All posts by Bob Morrison

Since retirement I've begun writing regular newspaper editorials and more recently created this blog. I'm a novice but have been a fascinated student of public policy for many years. I try to raise questions that have not yet been considered or to examine old questions from new perspectives. I have been 20+ years a Hoosier, 20+ years a Buckeye and now 20+ years a Tarheel, working as CEO of three different hospitals for 30 years, serving on numerous health care and non-profit Boards and government commissions along the way. Before working in health care I had brief experiences in manufacturing, sales, and services for the handicapped. With a BA in Psychology, an MBA, and a liberal arts background, I've become a bit of a futurist - taking the long view in considering public policy questions. I continue to enjoy discussion of alternative viewpoints and even change my mind now and then. I hope you will subscribe to the website and join the discussions!
All Posts, economy, environment, justice

IF WE VOTE WE WIN

“If we vote, we win.” I have heard that statement several times from earnest sounding first time candidates for public office. It is not as catchy, but I would modify their slogan to say, “If we are well informed and vote, we win.” We are fortunate to live in a republic where that is true, but it only matters if citizens accept the responsibility of selecting good candidates for public office.

Have you heard it said that, “We have the best government that money can buy.”? That is a cynical but too-often true statement. How did it happen? Perhaps we have become the best voters that money can buy – and if so, that is an even greater concern. Our national worship at the altar of profit and greed has led us to allow corporations and the extremely wealthy to influence us to an extent that threatens the existence of government by and for the people.

Our Supreme Court has ruled that corporations have all the same rights as individuals and that unlimited political spending is a “free speech” right, thereby allowing unlimited amounts of anonymous money to be used to influence our votes and our opinions on issues. There are even ways for big donors to claim charitable tax deductions for their contributions to organizations whose purpose is to convince us that we should vote the way the wealthy donors want us to vote. Their money hires marketing experts who seek ways to link their goals to our personal values and religious convictions – and it works. Special interests like petroleum companies, agribusiness, and the extremely wealthy fund immense advertising (propaganda) campaigns to convince us of their viewpoints without disclosing that they are behind the advertisements.

There are two things we can do to take control of our government. First, be as well informed as we can be. And second, ignore the advertising – all of it. An ad may say that it was sponsored by an organization with a high sounding name. Don’t trust it. It was probably paid for by someone with a lot of money who wants to influence you – someone who is working for their interest, not yours. To be well informed we should pay attention to our few legitimate, fact based news media and we should ask our questions directly of candidates in public forums. We should also trust our own instincts on issues. Most of the time, deep down, we know what is right. After we have done those things, then we will be ready to vote.

Will we trust ourselves or will we trust what the propaganda machines tell us? The propaganda machines of the Communist and Fascist powers of the 20th century demonstrated that if you say something often enough, many people will believe it despite any amount of evidence to the contrary. The propaganda machines operating in the USA today are run by special interest groups and corporations. They are very good at what they do and they often persuade both voters and government to ignore facts – the same facts that corporations take into account in their own planning. One example of this is the debate about climate change. Well documented scientific research tells us that human use of fossil fuels is contributing to climate change and that sea levels are rising as a result of that. Special interest groups, including fossil fuel companies, have run massive campaigns to convince us that it is not true. They have influenced our government so much that the State of North Carolina is removing information on the subject from their websites. The State also made it illegal for coastal planning agencies to project changes in sea level greater than the continuation of historical trends. That suits the needs of coastal real estate interests, supports re-building coastal roads that have been wiped out by storms and suits the needs of energy companies. But there is one business interest group that needs to evaluate the facts realistically. That is the flood insurance industry. Insurance companies are changing their risk zones and drastically raising insurance rates because they know that climate change and sea level rise are real.

How has government responded? Initially there was at least one intelligent response – to get the government out of the business of subsidizing flood insurance in high risk areas. But recently, after strong pressure from coastal real estate interests, the government has resumed heavily subsidizing insurance. The insurance companies and the real estate interests and the owners of coastal property will all do well and when the damage is done to their property, it will be repaired through insurance that was subsidized by taxpayers and by the national debt.

How can the same government that denies climate change and sea level rise also be the one that subsidizes higher insurance premiums made necessary by the projected rise of sea level? The answer is that the corporate propaganda machines have made it all seem very reasonable. That is just one example of big money influence on government policy. You can find many more if you look for them. We know it is wrong but we the voters elected the people who did it. There are other elections coming. If we are well informed and if we vote, we will win.

All Posts, budget, economy, medicaid, north carolina, poverty

MEDICAID AND MANAGEMENT INCOMPETENCE

“What are the most important decisions that you have made in your work?” Ask that question of executives who have been successful in leading complex organizations and a clear majority will give an answer that has to do with choosing the rest of the leadership team. That is a lesson which Governor Pat McCrory is learning in the school of hard knocks while North Carolina taxpayers fund his tuition bills.

