A Troubled America

Originally written January 2017

An Update January 2019

How did we get here?  Where, exactly are we ?

“Where Do We Go from Here” was MLK’s analysis of the state of American race relations and the movement after a decade of U.S. civil rights struggles. ‘‘With Selma and the Voting Rights Act one phase of development in the civil rights revolution came to an end,’’ he observed (King, 3). King believed that the next phase in the movement would bring its own challenges, as African Americans continued to make demands for better jobs, higher wages, decent housing, an education equal to that of whites, and a guarantee that the rights won in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 would be enforced by the federal government. He warned that ‘‘The persistence of racism in depth and the dawning awareness that Negro demands will necessitate structural changes in society have generated a new phase of white resistance in North and South’’ (King, 12).

White people are potential humans - they haven't evolved yet. 

Louis Farrakhan

Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, has long expressed anti-Semitic and anti-white rhetoric which has marked him as a notable figure on the extremist scene. This demagogue is a frequent speaker on college campuses and at rallies, where he has been received enthusiastically by thousands of people. During the 2016 U.S. Presidential campaign, Farrakhan came out in support of controversial Republican candidate Donald Trump, stating that he admired how Trump had steered clear of Jewish special interest money.

In 1984, the Indianapolis Jewish community was attacked by Reverend Louis Farrakhan.  Reverend Farrakhan at a meeting of 2,000 Hoosiers preached anti semitism. blaming us for all the social ills in the country.  A few Indiana activists came together to decide whether ‘to go high or to go low’. And this was before Michelle Obama.  We decided that giving people an opportunity to vent and plan was better than our attacking our attacker.  We chose to ‘go high’ and Dialogue.

When the organization formally incorporated in 1987, it stated as its purpose:  “To consider and address our common concerns through a coalition of Black and Jewish women.” Theresa Guise, Diane Meyer Simon, and Carole Stein formed a coalition between African-American and Jewish women in Indianapolis. One hundred Black and Jewish women were invited to be the founding group of ‘Dialogue Today’.  

And now Farrakhan is back in the news:

During his Feb. 25, 2019 speech, at an event for Saviour’ Day, a religious gathering of the Nation of Islam, Mr. Farrakhan said that the ‘powerful Jews” were his enemies, and that Jews were responsible for all of this fifth and degenerate behavior that Hollywood is putting out turning men into women and women into men,” as well as other incendiary remarks. And, it continues.

My response: I have spent much of my life reading and blogging about American politics, but nothing I’ve seen before has prepared me for what has happened these past months.  Increasingly, it feels as though the country is careening out of control and heading straight off a cliff — and nothing can slow it down.  I fear that we are on our way to an autocratic system of government:

“An autocracy is a system of government in which supreme power is concentrated in the hands of one person, whose decisions are subject to neither external legal restraints nor regularized mechanisms of popular control”

We have a president fully prepared to violate the Constitution. We have allegations that his advisers have worked directly with a foreign government to win his presidential election. We have a Congress indifferent to these potential crises and focused instead on repealing

legislation that will literally cause premature hardships of thousands of Americans. It’s almost hard to take all of this in. Since Trump does not believe that conflict of interest laws apply to him and that he’s under no obligation to ensure that he is not profiting from being president, he will take office under an ethical cloud that we’ve never seen in the 240-year history of the United States.

Emoluments Clause - Heritage Foundation

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign States.

Taken all together, this confluence of events represents perhaps the most profound and political crisis that this country has faced since Watergate.  And during this period, people are talking about ‘normalizing Trump,’  broadly defined as the act of treating his sexism, xenophobia and fascist dog-whistles as just another policy difference against equally valid opponents.  The Oxford English Dictionary defines “normalize” as “to make normal; to bring or return to a normal or standard condition or state.” It’s a word, then, as nebulous and conditional as the idea of normalcy itself — and one whose many meanings have been debated throughout a campaign season of unusual self-scrutiny within America’s professional political class.

