Post Election Day Thoughts

 

I am impressed by this year's election and how it was handled by both traditional and social media. Unlike in 2016, the news divisions of the major networks, the online social media sites, and the print media seemed to have taken the challenge of presenting real information to the public seriously.  Of course, this meant that the news divisions sometimes had to displease their corporate masters, that the social media sites had to perform limited censorship on lies posted by people friendly to a candidate, and that the print media had to call provable lies what they were - lies.

Regardless of who a person decided to vote for, the state election boards acted with appropriate dilligence to keep their elections honest, and many people from both major parties worked to ensure that all legal votes were included in the tallies for the candidates.  Not everyone would be happy. (Especially the supporters of the sore loser we have as our 45th president)  But there was no way that all could be happy in a polarized society such as ours.

My immediate impressions of some problems that must be addressed before the next presidential election are:

1. Procedures must be in place to deal with more than one type of disaster.  If major sections of this country were to be affected by natural disasters such as fires, floods, or hurricanes, what needs to be done to guarantee that the people affected by these disasters be able to cast their votes? 
2. In the case of a pandemic such as COVID-19, it doesn't make sense for people to cast their ballots in person. How can we ensure that appropriate and uniform procedures are available for people to cast absentee ballots in all of the 50 states?
3. Considering how long it took to get the results of the 2020 election, why shouldn't all 50 states be required to start counting absentee ballots before election day, and deal with provisional ballots within 48 hours of the close of polling places on election day?
4. Given that some states are using touch screen machines to cast ballots, shouldn't the states be required to have paper backup for each ballot?  In addition, shouldn't the machines be required to have double confirmation before a vote is considered cast?  (Can we afford not to be able to recount ballots as many times as needed?  Can we afford to have systems record votes before the voters intends their castings to be final?)    

Of course, there are many more procedural problems such as those listed above. But the bottom line is that all voters must be able to easily cast their ballots and be sure that their intent is recorded properly in time to have accurate results posted within 24 hours after the last vote has been cast.  

However, we must be vgilant - we can not afford to have a sore loser destroy the credibility of election results on his way out.  This is something we can't implement in law.  Instead, it has to be a custom that no one would dare think to challenge.  Unfortunately, we have a sore loser as president who will destroy what he can on his way out.  This is his way of expressing his anger at not being loved by the majority of the American public.  Hopefully, we will recover from this disaster of a presidential term....

Coronavirus - A Custer F--k we should have been better prepared for.

The Coronavirus.  Many images of it look.like a serious work of designer art. But it has proven dangerous to thousands of people.  As for me, it has put a dent into my social and work life, and has caused my 401-k to drop by 30+ percent.  Yet, I am still one of the lucky ones.  I will likely have an income through the worst of times soon to come.  But today's post is not about the virus itself.  Instead, it's about the consequences of the virus as it spreads across America.


What we're seeing today around the world is reminiscent of what happened in 1918 with the "Spanish Flu". Look at the world today then read about America in1918, and you'll see some eerie similarities. Today, the ease of air transit allowed people from one part of the world to infect nations all over the globe. In 1918, America had people from one area of the country infecting people from other areas of the country, facilitated by our interstate rail network.


"Social Distancing" is a polite term for keeping people away from each other.  We are social animals, and generally hate to be away from others of our own kind.  For example, all of my meetup groups cancelled gatherings voluntarily.  But I know of at least one that had three scheduled meetings in the second half of March.  And its organizer said the following in a group email:

Greetings, Just wanted to respond to members' comments and questions:

This is a group of intelligent, educated, informed and engaged adults. Therefore I am leaving it to each of you to decide how to respond to the current 'crisis'.

If any of our restaurants cancel, I will let you know right away.  Until that happens I am not cancelling any dinners or other activities - it is up to you to decide whether or not to come. If you choose to cancel - no problem and no need to explain why - we understand!! - just change your RSVP.

Stay safe and well and I look forward to seeing you again whenever you think it is safe to join us.

Cheers and best wishes,

Do you think this was responsible, based on what we already knew on March 13, 2020?  Each and every one of my other meetup groups had already cancelled their meetings for the rest of March, and some cancelled meetings through the first half of April.  This woman put social cohesion above the health of the people in her group.


Sadly, the above Meetup organizer's feeling about the virus was not uncommon. 

• Reuters - Florida Retirement Hub worried more about stock market than virus
• Crooks and Liars - See no evil. People in The Villages are a test case of whether ignorance is bliss
• Washington Post - Older Americans are concerned about the Coronavirus, unless they are Republican

The common factor - most of the people who believed that the virus story is a hoax are Republicans who watch Fox "News".  They echoed Trump's early statements that the Coronavirus was a hoax, and was no worse than the common cold.  It took a while, but New York State is now mandating that all but 10% of an employer's personnel either work at home, or are furloughed for the duration needed to stop the spread of the virus.


