual work force that will help the U.S. compete in an increasingly global economy.
Then, we need to find ways to help organizations who already provide these resources to scale up for the massive task of helping those learning our ridiculously difficult language and find the skilled teachers and eager volunteers who can make it happen.
Mano a Mano Family Resource Center -- a tiny organization in Round Lake -- has hundreds of people on its waiting lists for all levels of English-as-a-second-language classes.
Carolina Duque, the center's executive director, says that in her neck of the woods -- a small town where in the last 10 years Latino immigrants have flooded once-exclusively middle-class, Caucasian neighborhoods -- there's also a waiting list of people ready to volunteer to help sharpen English skills.
"Both community leaders and residents get frustrated by feeling they can't talk to their neighbors, but we're really lucky that the community is working together to overcome those frustrations," Duque told me. "We mostly work with volunteers who don't speak Spanish -- they get so much joy from being able to help others learn English and they want to do more. Unfortunately, we just don't have the capacity to train more volunteers, hold more classes or service all the people who need the help or want to give it."
Round Lake is just one little town where the swirling torrents of immigration, language and culture are coming together with little rage or angst.
If the bipartisan immigration law reform architects can learn from this town's ability to address this critical cultural issue -- and put some muscular incentives behind uniting the country via the English language -- we'll be on a pathway to true reform.
What will be impact of Spanish-only preschool classes on young Latinos?
July 5, 2010
BY ESTHER J CEPEDA Sun-Times Columnist
Hold your breath for Latino members of the Illinois high school class of 2026. Who knows what recent changes in how they are to be taught will do for them.
Or to them.
New rules requiring pre-school English Language Learners (ELLs) to be educated according to the same standards as for kindergarten through 12th grade ELLs were adopted last month by the Illinois State Board of Education. The rules, which are expected to sail through the final legislative process in time for the 2010-2011 school year, will make Illinois the most prescriptive state in the union for identifying and educating English Language Learners.
This will affect hundreds of thousands of ELL students -- the fastest-growing segment of the study body in Illinois.
The overwhelming majority of these students come from Spanish-speaking households, and if they have 20 or more peers in the same grade level, they're entitled to a classroom with a Spanish-speaking teacher. Children whose native languages are not Spanish also must have 20 or more grade-level peers to qualify for language-specific instruction and, therefore, are rarely isolated in non-English-speaking classrooms the way Spanish-speaking kids are.
The thought of 3-, 4- and 5-year-old Hispanic kids getting stuck in Spanish-language classrooms so they can be taught beginning literacy skills in their parents' native language before being taught the basic tenets of English makes me want to poke my eyeballs out. Despite widely accepted research that says teaching literacy skills to a child in his or her native language leads to better English-acquisition, I -- like Arizona, California and Massachusetts, who've turned away from this educational philosophy -- am skeptical.
Why? Mostly because I know that what works modestly in the lab does not always transfer to the classroom -- especially when there already are too few qualified teachers for the many non-English-speaking students.
Plus, in my short time as a bilingual teacher, I witnessed horrors such as underqualified teachers who never felt the need to address their students in English. And teenage U.S.-born students still confined to Spanish-only classrooms because the "transitional bilingual" program had never made them truly bilingual or transitioned them to mainstream English-speaking classrooms.
Because I've had such experiences, I turned to two less-emotional experts to soothe my fears that Illinois' educational system is about to disintegrate for children who happen not to speak English by the age of 3.
"This goes back to the bilingual education laws put on the books back in the '70's, before 'preschool for all' was popularized," said Reyna Hernandez, a policy analyst at the Latino Policy Forum. "This isn't really a new idea. The state was looking at where there needed to be cleanup in the legal language that had artificially limited rules to K through 12."
She also stressed that "starting in 2014, these rules will mean students will be taught by teachers that are certified in language acquisition" and she said this is "one of the greatest points."
Nancy Wagner, assistant superintendent for curriculum and instruction at Arlington Heights' multinationally diverse School District 59, says there are always risk and costs -- in this case to teachers who must get additional education and to school districts that must pay for that upgraded expertise -- but this definitely is a step up.
"The laws regarding preschool used to not have anything regarding English instruction; teachers weren't specially trained and could basically screen all the kids, identify them as ELLs and teach them in whatever language they wanted," she said. "There are many factors to take into consideration when you're talking about such young children, but no program wants its bilingual students to be the lowest tracked program. The goal of the program HAS to be English language proficiency."
Gosh, I hope so. Better-trained preschool teachers who can effectively address the special needs of English language learners sure can't hurt.
Still, the proof will be in the pudding, so keep your fingers crossed for Latino members of the Illinois high school class of 2026.
DUBLIN, Ireland -- This column is a love note to the country that has -- more than any other -- made Chicago what it is today: a city defined by a group of immigrants who came to the U.S. tired and poor but overcame institutionalized discrimination to become a politically empowered majority.
Yep, I'm on the Emerald Isle, and everywhere I go I see a little bit of home. In addition to the Bulmer Vintage's thrilling billboard which cheekily asks "North Cider or South Cider?" there are the two stunning Santiago Calatrava creations -- the Samuel Beckett and James Joyce bridges over the River Liffey -- which make me long for the Chicago Spire to come to life.
Let me assure you, based on my admittedly unscientific but in-depth research, that your favorite Chicago Irish bar is a darned good replica of the pubs all over Dublin. And also, I met your Irish uncle; almost everyone I've spoken to in my travels has either been to Chicago or has a relative in our fine town.
Oh, and Dublin -- like the rest of Ireland and much of Chicago -- is filled with Polish immigrants whose ethnic grocery stores dot the town, displaying "mowimy po polsku" signs.
From the sparkling glass high-rises built during the tech boom to Ireland's standing as a top beef, lamb and dairy exporter (hog butchers to the UK) and the dueling Old St. Patrick's churches, there are a million similarities.
I've spent time here learning about Ireland's history of struggle, uprising, independence and migration. What impresses me the most is how these people made names for themselves in the U.S., and how their success could be a model for the Hispanic community.
The Irish started showing up on U.S. soil en masse in the 1830s. They spoke English, sure, but with an accent and were ridiculed, marginalized and discriminated against.
When they weren't being denied work just for being Irish, they generally were used as cheap, disposable labor. Unlike today's Latin American immigrants, they weren't singled out as "illegals" but were demonized as "immorals." Take your pick as to which could be considered worse in historical context.
The key to the eventual economic empowerment of Irish immigrants was a heavy involvement in the political process: They networked, building powerful organizations, then set out to work successful alliances with non-Irish ethnic groups.
That's the inspiring part, the part that makes me feel I'll be writing a similar success story about Hispanic immigrants in a few decades: The Irish came here poor, uninvited and uneducated. They were hated, used and abused, but they worked hard, found their own political voice and eventually became part of the landscape -- just another ethnic minority taking a fair shot at the American Dream while melting down in the great assimilation pot.
Latinos in the U.S. are getting there. For all the angst and gnashing of teeth the Arizona anti-illegal immigrant laws are causing, what cannot be denied is that today's divisive immigration anxiety is successfully uniting the Latino community into an all-American subgroup that can and will come together to have a strong voice in the U.S. It's a community that's starting to flex real political muscle and simultaneously create alliances with Asian, European and other immigrant groups on the rise.
Like the Irish, Latinos and their multicultural offspring will grow up to become just another part of the landscape, with representation in all walks of private, public and civic life. Oh, it'll take a while, but those days are coming.
Like the Irish, Hispanics will achieve complete assimilation through politics.
I can almost hear the cheers at the someday presidential inauguration: "Kiss me, I'm Latino."
And in this week's edition of "How Can I Make This World A Better Place?" I'm going to tell you a story about love.
But first, a word from our sponsor . . . Today's heartwarming testament to the indomitability of the human spirit comes from none other than Luis Barrios, executive director of the Latino Consortium, eight Chicago nonprofit organizations under contract with the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services to provide child welfare services to Hispanic children and their families.
Barrios would like you to know that of the roughly 17,000 children in the Illinois foster care system, about 6 percent are Latino. And while they are only the sixth group most in need of foster parents (behind brother-sister pairs and ahead of babies born with HIV), those numbers are sure to grow as the Hispanic population continues its explosive growth.
Unsurprisingly, one of the big challenges to finding foster care parents for these kids is the language barrier.
"We need bilingual foster care parents -- those fluent in any language other than English, of course, but especially those who can speak Spanish," Barrios told me one sunny afternoon last week as he struggled with my remarkable ignorance about what foster care is and how it differs from adoption.
"Foster care is a temporary placement outside a child's home, usually due to abuse, neglect or other family problems -- it's an alternative to group homes or institutional care -- but it's not intended as a permanent living arrangement," he told me. "The point is to protect the child, with the ultimate goal of returning the child back home to the rehabilitated family."
It's exactly because of that end goal of reuniting children with their families that bilingual foster care parents are critical: It's not because the kids don't speak English, but because the foster family must be able to communicate with the child's family in their language.
And now, this week's edition of "How Can I Make This World A Better Place?"
Let me tell you about Georgina Salmeron. One fine day 16 years ago, her husband, Francisco, who at the time worked for Seguin Services, a nonprofit, community-based agency offering social and rehabilitative services to adults and children with special needs, came home and asked her if she'd mind "fostering" a sick child he'd met at Seguin. At the time, they had four young ones of her own, but they had the guts to open their home and hearts to a child with a severe developmental disability.
"I can't say for sure, but by now it's probably been 10 kids we've had. Even though my own kids are grown and left the house, we still take foster kids in," Georgina told me. "We just like it so much we keep doing it -- and there's such a need!"
Georgina and Francisco are extremely unusual; not only are they Spanish bilingual, but they don't bat an eye at severe physical or developmental disabilities.
"Right now I have an African-American baby who just has so many problems because he was born with drug-related complications," she says matter of factly. "Our hands are always full."
How do they do it?
"It's not about the size of your house or your paycheck," she said. "It's about opening your heart. And what you get back. It's really a beautiful thing to open your life to a child who needs love -- and someone to love -- and patience, stability."
The answer to the question: "How Can I Make This World A Better Place?" is simple. Consider being a bilingual foster parent.
Call (800) 624-KIDS and a local DCFS or private child welfare agency representative will contact you, and after you've heard the tremendous impact you can have on the life of a child, you can decide if offering foster care is a good plan for you and your family.
"There are so, so many kids who need a temporary home," Georgina said, "and it's so beautiful to send them back to their family well-fed and happy."
The latest casualty in the war against illegal immigration is not the Highland Park girls basketball team, it's -- drumroll please -- reason. You know: the sense that God gave a goose.
How else to explain the flat-out immigration madness sweeping this great nation?
Take the Highland Park High School decision to pull out of the Holiday Invitational girls tournament in Scottsdale, Ariz., in December, which they happily committed to back in March before Gov. Jan Brewer decided to sign the infamous SB 1070 bill. That's the law that critics say legalizes racial profiling against Latinos based on vague gut reactions as to who might or might not be an illegal immigrant.
School District 113 decided to pull out for so-called safety reasons, but Assistant Supt. Suzan Hebson threw in that the trip "would not be aligned with our beliefs and values" because of the recent Arizona legislation.
OK, how tacky was it to let the Arizona organizers of this school-sponsored event, who had nothing to do with this state law, find out about the rebuke via the Thursday morning news? Very.
But not nearly as tacky -- scratch that, make it senseless and borderline cruel -- as using the hopes and aspirations of a team of plucky young basketball-playing, cookie-selling schoolgirls who actually won their first conference title in 26 years to make a national political statement.
A national political statement that, by the way, lit a fire under Caribou Killer Barbie Sarah Palin and gave the rest of the hysterical Mexican haters who pose as strict defenders of immigration laws a unique opportunity to actually be 100 percent right about something.
This e-mail message from one such constant complainer -- who proudly begs for "CINCO-DE-PORTATION!" -- hit my inbox first thing Thursday morning: "You probably heard by now . . . Well i [sic] myself thinks [sic] this is totally wrong, and has broken these girls [sic] hearts. They played their hearts out to win and qualify for the tourney. They worked so very hard, with bake sales, car washs [sic] etc. to earn the money to finance the trip also. Only to have the politicly [sic] correct liberal idiot administrators say they can't go. If you would, please email the school's administrator and tell them they are WRONG."
When you're right, you're right, buddy -- and congrats on the coup.
Just as Arizona has blurred the line between what's under the purview of federal law and state law, so has Highland Park High School blurred the line between politics and educational experiences. Sadly, they won't be the last.
The backlash against Arizona has become a national movement. Local governments across the country are suspending travel to the state and banning future contracts with businesses headquartered there, and masses of people are in some way or another boycotting the state in hope of getting the law repealed.
Now that Brewer has signed yet another bad bill into law -- this one aimed at ensuring that no Arizona schoolchildren receive instruction in classes that are designed for students of a particular ethnic group or that advocate ethnic solidarity -- Arizona will surely continue morphing into a national joke.
I don't know if this new law banning ethnic studies classes will uphold its stated desire to teach Arizona's schoolchildren "... to treat and value each other as individuals and not be taught to resent or hate other races or classes of people." More likely it will legislate that no non-Caucasian child can learn about his or her family's heritage.
What I do know is that all this immigration-related craziness should, as much as humanly possible, be kept out of school classrooms and playgrounds. We can't let our country get so hysterical over a single issue that we lose sight of how wrong it is to play politics with kids.
Moms get a day -- what they really need is a good job
May 3, 2010
BY ESTHER J CEPEDA Sun-Times Columnist
This week, people across the land will buy pink, frilly, and/or shiny stuff to commemorate the Herculean effort their moms put into birthing and raising them. As if brunch and a gift card to the local nail spa could ever really express anyone's gratitude for not being left by the side of the road after a particularly colicky night!
I tend to frown on such forced days of parental appreciation, but -- let's face it -- if there were not a date printed on a calendar, who among us would pay the moms in our lives the homage they so richly deserve?
Still, let's not let the moment pass without taking the opportunity to consider the day after. While you're out and about this week picking out just the right card for the big momma in your life, turn your attention to what the day after Mother's Day will look like for millions of women across the country.
