.
“We won,” Obama said, and everyone heard him. I don’t think the Republicans quite believed him, but he meant it. He was going to compromise only so far.
So the Republicans picked up their baseball and went home.
Didn’t get them very far, did it? The Democrats had plenty of baseballs of their own, so the game went on. I’m hoping that they’ll make the rescue package even stronger and pass it no matter how hard the Republicans huff and puff.
Is the quest for bipartisanship worth the trouble?
Obama thinks so, but I’m not so sure. It’s good to sit down with folks and discuss the issues. Makes them feel included. But offering too much legislative good will up front, as Obama did with the tax cuts, isn’t such a good idea. I think you’re better off proposing a strongly progressive program and changing it after they object, making each modification look like a major concession, something that they can tell their constituents they wrung out of the President.
That’s the way FDR got his programs through: he asked for 50% more than he really wanted, then settled for his original hope-for result in the end. It’s an old bait-and-switch tactic, but it still works.
I don’t understand why Obama didn't use it.
Like Rachel says, “Could somebody talk me down?”
.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Be Glad You're Not a Legislator
.
Most of today was taken up with the budget debate on the floor of the Senate, and it doesn’t look like it’s going to be finished today, no matter how late the Senators sit there. The Democratic leadership wants to present an amendment which will, in effect, be a substitution of their plan for the Republican plan. I doubt it will pass, but it’s important that the Democrats make it clear that they would have gone about fixing this budget mess in a very different manner. Specifically, they would have tried to blunt the impact on our most vulnerable populations and the education of our children.
There’s no way that I can see that there is going to be no impact on people with disabilities, the elderly, foster parents and the children they care for, or any other particular group, but some of these across-the-board cuts of 3.4% are so draconian that we may lose programs that save us money.
One example of this is the money allocated to drug and alcohol treatment programs. Although there is supposed to be only a 3.4% cut, in actuality, those programs will be cut by about 20%, partly because so much federal money will be lost without the state’s contribution. I can hear the conservatives saying, so what? Why should we be coddling drug and alcohol addicts? They made their beds; let them lie in them.
Ah, such short-sightedness!
First of all, drug and alcohol treatment programs rarely coddle anyone. Even in a fancy place like the Betty Ford Clinic (and there is nothing equivalent to it in Kansas), addicts are forced to look addiction in the eye and realize that the disease is ruining not only their lives, but also the lives of many people around them, especially any young children caught up in the situation. If you think taking stock of yourself and finding yourself completely wanting is easy, then you’ve never done it. No amount of comfortable bed and fancy board makes up for knowing that you have failed abysmally, that you are in a deep hole in all aspects of your life, and that there’s nobody but you to dig yourself out. Be glad you’ve never been there.
And most treatment programs don’t include a comfortable bed and even passable food. Many of them, in the first place, are not in-house programs but rather out-patient, where the addict tries to deal with addiction while still functioning in the every-day world. Out-patient programs are cost-effective in that it costs a lot less to treat the addict in such a way, but they’re not always addict-effective, in that a lower percentage of people treated that way get off addiction and stay off it.
Nevertheless, there are generally waiting lists to get into such programs. SB 2003-123, which set up a process for sending non-violent addicts to treatment programs instead of prison, has had very good success, but it could have been better if we had about 50% more beds, especially in western Kansas. About a third of the people who could have qualified went to prison anyway, because there was no treatment program for them outside of prison.
Surely, I don’t have to list for you all the reasons it is more expensive to have untreated addicts bouncing around society. Addicts tend to wind up on welfare, using Medicaid funds to treat their addiction as well as the other medical conditions associated with addiction, like AIDS, for example. If we can keep just one junkie from contracting AIDS from a dirty needle, we can save enough money to pay for treatment for 100 others. Addicts who are actively using also mess up their children, who wind up in foster care and mental health treatment, again often on Medicaid, at beaucoup cost to society. As we all know, the children of addicts are far more likely to become addicts themselves, leading to another round of expensive treatment and support.
For all these reasons, reducing drug and alcohol treatment by 20% probably will lead to increased need in a very short time.
But, you say, where ARE we going to get the money? The same arguments can be made for decreases in funding for education and elder care and SRS. You either pay some today or you pay some more later.
The trouble is, at the state level, we don’t have a lot of options. We don’t have any flashy programs like the Department of Defense that we can cut to the bone for a short time while we transfer that spending into the essentials. (Not that the Department of Defense is a luxury, mind you; I’m merely objecting to the multi-billion-dollar fighter jets and multi-million-dollar tanks that need servicing after a mile and a half.) Nor can a state government simply print money. And God forbid that we consider raising taxes!
My hope is that Congress will include help to the states in the stimulus package and will pass it soon. Increases in unemployment benefits also might keep the revenue intake on a somewhat even keel as more Kansans lose their jobs. People do pay taxes on unemployment benefits, you know, and those funds flow out of the hands of the unemployed into the hands of businesses where sales tax is collected. Both those factors will help the State of Kansas.
But they’re only stopgaps. We need solutions. People need jobs. I believe that the President’s focus on making the country less dependent on fossil fuels is the way to go for the next decade. I like the idea of people putting insulation in homes, installing solar panels on roofs, and erecting wind farms. It’s going to take a lot of pump priming, and there’s always the risk that we will give up before we get to that tipping point, but I think Americans are ready to put themselves to work making America better for everyone.
At least I hope so. In the meantime, the Senate is debating another amendment. It’s going to be a long night leading into another long day tomorrow. Be glad you’re not a legislator.
.
Most of today was taken up with the budget debate on the floor of the Senate, and it doesn’t look like it’s going to be finished today, no matter how late the Senators sit there. The Democratic leadership wants to present an amendment which will, in effect, be a substitution of their plan for the Republican plan. I doubt it will pass, but it’s important that the Democrats make it clear that they would have gone about fixing this budget mess in a very different manner. Specifically, they would have tried to blunt the impact on our most vulnerable populations and the education of our children.
There’s no way that I can see that there is going to be no impact on people with disabilities, the elderly, foster parents and the children they care for, or any other particular group, but some of these across-the-board cuts of 3.4% are so draconian that we may lose programs that save us money.
One example of this is the money allocated to drug and alcohol treatment programs. Although there is supposed to be only a 3.4% cut, in actuality, those programs will be cut by about 20%, partly because so much federal money will be lost without the state’s contribution. I can hear the conservatives saying, so what? Why should we be coddling drug and alcohol addicts? They made their beds; let them lie in them.
Ah, such short-sightedness!
First of all, drug and alcohol treatment programs rarely coddle anyone. Even in a fancy place like the Betty Ford Clinic (and there is nothing equivalent to it in Kansas), addicts are forced to look addiction in the eye and realize that the disease is ruining not only their lives, but also the lives of many people around them, especially any young children caught up in the situation. If you think taking stock of yourself and finding yourself completely wanting is easy, then you’ve never done it. No amount of comfortable bed and fancy board makes up for knowing that you have failed abysmally, that you are in a deep hole in all aspects of your life, and that there’s nobody but you to dig yourself out. Be glad you’ve never been there.
And most treatment programs don’t include a comfortable bed and even passable food. Many of them, in the first place, are not in-house programs but rather out-patient, where the addict tries to deal with addiction while still functioning in the every-day world. Out-patient programs are cost-effective in that it costs a lot less to treat the addict in such a way, but they’re not always addict-effective, in that a lower percentage of people treated that way get off addiction and stay off it.
Nevertheless, there are generally waiting lists to get into such programs. SB 2003-123, which set up a process for sending non-violent addicts to treatment programs instead of prison, has had very good success, but it could have been better if we had about 50% more beds, especially in western Kansas. About a third of the people who could have qualified went to prison anyway, because there was no treatment program for them outside of prison.
Surely, I don’t have to list for you all the reasons it is more expensive to have untreated addicts bouncing around society. Addicts tend to wind up on welfare, using Medicaid funds to treat their addiction as well as the other medical conditions associated with addiction, like AIDS, for example. If we can keep just one junkie from contracting AIDS from a dirty needle, we can save enough money to pay for treatment for 100 others. Addicts who are actively using also mess up their children, who wind up in foster care and mental health treatment, again often on Medicaid, at beaucoup cost to society. As we all know, the children of addicts are far more likely to become addicts themselves, leading to another round of expensive treatment and support.
For all these reasons, reducing drug and alcohol treatment by 20% probably will lead to increased need in a very short time.
But, you say, where ARE we going to get the money? The same arguments can be made for decreases in funding for education and elder care and SRS. You either pay some today or you pay some more later.
The trouble is, at the state level, we don’t have a lot of options. We don’t have any flashy programs like the Department of Defense that we can cut to the bone for a short time while we transfer that spending into the essentials. (Not that the Department of Defense is a luxury, mind you; I’m merely objecting to the multi-billion-dollar fighter jets and multi-million-dollar tanks that need servicing after a mile and a half.) Nor can a state government simply print money. And God forbid that we consider raising taxes!
My hope is that Congress will include help to the states in the stimulus package and will pass it soon. Increases in unemployment benefits also might keep the revenue intake on a somewhat even keel as more Kansans lose their jobs. People do pay taxes on unemployment benefits, you know, and those funds flow out of the hands of the unemployed into the hands of businesses where sales tax is collected. Both those factors will help the State of Kansas.
But they’re only stopgaps. We need solutions. People need jobs. I believe that the President’s focus on making the country less dependent on fossil fuels is the way to go for the next decade. I like the idea of people putting insulation in homes, installing solar panels on roofs, and erecting wind farms. It’s going to take a lot of pump priming, and there’s always the risk that we will give up before we get to that tipping point, but I think Americans are ready to put themselves to work making America better for everyone.
