ࡱ> q` dbjbjqPqP 4::Z_+jjjzf/f/f/8/D/>F00"000111EEEEEEE$PGhIfE<11<<E00EABABAB<200EAB<EABABAB00 q9Ff/>rABC$F0>FABJA@JABJABX1N%5\AB7e98111EEA^111>F<<<<B#$ B#E  Linked Fate and Descriptive Representation among Mexican Americans Grace Garner Pitzer College Introduction According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, political representation is the activity of making citizens voices, opinions, and perspectives present in the public policy making processes. The simplicity and broad nature of the definition has led to countless theories regarding the question of political representation and the role of representatives in regard to their constituents. Hanna Pitkin is one of the leading theorists on the subject. Pitkins theories have provided the basis for modern political representation. She argues that there are four types of representationsubstantive, formalistic, symbolic and descriptive; which focus on the constituents views of how a representative should act. While each concept is a valid way of looking at political representation, descriptive representation is the focus of this particular study. Descriptive representation is based on the characteristics of the representative. John Adams believed that a representative legislature should be an exact portrait, in miniature, of the people at large, as it should think, feel, reason and act like them (Tate, 2004). This statement represents the core of descriptive representation. According to this theory, if a representative has similar characteristics as the constituent that they will be better suited to represent them. Minority groups, including women, are the strongest proponents of this form of representation. Descriptive representation gives minorities the opportunity to have a voice in politics by selecting someone that looks like them and thus has shared experiences. The focus of this study is on the relationship between Mexican Americans and descriptive representation. Do Mexican Americans feel that other Mexican Americans are better representatives than members of a different racial group? What is the relationship between linked fate in the Mexican American community and descriptive representation? While much scholarship has been written regarding the descriptive representation of African Americans and women, very little research has been dedicated to Latinos or Mexican Americans specifically. By analyzing data related to Mexican American political views important indicators regarding the future of descriptive representation and the political involvement of Mexican Americans can be determined. Minority Representation The issue of minority representation reached center stage in 1982 when the Voting Rights Act was extended to include the goal for each state to allow minorities to choose their representatives. In 1986, Thornburg v. Gingles began the creation of majority-minority districts to increase the number of Black and Latino candidates. A few years later in 1993, a slew of court cases (Shaw v. Reno; Miller v. Johnson; Bush v. Vera; Shaw v. Hunt) determined that bizarre shaped districts that are made with race as the sole determinant are unconstitutional (Banducci et al, 2004). Regardless of the controversy surrounding majority-minority districts, they have been successful in garnering more minority representatives. Substantive representation focuses on the specific actions the representative takes while in office to further the goals of the constituents. This allows for the constituents to keep their representative in check while they are in office, thus it is an ideal form. However in the case of minorities descriptive representation has been the most successful measure of their political advancement. Descriptive representation can also be a measure of substantive representation as it is for women. Female legislators are more likely to discuss and advance womens issues than male legislators (Thomas and Wilcox, 1998). Recent research has found that women who felt that females were underrepresented in politics were more likely to support descriptive representation than those that felt they were represented. It was also determined that women are more likely than men to think that women are more represented in Congress than they actually are. However, women are also more likely to think more women should be in Congress than men (Sanbonmatsu, 2003). In relation to minorities, Banducci et al. (2004) found that minorities are more likely to trust a minority representative. Blacks are more likely to recall the name of their representative, more likely to contact the representative, and approve of his or her performance if the representative