According to "Aiming Higher: Removing Barriers to Education, Training and Jobs for Low-Income Women," a report to be published this Wednesday by the Women's Economic Security Campaign, things aren't looking so good for moms these days. Though there is a perception that men have been the primary victims of the economic downturn's job evaporation, unemployment rates for women who head households are significantly higher than those for men who head households.
In March, the report says, the unemployment rate for women who maintain families was 11.3 percent -- the highest rate in the last 10 years. By comparison, the unemployment rate for all women was 8.6 percent and for married men it was 8.1 percent.
Sadly, women of color have been particularly decimated. In March, the unemployment rate for Caucasian women was 7.3 percent, compared with 12 percent for Hispanic and 12.4 percent for African-American women. And Illinois' figures almost exactly mirror these national numbers.
Not only that, but even women lucky enough to be working are barely making a living wage. In 2008, for example, 69 percent of all workers 25 and older with earnings at or below the minimum wage were women, and those numbers haven't changed much.
What this all boils down to, though, goes far beyond mothers to you and me and everyone else in town. You see, one of the most maddening myths I come across when talking about this issue with people who are generally comfortable in life -- or admittedly affluent -- is that they believe these awful statistics have nothing to do with them. Wrong!
"When women aren't able to provide healthy food, quality education or health care for their children, it has a direct and generational impact on an entire community," said Shelley A. Davis, a vice president at the Chicago Foundation for Women -- one of the member organizations of the Women's Economic Security Campaign. "But just one example of the wide ripple effect is this: One type of low-wage earner is the child-care provider. If a day care worker is going to work sick because she can't afford to take time off, who does that impact? Your children."
The report recommends building a wide safety net for low-income women, one based on education, access to job training and the creation of stable jobs with benefits conducive to caring for families -- priorities the Women's Economic Security Campaign says are "vital to a U.S. economy seeking to regain its global competitive edge."
So stimulate the economy this week by getting mom something nice, and be sure to tell her you love her.
And while you're at it, take a moment to hope that Mother's Day 2011 will bring a brighter economic picture for all the wonderful moms and grandmas in all our lives.
It's Money Smart Week in Chicago, that annual event sponsored by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, and -- if nothing else -- the city is accented with portraits of a robust Benjamin Franklin winking knowingly from the center of a $100 bill.
Catchy marketing materials aside, I wish Money Smart Week were not just an annual springtime community outreach effort to increase awareness about the importance of financial education, but rather a matter of national law. One of those pseudo-oppressive nanny state jobbies that turn people into stark-raving lunatics about being "force fed" something that's good for them.
I can see it now. Wouldn't it be cool if those replica Ben Franklins roaming the streets of Chicago in support of Money Smart Week were carrying functional revolutionary-era firearms and were allowed to shoot anyone who couldn't differentiate simple from compound interest?
I'm kidding, I'm kidding!!! But only because most people would fail that one and the Chicago Police Department would be working overtime to pick up bodies. What with all the money troubles the city has, that just wouldn't be a financially sound way to incentivize people to learn about the power of the cash they work so hard for every day.
So anyway, financial literacy. It's not a sexy topic to most people, though in some circles it is considered the next civil right. The fact that my very favorite founding father greeted me at the train station the other morning didn't hurt, but what really inspired me to write this column was not a hand-wringing "oh, the children of this country will never learn to manage their money" moment. Quite the opposite.
A few weeks ago, one of my favorite young pals asked me if I would take him to the bank.
"What for?" I asked, wondering if there was a local bank giving away some sort of kid-friendly tchotchke.
"I want to open an interest-bearing checking account with the $220 I've saved up," said the 11-year-old boy, whose first name is Stimpson.
Yes, this kid, who attends school in a financially struggling suburban school district where about 60 percent of students live at or below the poverty line and 20 percent of kids are considered limited in English proficiency, had learned all about the power of interest-bearing bank accounts at school. Having taught high school math in this very district, I know that as recently as four years ago the average high school student didn't have a clue what an interest-bearing checking account was.
Unlike the average kindergarten through 12th-grade child in this country, Stimpson -- a strapping young fifth-grader -- is getting familiar with money topics that have made it clear why putting your money in a bank is preferable to cashing your check at the currency exchange and will ultimately help him decide whether and how to take out car loans or student loans.
Yep, Stimpson is one of the lucky ones because some visionary at his school district decided to partner with Junior Achievement, a nonprofit that goes into schools to "teach the key concepts of work readiness, entrepreneurship and financial literacy to young people all over the world."
Their work is sorely needed. According to a recent article in the New York Times, only 13 states require students to take a personal finance course or include the subject in an economics course before they graduate from high school, up from seven states in 2007, according to the Council for Economic Education. Only 34 states (including those 13) have personal finance education in their curriculum guidelines, up from 28 states in 2007.
It's too bad more elementary school kids aren't itching to get their very own financial adviser. And too bad there aren't enough Benjamin Franklin costumes in the basement of the Chicago Federal Reserve Bank to personally reach all of the kiddies in the state to teach them how to manage the money they'll earn and spend throughout their lifetimes.
Coffee or Tea party? Whatever your cup, roll up your sleeves
BY ESTHER J. CEPEDA, Sun-Times Columnist
March 8, 2010
I remember my first Tea Party invitation. The "hosts" were a group of loosely federated regional anti-illegal immigration groups, the occasion was Tax Day, and the call to action was to "protest to demand the end of taxation without representation."
The particular bone of contention was Gov. Quinn's then-proposed tax increase, described thusly: "Governor Quinn says he must raise your income tax because he doesn't have enough money to pay for all the social welfare benefits demanded by the illegal alien invaders."
Fast-forward nearly a year and the Tea Partiers are going strong -- strong enough to have stumped some and horrified others. I've read big, epic pieces in several different publications alternately describing the Tea Party Movement as being one big quasi-Ku Klux Klan hate group, or the representative conglomeration of an America so fed up with our government they're ready to bear arms against it, or a young, dynamic collection of diverse individuals -- from liberal, nose-ring sporting actresses to frustrated middle-class professionals -- simply exercising their rights to free speech and peaceable assembly in support of controlling their own destinies. Pick yer favorite.
That's the thing that makes the Tea Party movement so fascinating -- and scary to some -- it isn't monolithic, it isn't easy to sort into a neat category and it isn't easy to dismiss out of hand, especially if your perfectly rational neighbor or friend can say they agree with a lot of what they stand for -- mainly an end to government's fiscal irresponsibility.
Might there be an alternative for those sick and tired of the mess that decades of waste and corruption hath wrought but who aren't anti-government?
Enter the Coffee Party movement. According to the New York Times, it is a burgeoning national movement for those hoping to work the system rather than eliminate it. Taking a quick Facebook jaunt over to the "Join Coffee Party Movement Chicago" page, I found their official mission statement: "We recognize that the Federal Government is NOT the enemy of the People, but the expression of our collective wills. As voters and volunteers, we will support leaders who work toward positive solutions, and hold accountable those who obstruct them."
By Thursday night, they had picked up an additional 95 fans on top of the 627 present and accounted for a mere 20 hours earlier when I first checked. Not bad for a group that had been alive for about the blink of an eye.
It's still in the infancy stage, and the postings on its discussion page have, so far, ranged from micro-narratives of hustling the local coffee shop for meeting space, complaints about meetups not being near enough to home, joyous woo-hoos, suggestions for tangible goals and long tracts wondering if they've bitten off more than they can chew.
About what you'd expect from grass trying to lay down roots.
Will the Coffee Party Movement grow into the populist political force the Tea Party groups are trying to become, or will the cups-o-joe get bitter after they've been around a while? I don't care either way -- it's all good.
Though the snarky among us would say, if nothing else, that President Obama can be credited with uniting people in their hatred of him, that's too cynical for me. I'd rather look at the bright side of the discontent and frustration boiling over across almost all economic classes, in cities, suburbs and on farms, among people of all ages, races and colors -- the muscular rise of a mass of civically engaged people.
Enraged, yes -- but primarily engaged.
Coffee or Tea, both movements are engaged, passionate, energetic and willing to roll the old sleeves up and put in the time and work toward reshaping their country in a way they think will serve their self-interests -- and their country -- best.
It's a beautiful thing, this season of hot and tasty parties. So much passion, so much energy, so much desire to just "do good."
It's a perfect time to get reacquainted with Scott Joplin, King of Ragtime
February 22, 2010
BY ESTHER J. CEPEDA Sun-Times Columnist
I've been on an insane Scott Joplin bender for two weeks now. I woke up two Saturdays ago thinking about ragtime and didn't even wait to get out of bed -- I downloaded 37 different rags straight into my iPod and have been obsessively playing them all over and over and over again ever since.
There's the "Country Club Rag," "Paragon Rag," "Fig Leaf Rag," "Pine Apple Rag," "The Heliotrope Bouquet," "Maple Leaf Rag," "Elite Syncopations"; the list literally goes on and on. A few days later, I sent my piano teacher a hysterical e-mail begging him to teach me "The Entertainer" at my next lesson.
My favorite comment last week was, "Why are you listening to the ice cream truck music?" The honest answer is: I don't know.
But I do know this: I'm not a fan of "Months." You know, National Sweet Potato Month, National Foot Health Month, National Hispanic Heritage Month, National Tickling Month. There are so darned many of them that they no longer impart meaningful information -- not like they really should, certainly not how they were intended to.
For instance, February is National Black History Month. Sure, I remember learning about George Washington Carver, Frederick Douglass and Rosa Parks during my school years, but after that I didn't get much more in the way of continued awareness of that aspect of February.
Imagine my surprise -- and embarrassment -- when last week while blathering on about Scott Joplin, I decided to do a quick Web search for images of him, I uttered: "Scott Joplin was black?!" The answer was "Duh."
All right, so sue me. I've been hearing his music my entire life, been actively studying music for more than 21 years, have played orchestrated versions of his most popular tunes in various musical groups, mangle "The Entertainer" during my evening piano practice, and I just did not know Scott "the King of Ragtime" Joplin was black.
In my own defense, I'll tell you it never ever occurred to me to care one way or the other about this remarkably talented composer's color or race. But his story is so amazing I can't believe it isn't taught in elementary schools along with that of Revolutionary-era hero Crispus Attucks, pioneer Jean-Baptiste-Point du Sable and beauty entrepreneur Madame C.J. Walker.
I certainly can't do justice to his complete narrative here -- visit the Web site of the Scott Joplin International Ragtime Foundation for a wonderful account -- but I will say that it would have been enough that he was born with perfect pitch, taught himself the piano as a child, then the cornet and a bit of violin, and created an enduring and much-beloved part of American musical history for which he was awarded a posthumous Pulitzer Prize.
But to have done all that starting out black in Texas circa 1870 -- sneaking practice on the pianos of the white people his mother cleaned house for as the result of an absentee ex-slave father -- is nothing short of amazing. He even did some chop-honing here in Chicago in the late 1890s with a band that played for visitors to the World's Fair who didn't mind getting their drinks in the seedier parts of town.
The classic 1973 Robert Redford/Paul Newman caper movie "The Sting" repopularized Joplin's music but, frankly, it's high time for another resurgence of interest in Scott Joplin; which is closer to the spirit of what "National Months" are all about: awareness of all the awesome things we should know.
So during this, the last week of Black History Month, I'm celebrating -- and making it up to ol' Joplin -- by jauntily pounding out "The Entertainer" and being grateful that every day brings a new opportunity to learn something new and interesting.
The Department of Homeland security provided a keyhole of hopeful light for the reform crowd on Tuesday. They published "Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States: January 2009" which was written by Michael Hoefer, Nancy Rytina, and Bryan C. Baker.
The report provides estimates of the number of illegal – they use the term "unauthorized" – immigrants residing in the United States as of January 2009 by period of entry, region and country of origin, state of residence, age, and gender. It also provides a favorable environment for the comprehensive immigration reform movement in that it shows that there are now less illegal immigrants residing in the US than there once was. This lessening will surely be attributed to better practices in DHS’ enforcement of existing laws, though they do also credit the Great Recession.
The bottom line is that true reform was not going to be a palatable concept to the illegal-immigration-is-killing-this-country crowd while illegal immigration was booming. The rallying cry on that side back in 2005 when the Sensenbrenner bill was introduced was – and continued to be – that you cannot talk about human reform and dealing equitably with those already here when the borders were still bleeding illegal immigrants daily. I always thought that was a good point that never got the attention it deserved.
At any rate, as you’ll see from DHS’ report -- whether for enforcement climate reasons or economic reasons -- illegal immigration has slowly abated and this might provide an opportunity for productive reform talks between both sides of the aisle.
Here are the items I’ve selected as the report’s highlights:
Between 2000 and 2009, the unauthorized population grew by 27 percent. Of all unauthorized immigrants living in the United States in 2009, 63 percent entered before 2000, and 62 percent were from Mexico.
Between January 2008 and January 2009, the number of unauthorized immigrants living in the United States decreased seven percent from 11.6 million to 10.8 million.
Here are state stats:
Between 2000 and 2007, the unauthorized population grew by 3.3 million from 8.5 million to 11.8 million. The number of unauthorized residents declined by 1.0 million between 2007 and 2009, coincident with the U.S. economic downturn. The overall annual average increase in the unauthorized population during the 2000-2009 period was 250,000.
Here is country of origin info:
The unauthorized resident population is the remainder or "residual" after estimates of the legally resident foreign-born population – legal permanent residents (LPRs), asylees, refugees, and nonimmigrants – are subtracted from estimates of the total foreign-born population
Here are demographic details:
The unauthorized resident immigrant population is defined as all foreign-born non-citizens who are not legal residents. Most unauthorized residents either entered the United States without inspection or were admitted temporarily and stayed past the date they were required to leave. Unauthorized immigrants applying for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) Section 245(i) are unauthorized until they have been granted LPR status, even though they may have been authorized to work. Persons who are beneficiaries of Temporary Protected Status (TPS)—an estimated several hundred thousand—are not technically unauthorized but were excluded from the legally resident immigrant population because data are unavailable in sufficient detail to estimate this population.