At least I hope so. In the meantime, the Senate is debating another amendment. It’s going to be a long night leading into another long day tomorrow. Be glad you’re not a legislator.
.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Ice on the Windshield
.
There was ice on my windshield this morning. I didn’t have a scraper, so I set both the front and rear defrosters going and waited for them to do their magic. It seemed to be taking longer than expected, however, so I looked again. That’s when I discovered that I had pushed the button to turn on the air conditioning instead of the rear windshield defroster. I fixed that, and soon I could see well enough to drive.
It seems to me that Obama is in a similar situation with the economic recovery plan, a.k.a. the stimulus package. Instead of writing a bill that would do what he thinks needs doing, and only what he thinks needs doing, he tried to write one that would invite the Republicans to be bipartisan or post-partisan or whatever -- to get with the program. Instead, the Republicans are playing their old partisan games and complaining that the bill doesn’t do enough of what they want and does too much of what the Democrats want. In the meantime, the Democrats are complaining that it does too little of what they want.
Now, I know and you know that Obama is trying to find a proposal that will garner broad support in the Congress. But the Republicans clearly aren’t going to give him that. Faced with a bill that includes $300 billion in tax cuts, they are whining that it doesn’t have enough tax breaks for businesses. Never mind that the tax cuts for individuals will give them the money to buy the goods and services the businesses produce. If Obama sweetened the bill, I’ll bet the Republicans would complain that it doesn’t cut the capital gains tax.
It’s time to admit it. They’re not going to support the bill no matter how it’s written. They still haven’t got the message voters sent them in 2006 and again last fall that we’re tired of this constant bickering at the expense of getting the people’s business done – and that we don’t believe their economic theories are the right ones for today’s problems.
So I think Obama should withdraw this one and send a different package to the Hill. The new package should include even more spending on infrastructure, should have fewer tax cuts, and should increase the amount that is going directly into the pockets of unemployed, elderly, and TANF citizens so that it will be spent immediately on necessities. That would be a real stimulus.
And I think Obama should say right out that he gave the Republicans a chance and they didn’t take it. He tried to give them something of what they want in order to get their support for something that would be good for the whole country, but they wouldn't buy it. So now we’re going to do it the Democrats’ way.
In other words, I think he should turn on every defroster full blast and see if that doesn’t melt some of the ice.
.
There was ice on my windshield this morning. I didn’t have a scraper, so I set both the front and rear defrosters going and waited for them to do their magic. It seemed to be taking longer than expected, however, so I looked again. That’s when I discovered that I had pushed the button to turn on the air conditioning instead of the rear windshield defroster. I fixed that, and soon I could see well enough to drive.
It seems to me that Obama is in a similar situation with the economic recovery plan, a.k.a. the stimulus package. Instead of writing a bill that would do what he thinks needs doing, and only what he thinks needs doing, he tried to write one that would invite the Republicans to be bipartisan or post-partisan or whatever -- to get with the program. Instead, the Republicans are playing their old partisan games and complaining that the bill doesn’t do enough of what they want and does too much of what the Democrats want. In the meantime, the Democrats are complaining that it does too little of what they want.
Now, I know and you know that Obama is trying to find a proposal that will garner broad support in the Congress. But the Republicans clearly aren’t going to give him that. Faced with a bill that includes $300 billion in tax cuts, they are whining that it doesn’t have enough tax breaks for businesses. Never mind that the tax cuts for individuals will give them the money to buy the goods and services the businesses produce. If Obama sweetened the bill, I’ll bet the Republicans would complain that it doesn’t cut the capital gains tax.
It’s time to admit it. They’re not going to support the bill no matter how it’s written. They still haven’t got the message voters sent them in 2006 and again last fall that we’re tired of this constant bickering at the expense of getting the people’s business done – and that we don’t believe their economic theories are the right ones for today’s problems.
So I think Obama should withdraw this one and send a different package to the Hill. The new package should include even more spending on infrastructure, should have fewer tax cuts, and should increase the amount that is going directly into the pockets of unemployed, elderly, and TANF citizens so that it will be spent immediately on necessities. That would be a real stimulus.
And I think Obama should say right out that he gave the Republicans a chance and they didn’t take it. He tried to give them something of what they want in order to get their support for something that would be good for the whole country, but they wouldn't buy it. So now we’re going to do it the Democrats’ way.
In other words, I think he should turn on every defroster full blast and see if that doesn’t melt some of the ice.
.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Legislative Work
.
Will the 2009 legislature wait until the last moment to tackle the problems facing the state? Will there be a special session? How will the budget come out?
I’m not a prophet, so I can’t answer those questions with any degree of certainty, but I can tell you some things about the process.
The legislature will not wait until the last moment to tackle the problems facing the state. They are already working on them. The trouble is, the media will focus on only one or two problems, and those will be the most intractable. Some years that is education; most years it includes abortion and the death penalty; every year it is the budget.
The budget, which is the 800-pound gorilla of legislation of every session, is this year the 800-pound gorilla and his brother Bob. Not only do the legislators have to reconcile competing proposals for next year’s budget, they must re-reconcile the budget for this year. The governor has put forward her proposal; the Republicans have put forward theirs. The Democratic legislators, for once, are being supportive of the governor by not putting forward a different one for themselves.
The two proposals for next year are actually mostly in agreement. No one is arguing for cutting essential services like the State Highway Patrol or mandating across-the-board cuts in all services. Instead, they are making changes around the margins, for the most part.
But changes around the margins aren’t going to take care of this year’s budget problems. The governor has proposed cuts that will pare some waste and overlap, but the Republicans want to cut things to the bone. The difference is $150 million – and that’s real money in a budget as small as the state of Kansas’.
But the legislators, for the most part, have rolled up their sleeves and are looking at both proposals line by line. When I say “legislators,” of course, I mean the members of the two budget committees and the leadership of each house of the legislature. Individual legislators will pay attention to the budget for their pet projects, but few will pay attention to the overall budget until it actually comes to the floor of their respective house.
That’s actually true of the budget committees, too. They are broken up into small subcommittees of usually only three members, each of which will hear limited testimony and work the budgets for one department or set of agencies within a department. For example, one subcommittee last year oversaw the KPERS budget, another the Department of Administration, which includes the Governmental Ethics Commission, the Human Rights Commission, the Kansas Corporation Commission, and the Citizens Utility Ratepayer Board. Not all the subcommittees in the Senate have been set for this year, because there is a new Ways and Means chair, and he is reorganizing them. It will take almost to turnaround day for these subcommittees to finish their work, and then they will have to do it all over again on the opposite house’s budget.
In and around those considerations will be the considerations of many of the other bills in all the other committees. Here is where the power of the committee chairs is exercised. There are always too many bills to be taken up, and the committee chairs decide which ones will be worked. If no hearings are held on a bill, it will not be voted on in the committee. If it’s not voted on in the committee, it won’t be sent to the floor of its respective house.
The floor is where the leadership’s power is exercised. Not all the bills sent to the floor actually make it to a vote. The majority leader puts bills “below the line” or “above the line.” The line referred to is a line on each day’s General Orders, which is essentially the agenda of the Senate, or at least the part of it that refers to bills. Only the bills above the line will be considered that day. Some bills never make it above the line. The ones that do, of course, have to be voted on in the opposite house.
So the legislators are working, and working hard.
But inevitably, there will be tremendous amounts of work produced in the last week before turnaround day and the last week before the Senate adjourns. Things pile up, and the legislators can’t always get one another to take a firm stand until the deadline approaches. If a legislator doesn’t know what the outcome for his or her bill will be, he or she obviously will ask the leadership to hold that bill to allow more time for dickering with the other legislators.
And the more important the bill, the more dickering goes on. So, yes, the legislators may “wait until the last moment” to vote on important bills, but, no, the legislators won’t wait until the last minute to work on them.
And that’s enough of that for today.
.
Will the 2009 legislature wait until the last moment to tackle the problems facing the state? Will there be a special session? How will the budget come out?
I’m not a prophet, so I can’t answer those questions with any degree of certainty, but I can tell you some things about the process.
The legislature will not wait until the last moment to tackle the problems facing the state. They are already working on them. The trouble is, the media will focus on only one or two problems, and those will be the most intractable. Some years that is education; most years it includes abortion and the death penalty; every year it is the budget.
The budget, which is the 800-pound gorilla of legislation of every session, is this year the 800-pound gorilla and his brother Bob. Not only do the legislators have to reconcile competing proposals for next year’s budget, they must re-reconcile the budget for this year. The governor has put forward her proposal; the Republicans have put forward theirs. The Democratic legislators, for once, are being supportive of the governor by not putting forward a different one for themselves.
The two proposals for next year are actually mostly in agreement. No one is arguing for cutting essential services like the State Highway Patrol or mandating across-the-board cuts in all services. Instead, they are making changes around the margins, for the most part.
But changes around the margins aren’t going to take care of this year’s budget problems. The governor has proposed cuts that will pare some waste and overlap, but the Republicans want to cut things to the bone. The difference is $150 million – and that’s real money in a budget as small as the state of Kansas’.
But the legislators, for the most part, have rolled up their sleeves and are looking at both proposals line by line. When I say “legislators,” of course, I mean the members of the two budget committees and the leadership of each house of the legislature. Individual legislators will pay attention to the budget for their pet projects, but few will pay attention to the overall budget until it actually comes to the floor of their respective house.