is a minority. Yet, there is an increase in approval when blacks are represented by a black representative (Banducci et al, 2004). Black constituents with black representatives were also found to know more about their representatives in Congress than black constituents represented by members of other racial groups. Nonetheless, black representation was not found to be political empowering (Tate, 2004). Claudine Gay, in her article regarding black and white descriptive representation found that descriptive representation was important to both blacks and whites. She found that a constituents ability to identify racially with her MC influences the attitudes and behavior that define the member constituent relationship. A constituent is more likely to contact a congressperson of their own racial group. Gay further writes that Affective attachments to members of ones own racial group also influence the preference for same-race legislators. For instance, whites that do not feel close to blacks, or do not have a connection with them, view black legislatures less favorably (Gay, 2002). Literature about Latino representation is limited to a handful of sources. One article in particular specifically addresses descriptive representation among Latinos and political alienation (Pantoja and Segura, 2003). It was determined that descriptively represented Latino citizens are less likely to articulate feelings of political alienation and those with multiple co-ethnic representatives are much less likely to feel alienated. Those constituents that were politically informed also had stronger feelings about descriptive representation which is said to have an impact on greater political participation such as voting, trust and knowledge of politics. A persons opinion regarding descriptive representation is not impacted by whether they are actually descriptively represented. Majority-minority districts are an important part of descriptive representation. In 2004, Barreto, Seguro and Woods found that there were no African American or Latino members of the Houserepresenting a district that [was] not a majority-minority or was not at the time of their first election. The paper addressed the question of Latino empowerment to vote in majority-minority districts. It also showed that prior research suggesting that majority-minority districts suppressed voter turnout was actually false. Instead it was determined that majority-minority districts serve the dual purposes of both increasing descriptive representation and increasing the overall minority share of the electorate. Furthermore, Latinos vote more when in a majority-Latino district and living in two to three majority-Latino districts greatly increases the likelihood of Latinos to vote. Although this research addresses the political empowerment of voting and levels of trust of African American and Latino constituents in regard to descriptive representation, there is no literature directly discussing the effect of Latinos and the connection between linked fate and descriptive representation. This paper will fill in the gap regarding Latinos and the importance of descriptive representation in terms of linked fate, as well as control for gender, age, education, income and knowledge of politics and public affairs. Argument and Theory My argument revolves around two main theories, the social identity theory and linked fate. I argue that there is a direct connection between linked fate and descriptive representation among Mexican Americans. Linked fate can be analyzed through answers to the question As things get better for Mexican Americans in general, things get better for me based on responses of agree, strongly agree, disagree, strongly disagree and neither agree nor disagree (LNPS, 1989). This question, coupled with the question Mexican American elected and appointed officials help Mexican Americans more than Anglo officials do, allows for an analysis to be made of whether or not Mexican Americans do prefer descriptive representation. Social Identity Theory In order to understand the idea of linked fate between members of different racial groups, we must first understand the social identity theory. This theory states that group membership creates in-group/self-categorization and enhancement in ways that favor the in-group at the expense of the out-group (University of Twente, 2003). Put simply, it is the idea that a person has multiple identities within each group that they are a part of and their loyalties fall within those groups. A persons sense of who they are is defined in terms of we rather than I. In relation to Mexican Americans and descriptive representation, the