Showing posts with label democracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label democracy. Show all posts

Sunday, April 27, 2014

Benjamin Franklin v Bundy

I've been thinking about cattleman Cliven Bundy's recent anti American rant and what it reveals about the warped views of American history it reflects.

Bundy and his Tea Party and Libertarian supporters envision America as some kind of historical anarchy. Laws are apparently tyranny in his view. And everything he has he did entirely on his own.

Benjamin Franklin, without whom we may not have ever achieved independence, had an entirely different view of property and taxes. Here is what he wrote in 1783:

Eagle
16
Property


CHAPTER 16 | Document 12
Benjamin Franklin to Robert Morris
25 Dec. 1783Writings 9:138 The Remissness of our People in Paying Taxes is highly blameable; the Unwillingness to pay them is still more so. I see, in some Resolutions of Town Meetings, a Remonstrance against giving Congress a Power to take, as they call it, the People's Money out of their Pockets, tho' only to pay the Interest and Principal of Debts duly contracted. They seem to mistake the Point. Money, justly due from the People, is their Creditors' Money, and no longer the Money of the People, who, if they withold it, should be compell'd to pay by some Law.
All Property, indeed, except the Savage's temporary Cabin, his Bow, his Matchcoat, and other little Acquisitions, absolutely necessary for his Subsistence, seems to me to be the Creature of public Convention. Hence the Public has the Right of Regulating Descents, and all other Conveyances of Property, and even of limiting the Quantity and the Uses of it. All the Property that is necessary to a Man, for the Conservation of the Individual and the Propagation of the Species, is his natural Right, which none can justly deprive him of: But all Property superfluous to such purposes is the Property of the Publick, who, by their Laws, have created it, and who may therefore by other Laws dispose of it, whenever the Welfare of the Publick shall demand such Disposition. He that does not like civil Society on these Terms, let him retire and live among Savages. He can have no right to the benefits of Society, who will not pay his Club towards the Support of it.

The Founders' Constitution
Volume 1, Chapter 16, Document 12
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch16s12.html
The University of Chicago Press

The Writings of Benjamin Franklin. Edited by Albert Henry Smyth. 10 vols. New York: Macmillan Co., 1905--7.
Easy to print version.

© 1987 by The University of Chicago
All rights reserved. Published 2000
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/

Thursday, April 10, 2014

Living Within Our Means?

The budget just passed by the Republican House of Representatives sheds new light on the phrase "living within our means."

"Mean" is a word with many meanings. But when referring to Republicans, one set of meanings stands out:

mean 2  (mēn)
adj. mean·er, mean·est
1.
a. Selfish in a petty way; unkind.
b. Cruel, spiteful, or malicious.
2. Ignoble; base: a mean motive.
3. Miserly; stingy.
4.
a. Low in quality or grade; inferior.
b. Low in value or amount; paltry: paid no mean amount for the new shoes.
5. Common or poor in appearance; shabby: "The rowhouses had been darkened by the rain and looked meaner and grimmer than ever" (Anne Tyler).
6. Low in social status; of humble origins.
7. Humiliated or ashamed.
8. In poor physical condition; sick or debilitated.
9. Extremely unpleasant or disagreeable: The meanest storm in years.
10. Informal Ill-tempered.
11. Slang
a. Hard to cope with; difficult or troublesome: He throws a mean fast ball.
b. Excellent; skillful: She plays a mean game of bridge.

[Middle English, from Old English gemǣne, common; see mei-1 in Indo-European roots.]
Synonyms: mean2, low1, base2, abject, ignoble, sordid
These adjectives mean lacking in dignity or falling short of the standards befitting humans. Mean suggests pettiness, spite, or niggardliness: "Never ascribe to an opponent motives meaner than your own" (J.M. Barrie).
Something low violates standards of morality, ethics, or propriety: low cunning; a low trick.
Base suggests a contemptible, mean-spirited, or selfish lack of human decency: "that liberal obedience, without which your army would be a base rabble" (Edmund Burke).
Abject means brought low in condition: abject submission; abject poverty.
Ignoble means lacking noble qualities, such as elevated moral character: "For my part I think it a less evil that some criminals should escape than that the government should play an ignoble part" (Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.)
Sordid suggests foul, repulsive degradation: "It is through art . . . that we can shield ourselves from the sordid perils of actual existence" (Oscar Wilde).
 
A check of the Republican budget reveals that it (the budget) is mean in most of those senses.
 
It is such a mean and destructive budget that Americans should be enraged. NYT  columnist Charles M. Blow tells us today why we should be enraged. Republican insistence on measures like this is the main reason why wages for sixty percent of Americans are lower now (in real terms) than they were 40 years ago, despite vast improvements in economic productivity. 

