As the holiday season really begins to envelop all of us, some of our staff are rushing around getting ready to do a little holiday traveling, while others are preparing to receive some holiday guests.
We're neither as hurried or as harried as we were last year at this point, and we're even beginning to feel a bit more of the holiday spirit - even with the warmer than usual temps in our DC and West Palm Beach quarters. Where our positive energy is coming from, even we're not sure - but we do know doing good things for the right reason is contagious.
It's also something a young man from Lincoln, Cameron Freeman would have appreciated.
We first heard about Cameron Freeman last year, though not via the newspaper or television. Cameron was the student of a longtime friend and acquaintance of ours, one of Cameron's teachers. He died in a horrible accident in Kansas in November, 2010, caused by a drunk driver who hit the car Cameron and his friends were traveling in.
Cameron's parents could have turned to anger, or turned inward, but as Peter Salter of the Lincoln Journal Star wrote last year, they began an effort to do something good, something right, to change the world in the name of their son. Mr. Salter followed up on the story this year - as did several Lincoln businesses, including Union Bank & Trust. As Salter's story explains, quite a number of people in Lincoln were given money by their employers earlier this week, and told to go out and do something good, for someone who needed it.
You can check out the stories of those who gave on the The Cameron Effect website - and some of those stories are quite good. Good enough, however, isn't. It never has been in our book.
We're well aware of the resumes and connections of many of our readers - those on Capitol Hill, in legislatures in multiple states, and even a few involved in presidential campaigns, not to mention all the well-connected members of the media across the country.
So we're going to go out on a limb, today - not for us, but for Cameron.
Or, as we'd bet he'd want us to do, for people who really need the help this holiday season.
We're not asking you to spend money you don't have, to randomly give to someone you don't know - though if you want to donate to a needy charity, we certainly won't dissuade that action. We ask that you do what Cameron's folks ask of people on his birthday - December 7 - but also on every other day of the year.
Do something compassionate, forgiving, and nice for someone else. Then take a moment, and write about it on The Cameron Effect webpage. We hope you'll do something unexpected - not just for the recipient of your gift, but also for you. Maybe you'll donate your time at a soup kitchen - but don't do it on Christmas or New Years. Do it on a random Tuesday. Just because.
If you see a homeless person in the street, as you're walking? Maybe you could take the time to buy them a meal. If you have an extra five dollar bill in your wallet, and you're at the counter of the store while someone is struggling to make change to buy that gift - the one you don't approve of? Give them your five bucks. When they're surprised and ask if you're sure you want to do that? Just smile, and say, "No problem. It's the right thing to do. You'll take care of someone else next time."
Regardless of what you believe in, spiritually, the holiday season is supposed to be about joy and peace. You might even say it's a time of year we try to bring a little happiness to everyone.
We think that's the kind of thing that Cameron Freeman might approve of.
We're certain that you'll feel a bit more of the spirit of the holiday season if you take our advice.
Friday, December 9, 2011
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Rolled Over, Snowed Under
Every year, while we watch the calendar days tick off, and the weather get steadily colder, the same thing happens: at some point the weather freezes us in our tracks and we're dumbly surprised by it. In hindsight, it's nearly always obvious that we should have expected it. For some reason, however, one or more of our staff members inevitably ends up caught in the weather, delaying travel or meetings of one kind or another.
That feeling of impending doom is never a good one when its happening to us - though it's one we've recognized on the faces and in the writings of many of our conservative friends recently, especially on the subject of taxes.
As our acquaintance David Cay Johnston of Reuters noted this week, most of the major Republican political figures in the U.S. have snowed themselves in on the subject of taxes, thanks to a pudgy, arrogant little lobbyist by the name of Grover Norquist.
We're fairly certain you've heard of Mr. Norquist. He's one of the most polarizing figures in American politics - and he's the reason that nearly every Congressional Republican has committed to his pledge that they should never raise taxes, ever, on anything, for any reason ever again.
Point blank, Mr. Norquist is a powerful anti-tax lobbyist, who has previously held enough money and power to scare most Republicans into following whatever his marching orders are - a fact he hasn't been shy about shoving in other people's faces.
As our colleague Mr. Johnston points out, however, it's this blind loyalty to Mr Norquist, above their duty to their country, that has led the Republicans to paint themselves into a corner.
In short, GOP members have been trained like Pavlov's dogs by Mr. Norquist to always bark in favor of tax cuts of any kind, while always opposing an increase in taxes for any reason - including the expiration of short-term tax reductions.
When President Obama convinced the Congress to cut the payroll tax rate as a short-term stimulus, it wasn't just an economically sound and sensible idea. It was also a political stroke of genius. Short-term stimulus of any kind - by definition - is short term. Whatever effects that stimulative action has on a federal or state budget, or an economy, are designed to be temporary.
