Time's up, the people lose

Apparently the administration is adding a partial retention of the estate tax moratorium to its offer to the Republicans.  Honestly, it's hard for me to see any good coming of this- we saw last year that the S/P will punish the government every time it doesn't cut Medicare ad Medicaid, to say nothing of attempting to fund Social Security.  (S/P said its credit downgrade was in response to what it viewed as insufficient cuts to health and welfare programs), meanwhile, the Republicans are in lockstep as ever, blocking any tax increase targeted by income, and holding down deduction adjustments to those most aimed at workers.  No surprise there, and the administration has already pledged 152 billion in unrelated Social Security cuts in exchange for...  Keeping the estate tax dead?  Seriously, whose side are the Democrats on?  I'm glad to see Harkin standing up, but without support from a White House that has betrayed its Democratic base at every opportunity, or a Scrooge-like change of heart from the House GOP I can't see anything good happening.  Social Security is going to be weakened, and it remains to be seen just what damage will be done to seniors, workers, and families who rely on Medicare or Medicaid, but said damage will be horrible.  Furthermore, the estate tax- a vital source of revenue for any government dating back to Henry II and before, and furthermore the best way to prevent concentration of wealth of the kind we've seen over the past two decades- will be kept dormant.

The entirety of the Republican Party, and a sizable contingent of the Democratic Party are completely dedicated to keeping things as they are for wealthy Capitalists, and philosophically committed to destroying the few social programs in existence.  The president has appeased this group at every opportunity, but the structure of our republic does make it far easier for a minority to blackmail a majority than for a majority to govern the country, so the blame isn't all his.  How do you negotiate with an enemy who has the ability to prevent you from doing anything to lead the country you were elected to govern, is committed to its goals, and tolerates no dissent?  The president seems to think the answer is by giving them everything they want, discreetly or otherwise.  The problem is- he's been doing that for four years now.  I sure don't see any payoff.  What little he's accomplished has either been with the Democratic House, or with Executive Order.  The Republicans (and certain Democrats) are committed to his personal downfall, and the continuation of the rule of the American aristocracy.  If he had realized this from the beginning, he may have been a great president.  Now, he is left pleading lamely with the Republicans not to follow the demands of their base.

This would be a time to say that the middle way is none at all, but that's actually not appropriate, since only one side has taken the middle path, so really, the middle way is non-existent would be better.  How can Democrats expect Republicans to respect progressive, communitarian values at the negotiating table if not in belief when their own president discards those values at every opportunity?

Solidarität
Genosse Graham

advantages of a mixed-member legislature

Well, one of winter break's many advantages is time to write.  I thought I'd take a moment to be weird and talk about how awesome a mixed-member proportional legislature is- this is the system used to determine representation in the German Bundestag.  Generally, it unfolds as follows-
some the legislature's members are chosen through first-past the post district plurality voting, as all are in the U.S. and U.K.  While this has many problems- i.e., it is winner-take all and discourages all but the most mainstream of opinions from being voiced- it does have the compelling advantage of ensuring that every citizen has an elected official personally answerable to their district's voters, ensuring a source of support for dealing with problems relating to government, on everything from pension checks to federal grants.  But the majority- here's where it gets interesting- are chosen by party.
     Each citizen gets two votes for the Bundestag- one for their own representative, and one for a party at the federal level.  The parliamentary seats are assigned on a proportional basis deriving from these votes.  Each party publishes a list of nominees in preferential order, and they fill out their share of the legislature accordingly.  Candidates who win districts outright are bumped to the top of their party's list.  Should a party win more districts than it is entitled to, more seats are added.  At present, I believe the threshold for representation is 5% of the national vote.  This ensures that moderate-to minor sized parties also get representation, and gives national attention to multiple viewpoints.  At present, there are five parties in the Bundestag, and two others are near the threshold for representation.  Now, more parties is not necessarily good- see Israel for a compelling indictment of extremely multi-party parliaments, with some forty parties represented in the Knesset, but I think it would be a good idea here- here is my estimation of what would be best here-

Republican Party- the Republican Party operates as a coalition between business interests/libertarians, hard-core war hawks and religious/racist fundamentalists, most of whom agree on basic issues, but have differing priorities when it comes to implementation.  While the Republican Party is masterful at delivering national support for all these disparate groups, there is some tension at times- the Christians involved in the Dominionist movement have been working to bridge this gap.  And for all those libertarians I know who claim that their brand of anarchy has nothing to do with religious hatred or mistrust of minorities, a MMP system would give them the chance to act as secular champions of feudalism, rather than as appendages of religious or (as they like to pretend) corporate authority.