This is not driven by economics. It is driven by the greed of a narrow sliver of American society who make nothing but deals. And prosper out of all proportion to any contribution they make to society. Many of them got their wealth the old fashioned way - they inherited it. And for the past half century they have used that wealth to acquire great political power. Which the George W. Bush Supreme Court has just increased.

The only weapon we have to fight back with is the vote. We can see how much this threatens the wealthy and powerful by what a concerted effort Republican state governments across the land have exerted to suppress the votes of the poor, people who work for a living, people of color, women and the elderly. 

We see it right here in North Carolina.

Get out and vote!

Sunday, March 23, 2014

Russia And Putin's New Order

Michael McFaul, until very recently our ambassador to Russia, has an article in today's New York Times.

He takes a look at how things came to this pass. "We did not seek this confrontation," McFaul writes. "This new era crept up on us, because we did not fully win the Cold War. Communism faded, the Soviet Union disappeared and Russian power diminished. But the collapse of the Soviet order did not lead smoothly to a transition to democracy and markets inside Russia, or Russia’s integration into the West."

I have a different take on this. Prerevolutionary Russia was always undemocratic, and the state played an enormous role in the economy. 

A century ago, as the German Empire was flexing its muscle and a Serbian nationalist under instructions from Belgrade assassinated the heir to the throne of Austria-Hungary, France and England allied with Tsarist Russia to oppose Germany and Austria. The US remained neutral, in part because President Wilson was uncomfortable making common cause with Autocratic Russia. Even after the Zimmerman telegram (German proposal to Mexico to enter the war against the US in return for the return of territory taken from Mexico in 1846) and German unrestricted submarine warfare and sinking of six US Flag merchant ships, the US did not declare war until after the Tsar was overthrown in March of 1917.

The collapse of the Soviet Union in December of 1991 brought with it the possibility of changes that would bring Russia into the general international system.

"Some Russians," McFaul writes,  "pushed forward on this enormous agenda of revolutionary change. And they produced results: the relatively peaceful (so far) collapse of the Soviet empire, a Russian society richer than ever before, greater protection of individual rights and episodically functioning democratic institutions."

But the transition did not go smoothly. I took part in a minor way in the transition, when I worked on projects by the United States Agency for International Development to assist in privatization. The contemplated transition was unprecedented. The truth is, no one knew how to do it and it was managed in a way that brought severe hardship to ordinary citizens.

The process also laid the foundation for well-connected government officials (the "nomenklatura") to skim great wealth from privatization. The most knowledgable and effective officials were KGB officers who had worked the international scene. They understood the workings of the west better than anyone else in the USSR.

McFaul explains that "the simultaneity of democracy’s introduction, economic depression and imperial loss generated a counterrevolutionary backlash — a yearning for the old order and a resentment of the terms of the Cold War’s end."

McFaul draws similarities between recent developments in Putin's Russia and the conflicts of the last century.

I would go further back. Since at least the time of Peter the Great, there has been a struggle within Russia between the "westernizers," who want to join the world of Europe, and the "slavophils," who see Russia as more pure and worthy. Slavophils oppose adopting the ways of the West.

There is much of that lind of emotion at work in today's Russia.

I recommend reading McFaul's article here.

Monday, March 3, 2014

History Doesn't Repeat Itself, But It Rhymes

This was Mark Twain's take on the lessons of history.

Ukraine's travails of the past three months and Russia's intervention remind me of nothing so much as the events leading up to Germany's occupation of Czechoslovakia in 1938.

After World War I, the Austro-Hungarian Empire was dismantled into a number of constituent successor states, among them Czechoslovakia. The Czech lands of Bohemia and Moravia were prosperous, modern, productive economies. But a substantial percentage of the population were German - speakers who had previously enjoyed a privileged position in the Austro-Hungarian Empire. They resented the new ascendancy of speakers of Czech and Slovak languages.

On top of this loss of prestige, Czechoslovakia was suffering, like the rest of Europe, from the worldwide depression, affecting the economic prospects of the formerly dominant group.

Resentment boiled up against what the German speakers viewed as Czech atrocities against them. These so-called atrocities were mostly invented, but founded on resentment. Reinvented as a new nationality, the "Sudeten" Germans invited Germany under Hitler to occupy first the "Sudetenland" and then all of Czechoslovakia.

British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain negotiated a settlement with Germany. In a radio broadcast of 27 September 1938, he had this to say about it:

"How horrible, fantastic, incredible it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas-masks here because of a quarrel in a far away country between people of whom we know nothing. It seems still more impossible that a quarrel which has already been settled in principle should be the subject of war."

