Two Speeches and a Movie July 17, 2009March 15, 2017 What ties these three items together? At the end of the day, it’s about our all managing to live together on a very small planet. NAACP CENTENNIAL SPEECH Delivered yesterday, it’s so worth watching the whole thing (and then, if you have time, the Chris Matthews discussion that follows). A highlight, 10 minutes in: The pain of discrimination is still felt in America. By African-American women paid less for doing the same work as colleagues of a different color and gender. By Latinos made to feel unwelcome in their own country. By Muslim Americans viewed with suspicion for simply kneeling down to pray. By our gay brothers and sisters, still taunted, still attacked, still denied their rights. On the 45th anniversary of the civil rights act, discrimination cannot stand. Not on account of gender or color, who you worship or who you love. Prejudice has no place in the United States of America. But the largest emphasis of the speech, echoing Monday’s Race to the Top, concerned education . . . with words that could have come out of Bill Cosby’s mouth, sure to make teachers’ unions nervous. HATE CRIMES Majority Leader Harry Reid urged passage of the Hate Crimes Amendment to the Department of Defense Authorization Bill on the Senate floor Monday: Luis Ramirez picked strawberries and cherries to support his three children and fiancée. When he wasn’t working in the fields, he worked a second job in a local factory in Shenandoah, Pennsylvania – a coal town of 5,000 people. As Luis was walking home one Saturday night, six high-schoolers jumped him in a park. They taunted and screamed racial slurs at Luis, who came to this small town in the middle of Pennsylvania from a small town in the middle of Mexico. The boys didn’t stop there. They punched him and kicked him. When Luis’ friend pleaded with the teenagers to stop, one yelled back: Tell your Mexican friends to get out of town, or you’ll be lying next to him. The boys stomped on Luis so hard that an imprint of the necklace he was wearing was embedded into his chest. They beat him so badly and so brutally that he never regained consciousness. On July 14, 2008 – two days after the beating and exactly one year ago yesterday – Luis Ramirez died. He was 25 years old. Hate crimes embody a unique brand of evil. A violent act may physically hurt just a single victim and cause grief for loved ones. But hate crimes do more. They distress entire communities, entire groups of people, and our entire country. Senator Kennedy has for many years so courageously fought for the legislation Sen. Leahy and I offered as an amendment today to the Defense Authorization bill. Senator Kennedy has correctly called hate crimes a form of domestic terrorism, and it is our obligation to protect Americans from such terror. The hate crimes bill will help bring justice to those who intentionally choose their victims based on race, color, religion, nationality, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, sexual identity or disability. Hate crimes are rampant and their numbers are rising. The Department of Justice estimates that hundreds happen every day. But right now, state and local governments are on their own when it comes to prosecuting even the most violent crimes, and conducting the most extensive and expensive investigations. State and local governments will always come first. But if those governments are unwilling or unable to prosecute hate crimes – and if the Justice Department believes that may mean justice will not be served – this law will let the federal authorities lend a hand to state and local authorities. This bill is named after Matthew Shepard, who was a 21-year-old college student in 1998 when he was tortured and killed for being gay. When Wyoming police pursued justice in his murder, they needed resources they didn’t have. The police couldn’t call on federal law enforcement for help, and their expensive investigation devastated their small police department. Five officers were laid off as a direct result of how much that case cost. When this bill becomes law, that will never happen again. We must not be afraid to call these crimes what they are. The American people know this is the right thing to do. Hundreds of legal, law enforcement, civil rights and human rights groups know this is the right thing to do. The United States Senate knows this is the right thing to do. This bill simply recognizes that there IS a difference between assaulting someone to steal his money, or doing so because he is gay, or disabled, or Latino or Muslim. That there IS a difference between setting fire to an office building, and setting fire to a church, or a synagogue or a mosque. That there IS a difference – as we learned so tragically just last month – between shooting a security guard, and shooting him because he works at the Holocaust Museum. It is a shame that we often do not discuss our responsibility to do something about horrific hate crimes until after another one has been committed. It means that we always seem to act too late. But that does not mean we shouldn’t act now. It means, in fact, the opposite – it means we must act before another one of our sons or daughters or friends or partners is attacked or killed merely because of who they are. We must act in the name of Thomas Lahey, who was beaten unconscious in Las Vegas for being gay. We must act in the name of Jammie Ingle, who was beaten and bludgeoned to death in Laughlin, Nevada, for the same reason. We must act in the name of Tony Montgomery, who was shot and killed in Reno because he was African American. We must act in the name of those who worship at Temple Emanu El in Reno, a synagogue that has twice been firebombed by skinheads. We must act in the name of Luis Ramirez, who died one year ago this week. And we must act in the name of Matthew Shepard, whose family has fought tirelessly in the 10 years since his brutal murder so that others may know justice. If their country does not stand up for them – if WE do not stand up for what is right – who will? HOME – THE MOVIE Very wow. As I say, at the end of the day, it’s about our all managing to live together on a very small planet.
