HOW ARE WE DOING ON CLIMATE CHANGE IN THE USA?

 (Wonkiness Alert: this post will be a bit wonky, with data being presented and science being spoken.)

Before I jump into the swirling pool of emissions data, I need to editorialize a bit. As I studied the Executive Summary of the Draft EPA document used for this post, I realized that something was not being said. I'm neither an expert on this topic nor an insider in the EPA; however, given the political climate in which this document was produced (Trump administration), I will assume a political filter was applied. 

The report presents greenhouse gas emission data for the years from 1990, 2005, and 2015 through 2019. The discussions in the report focus on comparisons of emissions for 1990 and 2019, in terms of increases or decreases between those years. In every data table, the columns are labeled with years, as shown below. I wondered why the year 2005 was included and highlighted in the tables, and the reason finally struck me (I was not hurt). The United States emission reduction goals in the Paris Agreement on Climate Change are based on emissions in 2005 as the baseline year. The EPA report uses the term "climate change;" however, there is no reference (at least in the Executive Summary) to the Paris Agreement or that 2005 is the baseline year for U.S. emission reduction goals. In fact, the report does not talk about emission reduction goals. 

So I have to assume, again, without knowing for sure, that the EPA scientists who wrote the report gave us a marker for looking at Paris Agreement goals. And so, in this post, I will use the 2005 data to look at how the USA is doing relative to the Paris Agreement goals. My final assumption is that, under the Biden administration, future EPA reports will not try to hide anything! 

____________________________________________________________________

This post is focused on greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. For context, some global data are included in this section.(1) The seven top emitter countries in 2017 are shown below. The U.S. is second, behind China.

On a per capita basis, the United States leads the world with about 19 tons of CO2 equivalent per person, followed by Russia (~15.5 tons/person), Japan (~10 tons/person) and the European Union and China (~8 tons/person each). 

Finally, when parsed by economic sector, as shown below, the energy sector accounts for 72% of global emissions, of which 31% is production of electricity and heat, and 15% is from transportation. 

So how are we doing on climate change in this country? We all know that it is real, that it started having real impacts years ago, and that the future looks different for human societies if we don't change the trajectory. I have wondered about this myself, so I decided to do some reading. I selected one document: Draft Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2019. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. in Federal Register, February 12, 2021. (1) This document was out for review comments until late March, 2021. I reviewed the Executive Summary. 

My goal in this post is to summarize the large amount of information in a clear and simplified way; this might or might not work. 

Let's start with defining a few terms and acronyms:

• emissions inventory - identifies and quantifies the anthropogenic sources and sinks of greenhouse gases
• GHG = greenhouse gas, a gas in the atmosphere that can directly or indirectly contribute to climate change
• GWP = Global Warming Potential is a way to compare the ability of a gas to trap heat in the atmosphere relative to another gas
• MMT CO2 Eq. = million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent. CO2 is used as the reference gas to calculate and compare the GWP of other gases. For these calculations, the GWP of CO2 has a value of 1. The report lists more than two dozen other gases that have GWP values relative to CO2; examples are: methane (CH4) = 25, nitrous oxide (N2O = 298, and hydrofluorocarbon 23 (HFC-23) = 14,800. In other words, one unit of methane has the greenhouse gas equivalent of 25 units of carbon dioxide. 
• a metric ton (MT) is 2,204.6 pounds, or 1,000 kilograms. 1 million metric tons (MMT) is 2.205 billion pounds. 
• LULUCF: Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry. These landscape categories have associated emissions and sinks of greenhouse gases. For example, a forest landscape might lock up more carbon than it emits. LULUCF includes agriculture, conversion of land from rural to urban, urban trees, forestry and other land uses.
• total emissions and net emissions: total emissions is the total of emissions from all economic sectors; net emissions is total emissions minus the amount of carbon removed, or sequestered, from the atmosphere by LULUCF.  

The above might be the wonkiest part of this post! 

Let's start with the big picture. Just how much GHG does the U.S. put into the atmosphere every year, and how has this changed in the past 29 years? 

• In 1990, total U.S. emissions was 6,449.4 MMT CO2 Eq.; net emissions was 5,548.6 MMT CO2 Eq.
•  In 2019, total U.S. emissions was 6,577.2 MMT CO2 Eq.; net emissions was 5,788.3 MMT CO2 Eq.
• Gross U.S. emissions per year increased by 2.0% between 1990 and 2019. However, gross emissions was 15.7% above 1990 levels in 2007, and generally decreased between 2007 and 2019. 
• Net emissions increased by 4.3% between 1990 and 2019. 

Paris Agreement Goals 

The U.S. stated goal in the Agreement was a 17% reduction in carbon emissions by 2020, and a 26% to 28% reduction by 2025, compared to 2005 emissions. (Without digging into the Agreement, I assume that "carbon emissions" means GHG emissions expressed as CO2 equivalent. I also don't know if the goal is based on total or net emissions, so I will assume it is net emissions.)

The actual emissions in 2005 were:   7,432 MMT Total, and 6,644 MMT Net.

The actual emissions in 2019 were:   6,577 MMT Total, and 5,788 MMT Net

The U.S. goal for 2020 is:                   6,169 MMT Total, and 5,514 MMT Net

The U.S. goal for 2025 is:                   5,351 MMT Total, and 4,784 MMT Net

In 2019, the 2020 goal for total carbon emission reduction was not met*, and the net carbon emission was slightly greater than the goal (not met). (Data for 2020 are not in this report; however, the pandemic might have resulted in a greater lowering of emission due to less transportation activity in the United States.) 

A few figures from the EPA report are instructive. Figure ES-3 shows changes of emissions relative to 1990 levels. Note the steady increase through 2007, followed by a bumpy but overall steady decline through 2019. (Editorial comment: the trends might be related to programs introduced and removed by the Obama (2008-2016) and Trump (2016-2019) administrations. The data might also reflect the impacts of the economic recession starting in 2008.)  

I have summarized, below, some of the data from Table ES-2 in the report, showing the major sources of carbon emissions. 

Table ES-2 Recent Trends in GHG Emissions and Sinks (MMT CO2 Eq): 

Total Fossil Fuel combustion          1990 = 4,731.5   2019 = 4,888.5

   transportation                                          1,469.1               1,843.2

   electric power                                          1,820.0        1,606.0

   industrial                                                     853.8   837.6

   residential                                                   338.6      338.8

   commercial                                                228.3          238.3

In 1990 and 2019, emissions from the transportation sector and the generation of electricity sector accounted for 69.5% and 70.6%, respectively, of total emissions from fossil fuel combustion. This is an important set of numbers to understand, as it tells us where we need to focus our attention for GHG reductions. These two sources are interrelated. The most obvious way to reduce transportation emissions is to transition from fossil fueled vehicles to electric vehicles; however, the methods of generating electricity also have to transition from a reliance on fossil fuels. 

