Carolyn Lerner, head of, the United States Office of Special Counsel,
has some bad things to say about the Hatch Act, which she must enforce. It "is broken and needs to be fixed"
She's right.
As originally conceived, the Hatch Act protected the federal civil service and military officers from being forced to take part in partisan activities. That's good. I was under that protection for thirty years and welcomed it.
But then it expanded to prevent certain local, county and state employees from running for public office because they are in some way, no matter how trivially, tied to a
source of federal funds in their professional lives. The law is most frequently used to prevent deputy sheriffs from running against their bosses.
As presently enforced, the law works as an incumbent protection program. In her article in yesterday's New York Times, "A Law Misused for Political Ends," Lerner makes clear what is wrong and how to fix it. There is even bipartisan support in both houses. But Congress is paralyzed.
If you agree, write your representative (Walter B. Jones) and both US senators and ask them to get off the dime.
Monday, October 31, 2011
Drug Shortages Kill Americans
I was pleased to learn this morning that the president will issue an executive order to resolve critical shortages of drugs for treating life-threatening illnesses, including cancer.
Shortages kill. To be more precise, the illnesses do the killing, but shortages of drugs and consequent inability to treat the illnesses prevent doctors from prolonging life.
My sister was a victim of shortages. One drug (the most effective in my sister's case) was withdrawn from the market because it didn't prove effective in very many cases. Translation: not enough customers. The next drug selected by the oncologist simply couldn't be located because of shortages.
We will never know how much the shortages curtailed my sister's life. Would she have lived a day longer? A month? A year or more? We have no way of knowing.
Still, we know that shortages have increased greatly in recent years, endangering thousands of lives. This shouldn't happen in America.
It's time to do something about it. If Congress won't act, then the president must.
Shortages kill. To be more precise, the illnesses do the killing, but shortages of drugs and consequent inability to treat the illnesses prevent doctors from prolonging life.
My sister was a victim of shortages. One drug (the most effective in my sister's case) was withdrawn from the market because it didn't prove effective in very many cases. Translation: not enough customers. The next drug selected by the oncologist simply couldn't be located because of shortages.
We will never know how much the shortages curtailed my sister's life. Would she have lived a day longer? A month? A year or more? We have no way of knowing.
Still, we know that shortages have increased greatly in recent years, endangering thousands of lives. This shouldn't happen in America.
It's time to do something about it. If Congress won't act, then the president must.
Humor, Censorship and Self Censorship
I try to be reasonably clear where I stand on public issues, but to speak to the substance of policy outcomes instead of relying on ad-hominem arguments. The truth is, that focusing on policy issues frequently comes out as dry as sand. Makes it hard for people to focus.
Sometimes a bit of humor makes the point clearer and also easier to swallow. Unless the humor descends into a mean sneer.
I was a bit taken aback today when a friend of the republican persuasion concluded that I have been too hard on republicans lately. I admit I've been paying attention to the republican debates and find it hard to say anything positive, especially about their economic views. Or their foreign policy views either, for that matter. Still, I don't want to descend into invective. If I oppose a particular policy, I have reasons. Problem is, the reasons may seem a bit Wonky. And I don't for a minute believe that every republican swallows every line put out by the candidates.
I have mentioned before that about sixty-five years ago I tried my hand at a bit of satire. I worked on an underground newspaper at Ole Miss that criticized the state's policy of segregation. That was a dangerous thing to do, but I thought it important enough to take the risk. I've never regretted it.
Doing satire well is a challenge. Sometimes the target of the satire believes you are on his side. Sometimes it just becomes mean. But in a repressive society it may be the only option. I'm out of practice and haven't tried it much lately.
All of this came to mind today when I read the account in the New York Times magazine section of the uses made of humor, satire, puns, visual jokes and other creative efforts by Chinese dissident cartoonists. They use the internet to pierce the efforts at thought control by Chinese authorities.
Read the article: "Where an Internet Joke Is Not Just a Joke." The article also calls to mind the successes of Czech cartoonists in using humor to satirize life in Communist Czechoslovakia. But this isn't just a problem in communist countries. Authoritarians everywhere seem to lack a sense of humor. It is often said that liberals have no sense of humor either, but that isn't accurate.
Sometimes a bit of humor makes the point clearer and also easier to swallow. Unless the humor descends into a mean sneer.
I was a bit taken aback today when a friend of the republican persuasion concluded that I have been too hard on republicans lately. I admit I've been paying attention to the republican debates and find it hard to say anything positive, especially about their economic views. Or their foreign policy views either, for that matter. Still, I don't want to descend into invective. If I oppose a particular policy, I have reasons. Problem is, the reasons may seem a bit Wonky. And I don't for a minute believe that every republican swallows every line put out by the candidates.
