WHY I ENDORSE EILEEN BRADY FOR MAYOR OF PORTLAND, AND DISAGREE WITH THE OREGONIAN EDITORIAL BOARD

The Oregonian has endorsed Charlie Hales for the next Portland Mayor, and I strongly disagree. The Oregonian endorsement is based on specific qualities of their candidate: "a mayor who's ready to lead...experience on the Portland City Council...a record of accomplishment on jobs, transportation, parks and public safety...leadership."  This sounds all too familiar, like this Oregonian endorsement of another former City Council member: "City Commissioner Sam Adams has delivered on his promises to businesses, bicyclists and other Portlanders. He has the drive, political savvy and vision to be mayor" (2008). 

The mistake made by the Oregonian is to choose a candidate based on a stereotype of what qualities the right candidate should have. Leadership, accomplishments and experience are certainly admirable qualities, but are these the only things a good mayor needs? I think not, as history has shown. Each of the three mayoral candidates has her/his own unique set of experiences, accomplishments and leadership qualities. Choosing between them on this basis doesn't get us very far. The Oregonian would have us only elect someone who has already served on the City Council; this is a very limiting proposition.

Portland is a good city aspiring to be a great city. There are certain things that hold us back, some of them inherent in our specific form of government, some based in the different visions of people in city management positions, and others based in the agendas of the multitude of interests and groups that make up our citizenry. What can a mayor do with this mix to move Portland forward? What qualities need a mayor have to change our direction on those pathways that need a new direction? I have seen the qualities needed in Eileen Brady.

Paul Hawken, the businessman, author and sustainability guru who spoke at an Eileen Brady for Mayor event, used the term "reimagine" when discussing how to effect change in our society. That word stuck with me, and the following day I realized that it is the perfect word for articulating a major quality Eileen has, the ability to reimagine. Eileen's experience, accomplishments and leadership are forged from her ability to bring people together to not merely solve a problem, but to reimagine an issue in a way that avoids problems rather than having to solve them because they can't be avoided. 

As a business owner in Portland for the past few decades, I've experienced first hand the multitude of issues one often hears from our business community when it comes to doing business here. As a consultant to both the public and private sectors, including contracts with the City, I've seen these issues from all sides. Portland does a lot right, but it also does a lot wrong, and this holds us back in many ways. Eileen Brady talks about the issues that she sees not only holding us back as a city, but, more importantly, holding us back as individuals who are the moving parts of the city. She voices concerns about the future, based on her view of the pathways leading forward from the place we are now. This is not a message of doom and gloom; this is a message of hope based on her firm belief that working together, we Portlanders can steer a course to a vibrant and thriving future. 

The Oregonian endorsed Charlie Hales because his set of experiences, accomplishments and leadership as a City Council member resulted in his knowledge of where the levers of city government are and which ones need to be pulled in order to keep the City that Works machinery working. That's fine, if what we want is yet another political lever-puller. 

I endorse Eileen Brady for Portland Mayor because she understands that moving Portland forward from these troubled times into a better future for everyone simply cannot be accomplished by keeping the old machinery running. We need a leader of a different kind, one who can help us reimagine the City of Portland as a great city, a city that works for everyone because we all make it work together.  

THE GREAT SHAME OF THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

I've had it! I'm pissed! The Congress of the United States of America is a body that needs electric shock therapy. In spite of the efforts by those in Congress who understand that their job is to "promote the general welfare" (Constitution of the United States of America), our governing body has been hijacked by those who see their job as un-electing a president and getting their hands on the levers of power.

What has our vaunted governing body been doing lately? Political theater over contraception and the supposed wounded feelings of the Catholic Church. The "War on Religion!!" Oh give me a f*cking break!! How is this promoting the general welfare?

Members of Congress: read this. I dare you! This column by John Canzano, a sports writer for the Oregonian newspaper, is about a 16-year old girl who is battling osteosarcoma - bone cancer. Her doctor has told her that she maybe has a year left. The only treatment for this killer cancer is to remove affected body parts. One leg is gone, parts of both lungs have been taken, and next week the entire lower half of one lung will be cut out. Natalie has a bucket list, and shooting baskets with the Portland Trailblazers was checked off yesterday. The photo in the paper shows a beautiful, smiling, bald and very, very brave teenager. Read this column and then tell us how you can justify your childish behavior. Compared to this teenager - to all of our children - you look like a bunch of spoiled, name-calling children fighting over a pile of toys. Stop it! Do your job!

Members of Congress - what are you thinking? While you posture and pontificate and blabber away about the insults to the church of this or that, thousands and thousands of our kids, like Natalie, are bravely fighting for their lives and futures. They are fighting disease, they are fighting hunger, they are fighting poverty, they are fighting abuse, they are fighting schools that are way too crowded and underfunded, they are fighting for basic health care, they are fighting for a chance to get a meaningful job when they grow up. They are fighting for the future; what are you fighting for? If you can't put aside your petty partisan politics and fight for the future of these kids, then you are failing to perform the job you were elected to do, and you need to step down.

I am so sick and tired of the crap coming out of this Congress.  What will it take to change it? I don't have many illusions left about the strength of our democracy; I'm afraid it's been lost. There is a great divide in this country, and it's not just the politicians in Congress. We are now living in a mean society, where people cheer when a political candidate says that people who can't afford health care are on their own and who cares if they die because it's their own fault. A society in which we have devolved to name-calling and demonizing. And yes, a society in which yelling people down about who should and shouldn't pay for birth control is more important than helping our children live, grow and thrive.

---

FISHING (NOT PHISHING)

Do you like to fish? If yes, I've built a fishing pond just for you. Yep, that's it just to the right of this text box. See the little fishies swimming around? Place your curser in the pond, let it sit for a few seconds, then slowly move it around. Hours and hours of fun - just for you!!

You're welcome.

