Dear Mr. President,
For all of the traffic-snarling inconvenience, it was really exciting to have you back in Seattle after so many years. (A sentiment that might be easier for me to express, as I don't drive, but I'm sure the commuters got over it.) It's too bad that the Secret Service said no to your stroll around town because it really was a lovely day out. Early returns from the primary are showing a healthy and unsurprising victory for Patty Murray, which is a good sign for Washington. If Dino Rossi manages to rally enough supporters to win in the general, I'll worry for the Senate even more than i already do. It may be purely symbolic, but having you visit Washington after so long almost felt like an attempt to assure solidly blue states that you haven't forgotten us. Or maybe Senator Murray's re-election is less assured than you're comfortable with. Either way, it was good to have you in the city. Apparently you even got to visit my neighborhood.
The howling sirens of your motorcade really took me back to my time in DC. It used to amaze me to see the Presidential motorcade (or the smaller processions of other government officials) speeding through the streets. I always wondered if the powerful occupants of the limos and SUVs ever noticed the run-down neighborhoods or the homeless men and women on the corners downtown. I know that as the country's leader you're constantly aware of the big-picture problems we face, the crushing effects of unemployment and poverty. Sometimes I wonder if your position distances you from the reality of these problems too much to see them as more than an abstraction or political liability. But that's more cynical than I'm comfortable being on a night like this.
Thank you for visiting Seattle. I hope it doesn't take another 4 years to get you back here, but I suppose there are worse things than having a reliably liberal population. Have a safe trip home.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Showing posts with label washingon state. Show all posts
Showing posts with label washingon state. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Friday, April 16, 2010
Day 106- The price we pay
Dear Mr. President,
The city of Seattle is contemplating a new law, proposed by one of our more conservative city councilmen, to create a $50 fine for aggressive panhandling. This idea is a poor one for several reasons, the most obvious of which being that those who beg for change on the streets don't exactly have the $50 to avoid jail. It punishes the poor for being poor and then helps to keep them poor. That a better way to mitigate the problem of homelessness might be an increase in assistance programs, shelters, police presence and other public services seems to escape the people who support this measure- many of whom also oppose existing social services and the taxes that fund them.
I'm not as compassionate as I ought to be. I don't give money to people on the street (be they homeless or the clip-board wielding WASHPIRG pests) and I generally don't enjoy being asked. (I, as the Lyndon LaRouche-supporting morons can attest, can often be impolite about this if caught in the wrong mood, especially by libertarians.) My vague annoyance, however, is not grounds for a fine. This law is designed to win the council favor with local business and encourage tourism (though, for the life of me, I can't imagine that there are a number of people who long to visit Seattle but don't because of the homeless.) When I worked at the downtown bookstore, homeless patrons were often problematic, however, if business owners don't want to deal with the inconvenience, than they ought to be willing to contribute to solving the larger problem, not just punishing its symptoms.
This whole debate contrasts sharply with the national debate about financial regulation. The role of the government, in my opinion, should be to protect the interests of the people, especially those who can't protect themselves. In regulating the financial industry, the government is doing just this; looking out for the people in the face of powerful organizations, companies and industries guided by self-interest. The city of Seattle, meanwhile, is trying to do the opposite; attempting through redundant and overly-broad legislation to protect the wealthy and powerful from the desperate and poor. Both homelessness and wall-street reform are important issues, and ones that will require us to determine where we want the government to intervene and who we really want it to protect us from.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
The city of Seattle is contemplating a new law, proposed by one of our more conservative city councilmen, to create a $50 fine for aggressive panhandling. This idea is a poor one for several reasons, the most obvious of which being that those who beg for change on the streets don't exactly have the $50 to avoid jail. It punishes the poor for being poor and then helps to keep them poor. That a better way to mitigate the problem of homelessness might be an increase in assistance programs, shelters, police presence and other public services seems to escape the people who support this measure- many of whom also oppose existing social services and the taxes that fund them.
