This was my first official workday as an intern in the Rosenberg-Humphrey Program for Public Policy at City College of the City University of New York. My work assignment is at the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF). Their office is located at 1717 K Street, NW in Suite Number 311 in Washington, DC. The office telephone number is (202) 293-2828, and my supervisor is Marisa DeMeo.

I arrived at the MALDEF office at 7:00 a.m. It was closed, and so I left and returned at 7:30 a.m. It was still closed and so I decided to go to a cafeteria that is next to the building where MALDEF is. While I was in the cafeteria I read the New York Times for about an hour. It was 8:30 a.m. when I decided to go back and see if the MALDEF office had opened.

At 8:30 a.m., I found that the office was open and a young woman named Nelly opened the door for me. She is the office receptionist. Nelly asked if she could help me. I introduced myself and I asked for Marisa DeMeo. Nelly asked me if I had an appointment with Marisa. I said, "well no, but I am coming from New York City and I was told that I will be working with this organization as an intern. And that the name of my sponsor is the Rosenburg-Humphrey Program in Public Policy at The City College of CUNY." Nelly told me that Marisa would be at the office around 10:00 a.m. Nelly again told me that I would need an appointment to see Marisa because she is a very busy person. Apparently, Nelly didn't know that they were expecting a summer intern.

When I returned to the MALDEF office at 10:00 a.m., Marisa was already there, and I didn't have to wait. She was waiting for me. Marisa introduced herself to me and took me to my office. I was given a computer and several newspapers.

Marisa told me my responsibilities. My responsibilities will be to read the newspapers everyday in the morning. These are the New York Times, USA Today, and The Washington Post. I will be looking for articles about education, judges, immigration, voting, and employment. All of the articles should be related to the Latino community. Also, I was told that I will be attending hearings at the Congress and Senate. At these hearings I will take notes, get handouts, and write memos about what is discussed and what I observe. I will also be filling in for Nelly, the receptionist, when she is at lunch or away from her desk.

At 11:00 a.m., we had a meeting. I was introduced to the rest of the group that works in the office. Angelo Amador works with educational issues. Christina Chavez Cook works with immigration and civil rights issues. Triana Doracio works with issues in the media that affect the Latino community and mobilizes to alert them. Nelly Valdez is the receptionist. Marisa DeMeo is the Regional Counsel for the organization. She is the main boss.

At lunchtime, Marisa invited me to go to lunch with her because it was my first day at work. It was very nice. She told me about her education and said that she went to Princeton and NYU School of Law. She also talked a little bit about MALDEF saying that it is a civil rights organization.

Around 3:00 p.m., I was assigned to do research using statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau. I was given two books and many articles. I will be looking for the most recent statistics about the entire U.S. population. I will need to find the statistics from 1997 or 1998 and the projections for the future: 2000-2050. Then, I will need to find the Latino population and its percentage. After that, I will separate the Latino population into the following subpopulations: Cubans, Puerto Ricans, Mexicans, Central Americans, South Americans, and Dominicans. I need to breakdown each group into its percentage of the total Latino population. Then I need to find the Latino population in each state in the U.S. The states need to be listed in alphabetical order.

I will also look for the most recent statistics about national economic factors. These factors are the number of Latinos living below the poverty line and their percentage, and the median income of Latinos and their annual buying power. Then, I will be looking for the most recent statistics of national educational factors. For example, the number of Latinos who have graduated from high school and their percentage, the number and percentage of Latinos who have college associates' degrees, masters or doctorates, and the number of Latinos who drop out of school and the percentage.

After I finish this project I am going to look for the most recent statistics in the National Statistics on Latino immigrants: the number and percentage of Latinos who were born in the U.S.; the number and percentage of Latinos who were born outside of the U.S.; and the number and percentage of foreign-born Latinos who are U.S. citizens.

Finally, I will look in the National Statistics on Language. I will find the number of Latinos who speak Spanish in the household and its percentage and the number of limited English proficient students who speak Spanish.

Journal Entry 2
May 31, 2000
Wednesday

12:30 p.m. Today has been an easy day. I am still working on my paper, and I’m trying to finish it as soon as possible. I am really having a good time. This is because I am learning a lot about how the United States government gets its information to know the needs of the people, and obviously to control the population. About 3:15 p.m., Marisa told me that she would be out for the rest of the week. She gave me several articles, letters, and faxes. She wants me to file them after I finish my paper.

Journal Entry 3
June 1, 2000
Thursday

11:00 a.m. My supervisor, Marisa DeMeo, is not here today, and it seems to be a very slow day. Angelo and Triana are not here yet. Nelly just received a phone call that her daughter is sick.

11:15 a.m. Angelo arrives at the office and Nelly leaves to see her daughter. I am still working on my paper. I am having some trouble finding the information about language. About 3:25 p.m., Angelo told me that after I finish this paper I will do another about education. I believe that the next paper should be interesting too. Also, I was told that I would be attending a meeting on Tuesday, June 6, 2000 at 9:30 a.m. at the national office of the National Counsel of La Raza (NCLA). The NCLA office is located at 1111 19th Street, NW, Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20036, telephone (202) 785-1670.

Journal Entry 4
June 2, 2000
Friday

At 9:00 a.m. the first thing that I did was to file the papers that were given to me the day before. I finished filing the papers about 1:15 p.m. After that I kept working on my paper. It is 4:30 p.m. already, and I am still having difficulty finding the information I need for my paper. Before I leave the office I will ask to take one of the books with me. Over the weekend I am going to try to find the information that I need.

Journal Entry 5
June 5, 2000
Monday

Today we had our first intern meeting. The meeting was held at the capitol building at 10:00 a.m. At the meeting we received information about how to travel in Washington, DC. Also, we were told about the places that are safe to walk in at night. We were encouraged to take advantage of this opportunity. Ray Bone talked about the transportation issue. He explained the Washington, DC metro system as well as taxi transportation.

Our guest speaker was Andrew, a student at George Washington University. Basically, he was encouraging us to take advantage of this opportunity. Andrew was part of the internship program in the summer of 1996. He has graduated from law school and is now studying for his bar exam. He has been working lately in a small business office, I believe in the Congress. The meeting ended at 12:00 p.m.

I got back to my job at 1:15 p.m. I spent the rest of the afternoon and evening on the statistics paper that I am working on for MALDEF. When I was getting ready to leave the office, I spoke with my supervisor about the meeting that I would be attending the next day. After I got the instructions, I left the office. It was 6:10 p.m.

Journal Entry 6
June 6, 2000
Tuesday

Today I had a meeting at 9:30 a.m. This meeting was held at the office of the National Council of La Raza. Two main issues were discussed at the meeting. One of them was related to the health of immigrant children -The Immigrant Children’s Health Improvement Act of 1999 (S.1227). This act would lift the five-year waiting period for children and pregnant women who arrived in the United States after August 22, 1996. Also, it would give the states the option of providing health coverage to eligible, lawfully present, pregnant women under Medicaid, and children under either Medicaid or other state coverage. It merely allows a state to draw down federal funds to help provide them care if the state chooses to do so.