Two Congresspersons July 16, 2009March 15, 2017 TOM PERRIELLO . . . . . . is a terrific freshman Congressman who – like many Democrats swept into office last year in traditionally-Republican districts – is likely to face a stiff challenge in 2010. Watch him on Morning Joe, here. CAROLYN MALONEY . . . . . . is a terrific veteran Congresswoman who couldn’t possibly lose her seat in 2010 – unless she abandons it to run for Hillary Clinton’s old Senate seat. (The problem with that is that there’s someone in that Senate seat – a pro-marriage-equality Democrat, Kirsten Gillibrand, endorsed for reelection by everyone from President Obama and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to NARAL and EMILY’s List.) It would be a terrible idea, as I argue here.
Race to the Top July 15, 2009March 15, 2017 A FLYING BUFFALO John Leonarz: ‘Here.’ Andrew Lees: ‘I have seen a fruit fly, a horse fly…’ EDUCATION What a difference an Administration makes – across every front. Here’s one more: Democratic Reform Group Declares Federal ‘Race To The Top’ Contest An Early Policy Success Before A Single Dime Is Even Distributed, Administration Making Its Mark; Tremendous Work Remains July 2, 2009 – Following the end of the spring legislative sessions in many states, the group Democrats for Education Reform today declared the federal ‘Race To The Top’ contest for $5 billion in education stimulus an early policy success, pointing to stimulus-inspired pro-reform legislative action around the country. ‘President Obama has shown he is serious about bringing change to public education – even in these difficult financial times,’ said Joe Williams, DFER’s executive director. ‘In just a few months, Education Secretary Arne Duncan has taken tremendous steps toward fundamentally redefining the role of the federal government in encouraging states to take bold steps to reform their public education sectors.’ Secretary Duncan has leveraged $100 billion in education federal stimulus funding, and his $5 billion Race to the Top initiative, to affect more change in state education policies in six months on the job than any U.S. Secretary of Education in history, said Charles Barone, DFER’s director of federal policy. ‘There have been no federal mandates, or heavy-handed edicts,’ Barone said. Rather, he said, Duncan has promoted progressive policy changes through candid observations on shortcomings in state educational policies; criticism of politics-as-usual gamesmanship; a vision for what a real 21st century U.S. education system could look like; and, the willingness to reserve a tiny fraction of federal education spending as a venture capital fund to invest only in those states that are ready to undertake meaningful, lasting, systemic change. Arne Duncan has been speaking truth to power, often by pointing out in the press that states will be looked upon unfavorably in the ‘Race To The Top’ contest if they don’t take steps to become more friendly. The powers-that-be in many states have begun to respond. Consider some of these recent developments: — Illinois. On Tuesday, April 14th, Duncan kicked off his nationwide ‘listening tour’ in Chicago, saying ‘business as usual, to be clear, would basically eliminate Illinois from [Race the Top] competition’ and citing funding inequity, a limit on the number of charter schools, and marginal efforts to police teacher quality as the biggest areas in need of change. In the wee of hours of June 1st, the Illinois state legislature answered Duncan’s call and ended its session by approving 45 new charter schools for Chicago, 5 of which would reserved for high school dropouts, and an additional 15 charter schools for the rest of the state. As a result, about 13,000 students now on charter school waiting lists or in otherwise low-performing schools will be enrolled in high-quality charters subject to stricter accountability requirements than other Illinois schools. — Colorado. Gov. Bill Ritter took the unusual step of appointing Lt. Gov. Barbara O’Brien (a member of the DFER-Colorado advisory board) to serve as ‘Race To The Top Czar,’ to make sure the state was positioned with enough progressive education policies to win the race outright. — Tennessee. In late May, Duncan said Tennessee would ‘not be helping its chances’ for Race to the Top funds if it continued arbitrary caps limiting the growth of charter schools. This set off a chain of events in which the state legislature held a special session and Democrats were freed to reverse their positions against charter school expansion from their leadership (and given a pass from the Tennessee Education Association), culminating in approval of charter school expansions in six school systems on a lopsided vote of 79-15. — Rhode Island. On Monday, June 22 at a conference attended by thousands of charter school parents, teachers, and Administrators, Duncan said, in response to a question from the audience, that Rhode Island risked eligibility for Race to the Top funding if it continued to roadblock efforts to establish and equitably fund charter schools. On Friday June 26, just after 2 a.m. the Rhode Island legislature approved a final budget deal that fully restored funding for a system of ‘mayoral academies’ that will serve students attending some of the lowest-performing schools in