At this point, two more graphics are instructive. Figure ES-6 shows 2019 emissions from fossil fuel combustion. Combustion of petroleum accounts for most of the emissions from transportation. Combustion of coal and natural gas account for the majority of emissions for generation of electric power, with coal representing more than half. Overall, emissions are greatest from burning petroleum, followed by natural gas and then coal (see pie diagram in figure). 

The next figure looks at emissions from electric power generation. Total emissions have steadily decreased since 2007 (solid black line, right axis), while the total amount of electric power has increased between 1990 and 2007, and then leveled off between 2007 and 2019. The reason total emissions have declined is two-fold: more renewable generation (e.g. wind and solar), and replacement of coal-burning with natural gas generation facilities (natural gas has lower emissions than coal). 

-------------------------            ------------------------            --------------------------            ------------------------

Different gases have different global warming potentials (GWP). For the EPA report, every gas has a carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalent. For the emission inventory, CO2 has a value of 1 GWP, methane (CH4) has a value of 25, nitrous oxide (NO2) is 298, hydrofluorocarbon 23 (HFC-23) is 14,800, and etc. 

Methane (CH4) is the second largest emission gas after CO2, at 10% of all emissions. The top five sources of CH4 emissions are, from highest down, enteric fermentation, natural gas systems, landfills, manure management, and coal mines. Enteric fermentation is methane emitted by livestock (burps and farts). In 2019, enteric fermentation was 178.6 MMT CO2 eq., representing 27.1% of the CH4 total emissions, an increase of 8.4% since 1990. This increase tracks the increase in cattle populations in the U.S. 

And, just in case you are wondering, as I did, about CO2 emissions from human breathing, I did a rough calculation. (2) For the population of the USA in 2021, total emissions from breathing is 84.5 MMT CO2 eq. (I did not do a calculation for human burping and farting.)

Carbon sinks. Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) are the areas where carbon is removed from the atmosphere. It is important to know that there are LULUCF emissions, as explained in the EPA report: "LULUCF emissions of CH4 and N2O are reported separately from gross emissions totals. LULUCF emissions include the CH4, and N2O emissions from Peatlands Remaining Peatlands; CH4 and N2O emissions reported for Non-CO2 Emissions from Forest Fires, Non-CO2 Emissions from Grassland Fires, and Coastal Wetlands Remaining Coastal Wetlands; CH4 emissions from Land Converted to Coastal Wetlands; and N2O emissions from Forest Soils and Settlement Soils."

LULUCF carbon stock change is how the EPA lists the removal or locking-up of GHG: "LULUCF Carbon Stock Change is the net C stock change from the following categories: Forest Land Remaining Forest Land, Land Converted to Forest Land, Cropland Remaining Cropland, Land Converted to Cropland, Grassland Remaining Grassland, Land Converted to Grassland, Wetlands Remaining Wetlands, Land Converted to Wetlands, Settlements Remaining Settlements, and Land Converted to Settlements."

LULUCF data, in MMT CO2 Eq., include:

                                                 1990                2005                2019

     Emissions                              7.9                  16.8                 23.4

     Carbon stock change          -908.7              -804.8             -812.4

     Net                                      -900.8              -788.0             -788.9

These data show that the capture and sequestration, or retention of GHG from release to the atmosphere is going in the wrong direction.

What's the take away? (This section is editorial.) 

It is obvious from this brief summary (and I encourage you all to look at the EPA document linked in note 2, below) that the major sources of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States, 70% of the total, are the transportation and electricity generation sectors. These two sectors are inter-related; we cannot decrease one by increasing the other, we have to decrease both. As the demand for electricity increases for reasons of reducing GHG emissions (for example, more electric vehicles, new residential and commercial construction that is all electric, &c), the production of this electricity must be from non-emission methods (i.e. renewable). It does not make sense to drive an electric car that recharges with electricity generated by burning coal or natural gas. 

Many Americans are doing things to reduce their "carbon footprint." Some examples are replacing incandescent light bulbs with compact fluorescent or LED bulbs, purchasing more energy efficient appliances, installing solar panels on homes, &c. These are worthwhile actions; however, based on the data above, the residential and commercial sectors are not the major sources of GHG. 

We Americans need a national program, enacted into law, that will drastically change the transportation and electric generation sector emissions. The Biden administration is proposing a massive infrastructure bill that will address these issues (as well as many others). This is perhaps the most important moment in the effort to reverse the trend of climate change. It is already too late in some respects; however, a focused, concerted effort can slow the trend, improve prospects for human society in the future, and set the United States on a course that makes sense.

It appears, from my cursory review, that the U.S. has made good progress towards meeting the Paris Agreement goals. New goals for the years 2030 and beyond will be set soon, and political will is the key to success. It is unfortunate that, like so many other issues, climate change is a partisan issue. The Democrats have two years to make significant progress that demonstrates to voters that there are tangible benefits to them from the needed programs.

Remember, the planet is not in danger; human societies are in danger. The planet will be fine, no matter what we do. Will we? 

---

* the original post stated that the goal "was met," this statement was corrected on April 7, 2021.

NOTES:

(1) https://www.c2es.org/content/international-emissions/

(2) https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/02/12/2021-02910/inventory-of-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks-1990-2019  

(3)https://www.globe.gov/explore-science/scientists-blog/archived-posts/sciblog/2008/08/11/release-of-carbon-dioxide-by-individual-humans/comment-page-1/index.html

STREAMING SERIES REVIEW: DJT - THE IMPEACHMENT: SEASON 2

Season 1 recap.  In season 1 of DJT: The Impeachment, we saw Donald John Trump, then President of the United States, impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives on two counts: abuse of power, and obstruction of Congress. These counts were a result of Trump's attempts to strong-arm and extort the newly-elected President of Ukraine in an attempt to get Ukraine to investigate Trump's opponent for the 2020 election, Joe Biden. Trump acted with his usual degree of impunity, brazenness, lying, and contempt for normalcy and decency. The entire season 1 of DJT: The Impeachment was a two-thumbs up series of episodes filled with excitement, amazement, brilliant and compelling walk-on cameos by career foreign service staff, incredible acts of logic- and law-defying tricks by the Attorney General of the United States, and bald-face denial by Congressional Republicans. The U.S. Senate acquitted Trump along party lines, with the exception of a single Republican, Senator Romney, voting to convict. The season ended in the post-trial episode in which Trump exacted retribution against those who dared to challenge him, including firing several career employees of the State Department and the Army. Our final glimpse of Trump was his victorious strutting, indicating that yes, he, Donald Trump, could get away with anything. 

Season 2.  Episode 1 - The Vote. The opening episode of DJT: The Impeachment: Season 2 dropped on election day in November, 2020. In that episode, the director used numerous flash-backs to set the scene of the constant Trump drumbeat of lies about election fraud, preparing his base and sycophants for his looming defeat. We also saw the gross incompetence of Trump and his key staff regarding the coronavirus pandemic, in which hundreds of thousands of Americans died. The episode ended as a cliff-hanger, with the vote counting continuing in a few key states that Trump needed to win. 

