Hasta La Gadget!

Leading up to the 2016 presidential elections — a race that is, to the annoyance of many, already dominating the political debate – the current narrative asserts that young people do not believe that we can truly influence government for the common good. Jon Stewart quipped that, in the last election, money was the winner: money beats ideas. Because of this influx of private money in our electoral processes and the rise of hyper-ideological legislators, people believe that government will now be more ineffective than ever before. Political commentators have argued that without an Obama-esque figure on the national ticket, new and diverse voters have no inspiration to come to the polls. There is a palpable fear that an entire generation will disinvest, tune out, and just stay home for elections to come.

We refuse to accept this sentence to inactivity. America has deep problems to solve in every community, city, and state. We need to continue the charge to bring the people most affected by these problems into the process of fixing them. Why? Because broad participation will lead to quality, inclusive outcomes. Mutual interest is self-interest, and communities have the ability to adapt, even in moments when positive change looks far from attainable. Participation can happen beyond electoral processes.

In fact, participation needs to happen beyond electoral processes. As one of the founders of the Roosevelt Institute | Campus Network, Kai Stinchcombe, stated, “Elections are every so often. Democracy is ongoing.” This country needs real ideas with real impact on people’s lives to move forward. As we saw in the 2014 midterms, when ideas were on the ballot, they increased turnout and saw victory: minimum wage, gun violence prevention, and so on. Imagine the potential for platforms that encourage debate on real ideas throughout the entire year. You don’t really need to imagine it: that is called governance.

That’s why we have started a new initiative at the Roosevelt Institute | Campus Network — Policy By and For: Where Ideas Meet Action. At a time when innovative political ideas are needed more than ever, our members are organizing their peers to take their policy ideas to their elected officials – online and offline. By connecting our ideas to decision makers and power brokers, we are creating a groundswell of real policy change.

We’re taking our ideas to the place where they can have the most impact, in local communities all across the country.

We stand for better governance: smarter ideas, impact over ideology, mutual interest over selfishness, understanding over fear of the unfamiliar. We believe that communities of people, when brought together with the right tools, platforms and opportunities, can solve our most challenging policy problems. In 2015, we seek to bring new voices into the debate. We’re moving toward transformational change–change that will impact us both now and into the future.

PHOENIX (AP) — The long-running effort by prosecutors to punish Jodi Arias for killing her lover nearly seven years ago is drawing to a close.

The jury deciding whether she should be sentenced to life in prison or death row is expected to begin deliberations Wednesday after closing arguments after a lawyer for Arias makes a final plea to the jury.

The start of closing arguments Tuesday featured dueling images from the defense and prosecution that portrayed the case in much different lights. The defense showed happy photos of Arias from her childhood and time with victim Travis Alexander. The prosecutor showed gruesome crime-scene photos of the victim’s slit throat.

Prosecutor Juan Martinez called Arias dishonest, questioned her claim that she’s remorseful for having killed her boyfriend, and tried to minimize the role her psychological problems played in the case.

“It doesn’t provide an excuse,” said Martinez, who later asked jurors to sentence Arias to death.

Arias was convicted in 2013 of murdering Alexander, but her first jury deadlocked on her punishment. The jury that has been hearing testimony since mid-October will decide whether to sentence her to life in prison or death.

Prosecutors said Arias attacked Alexander in a jealous rage after he wanted to end their affair and planned a trip to Mexico with another woman. Arias has acknowledged killing Alexander but said it was self-defense after he attacked her.

Defense attorney Kirk Nurmi told jurors that Arias should get life in prison, saying she deserves a second chance because she was the victim of verbal and physical abuse throughout her life.

Nurmi began closing arguments by showing photos from happy moments in her life, such as an image of Arias resting her chin on Alexander’s shoulder amid a forested background.

Nurmi said Arias’ problems stem from a personality disorder in which she tries to mold herself to the wishes of the men she dates.

He asked jurors not to judge Arias entirely on her actions on the day of the killing, saying she is remorseful.

“If you sentence Ms. Arias to death, you are killing this girl,” Nurmi said, displaying a childhood photo of Arias and her brother.

Nurmi portrayed Alexander as a man divided between his Mormon faith and sexual desires that led him to have relationships with several women. The defense attorney said Alexander used Arias to quench his sexual urges, called her demeaning names and told her she was soulless.

Martinez said Arias falsely attacked Alexander’s character to draw attention away from her own actions.

“It averts your eyes,” Martinez said, adding the evidence shows the sexual relationship between Arias and Alexander wasn’t abusive.

Arias often looked at the jury as her attorney pleaded for the more lenient sentence. When the prosecutor made his arguments, she occasionally cast her eyes on the jury but mostly looked elsewhere.

Her sentencing retrial has dragged on amid a series of expert witnesses and the surprising October decision by Judge Sherry Stephens to remove reporters and spectators from the courtroom so Arias could testify in private.

A higher court halted the testimony on its second day amid complaints from news organizations.

The sentencing retrial revealed few new details about the crime and was more subdued than Arias’ first trial, which turned into a media circus. At the retrial, the judge barred the broadcast of footage from the proceedings until after a verdict is reached. She did, however, agree to allow live broadcast coverage of the sentencing verdict.