The second issue discussed at the meeting was, “Obtaining Parents’ Social Security Number on Form SS-5” (application for a social security card). The purpose of this issue was to remind the Social Security Administration (SSA) staff not to discourage parents who do not have Social Security numbers (SSN) from applying for a SSN for their children. Also, it was mentioned that a new form with new language will be introduced. This will be on an information sheet that can be used to request a SSN card.

The meeting ended at 11:10 a.m. When I got back to the office I needed to write a memo about the meeting. This is the memo that I wrote:

SUBJECT: Meeting of the National Counsel of La Raza. Immigrant Working Group.

The two main issues that were discussed at today’s meeting were related to: 1.) Immigrant Children’s Health Improvement Act of 1999 (S.1227)
2.) Application for Social Security Card

The first issue, the Immigrant Children’s Health Improvement Act of 1999 (S.1227), is supported by most of the Democrats in Congress. George W. Bush, the presidential candidate, is also in favor of this document. The National Counsel of La Raza also wants support from other state governors. The point in question is to convince more Republicans to support this bill. If we have any Republican contacts, we need to make phone calls or write letters to try to convince them to support the bill. The purpose is to have an even number among Democrat and Republican congress people to get this bill passed.

The second issue discussed was related to Social Security Numbers. In some hospitals, the newborn are denied their Social Security Number. This is because on some occasions the parents of a newborn child cannot provide their own Social Security Number. This is either because they do not have one or they do not understand the questions on the application form. The point is that if a child is born in the United States, she/he is a U.S. citizen. But some institutions use the issue of the parents not having Social Security numbers to not register their newborn children. To help solve this problem, a new form is being introduced with new language that will explain how to fill out the form. In this way the parents will be able to provide the needed information.

Also, MALDEF is invited to participate in the National Food Stamp Conversation on June 22, 2000 in Washington, DC. More information will be provided later.

After writing this memo I was told by my supervisor, Marisa, to add new statistics on my first paper about the Latino population.

Journal Entry 7
June 7, 2000
Wednesday

4:30 p.m. I spent most of the day answering the phone and taking messages. Nelly, the receptionist, was not here today. Basically I did most of her job. Also, I was on the Internet looking for information about bilingual education. That is the subject of my next research paper.

Journal Entry 8
June 8, 2000
Thursday

12:25 p.m. Today we had a meeting in our office. This meeting is held every Friday, but because our supervisor travels a lot, sometimes the day changes. At this meeting we discussed what we have been doing over the last few days. Angelo spoke about a presentation that he will give next Thursday, June 15.

Angelo Amador will be representing the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) at the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) in Washington, DC. MALDEF “believes that all children should benefit from national standards and assessment; and that schools with limited English proficient (LEP) and minority students must provide the educational tools and resources necessary for them to compete and succeed.” Angelo Amador is a MALDEF Education Analyst, and he will present a statement on this issue at the NAGB public forum on education. NAGB regularly reports to the public on the educational progress of students in grades 4, 8, and 12.

Marisa spoke a little bit about the Richard Paez ceremony in Pasadena, California. Triana spoke about some articles that she has on her computer. These articles are related to the presidential campaign. I told them about my work on the statistics on the Latino population. It was very interesting for me to know what percentage of the population we represent in the United States. Also, to know our level of education, poverty, and living conditions in the most powerful country in the world.

Journal Entry 9
June 9, 2000
Friday

4:30 p.m. Nothing happened today. It was a regular day. It was not boring, but it seemed to me like a very slow day. Marisa, my supervisor, went out of town. She went to participate at a meeting in Miami. All the issues at this meeting will be related to MALDEF administration. It is almost time to leave the office for the weekend. The weather will be very nice, so we are going to have a good time.

Journal Entry 10
June 12, 2000
Monday

10:15 a.m. It has been a very busy day. I am adding new information to the paper that I am researching. I found more statistics that were updated on the Internet recently. Hopefully, I will finish the paper today. After that I will be looking for more information about bilingual education.

4:30 p.m. Angelo came to my office. He gave me information about a study that was conducted by Bank Street College. The title is, “Small Schools: Great Strides.” This study is the culmination of a longitudinal study of small schools in Chicago funded by the Joyce Foundation. Some of the issues in the study are:

Increased student performance
Decreased dropouts rates
Fewer incidents of violence
Increased teacher, parent, and student satisfaction

There will be a panel discussion of “Small Schools: Great Strides” on:
June 20, 2000 at 12 Noon in the Hart Senate Office Building, Room 708.

The following people will be on the panel:

Patricia A. Wasley, Dean, Bank Street College of Education
Michele Fine, Professor, The City University of New York
Sherry P. King, Superintendent, Mamaroneck, New York
Linda C. Powell, Associate Professor, Teacher’s College, Columbia University
Warren Chapman, Program Officer, The Joyce Foundation

Angelo has instructed me to attend this meeting and to report back to MALDEF. After the meeting is over I will write a summary about the most relevant issues according to my judgment.

Journal Entry 11
June 13, 2000
Tuesday

12:20 p.m. The first thing that I did today was to give my statistics paper to my supervisor. At about 1:10 p.m. Angelo told me to write a note to the National Center for Public and Higher Education. The purpose of this note was to request a free copy of an article that was published Monday June 12, 2000. This article was published in the Hispanic Link Weekly Report. The subject of the article was the percentage of Latino students at different levels of education in the U.S.

3:25 p.m. I was sent to pick up a package at a union organization for Christina. The weather outside was beautiful. I had a good time walking for a little while. After being in the office this errand was nice. I returned to the office at approximately 4:10 p.m. Two hours later I went home for the evening.

Journal Entry 12
June 14, 2000
Wednesday

12:30 p.m. Today I have been looking for more information on bilingual education on the Internet. Basically the information that I need is the amount of support that the candidates for the presidency of the United States give to bilingual education. Also, I need to find out what kind of policy they would use to approach the issue. Other information that I need to find is the position that the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) has on this issue. What I mean is how much support MALDEF has given to bilingual education.

In order to understand this issue I have been reading a little bit about the history of bilingual education. What I have learned is very interesting to me. This is because at the beginning of the bilingual education program the students were taught in two languages, Spanish and English. The students had the opportunity of learning English and being educated in Spanish at the same time. In this way, they would not fall behind in their studies. The history that I read was a history of bilingual education in the Latino community.

According to some research the period of time for students to learn English is between four to seven years. For example, Virginia P. Collier, a professor of bilingual, multicultural, and English-as-a-Second-Language said that, “there is research that shows three years is a given time frame. It’s very clear that it takes at least four to five years to learn English.”

Another study by Kenju Hskuta, an education professor at Stanford University, found that it took four to six years for a majority of students to learn academic English. However, a bill approved by the House requires schools to include Limited English Proficient (LEP) students in states’ tests. The students that would be taking these tests are students who have been in school for three years. This is just some information that I have located so far. I will keep looking for more articles and give a strong point of view.

Almost at the end of the day Angelo told me that I would be attending a meeting the next day (06/15/00). The issue to be discussed at this meeting will be “The Devastating Consequences of Zero Tolerance & School Discipline.” The Civil Rights Project, the Harvard University Advancement Project, and the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition will sponsor the meeting. It will be held at the National Conference Press Club.

