Wednesday, August 26, 2009

My Answer to the Moveon Question, What do I remember about Teddy ?





Teddy became a legend in his lifetime, of such magnificent fight and accomplishment, to, on the eve of his death, asking the Massachusetts Governor to replace his seat with someone quickly. That's how I will remember Ted Kennedy, always watching out for all of our best interests, for the common good. That inspires us all.

The greatest tribute would be for us to mobilize our resources as a nation now to pass, comprehensive, universal, affordable health care for all and treat it as the right that it is - for all Americans. And let's do that by starting to call it Medicare for All! Americans know and revere the word, Medicare, because of the pioneering work of his brother, John Kennedy.

The American legacy of three brothers: John, Robert and Teddy. They have helped me shape my political life of activism. We are called to that mission, each of us, and we can find no better inspiration than in the life of Ted Kennedy: passionate, wise and dedicated.

Karita Hummer
San Jose, CA

The family has asked that in lieu of flowers that we honor the memory of Senator Kennedy by sending a contribution to the Senator Edward Kennedy Senate Institute, which will be situated on the University of Massachusetts Campus, and will be a place to study Senatorial processes. It is a way for America to learn about the US Senate and how we can get the best legislation. It will be next to his brother's memorial library. A place where the common good can be considered civilly. One may contribute by going to: https://secure.kennedyinstitute.org/page/contribute?__utma=1.2475021559397214700.1251318298.1251318298.1251323121.2&__utmb=1.1.10.1251323121&__utmc=1&__utmx=-

Saturday, August 22, 2009

Red Window Furniture Store, beautiful!




Dear Elizabeth,

Your store appears quite lovely and I think it is based on a lovely concept and sure to boost the furniture, furnishings and crafts production and economy of North Carolina. Kudos for sharing such loveliness with us all and congratulations to your whole family for this achievement.

Karita and Paul Hummer
San Jose, CA

p.s. I don't think we have enough attention in our country to the role crafts can play for a warmer, richer quality of life.

Makes me want to hop over there to Chapel Hill!

Friday, May 22, 2009

California Voters Reject Robin Hood in Reverse in Tuesday's Election on budget propositions



The Land of Budget Shortfalls, Deception and Low education ratings!

California Voters Reject Robin Hood in Reverse in Tuesday's Election on budget propositions (+)
by: Karita Hummer
Fri May 22, 2009 at 03:02:44 AM EDT

Cross-Posted from Progressive Blue

http://www.eenrblog.com/diary/3890/california-voters-reject-robin-hood-in-reverse-in-tuesdays-election-on-budget-propositions
http://www.ca.gov/images/gov.jpg


So what does the Goverrnator say after his deceptive and tricky propositions got defeated. He says, "The people have spoken, and they want drastic cuts in the State budget." Foul play! That is not why I voted "no" on Prop 1D and Prop 1E. I voted against these measures because they were raiding funds that were set aside for the very young, especially from low-income families and the mentally ill.

California voters rejected the Governor's and the State Assembly's Robin Hood in reverse propositions, and it is time the Governor and the State Assembly recognize that fact. We were not condoning the draconian cuts being proposed for us out here in health care, education and law enforcement. All pretty basic needs. Does it make sense for Gov. Schwarznegger and his Republican cohorts and Democratic collaborators to believe that voters who rejected cuts to young children and the mentally ill would want to see the draconian cuts they propose for the disasabled, those in need of health care and education. No, it doesn't! But, will they do the difficult job of finding a solution instead, as they refused to do earlier in the year when they were confronted with the dilemma they have now. What is obvious is that if California wants to keep ranking near the bottom in public education and other critical services, the Governor and his erstwhile colleagues and collaborators will continue to proceed as they have: refuse to raise necessary taxes to address budget shortfalls and refuse to address the highly undemocratic requirement that 2/3 of the Assembly approve of any budget. The latter is the real reason California is in the mess that it is in, and how Republicans continually hold the democrats hostage to their Conservative agenda.

Though the San Jose Mercury News refers to us voters as uncompromising and perhaps uninformed, the height of insult, the paper did have a dissenting view by Larry Gerston, political scientist, from San Jose State University today, entitled, "FIVE DEFENSIBLE SOURCES OF NEW MONEY FOR CALIFORNIA:, San Jose Mercury News

With Tuesday's election decided, California's economic condition is more precarious than ever.
Two facts make this moment extraordinary. First, the new deficit appears just weeks after the governor and Legislature "closed" a $42 billion gap, including $15 billion in new taxes and $16 billion of cuts in programs and services. Second, California now ranks near the bottom in per capita commitments to critical areas such as public education (47th), highways (50th), and number of state employees (49th). Additional cuts will render the state into developing nation status, a tragic distinction for the world's eighth-largest economy.

Yet cuts are the heart of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's latest proposal.

Some suggest that the voters' rejections of Propositions 1A-1E underscore that point. Rather, it's likely that the voters spurned misleading reform propositions that simply targeted vulnerable constituencies such as children and the mentally ill with one-time solutions. So how then can California become whole again? The five suggestions below suggest new revenues without increasing traditional tax rates.

(box) Broaden the sales tax. Currently, the state applies sales taxes to only 21 of a possible 168 areas, according to the Federation of Tax Administrators. Nine states tax fewer areas, while 40 tax more. Taxing phone service alone would generate $3 billion annually, while sales taxes on entertainment would add $1 billion. Sales taxes could also be applied to professional services, storage, repairs and agricultural services. Twenty years ago, sales taxes and income taxes each represented about 40 percent of the state's revenues; today income taxes constitute 55 percent, compared with 25 percent for sales taxes. Broadening this tax could easily add $5 billion annually to state coffers without touching basic necessities such as food.

(box) Restoration of the vehicle license fee. Even Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger now regrets eliminating it in 2004. Then the loss accounted for $4 billion annually. With higher new car prices, the fee over the past five years would have netted the state about $25 billion. In today's dollars, the annual fee would total about $6 billion. Why should drivers pay next to nothing for the privilege of operating their cars, given the costs of maintaining roads? This would not be a new fee, but rather restoration of an abandoned fee.

(box) Alcohol fee. The state alcohol tax has not changed in nearly 20 years. Recently, San Jose Assembly member Jim Beall introduced a bill that would add 10 cents to each alcoholic drink. The money would be used to treat alcoholism, mental health and victims affected by alcoholism. This user tax would be paid only by alcohol consumers and bring in $1.5 billion annually.

(box) Oil severance fee. California is the only oil-producing state without a severance tax. It produces more than 215 million barrels of oil each year. A fee of $2 per barrel (5 cents per gallon) would yield $400 million annually.

(box) Cancellation of recent corporate tax breaks. In the recent budget agreement, the governor and Legislature gave nearly $1 billion in tax breaks to corporations and entertainment companies. Think of it -- as schools were losing teachers and the disabled were doing without health-care workers, the state relinquished $1 billion dollars. The Legislature should rescind this giveaway as soon as possible.

Combined, these suggestions amount to $14 billion in annual revenues. They are neither one-time gimmicks nor overly painful to any one target. They represent a start. To be sure, every recommendation will be ridiculed by the group effected as unnecessary or unfair. But if we believe that California must stop the bleeding, then now is the time to show leadership.Larry Gerston, "FIVE DEFENSIBLE SOURCES OF NEW MONEY FOR CALIFORNIA:, San Jose Mercury News, May 20, 2009

http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-sear...

The people showed wisdom and expect more from their leaders than a draconian punishment response, as in "There! Take your cuts, folks"

Karita Hummer
San Jose, CA

Saturday, May 16, 2009

FDR warned about Economic Royalists -- Guess What, They're Back! by jamess receives Karita Hummer's Silver Pen Award


jamess receives Karita Hummer's Silver Pen Award for a great piece on the kind of corporatists about which FDR warned us.

Karita Hummer

FDR warned about Economic Royalists -- Guess What, They're Back! (+)
by: jamess
Tue May 12, 2009 at 22:10:15 PM EDT

[subscribe]
(power and profits... - promoted by poligirl)


Economic Royalists:

President Franklin D. Roosevelt, in his speech accepting the Democratic nomination for a second term, delivered at Philadelphia on 27 June 1936, said, "The economic royalists complain that we seek to overthrow the institutions of America. What they really complain of is that we seek to take away their power. Our allegiance to American institutions requires the overthrow of this kind of power."

(emphasis added)
http://www.answers.com/topic/e...
jamess :: FDR warned about Economic Royalists -- Guess What, They're Back!
Huh, Royalists? we have no "Royalty" in America, unless you count Celebrities and Sports Stars. What is FDR talking about? Who are the Kings and Queens of our Economy?

Franklin D. Roosevelt Speeches
Democratic National Convention (June 27, 1936)
link to Audio

For out of this modern civilization economic royalists carved new dynasties. New kingdoms were built upon concentration of control over material things. Through new uses of corporations, banks and securities, new machinery of industry and agriculture, of labor and capital--all undreamed of by the fathers--the whole structure of modern life was impressed into this royal service.

There was no place among this royalty for our many thousands of small business men and merchants who sought to make a worthy use of the American system of initiative and profit. They were no more free than the worker or the farmer. Even honest and progressive-minded men of wealth, aware of their obligation to their generation, could never know just where they fitted into this dynastic scheme of things.

