Letters to the Editor
Undoing Racism?
I want to share an experience which occurred while Helen Jean Reindell (Uprooting Racism Task Force of VT Conference of United Churches of Christ), Arthur Washington & Martha Daley (parents who are now self-advocates) and I (VT Anti-Racism Action Team and Women’s International League for Peace & Freedom) were sitting in the Education Committee deliberations about H.113, the Racial Harassment in Schools Bill, on Wednesday, May 14, beginning at 8:30 in the morning.
The abject ignorance, the insensitivity, the lack of factual information, the lack of love, the lack of respect for the humanity of all, the bury-the-head-in-the-sand attitudes displayed by many in the room prompted Arthur to ask for the floor. Representative Ann Siebert (one of the champions, let me say) spoke FOR Arthur speaking, and he was granted the floor. I followed, and am still asking “do you really think the status quo is working??” It was impossible to just sit and listen to a lot of what was being said without asking to speak. It is so imperative for the people to witness these deliberations; I suspect, even with some of the gross statements made that day, that leaders speak with even more insensitivity when “the people” are not present.
Representatives Mark Larson and Steve Hintgen and Ann Siebert were articulate, patient, cool-headed and strong in their advocacy for the bill. Representative George Cross was good, especially at interpretation of policy. (He also spoke with Arthur, Martha and me at length during the lunch break.) Others present were Representatives Ernest Shand and Francis Brooks. There were quite a few people in the small, crowded, room on the third floor of the State House.
So, deliberations went on and on, there was not even a dinner break. They ended with a continuance for the following Friday afternoon. I did call a couple of people and asked if they could be the watchdog crew sitting in on the deliberations. Again, it is so important to have “the people” witnessing deliberations especially when the issues (racism, sexism, classism, anti-semitism, homophobism, heterosexism, looksism, mentalism, ableism, militarism, etc.) are being deliberated.
I want to say that although many people in that room seemed to want to maintain the status quo, there were a few there who see things differently and spoke quite eloquently to their position.
I spoke with Representative Mark Larson to see what is in store. Since the vote on Friday was 6-to-5, the bill was returned to the House for motion to go to the Judiciary. It is not expected to get out of the Judiciary this term, but will be deliberated in the Judiciary in the fall and then on to the Senate floor this coming fall.
It was a scary experience for people in my group, concerned that the entire bill might be sabotaged, and/or watered down to uselessness. It is very hard, very hard, to hear some people talking in what felt to me like racist terms.
Dear men and women, we cannot keep on doing it the way we’re doing it. Something has to change. By what means? I am totally angry, in pain, dis-eased about the racism, the classism, the militaristic mentality, the misogyny, and other oppression that gets swept under the rug in the name of “almost everything is okay in the schools.” It’s not.
Ask the Safe School Unit of Department of Education: they also get lots of complaints. (Perhaps they need to let Vermont residents know about them?) Ask the Human Rights Commission, ask the VT Anti-Racism Action Team, ask the Burlington Anti-Racism Coalition, ask Uprooting Racism Task Force of the VT Conference of United Churches of Christ, ask the African American Alliance of the Northeast Kingdom, and so many others. The demographics in Vermont are changing by leaps and bounds and there is not much preparation that I can see regarding these important changes.
Rep. Mark Larson would like to see some people get together after the Session, to talk about where we go from here. Who can be part of that group?
Thanks for listening. Thanks for anticipated response. I am glad you are the way you are in the world.
Paij Wadley-Bailey
VARAT
Montpelier
Three Reasons
“Ten Reasons Why Militarism Is Bad for Gay People” (Ryn Gluckman – May issue)? Maybe... Maybe not.
But, I can think of ten reasons why I LIKE the United States Military. I’ll just give you three. One: I feel safe they exist to protect us. Two: The Evil Saddam is gone. And Three: They are incredibly HOT and SEXY. Semper Fi!
Michael Sebastian Luna
Jeffersonville
Silence = Hypocrisy
You talk about the silence of the Republican Party regarding Santorum’s remarks. That is to be expected. But in my home state of New York, liberal Chuck Schumer made a weak comment after having been cajoled for over a week, and liberal Hillary Clinton, to date, still has not commented. Why do the Democrats think they own the gay vote? Do Hillary and others feel that they will only incense the Republican voters and they have the gay votes in their pockets already? Please comment.
Andrew Conte
Jackson Heights, NY
Corrections
In last month’s editorial “Homophobia, Continued,” I wrote that “Among the Democratic candidates for president, Sen. Bob Kerry was first off the mark” in responding to homophobic comments by Pennsylvania Republican Senator Rick Santorum. Of course, it was Massachusetts Senator John Kerry. Bob Kerry is a former US Senator from Nebraska, currently a college president, but not a Democratic candidate for President of the United States.
And a sharp-eyed reader of our web edition pointed out that Bush learned everything he knew about diplomacy in “kindergarden,” which should have been “kindergarten” in the “At Witt’s End” cartoon.
At Witt's End
Leah Wittenberg
Burlington, VT