Journal Entry 13
June 15, 2000
Thursday

3:30 p.m. Today I went to a press conference. There were five speakers at the conference: two lawyers, two professors, and Reverend Jesse Jackson. The issue being discussed was the “Zero Tolerance” law. The purpose of this law was “focused on truly dangerous and criminal behavior by students, requiring mandatory expulsion for possession of guns on school property.” Today this law is being applied in schools differently. Many students are being suspended or expelled from schools just for disrespect, noise, and loitering. The students that are being affected the most are African American students.

At this conference statistics were discussed that show the percentage of students being out of school in one school year. The African American students have the highest rate. Reverend Jackson thinks that this is no accident. He believes that this is the result of racism. The other speakers were saying that “Zero Tolerance” is not being applied fairly. This is because the studies that they used showed that White students overact, and they are not treated the same as Black students.

Tomorrow (06/16/00) I will be attending a one-day conference about the “Zero Tolerance” issue. This will be at the Hilton Tower Hotel here in Washington, DC.

Journal Entry 14
June 16, 2000
Friday

At today’s meeting the “Zero Tolerance” issue was discussed in more detail. During the day four panel discussions were held. Again, the panelists emphasized the disparity in how this law is applied in some public schools. They went into more detail showing statistics that they found in their research. According to the studies, White students overact more than Black students do. But the statistics show the disparity that exists among students suspended in public schools. Even though the researchers found that White students drink alcohol, use drugs, and act more violently than Black students, they are not suspended as often.

Not all the public schools have the same problem. There are some public schools that have a very low level of students suspended in one school year period. The researchers went there to see how those schools operate. What they found was that the professors worked more closely with the students. Also, the community is more involved in the needs of the schools. The parents frequently attended meetings where the problems of the schools were discussed. The professors are supported by the community, and they put more emphasis on teaching the students. The students in those schools feel more comfortable because they know that the professors care about them.

The conference ended at 6:30 p.m. I left to go to my dorm to get some rest because it was a long day. I really enjoyed the conference because I learned a lot about this law of “Zero Tolerance” and its consequences. Also, I learned some possible solutions to this problem that the last panel gave. The last panel was a group of parents that have been involved in the schools as a result of “Zero Tolerance.” The parents described the way that their children were treated before, and the changes that they have made possible with their intervention in this problem.

Journal Entry 15
June 19, 2000
Monday

9:30 a.m. Today I need to write a report about the conference that I attended last week. I feel a little nervous because it will be a two-day summary. I need to figure out how to collapse all the information that I have.

This is the memo that I wrote for Angelo Amador about the “Zero Tolerance” conference.

TO: Angelo Amador

FROM: Gabriel Hernández

DATE: 06/19/00

RE: Zero Tolerance Conference

The Zero Tolerance Conference took place at the National Press Club on June 15, 2000 in Washington, DC. Most of the people that attended this conference are members of different organizations that care about children’s education. There were about 45 people at this conference. The subject in discussion was “Zero Tolerance.” In an attempt to reduce violence in public schools, many state legislatures and Congress people passed a law concerned with school disciplinary sanctions. This law became known as “Zero Tolerance Policies.” The purpose of this law was “focused on truly dangerous and criminal behavior by students, requiring mandatory expulsion for possession of guns on school property” (Opportunities Suspended, p. iv). Today this policy is being applied unfairly because it is used to suspend or expel children out of school for insignificant non-violent offenses. “In 1998 more than 3.1 million children in America were suspended and another 87,000 were expelled” (Opportunity Suspended, p. iv). At the conference a document was presented that described the goals, strategies, and assignments that were developed in a session held before this conference. The purpose of this document is to find new approaches toward discipline in schools without affecting the students’ education. The document is attached to this memo.

Reverend Jesse Jackson President and Founder, Rainbow/PUSH Coalition
Penda Hair Co-Executive, Advancement Project
Christopher Edley Executive Director, Civil Rights at Harvard University
Russ Skiba Professor, University of Indiana

Reverend Jackson was the first speaker. He began his presentation by saying that what is happening today in public schools is the legacy of slavery. This is because the students that are the most affected by “Zero Tolerance” are African Americans. Reverend Jackson based his argument on one of the many cases that has happened in public schools. He gave the following example: last year there was a fight in one of the schools in Decatur, Illinois, which lasted about 17 seconds. One of the students who was not involved in it was trying to break up the fight. As a result the student that was trying to prevent the confrontation was sent to the principal’s office, and he was suspended from school for two years. The principal of the school refused to make any investigation about the issue (The Color of Discipline, p. 30). The point is that this type of matter is happening continually, and it is about time to take action to solve the problem. The solution that Rev. Jackson presented is a national movement where all the minority population of the United States should be included. He thinks that this is the only way to attract the attention of the policymakers and show them that something is wrong with this society.

Penda Hair spoke about a statistical study that they did in all of the states of the U.S. The purpose of the study was to find out what state or states have the highest rate of suspended students from schools. In this study they looked at the gender, race, color, and socioeconomic status of the students. What they found out was that 22 states have a rate of 12% - 18% of students suspended from school in one school year. Most of the students were African Americans and the most poor (the statistics paper is attached to this memo also, you can refer to Opportunities Suspended, p. III-1 to III-6). Professor Edley spoke about statistics also. His point of view about “Zero Tolerance” is that it is not being applied fairly. This is because Black students are being pushed out of the schools for almost no reason. The reasons that some professors used are not relevant and should not result in any punishment toward students. Some students that were suspended were, “as young as four years old - for trivial misconduct and innocent mistakes” (Opportunities Suspended, p. 3).

Another study done by Professor Russ Skiba and his team found that White students are sent very often to the principal’s office too, but their percentage of suspension is not very high. According to Professor Skiba, White students overact more than Black students, and yet Black students are the most affected by “Zero Tolerance.” The study found that “white students were significantly more likely than Black students to be referred to the office for smoking, leaving without permission, vandalism, and obscene language. Black students were more likely to be referred for disrespect, excessive noise, threatening, and loitering.” However, the students who were the most affected were African Americans (The Color of Discipline, p. 22). Another main point was that students who are being targeted are the ones who get free lunch and/or their parents do not work full time.

I was expecting more general information. What I mean is that I thought that at this two day conference other minority groups would be included. From the first day, the main issue was the disparity between White and Black students who have been suspended from school. The Latino students were mentioned only once even though the Latino students have a high percentage of suspension also. At the last panel there was a group of Latinos in the audience. They were representing an organization called, “Padres Association.” They came to this conference from Massachusetts and they were disappointed too. I believe that this was because we did not get the information that we were expecting. I think that if we want to fight the injustice we must get together instead of segregating ourselves.

Journal Entry 16
June 20, 2000
Tuesday

4:30 p.m. Today I went to a conference called, “Small Schools: Great Strides.” A study was presented that had been done in Chicago’s small schools. This study analyzed the achievement of the students and the way that principals administer the schools. The research was conducted by the Bank Street College of Education.