HEALTH CARE ACT, BIRTH CONTROL, AND THE CHURCHES

Here's the situation: the Affordable Health Care Act, passed by the US Congress in 2010, requires health insurance providers to include contraceptives as part of preventative health care coverage. The Department of Health and Human Services has issued a statement to this effect, and includes non-profit religious organizations that provide health insurance to their employees.  The Catholic Church and a number of others have loudly protested this requirement, and are joining together to work towards repeal of the health care law. The Republic Party has jumped on this attack on "Obamacare" with all four feet!

My opinion - tough luck non-profit religious organizations, just obey the law. If individual employees don't want contraceptives because of their religious beliefs, they won't get them. But what about your employees who do want them? Why is it any of your business? Do your employees have to be members of your religion? Why do you think you have the right to control what individual people do about their own health care and reproductive practices? I understand that birth control is against your religious doctrine, but we do (still) live in a democracy.

This is all a bunch of smoke that will help obscure the true values and benefits provided to millions of people under the new health care legislation. The media love it - it's a controversy! Talking heads and blabbing bloggers are filling the mediasphere with this stuff.....oh, um, wait a minute......OK, goodbye for now.

TAXING THE WEALTHY: A QUICKIE

I like numbers. Here are a few I gleaned from the media this week about taxes and some famous wealthy people. And btw, don't get me wrong, I have nothing against wealthy people in general.

Mitt Romney 2010 income tax return:
Income:  $20,000,000 approx.
Taxes paid: $3,000,000
Tax rate:  13.9%
Charitable donations:  $3,000,000 (15% of income)

Barack Obama 2010 income tax return:
Income: $1,800,000 approx.
Taxes paid: $454,000
Tax rate: $26%
Charitable donations: $250,000  (13.9% of income)

Newt Gingrich 2010 income tax return:
Income: $3,100,000
Taxes paid: $994,708
Tax rate: 31.6%
Charitable donations: $80,600 (2.6% of income)

What do I think about this? Mr. Romney makes a lot of money - good for him. Because most of his income is returns on investments - or capital gains -  it is taxed at a rate of 15%. This is the standard rate for this kind of income, and I think it was established during the G.W. Bush years.

Mr. Obama and Mr. Gingrich make good money also, and they each pay taxes in the 30% range, which is where many Americans are.

I'm a bit shocked that Mr. Gingrich seems a bit stingy with his charitable donations, paying well below the national average for people in his income bracket.

Now, what if wealthy folks like these three were taxed as much as 5% more on their income per year? Here is the additional amount they each would pay:
Romney:  $1,000,000
Obama:   $    90,000
Gingrich: $   155,000.

Would this extra amount break these people? Hardly. Would the extra tax mean that they would each create fewer jobs (a favorite "fact" of the Republicans)? Well, not directly, because these guys don't create jobs. Maybe indirectly in terms of them spending less money and thus less demand for goods translating into fewer jobs? Nope - they each would be left with plenty of cash to spend. So why don't we want to rescind the Bush tax cuts on these guys and help reduce the federal deficit?

Making money and being wealthy isn't a crime, and neither is paying taxes based on the government tax code. The issue here is the lack of a level playing field for all Americans, and the rightness of asking the more fortunate to pay their fair share.

KEYSTONE PIPELINE: WHAT IS THE REAL ISSUE?

The U.S. State Department today decided today not to approve, for now, the Keystone XL pipeline project from Canada to Texas. Keystone XL would carry crude oil from the Canadian oil sands in Alberta to coastal Texas. Keystone XL is an extension of an existing network of pipelines (see map).

Source: indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com

The proposed Keystone XL pipeline has generated a tremendous amount of controversy, with a host of groups choosing sides: environmentalists, tribes, states, private companies, politicians, and national governments. President Obama has been under a lot of pressure to deny or approve the project, and he tried to put a decision off until after the 2012 elections; however, Congress placed a 60-day ticker on the decision as a rider on a recent must-pass bill.

Speaker of the House John Boehner had this to say about the State Department decision: “President Obama is destroying tens of thousands of American jobs and shipping American energy security to the Chinese. There’s really no other way to put it. The President is selling out American jobs for politics." Ah yes....politics.

Source

Source: Energy Information Administration

So what is really going on here? What's the big deal, anyway?  It's not as if Keystone XL is the only oil pipeline in the USA. The map on the left shows the major existing oil/fuel pipelines in the U.S. The next map shows the regional pipelines. According to the Association of Oil Pipelines there are 168,000 miles of liquid pipelines in the USA, and these are the "safest, economical and environmentally favorable way" to transport oil and petroleum products, other liquid fuels and chemicals. Pipelines, most of them underground, are a fact of life, and we rely on them for the fuels we consume every day. 


Do pipelines have spills? Yes, all the time. So do trucks, trains, ships, barges and etc. Fact of life in the modern world.


Am I supporting the Keystone XL pipeline in this post? Not necessarily; I don't know enough about it to make that kind of decision. It's one of those knowing what I don't know moments! 


My main question is this: how should our government make this kind of decision? (The astute reader now knows that I'm not in the "keep government out of the way of free enterprise" camp; government absolutely needs to regulate this stuff.) The environmental and cultural issues are a matter of risk assessment; how much risk are we willing to take on in order to get the benefits of the proposed project? We assume risks every day in everything we do. 


Other environmental aspects include the negative impacts of recovering oil from oil sands, and the relatively large greenhouse gas emission factor of this type of oil recovery and refining.  


What about economics, including jobs? A project of this size will create thousands of construction jobs, and a smaller number of long-term jobs. And US companies could make money supplying materials and equipment for the project. (An interesting sideline: Evraz Steel, a major employer in Portland, Oregon is counting on a major order of steel pipe for the Keystone XL pipeline. An interesting twist - Evraz is a Russian company that bought Oregon Steel a few years ago.) 


There is also a geopolitical issue: should the US allow a Canadian company to build a major pipeline through the United States? What if the main use of this pipeline is to get Canadian oil to a seaport so it can be shipped overseas (this is one claim by project opponents who cite recent data showing that the US is now a net exporter of petroleum products)? 


