Infinite Dia(b)logue

MLK in Chicago 1966

2011-04-04T09:49:00.001-05:00

Unfortunately, this video wouldn't be much different today.

HUD Puts Recipients "On Notice"

2009-08-20T16:25:00.004-05:00

[Cross posted at www.justinmassa.com and co-authored by Justin Massa.]

Today, it is likely that most if not all of the 1,200+ states, counties, and municipalities across the country that receive CDBG funds are revisiting their plans and procedures. The Anti-Discrimination Center of Metro New York v. Westchester County settlement, announced last week, requires Westchester to make up for years of neglect regarding the affirmative furthering of fair housing – namely, addressing the impediments to fair housing choice that perpetuate segregation. As HUD’s Deputy Secretary Ron Sims noted during the press conference announcing the settlement, after nearly a decade of lax federal oversight communities around the nation are now “on notice”.

The case makes clear that recipients of federal housing and community development funds “must comply with, inter alia, the provisions of the Housing and Community Development Act, including the requirement that it affirmatively further fair housing”, which it goes on to define as pro-integrative housing policies. Long ignored and often misunderstood, affirmative furthering of fair housing has always been about promoting, fostering, and sustaining integration in the housing market.

The case could not be more timely. While a significant victory for fair housing and integration advocates, the Westchester settlement is small in comparison to the benefit that proper regulations from HUD on the duty to affirmatively further fair housing may provide. Regulations that are currently being drafted by HUD staff and are slated to be published for public comment within the next few months.

To understand the potential implications of the settlement and new regulations, take a look at the numbers. Under the settlement, Westchester County will spend roughly $50 million on affirmatively located affordable housing developments over the next 5 years. Annually, HUD allocates over $20 billion to affordable housing through CDBG, HOME, Section 8, voucher, and public housing funds. Billions more dollars in Low-Income Housing Tax Credits are used annually to finance affordable housing programs.

Currently, regulations regarding the affirmative furthering of fair housing are vague, process-oriented, unaccountable, and largely ineffective. Updating them to require measurable actions with targeted outcomes, subject to oversight and review, would result in powerful positive impacts. We believe these regulations should:

Provide a strong definition of affirmative furthering of fair housing as housing policies that promote integration of those protected by the Fair Housing Act. Recipients must show that they will develop new affordable housing in a manner that expands housing options for protected persons, particularly geographic expansion to high-opportunity communities with plentiful jobs, good schools, and quality services.
Require that Analyses of Impediments and Fair Housing Action Plans address systemic and structural barriers to fair housing choice. In analyses of impediments, recipients should be required to address how current patterns of segregation and points of resistance to diversity and integration (such as municipal zoning, industry practices, and popular (mis)perceptions) limit housing choices and integration. Recipients’ fair housing action plans must address measurable actions with specified goals to overcome these impediments.
Afford MPOs (Metropolitan Planning Organizations) with the resources and authority to determine regional priorities and disparities regarding affirmative furthering of fair housing. Overlapping local and state recipients should be required to cite these regional issues in their analyses and plans.
Clearly state that all federal community development funds should promote regional equity and greater opportunity in disinvested areas. Strategically spending economic, education, and infrastructure dollars to increase opportunity in disinvested areas will balance regional development and enhance the quality of life for everyone.
Improve transparency and accountability by compelling recipients to post their plans online, hold them open for public comment, and engage the community in the planning process. These are key components of the Obama administration’s commitment to good government and will reduce the oversight burdens on HUD by empowering local fair housing advocates with critical information.

Forty-one years later after its passage, we now have a chance to realize the full promise of the Fair Housing Act. HUD’s forthcoming affirmative furthering regulations will determine the future of our metropolitan regions, and we hope that the drafters within HUD are taking the time and care to get them right. While many in the fair housing community are anxious to see progress, the implications of these new rules are simply too large to rush them. With more than $20 billion annually at stake, these new regulations will determine if we will begin to actively promote fairness and regional equity or continue to segregate opportunity along racial and economic lines.

Testimony to the National Commission on Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity

2008-11-11T11:03:00.008-06:00

Introduction

Over the past 40 years, the fair housing movement has certainly made important progress toward ensuring the rights of individuals in their search for housing. Most significantly, systemic victories against lending and insurance redlining have improved the access to these services for people of color and other protected persons. In addition, random and systemic audits of real estate companies have provided gradual improvement in the expansion of homeownership locations available to protected persons.

However, the first 40 years of fair housing advocacy has almost completely failed at improving the integration of metropolitan communities. Differing segregation measurements show that communities throughout the United States continue to suffer from high segregation[1]. In many regions, while change occurs it often creates short-term integration that is replaced in short order by re-segregation. Common examples include gentrifying neighborhoods in central cities and suburban municipalities that experience increases in minority population. In the vast majority of these cases, increased diversity is followed by re-segregation that is due to displacement or flight[2].

This continual changing structure of segregation is due in part to the fact that in 1968, when the Fair Housing Act passed, American cities were already segregated in a way that privileged whites over people of color in nearly every quality of life measurement. Moreover, the most significant systemic victories (or their remedies) did not begin to manifest until the 1980s[3].

In their HUD-funded, landmark study of neighborhood diversity, Philip Nyden, John Lukehart, Michael Maly, and William Peterman found that the most stable diverse communities have “developed the institutional structures, social arrangements, and political-social environment to sustain their diversity. Among these structures are community organizations developed specifically to promote the community as racially and ethnically diverse[4].” Included among the activities are efforts to promote positive perceptions of diverse communities, affirmative marketing programs that seek to encourage inclusiveness, and active promotion of the goals of fair housing. They conclude that “stable diverse neighborhoods will not develop on their own; they require active intervention to counter misconceptions about diversity and a lack of institutional support for diversity[5].”

HUD and the fair housing community have largely failed to embrace the need to support community organizations that will affirmatively further fair housing in ways that foster and improve integration. The language of the most stable federal funding for fair housing activities, the Fair Housing Initiatives Program (FHIP), makes no mention of affirmative furthering or integration efforts in its fundable activities. It focuses solely on enforcement efforts through either investigation or education and outreach. This failure makes it nearly impossible for organizations focusing on integration to receive funding via FHIP.

At the same time, HUD does little to enforce the mandate for CDBG entitlement jurisdictions and their sub-grantees (EJs) to affirmatively further fair housing. In many cases, the only activities EJs engage in are poster contests for children or leaving fliers at libraries and municipal offices – activities that are not affirmative. Cases of affirmative activities such as promoting a community to underserved populations, establishing an active commission or sub-commission, or encouraging pro-integrative policies in their planning and development processes are extremely rare.

This is all the more tragic given that the academic literature on the subject of improving regional integration overwhelmingly supports the effectiveness of intentional programs. Cleveland State University professor Dennis Keating provides the most direct statement regarding neighborhood and community integration. In his study of racial change in Cleveland’s suburbs (including Shaker Heights), Keating explicitly frames his argument around the statement that, “to achieve the goal of community integration, affirmative housing policies are required[6].” Others concur and/or provide evidence that integration cannot be achieved solely through enforcement activity[7].

Keating and others come to this conclusion because they are aware of the limitations of fair housing enforcement techniques. The reactive nature of fair housing enforcement provides a number of restrictions to effective engagement in integrated communities. National estimates figure that less than 1% of discrimination complaints are reported[8]. When complaints are reported and referred to HUD or local agencies, the extremely long time it takes to remedy the complaints deters many complainants from completing the process. Most importantly, complaint-based fair housing efforts have absolutely no effect on the most difficult obstacle to integrated communities – white avoidance of communities of color.

Racial Attitudes Toward Integration

The reluctance of whites to live in communities of color is in continuous opposition to integration through at least three distinct processes. The best known of these three is white flight, in which white residents leave communities when minority populations increase in their neighborhood or community. A second, more benign, process is white avoidance, where whites refuse to consider moves to predominantly minority communities. A third process is gentrification, where communities seem integrated for a short period as whites begin to move into communities that become newly desirable and eventually significantly displace minority residents partly due to economic circumstances.

In all these cases, attitudes toward racial integration play a primary role. University of Pennsylvania professor Camille Zubrinsky Charles has conducted extensive research into racial housing preferences. In a multi-city survey, Charles found that only 45% of whites are willing to move into a neighborhood that is one-third black and fewer than 30% of whites would consider moving into a neighborhood that is majority black[9]. Latinos and Asians have similar attitudes toward black neighborhoods, always finding them to be the least desirable of any racial makeup.

Likewise, professor Lincoln Quillian of Northwestern University analyzed data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (matched data from multiple censuses) and found that whites are very reluctant to move from a current residence to a census tract where the percentage of African Americans is higher[10].

In 2002, professors Evan McKenzie and Jay Ruby wrote an article chronicling their revisiting of integration strategies in Oak Park, IL. Oak Park is a model for promoting meaningful and lasting community integration. The authors concluded that, even in a community where diversity and integration are values, the programs should continue. In particular, the section regarding the primary community organization implementing the affirmative policies, the Oak Park Regional Housing Center, concludes that:

[T]he reason for its creation has not changed. White people are reluctant to rent in neighborhoods where there are a significant number of black tenants… If Oak Park is to continue to realize its goal of dispersed integration then the Center will have to continue to induce white demand in East Oak Park.[11]

The research for McKenzie and Ruby’s article included Ruby volunteering to spend time as the receptionist for the Oak Park Regional Housing Center when he discovered that “white clients who knew almost nothing about Oak Park arrived at the Center convinced they knew where the ‘bad’ places to live are located[12].”

The attitudes chronicled here are not always based on explicit racial prejudice. In many cases, they are indicative of knowledge gaps that perpetuate misperceptions and misconceptions. In 2004, UIC professors Maria Krysan and Tyrone Forman found that people of all races are ill informed of neighborhoods and communities where they are not in the majority. Whites were the most likely to not know about communities where they were not in the majority.

Regardless of how these attitudes are shaped, it is important to note that the work of integration cannot be solely the responsibility of people of color and others protected by the Fair Housing Act. Moreover, accomplishing integration requires more than enforcing the limited number of complaints filed. True affirmative furthering of fair housing mandates that whites must participate in integration efforts as well.

Other Structural Factors

The lack of regional or inter-municipal programs to address segregation has also hampered pro-integration advocacy and policy. In particular, the decision in Miliken v Bradley is significant. Despite its content relating to school desegregation, the Supreme Court’s decision to limit the ability to address inter-municipal remedies to segregation played an important role in perpetuating the geography of inequality that provides the foundational structure of nearly all American metropolises today.

The geographies of housing segregation and regional opportunity/inequality correlate nearly one-to-one. This pattern was first confirmed by the Leadership Council for Metropolitan Open Communities in its 2006 report The Segregation of Opportunity and has been repeatedly confirmed in other metropolitan regions across the nation.

Another hope lost was that an increase in the African American middle class would produce greater integration and reduced discrimination. Yet, study after study shows that wealthy African Americans are more isolated than poor whites[13]. (It should be noted that personal decisions to abandon the goals of integration and instead move to predominantly minority enclaves has also limited integration.) And, while Asians and Latinos have experienced greater success than African Americans regarding integration with non-Hispanic whites, housing professionals continue to steer Asians and Latinos to ethnic enclaves and a lack of resources for folks with limited English proficiency in many suburbs serves as an impediment to fair housing choice.

In short, the federal government and the fair housing community have had limited success in promoting integration because of a reactive strategy that fails to provide models of inclusion or leadership on affirmative measures. This is partly due to the language of the Fair Housing Act and the Community Development Act. However, it is also significantly the result of a lack of imagination and innovation in fair housing advocacy (an understandable situation given the diminutive and precarious funding and support for fair housing activities).

Proactive Models of Intentional Integration and Affirmative Furthering

In cases where integration, opportunity, and inclusion come together, an intentional effort to be proactive has occurred and in some cases continues to occur. The best known of these programs are located in the Chicago region – the voucher-oriented Gautreaux program and the market-oriented Oak Park Regional Housing Center. Chicago continues to provide further innovation on this subject including a new start-up organization called MoveSmart.org a regional non-profit that aims to expand housing choices by reducing knowledge gaps that perpetuate segregation.

However, similar programs exist in other communities, such as the Inclusive Communities Project in the Dallas/Fort Worth region, the Heights Community Congress in Cleveland’s southeast suburbs, the Maplewood/South Orange Community Coalition in New Jersey.

Essentially, these programs inform housing seekers of their rights and opportunities from the beginning of their search process rather than after housing providers have denied them or discouraged them from quality housing options. These efforts create and sustain diverse, integrated communities of inclusion and harmony. They also create environments that minimize discrimination and expand housing choices. As such, these programs work to guarantee the right to fair housing choice at the beginning of a housing search rather than after an act of discrimination.

Housing patterns form the foundation for all other geographic structures of equality and opportunity. Prioritizing affirmative – pro-integrative – measures will add a sorely missing component to fulfilling the rights of all persons guaranteed under the Fair Housing Act as well as promote a structure of equal opportunity in our metropolitan regions that will assist in ameliorating nearly all other metropolitan problems. 40 years after the Fair Housing Act, it is time we embraced the full spirit and intent of the law.

[1] The most common of these are available at SUNY Albany’s Lewis Mumford Center’s web site http://mumford1.dyndns.org/cen2000/data.html.

[2] Two Chicago examples (where I am most familiar with changing neighborhoods) include Uptown, where low-income African Americans are increasingly isolated in the “Heart of Uptown” while the surrounding portion of the neighborhood gentrifies rapidly, and Cicero where Latino in-migration has coincided with white flight from the suburb.

[3] For instance, the remedies from the Gautreaux case began their implementation in the 1980s. The major systemic lending and insurance cases were decided in the 1980s and 1990s.

[4] Nyden, Phil et al. (1998) Neighborhood Racial and Ethnic Diversity in U.S. Cities. Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research. v4, n2, p9

[5] Ibid p266

[6] Keating, W. Dennis. (1994) The Suburban Racial Dilemma: Housing and Neighborhoods. Temple University Press. p4.

[7] Among others see: powell, john, et al. (2007) Communities of Opportunity: A Framework for a More Equitable and Sustainable Future for All; Briggs, Xavier ed. (2005) The Geography of Opportunity: Race and housing Choice in Metropolitan America. Brookings Press; Schwemm, Robert (2007) “Why Do Landlords Still Discriminate (and What Can Be Done About It)” John Marshall Law Review. v40.

[8] National Fair Housing Alliance 2006 Trends Report.

[9] Charles, Camille Zubrinsky. (2001) Processes of Racial Residential Segregation. From O’Connor, Alice et al. eds. Urban Inequality: Evidence from Four Cities. p237.

[10] Quillian, Lincoln. (2002) Why is Black-White Residential Segregation so Persistent?: Evidence on Three Theories from Migration Data. Social Science Research. v31,p209.

[11] McKenzie, Evan and Jay Ruby (2002) Reconsidering the Oak Park Strategy: The Conundrums of Integration. p30

[12] Ibid.

[13] Smith, Geoff et al. (2007) Paying More for the American Dream: A Multi-State Analysis of Higher Cost Home Purchase Lending. (available at the Woodstock Institute’s website).

To the Future!

2008-11-05T10:01:00.003-06:00

I started writing this blog for a lot of the same reasons I got into civil rights work in the first place. When I talk about how I got into civil rights work, the best explanation I can give is that, growing up in a nearly all-white and mostly-middle class suburb, I really believed that the stuff I learned in history class was how America really worked. I believed the hype that everyone has a fair chance and an equal shot. I believed that there was opportunity for anyone willing to work hard enough for it.

Then, as I became more aware of the inequality and injustices throughout the country, I felt compelled to act and try to make our ideals our reality. I wanted chances to be fair, for shots to be equal, for the playing field to be level. I wanted every American to be a valued and cherished American. I wanted a government to support the middle class, provide for the poor, and guard against greed, hate, and fear. That's why I got involved and that's why I campaigned, donated, and voted for Obama. Because for the first time in my adult life, I believed a candidate would attempt to live up to our ideals.

We have a very long road ahead of us. Our progress on issues of equality and justice is still in its early stages. I don't, and no one else should, expect the Obama administration to fix all our problems in the next 4 to 8 years. But, last night was an important step toward fulfilling the promise of America both because of Obama's race and because of his proposed policies.

I truly feel like that beacon is shining brighter today!

Way to Go, Ohio

2008-10-26T21:12:00.002-05:00

I spent Saturday canvassing in a rural part of Ohio near my hometown of Oregon. It was a great day full of unexpected delights.

The whole structure was not what I expected. I figured that I'd be meeting up with a few people in their early 20s decked out in Obama gear and full of a take-on-the-world attitude. I thought we'd be walking up and down the small town home to the staging area. And, I thought it would last about two or three hours.

Instead, I found myself among a bunch of ladies in their 60s and older. I was paired with a woman named Fay. Fay is 80 years old, spry, and witty. As she told me, she's spent her whole life within a mile and a half of the railroad tracks that run through the township. She'd also been a school teacher in the area. With that kind of experience, she knew just about everything about everyone in the township. It was amazing as she would correctly guess the last names at various addresses we stopped at.

These addresses were along township roads. Some of them the homes of farmers. Most of them not. But, all of them spaced far from one another in that rural pattern so common in Ohio. To get to each of them we didn't walk. Instead, we hopped into Fay's big white pickup truck and drove from house to house. I'd hop out at each place and strike up some conversation and pass out some literature for folks as we met them. Occasionally, Fay would jump out too to catch up with some of the folks she knew well.

The people we met, we're kind and considerate. If they felt it, they never let on hat they found our visit to be annoying or intrusive. Some folks even invited me in to keep warm while we talked. It was really no surprise to me. This is the way people always were when I was living back in Ohio, especially those farther out. There's a sense of knowing that if someone is actually taking the time to come over, they probably have something important to say. After all, it's not like you can just walk next door or across the street.

At the end of the day ,those who would tell us favored Obama over McCain by a margin of about 3 to 1. And, I really think that I answered a few questions in a way that turned people from leaning McCain to leaning Obama. I tried to urge those folks to vote early.

Not one person brought up Bill Ayers or Islam. On person asked me if Barack Obama changed his name. I told them no, but he did go by Barry in high school. I forgot to say, "Do you really think he'd change his name to Barack Obama?"

Most people were worried about health care, energy, and the economy. People are very afraid of slipping out of the middle class. They feel unsure about the future of the economy, wonder how they'll afford to pay for prescriptions and medical care, and think we need to end our dependence on middle eastern oil. I had a long conversation with a guy about energy and drilling. And, I talked about how a company near by called First Solar would benefit and likely expand from a policy change that focused more on domestic more green energy. He seemed to go from undecided to Obama in that conversation.

People were also freaked out about McCain's plan to tax health care benefits. They do NOT like that idea one bit. I never got this far with any of them, but I think the tax on benefits would also be a bigger hit for small businesses (that would also have to pay taxes on that portion of payroll) than any Joe the Plumber scenario. It would be very harmful to small businesses and large businesses too.

Anyone that brought up the war brought it up to say we need to get out of Iraq immediately. In fact, I was stunned at how many people stated that unprompted. I didn't really want to talk about the war much. My plan was to focus on taxes. But, people kept adding on that we're wasting money we need and losing soldiers we love in Iraq just to keep the oil flowing. It's clear that many people feel we're only there to protect the oil.

All in all, it was a good day. The people I met were all white and almost all in their 50s. The fact that they were 3 to 1 for Obama made me feel a little more confident. There were also a lot of undecided voters yet and in many cases, they seemed like folks who would have voted for a more moderate Republican ticket. A lot of those undecided folks thought the Palin selection was a poor choice made purely for political reasons.

I think this part of Ohio is ready for Obama and the change he promises.

