There is an organization in which of its 535 members:

29 have been accused of spousal abuse.
7 have been arrested for fraud
19 have been accused of writing bad checks
117 have bankrupted at least two businesses
3 have been arrested for assault
71 are considered bad financial risks and are thus ineligible for credit cards.
14 have been arrested on drug-related charges.
8 have been arrested for shoplifting.
In 1998, 84 were stopped for drunk driving.
And, 21 are currently named defendants in lawsuits.

Such are the legal records of the members of the United States Congress. This is the same group that routinely creates and enacts new laws and regulations for the rest of the nation.

The beginning of a New Year is often a time for reflection and re-evaluation. With that in mind, consider the following passage originally uttered either yesterday, or an eternity ago.

I say to you today, my friends, that in spite of the difficulties and frustrations of the moment I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American Dream...I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood...I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but the content of their character. I have a dream today...And if America is to be a great nation this must become true. So let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire. Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York...From every mountainside, let freedom ring. From every mountainside, let freedom ring. When we let freedom ring...we will be able to speed up that day when all God’s children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last! Free at Last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"

Never trust a dog to watch your food.
- Patrick, 10

When your dad is mad and asks you, "Do I look stupid?" don’t answer him.
-Michael, 14

Never tell your mom her diet’s not working.
-Michael, 14

Stay away from prunes.
-Randy, 9

Never allow your three-year-old brother in the same room as your school assignment.
-Traci, 14

Puppies still have bad breath even after eating a tic tac.
-Andrews, 9

Never hold a dust buster and a cat at the same time.
-Kyoyo, 9

You can’t hide a piece of broccoli in a glass of milk.
-Armir, 9

If you want a kitten, start out be asking for a horse.
-Naomi, 15

Felt markers are not good to use as lipstick.
-Lauren, 9

Don’t pick on your sister when she’s holding a baseball bat.
-Joel, 10

Since the beginning of time human beings have used art and music in one form or another. Prehistoric men used various colored dyes created from berries and mulched bark to paint animals on cave walls. From this to the flawless strokes of Monet, the artistic expression of human beings has been and always will be a constant in every culture in the world. With music, art is part of what it means to be human.

Primal men created music by rhythmically chanting with their voices and beating objects with a stick or bone. Since then, over the millennia of their existence, human beings of every culture have created numerous instruments to imitate the sounds of the world around them. From the clicks of crickets and the honks of wild birds and animals to violins, the closest instrument in range and flexibility to the human voice, these first instruments evolved from crude noisemakers to elegant instruments capable of creating beauty, elegance, and serenity. And variety: from the exquisite sounds of a Chopin piano prelude to the heart-wrenching blues guitar of B.B King or the mystically enchanting lyrics of Stevie Nicks.

While music and art are common to every culture in the world, past and present, it was not until recently, within the past hundred years, that we began to understood their influence in enhancing the ability of children to learn. Exposure to and training in music and art are vital in the shaping and building of young, impressionable minds. Yet recent years have rung loudly with parents and lawmakers who, in the name of economy, argue that music and art should be eliminated from school curriculums. How foolish and shortsighted are we, as a society, to ignore all the evidence that shows us these are essential not only to our humanity but to our ability to learn effectively?

Leslie A. Hart, in Human Brain and Human Learning, wrote that learning through music is effective because music is so compatible with brain activity. Music stimulates and unifies brain function by harmonizing three of the four modalities by which the brain processes information:

•Auditory: the brain’s ability to register what is being heard.

•Kinesthetic: the brain’s ability to comprehend movement;

•Tactile: the brain’s ability to respond emotionally to what is felt.

When the music and/or lyrics are also read in printed form, music also taps the visual modality.

Hart goes on to say that once the brain has processed specific information, it is then stored if it is either useful, rhyming or rhythmic, or emotionally charged. This automatic brain function is what makes songs, poems, rhymes, and raps and rhythms effective vehicles for long-term learning.