I'm not as compassionate as I ought to be. I don't give money to people on the street (be they homeless or the clip-board wielding WASHPIRG pests) and I generally don't enjoy being asked. (I, as the Lyndon LaRouche-supporting morons can attest, can often be impolite about this if caught in the wrong mood, especially by libertarians.) My vague annoyance, however, is not grounds for a fine. This law is designed to win the council favor with local business and encourage tourism (though, for the life of me, I can't imagine that there are a number of people who long to visit Seattle but don't because of the homeless.) When I worked at the downtown bookstore, homeless patrons were often problematic, however, if business owners don't want to deal with the inconvenience, than they ought to be willing to contribute to solving the larger problem, not just punishing its symptoms.
This whole debate contrasts sharply with the national debate about financial regulation. The role of the government, in my opinion, should be to protect the interests of the people, especially those who can't protect themselves. In regulating the financial industry, the government is doing just this; looking out for the people in the face of powerful organizations, companies and industries guided by self-interest. The city of Seattle, meanwhile, is trying to do the opposite; attempting through redundant and overly-broad legislation to protect the wealthy and powerful from the desperate and poor. Both homelessness and wall-street reform are important issues, and ones that will require us to determine where we want the government to intervene and who we really want it to protect us from.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Day 101- Immigration reform
Dear Mr. President,
Yesterday, in Seattle, more than five thousand people rallied for immigration reform. I was just getting off of work, when I passed through a crowd in Pioneer Square. Congressman Jim McDermott was among those in attendance, and, at first impression, the crowd seemed more like a jovial gathering than a political protest- I saw people of all ages and races, some angrily chanting, some silently holding up signs, more than a few children running around laughing and waving flags. I think it was uplifting to see so many Seattlites come together and stand up for the rights of illegal immigrants across the country.
Once, while sitting on a plane from Boise to Seattle, I was telling the woman next to me that I studied Arabic in school, and wanted to travel to the Middle East. She warned me not to expect "people over there" to accommodate me, the way we accommodate people over here. She went on to explain that, in America, we make it so easy that people don't even have to speak English, while the rest of the world insists on making people speak the native language. I've heard this mind-boggling rhetoric many times since; from old acquaintances on facebook who post things like "Welcome to America, press 1 for English, press 2 to hang up and learn English," as well as from coworkers who grow frustrated at customers who don't communicate easily in English. In DC one morning, I watched as an old woman yelled at a Hispanic McDonald's employee for denying a homeless white man free coffee, insisting that the employee, as a "non-American" was the reason the man was homeless in the first place. I try to imagine the logic behind a worldview that affords basic dignity and respect only on the basis of a shared language and place of birth, but I just can't do it. It's an ugly sense of entitlement that I just can't empathize with.
Unfortunately, I don't have to understand this kind of racism to be complicit in it. Things like this rally give me hope, even as they deepen my disappointment in myself for not being more actively involved. Just the other day, an old woman on my bus stormed off in protest after the driver angrily berated an elderly Chinese couple for not following his request to make more room quickly enough. I kept my seat; I was late for work, and I didn't want to walk in the rain, but the shame of staying silent while the woman stood up for two strangers, alone, stayed with me all day. It's up to all of us to stand up against discrimination, whenever we can, and I am too often content to look the other way if it is inconvenient for me to act.
Our government needs to do its part, as well. Immigration reform that offers a clear path to citizenship for those living in this country illegally cannot wait another year. We must make a clear demonstration that we value and respect the contributions immigrants make to our society, how essential they are to the character of America. We do not gain anything by forcing millions of people to live outside of the law; they suffer because of it, and our country suffers because of it. While comprehensive immigration reform will likely be even more difficult to pass than health care reform, it is long past time and well worth the fight. I hope that your administration begins an aggressive campaign to see that this becomes a reality.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Day 98
Dear Mr. President,
This month in Virginia is, apparently, Confederate History Month. I've spent my entire life in a state that didn't exist during the civil war, but, being about as far North as you can get in the lower 48, I grew up naively assuming that Washington and Washingtonians would generally have supported the Union, if only for geographic reasons. This is why I was surprised when, as a sophomore, I discovered that enough students had been wearing the Confederate flag, on jackets and T-shirts and hats, that my high school had to ban it. I often saw it still on cars in the parking lot, and wondered, frequently, where this fascination with the old Confederacy came from. The controversy over the South Carolina statehouse in 2000 seemed equally troubling, but at least I understood the historical relevance of the Old South to that state. That it continues in Virginia indicates that, even today, many Americans still cling to the era and its culture.