Geography and the Invisibility of Poverty

2008-10-15T11:14:00.013-05:00

Folks, today is blog action day and I'm joining in on the fight to eliminate extreme poverty in Illinois. You can do your part as well by going to the From Poverty to Opportunity web site.

Poverty is everywhere. But, it is most concentrated and noticeable in urban and suburban communities of color and rural towns and villages across the country.

I've written previously about the geography of inequality. It is clear that America is geographically divided into places of opportunity and places of struggle. This geography is a powerful force that often has an ability to squelch individual efforts toward self-improvement and actions to ameliorate despair. Documented in so many places (like this, this, and this) poverty isolation is certainly a broad structural barrier to opportunity and equality.

This isolation further frustrates efforts to eliminate poverty by rendering it invisible. By spacializing poverty and opportunity, those of us not in poverty benefit from the privilege to ignore our struggling brothers and sisters. Even during an age where the middle class is shrinking and the economy is failing, the geographic structure of our lives allows us to complete our day-to-day tasks without significantly interacting with those living in poverty. It encourages us to abandon those less fortunate than ourselves. And, it leads us to believe that we're insulated from the possibility of scarcity in our lives.

Perhaps most importantly, this isolation means that when we try to construct structures of opportunity we too often ignore the input of those in need of these structures. It is imperative that those living in extreme poverty must be engaged in the development, implementation and enforcement of the policies that grant freedom from poverty. Our separation discourages cooperative involvement and diminishes our capacity to value all voices and perspectives.

Hopefully, today will be the beginning of greater solidarity between those living in poverty and those living more comfortable lives. Hopefully, we can all reflect today on how the way we value the least fortunate among us is a reflection of how we value basic human dignity and our own integrity. Today is a chance to reflect. But, more importantly, it is a chance to get involved in the cause of eliminating extreme poverty and getting engaged with those we frequently fail to acknowledge.

Not so Calculated Risk

2008-10-08T07:27:00.003-05:00

Calculated Risk is fond of going on about how many homes are "underwater" -- where homeowners owe more on their mortgages than their home is worth. It seems like something we should keep an eye on but I disagree with the conclusions they consistently make stating that these homeowners are likely to default and/or "mail in the keys".

People buy a home for a lot of reasons. One is an attempt to make a smart investment. But, in most cases, that investment is a 20 to 30-year investment, not a 3 to 5-year investment. More importantly, people buy a home to have a place to live! They are not going to simply mail in the keys because their house lost value.

For starters, they often don't even know if the home is worth more than they owe because they don't know how much they owe at any one time. They might know the house has decreased in value but that doesn't mean it's worth less than they owe. And, it also means people have to give up on their dream of home ownership, something many are unwilling to do.

Calculated Risk is a great site, but I think they're taking too many liberties extrapolating on a short-lived, geographically-focused phenomenon. i wonder if there's any historical evidence of folks doing this in past housing busts. If not, then Calculated Risk should consider much more likely factors in defaults such as job losses and catastrophic payments.

How We Got to the Bailout

2008-09-26T13:26:00.005-05:00

Here’s my slightly-less-brief-than-my-comments-at-The Weblog synopsis about what happened in this crisis.

In the mid-1990s sub-prime mortgages begin their steady climb in market share.

Around the same time payday and title loan lending begin to take over America’s corners not already claimed by Walgreens, CVS, and Starbucks, especially in poor neighborhoods where there were no Starbuckses.

In 1998, there are a number of us (me as just a beginner in the movement) that are very loudly (or as loudly as we can) warning that this is problematic and needs to be re-evaluated. At this time, the real problem is that loans are being made with terms that are impossible or nearly impossible to repay. The borrowers are folks that should be able to get better terms. About 90% of the people affected negatively are not white so the problem is ignored.

In the early 2000s, a number of states pass anti-predatory lending laws or regulations. Around the same time, banks that are regulated by CRA are beginning to get in to the game more often. Chase and Citi and WaMu among others buy dedicated sub-prime lenders and designate them “another channel for mortgages” — the wholesale channel (because brokers, not loan officers, are the point of contact for the borrowers). That channel is the channel where people of color get worse terms than they could have gotten through the banks regular retail lending. In Georgia, possibly the state with the best protections passed, the banking industry (with the help of Wall Street and Fannie and Freddie) get the law repealed. Ohio passes a law that essentially is pro-predatory lending in classic Republican-controlled ironic-naming-of-bills fashion. The problem is still largely ignored and still predominantly harms poor people, seniors, and people of color (and most often people who fit all three categories).

Wall Street begins its fury to buy these loans because they offer a higher return than traditional mortgages. Sub-prime loans often have egregious fees, penalties, interest rates, and adjustments that make them look on paper like a better ROI. Even with state regulations, some of which are challenged by federal regulators, there's still room to soak "unsophisticated" borrowers.

(I should add here that some banks and brokers are doing their level best to stay out of this mess. But, it is becoming increasingly difficult to only lend based on sound practices and still get any significant market share.)

In the mid 2000s, competition takes hold in a top-down manner rather than a bottom up manner. This is where things really fall apart. Previously, the problem is more contained with a few banks and investment companies. Now, everyone wants some of that high return. To increase market share, the different investors start offering money with fewer strings attached (see This American Life’s “The Giant Pool of Money” for more detail). Now ridiculously poor judgments are being made and really poor loans are being made and sold into the secondary market.

Fannie and Freddie have lost much of their market share, dramatically, and feel the need to keep up with Wall Street. They have to compete in order to remain relevant and stable. This leads to the eventual conservatorship.

At a point near the beginning of 2006, the investors start to realize their mistakes. So, they accelerate and sophisticate the ways they hide their mistakes through multiple slicing and dicing of good and bad loans in their portfolios. The Urban Institute has a good description of just how incredible this all gets.

The hope is that the increase in home values will continue without pause and save everyone from their poor mistakes simply through inflation. It does not change lending behavior. The brokers have nothing to lose since they’re in and out of the process in a matter of days. Banks think they have nothing to lose because they sell their loans to Fannie, Freddie, and Wall Street. Apparently, Wall Street feels invincible. It just continues to buy these bad loans despite the fact that anyone paying attention, with an iota of financial knowledge, can see this is about to crash hard.

Around the same time, the problem is beginning to get attention because middle class white folks are now beginning to feel the effects as they begin to fail to pay their adjustable rate mortgages.

House prices fail to increase at high rates, then begin to decline or stabilize. Fannie and Freddie can’t capitalize enough. The feds take them over. The reality is now unavoidable.

The secondary market collapses/implodes, especially Wall Street (Fannie and Freddie are essentially still in business). The banks can't sell their bad loans and haven't held on to enough good loans in their own portfolios because those were needed to hide the risks when selling to the secondary market.

We’re $700b short, or maybe its less than that. No one knows for sure because of the shell game upon shell game upon shell game that kept this all going for far too long.

Real School Choice

2008-09-05T09:05:00.001-05:00

If John McCain is serious about school choice being a civil rights issue, perhaps he'd do well to revisit his party's longstanding efforts to ensure that public school districts remain segregated.

It was under the Nixon administration that the federal government fought busing programs and programs that made it possible for poor, minority, inner-city school kids to go to richer, whiter, suburban schools. The Nixon administration could have used its power to withhold Community Development Block Grant funds from municipalities, counties, and states that would not embrace affirmative measures. Instead they fought these measures and Republicans have made their resistance to regional, racial equality a hallmark of their policies ever since.

The Nixon administration even assisted with the fight against school integration in the (unfortunately) landmark case of Milliken v Bradley -- a direct attack on Brown v Board of Education.

Of course, this mentality has continued to today's Supreme Court in the recent school integration cases that included Justices Roberts and Alito -- the type of judges McCain says he wants on SCOTUS -- arguing against voluntary integration.

Here in the Chicago area, State Senator James Meeks used just this idea in his protest against unequal educational opportunities in the region.

The solution isn't to require poor people pay for private education while richer people get public education. It's to equalize the quality of education for everyone by removing the arbitrary barriers of school districts that perpetuate racial, ethnic, and income inequality.

Fannie Mae Ends Declining Markets Policy

2008-05-16T14:02:00.004-05:00

In just a few months, Fannie Mae has ended their declining markets policy in favor of a nationwide policy that requires reasonable down payments on loans regardless of geography. The policy is a win-win for Fannie and the fair housing community as it addresses both sound underwriting practices and fair lending concerns.

You can read Fannie Mae's press release here or this from Reuters.

update: Freddie Mac follows suit.

The State of Fair Housing 2008

2008-05-16T11:11:00.002-05:00

This week, The Chicago Area Fair Housing Alliance released its 2008 State of Fair Housing Report for the 6-County region. The report provides statistics on the frequency of discrimination complaints in the Chicago region and a narrative on the structure of segregation and inequality throughout the region.

It also includes a Blueprint for Change that recommends ways to foster integration, improve access to housing options, and promote sustainable development throughout the region.

You can view it here.

Lebetter v. Goodyear and the Future of Civil Rights

2008-04-24T07:47:00.004-05:00

In case you don't pay attention to civil rights, I'll give you the quick summary of Ledbetter v. Goodyear. Ms. Ledbetter worked for Goodyear a long time, decades actually. And, when she retired she became aware that she made about $6,000 less annually than her male cohorts. As this was the first she became aware of the disparity, she filed a complaint against Goodyear for the pay she didn't receive on the basis of pay equity.

No one disputes Ms. Ledbetter's qualities as an employee of Goodyear. She was a fine employee. But, the Supreme Court ruled against her claim because she filed it too long after the company violated her rights.

This ruling is due to what employment discrimination folks call "temporal proximity" -- in other words, was the complaint filed shortly after the alleged act of discrimination. Shortly is often considered within 90 days but can be even shorter in some cases. The problem with the Supreme Court's ruling is that temporal proximity is really aimed more at retaliatory actions and not, as in Ms. Ledbetter's case, systemic acts of discrimination. The Court is simply wrong in its ruling.

What's even worse is that with this ruling, the Court essentially said to employers, "You can discriminate against your employees as long as they don't find out in time."

Congress is attempting to amend the laws so that the EEOC and the courts will have to allow for longer periods for filing cases. The House passed an amendment to make the language fairer. Republicans are holding it back in the Senate. The President is promising to veto the bill.

Integration Makes the Tribune

2007-08-23T11:40:00.000-05:00

The Chicago Tribune has written an article about integration and the Oak Park Regional Housing Center's new program opening a Berwyn Housing Center. The article features some quotes from me as the Executive Director.

As with all news articles, there is never enough space to thoroughly address everything. Because of this, there are two things I'd like to clarify:

1. The Housing Center has outstanding support from the community and few detractors. Yet, quotes from detractors are included while quotes from supporters are not.

2. The additional service area was never intended to have a detrimental effect on black families hoping to move to Oak Park. We provide, and always have provided, listings in Oak Park to all clients regardless of race.

In addition, we are aware of the barriers, including perceptual barriers, African Americans face when considering affirmative moves in other communities in the western suburbs. The second service area was established to assist black clients interested in those other suburbs.

Realizing Integration

2007-07-09T15:36:00.000-05:00

I posted a very similar entry at From Poverty to Opportunity.

In July 6th's New York Times, David Brooks wrote a column that lamented the failures to integrate our society. In it, he suggests that we should give up on integration and accept that people want to live in a segregated society. It's a depressing read both for its suggestion and for the inaccuracies that Brooks uses to support it.

Brooks isn't alone in his thoughts. Many wonder why it is that we haven't integrated. They usually begin with the same premise. Since the civil rights movement guaranteed people the right to live wherever they want, they must be living apart because that is what they prefer.

This is counter to what most research shows. In actuality, people of all races express interests in living in diverse communities. People of color often express an interest to live in communities that have similar demographics to the regions they live in. Even whites, who express an interest in living in communities where they make up the majority, still indicate preferences to live in diverse neighborhoods. A recent example is the Chicago Area Study performed by professors Maria Krysan and Tyrone Foreman at the University of Illinois at Chicago that found this exact result.

Unfortunately, providing rights is not enough. In order to undo generations of segregation, we need programs that actively -- or as we say in the business, affirmatively -- further fair housing rights. In fact, the Fair Housing Act and many state human and civil rights acts have language explicitly stating that government has a duty to affirmatively further fair housing. Alas, HUD and its state equivalents frequently ignore this duty.

Meanwhile, real estate steering, linguistic profiling, and hate crimes are among many problems that continue to reinforce segregation.

The evidence shows that segregation itself perpetuates racial and ethnic inequality. This is something else Brooks fails to consider as he suggests that maybe segregation is just fine. The Chicago region is an excellent example of how patterns of racial segregation correlate almost exactly with patterns of opportunity*. In the 6-county area, 94% of African Americans and 83% of Latinos live in low-opportunity communities. This is roughly equivalent to the 86% of families in poverty that live in low-opportunity communities.

In these low-opportunity communities residents suffered from:

fewer jobs and transportation options
poorer schools
higher crime
less green space
more pollution and health problems
slower appreciation in housing values and older housing stock
fewer day care slots
reduced civic participation

As a result, the communities have stretched their fiscal capacities to the limit, making it difficult or impossible to provide additional services or incentives to equalize opportunity in the region.

Simultaneously, high-opportunity communities continue to add jobs, improve schools, expand infrastructure, and offer lower taxes. Yet, while high-opportunity communities make up 40% of the region, they have very little affordable housing -- only 4% of the housing affordable to households making 30% of the area median income. Consequently, only 9% of those in poverty live in high-opportunity communities despite the fact that they make up 29% of the total population of the region.

The geography of segregation makes it easy to provide for some while denying others. As a result, it exacerbates every problem we face in America. Giving up on the dream of integration is essentially to give up on the dream of equality and the guarantee of basic human rights we all deserve.

see Lukehart, John et al., The Segregation of Opportunites

Affirmative Action part 1.5

2007-01-17T15:26:00.000-06:00

Eric Alterman was kind enough to print a comment I made regarding Affirmative Action on his blog.

I'll try and get back to the Affirmative Action argument in a week or two.

MLK Day 2007

2007-01-15T11:27:00.000-06:00

This day is a good day to remind ourselves that The Dream has yet to be achieved. That discrimination still occurs. That segregation still determines the fate of so many. That the civil rights movement is still moving.

2006-12-07T08:54:00.000-06:00

Leyland Talks Roster Management

I wish I would have read the articles by Jason Beck and Lynn Henning before I read the Detroit Tigers Weblog this morning. Billfer, who does the DTW, posted about the Leyland's ideas in the articles and and now I feel like I'd be ripping him off if I did the same. Well, maybe just a few thoughts will be okay. If you don’t like links, the content of the articles has three points Billfer commented on. First, Leyland is coming up with a contingency plan for the leadoff spot in case Granderson doesn’t make progress in cutting down on his strikeouts. The two other candidates in Leyland’s eyes are Polanco and Pudge. Leyland also said he was trying to figure out how to get Thames at bats, and thought of trying him out at first base to do so. Finally, facing a similar problem with Omar Infante, he said he’s thinking of giving him some time in the outfield – center field specifically.

As everyone mentions, the Pudge thing sounds nutty when you consider he walked less than forty times in the past two seasons. Everyone also mentions that he seems to adjust his approach when he’s in the leadoff spot, and I think I remember saying the same thing in a post after one of those games where he led off last season. Now if somebody could just talk him into taking that “leadoff approach” regardless of where he bats in the order.

I love the idea of expanding Thames’ and Infante’s roles to get them more at bats. The Thames thing is only surprising in that the idea hasn’t been tossed around before. In the Tigers’ defense, it’s a lot easier to try a guy at a new position in Spring Training than in the middle of a playoff run. The Infante idea is not surprising at all. The Tigers have talked about making him a super-sub in the past and outfield was discussed then as one of his possible responsibilities. I actually thought the Tigers might think of Infante as their fourth outfielder if and when they traded Thames or Monroe. Such a designation would have allowed them to keep him, Santiago and Perez all on the roster once one of those to were moved.

That brings me to an interesting sidebar that comes from all of this (I guess Billfer didn’t cover as many of my thoughts as I realized). I’ve talked quite a bit about the 2007 roster and who there is and isn’t room for. Well, to recap there are only four bench spots once you get past the pitching staff and the regulars. Vance Wilson is signed for the next two years, so he is a lock for one of them. Santiago is signed and I believe out of options, so he is another lock on the roster (why sign a guy for half a mil and then let him get snagged off waivers?). That leaves two spots for Neifi, Thames and Infante. Leyland specifically addressed ideas for using Thames and Infante in 2007 with no mention (at least in these articles) about Neifi. Could it be? Is there no future with the Tigers for Neifi? I love that idea almost as much as the ideas for getting Thames and Infante playing time. I am on board with getting rid of Neifi whether it’s a trade requiring the Tigers to eat his salary or just releasing him. Basically, I’d rather pay him $2.5M not to play on the Tigers than the alternative. The only other option I can think of – which would allow keeping all three on the 25 man roster - is going with an eleven man pitching staff. As I said before, I doubt that’s likely. I’ll keep you posted on what could be a promising development for the Tigers’ roster.

Affirmative Action part 1

2006-12-05T10:51:00.000-06:00

So, I hinted on the Weblog that I might do some posts on affirmative action here and, well, that's what I'm about to do. The issue is a hot topic now as the Supreme Court just heard cases on this subject. Dahlia Lithwick tells the story in Slate. There are plenty of other sources for comment as well.

I'm a firm believer in affirmative action and I think it is underutilized in today's America. I work in civil rights, fair housing specifically, and I know from my daily work that people of color, women, and people with disabilities do not have the same opportunities that their more privileged counterparts enjoy.

The Supreme Court case is about school desegregation. Unlike other forms of desegregation, racially mixed schools have been a high priority for government and community leaders ever since Brown 52 years ago. However, the history of school desegregation since Brown has largely been one of slow movement to integrate, followed by a serious Supreme Court setback against integration, followed by re-segregation to a point where predominantly minority schools are worse today than they were in 1954.

When Brown was decided, many southern school districts were the first targets of desegregation. However, segregated schools could be found throughout the nation. The primary difference being that southern states and cities had laws encouraging segregation while northern and midwestern states and cities simply had enforced housing patterns that created segregated school districts. The southern districts delayed integration as long as possible. Some never integrated until the 1980s. The northern districts took a long time too.

In Detroit, there was a case that made its way to the Supreme Court. Milliken v. Bradley dealt a huge blow to integration efforts. The narrow 5-4 decision declared that "[w]ith no showing of significant violation by the 53 outlying school districts and no evidence of any interdistrict violation or effect," there could be no interjurisdictional remedy. This was a short-sighted ruling for a number of reasons. For one, it did not account for the "passive" resistance to integration of suburban communities (and their corresponding school districts). Also, it did not account for the fact that no real integration effort could be attained solely within the City of Detroit. Finally, it provided near-sovereignty to schools districts in a way that had never previously been given to local governments. The result was prototypical pattern of segregation that persisted throughout the 1970s and 1980s -- an urban/suburban dichotomy.

After Milliken, desegregation efforts were limited at best. For instance, Chicago Public Schools has a white population of less than 10% of its students. Whites have largely abandoned the public school system for private schools. Thus, even though CPS works toward desegregation, its best case scenario would be to have white students make up 8% of each school.

The pattern of segregation has changed a bit since the 1980s. Now, many suburban communities and school districts face the same dilemmas that Chicago faces. They have very small white populations. Worse, yet, they have very limited fiscal resources due to disinvestment from the business community. Meanwhile, their small populations make them ineligible for direct federal funding.

As a result, the current segregation in schools is worse than it ever has been. Meanwhile middle class minorities have had some success moving out of predominantly minority communities.
Thus, those minority school districts are also poor school districts.

The Louisville case is especially important here. Louisville has a metropolitan government. This should make Milliken's ban on interjurisdictional remedies irrelevant. But, in both cases, there needs to be some acceptance that because people have unequal opportunity due to their race, there necessarily needs to be corrective measures in place to provide equal opportunity to minorities and other protected persons.

