Oil Moratorium

Hooray for the President and Secretary Salazar for reinstituting the offshore oil moratorium for the next five years. One of the things the Secretary said in his press conference was something that my former employer (southern environmental law center) had emphasized: the oil and gas companies have thousands of leases that they have not yet exercised. There's no need to open up new areas right now, especially as we are still reeling from the results of the BP oil spill in the Gulf.

An October 12, 2010 Washington Post article showed how politics drove the opening of the mid- and south-Atlantic to oil drilling during the Obama Administration. It also repeated some of the misconceptions that the President and the Secretary had about the risks of offshore oil. For example, they had stated categorically that no oil had been spilled from rigs during severe weather events. Yet the Department of Homeland Security and NOAA had reported oil spills from rigs during Katrina and Rita -- Approximately 8 million gallons of spilled oil in comparison to 11 million gallons spilled during the Exxon Valdez.

The President did the right thing, although I'm sure we'll hear more from the oil and gas industry in the next Congress. Sphere: Related Content

TIME FLIES WHEN YOU'RE RETIRED . . . & OBAMA BLUES

Well, yes, I got over the election but November flew by. Although retirement brings more time, sometimes life takes over regardless of whether you're "working" or just hanging out.

Back to politics: the President is correct. Like him, I don't like the tax cut for the rich, but politics is the art of compromise, and as he explained - politics is not for the ideologically pure: if you want to get something done, you have to compromise. In this case, the compromise will allow unemployment benefits to be extended along with the extension of the tax cut.

If the American public doesn't like the tax cut, they should be telling that to their representatives and senators. Instead, collectively, the public elected a much more conservative House of Representatives (taking office in January) that won't raise any taxes and possibly will be less likely to compromise.

When I was first in politics, I used to think compromises were bad -- one needed to stand by principles. But deadlocks occur, you're in the minority and you don't get any of your goals accomplished. I can understand that senators and representatives from more liberal areas may object, but they ought to see the bigger picture and be able to explain it to their constituencies. A lot of their colleagues got defeated recently because they were too "progressive" -- they voted for the cap and trade bill or health reform or the stimulus package or wall street reform. In the long run, I think the public will be glad we have the last three and I hope eventually that some type of climate change legislation will pass -- But probably not in the next two years.

Politics can surely break your heart and November was a bad month for progressive politicos, myself included. But like Bill Clinton, Obama will rise and man, he has done the things he said he would do -- and is still trying. Sphere: Related Content

Election Hangover, Sorta

This morning a man in a class I am taking asked me how the election went for me. Although he was unknown to me, I could tell from his slight smirk that he was a gloating Republican.



"Not well," I first replied. Then I rejoined with "No, wait, I really enjoyed Election Day at Carver Recreation and seeing the tremendous response of people who turned out. I just didn't like the final result of the election [with Tom Perriello losing his seat as our representative for the 5th District of Virginia]."



I spent the day as an observer on behalf of the State Democratic Party's voter protection team to make sure the process was transparent and that challenges were handled appropriately.



I was deeply touched by the steady stream of people who showed up to vote -- some with kids in tow, pushing strollers or trying to ride herd on boisterous toddlers, other elderly people with canes, walkers, some accompanied by their adult child, sometimes carrying portable oxygen, a young disabled man in a wheelchair. There were a number of people from public housing who showed up to vote. Because this is not always the case, something -- good local organizing, the appearance of the President the weekend before -- had made them realize the importance of the election and their vote.



Sometimes people learned they were not registered, such as the young woman who had registered when she got her learner's permit at the Department of Motor Vehicles, only to discover that the registration had not shown up on the Board of Election records.



When they were rejected, people were extremely disappointed, which showed how important voting is to many.



Outside the polling place, the regular Carver precinct Democrats -- Tim Sims, Teresa Walker - Price, Former Mayor David Brown, Ann Hill Williams, Donna Goings, Former Vice Mayor John Conover, Jean Hiatt and many others -- greeted voters as they arrived to vote. The Republicans also had a representative greeting voters.



Inside the polling center, I listened as voters gave their names and the electoral workers searched the computer base, asked for their identification and in the large majority of cases, validated their registration and gave them the authorization to proceed to the voting booths.



