I really enjoyed hearing Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky's lecture. Not only was she entertaining but she also brought up very important issues concerning women's envolvment in Congress. Just as women's increased humber in congress brought about changes for women in society, I believe that if the poor were better representing the same could be done. Although it is unlikely for the actual poor people to be apart of congress because of barriers such as education and expierence, congressmen that make it a point to understand the poor's needs and be a spokeperson for those needs would have allow the poor to be better represented. Therefore, if the poor were better represented the problem of low wages and lack of programs to train and encourage the less fornuate would get the attention they deserve.

Even if directly of indirectly representing the poor is not successful, encouraging and making it easier for poor people to vote would help tremendously in the government being able to better represent Americans as a whole. If the poor people were encouraged to vote and their number of voters increased, candidates would focus more on thier needs because they do not want to lose their vote. After all, candidates are only going to take the time to campaign and help those that are supporting them and giving them their vote.

I found Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky's lecture to be very interesting. I enjoyed hearing about the women of Malawi and the statement they made by being tested for HIV themselves. I think that they recognized something important in realizing that it would be better for them to set an example than to just encourage others to get tested without doing so themselves. In regards to the influences of women in the 1992 Congress, I found it significant that once the issue of the IRAs was brought up, it was changed within as little as six weeks to include homemakers. This indicated to me that if adequate representation and supporters can pinpoint plausible changes and programs to help the poor, they can be put into action fairly easily. I think that the problem though is in getting that representation and support at times as well as deciding on what actual changes need to come about. In the Working Poor, I was shocked to see the statistics on how few of the poor vote. While I think a "critical mass" of the poor people in Congress is not very plausible, I do think that a "critical mass" of those committed to representing their interests could bring about positive changes, though the poor need to vote to gain that representation.

I really enjoyed Ms. Margolies-Mezvinsky's lecture. She was very funny and very interesting. It kind of reminded me of the lady who came to class to talk about Appalachian region and the family that she took to Washington. She said by the end of the trip the women who came along was asking questions and talking. I think that if the poor had more of a voice or someone who helped give them a voice, they could have more legislation passed to help them. And since more women in Congress ment that more women type legislation was going to pass, I think that if someone stepped up and talked about what is going on everywhere in the US that Congress could do something about the problem.

Just as a room full of whispering people can sound liike a roar, by voting thier opinions, a country of poor has the potential to deafen the ears of legislators holding the power of change. This fact was poven in "the year of the woman." This year of noticable whispers, in 1992, brought 24 new women to Congress where their voices with regards to issues such as health care were finally heard and addressed. Furthermore, Magorie Margolies-Mezvinsky was able to stir up a deafening whisper in Malowi, where influencial women took the message that "Knowlege is Power" back to their own villages. This message regarded the A.I.D.S. epidemic that is greatly affecting Malowi, among other places. Thus, it is possible for the small voices of the opressed to be heard, what is required is the determination to make the whispers heard.

I was excited to hear what Ms. Margolies-Mezvinsky had to say. It is so important that we have a "critical mass" of women involved in Congress. There are just certain issues where it is imperative that you have women's imput (i.e. abortion). It is great that women finally feel like they have the power to stand up and speak.
Like having a crucial number of women in Congress, it is equally important to have members in Congress speaking for different income levels. I realize that many underpriviledged individuals do not have adequate education to gain a position in Congress; but like Marion pointed out, if you had people to represent poverty-stricken individuals then maybe they could eventually recieve better education through awareness. People also need to be aware that they can make a difference by voting. You can have a good number of people in Congress representing a group, but the group would make a bigger difference by directly acting in the government by voting.

I agree that the most significant issue raised by Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky was the impact of women in the 1992 Congress. Although our country seems to be slow to reach sexual equality, the story Ms. Margolies-Mezvinsky told about the Bejing Conference just goes to show how much further we are than many other countries. The issue of the poor being represented in Congress is a completely different issue in my opinion. It seems to me that women would have a much easier time reaching positions of power than impoverished people ever would. If a critical mass of people who are sympathetic towards the issues facing the poor are elected, I believe many things would change. It is hard to say exactly what would change, but I think more emphasis would be placed on social issues instead of foreign affairs. The working poor have more pressing needs such as medical care and receiving higher wages than international trade and defense issues. It seems that there is an obvious connection between the demographics of Congress and the issues which are decided on. I think it is a safe assumption to say that if the poor were represented better, many laws would change.

Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky really inspired me to believe that there are people in Congress who have a passion for what they do and have pure motives for being there. I had an interesting realiztion of how much could change when there was a critical mass of women in Congress to bring light to womens' viewpoints on issues. I had never thought about how laws could really be affected by womens' ideas.
She was an enthusiastic character who honestly told us what she thought about things. I loved the story about the woman who told her that she didn't like her. It is nice and refreshing to see such an assertive woman. Just because we are women does not mean that it is necessary that everyone like us.
I think it is almost impossible to even picture a critical mass of poor people in the Congress. They simply do not have the resources to get the office. I feel that, ideally, it could change a lot about how our social welfare programs were run and it could set up programs to provide more assistance to the poor. I wish I could say that it would happen with the current set up of Congress, but I don't think that the working poor have representatives to voice their needs. I wish that more of the working poor could and would vote so as to have more of a say in how things are run, but after reading about their lives some don't have the available resources to reach the polls.

In 1992, I was only about 6 years old, so I had no idea of all the changes involving women that were going on in Congress. Therefore, listening to Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky's lecture was very interesting to me because of all the new things I learned. I was glad to find out that women had made such a difference in the U.S. government as well as the government of the small African country that she spoke of. When I watched the short documentary she made, it looked to me like the women of Congress had really made a lasting impression on the citizens in regards to AIDS. I think there would be some drastic changes to our government if more poor people served in Congress or voted more often. Most of the members in Congress have never had to suffer from extreme poverty, therefore the addition of those who have would provide much needed insight to Congress, and more laws would be passed that benefitted the poor. Because poor people generally do not vote at such high rates as those who are wealthier, and because poor people tend to be Democratic, I think there would be much more of a Democratic influence in the government.

In 1992, I was only about 6 years old, so I had no idea of all the changes involving women that were going on in Congress. Therefore, listening to Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky's lecture was very interesting to me because of all the new things I learned. I was glad to find out that women had made such a difference in the U.S. government as well as the government of the small African country that she spoke of. When I watched the short documentary she made, it looked to me like the women of Congress had really made a lasting impression on the citizens in regards to AIDS. I think there would be some drastic changes to our government if more poor people served in Congress or voted more often. Most of the members in Congress have never had to suffer from extreme poverty, therefore the addition of those who have would provide much needed insight to Congress, and more laws would be passed that benefitted the poor. Because poor people generally do not vote at such high rates as those who are wealthier, and because poor people tend to be Democratic, I think there would be much more of a Democratic influence in the government.

I thought that Ms. Margolies-Mezvinsky was very easy to listen to and she kept my attention throughout her speech. The two goals that she said that she was able to accomplish when she was elected to Congress were
1) to make a difference
2) to run away and join the circus
I thought that she was a riot. She just seemed so passionate about all that she talked about, especially the difference that was made when the women of Parliament were tested for AIDS. I was really glad that people were still fighting to better our world.