 |
|||||||||
 |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
May
22, 2006
VOL.
44, NO. 10Oakland,
CA
COMMENTARY
•A return to Juba: Solidarity in building a new Sudan
• Guidelines for sorting through another statewide election
A return to Juba: Solidarity in building a new Sudan
I recently
traveled to east Africa, where I helped to open the new Catholic Relief
Services office in Juba, the capital of southern Sudan. Normally, I wouldn’t
describe a ribbon cutting as momentous. But this event was imbued with
deep and powerful symbolism.
Southern Sudan is emerging from two decades of civil war and a fragile
peace holds. With the agreement that was signed in January 2005, refugees
are beginning to return and the southern Sudanese have begun the rebuilding
of their homeland.
Opening the Juba office is a tangible sign that CRS, and the U.S. Catholic
community, stand in solidarity and commitment with the people of southern
Sudan as they strive to live in peaceful prosperity.
In Darfur, too, there is a chance for peace with the recent accord to
end the conflict between the government of Sudan and the largest rebel
group.
These opportunities for peace fill us with hope. But history teaches us
we must maintain a sense of realism.
Thirty-four years ago, the first CRS representative in Juba wrote in his
first report:
“Peace is here to stay. This seems to be the attitude of the Sudanese
people during the past three months. After the signing of the Addis Ababa
Agreement many Southerners took the attitude of wait and see. Let someone
else be the one to move back and test the sincerity of those in authority.
When they prove that they mean what they say, then we will return to Sudan.
Almost a year has passed since the Addis Agreement signing and I think
people are now convinced that peace is lasting.”
It was a time of immense optimism and great hope. And in hindsight, it
may be characterized as a time of naive dreams. Peace was better than
war, but as we know the absence of violence in the face of indignity and
injustice, marginalization, abuse and trampled rights cannot be sustained
anywhere in the world. The aspirations of oppressed peoples always rise.
War came again. Misery, dislocation, fear, death, courage, valiant acts
were all part of the legacy of the people of southern Sudan.
The optimism that characterized the people around the CRS office in 1972
was real, if not lasting. By 1976, we felt that it was no longer necessary
to sustain a presence in Juba and that our office in Khartoum was adequate
to represent the programs and solidarity of the U.S. Catholic Church with
the people in Sudan. We were wrong.
In 1983 circumstances were such that we had to close our office and programs
in the North and shut our office in Khartoum. We returned to the south
in the late 1980s, but regrettably not to Juba.
Opening the CRS office in Juba signals a reaffirmation of our commitment
to the people of southern Sudan. We will help those who wish to return
and to be part of the vision for the new Sudan. We will help the Catholic
Church as it reaches out in concern for its people. We will help where
we can to support the building of structures to guide a vision of a better
tomorrow.
Sudan is important to Africa, to the United States and to the world. Nine
countries touch its borders. When the aspirations of the Sudanese people
are not satisfied, it impacts many outside of Sudan. And as Americans,
we have grasped the cause of those who are struggling to survive there.
The American people haven’t been this engaged in the plight of an
African country since the struggle against apartheid in South Africa.
Our government has committed millions both to short-term humanitarian
needs and also to build structures and capacities that will guide a future
stability and security. While there may be many motivations for this support,
one can clearly see that no other country in Africa, and few other countries
in the world, have received the level of support and sustained attention
that the U.S. government has given to Sudan, particularly to Darfur and
southern Sudan.
We may have closed our office in Juba in 1976, but we never ended our
commitment to its people. We aided them throughout the 1980s and 1990s,
and we assisted them throughout the south. The generations that fought
for human dignity and justice here in southern Sudan have left a legacy
to the young. The U.S. Catholic community will be with them as they live
out this legacy.
Guidelines for sorting through another statewide election
The political parties are holding conventions. Buttons sprout on lapels.
Ads claim to uncover the “truth” about issues. Elected officials
announce new projects. And the junk mail really grows.
It other words, it is an election year.
As a political science major, I enjoy debating issues and I take voting
seriously. But by November we will have had eight statewide elections
in four years. Even I’m a little fatigued.
We are “blessed” this year with a June primary – which
many people will ignore – and a November general election, where
many will complain about the lousy choices they have, lament the lesser
of two evils and say it’s time for a change.
And, then there are initiatives.
In California, with enough money, you can get just about anything on the
ballot. With a little more – well, actually a few million dollars,
which is more than the average voter has – you even have a good
chance of getting it passed.
We have a very over-used and abused initiative process in this state.
What is otherwise an excellent tool is often usurped by the very “special
interest” we love to hate.
With the advent of the internet, it is now possible to get even more information
and misinformation on issues than ever before.
How do you sort it all out? Everyone has a spin.
I’ve never been one to follow one party or another, and don’t
know if I’ve ever voted a straight party ticket, so that simple
route to making decisions is out.
Have you ever sat down to read the entire ballot handbook from the Secretary
of State? I skim it, but found I have to do a lot of work to validate
the claims. Whatever the proponents say, the opponents say the opposite.
It’s not much help.
As voters, our responsibility is to gather information, slog our way through
the hype, and make an informed decision on candidates and issues.
As Catholics, we have additional responsibilities – laid out succinctly
in “Faithful Citizenship,” a guide to political responsibility
developed by the U.S. bishops.
The document has solid guidelines to help us weigh our decisions. Does
the issue support the life and dignity of the human person? Does it promote
family? Does it support the poor and vulnerable, the right of workers,
and protection of God’s creation?
In June – in additional to federal, state and local candidates –
two issues will be on the ballot: Proposition 81, bonds for libraries,
and Proposition 82, preschool for all. Neither issue is as plain or simple
as it looks.
Both represent good goals – reading and education. Bonds are a good
way to finance long-term activities – like libraries and affordable
housing – not so good for other needs.
The preschool issue is a great example that even simple ideas require
careful analysis.
Prop. 82 provides little preference to the poorest children and may give
no assistance to private and religious schools. Each side presents persuasive
points to reinforce or refute each of these claims.
Proponents say that dollars invested in education provide long-term benefits.
Opponents say that the new $2.4 billion state-run program created by the
initiative will increase pre-school enrollment but only by four or five
percent. That’s a lot of money for a small improvement.
Decisions will depend on how you feel about a new state program, mandated
spending, private and public schools, educational opportunities for the
poor, and a host of other issues.
I’ll often look at the supporters and opponents of a measure. Are
they people I know and trust? Do they have an axe to grind? Are they hiding
behind a confusing name?
And the ultimate question: who benefits financially?
Following the money can be frustrating, even if you consult the California
Secretary of State’s website of political donors. If you cannot
find out who is paying for a campaign that is an immediate red flag.
Being an informed voter takes some work, but not as much as you might
think. My prescription for staying sane during an election year:
• Watch only recorded television until November so you can zip through
both political commercials and the usual kind – neither is reliable.
(Better yet: since “West Wing” has been cancelled, unplug
the TV.)
• Throw all the political mailers in the recycle bin and never,
ever, bring them into the house.
• Collect buttons as memorabilia to sell on e-bay in 20 years when
we can all say, remember the good old days.
• Scrutinize claims with as much diligence as they deserve. Extraordinary
claims require extraordinary proof. Silly claims deserve none.
• Follow the money, wherever it leads.
• Read, listen, discuss and watch reasonable analysis – not
shouting pundits. This eliminates vast reaches of the television and radio
spectrum.
• Use a compass, Geiger counter, lie detector, or anything else
handy to determine the spin in every statement. The less spin, the better.
• Finally, above all, pray to the Holy Spirit for guidance. That’s
always good advice in any endeavor.