Democratic Party- Democrats generally seem more compatibly aligned in term of goals, but far less compatible in terms of magnitude.  I think it's fair to say that aside from blue dog dinos, most supporters of the Democratic Party are at least somewhat in favor of regulation of business interests, a healthy welfare state, equal rights under the law regardless of identity, a less confrontational foreign policy, and some environmental protection.  There are some, like myself, who feel that class conflict is a fundamental part of American life and are therefore Socialists, some, like the president, who compromise on most of these basic goals for short term expediency, and many who are somewhere between those two avenues.  All these basic goals have their particular champions, but the potential for schism is largely along lines of intensity rather than overall goal.  And this is not necessarily bad- Germany has both a Social Democrat and a Democratic Socialist party.  Each has a share of the Bundestag, and the SPD is actually the default strongest opposition party, while the Left is largely successful in the ehmalige DDR, and parts of Bayern, but maintains firm adherence to neo-Socialist philosophy, providing a sort of moral voice to German progressives.  The Greens are quite successful too, and have been in government as many times as opposition over the past 20 years or so, to which I largely attribute Germany's world leadership in solar and wind power.  Again, the thing to remember is that this actually works.

Right now, the government is a coalition between the Christian Democrats (Conservatives), Free Democrats (Pro-business opportunists with very few principles other than staying in government at all costs, being sidekick to the Christians, and cutting foreign aid budgets and women's shelters with gusto), with the SPD, Grünen, and Linke in opposition.  The fascist NPD and freedom of information Pirate Party are both strong enough at the local level that they may soon win seats as well.

Here's an example of how things go there.  The City of Lübeck, with a city council coalition between SPD, Linke, and Grünen, has recently had its administration dissolved over an issue of cuts- the city's budget repair plan (and I use that term with full knowledge of its significance to my fellow Wisconsinites) mandated a certain level of cutbacks in the social welfare programs that make Europe great.  (Lübeck is a museum capital of the world).  The local government, under the left-centrist SPd, specifically targeted women's shelters for the cuts.  The Left and Greens, in a fine display of German chivalry, stood up to them, and left the government, joining the opposition, so the bill can't go through- the SPD then tried to form a coalition with the Christians, like they've done in Saarland, but the election will likely straighten this out.  Each party has declared its position, responsibly letting the voters know its priority, and now the electorate can make an informed choice, rather than wondering which faction of the victorious party will dominate decision-making.

Another example is in the debate over Aids-treatment funding.  The federal government, led by the Free Democratic Development Minister, is pushing through massive cuts to foreign aid in general and HIV/Aids programs in particular just as a serious dent is being made in new infection rates.  In America, this would play out as the GOP calling for cuts, and the Dems debating, then finally saying "ok" and demolishing lifesaving programs.  In Germany, the SPD seems undecided what to do- but not the Greens and the Left!  They're calling for an expansion of foreign aid, paid for (along with most other budget needs) by implementing a common-sense regulation of a financial transactions tax.

The multi-party parliamentary system ensures that politicians are able to show spine on issues of importance to their voters, and that the abomination of divided government never slows up the functioning of the state for long.  It also enables voters to make more informed decisions as to their choice of candidate and party, and allows a larger number of perspectives to be considered.  Now, this is constitutionally impossible for now, but I earnestly believe this would be a better system- perhaps a state should experiment with redesigning its legislature elections- Nebraska has already done so with a switch to a unicameral legislature in 1934- this experiment has proven a success, and stands to this day.  What we need is a small state willing to experiment- for the first time in American history, political outliers would know their votes would have significance, and we would arrive at a legislature that is more democratic.  (definitely small d, possibly big D)

Now, the question of reconciling this democratization of a legislature with an independent executive...  That's a problem, but I still would love to see this tried on the state or city level somewhere.