Our daily lives are filled with rhymes, rhythms, and mnemonics. We commonly access specific stored information with simple mental strategies: "Thirty days hath September..."; Red sky in the morning, sailor take warning...; Roy G. Biv (for red, orange, yellow, green blue, indigo, violet—the colors of the rainbow). These techniques can be invaluable aids for remembering and recalling information. Their utilization in the classroom and in the world of advertising is common. Can you recall the ingredients of a Big Mac? ("Two all-beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.") Of course you can. McDonalds’ commercials permanently imbedded this catchy tune in the minds of millions worldwide.

Educators can and should make even more use of the human mind’s musical facility. Through repeated rehearsal, rhythmic data is stored in the memory for later retrieval, even though that information might not necessarily be something the individual really cares to remember. If merchandisers can do this, why can’t educators use a rap, chant, poem, or song to teach about endangered species, the rainforest, spiders, multiplication facts, oceans, continents, and other factual or conceptual information and ideas.

An experienced children’s song writer, Ron Brown, has written over 400 songs to accompany core literature books and thematic teaching units. Don G. Cambell, author of Rythyms of Learning, writes that "music makes learning easier and is therefore a viable strategy for today’s classroom. It can create an exciting environment full of emotion and rich language. It allows the listener to acquire and transfer information kinesthetically and concretely. It can impart valuable concepts to students which they can connect and apply to existing knowledge; and it can build self-esteem and create a sense of inclusion and collaboration." Campbell goes on to say that music "also provides valuable opportunities to synthesize and combine learning in other subjects areas and disciplines."

Clearly we can achieve enormous success in learning through the strategic use of music. Music forms a natural bridge to literacy. If a child can sing a song, then learning to read becomes easier. All modes of presentation (individual lyric sheets, charts, sentence strips, transparencies, etc.) become valuable reading tools linking music and literature. Most of all, music adds an irreplaceable element of fun to the classroom! Sara Warren, a third grade student from D.A. School in Oxford, Michigan, summed it all up in a letter written to Brown in 1993. She said, "I think that it is a very good idea to use music in the classroom. If kids learn with music it will be more exciting! If kids work with music, they will work harder. If they played music for each class, kids would pay more attention.

Unfortunately, not all young students are as fortunate as Sara. In a 1994 article in the New York Times, U C Santa Barbara music history teacher Michael Beckerman criticized the San Francisco Unified School District because there were 10,350 students taking music lessons in the district and only 13 music teachers. "Simple arithmetic says that each teacher sees about 800 students per week," wrote Beckerman.

Statistics such as these reveal to us the alarming reality that, as bad as things were in the San Francisco school district, cancellation of school music programs would be worse. We can not allow our youth to be robbed of this opportunity. We must resist arguments based on false claims of economy and encourage our educators and our lawmakers to strengthen school music programs.

Beckerman also wrote that, "If we really love music and hope for a future in which it can flourish, our heroes should be the school music teachers who are fighting our fight on the front lines by teaching children to celebrate their separate identities by performing together."

Visual arts is also essential to children’s learning.

The importance of music in the classroom is undeniable; rhyme, rhythm, and music are the intangible educational tools that can touch students in uniquely memorable ways. As it has been proven that the effects of music in the classroom dramatically help to improve the retention and increase the learning capabilities of the left side of the brain (which deals with analytical intake), art does the same for the right side (which handles imagination and creativity). Through painting, sculpting, drawing, and various other types of visual arts that are taught in the classroom, children are able to expand their minds and express their creative selves.

Some educators say that reading, writing, and arithmetic are the key subjects to be focused on in the classroom, and though these subjects are important, imagine how dull this world would be if the youth which inhabited it were never able to get in touch with their own creativity. Without art and music we would quickly evolve into a society of accountants, engineers, and lawyers. (Readers who think this would be a good thing were probably denied access to art and music as children and need to get in touch with their own creative side.)

When I think back upon my own early education, and the effect that my art classes and instructors have had on me, I am overcome with pride and joy. From my third grade teacher, who was appropriately named Mrs. Art, to my four fabulous years of high school ceramics with Mr. Gordon, I had exceptional opportunity to work with various mediums and styles.

