The Routt Report

Are you smarter than a 5th grader?

  There was a very interesting editorial piece in today's Boulder Daily Camera regarding the electoral college. It was the opinion of 5th graders. I, perhaps more often than I should, defer to the logic of the playground. The innocent apolitical philosophy of playground society would of course be reckless and callous  in modern adult life, however there is no denying that some of the wisdom learned (either through experience and occasionally through force) playing baseball and tag during lunch at John Harvard Elementary in Queens Village, N.Y. has guided me, and been a more secure rudder than much of the abstract, if not well thought out  policies born in the libraries of that other Harvard.

What I learned at Harvard (elementary)

1. Life isn't fair so you better take opportunities when they come. But keep it real, good luck is equally an injustice as bad luck so take the good with the bad.

2. If someone is a jerk, you have two options, engage and accept the consequences (if you win, the brutal hand of the law, if you loose a fleshy black eye) or diplomacy. On the playground those who harbor bias and malice are ostracized until they either see the error of their ways or finally become disenfranchised and irrelevant. 

3. Popularity is important. Further it's frequently more important to be popular than it is to be right.

How do these three playground lessons translate into modern life?

  The first lesson teaches us the importance of not being a hypocrite. It looks poorly on adults to decry misfortune, particularly misfortune of design and not recognize  the inherent inequity of good fortune. For example it would simply be disingenuous  for us to wallow in woe as a result of this current financial crisis when this is a misfortune that we all actively pursued. Lenders did not have to be so reckless with their qualifications, but we as Americans did not "Need" that new car, tv, house, kitchen, vacation ... For those supporting the democratic ticket this misfortune has been a windfall of electoral support but we must temper the victory celebrations with the sobriety of the significant challenges ahead. This unjust good fortune is financed with the homes and jobs of many who are truly innocent.

 Lesson two teaches us about how to reconcile differences of opinion. We too frequently attach a persons views to our perception of them as a person. We for example confuse disinterest in environmental stewardship with a general misanthropy, we assume bias equates to inability to be compassionate. Rather than diplomatically seeking an amicable compromise we chose to engage because after all "they" are wrong. This engagement however simply proves valid, the very worst concerns about us, that those we disagree with believe. On the playground since the consequences of engagement are as negative as they are immediate, by and large children favor the longer, more prudent diplomatic route. They form coalitions of the willing to systematically make those with a social disorder irrelevant. Granted something goes wrong as the innocent self selections of the "geeks" "nerds" "jocks" and "cool kids" who seem to live in harmonious isolation morph into the adult institutions of "liberals"  "conservatives"  "democrats" and "republicans" (not respectively), but what those germinal institutions understand is there is no shame working together when necessary,  even if it requires concessions. Further unlike in the adult world, where the rare individuals that feel equally comfortable in all those groups is called, unprincipled at best, a traitor at worst, on the playground these people are called at worst popular, at best class president. The play ground teaches us that is is okay to to group together with those we want (Hence you have the Boulder's and Austin's of the world) but we fail (if your a jock or a cool kid in elementary school literally) if there is not cooperation.

  The lesson of popularity is frequently lost on adults. Unfortunately with an increase in education comes a disproportionate predilection to suffer from the illusion that accuracy is more important than the ability to sell it. As we learned from lesson two, those individuals who are comfortable moving between myriad groups, rise to leadership in the proto-society of the playground, sometimes even in spite of themselves. How many elections have we seen at all levels of government that the person who was clearly the most intelligent and most qualified was handily defeated. In a democracy the only entity that knows what's best for society is society itself. While the intellectual elite will certainly support the intellectual candidate by and large, even a few of them will be courted and succumb to the wiles of the cool kid. Meanwhile everybody else (who is the majority remember elite means minority) will overwhelming support the popular kid that they can relate to. This is actually okay, this is actually how it ought to work.  They only way for us to know where society is to look directly at it's reflection as becomes clear in the mirror of elections. The higher the voter turnout the clearer the picture and the aggregate is the truth, doesn't mean we have to like what we see, but like looking at ourselves in the mirror as individuals the honest assessment is how we should make policy.