social identity theory suggests that as a group Mexican Americans will have a stronger group identity than individual identities. If there is strong group identity among Mexican Americans, then their loyalties will lie in helping advance Mexican Americans as a whole. Therefore, they will be more likely to vote when a Mexican American is running for office and feel that Mexican American officials have an obligation to enhance the power and election of other Mexican Americans. In increasing the number of Mexican American elected officials, the group as a whole also gains political power, thus proving the social identity theory. Linked Fate Evelyn Simien takes the social identity theory further with the idea of linked fate. She defines linked fate as an acute sense of awareness (or recognition) that what happens to the group will also affect the individual member (2005). This is similar to the social identity theory, but expounds further upon the relationship between the group and the individual. The experiences that members of a certain racial group deal with on a day- to-day basis link them together, creating a shared experience and a sense of belonging or conscious loyalty to the group in question. Simien argues that racial discrimination and class have the largest impact on why minority groups have a strong sense of linked fate. The linked fate of the group then is able to transfer into collective action as a necessary form of resistance. In her study on Race, Gender and Linked Fate, Simien finds that linked fate is statistically significant between race identification and gender identification of African Americans, but not between black women and the womens movement. Black men also identify more strongly than women in linked fate due to race, yet they also identify with women as another oppressed group. While the research by Simien focuses on the linked fate of African Americans, through her work we can see that a strong correlation exists between shared experiences due to race and high levels of linked fate. Therefore, I hypothesize that Mexican Americans are likely to display high levels of linked fate due to the hardships they face as a minority group and their shared cultural beliefs. Those respondents with high levels of linked fate will be more likely to feel Mexican American officials should help increase Mexican American representatives and agree that officials from their same racial group are more helpful than Anglo officials. Data In order to test these hypotheses I looked to the Latino National Political Survey (LNPS) which was conducted from 1989 to 1990. The survey measured political attitudes and behaviors of Mexicans, Cubans, and Puerto Ricans in the United States. Of the 2,817 Latinos surveyed, 1,546 were Mexican, 589 were Puerto Rican and 682 were Cuban. Interviews were conducted face to face in English and Spanish. Since my research focuses on the feelings of Mexican Americans towards descriptive representation, the data was narrowed down to only include the 881 Mexicans that are citizens of the United States. The sample includes 358 males and 523 females. Questions regarding descriptive representation were not asked to non-citizens, thus decreasing the sample size. The data used looks at the likelihood of voting when a Mexican American candidate is running for office, Mexican American officials obligation to work with and increase the number of Mexican American officials in office, linked fate and the control variables of gender, age, education, income, knowledge of politics and birth country. These questions were cross tabulated with the question of do Mexican American elected and appointed officials help Mexican Americans more than Anglo officials do? This question acts as the dependent variable regarding descriptive representation and will be the basis of the results. Results In regard to the social identity theory (Table 1), Mexican Americans are not more likely to vote because a Mexican American is running for office. Similarly, there is not a significant relationship between voting when a Mexican American runs for office and descriptive representation. Instead, those that said it made no difference if a Mexican American was running for office or not, favored descriptive representation by 57.5%. It is probable that the race of a candidate does not pose a significant reason to draw constituents to vote in general. Yet, as was determined earlier by Barreto, Seguro and Woods (2004), Latino members of majority-minority districts are in fact more likely to vote. The broad based survey methods of the LNPS and the lack of discussion regarding majority-minority districts within the