And I am saying this now in January 2019. This is wrong, both tactically and ethically. Trump isn’t normal and he should never be treated as such. The overall message of normalizing Trump is that you can steamroll women, LGBT people, the disabled, Muslims, and people of color, yet everything will be okay so long as you win. Indeed, when asked if he thought his rhetoric had gone too far, Trump responded, “No, I won.” This is the logic of a fascist, and liberals are acquiescing to him by pivoting to “Trump as our kooky uncle” normalization mode.  Let us all stay awake and aware and speak up when we are shaken. We are older and we have seen so much of this behavior and sets of events that we probably want to remain untouched - I cannot feel untouched.  

My concern is for my children, grandchildren and great grandchildren.  I feel an obligation to leave them a better world and safer world

A Troubled America

How did we get here?  Where, exactly are we?

I have spent much of my life reading and blogging about American politics, but nothing I’ve seen before has prepared me for what has happened these past weeks.  Increasingly, it feels as though the country is careening out of control and heading straight off a cliff — and nothing can slow it down.  I fear that we are on our way to an autocratic system of government:

“An autocracy is a system of government in which supreme power is concentrated in the hands of one person, whose decisions are subject to neither external legal restraints nor regularized mechanisms of popular control (except perhaps for the implicit threat of a coup d'état or mass insurrection).”

We have a president fully prepared to violate the Constitution. We have allegations that his advisers might have worked directly with a foreign government to win the presidential election. We have a Congress indifferent to these potential crises and focused instead on repealing legislation that will literally cause premature hardships of thousands of Americans. It’s almost hard to take all of this in. It’s a disorienting and surreal moment in our history, and the worst part is that last week might have represented the calm before the true storm.

What is in this Inaugural message?  “We are one nation — and their pain is our pain. Their dreams are our dreams; and their success will be our success. We share one heart, one home, and one glorious destiny.”  Troubling words; something un-American. It will take time to digest, if possible.

Are the many allegations correct or are they just that, allegations?  But, unfortunately there is so much angst among Americans. We don’t know who or what to believe and trust.

As if this isn’t bad enough, we are also a week away from what will unambiguously be a constitutional crisis — namely Trump’s refusal to disentangle himself from his various business enterprises. It’s not an exaggeration to say that the moment Trump took the oath of office, he was in violation of the Constitution’s emoluments clause, which bans the president from taking gifts or payments from a foreign entity or individual. 

Since Trump does not believe that conflict of interest laws apply to him and that he’s under no obligation to ensure that he is not profiting from being president, he takes office under an ethical cloud that we’ve never seen in the 240-year history of the United States.

Emoluments Clause — Heritage Foundation

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

Of course, Congress could take steps to rectify this issue.  But this is not going to happen!

Taken all together, this confluence of events represents perhaps the most profound and political crisis that this country has faced since Watergate.

And during this period, people are talking about “normalizing Trump,”  

broadly defined as the act of treating his sexism, xenophobia and fascist dog-whistles as just another policy difference against equally valid opponents. This trend, born largely by a combination of cognitive dissonance and access, is being accelerated now that Trump has won the election, and its continuation, if left unchecked, could undermine opposition for years to come.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines normalize as “to make normal; to bring or return to a normal or standard condition or state.” It’s a word, then, as nebulous and conditional as the idea of normalcy itself — and one whose many meanings have been debated throughout a campaign season of unusual self-scrutiny within America’s professional political class.

The mainstays—Washington Post, New York Times and CNN—while frequently critical, are covering Trump’s transition as they would any other. President Obama, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have all issued statements recognizing Trump’s legitimacy and pleading we give him a chance.

But this is wrong, both tactically and ethically. Trump isn’t normal and he should never be treated as such, regardless of what President Obama and Clinton and Sanders say. These people are politicians, bound by a different covenant. The media, namely progressive media, is subject to no such charge. The overall message of normalizing Trump is that you can steamroll women, LGBT people, the disabled, Muslims, and people of color, yet everything will be okay so long as you win. Indeed, when asked if he thought his rhetoric had gone too far, Trump responded, “No, I won.” This is the logic of a fascist, and liberals are acquiescing to him by pivoting to “Trump as our kooky uncle” normalization mode.

And let us not forget, Martin Luther King and the role of Civil Rights leader John Lewis.