An Epithet is an Epithet

2006-11-28T11:46:00.000-06:00

I just want to start by saying I like Talking Points Memo and I think you should visit that site often. Also, I don't think Josh Marshall is a racist. But...

He has a post up on his site where he fake quotes as if he were Rush Limbaugh. In it Josh uses the term "towel-heads" to convey Limbaugh's racist attitude. I e-mailed him to say that, while I understand the intent of his using the word, I didn't think he had the liberty to use it.

Now, I've e-mailed TPM before and gotten some good responses straight from Josh. This time he ignored my e-mail. I know he's a busy guy, but I sent it to him when he was online because he posted a piece at about the same time. And, he's posted plenty since then.

Anyway, I think this is important. I don't think this is Michael Richards level, not even close. But, I do think that its inappropriate for him to use this term. I think the term is what we might consider a "second-tier slur" -- there are plenty of worse things one could call and Arab or a Sikh for instance. But, it's a slur nonetheless. I don't think we'd be okay with people using second-tier slurs for blacks or Latinos for example. And, we certainly shouldn't have to confront them in places where good people are doing good work.

This might be more about where we are as a nation than about Josh or TPM. Civil rights and racial relations are not high priorities in our national conscience right now. It's somewhat understandable since we're in a poorly considered war with Iraq, have a real scare of terrorism, and of course an economic policy that puts most of us in a precarious financial situation.

Still, civil rights are the guarantors of the promise of America. Until all people have the rights and opportunities that are the American Dream or the American Ideal, we have not truly the America we wish to be. And, this isn't just some dreamy lefty goal. It directly affects each and every person regardless of their race or gender or disability or sexual orientation, or other disfranchisement.

Take for instance housing segregation. Segregation is a civil rights issue and it is at the root of many of our urban problems.

Urban Sprawl: fueled by white flight.

Gentrification: fueled by racial displacement and unwillingness of whites to consider living in majority black or Latino neighborhoods.

Insufferable commutes: fueled by white flight.

Poor mass transit: fueled by hostility toward integration.

School inequality: fueled by unequal property values which are often caused by disinvestment in minority communities.

Do each of these problems have other causes? Sure. But, the problems will never be solved until we address segregation as one of the primary causes.

Unfortunately, we don't value the defense of civil rights or affirmative measures to ameliorate these problems. And, one piece of evidence is when a good person thinks its okay to use a slur.

Glass City Futurama

2006-11-20T11:19:00.000-06:00

Toledo's doing it again -- looking to the future that is. The Blade has a story that an east side location is in the running for a wind turbine farm.

There is some concern about bird migration patterns. (Northern Ohio is a very important stop on the migration pattern of many species as Lake Erie lies to the north. I can personally attest to viewing at least a million piles of geese guano in my lifetime.)
But, overall, this looks like a good situation for Toledo.

And, hey, it's on the East Side! I grew up on the East Side. Well, technically I grew up in a suburb. But, it was an east side suburb and my parents grew up in east Toledo. And, I did live in my grandfather's old east side house when he moved out. For those few Toledoans who read this, the East Side is a great place. You should consider it more often.

Anyway, another future-oriented development in Toledo.

btw: Did you know that the Toledo-area is also home to an innovative solar panel company -- First Solar. Will we look to Toledo in the future as a Green Energy hot spot?

2006-11-02T09:16:00.000-06:00

Still Around

If you’ve been wondering, I didn’t drive my car off an embankment when the Tigers lost the World Series. I could have though, as my wife and I were driving to Pittsburgh on Friday night and there are a lot of hills – and embankments - around Pittsburgh. I was going to do a post lamenting the way the season ended and recapping 2006, but after sniffing around the net the last few days, I see it’s been done to death. So I will just congratulate the Cardinals and say thank you to the Detroit Tigers organization for what was the most enjoyable season I’ve had as a sports fan.

Since the books are closed on 2006, I will now begin looking forward to 2007 and all that lies ahead for the Detroit Tigers organization. I was going to start my own Tiger website over the offseason – and I still may – but I really need to (start on and) finish my thesis and that probably should take precedence when I’m budgeting my time. However, I will still be posting fairly regularly about the Tigers’ organization, making guesses as to what they will do and reacting to what they actually do. Dombrowski is already on record as saying they need to bolster the catching position in the organization and that they need another middle-of-the-order bat, so I may run with that sentiment in the next few days.

So if you’re a Tiger fan, keep checking in. I should have some good content in this space over the offseason. If you’re not a Tiger fan, I’m hoping the long offseason will also allow some thoughts that aren’t related to baseball to creep into my head. So you should keep peeking in from time to time as well.

2006-10-27T09:09:00.000-05:00

Game 4: The Horror

Last night’s game was a crushing, crushing loss and it was the first time in this series I really believed the Tigers were not going to win the World Series. I’m not saying they can’t, but last night was the first time I didn’t think they would. When Curtis Granderson fell down and couldn’t field Eckstein’s fly to center, I said out loud (watching by myself), “Oh shit.” I felt like the game, and probably the series, was lost at that point. Little did I know there was much worse ahead with Rodney’s error and the ball that glanced off Monroe’s glove. My shoulders droop at the thought of these plays. For the first time this season, I didn’t shake off my Tiger-induced insomnia (we won't discuss the frequency of this) by convincing myself, “They’ll be alright.” I shook it off by convincing myself that these games and their outcomes - even this whole sport - have no real impact on my life. To get my five hours of fitful sleep I couldn’t tell myself all would be well in the world of baseball; I had to wipe away the existence of baseball. So yeah, I took the loss pretty hard.

Yet, I haven’t given up hope. The Tigers beat the Yankees and A’s three and four straight, respectively, so I see no reason they can’t do the same to the Cardinals. So despite seeing nothing from these first four games to suggest they will, I just have to believe the Tigers can do this. Jeff Weaver and Anthony Reyes are beatable pitchers and even though beating Chris Carpenter will be tough to do, the guy’s not perfect. I also take heart in the fact that I can’t think of one bad break the Cardinals have had to this point. That has to change eventually, doesn’t it?

2006-10-25T07:49:00.000-05:00

World Series Game 3: Quit Kidding Around Guys

Yesterday was a tough game to watch. I can’t remember too many games this season where there was less to cheer about as a Tiger fan. When your best offensive weapon appears to be passed balls by the other team, you can be pretty sure things aren’t going to go well for the good guys. If you weren’t watching, what I mean by that is the Tigers managed only three hits, and I don’t think they ever got the leadoff man on base. Their best chance at scoring came when Inge hit a one out single, was sacrificed over to second by Nate Robertson, and then moved to third on a passed ball. The very next pitch bounced in the dirt, glanced off Yadier Molina’s shoulder, but went forward rather than behind him and Inge wisely chose to stay at third. Granderson then grounded out to end the inning. That describes their best offensive inning.

Speaking of Granderson, his struggles coupled with Polanco’s really seem to be strangling the team’s offense. Neither has a hit in this series, and that has allowed the Cardinals to pitch tough against both Maggs and Guillen. That’s because they both always seem to be either leading innings off or coming up with two outs. When you throw in the o-fer by Pudge, you get a pretty impotent offense. The worse news is that of the three (Pudge, Curtis and Placido), I can only remember Polanco having any good swings yesterday. That came in his last at bat when he smoked a line drive that was snagged by Pujols at first.

On the mound, Robertson did his usual high wire act. He threw five innings, allowed the same number of hits and walked three batters. In the fourth inning, he faced a bases loaded situation with nobody out again, just like in the Oakland opener. He retired Ronnie Belliard, and got to two strikes against Jim Edmonds, but left a pitch out over the plate and Edmonds ripped it down the line for a two run double. It still seemed like a victory at the time when Robertson wriggled out of the inning with no more damage than that, but as things went that was all the Cardinals needed.

The most sickening moment of the game came when Joel Zumaya, pitching for the first time in two weeks, walked two batters to lead off the seventh. Walking Eckstein and Wilson was bad enough, but worse was that Pujols was coming up. Well, Zumaya got him to hit a comebacker and for some reason decided to cut down the lead runner rather than turn what probably would have been an easy 1-6-3 double play. His throw to third was wide and behind Inge and allowed both baserunners to score. This was bad enough, but Tim McCarver dwelled on this decision ad nauseum for almost the rest of the night. Here's where it seems most appropriate to say how much I hate Tim McCarver. I'm so sick of him getting a woodrow every time he gets to mention the Cardinals' World Series in the 60s. In case you didn't know, he played for the Cardinals back when he was a crappy catcher. Anyway, with Zumaya's crucial mistake – that wasn’t so crucial since they never scored – and McCarver blathering on and digging to find the last time a pitcher tried to start a 1-5-3 double play, it was very difficult not to just cut my losses and go to bed.

But as gloomy as the loss was, Tiger fans should know by now that there is no such thing as momentum in baseball. I think the Tigers have the better pitcher on the mound tonight in the matchup between Bonderman and Jeff Suppan. I’m also going to just take it on faith that the lineup will start hitting the ball to spots on the field where there are no Cardinals. Looking back over the pitch-by-pitch for the game, their approaches at the plate didn’t seem too bad. They took the first pitch quite a bit, and seemed to be trying to work the counts, but Carpenter was throwing strikes and they just couldn’t hit the ball hard when they were forced to swing. My final hope is that everybody has knocked off the rust and shaken the jitters, because it’s now the time to step up and start putting this thing away. Just think like this. If the Tigers win this series, tonight is likely to be the night their fortunes turned.

2006-10-24T08:36:00.000-05:00

The Smudge and Preseason Picks

By now, you’ve probably heard about the smudge Kenny Rogers had on his hand in Game 2 of the World Series. My view on this mimics others I’ve heard and it is simple. It was there. It was probably pine tar or something equally illegal and if the Cardinals had wanted, they probably could have had Rogers tossed. They chose not to make a big fuss about it. Some have said that LaRussa made a huge mistake and should have made a big stink about it, because he could have had the Tigers’ best pitcher in the playoffs tossed.

I say you have to ask yourself why didn’t LaRussa have Kenny Rogers inspected, and potentially tossed? It wasn’t because he didn’t want to embarrass him; I can almost guarantee you that. There is a reason, though, and you can be sure that reason has something to do with LaRussa figuring the positives and negatives of taking that action were uncertain. Two examples I will put out there as to why he may have been hesitant to make a big stink are 1) he didn’t figure the pine tar made much of a difference, and 2) he didn’t want Leyland looking too hard at his pitchers for similar substances. I heard that Keith Olberman brought up this point on the Dan Patrick Show. Leyland was in the Cardinals organization as late as last year. He very well may know who to point out, and maybe he figures losing one of his starters would hurt more than losing Rogers would have hurt the Tigers at that point. My final point on this matter is that while all these media members are going off on the significance of this, do you know what important group I haven’t heard complain? The players.

That’s all I want to say about it because I think too much has been said already. The only reason I even brought it up is because I figured if you’ve been reading this blog all season, you might want to read what I think of it.

Since I can’t think of anything else to talk about after the off day (the real reason I talked about the smudge), I will revisit my preseason predictions.

In the AL, I said the East would go: Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Devil Rays, Orioles.
The Central: Indians, White Sox, Twins, Tigers, Royals.
The West: A’s, Angels, Rangers, Mariners.

In the NL, I said the East would go: Braves, Mets, Phillies, Nationals, Marlins.
The Central: Cardinals, Brewers, Astros, Pirates, Cubs, Reds.
The West: Dodgers, Giants, Padres, Diamondbacks, Rockies.

The actual results were AL East: Yankees, Blue Jays, Red Sox, Orioles, Devil Rays.
The Central: Twins, Tigers, White Sox, Indians, Royals.
The West: A’s, Angels, Rangers, Mariners.

NL East: Mets, Phillies, Braves, Marlins, Nationals.
The Central: Cardinals, Astros, Reds, Brewers, Pirates, Cubs.
The West: Padres, Dodger, Giants, Diamondbacks, Rockies.

So in the American League, I placed only the Yankees, Royals and the entire West in the correct position. In the National League, I picked only the Cardinals, Diamondbacks and Rockies in the correct positions. That’s nine teams out of thirty and three of the six division winners. I hope you’re not reading this blog for its prognostication skills, because mine pretty much suck.

World Series Weekend Review

2006-10-23T08:51:00.000-05:00

It’s a bit odd that I have been so busy right at the time the World Series is going on. I wasn’t at work at all on Friday, and didn’t really have a shot at sitting down before the computer until about an hour before the World Series started on Saturday. At that point, I figured nobody would have a chance to read what I had to say before the game anyway, so I didn’t do the much anticipated (by me) World Series Preview.

Amazingly enough, the games went on without my thoughts or input. Game 1 started out well enough when Carlos Guillen singled to knock in the game’s first run after Verlander had set the Cardinals down in order in the top of the inning. That was about the end of the good news for the Tigers in this one, though. Rolen yanked a fastball over the wall in left in the second to tie it up. In the third, Chris Duncan and Albert Pujols doubled and homered to make it a three run game and I believe everybody who was watching was probably a little surprised when they didn’t walk Pujols with first base open and two outs. To make the home run hurt worse, Verlander gathered himself and struck out Edmonds to end the inning after Pujols went yard.

There was more trouble in the sixth, but the way the Tigers were hitting, it didn’t really matter. In the second, they saw seven pitches. In the fourth, it was six pitches. In the sixth, it was eight pitches. In the seventh, it was ten pitches. In the eighth, it was eight pitches again. In the innings mentioned, the outs were all pop outs or fly outs except for one ground out, one line out and one single. Don’t think I’m cherry-picking either, because the third and fifth innings weren’t offensive displays either. They were retired in order both innings; they just didn’t do it in so few pitches (13 in the 3rd; 19 in the 5th).

I really didn’t think the Tigers would be hurt too much by the week off, but it seemed like it may have had an effect on their approach at the plate. Maybe they were so keyed up to get this World Series won they forgot the approach that brought them. On the mound, the Tigers looked better than the box score would indicate. Verlander struck out eight, and at times looked dominant. Other times, it seemed he may have lost some focus and just figured they weren’t going to hit him. Well, when they hit him, they hit him hard. Of the six hits he allowed, four were for extra bases. Of the eight batters who reached base against him, seven of them scored. Verlander was good this season at keeping runners from scoring, and this is what happens when that “skill” goes away.

Game 2 was much better news for the Tigers. They dropped two runs on Jeff Weaver in the first when Monroe went deep on the first pitch he saw. They scored their second run when Guillen doubled in Maggs from first. For a while, it looked like we might be in for a repeat of the night before in that the Tigers had good success in the first but then fell off the map offensively. In the fourth, it seemed like this trend may really come back to haunt them when the bottom of the order loaded the bases with no outs and the top of the order struck out (Granderson), popped out (Monroe) and grounded out (Polanco) to harmlessly end the inning. We seemed to be in for more in the fifth when it looked like they may wasted a Guillen triple, but Sean Casey came through with a big single that made it 3-0.

The story of this game wasn’t the offense, though. Kenny Rogers turned in eight beautiful innings to run his scoreless streak in the playoffs to twenty three innings. I don’t know what the guy is doing, but it sure is a lot of fun to watch. For three games now, it seems like the batters are guessing wrong eighty percent of the time and hitting it right at Tiger fielders when they guess right. It’s almost enough to make you want to see a game six just so Rogers can try to throw another gem. Of course, in the ninth inning it looked very much like it may all have been for naught.

In the ninth, the Tigers brought in Todd Jones to close things out and he did – eventually. Spiezio and Pujols hit the ball hard, but right at Ordonez and Inge respectively, and the Tigers had two quick outs. Then Rolen hit an 0-2 pitch to right for a single, and we all probably thought the same thing. “Of course we won’t have a 1-2-3 inning.” Then Encarnacion hit a come-backer to Jones that bounced away and put the tying run, Edmonds at the plate. This was no longer funny or cute. Edmonds doubled, scoring a run and putting the tying run at second. My inner dialogue went something like this:

Breathe. Breathe. He’ll get out of it. I HATE YOU, TODD JONES! FIELD THE DAMN BALL, YOU TUB OF CRAP! Breathe. Breathe.

Then he hit Preston Wilson with a pitch to load the bases, and bring up Yadier Molina, the hero of Game 7 of the NLCS. This dog had already had his day, right? RIGHT? Right. He grounded out to Santiago who flipped the ball to Polanco for the 27th out. Whew.

Today is a travel day so the teams get a breather before the series resumes tomorrow at eight. In that one, it will be Chris Carpenter against Nate Robertson. Carpenter is a Cy Young candidate, but he’s been sketchy in the postseason and the Tigers had good success against him when they faced him earlier in the season. Polanco and Granderson have yet to pick up a hit in this series, so I’d look for them to add a little more to the mix in St. Louis. They can’t really do much less, right? As for Robertson, we’ll just have to hope we get the Nate that pitched just well enough against the A’s rather than the Nate that ran into some bad luck in New York.

2006-10-19T08:14:00.000-05:00

Mets and Cards Scratch and Claw for Series Bid; Tigers Scratch and Claw for Clubhouse Remote

My wish came true. The Mets beat the Cardinals in Game 6 of the NLCS yesterday, 4-2. Jose Reyes and John Maine were the key contributors for the Mets. Some will say Chris Carpenter didn’t get the job done when the Cards needed him, but the guy only gave up two runs and left the game trailing 2-0.

For the Cardinals, this means they will be sending Jeff Suppan out to the mound for Game 7. As I mentioned yesterday, this will make things interesting if and when they face the Tigers on Saturday since Carpenter and Suppan won’t be available and Weaver would have to go on short rest to take the hill. For the Mets, it turns out picking the starter for Game 7 wasn’t as cut-and-dry as I thought. Steve Trachsel is not getting the call, as Willie Randolph is opting to go with Oliver Perez on three days’ rest. Guy gets slapped around for five runs with more than his usual break between starts, and you turn around and go to him on short rest? Wow.

Of course, Trachsel had what two different radio guys are calling the worst postseason start ever. So either option probably would not have walked off the mound to a raucous standing ovation tonight. The nice thing for the Tigers is that they will probably get Trachsel for Game 1 of the World Series if the Mets win, and that Mets bullpen has been called on to make a lot of pitches in this series. One possible wrinkle to the Mets’ potential World Series rotation is I’ve heard El Duque (Orlando Hernandez) may pitch if they make the World Series. I just haven’t yet heard when that may take place.

Seeing the problems a long series poses for the Mets and Cardinals going into the World Series, is anybody still wondering if the negatives of the long layoff for the Tigers outweigh the positives? The Tigers can literally throw any of the starters for the first four games of the Series, and will probably have Casey and Zumaya game ready. Either the Cardinals or the Mets Game 1 starter will be like choosing between a bullet in the gut and a bullet in the knee. They will also have just about their entire World Series rotation dictated by the starters' usage in the NLCS. Their only flexibility would likely come later in the series when they may have to choose between trusting a back of the rotation guy in a big game and throwing a more reliable starter on short rest. I should stop talking about these National League teams, because pretty soon I’m going to start sounding like the Yankee fans before the ALDS.

I’m not rooting for either team tonight, so I guess I’ll root for a 19 inning marathon that forces the Mets or Cardinals to throw their bullpen catcher in Game 1 of the World Series.

2006-10-18T08:40:00.000-05:00

Here’s a funny little story for those of you who may roll your eyes at all the baseball content. I was listening to the radio on the way into work yesterday, and heard a commercial for a book by some spy novel author. The commercial goes something like this:

When a presidential candidate’s poll ratings skyrocket after an attempt on his life, CIA agent (something something) must determine if it was an act of terrorism…or an act of treason.