In the end, the agreement didn't work out well for any of the parties.

John Maynard Keynes foresaw the economic aspects of the disaster in his essays "The Economic Consequences of The Peace" and "The Economic Consequences of Mr. Churchill."

Diplomatic efforts collapsed with the collapse of the League of Nations.

Czechoslovakia was well prepared to defend itself so long as it retained the "Sudetenland." But it couldn't stand alone against the major powers. France couldn't come to the aid of Czechoslovakia because many of her leaders were more worried about the Communist "menace" than about Germany and the French military cowered behind the Maginot Line. Britain had a formidable navy, but not much of an army. The Soviet Union had no direct border with Czechoslovakia either.

Neither Ukraine nor any other power wants to see war break out. The risks of letting Russia get away with the partition of Ukraine are greater than most of the public seems to realize. Russia is violating agreements made to assure Ukrain's territorial integrity as a price of Ukraine agreeing to turn over nearly 2,000 nuclear weapons. Such agreements are generally necessary when nuclear proliferation is at issue.

Good luck getting other near-nuclear powers to give up their capability if existing nuclear powers don't make good on Ukrainian security.

For what it's worth, the stock market doesn't seem pleased with events.

Sunday, March 2, 2014

Что Делать? What To Do?

Что Делать? Is the title of one of Lenin's books. "What is to be done?" is one way to translate the phrase. I like the simpler and more direct "what to do?"

I offer the following list of things to do:

I: Military

1. What Russia has done in Ukraine is an act of war. Recognize Russia's belligerent status. Ask Turkey to close the Turkish Straits to transit by Russian warships under the Montreux Convention. [By the way, we have to ask politely, since we never adhered to the convention and therefore do not have the rights of a signatory. Why not initiate discussion with Turkey to seek status as a signatory?]

2. While Ukraine is not a member of NATO, she has been granted membership in the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council. Let's send an allied mission to Ukraine to assess their defense needs.

3. Reactivate discussions with Ukraine concerning transfer of warships from our reserve fleet to Ukraine. Include mine warfare vessels in the discussion.

4. Investigate modernizing Ukraine's Air Force and Air Defense.

5. Schedule friendly warship visits to NATO allies in the Black Sea: Bulgaria and Romania, and possibly Ukraine.

II. Economics


1. Don't threaten to withdraw from the G-8 conference in Sochi - withdraw! Now! Withdrawing from a conference may sound like a weak sanction. Not nearly as weak as threatening someday to think about doing it. Just do it!

2. Freeze Russian assets! Now! We can always unfreeze them later;

Getting Ukraine's economic house in order is probably the most urgent task. But it must be done in a way that improves the lives of ordinary citizens and builds Ukraine's productive capacity for the future. Here are some ideas set forth by economists Gorodnichenko and Roland:

"Although it is only a few days after the successful February revolution and the country is still in a state of flux, a new government is needed to deal with emergency economic measures.
  • The country is days away from facing a $2bln payment to international bondholders.
  • The provisional Ukrainian government does not have the necessary legitimacy to make all the changes demanded by the Maidan protesters.
The new government is inheriting a political system and a government administration that are in need of fundamental change. Because of this weakness, the new government needs to focus on a set of emergency measures that are both urgent and immediately feasible. In the long run, establishing a well-functioning democracy necessitates a new constitution and a popular referendum on a constitution, but that takes time. What must be done now? What needs to be changed in the long run?
  • First, the Ukrainian currency Hryvnya should be switched to a float and it should depreciate significantly.
The current-account deficit (about 10% of GDP) is clearly unsustainable. This should stimulate the economy and preserve precious foreign currency reserves. Barriers to export should be removed.
  • Second, the banking system badly needs liquidity and capital.
Raising these in the international financial market has become nearly impossible. The government should inject capital (for example, use a program similar to the TARP in the US). The Central bank should provide liquidity. Some form of temporary capital controls and temporary limits on withdraws of deposits appear unavoidable given the current ongoing bank run (deposits fell by a third in the last few weeks and are falling further on a daily basis). Banks should “reopen” after the infusions of capital and liquidity.
Third, the government must immediately present a plan to address fiscal imbalances over a period of several years.