That’s actually true of the budget committees, too. They are broken up into small subcommittees of usually only three members, each of which will hear limited testimony and work the budgets for one department or set of agencies within a department. For example, one subcommittee last year oversaw the KPERS budget, another the Department of Administration, which includes the Governmental Ethics Commission, the Human Rights Commission, the Kansas Corporation Commission, and the Citizens Utility Ratepayer Board. Not all the subcommittees in the Senate have been set for this year, because there is a new Ways and Means chair, and he is reorganizing them. It will take almost to turnaround day for these subcommittees to finish their work, and then they will have to do it all over again on the opposite house’s budget.
In and around those considerations will be the considerations of many of the other bills in all the other committees. Here is where the power of the committee chairs is exercised. There are always too many bills to be taken up, and the committee chairs decide which ones will be worked. If no hearings are held on a bill, it will not be voted on in the committee. If it’s not voted on in the committee, it won’t be sent to the floor of its respective house.
The floor is where the leadership’s power is exercised. Not all the bills sent to the floor actually make it to a vote. The majority leader puts bills “below the line” or “above the line.” The line referred to is a line on each day’s General Orders, which is essentially the agenda of the Senate, or at least the part of it that refers to bills. Only the bills above the line will be considered that day. Some bills never make it above the line. The ones that do, of course, have to be voted on in the opposite house.
So the legislators are working, and working hard.
But inevitably, there will be tremendous amounts of work produced in the last week before turnaround day and the last week before the Senate adjourns. Things pile up, and the legislators can’t always get one another to take a firm stand until the deadline approaches. If a legislator doesn’t know what the outcome for his or her bill will be, he or she obviously will ask the leadership to hold that bill to allow more time for dickering with the other legislators.
And the more important the bill, the more dickering goes on. So, yes, the legislators may “wait until the last moment” to vote on important bills, but, no, the legislators won’t wait until the last minute to work on them.
And that’s enough of that for today.
.
Friday, January 23, 2009
What a difference three days can make
.
What a difference three days can make.
Guantanamo is to be closed. The Iraq conflict is to end. Bush administration executive orders are to be reversed. Torture is ended.
And those are just the beginning.
I can’t think of a similar three-day period during my lifetime, and it just goes to show that it really does matter whom we elect President of the United States. If by historic we mean that which will be written up in the history books of the future, then this has been a truly historic week.
It makes the work of the State Legislature seem small by comparison, but that doesn’t mean that no matters of historic proportions were bruted in Topeka this week.
We have our own lobbyist reform bill in SB 2; a bill to institute disclosures by professional fund raisers in SB 6; a proposed requirement that all interrogations of persons suspected of felony violations be videotaped in SB 17; adjustments to the rules about campaign finance disclosure in SB 43 (state board of education) and SB 57 (electronic filing of reports); and three bills about the act of voting in SB 42 (state board of education), SB 55 (uniformed and overseas voters), and SB 56 (security of advanced ballots).
These last five bills affect the very foundation of our political life in proposing changes to the way campaigns are conducted and votes are cast, but just as important are “technical” bills like SB 3, a suggestion that a seventh member should be added to the Senate Confirmation Oversight Committee in order to give it a more bipartisan makeup. The Confirmation Oversight Committee is responsible for examining persons appointed to positions that must be confirmed by the Legislature before they can serve the Governor in her capacity as chief executive officer of the state. Currently the committee consists of five Republicans and one Democrat. Adding a seventh member would result in five Republicans and two Democrats, more reflective of the actual makeup of the Legislature.
More likely to affect people’s day-to-day life is SB 24, Senator Faust-Goudeau’s effort to divorce insurance premiums from people’s credit score. I’ll bet you didn’t know that if you have a low credit score, you can be charged a higher premium. This seems inherently unfair to me. Premiums should be based on the risk involved. For example, a person with a low credit score is no more likely than any other person with a similar driving record to have an automobile accident. What the insurance companies are trying to do, of course, is make sure their premiums get paid. Increasing the premium, however, is more likely to make sure the insured cannot afford to pay it, than to increase the likelihood of a claim being made against the insurance policy.
We have another concealed carry law this year. SB 19 would allow prosecutors and assistant prosecutors to carry a concealed weapon into a courthouse if they had fulfilled the requirements to have a concealed carry permit in the first place. The law also would apply to the attorney general and any assistant attorneys general he should designate.
What is already shaping up as the issue on which we get the most phone calls is the suggestion that the cigarette tax should be increased by 75 cents. Evidently, one of the cigarette companies is calling people, asking if they are smokers, telling them about the increase, then forwarding the call to the appropriate legislator for the smoker to express their opposition to the increase. Senator Faust-Goudeau has received more than ten of these calls already.
Then there is SB 4, which allows the Turnpike Authority to set different tolls based on the average speed of drivers on toll roads, such special tolls to be based on the added breakdown caused by speeding vehicles and the increased emissions from them. In other words, if it takes you only two hours to get from Wichita to Topeka on the Kansas Turnpike, you will pay a higher toll than if it took you two hours and ten minutes to cover the same distance. I haven’t decided how I feel about this bill. On the one hand, I believe that excessive speed is not a good thing. On the other, do I really want the state to go this way about addressing the problem or do I think this is an invasion of the privacy of the drivers?
Just as likely to stir up emotion, however, is SB 59, which increases the fine for not wearing a seat belt from $30 to $60 and extends the requirement to any occupant, whether front or back, and no matter what age. I can just see the libertarians exercising their index fingers to punch out those phone numbers – and flexing their hands before sitting down at the computer keyboard, too.
There are two bills, SB 64 and 65, concerning water rights and eminent domain, and several (SB 7, 9, 20, 21, 22, and 39) on different aspects of school finance. There are sure to be many more before the session is over. In fact, the session has barely begun. So far, only 64 bills have been introduced in the Senate. The final tally is likely to be 300. The really important bills – those involving the budget – are not likely to be introduced until the last minute, and they will be amended heavily in committee before coming to the floor of the Senate. And, don’t forget, the same process is going forward in the House of Representatives, as well, where already 49 bills have been introduced.
But the jockeying has begun, as Senators and Representatives sound one another out in the halls, lining up supporters, marking down opponents, doing their best to do their best for their constituents, knowing that they have only a few weeks – so few days – to make a difference.
.
What a difference three days can make.
Guantanamo is to be closed. The Iraq conflict is to end. Bush administration executive orders are to be reversed. Torture is ended.
And those are just the beginning.
I can’t think of a similar three-day period during my lifetime, and it just goes to show that it really does matter whom we elect President of the United States. If by historic we mean that which will be written up in the history books of the future, then this has been a truly historic week.
It makes the work of the State Legislature seem small by comparison, but that doesn’t mean that no matters of historic proportions were bruted in Topeka this week.
We have our own lobbyist reform bill in SB 2; a bill to institute disclosures by professional fund raisers in SB 6; a proposed requirement that all interrogations of persons suspected of felony violations be videotaped in SB 17; adjustments to the rules about campaign finance disclosure in SB 43 (state board of education) and SB 57 (electronic filing of reports); and three bills about the act of voting in SB 42 (state board of education), SB 55 (uniformed and overseas voters), and SB 56 (security of advanced ballots).
These last five bills affect the very foundation of our political life in proposing changes to the way campaigns are conducted and votes are cast, but just as important are “technical” bills like SB 3, a suggestion that a seventh member should be added to the Senate Confirmation Oversight Committee in order to give it a more bipartisan makeup. The Confirmation Oversight Committee is responsible for examining persons appointed to positions that must be confirmed by the Legislature before they can serve the Governor in her capacity as chief executive officer of the state. Currently the committee consists of five Republicans and one Democrat. Adding a seventh member would result in five Republicans and two Democrats, more reflective of the actual makeup of the Legislature.
More likely to affect people’s day-to-day life is SB 24, Senator Faust-Goudeau’s effort to divorce insurance premiums from people’s credit score. I’ll bet you didn’t know that if you have a low credit score, you can be charged a higher premium. This seems inherently unfair to me. Premiums should be based on the risk involved. For example, a person with a low credit score is no more likely than any other person with a similar driving record to have an automobile accident. What the insurance companies are trying to do, of course, is make sure their premiums get paid. Increasing the premium, however, is more likely to make sure the insured cannot afford to pay it, than to increase the likelihood of a claim being made against the insurance policy.
We have another concealed carry law this year. SB 19 would allow prosecutors and assistant prosecutors to carry a concealed weapon into a courthouse if they had fulfilled the requirements to have a concealed carry permit in the first place. The law also would apply to the attorney general and any assistant attorneys general he should designate.
What is already shaping up as the issue on which we get the most phone calls is the suggestion that the cigarette tax should be increased by 75 cents. Evidently, one of the cigarette companies is calling people, asking if they are smokers, telling them about the increase, then forwarding the call to the appropriate legislator for the smoker to express their opposition to the increase. Senator Faust-Goudeau has received more than ten of these calls already.
Then there is SB 4, which allows the Turnpike Authority to set different tolls based on the average speed of drivers on toll roads, such special tolls to be based on the added breakdown caused by speeding vehicles and the increased emissions from them. In other words, if it takes you only two hours to get from Wichita to Topeka on the Kansas Turnpike, you will pay a higher toll than if it took you two hours and ten minutes to cover the same distance. I haven’t decided how I feel about this bill. On the one hand, I believe that excessive speed is not a good thing. On the other, do I really want the state to go this way about addressing the problem or do I think this is an invasion of the privacy of the drivers?
Just as likely to stir up emotion, however, is SB 59, which increases the fine for not wearing a seat belt from $30 to $60 and extends the requirement to any occupant, whether front or back, and no matter what age. I can just see the libertarians exercising their index fingers to punch out those phone numbers – and flexing their hands before sitting down at the computer keyboard, too.