Maybe it is insensitive of me, but simply I do not understand this continued hold that the Confederacy seems to have over the hearts of many Americans. Can't we put that chapter of our history to rest? The war may not have been entirely about slavery, but it is impossible to credibly separate the legacy of the Confederacy from the bloody and brutal enslavement of Africans; the single greatest shame of our Nation's history aside from the annihilation of Native Americans. Why the fondness, reverence, even, for this history and those crimes? The Virginia Governor's decision to devote an entire month to Confederate history must be truly an affront to much of his state's citizens, and especially to the African American community. It also speaks toward an unsettling resurgence of pro-secessionist rhetoric, which seems to be increasingly acceptable in modern political discourse.
I think that the history and culture of the old south can be preserved and respected without celebrating the secession, slavery and war that tore apart our country and wasted or ruined hundreds of thousands, if not millions of lives. A rejection of the racism, divisiveness and destruction that defined the Civil War should be something that all Americans can agree on.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
This month in Virginia is, apparently, Confederate History Month. I've spent my entire life in a state that didn't exist during the civil war, but, being about as far North as you can get in the lower 48, I grew up naively assuming that Washington and Washingtonians would generally have supported the Union, if only for geographic reasons. This is why I was surprised when, as a sophomore, I discovered that enough students had been wearing the Confederate flag, on jackets and T-shirts and hats, that my high school had to ban it. I often saw it still on cars in the parking lot, and wondered, frequently, where this fascination with the old Confederacy came from. The controversy over the South Carolina statehouse in 2000 seemed equally troubling, but at least I understood the historical relevance of the Old South to that state. That it continues in Virginia indicates that, even today, many Americans still cling to the era and its culture.
Maybe it is insensitive of me, but simply I do not understand this continued hold that the Confederacy seems to have over the hearts of many Americans. Can't we put that chapter of our history to rest? The war may not have been entirely about slavery, but it is impossible to credibly separate the legacy of the Confederacy from the bloody and brutal enslavement of Africans; the single greatest shame of our Nation's history aside from the annihilation of Native Americans. Why the fondness, reverence, even, for this history and those crimes? The Virginia Governor's decision to devote an entire month to Confederate history must be truly an affront to much of his state's citizens, and especially to the African American community. It also speaks toward an unsettling resurgence of pro-secessionist rhetoric, which seems to be increasingly acceptable in modern political discourse.
I think that the history and culture of the old south can be preserved and respected without celebrating the secession, slavery and war that tore apart our country and wasted or ruined hundreds of thousands, if not millions of lives. A rejection of the racism, divisiveness and destruction that defined the Civil War should be something that all Americans can agree on.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Monday, March 29, 2010
Day 88
This is for all of you. Also, for those of you following it, Barbra Boxer's re-election race is heating up, she's polling within the margin of error against both republican front runners, and Carly Fiorina (of demon sheep/ giant blimp ad fame) is leading in the republican primary. If you know California voters, encourage them to get out the vote. The Senate might be funnier with Carly Fiorina in it, but I don't think congress needs any more of her particular brand of crazy.
Dear Mr. President,
The arrests in Michigan of militia members plotting to kill police officers reveals a deeply unsettling movement that seems to be growing. The recent rise in violent anti-government sentiments is frightening, the rhetoric of hate groups across the country, groups who often use religion or nationalism as a disguise echoed in the hysteria of the Tea Party movement and even by some members of the Republican party. This is not to say conservatives are to blame. I grew up in a part of Washington State (a blue state if ever there were) where survivalist militias, cults, and truly horrifying acts of hatred occurred under national leadership from Republicans or Democrats; I recognize that this kind of extremism co-opts the conservative opposition to government and subverts it into violence much in the same way the suicide bombers in Moscow twist their Islamic faith into justification for their crimes.
I don't know what the solution is. My fear-based reaction would be to call for stricter federal regulation of these groups, but I understand that it would only fuel their rhetoric and make all Americans less safe and less free. We cannot protect ourselves by infringing upon the rights of others. The arrest of these extremists in Michigan proves that the current system works; their plans were disrupted by the authorities and lives were saved.
