Racial profiling is almost always analyzed with regard to its moral implications followed by efficiency and effectiveness arguments. Racism is defined by Hernandez-Murillo and Knowles as “the standard police practice of basing search decisions on the fit between the motorist and the descriptions of typical law breakers” (p.960). Risse and Zeckhauser (2004) build this definition further. They add that “(a) the use of race, ethnicity, or national origin with (b) the use of an individual’s behavior or information that helps apprehend someone who has been identified as being or having been engaged in criminal activity” (Risse & Zeckhauser, 2004, p.136). They suggest that (b) is often left off of racial profiling definitions while (a) is focused on to exclusivity.
According to Anwar and Fang (2006), the practice of racial profiling began in an attempt to block the drug flow from Miami to the Northeast. The Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles distributed a plan for police on “The Common Characteristics of Drug Couriers” which specifically mentioned race/ethnicity as a defining characteristic. Though the program was implemented with good intentions, the door was opened to troopers to act in racist manners against minorities.
Police officers are street-level bureaucrats who administer the law using their discretion. They must use their discretion when making traffic stops. While society idealizes police officers, they are in fact human and can make mistakes in judgment like anyone else. In Cops, Teachers, Counselors, a police officer judged a prostitute to be unfit to be a mother while another officer described how his partner encouraged racist behaviors towards an African American man walking down the street. Police officers do not always make the right decisions because they are bounded in their rationality and can only make the best decision with the most relevant information provided.
This brings us to the relevance of this literature review. Can police administrations justify the use of racial profiling as a tool in their drug regulation tactics? Can racial profiling be justified in the administration of drug trade restriction tactics used by police? Does an administration using racial profiling outweigh the moral costs? Do these tactics apply without racial prejudice? Can racial profiling and racist policing be separated? The literature available both support and reject racial profiling as a viable police tactic. Efficiency and financial arguments typically support profiling while moral arguments recommend elimination of racial profiling tactics or requirements of police to file paperwork recording the race of an individual.
The support for the use of racial profiling is both philosophical and analytical. The philosophical support is found in three different arguments: the utilitarian argument, the nonconsequentialist argument, and the self-interest argument. The analytical support is found through analyzing efficiency as a financial policy.
First the utilitarian argument, as explained by Risse and Zeckhauser (2004), which expresses favor for the suffering of a few for the good of many. Their article “Racial profiling” argues that the damage done to minorities is relatively modest and the benefits of profiling may outweigh the costs imposed on the minorities targeted. “The cost benefit assessment of racial profiling is the incremental increase in harm those acts impose, not the overall level of harm ostensibly associated with them” (Risse & Zeckhauser, 2004, p.149). Thus the authors exclude the historical relevance of profiling and focus only on the immediate gratifications achieved through profiling. However, the authors cite the utilitarian tactic claiming that if a better tactic existed, utilitarians would endorse it (Risse & Zeckhauser, 2004).
The nonconsequentialist argument ascertains that innocent non-threatening persons have a right not to be attacked, and everyone has a duty to refrain from attacking them. “If one distinguishes among police abuse the disproportionate use of race, and the use of race as such and even if the policy maker’s intent was innocuous, profiling negatively affects minorities and is thus discriminatory” (Risse & Zeckhauser, 2004, p. 153). However, in order to count as discrimination, it must seek or actually add to an oppressive relationship. As racial profiling only intends to divert and discourage crime, it does not carry the intent to add to that oppressive relationship, barring exceptions of rogue officers who directly seek to contribute to the oppressive relationship. Should profiling encroach upon moral rights, it is reasonable to think that such violations occur because it is “discriminatory in the pejorative sense” (Risse & Zeckhauser, 2004, p. 154). Pejorative discrimination is the special handling of individuals with the intention or the effect of maintaining or creating an oppressive relationship among that group of individuals.
Risse and Zeckhauser (2004) point to the best interests of minorities as support racial profiling. African Americans most often face black-on-black crime and within their demographic, the crimes are typically committed by the young against the older population. The authors suggest that minority parents should support profiling as a deterrent to keep young people away from illegal activities. The authors claim that the group should endure the short term costs of a life interrupted by frequent checks for the long-term benefit of reduced crime in areas overburdened with crime. However, this places an unequal burden on African Americans. “To justify the unequal burden to people…, the benchmark must be higher. We must require a strong urgency of imposing crime-fighting measures that include racial profiling.”
In Ward’s article “Race, Ethnicity, and Law Enforcement Profiling: Implications for Public Policy” (2002), he states that African Americas are more likely to be stopped than any other ethnic group. He references a Gallop survey in which 59% of adults agreed that police officers are more likely to stop minority motorists because membership in that race predisposes them to commit certain crimes. Of that group surveyed, 77% of blacks agreed as compared to 56% of whites, but 80% agreed in disapproval of the tactic (Ward, 2002). Attorney General Janet Reno recommended that local police use some method of collecting data on races of motorists stopped to identify officers that may need retraining.
Police organizations oppose this tactic against racial profiling. They cite the growing industry of tort lawyers who would make a living off lawsuits against police officers. The added costs of keeping a more extensive database were also cited. The city of Huston required officers to file paperwork containing data on race. As a result, officers stopped fewer motorists and consequently Huston lost significant revenue because the officers feared litigation for perceived racial profiling, whether it existed or not.