At the beginning of the day, there were three other observers, all Republicans, with me. I pointed out to them that they were supposed to have only one representative per computer station, and since we had only one station, one was enough. The Republican male did not concur, and I did not complain to anyone, but eventually the Electoral board informed them that three were too many and so they took shifts.

With the Republican women (one Republican and one "Independent" she told me), I bonded as we discussed the community, mutual friends, foods and travels, and our concerns about our community. (I did not discuss our candidates because obviously we had reached different conclusions.)

However, a problem emerged that also bound me to the male Republican inside. We were both trying to observe the resolution of a dispute with a would-be voter told he was not on the rolls; he was directed to the precinct official across the room from where we were seated, so we followed. She did not want us present and told us to go back to our seats. I had the State Board of Election rules and tried to show her that we were entitled to observe the electoral process, and that the resolution of a dispute was part of that process.

Before we could say anything else, another official jumped up and started shouting at us to go to our seats. When we tried deferentially and quietly to respond to him, he just kept yelling "I can't hear you. My ears are clogged up. Now go to your seats!" We retreated but both of us (and the women observers who were still present and looking on in horror) agreed we would file a complaint about this poll worker (which we did). (My female cohorts at the site especially were encouraging and supportive of standing up to the officials and making the complaints.)

Later, our objections about not being part of the process were raised with the State Board of Elections (and I was told, with the Attorney General and Governor's Office), all of whom agreed that we should be allowed to hear the process going on. The Electoral Board member returned to the site to so inform us.

One small victory for transparency.

Of course no one in Carver was trying to prevent voting, but in any bureaucracy, people just want an issue resolved, regardless of the outcome (whether or not the voter gets to vote). My charge was to make sure that each voter entitled to a vote would get to vote either straightforwardly or provisionally. The Republican told me he was there to ensure that there were no double votes and no people voting who were not entitled to vote. He also was quite irate if someone had an out of state license and still got to vote (if you didn't have valid in-state identification, you could sign an affidavit saying you are who you say you are). "They only get 30 days to change their license," he insisted, although I rejoined that no one in the precinct was authorized to enforce the DMV law.

So it went for 13 hours that the poll was open. If there were situations I thought I could resolve (when the person was being sent elsewhere), I went outside and interacted with them, showing them the Board of Elections' rules so hopefully they could defend their right to cast a ballot as in situations, for example, where a voter was returning an unused absentee ballot.

Mid-day, I took a break to go vote in my own precinct - Recreation - and to drive by a couple of other precincts where I dropped off cookies for Democratic precinct workers and greeted old friends and new. At Jefferson Park, I briefly joined in the citizen-led traffic directions before the police arrived to thankfully take over.

I was at Carver when it closed at 7 pm and the results were heartening: Perriello, 977 and Hurt, 139. Later we saw high margins for Perriello in the rest of the City, but ultimately Hurt won by approximately 10,000 votes.

The election outcome was not what I desired, but all in all, I had a good day of watching the democratic process at work and staying alert to make the process transparent, and hopefully making sure everyone got his/her opportunity to cast a ballot and have a voice in this election.

Now, if I can only hold on to my image of this "beloved community" of Charlottesville and find other ways to help make our town an even better place for all of us to live together and prosper.

PS: At the end of the day, the shouting official told me that he had not meant to alarm us, and I and the other poll watcher reiterated that he had acted inappropriately but that in the end, our view had been vindicated by the State Board. And I responded: "But apology is accepted." Sphere: Related Content

LTE OCT. 22, 2010 WASHINGTON POST

The Oct. 13 front-page article "How politics spilled into policy" did an excellent job of showing how offshore drilling safety and spill records were ignored and industry assertions believed as the Obama administration sought to open more areas to drilling.

But I would like to correct a misstatement, attributed to President Obama, that no oil rigs were destroyed during Hurricane Katrina. According to a report from the Department of Homeland Security, 115 oil platforms were destroyed and sunk, 52 were significantly damaged and 19 were set adrift during Hurricane Katrina.

After hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the U.S. Coast Guard coordinated the cleanup of more than 8 million gallons of spilled oil, including six major and four medium-size spills, and more than 1,000 minor oil spills throughout the gulf region. To put that in perspective, the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill totaled 11 million gallons; Deepwater Horizon, more than 200 million gallons.