I have mentioned before that about sixty-five years ago I tried my hand at a bit of satire. I worked on an underground newspaper at Ole Miss that criticized the state's policy of segregation. That was a dangerous thing to do, but I thought it important enough to take the risk. I've never regretted it.
Doing satire well is a challenge. Sometimes the target of the satire believes you are on his side. Sometimes it just becomes mean. But in a repressive society it may be the only option. I'm out of practice and haven't tried it much lately.
All of this came to mind today when I read the account in the New York Times magazine section of the uses made of humor, satire, puns, visual jokes and other creative efforts by Chinese dissident cartoonists. They use the internet to pierce the efforts at thought control by Chinese authorities.
Read the article: "Where an Internet Joke Is Not Just a Joke." The article also calls to mind the successes of Czech cartoonists in using humor to satirize life in Communist Czechoslovakia. But this isn't just a problem in communist countries. Authoritarians everywhere seem to lack a sense of humor. It is often said that liberals have no sense of humor either, but that isn't accurate.
Saturday, October 29, 2011
Pride Of A Father For A Woman Officer
Received the latest copy of The Military Officer. Among the articles is a brief, eloquent essay on page 58 by Col. Charlie King, USA-Ret "On the Day My Daughter Became an Officer."
The essay makes clear what it means to take the oath to "discharge well and faithfully the duties of the office which I am about to enter." As Col. King explains, it means far more than following orders.
It's worth reading and contemplating.
The essay makes clear what it means to take the oath to "discharge well and faithfully the duties of the office which I am about to enter." As Col. King explains, it means far more than following orders.
It's worth reading and contemplating.
How 'Bout That Herman Cain?
Many political analysts have been puzzled by the Herman Cain phenomenon. One of the most puzzled has been the statistical analyst Nate Silver on his blog, fivethirtyeight. In the end, Silver concludes that Cain is a statistical outlier and he (Nate) has no idea how to make a prediction.
Not so with the blogger Amanda Marcotte at the blog pandagon.net. Here is what she has to say:
"Herman Cain's temporary surge in popularity baffles much of the press, but it honestly doesn't surprise me that much. There's always been a strain of conservatives---the ones who say, "I'm really more libertarian"---who missed out on the 60s and so want to reimagine themselves as dangerous rebels who are out to get The Man, except in this case The Man is ordinary working people who are oppressing the beleagured wealthy class. You don't know downtrodden until The Man, in his greedy grasping for health care and a humble pension, makes you downgrade to a smaller yacht and reduce your summer house options to a mere two or three. Luckily, the downtrodden rich have "libertarians" out there who imagine they're being radical and subversive by calling for regressive tax structures. These folks are Cain's base. Who else do you think is buying all those stupid Harleys?"
That offers a whole new perspective on lawyer and doctor bikers.
On second read, I have to admit that there is a sneering tone to Amanda's observations which I have decried elsewhere. So while I am personally more comfortable with Nate Silver's cerebral style, I couldn't resist Amanda's more visceral take. So sue me.
Not so with the blogger Amanda Marcotte at the blog pandagon.net. Here is what she has to say:
"Herman Cain's temporary surge in popularity baffles much of the press, but it honestly doesn't surprise me that much. There's always been a strain of conservatives---the ones who say, "I'm really more libertarian"---who missed out on the 60s and so want to reimagine themselves as dangerous rebels who are out to get The Man, except in this case The Man is ordinary working people who are oppressing the beleagured wealthy class. You don't know downtrodden until The Man, in his greedy grasping for health care and a humble pension, makes you downgrade to a smaller yacht and reduce your summer house options to a mere two or three. Luckily, the downtrodden rich have "libertarians" out there who imagine they're being radical and subversive by calling for regressive tax structures. These folks are Cain's base. Who else do you think is buying all those stupid Harleys?"
That offers a whole new perspective on lawyer and doctor bikers.
On second read, I have to admit that there is a sneering tone to Amanda's observations which I have decried elsewhere. So while I am personally more comfortable with Nate Silver's cerebral style, I couldn't resist Amanda's more visceral take. So sue me.
Warren Buffett Hoax
I just received for the umpteenth time an internet hoax (in this case attributed to Warren Buffet) purporting to forward an e-mail about a proposed 28th amendment. The amendment, it is claimed, would "fix" congress.
One of the things I have learned over the years when someone forwards a report alleging nefarious actions by public officials that are so bad they are hard to believe, is that they are probably not true. That is the case with this one.
It is a good idea to check with various sites that investigate possible internet hoaxes, such as snopes.com. In this case, here is a link to snopes.com's discussion of this particular item: http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/28thamendment.asp.
Snopes.com rates the e-mail as "mostly false." I rate it lower than that. It appears to be a concerted effort to discredit the entire U.S. Congress and to promote some really bad ideas on the basis of false information. By the way, I am fairly certain that Warren Buffet had nothing to do with the e-mails, though his idea about deficits is also a really bad idea. How does he propose to deal with emergencies such as wars and depressions?