There are two bills, SB 64 and 65, concerning water rights and eminent domain, and several (SB 7, 9, 20, 21, 22, and 39) on different aspects of school finance. There are sure to be many more before the session is over. In fact, the session has barely begun. So far, only 64 bills have been introduced in the Senate. The final tally is likely to be 300. The really important bills – those involving the budget – are not likely to be introduced until the last minute, and they will be amended heavily in committee before coming to the floor of the Senate. And, don’t forget, the same process is going forward in the House of Representatives, as well, where already 49 bills have been introduced.
But the jockeying has begun, as Senators and Representatives sound one another out in the halls, lining up supporters, marking down opponents, doing their best to do their best for their constituents, knowing that they have only a few weeks – so few days – to make a difference.
.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Just a Newsletter
.
Here it is 6:30 p.m., and I’m still in the office. One of the comments from last night was that the Senator needed to hire more staff, and I don’t disagree. Unfortunately, she can’t afford to pay anyone, and the state provides only me. We do have an intern, but her focus is on following the Senator to committee and learning about the legislative process.
The Senator has decided to miss tomorrow’s pro forma session and go home tonight rather than tomorrow afternoon, so I will be alone in the office for the part of tomorrow I will work before I head to Topeka, too. That’s when I will really get the work done, of course – when there’s nobody else in the office. With any luck, the phone will be quiet, too.
What kept me late tonight was the Senator’s newsletter. The Majority Leader’s office does have staff – enough staff to have a manager – and one of those minions, Stefanie Grave, produces a generic newsletter each Thursday that we look through and modify a little here and a little there to make it our newsletter. I, of course, also read it looking for typos and style errors. Being a nitpicker does take time.
Newsletters are one of those things that legislators are expected to produce, but which really gain the legislator little credit. No one values it but everyone notices if it doesn’t appear. Much of politics is like that. People want their legislators to continually communicate with them, then they complain because they get too many e-mails or such like from them. Finding the balance between keeping the public informed and letting the public be as uninformed as they'd like is tricky.
I was very proud of the nearly weekly newsletters produced by the Majority Leader’s staff and tweaked by me in the first two years of my time with Senator Betts. But I was recently told that many people objected to getting so many and tossed them aside without reading them. Talk about throwing a wet blanket!
On the other hand, I don’t have to feel guilty any more that I wasn’t able to keep up the same pace in the second two years I sat in that tiny little office. Perhaps the occasional newsletters we sent out those years had more impact than the weekly ones. I guess I’ll never know for sure.
Well, I’ve maundered along long enough. Tomorrow I’ll be able to write in the morning, so it may be worth reading.
.
Here it is 6:30 p.m., and I’m still in the office. One of the comments from last night was that the Senator needed to hire more staff, and I don’t disagree. Unfortunately, she can’t afford to pay anyone, and the state provides only me. We do have an intern, but her focus is on following the Senator to committee and learning about the legislative process.
The Senator has decided to miss tomorrow’s pro forma session and go home tonight rather than tomorrow afternoon, so I will be alone in the office for the part of tomorrow I will work before I head to Topeka, too. That’s when I will really get the work done, of course – when there’s nobody else in the office. With any luck, the phone will be quiet, too.
What kept me late tonight was the Senator’s newsletter. The Majority Leader’s office does have staff – enough staff to have a manager – and one of those minions, Stefanie Grave, produces a generic newsletter each Thursday that we look through and modify a little here and a little there to make it our newsletter. I, of course, also read it looking for typos and style errors. Being a nitpicker does take time.
Newsletters are one of those things that legislators are expected to produce, but which really gain the legislator little credit. No one values it but everyone notices if it doesn’t appear. Much of politics is like that. People want their legislators to continually communicate with them, then they complain because they get too many e-mails or such like from them. Finding the balance between keeping the public informed and letting the public be as uninformed as they'd like is tricky.
I was very proud of the nearly weekly newsletters produced by the Majority Leader’s staff and tweaked by me in the first two years of my time with Senator Betts. But I was recently told that many people objected to getting so many and tossed them aside without reading them. Talk about throwing a wet blanket!
On the other hand, I don’t have to feel guilty any more that I wasn’t able to keep up the same pace in the second two years I sat in that tiny little office. Perhaps the occasional newsletters we sent out those years had more impact than the weekly ones. I guess I’ll never know for sure.
Well, I’ve maundered along long enough. Tomorrow I’ll be able to write in the morning, so it may be worth reading.
.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
The Real Reason
.
This is the first day of the Obama Administration, and I haven’t seen any news since 7 a.m.
Aaarrggggh!
It is amazing how isolating it can be to work in the Capitol. There are no TVs and no radios around. I could listen over the computer, of course, but it is difficult to concentrate on both, so I wind up either working and not hearing the news or listening to the news and not getting any work done. Generally, I choose to get the work done. There are, of course, mounds of it.
The information age has meant that the paper trail is longer and wider every day. Sen. Faust-Goudeau receives e-mails on two aol.com accounts, plus the state computer network, where both she and I have separate inboxes. I try to read the e-mails on at least two of these sites every day, both the “official” inbox every day and alternating aol.com inboxes every other day. Needless to say, I am almost always at least a day behind on the aol.com inboxes.
This is a problem. The Senator does not have time to sift through the inboxes at all, so she is reliant on me to print out the ones I think she thinks she should see, punch holes in the side, and put them in her “dailies,” two notebooks we alternate each day giving her schedule, committee agendas, and all the other e-mails and regular mail. Right now, both notebooks are so full they don’t close properly, and I worry that business is not getting handled.
And we haven’t reached the point in the Session when we will be inundated with e-mails urging her to vote one way or another on a controversial bill.
So the information age overwhelms the system and makes the legislator, even a lowly state legislator, dependent on the quality of her staff to make sure she sees what she needs to see in a timely fashion. I can’t imagine what this process is like in a Congressional office. If we get 100 e-mails a day, do they get 1,000? 10,000? 50,000? Does a Kansas Senator get four times as many as each Representative? Times two Senators? Who reads them, who decides which ones are meaningful, who makes sure the member of Congress sees the ones he or she ought to see?
What is sad about all this is that it means that constituents, who think they have more access to their legislator because they can send an e-mail every time the impulse takes them, get less service. When you are approached about two SRS cases a day, most of them from people who don’t live in the district, it is difficult to do anything to check into the situation and see if a call from a State Senator’s office will unblock a log jam.
These SRS cases soak up a lot of time, and they’re the ones that tear at you the most. Who doesn’t want to help a child who is being failed or even abused by the system? That’s the kind of work every legislator most wants to do, but it’s not really part of the job description, so they pick and choose, often on fairly arbitrary criteria.
And then there are the vets not getting health care or a wheelchair when they need them; the people who are wrestling with Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security to get services they have paid for all their lives; constituents needing help getting a visa to visit their family overseas or one for a family member to visit here.
But the vast majority of the contacts are, indeed, from someone who wants to influence the Senator’s vote. The lobbyists are the most systematic, holding luncheons, receptions, and dinners to lure the legislators within hearing distance so they can plead their case.
Far more influential, however, are the individual voters who write to support a change to the animal cruelty laws to outlaw puppy mills or to oppose what they see as a bill that eviscerates one law or a bill to create an official overreach in another. These are of far more interest to the Senator because they come from “real people,” even if the people aren’t actually constituents but still come from Wichita or Sedgwick County. The Senator likes to answer all these e-mails, but it isn’t really possible. We do our best, however, and have to hope that is good enough.
So that’s why I haven’t been writing my blog on a regular basis since I got to Topeka. Not exactly a good excuse. Just the real reason.
And I still haven't seen any news.
.
This is the first day of the Obama Administration, and I haven’t seen any news since 7 a.m.
Aaarrggggh!
It is amazing how isolating it can be to work in the Capitol. There are no TVs and no radios around. I could listen over the computer, of course, but it is difficult to concentrate on both, so I wind up either working and not hearing the news or listening to the news and not getting any work done. Generally, I choose to get the work done. There are, of course, mounds of it.
The information age has meant that the paper trail is longer and wider every day. Sen. Faust-Goudeau receives e-mails on two aol.com accounts, plus the state computer network, where both she and I have separate inboxes. I try to read the e-mails on at least two of these sites every day, both the “official” inbox every day and alternating aol.com inboxes every other day. Needless to say, I am almost always at least a day behind on the aol.com inboxes.
This is a problem. The Senator does not have time to sift through the inboxes at all, so she is reliant on me to print out the ones I think she thinks she should see, punch holes in the side, and put them in her “dailies,” two notebooks we alternate each day giving her schedule, committee agendas, and all the other e-mails and regular mail. Right now, both notebooks are so full they don’t close properly, and I worry that business is not getting handled.
And we haven’t reached the point in the Session when we will be inundated with e-mails urging her to vote one way or another on a controversial bill.
So the information age overwhelms the system and makes the legislator, even a lowly state legislator, dependent on the quality of her staff to make sure she sees what she needs to see in a timely fashion. I can’t imagine what this process is like in a Congressional office. If we get 100 e-mails a day, do they get 1,000? 10,000? 50,000? Does a Kansas Senator get four times as many as each Representative? Times two Senators? Who reads them, who decides which ones are meaningful, who makes sure the member of Congress sees the ones he or she ought to see?
What is sad about all this is that it means that constituents, who think they have more access to their legislator because they can send an e-mail every time the impulse takes them, get less service. When you are approached about two SRS cases a day, most of them from people who don’t live in the district, it is difficult to do anything to check into the situation and see if a call from a State Senator’s office will unblock a log jam.
These SRS cases soak up a lot of time, and they’re the ones that tear at you the most. Who doesn’t want to help a child who is being failed or even abused by the system? That’s the kind of work every legislator most wants to do, but it’s not really part of the job description, so they pick and choose, often on fairly arbitrary criteria.
