After finally finding a home, Season for Caring recipient Olga Aranda Guzmán dies
For more than a dozen years, Olga Aranda Guzmán slowly declined from kidney and heart failure. On Monday, Aranda passed away. She was 63.
Two years ago, Aranda and her daughter Ana Laura Martínez Aranda left Nuevo Laredo and sought asylum in Texas, making their way to Austin.
By then Aranda was confined to a hospital bed and moved between family members' and friends' apartments. At one point, she and Martínez slept in their car.
Then, in September, Aranda and Martínez were chosen for the American-Statesman's Season for Caring program after being nominated by Hospice Austin. Since 1999, Season for Caring has raised more than $21.7 million for local nonprofits.
"I really think it was God's gift," Martínez said of Season for Caring and Hospice Austin
For the next seven months, Season for Caring grants and donations helped the family move into a home, repair their car and furnish their new place. For the first time, Aranda was able to leave the hospital bed and sit in a recliner in the living room.
Martínez could focus on carrying for her mother and not worry about rent or paying for groceries. "I thank God," she said.
On Monday, Aranda passed away and was celebrated by her daughter, six grandchildren and three great-grandchildren.
"She was not perfect," Martínez said. "Nobody is perfect, but she was a good mother. She was lovely."
Martínez remembers her mother would teach her a lot of things, including how to cook. "Maybe I am like her," Martínez said.
Her mother's passing, she said, means Aranda is no longer in terrible pain. "She was suffering," Martínez said. "I miss her a lot, but I know she's in a better place. ... She's getting rest. She's getting happy."
To find out more about Season for Caring, including how to apply as a local nonprofit, email nvillalpando@statesman.com.
This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Olga Aranda Guzmán from Statesman's Season for Caring program dies
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Vox
19 minutes ago
- Vox
Big government is still good, even with Trump in power
is a correspondent at Vox, where he covers the impacts of social and economic policies. He is the author of 'Within Our Means,' a biweekly newsletter on ending poverty in America. It's easy to look at Donald Trump's second term and conclude that the less power and reach the federal government has, the better. After all, a smaller government might provide Trump or someone like him with fewer opportunities to disrupt people's lives, leaving America less vulnerable to the whims of an aspiring autocrat. Weaker law-enforcement agencies could lack the capacity to enforce draconian policies. The president would have less say in how universities like Columbia conduct their business if they weren't so dependent on federal funding. And he would have fewer resources to fundamentally change the American way of life. Trump's presidency has the potential to reshape an age-old debate between the left and the right: Is it better to have a big government or a small one? The left, which has long advocated for bigger government as a solution to society's problems, might be inclined to think that in the age of Trump, a strong government may be too risky. Say the United States had a single-payer universal health care system, for example. As my colleague Kelsey Piper pointed out, the government would have a lot of power to decide what sorts of medical treatments should and shouldn't be covered, and certain forms of care that the right doesn't support — like abortion or transgender health — would likely get cut when they're in power. That's certainly a valid concern. But the dangers Trump poses do not ultimately make the case for a small or weak government because the principal problem with the Trump presidency is not that he or the federal government has too much power. It's that there's not enough oversight. Reducing the power of the government wouldn't necessarily protect us. In fact, 'making government smaller' is one of the ways that Trump might be consolidating power. First things first: What is 'big government'? When Americans are polled about how they feel about 'big government' programs — policies like universal health care, social security, welfare for the poor — the majority of people tend to support them. Nearly two-thirds of Americans believe the government should be responsible for ensuring everyone has health coverage. But when you ask Americans whether they support 'big government' in the abstract, a solid majority say they view it as a threat. That might sound like a story of contradictions. But it also makes sense because 'big government' can have many different meanings. It can be a police state that surveils its citizens, an expansive regulatory state that establishes and enforces rules for the private sector, a social welfare state that directly provides a decent standard of living for everyone, or some combination of the three. In the United States, the debate over 'big government' can also include arguments about federalism, or how much power the federal