The Maverick Tribe - general_politics

California High Speed Rail!

noreply@blogspirit.com (Jake) — Wed, 2 Jul 2008 03:00:00 +0200

I'm working on a passenger rail project for the urban planning think tank SPUR, and I came across this promotional video for the California high speed rail proposal, funding for which is on this November's ballot:

The remaining argument against same-sex marriage

noreply@blogspirit.com (Jake) — Thu, 29 May 2008 22:45:00 +0200

Not because it's judicial activism - because it's likely to win a popular vote in California. Not because it's bad for children - because that has been disproven by the facts. Not because it's an extension of the sexual revolution - because marriage of any kind discourages promiscuity and self-centeredness. Not because marriage has a consistent definition historically - because the Mormons, Warren Jeffs and old European aristocracy say otherwise.

Same sex marriage is wrong - just because.

Gavin Newsom was right

noreply@blogspirit.com (Jake) — Thu, 15 May 2008 10:45:00 +0200

The majority Republican California Supreme Court has just ruled that the state's ban on same-sex marriages is unconstiutional. A backlash constitutional amendment is in the works for this November. Six months away - a long six months.

Michael Gerson rips off Obama quoting MLK

noreply@blogspirit.com (Jake) — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 07:50:00 +0100

Barack Obama loves to say he's running for president because of what Martin Luther King called the "fierce urgency of now." Guess he didn't know we already have a president who already embodies it. According to Michael Gerson, his former speechwriter:

[Bush] views both meditation on the past and speculation about his legacy with equal suspicion, preferring to live in the urgency of the now.

Dude you're a speechwriter. You're supposed to be original.

Forget Iraq, bring some democracy to California

noreply@blogspirit.com (Jake) — Wed, 2 Jan 2008 09:55:00 +0100

The Iowa caucuses are tomorrow. If the experts are to be believed, then about six percent of the registered voters in a state containing less than one percent of the nation's inhabitants will all but determine the presidential nominations. I listened to Pat Buchanan this morning on MSNBC tell me that if Hillary Clinton wins Iowa, she'll have the nomination locked up. And if Romney secures a convincing win in this mainly rural, 90% white state, then no one can stop him, again according to the experts.

On February 5th I will have the opportunity to cast an irrelevant ballot in the California primary. (Haven't made up my mind yet as to whether I'll be voting in the superfluous Democratic primary or the pointless Republican one.) Then I get to look forward to a general election season in which neither major party candidate will so much as utter the word "California", much less have us as an audience. (Rest assured we'll be hearing plenty of snide pronouncements about "the culture of Hollywood" and "San Francisco values".)

The Soviet-style election absurdity doesn't end with the presidential contest. Consider my three representatives in the U.S. Congress: Diane Feinstein, Barbara Boxer, and, as a San Francisco resident, Nancy Pelosi. None of these women have faced a serious contender in their most recent respective reelection campaigns. (I don't think the Republicans even bother trying to get on the ballot against Pelosi anymore.)

But wait, there's more. Since the Prague Spring of democracy that resulted in a recall of then-governor Gray Davis in 2003, California statewide politics have been a real snore. Not one seat in the California Legislature has changed party hands in recent memory. (Could this have something to do with districts for California legislators being drawn by... California legislators?) Even Arnold Schwarzenegger's 2006 reelection was contested by a weak and forgettable Democrat.

Then there's San Francisco politics, in which Mayor Gavin Newsom, with a very mixed record and an adulterous relationship with his own campaign manager's wife to his credit, was handed another term in an election that was little more than a formality.

There are lots of things we could do about this: reform of the primary system, repeal of the electoral college system, term limits, and requiring that legislative districts be drawn by a computer, to name just a few. Not all of these measures are necessily constructive, but we need to extend the conversation beyond the wonks and political science professors of the world. Let's get this party started.