Given the deeply depressed state of the economy, now is not the time to implement deep budget cuts. But fiscal authorities can still lay out a budget plan for a gradual decline in deficits to restore confidence in the long-run solvency of the Ukrainian government. Stricter monitoring of spending to minimize corruption and waste of public functions must be implemented immediately to make the eventual fiscal consolidation less painful and restore confidence.
  • Fourth, external payments are a heavy burden on the collapsing Ukrainian economy.
One step is to bring in the IMF as well as other donors (EU, USA, etc.) to bridge the short-term gap in foreign currency reserves.
These funds are essential to avoid a drastic immediate fiscal contraction in the immediate future. They are necessary to enable authorities to inject capital into Ukrainian banks. The amount of required support is likely to be in tens of billions of dollars. Moreover, a restructuring of some of Ukrainian debt is necessary to avoid outright default.
  • Most of Ukraine’s external debt was accumulated under the previous corrupt regime.
  • The new leaders have little moral obligation to commit to reimburse that debt, and creditors have little moral standing to demand repayment: they knew who they lent to.
On the other hand, the amount of Ukraine’s external debt is not that high, and costs of defaulting – exclusion of Ukraine from the bond market for five years or so – are not-zero.
Ukraine badly needs immediate breathing space to introduce reforms and relieve the burden imposed by the Yanukovych government. The main risk here is that the absence of primary fiscal surplus makes an immediate fiscal consolidation or monetization of spending unavoidable in case of outright default. But Ukraine had a nearly zero inflation rate for two year. Some inflation could be a stimulating force if it can be kept under control later on. The new provisional government of Ukraine must weigh the costs and benefits of these scenarios. But right now, it should not exclude the option of default if external support is not coming. An external default would then not alienate Ukraine from the international community, despite the short run disorder it might create.
  • Fifth, a possible trade war with Russia and increased energy prices are looming.
Ukraine should prepare to obtain energy from alternative sources (including reversing the gas flow to get energy from the West).
  • Sixth, some people and businesses will be hit very hard.
The government should prepare short-term relief for all those likely to fall into temporary poverty: guaranteed minimum food, heating, electricity and water, all supplied on a lump-sum basis.
  • Last and not least, the EU and Ukraine should sign the association agreement.
This will anchor economic and political forces toward reforms and growth as well as provide credibility to the new government.

These emergency economic  measures will not address the need for fundamental long-term change. Once there is a legitimate government, elected on the basis of a Constitution approved by referendum, fundamental long term reforms can be implemented. These include a fundamental overhaul of government administration to root out corruption, fiscal decentralization to give more power to the regions, regulatory reform to break up monopolies, opening up entry to foreign firms and small private business, and securing a stable supply of energy by exploiting Ukraine’s large reserve of shale gas.
The need to act fast now does not mean one should not also begin in the necessary process of constitutional change. The people of Ukraine demand it. Ukraine had two revolutions in the last ten years. Both expressed people’s discontent with the status quo and aspirations for democracy. It needs to build a consolidated and participatory democracy. There will likely not be a third chance."

III Political

- Hold elections soon, with credible international observers.

- Convene a constituent assembly and  draft and ratify a new constitution as soon as possible.

Lots to do and not much time to do it.


Saturday, February 22, 2014

Ukraine Tragedy

Make no mistake about it. The violence in Kiev we saw on TV was orchestrated in Moscow. Or perhaps in Sochi.

The map below depicts the main ethnic divisions in Ukraine. Kiev is the pink circle along the Dnieper River, surrounded by red. The pink shows the area of ethnic Ukrainians who predominantly speak Ukrainian and the red mostly speak Ukrainian. In this case, "mostly" is more than "predominantly." Russian speaking Ukrainians are shown in yellow and white. Russians dominate the Crimea (brown) and the heavy industrial  and coal mining area of the Donets Basin (brown and yellow hatched area).

File:Ethnolingusitic map of ukraine.png

 It is plain that Russia sees the Donbas as important, and does not want to cede control to the West.






http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/Donbass_economic.jpg

This may seem like a return of Soviet cold war thinking.

Not exactly.

It is a return of Russian Imperial thinking. Did you notice the design of the Russian hockey uniforms at the Olympics? It is the coat of arms of the Russian Federation.

It is also the two-headed eagle, which served as the coat of arms of the Tsarist Russian Empire from the time of Peter the Great until the Russian Revolution of 1917.

Is Vladimir Putin the new Tsar?

Imperial Russia

Tuesday, February 11, 2014

The Big Game That Matters

From early childhood, we Americans are conditioned to believe the most important human events are the big game. Athletic contests define us. What are our loyalties? Red Sox or Yankees? Giants or Dodgers? Redskins or Cowboys? UNC or Duke?

A little over a week ago the Big Game was a Super Bowl that wasn't very (super, that is). This week and next the Big Game is the Winter Olympics at Sochi in Russia.