  With the caveat that even with the likely record voter turnout of the 2008 election cycle, we are woefully short of the 100% voter turnout that would tell us the truth. Further for every percentage point short of 100 we know the exact percentage by which our view of society is distorted. (i.e 80% turnout = 20% perversion of the view of society). With that said, it is very consistent that 5th graders would be so unified in opposition to the electoral college. Aside from the fact that the electoral college does not solve the problem it is intended to address, the undue influence of large states on national politics, it is also a distortion of the picture of society. The most recent example of course is that of 2000 when the popular vote gave us a (49% distorted) vision of a center left society but we ended up with a right oriented administration. How can we be surprised that the public policy of the past seven years has failed. Not only has history proven those policies invalid, electoral history (2000 popular vote, the consistent march to the left in local and state elections and of course the 2006 midterm election) has proven the center right philosophy unpopular. Barack Obama is going to win this election not because he's smarter than John McCain (I think that he is), but because he is the standard bearer of the center left political philosophy that is currently popular in this country. Obama maybe the darling of the "geeks" and "nerds" but he is also a cool kid. 

   It will be interesting to see if the liberal base who was staunchly supportive of eliminating the electoral college after the 2000 election will be continue to be committed to this position once they regain the reigns of government, or will the unfortunate truth that power corrupts be proven true once again. Barack Obama will win the popular vote, and likely a decisive electoral college victory. That does not change the fundamental flaws of the electoral college that it exacerbates the undue influence of population centers rather than diminish it, while distorting, sometimes beyond recognition the reflection of society that elections provide, the only guide by which good leaders can know where we are where we need to go.

How to fight back!

 McCain threw a hail mary in his V.P. pick. He had to. Had he picked a safe, or expected or anything but outright shocking choice, this election would already be over. So for the choice of Sarah Palin? Well played sir, well played.  Now let's not confuse the hype over Sarah Palin for a surge in people wanting to vote for McCain, perhaps he has garnered some voters who would have otherwise stayed home, or would have shown up to vote Republican at the last minute, but the other side of that sword is that he sparked those who would have stayed home because Obama is not liberal enough, or would have voted Democrat at the last minute to cast their ballot.

  

   For every action there is an equal but opposite reaction. And the equal but opposite reaction to the past 8 years will be an Obama Presidency.

  

   Before they can regain control of the White House however, the Democrats need to gain control of the news cycles.

   Yesterday I was phone banking for Obama here in Boulder, County, Colorado, and one women I spoke with insisted that I get word to whoever I could that Obama should select and then announce that California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger will be his energy and environment czar. Not only would that be a good idea  but according to this article based on this interview something that Arnold would be receptive to. Maybe this is in the works already. But since nothing will take the wind out of the Palin sail faster than the announcement that the other darling of the Republican party, the one that can't run for President but everyone secretly, (or less secretly) wishes could, became a key component of an Obama administration. Good idea or not (I happen to think Schwarzenegger would be great in this role) think of how many news cycles it will dominate. 

    So if this is in the works, the time to play this hand would be now Mr. Obama, I'm sure there are a few other aces up your sleeve but now is the time to play the Arnold card.

Palin in 12 . . . years? or '16 as in 2000 and . . .

