A pair of columns skeptical of democracy dominated the Opinion page of Sunday's Minneapolis Star Tribune. Columnist Lori Sturdevant decries the surplus of democracy in Minnesota, ("Punting the tough issues to the people: Is there such a thing as too much direct democracy? Ask California. Ask schools.")
Her thesis is that referenda on school levies and stadium taxes show a failure of leadership by elected officials. To be clear, by failure she means the failure to raise taxes, writing, "This is a case of legislators running amok with their desire to dodge blame for higher taxes."
As readers of this blog will know, I favor direct democracy. Yes, we have a Republic, with representative democracy. But whenever the people vote on an issue, I believe that the outcome is, by definition, the "right" outcome.
Former third-party candidate for Lt. Governor, Jim Mulder, writes about the redundancy of all the overlapping levels of government in Minnesota. I am very receptive to arguments in favor of government redesign. But I think that Mr. Mulder is attacking the problem from the wrong end. Basically, Mr. Mulder thinks we have too many counties, with some including more than a million people, but some with just a few thousand.
He makes some good observations regarding overlap. I have often wondered why we have local Soil and Water Districts and a state Board of Water and Soil Resources. However, he believes archaic the "Jeffersonian principle of democracy--that no one should live more than a day's horse ride from the county courthouse."
The implication here is that any political arrangement supported with an argument related to horse travel must be discarded as hopelessly out of date. Well, how about this, political boundaries should be small enough that the people governed together are likely to know one another.
My county, Hennepin, holds more than 1.1 million people. I cannot believe that densely populated neighborhoods in Minneapolis share much in common with semi-rural areas at the County's western edge. Yet all are governed by the same County board. I would argue that residents would benefit from having the jurisdiction split into three or four entities, grouping populations with like interests.
The actual Jeffersonian principle has nothing to do with horse travel but that "the government closest to the people is the most responsive" (1787). Mr. Mulder would have the government move away from the people, trading responsiveness for some notion of "efficiency."
Monday, November 7, 2011
Trapped at the Airport: A Parable for Our Times
In the category of almost "too good to check" comes this story from the Daily Mail, which surely must be a parable for our times.
A 55-year-old California woman, Teri Weissinger, was at the San Francisco airport, for a flight to Idaho where she hopes to start a new life.
Down to her last $30, she didn't have money for the airline's baggage fees ($60), and was told that abandoning her luggage was not an option (security risk, you see). (She had purchased the plane ticket before the rule on disclosing hidden fees took effect.)
A desperate series of calls to family and friends failed to raise the money in time for the flight's departure, and now she was down $210--$60 for the luggage and a $150 change fee for missing her original flight.
What followed was an 8-day ordeal reminiscent of the Tom Hanks movie The Terminal, about a man trapped at JFK airport because of visa problems. The Terminal movie itself was based on the real-life story of Mehran Karimi Nasseri, an Iranian refugee, who lived at Charles de Gaulle airport in Paris for 17 years because he had his briefcase stolen and did not have the proper visa to either enter France proper or fly on to another destination.
M. Nasseri finally escaped the airport when an illness forced him into a nearby hospital and he now lives in a Paris shelter.
Ms. Weissinger's story is not nearly as dramatic, as she was always free to leave the airport, with luggage in tow. After 8 days of sleeping at the airport and living on trail mix, she finally received help from a nearby church, the Airport Church of Christ, who raised the $210 to see her off to Idaho.
Self-employed for the past 25 years, she was leaving California to take a new job in Idaho.
San Francisco International Airport is located in San Mateo County, but is owned by the City of San Francisco. Ms. Weissinger thus received no assistance from the most liberal city in the most liberal state in America. You can understand why. As a economic refugee on her way out, she was in no position either to continue in the dependent class, voting in her would-be benefactors in election after election or continue as a producer, funding the progressive state. As she was of no use to them, they provided no help. The Daily Mail reports,
"When she tried to plead with airport authorities for help, Ms Weissinger claimed she was threatened with arrest on vagrancy charges."
Who did come to the rescue? Not any level of government, but a local faith community. And after 8 days in the airport, she boarded a flight on a different airline, who waived the change fee, but not the baggage charge.