Policy analysis focuses on the “tension between efficiency and equity in public decision-making” (Myers, 2002, p. 287). The authors analyze the implications of Minnesota's pending bill that would require officers to collect racial data. The catch is "the need to respect the balance between the rights of all persons to be free from unreasonable governmental intrusions and law enforcement's need to enforce the law" (Myers, 2002, p. 289).
Myers analyzed the Minneapolis policy CODEFOR modeled after New York's COMPSTAT aimed to allocate police resources by mapping crime. The policy was substantially successful, even though it faced considerable controversy concerning possible racial profiling. Myers also analyzed St. Paul's policy to ask for consent before searches. The African American stops by police comprise 26 percent of stops but less than 11 percent of the African American population were over the age of 18 (Myers, 2002). He also fund that African Americans were composed 43 percent of all frisks and searches, citing rear view mirror and tail light malfunctions and cracked windshield. These expose the real problem of optimization – faults in rational choices in problems concerning race. The problem often pits transparent efficiency against fairness and equity, leaving them unclear. In fact, Myers argues that the disregard of race might actually lead to increased efficiency in drug trafficking.
The argument against racial profiling as a moral problem delves much deeper than the frequent traffic stops endured by minorities. It is an inherent part of minority histories and cultures. The fact of the matter is that minorities have experienced greater proportions of traffic stops than their white majority counterparts. African Americans have the greatest propensity to being searched, followed by the Hispanic population. Relatively little mention is made of other minority groups such as American Indians and those of Asian descent.
Bureaucracy has also contributed to the mistrust of the public toward the police. Bureaucracy diminishes the value of individualism and leaves those who are searched with a sense of a loss of value in their identities. While they are being devalued on a part of their individual identities, they are being devalued also as being included as a member of a group which they have no control over.
Demographics are hugely relevant to the study of racial profiling. The theory of representative bureaucracy is concerned with “how the demographic makeup of bureaucrats affects the distribution of outputs to clients who share these demographic characteristics” (Wilkins & Williams, 2008, p.655). The police bureaucracy should mirror the population it serves. Passive representation through demographic makeup of the police should serve to represent all interests. The demographics considered are race, sex, religion, income, and class. The police serving should share many of these demographics.
However, there are instances in which passive representation does not suffice. “Active representation… influences policy making and implementation” (Wilkins & Williams, 2008, 656). As the authors of “Black or blue: Racial profiling in a representative bureaucracy” state, early scholars of representative bureaucracy thought that passive representation would naturally lead to active representation. In bureaucracies with extensive rules like a police department, bureaucrats have little chance to shape outputs to reward a group within the population they serve. In order to combat profiling, the police department representing a population with a large minority group must be aware of the problem and desire to fix it.
Hernandez-Murillo and Knowles conducted a survey to test racist policing strategies as opposed to racial profiling. They state that there is a trade-off between fairness and effective policing. They examined ways to apply a test for racial profiling which has an unequal effect by race. Their objective is "to allow public monitoring of racial or ethnic inequalities in the burden of police activities" Hernandez-Murillo & Knowles, 2004, p.959). However, they are unsure about how this information could be used to measure that possible discrimination. In order to discern unbiased policing, the success rate for discretionary searches will be equal across all groups searched with higher likelihood of illegal activity. Lower success rates show an unequal targeting of minorities. The question for research asks "how can the aggregate profiling statistics published at the state level are used to distinguish racial profiling from racial bias?"
Maryland had success rates that did not vary greatly by race. However, Missouri was found to have much lower success rates for blacks and Hispanics than whites who were stopped. The authors found that police forces in Missouri under their nonparametric bounds were biased for two percent or less of all discretionary searches. Under a restricted test, they found that police forces, including police departments, sheriff departments, and state troopers, were biased against minorities for at least 30 percent of the searches. Search success is measured in searches resulting in drug finds, searches where general contraband was found, and searches resulting in arrests (Hernandes-Murillo & Knowles, 2004, p.969). They found that the greatest amount of bias is aimed at the Hispanic population and African Americans were more likely to be stopped in predominately white neighborhoods. They confirmed that the "searches by police biased against minorities account for a much larger share of all discretionary searches than of searches of minorities" (Hernandez-Murillo & Knowles, 2004, 982).
Fixing the situation is easier said than done. The high levels of organizational socialization do not directly allow active representation to occur. “Scholars argue that administrators are socialized by the organizations they work in and adopt behaviors and preferences that are consistent with organizational goals, thereby minimizing the influence of the own personal values on bureaucratic behavior” (Wilkins & Williams, 2008, p.656).
Group behavior often dictates the actions that a police officer may take. Officers are given a large range of discretion as street-level bureaucrats. However, police departments must organize and manage the activities and behaviors of the officers (Smith et al., 1994). Police officers often face pressures from within the organization to act as the rest of the group. This can result in the misuse of racial profiling to cause harm to a minority; exactly the opposite reason that Risse and Zeckhauser use to support practices involving racial profiling.