It was natural and perhaps human that the privileged princes of these new economic dynasties, thirsting for power, reached out for control over Government itself. They created a new despotism and wrapped it in the robes of legal sanction.
[...]
For too many of us the political equality we once had won was meaningless in the face of economic inequality. A small group had concentrated into their own hands an almost complete control over other people's property, other people's money, other people's labor--other people's lives. For too many of us life was no longer free; liberty no longer real; men could no longer follow the pursuit of happiness.

Against economic tyranny such as this, the American citizen could appeal only to the organized power of Government. The collapse of 1929 showed up the despotism for what it was. The election of 1932 was the people's mandate to end it. Under that mandate it is being ended.
[...]
Today we stand committed to the proposition that freedom is no half-and-half affair. If the average citizen is guaranteed equal opportunity in the polling place, he must have equal opportunity in the market place.

These economic royalists complain that we seek to overthrow the institutions of America. What they really complain of is that we seek to take away their power. Our allegiance to American institutions requires the overthrow of this kind of power. In vain they seek to hide behind the Flag and the Constitution. In their blindness they forget what the Flag and the Constitution stand for. Now, as always, they stand for democracy, not tyranny; for freedom, not subjection; and against a dictatorship by mob rule and the over-privileged alike.

(emphasis added)
http://www.oldamericancentury....


So what do Economic Royalists look like? Do they where capes and masks? Or is it, the suit of Respectability and Credibility that they are more likely to don.

"Shocked" (with Rick Scott)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Who is Rick Scott?
By Jessica Kutch - May 4, 2009

Recently, Mr. Scott bought ads for his group "Conservatives for Patients' Rights" on CNN and FOX News networks. The ads were created by the same firm behind the now discredited "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" ads from the 2004 presidential campaign.

Rick Scott's anti-health care reform ad is chock-full of misinformation. SEIU has requested that the ads be pulled

(emphasis added)
http://www.seiu.org/2009/05/wh...

So Here we go again! Those Economist Royalist are spending Big Bucks to get their way. Whether or Not, the Truth is the Victim, in their Charades of mis-direction. Why should the Health Insurance Industry bother to let Facts get in the way, when they can hire smooth talking spokemen, to muddy the waters?

U.S. health care lies about Canada
Greed, U.S. Politics, dysfunction
May 12, 2009, 8:40 AM by Diane Francis

Just who is this jerk, Rick Scott of propaganda-mongering Conservatives for Patients' Rights? He and his group are fabricating negatives about Canada's health care system and I resent this. I am an American who has lived in Canada for more than 35 years. I can vouch that the system is more than adequate and is not run by civil servants but by doctors who are able to treat everyone, rich or poor.
[...]
4. Canada's health care system enhances economic productivity. Workers diagnosed with illnesses can still change employers and be employable because they are not rejected by employers with health benefits due to pre-conditions.
[...]
6. Outcomes with major illnesses, such as cancer and heart disease, are better than in the United States.
[...]
10. No one in Canada goes broke because of medical bills whereas ARP estimates half of personal bankruptcies are due to unpaid, high medical bills.

(emphasis added)
http://network.nationalpost.co...


Economic Royalists care about one thing, keeping their Power, and keeping their Profits (oops, that's 2 things).

So much so, that the Royalists in the Health Denial business, have sparked a war of sorts, with the Doctors and Nurses just trying to care for their Patients:

Denial Management Industry Grows Amid Debate Between Health Insurers, Physicians Over Claims
16 Feb 2007 - Health Insurance / Medical Insurance News

"[T]ension" between insurers and physicians over claims payments "has spawned a booming industry of intermediaries" known as denial management, the Wall Street Journal reports. Some doctors, clinics and hospitals are investing in software systems that help navigate insurers' payment systems and prevent denials

[...] medical group Paluxy Valley Physicians, which four years ago was trying to recover more than $500,000 in denied or unpaid claims from insurers [...] Shari Reynolds, the administrator at Paluxy Valley, said, "The insurers outcode us, they outsmart us and they have more manpower. Now, at least we have a fighting chance."

(emphasis added)
http://www.medicalnewstoday.co...

The high stakes of the "Business of No"

from Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP)


When Profits matter more than People -- perhaps the Royalists (aka Elites) have too much Power and too much control. (Monopolies and Oligopolies, tend to do that.)

When our lives are frittered away in an insane system of endless Payments, that steals our Freedom, and steals our Health, and in some say our Economic Security -- well those "excising" those endless Payments, could indeed have TOO MUCH Power.


So what does an Economic Royalist look like? Do they wear capes and masks? Or is it, the Cloak of Impartiality, when conducting the People's business. Sadly it seems that all Voices, are indeed NOT welcome in some chambers -- be they the Voices of Doctors or Nurses, or not -- No Seat for you!

Protesters Disrupt Senate Hearing on Health Care

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Sooner or later the People must Demand the Representation, that is pledged through our Votes. Those Seats should NOT be for sale to the highest Bidder! (aka Lobbyists, the agents of Royalty.)

Sooner or later a truly Progressive-People's party must stand up and be heard.

Sunday, April 26, 2009

Bruce McF gets another silver pen for What's in SUPERTRAINS for Small Town and Rural America?



Bruce McF receives another Karita Hummer's Silver Pen Award for his accomplished writing on the subject of high speed rail, which would connect our country in the most remarkable and effective way possible, for a more connected, sense of nastion.

What's in SUPERTRAINS for Small Town and Rural America? (+)
by: BruceMcF

Sat Apr 25, 2009

Crossposted from Progressive Blue: http://www.progressiveblue.com/showDiary.do;jsessionid=AD7115B2C9851F3FBB289A1E29545A06?diaryId=3790

This last weekend I wrote up a small diary, cross-posted to various places ... which even stumbled into being wrecklisted at Agent Orange ... about the High Speed Rail plan released by the Obama administration.

That diary focused on laying out the three "tiers" of HSR in the announced plan. "Express HSR" is one of the bullet train systems, like they are planning for California. But between that tier and conventional rail, are two more tiers:

* "Regional HSR", with a top speed of around 125mph, able to provide trips at average speeds in the range of 100mph, operating in existing rail rights of way, but mostly on its own track, with upgraded signaling and substantial investment in grade separation and/or the top level of "hardened" level crossings, normally with electrified lines; and
* "Emerging HSR", with a top speed of 110mph, able provide trips at average speed in excess of 80mph, operating on existing rail right of way with improved capacity, but sometimes sharing track with freight rail, the 110mph standard of quad gate, speed sensitive level crossings, and provided by either electric or diesel 110mph tilt-trains

The bullet trains are the show ponies ... but for small town and rural America, the genuine seat at the table for Emerging and Regional HSR is the real good news from the announcement.
BruceMcF :: What's in SUPERTRAINS for Small Town and Rural America?
Now, I do not want to give the impression that Express HSR is somehow "anti-rural development". Far from it ... all forms of HSR share a key feature that is very good news for small town and rural America.

Trains lose much less time on a stop than airplanes do. And while an Express HSR route might be built in order to serve transport markets between two big metro areas ... you need two way track pretty much all the way to run them properly, and once you have it, adding services to serve smaller cities in between is very cost efficient.

That doesn't mean a station in every little village and hamlet, but it does mean that there can be a station every thirty to fifty miles, which means the areas that the HSR passes through are likely to see far more frequent services at the closest HSR station than at the closest airfield.

So, compared to the current state of affairs, there are going to be more rural areas with more effective transport options in reasonable driving distance with "Express HSR" than with the two level system of short-hop flights and interstate buses.


Cost Matters

No, what makes the seat at the table for Emerging HSR and Regional HSR so exciting is that they cost so much less per mile to get built.

Consider that basically one Express HSR corridor from San Francisco to San Jose through the Central Valley then LA and ending in Anaheim California ... is projected to cost $46b.

However, to build the Ohio Hub for 110mph service (blue and orange lines) would cost under $10b ... maybe under $5b. That's Buffalo to Cleveland to Columbus to Dayton to Cincinnati ... connecting to Indianapolis and Chicago, Pittsburgh to Cleveland to Toledo to Fort Wayne .... connecting to Chicago, Pittsburgh to Columbus to Toledo to Detroit, and Pittsburgh to Columbus to Fort Wayne.

The thing is, when existing rail sees light freight traffic, it can be upgraded, 10miles of passing tracks added in each 50 miles of track, when existing rail sees heavy freight traffic, a new passenger track can be laid ... and all in existing rail rights of way. Most of the worst headaches of establishing a new rail line in terms of environmental clearances, property fights, etc, ... just are not there when building inside an existing rail right of way.

The track is built for 60mph freight traffic, and then the extra tilt that has to be added to allow trains to go through turns at 110mph without tossing the passengers around is added by the train itself.

And consider the stations ...

... while it is patronage involving the three largest cities in that provides the financial foundation for the Ohio Hub system, once the rail line is passing through, it makes sense to add a station every so often, to get an additional increment of passengers.

And so there are stations laid out in Coshocton, Springfield, Kenton, New Castle PA, Findlay, Defiance ... a lot more stations a lot more accessible to the rural counties of the state than a single Express HSR system could be, and for less money.