 Sarah Palin's acceptance speech was remarkable. Overall she hit every mark. She touched on her personal narrative (though a little long), She played the role of the V.P. candidate, which is that of attack dog, she may be a puppy but she's got teeth! And she wisely attacked her opponents policy positions without giving specifics on her tickets alternatives.  In short she is the perfect V.P, pick, clearly a person with a political future. A gift for rhetoric, a natural, almost Clintonesque style with turns of phrase, and a grasp of the right message for the time. It begs the question, 
    Why now? She could easily be a Presidential candidate in her own right, and perhaps this is to set the stage for 2012 (It'll be close but McCain is going to loose this election). That strategy is a long toss, but this national exposure, along with the learning experience of being on the campaign trail and going back to Alaska for four more years as Governor could make her a serious force in 2012 if Obama proves a weak President, and a lock for 2016 perhaps paired with some other rising star like Bobby Jindal. Also now that she knows the game of national politics she won't get caught in "gotcha" politics from here forward (or at least not frequently). She is getting her dirty laundry aired now, and everyone will have forgotten by 2012 and certainly '16.   She spit fire on some solid criticism of her opponents. Neither ticket is perfect and there are positions and frankly qualifications that I have concerns about from the Democratic ticket. That said I still believe the Democratic ticket is SUBSTANTIALLY stronger on truly addressing all of the 3 "E's" (Energy, Economy, and Education). In terms of what I look for first in a President, executive experience, Palin is the only candidate that has it, however she is not running for President.   In terms of policy, she spoke to renewable energy and other key components of the democratic platform, in fact both platforms sound very similar, the only difference is that at least the Democrats are honest about how they are going to get there. There is no way to spark investments in domestic energy, be environmentally responsible AND lower taxes for everybody. The Democrats say they will lower taxes for all but the upper 5-10% of incomes for which there will be tax increases. Peter Pan politics? Sure, but it's not vague, there will be no surprise and it's a better bad policy than the current bad policy of tax cuts for the wealthy shifting the burden to the lower and middle class.    So the question is, when both parties are basically offering the same thing, Who do you trust? I trust the Democrats. The Obama-Biden ticket brings with them the cooperation of the political regime that will be the drivers of renewable domestic energy, education innovation and economic reform. The left wing of American political life has historically been the side that nurtures innovation.   The biggest concern the Republicans should have now is, Will Sarah Palin steal too much spotlight from McCain? All things being equal, same stance on drilling, same plank on anti-abortion, but simply having Palin on the top of the ticket, this would be a very different race. There will be enough people who want to vote for Palin but aren't willing go around McCain in order to do it.
 And on an editorial note . . .  I am deeply troubled by the way Palin's daughter's pregnancy is being discussed by both the media and Republican operatives. For the party that claims to value life, and family values, how can they in the same breath praise Bristol for keeping her child yet call the situation "a problem" "an issue" " a mistake". I believe in a woman's right to choose, but I would never call the decision to start a family, to have a child a mistake or a problem. And for the record respecting a women's right to choose is not the same as supporting all abortion all the time. If I got a woman who was not my wife pregnant I would want her to have the child and even if it didn't workout romantically between us I would be a father for that child. But every situation is different and what I can't reconcile is how the promoters of family values can so easily call the creation of a new one a mistake. The hypocrisy of this rhetoric, and the apparent failure of abstinence only sex education is exactly why democrats have it right on social issue. They base their policy on personal responsibility not an attempt to deny and control natural human behavior. 

Bellygate

  A friend of mine sent me a link to this Daily Kos blog posting. Without knowing how true the story is I will say it should be off the table. The trials and tribulations of the children of elected officials must be off limits. The intrigues of the personal lives of leaders is  a distraction from the important aspect of their persona, their policy positions. I acknowledge here the hypocrisy  of propagating the story in order to decry it, however the end that I am justifying is to make clear that I take serious exception with the following paragraph:

 

 "Calls that this type of information is muckraking and 'below us'. The truth is not below any progressive, nor any citizen of the world that is one heartbeat away from having Palin as leader of the free world. We simply ask that she be forthright, honest, and not waste our time with such juvenile games that anyone with eyes can see as fabrication."

    No this is certainly below progressives. The left prides itself on running elections based on facts. We have to often found our candidates and issues fall victim to this type of slander. And fact or not this story tells us nothing about Palin that is inconsistent with her policy platform. The personal intrigues of Bill Clinton robbed the American People and the world of the environmentally progressive presidency of Al Gore. All parents that are imperfect have had to at some point lie to protect the best interest of their children, however without any regard to the children who by accident of birth belong to great leaders we display their personal stories as if they are equally as important as their policy positions.

