Bread and Circuses

"Bread and circuses," an expression describing people choosing food and fun over freedom, was coined by Roman satirist Juvenal (55-127 A.D) writing about the Rome of his time. Juvenal could have been writing about Americans today.

The populace-distracting circus games of Juvenal's time are today, housed in publicly funded sports stadiums. The publicly-funded new Yankee stadium is scheduled to open next year. A November 30, 2008 NY Times article, "City Pressed Hard for Use of Yankee Luxury Suite," describes how aides to NYC mayor Bloomberg wanted a free luxury suite at the new Yankee stadium for use by the administration. In exchange for a larger suite and free food, Bloomberg gave the Yankees the rights to three new billboards along the Major Deegan Expressway and whatever revenue they generate, and 250 additional parking spaces, originally planned for public parking.

Bloomberg administration officials wanted the best seats in the new stadium, just as the emperor and the Vestal Virgins kept the best seats in the Flavian Amphitheatre, the Colosseum of ancient Rome. The NY Times article describes the observations of a NYC assemblyman: "...what emerges from the e-mail correspondence is a sense of entitlement ingrained in Bloomberg officials."

This sense of entitlement isn't unique to New York city politicians. During the post 9-11 Arizona Diamondback-N.Y. Yankee World Series in November 2001, a handful of Arizona politicians, members of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, pre-empted a Valley of the Sun United Way charitable auction of World Series tickets for games one and two. They purchased the tickets at face value and used the tickets for themselves, their families, and their friends.

The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors had approved a sales tax to help publicly-fund construction of the ballpark seven years earlier. According to the Phoenix New Times: "The United Way subleases the stadium suite from the Maricopa County Stadium District, which is overseen by the five-member Board of Supervisors. The lease agreement gave the supervisors leverage to muscle the charity for the tickets."

One of the members of the Board of Supervisors in 2001 with a sense of entitlement to the luxury box seat tickets was Jan Brewer, currently Arizona Secretary of State. If current Arizona governor Janet Napolitano joins the Obama administration as Homeland Security head (more change you can believe in), Brewer will become governor of Arizona. Perhaps the Arizona Diamondbacks will let her throw out the first ball in the season opener.

In 1989, George Bush used the power of his father's public office for personal gain and privilege before he became governor of Texas by becoming a managing partner and part-owner of the Texas Rangers. Two years later, in 1991, when Arlington, Texas voters decided to help pay for a stadium, George Bush could sit wherever he wanted.

If you've ever voted to support public-funding of a sports team, none of this is new: Juvenal was laughing at you almost two thousand years ago. The next time you go to the game, if you look up at the luxury suites, you might see a politician laughing at you, too.

Democracy. Power to the people. Which people?

Other People's Money (Part III)

During the campaign in January of this year, Hilary Clinton proposed to jump-start the economy with a $70 billion stimulus plan and the possibility of $40 billion more.

Barack Obama said: "I'll see you, and raise you $10 billion" when he proposed a $75 billion plan with a possibility of $45 billion in reserves in his January 2008 stimulus plan to jump-start the economy.

President Bush thought even more amperage was needed and asked for $145 billion.

Congress, not to be outdone with other people's money, passed a $168 billion package which Bush signed February 13, 2008, with Rs and Ds looking on admiringly.

In October before the election, McCain vowed tax cuts to jump-start the economy and Obama proposed a $175 billion stimulus plan. The main difference in their approaches was where to clip the jumper cables.

Now President-elect Obama has appointed Paul Volcker, Federal Reserve chairman during the Carter and Reagan administrations, to head his economic advisory board (more change you can believe in). Obama is proposing yet another economic stimulus plan to "jump-start economic growth."

Would you be surprised that his latest plan has increased the stimulus amount?

From a 22 November NYT article:

"Mr. Obama’s proposal would go beyond the $175 billion stimulus plan he proposed in October ... Separately, Democratic leaders in Congress have been calling for a robust economic recovery initiative of up to $300 billion, including major investments in infrastructure to create jobs."

Deus ex machina anyone?

Other People's Money (Part II)

We're taught in grade school that democracy isn't a perfect system, but that it's the best system to determine the will of the people. The publicly-funded Valley Metro Light Rail in metropolitan Phoenix, scheduled to open in December 2008, is an example of democracy in action at the local level, and now at the national level since Phoenix Mayor Gordon wants US taxpayers to subsidize it.

Democracy isn't perfect at determining the true will of the people and the history of the referendums to fund the Valley Metro Light Rail shows some of the difficulties our democratic system encounters:

• In 1989, Maricopa county voters got it wrong, they said no to a sales tax to fund light rail by a margin of 61 percent to 39 percent.
• In 1994, Maricopa county voters got it wrong again when they rejected Proposition 400, another attempt to fund light rail.
• In 1997, Phoenix voters got closer to getting it right ; they were evenly divided, but the proposition to fund light rail failed again 50.2 to 49.8 percent.
• In March 2000, Phoenix voters finally figured it out and approved light rail funding 65 to 35 percent.

