Papers

If you know me well enough, you know that I have a degree in Spanish and French from the best university in Texas, Texas A&M. It is possible that, like my sister, reading my blog gives you the opinion that I am off-the-deep-end conservative. What you might not know is that the highest grades I ever received in college were in a class called Sociology of Minority Groups.

After taking that class, I considered pursuing a Master's in Sociology. What kept me from heading in that direction was the feeling that there were so many problems for which I did not have answers. I did not want to set myself up for the intense frustration that would surely accompany studying so many disturbing trends among the world's population and not being able to make anything better.

It turns out that if you consider all of the groups I belonged to while at A&M (being female, being in a sorority, being LDS, being married, being pregnant and married, being a Spanish major, pursuing a French minor, participating in the University Research Fellowship, but not completing it, the list actually goes on), I was a minority. I was more than a minority: there was no one in the entire university, at any point in those four years, like me. So, while I am not an ethnic minority, I am empathetic to being on the receiving end of humanity's less than noble sentiments.

The debate on immigration reform is similar to the debate on healthcare reform: technically complex, in the sense of the law, politically complex, and emotionally charged. Obama campaigned on delivering the fundamental transformation of America, but his radical changes are not the only possible radical changes out there. The Repubs had eight years to tackle immigration, but they did not. They feared losing the Hispanic vote, which they never had anyway.

I, for one am glad that they did not follow the extreme Right and build a wall or deport everyone. Why does it have to be all or nothing? Complete amnesty or the Great Wall 2.0? How is it possible that no one in Washington is intelligent enough, or courageous enough, to propose radical changes that would satisfy the needs of the immigrants as well as our budgetary constraints? If I had to guess, it is courage they lack, not ideas.

The media hype surrounding Arizona's new law frustrates me to no end. Today I heard an endless reel of soundbites comparing asking someone to show id to a Nazi asking for a Jew's papers. While I have lived in Fayetteville, the police have twice set up a road block on a nearby street, where every car on the road, had to stop and show ID. I wonder how well it would turn out for me if I called the cop a Nazi for asking to see my license? How is this, supposedly legal, violation of my civil liberties any different than what is proposed for Arizona? There is this thing called a social contract: we give up certain liberties in exchange for certain protections and services.

I have my own ideas of how to solve this, but UFC is about to come on, so saving the world will have to wait another day.

June Cleaver on Federal Regulation

The first thing on my mind is the EPA's new video contest entitled "Rulemaking Matters!" Participants are encouraged to submit a video that "highlights the importance of federal regulations and motivates others to participate in the rulemaking process." As we watched the youtube video introducing the contest, Neil and I about laughed ourselves off the couch. I kept looking for a Dharma Initiative uniform (from the TV series Lost) or some video-feed circa 1950 of June Cleaver explaining how forward-thinking, media-savvy the contest is. June might even remind us how federal regulation touches "almost every aspect" of our lives and that we can take part in that exciting process. The video contest has an introduction video on youtube. You can search "EPA Rulemaking Matters".

The EPA's contest says, "We'll provide the facts. You provide the creativity!" The EPA just rolled out a new website called regulation.gov; among other things, the intent of this video contest is to drive traffic to their website. Each video must give a shout out to this link to be considered for the grand prize.

The EPA spokeswoman gives the example of the Cash for Clunkers program that allowed so many people to trade in their gas guzzlers for more fuel-efficient cars. She explains that Congress created the law and then authorized the federal agency, in this case something to do with Highways and Transportation, which falls under the Executive branch umbrella, to create the actual program, with it's rules and regulations.

I wonder when everyone was rushing in to buy new cars on this specific weekend, was reducing their carbon footprint the catalyst for their decision? If the financial benefits had not been provided by the govt, would the people have rushed to be more eco-friendly? Not likely.

I was pretty certain the entire program was designed to stimulate the economy, to infuse money into the failing auto industry. Maybe the federal govt used the automakers' financial need to forward their own eco-agenda or to increase their reach into citizens' personal decisions as they mandated what kind of cars people could buy.

Either way, the question is not whether people need to be convinced as to the extent of federal regulation in their lives, but rather that their voice matters in the formation of those rules. Maybe the govt is right-we do need to see what's on their website to see how to make a difference. Unless there is a specific and meaningful way the private citizens' comments and suggestions are considered, their "involvement" in the process will amount to nothing more than an opportunity for the govt to say that they considered our opinions, that we are part of the solution, to push some of the ownership of these programs onto our backs rather than their own. Is it feasible that our input on the implementation of the health care overhaul will be considered if it is contrary to the agenda and ideals of those who passed it into law?

Unfortunately for me, I need to see their website to see what kind of a voice we have.

Mack and Jess Wedding Weekend, Part I

My Aunt Jeanie dances at the reception with the groom, Mack.













Jeanie and Willie's grand entrance into the reception.

















Zach performs surgery on his Bionicle at dinner. We allowed Zach to bring a back pack full of toys to entertain himself.

















While I am not sure who this young guest is, how adorable that he spent his time waiting for the reception to start in such a worthwhile pursuit. The lighting's not great because I had to sneak the camera between the two doors and turn off the flash so I wouldn't surprise him. If I was that smart at such a young age, or even now...This is in contrast to the only other young man at the wedding, the ring bearer, who spent the evening dancing with the brides' maids who were all in their early-mid 20s. Either way, both of these guys know where it's at.












Ainsley

















Me and Jeannie at the wonderful Rehearsal Dinner. I have never eaten Seafood Chowder before, and it was delicious!









My Uncle David (my Dad's brother) and his wife, Debbie, with Willie at the Rehearsal Dinner.













The girls danced all evening with the bride, Jess, and her sweet bride's maids who were so kind as to include the girls in the fun. Jess looked especially beautiful, and I will post more pictures from the actual wedding later.

Zach's Dress Down Day

Zach's dress-down day, making a funny face. The Jedi In Training.

Ainsley's Dress-Down Day

Ainsley's Diva Dress-Down Outfit consisted of black plaid walking shorts with a boy-tie as a belt, a turquoise tank top with attached necklaces, and a black knit cardigan with a sequin star on the back.

Sydney's Dress-Down Day

The only school day that the children were given permission to wear street clothes instead of their uniforms was Spring Picture Day. Syd and Ainsley began planning for this day back in January.

Audrey and Dad

Soon after Neil got home, he went to watch Audrey at ballet class.