Solidarität, mein Genossen und Genossinnen
Graham

Voter suppression in Wisconsin

First of all, it has come to my attention that we have a foreign audience, with a reader in the U.K., 2 in France, and four pageviews from the Bundesrepublik Deutschland- Wilkommen, mein Kameraden!  Bitte, erzählen mir, was sie denken über die Frühling Wahlkampf!  Ich muss meine ND mehr oft lesen, aber ich hoffe das Merkel wird verloren.  Linke-Grünen, ich hoffe!

Now that I'm through butchering the language of my forefathers, on to business.  This past election cycle, (as some of you may know) I tried to vote for Rocky Anderson for president.  I had to write him in on the ballot, which is admissible and I had submitted the full slate of electors necessary for this vote to be counted.  A friend of mine did likewise, indeed we both ran for elector on the Justice Party ticket- he at large, I for the second district.  Having labored over my ballot to ensure my (admittedly atrocious) handwriting did not preclude the counting of my vote, I was fairly certain I had met all the necessary qualifications to make sure my vote got counted.  December first rolled around, and I combed through the returns, only to find that no votes for Rocky had been counted in the 16th ward of Beloit, where my friend Sam and I voted.  Irate correspondence with the GAB and Beloit City clerk got me the list of all write-in votes.  Aside from the depressing fact that the fictional (if awesome) wookiee, Chewbacca matched our tally, I learned several unsettling things.

My vote seems to have been counted at the local level, as one vote was recorded for Anderson Rodriguez.  this is presumably mine, as Sam neglected to write-in Rodriguez, leaving the VP slot blank).  This half-counted vote may have been one of the three listed "scattering"-i.e., insignificant votes in the returns, but it should not have been, by the GAB's own admission.

The GAB says a mistake was made, and my vote should have been listed for Anderson.  Instead, the results show an inflated total for the "scattering" column, and omit Anderson's votes.

Vote counting is done erratically- 112 votes for Anderson were counted statewide, yet mine was not.  Clearly, we met the requirements, but someone in Rock County just decided my vote wasn't worth listing.

Sam's vote has entirely disappeared.  Having seen all write-in votes cast in our ward, there was one vote for Anderson-Rodriguez (presumably mine), but none for just Anderson.  As many other votes were cast for legally unqualified candidates with no VP slot, this becomes really troubling.  Votes for Chewbacca, Ron Paul, and Palpatine were listed on the write-in tally sheet alongside my vote for Anderson-Rodriguez, but no vote for just Anderson was present.  Where is Sam's vote?

I have been in contact with the GAB- they acknowledge a mistake was made, and say they'll make a note of it, but can't do anything to record my vote accurately, much less tell me what happened to Sam's ballot.

If anyone would like, I'll post the text of our email conversations here, to reveal just how little is done about improperly counted ballots.

The excuse I've been given again and again is that this isn't likely to change the outcome of the election and is therefore a waste of time.  I disagree- I know Anderson didn't win a single state or electoral vote.  This isn't about winning, this is about exercising my right to protest- if not on our ballots, where may we speak freely?  I felt very strongly that I could not vote for either pro-war, anti-worker, anti-woman, anti-climate, pro-gun, pro-austerity Capitalist candidate, but I also felt that I should vote for a competent administrator, rather than merely a doctor or dentist who shares my beliefs.  I found my guy, did the groundwork, made sure that votes for my candidate would be counted, ran for electoral college in support of him, and finally voted, or so I thought.  Some clerk in Rock County decided to correct my ballot, lowering the total for Anderson statewide, and, more significantly, destroying my rationally decided protest.  And then there's Sam's vote.

Forget president- if you want to rule the world, just make sure you're the one counting the votes.  This admittedly offensive squelching of my rights to free speech and voting is relatively innocuous, but this, and much worse happens in elections where it does make a difference.  If I, a relatively well-off, white student with the time on my hands to at least try to figure out if my vote was counted can be disenfranchised, just think what the suppressors can do to poor, minority voters!  As it stands, nearly twenty percent of black votes are retroactively invalidated in Florida, and just last year Waukesha county produced 15 thousand miracle ballots for Prosser two days after the election!  Voter suppression is rampant, and has been systematically deployed to shift election results to the right.  By some accident, they decided to go after our votes too- we didn't fit the profile of their usual demographic targets beyond being students, and our votes were only of value in the sense that they would let us hold our heads high with the knowledge that WE VOTED FOR AN ALTERNATIVE to war, greed, recklessness, and indifference.  They have taken that away from us with seemingly no reason, or maybe not even intention.  It remains to be seen how much they've taken away from others.