Shortly after Dr. Aldona Wos was named Secretary of Health and Human Services for the state, I pointed out that her principal qualification appeared to be the success that she and her husband had in raising money for Governor McCrory’s and President George W. Bush’s election campaigns. In a column at the time, I described her as “…a physician who has not been involved full-time in health policy or medical practice for many years…President Bush rewarded Dr. Wos by appointing her as Ambassador to Estonia. Likewise, the Governor made her DHHS Secretary and she hired a young McCrory campaign staffer, Matthew McKillip, as the Chief Policy Officer of DHHS. At age 24, he has no previous health service education or experience but he has worked for a right wing think tank and now he is leading health policy development for the state.” She proceeded to select others for the DHHS team including Ricky Diaz, a McCrory campaign staffer hired as the top public information officer. He was forced to resign after lying to the press about violations of medical record confidentiality laws.

Wos picked Carol Steckel, another conservative ideologue but one with substantial experience in Louisiana, to re-organize the Medicaid program. Steckel resigned after only eight months. Dr. Laura Gerald resigned as the State Health Director as did Dr. Rebecca King, the state’s top dentist, citing differences with Wos and the administration. Wos and the Governor publicly misinterpreted the findings of the North Carolina Auditor to create the appearance of extraordinarily high administrative costs in the Medicaid program. They used that interpretation to support their goal of privatizing Medicaid. Protests by the auditor and health professionals later demonstrated that the state’s administrative costs are actually quite moderate.

Wos changed the application and enrollment procedures for Food Stamp assistance and her new process takes months for many low income families. It is so bad that the federal government has warned the state that funding for administrative costs will be withheld if improvement is not made promptly. She implemented a new computer system for making Medicaid payments to physicians and other health care providers despite credible warnings that it was not workable, resulting in payment slowdowns that have jeopardized the financial survival of health care providers (doctors, hospitals, therapists and others) who depend heavily on Medicaid.

She is promoting an idea for addressing our troubled state mental health system by merging several quasi-governmental regional agencies into a smaller number without addressing the underlying issues about how and by whom services are delivered to living, breathing patients. Thinking that this administrative re-shuffling will improve mental health services is a bit like preventing the sinking of the Titanic by rearranging its deck chairs. It may appear that something is being done but the ship is still headed for the bottom of the ocean.

The biggest problem in this case is not with Dr. Wos. The major problem is with a Governor who has “rewarded” (punished might be a more apt description) political allies by putting them in highly responsible leadership positions for which they are unprepared. In this case the Governor chose someone who ideologically agrees with him but lacks necessary experience then he offered encouragement as she put other unqualified people in key roles. More recently he has failed to take action as a series of high level staff resigned. The debilitation of DHHS began with the appointment of unqualified personnel and that has demoralized more capable members of the department’s team.

DHHS is by far the largest and most expensive department of state government – comparable in fact to the Titanic. A ship so large cannot turn on a dime and ours is clearly in peril. Unless the Governor acts soon, DHHS will take many thousands of mentally ill and low income North Carolinians down along with some of our health care providers. It remains unclear whether Governor McCrory and Secretary Wos will go down with the ship.

All Posts, economy, environment

ARE WE VICTIMS OF SUCCESS?

We human inhabitants of planet earth have a problem that we would rather not face or discuss. That problem is our astonishing rate of population growth. The human population of our world was estimated to be about 1,000 million in 1800. By 1900 our numbers had increased by 65% to 1,650 million. By 2000 it had increased to 5,973 million – roughly six times as many as in 1800. At expected rates of growth, we will be close to 9,000 million souls by 2050.

So far, we have been reasonably successful in adapting the way we live to accommodate more people. When there was conflict over rights to graze animals wherever we wanted, we invented the idea of private property rights so that we would know who had the right to use which land. When our cities reached a size which allowed vermin to transmit disease, we suffered the plague. Eventually we learned that by getting garbage and sewage out of the city, we could avoid the plague and many other health problems. Later on we learned how to share water with rules that regulate how much one person can take from a stream or well so that there will be water left for others to use. When rules were ineffective or inconvenient, warfare has sometimes been an alternative. Biblical history says that the tribes of Israel slaughtered the inhabitants of the land that they wanted and took it as a place to live. In a similar situation, Americans of European ancestry killed off the Native American population and forced the survivors to relocate to reservations. The competition for land and resources has sometimes been brutal but humans have thrived as a species through whatever means seemed necessary at the time.

Modern health care, agribusiness and industrial scale animal production have succeeded in extending our lives, feeding our burgeoning population and avoiding famine. They enabled the record-breaking population growth of the 20th and 21st centuries but added dangerous chemicals to our food and environment in the process. We ignore warnings about poor air quality and fish that are unsafe to eat. In some places (Beijing for example) the air is often unsafe to breathe and hard to see through. Global warming is creating sea level rise which will make some coastal population centers uninhabitable in the next century. New York, Miami, and New Orleans are endangered along with many coastal cities around the world. Mountain gorillas, tigers and elephants are among those who will not survive in the wild if we continue taking their land for human habitation. There are predictions that future wars are more likely to be fought over scarce clean water than oil.