Much as we enjoy the spectacle of these events, hang on every slip of a ski or skate, wince at every stumble or fall, once the spectacle is over, we should remember that nothing in the real world has changed. People still die in Syria and Afghanistan and Darfur, there is no peace in the Middle East. And nothing has made lives better for human beings anywhere, including here in America.

Six hundred forty-two miles North West of Sochi, in Kiev, the capital of Ukraine, a drama is playing out that could change the lives of people living there and the fates of nations. The drama gets little press here, but at stake is the future of Ukraine as a European country. Will Ukraine join Europe or be captured in the orbit of a resurgent Russia?

Two decades ago, not long after the Soviet Union broke up, I met a dozen or so Ukrainian judges at a bar in Georgetown, District of Columbia. They were in this country to study our legal system, including some pretty esoteric issues of corporate law. They were interested to learn that I was vice president of a limited liability corporation. They had just learned about that legal structure.

After a few beers, they made it clear that their aspiration was for Ukraine to become a "normal European country." I found the same sentiment when I visited Kiev a few years later. It was as though the disaster at Chernobyl had broken a dam, releasing a vast reservoir of disdain and resentment at not only the former Soviet Union but also at Russia.

The story may seem complicated. The characters have funny-sounding names like a Dostoevsky novel.  Here is one account of what is going on and why it is happening.

This is an actual Big Game - and the outcome does matter.

Wednesday, January 29, 2014

Speeches From The Past

What does the Democratic party stand for?

In a recent New York Times, Paul Krugman reminds us that President Franklin Delano Roosevelt spelled it out pretty well in a speech of 78 years ago here.

The speech, delivered at Madison Square Garden in October, 1936, would need only minor edits to apply today. Here are some excerpts:

"Tonight I call the roll—the roll of honor of those who stood with us in 1932 and still stand with us today.
Written on it are the names of millions who never had a chance—men at starvation wages, women in sweatshops, children at looms. Written on it are the names of those who despaired, young men and young women for whom opportunity had become a will-o'-the-wisp.

"Written on it are the names of farmers whose acres yielded only bitterness, business men whose books were portents of disaster, home owners who were faced with eviction, frugal citizens whose savings were insecure.
Written there in large letters are the names of countless other Americans of all parties and all faiths, Americans who had eyes to see and hearts to understand, whose consciences were burdened because too many of their fellows were burdened, who looked on these things four years ago and said, "This can be changed. We will change it...."


"For twelve years this Nation was afflicted with hear-nothing, see-nothing, do-nothing Government. The Nation looked to Government but the Government looked away. Nine mocking years with the golden calf and three long years of the scourge! Nine crazy years at the ticker and three long years in the breadlines! Nine mad years of mirage and three long years of despair! Powerful influences strive today to restore that kind of government with its doctrine that that Government is best which is most indifferent....

"We had to struggle with the old enemies—business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering. They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.

"Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today," President Roosevelt said. "They are unanimous in their hate for me—and I welcome their hatred...."

"....today there is only one entrance to the White House—by the front door. Since March 4, 1933, there has been only one pass-key to the White House. I have carried that key in my pocket. It is there tonight. So long as I am President, it will remain in my pocket....Those who used to have pass-keys are not happy...." 

"The very employers and politicians and publishers who talk most loudly of class antagonism and the destruction of the American system now undermine that system by this attempt to coerce the votes of the wage earners of this country. It is the 1936 version of the old threat to close down the factory or the office if a particular candidate does not win. It is an old strategy of tyrants to delude their victims into fighting their battles for them....

"This is our answer to those who, silent about their own plans, ask us to state our objectives.
Of course we will continue to seek to improve working conditions for the workers of America—to reduce hours over-long, to increase wages that spell starvation, to end the labor of children, to wipe out sweatshops. Of course we will continue every effort to end monopoly in business, to support collective bargaining, to stop unfair competition, to abolish dishonorable trade practices. For all these we have only just begun to fight.
Of course we will continue to work for cheaper electricity in the homes and on the farms of America, for better and cheaper transportation, for low interest rates, for sounder home financing, for better banking, for the regulation of security issues, for reciprocal trade among nations, for the wiping out of slums. For all these we have only just begun to fight....

"Of course we will continue our efforts in behalf of the farmers of America. With their continued cooperation we will do all in our power to end the piling up of huge surpluses which spelled ruinous prices for their crops. We will persist in successful action for better land use, for reforestation, for the conservation of water all the way from its source to the sea, for drought and flood control, for better marketing facilities for farm commodities, for a definite reduction of farm tenancy, for encouragement of farmer cooperatives, for crop insurance and a stable food supply. For all these we have only just begun to fight....

"Of course we will provide useful work for the needy unemployed....