And energy security. Does this project make the United States more secure in terms of energy resources and supplies, and reduce our dependence on oil from less-friendly or stable countries than Canada (we get a lot of our oil from Nigeria and Venezuela, although Canada is our largest supplier)?


Complicated, eh what? I think part of the answer lies in the energy policy of the United States. Unfortunately, I don't know that we have a comprehensive energy policy, although I am confident that President Obama will try to push one through in his second term. (Remember the Bush Energy Policy crafted by Cheney and his oil industry cronies behind closed doors?) 


In conclusion, the decision to allow or not allow the Keystone XL pipeline will most likely be a political decision, and this is unfortunate. We have now, and will always have many of these kinds of decisions to make. Local examples where I live: several proposals to build export facilities on the Columbia River to ship Montana coal to China, and other proposals to ship liquefied Canadian and US natural gas to Asia. It seems that the Canadians and Americans have large reserves of coal, oil and gas and prices are high in other parts of the world. And by the way, the companies wanting to build these export facilities are not all American companies. 


We need to think and act more globally, and our government needs to have a solid set of policies that will guide these kinds of decisions. Can we ever wrest these decisions out of the political arena? Sometimes. Maybe. 





  are the safest, most reliable, economical and environmentally favorable way to transport oil and petroleum products and other energy liquids and chemicals throughout the U.S.

THE AMERICAN UN-CIVIL WAR: 2012 - 20??

I've stopped laughing at the Republican presidential candidates comedy show; it's not funny anymore. I now realize that this bizarre episode in U.S. history is only one of many indicators of a war brewing within our country, the Un-civil War.

The signs have been right in front of us for a few years, most evident since the election of President Barack Obama. Our Congress has devolved into a snake pit of partisanship, with the minority leadership pledging to uphold only one goal - to beat Barack Obama in 2012. Both sides of the aisle play the game; the losers are the American people.

There is a large and widening chasm running down the middle of the American people, dividing us into mostly two camps - the left and the right. But "left" and "right" are terms that are too simplistic, and not really correct. The divide runs along a seam of what Americans think about who we are or should be. The geographic features on either side of this chasm have labels like religion/secularism, capitalism/socialism, gay/straight, 1%/99%, big government/small government, private/public, basic rights/survival of the fittest, union/non-union and others.

When G. W. Bush was President, I often talked about taking back our country from what I considered to be dangerous men in control of our government. Now I hear people interviewed on the radio saying that we have to take back our country, except they mean from Obama and his supporters. Obama is characterized as a European-style socialist who, according to Mitt Romney, is using the "politics of envy" as part of his attack on and deconstruction of free enterprise.

What I initially considered to be loony tunes statements and ideas expressed by candidates for the Republican presidential nomination are actually serious, and supported by many voters. Some examples (and these are actually mild compared to others):
  - Ron Paul was endorsed by a pastor who once spoke about executing homosexuals,
  - Rick Perry pledged to devote predator drones and thousands of troops to protect the U.S. - Mexico border
  - Governor Perry also said that voters should serve god by voting for him,
  - Rick Santorum promised not to be cowed by "the craven secularists who believe that a stable, healthy household need not be headed by god-fearing moms and dads,"
  - and Newt Gingrich stated that only people of faith should have the right to be citizens of this country.

The lack of civility in the national discourse has reached great heights. The Congress is a prime example, and a number of congressional old-timers have talked about this sea change in how members of Congress relate to one another. Some have announced their retirement, citing this new lack of civility and collaboration as a primary reason.

I think this is serious. I think this is more than election year rhetoric. I think the United States of America is headed for an Un-civil War within, the result of which will be a great tear in the fabric of our society. We are slipping from greatness. We are devolving into a country of meanness in which many good people will be hurt economically, socially, politically and, yes, even physically. I fear for our future.

Does this sound dire? I think it is, and the lack of leadership in this country at this critical time does not bode well for the American future.

CHANUKAH: EARLY ORIGINS IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST?

Because this is the eighth, or last night of Chanukah, it is fitting for me to delve into some historic secrets that might link people in different parts of the world. To do this, we need to dial time back to the early 19th century and Thomas Jefferson's preparations for what would be known as the Lewis and Clark Expedition.

Jefferson was at heart an explorer and scientist. In early 1803, he wrote to three prominent Philadelphia scientists, including Dr. Benjamin Rush, asking each to send him their thoughts "in the lines of botany, zoology, or of Indian history which you think most worthy of inquiry and observation." Rush prepared a long list for Jefferson with questions aimed at many aspects of Indian culture, health, diet and habits. Among these, Rush included questions about Indian languages and ceremonies that might prove or disprove an old, persistent academic theory about the origins of native people in the American west, that they might be one of the lost tribes of the children of Israel.

We now know that Lewis and Clark did not find any direct evidence linking Native Americans with early Israelites; however, there are some interesting possibilities. Let's start with the anchovy. Lewis and Clark described and wrote about the "anchovy" in the lower Columbia River. They found this to be the most delicious fish they had encountered during their travels. They learned that these small fish migrated into the river from the sea every year, and were harvested by the native people. They also learned that these are very oily fish, and that the Indians rendered them for their oil, which they used and traded.

In fact, this fish is not an anchovy but is a smelt that is usually called the eulachon (Thaleichthys pacificus). It also goes by numerous local names, including hooligan and candlefish. The fish is so oily that, when dried, it can actually be ignited.

And so we get (finally) to the point. If Native Americans had been one of the lost tribes of the Israelites, how would they have celebrated Chanukah? If we combine the materials available to these people before European/Russian contact, and add a bit of over-active imagination, we might come up with something like the illustration below.

Ancient lower Columbia River Chanukah menorah. Materials used: board made from Western red cedar (Thuja plicata), candle holders made from Two-spot keyhole limpet (Fissurellidea bimaculata) shells and a Red sea urchin (Strongylocentrotus franciscanus) shell, candles are dried eulachon, or candlefish.