While US states sue each other for allowing their businesses to create pollution which crosses into other states, advocates of economic development and job growth are winning legislative debates to allow hydraulic fracturing for natural gas and expanded use of coal without holding the energy companies responsible for correcting environmental damage that they cause. 21st century children born around the world will want modern, high tech lives requiring more jobs and more energy.

There is no one with the power or authority to restrict population growth. That is up to individuals. By all appearances, decisions about consumption of energy and other resources will be much the same. I don’t know who first said that, “When everyone is responsible, no one is responsible.” but that sentence sums up the situation in which we find ourselves. Individuals will decide to create more children and the population will continue to grow.

The idea of collective action to control population may seem as repugnant today as restrictions on water use seemed when they were first suggested. China’s “one child per family” law has been withdrawn. Ideas, such as higher taxes on anyone with more than two children or life-long tax reduction to anyone who undergoes voluntary sterilization are generally dismissed as “extremist” and no “moderate” alternatives are offered. Some of our religions (fundamentalist Islam and traditional Mormonism) teach procreation as a responsibility. The largest Christian denomination (Catholicism) teaches that artificial birth control is morally wrong. They fight against including birth control in foreign aid to poor nations with high birth rates and against including it in health care plans. They are so effective that one of our major political parties (Republican) backs those positions. The prospects for meaningful collective action seem dim.

With improving technology, we can probably continue growing our population for a few more generations before some science-fiction sounding combination of disease, famine and war imposes population control on a hotter planet with less land and bigger oceans. In the meantime we might do well to explore this lesson in humility. Modern humans as a species have existed for about 200,000 years. Dinosaurs lasted over 160,000,000 years. Now all of them are gone. There is little question that the Earth and life will survive. There is less certainty about humanity. No individual needs population control but humanity does. When everyone is responsible, no one is responsible. That leaves considerable doubt as to whether we can last as long as the dinosaurs did. Will humans be victims of our own success or will we evolve enough and care enough to leave a healthy planet for our descendants? We are all responsible.

All Posts, religion

CHRISTMAS THOUGHTS 2013

Before they learned to write their history, our ancestors began celebrating their most sacred ideas at the time of the year when their nights were dark and long and cold. Because they carried knowledge in their minds and faith in their hearts that the light would return with life and abundance, they could celebrate the darkest day with certainty of a better future. Here are some words to carry forward from our past.

 “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men. “ – An Angel

“The first peace, which is the most important, is that which comes within the souls of people when they realize their relationship, their oneness with the universe and all its powers, and when they realize that at the center of the universe dwells the Great Spirit, and that this center is really everywhere, it is within each of us.” – Black Elk, Oglala Sioux Medicine Man 

“At times our own light goes out and is rekindled by a spark from another person. Each of us has cause to think with deep gratitude of those who have lighted the flame within us.” – Albert Schweitzer 

“In the depth of winter, I finally learned that within me there lay an invincible summer.” – Albert Camus 

“What can you do to promote world peace? Go home and love your family.” – Mother Teresa 

“You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before men.” – Jesus 

Before this is published there are those among us who will have celebrated Christmas, Hanukah (Jewish festival of lights), Diwali (Hindu and eastern festival of lights), and Yule. A friend sent me a “Happy Kwanzaa” message on Facebook, and I was pleased to receive it. Hope is expressed in each of those traditions and in many others. 

How can we have such hope and faith in a world beset by cruelty and war? Can one believe in peace while living in a nation that owns more nuclear weapons and fights in more wars than any other? Can we have faith in the future while hunger and poverty live alongside wealth and gluttony? The spirit of Christmas responds that “yes, we can”.  

The lessons that we need are present in our history and our holy books – the ones that contain the wisdom of our ancestors. Those lessons live in the inspirational words of our own generations. Black Elk has reminded us of something we know: Peace can be discovered in the knowledge that each of us is part of one humanity and one universe. But at times the light of faith flickers, and we can experience inspiration from others, as Albert Schweitzer said. Like Camus, we can discover invincible summer in the depth of winter. 

Today, in a world filled with political confrontations and open hostility, how do we bridge the chasms that divide us? First, we must recognize that no one among our wise leaders has imposed “peace on earth and goodwill toward men”. In the name of their religion or of justice, some have tried to force their beliefs on others and the carnage lasts to the present day. Consider, for example, the Crusades as Muslims and Christians wreaked mayhem on each other with “God on their side”. No one is going to create peace on earth for us, but we can follow Mother Teresa’s advice, “Go home and love your family”. Perhaps it is true that children raised on love don’t start wars.  