And then there are the vets not getting health care or a wheelchair when they need them; the people who are wrestling with Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security to get services they have paid for all their lives; constituents needing help getting a visa to visit their family overseas or one for a family member to visit here.
But the vast majority of the contacts are, indeed, from someone who wants to influence the Senator’s vote. The lobbyists are the most systematic, holding luncheons, receptions, and dinners to lure the legislators within hearing distance so they can plead their case.
Far more influential, however, are the individual voters who write to support a change to the animal cruelty laws to outlaw puppy mills or to oppose what they see as a bill that eviscerates one law or a bill to create an official overreach in another. These are of far more interest to the Senator because they come from “real people,” even if the people aren’t actually constituents but still come from Wichita or Sedgwick County. The Senator likes to answer all these e-mails, but it isn’t really possible. We do our best, however, and have to hope that is good enough.
So that’s why I haven’t been writing my blog on a regular basis since I got to Topeka. Not exactly a good excuse. Just the real reason.
And I still haven't seen any news.
.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Unbearable Lightness of Being
.
The unbearable lightness of being.
That phrase, actually the title of a novel and a film, has been running through my mind for days now. It describes the emotions racing through me upon the inauguration of Barack Obama. I cannot describe how hopeful and fearful and excited I am. What words I come up with are just not adequate to my feelings.
I believe that this is a great man. Not a messiah, but an extraordinary human being who is far better equipped than any of the other people who might be leading us at this extraordinary time.
We have been through hell in the past eight years. I don’t need to detail the darkness. We are all far too familiar with it. The hell is not over. In some ways, it has just begun. We have so much work to do. The trouble is, we’re not always sure what steps we need to take to achieve our goals.
For eight years, we have been forced to accept the leadership of small people, people unequipped to deal with any problems, let alone the gigantic ones that have appeared. Some of those problems were brought on by our own stupidity; all are the result of bad leadership going back many years.
Finally, we have leadership whose policies we know to be the result of deep thought and great instincts. No longer will we distrust everything that comes out of the White House. No longer do we need to resist foolish directions and incompetent management. No longer will we view the people who serve us in our government as venal and contemptible.
He will make mistakes. His people will make mistakes. We will make mistakes. I pray that we will forgive with generosity of spirit. If we don’t, it won’t be because the people in the government are spreading hate and denigration. His leadership will see to that.
The transition is excruciating. Can we wrap our heads around the new atmosphere? Can we accept that pragmatism will rule? Can we prevent a reversion to the old ways?
Yes, we can.
.
The unbearable lightness of being.
That phrase, actually the title of a novel and a film, has been running through my mind for days now. It describes the emotions racing through me upon the inauguration of Barack Obama. I cannot describe how hopeful and fearful and excited I am. What words I come up with are just not adequate to my feelings.
I believe that this is a great man. Not a messiah, but an extraordinary human being who is far better equipped than any of the other people who might be leading us at this extraordinary time.
We have been through hell in the past eight years. I don’t need to detail the darkness. We are all far too familiar with it. The hell is not over. In some ways, it has just begun. We have so much work to do. The trouble is, we’re not always sure what steps we need to take to achieve our goals.
For eight years, we have been forced to accept the leadership of small people, people unequipped to deal with any problems, let alone the gigantic ones that have appeared. Some of those problems were brought on by our own stupidity; all are the result of bad leadership going back many years.
Finally, we have leadership whose policies we know to be the result of deep thought and great instincts. No longer will we distrust everything that comes out of the White House. No longer do we need to resist foolish directions and incompetent management. No longer will we view the people who serve us in our government as venal and contemptible.
He will make mistakes. His people will make mistakes. We will make mistakes. I pray that we will forgive with generosity of spirit. If we don’t, it won’t be because the people in the government are spreading hate and denigration. His leadership will see to that.
The transition is excruciating. Can we wrap our heads around the new atmosphere? Can we accept that pragmatism will rule? Can we prevent a reversion to the old ways?
Yes, we can.
.
Friday, January 16, 2009
Belief Is Not Proof
.
As I’m sure you’ve noticed, I am having trouble settling into a routine here in Topeka that allows me to write my nightly blog.
I had thought I would work my usual 10-hour day, then stay on an hour or so to answer my e-mails and write my blog. Unfortunately, this week I have been working 11- and 12-hour days with little or no chance to write at the end of them.
So I’m going to start a new schedule and try to write my blog during the half hour that I am in the office before the Senator. It didn’t really work this morning, because I was late getting in after over-sleeping from being here ‘til 8:30 last night, but we’ll see.
There has been so much political news this week that I almost don’t know where to start.
I guess the main thing is the President. These “Legacy Project” appearance have, in my humble opinion, done more to hurt his legacy than help it. Because he has made claims that are 90% off from the truth, we are all being reminded of everything he did wrong.
Does he really think the government’s response to Katrina can be judged only by the swiftness with which the Coast Guard and other first responders got people off their roofs? Can he really have forgotten the mess at the Superdome, where people were told each day that busses were coming to rescue them, so they’d better stick around in order not to miss their ride? Can he really have forgotten that no effort was made to get the elderly, infirm, and just plain poor people out of the 9th Ward before the storm? Can he have forgotten the trucks full of ice that were shunted off to other cities to wait to be told where the ice should be delivered? And finally, can he really justify the fact that Mississippi, which had far less devastation, received the lion’s share of what little help the federal government did supply?
Can he have forgotten all that?
Does he really think that he has promoted democracy in the world by devastating two countries and installing “democratic” governments that are nearly as violent and just as corrupt as the ones they replaced? Can he really ignore the fact that the Taliban are once again a force to be reckoned with in Afghanistan? Can he really ignore the cash – cold, hard cash strapped into bundles on pallets – that has gone missing in Iraq? Can he really ignore the utter failure of the reconstruction effort, which has only returned Iraq to what it was before the American bombing in some places, has provided substandard construction and infrastructure repair in other places, and is totally lacking in too many places?
Can he really ignore all that?
Does he really think that America is safer now than it was before 9/11? Can he really believe that our ports are safer or would have been safer if he had had his way and turned the security measures over to that company from Dubai? Can he really believe that the Traffic Security Administration minions are doing a good job of examining our luggage (and our persons) at airports? Can he really believe that the completely open borders between us and Mexico and Canada aren't open invitations to terrorists with a dirty nuclear bomb?
Can he really believe all that?
Of course, he can. He views the world through a prism of partisanship that highlights only the good parts of his record and blocks the bad parts. He thinks that history will vindicate him, that he will be seen as another Harry Truman.
Well, Mr. President, Harry Truman had a famous plaque on his desk: “The buck stops here.”
You, sir, have not and do not live by that code. You blame everyone and everything but yourself. You promised us that you would surround yourself with experts who would guide your policies, but you refused to heed the warnings of people who knew better.
The bitter comeback to this situation is “Live with it!” Unfortunately, it is we, the American people, whose spirit you invoke every time you speak, who will have to live with it. And I don’t think we’re going to be giving you the benefit of any doubt while we do.
------------------------
Have a nice weekend, everyone! I will be journeying into the wilds of Missouri to celebrate my mother’s 80th birthday tomorrow, and there will be no more blogs until I return.
.
As I’m sure you’ve noticed, I am having trouble settling into a routine here in Topeka that allows me to write my nightly blog.
I had thought I would work my usual 10-hour day, then stay on an hour or so to answer my e-mails and write my blog. Unfortunately, this week I have been working 11- and 12-hour days with little or no chance to write at the end of them.
So I’m going to start a new schedule and try to write my blog during the half hour that I am in the office before the Senator. It didn’t really work this morning, because I was late getting in after over-sleeping from being here ‘til 8:30 last night, but we’ll see.
There has been so much political news this week that I almost don’t know where to start.
I guess the main thing is the President. These “Legacy Project” appearance have, in my humble opinion, done more to hurt his legacy than help it. Because he has made claims that are 90% off from the truth, we are all being reminded of everything he did wrong.
Does he really think the government’s response to Katrina can be judged only by the swiftness with which the Coast Guard and other first responders got people off their roofs? Can he really have forgotten the mess at the Superdome, where people were told each day that busses were coming to rescue them, so they’d better stick around in order not to miss their ride? Can he really have forgotten that no effort was made to get the elderly, infirm, and just plain poor people out of the 9th Ward before the storm? Can he have forgotten the trucks full of ice that were shunted off to other cities to wait to be told where the ice should be delivered? And finally, can he really justify the fact that Mississippi, which had far less devastation, received the lion’s share of what little help the federal government did supply?
Can he have forgotten all that?
Does he really think that he has promoted democracy in the world by devastating two countries and installing “democratic” governments that are nearly as violent and just as corrupt as the ones they replaced? Can he really ignore the fact that the Taliban are once again a force to be reckoned with in Afghanistan? Can he really ignore the cash – cold, hard cash strapped into bundles on pallets – that has gone missing in Iraq? Can he really ignore the utter failure of the reconstruction effort, which has only returned Iraq to what it was before the American bombing in some places, has provided substandard construction and infrastructure repair in other places, and is totally lacking in too many places?
Can he really ignore all that?
Does he really think that America is safer now than it was before 9/11? Can he really believe that our ports are safer or would have been safer if he had had his way and turned the security measures over to that company from Dubai? Can he really believe that the Traffic Security Administration minions are doing a good job of examining our luggage (and our persons) at airports? Can he really believe that the completely open borders between us and Mexico and Canada aren't open invitations to terrorists with a dirty nuclear bomb?
Can he really believe all that?
Of course, he can. He views the world through a prism of partisanship that highlights only the good parts of his record and blocks the bad parts. He thinks that history will vindicate him, that he will be seen as another Harry Truman.