From there, they go to some reviews and then say, “…the new novel by (somebody), Act of Treason”. So, it would appear all that the CIA agent would have to do to decide “whether it’s an act of terrorism or an act of treason” is read the title. I’m not an ad exec, but putting a spoiler in the commercial doesn’t seem real bright to me.

But maybe this could be a new trend for movie trailers:

(Narrator voice) When Jenny Wilson woke up this morning, she never could have imagined that her baby would be missing. (Phone rings. Jenny looks at it, terrified.) Menacing voice on phone says, “Your daughter won’t eat her peas.” (Jenny screams and starts crying) (Narrator) Now, she has just three days to find out who has her child or she will have to do the unthinkable. (Menacing voice) Blow up the US Embassy or your daughter will never blow out her first birthday candle. (Narrator) It’s the guy who delivered the baby’s formula to the house in the movie’s first scene. Julianne Moore. Christopher Walken. From Director Pedro Almodovar, Peas Don’t Kill My Baby. Opens Friday Everywhere.

2006-10-18T08:08:00.000-05:00

Future Opponents for World Series

Things do not look good for the Mets right now. Before the NLCS, I would have said that’s a good thing, but the Cardinals are beating the Mets so I’m not sure anybody should get excited to play the Cardinals instead of the Mets. Last night, the Cardinals beat them 4-2 to take a three games to two lead in the series. It’s certainly not over, but the Cardinals are sending their best pitcher to the mound tonight against the Mets’ John Maine. If the Mets are able to pull out the win tonight, nobody seems to know who would be their Game 7 starter.

So what does all this mean for the Tigers? The Cardinals winning tonight would mean Jeff Suppan would be available for Game 1 of the World Series on Saturday. Jeff Weaver would probably go on Sunday, and Chris Carpenter would take the mound for Game 3. Those are assumptions on my part, but I don’t wear the genius goggles Tony LaRussa does, so there could be something I’m missing. If the Mets pull off the win tonight and the Cardinals win Game 7, that would throw a monkey wrench into things for the Cards’ Game 1 plans. Suppan and Carpenter would be off-limits and if they gave the ball to Weaver, he’d be going on three days’ rest and they still have to figure out who’s going to go in Game 2. Of course, they could go with Carpenter on three days’ rest as well. As a Tiger fan, I like the idea of their lineup getting to face two straight starters going on three days’ rest.

The more logical course for Game 1 would seem to be something like what the Cardinals did for Game 4 of this series, which was start with Anthony Reyes and go to the bullpen early. Then they would be able to go to Weaver, Carpenter and Suppan all on their normal rest or longer. They could go with Weaver on short rest for Game 1 and then look to Reyes and the bullpen for Game 2, but that would be very risky. If Weaver was chased early in Game 1, they’d be kind of screwed either leaving Reyes in longer than they would like or going to a haggard bullpen. When you look at things this way, it’s pretty amazing how big tonight’s game becomes for the Cardinals. That’s on top of the fact that if they don’t win tonight, they’re on the road for a Game 7 and will face a very real possibility of their starters all getting four months rest before their next start.

I don’t really know why there seems to be so many questions about who would pitch a Game 7 for the Mets. It would be Trachsel’s turn in the rotation, and the fact that they have him in their rotation at all suggests to me that they don’t really have a whole lot better option behind him. You certainly wouldn’t want to put your World Series ticket on Oliver Perez on short rest, would you?

If the Mets do pull this series out, they will be hard pressed for starters in the first two games of the World Series. They could pitch Glavine in Game 1, but it would be on three days’ rest and assuming Trachsel starts tomorrow, that would leave Oliver Perez as their only other option. Again, if I were Willie Randolph, I’d risk Perez in Game 1 to go to my best pitcher, Glavine, on normal rest for Game 2.

I don’t know if this little exercise in possibilities clears things up for you, but it certainly cleared up two things for me. First, I don’t really care who wins this series, but I am definitely rooting for the Mets tonight. If a Game 7 is forced, whoever wins that game will have to scramble to get anything close to good pitching on the mound for Game 1 against the Tigers. Secondly, I am going to be pissed if the Tigers get beat by either of these teams’ rotations.

Go Mets (in Game 6).

2006-10-16T19:54:00.000-05:00

2006 American League Champions

I think a lot of people are struggling for the right words to talk about this Tiger team because it has snuck up on them. In 2001, after having seen the team get a whiff of .500 the previous season, I foolishly bet my friend they could reach 85 wins. He said I was crazy; they had only reached 79 the previous season and now they didn’t even have Juan Gonzalez. Big deal, I said. You don’t think they can get 22 home runs from whoever fills that four spot? The next season I was a little wiser and reduced the over/under on the same bet to 75 wins. I lost again and they were even worse. In 2003, we didn’t do the bet because there was no number I felt comfortable picking and there was no way I was going to cheer when the Tigers scratched to the number that I feared may be accurate - 50 wins. As everyone knows by now, even that pathetic goal was out of their reach.

I love this Tiger team, but I loved those Tiger teams, too. Back then, I had to latch on to the smallest successes and it seemed like each one would get smothered in the hope. I was Lenny squishing rabbits and the rabbits were guys like Nate Cornejo, Robert Fick and Eric Munson. In desperation, I would scour the minors and see promising numbers only to find out that player was 31 years old or a “crafty” pitcher who would later be completely undressed and demoralized when he was called up – more like sentenced – to the majors. The efforts the Tigers made toward respectability were mocked widely and, it usually turned out, presciently. It became almost a cruel joke when dud free agent signings were dressed up like a cousin to take to the prom. Craig Paquette? We gave up a draft pick for this guy? I winced to read what the national media was saying about the Tigers. In 2002 and 2003 they were written off after the first week.

With many franchises, this consistent ineptitude at the major league level could be hiding a growing and deepening pool of minor league talent, but even this wasn’t true of the Tigers. Each year, scouts would look through the system and wave away the whole system. A closer with a number one overall pick? (Anderson) The only award those guys are going to win is Most Likely to Break Down. (Baugh and Sleeth) Even when a move in the Tigers’ draft was applauded, such as when they “stole” Michael Woods with a supplemental first round pick, he turned out to lack the promise the accolades suggested. I had turned to the minor leagues to take solace from a major league team that seemed poisoned. Well, the poison in the fruit was starting in the soil.

In 2004, they made some steps back toward respectability, but it felt like the team had to pull a Yankee move just to get to those 72 wins. We had seen these mock charges before and a lot of us were skeptical that this bear was just trying to get a rise out of us. We fans who thought of ourselves as savvy knew that this organization’s only hope was to be patient, and build this franchise back up from within. That takes a lot of time when you're starting with almost nothing. Pudge, Rondell and Urbina were all just bandages that would be long gone by the time the Tigers were ready to make a real charge. Therefore, we weren’t surprised when they regressed a little and dipped back to 71 wins in 2005. Signing Maggs and Percival and trading for Farnsworth were just more of the same. They were empty calories for the greedy fans who needed progress in the form of names they knew. We figured – we hoped – that Dombrowski was just pulling these strings while the depths of the system were mended and made stronger. You know, guys like this Curtis Granderson kid.

In fact, I cringed when 2006 was near its beginning and I heard reports of Dombrowski saying that if progress wasn’t made this year, people would be held accountable. That was strategically leaked, right? They’re not going to do anything stupid like trade Justin Verlander and Curtis Granderson for Josh Beckett and Mike Lowell, right? I don’t know how good those two are going to be, but please tell me the rumor about trading them for Javier Vasquez isn’t true either. I’m already worried about how Leyland is going to do; didn’t he kill young pitchers like Wilson Alvarez in Florida and Jon Smiley in Pittsburgh? Please don’t make me fret that we just gave away another John Smoltz besides.

So the losing culture in the locker room was nothing compared to the years of calluses and scars we had built up as fans. Brandon Inge had been on the team the longest and we remembered when he was supposed to be an athletic young catcher who had not yet disappointed us. We saw them shoot out to 5-0 and nodded knowingly when they were just as quickly 5-4 and then 7-7. Sure, they could slap around Texas and Kansas City, but Chicago and Cleveland sure showed them where they stood in the division’s pecking order. Well, you know the story from there. They got up to ten games over after 28 games. Twenty games up after 48 games. Thirty games up after 80 games. By this time, even the crustiest fan would have to acknowledge their first winning season since 1993 was in the bag. You didn’t even have to be too much of an optimist to start talking playoffs at that point, but deep down I think we all expected the last game of the Tigers’ season to be a loss if they made the playoffs. Surely, they couldn’t have come this far this quickly? It took forty games above .500 with fifty games left to play to open our eyes.

Our Tigers were really good. They were smoking the rest of the division and they looked for all the world like they might just be the best team in baseball. Some fans even got overzealous and mentioned playoff rotations. But even on a pace to win 110 games, the wounds from past seasons were still too fresh to talk too much about what all this could mean. There was still a lot of time left, and there was still a lot that could go wrong. Well, as everybody who’s watched a game of the playoffs knows, it did. This team was by no means as bad as teams from a few years ago, but like a few years ago, I hated to turn on the radio. They were just going to talk about the Tigers and their historic choke. They blew the division despite a cupcake schedule the last couple weeks, and it was a good thing they did celebrate clinching the playoffs because that was likely the only celebration there would be.

So do you see? Do you see why I almost lost my voice when they beat the Yankees? Do you get why my nose starts to burn and my scalps tingles when I hear the call of Maggs’ home run? This was a franchise that had a team on ESPN’s Worst Teams of the Past 25 Years before the 2003 Tigers. This was a team that was a consensus fourth place team this season. I braced myself for disappointment when I predicted they would flirt with .500. Not break it. Flirt with it. This is the team that turned phone conversations with family from “Can you believe the Tigers?” to “Can you believe the Tigers!” They made us believe. Then they took that away. Now they have given it back. Now the Tigers are going to the World Series. I can only think of one thing in sports that could be better than that.

2006-10-13T08:20:00.000-05:00

Athletics v. Tigers: Weekend Preview

Well, as I mentioned yesterday, the Tigers are in about as good of shape as possible in a seven game series. They have a 2-0 lead heading into a three game home stand, which I’m sure they’re hoping will lead to them not having to return to Oakland and its ugly, concrete, glare soaked stadium. This thing is definitely not a done deal, though. In both of the first two games, the A’s were a well-placed hit away from busting things open. In the second game, they appeared to be about a centimeter away from a walkoff grand slam. I’m not familiar enough with the A’s to know if the close calls mean I have underestimated their lineup or if the close calls and the inability to get baserunners home is what makes their lineup okay rather than good. Either way, they seem to be flirting with busting out and it’s up to Kenny Rogers and Jeremy Bonderman to make sure at the end of this series they’re saying “We missed our best chances in Games 1 and 2”.

The Tigers could really use another special effort from each of those two because so far the bullpen has been called on to pitch 7 2/3 innings in two games. Joel Zumaya is having some trouble with his wrist again, and if he can’t go, the inning or two he would usually give them has to come from somebody. Regardless of who that is, it's a step down from Zumaya. For that reason, it would be nice if the bullpen only had to cover his absence for a couple innings rather than three or four.

For the A’s it is scheduled to be Rich Harden today and Danny Haren tomorrow. After spending over three months on the DL, Rich Harden came back in September for the A’s and made three starts. He is said to have the best stuff on their staff when he's healthy, but he's had mixed results in his short time back. In his three starts, he pitched 11 2/3 innings, gave up 8 hits, 7 runs, struck out 15 and walked 8. The first two games, he did well enough but appeared to be on pitch count limits because he was taken out after three innings (55 pitches) in the first game despite striking out seven and allowing only one run. In the second game, he went five innings (76 pitches) and didn’t give up any runs, while striking out five. It was his third start that was cringe-inducing as he threw 91 pitches in 3 2/3 innings, giving up 6 runs and 6 walks in the short outing. That game was on the first of this month and he hasn’t faced major leaguers since. He did throw in the A’s instructional league a few days ago, and evidently the results gave them confidence he was their best option today. With his tender condition, the long layoff, and the weather man calling for high 40s at game time, I’m guessing the Tigers will be seeing a lot of that A’s bullpen again. I’m hoping they have the patient approach they brought to Game 1 to ensure that scenario. Not only is Harden is likely to have a pitch limit, but he obviously had trouble finding the strike zone in his last start and it would be a shame to give him easy outs if that's the case again today.

As for Haren, I’d be curious to hear why the A’s are shoving him to the back of the rotation. He pitched on October 6th against the Twins, so he could have pitched in Game 2 or 3 with either normal rest or an extra day. He led the team in strikeouts, has a fantastic walk rate and his ERA is only higher than Zito’s by a pretty negligible amount (4.12 to 3.83). The A’s said they know what they get from Loaiza; I’m wondering why they seem to suspect it’s better than what Haren can give them. Whatever the reasoning, don’t be surprised if the Tigers have their toughest challenge tomorrow afternoon.

So hopefully you now feel comfortably informed of what the Tigers will be facing the next two games, but I also hope you’ll remember the playoffs are known for being the time when the announcers say, “Who could have seen this coming?” So it's probably just as likely as not that this little preview will just be an exercise in frustrated expectations. The game is at 4:30 today. I’m skipping lunch to get out of work at 3:30. I recommend you take similar steps if you can.

2006-10-12T09:23:00.000-05:00

I guess I will start today by mentioning that Yankees pitcher Cory Lidle died in a plane crash in New York City’s Upper East Side, according to the reports I heard. His instructor, who was in the plane (the plane was a small four-seater owned by Lidle) with him, died and the last report I read said two others who were in the apartment building they crashed into died as well. This is clearly a very sad thing, and I feel terrible for the people and the families involved, but I have to say I feel worse for the people who were in the building. Lidle and his instructor were in a plane, and therefore kind of assumed the risks that go with that. These people were sitting in their 20th story condo and a plane crashed into the building. It is almost as bizarre to think of as it is tragic. It’s also kind of weird to think that I saw Lidle’s last professional pitch when he threw a bit for the Yankees on Saturday. Update: Lidle and the instructor were the only ones who died in the crash. Others were only injured.

Moving on to the Tiger game, the Tigers didn’t look as sharp as they did when they were dismantling the Yankees, but they put together another win. This puts them ahead 2-0 in the series as they head back to Detroit for three games over the weekend, starting tomorrow. So essentially, they have to win a three game home series and they will be returning to the World Series for the first time since 1984.

As a fan of the team, this one didn’t start out well. It wasn't so much anything that happened in the game itself, but they showed the lineup and not only was Neifi Perez starting – I kind of expected that – but he was for some reason batting second. While I sat down and breathed into the paper bag, I happened to trail down the rest of the lineup and my eyes got very big when I saw that Alexis Gomez was batting eighth and he was the designated hitter. I promised my wife I wasn’t going to get angry, but boy this was pushing it. Here’s why. First, this meant Thames was sitting the bench again. You know I hate how little they value Thames. Second, Gomez is supposed to be their fourth outfielder. Should anything have happened to Maggs, you would have to slide Monroe over to right and put Thames in left. That is a pretty badly compromised outfield defense. If Gomez absolutely has to play, at least throw him in the outfield and let either Maggs or Monroe DH.

The results of this lunacy were kind of shocking, but it didn’t really surprise me. Neifi was his predictable self and was essentially an automatic out in the second spot in the order. Alexis Gomez was the one whose performance was shocking, but I mentioned earlier in the season that it seemed like whenever I complained about Leyland overvaluing Gomez, he came through and made me look stupid. That’s why I wasn’t surprised by what he did. Last night, I was even cheering for him by saying, “Come on, Alexis. Prove me wrong.” So how did he prove me wrong? Well, in the fourth, he came up with bases loaded and hit a grounder to Eric Chavez’s left. It looked like Chavez would eat it up and while a double play seemed unlikely, the second out of the inning didn’t. Well, the ball bounced off his glove and slowly rolled into shallow left allowing two runs to score. This gave the Tigers a 4-3 lead the inning after Milton Bradley had just given the A’s a 3-1 lead with a two run shot off Verlander. In the sixth, he hit a two run homer to put the Tigers up 7-3. What can I say? Leyland has the Midas touch right now. I will say that just because decisions work out well doesn’t mean they were the right decision, but at this point I’m not going to pick nits as long as the Tigers keep winning.

Gomez was the driving force of the offense, but the pitching was definitely more of a team effort. Verlander didn’t look bad despite giving up seven hits and four runs in just over five innings of work. He did strike out six batters, after all. It was just that when the bats found the ball, the A’s seemed to find the bases as a result. The first run he allowed was a bit of bad luck as Kotsay doubled, took third when Pudge didn’t make much of an effort to block a pitch in the dirt, and then scored on a broken bat single to right by Milton Bradley that would have been an easy out had the infield not been pulled in. The rest of his runs came from home runs by Bradley and Eric Chavez. Justin didn’t get into a lot of trouble other than those situations, but the A’s also made him work and he ended up throwing 106 pitches in a short night of work.

The bullpen did a great job of bailing him out, though. Ledezma finished the sixth for him and got two outs in the seventh before he succumbed to another no-doubter from Milton Bradley that pulled the game back to 7-5. He was relieved by Grilli, who faced only the Big Hurt and struck him out. Rodney was brought in for the eighth and he turned in what had to be one of his more impressive showings of the season. With a two run lead, and Chavez, Payton and Swisher coming up, Rodney struck out the side with none of those guys so much as fouling a ball off. That’s right. He threw thirteen pitches. Four were balls. Five were strikes looking. Four were strikes swinging, including each of the strike three pitches. Clearly, he’s another Tiger who has stepped up for the playoffs to this point.

Granderson provided a little breathing room in the ninth with a solo home run and heading into the bottom of the ninth with a three run lead, everybody knew that meant Johnny Cakes was coming in. I liked the Tigers’ odds because the three batters he had to face were the 8-9-1 batters, Scutaro, Jimenez and Kendall. He struck out Scutaro, and then Melhuse was brought in to pinch hit for Jimenez. He struck out on three pitches, but it wasn’t a bizarre decision only because he failed so miserably at this assignment. Melhuse is the backup catcher and Jimenez was only playing second because Mark Ellis went down with a broken finger in the Twins series. That meant even if the A’s tied this one up, they would now be without a backup catcher for extra innings and Mark Kiger – who has never played in the majors – would have to staff second base. Weird. Anyway, with two outs, Jason Kendall was coming up and he was so far 0 for 4 on the night. See how that works? Pitch to him and he gets himself out. I was pointing this out just about when he hit a single that Polanco just couldn’t quite turn into an out. Crap. Kotsay then singled and that brought up Milton Bradley as the tying run who had already hit two home runs. Double crap. I was almost relieved to see him get only an infield single that Neifi couldn’t field and throw quick enough to get the out. I’m not saying Neifi did anything wrong. I doubt anybody could have done any more.

The problem with Bradley getting the single was that it brought up Frank Thomas with bases loaded. A home run would mean an ultimate grand slam for Thomas. That’s a walk off grand slam that comes when your team had been down by three runs. Frank Thomas in this situation with Todd Jones on the mound is absolutely terrifying. First pitch: strike looking. Great, he’s sizing up Jones’ fastball. Next pitch: ball. Final pitch: fastball up in the zone. Thomas makes contact. I wet myself and sob openly at the same time. (Not really.) I compose myself to rejoice when I see Thomas grimace because he just missed Jones’ meatball and Jones point at the popup. Granderson calls everyone off and takes it for the final out. Woo! Like I said, it wasn’t pretty, but we’ll take it. I will definitely take the Tiger staff combining for thirteen strikeouts. If they want to do that every game, I’m fine with that.

2006-10-11T15:09:00.000-05:00

Warning: Post Not Related to Baseball. It is, however, related to commercials that play during baseball games, if that makes you feel better.