A bit far-fetched? Perhaps. But.....


Postscript: the eulachon is now listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. They still migrate into the lower Columbia River where they spawn in some of the larger tributaries.

MEMORANDUM TO THE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES: YOU'RE FIRED!

Your job description as members of the Congress of the United States is "to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States...." (Constitution of the United States Article I, Section 8).  You have not met the basic requirements of your job; therefore, as your employers, we the people of the United States terminate your employment.

You have one hour to clean out your desks before you are escorted off the premises by Capitol Security. We suggest that you try to find meaningful and gainful employment elsewhere. And by the way, you will need to shop for your own health insurance and retirement plan, we will not be funding those for you anymore.

THE 99-PERCENT DILEMMA

Before I begin, I need to give you some relevant data: I am the Director of a Corporation, and the sole employee thereof. This concerned me a bit until I checked the official government figures, and I can tell you that this married-couple-filing-jointly is definitely part of the Ninety Nine Percent (the NNP). Also, I was born in 1944 (you do the math) and therefore have lived through several popular Movements, including the Civil Rights Movement (I did not go to the south to participate, but was a supporter) and the Anti-War Movement (Vietnam War, in which I did not serve, but against which I did participate in various marches, rallies and etc.). I also participated in union labor actions (I spent a night in jail as a teacher's union vice-president when all the striking workers and supporters on a factory picket line were busted by the Anaheim, CA cops who were in full riot gear and practicing for something real (I think that arrest record was expunged when I signed a statement, in order to get released the next morning, that I would not sue the Anaheim Police Department for false arrest. (There's an interesting side story here that is still germane: I was video taping (note to young people, this was an ancient way of recording video) the strike when the Darth Vader-like cops came marching in. I kept the camera rolling as a 6+ ft clad-in-black-armor cop marched towards me slapping his riot club into his thickly-gloved hand. I looked up - way up - at him and asked clearly "You're not going to hit me with that, are you?" His very clear clenched-teeth reply was "I'd love to beat your fucking brains out!!" At which point I beat a hasty retreat.)) 


OK, so you're now thinking that I digress, but I'm not. All of this is to set the stage for my following remarks about the Occupy Wall Street Movement (OWSM). Everything I have to say has certainly already been said by pundits, bloggers and various talking heads, but you're reading my opinion (and you're entitled to it). 


I'll start with the conclusion (this is a method used by many public speakers/presenters - I always thought it was just insurance in case they ran out of time and got yanked off stage). OWSM, what is the message? We the NNPers need to know what to do that will change things. And please don't tell us that sleeping in the park is the message. 


I'm really not being harsh; in fact, I support what the park-sleepers and other activists have been doing because I have seen that it has made a difference. After a few weeks of those dirty not-just-going-away hippies being in many parks around the country, suddenly politicians - both Democrats and (gasp!) Republicans - started talking about how the OWSM was an important expression of public concern about the state of the economy and the excesses of the financial sector. Large, legitimate institutions like labor unions, as well as prominent politicos and others of the famous around us expressed their support (and sought photo ops). This thing is real, and looks like it's serious. Uh oh! Now whadda we do?


Look, the main messages of the Civil Rights, Anti-War, and now Gay Rights Movements were that very specific societal changes had to happen, and the changes had to be rooted in law. The right to vote for all citizens, the ending of hostilities in a war, the end to discrimination because of sexual orientation - these were the concrete actions. What doesn't work is trying to get the Wall Street One Percenters to change their behavior by taking over a city park for weeks or months and spending tens or hundreds of thousands of local tax dollars to deal with it. Wall Street doesn't give a shit about that, it's not THEIR money! 


So I'll lay out a couple or so ideas of specific messages and actions that I think the OWSM can use.


Occupy Congress - with meaningful work that promotes the general welfare (this last part is the job description for Congress found in our Constitution). Enough already with no new taxes on the wealthy. Enough already of enabling the Wall Street financiers, the health insurance companies, and the drug manufacturers to make obscene profits at the expense of the 99%. Enough already of cutting funding for education, police and fire departments, public infrastructure while maintaining or increasing the subsidies to big industry. Enough already of gutting the laws that regulate the financial industry and letting the "free market prevail." And enough already of partisan politics and gang warfare between elected officials to win the next election. Congress: do meaningful work for the people of this country; that is your job! 


Occupy the Courts - with legal actions against the corporate greedmeisters who engineered this global economic meltdown. Go after them, take away their money (give it back to us, by the way), and put them in jail - the regular jails, not the country club ones. Make the message very clear that if you commit fraud, if you game the system, if you cheat your customers, you will go directly to jail. Period.


Occupy Businesses - with meaningful work that will employ working people in living-wage and meaningful jobs. The business community needs to step up and help make this happen (and by the way, more and more businesses are stepping up). Government stimulus money is a good thing if it is wisely used for public infrastructure, education, health and safety projects. We haven't forgotten how to be a great nation of ideas and manufacturing; we've just let those get moved elsewhere to boost shareholders' and corporate executives' massive profits. Is the future in America really one in which the average worker is either making lattes or selling Made-in-China chatchkes at a department store? I hope not.


Finally, a few words about who the NNP - the 99% - really are. The 99% are not just people whose income is not in the top 1% category. No. The 99% are people who think a certain way. We are people who think that society should be equitable and just. We are people who think that everyone should have (actually, has a right to have) good, affordable health care, an excellent education, a good-paying and meaningful job. There are people in our society who are in the top 1% based on their income, but in the 99% based on the way they think. I recently read an article about Jerry, of Ben and Jerry Ice Cream. He said that corporations and the people who run them can be socially and environmentally progressive and still make a profit. His company is and does, and there are many more who follow that business philosophy. So let us not get into class warfare along the simple lines of 99 vs. 1, us vs. them. That won't work. People of like minds need to work together, no matter what their income or position in society. 


