Monday, February 26, 2007
That's Why I Don't Have Facebook Anymore
Interesting article today in the Daily Trojan sheds light on truth for many students who are addicted to Facebook. I found Facebook to be distracting. That's one of the main reasons why I don't have Facebook anymore. I kind of miss it sometimes, but then I forget about it. There are more important things I must focus on in my life.
Hollywood Helping the Homeless
Not far from the glitz and glammer of Hollywood are hundreds of hungry homeless people on Skid Row in Downtown Los Angeles. Today, they were able to enjoy some of the cuisine that the celebrities had eaten yesterday at the Oscar's. It's so great to see good food not go to waste. Sunday, February 25, 2007
"High Maintenance Bitch" - What’s in a Word?
Local residents in Seattle are outraged by a controversial sign with the words “High Maintenance Bitch”. However, some people are not bothered by the words and feel that the slogan is catchy. Nevertheless, there are some parents who do not want their children to be subject to such profound language at an early age. This may be upsetting for some individuals in the community, but they will have to deal with the title. That’s the beauty of the First Amendment – one’s liberty to express unwanted material.
Monday, February 19, 2007
Police Misconduct
The Los Angeles Times sadly reports a Los Angeles Police Officer that is accused of raping a 17 year old girl. Jeffrey Sandwell, 37, was a family aquaintanc to the victimized girl and represents another case of police officers that partake in misconduct. An insightful essay I read a week ago shed light on police misconduct and abuse of powers. There has to be more stringent penalities for police officers who violate laws that they are supposed to be enforcing.
Monday, February 12, 2007
Abolish the Electoral College
Of all the possibilities that I present in “Different Alternatives to Reforming the Electoral College”, the elimination of the Electoral College is the one that I would like to see prevail. Abolishment of the Electoral College would provide the most democratic solution to ensuring that the loser of the popular vote does not have an opportunity to win the presidency as we have seen in the 2000 presidential election.
Prior to the controversial election of 2000, there have been different occasions in our nation’s history where the Electoral College has failed. For example, in 1796 John Adams was a candidate for the presidency and his opponent was Thomas Jefferson. Adams running mate was Thomas Pickney, but Jefferson received more votes than Pickney. Thus, Jefferson became Adams Vice – President because at that time the person with the second highest votes automatically became Vice-President. Also, in the following election of 1800, there was a tie between Thomas Jefferson and his vice – presidential running mate Aaron Burr. As a result, the 12th Amendment declared electors to specify their vote for president and vice president. However, problems still persist with Faithless Electors either casting a blank ballot, or casting a ballot for a different presidential candidate that they vowed to vote for. Thus, direct election of the president would rectify the issues that are inherent in the current Electoral College.
Prior to the controversial election of 2000, there have been different occasions in our nation’s history where the Electoral College has failed. For example, in 1796 John Adams was a candidate for the presidency and his opponent was Thomas Jefferson. Adams running mate was Thomas Pickney, but Jefferson received more votes than Pickney. Thus, Jefferson became Adams Vice – President because at that time the person with the second highest votes automatically became Vice-President. Also, in the following election of 1800, there was a tie between Thomas Jefferson and his vice – presidential running mate Aaron Burr. As a result, the 12th Amendment declared electors to specify their vote for president and vice president. However, problems still persist with Faithless Electors either casting a blank ballot, or casting a ballot for a different presidential candidate that they vowed to vote for. Thus, direct election of the president would rectify the issues that are inherent in the current Electoral College.
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
Different Alternatives to Reforming the Electoral College System
In our current governmental system democracy does not rule, the people do not rule, but electors of the fifty different states do because the states’ electors are the determining factor behind who will be the next president of the United States. By creating the Electoral College, James Madison, commonly known as the father of the constitution, instituted a paradoxical system that has discrepancies when voter’s cast their vote for the president of the United States. For example, a president can win the presidency, but lose the overall majority popular vote. However, Jean Jacques Rousseau, political philosopher, says that “each man, in giving his vote, states his opinion on that point; and the general will is found by counting votes” (Jacob 200). Unfortunately, the framers of the constitution originally did not comply with Rousseau’s notion of direct election by the people because of a fringe disagreement between the states. The framers “intention was to devise a compromise that would satisfy a number of different constituencies needed to ratify the Constitution, primarily the small states and the slave states” (Pfiffner 65). As a result, the paradox behind the current electoral system causes controversy in our country and poses a question of the legitimacy of our nations’ democratic values. Thus, the Electoral College should be reformed because having a president that wins the electoral vote, but loses the popular vote disregards the voice of the people.