We can set the example that Jesus encouraged by being the light of the world, the city on a hill. We can live the peace that we want for ourselves and our world. Doing that won’t make all the wars go away but we will have fewer of them and we can devote more of our resources to making our portions of humanity and time peaceful places of light and plenty. It is both a choice and a matter of faith. 

“You may say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one. I hope someday you’ll join us and the world will live as one.” – John Lennon

All Posts, budget, economy, justice, north carolina, poverty, public education

PUBLIC POLICIES AFFECT OUR INCOMES

Nine of the ten US States with the highest median household incomes voted for a liberal in the last presidential election. The only outlier among the high income states was Alaska. At the other end of the income scale, nine of the ten US States with the lowest median household incomes voted for a conservative. The only outlier was New Mexico. The same tendency is apparent when all states are considered. 80% of the states with household incomes above the US median voted for President Obama. 67% of states with incomes below the US median voted for Mr. Romney. For convenience I’ll go with the conventional names and call the more liberal states “blue” and the more conservative states “red”.

Reading down the list of states by income, it is clear that the leaders are blue states with moderate to liberal policies at the state level. In general they are the states which spend more on social safety net programs and public education. They also tend toward the moderate or liberal part of the spectrum on social issues like same sex marriage, abortion, and immigration reform.

Reading up from the bottom of the list of states by income, you will find red states that spend less on social safety net programs and public education. And they tend toward the conservative end of the spectrum on same sex marriage, abortion and immigration reform.

How can these patterns be explained and what can be learned from them? Here are some ideas. By focusing their resources on assuring good public education and access to health care for everyone, including those with low incomes, the blue states develop strong work forces that attract good paying jobs. Some will argue that many jobs have moved to the low-tax environments in the red states and there may be some truth in that. It should be noted that many businesses that talk about such relocations are not only seeking low taxes. They are seeking low wages. If there has been movement of jobs to red states, it appears to have perpetuated their low wage environment rather than improving it.

The relatively liberal social policies of the blue states seem open to more people regardless of sexual orientation or immigration status; and some people looking for such openness also have the economic and intellectual means to start businesses that create economic growth. They gravitate to places where their lifestyles and freedom are respected – bringing economic growth that benefits everyone. If my thinking is wrong, then how would one explain that blue state residents clearly have higher incomes?

It is our tradition to be a nation with regional cultural differences and that will certainly continue. And it has also been our tradition to learn from each other’s successes and failures. In 1789 North Carolina created the first State operated university. Other states saw how well the idea worked and copied it. Cincinnati created the first paid fire department in the US in 1853. The idea succeeded and was copied across the nation. Today hardly anyone thinks of public universities or fire departments as liberal or conservative ideas.   They are simply accepted as ideas that work well and that contribute to the success of everyone in the community.

It is time once again to look across state lines and see which public policies are producing the best results. Blue states are leading the nation in median income, educational attainment, and life expectancy. Red states are leading in poverty-related problems including divorce, adolescent pregnancy, and shorter life expectancy. Low funding of education and safety net programs are not producing good results. Restrictions on the personal freedoms to control one’s own body and to marry the person of one’s own choice do not contribute to the success of a state or its citizens.

It’s time to look carefully at what works and what doesn’t and then move ahead with public policies that enhance personal freedom and encourage success. With that attitude and all of our other advantages, North Carolina can become the economic envy of the nation. Two things are required if we are to achieve that. First, we must pay attention to the management and effectiveness of our public policies – stop tearing down public institutions and government and begin making them more creative and efficient. Second, we must study what works (whether a “liberal” or “conservative” idea) and adopt the public policies that lead to success.

There is no question about our ability or our resources. We can be as great as we choose to be. The important questions are about our willingness to abandon hard line ideologies in favor of doing the things that produce the results that we want. Those choices will be made by voters. Without the willingness to adopt successful public policies we can be thankful for our friends in Mississippi. They will assure that we don’t finish last.

All Posts, deficit, justice

BUILDING NATIONAL PRIDE

I am thankful for my nation and the opportunities that it provides. My pride however is in need of repair. After hearing similar sentiments from others, I have written some thoughts about how we might build pride and trust.

Nations succeed as long as the great majority of people willingly support their government. The truth of that can be seen across the span of history and it is visible today from undemocratic China to democratic socialist Scandinavian nations and capitalist democracies like those in North America and Western Europe. National and cultural pride contributed to the success of each of them. Another reason why people unite as a nation is to respond to a natural disaster or some other crisis or threat. This positive part of human nature can quickly become apparent when it is needed and it serves to make national trust and pride even stronger. Examples of these positive qualities abound in American history.