Providence. The first school, set to open this Fall, will be run by Democracy Prep, a Harlem charter operator. The lottery for slots will be held the first week of July. — Connecticut. Duncan’s comments regarding Rhode Island rippled out to Connecticut, when on June 26, virtually simultaneous with Rhode Island’s action, Connecticut reversed its decision to cut charter school budgets, and moved toward an agreement that would fully restore charter school funding. The victory was hailed not only by charter school advocates, but also by those who are working on behalf of statewide school reform efforts, like Alex Johnston, Chief Executive Officer of the Connecticut Coalition for Achievement Now (ConnCAN): ‘The education reform movement in Connecticut is gratified that this budget averts the tragedy of half-completed public charter schools so that they can continue their work to close Connecticut’s largest-in-the-nation achievement gap.’ — Massachusetts. On Monday, June 29, Massachusetts Secretary of Education Paul Reville announced that Gov. Deval Patrick will soon introduce legislation to lift the cap on charter schools in school districts in the lowest 10 percent on performance exams. Earlier this year Patrick said he was opposed to lifting the cap on the number of charter schools – proposing instead to increase spending on them in the lowest-performing districts. — Louisiana. On Thursday, June 25, on the last day of Louisiana’s legislative session, Rep. Walt Leger III, a New Orleans Democrat, introduced legislation lifting the cap on charter schools. The state Education Department’s press release indicated that states that lift caps on charter schools will be viewed more favorably by the federal government in the Race To The Top. — Indiana. The new state budget approved by the Legislature this week lifted the cap on charter schools and allows student performance to be used in teacher evaluations. Duncan had warned Indiana legislators that a failure to remove obstacles to reform, like charter caps, would jeopardize the state’s standing in the contest. These are encouraging developments. What these small, but significant victories show is that many changes can be made without huge additional investments by states or localities. It’s not a matter of know-how, but rather a matter of political will. The next battleground will likely be the firewalls between student data and teacher evaluations that affect pay, tenure, and placement decisions, Barone said. As a result of Race to the Top, Colorado has moved to link student and teacher data so that it can more accurately and swiftly target reforms to where they are most needed. In the time since Duncan began calling attention last month to states that have erected student-teacher data firewalls, such as California, New York, and Wisconsin, politicians and lobbyists have been scrambling to figure out whether they will be forced to take real action, or lay low to see whether Duncan actually means business. What’s clear is that, based on what happens between now and the beginning of the 2009-10 school year, there could be as many as five or ten states that are ready to embody the full breadth of reforms laid out under ARRA in accordance with the four assurances laid out by the President and Congress, and by Secretary Duncan’s ‘Race to The Top’ to: — create and implement world class standards and assessments; — develop robust data systems that track student achievement and allow real-time decisions about the deployment of interventions and resources; — reconstitute or shut down the lowest-performing schools; — and improve teacher quality and the equitable distribution of effective teachers through incentives like performance pay and differential compensation. Speaking before charter school advocates last week, long-time champion of education reform Howard Fuller said ‘tell no lies, and claim no easy victories.’ The reality is that the battles waged and won over the past 6 months were hard-fought and partial. It’s no coincidence that most of the decisions were made late at night or early in the morning. In large part, these were ‘proxy’ wars. The forces invested in maintaining the status quo resisted even these small advances on charter schools, and are still resisting breaking down teacher-student data firewalls, because they know they are symbolic of larger reform issues on the horizon. This time around, they lost several battles in their attempt to teach parents and community organizers a lesson about who’s in charge, to keep them in the back of the line when it comes handing out political favors, regardless of their impact on the education of poor and minority children. But those who resist the school reform movement are going to find they are on the wrong side of history. They may affect the pace of reform, but not its inexorable direction. They must decide whether they will participate, or continue to be further marginalized. Secretary Duncan has exercised wise leadership and exhibited extraordinary political courage in the face of daunting political opposition and bureaucratic intransigence. But make no mistake, the real fights are yet to come, inside the Beltway, and in state Capitols across the nation. For more information from DFER on the Race To The Top fund, see our recent issue briefs.