This puts Congressional Republicans in the kind of bind that Mr. Johnston notes that not only could have been a major political stroke in their favor - but should have been something that they or Mr. Norquist should have seen coming a mile away.
Now, President Obama has put Republicans on a slippery political slope, with a potentially massive increase in taxes rolling toward Americans during the holiday season - one that Republican politicians will be responsible for, if the increase goes through. At the same time, it clearly displays how extremely hypocritical Norquist - and anyone who follows his lead - truly are.
We're aware that most on Capitol Hill say the increase won't likely happen, that the payroll tax cut will likely continue, along with an extension of unemployment benefits.
Still - just like that nasty winter weather that happens every year, the failure of Republicans to compromise with Democrats is something we've seen time and time again, most recently on the not-so-supercommittee. This time, we're prepared for that snowball to come rolling down from The Hill.
Too bad for them, Congressional Republicans didn't see this one coming.
They should have.
That feeling of impending doom is never a good one when its happening to us - though it's one we've recognized on the faces and in the writings of many of our conservative friends recently, especially on the subject of taxes.
As our acquaintance David Cay Johnston of Reuters noted this week, most of the major Republican political figures in the U.S. have snowed themselves in on the subject of taxes, thanks to a pudgy, arrogant little lobbyist by the name of Grover Norquist.
We're fairly certain you've heard of Mr. Norquist. He's one of the most polarizing figures in American politics - and he's the reason that nearly every Congressional Republican has committed to his pledge that they should never raise taxes, ever, on anything, for any reason ever again.
Point blank, Mr. Norquist is a powerful anti-tax lobbyist, who has previously held enough money and power to scare most Republicans into following whatever his marching orders are - a fact he hasn't been shy about shoving in other people's faces.
As our colleague Mr. Johnston points out, however, it's this blind loyalty to Mr Norquist, above their duty to their country, that has led the Republicans to paint themselves into a corner.
In short, GOP members have been trained like Pavlov's dogs by Mr. Norquist to always bark in favor of tax cuts of any kind, while always opposing an increase in taxes for any reason - including the expiration of short-term tax reductions.
When President Obama convinced the Congress to cut the payroll tax rate as a short-term stimulus, it wasn't just an economically sound and sensible idea. It was also a political stroke of genius. Short-term stimulus of any kind - by definition - is short term. Whatever effects that stimulative action has on a federal or state budget, or an economy, are designed to be temporary.
This puts Congressional Republicans in the kind of bind that Mr. Johnston notes that not only could have been a major political stroke in their favor - but should have been something that they or Mr. Norquist should have seen coming a mile away.
Now, President Obama has put Republicans on a slippery political slope, with a potentially massive increase in taxes rolling toward Americans during the holiday season - one that Republican politicians will be responsible for, if the increase goes through. At the same time, it clearly displays how extremely hypocritical Norquist - and anyone who follows his lead - truly are.
We're aware that most on Capitol Hill say the increase won't likely happen, that the payroll tax cut will likely continue, along with an extension of unemployment benefits.
Still - just like that nasty winter weather that happens every year, the failure of Republicans to compromise with Democrats is something we've seen time and time again, most recently on the not-so-supercommittee. This time, we're prepared for that snowball to come rolling down from The Hill.
Too bad for them, Congressional Republicans didn't see this one coming.
They should have.
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Delivering Insanity
The recent news that - once again - the U.S. Postal Service continues to have major money problems didn't surprise us. It's a story that has upset our entire staff for a variety of reasons, for some time now.
For many years now, it's been obvious that the U.S. Postal Service, like virtually every postal system around the world, has had its previous business model threatened by the reach and growth of the internet. This past year has been especially hard on U.S.P.S., as pressures from many directions have come to a head - especially from those in politics who'd either prefer to privatize the whole system or would prefer to use the postal service budget money elsewhere.
The fact is, if the postal service were allowed to implement some of the ideas that many in the postal system have suggested for years, there would be no problem at all.
As the radio and tv commercials you may have seen and heard, correctly point out, one of the Postal Service's biggest financial liabilities is their pension fund. Thanks to a 2005 change by Congress, the postal service pension fund is required to be fully-funded at all times, unlike virtually every other pension fund for either private businesses or public unions.
For the U.S.P.S., that adds up to roughly $5.5 billion annually - and it means the Postal Service pension fund is currently way overfunded. Even by conservative measures, the postal service pension fund currently has more than $75 billion more than it needs, something the Postal Service has been trying to change for several years now.
The U.S. Postal service hasn't been blind to the internet, either. More than once over the last decade, proposals have been presented or floated which would have allowed the Postal Service to follow in the footsteps of Deutsche Post, the German federal postal system.
