Yuletide Greetings To All

"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires."

By reenee, Santa Maria

Why do so many people get so riled up when someone says, "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas"? Coming from the "live and let live" school of thought, this entire debate escapes me. There are far too many different religions out there all celebrating their view of the holiday season, to expect that everyone should say "Merry Christmas."

There's also Happy Winter Solstice, Happy Kwanzaa and Happy Hanukkah, just to name a few, all happening about this time of year. Then there's the Jehovah's Witnesses who do not celebrate Christmas at all because they do not participate in "pagan celebrations," because they say that Jesus was not born on December 25. What shall we say to them? Are they not Christians too?

So, is Christmas based on Pagan origins? Some say yes. The exact dating of Christmas has been a subject of great debate and disagreement, although tradition and custom has it affixed now to December 25th. This date has little to do with actual Christian history and much to do with attempts by Christians to appeal to potential pagan converts by appropriating their own festivals of Saturnalia and Brumalia. Indeed, the earliest calendars to even list December 25 as Christmas do not appear until 336 C.E. Pope Julius formally selected December 25 as the day of Christmas in 349 C.E.

There is no hint in the Gospels about the time of the year when Jesus is supposed to have been born--except that it couldn't have been midwinter, because in that part of the world this is the rainy season and shepherds would not be out at night. This means that early Christianity found itself in the odd position of trying to tell everyone about what they claimed was the most tremendous birth ever without being able to say when it happened.

How about the entire Christmas/Holiday tree issue? Originally, trees were decorated by Pagans, but they never cut them down and dragged them inside, that would have been too destructive for them. The 16th century Germans began the custom of bringing them into the house. They brought this custom to the United States about 1700. In 1850 the idea of the Christmas tree became popular with the general public.

There has been much controversy throughout the ages about most of the holidays recognized as religious. Religious Tolerance is not just a motto. It is something that should be practiced by everyone, due to the diversity in this country. People that bully others, be they individuals or large retail stores to say "Merry Christmas" do not know very much about tolerance or history.

People in the U.S. and Canada are going to need religious understanding and tolerance in the future, because these are the currently most religiously diverse countries in the world--and we are becoming increasingly diverse. If current trends continue, Protestants will become a minority by 2006, Christians will become a minority in the U.S. about the year 2042, and in Canada about 2023.

I'd like very much to refer people to the December 17th entry on the blog entitled "archy." He very succinctly says, GROW UP YOU INSUFFERABLE CRYBABIES. Well, I must agree. For those of you that will not visit "archy", he goes on to say that there are much more important issues to worry over, than how you are greeted in a store. Hunger, despair, diseases that go unchecked in Third World countries, illiteracy in our own country, just to name a few. The idea that something as innocuous as being greeted with "Happy Holidays" or "Season's Greetings," by someone whose religious beliefs they don't know, is getting people riled up, is truly ludicrous.

While I do not share her belief, I respect that my mother is very devout in her Catholicism. The rest of my family, immediate and extended, exhibit various levels of this belief with a few non-believers for whatever reason. There are some of different faiths, with a sprinkling of Pagan tossed in just for fun. I cannot speak for any of them, with regards to the "Happy Holidays" debate, nor would I want to. I have the utmost respect for other faiths and would never denigrate what they feel or believe. At the same time, I want my own choices to be respected as my own, as I respect theirs as in Ethics of Reciprocity. Isn't this after all, the "Golden Rule" no matter what your faith is?

For another mind boggling eye opener, don't forget the entire Santa Claus connection. His origins are also Pagan. Most religious historians and experts in folklore believe that there is no valid evidence to indicate that St. Nicholas ever existed as a human. In fact, there are quite a few indicators that his life story was simply recycled from those of Pagan gods. Many other ancient Pagan gods and goddesses were similarly Christianized in the early centuries of the Church. The Christian church created a fictional life history for St. Nicholas. He was given the name Hagios Nikolaos (a.k.a. St. Nicholas of Myra).

This season means many different things to many different people, and celebrating and embracing those differences when we find them could enrich us all. So, regardless of your faith or traditions, may peace find each of you at this special time of year.

Happy Holidays! Merry Christmas! Happy Hanukkah! Happy Winter Solstice! Happy Kwaanza! Happy Ramadan! Seasons Greetings!

Common Sense vs Governments

By reenee, Santa Maria

In an interesting twist of priorities, the Santa Maria City Council has nixed a homeowner's request to remove a tree from in front of his house. Root damage? No problem, they'll fix it they say. Let's take a look at how they've fixed it in the past, shall we? This particular sidewalk was patched in 1985 and 1988 as a result of root damage, then it was removed and replaced in 1990. It was patched again in 1997, and again, earlier this year. Now, it's on the list for replacement on the 2006 schedule. I for one would love to know how much this repetition has cost the city, both materials and labor, since it's common knowlege that it takes a crew of no less than six to seven people to do the work.

He needs to widen his driveway? No problem they say, expand towards the neighbor's property. Branches fall off of the tree? No problem, we'll clean them up, they say. You don't like the tree? No problem, when you get old like us, you'll appreciate it. How condescending and pompous is that? This is a young couple wanting only to make improvements to their property, they aren't stupid, and they aren't unappreciative. Instead of cooperation, they got arguments and reminiscences of tree climbing.

I'm willing to bet that this couple would have been happy to replace this tree with another, perhaps even two trees that would not be so damaging to their property or the city sidewalks. I wonder how many of these city council members objected to the removal of all of the trees that were ripped out by their roots right behind city hall over on McClelland Street. Oh wait! Perhaps they weren't "heritage trees." Besides, the library needed expansion, and I'm sure that those trees are sitting on ice somewhere ready to be replanted. Yeah, that must be it.

Considering that the Recreation and Parks Department earmarks more than $300,000 for trees, you'd think that all the trees all over the city would look better. However, a drive around town will tell you that some trees are not as well maintained as others, and neither are the sidewalks. I wonder why.

I happen to know from personal experience that if a tree or bush is on a corner, and a police officer driving by says that it obscures the view of oncoming traffic to drivers trying to cross the street, that tree or bush will be removed, no matter how long it's been there. Yes, it happened to me. However, as I digress, when large vans or industrial sized pickup trucks are parked more than 18 inches from the curb, obliterating the view of traffic for the hapless souls backing out of a driveway, or on a corner, obliterating the view of traffic for the hapless souls trying to drive across a street, nothing is done. Why is that? I was seriously thinking about painting the curb red, just west of my driveway, you think anyone would notice?