A missing political calculus is that many Virginia politicians do not recognize the significant impact oil drilling could have on military operations along the Atlantic Coast. In the quest for oil revenue, some seem willing to sacrifice the golden goose of the military that has helped Virginia and other Atlantic states prosper. Sphere: Related Content

Letter to Charlottesville Daily Progress, Oct. 26, 2010, re Tom Perriello

Tom Perriello should be re-elected because he is part of a new generation of political leaders who seek creative solutions without regard for partisan politics or ideology. Tom, responding to constituents, has applied his intelligence to restarting the economy while protecting the environment, promoting true health insurance reform, preserving Social Security and assisting returning military veterans.

To reform health care, Rep. Perriello sponsored legislation to remove the anti-trust exemption health insurance companies enjoy that enables them to avoid competitiveness, thus increasing consumer cost. His bill passed the House three times, only to die in the Senate because of undue influence by the health insurance industry. Perriello will continue to push this bill until the Senate enacts it.

He has also supported legislation to jump-start the new energy economy because he knows that renewable energy sources can create new jobs for much of Southside Virginia and that they will also be good for the environment.

The congressman voted against Wall Street bailouts and against a budget bill that did not address the growing deficit. Thus, he does not vote in lockstep with the president or with the Democrats in Congress. Instead, he reads the bills, thinks through the options, including the unintended consequences, and listens to his constituents. I do not necessarily agree with his every vote, but I support the principled basis, including impacts on the district, on which he makes decisions.

Tom Perriello has held scores of public town halls and meetings with constituent groups, including those such as the tea party, which opposes him. Last year, at a health reform meeting in Charlottesville, he listened and responded to questions for several hours without making speeches or pronouncements. He cares about the needs of others, not only in terms of legislation but also in a personal commitment to fairness and justice for all.

The congressman receives no support from corporate political action committees or paid lobbyists; instead, he has based his campaign on contributions from thousands of individuals.

Tom Perriello is a good man who represents a bright future for the regions of Central and Southside Virginia. I know I will be proud to vote for Tom Perriello for Congress on Nov.2 Sphere: Related Content

Beginnings & Endings on Women's Equality Day

http://www.readthehook.com/stories/2010/09/02/ESSAY-slaughter-womensequality-b.aspx

Last Thursday, August 26 was the 90th anniversary of the ratification of the 19th Amendment, the one that granted women the right to vote. I've been thinking about this one for a while.

In fact, when I began my career as a reporter at the Harrisburg Patriot News in 1961, one of my first assignments was covering the 41st anniversary of this Amendment. I was one of six women on the newspaper, all of us assigned to the Women's Section, which, ironically, was edited by a man.

For my story, I reviewed the history of the women's movement back to the first Women's Rights Convention convened by Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott in 1848. It took until 1920-- 72 years of struggle--- to get the right to vote.

A Pennsylvania suffragist still alive in 1961 told me that she and her colleagues often used existing political gatherings to argue their cause, and not all women were convinced that voting was the right way to go. She recounted that one suffragist, so stunned by the polished rhetoric of an anti-suffragist, tried a little reverse psychology as a debating point: "My opponent with all her intelligence and eloquence certainly belongs in the halls of Congress," said the suffragist, "while I should remain a housewife."

In the early 20th century, the movement focused on the workplace. While many women toiled in factories and in the "female" occupations, women had fewer economic and educational opportunities-- and no representation in the federal halls of power. There were 22 states and territories that allowed women to vote in their elections, but most states denied the right.

As I talked to the Pennsylvania suffragists nearly 40 years ago, I liked to think that I would have been one of them. A few years later, I was a wife and mother when I read Betty Friedan's The Feminine Mystique, which sealed my fate as a modern-day suffragist, that is, a feminist. Increasingly, I questioned why women couldn't do the same jobs as men.

Why couldn't our daughters grow up to be doctors or lawyers? And by the way, I thought, why can't I be a lawyer? I'll admit that after initially perusing a George Washington University law school catalog, I found the academic schedule too daunting for a mother of two toddlers, even with their dedicated feminist father at my side.