This may have been a accident, but that leaves us with the question of why does the GAB refuse to fix it, and as I've asked before- what of Sam's vote?  Where did it go, and who sent it there?

I've contacted MSNBC and the ACLU.  I further intend to speak with my state rep upon returning to Beloit, but I really don't think I'll get any answers.  So much for my attempt to vote- guess I'm another apathetic, young, non-voter through the action of some clerk's assistant, not any action or inaction of my own.  I'll keep on voting, but I bet I'm on a caging list now for daring to ask.  Probably won't work.  I'll see what I can find out by next election.

In dejected Solidarität
Genosse Graham

Climate sustainability- what our nation must (and therefore will not) do

Now as we enter a year dominated by concerns for the appeasement of the Capitalist rulers, environmental policy seems poised for a massive rollback, or failure, depending on one’s point of view.   Under the present administration, oil extraction has reached new peaks, and unsafe new mining techniques poison dozens of communities in a pyrrhic quest for „clean burning“ Natural Gas.  We are entering a December that behaves like September, and erratic rainstorms follow an unseasonably severe hurricane, with no glimpse of the redeeming snow.

Global warming is ravaging our planet, permitted to run rampant by human excess, and we are doing precious little to address it.  We are going to lose a LOT of land over the next few decades, and the land we don’t lose will be blighted with chronic drought and wildfires, making the maintenance of adequate food supplies increasingly expensive- strengthening the corporations which own the very genomes of our crops- and driving many species to extinction.  While it is too late to prevent this, we still need to act quickly to reduce the damage.  to that end, I state my support of the following.  (Yes, I know that numbers 5 and 6 are impossible at the moment).

1.          Prohibition of new coal-fired power plants- we need to streamline our existing power grid to minimize power consumption, not generate more power.  The 4 billion of stimulus money towards a smart grid is a good beginning, but merely that, a beginning.  Sadly, this is one of only two environmentally meaningful actions taken by the administration in the last 4 years.

2.           Ban fracking- natural gas burns cleaner that coal or oil, but its extraction from rock reservoirs at present necessitates the injection of noxious chemicals into freshwater reservoirs, massive venting of methane, which is worse than any amount of CO2, and the fracking process seems to correlate with increased earthquakes.  Stop it, with EPA regulation if nothing else.

3.          Restore public transit- General Motors bought up and destroyed most of the nation’s streetcar systems in the early twentieth century.  This public transit system needs restoration.  Intercity rail is important, and the construction of such a system in California ia great, but what we need even more dearly is a convenient alternative to commuting by car- my hometown of St. Louis has the metro, which runs in a very limited fork, rather than a complete circuit of the metropolitan area.  Every major city needs a massive rail system like that in D.C., to better enable and encourage workers to make environmentally conscious choices.  that said, an inter-city rail project between St. Louis and Beloit would be pretty cool for me.

4.         Improve automobile mileage- some people ar ejust not going to be willing or able to use public transit, especially in more rural areas, but also for certain occasions.  The administration has introduced new mileage standards, to its credit, but they will not take full effect until 2020, barring Republican repeal of the policy, and even then will only determine new vehicle standards.  What we need is a way to get more fuel-efficient cars onto the market at affordable rates.  I confess to being VERY jealous of the Indian state car company Tata’s Nano- this is a two-door hatchback, on the Indian market for the equivalent of 2,500 dollars, which seats four, can maintain speeds of approximately sixty miles an hour, and gets 55 miles per gallon.  Assuming significantly higher prices, reflecting our labor, environmental, and safety standards does put something of a damper on it, but I think the idea is sound in principle.  The Department of Energy invites bids to develop a four-seater car with efficiency of at least 60 miles per gallon, and possessed of relative safety.  The winner would be subsidized by the government with the goal of reducing automobile inefficiency with greater haste than waiting for gas guzzlers to die natural deaths.  If we could put an affordable, efficient car on the market for between 5 and 10 thousand dollars, possibly with a generous subsidy, we could really reduce our impact even without making the (needed) changes in lifestyle.