Those same positive qualities can be manipulated to unite people in vilifying and attacking others. In Napoleonic France, Nazi Germany, and the Japanese Empire of WWII nationalism and pride were turned toward dominance and exclusion of others. Nazis, for example, united most Germans by blaming Jews and communists for economic problems. Similar techniques have sometimes been used in the US to unite a political majority by vilifying ethnic and religious minorities. One of mankind’s great attributes, our desire to unite in times of crisis, can also divide us into warring clans that threaten our very survival. When the people of a nation mistrust and mistreat each other, national trust and pride are quickly eroded.

Once we define ‘other’ citizens within our nation as enemies, it is only one additional step to conclude that, “The end justifies the means.” Dishonesty becomes a way of getting people to support what a leader perceives to be “right”. Subterfuge and deception become acceptable means of defense against imagined and ambiguous and threats. Mistrust grows. The divisions within a nation become more sharply defined. Somewhere along the way, the goal shifts from building the nation to destroying the opposition. That seems to describe the USA today and it is rapidly eroding our pride and trust.

When President Kennedy proposed that we land on the moon by the end of the 1960’s the nation took up that challenge and succeeded ahead of schedule. We were proud and we trusted our government to manage the work. The same could be said of great successes such as Social Security, the Hoover Dam, and the Interstate Highway system. Today the sense of pride, optimism and confidence to do great things has waned; and instead our national energy is directed toward internal conflict.

Some steps toward building national pride would be to replace deception, partial truth, and manipulation of government processes that are the current norm with integrity, openness and equal application of laws and standards to all of us. Integrity requires much more than not telling lies. It requires intentionally communicating the whole truth; a task that is difficult when the subjects are laden with emotion. Integrity also requires listening to learn what we do not know and to understand the perspectives of others. In our discussions of social and political issues we must hold ourselves to those standards. Only then will we be able to hold our leaders to them too.

The list of reasons why people mistrust government seems unending. Elected leaders manipulated information to the extent that voters don’t know what or who to believe about Social Security, taxes, health care, bank bailouts, and climate change. They misled us into the Vietnam War and the second Iraq War; used the FBI to spy on political opponents; and deceived us about spying on both Americans and foreign governments. Because of these experiences, many Americans mistrust our government regardless of which party is in power. Misleading the public with statistics and facts that have been twisted to make a point is like pouring acid on our national pride. It destroys trust. No matter how strongly one believes his cause is right, the end does not justify the means.

In the USA that most of us want to believe in and support, laws and standards will be applied equally and fairly to all of us. But most priests who molested children did not go to jail or register as sex offenders. The FBI Director who illegally spied on union and civil rights leaders was not prosecuted. Demonstrators who went to the North Carolina Capitol to peacefully protest new voting rules and failure to expand Medicaid were arrested and jailed. Shortly thereafter, a North Carolina judge visited Washington DC to protest the closing of war memorials during the government shutdown. He physically removed barricades that blocked entrances (destruction of government property) and bragged about it. He was not arrested or disciplined in any way. That inequity damaged confidence and pride for other Americans.

We can and should build our national pride and confidence; beginning by expecting truth, integrity, and the same standards for all of us as we continue creating a more perfect union. Our pride does not arise from already being perfect. It comes from working together to make what is good in our nation even better. We can do that if we will.

All Posts, justice, north carolina, public education, religion

WHY NOT THE BEST EDUCATION?

My initial reaction to the recent performance of the Randolph County Board of Education was disbelief. They seem to want what is best for students and for the schools but how did people with good intentions make such a mess? There are, perhaps two underlying problems. One is that a majority of Board Members became so confident that they know what is good and right that they felt justified in imposing their personal values on students and faculty. The other is that a majority have become so complacent in accepting “how things are” that they are not attending to “how things could be”. There can be a happy ending to this story when the whole education team is working together toward a shared vision of excellence. First, here is a review of recent problems.

One Board Member defied the US Supreme Court, the Constitution and the advice of the Board’s legal counsel by offering sectarian prayer over the public address system prior to high school football games.  That created a distraction from the School System’s responsibilities rather than advancing the cause of excellence in education. It does matter that some fans don’t want to be forced to hear his prayer in order to see a football game at a public school. Perhaps with good intentions, he imposed his beliefs and values on everyone in attendance and put the School System in a very difficult position.

In a separate matter, one parent complained about a book (The Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison) on a suggested reading list given to her 12th grade son. The school system staff followed their established policy; inviting the parent to specify her concerns, then convening two teams of professional educators to reconsider the appropriateness of the book.   Both teams affirmed that the book should remain in school libraries and on the recommended reading list. It had been carefully selected for sound reasons.

The Board of Education voted to overrule its teachers, librarians and administrators by not only removing the book from the reading list but removing it from school libraries. It won the national book award and is considered an American classic by most scholars but board members explained imposing their views on students, professional educators, and the executive team by describing the book as “filth” and “…of no literary value…”.