By 1971, the movement then known as Women's Liberation had been launched, Ms. magazine founded, and Bella Abzug convinced Congress to proclaim August 26 as Women's Equality Day. My friends and I celebrated as we continued to advance in our jobs and take care of kids.

Fast forward to 1986, and I am graduating from the University of Virginia Law School, a place where I could not have pursued undergraduate studies back in 1957 when I was graduating from high school. During my graduation year, female enrollment in the law school class was 35 percent, and I was told this was the highest female enrollment to date. (By contrast, the class of 2012 is 47 percent female.)

While I had few professional female role models, my grandmother, widowed in her 40s, became independent by necessity and found a position as a college housemother at Mary Washington. My mother worked outside the home as a secretary when that was not the norm. These two women, along with numerous teachers, scout leaders, and friends both male and female, demonstrated that exercising competence and freedom in the larger world could be very satisfying.

My mother's and grandmother's modest goals helped me set mine a little higher-- to eventually become a lawyer who would work in the public interest. My 24 years at the Southern Environmental Law Center have given me that wonderful context in which to advocate for the beautiful earth I inhabit and want to preserve.

Last week, as I celebrated Women's Equality Day, it was also my last day before retiring as an attorney from the SELC.

I've come full circle in my work life-- from being a reporter, editor, wife, and stay-at-home-mom to working mom editor, adult educator, and counselor, administrator, lawyer, small town politician, and teacher.

We women have come a long way since 1920. Hillary Clinton was close to becoming president; and now, she, Condeleeza Rice, and Madeline Albright have made serving as a female secretary of state seem routine. An August 22 Washington Post article points out that women dominate the American nuclear diplomatic debates at the highest echelons.

Locally, we've had women represented on the City Council ever since Jill Rinehart was elected in 1972 and Nancy O'Brien became Mayor in 1976. Similarly, the County has had able representation from women beginning in 1976 with the late Opal David.

Yet there is a lack of women at the state level. No woman has held an elected statewide office since the 1988 re-election of Mary Sue Terry as Attorney General. Of the 40 state senators, just eight are women; of the Virginia House of Delegates, just 18 out of 100 are women.

One can view the glass as half empty or half full. My own personal glass is overflowing.

On August 26 (interestingly also my first born's birthday), I retired from my beloved vocation as a professional advocate and attorney. I celebrated not only the end of my professional career but also those feisty women who preceded me-- the celebrated and the forgotten-- who worked for access to the ballot box, to universities and professional schools, to board rooms, courthouses, city halls and to legislatures. If not for them, my glass today would not be so full.

So let the celebrations continue. Here's to those pioneering women and also our daughters and granddaughters, our colleagues and friends, and the women of generations to come. Sphere: Related Content

Ode to the Perfect Secretary

In my early days as a single working woman and a feminist, I would lament -- not without irony -- that I needed a wife – someone to take care of me, as millions of women had taken care of the details of the lives of their working husbands.

Little did I realize that after 24 years of my legal career, I would look back and see that – in the very best sense of the word – I found such a partner in my secretary, Carol Satterwhite.

For approximately 22 years, Carol has been my help-mate during the 52 work weeks per year. I was 48 when we began working together; she was 28. I was divorced with adult children; she was married without children. I had become a lawyer in middle age and was still – professionally speaking – a novice. She had worked for other lawyers in private practice before coming to our law center and knew the ropes of working for lawyers.

We grew up together in this practice. Carol became the secretary I shared with Deborah and later with other attorneys. At the beginning of the word processing era (late 80s), I was a good typist and learned how to cut and paste and edit. Back then, we had no email so land phones (not cells) and letters were our modes of communication to the outside world. Even the fax was new.

Carol was a super typist, so often I dictated notes or memos into a small machine, which she then transcribed. I edited her copy by hand and she prepared the final version. In the early days I was doing a lot of billboard work – most notably defending the Waynesville, NC sign ordinance outlawing billboards that was before the district court in North Carolina, a case that at the time seemed to last forever although it truly was litigated within a couple of years.

It seems every time I went on vacation in the summer, a brief or pleading would be filed, and Carol – my ever trusty secretary – would have to track me down on Ocracoke Island, N.C. In those days – before cell phones – she had to call the Community Store, which had to call my landlord who had to drive over to tell me to call the office. Once faxes came in, she was able to fax a brief to me via the Community Store.