survey does not allow for data regarding the percentage of Mexican Americans living in majority-minority districts. The second hypothesis in relation to the social identity theory was whether or not Mexican American officials have an obligation to try to increase the number of Mexican American officials. Overall, 71.2% of respondents felt that Mexican American officials do have an obligation to increase representation. This strong support of Mexican Americans helping other Mexican Americans fits exactly within the social identity theory in that the groups identity and success is most important. The results of the analysis in association to linked fate show that the respondents with high levels of linked fate are more likely to favor descriptive representation and feel Mexican American officials have an obligation to work to increase the overall number of Mexican American officials. These results are consistent with my third hypothesis. High levels of linked fate overall are lower, yet still significant at 65%. The higher percentage of supporters of obligation when coupled with linked fate at 85% is due to the combination of the social identity theory and linked fate theory. A shared experience makes it more likely for a person to want to support others in similar situations as well as improve the overall perception of the group. Many of the other variables used in the data analysis were also found to be significant. The largest gap occurred with respondents born in the United States and those born in Mexico. Of those born in the United States 88% supported descriptive representation while only 12% support of respondents born in Mexico. There could be a number of reasons for why this gap is so large. It is possible that respondents from Mexico are not as knowledgeable about the United States political system and thus are not aware of the low number of Latino elected and appointed officials. As was shown by Sanbonmatsu (2003) women who were not aware of the low number of women officials were less likely to be in support of descriptive representation. The possibility of this result crossing over gender and racial lines is worth analyzing in future studies. The second largest gap is that of political and public affairs knowledge. The more attention a person pays to political and public affairs, the more likely they are to support descriptive representation. This result coincides once again with the study by Sanbonmatsu (2003) in which she determines that greater political knowledge is directly related to descriptive representation. 64.1% of respondents that had high levels of political and public affairs knowledge felt that descriptive representation is important. By keeping up to date with politics a person may have more knowledge of the low percentage of Mexican American or Latino representatives and thus be more strongly compelled to support descriptive representation. The third largest gap is that of income. The lower the total income ($29,000 or less), the more likely a person was to favor descriptive representation. This is likely due to a correlation with higher incomes and political representation. The more money a person has the more opportunity they will have to be involved with politics on a variety of levels. By being involved with politics a person is able to influence legislatures at a higher rate than those who are not. Differences in class also tend to be greater regardless of race. That last significant gap is that of gender. Women tend to favor descriptive representation over men, with a gap of 17.2%. The reasons for this gap may be due to the lack of overall representation of female candidates as well as Mexican American female candidates. The double minority status given to Latinas may be a factor in their greater support of descriptive representation. Sanbonmatsu (2003) found that women in general were more likely to support more women in Congress than men. This can be linked to a desire for descriptive representation by both women and men. In order to fully determine if race and gender play a part in Mexican American womens support of descriptive representation questions regarding descriptive representation must be asked considering race and gender separately for men and women. The last two variables used in the analysis were age and education. Neither variable had a significant effect for support of descriptive representation. However, in answer to whether or not the respondent had a high school diploma a percentage of respondents did not answer the question. This gap in the findings is most likely due to the percentage of applicants that received their education in Mexico as