The 12th graders who received the reading list would within a few months be deemed sufficiently mature to join the armed forces, go away to college, sign contracts and vote. Great literature can help them think through their own values before they are faced with the immediacy of important life questions. A majority of the Board of Education, much like their colleague who imposed his religious views on everyone attending football games, enforced their personal views of a book and thereby deprived students of an opportunity to think for themselves about American culture and literature.

The Board’s responsibility is to create an educational system which enables students to study, think, and come to their own conclusions. Instead, they appear to prefer indoctrinating students with their own beliefs and values. After local and international outcries over their action, the Board reversed themselves but offered minimal explanation and no apology to staff or students. Despite clear recommendations provided to the Board by the review teams, one Board member blamed the staff for not providing adequate advice. Why would English teachers and librarians want to work for a Board which does not trust them to choose books?

Robert Kennedy, paraphrasing George Bernard Shaw, said “There are those that look at things the way they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?” We need that attitude among our Board of Education. The Board’s role is to establish broad vision, strategies and policies; to select the executive leadership; and to support them in their work. The Board should distinguish their responsibilities from those of the staff by leading on issues such as, “What policies and governance practices are followed in nations that have the best educational outcomes?” “Which of those ideas would work well here?” “What resources are needed and how will we provide them?” “How will we prepare students for lifelong learning and coming to their own conclusions about the important issues of their lives?” “Why will the best teachers want to practice their profession in our school district?”

We should not be satisfied with what we have done in the past – not because it was bad; but because we need to do better.  Our target should be public education as good as the best in the world because that is what our children deserve and because anything less will eventually produce a second class nation.   Rather than school prayer or their opinions of individual books, we should hear from our Board of Education about their plan for excellence including educational strategies, projected human and financial resource requirements, recruitment, retention, nationally competitive salaries, facilities, a budget sufficient to provide classroom supplies (so teachers don’t have to purchase their own) and even the option of year-round school for students who are aiming for the stars. If the Boards and the public give our school systems the encouragement and support that they need and deserve, we will be thrilled with the great results that our students achieve.

All Posts, deficit, justice, poverty, religion

YES, WE HAVE NO MAGIC

Yes, we have no magic

“I can’t really criticize the Tea Party people, because I came into the White House pretty much on the same basis that they have become popular. That is dissatisfaction with the way things are going in Washington and disillusionment and discouragement about the government.” It may surprise many readers to learn that this quotation is from former President Jimmy Carter.

At the time when we elected President Carter, trust in government was very low. We had experienced the Watergate scandal which forced President Nixon to resign from office for spying on political rivals. His schemes included an “enemies list” of opponents to be targeted with IRS audits or malicious prosecutions.  His predecessor, President Johnson, made up stories about attacks on American forces in order to justify the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution that allowed him to start the Vietnam War.  We also learned that the FBI had been tapping the phones of civil rights leaders, including Dr. Martin Luther King. There was suspicion that President Kennedy’s assassination was part of some conspiracy. There were plenty of justifications for mistrust of government.

“I’ll never tell a lie. I’ll never make a misleading statement. I’ll never betray the confidence that any of you had in me. And I’ll never avoid a controversial issue.” Those were promises that President Carter made. And to the best of my knowledge, he kept them. He dealt with an energy crisis by urging us to become more energy efficient. He talked about national initiatives to develop wind and solar power. His fiscal policies were disciplined, leading us away from the deficit spending of the Vietnam era and toward a balanced budget. He championed zero based budgeting which meant that no government agency would get money next year just because they had it this year. He offered leadership toward building our nation at home and keeping us out of wars.

It seems that voters want to hear about painless solutions to national problems from candidates who have magical cures for whatever ails the nation. In the very next election, the voters chose easy money and the cheerful countenance of President Reagan. He created economic stimulus by cutting taxes without cutting spending, leading us along the path to our current massive deficits and debt. He wanted to overthrow the democratically elected Sandinista party government of Nicaragua but congress forbade that. President Reagan then secretly sold arms to Iran (which had been holding our citizens hostage) and used the off-the-books proceeds to finance Contra rebel insurrection in Nicaragua. We became accustomed to disclosures of covert actions that congress never authorized. Since then, we have fought two wars in Iraq and one in Afghanistan, all paid for with borrowed money and American blood. Many Americans suspect the Bush-Cheney administration of making up the evidence for the second Iraq war, just as President Johnson did for Vietnam.

We have recently learned (through illegal disclosures) that the FBI, NSA, and CIA are running immense espionage programs, some directed at our allies and American citizens. The principal government response is to try to prevent disclosure of information rather than to honestly examine the proper role of government. Big financial institutions are suspected of improper influence on elected officials and regulators who created the opportunity for the 2008 financial meltdown – and with good reason. Deregulation of campaign finance is allowing the very wealthy and the biggest businesses to pay for massive campaigns to influence voters, often drowning out the voices of citizens, science and reason and subverting the “one man, one vote” principle.