"It is a thousand times better to have common sense without education than to have education without common sense."

Next big problem for me when I'm not busy minding my own business is the way in which Arellanes Junior High School dealt with Hector Maldonado. I can understand calling the law if someone has a weapon, but a "scuffle"? There were originally four boys, ages 12 to 14, involved in two fights, but only two were taken to Juvenile Hall. Arellanos Principal, Carl Sousa says, "Santa Maria-Bonita School District rules mandate that law enforcement be notified whenever there is a conflict between two students." Apparently some administrators do not know the meaning of discretion. Cops being used as the last resort, or as a teaching tool is why a five year old Florida girl was handcuffed last April.

Officials of the local school district, county sheriff and federal immigration services say they are only following procedure that applies to every juvenile who is arrested and then determined to be in the country illegally. How about if the school tries to contact the parents about the student's behavior before calling the cops? How about if the cops try to find out if the parents are here legally before calling immigration? How about if immigration contacts the parents to try to further determine as to their resident status? The Public Information Officer at SMBSD, Maggie White says, “The school district and the school didn't do anything to create this situation, if anyone did this, it was the students involved.” But, Ms White, if common sense had kicked in at any one of several levels, would this 13 year old child have been driven all over the state in chains? This reminds me of the story of the men who were chasing a chicken they wanted to eat. When the chicken ran into a barn to hide, they blew up the barn to kill it.

Perhaps the people that are in positions that allow them to gloss over the real problems, or like to pass the buck, ought to imagine being the parents of a 13 year old that has been taken away. Then, they need to imagine what we'd all be paying for our fruits and veggies and wines if the undocumented workers, or illegal aliens, as the whiners like to call them, weren't here.

"Theories and goals of education don't matter a whit if you don't consider your students to be human beings."

By reenee, Santa Maria.

Ah yes, in yet another example of how to remain firmly cemented in denial, here comes a story out of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, about a high school newspaper that was confiscated by school administrators due to the content. The student newspaper, The Oak Leaf, dared to include an article on birth control, along with information on how to obtain contraceptives from doctors and the local health department. Additionally, it had a photo of an unidentified student's tattoo. The student had not told her parents about the tattoo, which begs the question, "How did she get a tattoo?" Aren't most reputable tattoo artists required to demand parental permission for anyone under 18? Of course they are. More on this later.

All of this takes us to the brutal reality that, "some kids will find a way to do what they want, despite parental objections."

Superintendent Tom Bailey in defending his actions said, "The article needed to be edited so it would be acceptable for the entire school." He went on to say, "We have a responsibility to the public to do the right thing, We've got 14-year-olds that read the newspaper."

Call me crazy, but wouldn't it be better to have a 14 year old educated on how to prevent pregnancy? What would be worse here, a 14 year old finding out about how to obtain contraceptives, or a 14 year old getting pregnant? Gee, let me mull this one over.

Is it possible that there are people still living in a world where they think that if as adults, they don't talk outloud about certain things, then the kids won't find out about them and do them? Well, yes, yes there are. This mythical land is called "Denial."

Denial is after all, a refusal to accept or believe something. It's an unconscious defense mechanism characterized by the refusal to acknowledge painful realities, thoughts, or feelings, and as a result, we want to avoid the pain. It's a very powerful force. Who wants to be hurt, angry, or disappointed? Everyone does it at some point in there lives, it can be very comfortable. However, the trick is to not set up housekeeping in the "Land of Denial." If you have to go there, trust me on this one, never unpack your bags, just visit.

It's obvious that this particular lesson in censorship was the result of Superintendent Bailey reacting to his own kind of peer pressure. The kind of pressure that comes from people that are scared of parental reactions. In my humble opinion, the nation's school's might turn out thousands of more well rounded students if instead of dissecting frogs, and looking for the meaning of poems, they concentrated on life's skills, things like reading comprehension, writing skills, managing/budgeting money, sex education, choices in birth control, and how to prevent the rampant spread of sexually transmitted diseases. All students who are not allowed to attend the birth control and sex education classes could be enrolled in parenting skills classes.

You think I'm crazy? Check out this graph. Whatever it is that we're doing right now to educate our teens is clearly not working. Apparently, neither is ignoring their raging hormones.

Parents thinking that their teenagers are going to do what they say all of the time, are of course, living in denial. When some children find that their parents remain closed off from certain subjects that they're curious about, then they will go to their peers, they always have and always will. Some parents fear the term "peer pressure," without acknowledging that it can be positive at times. Not all children will abandon their value system when hanging around with their friends. Strong, accessible parents will never be completely abandoned by their children. At the same time, parents must realize that no matter how great their relationships are, some children will look to their peers for certain acceptance and or answers. Sadly, for some parents it's easier to lay the blame on television, the movies, music, friends they disapprove of, and even at times, each other, when they don't find the time for them. Perhaps more parents should get involved and keep in mind what Coretha Henderson did when her 14 year old began to misbehave. This woman was both villified and praised. What ever opinion you might have about this woman, what is undeniable, is that she did something.

Regarding the aforementioned tattoo, Superintendent Tom Bailey said, "I have a problem with the idea of putting something in the paper that makes us a part of hiding something from the parents."

Well, I'm sorry, but this makes no sense to me whatsoever. As I mentioned before, the student paper had included picture of a tattoo on an unidentified student. If the student allowed it to be photographed, chances are someone already knows, and the student will have to ready herself for the inevitable moment when her parents find out. Considering this country's preoccupation for minding other people's business instead of their own, odds are that the parents already know.

There are so very many more important things in life to focus on rather than a tattoo or parents boohooing. There are so many other things that could be getting the school boards, parents and administrators to sit up and take notice. Confiscating a student newspaper seems so obtuse. Let's face it, kids are having sex. That's a fact. It matters little whether we approve or disapprove. That's not the point. Dealing with it would be better than ignoring it and hoping that it goes away. Not talking about it will not make it go away. Kids that are aware, are already using birth control. The ones that could profit from this information will not. Getting on our high horses and telling teens to "just say no" is not going to work with all of them, so all we need to stop thinking that it will. Isn't it better to give a teenager the facts about prevention before they're pregnant?