Robert Reich, idealist, buddy cop, AND deadpan comedian

noreply@blogspirit.com (Jake) — Thu, 8 Nov 2007 19:37:42 +0100

What's my obsession with Robert Reich all about, you might ask. I dunno, I just think he's the coolest economist around... cooler even than those guys who wrote Freakonomics. Also I recently attended an information session on UC Berkeley's Master of Public Policy program, the school he currently teaches at. Given Prof. Reich's celebrity status, I figured I wouldn't be running into him, but I was wrong. He was there and he gave a short talk. The guy is totally deadpan. Here are some exerpts.

On Hillary Rodham Clinton:

Back in 1967 I went on a date with one of the current presidential candidates. Hint: it's the only one that's a woman. I don't remember anything about the date except that at the movies she wanted a lot of butter on her popcorn. Significant? You decide.

On the current TV and film writers strike:

I'm supposed to be on a plane right now to New York to appear on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. But because of the writers strike, my trip got cancelled. Now, as a former Secretary of Labor, I'm sympathetic with their cause, but between you and me, I'm pissed.

On the public policy school he works for:

The only reason I'm here at this late hour is because the dean is a real slavedriver. Other than that, it's an excellent school.

Robert Reich, idealist AND buddy cop

noreply@blogspirit.com (Jake) — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 18:19:47 +0200

Brought to you by Philip:

Robert Reich, idealist

noreply@blogspirit.com (Jake) — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 19:03:03 +0200

Robert Reich, former Secretary of Labor under Bill Clinton, states the obvious on farm policy. Getting rid of national farm subsidies and trade barriers to agricultural imports would reduce global poverty, reduce illegal immigration, save taxpayer money, and improve the environment. Given that repealing farm subsidies and tariffs makes so much sense to everyone except big agribusiness, we can all rest assured that Congress will never do it.

Robert Reich, you are such an adorable little man! Who's a cute widdle idealist, huh? You are! Yes, who's a widdle idealist... Good boy!

The Brain has left the building

noreply@blogspirit.com (Jake) — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 01:55:00 +0200

Today White House political advisor Karl Rove ("Bush's Brain") announced that he would be resigning from his duties to spend more time with his family.

I, for one, am utterly shocked by this. I mean, Karl Rove has a family?

The pendulum swings

noreply@blogspirit.com (Jake) — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 23:25:00 +0200

The Economist is the latest entity to predict an imminent leftward turn for the United States. Jeez, I could have told you that. The 60's and 70's were a time of liberal overreach. LBJ gave us guns and butter, and new era of profligate government spending. Richard Nixon, a Republican, created the EPA, engaged with communist China, and mentioned God less then your average Democrat of today.

Ronald Reagan gave us two decades of conservatives winning the national debate and establishing the premises of public policy. By assumption, government was too big and addressed social problems poorly. By assumption, liberals were an elite, overly secular segment of the population trying to tell ordinary Americans how to live their lives. By assumption, Democrats could not be trusted in matters of national defense, or in letting free markets work without government intervention. Enter Bill Clinton, the New Democrat, the free trader, the triangulator.

We are entering a new era, in which many of these assumptions will change, thanks to the presidency of George W. Bush, a conservative in all the bad ways and in none of the good ways. The failure of this largely ideological presidency will weigh heavily on the political psyches of the American majority. Let's just hope the Democrats can assume leadership of this majority with screwing everything up.

More Moore

noreply@blogspirit.com (Jake) — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 19:40:00 +0200

The press is starting to whirl over the imminent release of Michael Moore's new work, SiCKO. The first thing that strikes me is how much Mr. Moore delights in repulsing his conservative opponents. ("No, you're the sicko, Michael Moore!", and so on and so forth.) Sean Hannity is already taking the bait. I obviously haven't seen the movie yet, but I hope it doesn't do for national health care what Fahrenheit 9/11 did for the Iraq War: inflaming national opinion by creating a diversionary punching bag for the right, and undermining a legitimate grievance on the left. I agreed with the basic thrust of Fahrenheit, but I felt it was mean-spirited (perhaps justifiably), and intellectually manipulative (never justifiable).

If, as suggested by early reports, Mr. Moore is advocating that Americans model our health care system after Canada , France , or Cuba , and that we abolish the profit motive, this does not bode well for the next president’s attempts to craft decent health care policy for the nation. Nationalized, single-payer health care for all is a noble ambition but will spell bankruptcy for the U.S. Treasury.