As in 1976, when President Carter was elected, the mistrust of government is palpable; and the people are divided between left-leaning and right-leaning ideologies. Here is a more recent quotation from President Carter, “I don’t want to tell President Obama how to make a speech. He’s a much better speech maker than I am. But I think always to tell the truth in a sometimes blatant way, even though it might be temporarily unpopular, is the best approach.” That may not be the best politics but it is the best public service.

My hope is that regardless of ideology we will elect candidates who insist on integrity. Even if we disagree with their conclusions, their statements should always be factually true and above reproach, never designed to mislead us. If that is to happen, the candidates will need the courage to make voters uncomfortable by telling us things that we do not want to hear. We will need to learn, for example, how our spending for health care and defense compares to other nations and then decide how much we are willing to spend. Whatever we spend, we will have to decide who is going to pay enough taxes to collect more than we spend, so that we can begin paying down our debt. It will be our responsibility as voters to turn down any smiling faces who tell us that they have magical ideological solutions to our problems. Perhaps we have learned by now that they don’t exist. President Carter jokingly also said, “I have often wanted to drown my troubles, but I can’t get my wife to go swimming.” Candidates who mislead us with smiles and magical ideologies will drown us all if we continue to swim with them.

All Posts, budget, deficit, economy, justice, poverty

INCOME INEQUALITY AND A POLITICAL DIVIDE

It is said that those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. We can learn a great deal from the strong historic correlation between political polarization and income inequality.

Income inequality peaked in the early 20th century when the top 1% of the population claimed about 20% of total income. Political polarization peaked around the same time as fiscally conservative Republicans and their presidential candidate, Herbert Hoover, carried the 1928 Presidential election. This was before the stock market crash but already there was rising dissatisfaction with income inequality. White southern farmers (Most blacks were barred from voting.) were pushing for increased federal regulation of banks, financial institutions and railroads that were thought to be profiting unfairly from the work of others. Organized labor gained traction among industrial workers who felt abused by their employers.

Conflict was widespread as workers banded together for higher wages and better working conditions while their employers arranged for police or private armed forces to attack strikers and organizers. In 1929, National Guard and local police intervened to end a textile mill strike in Gastonia NC, resulting in the shooting deaths of several strikers and a law enforcement officer. Bloodshed was more common in northern industrial centers.

Workers formed unions because their work was dangerous, provided no job security and they could not decently support families on what they earned. In 1912, a Socialist third party candidate garnered 6% of the popular vote for President. The “Farmer-Labor Party” gained fringe popularity along with socialist and communist movements. By 1930, the Depression was severe and FDR was elected President, subsequently passing his New Deal programs including federal economic stimulus, massive public works projects, Social Security, and strong regulation of banks. Thus began a painfully slow recovery which was not complete until the WWII effort brought full employment.

Today the share of national income enjoyed by the top 1% is again around 20% and political polarization is at its highest level since 1900. Conservatives have blamed unions for economic woes and more recently have succeeded in changing laws to make it harder for workers to organize; but labor activity is on the rise among low wage workers. Like their predecessors a century ago, they find it impossible to participate in modern society on their wages. Even among those who have jobs, hunger and homelessness are rising. Politicians respond that they would like to do something to help but they don’t have enough money. That response comes resoundingly from Republicans but also from Democrats.

Explanations of why there is not enough money ring hollow when the incomes of the top 1% continue to rise while the wages for labor stagnate or shrink. Teachers and many white collar workers are similarly affected. One factor contributing to the rapid growth of income among the wealthy while others see no increase is the more than 50% reduction in tax rates for the wealthy since their 20th century peak. Our budgets were balanced and our middle class grew to its largest size when taxes were higher. Poverty was shrinking; unemployment was low; and public education was a source of national pride.

Today, candidates from both major parties depend on the very wealthy for campaign contributions which they use to sell themselves to the general public. In 1982, the top .01% (one ten thousandth of the population) made 10% of all campaign contributions for federal elections. By 2012, they provided 40% of the contributions. Major corporations make sure that they have very wealthy people from both parties on their boards in hopes of sustaining strong influence on public policy no matter who wins an election. That is the same kind of influence which encouraged the Governor of North Carolina to send troops to break up the Gastonia strike.

Most Americans do not want a radical swing to the right or the left but they do desperately want an economy where hard work is rewarded with wages sufficient to support a family; including realistic opportunities for good education and upward mobility. We want to believe that any job worth doing is worthy of a living wage but our middle class is disappearing. We see employers back out of promised retirement plans and other benefits while using temporary employment arrangements to cut wages. People don’t join labor unions because they enjoy paying dues. They join because they believe they need protection from untrustworthy employers and because they perceive strength in unity.

We are again in a time when many adult workers cannot support a family and see little hope of upward mobility. In the early 1900s, desperate people tried desperate things. From their despair they built strong unions, New Deal jobs programs, and tax policies of the 1930s – 1950s. Their actions decreased unemployment and poverty and built our middle class. Once again, we are in a time when desperation will bring change. I wonder, this time will we read the writing on the wall before our backs are up against it?