well as those who took a GED or other high school equivalency test that was not taken into consideration in this particular question. Table 1: Percentage of respondents that approve of descriptive representation in each category VariableDoes descriptive representation matter? YesFemale58.6% (523)Male41.4% (358)Age (18-24)20.0%Age (25-34)28.7%Age (35-49)24.2%Age (50+)27.1%High School Diploma (Yes)34.2%High School Diploma (No)20.2%Country of Birth (United States)88.0%Country of Birth (Mexico)12.0%Low Income ($29,000 or less)61.9%High Income ($30,000 or more)38.1%High Political/Public Affairs Knowledge (most of the time/some of the time)64.1%Low Political/Public Affairs Knowledge (only now and then/hardly at all/never)34.7%Probability to vote when Mexican American runs for office: (more likely)39.7%Probability to vote when Mexican American runs for office: (less likely)2.8%Probability to vote when Mexican American runs for office: (no difference)57.5%Obligation to Increase Mexican American officials: (agree/strongly agree)82.2%Obligation to Increase Mexican American officials: (disagree/strongly disagree)16.9%High Linked Fate (agree/strongly agree)77.5%Low Linked Fate (disagree/strongly disagree)21.3%Conclusion The levels of linked fate and descriptive representation are strongly correlated within the Mexican American respondent group. Those with high levels of linked fate are more likely to support descriptive representation as well as obligation to other Mexican Americans. Support of obligation to other Mexican Americans was strong overall, yet race as a reason to vote had no bearing on the respondents. Country of birth, political knowledge, income and gender all have significant correlations to descriptive representation. Education and age however, have no connection to descriptive representation. While the results were statistically significant, it is important to recognize the age of the data set in use. The data found in the LNPS is now seventeen years old. It is possible that with the increase of the Latino population in the United States and recent events surrounding immigration that updated data may find similar results. An updated sample of the LNPS will be available in 2007, which can be used as a comparison to the 1989 edition. In order for the results to be statistically significant and relevant to the current time it will be important to re-test the data in 2007. Works Cited Banducci, Susan A., Donovan, Todd and Karp, Jeffrey A. May 2004. Minority Representation, Empowerment, and Participation. The Journal of Politics. Vol. 66 (2): 534-556. Barreto, Matt A., Segura, Gary M. and Woods, Nathan D. February 2004. The Mobilizing Effect of Majority-Minority Districts on Latino Turnout. American Political Science Review. Vol. 98 (1): 65-75. de la Garza, Rodolfo, Angelo Falcon, F. Chris Garcia, and John A. Garcia. LATINO NATIONAL POLITICAL SURVEY, 1989-1990 [Computer file]. 3rd ICPSR version. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University, Institute for Social Research [producer], 1992. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 1998. Garcia, John A. 2003. Latino Political Participation. Latino Politics in America. Rowman and Littlefield, New York. Gay, Claudine. October 2002. Spirals of Trust? The Effect of Descriptive Representation on the Relationship Between Citizens and Their Government. Midwest Political Science Association. Vol. 46 (4): 717-733. Latino National Political Survey Pantoja, Adrian D. and Segura, Gary M. June 2003. Does Ethnicity Matter? Descriptive Representation in Legislatures and Political Alienation Among Latinos. Social Science Quarterly. Vol. 84 (2): 441-459. Pitkin, Hanna. 1967. The Concept of Representation. University of California Press, Berkeley. Sanbonmatsu, Kira. December 2003. Gender-Related Political Knowledge and the Descriptive Representation of Women. Political Behavior. Vol. 25 (4): 367-388. Simien, Evelyn M. May 2005. Race, Gender and Linked Fate. Journal of Black Studies. Vol. 35 (5): 529-550 Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2006. Political Representation. Tate, Katherine. 2003. Black Faces in the Mirror. Princeton University Press, Princeton. Thomas, Sue and Wilcox, Clyde. 1998. Women and Elective Office Past, Present and Future. Oxford University Press, New York. University of Twente. 2003. Social Identity Theory. www.tcw.utwente.nl  While this information is significant, it is still important to note that data regarding current minority house members in non-majority-minority districts is unknown.  The reasons respondents answer positively to the question of linked fate will not be addressed, although it is likely that it positively correlates with levels of assimilation.     