There is some commercial for some company that has a gorilla talking to a couple about something. At the end, he says with a feigned modest tone that he is “just the 800-lb gorilla in the room”. The first time I saw this I mentioned to my wife that the ad team has created an amalgam of two common sayings. It was my impression that you had one saying where things were “an 800 pound gorilla”. Actually, I thought it was 500-lb, but I’m willing to acquiesce on this detail. It was my understanding that the implication of something being this proverbial gorilla was that it could do whatever it wanted. It was also my understanding that this saying was an allusion to the grade school level joke, “What does a 500 pound gorilla do?... (wait for it)… Whatever it wants.” Ha.

Then, there was a completely different saying that something could be “the elephant in the back of the room.” Again, I’m going with my personal understanding, but I thought this was supposed to be something you were hesitant to talk about, but you may as well, because it’s what’s on everyone’s mind.

Well, now all the sudden there’s the 800-lb gorilla in the room. I have no freakin’ idea what this is supposed to mean. Evidently, it’s a know-it-all simian who gives good advice on insurance or stocks or something. Can anybody lend any thoughts on this? Am I the only one who has noticed this? I’m pretty sure I’m the only one who cares, but this is an effort to extend that distinction beyond myself.

Your question to me may be, “why do you care?” Here’s why. Misinformation spreads quickly and if this thing isn’t nipped in the bud, not one, but two clever little colloquialisms will be lost forever and they will be replaced by a murkier, clumsier one that is less than the sum of its parts.

More importantly, I will not have a repeat of a fifth grade experience that nearly drove me insane at a young age. It happened when Pete Rose broke the hit record. The teacher asked the class how many hits he had to get to break the record. I shot my hand in the air and had to listen to idiotic guess after guess that was WAY off. “Six thousand hits? Really? So he gets, what, three hundred hits a year for twenty years? What’s that make his career batting average? .500? Idiot. You don’t deserve to be in the fifth grade.” I’ve always been very serious about baseball, you see. When she finally called on me I said with certainty: 4,192. This exercise was over, because that was it. I knew because it was Ty Cobb’s record he was breaking and Ty Cobb is the greatest and perhaps most famous Tiger of all time.

But, to my great distress, the teacher treated this as a democratic endeavor and proceeded to have the class VOTE on what they believed to be the correct answer. When they “voted for” the wrong answer, I was inexplicably mocked for being wrong. Here’s the kicker: she didn’t bring in a newspaper article to validate my correct response. This wasn’t some trick experiment to teach us a lesson about bad information. It was evidently a direct attempt to drive anybody with the correct answer insane. In twenty-five kids’ uninformed brains, Pete Rose broke the hits record with some number of hits beside 4,192. It was like something out of A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court. That’s Mark Twain, I think. Unless my fifth grade class voted on it being Dickens and history was re-written to accommodate them.

To bring that little anecdote back to the point, I’m right on this giant ape/elephant thing. If I don’t get the word out quickly, people are going to be looking at me like I’ve lost my mind when it is clearly they who have had a schism from reality. After all, this is some big high-priced ad firm – clearly they are the ones who have it right, and not me. It’s already starting because when I stated my case to my wife, she looked concerned for my well-being and the state of my mental health. Dammit, they may have already won.

2006-10-11T09:33:00.000-05:00

ALCS Game 1: Zito Gets Zinged

The Tigers have been incredibly impressive in the playoffs so far. Last night, they were facing Barry Zito, who had shut down the Twins in his previous postseason start and was equally impressive against the Tigers when he faced them earlier in the season. He is supposed to be a pitcher who thrives on inducing harmless contact from batters, and with the Tigers’ free-swinging ways everyone seemed to think this was a good matchup for the A’s. Well, these Tigers don’t seem all that interested in what is supposed to happen.

Zito retired the first eight batters he saw, but after that the Tigers pummeled him. With two outs in the third, Inge hit a line drive over the left field wall just inside the foul pole. Granderson then yanked a 2-0 pitch into right field for a double, and Polanco followed that up with a walk. Casey walked on seven pitches, loading the bases, and that brought up the cleanup hitter, Magglio Ordonez. He hit a hard grounder to the left of Chavez, who got his glove on the ball but was unable to field it cleanly and was unable to get an out. Zito finally got his third out when Guillen grounded out to short but not before the Tigers worked him over for two runs on thirty eight pitches in the inning.

Even before they started getting to Zito, they were taking pretty good approaches at the plate. Granderson led off the game by flying out on a 2-1 pitch, but he made contact on the first pitch he swung at. Polanco then grounded out on another 2-1, and he didn’t swing until the count was 1-0 (he fouled that pitch off). Casey ended the inning in the first when he hit a grounder back to Zito on a 2-2 pitch, but he looked at the first two strikes he saw as well. In the second, the Tigers went 1-2-3, but Maggs and Pudge both worked the count full before getting out and Guillen made an out on a 2-1 pitch. In fact, if you look at the Tigers’ approaches against Zito, only three batters swung at the first pitch and almost everyone did their damage from either a full count or a hitter’s count.

It wasn’t just their approach that did Zito in, though. They had their mojo working. According to sportsline.com’s pitch-by-pitch, they swung and missed exactly three times. Inge was one of those hitters who missed a pitch, but followed it up in the same at bat with a home run. The Tigers pretty much put on a clinic as to how they can beat Barry Zito. It’s unfortunate that they didn’t seem to take that same disciplined approach the rest of the game, as they picked up only four hits and zero runs off non-Zito pitchers.

Luckily, the pitchers made sure the early runs stood up. Robertson didn’t look all that sharp (he walked Jason Kendall twice, after all), but he made his pitches when he had to. He was in trouble early in the first with runners on first and second with one out, but he got Big Hurt to hit to the big part of the park for a fly out and Jay Payton grounded into a fielder’s choice to end the inning. In fact, he got into some degree of trouble in each of his five innings but nothing ever came of it. His most impressive escape act came in the fourth when he walked Frank Thomas and gave up double to Jay Payton to start the inning. As you may have heard, Leyland came out at this point, said his magic words, and Nate struck out the next three batters to get out of the pickle. It was still early in the game, but you had the feeling the A’s would not get a better chance to make things interesting.

They didn’t. They put two runners on again in the fifth, but a double play grounder by Kotsay and a fly out from Bradley ended the threat pretty quickly, and that was it for Robertson. Rodney pitched two innings, and while the A’s scored a run off Zumaya in the eighth, they scored it on a ground out that left the bases empty with two outs. That’s not exactly prime ground for scoring four comeback runs. When Jones came in to wrap things up, I said that at least we wouldn’t have to sit through the damn walks any more. He proceeded to walk the first batter on four pitches. He made up for it though, by getting a harmless popup and grounder to Polanco for the first two outs and finally retired the immortal Jason Kendall (this is sarcasm, but he had reached base in all his other appearances) to end the game.

This was another game where the Tigers took advantage of both their strengths and the opportunities the other team gave them. It was another great team effort, between the gritty pitching, the undressing of Zito and the timely double plays. Let’s not get to cocky, though. The A’s put a lot of runners on the bases, and sooner or later the walks and hits will come in an order that produces runs if you don’t start keeping guys off the bases. The Tigers also need to keep the same discipline they take into their first couple at bats throughout the game. They worked over Zito pretty badly, but they didn’t seem to have an answer for any of the A’s relievers and the A's didn’t even throw Duchsherer or Street. They’ll need to improve there because I doubt they’ll score five runs too many more times off the A’s starters.

The other bad news was Sean Casey hurting his calf coming out of the batter’s box in the sixth inning. Since the Tigers decided to carry three middle infielders instead of putting Shelton on the playoff roster, I would imagine replacing Casey will involve sliding Guillen over to first and putting in Infante (I hope) or Perez (please, no) at short. My guess is they only put in Santiago last night because the game was already 5-0 and they figured his solid defense was more important than the increased offense Infante offers. The subs may actually work out well for the Tigers because they will probably slide Thames or Monroe up into that three slot, and Infante is at least as capable at the plate as Casey.

The pitching matchup tonight is Justin Verlander against Esteban Loiaza. I think this is a big edge for the Tigers, especially when you consider each team's lineup. Then again, I thought the A's had the edge last night.

2006-10-10T09:53:00.000-05:00

ALCS 2006: Tigers v. Oakland

I haven’t figured out the best way to preview a playoff series, and I think it may be because it’s a pointless exercise. My first inclination is to look at the numbers, but if I would have focused on the numbers before the Yankees series, I would have never been so optimistic about the Tigers’ chances. In the A’s first round series, the numbers wouldn’t have made you think the A’s would beat Santana at home, and nothing could have predicted the series’ pivotal play – Hunter missing that line drive to center that turned into a crushing two run homer. So, let somebody else get all worked up about Zito outpitching his peripherals and Verlander walking a fine line when he strands so many baserunners. I’m not going to, because all it does is make you shake your head when reality flies in the face of what you convinced yourself was probable.

So, if you came here today thinking I was going to give you solid evidence as to why the Tigers were going to beat the A’s, I apologize. I’m not going to do it. I can tell you the A’s lineup doesn’t scare me all that much, I think the Tigers can put a better pitcher on the mound three nights out of four, and I have a good overall feeling about their chances in this series, but they’re just hunches and I’m not going to spend more time than that trying to explain them. I guess this may be a cop out, and you may think it’s kind of gutless, but the truth is I want you sitting in front of your TV screen with your fists clenched and your legs twitching in anticipation of how things will unfold just like I will be. I want you pacing around your living room when Leyland brings in Jones instead of leaving in Zumaya just like I will be.

We headed into that Yankees series hopeful, but very aware that we may be in for a beating that would seem logical after the way the Tigers finished the season. A loss to the Yankees still would have hurt, but not nearly as much after seeing the Tigers piss away a series and the division against the Royals. Well, now that the Tigers have put down the Yankees, we don’t have that protection anymore. We’re all secretly or not-so-secretly expecting the World Series and we’ve tossed aside the padding and armor we put on before the Yankees series because that stuff pinches and chafes you when you’re celebrating. Nothing I say is going to make anybody put that padding back on, and if the A’s find a way to put the Tigers down, I’ll be laid low at least as badly as anybody reading this (unless any actual Tigers read this, I suppose). So, pull up a seat on the couch or at the bar, but do so knowing that unless we’re on the Tigers payroll, all we can do at this point is watch and hope no matter how much or how little we know about the two teams.

Actually, this approach of not making predictions is probably a good thing because if somebody taunted me with my own words in the even of a Tiger loss, I may not be able to keep the blog going after I was convicted for whatever I did to them. I was in a meeting last week and all a guy said was “You can stick a fork in the Tigers” after their Game 1 loss and that made me want to strangle him with his own tie. “What are you basing that on?! Did God Himself tell you that? Then shut the hell up, you sheep! Oh, and could you take a look at this work plan and approve what we’ve proposed? Thanks.”

Game 1 is at 8:09 tonight, and it will be Barry Zito against Nate Robertson. Go Tigers.

2006-10-08T13:57:00.000-05:00

Game 4: They Did It

I don’t know what to say about the game last night, and really the last two games. Going into Saturday’s game, as we looked around the park and talked about how nice the seats were, and what grand slams we had seen live, etc., I debated internally on whether I’d rather see something like the previous night’s game or something more like a classic. I decided I didn’t really care as long as the Tigers won, and let me tell you, I have no complaints about the way things went down.

It was unbelievable the way the weekend games went, and Saturday the surprises started before the teams even took the field. They showed the Yankee lineup and A-Rod was batting eighth and Giambi wasn’t batting at all. I haven’t read the stories to find out if he was injured or not, but he definitely wasn’t in there. Instead, Matsui filled the DH spot, Melky Cabrera played left and Sheffield resumed his duties at first. I was pretty surprised, just because in the beginning of the series Leyland was quoted as saying they would have to do some unconventional things to win. Now here was Torre sitting one of his best hitters – a lefty when the starter was right-handed - and sliding one of the most talented players ever down to the eighth slot in the lineup. I’m not saying these were bad decisions; they were just surprising, and a good indicator of how things had changed since Tuesday.

When the game started, I couldn’t tell if I was going to have to run off to the bathroom or if I was just this excited. It was the same feeling I had before my high school pitching debut and my high school varsity pitching debut. Bonderman retired the first three batters before I could even decide. Damon flied out on an 0-1 pitch. Jeter grounded out to short on the first pitch he saw and Abreu flied out to Granderson. After only seven pitches, the Tigers were coming to bat. Clearly, we didn’t know what we were in for, but it felt like a small victory that the Yankees didn’t bat around and score five runs after being shut down the night before. The Tigers didn’t fare much better in their half of the inning, as they were only able to work Jaret Wright for nine pitches before going to 1-2-3 as well.

The surprises kept coming when Bonderman repeated his first inning effort. He mowed the four through six spots down in eight pitches and that was after a three pitch strikeout of Gary Sheffield. Was it possible that he would be able to improve on Rogers’ start from the night before? We just laughed at the idea of Bonderman getting six outs on fifteen pitches, and had barely settled in our seats when Maggs took a 1-0 pitch and absolutely crushed it into centerfield. God, he smoked that ball, but was it high enough to clear the wall? It was definitely going to be extra bases because Damon was just putting his head down and running, but to go out, it would have to do it in the ballpark’s deepest dimensions. It seemed to take forever, but it finally landed on the side of the fence that let Ordonez slow to a trot, nearly hitting the flagpole (that used to be in play) when it did. The stadium erupted with an orange flash of Tiger Towels and cheers. I realized my celebration perhaps went a little overboard when I was still shouting “Yes!” and high-fiving everyone around me and the guy behind me was sitting down and looking at me with one eyebrow raised. But, dude, these are the Yankees, and these are our Tigers!

After Guillen had a good at bat, Pudge came up and quickly found himself down 0-2. He worked the count back to full – yes, Pudge worked the count. My wife told me Pudge didn’t have to do anything but get a walk so that Craig could hit a two run home run. The next pitch was in the dirt, and a few pitches later, her request was answered when Monroe hit a fly ball where the only question from where we sat was which side of the foul pole it would land on. This is how things went all day. The 3-0 lead convinced that a complete undressing of the Yankees would be okay by me, and the classic could wait until a later round.

In the third inning, Bonderman put them down in order again, and again it was with only eight pitches. This inning was a little different because Craig Monroe made a very nice catch to get the first out. To that point, everything had been pretty routine if I remember correctly. The fifth and sixth members of our party showed up after Monroe’s catch, so we celebrated all that had already happened again and said, “Can you believe this! Oh my God!” for at least the tenth time already. In the bottom of the inning, the first two Tiger batters were retired uneventfully, but then Maggs came up and hit what seemed like a sharp grounder to A-Rod. He booted it, but still had time to make the play. However, hurrying to get the out, he made a bad throw that got past Sheffield and Maggs was safe at first. Since these were the playoffs and it was A-Rod, you couldn’t help but wonder how bad the Tigers could make it hurt. Guillen and Pudge singled to make it hurt for one run, and we all laughed at the idea that A-Rod could not make himself hated more if he scripted it. Maybe in his next at bat he would strike out, but not before he hit a foul ball that hit Jeter in the face.

From there, the Tigers just kept on pouring it on and it seemed like the biggest thing left to cheer for was the “special” night Bonderman was having. After he sent them down in order in the fourth, I leaned over to my wife and told her that if she noticed anything particularly special about what Jeremy was doing, don’t say anything. After the fifth inning, when the Yankees went down in order yet again - this time with two strikeouts in the mix - she had an exchange with my cousin I couldn’t hear and excitedly told me that Bonderman was throwing a perfect game. I winced. “I told you not to say anything!” I said while laughing. The people in front of us heard us and jokingly feigned disgust when asking if she said what he was doing out loud. “No, no, she didn’t say anything” I told them. My wife grimaced when Cano led off the sixth with a single up the middle, and the crowd cheered Bonderman for lasting that long before giving up a baserunner. My wife was quick to point out that my cousin mentioned it and he was the one who should know better. Besides, it was 7-0 at this point, and it wasn’t going to take a perfect game to win this one. The Tigers added their final run in the bottom of the inning on a Casey double, and with the lead at two grand slams, I felt free to stop worrying about a comeback. I say that, but when the Yankees scored in the seventh and had runners on first and second, you could feel a release of tension when Cano flied out to end the inning.

All that was left was to count down the outs, and wonder when and if they were going to take out Bonderman. I guessed aloud that Leyland would leave him in after the eighth so he could get the same ovation Rogers had the night before and as his pitch count neared 100, it was just a matter of which batter would be his last. Abreu led off the inning with a single and then Sheffield, who had pulled balls violently foul the whole game, smoked one to left field that went just foul and instead of being a two-run home run, it was a long second strike. He followed that up with another hard hit to left that looked like it would be trouble. Monroe came in on it and I cringed when he dove because there was a lot of space behind him if he missed. But he hit the ground, the ball hit his glove, the ump went up with the hand, and the place went nuts for the several hundredth time. Leyland must have figured that was as good a time as any to pull Bonderman, and when he started walking off the field I think it was the loudest the stadium was all day. It was like every fan in the park had been told they had won a million dollars. We fell all over ourselves trying to let Bonderman know how much we appreciated this fantastic and unexpected effort. With Bonderman out, counting down the outs was really all there was left to cheer for. Walker came in to get Matsui, reminded us why he probably shouldn’t ever be left in against righties when Posada pounded a two run homer, and then induced a grounder to Polanco that was clearly going to be the final out. My voice hasn’t fully recovered from the celebration.

Watching the Tigers celebrate, we all had to wonder what they were going to do should they actually win the World Series at home, and we were left to worry that they were satisfied with what they’d already accomplished. After all, the Twins were quite a formidable opponent and we don’t want to fall victim to the same fate they and the Yankees just did. But as these kind of thoughts went through my head even as I danced and cheered and looked around at what Comerica looked like when things went nuts, Leyland did an interview that eased my fears. He said that this was so special because the Tigers knew they had broken the fans’ hearts the week before and they were just so glad to be able to do this for the fans. They knew they had work to do; they were just glad to redeem themselves. So this afternoon – or maybe this evening, judging by the hazy eyes of the countless strangers we exchanged hugs, cheers and high-five with - we can start worrying about Zito and Haren and Harden and Big Hurt. Right now, I’m just happy to say the next game is Tuesday night.

2006-10-06T09:33:00.000-05:00

Game 2: Almost Worth the 19 Year Wait

As I mentioned yesterday, I took a half day in order to watch the Tigers game. I said I’d be watching it on my couch, but my wife pointed out that we’d need to eat and it’d be more fun to be among others should the Tigers win, so we trekked up to Buffalo Wild Wings. I can’t imagine too many better uses of a half day’s vacation.

The Yankees’ first inning gave us a pretty good clue as to what kind of game it was going to be. Damon dropped a little flare perfectly between Monroe and Guillen for a single. Jeter popped up a bunt attempt for the first out. Abreu walked. Sheffield struck out on one of Justin’s sick curveballs, and Giambi walked to load the bases with two outs. Guess who that brought up. Verlander must have pumped himself up to face Alex Rodriguez because he worked two fastballs inside and up in the zone and both were clocked at 101 mph. That set A-Rod up perfectly for another nasty bender that he was unable to even make an attempt on. It was fantastic to witness, but you had to wonder at that point if the Yankees had just wasted their best chance, or just missed on one of many.

In the Tigers’ second, you had to be nervous as a Tiger fan when Guillen and Pudge both were out on four combined pitches since Mussina had already carved up the Tiger lineup once this season when he threw a complete game without giving up an earned run. But, just as I was realizing I was drinking my beer too quickly from all the nervous energy, Monroe smacked a ground rule double down the line on a 3-1 count. Marcus Thames knocked him in almost before I could say I hoped he did something big because he’s finally going to get his chances without having to worry about getting benched the next day. He singled into right center and it was obvious from the location of the hit that Monroe would score easily.