“Where Do We Go from Here” was MLK’s analysis of the state of American race relations and the movement after a decade of U.S. civil rights struggles. “With Selma and the Voting Rights Act one phase of development in the civil rights revolution came to an end,” he observed. King believed that the next phase in the movement would bring its own challenges, as African Americans continued to make demands for better jobs, higher wages, decent housing, an education equal to that of whites, and a guarantee that the rights won in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 would be enforced by the federal government. He warned that, “The persistence of racism in depth and the dawning awareness that Negro demands will necessitate structural changes in society have generated a new phase of white resistance in North and South.”

Over the past few years we have seen many acts of racism and hate crimes against young black men and violence against churches and gathering places along with questionable court decisions/outcomes not delivering fair and honest justice.  

And what can we do about these evils?  The only thing we can be certain of is when good men and women are determined to improve the social condition — success can be realized.

A Troubled America

Two Americas

“The form of law which I propose would be as follows: In a state which is desirous of being saved from the greatest of all plagues—not faction, but rather distraction—there should exist among the citizens neither extreme poverty nor, again, excessive wealth, for both are productive of great evil . . . Now the legislator should determine what is to be the limit of poverty or of wealth.”

–Plato

Greek philosopher (427-347 B.C.)

TWO AMERICAS

I'm curious what you think about this. Are we on the verge of a populist uprising that will result in "some moderation in the growth of United States inequality in the next decade," or will things continue along the present path for quite some time?  

I will be watching New York and Mayor De Blasio.  He has a tale of two cities in New York.  He will be faced with the 20,000 homeless children living underground in the city.  New York is the perfect example of a two city dilemma.  The stock market is at its highest and the poor are getting poorer. Corporate leaders are making obscene salaries while families are struggling to find jobs at minimum wage.  The public schools are crumbling while the private school population is growing with the median 12th-grade tuition for the current school year costing $36,970, up from $21,100 in 2001-2, according to the national association’s survey. Nationally, that figure rose to $24,240 from $14,583 a decade ago.  Two Americas.

I find myself sad every morning - the NYTimes, Morning Joe, PBS News, etc., etc.  My favorite news media and there doesn’t seem to be a blink of sunshine on the table.  This is a new feeling for me - I have always been optimistic about how government can work and in many cases, does work. I was part of an Administration in Indiana that made government work and our Governor did so for the old and the young and for the rich and poor.  We proposed legislation with bipartisan sponsors.  Always bipartisan - that was the only way legislation would be heard and passed.  

I think that the republicans in Congress have been effective at preventing any work from being done at the congressional level since 2010, but overall the administration has done an outstanding job of economic stewardship. 

The GDP grew at over 4% last quarter, unemployment is down from 10% to 7%, people's 401k's have recovered all the losses that occurred in 2008, deficit growth has been curtailed. President Obama took over a country in the midst of an economic disaster and fixed some of the problems. 

These accomplishments are great but they effect the upper set of Americans with substantial incomes.  The lower income family does not have 401k’s to draw upon. The 401(k) plan was never meant to be a mainstream pension plan and is a poor substitute for one. It’s a voluntary program that was intended to supplement retirement savings. 

I see some light with the recent congressional passage of a budget deal as a major step away from the obstructionism of the Republicans over the past recent years. It looks like the grown-ups are asserting themselves finally.

During my time in Indiana’s Statehouse President Clinton introduced Welfare Reform and it became law.   In 1996, Congress enacted welfare reform legislation that included three main elements, the most important being the work requirement. As a result of this reform, welfare caseloads dropped by half and employment rates among welfare recipients soared.

My colleagues at the Children’s Defense Fund stepped away from the President, a long time friend and ally to their programs for children, saying he lost his empathy for the poor.  Hillary, too who was very involved with the Children’s Defense Fund also suffered rebuke by her colleagues around the country.  Why welfare reform - it is cruel - how could it help the people we wanted to help - that was the repeated question for a long while.  

I was at the table with counties and cities as we tried to create a fair and equitable welfare reform block grant approach.  My belief has always been that the best welfare program was a job and the best social service provider was a parent.  When a family sits down at the dinner table and parents ask their children - what did you do today - children can ask what their parents did and they could hear, we went to work.  That too is a valuable program - that job regardless how small gave mom and dad a  feeling of self respect and dignity.  What better lesson to offer a child. 