government should have over states. All these distinctions complicate the debate over the size of government: Because while someone might support a robust welfare system, they might simultaneously be opposed to being governed by a surveillance state or having the federal government involved in state and local affairs. As much as Americans like to fantasize about small government, the reality is that the wealthiest economies in the world have all been a product of big government, and the United States is no exception. That form of government includes providing a baseline social safety net, funding basic services, and regulating commerce. It also includes a government that has the capacity to enforce its rules and regulations. A robust state that caters to the needs of its people, that is able to respond quickly in times of crisis, is essential. Take the Covid-19 pandemic. The US government, under both the Trump and Biden administrations, was able to inject trillions of dollars into the economy to avert a sustained economic downturn. As a result, people were able to withstand the economic shocks, and poverty actually declined. Stripping the state of the basic powers it needs to improve the lives of its citizens will only make it less effective and erode people's faith in it as a central institution, making people less likely to participate in the democratic process, comply with government policies, or even accept election outcomes. A constrained government does not mean a small government But what happens when the people in power have no respect for democracy? The argument for a weaker and smaller government often suggests that a smaller government would be more constrained in the harm it can cause, while big government is more unrestrained. In this case, the argument is that if the US had a smaller government, then Trump could not effectively use the power of the state — by, say, deploying federal law enforcement agencies or withholding federal funds — to deport thousands of immigrants, bully universities, and assault fundamental rights like the freedom of speech. But advocating for bigger government does not mean you believe in handing the state unlimited power to do as it pleases. Ultimately, the most important way to constrain government has less to do with its size and scope and more to do with its checks and balances. Related Three reasons why American democracy will likely withstand Trump In fact, one of the biggest checks on Trump's power so far has been the structure of the US government, not its size. Trump's most dangerous examples of overreach — his attempts to conduct mass deportations, eliminate birthright citizenship, and revoke student visas and green cards based on political views — have been an example of how proper oversight has the potential to limit government overreach. To be sure, Trump's policies have already upended people's lives, chilled speech, and undermined the principle of due process. But while Trump has pushed through some of his agenda, he hasn't been able to deliver at the scale he promised. But that's not because the federal government lacks the capacity to do those things. It's because we have three equal branches of government, and the judicial branch, for all of its shortcomings in the Trump era, is still doing its most basic job to keep the executive branch in check. Reforms should include more oversight, not shrinking government The biggest lesson from Trump's first term was that America's system of checks and balances — rules and regulations, norms, and the separate branches of government — wasn't strong enough. As it turned out, a lot of potential oversight mechanisms did not have enough teeth to meaningfully restrain the president from abusing his power. Trump incited an assault on the US Capitol in an effort to overturn the 2020 election, and Congress ultimately failed in its duty to convict him for his actions. Twice, impeachment was shown to be a useless tool to keep a president in check. But again that's a problem of oversight, not of the size and power of government. Still, oversight mechanisms need to be baked into big government programs to insulate them from petty politics or volatile changes from one administration to the next. Take the example of the hypothetical single-payer universal health care system. Laws dictating which treatments should be covered should be designed to ensure that changes to them aren't dictated by the president alone, but through some degree of consensus that involves regulatory boards, Congress, and the courts. Ultimately, social programs should have mechanisms that allow for change so that laws don't become outdated, as they do now. And while it's impossible to guarantee that those changes will always be good, the current system of employer-sponsored health insurance is hardly a stable alternative. By contrast, shrinking government in the way that Republicans often talk about only makes people more vulnerable. Bigger governments — and more bureaucracy — can also insulate public institutions from the whims of an erratic president. For instance, Trump has tried to shutter the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), a regulatory agency that gets in the way of his and his allies' business. This assault allows Trump to serve his own interests by pleasing his donors. In other words, Trump is currently trying to make government smaller — by shrinking or eliminating agencies that get in his way — to consolidate power. 