Tormenting the poor

Judah pointed me to Barbara Ehrenreich breaks it down in her NYTimes op-ed, Is It Now a Crime to be Poor?:

Maybe we can’t afford the measures that would begin to alleviate America’s growing poverty — affordable housing, good schools, reliable public transportation and so forth. I would argue otherwise, but for now I’d be content with a consensus that, if we can’t afford to truly help the poor, neither can we afford to go on tormenting them.

This is definitely something that Bloomington should keep in mind, and I suspect a lot of people who live in neighborhoods and communities that are confronting more visibly human faces of poverty.  Still, I’m not content with criticizing middle-class suburbanites|yuppies|city governments|business associations|police are whack for tormenting people experiencing poverty or trying to ignore it.   I feel like I’ve inherited, despite my best efforts, the cultural anxiety with poverty and I think we need to have a frank discussion about what scares us so much about poverty and poor people and how we can get over it.  One of the problems with intense efforts, over time, to racially and economically segregate our communities is that many of us in this country who grew up in those segregated places have no tools to accurately assess our real safety.  We just rely on the mythologies about the potential dangers that people who we perceive as different than us might pose.  I don’t think the antidote is to fetishize poverty either, but I hope there’s a way out.

Untitled

I’m excited that some of Decarcerate Monroe County’s ideas have become projected into the mainstream media, like this from a July 26 Herald Times op-ed:

Some of his numbers also should give pause to our criminal justice hierarchy. Why is it that while incarceration rates have gone up nationwideby 38 percent from 1994 to 2007, the rate here has gone up 53 percent? And why is it that fully 87 percent of the jail’s inmates haven’t been convictedof anything but are simply awaiting trial?

Graffiti Panic

This is a letter to the editor that I just submitted in response to an editorial in today’s H-T, Graffiti not art; it is vandalism:

I was disappointed by today’s editorial condemning graffiti.  Rather than fostering a nuanced and frank dialog about complicated issues like the state of public and private spaces in Bloomington, the editorial’s intention seemed only to attempt to induce panic.  Why even mention the specter of gang violence when the police department confirms that graffiti in Bloomington has no relation to such violence?  Furthermore, I am disappointed by the brief mention of the “broken windows theory”  and other studies outside of the context of a broader body of research.  This theory, like many sociological theories, is still being widely debated.  For instance, one study by researchers Robert J. Sampson of Harvard University and Stephen W. Raudenbush of the University of Michigan suggests that rather than being inherently problematic to the well-being of a neighborhood, graffiti (among other things) invokes deep-rooted anxieties and prejudices that people have about changing class and race dynamics of a community.  Ultimately, I am far more concerned about the high costs of renting spaces, barriers to starting businesses, and difficulty finding employment in Bloomington.  If we do not address these factors, graffiti may be the only way that many can participate in Bloomington’s downtown.

Holla at your representatives that you don’t want to fund abstinence-only sex ed.

Act at http://capwiz.com/advofy/utr/2/?a=12162006&i=92217564&c=

This is what I wrote:

I am very concerned about the safety, health, and happiness of youth in Indiana and across the nation.  So, I am writing to ask you to end funding for ineffective abstinence-only-until-marriage education programs including:

* Title V Abstinence Education program, Section 510 of the Social Security Act – (state formula grants), funded at $50 million

* Community-Based Abstinence Education under Title XI of the Social Security Act – (direct grants), funded at $116 million

* Adolescent Family Life Act (Title XX of the Public Health Service Act) abstinence-only grants, funded at $13 million

GRAND TOTAL: $179 million per year

It is my hope that by de-funding programs that don’t work, we can provide support that will help youth in Indiana, and across the U.S., safer, healthier, and equipped to make the best choices in their lives.

I know that my local school district has an abstinence-based curriculum and not an abstinence-only sex education curriculum.  However, the pressure of funding programs that do not fully discuss contraception, STI prevention, and acknowledge the reality that youth in Indiana (and around the US) are sexually active, regardless of whether this is the best choice or not, means that many youth in my community do not have the information they need to be safe and healthy and to encourage their peers to make safe, healthy life choices.

I have first-hand experience working as a volunteer doing presentations about healthy relationships, sexual assault, and domestic violence in Bloomington-area middle schools and high schools.  I have found that, because of the local school district’s and Indiana’s emphasis on abstinence and reluctance to talk about even the biological mechanics of sex, many youth lack the basic information they need to participate in a comprehensive discussion about preventing sexual assault and relationship violence.

