Or so said William Tecumseh Sherman, a General for the Union Army during the American Civil War in the late 19th century. It’s been an apt quote through the ages, and one that really comes into play at the moment.
Much has been made about the 90+ thousand pages of documents leaked about American involvement in Afghanistan and the geopolitical struggle in the region. Jon Stewart (of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart) weighs in on this. Readers and viewers be advised, this contains strong language:
If ever there was a reason to support the troops, it would be to get them out of Afghanistan. We’re fighting alongside an Afghan army that could, quite frankly, care less about their safety and security. We’re fighting against a well-financed insurgency that might even be financed by the Pakistani government, which is in turn financed by us. We’re also fighting history: nobody has ever won a war in the eastern mountains of Afghanistan.
This war will not be won by military prowess alone. It will take a lot of well-choreographed diplomacy. Throwing money at Afghanistan (and Iraq) will not solve the problem.
I am a pacifist but there are times when even I believe that war is necessary. As Scripture says, “There is a time for war and a time for peace.” We’re past the time for war. Now is the time for peace.
It’s been a few weeks now since SB1070 has been signed into law. Unless you’ve been living in a cave for the past few weeks, you know all the fallout that’s happened from around the state and across the nation. It hasn’t been pretty. There have been calls to boycott Arizona, and some state and city legislatures have introduced measures to boycott Arizona.
In all the madness, I’ve been trying to figure out what SB1070 means for me, my community, and greater Arizona. I believe that SB1070 is misguided and does nothing to solve the true issue at hand, immigration reform. I firmly believe that SB1070 was passed because we’ve let fear drive the conversation instead of reasoned, rational debate. As Emerson said, “Fear always springs from ignorance.”
It’s been hard putting words to how I feel. I understand the frustration on the parts of those who support this law. The Federal government has definitely let us all down in passing any sort of immigration reform. I hope that Arizona’s passing of this misguided law is a wake-up call to the Federal government to start a new dialog on immigration. Unfortunately, seeing how this is an election year, I’m not holding my breath that a humane, sensible, and comprehensive immigration policy will be passed as candidates will pander to their ever-increasingly polarized sides.
I know that it’s all too easy to say that the law will only impact those who aren’t legally in this country. I believe that this will impact everyone. It has only raised the already-heightened sense of fear in the community. Those who support the law have publicly squirmed when they try to come up with criteria besides skin color of what an “illegal immigrant” might look like. We have a sheriff that goes on media blitzes to brag about how many undocumented immigrants he and his office have apprehended. Laws like SB1070 will only further enable him to do that.
I’m not writing this to downplay the issue of undocumented immigration in Arizona. It is a big deal. For too long, it seems like we’ve let this issue slide because there was enough resources to help immigrants and because we recognized the positive effects they’ve had on the economy. Only now are we realizing that operatives of drug cartels are operating in the local schools. Now that Arizona’s economy is in a nosedive, the state legislature and a somewhat silent citizenry are scapegoating the immigrant community for these problems. It’s their fault that Arizona is losing money. It’s their fault that crime is on the rise. It’s not our fault, it’s their fault.
It seems like an excuse to pass this law is the increased border violence, drug transportation, and its localized crime. If this is the case, why was there not an element in the law deploying the Arizona Army National Guard to the border area to defend against this criminal element? Why are we focusing on people who are here already instead of stopping the real threat to our safety and security? The framers of this bill have said that we want safer communities and that this will help mitigate the criminal element inherent in immigration. So why, then, are we focusing on those who have innocently set up their lives here to escape the violence and bloodshed in their homeland instead of those committing the violence and bloodshed?
One has to understand that it is a small percentage of the total immigrant population that is giving everyone a bad name. The media and its unchecked commentators are quick to highlight on a few stories that prove their points. We were spoon-fed stories about a southern Arizona rancher allegedly being murdered by an immigrant yet evidence is now emerging that an American citizen is the alleged suspect. We hear of a rise in crime, but that crime is usually localized and insider crime that is tied to smuggling. It’s not random. As Dean Nicholas Knisely+ of Trinity Episcopal Cathedral wrote in an essay on this very topic, “There are some very bad people coming across the border. There are also many people desperate to find work coming across as well, because the crushing poverty in their home communities makes [it] impossible to feed and care for their families.”
There have been many parallels drawn that connect Arizona to Nazi Germany. As an Arizonan, I’m offended. Nobody likes their home state compared to a brutal régime that systematically killed millions of Jews. Yet that does not mean that I’m oblivious to these parallels. Those who support this law say that those who are here with the appropriate paperwork have nothing to hide. But this now means that entire groups of people will now have to carry with them the appropriate papers to show that they are either citizens or immigrants in the country legally.