5.         Nationalize, nationalize, nationalize!  I’m not saying the government manages things perfectly, but taking away the profit motive for maximum consumption is practically a necessity to any realistic address of the problem.  We need to build wind farms asap, install solar panels on every roof, and drill, baby drill-for geothermal climate control systems, not fossil fuels!  This is hard to do with the upfront cost- tax credits are a good idea, but to do this on a large enough scale (especially the macro-scale developments like Windfarms) we need centralized authority, and planned economic structure. 

6.         Centrally planned economy- this is hard to pull off, but if we could make a conscious leap from promoting maximum consumption towards providing adequacy for all, we could really reduce our impact.  Psychologically, I think this would also have a beneficial outcome for workers- as it is, people do whatever job the capitalists are willing to pay them for, beacuse it makes the corporations more money.  Under a planned system, labor would be treated as the single most valuable asset, and given meaningful tasks, because to do otherwise is to waste finite human resources.  All my time in the pharmacy, I knew my every act was, in the final sense, coordinated to bring profit to the drug companies.  Seeing people clean out savings accounts for one months supply of pills, the walking sick unable to afford profit-motivated medicine, and facing the shame of those unable to care for their children’s health left me with quite a feling of futility- what if every worker had the satisfaction of knowing that their job has been expressly calculated to be of service to the community, not the capitalist overlords?

7.         Tax carbon- even many Republicans (albeit those out of office) support this.  A tax of a few dollars per tonne of carbon burned will singlehandedly make going green the most profitable outcome.  As we’ve seen with the destruction of our infrastructure and the sabotage of the electric car, our corporate sector is very adept at changing the habits and culture of the country when its profits are on the line.  This tax can go towards funding new green installations, constructed by public workers, ameeliorating environmental damage, and paying down the deficit incurred by years of environmental and economic unsustainability.  Basically, this is Cap-and-Trade without the bugs or loopholes, but as the administration sold out even on cap-and-trade, it seems unlikely.

8.       Reforestation- we’re running out of the time window in which trees are net reducers of carbon emissions- we need to exploit this simplest of tools as much as possible.  China in particular has been a real leader here.

9.         Follow Europe’s lead- last summer, on good days, Germany got half its power from solar banks alone!  The largest sustainable western economy has gone VERY green indeed, and is still thriving, despite Merkel’s conservatism!  The solutions practiced are incentivizing sustainable behavior, taxing unsustainable behavior, decent public transit, stringent mileage (kilometerage?) standards, and building lots and lots of wind farms.  It CAN be done. 
  Solidarität, mein Genossen und Genossinnen

farewell to my Saint George

Last month, I lost my hero, George McGovern.  I've been trying to write a suitable eulogy for the past few weeks, and I just can't do it justice.  Lo and behold, we were assigned to write a poem submission about a significant historical figure for Creative English, and mine turned out fairly well (if you're a history geek, that is).  It's the best I've managed to come up with since his death, so I thought I ought to post it here in absence of anything else.  Sorry for the delay.

1972

The choice of the young to lead us

In so strange a time, which is now reborn                     

In troubles, if not in champions

For who since has ever compared, or even shone?

Whoever since has called us home?

Truly our first candidate in so many ways                                                                        

 To think Gays are people                                                                                                                            That women deserve freedom

The first to see the spirit of the land and its nature

The first and last to rebuff our blood bill of needless wars and aggression

I hope you died with as little fear as you lived

What was it about that year?  So many      

 Whom I’ve cheered and booed in the pages of musty tomes

After the peak of our glory, we have 72, the Siege Perilous from which you rose

Like our Galahad, to make the quest, to serve our great calling

And many others, great and terrible alike deserve memory, even as our great Launcelot lay dying in Texas! 

Humphrey- the Gawain, greatest of men yet blinded by vengeance

Wallace the scoundrel, vile as any Agravain, struck down ere it ended

Chisolm- another first, in her challenge, perhaps she most approached a Gareth

Muskie as our Bors- imperfect, but always the survivor- the strong knight

McCarthy, our Tristan, our dreamer, our poet

What higher praise can escape human lips, than that none of these compare with you?

But there were none to aid you and your troops

To be your herald and squire fell to an enigma

An enigma as flawed as myself, as sad as your daughter

I know the drill- the vain hiding of truth behind... nothing material

I know you did too, as you watched her die

And so it emerged- a danger, a lunatic

No more or less these things than me or mine

And you dropped him, to save the cause

And all that remained was our Bedivere, Shriver

Deserted and betrayed, you entered history

As my greatest hero, twenty years before my birth

But who since has dared?