And its not just the Regional HSR Systems

The red corridors in that map is the Midwest Hub ... one of the main inspirations of the Ohio Hub, as the Midwest Hub was originally to connect to Cleveland and Cincinnati, and someone said, "Hmmm, something seems to be missing here".

The Midwest Hub is a product of the Midwest Interstate Passenger Rail Commission (FAQ), an alliance of states.

And the membership of the MIRPC extends beyond the boundaries of the Midwest Hub, extending on to North Dakota.

North Dakota? Why are they a member of the alliance?

Note that North Dakota may not be in that route map, but rail is still important to North Dakota. The transcontinental Amtrak system is quite important for many North Dakota towns and rural counties. And so the Midwest Hub will benefit North Dakota in two main ways:

* First, the Amtrak to Minneapolis will then connect to a Regional HSR corridor to Chicago, offering a substantially quicker train trip than what is currently available; and,
* Second, when the Amtrak is running through an area with a Regional HSR system, it will be able to use the improved track as well, avoiding the delays from freight trains that currently plague the transcontinental routes and can put them many hours behind schedule.


Getting down to work

Note that the plan set down is not a centralized, top-down plan. It involves states, one at a time or in groups, sitting down, deciding what kind of improved rail service would benefit them, working out a desired alignment, and going through the process to get it added to one of the existing systems of HSR corridors.

Some states have taken a lead, like the alliance led by Illinois, and the Southeast corridor led by Virginia and North Carolina.

Some states are scurrying to catch up, like Colorado, which started studying a corridor from Cheyenne through Denver and Colorado Springs to the New Mexico border last year.

Some states have had stop-start-stop approaches, like Florida and Texas, both of which almost got started on HSR systems, and both of which had their HSR projects killed by a Governor Bush.

And some states have lagged behind. There ought to be a Southeast Hub spreading out from Atlanta, similar to the one spreading out from Chicago, but Georgia seems content to sit on its hands, letting others do the work. And Tennessee seems to be completely asleep at the wheel. That means obvious lines, like Atlanta to Nashville connecting to the Midwest Hub at Louisville, are missing.

But the advantage of the system is that we do not need to get heard over the noise in Washington DC in order to get the ball rolling in our own neck of the woods. What we need to do is to corral our own State Legislator, State Senator, even Governor, and talk to them about when they are going to get off their fat asses and get to work on working up a Regional HSR system to serve both the cities in their states and the country in between the cities that the rail lines will pass through.

Saturday, April 25, 2009

How To Build a National High Speed Rail system receives Karita Hummer's Silver Pen Award.

Kudos and a Silver Pen Award to Bruce McFadden who writes eloquently and brilliantly on the need for high speed rail, which would be a great way to connect the country. It's thrilling to think of traveling through the country on high speed. All aboard!


How To Build a National High Speed Rail system (+)
by: BruceMcF
Sat Apr 18, 2009 at 14:56:16 PM EDT

[subscribe]
(it's always midnight somewhere... - promoted by poligirl)

Burning the Midnight Oil for Living Energy Independence

... A Four Step Program

Step 1. Give states a framework to develop plans, either individually or in groups, and present them to the Federal government for vetting, approval, and funding support.

Step 2. States do that.

Step 3. Fund a substantial number of seed corridors, so that a large number of metro areas (House) and States (Senate) have a stake in maintaining ongoing Federal HSR funding.

Step 4. Keep funding the construction of more.

That is my plan. But, OTOH, I'm just an obscure Development Economist with a field specialization in Regional Economics, so the fact that its my plan is neither here nor there.

More newsworthy, it seems to be the plan of the Obama administration. So, unlike the Bank Bail-out, I find myself on the "cheerleader" side of Administration activity.

Give Me an H! Give Me an S! Give Me an R! What's It Spell? One Piece of the Energy Independent Transport Puzzle! YEAH!!!!
BruceMcF :: How To Build a National High Speed Rail system

Wait a minute, what about the network map?

What about it? You want a network map, here's a network map:

That from a crude spreadsheet of pairs of 1m+ metro areas within a line-of-sight radius for Express HSR, based on geometric mean population per mile. Its main flaws, of course, are lack of detailed knowledge of local conditions ... for example, the Pacheco Alignment selected for the California HSR system, with HSR train running up the Caltrain Corridor from San Jose to San Francisco, has the impact on an HSR service of making San Jose and San Francisco into a single destination zone from Southern California, and adjusting for that adjustment would make for a much stronger corridor between LA and the BAY.

But, that's the point of the strategy, above. Those dots and lines are not a corridor map, they are a service map. One strong network economy of HSR is the ability to provide multiple trip-pair services on a single train with far less difficulty than an airplane.

Here is the (newly buffed and polished) Department of Transportation map of the HSR corridors that have already won official designation:

These corridors are shown laid out over a ghost of the existing Amtrak intercity network, which is reasonable since connection to existing passenger rail service is one of the criteria for designation.

They are not a design for a future HSR network. What they are is the result of the pieces of the four part strategy that were already in place. To make a long story short, we had everything in the above strategy except the money.

IOW, Shorter Obama: "High Speed Rail makes sense. Let's take our HSR plans and start funding them".


zOMG, some of those are not Bullet Trains! MASSIVE FAIL

There is some hyperventilating about the fact that many of the systems being talked about receiving funding are not going to be among the fastest trains on the face of the earth.

This hyperventilation is based on a fundamental misconception about how HSR works.

High Speed Rail does not work by being the fastest mode of transport on the planet. The fastest mode of transport on the planet is the Rocket. After that the Supersonic Plane. After that regular Jet Aircraft ... which, should be noted, is the mode that has commercial passenger operations ... then short-haul commuter jets, then prop planes, then ... I'm not sure what is next. Sooner or later we get to bullet trains.

High Speed Rail works be being fast enough so that it can offer competitive trip speeds, and then leveraging the other competitive advantages of rail over air and car transport to carve out a successful market niche.

How fast is fast enough depends on the distance between two cities.

Outside of congested areas, conventional rail cannot compete for speed against cars on the Interstate Highway system, so for most of the country, conventional rail relies entirely on its other competitive advantages in order to attract patronage ... not everyone has a car, some people dislike driving and view it as a tedious chore, on a train you can watch a movie on a portable DVD player or get work done on a laptop, there are some (mostly urban) destinations where having a car is a pain rather than a benefit, etc.

For conventional rail with conventional signaling and running over conventional level crossings, Federal Railroad Administration regulations typically mandate a top speed of 79mph. Add in slow zones for curves, station stops, etc., and conventional rail is only faster than the Interstate in congested areas.

Raise the top speed to 110mph and the effective trip speed to the 80mph-90mph range, and for most non-insane drivers a train trip begins to be faster than driving. This is the "Emerging HSR" class of HSR. When you take an existing rail corridor and upgrade it to take faster than conventional trains, this is the first step up from there. 110mph here is a limit for a specific class of upgraded level crossings.

Raise the top speed to 125mph and the effective trip speed to the 90mph to 110mph range, and for all non-insane drivers, a train trip of 2 to 3 hours begins to be significantly faster than driving. This is the "Regional HSR" class of HSR. 125mph here is the limit for trains relying on conventional signaling with lights and information next to the track ... beyond 125mph, signals have to be brought into the cab.

Most of the planned corridors on the DoT map above are Emerging HSR corridors ... and by the same token, since they were the ones that states took seriously enough to push through the process, they are mostly strategic enough corridors that they are likely to end up as Regional HSR corridors.

For many metro areas trip pairs, an effective trip speed of 100mph, which is a radius of 300mph, is fast enough to bring trips down to 3 hours or less. For others, its not. For Cleveland/Cincinnati, Regional HSR is certainly "High Speed Enough". For the LA Basin to the Bay Area, Regional HSR is not "High Speed Enough".

And that brings the final class of HSR, "Express HSR", also known as bullet trains. This is the class which would be referred to as HSR basically anywhere in the world. It requires all grade separated corridors ... 200mph is too fast to take across a level crossing, no matter how "hardened" the crossing may be. It requires that the track be banked for operation far above the speeds of normal container freight cars. It requires an ability to broadcast signals into the driver cabs of the trains. It requires broader, more sweeping turns than conventional rail. In order to keep the mass down and the driving energy up, it essentially requires an all-electrified corridor.

It is, in other words, not an incremental upgrade to an existing rail corridor. It might use an appropriate existing rail Right of Way, but it would use that right of way as a location to lay new bullet train tracks. And its not uncommon for bullet train systems to use the margins of rural and suburban Expressways for their Right of Way.


Fighting HSR Segregation

Now, assuming good design, you get what you pay for. Or as a programmer I am acquainted with writes, "Good, Fast, Cheap ... pick any Two out of Three".

The danger in providing only Express HSR funding is that an Express HSR corridor is expensive. Not every part of the country will find it possible to justify the required state contribution.

That means that if we segregate Express HSR out as the "only true and holy" HSR, we leave it politically exposed to counterattack in the areas that are left out.

And where, precisely, is left in? Well, California has passed $9b in state bond funding for a California HSR system that is Express HSR. The Northeast Corridor is the only place in the country that has established a "Regional HSR" system (though because it is operating in such a congested rail corridor with substantial legacy constraints, it operates in effect as an Emerging HSR system).

Florida and Texas have at various times flirted with bullet train systems ... indeed, a Governor Bush helped kill the flirtation in both instances.