Presidential candidates tend to focus their campaigning on states that have the most electors in order to get the most electoral votes. Most states use a winner-take-all system, in which the candidate with the most votes in that state receives all of the state's electoral votes. As a result, candidates tend to focus more of their time on larger states without a clear favorite. “With direct popular election all votes would count for candidates, and they would be less likely to write off many states merely because they could not win the plurality in that state” (Pfiffner 65). Others feel that the Electoral College turns presidential elections into massive efforts by presidential candidates to win the votes of a small number of voters in a few key states, rather than the support of the American people as a whole. “Most candidates do not run a fifty state strategy. Instead, because many states tend to vote consistently over time, they focus on the fifteen to twenty states that swing back and forth between the two major parties” (West 18). This exemplifies the flawed system of the Electoral College to leave out certain states because candidates will not waste their time and money on a state that they know will not vote for them.
Some say that we should just dispose of the whole Electoral College system; however, because it is mandated by the constitution, it is unlikely ratification that would take place, essentially negating that alternative. The Seventeenth Amendment in 1913 provided for direct election of senators and proponents of abolishing the Electoral College feel that we need a constitutional amendment where the people directly elect the president. Since the framing of the constitution slavery has been abolished, women have been given the right to vote and all citizens eighteen and over are permitted to take part in the election process. These three reasons were some of the initial factors behind the framers of the constitution initially instituting the Electoral College; however, this system is now paradoxical and unnecessary. Doris Haddock, a political activist, once said, today “Democracy is not something we have, but something we do” (Mahe and Covert 133). Nevertheless, we do not have a complete democracy because the president is still elected indirectly by the people and “indirect democracy” is not “more closely into line with the original ideal of rule by the people” (Arblaster 79). This exemplifies the dire need for a reformation of the current Electoral College system because of the many controversies the system has caused.
Then there is the issue with the “Faithless Elector” where a voter thinks that they are voting for a particular president but the “Faithless Elector” votes for another presidential candidate. A “faithless elector” is an elector that decides to vote another way than he/she is designated to vote, or simply casts a blank ballot. The Electoral College can be misleading to citizens because most “citizens who go to the polls to vote for president think that they are voting for the president rather than a slate of electors” (Pfiffner 62). For example, most states do not list the names of potential electors on a ballot, but rather the names of the candidates they have promised to vote for. This exemplifies the common falsification that can take place when citizens go to the polls and cast their ballot for a particular elector that could end up being a “faithless elector”. As a result, the voters’ vote is overruled by an elector who will not comply with the rules of his/her state or the wishes of the people. The most recent “faithless elector” was from Washington D.C. in the 2000 presidential election.
A solution to prohibiting a “faithless elector” would be to institute the “automatic plan”. The “candidate who won the plurality of popular votes in the state” would automatically get all of the electoral votes (Pfiffner 64). “Opponents of the automatic plan argue that it perpetuates many of the perceived inequities inherent in the present Electoral College system of electing the President and the Vice President” (Dahl 396). This exemplifies an alternative to the current Electoral College, but does not fully reform the selection of the president in securing a victory for the winner of the popular vote.
Opponents to the proposed reformation of the Electoral College claim that we are a republic and not a democracy. They say, “The governmental system was designed by the Framers to be a republic” and we should not reform the Electoral College system because it is a system that has been in use for over two hundred years (Pfiffner 60). Nevertheless, supporters for reform of the Electoral College system feel that “The president and vice president are the only national officials who represent the people as a whole and that the choice of the people is best approximated by the candidate who wins the most votes” (Pfiffner 61). America has practiced many democratic principles, but has yet to institute a constitutional amendment that would prohibit the winner of the popular vote from losing the presidency. Raymond Aron, one of the greatest teachers of political philosophy in the twentieth century, states, “There is government for the people; there is no government by the people” (Arblaster 50). Ensuring that the winner of the popular vote does not lose the presidency will make our system a “government by the people”.
Opponents to direct elections feel that presidential candidates will focus their campaigning practices in major cities. Opponents to reformation of the Electoral College
fail to realize that “swing states” enable candidates to focus on the states that are still indecisive. This parallelism is also an issue that brings out the flawed system of the Electoral College and the need for reformation. In How Democratic Is the American Constitution?, Robert Dahl, political scientist, states “The American Constitution ensures both that many people are poorly represented and that government often is ineffective” (Pomper). As we have seen throughout our nation’s history, many citizens agree with Dahl that people are poorly represented when the runner-up of the popular vote wins the presidency.