As I said earlier, protecting people from this virus means behaving in a manner we are uncomfortable behaving - as if we were hermits.  Yet, some communities, such as the ultra orthodox Jewish community in Brooklyn continue to violate public safety norms.  These will be the same people who complain most when many people from their community get sick then die.  It's hard to have compassion for these people, as they put their tradition above their communal safety.


During an age of social distancing, the function of governments must still be performed.  Garbage must still be picked up, Fires must still be fought, and the normal paperwork of government must still be processed. Not all functions will be performed well.  For example, we can't release every person from our prisons, nor can we staff the prisons at normal levels during this outbreak.  This means that more people will be at risk inside our prisons than before.

There are two functions of the federal government that can not be avoided or postponed this year - the presidential election and the decennial census. We're already seeing problems in the first, as no one ever dreamed that we'd have a pandemic in an election year.  Nor did anyone dream that we'd have so much politically at stake in this election.  In regard to the census, how many people will bother to open their doors to respond to a census taker - even when most people will be able to file electronically?  A screw up in the census can affect all 50 states for the next 10 years.  So it's very important that we get it right - in spite of the virus.

Without much help from the federal government, the states have taken it on themselves to act.  But uncoordinated action is likely to put resources where the highest bidders are, and not where they are most needed.  Can you imagine if California and New York were to buy up all the available masks, respirators, and other medical supplies before Texas felt there was a need to do so?  Even worse?  What if a poor state like West Virginia couldn't get needed supplies because they couldn't afford them?

Luckily for me, New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut are working together to slow down and stop the virus' spread in the tri-state region.  Andrew Cuomo looks much more like a national leader than our own president, as he is taking actions that the public can understand AND he is being clear about what is happening that can influence.  Unfortunately, there is only so much any leader at his level can do, as his powers are limited by custom, law, and the norms of society.


Unfortunately, there is an economic cost to fighting this virus.  Many of us will be out of work for a short time.  Others will lose their jobs permanently.  Businesses with healthy cash reserves will survive, while others that do not have adequate reserves will fail.  Even Steven Mnuchin, Trump's financial guru, says that we could have a 20% unemployment rate by year end.  This is coming way too close to the 25% unemployment rate of the Great Depression.  It could take decades to dig ourselves out from under this economic hole.  We need tools to keep things from getting as bad as the great depression - and we need to use them soon.

During his presidential campaign, Andrew Yang proposed the idea of a basic minimum income.  Recently, Mitt Romney suggested that we give out $1000 to every American to help keep the economy afloat.  Even though Romney thought of this as a one time action, universal basic income is now starting to get some traction on Capitol Hill - if only because politicians know in their guts that we need to spend some big money now to avoid radical political change.

Yet, the cost to sociaty can not only be measured in terms of money.  People need to feel they make a real contribution to society.  Getting paid real money for real work is part of the solution. And we have tools from our past we can use.  During the Great Depression, FDR put as many people as possible building (and enhancing) our nation's physical infrastructure.  We built dams, roads, post offices, and other public places - many of them still in use today.  Why not make similar investments in this country, instead of wasting money on our military-industrial complex?


Sadly, everything always seems to come back to politics - something my brother hates talking about with a passion.  With this virus, we had few tools to deal with many of the problems we now face.  For example, our president cut the CDC's pandemic response team in 2018, climing he could hire people quickly when needed.  Has this happened yet?  NO!  These people have moved onto better paying jobs, and will not make a sacrifice to be on Trump's team.  The financial stimulus tools we once had were squandered to give the wealthy a tax cut in 2017, goosing the economy's health for an extra 2 years.  Our president judged the health of America solely by the health of the stock market, and not the health of its people.  If he had cared about the health of its people, he would not have tried to gut the ACA (Obamacare) before having a good replacement ready to go. And recently, the president kept a cruise ship from docking, as it would increase the number of Americans in the 50 states afflicted by the virus.  

Years ago, Harry Truman said, "The Buck Stops Here!"  He took responsibility for dealing with things which were not his fault.  Trump says nothing is his fault, and shifts blame elsewhere. He is ignorant of science, and had no clue about how viruses spead.  All his actions were reactionary, and in his self interest - including NOT using the WHO virus test kit, and developing one of our own.  This wasted precious time we'll never get back in stemming this virus.  When asked about firing the CDC pandemic staff and not using the WHO virus test kit, he shows no responsibility.  Someone else is always to blame. This is not leadership. 