That philosophy remains - a job is the best welfare program and a parent is the best social service provider.  But, it is fine to say people must go to work . But where are the jobs?  How can a young man begin to support his children when the available jobs are at minimum wage - an issue stymied in Congress.  And can a parent provide food and shelter for that child at minimum wage?  I don’t think so.  The food stamp program (Special Needs Assistance Program) is also stymied in Congress.  Once again, two Americas.   

I think we understand that the economic crisis and the deep recession weren’t created overnight and won’t be solved overnight. The economic security of the middle class has been under attack for decades. President Obama unveiled the American Jobs Act  – nearly all of which is made up of ideas that have been supported by both Democrats and Republicans, and that Congress could pass right away to get the economy moving now.  Put more people back to work and put more money in the pockets of working Americans. And it would do so without adding a dime to the deficit.  

The Act is waiting.  It isn’t moving forward.  It, too, is stymied in Congress.  Partisanship, ideology, the birther faction, the Tea Party movement fighting more taxes and support for entitlements - fighting any way they can - even shutting down the government.  These are strong adversaries for restoring some equality for Americans.   

The issue of long term unemployment is not a new issue. The economy has recovered and there are still people who had jobs before and don't now. Typewriter repairmen can no longer find work, just like those who groomed horses and collected droppings from the streets became unemployed in New York with the advent of the automobile. We are making a transition away from a heavy manufacturing economy and there are people who's skills don't match the needs of employers.

Government can't really change these fundamentals. People can learn new careers at a subsidized rate. (community college is still approximately $3500/year and fully covered by Stafford loans) but people can't be forced to learn new skills.  Unfortunately, many of the current unemployed are in their 50’s and learning new skills is  a daunting challenge.  A critical component of any employment program is Job training - look at different states and cities in the country, talk to the communities and start to rebuild supply and demand for new skills. Make investments in building this new workforce.

The issue with unemployment benefits is a complicated one. Unemployment benefits are distinct from conventional assistance as they have always been designed to be self supporting. They are not welfare, you pay into a system when employed and withdraw when unemployed. The issue of what to do when your money is exhausted is a difficult one. For how long should a person receive extraordinary benefits? Should unemployment be a tax based system? These are valid questions.  And, Congress is refusing to support even a three month extension.  Perhaps they don't know the premise of unemployment benefits.  Once again, the two Americas.

All the situations mentioned in this message are complicated.  We have movement in some directions, spearheaded by the President and supported in some part by Congress.  On the other hand, we have resistance to any change to make these years better for the people.  Once again, the two Americas.

My experience has been at the state level.  The states are the producers of results. They have always been the engine of ideas and the laboratories for innovation.  The states are increasing the minimum wage.  The states are doing workforce development.  We had challenges in Indiana.  We needed to make difficult choices.  We made them.  With the other side of the Senate chambers, with respect for differences.  There was ideology but not to threaten those of us who were more moderate in our beliefs. 

It worked because we understood our role as the people’s servant.  That is lost - how it lost its way, I am not sure.  What I do know is that it takes a strong leader with outstanding skills and conviction of his beliefs.  Perhaps we have this leader - perhaps we don’t.  We have until 2016 to find out.   

WHO ARE WE?

“Better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity than the constant omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference.”      

Franklin D. Roosevelt

It is taking us too long to understand and accept the miracles of the very young. It is taking us too long to learn what we should already know.  

We should look at a young child and see the love and hope in their eyes rather than shut our eyes to the economic costs to our nation caused by neglecting our children.

Our failure, as a nation, to effectively deal with our children has resulted in what is called the “achievement gap,” defined by Wikipedia,  as: “The disparity on a number of educational measures between the performance of groups of students, especially groups defined by socioeconomic status.  On a variety of measures, including standardized test scores, grade point average, dropout rates, and college enrollment and completion rates.”

Achievement gaps in the US impose “the economic equivalent of a permanent national recession.” McKinsey & Company, a global management consulting firm.