Supporters of the Electoral College feel that although the system is outdated and people are more educated, they are still not fully knowledgeable enough to directly elect the president. However, “The rise of television has had a profound impact” on voters because television has given Americans the opportunity to watch the news instead of read it in the paper (Edwards 207). Most Americans do not have time to read the paper everyday and the mass media have provided citizens an opportunity to stay politically informed at a minute’s notice. “Candidates seek to assemble a majority of Electoral College votes by winning targeted states. This Electoral College structure has enormous implications for advertising strategies” (West 18). However, Americans are more informed than they were 200 years ago. As a result, voters are more prepared to directly elect the president and the need for the Electoral College has diminished. According to West, “people ‘know too much’ to be influenced by ads” and are knowledgeable enough to decide which candidate is the best presidential elect (West 18). Most citizens would
agree that the need for the Electoral College is unnecessary and has become perceived upon as undemocratic over the years.
A solution to reforming the Electoral College is the Maine-Nebraska plan. The plan allocates electoral votes based on the plurality in different districts and gives two electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote in the state as a whole (Pfiffner 64). The Electoral College would be more closely geared to the popular vote because of the plurality vote winners in each district, but would still leave the possibility of the runner up becoming president. The Maine -Nebraska plan could be adopted by the states on a volunteer basis and does not require a constitutional amendment. The Main-Nebraska plan is more democratic and a better reform solution to ensuring that the plurality of each presidential candidate is evenly dispersed throughout the state.
Another solution to reformation of the Electoral College is the “national bonus” plan. The “national bonus” plan “would grant a bonus of 102 electoral votes to the candidate who wins the most popular votes” almost eliminating the chances of the winner of the electoral vote becoming president (Pfiffner 65). The national bonus plan creates a more democratic approach to ensuring that the runner up of the popular vote does not become president. Unlike the Main-Nebraska plan, the national bonus plan would require a constitutional amendment, but elimination of the Electoral College would override the need for the “national bonus” plan.
The Electoral College should be reformed because having a presidential candidate win the electoral vote and lose the popular vote causes controversy in our country. The most recent example of such controversy was the presidential election in 2000 between
George W. Bush and Al Gore. “The Supreme Court decisively intervened in the disputed presidential election of 2000, in the famous (or infamous) case of Bush v. Gore. Its decision – a very controversial one – in effect chose the next president of the United States (George W. Bush). In part, the Supreme Court, in this case, was overruling or forestalling actions of the Florida Supreme Court. After all, the state courts are, in their own sphere, political actors too, and often very significant ones” as exemplified with the Bush v. Gore case (Friedman 179). Gore won the popular vote, but lost the electoral vote by one deciding state Florida. Gore had a clear victory within the popular vote, but the Electoral College system shortchanged the presidential candidate from becoming president. Instead, the country had to wait for the presidential outcome and the deciding factor was from an unelected Supreme Court. This strongly exemplifies the urgent need for a constitutional amendment to reform the Electoral College system to guarantee that the majority winner of the popular vote does not lose the presidency.
Ultimately, the Electoral College is illogical and contradictory to our American democratic values. “In order to form a more perfect union” the Electoral College needs to be reformed to suit the American people and prohibit a presidential candidate that wins the popular vote from losing the presidency as we have seen in previous elections (Edwards 705). “The seeming irrationality of conflicts inescapably causes impatience and intolerance among proponents of reforms” (Dahl 91). Hopefully, one day Americans will be able to directly elect the president and abolish the Electoral College system.
Presidential candidates tend to focus their campaigning on states that have the most electors in order to get the most electoral votes. Most states use a winner-take-all system, in which the candidate with the most votes in that state receives all of the state's electoral votes. As a result, candidates tend to focus more of their time on larger states without a clear favorite. “With direct popular election all votes would count for candidates, and they would be less likely to write off many states merely because they could not win the plurality in that state” (Pfiffner 65). Others feel that the Electoral College turns presidential elections into massive efforts by presidential candidates to win the votes of a small number of voters in a few key states, rather than the support of the American people as a whole. “Most candidates do not run a fifty state strategy. Instead, because many states tend to vote consistently over time, they focus on the fifteen to twenty states that swing back and forth between the two major parties” (West 18). This exemplifies the flawed system of the Electoral College to leave out certain states because candidates will not waste their time and money on a state that they know will not vote for them.