“Some … rely on strong informal cultures and systems of values to socialize and control member behavior while others use more formal mechanism such as rules and regulations” (Smith et al., 1994, p. 415). Wilkins and Williams state that organizational socialization teaches members of the group certain behaviors required of them and supportive attitudes needed to become a recognized member of that group (2008, p.657). African American officers’ behaviors may be influenced by a perceived need to fit in with the department’s organization.
Police officers have unusually strong solidarity within their department as well as in the profession. It is often noted as one of the most noticeable parts of police culture. Police officers are often referred to as men in blue, referring to the color of their uniforms. The uniform becomes their identities. This is sometimes problematic for minority officers, characterized in the title of Wilkins and Williams (2008) article “Black or blue: Racial profiling and representative bureaucracy.” This identity supersedes any other identities held, “strip[ping] away the racial identity of black police officers and replac[ing] it with an organizational identity” (Wilkins & Williams, 2008, p.656). A black officer may act on behalf of his or her uniform instead of on behalf of the minority he or she represents. Wilkins and Williams studied a large urban police department in San Diego comprised of eight distinct precincts and found that the racial disparity between rate of stops for African Americans and white Americans was higher in areas of greater minority occupancy than in primarily white neighborhoods with a greater presence of white police officers.
Risse and Zeckhauser also make a very valid point in the argument for racial profiling. If police stopped the practice, society would still be racist and attitudes that lead to police abuse would remain unaltered and racism would persist in other forms in other areas of life (Risse & Zeckhauser, 2004, p. 146). The hurt felt from racial profiling exists with underlying reasons rather than racial profiling as the sole reason for their search. However, there is statistical data that exists for targeting young black men, especially during the summer. The statistics describe the occurrence of crime and the targets of these crimes are often members of the same minority.
Minneapolis' CODEFOR system seemed to target communities of color disproportionately and received mixed reactions. Many of the areas targeted had asked for a higher level of crime control. This complements Risse and Zeckhauser's argument for profiling in the self-interest of minority populations.
The utilitarian perspective “turns on factual and counterfactual claims that are hard to verify and justifications… illustrate that investigations…will have to proceed community by community and context by context” (Risse and Zeckhauser, 2004, p.145). Risse and Zeckhauser contend also that police abuse must be corrected outside of their article. The authors suggest that if ALL possibilities were considered, utilitarians would reject profiling because it creates a great harm is a result of underlying racism and profiling on a component of one’s identity, leading one to question their identity.
According to Gormley and Balla (2004), police officers cannot take all possibilities into consideration when making a decision. Police must use bounded rationality in making decisions in the field. Bounded rationality states that individuals are rational, but limited in their comprehension of all possible options and solutions. Therefore, they satisfice by coming to a decision that is satisfactory, given the readily available data. When police officers make discretionary stops, they must use the information they can take in on the scene and make the best decision with their available options. These options are standardized in certain protocols, but are made available to exercise abuse when intentionally singling out a group. This may substantiate the fear that many authors share in that profiling could mask racist policing efforts.
Risse and Zeckhauser argue that profiling is beneficial because it is efficient. By targeting a group with a greater risk rather than the general population, there will be an increase in the number of criminals caught during those searches. That risk ratio is the probability that a random group member committed a crime as compared to a random person in another group (Risse and Zeckhauser, 2004, p. 141). The group may be identified by race, but if that is the exclusive measure used in screenings, those screenings should be eliminated. The benefits of racial profiling include a reduction in crime which may consequently bring economic growth. Myers agrees that profiling is efficient in the sense that it generates higher expected profits than random stops and searches. Another benefit in profiling may be in regard to traffic stops, which “often identify fugitives with outstanding warrants or criminal charges, or those carrying illegal guns or drugs. Fewer stops mean fewer opportunities to get these people off the street” (Ward, 2002, p.30).
There is a problem with this statistical information. “Unless truly random searches are conducted, researchers typically will not observe the true proportion of drivers who carry contraband” (Anwar & Fang, 2006, p.128). Most information gathered has the possibility of being tainted by rogue officers who have taken deliberate action against minorities based solely on their ethnicity. That is the piece of information that makes statistics for profiling nearly invalid.
“There is a tradeoff between… efficiency… and equity” in the use of racial profiling (Myers, 2002, p. 295). Racial profiling is financially efficient by only targeting populations with greater propensity to commit certain crimes. (Myers, 2002, p. 295).
Under a federal law proposed in 2001 to combat profiling, police may write fewer tickets (as observed in Huston, TX) resulting in lower revenues for the state. Officers may alter ticketing behavior unnecessarily in the fear that recording racial data might implicate them in lawsuits.
The overall findings have both supported and argued against the use of racial profiling in police departments across several states. However, the data shows that racial profiling does exist. The dilemma faced by police is that they must choose to act with the history of preconceived notions of racial groups, making them appear racist. There is data and statistics that prove African American and Hispanic minorities are more likely to be stopped and searched than other ethnic groups.
Racial profiling adds an unnecessary level of inconvenience to the innocent population. Increased paperwork for the police is inefficient use of tax dollars which could also decrease revenue for the state as a result of fear to file that paperwork. The results of elimination of racial profiling could cost states a portion of their revenue. This loss might come as a result of refusal to ticket for fear of potential litigation or as retraining costs for officers who are identified as using racist policing tactics.
