80,000 Missed Opportunities

Texas has missed the opportunity to offer health care coverage to 80,000 of the state’s uninsured children. Even though health insurance for children was a priority in this year’s session, the Legislature failed to act on a proposal to expand the Children’s Health Insurance Program.

Twenty-two percent of Texas children lack health insurance, amounting to a total 1.5 million uninsured youth. At the national level 12 percent of children are uninsured, making Texas the state with the largest number of uninsured children in the country.


The fact that one out of every five children in Texas doesn’t have health insurance raises the question: What kept our state lawmakers from intervening and ensuring the passage of the CHIP expansion bill?

CHIP provides health coverage for children whose working families make too much money to qualify for Medicaid but still can’t afford private health insurance plans. Eligible parents have a maximum yearly income of $44,100 for a family of four. The CHIP expansion bill would have extended eligibility to families of four that earned up to $66,150 and paid a monthly premium for the coverage. The expansion plan would have worked in favor of Texas Hispanic children, who are 3.5 times more likely to live in poverty and 2.5 times more likely to be uninsured than their Anglo counterparts.

Money was not the problem in the CHIP decision. Federal matching funds were available through the CHIP reauthorization law signed in January. Additionally, the state could lower the cost of emergency rooms and loss of workforce productivity by keeping children healthy.

Since parents of uninsured children can’t meet the expense of preventive treatment, they tend to wait until their children’s health reaches critical condition to get them medical attention. Parents must then resort to expensive hospitals and emergency care funded by taxpayers.

CHIP, on the other hand, returns money to taxpayers’ pockets. The federal government matches every dollar that Texas invests in CHIP with approximately $2.65 in federal funds. By failing to invest in CHIP and add more children to the program, our state is losing out on a federal contribution of millions of dollars that could relieve some of the state’s current financial burden.

Our lawmakers have denied CHIP expansion to higher income children this year, but more than half of Texas uninsured children are still qualified for enrolment in CHIP and Medicaid under current eligibility rules. The state now needs to reach out to these eligible families and increase enrolment in the program.

It is time for Texas legislators to tune out their political battles and put the children first. Texas leaders must attend to the health insurance demands of our youth to ensure they grow into healthy adults and build a prosperous future for our state.

© Latin Breaking News

Should You Care Who Governs Your City?

How many of us know our City Hall representatives, why we must elect them, or what they do once they hold a seat in city government?

Last May, only 4,186 ballots were cast from more than 93,000 registered voters in the special election to fill the District H seat vacated by Adrian Garcia. The number of voters accounted for less than 4.5 percent of the potential voter pool.

The low voter turnout was also reflected in the 2007 mayoral election, when only 117,098 out of 930,000 registered voters in the city of Houston showed up at the polls. Yet the presidential election attracted 1.18 million, or 60.3 percent of Harris County registered voters to cast a ballot in 2008.

Hispanics can no longer be used as scapegoats for the voter turnout since voter presence at council elections is lacking from the general population and not from a single ethnic group. Take District H as an example, where the electorate is 42 percent Hispanic and 45 percent Anglo.

So why don’t Houstonians attend to their local elections like they do to presidential and other national voting? The lack of participation in local politics may stem from the belief among constituents that their vote won’t make a difference in the overall future of the city or from the poor performance of past and current council members that alienates citizens from visiting the polls.

Indifference toward city elections also derives from failing to provide constituents adequate information about the candidates, the work that their position entails and the political process itself. Local elections call for the civil education of Houstonians. The city should take responsibility for teaching every resident about their leaders and representatives, the role of city council, and why their voice is important in community elections.

If you plan on brushing aside the June 13 run-off election for District H councilman or the November 3 election for city of Houston mayor, consider first what is at stake.

The council works with the mayor in matters of legislation and budget. It supervises city agencies, confirms the mayor’s appointments and approves city expenditures. A leader elected by a minimal percentage of the population may not be able to see to the demands of an entire city or community.

Houston’s city council is made up of 14 members, nine from specific districts and five elected citywide; each member is allowed to serve up to three two-year terms. Today there is only one Hispanic councilman serving a city that is 40 percent Hispanic. The District H election presents the opportunity to place a second Hispanic in city council and maintain the representation formerly assigned to Adrian Garcia before he left to become Harris County sheriff.