I’ve been convinced that SB1070 will never actually go into effect because there are a multitude of legal challenges and injunctions that will be filed against it. I hope this is the case. I’m a proud Arizonan and I don’t like that my home state, the state in which I was born, is the butt end of jokes. The Arizona in which I live is open, welcoming, and tolerant of other peoples. The Arizona that is unfortunately being portrayed to the media is a xenophobic, old, and rancorous state.
For those who care about this state, we’ve been let down. We’ve been let down by a state legislature that passes policies blaming one group of citizens for the state’s troubles. We’ve been let down by politicians that put their careers before their constituents. We’ve been let down by a federal government that has neglected to address immigration reform thus enabling states to pass draconian laws such as these. We’ve been let down by the media that is using opinions as the basis for facts and not vice versa.
I’ve publicly debated on this blog whether or not I’ll stay in Arizona once I’ve finished my Master’s degree. I think that now is the time that I should stay here and fight to change Arizona to be the Arizona in which I want to live. The quotation by Mohandas Gandhi is increasingly pertinent: “We need to be the change we wish to see in the world.”
We need change. Desperately. But that change has to be relevant, humane, sensible, and comprehensive.
Last week, retired US Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor stopped by KAET’s public affairs program Horizonto talk about what she’s been doing since she retired from the high court, civility in government, and her O’Connor House Project.
Justice O’Connor’s confirmation created the Horizon program back in 1981 and it’s apropos that she was the first guest in Horizon’s new set in the Cronkite School building on the ASU Downtown Phoenix campus.
Phoenix’s (and here, I mean the entire metropolitan area) leaders still don’t get it. Surprise? Probably not: even our own Governor has called this place a “hellhole.”
Our leaders think that we’re going to grow, and to satiate that growth, they’re calling for 400 miles (!!!) of new highways in the metro area over the next four decades. (In fairness, the plan does call for 320 miles of rail.)
Plus, how can we sustain that growth? I’m thinking in terms of water. With more growth comes the increased demand for more water. Water that is incredibly under-priced for desert living.
Do I need to remind you what happens when a region puts its entire economic development’s eggs in one basket? Phoenix was hit the hardest during this economic recession because our economy was because we had a growth-centric economy. Yeah, it provided fantastic revenues for the state when it was going gang-busters, but now that it isn’t, well…you know where I’m going.
“For me, a few hours ago, this campaign came to an end. For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die.” [Sen. Kennedy, 12 August 1980]
It’s a fair question to start this post. In the last week, I have learned a lot about myself. While the guiding theme behind this series of posts focused on if Phoenix and its surrounding metropolitan area is a suitable place in which to raise a family, there was a personal objective to this. This series was a personal sounding board, if you will, that looked at where I might end up calling home.
A couple of weeks ago, I was talking to one of my dear friends who was on vacation at the time in Seattle. In our conversation that one night, she had talked about moving to Seattle. She mentioned a couple of reasons why she would move there, namely family and education. But another major theme emerged from that conversation: when it comes down to it, are we ready to pick up where we’ve lived for so many years (she and I are both Arizona natives) and start anew in a different locale?
Starting anew in a different place sounds so romantic. The movies and literature give us many reasons why their characters move: a fresh start, a place to discover one’s self, a chance to escape the institutions that pervaded one’s life in a different city. But when the chips are down – when a decision actually has to be made – am I (and are we) capable of actually carrying through with it?
Rewind to that Downtown Phoenix Journal post that sparked this whole series off. The comments are truly enlightening. A comment left by user AdamMackWright summarizes that which has taken me a week to write into a couple sentences [spelling, capitalization, grammar retained from the original]:
In the last few years, the majority of the people who i once called “my community” have left or are planning to leave (some to Korea, some to San Fran, MOST to Bend, OR…). I find it hard to disagree with Kelli’s comment…Arizona is being run by people who are amongst the worst decision-makers/human beings i’ve ever seen or heard about in the country.
Sadly, I find it hard to disagree with that last statement. I’ve been following a couple of our state legislators – David Lujan and Kyrsten Sinema (both Democrats) – on Twitter and Facebook as they provide updates on what’s going on with our state legislators. That which I’ve been reading is simultaneously enlightening and disturbing.
~ ~ ~
So, here’s what will make my “should I stay or should I go” decision easier: if our lawmakers continue this downward spiral in their decisions, then going seems appetizing. But if our lawmakers come to their senses, which seems like a fat chance, then staying becomes a favorable choice.