Here are some sobering facts regarding pregnancy:

• Despite recent and encouraging declines, the United States still has the highest rates of teen pregnancy and birth among comparable nations.
• Nearly four out of 10 girls still become pregnant at least once before they reach age 20. Nearly 1 million teen pregnancies occur annually, some 55 each hour.
• Four-fifths of teen births are to unmarried teens. In fact, nearly half of all non-marital first births occur to teens.

Why should this matter to us?

• Teen pregnancy is closely linked to a host of critical social issues-welfare dependency and overall child well-being, out-of-wedlock births, responsible fatherhood, and work force development, in particular.
• Teen mothers are less likely to complete high school and more likely to be on welfare.
• Children of teen mothers are at a significantly increased risk of poverty, welfare dependency, poor school performance, growing up without a father, low birth weight and prematurity, and abuse and neglect.

The only real lesson that the administrators gave to the students was, "We're in control, you have no voice."

What Can We Do To Protect Our Children?

By reenee, Santa Maria

Well, it hapened again. Three more teens are dead because the driver lost control of the speeding car they were in. It's only been a week since I wrote about the last horrific waste of lives. Just last December three boys died on Rice Ranch Road. The fourth boy miraculously escaped with minor injuries and a concussion.Then barely three weeks ago, on October 31st, two boys in Lompoc died in an accident that left the third boy in the car with major injuries that have required continued hospitalization. That's eight local teenagers in less than a year. The driver of this latest accident, is 18, and has been arrested for manslaughter and "hit and run" because immediately following the accident he got out of the car and ran away into a nearby field, trying to get away. Obviously he panicked. Panic is usually the first response of quite a few eighteen year olds, so this alone certainly should not condemn him. What the authorities do to him will be minor when compared to what his own psyche will do to him. He had four passengers, two girls and two boys. Three of those passengers died outright, and one of the girls is in critical condition. There's no word yet if he was driving under the influence.

This accident occurred at 8:30 in the morning, but that certainly does not eliminate the possibility of being impaired. It could have been that he was just simply going too fast for the conditions of the road. Isn't that one of the main driving rules? Could it have anything to do with the fact that the car was full of teenagers? Was he showing off? Was it a new car? Had he done this a hundred times before with no ill effects? Considering that three kids are now dead, does it really matter? Motor vehicle accidents remain the leading cause of death in youths from 16 to 20 years of age. What can be done? Stricter laws for teens? More hours of instruction? More emphasis on safety? Graphic films of accidents involving teen drivers? Will that make a difference? How many of us believe that any of the kids in that car on Saturday were thinking of the boys that died Halloween night, or last December? As I had mentioned when I last wrote, there are a few states that already have established laws to deal with teen drivers. However, since the laws are aimed at teens between the ages of sixteen and eighteen, the boy that was driving this past Saturday would not have been affected by those laws.

This is a small town. As a result tragedies like this always affect a lot of people. Therefore we will see another big story in the local newspaper. Our imported local columnist/romance novelist/color commentator will devote a column or two no doubt. We might even see the local city councils get involved with at least some commentary, if not a plaque, or proclamation of some sort. There's even a possibility that the Board of Supervisors will weigh in with their opinions. The television and newspaper reporters will probably interview the Chief of Police, along with some spokesman from the Motor Vehicles Department, perhaps even some teachers, all who will no doubt have have something important to say. Nearly everyone who's anybody or anyone who thinks they are, will have something to say. Like me, for example.

The problem with all of this is that no matter how well intentioned it is, it will not be enough. Words are simply words. Actions are needed. Something really big has to happen. Something significant that will have an impact on these young drivers. Something that will grab their attention and make them sit up and take note. Something really ugly. What happened Saturday is very ugly, but will it affect other young drivers? Will delaying their driving privileges be the answer? The nationwide movement to make Graduated Driver Licensing a law in every state is another possible solution. Is not getting their driver's license until they show a certain level of maturity the answer? While I understand that this might be difficult to measure, given the number of adults that have not yet become full fledged grownups, it is at least a thought worth entertaining.

Anyone who has ever spent time with teenagers knows that they go through a period of time when they cannot be told anything. They know it all. They're smarter than anyone else. They know what they're doing. Add to this, busy parents trying to make ends meet. Consequently, a lot of the teens that need to get the message, will not see it, nor will they hear it, at least not in the sense that it will have a lasting impact. Once the shock of a friend's death wears off, they will re-inhabit their bubble. They are after all, invincible. Weren't we all? Between the ages 14 to 16 they are trying to establish their independence while still very aware of their dependence. At times their attitudes suck and they seem impervious to any signs of parental control. They've not gone crazy, they're just teenagers being insufferable, which, if memory serves, is normal behavior for this age group. Reading James Windell's explanation should remind us all of how and why we were like this. The average teen will not realize that they didn't know it all until they get older, if they survive their driving. In order to get through to them, a message has to be dressed up in whatever appeals to them and the group they hang out with. High school kids are already dealing with so many pressures from every direction, that they will not respond to pussy footing around a subject. Something needs to grab their attention in a very big way. Teens live for driving privileges, so once again, will threatening this "rite of passage" be the answer?

Parents, teachers, school administrators, police, health care workers, and anyone else who wants to address this continuing problem in a positive manner, need significant input from the teenagers they are trying to reach. All of them. I don't mean just the National Honor Society students, or the "Stepford Children," I mean all of the students. Some adults need to get in touch with how they used to be at this age, and understand that these kids are not "Children of the Damned" or, "Children of the Corn". All kids can bring something positive to the discussion. Today's teens are very smart and much more sophisticated that we were. We might not like the attitudes they display, we might not like the language that they choose to express their opinions in, we might even detest how they dress, but all of these things are not at all significant in the scheme of things. We need to keep in mind what the real issue is: trying to keep kids educated enough so that they will remain safe behind the wheel, and alive long enough to finish growing up.

So how about beginning driver's education much earlier? It just might be that waiting for the high school years is already too late to begin the brainwashing. The sooner this education begins the better. Perhaps with more awareness, these children can grow into adulthood. This latest accident has robbed one local family of two sons. They join the sad circle of other families that have been equally devasted by this life altering tragedy. Eight dead teenagers in less than a year in our small area is totally unacceptable in a civilized society.

"It Is The Mark Of An Educated Mind To Entertain A Thought Without Accepting It."