The presenters were:

1.) Dr. Patricia Wasley, Dean, Bank Street College of Education
2.) Dr. Linda C. Powell, Associate Professor, Teacher’s College, Columbia Univ.
3.) Dr. Sherry King, Superintendent, Mamaroneck Schools
4.) Dr. Michelle Fine, Professor, City University of New York, Graduate Center

What the researchers found was that students are performing better in small schools than in the large schools in the public system. Elementary schools, which have 300 students or less, are considered small schools. High schools that have 400 students are considered small schools too. According to the researchers, these schools are performing better because the professors are able to help almost every student. Another important finding is that the communities are involved in the needs of the small schools. For example, if the school is going to celebrate any cultural event, students, professors, and parents will participate together. These types of activities make the community come together and become strong.

The researchers hope that small schools will be able to survive in this struggle. This is because they showed that they could be a good example to follow in order to stop violence and dropouts from schools. Small schools have fewer rates of students dropping out. Also, the students have gone up in performance on their standardized tests.

Journal Entry 17
June 21, 2000
Wednesday

8:30 p.m. I spent most of the day helping Nelly, the receptionist. Marisa, my supervisor, has been very busy. Angelo is the person who has been giving me my assignments lately. At about 3:00 p.m., he told me to go to the Cannon Building. This building is located on Capitol Hill. The purpose was to attend a Latino student reception. This reception was sponsored by NASA. There were 32 students and most of them are science majors.

The Republican Congressperson, Silvestre Reyes, was at the reception for about 20 minutes. He gave a speech encouraging the students to complete their careers and congratulated them. He said that the projection for the Latino community for the year 2050 is to be the largest minority group in the United States. Therefore, the Latino community will need to have representatives in different political fields in order to have its needs met.

At the end of this reception I introduced myself to all of the students. We spoke about our goals for the future. We exchanged e-mails, phone numbers, and we wished each other good luck.

Journal Entry 18
June 22, 2000
Thursday

5:00 p.m. Today was very quiet. I helped Nelly answer the phone. I began to write the draft of my report about the conference that I attended yesterday. Marisa asked me if everything was all right. I said, “yes.” I told her about the meetings that I have been attending. She smiled and told me, “that is great.” Marisa will be out of town again. She will be back next Wednesday, June 28, 2000.

Journal Entry 19
June 23, 2000
Friday

4:25 p.m. Today I was assigned to attend a meeting at the Rayburn Building. This building is located on Capitol Hill. There was a presentation of a study done in Wisconsin. The name of this research was “Service Learning.” There were about 60 people at the meeting. The speakers were John Benson, Superintendent of Wisconsin’s Department of Public Instruction, and Terry Pickeral, Project Director.

The purpose of the meeting was to present the findings of the Service Learning research in Wisconsin. Again, the issue was the difference between the small schools and the large schools within the public system but with a different perspective. The different perspective is that in Service Learning schools one of the goals is to teach the student the values of civics in this society. Also, in comparison to the big schools, the communities are more involved in the needs of the schools and the students. John Benson thinks that by teaching the students in this way they will develop the value of the importance of education and in the future they will care about their communities also. Students in Service Learning schools have better scores on standardized tests, better attendance, and very few dropouts in comparison with large schools in the public system. Another goal is to create programs to support students’ activities.

Journal Entry 20
June 26, 2000
Monday

7:15 p.m. Today I finished writing my report about, “Small Schools: Great Strides.” Also, I sent some faxes to San Antonio, Texas. This is the memorandum that I wrote:

TO: Angelo Amador

FROM: Gabriel Hernández

DATE: June 26, 2000

RE: Small Schools: Great Strides

I attended the conference titled, “Small Schools: Great Strides.” This conference was held at the Hart Federal Building, on June 20, 2000 at 11:45 a.m. The purpose of this conference was to present a study done by the Bank Street College of Education on Chicago’s small schools. The Joyce Foundation funded the study. This study analyzed students’ progress and achievements for a period of two years. The issue was to see how well students are performing in Chicago’s small schools. The researchers wanted to see the achievement of the students in the fields of science, mathematics, and writing. Chicago was chosen because most of the population is composed of Latinos and African Americans. This study was completed by visiting the schools, and talking with the professors and students. Also, the researchers analyzed the students’ scores on standardized tests.

According to the study, “Small Schools: Great Strides”, elementary schools that serve fewer than 350 students and high schools that serve fewer than 500 students are considered small schools (Small Schools, p. 9). On the other hand, elementary schools that have 1000 students, and high schools that have 3000 students are considered large schools in the public system.

Dr. Patricia Wasley Dean, Bank Street College of Education
Dr. Linda C. Powell Associate Professor, Teacher’s College, Columbia University
Dr. Sherry King Superintendent, Mamaroneck Schools
Dr. Michelle Fine Professor, City University of New York, Graduate Center

Small schools today are being considered by many educators and policy makers a solution to the problems that exist in large public schools. This is because in small schools students’ attachments, persistence, and performance are stronger. Also, students in these schools have better attendance rates and lower dropout rates. Reading scores have increased in small schools also. Violence occurs less frequently in small schools. This is because the conditions in small schools are more conducive to learning. Large schools have high rates of students dropping out. There is more violence, the standardized test scores are low, and the professors do not interact with the students.

Small schools could be one possibility to improve education. The problem is that small schools are fragile. For example, in Chicago many small schools have closed because they could not get the necessary support from the government. This is because most school systems are designed to support large schools. The educational system needs to be redesigned to support small schools. Small schools may not be the solution, but they could be the key to begin to improve education.

Journal Entry 21
June 27, 2000
Tuesday

7:00 p.m. Today another intern came to the office. Her name is Maricela. She is from the state of Illinois and her background is from México also. Maricela is studying in a Community College in her town in Illinois. She wants to be a paralegal aid and she has been working in factories almost all her life. Six years ago she was laid off and she could not find a job. After struggling looking for a job for a while she understood that without education it is not easy to find a job. Maricela finished her high school education many years ago.

After looking for a job she decided to go to school. Next semester she is going to finish her associates’ degree in a community college. This makes me feel better because I am not the only one coming from the work place doing labor. Like me, Maricela does not have any experience working in an office either.

Today I helped Nelly answer the phone and I also made some photocopies. I think that the most relevant thing that happened today was what I mentioned above.

Journal Entry 22
June 28, 2000
Wednesday

Another intern came today. Her name is Monica. She is from Los Angeles, California. Her parents are from México but she was born here in the United States. She will be here in this office only once a week because she is working in the Smithsonian Museum. Monica is an undergraduate student at Harvard University in Massachusetts.

Monica’s major is Latin American Literature and American Literature also. After she finishes her BA she is thinking of going to law school.

Tomorrow (06/29/00) I will attend a meeting about immigration issues. The speakers will be one person from Canada and the other person from the Mexican Embassy. I also finished the other memo about Service Learning schools.

Journal Entry 23
June 29, 2000
Thursday

8:30 p.m. Today I attended a meeting called “Briefing Migration.” The principal speaker was Mr. Daniel Jean, an immigration counselor at the Embassy of Canada. The other speaker was Mr. Gustavo Mohar, Minister for Political and Congressional Affairs, Embassy of México. The orator was Demetrios G. Papademetriou, Senior Associate and Co-Director of the International Migration Policy Program.