No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened
One of the things I have learned over the years when someone forwards a report alleging nefarious actions by public officials that are so bad they are hard to believe, is that they are probably not true. That is the case with this one.
It is a good idea to check with various sites that investigate possible internet hoaxes, such as snopes.com. In this case, here is a link to snopes.com's discussion of this particular item: http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/28thamendment.asp.
Snopes.com rates the e-mail as "mostly false." I rate it lower than that. It appears to be a concerted effort to discredit the entire U.S. Congress and to promote some really bad ideas on the basis of false information. By the way, I am fairly certain that Warren Buffet had nothing to do with the e-mails, though his idea about deficits is also a really bad idea. How does he propose to deal with emergencies such as wars and depressions?
I will insert my comments after each paragraph:
Sent: Sat, Oct 22, 2011 6:42 pm
Subject: Fwd: Warren Buffett's proposal
Warren Buffett
in a recent interview with CNBC, offers one of the best quotes about
the debt ceiling:
"I could end the deficit in 5 minutes," he told CNBC. "You just pass a
law that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% of GDP,
all sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election
That's a really bad idea. What do we do in an emergency? Like a War? Like a depression? There are times when a deficit is really good. There are times when a surplus would really be good.
The 26th amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took
only 3 months & 8 days to be ratified! Why? Simple! The people demanded
it.
That was in 1971...before computers, e-mail, cell phones, etc.
Of the 27 amendments to the Constitution, seven (7) took 1 year or less
to become the law of the land...all because of public pressure.
Warren Buffet is asking each addressee to forward this email to a
minimum of twenty people on their address list; in turn ask each of
those to do likewise.
I doubt that.
In three days, most people in The United States of America will have
the message. This is one idea that really should be passed around.
Congressional Reform Act of 2011
No such act has been introduced.
1. No Tenure / No Pension.
A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay
when they are out of office.
Members of Congress have no tenure now. Their pensions result from a contributory retirement plan just like that of other federal employees.We even have term limits. They are called elections.
2. Congress (past, present &future) participates in Social Security.
All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social
Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social
Security system, and Congress participates with the American people. It
may not be used for any other purpose.
Members of Congress have participated in the Social Security program since 1984.
3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all
Americans do.
They do.
4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional
pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.
See Amendment 27:
No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened
5. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in
the same health care system as the American people.
Members of Congress have the same health care system as is provided to all other federal employees.
6. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American
people.
There is only one provision in the Constitution relating to this: [Members of the House and Senate] "shall in all Cases, except Treason,
Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their
Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and
returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they
shall not be questioned in any other Place." This protects the people's representatives from harassment by law enforcement officials of the executive branch, especially of a different party.
7. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective
1/1/12.
What contracts? Hard to make sense of this.
The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen.
Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in
Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned
citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then go home
and back to work.
If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only
take three days for most people (in the U.S.) to receive the message.
Maybe it is time.
THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS!!!!!
If you agree with the above, pass it on. If not, just delete. You are
one of my 20+.. Please keep it going.
Please don't.
It would be foolish of anyone to claim there are no problems with the Congress. There are. Mostly they are problems with the Senate, which was the least representative legislative body in the western world (except for the House of Lords) to begin with. Current procedures on cloture make it worse. That needs to be changed. But changes like that need to be handled with care.
It Isn't Greece - It's the Euro
Strong concerns yesterday about the European debt package adopted last Wednesday/Thursday by the EC were expressed Friday by both economists and investors. Economist Kash Mansori reported the results of Friday's auction of Italian bonds.
I have cruised the internet this morning, reading blogs of respected economists, and haven't found a single one who is confident that the rescue plan will work. It's no longer about Greece - it's about Italy and Spain and more importantly, about the survival of the Euro project itself. It would be more reassuring if the European Central Bank seemed committed to doing everything necessary. No such signals have been received.
What should the message be? How about: "It's the Euro, stupid!"
I have cruised the internet this morning, reading blogs of respected economists, and haven't found a single one who is confident that the rescue plan will work. It's no longer about Greece - it's about Italy and Spain and more importantly, about the survival of the Euro project itself. It would be more reassuring if the European Central Bank seemed committed to doing everything necessary. No such signals have been received.
What should the message be? How about: "It's the Euro, stupid!"
Friday, October 28, 2011
Keep Your Eye On The Ball
In case you joined the parade of optimists thrilled by yesterday's step back from the brink by European banks, here's one of today's posts by Paul Krugman:
European
leaders reach an agreement; markets are enthusiastic. Then reality sets
in. The agreement is at best inadequate, and possibly makes no sense at all. Spreads stay high, and maybe even start widening again.
Another day in the life.
Here We Go Again
Another day in the life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
