Wisconsin Workers’ Woes: Fiscally Sound or Unions Aground?

By: Shailee Diwanji

In 1959, Wisconsin was the first state to pass a comprehensive collective bargaining law for public employees and was the birthplace of the national union representing all non-federal public employees. In a dramatic shift, today, Wisconsin's Assembly passed a bill attempting to curb union rights. Protests, both for and against the bill, have been underway across the country for weeks. But the fight is far from over. Wisconsin's Senate is now in the hot seat, as it gears up to tackle this bill. And with the fourteen "missing" Democratic state senators (they can be found in Illinois in an effort to prevent a quorum from voting on the issue), this could prove to be a real challenge.

The bill creates an interesting dichotomy. It purports to reign in fiscal spending and end the budgetary woes (or at least begin to), but many are concerned that it may foreshadow the demise of unions. The bill terminates collective bargaining for most public employees and requires employees to contribute heavily to their pensions and health care. On the other hand, the bill bars unions from forcing employees to pay dues and does not terminate collective bargaining rights for local police, firefighters, and state troopers. Most significantly, the bill has the potential to save up to $300 million over the next two years.

Although the battle appears to be largely political and based on fiscal policy, it implicates the centuries old battle between the rich and the poor. Unions, according to its ardent advocates, allow the American middle class to bargain for increased wages and benefits, better job security, and guaranteed retirement benefits. These may seem like meager demands when pitted against the inflated bonuses doled out on Wall Street. Without a doubt, the passage of this bill could deteriorate the quality of education and other public services in the state. But budgetary problems are looming large. The result of continued fiscal irresponsibility could be unquestionably devastating. One Ohio state senator pointed to Camden, New Jersey saying, "It's an example of where the union refused to renegotiate, and now that city is suffering a 45 percent reduction in the size of its police force because management had no choice."

This bill has elicited passionate responses on both sides of the issue. As neighboring states move to adopt similar legislation, the people are left with a difficult question. Is this sound fiscal policy, or simply a strategy to widen the rift between the economic classes?

-- Shailee Diwanji

   TMA Staff Writer

Terminating the Parental Rights of Undocumented Immigrants

By: Shailee Diwanji

The recent media coverage of the illegal termination of undocumented immigrant Encarnacion Bail Romero's parental rights has, once again, brought the issue of the parental rights of undocumented immigrants to the forefront. While, under law, an individual's immigration status is unrelated to his or her parental rights, we are increasingly witnessing the tenuous connection that does, in fact, exist between the two.  Bail Romero's case exemplifies the numerous injustices and flagrant violations of due process that undocumented immigrant parents may be subjected to.

Bail Romero was picked up by INS in a 2007 raid at the factory at which she was working. She was imprisoned for using a stolen Social Security Number and deportation proceedings were initiated against her. Meanwhile, Ms. Romero’s then six-month-old son, Carlitos, was cared for first by Ms. Romero’s brother, then by her sister, and then by a clergy couple who offered to help. The clergy couple sought to adopt the boy, but when Ms. Romero refused and asked that her son be placed in foster care, the couple introduced the boy to the Mosers. Carlitos, now renamed Carlos, was placed under guardianship of the Mosers, who first petitioned for temporary custody, and a year later, filed for adoption. Since Ms. Romero, who was still in prison, had not sought to visit her son in over a year, a judge approved the adoption. Ms. Romero, who spoke no English, was left with no way to plead her side. Last month, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that the State had terminated Ms. Romero's parental rights without a fair trial in violation of its own laws, which require a trial in such cases. The court, however, refused to return the child to Ms. Romero, and instead ordered a new trial.

Professor Marcia Zug at the University of South Carolina, School of Law, has researched several such cases and says that this chain of events is far more common than we may think. In fact, children are separated from their undocumented parents by state welfare agencies even before their parents' immigration status is called into question. The reason for such separation is usually "abuse and neglect." "Abuse and neglect," however, can range from violence to the inability to speak English or simply the undocumented status of the parent. The latter cases are usually dismissed on appeal; but in the case of an undocumented immigrant, the opportunity to appeal may only occur after he or she is deported and left without an opportunity to do so.

- Shailee Diwanji

   TMA Staff Writer

From ‘Victim’ to ‘Accuser’: A Misguided Attempt at Courtroom Neutrality?

By: Shailee Diwanji

Last November, Georgia State Rep. Bobby Franklin introduced a bill to re-label "victims" of rape, stalking, and domestic violence cases, "accusers." The bill seeks to "amend Titles 16 and 17 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to criminal law and criminal procedure, respectively, so as to change the term 'victim' to the term 'accuser' in the context of a number of statutes making reference to the circumstances where there has not yet been a criminal conviction."