Some say that we should just dispose of the whole Electoral College system; however, because it is mandated by the constitution, it is unlikely ratification that would take place, essentially negating that alternative. The Seventeenth Amendment in 1913 provided for direct election of senators and proponents of abolishing the Electoral College feel that we need a constitutional amendment where the people directly elect the president. Since the framing of the constitution slavery has been abolished, women have been given the right to vote and all citizens eighteen and over are permitted to take part in the election process. These three reasons were some of the initial factors behind the framers of the constitution initially instituting the Electoral College; however, this system is now paradoxical and unnecessary. Doris Haddock, a political activist, once said, today “Democracy is not something we have, but something we do” (Mahe and Covert 133). Nevertheless, we do not have a complete democracy because the president is still elected indirectly by the people and “indirect democracy” is not “more closely into line with the original ideal of rule by the people” (Arblaster 79). This exemplifies the dire need for a reformation of the current Electoral College system because of the many controversies the system has caused.
Then there is the issue with the “Faithless Elector” where a voter thinks that they are voting for a particular president but the “Faithless Elector” votes for another presidential candidate. A “faithless elector” is an elector that decides to vote another way than he/she is designated to vote, or simply casts a blank ballot. The Electoral College can be misleading to citizens because most “citizens who go to the polls to vote for president think that they are voting for the president rather than a slate of electors” (Pfiffner 62). For example, most states do not list the names of potential electors on a ballot, but rather the names of the candidates they have promised to vote for. This exemplifies the common falsification that can take place when citizens go to the polls and cast their ballot for a particular elector that could end up being a “faithless elector”. As a result, the voters’ vote is overruled by an elector who will not comply with the rules of his/her state or the wishes of the people. The most recent “faithless elector” was from Washington D.C. in the 2000 presidential election.
A solution to prohibiting a “faithless elector” would be to institute the “automatic plan”. The “candidate who won the plurality of popular votes in the state” would automatically get all of the electoral votes (Pfiffner 64). “Opponents of the automatic plan argue that it perpetuates many of the perceived inequities inherent in the present Electoral College system of electing the President and the Vice President” (Dahl 396). This exemplifies an alternative to the current Electoral College, but does not fully reform the selection of the president in securing a victory for the winner of the popular vote.
Opponents to the proposed reformation of the Electoral College claim that we are a republic and not a democracy. They say, “The governmental system was designed by the Framers to be a republic” and we should not reform the Electoral College system because it is a system that has been in use for over two hundred years (Pfiffner 60). Nevertheless, supporters for reform of the Electoral College system feel that “The president and vice president are the only national officials who represent the people as a whole and that the choice of the people is best approximated by the candidate who wins the most votes” (Pfiffner 61). America has practiced many democratic principles, but has yet to institute a constitutional amendment that would prohibit the winner of the popular vote from losing the presidency. Raymond Aron, one of the greatest teachers of political philosophy in the twentieth century, states, “There is government for the people; there is no government by the people” (Arblaster 50). Ensuring that the winner of the popular vote does not lose the presidency will make our system a “government by the people”.
Opponents to direct elections feel that presidential candidates will focus their campaigning practices in major cities. Opponents to reformation of the Electoral College
fail to realize that “swing states” enable candidates to focus on the states that are still indecisive. This parallelism is also an issue that brings out the flawed system of the Electoral College and the need for reformation. In How Democratic Is the American Constitution?, Robert Dahl, political scientist, states “The American Constitution ensures both that many people are poorly represented and that government often is ineffective” (Pomper). As we have seen throughout our nation’s history, many citizens agree with Dahl that people are poorly represented when the runner-up of the popular vote wins the presidency.
Supporters of the Electoral College feel that although the system is outdated and people are more educated, they are still not fully knowledgeable enough to directly elect the president. However, “The rise of television has had a profound impact” on voters because television has given Americans the opportunity to watch the news instead of read it in the paper (Edwards 207). Most Americans do not have time to read the paper everyday and the mass media have provided citizens an opportunity to stay politically informed at a minute’s notice. “Candidates seek to assemble a majority of Electoral College votes by winning targeted states. This Electoral College structure has enormous implications for advertising strategies” (West 18). However, Americans are more informed than they were 200 years ago. As a result, voters are more prepared to directly elect the president and the need for the Electoral College has diminished. According to West, “people ‘know too much’ to be influenced by ads” and are knowledgeable enough to decide which candidate is the best presidential elect (West 18). Most citizens would
agree that the need for the Electoral College is unnecessary and has become perceived upon as undemocratic over the years.