Anyway, California, and the Northeast Corridor. That's it.

Now, instead of fighting over the "true and holy meaning of HSR", suppose that all of the systems that met the original Department of Transportation HSR corridor designation are given a definition as a "class of" HSR.

Now you have Southeastern Corridor, the Gulf Corridor, the Empire and Keystone corridors, the Ohio Hub, the Midwest Hub, possibilities for Emerging HSR corridor development in Texas, the Cascade Corridor in the Pacific Northwest, the New England Corridor connecting into the NEC. Add to that the Front Range corridor presently in early exploratory stages, and there is a massive footprint ... in total number of beneficiary states, for the Senate, in metro populations served, for the House, and even in terms of Swing States, for Presidential Politics.

And unlike bullet train corridors, those are systems that can have their foundation corridors built and put into operation in five years or less, which means corridors that can see ground broken before 2012 and passengers being served before the 2014 midterm elections.


Express and Regional HSR Should Be Friends

When built out, one way that Express HSR and Regional HSR work together is by sharing transfer passengers.

However, by electrifying the Regional HSR line, the Express HSR train can also simply continue on the Regional HSR to a destination that is off the HSR corridor.

So consider the following Express HSR alignment: New York City directly through northern Pennsylvania to North Central Ohio to Fort Wayne Indiana and on to Chicago.

"But it doesn't go to..." is the first reaction. If I set out that map, then assuming anyone was reading, the reaction would be to point out all the places it does not go. But that is ignoring the Midwest and Ohio Hubs. Which is a silly thing to do. Consider the following (note that this is from the Ohio Hub site ... it does not include the entire Midwest Hub, but only the eastern corridors ... the Midwest Hub does actually extend from the Great Lakes into the Midwest proper):

Only the far western stretch of that bullet train alignment appears in this map ...

... but from where it crosses the "Pittsburgh to Cleveland via the Rail Line I Cycle Commute Over" alignment, a bullet train can run from New York City to Cleveland, Toledo, and Detroit, from where it crosses the Triple-C from New York City to Columbus to Cincinnati (and likely on to Louisville and Memphis).

... from Chicago, Chicago to the Triple C to Buffalo and Albany, Chicago to the Cleveland / Pittsburgh corridor to Pittsburgh / Harrisburg / Philadelphia, as well as after upgrading the Pittsburgh / DC alignment, Chicago / Pittsburgh / DC.

That is, after all, how it is done overseas ... quite a large number of the French TGV routes, for instance, keep going for quite a way beyond the end of the bullet train corridor. In the map to the right, grey lines are TGV's running on conventional French rail corridors ... which, because of the differences between European and American rail systems, could be considered to be running on "Regional HSR" lines.

Indeed, much of the French TGV system was built in stages, with individual segments of a corridor brought into service on completion, with each segment reducing the travel time on that corridor until all bullet train corridors are completed.


Anyway, that's how to build a HSR system

It doesn't actually matter whether someone is an "Amtrak incrementalist", a "Rapid Rail advocate", or a "HSR advocate" ... its the same plan.

Which is why its not big deal if "Emerging HSR" and "Regional HSR" is not what some Europeans would call "Real HSR". Now that we have the blueprint, we have the language to say "Express HSR" when we mean bullet trains, "Regional HSR" when we mean full fledged Rapid Rail, and "Emerging HSR" when we mean turbocharged conventional rail corridors with plans to build toward full fledged Rapid Rail.

Its a natural coalition of interests, which is a durable foundation for a political coalition among the supporters of the full range of systems.

Those of us living in flyover country no that this is not really building the "Regional HSR" in the outback ... but we do need to be building systems between the Appalachians and the Rockies if we want the robust political coalition that will allow the building of ten and twenty year infrastructure projects in the new century ahead.

Tags: Infrastructure, HSR, rail electrification, A Brawny Recovery, Living Energy Independence, (All Tags) :: Add/Edit Tags on this Post

Friday, April 24, 2009

How To Build a National High Speed Rail system receives Karita Hummer's Silver Pen Award.

How To Build a National High Speed Rail system (+)
by: BruceMcF
Sat Apr 18, 2009 at 14:56:16 PM EDT

[subscribe]
(it's always midnight somewhere... - promoted by poligirl)

Burning the Midnight Oil for Living Energy Independence

... A Four Step Program

Step 1. Give states a framework to develop plans, either individually or in groups, and present them to the Federal government for vetting, approval, and funding support.

Step 2. States do that.

Step 3. Fund a substantial number of seed corridors, so that a large number of metro areas (House) and States (Senate) have a stake in maintaining ongoing Federal HSR funding.

Step 4. Keep funding the construction of more.

That is my plan. But, OTOH, I'm just an obscure Development Economist with a field specialization in Regional Economics, so the fact that its my plan is neither here nor there.

More newsworthy, it seems to be the plan of the Obama administration. So, unlike the Bank Bail-out, I find myself on the "cheerleader" side of Administration activity.

Give Me an H! Give Me an S! Give Me an R! What's It Spell? One Piece of the Energy Independent Transport Puzzle! YEAH!!!!
BruceMcF :: How To Build a National High Speed Rail system

Wait a minute, what about the network map?

What about it? You want a network map, here's a network map:

That from a crude spreadsheet of pairs of 1m+ metro areas within a line-of-sight radius for Express HSR, based on geometric mean population per mile. Its main flaws, of course, are lack of detailed knowledge of local conditions ... for example, the Pacheco Alignment selected for the California HSR system, with HSR train running up the Caltrain Corridor from San Jose to San Francisco, has the impact on an HSR service of making San Jose and San Francisco into a single destination zone from Southern California, and adjusting for that adjustment would make for a much stronger corridor between LA and the BAY.

But, that's the point of the strategy, above. Those dots and lines are not a corridor map, they are a service map. One strong network economy of HSR is the ability to provide multiple trip-pair services on a single train with far less difficulty than an airplane.

Here is the (newly buffed and polished) Department of Transportation map of the HSR corridors that have already won official designation:

These corridors are shown laid out over a ghost of the existing Amtrak intercity network, which is reasonable since connection to existing passenger rail service is one of the criteria for designation.

They are not a design for a future HSR network. What they are is the result of the pieces of the four part strategy that were already in place. To make a long story short, we had everything in the above strategy except the money.

IOW, Shorter Obama: "High Speed Rail makes sense. Let's take our HSR plans and start funding them".


zOMG, some of those are not Bullet Trains! MASSIVE FAIL

There is some hyperventilating about the fact that many of the systems being talked about receiving funding are not going to be among the fastest trains on the face of the earth.

This hyperventilation is based on a fundamental misconception about how HSR works.

High Speed Rail does not work by being the fastest mode of transport on the planet. The fastest mode of transport on the planet is the Rocket. After that the Supersonic Plane. After that regular Jet Aircraft ... which, should be noted, is the mode that has commercial passenger operations ... then short-haul commuter jets, then prop planes, then ... I'm not sure what is next. Sooner or later we get to bullet trains.

High Speed Rail works be being fast enough so that it can offer competitive trip speeds, and then leveraging the other competitive advantages of rail over air and car transport to carve out a successful market niche.

How fast is fast enough depends on the distance between two cities.

Outside of congested areas, conventional rail cannot compete for speed against cars on the Interstate Highway system, so for most of the country, conventional rail relies entirely on its other competitive advantages in order to attract patronage ... not everyone has a car, some people dislike driving and view it as a tedious chore, on a train you can watch a movie on a portable DVD player or get work done on a laptop, there are some (mostly urban) destinations where having a car is a pain rather than a benefit, etc.

For conventional rail with conventional signaling and running over conventional level crossings, Federal Railroad Administration regulations typically mandate a top speed of 79mph. Add in slow zones for curves, station stops, etc., and conventional rail is only faster than the Interstate in congested areas.

Raise the top speed to 110mph and the effective trip speed to the 80mph-90mph range, and for most non-insane drivers a train trip begins to be faster than driving. This is the "Emerging HSR" class of HSR. When you take an existing rail corridor and upgrade it to take faster than conventional trains, this is the first step up from there. 110mph here is a limit for a specific class of upgraded level crossings.

Raise the top speed to 125mph and the effective trip speed to the 90mph to 110mph range, and for all non-insane drivers, a train trip of 2 to 3 hours begins to be significantly faster than driving. This is the "Regional HSR" class of HSR. 125mph here is the limit for trains relying on conventional signaling with lights and information next to the track ... beyond 125mph, signals have to be brought into the cab.

Most of the planned corridors on the DoT map above are Emerging HSR corridors ... and by the same token, since they were the ones that states took seriously enough to push through the process, they are mostly strategic enough corridors that they are likely to end up as Regional HSR corridors.

For many metro areas trip pairs, an effective trip speed of 100mph, which is a radius of 300mph, is fast enough to bring trips down to 3 hours or less. For others, its not. For Cleveland/Cincinnati, Regional HSR is certainly "High Speed Enough". For the LA Basin to the Bay Area, Regional HSR is not "High Speed Enough".

And that brings the final class of HSR, "Express HSR", also known as bullet trains. This is the class which would be referred to as HSR basically anywhere in the world. It requires all grade separated corridors ... 200mph is too fast to take across a level crossing, no matter how "hardened" the crossing may be. It requires that the track be banked for operation far above the speeds of normal container freight cars. It requires an ability to broadcast signals into the driver cabs of the trains. It requires broader, more sweeping turns than conventional rail. In order to keep the mass down and the driving energy up, it essentially requires an all-electrified corridor.