"Here and now I want to make myself clear about those who disparage their fellow citizens on the relief rolls. They say that those on relief are not merely jobless—that they are worthless. Their solution for the relief problem is to end relief—to purge the rolls by starvation. To use the language of the stock broker, our needy unemployed would be cared for when, as, and if some fairy godmother should happen on the scene.
You and I will continue to refuse to accept that estimate of our unemployed fellow Americans. Your Government is still on the same side of the street with the Good Samaritan and not with those who pass by on the other side....

"Again—what of our objectives?
Of course we will continue our efforts for young men and women so that they may obtain an education and an opportunity to put it to use. Of course we will continue our help for the crippled, for the blind, for the mothers, our insurance for the unemployed, our security for the aged. Of course we will continue to protect the consumer against unnecessary price spreads, against the costs that are added by monopoly and speculation. We will continue our successful efforts to increase his purchasing power and to keep it constant.
For these things, too, and for a multitude of others like them, we have only just begun to fight...."

"We have need of that [faith] today....which makes it possible for government to persuade those who are mentally prepared to fight each other to go on instead, to work for and to sacrifice for each other. That is why we need to say with the Prophet: "What doth the Lord require of thee—but to do justly, to love mercy and to walk humbly with thy God."








 

Tuesday, January 28, 2014

Where Have All The Singers Gone? - Long Time Passing

Learned with sadness of Pete Seeger's passing. I miss the gentle passion of the folk singers like Seeger, Woody Guthrie, Joan Baez and others who used song to remind Americans of our better angels. Good article in today's New York Times.

I was pleased recently to learn of the new Woody Guthrie museum in my home town, Tulsa, Oklahoma. As I read the lyrics of Guthrie's songs, I hear the voice of the ordinary people of rural Oklahoma from my childhood.

We need to recapture such voices and bring them forward to our own times.

Pete Seeger's was a giant voice in that tradition. We are fortunate to have lived in his time.

Saturday, January 25, 2014

Elections In America: New Report By Presidential Commission

The Presidential Commission on Election Administration, a bipartisan commission co-chaired by Robert Bauer (democrat) and Benjamin L. Ginsburg (republican) has just issued its 112-page report: http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/pcea-final-report.pdf

Anyone experienced in the vagaries of elections and election law in the United States should read the report. The problems of election administration in this country are well summarized in the introduction:

"The United States runs its elections unlike any other country in the world. Responsi-
bility for elections is entrusted to local officials in approximately 8,000 different juris-
dictions. In turn, they are subject to general oversight by officials most often chosen
through a partisan appointment or election process. The point of contact for voters in
the polling place is usually a temporary employee who has volunteered for one-day duty
and has received only a few hours of training. These defining features of our electoral
system, combined with the fact that Americans vote more frequently on more issues
and offices than citizens anywhere else, present unique challenges for the effective ad-
ministration of elections that voters throughout the country expect and deserve."

That's the problem in a nutshell.

Problems were even worse before the Voting Rights Act, the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote Act. There have been significant recent improvements in administration of Uniformed and Overseas Civilian voting.

The report sets forth many recommendations and best practices to improve the administration of elections for the benefit of voters. I have taken a quick look at the report. Up until last year, North Carolina election procedures stood up very well to the suggested recommendations and best practices. In Pamlico County, we have had very well run elections administered by very conscientious polling officials, many with long years of experience and training.

Unfortunately, in my view, the General Assembly has passed legislation introducing new and totally unnecessary obstacles to voting.

I'll have more to say about this in future posts.

Monday, January 20, 2014

Martin Luther King, Jr.

Today we honor the memory of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

I can't put it better than Keith Crisco of Ashboro and Oriental, former North Carolina Secretary of Commerce:

"Though Dr. King’s life ended far too early, his legacy of non-violent protest carried on to future generations and inspired others in the struggle for equality. Here in North Carolina, the Greensboro Four staged non-violent sit-ins in an effort to integrate department store lunch counters. That work by four courageous North Carolina A&T State University students helped lead a wave of change across this state and the nation."

I like what Keith Crisco has to say, because it highlights that the accomplishments of Martin Luther King Jr. were not just the work of a charismatic, eloquent and thoughtful leader - they were the accomplishments of a generation of leaders working together for a better America.

We should also not forget that, while protest demonstrations were non-violent, the reaction of the other side was not. Many brave Americans gave their lives so we could achieve a more perfect union. The names of those who fell in the cause of a more inclusive, a freer America, included black and white Americans; protestant, catholic and jewish Americans; unbelievers as well as believers; women as well as men; children as well as adults. In this respect, the forces of hate did not discriminate.