Join the Amazon Conservation Team July 14, 2009March 15, 2017 Buffalo wings? Has anyone ever seen buffalo fly? (Just asking.) RAIN FOREST Another of the articles in the Washington Monthly I linked to Friday examines the 2005 Amazon drought and concludes: “The good news, Phillips says, is that much of the damage has yet to be done. ‘About four-fifths of Amazonia is still mature forest,’ he explains. ‘It is the biggest wilderness left on the planet. There is a lot to fight for; there is a lot to save. I am not disheartened.’ But if his and others’ predictions are reliable—and the careful measurement of the 2005 Amazon drought certainly lends them some credence—there is a real risk of drought accelerating climate change to a point where it would be beyond our ability to control it.” Yet another of the articles describes the fight of the indigenous population to save their forest – with the aid of Google Earth and poison arrows. Join the Amazon Conservation Team here. HOME – THE MOVIE Very wow.
Stocks for the Long Run How to Turn a Penny into $1 Billion in 74 Years (Without Even Having to Inject Dennis Quaid into Your Bloodstream) July 13, 2009March 15, 2017 It seems stocks may not have been quite the steady outperformers Jeremy Siegel and others have led us to believe. This important Wall Street Journal article leads off: ‘As of June 30, U.S. stocks have underperformed long-term Treasury bonds for the past five, 10, 15, 20 and 25 years.’ And the 200-year history on which a lot of our conventional wisdom is based rests on some very iffy data in the early years. So? Does this mean people will now begin abandoning stocks for long-term bonds just when they should not? (Just as they abandoned long-term bonds for stocks these past five, 10, 15, 20 and 25 years and may now wish they hadn’t?) I’m sure not willing to accept a 4.2% taxable return on a 30-year Treasury. What if inflation returns at some point? Interest rates would rise and the resale value of those bonds would fall. Or are we to draw the opposite conclusion – that stocks are cheap here? Facing all the challenges we do, I don’t buy that either. I think ‘Dow 36,000’ is a long way off, just as it was when that iconic article appeared in The Atlantic a decade ago. (‘Has the long-running bull market been a contemporary version of tulipmania? In explaining their new theory of stock valuation, the authors argue that in fact stock prices are much too low and are destined to rise dramatically in the coming years.’) ‘Oh, please,’ I wrote in this space at the time. ‘The only thing more preposterous than this – you have doubtless seen some discussion of a book by this name (by bright people! how could they?!) – is Donald Trump for President. I mean, please.’ As an update, I would simply replace ‘Donald Trump’ with ‘Sarah Palin.’ (Whatever role Kevin Bacon may play in this, the one degree of separation here is that John McCain chose Sarah Palin to be his running mate – and chose the co-author of Dow 36,000 to be chief economic advisor to his 2000 Presidential campaign. Say what you will about the good Senator, but he knows how to swing for the fences.) The Dow was 11,000 when Dow 36,000 appeared ten years ago; is 8,200 or so today. I wouldn’t be surprised if it were 8,200 ten years from now – though one can certainly see 5,200 or 20,000, as well. Ten years is a very long time. Where the Dow will be, adjusted for inflation (or deflation), is yet another – and more meaningful – question. Some stocks are likely to do well, certainly. But the market as a whole? I don’t see it being a bargain here. So are we headed back toward an earlier era where investors – perceiving stocks as risky, and focusing more on that than on their growth potential – demand higher cash pay-outs from stocks than from bonds? That’s how it used to work for many years: stocks had to pay higher dividends than bonds paid interest, because the interest was considered more reliable. And, yes, sure, profits and dividends could grow – but in a failure, the shareholders would get wiped out, where the bondholders might not. Ten years ago, the notion of stocks having to pay higher cash yields than bonds seemed quaint at best. Today? Well, today, I think some people may at least pause to ponder whether there could be some sense to this. Done pondering? My own answer is: I sure hope not. At least not with regard to the companies on which our future rests. Perhaps Starbucks should pay a high dividend, as the species’ survival does not depend on reinvestment in proliferating coffee shops. But our high tech companies? The ones investing in the miracles of nanotech and biotech? And nano-biotech? (That’s where Dennis Quaid is miniaturized and enters your bloodstream – as actually happened, although it was Martin Short’s bloodstream, not yours.) I’m not keen on such companies paying out profits in dividends that they could reinvest for growth. I’d like to see people investing at hefty valuations to finance those dreams. Or is the answer that, on average, at least for a while, investors should just come to expect lower returns across all asset classes? That’s way too big a question for my summertime brain, although I expect it would have something to do with the supply and demand for capital. If the world is awash in savings with little opportunity for productive investment, returns would be low. If savings are scarce relative to spectacularly productive projects just screaming to be financed, returns would be high. It would also have something to