By Reenee, Santa Maria

Well, I must say, the break I took was well worth it. For creativity to flow unfettered when you need it, you must go some place...any place, to clear out all of the unnecessary stuff that clogs your already overworked and occasionally misfiring synapses. While trying to get in touch with my alpha waves I discovered that I have none; however, in my quest, I ran across an excellent book, that everyone should read. The title of the book says it all, but I do recommend reading it anyway. Living Successfully With Screwed Up People, by Elizabeth Brown. It won't change your life, nor will it solve all of your problems, but you might get a better insight into why people do what they do. More importantly, you might at least begin to understand why you do what you do. Give it a whirl, or not.

What compelled me to take my much needed break were two stories recently in the local news. One was my irritation at the coverage that the newspapers were giving to Santa Maria Judge, Diana Hall. Yes, she's a judge, and yes, some of us will hold her to a higher standard than perhaps we would a drug pusher, but we must also keep in mind that people make mistakes.

Some mistakes are bigger than others. Some people only make the headlines because of their position in the community. Each and every time that her current woes are reported on, there has to be a mention of the fact that it all began with a domestic disturbance. Actually, were it anyone else, the story would move on.

However, since it involved her "former live-in partner Deidra Dykeman" this must be mentioned as well. Is this as important as the subsequent events? Or is it there for titillation? I'll answer that, it's the latter. We're never given a chance to forget something about her personal life that really and truly is none of our business! What is it with the preoccupation of her lifestyle? How in the world is that going to affect anyone's life? I suggest moving on.

In any case, the formal proceeding Diana Hall faces is rare. According to today's story, the Commission on Judicial Performance received complaints on about 848 of the state's 1,610 judges in 2004. Interestingly enough, Diana Hall's case is the first to result in a hearing this year. Imagine that. Others that have followed this story have taken a decidedly different view, and implied that Judge Hall cannot get a fair trial in Santa Maria. That might be true, and considering the Michael Jackson fiasco, anything is possible. Hmm, perhaps if someone wanted to write a book...now there's a thought.

The other story was the heartbreaking waste of two young lives in Lompoc, in a horrific accident on October 31st. High school boys. One was 16, the other was 17, and the third, also aged 17 is still in very serious condition.

Only last December, Santa Maria lost three teenaged boys. In that accident, the dead were two 17 year olds and one 14 year old. A fourth, aged 16, survived. Why does this happen so often? Could it be that most teenagers believe that they're invincible? I know that they think they're smarter than everyone else, this is what makes them so insufferable for a while, at least I know I was. But indestructible?

Does this temporary "superiority complex" extend to their belief that nothing can ever happen to them? I never once thought this, but then I had a mother that had convinced me that she'd simply "take me out" if I got too big for my britches. I'd like to think that these deaths will in some way have a impact on how all other young drivers behave when behind the wheel of a car. Perhaps in the days that immediately follow a such tragedy of this magnitude, these kids do think about how short life can be. However, after the shock wears off, they'll be back to the "it won't happen to me, I'm too smart" mode.

You don't believe me? Drive around town before and after school hours. Or better yet, pay attention to who's driving beside you during the summer or weekends. I've been noticing that these young drivers also, many more times than I can count, seem to have a cell phone stuck in their ear. Will banning hand held cell phones help? Well, no, it won't. Wearing a headset won't eliminate the distraction, all it will do is get them to maybe put both hands on the steering wheel.

How about the ever present "need for speed"? There are several streets in Santa Maria that double as "speedways." It has been noted that "teenagers' perceptions of their own skills and those of the drivers around them contribute to their risky behavior. Drivers who believe they are highly skilled are less likely to properly evaluate a risky situation. Young drivers in particular are much more likely to overestimate their skills."

Whatever the cause of these accidents is, it's clear that something must be done. At present, 27 states have restrictions on teen drivers. Some would be viewed as harsher than others, by both parents and teens.

For example, in New Jersey, drivers under 18 years old can have no more than one passenger; teen passengers are not allowed in a car operated by a teen driver, and the curfew for teen drivers is midnight.

California has passed laws that will go into effect January 1, 2006 that many teens and parents will be grumbling about. Before they groan, grumble and write letters to the editors, they might want to go spend the day with the parents that lost their teenagers. This should prove more educational than anything else.

America: A Secular Or Christian Nation?

By Reenee of Santa Maria.

In the increasingly bitter battle over separation of church and state, and what the Founding Fathers had in mind, we now have two sides pitted against each other in a Harrisburg, Pennsylvania courtroom.

A trial is taking place as we speak...er...blog, to determine who is right and who is wrong in the ongoing battle between Intelligent Design and Evolution. Yep, it's another battle over what can be taught in school.

Why does everything always have to come down to "I’m right, and you’re wrong?" Why can't we simply embrace our differences and celebrate them as we all dance around a Maypole? No? OK, sorry, I went to LalaLand for a moment.

Heathens vs God?

The eight outraged families that are suing the Dover Area School District in Harrisburg, maintain that the district policy in effect promotes the Christian's Bible view of creation, violating the constitutional separation of church and state. The rural school district of about 3,500 students argues it is not endorsing any religious view and is merely giving ninth-grade biology classes a glimpse of "differences" over evolution.

Well now, if they were really seriously offering a "well rounded" glimpse, wouldn't the school district also be teaching students about the Koran, or the Torah, or the Sacred Texts of Wicca and Neo-Paganism? What about the Vedas of Hinduism? Or, perhaps the Four Noble Truths of Buddhism? I could keep going, but why?

What A World It Would Be

I think we all know what would happen. People that never go to church, except to show off their "Easter Duds" would be arm in arm with those that think going to church is all they have to do to not only keep their ticket to Heaven valid, but to absolve their own weekly "misdeeds." People that truly believe and follow their own belief system's Golden Rule, will not be telling you that you're wrong.

Then there's the fear factor. Anything different than what we're used to or at least somewhat familiar with, is frightening to most people. Fear can overwhelm, paralyze, or cause odd and bizarre behavior.

Speaking of oddities, why you might ask, is this argument raging again? Well, despite what so many people believe about the founding of our nation, this country was founded as a secular republic by the Founding Fathers. Over the years, several factions have added to the original document and ideals.

Start At The Start

Let's look at the original motto. It was, "E Pluribus Unum," which means "one from many." However, 72 years later, in 1861, eleven Protestant denominations began their campaign to add references to God to everything they could think of. They finally got to the Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase and in 1863 he asked the Director of the U.S Mint to prepare "some suitable wording" to be used on some coins.