Season 2, Episode 2 - The Madman Roars. We saw the agony and anger of Trump as his must-win states fell to his opponent, Joe Biden, who was declared the winner. Trump ranted and raged on social media, television, and to the press, a madman insisting he had actually won by a landslide and that the Biden campaign and Democrats had committed the greatest fraud of all time and cheated him out of his win. The anger of his MAGA hat-wearing base grew to a fever pitch, and Trump went on the road to hold large rallies - in the middle of a pandemic - to promote his great lie and whip up his supporters. The Great Lie was promoted everywhere, including by prominent Republicans. We see Trump lawyers filing court actions more than 60 times to have various states ballots disqualified; all of these efforts failed. The Supreme Court declined to take up Trump's election challenge. Trump is shown making phone calls to various state Republican officials, from governors down, to convince them to change the vote results in his favor. Using social media and other avenues, Trump triples down on the Great Lie that the vote was a fraud, it was stolen, he had won by a landslide, and his supporters needed to "stop the steal" and take back their country. As the episode closes, we see a frustrated and angry Trump planning his last options involving Vice-President Pence and, if all else fails, a massive action in D.C. on January 6.

Season 2, Episode 3 -  The Insurrection. Episode 3 was the most chilling episode of the series to date. It opened with Congress preparing to certify the electoral college votes of each state in a joint session, with Vice-President Pence presiding. This action is normally a straight-forward confirmation; however, the tension built in episode 3, with Trump increasingly turning up the volume of his lies about "the great fraud" perpetrated by the Democrats, culminating in Trump's call to his base to come to Washington, D.C. to "Stop the Steal." Thousands of Trump loyalists showed up from every corner of the country. On the morning of January 6, 2021, the Trump machine held a massive rally at which various speakers, a propaganda film, and Trump himself whipped up the crowd to a mob frenzy, demanding that they "be strong, very strong," engage in "combat," "stop the steal" and "save our democracy." The crowd responded by attacking the Capitol Building while Congress was in joint session, breaking through barricades and police lines, breaking into the building, attacking and battling the police, and looking for members of Congress and Vice-President Pence with intentions of capturing them and, based on the video evidence, threatening to kill them. Members of Congress barely escaped. Seven people died, including one policeman beaten to death and two who later committed suicide. More than 140 police officers were badly injured, many for life. Donald Trump watched the insurrection on T.V., ignoring the pleas of those around him, members of Congress, former staff, and family members to do something to stop the violence. 

Scene from DJT The Impeachment, Season 2, Episode 3.

Season 2, Episode 4 - In da House. Within a week of the Capitol insurrection, and one week before the end of his term as President,  the House of Representatives impeached Donald Trump, for the second time, on a single article: incitement of insurrection. In an unusual defection, 10 Republican members of the House voted for impeachment. House leadership is stymied in their hope to have the Senate conduct the required impeachment trial before January 20, Inauguration Day, while Trump is still in office; however, Mitch McConnell, outgoing Senate majority leader, refuses to put it on the Senate schedule until February. This is a calculated move by the sly McConnell. 

Season 2, Episode 5 - The Trial. This episode dropped on February 9, 2021, almost exactly one year ofter the conclusion of DJT - The Impeachment Season 1. The Episode was presented in two parts, both set in the U.S. Senate as the House Impeachment Managers prosecute Donald Trump, and Trump's legal team, hired about a week prior (because previously hired attorneys left or were fired by Trump) defends him. The opening day of the trial is focused on one question: is the impeachment constitutional? The House Impeachment Managers present their case that the trial is appropriate and lawful under the Constitution, and they do a masterful job. The defendant's lawyers, seemingly from the law firm Meandering, Furious and Scolding, LLP, are exactly that as they claim that Trump, now a private citizen, cannot be impeached. The session ends with a role call vote in which all Democratic Senators, and 5 Republicans, vote that the trial is constitutional.  On Day 2 of the Senate trial, the Impeachment Managers present hours of evidence showing how Donald Trump, while President, created the Great Lie that the election was a fraud and that he had actually won by a landslide, that the Democrats had stolen the election, and that Congressional Republicans and the Vice-President, and his base of voters, needed to "fight like hell" to save the country and right the huge wrong that put Trump out of office.  

The Trump legal team has their day to present the case for their client. They focus on everything but the question of Trump's guilt. Instead the Trump crack legal team (are they on crack?) chastises the House Impeachment Managers for lying, cheating, altering video and tweet evidence, being mean, conducting a "snap impeachment,"being radical socialists, eating babies for brunch (well, maybe not that), ignoring due process, violating the First Amendment of the Constitution, and...well, you have to watch it yourself. A highlight of the episode is a lengthy video, the "Fight Club" video, showing Democrats (mostly women, people of color, and Jews) using the word "fight," meant to imply that there was nothing untoward about Trump telling his people that they had to "fight for their freedom," and "fight to keep their country." No, they claim, he did not mean they should actually fight with anyone, even though many of them were armed and wearing battle gear and shouting for blood.  

Part 2 of Episode 1 opens on the final day of the Senate trial, with each side presenting their closing arguments; however, there are a few plot twists and turns. The Impeachment Managers want to depose a witness, a Representative from Washington State who had told the press about a telephone conversation between Trump and Rep. Kevin McCarthy, the Minority Leader of the House, in which McCarthy implores Trump to send help, and that VP Sense had just been rushed out of the chamber by the Secret Service - Trump did nothing. The Trump team was incensed, and said that they would depose a hundred witnesses. Confusion ensued, and the Senators caucused to figure it out. In the end, the lead Impeachment Manager read the Washington Representative's statement into the record as evidence, and they moved on to closing statements. 

The vote was taken, and the result was that Trump was acquitted by the Republicans on a vote total of 57 guilty to 43 not guilty. A two-thirds majority, 67 votes, is needed to convict someone in a Senate trial. Although Trump was not convicted, he does have the dubious historic honor of being the only U.S. President to be impeached twice, and the only one to have such a bipartisan guilty vote, 7 members of his own party. 

The episode, and season 2, closes with a bizarre epilogue. We see Senator Mitch McConnell, majority leader of the Senate when Trump was president, now minority leader as a result of the 2020 election, standing alone at the podium and speaking. There are brief flashbacks of McConnell, the majority leader, refusing to accept the Article of Impeachment from the House of Representatives until after the inauguration of Joe Biden. We see McConnel, now the minority leader, casting his "not guilty" vote only moments before he steps to the podium. And then McConnell begins to speak. 

"January 6th was a disgrace. American citizens attacked their own government. They used terrorism to try to stop a specific piece of democratic business they did not like. Fellow Americans beat and bloodied our own police. They stormed the Senate floor. They tried to hunt down the Speaker of the House. They built a gallows and chanted about murdering the vice president. They did this because they had been fed wild falsehoods by the most powerful man on Earth – because he was angry he'd lost an election. Former President Trump's actions preceding the riot were a disgraceful dereliction of duty. The House accused the former president of, quote, "incitement." That is a specific term from the criminal law. Let me put that to the side for one moment and reiterate something I said weeks ago: There is no question that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of that day. The people who stormed this building believed they were acting on the wishes and instructions of their president. And their having that belief was a foreseeable consequence of the growing crescendo of false statements, conspiracy theories, and reckless hyperbole which the defeated president kept shouting into the largest megaphone on planet Earth. The issue is not only the president's intemperate language on January 6th. It is not just his endorsement of remarks in which an associate urged "trial by combat." It was also the entire manufactured atmosphere of looming catastrophe; the increasingly wild myths about a reverse landslide election that was being stolen in some secret coup by our now-president. I defended the president's right to bring any complaints to our legal system. The legal system spoke. The Electoral College spoke. As I stood up and said clearly at the time, the election was settled." And he continued in that vein for several minutes.