After a couple of years, Carol and her husband Pete became expectant parents, and Carol took maternity leave to have her baby girl, Brittany. Brittany was only a year or two younger than my grandsons.

When Carol came back to work, Baby Brittany grew up fast and before I knew it, Carol, searching for a better school, found one here in Charlottesville. Many days Brittany would come to the office after school, and I watched her grow. Later, in high school, I ran into her in Richmond while I was lobbying and she was on a class trip. She is now a college student at Liberty University.

Through all the early years, Carol stayed up nights with Deborah and me when we were filing motions, and briefs, appendices to briefs, the records, etc. First there were the billboard briefs for Waynesville and Durham and Raleigh. Then, there were many briefs and other legal documents relating to changing Virginia’s law on “who has standing to sue on environmental matters” Finally, there were 15 years of comments and briefing on the King William Reservoir. Deborah and I would draft, read, re-edit and revise the documents, and Carol would dutifully re-type the next version. She was fast, she was accurate and she could usually read my scrawled rewrites with the various editorial marks noting deletions, insertions and the moving of words, phrases, paragraphs or pages. She was remarkably accurate even though our legalese sometimes made no sense to her.

And here’s the rub -- No matter how late in the evening we labored on deadline night, she was always organized, had the appendices in order, the table of contents done and the table of authorities (an index to all legal documents in the brief) ready to go with all the documents together. We’d be bleary eyed, and she would be clear headed . . . even though she was just as tired as we were – and had to drive further to get home than either of us.

She was also always cheerful and calm under pressure.

In addition to handling litigation, comments to state and federal agencies on a host of issues and correspondence, Carol kept my schedule, ordered my rental cars, hotels, made air reservations, reminded me of meetings, collected my trip receipts and filed my travel vouchers; she kept up with my Lexis account information as well as my frequent flyer mileage numbers on a host of airlines. She registered me with the Commonwealth as a lobbyist and she helped file my year end report. She reminded me of my continuing legal education requirements each year and kept me up to date on numbers of hours I still needed to complete.

Carol “refreshed my recollection” of staff meetings (even after we got email and notices) and attorney lunches. She told me about interns’ schedules and reminded me about my intern presentation. She reminded me when I needed to turn in my work hours or put a code on a file. As to filing – although not her favorite subject, she reminded me of this necessary task and would “babysit” me while I tried to do the impossible – file the oodles and oodles of papers that had sat for weeks (if not months) in piles on my desk. Most recently she has helped me clear out the 24 years of files I have accumulated, discarding much material, and saving only those still important documents needed for current or historical purposes.

Carol showed me how to insert pictures into my documents and how to do other functions with the computer. And when I got frustrated with the computer (how do I get to the “fat” side of the network) – which was often – she always kept her cool and either told me how or found someone who could help.

In short, Carol has taken care of me and my office needs for 22 years. That’s longer than I was married. And in our partnership, Carol has made my life so much easier than it would have been otherwise. And, like any successful marriage, our partnership has succeeded not just by being my help-mate but also by the broader and deeper relationship we have formed over this long time.

Carol is my friend. There have been many times when one or the other of us needed someone to listen or to counsel and comfort. I remember especially only a few years ago when my daughter Margaret was diagnosed with breast cancer, Carol was there for me (as she was for Deborah who later received a similar diagnosis). When Carol went through a rough patch in her marriage – like everyone does – I was there assuring her that she could find help to make better times occur. And she did.

At holidays and birthdays, Deborah and Carol and I have long celebrated together. We have our special lunches, exchanging gifts and spending time together. And now, as I prepare to retire, we will begin a monthly breakfast so that we can stay in touch and share our lives still.

Did I mention that Carol is almost always cheerful and optimistic? When I have been storming around or grumpy or overworked or stressed for a variety of personal or professional reasons, Carol was always there – not Pollyanna-ish – but compassionate and helping me to find a solution, always assuring me that I could get through the crisis du jour – small or large. For 22 years, as I struggled through stressful storms and anguished moments, Carol was there for me, as a helpmate and a friend.