I'm glad that the police were successful in preventing this group from carrying out their plans. My heart is heavy at the loss of life in Russia, as well. I'm sure there are many struggling to make sense of the anger that leads people to this kind of violence, and I have faith that your administration will not take advantage of this struggle to increase its power, as President Bush's did. I sincerely hope that politicians across the political spectrum recognize the power their words have over people, and tone down the rhetoric that is fueling these violent sentiments.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Dear Mr. President,
The arrests in Michigan of militia members plotting to kill police officers reveals a deeply unsettling movement that seems to be growing. The recent rise in violent anti-government sentiments is frightening, the rhetoric of hate groups across the country, groups who often use religion or nationalism as a disguise echoed in the hysteria of the Tea Party movement and even by some members of the Republican party. This is not to say conservatives are to blame. I grew up in a part of Washington State (a blue state if ever there were) where survivalist militias, cults, and truly horrifying acts of hatred occurred under national leadership from Republicans or Democrats; I recognize that this kind of extremism co-opts the conservative opposition to government and subverts it into violence much in the same way the suicide bombers in Moscow twist their Islamic faith into justification for their crimes.
I don't know what the solution is. My fear-based reaction would be to call for stricter federal regulation of these groups, but I understand that it would only fuel their rhetoric and make all Americans less safe and less free. We cannot protect ourselves by infringing upon the rights of others. The arrest of these extremists in Michigan proves that the current system works; their plans were disrupted by the authorities and lives were saved.
I'm glad that the police were successful in preventing this group from carrying out their plans. My heart is heavy at the loss of life in Russia, as well. I'm sure there are many struggling to make sense of the anger that leads people to this kind of violence, and I have faith that your administration will not take advantage of this struggle to increase its power, as President Bush's did. I sincerely hope that politicians across the political spectrum recognize the power their words have over people, and tone down the rhetoric that is fueling these violent sentiments.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Day 84- Rob McKenna does not speak for me
Dear Mr. President,
My state's attorney general is joining the ranks of those filing law suits against the health care reform legislation. I apologize on his behalf. He does not represent me, (or, for that matter, most of the voters in my state,) and if the law suit isn't dropped, I can assure you that Washington State voters will not let him forget it, come 2012.
Today I took a class as part of my training at my new job. We went around the room discussing our reasons for joining the company, and most said that they were doing it for the health insurance. Our company is one of the few that elects to give part-time employees health benefits, but many in my state are not so fortunate. We'll benefit from health care reform in a number of ways, and to have our attorney general join the suit against the legislation is truly disappointing, (not to mention an unconscionable waste of our time & tax dollars.) I hope that Mr. McKenna appreciates just how much this is going to finish his career.
For health care opponents campaigning to repeal the legislation, I share the sentiments you expressed today in Iowa; they want to give insurance companies back the right to deny children with preexisting conditions and raise taxes on small businesses? They should go right ahead. I just can't wait to see the ads coming out of this. I don't think I've ever been so excited for midterm elections. I am not afraid, if other democrats will get out the vote this year, like we did in 2006, we can defend our majority well. Furthermore, we can show those elected officials like Mr. Mckenna why speaking for their constituents is an important part of job security.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
My state's attorney general is joining the ranks of those filing law suits against the health care reform legislation. I apologize on his behalf. He does not represent me, (or, for that matter, most of the voters in my state,) and if the law suit isn't dropped, I can assure you that Washington State voters will not let him forget it, come 2012.
Today I took a class as part of my training at my new job. We went around the room discussing our reasons for joining the company, and most said that they were doing it for the health insurance. Our company is one of the few that elects to give part-time employees health benefits, but many in my state are not so fortunate. We'll benefit from health care reform in a number of ways, and to have our attorney general join the suit against the legislation is truly disappointing, (not to mention an unconscionable waste of our time & tax dollars.) I hope that Mr. McKenna appreciates just how much this is going to finish his career.
For health care opponents campaigning to repeal the legislation, I share the sentiments you expressed today in Iowa; they want to give insurance companies back the right to deny children with preexisting conditions and raise taxes on small businesses? They should go right ahead. I just can't wait to see the ads coming out of this. I don't think I've ever been so excited for midterm elections. I am not afraid, if other democrats will get out the vote this year, like we did in 2006, we can defend our majority well. Furthermore, we can show those elected officials like Mr. Mckenna why speaking for their constituents is an important part of job security.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