We have been talking about this “gap” for close to 50 years since the 1966 publication of Equality of Educational Opportunity, more widely known as the Coleman Report. That research suggested that both in-school factors and home/community factors impact the academic achievement of students and contribute to the gap.  

Why is it so difficult to absorb this? Americans are smart and fair, so why are we willing to fall so short for our children?  What is our problem that we haven’t been listening to the social scientists, the researchers? 

James Heckman is one of the economists of the hour, a quirky star whose work is now in the limelight. He teaches at the famously conservative University of Chicago, where previous Nobel laureates have also worked, including Milton "Free to Choose" Friedman and Robert "Rational Expectations" Lucas.   I had the good fortune to work with Jim in planning Indiana’s Symposium on Child Care Financing.  He was a research partner with Eli Lilly and Company, and a Lilly VP and I were co-chairs of the Indiana Child Care Fund along with Mrs. Lugar and Mrs. Bayh (the wives of a Democratic sitting governor and a Republican sitting senator).  Mr. Heckman taught us all so much. What a great experience!

Since his Nobel Prize in 2000, Jim Heckman has focused on early childhood education and something it was long thought impossible to achieve: boosting the IQ scores of disadvantaged children, and therefore, their economic futures. 

“Learning starts in infancy, long before formal education begins, and continues throughout life. Recent research in psychology and cognition demonstrates how vitally important the early preschool years are for skill formation. Significantly, this is a time when human ability and motivation are shaped by families and non-institutional environments. Early learning begets later learning and early success breeds later success, just as early failure breeds later failure. Success or failure at this stage lays the foundation for success or failure in school, which in turn leads to success or failure in post-school learning.” James Heckman,  Professor of Economics at the University of Chicago

The costs of not making these investments in our young are clear. Julia Isaacs, an expert in child policy at the Urban Institute in Washington, finds that more than half of poor 5-year-olds don’t have the math, reading or behavioral skills needed to profitably start kindergarten. If children keep arriving in school with these deficits, no amount of money or teacher evaluations may be enough to improve their lot later in life.

Let me give you another startling finding. If you take disadvantaged, minority children starting at age 6 to 8 weeks – I mean, they're literally just born – and you follow these kids and give them intensive interventions for about eight years, you can boost their IQ at least up to age 21. You can see permanent differences between the treatment and control groups in both men and women, boys and girls.  We can take these giant steps to close the achievement gap.  We need to get started.

In principle, the public has been behind closing the achievement gap, and schools have employed a variety of tactics to address it. Common reform recommendations have included reducing class sizes, creating smaller schools, expanding early-childhood programs, raising academic standards, improving the quality of teachers provided to poor and minority students, and encouraging more minority students to take high-level courses. Still, progress in reducing academic divides has been slow or nonexistent.

Achievement gaps seem likely to remain a focus in the next authorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. The requirement that schools, districts and states disaggregate students’ test scores and graduation rates by race, gender, language and socio-economic status remains one of the few parts of No Child Left Behind with broad bipartisan support for reauthorization. Moreover, the economic-stimulus law passed by Congress in 2009 required states to close achievement gaps and provide more equitable distribution of high-quality teachers for poor and minority students. Policymakers and educators hope to find new ways to close achievement gaps faster in the decade to come.

Here we are in 2013 and we have an achievement gap that is widening every minute.  What will it take for us to say yes to our children – no more “no more.”

carole stein

Race Relations - Let's Dialogue

race relations

“The plague of racism is insidious, entering into our minds as smoothly and quietly and invisibly as floating airborne microbes enter into our bodies to find lifelong purchase in our bloodstreams.” 

Maya Angelou 

Growing up in NY - race was always the unspoken but always an underlying powerful issue.  It was always the “elephant in the room.” There were always the haves and the have-nots.  And those breakdowns were usually along racial lines.  

My family and friends were middle class - no major tensions - everyone pretty much had the same.  This fostered a certain sense of security and comfort in a middle-class lifestyle.