Racial profiling costs do not outweigh the benefits of efficiency. They cause emotional damage to minorities. The continued acceptance of racial profiling also extorts a historically oppressed group as well as groups that are socioeconomically deprived. In order to correct racist police officers' behaviors; the cost to the state would be great. Human beings strive for perfection and government is one tool that helps humans toward reaching that goal. In letting the state continue on a path that includes an injustice toward a specific group, humans are being done a disservice on their path to perfection.
Further research might be done to find commonalities among the rest of the United States as compared to researching one or two cities. No research has been done to compare East Coast to West Coast to Middle America policing strategies. Studies focused on one area, completing studies in only one area and trying to make it fit to the rest of the United States. Studies using purely objective data might be a place to research as well. Then America can take further steps toward reducing feelings of racial injustice and a more objective perspective on American citizens.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
References
Hernandez-Murillo, R., & Knowles, J. (2004). Racial profiling or racist policing? Bounds tests in aggregate data. International Economic Review. 45(3). 959-989.
Anwar, S., & Fang, H. (2006, March). An alternative test of racial prejudice in motor vehicle searches: Theory and evidence American Economic Review. 96(1). 127-151.
Ward, J. D. (2002, November/December). Race, ethnicity, and law enforcement profiling: Implications for public policy. Public Administration Review, 62(6), 726-733. doi:10.1111/1540-6210.00254
Smith, K. G., Smith, K. A., Olian, J. D., Sims, H. P., Jr., O'Bannon, D. P., & Scully, J. A. (1994, September). Top management team demography and process: The role of social integration and communication. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(3), 412-438.
Williams, B. N., & Wilkins, V. M. (2008, July/August). Black or blue: Racial profiling and representative bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 68(4), 654-664. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.00905.x
Maynard-Moody, S., & Musheno, M. (2003). Cops, teachers, counselors: Stories from the front lines of public service. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Gormley, W. T., & Balla, S. J. (2004). Bureacracy and democracy: Accountability and performance. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
Risse, M., & Zeckhauser, R. (2004, Spring). Racial profiling. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 32(2), 131-170.
Myers, Samuel L., Jr. (2002, Spring). Analysis of racial profiling as policy analysis. Policy Analysis and Management. 21(2), 287-300.
Sunday, May 15, 2011
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
First Plenary for the New Welsh First Minister
Well, as not many people may know, the National Assembly for Wales just elected their third First Minister. The first First Minister lasted for only 10 months and was ousted by a vote of no confidence, but Rhodri Morgan was the leader for 10 years. He only stepped down this December and allowed a new First Minister to take his place. He made the promise to step down two years before his 70th birthday. At the end of those two years, his popularity was still high.
The new First Minister is Carwyn Jones. Following in suit with Parliament in Westminster, Jones is a member of the Labour Party - same as Gordon Brown and the majority of the UK. Labour is in a joint coalition government with my party, Plaid (plaed) Cymru (KUMree). Plaid is the nationalist party, primarily concerned with promotion of the Welsh language and culture.
And their work was fruitful. The country is officially bilingual and all their signage is in both Welsh and English. The Welsh did supply the stones for Stonehenge afterall. They've got a lot of history and culture to grow!
But back to today. The Assembly was on tip toes with excitement, waiting to ask the first installment of new First Minister's questions in almost 10 years. The questions were general, mostly about the amount of snow and how to improve responses to it. The AMs were overall very nice to Jones, but there was definitely still hostility between the parties. The Conservatives are the main opposition to Labour as well as the Liberal Democrats.
The contrast to American politics is stark. The first difference is in the multi-party system. The second is in the way members conduct themselves in Plenary Sessions. They aren't quiet for debates. In fact, outbursts are quite common. The other interns and I determined that we liked the fact that outbursts were acceptable. It lets members say their peace and move on, even if their comments aren't noticed. The third is in the level of involvement the Assembly Members have with their constituents. The intern working for Labour (Matt Schappa) spent the day answering constituent mail. Another difference is in the level of power granted to the Assembly. The Assembly only has secondary legislation powers, meaning they can't make laws that impact the way the government works, only on local issues.
Our level of involvenent is amazing. Two interns work directly for an Assembly Member and two work for the remaining parties. None of us work for the same party. We all enjoy working for the Assembly very much, especially after watching the plenary session today. Looks like there's a lot of work to do over here!
The new First Minister is Carwyn Jones. Following in suit with Parliament in Westminster, Jones is a member of the Labour Party - same as Gordon Brown and the majority of the UK. Labour is in a joint coalition government with my party, Plaid (plaed) Cymru (KUMree). Plaid is the nationalist party, primarily concerned with promotion of the Welsh language and culture.
And their work was fruitful. The country is officially bilingual and all their signage is in both Welsh and English. The Welsh did supply the stones for Stonehenge afterall. They've got a lot of history and culture to grow!
But back to today. The Assembly was on tip toes with excitement, waiting to ask the first installment of new First Minister's questions in almost 10 years. The questions were general, mostly about the amount of snow and how to improve responses to it. The AMs were overall very nice to Jones, but there was definitely still hostility between the parties. The Conservatives are the main opposition to Labour as well as the Liberal Democrats.