Mr. Jean spoke about the process of the migration issue between Canada and the United States. In 1996 they were concerned about the people who were coming illegally to the United States through Canada. This is because they were afraid of terrorism and they wanted to control the threat of illegal drugs. After discussing this issue Mr. Jean and some American politicians made an agreement for having an open border. In his presentation Mr. Jean used a very technical vocabulary that was very difficult for me to understand. I believe that the agreement for having open borders was reached because they thought in this way they would have more control of people who would come from Canada to the United States. The United States government was flexible in negotiating this issue because one billion dollars per day is given to this country due to free trade according to Mr. Jeans and what I believe that I understood.

Mr. Mohar from the Embassy of México opened his presentation by saying that México is also a neighbor with the United States in the south, and that last year the U.S. brought to this country 200 billions of dollars as a result of the free trade agreement. Mr. Mohar has been working on the issue of immigration. Mr. Mohar and Mr. Jean made an agreement to import Mexican workers every year to work in Canada. Canada uses about 70,000 workers during the harvest season. After the harvest season is finished all of the Mexican laborers return to México. While the Mexicans workers are in Canada they are treated good, paid good salaries and they also have health care. Mr. Mohar wants to make a similar deal with the United States. This is because there are many Mexicans crossing the border every day looking for a better opportunity in their lives. Also, many of the Mexicans who are here working illegally are unprotected by the law and have a very difficult time surviving.

This presentation was not a discussion or debate. It was a reflection of what has happened in the last five years. This was because Mr. Jean is going back to Canada in July, and Mr. Papademetriou asked him and Mr. Mohar to give their impressions about those five years of working together here in Washington, DC.

Journal Entry 24
June 30, 2000
Friday

9:30 p.m. Today I was told to do a summary about the Legal Service Corporation (LSC). I am going to write about who funds this program and what kind of issues they work on. Also I am going to give some historical information about this program and the problems that it has been facing lately from some people in the U.S. Congress.

I began to read about the LSC and hopefully on Monday (07/03/00) I will be able to write the summary. This weekend should be interesting because of the Fourth of July celebration. I am planning to go to the Mall and see the festival. I heard that there are very interesting things to see.

Journal Entry 25
July 3, 2000
Monday

6:30 p.m. I spent most of the day writing the first draft of a summary about the Legal Service Corporation (LSC). I think that because tomorrow (07/04/00) is a holiday, this week will be slow. This is because when the congress people are not in session there is nothing to do. What I mean is that there are no conferences or meetings about issues that need to be addressed.

This is the draft that I wrote today:

The purpose of this paper is to present the problems that the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) is facing today. This paper reviews its funding, the restrictions that have been imposed on the LSC, and the consequences of those restrictions toward poor communities. The LSC is a non-profit organization and has several offices all over the country. The main perspective when the LSC was founded was the idea that it would be independent of political influences. However, because the LSC was challenging towns to demand better services for poor communities, some politicians criticized the people who work for the LSC as “ideological vigilantes.” Since its creation in 1974, the LSC faced its first restrictions.

When the LSC was first funded in 1974 its entire budget came from the federal government. In 1975, the LSC got $71.5 million, and in 1981, it received $321.3 million. This helped the LSC to expand their services to rural areas where poor people did not have the opportunity to find a lawyer. Also, the LSC-funded lawyers began to take larger legal cases on behalf of their clients. Because many congressional members disagree with the LSC’s agenda, they have been cutting its financial budget over the last several years. In 1995, the LSC’s funding was cut abruptly from $400 million to $278 million. This was because congressional members did not agree with the LSC’s standpoints and were trying to eliminate it. However, congressional supporters have managed to keep the program alive.

Because the LSC had been involved in several civil rights issues representing poor communities, some people in the Congress told President Nixon that in order to give federal funds to this program some restrictions should be applied. One restriction was that the LSC’s lawyers could not file school desegregation cases. Also, the lawyers could not be involved in abortion rights issues or with organizing and social protests. Another restriction was that they could not be involved in post conviction civil challenges where they could say that the jury was not put together fairly.

Politicians who did not agree with the LSC’s political agenda have been trying to get rid of the program for several years. Other critics of the LSC looked for a new reform instead of cutting the program. Those critics finally succeeded in 1996 when the LSC suffered other restrictions. The new restrictions imposed in 1996 prohibited class-action lawsuits, they eliminated the collection of attorneys’ fees, rulemaking, lobbying, litigation on behalf of prisoners, and representation of certain categories of immigrants. They also barred LSC-funded attorneys from challenging state reform laws under any circumstances, even if a state measure unlawfully violated a federal statute.

In August 1996, when the last restrictions were applied, the LSC was forced to pull out of more than 600 class-action lawsuits all over the country. The LSC-funded lawyers were no longer permitted to use specific methods to help their patrons. For example, the class action was considered a powerful tool to work against injustice. With this law, the LSC was capable of helping many people. The LSC-funded lawyers used a class-action suit in California to help a group of farm workers improve their living conditions and salaries, and to have their civil rights respected. Also, a class action lawsuit was used in Baltimore to improve the situation for about 3,000 foster children who were living under abuse for many years. In 1996, the LSC-funded lawyers were prohibited from using federal funds to use the class-action law and the restrictions mentioned above.

All poor people living in this country are being affected by the restrictions applied to the LSC. The Latino community especially is being affected by these restrictions. They cannot receive help for welfare issues any more and they cannot complain even if their rights are being violated.

Journal Entry 26
July 4, 2000
Tuesday

Today we are planning to go to the Mall. The Independence Day celebration will begin at 9:10 p.m. I heard on the radio that there would be more than a half million people at the celebration. I am very excited because this is going to be my first experience celebrating the Independence Day here in the United States and in Washington, DC.

Journal Entry 27
July 5, 2000
Wednesday

7:00 p.m. Today I received feedback from Marisa about my Legal Service Corporation (LSC) paper. I was told that I should add more information to the paper. She gave me another book to read about the restrictions that the LSC is facing. Marisa also told me that I should emphasize more about the Latino community.

This is my own opinion. I understand that this office (MALDEF) works just with the Latino population. But, I do not feel comfortable just talking about the Latinos’ needs when there are more minorities and other poor people that are being hurt by the restrictions that were applied to the LSC. I really do not understand why every ethnic group should have their special programs to help them, instead of all these programs getting together and being stronger to fight injustice.

Journal Entry 28
July 6, 2000
Thursday

9:30 p.m. I am still feeling this week as very slow. I think that this is because many Congress people are still away. Today, I helped Nelly do some photocopying. I also answered the phone. Nelly, Maricela, and I went to have lunch together. Nothing really interesting happened today. I am still adding information to my Legal Service Corporation paper. Sometimes it is difficult for me to understand what I am reading because the vocabulary is very technical. I need to read these books with my dictionary next to me in order to understand more accurately.

Journal Entry 29
July 7, 2000
Friday

7:30 p.m. Today I sent some faxes to Texas and Los Angeles. I answered the phone and I helped Nelly make some photocopies. I also read the last booklet that Marisa gave me about the Legal Services Corporation (LSC).

It is very frustrating for me to learn how the congress people have the power to impose restrictions on the LSC’s lawyers that do not allow them to help the poor people. For example, before the restrictions, the LSC’s lawyers could use the class-action suit to help their clients in housing eviction, job discrimination, etc. By using this tool they were also helping other people who were not involved in the cases but were also affected by those same issues. This is because the party that was being sued was forced to rewrite their laws in order to avoid more legal problems.