DHS has said that from now moving forward, this report will be updated and made available annually based on "the [annual] foreign-born population collected in the American Community Survey and on the estimated lawfully resident foreign-born population derived from various administrative data sources."
Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com
Melting pot giving rise to post-'Latino' Latino politicians
BY ESTHER J. CEPEDA
February 1, 2010
I have no idea what 2050 will actually be like, but I'm imagining it will be fantastic beyond my wildest dreams!
By then I'll have mastered the piano and will be making tons of cash singing nightly cabaret gigs, not a bit bothered that no one is interested in what I've got to say about the world anymore because there'll be plenty of multi-ethnic people opining on current affairs in whatever passes for digital newspapers by then. Me and my "unique perspective," which is representative of the "emerging" Latino population, will have become as defunct as my gas-powered car.
By then Hispanics will be about a quarter of the population. Add the 15 percent of the population that blacks are projected to be, plus the children of today's estimated 3 million mixed-race couples, and there surely will be so many "minority" journalists, columnists and lawyers, engineers, scientists and sports stars that no one will care what I think anymore because I'll be just another face in the multi-hued crowd.
That happy thought sprang to mind last week when I was asked to go on Chicago Public Radio WBEZ's news program "848" for a discussion of the "Future of Latino Politics."
I chuckle when I hear stuff like that because the real future of Latino anything is a mainstream, U.S.-born, English speaking one that will be about as exotic and ethnic as the Chicago Irish.
Sure, there'll be the obligatory heritage parades, but it'll be a "unique cultural identity" that's given consideration only annually and will be adopted by anyone who happens to be walking by and thirsty for beer. Think: Cinco de Mayo.
While the conversation's starting point was a recitation of Latino politics' greatest hits -- the supposedly defunct Hispanic Democratic Organization, the highly emotional Jesus Garcia/ Rudy Lozano campaigns against clouted incumbents, the rise of the young professional types like ex-Ald. Manny Flores -- I think I brought us back to the reality that the continually churning melting pot is already giving rise to the post-"Latino" Latino politician. Which is to say, a politician who's running as a candidate, not as a Hispanic candidate.
It's too soon to visualize that, I know. The Latino population as we know it today is relatively new to the United States, and its politics are defined by the civil rights, worker's rights and immigration reform concerns that naturally have particular resonance to a community still gaining a foothold in our society.
But much like the Italians and the Irish before them, who became just another thread in the fabric of this country, Hispanic community leaders will someday stop gathering from across the country to discuss a "Latino agenda" of social and political empowerment and instead concern themselves with focusing on more universal themes such as the U.S. economy, health care and education.
People often disdain my constant scanning of the horizon to a time when no one will focus on such matters as whether your mom's mom came from Latin America or Latvia, completely ignoring that our whole American conscious is made up of all the cultures of the people who live here and there's nothing wrong with focusing on the scary-to-some time when Latinos will have completely melted into the melting pot.
Like I told the radio show producer, as assimilation draws immigrants into the "American" culture -- as it always has and always will -- this "Hispanic" narrative that's currently playing out will become old hat. In the not-too-distant future, we'll be talking about the future of Muslim politics or of East Indian politics.
Or, if I look into the faces of my own family's children, we'll be talking about the rise of quarter-Mexican-quarter-Ecuadorian-half-black politics, quarter- Mexican-quarter-Ecuadorian-half-Filipino politics, and quarter-Mexican-quarter-Ecuadorian-half-white politics.
But it'll be called something else by then: just plain old politics.
And me? I won't have much to say about it, I'll be too busy tinkling the ivories, crooning "When You Wish Upon A Star" for you.
In the early-morning hours before Michelle Obama addressed the Conference of Mayors in Washington to make her pitch about the importance of curbing childhood obesity last week, I was sitting in a crowded elementary school gymnasium with kids and their parents, fearing for the heart attack victims of tomorrow.
The occasion was a salute to the school's honor roll students, which certainly called for an extra dose of celebratory sugar, sure. But it wasn't the kids' liberal dose of syrup for the French toast sticks that concerned me; it was parents' obvious lack of any nutritional cognizance that sounded the alarms.
Children mimic their parents' behaviors and habits, and if a child sees his mom or dad bypass the freshly cut fruit and whole-grain bagels in order to load up a plate with greasy muffins, iced sweet rolls and French toast sticks drenched in syrup destined to be downed with a handful of juice boxes, what, exactly, will they understand about healthy eating habits?
Though, who can blame anyone for looking for some sweetness in life these days? I'm sad to say there were tons of parents at this breakfast because so many are out of work. I heard their stories myself: One dad was telling an acquaintance he had been laid off months ago and his wife was working two jobs. Another lady was worried about making it to an upcoming Parent Teacher Organization meeting because her scant hours at work are all over the map and she's never really sure where she's going to be. Who could begrudge these people a couple of extra free cheese danishes?
During her speech, Obama rattled off facts: Nearly one-third of children in America are overweight or obese, and one-third of all children today will eventually suffer from diabetes -- in African-American and Latino communities it goes up to almost half. She cited recently published studies stating that obesity could now be an even greater threat to Americans' health than smoking, that medical experts are predicting the next generation is on track to have a shorter life-span than their parents, that budget cuts are decimating school gym time, and that crime makes it impossible for most parents to tell their kids to go out and play until dark.
I'd add that we are also burdened by school systems that pump our children full of sugar and fat-laden breakfast and lunches -- the poorest among them for a low cost or for free -- and then wonder why they get labeled by frustrated teachers as behavior-issue problem kids. Also add that parents don't understand the consequences of what their kids eat because they never learned what healthy eating means.
The first lady closed her speech by praising creative ideas some cities are trying in order to manage the problem, but she also soberly stated the obvious: Efforts to curb childhood obesity won't be cheap, easy or quick. I agree with her and add that it's doable. At the very least, it's the worthiest goal I can think of.
We may have tragically lost a generation to killer eating habits, but if the statistics horrify enough leaders and role models into action, helping others understand good nutrition, then in about 40 years we'll have a whole crop of young parents -- and enlightened grandparents -- who'll know that "fruit punch" is not fruit juice, and certainly not preferable to fresh, frozen or dried fruit.
They'll get it that a "special treat" is not something that occurs hourly or even daily. They'll know that if you have time to surf the Web, you can also make time to box your best friend on the Wii. And they'll understand that -- repeat after me -- chocolate-chip bagels, banana split-flavored yogurt and blueberry jam granola bars are not "health food."
"Carlos Hernandez Gomez, political reporter for CLTV, stood out among Chicago reporters not only because of his old-school fedora, but also because of his encyclopedic knowledge of Chicago politics.
He didn’t need notes to tell his audience who was backing whom in a campaign, why a specific endorsement was so important — or why two politicians couldn’t stand each other.
Off camera, he was the life of the party, a friendly, down-to-earth storyteller who would do spot-on renditions of politicians’ speaking styles — often at their request.
Mr. Hernandez died Sunday evening following a battle with cancer that was diagnosed on Christmas Day, 2008. He was 36.
"Carlos was more than a great reporter and a great friend to hundreds of people. He had a great heart," said Sun-Times investigative reporter Steve Warmbir, who was best man at Mr. Hernandez’s wedding.
"In a business filled with cynics, he was one of the kindest and most decent people you would ever want to meet."
Mr. Hernandez grew up in the Chicago neighborhoods of Lincoln Park and Portage Park, and was fiercely proud of his ancestral home of Puerto Rico.
A graduate of Quigley Seminary, he attended DePaul University and was an editor at the DePaulian, the school’s student newspaper.
He covered local and national politics for WBEZ-FM and the Chicago Reporter before joining CLTV in 2005.
"To a certain extent he was a throwback," said U.S. Rep. Mike Quigley, who visited Mr. Hernandez at Northwestern Memorial Hospital Sunday. "He wanted to dress the part with the glasses and the hat. He was kind of retro. He decried modern journalism where you do a superficial story as fast as you can."
"Coming from public radio, he was determined not to dumb down the news. He would rather do a thorough story about a complicated issue and he explained it. He had this great sense of humor and could do great impressions of elected officials. With his boyish sense of humor he made us all laugh and smile."
Survivors include his wife, WGN-TV reporter Randi Belisomo Hernandez; father, Carlos Hernandez Sr.; mother and stepfather, Myrna and Tom Kinsella and brother Jason.
Funeral arrangements were pending
President Barack Obama released the following statement at 12:45 today:
Statement from the President on the Passing of Carlos Hernandez Gomez
"I was saddened to hear of the passing of Carlos Hernandez Gomez. Our paths first crossed when I was a State Senator. He was a throwback in the style of Chicago’s storied political reporters. He loved Chicago, and he relentlessly sought to tell its story with the commitment to truth and the insatiable curiosity that any good reporter has to have. I quickly learned that when you saw his sharp fedora in a crowd, hard questions were coming. But Carlos always played it straight. And I always enjoyed our interactions in Springfield, Chicago, or on the campaign trail. Carlos was a role model to many, and an integral part of the Chicago story he strived to tell. My thoughts and prayers are with his wife Randi and his family."
##
Mr. Gomez had the same profound impact on the city as many of the stalwart reporters Chicago is famous for but he did it as one of a very, very few Hispanic journalists working today – and, most notably to me, as a journalist who neither highlighted his heritage for any sort of gain, nor shrank away from it.
My very favorite part of his reporting was when he said his name! It was always this perfect, perfect English throughout the report and then his perfectly pronounced name in all it’s rolled R’s glory. I loved that!
Yet people would complain about it to me! They were literally surprised, or offended at the aural intrusion, they felt he was waiving his heritage in their faces when the guy was simply just pronouncing his name correctly.
Either way, people took notice of Carlos Hernandez Gomez – and not mostly for his name. He was a respected and knowledgeable journalist with a style all his own. A real American original.
And he will be missed.
Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com
Slap me on the back, pals, I've come up with a brilliant plan to solve the persistent problem of the lack of enough highly qualified high school math teachers to train the scientists and engineers of tomorrow: Let's not ask potential math teachers to pass the state's required-for-certification test in mathematics.
Problem solved.
Also, a recent study by a Columbia Law School professor has found that despite the push to diversify the student body in law schools to better reflect our nation's multicultural population, both the percentage and the number of black and Mexican-American law students remains low and has actually declined in the last few years. Let's fix that one right here and now, too: Throw out the Law School Admission Test.
While we're at it, the country has a shortage of family-practice doctors -- the real money is in orthopedic surgery these days. So let's just drop the board certification requirement for doctors going into primary care.
What, you don't like the reasoning here? Maybe because the idea is stupid. Simplistic and lazy in that it doesn't fix -- or even address -- the problem of finding ways to get more qualified people of a certain background into a particular profession. It merely sidesteps the problem while creating bigger problems. It doesn't take a genius to see that the cure in each case is far worse than the ailment it's intended to heal.
So why would anyone even consider creating a police corps that reflects our fine city's diverse populace by just tossing the entrance exam? Faced with a suddenly intolerable 54 percent Caucasian police force, sources told two Sun-Times reporters, that's exactly what City Hall seriously is considering.
Oh, we're told, there would be other benefits if the city were to eliminate the police entrance exam. Besides making it easier to hire minority officers, the city would be spared the considerable expense of providing and scoring the test, and it would avoid costly legal challenges by those who fail the exam.
My favorite cops called me the day the story ran. They were incredulous, disgusted, offended and angry.
But the angriest messages I got were not from police officers ticked off that this scheme to maybe drop the entrance exam basically represents a lowering of the high standards they had to meet in order to become one of Chicago's finest. They had to work to become members of the second-largest police department in the United States, a department, I might add, that in the last three years has had to deal with several embarrassing situations of violence and brutality against civilians.
Nope, the people I heard from most were multiracial, multi-ethnic and multi-mad at the implication that minorities are such dolts that the only way to integrate a homogenous organization with high standards is to drop those standards.
"Condescension is the worst form of discrimination," one woman wrote to me, angered by the ridiculous claim that creating a rigorous test that is fair to anyone of any gender, culture or color would be too much of a burden.
Could it really be true that becoming one of the easiest police departments in the country to slide into -- few other police departments, and none in major cities, lack an entrance test -- is preferable to putting in the time and effort to becoming a pioneer in culturally sensitive, cognitively arduous police entrance exams for a diverse 21st century police force?
The word "laughingstock" comes to mind.
As does Groucho Marx's famous condemnation, which will ring in the ears of Chicago police veterans and future cops if this plan is adopted: "I don't want to belong to any club that will accept me as a member."
Auto shop, wood shop, metal shop – all horrors of a certain segment of the high school population. Let’s face it, shop class never got much respect.
So, when I read Rosalind Rossi’s story "Shop Class shake-up" in Tuesday’s Chicago Sun-Times I was near giddy. In it, Rossi details a new Chicago Public Schools push to elevate shop classes from the second-tier electives most people recall to high-tech, certified vocational education programs that will put kids into decent-paying 21st century careers the day they walk out of high school.
It’s about time.
We live in a world where the corridors of the educational industrial complex are clogged with academics and starry-eyed teachers who truly believe that every single student in the United States must be prepared and routed straight to a four-year college. They believe that to expect anything less is to doom a child to a life of destitution.
I’m not making this stuff up. You need only spend about 15 minutes with the average teacher or teaching professor at any educational facility in this country; if you were to opine that hey, maybe not every Susie and Tommie should be encouraged to strive for Harvard or Princeton, you’d get looked at like you were a monster. A bad one. The kind of monster that did not, in fact, believe that every single human in the world must study Jane Austen – sans zombies – or Greek philosophy to experience a happy, productive or healthy life.
(I dare you to try this next time you come across a professional educator, sucker! Dare you not to roll your eyes when the words "I believe the children are our future…" come rolling out.)
Don’t get me wrong: we are indeed operating in a 21st century knowledge economy and every single student who wants to go to college should get every bit of assistance humanly possible to do so, but college prep shouldn’t be the sole focus of schools as it currently stands. When my washing machine spewed soapy water all over my basement a few weeks back I did not consult a mechanical engineer. I also didn’t call one of my many brilliant PhD friends. Nope, I called up my local appliance repairman, thanked him with a nearly unnatural ferocity after he showed up at my house on a Sunday morning. Then, with a great big smile, I happily paid him a lot of money when my machine was working again.