Who has called us to our „higher planes“?

Who has acted with the just right, not the cautious restraint?

Who has shielded little children from bombers‘ reign?

Who has given voice to the workers?  The downtrodden?                                                               

 The oppressed, the poor, the farmers, the women? 

Who fought to feed the hungry? 

Who has sent food, not bombers?

Any who try to answer will see

Just how great this emptiness will be

There will never be another like my Saint George

Who called his country home, and then went down

                In the flames of defeat

And could it be any other way?  As if to answer, I hear you

                „From secrecy and deception in high places, Come Home, America

                From a conflict abroad which maims our ideals as well as our soldiers, Come Home,                                America

                From military spending so wasteful that it weakens our nation, Come Home America

From the entrenchment of special privilege and tax favoritism, from the waste of idle hands to the joy of useful labor, from the prejudice of race and sex, from the loneliness of the aging poor and the despair of the neglected sick, Come Home, America!

Come Home to the affirmation that we have the dream.

Come home to the conviction that we can move our country forward

Come home to the belief that we can seek a newer world

And let us be joyful in the homecoming...  This land was made for you and me...

...This is the time“

As you enter Avalon, I will always be waiting for your return.

For the time to arrive when we may once more try to bring our country home

Why I Voted Third Party

I originally published this in the Beloit Round Table, which will be distributed Monday November 5th.  You all get a sneak preview, you lucky people:).

Ok, Ok, I’ll confess to voting third party !

                Last Wednesday, I cast an early ballot with the write-in slot marked for Rocky Anderson of the Justice Party, and on Tuesday will stand for election to the Electoral College on his behalf.  My reasoning is simple- both major party candidates promise war, Austerity, capitalist health care, environmental degradation, and patriarchy.  I cannot morally support the president who ordered more airstrikes in one year than Bush did in eight, who overruled his own HHS Department to prevent young women from using birth control without their fathers‘ permission, failed to defend our precious natural resources and abandoned his central promise of civil rights protection in employment and housing to the Gay community.  Nor can I support a Republican.  I’m left with a choice between two war-mongering, theocratic climate change deniers who will continue to accelerate the evolving exploitation of the workers.  This is unacceptable to me, and last summer, I began seeking a qualified third-party candidate for whom to cast a sincere protest vote.

                Rocky Anderson is that candidate.  (At least in the opinions of myself, Ralph Nader and Barbara Ehrenreich among others).  While I respect Jill Stein and Stewart Alexander, neither of them have ever served in government.  Rocky was Mayor of Salt Lake City from 2000-2008, during which time he cut city greenhouse gas emissions by 31 percent, expanded contracts with unionized labor, grew the surplus by 60 percent by defunding failed anti-drug programs, and created the Family to Family program to assist immigrants who had lost family members to deportation.  He also fought for and passed a municipal version of the Gay Civil Rights law conveniently abandoned by the president.  That’s right- Gay Rights.  In Utah.  Successfully.  (He also passed an ordinance raising the minimum wage, but it was struck down by the court.)  Anderson has also served as a board member of Planned Parenthood of Utah and Mayors Against Illegal Guns, as well as president of the Utah ACLU, and founded the High Road for Human Rights group.  He’s ranked as one of the fifteen greenest politicians in America, as well as in the Human Rights Campaign’s “Top 10 Straight Advocates for LGBT Americans“.  Most impressively, Anderson organized the massive 2006 anti-war rallies which greeted President Bush’s visit with a call for peace.  Now, he’s running for president, on the ballot in 15 states, and with recognized write-in status in some 25 others, including Wisconsin. 

                Anderson is calling for single-payer healthcare, an immediate end to the undeclared drone war, restoration of Civil Liberties, Public Employment for the jobless,forgiveness of student debt, legalizing hemp, abolishing the regressive Payroll tax cap, and repealing the regressive Bush tax cuts. 

If supporting someone who not only calls for what I truly believe in, but has actually implemented many of those same principles in an accomplished government career is a protest vote, so be it.  I cast my first presidential vote for Rocky Anderson, and I’m proud to have done so.