Today I phoned Mr. Gustavo Mohar. He works in public relations in the Mexican Embassy. I met him two weeks ago at a meeting about immigration issues. At that time I introduced myself and I asked him if I could work as an intern next summer in the Mexican Embassy. He told me yes, but that I would need to call him before I leave Washington, DC to go back to New York City. He wanted to know what issues I was interested in. I have an appointment to see him on Monday, July 10, 2000 at 10:00 a.m.

Journal Entry 30
July 10, 2000
Monday

9:45 p.m. Today at 10:00 a.m. I went to go see Mr. Gustavo Mohar at the Mexican Embassy. He was very friendly and we talked for about 25 minutes. Mr. Mohar told me that the Mexican Embassy has student interns every summer. If I want to be an intern I only need to call them in advance and let them know if I am an undergraduate or graduate student in order to place me in the right position. Mr. Mohar also told me that there is a possibility that he would be at the Embassy only until this November 2000, because with the change of the president in México there will be some changes at the Embassy.

Mr. Mohar gave me his personal e-mail and told me to be in touch with him. He also told me that if he knows the people who will be coming to the Mexican Embassy after he leaves, he will talk to them about me. In this way it will be easier for me to be accepted as an intern in the Mexican Embassy for next summer (2001).

I got back to the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund office at about 10:45 a.m. Marisa, my supervisor, gave me information about a meeting and a class that Maricela and I will be attending tomorrow at 9:00 a.m. (07/11/00). The class will be at the Federal Registration Building. In this class we are going to learn how to read the “Federal Registration Book” that is published daily. The law or laws that are in the process of being passed by the Congress people are published in this book.

The next meeting that I will attend is going to be at 10:00 a.m. tomorrow (07/11/00). The name of this meeting is, “First Monday 2000, United to End Gun Violence.” The speakers will be the U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, U.S. Representative Carolyn McCarthy (NY-4), U.S. Representative Rosa DeLauro (CT-3), U.S. Representative Connie Morella (MD-8), U.S. Representative Bobby Rush (IL-1), and Leslie Willis-Lowry, the mother of a victim of gun violence. The meeting is going to be at the National Education Association, 1201 16th Street NW, Washington, DC 20036. There will also be a new film shown that looks at three families’ experiences with gun violence.

Journal Entry 31
July 11, 2000
Tuesday

8:30 p.m. Today I attended a meeting at 10:00 a.m. The name of the meeting was “First Monday 2000,” and the issue was gun control. The main speaker at this meeting was Janet Reno, the Attorney General of the country. She was the first speaker. After Janet Reno spoke, a group of senators, and families that have been hurt by gun violence, gave speeches also.

There were about 200 college students at the meeting. They came from different colleges from all over the country. Most of the students were very young. The students were encouraged by the senators and Janet Reno to stay in college because in the future they could make a difference. This was because many of the students who attended the meeting might be working for the government in the future. If so, they will have the opportunity to work on the issues that they are concerned about.

At the end of the meeting I registered with the activist groups that are against gun violence. They will send me information about their future meetings. Also, in September 2000 “First Monday 2000” will have programs and workshops against gun violence at most of the colleges in the country. They told me that there was a possibility that my college will have a program so that I could also participate.

I returned to the MALDEF office about 3:00 p.m. I asked my supervisor, Marisa, if she wanted me to write a memo about the “First Monday 2000” meeting, and she told me no. She said that the purpose of this meeting was to be exposed to other kinds of issues that concerned the population. At the end of the day I was told that MALDEF would give a presentation the next day at 9:00 a.m. at another civil rights organization.

Journal Entry 32
July 12, 2000
Wednesday

7:30 p.m. Today at about 9:00 a.m. I attended a MALDEF presentation at another civil rights organization. The people who work at MALDEF were asked to give a presentation in front of 20 students that have come from different colleges from all over the country. These students will be here in Washington, DC for one week. They will be attending different meetings before they go to their internships in different cities.

At this presentation Marisa spoke about what MALDEF focuses on. She said that the MALDEF organization works mostly on Latino issues. Marisa works on civil rights issues, voting, and the census. Christina Chavez Cook works on immigration issues, especially undocumented workers. Angelo Amador works on education issues. He follows the changes of administration in junior high schools and in high schools and focuses mostly on standardized testing.

Marisa said that MALDEF supports the Latino representatives in the government. She mentioned how they put pressure on the senate to get the federal judge, Richard Paez, elected. Paez is one of the few Latinos that works for the federal government, and it was very difficult to get him elected. This was because the Republicans did not want Paez as a federal judge. MALDEF and other civil rights organizations got together to put pressure on the Republican senators to vote in Paez’s favor.

The presentation ended at about 10:30 a.m. After the presentation we went back to the office. I spent most of the day reading the newspaper and the Federal Register Book. I also made some photocopies for Christina.

Journal Entry 33
July 13, 2000
Thursday

7:30 p.m. I spent most of the day reading newspapers. Also, I went to pick up a package for Christina at the photocopy shop that is located at the corner of K Street and 21st Avenue. I am still working on my research papers. Today I could not do much work on my papers because I did other things, but I really enjoyed the day.

Tomorrow (07/14/00) I will try to spend more time on my research papers. I noticed that I have some problems in paraphrasing the statistics information. This experience is showing me where I need to work hard to improve my skills. I also noticed that my vocabulary has improved and I feel more confident now than before.

Journal Entry 34
July 14, 2000
Friday

10:25 p.m. Today was a very calm day. I read the newspapers again and the Federal Register book. I did as much as I could with my papers. At 2:00 p.m. we had our weekly meeting. Marisa will not be out next week because she has to give several presentations. Also, Marisa will be attending a press conference next week. MALDEF will be supporting a bill that is going to be at the senate house. This bill will address immigration issues. If the Congress people pass this bill many farm workers will benefit. Also, people from Central America will be able to fix their legal status in this country.

I left the office about 5:45 p.m. According to the weather report tomorrow will be a nice day. I will try to enjoy it and I will go to visit some places that I have not yet visited.

Journal Entry 35
July 17, 2000
Monday

7:00 p.m. Today Marisa gave me a new assignment. She gave me a General Accounting Office (GAO) report. Marisa told me to read it and write a summary about it. This report is about Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO), and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). These are the offices where the federal workers can file a complaint when they feel that they are being discriminated against.

According to my understanding the EEO office receives the cases first. The EEO office decides if the cases go to court or not. If the worker being affected feels that the decision is not fair he/she can appeal at the EEOC office. The EEOC office is the highest level that the federal workers can go. The report also analyzes the unresolved cases that are in the EEO office and the time that it takes to process them.

Journal Entry 36
July 18, 2000
Tuesday

8:25 p.m. Today I received information about the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). I am going to read this information and summarize the main points.