The contrast to American politics is stark. The first difference is in the multi-party system. The second is in the way members conduct themselves in Plenary Sessions. They aren't quiet for debates. In fact, outbursts are quite common. The other interns and I determined that we liked the fact that outbursts were acceptable. It lets members say their peace and move on, even if their comments aren't noticed. The third is in the level of involvement the Assembly Members have with their constituents. The intern working for Labour (Matt Schappa) spent the day answering constituent mail. Another difference is in the level of power granted to the Assembly. The Assembly only has secondary legislation powers, meaning they can't make laws that impact the way the government works, only on local issues.
Our level of involvenent is amazing. Two interns work directly for an Assembly Member and two work for the remaining parties. None of us work for the same party. We all enjoy working for the Assembly very much, especially after watching the plenary session today. Looks like there's a lot of work to do over here!
Sunday, January 10, 2010
World poverty still thrives in even modern civilizations
I've finally arrived in my final destination (at least for now) of Cardiff, Wales. I've been visiting a couple of cities in Europe for the last week. I left the US from the Dullas Airport in Washington, DC to arrive early 2 January in Fumachino Airport outside of Rome. I left Rome and headed to Paris by way of a sleeper train (I don't recommend it in the least), of which I could touch both walls at the same time. The train from Paris to London was particular vulnerable to ice on the rails, as I learned. Our less-than-2-hour train ride took 7 hours.
Rome was a fantastically impressive city to look at. The buildings were beautiful and there were expensive buildings everywhere, but nothing higher than St. Peter's Basillica in Vatican City. There's a law against building anything higher in Rome. Vatican City is the result of a deal between Mussolini and the pope orchestrated for Mussolini to gain more political power, making the Pope the leader of only the religious aspect of the Catholic Church and Mussolini the sole governmental power of Rome and Italy.
The political science major and Latin language minor inside of me had a field day while in Rome. After touring the Colosseum, I was taken on a complimentary tour of the Palatine Hill and the Forum (I'm pretty sure the guide thought I was nuts). It was a dream come true to be in the very place from which our American political system was modeled. To be able to look out into the place where Cicero defended so many men and, after he was killed for speaking against Mark Antony, where his hands and head were displayed for all to see as a warning was simply electrifying. I can't begin to describe how it felt to see the Senate building and the Temple of Vesta. I stood in the palace of Augustus and the palace of Domitian. The Roman people are still reminded of their ancient government every time they walk down a street by the "SPQR" (Senatus Populusque Romani) that adorns every entrance to the underground systems. The people are reminded by those covers that the city was founded and run by the "Senate and the People of Rome", and they are still run by the people today. They have always had the power and they are ensured to always keep the power in their own city.
What really stood out to me was the poor and homeless people of Rome. In a city which houses the richest organization in the world, the presence of need was astounding. I saw at least three beggars with clubbed feet, one with clubbed hands as well. They were on the streets in the most crowded tourist attractions, begging for money. The man near Treve Fountain didn't even have a wheelchair; he got around by sliding on a broken skateboard. There was also a demonstration by the homeless living in tents.
We need to open our eyes to those who are even still in need, though many of us have closed our eyes and denied that such injustices are a result of sloth. These people have still so many injustices to overcome before they can even begin to reach the standard of living for the poor in America.
In Paris, where it was much colder, the presence of beggars was less obvious, but still present. The clothing of the poor are quite distinguishable, moreso than those homeless in America. The city itself is beautiful, but the subways are filled with homeless men and women (and their dogs). They stayed underground, where it was warm and away from the wind. They weren't happy about being there either. And they displayed it openly. I mistakenly took a picture of one man while I was trying to take a picture of the Star Wars music poster above him. He yelled at me in French. I guess it was a good thing, as I couldn't understand a word he said.
In Cardiff, I'll be working for the nationalist party for Wales, Plaid Cymru (playd KUMree). Wales is one of the poorest countries in the European Union. While in Rome, I was asked why I would go to Wales, like it was a dirty place. No one goes there unless they're Welsh. Even then, I suppose its not a desirable place to live. The country depends on the UK Parliament in Westminster to give them an allotment of funds to be used across the country. The majority of income comes from sheep farmers and a light services catering to tourists. The country reached its height in the industrial era through mining for slate and coal. Of course, the major sights include Millenium Centre, Roald Dahl Plass, the Senedd building, and the quarry where the stones from Stonehenge were cut. Ah, Wales... how I love this country already.
I've been placed on a mission to find some good fish and chips.
♥ Blondie
Rome was a fantastically impressive city to look at. The buildings were beautiful and there were expensive buildings everywhere, but nothing higher than St. Peter's Basillica in Vatican City. There's a law against building anything higher in Rome. Vatican City is the result of a deal between Mussolini and the pope orchestrated for Mussolini to gain more political power, making the Pope the leader of only the religious aspect of the Catholic Church and Mussolini the sole governmental power of Rome and Italy.