A solution to reforming the Electoral College is the Maine-Nebraska plan. The plan allocates electoral votes based on the plurality in different districts and gives two electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote in the state as a whole (Pfiffner 64). The Electoral College would be more closely geared to the popular vote because of the plurality vote winners in each district, but would still leave the possibility of the runner up becoming president. The Maine -Nebraska plan could be adopted by the states on a volunteer basis and does not require a constitutional amendment. The Main-Nebraska plan is more democratic and a better reform solution to ensuring that the plurality of each presidential candidate is evenly dispersed throughout the state.
Another solution to reformation of the Electoral College is the “national bonus” plan. The “national bonus” plan “would grant a bonus of 102 electoral votes to the candidate who wins the most popular votes” almost eliminating the chances of the winner of the electoral vote becoming president (Pfiffner 65). The national bonus plan creates a more democratic approach to ensuring that the runner up of the popular vote does not become president. Unlike the Main-Nebraska plan, the national bonus plan would require a constitutional amendment, but elimination of the Electoral College would override the need for the “national bonus” plan.
The Electoral College should be reformed because having a presidential candidate win the electoral vote and lose the popular vote causes controversy in our country. The most recent example of such controversy was the presidential election in 2000 between
George W. Bush and Al Gore. “The Supreme Court decisively intervened in the disputed presidential election of 2000, in the famous (or infamous) case of Bush v. Gore. Its decision – a very controversial one – in effect chose the next president of the United States (George W. Bush). In part, the Supreme Court, in this case, was overruling or forestalling actions of the Florida Supreme Court. After all, the state courts are, in their own sphere, political actors too, and often very significant ones” as exemplified with the Bush v. Gore case (Friedman 179). Gore won the popular vote, but lost the electoral vote by one deciding state Florida. Gore had a clear victory within the popular vote, but the Electoral College system shortchanged the presidential candidate from becoming president. Instead, the country had to wait for the presidential outcome and the deciding factor was from an unelected Supreme Court. This strongly exemplifies the urgent need for a constitutional amendment to reform the Electoral College system to guarantee that the majority winner of the popular vote does not lose the presidency.
Ultimately, the Electoral College is illogical and contradictory to our American democratic values. “In order to form a more perfect union” the Electoral College needs to be reformed to suit the American people and prohibit a presidential candidate that wins the popular vote from losing the presidency as we have seen in previous elections (Edwards 705). “The seeming irrationality of conflicts inescapably causes impatience and intolerance among proponents of reforms” (Dahl 91). Hopefully, one day Americans will be able to directly elect the president and abolish the Electoral College system.
Tuesday, February 6, 2007
Why Do We (Black People) Get The Shortest Month of the Year?
In 1926, Harvard graduate, Dr. Carter G. Woodson, choose the second week of February to celebrate Negro History Week because of the birthday’s of two prominent men that positively influenced the black population – Fredrick Douglass and Abraham Lincoln. Over time, other historical events took place for African-Americans that turned our week celebration into a month long annual tradition that started in 1976.I’ve heard plenty of people say that Black people get the month of February because it is the shortest month of the year. However, listed below are some of the real reasons that Black History Month is celebrated in February:
February 23, 1868: W.E.B. DuBois co-founder of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) is born.
February 3, 1870: 15th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution grant’s Black men the right to vote.
February 25, 1870: Hiram R. Revels (1822 -1901) became the first Black U.S. senator.
February 12, 1909: The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) was formulated by blacks and progressive whites.
February 1, 1960: Monumental civil rights movement begins in Greensboro, North Carolina by college students.
February 21, 1965: Malcolm X was assassinated.
So, next time you hear someone ask, “Why do we celebrate Black History Month in February”, you can enlighten them with the facts and not a false assumption.
Monday, February 5, 2007
"Thank You For Smoking"
State tobacco tax money help fund annual stipends to improve job opportunities for child care workers.
Sour Deal
What’s the big deal about John Edwards receiving less for what he expected to get from his home that he sold in Washington D.C. There should be more important matters being discussed other than the assumed disappointment Edwards experienced.