The Yankees threatened again in the bottom of the inning with Matsui ripping a first pitch fastball into right and Posada working a nine-pitch walk that put runners at first and second with no outs. Then Cano grounded out to Inge on a ball that Brandon didn’t even see until it was about thirty feet away from him. I think the reason was probably because he expected it to be hit much harder. As it was, he fielded the dribbler and stepped on third before making an ill-advised throw to first that had no shot at getting Cano. Damon followed up by flying out to Granderson and Jeter hit a fielder’s choice to his counterpart Guillen to wrap up the inning. Yes, it was one of these kind of games.

Mussina and Verlander both had easy third innings, but that was just to give us a breather for the fourth. In the Tigers’ half, Guillen doubled and moved to third on a Pudge ground out (Pudge, feel free to unleash any time now) to bring up Craig Monroe. I’m pretty sure everybody in the stadium was surprised to see him square around, and if he would have been able to pull it down it might have worked. That didn’t happen though, and Mussina fielded the ball easily and threw him out to end the threat. That's the problem with bunting for a base hit, and that's why this was a terrible decision by Monroe. Even when the situation is right, you have to do it almost perfectly for it to work. He didn't...and it didn't.

To make things worse, the Yankees finally followed through with a threat in the bottom of the inning. It looked like maybe Verlander was going to work out another one as Matsui and Posada singled and walked again, but Cano flied out and was unable to move either up. With two outs, I went to the bathroom and hoped I would come back to wings on my table and the Tigers at the plate. Instead I came back to a 3-1 deficit as Johnny Damon put one into the third deck. I think expectations are slowly eroding in Yankee Stadium, because he received a curtain call for that, and I don’t think that would have happened in the late 90s. Verlander was looking tired when Jeter followed that with a double and Abreu smoked a grounder to first to end the inning. This is where things were just getting good, though.

The Tigers scored in each of the next three innings. The first came in the fifth when Thames doubled, moved to third on a wild pitch and scored on a Granderson sac fly. The second came the next inning when Guillen continued to smoke the ball, and this time pounded one over the right field wall to tie it up. The deciding run came from Thames and Curtis again when Thames singled, moved up on a passed ball, and took third on a bunt by Inge. That brought up Granderson and after falling down 0-2 quickly, he fouled off the next pitch and then connected with a fastball in and sent it all the way to the wall in left center. The Yankee outfielders must have been pulled in a bit to cut down the run, because they took a while to get out there and Granderson slid into third without much of a play. Just like that, the Tigers were up 4-3 and while the scoring was finished, the fun wasn’t.

Verlander was pulled in the sixth with one out and a 1-1 count on Robinson Cano. Leyland saw his decreased velocity and figured it was time to use the hook. This was an especially good time to do it, because the Yankees were in the only part of their lineup where they had consecutive batters who were lefties. That meant Walker could come in to burn two outs instead of just one. Well, it worked even better because he coaxed a double play from Cano to end the inning. That meant he could start the seventh against Damon as well.

He did, retired Damon and gave way to the guy we all love to see, Joel Zumaya. Zoom Zoom (he really needs to ink a deal with a Mazda dealership) came in and immediately established what kind of day he was going to have by striking out Jeter. They said Jeter tipped the ball, but on the replays I saw, he didn’t come with two inches of that ball. Zumaya then retired Abreu on a grounder, and the Yankees were down to six outs.

The eighth was even better as Sheffield hit a line drive right to Granderson on the first pitch, showing that he still has one of the fastest bats in the majors. Zumaya had Giambi and A-Rod after that, and he was more than up to the challenge. According to ESPN’s guns, he struck out Giambi on a 103 mph fastball. He threw two more at that speed to get two strikes, and finally dusted him off. I can’t remember for some reason but I think he got A-Rod with the hammer just like Verlander had earlier edit: It was another 100 mph fastball. Oh, and those fastballs that broke 100 so consistently? At the knees on the outside corner. Just sick.

That left the ninth to Todd Jones, who of course gave up a leadoff single to Matsui. He then struck out Posada in an impressive display that was capped with a called third strike. He induced a harmless fly ball from Cano, and ended the game on a shallow fly to center from Damon. Everybody in the bar whooped and hollered and we had to wait for our victory round of shots because just about every table had ordered one as well.

In case you haven’t believed before this game, I think it’s obvious now that the Tigers haven’t just come to compete in this series. They CAN compete. Not only can they compete, they can win. They are hitting Yankee pitching just well enough, and when professional pitchers make their pitch, outs will follow – yes, even against this lineup the Yankees have. This series may come down to which side can make their pitch more often, and with Randy Johnson and his bad back going tonight and Jaret Wright going tomorrow, there’s a decent chance the Tigers will be the team to do that more often. I’m going to rein in my excitement a bit, because I don’t want to overstate the importance of yesterday’s win, but this just became a best of three series and the Tigers now have home field advantage. By no means can the Yankees be counted out at this point, but whoever comes out of Sunday the series winner, I bet they’re going to feel like the toughest may be behind them.

Tonight it will be the Gambler against Randy Johnson. I obviously don’t know what’s going to happen, but I’m pretty sure I’ll have fun finding out.

2006-10-05T08:39:00.000-05:00

Game 2: Delayed

Well, the Tigers didn’t play last night. I was kind of relieved they didn’t start the game because it wouldn’t have started until 10 or so, and that would have made 6 o’clock come very early this morning. I was also relieved because if they started and two innings later, the rain comes back, the Tigers have almost completely wasted Verlander and we’re left to watch Ledezma and Miner against that Yankees’ lineup. As it is, the Tigers have lost their travel day, but at least they get to come home and sleep in their own beds tonight. The Yankees are going to have to fall asleep despite me banging pots and pans and honking my horn all night outside their hotel. I’m kidding, of course. I’m paying somebody else to do that.

In the other games that were played yesterday, the Mets beat the Dodgers and the A’s beat the Twins again. Both games had key mistakes that affected the final outcome. In the Dodgers’ case, it was Jeff Kent not getting a good read on a ball to right field and getting thrown out at the plate. The only reason he was sent home, according to the Dodgers, is because J. D. Drew had run up on his heels and if Kent would have stopped at third, they would have had two runners on third. That’s bad enough, but Drew compounded his mistake by running through third base as well, so after LoDuca tagged out Kent at the plate, he was very surprised to be able to turn a unique double play by tagging out Drew without so much as a rundown. I heard the play described on the radio, so I didn’t see it, but that is indescribably bad baserunning by Drew. If you know there’s a baserunner ahead of you, you never round a bag without taking a peek to see what’s going on ahead of you.

The mistake everybody is talking about in the Twins game was Torii Hunter taking an aggressive route on a line drive to center by Mark Kotsay, diving for the ball, missing it, watching as it rolled all the way to the wall and Michael Cuddyer ran it down from right field. Kotsay scored on the play, as did Jason Kendall, and instead of two runners on with two outs, the Twins found themselves in a 4-2 hole almost immediately after Justin Morneau and Michael Cuddyer had hit back-to-back home runs to tie the game up. I heard Hunter’s comments after the game and he said something to the effect that there was no question in his mind that he had that ball, and it didn’t even cross his mind to play it like a single. Unfortunately for Hunter and Twins fans, the other thing that didn’t cross his mind is that he’s apparently not the fielder he was when he developed those aggressive instincts. Do you feel worse for Hunter or the fans in that situation?

That’s enough about the poor and unfortunate fans of other cities, though. The Tigers play at 1 o’clock today, and I will be watching on my couch. I know it’s probably ridiculously dorky of me to take a half day to go watch a baseball game, but it’s really a responsible act on my part because I wouldn’t be much good to my employer this afternoon anyway.

One more thing, Baseball America announced their Top 20 Players for the Florida State League yesterday. The Tiger’s sole representative was Jair Jurrjens. He’s another quality starting pitcher in the system, and I plan to post about him sometime soon after either the postseason or the Tigers’ season is over. Here’s hoping those two conclusions come on the same day.

2006-10-04T07:57:00.000-05:00

Game 1: Keep Hope Alive

I don’t have a wealth of time today, but I just wanted to get some thoughts in on the Tiger game. First, I saw nothing yesterday that tells me the Tigers have no chance in this series. I also saw nothing that tells me the Yankees are a freight train that cannot be stopped on their way to a 27th World Series ring.

I hated the call in the second inning to send Ordonez and Guillen on a hit and run with no outs. I’m not a fan of the hit and run, but I’m a stark opponent to doing it with runners and first and second, especially when somebody like Maggs is the guy on second. That is especially true when you have put your first two runners on and it looks like you may be starting something. It reeked of desperation, and I don’t think the Tigers need to play like that.

Oddly, the next inning the Tigers weren’t aggressive on the basepaths when Marcus Thames wasn’t sent home from second on a single to right by Curtis Granderson. I had no problem with that call since there was only one out and I assumed they would be doing another hit and run with Polanco that probably get the run in. Yet, they didn’t put any play on with Polanco batting and he hit a sharp grounder that Jeter and Cano did a great job of turning into a double play. So, hit and run with no outs and guys on first and second, but no hit and run with a contact hitter up, a good baserunner on first and a runner on third. I don’t get the inconsistency.

In the Yankees’ third, things looked like they were going to get ugly when the Yankees dropped five runs on Nate Robertson. But think of how that inning started. Nate botched a dribbler by Damon. Then Jeter hits a line drive right at the vacated position of Guillen who was pulling toward second to cover as Damon was running. Damon shouldn’t have been on base, and if the Tigers do a conventional cover play there (Polanco covering), Guillen grabs that ball and doubles up Damon easily.

Later, the Tigers had pulled the game back to 5-3 and Robertson found himself in trouble again. He had two outs and a runner on first and he felt he was squeezed on his first pitch to Jeter. He was visibly upset as he received the throw from Pudge, and Jeter pulled the next pitch into left field for his second double of the game. No problem, I thought – there’s two outs. Robertson makes a nice pitch to Abreu who fights it off to get a slow grounder in the hole between Polanco and Casey. Polanco dove, but couldn’t reach it, two runners scored and Robertson was done for the evening.

Even then, the Tigers kept their composure. With two outs in the seventh, Torre pulled Wang to get a lefty-lefty matchup with Granderson and put in Mike Myers. To Yankee fans’ chagrin, Granderson didn’t think much of the matchup and pulled a pitch over the right field wall. Polanco and Casey followed with hits, and with Ordonez coming up down by three, we saw why the Yankees are not unstoppable. The Yankees fans they showed in the crowd were visibly worried, and guys like Scott Proctor and Kyle Farnsworth were not concerning the Tigers. Proctor ended up getting the strikeout to end the inning, but I doubt a lot of people are very confident he will do the same next time.

No, this game didn’t worry me too much, as the Tigers were sure to lose one in Yankee Stadium. I was impressed that all the Tigers who were supposed to be in shock and awe played well and kept fighting. It won’t be easy for them to get to Mussina tonight, and Verlander faces a tough task of his own, but I think anybody who says the Tigers don’t have a chance tonight wasn’t watching closely enough last night.

Go Tigers.

2006-10-03T13:39:00.000-05:00

Opening Day

I was regretting that my schedule got in the way of doing a proper preview of this series, but after thinking more about it, I’m not. If you do a preview, you’re going to get the feeling the Tigers will get absolutely railroaded in this series. At least, that seems to be the consensus across the country. I mean, Guillen is the Tigers’ best hitter this season and the Yankees have probably five guys who are better hitters. The Yankees’ pitchers have had their struggles this season, but they don’t seem to have come very often against the Tigers. Mussina, Wang and Johnson have all had their way with the lineup at different points this season.

So all I can say is the playoffs aren’t the regular season, and nobody has any idea what the hell is going to happen. They may act like they do, and their predictions may even turn out to be right, but there’s a difference between probabilities and outcomes and any team in this league can win three out of five. For Christ’s sake, Daniel Cabrera almost no-hit the Yankees last week. Show me one sportswriter in America who hasn’t picked the Yankees to win the World Series at least once over the span covering 2001 to 2005. There may be one - I haven’t checked - but I doubt it. These may be the rantings of a desperate fan, but I’ve watched this team do amazing things this season, and I’m not ready to concede they won’t do more.

I will say that my heart dies a little every time I read that the Tigers will lose in four since I have tickets to what would be the deciding game if that prediction comes true. Still, it’s October and my heart is racing at the thought of 8:19 this evening.

Go Tigers.

2006-10-02T08:34:00.000-05:00

Oh Good God

Well, I guess I should start by congratulating the Minnesota Twins for winning the American League Central. They tried pretty hard to gift wrap it for the Tigers, but the Tigers returned it like it was a garden gnome. Second, after dogging on Todd Jones so much this season for not being able to throw more than one inning, I’d like to congratulate him on doing such a good job yesterday. He seemed to be the only pitcher yesterday who could get the mighty Royals out consistently. Finally, I’d like to congratulate the Tigers again for making the playoffs for the first time since 1987. My prediction at the beginning of the season was that they would have a shot at .500 going into the final series of the season, and then they would break my heart. I guess you can just replace “.500” with “the division”. That’s all I’m going to say about this weekend because if I start talking about Neifi Perez leading off the last inning or the Tigers blowing leads of 5-0 on Friday and 6-0 on Sunday, I will go crazy.

The important thing now is to focus on beating the Yankees. Every year, it seems like everybody says it won't be done, but somebody has done it every year since 2000. The Tigers just need to figure out how to be that team in 2006. The series starts tomorrow, and the Game 1 starters will be Chien-Ming Wang and Nate Robertson. In Game 2, Mike Mussina will face off against Justin Verlander. Rogers will start for the Tigers in Game 3, but the Yankees' starter will depend on how Randy Johnson's herniated disc in his back is feeling. I fretted about the Yankee lineup last week before shrugging my shoulders and saying they’re not our problem yet. Well, they’re the Tigers’ problem now and here’s what they can fire at you:

1. Damon CF
2. Jeter SS
3. Abreu RF
4. Giambi DH
5. Rodriguez 3B
6. Matsui LF
7. Sheffield 1B
8. Posada C
9. Cano 2B

So, you know, they’re no Kansas City Royals, but they can plate some runs just the same.

So there’s the bad news. The Tigers totally backed into the playoffs. They have to play the $200 million Yankees as a result, and if they’re able to win, they’ll probably have to win a series against the Twins when the Twins will have home field advantage. (That’s the less mentioned little nugget that is a result of this weekend.) Where’s the good news?

Well, if you’re going to beat a team, you have a better shot in a short series than you do in a long one. That is a fact. So, if you’re somebody who assumed the Yankees were going to beat the Twins if they played in the first round, the Tigers are catching a bit of a break by drawing the Yankees in the first round rather than the second because it’s clearly easier to beat them three times than four.

You want more good news than that, you say? Well, how about this? The good people at Baseball Prospectus did a study of what it is that seems to get it done in the playoffs, and they came up with three key ingredients. The first was a power pitching staff that strikes batters out. The Tigers don’t really have that, but they did strike out more batters than the Yankees this season. The second ingredient was a good closer. We have Todd Jones; they have Mariano Rivera. Um…The third ingredient was a good defense. Whew, two out of three for the Tigers, because the Tigers converted balls in play into outs better than any team in the American League this season. At least they had before this past weekend. I haven’t checked the final standings on that particular category and the 342 hits they gave up to the Royals over the weekend may have hurt them. So, if BP has it right, the Tigers may actually be able to hang this week. Actually, BP did a story talking about those three ingredients and evaluated which teams they were good news for, but it was a subscription article and I haven’t shelled out the dough required to read their premium content stories. It’s too bad my birthday isn’t coming up soon. Oh wait…

So, good reader, that’s all I have for you this morning. I’m actually feeling much better this morning about things than I was yesterday, and I’m pretty sure I will continue to feel better as 7:35 approaches tomorrow. That’s because the shock, dismay and anxiety that resulted from watching the Tigers fail to win one of their final five games will be almost fully converted into hope that they can win three of the next five.

2006-09-05T10:31:00.000-05:00

Hometown pride is coming to Toledo. Or, at least for me it is. Toledo has two news items that should be helping all of us from the Glass City (current and former) to hold our heads up.

The first is the new addition to the Toledo Museum of Art. While you scratch your head, I'll remind you that the TMA is one of the world's great art museums. The collection includes Rubens's The Crowning of Saint Catherine, El Greco's The Agony in the Garden, and Matisse's Apollo. True to its hometown, it is also houses an impressive array of glass art. This is possible largely due to a generous endowment given by industrialists upon its founding.

And, the history of the museum itself is something to be proud of. It was first built as a depression era project that helped construction employment.

The main building is in the Beaux Arts style with majestic pillars at the main entrance. Yet, it's the least impressive of the three main structures, despite these great rooms. It includes, the Peristyle, which houses the space for the Toledo Symphony Orchestra and other concert venues. Outside the main building, a sculpture garden of modern sculptures invites the visitors and Monroe Street traffic.

The first addition was designed by Frank Gehry and I think it is one of his best designs. I actually like it better than the overblown, too clever, larger works he has done since then. While many people don't see the connection to the original structure, the leaded copper plates in his building actually have a similar pattern to the marble in the main building. This is one element that pulls the two buildings together. And, maybe you have to stand there to see it. But, the building feels right in context, unlike many of his works.

Now, we have the latest addition. It is located across the street and is in the minimalist style. So far, it's been given rave reviews from the LA Times and NY Times. I haven't seen it in person yet but I'm looking very forward to it. This is a great institution.

The next reason to be proud is an appointment at the University of Toledo designating a Chair of Islamic Studies. It makes sense. Toledo, as I have noted before, has significant Arab and Islamic populations. The Arab population is about 1% of the MSA population. The suburb of Perrysburg is home to the largest mosque in North America. The "famous" Toledoans most known, Jamie Farr and Danny Thomas, are Lebanese (and Christian). Alas, Katie Holmes is not (either anymore, I guess).

I'm just really happy to see these sorts of advances in Toledo. The area really needs to capitalize on its strengths. And, it seems to me that it has hit two solid home runs with these developments. Moreover, these changes will have positive long-term results by attracting a diverse population of educated persons to the region. For too long, Toledo has basically focused on industrial development -- hoping to hold on to its past manufacturing dominance in a global economy that keeps pulling manufacturing out of developed countries. The university and museum are important components of Toledo's future. These new developments will help balance the region's pull factors. Yeah, Toledo!

2006-07-11T11:45:00.000-05:00

Sepia Mutiny provides updating coverage of the Mumbai train bomb killings.

2006-05-17T13:23:00.000-05:00

We’re going to make this an open city, because it’s right. We’re going to make it an open city because it’s practical. We’re going to make it an open city because it’s sound economics. We’re going to make it an open city because we’re tired of being humiliated.
- Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Those were Dr. King’s words 40 years ago when he and Al Raby lead the Chicago Freedom Movement's campaign for open housing, resulting in the establishment of the Leadership Council for Metropolitan Open Communities. In 1966, discrimination was overt and blunt. There were sundown towns, restricted covenants, and other visible actions.

Today more choices are available to minorities in Chicago and the region (although, income tends to be a factor in that equation). However, discrimination still exists. In 2006, discrimination is subtle and sophisticated. Discrimination occurs through the omission of information, linguistic
profiling, and other invisible means.

So, it is with much sadness that I report to you that the Leadership Council will close its doors on June 2. As those doors close, the primary voice for fair housing in the Chicago region will be silenced. Hopefully, others will take up the cause. But, the reason this loss is so great is due to the fact that no other organization has fully embraced the need to overcome segregation in the region.

As I have repeatedly announced here, Chicago is the 5th most segregated region in the country. The pattern of segregation continues through both individual actions and stuctural forces that further the system of containment and sprawl that is modern segregation.