The political science major and Latin language minor inside of me had a field day while in Rome. After touring the Colosseum, I was taken on a complimentary tour of the Palatine Hill and the Forum (I'm pretty sure the guide thought I was nuts). It was a dream come true to be in the very place from which our American political system was modeled. To be able to look out into the place where Cicero defended so many men and, after he was killed for speaking against Mark Antony, where his hands and head were displayed for all to see as a warning was simply electrifying. I can't begin to describe how it felt to see the Senate building and the Temple of Vesta. I stood in the palace of Augustus and the palace of Domitian. The Roman people are still reminded of their ancient government every time they walk down a street by the "SPQR" (Senatus Populusque Romani) that adorns every entrance to the underground systems. The people are reminded by those covers that the city was founded and run by the "Senate and the People of Rome", and they are still run by the people today. They have always had the power and they are ensured to always keep the power in their own city.
What really stood out to me was the poor and homeless people of Rome. In a city which houses the richest organization in the world, the presence of need was astounding. I saw at least three beggars with clubbed feet, one with clubbed hands as well. They were on the streets in the most crowded tourist attractions, begging for money. The man near Treve Fountain didn't even have a wheelchair; he got around by sliding on a broken skateboard. There was also a demonstration by the homeless living in tents.
We need to open our eyes to those who are even still in need, though many of us have closed our eyes and denied that such injustices are a result of sloth. These people have still so many injustices to overcome before they can even begin to reach the standard of living for the poor in America.
In Paris, where it was much colder, the presence of beggars was less obvious, but still present. The clothing of the poor are quite distinguishable, moreso than those homeless in America. The city itself is beautiful, but the subways are filled with homeless men and women (and their dogs). They stayed underground, where it was warm and away from the wind. They weren't happy about being there either. And they displayed it openly. I mistakenly took a picture of one man while I was trying to take a picture of the Star Wars music poster above him. He yelled at me in French. I guess it was a good thing, as I couldn't understand a word he said.
In Cardiff, I'll be working for the nationalist party for Wales, Plaid Cymru (playd KUMree). Wales is one of the poorest countries in the European Union. While in Rome, I was asked why I would go to Wales, like it was a dirty place. No one goes there unless they're Welsh. Even then, I suppose its not a desirable place to live. The country depends on the UK Parliament in Westminster to give them an allotment of funds to be used across the country. The majority of income comes from sheep farmers and a light services catering to tourists. The country reached its height in the industrial era through mining for slate and coal. Of course, the major sights include Millenium Centre, Roald Dahl Plass, the Senedd building, and the quarry where the stones from Stonehenge were cut. Ah, Wales... how I love this country already.
I've been placed on a mission to find some good fish and chips.
♥ Blondie
Monday, December 21, 2009
Unemployment and the Homeless
Welcome to America, land of opportunity - opportunity for 90% of the population. We're nearing a 10% unemployment rate throughout the country. That's one in 10 people; one in ten of your friends CANNOT FIND a job. Unemployment is not an issue of laziness, this is an issue of finding a job that can support a family.
So you say McDonalds is hiring. Lets do some math:
Minimum wage in Ohio is $7.30 an hour. We'll assume that this McDonalds is hiring full time. So $7.30 at 40 hours a week is $292 BEFORE taxes. A whole year's earnings, assuming this person works 48 40-hour weeks, before taxes, is approximately $14,016 for the year. Taking out taxes, that leaves them with considerably less than even that. The average income in Akron, Ohio is $43,000 a year.
Costs of living include rent/mortgage, utilities, and food. A small apartment can be rented for approximately $300 a month, so over 12 months, that comes to $3,600. Water, trash, and electricity amount to about $100 a month, costing $1200 yearly. Food costs about $50 to $100 a week - $200-$400 a month. Food costs can total in excess of $4,000 over the year. We're at almost $9000 for the year. Add in necessities like gas or bus fare and we're nearing our allotted allowance of less than $14,000 a year. Health insurance costs a lot of money. Vehicle insurance is expensive too. And what if the car breaks down? That could be an expensive fix. Can't really squeeze a new set of tires in there or a new catalytic converter.
Now, add in a child. Childcare costs include doctor visits, clothes, school supplies, babysitters, and their own food. So you say that charities can help these children. Here's the catch, they aren't relying on their own income anymore. They are not using their own income for their children. They are no longer living on their measly less than $14000 a year income.
To the point of homelessness. Mortgages are not inexpensive and are subject to change on interest rates. Its very easy anymore for anyone to become homeless. If a two-income household making a combined $80,000 a year loses one of those incomes because a job was sent overseas, that mortgage may not get paid. And adding a McDonalds job is not going to even the defecit. Imagine the other main breadwinner losing hours to less qualified individuals working for less money and there is a recipe for a repo - another hardworking family ends up on the streets.
Families with older children of different sexes are often split up. Some are even rejected from homeless shelters. Fortunately, there are specialized shelters that take on those families to keep them together. The summit county Interfaith Hospitality Network (IHN) is one of those places and they have branches all over the US. In Summit County's Barberton location, Lakeview UMC is a home to this rotating homeless shelter in partnership with several other Akron churches. Here's how it works: for a week, Lakeview becomes the host to two or three homeless families, then members from Lakeview and St. Augustine make dinner and stay the night as hosts. In the morning, someone drives a bus to the Day Center at the corner on Miller Ave. in downtown Akron for the adults and drops the kids off at school. The IHN offers short-term housing to the invisible homeless, families that don’t qualify for shelter - parents with teenagers of the opposite sex and two parent families with children trying to stay together.