PAGE  PAGE 2 Garner y~ 5 N 16${?Wvfi ߽߹߹۹۹߹߹߹߹߹߹߹߹߲ hhJh\ h15hJhoWhJ5 hOhJh15h5hw9GhJhDFhJ5 heBCJhSP`heBCJ heB5DKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\ gdeB$a$gdeBdgdKbSd~d\]jyz{|}~ x3M!!$&&)), d^gdK d`gdKdgdK$a$gdeB !L!v"w""".#B#$$$$$% %%&.&0&&&((Q)R)X)))))****++,,,,,2,P,z,{,,,,,,b-c-s----....žźŶŲŲŲhhrhzphIhfh@h%w< hzhzhz hz5hzhJ5h<2hxC hJ5hThOjhJ0JUh5ZhJhESS>,..36"69;;8?"ADZG4JNLOQQQQQQQQQQQQ d`gdKdgdK..../D0000001112\22333444444555O5T5j5555666!6"6#6D6666677+75777;7@7H7¾ث܋hzHhEh hE5 hzHhEhhT5 hKhKh:hSM hTh=jhT0JUh]hw9Gh\(hKh5ZhfHshc^h Q h Q5h Qh.5 h5ZhzH5H7J7M7R7_7d7g7l7r7s7t7~777773848E8I8z8888888991959w9999;;;;";B;;;;;;;;;`<===u>v>7?8???L@!A"Aļh)^h*6hahyhhah3=5h}h3=h M05 hOSu5 h5Zhc h5Zhz~ h5Zh!h!h5Zhz~hEhzH hzHhE hzHhzH="A#A=A[AkBqB}BBDIE3GZG4J8J=J]JwJJrK LMLNL{LL3M6NOhPtPPP}QQQQQRRCRQRWRcRiRoRwRRRRRRRRȸȸhehc6hw9Ghehc5h#hc5CJaJhC%5CJaJhzphchOSuh#hHh|hR&[h3=hAhwhRBh;rhh<hkhyh/hh)^hahC%3QQQQQQRRR@RDR $$Ifa$gdcgdc$a$gdc d`gdK DRERLRXR{o $$Ifa$gdc $Ifgdczkd$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 laXRYR^RjR{o $$Ifa$gdc $IfgdczkdQ$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 lajRkRoRwR}R{{o $$Ifa$gdc $Ifgdczkd$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 la}R~RRRR{{o $$Ifa$gdc $Ifgdczkd$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 laRRRRR{{o $$Ifa$gdc $IfgdczkdD$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 laRRRRR{{o $$Ifa$gdc $Ifgdczkd$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 laRRRRR{{o $$Ifa$gdc $Ifgdczkd$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 laRRRRRRSS0S9SLS^SrSSSST-ToT|TTTUUXUnUUUUU V*V1V*hMhC%>*hC%h, h>*h$ hh$h$h$mH sH h$mH sH hzphzphmH sH hzpmH sH h,h>*h hzphzp h(*h$ h(*hzph(*mH sH h(*hzpmH sH '``h`t`aaaaaa%b&bxbbbbbbbbbcRdSdUdVdgdJgdC% d`gd$dgd$bbccRdSdTdVdWdYdZd\d]d_d`dfdgdhdjdkdqdrdsdtdud}d~dd hhGheB0JmHnHu hG0JjhG0JUjh~XUh~XhGjhG0JUVdXdYd[d\d^d_dhdidjdud|d}d~ddgdC%h]hgdGh]hgdJ &`#$gdJ21h:peB/ =!"#$% O$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LO$$If!vh5L5L#vL:Vl t65LD@D iGNormalCJPJ_HaJmH sH tH DA@D Default Paragraph FontRi@R  Table Normal4 l4a (k(No List4@4 iGHeader  !.)@. iG Page Number4 @4 iGFooter  !>@"> p\ Footnote TextCJaJ@&@1@ p\Footnote ReferenceH*j@Cj c Table Grid7:V06U@Q6 C% Hyperlink >*B*phv-\^a\KLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]jyz{|}~ x3M!!$&&+.".13387"9<Z?4BNDGIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIJJJ@JDJEJLJXJYJ^JjJkJoJwJ}J~JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJKKKK0K9K?K@KLK^KdKeKrKKKKKKKKL-L3L4L}LLLLLLM$M%MoMuMvMMMMMMMM N*N0N1N?@ABCEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTVX~d5  -!!8@0(  B S  ?<-.ԧ/l01L2L3}456789Կ:;<=p>|?@A4BTKCHD EF2G|HI jJKLMN_OPLBQBRST4UtVWDXYZ[D\]Д^Д_4є`tєaєbєc4ҔdtҔeҔfҔg4ӔhtӔ]jjq # ##//k0k0<<<<A=A====II K K1K1KQQSU'U+U+U2UnUnUyUVV1V1V>VVGXGXUXhXhXYZZ>ZZZZZZZZ\     ! "$#%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;ipxx###//x0x0<<<<G=G====IIKK7K7KQQS%U)U1U<*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PersonName9;*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplace=:*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceName=9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceTypeB4*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagscountry-region9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsState8*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsCity  y<;:9;;9:4;4;4;44;44;44;;4;4;4;;99;4;;;9;:;:9;;:9;9;:jp MU##&&!)')I*O*++5555\>g>Y@d@EES SSSTTTTTTTTTTTTTT&V,VOVWVBWIWKWQWUWXWaWeWiWmWtXXXXYYZZZS\S\U\U\V\V\X\Y\[\\\^\_\}\\##ESSSSSSSCTDTgT~TTUUUV V$V&VGVgVyVVVVWWWWWXXXXRYlYYY&ZDZxZZZZZS\S\U\U\V\V\X\Y\[\\\^\_\}\\33333333333333333333333~!!.#.33JJEJJKKKK-L4L}LLLLM%MoMvMMMMM*N=NRSSSUUJVYVWBWY2YmYYYYYYZZZS\S\U\U\V\V\X\Y\[\\\^\_\u\{\}\\ZS\S\U\U\V\V\X\Y\[\\\^\_\}\\PORBSM Aw|CJ* m$C%0'&(*Hq- M0515%w<3=Z@.AeBw9GKESS~XR&[\)^c^$h2+nzp;rfHsOSu|z~KpG/@OzH*6#TJ,`=<25Z]E<IGf:}zc5 $ Qa\(yH.S!krJJDJEJLJXJYJ^JjJkJwJ}J~JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJKKK9K?K@K^KdKeKKKKKKK-L3L4L}LLLLLLM$M%MoMuMvMMMMMMM*N0N1N\@~~x~~\p@UnknownGz Times New Roman5Symbol3& z Arial[ PMingLiUArial Unicode MS"1h  aM. aM.!4dZZ 2QHX ?iG2 Introductionchrisp Grace GarnerOh+'0   @ L X dpxIntroductionchrispNormalGrace Garner2Microsoft Office Word@Ik@pS5F@$eF@$eF aM՜.+,0 hp  Pitzer.Z  Introduction Title  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXY[\]^_`acdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~Root Entry FQFData Z1TablebJWordDocument4SummaryInformation(DocumentSummaryInformation8CompObjq  FMicrosoft Office Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89qRoot Entry F