Well, Mr. President, Harry Truman had a famous plaque on his desk: “The buck stops here.”
You, sir, have not and do not live by that code. You blame everyone and everything but yourself. You promised us that you would surround yourself with experts who would guide your policies, but you refused to heed the warnings of people who knew better.
The bitter comeback to this situation is “Live with it!” Unfortunately, it is we, the American people, whose spirit you invoke every time you speak, who will have to live with it. And I don’t think we’re going to be giving you the benefit of any doubt while we do.
------------------------
Have a nice weekend, everyone! I will be journeying into the wilds of Missouri to celebrate my mother’s 80th birthday tomorrow, and there will be no more blogs until I return.
.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
A Kerfuffle Too Nice
.
Today was the day when the Senator and I began to really thrash out the question of how we’re going to handle things. What I’ve been doing was only partially working for her and some of what I was doing was getting in her way. Those issues have been addressed and I think we can move on smoothly from here. What was nicest about it was that this kerfuffle was handled without any hard words or hurt feelings. In fact, the Senator is so determined not to hurt my feelings that she wasn’t getting across to me that I needed to do something different. Pretty neat to have a “fight” because we’re both too accommodating.
But it has been a long day, so I will wait for tomorrow to be philosophical.
Good night.
.
Today was the day when the Senator and I began to really thrash out the question of how we’re going to handle things. What I’ve been doing was only partially working for her and some of what I was doing was getting in her way. Those issues have been addressed and I think we can move on smoothly from here. What was nicest about it was that this kerfuffle was handled without any hard words or hurt feelings. In fact, the Senator is so determined not to hurt my feelings that she wasn’t getting across to me that I needed to do something different. Pretty neat to have a “fight” because we’re both too accommodating.
But it has been a long day, so I will wait for tomorrow to be philosophical.
Good night.
.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Time Flies
.
You may not have noticed, but I haven’t blogged much this week. I couldn’t Sunday, and I actually forgot Tuesday.
All this is the result of the start of the State Legislative Session. I’m still trying to get caught up on things like entering Oletha’s calendar onto the state’s system or setting up the system of notebooks I use to keep her informed and me sane as far as dealing with all the paper goes.
So I haven’t had much time for deep thought. I’d give you a few shallow ones, but I can’t think of any right now. It’s 6:41 p.m., and I want to go home for the evening.
I’ll try to do better tomorrow.
.
You may not have noticed, but I haven’t blogged much this week. I couldn’t Sunday, and I actually forgot Tuesday.
All this is the result of the start of the State Legislative Session. I’m still trying to get caught up on things like entering Oletha’s calendar onto the state’s system or setting up the system of notebooks I use to keep her informed and me sane as far as dealing with all the paper goes.
So I haven’t had much time for deep thought. I’d give you a few shallow ones, but I can’t think of any right now. It’s 6:41 p.m., and I want to go home for the evening.
I’ll try to do better tomorrow.
.
Monday, January 12, 2009
The Nitty-Gritty
.
Today was quite a day.
It’s the first day of the legislative session, and I’m still at something of a loss about how the Senator’s office is going to run.
I finished up going through the boxes. Now I just need to know what to do with all the stuff. The Senator says there should be a couple of file cabinets and her desk from the floor of the House yet to come. I’ve called maintenance, and they’re supposed to get with me tomorrow to figure things out.
Communication is always at issue in the Legislature. The legislators run from pillar to post, making decisions on the fly, and not always letting people know what those decisions are. It makes for a spontaneous atmosphere.
But I feel very much at home in this building. It’s odd to look back over the four years I was here with Senator Betts and see the patterns emerging. It’s time to let the world know that the Senator has openings for pages, to get re-acquainted with the guys in the Mail Room, to try to get the supplies you need from the spare little room off the Senate Chamber where the Sergeants-at-Arms try not to go over budget.
I’m in a different room this year, down on the first floor, not far from the Rotunda, where there is more traffic, more sunlight, more voices echoing. The Rotunda has been blocked off with plaster-board walls sporting a sign that says the renovators are working on the Dome. But it’s still possible to get a tour of the Dome, so it’s hard to know what work they’re doing.
Already, I can see that there will be more visitors to this office than there were to the little cubby-hole Senator Betts had. Perhaps few people came to his office because they saw how small it was. If so, I expect I’ll have more repeaters this year, because this room is more than double the size of the old one.
When I thought about writing this first blog from the Capitol, I thought I’d be waxing philosophical. But we have knotty problems this year. The supporters of the Holcomb coal-fired power plants are going to make another run at it. Education reform must be extended another year. The budget is in terrible shape. And there’s sure to be another abortion bill.
It’s time to get to work.
.
Today was quite a day.
It’s the first day of the legislative session, and I’m still at something of a loss about how the Senator’s office is going to run.
I finished up going through the boxes. Now I just need to know what to do with all the stuff. The Senator says there should be a couple of file cabinets and her desk from the floor of the House yet to come. I’ve called maintenance, and they’re supposed to get with me tomorrow to figure things out.
Communication is always at issue in the Legislature. The legislators run from pillar to post, making decisions on the fly, and not always letting people know what those decisions are. It makes for a spontaneous atmosphere.
But I feel very much at home in this building. It’s odd to look back over the four years I was here with Senator Betts and see the patterns emerging. It’s time to let the world know that the Senator has openings for pages, to get re-acquainted with the guys in the Mail Room, to try to get the supplies you need from the spare little room off the Senate Chamber where the Sergeants-at-Arms try not to go over budget.
I’m in a different room this year, down on the first floor, not far from the Rotunda, where there is more traffic, more sunlight, more voices echoing. The Rotunda has been blocked off with plaster-board walls sporting a sign that says the renovators are working on the Dome. But it’s still possible to get a tour of the Dome, so it’s hard to know what work they’re doing.
Already, I can see that there will be more visitors to this office than there were to the little cubby-hole Senator Betts had. Perhaps few people came to his office because they saw how small it was. If so, I expect I’ll have more repeaters this year, because this room is more than double the size of the old one.
When I thought about writing this first blog from the Capitol, I thought I’d be waxing philosophical. But we have knotty problems this year. The supporters of the Holcomb coal-fired power plants are going to make another run at it. Education reform must be extended another year. The budget is in terrible shape. And there’s sure to be another abortion bill.
It’s time to get to work.
.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Frost/Nixon
.
My husband and I went to see “Frost/Nixon” this afternoon and highly recommend the movie. Frank Langella gives a great performance as Nixon, truly deserving of an Oscar, capturing not only the man’s bluster and guile, but also his self pity and gracelessness.
The big moment, of course, comes when Nixon says “If the President does it, then it’s NOT illegal.”
It reminded me that Dick Cheney was in Washington in those days. Obviously, he took those words to heart.
I wonder if he ever saw the original interviews. If so, did he not get the point of the rest of that exchange, in which Nixon admits that what he did was wrong, that some of it was illegal, and that he let down himself, his supporters, and the American people? Or did Cheney just ignore those words?
To hear Republicans talk, the Democrats used Watergate to destroy the Republican Party. What they never seem to realize, or at least admit, is that it was only six years from Nixon’s tearful farewell to Reagan’s resurgent triumph. Clearly, the Republican Party was not down for very long.
What Democrats need to remember as we celebrate the end of Bush/Chaney is that Obama/Biden could easily face the same fate as Carter/Mondale. We already know they have inherited problems far greater and the Party is no more united now than it was in from 1976 to 1980. If we want to hold onto power long enough to dig ourselves out of the potholed present, we’d better learn to pull together in the future.
Or else they’ll be making movies about the tragedy of Barack Obama before you know it.
.
My husband and I went to see “Frost/Nixon” this afternoon and highly recommend the movie. Frank Langella gives a great performance as Nixon, truly deserving of an Oscar, capturing not only the man’s bluster and guile, but also his self pity and gracelessness.
The big moment, of course, comes when Nixon says “If the President does it, then it’s NOT illegal.”
It reminded me that Dick Cheney was in Washington in those days. Obviously, he took those words to heart.
I wonder if he ever saw the original interviews. If so, did he not get the point of the rest of that exchange, in which Nixon admits that what he did was wrong, that some of it was illegal, and that he let down himself, his supporters, and the American people? Or did Cheney just ignore those words?
To hear Republicans talk, the Democrats used Watergate to destroy the Republican Party. What they never seem to realize, or at least admit, is that it was only six years from Nixon’s tearful farewell to Reagan’s resurgent triumph. Clearly, the Republican Party was not down for very long.
What Democrats need to remember as we celebrate the end of Bush/Chaney is that Obama/Biden could easily face the same fate as Carter/Mondale. We already know they have inherited problems far greater and the Party is no more united now than it was in from 1976 to 1980. If we want to hold onto power long enough to dig ourselves out of the potholed present, we’d better learn to pull together in the future.
Or else they’ll be making movies about the tragedy of Barack Obama before you know it.
.
Friday, January 9, 2009
Man-Made Disasters
.
A bridge collapses in Minneapolis. A holding pond dumps an avalanche of toxic ash on a neighborhood in Tennessee. What do these two man-made disasters have in common?
In each case, needed maintenance was deferred because it was too costly. And in both cases, the decision was made by the government, by the part of our society that is supposed to operate, not on the profit motive, but rather on the philosophy of the common good.
In the rush to (supposedly) cut government spending, so that people could (supposedly) receive tax cuts, we have left common sense in the gutter. Notice that I don’t say Republicans or Democrats have left common sense in the gutter. No, it isn’t one party or the other, but all of us – all of us who allowed our elected representatives to persuade us that government never knows how to spend our tax dollars wisely, that bureaucrats are only interested in protecting their turf and not in doing what’s right.