Also, for those who are in need in Barberton, here is some helpful information:
If someone is in need of health care and does not have insurance or qualify for public healthcare programs, there is a free health clinic called the Barberton Community Health Clininc. The clinic is run by Walt Ritzman and Donna Keim and staffed by volunteers, including doctors and nurses. Its located at 113 Ninth St in Barberton.
Barberton Area Community Ministries( better known as BACM) runs The Soup Kitchen on Tuesdays and Thursdays. The Soup Kitchen serves the area's less fortunate by serving over 104,000 hot meals since 1985. Should you need a meal,The Soup Kitchen is currently located in the hall of the Presbyterian Church next to the Barberton Public Library.
On Wednesdays, Lakeview United Methodist Church hosts the Springtime of Hope, a program to distribute hot meals to the homeless. In addition to the hot meal, they are sent off with a packed lunch for the next day. Lakeview is located across the lake from the Presbyterian Church, next to the new YMCA.
So you say McDonalds is hiring. Lets do some math:
Minimum wage in Ohio is $7.30 an hour. We'll assume that this McDonalds is hiring full time. So $7.30 at 40 hours a week is $292 BEFORE taxes. A whole year's earnings, assuming this person works 48 40-hour weeks, before taxes, is approximately $14,016 for the year. Taking out taxes, that leaves them with considerably less than even that. The average income in Akron, Ohio is $43,000 a year.
Costs of living include rent/mortgage, utilities, and food. A small apartment can be rented for approximately $300 a month, so over 12 months, that comes to $3,600. Water, trash, and electricity amount to about $100 a month, costing $1200 yearly. Food costs about $50 to $100 a week - $200-$400 a month. Food costs can total in excess of $4,000 over the year. We're at almost $9000 for the year. Add in necessities like gas or bus fare and we're nearing our allotted allowance of less than $14,000 a year. Health insurance costs a lot of money. Vehicle insurance is expensive too. And what if the car breaks down? That could be an expensive fix. Can't really squeeze a new set of tires in there or a new catalytic converter.
Now, add in a child. Childcare costs include doctor visits, clothes, school supplies, babysitters, and their own food. So you say that charities can help these children. Here's the catch, they aren't relying on their own income anymore. They are not using their own income for their children. They are no longer living on their measly less than $14000 a year income.
To the point of homelessness. Mortgages are not inexpensive and are subject to change on interest rates. Its very easy anymore for anyone to become homeless. If a two-income household making a combined $80,000 a year loses one of those incomes because a job was sent overseas, that mortgage may not get paid. And adding a McDonalds job is not going to even the defecit. Imagine the other main breadwinner losing hours to less qualified individuals working for less money and there is a recipe for a repo - another hardworking family ends up on the streets.
Families with older children of different sexes are often split up. Some are even rejected from homeless shelters. Fortunately, there are specialized shelters that take on those families to keep them together. The summit county Interfaith Hospitality Network (IHN) is one of those places and they have branches all over the US. In Summit County's Barberton location, Lakeview UMC is a home to this rotating homeless shelter in partnership with several other Akron churches. Here's how it works: for a week, Lakeview becomes the host to two or three homeless families, then members from Lakeview and St. Augustine make dinner and stay the night as hosts. In the morning, someone drives a bus to the Day Center at the corner on Miller Ave. in downtown Akron for the adults and drops the kids off at school. The IHN offers short-term housing to the invisible homeless, families that don’t qualify for shelter - parents with teenagers of the opposite sex and two parent families with children trying to stay together.
Also, for those who are in need in Barberton, here is some helpful information:
If someone is in need of health care and does not have insurance or qualify for public healthcare programs, there is a free health clinic called the Barberton Community Health Clininc. The clinic is run by Walt Ritzman and Donna Keim and staffed by volunteers, including doctors and nurses. Its located at 113 Ninth St in Barberton.
Barberton Area Community Ministries( better known as BACM) runs The Soup Kitchen on Tuesdays and Thursdays. The Soup Kitchen serves the area's less fortunate by serving over 104,000 hot meals since 1985. Should you need a meal,The Soup Kitchen is currently located in the hall of the Presbyterian Church next to the Barberton Public Library.
On Wednesdays, Lakeview United Methodist Church hosts the Springtime of Hope, a program to distribute hot meals to the homeless. In addition to the hot meal, they are sent off with a packed lunch for the next day. Lakeview is located across the lake from the Presbyterian Church, next to the new YMCA.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Christian Healthcare Debate
As you know, many representatives and senators in Congress openly declare themselves to be Christians. But identifying in Christianity has certain requirements, like believing in Jesus and striving to be like Him. Believing in Jesus also means knowing a thing or two about Him. So what would Jesus think about the current healthcare debate?
Well, Jesus was a lover of people, particularly sinners. Sinners don't know the correct path. How does this situation relate to healthcare and the economy? Those on welfare are the economic sinners of America. Jesus gave all he had to the poor. It's not right for us to withhold our time, finances, or sympathy from them because "they're lazy." The Christian thing to do is to help the poor by giving to organizations dedicated to helping the less fortunate. There are even organizations that teach people how to manage their money so they won't need yours anymore. But until then, they are the burdens of the state and ultimately your tax dollars. The government needs that money to improve technology, fund government programs, and ensure your safety in the world threatened by nations like North Korea and Iran.