Ultimately, "In God We Trust" was chosen. My previous contribution here covered what the 1950's Congress did to the Pledge of Allegiance 165 years after the constitution was adopted, along with other references to God. For those of you interested, "In God We Trust" did not appear on currency until 1957.

Many Reasons Immigrants Came To America

People originally arrived on these shores looking for treasures or to claim more land for their governments. Others came for the fishing, trapping and trading opportunities. Still others, fleeing religious persecution all over Europe often ended up on this side of the Atlantic as well.

Certainly there were many reasons for arriving in America besides freedom from, or of, religion. From the first recorded sighting in 1000 to the 1791 finalization of the Constitution, many people of many different religions and cultures arrived, much to the consternation of some of the Native Americans. After the Revolutionary war ended in 1784, Congress got busy and by September of 1787, the final draft of the new Constitution was approved.

In 1789 Congress submitted 12 proposed constitutional amendments to the states for ratification. The first ten were be ratified and added to the Constitution in 1791 as the Bill of Rights.

Framers Specifically Wanted Separation

In the first Amendment, the Constitution clearly established that there was to be a separation of church and state. Since then some people have argued that because the words, "separation of church and state" do not appear in the constitution, it does not exist.

How about the phrases, "right to privacy" or "right to a fair trial"? They aren't in there either, so using that same argument, they also don't exist. I guess some people will cherry pick what they need in order to make their cases. The words that do exist are, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." Apparently "no law" was not, nor has it proven to be, clear enough.

Others argue that the Constitution refers to Christianity and Jesus due to the fact that authors and signers of the Constitution relied upon a dating system which marks as its beginning the birth of the founder of Christianity. OK, how about the names of the months and days that have Pagan rather than Christian origins? This entire argument falls flat in the face of that contradiction. Even though some now argue that the Constitution somehow reflects fundamental Christian morals and principles, the Quakers were fit to be tied about how the authors of the Constitution showed "general disregard of" and "cold indifference towards religion."

Document Unlike Others At The Time

The Constitution is, in fact, unusually secular for the time when it was written. That this was very obvious to the people at the time can be seen in the fact that so many Christian preachers stood up and attacked it specifically because it lacked any overt protection or promotion of Christianity.

Arguments will continue to go on and on about what the Founding Fathers meant or implied or believed. From the people who say that widespread belief in God may contribute to the dysfunctions of a society, all the way to the other side where the Christian Right hang out with their assorted agendas. Extremism can be found on both sides of the argument.

None of this will be answered easily or to everyone's satisfaction. As long as we have people in high profile positions who do not really know the history of the Constitution and what the Founding Fathers meant, we will have people like Alberto Gonzales and George W. making statements based on their own misinterpretations. This will ultimately lead to further confusion.

Lenin once said, "A lie told often enough becomes the truth," and Franklin D. Roosevelt said, "Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth." Confusing isn't it? So, agree or disagree, just go get your popcorn, because it's going to be an interesting battle.

The Next Big Fight

By guest bloggette, Reenee of Santa Maria.
Check her blog: hastalosgatosquierenzapatos

Get ready folks! The next big fight looming on the horizon will be the constitutionality of the Pledge of Allegiance. It has all the earmarks of yet another fight which will bring out the hubris of those in Congress who still reside in the 50s, among others.

The opposition will have "Those Godless Creatures!" who will stop at nothing to destroy the "American Family." You know, the Liberals. Forget poverty, the disenfranchised, unemployment, women's personal rights, child abuse or the more important issues like "hand to mouth" survival.

It'll be the debate about the pledge that will pit the talking heads against each other. I can see it now: Faith! God! Country!

Facts For Your Consideration

Here are facts and links. You decide, and then if you want, be like Mark Twain who said, "Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please."

The Pledge of Allegiance was written in 1892, by Francis Bellamy, a Baptist minister and a Socialist. It was first published in the children's magazine, Youth's Companion in 1892 to celebrate the 400th anniversary of Columbus' arrival. He initially wanted to add the word "equality," but since women and blacks were not yet equal, he didn't. Some might argue that they still aren't.

The original pledge was:
"I pledge allegiance to my flag and to the Republic, for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

First Change To The Pledge

In 1924, the American Legion and the Daughters of the American Revolution, at the National Flag Conference, changed the words "my flag" to "the flag of the United States," much to Bellamy's dismay. When he protested, he was ignored; after all, he was only the author. The following year they added the words, "of America."

For the next thirty years, the pledge was recited as:
"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic, for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

During the 1950's the nation was suffering the drizzles as a result of the cold war and the McCarthy communist witch hunts. In 1953 the Knights of Columbus, mounted a campaign to add the words, "under God." As a knee jerk reaction to the fear of "Godless" Communists, Congress added them to the otherwise secular pledge, and in 1954 it became official. (In the 1950's the federal government's mottos changed as well.)

Second Change To The Pledge

The pledge now was both a patriotic oath and a public prayer. When Eisenhower signed it into law he said, "From this day forward, the millions of our schoolchildren will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and rural schoolhouse, the dedication of our nation and our people to the Almighty." Bellamy's granddaughter said he would have resented this second change as well.

Now the pledge was:
"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic, for which it stands; one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

This country was founded as a secular republic. The U.S. Constitution was first drafted in 1787 in Philadelphia by the Constitutional Convention of the new American republic and was officially adopted in 1789. The first amendment is very clear. It begins with, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." How can that be misconstrued?

America's Founding Misconstrued?

The pledge didn't show up until 103 years later and was quite innocuous, yet some people believe this nation was "founded under God." These are educated people too. But then, look at how George Bush Sr. responded to this question from a reporter for the American Atheist news journal, while campaigning for the presidency in 1987:

Q: "Surely you recognize the equal citizenship and patriotism of Americans who are Atheists?"
A: "No, I don't know that Atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God."

Yep, that's what I like to see in any candidate, compassion, tolerance, a good grasp of the history of this country and the understanding of separation of church and state.

What Does Religious Tolerance Mean To You?

To me, religious tolerance means extending religious freedom to people of all religions, even though you sincerely disagree with their beliefs and practices. Religious freedom means that you can believe, worship and witness as you wish; and join with others to express your beliefs.

Was this ignored in the 50s? Yes, due in part out of fear of Communism. As for today, I've not seen too much tolerance in the country lately. It's "my way or the highway" for certain factions, which gives weight to what Friedrich Nietzsche said, "The Christian resolution to find the world ugly and bad has made the world ugly and bad."