Yet, there has been progress. Much of that progress directly ties to the programs of the Leadership Council. The 40-year legacy of the Council includes landmark lawsuits, advocacy for affirmative public policies, an engagement with the housing industry, and mobility programs that actively increased integration and housing choice in the region.

Despite the successes of the Leadership Council, there is still much to accomplish – much progress yet to make. While the Council and others have had victories in defending the rights of individuals facing discrimination, segregation still exists. Indeed, it exists in even more subtle and divisive ways today than it did in 1966 by including not only race but also income.

Today’s segregation is a segregation of opportunity. Minorities and low to moderate-income persons are largely housed in neighborhoods and communities that have few employment opportunities, poor schools, crumbling infrastructures, and limited transportation networks. Meanwhile, whites and middle and upper-income persons enjoy plentiful job growth, good schools, steady investment, and more abundant transportation choices.

Although the Leadership Council is closing its doors this year, our work as fair housing advocates is not finished. We still need to make this an open region because it’s right, it’s practical, and it’s sound economics. We still need to ensure that no one is humiliated through limitations based upon their race or income. Dr. King’s mission, left to us, has yet to be completed. Who will answer the call now?

2006-03-06T09:06:00.000-06:00

On Friday, I had the good fortune of attending the Gautreaux at 40 Conference held by Northwestern's School of Law and Institute for Policy Research. The conference brought in some seriously high level brainpower from around the nation including -- Xavier de Sousa Briggs, Rhonda Y. Williams, Mary Pattillo, Alex Polikoff, Sudhir Venkatesh, and Susan Popkin. It also included a lot of really smart public housing residents and voucher holders who don't have web sites.

For those unaware, the case of Gautreaux v. HUD and the Chicago Housing Authority was argued before the Supreme Court in 1969. The decision found that the CHA had been perpetuating segregation. The result was a mobility program to give public housing residents a voucher and a choice to move to "opportunity areas" -- census tracts which had low concentrations of poverty and low percentages of African American populations. (Almost 100% of CHA residents are black, which is further evidence of the dual system.)

My organization, the Leadership Council for Metropolitan Open Communities implemented the mobility program, which is known as the Gautreaux Program. The program moved 7,100 families from CHA developments to opportunity areas (the number of families the CHA was required to help move). Subsequent contracts moved another 1,400 families. The CHA ended its relationship with the Leadership Council in October 2005.

These moves both benefited the individuals themselves (as documented in interviews and research) and affirmatively furthered fair housing as each move made a dent in desegregating the Chicago region both racially and economically. So, the questions of the day all focused on where we go now that the nation's first, largest, and most successful mobility program has marked its 40th year. The answers mostly mirrored the policies that guide the programs of the Leadership Council today.

I think the consensus of the conference was that mobility programs are a good way to help people help themselves. But, there are other solutions that should be used in tandem. And, in the situation we're facing in Chicago -- the Plan for Transformation -- means that we also need to strategize about how to best ensure that those who do not choose to move are not displaced involuntarily. An important component of this process is the input from the residents and communities that these programs aim to assist. Of course, these are also the people who actually live the experience of the Plan for Transformation unlike advocates, researchers, and politicians who, for the most part, do not.

I'll add more of my thoughts later/

2006-01-25T08:21:00.000-06:00

This is going to be the longest post ever on this blog. Amardeep wrote about Ruchir Joshi's reaction to Bangalore being renamed Bengaluru. Most of the discussion there is on the local context. I wanted to show here just how the West reacted to the name change of Bombay to Mumbai. So here's something I wrote a few years ago on the subject.

As early as 1981 the push to rename Bombay was underway. One account among many – an editorial in The Christian Science Monitor dated June 3, 1981 – serves particularly well in illustrating the prevailing view from the West on the subject. The importance of the Monitor editorial relies specifically upon four factors – 1.) its position as an international newspaper (originating from the West), 2.) its early entry into the discussion, 3.) its choice to editorialize instead of report on the matter, and 4.) its decision to ignore entirely the local context.

Under the headline of “So Long Bombay; Hello Mumbai.” the body of the editorial began with the statement “Bombay means India – at least to many of us remote…” The editorial enlightens discussion on how this change from Bombay to Mumbai symbolizes (and attempts to actualize) a concurrent change in the perception of place. This opinion clearly emphasizes the place of Bombay in the global context – particularly from the West. By first claiming that “Bombay means India” (and by doing so implying that Mumbai does not) the Monitor asserted that the name Bombay held a unique significance from the perspective of the West. “Bombay” evoked a sense of place so important to the West that it symbolized not only itself but also the Western idea(l) of India as a whole. Therefore, the name change from Bombay to Mumbai threatened the certainty of that historic view. It disrupted a narrative defined by the West that nearly stretched back to the origins of the East India Company.

In contrast, “Mumbai” suggests that the view of India from the West requires some revision engendering a new uncertainty coinciding with a loss of power over a formerly subservient space. The editorial suggests that relationship between India and the West changed when Bombay became Mumbai. Previously, “Bombay” evoked a sense of control by the West over India and its identity. “Mumbai,” on the other hand, elicits liberation from the West. The change in toponymy signals an Indian will to claim its own identity and foster new relationships with the West as an equal.
Nevertheless, The Monitor immediately follows this statement with a betrayal by adding, “-- at least to many of us remote…” Here it confesses its privileged Western view and half-heartedly apologizes for it. This honesty serves as an implicit admission that the West no longer has a firm control over India. Once, India was an occupied space controlled by the West with little regard for its previous inhabitants. However, since Midnight, India has progressed away from its colonial legacy. While the Monitor does not revisit the historical arrogance of colonial control, it does concede that, today, a different relationship would likely exist. By proceeding to shed its colonial past, India steadily reinvents its identity and relationship with the West. According to the Monitor, changing the name of Bombay to Mumbai exemplifies this factuality.

The editorial goes on to lament the removal of erstwhile Bombay from the world. It romanticizes “Bombay” and complains of the myriad practical matters that will arise with the arrival of “Mumbai.” The Monitor cites that, “Airline schedules that will have to be changed,” and that someday a new generation will have forgotten Bombay altogether. Additionally, one can imagine that government documents and official references required updating. Meanwhile, the Marathi and Indian governments likely need to inform people of the change – both inside and outside of India. Although these concerns have some validity (airline schedules have been changed to list Mumbai not Bombay as a destination), their genuine purpose is to conceal the West’s unspoken yet utmost anxiety – the erosion of its privileged status.

After registering their complaints, the editors conclude in a contradictory manner that attempts to both reestablish Western authority over Bombay and recognize the arrival of Mumbai. The editors proclaim, “Bombay could never be anything except Bombay. But, but…Welcome, Mumbai!” evincing an unmistakably less than sincere welcome to a new challenging perception of India. First, by iterating the position that Bombay will always be what the West says it is/was perhaps the editors have surrendered to the reality of a postcolonial present. Whereas the Monitor reluctantly concedes that this new existence incorporates multiple perspectives, it also contemporaneously claims Western authority over the truth of the past. It is as if to say never mind “Mumbai’s” new identity increasingly defined by India in the present. The West will not allow such a happening to alter the identity of “Bombay.” That identity has been established and sanctioned. It will always remain intact. The West will not condone any threat to its authority of the past – name change or not.

Second, the editors finally welcome Mumbai. At this point in the editorial, the welcoming serves a dual role. It is at once an olive branch and at the same instant a reluctant admission of powerlessness. The olive branch offering both a half-hearted apology for the West’s colonial transgressions and a gesture encouraging a fruitful future relationship. The admission signaling an awakening to the restlessness of postcolonial space freeing itself from the regulation of the colonial era. A space that, since 1947, finds itself defined more and more by India and less and less by the West. That therefore grants India the ability to determine how the world should perceive it instead of allowing the world to continue to define India. The Maharashtra government proposed to rename Bombay Mumbai. The Indian government approved the change. The West had little choice but to formally recognize it. Meanwhile, the world witnessed another demonstration of the dynamic nature of social space - a quality that cultivates ever-changing perceptions of space and place. The Monitor’s salutation suggests the West endeavors to cope with this reality. Still, its reluctant and qualified welcome suggests one last attack. An assertion that Mumbai’s authenticity still necessitates a blessing from the West.

2006-01-06T11:42:00.000-06:00

King Kaufman (the best sportswriter in the business by the way) gains my respect yet again by not using the racist nickname for Washington's football team in his column. King is very cool about it. He doesn't mention it or call attention to it. He just ignores the nickname. Genius.

2005-10-25T12:29:00.000-05:00

Rest in Peace Rosa Parks. Your actions made a difference and inspired many.

The best article I've seen about Rosa's actions and their results is from the Birmingham News.

2005-09-19T16:37:00.000-05:00

Vacation was nice. Very relaxing, lots of fun activity, and no information. We had Sirius satellite radio in the car so we just listened to music whenever we drove. No talk radio, no news, nothing informative except the weather.

Acadia National Park is beautiful. Mountains, lakes, ocean, and a hint of fall color. It was technically the off season so we didn't have to deal with crowds. And, it had the added bonus of quaint towns full of very friendly people. We hiked every day and did some bike riding on these stone roads called carriage roads that don't have any motorized traffic. We stayed away from Bar Harbor except for two meals and spent more time on the "quiet side" of the island.

And now I'm back but I have no idea about anything current. Also, I'm swamped with work. So, it may take a few days to get back up to speed.

2005-09-03T20:34:00.000-05:00

The consequences of Hurricane Katrina have provided obvious evidence of an often invisible phenomenon, racial segregation. Rarely talked about in the media, ignored by most whites as a problem that doesn't directly affect them negatively, and supported by political-economic policies, everyone knows our nation's cities are segregated but too few consider it seriously.

The poor response has brought up the question of how race factors in government policies that lead to such consequences and in government response in the wake of crises. These questions need to be asked not only of how they affected the situation surrounding Hurricane Katrina but also of how they affect the daily lives of people, especially minorities, living in all of our cities.

As I have argued previously and the Leadership Council has documented, segregation has created systemic inequalities and structural barriers to community development and personal improvement that continue to encourage a widening socio-economic gap between whites and minorities. This is especially true for African Americans.

Segregation negatively affects minorities in many ways. Economically, poverty is concentrated in minority neighborhoods thus, severely limiting the fiscal capacity of predominantly minority municipalities and the infrastructure in predominantly minority neighborhoods. That results in poorer schools, libraries, and public spaces; fewer services such as police, fire, and garbage; lower qualities of life including limited transportation options on more antiquated networks, less green space, more heavy industry, and fewer child care options; and reduced civic participation caused by (understandable) cynicism and despair.

As shown here at SUNY Albany's Lewis Mumford Center web site, New Orleans ranks as the 33rd most segregated city in the United States. Its black/white dissimilarity score is 69 -- meaning 69% of all whites and blacks would have to move in order to create a fully integrated city. Full integration does not mean equal percentages of each group. It means that percentages of each group for each census tract (typically larger in area than neighborhoods) will be similar to the region's average racial percentages.

Hurricane Katrina has shown just how stark a dissimilarity score of 69 is. Obviously, 32 Cities are more segregated than New Orleans include large, medium, and small cities such as:

1. Detroit, MI (85) [16 points higher than New Orleans]
4. New York, NY (82) [+13]
5. Chicago, IL (81) [+12]
14. Benton Harbor, MI (74) [+5]
17. Kankakee, IL (73) [+4]
24. Fort Wayne, IN (71) [+2]
30. Dayton, OH (70) [+1]
31. Johnstown, PA (70) [+1]

Clearly, there's not only a crisis in New Orleans. There is a crisis of racial relations in almost every city in America, especially east of the Mississippi River. For the most part, blacks and whites are not living together. And, they are not experiencing the same America. Ignoring the problem will not make it go away. A serious and heartfelt discussion about race, racial inequality, and racial segregation in America could provide one positive result from this terrible disaster.

2005-09-01T12:07:00.000-05:00

Jack Shafer discusses the (invisible) issue of race and class in the news of Katrina.

Also, see Amardeep's post about the AFP pictures with blacks "looting" and whites "finding". Just disgusting.

Speaking of looting and finding. I think if I were in one of these devastated places I might find some dry clothes or food however I could.

And, also, the idea of the Bush administration making poor choices prior to this disaster. What did we know about New Orleans?

1. New Orleans is below sea level and meteorolgists, geographers, and others have been warning about what a direct hit from a Category 5 hurricane would do (level the place).
2. Hurricanes have been more active in recent years, especially in those years of the Bush presidency. Global warming, which the Bush adminsitartion has done less than nothing about (it has actually regressed on envirnmental stewardship) has been cited as a probable cause for this increase in hurricane activity.
3. FEMA lost a director that was an experience emergency management professional for a political crony.
4. FEMA's budget was decimated by Homeland Security. The projects that needed to be built or improved where cut from the federal budget.
5. The Iraq War took away the backup plan of calling in the National Guard in case the preparations didn't hold.

2005-08-31T15:14:00.000-05:00

King Kaufman is spot on today. He opened my eyes to just how great a year Ken Griffey Jr is having. He looks like the Griffey you remember from Seattle. Griffey's year is what should be considered a great year but isn't anymore because steroids have made 40 homer seasons seem ordinary.

Also, King documents the rise in ratings for Canadian Football League games now that they don't have announcers. I have to agree that I would love to watch a game without an announcer or all of the stupid gimmicks that are on tv. I especially hate Fox broadcasts with all of their different sounds and images. Just show the damn game and get out of the way please. I like the corner scoreboard and the ticker. You can keep those. Everything else can go.

2005-08-24T16:23:00.000-05:00

You can write in to Senate Democrats and tell them what you would ask John Roberts. I'm guessing they're looking for simpler questions but mine was:

In much of America, structural inequality directly and indirectly frustrates the rights of individuals. For example, in many metropolitan regions, patterns of racial and ethnic segregation create a structural barrier to community development and personal improvement including access to quality education, employment, and government services. These patterns did not appear out of thin air. Individuals and governments shaped these patterns over decades. The federal Fair Housing Act and Amendments of 1988 (as well as the Community Reinvestment Act of 1973 and other federal laws) requires the federal, state, and local governments to affirmatively further fair housing. Yet, governments at all levels do not seriously engage in affirmative measures. One response to this is to bring cases against governments charging them with policies and practices that have disproportionately negative effects on minorities, families, and persons with disabilities. Given that the facts of a case proved a government did have a policy with a disparate impact on protected persons, what is your opinion of whether federal law allows for such a lawsuit where an individual sues a government for structural inequality that leads to restrictions on individual rights?

2005-08-16T14:56:00.000-05:00

Well, it's about time someone pays attention. David Brooks urges young minds to enter the field of cultural geography. Too bad his alma matter doesn't take it very seriously. Then again neither do these big Chicago universities.

Oddly, in a city that owes its success almost entirely to its relative geography and that also continuously parades its cultural geographic importance, its major universities all but ignore the subject of cultural geography. It's all sociology, public policy, and social work in the City of Broad Shoulders.

Instead, you have to go to the west coast if you want to join the elite geography schools.

Anyway, back to Brooks. He's almost right. There are a lot of great brains in cultural geography already. But, it is true that there's a lot of room to grow and a lot of topics waiting for a dominant author.

But, Brooks will be disappointed to find that the best schools embrace the neocon-dreaded notions of multiculturalism and poststructuralism. And, that geography is also an important point of critique on Empire and globalization.

2005-07-28T12:43:00.000-05:00

In New Mexico, they claim to have a monsoon season. I only witnessed one actual day during our two years there that I would consider monsoonish. The streets flooded almost immediately. You'd be amazed at how fast rain can fall and cause havoc. Of course, that was nothing compared to 26" in one day!

2005-07-26T16:00:00.000-05:00

Crooked Timberers are discussing Jared Diamond's, Guns, Germs, and Steel. It's an interesting debate on what environmental determinist perspectives might be omitting. It seems for the most part that certain people are upset with how this alters the colonialism debate.

My biggest issue is what the popularity of Jared Diamond means for geography in the public sphere. I'm afraid too many people will think geography is what Jared Diamond does. Instead I'd rather people looked to this guy, this guy, this gal, this gal, this guy, or this guy.

2005-07-25T09:57:00.000-05:00

HUD, the Urban Institute, and Access Living conducted some testing research on discrimination against persons with disabilites in the Chicago region. As the Tribune describes the story in today's paper based on today's press release from HUD.

The study showed people with disabilities being discriminated against in 30% to 50% of the time based on type of disability. For example, blind people with service animals were not given an opportunity to rent because of no-pets policies. Under the Fair Housing Act, service animals are not to be considered pets. Deaf persons were often cut off on the phone when using relay services. People in wheelchairs were told they couldn't rent in some buildings without entering into reasonable modification or reasonable accommodation negotiations. In fact, they were not even allowed to state a case for why they wanted to live in the units they called on. By law, disabled persons are allowed to make reasonable modifications to inaccessible units if they are willing to pay for installation and (in some cases) removal of them.

Disability is a protected class at all levels of government in Chicago (federal, state, county, local). And, HUD plans on using the information gathered to actually enforce the law. So, there should be some good case law or ALJ agreements on disability rights in the near future.

2005-07-13T11:25:00.000-05:00

This report came out to identify the costs of transportation in metropolitan areas. turns out that not having viable mass transit alternatives makes it more expensive to get around in a region.

2005-07-07T09:40:00.000-05:00

Because I lived in and loved living in London for six months in my twenties, I often feel more when a tragedy happens there than in New York which I've only been to as a tourist. I lived very close to Russell Square and crossed it often to go to a favorite pub. (Russell Square is where the double decker bus was blown up today.)

London is such a wonderful place and I have very fond memories of walking along the Thames, long converations in pubs, lazy days in art museums, and just having that ex-pat feeling with others from the US and elsewhere. London is also the most cosmopolitan city I know of. Certainly, this is partly an echo of the British Empire. But, no other city I've spent a lot of time in has as many people from different cultures interacting with one another. It was so common for me to see kids of different colors and languages playing soccer together. Or, to see people of different races holding hands while walking down the street. In other words, if London is a target then the target is a liberal lifestyle.

Sure, this might sound a little too Hitchensian for some. But, unlike Christopher, I do not see the West as faultless freedom fighters. In fact, I think this problem is exacerbated by extremists on both sides of the issue. Do I possibly have a little more in common with the Western interests? Yes. Do I think that fighting violence with violence is the solution though? No. Indeed, I think one of the solutions is exactly what was interrupted by these bombings. Aid and fair trade and an equitable set of possibilities for all the world's people is what I think will make a difference.

Which is not to say I think people only become al-Qaida recruits because of poverty and despair. It's not that simple. Some people believe in fundamentalism per se. But, poverty and despair make it a lot easier to coax recruits into an extremist ideology that targets an other as the source of that recruit's problems.

Of course, this is just a small bit of the problem. There are also the follies of our leaders, the dictatorial regimes in too many countries of the world (that we have and have not supported), our own fundamentalisms that offer a point to be countered, and other things I can't think of right now.

But, the bottom line is that violence is not the answer. It won't stop us and it won't stop them. I just hope that this will not derail the momentum to offer more aid to African nations. Because, that is part of the solution. It would be sad to see the terroists win this battle.

ADDENDUM: This dispatch from London over at Slate is worth a read.

2005-06-30T11:24:00.000-05:00

Here's some good news! The National Fair Housing Alliance and its member organizations led a campaign to get ABC to pull a reality show called "Welcome to the Neighborhood" from its schedule. The story is here.

The show created a rule that allowed three white Christian families in an Austin neighborhood to decide who would be their neighbor among half a dozen families. The deciding families made discriminatory statements during episodes of the show and the criteria they used to select their neighbors were in violation of the federal Fair Housing Act and the Texas equivalent.

Specifically, we contend that the show violates the Fair Housing Act by "otherwise making unavailable". The Act does not require a monetary transaction in order for a violation to occur. Any entity that "otherwise makes housing unavailable" because of a person's protected status (race, color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status, disability) is subject to the Act. The contestant families fell into almost all of these categories.