Art and music in schools is as important as cafeteria lunches with their mystery stews, Sloppy Joe’s, and half-pint cartons of milk. Art and music are as vital as recess and field trips, P.E. and science class, and yes, even those two weeks of giggling during sex education. To remove art or music classes from schools would be a travesty that could cause irreversible harm to future generations of human beings. Art and music spread joy and laughter, influence youngsters to attain their dreams with passion, and make this world a better place.

Elian Gonzales, a 6-year-old Cuban boy, was found on Thanksgiving Day clinging to an inner tube off the coast of Florida. The boy had accompanied his mother, stepfather, and eight other Cubans who drowned in a dangerous attempt to flee Communist Cuba. after a petition to keep him in the United States was granted by a Miami judge after federal immigration authorities, the INS, ordered the boy’s return to Cuba.

The boy is currently living with his paternal great-uncle in Miami while the various government agencies—including the U.S. Congress, for obvious political motives—sort out what should be done.

Should Elian be returned to Cuba to live with his father, or should he be allowed remain in the United States with his great-uncle?

In order to answer this question, aspects of fact, law, and politics must be addressed.

Some facts

Some of the facts of the issue are problematic. First, the father’s knowledge and true position can never really be known. Since free speech is not possible in Cuba, the father may only be saying what Cuban Communist Party officials tell him to say. He could be threatened with losing his new wife and infant for not complying.

It might be important to remember, however, that Elian’s father never actually demanded the return of his son until after the Castro government had made that demand. This could imply that Elian’s father doesn’t really want the boy back, a circumstance for which there could be any number of reason ranging from concern for the child to support of Castro’s anti-American campaign.

Second, Elian was taken out of Cuba by his mother and stepfather. Did his father know of their plans? Elian’s father is remarried and the couple has a new baby, but he did not have custody of Elian. In the United States, a mother cannot move to another state with a child without the father’s permission. Cuban law in this regard seems irrelevant, since Elian’s mother was rejecting the whole Cuban system in her flight to America.

Third, while the anti-American propaganda elements of the situation are clear, the real sentiment of the Cuban government is impossible to ascertain. According to the Washington Post, the last time the Castro government caught Cubans attempting to leave Cuba, officials of that government sunk the refugees’ boat and ignored the fact that escaping women drowned while desperately trying to keep their children’s heads above water.

Some law

In terms of immigration law and policy, even U.S. government organizations seem to be confused. For many years now, INS policy has been to welcome victims of political strife from countries such as Cuba, but to reject victims of economic strife from countries such as Mexico. These days, the message inscribed on the statue of liberty by Emma Lazarus only applies to those "tired, poor, and weak" individuals who happen to live under a dictator—and he or she doesn’t even have to be Communist.

So why does U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, who has clearly defined Elian’s case as being that of an illegal immigrant, seem so determined to return him to a dictatorship?

Mostly politics

Since Elian had no choice in his attempted flee, it is unlikely that he would be harmed upon his return to Cuba. It is more likely that he would be used as a symbol of Cuba to the rest of the world. The media will no doubt follow the boy’s life, and Castro will use this to show the world that Cuba is not the evil empire that the United States makes it out to be.

If the motives of Castro’s government seem political, so do the reactions of many people in the United States. From U.S. Senators and Congresspersons to exiled Cuban refugees in Miami, many people see this whole situation as a political opportunity with the boy as the unfortunate pawn. If he is returned to Cuba, they seem to argue, Castro and communism win. Denying Elian’s return to Cuba ensures a U.S. propaganda victory.

Some more law

U.S. law states that if the mother of a child is killed, the father should have custody, providing he has not been deemed unfit by a court of law. This is United States law, and would be applied if this whole incident had taken place in the United States or between two amicable countries.