Someone needs to update the lyrics to the Al Jolson song, "California Here I Come", as the flow is now the other way.
A 55-year-old California woman, Teri Weissinger, was at the San Francisco airport, for a flight to Idaho where she hopes to start a new life.
Down to her last $30, she didn't have money for the airline's baggage fees ($60), and was told that abandoning her luggage was not an option (security risk, you see). (She had purchased the plane ticket before the rule on disclosing hidden fees took effect.)
A desperate series of calls to family and friends failed to raise the money in time for the flight's departure, and now she was down $210--$60 for the luggage and a $150 change fee for missing her original flight.
What followed was an 8-day ordeal reminiscent of the Tom Hanks movie The Terminal, about a man trapped at JFK airport because of visa problems. The Terminal movie itself was based on the real-life story of Mehran Karimi Nasseri, an Iranian refugee, who lived at Charles de Gaulle airport in Paris for 17 years because he had his briefcase stolen and did not have the proper visa to either enter France proper or fly on to another destination.
M. Nasseri finally escaped the airport when an illness forced him into a nearby hospital and he now lives in a Paris shelter.
Ms. Weissinger's story is not nearly as dramatic, as she was always free to leave the airport, with luggage in tow. After 8 days of sleeping at the airport and living on trail mix, she finally received help from a nearby church, the Airport Church of Christ, who raised the $210 to see her off to Idaho.
Self-employed for the past 25 years, she was leaving California to take a new job in Idaho.
San Francisco International Airport is located in San Mateo County, but is owned by the City of San Francisco. Ms. Weissinger thus received no assistance from the most liberal city in the most liberal state in America. You can understand why. As a economic refugee on her way out, she was in no position either to continue in the dependent class, voting in her would-be benefactors in election after election or continue as a producer, funding the progressive state. As she was of no use to them, they provided no help. The Daily Mail reports,
"When she tried to plead with airport authorities for help, Ms Weissinger claimed she was threatened with arrest on vagrancy charges."
Who did come to the rescue? Not any level of government, but a local faith community. And after 8 days in the airport, she boarded a flight on a different airline, who waived the change fee, but not the baggage charge.
Someone needs to update the lyrics to the Al Jolson song, "California Here I Come", as the flow is now the other way.
Friday, November 4, 2011
A False Dawn for Detroit
Recently, I posted about some inklings of good news for the beleaguered city. In the past few days, it has made a turn for the bleaker. Mayor Dave Bing muses about the need for a state takeover of the city, with the possibility that its cash may be exhausted by February. The town of Highland Park, which lies within the footprint of surrounding Detroit, has followed through on its plans to have all the streetlights removed for lack of funds.
Thursday, November 3, 2011
Democracy is Dead, After All
An update of my post yesterday. It seems democracy is dead. Greece caved into European demands and dropped the idea of a national referendum on the bailout. Although the stock market liked it, Walter Russell Mead thinks that it reflects badly on the ability of European institutions to cope with the crisis. Mead writes,
"Europe’s institutions cannot cope. Decades of building intricate rules and complicated institutions have failed to create an institutional architecture than can resolve basic disputes."
"Europe’s institutions cannot cope. Decades of building intricate rules and complicated institutions have failed to create an institutional architecture than can resolve basic disputes."
Green Jobs Fail
For someone involved in the energy industry, I probably haven't paid as much attention to the Solyndra and subsequent scandals as I should. But to paraphrase an infamous quote, "one Solyndra is a scandal, a thousand Solyndra's are a statistic."
The problem isn't that some politicians steered some government money toward a few favored donors, it is that the whole enterprise is misguided.
Today, Walter Russell Mead posts on his blog about the subject, "Time To Change Course on Green Jobs." where he asks the question,
"Is there something about the word ‘green’ that makes people go weak in the head?"
Adding, "What three months ago was widely hailed by the establishment press as a sign of the futurism and forward-thinking of the Obama Administration now, post-Solyndra, is increasingly seen for the bone headed blunder it was."
