The LA Times today had a story about an State Assembly Bill to make human trafficking a felony offense. Check out the story. I believe that this part of the discussion needs to happen more in order to address the “whole enchilada” of immigration issues in our country. The problems and evils associated with human trafficking and contemporary slavery are worse than the Social Security problem or congressional filibusters. But that’s just me.

This weekend at the Urban Youth Worker’s Institute (UYWI) I learned about two pieces of immigration legislation that would greatly impact - for good - a multitude of students across the country, but especially in Los Angeles.The first is called the DREAM Act - “Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors” (S. 1545). It has been introduced twice in the US Senate by Orin Hatch of Utah, and Richard Durbin of Illinois. A summary of the bill is:

The second piece of legislation is the Student Adjustment Act (HR 1684), that was introduced in the House by Chris Cannon of Utah, Lucille Roybal-Allard of California (Boyle Heights!!!), and Howard Berman of Utah.Both legislations have been gaining support in both branches of the legislature, but will probably need help from the White House in order to go through. I encourage you to write a letter to the president (YES, Mr. GW) at president@whitehouse.gov. Check out a sample letter of support.

First of all, I guess my vote really did count, since Villaraigosa was elected as the next Mayor of Los Angeles - and the first Latino since Cristobal Aguilar in 1872.Despite the electoral result, it is disappointing to believe that less than 1/2 a million people voted in Los Angeles for Mayor. That’s only 32 % of the 1.4 million registered voters - which is only 36% of the 3.8 million total residents in the city of Los Angeles. That means that only 11% of Los Angeles voted for mayor. Wow!

By contrast, over 72% of Iraqis voted in January for their 1st election - and that in the midst of bombs and bomb threats. Sure, I know, that was a “1st” and a national election. But still. It is hard to wave the flag of the “land of the free and the brave” when we don’t turn out to vote.

Today will be a historic election for Mayor of Los Angeles, almost regardless of the outcome. If Jim Hahn is able to pull off “an upset”, he’ll be overcoming recent polls that have indicated he was down by double-digits in pre-polls. And if Antonio Villaraigosa wins, not only will he be the city’s 1st Latino Mayor in over 130 years (1887), but he’ll be the first challenger to defeat an incumbent mayor in over 30 years.I’m not political expert, but in addition to the always debated political “record” of candidates, I believe that Villaraigosa will win because he has appealed to voters with a stronger vision for change. Take a look at their campaign websites as an example. For Hahn, he has 7 issues listed - with only a word title to catch you: “Economy”, “Education” (which the mayor has little direct influence in), “Environment” (read=LA River), “Housing”, “Neighborhoods”, “Public Safety” (read=more cops shooting more guns), and “Transportation”. More on the issues in a second. Looking at Villaraigosa’s website, under VISION, he has things listed like the following: “a safer LA”, “a greener LA”, “Affordable Housing”, “Cleaning house at City Hall”, “a healthy city”, “getting traffic moving”. What’s not to like about all of those visions.

I’m not saying that Villaraigosa will be a better mayor just because he has a cooler campaign website. But I do think it reflects a different approach that people are looking for. Politicians are notorious for making lots of promises - this is not new. But a politicians ability to inspire and direct people with vision is important.

Now for all of the attention that is being “paid” (pardon the pun) to different scandals in both campaigns, I think that there are 3-4 key issues that the next mayor must address: “a smarter city”, “a commuter city”, “an affordable city to live in for everyone”, and “a safer city”.

Though it is not under the direct supervision of the mayors office, this mayor must address the substandard school system. LAUSD needs to double the number of SCHOOLS (not just teachers) in order to serve the current student population. Forget doubling the police force. That may or may not (probably not) reduce crime in the immediate future, but it will do nothing to reduce the wave of crime that will come when the current generation of students - under-equipped, unmotivated by overcrowded schools that were unable to adequately educate them - is unemployed with no skills and no direction. If public safety is such a huge issue - which I believe it is - then more attention and more money needs to be invested in creating new schools, involving parents and the community in those new schools and in preparing kids for success, not dooming them to failure.

I don’t have any answers for the ridiculous housing situation faces Los Angeles, but it is approaching a dangerous place. If by last summer’s housing market, only 18% of non-homeowners could afford to buy at the median house price, then LA is in trouble. Equally, despite the abundance of freeways in Los Angeles, I see the transportation issue - with growing gridlock and soaring gas prices - to be a major issue for this mayor.

I may be a prophet. I may just be standing on a soap box. What do you think? What motivated (or didn’t) your voting today?

My friend Greg - currently a ridiculously happy resident of Singapore - sent me this link about “God-dar.” I’m a little slow in the head right now, so it took me a few minutes after I read through the article to figure it out. I think it is like “radar,” but I’m humbly open to correction. The article addresses more the ways that politics and religion get mixed together. The article quotes Bob Schieffer from CBS News, who,”…concluded incredulously that this was a religious country and the divide was now not between classes or races, but between those who attended church regularly and those who didn’t.”While I’m not sure if the divide he refers to isn’t ultimately still influenced by class and race - since class and race still divide (read James 2:1-7) those who attend church regularly - I still think that American Christians are being awkwardly compromised in their faith by a blind adherence to politicians that claim a ‘born-again’ evangelically general faith heritage, even if their actual political philosophy and policy-making are questionably biblical. Or worse.

This article about the bad mix of politics and preaching is humbling. I know this is an extreme example of manipulation, but still. As much as I want to be faithful to preach biblically and engage on relevant political issues (not just pro-life/pro-choice), it is humbling to recognize the limits and the dangers of overstepping faithfulness from the pulpit.I’m also challenged in my thinking about what role the church universal is supposed to play in the political sphere - whether local, national, democratic or other. I’d be curious to hear different thoughts.

My friends know that one of the things that I love is friendly banter - aka smack talk. So I really appreciated hearing about the high-level banter that Russian President Vladimir Putin threw down about President Bush and U.S. democracy:

“In the United States, you first elect the electors and then they vote for the presidential candidates. In Russia, the president is elected through the direct vote of the whole population — that might be even more democratic,” says Putin. “And you have other problems in your elections. Four years ago, your presidential election was decided by the court. But we’re not going to poke our nose into your democratic system because that’s up to the American people.”

Touche. I guess it is also very ironic that this criticism is coming out of Russia - the U.S.A.’s long Cold-War enemy. But it stands to know that the U.S. is not beyond criticism - even for the very treasured democracy that we claim to maintain so purely and to export from said “purity” to the rest of the world.

I love it when someone states an idea more clearly - and more briefly. Relate this quote to my previous post on “immigration amnesia.”

“Innocent history is a selective forgetfulness, used precisely to avoid the consequences of a more realistic memory.”