The Constitutional Issue Is Not Settled

Since the courts are not filled up enough with polarizing cases, we're going to see a rerun of the Pledge of Allegiance Debate. The same attorney that filed a lawsuit back in 2002 to prevent his child from reciting it is at it again. If you recall, the Supremes weaseled out of having to rule on the issue by saying that this man "had no standing" since he did not have custody of his daughter.

OK, fine. Now he's filed on behalf of three other kids and their parents. Tenacious little guy, ain't he? Prepare for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to weigh in as well. After all, his comment was, "The high court affirmed time and again that such official acknowledgments of our nation's religious heritage, foundation and character are constitutional."

Oh yeah, don't tell me I’ll burn in Hell; I don't believe in it. --Reenee

It Ain't Over Till It's Over

As I was reading the newspaper last week, I came to a screeching halt when I choked on my coffee over the story about the "Reluctant Aquitter." It seems that Jackson juror, Ray Hultman and his wife, are suing to get out of the "after-the-verdict-book-deal." Am I guessing correctly that the missus is also a plaintiff due to the community property rules in this state?

Anyway, this juror is claiming that they were misled by the publisher's representatives and that their "simplicity, naiveté, overly trusting natures, lack of sophistication and inexperience" was the reason they were duped. Excuse me, but aren't those the very attributes that the attorneys want in a juror? Well, OK, defense attorneys anyway.

Immediately after the verdict, both jurors and alternates, 19 in all, gave a press conference where they were all waxing nostalgic about "life long friendships, how close they got, how they'd stay in touch, etc, etc." At this press conference Mr. Hultman said that he and two others didn't initially share the opinion that Jackson was innocent, but the majority eventually convinced the three that the evidence wasn't strong enough to convict. Everyone was slap happy and fancy free.

Then by the time August rolled around, Mr. Hultman gave another interview, this time with with fellow juror Eleanor Cook, where they both whined about being pressured to acquit. This of course came hand in hand with their announcement to write books about the trial, most especially about being bullied. They said in the interview that they believed that Jackson was guilty, but were "railroaded into acquitting him." Mr. Hultman then went on to say that he felt that the other panelists were not educated enough, so he went along with them knowing he'd never be able to convince them that Jackson was guilty. Ouch. Think Roy is off their Christmas card lists?

Interestingly enough, while researching for this article I found a news story dated June 07, 2005 that Mrs. Cook's granddaughter had been talking to the Associated Press about how her grandmother, talked about wanting to write a book about her jury duty experience, back in February when she was first chosen. She also mentioned the possibility of being on 60 Minutes and the Oprah Winfrey Show. Huh?

There was no way to tell how it would play out as this trial progressed. The Santa Maria Times columnist/romance novelist, Steve Corbett was always writing about jurors behaving badly, or jurors talking to other people about the case during the trial or some other colorful issue, while the "Hang 'Em High" anchors on Court TV were discussing detailed plans on how they were going to draw and quarter Jackson. once he was convicted. The only thing that ever changed was the number of helicopters hovering.

According to Robert Frost, " A jury is a group of 12 people, who, having lied to the judge about their health, hearing, and business engagements, have failed to fool him." Since the extremely organized no-nonsense Rodney Melville presided over the Michael Jackson jury selection, I'd say that's probably a fair statement, since they were chosen so quickly. Judge Melville is an excellent jurist. He's definitely raised the bar, whereas countless others like Lance Ito have done everything they could to lower it, and in some instances, bury it, while becoming a joke. I often wonder why we've been so very lucky to have him in Santa Maria, but i'll be quiet about it so as not to jinx it.

However, once the trial was came to an end, I found that H.L. Mencken's quote, "A jury consists of twelve persons chosen to decide who has the better lawyer" was much more appropriate. Since I might be one of the three people in all of Santa Maria that stayed away from the court house, I never saw Thomas Mesereau in action, but after seeing him and his flowing silver locks coming and going on Court TV, I'm going to stick my neck out here and say that he out maneuvered Thomas Sneddon, since his team won.

Andy Warhol said that in the future everyone will be famous for fifteen minutes. My guess is that Mrs. Cook and Mr. Hultman want more time and money to boot. This puts a whole new spin on "doing your civic duty." --reenee

How Long Did You Wait In Santa Maria Today?

By guest bloggette, Reenee of Santa Maria.
Check her blog: hastalosgatosquierenzapatos

Back in the day when doctors were considered Gods, people were required to endure interminable hours in waiting rooms, sitting next to someone who was coughing, hacking and sharing their virus-ridden breath with everyone within a 20 foot range. But enough about yesterday.

(Photo: Virginia Commonwealth University)

There are some little known alternatives to this ugly scenario. There are success stories everywhere about some doctors' offices telling a patient to come in the same day that they call.

No, this is not a cruel joke, it’s really happening out there. Apparently this is happening in different parts of the country, much to the delight of both the doctors and the patients.

What Does A Long Line Of Patients Signify?

For these patients, gone are the days when being booked for months in advance meant "the doctors must be good." There are several ways doctors' offices can achieve what is being referred to as "Advanced Access". Simply put, this means that if somebody wants an appointment, you offer them an appointment today, and not just because they're on death's door.

According to those that have done this, it's not that difficult to implement. It's time consuming and frustrating at its inception, therefore doctors resist it. Among others, the main reason for this resistance is that a completely booked schedule, at times months in advance, translates into guaranteed income. This works as long as the patient remembers he even had an appointment that day.

Then of course, since most doctor's offices are abuzz with more people behind the window than in the waiting room, they're happy with this method as well. However, when the patients that have already waited for what can seem like months when they're sick, have to wait hours cooling their heels in the waiting rooms, not to mention sucking in microbes of every variety, it's not a good thing.

Looking For Advanced Access In Santa Maria

Advanced Access was originally put into practice in managed care environments, but these innovators worked with organizations throughout the United States, Canada and Europe testing and refining their principles. They discovered that same day appointments work equally as well, if not better, in "fee-for-service environments."

In an effort to discover if Advanced Access was being practiced here in Santa Maria, I called several doctor's offices at random. The answer I got most often, after the laughter stopped was, "Our practice is so full that new patients can often wait as much as six to eight weeks to be seen." Followed by, "We keep a few slots open for emergencies in between our follow-up patients" and "if the person only has a wart to remove, then they can wait."