We could and should have been better prepared for a pandemic.  Even now, they are wondering what to do about Congress.  Why not brush off the old plans for a nuclear war, and move the three branches of government to an underground shelter after 30 days of self quarrantine?  There are 9 Supreme Court justices, 100 Senators, 435 Congressmen, a President and a Vice President. Can't they figure out ways to deal with their duties in a confined, safe place until the virus is contained?  What sould we do about elections?  This is something we should have planned for as well.  We did much of the thinking when we planned for a nuclear war against the USSR.  Now it's time to complete the thought process and update our preparedness plans.

To me, the biggest preparedness problem we should have solved was the presidential and congressional elections.  After that, comes the census, as we have both taken more than one year to complete a census AND have delayed reapportionment for several years.  In regard to this year's election, this is something we'll need to deal with quickly, as many current polling places are not equipped to handle large numbers of people and keep them the needed 6 feet apart in this age of the virus. It's bad enough that we have to deal with foreign meddling in this year's election. But having to worry about spreading a virus is way too much for many people to contemplate.  Hopefully, we'll be better prepared next time.

The fourth horse in the race

Do not interpret this post as an endorsement of Hillary.  As much as I am not a fan of any of the GOP candidates so far, I am not a fan of Hillary. At the time of writing this entry, I know more about where the 3 GOP candidates stand than I do of where of where Hillary stands - and that's a big problem. Hillary is a Machiavellian Sphinx.

- - - - - -

The democrats have a big weakness - they have no fallback candidates. Elizabeth Warren does not want to run for president - her power, like Ted Kennedy's power, is to influence the debate from the Senate chamber. She is a true liberal, and has more access to the levers of power as a senator than she ever would as a presidential candidate. If she were to run against Hillary, she would only force Hillary to move to the right, instead of being able to pull Hillary to the left, as she could from the Senate floor.

Next comes Bernie Sanders. I respect him because he's a true, honest liberal. He will likely run for president, even though he can't win. The taint of the "Liberal" brush has made it impossible for him to capture any of the "Red States". Yet, he has ideas which must be included in the presidential debate, although he has no chance against Hillary.

But who is left in the Democratic party to challenge Hillary?  If there is anyone, then who is he/she, and what does he/she stand for?

- - - - - -

Let's say that Hillary loses.  Who does the Democratic party have on its bench for the 2020 run? I see no one who can capture enough Red states to make a difference. This is very important. Although demographics are favoring the left over the long term, they strongly favor the right in the short term. Gerrymandering, abuses of political powers, stacking of the courts, and other tactics will make it much harder for the left to gain power in the normal cycle of the political pendulum - and this is dangerous, as it will make the stakes even greater each election cycle, and authoritarians tend to abuse power to stay in power.

If we look at the recent problems in Ferguson, MO, we find that there is a political district whose officials are not representative of the community as a whole. A large percent of the community has been disenfranchised (made ineligible to vote) because of minor legal infractions.  Even though these people have paid their time for their crimes, their rights have not been restored.  Add to this, a government which is financed mostly by predatory law enforcement, and one has a pot ready to boil over.

What happens when the pot boils over?  The most recent time it did, we had riots - which makes the people from the community look bad.  These riots are disorganized, and do not serve much than to be a collective release of anger. This is inexcusable, as much as it is ineffective. But what would happen if these same people were to get illegal weapons and overthrow the police using selective assassinations?  We could see a situation similar to that occurring in Central Europe in the 1920's - where Fascists and Communists fought in the streets, and a relatively unknown Austrian found a voice and a forum to gain power after a short stint in prison.  You might have heard of his most famous book - its English title is "My Struggle".

- - - - - -

"My Struggle" is not the name most people associate with this book. They are more familiar with its German title "Mein Kampf". Years ago, I had a conversation with a friend whose political views shifted far to the right, a friend from whom I disconnected to preserve my sanity. And at that time, we both came to the conclusion that the political left decays much more quickly, as it tends to place more emphasis on the rights of the individual than the political right. The political right puts a greater emphasis on the needs of the tribe (its tribe) over that of the individual, though it uses misleading language stressing individual and collective liberty.

We've seen this problem before. Leaders (from the right) stir up hatred for selected minorities who do not have the power to fight back - and the average person follows, as a herd mentality takes over. In 1934, it was hard to believe how quickly a free Germany changed into an authoritarian state. People got tired of the political battles, and surrendered power to an authoritarian government simply to end the fighting - and instead, got war. We have that same danger in today's America - give those authoritarians power, and they will keep us poor and in forever wars. So it is extremely important for the political left to again have a strong back bench of people who know how to use the levers of power - if only to check and balance the political right.....