Also today, the Wall Street Journal has an editorial on the issue ("Solyndra Without the Tears," subscription required) covering the energy scandal du jour, the now-bankrupt Beacon Power Corp. The editors ask an interesting question,
"Would the Obama Administration's record be better or worse if it tried to pick losers instead of winners?" The world will never know.
The problem isn't that some politicians steered some government money toward a few favored donors, it is that the whole enterprise is misguided.
Today, Walter Russell Mead posts on his blog about the subject, "Time To Change Course on Green Jobs." where he asks the question,
"Is there something about the word ‘green’ that makes people go weak in the head?"
Adding, "What three months ago was widely hailed by the establishment press as a sign of the futurism and forward-thinking of the Obama Administration now, post-Solyndra, is increasingly seen for the bone headed blunder it was."
Also today, the Wall Street Journal has an editorial on the issue ("Solyndra Without the Tears," subscription required) covering the energy scandal du jour, the now-bankrupt Beacon Power Corp. The editors ask an interesting question,
"Would the Obama Administration's record be better or worse if it tried to pick losers instead of winners?" The world will never know.
More "Complete Streets" in St. Paul: Goodbye Parking!
The St. Paul Pioneer Press reports on major street work planned for the City's Raymond Avenue in 2013. And yes, "complete streets" is on the job.
"About 50 of the existing 112 parking spots along the avenue would be eliminated to add bike lanes and other improvements." Comments at the hearing were split evenly, 7 to 7. In baseball, a tie goes to the baserunner. In Urban Planning, it seems, a tie goes to the bike rider.
"About 50 of the existing 112 parking spots along the avenue would be eliminated to add bike lanes and other improvements." Comments at the hearing were split evenly, 7 to 7. In baseball, a tie goes to the baserunner. In Urban Planning, it seems, a tie goes to the bike rider.
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Are Greeks Ready for Democracy?
Not if you believe European Union's leadership.
Daniel Hannan, a British Member of the European Parliament, is on the case. Today on his blog, Hannan takes them to task (reprinted on the pages of the Daily Telegraph), opening with,
"Shall I tell you the truly terrifying thing about the EU? It’s not the absence of democracy in Brussels, or the ease with which Eurocrats swat aside referendum results. It’s the way in which the internal democracy of the member states is subverted in order to sustain the requirements of membership."
On Monday Hannan wrote about the initial reaction to the news that Greece would hold a referendum on the European bailout,
"I wish I could convey the sheer writhing horror that George Papanderou's referendum proposal has provoked in Brussels. Eurocrats instinctively dislike referendums. They feel that their work is too important and complicated to be vulnerable to the prejudices of hoi polloi..."
Today's Wall Street Journal sees the benefits of this referendum in an editorial. The Editors write,
"As for the rest of Europe, they may eventually come around to thanking Mr. Papandreou and the Greeks, even for a no vote. Today's conventional wisdom is that a Greek default would spread contagion, never mind that past bailout packages for Athens haven't exactly contained it...A Greek default would provide a lesson in what happens to countries that can't live within their means."
Even if the Greeks vote no, at least they will have chosen their own fate. The only cure for the excesses of democracy, is more democracy.
Daniel Hannan, a British Member of the European Parliament, is on the case. Today on his blog, Hannan takes them to task (reprinted on the pages of the Daily Telegraph), opening with,
"Shall I tell you the truly terrifying thing about the EU? It’s not the absence of democracy in Brussels, or the ease with which Eurocrats swat aside referendum results. It’s the way in which the internal democracy of the member states is subverted in order to sustain the requirements of membership."
On Monday Hannan wrote about the initial reaction to the news that Greece would hold a referendum on the European bailout,
"I wish I could convey the sheer writhing horror that George Papanderou's referendum proposal has provoked in Brussels. Eurocrats instinctively dislike referendums. They feel that their work is too important and complicated to be vulnerable to the prejudices of hoi polloi..."
Today's Wall Street Journal sees the benefits of this referendum in an editorial. The Editors write,
"As for the rest of Europe, they may eventually come around to thanking Mr. Papandreou and the Greeks, even for a no vote. Today's conventional wisdom is that a Greek default would spread contagion, never mind that past bailout packages for Athens haven't exactly contained it...A Greek default would provide a lesson in what happens to countries that can't live within their means."
