Guest Editorial

By William Breining


Immigration Then and Now

In response to Marcony Almeida’s weekly column. Mr. Almeida claims in the Aug. 24, 2006 edition of the Everett Leader Herald of the long period of time and obstacles facing today’s immigrants. He states that “immigrants arriving in the United States in the 19th or early 20th century were not placed on long waiting lists or faced with a reduced number of annual green cards and that almost all were authorized to work and that there were no Social Security number requirements as there are today.” That statement is a willful distortion of the truth.

Social Security numbers were not required in the 19th and early 20th centuries for a valid reason, Social Security did not exist until the 1930’s (a program started after the Great Depression by President Roosevelt). It is a further distortion of the truth to claim that immigrants did not have to go through a “qualification” process to be considered as a candidate for immigration. During the time period Mr. Almeida brackets, there were many obstacles facing immigration to America, including sponsorship by a U.S. Citizen; a place to live; a job waiting for the immigrant; and passage through Ellis Island or similar facility. Arriving at Ellis Island (or its counterparts) was no guarantee of entry into America. It was the processing point for immigration. Here the final and perhaps the most grueling qualification began; quarantines, identification verification, medical evaluation, etc. If an immigrant did not meet the standards, they left Ellis Island on a ship home, not released into the general population waiting for a court date for an appeal; you were gone, period! A new immigrant, leaving an intake facility, stepped on the soil of his new homeland cleared and thankful to have been accepted into America. U. S. immigration, in many ways, was stricter than it is today.

Mr. Almeida, further states (in his article) “As long as American immigration laws remain viewed as inefficient, more families will remain separated and America can be called a nation of immigrants only with difficulty.” We are not a nation of immigrants; we are a nation of American (U. S. Nationals) descendent of immigrants; we are a nation, not a tourist attraction! As I have stated before, immigration is a privilege, not a right! And its parameters remain at the discretion of the American people.

Mr. Almeida’s final complaint is that it takes too long to become a U. S. Citizen and that the process requires that candidates fill out a 13 page form; be of good moral character; pass both an oral and written English exam, be tested in American History and pass a Federal background check. And this is a bad thing??? America is an English speaking country, the background check is necessary to our security. People coming to America, in the past, came here to be Americans. They did not need additional incentives. Again Mr. Almeida speaks generally of illegal aliens, not legal immigration. Immigrants are not relegated to “second class” status as indicated; in no other nation do immigrants enjoy the freedom and benefits they receive here in America. Those who remain “hidden” from society do so because they chose to ignore our laws and come here illegally…and who is to blame for that? In closing, I ask this question, “What kind of citizens will they be; those who begin their life in a new nation through deceit and contempt for our laws? Not the kind that made and continue to make our nation the greatest on earth.

Newspaper Wars or Jaw Wars?

Everett is a unique city in many ways, one being that for a city of relatively small size, three newspapers vie each week for readership and advertising space. This could be a good thing in terms of competition if each paper was competing for legitimate news stories. However, after reading this week's editions of the Independent and the Advocate, it's clear that these two papers, at least, are vying for the championship title of spitball fighting. This is no "clash of the Titans," - that would be far too regal. This is more like "Beavis and Butthead.

For those of us old enough to remember, the volleying between these two papers is reminiscent of the battles long ago between the Everett Leader Herald owned by Joe Curnane Sr and the old Everett News, owned by Tom Guarino. It was foolish then, and it's foolish now. It's amusing, in some ways, but foolish nonetheless. Curnane Sr. would hold court in his cramped, cluttered office. His was the paper of record -- he was the one that local politicians and political wannabes went to for advice, and woe be unto them if they failed to heed that advice. Guarino fought to achieve the same type of status but never quite achieved it. The difference back then was . . . both Mr. Curnane and Mr. Guarino were "Everett guys."