A few years ago my wife and I visited the Martin Luther King Jr. museum in Atlanta. In the bookstore was a well-illustrated book on the civil rights movement. On the cover, a headline declared that Martin Luther King Jr. had worked to insure freedom for African Americans. I disagree. He worked to achieve freedom for all Americans.

And the work is not yet finished.

Thursday, November 14, 2013

Oriental Town Board Meeting November 13, 2013

I attended last night's meeting of Oriental's Town Board.

I'm not quite sure why I keep going. Possibly because I believe in democracy and think everyone should take part. Possibly because I remain puzzled about why so little of importance gets done, why so much of the activity is expended on trivialities and so little on planning for the future.

You can learn a bit by reading Town Dock's account:

"Oriental’s Town Board met last night. Among other things, the Board okayed, in a 4-1 vote, the lettering for a Town Hall dedication plaque that will list the Town Board members and the Town Manager at the time of the renovation. Cost: upwards of $875 (on top of the $160 spent on an earlier rendition the Board rejected.) Commissioner Larry Summers said after the meeting that he voted against it because “I don’t believe in self-aggrandizement.” He said it was also, “quite a bit of money.”

"Earlier in the meeting, the Board put off spending money on 20 chairs for the public to sit on the Town Hall meeting room. Some commissioners said they thought the price too high. The chairs, from Staples, were listed as $54 apiece.

"It was also stated at the meeting that the dock the Town got in the Chris Fulcher land swap cannot be extended now — it’s not CAMA that decides if it can be made longer, as first thought. Turns out it’s up to the Corps of Engineers, whose review is seen as a more onerous process. The dock will stop at 80 feet. The town’s already spent $12,000 to have planks laid and other modifications."

But that's not all. The board held a public hearing on an amendment to the GMO "for clarification," the mayor explained. Balderdash! The purpose of the amendment was to "get" one of our citizens. This was never clearly explained, but one of the commissioners let slip the true objective.

A good question to ask at one of these hearings about an amendment is: "what is the problem to which this is the solution?"

We should be about fixing the town's figurative and literal potholes, and not pursuing personal vendettas.

Is that too much to ask? Maybe it is.

Saturday, October 26, 2013

Oriental Town Board Special Meeting

Without getting into all the details (you can read about it on Town Dock), yesterday's special meeting of the Town Board confirmed that not a single incumbent, including the mayor, should be reelected.

In a nutshell, the four members of the Town Board who attended refused to adopt the mayor's proposed motion to sell Town water to Wal-Mart with no conditions. Then they appointed a committee to "negotiate" with Wal-Mart  before they capitulate. Committees spread the responsibility around.

I intend to vote for Lori Wagoner for mayor, Ben Cox for commissioner, and to write in votes for Lili Stern and Barbara Stockton for commissioner.

For those concerned about "wasting" a write-in vote, I remind you that one current incumbent, Warren Johnson, won his seat on a write-in vote. A vote for a candidate who either can't or is unwilling to do the job is truly a wasted vote.


Saturday, October 19, 2013

2013 Oriental NC Candidate Forum On Line

Now that Town Dock has put the audio recording of last Wednesday's candidate forum on line here, I no longer have to rely on reports by attendees. I can hear for myself how the candidates responded.

That being said, I have heard nothing that changes my judgement. I support Benjamin Cox for Commissioner and Lori Wagoner for Mayor.

It's all about the future of the town.

Wednesday, October 16, 2013

Town Of Oriental Elections

Out of town this week, so no posts so far. But tonight is a big event in Oriental - the candidate's forum. And voting starts tomorrow.

With ten candidates for five seats on the Town Board, voters will face some difficult choices. My advice: don't reelect any incumbents. I thought about posting my reasons, but decided against it. My reasons have to do with policy, not personalities, though in some cases it is hard to separate the two.

I don't know anyone who follows town affairs who believes the present Board has done well.

I will vote for Benjamin Cox. He has the knowledge and skills to contribute valuable insights to the Board.

Something to bear in mind is, voters don't have to vote for all five commissioner seats. There are good reasons to vote for the one or two that you support and no others. There is also the option of casting write-in votes. I could be tempted, for example, to write in Lilli Stern's name. I think she is going to contribute a great deal to the Town, whether in office or not.

I intend to vote for Lori Wagoner for mayor.

Time for a new broom.

Wednesday, October 9, 2013

More On The History Of Republican Election Strategy

Yesterday I provided a link to an article by Michael Lind shedding light on Republican strategy. A strategy, by the way, that has been pretty successful as well as destructive.