It’s their decision. There’s only so much I can do. I exercise my duties and vote for my representation, but others express that same right, too. But if people think that our state legislators are doing a good job – a rather scary thought – then I regret to say that I live in a backward state. Sadly, though, my decision on staying or going depends on my neighbors and fellow Arizonans. I am resigned to this fact.
CNN reports that work has begun on the nation’s largest – and most ambitious – mass transit project. Dubbed as ARC, or Access to the Region’s Core, the project will create over 6,000 design- and construction-related jobs.
This is a textbook example of how the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, colloquially known as the Stimulus Package, is supposed to work. These are shovel-ready projects that can be started earlier with the help of matching Federal funds.
The largest mass transit project in the country got under way Monday with the help of federal stimulus dollars, as public officials broke ground on a second passenger rail tunnel beneath the Hudson River.
The new tunnel will link New Jersey with New York and eventually will double capacity on the nation’s busiest rail corridor, running from Washington to Boston, Massachusetts, officials said. Officials participated in the groundbreaking for the $8.7 billion project as commuter trains passed behind them in North Bergen, New Jersey, before entering the existing train tunnel, which went into operation in 1908.
As if you needed to be reminded, the economy is bad and cities need to save money. Sadly, most of the cost reductions come through service cuts of much-needed programs. Policy studies would show us that now is the time to cut duplicate items. The DASH Downtown Loop, as I am prepared to argue, is one of those duplications.
For those familiar with Downtown Phoenix, there are two free shuttles that connect various parts of the area: the Downtown Area Shuttle, or DASH. One travels from Central Station to the Arizona State Capitol (Government Loop) and the other meanders around the area, traveling to the two stadia and up to Roosevelt St (Downtown Loop). Both shuttles operate from 6.30a-6.30p. For the Government Loop, this may make sense since that’s when state offices are open. But it doesn’t make sense for the Downtown Loop: the areas served by the Downtown Loop start to come alive after that shuttle service is finished for the evening.
Here’s the proposal: get rid of the DASH Downtown Loop and replace it with a free-ride zone on the Metro Light Rail that extends from the Roosevelt St/Central Ave station to the 3rd St/Washington & Jefferson St stations. Most major downtown areas have a free-ride zone to encourage people to take public transport to get from one part of the downtown to the other. Phoenix should not be different.
It would work by not having fare enforcement officers check between the Roosevelt/Central Ave station and the 3rd St/Washington & Jefferson St stations. There would still be ticketing machines at those stations so people who need to go outside of the free-ride zone can buy their tickets.
[source: Corey Schubert, media manager, ASU College of Public Programs] Can tourism help eliminate hunger? That’s the hope of Waste Not Arizona, a nonprofit organization that has been working with local resorts to supply their unused food to the hungry in the Phoenix area. A recent research study by MBA students from Arizona State University’s W. P. Carey School of Business has been helping the organization increase its impact.
The study, part of a class taught by ASU Associate Professor Elliot Rabinovich, examined the supply chain processes leading from Phoenix-area tourist resorts to a network of local groups that feed the hungry. The study was a collaborative effort between the Megapolitan Tourism Research Center in the College of Public Programs and the Center for Services Leadership at the W. P. Carey School of Business. W. P. Carey MBA students Ross Cain, Xicheng Zhou and McCall Baldwin wrote the report.
Waste Not Arizona has a fleet of four refrigerated trucks that run in the Valley six days per week, picking up food from donors and delivering to several organizations that feed the hungry. The study focused on the organizational structure, current supply chain processes, the pros and cons of different initiatives within Waste Not Arizona’s network, and ways to maximize how the organization carries out its daily activities.
“The ASU supply chain analysis completed for the logistics side of Waste Not was invaluable,” said Dee Mitten, executive director of Waste Not Arizona. ”The caliber of analysis and suggestions for improvement were well-thought out, realistic and attainable. We tremendously value and appreciate the commitment of time, energy and enthusiasm devoted to this project.”
Dr. Timothy Tyrrell, director of the Megapolitan Tourism Research Center, initiated the project that led to the study. “The tourism industry gives much more than jobs and tax revenues back to the community,” Tyrrell said. “Tourism contributes to a wide range of economic and social qualities of life for local residents. This study is a great example of how the university can help tourism do an even better job of serving the public good.”
Dr. Rabinovich, who supervised the course, said the project was also beneficial for the students who took a hands-on approach and were engaged in learning from Waste Not Arizona’s operations. “For the students, this was an educational experience, as well,” Rabinovich said. “They were exposed to an area of the economy they rarely get to see as part of their MBA curriculum.”