This is the result of making fun of people who have experience and education and might, just possibly, know more about doing their jobs than we do. It’s also the result of smiling knowingly and shrugging our shoulders when we hear of a boondoggle, no matter how large. It’s the result of the cynicism that pervades our culture that everyone is only out for himself, that no one really cares whether something is right, but only that it will make his life better. It’s the result of thinking that greed is good.
I used to think that the rise of religion would lead to greater honesty in our public life, but it seems only to have created a phalanx of credulous morons who think that if a Democrat says it, it must be a lie. Our thinking that if a Republican says it, it must be a lie, doesn’t help us get beyond this and back to the point where we reward people for being good citizens and punish them when they're not.
I’m not sure how we get there, but we better figure it out soon, before the next man-made disaster happens.
.
A bridge collapses in Minneapolis. A holding pond dumps an avalanche of toxic ash on a neighborhood in Tennessee. What do these two man-made disasters have in common?
In each case, needed maintenance was deferred because it was too costly. And in both cases, the decision was made by the government, by the part of our society that is supposed to operate, not on the profit motive, but rather on the philosophy of the common good.
In the rush to (supposedly) cut government spending, so that people could (supposedly) receive tax cuts, we have left common sense in the gutter. Notice that I don’t say Republicans or Democrats have left common sense in the gutter. No, it isn’t one party or the other, but all of us – all of us who allowed our elected representatives to persuade us that government never knows how to spend our tax dollars wisely, that bureaucrats are only interested in protecting their turf and not in doing what’s right.
This is the result of making fun of people who have experience and education and might, just possibly, know more about doing their jobs than we do. It’s also the result of smiling knowingly and shrugging our shoulders when we hear of a boondoggle, no matter how large. It’s the result of the cynicism that pervades our culture that everyone is only out for himself, that no one really cares whether something is right, but only that it will make his life better. It’s the result of thinking that greed is good.
I used to think that the rise of religion would lead to greater honesty in our public life, but it seems only to have created a phalanx of credulous morons who think that if a Democrat says it, it must be a lie. Our thinking that if a Republican says it, it must be a lie, doesn’t help us get beyond this and back to the point where we reward people for being good citizens and punish them when they're not.
I’m not sure how we get there, but we better figure it out soon, before the next man-made disaster happens.
.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
Getting Back to It
.
Last year, when Senator Oletha Faust-Goudeau was trying to decide whether to run for the Senate or stay in the House of Representatives, I urged her to go for it. In one of our conversations, I made a rash offer: “If you run for the Senate seat and win, I’ll come up to Topeka and be your session secretary.” Well, she ran and she won, and I’m keeping my promise.
The powers that be told me I should come to Topeka Thursday and Friday this week “to get your office set up.”
Yes, indeed, but how am I supposed to do that when all the furniture in the room is marked
“Senator Francisco” and the boxes have been piled so high that I can’t reach the top one? Where is the furniture that belongs to Senator Faust-Goudeau? Why did they have to put boxes of books at the top of the piles? Should I just knock the piles over so I can get to the boxes at the bottom?
I don’t know, so I sit here waiting for the poor maintenance men to come move things around.
It’s eerie being here after my absence last year. So much has changed, because they are slowly but surely renovating the Capitol. The mail room is around the corner from where it used to be. Secretarial Services has a new office down the hall from its old one. Access to one of the elevators has been blocked off, but that’s OK because there’s a new elevator that will be operating soon.
All this is on top of the changes I have seen before but didn’t remember at first. The computer tech people are in the basement, as is Legislative Research. Conference rooms have been created. The Sergeant-at-Arms dispenses supplies from what appears to me to be an inadequate space.
---------
The maintenance man just came to move boxes around and told me that Senator Francisco is now operating out of one of the beautifully renovated offices in the east wing, which come with mahogany desks and bookcases, so we can keep her furniture. I guess I’ll go around and take off the stickers. I still wonder what happened to the furniture that was in this office last year.
What will Oletha say when she sees this room?
I’d better get back to it. I plan to continue this blog. I have no computer and no Internet access in my “studio apartment,” but I plan to write it at the end of the work day. There may be days I’m not able to do that, however.
.
Last year, when Senator Oletha Faust-Goudeau was trying to decide whether to run for the Senate or stay in the House of Representatives, I urged her to go for it. In one of our conversations, I made a rash offer: “If you run for the Senate seat and win, I’ll come up to Topeka and be your session secretary.” Well, she ran and she won, and I’m keeping my promise.
The powers that be told me I should come to Topeka Thursday and Friday this week “to get your office set up.”
Yes, indeed, but how am I supposed to do that when all the furniture in the room is marked
“Senator Francisco” and the boxes have been piled so high that I can’t reach the top one? Where is the furniture that belongs to Senator Faust-Goudeau? Why did they have to put boxes of books at the top of the piles? Should I just knock the piles over so I can get to the boxes at the bottom?
I don’t know, so I sit here waiting for the poor maintenance men to come move things around.
It’s eerie being here after my absence last year. So much has changed, because they are slowly but surely renovating the Capitol. The mail room is around the corner from where it used to be. Secretarial Services has a new office down the hall from its old one. Access to one of the elevators has been blocked off, but that’s OK because there’s a new elevator that will be operating soon.
All this is on top of the changes I have seen before but didn’t remember at first. The computer tech people are in the basement, as is Legislative Research. Conference rooms have been created. The Sergeant-at-Arms dispenses supplies from what appears to me to be an inadequate space.
---------
The maintenance man just came to move boxes around and told me that Senator Francisco is now operating out of one of the beautifully renovated offices in the east wing, which come with mahogany desks and bookcases, so we can keep her furniture. I guess I’ll go around and take off the stickers. I still wonder what happened to the furniture that was in this office last year.
What will Oletha say when she sees this room?
I’d better get back to it. I plan to continue this blog. I have no computer and no Internet access in my “studio apartment,” but I plan to write it at the end of the work day. There may be days I’m not able to do that, however.
.
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Sleep Tight
.
One of the disadvantages of no longer taking sleeping pills is that it gives free rein to my insomnia. Some nights I get to sleep fairly quickly, but some nights not so quickly. Each night of short sleep leads not to sleepiness the following night but to further insomnia, probably because I have operated on adrenalin during the day. But after three or four such nights (and days) I crash.
Hence, no blog last night.
I’m worried that we’re going to see a similar effect when Barack Obama finally becomes President Obama. We all have been obsessing over our “situation” and pinning all our hopes on Obama to lead us out of it. Most of us are running on psychic adrenalin, knowing that we need to be part of the solution, that Obama won’t know what to do if we don’t tell him.
So Obama’s recent outreach to his supporters to meet and send him descriptions of our health care problems has met with fervent response in some areas. But each of us has a different idea of what the final solution should be, and already some constituencies are beginning to peel off, disenchanted with his Cabinet appointments. Many say that they didn’t vote for a third Clinton term.
Will there come a time when we all give up and crash? Or will we manage to calm down and hang in there for the long haul? I don’t know about you, but I’m going to work really hard to bring about the latter.
And then maybe we can all sleep better at night.
.
One of the disadvantages of no longer taking sleeping pills is that it gives free rein to my insomnia. Some nights I get to sleep fairly quickly, but some nights not so quickly. Each night of short sleep leads not to sleepiness the following night but to further insomnia, probably because I have operated on adrenalin during the day. But after three or four such nights (and days) I crash.
Hence, no blog last night.
I’m worried that we’re going to see a similar effect when Barack Obama finally becomes President Obama. We all have been obsessing over our “situation” and pinning all our hopes on Obama to lead us out of it. Most of us are running on psychic adrenalin, knowing that we need to be part of the solution, that Obama won’t know what to do if we don’t tell him.
So Obama’s recent outreach to his supporters to meet and send him descriptions of our health care problems has met with fervent response in some areas. But each of us has a different idea of what the final solution should be, and already some constituencies are beginning to peel off, disenchanted with his Cabinet appointments. Many say that they didn’t vote for a third Clinton term.
Will there come a time when we all give up and crash? Or will we manage to calm down and hang in there for the long haul? I don’t know about you, but I’m going to work really hard to bring about the latter.
And then maybe we can all sleep better at night.
.
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Drawing the Lines
.
As if things weren’t strange enough these days, word now comes of a former KGB analyst who is predicting that the United States will fall apart by 2010.
Igor Panarin is dean of the Russian Foreign Ministry's academy for future diplomats. He has been floating his argument for over a decade, saying that a moral and economic crisis will cause the U.S. to split into four large and two small pieces.
The Northeast/Atlantic Coast states would form their own government and might join the European Union.
California and much of the west would declare independence or might become part of China.
The plains states and midwest would join to become part of Canada, though why Canada would want them is a mystery to me.
Most of the Confederate states, plus Oklahoma and New Mexico, would find itself dominated by Mexico. That wouldn’t break my heart. I often think that we should have let the Confederacy secede, but then I remember slavery and change my mind.
Alaska would go back to Russia and Hawaii to Japan or China.
It’s an interesting map. Go to http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123051100709638419.html to see it.
Personally, I think he’s got his lines drawn wrong. If New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia and Florida were to form a more perfect union, Kentucky, Tennessee, and the Carolinas are sure to want in. I don’t see them going with New England and the Mid-Atlantic states. And what about Missouri? It would be more comfortable with Arkansas than Iowa and the Dakotas.
It’s not clear to me that Virginia and West Virginia would stay with Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Maryland. Perhaps they would join with Ohio, Indiana, and Michigan to form the Rust Belt Confederation.