It is, in other words, not an incremental upgrade to an existing rail corridor. It might use an appropriate existing rail Right of Way, but it would use that right of way as a location to lay new bullet train tracks. And its not uncommon for bullet train systems to use the margins of rural and suburban Expressways for their Right of Way.


Fighting HSR Segregation

Now, assuming good design, you get what you pay for. Or as a programmer I am acquainted with writes, "Good, Fast, Cheap ... pick any Two out of Three".

The danger in providing only Express HSR funding is that an Express HSR corridor is expensive. Not every part of the country will find it possible to justify the required state contribution.

That means that if we segregate Express HSR out as the "only true and holy" HSR, we leave it politically exposed to counterattack in the areas that are left out.

And where, precisely, is left in? Well, California has passed $9b in state bond funding for a California HSR system that is Express HSR. The Northeast Corridor is the only place in the country that has established a "Regional HSR" system (though because it is operating in such a congested rail corridor with substantial legacy constraints, it operates in effect as an Emerging HSR system).

Florida and Texas have at various times flirted with bullet train systems ... indeed, a Governor Bush helped kill the flirtation in both instances.

Anyway, California, and the Northeast Corridor. That's it.

Now, instead of fighting over the "true and holy meaning of HSR", suppose that all of the systems that met the original Department of Transportation HSR corridor designation are given a definition as a "class of" HSR.

Now you have Southeastern Corridor, the Gulf Corridor, the Empire and Keystone corridors, the Ohio Hub, the Midwest Hub, possibilities for Emerging HSR corridor development in Texas, the Cascade Corridor in the Pacific Northwest, the New England Corridor connecting into the NEC. Add to that the Front Range corridor presently in early exploratory stages, and there is a massive footprint ... in total number of beneficiary states, for the Senate, in metro populations served, for the House, and even in terms of Swing States, for Presidential Politics.

And unlike bullet train corridors, those are systems that can have their foundation corridors built and put into operation in five years or less, which means corridors that can see ground broken before 2012 and passengers being served before the 2014 midterm elections.


Express and Regional HSR Should Be Friends

When built out, one way that Express HSR and Regional HSR work together is by sharing transfer passengers.

However, by electrifying the Regional HSR line, the Express HSR train can also simply continue on the Regional HSR to a destination that is off the HSR corridor.

So consider the following Express HSR alignment: New York City directly through northern Pennsylvania to North Central Ohio to Fort Wayne Indiana and on to Chicago.

"But it doesn't go to..." is the first reaction. If I set out that map, then assuming anyone was reading, the reaction would be to point out all the places it does not go. But that is ignoring the Midwest and Ohio Hubs. Which is a silly thing to do. Consider the following (note that this is from the Ohio Hub site ... it does not include the entire Midwest Hub, but only the eastern corridors ... the Midwest Hub does actually extend from the Great Lakes into the Midwest proper):

Only the far western stretch of that bullet train alignment appears in this map ...

... but from where it crosses the "Pittsburgh to Cleveland via the Rail Line I Cycle Commute Over" alignment, a bullet train can run from New York City to Cleveland, Toledo, and Detroit, from where it crosses the Triple-C from New York City to Columbus to Cincinnati (and likely on to Louisville and Memphis).

... from Chicago, Chicago to the Triple C to Buffalo and Albany, Chicago to the Cleveland / Pittsburgh corridor to Pittsburgh / Harrisburg / Philadelphia, as well as after upgrading the Pittsburgh / DC alignment, Chicago / Pittsburgh / DC.

That is, after all, how it is done overseas ... quite a large number of the French TGV routes, for instance, keep going for quite a way beyond the end of the bullet train corridor. In the map to the right, grey lines are TGV's running on conventional French rail corridors ... which, because of the differences between European and American rail systems, could be considered to be running on "Regional HSR" lines.

Indeed, much of the French TGV system was built in stages, with individual segments of a corridor brought into service on completion, with each segment reducing the travel time on that corridor until all bullet train corridors are completed.


Anyway, that's how to build a HSR system

It doesn't actually matter whether someone is an "Amtrak incrementalist", a "Rapid Rail advocate", or a "HSR advocate" ... its the same plan.

Which is why its not big deal if "Emerging HSR" and "Regional HSR" is not what some Europeans would call "Real HSR". Now that we have the blueprint, we have the language to say "Express HSR" when we mean bullet trains, "Regional HSR" when we mean full fledged Rapid Rail, and "Emerging HSR" when we mean turbocharged conventional rail corridors with plans to build toward full fledged Rapid Rail.

Its a natural coalition of interests, which is a durable foundation for a political coalition among the supporters of the full range of systems.

Those of us living in flyover country no that this is not really building the "Regional HSR" in the outback ... but we do need to be building systems between the Appalachians and the Rockies if we want the robust political coalition that will allow the building of ten and twenty year infrastructure projects in the new century ahead.

Tags: Infrastructure, HSR, rail electrification, A Brawny Recovery, Living Energy Independence, (All Tags) :: Add/Edit Tags on this Post

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

On Supporting President Obama by Michael Conrad receives Karita Hummer's Silver Pen Award


Cross-Posted from Progressive Blue Blog: http://www.progressiveblue.com/diary/3750/on-supporting-president-obama

Michael Conrad is the recipient of Karita Hummer's Silver Pen Award for this incisive piece on the need to praise and question President Obama as warranted by his policies and decisions. Democrats don't lose their ability for critical thinking. We must applaud and we must protest, as appropriate. Michael Conrad says it perfectly well, in a most balanced and insightful piece.



On Supporting President Obama (+)
by: Michael Conrad
Sun Apr 12, 2009 at 06:35:29 AM EDT

[subscribe]
(the title says it all... - promoted by poligirl)

I'm in the process of streamlining the project I've been working on. In order to make room for other content, I'm posting my general views about what it means to support President Obama now, ahead of the project itself.

Besides being something I can refer to when talking about how progressive populism relates to the Democratic president, I hope this contributes something to the grassroots conversation about values, priorities, goals, and how we reach them. I largely personalized this, as I can only speak for myself, but I'm interested in your feedback.
Michael Conrad :: On Supporting President Obama
The discussion in the netroots about the merits of the president's policies has become increasingly frustrating to many of those involved.

Some thoughts:

- Purposeful criticism is necessary. Part of our job is to hold elected Democrats accountable, whether they're in Congress or the White House.

- Applause and criticism for the Obama Administration are not mutually exclusive.

For example:

The way the president initially went about selling the stimulus was ineffective.
The weekly address he used to rally support for his budget was excellent.

Taking crucial economic advice from the Church of Rubin is bad on numerous levels.
Creating a Middle Class Task Force led by Jared Bernstein was a great move.

- Too much is on the line for this to be about us, or desire for personal vindication.

- President Obama has to deal with a dizzying amount of BS, from right - wing attacks and bizarre protests, to inane chatter from Pundit Land about "doing too much at once" despite the desperate need for action on numerous fronts, to incoherent opposition from members of his own party in the form of the Evan Bayh Vanity Project. Voicing our disagreements with the president isn't going to stop us from aggressively pushing back against the GOP, media hackery, and self - proclaimed "moderate" Democrats.

- If Obama is compared to his immediate predecessors, I think he'll likely clear the bar with ease. With that said, if he is going to get the economy working for everyone, there is a lot that must be done. In this case, very good might not be good enough.

- Merely saying that something is "smart strategy," or that the president is "doing what works" doesn't make it true. Distorting pragmatism is highly counterproductive.

- The notion that acknowledging the president's mistakes will damage him is wildly off the mark. If something he is doing undermines his message, the Democratic base isn't going to be the only entity to notice. This misguided mentality is anathema to improving the Democratic Party. It's also a direct contradiction of President Obama's own words about change coming from the bottom up, his supporters holding him accountable, and his willingness to admit mistakes.

- The influx of new participants presents the netroots with a real opportunity to build on the broad support for a bold Democratic agenda within its ranks. A focused netroots will find itself in a good position to accomplish things it has been working towards for years.


Weak Policy = Bad Politics

It's simplistic, but now more than ever, it's true. Our message machine isn't the feeble shell it used to be, and the GOP has very little credibility left.

Health Care

There is a difference between less than ideal policy and weak policy. Single - payer health care is ideal, but right now it makes sense to focus on passing the best health care legislation possible. This means making sure the public option is included.

Jonathan Cohn, a longtime advocate for Universal Health Care recently wrote about the divide within the administration over the issue. President Obama deserves a tremendous amount of credit for standing his ground, and not being swayed by the faction within his inner - circle that leaned toward delay. Defenders of the Clueless Caucus might say that they "only" wanted to wait, but even that is indefensible. Terrible advice like this shows that prominent Democratic consultants are still capable of scaling Mount Stupid in record time.

It's well - understand how cruel and nonsensical this would be policy wise, but what how can anyone argue it would make for good politics? The concerns mentioned in the article that UHC might not be sufficiently popular with persuadable middle class voters would be laughable if this wasn't such a critical issue. There's a reason why Cons like Bill Kristol and Michelle Bernard positively freak out at the thought of the American people getting the health care system they deserve. If you think the concept of Universal Health Care is popular now, wait until after it's enacted.

