So we've been having some pretty crummy weather lately, and our entire summer has really been kind of lousy. Elise Patkotak, a blogger I've quoted here before, has some wise words for us to ponder:

"You can check out Elise's blog at elisepatkotak.com.

So I got an email from the Department of Education today. They've decided that because my dad has a 30% share of a small business, my family should pay a little more than $21,000 towards my annual college expenses.

That's nearly half of my parents' adjusted gross income. And less than the university costs after my presidential merit scholarship. Meaning that I'll never be able to get any funding based on financial aid.

It's not like my dad can use his business to pay my college expenses. Seriously, wtf?

I had a phone “interview” with Northwest Airlines this afternoon. I answered all the questions correctly and was told that I’m qualified to go to the next step of the hiring process, a face-to-face interview. Only catch, the interview has to happen in D.C. So it won’t be until this time next month at least.

I’ve still got a few concerns about scheduling - since it’s a union position, the shift times are standardized, and I wouldn’t be eligible to trade shifts with anyone for my first three months. So I guess my viability for the position depends a lot on how flexible my supervisor would be on giving shifts, and how much I can push and poke my class schedule. It sounds like a really fun job, but school has to come first.

My mom received a flier yesterday from “Alaskans Against the Mining Shutdown” concerning Ballot Measure 4, which “seeks to restrict discharge of pollutants into waters used for human consumption or by spawning salmon.” (Peninsula Clarion). It included a survey which they asked recipients to complete and return via mail. Here’s what it said, with my handwritten responses in italics:

Long a part of Alaska’s history, mining is a growing part of our state’s economic future. It provides jobs and opportunities for thousands of Alaskans. Which of the following best describes your personal feelings towards mining in Alaska?
I strongly support mining and believe that new and existing mines are an important part of Alaska’s future.
I support the existing mines in Alaska but don’t support new mines in our state.
I support banning all mining in Alaska.
I’m sick of your scare tactics.

Regardless of how you might vote on Measure 4, the anti-mining initiative, what concerns you most?
The loss of thousands of jobs across the state.
The negative impact on Native and rural communities that rely on mining for work, revenue and opportunity.
The long-term cost of shutting down a growing sector of Alaska’s economy.
The loss of much-needed revenue to the state.
Leading questions.

Which best expresses your view on the anti-mining initiative?
I oppose Measure 4
I am leaning towards opposing Measure 4, but I need more information.
I am leaning towards supporting Measure 4, but I need more information.
I support Measure 4 after reading these questions.
This is the most biased “survey” I’ve ever seen.

As an intelligent human being, I’m offended by this garbage.
I definitely know how I’ll be voting this August.

My family went downtown for the Fourth of July parade today. I ran off and held a sign for Diane Benson among the frolickers surrounding the Anchorage Democrats float. It was a lot of fun. :)

Fellow blogger Elise Patkotak, who writes regularly for the Anchorage Daily News, gave some sound advice today:

In honor of America and everything she has stood for up until the Current Occupiers took office, I think everyone should take a moment today to face towards Washington, DC and extend their middle finger. Now THAT’S American!

I encourage everyone to follow Elise’s example as part of today’s festivities.

I’ve been meaning to write this up for a while. A long while, really. I started work on it on a comment form for the program in DC, which subsequently got lost (resulting in them never getting this feedback)...and then I carried a blank comment form around with me for a long time, and finally threw it out because it was falling apart and I knew I wasn’t going to do anything with it. So here goes. A little bit of background info: The U.S. Senate Youth Program is an exercise “sponsored” by Congress and funded by the William Randolph Hearst Foundation. It has departments of education select two youth from each state (plus DC and the Dept. of Defense Education Activity) and takes them to DC for a weeklong program of speakers and sightseeing. The delegates also receive a $5000 college scholarship. My issues with the Senate Youth Program started early on. I had two other events in DC shortly before the Senate Youth Program, and my spring break was directly afterwards. So I made what seemed like a reasonable request - to adjust my dates of travel from those they selected. The answer? Absolutely not. In fact, they were completely unwilling to provide any flexibility in travel scheduling. I couldn’t provide transportation one way and have them buy me a one-way ticket. I couldn’t change the ticket they purchased for me. In order to even allow me to participate in the program without their provided transportation, I (an 18-year-old adult) had to have both of my parents sign a release form as well as having a legal adult (identified by name and driver’s license number in the release) come to pick me up. The Foundation wouldn’t even pay for my Metro and taxi expenses to get to the hotel they were keeping us at - “You’ve forfeited your right to any transportation support.” Once arriving at the program, I was shocked to learn that we were not allowed to go anywhere by ourselves. We had to have a “buddy” to go anywhere other than our own rooms and the group’s common areas - even to go to the bathroom. And naturally, this buddy had to be perceived as the same sex - I once tried to tag along with two girls to go upstairs and got yelled at by a security staffer for “being caught alone for the second time” (I’d been sitting in the main area on my floor using my computer at one point the first night.) When I protested that I was, in fact, accompanied by two other people, said security person pointed out that they were females - obviously not sufficient to keep me out of trouble. To this day, I wish I had gone off on him about ageism, sexism, and heterosexism...not that it would have accomplished anything, but it would have been immensely satisfying. The program also involved sitting for hours observing an interminable number of “important” people infatuated with the sound of their own voices. While there was the rare speaker that was actually interesting, the majority of them were truly a waste of time - even USSYP staff and military mentors had trouble listening to a few. Virtually all of these speakers were male - a point which was quickly squashed when one speaker asked students to take an opportunity to speak instead of listen. Meals were a favored venue for these speakers, and yet another place where ageism and other problems were clear. A “head table” of adults was introduced at virtually every meal, and students were cautioned to allow the more important adults to exit the room before leaving their seats at the end of the meal (after being dismissed by a USSYP staff member). At one point, I was practically screamed at by a very unpleasant USSYP staffer for not having a vegetarian meal ticket out on the table - a meaningless scrap of paper bearing a large V with vegetables around it which meant nothing to waitstaff and was never collected. There was also more than one meal where vegetarian entrees were unavailable - and apparently the existence of vegans never crossed their minds, judging from the menu selections. The USSYP was also one of the most gender-segregated spaces I have ever experienced. Delegates were split into small groups based on their room assignments, which meant that most people travelled exclusively with 7-9 others perceived to be of the same gender. This often carried on to meals and free time as well, and was very distressing. An additional frustration during the Senate Youth Program was that delegates were forbidden from possessing personal electronics other than cameras. In the 21st century, when you’re collecting groups of teenagers who are supposed to be outstanding, chances are that they will have organizations, employers or colleagues who need to be able to contact them to get information. Forbidding electronics for no apparent reason is obnoxious and ageist - would you ever do that to a group of people ten or even five years older? The Senate Youth Program also professed to be religion-neutral, to the point of forbidding students from the personal exercise of religion outside a nondenominational service the first evening. This was all well and good until the last night, where a flag-folding ceremony was performed full of references to God and Christian faith. This was extremely uncomfortable for many participants, and broke the promises the program had made to its participants. Overall, the United States Senate Youth Program was an oppressive, sexist, ageist, heterosexist and extremely unpleasant environment to spend a week in. It sets negative examples for the youth it claims are the future leaders of America, and overemphasizes the value of forcing oneself into the boxes of modern politics and society. Despite the lucrative nature of the program for its participants, I cannot in good faith recommend the United States Senate Youth Program to any young person - particularly not anyone outside the mainstream white straight male demographic; at least not until they get their act together and recognize that doing something a certain way for decades doesn’t make it a good idea.