Neither Josh Resnek nor Jim Mitchell are from Everett; both hail from Chelsea, a city with a long history of its own. Not that their residency should matter, but it's patently obvious that Josh Resnek and Jim Mitchell don't give a damn about Everett. Both are egomaniacs more interested in their own opinions than they are in what is really going on in the city. They help to keep the city divided with their ridiculous rambling commentaries -- Resnek the self-appointed defender of all things Hanlon, attempting to salve his own hurt feelings from what he believes was his mistreatment by the former Ragucci administration, and Mitchell slashing against the Hanlon administration because, it would seem, the Mayor owes Mitchell a good deal of money from his multiple campaigns to occupy the corner office. Anyone who knows Mitchell knows that he's all about the money.

And staying out of the fray is the once Grand Pubah of the Everett newspaper wars -- the Everett Leader Herald. The paper is now run by Joe Curnane, Jr., a nice guy with a friendly disposition but without the acerbic outlook of his father. Why Joe keeps the paper running is anyone's guess, but as long as it's making money, why not, right? He prints press releases, runs the ocassional story, is very good at covering the feel good community events, and collects what appears to be a significant amount of advertising dollars, then goes home at the end of the day to -- Melrose.

At the end of the day, Everett still needs a good newspaper, and none of our weekly papers are anywhere close to providing solid and objective reporting. Most other local weeklies charge a small fee for their papers - so perhaps that makes them more loyal to their readers than to the advertising revenue raised from city hall or the school department. We're not sure, but we do know that Everett deserves better than the newspapers wars.

Community Service Notice

Free September workshops for parents and caregivers of

children and adolescents with mood disorders at Cambridge Health Alliance

Cambridge Health Alliance’s Center for Child and Adolescent Development is offering “Second Monday of the Month”, a new, practical series of workshops aimed at parents and caregivers of children and adolescents with mood disorders. The series is free and open to the public. The second workshop is entitled “How to help your child with social skills.” Please note that the upcoming lecture will take place on a Tuesday.

Date: Tuesday September 12, 2006
Time: 4-5pm
Location: Center for Child and Adolescent Development
101 Station Landing
Medford, MA 02155

Cost: FREE, but RSVP is strongly suggested.
Contact: Mimi Braude, LICSW, 781-306-8684
For more information about the CCAD and directions, please visit http://www.challiance.org/ccad/

Center For Child and Adolescent Development (CCAD) is a regional clinic that helps children, adolescents, and young adults achieve their fullest potential by providing assessment, treatment, and support to children and families dealing with learning, attention, and behavioral difficulties; conditions such as ADHD, Bipolar Disorder, and Psychosis; Neurological Disorders such as Tic and Seizure disorders; Autism Spectrum Disorders; and Developmental Disabilities. To find out more about CCAD, please call 781-306-8640 or visit http://www.challiance.org/ccad/.

CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE Cambridge Health Alliance is an innovative, award-winning health system that provides high quality care in Cambridge, Somerville, Everett, Revere, and Boston’s Metro-North communities. It includes three hospitals, more than 20 primary care practices, the Cambridge Public Health Department, and the Network Health plan. With this unique model, the Alliance is able to offer the finest health services, a diverse working environment, and a premier training experience in community-based medicine. To learn more, visit us online at www.challiance.org.

Kerry Healey - Another Fish Story?

Kerry Healy is doing her best to redefine herself. Just a few days ago, she was visiting with New Bedford fishermen, and vowing to fight fishing regulations. And then, despite years of being prochoice, she refused to fill out a survey by Planned Parenthood. And now, the Lt. Governor is trying to make the voters believe that she will hold down local property taxes. This is the same woman who made Everett her very first visit on her "goodwill tour" during the state budget cuts in 2003. Kerry's job on behalf of the Romney administration during the good will tour was to look at city and town budgets, and to "explain" why the state government was reneging on the Cherry Sheet promises and how local taxpayers had to pick up the tab through local taxes, particularly if there was "room" on the tax levy. Mayor Ragucci remarked in the Leader Herald at the time that he hoped that Everett would not be penalized. We took a 3/4 million dollar hit that year. That sounds like a penalty to us!