In 2003, nine years after the original county-wide vote ended in failure, a resurrected Proposition 400 was planned for the 2004 ballot. Since the voters don't always get it right, at a December 7-9, 2003 conference in Tempe, AZ, politicians, contractors, and transportation lobbyists met to compare notes on how to market light rail to voters to make sure the voters would get it right this time.

The politicians included former Phoenix mayor Skip Rimsza, Mayor Gordon's former boss and predecessor, Peggy Bilsten, former city council member, a Tempe city council member, and various government bureaucrats from other cities with transportation initiatives past and pending. Conference attendees were told, “If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again ... they’ll come around eventually.” Strategies to divide and conquer and keep putting up referendums until they pass, and lessons learned from past referendums in other cities were presented.

Unlike its 1994 predecessor, in 2004 the marketing worked. Maricopa County voters passed Proposition 400 by a 58-42 percent margin and established funding for several future projects including highways and mass transit.

As we all learn in grade school, democracy isn't perfect at determining the true will of the people. What we aren't taught in grade school is that the real question is not, what's the true will of the people, but the will of which people?

Mayor Gordon (seated right), former mayor Rimsza (back row, 3rd from left), and other light rail advocates after funding available

Timeline of Light Rail in Metropolitan Phoenix

1989: ValTrans - Regional rejected

1994: Proposition 400 - Regional rejected

1996: Proposition 400 - Tempe passed

1997: Proposition 1 - Phoenix and Scottsdale rejected

1998: Question #1 - Chandler rejected

1998: Qualify of Life Tax - Mesa passed

2000: Proposition 2000 - Phoenix passed

2001: Proposition 402 - Glendale passed

2004: Proposition 400 - Regional passed

2008: Mayor Gordon ask for US taxpayers to help Phoenix with revenue and infrastructure problems

Other People's Money

On Friday, 14 November 2008, Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon added the city of Phoenix to the growing list of those with their hands out for taxpayer money after Congress approved a taxpayer bailout last month of wealthy bankers. The mayor is asking for money from US taxpayers to help pay for a city budget shortfall of sales tax receipts of up to $250 million and also to pay for other Phoenix projects, "including transit," for a total of $1.2 billion.

The mayor's timing is interesting because the day before he was at the CityNorth grand opening, which he has championed by subsidizing it with up to $97.4 million over 11 years in sales taxes the developer is allowed to collect and keep.

From Mayor Gordon's website, one can see that he is a proponent of spending taxpayer money on infrastructure:

"As Mayor, Gordon lists his three priorities for the city as: Public Safety, Education and Jobs. He has already chalked up a tremendous record: Light Rail, ASU Downtown, two new downtown hotels, expansion of the Phoenix Convention Center and the passage of a $878 million bond program. The U of A Medical School is headed for downtown Phoenix and, according to The Tucson Citizen, 'Credit for this belongs to UA President Peter Likins, Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon, and members of the Board of Regents, who hammered out details between two schools that have been traditional rivals.' "

Some more interesting timing is that the controversial light rail system supported by the Mayor is scheduled for completion next month. With a $1.4 billion price tag ($200 million more than what the Mayor is asking US taxpayers to pay), one hopes it doesn't run into the same problem that the Houston Metro is having with bank lease-back deals now in default since insurer American International Group (AIG), which insured the deals with the banks, collapsed.

Final note: "other people's money" is how politicians and developers see it. The other people are you and me.

Change You Can Believe In (Part II)

As the Obama campaign slogan would have you believe, a vote for Obama was a vote against George Bush and his foreign policy.

For those of you in that group, here's a 17 November 2008 article by Guy Raz that might indicate how successful your strategy will prove to be: For Albright and Rice, Josef Korbel Is Tie that Binds. Joseph Korbel was a believer too. Korbel believed in US intervention in other countries to spread freedom. Two of his proteges are his daughter, Madeleine Albright, and Bush's Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice.

Those who believe in change and Obama will be familiar with Rice and her support of the Bush administration's foreign policy. This Council on Foreign Relations website lists Madeleine Albright as one of many from the Clinton administration who is advising President-elect Obama on foreign policy.

While the article about Korbel tries to draw a distinction between his two students, and Madeleine argues that her foreign policy follows what her father advocated and is different from that of the Bush administration, the differences seem superficial.

Madeleine Albright infamously stated that the ends justified the means when she said it was worth killing 500,000 in Iraq during the US embargo of that nation. Albright was the US ambassador to the UN at the time, and later became Secretary of State in the Clinton administration.

Perhaps the change you can believe in Obama's foreign policy will have Oceania invading the disputed zone in addition to Eurasia?

Change You Can Believe In

The economy is weak because of inflation and the ever-growing national debt. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan drain money and blood from Americans. As President-elect Barack Obama delivered his election night victory speech, reiterating a campaign message of "change you can believe in," the television showed close-ups of many in an audience filled with true believers in the Eric Hoffer-sense.

What kind of change should we expect?