I went through the information quickly and this is what I understood. The OSHA’s mission is to protect American workers. OSHA works with the employer and with the employee to reduce risk in the work place. The following are some examples of what OSHA does:

1.) Implements new safety programs or improves the existent ones
2.) Creates mandatory job safety and health standards
3.) Establishes responsibilities and rights for employers and employees to achieve better safety and health conditions
4.) Maintains a reporting and record keeping system to monitor job-related injuries and illnesses
5.) Establishes training programs to increase the competence of occupational safety and health personnel
6.) Develops, analyzes, evaluates, and approves state occupational safety and health programs
7.) Provides technical and compliance assistance, training and education, and cooperative programs and partnerships to help employers reduce worker accidents and injuries

In comparison to last week (week of 07/10/00), it seems that I am going to be very busy this week. Tomorrow (07/19/00) I will be attending a press conference at the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill. The speakers will be Cecilia Muñoz, Vice President of the National Council of La Raza (NCLR), Manuel Mirabal, Chair and President of the National Puerto Rican Coalition, Brent Wilkes, Executive Director (DC Office) of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), Oscar Sanchez, Executive Director of the Labor Council for Latin American Advancement, Larry González, Director (DC Office) of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials, and Marisa Demeo, Regional Counsel for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF).

Journal Entry 37
July 19, 2000
Wednesday

9:30 p.m. This morning I went to a press conference. The conference was held at 2237 Rayburn House Office Building. The name of the conference was “ Latino Leaders to Challenge Congress, Candidates on Immigration Bills.” The Congress people are trying to pass a bill called “High-tech workers. Legislation” (H-1B).

This bill will allow highly qualified workers to come to the United States especially from Asia. This is because the bill is focused an importing people from China, Japan, and India. The representatives from the Latino Organizations were saying that the Latino immigrants should be taken into account also. They are the ones who are doing the hardest jobs in this country. Therefore the Latinos should be treated as equally as the Asian workers that are about to come.

Also, today I was told that tomorrow (07/20/00) I will go to a meeting at the Rayburn House Office Building again. I will be attending a meeting about the Census 2000. The meeting will begin at 10:00 a.m.

Journal Entry 38
July 20, 2000
Thursday

8:50 p.m. Today I went to a meeting at 2237 Rayburn House Office Building. The meeting began at 9:30 a.m. The complaints from the public about the census long form that was used in the 2000 Census were discussed at this meeting.

In the 2000 Census many Americans complained about some of the questions that were asked of them on the census long form. Some people felt that their privacy was invaded with questions such as how many toilets they have, their yearly income, the kind of job they perform, questions about their bills, and some other questions that they thought were too invasive.

The Honorable Dan Miller, Chairman, said that the census long form is the same as the one they used in 1990. The complaints that they received from this year’s census have shown them that the population has changed over the past ten years. This reaction tells them that the population is more aware of the politics behind the census. Therefore the Census Bureau needs to work on these new issues.

Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney said that to serve the populations fairly, they need to know certain information. She also mentioned that in the United States there are some rural areas where there is no electricity or drainage. If they do not get this information many communities will not receive the help that they need. The congresswoman added that the government relies heavily upon the census to distribute the money every year and that was the reason why they ask these types of questions. She says that to avoid problems in the future they need to educate the population about those issues. In this way people will better understand the purpose of the questions.

Journal Entry 39
July 21, 2000
Friday

10:45 p.m. Today I began to write the report about yesterday’s meeting. The day was kind of slow and I was in the office all day. I helped Nelly make some photocopies and answer the phone. Maricela, the other intern, was in my office for about two hours doing some research on the Internet on my computer. In the meantime I read the information about the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

At 2:30 p.m. we had our weekly meeting. We talked about the projects that we are working on. At the end of the meeting I told them that this would be my last meeting with them because my internship will end on July 26th. I really felt kind of sad because I have already gotten used to working in the office, going to meetings, and learning about different issues. They told me to save the speech for Wednesday because all of us are going to have lunch together. This is because Christina Chavez Cook is leaving the organization. Next week will be her last week at the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF).

Christina has been working for MALDEF for two years. She works on immigration issues. I believe that she is going to New Mexico where she will be working for another civil rights organization. Also, on Wednesday we are going to attend a soccer game here in Washington DC. The game will begin at 7:30 p.m.

Maricela, Nelly and I left the office at 5:45 p.m. Nelly invited us to go to a church where they were having a party. We went to the church. The church is located in Adams Morgan where most of the Latino population is concentrated. I decided to go because I want to do my research paper on immigration issues. I also wanted to know the area because I want to do fieldwork in Adams Morgan before I leave Washington, DC. When we arrived in Adams Morgan I noticed that there were many young Latino males on the street trying to sale fake green cards. I would like to interview some of them and find out what it is going on. If I am lucky I may find out some good information for my research paper that I will do this coming fall semester.

Journal Entry 40
July 24, 2000
Monday

9:30 p.m. Today at about 11:00 a.m. Marisa told me to finish the job that I have pending. She also told Angelo and Christina not to give me anymore jobs. I focused all day on the report called “The American Community Survey (ACS) - A Replacement for the Census Long Form.” This is the report that I wrote:

On July 20, 2000 I attended a hearing called “The American Community Survey (ACS) ¾ A Replacement for the Census Long Form.” This hearing was held at 2358 Rayburn House Office Building. The purpose of this hearing was to discuss some of the issues that were raised as a result of the census long form 2000. In the Census 2000 many Americans complained about the questions that they were asked to answer. Another complaint was that it took too much time to answer the census long form. Others felt uncomfortable about answering some of the questions that they thought were too personal.

The chairperson, The Honorable Dan Miller, said that the census long form was used in 1990 and that at that time no one complained about it. The complaints that they received from the Census 2000 showed them by comparison that the population has changed politically and that people are more aware of the politics behind the census. The chairperson said that the hearing was organized to examine this problem and to work on finding a solution.

A new survey form that was in discussion will be a substitute for the census long form. I believe this new form will be called the “American Community Survey” (“ACS”). This form will be similar to the census long form and it will be sent by mail every year. They hope that this new form will address the American people’s concerns. Several questions were addressed concerning the ACS. For example, will the new survey method be cost efficient, should it be mandatory to answer or not, will rural areas receive quality and timely data, will the information be accurate and consistent, and finally will this survey address the privacy concerns of the American people.

Congressperson Carolyn Maloney said that the decennial census does two things. First, it counts the population and obtains demographic, social, and economic information by asking one in six American households to fill out a long form. Second, the information is necessary for the proper administration of federal programs and the distribution of approximately $180 billion federal dollars per year. Congressperson Maloney said that people who criticize the census long form would also criticize the ACS. This is because those people do not understand or know the needs of the American population or they do not care.

In the last Census 2000 many Americans felt that their privacy had been invaded. This was because there were questions on the census long form that some people felt were inappropriate. Others thought that the questions were too personal. Americans wanted to know why the government needed to know about the size of their checks, the kinds of jobs they perform, what time they leave for work, how long it takes them to get to their jobs, and the amount of money that they pay annually for electricity, gas, water, sewers, oil, coal, and wood.

Congressperson Maloney said that in order to fulfill the American population’s needs they need to ask these types of questions. Also, she said, that the government relies on the census data when they distribute money to communities, and if the data are not accurate the money will not be distributed fairly among communities. She mentioned that they are responsible for the complaints because they did not prepare the American people properly. They are thinking of educating the American people about these issues in the future, and letting them know the purposes of the questions. Even though the United States is the richest country in the world there are many people living in poverty and so in order to solve these problems they need to have the most accurate data.