In Germany, many years ago, they saw that physical mail volume was decreasing, so - like any smart business - they attempted to broaden their potential market. Deutsche Post gained the right to act as a small-scale banking service, developed a service to sell long-distance phone cards, and worked out deals to act as a payment service for bills from many different companies, including utilities, phones, and internet providers. They even took their delivery services overseas, through DHL, which Deutsche Post owns.
All of these would be great options for the U.S. Postal Service as well - if only they were allowed by Congress to make changes of this nature.
Unfortunately, as a constitutionally mandated but semi-autonomous arm of the government, whenever the Postal Service wants to make a change of virtually any kind, they have to go through extensive Congressional wrangling. As Congress has become increasingly paralyzed by partisanship and inaction, even the simplest measures have gotten hopelessly tied up in petty politics and bureaucracy.
Instead of standing up and boldly stating what needs to be done - as President Obama did in Kansas on Tuesday - the U.S. Postal Service and its management has surrendered, proposing massive cuts to services, massive cuts to postal service jobs, ending next-day delivery, and ending Saturday delivery as well.
Not only would those measures devastate rural communities from coast to coast, they will also likely harm the long-term success of the Postal Service -- which, as a constitutionally mandated government organization, can't go away, and can't be privatized without significant Congressional action.
Meanwhile, postal workers are deeply unsure of their future, and terrified of the present, but they still keep on delivering presents, letters, and packages on time, and at prices no private company can or would ever match, to places that Fed Ex and UPS simply don't go.
From our perspective, the actual workers of the U.S.P.S. seem to be the only people who are delivering any sanity into this subject.
Sadly, it is Congress and the Postal Service executives who are in control of the future of the very folks who do all the heavy lifting at the U.S.P.S.
For many years now, it's been obvious that the U.S. Postal Service, like virtually every postal system around the world, has had its previous business model threatened by the reach and growth of the internet. This past year has been especially hard on U.S.P.S., as pressures from many directions have come to a head - especially from those in politics who'd either prefer to privatize the whole system or would prefer to use the postal service budget money elsewhere.
The fact is, if the postal service were allowed to implement some of the ideas that many in the postal system have suggested for years, there would be no problem at all.
As the radio and tv commercials you may have seen and heard, correctly point out, one of the Postal Service's biggest financial liabilities is their pension fund. Thanks to a 2005 change by Congress, the postal service pension fund is required to be fully-funded at all times, unlike virtually every other pension fund for either private businesses or public unions.
For the U.S.P.S., that adds up to roughly $5.5 billion annually - and it means the Postal Service pension fund is currently way overfunded. Even by conservative measures, the postal service pension fund currently has more than $75 billion more than it needs, something the Postal Service has been trying to change for several years now.
The U.S. Postal service hasn't been blind to the internet, either. More than once over the last decade, proposals have been presented or floated which would have allowed the Postal Service to follow in the footsteps of Deutsche Post, the German federal postal system.
In Germany, many years ago, they saw that physical mail volume was decreasing, so - like any smart business - they attempted to broaden their potential market. Deutsche Post gained the right to act as a small-scale banking service, developed a service to sell long-distance phone cards, and worked out deals to act as a payment service for bills from many different companies, including utilities, phones, and internet providers. They even took their delivery services overseas, through DHL, which Deutsche Post owns.
All of these would be great options for the U.S. Postal Service as well - if only they were allowed by Congress to make changes of this nature.
Unfortunately, as a constitutionally mandated but semi-autonomous arm of the government, whenever the Postal Service wants to make a change of virtually any kind, they have to go through extensive Congressional wrangling. As Congress has become increasingly paralyzed by partisanship and inaction, even the simplest measures have gotten hopelessly tied up in petty politics and bureaucracy.
Instead of standing up and boldly stating what needs to be done - as President Obama did in Kansas on Tuesday - the U.S. Postal Service and its management has surrendered, proposing massive cuts to services, massive cuts to postal service jobs, ending next-day delivery, and ending Saturday delivery as well.
Not only would those measures devastate rural communities from coast to coast, they will also likely harm the long-term success of the Postal Service -- which, as a constitutionally mandated government organization, can't go away, and can't be privatized without significant Congressional action.
Meanwhile, postal workers are deeply unsure of their future, and terrified of the present, but they still keep on delivering presents, letters, and packages on time, and at prices no private company can or would ever match, to places that Fed Ex and UPS simply don't go.
From our perspective, the actual workers of the U.S.P.S. seem to be the only people who are delivering any sanity into this subject.
Sadly, it is Congress and the Postal Service executives who are in control of the future of the very folks who do all the heavy lifting at the U.S.P.S.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)