do with Moore’s Law. (Hang on, I will get to him.) Consider. As I used to get paid ridiculous fees to astound personal finance audiences . . . ‘If you had invested just one penny – not a dollar, penny – at just two percent – not ten percent or eight per cent or five percent – just two percent . . . [here I would pause and, as if struck by the thought for the first time, ask, ‘was there ever a time in human history you couldn’t earn two percent? Even the Huns were paying two and a half,’ which was not true, I knew, having spent a good portion of my eighth grade year researching barbarians, but good for a harmless laugh] . . . the day Christ was born [a nervous titter, followed by a long pause to let the time span sink in and the audience conclude this was not an inappropriate use of His name] . . . how much would you have today?‘ I would then recap – ‘one penny at two percent for 2,000 years’ – and, after another long pause, during which in the scores of times I gave this speech no one ever ventured a guess, I would conclude: ‘If you guessed one point five trillion dollars, not pennies [I would rise on my tip-toes to emphasize the relative enormity of the dollar as compared with the penny] . . . you would be low by a factor of a thousand times.’ Awed silence. ‘Lesson number one: slow but steady does indeed win the race. Lesson number two: no wonder the Catholic Church has so much money – and more power to it, may I be quick to add.’ Whereupon I would launch into the virtues of the Individual Retirement Account. But think about it. If a penny at 2% grows to $1.5 quadrillion in 2,000 years (vaguely 150 times the value of all the stocks listed on the New York Stock Exchange) – let alone where it would be from Moses’ day – what implications does this have? The first is that ‘past performance’ truly is ‘no guarantee of future results,’ as all the prospectuses say. The notion that most of us can compound our money at 5% or 10% a year (after taxes and inflation, no less) is truly a stretch. In the retirement section of Managing Your Money, the old software program I used to flog, I put up a warning message whenever someone entered an assumed rate of growth that exceeded their assumed rate of inflation by more than 3%: ‘It’s no cinch to outpace inflation by even 3% over the long run. You have chosen yields that outpace your inflation assumption by more than [5%]. We hope you’re successful, but if you wish to change your entries, press ESC and do so now.’ The second implication: people are not saving enough to fund the comfortable 35-year retirements they envision. (So the basic advice – fund that IRA, which these days should be ‘that Roth IRA’ – was not bad then and still holds.) For both our own future financial security and for the sake of the planet, we need to live beneath our means, building up savings each year, not further credit card debt; and we need to live lighter on the land, eating chicken instead of beef most of the time; pasta and locally grown veggies instead of chicken much of the time; water from the tap, not from the plastic bottle. (An enormous sense of guilt compels me to admit that I provided guests with, among other things, four cases of mini Poland Spring Water this July Fourth – my fault exclusively, not Charles’s – and I still feel bad about it. Never again. And in future, we will try harder than ever to recycle the plastic cups we used for the beer and wine. A quick rinse, dry in the sun, and they are as good as new. As Cyberspace is my witness, I vow to do better. We have to.) The third implication: the compounding of our wealth may come in nonphysical things. Nothing physical can compound at 2% forever on a finite planet, let alone faster. (Have you seen HOME, the movie? Very wow.) That said, Moore’s Law, named after Intel co-founder Gordon Moore, held that computing capacity would double every two years. That’s a 41% compounded rate of growth. (A penny grows to $1 billion in 74 years at that rate.) And lately, the law has been broken in a counter-intuitive way: the doubling seems to have speeded up, to every 18 months or so (a 58% annual rate). So while the amount of physical material we consume (and discard) each year may need to shrink for at least a few decades while we work out the problem of cheap, clean inexhaustible energy . . . we are living at this astonishing moment – see Ray Kurzweil, also – when, by some measures at least, the growth rate of our individual wealth . . . and perhaps the stock market . . . can handily exceed 2%. As in, for example, my iPhone. Its monetary value is minor; but what would a king, sultan or maharaja have paid to own one (assuming he could have supplied them, also, to his minions and concubines)? So long as productivity can grow rapidly, so can investment returns. I’m not sure where the market is headed. I am sure this is a time everybody needs to really start thinking outside the box – or we will so foul our box that we miss the chance for a spectacular future . . . and leave the world to the cockroaches, who watched us evolve, learned not to enter the Motels we built for them, and may watch us filibuster our way into decline and extinction. I got an email from a wealthy friend the other day – an investment banker, no less – politely declining an invitation with the explanation, ‘I am politically apathetic.’ How anyone can be apathetic as our species makes it or breaks it over the next few decades leaves me baffled and worried. Have I mentioned Earth 2100? Have I mentioned Home?