Voting for a city council member is as important as electing a mayor, a governor, or even a president, considering city council represents the needs of your particular community. Decide wisely. Your representative will have an impact on decision-making that targets issues such as land use, public safety, transportation, flooding, education, housing and the environment.

Texas' Future Demands Our Action

High dropout rates across Texas pose a risk to the financial future of the state, particularly in big cities such as Houston.













According to a study by the Editorial Projects in Education Research Center, more than 120,000 Texas students failed to graduate in 2006 and 70 percent of all non-graduates were minority students. Hispanic males were the lowest-performing group, graduating at a rate of less than 53 percent.

A study by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation found that most dropouts leave school because classes are not interesting or they have missed too many days to catch up. Other reasons include failing, pregnancy, a lack of motivation to work hard, the need to get a job, and not getting along with teachers and classmates. Whatever the reasons for dropping out, the increasing loss of students in Texas has serious economic implications for the state. The graduation crisis not only affects the labor opportunities of individuals who don’t finish school, it also damages the economic health of their communities.

Almost 20 percent of Houston adults ages 25-64 didn’t finish high school and have an income averaging less than $15,000. The average annual earnings in the U.S. are $20,000 for people who didn’t finish high school, $30,000 for high school graduates and nearly $60,000 for individuals with bachelor degrees.

Texas Kids Count reports that keeping everyone in school would cost Texas an additional $1.7 billion for more teachers, more textbooks, more after-school programs and more space. However, if every 16-19 year-old in Texas graduated from high school, then the state’s earnings could increase by $865 million per year, or $3billion in four years, which would be more than enough to cover the education costs.

Higher incomes are only available where jobs are available. A study from the Milton and Rose D. Friedman Foundation reports that dropouts reduce Texas employment by more than 302,000 jobs. The pattern is simple: Quality well-paying jobs require well-educated and productive workers. If Texas residents fail to receive a good education, they reduce the productivity of the Texas economy. Dropouts accept jobs with lower earnings that result in reduced spending. Less spending translates into less demand and less available jobs.

Dropouts are also more likely to need government assistance than high school graduates, increasing state spending in food stamps, housing assistance and Medicaid. Moreover, approximately three-fourths of state prison inmates are high school dropouts, accounting for an extra $12 million annual expense. The Friedman Foundation study concluded that high school dropouts are costing Texas taxpayers $337 million per year in lost tax revenue, increased Medicaid costs and increased incarceration.

Lowering the dropout numbers is essential to fuel the future of our city and our state. The cycle that starts with less high school dropouts and ends with a prosperous economy is challenging, but collaboration between school districts and their surrounding communities offers a potential cure to the “silent epidemic.”

Texas has a responsibility to feed its youth a proper education and prepare a strong work force. It is time to act collectively to eradicate dropouts if we want to keep our cities safe from a crumbling economy.

Cinco de Mayo: What Comes to Mind?

As you get ready to drink your margarita, wear your sombrero and hit that piñata this Cinco de Mayo, consider first what it is exactly that you are celebrating. Or not celebrating.

While Mexicans in their native country don’t generally recognize the Cinco de Mayo holiday, partygoers in the United States have turned the date into a large festivity. The reasons for the American celebration have more to do with the U.S. Latino culture and alcohol than with history.


Cinco de Mayo marks the 1862 Battle of Puebla, where Mexican forces defeated the French army. General Ignacio Zaragoza led the Mexican troops to win despite the more numerous and better equipped French forces of Napoleon III.

The victory in Puebla is a good reason to celebrate, but Mexico ultimately lost the war against the French and one of Napoleon’s relatives, Maximilian of Austria, was left to rule Mexico from 1864 to 1867. This may be the reason why Cinco de Mayo goes largely unnoticed south of the border, except in the state of Puebla where the battle took place.
In the United States, Cinco de Mayo also made its first appearance during the 1860s. Mexicans in San Francisco lent their support to their mother country during the war by commemorating the date of the battle with private dances and speeches that addressed the significance of the day. The celebration continued with dances and parades until the 1950s.