This is just one local and personal example about how non-comprehensive, abstinence-only-until-marriage education sex education is failing to make Hoosier youth safe and healthy.  However, there is ample additional evidence at the dangerous shortcomings of such approaches.

Here are the facts:

• In spite of their receiving over 1.5 billion dollars in federal funds since 1996, not a single, sound study has shown these programs to have a beneficial impact on young people’s behavior.

• Recent studies show these programs can create harm by undermining contraceptive use when young people in abstinence-only-until-marriage education become sexually active.  In one study, abstinence-only-until-marriage program participants were one-third less likely to use contraception when they did have sex compared to students not receiving the restrictive abstinence-only education. Nationally, over 60% of young people will have had sex before graduating from high school.

•  Over 135 national organizations, including the country’s major medical organizations like the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics, belong to the National Coalition to Support Sexuality Education and strongly believe in teaching young people both abstinence and contraception.

I know that issues around sex and youth can be controversial, but I believe that I stand with the majority of Americans who want comprehensive sex education for their young people.  A 2004 survey by National Public Radio/Kaiser Family Foundation /Harvard University Kennedy School of Government found that 86% of voters want young people to receive a comprehensive approach to sex education that includes teaching about both abstinence and contraception.

By voting to end the 179 million dollars per year funding for the following failed programs, you will be sending a clear message that you support science and common sense.

Both fiscally and in terms of public health, we cannot afford to continue funding this unproven, dangerous approach. Young people’s health and lives are at risk.  We urge you to side with public health, with the medical community, with parents, young people and teachers and oppose any new funding for the abstinence-only-until-marriage programs.

V Week events I’m stoked about

These are part of the V Week of Events. There’s lots more, but these were the ones that caught my eye.

2/6 Friday — Critical Mass & Speak Out
@ 1pm, SAMPLE GATES
–Take to the streets in a critical mass bike ride to raise awareness of violence against women.

2/11 Wednesday — Film Screening & Teach-In, The Greatest Silence: Rape in the Congo @ 7:30PM
–Join us to view and discuss the documentary film that explores the violence faced daily by the girls and women of the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Roe v. Wade Anniversary Rally in Bloomington

Event: Roe v. Wade Anniversary Rally
“Celebrating 36 years of reproductive choice!”
What: Rally
Host: Roe supporters
Start Time: Thursday, January 22 at 2:00pm
End Time: Thursday, January 22 at 3:30pm
Where: IU Sample Gates

To see more details and RSVP, follow the link below:
http://www.facebook.com/n/?event.php&eid=71448004688

COMMUNITY MEETING AGAINST JAIL EXPANSION

INVITATION TO COMMUNITY MEETING AGAINST JAIL EXPANSION

SATURDAY, JANUARY 31, 3:00-6:00 p.m.

GREAT HALL, TRINITY CHURCH, 111 S. Grant St.

Childcare will be provided

Decarcerate Monroe County (DMC), with the encouragement of Citizens for Effective Justice, UU Friends of Prisoners Task Force, and New Leaf/New Life, is pleased to invite you to a community update and discussion on Monroe County’s plan to expand incarceration. Please come to share information and personal stories about incarceration, coordinate efforts to fight the expansion, and begin developing effective, long-term strategies and proposals to reduce incarceration!

BACKGROUND

In the fall of 2008, the Monroe County Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (MCCJCC) held a series of meetings ostensibly to solicit public input regarding the proposal to construct new criminal justice facilities, including a new youth lockup, to replace the current jail. The meetings gave criminal justice personnel opportunities to present their assessment of the current situation and to make their arguments in favor of the County’s plan for expansion. The final meeting offered a platform for the presentation of construction plans by the Noblesville-based design and construction contractor PMSI, Project Management Solutions Incorporated. Despite overwhelming opposition expressed in public comments, County officials seem to have emerged from the meetings with continued determination to pursue the expansion plan.

COMMUNITY MEETING

As an alternative and follow-up to this series of meetings, Decarcerate Monroe County has called a genuine public forum for Saturday, January 31st, in the Great Hall of Trinity Church. This afternoon will offer information, facilitate a broad-ranging public conversation, and plan continued active response. People should bring their experiences and ideas to contribute to working out practical solutions to the problems the jail purports to solve but actually only worsens.

WHAT IS DMC?