Then McConnell explained that he had voted for acquittal because he believed the trial was unconstitutional; Trump could not be impeached after leaving office. In other words, McConnell, and very probably many other Republican Senators who voted "not guilty" actually thought Trump was guilty, but acquitted him on a technicality. The Senate voted, on the opening day of the trial, that the trial was constitutional, and this should have settled the matter, but obviously the majority of Republican Senators did not honor that vote, because the constitutional issue gave them an easy out. 

DJT - The Impeachment is a brilliant mini-series. In it's two seasons, it provides many chilling lessons about democracy, politics, and authoritarian tendencies of leaders and followers. Luckily, nothing like this has happened in the history of modern democracies, and in fact, much of it stretches the imagination to the point of being unbelievable and unlikely. It is, however, great entertainment.

--- 

REFORMING ELECTION LAWS

This post is NOT about the Big Lie that Biden rigged the election. Now we have that out of the way.

This post is about how our election process works, or doesn't work, and what, if anything, we can and should do to fix it.

The Electoral College.  I'll leave this one to the experts; however, there is one solution I've read about that could be a simple solution. A number of states have already signed on to a proposal under which all of the state electoral votes would be assigned to the winner of the popular vote. If this were to be the process in every state, it would basically bypass the role of the Electoral College, and the winner of the popular vote would be the winner of the election. 

Money in Politics.  Campaign spending on the 2020 election was about $14,000,000,000 (14 billion). For the presidential contest, Trump raised $785 million and Biden raised $1.06 billion, totaling $1.85 billion, between January 1, 2017 and November 23, 2020.(1) In my humble opinion, this is obscene and out of control. We need to limit the amount of money in electoral politics. Citizens United went the opposite way, so we need to overturn that through legislation, or a constitutional amendment. There should be strict limits on the amount of money spent, no dark money, complete transparency and more. It is a fact that electeds spend a huge amount of their time every year doing fund raising. And yes, big donations result in favors or special treatment.

Politics should be Local.  Why do we allow people (or corporations and other entities) to get involved in elections for people who will not represent them? In other words, donations to and campaigning for political candidates should be limited to the people who will be represented by the elected person. In many elections at the local, regional, state and federal levels, outside money and campaigners can flood into the process and determine the outcome. In Oregon, for example, we have a ballot initiative process, and we often find that some person or organization from outside Oregon sponsors an initiative, puts big money into campaigning for it, and can win over Oregon voters for it. Why is this O.K? 

The recent presidential and senate elections in the State of Georgia is another good example of outside influence. Many millions of dollars poured into the Georgia election from outside Georgia. Georgia voters were inundated by many thousands or millions of letters, postcards, telephone calls, text messages from people outside Georgia. Wouldn't it be a better process if the citizens of Georgia made their own decisions without all the outside money and labor trying to persuade them? (Yes, I know that if you are a Democrat, you don't like this idea; but it works both ways.) 

This issue, of course, goes back to the issue of money in elections. Think about it, if every candidate was given the same amount of money by government to spend on campaigning, and was not allowed to use outside money, a lot of the problems would go away. 

Voter Registration.  Voting in America is not just a right, it is a responsibility. As such, it should be easy for citizens to become registered voters. In fact, there are some who think that every eligible person should automatically be registered by some process, and even make voting mandatory. The 2020 election had the largest voter turnout, by percentage, in more than a century, at 66.3%. In other words, one-third of American voters didn't vote. Certainly we can and should be better at this.

Voter Suppression. A shameful aspect of voting in America is the efforts by political bodies at every level to suppress the votes of specific groups, mostly people of color. The formation of the United States only allowed white men to vote, and this was not completely corrected until the twentieth century. Today there are efforts to redraw voting districts to favor a specific political party (usually Republicans), there are laws passed to make it more difficult for certain people to exercise their voting right, and the act of voting is often made more difficult for minority communities by limiting the number of voting locations and understaffing them. Many solutions abound, including a national vote-by-mail mandate. Credit is due to the dedicated people who worked hard to make the 2020 election one of the most secure in history, and in the midst of a pandemic. 

Stop the Lies.  Elections and campaigning should be based on fact and truth, not lies and deception. Candidates should be punished in some way for mounting advertisements or making speeches that convey false statements - lies. Broadcasters should be regulated, as they used to be, to only allow truthful statements and facts to be aired. Unfortunately, lies were the foundation of the Trump administration, and this will be difficult to unwind.

Back to the Basics.  Unfortunately, American politics has become a partisan money game, instead of the ideal we strive for. According to the Constitution:

• The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States.... [Article 1, Section 2]
• The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof....[Amendment XVII]
• The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States....[Article 1, Section 8] 

(emphases added, above)

In other words, each State should elect the people to represent it, and these members of Congress have the responsibility to "promote the general welfare" of the country. Nowhere does the Constitution say or imply that the job of members of Congress is to promote their party or their own fortune. 

Yes, I know, things are not that simple; but seriously, our system is totally screwed up, and smart people can certainly find ways to make the system more fair, more transparent, and more representative of voters. And that's my opinion.

---

Footnote:

(1) Source:https://ballotpedia.org/Presidential_election_campaign_finance,_2020

(This post was modified several hours after the original posting.)

WHITHER DEMOCRACY?

On January 6, 2021, at 1:24 PM, the assault on American democracy continued, this time in the Congress of the United States of America.  In a joint session of Congress, more than 100 members of Congress, all Republicans, gave a rare standing ovation to the objection by a representative of the State of Arizona to the counting of Arizona electoral votes for Joseph Biden and Kamala Harris. 

Scholars, lawyers and pundits on both political sides agreed that this grand side show had no chance of changing the results of the 2020 presidential election; it was pure political theater designed to appeal to the Trump/Republican base and burnish the Trumpian credentials of aspirants to the presidency in 2024. This cynical move, however, was more dangerous than not, as it continued the constant drumbeat of lies and conspiracy theories spewing from the mouth of the U.S. President and his co-conspirators. The fabricated lie of a stolen election had convinced a huge number of Americans that Joe Biden and the evil Democrats had cheated Donald Trump out of a second term to make America great again, again. 

Sen. Ted Cruz (R Texas) spoke first in the Senate after they reconvened to debate the challenge to Arizona votes. He said "...almost half of Americans (Republicans, 39%, Democrats 17%) think the election was "rigged." He called for "appointment of an Electoral Commission to conduct a 10-day emergency audit, to examine the evidence...." The problem with Cruz's argument was that there is no evidence of election fraud - zero - as determined by every state and every court. Cruz used circular logic; "we kept telling the people the same lie, and look, a lot of them believe it!"