Sunday, February 4, 2007
The African American Super Bowl Challenge
Tony Dungy of the Indiana Colts and Lovie Smith of the Chicago Bears have made double history by becoming the first African -American coaches to go to the Super Bowl. This is a great contribution to the accomplishments achieved by African-Americans. However, will it ever come to a point in time when color does not matter. Currently, it seems as if whenever a black person makes history by becoming the first to do something the media makes a big deal about the achievement. For example, when Denzel Washington won an Oscar for Training Day and Halle Berry won an Oscar for Monster's Ball the two of them were praised by the media for being the first African-American male and female to earn an Oscar. Nevertheless, whether Tony Dungy wins or Lovie Smith wins, whoever wins they are both champions and broke history together as the double first African -American coaches to make history by going to the Super Bowl. What a way to celebrate Black History Month!
Saturday, February 3, 2007
Thou Shall Not Disobey The Law
National Football League attorney, Rachel L. Margolies successfully sought to shut down congregations from gathering to watch Super Bowl XLI on big screen television sets across the country. According to the "NFL guidelines — and federal law — churches, schools and other public venues can hold football-viewing parties only if they use a single, living-room-size TV, no bigger than 55 inches. When they project the game onto 12-foot screens or set up banks of TVs, they cross the line, according to NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy". However, this stringent search to shut down large amounts of people from viewing the big game on one screen is clearly the work of excellent public relations practitioners to discover different ways to protect and increase the profits of the NFL industry. Nielsen Media Research are currently only able to determine the ratings of a show by using surveys and from household viewership. As a result, the NFL figured they need to fill living rooms to increase their ratings. Thus, strictly enforcing churches to cancel their congregations from viewing the game on one screen.
Thursday, February 1, 2007
The Lady in Red
In honor of Black History Month, I would like to take a moment and give recognition to Mrs. Eliza Cason. “The Lady in Red” is another name that she is commonly known by throughout the city of Anaheim and Orange County because she would always wear a sharp red suit and hat. This remarkable woman was active in the city of Anaheim for over forty years. Mrs. Cason demonstrated years of service to her community by providing scholarships to students, reading to students at local libraries in after school reading programs, and she was a mentor at the boys and girls club just to name a few. Liz Cason is a strong advocate of education and stressed the importance of higher education.
I was blessed to have her as a role model mentor and more importantly godmother because she influenced me to strive in school by being in different groups and organizations. For example, I was freshmen, sophomore, and junior vice-president of the Associated Student Body (A.S.B) and was Senior Class President of Katella High School’s Class of 2003. I was a cheerleader, varsity basketball player, and a member of the Black Student Union (BSU).
Unfortunately, my godmother was diagnosed with Alzheimer disease about seven years ago. As a result, she currently lives in Los Angeles in a care facility, but she still stands strong and smiling whenever I go to see her. She is not aware that there is a group of community members advocating to get a school named after her in Anaheim. This all started when my dad, David Reyes, read an article in the Orange Country register that informed him that the school located on Harbor Boulevard and Ball Road needed a name. This gave him the idea and opportunity to start a campaign to get the school named Elisa “Liz” Cason.
The Anaheim School Board of Education will announce the results February 26, 2007. If our campaign is successful, Mrs. Elisa “Liz” Cason will be the first to have a school named on behalf of an African-American in Anaheim.
I was blessed to have her as a role model mentor and more importantly godmother because she influenced me to strive in school by being in different groups and organizations. For example, I was freshmen, sophomore, and junior vice-president of the Associated Student Body (A.S.B) and was Senior Class President of Katella High School’s Class of 2003. I was a cheerleader, varsity basketball player, and a member of the Black Student Union (BSU).
Unfortunately, my godmother was diagnosed with Alzheimer disease about seven years ago. As a result, she currently lives in Los Angeles in a care facility, but she still stands strong and smiling whenever I go to see her. She is not aware that there is a group of community members advocating to get a school named after her in Anaheim. This all started when my dad, David Reyes, read an article in the Orange Country register that informed him that the school located on Harbor Boulevard and Ball Road needed a name. This gave him the idea and opportunity to start a campaign to get the school named Elisa “Liz” Cason.
The Anaheim School Board of Education will announce the results February 26, 2007. If our campaign is successful, Mrs. Elisa “Liz” Cason will be the first to have a school named on behalf of an African-American in Anaheim.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