   Let's talk about Mrs. Palin's support for drilling in ANWR, Let's talk about Mrs. Palin's reversal on position on the bridge to nowhere for political expediency, Let's talk about Mrs. Palin's potential abuse of influence of her State Police. Let's plaster the airwaves with Mrs. Palin's inexplicable crusade against a women's right to choose.  Senators McCain, Obama, Biden and Governor Palin all have plenty of points of policy where they can and should be criticized. All four have made political mistakes that will come to light. All four have made personal mistakes that should not become campaign issues but they will anyway. I realize it is too much expect that four individuals who dared commit the offense of wanting to lead our country should be treated with any semblance of civility. I shouldn't expect the blogosphere on either side to refrain from decrying muckraking while slinging mud without a hint of irony. It's clearly too much to ask that this campaign focus on issue of energy, education and the economy.  While I believe these are urgent times that call for a serious discussion and deliberate action, many continue to believe that we have the luxury of pausing for side shows . . . FINE.

      Governor Patterson of New York in an extraordinary display of leadership at the helm of a state in the midst of Fiscal Crisis came clean about his personal foibles without prompting. It was a decision that was as wise as it was unfortunate. To own his story, and make it a uni-news cycle blip was a pragmatic decision so that he could return to the business of the budget. And  unsurprisingly when the Governor turned it into a non-issue the people of New York realized that they didn't really care about 20 years ago either in light of the states financial crisis. But in an election year this type of progress comes with 15 steps backwards.

    Barack Obama, is an Adult, John McCain is an Adult, Joe Biden is an Adult, and Sarah Palin is an Adult. They have survived challenges and adversity before and will again. They are driven professionals. But for the sake of human decency, let's please leave their children out of this.

Palin Comparison

We interrupt this DNC coverage for breaking news. I realize that this is exactly what the RNC wants but this is quite the bit of news. John McCain has chosen Alaska's Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate. 

  WOW, what a choice. Sarah Palin, young, charismatic, driven with an unshakeable ethic is as phenomenal a choice as it is politically savvy. Where as Senator Biden is the democratic answer to McCain's experience, Palin is the republican answer to Obama's claim to history. Ladies and Gentleman, we now have ourselves a election!

  Sarah Palin is WILDLY popular. Giving her the nod doesn't do much in terms of the electoral map as the GOP was likely to hold Alaska anyway because of Palin's popularity, (conversely Brian Schweitzer's  popularity in Montana will likely put that state in Obama's column) but what will be interesting to watch is will Palin be too much of a distraction from the top of the ticket?  The problem with picking a Governor (which is why Obama did not pick Kaine of Virginia) is that they are usually unknown on the national stage unless something goes wrong. There is the potential for Palin to upstage McCain. When the V.P. takes too much attention away from the top of the ticket in a close election (see Kerry/Edwards) that could spell trouble. Palin is a risky choice, but McCain could not afford to play it safe. And the dividends may not only be the temptation she gives to Clinton supporters, or how she offsets the history of the first black President by being the first female vice-president. The real danger for the Democratic ticket is that when people get to know Sarah Palin, they are going to like her. She is a great personality, ambitious and a great Governor. While I don't agree with her social positions, and am in no danger of voting the Republican ticket, I have to say I really like Sarah Palin. She is a fantastic executive, I believe she would make a great President if it came to that. She has done great things for her State in only 2 years, and She would be a real contender in her own right. 

   I have to give the RNC credit, with the announcement of Palin, and McCain's  t.v. spot congratulating Obama, they could not have done a better job of setting the stage for their convention. We have a race on our hands, it is still the Democrats race to loose but the Republicans have shown they still have some fight left so it will be on the American People to decide the direction we will take.