Even if the Greeks vote no, at least they will have chosen their own fate. The only cure for the excesses of democracy, is more democracy.
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Niall Ferguson on how America can avoid collapse
From his Newsweek column. Add his name to those you should read regarding the decline and fall, but don't call him a "declinist." He's more of a "sudden collapse" kind of guy.
To avoid that fate here, Ferguson offers this software analogy,
"What we need to do is to delete the viruses that have crept into our system: the anticompetitive quasi monopolies that blight everything from banking to public education; the politically correct pseudosciences and soft subjects that deflect good students away from hard science; the lobbyists who subvert the rule of law for the sake of the special interests they represent—to say nothing of our crazily dysfunctional system of health care, our overleveraged personal finances, and our newfound unemployment ethic."
To avoid that fate here, Ferguson offers this software analogy,
"What we need to do is to delete the viruses that have crept into our system: the anticompetitive quasi monopolies that blight everything from banking to public education; the politically correct pseudosciences and soft subjects that deflect good students away from hard science; the lobbyists who subvert the rule of law for the sake of the special interests they represent—to say nothing of our crazily dysfunctional system of health care, our overleveraged personal finances, and our newfound unemployment ethic."
The Receding Tide of Prosperity
Picking up on yesterday's theme, there are more good analyses popping up of the current situation, particularly of the Occupy Wall Street phenomenon. Over on his blog, Walter Russell Mead calls attention to an analysis by Megan McArdle at The Atlantic. She builds on the essay I linked to yesterday by Kenneth Anderson, who argues that the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement really represents an intra-class conflict between the upper and middle tiers of the (his word) virtueocracy.
Before returning to that thread, I first want to call more attention to to this piece from Anne Applebaum in the Daily Telegraph, "Can America survive without its backbone, the middle class?" This quote helps frame the issue,
"Despite all the loud talk of the “1 per cent” of Americans who, according to a recent study, receive about 17 percent of the income, a percentage which has more than doubled since 1979, the existence of a very small group of very rich people has never bothered Americans. But the fact that some 20 per cent of Americans now receive some 53 per cent of the income is devastating."
Rich Lowry, in the New York Post, picks up on a theme of inter-class struggle in "Stuck at the Bottom: Culture and the American Dream." He concludes, "old-fashioned bourgeois virtues, and particularly marriage, rarely figure in the public debate. Everyone is more comfortable talking about taxes or the banks, as the American Dream frays."
Finally, from Sunday, Ross Douthat writes in the New York Times about stresses on the middle class and diminishing expectations. While the OWS crowd may harbor some legitimate (if well-hidden) grievances, their preferred policy solutions--higher taxes and a bigger government--will only lead to more grief,
"The public-sector workplace has become a kind of artificial Eden, whose fortunate inhabitants enjoy solid pay and 1950s-style job security and retirement benefits, all of it paid for by their less-fortunate private-sector peers. Some on the left have convinced themselves that this 'success' can lay the foundation for a broader middle-class revival. But if a bloated public sector were the blueprint for a thriving middle-class society, then the whole world would be beating a path to Greece’s door."
Instead, Douthat makes an argument for what he terms "small-government egalitarianism," which to my ears sounds a lot like "aspirational conservatism" combined with "redesigning government." His concept,
"would seek to reform the government before we pour more money into it, along lines that encourage upward mobility and benefit the middle class. This would mean seeking a carefully means-tested welfare state, a less special interest-friendly tax code, and a public sector that worked for taxpayers and parents rather than the other way around."
Back to McArdle's analysis, "The Rage of the Almost-Elite." Picking up on Anderson's analysis, she extends it, by harkening back to this work by George Orwell from the last century, where he describes another time and place occupied by the "wreckage left behind when the tide of Victorian prosperity receded."
McArdle touches on the culture theme, as did Lowry, not to praise "old-fashioned bourgeois virtues" as he did, but to explain why members of Anderson's "New Class" seem so obligated to trash those same virtues,
"It's not entirely crazy to suspect, as Orwell did, that this has something to do with money. Specifically, you sneer at the customs of the people you might be mistaken for."