'Despite Donald Trump's rhetoric about the size or inefficiency of government, what he has done is eradicate agencies that directly served people,' said Julie Margetta Morgan, president of The Century Foundation who previously served as an associate director at the CFPB. 'He may use the language of 'government inefficiency' to accomplish his goals, but I think what we're seeing is that the goals are in fact to open up more lanes for big businesses to run roughshod over the American people.' The problem for small-government advocates is that the alternative to big government is not just small government. It's also big business because fewer services, rules, and regulations open up the door to privatization and monopolization. And while the government, however big, has to answer to the public, businesses are far less accountable. One example of how business can replace government programs is the Republicans' effort to overhaul student loan programs in the latest reconciliation bill the House passed, which includes eliminating subsidized loans and limiting the amount of aid students receive. The idea is that if students can't get enough federal loans to cover the cost of school, they'll turn to private lenders instead. 'It's not only cutting Pell Grants and the affordability of student loan programs in order to fund tax cuts to the wealthy, but it's also creating a gap where [private lenders] are all too happy to come in,' Margetta Morgan said. 'This is the small government alternative: It's cutting back on programs that provided direct services for people — that made their lives better and more affordable — and replacing it with companies that will use that gap as an opportunity for extraction and, in some cases, for predatory services.' Even with flawed oversight, a bigger and more powerful government is still preferable because it can address people's most basic needs, whereas small government and the privatization of public services often lead to worse outcomes. So while small government might sound like a nice alternative when would-be tyrants rise to power, the alternative to big government would only be more corrosive to democracy, consolidating power in the hands of even fewer people (and businesses). And ultimately, there's one big way for Trump to succeed at destroying democracy, and that's not by expanding government but by eliminating the parts of government that get in his way.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Key SCOTUS parental rights cases draw McMahon, Moms for Liberty to rally on court steps
Education Secretary Linda McMahon and the conservative group Moms for Liberty took to the Supreme Court steps Tuesday to recognize the 100-year anniversary of a landmark case that they said gave parents more control over their children's education. But advocates who spoke at the event are also anticipating decisions in two other pivotal cases that could affect the conservative-led parental rights movement. Rosalind Hanson, who is part of a group of plaintiffs in Mahmoud v. Taylor, told Fox News Digital in an interview after the rally that she is optimistic about a forthcoming decision from the high court on the key religious liberty case. She said it came from Montgomery County Public Schools in Maryland refusing to allow parents to opt their elementary school children out of being exposed to books containing gender and sexuality concepts. "We are not trying to change the curriculum," Hanson said. "We are not trying to say what you teach.… The majority of states across the country have said you can have an opt-out for these very sensitive issues and topics, especially because of the religious component, but also because of the age appropriateness." Supreme Court Likely To Side With Parents In Letting Them Opt Out Of Lgbtq Storybooks, Expert Says Montgomery County Public Schools attorneys argued to the Supreme Court that courts have long held that "mere exposure to controversial issues in a public-school curriculum does not burden the free religious exercise of parents or students." Still, the attorneys stood by the school system's decision to incorporate what they described as a "handful of storybooks featuring lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer characters" for use in language arts lessons. Read On The Fox News App The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the case in April, and a decision is expected in the coming weeks. Also on Moms for Liberty's radar is United States v. Skrmetti, one of the most closely watched cases of the court's term. The case arose from the Biden administration suing over a bill Tennessee passed in 2023 to ban puberty blockers and hormone therapy as treatments for minors who identify as transgender. The Supreme Court is now poised