It takes all kinds to make this world go ‘round: doctors and car mechanics, lawyers and magnificent sous chefs, accountants and creative, talented construction workers. Starting next year, CPS’ new "College and Career Academy" programs will be a living testament to that by training kids to walk out of senior year with the expertise to begin work in so-called "middle-skill" careers such as electricians, medical technicians, welders, and computer support services. And don’t worry, this is not some fairy-tale CPS lark, many many school districts across the country and in Illinois already have similar, and successful programs (Lake County, IL’s High School Technology Campus is one notable example).
So three cheers to the CPS shop rats of tomorrow from someone who knows she’ll soon be shelling out major dollars to the furnace repair woman – they’ll be laughing all the way to the bank as I make my thousand-dollar student loan payment every month.
Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com
The first time I ever set foot in Pilsen was as a newly hired reporter after a white editor asked me to go there to "find some Latino stories" for the next day's paper.
That might sound weird to some, but I'd always been a Little Village gal. For as long as I can remember, my family had made monthly Sunday treks from our Lake View two-flat to "La Garra" at the University of Illinois at Chicago, also known as the Maxwell Street flea market. Afterwards, it was up to 26th Street to hit the Mexican bakeries and shops.
And I cannot remember a time when I wasn't intimately familiar with the city's Hasidic Jewish, Indian, Chinese, Korean, Iranian and Polish neighborhoods, but Pilsen was just a big old blind spot for me.
I've often written about how I hate it when people assume I grew up there -- that's a sort of a blind spot, too. It's one of many, many blind spots many of us didn't even know we had until a transplant to our fine city took it upon herself to define them.
Fascinated by Chicago's ethnic neighborhoods when she arrived back in 2000, Maria Krysan, an associate professor in the Department of Sociology at UIC, decided to gauge residents' knowledge of city communities and quickly realized that Chicago's North Sider vs. South Sider pride stands akin to that of the Union and the Confederacy in the 1800s.
In her report, "Black-White-Latino Differences in Community Knowledge," based on a 2005 survey of more than 700 adults living in Cook County, Krysan explored the gaps in awareness these different groups had of the myriad segregated, integrated and everywhere-in-between neighborhoods in the Chicago region. She called these gaps "blind spots."
Like all good studies, it quantified gut feelings that had never before been confirmed, with simultaneously obvious and shocking results.
For instance, on the common-sense front, Krysan found that whites were generally unfamiliar with communities that featured a significant black population or were racially integrated -- including a few communities with majority white populations, such as Beverly and Homewood/ Flossmoor. Relatively unknown communities for at least a third of the African Americans surveyed included distant suburbs with majority white populations, such as Libertyville and Crystal Lake, in addition to racially and ethnically diverse Chicago neighborhoods such as Uptown, Logan Square and Albany Park.
Latinos, though, are in a league of their own when it comes to blind spots. Hispanics, when compared to whites and blacks, were oblivious to more than twice as many communities.
With the exception of Hispanic-centric spots such as Humboldt Park, Cicero, Pilsen and Little Village, more than half of the 41 communities used as examples in the study were "unknown" to a third or more of the Hispanic respondents. We were equally in the dark about segregated, integrated, city and suburban communities alike.
"Well, the bright side is that once you control for background characteristics like socioeconomic status and number of years of residency in the city, Latinos are quite knowledgeable about a wide range of communities; more so, in fact, than whites and blacks," Krysan told me. "But, from a practical standpoint, you can control away any factor to level the results and, the fact is, the Hispanic community in Chicago is still relatively new to this city -- not in all cases, of course, but generally -- and these blind spots do exist."
The neighborhood knowledge gap for Hispanics isn't the end of the world, but it keeps us more apart than we actually are. As it turns out, there are lots of inviting racially and ethnically diverse neighborhoods and suburbs, in addition to the well-marketed Oak Park, but most of us just don't know about them.
It has now been many, many years since I first set foot in Pilsen, but judging from my knowledge of the 41 neighborhoods on Krysan's list, I still need to get out more. And, probably, so do you.
Picture an idealistic Northwestern University cello student, circa 1993, playing a tune for a crowd of colorfully-robed monks from all over the world and you'll have visualized Michael Fitzpatrick.
Since his years in Chicago, Michael - golden-curly-haired, tall, and possessed of a chill-axed surfer dude vibe - has been featured on the recent PBS special "The Music Instinct: Science and Song" and has performed for political and religious royalty around the world. Really, the plaudits are so lengthy one's eyes glaze over.
I met him when he was in town giving a live performance of his musical accompaniment to the new Frederick Marx documentary "The Journey from Zanskar," a labor of love in a similar vein to the work he's done on his signature "Compassion Rising" project. The project serves - as the title of one of the tracks declares - as an "Invocation for World Peace."
What Fitzpatrick does with a cello cannot be adequately described as mere music; I can best describe the sounds Michael pours out of that four-stringed instrument as simple beauty that fills one's soul with nothing less than pure joy and peace. Plus, he just flat-out ROCKS, too. No kidding.
How Michael Fitzpatrick went from being a socially-conscious musician to becoming the virtuoso who travels the world injecting musical spiritualism into sacred events large and small - he's served as featured Soloist, Music Director, and Producer for the unprecedented musical collaboration recorded and filmed at sacred sites including Mammoth Cave, the largest cave in the world; the Abbey of Gethsemani; and the Furnace Mountain Zen Temple - is too a long a story for today.
But I was able to get Fitzpatrick on the phone for a few minutes in the hour before he went onstage with His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama of Tibet who is in Melbourne, Australia this week addressing the Parliament of the World’s Religions. Here's Fitzpatrick on the art of making music, spreading compassion, and providing the soundtrack for spiritual leaders, pictures from the morning performance, as well.
EJC: What are you doing right now?
MF: I just got done with the sound check and am on my way back into the theater among the high, high security protocols. I'll go onstage first, with the Dalai Lama, Wednesday morning for the morning keynote and invocation.
EJC: What's the extra-special magic for you with this set of events?
MF: It's very, very special! We're performing Wednesday and Thursday. And December 10 is the 10th anniversary of the death of Thomas Merton who was regarded as the most influential monk of the 20th century. Also December 10, 2009 is the occasion of the 20th anniversary of His Holiness the Dalai Lama being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. December 10th is also the anniversary of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and of course, the day President Obama will be accepting the Nobel Peace Prize, so it's very, very exciting.
EJC: How does one gear up for THAT?
MF: (Laughing) How do you prepare to go on stage with the man many people consider the most enlightened being of our time?
I eliminate the extraneous thoughts from my mind then I prepare to send the notes out to everyone in the world to touch their hearts and move them to the compassion that the Dalai Lama is the embodiment of.
I meditate before I go on stage but not like, "oh I’m going to set 15 minutes aside," I do more of a walking meditation but so much of the time I’m already in a meditative state – I hold everything in, the energy, the creativity and when the show is going to happen I delve deep into that internal place. I review in my mind the Compassion Rising project then force myself deeper into remembering why we’re all here: to come together in peace, love, compassion and to hold that space.
Basically, it's like getting ready for the big basketball game.
EJC: So what's it like to be onstage with His Holiness? You've performed for and with him many, many times - spent a lot of time with him, actually, for a non-monk. So you're probably not nervous per se... Does His Holiness' vibe throw off your tuning or anything like that?
MF: Yeah, it's a very specific frequency he resides in it's an extremely high vibration but a really heavy grounded vibration at the same time. I've been working with him for 13 years and I've just learned how to adjust my frequency to him. It's kind of like downshifting.
Playing my cello is a bit different, yes. Being in the presence of the Dalai Lama and many other powerful beings, playing in sacred places all over the world - I’ve played on the site where Jesus was baptized, in sacred caves where there is ancient earth - the resonances are so different! When I start to play, [the energy] starts to wake up the sound vibrations and the sound molecules in the wood - it, like, heats up and the sound and quality leaps and takes on a mystical dimension.
EJC: Tell that story about when you first met the Dalai Lama.
MF: I was attending Northwestern University in Evanston, working on a master's in performance in 1993 when he was in Chicago and I met him for the first time. I didn't really know a thing about him except that he was the Dalai Lama. There I was in the Palmer House Hilton surrounded by every colorful turban-ed, robed monk - it was like something out of a movie.
EJC: What was happening in your training that was preparing you for the path you started on after that Palmer House Hilton performance?
MF: At Northwestern I had two exceptional cello teachers who gave me a tremendous amount of creative freedom to explore the other types of sounds a cello could make - overlaid on the basics of the core principles, of course.
As a student in Chicago I was very concerned about the role of the musician in 21st century and the need to not just entertain but to inspire and uplift. In particular, my teacher and conductor Victor Yampolsky really allowed for that next-level of exploration of the music. He had a titanic energy about him! I remember performing Beethoven's 9th Symphony at Pick Staiger Hall and feeling the truest expression of spirituallity - it just blew me away! The way this master musician from Russia brought through this most ancient energy to that work was life-changing.
EJC: What about now? What keeps you going on this quest to bring compassion to the world through your music - it's not a bed of roses every day, right?
MF: There’s this great line that Tom Petty said during his 30th anniversary concert, he was just riffing, and he said something like "just for one moment I want to believe everything is OK, because then there might be another moment where everything is OK." That’s how I feel when I’m making music for the world – if that "one moment" is possible, then the reality of the violence and the dark side of life can start to be replaced with peace and compassion.
Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com
'Tis the season to be jolly! You're stuffed from the turkey and trimmings, all the relatives have been placated for the time being, and the Christmas carols haven't gotten on your nerves yet.
But things are moving quickly. There are greeting cards to mail, people to visit, electronic gadgets to hunt down and parties to get to. You're busy. Verrrrry busy. And stressed out, and even a little overwhelmed . . . ummmm, maybe this is not the time to ask for a favor?
Well, here I go anyway, but I'll make it as simple as possible: Please feed me.
And when I say "me," well, OK, so not me, per se . . . but all the other "me's" I live and work with: young neighbors, old friends, co-workers and kids. Yours, too. They're all still hungry after the Thanksgiving holiday.
"I can't tell you how many times I've wished there was as much attention paid to the hunger problem in this city after Thanksgiving as before," Kate Maehr, executive director of the Greater Chicago Food Depository, Cook County's main food bank, told me last week.
"It really is incredible how generous people are leading up to Thanksgiving, but hunger in Chicago is a 365-day-a-year challenge," she said.
Maehr had gotten my attention by appealing to my insatiable devouring of delicious statistics via this delectable e-mail:
"Between now and the end of December the Food Depository will distribute:
• 241,920 pounds of turkey
• 67,500 pounds of yams
• 43,200 pounds of ham
• 36,960 pounds of cranberry sauce
• 33,516 pounds of corn
• 19,440 pounds of stuffing
• 18,000 pounds of chicken
• 4,375 pounds of gravy . . ."
I called her to really sink my teeth into the logistics of slinging all those goodies to almost half a million Chicagoans every year when I was distracted by the phrase, ". . . but the need continues."
"What do you mean the need continues?" I asked her incredulously. "Aren't there like 7 gazillion food drives at the holidays. Isn't this your easiest time of the year to raise food and funds? Holiday spirit? Good will toward men?"
Kate was kind enough to not bite my head off.
"We have almost 600 member agencies struggling to keep food on shelves; there is such a dramatic increase in people turning to these agencies that we're shattering records," she said. "For instance, September tends to be a really slow month for us, but this September, we were already 26 percent ahead of last year's pace in pantry visits, and 70 percent ahead of the pace of two years ago."
"But what about the spirit of the season, Zuzu's petals and all that -- don't you rake it in at this time of year?" I asked.
"Well, that's certainly the case leading up to Thanksgiving, but December is a whole different story. We all get preoccupied with our lists -- gifts to buy, things to pack for vacation, resolutions to start -- and along the way, people start to think that one can of food or a small donation doesn't do much," she said. "That couldn't be farther from the truth -- that one can of food, the $5 donation, it means everything to us. And we need you every day."
So there it is.
And here I am, asking on behalf of me, and Maehr, and the Greater Chicago Food Depository, and on behalf of the half-million Chicagoans -- a third of them children -- who are hungry, even when we're tight on cash and time: Feed young neighbors, old friends, co-workers and kids.
What’s far scarier than the thought of Guantanamo Bay terrorist suspects cooling their heels behind maximum security bars in Thomson, Illinois?
Fear-mongered people – already stretched to the limits due to the ravages the economy has inflicted – acting out against anyone who looks like a foreigner because the TV and newspaper headlines are hyperventilating about terrorists living among us.
There is no doubt that the recent Fort Hood Massacre left the country wondering where they can feel safe from terrorism. If the young men and women who have pledged to protect the good old U-S-of-A can’t be kept from being slain in the name of Islam on a military base filled with their peers, the dark thought goes, then what level of safety can the average Joe hope for?
I won’t deny that the concern does give one pause, but honestly, I’m less scared of the possibility of an armed Islamic radical coming into my life than I am about the everyday bigots.
Take Valerie Kenney, resident of Tinley Park which was just named by BusinessWeek Magazine the "Best Place in America to Raise Kids." She is accused of yanking off a Muslim woman’s headscarf at the checkout counter of the neighborhood Jewel.
Two days after the Fort Hood shootings Kenney, 54, allegedly walked up to a woman in a hijab – who was almost certainly loading sugary all-American kiddie cereal and milk onto the conveyor belt to take home to her four young daughters – and shouted "That guy that did the Texas shooting, he wasn’t American, and he was from the Middle East." Nidal Malik Hasan was born in the U.S., in Virginia, to Palestinian parents.
Gee, I wonder how those four daughters – or the other families who have reported derogatory terrorist-related terms graffitied on their Tinley Park property – feel about Tinley being the "Best Place in America to Raise Kids."