During the civil rights movement of the 1960s and 70s, Cinco de Mayo evolved into a tool for recognition of the Chicano culture. To Chicano activists, the Battle of Puebla symbolized perseverance and unity, and they saw the holiday as a way to build pride among Mexican Americans and celebrate their bicultural identity.

Unfortunately beer companies trumped the fight for civil rights and the original intentions to promote Latino culture. Cinco de Mayo as we know it in the United States today is the result of an exploitation of Mexican history on the part of the alcohol industry.

In his book Anything but Mexican, Rodolfo Acuña discusses how a minor holiday became the opportunity for brewers to “make alcohol a staple of Latino social life.” The Molson Coors Brewing Co. needed to save its image and market to Latinos after a group of Mexican-American activists complained about the company’s discriminatory hiring practices in the 1960s. Chicanos, on the other hand, needed funds to launch their Cinco de Mayo celebration. To silence the Chicano opposition, Coors sponsored their holiday with millions of dollars in “donations.” In exchange, Cinco de Mayo had to promote beer drinking.

Another deal in 1985 involved Mexican American organizations--the National Council of La Raza, the League of United Latin American Citizens and the American GI Forum. The organizations withdrew a boycott against Coors’ labor practices when the brewing company promised them $350 million. This growing dependence on beer companies has offset the Latino efforts for civil rights.
Latinos should celebrate their culture and heritage but not at the expense of neglecting the roots of their holidays and propagating negative drinking stereotypes. So before you get out those green, white and red streamers, think about what it really means to be Mexican, Mexican-American or Latino, or at least take some time to genuinely learn about these cultures.

12 Million SS Numbers Do Not Match

Criticism against legalizing undocumented immigrants has resurfaced as President Obama’s plans for immigration reform build momentum.

Opponents have condemned the possible legalization of undocumented immigrants on a variety of grounds--allowing immigrants to work legally when so many Americans are unemployed is irrational and granting amnesty to immigrants who broke the law when coming into this country is wrong.

The Pew Hispanic Center reports an estimate of 12 million unauthorized immigrants living in the United States. Texas alone is home to 1.45 million of them. Before attacking immigration reform, critics should consider why a legalization effort for this large number of immigrants is crucial in terms of economic recovery.

Researchers from the Immigration Policy Center have suggested that a change in immigration policy offers the potential to generate new revenue from income and payroll taxes. The Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation estimate that the immigration reform bills introduced in 2006 and 2007 would have increased the tax revenue by $66 billion and $48 billion respectively.

Our current policies drive undocumented immigrants to work for an underground economy outside of the tax system, resulting in a loss of revenue from personal income taxes. More important, though, are the undocumented immigrants (between 50 and 75 percent) that are paying Medicare, Social Security, federal and state income taxes without receiving any of the benefits. In 2006, the Social Security Administration reported a total $586 billion in earnings from workers who weren’t eligible for Social Security benefits because their names or numbers didn’t match SSA records.

An immigration policy that gives legal rights to undocumented workers will allow them to have better jobs and earn higher wages. Higher wages translate to more spending and more money pouring into our businesses. Immigrants have already proved to be a major economic force. A study by The Selig Center for Economic Growth at The University of Georgia reports that the Latino buying power totaled more than $950 billion in 2008, while the Asian purchasing power amounted to $509 billion. Moreover, immigrant-owned businesses generate $67 billion of the $577 billion in U.S. business revenue, according to the Small Business Administration. Immigration reform would be a step toward creating more businesses and more jobs.

The financial situation is America’s main threat, not immigrants. Instead of spending a massive $13 billion on border security and immigration enforcement, our country should be taking advantage of the contributions that a foreign-born population has to offer. The U.S. needs immigrants who can study, work, earn, spend, create businesses and pay their taxes legally to drive the economic growth.

YESTERDAY'S NEWS VS. TODAY'S NEWS

In a sad day for print journalism, the Houston Chronicle lays off almost 200 people. Two Detroit papers end daily home delivery. The line between life and death for the San Francisco Chronicle gets thinner. Newspapers are quickly becoming an endangered species, but is this necessarily a bad thing?