As Congressional Republicans attacked democracy in the House and Senate chambers, Donald Trump was inciting a huge crowd of his supporters to attack the Capitol Building. He instructed them to march down Pennsylvania Avenue to the Capitol, repeatedly saying that he would march with them (he didn't; he went back to the White House and watched on T.V.). And so thousands of screaming and yelling Americans stormed the Capitol of the United States, overwhelmed ill-prepared Capitol Police, broke in, vandalized the hallowed halls of government, threatened members of Congress, who fled to secure locations, and tore a gaping hole in the American facade of "united." Five people died, including one policeman; many more were injured. All of the facts of this incident have yet to be uncovered, and we can assume that it was much worse than we think now. 

Time will tell the extent of coordination and possible collusion around this mob invasion of the Capitol. Many questions remain unanswered. One thing, however, is crystal clear: authoritarianism has taken root in America.

In November, 2020, 74,224,501 Americans voted for Donald J. Trump; this was  46.82% of the votes cast in the election (about 6 million more voted for Joe Biden). 

On the morning of January 6, 2021, 15 Senators and 141 Representatives were on record as intending to challenge state-certified electoral college votes for Joe Biden (7 Senators and 2 Representatives changed their minds after the Trump mob attack on the Capitol). Assuming the original number of Senators and Representatives would have voted their opposition had the mob riot not occurred, 28.3% of Republicans in the Senate, and 71.6% of Republicans in the House of Representatives would have voted against the democratic election process and in favor of giving the election to Trump. Combining the Senate and House numbers, 62.4% of Congressional Republicans intended to vote against the democratic process. 

Let's be very, very clear here about this critically important take-away from the 2020 presidential election process: almost half of American voters (47%) and almost two-thirds of Republicans in Congress (62%) chose authoritarianism (Donald Trump) over democracy!  (see update at end)

This fact has to be foremost in our minds moving forward. Many of us assume that every American believes in and supports democracy, as opposed to fascism or authoritarianism. The facts show otherwise. The far-right in America, led for the past four years by Donald Trump, has convinced a significant number of Americans that only they can save America, make it great again, and keep the socialists and "others" (re: people of color, immigrants) from taking over their country. Using lies and fear-mongering, the right has somehow convinced these Americans that a man like Donald Trump is actually their champion and has their best interests in mind, even though any intelligent person can see clearly that Trump and his minions only have the interests of themselves and the very wealthiest people in mind. This is a truly dangerous time for America. 

Soon-to-be President Joe Biden ran on a platform of unification, of working across the aisle, of being the president of every American, not just those who voted for him. This is a great ideal; however, in practice, Mr. Biden will need to charge ahead with the critically needed new programs and reforms that will, in fact, benefit the vast majority of Americans, including those who chose authoritarianism. He must find ways to open people's eyes to the realities of Trumpism by showing them the tangible benefits of improved wages and meaningful jobs, health care, education, building a carbon-free energy system, improvements in air and water quality, and many other aspects of life. This will be a tough job, and the Biden team, including all of us who want him to succeed, have the next two years, until the mid-term election of 2022, to show fickle American voters what major progress looks like. 

Make America Great Again - MAGA - is a dog whistle for Keep America White. This fact is much more evident today than it was a week ago or four years ago. The contrast between the law enforcement response displayed at the nation's Capitol Building compared to that at every Black Lives Matter demonstration in D.C. and across America is shockingly stark. Although there are numerous videos of Capitol Police seeming to accommodate the white rioters, even befriend or assist them in some cases, overall the officers appeared to try to keep the crowd back and protect the building and the people inside until realizing their lives and safety were at risk against impossible odds of success, and they pulled back. One officer was killed, and many others injured. The failure of law enforcement at the Capitol was a failure of leadership; it remains to be seen if this was intentional. It appears that a "demonstration" of white people did not present the threat that demonstrations by Black Americans is assumed to present. We can only imagine the extent of injury and death of rioters had they been persons of color. However, an alternative explanation could be that this was an intentional plan to set up a situation that would allow "demonstrators" to overwhelm law enforcement in order to stop the Congress from approving the electoral college certification of the election of Trump's opponent. This is a conspiracy theory alternative explanation, but in the Trump-era, it has to be considered. Hopefully, time and investigations will determine the truth. 

I believe that the American democratic republic is strong and will endure; however, I also believe that the many flaws in our system must be corrected, and the tide of authoritarianism must be defeated. America was founded in white supremacy, and its history has followed that shameful track to this day. Advances and improvements have been made along the way, but the framework of systemic bias remains. To move forward, we must change the framework.

---

UPDATE (January 27, 2021): Yesterday, I finished reading the book "Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents" by Isabel Wilkerson. She recounted a question by Taylor Branch during their discussion: "...if people were given the choice between democracy and whiteness, how many would choose whiteness?" This is an important word substitution I accept instead of "authoritarianism," above. 

DECEMBER 31, 2020 - AT LAST!

It's been awhile. I guess I just haven't had the heart or the will to post here since early November.  The Joe Biden and Kamala Harris ticket won the election, and Donald Trump and his minions stepped up their denial snake oil pitch and continued to make a mockery of the office of president and the Republican Party. He left for Florida and has spent the days playing golf and tweeting bile while many more thousands of Americans sickened and died from the killer virus. Trump will be gone soon - not soon enough - the Retrumplicans will stay on, and the new administration will have a daunting job ahead, to say the least.

2020. A year of infamy. Many people have or will write about the year that ends tonight, and I have nothing new to say. At the end of a year, I usually scroll through my digital calendar from January 1 to December 31 as a way of reviewing the year. For 2020, this scroll-through looks pretty typical for us; dinners out, theater evenings, museum visits, doctor appointments, gatherings with friends and family for normal activities or special events. But it all changes starting March 11. After March 11, the calendar is filled with video calls; first using Skype, then exclusively Zoom. And grocery pickups. Zoom gatherings and grocery pickups, all...year...long. We have been "sheltering in place" to avoid exposure to the virus. 

>19,970,000 COVID-19 cases; >344,000 people dead as of today in America since February, 2020. A lot of this was preventable. There are vaccines now, but the distribution system is screwed up, so it will be a long time until enough people are vaccinated to clear this train wreck off the tracks. The Biden-Harris administration will hopefully fix a lot of what's broken. Fingers crossed.

Our family has been fortunate. We elders are retired and comfortable; the kids (anyone under 60) are hanging on and getting on well enough. No-one in our immediate circle has tested positive, or been ill with the virus. And no deaths. We grieve for the many families - too many - in our country who have been visited with pandemic tragedy, and we are saddened by the loss of jobs, economic and social stresses so many families are experiencing. And yes, we are mad as hell that the Repugnicans in Congress have dithered away the time with their partisan politics, their Trump-support nonsense, instead of doing the job the Constitution requires them to do: "promote the general welfare." A pox on all their houses!!!