While I would bet some kind of polling was behind this concern, there is a ton of public polling showing support for UHC from the country as a whole, and especially from those who either vote for Democrats or are in play. I'm sure I'm not the only one who remembers what happened when health care came up during one of the presidential debates. Then - Senator Obama followed up John McCain's right - wing idiocy by saying that health care is a right. The response from the much - hyped focus group of Independents was overwhelmingly positive. A national poll taken shortly after the debate showed Senator Obama leading Senator McCain by 39% on health care, and trouncing him in the general election.

Wall Street

We'd all breathe easier if there weren't good reasons to question whether the Obama Administration is sufficiently challenging Wall Street, but there are... Larry Summers guiding policy, an anemic outside economic advisory board, Geithner's nomination of Neal Wolin, Elizabeth Warren's comments about the Treasury Department, etc.

I don't think the claim that personnel is largely irrelevant can pass its own "stress test." It seems to me that advocates of the DLC / Third Way / Hamilton Project approach have drowned out other voices. I'd like to be proven wrong about this, but we should be prepared for the outcome described by Robert Kuttner.

The grave political and economic risk is that Obama continues to let Summers and Geithner lead him down the garden path; the industry-oriented mortgage rescue saves too few homeowners; housing remains in the doldrums and mortgage securities with it; the hedge funds and private equity companies make some money with government guarantees, but the banking system remains comatose; and Republicans increasingly become the instruments of public anger.

Mike Lux on what to do next here and here.

Main Street

And then there is Michigan. The failure to distinguish between the big 3 and the auto workers was a sign of weakness. President Obama could have talked about the changes that need to be made and still done something long overdue; use the bully pulpit to confront the smears about people who have actually contribute to our economy. (I'll admit this wouldn't have won over the DC establishment, which much prefers defending those who devour the economy.)

This Wall Street / Michigan double standard was just the latest example of a problem that goes beyond the White House to the party as a whole. From the UAW to EFCA, we've seen how quickly debates involving unions become fundamentally dishonest if Democrats don't assert themselves.

Falling down on the Rust Belt is politically dangerous, and the mood of the electorate make it even harder to understand. The electorate isn't going to tolerate disingenuous attacks from Republicans and their K Street bosses. If we speak the truth, that they are being lied to again by the same people who got us into this mess, the American people are going to listen. Authenticity, passion, and candor will be admired, not shunned.


Fierce Discontent and Fierce Urgency

The Beltway bubble keep its residents insulated from the consequences of their action, and leads them to embrace cop outs and deeply flawed conventional wisdom. Evan Thomas' acknowledgement of the gap between conventional wisdom and reality received a lot of attention for good reason.

But sometimes, beneath the pleasant murmur and tinkle of cocktails, the old guard cannot hear the sound of ice cracking.

This was evident when talking heads came out in droves to condemn the recent wave of populism. To them, talking about stagnant wages makes you a dangerous populist. If you talk about channeling the outrage over ridiculous bonuses into support for re - regulating Wall Street, then you are an extra - scary double populist, and every pundit should be armed with a tranquilizer gun to protect themself from you.

Note: The "we're all in this together" ethos of progressive economic populism are a direct repudiation of right - wing populism. The role economic anxiety plays in fueling the Glenn Beck version is being overlooked.

The Obama Administration and Congressional Democrats need to focus on the perspective that really matters. I've said this before, but I think it's worth repeating. Out of touch Broderites aren't going to like the Democratic Party at its best, but the rest of the country will.

"On Supporting President Obama" by Michael Conrad receives Karita Hummer's Silver Pen Award

Cross-posted from Progressive Blue: http://www.progressiveblue.com/diary/3750/on-supporting-president-obama
On Supporting President Obama
by: Michael Conrad
Sun Apr 12, 2009 at 06:35:29 AM EDT

[subscribe]
(the title says it all... - promoted by poligirl)

I'm in the process of streamlining the project I've been working on. In order to make room for other content, I'm posting my general views about what it means to support President Obama now, ahead of the project itself.

Besides being something I can refer to when talking about how progressive populism relates to the Democratic president, I hope this contributes something to the grassroots conversation about values, priorities, goals, and how we reach them. I largely personalized this, as I can only speak for myself, but I'm interested in your feedback.
Michael Conrad :: On Supporting President Obama
The discussion in the netroots about the merits of the president's policies has become increasingly frustrating to many of those involved.

Some thoughts:

- Purposeful criticism is necessary. Part of our job is to hold elected Democrats accountable, whether they're in Congress or the White House.

- Applause and criticism for the Obama Administration are not mutually exclusive.

For example:

The way the president initially went about selling the stimulus was ineffective.
The weekly address he used to rally support for his budget was excellent.

Taking crucial economic advice from the Church of Rubin is bad on numerous levels.
Creating a Middle Class Task Force led by Jared Bernstein was a great move.

- Too much is on the line for this to be about us, or desire for personal vindication.

- President Obama has to deal with a dizzying amount of BS, from right - wing attacks and bizarre protests, to inane chatter from Pundit Land about "doing too much at once" despite the desperate need for action on numerous fronts, to incoherent opposition from members of his own party in the form of the Evan Bayh Vanity Project. Voicing our disagreements with the president isn't going to stop us from aggressively pushing back against the GOP, media hackery, and self - proclaimed "moderate" Democrats.

- If Obama is compared to his immediate predecessors, I think he'll likely clear the bar with ease. With that said, if he is going to get the economy working for everyone, there is a lot that must be done. In this case, very good might not be good enough.

- Merely saying that something is "smart strategy," or that the president is "doing what works" doesn't make it true. Distorting pragmatism is highly counterproductive.

- The notion that acknowledging the president's mistakes will damage him is wildly off the mark. If something he is doing undermines his message, the Democratic base isn't going to be the only entity to notice. This misguided mentality is anathema to improving the Democratic Party. It's also a direct contradiction of President Obama's own words about change coming from the bottom up, his supporters holding him accountable, and his willingness to admit mistakes.

- The influx of new participants presents the netroots with a real opportunity to build on the broad support for a bold Democratic agenda within its ranks. A focused netroots will find itself in a good position to accomplish things it has been working towards for years.


Weak Policy = Bad Politics

It's simplistic, but now more than ever, it's true. Our message machine isn't the feeble shell it used to be, and the GOP has very little credibility left.

Health Care

There is a difference between less than ideal policy and weak policy. Single - payer health care is ideal, but right now it makes sense to focus on passing the best health care legislation possible. This means making sure the public option is included.

Jonathan Cohn, a longtime advocate for Universal Health Care recently wrote about the divide within the administration over the issue. President Obama deserves a tremendous amount of credit for standing his ground, and not being swayed by the faction within his inner - circle that leaned toward delay. Defenders of the Clueless Caucus might say that they "only" wanted to wait, but even that is indefensible. Terrible advice like this shows that prominent Democratic consultants are still capable of scaling Mount Stupid in record time.

It's well - understand how cruel and nonsensical this would be policy wise, but what how can anyone argue it would make for good politics? The concerns mentioned in the article that UHC might not be sufficiently popular with persuadable middle class voters would be laughable if this wasn't such a critical issue. There's a reason why Cons like Bill Kristol and Michelle Bernard positively freak out at the thought of the American people getting the health care system they deserve. If you think the concept of Universal Health Care is popular now, wait until after it's enacted.

While I would bet some kind of polling was behind this concern, there is a ton of public polling showing support for UHC from the country as a whole, and especially from those who either vote for Democrats or are in play. I'm sure I'm not the only one who remembers what happened when health care came up during one of the presidential debates. Then - Senator Obama followed up John McCain's right - wing idiocy by saying that health care is a right. The response from the much - hyped focus group of Independents was overwhelmingly positive. A national poll taken shortly after the debate showed Senator Obama leading Senator McCain by 39% on health care, and trouncing him in the general election.

Wall Street

We'd all breathe easier if there weren't good reasons to question whether the Obama Administration is sufficiently challenging Wall Street, but there are... Larry Summers guiding policy, an anemic outside economic advisory board, Geithner's nomination of Neal Wolin, Elizabeth Warren's comments about the Treasury Department, etc.

I don't think the claim that personnel is largely irrelevant can pass its own "stress test." It seems to me that advocates of the DLC / Third Way / Hamilton Project approach have drowned out other voices. I'd like to be proven wrong about this, but we should be prepared for the outcome described by Robert Kuttner.

The grave political and economic risk is that Obama continues to let Summers and Geithner lead him down the garden path; the industry-oriented mortgage rescue saves too few homeowners; housing remains in the doldrums and mortgage securities with it; the hedge funds and private equity companies make some money with government guarantees, but the banking system remains comatose; and Republicans increasingly become the instruments of public anger.

Mike Lux on what to do next here and here.

Main Street

And then there is Michigan. The failure to distinguish between the big 3 and the auto workers was a sign of weakness. President Obama could have talked about the changes that need to be made and still done something long overdue; use the bully pulpit to confront the smears about people who have actually contribute to our economy. (I'll admit this wouldn't have won over the DC establishment, which much prefers defending those who devour the economy.)