The bill seems to have been met with little support from both sides of the aisle. Most agree that this bill could create an additional barrier to reporting the already underreported crime of rape. Worse, the bill disproportionately affects women, who form the majority of victims of rape and sexual assault. Besides creating a disincentive for victims to come forward, the bill leaves a glaringly obvious question unanswered - Are victims of these unreported crimes not victims at all, but simply accusers? Even when these crimes are reported, convictions are generally difficult to get and this bill just makes it more difficult to get a conviction because it insinuates, perhaps unintentionally, that the crime was fabricated.

Many want to know why these crimes were specifically targeted for reformation. As Carolyn Fiddler, the communications director for the Democratic Legislative Committee, pointed out, "Burglary victims are still victims. Assault victims are still victims. Fraud victims are still victims." There is, however, some merit to the notion of neutralizing the language used in the courtroom to encourage jurors to focus on the facts of the case rather than the emotions that necessarily accompany it. But even the proponents of language neutrality in courtrooms admit that "accuser" sounds rather hostile. Instead, they recommend "complainant," a term currently used in Pennsylvania.

The outcome of this Georgia bill remains to be seen. The Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee has organized a petition urging Republicans to denounce this bill. It can be found at: http://www.change.org/petitions/rape-victims-are-not-accusers.

- Shailee Diwanji

   TMA Staff Writer

Reconceptualizing Race Across Campus: Multiracial Youth’s Engagement in Identity Projects

By: Zannie Carlson


In my Critical Race Theory course, we have been discussing a contingent of critical race theorists who asserted that race should no longer be considered a relevant means of self-identification. These theorists’ rationale is that the social construct of race has been used to oppress and divide, and by rejecting these dangerous categories, individuals of color will be better able to create unity based on personality or humanity rather than skin tone.

However, increasing numbers of multiracial youth have been engaging in a different kind of racial project where they assert and embrace both parents’ lineages in efforts to celebrate their multiracial identities. The student organizations offer support for mixed-race individuals, who are more common in American society now more than ever before. Likewise, more individuals are filling “other” as their racial identity on the census so that they do not choose one parent’s racial background over another’s.

 Shifting demographics and attitudes hardly makes us post-racial, however. Part of the reason for establishing these organizations originates from students’ interest in creating a safe space to express their experiences to address a defining characteristic that strangers and friends tip-toe around, misrepresent, or misunderstand. America’s racial hierarchy is not broken, but rather accommodated for multiracial individuals.

What is most moving about these student organizations, however, is the fact that they are encouraging dialogue. Through dialogue, the students promote cross-racial understanding.  These connections may have a more profound effect on attitudes on multiculturalism than the diversity itself.

- Zannie Carlson
   TMA Staff Writer

Caught between Honoring History and Celebrating Slavery

By: Zannie Carlson


2011 marks the 150-year anniversary of the Civil War, and the South is gearing up to honor history and heritage in various celebrations that glorify the antebellum South. There will even be a ‘“secession ball” in the former slave port of Charleston.”  Amid public controversy, Virginia retracted its proposal for an April Confederate History month, which honored Confederate soldiers’ sacrifices, but failed to mention slavery. Being a Yankee myself, I have never fully understood the Southern pride that seems to stem from secession and the establishment of the Confederacy itself, but I wonder if history, culture, and upbringing comingle in our not taking advantage of an opportunity to engage in dialogue and deepen understandings of American history.


Southern and Northern identity construction further divided as the North supplanted an agrarian lifestyle with industrialization. A Northern interpretation of the postbellum South would assert that following the Civil War, Southerners sought to reestablish the antebellum status quo and reject Northern Reconstructionist policy by engaging in racial terrorism, while Southerners highlight resistance as part of their heritage. The destruction of social structures and institutions essential to white Southerners’ way of life were no longer viable options resulted in chaos in the South. The lack of alternative means to sustenance was so prevalent that many ex-slaves went back to their masters to work as farmhands.


I figure a lot of this is common knowledge to many of us, but my intent in highlighting the two interpretations of the Southern experience is that there is still a social barrier in which the South still has an interest in sanitizing history in defense of the North’s knee-jerk exclamations of racism. I don’t think it’s the celebrations themselves that are necessarily racist, but if they are promoted without the understanding of the social and racial context in which the South operated at the time, Southern states would be doing more than a disservice in miseducating the public and misrepresenting history. I think that necessary in the celebration of the anniversary is a healthy acknowledgment of how both the North and South depended on slave labor to drive the economy. As one historian noted, 'Now we find some attention also in the North.... We can mourn without the allegation that all Southerners are rednecks who want to defend slavery. How many soldiers had slaves?'  Forwarding more complicated understandings of both regions’ roles in the institution both discourages the blame game and promotes a richer understanding of the relationship between Blacks and whites in America today.

One article argued that America may be closer than ever before in repairing psychological war wounds between the two regions, as it noted Georgia’s remarkable reinterpretation of the Civil War since the centennial, from a defense of a Northern invasion to a defense of the institution of slavery. As increasing numbers of African Americans take prominent positions of power in American society, it will be interesting to see how public perceptions of the Civil War and attitudes between the North and South will further evolve over time. 


- Zannie Carlson
   TMA Staff Writer