But, I do remember one of our housekeepers, Sarah.  She was leaving our home and taking the bus to get to her home in Bedford/Stuyvesant - a rough neighborhood.  She was a petite woman with a nice smile.   She got off the bus and was greeted by an angry group of white teenagers - I presumed they knew it was payday.  She was beaten so badly that she died.  My parents immediately went to her family’s home and took care of funeral expenses and made sure the children got fed and to school over the coming weeks.  That was the childhood I remembered - I never felt anything but admiration for Sarah - working hard so she could buy a set of World Books for her children.  We took care of our neighbors and our friends and certainly a woman who provided us with kindness and care.

Notwithstanding all of the myriad issues associated with the Trayvon Martin case, I want to focus on the claim by Juror B37 as well as by the defense attorneys and countless other pundits that race was not the issue. We are delusional if we really believe race was not the basis for the whole sad series of events. I think we should be ashamed of ourselves as a country if we continue to perpetuate the notion that we live in a post-racial, race-neutral or colorblind society.  We just need to look at the glaring disparities in health, education, incarceration and unemployment rates between the black and white populations.

"Whenever men take the law into their own hands, the loser is the law.  And when the law loses, freedom languishes."  Robert Kennedy

Today, while reading and watching the news, Sarah crept back into my mind.  As I was watched and listened to the President this week, memories of racism made my heart ache. His words were not scripted - he spoke from his heart - “You know, when Trayvon Martin was first shot, I said that this could have been my son,” he said. “Another way of saying that, is Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago.”

That was so powerful.  And for me, my experience with Sarah some 65 years ago was as clear today as it was then.

After Jerry and I started our family, we moved from New York to Indianapolis - a very conservative city.  Schools were all segregated, neighborhoods were segregated.  I learned about redlining.  

Redlining was used to keep minorities in one neighborhood and keep everyone else in different neighborhoods. Realtors would show places based on race.  Banks were in the habit of charging higher interest rates in minority neighborhoods.  All this was part of redlining.  Just a way to keep those further down the economic scale from ever rising. Keep their property values low. Keep their cost of living high.

At the same time I was eager to learn how the city worked, and, as a Jewish woman, to learn what the community was all about and what it had to offer.  To give you an idea of discrimination,  we lived in a private home neighborhood where I joined the Association.  I signed up for bowling and I was curtly told, “There are enough Jews on the team.” I immediately started a house search.  

At the same time, I met some wonderful young women very progressive in their thinking and workings.  I met my friend Diane Simon on the evening that Martin Luther King, Jr. was shot.  On April 5, 1968, Robert Kennedy came to Indianapolis and on the steps of a local church, spoke to the crowd and broke the news.  Diane was standing right next to me - grabbed my hand.  Diane was in graduate school at the time and then went on to work for Senator Birch Bayh - a beautiful woman and Todd had the biggest crush on her - especially her perfume.   Our interests and concerns never waivered.  We have stayed close for these 45 years.

We held tight to those feelings from the church and when we were confronted with the Rev. Louis Farrakhan’s anti-Semitism, we were there for each other and for many friends in both the black and Jewish communities.

Rev. Farrakhan was scheduled to appear at The Black Expo, a major organization focused on “being an effective voice and vehicle for the social and economic advancement of African-Americans.” The chairs of the event were black and Jewish leaders of Indianapolis.  Diane Simon was one of those leaders.

There was Farrakhan - sitting and spewing all that hate in Indianapolis. Diane and I, along with the rabbis and community leaders sat down to decide our strategy.  Do we remain in that leadership position?  Do we set aside the good that could be accomplished for young black men? There are always riotous opportunities - angry crowds against this hatred - but we on the other hand, used our political and social work backgrounds and came up with a more cerebral and non-violent approach.  We entered into conversations with Rev. Farrakhan, and we found our strategy.  We agreed to ‘dialogue’ with women of similar minds.  We decided on 100 women, 50 black and 50 Jewish.  And that was the start of “Dialogue Today”  - now celebrating its 30th anniversary.   In 1984 Theresa Guise, Constituent Relations Director for Congressman Andy Jacobs,  Diane Simon, and I formed a coalition between African-American and Jewish women in Indianapolis.  When the organization incorporated in 1987, it stated as its purpose: 

 “Dialogue Today is dedicated to the reaffirmation of the commitment of Black women and Jewish women to their common concerns for the dignity and human rights of all people.”