Both Obama and McCain voted for the October $700 billion bailout of investment bankers. Obama's chief of staff-to-be, Rahm Emanuel, also supported the bailout bill, was on the board of directors for Freddie Mac from 2000-2001, supported the Iraq invasion, and advocates mandatory government service for American youths. Early in his campaign, Obama solicited advice from Franklin Raines of Fannie Mae fame.

Obama's Vice President, Joe Biden, has been in the US Senate for 36 years. He also voted "yea" for the $700 billion bailout for the wealthy.

Obama favors increasing U.S. military forces in Afghanistan; McCain favored the increase of U.S. military forces in Iraq. Both McCain and Obama advocate control of Iranian access to nuclear weapons. Mark Brzezinski was a campaign foreign policy advisor of Barack Obama and is the son of Zbigniew Brzezinski, a founder of the Trilateral Commission and architect of the Carter era policy of funding the mujahadeen of Afghanistan that started the latest blowback mess in America. The foreign policy advisor to John McCain was Mark's brother, Ian Brzezinski.

In their pamphlet, Blueprint for Change, Obama and Biden give more details of the change we can expect:

• On page 9: a $1000 emergency energy rebate to help pay energy bills. This rebate is different from rebates offered by businesses--the US government would take it from oil companies and give it to families.
• On pages 17-21: "shine the light on Federal lobbying and free the Executive branch from special interest influence." Page 21 states that "Obama’s campaign refuses to accept contributions from Washington lobbyists and political action committees" which is casuistry at best.
• On page 25: guarantee affordable health coverage for every American. Guarantees paid for by whom?
• On page 34: help states move to voluntary, universal pre-school. Paid for voluntarily by whom?
• On page 37: "Obama and Biden will reduce oil consumption so that we will eliminate our current imports from the Middle East and Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela within 10 years." Either Obama and Biden use a lot of oil themselves and plan on cutting back, or they are planning on telling others how much oil they can use.
• On page 49: "Obama and Biden will tackle diseases and illnesses that disproportionately affect women." Perhaps only equal opportunity diseases are allowed, or diseases that disproportionately affect men?
• On pages 55-57: increase the minimum wage to $9.50 by 2009 and increase the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). The EITC is an income redistribution scheme. Politicians who advocate increasing the minimum wage are apparently unaware that it causes unemployment. This would seem to work against the new administration when they strive to "tackle concentrated poverty" as planned on page 57.
• On page 65: end deceptive voting practices. This "establishes harsh penalties for for those who have engaged in voter fraud and provides voters who have been misinformed with accurate and full information so they can vote." I predict that neither Obama or Biden will ever be prosecuted under this proposed legislation.
• On pages 67-69: plans (in Orwellian doublespeak) to keep a residual military force in Iraq and also remove troops by the summer of 2010. "Military experts believe we can safely redeploy combat brigades from Iraq at a pace of 1 to 2 brigades a month that would remove them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 – more than 7 years after the war began." Does this sound similar to the Vietnamization program of the Nixon administration? The repeated use of the word "would" means it isn't a definite withdrawal plan and leaves plenty of wiggle room for the new administration.
  
• On page 71: refocus the military on fighting in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Since the military is fighting in Afghanistan now, this would be an escalation. Moving into Pakistan would be a new front--like Laos or Cambodia in the Vietnam era.
• On page 75: continue foreign aid to Israel. Business as usual?

Was the change from the frying pan into the fire?

Takings and Teachable Moments

The headmaster at our children's school recently sent parents a message about teachable moments--those opportunities which present themselves, oftentimes unexpectedly, to address issues critical to a child’s education. Two separate moments were mentioned as teachable moments: the upcoming Presidential election and a recent theft of candy by some older students at the school.

The school has high standards and the children were disciplined in a manner consistent with values espoused in the Parent-Student Handbook, the written code of values for the school. The reason given for the punishment was the responsibility of the school staff as educators in partnership with parents to develop each student's moral character. Some adults thought the children were dealt with too harshly.

There were also recipients of the filched candy, so the headmaster's message also stressed the importance of listening to one's inner voice and not going along with the crowd.

I can imagine the reasoning of the children and those who thought what they had done wasn't a big issue--it was only candy, no one would miss it. The headmaster's point of view was that he was upholding the written code of values for the school, and by addressing a problem early, was helping prepare those students when they face bigger issues.

The Presidential election, with both of the major party candidates coming to the finish line is a bigger issue. Both the R and D candidates recently voted for a massive bailout expected to exceed a trillion dollars to subsidize a select group of individuals. At various rallies, sign-shaking supporters cheer as their candidate explains a plan to make their supporter's lives better at the expense of someone else. Each candidate has a plan to take someone's money and satisfy those he thinks more deserving. Is anyone's inner voice whispering to them yet?

Neither R nor D candidate, nor their supporters pay much attention to the US Constitution, a flawed, but written code of rules that's supposed to limit our federal government. Is there any wonder if the students who took that candy are morally confused?

Is there perhaps a teachable moment for adults in all of this?