Today I offer a link to an article in Salon.com by Salon's editor, Joan Walsh: http://www.salon.com/2013/10/01/the_real_story_of_the_shutdown_50_years_of_gop_race_baiting/

This new article complements the piece by Michael Lind.

I have been following the developments described by both authors for about seventy years. They pretty much hit the nail on the head.

Sunday, June 2, 2013

Wall Street Journal: New York City Is Totalitarian

According to the Wall Street Journal, New York City has become totalitarian because it is making rental bicycles readily available to visitors.

There may be logic to the WSJ attack, but it escapes me. Here is an article explaining the WSJ complaint and providing a link to the relevant video.

Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Does The US Need A Different Layout Of States?

Today's New York Times web site posted a very interesting analysis of the electoral college by Nate Silver on his blog, Five Thirty-Eight. The article's headline, "Did Democrats Get Lucky In The Electoral College?" doesn't convey the depth and innovation of the analysis.

The most interesting component of the analysis is a map of the United States redrawn into fifty states, each with equal population. The point of the map is to illustrate the effect such redrawn boundaries would have on the outcome of the electoral college.
http://fakeisthenewreal.org/img/reform/electoral10-1100.jpg

Nate Silver's discussion  of the electoral college and the associated issues of reapportionment and redistricting is among the best I have ever read. I like the map, but also like a table in the article showing the distribution of population within each state into urban, suburban and rural. Not unsurprisingly, Wyoming is the most rural state in the union. Vermont is the least urban, followed by Mississippi with only 4% urban population.

As I looked at the map, I was also struck by its resemblance to a concept put forth by George Kennan in his 1993 book "Around The Cragged Hill." In short, Kennan believed the United States was so big as to be ungovernable. He proposed that a better scheme would be to split the country apart into what amounted to city-states.

Years later, others picked up on Kennan's idea and began pushing a movement to promote the idea of states seceding from the Union. Then again, maybe they didn't even know about Kennan's ideas.



Monday, September 10, 2012

Democracy In America

Last May I came across a blog titled Middle Class Political Economist.  The post that caught my eye was an examination of over representation of rural areas in the US Congress. I thought it was a good discussion of an issue I had long pondered.

So I offered the following comments:

Some of the ills of congress are built into our constitution. The US Senate, for example, which likes to characterize itself as "the world's greatest deliberative body" is arguably the "free world's" least democratic body. That is, first of all, a consequence of the constitutional arrangement that each state, regardless of size or economic output, have an equal number of senators. This is compounded by the increasingly inexplicable commitment of the senate to the requirement of a supermajority of senators to pass any legislation at all. My solution to that: get rid of paper filibusters imposed by the cloture rule. Let's go back to "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" style of filibuster. Filibusters would become more rare because voters could see what was happening and better understand what it was about.

Some republicans want to fix the senate by repealing the seventeenth amendment providing direct popular election of senators. What, we have too much democracy?

A common complaint about the House of Representatives is "My representative doesn't listen to people like me."

Some advocate term limits to fix this. I say, we already have term limits. Elections. What we don't have is enough representatives.

We are going through redistricting right now. This is the process after every decenniel census (except for the 1920 census - there was not a reapportionment after that census). First congress reapportions seats in the House of Representatives to the states according to population. District boundaries are then redrawn by state legislatures and in some cases by courts.

Contrary to popular opinion, the number of seats in the House of Representatives is not in the constitution. But the number has not changed since it was set at 435 in 1911. At that time, each member of the House represented about 216,000 citizens. Since then, our population has more than tripled, but the number remains the same. Now each member represents about 708,000 constituents.

My suggestion: enlarge the House so that each member represents about 216,000 citizens. With modern communications systems, that would allow the members closer communication with constituents. It would also lower the financial and organizational barriers to running for office. It might reduce the influence of money in politics and even create opportunities for more political parties to become competitive.

How many representatives would we have? About 1,426. Admittedly, that might make the body even more unwieldy, but it might force more cooperation. It would certainly induce representatives to be more responsive to constituents.

How could we accommodate so many representatives? Replace the desks on the floor of the House with benches. Reduce representatives' personal staffs. Currently, members are allowed to hire as many as eighteen personal staffers. Reduce that to five per member. Representatives might have to study bills themselves, possibly answer phones and write some of their own correspondence. But they wouldn't have to raise so much money.

Originally Posted May 29, 2012

Saturday, September 1, 2012

Democracy And Its Discontents

It seems that elections sometimes bring out the least thoughtful contributions to public discourse.

This is not just an American affliction. Folks across the Pond with whom we claim a "special relation" share the problem.

Here are some interesting thoughts on political discourse.

As always, it is good to read the comments as well as the blog posting. It helps get your mind around the problem.