Farrakhan was an attack on that very necessary coalition, so he was not just attacking the Jews, he was also weakening the Afro-Americans in their pursuit of civil and political rights.  Men have difficulty talking about feelings, so we pursued a group of Black/Jewish women to start talking, sharing and attacking those myths and stereotypes of each other.  We were asked to facilitate a men’s Dialogue Today group, but identifying the joint leadership eluded the three of us.

As we discussed hate groups, myths and stereotypes about their two groups, problems in Africa and the Middle East, I remember preparing a Position Statement on the South African anti-Apartheid movement.  Surprisingly, several of the black women were hesitant to sign on to the statement - fear of possible retaliation.  And there was much discussion on the Palestinian situation.  Who was the oppressor and who was the oppressed?  We were wise enough to agree to disagree.

In looking ahead, these subjects are just as relevant today.  There is always a need to “dialogue.”  It is our hope that such dialogue groups will continue to grow and flourish. Much has been gained, but we are far from living a life of equal opportunities, education and financial success.

Diane spoke these words at Dialogue Today’s Opening Luncheon in 1984.

"We’re here today with expectations and apprehensions, questions and comments.  We’re here to talk until we hear each other and until we understand each other.  We must ask ourselves to be honest with ourselves and with one another; to be open to the truth and to bind together to improve the chances for a better future.  When women band together, it is a powerful phenomenon." 

[This]  In the aftermath of recent events, we need exactly this kind of national dialogue on race relations.  Let’s be part of this dialogue in communities around the country.

CHILDREN TODAY AND TOMORROW - FOR ME!

One's philosophy is not best expressed in words; it is expressed in the choices one makes. In the long run, we shape our lives, and we shape ourselves. The process never ends until we die. And the choices we make are ultimately our own responsibility. 

Eleanor Roosevelt

Five years ago I lost my best friend, my lover and my partner.  Three years is coming up - three years since I left Indianapolis - three years finding this beautiful new world with new challenges and great new friends and after these major life changes - I am now in a very good personal space.

Here I am in this new place and the world has reopened up for me.  Everything that was important to me in the past is now before me.

Now, let me share one of my pleasures in life.

Cooking -  why, you ask!  I honestly see cooking as culinary art therapy.  This kind of therapy uses cooking as the means of communicating and self expression.  I did not grow up in a home with mother cooking those great old European recipes.  She was lovely but she lived for Sundays when my Dad and I would pick up Chinese from the restaurant on Flatbush Avenue in Brooklyn.  Even after all these years and not having lived in the neighborhood for many years, I can remember the aroma entering the restaurant and waiting for the big brown paper bag with many containers filled with marvelous delicacies.

And my husband would comment in agreement with this Thomas Wolfe quote.

There is no spectacle on earth more appealing than that of a beautiful woman in the act of cooking dinner for someone she loves.
 Thomas Wolfe

Cooking is a long time love of mine - making a guest list, send out invites, decide on a menu, make a prep time line, shop for the very best ingredients, start to cut, chop, saute, steam, roast - enjoy the thought of what is at the end of this day of great aromas, cutting fresh flowers, setting a beautiful table and then opening the door for friends and family.
 
Mark Bittman, the food critic, would agree about the health value of this love of mine. "You're also not going to cook much junk. I love French fries, but how often are you going to cook them? It's too hard and messy. But when they're made at the industrial scale, you can have French fries three times a day. So there's something in the very nature of home cooking that keeps us from getting into trouble."

"We know why people don't cook: because the marketers of prepared food have taken over our kitchens; the Food Channel fetishization of cooking has made it look intimidating, especially for those who grew up without parents in the kitchen; and people say they don't have the time — or they just don't like it."We do find time for activities we value, like surfing the Internet or exercising," says Michael Pollan.

"The problem is we're not valuing cooking enough. Who do you want cooking your food, a corporation or a human being? Cooking isn't like fixing your car or other things it makes sense to outsource. Cooking links us to nature, it links us to our bodies. It's too important to our well-being to outsource."And yet Big Food has convinced most of us: "No one has to cook! We've got it covered." This began 100 years ago, but it picked up steam in the '70s, when Big Food made it seem progressive, even "feminist," not to cook. Pollan reminded me of KFC's brilliant ad campaign, which sold a bucket of fried chicken with the slogan "Women's Liberation."