ABC pulled the show after opposition from NFHA, GLAAD, the National Association of REALTORS and others (including my organization and our regional fair housing alliance.

To me, there are still questions. This show won't air but the contest already happened. Who got the house? Who at ABC allowed this show to be produced? Who gave it the okay to air? Will ABC do anything else to remedy the situation? Maybe they could talk about fair housing in an episode of "Extreme Makeover: Home Edition".

Anyway, the good guys got a victory this week.

2005-05-31T10:22:00.000-05:00

Not sure if the youngsters out there know how big the first Live Aid was. (They re-united The Who and Zeppelin!!! You can't imagine how big that was in 1985.) I remember being glued to the TV and having a huge pit in my stomach because I wasn't there. It was a huge huge event -- so many big names and such hype. I taped as much of it as I could and played it back a bunch of times. It just made me feel so good to hear all these great bands and know that it was for a good cause. I even liked the cheesey video David Bowie and Mick Jagger made of "Dancing in the Streets".

Sometime this decade, I read an interview of Bono talking about how little help it really was. The money they raised -- while very substantial -- just didn't go very far. And, the logistics of getting the food to starving people was extremely complicated.

Sir Bob Geldof is doing it all over again. This time, it's even bigger and hopefully the idea behind it is even more powerful. It's called Live 8 (as in the G8) and is meant to emphasize justice over charity. You can read a brief summary and a list of the line-ups so far at Radio 1. It's going to be in five cities with London as the main venue. The BBC will be broadcasting the whole thing for those of you in the UK or with broadband or Satellite Radio.

2005-05-19T09:40:00.000-05:00

Not likely to be new posting here from me until next week. Grant deadlines have me busy busy busy. Maybe Matt and Rich will take up the slack.

In the meantime you can check out this great report that the Leadership Council produced with the Institue on Race and Poverty at the University of Minnesota and the Kirwan Institute at Ohio State on racial segregation and its correlation to economic, educational, and other life opportuntites.

UPDATE: Eloy at DailyKOS blogged about this as well!

2005-05-12T07:35:00.000-05:00

I'm running in a half marathon to raise money for the AIDS Foundation of Chicago. They are a national leader in grantmaking, housing and medical services, and advocacy for people living with HIV and AIDS. At the end of 2003, the CDC estimates that 405,926 persons were living with AIDS in the USA. These persons come from every race and class. But, infection rates are now disproportionately growing in the African American and Latino communities. Women are also increasingly being infected.

You can help by clicking on my runner's page and making a donation. No matter how large or small, the AIDS foundation will send you a form for tax deduction purposes. I need to raise $1,300 by June 17th. If you can afford to, I hope you'll give to this great cause.

2005-05-04T11:59:00.000-05:00

Parks are more than just pretty places. They are public space that becomes a place for relationships, organization, and leisure. And, they tend to bond neighbors and people who normally wouldn't get to know each other.

2005-04-29T14:31:00.000-05:00

The Gathering of Nations is this weekend in Albuquerque. It's the largest Pow Wow in North America. I've been once. It's an awe-inspiring event. And, just knowing it's happening makes me miss Albuquerque. Oh, for quicker, cheaper transportation.

2005-04-12T11:55:00.000-05:00

In my hometown of Toledo, OH, a great independent bookstore -- Thackeray's -- is on it's last day. Local columnist, Roberta deBoer, sums up the prevailing feelings about the loss. The shopping center she mentions has also lost Toledo's best independent record store and will probably soon lose other treasures of the Glass Capital as it continues to slowly die while a giant mall grows and grows a mile away.

It's disheartening to think about the homogenization of our culture and landscapes. With a few exceptions, cities in America look and feel pretty much the same wherever you go nowadays. And, I think it affects hometown pride and tends to make people feel less rooted. I'm sure that someone could correlate the rise of chains and an increase in intranational migration to show a positive relationship.

And, I can feel that as well. The loss of Thackeray's is the loss of one more thing that was part of my Toledo.

I wish there was an alternative to the chainization of America. It leads me to believe that Americans value uniformity or individuality more than our rhetoric might suggest. Maybe Applebee's might just be the quintessential American place. Each Applebee's is more or less the same with a few local touches added. Unless you're interested in them, you'd never even know they're there though.

Or, maybe chains are like a new religion in that they offer a stable known entity in an ever changing world.

Whatever, it's depressing to think about the blahness that America has become.

I wonder... Did previous empires go through similar patterns of homogenization in their declines? Seems like this could be similar to something I vaguely remember form the decline of the Roman Empire.

Well, I guess this is an SOC posting.

2005-04-06T10:15:00.000-05:00

Everyday, I go to work to fulfill the mission of our organization. That mission in a nutshell is to eliminate housing discrimination and segregation in the six-county Chicago region. As you might expect, this is not always an easy sell.

One of the common retorts sent my way is that people in protected classes -- especially minorities -- tend to self-segregate. In other words, people tend to "stick with their own kind." And, there is evidence that self-segregation does happen in places throughout the region. But, the term is a little misleading. While it might seem as though people are "self-segregating" in reality they are making choices based on perceptions of where they are and are not welcome.

In truth, self-segregation is an effect not a cause. The causes of self-segregation are primarily discriminatory techniques and attitudes and perpetuated perceptions of openness. Self-segregation is the effect.

Of course, people then say things like, "Latinos just seem more comfortable living in neighborhoods where the signs are in Spanish." or "We don't really get many African Americans looking for housing here." To which I ask, "Why? Why aren't there any signs in Spanish in your community? Why do you think African Americans tend to stay away from your town?" The problem isn't the homeseekers. To which I add, "You basically just stated a plan for how to attract more minorities to your community. If you were to provide services in Spanish and promote your community as tolerant and welcoming then you'd probably see more diversity."

The problem is that governments don't do enough to promote their communities as open and inclusive. The housing industry doesn't work hard enough to provide housing for minorities in white areas and vice versa. Nor, does the housing industry do enough to educate consumers on non-traditional choices. Community groups could also better promote their activities to minorities. In Chicago, this is situation is severe. Chicago is the fourth most segregated MSA in the country. Of course, it used to be #1 so there has been a little progress. (Or, others have gotten worse.) But, there are examples of diverse, welcoming, open, and inclusive communities. The shining example being Oak Park.

So to me, the argument that segregation is partially caused by self-segregating minorities is just plain wrong. And, those who use it are either ignorant or dishonest.

2005-03-14T11:00:00.000-06:00

Amardeep has an quick post on the term "South Asia" that I wanted to comment on but the comments won't come up on his blog. I'm sure Blogger's poor service is to blame. But, hey, you get what you pay for and I'm not willing to pay anything.

Ashis Nandy wrote a column in the Times of India that seems to see the term "South Asia" as problematic. It's not a great argument to me for a few reasons. The first is that he starts the article off by making a statement that is in error. That statement is

"South Asia is the only region in the world where most states define themselves not by what they are, but by what they are not."

Has he ever heard of Canada or New Zealand which both do a lot of identifying with what they are not (The US and Australia respectively). That puts me off right away.

Secondly, he argues that "South Asia" has been largely unsuccessful as a term. I disagree. It is the preferred geographical notation for the region that was once called the "Indian Subcontinent." Nandy doesn't seem to like the coldness of this physically derived name. But, geographers love these types of names as they have the best chance of remaining politically neutral. Although, eventually every name gains political significance as Nandy demonstrates here. Still, there is unyielding hope that a name will remain neutral.

Thirdly, Nandy claims that "South Asia" has allowed India to "hijack the right to Indic civilisation." I've always known the term "South Asia" to be an attempt to reduce the influence of India. There are primarily two reasons in the US that people say "South Asian."

1. It reduces confusion as to which population one is referring -- Native Americans or Asians.

2. It has been used instead of Indians so that people from Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Nepal (and to a lesser extent Bhutan and Myanmar and rarely Afghanistan, Singapore, and Malaysia) are included without being identified with a national name that is not their own.

So, the second reason (the more globally transferable reason) intends to be inclusive of all the nations in the region. Sure, India is far and away the largest of these countries by both size and population. Consequently, it will likely be more influential in the region. Would anyone expect to find Denmark more influential than France or Uruguay more influential than Brazil? I think one could make an argument that when the term "North America" is used it has more of a slant toward one country than the term "South Asia" does.

These arguments will always go on because place names are somewhat inconsistent with reality. Boundaries are fuzzy. And, place names are part of our everyday lives. Each day we encounter them and use them to understand our world. Naturally, we're going to question them.

2005-02-14T21:48:00.000-06:00

Lessons of 9/11
How soon we forget. What were two of the messages that we kept hearing after 9/11? One was that the country needed to do a better job diversifying its transportation network. This included improving passenger train service to decrease the reliance on air travel. The second was how important it was to help the "first responders" including local police deal with the threat of terrorism.
What were two of the major cuts in the new Bush administration "budget" cuts? Cuts to Amtrak and federal funds to local police departments. Meanwhile the administration is spending billions of dollars on a war that had little to nothing to do with the threat of terrorist attack on this country. Of course the money to fund the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as the proposed changes to social security, are not covered in the budget that Bush has promised to balance in the next five years. The smoke-and-mirror administration pays for these endeavors out of the discretionary fund. A fund that is suppose to pay for unexpected expenses such as aid for the tsunami catastrophe.

2005-01-28T16:47:00.000-06:00

When one studies the situation of housing segregation and attempts to promote open, inclusive, and diverse communities, one tends to find some issues that are hard to deal with when it comes to strategies of integration.

One such dilemma is that when polled about the types of integrated communities that people want to live in, African Americans often say they prefer a neighborhood that is 50% white and 50% black. (These surveys are too often disregard that there are other races and ethnicities to consider so we have to stick with the black/white dichotomy here.) Whites feel that 50/50 is something to flee. They prefer a much smaller amount -- approximately 10% Black.

In reality, the population of the United States is breaks down as follows:

White: 211 million (75%)
Black: 35 million (12%)

(Btw, the US is also 4% Asian, 2% Multiracial, 6% Other. Of the total population, approximately 13% are Latino across al races but mostly white.)

Obviously we have a mathematical conundrum. If African Americans all lived in 50/50 neighborhoods then that would mean 83% of whites would live in exclusive neighborhoods. Even if all Latinos were white and the other races lived in 50/50 situations 52% of non-Latino whites would live in exclusive communities) lived I don't think that's such a good situation. But, if it takes a 50/50 neighborhood for African Americans to feel comfortable living in an integrated community what is an integrationist to do? It seems unfair to ask an extremely disenfranchised group to accept less than the ideal requested.

My current thinking: If the 50/50 model were to become reality (we're not even close to that yet), there is no guarantee that those neighborhoods will offer the same opportunities as the 100/0 neighborhoods. So, maybe the 50/50 model is just a first step. But, the ultimate goal should be 75/12. Then there are no exclusive communities for whites.

2005-01-17T10:50:00.000-06:00

The Tribune has picked up the story on suburban fair housing ordinances -- complete with quotes from your humble host.

UPDATE: Here's the Daily Herald's article as well.

2005-01-14T13:02:00.000-06:00

The Bush Administration is planning on cutting the HUD budget drastically. You can read the story in the Washington Post.

This is an extremely serious attack on the poor and minorities in our country. While it's not perfect, HUD is one of the few federal departments with "people oriented" policies and procedures. The movement of some of its programs to the Commerce Department is, on that front, appalling.

Some HUD programs are to be cut entirely. One such program is the rural housing program. Others are going to be moved or cut in dramatic fashion. To no surprise, these changes will likely benefit the housing, lending, and insurance industries to the detriment of the actual people who need help with housing.

When taken with the Community Reinvestment Act dilutions and the previous proposed changes in HUD's support for public housing and Housing Choice Vouchers, this is beginning to look like very dark news.

I will post on some advocacy actions as soon as they are available.

2005-01-14T10:09:00.000-06:00

In contrast to Denver - a city and region with future oriented planning policies, Los Angeles is witness to a fight pitting bad ideas against one another. The two candidates for mayor of LA are arguing over commuter issues. As this article in the Los Angeles Times retails, the challenger, Bob Hertzberg, has announced a "Commuters Bill of Rights" that proposes 10 points all about cars and highways.

In response, current mayor James Hahn bellyached about Hertzberg's role in the Sacramento budget mess. He claims that all of Hertzberg's ideas need money from the state to be feasible. Hertzberg is a State Assemblyman so it's his fault that there isn't more money for roads.

Now it should be noted that Denver's movement toward a mass transit system is primarily driven by planners -- people who actually care about making cities and metropolitan areas work better. LA's debate is between politicians -- people who mostly just care about saying what they think people want to hear. But, those two statements aren't as judgmental as they might first appear. One might ask then, why don't politicians think people want to hear about mass transit. I think there are a few of reasons for this political perception. Briefly:

1. People in many cities think mass transit is about as likely as the flying car or the jet pack. They've been hearing about it for years but nothing ever happens. Actually, in bigger cities where there is a rail system, the same is true for any expansion. In Chicago, talks about new rail lines have been ongoing for decades but there is never any action on building new or expanding existing lines.

Of course, experiences in Denver, Washington, and Seattle seem to be signaling a possible end to this trend of "all talk and no action." It might be that the day of the rail line is approaching. I'm not holding my breath though.

2. People are told that rail lines will cost too much or that they are not sustainable. In some cases it's true. Any city with fewer than a million people probably can't support a rail line. Some with populations over a million still can't support them because of density issues. But, alternatives such as rapid bus lines (where buses get automatic green lights through intersections) are probably viable in some of these cities.

People are also oblivious to how much it costs to maintain and build roads and highways. Although, they do complain about toll roads.

3. The people who would benefit most from mass transit are the least likely to have their voices heard. Not that rich and middle class people don't benefit from mass transit. I'm middle class and I take the El daily to work. It saves me a lot of money and time compared to driving. But, I have the option of driving if the El were to cease functioning. Many poorer people, seniors, and the disabled do not have that option. And, their voices are usually not heard or they need to use their political capital on other issues that are just as threatening (i.e. Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid).

You'll notice that I did not include that "people just love their cars" or "Americans need to have the freedom of a car" etc. I think if you polled a thousand Chicagoans about the issue you'd find only a few who stated these things. Chicagoans are more likely to complain that "I have to drive because the trains and busses don't go where I'm going." Or, "It takes to long if you have to transfer from one system to another so I drive instead." Or, "I'd be pleased to see more transit options because I'm really tired of getting up at 5am to get to work at 9."

What LA's commuters (and all large metropolitan areas) really need is a decent mass transit system. Where is that in either candidates recommendations? Or, more generally, where is that in the American discourse at all?

2005-01-11T17:05:00.000-06:00

FYI: The Leadership Council just released a report on how most suburban Chicago municipalities fail in their fair housing obligations co-authored by yours truly. You can read a summary and download a .pdf copy here if the spirit moves you.

Part of the reason we released this report now is that it is MLK Day Monday. Dr. King came to Chicago in 1965-66 and lived here for a year while working with local leaders to promote an open housing environment in Chicago and the region. By the time he left a lot of organizations were in place to deal with the racial tensions of Chicago. One was the Leadership Council. In 1968, in the wake of Dr. King's assassination, Congress passed the Fair Housing Act. 37 years later there is still a lot of work ahead of us.

2004-12-30T22:50:00.001-06:00

Besides Oxfam you can also do a little every day to relieve hunger, improve women's health, provide health care for children, reduce illiteracy, save the rainforests, and rescue animals. It's about the least you could do.

2004-12-17T13:28:00.000-06:00

A colleague and I recently had a chat about transit and fair housing. The non-profit organization I work for was founded through the organizing efforts Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Al Raby during the Chicago freedom movement (how cool is that?!). And, our mission is to overcome discrimination in the housing market through a variety of methods. My particular focus is community relations and public policy.

So anyway, we were discussing the issue of how transit plays a role in eliminating barriers to fair housing choice. Housing integration is a goal of our agency. We advocate for open and inclusive communities for people of all protected classes especially race, national origin, and people with children. However, some practical realities sometimes make affirmative moves difficult. For instance, making a move from the south side of Chicago to the northwest suburbs means that one must leave behind social networks that have helped make life easier. On the other hand, it provides many more potential opportunities for employment and education. And, it's safer.

But, transit development could help maintain social networks. If the CTA lines extended farther into the suburbs, it would decrease the time needed to get from one point to another. It would also be helpful to have more rings of rail lines (just as we have rings of highways) at some interval of length that made sense according to population density. I've made the argument previously that Chicago needs a western arc line. It would also be helpful for the commuter trains (Metra) to provide an arc that connected the suburban lines from the northwest to the southwest. Better coordination between transit agencies would be helpful as well. Currently there are 3 different agencies -- the CTA (busses and rail in Chicago), Metra (rail in the suburbs and city), and PACE (busses in the suburbs). They don't coordinate well even when the timetables say they do. The delays at the point where one connects to another are always at least fifteen minutes and sometimes as long as an hour or more.

What I'm getting at here is that transit has the opportunity to compress space. It brings spaces closer together because people can get from one place to another quicker and cheaper. Ideally, if it were very efficient it could make integration efforts easier. And, it could make ameliorate the disparities that result from segregation. That is partly why I am such an advocate for mass transit. And, I just wanted to pass along that argument for others to use. Plus, I was supposed to talk about fair housing this week.

2004-12-10T13:26:00.000-06:00

It just might be that the Denver MSA is rapidly becoming the model for urban and regional planning practice. This article describes a policy the mayor is proposing to include low and moderate-income rental housing near the stations that will be built along the new FasTracks mass transit system.

Contrast this with the rent curve for the El in Chicago. Rents nearer to the lines are typically higher than those over the quarter mile distance planners usually use to determine the catchment area for mass transit.

It will be exciting to watch this as it develops.

2004-11-12T15:14:00.000-06:00

Denver is committing to six new rail lines totaling 120 miles in track. And, it wasn't no activist judge that made the commitment. It was passed by referendum. Here's the story.

2004-11-12T14:45:00.000-06:00

Today is the Indian holiday of Diwali (or Deepavali). Although, it is now celebrated worldwide in places with a critical mass of NRIs and/or the South Asian disapora. You can read a basic introduction here. The festival celebrates many things including the return of Lord Ram after an exile and the worship of the goddess of wealth, Lakshmi. There are different traditions surrounding the holiday as well. All the celebrants I've ever known light candles in the windows and set off a firework or two. There's more on Diwali here and here.

2004-11-02T15:32:00.000-06:00

I have to say that I haven't been this excited to vote since I first voted for Jesse Jackson in the 1988 Democratic primary. Besides voting for Kerry, I get to vote for Barack Obama and Jan Schakowsky two wonderful people and great legislators.

I've been getting very promising news from friends in Ohio. In the Hough area of Cleveland -- a mostly poor and mostly black neighborhood -- the voter turnout is huge. A poll watcher wrote to me stating that there more people had voted in his precinct before 11 a.m. than had voted for the entire day in 2000!

In New Mexico, CNN reports 46% of registered voters used the early voting method. The polls are apparently still well attended today. High turnout in New Mexico is favorable to Democrats because Albuquerque and Santa Fe (the population centers) are Democratic. Las Cruces (which is larger than Santa Fe) and Farmington are more Republican but Albuquerque is, by far, the largest city in New Mexico. If everything goes ideally, Heather Wilson will be defeated as well. She's a total partisan hack without an ounce of integrity in her bones. Part of me really wishes I were there to vote against her.

Not sure about other swing states but if OH and NM go Kerry then its over for Bush anyway.

Let's hope our four year nightmare experiment with incompetency, arrogance, and ignorance is over.

If you haven't voted yet get off your butt and do it. And, make sure you vote for Kerry -- not the other guy(s).