I know that in some if not all doctor's offices, you are a new patient if you have not seen him/her in at least a year. You'd better hope that during that six to eight week wait, whatever it was that made you call to see that particular doctor, doesn't fall off. If you're the patient that has the wart, you'd better hope it doesn't get bigger, develop a life of its own and talk to you.

Anyway, as I continued my research trying to find a doctor in Santa Maria that practiced "same day care," I was told, among other things that I was "nuts," "dreaming," "not thinking clearly," "out of my mind," "had clearly never worked for a doctor," and "didn't understand the need to generate surgeries."

My personal all-time favorite was that I "was so far out there that I needed ropes and a compass to get back to reality."

OK, I'll admit, I'm pretty much "off center." I would put more thought into the other accusations, but right now I'm on my way to find a compass and some ropes as I've not been near reality for quite some time now. --Reenee

Do STAR Tests Tell Us Who Teaches Well?

by guest blogger, Dr. Andrew Millar, Clinical Psychologist, Santa Maria. See more archived published articles, PsychologyCenter Blog

As a newspaper columnist on psychology, I focus on questions that might be of interest to Central Coast readers. Some of my articles take significant research and consideration before they are ready for publication. Other articles don't seem as though they will work for the column. I plan to use this forum to work out ideas, get feedback for additional points of view and find out what issues might be of most interest to people locally. Please write: Dr. Andrew Millar at gmail.com

Today I'm working on an idea about the problems with applying the results of school-based standardized testing to make decisions about schools and the careers of educators.

These are achievement tests, assessing what students know. I know of no research that supports the use of these test results for political and administrative decisions.

The STAR Test Defined

After a few years of controversy and changes, the current version of this testing program in California is STAR, for Standardized Testing And Reporting. The news has reported how teachers throughout the country are motivated to teach about how to take tests well, which sacrifices time and energy they might otherwise use to teach academic subjects. Some have even cheated by giving students test answers and correcting answer sheets before the tests are submitted for scoring.

There are incentives for good outcomes, including bonus money. There are consequences for low-level outcomes, including probation status for schools and possible job termination for teachers and principals.

Psychologists are well-trained in developing, using and interpreting standardized testing. I believe that testing can provide useful information. I have no quarrel with a well-designed test.

Can A Test Measure A Teacher's Ability?

The problem is that the tests are not necessarily good indicators of teacher ability and school adequacy. They measure student knowledge, but student knowledge is influenced by more than just teacher and school performance. Some students know more about some subjects because of things they have learned at home.

The most prominent example are the results of tests of ability in language. I can do well in English tests, largely because I learned English from my family. I would fail any test of Spanish, French, Hmong or any other language.

What the standardized tests showed in past years is that some parts of the county have a higher proportion of native English speakers in the schools.

We don't need the expense of statewide testing to find that out.

What We Really Need To Do

We also don't need to sanction teachers for teaching at schools where the students don't have the extracurricular advantages that will give them an edge on tests.

I know that we can use tests to tell how individual students and groups of students compare on abilities. We can use the results to guide decisions about academic abilities and needs for improvement. We can decide where to place community resources so that students have the best chance for success.

It is up to the school system to prove that rewarding and punishing teachers and schools for students' test performance will benefit society. It would be best that they conduct the necessary experiments on small samples of students and teachers before they make the entire academic population the subjects of a state- and nation-wide experiment, because they might be wrong.

Their being wrong will cost us all time, money, opportunities and possibly the expertise of good educators who might stop teaching after being punished for something over which they have no real control.

Subdivisions, Narrow Streets and Race Tracks

by Reenee,
from Santa Maria, who holds forth on her blog:
hastalosgatosquierenzapatos

Has anyone else noticed how subdivisions in Santa Maria have changed over the years? Surely I am not the only one who has noticed that the streets are getting narrower?

According to my mother who also happens to be my chief historian, the first subdivision built in Santa Maria is the area north of West Alvin Street and west of North Broadway, in the early 50's. There is always the possibility that she might be incorrect, but way back when I was a tiny little blogger, I learned to never question her memory.

However, we do have home movies to prove that just past the 500 block of West McElhenny Street there were acres and acres of agricultural fields, as far as the eye could see. So she might be right.

Also on one of these antique 8mm rolls of film, George Hobbs can be seen waving to the camera as he delivers mail long before he went on to fame and fortune as Mayor of the town that had the "Mexican problem." (As provocative as that little nugget is that led to a lawsuit, it's a different rant for another day.)

Back To Narrow Streets

Some of these older subdivisions have streets almost as wide as the ones that border the block I live on. The two streets that intersect on my corner have four lanes each. The one street that runs east and west has no stop signs for seven long blocks, before it curves to the north turning into Railroad Street.

There are no sudden dips or pesky bumps anywhere to obstruct the many race car drivers that frequent the area. There are a few other streets this wide found in other older parts of town, but they have stop signs. You'll recognize these sections of town easily, it's where the houses don't look like they all came from the same mold.

Wide Streets, More Cars

Having wider streets is a very good thing since there always seems to be a thousand cars parked along every inch of curb no matter where you go. Also, the older areas have alleys down the middle of the block, these alleys are curiously all in the East/West direction. Once I find out the reason for this I’ll report it here.

Getting back to the subdivisions, they have blocks that have no alleys. Why is that by the way? Subdivisions that have been built most recently have the narrowest streets in town, lanes really. Also, some of the streets dead-end without rhyme or reason and you have to try to find your way around hoping you're going in the right direction to avoid driving around in circles.

Mice scurrying around in a maze comes to mind here. Considering the ever increasing cost of these homes, I can guess why the builders want narrow streets with no alleys. Yes, you got it, more houses! Consequently, these houses are so very close together that in some areas, people could share breakfast and the morning newspaper by merely leaning out of their windows.

New Neighborhoods, Small Streets

The biggest problem with these narrower streets is that they can barely accommodate two cars going in the opposite direction, so you imagine what happens when cars line every inch of the curbs. Yes, it turns into a stand off, both drivers squinting at each other to see who's going to go first.

You can almost hear the theme from "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" as each driver wonders who will blink first. Sometimes it's a game of chicken to see who can beat who and save ten seconds. It's pretty much the same game at stop signs.

The next time I renew my driver's license I'm going to have to read the manual thoroughly this time so I can find the section that says, "Two vehicles at a time can proceed after coming to a stop, instead of just the first vehicle." It's probably in the same section that states, "A driver can roll through a stop sign if the oncoming traffic is moving too slow for them, or if there is no traffic."