The Occupy Wall Street Movement is a beginning, not an end. We need to find our common voice and together articulate a clear message. We can do it. History tells us that it has been done, and can be done again. As we used to say in the day: Right ON brothers and sisters! 

The Bowmer Theater at OSF: We're the Problem

It's us! We've done it again. The last time we were in the Bowmer Theater at Oregon Shakespeare Festival, during June of this year, the main support beam of the building cracked and the theater was shut down for many weeks. I wrote about the experience on this blog (see June 19, 2011).

Well here we are back at OSF for the closing weekend, and we attended the last performance of the season of the production "The African Company Presents Richard III." As we entered the theater, the ticket taker was telling people that there would be a short delay due to an electrical problem. After a delay of some minutes, the doors opened, the audience filed in, and we sat in anticipation of another fine OSF production. An OSF staff member came out on stage to announce that there was a problem with the sound system, and they were trying to reboot it; however, in true theatrical tradition, the show would go on. And it did, without what we imagine are the various sound effects for the production.

The show was wonderful. The acting, directing, costuming, sets and props and lighting were highest quality - this is, after all, the Oregon Shakespeare Festival! The original music and sound design by Todd Barton was, well... we'll never know.

We hope that OSF doesn't banish us or bar us from ever entering the Bowmer again. I don't think we could bear that. After all, despite what some people and politicians think, art is not a luxury, it is the true essence of being human. Thank you OSF for keeping us alive.

And, um, we're sorry.




- posted from the fisheyepad

Location:4th St,Ashland,United States

CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY: THE BAD EXAMPLE OF OREGON FORESTRY COMPANIES

A cover story in the Oregonian newspaper today reports that several Oregon forestry companies hired foreign workers for contracts won under the federal stimulus program. The story tells how these companies used loopholes in federal regulations and deceptive practices to avoid hiring local workers and instead obtained temporary visas for foreign workers.

This story is easy pickings for Republican politicians to rail about wasteful Obama administration programs and the stimulus program. But I have a different take: this is yet another story about corporate greed and the widespread lack of corporate responsibility for the condition of our economy and the well being of Americans.

Here's the list of the Oregon companies implicated in this unforgivable episode: Medford Cutting Edge Forestry, Summit Forestry, Ponderosa Reforestations, and G. E. Forestry. All I can say to these companies, if the allegations are true, is shame on you!

GETTING CHARGED UP AT NATIONAL PLUG-IN DAY, PORTLAND

As I walked down Electric Avenue in Portland, Oregon today, I realized that the smile on my face was because I suddenly didn't feel like an oddball. I had driven my Zap electric truck to National Plug-in Day, and I was surrounded by about three dozen electric vehicles (EVs), including two other Zaps. It's always a good feeling to be among people like yourself.

Everyone there is interested in EVs. Many brought their EV to display and talk about. The vehicles ranged from mass-produced Nissan Leafs, Chevy Volts, and Toyota plug-in electric models to home-made conversions (converting a brand name gasoline vehicle to electric) and everything in between. The common denominator is a conviction that the gasoline-centric transportation in the USA is not sustainable, and EVs offer kind of a no-brainer solution.

Here are a few examples of the EVs at the event today.
Of course I'll start with a picture of my Zap Xebra PK truck next to a TWIKE pedal-assist EV (http://www.evalbum.com/1886).  There was another Zap PK at the event, and a zebra-striped Zap 4-door sedan. The TWIKE brand, now being built in Germany, gets about 40 miles to a charge, configured like this one at 336 volts, compared to the 18 miles I get on the 72 volt Zap PK.

This prototype EV is made by Arcimoto in Eugene, Oregon. It's also a 3-wheeler that the company plans to have in production by next year, and will have 4 different models (http://www.arcimoto.com/products). Range will vary from 40 to 80 miles, depending on the type of battery pack, and the cost will be under $20,000. These EVs seat two people in tandem position. Cool machines!

Next up, a late 1990s (1997?) factory-built Chevy EV pickup truck. Yes, GM built these in the late '90s for the California market, as mandated by that state. Only a few of these were sold, the remainder were leased, and all of those were pulled back by GM a few years later, never to be seen again. GM was ahead of the times with these vehicles, and this one is still running strong.

How about a home-built conversion, a Saturn EV? Here it is, converted about three years ago by a young man I chatted with. He packed a bunch of lead acid batteries in the front and back, added electric motor, controller and other components, and has run the car gas-free since.

Something that impressed me at the event was talking with people who are very knowledgeable about EVs and their technoology. I have a lot to learn from these folks!

And if you get the bug for EVs, how about an EV Beetle? There were two conversion companies represented at the event who were showing converted 1970s VeeDubs. These are really sweet. I talked with Ernest from Voltwagen EPC (Electric People Car  http://voltwagenepc.com/ ) who converted the red one, and found out that it has a decent range (40-100 miles per charge, depending on battery pack), and you can even shift gears if needed. I didn't see the owner of the green Bug, but it's by Green Scene in Milwaukie, Oregon (http://www.thegreensceneev.com/contact.html).

It's that time of year when leaves are all over the street, and Electric Avenue was no exception. There were more Nissan Leaf EVs than any other brand. Although I didn't talk to a Leaf owner, these are very nice, "normal" looking cars, and they seem to be selling well in Portland.

 And, OK, who wouldn't be green with envy over this green (in more ways than one) beauty, a MG ragtop conversion. This is a beautiful car, and the conversion looks to me like a marvelous job.

And finally, here's a crowd stopper: an electric monocycle. I only overheard part of a conversation with the owner/builder, but it uses technology similar to the Segway, with the driver's body movements acting as controls. It even sounds like the Portland Police are interested in these for local patrols.