This Wall Street / Michigan double standard was just the latest example of a problem that goes beyond the White House to the party as a whole. From the UAW to EFCA, we've seen how quickly debates involving unions become fundamentally dishonest if Democrats don't assert themselves.

Falling down on the Rust Belt is politically dangerous, and the mood of the electorate make it even harder to understand. The electorate isn't going to tolerate disingenuous attacks from Republicans and their K Street bosses. If we speak the truth, that they are being lied to again by the same people who got us into this mess, the American people are going to listen. Authenticity, passion, and candor will be admired, not shunned.


Fierce Discontent and Fierce Urgency

The Beltway bubble keep its residents insulated from the consequences of their action, and leads them to embrace cop outs and deeply flawed conventional wisdom. Evan Thomas' acknowledgement of the gap between conventional wisdom and reality received a lot of attention for good reason.

But sometimes, beneath the pleasant murmur and tinkle of cocktails, the old guard cannot hear the sound of ice cracking.

This was evident when talking heads came out in droves to condemn the recent wave of populism. To them, talking about stagnant wages makes you a dangerous populist. If you talk about channeling the outrage over ridiculous bonuses into support for re - regulating Wall Street, then you are an extra - scary double populist, and every pundit should be armed with a tranquilizer gun to protect themself from you.

Note: The "we're all in this together" ethos of progressive economic populism are a direct repudiation of right - wing populism. The role economic anxiety plays in fueling the Glenn Beck version is being overlooked.

The Obama Administration and Congressional Democrats need to focus on the perspective that really matters. I've said this before, but I think it's worth repeating. Out of touch Broderites aren't going to like the Democratic Party at its best, but the rest of the country will.

Wednesday, April 1, 2009

Has the world become indifferent to human rights atrocities?



The Tamil People being displaced in Sri Lanka, due to the government of Sri Lankan's actions. Photo from Indy Media



by: Karita Hummer

The world sleeps while ethnic strife and atrocities abound. Yet, another sign of the vacuousness of Mainstream Media. Arundhati Roy warns of another great human rights tragedy unfolding in Sri Lanka by the government against the Tamil people of that country. http://www.commondreams.org/vi... She states that "civilian areas, hospitals, and shelters are being bombed and turned into a war zone", against this population." Arundhati Roy, "The Silence Surrounding Sri Lanka", The Boston Globe, Tuesday, March 31, 2009 http://www.commondreams.org/vi... And what excuse does the government of Sri Lanka give? "The War on Terror", apparently following the lead of the United States, who made the War on Terror the excuse for all manner of human rights abuses, in the Iraq War, and yes, in Afghanistan. Much like Israel did in Gaza.

Ethnic conflicts, and especially, those that involve the atrocities that she has described, should gather journalistic attention from all the corners of the world, so they can more readily be stopped in their tracks. Journalistic review used to be one of the word's bulwarks against the escalation of human rights abuse. In Timor, the attention there probably shortened the conflict there. Even in Bosnia, the steady coverage of the atrocious news there probably led to the Dayton peace accords, imperfect as these accords are.

It is heart sickening to see that our own government has given cover to world governments to abandon international human rights laws. It is time we right this wrong, which gives such a sense of impunity to governments to terrorize in the name of the "War on Terror."

More below...
Let us remember that two wrongs don't make a right, either. Hugo Chavez called for the World Court indictment of George Bush rather than Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir for crimes in Darfur. Excuse me, that is not justice. Yes, I believe that the Pre-emptive War in Iraq, and the way it was conducted, does warrant World Court examination, but that would never lead me to want to excuse the atrocities committed in Sudan. Let them all - U.S., Sudan, Israel, and Sri-Lanka be examined by the Press and by the World Court.

While blame is being cast, and deciphered, let us not forget our humanitarian responsibilities as facts are sifted. When does neglect itself rise to atrocious levels? I would say that our neglect of Iraqi refugees is, indeed, atrocious and unforgivable.

The U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants has sent out an urgent plea to President Obama to remember the Iraqi refugees that fled their country, because the War there. Go there and sign on to the letter: https://secure2.convio.net/usc...

Here is the sample letter to the President the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants' sent to me:

Dear Karita and Paul,

Millions of Iraqi civilians have had to flee their country to escape religious, ethnic, and political violence and it is not clear when they will be able to return. For now, they languish in countries like Syria and Jordan where they are not allowed to work or otherwise establish a real home for their family.
While we begin to remove our troops from Iraq, we must also take action to help these men, women and children. Please ask President Obama to not forget these innocent refugees and to make provision for them a part of any US withdraw planning.

Specifically, ask him to take two actions:

1. Accept more Iraqi refugees for resettlement in the United States

2. Generously help the countries of the region that are hosting refugees by providing funds for their schools, hospitals, and other service institutions that aid refugees along with locals. This funding would be contingent on these host countries allowing Iraqi refugees to work and establish homes for their families.

Many Iraqi refugees are highly skilled professionals who can make substantial contributions to the communities where they settle.
But all are human beings with inherent dignity and the right to provide for their families by their own efforts. They should not be forced into dependence, poverty, and despair upon the "care and maintenance" of international organizations.
Please contact President Obama today and ask him to help Iraqi refugees.

Sincerely,

Lavinia Limon
President, USCRI


To learn more about the work of this great agency advocating for resources for refugees, visit: http://www.refugees.org/

Karita Hummer



Take Action! Ask President Obama to expedite Iraqi refugees' entry in to our Country.

https://secure2.convio.net/usc...

Friday, March 6, 2009

Citizen Media and Civil Liberties

Citizen Journalists are our best hope for countering the biases and neglect of news and opinion by Mainstream Media (MSM)

Citizen Media and Civil Liberties
Initially written, October 31, 2008



Introduction

Citizen media, or citizen journalism, as it is alternatively sometimes called, is news or public opinion that is being generated by lay citizens rather than by professional writers and journalists. It has come to be an antidote for the narrowness and seeming bias of Mainstream Media (MSM). Many of us who have been concerned that the values written in to the social contract, as embodied in the Preamble to our Constitution, have been seriously undermined by omissions and commissions of “Mainstream Media”. Because of its very large role as a major influence on our Society, media as a whole has been sometimes dubbed as the Fourth Estate, almost like a fourth branch of government. Esteem for the Fourth Estate in our society has always been quite high. As a people, we have prized our “Free Press”. But far from educating the public in a fair and honest way, Mainstream Media seems to be more at the beck and call of special interests in our country, related to privilege, celebrity, class, ownership, profit and wealth. Conglomerate owned media is at an apex in our country. The consolidation of such media has been accelerated in the last eight years under the Bush Administration. The public awareness that something was amiss in the coverage of news seems to have been heightened by the election of 2000, when grumblings about unrecorded and hanging chads began to be voiced by the Public at Large.

Many simply didn’t buy that the whole story of the 2000 election had been told fully. After the Supreme Court intervention in that election, the Press folded like puppies in a cage, all meek and ready for the January Inauguration (or coronation) to come! All meekly accepting the “results”of an election, as if it had been fought fairly and squarely, hanging chads, be damned! And the puppies pretty much have stayed in their cage ever since.

When the run-up to the War in Iraq was being advanced by the Bush Administration, MSM was either primarily silent or supportive - and certainly not asking the Administration the hard questions that needed to be asked.

When detentions, renditions, and wiretapping on citizens were being perpetrated, MSM rarely made them the front page stories they rightly should have been, considering that such actions were so contradictory under our system of government, as we citizens know it from our most basic civics education, pertaining to laws about human and civil rights. But where was the media outcry or basic coverage about such untoward, seemingly unconstitutional, behavior on the part of the Bush Administration. Few questions were asked and few demands for accountability were made from MSM editorial/opinion writers.

The election of 2004 heightened the alarm many of us had already been feeling about the state of press coverage in America, to the detriment of our democracy. The infamous swift-boat attack on the credentials of John Kerry was magnified enormously by MSM. When the final “results” of the election were actually tallied, there appeared to be nothing “free” about the Press any longer. It was clear to many how cautious and biased, the Press had actually become. Once again, the press chose to accept carte blanche, the “official results” of the election, despite stories of voter disenfranchisements, apparent statistical discrepancies and anomalies, unfair access to voting machines, and the radically different exit poll figures, from vote “tallies”. But such stories were never pursued in the Press. What we got was zilch. It was a dead issue, in this land of Democracy, at the height of when we were on an imperial march to establish democracy in Iraq! Confidence in the accuracy and fairness of the press was eroded still further.

There was only one exception to the lack of coverage of those questionable election results, and it was that which derived from the Internet, primarily by citizens fed up with the state of our Press and news coverage. On the internet, the story was available to all to pursue and discuss. We joined Yahoo and Google groups to lament the situation and we exchanged information about the state of our Democracy. We collected the information and shared it all around. The story of electoral process problems was being by told by Citizens and communicated from one citizen to the next. The story was there to tell and tell it we did, and I did! See Passionate Progressive Patriot. Electoral Reform by Karita Hummer http://passionateprogressivepatriot.blogspot.com/2007/11/electoral-reform.html We didn’t think this was an American story that the country could afford to have go untold or to be forgotten.