A couple of weeks ago, Carol went on vacation for a week. In past years, I always coped with her temporary absences and celebrated her return when things got “back to normal.” For the first time, I truly realized how my life was going to change without Carol in it on a daily basis. I can only hope that after 22 years I have internalized her sunny presence and can-do attitude so that in my moments of need, I’ll find my way.

And I will anticipate with pleasure those monthly breakfasts. Sphere: Related Content

SUFFRAGIST CITY: BEGINNINGS AND ENDINGS ON WOMEN'S EQUALITY DAY 2010 (Published in The Hook, September 2, 2010)

         

Last Thursday, August 26 was the 90^th anniversary of the ratification of the 19^th Amendment, the one that granted women the right to vote. I've been thinking about this one for a while.

 

In fact, when I began my career as a reporter at the Harrisburg Patriot News in 1961, one of my first assignments was covering the 41st anniversary of this Amendment. I was one of six women on the newspaper, all of us assigned to the Women's Section, which, ironically, was edited by a man.

 

For my story, I reviewed the history of the women's movement back to the first Women's Rights Convention convened by Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott in 1848. It took until 1920– 72 years of struggle–- to get the right to vote.

 

A Pennsylvania suffragist still alive in 1961 told me that she and her colleagues often used existing political gatherings to argue their cause, and not all women were convinced that voting was the right way to go. She recounted that one suffragist, so stunned by the polished rhetoric of an anti-suffragist, tried a little reverse psychology as a debating point: "My opponent with all her intelligence and eloquence certainly belongs in the halls of Congress," said the suffragist, "while I should remain a housewife."

 

In the early 20^th century, the movement focused on the workplace. While many women toiled in factories and in the "female" occupations, women had fewer economic and educational opportunities– and no representation in the federal halls of power. There were 22 states and territories that allowed women to vote in their elections, but most states denied the right.

 

As I talked to the Pennsylvania suffragists nearly 40 years ago, I liked to think that I would have been one of them. A few years later, I was a wife and mother when I read Betty Friedan's The Feminine Mystique, which sealed my fate as a modern-day suffragist, that is, a feminist. Increasingly, I questioned why women couldn't do the same jobs as men.

 

Why couldn't our daughters grow up to be doctors or lawyers? And by the way, I thought, why can't I be a lawyer? I'll admit that after initially perusing a George Washington University law school catalog, I found the academic schedule too daunting for a mother of two toddlers, even with their dedicated feminist father at my side.

 

By 1971, the movement then known as Women's Liberation had been launched, Ms. magazine founded, and Bella Abzug convinced Congress to proclaim August 26 as Women's Equality Day. My friends and I celebrated as we continued to advance in our jobs and take care of kids.

Fast forward to 1986, and I am graduating from the University of Virginia Law School, a place where I could not have pursued undergraduate studies back in 1957 when I was graduating from high school. During my graduation year, female enrollment in the law school class was 35 percent, and I was told this was the highest female enrollment to date. (By contrast, the class of 2012 is 47 percent female.)

 

While I had few professional female role models, my grandmother, widowed in her 40s, became independent by necessity and found a position as a college housemother at Mary Washington. My mother worked outside the home as a secretary when that was not the norm. These two women, along with numerous teachers, scout leaders, and friends both male and female, demonstrated that exercising competence and freedom in the larger world could be very satisfying.

 

My mother's and grandmother's modest goals helped me set mine a little higher– to eventually become a lawyer who would work in the public interest. My 24 years at the Southern Environmental Law Center have given me that wonderful context in which to advocate for the beautiful earth I inhabit and want to preserve.

 

Last week, as I celebrated Women's Equality Day, it was also my last day before retiring as an attorney from the SELC.

 

I've come full circle in my work life– from being a reporter, editor, wife, and stay-at-home-mom to working mom editor, adult educator, and counselor, administrator, lawyer, small town politician, and teacher. 

 

We women have come a long way since 1920. Hillary Clinton was close to becoming president; and now, she, Condeleeza Rice, and Madeline Albright have made serving as a female secretary of state seem routine. An August 22 Washington Post article points out that women dominate the American nuclear diplomatic debates at the highest echelons.

 

Locally, we've had women represented on the City Council ever since Jill Rinehart was elected in 1972 and Nancy O'Brien became Mayor in 1976. Similarly, the County has had able representation from women beginning in 1976 with the late Opal David.