But I digress; healthcare reform in the government is what I want to discuss. Jesus cared for all people, no matter what their size, shape, color, disease, financial situation, pre-existing health condition, or age. Is it right that we keep public healthcare dangling in front of those who need it like a carrot tied to a stick in front of a donkey? It is not God's will that there be such staunch inequalities between classes - so much that 40% of the wealth in this country is held by the wealthiest 1% of the population and the bottom 40% possesses less than 1% of the nation's wealth.
The heart of this discussion is, however, whether the Christians in government are aware of how their self-proclaimed beliefs should be affecting their judgment. I'm not suggesting that we revert to a complete socialist government, but rather that they realize that it is not a Christian moral to let those less fortunate suffer while the wealthy watches and says "that's too bad. Should've worked harder."
The truth of the matter is that unemployment is nearing 10%. Not everyone is fortunate enough to afford higher education. High school diplomas just don't cut it for good paying jobs anymore. Even a bachelors degree is beginning to lose its wow-factor. Are we going to sit around and just watch as our nation's infrastructure crumbles as we fail to support it at the base? The lower class are typically the unskilled laborers who work in boring assembly lines or sorting packages in warehouses bringing you prepackaged coffee or tubes of toothpaste or any number of gifts you're going to open on Christmas day. Don't the people who make the things you take for granted - your basic necessities - deserve the insurance of a healthy life, just like you?
Christmas? You say Christmas because Christ is the reason you celebrate what you have. While you remember what you have, try thinking about those who don't have any gifts to open Christmas morning. Think about those who are too sick to visit family members. Think of children whose parents can't afford to visit the doctor. While you think about Christmas, remember that its not about receiving your gifts and visiting your family, its about giving of yourself to others less fortunate than yourselves.
Healthcare is not a problem in Europe and many other countries around the world. Why? They have nationalized healthcare programs. Its working for them too. They declare themselves to be Christian nations and have taken the step that Jesus would have proposed. It is not His will that we should snub our noses at those less fortunate - and they get that.
How can you help? Write to your representatives in Congress. Share your opinions with them. They love to hear your opinions. Its their job to represent YOU and YOUR OPINIONS.
Well, Jesus was a lover of people, particularly sinners. Sinners don't know the correct path. How does this situation relate to healthcare and the economy? Those on welfare are the economic sinners of America. Jesus gave all he had to the poor. It's not right for us to withhold our time, finances, or sympathy from them because "they're lazy." The Christian thing to do is to help the poor by giving to organizations dedicated to helping the less fortunate. There are even organizations that teach people how to manage their money so they won't need yours anymore. But until then, they are the burdens of the state and ultimately your tax dollars. The government needs that money to improve technology, fund government programs, and ensure your safety in the world threatened by nations like North Korea and Iran.
But I digress; healthcare reform in the government is what I want to discuss. Jesus cared for all people, no matter what their size, shape, color, disease, financial situation, pre-existing health condition, or age. Is it right that we keep public healthcare dangling in front of those who need it like a carrot tied to a stick in front of a donkey? It is not God's will that there be such staunch inequalities between classes - so much that 40% of the wealth in this country is held by the wealthiest 1% of the population and the bottom 40% possesses less than 1% of the nation's wealth.
The heart of this discussion is, however, whether the Christians in government are aware of how their self-proclaimed beliefs should be affecting their judgment. I'm not suggesting that we revert to a complete socialist government, but rather that they realize that it is not a Christian moral to let those less fortunate suffer while the wealthy watches and says "that's too bad. Should've worked harder."
The truth of the matter is that unemployment is nearing 10%. Not everyone is fortunate enough to afford higher education. High school diplomas just don't cut it for good paying jobs anymore. Even a bachelors degree is beginning to lose its wow-factor. Are we going to sit around and just watch as our nation's infrastructure crumbles as we fail to support it at the base? The lower class are typically the unskilled laborers who work in boring assembly lines or sorting packages in warehouses bringing you prepackaged coffee or tubes of toothpaste or any number of gifts you're going to open on Christmas day. Don't the people who make the things you take for granted - your basic necessities - deserve the insurance of a healthy life, just like you?
Christmas? You say Christmas because Christ is the reason you celebrate what you have. While you remember what you have, try thinking about those who don't have any gifts to open Christmas morning. Think about those who are too sick to visit family members. Think of children whose parents can't afford to visit the doctor. While you think about Christmas, remember that its not about receiving your gifts and visiting your family, its about giving of yourself to others less fortunate than yourselves.
Healthcare is not a problem in Europe and many other countries around the world. Why? They have nationalized healthcare programs. Its working for them too. They declare themselves to be Christian nations and have taken the step that Jesus would have proposed. It is not His will that we should snub our noses at those less fortunate - and they get that.
How can you help? Write to your representatives in Congress. Share your opinions with them. They love to hear your opinions. Its their job to represent YOU and YOUR OPINIONS.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