California almost certainly would become a country all by itself. Why should their economy, the seventh largest in the world, support Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Nevada, Utah, and Arizona? they would ask. And I don’t see Utah willingly joining with a state that is on the verge of allowing same-sex marriage.
Of course, the whole premise is ridiculous. The United States has its problems, but union is not one of them. I may wonder when Kansas is going to join the 21st century, but I don’t doubt that it will stay in the Union. Even the secessionist party in Alaska cannot get enough members to be a force in state politics – unless you consider the election of Sarah Palin the result of them throwing their support behind her.
But it’s fun to think about. How would you draw the lines?
.
To read more about Prof. Panarin’s prediction,
As if things weren’t strange enough these days, word now comes of a former KGB analyst who is predicting that the United States will fall apart by 2010.
Igor Panarin is dean of the Russian Foreign Ministry's academy for future diplomats. He has been floating his argument for over a decade, saying that a moral and economic crisis will cause the U.S. to split into four large and two small pieces.
The Northeast/Atlantic Coast states would form their own government and might join the European Union.
California and much of the west would declare independence or might become part of China.
The plains states and midwest would join to become part of Canada, though why Canada would want them is a mystery to me.
Most of the Confederate states, plus Oklahoma and New Mexico, would find itself dominated by Mexico. That wouldn’t break my heart. I often think that we should have let the Confederacy secede, but then I remember slavery and change my mind.
Alaska would go back to Russia and Hawaii to Japan or China.
It’s an interesting map. Go to http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123051100709638419.html to see it.
Personally, I think he’s got his lines drawn wrong. If New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia and Florida were to form a more perfect union, Kentucky, Tennessee, and the Carolinas are sure to want in. I don’t see them going with New England and the Mid-Atlantic states. And what about Missouri? It would be more comfortable with Arkansas than Iowa and the Dakotas.
It’s not clear to me that Virginia and West Virginia would stay with Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Maryland. Perhaps they would join with Ohio, Indiana, and Michigan to form the Rust Belt Confederation.
California almost certainly would become a country all by itself. Why should their economy, the seventh largest in the world, support Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Nevada, Utah, and Arizona? they would ask. And I don’t see Utah willingly joining with a state that is on the verge of allowing same-sex marriage.
Of course, the whole premise is ridiculous. The United States has its problems, but union is not one of them. I may wonder when Kansas is going to join the 21st century, but I don’t doubt that it will stay in the Union. Even the secessionist party in Alaska cannot get enough members to be a force in state politics – unless you consider the election of Sarah Palin the result of them throwing their support behind her.
But it’s fun to think about. How would you draw the lines?
.
To read more about Prof. Panarin’s prediction,
Saturday, January 3, 2009
Good plan
.
An item from the Eagle’s Opinion Line:
“Open a homeless shelter in any vacant building in the wealthy part of town. The wealthy then will build a shelter in the poor part of town, pay the heating bill and even donate the food, just to keep the homeless out of their area.”
Sounds like a plan to me. Anyone know of a good vacant building?
.
An item from the Eagle’s Opinion Line:
“Open a homeless shelter in any vacant building in the wealthy part of town. The wealthy then will build a shelter in the poor part of town, pay the heating bill and even donate the food, just to keep the homeless out of their area.”
Sounds like a plan to me. Anyone know of a good vacant building?
.
Friday, January 2, 2009
Financial Literacy
.
Did you see the article in this morning’s Wichita Eagle about financial literacy?
It seems that several legislators, led by our own Rep. Melody McCray-Miller, are proposing to put teeth in the 2002 bill that mandated that the public school system teach children how to manage their money.
Glory Hallelujah!
I was taught how to balance my checkbook by my father, but I didn’t learn to manage my money until after my son was born. We used a very simple method: we added up all the bills that came due at regular intervals, divided the total by 52, and had that amount (rounded up to the nearest $10) taken out of my husband’s paycheck and deposited in the credit union run by his employer each week. Then, once a month, we transferred funds out of the credit union and into our checking account and paid whatever bills were due that month.
Simple, right? It worked really well until my husband changed jobs and there was no credit union to make the deduction for us.
Now, you’d think that we would be smart enough (we’re both college graduates, after all!) to make a deposit into a savings account each week, but somehow it never happened. There was always some reason not to make the deposit. Even when we opened accounts in banks that were willing to make deductions for us, we didn’t set up the system again until a few years ago.
We were never in really bad shape financially, but we could have been in much better shape if we’d just used our system consistently throughout the years.
Now imagine a teen-ager who hasn’t been shown how to reconcile a bank statement growing into an adult who has never discussed finances with anyone. Imagine that person being faced with a predatory lender who can play financial footsie with panache. Do you have any doubt why we’re in the financial condition we’re in?
So kudos to Rep. McCray-Miller and the other legislators who are backing her up. And let’s hope that the teachers all over Kansas will follow through on the plan.
.
Did you see the article in this morning’s Wichita Eagle about financial literacy?
It seems that several legislators, led by our own Rep. Melody McCray-Miller, are proposing to put teeth in the 2002 bill that mandated that the public school system teach children how to manage their money.
Glory Hallelujah!
I was taught how to balance my checkbook by my father, but I didn’t learn to manage my money until after my son was born. We used a very simple method: we added up all the bills that came due at regular intervals, divided the total by 52, and had that amount (rounded up to the nearest $10) taken out of my husband’s paycheck and deposited in the credit union run by his employer each week. Then, once a month, we transferred funds out of the credit union and into our checking account and paid whatever bills were due that month.
Simple, right? It worked really well until my husband changed jobs and there was no credit union to make the deduction for us.
Now, you’d think that we would be smart enough (we’re both college graduates, after all!) to make a deposit into a savings account each week, but somehow it never happened. There was always some reason not to make the deposit. Even when we opened accounts in banks that were willing to make deductions for us, we didn’t set up the system again until a few years ago.
We were never in really bad shape financially, but we could have been in much better shape if we’d just used our system consistently throughout the years.
Now imagine a teen-ager who hasn’t been shown how to reconcile a bank statement growing into an adult who has never discussed finances with anyone. Imagine that person being faced with a predatory lender who can play financial footsie with panache. Do you have any doubt why we’re in the financial condition we’re in?
So kudos to Rep. McCray-Miller and the other legislators who are backing her up. And let’s hope that the teachers all over Kansas will follow through on the plan.
.
Thursday, January 1, 2009
Reality
.
How do we tell what is real?
Just now, a commercial came on the TV showing a metal ladle falling for a bottle of spaghetti sauce. The ladle fawns over the bottle, wraps itself around it, then drops to the counter with a clang when someone comes to the door. I know it’s computer graphics, but for the length of the commercial, I find myself believing that a ladle could really do that.
We are surrounded by such images. The artistic geniuses who turn them out have us believing that animals can talk, cars can drive on the edges of skyscrapers, and cute little robots from the cable company will help you decorate for a party.
This all started with the special effects of the movies. Through the magic of special effects, we could see Moses part the seas and Sinbad battle the rocs. This was advanced by animated cartoons, which showed us flying unicorns and dancing appliances, but those images were clearly not real. They were drawings, not film, and even children knew there was no chance they would run into fairy godmothers at the playground.
About 25years ago, however, computer graphics came into being. At first, those images were also clearly not real, but soon it was not so easy to tell the graphics from the virtual. From the elephants and lions of Jumanji to the balrog and orcs of Middle Earth, we have to know, going in, whether things are real. We can’t tell just by looking.
This broadens our horizons, I suppose, but it also feeds into the mindset that makes us satisfied only with perfection. It’s not enough to have a beautiful gown, it must shimmer and swirl like Cinderella’s. The paint on our cars must be flawless. Every steak must be the most tender and juicy possible. Life must be beautiful.
Sometimes, when reality doesn’t match our dreams, we retreat into the TV and the movies, but that doesn’t help, because what we really want is the life we see on the screen. And we can’t have it. And that makes us mad.
Some of us eventually wise up and grow up and get on with life. But it seems to me that all too many simply lash out at a world that doesn’t live up to our fantasies.
And that is very sad.
.
How do we tell what is real?
Just now, a commercial came on the TV showing a metal ladle falling for a bottle of spaghetti sauce. The ladle fawns over the bottle, wraps itself around it, then drops to the counter with a clang when someone comes to the door. I know it’s computer graphics, but for the length of the commercial, I find myself believing that a ladle could really do that.
We are surrounded by such images. The artistic geniuses who turn them out have us believing that animals can talk, cars can drive on the edges of skyscrapers, and cute little robots from the cable company will help you decorate for a party.
This all started with the special effects of the movies. Through the magic of special effects, we could see Moses part the seas and Sinbad battle the rocs. This was advanced by animated cartoons, which showed us flying unicorns and dancing appliances, but those images were clearly not real. They were drawings, not film, and even children knew there was no chance they would run into fairy godmothers at the playground.
About 25years ago, however, computer graphics came into being. At first, those images were also clearly not real, but soon it was not so easy to tell the graphics from the virtual. From the elephants and lions of Jumanji to the balrog and orcs of Middle Earth, we have to know, going in, whether things are real. We can’t tell just by looking.
This broadens our horizons, I suppose, but it also feeds into the mindset that makes us satisfied only with perfection. It’s not enough to have a beautiful gown, it must shimmer and swirl like Cinderella’s. The paint on our cars must be flawless. Every steak must be the most tender and juicy possible. Life must be beautiful.
Sometimes, when reality doesn’t match our dreams, we retreat into the TV and the movies, but that doesn’t help, because what we really want is the life we see on the screen. And we can’t have it. And that makes us mad.
Some of us eventually wise up and grow up and get on with life. But it seems to me that all too many simply lash out at a world that doesn’t live up to our fantasies.
And that is very sad.
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)