Speaking as someone who has actually been slurred a terrorist in public – dark skin, hair and eyes makes for a great many terrorist suspects – I can tell you that the shame and humiliation of the words alone are painful enough, I can’t imagine how devastated the young woman was to be violated publicly in such a religiously-offensive way. Just think about someone ripping a shirt off a nun and you might get how serious that is.
So we were already on "high" for terror alert when the Thomson, Illinois situation reared its head. Last Saturday the White House floated the idea of holding terrorist suspects who are currently in Guantanamo Bay in rural Western Illinois. Never mind the Thomson facility is a maximum security prison and the prisoners in question would be held to military detention standards which precludes all but the essential legal or enforcement visitors. Still, the fear mongers would have us believe that – I’ll quote running-for-Senate U.S. Repesentative Mark Kirk – "If we transfer al-Quaida terrorists to Illinois, the Chicago area will receive increased attention from the jihadist world. As home to America’s tallest building and her busiest airport, this is not a risk we should impose on Illinois families."
Really? Kirk wants to run for Senate to represent all of Illinois in Washington and the best he can do to whip up votes is dissuade potential economic development for a rural area – and state –
that badly needs it is because otherwise, scary terrorists will have never heard of the Willis-formerly-Sears Tower and O’Hare?
Please! That’s crazy talk coming from someone who should just know better for all sorts of different reasons. And it puts Kirk in the same class as Valerie Kenney: frustrated, scared, and just plain wrong about credible terrorist threats to Illinois’ residents.
Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com
So what about Sosa? If he wants to be what the kids today call "light skinned-ed," well, is that so wrong?
The blogosphere is burning up with beastly, snarky comments and pictures of retired Cub Sammy Sosa, who has denied he has a skin disorder and instead credits his new hue to a skin-hydrating cream he's not ashamed to admit accounts for his stunning skin lightening.
I've seen people react with rabid disgust to Sosa's new look, with the main theme of the outrage centered around the idea that he's "making himself white" ostensibly because of some sort of self-hatred toward his dark Latin-American roots.
The filthy rich ex-slugger was born in the Dominican Republic, a land of lots of white sandy beaches and dark coffee-bean-colored skin.
But why is Sosa's desire to be lighter-skinned self-hatred?
Or better yet, why does it represent -- to some -- any more self-hatred than the adults who get braces to straighten their naturally gnarly teeth, or the man who gets a hair transplant to replace his long-departed hair, or the woman who can afford to de-gravity her once-perky bosom?
Sosa, who is making international headlines once again -- this time on a topic unrelated to cork -- has gotten so much heat about this he felt the need to tell an inquiring Univision television reporter, "I'm not a racist. I'm not like that. I'm just a happy person."
Sheesh.
My dad is from Ecuador and he is a very dark-skinned -- excuse me, a verrrrrry handsome, dark-skinned -- man. His whole life, our entire family and all his friends have called him by a nickname that referred to his dark caramel color. My mom is from Mexico and so very light she fries like a potato in a McDonald's deep fryer after being outside for 10 minutes.
I'm the lucky one: I get to be dark in the summer and light in the winter.
But what if that weren't so? What if I were really dark all the time -- would I be a "freak," "ashamed of my race," "disturbing" or "self-hating" if I were to lighten my skin?
Maybe I should go to the tanning salon -- like my white friends do to get their skin golden brown -- in the winter to stay closer to my "roots."
And by the way, would you say it was an affront to my lineage or a mark of low esteem when I asked my dentist to pull four of my teeth to get braces? I love myself plenty, thank-you-very-much.
The guy is rich, and when you have lots of money, you get to spend it on basically anything you can think of. When I first heard about his new skin color, my mind jumped to wondering whether he has also purchased any Beatles songs or large ranches equipped with carnival rides and the like -- but no, he seems to be mostly the same old Sammy.
He's just a Sammy who maybe looked in the mirror one day and said, in his best Lou Reed voice, "Hey, babe, take a walk on the white side."
Doot do doot do doot doo doo doot . . .
C'mon, it's the year 2009 and we have a black president in the White House. Black is beautiful, brown is all around and white's still just right. Isn't it about time we stop judging people by the color of their skin -- or by the color they choose their skin to be?
Esther J. Cepeda will blog about her darkening skin color right from the beaches of the Dominican Republic this December on
Looking back on it, I just don’t know how I made it in.
Growing up at Addison and Lincoln there was no question where I wanted to go to high school: the gorgeous, ivy-covered walls of Albert G. Lane Technical High School up the street at Addison and Western.
The place where, every time I mentioned it, older folks would say "that place, yeah, my brother went there…before they let girls in."
I remember the first time I ever graced Lane’s halls as a knock-kneed 8th grader back around February of 1988. There, on that stunning campus, I took something called an "entrance exam." When the bell rung, out flooded big girls and boys of every color, style, and age imaginable and I remember I just could not wait to join them and be totally cool with a new-wave hair-do and black and white tights in thick black clod-hopping combat boots.
Also I remember being told to not hold my breath. "I hope you noticed all the other boys and girls in that auditorium taking the same test you did, Esther," Mr. Nutley, the St. Andrew’s school principal warned me and the three other kids who had braved the elements to take the test. "They’re all really bright, too, I hope your family applied to other schools just in case."
Fast forward to November 2009.
I absolutely cannot begin to imagine what sort of Dickensian horror city parents today go through to get their kids into decent schools. Even the schools in the "good" neighborhoods have spotty teaching quality and the rest – well, their achievement and standardized test scores speak for themselves. That leaves selective-enrollment schools like Lane Tech and Payton College Preps, and magnets like Whitney Young and Chicago Metropolitan High schools.
Now, in the wake of the "clout scandal" and the recent tossing of the 1980 desegregation consent decree that had given schools leeway in admissions based on race, the Chief Mathemagician at CPS, Ron Huberman, has come up with a plan to select enrollment to these schools based on family income.
As ace education reporter Rosalind Rossi outlined in Wednesday’s Sun-Times story "College Preps to admit by income" there will be four economic tiers ranging from $22,959 to $61,862, which is estimated to cover about 600,000 students – the neediest in the city. But it leaves the "middle class" kids whose family’s household income is above that top number. The kids of Frank the fireman and Darla the nurse who are doing alright, but probably not alright enough to send their kids to private schools if they can’t get them into the "good" CPS schools.
I have consistently clanged the bell of educational equality based on socio-economic status over race for years, and I’m really glad Huberman has taken his statistical analysis skills out of the same tired old race box, but I worry that there will still be kids unfairly left behind.
Depending on whether the plan gets voted in by the CPS School Board December 16th and then on a "principal pick" situation, the admission status of a sibling, scores on entrance tests, and/or proximity to schools, there’s still ample opportunity for families to be left out in the cold.
What, exactly, is so wrong with putting ALL eligible kids – ignoring race and income –
in a locally televised lottery for all to see?
Why are we contriving to ensure the proper mix of students by segregating them whether it is by race or income? In either case you exclude city residents because they aren’t the right color or because they’ve been fortunate enough to make a decent living for themselves. It just doesn’t feel fair.
My parents, thank goodness, were professionals who came to this country with some serious skills. They lived out an American Dream that included a private elementary school that enabled me to make the cut and live my life-long desire to attend Lane Technical High School.
If I were trying to get in today – under this new plan, if it is passed – I would have lost a leg-up on the ethnicity aspect (which would have been perfectly fine by me), might have still shined based on my academic prowess, but might have gotten passed over because my parents made too much money. I don’t like those odds.
All parents want to believe that if they work hard, they can get a decent education for their kids. City parents know it’s a gamble between a bad or so-so school; short of leaving town, all Chicago parents just want an equal chance at some of the better schools regardless of their income or race.
The CPS School Board – which was appointed to represent all parents, not just the financially neediest ones – must ensure they get their fair shot.
Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com
Let's get past the stereotypes and get down to business on this census thing. I'm talking about the push to accurately count Hispanics during the 2010 U.S. census. Though organizers and many in the media like to say that the biggest barrier to counting Hispanics is fear on the part of illegal aliens, it's not all about fear.
For the uninitiated, the U.S. census has been taking the most accurate count of everyone it can get its hands on since 1790. The boundaries of political districts and the public funding for a million different things, such as social services, are decided based on census figures. But over the years, there has been a recurring argument about whether illegal aliens and other noncitizens, such as legal permanent residents, should be included in the tally.
The most recent dust-up came courtesy of Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana. Completely ignoring the fact that Congress over a year ago approved every question on the surveys being printed by the U.S. Census Bureau, Vitter decided that funding for the census should not be released unless questions about citizenship and immigration status were included. His real aim was to make sure congressional districts would be redrawn solely on the basis of the population of American citizens -- and did not include noncitizens.
This upset Hispanic advocacy organizations struggling to mobilize a "difficult-to-reach" community to make sure they're counted. Last week, the Senate ignored Vitter's amendment and the whole case was closed. Again. (A Census Bureau spokeswoman said they go through this dance every 10 years!)
Meanwhile, the big story about this must-count "hard-to-reach" Hispanic population, whose numbers have so quickly swollen, remains centered on fear. Fear that illegal immigrants and their families -- even those members who are legal residents -- will opt out by making it impossible for any "official"-type people to find them.
Yes, there are millions of illegal aliens residing in the U.S. Guess what? Millions of them are not of Latin-American origin. And early estimates, based on 2000 census figures, already predict that the nation's Hispanic population increased to 50 million from 38 million, with U.S.-born "second-generation" Hispanics like me driving the growth.
But the real story is not about fear. Hispanics tend to be undercounted for the same reason many other Americans -- whites, blacks, Asians, etc. -- are undercounted: a simple lack of awareness.
"The number one thing I hear when I'm out in the community is 'what the heck is the census?' " said Elisa Alfonso, regional census director for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund's Chicago office. "This 'illegal fear' thing is nothing but a distraction."
The organization started its census outreach into the Chicago area's metro and suburban Latino neighborhoods in August.
"The main barrier continues to be what it has always been -- not just for Latinos but for the populations as a whole -- lack of information about the census," Alfonso said. "I've been all over the region, and I'm sorry to tell you that though some of us think of being counted in the census as a lofty civil rights issue, that does not resonate with people. I'm going to churches, community centers and schools where the organization leaders and even the teachers don't know what the census is."
That, too, will change. The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 opened the way for about 2.7 million immigrants to be legalized, which means many members of the extremely young Hispanic community have gone through only one or two census counts.
As Hispanics come to make the connection between filling out a census form and a better quality of life -- in higher census numbers there is funding and political power -- they will likely become as familiar with the census process as non-Hispanics.
The quicker those who are aiding the Hispanic outreach effort figure out that the main concern for this population is not fear of "La Migra!" the more successful they will be in counting and serving this "hard-to-reach" community.
Things were starting to get rough back then and they’re still not great. Despite some nice indicators of national economic health,for the most part, people are concerned about jobs, jobs, jobs.
The Obama administration has been knocked for not delivering on the promise of "shovel-ready" infrastructure-related job creation opportunities because state-level budget catastrophes used up a lot of the stimulus money to keep jobs they otherwise would’ve had to eliminate.
When it comes to stimulus-related government contracts that could bring small business, women’s business, and minority-owned businesses the opportunity to create more jobs for their communities, there are but few happy campers.
For instance, in Lake County, Illinois State Rep. Eddie Washington (D-Waukegan) recently put out a call to action to figure out why minority contractors who have bid on federal contracts have been so unsuccessful. Despite the number of requests for proposals filed for contracts, Washington is frustrated and concerned by the number of bids by minority small business owners that didn’t win the government’s bidding process.
"It is critical to economic recovery that all those interested have equal opportunity to obtain federal contracts," Washington said at a recent town hall meeting.
Equal opportunity – that’s the rub when it comes to the government procurement process. Anyone can go to a website and see the specifications and deadlines for submitting a proposal to bid on a contract, in most cases you can even ask questions for clarification and get them answered.
If you know where to look, that is. If you know how to ask, if you know how to craft the best proposal so that it not only IS the best proposal, but it stands out to evaluation committees as THE best proposal when go through the extremely complex process of assigning number or letter grades to hundreds of items in the questionnaire analysis they do on each and every proposal.
Big surprise: a contract bidder – let’s say a small minority firm or a female contractor – who doesn’t have the expertise to wade through the bureaucracy, read and digest the legal jargon, who has no experience in going through the lengthy procurement process gets left behind. Big businesses have teams of lawyers and procurement experts who devote their entire careers to navigating the thickets of government contracts, is it any wonder that a two-man shop, or a small woman or minority firm who is just now looking to round out their business with federal, state, or city contracts are having trouble winning them?
And I’m not talking about ability or quality level or service level – I’m talking about the little firms who may actually have the very best product or service to fill the contract need but they weren’t able to cut through the clutter to actually win a bid. It can be overwhelming enough to make you throw your hands up in the air and give up.
Don’t. The problem is at least getting attention. Several Federal government agencies are starting workshop processes to ensure the equal opportunity promise is delivered on. In Chicago, Jamie Rhee, the City’s Chief Procurement Officer recently said his office will be looking into making it easier for minority businesses to get certified as eligible to compete for such contracts (and, hey, wouldn’t it be nice if the State of Illinois’ small/minority business certification process took less than a minimum of 6 months!?).
More importantly, community organizations and big businesses are putting the issue on their front burners.
For instance, the Chicago Foundation for Women recently put on a webinar designed to help busy women business owners learn the basics of competing for "green" project jobs. "The process for accessing the contracts and the money is very slow and confusing," Shelley Davis, CFW’s vice president of programs and advocacy told me. "But I believe the funds will start flowing and when they do we want to have provided guidance and advocacy for better policies to secure women’s economic stability. My concern is that these contracts are not being tracked and reported properly so that we can see who, really, is successful in landing contracts."
The other interesting tactic for cutting through some red tape is happening on the big business side. I talked with Lourdes Martin-Rosa, American Express Card’s OPEN Advisor on Government Contracting. AmEx is offering extensive training – through their "Give Me 5" program, so named after 2000 Equity in Contracting for Women Act which stipulated that federal contracting officers award 5% of all contracts to women-owned businesses – to small women’s businesses to sharpen their skills on the details of getting registered on the Federal government’s Central Contractor Registry. The program also teaches women how to narrow down to the best possible opportunities so time can be invested in the perfect proposal with the highest likelihood of winning a contract.