Decarcerate Monroe County is an open coalition that works to challenge the belief that cages, coercion, and confinement keep our community safe. DMC believes that people are safe when they have their basic needs met and when they feel empowered and free. DMC works to build access to meaningful, non-coercive options for dealing with problems and resolving conflict. We resist expansion of incarceration, including the proposed adult and youth jails; we support shrinking the existing punitive justice system in Monroe County.

While the group calling the meeting is explicitly against jail expansion, the Community Meeting will welcome the broadest array of opinions — please come and let’s all work together to make Monroe County a safer and more just place!

New Neighbor

Moved House

Sometimes people move into your neighborhood, and sometimes it’s the whole house.  I think the house moved from N. Walnut St. to a block from my house.

election reflection

I want to try to draw some cohesive analysis from the election results, but it’s so difficult.  I’m just going to post some things that come across my radar that I responded to.

Folks talking about voting for McKinney/Clemente made me think long and hard about third party candidates.  I was so sick of hearing people talk about how Green Party voters were spoilers in the 2000 election, and am glad that I felt good about a major party candidate this time around.  Still, it leaves me asking, would it be better to have a presdent whose ideas I feel better about, or a president whose ideas I can largely identify with (though strongly disagree with also) and lots of other people can feel secure and energized by, thus creating a different context to the work I want to do to see the world change towards a more just place?

Lots of people who aren’t in the U.S. seem stoked about the Obama victory.  Chiara’s mom stayed up late across time zones to follow the election and was  excited at the end.  I saw this message on a community informatics mailing list that I subscribe to:

I want to try to draw some cohesive analysis from the election results, but it’s so difficult.  I’m just going to post some things that come across my radar that I responded to.

Folks talking about voting for McKinney/Clemente made me think long and hard about third party candidates.  I was so sick of hearing people talk about how Green Party voters were spoilers in the 2000 election, and am glad that I felt good about a major party candidate this time around.  Still, it leaves me asking, would it be better to have a presdent whose ideas I feel better about, or a president whose ideas I can largely identify with (though strongly disagree with also) and lots of other people can feel secure and energized by, thus creating a different context to the work I want to do to see the world change towards a more just place?

Lots of people who aren’t in the U.S. seem stoked about the Obama victory.  Chiara’s mom stayed up late across time zones to follow the election and was  excited at the end.  I saw this message on a community informatics mailing list that I subscribe to:

Dear Global colleagues

This is an excellent idea. Obama is no more just the President of America. He is the nucleus of hopes for the global citizens. I feel he can give a very nice shape to the whole world – a place for living for everybody. Technology has has brought the globe on his palm and he
will surely utilize his knowledge, wisedom, talents, expertise, experience and skills for the people of the world (who love him)
irrespetive of sex, race and color.

We also enjoyed the election from here in-Bangladesh in south Asia. We expect that Obama will create a better and peaceful world forcus.

Lutfor
Bangladesh

I too am excited that a U.S. leader is talking about global cooperation and collaboration and support instead of  just confrontation.  We’ve seen capital become globalized, maybe there’s hope for globalized accountability.

Finally, the local elections  have implications too.  Lauren Taylor wrote this about the implications of the county government races for the proposed new jail:

So in case y’all didn’t hear or see it already, the Democrats swept
the local elections, with more than a little help from Obama
supporters who turned out in record numbers. In relation to the jail
and juvenile facility issues, that means that:

County Commissioners (the three person triumvirate that serves as the
executive branch of the county, implements policy)
Two of the three commissioner seats were up for election, the third
seat stays with Republican Pat Stoffers (R).
– Iris Kiesling (D) is a big supporter of a new jail and juvenile
facility. She was re-elected with 61.4% of the vote.
– and Mark Stoops (D) opposes the expansion of the jail though
supports a juvenile treatment facility. Won with 62% of the vote.

County Council (holds the purse, decides whether or not to fund things)
Three at large seats were up for grabs. There are seven total council
members at any given time.
– Julie Thomas (D) got the most votes, and will join the council. She
opposes the jail and supports a juvenile treatment facility.
– Warren Henegar (D) was second, and was re-elected to the county
council. He supports both the jail and juvenile facility.
– Geoff McKim (D) was third, and will also join the council. He
conditionally supports the jail – wants only more space for
programming and improved conditions, NOT for more beds. Also supports
a juvenile facility.

so yeah, best possible results from local elections, i believe.

~lauren