The Honorable Mac Collins, Member of Congress, said that there have been two proposals for collecting data as a result of the census long form. The first method could be a postcard census for reapportionment, and the other one could be handled through surveys and polls. The second proposal of using surveys and polls seems to have more acceptance among the congress people. It could be done every year. They think that in this way they would have more accurate information. Also, the congress people would know what issues to work on because they will have the statistics more frequently.

There were other speakers addressing the problems about the census long form. According to what I understood, the points mentioned above were the most relevant for me. This is because the other speakers were addressing the same issues but using a vocabulary more sophisticated than mine. But I believe that they were concerned because the American population disagreed in the way that the Census 2000 was conducted. So in order to keep the population quiet they are working on new ideas. I strongly believe that people have the power to demand what they need. The problem is to convince them that this is true. It is hard to fight against the ideology that the media is sending everyday. It is difficult but not impossible. I believe that we can make a difference if we are not afraid to act.

Journal Entry 41
July 25, 2000
Tuesday

10:30 p.m. Today I was working on the last two reports that I have to complete before I leave the MALDEF office on July 26, 2000. At about 10:00 a.m. I saw Christina Chavez Cook and I told her that I wanted to write my fall semester research paper on the subject of immigration. She told me that there was going to be a press conference at 1:00 p.m. at the Rayburn House Office Building on immigration. She suggested that I go to this press conference because I would be able to meet people that could give me information I could use for my paper.

I went to the press conference and the main subject was a discussion of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) and also the most recent 1996 Immigration Act. A 101-page bill was presented. The people who worked on this bill are hoping that most of the issues in the bill will be passed before the Congress goes into recess.

The 1986 IRCA allowed undocumented immigration to legalize their status here in the U.S. However, the 1996 Immigration Act stipulates that undocumented immigrants should leave the U.S. in order to get their “green cards.” This is causing many problems because people who have been in the U.S. for many years because they will have to leave their family members and social support group in order to get their legal status. This will cause the dissolution of families and financial and emotional hardship.

The bill that was presented is addressing these issues. The framers of the bill are hoping that this new law will allow the undocumented to remain in the U.S. while legalizing their status.

Because I attended this press conference I did not have enough time to finish my last reports. I am working very carefully now on these last two reports. Tomorrow I will do everything possible to be able to submit my last reports to my supervisor, Marisa. One of the reports is about the U.S. General Accounting Office and the other one is about the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

Journal Entry 42
July 26, 2000
Wednesday

11:00 p.m. Today was my last day at the Mexican Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF). I felt sad because I got used to working with wonderful people. All of them helped me tremendously during my internship with them. I am very grateful to have had this opportunity because it taught me about issues that I didn’t even know existed. For example, I was exposed to congressional hearings where issues are debated in order to make new laws. I attended press conferences and academic and activist conferences.

Because it was my last day the MALDEF staff invited me to have lunch with them. Then, later on at 6:30 p.m. we met to go to a soccer game at RFK stadium in Washington, DC. The Washington, DC team played against a soccer team from Massachusetts. I really enjoyed the game and the affection that everyone showed toward me. I will try to maintain contact with my new friends at MALDEF.

The following are my last two reports:

In July 1998 the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) reported the amount of unresolved complaints that were compiled by the Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) office between the fiscal years 1991 and 1997. They also analyzed the increase in time that it took to process complaints. According to the report the increase in time and in unresolved complaints was due to the fact that federal agencies and the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) were not able to keep up with the outpouring of new cases coming into the agencies.

An updated report was released on August 16, 1998. This report was focused on two main areas. The first one looked at the size of the records and length of time that the cases have been there plus the phases of the process of the EEO. The second area looked at the number of complaints “filed by the federal workers and the time taken by the federal agencies and EEOC to fix them” (Equal Employment Opportunity, Complaint Caseloads Rising with Effects of New Regulations on Future Trends Unclear, p. 1).

According to the GAO, there were 36,333 complaints at the EEO’s office in 1998. In comparison to the fiscal year of 1997 the increase was six percent. Between fiscal year 1991 and fiscal year 1998 the inventory in federal agencies, the EEO, and EEOC increased about 648 percent (Equal Employment Opportunity, Complaint Caseloads Rising with Effects of New Regulations on Future Trends Unclear, pp. 5-6). According to the GAO report the increase of inventories in those agencies was because the pending cases that those agencies had were processed slowly.

It should take approximately 180 days for a case to be processed. On some occasions the cases take longer than 180 days to be processed and as a result the inventories increase in the agencies. For example, in fiscal year 1991 it took 173 days for the EEOC office to process a case, however, by fiscal year 1997 it took 227 days. This comparison shows one of the reasons why the inventories have increased so much (Equal Employment Opportunity, Complaint Caseloads Rising with Effects of New Regulations on Future Trends Unclear, p. 10).

The GAO report about complaints filed with the EEO office and other federal agencies analyzes the workload that the federal agencies have. What I understood from the report is that the federal agencies receive more cases than they actually process. This is because the federal agencies do not have the resources that they need. For example, they do not have enough staff to speed up the process. I think that the people who are in charge of the federal agencies should do something to take care of this matter. In this way they will give better service to the people who need help. The second report is on OSHA

In this paper I will try to describe the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and explain what it does. OSHA was created under the Occupational Safety and Health Administration Act of 1970 - the OSHA Act. Congress people passed the law to insure security for all working people in the U.S. and to give them healthful working conditions at their workplace.

The goal of OSHA is to protect the American workers and to inspire employers and employees to minimize danger in the workplace. OSHA creates obligatory job safety and health standards. It also imposes responsibilities to achieve improvements and better working environments for workers. OSHA keeps a record system to follow job injuries and illnesses and encourages workers to increase safety in the workplace. It provides technical training assistance and cooperative programs to help employers reduce accidents.

In 1970 nothing existed to protect the American workers against health hazards and to insure workplace safety. That same year the Congress examined annual reports of accident estimates and the causes for more than 14,000 workers deaths. The reports showed that workplace injuries and casualties had incapacitated almost 2.5 million workers. OSHA’s goal was to cut down those numbers. They did this by working together with the workers and the employers. When there is a workplace with a high rate of accidents OSHA goes there to improve the environment and train the workers as well as the employers. In this way OSHA has been able to reduce the number of workplace accidents.

Employers must let the workers know in a written statement about the danger of any materials at the work site or other safety hazards. The statement must include the names of all chemicals that might be in certain areas. Employers should also have special training for employees, the proper labeling of materials, and data sheets. In this way the employees will be more protected against dangerous materials. Workers must be informed about the locations of medical services in case of an accident so they will know in advance where to go. OSHA encourages the employers and the employees to discuss safety and health issues to avoid fatal consequences.

The workers have the right to pursue safety and health on the job without being afraid of punishment. In Section 11 (c) of the OSHA Act of 1970, the law says the employer “shall not punish or discriminate against employees for exercising such rights as complaining to the employer” (OSHA: Employee Workplace Rights, U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 1997: 10). If employees believe that they have been discriminated against for exercising their rights they must contact an OSHA office within 30 days. An OSHA representative will then open a file and contact the person for an interview. If OSHA finds that the complaint has merit the agency will require payment of compensatory damages.