There's a paradigm shift starting to build in this country. More and more people are looking for alternatives to petroleum-fueled vehicles, and electric vehicle technology has made tremendous strides in the past few years. I'm a proponent of small, medium-range EVs for urban use - commuting to work, going shopping, taking the kids to soccer practice, etc. A vehicle with a range of 30-40 mpc (miles per charge) would work for most folks. I'm encouraged by what I saw today. Thanks EV community!

OREGON: WE'RE NUMBER ONE! (and it's shameful)

I watched some of the Oregon LSU football game the other day (the Ducks lost badly). I enjoy watching sports once in awhile, but I'm increasingly bothered by the high level of hype, and the very big dollars that are associated with college sports (men's).

But that's not what this post is about. This post is about the fact that, according to a recent report released by Feeding America, the national food bank organization, the State of Oregon leads the nation in the percentage of children who are food insecure.  In my state, 29.2 percent of people under the age of 18 years don't get enough to eat, and don't always know where their next meal will come from (based on 2009 data). This is not a "being number one" that we are proud of.

Food insecure kids don't do well in school, and this can harm them for life. It also harms our society and our economy. A number of organizations are helping get food to kids at school that they can eat there, and also take home for the weekend. School staff will tell you (and my wife saw this when she was working in schools) that some kids come to school because they know they'll get a meal there (some parents do, too).

Let's work together to put an end to this problem. Donate money and/or time to organizations that help feed kids. Let your congresspersons know that this isn't right and needs to be fixed.

And when you are cheering for the Ducks, or whatever team you like, as they run onto the field or court, in their shiny new uniforms and shoes and gear, show your team spirit by putting a little more cash in that envelope to the Food Bank.

THE AMERICAN ECONOMY: THE MISSING PIECE

Something I realized recently is that the on-going discussion in this country about the economy, including the high rate of unemployment, is missing a critically important piece, the role of business in solving the problems.

Where is the voice of American businesses in this discussion? I don't mean the quiet voice of lobbyists whispering in the ears of elected representatives. I don't mean the voice of corporate money slipping into the campaign pockets of politicians. I mean the public voice of businesses, a load voice that is talking about how they are or can help solve this mess we're in. After all, it is in the best interest of corporate America that consumers have the money needed to consume.

We hear a lot about corporations, but not much from them. We hear about how many people they are laying off, and sometimes how many they are hiring. We also hear about the record profits some of the largest firms are racking up, and some analyses that they are hoarding profits by not hiring workers. But what are corporations saying?

I had a discussion with my brother recently about the responsibilities of corporations. Corporations are considered to be "persons" by our legal system; so do these persons have responsibilities to be moral and to be good citizens? My brother says no, the only responsibility a corporation has is to maximize profits for it's shareholders. I spent a bit of time on the internet looking at what legal and economic experts have to say on this topic, and they don't all agree. Some agree with my brother; others say that corporate entities have the same responsibilities as other persons in our society.

This morning, as I read through yesterday's (Sunday) New York Times, I found a full page letter from Howard Schultz, CEO of Starbucks, to "fellow concerned Americans." His letter talks about the failure of our government to provide leadership instead of partisan politics. He and 100 other business leaders sent a letter urging the President and members of Congress to provide the leadership needed to end the downward spiral we're in as a nation, and these business people signed two pledges. The first is "to withhold political campaign contributions until a transparent, comprehensive, bipartisan debt-and-deficit package is reached that honestly, and fairly, sets America on a path to long-term financial health and security." The second is "to do all we can to break the cycle of economic uncertainty that grips our country by committing to accelerate investment in jobs and hiring." 


Now that's the voice of business I've been listening for!!  And I hope to hear this voice loader and more clearly as American business people stand up to take this mess head on. 

GOP DENIES THAT EARTHQUAKE IS REAL, CLAIMS HOAX BY SCIENTISTS

(The Scallion) Republican congressional spokesmen held a hurried press conference today following what many people believed was a large earthquake in the D.C. area. "Once again, the American public is being led to believe an alternative reality supported by so-called scientists whose only goal is to increase their grant funding" said Rep. John Boner, "There is no credible evidence that earthquakes are real, in fact, many scientists have stated that they just don't exist." Republicans quickly added that any attempts by the Obama administration or Democrats to increase funding for earthquake research and recovery planning would constitute "job-killing impacts to American businesses, especially those owned by the ultra-wealthy" and would be fought to the death by Republican members of Congress.

In a response, the White House indicated that they would seek a compromise with the Republican leadership that would allow public workers to sweep up any broken glass, without ending the Bush tax cuts or increasing any spending. The White House also signaled that the President might be willing to discuss cuts in Medicaide and Social Security to offset the costs of glass sweeping.

---


- posted from the fisheyepad

Location:Washington, D.C.

WHERE ARE WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES?

The Constitution of the United States of America, in it's Preamble, lists six goals of those who wrote it. One of these goals is to "promote the general Welfare."  Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution vests all legislative powers in a Congress, consisting of a Senate and a House of Representatives. The most important phrase in the Preamble, however, consists of the first three words: "we the People." With these three words, the framers of the Constitution clearly meant that the nation was to be ruled by the people, not a king, not a dictator, and not the Congress or the courts. Unfortunately, we the people have gone missing.


It can be argued the the general welfare is not being promoted in the year 2011. Instead, the members of the House and Senate spend most of their time promoting their political parties and political agendas. We the People are nowhere to be found. Oh yes, we "elect" the members of the House and Senate, but the reality is that big money decides these elections. We the People have been replaced by powerful corporations, unions, political action committees and individuals of the wealthy class. The general welfare of the powerful is being promoted at the expense of We the People.


The present battle over the debt ceiling being waged by the two political parties is really the continuation of a war of political philosophies that has raged for decades. The Democrats generally agree that "promoting the general welfare" includes providing for those who can't provide for themselves, using entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare. This side also sees that education and health care are the responsibilities of government. The Republicans generally agree that government should be lean and mean, with controlled spending funded by low taxes. The various social services should be either eliminated or scaled way back, and to hell with They the People who can't make it on their own. And, by the way, leave corporations and wealthy people alone so they can do business as usual (their good work will trickle down and help everyone). 