A friend remarked yesterday that it was not really the new year until January 21. Agreed. While it is true that much of what happened during 2020 was brought by nature, it is also true that the Trumpsters made everything worse, every time. An old adage is: everything is political. 

As I complete this short post today, 01/01/2021, I know that today is simply the day after yesterday, and that the "new year" is only symbolic. Nothing has changed from yesterday that is outside the trend lines from the yesterdays. And yet, we can symbolically take a deep breath, look ahead, see the end-of-tunnel light is a bit larger and brighter, and renew hope for a better year. And maybe, just maybe, if we all work together, we can make it so. 

---

 

TRUMP, REPUBLICANS, ME AND KAYAKING

 As soon as we rounded the tip of the point, we were in the washing machine of wind, waves and tide all colliding in one space. The strategy for paddling in this kind of water is to keep your nose into the waves and paddle like there is no tomorrow. A strong westerly wind was blowing upstream (east) and the waves it produced were at least 3 feet tall and mostly coming straight up-river. I say mostly because some waves were reflecting off Tongue Point and coming crosswise, while others occasionally came at us from the other side. I fell into a rhythm of steady and long paddle strokes, focused on keeping my paddle blade in the water and my nose into the waves, watching the bow of my kayak come off the top of a wave so that 1/3 or more of the boat was in the air, and then plunging into the trough and disappearing below the next wave until it suddenly lifted clear again. Sometimes the nose of the boat would go below water far enough that my waist was almost in the water; this is when a paddler appreciates a drysuit and a well-fitting spray skirt!

I clearly remember to this day the wave that suddenly reared up to my right heading straight for me and slapped me across the face. I didn't see that one coming, but it was very refreshing. What a wild ride, what a fun time, what a lot of work!

This excerpt is from my journal of a 90-mile paddling trip from Portland to Astoria, Oregon, on the Columbia River. And you, dear reader, are wondering what this has to do with Trump and the Republicans. And I'll tell you. 

For the past four years, we have been in the washing machine of Trumpism, tumbling daily between reality and fantasy, truth and lies, normalcy and outrageously abnormalcy. Finally - finally - we had an election and Donald Trump was given his pink slip, his boot in the ass, and shown the door. And yet (which has become a favorite term of mine recently), here we are, nine days after the election, Joe Biden clearly the winner, and Donald Trump refusing to accept defeat. Worse yet, his Republican cronies, his enablers, have his back! What shall we good people of America do?

I know certain things from my many years of paddling a kayak on big rivers and tidal bays. These things are reflexive now. I have been in situations, such as that described above, where there is no time or purpose for worrying, for fretting, for trying to analyze the future. If reflex and determination and persistence do not take over the "deep doo-doo" can be very, very serious. 

So this is what we good people of America need to do: stay focused, keep our noses into the wind, paddle with strength and determination, trust that our vessel is sound and designed to stay afloat, and keep the goal in sight and mind. Sure, some rogue wave might slap us in the face, but it will only make us that much more resolved to move forward. We will get to our destination, and yes, we will be tired but joyful. 

Donald Trump will be gone in January, 2021. If we persist, if we stay strong and focused, if we see our goal as a better America, we will not be defeated. This I know.

My buddy Dave and I did conquer everything the mighty Columbia threw at us that day, and arrived tired, safe, and joyful in Astoria. Let's all work together to conquer the dark and turbulent politics of our time, and arrive safely in a different place. 

(I did not paddle again after that trip for three years, until I had shoulder surgery. And I can't think of a good analogy for that!)

---

PLASTIC BAGS: THEY’RE BACK!

This is a plastic bag that our groceries came in when we did a pickup at Safeway recently. It surprised me, because we have a plastic bag ban in Portland, as well as the State of Oregon. So, um, what the....?

I have not done any research; however, it is obvious that this is considered a reusable bag - it even says so on the bag. This bag is very thick plastic (HDPE) and the text on it says that it can be used at least 125 times. It can be recycled by returning it to the store, so it says on the bag.

This bag seems no different from many of the plastic reusable shopping bags we already have, unless those are made from recycled plastic (these do not appear to be). These are pleated on the bottom, so the stand by themselves when loaded with items. My own reading has led me to believe that, in many instances, plastic could be better environmentally than shopping bags made of cloth or other materials. But that’s a longer post, which I might do someday. 

So, yes, we kept these nice, heavy-duty plastic bags, and will reuse them for a variety of things. For now, during the pandemic, we are not doing our own shopping, so we order on-line and pick up the order curbside at the store. These orders typically come in paper grocery bags, and because I have a garage full of those, the new ones immediately go into the recycling bin. Seems kind of wasteful to me.  

So plastic is back. OK, I’m down with it!

—-

SHOULD WE WISH WHITE HOUSE FOLKS WELL IF THEY CONTRACT COVID-19?

As reported on October 25, 2020, “We’re not going to control the pandemic,” White House chief of staff Mark Meadows told CNN’s Jake Tapper on “State of the Union.” 

Meadows argued that the administration wouldn’t get the pandemic under control “because it is a contagious virus, just like the flu.”

He also said Americans, including the president, should “certainly” follow CDC guidelines, but when it comes to wearing masks at rallies, he said, it’s not mandated because “we live in a free society.”

(Source:https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/25/white-house-chief-of-staff-controlpandemic-432236)

A few days ago, it was announced that Mr. Meadows, the White House Chief of Staff, had tested positive for the coronavirus. A number of other people in the White House have also tested positive in the past week, and this adds to the people, including the President, his wife and youngest son, who have tested positive. 

Everyone on the news programs we watch - MSNBC and CNN - and NPR have made the requisite statement that they wish Mark Meadows well, or don't wish him ill, or similar. But you know what, this sticks in my craw! These folks such as Meadows have bought into a herd immunity strategy that is now the official policy of the Trump administration. So basically, he has contracted the disease because that is the plan - everyone should contract the disease and then it will simply go away. 

So here's what I wish the media folks would do: if they are going to report that people in the White House or the administration have tested positive for COVID-19, they should lead with the fact that the White House pandemic strategy is that everyone should contract the virus. Then they should not wish these folks well, they should congratulate them for complying with the administrations pandemic policy! (Keep in mind that these folks knowingly expose thousands of people to the virus.)

---

AMERICAN POLITICS AS WAR: A THOUGHT EXPERIMENT

 The 2020 election is over (yes, Donald, it is), and we now move into a new phase of American history. Here's a thought experiment that could help put things into perspective.

Let's say we think about American politics as war, with two opposing sides battling for dominance. There is trench warfare - in the Congress and state legislatures - and there are major battles every two years, and very major battles every four years.

One side just won a very major battle and will control the Executive branch of government. So let's talk about winners and losers.

When a war is won, a peace treaty is usually agreed upon by both (or all) sides. Often, the winner will agree to help the loser rebuild its economy, infrastructure and other aspects of its society that were damaged or destroyed by the war. And so we can expect the new administration to offer assistance to the people on the losing side in the form of stimulus money, economic development, health care (especially regarding the current pandemic) educational assistance, &c. In other words, give things to the losing side that will hopefully help them salve their resentment towards the winners.