Liberals think of health care as a quasi-civil right, a new government-funded entitlement. Conservatives look at health care through the lens of free-market economics, in terms of consumers rather than patients, incentives rather than mandates, and moral hazard rather than moral obligation. Both sides are right. Any workable solution to our health care problem needs to address both these views. That’s why we need to start thinking about tiers of health care: basic/preventive/catastrophic care guaranteed to everyone; premium/non-essential/elective care as a tax-deductible out-of-pocket expense. This is the only way we’ll manage to hold down costs. And for a society that prides itself on economic mobility and so-called “labor market flexibility” (i.e., it’s easy for companies to hire and fire), we must decouple health care from employment.

It’s hard to boil down a complex problem like this, one that Hillary Clinton required over 1000 pages to address in her nonstarter plan back in 1993, in a blog post. But suffice it to say that a stridently ideological approach such as Mr. Moore’s is not going to fly. Mr. Moore apparently believes that the whole concept of profiting from health services is crass. But the profit motive creates enormous efficiencies in an economic system. What if the crass approach is the best one? I’m looking for an idea that works, not one that satisfies a left-wing filmmaker’s emotional aesthetic.

The Return

noreply@blogspirit.com (Jake) — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:25:00 +0200

I've decided to revive the blog. For those of you who don't know, I'm currently making my residence in New York City - with more moving around likely on the horizon - but I don't plan on continuing on the "Down and Out In..." travel updates stuff.

Here on out, it's going to be mainly political musings. If I'm ever going to find a job with a persuasive writing component, I'd better start practicing. Also, politics has taken center stage in my headspace in recent years. The election of 2004 had me obsessed over the horserace, from rooting for Howard Dean (my Vermont governor) to embracing Senator John Kerry as my only hope for the unseating of President George W. Bush. I distinctly remember Election Day 2004. All day at work, I kept checking the blogosphere for any morsel of early exit poll results. Mid-afternoon, word was leaked that John Kerry was leading. I saw the stock market dive and my mood lift. Finally as polls began to close on the East Coast (I was, of course, living in California at the time), the exit polling results were published to the internet and I was able to review them myself. Ignoring my own academic training on the power of sample bias on statistical measurements, I believed these results to indicate a convincing Kerry victory. As I left work that night, I was walking on air. John Kerry had won! No more George Bush. No more having my intelligence insulted on a daily basis. No more contempt for civil liberties and constitutional tradition. No more Fear.

Needless to say, the elation didn’t last long. The following morning, dejection took its place – and had company. It was palpable on the streets and in the subways of San Francisco . Really. A pall hung over the city, whose electorate had gone 80% to Mr. Kerry. But as for me, it was on this day that I realized how much the nation’s political stage plays out on my psychological well-being. Without trying to sound too embittered, I’ll say Act 2 of George W. Bush has turned out to be a real tragi-comedy.

This blog is not going to be a George W. Bush Hate-a-thon. First of all, there are enough of those out there, and second-of-all, we need to start looking beyond the George W. Bush era, in which “only” nineteen months remain. For what it’s worth, I’ve always given the man credit where credit is due. (He has an admirable record on international humanitarianism, for example.) And the funny thing is, despite charges leveled by my significant other that I’m “the most partisan person” he’s ever known, I’ve never thought of myself as a Democrat. Indeed, of the three gubernatorial elections in which I’ve voted in California , I chose the Democratic candidate in none of them. (Libertarian, Republican, and Libertarian.) But the national political environment over that last six years has made me feel aligned with the far left on a whole host of issues, from warrant-less wiretapping to torturing prisoners to the Federal Marriage Amendment. (And someone still needs to explain to me why it should be only the left that is opposed to these things.) Furthermore, I embrace the radical, borderline-subversive position that the whole notion of fighting a “War on Terror” represents little more than a Sisyphean challenge. Let’s get real.

So there you have it. The re-launch of MaverickTribe – one man’s oxymoronic quest for community and autonomy through a blog. I’ll keep you posted.