Kerry Healey...not your local property tax crusader. We hate to call it a fish story, but that's exactly what it is.

Seeking Reader Input

The Everett Mirror is looking for your opinion. We've received comments on the blog in the past asking that people use some sort of a pen name when posting their comments -- the reason being the confusion that can result from so many people signing their comments as "anonymous."

Would people be agreeable to registering a pseudonym to enter their comments on the blog, similar to the procedure used on Michael's Message Board? This is just to make it easier to follow the conversations posted on the blog. However, we'll make no move to institute this process until we get your input. This post will run for 48 hours, and the majority opinion at that time will rule the day.

Also, as you can see, we have our first guest editorialist. Thanks to Bill Breining for taking the time to write this editorial! If anyone else is interested in writing a guest editorial, please feel free to email your material to us.

Thanks for participating!!

The Staff of the Everett Mirror

Guest Editorial by William Breining

Here's a special welcome to Bill Breining, who is our guest editorial writer this week.
As this is a guest editorial, it may or may not represent the opinion of The Everett Mirror or its staff.

By William Breining

The Mayor’s veto of the Parking Program

Mayor Hanlon was correct in vetoing the badly flawed permit parking revision ordinance. This poorly written ordinance, if enacted, would have weakened the existing ordinance and had a significantly negative impact on overnight parking. The current overnight parking needs some revision but this version is not an improvement.

It is very telling to examine what was included and excluded from the proposed ordinance. Included was the following:

1. A visitor’s pass for a $10.00 fee, issued for a definitive period of time (7 to 14 days). Charging a fee to cover these costs is reasonable and will help curtail abuses.

2. A second visitor’s pass, issued for a full year for a $100.00 fee. In a city with as limited parking as Everett, this is a ridiculous proposal, it amounts to nothing more than the attempt to sell parking spaces in exchange for a higher fee . This would reduce the amount of parking available to the residents with no benefit to the general populace of the city.

3. A proposal to charge residents of abutting cities (whose property lies in one city and abuts a street that is in Everett) a $100.00 fee to park on the street (the sticker is supplied to Everett residents for no charge). Outrageous! All cities have streets that are bordered by adjacent municipalities and all have cooperative agreements for parking enforcement, and maintenance of the roadway. These residents, having no control or voice over the parking regulation (not being able to vote in Everett) should be accommodated with a parking sticker by virtue of the circumstances. When did it become the intention of a governing body to seek out ways to punish the innocent? Including these residents is the right thing to do both morally and ethically.

4. A $10.00 fee for the parking sticker for new residents moving into the city after the annual issuance of parking stickers. This is just another way to separate the residents from more of their money.

What was not included is equally as telling!

1. An extension of the overnight parking hours requested by residents and removed in committee, not part of the ordinance. I cannot comment on the wisdom of this except to state that I think the input of the residents should always receive serious consideration.

2. A provision to allow residents to obtain a non-resident permit to park a required work vehicle on the street. This was reportedly removed because some of our elected officials wanted to collect an amount equivalent to the excise tax paid on the vehicle in the city that it is registered. Our elected officials seem to think it is “acceptable” to sell visitors’ passes for a $100.00 per year, but not to allow a reasonable fee for a resident to park a vehicle that allows him to be gainfully employed and be a productive member of our community? I believe that the employer should be required to submit the application, signed by a company official and that the fee be paid by company check. This would reduce the possibility of abuses.

The current parking ordinance does not need some revision to make it more workable for the residents. What is not needed is having parking turned into yet another convenient revenue stream.

What will it take to bring our elected officials state of mind back to acting only when the government has a compelling interest and only in a manner that benefits the general populace? Unfortunately, many of our officials (elected and appointed) have succumbed to the addiction of public life …revenue; the ever increasing need and desire to charge the residents more and more for less and less.