 

Yet there is a lack of women at the state level. No woman has held an elected statewide office since the 1988 re-election of Mary Sue Terry as Attorney General. Of the 40 state senators, just eight are women; of the Virginia House of Delegates, just 18 out of 100 are women.

 

One can view the glass as half empty or half full. My own personal glass is overflowing.

 

On August 26 (interestingly also my first born's birthday), I retired from my beloved vocation as a professional advocate and attorney. I celebrated not only the end of my professional career but also those feisty women who preceded me– the celebrated and the forgotten– who worked for access to the ballot box, to universities and professional schools, to board rooms, courthouses, city halls and to legislatures. If not for them, my glass today would not be so full.

 

So let the celebrations continue. Here's to those pioneering women and also our daughters and granddaughters, our colleagues and friends, and the women of generations to come.

~

The author served as mayor during the final two of her eight years, 1990-98, on City Council. 

#

Sphere: Related Content

Good NPR stories on Offshore Oil and Berms - Friday, June 11, 2010

Check out:

Offshore Oil Companies Get Break from Washington
http://http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=127774532


Scientist Warns Oil Fighters: Sand Berms Won't Last
http://http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=127774917 Sphere: Related Content

Oil Spill: A Collective Responsibility

Now that the Deepwater Horizon has shown us just how bad an oil spill can be, people are looking to blame someone for the fiasco. Understandable but unproductive.

"Drill Baby Drill" was a popular slogan in the 2008 Presidential race and reemerged as a theme of the winning candidate in the 2009 Virginia gubernatorial campaign who proposed to fund needed transportation improvements with revenue sharing (that does not exist) from future wells (not yet discovered).

As an environmental lobbyist opposing state resolutions on oil drilling during the 2010 Virginia General Assembly, I testified before legislators fighting to embrace the Governor's irresponsible view that future drilling would solve Virginia's financial problems and bring economic prosperity.

All this was in the face of facts that only a small amount of oil is likely to exist off Virginia's coast (6 days at current rates of consumption). And, thus far, there is NO revenue sharing for any states beyond the Gulf Coast.

Moreover, as reiterated a couple of weeks ago, the Department of Defense continues to oppose the establishment of Virginia off shore oil drillling in the midst of naval and NASA operational areas. Military operations in Hampton Roads represent existing economic activity in the Commonwealth.

The mood had definitely been pro-oil drilling in this state. Nationally, Senator John Kerry -- long a staunch environmental supporter, had agreed to drilling in order to attract his colleague, Sen. Lindsay Graham to co-sponsor Climate Change legislation (though the senator has now backed out of this co-sponsorship).

The country has been in a "why not drill?" mood. Now that the spill has occurred, Americans need to examine their attitudes that supported this movement for "drill now" as well as the motives and mistakes of BP, Halliburton and other contractors involved with Deep Water Horizon. My point is not to exonerate corporate malfeasance but instead to be more productive about our collective responsibility.

We are a nation addicted to oil (and indeed to fossil fuels). We're looking for a new supplier (hey, let's try the Atlantic) rather than looking to break the addiction. The President understands that we need to move toward a new energy future. But even he still emphasizes the need for fossil fuels during the "transition period." But when would the transition end?

What about focusing more on conservation and energy efficiency? Promoting transit more than new roads? Building cars that will get more miles per gallon?

At the very least, Deepwater Horizon should get a dialogue going on these issues. Sphere: Related Content

Pilate the Politician: A Political Meditation for the Season

The Story of Pilate provides an opportunity to reflect on power and politics in Jesus’ time and in our own lives.

Rome is the occupying authority of Jerusalem, Pilate, the Roman governor. He is indeed the top politician in Jerusalem.

The high priests and elders, politicians in their own religious bailiwick, have held their court, and they bring the defendant Jesus to Pilate who as civil authority has the power to mete out punishment.

Pilate is not a rubber stamp for the priests – Instead, he uses his position to question Jesus:

“Are you the king of the Jews?”

Jesus responds simply “you have said so.”

The priests and elders make their accusations against Jesus, but Jesus remains silent. He does not defend himself,

What kind of man is this? What kind of power does he have?

Pilate questions Jesus a second time: You hear how many things they say against you; what do you say?