American’s have been taught for years that Castro is an oppressor of his people. Disregarding the fact that we are likely victims of our own propaganda machine, everything the United States does to keep Elian in this country allows Castro to point to America as an international criminal. Communism may not be the best form of government, but Cuba is not known for it’s starving children and uneducated populace. Cuban children are well taken care of and well educated. Better educated, in fact, according to National Public Radio reports (Feb. 4) of a recent study of all Latin American countries, than most non-U.S. children in this hemisphere.

Some people say the boy has said he wants to stay with his relatives in Miami, so that’s what should happen. Of course he is going to say this. If your child had a chance to live in Disneyland, instead of at home where he had to keep his room clean, what do you think he would say?

Regardless of what Elian wants or says he wants, he is a child, not an adult, and laws exist to protect children. Those laws should prevail.

If that principle were not enough, the United States needs to look carefully at the bottom line—the political consequences of failing to obey its own laws. The United States must act the way it would like to be treated by other countries. This includes applying U.S. laws to the actions of the U.S. government and ending trade embargoes and restrictions that hurt only Cuban and American citizens. Sanctions have never worked on Cuba. Perhaps an alternate approach should be taken?

This year’s presidential campaign is historic. Republican Senators and Congressmen who pilloried President Clinton for "not inhaling" are now speaking out in defense of candidate George Bush’s alleged prior use of illicit drugs. These Republicans say that such prior experimentation with illicit drugs by a presidential candidate does not disturb them, and that it should not be an issue in the campaign.

Doesn’t anyone else find this disturbing? The same politicians who make laws responsible for the imprisonment of thousands of drug users now say that if a person tries drugs and is lucky enough not to become addicted or to get caught breaking the law, he is qualified to become President. Are we redefining a class of criminal as only those people who have addictive personalties? Are we redefining all criminals as only those who have the bad luck to get caught? Good luck gets you in the White House?

Drug laws irrelevant

The real problem is that the laws regulating substance abuse have no connection with scientific fact or medical reality. Medical Science shows that some people have no control over their susceptibility to addiction. Addiction to a substance appears to be a function of individual physiological traits and may have a genetic basis. People who become addicted to a substance often find they cannot quit their substance abuse no matter how hard they try. Their continued use of a substance is therefore properly viewed to be more an involuntary act than a voluntary one.

The only truly voluntary criminal act such people are guilty of is their initial experimentation with drugs. In the event they become addicted, all subsequent use of the drug should quite properly be viewed as involuntary in nature.

But this is exactly the same as voluntary crime candidate George Bush is allegedly to be have committed. On a voluntary basis, every drug user in prison is guilty of doing exactly the same thing candidate Bush is alleged to have done.

So, the fate, in a criminal sense, of the millions of people who once experimented with illicit drugs, depends totally on luck. If they were susceptible to addiction, they have probably become chronic substance abusers and are constantly vulnerable to arrest, criminal prosecution, and incarceration in prison. If they were lucky, if they were not susceptible to addiction, they were able to stop using drugs. They can, like candidate Bush, under our current system of justice, hold the highest office in the land.

Drug laws unjust

Our current drug laws are the most unjust laws enacted by the United States government since the Civil War. They exonerate those lucky enough not to get caught experimenting with controlled substances and lucky enough not to have addictive personalities. And they punish the unlucky who become addicted. Luck controls the fate of the first-time drug user.

Then there is the impact drug laws have on the integrity of our government. Current drug laws often dissuade if not prevent honest men and women—those who value truth in what they say and do, who may have once tried drugs in their youth—from pursuing political office or participating in law enforcement. Conversely, these same drug laws invite those willing to lie about youthful experimentation to pursue political office and to even be elected.

We have just been through eight years of an administration led by someone who, in the eyes of many Americans, lied under oath. Now a new candidate seems to be emerging from the smoke and denying that there is any fire, and those of our elected legislators who are of his party are denying even that fire is relevant. Do we really want another administration led by people to whom the definition of crime is so self-serving? Do we want another administration that is comfortable lying under oath? Lying to the entire nation? Lying to the world public? Lying constantly in order to achieve political goals?