There is a major problem with this analogy of war and politics; the losers didn't really lose. Unlike the period after a war, the losers (Republicans)  still have all of their military leaders in place (in politics this is the electeds), and, importantly, their propaganda machinery is still cranking out the propaganda (in this analogy, Fox News and its ilk). The losing side still controls the judicial system (judges appointed by Trump). And so the analogy breaks down. 

The important point of this thought experiment is this: the Democrats won a major battle, but the war rages on. Without some kind of peace treaty between the two political sides, we can expect the battles to rage on. If very recent history tells us anything, one of the generals on the losing side (Mitch McConnell) will rally his troops to resist any kind of cooperation or collaboration with "the enemy." As the war continues, citizens on all sides will be the ones who suffer, except for the very wealthy class, who fund the generals. 

In a rational society, everyone would understand that politics is not war, and that governance is an activity in which all sides work together, always with some disagreements, to find a path forward that improves society. The job description of members of the U.S. Congress is simple, as stated in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. The Congress "...shall have Power To...provide for the common Defense and General welfare of the United States...." The Section contains a list of Congressional Powers, all of which pertain to providing for the common Defense and the general Welfare. Nowhere does the Constitution state that elected members of Congress must swear to defend their political party; in fact, the oath taken by members of Congress has them swear to "support" the Constitution of the United States (see Article VI). 

President-elect Biden and many others stress that the great divide in our country has to be healed. This can only happen through leadership at many levels. Unfortunately, the Congress of the United States, the legislative body that was established to provide for the general welfare of the country, has devolved into partisan warfare, and the general welfare has suffered greatly. This has to stop. Partisanship in Congress, and the Executive Branch, leads to partisanship among citizens. 

On January 20, 2021, then President Joe Biden will have a daunting set of tasks before him. He alone will not be able to heal the divisions in this country; only the combined efforts of all members of Congress can accomplish that task. Perhaps that is a fever dream. 

---

UM, WHERE AM I?

Everyone I know woke up the morning after the election, looked at the 2020 election results so far, and said aloud and posted on their social media feed, "Where the eff am I? What happened to my country?"

Yes, everyone I know is a coastal elite (whether or not they live on a coast). We were certain - CERTAIN - that after four years of abuse, most Americans would repudiate Donald Trump and everything he stands for. But no. 

As of this moment (November 5, 2020; 08:16 AM (Pacific time), 68,538,176 Americans have voted for Donald J. Trump. Joe Biden has 71,414,442 and is (hopefully) closing in on the magic 270 Electoral College votes needed to win the presidency (he has 253 compared to Donald's 214). 

That's right, sixty-eight million five hundred thirty eight thousand one hundred and seventy six Americans think Donald Trump deserves another four years in the office of President. This is astounding! 

Joe is saying the right things about healing, about being President of all Americans, about finding common ground, about going back to what America stands for while moving forward. But everything seems different now, and the United States of the future will never be something it was before. Various terms are are floating around in our heads: culture wars, civil war, unbridgeable divide. We are all mostly in bubbles of likeness, perpetuated by social media (anti-social media is what I call it) and the mostly partisan news sources we watch and read. 

Do people in Redlandia and those on Bluelandia have values that are so dissimilar that we will never come together? Will we always be divided by narratives - often false - that become fortified mantras? I'm a devoted cynic. No matter how cynical I get, I just can't keep up (thanks Lily Tomlin). But there is hope, and it will require great effort. The hope is founded on changing our behaviors, something we have the innate capacity to do, but usually the mind set to resist. In a recent post I talked about where we humans are in the process of evolution, and I wondered if intelligence is the end point of natural evolution, and the beginning of conscious evolution. We can change our behaviors if we want to. 

And by the way, my map, above, is obviously a great over-simplification. There are many blue folks in red territory, and red in blue. The urban-rural divide is real and a major factor. We have serious issues to deal with, and the best thing we can do is get started.

Now...how will we connect the disparate parts of Bluelandia? High-speed rail? Solar-powered airplanes? Hmmm.....

---

 
 

TRUMP AND HIS SUPPORTERS EXPLAINED, AT LAST

 Don't get me wrong here; Donald Trump is a very, very dangerous man. He is the head of a three-generation New York crime family, and somehow he was elected to the office of President of the United States. He is a fascist, and a wanna-be dictator. He has a base of millions of ardent supporters, and he has somehow kept congressional Republicans under his thumb. How has he done this? How can this be explained?

One easy answer is this: Donald Trump is a buffoon, and people love a buffoon. 

I'm not just calling names here. But seriously, gird your loins and watch some video clips from his campaign rallies (yes, the COVID-19 super-spreader rallies). There is The Donald, in his element, acting the buffoon to a crowd of thousands of MAGA hat-wearing, cheering buffoon-lovers. He does his stand-up comedy schtick, making funny faces, cracking one-liners (usually something mean about someone, and always lies), doing that weird gesture with his hands (palms facing out, jerking out and back at waist level). His fans eat it up; they laugh, they hoot, they shout "lock her up - lock her up" at the mention of any Democratic woman politician, they hold up their stupid signs like "Women for Trump" and "Make America Great Again, Again" and "Trump-Pence 2020" and other bullshirt. 

And they are all crowded together, and very, very few of them are wearing masks (except the ones behind him who are on-camera, and have been told to wear masks to give a false impression), and they are in violation of every rule about the pandemic, and Trump doesn't give a rats ass about that or them, and when he leaves there is a COVID surge left behind. 

Sometimes he has a warm-up comedy act, his robotic wife, Melania. She has some extremely funny one-liners about how Donald is protecting shildren, and has stopped the pandemic, and is fighting bullies, and other stuff that is oh so hilarious in its irony. 

If the Trump family was not such a dangerous cabal of fascist grifters, if we could back away and look at them as if we were observers from another galaxy, well, we would certainly be laughing out loud at their antics and their ironic humor (if we had mouths to laugh through). I'm thinking Charlie Chaplin as The Great Dictator. 

We will get rid of this dangerous buffoon soon enough. Then we need to figure out how to live with his buffoon supporters.* Ugh.

---

* Yeah, I know, we need to talk to people, and heal the divide, and find common ground, and all that. But seriously...

CORONAVIRUS, HUMANS, AND THE NATURAL WORLD

 You can't fool Mother Nature. (anonymous)

Nature is a Hanging Judge. (Professor Scott Morris)

The numbers are not good: 

• total cases, in the world and in the USA: at least 44,300,000 and 8,817,000
• total deaths, in the world and in the USA: at least 1,170,000 and 227,000
• average (7-day running) daily number of new reported cases, in the world and the USA: 450,000 and 77,000 (highest to date)
• in the past week in the USA,
• the daily number of new cases has increased by 20%
• the number of deaths has increased by 5.4%
• the number of hospitalizations has increased by 9.5%

Yes, I'm talking about the SARS-CoV-19 virus that causes COVID-19. In just seven months, this virus has been responsible for the numbers presented above, and the end is nowhere in sight. 