I’ll need to highlight it and keep it in my car to show the traffic officer that stops me the next time I roll through an intersection simply because I didn't see any cars, or him. I'm certain I’ll also find the section that says, "Any city street that has two lanes going in each direction for several blocks can be used as a racetrack at any hour of the day, rain or shine. We recommend Fesler Street for this activity." As I sit here typing, I can hear racing going on. (But, I digress.)

I know that the influx of cars in Santa Maria is due to many reasons, not least of which is that every single human being over the age of sixteen simply has to have a car. I know that when I was sixteen I had to have one. I didn't get one of course, but I still felt I had to have one.

Why So Many Cars?

One of the lesser acknowledged reasons, is that several houses around town have several families living in them. All of these families come with several cars and when their owners run out of room in their driveways and lawns, they park in the streets. They always seem to save the spots on the corners for either the large vans or huge pickups, so that the drivers of standard sized cars have to inch out into the middle of the street at the intersections to see if the coast is clear before proceeding.

Hint: If a car is bearing down on you at that point, the coast was not clear. My Aunt found this out...twice. Another favored spot for these huge vehicles is next to driveways. Due to the fact that my driveway empties into a four lane street (race track), it can take me up to five minutes or more to back my car out since there is always a huge pickup parked next to my driveway that blocks my view.

The upside to this is that it's good exercise. I back up my car a few feet, then I put it in "park" jump out, run into the street to see if anyone is coming, then jump back into my car and back out a little bit more. I repeat this process until I'm out of my driveway. This gets ugly in a rainstorm due to the umbrella action.

I once asked the neighbor that drives this huge pickup if he could park it in his driveway instead to prevent this obstruction, but he told me that he prefers to park in the street. He went on to tell me that backing out of the driveway was too time consuming for him. As I was enjoying this knee slapper, he told me that if I'm so concerned I should get a "taller car."

Had he not then bid me adieu and firmly closed the door, I’d have explained the "good neighbor policy" of our All-American City.

Good 'Ol Networking Requirements

(Note: this is part two of a two part contribution from Santa Maria blogger "Reenee" in an occasional series of items from North Santa Barbara County residents.)

by Reenee,
from Santa Maria, who holds forth on her blog:
hastalosgatosquierenzapatos

This brings me to the reputed "good ol' boy network". Now that was a good segue, if I do say so myself. Ah yes, what a deal! Getting appointed to a city council seat will lead to being appointed Mayor. Why campaign?

When our previously elected Mayor ran for and won a seat as a County Supervisor, he declined the invitation to step down as mayor, thereby ensuring that the next mayor would be appointed.

Conspiracy Theories In Santa Maria?

Now, if I were a rabid conspiracy buff I’d imagine all sorts of little coffee klatches going on behind the scenes. Heated little discussions and debates, surreptitious little meetings, busy little footsteps running back and forth ignoring the loud outcry several residents demanding to have the choice of electing a mayor.

The majority of the residents were busy trying to make a living blissfully unaware of the goings on, which is something that the movers and shakers count on by the way. Palace intrigue can be highly entertaining, as long as it's not directed at you.

The GOB Networks Are Everywhere

In any event, there are "good ol' boy networks" everywhere in this town. If someone doesn't play by the established "rules" or looks a certain way, or behaves a certain way or knows someone who knows someone else, it will never matter how good they are at their job. The ax will fall, heads will roll and people's names will be sullied.

Yes, politics! It starts in the playgrounds with finger pointing and whispering, and it never really goes away.

I will end my rants with these words attributed to the 19^th century English publisher, Ernest Benn: "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies."

(email contributions are welcome; send to the address at the top of the next column.)

Where Did The Name "Mission County" Come From?

(Note: this is part one of a two part contribution from Santa Maria blogger "Reenee" in an occasional series of items from North Santa Barbara County residents.)

by Reenee,
from Santa Maria, who holds forth on her blog: hastalosgatosquierenzapatos

Because I get so very cranky about things that I see happening in this town, I decided to share on this blog. I have been described by some family and friends as a very liberal conservative. Others simply call me a wacko and dismiss my rants as they walk away from me with their hair standing on end.

My response to these accusations and compliments is a hearty thank you! You noticed! As my mother once told me, "If they are talking about you, you're important to them."

Now I’d like to opine on a couple of subjects. First, I want to expound on the county split.

The County Split: Who Benefits?

No, let me back up a bit further. Whose idea was it to come up with the name "Mission County?" Was there a vote? When? Where? Did I not get the memo? The name of the proposed new county is almost as dumb as the idea. Whose brain-child was this?

I seem to remember some grumblings over the county supervisors a while back, but is that still a valid complaint? After all, there are new faces on the board. Are "we" still not represented fairly in the north part of the county? Does it mean that "we" are still not getting our way?

I think that I'd probably be all for the split if I was one of those developers or construction companies who will make out like fat rats at the landfill when the need for new county buildings arise. However, being a lowly taxpayer, I'm simply not looking forward to more taxes to make up for the astronomical debt we'd start out with.

Are the county split proponents aware of who is using most of the county services that are paid with funds that are generated chiefly by the south county? I’ll tell them. Santa Maria is!

Santa Maria Home Sales Booming

Are they paying attention to who is buying all the houses around here? A news story in the Santa Barbara News Press in June of 2004 told us that "nearly 1,000 homes had been built in the past year in Santa Maria, and another 2,400 are under review--more new housing than anywhere else in the county."

The article continues, "but they are primarily market-rate homes selling for at least $400,000; and middle-class couples of all ethnicities who work in Santa Barbara or San Luis Obispo are snapping them up." And, "according to the city, fully two-thirds of the local work force earns less than $18,000 per year."

Let's look at the industries in this valley. The major employers in the Santa Maria area include agriculture and Vandenberg Air Force Base. Given this data, I doubt that the two-thirds mentioned above are buying any of those houses. There was a story not too long ago about the high number of people that live here and work in the Santa Barbara area, I cannot remember the exact percentage, but it was ugly.

The Future of Santa Maria

This all reminds me of what one of our appointed city council members said, "We don't want Santa Maria to become a bedroom community." OK, let me get my "Duh" stick. Hello! This had been happening for years before this profound statement and is obviously still happening. I'm not sure acute awareness is a prerequisite to be elected to the city council.

Oh wait! This council member was appointed!

(part two from Renee appears here on Sunday.)