I lobbied for the ERA - won that battle in traditional and ultra-conservative Indiana.  Yes, women are now in the game, as Sheryl Sandberg  'Lean In' Author: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead.' says 'When A Woman Is Competent, She Doesn't Seem Nice Enough'

And here we are - I am still an ardent believer in women - women's liberation- great thought moving forward.

…be yourself- not your idea of what you think somebody else's idea of yourself should be.
Henry David Thoreau 

This brings me to another one of my top priorities.  For many years, in state and national governments, I advocated and lobbied for early childhood education with special attention to brain development in the 0-5 population.

Well, this year I have witnessed a new awareness by unusual suspects and allies.  Great strides being made as evidenced in articles and op-eds in the NY Times.  The following speaks to benefits of early education by leading economists.  Certainly worth a read.

Studies Highlight Benefits of Early Education - Economist

James Heckman is one of the nation's top economists studying human development. Thirteen years ago, he shared the Nobel for economics. In February, he stood before the annual meeting of the Nebraska Chamber of Commerce and Industry, showed the assembled business executives a chart, and demolished the United States' entire approach to education.'

EXERPTS OF STUDY

'More surprising is that the difference in cognitive performance was just as big at age 18 as it had been at age 3.'

"The gap is there before kids walk into kindergarten," Mr. Heckman told me. "School neither increases nor reduces it."

'If education is supposed to help redress inequities at birth and improve the lot of disadvantaged children as they grow up, it is not doing its job.'

For me. my ongoing commitment to these young years is now within my grasp as I represent the Palo Alto League of Women Voters as a delegate to their upcoming state Convention in San Jose, California.

So, for me - what could be better.  At 80, still pushing for what I so strongly believe.

The President's Commitment to Early Education

A zip code should never predetermine the quality of any child's educational opportunities.  Yet studies show that children from low-income families are less likely to have access to high-quality early education, and less likely to enter school prepared for success.  By third grade, children from low-income families who are not reading at grade level are six times less likely to graduate from high school than students who are proficient.  Often, the high costs of private preschool and lack of public programs also narrow options for middle-class families. High-quality early childhood education provides the foundation for all children's success in school and helps to reduce achievement gaps.  Despite the individual and economic benefits of early education, our nation has lagged in its commitment to ensuring the provision of high quality public preschool in our children's earliest years. The Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) estimates that the United States ranks 28th out of 38 countries for the share of four-year olds enrolled in early childhood education.  And fewer than 3 in 10 four-year olds are enrolled in high-quality programs.

To another priority for children.  Bullying: A National Epidemic

Popular culture often regards bullying as a fact of life — a normal part of childhood that one must endure and learn to handle. Children sing the old adage about sticks and stones, but words used with intent to harm have been proven to cause serious damage, mentally and physically. As more high-profile teen suicides continue to emerge in the news, it is becoming clear that bullying is a serious problem. Over 60% of elementary and secondary school students rate bullying as the biggest problem in their lives.  About 40-80% of students experience it at some point in their school life.

After three years of advocating, networking and lobbying, our Indiana legislative team were able to accomplish anti-bullying legislation in a state where fundamentalist principles have prevailed for many, many years.  Where they felt that bullying was protected by the 1st Amendment, Freedom of Speech.

As Americans, let's not take our eyes on the ball - The San Francisco Chronicle' front page.  Right here in our own Saratoga.

"Cyberbullying's tragic toll"  Cruelty gone viral can devastate fragile teens with deadly results.  Andrie Pott, hanged herself days after she was allegedly sexually assaulted and photos circulated.

The 'Rape Culture.'  Students at Palo Alto High School became better acquainted with the phenomenon of callousness when their high school's newsmagazine, Verde, published a cover package on 'rape culture' in early April  The main story profiled two students who described their experiences with date rape.  One of the girls said the blame and gossip she encountered included texts, Facebook messages and Tumbir posts.

As Americans, let's agree - we need to keep our eyes on the ball.