We humans should all feel humbled and afraid. The virus, something that is not considered a living organism (see my earlier post), a tiny packet of genetic material (about 700 of them laid side-by-side would equal the thickness of one human hair), has basically brought humanity to our knees. In the 21st century, a time of advanced knowledge and technology in medicine and science in general, a microscopic, replicating chemical particle is winning its attack on, and invasion of, human beings. And so far there is nothing we can do to stop the virus in its tracks and eliminate it from the planet.

The interesting, and very sad fact is that we humans know how to slow the spread of the virus, and it is not through technology. Behavior is, so far, the only thing that works. Wear a mask. Keep a distance of at least 6 feet between yourself and other people. Do not go into crowds of people. Simple, and proven effective behaviors. And yet...

And yet human hubris enables the virus. The simple virus-slowing behaviors have been politicized instead of accepted as fact. Some political leaders claimed that the virus was a hoax, the scientists and medical experts were wrong, and that political opponents were using the virus as a way to bring down the fearless leader. The truth is a simple equation: science denied = people died. 

Humans, the species Homo sapiens, are not above nature, we are part of it. No matter how strenuously we deny it, we are part of the natural world, and we ignore nature at our own peril. We have carelessly and foolishly significantly changed the chemistry, physics and biology of the planet as a result of our actions in modern times. Climate change is no longer a question to be debated; it is a proven process and our chickens have come home to roost! Drought, violent storms, massive wildfires, altered ocean chemistry, and many more processes of the planet systems are altered from what used to be normal. It is already too late to ask "what if" and instead, ask "what now?" 

My point, if you have not gotten it by now, is that as part of the natural world, we humans are impacted by whatever happens in natural systems. A tiny virus, part of nature, can do tremendous damage to our societies. The systems of nature, such as the atmosphere, that we so wantonly and carelessly abuse will change in ways that negatively impact us. We cannot fool nature; nature will win in the end.

I am not one who says that the planet is in danger, and we need to save the planet. Planet Earth will be fine no matter what we do; it will just be different. The reality is that humans are in great peril, and our social structures, always tenuous constructs, are breaking down at a fast rate. The virus and the changing climate - just those two factors alone - are drastically changing our economies, our demographics, our geographic distribution on the planet, our behaviors, and much more. We humans have the capability, at this moment, to destroy ourselves. We could do it quickly, through nuclear war; we could do it slowly, by continuing business as usual. Perhaps our species will survive and continue to evolve; however, we must keep in mind that other great civilizations of humans once prevailed on Earth and are now long gone. 

Perhaps intelligence is a fatal flaw in evolution. Or perhaps intelligence is the key to successful evolution. Humans are intelligent enough to understand that our own behaviors and actions are destroying the natural system of which we are a part and that keeps us alive. Perhaps natural evolution can only go so far, and once intelligence is reached, the species has to self-evolve behaviorally. In addition to having the capacity to destroy ourselves, we humans have the capacity to change ourselves in ways that will enable survival: acceptance instead of rejection, cooperation instead of conflict, building a world community instead of separate enclaves, loving instead of hating. Technology has a role in this, but it alone will not save us. 

Human. Nature. 

---

IMMORAL, OR JUST POLITICS AS USUAL?

Gleeful hypocrisy is one way to describe the Congressional Republicans as they celebrate the addition of Judge Barrett to the Supreme Court. Another description might use the term "immoral" because of all the lies and breaking of long-held processes and "gentleman" agreements. One side celebrates their tawdry victory while the other licks their wounds and vacillates between thoughts of revenge and how to regain power. 

I personally think the actions of the Congressional Republicans are immoral - "not conforming to the patterns of conduct usually accepted or established as consistent with principles of personal and social ethics." But, on the other hand, we're talking about politics. 

The politics of governance has always been a push and pull between different views and philosophies. In the United States, politics has always been rough and tumble, and perhaps what we are experiencing today is not very different from other periods in our history. So while we might conclude that this is simply politics as usual, that doesn't make it right. 

Should politics operate on moral principles? If yes, whose morals? Should we have rules that politicians must always take the high road? In the present case of Supreme Court nominations, should the Republicans have stayed with their previous position - the one they invented in 2016 - that nominations to the Supreme Court should not be made in an election year? If we say yes, then they would have had to give up a rare opportunity to create a solid conservative majority on the court. 

What would the Democrats do in the same situation? I'm certain they would do the same thing the Republicans just did, and find ways to justify it. It's politics.

And what about the moral obligation of the nominee? Should Amy Coney Barrett have declined the nomination to the court based on moral grounds? She is, after all, a very devout, and supposedly moral person of faith. How does a nominee justify participation in a process that is so obviously cynical, hypocritical and tainted? This should be a tough decision between the once-in-a-lifetime career opportunity and the willing participation in a corrupt political game. The fact that we saw absolutely no hesitation by Barrett should truly give us pause about her character. 

The dice are cast, the Supreme Court is now solidly right-wing, and Americans will live with the consequences for generations. This is not the first time the court has been this conservative, and it won't be the last. Meanwhile, there is an election a week from today, and there is already fighting in the streets of America between the Trumpsters and the anti-Trumpsters. America is at another major crossroad in our history where ideologies clash, social issues motivate mass civic unrest and action, and violence erupts across the country. Our future is uncertain, and there is no easy resolution of the issues that divide us. We don't seem to be the "united" states at this point, and our elected representatives seem incapable, or unwilling, to find a peaceful path forward. 

Can politics be moral? The answer seems to be no. 

---

COVID CREEP

 As The Donald gets closer to the election that looks more and more like he will lose, he gets whackier and whackier. He has held large political rallies, indoors and out, with thousands of packed-in, unmasked supporters. He has had events at the White House where people were not distanced and mostly not wearing masks. There is an outbreak in the White House, with numerous staff testing positive for COVID-19, as well as Donald, his wife and son.  He was hospitalized with COVID-19, came out after a few days, and went out on the campaign trail claiming that the "Chinese virus" is like the flu (he told us that long ago), that it is not a killer, and that everyone should get it so we will all be immune. 

Meanwhile, back in reality....

...the number of new COVID-19 reported cases per day continues to increase...

...the number of COVID-19 cases reported per day in the United States continues to increase...

...the number of reported COVID-19 cases in our State of Oregon is increasing...

...and the number of deaths reported per day related to COVID-19 in the world, USA and Oregon (below) seems to be steady or declining slightly. (All graphics from the Washington Post.)

The medical experts tell us that things are trending in the wrong direction and will get worse as winter approaches. Trump tells us that the "China virus" is going away and everything will be just fine very soon. I know who I believe; how about you? 

I am working hard and hopeful that President Donald J. Trump will be citizen (and inmate) Donald J. Trump as of January 20, 2021. We ned a president who is serious about dealing with a killer pandemic and provides the resources and leadership to get it under control. We need a leader, not a miracle.

---