to decide within the next few weeks if states can restrict such medical treatments for minors. Maryland Mom Taking Fight To Opt Child Out Of Lgbtq Story Books Before Supreme Court Scarlett Johnson, who has a leadership role in Moms for Liberty, called the case a "big one" and told Fox News Digital she also urges members of her group to advocate legislation that "will protect children from the puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries for minors regarding the issue of gender identity." McMahon, meanwhile, reflected on Pierce v. Society of Sisters, a landmark decision issued 100 years ago that struck down Oregon's law requiring all children to attend public school. McMahon called it "one of the most impactful education-related cases in American history" but said the parental rights movement remains necessary. Watch Live: Moms For Liberty Rally With Linda Mcmahon At Supreme Court "Special interest and progressive activists still try to agitate for the government to override moms and dads in education," McMahon said. "Whether it's through ideological indoctrination, sexually explicit curriculum, or hiding health and safety risks from parents, the progressive left always wants to come between you and your kids." The speakers' remarks could be heard clearly over livestreams online, but in person in front of the Supreme Court building, they were drowned out entirely by a single protester screaming profanities and bashing a string of officials, including McMahon, Justice Clarence Thomas and President Donald Trump. Rep. Kat Cammack, R-Fla., elicited laughs when she thanked the protester, who was holding a sign reading "Let's TACO 'bout tariffs," a reference to an acronym Democrats' adopted for "Trump Always Chickens Out." "I'd also like to thank our lone protester for highlighting the mental health crisis in our country. Bless your heart, as we would say in the South," Cammack article source: Key SCOTUS parental rights cases draw McMahon, Moms for Liberty to rally on court steps
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Rodent droppings atop ice machines, floors covered with ‘slime-like substance': 2 South Florida restaurants shut
Two Palm Beach County restaurants temporarily shut by the state last week had one common issue: rodent droppings on top of their ice machines. Other violations included flies buzzing around a dish-washing area, a lack of hand washing, and floors covered with a 'slime-like substance.' Meanwhile, in Broward County, no restaurants were forced to close because of emergency orders. The South Florida Sun Sentinel typically highlights restaurant inspections conducted by the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation in Broward and Palm Beach counties. We cull through inspections that happen weekly and spotlight places ordered shut for 'high-priority violations,' such as improper food temperatures or dead cockroaches. Live roaches in donut prep area, 'dead roaches in spider webs' in kitchen: 2 South Florida restaurants shut Any restaurant that fails a state inspection must stay closed until it passes a follow-up. If you spot a possible violation and wish to file a complaint, contact Florida DBPR. (But please don't contact us: The Sun Sentinel doesn't inspect restaurants.) AJ's American Grill 6316 Lantana Road, Lake Worth Ordered shut: May 28 Why: 20 violations (10 high-priority), including: About four rodent droppings in kitchen 'on top of ice machine' and 'under sink in dish-washing area.' About 10 live flies in kitchen 'in dish-washing area landing on trash can, walls and shelves used to store clean and sanitized dishes' and 'in dry storage area landing on sealed boxes.' 'Server wiped mouth with hand and, without washing hands, server handled tin foil lid to cover to-go container of cooked lobster.' 'Employee handled visibly soiled sanitizer cloth to wipe down table and, without washing hands, employee handled clean and sanitized dishes.' 'Employee entered kitchen through back door and, without washing hands, employee began to handle containers of food at cook line.' Time/temperature issues involved mozzarella, Swiss, cheddar and American cheeses, cooked pasta and rice, Philly steak meat, raw steak, cooked chicken, cooked peppers, cooked mashed potatoes and french onion soup. Floors under dish-washing areas covered with a 'slime-like substance.' Status: Reopened May 29 after a follow-up inspection found no violations. CocoCabana Bar & Grill 2944 S. Jog Road, Greenacres Ordered shut: May 27 Why: Six violations (three high-priority), including: About 17 rodent droppings in kitchen 'under canned goods storage shelves' and on top of and under ice machine, as well as at the bar 'on drip mat with clean and sanitized mini buckets used to serve iced beers' and 'under soda dispenser gun station.' Rodent rub marks in 'kitchen hole in the wall next to ice machine and canned goods storage rack.' 'Raw pork stored directly above open bucket of plantains' in reach-in cooler. Time/temperature issue involved 'large bin of white rice' in reach-in cooler. Status: Reopened May 28 after a follow-up visit found no violations.