But Jesus gives no answer.

Pilate, the gospel tells us, knows that the priests are envious of Jesus. The priests – and Pilate - understand the power that comes with their positions. But Jesus has a different kind of power, the power that emanates from his very person.

In the face of Jesus’ silence and lack of defense, Pilate, we are told, “Wondered greatly.”

Jesus’ refusal to play the power games makes Pilate pause and listen.

Pilate is perceptive: He understands power and he understands politics; he understands the priests’ and elders’ motives: they want to get rid of this troublemaker who threatens their authority.

Pilate is also traditional: he adheres to the Passover custom of releasing a prisoner to the Jews. So he asks the crowd –

Who do you want released -- Barabbas or Jesus who is called Christ?

Then a remarkable interlude occurs: As the people talk, Pilate is interrupted by a message sent by his wife.

She has had a dream that has disturbed her, and she warns her husband against harming Jesus, whom she calls “this righteous man.”

Pilate allied himself with a woman who pays attention to her dreams, to her intuitions. The message to Pilate can also be seen as a message from Pilate’s own intuition about Christ’s innocence. At the very least, the message reinforces Pilate’s reluctance to harm Jesus.

Pilate thinks, he perceives the motives of others, and he intuits what is going on.

And yet . . . and yet . . . he ultimately will give in to the mob.

Returning to the crowd, Pilate continues:

Which of the two do you want me to release?

And the crowd, which has been instructed by their leaders, the priests and elders,

This crowd says “Release Barabbas.”

Pilate still struggles with his own instincts as he asks again the fatal question:

Then what shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ.

The mob shouts: Let him be crucified.

Yet Pilate is still not ready to give in: “Why, what evil has he done?” he questions.

Let him be crucified.

The polls are in – the crowd wants death for Jesus. Despite Pilate’s wonder at Jesus’ person, his understanding of the envy of the priests and the manipulation of the crowd, despite his intuition that Jesus has done nothing wrong, Pilate gives in.

Just like that.

The gospel says “He saw that he was gaining nothing, but rather than a riot was beginning.

Even though Pilot may be afraid he has other options. He has an army at his disposal. He could use military power to quell the riot. But he does not.

Instead, he takes water and washes his hands.

He says to the crowd “I am innocent of this man’s blood.”

Pilate thinks he is absolving himself by doing the crowd’s will.
He knows the score but he is unwilling to stand up to the crowd OR take responsibility for what he does.

The priests and the crowd need Pilate to do their will, and Pilate thinks he needs them.

Finally, there is a chilling conclusion to the story of Pilate. Not only does he give in to the crowd but once he has agreed to have Jesus crucified, he must go the whole way: scourging Jesus before delivering him to be crucified, torturing him: Jesus is beaten, probably whipped with belts and metal balls as was the practice prior to crucifixion. Jesus suffers torture so violent that muscles and sinew are torn and the flesh is bleeding, and he is losing consciousness even before he attempts to carry the cross to Golgotha.

The Bible does not tell us, but Pilate has probably left the scene: he has washed his hands; he does not want to see the consequences of his decision.

This is a story about power – the power of God that Jesus has demonstrated throughout his short life to heal and teach and love, the power that does not need to boast or defend itself against its enemies, even in the face of death.

And it is the story of the other faces of power – the priests and elders’ envy of Jesus’ power. And the power of Pilate, the politician, who had a choice to use his power for good or for evil.

But the Church and the State are not the only forms of power.

Like Pilate, we too have been given many forms of human power. As Americans we enjoy a degree of prosperity and well being beyond most of our fellow creatures on this planet. As people of faith, we know what is right and wrong. We exercise a great deal of personal and collective power.

The question remains: how do we use our power – within our families, our relationships, within our places of worship, the workplace, our schools and other organizations? How do we use our power as citizens of our community, the nation and the world?

Do we like Pilate give in to the easier way and wash our hands of the pain we see, the pain we inflict.?

How do we use our human ability to perceive, to think, and to feel? Do we seek to follow Christ’s example to heal, to love, to serve others?

May we learn from Pilate to strive toward using our power in the service of God, the Christ of our better nature and to pray for forgiveness when we, like Pilate, fail. Sphere: Related Content