But McArdle confirms with her experience that the New Class saves their ire more for the tier directly above them, than the classes they view as below them,
"They didn't see it coming. Yes, yes, maybe they were naive about the possibilities of a fulfilling and secure life in the field of non-profit environmental management. Probably they should not have sunk tens of thousands of dollars into acquiring a BFA. But these mistakes didn't usually used to be crippling.... Unfortunately their choices became utterly, horrifyingly disastrous just at the moment when we had a terrible financial crisis that spiked our unemployment rate up to 10%."
I find much of this analysis persuasive in explaining current events, like the OWS protests. More importantly, these analyses show the Internet at its finest. Rather than fomenting dissent and spreading confusion, analysts around the globe are able to read and react to each others' work almost in real time, strengthening arguments and building on one another.
Before returning to that thread, I first want to call more attention to to this piece from Anne Applebaum in the Daily Telegraph, "Can America survive without its backbone, the middle class?" This quote helps frame the issue,
"Despite all the loud talk of the “1 per cent” of Americans who, according to a recent study, receive about 17 percent of the income, a percentage which has more than doubled since 1979, the existence of a very small group of very rich people has never bothered Americans. But the fact that some 20 per cent of Americans now receive some 53 per cent of the income is devastating."
Rich Lowry, in the New York Post, picks up on a theme of inter-class struggle in "Stuck at the Bottom: Culture and the American Dream." He concludes, "old-fashioned bourgeois virtues, and particularly marriage, rarely figure in the public debate. Everyone is more comfortable talking about taxes or the banks, as the American Dream frays."
Finally, from Sunday, Ross Douthat writes in the New York Times about stresses on the middle class and diminishing expectations. While the OWS crowd may harbor some legitimate (if well-hidden) grievances, their preferred policy solutions--higher taxes and a bigger government--will only lead to more grief,
"The public-sector workplace has become a kind of artificial Eden, whose fortunate inhabitants enjoy solid pay and 1950s-style job security and retirement benefits, all of it paid for by their less-fortunate private-sector peers. Some on the left have convinced themselves that this 'success' can lay the foundation for a broader middle-class revival. But if a bloated public sector were the blueprint for a thriving middle-class society, then the whole world would be beating a path to Greece’s door."
Instead, Douthat makes an argument for what he terms "small-government egalitarianism," which to my ears sounds a lot like "aspirational conservatism" combined with "redesigning government." His concept,
"would seek to reform the government before we pour more money into it, along lines that encourage upward mobility and benefit the middle class. This would mean seeking a carefully means-tested welfare state, a less special interest-friendly tax code, and a public sector that worked for taxpayers and parents rather than the other way around."
Back to McArdle's analysis, "The Rage of the Almost-Elite." Picking up on Anderson's analysis, she extends it, by harkening back to this work by George Orwell from the last century, where he describes another time and place occupied by the "wreckage left behind when the tide of Victorian prosperity receded."
McArdle touches on the culture theme, as did Lowry, not to praise "old-fashioned bourgeois virtues" as he did, but to explain why members of Anderson's "New Class" seem so obligated to trash those same virtues,
"It's not entirely crazy to suspect, as Orwell did, that this has something to do with money. Specifically, you sneer at the customs of the people you might be mistaken for."
But McArdle confirms with her experience that the New Class saves their ire more for the tier directly above them, than the classes they view as below them,
"They didn't see it coming. Yes, yes, maybe they were naive about the possibilities of a fulfilling and secure life in the field of non-profit environmental management. Probably they should not have sunk tens of thousands of dollars into acquiring a BFA. But these mistakes didn't usually used to be crippling.... Unfortunately their choices became utterly, horrifyingly disastrous just at the moment when we had a terrible financial crisis that spiked our unemployment rate up to 10%."
I find much of this analysis persuasive in explaining current events, like the OWS protests. More importantly, these analyses show the Internet at its finest. Rather than fomenting dissent and spreading confusion, analysts around the globe are able to read and react to each others' work almost in real time, strengthening arguments and building on one another.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)