CD2 from VT

This morning in Vermont I found a quite place that had just enough reception to be able to read the Daily Camera. I was very pleased to learn that Jared Polis had won the primary election. There is no question that Will Shafroth and Joan Fitzgeral ran excellent campaigns. They have both been and I hope continue to be important influences for policy in Colorado. When it came to the issues however the voters of CD2 concurred with my assesment that Jared is the right congressman for the times. Like all elections however now that it's over we can figure out what the election was actually about. The election of Jared Polis in context of Rollie Heath's election says that voters are voting independently. If one where to take any set of litmus test issues and vote "down ticket" on that basis, there aren't too many ways you could get Jared and Rollie on the same ticket. That's not to say they don't agree on much, rather they agree on most things actually, it's just that the only way to see that is to assess the candidates on very objective terms. With that in mind I am very proud of my neighbors in looking past what was sometimes ugly mudslinging and vote for the candidates that they thought were the best for time regardless the opinions of special interest groups and political blogs that nobody reads. So what does this say for November? CD2 and Boulder County democratic primaries are not very good baramoters of what the state will do in a Presidential election. Further there are some hot button ballot measures that will have some sway, that said I do think that Jared Polis will coast into a general election victory though I hope he continues to campaign hard. Why? The real wild card in terms of both CD2 and the presidentiall election is the Hillary/Joan factor. This blog is not the first to recognize the similarities in the two primaries and probably not the last to question if the Clinton/Fitzgerald constituency which demographically have a lot in common will cast protest votes. As a block their numbers are not large enough to win Boulder County for McCain (read loose it for Obama), but CD2 is a slightly different story. I suspect Jared will win the general election handily. Both Joan Fitzgerald and Will Shafroth are adults and proffesionals and they will throw their support behind Jared. But for his part, Jared should start the healing process now, if not for his sake then for the sake of the Democratic Party in Boulder County. The Hillary/Joan crowd may not have the numbers to sway an election, but in there persons are some pretty key players who are now licking 2 sets of wounds. It is incredibly important to the Boulder County Democratic party to not cause some of the party elite to succumb to their injuries.

In the interest of full disclosure

I believe in the privacy of the vote. We live however in a world where people believe that a persons actions in the past are indicators of what they are likely to do in the future. The efforts of graduating from a conservatory of music for example is a pretty good indication that a person would be an asset to a symphony orchestra.
A person seeking a life in public service, a politician is asking the public to hire them to cast votes on their behalf. Now perhaps there is something to be learned from their prior business dealings or personal relationships, but if I am electing someone to cast votes on my behalf, if I had one opportunity to invade their privacy I want to know who they vote for and why.
In an attempt to start a trend of voluntary disclosure I will now tell you who I voted for in the August primary and why (personal voting records should only be disclosed voluntarily and I think the willingness to disclose that information in itself is more telling than who they might have slept with 20 years ago or last week)
Out of principle I did not vote in any of the uncontested races (save Joe Neguse for CU Regent, I voted for Joe because he is a good friend of mine and he did have an opponent through the assembly process which satisfies the issue I outline below) I did not vote for HD10 or County Commissioners all of whom I may vote for in November because an uncontested primary is a coronation. I'd rather give a tacit endorsement for lack of options than be complicit to the local democratic parties lack of democracy. I finally get it. I understand how the self righeous non voter feels. They are still wrong when it comes to a contested general election where the winner can claim the silent majority as a key support base for their agenda, but I do apologize for my sometimes harsh words to those earnestly trying to "not be a part of the problem". I get it now.
Now to the actual races. Little surprise here to the 5 people that pay attention to what I think I voted for Jared Polis for Congress, and Cindy Carlisle for State House 18. These two candidates have the most comprehensive platforms in their respective races. They are both the "insurgent" candidates and until we have a competitve democracy with choices across a broad ideallogical spectrum I will vote against the machine, unless the insurgent is incompetent, fortunately this go around the insurgent candidates had the decency to be the better candidates also, how convienent! Lastly these candidates both represent most closely the values of the districts they seek to represent.
Niether candidate is the candidate most similar to my own philosophy in governance (those candidates would be Joan Fitzgerald and Rollie Heath respectively, what can I say I'm a "Boulder Conservative" in New York they call that a "Cuomo Democrat") However both make compelling arguments for their positions, have clearly given the issues a great deal of thought and most important actually listen to those with whom they disagree not with scorn but rather a sincere curiosity. They both view debate as much as an opportunity to learn how they may be wrong as it is a chance to prove they are right.
We have challenges that are significant both here in Colorado as well as for our Nation. The temptation for us to all go to our political corners and be uncompromising is tempting and perhaps in my dogged strive for electing critical thinkers I am in my own way guilty of that crime of human nature. But I urge you to fight the temptation and vote for the best candidate for the job. That person may not always sing your song, but take it from this Clarinet player, left to our own devices, very few of us would create a playlist anybody else is interested in.
I hope candidates for office follow my example, to me their voting record, and their defense (or admition of error) is much more valuable than their latest tax return.