As the economy worsens and more online news sites replace newspapers due to a drop in revenue from advertising and subscribers, it is difficult to ignore the developing concerns: newsroom employees losing their jobs and journalism losing its watchdog role.

Paper Cuts, a blog that tracks newspaper layoffs and buyouts, reports that in 2008 more than 15,800 newspaper jobs disappeared, while 7, 652 jobs have vanished so far in 2009. One of the tragedies of the layoffs is the loss of diversity in the newsrooms. The Newspaper Death Watch site mentioned that the positions of two women on the editorial board of the Houston Chronicle were eliminated, leaving a less diverse team in command of the newspaper. The newspaper has not published a list with the names of those laid off.

Time.com also indicated that some metropolitan dailies are not leaving behind news Web sites, as is the case of the Rocky Mountain News and the Cincinnati Post. Cutting Web sites leaves more personnel without jobs and more readers short of alternatives. In addition to jobs, the traditional watchdog role is also at risk. The main worries are the growing number of bloggers and the demands of continuous news. Although bloggers can be knowledgeable and provide valuable information not found in the mainstream news, most bloggers are not trained reporters. While blogs are a tool for democratization and free speech, they should not be considered on a par with journalism because a majority of them are based on opinions instead of facts.

The pressure of nonstop online news can also affect the accuracy and depth of reporting. The quality of journalism has suffered in the growing competition among news Web sites.

Keeping newspapers alive is a serious effort for these and other reasons, but even if we wake up to a world without newspapers one morning, it will not be the end of news. On the contrary, the news demand is increasing as the Internet makes more media free and accessible.

The Internet allows news consumers to get their information from different publications, act as critical readers and form their own balanced views. Younger readers are less interested in newspapers, but links from CNN, The New York Times, and other major news sources on Twitter, Facebook and Apple applications are attracting the youth to stay informed. A Scarborough Research study found that readers aged 18-34 who viewed only the online editions of newspapers increased 21 percent between 2004 and 2007.

Laid-off and unemployed journalists should be interested in contributing to online media and providing the analysis that this medium often lacks. The shift from newspapers to the Internet has the potential to improve journalism as a whole. It is important for reporters to take advantage of the new technology to continue serving as watchdogs and do their best to monitor Houston’s social, political and economic life.

Houston: The Quest for Inclusion

Current Houston population estimates place the percentages of the different ethnic groups as follows: 41% Hispanics, 28% Whites, 24% African-Americans and 7% Asian-Americans, but the percentages of Hispanics in key positions in local organizations convey a dismal reality. Members and leaders of the Hispanic community, often voice their concern about being underrepresented in the local government and other local organizations. This is an undeniable fact. The question is, why?

In a recent series of articles written by Dr. Richard Murray (U. H.) and published in his blog at http://prof13.abc13.com , he elaborates on the possible reasons. The first and more important he mentions, is the poor participation. Out of 41% Hispanics, only an estimated 12% voted in the last presidential elections. (12 percent of 41 percent, is less than 5% of the total potential votes!) With that level of participation, the only chance a Hispanic leader may have to become Houston Mayor, for example, is to receive a considerable support from other groups. If the Hispanic leadership cannot bring “their natural constituency” to the voting room, a more difficult challenge would be to appeal other voters.

Recently Texas Senator Mario Gallegos and other Hispanic and African-American leaders proposed legislation on non-profit organizations, specifically requesting that they “appoint a board of directors that represent the diversity of its constituents.” Actions of this type address the issue of representation, but still do not solve the one of participation, and furthermore, equate to some form of affirmative action. A representation without participation always raises the question of legitimacy, some of our website readers have pointed out.

The root cause of the poor representation in the local non-profits and local politics resides in the failure of the Hispanic leadership to convince their own constituency to participate, to vote, to volunteer, to pitch in. Breaking the indifference of the Hispanic population is the real challenge.

As with any rule, there are exceptions, of course: Harris County recently elected Adrian Garcia as its County Sheriff, from his previous position as Houston Council Member.