Patrick Murphy’s Video (But First Plant a Tree, Save the Rain Forest, and Bake a Souffle; then Consider Anthony Woods) July 10, 2009March 15, 2017 PLANT A TREE! “Tropical deforestation contributes more to global warming than all the vehicles on earth. Does the world have a plan to deal with it?” Read it here. Help the Amazon here. EAT SOUFFLÉ! Charles went nuts last night and made an enormous cheese soufflé followed by a chocolate soufflé. I didn’t even know how to spell soufflé (spellcheck did it for me); all I knew about soufflés was that convulsively funny scene with Betty White’s knee and the oven door (you either know it or you don’t). In 15 years, Charles had never done this before. But they were good, and while perhaps not completely healthy (think fluffy baked cholesterol), they are a lot healthier for the planet than flank steak. These are two concrete things – plant a tree, eat less meat – you may feel inspired to do after watching . . . THE MOVIE Very wow. I’m counting on you to block out some time this weekend to watch it. It is beautiful. The ultimate home movie. IS YOUR CONGRESSPERSON ON THIS LIST? Here’s Congressman Patrick Murphy (bronze star veteran) who’s lined up 152 co-sponsors to repeal Don’t Ask / Don’t Tell (and who makes the case against the President’s taking unilateral action). Is your Congressperson listed below? If so, please take 30 seconds to say thanks – 202-224-3121. If not, please call to urge co-sponsorship: H.R. 1283 Co-Sponsors The Military Readiness Enhancement Act Rep Abercrombie, Neil [HI-1] – 3/3 Rep Ackerman, Gary L. [NY-5] – 3/3 Rep Andrews, Robert E. [NJ-1] – 3/3 Rep Arcuri, Michael A. [NY-24] – 3/17 Rep Baca, Joe [CA-43] – 7/8 Rep Baird, Brian [WA-3] – 3/12 Rep Baldwin, Tammy [WI-2] – 3/3 Rep Becerra, Xavier [CA-31] – 6/16 Rep Berkley, Shelley [NV-1] – 3/3 Rep Berman, Howard L. [CA-28] – 3/3 Rep Bishop, Timothy H. [NY-1] – 3/3 Rep Blumenauer, Earl [OR-3] – 3/3 Rep Brady, Robert A. [PA-1] – 3/3 Rep Braley, Bruce L. [IA-1] – 6/8 Rep Capps, Lois [CA-23] – 3/3 Rep Capuano, Michael E. [MA-8] – 3/3 Rep Carnahan, Russ [MO-3] – 4/27 Rep Carson, Andre [IN-7] – 3/3 Rep Castor, Kathy [FL-11] – 3/3 Rep Christensen, Donna M. [VI] – 3/3 Rep Clarke, Yvette D. [NY-11] – 3/3 Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy [MO-1] – 3/3 Rep Cleaver, Emanuel [MO-5] – 3/3 Rep Cohen, Steve [TN-9] – 3/3 Rep Conyers, John, Jr. [MI-14] – 3/3 Rep Courtney, Joe [CT-2] – 3/3 Rep Crowley, Joseph [NY-7] – 3/3 Rep Cummings, Elijah E. [MD-7] – 3/3 Rep Davis, Danny K. [IL-7] – 4/27 Rep Davis, Susan A. [CA-53] – 3/3 Rep DeFazio, Peter A. [OR-4] – 3/3 Rep DeGette, Diana [CO-1] – 3/6 Rep Delahunt, William D. [MA-10] – 3/3 Rep DeLauro, Rosa L. [CT-3] – 3/3 Rep Dicks, Norman D. [WA-6] – 3/9 Rep Dingell, John D. [MI-15] – 3/3 Rep Doggett, Lloyd [TX-25] – 4/2 Rep Doyle, Michael F. [PA-14] – 3/3 Rep Edwards, Donna F. [MD-4] – 3/3 Rep Ellison, Keith [MN-5] – 3/3 Rep Engel, Eliot L. [NY-17] – 3/3 Rep Eshoo, Anna G. [CA-14] – 3/3 Rep Farr, Sam [CA-17] – 3/3 Rep Fattah, Chaka [PA-2] – 3/3 Rep Filner, Bob [CA-51] – 3/3 Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4] – 3/3 Rep Gonzalez, Charles A. [TX-20] – 3/6 Rep Grijalva, Raul M. [AZ-7] – 3/3 