Also exciting is American Express’ ability to bridge between these small women business owners and big corporations so that "team" relationships can be established. The strength of the diversity of skills and the large-business experience results in mutually beneficial joint contracts.
"The insight I’ve gained through my mentorship with the Give Me 5 program has been invaluable to my business and helping me achieve my federal contracting goals," said Valarie King-Bailey, the head of Chicago’s OnShore Technology Group. "Using the techniques I learned in my mentorship, I have already identified several solid leads for subcontracting opportunities and I am well on my way to being added to the General Services Administration for a series of prime contracting opportunities."
If the teaming effort American Express is helping her with is successful, King-Bailey will make the Obama administration very happy. That 2000 law stipulating 5% of contracts go to women has never been met. In 2008, only 3.41% of women actually received federal contract dollars.
"It was 3.4% in 2007, so 3.41% in 2008 was actually good news," AmEx’s Lourdes Martin-Rosa told me, "we’re talking about 13 Billion in 2007 and going to 14.7 Billion in 2008. We mentored 200,000 women in that time, I think we’re at least making a difference."
"The government is actually trying, too," Martin-Rosa said, "they’re trying to make the whole process as accessible as possible because they’re missing marks everywhere. Contracts with small businesses were only 21.5% last year which was short of their 23% goal."
There is a lot of work left to do in making government contract accessible to "the little guy", not to mention "the little gal" and other diverse businesses. It’s not going to be quick and easy anytime soon but there is help out there and things are moving in the right direction.
Maybe next November when I check in on the state of women’s economic empowerment, diversity in business, and diversity in government contracting there will be even more to celebrate.
Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com
Death is all around us. Well, that much is always true, but it has been especially so around my house, where, since Sunday, my living room has been graced by the yearly addition of a candled, flowered, candied altar to my dead.
Yep, it's that time of the year: Saturday was Halloween, followed immediately on Sunday by the first day of the Mexican, Central and South American celebration Dia de los Muertos, a festival-like tradition honoring departed loved ones.
Today, Nov. 2, is when the whiskey, tequila, heavy food and cigarettes are usually brought out because that's the day deceased adults are honored. But I go to town with candy, toys, flowers and light-hearted trinkets on Nov. 1, which is the day infants and children are remembered -- and the day my own departed young one is celebrated in my home.
The coolest thing about this year's Day of the Dead celebrations is that this -- I proclaim -- is the year it went mainstream. It's no surprise every year when the Mexican supermarkets and bakeries put out the annual sugar skulls, pan de muerto -- "bread of the dead" -- and skeleton pinatas. But this year I've seen Mexican muerto skull sugar cookies in very mainstream bakeries, and I've seen feature stories all over the Internet, in mainstream newspapers, magazines and on TV about how to make the vibrant and fun accoutrements of this Latin American holiday.
I love that for two reasons. First, non-Latinos are learning about Hispanic culture and naturally integrating bits and parts into their own Halloween affairs -- melting pot, I think they call it.
Second, it's a great education for that segment of the Hispanic population who didn't grow up with this tradition. Culture is funny that way, some touchstones ignored by one generation only to be taken up by the next.
Take me, for instance. You might be imagining a young me flanked by black lace-garbed Mama Cepeda and Abuelita Cepeda in a great big sun-drenched kitchen decorated with colorful clay cooking pots, learning with tiny hands how to roll out the masa -- dough -- for the pan de muerto. Perhaps you imagine us decorating the graves of our loved ones. That couldn't be farther from the truth.
A family trip from the bosom of the North Side all the way to Pilsen's National Museum of Mexican Art to see dressed up little skeletons? Not once.
And there's nothing wrong with that. Culture can be so very strong that it need not be drilled in via field trip or workshop. Think chocolate bunnies at Easter.
No, I grew up in this city living whatever the "typical American life" means. Since Mayor Daley never dyed the Chicago river black on Dia de los Muertos, my family never made a fuss about it, reserving their loving attention to ensuring year after year of picture-perfect Halloweens for me.
Like I said, culture is a funny thing. It can skip generations, yet it is so strong that it can leave a homeland, travel thousands of miles and settle into new interpretations. This is only my sixth year of setting up a Day of the Dead altar.
When I started, I felt the need to connect to something symbolic in my heritage, but I didn't want to share my new personal tradition with anyone. I didn't want to deal with explaining that it's not some Satanic hoodoo voodoo thing.
But how scary can Latin American traditions really be to anyone -- even those who fear the melting pot has become an unwieldy and distasteful chunky stew -- when grocery chains sell Day of the Dead greeting cards and delightful pictures, and recipes for traditional sugar skulls, sweet bread, and hot chocolate seem newly omnipresent?
To my great happy surprise, I've "come out" of the Dia del Muerto coffin only to find a pre-Colombian, all-American tradition rising in the U. S. of A.
Chicago Sun Times http://www.suntimes.com/news/cepeda/1845558,CST-EDT-esther26.article
October 26, 2009
Let's talk. Let's really talk about this problem of youth violence that is tearing us -- not just certain families and classrooms, but all of us -- apart.
Last Thursday, yet another unthinkable heartbreak occurred. A 17-year-old Chicago boy was killed in the middle of a drizzly afternoon, walking home from school. Police said some guy just walked up to him and shot him.
A few weeks ago, the White House had to send in the U.S. secretary of education and the U.S. attorney general because, seemingly, Chicago is ground zero in an escalating catastrophe involving poor kids in tough neighborhoods that's beyond local help.
But it's not. The helplessness you and I feel when we hear about the latest tragedy -- whether a shooting or an unspeakably brutal beating -- is an illusion that serves only to keep us from even contemplating the thought that insistently wakes me up some mornings: "What can I, personally, do to keep Chicago kids from getting killed on our streets?"
No one would fault you for coming to the conclusion that volunteering to serve as a cafeteria monitor at Fenger High School's lunchroom is out of the question.
But it's so much simpler than that: Just ask the question -- "What can I do?" -- out loud.
And I don't mean by posting a frustrated message on a news story comment board or kvetching to your seatmate on the bus that poor teens might simply be a lost cause.
I mean ask a teen.
"If you want to help, talk to young people," said Hilda Franco, a youth organizer at the Chicago Freedom School, a center for youth-led social change that works to get adults and teens to build understanding of current social problems and create coalitions. She teaches a monthly class there on how to think respectfully about, and act respectfully toward, young people.
"There isn't enough space for young people or adults to think and talk about violence in their own life, of how it exists and whether they choose that part of themselves, and no one is asking," Franco said.
If gearing up for a deeply philosophical inquiry with a teen is too much to tackle at first, Franco told me, it's critical to start by simply seeking and listening.
"We've had to do a lot of work to teach teens how to create their own media and document their own stories because the media does not talk to young people," she said. "It's always adults writing the news articles and telling the stories."
Faults of the media aside, what's important is to turn our respectful attention to the experiences of young people -- whether they're "at-risk" or not.
It's the only way to create a space where understanding can begin.
I find people really undervalue just talking openly and honestly about fears and concerns, and that's doubly true when it comes to talking to teenagers -- about anything, really. Popular culture, TV sitcoms and slapstick movies have reduced adults' ideas of the teenage temperament to a small handful of stereotypes.
How could anyone over 21 hope to meaningfully contribute to solving the puzzle of how to secure the passage of the city's future to the actual future through that sort of lens?
"People just don't want to talk about it or think about it, and that's going to continue the cycle," Franco said. "If we keep ignoring teens and this issue, we're ignoring a really, really big thing. We need this city's adults to step up and become allies to the young."
Give it some thought.
Open your mouth.
And if you can't find a young person who trusts you enough to talk honestly about how teen violence makes him (or her) feel and what he would do about it, start by searching for the answer within yourself.
Let’s celebrate! And let’s celebrate fish! And fishing!
Yes, you heard me right.
Between the shootings that happen steps from school boundaries and the domestic violence that splatters on the very kids who are supposed to grow up and lead us to a brighter, better tomorrow, it seems like there’s just not a whole lot of good news to celebrate on the teen front.
I have some. Good news – not fish, that is. But more about fish later.
This weekend while you and I relax Friday after work, then sleep late, overindulge Saturday night, and finally veg in front of the Bears game Sunday afternoon, there’ll be about 160 Chicago high school students gathering at Daley College Arturo Velasquez Institute and Little Village Lawndale High School to think deep, intellectual thoughts about the heady topic of food.
The occasion is the "New Frontiers of Knowledge" program a new collaboration between Bucknell University and nine Chicago public and charter schools. The program, starting Friday morning, is bringing together twenty-six Bucknell University students and faculty members to spend three full days helping our kids think critically, scientifically, economically, and artistically about food.
That’s right: our group of college-kid-wannabes aren’t going to train for some sort of academic competition or prepare themselves to do well on standardized tests, they’ll be talking, questioning, analyzing, defining problems, drawing conclusions, and reflecting.
In short the all-volunteer Bucknell crew – fresh in from a ten-hour road trip from their Lewisburg, PA campus – will be teaching our kids what it really takes to succeed after high school graduation.
"For twenty years we’ve worked with populations of students from average to the best and the first thing we discovered is that the number one determinant of success in college is not academic ability, rather it’s the ability to be self directed and to be able to do critical processing," said Rolando Arroyo-Sucre, the chief officer for diversity and equity at Bucknell University, who is spearheading this extremely ambitious project.
Triggered in part by the 2008 report by the Consortium on Chicago School Research at the University of Chicago, From High School to the Future: Potholes on the Road to College, and Bucknell University’s strategic plan to increase diversity on its campus, the collaboration wants to help prepare talented underrepresented inner city Chicago high school students for admission and academic achievement at private, selective, liberal arts colleges.
Translation: this weekend, while small groups are busily looking at food-wonderful-food through the lenses of the key components of liberal arts education, our high-schoolers will be gleaning from the Bucknellians what the demands are at highly selective liberal arts colleges and universities, what the transition from high school to college means, and, frankly, how to deal with being a kid from the other side of the tracks attending a predominantly white institution of higher education.
During the training of the Bucknell volunteers, Arroyo-Sucre said he emphasized that despite the fact that the high school participants will be underprivileged, the bigger lessons to impart should revolve around familiarity with the higher education culture. "Hispanics, blacks, poor whites, the challenge for them is not a color one, it’s actually socio-economical and the lack of familiarity with the system," Arroyo-Sucre said.
"These kids will have fun working in teams, making presentations, having side conversations about college life, and gain valuable peer-to-peer relationships, but the really exciting thing is this idea of the 160 of the best and brightest realizing they are not alone," Arroyo-Sucre gushed. "I’ve seen it before, I’ve seen the students realize it is OK to be what they are – to be smart. They see it’s OK because there is a critical mass of people who feel the way they do, people who enjoy learning."
When I caught up with Abraham Ramirez, 15, and Martina Camacho, 16, both from Hubbard High School on the city’s far-southwest side, believe me, they were ready to squeeze every drop of opportunity from the experience.
"I’m looking at it like a way to figure out how I’m going to get there," Abraham, a sophomore, told me, referring to "college" as a not a place but almost as another world. "I want a good career when I grow up, and spending the weekend with my friends and college people sounds interesting."
Martina, a junior who has had a life-long dream of becoming a pediatrician, is especially looking forward to finding out what this whole "thinking out of the box" business is and how she can use it to get to where she’s going. "I want this [experience] to be something I can use outside of school, like, to really improve my life."
She won’t be disappointed: this weekend is just the beginning of a years-long collaborative process between students and the Bucknell crew. They’ll be keeping in touch through web-based communication tools, working on a long-distance group project that will last a full year, and prepare for a conference next fall, all while maintaining the very relationships that will de-mystify college not only for themselves, but for their friends and families as well.
Arroyo-Sucre has the highest of hopes, not only for this "class" but for the ripple effect it could have. "As we get the student portion of this program set, in the future we’d like to include teachers and counselors to teach them how the college professors approach the work. Then there are the parents – the idea is to find professional mentors for parents and creating small groups where the parents can ask questions, have brag time, and get to feel comfortable with learning and enabling their students to learn," Arroyo-Sucre said. "Teaching parents how to help develop skills and instill motivation in their students is key."
Of course this out-of-town, fresh-faced, idealistic team has their work cut out for them but they’re dreaming big for Chicago students – thank goodness – even as we residents wallow in self-pity for how enormous their challenges are.
Arroyo-Sucre sees it as a simple thing, really, "We’re talking about these high-level theories for college admission and success, but we’re not giving away fish, we’ll be teaching these students how to catch their own."
Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com
Outspoken Chicago Teachers Union President Marilyn Stewart gave me pause last Thursday.
In a speech to the City Club of Chicago, she suggested that chronically disruptive students be cast off to special schools so they could get an appropriate education there and leave the non-disruptive kids in peace to learn as best they can.
I am not a Stewart fan, but even through that filter I had to stop and consider. On a normal day, I might have automatically dismissed such a -- on the face of it, at least -- potentially life-ruining placement for any student who doesn't fall neatly into the special-education category or who hasn't already started down a path of criminal behavior.
Wouldn't putting all these kids together make for one big powder keg -- or create a failure factory?
But last Thursday wasn't a normal day.
That morning, I had cracked open the Lake County News-Sun only to look into the eyes of one of my former high school algebra students, now making his first media appearance for alleged acts of burglary, theft and forgery, and finally being nabbed for it.
I'd had now-21-year-old Rafael Mendoza in not one, but two, algebra classes during the 2005-2006 school year because he hadn't been able to pass either level in order to graduate, so the school had put him in two separate levels at once to get him done and out.
Rafael wasn't a violent young man. He wasn't one of the ones peddling drugs and making a scene around my classroom doorway. And because he thought I was one of the few teachers who did not treat him like a criminal -- he had not, by all accounts, gotten caught up in anything yet -- he spent much of his time in the refuge of my classroom.