Arias passed up a chance Monday to address the jury, saying she wanted to make such comments but insisting the courtroom be cleared. She said she wouldn’t make any remarks if she could be seen and heard from a remote viewing room.

This is the third story in a four-part series on the culture of domestic helpers in Hong Kong.

While I consider my former helper to be one of the most important figures in my life, I won’t pretend that our relationship hasn’t affected the broader family dynamic. A few years ago, for example, Che Che told me that our current helper, whom my sister and I call Che Che Miriam, didn’t like her. “What makes you think that?” I said uncomfortably.

“I know,” she replied. “I don’t just think, I know.”

It soon became apparent that her sentiment was not unfounded. From then on, I began noticing that Miriam, who has been with my family for nine years, would tense up whenever Che Che came over, turning her attention to washing the dishes or putting away leftovers once she’d walk in the front door. Che Che, for her part, usually attempted a friendly hello but wouldn’t try to prolong conversation.

“I just don’t want her to think that I am going there just to get her job,” said Che Che one day when I asked her about it. “I think she’s worried that because you are close to me, and your mommy’s close to me, that I will be – what is it that one? – that she’s losing her job. There’s a feeling, even your mom, she’s saying that.”

Che Che began trying to limit the number of visits to our home to curb the tension. “Even though I wanted to go to your place, I’m trying to avoid,” she said. “Because I don’t want her to be uncomfortable.”

Feeling torn, I asked Che Che whether she felt that Miriam’s treatment of her was fair. In Hong Kong, it isn’t uncommon to see helpers smiling at each other in acknowledgement on the bus, and you rarely ever see them being unfriendly. To see it happening in my own family was even more unsettling. “I do understand her, maybe because she needed a job,” she said.

My mother also wrestled with her feelings about my relationship with Che Che. In some of our more raw conversations, she’d tell me that her single biggest regret was not spending more time with my brother or me growing up.

Even as I write this story, I’m trying to stifle my anticipation of her reaction, though it’s a telling indicator of these relationships’ underlying complexities. For instance, once domestic helpers in Hong Kong are hired, they’re legally required to live in the homes of their employers, meaning there are virtually no bounds to what they witness – women who quietly pretend not to hear their employers fight, snap at their chicken pox-contracted children not to scratch, and sit in their rooms at holiday dinners, where they’re expected to come out to take the family photos and have supper off the leftovers.

For decades, critics like Holly Allan, manager of the legal aid clinic Helpers for Domestic Helpers, have argued against the mandate to no avail, pointing out the dangerous promotion of the idea that helpers only live to work and the increased risk of physical and sexual abuse. Proponents contend that the requirement is convenient for helpers looking for accommodation in Hong Kong, the world’s most unaffordable housing market. But most of the time in such a densely populated city, employers can’t afford to put up a helper anyway, said Allan. Some workers will be made to sleep “next to the washing machine, on the floors, in the corridors. Sometimes, even required to share a room with a male member of the household.”

Shortly after I was born, my father was working as a business development manager in Beijing, only returning to Hong Kong every few weeks. “Mommy was working full-time, almost 24 hours,” Che Che told me. “She would leave about 6, or 6 something, and then come back at 11 o’ clock, nighttime. She is working very hard, that time. She would leave, you’re sleeping. She would get back, you’re sleeping. She can talk to you only on the phone.”

Today, my mom, who still pulls demanding hours at an insurance firm, has a decidedly strong relationship with Che Che. Although she talks about her guilt, I believe that seeing how close my relationship was with our helper also came to be a source of comfort for her, the sense that something good had come from her role as a working parent. They were only a year apart in age, and related to one another in their humble backgrounds and desire to provide for their children. Sometimes when Che Che would come over after a trip home to the Philippines, she’d bring her mangoes wrapped in newspapers, and they’d usher me away for a long, private chat. A few years ago, Mom too became Hazel’s unofficial godmother.

There are some 320,000 domestic helpers in Hong Kong, 320,000 potential Che Ches for other little girls. Sadly, our bond is vastly different from most others. A few months ago, my friend’s mother posted a cartoon on Instagram, announcing she’d fired one of her helpers that morning. Presumably a joke, the picture received a number of “likes,” including one from another friend’s mom. A few of us stayed with her son one spring break in their London home, a luxury apartment in Westminster. One day, we got a text asking us to tidy up because his mom was coming to visit. We got to work wiping down the kitchen counters and finally making up his bed after a week of neglect, even fluffing the pillows.

His mom arrived the next day. “Wah, so messy!” she declared cheerfully.

She turned around and beckoned the Filipina woman behind her. “Rose, come on. We got a lot of work to do.” Apparently, she flies their helper from Hong Kong to London every few months to help clean her college-aged sons’ apartment. We stepped aside.

For Part Four, check back next Wednesday.

In-between shenanigans, Uber actually offers a pretty nice car service, and users are about to get a perk besides free water: points from chi-chi hotelier Starwood. Starwood Preferred Guest (SPG) members can now link their accounts to Uber, and (afte…

The recent privacy scandal that Samsung’s Smart TVs have brought the issue of privacy and security with such voice-controlled features into the spotlight. But if you thought that Samsung was alone in this behavior, you’d be dead wrong. Perhaps it isn’t common knowledge yet that smart assistants like Siri, Google Now, or even Cortana do keep your commands for some … Continue reading