Rep Gutierrez, Luis V. [IL-4] – 3/3 Rep Hall, John J. [NY-19] – 3/3 Rep Hare, Phil [IL-17] – 3/3 Rep Harman, Jane [CA-36] – 3/3 Rep Hastings, Alcee L. [FL-23] – 3/3 Rep Heinrich, Martin [NM-1] – 6/26 Rep Higgins, Brian [NY-27] – 4/29 Rep Hinchey, Maurice D. [NY-22] – 3/3 Rep Hirono, Mazie K. [HI-2] – 3/3 Rep Holt, Rush D. [NJ-12] – 3/3 Rep Honda, Michael M. [CA-15] – 3/3 Rep Inslee, Jay [WA-1] – 3/3 Rep Israel, Steve [NY-2] – 3/3 Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] – 3/9 Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18] – 3/9 Rep Johnson, Eddie Bernice [TX-30] – 3/3 Rep Johnson, Henry C. “Hank,” Jr. [GA-4] – 3/3 Rep Kennedy, Patrick J. [RI-1] – 3/3 Rep Kilpatrick, Carolyn C. [MI-13] – 3/5 Rep Kilroy, Mary Jo [OH-15] – 3/5 Rep Klein, Ron [FL-22] – 6/9 Rep Kucinich, Dennis J. [OH-10] – 3/3 Rep Langevin, James R. [RI-2] – 3/3 Rep Larsen, Rick [WA-2] – 3/3 Rep Larson, John B. [CT-1] – 6/23 Rep Lee, Barbara [CA-9] – 3/3 Rep Levin, Sander M. [MI-12] – 7/8 Rep Lewis, John [GA-5] – 3/3 Rep Loebsack, David [IA-2] – 3/3 Rep Lofgren, Zoe [CA-16] – 3/3 Rep Lowey, Nita M. [NY-18] – 3/3 Rep Lujan, Ben Ray [NM-3] – 6/23 Rep Lynch, Stephen F. [MA-9] – 3/3 Rep Maloney, Carolyn B. [NY-14] – 3/3 Rep Markey, Edward J. [MA-7] – 3/3 Rep Massa, Eric J. J. [NY-29] – 3/23 Rep Matsui, Doris O. [CA-5] – 3/3 Rep McCarthy, Carolyn [NY-4] – 3/3 Rep McCollum, Betty [MN-4] – 3/3 Rep McDermott, Jim [WA-7] – 3/3 Rep McGovern, James P. [MA-3] – 3/3 Rep McMahon, Michael E. [NY-13] – 6/9 Rep Meek, Kendrick B. [FL-17] – 3/3 Rep Meeks, Gregory W. [NY-6] – 3/3 Rep Michaud, Michael H. [ME-2] – 3/3 Rep Miller, Brad [NC-13] – 3/23 Rep Miller, George [CA-7] – 3/3 Rep Moore, Gwen [WI-4] – 3/3 Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] – 3/3 Rep Murphy, Christopher S. [CT-5] – 3/3 Rep Murphy, Patrick J. [PA-8] – 3/3 Rep Nadler, Jerrold [NY-8] – 3/3 Rep Napolitano, Grace F. [CA-38] – 3/3 Rep Norton, Eleanor Holmes [DC] – 3/3 Rep Oberstar, James L. [MN-8] – 3/3 Rep Olver, John W. [MA-1] – 3/3 Rep Pallone, Frank, Jr. [NJ-6] – 3/3 Rep Pascrell, Bill, Jr. [NJ-8] – 3/3 Rep Pastor, Ed [AZ-4] – 3/3 Rep Payne, Donald M. [NJ-10] – 3/3 Rep Peters, Gary C. [MI-9] – 5/13 Rep Pingree, Chellie [ME-1] – 3/3 Rep Polis, Jared [CO-2] – 3/3 Rep Price, David E. [NC-4] – 3/3 Rep Quigley, Mike [IL-5] – 6/2 Rep Richardson, Laura [CA-37] – 3/17 Rep Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana [FL-18] – 3/3 Rep Rothman, Steven R. [NJ-9] – 3/3 Rep Roybal-Allard, Lucille [CA-34] – 3/3 Rep Rush, Bobby L. [IL-1] – 3/3 Rep Sanchez, Linda T. [CA-39] – 3/3 Rep Sanchez, Loretta [CA-47] – 3/3 Rep Sarbanes, John P. [MD-3] – 3/3 Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9] – 3/3 Rep Schiff, Adam B. [CA-29] – 3/3 Rep Schwartz, Allyson Y. [PA-13] – 3/3 Rep Scott, Robert C. “Bobby” [VA-3] – 3/17 Rep Serrano, Jose E. [NY-16] – 3/3 Rep Sestak, Joe [PA-7] – 3/3 Rep Shea-Porter, Carol [NH-1] – 3/3 Rep Sherman, Brad [CA-27] – 3/3 Rep Sires, Albio [NJ-13] – 3/3 Rep Slaughter, Louise McIntosh [NY-28] – 3/3 Rep Smith, Adam [WA-9] – 3/3 Rep Snyder, Vic [AR-2] – 3/12 Rep Speier, Jackie [CA-12] – 3/3 Rep Stark, Fortney Pete [CA-13] – 3/3 Rep Sutton, Betty [OH-13] – 3/3 Rep Thompson, Mike [CA-1] – 3/3 Rep Tierney, John F. [MA-6] – 3/3 Rep Tonko, Paul D. [NY-21] – 3/17 Rep Towns, Edolphus [NY-10] – 3/3 Rep Tsongas, Niki [MA-5] – 3/3 Rep Van Hollen, Chris [MD-8] – 3/3 Rep Velazquez, Nydia M. [NY-12] – 3/3 Rep Wasserman Schultz, Debbie [FL-20] – 3/3 Rep Watson, Diane E. [CA-33] – 3/3 Rep Waxman, Henry A. [CA-30] – 3/3 Rep Weiner, Anthony D. [NY-9] – 3/3 Rep Welch, Peter [VT] – 3/3 Rep Wexler, Robert [FL-19] – 3/3 Rep Woolsey, Lynn C. [CA-6] – 3/3 Rep Wu, David [OR-1] – 3/3 Rep Yarmuth, John A. [KY-3] – 6/9 AND SPEAKING OF GAYS IN THE MILITARY Wouldn’t it be nice to have this one in Congress? Gay, African American, a military veteran, son of a single mother, lived without healthcare until enrolling at West Point, a master’s degree from Harvard’s Kennedy School?
Very Wow July 9, 2009March 15, 2017 MY COLLEGE CHUM WENT TO LIVE IN A TREE And here we are, nearly 27 years later, and he’s improved thousands of lives (and I’m pretty sure he now lives in a hut). Here‘s the annual report. As you’ll see, what Bob and his college pal Steven (who lives in an apartment several mule-hours from the Turimiquire valley) have accomplished on a shoestring in the last dozen years since becoming an official foundation is remarkable. And replicable throughout Venezuela and beyond. Women’s rights, family planning, anti-poverty, rural development microfinance enthusiasts – take note. PHOTOS Take a look at the world through Tipper Gore’s eye. PRINTING – FAST AND CHEAP You need leave your keyboard only to answer the door when your order arrives. Click here. HOME – THE MOVIE Very wow. Did you watch it? I’m counting on you to block out some time this weekend.
Summer Fun July 8, 2009March 15, 2017 YOU THINK +YOU+ HAD A BAD DAY I owned shares in Diamond Crystal Salt, decades ago, and vaguely, faintly remember something about this, which was maybe just a $45 million footnote in an annual report. Reading the full story now (which I won’t spoil by summarizing it) leaves one’s head shaking in wonder. “Oy,” is the best way I can describe it. (And then, if you’re on summer break, click the “previous” story, about Peshtigo, Wisconsin, or any of the others on this “Damn Interesting” site. A sort of Ripley’s Believe It Or Not for people with attention spans.) PUBLIC OPTION James Musters: “If a public option would drive private health insurance out of business, how – asks Political Irony – do UPS and FedEx survive against the USPS?” FUN Maureen Dowd Sunday on Sarah Palin. (It was less a resignation, writes Tina Brown, than a cry for help.) INDIA GOES GAY Seventeen percent of the LGBT people on the planet were decriminalized yesterday. Read it here.
Health and Home July 7, 2009March 15, 2017 HEALTH This tells you how long you’re going to live – with implied hints for living longer. HEALTH CARE This is Paul Krugman with the crystal clear case for why we can afford it. HOME – THE MOVIE Very wow. Did you watch it? It is beautiful, haunting – free – and (please don’t let this turn you off) show-stoppingly important.
Videos July 6, 2009March 15, 2017 AL FRANKEN Take 30 seconds to enjoy it? PEPSI Take 60 seconds to enjoy a Pepsi? (Thanks, Juan.) HOME – THE TRAILER Wow. HOME – THE MOVIE Very wow.