The reality of 2011 is that the Congress of the United States of America is a dysfunctional entity that is not fulfilling it's sole purpose for being: carrying out the duties assigned to it by the Constitution of the United States of America. The other reality of 2011 is that We the People are not of a unified mind or opinion regarding what the general welfare should be. And so we drift out of control with  inept and bickering politicians at the helm of the ship of state. We are basically out of control.


I don't know what we the people can or should do. Perhaps we need our own Tahrir Square, but I don't think there is a single, unifying cause that will bring us there. I hate the feeling of being adrift, and I hate the feeling of helplessness. I'm comfortable enough in my middle class-ness that I could simply ignore the conditions around me and enjoy my remaining years; but I can't accept that so many other people in this country (I'll save the rest of the world for another post) are truly suffering unnecessarily. I want a "more perfect Union" that truly "promotes the general Welfare." I just don't know how we the People can make it happen. 

AFGHANISTAN: THE USA NEEDS A NEW STRATEGY

I had mixed feelings about the U.S. going into Afghanistan initially, and I grew increasingly against our involvement there as time wore on. At this point, I have absolutely no idea why U.S. troops are still there, and I firmly believe we should pull out. "Nation building" is a joke, not a reason. We don't have a partner for nation building within Afghanistan, and anyway, since when did nation building become a goal of the U.S. government?

Every time my wife and I discuss Afghanistan we agree that the U.S. should leave; however, my wife always brings up the fate of women there when the Taliban regain control, which they probably will. It's not a pretty thought. So I have a new strategy to propose to the U.S. government: help all Afghani women leave Afghanistan. Let's look at the numbers.

The population of Afghanistan in 2011 is estimated to be 29,835,392 people. Of these, 6,149,468 are girls age 0 to 14 years, 8,031,968 are women age 15 to 64, and 380,051 are women 65 and older (that's correct, women don't live as long in Afghanistan as in the U.S. and many other developed nations). The total number of female Afghanis is 14,561,487.

The U.S. budget for operation in Afghanistan for 2012 is $107,000,000,000. That's 107 billion dollars if you got tired of reading zeros. This sum divided by the number of female Afghanis equals $7,348.15 per person. My new strategy is to take this budget and use it to transport and resettle all female Afghanis somewhere other than Afghanistan, in places where they will be safe and will have opportunities to rebuild their lives and have a positive future for their children.

As for the men left behind, well, let's let them figure it out themselves. And good luck to them!

---


- posted from the fisheyepad

IT'S GREEK TO ME: FINANCIAL MARKETS

I like to read the Business Day section of the NY Times. The top story today has the headline "Derivatives Cloud the Possible Fallout From a Greek Default." OK, sounds like I could get some insights into the economic woes of Greece, so I read the article. I have no idea what it all means! 


The situation in Greece is "clouded" by derivatives and credit-default swaps, whatever they are. It sounds like institutions buy insurance against loan defaults of others, and somehow make money from those. 


Let's start where I often start: definitions. 


Derivatives: according to Wikipedia, a derivative is "a financial instrument whose value depends on underlying variables." Um, not very helpful, but let's read on...a derivative "is essentially a contract whose payoff depends on the behavior of a benchmark." O...K....maybe we can find another definition.


Let's try Investopedia - that sounds pretty wonkish. 
A security whose price is dependent upon or derived from one or more underlying assets. The derivative itself is merely a contract between two or more parties. Its value is determined by fluctuations in the underlying asset. The most common underlying assets include stocks, bonds, commodities, currencies, interest rates and market indexes. Most derivatives are characterized by high leverage. (I remember studying leverage in high school physics.)


Hmmm, let's read on: 
Futures contracts, forward contracts, options and swaps are the most common types of derivatives. Derivatives are contracts and can be used as an underlying asset. There are even derivatives based on weather data, such as the amount of rain or the number of sunny days in a particular region.

Oh great, now were into forecasting the weather! 


Maybe "credit default swap" will be easier to understand, and I'm liking Investopedia, so let's stay with them. 
Credit default swaps (CDS) are the most widely used type of credit derivative and a powerful force in the world markets. The first CDS contract was introduced by JP Morgan in 1997 and by mid-2007, the value of the market had ballooned to an estimated $45 trillion, according to the International Swaps and Derivatives Association - over twice the size of the U.S. stock market.


Now we're getting somewhere....let's keep going:
A CDS contract involves the transfer of the credit risk of municipal bonds, emerging market bonds, mortgage-backed securities, or corporate debt between two parties. It is similar to insurance because it provides the buyer of the contract, who often owns the underlying credit, with protection against default, a credit rating downgrade, or another negative "credit event." The seller of the contract assumes the credit risk that the buyer does not wish to shoulder in exchange for a periodic protection fee similar to an insurance premium, and is obligated to pay only if a negative credit event occurs.



So what does this have to do with Greece? Well, what the NY Times article discusses is that there might be large financial institutions that are holding CDS contracts on Greek debt, and if Greece defaults on the debt, these institutions will have to pay out. The trouble is, no-one knows who is holding CDSs on Greek debt and how large these are. If some institutions are holding huge amounts of CDSs on Greek debt, they might be unable to pay out, with very serious impacts to the world economy - again. 


I say again because this is exactly what happened in the good old US of A; remember AIG? That's right, AIG (American International Group) had insured the performance of mortgage bonds through derivatives (there's that term again) and could not pay out on them. As a result, the US government had to bail out AIG to the tune of 182 billion dollars. 


So maybe I do understand this stuff a little bit now. For me, the bottom line is this - the financial institutions on Wall Street and elsewhere have set up this very large and complex system (dare I call it a form of gambling?) that imperils the world economy. Recent history has shown us very clearly that if these big guys get in trouble, us little folk will have to bail them out with our tax dollars. And keep in mind, this derivative and credit-default swap stuff is mostly unregulated. 