As our lament about this electoral injustice rose in our writing, it seemed to stimulate all kinds of citizen disgruntlement, and many of us began to write almost non-stop about a number of issues. There were so many injustices we discovered that were going unreported or under- reported. Some of us began to focus on key inequities such as inequality in criminal justice, global warming, homelessness, poverty, unbridled power grabs by the Executive Branch of Government and seemingly, creeping authoritarianism in our government, pre-emptive war, lack of health care for all, special interest and influence in government, and the vacuousness of media, itself, to name just a few of the concerns, being raised and discussed by citizens. Our stories, commentaries and opinion pieces revealed a collective angst about the state of the Nation, and always a sense that we were called to do something about it.

I can recall a time in our country, when the media really was not as vacuous as it is now. In the 1960’s, there was almost daily coverage of poverty conditions and hunger in places like Appalachia, the inner city and other parts of America, which had been left behind. Why did these stories in MSM dry up? Fortunately, like latter day Boston Tea Party goers or Paul Reveres, we refused to be complacent about the really big issues of our time and especially about the sense that our very democracy was eroding beneath our feet. Citizens are coming to the rescue and sounding the alarm – through citizen journalism.

Current State of Citizen Media Today.

There really are numerous examples of Citizen Media today and most of them are concentrated on the Internet, because the computer and Web 2.0 have given ordinary citizens the tools at their disposal to publish their news and opinion in many interactive venues. Penn State University has a glossary up on the topic of Web 2.0, and at that site, which they call Penn State Learning Design Community Hub, Web 2.0 is defined this way: Web 2.0 - A term to generally describe web sites and services where the content is shaped partially or entirely by the users (instead of being read-only and published by a sponsoring company). Authors at Penn State Learning Design Community Hub http://ets.tlt.psu.edu/learningdesign/

But old fashioned newsletters still qualify as examples of Citizen media, as are Letters to the Editor. In fact, interestingly, as Consolidated Corporate Media cuts back on their papers’ editorial pages, as recently seems to have happened under McClatchy Newspapers at the San Jose Mercury News, the Letters to the Editor are becoming more prominent and appear to be being read a lot more than ever before, and cited by the general public. In the last year, for example, I have had the good fortune to have had almost all the letters I have written to the Editor of the local San Jose Mercury News published. I hear from numerous people that my letters have been noticed and read.

On the Internet, itself, social network sites like Facebook and My Space provide an immediate forum for members to communicate and exchange ideas, and opinions, as well as to promote causes. Some Dot.Com companies like Google and Yahoo have enabled people, such as me, to create their own blog sites, as I have done with my own blog, Passionate Progressive Patriots through Google Blogspot service. http://passionateprogressivepatriot.blogspot.com/
Daily Kos, Huffington Post, Digg, my DD, Democrats.com, Democrats Underground, Velvet Revolution, Brad’s Blog are especially popular sites for Progressives, so, admittedly, those are the blogs I know best. Daily Kos and Huffington Post are the gold standard for Progressive blogs. Newer blogs, like Progressive Blue Blog, have been created by a community of users who tired of the unruly company at some of the blogs and found they had more in common and shared interests and purpose with some more than others. In the case of EENR (later named Progressive Blue, most of the community there were supporters of one of the presidential candidates, John Edwards, and had often written about the issues of that campaign on Daily Kos, on such topics as economic justice, energy conservation and alternative energy, manufacturing and fair trade, participatory democracy, party transformation and other topics. When they created their own site, they set up strict rules for civil discourse and fair, respectful dialogue, which they felt they were not being accorded properly at other sites, such as that of Daily KOS.
Parallel with the growth of citizen media has been the exponential growth of alternative media and the outcry for media reform. Many citizen journalists are devoted to alternative media and receive much inspiration from it, such as from republished pieces in Common Dreams, Free Press, Democracy NOW, and Truthout.

Wikipedia has devoted a whole section of their site now to the topic of Citizen Media. In fact, they have two sections, one called Citizen Media and one called, Citizen Journalism.

· Wikipedia defines Citizen Media this way: “The term citizen media refers to forms of content produced by private citizens who are otherwise not professional journalists. Citizen journalism, participatory media and democratic media are related principles.” “Citizen Media” Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_media. in their section on Citizen Media, they cover the following topics: Principles of citizen media and Modes of citizen media , including Radio, Television, Internet and Video
According to Wikipedia, Citizen Media or Citizen journalism is now becoming a subject of literary discourse, with whole books being published on the subject (e.g. We the Media (Dan Gillmor) and The Wealth of Networks (Y. Benkler) Both of these books are said to have focused on the topic of participatory citizenship.

In Wikipedia’s separate section on Citizen Journalism, Citizen journalism is described as the process or the collecting of information by citizens (as I am doing here for this piece.). It is the act of conducting citizen media. Citizen journalism, From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_journalism
The phenomenon of Citizen Media is not limited to the US. Wikipedia gives examples of Citizen Media occurring worldwide. For example, one outlet, OhmyNews, in Korea, describes itself as the first one of its kind, an online newspaper with the motto "Every Citizen is a Reporter". It was founded by Oh Yeon Ho on February 22, 2000. Source, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_journalism and, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OhmyNews
Rights and Responsibilities
Rights
There are both rights and responsibilities about which advocates for Citizen Media must be aware. Freedom of speech, Press and Assembly, and even that of petititon, as protected in the first Amendment to the Constitution, is the bedrock on which the Citizen Media movement stands. It stands on the very tradition of colonial citizens in support of our Revolution who took to using pamphlets to express their disgruntlement with the King of England. It is at once a Civil Liberties issue and a Civil Rights issue.

In introducing first Amendment Language in to Congress in 1789, Madison said, (p/1 0f 5, Find Law http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment01/06.html#1) “The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write or to publish their sentiments”.

Justice Brennan affirmed such sentiment in the Tinker vs. Des Moines School District case when he state the need for a “profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues, should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open” (Peck, Robert S., Constitutional Protection, under Publication, Unfettered Press http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/press/press02.htm
The First amendment with regard to the expression of opinion has been tested and affirmed in the Courts numerous times. These affirmations were an echo of Andrew Hamilton of many years earlier who as an attorney in defense of one John Peter Zenger, a printer, charged with seditious libel, said, “..."The Question before the Court and you, Gentlemen of the Jury, is not of small nor private Concern, it is not the Cause of a poor Printer, nor of New York alone, which you are now trying: No!.... It is the best Cause. It is the Cause of Liberty."! Andrew Hamilton, from Peck, Robert S., Constitutional Protection, under Publication, Unfettered Press http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/press/press02.htm
Andrew Hamilton was ultimately successful in the defense of John Peter Zenger in 1735, and it became the cornerstone of future court cases regarding Freedom of the Press. Peck, Robert S., Constitutional Protection, under Publication, Unfettered Press http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/press/press02.htm

Ethics and Responsibilities
With rights always come responsibilities. With all the criticism we citizen bloggers have leveled at Mainstream Media, it behooves us, as citizen journalists, to establish and adhere to a set of ethics that ensures that we don’t repeat the same old unprincipled behavior we have suffered of late at the hands of greatly consolidated Mainstream Media. In other words, what we expect of MSM, we should demand of ourselves. We have a litany of complaints, so let’s not compound the problem by repeating the mistakes that have so undermined our access to information. Fortunately, there have been citizen media advocates who have put a lot of thought in to guiding would-be citizen bloggers. Dan Gillmor, Founder and Director of the Center for Citizen Media, formerly Technology Writer for the San Jose Mercury News, and one of the most renowned citizen media advocates, clearly advances one set of ethics to guide any kind of media. On his private web-site, Dan Gillmor on Grassroots Journalism, Etc., Gilmor discusses ethics quite succinctly, quoting a fellow blogger, Len Witt, with the admonition, "Don't lie. Don't sell out." , adding, himself, this statement, “I tend to bring it down to this even tinier admonition: Be honorable. Period.” Well-said and pretty clear. http://dangillmor.typepad.com/dan_gillmor_on_grassroots/2005/05/journalistic_et.html
The Knight Citizen News Network is another place that encourages, educates and guides citizen journalists in the ethical practice of citizen journalism. This site stresses six basic principles to follow:
1. “Accuracy
2. Thoroughness
3. Fairness
4. Transparency
5. Independence
6. Resources” (as in proper researching)
http://www.kcnn.org/principles/
The site is a great resource to Citizen Bloggers, as they back up each of these principles with information and education in order to help such bloggers become really capable of applying these principles to their writing.. As the Knight Citizens News Network suggests on their page about principles, it is only in the adherence to such principles that Citizen Journalism will achieve “trust and credibility”.






Summary
The fourth Estate, i.e., Mainstream Media, has utterly failed our democracy. There is little free press around these days, as they are so controlled by Corporate conglomerates. The Press serves the Plutocracy today. In recent years, we suffered through a degrading and demoralizing eight years under the Bush Administration, while the Press did precious little in giving the citizenry information on which to go to reign in the worst of the Administration's excesses. The Press gave Bush and his company of Pretenders a free pass, from the "selection" by the Supreme Court, through all the other electoral atrocities and thefts in the last eight years, through Constitutional Law violations. You name it, Press criticism has been muted at best. It especially thrives on providing entertainment as news, perhaps because it sells. Perhaps Citizen Media can finally become enough of a challenge to MSM that the fourth Estate will find their truly serious purpose once again. Until then, if it ever comes, we need Citizen Media to balance the pool of information and persuasion open to citizens.