After the first few weeks of power struggles, the respect I paid him paid me back. In my room, Rafael was mostly a quiet, well-behaved pupil who clearly was really, really smart.
He could have passed those classes easily had he not been working outside of school to help support his family.
But that was my experience with Rafael. To other teachers, he was nothing short of a terror. He intimidated some teachers with sharp questions and attacked the boring ones with childish antics. Some of the faculty were actually physically afraid of him -- and fearful for my physical safety because he spent so much time in my classroom.
Rafael made administrators' blood boil, to say the least, but through it all, he wasn't the kind of kid who had really done anything to warrant being bounced out of a mainstream school setting -- a place rife with pregnancy, classroom and hallway violence, alcohol and drug problems and the fallout of absent parents.
I don't know if Rafael ever got his high school diploma, but I do know the destructive impact he had on classmates outside of my algebra lessons: mounds of lost instruction time; undermining of other students' respect for their teachers; some diluted bullying, annoying those who actually wanted to learn. In short, distractions galore.
Would a system of identifying students like Rafael and putting them in classrooms with top, specially trained teachers who could really "reach" them disintegrate into a holding cage for students who simply were not stamped out by someone else's version of a proper cookie-cutter?
That's a reasonable fear. But it's a fear that should be set aside to investigate the possibility that such a program could recoup thousands of hours of instruction time in mainstream classrooms.
And maybe Stewart's idea of a separate school for kids who aren't violent or don't qualify for special-education services -- but clearly need something other than what a regular school can offer -- would help keep those kids on the margins out of real trouble.
If only Rafael Mendoza could have had that opportunity.
Regular Joe and Jo-ettes don’t spend enough time thinking about how federal policy shapes their lives on a day-to-day basis. Even in good times, most people are just too busy trying to keep their heads above water and makin’ a wave when they can – and these times are far from being Dyn-o-mite.
And if you can connect those dots you might see how I could end up at a high-end conservative activist Tea Party at Chicago’s Fairmont hotel during an Executive’s Club of Chicago panel discussion on "The Impact of Washington's Decisions on the U.S. Economy."
Usually Executive’s Club events are moderate affairs – clubby, business-focused and a little tepid – but Wednesday afternoon there was fiery, anti-government passion on display. And in the audience – more than a few jaws hanging open.
For instance David Chavern, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of the US Chamber of Commerce, declared that 2008 had been the slowest legislative year in decades but 2009 had immediately launched us into the most pressing core-issue debates of our time where "business is the problem and government is the solution." He went on to predict that 2010 will be "the mother of all tax years."
Chavern handed the mic off to Norman Bobins, Chairman of The Private Bank & PrivateBancorp who ripped the government’s post-Lehman Bros.-failure efforts to avert another Great Recession. "I do not believe we need more regulation or legislative oversight from Congress," he said struggling with his prepared notes. "We don’t need that level of micromanagement – too much regulation will only drive people out of the system, not make things better and it’ll lead to another meltdown."
Bobins was downright meek compared to William Doyle, fertilizer giant PotashCorp’s President & Chief Executive Officer. Doyle offered that "Washington can’t see a cornfield and has lost sight of how a truly efficient organization operates," and that "the current presidential administration is too focused on special interests to prioritize the country’s urgent needs."
The rest of the discussion – with the exception of Best Buy CEO Brad Anderson’s thoughtfully moderate comments – pretty much went on in that same "we’re not going to name names, but you know who’s screwing our way of life" fashion.
It was suggested that the 2009 economic stimulus plans were not successful because they didn’t drive retail sales as well as the previous administration’s tax rebates had. The proposed Waxman-Markey climate change legislation was panned. China was lauded for investing 80% of their economic stimulus on infrastructure in contrast to the 80% the U.S. spent on "social welfare" programs. Downfall via devilish details and economic demise from inflation was predicted.
After about 20 minutes, people got up and started leaving in droves – both because the hour had grown late and because the angry froth was starting to wear on those in the crowd who generally don’t consider unemployment benefits for peons who aren’t still making seven-figure salaries "social welfare."
My take-away: if these are the type of business people at the top who think they’re going to lead "the American people" out of the gloom and into economic prosperity, I’m afraid us Regular Joe and Jo-ettes are screwed.
It’s not that there wasn’t truth in some of their complaints. It’s not that you don’t go to a business networking event expecting to hear captains of industry defend their turf at the expense of federal leadership that’s been at the helm for all of seven and a half months.
It’s that to say there was no hope on the stage is a tremendous understatement.
"This administration" needs to realize that no matter how hard it tries to be conciliatory, collaborative, and responsive to the needs of some parts of the business community, a lot of big businesses are mad as hell and not gonna take it anymore.
None of them really talked about profits or share. No one talked about people in any sense – not as employees, or as consumers, or even as shareholders – it was just whining and finger-pointing about all that’s wrong with, only our current fiscal, economic, and monetary policy and the political leadership helming it. No innovative suggestions for how to "right this ship."
These are the doldrums, Joe and Jo-ette, and it’s simply no wonder why you don’t give a rat’s ass about Washington D.C.’s impact on the U.S. – or Chicago – economy. Even the people who do care don’t have you in mind.
If three representatives comprise any sort of worthwhile sample at all, then what we can glean is that Big Business is not as interested in making big plans or big money with big ideas as they are in blaming Washington D.C. for all that ultimately ails you.
Ain’t we lucky we got ‘em?
Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com
I have a three-parter for you: first my FOX business channel interview about today's announcement, which aired at 3:40 pm CST. Then the White House's official announcement, and if you keep scrolling, the White House Q & A.
Following Posted at 7:38am Sept 28, 2009
I just got the official word from the White House, folks, President Obama will be travelling to Copenhagen. Here’s the release from the White House, sent out at 7:18am this morning:
President Barack Obama to Travel to Copenhagen
President will join the First Lady to Support Chicago’s Bid for the 2016 Summer Olympic and Paralympic Games
WASHINGTON – Today, the White House announced that President Barack Obama will travel to Copenhagen, Denmark to support Chicago’s bid for the 2016 Summer Olympic and Paralympic Games at the 121st International Olympic Committee (IOC) Session. On Friday, October 2nd, IOC members will elect the host city for the 2016 Summer Games.
President Obama will join First Lady Michelle Obama, who will be leading the United States delegation to Copenhagen. Mrs. Obama will arrive in Copenhagen on Wednesday, September 30, along with Valerie Jarrett, Senior Advisor to President Obama and head of the White House Office on Olympic, Paralympic and Youth Sport.
President Obama will depart Washington on the evening of Thursday, October 1 and arrive in Copenhagen on the morning of October 2 local time, just prior to Chicago’s presentation to the voting members of the IOC. He will arrive back in Washington on Friday afternoon.
President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama will both make presentations to the IOC during Friday’s session. They will discuss why Chicago is best to host the 2016 Summer Games, and how the United States is eager to bring the world together to celebrate the ideals of the Olympic movement.
While in Denmark, the President and First Lady will meet with Her Majesty the Queen and His Royal Highness, the Prince Consort. President Obama will also meet with Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen.
What does it mean in layman’s terms? The President is coming in to seal the deal after national attention was put on whether this squeaker of a contest would be lost because the U.S. rock star president didn’t show up to schmooze ala Tony Blair and Vladimir Putin.
As late as Sunday night, aroundtherings.com was scoring the U.S. bid at an 82 – one point behind Rio but this political calculus might be changed now that the President’s presence is official.
UPDATE: (Here are portions from today's briefing specifically referencing today's announcement)
September 28, 2009 at 1:39 pm EST
PRESS BRIEFING BY PRESS SECRETARY ROBERT GIBBS
James S. Brady Press Briefing Room
Q Thanks, Robert. Why does the President think a trip to Copenhagen is going to make that much difference? And what does he hope his appearance there will help?
MR. GIBBS: Well, obviously, I think he hopes that he can make a strong case for Chicago and America's bid for the Olympics in 2016. Obviously any Olympics showcases the country that those Olympics are in and there's a tangible economic benefit to those Games being here. And the President wants to help out America's bid.
Q Did he get a hint that an appearance would help America's bid?
MR. GIBBS: Well, I certainly hope that an appearance wouldn't hurt it. But we have gotten no intelligence on it.
Q Robert, what can you tell us about the lobbying effort behind the scenes that the President has already started with the IOC?
MR. GIBBS: Well, I don't know that it's much behind the scenes if you're asking me about it. I think it's -- obviously the President has mentioned this in meetings when we were at the U.N. and at the G20. He's going to continue to talk to people, including in person in Copenhagen, in an effort to bring the 2016 Olympics to the United States.
Q What's his best pitch? What is he telling them?
MR. GIBBS: Well, look, I think, having spent some time in Chicago, I think it is a -- it's a perfect place to hold the Olympics. It is -- it offers a great place for the world to see. It offers all the amenities that one would want in the Olympics. And I think, far and away, it's the strongest bid of the four that are out there.
Q What if he goes and he doesn't get it?
MR. GIBBS: Well, we'll -- you can call Tommy on Saturday -- (laughter.)
Q The President said, I would make the case in Copenhagen-hagen personally if I weren't so firmly committed to making real the promise of quality affordable health care for every American. He sounded pretty clear that 12 days ago he was not going to go. What changed in the meantime? Is it health care that changed? Does it look like it's in better shape, or is it that this is in worse shape?
MR. GIBBS: I think the President believes health care is in better shape. I believe he felt strongly and personally that he should go and make the case for the United States, and that's what he's going to do.
Q And he's not worried about health care, as he seemed to be just 12 days ago, suffering if he went?
MR. GIBBS: I think he believes he can do this and get back in time.
Q Right. I wanted to ask, you know, when you look at the sort of picture here, you have a planeload of, you know, top level officials, the President himself, Mrs. Obama. The risks are obviously huge if he doesn't bring home the Games for Chicago --
MR. GIBBS: Call Tommy. (Laughter.)
Q But to what degree --
MR. GIBBS: I appreciate getting into what happens on Saturday, but I don't even know what I'm going to have for dinner tonight.
Q I understand. Okay, let's go forward then. So what degree is this pre-cooked in any way? Are there any assurances, anything --
MR. GIBBS: I think I looked back and addressed this not long ago.
Q It just seems you folks are too savvy to do this with it being totally up in the air.
MR. GIBBS: I appreciate that. Thank you. (Laughter.)
Q Is the Chicago Host Committee paying any of the costs for President Obama or Mrs. Obama to go to Copenhagen?
MR. GIBBS: I can check but I don't know the answer to that. I assume this is being handled as all presidential travel would be.
Q Are you saying that the reason that he wasn't going to go to Copenhagen and now is, is that health care is in better shape?
MR. GIBBS: Well, no, I don't -- as I understand it, Chip asked me, that was one of the reasons that the President stated --
Q It was the reason.
MR. GIBBS: -- and that while I believe that health care is in a better place, and I think he believes health care is in a better place, he also believes it's important for him to go and personally try to persuade the International Olympic Committee to pick the United States in 2016.
Q I'm just trying to close the logic loop here. (Laughter.) So did anything else change --
MR. GIBBS: I thought I did with Chip, but go ahead.
Q Okay. But did any -- so, are you -- so it's okay for us to infer, then, even though you're not going to say that's the difference between last week and this week?
MR. GIBBS: Well, I acknowledged to Major that -- and I acknowledged to Chip and I think to at least one other -- that I thought health care was -- so we can -- I'll go on background as a senior administration official -- (laughter) -- with intimate knowledge of the press secretary's thinking and say, yes, we think health care is in a better place.
Q And how does he see going to Copenhagen as part of his core mission as President?
MR. GIBBS: Well, I think everybody is proud of the Olympics. I think everybody is proud of the Olympics when they're in their country. It provides a wonderful opportunity to showcase the United States. It's, as I said earlier, a big economic benefit. Surely it's within the purview of the President to root for America, but maybe I'm wrong.
Q Yes, but is there a fear that the delegation that was going was not going to be on par with the heads of state from the other countries going?
MR. GIBBS: No, I've said this many times in the past five years, and I think the President would agree that Michelle and Michelle alone is a powerful presence and will be a powerful voice for the Olympics coming to America. The President simply wanted to lend his voice, too.
Q Then why do you need Oprah going, too? (Laughter.)
MR. GIBBS: Ask the Olympic Committee. (Laughter.)
Q This is all about Tommy. (Laughter.)
MR. GIBBS: Right, Tommy on Saturday. (Laughter.)
Q The First Family's Chicago ties, are they a factor in the decision to have both the First Lady and the President make this trip? And is there a feeling in the administration that it's a proper role for them to make this pitch than, for example, if it had been another city where they didn't have the same kind of long-standing ties?
MR. GIBBS: Well, look, I don't think that there's any doubt that the President is enormously proud of Chicago and would be enormously proud of the city hosting the bid. I think it's somewhat silly if it had been Los Angeles, I think the notion that the President would have done less because it was a different U.S. city just doesn't hold water.
Q But, I mean, I'm just saying did they have, by virtue of being from Chicago do you think that they have maybe a special message that they can carry?
MR. GIBBS: Well, I think there's no doubt. I think you'll hear directly from both the First Lady and the President about what they think the Olympic Games mean and how Chicago hosting those Games fits with what we all believe the Olympics mean.
Q On Copenhagen, is this more official or personal for the President, this trip?
MR. GIBBS: This is official, as the President of the United States representing the bid of the United States to host the 2016 Olympics.
Q So is it more about the United States versus Chicago?
MR. GIBBS: Yes, it's about the American bid which is Chicago.
Q Chicago doesn't have a great record, especially recently, of spending public money. Is the President convinced that there are safeguards in place to make sure that money that goes to the Olympic bid will not be misspent? I mean, the City Council, for instance, has a pretty big oversight role in the way it's been --
MR. GIBBS: And I think obviously the onus is on the city to ensure that whatever money is used is spent wisely and efficiently. The President is going to make the case for the American host city -- for the American city of Chicago, which is the bid that this country put forward -- is going to go advocate in front of the International Olympic Committee for that bid.
Q I just want to make sure, he's sure that the city is up to that task?
MR. GIBBS: Not only is he, but as is the U.S. Olympic Committee that picked Chicago over other cities.
Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com
There’s really only one good reason to watch a boxing match: ass-kicking.
Face it: you can talk about sportsmanship, you can talk about guts, grit and determination, you can talk about technique. But when it all comes down to it, there are two men in a ring and one of them is going to get his ass kicked.
It’s either going to be your guy, or your guy’s going to pound someone until the bell rings done. The question is, is it going to be quick or protracted and bloody – and is your guy going to be the one still standing?
Diaz came out slow and by round two he’d already been cut on the face. By round four it was a wonder Diaz could even see with all the blood pouring down his broken mug.
Round eight was pure torture for both Diaz and everyone watching – no one expected him to be able to stand up straight for a ninth round but he went in there and Pacquiao just knocked his block off sending him to the mat facedown to lose his world title in a puddle of his own blood. Technical knockout.
It was horrifying…but you had to hand it to him, the guy just would not be kept down and his determination was a beautiful thing to behold.
No one who’s ever seen David Diaz fight doubted for a second that he’d be back and this Saturday September 26 will be his first since losing his belt to Pacquiao. Diaz (34-2-1, 17 knockouts) will face-off against former two-time world champ Jesus Chavez (44-5, 30 KOs) at the UIC Pavilion.
I talked to Diaz last week and led off with the sheer morbid curiosity about how one comes back from a nationally-televised beat-down, a year older and a bum knee later.
"I was down, the ego was shot. I felt it was a moral victory but at the end of it I still lost," the 33-year-old Northsider said. "I felt like I’d let everyone down: my family, my kids…I was really hurt for like two weeks but it was them who got me going."
Amazingly, he hurt his knee from playing on his laptop, sitting cross-legged on his recent best friend, the couch. "I didn’t start training until April of this year because of the excruciating pain and then the surgery," he said, joking that it was his wife who suggested he either get back in the ring or paint the house. Knee pain and all, it was an easy choice.
Diaz says it’s all good and that he’s now in the best physical condition of his career which is, of course, what all aging athletes tell themselves and their fans. "I just think it’s going to come down to conditioning; we’re both the type of guys that don’t back off for one bit," Diaz said of Chavez, a Mexico native who has made his home in Chicago since the age of five.
Either way, there’s absolutely no doubt that it’ll be a hell of a fight to watch – after all, somebody’s going to get his ass kicked and the only question is whether it’ll be quick or bloody. Being a fan, I’m voting for a little of both – but this time with Diaz still standing at the end.
"Long term I want to be champion again and have the city behind me again – when I was a champion it felt so good and so right and I want that again," Diaz said. "Hopefully this is a step towards trying to realize that moment. This Saturday, this is going to be the kind of fight that Chicagoans are going to love."
Tickets are still available: Ticketmaster (www.ticketmaster.com), the UIC Pavilion Box Office (312-413-5740) and the 8 Count Productions Office (312-226-5800).
Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com
There really shouldn’t be much suspense here – I heard the man say it plain-as-day during Wednesday’s White House rah-rah for Chicago’s 2016 Olympic bid: "I would make the case in Copenhagen personally, if I weren't so firmly committed to making -- making real the promise of quality, affordable health care for every American." President Obama said. "But the good news is I'm sending a more compelling superstar to represent the city and country we love, and that is our First Lady, Michelle Obama."
"I promise you, we are fired up about this," he said, making it obvious that he needed to make that particular point crystal clear to his audience.
The guy has several no-win situations:
A) He’s a deadbeat for ignoring health care reform and the war in Afghanistan to go schmooze the International Olympic Committee on vote day, October 2, in Copenhagen if Chicago gets it.
B) If instead the bid goes elsewhere, Obama looks like a total loser if he went through all the trouble of going there to kiss the Olympic committee’s ring for naught.
C) He looks bad if he doesn’t go "represent" his fellow Chicagoans and his absence is blamed for a loss.
The only way he looks good is if Chicago gets it without him there, which is not likely according to at least one guy who oughta know, but I’ll come back to that.
I spent almost three full days this week immersed in the minutiae of the 2016 proposal during DePaul University’s 2016 Olympics Specialized Reporting Institute and picked up a bunch of interesting tidbits I’ll just list for your reading enjoyment:
· Charlie Besser, a sport television media specialist, estimates that a U.S. 2016 Olympic games would bring in $400- $500 million more U.S. dollars in sponsorship revenue than a Rio, Madrid or Tokyo games. He said that if you aggregated media rights revenues from all of Europe, it would come out to be about a third of the estimated $2-billion-plus the U.S. summer-winter package would bring in - and he made it clear the IOC knows this.
· Misty Johanson, a Hospitality Leadership professor who was immersed in Atlanta’s 1996 summer games, said their games revitalized downtown Atlanta and had an estimated $5 billion economic impact from over 2 million visitors during the Olympic and Paralympic games. Give the lady her honesty points: she was clear that people were displaced in the process and that all these years later, there are lingering issues over the loss of a key housing project.
· I’ll credit this quote to Rita Athas, the executive director of World Business Chicago, though nearly every expert who addressed the press corps during the conference said exactly the same thing: "No summer games in the United States has ever lost money." Sure, breaking even is a far cry from the $22.5 billion she said the bid expects to bring to Chicago, but still.
· Over at Washington Park, home to the proposed Olympic Stadium, a Bid representative said that although opponents are complaining about the crowds, even the largest estimated number of people clogging the area during the games wouldn’t compare to the number of kiddies, bands, and grannies that choke the place up every year during the annual Bud Billiken Parade.
· Also over in Washington Park, Cecilia Butler, an outspoken neighborhood activist, responded thusly when I told her about all the people who contact me daily to say how pathetic the 2016 Olympics committee’s outreach has been and how dearly they want Chicago to lose the bid: "We’ve had close to 50 meetings here, this has been in the minds of people for a long time. The very fact that we’re here talking is a good thing." Butler said, "And a lot of those people who are against this – they’ve never lived here."
Some thoughts from Richard Pound, a voting member of the International Olympic Committee:
· "One of the problems Chicago has is that not as many [evaluation committee members] have been to Chicago as have been to Madrid, Rio, or Tokyo."
· "Who wins is not necessarily based on which is the best bid, but which has the least risk associated and you don’t want to make a mistake."
· "I don’t think the International Olympic Committee pays attention to opinion polls they figure if the city gets the bid, public opinion will come around. I think that’s a very minor part of it – besides, if you had 98% of the people in Chicago in favor of it, I’d be really worried."
· "It’s very hard to tell [who the favorite is], if you’re in my position you kind of follow the media. There’s not the slightest doubt that Tokyo would put on a good games, that Madrid would build on Barcelona…no one has any doubts Chicago can organize a games. To say they’re all good – that’s a waste of time."
Now, getting back to this Obama business…nearly every single expert was asked about the Obama Factor. And all of them said that hands-down, the President not showing up would certainly not bode well for the bid and his presence could make the big difference.
Mayor Daley had, earlier in the week, said he had a "glimmer of hope" that the President would change his mind and be in Copenhagen for the big day, but chose not to press the President on the South Lawn of the White House Wednesday. He instead expressed gratitude that First Lady Michelle Obama is going.
That’s gotta hurt, but don’t count Obama out yet…those who know him say hope is still alive.
"I’ve been following Obama since he went to Springfield, I know him pretty well, and I think he’s going to go," long time political reporting star Andy Shaw, now Executive Director of the Better Government Association, told us during a breakout session. "He’s going to carry the day – he does some things on gut, he believes in giving things his best shot."
Richard Pound, who himself will be casting a vote, said it loud and clear: "I think it’s pretty important for the President to go to Copenhagen for the vote, if he doesn’t, you’re not maximizing the chances of winning. If you can twist the Presidential arm to go…it could make a huge difference."
If Obama shows up in Copenhagen in October, I don’t think anyone will have to wonder who did the twisting.
Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com
Not on Twitter? Who can blame you, I’m sick and tired of hearing about it too, but, it’s soooo cool.
For instance, I was privileged to be one of a few journalists selected to attend DePaul University’s College of Communications 2016 Olympics Specialized Reporting Institute (which was generously supported by the McCormick Foundation) from Sunday September 13 to Tuesday September 15.
We had full access to elite Olympians, internationally-recognized Olympics experts, and even a voting member of the International Olympic Committee. (Read the column I wrote about it HERE)
If you had been following me on Twitter @ejc600words , you would have seen tidbits – quotes, pictures, and video – from the conference posted in real time. Those of you who keep up with me on www.600words.com could have seen the updates scrolling up the left hand side of the screen, also in real time.
Even if you aren’t on Twitter, you can check out my Twitter stream at http://www.twitter.com/ejc600words and click on anything you like without even having to join.
But if you’re like Mama Cepeda – who will follow me on Twitter when hell freezes over – I understand, so here’s my Twitter stream for you.
Read from the bottom up (or just know that the whole thing is in backwards chronological order) and don’t forget to click on the photos and videos, they’re fun!
Enjoy!
RT @Brooke22, after hearing IOC's Pound talk about voting process last night I'm less confident but it is 100% up in the air2:01 PM Sep 15th from web
If we don't get the Olympics? Lori Healy says:"The answer to that question is that we're focused only on 2016, it is the right place/time."9:44 AM Sep 15th from TwitterBerry
IOC’s Pound says no one's worried about who will be Chicago's mayor in 2016, "[Daley]'s the mayor now, that's really all that matters".7:13 PM Sep 14th from TwitterBerry
IOC's Pound says IOC not paying attention to local opinion polls of community support. "A very minor part of it."7:10 PM Sep 14th from TwitterBerry
"I think pretty important" for pres Obama to go to Copenhagen for deciding bid...if not, not maximizing chances of winning" says IOC Pound7:05 PM Sep 14th from TwitterBerry
IOC's Dick Pound says picking: "not necessarily which city is the BEST, but which has the least risk? You don't want to make a mistake."6:40 PM Sep 14th from TwitterBerry
Richard Pound, voting member of the Int'l Olympic Comm. tonight, Lori Healy tomorrow am, then documentarian Ken Burns after lunch whew!4:25 PM Sep 14th from TwitterBerry
The answer to #1 question is "no development east of Lake Shore Drive" because they are protected parklands says a 2016 rep.2:12 PM Sep 14th from TwitterBerry
2016 will require development contracts to be awarded 30% for minority/disadvantaged and 10% women - higher than City of Chgo requires1:01 PM Sep 14th from TwitterBerry
Redevelopment RFPs have already been written for M. Reese site: 1 for if we get games and 1 for if we don't12:59 PM Sep 14th from TwitterBerry
One 2016 representative says the Michael Reese facility will very definitely been demolished if Chgo gets the games (as planned)12:54 PM Sep 14th from TwitterBerry
Jimmy DeCastro is sitting across the table from me telling me he has the inside scoop - says we're definitely getting the 2016 Olympics8:43 AM Sep 14th from TwitterBerry
Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com
Where were you one year ago today, on that mild Sunday when the world seemed to go off its axis? Seems like a long, long time ago, doesn't it?
Had you heard the breathless news about some East Coast fancy pants finance house called Lehman Brothers filing the largest bankruptcy case in the history of the United States -- to the crazy Monopoly money tune of $639 billion?
Though two weeks earlier, the federal government had taken over mortgage giants Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae -- putting about 5 trillion bucks worth of debt onto U.S. taxpayers -- most people hadn't really turned away from the historic presidential race and Madonna's 50th birthday long enough to realize that Wall Street was swirling into the toilet and Main Street was getting sucked down with it.
Giants -- AIG, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, Washington Mutual, Wachovia, Countrywide, Bear Stearns -- toppled one after the other like dominoes. The stock market tanked, with the Dow losing a cool 777.7, posting its largest one-day point drop in history -- whoosh!
Then came panic and fear: People scanned the high-rises for suits throwing themselves out of windows to end it all (horribly, some did). Books on the Great Depression were dusted off. Any sort of financial catastrophe seemed entirely possible.
Companies slashed jobs to the bone marrow, houses stopped selling, workers were out on the streets and the Feds talked about trillion-dollar bailout packages. For a while there, it seemed like we'd never see the sun again.
Fast-forward a year:
Last week, Christy Romer of the President's Council of Economic Advisers presented the first official quarterly report on the street-level impact of the American Recovery and Investment Act of 2009 and pretty much declared it a success: "1.1 million jobs were added in the 3rd quarter as result of the Recovery Act," Romer chirped on a conference call with reporters.
Twenty-one thousand Oprah fans swarmed the Magnificent Mile to worship her and stimulate the economy along the way. Steve Jobs wooed us all with the new iPod, complete with video camera and radio tuner. Electronics retailers licked their chops about sales of the new Beatles video game.
Are we all better?
"One year ago, there was a real moment of panic, but we realized it was not the end of the world," Adolfo Laurenti, deputy chief economist and managing director of Mesirow Financial, told me. "You see people still buying homes and cars, and going shopping. Maybe not as much as before -- there's more a sense of people knowing they need to have some real money in their pocket before they spend it -- but where they may no longer be buying a McMansion or a gas-guzzling SUV, they're also not walking away from the latest iPhone."
That's certainly the case for some. For others, the worst is yet to come. The nation's unemployment rate climbed to 9.7 percent last month, the highest since 1983.
"Nationally, there's talk of the green shoots of an economic recovery, but we know that in a three-year cycle, the pain of 2009 will prove to have been the easiest," said Terry Mazany, president and chief executive officer of the Chicago Community Trust, which tracks the city's vital signs -- unemployment, food stamp demand, foreclosure rates. "While some of us can indulge in Oprah-mania and think the worst is behind us, really, with state budget cuts that are closing health and human services and shedding workers, and the accumulated impact of it all, we're still in danger of experiencing a lost decade like Japan's in the '90s."
As the entire country works through a return to a "new normal," Mazany suggested, nobody should be dazzled by news stories trumpeting the return of consumption. Rather, he said, we should develop a mind-set of contribution -- to sustain those still very much in danger of a catastrophic financial collapse.
Good advice . . . if only those of us who have been lucky so far can remember those dark, dark days, oh so long ago.