Most data for this column is from the article “Why hasn’t democracy slowed rising inequality?” Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 27, Number 3—Summer 2013. It is available free on line or I will email it to readers on request.

All Posts, budget, economy, justice, medicaid, north carolina, poverty

ESSE QUAM VIDERI

The Latin phrase that heads this column is the North Carolina state motto, adopted from the Roman philosopher and political theorist Cicero. It means “To be rather than to seem”. It is a fine motto; inspiring integrity and openness in government. In The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli taught the reverse saying, “It is not essential, then, that a Prince should have all the good qualities which I have enumerated above, but it is most essential that he should seem to have them.” Machiavelli was coaching a prince who would soon become a ruler and he wanted his pupil to understand that it is not necessary or even advisable to always behave with integrity. All that is necessary is to SEEM trustworthy.

Proponents of North Carolina’s voter ID law understood Machiavelli’s lesson well. They would have us believe that the purpose of the law is to protect the value of every citizen’s vote by eliminating voter fraud; but they never produced evidence that fraud has affected the outcome of a North Carolina election (or that fraud exits). If they had proof, they would publish it. The leaders of the Voter ID movement only need for fraud to SEEM real so they can SEEM to be protecting the rights of voters while they selectively reduce the rights of targeted groups.

Their decisions regarding which IDs are acceptable for voting discriminate against minorities, the poor and the young. A state issued driver’s license was accepted but a state issued college ID was not. A federal military ID is ok but a Food Stamp ID is not – selectively targeting the poor and the young. The photo ID requirement, which sounds nondiscriminatory, will be discriminatory in practice. The proportion of black voters in the last election who lacked a driver’s license is more than double the proportion for white voters. Those problems demonstrate that the bill is not what it seems to be. Supporters of the new law argue that the state will provide a free ID to anyone who doesn’t have one, conveniently failing to notice that poor folks generally don’t have the certified original birth certificate, passport, or alternatives needed to get the free ID. Nor do they have time and transportation for trips to license offices to complete the application process. As Machiavelli pointed out, the sponsors don’t need to BE non-discriminatory as long as they can SEEM non-discriminatory.

During the legislative session, the Supreme Court terminated one of the protections of the 1965 voting rights act. Afterward Republicans moved quickly to supplement the Voter ID Bill with schemes that target the poor, the young, minorities, and college students. Believing that the Federal Government could no longer interfere with discriminatory laws and practices, they cut the early voting period in half, making it harder for those who depend on their churches or civic groups to provide transportation to the polls. They made it illegal for those who will soon turn 18 to pre-register as voters. They banned registering and voting on the same day, making it harder for unregistered citizens to vote. The targeted populations, of course, are ones that traditionally tend to vote for other parties.

Republican majorities on some local Boards of Election are adding their own means of disenfranchising their targets. In Elizabeth City, the Republican dominated elections board has denied students at historically black Elizabeth City State University the opportunity to run for elected office. The new Republican chairman of the Forsyth County Elections Board has proposed closing the early voting location at historically black Winston Salem State University. At Appalachian State University in Boone, not only will the on-campus polling place be eliminated, there will be over 9300 voters assigned to the new polling place which has only 35 parking spaces. There are no sidewalks between the campus and the polling place, just a dirt path along a highway.

Over recent decades, North Carolina has made huge strides in voter participation, moving from 47th in the nation in 1990 to 11th in 2012. During that period, we made it easier to vote through measures like same day registration and early voting. Now the same Republicans who cut taxes for the wealthy then failed to support public education, Medicaid expansion and unemployment benefits have implemented a voter ID law which will make it harder for those they have harmed to vote them out of office. Their new law is much more than an ID law. It will have the effect of discouraging voting, especially among minorities, the poor and the young.

On the Seal of the United States is the slogan “E Pluribus Unum” – out of many, one. It is a principle which has helped our nation become great.   By disenfranchising many voters the new North Carolina law makes a mockery of both “E Pluribus Unum” and the state motto.   A reversed motto, “Videri quam esse” – to SEEM rather than to BE better fits the law’s supporters but it does not fit the proud and free traditions of our state and our nation.

http://www.npr.org/2013/08/16/212664895/in-rural-n-c-new-voter-id-law-awakens-some-old-fears lack of voter fraud evidence

Bush administration 5 year study turns up no evidence of fraud: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/washington/12fraud.html?_r=2&

Annual nc voter turnout http://www.ncsbe.gov/content.aspx?ID=70

Early voting and campus voting: http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/08/19/3120626/county-elections-boards-in-nc.html

http://www.thenation.com/blog/175837/north-carolina-republicans-escalate-attack-student-voting#

http://www.journalnow.com/news/state_region/article_1bedcab6-0acc-11e3-9d20-001a4bcf6878.html