Maybe I'll pull my money out of the market and take it to the nearest casino.

"TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD" SEEN AS NEVER BEFORE AND PROBABLY NEVER AGAIN

Tonight we were among a few hundred people gathered in the 1913 Historic Ashland Armory for a "concert performance" of the play "To Kill a Mockingbird" by the Oregon Shakespeare Festival. The regular staged performance had to be cancelled because of structural damage to the Bowmer Theater building discovered earlier in the day. Numerous people and institutions of Ashland rallied around OSF to make the Armory available and ready for the performance.

Nineteen chairs were lined up across the stage. The actors filed in, sat down, and after an explaination of how this had come together so quickly, each actor introduced her/himself, told what characters they play, and the play began. No set. No props. Each actor standing to play their role, with limited stage movement. And it was wonderful!

The audience sat enthralled on folding chairs borrowed from local schools, hanging on every word and phrase. I can't imagine a better performance, even with a full set, props and blocking. The cast, to a person, brought this compelling play to life using only their acting skills, the words of a great script, and the cohesion of a fine acting company.

Thank you, Oregon Shakespeare Festival, for a once in a lifetime experience.

- posted from the fisheyepad

Location:Ashland, Oregon. USA

WOULD YOU LET THIS DOCTOR EXAMINE YOUR EYES?

(Photo Source)


This is Dr. Assad, an ophthalmologist who trained in Damascus and London. He is 46 years old, his wife was born in London to Syrian parents and is an investment banker. They have three children. In addition to his native language, Dr. Assad speaks fluent English and French, and has traveled widely in the world. He is a very modern man. 


And did I mention that Dr. Assad is the brutal Syrian dictator whose security forces torture and murder civilians? He's the kind of guy who, in addition to giving you a thorough eye examination, would also probably enjoy pulling your eye out of it's socket with his fingers (probably not a technique he learned in medical school)! 


How do educated people like Assad become monsters? And why does the rest of the world put up with guys like him? The answers are, as usual, politics. Answer 1: Assad wants to stay in power; answer 2: world governments have made the usual choice of political expediency over human rights. 


I watched a portion of an Anderson Cooper (CNN) report about the situation In Syria, a report that held nothing back. The violence captured on cell phone videos was shocking and disturbing. Assad's forces are seemingly beating and killing everyone in their sight. Children are being "arrested" and their tortured, mutilated bodies returned to the parents weeks later. The Syrian forces are operating under a scorched earth policy - leave nothing standing, leave no one alive. 


And what is the response by the rest of the world? Elected leaders have harsh words and a few economic sanctions. But world leaders are being extremely cautious, because a Syria without Assad could be a bad geopolitical situation that could make matters in the Middle East worse than they have been under Assad's tight control. 


What we are witnessing, yet again, is the critical failure of humanity to live up to it's potential. Instead of progress and improvement for everyone, we see brutal repression for the benefit of the few, and world indifference for political reasons. The same old same old, endlessly repeated.


Dr. Assad, how do you live with your actions? How do you hug your children knowing that your storm troopers are torturing and murdering other people's children? How do you justify the extreme violence being committed in your name? Are you a human or a monster? 


I recently attended my niece's graduation from medical school. Part of the ceremony was the recitation of the Declaration of Geneva physician's oath. This declaration includes the following statements: 


"I solemnly pledge myself to consecrate my life to the service of humanity;" 

"I will maintain the utmost respect for human life from the time of conception, even under threat...."


Maybe Dr. Assad had his fingers crossed under his gown.


I truly wish I could do something to help the Syrian people. I'll contact my elected representatives and implore them to act, but the reality is that the Syrian people are on their own. The rest of us can only sit and watch the horror on CNN. 

THE OREGON BOTTLE BILL: CAN SOMEONE EXPLAIN THE LOGIC?

Oregon was one of, or maybe the first state to enact a bottle deposit system, and we've been paying the nickel per certain types of glass and plastic bottles and aluminum cans ever since. We get back a nickel per bottle or can when we take them back to the retail store. Now the Oregon legislature is working on an update to the bill that will include many more bottle types than beer and soft drinks. The bill will also establish a system of bottle redemption centers so that the retail stores will no longer have to deal with bottle returns. And the deposit might increase to ten cents per bottle.

I don't get it.

I just returned from a walk to my local Fred Meyers store, where in addition to shopping, I returned some deposit bottles. This recently remodeled store has a separate small building, across the parking lot from the store, that has four bottle and can return machines. One of the three can and bottle machines was out of order, and the fourth machine is only for aluminum cans. A woman and her two kids were feeding bottles and cans into one machine; they had a half-dozen very large plastic trash bags full. A man was feeding bottles and cans into another machine; he had a shopping cart mounded high with bottles and cans. Another woman was standing and waiting; she had a shopping cart full plus a trash bag of cans and bottles. The can only machine was unused - I had bottles. The two working machines are the type that accept one bottle or can at a time, so I knew I had to be patient. Did I mention that I had three six-pack carriers of glass bottles and two liter-size plastic seltzer bottles? I waited, fed my few bottles into the machine, and got a receipt worth one dollar. Oh joy!

So the future is that I'll need to get in my car and drive to a redemption center, so I'll probably save bottles until I have a truck load (where the hell I'll keep them I have no idea), and then I'll spend a bunch-o-time standing around a smelly, sticky-floored crap hole to have my turn at a machine. Hmmm....get in car, use gas, spew emissions, stand around waiting for the professionals to be finished.....great plan.

We have curbside recycling in Portland. The blue rolling cart is for paper, cardboard, certain plastics, and metals. The green rolling cart is for yard debris. The yellow bin is for glass. The pickup is once a week. So why can't they also give me a bin for deposit bottles and cans, scan in some code that records the credit to my account, and dump it into a machine like the ones at the redemption center that counts them and breaks the glass bottles and shreds the plastic bottles and aluminum cans?

Is this too logical, or what? Someone please help me out here.